The Stew

I just got a grinder attachment for my standing mixer. I’d been meaning to get one for about 20 years now, but never got around to it.

First thing I ground was a chuck steak. It was pretty lean, so I ground up a couple of pieces of bacon with it to make up for the lack of fat. I ground it twice — once with a coarse die, then a finer one. I mixed in a little bit of salt (the bacon, I figured, is salty) and some fresh ground pepper, then loosely formed some patties and fried them up in a hot skillet.

A toasted bun, some avocado and HOLY CRAP THESE ARE GOOD.

Seriously, you may have heard some people on the Food TV telling you to grind your own meat for burgers — and they weren’t lying. And this was just a cheap chuck steak! I’m looking forward to trying out some different cuts of meat to see what else I’ve been missing out on for no good reason.

I’ve seen a lot of chatter about Inception, and it’s definitely a worthy subject for debate. Is it a meta-narrative about movie making? Is it a heist flick with delusions of grandeur? And did that top fall at the end or not?

What I find tedious in the discussions is the inevitable film “expert” who insists that Inception is nothing noteworthy. As if all this digital ink has been spilled about a topic not worthy of the expert’s time, but it’s apparently worth noting that it’s nothing noteworthy.

It’s noteworthy for many reasons, and not just the finer points of “what’s it all mean” that everyone has an opinion about:

• It’s not a sequel. It references several earlier movies, but isn’t based on them or a re-imagining of anything.
• It’s remarkably stingy with its computer effects. So much of the action is in-camera, like the scene pictured here, that it stands apart from typical summer action fare.
• It’s relatively smart. It’s not incomprehensible; it’s layered. There’s a lot going on, including four concurrent action sequences, and it fits together remarkably well.
• It’s successful. It’s the number 1 movie two weeks in a row, which isn’t bad for a long, thought-provoking actioner. It’s not revelatory in the sense that denser (Webster definition 1a) Hollywood projects will suddenly get green-lit over ones that are merely dense (Webster definition 2a) — but maybe it opens the door slightly to make that process easier. We’ll have to wait and see.

There have been a couple of times, watching some TV show or movie, when a piece of music suddenly appeared and the combination of images, emotions, lyrics and notes elevated whatever was going on. The use of “This Woman’s Work” in the film She’s Having a Baby is an example of how it can work brilliantly for dramatic effect.

I was thinking about that recently because I ran into an example this week that fires on all cylinders… in a video game, of all places.

I’ve heard the song “No Rest for the Wicked” by Cage the Elephant, and it’s okay. It’s fun, even. But pair it up with the pseudo-cell-shaded, dark-humored goodness of the sci-fi RPG shooter Borderlands and you’ve got a toe-tapping intro that revels in its own bad-assery.

If you’re the type of person who would enjoy a sci-fi RPG shooter, I defy you to watch that and not want to play this. It’s damn near perfect in setting up the visual and emotional tone of the game.

“District 9″ is not, despite some hyperbole to the contrary, the second coming of sci-fi cinema. But it has engendered some strong feelings — both positive and negative.

Yeah, there are clever allegories… and yeah, there are plot holes. Depending on who you talk to, the shaky-cam documentary-style cinematography is either a brilliant way to add to the sense of realism or a nausea-inducing brain fart of a first-time filmmaker. The third act is either a non-stop thrill ride or an unfortunate pandering to Hollywood sensibilities. The CGI effects are either gritty and utterly believable or a digital mess that comes off more as a demo reel than an element of an actual movie.

I’ve argued with people about various aspects of this movie, I’ve discussed its themes, and I’ve taken note of the way people are really arguing about his film. What I didn’t note during all that arguing and discussing is, I believe, one of the most important aspects of this movie: Fun.

I haven’t had this much fun at a movie in a long time. “Star Trek” was fun-ish,  but “District 9″ is made of fun. It’s brutal, sad, uplifting, funny — sometimes simultaneously. It’s filled with gore in exactly the way the “Saw” films aren’t, and I uncharacteristically found myself cheering as bodies exploded like water balloons.

And the digital characters? I want to rub George Lucas’ face in this film, because director Neil Blomkamp understands how to get a dramatic performance both from real actors and things that only exist in a computer and our imaginations. I was constantly impressed with what I was seeing, and I couldn’t wait to see what was coming next.

I understand some of the criticisms that have been leveled at the film, and I even agree with some of them. But doesn’t anyone go to the movies just to have fun any more? I’m not talking about Adam- Sandler-esqe in-one-eye-and-out-the-other comedic fun. I’m talking about genuine glee.

That’s got to be worth something.

Lowered expectations FTW.

I’m not a huge Shrek fan. I thought the first one was amusing, the second one was mildly amusing, and the third one — well, I couldn’t be bothered with it. The missus reports that it was slightly less than mildly amusing, so at least it fits a pattern.

So I almost skipped the TV special Shrek the Halls. Can you blame me? Look at the incredibly lame promotional still. These things are supposed to make you want to watch the show. In the modern parlance, epic fail.

In order to get me to actually watch this thing, two great truths won out: 1) broadcast TV is still free; 2) DVR space is cheap. So I devoted roughly 3 gigs to recording it.

I can’t believe I actually thought this thing was funny. Laugh-out-loud at times, even. It should have been as completely lame as this picture, but it wasn’t.

It helps that the entire star-filled cast was involved. You’d almost expect a series of B- to D-listers to be asked to do the voices, just to keep costs down. (Let’s fill the comments with who could have provided voices. How about Kathy Griffin for Fiona?) These are real actors doing, generally, a really good job. Cameron Diaz seemed to be the only one who wasn’t having a blast, but that’s because Fiona spends the entire show being the straight guy… gal… ogre. Antonio Banderas and Eddie Murphy are both better than they needed to be, and Mike Myers, when his accent isn’t going all wonky, is perfectly acceptable.

The animation in HD looked pretty damn good, but Dreamworks can’t match Pixar when it comes to facial animation. At times, it seemed like the voices were floating out of the heads of the characters, rather than being perfectly in synch with what their mouths were doing. It’s possible that the sound was broadcast just a hair off from the video, but I think I remember that phenomenon at the movie theaters with the Shrek movies as well.

All in all, definitely worth a look. Especially for the 20-second “pigs in a blanket” meta-joke.

Every now and then, there’s a magic summer for movies. 1982 was like that: with “E.T.,” “Blade Runner” and “Star Trek II” all in theaters, it was a good time to be alive. Alas, the opposite is true as well — there is, every now and then, a summer of black holes, sucking the time and life out of us. 1998 was like that: with “Godzilla,” “Armageddon” and “Star Trek 10,” it was a good year to play outside instead.

So far this year, it’s been more magic on TV than black holes — not as magic as 1982 (nothing ever will be), but we’ve exited a trough and are on our way up. New shows just seem better than they have in the recent past. I’m willing to chalk some of that up to lowered expectations (Bionic Woman), but some shows are just plain good (Journeyman).

Let’s talk bionics, first. Bionic Woman (notice the lack of a “The,” which isn’t the only departure from the original) is a re-imagining of the 70s sci-fi TV series, from the same minds that brought us the re-imagining of another 70s sci-fi TV series, Battlestar Galactica. As with the other re-imagining, this one is darker and sexier than the original, though not necessarily smarter.

Let’s face it, this is a dumb show. The pilot is basically a series of scenes we’ve seen in other, better projects, ranging from “The Matrix” to “La Femme Nikita” (the movie, not the TV show) and about a dozen other sources. Michelle Ryan may be the hottest thing on TV right now, but that’s not enough to get people other than me to tune in. Well, maybe a few more people than me.

The thing is, this show had such a negative buzz going in, based on the leaked pilot episode (which I never watched), that I had absolutely zero expectations going in. And I was richly rewarded for that, because this reshot pilot is a lot better than I expected. Dumb, but okay. Maybe a little better than okay. Definitely good enough to keep watching, which is more than I can say for shows like Standoff from last season.

Journeyman, on the other hand, is genuinely good. Equal parts Quantum Leap and Life on Mars, it’s almost as derivative as Bionic Woman but it cribs from better material. It’s also better written and acted, which is a huge plus.

I like the complicated dynamics of the cast, and the way they were introduced. When lead character Dan Vassar has a conversation with his brother Jack in a police station, in the span of two sentences it becomes clear that Dan is now married to one of Jack’s old girlfriends and there’s some residual feelings about that. They managed to get this information across in a natural way, without stilted dialogue that explicitly spells out the relationships. Of course, a few scenes later, they explicitly spell out the relationships for people who weren’t paying attention.

Still, this is one of the most promising pilots I’ve seen since Lost. It’s also nice to see someone who was in “The Lost Skeleton of Cadavra” getting some regular work.

Next to check out: Reaper, which I’ve been led to believe is another example of how this TV season is shaping up to be a good one.

I hate “Grease.” Oh, wait, that’s not what this is about.

Everyone knows that television in the summertime is the dumping ground for cheap-to-produce crap. But this year, between “So You Think You Can Merengue” and “So You ‘Celebrities’ Think You Can Merengue,” we’ve got “Burn Notice.” Essentially, it’s “The Equalizer” for people too young to know who Edward Woodward is.

It’s not a perfect show, but it does have Bruce Campbell in it. At times, it’s readily apparent that it has been scripted by a computer (mother and rebelious teen daughter are in danger, and hidden away in a safe house… what are the chances that before the end of act 2, the daughter will sneak out and find herself in trouble), but it takes place in Miami and features a lot of beautiful scenery. By beautiful scenery, I mean bikinis.

It’s not perfect, but it’s better than we usually get in the summer. So watch it, unless you’re out enjoying the weather or something.