An open letter to employees in New Zealand, on behalf of all Arts graduates.

Greetings and salutations,

I hope you find this polite and to the point, it is neither my intention to lick your shoes nor waffle on about my skills. You are an employer, I am a graduate. You have money and a job that needs doing; I am broke with time on my hands. Do not treat me like a fool. Putting ‘comprehensive prior experience’ as a prerequisite for whatever banal position you care to throw into the market – as the gorged diner throws his scraps to the dogs – does not change nature of the job itself.

I am a Bachelor of Arts graduate, which means I spent at least three years buried in academia. Three years of experimenting with ideas and points of view, learning how to deconstruct an argument and assemble another from scratch. I was not allowed to have ideas of my own, I wrote what others before me had said; fastidiously referenced it all. I came through it with knowledge of political systems, the basics in policy making, even the vagaries of Japanese Kabuki theatre. I can learn anything, question anyone, and argue any point.

You want me to have experience in the kind of job you’re offering? I want it too; why not give it to me? Employment law now says you can sack me within 90 days, so give me that chance to prove myself. You hold all the cards, so ditch the automated system that filters out the best applicants on account of them declining to put all the right buzz words into the fields. Treat me as a human being, I studied humanities – I know the difference.

Sincerely,

An Arts Graduate

Don't Rock the Boat: Key's Election Year Strategy

Prime Minister John Key is stepping into this election year with a massive advantage - the economy is doing well. Extremely well in fact. Recent projections put the rate of economic growth at 3.3%, against the 2.3% OECD average (figures sourced here). If the Clintonian motto, "It's the economy, stupid" still has currency (and I believe it does) then it is clear that the National-led government has a good chance of keeping the government benches. His strategy is simple, focus on the economy and don't rock the boat.

The well worn approach of "trust me, I'm John Key", remains the government's most effective weapon, however it is subject to diminishing returns. For an increasing number of people the Prime Minister's grinning, dismissive nature has become condescending, and patronizing. While that number is no where near critical mass, these people are voters who occupy the centre ground. If he steps too far and fans that particular flame, the resulting burn will be fatal. Even so, what is a small minority this year will be crucial body in 2017. As governments age their opponents increase in number and the public forgives less easily. And Cunliffe is the most formidable opponent Key has faced since Helen Clark. The Labour leader will not make it an easy competition, and I wouldn't bet against him just yet.

Who moved my mic?

So John Key's first task is to shore up his leadership credentials - more vital now than in 2011, with a resurgent opposition and effective Labour leader. To this end he has started extremely well with scoring a golfing photo op with President Obama while they holidayed in Hawaii. A perfect opening for an election year, putting Key at the forefront of the charge - so much more necessary now since the rising stars of Judith Collins and Stephen Joyce have attracted media interest in their leadership potential. It is also a photo op that David Cunliffe simply cannot compete with.

Bored John? The things you have to do to win a third term...

Key's cunning in securing a royal visit from the Duke and Dutchess of Cambridge in April, deserves a round of applause. It is a chance (like golf with Obama) to re-emphasize his own leadership, but more than that it damages the republican movement - which is largely a Labour/Green bloc. Monarchist sympathy exploded when Prince William last visited, the smart money is on that sympathy reaching titanic proportions when the Duchess and baby-Prince come to. Like the doomed liner the monarchist feeling will be short lived, as it is based on surface level events, not convincing argument, but it will certainly have an impact on election results.

The 2014 budget is also going to be a formidable tool for the governments electoral success. Their plan for insulating the economy against future shocks by 2016/17 by further restraining public sector spending so they can pay down debt, is only convincing in isolation. They will try to shout down opposition criticism, and if that fails (as it conceivably will considering the skills of David Cunliffe, David Parker, and Russell Norman) they will revert to "trust me" politics.

Don't rock the boat! We can see this in Murray McCully's impotent statements that although whaling is completely indefensible, New Zealand has no jurisdiction over the actions of the Japanese whaling fleet inside the southern ocean whale sanctuary. It would be a risk (politically as well as physically) to send the HMNZS Otago to monitor the fleet, but it would set a precedent. He won't though, the government sold their international courage along with other assets.

McCully's election year pose

Support party survival is the government's Achilles heel, but it is likely that Colin Craig will manage to scrape through. If this is the case then the fifth National Government (a technically incorrect but convenient name) will continue in the 51st New Zealand Parliament. Key just has to not rock the boat.

The Desolation of Smaug

I will not transgress the sturdy boundaries of brevity in this review. I am not engaging in either intense criticism, nor protracted fawning. If you haven't yet seen The Desolation of Smaug then I offer you a frank, yet humble reason why you should.

Firstly, I write with the assumption that you, dear reader, sustained a degree of disappointment with An Unexpected Journey. A solid preamble to be sure (if rather protracted, to the discomfort of the less bladder controlled), but something of a narrative mess. Furthermore, the high frame rate (HFR), coupled with the busy nature of 3D, left much (or a lot less!) to be desired. Middle Earth felt familiar, but less genuine.

The aforementioned issues compounded the usual problems encountered by the first in a pre-concieved trilogy (so the Matrix, Raiders of the Lost Ark, and initial Pirates of the Carribean are exempt from the rule). The first film has to introduce the core characters, build audience sympathy, thoroughly illuminate the many strands of the plot, and remain (in this case) reasonably close to the book. The curse of the first film is that the pay off for all this trouble does not occur until its sequel.

Think of the movie sagas that were conceived as more than one film in the first instance. The Empire Strikes Back is often considered the jewel of Star Wars. The Godfather Part II is the finest film Frances Ford Coppola has ever made. Every issue plaguing the success of the first movement in these grand cinematic endeavors is absent in the second - by definition.

Aiding The Desolation of Smaug is the slight modification of the effects, and the year we have had as audiences to come to terms with HDR. If you are one of the unfortunate viewers for whom HDR and/or 3D is always trouble, then you don't have to try it this time. Simply see the film in old school glory and enjoy yourselves.

Greame Tucket mentions in his Dominion Post review that the difficulty with the Hobbit from a screenwriting perspective is the great proportion of characters. The company of Thorin Oakenshield sits at fourteen and though all their names may be hard to keep in mind (I still confuse Oin, Bifur, Dwalin, Orry, and Norry), their individual characteristics are so particular, and thanks to Journey so familiar that you shouldn't get lost. The classic barrel sequence, and Bilbo's introduction to Smaug are highlights - Oscar fever is rightly warming.

I promised to be terse and so I shall, the reason to go to The Desolation of Smaug is it vindicates An Unexpected Journey, and proudly hits the mark of a great film.

Smarmy vs Smug

Chin-up David, It's not a blow but an opportunity.

In the most recent Fairfax Media-Ipsos (how many bloody names does it need?) poll, the post leadership election high David Cunliffe was enjoying, has burned out. No matter, it was always going to. I predicted as much although I have to admit being wrong on the timing (I thought the numbers would remain solid until the lead up to Christmas) but right in principle: the swell of support for Labour was shallow, only a temporary side affect of a fresh presence and frequent media attention. See the news story about the poll here.

This is not to say that Cunliffe has failed however, his greatest risk was the thin bubble of support not bursting until much later, for then he would not have the luxury of time to build a sturdy base of support before the next election. John Key is in a strong position, this cannot be contradicted, and he now has a strengthening economy and returning expat population to add weight to his bid for a third term.

What this does for Key is cement his position as National Party Leader until after the general election. Judith Collins in positioning herself to succeed him, but she won't stage a coup this term. In fact she will likely wait until Key goes of his own accord, then step in with the support of the 2008 and 2011 intake of National MPs

This should not concern the leftists, because David Cunliffe is at his best when his back is up against the wall. It's how he rebuilt his profile after Shearer demoted him, it is the nature of strong leaders. Helen Clark in 1996, Tony Blair in the lead up to the campaign in Kosovo. Achievements have to be taken though struggle and effort, and that is what Cunliffe is good at. Now he has the time and the opportunity. You want people to get out and vote? Then tell them you are going to save them from a disastrous National majority government, the likes of which no seen under MMP. Cunliffe will do this with his characteristic evangelical flair. 

Zero Dark Thirty

I finally got around to sitting down and watching Kathryn Bigalow's tale of the decade long manhunt for Osama Bin Laden. While just as uncomfortable in parts as I expected it to be, this film is utterly captivating. Having not yet seen the Hurt Locker (I know, I know) I don't have a point of reference from which to hang an in depth analysis, but I shall do my best in a few words. There is no romance, nor sex to give relief from the gritty and superbly realistic scenes of, Jessica Chastain gives a phenomenal performance. Charged by some as supporting torture, by others as criticizing the "enhanced interrogation techniques" of the Bush-era, Zero Dark Thirty does not actually do either of these things. Rather, it shows the torture and water-boarding as realistically as possible, showing too the toll it takes on the perpetrators, and the reliability of information gleaned from such means.

Bigalow avoided taking any particular stance with her film, few subjects are as mired in controversy and it would have been easy to get lost in political propaganda. The relentless search for Bin Laden needs no justification beyond that he was still managing Al-Qeada, and since 9/11 they had attacked Spain, Bali, London, New York. His location inside Pakistan and the need for the United States to engage in a covert operation without the prior knowledge of the corrupt Pakistani government narrowed the options of the team that went in and killed the terrorist. In a more perfect world I confess I would like to have seen him captured and put on trial, but that simply was not possible. He had to die. The film treats this extremely well by portraying it as a hard won end in a decade long enterprize that brought neither joy nor sadness. Chastain is critical to making this feel genuine, and she does with great aplomb. 

I really can say no more except that Zero Dark Thirty is an indispensable film. It is as crucial to the story of the war on terror as Schindler's List is to those studying the holocaust. Its remarkable to have lived through the post 9/11 period and now have a bookend like Zero Dark Thirty to conclude the epoch.  

The assault scene is gripping and spectacular.

Kick-Ass 2: Review of Sad Spoils

2010 delivered a stunning dash of originality with Kick-Ass, a fully realized comic book adaption that floated above the sea of the washed up cinematic failures, despite the existence of a fair number of narrative cliches and archetypal traps. It did so because it featured charismatic and memorable characters, a plot grounded in believable motivation, startling emotional depth, and it had the feel as if the film itself was ironically winking at you. Kick-Ass 2 while not sinking in the washed up sea, was content to float in it.

The main problem (though not the only one) was that the concept was misconceived. The original sin was to not make it clear at the outset that it was either Hit-Girl, or Kick-Ass's story. Jeff Wadlow endeavored to do both and therin lies the root of the problem. Hit-Girl stole the previous film, and Hit-Girl was who audiences wanted to see. The studio knew that and that is why they engaged in their misjudged fiddling with the screenplay, to try to lessen Hit-Girl's abrasiveness and take her on a journey through stereotypical high school girlhood. The reason ostensibly was to better reflect her older age. But that's not what we wanted. We fell for the Hit-Girl who puts a blade through a thugs chest and then addresses the four remaining thugs as 'cunts'. Fortunately we were not entirely deprived of the old Hit-Girl and Chloe Moretz is as brilliant as ever in her fight sequences. She even did her best with the banality of the material she was given in the conformity storyline.

The issue with that particular narrative soiree is that the idea of debutante style popular girls running the social gaol of high school, is a fiction to most people. I have never met an inmate of an American high school who says that a similar state of affairs exists at their institution. This is important because in holding up a stereotype for Ht-Girl/Mindy Mcreedy to conform to and ultimately reject, weakens the strength of her character, and it reduces all supporting characters around her to a single dimension. We like Hit-Girl because she is so radically different from us. By rejecting a place in a construct mired in cliche, she makes the same choice we would (that of refusing to conform) and becomes more similar. Thus she looses some of her power.

In basic terms the difference between Kick-Ass and Hit-Girl is the same as Luke Skywalker and Han Solo. As viewers we really want to be Han, but we feel more like Luke. We may not want to be Hit-Girl in quite the same way, but she is the bad-ass we admire. Kick-Ass is who we are.

Compounding the difficulties of the aforementioned story is that it plays out in tandem with the character development of Dave Lizuski aka Kick-Ass. First of all he is far less interesting than Hit-Girl, secondly his power as a character is he reflects us the viewers. He never really had a motivation to don the wet-suit and mask beyond that he was tired of petty thugs mugging with impunity, and the vague frustration that no-one before had tried to become a super hero. The makers of this film (I am not sure whether to accuse director Jeff Wadlow since the studio did interfere with calamitous results) decided it would make sense to give him one. Not content with this they chose to kill off his father to achieve a Bruce Wayne style dedication to the punishment of crime. As buttock-clenchingly cliched as this is, it serves to distance the audience from its ambassador, and waste the versatile talents of actor Garrett M. Brown. The abbreviated nature of his death deprived it of much of the emotional impact the film desperately needed. Nicholas Cage's death scene as Big-Daddy in Kick-Ass pulled this off superbly, and Chloe Moretz desperate fight in the strobe light as Big-Daddy burned was an absolutely stunning piece of cinema.

With the character development mishandled the final confrontation felt contrived, entertaining though it was. Again Moretz deserves high praise for her physical performance, Aaron Tailor-Johnson was also much more convincing in the physicality of his role. He clearly worked very hard to get into shape, and the lean, tough shape his character suggests. All the performers were exemplary, it is a very great pity that they were served with such drivel and expected to exceed the success of the first film. I hope I do not convince anyone to not see the film who otherwise would (it seems a trifle arrogant to believe I ever could do that), it is very entertaining and the action is of a high standard. Just don't expect the glory that was 2010 Kick-Ass, as we now know that really was one of a kind.

Post Script: On the off chance that a Universal executive reads this, if you do greenlight a sequel please for the love of all that is holy make it focus on Hit-Girl! That's the movie we wanted, with as many cuss words as possible.