bu1057dvd-2http://www.blue-undergrounddvd.com/index.php?pg=il&search=fast+company

 

The films of David Cronenberg reveal a director who is continually finding new ways to explore themes that have preoccupied him since his early work on  Stereo, Crimes of the Future, and Shivers. His films are populated with characters who alter or are involved in altering the human body through violent acts, who represent science or the media or some fringe element of society such as the mob in A History of Violence or Eastern Promises, and where the  logical and ordered reasoning of science or norms are no longer applicable.

While Fast Company is certainly not a horror movie it is certainly not the typical racing movie either. David Cronenberg has substituted grotesque human physiology for the inner workings of the “funny car” which cinematographer Mark Irwin(who also shot Cronenbergs The Brood and Scanners) photographs in various stages of repair and assembly throughout the movie as if it were the inner workings of the human body. How the cars work is detailed throughout the movie without hindering the plot, which is deceptively simple when viewed as a standard 70’s car movie but when looked closer at reveal those themes which Cronenberg has been working through for quite some time. The physiology of the car iself is one theme that plays out through the movie and is tied intricately with the characters. The two main racers, Lonnie Johnson and Gary Black are physically part of the vehicles they race. I am sure that as anyone who races cars would tell you, the vehicle becomes an extension of the driver with every turn and increase of speed. There seems to be a certain appeal in this for Cronenberg who shows the drivers in and out of the car but these characters are only really complete when man and machine are unified. This is important because these characters also exist on the fringe, inhabiting race tracks and trailers and cruising down the highway from town to town. They are not the heroes of NASCAR who have gotten rich driving cars, just ordinary people who do not know how to do anything else but drive.

Then there is the organization called Fast Co. which, in true Cronenberg form, is a crooked and menacing company that is more concerned about selling its product(which is no good of course) then with winning the races that Lonnie Johnson drives for them. The track rep for Fast Co. is played with very dirty gusto by John Saxon as he constantly tries to put Lonnie Johnson and his crew off the track and out of a job. This unseen force which John Saxon’s charcter personifies is not subject matter that Cronenberg completely takes seriously, as there is a sex scene which involves two girls being rubbed down with Fast Co. oil and another where a dumbfounded security guard stands helplessly by as Lonnie Johnson and his crew steal back the funny car that was taken from them after they were fired. There are plenty of moments of good humor in this picture and they are made all the more funny because they are balanced out with the desperation the characters feel as they are drive and as they attempt to hold onto what they have worked so hard for throughout their lives. Lonnie Johnson and Gary Black are set up as polar opposites in this respect with what and who they love stuck in between their rivalry.

You might not think so from watching such movies as Rabid or The Brood, both of which bookend Fast Company, but much like The Fly or some of his other works, Fast Company reveals David Cronenberg to be very humane and compassionate towards his characters. Human suffering and struggle turns out to be a very important  part of the physiology which Cronenberg studies so intently in his films and while he never quite takes a transcendent view of the human condition or is very optimistic about it, he does take his characters at face value and is never flippant about their surroundings or circumstances. It is a shame then that this film has been all but eclipsed by a lack of distribution when it was released and very little critical attention afterwards. Despite all of this Fast Company is a great genre film and one that is an important reference point in the work of David Cronenberg.

charlesjacob; vanheck123@hotmail.com

Advertisements

White Dog

December 17, 2008

White Dog(1982); Dir. Samuel Fuller. Criterion Collection DVD(2008)

http://www.imdb.com/video/screenplay/vi1016791833/   White Dog Movie Trailer

There are films that gather a certain mystique around them because they have attracted so much controversy, were banned for one reason or another, or were so wildly popular that they become representative of the movies as a whole. Then there is Samuel Fuller’s White Dog. This film was tucked away by Paramount Pictures after it was completed because the studio worried that the subject matter would ignite racial tension across the country. It was criticized for being a racist film and for all practical purposes, ignored for many years. This Criterion release is the first home video release of the film and it was not shown in theatres at all.  White Dog, I believe, touched such a raw nerve  because it is the history that many people have lived through and the sense of shame that we have never quite come to terms with. Fuller himself said that the studio were essentially cowards for not backing the picture and those that have spent any time watching Samuel Fuller films, reading his autobiography “A Third Face” or any of the numerous writings on his work, know the difficulty he has encountered throughout his career in finding support for his films. Fuller not only had difficulty getting some of his movies made but also faced obstacles after his films were completed and with the exception of critics such as Manny Farber, his films were not always that well  received in the United States. There are still many of his movies such as Underworld U.S.A., Verboten!, Park Row, The Chrimson Kimono, China Gate, and The Run of The Arrow that are still not available on video; not to mention the dozens of writing credits that he was never given proper due  for.  One of the great American genre directors along with Don Siegal,  Howard Hawks, and William Keighley, Fuller’s films always championed the underdog and never shyed away from topics such as racism, communism, and an unglorified look at war when those were not such popular issues to be discussing in the manner  which Samuel Fuller chose to present them.

White Dog is the story of a dog that was conditioned to hate black people and viciously attacks them until an african american animal trainer steps in to try and recondition the dog. The dominant image in the film is that of the steel cage, referred to in the movie as the “arena,”  in which Paul Winfield’s character Keys fights against the white dog’s engrained racism. The “arena” not only occurs throughout the film as the center of the action but also as an allegory for the combat our society must engage in on a daily basis in order to fight racism in this country. The dog is not simply a symbol of racism in this country but also embodies the sickness and hatred that has been such a part of America’s history and it is in the “arena” that Keys seeks to recondition this white dog to treat blacks the same way he treats whites. While Keys untangles the white dog’s racist instincts, which were born out of learned fear and hatred, Kristy McNichol’s  character Julie Sawyer must come to grips with the reality that this dog has been twisted and contorted by men who hate and that the racism embodied in this dog is very alive in the United States. But Juile’s answer to the problem is to kill it right there. While she might not understand the racism that is in this dog, she wants it stamped out. Keys wants to “cure” racism by retraining the dog. With these two views, Fuller takes us in a direction that is very cynical and unforgiving, yet sadly realistic.

One of the most shocking scenes in the film is when Julie meets the owner of the dog, who has come with his two grandchildren and a box of chocolates to claim the dog. She lashes out at him for making the dog such a horrible monster but the owner is very proud of the dog being a “white dog” and threatens to go to the police if she does not give him back. It is this scene that really captures the themes of the movie best because it is an extension of the “arena” motif that encompasses all of society and how this racism is passed down from generation to generation. This also is important because it illustrates what Burl Ives character Carruthers says earlier in the scene where he is having a meal with Keys and Julie and a police officer stops in to ask for directions. This comes after the dog had murdered a black man in a church. Their guilt is palpable and this is the type of emotional scene that Fuller is best at.  After the officer leaves, Carruthers says that they can never tell anyone what they are doing because no one would understand. Society is guilty of promoting institutional racism and these beliefs are so deeply entrenched that for them to try and undo this would have great consequences.

Samuel Fuller does not flinch away from the difficulty of this subject matter or attempt to force a resolution to the problem. It is a problem that does not have a solution and though Keys and Julie make an effort to defeat the dog’s sickness, in the end it is not enough. If there is any fault in this picture, it is not the subject matter or how Fuller approaches it but in the hurried feeling of the first ten or fifteen minutes. Dialogue is dissapointingly out of synch in a scene where Julie is almost raped by an intruder in her home and collapses on the floor where she manages to call 911 and have the police come out without ever picking up the phone.  This is supposed to be a key scene where Julie’s relationship with the dog that she nursed back to health is firmly set and that makes what she discovers about the dog all that more horrifying. When you watch this movie it is very evident that this was not intended to be viewed as a horror film, even though the attempt was made to market it as such, but instead as a social commentary. It just happens that this particular social commentary comes from a director whose body of work is as rough and tumble as he was, and not the polished, “do you get it yet?” type of commentary one finds in a movie such as “Crash.” It is that rough and tumble feel that makes this film so endearing and tangible because that is often how life comes at us. It is exactly that which makes Samuel Fuller’s body of work so important to American cinema and White Dog such a powerful movie experience.

Charles Jacob; vanheck123@hotmail.com

The Chronicles of Narnia: Prince Caspian; Dir. Andrew Adamson

 Perhaps it was a feeling when The Lion, The Witch, and The Wardrobe came out that Disney was not the studio I wanted to see working on this film but I recognize that I have been very biased against this film series since its inception. I have very fond memories of reading the books when I was younger but I cannot say that they ever really captured my imagination the way other stories did and while I have always admired the writing of author C.S. Lewis(as much as that of J.R.R. Tolkien for the worlds and mythology they were able to create and the characters they populated them with) I suppose I have to admit that it never really interested me that much and while that might not be the best way to start of a review of this movie, it is the most honest way that I can because it was not an issue I could sidestep while watching Prince Caspian.
Faithful literary adaptations present filmmakers with a very fine line to walk. Especially in situations where the source material is a bit dry or even lacking in some details that would make for a good movie, the filmmaker has to dig beneath the surface of the work to excavate some of the more “cinematic” moments and thematic gems. Characters are flushed out, scenes are brought to life, and the action of a story congeals around what is central to the story, even when it is not directly stated by the author. Andrew Adamson seemed to completely miss the mark in this aspect and ended up creating a movie that seemed to exist only to make room for the next in the series.  Visually, the film glistens with impressive scenes and sets. It is a far cry from the BBC series based on the same material from the late 1980’s, but I am not convinced that this is the definitive interpretation of The Chronicles of Narnia in the way that Peter Jackson’s Lord of The Rings was. The problem is that there is too much on the surface of the film and not enough beneath that to really make a difference. The allegory of the story itself is very powerful and is historically very compelling when looked at in the context of World War II and the struggle between good and evil. I would not blame  Andrew Adamson for this. He is very capable of telling a meaningful fantasy story as he demonstrated with Shrek and Shrek 2. The fault, I believe, lies with Disney, whitewashing to deliver a movie that spends a great deal of time talking about things you do not understandand, establishing relationships that are sterile and add more confusion to the story and building the conflict to a level that results in a battle sequences which almost feels like an entirely different film than the one you had been watching for the last hour.

There are two scenes in the film which stand out and make you wish that the filmmakers had used this to set the tone for the rest of the movie. The first comes after a disastrous attack on the castle in which Prince Caspian breaks the plan they had developed to lay siege in order to seek revenge against his Uncle, the man who is laying claim to the throne. As Prince Caspian and his forces are driven into retreat, there is a moment where they look back at the men left behind and you realize that the whole attack was a waste of life. The other scene which contains the emotional core of the film is that in which Prince Caspian wavers in his faith and is about to give power to the White Witch in order to defeat his Uncle. Andrew Adamson creates a great deal of dramatic tension in this scene and it is surprisingly not overplayed, as you would expect from watching the rest of the movie. What is disappointing is that these scenes are never quite able to congeal along with the rest of the movie. Perhaps, though, it is more disappointing that they are never allowed to. The characters and plot feel restrained in a way that any creative work should never be and again, I would not not blame this on Adamson’s direction or the story. The acting of Ben Barnes, who plays Prince Caspian the way one would play a tortured prince whose kingdom is being taken away from him, far exceeds that of the actors and actresses who play the Pevensie children and unfortunately, the rest of the cast feels like caricatures of who they are supposed to be portraying, stock characters who try very hard to fit into the picture as if the audience might not be able to figure out who they are supposed to be.

This could  sum up the entire movie. It is like that person at the party who wants everyone to like them and moves from group to group making sure that there is no ambiguity about who they are or what they are about. There is something rather ingenuous about such an experience and one cannot help but feel that there is something  ingenuous about Prince Caspian. I would hope that someday, someone will get it right and make a Chronicles of Narnia that relies on the merit of being a cinematic epic. But I suppose that movie will come as a completely different series with a completely different production company.

Charles Jacob; vanheck123@hotmail.com

Hellboy II: The Golden Army

December 3, 2008

Hellboy II: The Golden Army(2008); Dir. Guillermo Del Toro

Hellboy II represents a watershed in the filmmaking career of director Guillermo Del Toro. For years he has moved between the more personal, mystical fairy tales of children attempting to navigate the adult world in times of great crisis or loss such as in Cronos or Devil’s Backbone and the pure action/adventure of Blade II or even the often forgotten Mimic. While Pan’s Labyrinth indicated a new direction for Guillermo Del Toro in both the scope of visual storytelling and exploring in fantastical detail worlds that coexist alongside the human world, it is with Hellboy II that his vision becomes fully realized and these two aspects of his films are brought together to create a story that is magical in a way that most films are not able to achieve.

 This world of elves, trolls, tree monsters, and other mythical creatures is one that has existed countless times in books and film and  Guillermo Del Toro uses some well tried conventions of fantasy stories such as the epic battle and retelling of the legend of King Balor, Prince Nuada, and the Golden Army that begins the film.  What is exciting about Guillermo Del Toro’s filmmaking though is that he takes these conventions of the genre and creates something that we are both in awe of and  strangely familiar with. There is a sincerity of purpose in the telling of the story as well as a wonderful understanding of how a fantasy film is supposed to look and feel for the audience. The characters are not lofty or exaggerated, even by comic book standards, but flawed in very human terms. We can appreciate them for this and it adds a dimension to the story that is rarely seen in action films.

Guillermo Del Toro is certainly not a melodramatic director but he is very sentimental both for his characters and in his style of filmmaking. He gives his characters moments where they are able to reveal themselves without seeming out of place and while Hellboy II is an action picture, it is one with a great deal of mythology and influences layered beneath the fight sequences, love stories, and comic relief that populates the film’s swiftly moving plot. One of the most difficult challenges in a sequel is to continue developing familiar characters while still making a film that stands on its own. Guillermo Del Toro does not rely on bringing back old characters to add excitement to the movie but there is that “picked up where we left off feeling” which serves the movie well. In fact, he also brings in new characters such as Johann Kraus voiced by Seth MacFarlane, who lives in a mechanical suit apparatus constructed by Hellboy’s adoptive father as well as Prince Nuada’s twin sister Princess Nuala who brings a very interesting aspect to the story.

Hellboy II represents a new direction for what action films can accomplish as much as The Dark Knight pushed the boundaries of how the comic book hero was potrayed on film. Masterpieces? Certainly not. Great Genre filmmaking? There is no doubt. What is most clear with Hellboy II is that Guillermo Del Toro is gradually building a body of work that embodies the fantasy genres’ best aspects and modern fairy tales which entertain as well as find their way to the heart of something more substantial and meaningful then just flashy action sequences, quick moving plots, and snappy dialogue.

Charles Jacob;  vanheck123@hotmail.com

Mongol

December 1, 2008

Mongol(2007); Dir. Sergei Bodrov. New Line Home Video(2008)

  • Format:Color, DVD-Video, Widescreen, NTSC
  • Language: Mongolian
  • Rating:
  • With sweeping, dramatic camera movements that cover the vastness of the Mongolian landscape, one gets the sense while watching the epic Mongol that director Sergei Bodrov is also attempting to give the viewer a sense of the vastness of time as he inter cuts scenes from the childhood and adult life of the main character Temujin in a prophetic tone that anticipates his rise to power as the formidable Genghis Khan, a conqueror and feared warrior across the known world. As we watch Temujin develop from a young boy who watches his father die, to a young man captured and recaptured into slavery, as well as being hunted and imprisoned by the Tangut, we see a character emerge who is pushed towards his destiny by divine and human forces. Temujin, the film surmises, must achieve this singular purpose and there is never any doubt that he will.

    For anyone knowledgeable about 13th century Asian and European history, they are well aware of the importance that Genghis Khan played in this time period and what is known of his life. Perhaps it is this sense of destiny that the film makers imply in every action Temujin undertakes that leaves the film feeling a little shallow. Some of the grandiose aspects of the story actually work at times but when we are constantly made to feel that we are watching the development of greatness and a leader whose destiny was anointed by the gods and the unfolding of history, it is easy to loose a sense of the man Temujin. There is almost something mythological in the portrayal of Temujin. No matter how many times he is captured or beaten or chased, he always manages to come back to the track of his destiny. Sergei Bodrov approaches the subject of his film with reverence and a sacred timidity that does not seem to fit such a bold historical figure as Genghis Khan.

    There is no doubt that Mongol is a powerful film, just as Oliver Stone’s Alexander or Zac Snyder’s 300 were powerful films. They were powerful because they invested a sense of otherworldly significance into the actions of the characters and the events which they participated in.  But like these other pictures, Mongol offers very little of what could be a true character study or even much speculation about what drove these men to such vast conquests. Why did Temujin wish to unite the Mongol people? What was the political and social climate like at that time period? These are questions that I could not avoid while watching the film and wished that the film makers had taken a bit more time with the story and attempted to really construct the character of Temujin and 13th century Mongolia. Historical fiction is indeed a very fine balancing act but that does not always make for good film making.

    Charles Jacob;   vanheck123@hotmail.com

    Salo or the 120 days of Sodom(1975); Dir. Pier Palo Pasolini. Criterion Collection DVD(2008)

    Format:Color, Dolby, DVD-Video, NTSC, Subtitled, Widescreen

    Subtitles: English

    Rating:

    Number of discs: 2

    Run Time: 116 minutes

     

     

    I have decided to post my review of Salo before I posted the one for Mongol because it was such a disturbing experience that I felt the need to commit to writing my impressions of the film before I moved on to anything else.  Salo is not only notorious for its extremely graphic content and its lack of restraint in showing and speaking about any kind of human depravity that is imaginable but also for the circumstances surrounding the film and the fact that the director, Pier Palo Pasolini, was murdered shortly after completing the film in 1975. I would like to separate the film from some of its notoriety and examine it as a philosophical and social statement.

    Salo cannot be viewed in the same fashion that one would view Hostel or any of the Saw movies, where characters are graphically tortured and murdered for the shock value and entertainment of the audience. In those movies, we are supposed to believe that there is some moral compass that has gone horribly off course and we have ended up in a nightmare of torture for torture’s sake. The makers of Saw go so far as to try and convince us that this man murders people who do not appreciate the value of life because he himself is dying and cannot stand people who squander such a precious gift. These are so called “torture porn” films and I also wish to seperate Salo from these films because the purpose and intent of Pasolini was firmly rooted in the history of fascist Italy and the rule of Benito Mussolini. Here, the moral compass has been stomped on and completely discarded.

    In this sense the graphic scenes of defecation, urinating into someone’s mouth, anal sex, and the depraved stories told to the group of captives get progressively  worse and worse until they culminate in the brutal scalping, tongue removal, hanging, and burning of the child victims, all play into this philosophy and view of Italy under fascism. What Pasoliniasks us to understand is that the children rounded up by the group of government leaders and imprisoned in a castle where they are subjugated to these acts of brutality is, I think, the way that Mussolini and his government, held Italy captive and both literally and figuratively tortured the country. Each act of violence committed in this film represents a lower and lower level of depravity committed against the minds, bodies, and souls of the Italian people. Taken from the works of the Marquise De Sade, the stories of increasing depravity and violence, I think also illustrate worst aspects of human nature and Pasolini makes it all the more worse but intercutting the violence with scenes of the government officials sitting around for tea, discussing philosophy and their ideas about life. Perhaps the most disturbing scene of the film comes at the end when the government officials are doing a chorus line around the the brutually murdered bodies of the children. It is not whimsical or light hearted in an ironic way, but a revolting dance of death that really highlights the casual disposal of life.

    Salo is above all a radical film from a radical and controversial director and to truly understand his films or any of his work, you must understand modern Italian history and the philosophy that Pasolini held as a communist, homosexual, atheist, and anti-fascist. If you are going to sit down and watch Salo then you must also watch The Gospel According To Matthew which is a very personal statement of reinterpreting Jesus Christ as an Italian peasant in a very realistic and stripped down style, or Mamma Roma which is the story of a struggling prostitute. Taking only one of his film such as Salo or even his poetry and novels, and looking at them in an isolated context cannot be done with such a complex director.

    As a film, Salo might not be one of Pasolini’s best, but it has such a visceral impact that it has often taken its place at the top of his body of work. While watching the movie it is difficult to remind oneself that you are watching actors portray the monstrous government officials and they are not actually committing these atrocities against the captive children. The violence is pornographic but what is most disturbing is that the camera angles make you feel that you are participating in these atrocities. We are placed as if we are actually sitting in the room where all the children are abused and must listen to the graphic stories of sexual depravity from one of the women and at the end of the film we look through the binoculars with the government officials as the children are being murdered in the courtyard. You have to wonder then if Pasolini’s intent is to implicate us in the atrocities as much as those directly responsible. We, as the audience, must bear the guilt and shame of what was done to these children and by extenstion, what was done to Italy during the rule of fascism and Mussolini. Salo, coincidentally, is the name of the town where the children are captured, and where in real life, a great deal of atrocities were committed by the Mussolini government. While the Criterion Collection copy of Salo is wonderfully remastered and packaged, I am certain that I will never sit down and watch this movie again. But, for those who have never watched the film, it is a work that will challenge you more than most other films can do  and it is undeniably important. But it also demands a lot out of the viewer and I wonder if the notoriety of the film’s violence will always overshadow its purpose.

    Charles Jacob; vanheck123@hotmail.com

    The Fearless Vampire Killers(1967); Dir. Roman Polanski; Warner Home Video(2004)

    A movie with the subtitle Pardon me, but Your Teeth are in My Neck would suggest to the viewer that they are about to watch something that is in the same vein(I just couldn’t resist) as Mel Brooks’ Dracula: Dead and Loving It or the more accomplished Young Frankenstein. The trailer for the release of The Fearless Vampire Killers sets up the film as a parody of vampire movies by adding slapstick sound effects and there is a short special feature included on the disc entitled Vampires 101 which plays as a farce of how to protect oneself from and kill vampires in the form of a lecture given by a very serious and scholarly professor in a creepy castle. Having watched both of these before the actual film, I was almost expecting a film that was absurd, as well as very blatant and intentional about its efforts to parody classic vampire films.

    Parody and satire, over the last several years, have gotten a very bad rap because of such movies as Disaster Movie, Scary Movie, Epic Movie, and the countless drone of films that attempt to lampoon everything in sight that could be classified as “pop culture sacred cows.” These movies show very little production value and operate on the lowest levels of humor by finding actors and actresses that can look or sound like the person they are parodying enough to get a few cheap laughs. I bring these movies up not to set them up as straw men in an easy argument for the merits of Polanski’s film but rather to point out that parody is a very delicate thing often taken for cheap entertainment.

    What stands out immediately in The Fearless Vampire Killers is the sets and landscape of the film. The castle where a good deal of the action in the film takes place feels Medieval and haunted. The cobwebs, creaky doors, and other aspects that are so often used as cliches and convenient set pieces really feel like they belong there and add an ominous quality to the atmosphere as Prof. Abronsius and Alfred travel through the castle in search of answers.  The inn where Abronsius and Alfred first arrive at, as well as its inhabitants, seem strange and foreboding in their daily routines. You know from the start that things are not quite right when you see the rooms lined with garlic and crucifixes hanging on every wall. But everyone goes about their business and the innkeeper, Shagal, played with great attention to eccentricity and a great sense of comedic timing by Alfie Bass, is unwilling to disclose what it is all about. The inn and the castle are the only interior sets in the film and the rest relies on the beautiful snowy exteriors filmed by the great Douglas Slocombe(cinematographer on the first three Indiana Jones movies among many others).

    This attention to detail and moody atmosphere perfectly compliments the performances given by the actors throughout the film. The characters are played with a seriousness that makes the satire work even more effectively, even when they are unrestrained and bumbling as in the case of Polanski’s Alfred or unabashadly sinister as in the case of Ferdy Mayne’s Count von Krolock. There is the homoerotic son of Count von Krolock, played by lain Quarrier and the wonderful hunchback servant to Count von Krolock, Terry Downes who chases after Prof. Abronsius and Alfred in a coffin used as a sled and refuses to let the undead Shagal sleep in the coffin room with his masters, pushing the coffin outside to Shagal’s neurotic complaints. The comic turns these actors give in the film range from the genuinely creepy to the inept attempts of Abronsius and Alfred to stop the vampires once they have discovered them. The darker undertones of the film seem to play out through these characters as they try to reckon with Count von Krolock and his undead forces while unwittingly doing more harm then good in the end.

    There are many times when it is refreshing not to know what to expect from a movie, and this is certainly one of those times. What is unexpected about this film does not come from any scary surprises or plot twists that are supposed to shock us but through the landscape that Polanski creates and the attention to detail that he consistently uses throughout the film. He directs The Fearless Vampire Killers the same way that he would have with any of his more serious films and this gives the movie a charm that draws you in and engages you all the way through. Polanski demonstrates a sense of freedom in directing with a deft touch that emphasizes the satirical aspects of the movie while exploring the possibilities of the story material and this makes it more than just an odd curiosity in Roman Polanski’s long film career.

    Up Next The October Horror Movie Series gets a tasty but deadly treat with Larry Cohen’s The Stuff.

    Charles Jacob

    vanheck123@hotmail.com, please feel free to contact me with any comments, questions or general thoughts that you would like to share.