Welcome to The Feder Files. A new article/essay/story (by our esteemed editor) will appear as the spirit moves him. Be prepared for an
extreme breadth of style here; these articles will range from light and not-so-light parody, to emotional personal stories, to cultural
critiques and political rants. There will also be the occasional book or movie review, and more features to be added later.
Email Mike by clicking
You can also get in touch by calling 212-252-2042.
Please join the mailing list (see link on the left).
Hello Friends...
Just saw a movie... Or was it a film?
Before I moved to Manhattan I used to--coming from the outer rings of Queens--call everything a movie. When I got to the real Big Apple and mingled with people who had better educations than I did (most people), I discovered that some motion pictures were "films" and the rest were mere movies that Hollywood churned out for the popcorn-chomping masses.
I suppose some are both movies AND films... Goodfellas, LA Confidential, etc.
Anyway... My wife and I just saw a netflix DVD of "Into The Wild"; based on the book by Jon Krakauer. I hadn't read the book so I didn't have to be troubled by those nagging little comparisons that inevitably devil your mind while you're watching the film/movie of something you first encountered in book form. Course, on the other hand, I have always had a disconcerting ability to suspend my disbelief when I needed to.
For instance, I read LA Confidential before the movie came out but I never made any comparisons while watching the movie.
I guess that happens if it’s really a good movie;when its bad, that’s all you can think about--how they screwed up the book.
Back to "Into The Wild"... It’s a beautiful and deeply sad movie/film.
I'm guessing more than a few of you read the book and/or saw the movie. Great directing, great acting, terrific story (based on a terribly real story).
A boy/young man leaves his home and family and sets out to get to the "truth"--to discover himself... This kid was lied to and his great gift of love (to simplify the story and characters) refused and twisted in angry/sad knots most of his young life... So he gave away all his privileges and money and went out onto the road; and eventually just about as far into the wilderness as a human could go...
When he finally discovers, at the very end, that "Happiness isn't real unless it is shared," it was too late for him... He had miscalculated the wilderness he drove himself (had been driven) into and literally could not cross a raging river to find his way back to people he loved... A great and perfect metaphor.
That's the tragedy of the film, and the great warning... You can go too far into the wilderness sometimes. You may have been driven there or you may have been driven most of the way and continued the trajectory yourself.
If you're lucky you discover the "truth" (the particular truth this boy discovered) in time and can turn back. If you're unlucky and have gone too far-- and the the wilderness you've gone into is too unforgiving, you can die out there... or IN there, for that matter; if the wilderness you were driven to or escaped into is in your mind.
More political comments/questions (in no particular order)…
These are a kind of blend of my own views, those of my listeners and various political scientists and writers that I’ve had on my show on Sirius.
1) Who was surprised that Edwards dropped out before Super Tuesday? If he had stayed in, even if he couldn’t afford to run many commercials or do much campaigning, he might have put himself in a stronger position to make a difference at a “brokered” convention—and/or, (if he is interested) make himself a more viable vice-presidential nominee.
Maybe, in the end, it was personal, considering his wife’s illness…
2) Would Edwards be a good choice for either Clinton or Obama as a VP nominee?
3) If not Edwards, who are the possible VP nominees for the Democrats—Who would be best with Clinton—Who would be best for Obama? (I’m assuming those two would never consent to serve under each other—considering the obvious deep dislike that exists between the two of them.
Also, if Clinton were elected president, we’d have her and her husband in the White House. It’s hard to imagine any Vice President having any power or influence at all under those circumstances.
4) I’m assuming the McCain will be the candidate on the other side… There are a lot of indications that, at 71, he might be just too old (whether or not that’s fair or right) for most of the younger voters who have shown up during this primary season; though it seems that most of these younger voters—so far—are Democrats—attracted by Obama…
© 2003 Mike Feder Warning! All materials on this website are copyright Mike Feder. Permission
from Mike Feder is required if you wish to reprint or quote from any article, letter or other feature on this site.
