Cinemas in the Netflix age

I am sure everyone knows about Netflix, the company that has made a roaring business out of mailing movie DVDs on a subscription basis. For most Americans who do not have a 70,000 title movie rental store nearby (most of us), it is amazing to find just about any movie one would like to see. But getting the DVD in your hand is just the first part of the solution. The movie makers don't imagine viewers watching their movies on a 30-inch screen, with bright lights or the sun washing out some of the more subtle colors, finger ready on the Fast-Forward or Pause to accommodate the phone, the neighbors, the kids and the door-to-door solicitors.

I remember watching Dances with Wolves at a cinema. I could not only appreciate the wide expanses of the frontier lands, I could also feel the weather, the snow, the winds and the sunsets that can create new philosophers. When I saw Omar Mukhtar: Lion of the Desert at the cinema, the sand and dust choked me and the sun burnt my face. But then again, they are action movies. But what floored me was when I saw Casablanca on the big screen (at Stanford Theatre) after seeing it on the small screen. There is hardly any action, no sweeping vistas, heck there isn't any color either! But, it was amazing.

I think I know why. In a movie theater, you are immersed in the experience. You have to pay attention. No remote to replay a scene, no phones to distract you, no expectations of interruptions, just you and your fellow moviegoers. This immersion is what is missing from the home theater experience.

So, here is an idea. Any entrepreneurs out there who feel like implementing it are more than welcome to it. Heck, you don't even need to credit me for it. I give it to the public domain. Moviegoing by subscription. Just like you make a list of movies to see in the request queue at Netflix and its competing services, you make a list and when there is enough interest, the movie theater gets hold of the movie and shows it. A perfect marriage of the old world and the new. Just imagine, watching Lawrence of Arabia on the big screen. Actually, if you start such a service, my first vote would be for Lawrence. I have seen it on the small screen a few times. I just want to see it in its full splendor.

Victory in Iraq

Well, our soldiers have now spent four years in Iraq. That is longer than we spent during World War II. And while fighting rages on in Iraq, debate continues on the home front. There are many who think we should call it quits in Iraq and bring all the soldiers home. There is even a website bringthemhomenow.org, detailing all the various pitfalls that American soldiers are facing in Iraq.

Then there are those who feel that American soldiers should not be recalled and allowed to win the war. They call the first group various names and accuse them of not supporting the troops.

Now, I may be just an ole farm boy from Iowa but let us look at some facts. More specifically, let us look at facts that would help us determine where we are now.

• President Bush said that he was sending the troops over to discover, secure and destroy Weapons of Mass Destruction (WMDs). The troops dug through everything and could not find any. Mission SUCCESS.
• Bush said that he was sending the troops over to topple Saddam Hussein because he had killed Iraqi citizens by gassing them and was an overall bad guy. Saddam Hussein's regime was destroyed and he went into hiding from where our soldiers captured him alive. Mission SUCCESS.
• Bush said that he was sending the troops over to bring democracy to Iraq. Iraq has had quite a few elections, a new constitution has been drafted and promulgated and many of the structures of democracy have been put in place. Mission SUCCESS.
• Bush said that he was sending the troops to build a just society. Saddam Hussein and some others close to him were tried in court and sentenced to death and hanged. Mission SUCCESS.

That makes four successes out of four reasons why we invaded Iraq. 100% success. That is amazing. The mission statement had four things in it and all four things got accomplished. So what are we waiting for? Mr Bush, our soldiers have done all you asked them to do four years ago. The entire list has been checked. Why wouldn't you declare victory, Mr Bush?

The US constitution says a lot about who can declare war and who is in charge of our troops but is not very clear about who has the power to declare victory. Maybe, if all the states, cities and people around the country started declaring victory, Mr. Bush just might listen...

Why religious right needs to embrace gay marriage

As we all know, members of the religious right are up in arms about same-sex marriage, pushing most states to amended their constitutions to explicitly forbid the recognition of same-sex marriages. Massachusetts is the only state to buck the trend and recognize same-sex marriages. Many on the right call same-sex marriages as an abomination, a crime against God, a crime against nature and a fundamentally Wrong Idea. Heck, there is even a catchy phrase "God created Adam and Eve, not Adam and Steve." Yet, I feel that the time has come for the religious right to not just tolerate same-sex marriages but even embrace them. Why?

Well, let us go back in history and see what marriages were like 2000 years ago. The poor did not have much and most of them perhaps did not even go through any proper ceremony to get married. The rich and powerful, on the other hand, saw marriages as an instrument to solidify and further their position in society. Kings and princes married wisely, hoping to inherit some lands through their wives. Merchants married off their daughters to potential business partners. In many cultures, marriages were decided long before the bride or the groom could entertain any contrarian thoughts. Love did not figure in the equation. The couple getting married were just pawns in the chess game played by their families.

But as the society has evolved, love has come to play a role in marriages. People are now expected to fall for someone, not simply paired up in a business transaction. That has led to inter-religion as well as inter-racial marriages (perhaps the most famous being between Mr. and Mrs. Loving).

So, what does this have to do with same-sex marriages? Well, the other trend that keeps a lot of priests and other religious leaders up at night is that many young people are foregoing marriage altogether. They have seen love go out of many a marriage and the aftershocks of a divorce scare them. So, people are living together, having children, maintaining a life as close to being married as possible but there is no marriage. If this trend takes hold, who would get married? The 10% who are truly religious? That would lead to another problem...

You see, the federal, state and local governments give many privileges (roughly 1,100!) to married couples that they don't give to unmarried couples, most famous being the ability to inherit from a spouse without paying any inheritance tax (and more importantly, automatically). So, as people start skipping the marriage part, they are going to find themselves in various legal limbos when they want to make medical decisions or trying to enroll their children in school. And so these unmarrieds are going to start demanding the same rights as married couples...

Do you see where I am going? By denying the same-sex couples these "married rights", the religious right is making it more likely that some of these "married rights" shall end up being granted to cohabiting couples as well. The people on the right should try to nip this problem in the bud by ending their opposition to gay marriage to make sure that marriage as an institution (and as a grantor of various rights and privileges) survives. After all, the gays are trying to follow the same process that everyone else has for many generations (be a kid, study hard, grow up, get married, have kids, help them grow up, enjoy grandkids...). Sure, some churches may face a schism much like the one faced by Episcopalians today, but things do work out in the end. After all, slavery, interracial marriages and civil rights have led to schisms in the past...