| Search |
| Navigation |
| Syndicate |
|
| User login |
Movies
Well... I sort of appreciated it.
Would it have been that hard to let the camera stand still for more than a few seconds at a time? I really wanted things to slow down for a while now and then.
I'm trying to determine if "Casino Royale" was really the last movie I went to see in a theater. For tomorrow, I'm feeling compelled to go see "The Bourne Ultimatum."
But nope. Now, consulting my email archives, I remember. "Hot Fuzz" was the last movie I saw. In May. Maybe "Casino Royale" preceded that.
It will prove interesting to see the results of the election as they bubble up.
Election’s Impact on Info/Law:
In the House, it appears most likely that Rep. Howard Berman will take over the chairmanship of the subcommittee that handles intellectual property law. As National Journal’s Congress Daily noted, we can expect him to ‘protect his nearby Hollywood interests by cracking down on piracy and protecting against copyright infringement of TV, music and movie productions.’ In general terms, that means restrictive IP law that favors content producers and rightsholders and hostility toward flexibility or expansion of fair use. That’s the bad news for Info/Law. The good news is that Congressman Ed Markey, a champion of consumer-oriented telecom and internet policy (and sponsor of the network neutrality amendment in the House earlier this year) will take over the subcommittee with the most power over these issues; the full Committee on Energy & Commerce will be helmed by John Dingell, who is pretty good on telecom as well. In addition, Rick Boucher, another consistent advocate for balanced information policy, particularly fair use and library concerns, will be a very senior Democrat on the Judiciary Committee (and possibly on Berman’s subcommittee). Finally, there is reason to hope education-oriented Democrats like Dale Kildee may pay attention to the serious and growing problems relating to educational uses of digital content.
I don't know how this post slipped away from me. Perhaps it was just a busy time of the semester. Such time periods do tend to arise.
Anyhow, I love the Dirty Harry movies, even The Dead Pool. Truth be told, Sudden Impact is by far my least favorite, despite its introduction of what is arguably Harry's most famous catch-phrase.
However, one of my long-time favorite exchanges came in the original:
District Attorney Rothko: Where the hell does it say that you've got a right to kick down doors, torture suspects, deny medical attention and legal counsel? Where have you been? Does Escobedo ring a bell? Miranda? I mean, you must have heard of the Fourth Amendment. What I'm saying is that man had rights.
Harry Callahan: Well, I'm all broken up over that man's rights!
Of course, most people know about the reading of our rights that Miranda has wrought; as a long-time watcher of "Cops", I've seen the readings in action. What I didn't know was how they came about, and I didn't really know what Escobedo had to do with anything. In Criminal Procedure this past semester, I finally found out. It was exciting.
Miranda, as it happens, has provided us with a wonderfully complex series of decisions. As the (Rehnquist) Court repeatedly emphasized, Miranda is a prophylactic. The Miranda warnings themselves are not Constitutional requirements. Instead, the Court requires their reading to protect Fifth and Sixth Amendment rights. That is to say, failure to read Miranda warnings itself isn't a violation of a Constitutional right; however, such a failure will make it very difficult for the state to use a confession or other evidence gained from a custodial interrogation.
And Escobedo? Well, Escobedo really just laid the groundwork for Miranda, as part of a series of cases showing police abuse of power.
What brought on writing this? For the second time in as many weeks, posts at BMWSportTouring.com have brought up the notion of random police stops of motorcycles, and there's a constant refrain that "if you haven't done anything wrong, why worry about the police performing a stop?" In this most recent stop, it sounds as if it's a Constitutional checkpoint stop, a la Prouse. But in the first one we heard about, an open-road stop to check documentation, it sounded much more questionable. And my point? The reason we constrain police is because when we haven't in the past, they've betrayed our trust.
Catch the trailer here. For a reimagining of "All work and no play."
Months ago, I activated the "Starz On Demand" feature on my DirecTV with TiVo system. Months went by, and I never saw the string of new movies I was supposed to get first.
Several weeks ago, movies started appearing like mad. Fun, new-to-cable movies, like "Rounders,""Jersey Girl," and "Harold & Kumar Go to White Castle." Yes, indeed. I'm sure getting all the great Starz exlusive movies first.
For the second time, the TiVo just gave me a "Starz On Demand""Ella Enchanted" recording. Early on, I got "The Pricess Diaries 2," but at least I didn't repeatedly get it.
Right now, I can't blame this on much other than the really crappy "upgrade" we got recently, which supposedly makes browsing the guide faster, at the expense of speed and usability in everything else. Please, please give me back my "typeahead" buffer. I'll trade you "Ella Enchanted."
| Browse archives | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
| IP/Tech Blawgs |
| Other Blawgs |
| Friends |
| USF Law Blawgs |