Friday, November 21, 2014

David Brooks refuses to admit he did not factcheck his NYT oped piece in INTERSTELLAR and was overeraching by a long shot

See this blog's mild-mannered response to David Brooks brouhaha:

http://www.sdjewishworld.com/2014/11/21/new-york-times-columnist-forgot-fact-check/

NYT oped columnist David Brooks gets 'Interstellar' into a religious pickle


LINK TO RESPONSE TO DAVID BROOKS OPED IN NYT:
http://www.sdjewishworld.com/2014/11/21/new-york-times-columnist-forgot-fact-check/

I am sure New York Times columnist David Brooks meant well when he wrote his "Love and Gravity" column the other day about the faith aspects of Christopher Nolan's new "Interstellar" movie

Brooks is a very good writer, a bit on the rightwing side of things and with a big following among readers on the right, and he often makes very good sense. Even if you don't agree with his politics. He's balanced and fair and really more of a mid-center guy than right or left.

But boy, did he get himself into a big pickle in his recent oped column about "Interstellar." It was a think piece, not a movie review, and it was well written and thoughtful. The Times has him on board for a reason: David Brooks can write like a pro and a pro he is.

But when he tried to paint "Interstellar" as a religious allegory, taking reddit and blogger posts that were never fact-chcked or vetted, Brooks went overboard and ended up in a pickle. Will he apologize for the inaccuracy or will his editors issue a correction? I am waiting.

Here is what Brooks wrote, in part:

"In the movie, 12 apostles go out alone into space to look for habitable planets. They are sacrificing their lives so that canisters of frozen embryos can be born again in some place far away.'' 

He added: ''Bloggers have noticed the religious symbols in the movie. There are those 12 apostles,and there’s a Noah’s ark. There is a fallen angel named Dr. Mann who turns satanic in an inverse Garden of Eden. The space project is named Lazarus. The heroine saves the world at age 33. There’s an infinitely greater and incorporeal intelligence offering merciful salvation."

It's all very nice and cheerful except for one thing: The crew of the Endeavor in "Interstellar" had just four people, not twelve. There were no 12 apostles in the movie. 

Cooper is not Jesus, and there was no Noah's Ark. 

And while Brooks did not go down this road, some religious bloggers are now elsewhere that Dr Mann was ''Judas'' -- that old antisemitic canard from the New Testament that created an imaginary, perfidious, betraying Jew named, well, we all know his name by now.

But look, Matt Damon's character was not Judas. Cooper's initials in the movie were not JC, as some are now saying. Come on, it's just a movie!

David Brooks wrote a very good column except for those two paragraphs above. He never fact-checked the items he picked up from blogs and other online posts. He just put them in and got himself into a pickle.

It's just a movie, David. What's next, you're going to say that Nolan's first name has the word ''Christ'' in it and therefore...

When does this nonsense stop? Twelve apostles, my eye; 12 astronauts in the crew, my eye! Doesn't the New York Times employ fact-checkers anymore?

Interstellar, Interschtellar! I loved the movie -- without the God stuff! That's pushing it.

http://www.sdjewishworld.com/2014/11/21/new-york-times-columnist-forgot-fact-check/

Monday, November 17, 2014

MEET ''CLI FI'' HORROR GENRE AUTHOR ADAM NEVILL

His next work will concern 'the horror of the future as opposed to the past.' .......it is a distillation of three of his greatest imagined horrors - the loss of a child, runaway climate change, and the collapse of civilisation into barbarism. .....========================= http://thequietus.com/articles/16710-adam-nevill-horror-stephen-king-no-one-gets-out-alive-interview

There's Poverty and then there's Poverty

Any reasonably intelligent reader could blow that generalization apart in the time it takes to write it. But as with most generalizations, a truth lies behind it. Ultimately, what binds the rich together is that they have more money, lots more. For one reason or another, the poor don’t have enough of it. But poverty doesn’t bind the poor together as much as wealth and the need to protect it bind the rich. If it did, we would hear the rattle of tumbrels in the streets. One hears mutterings, but the chains have not yet been shed. I have some personal experience here. Like a lot of other people, I started life comfortably middle-class, maybe upper-middle class; now, like a lot of other people walking the streets of America today, I am poor. To put it directly, I have no money. Does this embarrass me? Of course, it embarrasses me—and a lot of other things as well. It’s humiliating to be poor, to be dependent on the kindness of family and friends and government subsidies. But it sure is an education. Social classes are relative and definitions vary, but if money defines class, the sociologists would say I was not among the wretched of the earth but probably at the higher end of the lower classes. I’m not working class because I don’t have what most people consider a job. I’m a writer, although I don’t grind out the words the way I once did. Which is one reason I’m poor. My income consists of a Social Security check and a miserable pension from the Washington Post, where I worked intermittently for a total of about twenty-five years, interrupted by a stint at a publishing house in New York just before my profit-sharing would have taken effect. I returned to the Post, won a Pulitzer Prize, continued working for another eight years, with a leave of absence now and then. As the last leave rolled on, the Post suggested I come back to work or, alternatively, the company would allow me to take an early retirement. I was fifty-three at the time. I chose retirement because I was under the illusion—perhaps delusion is the more accurate word—that I could make a living as a writer and the Post offered to keep me on their medical insurance program, which at the time was very good and very cheap. The pension would start twelve years later when I was sixty-five. What cost a dollar at the time I accepted the offer, would cost $1.44 when the checks began. Today, what cost a dollar in 1986 costs $2.10. The cumulative rate of inflation is 109.7 percent. The pension remains the same. It is not adjusted for inflation. In the meantime, medical insurance costs have soared. Today, I pay more than twice as much for a month of medical insurance as I paid in 1987 for a year of better coverage. My pension is worth half what it was. And I’m one of the lucky ones. I was never remotely rich by what counts for rich today. (That requires a lot of zeroes after the first two or three digits.) But I look through my checkbooks from twenty-five and thirty years ago and I think, Wow! What happened? It was a long, slowly accelerating slide but the answer is simple. I was foolish, careless, and sometimes stupid. As my older brother, who to keep me off the streets invited me to live with him after his wife died, said, shaking his head in warning, “Don’t spend your capital.” His advice was right, but his timing was wrong. I’d already spent it. He sounded like the ghost of my father. Capital produces income. If you want to have an income, don’t dip into your capital. I’d always been a bit of a contrarian, even as a child. My money wasn’t working hard enough to finance my adventures, which did, after all, come with a price. I wanted to explore and write about eastern Europe after the fall of the Wall, which I did for several years. It was truly a great adventure, it changed my life, and it was a lot more interesting than thinking about what it cost, which was a lot. There’d always been enough money. I assumed there always would be. (I think this is called denial.) So another dip into the well. In my checkbook, I listed these deposits as draws. That sounded very businesslike, almost as if I knew what I was doing. Sometimes I did. (It’s hard to resist a little self-justification.) Against the advice of people who thought they knew better, I bought shares in AOL before it really took off and in Apple when it was near its bottom. I figured Apple’s real estate must be worth more than the value the market gave the company. I was right. Shares in both companies soared. If I’d shut up and stayed home…but I didn’t. On the advice of these same people who advised me against AOL and Apple, I turned my brokerage account into a margin account for someone else to handle, and I left the country again. A few more dips into the well, a few turns in the market, a few margin calls, and when I went back for another dip, the well was empty. The old proverb drifts back to me on a wisp of memory. A fool and his money are soon parted. My adventures were over. The story is, of course, more complicated than that—whose story isn’t?—but these are the essentials. It’s unlikely, and it’s not intended, to evoke sympathy. I’d acted like one of those people who win the lottery and squander it on houses, cars, family, and Caribbean cruises. But I hadn’t won the lottery; I’d fallen under the spell of magical thinking. In my opinion, I didn’t squander the money, either; I just spent it a little too enthusiastically—not on Caribbean cruises but on exploring the aftermath of the fall of Communism in eastern Europe. I don’t regret it. When my writing was bringing in a little money I had a Keogh plan, and when I was at the Post a 401(k) account. I’d made a little money in real estate and received a couple of modest but nice inheritances, which together, and with Social Security and the pension, would have given me enough income to live on, had I not felt I’d lost the ability to continue writing and had I forgone, or at least spent more modestly on, my work in Europe and related activities, avoided the margin account, and so on. The “so on,” I should add, included a major heart attack that led to congestive heart failure, a condition that greatly reduced my physical resilience and taxed my already-limited income. There are a lot of people like me, exiles from the middle class who suddenly find themselves on Grub Street. Unless something truly awful has happened, they are not standing at the corner with a cup like my friend Kenny, whom I pass every Wednesday afternoon when I’m entering the farmers’ market at Foggy Bottom. We chat. He’s bent over a cane but always clean and nicely dressed. He tells me not to stay long, that it’s too hot. Kenny is a genuinely compassionate man. I tell him I am writing an article on poverty, my own poverty, but I’d like to know about how he got where he is. Would he talk to me? Yes, he would, but our conversation hasn’t happened yet. I feel guilty that I am shopping at this upscale market when I am wondering which medical bill I can postpone this month and, which, if any, I can pay. Meanwhile, Kenny stands at the corner with his cup. On my way out, I bring him a gelato. It’s too hot to stand and talk. Kenny looks poor. He looks weary. After it had been pointed out to me by a friend who has a brain in his head but once had no money in his pocket, I noticed that the truly poor often look weary. Dealing with the system—“the Man”—is frustrating, exhausting, and takes many hours of waiting for bus and subway, of shuffling back and forth from one office to the next, one building to the next, one bureau to the next, filling out forms and generating a growing stream of paper along the way. Fortunately, I haven’t had to deal with government agencies very often, but once I took an addict, who was in dire straits, to an agency that might give him a referral for psychiatric treatment at a much reduced rate or even to a well-regarded clinic in another part of the city for free. He’d need Medicaid, of course. It took the entire day, from eight in the morning to five at night. The waiting room was jammed. There must have been seventy-five people there, and for most of them it was not their first visit. When my friend was called to see a member of the staff who could pass him to another, and so on, I was the only white person in the room. But I was not the only poor person in the room. The only people who weren’t were the two women behind the desk, probably hanging on by their teeth to the lowest rung on the middle-class ladder. Nice women, actually, patient and polite. Poverty is a great leveler. There was camaraderie among those men and women in the waiting room. My awkwardness soon slipped away and I, too, became part of the group. I heard stories, I laughed, and we talked. It was interesting, an experience, as they say, like working on a freighter, which I did for a time. Only my experience as an able-bodied seaman in my youth was one of my attempts to try on a new identity and escape the world around me. This waiting room in a part of the District government most middle-class people never see was not an escape from the “real world”; it was the real world. All of us there had two things in common: None of us had any money, and all of us had time. That was good because, as I said, I was there all day. It’s a common assumption that poor people don’t have much need for time, but for rich people time is money. They have important things to do. Poverty, my mother used to say, is a state of mind. She never stood in line to apply for welfare, or Medicaid, or food stamps. Then she would have learned, as I did, that it may be a state of mind—and to some degree I believe it is—but it is also a harsh daily reality for millions of her fellow citizens of this country and on this planet. And now for her son. I am not trying to exaggerate my own particular plight. I’ve never had to apply for welfare, or Medicaid, or food stamps. I have asked the Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) to subsidize my rent and a District office to subsidize my medical insurance payments. That involved a lot of paperwork but not a lot of lines, and I am very glad to live in subsidized housing with a number of people who really run the gamut. One of them is the great-grandson of Leo Tolstoy. Another fled Bulgaria as the Communists were taking over, eventually came to the United States, speaks several languages, and worked for the Library of Congress. There are refugees from one regime or another, from all parts of the world. They come in all colors. Some were trained as lawyers, some have doctoral degrees, some were teachers. There are journalists and writers. What we have in common is we are all older, we are all poor, and each of us has, to a greater or lesser degree, the ailments that come with age. As everybody knows, if you don’t have good insurance, medical bills can be catastrophic and have been for some of us here. But I think all of us would agree that living here beats living in a homeless shelter. Compared with most poor people, I am fortunate. If you’ve got to be poor, finding yourself at the upper edge of poverty with a roof over your head and a wardrobe that doesn’t look as if it came from the Salvation Army is as good as it gets. It also helps to be white. An African-American trainer at a gym I used to go to before the well went dry had a lot of clients and must have made decent money, enough to support himself and his son, anyway. He was walking down Connecticut Avenue one day when he saw one of his female clients approaching. “I don’t have any,” she exclaimed and turned abruptly away as he was opening his mouth to greet her. “I don’t have any money!” She didn’t see my friend Jeff; she saw a black man in trainers about to ask her for a handout on one of the busier avenues in the city. Jeff doesn’t look like a hustler. He doesn’t look poor. I don’t look poor, either, but I am white. So I never suffered that kind of demeaning slight. By federal government standards, I’m not poor, but by any rational standard, I am. My income is above $11,670 annually, which, in 2014, puts me above the poverty line for a single person. My Social Security comes to more than that. The federal minimum wage in 2014 is $7.25 an hour, or $15,080 annually. When FICA taxes of 7.65 percent for Social Security and Medicare are deducted, that brings the income of a full time minimum-wage worker to $13,949. For a family of three, the poverty line is $19,790. This is not a joke. It doesn’t leave much extra for an ice cream cone. I have a roof over my head, thanks to the aforementioned HUD subsidy, which required hours of paperwork, signed affidavits from doctors, many duplicate copies, and a lot of running around. (The Paperwork Reduction Act was passed in 1980. How many trees, I wonder, has it saved?) The management of the building where I live used to deal directly with HUD. Now a company based in Alabama has been hired as a distant intermediary of sorts between the very capable management and HUD. I don’t believe this was done in an attempt to reduce paperwork. If you’re poor, what might have been a minor annoyance, or even a major inconvenience, becomes something of a disaster. Your hard drive crashes? Who’s going to pay for the recovery of its data, not to mention the new computer? I’m not playing solitaire on this machine; the hard drive holds my work, virtually my life. It is not a luxury for me but a necessity. I need dental work. Anybody got $10,000? Dentists are not a luxury. Dental disease can make you seriously ill. Lose your cellphone? What may be a luxury to some is a necessity to me. Without that telephone and that computer, my life as I have known it would cease to exist. Not long after, so would I. I am not eager for that to happen. Need to go to a funeral hundreds of miles away? Who pays for the plane ticket? In the case of the funeral, my nephew paid for the plane ticket. My daughter and son-in-law paid for the dental work. Sometimes, I find it deeply humiliating that I am dependent on such kindnesses when I would prefer that the kindnesses flow the other way. Most of the time, though, I am just extremely grateful for the help of family and friends. It’s not so much humiliating as it is humbling, which is a good thing. I am ashamed to have gotten myself into this situation. Unlike many who are born, live, and die in poverty, I got where I am today through my own efforts. I can’t blame anyone else. Perhaps, it should be humiliating to reveal myself like this to the eyes of any passing stranger or friend; more humiliating to friends, actually, some of whom knew me in another life. Most of my friends probably don’t realize or would rather not realize just how parlous my situation is. Just as well. We’d both be embarrassed. Although I am embarrassed by my condition, and ashamed of myself for putting myself there, I feel grateful to have had some of these experiences and even more grateful to have survived them. I am glad that none of my friends has ever found himself sitting on a bench in a park with a quarter in his pocket, as I once did, and nothing in the bank; in fact, no bank account. It’s a very lonely feeling. It gives new meaning to the sense of loneliness and despair. I wallowed in that slough for a bit. It was not, after all, a happy situation and I am not a dim-witted optimist. But I had two choices, die in the slough or move on. I thought of the last two lines of Milton’s Lycidas, At last he rose, and twitch’d his mantle blue: To-morrow to fresh woods, and pastures new. So I got up, forever grateful to Mr. Barrows, my college English instructor, for teaching me to study Lycidas seriously and realize what a great poem it is and why that matters.

Why does Leonard Cohen kneel down on stage so often during concerts in old age?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=f-l_uWlb4Qs =====================One cannot imagine there are many popular concerts in which the star spends as much time on his knees as Leonard Cohen. In many of his moving three-and-a-half hour performances, Cohen spends a good deal of the concert kneeling in the middle of the stage surrounded by the nine members of his band. Although he is 80 years old, Cohen certainly did not appear to be kneeling because he was tired of standing. He bounced up and down and danced on and off the stage with the agility of a man who seems much younger. Cohen kneels through much of his concert because much of the time on stage Cohen is praying. A Jew-Bu praying. A Jewish Buddhist. His songs are offered reverently to a hidden unnamed presence that permeates even those songs that celebrate the pleasures of physical desire and passion. Cohen prays about forgiveness; he prays about pain. He offers up the brokenness of life longing for redemption and healing: O, gather up the brokenness Bring it to me now The fragrance of those promises You never dared to vow The splinters that you carried The cross you left behind Come healing of the body Come healing of the mind And let the heavens hear it The penitential hymn Come healing of the spirit Come healing of the limb Leonard: Behold the gates of mercy In arbitrary space And none of us deserving Of cruelty or the grace O, solitude of longing Where love has been confined Come healing of the body Come healing of the mind O, see the darkness yielding That tore the light apart Come healing of the reason Come healing of the heart O, troubledness concealing An undivided love The heart beneath is teaching To the broken heart above Cohen is deeply aware of his own mortality. He admits his failures and acknowledges with profound vulnerability the confusing conflicted path that is characteristic of so much of life. At times Cohen sounds like the Apostle Paul longing to be away from this troubled world and at rest in God. Paul prays: we would rather be away from the body and at home with the Lord. (II Corinthians 5:8) Cohen seems to share Paul’s yearning for release from this painful world when he sings: Going home Without my sorrow Going home Sometime tomorrow Going home To where it’s better Than before Going home Without my burden Going home Behind the curtain Going home Without the costume That I wore He wants to write a love song An anthem of forgiving A manual for living with defeat But most of all Cohen prays and performs with an enduring and profound trust in the power of love. Tell me again when I’ve been to the river And I’ve taken the edge off my thirst Tell me again we’re alone and I’m listening Listening so hard that it hurts Tell me again when I’m clean and I’m sober Tell me again when I’ve seen through the horror Tell me again tell me over and over Tell me that you’ll love me then Amen Cohen makes no apology for his faith in the hidden power that his concerts celebrate. He is not embarrassed to admit in public his awareness that the long journey of his life has been haunted by unseen powers that he cannot fully explain or entirely grasp. His deep faith in the transcendent and abiding power of love gives a Cohen concert the profound sense that the audience has for a moment been invited to enter a temple. Cohen is still praying and inviting his audiences to join with him in a corporate act of deep devotion.

''INTERSTELLAR'' IN KATMANDU

A truly effective outer-space sci-fi thriller could be said to function on two levels. First is the way it works to represent, visually, the vastness and terrifying beauty of all that is beyond earthly perimeters, an aspect wherein possibilities have expanded of late, thanks to evolving digital technology capable of painting ever more realistic cosmic canvases for our viewing pleasure. And second is the cultivation of the sort of allegorical pull that the concept of space abounds in, where the wonder and terror of hurtling into the unknowable wilderness, far from all things familiar, could express anything from collective social and political anxieties to existential questions about where humanity stands in the grand scheme of things. The astute filmmaker is able to blend these two sides—what film researchers Geoff King and Tanya Krzywinska call ‘spectacle’ and ‘speculation’—with productions that are as intimate in emotional perspective as they are enormous in physical scale. Unfortunately, it’s this sort of balancing act that Christopher Nolan’s new film just isn’t able to get right. While “Interstellar”s gears might be all accounted for—the film doesn’t lack in visual and conceptual ambition, and boasts a cast littered with some of Hollywood’s brightest—how these click into place is a different story. Granted, we’re offered some impressive sights to fawn over, and a few heavy ideas to chew on, but both are steamrollered under the easy sentimentality that has been unwisely elected as the film’s cornerstone, dampening narrative impact. To be plain, “Interstellar” is just not as smart or as complex as it pretends to be, and the illusion is stretched perilously thin over the 167-minute running time. Like so many other sci-fi flicks, this one too opens in an unstated future date, where the Earth has been wrecked by pollution and disease, much of the population eliminated, and persistent dust storms tormenting those who remain. These are distinctly technophobic times—believing scientific innovation to have caused the ruin, the government has abolished its practice in favour of an emphasis on farm-work. And somewhere amid the cornfields of rural America lives the widowed Joseph Cooper (Matthew McConaughey) with daughter Murph (Mackenzie Foy), son Tom (Timothée Chalamet) and father-in-law Donald (John Lithgow). Coop used to be a NASA engineer and test pilot until the agency was shut down, and though he has since been making a living off of farming, he can’t help but rue the loss of his former life. “We used to look up at the sky and wonder at our place in the stars,” he says. “Now we just look down and worry about our place in the dirt.” It’s of some consolation to him that Murph shares his interest in science. Among the things they routinely discuss is the ‘ghost’ in her room she swears has been trying to talk to her. Coop is dismissive, until one day, he sees proof of this presence, and it’s soon giving him directions to a mysterious spot. This turns out to be the hidden NASA headquarters, where a team led by Dr Brand (Michael Caine) has been planning to resettle humans on other planets—the only way the species can survive. He explains to Coop about a ‘wormhole’ that’s opened up near Saturn, a portal to other galaxies. A dozen scientists have already passed through it, one-way, but only three have been in contact. NASA needs a crew to head out and verify the findings, and Coop is asked to lead the mission, accompanied by three others (Anne Hathaway, David Gyasi and Wes Bentley). Though it’s agonising to leave his children—Murph might never speak to him again—Coop knows it’s the only shot at giving them a better future. But this isn’t just any trip we’re talking about; he doesn’t know whether he’s ever coming back, or what state he’ll be in if he does, given that the further he moves out there, the lesser he’s bound to the rules of terra firma. It goes without saying that Nolan has a knack for staging dazzling, elaborate set pieces: just think back to that scene in “Inception” where the streets of Paris are collapsing on each other, or the action sequences threading the “Dark Knight” movies. “Interstellar” certainly showcases its share of awe-inspiring imagery; working with production designer Nathan Crowley, VFX supervisor Paul Franklin and, for the first time, cinematographer Hoyte van Hoytema, the director invents a realm that is detailed and captivating. Whether it’s the intricate rendering of machinery or the various celestial landscapes we’re made to encounter—or just the silent nothingness in between—it all feels authentic, and is reportedly accurate to a large degree, thanks to astrophysicist Kip Thorne, brought on as consultant as well as being a producer. The beauty of the images, or even the heady intellectual themes that the film, on the surface, appears to grapple with, however, is not enough to forge a necessary engagement with the story or characters. This is because at the very core of “Interstellar”s script—written by Nolan with his brother Jonathan—is a protracted parent-child saga, which still would’ve been fine had it not been painted in such clichéd, simplistic colours as it is here, splotched in sappy melodrama. Everything else is mere decoration, and that fact becomes more and more apparent as we go on—ironic how a film that harps on big ideas like mankind’s connection with the wider universe and the resilience of hope and love, is actually quite narrow and unimaginative in focus. By the end, you’ll have been so hammered by pseudo-portentous dialogue, incomprehensibly dense talk about time-space paradoxes, extra-dimensions, and so on—set against a score by Hans Zimmer that tries to strangle the tears out of you—that any mention of the ‘relativity of time’ or Dylan Thomas’ “Do Not Go Gentle Into That Good Night” is liable to make your head throb. Nolan is lucky to have secured actors who are able to give the film what little emotional heft it possesses. McConaughey, whose character is the only one that seems to have been drawn with any effort, has become one of those performers who can’t really do any wrong, and trademark southern drawn in place, he cruises by confidently. The rest of the cast, including the younger members, all man their corners well, though one wishes Hathaway and Jessica Chastain (who comes in later) were given more to do; both are terrific actresses, but confined by ill-written roles. “Interstellar” is, ultimately, inadequate: it goes all out when it comes to visuals, but there isn’t enough underlying substance to really drive it home. I’d recommend catching it on the big screen—if cinemas in Nepal do decide to carry it—but otherwise, you’re much better off revisiting Stanley Kubrick’s “2001: A Space Odyssey”. Now that’s some stellar sci-fi.

What INTERSTELLWAR WAS NOT ABOUT: CLIMATE CHANGE! SIGH!

When INTERSTELLAR was shooting last year in Alberta, Canada, where much of the movie's first-hour scenes were shot, the local newspaper -- The Macleod Gazette, the local newspaper of Fort Macleod, Alberta -- ran some tantalizing details about ''Interstellar'' as Nolan and company were shooting on location in the Canadian town. ============= The Gazette followed the rundown of the movie as was then known — scientists who travel to a different dimension — and noted that the film centered on the tremendous destruction climate change had wrought on world agriculture. ============= As a result, these time/space-tripping scientists are seeking out a place where crops can be grown. This was the first that the media has said anything about Interstellar involving climate change, but but it turned out to be wrong, since INTERSTELLAR is NOT ABOUT CLIMATE CHANGE AND WHAT A PITY THAT IT DIDN"T GO DOWN THAT ROAD. Big fail!=========== ''Canadian locals spotted Interstellar crew members pouring sand all over Fort Macleod’s Main Street, setting the stage for the following day’s shoot. On Wednesday, McConaughey and John Lithgow were spotted driving a pick-up truck down the street in a manufactured dust storm, which within the film is likely the result of climate change. The many takes involved crew members manning fans to blow dust that created billowing dust clouds above the area that could be seen at a distance," the newspaper reported.========= Btw, Paramount Pictures has refused to comment on ''rumors'' that Matt Damon had been added to the production.