Z/Web

My car’s been getting old (I’ve had it for over 10 years) and it lately started acting up. The air conditioner was making noise, it was creaking and not steering properly, and other weird things. Then last week I drove to Modesto and Fresno to visit my Aunt Joann and go to the eye doctor (my first visit in over two years). I had planned to get an oil change but when I went they were closed: it was Labor Day, the morons. So I left without having my car checked out. I was nervous, but everything worked great until I got to Fresno. Suddenly the car started making weird sounds (the engine was snorting during idling), the air conditioner made screeching sounds so I had to turn it off, acceleration pooped out, and then a strange bell began dinging randomly. I thought the car was toast for sure.

That evening I headed for home. I got on the highway and the bell began ringing again. It’s the same warning bell that rings when you leave your keys in the ignition and open the door. I thought something wasn’t working right with the system. I couldn’t see any warning lights on the dash. Then I noticed that the temperature gauge, which I’ve never seen above 30%, was at max. As I watched, it went all the way to the top and the bell rang. That happened again and cleared up the bell mystery: it was telling me my car was overheating.

I got off at the next exit and went to a gas station. There I sprayed water on the engine and after a 20 minute cool-down, added water to the radiator. Then I called my Uncle Phil for advice (I know less than nothing about cars) and added some oil (it seemed low). The odd thing was that after the car was cool, just sitting and idling made it overheat! I had to cool it down a second time (after turning off the engine, of course).

Once I got on the road, the wind kept the engine cool and I made it home just fine. But idling for more than a few minutes — in a parking lot, in traffic, etc. — would make the car overheat.

I dreaded taking the car to a shop. Who knows how much I’d be charged? Probably they’d tell me the engine was dead. Except the car did work fine on the highway. I was so nervous I actually checked out the prices of new and used cars. What I found was depressing, because used ones that I could afford were in even worse shape than my Neon, and because new cars are way out of my price range (which is pretty close to zero).

Finally, I decided I at least had to know how much it would be to fix, so I took it in. The shop had given me a $108 estimate to find the trouble and called a couple hours later. “You car’s fixed!” they said.

“What? Seriously? What was wrong?”

“It was simple: the relay to the cooling fan was bad. So the fan wasn’t turning on when needed. We replaced the relay and everything works great now.”

The total bill came to $88 labor/diagnostic and $12 for the part. Not bad at all. The odd thing is the overheating seemed to be the problem all along. The air conditioner now works fine (no more weird sounds), the engine noise I’d been hearing in retrospect was water boiling, and the sluggish acceleration is cured, probably because higher RPMs generated more heat. I don’t understand why overheating would effect the steering, but it’s fixed now, so I can only assume it was also related.

Weird the way a single problem could create such a variety of symptoms.

I was hoping this rerelease would clarify this muddled and confusing film, but no such luck. Supposedly twenty minutes of new footage has been added, but I couldn’t tell where. Some scenes seemed longer but there was much I didn’t remember anyway, so I found it hard to tell waht was new. Nothing new helped explain anything; my comments on the original

Of course this “off-screen action” problem isn’t limited to this one key scene. It happens throughout the film, to different degrees of harm. The most obvious are the sabotage events, which we don’t really see Donnie do, but suspect. Now those actually benefit from some abiguity as they make us wonder if Donnie’s really done them or just assumes he did them; unfortunately, they aren’t ambiguous enough. There’s far too much evidence that he did them, such as the shot of him with the ax, his own words that he did them, etc. So the question then becomes, if he admits he did them and it’s so obvious he did, why obscure that from the audience? Why not just show us plainly? What benefit is gained by obscuring those events? If the events were intended to be ambiguous there’d be a gain in mystery and complication, but since there is no mystery — he did the sabotage — the abiguity just confuses.

I really wanted to like this movie. I’m a huge fan of cult classics and this movie has a large following. I gave it a question mark after my first viewing, unsure of my feelings. Seeing it a second time, however, confirmed my conclusion that this is dreck. It’s a mess that severely needs a rewrite, editing, and a better director. Keep in mind that I normally like confusing, puzzling movies. For instance, I wasn’t sure about Donnie Darko could have been that kind of film, but it’s weakly done. Nothing is clear, even in retrospect, and much of what happens, even when cool, is never given a reason. For instance, it’s widely assumed by fans that the rabbit is an alien being, yet I saw not a shred of evidence to support that. Not even a hint. Why? If that’s a possibility, why wouldn’t the writer include a hint or two?

Author: Paul Auster (Adaptation by Paul Karasik and David Mazzucchelli)

Last spring my cousin-in-law lent me a book by Paul Auster which included the fascinating story City of Glass. It’s an amazing story about a writer who’s mistaken for a detective and gets so involved in a complex case that he loses his identity. Recently, a classic graphic version of the story has been republished and I quickly bought a copy. I was intensely curious how such a complicated story could be transformed into a comic. Would it retain the magic of the original story? The answer is a tremendous “Yes!” The reason it works is that much of the text of the original story is used verbatim in the graphic novel. The graphics only add meaning and depth to the story. Honestly, I felt this version was even better than the original! It’s much more approachable, more interesting, less technical. Yet the full meaning and depth of the original story is preserved. While it’s been a while since I read the story, I can’t think of anything left out; the comic version includes all the important scenes and elements. As an introduction to Auster, this short graphic novel is ideal. I highly recommend it. It’s literary, profound, complex, unusual, and well worth your time.