pale-blue-dot1

Our Pale Blue Dot, floating in the Cosmos

From this distant vantage point, the Earth might not seem of any particular interest. But for us, it’s different. Consider again that dot. That’s here. That’s home. That’s us. On it everyone you love, everyone you know, everyone you ever heard of, every human being who ever was, lived out their lives.
— Carl Sagan, Pale Blue Dot: A Vision of the Human Future in Space

The year was 1990. Nelson Mandela was released from prison. East and West Germany reunified. The Hubble Space Telescope was launched. The Human Genome Project began. The United States engaged in Operation Desert Shield, in what would become the opening moves of the first Gulf War. Tim Berners-Lee created the first web server, which would become the foundation for the Internet when it was released to the public in 1991. Margaret Thatcher resigned as Prime Minister of England after serving in that capacity for 11 years. The Warsaw Pact began to collapse as Poland became the first of its member states to withdraw from that treaty and abolish its state socialist economy. The Channel Tunnel was completed. The Cold War ground to a halt.

And nearly four billion miles away from Earth, the Voyager 1 space probe turned its eye back toward home for the last time to take a series of pictures that would be known as the Family Portrait. It captured a shot of Earth, caught in a shaft of light — a single blue pixel hanging in the great vast blackness of eternity.

Voyager 1 was launched September 5, 1977. It completed its primary mission in November 1980, having taken detailed pictures of Jupiter and Saturn and their respective moons. It will continue operations until sometime in the year 2025, at which point the probe’s generators will no longer be able to power its sensors and transmitters, and it will continue eternally onward, a lonely traveler far from home. At the time of this writing, Voyager 1 has been in operation for 36 years, 6 months, and 3 days.

Voyager 1 and its sister probe, Voyager 2, each carries a golden record in the hope it encounters an advanced civilization. The record, an audio-visual disc, contains, among other things, images of the Solar System, human DNA, and the music of Beethoven, Mozart, and Chuck Berry. The golden record is more a time capsule than a serious attempt to communicate with another civilization.

Carl Sagan, the cosmologist and author who pushed for the inclusion of the golden record on the Voyager probes, said, “The spacecraft will be encountered and the record played only if there are advanced space-faring civilizations in interstellar space. But the launching of this ‘bottle’ into the cosmic ‘ocean’ says something very hopeful about life on this planet.”

Sagan was involved with assembling the contents of the golden record. He had been a researcher and a science advocate for many years, working on the cutting edge of the science of space exploration. Sagan had been instrumental in the discovery of Venus’ high surface temperatures. He hypothesized about the oceans of liquid gases on Saturn’s moon Titan. He was a member of the SETI Institute board of trustees, guiding its mission to search for extraterrestrial intelligence.

Sagan’s most well-known contribution to science is the television series Cosmos: A Personal Voyage, which premiered on PBS in 1980 and remained the most highly watched series on public television until the broadcast of Ken Burns’ documentary The Civil War in 1990, the same year Voyager would take its famous photograph. Sagan released a book, also titled Cosmos, at the same time as the television series, and it became the best selling science book ever published in the English language.

The Cosmos television series will be rebooted this Sunday. Cosmos: A Spacetime Odyssey will be presented by today’s most popular astronomer, Neil deGrasse Tyson; the executive producers are Seth MacFarlane and Sagan’s widow, Ann Druyan.

As the Voyager 1 probe reached the edge of the Solar System in 1990, Sagan managed to convince NASA to turn the probe’s cameras back toward the Earth. The narrow-angle camera that Voyager carried was far better suited to this sort of distance photography than the wide-angle camera’s the Mariner probes had carried. The photographs of the first six planets in the Solar System would be the last pictures Voyager 1 would take.

In his book Pale Blue Dot: A Vision of the Human Future in Space, Sagan would eloquently describe this picture of Earth, distant and alone. He would speak from his perspective as an early activist about the dangers of climate change, as a man who spent a sizable portion of his career struggling against anthropocentrism, and as a survivor of the Cold War, a time when the possibility of mutually assured destruction in a hail of nuclear fire was no further away than a single moment of irrational international saber-rattling.

Sagan’s words are powerful. (Read Sagan’s full reflection; listen to Sagan read it in full; view the image in full) He speaks of the reality that there is as yet no other world that we know of that can harbor human life. He reminds us that we have been engaged in our many internecine struggles over possession of a section of a tiny mote of dust.

Our planet is a lonely speck in the great enveloping cosmic dark. In our obscurity — in all this vastness — there is no hint that help will come from elsewhere to save us from ourselves.

Sagan speaks to the ties within humanity. We are alone in this universe, and yet we throw ourselves at each other in bloody conflict over minutiae of ideology and nearly indistinguishable differences in genetics. Sagan reminds us there is no help coming from elsewhere: if we are to survive as a people, as a species, we must look to each other for the answers.

Today, the world is a very different place than it was in 1990. With the end of the Cold War, the specter of nuclear apocalypse has largely disappeared. The Internet has created a world that is more interconnected than we had imagined possible. We have created an International Space Station that might become the staging area for future explorations of the Solar System and beyond. Computer technology has become far more compact and powerful than once thought possible. The world we live in today is, in many ways, the future predicted in the dreams of science fiction.

Despite the progress we as a species have made, we must regretfully acknowledge that Sagan’s words still ring true.

Think of the endless cruelties visited by the inhabitants of one corner of this pixel on the scarcely distinguishable inhabitants of some other corner. How frequent their misunderstandings, how eager they are to kill one another, how fervent their hatreds. Our posturings, our imagined self-importance, the delusion that we have some privileged position in the universe, are challenged by this point of pale light.

In the United States, political acrimony and partisanship have deadlocked the government. Africa and the Middle East remain hotbeds of ethnic and religious tensions, where being a member of the wrong tribe or worshipping the wrong god can lead to death at the hands of one’s neighbors. Venezuela and Ukraine are wracked by violent protests, and the ghost of the Soviet Union and Cold War imperialism stalk Crimea. The reality that we live in a post-9/11 world hits us every time we go to an airport, apply for a loan, or open a bank account.

We face the challenges of global climate change and its potentially devastating effects on our ability to produce food and have access to clean drinking water. Increasing denialism about the validity of scientific research has created a society ever more ignorant of the way the world around them works, leaving questions about how to handle genetically modified crops, vaccinations, and medical ethics in the hands of people willing to consider unrefuted scientific evidence as nothing more than an opinion.

While we may have made many amazing advancements, our future as a species is inexorably tied to the same realization that Sagan had when he spoke of the Pale Blue Dot. We feel that we are important, enthroned among our achievements. We need to be reminded on occasion of how big the universe is, and of how small a piece of it we have managed to master. When we look at the last picture Voyager 1 took of its home before turning its electronic eyes outward, toward the vast and unknowable distances between the stars, we should remember the words of Carl Sagan:

The aggregate of our joy and suffering, thousands of confident religions, ideologies, and economic doctrines, every hunter and forager, every hero and coward, every creator and destroyer of civilization, every king and peasant, every young couple in love, every mother and father, hopeful child, inventor and explorer, every teacher of morals, every corrupt politician, every ‘superstar,’ every ‘supreme leader,’ every saint and sinner in the history of our species lived there — on a mote of dust suspended in a sunbeam.

zind

All about Alsace: Perfect French, German blend

If you’re not much of a wine drinker (yet), you might not know that Alsace — that famed region that has sometimes been called Alsace-Lorraine and has flipped back and forth as part of Germany or France since the time of Charlemagne — is actually a vibrant winemaking region. The focus is primarily on white wine, although some light-bodied Pinot Noir is produced as well.

What makes Alsace different from other areas in France? For one, Alsace is one of the few French regions that produces varietal wines rather than blends, possibly due to the influence of winemaking in Germany, where wines are also usually single varietals: wines are named after the grape, rather than the region — virtually unheard of in the rest of France. Similarly, the grapes planted are much more German than they are French: Riesling and Gewürztraminer, for example, along with Pinot Gris, are the three most popular wines of Alsace.

Additionally, the Vosges Mountains cut Alsace off from the Atlantic climate that prevails in most of France. As rain moves from west to east toward Alsace, the mountains block it, leaving Alsace with the driest region in France (particularly in September and October, making for perfect harvest conditions). The sloping, stony foothills of the east side of the mountains provide ideal vineyard locations.

Rieslings from Alsace will probably be the easiest to find, are considered the best in the region, and are usually clean, stony wines with citrus fruit flavors. Alsatian wines are typically void of oak flavors, relying on the pure flavors of the grape and the soil. The Rieslings show that sense of place (or “terroir”) more than just about any other white wine, and as a result of the varied terrain of Alsace, they display a tremendous variety. Wines produced from vines growing at higher altitudes or on rocky soil will show different flavors than those grown in valleys or in loamy, clay soil.

Domaine Zind-Humbrecht (not exactly a French name) is a classic Alsace producer that makes outstanding Rieslings. The 2012 ($20, 90 points from Wine Spectator) displays really well-integrated floral notes, petrol (yes, believe it or not, gasoline is a typical Riesling characteristic), and apple aromas, with a palate of honey, orange, lemon, and apricot flavors. The wine is rich and, like most Rieslings, has an acidic backbone that make it very food-friendly.

Gewürztraminer in general is somewhat of an acquired taste, and those from Alsace are no different. The intensely floral, “perfumey” characteristics are somewhat odd to the novice wino. The 2012 Albert Mann Gewürztraminer ($20) is an intense wine with aromas of peach, honey, and perfume, followed by by bursts of spice, apple, lemon, lychee, and mango on the palate.

Pinot Noir is just about the only red you’ll find from Alsace, and these are normally light-bodied wines, again with very little oak. Trimbach, another classic Alsace producer, makes a Pinot Noir Reserve with fantastic earthy aromas of forest, subtle flowers, and spice, with cranberry and dark cherry flavors on the palate, and very soft, earthy tannins on the finish. Don’t stop with the Pinot Noir — try Trimbach’s Rieslings and Gewürztraminers as well.

Finally, Alsace also produces a fair amount of Pinot Gris, which is called Pinot Grigio in Italy and by some U.S. wineries. If you can find a bottle of Pierre Sparr Mambourg Grand Cru Pinot Gris, give it a try. The flavors are concentrated and intense, with a slightly viscous consistency, and flavors of tropical fruit like pineapple and tangerine, plus apricot, pear, and zesty acidity.

Alsace is also known for its sparkling wine, Crémant d’Alsace, which is widely available. The sparkling rosés are particularly worthwhile.

Alsace is definitely unique within France, and its wines make for a great change of pace. The price is usually right, too, with reasonably priced bottles widely available for $15 to $25.

walker

Some stars have softer sides, donate time

Fan*s can sometimes be obsessed with the on-screen work of their favorite actors. There’s nothing wrong with that; after all, I’m one of you! But what really makes a star of the screen worth adoring is what they do when the camera isn’t on them.

The media loves to talk about celebrities behaving badly. It seems we’re constantly seeing stories about stars getting arrested or going to rehab or egging people’s houses. Reality shows earn half of Hollywood a living showing the negative sides of stardom.

However, we rarely get to see stories in the news about the good things celebrities do for others. Sure, we all know a lot of celebrities donate and support charities. They are often photographed at dinners and various other fundraising events. However, there are some who choose to get more actively involved in the causes they care about. Here are just a few of those who use their fame for a better purpose.

Several members of the cast of Glee, including Chris Colfer, Darren Criss, and Jane Lynch, are big supporters of The Trevor Project, which provides “crisis intervention and suicide prevention for LGBTQ youth.” Bret Michaels, of Poison and Celebrity Apprentice fame, supports the American Diabetes Association and the Juvenile Diabetes Research Foundation, plus his mother helped start the Harrisburg Diabetic Youth Camp, a weeklong summer camp for children with diabetes in Harrisburg, Pa.

When Paul Walker passed away last year, we not only lost a good actor, but a great humanitarian. Hours after Haiti was hit by a devastating earthquake in 2010, Walker was organizing a group of friends to travel to the island and help, even with no way of knowing what he could do. Out of this came Reach Out WorldWide, an organization founded by Walker to organize first responders for natural disasters. Since Walker’s death, his brother Cody has joined the organization as brand manager, and ROWW is determined to continue the mission Walker started.

In real life, the much loved Tom Hiddleston couldn’t be more different from his hugely popular role as the trouble-making Loki in the Marvel Cinematic Universe. Last year, Hiddleston traveled to Guinea in West Africa with UNICEF UK. While there, he met with children and families and had the opportunity to tour several UNICEF project sites and learn about the work the group has been doing. Hiddleston shared his own thoughts about his time in Guinea. A few months later, he also participated in the Global Poverty Project’s “Live Below the Line” challenge, which asks participants to spend less than $1.50 per day for five days.

Vampire Diaries and Lost star Ian Somerhalder is a big animal lover, and several years ago he started his own organization, the Ian Somerhalder Foundation, which fights animal cruelty and raises awareness of global deforestation and conservation efforts. Somerhalder has been very active with the organization and maintains an online presence promoting the foundation and encouraging his fans to get involved.

Teen Wolf has a reputation for being a hormone-fueled drama in which guys just run around with their shirts off. While this isn’t necessarily true — there’s actually a lot more going on in that show than shirtless hunks — some of the series’ stars have decided to use that perception to their advantage. Toward the end of 2013, they launched Reflect it Back, a website selling calendars featuring photos of several Teen Wolf actors as well as some of their friends. The proceeds from the calendars go toward a fund to battle cystic fibrosis. The site also encourages fans to share what cause they are passionate about. In this way, the actors are encouraging activism in their young fanbase.

Fan*s know Zachary Levi as the star of the series Chuck and recent co-star as Fandral in Thor: The Dark World. In 2011, Levi founded “Nerd HQ” through his Nerd Machine website dedicated to nerd culture. Nerd HQ is an event at Comic-Con that has become almost as popular as the main event itself. Last year’s edition included autograph signings, a screening of Serenity, after-parties where fans mingled and danced with celebrities, and a panel series called “Conversations for a Cause” — an opportunity for many Fan* favorites to appear on panels where the proceeds go towards Operation Smile.

Operation Smile is an organization that provides surgeries to repair cleft lips, palates, and other facial dysmorphism in children all around the world. Nerd HQ raised $40,000 for the organization its first year and has grown exponentially, last year bringing in $215,000 through panels featuring celebrities like Nathan Fillion, Matt Smith, Jenna-Louise Coleman, Richard Madden, Hiddleston, and more. This year, the Nerd Machine is also serving as the title sponsor for Operation Smile’s third annual Park City Celebrity Smile Challenge, which partners celebrities with professional and amateur skiers to raise money for the organization’s efforts.

Perhaps one of my favorite celebrities when it comes to interaction with fans — and selflessly working for others — is Misha Collins. Supernatural fans know Collins as the angel Castiel, and he has developed a devoted following of “minions” on Twitter. While his character on Supernatural is often very serious, Collins himself has proven he has a wicked sense of humor and a wild imagination. With the help of his dedicated followers, Collins founded the non-profit organization Random Acts, which sponsors several events throughout the year, including “A Melee of Kindness” (AMOK), which occurred just last weekend. Participants all over the world “ran amok,” performing random acts of kindness such as shoveling sidewalks and “paying it forward” for future customers by buying “suspended coffees” or taping change to vending machines.

Through Random Acts, Collins also began “Hope 2 Haiti,” a campaign to benefit those affected by the 2010 earthquake. For the past three summers, anyone who has been interested in participating could raise money to travel to Haiti with Collins to work in the town of Jacmel. In 2012, actor Colin Ferguson — known for his roles on Syfy’s Eureka and Haven — raised funds and joined the team, helping to work on building a children’s center, completed last summer. Random Acts isn’t planning any more trips to Haiti, but the group is still accepting donations to continue to support their projects in Jacmel.

Collins also created the Greatest International Scavenger Hunt the World Has Ever Seen, more commonly referred to as GISHWHES. For the past three years, GISHWHES has earned a place in the Guinness Book of World Records for the largest online scavenger hunt. Participants have to stage or find and then photograph items straight out of Collins’ insane imagination — items such as a person covered in cotton candy, artwork made out of candy, a Christmas Tree floating with helium balloons … and the list just gets crazier. Collins uses this Scavenger Hunt not just as a way for fans to have fun while competing for a chance to hang out with the actor himself, but as a way to spread his dedication to Random Acts. Each year, at least one or two of the items on the scavenger hunt list involve some sort of act of kindness: some participants visited hospital patients, while some handed out random gifts. GISHWHES requires a donation to participate, and all the money left after funding the prizes is donated to Random Acts.

So the next time you hear a report about yet another celebrity going to rehab, or some other negative news story, remember there are some out there who are doing real good in the world and attempting to make a difference, whether it’s through donations to an organization or by creating their own organizations and recruiting their fans to help. Represent your fandom well by being a part of these great opportunities.

dogfish

United across time, cultures by Ancient Ales

A gentleman drinks.* A gentleman is discerning in what and how he drinks, for alcohol is art — from the method of its crafting, to the appreciation of its consumption, to the ideas released under its influence.

A gentleman is well-versed in beer, wine, and spirits, and cultivates an appreciation for each offering. A glass of Scotch, neat, is intimidating to the budding gentleman, but he is tenacious and determined to find the flavors and complexities that have bonded gentlemen over whiskey for centuries. (This column will address that most holy spirit in full on another day.)

Today, the Modern Urban Gentleman turns his focus to the deep historic ties the gentleman has with the hop-infused, fermented starch beverage known as beer. It may surprise some to learn that distilled spirits — gin, whiskey, vodka, brandy, tequila, et al — are an invention of a post-Caesar world: the earliest traces of distillation can be found in first century Greece. Indeed, the production of wine, beer, mead, and other fermented and brewed products, is rooted much deeper in human history.

The Modern Urban Gentleman leaves the historic perspective on wine to his most able colleague. Wine’s dear cousin, beer, has a story just as long and equally tied to the evolution of human culture. It is the gentleman’s duty to be a part of this link from past to present, to understand and to appreciate how the common thread of each sip of beer ties him to the cultures and concepts that have defined humanity.

The ongoing home brew movement is Gentleman to its core, and the Modern Urban Gentleman applauds those who invest themselves in this rich tradition. The godfather of home brewing, the man who took craft brewing mainstream, Sam Calagione, thrives on upending a beer industry that had fallen victim to mass production and watering down of flavors, and he does so to the benefit of gentlemen like us.

Calagione’s brewery, located in Milton, Del., is rekindling our connection to our ancient alcoholic roots. Since 1999, Dogfish Head Brewery has been researching, reconstructing, and releasing examples of prehistoric beverages to recapture the spirit of those times. In the days before purity laws and byzantine tax structures, there was no need to draw a line between a pale ale and a hefeweizen, a lager and an ale, even a beer and a wine. At a time when all alcoholic beverages were small-batch home brews or fermentations, the only applicable rules for these drinks was that they should be made to taste good and to create a slightly altered state of consciousness.

The Dogfish Head Ancient Ales series revives that genre-bending strategy, and the result is an entirely new set of flavors for our modern palettes. The seven concoctions available today are a veritable road trip across the ancient world. Each is derived from archaeological evidence uncovered at millennia-old settlement sites. The flavor profiles can seem, at first glance, off-putting. But the gentleman knows that discovery is only accomplished through adventure. Do not hesitate to try these brews:

  • Midas Touch is the original Ancient Ale, and it is an easy-to-find, year-round offering in the eastern United States. The excavation of the tomb of King Midas in Turkey uncovered drinking vessels showing evidence of honey, white muscat grapes, and saffron. This has been reanimated as a “sweet-yet-dry” offering reminiscent of a beer/Chardonnay hybrid.

  • The oldest known fermented beverage in history is a beer from China. Over 9,000 years ago, enterprising villagers in Jiahu mixed fermenting rice, honey, and fruit; today, Chateau Jiahu is available in limited quantities to anyone in Dogfish’s coverage area. The beverage contains orange blossom honey, muscat grape juice, barley malt, and hawthorn fruit, all brought together with sake yeast. This is truly an Ancient Ale.

  • Theobroma means “food of the gods” and is the genus of the cacao plant. This makes complete sense, and what makes even more sense is to combine the food of the gods with the drink from heaven as well. With a recipe rooted in indigenous Honduras, the brew contains Aztec cocoa powder, cocoa nibs, honey, annatto, and gets an incredible, pleasing heat from the surprising addition of chilies. Theobroma is also a much lighter beer than any other “chocolate” offering on the shelves.

  • It’s a safe bet most gentlemen have never sampled a beer from a recipe written in Egyptian hieroglyphics. Ta Henket offers a chance to change that. The centuries-old prescription, including hearth-baked bread and Middle Eastern herbs, is fermented with a yeast strain captured in a petri dish in present-day Cairo. Anyone who avoids hoppy beers will be pleased with this tasty treat.

  • The history of Italy is inextricably linked with the one of god’s great gifts: wine. But Birra Etrusca Bronze proves that beer has been brewed in Europe’s boot for nearly 3,000 years. This beer is specifically taken from a tomb of the Etruscan civilization, an area now centered on Tuscany. Among its distinct ingredients are an heirloom Italian wheat, Italian chestnut honey, Ethiopian myrrh resin, and Delaware wildflower honey. Dogfish fermented its Birra Etrusca in bronze, while two Italian brewers are producing the same beer with wood and terra cotta.

  • It has become commonplace to find beer infused with or influenced by coffee, but Dogfish has incorporated that other hot beverage sipped the world over. The blueprint for Sah’tea goes back “only” to ninth-century Finland. Sah’tea comes from rye wort caramelized over heated river rocks, fermented with a German weizen yeast, and flavored with wild Finnish juniper berries and black tea.

  • The newest offering in the series is Kvasir, a mélange of wheat, cranberries, myrica gale, yarrow, honey, birch syrup, and a trademark of ancient and modern Nordic lands: lingonberries. Kvasir is a “toasty red winter wheat” with a pleasing pungency lent by the berries. Consider that this is the beer of a Danish upper-class dancer or priestess and the red-blooded gentleman must understand the appeal.

Dogfish Head truly plumbed the depths of the human experience not just by bringing these ingredients together, but also by incorporating the very methods used by our ancestors. Drinking these beers is an experience like no other: breathe the brisk Nordic air, feel the tart berry juice in the mouth, smell the North African and West Asian herbs, and taste the rich tapestry of flavors thanks to the efforts of the men and women at Dogfish Head Brewery.

Yet it would perhaps seem ironic that the Modern Urban Gentleman would bestow its blessing upon a company such as Dogfish Head. Indeed, the culture among the employees and masterminds of the business is decidedly anti-suit-and-tie. The company motto, after all, is “Off-centered ales for off-centered people.” But the Dogfish ethos of passion, innovation, tradition, and expression is a perfect reflection of the template for the modern urban gentleman.

Gentlemen of the U.S. East Coast, or gentlemen traveling there: Experience the Dogfish culture for yourself. The brewery offers free tours of its Milton facility that include four samples from its bar (book early), where an incredible wealth of knowledge and passion is on display in each employee. Then take a trip to the ocean and stop by the Dogfish Head Brewings & Eats brewpub in Rehoboth Beach, Del., where the food is excellent, the music is live, and a few experimental beers are always on tap.

Dogfish Head is, of course, not alone in revolutionizing the brewing world. But its commitment to learning from history makes it a perfect entry point for gentlemen looking to join the community of drinkers that binds all mankind.

* — The art of drinking balances enjoyment and self-control. In that vein, there is one and only one acceptable reason not to drink, and that is when a gentleman knows that his self-control will not allow him to imbibe responsibly. Those who are working to overcome a substance abuse problem are exemplars of self-control and afforded all the respect of a gentleman.

Before we part ways this week, the Modern Urban Gentleman would be remiss if he did not make a brief comment on the men’s fashion of the Academy Awards (due in no part to the prodding of a certain feminist). GQ named Bradley Cooper its best-dressed man of the night, and the Modern Urban Gentleman won’t knock the choice, but he would go in a different direction.

For two years running, the best dressed man at the Oscars has been Daniel Day-Lewis. Last year, he wore a midnight blue tuxedo as he accepted the Best Actor award for his role in Lincoln; this year, he presented Best Actress to Cate Blanchett in a classic shawl collar black tux with a killer patterned pocket square. The actor defines what it means to be a modern urban gentleman.

Another actor who pulls off black-tie flawlessly is Christoph Waltz. He does nothing special with his tuxedos; he just nails the size and fit and carries himself like someone who belongs on any red carpet. He looked great winning an award last year, and kept it up as a presenter this year.

The Modern Urban Gentleman will present a full-length primer on tuxedos in the future. Stay tuned.

adams

Don’t be afraid to rate Oscars fashion

In the first edition of “A Feminist Sensibility,” I mentioned the unfortunate practice of calling out feminists for not being “feminist enough.” This time of year, I find myself defending my feminism more than ever because I enjoy talking about the makeup, heels, and sparkly dresses on all our favorite stars of film, television, and stage.

I absolutely love awards season in Hollywood. I know there are individuals out there who feel like the whole thing is nothing more than Hollywood patting itself on the back, but I think it’s a great time when we get to recognize not just actors, but directors, writers, make-up artists, and all the other participants who contribute to our entertainment.

I love watching the red carpet coverage on E!, and I sometimes find myself defending my enjoyment of this to those around me, and sometimes even to myself. But I’ve come to realize that my love of fashion and the pleasure I get from watching red carpet coverage doesn’t need to conflict with my feminist sensibility.

To me, fashion is wearable art. It conveys a message to the world around you about your style, sense of adventure, and overall personality. The Oscars ceremony, held last Sunday, is the grandest of them all, and the grown-up equivalent to prom. It is also definitely the most decadent when it comes to wardrobe choices.

If I had to sum up this year’s Academy Awards fashion in one word it would be “timeless.” The actresses that made their way down the carpet mostly favored a structured, old Hollywood glam look. Some of my favorites in these classy starlet gowns were Sandra Bullock, Amy Adams, Kate Hudson, and Charlize Theron.

There were some other actresses that shied away from the structured fabrics and tailored designs in favor of more flow or a glitzy look. Two of these notable standouts were Lupita Nyong’o and Cate Blanchett. Nyong’o looked stunning in a long, flowing, pale blue Prada dress. She stated in one red carpet interview that she actually participated in the design process for that dress. Blanchett was breathtaking in an Armani gown that made her glow like a chandelier.

I thought all the ladies looked at least “good,” although some could have raised the bar to “excellent” by choosing dresses that were better-suited to their age or body type. I adore Anna Kendrick, and I hope someday she will marry into my family so we can sing duets and go shopping together. Despite my affection for her, I think she missed the mark with her dress. She’s so youthful, light, and stunning; that dress was a little too gothic, too dark, and too matronly, all in one fell swoop. I think the gothic look can be extremely well done, and Kendrick probably could have pulled it off if she would have committed to the overall look, but as it was, the dress paired with that make-up and those accessories felt disjointed.

Let me just take a moment to share my thoughts with everyone about Liza Minnelli. Liza was rocking an age-appropriate pantsuit in cobalt blue with matching blue hairstreaks. As soon as she hit the red carpet, critics were taking to Twitter to chastise her for not wearing appropriate (or any) undergarments, some even calling it obscene. If Liza were a 20-something with perky breasts going sans bra, would people be calling it obscene or just plain hot? The idea that it’s acceptable for young, attractive women with tight bodies to go without a bra, but not the older ladies, is just plain ridiculous. Personally, I wouldn’t go to an awards show without a bra or cups in my dress, but if there is someone who feels comfortable enough with her own body to do so, more power to her.

As for the male fashion, I’ve been trying to encourage The Modern Urban Gentleman for his comments, but I’m not sure that he’ll weigh in, so I’ll give you my thoughts. It always seems that the ladies get to express themselves way more than the men do at these awards shows, so I was happy to see some variances from the standard black tuxedo. I really enjoyed Will Smith‘s fashion statement: a classic suit, but instead of the traditional accouterments, he completed the look with a patterned necktie scarf and matching pocket square. Another notable look was Ryan Seacrest in his white dinner jacket with black pants and black bow tie. Interestingly, Jared Leto sported an almost identical look, but opting for a maroon bow tie instead. Last, but not least, I’m giving out my best classical black tie look award to Chiwetel Ejiofur. The only mistake in that ensemble was pairing a tux with a wristwatch. It’s the Oscars, my friend: Where else could you possibly have to be?

Feminism is about standing up and declaring that you will not let someone else tell you what you should or shouldn’t do or like. So if you are a secret fashionista, come out of hiding and let me know: Did I miss any of your favorites? Leave your thoughts in the comments!

trojan-horse

What is it good for? War, archery to win wives

War. War never changes. Or so says Ron Perlman at the start of the Fallout video game, anyway. Syria is embroiled in all-out civil war, Russia is on the brink of rampaging through Ukraine, and Venezuela is newly plagued by violent unrest. War is something that permeates human history and leaves scars, both physical and cultural, in its wake.

While we’re all quite aware how poorly real people deal with war, maybe we can learn something from the myths and legends about how to resolve our differences in a better way. Let’s find out.

 

The fall of Camelot

Ah, the nobility and honour (English spelling intentional) of the chivalric court of King Arthur (“Arthur” possibly means “bear king” in Old Irish). The golden age of Britain, when Arthur and his Knights of the Round Table slew ferocious creatures like boar demigods and dragons, and sought to engender unity and goodwill among men. Surely these paragons of virtue can tell us something about how to conduct just wars and strive for peace.

Yeah, it’s a great thought, but these guys were as bloodthirsty as anybody else. Arthur reportedly conquered Britain, Ireland, Iceland, Norway, took Gaul from the Romans, and ran roughshod over the Saxons that tried to invade. When he had to march out to defend Gaul from the Romans who wanted it back, he left his nephew (or possibly his bastard son) Mordred in charge of Camelot. When he returned, Mordred had stolen his wife, Guinevere, and usurped the throne. There was another battle among the family at Camlann (which could be a word derived from “Camelot”), and both kings died there, or maybe Arthur escaped to Avalon (which could also be a word derived from “Camelot”) to recuperate.

What can we learn about war from these noble knights? Mostly that you shouldn’t trust family members with your crowns. But, y’know, d’urrr. Moving on.

The battle of Troy

No other mythical battle has received quite as much cultural exposure in this country than the battle of Troy (Greek Ἴλιον, or Ilion — now you know why Homer called his poem The Iliad). There are movies and retellings and Wishbone episodes — you name it. We all know how it goes. Trojan prince Paris names Aphrodite the prettiest goddess, so she makes Grecian princess Helen fall in love with him. Helen’s husband Menelaus and his brother King Agamemnon (“very steadfast”) get some Greeks together to go burn their topless towers, or some junk.

After a 10-year siege, including lots of heroics and human sacrifices and dead warriors, Odysseus (obviously the root of our word “odyssey”) carts out his big wooden horse and the Trojans take it into the city, accepting it as a gift to the victors. Greeks pour out in the middle of the night and open the gates, and the rest is a slaughter. Troy is razed to the ground. Pretty much all the remaining Greeks get killed on the way home, though, save Odysseus the wise, who has a very eventful journey and has to win his wife back in an archery contest when he finally returns to Ithaca.

So, what can we learn from the Trojan War? Maybe that you shouldn’t commit genocide just because your wife runs off with another man? Also, it’s okay to look a gift giant-wooden-horse in the mouth.

Mahabharata

The “great tale of the Bharata dynasty” is the longest poem ever written, consisting of about 1.8 million words (or over 7,000 pages — twice the length of all of the Song of Ice and Fire novels so far put together). It’s a Hindu holy book, filled with philosophical and religious instruction about the gods and living nobly, but the story it tells is that of the Kurukshetra War that took place sometime in the 1000s BC, beginning the fourth and final age of mankind, the age of Kali.

The war was fought between two sets of cousins, the Kaurava and Pandava princes. More family trouble. Basically, this guy named King Shantanu falls for a girl who already has a child. They have two sons together who inherit the throne, but both die childless. The girl’s first kid, Vyasa, beds some of the former queens of his half brothers and two sons come out of it: Dhritarashtra (king of Kuru, hence the Kauravas) and Pandu (hence, Pandavas). Pandu gets the throne, but then his son bets his kingdom in a crooked dice game with his cousin and loses everything. After the cheating is found out, war happens.

The Bhagavad Gita, probably one of the most famous works of Hindu religion/mythology, concerns one of Pandu’s semi-divine children, Arjuna, who balks at the idea of fighting his own family. Krishna, one of the avatars (incarnations, from the Sanskrit avatāra, “descent”) of the god Vishnu, convinces him to fight, as it is his duty to uphold the law and serve his royal father.

(Arjuna, point of interest, also wins his wife Draupadi in an archery contest, in which he wields a heavy steel bow and shoots a target shaped like the eye of a big fish. What is it with people winning wives by shooting? Wasn’t that also the deal in Disney’s Brave?)

Anyway, the Pandavas eventually win out, though the battle only leaves 10 surviving warriors in the aftermath.

So, what can we learn from the Kauravas and the Pandavas about warfare? Probably a lot of things, but mostly that you should never bet your kingdom in a dice game. I swear, even Richard would have put up his kingdom for a horse that one time. Bad policy.

 

So there you have it. Legendary wars are a lot like real world ones, with death and sorrow being the primary leavings. Justice only ever prevails at great cost, and virtue is mostly rewarded with a quick, clean death rather than one drawn out and terrible. If the ancient heroes rarely live through their wars, why do we suppose we will live through ours?

butler

Butler, Fruitvale Station snubs show prejudice

In the past 20 years, 120 films have received Academy Awards nominations for Best Picture. Of those nominees, only 17 featured nonwhite leads, and those characters were primarily athletes, entertainers, and criminals.

Is this evidence that a movie starring a white man is inherently better?

Do this year’s nominations mean there was only one good movie made by a black director in 2013?

Can the Academy only nominate one movie with a black star each year?

The answer to the first two questions is obviously, “No,” but digging deeper into that third question may uncover a real problem.

2013 was a good year for movies about the black experience, but it has not translated into Oscars recognition. 12 Years a Slave is likely to win the award for Best Picture tonight, but it is the only nominee in the category featuring any nonwhite lead. Many movie buffs were left shocked at the lack of nominations for two strong films with black lead actors: Lee Daniels’ The Butler and Fruitvale Station were completely shut out by the Academy.

Many argue that the oversight was simply due to the films’ midyear releases. Others, myself included, worry it may be something more. It would appear the Academy of Motion Picture Arts and Sciences is suffering from the same problem as the National Academy of Recording Arts and Sciences, which generated anger by awarding a Grammy to Macklemore over a collection of black artists. In response to the lack of recognition by both academies, some fans of the artists on the short end have cried “racism.”

I disagree. What’s at play here is not a matter of racism. To be racist is to knowingly bear resentment against a person for their ethnicity or the color of their skin. The Academy’s lack of recognition for The Butler and Fruitvale Station is not a malicious action to deny the artistic value of these works, but rather a subconscious prejudice against movies that are harder for these voters to relate to.

To be prejudiced is not to be racist. To have prejudice is not blatant or malicious. Every one of us has some kind of prejudice. The Academy has a prejudice, too. It suffers from a lack of understanding different cultures — a problem that is unavoidable in such an homogenous body: the members of the Academy are 94 percent white. (12 Years a Slave managed to overcome this prejudice, in part, because of its strong white supporting cast.)

Perhaps this is why Fruitvale Station received no love from the Academy. The old, rich, white folks who make up the voting body simply cannot relate to the everyday challenges in the life of Oscar Grant. The film, starring Michael B. Jordan as Grant, was hard for me, a white male, to get into at first. Grant, a 22-year-old man who was believed to have been a victim of police brutality, is shown unknowingly living his last day on Earth. Writer and director Ryan Coogler artfully tells Grant’s story in a raw and real way, showing the everyday life of a good, if flawed, man.

Fruitvale Station is just not the type of movie that I would typically enjoy. It felt almost too real, at times too mundane, and Grant was a man with whom it was difficult to sympathize at first. However, it wasn’t long before I found myself questioning the prejudice that plagued my view of the movie. As a regular movie viewer, I’ve become conditioned to expect certain things in my movies even as I profess to oppose that mentality. It took some time before I was able to look past the fact that the sets were dirty and the people weren’t all beautiful — that the world the characters lived in was my own, and that this story was not going to have a happy ending.

Our prejudice influences our immersion into movies. It’s only natural that we try to latch onto the character who is most like us when watching a film. We like to see ourselves as Captain Phillips or Dr. Ryan Stone as we wonder how we would handle the difficult circumstances these characters face. We find it easier to live vicariously through Jordan Belfort as he behaves extravagantly because it’s what any one of us would love to do if there were no consequences.

It is harder, though, to become engrossed in a film that is about a real life, not like our own: a tragedy, out of our hands, depicting someone who might not look like us. Perhaps it’s more difficult to watch when we realize the unthinkable story of Fruitvale Station took place as recently as 2009. Maybe watching that film made members of the Academy uncomfortable, unwilling to nominate it for a major award.

The Butler, however, had all the benchmarks of the type of movie the Academy would regularly reward. With beautiful cinematography, an all-star cast of actors both black and white, social commentary on the 1960s and 70s, and a true story about mistakes made by white people set right again by more white people. So why did Lee Daniels get snubbed?

My prejudice was no factor in thoroughly enjoying The Butler from beginning to end. Based very loosely on a true story, much like American Hustle, The Butler tells the story of Cecil Gaines, a White House domestic servant, as he leads his life and family through the tumultuous 20th century and the early years of the 21st.

Unfortunately for history fans, the most intriguing angle of The Butler was a complete Hollywood concoction. In order to show the changing social conditions in the United States from the 1950s to the current millennium, the movie also follows the story of Cecil’s son, Louis, as he joins the Civil Rights movement, the Black Panthers, and later, the Democratic Party as a nominee for Congress. Unfortunately, Louis Gaines was never a real person.

Eugene Allen, the man upon whom Cecil was based, was an actual White House butler for over 34 years. But unlike Cecil, Allen only had one son, who fought in and survived Vietnam. The character of Cecil is the father of two children, with the younger boy leaving to fight in Vietnam during the course of the movie. Still, these sorts of liberties are taken in many movies and can’t possibly be held up as an excuse for snubbing the film when American Hustle followed the same formula.

Obviously, not every movie can be nominated for Best Picture. Still, it seems like a slight against these two magnificent movies that neither was nominated when realistic stories about white men, like Nebraska and Captain Phillips, received their recognition from the Academy.

I am not arguing that either Lee Daniels’ The Butler or Fruitvale Station deserves to be awarded Best Picture. Neither was on the same level as 12 Years a Slave. Both movies, however, certainly deserve to be recognized ahead of some of the other Best Picture nominees.

While I don’t believe the Academy made malicious, racist decisions, I have to conclude that the slights given to these two movies were based on a subconscious prejudice that influences all of us. The diverse perspectives that can be brought together when a group of about 6,000 people vote on the best films of the year should counterbalance those prejudices. But that outcome is impossible when the Academy is 94 percent white, 77 percent male, and very old.

the-oscars

Curiata.com chooses Best Picture winner

The 86th Academy Awards will be presented Sunday, March 2, 2014. We here at Curiata.com have assembled a panel of five “experts” who have watched the Best Picture nominees, found their personal favorites, and considered which is likely to be awarded the final prize of the night. Read through their thoughts, weigh in with your own view, and tune in Sunday night to see who knows the Academy best.

Carrie Hillman
(Reviews: Philomena)

Favorite nominee: Two movies from among the nine Best Picture nominees really appealed to me. I was surprised to find how much I enjoyed Her, given the oversimplified description of “guy falls in love with his cell phone” that became ingrained in our cultural consciousness. What I found instead was a nuanced outlook on the nature of love that gave insight into the hopes, happiness, and disappointments of both parties in a relationship, even when one is the artificial manifestation of our collective human experience. But my favorite film of the bunch, the one that delighted me the most while challenging my gut reactions, was Philomena. My review of the film gives a more thorough examination of my reactions to the movie, but the takeaway for me was that I had a good time watching a good movie.

Likely winner: On the flip side of that coin, the best movie of the year was not particularly fun to watch. That’s not to say I wasn’t immersed in the movie and captivated by the performances, but what I gained from watching the film was something deeper, something more lasting than enjoyment. 12 Years a Slave is a masterful, important work of art that illustrates a chapter of American history that must be told and retold to each new generation. The work of Ejiofor, Nyong’o, Fassbender, McQueen, and the rest of the team deserves the honor it will receive from the Academy.

Charissa Jelliff
(Reviews: Dallas Buyers Club, Her)

Favorite nominee: I tend to be drawn to films that are heavily character-driven; if I can’t identify with or feel sympathy for the main characters, I sometimes can’t enjoy the film quite as much. This year’s Best Picture nominees created a lot of great characters, but I think if I had to choose a favorite it would be Philomena. I loved the contrast between the protagonists, Philomena and Martin; I loved the little moments such as Philomena discovering Big Momma’s House, or the breakfast buffet, or Philomena knocking on Martin’s hotel room door late at night to thank him. I also loved the theme of forgiveness in this story. I’m not sure I could have forgiven those nuns had I been in Philomena’s shoes, but even after all they had done to her, that fact that she held onto her faith made a powerful statement. Plus, Judi Dench was absolutely fantastic as Philomena. I’ve become accustomed to seeing Dench play strong, confident women, and it was a change of pace to see her as Philomena, but she brought the character to life beautifully. Of all the Best Picture nominees, I think this is one that everyone should see and from which everyone could learn an important lesson.

Likely winner: Each of the nine nominees has its strengths, but I feel only 12 Years a Slave was able to fully integrate some brilliant uses of cinematography with an entire cast whose performances were all top-notch. I was really impressed with the direction of the film: each shot was composed so carefully and nothing was wasted; the filmmakers really used everything at their disposal to great effect. The one shot that stands out in my mind is when Northup is left hanging for what seems like hours, struggling to keep his footing in the mud. Using a long shot and holding it for such an extended, uncomfortable period of time really emphasized and evoked Northup’s struggle-not just in that moment, but throughout the entire time he spent as a slave. Chiwetal Eijofor’s performance in this film was raw and powerful. I would love to see him win Best Actor for this film; however, he’s going to have some stiff competition from Matthew McConaughey. While there were aspects of each of the nominees that I loved, 12 Years a Slave is the only one I feel has all the qualities that make it deserving of being the Best Picture.

Gabe Spece
(Reviews: American Hustle, Nebraska)

Favorite nominee: Can we be honest that this is a subpar year for Best Picture nominees? Sure, they’re all pretty good, but how many of them approach genuine greatness? Unfortunately, not many. But the one that gets the closest is Alexander Payne’s haunting Nebraska, and for that reason, it deserves the golden statue. As I said in my review last week, this film is about longing and times forgotten (both figuratively and, unfortunately, literally), built around a superb, authentic screenplay by Bob Nelson and a career-capping performance from Bruce Dern. For some, the film is too slow and too melancholy, but for me, it struck all the right chords. The chances of Nebraska winning Best Picture are long, but something tells me this movie is used to being the underdog.

Likely winner: I liked 12 Years a Slave quite a bit, and of course I should preface that with a note about how it’s impossible to ever really “like” a movie that so relentlessly, brutally, and honestly portrays the horrors of slavery. But as a film, 12 Years is a stunning achievement. Director Steve McQueen provides an unflinching look at the trials and tribulations of Solomon Northup, a free man from New York who is kidnapped and sold into slavery for the aforementioned amount of time. Working in the film’s favor for a Best Picture win is the average-strength playing field of fellow nominees, and more importantly, a subject matter that is ripe for Oscar voters to cast their vote. Gravity is more impressive technically, and Dallas Buyers Club tugs at the heart strings just as hard. But come Sunday night, nothing will stand in the way of 12 Years a Slave claiming the top spot.

Kevin Hillman
(Reviews: Captain Phillips, 12 Years a Slave)

Favorite nominee: When it comes time to choose a Best Picture winner, I feel the honor should go to a movie that is going to endure for years. Last year, that movie was Lincoln, which of course lost to Hollywood’s vanity piece, Argo. A film about how Hollywood saved people? Give those guys every award we have. This year, I fear a similar outcome, though I am more hopeful. 12 Years a Slave was not only the best of the nominees, but is a movie which is sure to endure across the generations. It may not win for Best Director or the Best Actor awards, but in terms of the best all-around movie-one that makes you think, feel, and learn — 12 Years is the clear winner.

Likely winner: Knowing how Hollywood awards work, however, I don’t believe 12 Years will win. The likely winner, in my estimation, will be Dallas Buyers Club. Dallas isn’t a better movie, though it is definitely my choice for second-best. But it strokes the egos of Academy members to honor this story, one that the voters who inhabited the epicenters of the HIV/AIDS pandemic of the 1980s lived through. Will Dallas Buyers Club endure? Likely not on the level of 12 Years or American Hustle, but it is a really good movie that will deserve the recognition.

Mike Hillman
(Reviews: Gravity, The Wolf of Wall Street)

Favorite nominee: The Best Picture award should not be given to the most enjoyable movie of the year; it should be given to the best. Nonetheless, some nominees (recently for me: Black Swan, Midnight in Paris) cast a spell over audiences even if they aren’t the best of that particular year. Of this crop, though, no Best Picture nominee enchanted me and made me fall in love. Some came close, namely Nebraska and Her, but I don’t think I will ever watch any of these nine films again. In the absence of having a sentimental attachment, I am compelled to root for the movie I think was the all-around best, and one stood head-and-shoulders above the crowd: 12 Years a Slave.

Likely winner: As I expressed in my review of Gravity, most films that receive a Best Picture nomination only excel in one particular area. I appreciated the technical accomplishments of Gravity and the acting of Dallas Buyers Club. Philomena succeeded without excelling in several areas, including great acting and a challenging story. But only one film brought all the elements together nearly flawlessly. The Academy and I don’t always see things the same way, but my sense is that we will agree this year. 12 Years a Slave is the unquestionable Best Picture of the year.

Curiata.com

Favorite nominee: The ladies love Philomena, and the guys are split between Nebraska and 12 Years a Slave.

Likely winner: Curiata.com predicts, by a 4-to-1 tally, that 12 Years a Slave will take home the trophy.

sparkling

Finding interesting bubbles for Oscars night

Champagne and the Academy Awards seem to go together like ice cream and apple pie. It’s become a natural pairing: glitzy, glamorous Hollywood celebrities sipping the finest sparkling wine available. And if you feel like splurging on $100 or $1,000 bottles, go for it! But alternatives abound, including some unique, interesting sparklers.

You probably know that Champagne originates from the Champagne region of France, and only sparkling wine produced there can carry the name in that country. But plenty of comparable sparkling wine is produced elsewhere and for a lower cost. So how is sparkling wine made?

The process starts out similarly to normal wine: harvesting and crushing grapes into juice, and allowing the juice to ferment. Sparkling wine from France is either “Blanc de blancs,” made with white grapes, or “Blanc de noirs,” made with red or black grapes. Blanc de blancs are usually crafted from Chardonnay, while Blanc de noirs often use Pinot Noir and/or Pinot Meunier. Despite these Blanc de noirs being dark-skinned, the juice is drained off the skins almost immediately, so the wines still look “white,” much like the process used for many rosés.

After this, sugar and more yeast are added to the wine before it is bottled to undergo a second fermentation and aged “on the lees“. This is when the bubbles are created. Next, the bottles are stored at a 45-degree angle with the cork pointed down, then “riddled” — turned and gently shaken every few days — to force the dead yeast cells down towards the cork. The necks of the bottles are dipped in a freezing brine and turned right side up when the pressure builds enough to push the dead yeast cells (and a small amount of wine) out.

The expelled wine is replaced with a sugary mixture that determines how sweet or dry the sparkling wine will become, and then is finally re-corked. This is referred to as the “méthode champenoise” in Champagne, or the “traditional method” everywhere else. For designations of sweetness, drier bottles will typically labeled Brut (dry), Extra Brut (extra dry) or Brut Natural (driest).

Elsewhere in France, there are multiple “Crémant” (French for “creamy”) appellations which focus on sparkling wine. Crémant de Bourgogne (Burgundy) is one such appellation, and there are definitely smart buys to be found. Louis Bouillot Crémant de Bourgogne Rosé Brut Perle d’Aurore is one example — a rosé that, while not complex, has delicious creamy flavors of strawberry, cranberry, cream, and apple, and is very affordable.

Of course, there’s plenty of sparkling wine from France produced outside the well-known regions like Champagne and Burgundy. One of my favorites is the Domaine de Martinolles ‘Le Berceau’ Blanquette de Limoux. Limoux, in the western part of the Languedoc region, is one of the few places left on Earth planting the Mauzac grape, which must make up at least 90 percent of wines produced there. The wine is an easy drinking sparkler, with refreshing lemon and tart apple flavors that intertwine with yeasty bread, herbs, and fresh-cut grass. This is great with light appetizers or cheeses, but my favorite pairing is buttered popcorn — perfect for Oscars night. The lemony acidity cuts right through the butter. The Lucien Albrecht Crémant d’Alsace Brut Rosé is also a great sparkling rosé, with similar red berry flavors to the Louis Bouillot, but with an added fresh baked bread component.

If you are looking for something domestic, there are plenty of examples from California at decent prices. The Piper Sonoma Blanc de Blancs Sonoma County Select Cuvée is a solid purchase at $18, as is Korbel’s Brut Rose for an easy-drinking value buy at $15. But the Gruet Winery is creating some outstanding sparkling wine — in New Mexico, of all places. Their line of non-vintage sparklers is outstanding both in quality and price, falling between $15 and $18. The Gruet Brut has classic flavors of toast, yeast, apples, and a little lemon, while the Brut Rose exhibits creamy strawberry, raspberry, and tart cranberry flavors. I’m looking forward to trying the Extra Brut, Sauvage, and Blanc de noirs as well.

Finally, the new kid on the block is Cava, a sparkling wine from Spain. Cava is also produced using the méthode champenoise, but uses lesser known grape varieties including Macabeo, Parellada, and Xarel-lo. Cava is typically much less expensive than Champagne or California sparklers because it is still relatively unknown: the demand is low, so there are some good wines available for very good prices, sometimes less than $10. Cava typically shows less fruitiness than Champagne or Italian Prosecco (another sparkling wine worth trying) and more earthy, mineral, and citrus flavors.

Freixenet produces a variety of Cavas from sweet to dry, and their two driest, the Cordon Negro Brut and Cordon Negro Extra Dry, are both worthy of an Oscars party. The Brut shows plenty of grapefruit and lemon citrus, with hints of apple and ginger. The Extra Dry is just a little bit sweeter, with melon, peach, and earthy mineral flavors. Both are widely available for less than $15.

There are plenty of options out there and many sparkling wines are offered for a decent price. For most of us, the Academy Awards are an excuse to have a fun night, but it is by no means a huge milestone that requires a magnum of Dom Perignon. So try something new! Who gets your award for “Best Wine”?

gravity

Gravity fun to watch, but thin on story

Since the Academy of Motion Picture Arts and Sciences expanded the Best Picture category to allow between five and 10 nominees beginning with the awards that honored films released in 2009, a predictable pattern seems to have emerged. Slots are reserved for different classifications of films: the crowd-pleaser, the avant garde, the historical drama, the female-driven triumph, the performance piece, the Hollywood self-congratulation, and more. This year, Gravity was nominated in what I like to call the Avatar slot: a stunning showcase of technological marvel.

Like James Cameron’s CGI-fest of four years ago, Gravity demonstrates the state of the art of movie-making. The cinematographers, graphic artists, sound technicians, and other visual and audio masters of the movies flex their muscles to demonstrate the farthest reaches of what today’s technology can display on our screen and what, a decade from now, will be the standard in any well-produced film. This is necessary, this is welcomed, and this is marvelous.

However, to win Best Picture, a film must typically achieve success outside of the narrow set of characteristics that defines the “slot” through which it earned a nomination: artistic direction combined with powerful acting, for example, or a compelling historical narrative brought to life by performances that rattle the audience. Unfortunately for Alfonso Cuarón and company, Gravity does not break out of its pigeonhole.

Gravity is visually stunning; this has been covered extensively, and by more capable hands, elsewhere. It should and will take home the Oscar for Cinematography, as well as many of the technical awards. And the film does offer more than just breathtaking views of space and the planet rotating below.

The movie is expertly paced, keeping the viewer on the proverbial edge of his seat from start to finish. Telling the story in near-real-time is intriguing and does not feel gimmicky, as it might in less capable hands. The science is generally sound — at least sound enough that the viewer can reasonably suspend disbelief for the duration of the movie with few exceptions (navigation by fire extinguisher?).

And Sandra Bullock does a superb job with the script and range of character she is given. But that compliment leads directly into the discussion of what the film lacks.

Readers may have noticed that, more than halfway through this review, I have not even mentioned the plot of Gravity. That’s because there isn’t much to say: Bullock’s Ryan Stone is a scientist working in space. Debris hits the spacecraft she is stationed on and all other outposts in nearby orbit. People die; Stone is left alone to find her way back to Earth. Straightforward and sparse.

The paper-thin plot comes across as an afterthought to the visual presentation of the film, and that is not the only shortfall; the characterization is also woefully inadequate. The attempt to humanize Stone with a contrived back story falls flat. Only one other character, Commander Matt Kowalski (George Clooney), appears on-screen, and Clooney either succeeded immeasurably in creating an obnoxious, aloof, unlikable space cowboy or, what seems more likely, did not deliver a strong performance in what should have been a simple role (which is easy for a non-actor to say, I’m sure).

Contrary to what you may believe if you’ve read my previous review of The Wolf of Wall Street, I don’t hate movies that are designed to be fun or escapist; I quite enjoyed Gravity. I wish I had seen it in October, before the crush of Oscars season, to enjoy and evaluate it in the way it was designed to be consumed. In fact, I’ve given lip service to the visual effects of Gravity, but I must say I would likely have been more impressed had I seen the film in a theater. (As it was, I watched it at home, on demand.)

I also did not see the 3D version, which would have left yet another impression, I’m sure. (I appreciate that Cuarón has said he did not want the 3D aspects to be a gimmick, but I still got that impression, even in 2D, early in the movie.) I hope Gravity will see a wide re-release after the Academy Awards, so that those like me who skipped seeing it on the big screen the first time around will have a second chance. I would urge anyone in that boat to take advantage of the opportunity.

In the end, though, this delightful film cannot be a serious contender for Best Picture. No matter whether it is viewed in 2D or 3D, Gravity is successful in only one dimension, and that just won’t be enough.