Friday, March 31, 2006

Film - Basic Instinct 2

2/5

This film will draw in a lot of people looking for a sexy murder-mystery thriller. Basic Instinct 2 delivers instead a very poor imitation of the original from 14 years ago.

Image Hosted by ImageShack.us

Author Catherine Tramell survives her car crashing into the water, but her male companion dies in the process, apparently drugged earlier that evening to be slow, sluggish and have his lungs fail. In order to figure out if she's a danger to herself or the public, the court appoints a psychiatrist, Dr. Michael Glass (David Morrissey) to evaluate her. Soon after, people around him begin to drop like flies. There are signs that point to Tramell as the killer but the victims also appear to be people the psychiatrist could have killed, for his own personal reasons.

You know the film is about to fall apart when the psychiatrist declares that he doesn't socialize with his patients. Surprise, surprise, guess who breaks his own rule not too long after? Is there anyone, man or woman, who can resist her? Apparently, not.

Sharon Stone (47) was actually really good as the rich, playgirl author, who never seems to be living in the real world. She appears to be somewhat loopy and carefree, never serious for even a second, confident that she is the ruler of her existence. She gets what she wants and people are magnetically seduced by her. Still, we don't get to know her character very much. We don't get inside her head except when we find out in court what Dr. Glass believes about her personality flaws. She's also given some pretty stupid dialogue.

David Morrissey isn't as watchable as Michael Douglas, cop Nick Curran, from the first film. The electricity between them just isn't there. I wonder how much better it could have been with Clive Owen instead. His screen presence is much stronger. He isn't helped, however, by the film's weakly executed story.

David Thewlis, last seen in the third Harry Potter movie as Professor Lupin, also doesn't put in a great performance as the detective with an apparent dirty past, on the trail of Tramell. Veteran actress Charlotte Rampling also seemed underused as psychiatrist Milena Gardosh, a minor role in the film. I kept waiting on her character to be a more significant player but that didn't happen.

This could have been a better film, if there was more of detective story to it with more intrigue and focus. Audiences prefer murder mysteries to be more about "who-dunnit" with "a-ha" moments, rather than just a parade of corpses and a lead character constantly being sexually gratified.

My rating for this film is 2/5 and I wouldn't see it again.

Thursday, March 30, 2006

The Passion of the Cruise

From Rolling Stone.

Image Hosted by ImageShack.us

The Passion of the Cruise
Tom talks frankly for the first time about why Scientology is "the shit, man"
"Want to meet my mom?" Tom Cruise asks as we walk through the halls of the Celebrity Centre, ground zero for Scientology in Los Angeles.

Um, sure.

We round a corner and enter the president's office, where Mary Lee (a.k.a. Mom) has just ordered a salad. In town from Florida, she is leaning against a door frame near Lee Anne DeVette, Cruise's sister and publicist, and Tommy, who manages Cruise's philanthropy work. Mom is thin and tan, and she beams an even toothier smile than her son when she is introduced.

Considering that she is a practicing Catholic, it is somewhat surprising to see her in the Celebrity Centre. "I just finished taking the Way to Happiness course," she says. "I learned so much."

She pauses for a moment and reflects on the day's lesson: "And I thought I was happy before."

Cruise joined Scientology, the controversial church of religion and life philosophy started by L. Ron Hubbard, after church courses helped him overcome his dyslexia in the Eighties; he was followed, one by one, by his three sisters. His mother was the lone holdout in the clan. A year ago, however, after going through what she describes as "some things," she relented.

But doesn't Scientology conflict with her Catholicism? Not at all, she says: "I think Jesus wants me to be here right now. My church may not agree, but I personally know that."

We sit down on the couch, and Lee Anne puts in a video. It is a tape of Tom Cruise speaking at her daughter's graduation from the Delphian School, which uses L. Ron Hubbard's learning principles. It is a passionate speech, in which Cruise sings the praises of Hubbard's "Study Tech" and rails against psychiatry and psychiatric medication. After graduating, Lee Anne's daughter will work in Cruise's office. They're a tight little family.

On the surface, Cruise seems to be at a turning point in his life and career. Romantically, he is alone, having divorced Nicole Kidman after ten years and broken up with Penelope Cruz after three. And he recently left his longtime -- and notoriously overprotective -- publicist, Pat Kingsley, preferring representation by his family. Meanwhile, in his movies, he is taking steps to shed his old persona of headstrong-young-hotshot-with-a-good-heart-underneath-it-all in favor of progressively more evil characters -- from Lestat in Interview With the Vampire to Frank "T.J." Mackey in Magnolia to Vincent in his latest film, Collateral. An older character with salt-and-pepper hair, Vincent is not a nice guy: He is a cold-blooded killer and an unredeemable sociopath who leaves a trail of bodies in his wake.

But the most surprising change is that the famously press-phobic Cruise seems more open than ever about his commitment to Scientology, having provided funds for a detoxification clinic to help New York firefighters who became sick after 9/11.

Since Scientology, in the popular imagination, is such a loaded word -- often associated with heavy-handed recruitment tactics, strong-arm-lawyer assaults and steep membership and course fees -- one would think that Cruise wouldn't be so willing to take a journalist through that world.

"Who are those people that say those things?" Cruise asks when I bring it up over lunch one day. "Because I promise you, it isn't everybody. But I look at those people and I say, 'Bring it. I'm a Scientologist, man. What do you want to know?' I don't mind answering questions."

He lists some of Scientology's selling points: its drug-abuse, prison-rehabilitation and education programs. "Some people, well, if they don't like Scientology, well, then, fuck you." He rises from the table. "Really." He points an angry finger at the imaginary enemy. "Fuck you." His face reddens. "Period."

It is a beautiful exhibition, and I don't believe that he's acting. Before meeting Cruise, I had been warned roundly by my colleagues. They told of restrictions set in interviews, documents that I would have to sign, unprintably generic answers I would receive. They said that he smiles and listens and talks and looks you in the eye, but afterward, when you walk away, you realize that you've really been given nothing but a command performance.

Frankly, none of that turned out to be true. My afternoon in the Scientology Celebrity Centre, a church (featuring a restaurant, a hotel, a spa and classrooms) that caters to Scientology's Hollywood dignitaries, was the cap to a fascinating and unusual week in the world of Cruise that began in the blistering heat of the Mojave Desert.

I'm training to jump a trailer," Cruise says when I arrive at a Willow Springs International Raceway wheelie school in Rosamond, California. He is in black bike leathers, with a matching black helmet tucked under his left arm and two days of stubble on his chin. He points out a trailer sitting just off the track. "It'll be bigger than that one," he continues. "But it's not that hard."

He narrows his eyes and squints at the trailer for a moment, visualizing the feat. "Well, the jumping's not that hard," he says. "It's the landing that's difficult."

He cocks his right hand and slugs me in the shoulder. Cruise has spent the day training to be an action hero. The trailer jump is part of his warm-up for Mission: Impossible 3. Earlier in the day, he took his Cessna plane out to practice loops, prepping for his role as a World War II fighter pilot in his next collaboration with Collateral director Michael Mann, The Few. I have been summoned to the desert to learn to do wheelies with Cruise. There is only one flaw in the plan: I've never ridden a motorcycle in my life.

But I'm willing to learn -- it's part of the job when you're writing stories about sports and other skills. "That's great," Cruise says. He reaches his right hand out to shake mine as a gesture of approval. When his hand grips mine, his elbow comes flying out of nowhere and slams into my chest, knocking me off balance. He has a habit of making great bonding alpha-male gestures of body contact. When you've said something that earns his agreement or respect, you get a firm handshake. Respect mixed with encouragement earns you a spine-collapsing clap on both shoulders. And if he feels a little healthy surprise, you get the flying elbow to the chest. He is the ultimate high school jock, but not the mean, arrogant one. He's the one who's so guileless and friendly that even the nerds don't resent him.

Cruise shows me the powerful Triumph bike I will be riding -- the brake, the clutch, the gearshift and the wheelie bar added to the back of the bike. If a line could be drawn between comfortable personal space and invasive personal space, Cruise would always be just a centimeter over the line. His behavior is not meant to be rude, only sincere and attentive. "Look at this," he says, rapping on the wheelie bar, which trails behind the bike and stabilizes it when the front wheel lifts off the ground. "It's gauged to make sure you don't go too high."

Cruise is a dedicated student of the action-hero disciplines: He wants to gain competence, he says, at rock-climbing and flying; he is loath to use a stunt double, preferring instead to spend months training in swordplay, Nascar racing and bike-riding for films. As he talks about his adventuring skills, one gets the feeling that in the event of an apocalypse, an action hero would have a more likely chance of survival than most ordinary folk.

Cruise considers the idea. In fact, there's nothing that you can say that he won't seriously consider. He pays attention, almost to a fault. "I can live out in the woods," he begins. "I would eat bugs. I can use a sword and a pistol and stuff."

Cruise, ultimately, is a survivor. "There's a confidence that comes from knowing you can work, no matter what," he says. "I can deliver papers. I can take care of myself."

Cruise's dogged work ethic is one reason directors love him. He has worked with some of the best: Martin Scorsese, Steven Spielberg, Oliver Stone, Francis Ford Coppola, Stanley Kubrick. And he rarely limits his involvement in a film to just acting -- he has helped produce, write, even scout locations. Even rarer for an actor, he is a team player. In movie after movie, he has played the straight man in order to enable great performances by his co-stars, whether it be Dustin Hoffman in Rain Man, Cuba Gooding Jr. in Jerry Maguire, Paul Newman in The Color of Money or Jack Nicholson in A Few Good Men.

When we return to the riding lesson, there are two words that seem to recur over and over in Cruise's stories and instructions: competence -- his goal in learning anything new -- and gradient, which is a step in the process of learning. Days later, when he supplies me with materials written by L. Ron Hubbard, I will learn that they are concepts that come from his pamphlet The Way to Happiness (Step 17: Be Competent) and his Study Tech manuals (Barrier 2 to Study: Too Steep a Gradient).

We drink some water and pop a couple of salt tablets to prevent dehydration, then get on our bikes. While Cruise races around the track on his back wheel, I inch along at 10 mph on his 955cc Triumph. Afterward, we adjourn to his trailer for lunch. Nearly every available inch of wall space is filled with photos and montages of Cruise and his family: his mother, his children, his sisters and his nieces and nephews. Even the dashboard is covered with framed photos of the younger generation of Cruises. Cruise currently lives in Los Angeles with his sister Cass, her three children and, when they are with him, the two children he adopted with Nicole Kidman, Isabella, 12, and Connor, 9.

Cruise removes his bike gloves, pulls off his motorcycle helmet and runs a hand through the perfectly shaved black stubble on his head. "That's my daughter," he says, pointing to a girl in his arms on the wall of images. "Look at that. So cute. And that's my son doing his first oral presentation, on Ulysses S. Grant. And that's us in New Zealand."

He pauses, then reflects, "I would live with all of my sisters if I could. We've always been very close, my sisters and me. And we always dreamed of making sure that when we grew up, our kids were together and had their cousins and family."

I ask him how often he sees his kids. "A lot," he replies, unzipping his bodysuit to reveal his trademark immaculately white T-shirt. "Nic and I don't talk publicly about custody, but, definitely, both of us share the kids back and forth. They're amazing kids." He pauses and his eyes narrow, as they usually do when he's speaking about a serious topic. His left eye tends to close a little more than the right one, giving the appearance of deep focus. He nods his head and repeats the thought with more emphasis. "They're amazing kids."

There are few questions that Cruise won't answer, but there are many that he won't give a direct answer to. The general rule is that the more difficult the question, the longer the silence before he answers. These periods of silent contemplation tend to mean that the answer will be a deflection to another topic. And the last line will be a firm and resolute statement, so that it seems as if a meaningful answer has been given. For example:

I ask, "Since your parents' divorce affected you to some degree, were you worried that your breakup would affect your kids?"

One second, two seconds, three seconds. "When it comes to divorce, it's . . ." Four seconds, five seconds, six seconds, seven seconds, eight seconds, nine seconds. "The important thing with a child is that you love them, you protect them and you help them to grow and find out who they are. And as a parent, it's my responsibility to help them to become independent and get all the knowledge and a broad view of the world and life. I know that Nic absolutely agrees with that. And that's what's important: being there."

(Excerpted from RS 956)

NEIL STRAUSS

Posted Aug 11, 2004 12:00 AM

Inside Scientology

From Rolling Stone Magazine. You won't believe the "sci-fi" story behind the religion.

Inside Scientology

Unlocking the complex code of America's most mysterious religion
The faded little downtown area of Clearwater, Florida, has a beauty salon, a pizza parlor and one or two run-down bars, as well as a bunch of withered bungalows and some old storefronts that look as if they haven't seen customers in years. There are few cars and almost no pedestrians. There are, however, buses -- a fleet of gleaming white and blue ones that slowly crawl through town, stopping at regular intervals to discharge a small army of tightly organized, young, almost exclusively white men and women, all clad in uniform preppy attire: khaki, black or navy-blue trousers and crisp white, blue or yellow dress shirts. Some wear pagers on their belts; others carry briefcases. The men have short hair, and the women keep theirs pulled back or tucked under headbands that match their outfits. No one crosses against the light, and everybody calls everybody else "sir" -- even when the "sir" is a woman. They move throughout the center of Clearwater in tight clusters, from corner to corner, building to building.

Image Hosted by ImageShack.us

This regimented mass represents the "Sea Organization," the most dedicated and elite members of the Church of Scientology. For the past thirty years, Scientology has made the city of Clearwater its worldwide spiritual headquarters -- its Mecca, or its Temple Square. There are 8,300 or so Scientologists living and working in Clearwater -- more than in any other city in the world outside of Los Angeles. Scientologists own more than 200 businesses in Clearwater. Members of the church run schools and private tutoring programs, day-care centers and a drug-rehab clinic. They sit on the boards of the Rotary Club, the Chamber of Commerce and the Boy Scouts.

In July 2004, The St. Petersburg Times dubbed Clearwater, a community of 108,000 people, "Scientology's Town." On the newspaper's front page was a photograph of Scientology's newest building, a vast, white, Mediterranean Revival-style edifice known within Scientology circles as the "Super Power" building. Occupying a full square block of downtown, this structure, which has been under construction since 1998, is billed as the single largest Scientology church in the world. When it is finally completed -- presumably in late 2006, at an estimated final cost of $50 million -- it will have 889 rooms on six floors, an indoor sculpture garden and a large Scientology museum. The crowning touch will be a two-story, illuminated Scientology cross that, perched atop the building's highest tower, will shine over the city of Clearwater like a beacon.

* * * *

Scientology -- the term means "the study of truth," in the words of its founder and spiritual messiah, the late science-fiction writer L. Ron Hubbard -- calls itself "the world's fastest-growing religion." Born in 1954, the group now claims 10 million members in 159 countries and more than 6,000 Scientology churches, missions and outreach groups across the globe. Its holdings, which include real estate on several continents, are widely assumed to value in the billions of dollars. Its missionaries -- known as "volunteer ministers" -- take part in "cavalcades" throughout the developing world and have been found, en masse, at the site of disasters ranging from 9/11 to the Asian tsunami to Hurricane Katrina. Within the field of comparative religions, some academics see Scientology as one of the most significant new religious movements of the past century.

Scientology is also America's most controversial religion: widely derided, but little understood. It is rooted in elements of Buddhism, Hinduism and a number of Western philosophies, including aspects of Christianity. The French sociologist Regis Dericquebourg, an expert in comparative religions, explains Scientology's belief system as one of "regressive utopia," in which man seeks to return to a once-perfect state through a variety of meticulous, and rigorous, processes intended to put him in touch with his primordial spirit. These processes are highly controlled, and, at the advanced levels, highly secretive. Critics of the church point out that Scientology, unique among religions, withholds key aspects of its central theology from all but its most exalted followers. To those in the mainstream, this would be akin to the Catholic Church refusing to tell all but a select number of the faithful that Jesus Christ died for their sins.

In June of last year, I set out to discover Scientology, an undertaking that would take nearly nine months. A closed faith that has often been hostile to journalistic inquiry, the church initially offered no help on this story; most of my research was done without its assistance and involved dozens of interviews with both current and former Scientologists, as well as academic researchers who have studied the group. Ultimately, however, the church decided to cooperate and gave me unprecedented access to its officials, social programs and key religious headquarters. What I found was a faith that is at once mainstream and marginal -- a religious community known for its Hollywood members but run by a uniformed sect of believers who rarely, if ever, appear in the public eye. It is an insular society -- one that exists, to a large degree, as something of a parallel universe to the secular world, with its own nomenclature and ethical code, and, most daunting to those who break its rules, its own rigorously enforced justice system.

Scientologists, much like Mormons or Christian evangelicals, consider themselves to be on a mission. They frequently speak of "helping people," and this mission is stressed in a number of church testaments. "Scientologists see themselves as possessors of doctrines and skills that can save the world, if not the galaxy," says Stephen Kent, a professor of sociology at the University of Alberta, in Canada, who has extensively studied the group.

Church officials boast that Scientology has grown more in the past five years than in the previous fifty. Some evidence, however, suggests otherwise. In 2001, a survey conducted by the City University of New York found only 55,000 people in the United States who claimed to be Scientologists. Worldwide, some observers believe a reasonable estimate of Scientology's core practicing membership ranges between 100,000 and 200,000, mostly in the U.S., Europe, South Africa and Australia. According to the church's own course-completion lists -- many of which are available in a church publication and on the Internet -- only 6,126 people signed up for religious services at the Clearwater organization in 2004, down from a peak of 11,210 in 1989. According to Kristi Wachter, a San Francisco activist who maintains an online database devoted to Scientology's numbers, this pattern is replicated at nearly all of Scientology's key organizations and churches. To some observers, this suggests that Scientology may, in fact, be shrinking.

But discerning what is true about the Church of Scientology is no easy task. Tax-exempt since 1993 (status granted by the IRS after a long legal battle), Scientology releases no information about its membership or its finances. Nor does it welcome analysis of its writings or practices. The church has a storied reputation for squelching its critics through litigation, and according to some reports, intimidation (a trait that may explain why the creators of South Park jokingly attributed every credit on its November 2005 sendup of Scientology to the fictional John and Jane Smith; Paramount, reportedly under pressure, has agreed not to rerun the episode here or to air it in England). Nevertheless, Scientology's critics comprise a sizable network of ex-members (or "apostates," in church parlance), academics and independent free-speech and human-rights activists like Wachter, who have declared war on the group by posting a significant amount of previously unknown information on the Internet. This includes scans of controversial memos, photographs and legal briefs, as well as testimonials from disillusioned former members, including some high-ranking members of its Sea Organization. All paint the church in a negative, even abusive, light.

When asked what, if anything, posted by the apostates is true, Mike Rinder, the fifty-year-old director of the Church of Scientology International's legal and public-relations wing, known as the Office of Special Affairs, says bluntly, "It's all bullshit, pretty much."

But he admits that Scientology has been on a campaign to raise its public profile. More than 23 million people visited the Scientology Web site last year, says Rinder, one of the highest-ranking officials in the church. In addition, the church claims that Scientology received 289,000 minutes of radio and TV coverage in 2005, many of them devoted to the actions of Tom Cruise, the most famous Scientologist in the world, who spent much of the spring and summer of 2005 promoting Scientology and its beliefs to interviewers ranging from Oprah Winfrey to Matt Lauer.

Shortly after Rolling Stone decided to embark on this story, Cruise called our offices to say that he would not participate. Several weeks later, the magazine was visited by Cruise's sister, Lee Anne DeVette, an upper-level Scientologist who until recently also served as Cruise's publicist, along with Mike Rinder. Both expressed their dissatisfaction with previous coverage of Scientology by major media outlets, and they warned against what they perceived to be the unreliability of the faith's critics -- "the wackos," as Rinder described them. He then invited Rolling Stone to Los Angeles to show us "the real Scientology" -- a trip that took five months to set up.

A number of people who have spoken for the purposes of this article have done so for the very first time. Several, in speaking of their lives spent in the church, requested that their identities be protected through the change of names and other characteristics. Others insisted that not even a gender be attached to their comments.

There will always be schisms in any religious group, as well as people who, upon leaving their faith, decide to "purge" themselves of their experiences. This is particularly true in the case of members of so-called new religions, which often demand total commitment from their members. Scientology is one of these religions. "We're not playing some minor game in Scientology," Hubbard wrote in a policy paper titled "Keeping Scientology Working," which is required reading for every member. "The whole agonized future of this planet, every man, woman and child on it, and your own destiny for the next endless trillions of years depend on what you do here and now with and in Scientology. This is a deadly serious activity."

* * * *

It is impossible to go anywhere in downtown Clearwater without being watched by security cameras. There are about 100 of them, set up on all of Scientology's properties, which include several hotels, a former bank and a number of administrative buildings. Cameras face in, toward the buildings themselves, as well as out at the street.

While some might find this disconcerting, Natalie Walet, 17, thinks it's normal. "It's just a point of security," she says over coffee one evening at the downtown Starbucks. She notes that Scientology's buildings have been marred with graffiti and are routinely picketed, which she sees as a sign of religious bigotry. "You have a church that a lot of people don't like, and some people are assholes," she says. That said, Natalie adds, most people in Clearwater have "very high standards and morals -- they're ethical people."

A pretty girl with a long black ponytail, Natalie was born and raised in Scientology. Both of her parents and her grandmother are church members, and her involvement in Scientology centers around Clearwater. But the church has other far-flung hubs, including the organizational headquarters in Los Angeles, home to the powerful Church of Scientology International; and Freewinds, the 440-foot cruise ship that docks in Curacao and is used as a training facility, meeting hall and vacation destination for elite Scientologists, including Cruise and John Travolta. There is also "Gold Base," the exclusive desert compound housing the Religious Technology Center, or RTC, the financial hub of the church, located about eighty miles southeast of Los Angeles, home to David Miscavige, the charismatic forty-five-year-old who heads up the international church.

Natalie's everyday reality is one of total immersion in all things Hubbard. Scientology kids are raised in a very different manner than mainstream kids. Most of them, like Natalie, have been educated by special tutors, and enrolled, as Natalie was when she was younger, in private schools run by Scientologists that use a Hubbard-approved study technique. Most kids are also put "on course" -- enrolled in classes at the church that teach both children and adults self-control, focus and communication skills. Natalie was put on course, upon her own insistence, when she was seven or eight years old. Between school and church, life was "kind of a bubble," she says.

It is a steamy night, and Natalie is dressed in a sleeveless black Empire-waist blouse and tight jeans; her short, bitten nails are painted red. She lights a Marlboro Menthol. Smoking is Natalie's only vice. She neither drinks nor takes drugs of any sort -- "once in a grand while I'll take a Tylenol," she says. "But only if my headache is really bad." She admits this with embarrassment because Scientologists consider many illnesses to be psychosomatic and don't believe in treating them with medicine, even aspirin.

Like all Scientologists, Natalie considers her body to be simply a temporary vessel. She thinks of herself as an immortal being, or "thetan," which means that she has lived trillions of years, and will continue to be reborn, again and again. Many Eastern religions have similar beliefs, and Natalie is quick to note that Scientology is "actually a very basic religion. It has a lot of the same moral beliefs as others." What's special about Scientology, Natalie says, is that it "bears a workable applied technology that you can use in your everyday life."

"Technology," or "tech," is what Scientologists call the theories, methods and principles espoused by L. Ron Hubbard -- "LRH," as Natalie calls him. To the devout, he is part prophet, part teacher, part savior -- some Scientologists rank Hubbard's importance as greater than Christ's -- and Hubbard's word is considered the word. Hubbard was a prolific writer all his life; there are millions of words credited to him, roughly a quarter-million of them contained within Dianetics, the best-selling quasiscientific self-help book that is the most famous Scientology text.

Published in 1950, Dianetics maintained that the source of mental and physical illness could be traced back to psychic scars called "engrams" that were rooted in early, even prenatal, experiences, and remained locked in a person's subconscious, or "reactive mind." To rid oneself of the reactive mind, a process known as going "Clear," Dianetics, and later Scientology, preached a regressive-therapy technique called auditing, which involves re-experiencing incidents in one's past life in order to erase their engrams.

Natalie is a fan of auditing, something she's been doing since she was a small child. Most auditing is done with a device called the electropsychometer, or E-meter. Often compared to lie detectors, E-meters measure the changes in small electrical currents in the body, in response to questions posed by an auditor. Scientologists believe the meter registers thoughts of the reactive mind and can root out unconscious lies. As Natalie explains it, the E-meter is "like a guide that helps the auditor to know what questions to ask." Sometimes, she says, you might not remember certain events, and you might not know what is causing your problems. "But they'll just dig it up until you go, 'Holy shit, was that what was going on?'" She smiles. "And afterward, you feel so much better."

Natalie has just begun her path to Scientology enlightenment, known as the Bridge to Total Freedom. There are specific stages, or "grades," of the Bridge, and the key to progressing "upward" is auditing: hundreds, if not thousands, of sessions that Scientologists believe can not only help them resolve their problems but also fix their ethical breaches, much as Catholics might do in confessing their sins. The ultimate goal in every auditing session is to have a "win," or moment of revelation, which can take a few minutes, hours or even weeks -- Scientologists are not allowed to leave an auditing session until their auditor is satisfied.

So far, Natalie has gotten much of her auditing for free, through her parents, who have both worked for the church. But many Scientologists pay dearly for the service. Unique among religious faiths, Scientology charges for virtually all of its religious services. Auditing is purchased in 12.5-hour blocks, known as "intensives." Each intensive can cost anywhere from $750 for introductory sessions to between $8,000 and $9,000 for advanced sessions. When asked about money, church officials can become defensive. "Do you want to know the real answer? If we could offer everything for free, we would do it," says Rinder. Another official offers, "We don't have 2,000 years of acquired wealth to fall back on." But Scientology isn't alone, church leaders insist. Mormons, for example, expect members to tithe a tenth of their earnings.

Still, religious scholars note that this is an untraditional approach. "Among the things that have made this movement so controversial," says S. Scott Bartchy, director of the Center for the Study of Religion at UCLA, "are its claims that its forms of therapy are 'scientific' and that the 'truth' will only be revealed to those who have the money to purchase advancement to the various levels leading to 'being clear.' It is this unvarnished demand for money that has led many observers to opine that the entire operation looks more like a business than a religion." Clearing the stages along the Bridge to Total Freedom is a process that can take years and cost tens and often hundreds of thousands of dollars -- one veteran Scientologist told me she "donated" $250,000 in a twenty-year period. Other Scientologists can wind up spending family inheritances and mortgaging homes to pay the fees. Many, like Natalie's parents, work for their local church so they can receive auditing and courses for free.

Both of Natalie's parents are Clear, she says. Her grandmother is what's called an "Operating Thetan," or "OT." So is Tom Cruise, who is near the top of Scientology's Bridge, at a level known as OT VII. OTs are Scientology's elite -- enlightened beings who are said to have total "control" over themselves and their environment. OTs can allegedly move inanimate objects with their minds, leave their bodies at will and telepathically communicate with, and control the behavior of, both animals and human beings. At the highest levels, they are allegedly liberated from the physical universe, to the point where they can psychically control what Scientologists call MEST: Matter, Energy, Space and Time.

* * * *

The most important, and highly anticipated, of the eight "OT levels" is OT III, also known as the Wall of Fire. It is here that Scientologists are told the secrets of the universe, and, some believe, the creation story behind the entire religion. It is knowledge so dangerous, they are told, any Scientologist learning this material before he is ready could die. When I ask Mike Rinder about this, he casts the warning in less-dire terms, explaining that, before he reached OT III -- he is now OT V -- he was told that looking at the material early was "spiritually not good for you." But Hubbard, who told followers that he discovered these secrets while on a trip to North Africa in 1967, was more dramatic. "Somehow or other I brought it off, and obtained the material and was able to live through it," he wrote. "I am very sure that I was the first one that ever did live through any attempt to attain that material."

Scientologists must be "invited" to do OT III. Beforehand, they are put through an intensive auditing process to verify that they are ready. They sign a waiver promising never to reveal the secrets of OT III, nor to hold Scientology responsible for any trauma or damage one might endure at this stage of auditing. Finally, they are given a manila folder, which they must read in a private, locked room.

These materials, which the Church of Scientology has long struggled to keep secret, were published online by a former member in 1995 and have been widely circulated in the mainstream media, ranging from The New York Times to last year's South Park episode. They assert that 75 million years ago, an evil galactic warlord named Xenu controlled seventy-six planets in this corner of the galaxy, each of which was severely overpopulated. To solve this problem, Xenu rounded up 13.5 trillion beings and then flew them to Earth, where they were dumped into volcanoes around the globe and vaporized with bombs. This scattered their radioactive souls, or thetans, until they were caught in electronic traps set up around the atmosphere and "implanted" with a number of false ideas -- including the concepts of God, Christ and organized religion. Scientologists later learn that many of these entities attached themselves to human beings, where they remain to this day, creating not just the root of all of our emotional and physical problems but the root of all problems of the modern world.

"Hubbard thought it was important to have a story about how things got going, similar to the way both Jews and Christians did in the early chapters of Genesis," says UCLA's Bartchy. "All religion lives from the sense either that something in life is terribly wrong or is profoundly missing. For the most part, Christianity has claimed that people have rebelled against God with the result that they are 'sinners' in need of restoration and that the world is a very unjust place in need of healing. What Hubbard seems to be saying is that human beings are really something else -- thetans trapped in bodies in the material world -- and that Scientology can both wake them up and save them from this bad situation."

The church considers OT III confidential material. But there are numerous science-fiction references in Scientology texts available to members of all levels. The official "Glossary for Scientology and Dianetics" includes an entry for "space opera," a sci-fi genre that the glossary says "is not fiction and concerns actual incidents." Scientology's "Technical Dictionary" makes reference to a number of extraterrestrial "invader forces," including one, the "Marcab Confederacy," explained as a vast, interplanetary civilization more than 200,000 years old that "looks almost exact duplicate [sic] but is worse off than the current U.S. civilization." Indeed, as even Rinder himself points out, Hubbard presented a rough outline of the Xenu story to his followers in a 1967 taped lecture, "RJ 67," in which he noted that 75 million years ago a cataclysmic event happened in this sector of the galaxy that has caused negative effects for everyone since. This material is available to lower-level Scientologists. But the details of the story remain secret within Scientology.

Rinder has fielded questions on Scientology's beliefs for years. When I ask him whether there is any validity to the Xenu story, he gets red-faced, almost going into a tirade. "It is not a story, it is an auditing level," he says, neither confirming nor denying that this theology exists. He says that OT material -- and specifically the material on OT III -- comprises "a small percent" of what Scientology is all about. But it is carefully guarded. Scientologists on the OT levels often carry their materials in locked briefcases and are told to store them in special secure locations in their homes. They are also strictly forbidden from discussing any facet of the materials, even with their families. "I'm not explaining it to you, and I could not explain it to you," says Rinder heatedly. "You don't have a hope of understanding it."

Those who have experienced OT III report that getting through it can be a harrowing experience. Tory Christman, a former high-ranking Scientologist who during her tenure in the faith reached the near-pinnacle of enlightenment, OT VII, says it took more than ten years before she was finally invited onto OT III. Once there, Christman was shocked. "You've jumped through all these hoops just to get to it, and then you open that packet, and the first thing you think is, 'Come on,'" she says. "You're surrounded by all these people who're going, 'Wow, isn't it amazing, just getting the data? I can tell it's really changed you.' After a while, enough people say it and you're like, 'Wow. You know, I really feel it.'"

Natalie has a long way to go before she reaches OT III. Although virtually everything about the OT levels is available on the Internet, "I don't look at that stuff," Natalie says. She believes it is mostly "entheta," which are lies, or negative information about Scientology meant to undermine the faith. "You know, sometimes in school, kids would hear I'm a Scientologist and be like, 'No way -- are you an alien?'" Natalie says. "I don't get mad about it. I just go, 'OK, let me tell you what it really is.'"

Natalie's view of Scientology is the one church officials promote: that it is not a religion about "space aliens" but simply a set of beliefs that can help a person live a better life. And Natalie appears to be the poster child for Scientology as a formula for a well-adjusted adolescence. Articulate and poised, she is close to her family, has a wide circle of Scientologist and non-Scientologist friends and graduated from high school last spring as a straight-A student. "I'm not saying that everybody must be a Scientologist," she says. "But what I am saying is that I see it work. I've learned so much about myself. LRH says, 'What is true for you is what you observe to be true.' So I'm not here to tell you that Scientology is the way, or that these are the answers. You decide what is true."

* * * *

Truth is a relative concept when discussing the life of Lafayette Ronald Hubbard. He was born in 1911, and, according to his legend, lived a life of heroic acts and great scientific and spiritual accomplishment until his death, in 1986. Photos of Hubbard in robust middle age -- often wearing an ascot -- hang in every Scientology center. You can read Hubbard's official biography on the Scientology Web site, which portrays the man Scientologists call the "Founder" as a great thinker, teacher, scientist, adventurer, ethnographer, photographer, sailor and war hero.

The reality of Hubbard's life is less exhilarating but in many ways more interesting. The son of a U.S. naval officer, he was by all accounts an unremarkable youth from Tilden, Nebraska, who flunked out of George Washington University after his sophomore year and later found moderate success as a penny-a-word writer of pulp fiction, publishing hundreds of stories in fantasy magazines like Astounding Science Fiction. As a lieutenant in the Navy, Hubbard served, briefly, in World War II, but never saw combat and was relieved of his command. He spent the last months of the war as an outpatient at a naval hospital in Oakland, California, where he received treatment for ulcers. Years later, Hubbard would claim to have been "crippled and blinded" in battle, and that, over a year or so of intense "scientific research," he'd cured himself using techniques that would later become part of Dianetics.

After the war, Hubbard made his way to Pasadena, California, a scientific boomtown of the 1940s, where he met John Whiteside Parsons, a society figure and a founder of CalTech's Jet Propulsion Laboratory. A sci-fi buff, Parsons was also a follower of the English occultist Aleister Crowley. Parsons befriended Hubbard and invited him to move onto his estate. In one of the stranger chapters in Hubbard's life, recorded in detail by several biographers, the soon-to-be founder of Dianetics became Parsons' assistant -- helping him with a variety of black-magic and sex rituals, including one in which Parsons attempted to conjure a literal "whore of Babalon [sic]," with Hubbard serving as apprentice.

Charming and charismatic, Hubbard succeeded in wooing away Parsons' mistress, Sara Northrup, whom he would later marry. Soon afterward, he fell out with Parsons over a business venture. But having absorbed lessons learned at Parsons' "lodge," Hubbard set out to figure his next step. In his 1983 autobiography, Over My Shoulder: Reflections on a Science Fiction Era, the sci-fi writer Lloyd Eshbach describes meeting Hubbard in the late 1940s. "I'd like to start a religion," Eshbach recalls Hubbard saying. "That's where the money is."

Dianetics: The Modern Science of Mental Health was published in May 1950, and it soon became a runaway hit. Written as sort of a practical pop-psychology book, Dianetics promised that by practicing certain techniques, some of which seemed almost hypnotic, one could be free of sickness, anxiety, aggression and anti-social tendencies, and develop perfect memory and astounding intelligence. Hailed by the newspaper columnist Walter Winchell as a "new science" that "from all indications will prove to be as revolutionary for humanity as the first caveman's discovery and utilization of fire," Dianetics remained on the New York Times best-seller list for twenty-eight consecutive weeks.

But a number of factors, including condemnation from the American Psychological Association, hurt book sales. Public support for Dianetics took a downturn, and by the end of 1952, Hubbard was facing financial ruin.

Rather than admit defeat, Hubbard "improved" Dianetics and unveiled what he claimed was an even more sophisticated path to enlightenment: Scientology. This new technique was designed to restore, or enhance, the abilities of the individual, as opposed to simply getting rid of the reactive mind. In 1954, the first Church of Scientology was born, in Los Angeles. L. Ron Hubbard was now the founder of his own religion.

From there, Hubbard set about spreading Scientology around the world, opening churches in England, Australia, New Zealand and elsewhere. In 1955, a policy known as "Project Celebrity" was launched with the aim of recruiting stars in the arts, sports, business and government -- those dubbed "Prime Communicators" -- who could help disseminate the message. As incentive, these celebrities were given free courses; those who did outstanding work could be "awarded" an OT level, in honor of their service to the organization. Special churches -- known as "celebrity centres" -- were set up, allowing its members to practice Scientology away from the public eye. The most lavish of these is the neo-Gothic Celebrity Centre International, which is housed in a former chateau on Franklin Avenue, at the foot of the Hollywood Hills.

Among the high-profile types who dabbled in Scientology was the writer William S. Burroughs, who would later attack the organizational structure as suppressive of independent thought. But other artists were less critical. John Travolta became a Scientologist in 1975 after reading Dianetics. "My career immediately took off," he states in a personal "success story" published in the book What Is Scientology? "I landed a leading role on the TV show Welcome Back, Kotter and had a string of successful films." Indeed, Travolta says, "Scientology put me into the big time."

In addition to Travolta, Scientology attracted musicians Chick Corea and Isaac Hayes, actresses Mimi Rogers and Kirstie Alley, and the influential acting coach Milton Katselas, who brought in a number of others, including actresses Anne Archer and Kelly Preston, who later became Travolta's wife. And those celebrities begat others, including Tom Cruise, who was introduced by his then-wife, Rogers, and Jenna Elfman, introduced by her husband, actor Bodhi Elfman. Others, such as Juliette Lewis, Erika Christensen and Beck, were born into Scientology.

But as Scientology raised its profile, so too did it find itself under increased scrutiny by the U.S. government, which raided Scientology's offices a number of times in the late 1950s and early 1960s. In 1963, the Food and Drug Administration confiscated hundreds of E-meters from Scientology's Washington, D.C., offices (the FDA accused the church of making false claims about its healing powers). Soon afterward, Hubbard moved his base of operation from the U.S. to England, but continued to face condemnation from a variety of Western governments. To avoid such scrutiny, Hubbard purchased a small fleet of ships in 1967, and, dubbing himself "Commodore," headed for the high seas, which would serve as Scientology's official home and, some maintain, tax shelter until the mid-1970s.

Serving Hubbard at sea were a small group of devoted followers who comprised a private navy of sorts. They were known, collectively, as the "Sea Organization," and dressed in full naval uniforms. Mike Rinder, who joined the Sea Org when he was eighteen, served on Hubbard's lead ship, the Apollo, as a deckhand. He arrived in 1973, having endured years of discrimination in his native Australia (southeastern Australia banned Scientology from 1965 to 1982). "You couldn't own Scientology books," he says. "If you did, you had to hide them because if the police came and found them, they'd take them away."

On the Apollo, Rinder found Hubbard, a reputed recluse, to be totally accessible. He hosted weekly movie nights and often strolled across the ship talking with the crew. "What was most incredible about being with him was that he made you feel that you were important," Rinder recalls. "He didn't in any way promote himself or his own self-importance. He was very, very loving and had the widest range of knowledge and experience that you could possibly imagine -- he'd studied everything." Rinder marvels at Hubbard's abilities: He knew how to cultivate plants, fix cars, shoot movies, mix music, fly an airplane, sail ships.

At sea, Hubbard, who had officially resigned his post as the head of the Church of Scientology (leaving the day-to-day management of the church to lesser officials), worked on his writings and "discoveries." Hubbard also began to obsess over the forces he saw opposing him, including journalists, whom Hubbard long distrusted and even banned from ever becoming Scientologists. Worse still were psychiatrists, a group that, coupled with the pharmaceutical-drug industry -- in Hubbard's words, a "front group" -- operated "straight out of the terrorist textbooks," as he wrote in a 1969 essay titled "Today's Terrorism." He accused psychiatrists of kidnapping, torturing and murdering with impunity. "A psychiatrist," he wrote, "kills a young girl for sexual kicks, murders a dozen patients with an ice pick, castrates a hundred men."

To attack his enemies, Hubbard issued a policy known as "Fair Game," which maintained that all who opposed Scientology could be "tricked, sued or lied to and destroyed." This policy was enforced by Scientology's quasisecret police force, known as the Guardian's Office. By the 1970s, among its tasks was "Operation Snow White," a series of covert activities that included bugging the Justice Department and stealing documents from the IRS. (Scientology officials say Fair Game was canceled decades ago.)

The plan was discovered in FBI raids on Scientology's Los Angeles and Washington, D.C., offices in 1977, which yielded wiretap equipment, burglary tools and about 90,000 pages of documents. Eleven Scientology officials, including Hubbard's third wife, Mary Sue, went to federal prison for their role in the plot, which led to a 1982 "sweep" of the church's upper management.

By then, Hubbard, who was cited as an "unindicted co-conspirator" in Operation Snow White, had vanished from the public eye. For the next several years, rumors of his whereabouts circulated freely -- he was at sea; he was on an island. In fact, Hubbard was on his isolated ranch, Whispering Wind, near the town of Creston, in the California desert. He was attended by a small number of Scientology officials, and his physician, Dr. Eugene Denk, who treated him for a number of conditions, including chronic pancreatitis. On January 17th, 1986, Hubbard suffered a crippling stroke. A week later, he died, in a 1982 Blue Bird motor home on his property. He was seventy-four years old.

Upon Hubbard's death, his ambitious twenty-five-year-old aide, David Miscavige, who would soon succeed him as leader of the church, announced that Scientology's founder had willingly "dropped" his healthy body and moved on to another dimension. In keeping with Hubbard's wishes, his body was cremated within twenty-four hours. There was no autopsy. But the coroner's report described the father of Scientology as in a state of decrepitude: unshaven, with long, thinning whitish-red hair and unkempt fingernails and toenails. In Hubbard's system was the anti-anxiety drug hydroxyzine (Vistaril), which several of his assistants would later attest was only one of many psychiatric and pain medications Hubbard ingested over the years.

These secrets were kept under wraps by Scientology officials. The church would later be named Hubbard's successor in accordance with his will, which had been amended and signed just a day before his death. In it, Hubbard ceded the copyrights to all of his works, as well as a significant portion of his estate, making Scientology, not Hubbard's wife and five children, his primary heir.

Today, every church or Scientology organization has an office reserved for Hubbard. Usually found on the church's ground floor, it is carefully maintained with books, desk, chair, pens, notepads, desk ornaments and other accouterments, as if the Founder might walk in at any moment.

* * * *

The imposing limestone-and-granite Church of Scientology in midtown Manhattan calls itself the "New York Org." A stately building on West 46th Street, northwest of Times Square, it is here that I come, on a hot July afternoon, to experience Scientology for myself.

The first Scientologist I meet here is a kid named Emmett: a clear-eyed and enthusiastic young man in his early twenties whose job is to be a "body-router," which means someone who brings people into the church. "Hi!" he says, accosting me as I stand near the center's entrance. "Do you have a minute?" He waves a postcard-size flier in my face. "We're showing a fifteen-minute film inside," he says. "It's about Dianetics. Ever heard of it?"

He ushers me through a set of glass doors and into the church's lobby, a glossy-marble space with the kind of lighting that bathes everything in a pinkish-golden glow. It is set up as a sort of museum, with a number of video-display panels, one of which offers an earnest testimonial by Tom Cruise. "The Aims of Scientology," a document written by Hubbard, also hangs in the lobby, and it declares Scientology's goals as "simple, but great," including "a civilization without insanity, without criminals and without war; where the able can prosper and honest beings can have rights, and where man is free to rise to greater heights."

The New York Org claims to receive more than 500 phone calls per day, and nearly as many visitors in a week. But aside from its staff, I find the place to be almost entirely empty. Seated alone in a small auditorium, I watch the film, which turns out to be an infomercial featuring a cast of "real" people talking about how Dianetics changed their lives, curing them of ailments ranging from cancer to depression. Scientology is not mentioned once in the film. Nor is Hubbard. And neither are mentioned afterward, during an hour or so conversation I have with a motherly woman in her early fifties named Laurie. She is what is known as a "greeter," and her role is to keep me in the church long enough for me to feel encouraged that, maybe, all of this is worth my time.

Self-betterment is a powerful concept to use as a sales technique, and Laurie begins her pitch in the gentlest of ways. "Tell me about yourself," she says. "What made you interested in Scientology?"

"I guess I was just curious," I tell Laurie.

"Good!" she says with a smile. "We like curious!"

In the next hour or so, Laurie asks me a number of questions: Am I married? Am I happy? What are my goals? Do I feel that I'm living up to my potential?

A failure to live up to potential is one of the things known in Scientology as one's "ruin." In trying to get at mine, Laurie is warm and nonaggressive. And, to my amazement, I begin to open up to her. While we chat, she delivers a soft sell for Scientology's "introductory package": a four-hour seminar and twelve hours of Dianetics auditing, which is done without the E-meter. The cost: just fifty dollars. "You don't have to do it," Laurie says. "It's just something I get the feeling might help you." She pats my arm, squeezes it warmly.

Then she gets down to business and presents me with the $100 Dianetics "starter" kit, which includes a large-type copy of Hubbard's tome, a few CDs and some workbooks to practice the stuff at home. "It's really such a good thing you came in," Laurie adds reassuringly. "You'll see."

On my next visit to the church, the following day, I see Laurie again. She spots me as soon as I walk in and rushes to greet me. "You're back!" She gives me a hug. "I am so glad you decided to give this a try." She then introduces me to a preppy-looking guy in his early thirties named Rurik, who, wasting no time on small talk, leads me to the church's second floor and installs me in a room for my introductory seminar. As with the previous day's film, I'm the only one there. Rurik starts his lecture with the claim that the mind really isn't in the brain. "Close your eyes and think of a picture of a cat," he tells me. I do. "Now, open your eyes and point to where you saw that picture."

I point to my eyes.

Rurik grins. "See? When you're asked to use your mind, you don't point to the brain."

The brain, Rurik says, has absolutely no bearing on our thoughts or feelings. Nor, he adds, does the mind -- its chief function is to serve as a memory bank of all we've experienced in trillions of years of lifetimes. Indeed, Scientology holds that the entire field of neurological and mental-health research -- from Freud to the study of brain chemistry -- is pseudoscience. In Scientology's overview text, What Is Scientology?, psychiatry is described as a "hodgepodge of unproven theories that have never produced any result -- except an ability to make the unmanageable and mutinous more docile and quiet, and turn the troubled into apathetic souls beyond the point of caring."

Most of the dedicated Scientologists I meet echo this opinion, including Kirstie Alley, who has been a Scientologist for more than twenty years and is the international spokesperson for Narconon, the church-supported anti-drug program. In an interview with Alley several weeks later, she calls Scientology the "anti-therapy." "Therapy is based on some guy analyzing you, and what he thinks is going on with you," she says. "And when he can't quite figure it out, he makes up a disease and gets a drug for that. If that doesn't work, he shocks you. And then surgery . . ." Scientology employs a holistic detoxification program known as the "purification rundown," which involves heavy doses of vitamin supplements, primarily niacin, used in conjunction with exercise and long hours in a sauna. Though many doctors point out that none of this has ever been scientifically proven, and, indeed, might be harmful, Scientology claims that the "purif" cleanses the body of impurities. "I can get someone off heroin a hell of a lot faster than I can get somebody off a psych drug," says Alley. "The guy on heroin's not being told daily, 'This is what you need for your disease, and you're gonna have to take this the rest of your life.'"

A few days later I arrive for my free Dianetics auditing sessions. I am put in a large, glass-enclosed room with a student auditor named David, who asks me to "relive" a moment of physical pain. "Don't choose something that's too stressful," David suggests.

Try as I might, I cannot relive much of anything -- indeed, I can barely focus, given that I am surrounded in the room by a number of other pairs who are all being asked to do the same thing. After fifteen minutes, I give up.

Jane, the registrar who is now handling my "case," then whisks me away and, taking a look at my Oxford Capacity Analysis -- a 200-item questionnaire that I filled out on my first day -- tells me that she thinks I need something more personal. "I really want you to have a win," she says.

What Jane recommends is called Life Repair, basic Scientology counseling that she explains will "get to the root of what's inhibiting you." It is conducted in a private room, and involves one, but most likely two, 12.5-hour auditing "intensives," using the E-meter, which will cost around $2,000. Coupled with the purif, which is recommended to anyone starting in Scientology, the total cost will be around $4,000. "And then you'll be on the Bridge," Jane says enthusiastically. "You'll see. It'll change your life."

At the intake level, Scientology comes across as good, practical self-help. Rather than playing on themes that might distance a potential member -- the concept that I am a "thetan," for example -- members hit on topics that have universal appeal. Instead of claiming some heightened degree of enlightenment, they come across as fellow travelers: people who smoke too much, who have had bad marriages, who have had addictions they couldn't handle but have somehow managed to land on their feet. Scientology, they explain, has been a form of "recovery." As one woman I meet puts it, "Scientology works."

There are, however, a few things that seem jarring. Like the cost: $4,000 is a lot to spend for what Jane suggests are "basic" sessions. But perhaps even more alarming is the keen interest they take in my boyfriend. While Laurie inquired sympathetically about the dynamic of our relationship, Jane is suspicious, concerned with his views of the church and his attitude toward my being here. "If he's not open," she says, "that could be a problem."

And then there are Scientology's rules. A fiercely doctrinaire religion, Scientology follows Hubbard's edicts to the letter. Dissent or opposition to any of Hubbard's views isn't tolerated. Nor is debating certain church tenets -- a practice Scientologists view as "counterintentioned." Comporting oneself in any way that could be seen as contrary to church goals is considered subversive and is known as a "suppressive act." One text that sheds enlightenment on both the mind-set of the founder and the inner workings of the church is Introduction to Scientology Ethics, which every Scientologist owns. In this book, the list of suppressive acts is six pages long and includes crimes ranging from murder to "squirreling," or altering Hubbard's teachings.

Jane hands me a form and asks me to sign. The document absolves Scientology of liability if I am not wholly satisfied with its services, and also requires me to pledge that neither I nor my family has ever sued, attacked or publicly criticized Scientology. It also asks me to pledge that I will never sue the church myself.

For the next several months, Jane and various other registrars call my cell phone, asking me to come back to the church and have a "win." I never do.

* * * *

Somewhere in the vast California scrubland east of Los Angeles, west of Palm Springs and near the town of Hemet, is Gold Base, the heart of the Scientology empire. It has been described in some news reports as a "top-secret" facility, monitored by security cameras and protected by electric fences. Most Scientologists have never been to Gold. Within church circles, it is often spoken of in whispers: as INT Base, Scientology's management headquarters and hangout for the likes of Tom Cruise and David Miscavige.

Gold, a former resort, was purchased by the church in the mid-Eighties and sits at the foot of the San Jacinto Mountains. A simple metal gate announces its presence, behind which is a long driveway and, beyond that, a golf course. The 500-acre grounds include grassy meadows and a small lake where swans and ducks roam at will. There are no visible security cameras. But there are electric fences. "Of course we have fences," says Tommy Davis, a senior church official who, with Rinder, accompanies me on a tour of the compound. "We have $60 million worth of equipment here."

Gold is the central dissemination facility for the church. It is best known as the home of Golden Era Productions, Scientology's film, video and sound facilities. Scientology produces myriad promotional and training films here, teaching parishioners everything from auditing techniques to what goes on during a marriage-counseling session. It also makes CDs, produces events and prints its own packaging. Even its E-meters are made here, in a building where Scientologists work on a sort of corporate assembly line, producing roughly 200 of the devices per week.

There is a Disney-esque quality to Gold Base. The focal point of the complex is a beige estate house, known as the Castle, which houses the film wing. The Tavern, a nearby stone carriage-house building, is used for visiting VIPs and is decorated in a King Arthur motif, complete with a sizable round table. There are winding paths and walkways made out of what appears to be fake flagstone. All of the buildings, save the Castle, are white, with blue-tiled roofs.

Breaking up the uniformity is a startling sight: a three-mast rudderless clipper ship, the Star of California, built into a hill overlooking the campus. Some former Scientologists say this structure was built for Hubbard -- though he'd "dropped his body" before it was finished -- but Rinder explains it as just "an idea someone had to build a ship" as a place to house restrooms and a snack bar near the pool. It has a broad wooden deck, mermaid figurines and, at its gangplank, a fishing net adorned with plastic crabs.

Despite these colorful landmarks, Gold is essentially an office park. Its buildings are furnished like a series of corporate suites, complete with bland gray or blue rugs. There's virtually no artwork save a few Scientology posters inscribed with the words of L. Ron Hubbard, and, in the sound studio, framed headshots of various Scientologist celebrities, including Tommy Davis' mother, Anne Archer.

Davis, 33, helps run the Celebrity Centre in Hollywood and is the scion of one of California's real estate dynasties. He freely admits to being a Hollywood rich kid. He dresses in Italian suits, drives a BMW and is addicted to his Blackberry. "I have enough money to never work a day in my life," he says.

But Davis, who calls L. Ron Hubbard "the coolest guy ever," works for the church as a nonuniformed member of the Sea Organization, the Church of Scientology's most powerful entity. Sea Org members staff all of the senior ecclesiastic positions in the church hierarchy, and the top members have exclusive authority over Scientology's funds. In a nod to the group's nautical beginnings, Sea Org members were required to wear naval-style uniforms, complete with epaulets for "officers," until several years ago. Today, for all but those who serve on the Freewinds, the epaulets have been retired. At Gold, whose entire population, save the actors and directors of Scientology films, are Sea Org members, men and women dress in the style of deckhands: short-sleeve dress shirts over dark T-shirts and chinos.

The church describes the Sea Org as a fraternal order -- not a legal entity -- requiring lifelong commitment. It is, in fact, an eternal commitment: Sea Org members sign contracts pledging 1 billion years of service to the church. Scientology's publicity materials portray the Sea Org as similar to the U.S. Marines: "The toughest, most dedicated team this planet has ever known," according to one recruiting brochure. "Against such a powerful team the opposition hasn't got a chance."

Kim Fries, who works in Gold's audiovisual editing department, has been in the Sea Org since she was fifteen. Now thirty-two, Fries says she couldn't imagine living any other way. "What else are you going to do with your life?" she says, with a flick of her dark, wavy hair.

The Sea Org has often been portrayed as isolated, almost monastic; members are rarely allowed to see films, watch TV or read mainstream magazines. "Are we devoted? Yes. Sequestered? No," says Fries, who married a fellow Sea Org member. "I go out into the world, I talk to people out in the world, I definitely live a very full life. This isn't a priesthood. I mean, if it were a priesthood, do you think I'd work here? It would just be so unhip."

Gold is seen as the place "every Sea Org member aspires to work," says Rinder. There are expansive grounds to wander, a crystal-blue pool in which to swim; the dining hall is large and features low-fat and vegetarian entrees. A tiny shop sells cigarettes, juice, soft drinks and junk food.

In my ten or so hours at Gold, I am aware of being taken on an elaborately orchestrated junket, in which every step of my day has been plotted and planned. I don't blame the group for wanting to present its best face; at least half of my conversations with Rinder and Davis pertain in one way or another to what Scientology perceives as a smear campaign on the part of the mainstream media. A chief complaint is that reporters, eager for a story, take the words of lapsed members as gospel. Davis says Scientology gets little credit for the success of its social-betterment programs, which include Narconon and also literacy and educational programs. "Look around," says Davis. "People are out here busting their butt every day to make a difference. And one guy who leaves because he wants to go to the movies gets to characterize the whole organization? That sucks."

Scientologists do not look kindly on critics, particularly those who were once devout. Apostasy, which in Scientology means speaking out against the church in any public forum, is considered to be the highest form of treason. This is one of the most serious "suppressive acts," and those who apostatize are immediately branded as "Suppressive Persons," or SPs. Scientologists are taught that SPs are evil -- Hitler was an SP, says Rinder. Indeed, Hubbard believed that a full 2.5 percent of the population was "suppressive." As he wrote in the Dianetics and Scientology Technical Dictionary, a suppressive person is someone who "goofs up or vilifies any effort to help anybody and particularly knife with violence anything calculated to make human beings more powerful or more intelligent."

Given this viewpoint, I wonder why anyone with connections to Scientology would critique them publicly. "Makes them famous," Rinder says. "They do it for their fifteen minutes."

Scientology has been extremely effective at attacking its defectors, often destroying their credibility entirely, a policy that observers call "dead agenting." Some of the church's highest-profile critics say they have been on the receiving end of this policy. In the past six years, Tory Christman claims, the church has spread lies about her on the Internet, filed suit against her for violating an injunction for picketing on church property and attempted to get her fired from her job. Rinder dismisses Christman as a "wacko" and says her allegations are "absolute bullshit."

When Christman split from the church, her husband and most of her friends -- all of them Scientologists -- refused to talk to her again. Apostates are not just discredited from the church; they are also excommunicated, isolated from their loved ones who, under Scientology rules, must sever or "disconnect" from them. Scientology defines those associated with Suppressive People as "Potential Trouble Sources," or PTS.

Rinder says disconnection is a policy of last resort. "The first step is always to try to handle the situation," he says. A "handling" generally refers to persuading a wayward member to return to the church in order to maintain contact with his family. The parent of someone who's apostatized might call his child and ask him to "handle" a problem by essentially recanting. "They'll ask them to make some amends, show they can be trusted . . . something to make up the damage," says Davis. Those amends might range from volunteering in a literacy program to taking a public advocacy role -- campaigning against psychiatry, for example.

But some people, the officials admit, refuse to be handled. What happens to them? "Then I guess not believing in Scientology means more to them than not seeing their family," Davis says.

Excommunication is nothing new in organized religion. A number of sects have similar policies to Scientology's: the Amish, the Mormon Fundamentalists, the Jehovah's Witnesses. All have a rationale. Scientology's rationale is very simple: "We are protecting the good of the religion and all the parishioners," says Rinder.

"It's for the good of the group," says Davis.

"How are you going to judge what is and isn't the worst tenets and violations of the Church of Scientology?" Rinder asks. "You aren't a Scientologist." Complaints about these policies, he adds, "come from people who aren't Scientologists [anymore]. What do they give a shit for anymore? They left!"

I spend a lot of time talking about the question of apostasy with Rinder and Davis. Both feel the church has been miscast. "Somewhere there is a concept that we hold strings over all these people and control them," says Rinder. But provided you don't denounce Scientology, it's perfectly fine to leave the church, he says. "Whatever. What's true for you is true for you." Nothing will happen to those who lose their faith, he says, unless they "tell bald-faced lies to malign and libel the organization -- unless they make it seem like something it isn't."

* * * *

Paul James is not this twenty-two-year-old man's real name. He is the son of established Scientologists, blond and blue-eyed, with the easy smile and chiseled good looks of a young Matt Damon. He has had no contact with the church since he was seventeen. "I honestly don't know how people can live psychotically happy all the time," Paul tells me over coffee one afternoon at his small, tidy house outside Los Angeles. "Or thinking that they're happy," he adds with a grin. "I'm talking about that fake-happiness thing that people make themselves believe."

Like Natalie, Paul was educated by Scientology tutors, sent to Scientologist-run private schools and put "on course" at his church. Unlike her, he hated it. "I never found anything in Scientology that had to do with spiritual enlightenment," he says. "As soon as common sense started hitting me" -- around the age of ten -- "it creeped me out."

Though there are a significant number of second-generation Scientologists who, like Natalie, are devoted to the church, there are also kids like Paul. This, says the University of Alberta's Stephen Kent, is to be expected. One "unanticipated consequence" of the widespread conversions of young people to sects like Scientology in the 1960s and 1970s, Kent says, has been a "wave" of defections of these members' adult children.

A fundamental element of Scientology is that children are often regarded as small adults -- "big thetans in little bodies," as some parents call them. Paul's parents worked eighteen-hour days for the church, he says, and generally left him and his older brother to their own devices. "My brother was baby-sitting me by himself when he was eleven years old," Paul says. When his brother went off with his friends, "I'd get home from school and be wandering around the [apartment] complex."

Paul's school was no more structured, he says. Students were encouraged to work at their own pace on subjects of their choosing, and, according to Paul, received little guidance from teachers, who are called "supervisors." I found this to be true at the Delphi Academy in Lake View Terrace, California, part of a network of elite schools that use Hubbard's study technology. Maggie Reinhart, Delphi's director, says that this technique forces a student to take an active role in his education. A number of Scientology kids have thrived in this environment. Others, like Paul, felt lost. "I just kind of roamed from classroom to classroom and nobody cared," he says. At Delphi, I saw teachers assisting certain students, but there was no generalized "teaching," no class discussions.

Discussion, as some academics like Kent note, isn't encouraged in Scientology, nor in Scientology-oriented schools. It is seen as running counter to the teachings of Scientology, which are absolute. Thus, debate is relegated to those in the world of "Wogs" -- what Scientologists call non-Scientologists. Or, as Hubbard described them, "common, ordinary, run-of-the-mill, garden-variety humanoid[s]."

Paul met very few Wogs growing up, and those he did know often didn't understand him. Scientology has its own unique lexicon. "It's kind of like being a French Canadian," Paul explains. "You speak one thing out in the world and another thing at home."

Many kids who've grown up in Scientology describe it as Natalie did: "a bubble" that exists in tandem with the mainstream world. "It's impossible to understand it unless you've lived it," says Paul.

Even when you've lived it, as one young woman notes, it's hard to fully understand. This twenty-two-year-old, whom we'll call Sara, left Scientology in high school. After leaving, she and a friend who quit with her sat down with a dictionary. "We looked up all the words we used [because] we didn't know if we were speaking English or not," she says.

Hubbard created Scientology's language to be unique to its members. It includes words that are interpretations, or variations, of standard terms: "isness," for example, which Scientology's glossaries say, in essence, means "reality." But there are also words that are wholly made up, such as "obnosis," which means "observation of the obvious."

The chaotic world, as one might call it in the mainstream, is, in Scientology, "enturbulated," which means "agitated and disturbed." To correct, or solve, personal or societal problems requires the proper application of "ethics," which in Scientology refers to one's moral choices, as well as to a distinct moral system. Those who conduct themselves correctly have their ethics "in." Those who misbehave are "out-ethics." A person's harmful or negative acts are known as "overts." Covering them up is known as a "withhold."

All of these terms, and many more, are contained in a number of Scientology dictionaries, all written by Hubbard. Scientologists consider word comprehension and vocabulary skills to be essential parts of their faith.

The Hubbard Study Technology is administered in schools through an organization called "Applied Scholastics"; it emphasizes looking up any unknown or "misunderstood" word in a dictionary, and never skipping past a word you don't understand. This same study method is used in church, where adults of all ages and levels of advancement spend hours poring over dictionaries and course manuals.

One key word is "gradient," which is defined in the official Scientology and Dianetics glossary as "a gradual approach to something, taken step by step, level by level, each step or level being, of itself, easily surmountable so that, finally, quite complicated and difficult activities or high states of being can be achieved with relative ease." This principle, the glossary notes, "is applied to both Scientology processing and training."

Another key belief is "communication." One of Scientology's basic courses is "Success Through Communication," taught to young people and adults. It involves a series of drills, known as "training routines," or "TRs." One drill asks students to close their eyes and simply sit, sometimes for hours. Another asks them to stare at a partner, immobile. A third requires students to mock, joke with or otherwise verbally engage their partner. The partner must passively receive these comments without moving or saying a word.

These drills, Scientologists say, help improve what they call their "confront," which in Scientology's lexicon means "the ability to be there comfortably and perceive." A fourth drill requires students to pose a series of questions to one another, such as "Do fish swim?" Their partner may respond in any way they like, with the question being asked repeatedly until the partner answers correctly. Sara's favorite drill involved an ashtray: "You tell it to stand up, sit down, and you 'move' the ashtray for hours. You're supposed to be beaming your intention into the ashtray, and the supervisor is going to tell you if you're intent enough."

At Delphi, students take a course called "Improving Conditions." "Conditions" refers to key Hubbard principles. Charted on a scale, they relate to one's relationship to oneself and to those within one's organization, school or "group." A Scientologist's goal, it's often noted, is to "improve conditions."

From highest to lowest, the Conditions are: Power, Power Change, Affluence, Normal, Emergency, Danger, Non-Existence, Liability, Doubt, Enemy, Treason and Confusion. Together, these conditions form the spine of the practical application of Scientology "ethics," which is, many say, the true heart of the faith. "Ethics," as a Scientological term, is defined as "rationality toward the greatest good for the greatest number of dynamics," as well as "reason and the contemplation of optimum survival."

To survive, Scientology applies its philosophy, or "ethics tech," across a broad social and societal scale. They do good works -- indeed, as Rinder notes, "Scientologists are driven by a real concern for the well-being of others. They see the world around them and want to do something about it."

But the church's drug-treatment and literacy programs and anti-psychiatry campaigns do more than just evangelize through charity; in fact, they exist largely to help prepare people to become Scientologists. Once a person is drug-free, psychiatrist-free and literate, he is qualified for auditing. And auditing is the centerpiece of Scientology. "It's all about going up the Bridge," says Paul.

Paul began auditing when he was four. Rebellious by nature, he says it did very little for him. By the age of eleven or twelve, he says, "I was so out of control, my parents had no idea what to do with me."

Scientologists run a number of boarding schools around the country, including the prestigious Delphian School, in the Willamette Valley of Oregon, which counts Earthlink founder Sky Dayton among its graduates. Scientologists' kids who caused trouble, or otherwise displeased their parents, have been sent to more restrictive private boarding schools. Paul was sent to Mace-Kingsley Ranch, located on 2,000 acres in New Mexico, which was closed in 2002.

Paul arrived at Mace-Kingsley when he was thirteen, and stayed for three and a half years. As he tells it, he underwent what sounds like a typical "boot camp" experience, complete with hard labor, bad food, tough supervision -- all with a high price tag, roughly $30,000 per year. The school enforced a rigid Scientology focus that many former students now say served as both a mechanism of control and a form of religious indoctrination.

The process began for all new students with an IQ test and the Purification Rundown, which Paul says was given to kids as young as eight or nine years old. Then they were administered the Oxford Capacity Analysis, created by Scientologists in 1953. The test was designed to find out the student's "tone," or emotional state, in preparation for auditing. Students were audited daily at the ranch. By the age of sixteen, Paul says, he'd grown so used to the process, he'd figured out how to "trick" the E-meter: By remaining calm enough for no electrical charge to register, he was often able to hide most of his inner feelings from his auditors and his "case supervisor," who oversaw his progress.

But not always. "There are things they wanted to know, and they'd just keep asking until you finally told them," he says. "They'd get me to tell them about lies, or things that were bad, right down to my thoughts -- some of which were overts." So were some of his deeds. Masturbation is an overt -- strictly forbidden in Scientology, as Hubbard believed that it can slow one's process to enlightenment. "It's not evil, just out-ethics," says Paul. "They'll dig it up in session and tell you to stop because it's slowing you down."

Another overt is homosexuality, which Hubbard believed was a form of sexual "deviance" best treated by therapy, or institutionalization. This view was espoused by many psychiatrists of Hubbard's generation. Mainstream psychiatry has changed its view since the 1950s. Scientology as an institution takes no formal position on issues like gay marriage, but homosexuality, sexual promiscuity or any other form of "perversion" ranks low on Scientology's "tone scale," a register of human behavior Hubbard described in his 1951 book Science of Survival: Prediction of Human Behavior.

This book, according to Mike Rinder, is perhaps the most important Scientology text after Dianetics. In it, Hubbard denounced virtually every sexual practice that doesn't directly relate to marriage and children. "Such people should be taken from the society as rapidly as possible . . . for here is the level of the contagion of immortality and the destruction of ethics," he wrote of homosexuals. "No social order will survive which does not remove these people from its midst."

In auditing, Scientologists are frequently asked about their sexual thoughts or practices, particularly in the special auditing sessions called "security checks." This process requires a church member to write down any break with the ethical code. Security checks are administered to every Scientologist on the Bridge, and particularly to all OTs, who must be checked every six months "to make sure they're using the tech correctly," as church officials explain. In September, I received, through a source, a faxed copy of the standard security-check sheet for adults. Its questions include "Have you ever been involved in an abortion?" "Have you ever practiced sex with animals?" "Have you ever practiced sodomy?" "Have you ever slept with a member of a race of another color?" as well as "Have you ever had any unkind thoughts about L. Ron Hubbard?"

Paul resisted his security checks -- he says he sometimes fell asleep during the sessions. But Sara, who says she went through months of "sec checks" after deciding, at age fifteen, that she didn't want to be a Scientologist any longer, says she was highly disturbed by the process. At first, she says, counselors at her church tried to "clear" her. She was forced to repeatedly look up words in the dictionary to make sure she misunderstood nothing about Scientology. Then they gave her a security check. "For months I'm going to the church every night after school, and I'm in this fucking basement for four hours a night, on the E-meter," she says. "They're asking me questions about sex -- every personal question known to man." If she tried to leave, Sara adds, the auditors would physically block her path and force her back in her chair. Officials say this forced auditing is for the subjects' own good, as it might be harmful if they were to leave a session before they were ready.

"Scientology has a plausible explanation for everything they do -- that's the genius of it," says Sara. "But make no mistakes: Scientology is brainwashing."

* * * *

Jeffrey Aylor was thirteen when he joined the sea Organization. Raised in a Scientology family in Los Angeles, he was at church one day when a Sea Org recruiter approached him. "What are you doing with your life?" he asked the teen.

Jeffrey had no idea what to say. "I'm thirteen, I'm not doing anything with my life," Jeffrey said. The recruiter asked him if he wanted to "help" people. Jeffrey said, "Sure. What kid doesn't want to help people?"

Thus began Jeffrey's immersion into the tightly wound world of the Sea Org, where he would spend the next seven years of his life. In that time, he would see fewer than ten movies, would rarely listen to music and never had sex. Though theoretically reading newspapers and magazines was allowed -- USA Today is sold openly on Gold Base -- in practice it was discouraged, along with surfing the Internet and watching TV. Indeed, all contact with the world at large was "entheta." "I never considered myself a Scientologist until I joined the Sea Org," Jeffrey says.

Jeffrey's indoctrination began with a boot camp known as the "Estates Project Force," or EPF. There, he learned to march, salute and perform manual labor. Physical work is a key training technique for new recruits. Jeffrey's sister, for instance, went through the EPF when she was twelve and was forced to crawl through ducts that were roach- and rat-infested. Like the TRs, this kind of work, Jeffrey explains, is meant to raise a person's "confront," enabling them to be more in control of their environment.

After the EPF, Jeffrey was given a blue shirt, blue tie and dark-blue trousers, and sent to work as a receptionist at the American Saint Hill Organization for spiritual training, on Scientology's expansive Hollywood campus. He was paid fifty dollars per week and worked an average of fifteen hours per day, including an hour or two of auditing and other training. Home was a large barracks-style room in a building where Jeffrey lived with about twenty other boys and men. In seven years, Jeffrey says, he saw his family just a handful of times. His only free time was the few hours he received on Sunday mornings to do his laundry. Hubbard believed strongly in productivity, which he saw as highly ethical behavior. "We reward production and up-statistics and penalize nonproduction and down-statistics," he wrote in Introduction to Scientology Ethics.

Eventually, Jeffrey found himself on "PTS watch," monitoring Sea Org members who wanted to leave the order. According to church officials, Sea Org members can leave anytime they want. But in practice, the attitude is "the only reason you'd want to leave is because you've done something wrong," says Jeffrey. This would call for a round of "sec checks," which would continue throughout the "route out" process, which can take up to a year. During that time, former Sea Org members have asserted, they are subjected to so much pressure they often decide not to leave after all.

To make sure no one would leave before their route-out was complete, Jeffrey would shadow them: "I've been assigned to go and sleep outside somebody's door -- all night, for as many nights as it takes -- on the floor, against the door, so I could feel if they opened it. If they went to the bathroom, someone would stand right outside. Someone is always there."

Some wayward members have "disappeared" for long periods of time, sent to special Scientology facilities known as the "Rehabilitation Project Force." Created by Hubbard in 1974, the RPF is described by the church as a voluntary rehabilitation program offering a "second chance" to Sea Org members who have become unproductive or have strayed from the church's codes. It involves intensive physical labor (at church facilities) and auditing and study sessions to address the individual's personal problems. The process is given a positive spin in church writings. "Personnel 'burnout' is not new to organizations," a post on Scientology's official Web site reads, in relation to the RPF, "but the concept of complete rehabilitation is."

Former Sea Org members who've been through the program charge that it is a form of re-indoctrination, in which hard physical labor and intense ideological study are used to break a subject's will. Chuck Beatty, a former Sea Org member, spent seven years in the RPF facilities in Southern California, from 1996 to 2003, after expressing a desire to speak out against the church. For this, he was accused of "disloyalty," a condition calling for rehabilitation. "My idea was to go to the RPF for six or eight months and then route out," says Beatty. "I thought that was the honorable thing to do." In the RPF he was given a "twin," or auditing partner, who was responsible for making sure he didn't escape. "It's a prison system," he says, explaining that all RPFers are watched twenty-four hours per day and prevented from having contact with the outside world. "It's a mind-bending situation where you feel like you're betraying the group if you try to leave."

Quiet and disciplined by nature, Jeffrey never minded the regimentation and order of the Sea Org. "I was wrapped up in work," he says. "And that's what I liked doing. And I thought I was helping people." But when he became ill, his perspective radically changed. For the first six years of his Sea Org service, Jeffrey had kept his asthma and other health issues in check. In the spring of 2004, he began to develop severe chest pains. By the summer, he was unable to work. By fall, he could barely get out of bed.

Scientologists believe that most illnesses are products of a person's own psychic traumas -- they are brought upon themselves. Sea Org members are promised medical care for any illness, but Jeffrey says that he received little medical attention or money with which to seek outside medical care. Instead, he was sent to Ethics counseling. When that didn't cure him, it was suggested he return to the EPF to repeat his training.

Even while bedridden, "if I wasn't there pushing somebody to take me to a doctor . . . it didn't happen," he says. Lying in bed one night, Jeffrey listened to a taped lecture given by L. Ron Hubbard, in which he made his famous statement "If it isn't true for you, it isn't true." For Jeffrey, this began a questioning process that would eventually lead to his leaving Scientology altogether. "Nobody can force Scientology upon you, but that is exactly what was happening to me," he says.

And so, one day last February, he asked for some time off to see a doctor. Then he called his mother and asked her to come get him. When she arrived the next morning, Jeffrey left his keys and his Sea Organization ID card behind on his bed. Then, taking only his clothes, he left.

Now twenty-three, Jeffrey lives in a small mountain town more than four hours from Los Angeles. Since his "escape," as he calls it, from the Sea Org, he has not returned to the church. He has never spoken out about his experiences, which he still insists "weren't all that bad." But because he left the Sea Org without permission, he has been declared suppressive. Soon, he believes, his family still in the church will have nothing more to do with him.

The order of disconnection, called a "declare," is issued on a piece of gold-colored parchment known as a "goldenrod." This document proclaims the suppressive person's name, as well as his or her "crime." According to one friend of Jeffrey's mother who has read his declare, Jeffrey's crimes are vague, but every Scientologist who sees it will understand its point.

"This declare is a warning to Jeffrey's friends in the Sea Org," this woman, who is still a member of the church, explains. "It's saying to them, 'See this kid, he left without permission. This is what happened to him. Don't you make the same mistake.'"

* * * *

During the time I was researching this piece, I received a number of e-mails from several of the Scientologists I had interviewed. Most were still technically members of the church in good standing; privately they had grown disillusioned and have spoken about their feelings for the first time in this article. All of the young people mentioned in this story, save Natalie, are considered by the church hierarchy to be Potential Trouble Sources. But many have begun to worry they will be declared Suppressive Persons.

Their e-mails expressed their second thoughts and their fears.

"PLEASE, let me know what you will be writing in the story," wrote one young woman. "I just want to make sure that people won't be able to read it and figure out who I am. I know my mom will be reading."

"The church is a big, scary deal," wrote another. "My [initial] attitude was if this information could save just one person the money, heartache and mind-bending control, then all would be worth it. [But] I'm frightened of what could happen."

"I'm about two seconds away from losing my whole family, and if that story comes out with my stuff in it, I will," wrote a third. "I'm terrified. Please, please, please . . . if it's not too late . . . help me keep my family."

One particularly frantic e-mail arrived shortly before this story was published. It came from a young Scientologist with whom I had corresponded several times in the course of three or four months. When we first met, she spoke passionately and angrily about the impact of the church on herself and those close to her.

"Please forgive me," she wrote. "The huge majority of things I told you were lies. Perhaps I don't like Scientology. True. But what I do know is that I was born with the family I was born with, and I love them. Don't ask me to tear down the foundation of their lives." Like almost every young person mentioned in this piece, this woman was given a pseudonym to protect her identity, and her family's. But it wasn't enough, she decided. "This is my life . . . Accept what I tell you now for fact: I will not corroborate or back up a single thing I said.

"I'm so sorry," she concluded. "I hope you understand that everyone I love is terribly important to me, and I am willing to look beyond their beliefs in order to keep them around. I will explain in further detail, perhaps, some other day."

JANET REITMAN

Posted Feb 23, 2006 1:16 PM

Monday, March 27, 2006

Does Open Source Create Jobs?

Another interesting article about open source software.

Image Hosted by ImageShack.us
And How About Ajax and Web 2.0, Now That We're On the Subject?

By: Roger Strukhoff
Mar. 27, 2006 01:15 PM

Does Open Source Create Jobs?

As West Coast Bureau Chief of SYS-CON Media, I have the privilege of observing, and reporting on, what remains the most dynamic technology development region in the world, Silicon Valley. And frequent visitors to the SYS-CON family of websites will be familiar with my occasional rants about how things just aren’t what they used to be around here, even as we approach the sixth anniversary of the initial dot-com bubbleburst.

My lament runs something like this: the Nasdaq continues to be mired somewhere around the 2000 level, traffic (aka my “favorite metric,” according to our publisher director Jeremy Geelan) is still less abominably bad than in the glory days, and acres upon acres of low-slung office buildings continue to sit empty.

The singular fact emerging from all this is that employment has simply not approached glory-day levels. Even as the Nasdaq has edged up 15% in recent months, it languishes far, far from its late 90s peak. And the most wildly successful Silicon Valley company in recent years, Google, has shown signs of stock-price stress in the wake of a candid assessment by the company’s CFO about its prospects for future growth.

OK, enough replaying of the familiar whine. My purpose today is to examine the question about whether the hottest topics in software development right now—Open Source, Ajax, and Web 2.0—offer any relief.

Open Source is as much a political movement as a technical one, and has a very large and tremendously passionate following around the world. Ajax, the old wine in a new bottle, has tapped into the open-source sensibility to launch a new wave of application development suited for the current principle that websites should be faster, more functional, and highly flexible. And Web 2.0, a term that noted Silicon Valley venture capitalist was just quoted as saying makes him “puke,” has risen into the zeitgeist so quickly as to give everyone a bit of queasiness as they try to define it, and more important, value it properly.

But does any of this solve the problem of creating jobs? And it’s always seemed to me that, at the risk of sounding like a hackneyed politician or out-of-touch activist, that job creation is the keystone of capitalism and the (theoretically) fair-minded democracies it helps create and foster.

My attention was drawn to recent coverage of three classic Web 2.0 companies, flickr, myspace, and youtube. All have put “the community” at the center of their plans, in a way that respects hive intelligence and lets users decide what the heck is going to be going on at the sites. The first two have been wildly successful, both in terms of the traffic they attract and in the fact that they’ve been sold to major corporations (Yahoo and News Corp., respectively). The third, youtube, appears to be on a similar path.

But none of these companies created much in the way of employment. A staff of 19 currently drives the youtube vision, and stories from the early days of flickr and myspace show similar skeleton-crew efforts.

Contrast that to Google or Yahoo, or the father of the dot-com boom, Netscape, or an even earlier generation of start-ups that included Apple, Oracle, Sun Microsystems, and of course, Microsoft.

So will the Web 2.0 phenomenon create any meaningful employment? Will there be any trickle-down wealth creation to anyone but a precious small group of founders? (Not that there’s anything wrong with the founders being enriched, as they people all had penetrating vision and the will to work 26 hours a day to make it happen.)

Turning to the other two hot topics, Ajax and Open Source, will they generate significant employment?

Isn’t Ajax just a new/old way to create applications? It seems destined to make companies more adaptive and will reward those programmers and managers who master its subtleties and potential, but does it in and of itself engender any new job creation?

And how about Open Source? One of the great overarching topics in technology today, open source has been assailed by traditional software vendors as removing the profit incentive from business. Some reports have said it will remove hundreds of millions of dollars of profit from the industry over just the next five-year period.

Well, there are dozens of companies with sufficient profile to establish open source as a real business, with some of these companies already acquired by a few of the Very Large Companies who are clearly fearful of not having a sufficient open-source strategy. But in the longer run, it has to be asked whether open source will be able to incubate any companies with a prayer of reaching the Fortune 500 class, something that traditional technology companies from Silicon Valley and elsewhere have achieved on a widespread scale over the past quarter century.

Whether or not open source is destroying traditional business, there is an even more serious side to the debate: a highly respected analyst with whom I spoke over the week-end says that open source is destroying technology as well. This person shall remain nameless for now (although I can show you the proof of the call from my next wireless bill), but his viewpoint comes from one who advises Fortune 1000 corporations on how they should deploy key subsystems within their IT infrastructures. “Do you want to fly on a plane running open-source software in its navigation system? Would you be comfortable in knowing the FAA is guiding it with open-source software? Do you want the DoD to start running open source?” he asks.

This analyst thinks open source has a tendency to drive expectations of what software can do downward. New, lowered expectations of how long and how much money it should take to develop applications is leading to lowered expectations for performance, too, he claims.

I told him to read all the content provided by SYS-CON’s LinuxWorld and Enterprise Open Source magazines more closely, and to take a chill pill and call me in the morning. But hand-in-hand with his observation is the idea that smaller, more agile development teams translate to smaller organizations over all—in this case without the benefits of higher effectiveness and efficiency that we’ve come to associate with “smaller is better” business philosophy over the past two decades.

What do you think? Do I sound like an old-line rust belt union guy, bellowing for more jobs while not identifying why, other than I just think we should have more jobs? Or is there something to this idea that Open Source, Ajax, and Web 2.0 are marvelous developments, each in their own particular way, but none of these trends is going to lead the former orchards of the Santa Clara Valley (or any other region) to a new era of significant job growth?

© 2006 SYS-CON Media Inc.

Sunday, March 26, 2006

The man who could fix Windows

Time will tell if this "new" approach works in their favour. There are two things people want from their software: stability and security. Will MS deliver or will they simply drive more customers to seek out alternatives?

The man who could fix Windows
Microsoft's new OS chief has to get Redmond to embrace a new model of programming, in which software is constantly being improved instead of updated every 5 years.
Business 2.0 Magazine
By Erick Schonfeld, Business 2.0 Magazine editor-at-large
March 24, 2006: 4:26 PM EST

Image Hosted by ImageShack.us

NEW YORK (Business 2.0 Magazine) - Steven Sinofsky is a rare bird on Microsoft's Redmond campus -- a manager who actually delivers software on time. As head of product development for Office, he's known for meeting release deadlines.
The perpetual beta

Image Hosted by ImageShack.us
Steven Sinofsky

He's now been put in charge of Microsoft's Windows group, which has seen endless delays in the release of its new Vista operating system. (Indeed, the recently announced delay of the consumer version of Vista will hold up what would have been the timely release of Sinofsky's Office 2007 since Microsoft wants to release the two products at the same time).

One of Sinofsky's main tasks in his new role will be to revamp the way that software is developed and pushed out the door. And it won't be enough to just crack the whip on deadlines. He'll also have to get Microsoft (Research) to embrace a new model of programming born on the Web -- the "perpetual beta" -- in which programmers continuously improve software with new features rather than wait to roll them up into a big release every few years.

That's a big challenge, but if Sinofsky can succeed in that task, he could be headed straight to the top. Indeed, in 2003 Business 2.0 identified him as one of seven executives who might one day succeed Bill Gates.

When Microsoft ruled the desktop-software universe, delays didn't matter. Microsoft marketers could announce a product years in advance and keep pushing off the release date -- creating what some critics called "vaporware" -- and partners would fall into line, pledging their support while the software took years to coalesce out of Redmond's fog.

But Google (Research) and others have shown a new way of delivering software. Rather than wait until a program is perfect and bug-free, with all the desired features, Google releases it in a so-called "beta," or test version, that consumers can use. Product improvements are then rolled out invisibly -- programmers never stop improving upon the software. Best of all, upgrades don't require the purchase of new software or a lengthy download.

That's the model Sinofsky will have to embrace as he also oversees Microsoft's new Windows Live initiative, which includes Web-based software like e-mail and Web search that will be closely integrated into upcoming versions of the Windows operating system.
Real time focus groups

With Windows Live, Microsoft can do something it's never done before outside a controlled lab or focus group: It can watch people as they are using its software. And the way people use it can then be fed back into the design of new features and functions. As the desktop version of Windows incorporates more and more data from the Web, desktop and Web software will become fused together. It will become increasingly difficult to tell the difference between the two.

As that happens, Sinofsky should be able to apply more and more of the perpetual beta approach to the Windows operating system, too. The more that your desktop software borrows from other bits of software and data on the Web, the more that the whole idea of waiting for new versions of software goes away. Just like you don't have to wait five years for a new version of Amazon.com (Research), you shouldn't have to wait five years for a new version of Windows. It should just improve perpetually and imperceptibly in the background. That's how Sinofsky can get Microsoft to escape from the vaporware trap.

Sinofsky is a programmer at heart, and he also understands the Internet. In fact, he was one of the first people to turn Bill Gates onto the subject, well before Netscape launched. As Gates' personal technical assistant in 1993, Sinofsky bought him a book about the Internet as a Christmas present.

It's taken more than a decade for Gates & Co. to grasp the implications the Internet has on the way they write software. But Sinofsky's appointment shows that Microsoft realizes that the software industry is changing, and the company can't afford missed deadlines or slow reaction times anymore. Customers weaned on the Web won't wait half a decade for better software, when they can go online and use products that get better every day.

Saturday, March 25, 2006

Film - The World's Fastest Indian

4/5

Image Hosted by ImageShack.us

Old eccentric Burt Munro decides to travel to the Bonneville Salt Flats to set the land speed record for his 1920 Indian motorcycle in 1962. He's next to being broke and has a heart condition. He's also bit of a loon with his habit urinating every morning on his lemon tree and failing to mow his lawn so that his yard resembles a patch of prairie grass.

Image Hosted by ImageShack.us

Munro's 1920 Indian Scout motorcycle was supposed to only reach a top speed of around 55 mph. He owned it for 57 years, until his death in 1977 at the age of 78. He made it up to around 206 mph! Read more about Burt Munro here.

Image Hosted by ImageShack.us
Burt Munro

Anthony Hopkins is superb as the hard of hearing but full-of-heart Munro. Like so many other quality low budge films these days, the acting is solid and the story draws you in and keeps you focused until the end. It's nice to see a film about overcoming setbacks, perseverance, and winning friends and respect along the way. A film the whole family can enjoy, whether or not you are into motorcycles or racing.

While the bike isn't much to look at, in the film, it performs like a missile on wheels.

Image Hosted by ImageShack.us

Based on a true story.

Making the jump to Linux: Six frustrations

From Linux.com, The Enterprise Linux Resource

Title Making the jump to Linux: Six frustrations
Date 2006.03.25 4:01
Author StoneLion

I am a high school science teacher who is attempting to make the jump to Linux. A few months ago I made a some changes to my desktop PC, and had to re-register my Windows XP installation. This infuriated me -- and my quest for a suitable Linux replacement began. I'm now a bona fide Linux user, but that doesn't mean I'm completely happy.

My experiences with Linux go back to Red Hat 6, which I got up and running with extreme effort and no joy. I've since tried Xandros, Ubuntu, MEPIS, Kubuntu, SUSE 10.0, Solaris, Damn Small Linux, and Kanotix.

Image Hosted by ImageShack.us

I currently run Kanotix on my laptop and desktop computers. I am attempting to learn as much as I can about the operating system by clawing my way through multitudes of forums and wikis. I do my part by reading and contributing my limited knowledge, and I am thankful that so many in the community are attempting to do theirs.

While I appreciate these efforts, I see some limitations that make it difficult for me -- and others -- to make the transition.

The frustrations

First, I wish writers would explain acronyms fully in the early part of a post or review, so people unfamiliar with Linux can get a clue. It took me a number of weeks to find what DAO stood for (disk-at-once). Also, it took me quite a while to determine that CHMOD wasn't an acronym, but a command. AAAArrrrgh.

Second, do not expect others to know exactly what you are writing about. While you may be responding to a single question, keep in mind the person asking is not your only audience. It would cut down greatly on repetitive responses if you gave step-by-step instructions that don't expect much prior knowledge. As a teacher, I am aware of how agonizing it is to explain the same thing over and over, but it greatly reduces the need when I explain, without skipping steps, exactly how to do something.

Third, one thing missing from Linux (most flavors anyway; Xandros is better here than most) is a hardware configuration tool that uses a graphical user interface (GUI). Most distros have something that informs you somewhat, but that doesn't assist you in making changes. If the distro doesn't recognize hardware during the install, changes are hard to make.

Many longtime Linux users frown on using a GUI to do this type of thing, but new users would benefit greatly from it. While XP can be faulted for many things, hardware recognition and installation are not among them -- and it is all GUI. Here the Linux community is behind; the idea that a novice will grasp the command line quickly is fantasy. Most of us are not programmers, just people who want things to work.

Fourth, for those distros that utilize customized scripts, it would be nice to have a list of them, where they are located, and how to edit them. This would facilitate our ability to make the changes we need. These customized scripts often automate various functions, controls, and configurations, and for that we are eternally thankful, but we should be able to rewrite or reconfigure them as root.

I found (after a great deal of frustration) that even Kanotix rewrites a number of files that I must change each time I restart the system. One of the reasons that many of us left Windows was the desire to customize, but without knowing the locations of files and executables, we will be lost.

Fifth, the community at large tends to snub those who must still use dial-up as their main avenue to the Internet. It would be nice if we could all afford DSL, but we are stuck with what we have. I am a loyal Juno user, so it was frustrating to find that no one recognized this need. I understand that there are native Linux dialers, but they do not connect to Juno properly and I continuously got bumped.

I discovered that there is a Juno dialer for Linspire. Since Linspire is a Debian-based distro I was able to download and configure the dialer to suit my Kanotix system. I found the files that were responsible, edited them using Kate, and found that I now had a system that dialed out as easily as XP did. I have used it in Xandros, Kanotix, MEPIS, and Ubuntu with satisfaction. I cannot believe that I am the only one to face this issue. At least it is solved.

The sixth, and final frustration, is the fact that I don't understand German -- most of the content on the Kanotix site is in German!!! Why didn't I take German???

Overall, I haven't completely decided if my frustration with Linux is worth the benefit. So far, so good, but I have a few hurdles looming that may push me back to XP. I hope not.

Links

1. "Xandros" - http://www.xandros.com/
2. "Ubuntu" - http://www.ubuntu.com/
3. "MEPIS" - http://www.mepis.org/
4. "Kubuntu" - http://www.kubuntu.org/
5. "SUSE 10.0" - http://www.novell.com/products/suselinux/
6. "Solaris" - http://www.opensolaris.org/
7. "Damn Small Linux" - http://www.damnsmalllinux.org/
8. "Kanotix" - http://kanotix.com/
9. "Linspire" - http://www.linspire.com/

CRIA's Own Study Counters P2P Claims

This article is by Dr. Michael Geist, from his website, from March 17, 2006.

Image Hosted by ImageShack.us

Dr. Michael Geist is the Canada Research Chair of Internet and E-commerce Law at the University of Ottawa. He has obtained a Bachelor of Laws (LL.B.) degree from Osgoode Hall Law School in Toronto, Master of Laws (LL.M.) degrees from Cambridge University in the UK and Columbia Law School in New York, and a Doctorate in Law (J.S.D.) from Columbia Law School.

While CRIA regularly trumpets commissioned studies as evidence for the problems posed by P2P, this week it released a major study without any fanfare whatsoever. Conducted by Pollara last month, the study serves as part of CRIA's submission to the CRTC's Commercial Radio Review. What makes this particular study interesting (aside from the fact that it finally includes full details on responses and the actual questions posed), is that much of the data challenges many familiar CRIA claims.

Particularly noteworthy findings in the 144 page study report (appendix one) include:

* The survey asked for the sources of music on people's computers. Among those who download music from P2P services, the top source of music was ripping copies of their own CDs (36.4%), followed by P2P downloads (32.6%), paid downloads (20.1%), shared music from friends (8.8%), downloads from artist sites (5.6%), and other sources (2.9%). In other words, even among those who download music from P2P services, the music acquired on those services account for only one-third of the music on their computers as store-bought CDs remain the single largest source of music for downloaders (page 53).
* For all the emphasis on the teenage downloaders, it is interesting that the 35 to 44 age group had the largest spread between CDs and P2P as the source of music. Among that demographic, 31 percent of their music comes from P2P services and 27 percent from ripping their own CDs (page 69).
* Consistent with many other studies, people who download music from P2P services frequently buy that same music. The study found that only 25% of respondents said they never bought music after listening to it as a P2P downloaded track. That obviously leaves nearly 75% as future purchasers, including 21% who have bought music ten times or more. Note that demographically, the lowest percentage of non-buyers actually belonged to the 13 to 17 year old demographic (page 70).
* The 13 to 17 year old demographic also happens to be the largest purchasing group of music, buying an average of 11.6 music CDs or DVDs in the past six months. Close behind are the 18 to 24 age group at 10.9 music CDs or DVDs. By comparison, the older demographics may not download much music but they don't buy much either. The 55 - 64 age group bought 4.2 music CDs or DVDs, while the 65 and up age group bought 2.8 music CDs or DVDs (page 92).
* As for music buying trends, the study also asked whether purchasing patterns had increased or decreased over the previous year. The data was inconclusive with 28% buying more, 35% buying less, and 37% saying they didn't know (page 93).
* More interestingly, the survey also asked why people bought less. Only 10% of respondents cited the availability of music downloads. Instead, people cited a long list of alternatives that have nothing to do with downloading including price (16%), nothing of interest (14%), lack of time (13%), collection is big enough (9%), don't buy (7%), listen to radio (7%), change in tastes (6%), no CD player (3%), have an MP3 player (2%), lack of opportunity to buy (2%), watch more tv (2%), age (1%), only buy what I like (1%). Simply put, P2P simply is not a major factor behind decisions to buy less music (page 95).

In summary, CRIA's own research now concludes that P2P downloading constitutes less than one-third of the music on downloaders' computers, that P2P users frequently try music on P2P services before they buy, that the largest P2P downloader demographic is also the largest music buying demographic, and that reduced purchasing has little to do with the availability of music on P2P services. I've argued many of these same things, but now you don't have to take my word for it; you can take it from the record labels themselves.

Update: Howard adds to the coverage of the Pollara report by noting the enormous difference in the response to the question about Canadian copyright law and international standards. CRIA reported that 72 percent of Canadians favoured meeting international standards in December, while two months later that number declined to 46 percent. As Howard notes, the difference highlights the lack of reliability of public surveys about complex legal treaties since most people have not taken the time to become fully informed about the issue. Of course, asking about copyright law and international standards increasingly means more than just WIPO as it may also include the dozens of exceptions contemplated by the Australian parliamentary committee, the mandatory DRM compatibility being considered in France, fair use provisions in the U.S., and the provisions being floated as part of an Access to Knowledge Treaty.

Update II: Pollara has responded to this posting and I've replied with a few comments.
Write Comment View Comments (21 Comments)
Comments

Why The CD Sales Fall Off - I think the study misses several things -

Many music downloaders are "packrat" collectors. I thought I was bad with 20Gb of stuff (including rips of my 500 CD's). Then I hear from a relative about his friend, a truly obsessive-compulsive, who has 250Gb of full albums he's downloaded.

I think part of the "drop off" in sales is explained the same as it is for me; I have spent 20 years replacing my vinyl, and buying the albums I wished I'd bought on vinyl. I'm done.

I refuse to pay $15 for that one song from the 60's I'd really like. I'm not buying online music because it will only play on 1 of my 3 MP3 players (yes, the iPod). I'm too lazy to 'burn and rip" to bypass DRM, and I find that DRM-stripping-from-iTunes software is not easily found. So, if I find something traded, I'll take it.

Oh,yeah - all that money I spent on CD's? It's going to DVDs now. I think I'm at 200 DVDs. Hmm, $20 for a 2-hour audiovisual treat, or $15 for a 3-minute audio treat.(Or $1 for a crippled 3-minute treat...) Some sellers have to get their price into perspective.

(Side note: what does this say for the HDTV market? I'm well satisfied with the quality of a DVD; unlike the contrast between vinyl and CD's, I have yet to be convinced the difference between DVD and HDTV discs -whichever wins - is worth the extra cost. Plus the DRM issue again - I'm told my early HDTV without digital input won't play full 1080i - so I'll be on the sidelines...)

But, I'm that demographic that has bouhgt the occasional CD the last year or so, after listening to the music on download... And part of that is a "moral imperative", a desire to use my wallet to express support for artists I like.

However, most of the crap that allegedly is "modern music"? No wonder nobody's buying it.

(Written by MD on 12:05:18 AM March 23rd 2006 )

Mr. Geist not saying much about Pollara - I notice there's no Geist post about Pollara's comments about how he selectively used research, took things out of context and creatively added some figures to support his conclusions. Why is that Michael? Don't you want an "open and honest" discourse? Of course not. That would expose you as the fraud you are.

(Written by Tired of this... on 06:44:57 PM March 21st 2006 )

For me its:
* size does matter. I can get a lot more music on a disc in MP3 format. In the car that means much less changing of discs.
* Toss out songs I don't like
* Rearrange songs, not just from one album or one artist, but into an order I like across all my music.
* Purchasing only music I like, right down to the song. No more "11 out of 12 songs stink" syndrome.
* Try before you buy; this includes quality of the recording, quality of the song, quality of the compression.
* Flexibility to play anywhere we want, and not being restricted to DRM versions, operating systems (brand and versioning), backward compatibility, nor the output devices.
* Security. No DRM on mp3's, plus we are protected from theft (only the copied mp3 disks would be stolen since the originals are locked away, and a homemade mp3 disk has little value to thieves)
* Simplicity. Mp3 just works, no fuss and no bother.

Our music in this house is all bought and paid for, about 90% of it is on CD originally but copied to mp3. The rest is online purchases, often directly from the artists site.

Until the record industry wants to cater to my needs, I don't plan to hand them a great deal of my money.

CRIA and RIAA labels are bypassed when we look for new music; we would rather support independent artists. We feel our money goes more directly to the artists, rather than to corporate corruption, obsolescent business models, large scale political lobbying, and an seemingly infinite legal fund. We just want our money to get to the artist, and we would really love to know where to buy to ensure they get their money.

Reduction of the middleman. Especially ones we simply don't respect. That would really make buying music more fun for us.

(Written by Trelly on 12:50:22 PM March 21st 2006 )

P2P - Let me first of all say that the music industries' troubles have to do with a few things. 1) Greed. Artists and companies make way too much money. 2) the music that it produces isn't all that good. Music is so formulaic and robotlike these days.

I P2P, bittorrent music, etc. Why? A few reasons. One, music is expensive. Two, music is not always made available online at high bitrates. Sorry, iTunes 128Kbps doesn't cut it. Three, and probably most importantly, I download music that I have already bought.

This has really gone unnoticed as an argument by most everyone. I treat my CDs like garbage. As a result, they get scratched up. What do I do to get them on my computer? Download new ones.

I also have CD's that have been stolen from me. Do I take the hit? No. Why would I if I can just download the music?

The ads that are on DVDs and movies that urge people not to download movies because you wouldn't steal a car (so why would you steal a movie) clearly goes against most people's reason. If car's could be replicated as easy as music...I think a lot of people would be willing to "steal" a car. Why wouldn't you? You could replace a car ad infinitum.

(Written by Jonathan on 02:17:15 AM March 21st 2006 )

CD is dead, long live MP3 - It's two things really that reduce my cd buying. Remember when walkmans came out, and you still were buying LPs, then had to record it to tape? Well the LP was basically dead, the converting is the sign that it's over. Well I don't buy cd's very much anymore, because I have to convert them, I have MP3s on the computer for music and that's what I listen to at my desk, an IPOD to take with me, and either the radio, or the IPOD plugged into the head unit in the car. So after a while I find if I don't rip my cd's I just don't listen to them. And even the disks I bought I don't like all the songs. With all the music backed up anyway I'll probably just have a garage sale for the cds

(Written by p2p guy on 11:56:01 AM March 20th 2006 )

P2P vs CD's - I p2p download, I'm mid 30s and yes I have bought cd's after having listed to a few p2p tracks. But I would say that having been burned so many times when I was younger buying an album with 1 or 2 good songs, and the rest were junk, I'm a lot more careful now.
If I listen and like MOST of the songs I buy the album. but really most of my p2p downloads are just one hit wonders. The music industry might get my buisness if they brough back the single.

(Written by Non reformed downloader on 11:52:27 AM March 20th 2006 )

Where are the real artists? - I keep finding good music by accident. It's the only way these days: the recording industry keeps trying to sell me Britney Spears' or Christina Aiguilera's breasts. I'm not buying. These days I'm really into Jim Guthrie (google him), and thanks to Brent Bambury, I'm starting to catch on to Antony and the Johnsons. Big Music won't touch the unpretty stuff with a pole. They'd rather blame the customer for being wrong.

(Written by WJM on 10:02:45 PM March 19th 2006 )

Thanks for pointing this out - It's nice to see something offsetting the usual fear-mongering.
My post:
Big Surprise

(Written by Eric E on 11:38:41 AM March 19th 2006 )

Dropping CD sales -

P2P isn't the problem - the problem is what the recording companies offer. While Christina Aguilera looks great in tight clothing, I can't stand her music. Same with most of the new "stars". Most current music has no substance.

Where are the real artists? People like Johnny Cash, Joan Baez, and Bob Dylan? Guess what - they aren't pretty enough to get a recording contact. But the music they recorded had bite.

Think of such classics as "The Sounds of Silence", "Sixteen Tons", or "One Tin Soldier". That sort of music isn't available from any of the major labels, and they are suffering because of it.

You can still here this sort of stuff - there are many folk artists producing amazing music, but from the record companies think it isn't marketable. One of the most haunting songs I ever heard is called "Voices". My wife (Heather Borean) wrote it one night - she doesn't know where the idea came from, and it scared her at the time - but it's a beautiful haunting song. Talis Kimberly's "Velvet" is another killer song. "Kerowyn's Ride" by Leslie Fish and Mercedes Lackey is another incredible song. All three have been recorded - but not by the mainstream recording companies.

And they won't be. None of the songwriters is "Hollywood" material. The recording companies are mistaking image for talent. Bob Dylan wasn't handsome. Joan Baez was average looking. Johnny Cash looked like a wreck. But man could they write (and sing). The current crop of artists looks good, but most of them don't have soul.


(Written by Wayne on 11:11:53 AM March 19th 2006 )

a new era.... - What is undeniable is that we have entered a new era in which access to information is at all new highs. The major labels demonstrate the inability of bloated, inefficient, cumbersome, and unimaginative corporations to understand when a revolution is staring them in the face. For a great example of their lagging, visit any of the artist websites that are created and run by the label. They are among the least creative and interesting pages out there. Since the 70's, these companies have been increasingly led and staffed by non-music people. I am glad to see a shake up in this department primarily because I know that the relationship between music and commerce is a relatively new and in my opinion, bizarre one. The mere notion that the RIAA could and would actually fine citizens for sharing information is inconceivable to me. I also love to watch millionaires like Metallica get up and act as if they really stand for something other than the almighty dollar. Hilarious.
When I was young, my parents would buy records based on one single on the radio. Sometimes that was the only song they ended up liking. I feel that the current situation of p2p serves as a market correction for the years of companies duping their customers, as they still try to do now with their fraudelent "customer reviews" on iTunes. Let it go back to being a singles business. People who know and love music will find what they like for themselves in this unparalleled age of information.

(Written by Art Hays on 11:06:51 AM March 19th 2006 )

In reply to A Tired Reader - I believe the study WAS commissioned by the music "business" and Michael's breaking it down for us has got THOUSANDS if not MILLIONS of people interested in it. You, Sir/Madam, smack of a sore losing industry insider and ARE the only uninterested person (interested enough to post though) around here.

(Written by An Interested Voter on 09:01:51 AM March 19th 2006 )

P2P VS Used CD stores - FIGHT! - Either buy music from CD stores, or download it from the interweb, both ways artists are not making money. If the recording industry made available samples of the music so people could listen to a entire album before they buy it, I would almost guess that sales would go back up. I personally have picked up a album from a new artist that is getting radio play, I liked the radio version of the song and thought "Well I'll pick up the album because I liked that one song a lot" only to be disappointed by the other tracks that are on it. If I had known about it a head of time I would have saved my money and got some other CD and have picked up that individual track somewhere, or maybe even just the single. Also, maybe the RI should consult the musicians with their work being "stolen" and find out what they think about it. Don't just poll the big bands, poll the small bands that only get distributed online or small independant record stores.

(Written by 1337 on 05:29:35 AM March 19th 2006 )

Musician - AWESOME! - Well first off, I as a musician would rather send out free MP3's to draw people into live shows. Generally musicians don't make money off of sales and usually get up front deals. Thus, downloading doesn't really hurt them, in fact the more they can get out (especially in underground music) the more people that will go to their show and potentially buy their merch! Now most if not all merch sales go directly to the bands. Also, if people like the music enough, if they can afford it they will buy it. The fact that the big bands that make millions already won't sell 1000 more albums really doesn't hurt them. It is the small independant artist that needs the distribution that most small labels can not afford to get the sales/interest.

Also to mention that Canadian law is much different then american law. Also, did you know that all writeable media has a tax built into it to help recover from these costs? How does the network administrator get compensated for the however much money spent to this for some other industry make up for it so he can back up his server? Even if people are burning CDr's and the like, money is still getting back into that industry, and generally the more music you have out there, the more people know who you are, the more people that will likely go to your show and buy some stuff.

(Written by Anonymous on 05:12:40 AM March 19th 2006 )

Careful on the numbers.. - That 33% vs. 36%, means that on average, people have a few more CD ripped MP3s than P2Pd ones. It doesn't mean that 36% only buy CDs, and 33% only download.

Actually, what it reads like, is people tend to have a mix of everything, and are willing to pay for something they like *enough*. That's the keyword.

(Written by Karmakin on 12:49:14 AM March 19th 2006 )

An Excellent Report - Since it is currently unknown what the new Canadian Government's approach to copyright will be due to a very successful musseling campaign by the PMO, this will report will be an excellent reference should DMCA-style ammendments are proposed.

It will also help should content producers get unrealistic in their demands for content-protection. I would like to see how this plays out, since the Liberal copyright law amendment attempts became dead in the water when they were brought down.

(Written by Andrew Fergusson on 09:01:36 PM March 18th 2006 )

more of the same - I don't understand the point in which you became an expert in the music business, Michael. Like any lawyer, you only bring up the points you feel support your very specific point of view. I thought you taught law, but apparently you are some sort of business expert on the music industry. This sort of smacks of a personal vendetta, and really has nothing to do with copyright law. This has grown very tired -- as has your incesant need to have your face and words in the media.

(Written by A tired reader on 06:37:42 PM March 18th 2006 )

re: knobtweakers - I don't know if I'd consider this as being heard from the CRIA, because they haven't been publicising the study. I couldn't even imagine th at being played out: "Big news, everyone, this new and better documented study contradicts what we've been saying all along!".

(Written by Simon80 on 02:59:12 PM March 18th 2006 )

Very interesting! - I never thought I'd hear that coming from an organization that represents the major labels.

(Written by knobtweakers on 11:30:47 AM March 18th 2006 )

Pushing towards a free approach? - Congrats, you have been slashdotted! :-)

I also added the link to my blog at http://icct.blogspot.com/ and drew some parallels to unrestricted content/service architectures, which I think would be strong on today's markets.

The music industry should move towards providing free content like is the norm in Internet. Instead of tapping into new markets generated online, the record industry has been just kicking and screaming about how they hurt their current business. Not that convicing in the way of business professionalism, but perhaps the record industry can gain a better assessment of its current situation as better research comes out?

(Written by Varis on 08:22:27 AM March 18th 2006 )

The summary is accurate - Julien says the statement that 75% represent future purchasers is flawed, "The 75% figure is just that: unnacounted for." Not so! Take a look at the full data. In fact, the exact question was "How often have you listened to a peer to peer downloaded track and then purchased the album or song..." This was only only posed to people who said they shared music via P2P, and the responses broke down as:

Never: 25%
Once or twice: 25%
More than twice but less than 10 times: 27%
10 times or more: 21%
Don't know/refused: 1%

They aren't unaccounted for at all. They are all people who claim to have purchased after listening to a P2P download. Nobody is claiming that 75% of the respondents were certain to purchase, but in the past, they have done that (up to rounding error).

(Written by Duncan Murdoch on 06:34:35 AM March 18th 2006 )

10% purchased fewer CDs explicitly because of P2P. However, only 33% of respondants (p. 68) used P2P to begin with. Therefore, it could be assumed that at the very least, 33% of P2P users reduced their purchases as a direct consequence of utilization of P2P.

As for the other 66%, it would be unfair to assume that they purchased more. One would have to explicitly ask that question to the users; as many either may not know themselves, or not see any rise in purchases.

In the same theme, the following statement:
"The study found that only 25% of respondents said they never bought music after listening to it as a P2P downloaded track. That obviously leaves nearly 75% as future purchasers, including 21% who have bought music ten times or more."

Is flawed. The 75% figure is just that: unnacounted for. Whether it be because music was actually bought or not is unknown. Now the reason we don't know the answer to this has to do with the fact that the study was seeking specific answers to begin with; it was designed with a specific agenda in mind.

Nevertheless, it would be inaccurate to say that that 75% represented future music purchasers. Don't get me wrong - I'm neither pro-Industry nor pro-P2P on this. I'm just pointing out the flaws in the counter-argument.

(Written by Julien on 11:49:39 PM March 17th 2006 )

Free download - Open Source Software cd-rom for Windows

Richard Houston has created a cd-rom of open source software that for Windows that you can download for free. What follows below is from his blog Rich on Linux, OSS and other stuff.

I have produced V1.1 of WinOssCdrom. The software on this ISO is all open source and run on Windows 2K or above.

There are 2 idea behind this cdrom. First is to show an OSS desktop software stack that runs on Windows. The second is to show all this good software that will also run on Linux. A great tool to prepare people for a possible move to Linux. Regardless if you are planning to move to Linux or not it is all good quality and in active development.

I built this cdrom with the following rules in mind, the software had to be free and open source and also had to run on both Windows and Linux. You Apple fans will be happy to know that _some_ of the software titles are also available on the Mac. :)

You can find the bittorrent file at http://www.rlhc.net/downloads/Winosscd-v1.1.iso.torrent

I will be emailing several sites around the net promoting the disk but if you want to let friends know about it, I would appreciate it. Of course you could just download it and burn copies for your friends too. ;)

If you have any thought, comments or ideas for software to include for future version please let me know.

On this disk you will find various open source programs that run on Microsoft Windows 2000/Xp/2003. Some will operate on Windows 98/ME but no guaranties. ;)

Here is a list of the programs you will find with a brief description and a web site where you can find more info.

3D Animation:

Blender. Blender is the open source software for 3D modeling, animation,
rendering, post-production, interactive creation and playback.
Available for all major operating systems under the GNU General Public
License.
http://www.blender.org

Art Of Illusion. Art of Illusion is a free, open source 3D modelling and
rendering studio. It is written entirely in Java, and should be
usable on any Java Virtual Machine which is compatible with J2SE 1.4
or later.
http://www.artofillusion.org/
Image Hosted by ImageShack.us

Archive:

7Z-zip. 7-Zip is a file archiver with the high compression ratio. The program
supports 7z, ZIP, CAB, RAR, ARJ, LZH, CHM, GZIP, BZIP2, Z, TAR, CPIO,
RPM and DEB formats. Compression ratio in the new 7z format is 30-50%
better than ratio in ZIP format.
http://sourceforge.net/projects/sevenzip/

Database servers:

Mysql server. Mysql is the premier open source relational database
server. Mysql can be found under the covers of many high volume
website such as NASA and Yahoo.
http://www.mysql.org
Image Hosted by ImageShack.us

Postgressql. Postgresql is a feature rich and powerful object relational database manager server.
http://www.postgresql.org
Image Hosted by ImageShack.us

Desktop publishing:

Scribus. Open Source Desktop Publishing for Linux, Mac OS® X and Windows
http://www.scribus.org.uk/
Image Hosted by ImageShack.us

Development tools:

Eclipse. Eclipse is an open source community whose projects are focused on providing an extensible development platform and application frameworks for building software.
http://www.eclipes.org
Image Hosted by ImageShack.us

File sharing:

FrostWire. Frostwire is an open source version of the popular Limewire P2P file sharing program.
http://www.frostwire.com/static/index.html
Image Hosted by ImageShack.us

Graphics:

The Gimp. A raster image editor similar in function to Adobe Photoshop.
http://www.gimp.org/
Image Hosted by ImageShack.us

GimpShop. The Gimp but made to look and act like Adobe Photoshop.
http://www.gimpshop.net/

Inkscape. A vector graphics program similar in function to Corel Draw or Adobe Illustrator.
http://www.inkscape.org
Image Hosted by ImageShack.us

Internet:

Browsers:
Mozilla Firefox. The open source number 2 web browser used on the net.
http://www.mozilla.com/firefox/

Email:
Mozilla Thunderbird. A feature rich email client.
http://www.mozilla.com/thunderbird/
Image Hosted by ImageShack.us

Instant Messaging:
Gaim. A multi protocol instant messaging client for accessing AOL, MSM, Jabber and others.
http://gaim.sourceforge.net/win32/index.php
Image Hosted by ImageShack.us

RSS readers:
RSS Owl
RSSOwl lets you gather, organize, update, and store information from any compliant
source in a convenient, easy to use interface, save selected information in various formats for offline viewing and sharing, and much more. It’s easy to configure, available in many many languages and the best of all: It’s platform-independent.
http://www.rssowl.org/
Image Hosted by ImageShack.us

Media Players:

VLC. A very capable media player which includes most common and some less common multimedia files. DVD play back included.
http://www.videolan.org/vlc/

Office tools:

OpenOffice.org. A feature rich and Microsoft compatible office suite.
http://www.openoffice.org
Image Hosted by ImageShack.us

PDF Creator. A free print to PDF program.
http://sourceforge.net/projects/pdfcreator/
Image Hosted by ImageShack.us

Security software:

Truecrypt. A very capable disk encryption tool. Similar to BestCrypt or PGP Disk.
http://www.truecrypt.org/

OpenVPN Gui client. A graphic client for accessing the popular and open source Openvpn server Server http//www.openvpn.net Client software: http://openvpn.se/index.html

Sound Editing:
Audacity. An open source sound editor.
http://audacity.sourceforge.net/
Image Hosted by ImageShack.us

Spyware detection:
Spybot. Spyware detection and removal tool.
http://www.spybot.net/en/index.html
Image Hosted by ImageShack.us

Video Editing:
JAHSHAKA. The worlds first Open Source Realtime Editing and Effects System.
Jahshaka takes advantage of the power of OpenGL and OpenML to give its
users exceptional levels of performance. We currently support Linux,
OsX, Irix and Windows, and Solaris is on the way! Jahshaka is licenced
to the public under the GNU GPL agreement.
http://www.jahshaka.org/
Image Hosted by ImageShack.us

Friday, March 24, 2006

CD review: Chantal Chamandy - Love Needs You

Chantal Chamandy - Love Needs You
Ninemuse 506010361008

Born in Egypt and living in Montreal, Chantal Chamandy's Love Needs You album is an exquisite and tasteful recording of pop music. Given a chance, there's nothing stopping Chantal from becoming a global pop star.

Image Hosted by ImageShack.us

The album starts off with the anthemic and catchy "Zindegi," followed by the single "You Want Me." The rich sound of Chantal's music is a result of both Middle Eastern influences as well as a host of real musicians playing electric and acoustic violins, carnatic violins, saxophones, trumpets, guitars and tablas, to name a few. The exotic flavour of the album is also as a result that she sings a few lines here and there in French, Arabic, Italian and Spanish. It's works to add to the mood that you're listening to a bona fide international star. Being a tasteful recording, however, she doesn't overdue it on the exotic instrumentation.

The ballad Feels Like Love showcases Chantal's stellar vocals and is a duet with Chico Castillo. Other tracks that I liked a lot include "Salma Ya Salma,", "Music on the Moon" and "Peace,", which reminded me of the light, piano driven music of Moby.

Chantal wrote and produced the all the songs and it's on her own label. Occasionally, she sounds like she's holding back her vocal performance. It should be more front and centre and prominent. Will listeners find Chantal Chamandy to be an exciting and distinctive voice in pop music or will she fail to break away from the multitudes of other promising new artists, many of whom are indistinguishable from one another? As far as I can tell, she's almost unknown in Canada. Her challenge is to play some dates and to prove herself in a live setting.

Image Hosted by ImageShack.us

Watch the UK interview with Chantal from Chatshow.net.

My rating is 4/5.

film - Inside Man

2.5/5

Given that this is a Spike Lee production, it just couldn't be a straight-ahead heist film. And it isn't.


Image Hosted by ImageShack.us

The hostages change into the same outfits that the bad guys are wearing, thus making them all look alike. You see flash forward interviews of the hostages in people in police custody, with the cops trying to trip them up to figure out who the thieves are.

The acting is fine all around, but there are no knockout performances that will be remembered at Oscar nomination time. Christopher Plummer plays the paranoid bank president, with a deep, dark secret to hide. He enlists of the help of a mysterious power broker played by Jodie Foster, to protect his secret. You just don't get a sense that her character really had a chance to use exercise her power, and thus give us more insight into who she is and what she can do.

Clive Owen seems cool, calm and in control as the lead bagd guy. There are clues throughout the film about how things will unfold with this character, but you're supposed to just mentally file them away since they don't give you any "a-ha" moments when you see them. If you see something that doesn't seem to add to the story, pay attention.

The dialogue contains references to race relations - always a Spike Lee favorite. If you're expecting fast-paced action, you'll be disappointed. Does it deliver as a smart "conspiracy" film? Heil, no!

The Inside Man is supposed to be more about a morally bankrupt past than it is about a bank robbery. However, I found this film to be under whelming and unsatisfying. It's tries to be a clever story, but it wasn't sharp enough for me. It's lacks a really meaty story. The film tries to appeal to your head by being an intelligent thriller but Lee forgot to add in the "thriller" part. By the way, you'll know you're watching a Spike Lee film when you see Denzel Washington's character running down the street but in reality, just standing on a rapidly moving platform. Lee has used this idea in some of his previous films.

Stars Denzel Washington, Clive Owen, Jodie Foster and Christopher Plummer.

Saturday, March 18, 2006

Film - Tsotsi

3/5

Image Hosted by ImageShack.us

The parentless leader of a gang robs a woman of her BMW and is shocked to find a baby in the back seat. This troubled, remorseless criminal ends up caring for the child, but when a police sketch of him appears in the newspaper, he has to decide whether or not to return the child or keep it. His attachment to the child is obvious and it seems to give his meaningless life some purpose and it helps him deal with his less than ideal childhood.

The acting was strong. I felt anger towards the gang leader Tsotsi (Presley Chweneyagae) for his crimes and attitude towards people. The film provided some insight into his troubled beginnings and his childhood, with a mother dying of a disease, possibly AIDS, and a cranky father, whom he escapes from.

The visuals are so realistic that they must have filmed right in the townships, with dusty sheet metal builds and dirt roads adding to the ambience.

The pace of the film is not as quick as I would have liked, but it does pick up towards the end. The tension at the end kept me alert, but the film ended with the viewers left to ponder the fate of the Tsotsi. I can see some people finding this film dull do to its lack of surprises and plot twists. The film really doesn't have a plot as much as a message that beneath every rough exterior lies someone who wants to be loved and has the ability to express compassion.

My rating for this film is 3/5. Tsotsi recently won the Oscar for best foreign film.

Friday, March 17, 2006

CD review: Sonny Rollins - Without a Song (The 9/11 Concert)

Without A Song (the 9/11 Concert)
MCD-9342-2
Milestone/Concord
recorded September 15, 2001

Image Hosted by ImageShack.us

Sonny Rollins is one of the giants of jazz and is the only surviving member whose contemporaries include John Coltrane, Miles Davis, Dizzy Gillespie, Louis Armstrong, and Charlie Parker. For sure, there are lots of fantastic players around today, but none who are alive have the pedigree of Sonny Rollins. I had a chance to see him live about 15 years ago and it was an unbelieaveable experience. Rollins rich legacy of albums made between the 50s and 70s estabished and confirmed his legend, including The Bridge, Saxophone Colossus and Sonny Side Up.

From www.jazzitude.com:

Rollins was in his Manhattan apartment six blocks from Ground Zero during the 9/11 attacks, and was evacuated by rescue workers the following day, when his building lost power. I recall Nat Hentoff writing a piece about Rollins'’ evacuation in his back-page column in JazzTimes. Like many during that day and the following weeks, Rollins wondered whether to get back to the business of his life or withdraw. He had been booked to play this concert at the Berklee College of Music in Boston'’s Performance Center on Sept. 15th. His first thought was to cancel the performance, but his wife Lucille convinced him that he should leave town and do the show.


The band from this show included trombonist (and nephew) Clifton Anderson, bassist Bob Cranshaw, pianist Stephen Scott, African percussionist Kimati Dinizuli, and drummer Perry Wilson.

Image Hosted by ImageShack.us
Clifton Anderson

You can hear Sonny struggling at times, but this is coming from someone who had just turned 71 years old a week earlier. This album wouldn't necessarily convince someone hearig Rollins for the first time that he is held in such high esteem, but it's a fun, lively album, with very entertaining performing from the entire group. Trombonist Clifton Anderson stands out on the calypso influenced "Global Warming," the only Sonny original here and a touted answer to his famous "St. Thomas" from Saxophone Colossosus. Anderson absolutely cooks on the fast-paced "Why Was I Born?" Pianist Stephen Scott's playing is wonderful but some listeners will be distracted by his Keith Jarrett-like habit of singing along to his own playing. Thankfully, it's not terribly noticeable. Scott, 36, has been heralded as one of the most brilliant players of his generation, a cut above most.

Image Hosted by ImageShack.us
Stephen Scott

My favorite tracks include the first two tracks, and the last two. The fourth track, is a decent ballad, but I prefer Sonny Rollins best when the band turns it up a notch.

Image Hosted by ImageShack.us
Sonny Rollins

1: "Without A Song" 16:37
2: "Global Warming" 15:16
3: band introductions 0:59
4: "A Nightingale Sang in Berkeley Square" 10:57
5: "Why Was I Born?" 16:14
6: "Where or When" 12:20
72:23

If you're a fan of Rollins or his style of straight-ahead jazz, you would be hard pressed not to smile when you hear this live album, a swinging celebration of life. Not surprisingly, the album was the winner, Best Jazz Instrumental Solo, at the 48th Grammy Awards(Feb 8, 2006.)

Film - V For Vendetta

2/5

V For Vendetta, based on the graphic novels by British writer Alan Moore, is the first new film by the Wachowski Brothers since the final Matrix film. And we know how disappointing that series turned out to be.

Image Hosted by ImageShack.us

The setting is in the not too distant future in the fascist police state of England, where deviant art, culture and sexual behavior is outlawed and nighttime curfews are strictly enforced. The public broadcaster is essentially the Ministry of Propaganda, and they put the government's spin on events to constantly cover up the truth about crimes of dissention.

Our protagonist wears a Guy Fawkes mask (the guy who tried to blow up the British parliament buildings in 1605) to conceal both his identity and his burned face. He rescues Evey Hammond (Natalie Portman), who was on her way to dinner at a co-workers house, from a sexual attack by the curfew authorities (the "Fingermen".)

By coincidence, they ran into each other again at the public broadcaster's office, where he managed to air a pre-recorded explanation of his "terrorist" demolition of a government building (the Old Bailey, the Central Criminal Court) the night before, which the government tried to cover up by calling it a scheduled demolition. I didn't buy how she bonded easily and agreed to live with this creepy stranger so quickly in his windowless lair/ deviant culture museum.

Natalie Portman was miscast as a Brit and but despite her poor attempt to fake the accent, her performance was all right. Hugo Weaving's "V" character is foiled by the useless cute aliteration in his opening scene as well as his quoting of the Bard to suggest his wit, intellectual depth and the credibility of his largely symbolic mission. John Hurt played the leader of the government, a Hitler-esque fascist, but he was largely one-dimensional. Stephen Rea as detective Finch did the best with his lines.

In the film, there is a conspiracy story regarding human experimentation, deliberate unleashing of deadly viruses, huge profits for the cure, people falsely arrested under the pretense of being terrorists, people concealing deviant sexual lives, etc. The story could have had more impact for me, if there wasn't such an ambitious attempt to stage a spectacle, both visually and story-wise.

Image Hosted by ImageShack.us

The Wachowski Brothers aren't known for carrying a story with subtlety and intrigue and instead hammer you over the head with action and scenes that could have been edited out. The story seemed squandered rather than focused and tight.

I wouldn't see this film again.

Friday, March 10, 2006

Film: Beowulf and Grendel

3.5/5

Image Hosted by ImageShack.us

This is a Canada-UK-Iceland production and not made by Hollywood, and it shows. It's actually refreshing to not see an overly slick epic sword film. Written approximately 1000 AD, by anonymous, sometimes touted as a priest, this is one of the longest old English poems. It was regarded as being mainly of interest to academics, but it was brought to prominence by J.R.R. Tolkien in his essay, "Beowulf: The Monsters and the Critics" from 1936.

Recently seen in King Arthur and the last Exorcist movie, Stellan Skarsgård, a great actor, shows up as the beleaguered King Hrothgar. Beowulf and twelve other warriors show up to help kill off a troll who recently stormed the King's wooden lodge and massacred twenty guards. The troll Grendel, dresses in a chain mail vest and appears to stand around 8 ft tall. In fact, Ingvar Eggert Sigurðsson stands just a hair above 6 feet but appears quite a bit larger thanks to movie magic.

This medieval tale is a morality story. We soon figure out why, exactly, Grendel the troll torments the Danish King and his very small collection of subjects, however, our hero Beowulf, played by Gerard Butler (last seen in The Phantom of the Opera) doesn't know the full story. Sarah Polley is the local witch who can see how people die but she doesn't even make an attempt to fake an accent more becoming of those times. She speaks as if she's hanging out with friends at the mall.

Image Hosted by ImageShack.us
Gerard Butler as Beowulf.

Gerard Butler gives a strong performance as the hero with both a heart and a sense of morality. And he looks a bit Christ-like with the long, flowing hair.

Image Hosted by ImageShack.us
Stellan Skarsgard in Beowulf and Grendel.

Image Hosted by ImageShack.us
Here he is again in King Arthur.

The film made me feel chilly and isolated, perfectly matching the rocky, steep seaside terrain, shrouded quite often in mist. Director Sturla Gunnarsson (Such A Long Journey) filmed in his native Iceland, which he immigrated from as a child to move to Canada. The dangerous black cliffs tower above the sea and contribute to the unbelievable scenery.

Beowulf and Grendel is a refreshing epic film but due to its lack of mainstream production values, it may not find the size of audience it really deserves.

Thursday, March 09, 2006

WebTalk Radio Show - OpenOffice Suite Getting Better

Image Hosted by ImageShack.us

Listen to the February 20, 2006 episode of the WebTalk Radio Show. The topic is OpenOffice Suite Getting Better, MS-Office is getting matched by OpenOffice.org.

Show Guest:
Robin "Roblimo" Miller, Editor-In-Chief of Slashdot.com
Author of Point and Click: OpenOffice.org

WebTalk is hosted by Rob and Dana Greenlee. The WebTalk can be heard on talk radio station KVTI 90.9 FM every Tues at 10pm (PST) in Seattle/Tacoma market.

Wednesday, March 08, 2006

SXSW 2006 - Over 900 artist MP3 free downloads!

For the second year in a row, Austin, Texas' South By Southwest Festival is offering hundreds of MP3s of the performing artists, for free download, as well as film trailers. SXSW is known as "South By Southwest Music, Film and Interactive Conferences and Festivals."

Here are some quick facts about the main events:

South by Southwest Music and Media Conference (SXSW) 2006, in its twentieth year, will take place March 15 - 19, 2006. The SXSW Film Conference and SXSW Interactive Festival, both in their thirteenth year, will take place March 10 - 14, 2006 with the Film Festival running from March 10 - 18, 2006.

Music
• Showcasing Acts: 1331
• Music Venues Participating: 58
• Music Conference Participants: 8,604 (with band registrations 9,692)
• Approximate Number of Music Media in Attendance: 1,866
• Approximate Number of Music Trade Show Attendees: 11,000
• Number of Music Trade Show Exhibitors: 191

Film/Interactive
• Number of Films Screened: 180
• Film Conference Participants: 3,807
• Approximate Number of Film Media in Attendance: 459
• Interactive Conference Participants: 3,343
• Approximate Number of Interactive Media in Attendance: 424
• Approximate Number of Film/Interactive Trade Show Attendees: 8,000
• Number of Film/Interactive Trade Show Exhibitors: 125


SXSW doesn't just feature a ton of unsigned artists, representing nearly every musical genre, looking for deals. Several very established artists show up to speak, perform or do both. Robert Plant performed last year. This year's keynote speaker is Neil Young, hot on the heels of his excellent concert movie Neil Young: Heart of Gold. Ray Davies, Herbie Hancock, Morrissey, the Pretenders, k.d. lang, Kris Kristofferson and Bill Bragg will also appear.

Some of the musical acts appearing who I have an interest in include Page France, from Baltimore; Of Montreal, from Athens, GA; The Plimsouls, from L.A.; The New Pornographers, from Vancouver; and Belle & Sebastian. Frankly, there's too many bands I like to list, among the sea of unknown. Read the schedule of who is playing where and download some MP3s, if you like.

On the film side, they plan to show 115 feature films, including 50 world premieres, and 130 short films. Yes, they are showing films that will play in a theatre near you that I am looking forward to seeing, such as A Scanner Darkly, Thank You For Smoking, Metal: A Headbanger's Journey, V For Vendetta, and A Prairie Home Companion.

You can either browse the daily schedule and pick the MP3s you wish to download, or you can take them all in one fell swoop (well, two, actually) by using your bittorrent client.

There's an interesting thread about this post at digg.com.

Monday, March 06, 2006

Post-78th Oscar thoughts...

The 78th Academy Awards were boring. Jon Stewart looked apprehensive and was a disappointment as a funny man. I expected more edge from him. Next year, maybe they can try Bill Maher. Or George Clooney. And the Oscars had the second smallest audience in almost two decades. The smallest audience in twenty years was in 2003 when Chicago won best picture.

The montage of "gay" moments from westerns was hilarious.

How,exactly, do they decide that Heath Ledger rates a nomination for Best actor while Jake Gyllenhaal, who was equally prominent in Brokeback Mountain, only gets the Support Actor nomination?

Did anyone notice that in Syriana, George Clooney was the main character, yet he was nominated for and won, Best Supporting Actor? Was his character not prominent enough to be a Best Actor nominee?

Crash, winner of the Best Picture, didn't have anyone as Best Actor or Actress, since it had no central character.

Lauren Bacal is 82 and she shouldn't be asked to read from the teleprompter again. She was painfull to watch, which is not the way such an elegant and legendary star should be remembered. She will be remembered that way, however, by the younger folks who haven't seen her films.

What was up with Ang Lee trying to make a joke by repeating the much mocked line "I wish I knew how to quit you"? It went over like a sack of wet noodles.

Ben Stiller made me laugh with his "floating head" routine, dressed in a green unitard.

Image Hosted by ImageShack.us

Coolest cat of the evening, was, of course, the liberal George Clooney, he of shifting glances and eyes rolling whenever references were made to him.

Second biggest surprise of the evening...Three 6 Mafia winning best song with "It's Hard Out Here For A Pimp," topping Dolly Parton, who's tune "Travelin' Through" wasn't especially strong.

Some of Jon Stewart's jokes:

"Bjork couldn't be here tonight, she was trying on her Oscars dress and Dick Cheney shot her."

"'Schindler's List' and 'Munich.' I think I speak for all Jews when I say I can't
wait to see what happens to us next."

Saturday, March 04, 2006

Film: 16 Blocks

2.5/ 5

Bruce Willis plays Jack Mosley, a tired old cop who has reluctantly accepted the task of transporting a prisoner (Eddie, played by Mos Def) to the courthouse to testify. He's told the prisoner is a nobody. Along the way, Jack stops off for some Advil and booze, and discovers that there's a team of guys trying to kill his prisoner, presumably to prevent him from testifying.

Image Hosted by ImageShack.us

He escapes to a small pub with Eddie and once the cops arrive, he realizes that Eddie is going to be killed by the cops since he saw another cop commit a crime. Eddie's testimony could bring down several dirty cops.

This is a fairly predictable buddy movie, with no truly outstanding performances, save for Willis'. A few of the scenes were far fetched, but allowed the story to progress along. Mos Def's Eddie character, a small-time thief with the goal of moving to Seattle to meet his long lost sister and become a baker, speaks with a very annoying whine. I'm not sure if this is Def's natural speaking voice but is was distracting. David Morse appears as the main bad cop but is absolutely without charisma whatsoever. He does a lousy job of portraying emotion and this deficit is quite noticeable next to the malleable Bruce Willis.

78th Oscar predictions

78th Oscar predictions.

Last year, I didn't make too many correct guesses.


Best motion picture of the year
Brokeback Mountain (Focus Features)
Capote (UA/Sony Pictures Classics)
Crash (Lions Gate)
Good Night, and Good Luck. (Warner Independent Pictures)
Munich (Universal and DreamWorks)
-----------------
will win: Brokeback Mountain
should win: Crash

Achievement in directing
Brokeback Mountain (Focus Features)- Ang Lee
Capote (UA/Sony Pictures Classics) - Bennett Miller
Crash (Lions Gate) - Paul Haggis
Good Night, and Good Luck. (Warner Independent Pictures) - George Clooney
Munich (Universal and DreamWorks) - Steven Spielberg
-----------------
win will: Ang Lee - Brokeback Mountain
should win: Paul Haggis - Crash

Performance by an actor in a leading role
Philip Seymour Hoffman in Capote (UA/Sony Pictures Classics)
Terrence Howard in Hustle & Flow (Paramount Classics, MTV Films and New Deal Entertainment)
Heath Ledger in Brokeback Mountain (Focus Features)
Joaquin Phoenix in Walk the Line (20th Century Fox)
David Strathairn in Good Night, and Good Luck. (Warner Independent Pictures)
-----------------
will win: Philip Seymour Hoffman
should win: Philip Seymour Hoffman

Performance by an actor in a supporting role
George Clooney in Syriana (Warner Bros.)
Matt Dillon in Crash (Lions Gate)
Paul Giamatti in Cinderella Man (Universal and Miramax)
Jake Gyllenhaal in Brokeback Mountain (Focus Features)
William Hurt in A History of Violence (New Line)
-----------------
will win: George Clooney
should win: Matt Dillion

Performance by an actress in a leading role
Judi Dench in Mrs. Henderson Presents (The Weinstein Company)
Felicity Huffman in Transamerica (The Weinstein Company and IFC Films)
Keira Knightley in Pride & Prejudice (Focus Features)
Charlize Theron in North Country (Warner Bros.)
Reese Witherspoon in Walk the Line (20th Century Fox)
-----------------
will win: Reese Witherspoon
should win: Reese Witherspoon

Performance by an actress in a supporting role
Amy Adams in Junebug (Sony Pictures Classics)
Catherine Keener in Capote (UA/Sony Pictures Classics)
Frances McDormand in North Country (Warner Bros.)
Rachel Weisz in The Constant Gardener (Focus Features)
Michelle Williams in Brokeback Mountain (Focus Features)
-----------------
will win: Rachel Weisz
should win: Michelle Williams

Adapted screenplay
Brokeback Mountain (Focus Features)- Screenplay by Larry McMurtry & Diana Ossana
Capote (UA/Sony Pictures Classics) - Screenplay by Dan Futterman
The Constant Gardener (Focus Features)- Screenplay by Jeffrey Caine
A History of Violence (New Line) - Screenplay by Josh Olson
Munich (Universal and DreamWorks)- Screenplay by Tony Kushner and Eric Roth
-----------------
will win: Brokeback Mountain
should win: Munich

Original screenplay
Crash (Lions Gate) - Screenplay by Paul Haggis & Bobby Moresco, Story by Paul Haggis
Good Night, and Good Luck. (Warner Independent Pictures)- Screenplay by George Clooney & Grant Heslov
Match Point (DreamWorks) -Written by Woody Allen
The Squid and the Whale (Samuel Goldwyn Films and Sony Pictures Releasing)
Written by Noah Baumbach
Syriana (Warner Bros.)- Written by Stephen Gaghan
-----------------
will win: Crash
should win: Crash

Thursday, March 02, 2006

Film: Neil Young - Heart of Gold

4/5

Image Hosted by ImageShack.us

This is a concert film, with a brief opening chapter showing the band members driving to the concert hall and reminiscing about Neil Young.

The concert in Nashville is the world premiere of his new album, Prairie Wind. Some of the tracks are pretty good while others, like the title track, are instantly forgettable. The band plays mostly country-folk music and features Emmylou Harris, a huge star in her own right, on backing vocals.

Free Image Hosting at www.ImageShack.us

Towards the end of the show, Young rattles off a few of his hits including "Old Man," "The Needle and the Damage Done," "Harvest Moon," and of course, "Heart of Gold." Young mentions Winnipeg and Falcon Lake and recalls plugging all his money into a jukebox in a restaurant there to hear Ian Tyson "Four Strong Winds," one of the most defining songs in Canadian popular music history, at Falcon Lake. Neil also spoke about his father, who passed away a few months before the show. He recalled the time he was being shown around the ranch property he bought when he was quite a bit younger by the caretaker and how it inspired him to write "Old Man." Young's guitar, formerly Hank William's even rated a story. You even get to see one of the band members sweep a mat with a straw broom, contributing to the shuffling sound of "Harvest Moon." Who knew?

Image Hosted by ImageShack.us

If you're a fan, you're probably going to enjoy this film. The Ryman Auditorium's balcony is the first upper level I've seen that looks as good as the lower level. There's not a bad seat in this house, the former home of the Grand Old Opry. If you're not a fan, you would be hard pressed to dismiss the band's performance. Neil Young expresses emotion and beauty as honestly and intimately as the his legend would suggest. Curiously, Oscar winning director Jonathan Demme doesn't have shots showing the audience close up, which was a tad disappointing.

Wednesday, March 01, 2006

Massachusetts Mandates Open-Format Documents, Edges Towards Linux

Sep. 01, 2005

The state of Massachusetts will revamp its digital output during the next 16 months to create only open-format documents and is increasing its use of Linux and free and open source software (FOSS) among its workers, the state's chief information officer told DesktopLinux.com Thursday in a conference call.

CIO Peter Quinn challenged Microsoft and other companies who sell software that uses proprietary document formats to consider enabling open-format options as soon as possible. Quinn said that "government is creating history at a rapidly increasing rate, and all documents we save must be accessible to everybody, without having to use 'closed' software to open them now and in the future."

The state said Wednesday that starting on Jan. 1, 2007, all electronic documents created by state employees could be saved in only two format types: OpenDocument, which is used in open source applications such as OpenOffice.org, and the Adobe-created Portable Document File (PDF). OpenDocument can be used for saving documents such as letters, spreadsheets, tables, and graphical presentations. It is the default file format for OpenOffice 2.0, currently in Beta 2.

Using OpenOffice.org and Linux "more and more"

Quinn said the state runs a "vast majority" of its office and system computers on Windows and that "only a very small percentage of them run Linux and other open source software at this time. This is in tune with the general market in the US. But we like to 'eat our own cooking,' in that we are using OpenOffice.org and Linux more and more as time goes along, because it produces open format documents."

In contrast, Microsoft's Office creates Word, Excel, PowerPoint, and other documents that are accessible only by Microsoft products, making them ineligible for use, the state said.

"Microsoft has remade the desktop world," Quinn said. "But if you've watched history, there's a slag heap of proprietary companies who have fallen by the wayside because they were stuck in their ways. Just look at the minicomputer business, for example. The world is about open standards and open source. I can't understand why anybody would want to continue making closed-format documents anymore."

Microsoft answer to that is simple. MS Office, which is upgraded about every three years and includes Word, Excel, PowerPoint and Outlook, brought in more than $11 billion last year, or about 28 percent of Microsoft's total revenue, according to the company's recently filed annual report.

"We've had an active, ongoing conversation with Microsoft since January about this, and they've been open to hearing our position," Quinn said. "But I don't know one way or the other how they're ultimately going to react to this. Also, this isn't just about Microsoft. We're focusing on the formats here, not necessarily the software. But wouldn't it be nice not to have to remake the systems?"

Quinn said the state is looking at all its options, including using conversion tools to create open documents. "We're cognizant of what happens in a bifurcated world," he said. "If we have to convert everything as we go along, we'll look at the cost [associated] with it and make decisions based on what's best for the taxpayers. We'll also look at other options, like Linux systems, because open source and open standards are where the world is going."

Microsoft's response

Alan Yates, general manager of Information Worker Business Strategy at Microsoft, told DesktopLinux.com: "We do not believe ... that the answer to public records management is to force a single, less functional document format on all state agencies.

"The proposed policy is inconsistent with ongoing dialogues Microsoft is having with other Massachusetts state agencies about how Microsoft products can best meet their data and records requirements for a variety of data types -- ranging from traditional documents to pictures, audio, video, voice, voice-over-IP, data, database schema, webpages, and XML information.

"As we look to the future, and all of these data types become increasingly intertwined, locked-in formats like OpenDocument are not well suited to address these varying data types -- as the proposed policy itself acknowledges." Yates said. "We would advise the Commonwealth of Massachusetts to do a thorough evaluation of the costs and benefits before making such a major shift."

Feedback requested from companies and individuals

Quinn said that for the next week, the state is requesting feedback from companies and individuals on the issue of open-format electronic documents. The Enterprise Technical Reference Model v.3.5 draft specification is available for review until Sept. 9.

website page counter