Inglourious Basterds

For all you Tarantino fans who liked his latest movie, history is perhaps not something he should have messed with, and especially not this history. Yes, it's fiction, but as a filmmaker is he exempt from historical truth? Exempt from being responsible with history? It seems some critics do not feel he has the knowledge or sensitivity to be in this realm. (See end of Newsweek and NY Times critique below.) Both critics had good things to say, but in their final assessment were not pleased with the film. His knowledge of pop culture and film is his forte and maybe that's what he should stick to. A rather dicey chance he's taken with this film.  Even though the story is fiction, unfortunately many people do not know the history of this time and might not discern fact from fiction. See quotes below:
___________________
"Tarantino's movie may be the latest, if the most extreme, example of a trend that shows just how fragile memory can be—a series of popular World War II films that disproportionately emphasize armed Jewish heroism (Defiance) and German resistance (Valkyrie, White Rose), or elicit sympathy for German moral confusion (The Reader). If so, it may be that our present-day taste for "empowerment," our anxious horror of being represented as "victims"—nowadays there are no victims, only "survivors"—has begun to distort the representation of the past, one in which passive victims, alas, vastly outnumbered those who were able to fight back. "Facts can be so misleading," Hans Landa, the evil SS man, murmurs at one point in Inglourious Basterds. Perhaps, but fantasies are even more misleading. To indulge them at the expense of the truth of history would be the most inglorious bastardization of all."
("'Inglourious Basterds’: When Jews Attack." By Daniel Mendelsohn, Aug 14, 2009.)  http://www.newsweek.com/id/212016

And NY Times:

"Cartoon Nazis are not new to the movies, and neither are fascinating fascists, as evidenced by Ralph Fiennes’s Oscar-nominated turn in “Schindler’s List.” Unlike those in “Schindler’s List,” Mr. Tarantino’s Nazis exist in an insistently fictional cinematic space where heroes and villains converge amid a welter of movie allusions. He’s not making a documentary or trying to be Steven Spielberg: Mr. Tarantino is really only serious about his own films, not history. In that sense “Inglourious Basterds,” which takes its title if not its misspellings from an Italian flick in “The Dirty Dozen” vein, is simply another testament to his movie love. The problem is that by making the star attraction of his latest film a most delightful Nazi, one whose smooth talk is as lovingly presented as his murderous violence, Mr. Tarantino has polluted that love. "
("Tarantino Avengers in Nazi Movieland." By MANOHLA DARGIS, Aug. 21, 2009.) http://movies.nytimes.com/2009/08/21/movies/21inglourious.html

Rachael Ray and Being Childless

Rachael Ray and Being Childless By Choice - The Juggle - WSJ. A reader comment: "Having children is not about fulfilling your personal fantasy for your life. They are not toys. They do not complete you or all the other crap you hear from some people. No human does that and the desperation with which some women approach having a child is proof enough that people are not thinking clearly about what it is to be a parent."

I have been doing searches on Julia Child since I saw the movie Julie&Julia this week. I guess I've picked up another theme via cooking: having children or not having children, by choice or by circumstance. For me, as for others, it was 'circumstances' (namely, TIMING - relationships ending, getting older, less energy, the dictates of biology, not paying attention to the facts of biology), and it has not been easy and is in last decision stages.

Elk Grove News.net: Weekend Movie Review; The Three J's - Julia, Julie and Joe

Elk Grove News.net: Weekend Movie Review; The Three J's - Julia, Julie and Joe: "Maybe the screen writer is the one to blame, but this movie just irked me so much. Julie seemed so fragile, a girl that you would hate to be married to... to think about it, she is trying to get fame from someone's else's hard work. recreating every recipe and blogging about the experience does not make her to be an instantaneous four star Author. How can you really bypass, years of hard work and dedication unlike many authors out there who writes about politics, social issues, fashion etc... who spent their whole lives researching and reporting. Don't get me wrong, blogging is a great way to share ideas and to flex the noggin muscle, but I think hard work has to come out from other aspects of any endeavor beside just one try."

This is similar to what I've said in previous posts about another 'instant writer' (I say -shaken, not stirred, and pour), so now I don't feel like 'sour grapes' for blogging about it.

Go Retro!: The Saucy Sex Life of Julia Child

Go Retro!: The Saucy Sex Life of Julia Child

I really enjoyed reading this post, especially as I did wonder about her reaction in the film Julie and Julia to her sister's announcement. I'm not sure, though, that having children or not has anything to do with 'making it' in a profession. One could say then that if you are childless you should be a Superstar because, after all, you don't have kids. Perhaps you would have a better chance at success without kids; that is, if you define success (as it seems this Blogger was), as attaining extraordinary wealth and/or fame.