A unique and captivating film, it won France’s (National Academy of Cinema) Academy Award in 1989. Ostensibly about the sport of free-diving, it’s really much more about an unusual and extraordinary man named Jacques Mayol (played by Jean-Marc Barr) – his special connection to the sea (and dolphins), the woman who falls in love with him (Joanna, played by Rosanna Arquette) and his life-long friendship and competition with another free diver (Enzo, played by Jean Reno).

People who love this film tend to be quite passionate about it – especially those who saw the U.S. release, loved it, then bought/watched the Director’s Cut and hated it. I am one such person, and I’ve run across many others – not only online, but in meatspace, as well.

While I generally prefer director’s cuts (and found Luc Besson’s director’s cut of Léon to be far superior to the U.S. release The Professional), the director’s cut of The Big Blue is, in my opinion, terrible. 50 additional minutes of scenes that (for the most part) seem completely incongruous and unrelated. These scenes (especially the ones with Jacques’s Uncle Louie) don’t seem to develop anyone’s character nor do they advance the plot or even a subplot. On top of that, they’re visually ugly, while the rest of the film tends to be quite beautiful. Another good example is when Jacques becomes very vocal and angry after Joanna leaves. In the U.S. version, Jacques is quiet and enigmatic, paralleling the sea – as he does in so many other ways. (And yes, you could make the case that the sea sometimes becomes angry and volatile, but that just makes it more awesome and mysterious; in Jacques’s case it just makes him more human and ordinary.) To me, these scenes are a perfect example of the difference that a good editor makes. To me, they belonged on the cutting room floor.

Years ago I actually created (using DVDShrink in reauthoring mode) a version of the director’s cut that cut out all the extra scenes. Of course, it still had the director’s cut ending, but I actually prefer the somewhat mystical ending. I was excited to (sort of) be able to see the original version again. How disappointed I was. It’s incredible what a difference the soundtrack makes. Compare for yourself…

U.S. Version

Director’s Cut

You tell me… which one seems to “fit” better? (Frankly, the whole thing reminds me of this.

The score for the U.S. release was written by Bill Conti. It’s very “new age” (which is generally not my cup of tea) but in the context of a film that’s heavily focused on the mysteries (and tranquility) of the sea, the ethereal nature of Conti’s score is perfect. The score (by Eric Serra) in the director’s cut is much more electronic and not (in my opinion) in keeping with the character of the film. Serra, however, is a good friend of Luc Besson’s, so there can be no question that the Eric Serra score is what the director had in mind. (Although, in this case, that doesn’t necessarily make it better!)

The big problem with all of this is that the U.S. version was only released on VHS. Reportedly, Luc Besson hated this version, so it never made it to DVD. Now that the director’s cut has been released on Blu-Ray, I’m considering a project in which I would remaster the Blu-Ray, cutting the scenes which (for me) ruin the director’s cut and replacing the Eric Serra score with the Bill Conti score (which I have – just this morning – obtained in high bitrate (320kbps) MP3 format – though a copy of a CD, with uncompressed/never compressed audio would be a better starting point.)

There are three problems with such a project…

1. I need another project like I need another armpit.
2. I have no idea where my VHS copy of this movie went (and, disappointed with the soundtrack, I threw out the DVD I made long ago.) The good news is, it’s somewhere (I think) in my storage locker – which I’m planning to go through at the end of this month.
3. While I can easily blend in the Bill Conti soundtrack, I’m not sure it’s possible to strip away Eric Serra’s music while leaving the film’s non-music sounds and dialog intact. There are tools for doing this, but I’ve never used them and have no feel for how well they work.

If you, like me, have a fondness for the original U.S. theatrical release of this movie and would like to see this project completed (and copies made available) please let me know. (Especially if you can provide a VHS copy of the original U.S. release.) I’d also like to know your thoughts on the following…

If I do this, my inclination would be to make a hybrid version… using the ending in the director’s cut and probably keeping the Jacques-Joanna sex scenes. (Not for any lurid reasons, but because I think the scenes that follow are better for their inclusion.)

If I make copies available, they’d have to be on DVD, because I have no means for burning Blu-Ray discs.

Please see the comments for this post for updates.

No webcam? Come on – this would have been an AWESOME platform for Skype/videoconferencing. That’s OK, though, you can always hook up a USB webcam…

Oh, wait. No USB port?!?! That also means no external peripherals, hard drives, etc.

No SD card slot, either. In fact, the *only* way to get any data on this thing – music, photos, video, podcasts, etc. – is via iTunes. (And as a recent Linux convert who can no longer sync my iPhone, I can tell you- THAT BLOWS.)

Sure, it’s got wonderful Apple design- sleek and sexy – and at a pretty decent price, too. But man is this thing crippled. It’s basically a giant iPod Touch. Literally.

No, thanks.

Government should not be for sale.

Whether it’s an elected office or an issue, majority vote should rule. I’m so sick of this or that organization sending me an email stating, “We need to fight/win this… can you send us $X?” – as if throwing money at the problem is going to solve it. As if enough money can buy a victory. That’s just deplorable.

What’s perhaps more deplorable is that they’re right.

And what’s even more deplorable is that this has become essential.

It has become essential because the special interests are throwing their money around. They give generously to the campaigns of our representatives, then, when the time comes, they say, “time for the payback.” And if the overwhelming majority of that Senator’s constituents feel differently? Too bad. Unless, of course, enough money can be raised to publicly pressure them into voting with their constituents and against the big money donors that sent them to Washington. But what, then, when it’s time for reelection?

To say that our government is badly broken is an incredible understatement. Likewise, saying that we need to break the hold of special interest groups and lobbyists on our elected officials is mind-numbingly obvious. That we need major, significant campaign finance reform? DUH?!?!

I think it’s time for a new political party. The Reform Party of America. The party platform? One plank: Majority rules. Rewrite campaign finance laws until special interests (and their fat checkbooks) have been purged from the political process and the voice of the majority is the deciding factor.

Following is an interview with fictitious Reform Party of America candidate, Roger E. Form…

Q: Where do you stand on the issue of a flat income tax?

A: Whatever the majority of my constituents are for, that’s how I’ll be voting.

Q: Where do you stand on the issue of gun control?

A: Whatever the majority of my constituents are for, that’s how I’ll be voting.

Q: But aren’t you a lifelong member of the NRA? As well as an avid hunter?

A: Yes, but that really has no bearing. As a member of the Reform Party of America, I’m sworn to vote in accordance with the wishes of the majority of my constituents.

Q: So, regardless of your status as an NRA member, you would vote in favor of gun control if the majority of your constituents were for it?

A: I live in Texas and, if elected, I’ll be representing Texans. Fortunately for me, the majority of my constituents share my personal views on gun control, but as a member of the Reform Party, I would absolutely vote in opposition to my personal beliefs if that was the intent of the majority of my constituents.

Q: How would you respond to your party’s critics who say that this is an utopian viewpoint and not actually possible?

A: I have taken the pledge to vote in accordance with the wishes of the majority of my constituents, regardless of my own personal beliefs or stance on any given issue. Other Reform Party candidates across the country have made the same pledge. If my constituents elect me, that’s one.  And I’m personally committed to setting an example. To proving that, yes, people can live up to their promises – even if it means doing something or voting in a way that’s not necessarily in keeping with their own personal views. As the example is set, and other Reform Party candidates set the same example, the public will have to realize that, at some point, this is possible. That this vision can become a reality.

Q: How do you propose to know the wishes of the majority of your voters?

A: By facilitating the means and opportunity for them to sound off on any and all issues that I’ll be voting on. The Reform Party wants to do everything possible to make it easy and convenient to sound off on an issue. The Internet, of course, makes short work of such a task, but obviously we have to give voice to those with no Internet access.  One possible way to do this is using the “One Laptop Per Child” approach to put a connected voting device in the household of every person that wants one. Those who can afford to pay for them, do so, and in so doing, subsidize those who can not afford to pay. Another possibility (which is probably less costly) is to place public voting terminals in public places, from grocery markets to laundromats to check cashing businesses, etc.

Q: Wouldn’t such public terminals create serious potential for voting fraud?

A: There’s already a model that demonstrates how safe something like this can be. They’re called ATMs, and they operate with little or no susceptibility to fraud. As long as we treat votes with the same level of seriousness that we treat bank account balances, there’s really no reason to think this can’t work.

Q: How does your party propose to purge special interests from government?

A: By any (legal) means necessary. [candidate chuckles] Really, whatever makes sense. Whatever will work. One proposal I’ve heard is to enact election reform law such that primaries are used to narrow the field down to three or four (or some reasonable number that’s greater than two) candidates. Then, all campaign contributions are made to the race and not to a specific candidate. All the candidates in that race (as ratified by the primary process) are then entitled to equal shares of the campaign finances.

Q: So when a special interest group gives money to the candidate of their choice, they’re actually giving equally to all the candidates in that race?

A: Precisely. And since that pretty much defeats their purpose, they can simply hang on to their money and use it for purposes that will hopefully benefit the local, national or global economy in some way, whether it’s creating jobs or through some sort of trickle-down. If you think about all the money that goes toward electing every candidate at every level of government from local/municipal to Federal, the numbers are staggering. The potential good that could otherwise be done with all that wasted money is one of the cornerstones of the Reform Party of America, and the reason that I, and every other Reform Party candidate have taken the pledge.

Q: So, at some point, there’d be no good reason for private campaign contributions?

A: That’s the hope.

Q: By giving each person a single vote on every issue, are you, at some point, moving toward a system where elected officials are obsolete?

A: Off the record, I suspect that most Reform Party candidates would tell you, “Hey, I’d be fine with that.” But realistically, I’m not sure that’s plausible. Running a government, at any level, is pretty much a full-time job. Average Americans have enough on their plates just trying to pay the mortgage, raise their families, plan for college expenses and retirement, and so on.  Most don’t have the bandwidth to be  actively engaged on every single votable issue. But there will be issues that they care about deeply, and on those issues, they’ll want to make their voices heard.

Scott Downard - - 11/21/1962 - 2/7/2009

Scott and I had so much in common. We both loved music (and loved much of the same music.) We both loved movies and home theater. We both loved cars and computers and gadgets and the list goes on and on. So often I would find something cool- a great CD, an awesome website, or a cool piece of software, and I’d tell Scott about it. I don’t have that with anyone else, and I don’t know that I ever will again.

Recently, Scott got a phone like mine (but a newer, cooler model) and I was so looking forward to sharing with him all the cool stuff I had found for mine. For months, now, I’ve been obsessed with designing my own user interface, and I knew Scott would really dig that, too. But he never got the chance.

I’m struck by all the things Scott left undone… all the things I know he wanted to do or would have enjoyed. 46 is far, far too young to die.

Goodbye, Scott

Scott got me started in computers, and helped me fix it every time I really screwed things up. He was like my safety net, and as a result, I was free to really play and explore. He was incredibly patient (to a fault- literally, I think) and not the least bit competitive. So when the pupil surpassed the master, he was happy for me – and happy to learn whatever I could teach him. Bottom line, though, is that the living I’ve made for most of the last 20 years probably wouldn’t have been possible if not for Scott. Certainly my life would have taken a very different path.

Scott shared my passion for stereo equipment, and we built a subwoofer together. That thing would (literally) rattle not only the windows, but your innards. Scott was incredibly proud of that thing. I introduced Scott to high end audio, and took him to his first high end salon so he could hear Magneplanars. Just as I had been, Scott was instantly smitten, though I’m not sure he ever aspired to own a pair himself. (Scott was a lot of great things, but he wasn’t terribly ambitious. I really admired how content Scott was with what he had. It was an outlook I’ve never mastered.) When I got him a Class A amplifier kit as a gift, we had a great time building it together and marveled at the detailed sound it produced. It exceeded both our expectations.

I introduced Scott to Stevie Ray Vaughan, and he became as big a fan as I ever was. Scott became a blues man, collecting and listening to music from B.B. King, Albert King, Buddy Buy, Eric Clapton and more. Scott and I went to see Kenny Wayne Shepherd play (and we both left the show talking not so much about KWS, but about Stu Hamm, Joe Satriani’s bass player. Neither of us had any idea that an electric bass could make such sounds.) Krista and I also took Scott to see John Lee Hooker, Little John Chrisley and Corby Yates.

When Scott died, I took it upon myself to do the music for the service. Beyond that, I wanted to make the CD available to his friends. It was a labor of love, and no small task. Scott’s tastes were as diverse and eclectic as my own; condensing them down to a single CD proved impossible. Two CDs was quite difficult, but I managed.

When Krista and I got the call, we naturally packed in a hurry and headed to Pahrump to be there for Gene & Charlotte. We arrived the day he died and were there for all the funeral arrangements and so forth. When we met with the funeral director and he told us that their little chapel seated 80 people comfortably and as many as 100 if people were willing to squeeze together a bit. We all thought that this would be adequate, but we underestimated Scott’s impact on this community. When I got up to speak, all the pews were full, people were standing along the back wall of the chapel, and there was overflow into (and filling) the vestibule.

Someone once said that a man’s wealth is measured by the number and depth of his friendships. By that measure, Scott was a rich man, indeed. In talking to all these people, not one mentioned liking him. They all loved him.

Another striking thing about the service was that so many people had worn Hawaiian shirts. When I bought Scott his first XXXL Hawaiian shirt, little did I know that he would come to be known for wearing them just as much as I have. Yet another thing we shared, and for the same reason…

Some folk built like this,
some folk built like that
But the way I’m built,
now don’t ya call me fat
Because I’m built for comfort,
I ain’t built for speed
But I got everything
all the good girls need

Some folk rip and roar,
some folk b’lieve in signs
But if you want me,
you got to take your time
Because I’m built for comfort,
I ain’t built for speed
But I got everything
all the good girls need

I don’t have no diamonds,
I don’t have no gold
But I’ve got a lot of lovin’
to satisfy your soul
Because I’m built for comfort,
I ain’t built for speed
But I got everything
all the good girls need

from Howlin’ Wolf’s “Built For Comfort“

And like the cherry on top of a hot fudge sundae, this amazing sunset…

I stitched this panorama together. It came out pretty good, I think.

Starting to get even better…

and better and better…

Even the finale was pretty grand.

What a great day!

I have the originals, taken with an 8.1 MP camera. (Panasonic DMC-FZ18 in case you’re wondering.) If anyone wants a full-size copy, I’m happy to share.

Photos here

The main thoughts in my head as I left…

1. I never knew that, from day one, our nuclear arsenal was intended as a deterrent, never to be used.
2. The quantity and sophistication of safeguards implemented (to insure that there was never an “accident”) are very impressive.
3. How incredible that this stuff is so antiquated that they’re showing it to the public
4. How wonderful that these things were never put to use.
5. People like George W. Bush should never, EVER be in charge of if/when such things are used.

ADMINISTRATOR – that’s computer for “ALL POWERFUL GOD-LIKE ENTITY”

So, imagine my surprise when I tried to move a folder and Vista said, “You need permission to do this.”

If the freaking ADMINISTRATOR doesn’t have permission, then who the hell does???

A quick google search on “logged in as administrator” AND “you need permission” reveals that THOUSANDS of users all over the world have had the same problem. Digging through a sampling of these thousands of search results, I quickly deduced the following:

There is no single, accepted, works-for-everyone solution.

Disabling User Account Control, taking ownership of the file, starting the command prompt as Administrator and doing it from there, restarting Windows in Safe mode, even nuke & pave (reinstalling Windows from scratch) doesn’t always resolve the issue!

In my case, the thing that ended up working was copying the folder, pasting it to the new location, then deleting the original. Yeah, Vista was OK with that.