The following text may have been generated by Optical Character Recognition, with varying degrees of accuracy. Reader beware!

4 -- PORT PERRY STAR -- Tuesday, May 29, 1984 editorial comments 'Buzz OFF, HONEY, 7415 1% ()Y CORNER 1" chatterbox by John B. McClelland THE NATURAL The hottest new film making the rounds this early summer is 'The Natural," starring Robert Redford. I had a chance to see this film a week or so ago, and it was, well, shall we say different. That's not to say I didn't enjoy it: on the contrary, it was marvellous; a cinemagraphic treat for the senses, some fine character acting, and, of all things, a HAPPY ending. One billboard ad described 'The Natural' as part 'Rocky' and part "Star Wars," and all of the critics' reviews I've read since the film was released, none gave it bad marks. On the surface, it is a film about baseball, more specifically about a player (Redford) who at age 36, ar- rives to join the New York Knights, a team wallowing in the cellar. The year is 1939, and the Knights coach and manager can't imagine how the scouts sent a 36 year old rookie to bail the team out of the doldrums. Anyway, Redford finally gets his chance to play and he is a sensation, running down long flies in the field and cracking out home runs that don't just clear the field, they sail right out of the stadium. The team vaults into first place. Predictably, Redford goes into a slump, the team fades, we learn that the likeable old manager will lose his share of the team to a nasty owner if the Knights don't win the pennant. There is a predictably nasty bookie in cohoots with the nasty owner and a shady sports writer trying to pin down Redford's mysterious past. Redford falls ill right before the crucial game, then leaves his hospital bed, dons his uniform and true to the ultimate cliche, hits a home run in the final inning to save the season for the Knights. ; From start to finish, there are so many cliches in this film, that it seems the entire thing is just one giant cliche. And on the surface it is. We catch a glimpse of Redford as a young boy play- ing c atch with his father wha is then felled by a heart attack. We see hint at age 20 going off to training camp only to be struck by misfortune. Then he mysteriously re-surfaces again at 36 to begin the comeback and lead the Knights to fame and a nt. There are a couple of sleazy women, and one as ge- nuine and wholesome as American Pie. Early in the film, there is a marvellous scene where Redford challenges a player thinly disguised as the Great Babe Ruth to a pitching-batting duel. Redford wins, of course, striking out Babe on three pitches. There are so many cliches throughout that about the only thing missing is the smell of hot dogs and cracker jacks. Why would a cliche-ridden film that stenches credibility to the nth degree be so appealing, so alluring? I guess what it's all about is a three hour metaphor of innocence, lost and re-gained; the triumph of good over evil; the notion that even the most impossible of dreams can come true if you live cleanly and stay away from temptations; and yes, Virginia, there really is a Santa Claus happy ending in life: all you have to do is believe. Much of the film is set in1939, the end of the Great Depression, but also the year the world was plunged into the dark evil of World War 2. The forces of good trium- phed in that struggle, too. The film centres around a sport that is a cliche for the American dream; baseball, where golden-haired boys from the heartland of America can play their way to fame and fortune and still be little boys all their life. (I don't think the film could have built around a hockey player from Kirkland Lake). The film is like a game of Trivial Pursuit: nostalgic, easy going, light and airy, yet with just enough nuance and twists to keep it interesting. It is almost the perfect film for the 1980's; a time when people are hungry for the past when things were easier somehow, when life wasn't a constant pressure cooker, when the forces of good and evil were sharply defined and hope could spring eternal in a ray of golden sunlight. "The Natural' is also a pleasant switch from the usual fare on the screen these days: there is no blood and guts spilling everywhere; no crude language; no heavy duty sex scenes; no blatant social statements. There is a dreamy, meandering kind of charm to it all, almost like going to a ball game, but more like sitting down to leaf through a book of Norman Rockwell paintings. The critics have called Redford superb in this film, and I have to agree. No other actor could have carried it off, not Clint Eastwood, Robert Duvall or Jack Nicholson. About the only other actor I can think of who might have been able to do the part justice would be a young Henry Fonda. Redford, in the film is the epitome of the All- American boy: handsome, tanned, golden-haired, square-jawed, naive but tough, brimming with self- confidence and a spirit that is just un-bustable. He got his muscles pitching hay on the family farm in Kansas, not pumping iron in a co-ed health studio. "The Natural' is a good film to see in the month of May, when the air is light and golden with the com- ing of summer. It is not a November or February film. Some critics are already saying it is Oscar-bound next year, and who's to argue with them. And who's to argue with the millions of people who have already seen it and enjoyed it. Like me. Catch "The Natural' even if you don't like baseball, and treat yourself to a different kind of film experience. Don't forget the hot dogs and cracker jack. apprepespegeeeer SP ER EES 2 2 2 2 2 2 AA A AAA Ed dt ddd Sadi - Not Much Fuss After promising for several years to bring in a freedom or access to government information bill, the Conservative government of Ontario finally unveiled the proposed legislation recently, and most informed observers immediately pointed out two very glaring . weaknesses. First of all there is the peculiar time frame attach- ed. The new bill will not apply to government files and information prior to July 1 of this year. Just why the new bill won't apply to ALL information on file with the govern- ment has not been made clear. But an even more serious flaw in this legislation in- volves who has the final say in what government infor- mation and files can be opened up to the public. The bill creates a new government post: an infor- mation commissioner. But he/she will only have the power to recommend that a certain piece of information or a certain file or dossier be made public. The final say on whether this comes about will rest with the Cabinet, the politicians. And if a member of Cabinet says no to releasing a file, that's the end of it. There is no independent review of that decision, not even to the courts of the land. In recent days, the new information legislation (pro- posed) has been blasted by editorial writers and colum- nists, who have pointed out that in effect, it won't change a darn thing in this province. The people of Ontario will still be faced with the same roadblocks in their quest to see information that has been compiled with their tax dollars by the government they elected. The distressing part about all this is that aside from the harping by columnists and editorial writers, there has not been much. of a public outcry about this severely in- adequate piece of legislation. Let's be very frank. Most members of the general public in Ontario could give two hoots about improved access to information. They are. much more concerned about jobs, the economy, inflation, and taxes. We doubt very much that any individual or group will be marching on Queens Park with placards flying to protest the Government action (or lack of action) on this issue. It is just not a high profile public issue, and the Con- servative Government of Canada recognizes it as such. That is why the Tories have handed down a bill without teeth, a bill that really does nothing. Sure, the columnists and editorial writers can slam the bill and tear their hair out over its shortcomings, but who cares. Some people are probably going to say the only reason these writers are upset at all is that they ~ won't have carte blanche accesss to make life more dif- ficult for the government. Most people in Ontario simply don't care whether they have access to government files and information. What they don't know won't hurt them. They trust the government and feel there will always be certain things a government must do which should not be available to the prying fingers of the public, let alone the media. Of course, free and open access to all government information should be a fundamental right of every citizen in this province. But it's not, never has been, and never will be the way this bill is written. But on the surface it looks good. There's a new com- missioner of information coming on stream, a new department probably, and the legislation itself. We suspect that when Premier Bill Davis and his Cabinet colleagues hit the election trail this fall or next spring, they will make reference to this legislation in glowing terms, and the people will nod appreciatively when told that the Government indeed has come through with its promise, once again. And if somebody dares to question the lack of teeth in this bill, the Premier will be so reassuring when he says the columnists and editorial writers don't know what they are talking about. Trust me, he'll say. The bill is a good one. And the people will nod their heads and say "we do trust you." TT mm---- ee