Hooray for you, Mari Sasano.

The EIFF had a fundraising preview screening of Project Nim last night, so my friend Alexis and I went to see it.

It’s basically the story of Nim Chimpsky, a baby chimpanzee who was raised by humans as a language experiment. It’s heartbreaking: he is taken away from his mother at two weeks, then moves from home to home until basically no one wants him anymore. The scientist who headed the study, Herb Torrance, has questionable methods and motives, and most of his teachers eventually leave the experiment due to Nim’s increased aggression. Nim’s story is told through archival material, interviews, and re-enactments. The filmmakers didn’t want to perpetuate the exploitation of apes by hiring an animal performer, so in the re-enactments, they use animatronics, puppetry, and a human actor.

I’ve always had an interest in primatology, and the more I learned about it, the more troubled the field seemed to me (at least in the early years). The practice of it is weirdly gendered (“Leakey’s Angels”, anyone?) and it’s weighted down with a lot of cultural baggage in terms of a Western attitude about animals. It’s almost racialized– in fact, the paternalistic attitudes towards primates have eerie echoes in the way that aboriginal people are often treated. When Nim was first taken away from his family, I thought about residential schools. I’m actually surprised at how the researchers went about their study: after all, language can’t really be isolated from culture, and it could definitely be argued that chimps have culture. The research takes no account of the way chimps might perceive the world in the first place.

What is striking is that, though Nim doesn’t speak at all, the interviews with those who were close to him reveal that Nim had a great observational power, and that he probably understood more than he was able to express with his limited vocabulary of signs. He seemed to sense that his first human “family” was fraught and tense: a blended family including a patriarch whose supremacy was being challenged by a wife who made unilateral decisions, including the one that brought Nim under their roof. He understood the relationships between his caregivers, manipulating them to get out of situations he found uncomfortable.

Never once does anyone consider that a human house might be the opposite of a good environment for a chimp. Why do they not move humans into a chimp’s natural habitat instead? It’s horrible what they put him through. It really makes you think about those who are vulnerable to the whims of dominant society: children, the poor, the uneducated, animals, and even threatened natural spaces. As their protectors, don’t we have some responsibility towards their welfare?

Nim’s story is hard to watch, but everyone should see it.

I saw both Thor and Bridesmaids recently, and surprise! Both pass the Bechdel Test!

In fact, it is not as simple as chick-flick VS dude-flick. Thor, while it does fulfil the action and fighting part, also manages to be quite a nice family drama. Anthony Hopkins is a great actor who shows up in terrible movies (Hannibal, anyone?), and he makes a very serviceable Odin. But what an appealing God of Thunder they found in Chris Hemsworth! He is certainly beefy enough (and is frequently shirtless to prove it), but he’s also charismatic enough to pull of the godlike thing. It’s pretty easy to dismiss a guy with big muscles as no more than eye candy, but his character is given enough depth (comedic to epic) that he kind of grows on you.

The same, unfortunately, can’t be said of Natalie Portman’s Jane Foster, who we are told is a brilliant scientist but never really demonstrates how that might be. It’s too bad that she’s reduced to just a pretty girl. It’s hinted that there’s something special about her that Thor is attracted to, possibly her intelligence or something. But mostly she aw-shucks herself under his gaze and never really proves herself. Kat Dennings, as her lab assistant, has more moxie. (and yes, it’s these two female characters who chat nicely about science to fulfill the Bechdel requirements!)

Yeah, though: the 3D is as blurry as ever, and the ice giants are fakey. It’s silly, predictable, but still Ok enough to sit through.

Bridesmaids, on the other hand, was much better than I expected.

I try not to read too many reviews before I see something for fun (when I review, I do lots of research). From what I could tell, it was a ensemble comedy with lots of women, but it was a gross-out formula in the Judd Apatow vein. And sure, there’s a food poisoning scene that’s pretty gross. But that’s just ONE incident. It’s no Hangover.

What it does have: female characters, over 30, who aren’t all moms. Women who are as concerned about their friendships with each other, their work, and the meaning of life as they are with their spouses and children. And it’s FUNNY.

There’s lots to relate to. Kristen Wiig is Annie, a slightly washed-up 30-something who is floundering after losing her business and her boyfriend. Her best friend Lillian (Maya Rudolph, who was so great in Away We Go) gets engaged, and it lets loose all kinds of issues. Helen (Rose Byrne) is a rich, put-together uber-bridesmaid who is perfection to Annie’s disheleved chaos. There’s a rivalry, plus a sense of mourning that Lillian is not the same kid she grew up with. Friendships do change, and there’s no simple way to evolve out of them sometimes.

Add to that a cute love interest (Chris O’Dowd), some puppies, and Wilson Phillips, and of course, a wedding. There will be tears.

When I was first talking to my editor about Taste Alberta, I called dibs on Cheemo. Why? Because I’ve been eating those little doughy dumplings since I was a kid and I love them. My little brother even invented a superhero, Cheemoperogyman, whose name made us laugh and laugh. Even now.

Since then, I’ve eaten home-made, and even learned how to make a decent perogy myself. And of course, home-made is better. But you know? In a pinch, Cheemos are a pretty nice comfort food that you can make in less than 10 minutes. There’s always a bag of them in the freezer. As someone who tends towards seasonal depression, there’s a good reason for that.

Anyhow, I jumped at the chance to tour the factory. I felt like Charlie Bucket!

Indeed, the facility did not disappoint. I saw 36,000 lbs of potatoes, stored in bins as tall as I am. That’s how many potatoes they go through EVERY DAY. Same goes for the two silos of flour. I saw the process from beginning to end, with all the amazing high-tech machinery that it takes to go from raw ingredients to finished, frozen product.

The potato peeling machine knew not to waste too much by overpeeling. It also had cameras that spotted brown spots, and the jets of air that blasted them off the conveyor belt. The dough maker was the size of a La-Z-Boy chair, and after a couple of minutes, it would offer up a 600 lb pillow of soft dough, which would get portioned and whisked off (via another conveyor belt) to the perogy-making machine, which was invented and patented by the founder of the company, Walter Makowecki. His son, Joe, now runs Heritage Frozen Foods (Cheemo’s parent), and he was my guide. Super-nice guy, and if he ever gets tired of explaining what goes on there, he doesn’t show it. Heck, I’d be pretty darn proud of myself if I were the president of Cheemo!

The perogy making machine is pure magic. Tubes of dough filled with filling are rolled into dumplings, which then go through a tunnel of steam where they are all cooked. Then they go up a spiral staircase inside a blast freezer, and into bags. It was like watching angels being made. I was so happy! Incidentally, so did most of the people working there. Joe says a lot of his staff have been working there for decades. A good sign!

After our interview, I shook Joe’s hand and told him, “You are doing good work here.” I think we can all be proud as Edmontonians that this factory was started, and remains, here. When I announced on my Facebook that I’d be going, the number of responses all showed a deep affection for Cheemo, and no wonder. Cheap, delicious, and not too bad for you. Easy on the bacon and sour cream… or not!

Anyhow, watch for the article in the Journal’s food section in the coming weeks. It’s about the best thing I ever got to do!

My good friend Alexis first took me to the Bulk Barn within the first week it was open, about a month ago. It is EXCELLENT.

Food, in bulk, for cheap! SO MUCH OF IT! The place is huge: it’s in the space that used to be Henry, beside the Shoppers Drug Mart on 81 Ave. For thrifty cooks and demanding bakers, this is heaven. We got unsalted mixed nuts (no peanuts!), some dried blueberries, dried organic (unsulphured) apricots, pot barley, lentils, wasabi peas and Panda licorice for about $30. Be careful of the snack/candy/dried fruits. They can really get pricey. But the dry staple foods and spices are amazing deals!

Yay Bulk Barn!

I liked the movie. It’s very beautiful and is both complicated and easy to follow at the same time (nice that they keep telling you exactly what’s happening). But here’s the thing: the entire reason all those people get involved in that dream-mind-influencing scheme is for a business deal? Wouldn’t it have been easier  to make that happen with lawyers? It would certainly would’ve been less dangerous and probably even cheaper, given that messing with someone’s unconcious mind is illegal. They said so themselves.

And besides, Cillian Murphy’s character (thanks for casting Cillian Murphy!) didn’t seem to be all that keen on running his father’s company anyhow. If they went up to him and said, “Hey buddy, I bet if you dismantled your dad’s business empire, it would really tick him off,” that would be enough to do it.

Anyhow, at least everyone in it was very, very good-looking.

This is basically all spoilers, just so you know.

I was really looking forward to this, because the original Ray Harryhausen stop-action film was so much fun. But instead, I’m infuriated!

It’s cynical, misogynist, and arrogant. The main problem is that they completely erase the role of most of the other gods of Olympus, making it a God VS Satan dualism between Zeus and “Hades”, which is what they’re calling the god of the Underworld. People: Hades is a PLACE. The god’s name is Hephaestus. [I've been reminded that yes, there is a god named Hades, but the '81 version it was Hephaestus, the metalworker. He made Bubo.] And Hades is not the equivalent of Hell, in the Christian sense. But I guess they don’t trust the American public with polytheism, or maybe they don’t want to offend the fundamentalists by suggesting it.

But it’s important: the original film (and Greek mythology generally) showed the gods arguing, bargaining with each other, and finding compromises. That helps explain the seeming randomness of fortune back on earth: there are consequences to intervening in our lives. In order to prevent utter disaster, someone else might have to suffer. It’s a very complex system, and no one on earth can understand it from our very limited point of view.

In the original, Perseus is an innocent, thrust into a confusing world at the whim of the gods. In this new CotT, Perseus is an angry young man who just wants to spit in the face of the gods who “killed” his family. He is singlemindedly vengeful, and is not even interested in adventure for its own sake, or the love of Andromeda. You can even see it in the way they represent the character, physically: Perseus in CotT (1981) is a curly-haired, nearly nude young Harry Hamlin, guided by the playwright Ammon (Burgess Meredith). He learns that the privilege he has is not an accident: his father is a god, and he understands that every man is presented with opportunity and fortune as a result of a history that has nothing to do with him. He fumbles his way through, forgetting his sword but being grateful for the help that he gets.

Perseus 2010 has a shaved head like a military man and rejects any of the help that the gods offer. He is played by Avatar’s Sam Worthington. But even though he prefers to make it on his own, it’s not because he aligns himself with humanity: when he is given a chance, he refuses to take on a leadership role, even when his men need it. He is entirely self-centred, thinking only of his need for revenge. In a Greek play, this hubris would usually lead to something terrible happening; in CotT, he is rewarded.

And women in this film are virtually invisible, and when they appear, they are powerless. In 1981, Hera (Claire Bloom) Thetis (Maggie Smith), Aphrodite (Ursula Andress) and Athena (Susan Fleetwood) all had a say in Olympus. It was love that motivated Perseus, not revenge. By eliminating the role of all but two gods, we remove just about all womens’ voices as part of the cosmic plan. And it’s shocking to hear Perseus 2010 refer to Medusa as “that bitch” after it is explained to us that she is cursed by Athena for being raped in her temple– victim-blaming at its most horrible. And Io, the only other woman with any significant role, is barely a presence; in fact, she becomes a PRESENT, literally gifted to Perseus by Zeus as a reward. She has no say in it, and doesn’t indicate any interest in him along the way, unless you count a parental role or a rape-like scenario where Perseus pins her down during a training fight.

Sure the animation is better now and the Kraken looks pretty cool. But in hindsight, there’s so much more charm in Ray Harryhausen’s stop-action compared to the fascistically perfect CGI of the 21st century, especially combined with the questionable politics of the new Perseus. They even make reference to the Harryhausen film, by finding the mechanical owl Bubo and throwing him away! Heartless.

And that’s the problem with Clash of the Titans ’10.  The playwright Ammon was our guide in 1981. In 2010, we have only soldiers. It has no poetry in it, literally.

We have to go to the Valley Zoo again!

I got to go to a photo op for a baby squirrel monkey this morning, and the zoo in the morning at this time of year is so quiet! I had a quick look around before I went home. The Arctic foxes were very active, and so were the alpacas. I imagine that the cold weather animals are going to be peppier at this time of year. The rest of ‘em are cosy in the winter pavilion.

Let’s go soon!

I hate to speak ill of children’s entertainers, but the more I think about it, the more it bugs me: the science in Ellen Chorley’s The Tortoise and the Hare is terrible. So much so that it kind of ruined the good parts of the show (the performances, the dazzling effects).

In it, the hare is a high-maintenance businesswoman who is hellbent on finding the best fuel source for Storyland’s satellite launch. She’s going to do it by any means necessary, which in this context means toxicity and greenhouse gasses be damned. The tortoise is trying to find a renewable source. Fine, a good message!

However, when the renewable resource ends up being LIQUID SUNSHINE mixed– slowly, natch– into a mysterious photoshynthesis-making solution that creates AIR to propel the rocket, well… I kind of lost it.

Air is not the primary product of photosynthesis. In the simplest of terms, sugar is. Sugar, which burns. Or ferments. They could’ve gone the biofuels route. But AIR? Seriously? Compressed air? And they had to simulate photosynthesis to get it?

Here’s how they could’ve made it awesome: instead of focussing on the product of the research, they could’ve written it as about the process. As in, the tortoise follows proper scientific method: experimentation, followed by careful repetition to see if there are consistent results. Science is all about slow and steady, so it would’ve been perfect. They almost went this route, but no.

It’s a real shame. It’s not OK to lie to kids, even if you think that the message to your story is good. If the message of the Tortoise and the Hare is to be careful and accurate, well, it’s undermined by the sloppy science. It’s kind of disrespectful to fudge the facts so much, especially when the show is all about taking the time to do it right.

So I spent 9 hours volunteering at the AGA today. It was awesome. Here’s why:

Volunteering is, overall, an awesome thing to do. People treat you like a superhero, and you get free pizza. People should volunteer more.

They started the tours on the third floor, where the Miller/Cardiff sound installation is. This means that people go to see the more conceptual media art first. This is good! And people love it! One dude said it was “As good as AC/DC.” I think that people are a little reluctant to see media art because it’s unfamiliar– they understand paintings and sculpture as art, but “sound” and “video” are intimidating. But once they see it, it makes sense. It’s stereo systems and TV’s, and we LOVE those things. AGA, take note! Don’t rely too heavily on old masters.

On the second floor, visitors had a chance to see the Storm Room, also by Miller/Cardiff. It’s a soothing break, and again, the subject of a lot of discussion. People said either, “We live on the prairies so a storm is no big deal,” which is sort of awesome when the idea of the room is simulated reality, or they love the experience of being in a storm, period. Kids love it, though!

I had a whirlwind tour of the Karsh in the last five minutes of the gallery’s hours. It’s gorgeous. And also, a great place to people-watch. My favourite? “Look, that’s Churchill. And Einstein. OOOOH! BRYAN ADAMS!” Or some kid: “Is that Einstein? How old is he?” People instantly recognize his most famous images.

Then, downstairs to the Degas and Goya. I didn’t have a chance to see the Goya, but the Degas crowds were fascinating. The security guard asked me if this was a famous painter. I told him yes, but less famous than Leonardo Da Vinci, who he did know. He was cool– recently immigrated from India, waiting to get landed immigration status to start his EMS certification. Anyhow, some people were put off by the idea that they were looking at casts from original wax sculptures, but I explained to them that sculptors don’t usually exhibit wax, that making bronze sculptures involves making wax moulds for castings anyways. The idea of “original” is kind of grey when it comes to sculptors (and printmakers, and photographers). I think the AGA could make this point stronger, to avoid alarmist “THE STATUES ARE COPIES!” articles like the one in Vue this week. Of course they’re copies. It’s not a big deal. The drawings, in pastel, are real. And some of the frames as original, as pointed out by a grinning Catherine Crowston, who took a shift protecting the artwork!

All in all, the reception to the art was as interesting as the works themselves. People looked in awe, intimidation, or boredom. All fair  reactions.  As crowds walked by, they would smile, or mouth silently, “WOW!” Some people would wait impatiently as their waited for friends to finish looking, ladies would discuss heatedly this or that photo. Gallery educators answered questions, and posed some themselves.

I hope people take advantage of the AGA. Memberships are relatively inexpensive, and they are planning once-a-month free admission (Family Day is the next one). Once the hype has worn down, free days are going to be awesome. You should go! Or volunteer, and get passes. See? Everyone wins.

PS they’re looking for volunteers for the chic Refinery party next Saturday. For $45 a pop, it’s out of a lot of people’s range, but you can go for free (and get a pass!) if you volunteer.

Dear Hollywood, more Paul Bettany please. Even in this, he’s quite lovely.

Legion is, I think , an attempt at the Christian-horror genre. It’s not good, but it’s interesting in its own ways. In fact, as Christian horror, it’s an utter failure, unless you think that the whole angels-as-killer-zombies thing is NOT blasphemous. If you can let go of that, you might have a good time, if you also let go of the fact that it’s deeply silly.

And oh yeah, there’s the whole sometimes-you-have-to-disobey-to-do-the-right-thing problem. I can’t imagine that’ll go over well.

In it, God is so ticked off, he’s wiping the slate clean. But the angel Michael loves us so much that he’s willing to renounce his wings and disobey his boss to help out a group of misfits in an isolated roadside diner. After all, the waitress is pregnant with the blessed child sent to save us all. Kind of like Terminator.

But there’s no flood this time, instead, He’s going with the very inefficient zombie massacre route. Apparently angels can possess the weakest-minded humans to do their dirty work, which give us the pleasure of seeing a little granny go all Exorcist on us, climbing the walls and spitting out hateful theology. The ice cream man even gets a little werewolfy, growing elongated limbs. And there’s a creepy child. There must always be a creepy child.

But really. If God wants to get rid of his most beautiful creation, why would He do it in a way that is so easily thwarted with machine guns? Or why not possess one of the people in the diner?

And the whole love-the-human-race-so much thing is done up much better in Wings of Desire. I would love to see that again.