Reel Rewind: "Freakonomics"

English title - "Freakonomics"

Title is taken from the book Freakonomics: A Rogue Economist Explores The Hidden Side of Everything by Steven D. Levitt and Stephen J. Dubner

From the book of the same title, “Freakonomics” presents a number of the ideas and findings from the book in four major segments and in several, short, segment transitional conversations with Steven Levitt and Stephen Dubner. Having read the book a couple of years ago, I was looking forward to the film. The four film segments are: “A Roshanda By Any Other Name”, “Pure Corruption”, “It’s Not Always A Wonderful Life”, and “Can A Ninth Grader Be Bribed To Succeed?”

In “A Roshanda By Any Other Name” the discussion centers around the baby naming patterns of American parents. The specific focus is on black parents and white parents. Up until the 1960s, the naming of children by black parents and white parents was similar. At the time of the Civil Rights movement the naming pattern began to diverge. Black parents sought to differentiate themselves from white parents and began giving their children names that reflected a cultural connection to Africa, the Muslim religion, or a desire for uniqueness (watch for the “Unique” spelling bit – amusing!). Also bound up in this naming discussion is giving a child a name that would help in making him/her a success in life and not one that would contribute to a lackluster life. Unfortunately there is no “magic” name. For further investigation of this naming topic, I would suggest looking at the child names of couples in which one parent is black and the other is white, as well as other heteroracial couples and single racial couples; and studying the naming patterns in other countries.

The next segment in “Freakonomics” is “Pure Corruption”. Mix one part Shinto, one part Sumo, one part Stable, add a little Hierarchy and you have the makings of sport fixing Japanese style. As in all sports, competition is the name of the game and moving up in the rankings is always desired. But because Sumo wrestlers in Japan, from a very early age, live and train together in stables, there is a cooperative incentive to fix matches late in a tournament. Sumo wrestlers move up in rank by winning at least eight matches in a fifteen match tournament; so if in a fifteenth match of a tournament, Opponent A has eight wins and six losses and Opponent B has seven wins and seven losses, Opponent A can afford to let Opponent B win, who then also gains in ranking. Of course Opponent A would expect the same treatment, if necessary, from Opponent B in a future tournament. Perhaps I’m jaded by the workings of professional wrestling in the US, but I guess the findings don’t surprise me. Even a sport tied up with the Shinto religion is subject to secular sins.

“It’s Not Always A Wonderful Life” examines the connection between the legalization of abortion in the United States and the drop in crime rate. Though people may wonder what the world would be like if they were never born, this segment of “Freakonomics” postulates that the non-existence of children from lower socioeconomic women decreased the crime rate by not having potential criminals born. I have mixed feelings about this segment. I can understand that the reduction of some population groups can have an impact on criminal activity, but I think there have to be other contributing factors, not just one – state of the economy, level of education, increase in technology. In any case, if the crime rate has gone down, then that improves life for everyone and perhaps some version of “It’s A Wonderful Life” is possible for most.

The final segment in “Freakonomics” is “Can A Ninth Grader Be Bribed To Succeed?”. Focusing on two underachieving ninth grade boys, the experiment takes place in a Chicago-area school over one semester. Students who achieve Cs or above in their classes receive fifty dollars and are eligible for a drawing for five hundred dollars and a limousine ride. The payouts and drawings happen three times over the course of the semester. The two boys are followed during the experiment to see if they can bring up their grades to meet the fifty dollars criteria. One of the boys is a D/E student and the other one is a C/D one. There are ups and downs in the grades for both boys, but in the third and last time of checking grades, one of the boys (C/D) finally meets the criteria and gets fifty dollars. The fifty dollars (along with his mother’s offer to match it) was not enough of a motivation for the D/E student to meet the criteria; in fact he didn’t even improve to be a C/D student. On the other hand, the boy who eventually got the fifty dollars had shown a lot of self-motivation during the semester, in addition to his wanting to win the fifty dollars. If this experiment is done again, perhaps monetary tiers could be used – fifty for Cs, one hundred for Bs, one hundred fifty for As, and something for students below the criteria who show and sustain improvement over the time frame.

“Freakonomics” is a quick-paced documentary with lots of information and graphics thrown at the viewer throughout the film. Because of this, more than one viewing might be necessary to take in all the ideas and visuals presented. I know that there are things that, upon reflection, I don’t quite remember. For example, the transitional segment to “It’s Not Always A Wonderful Life” concerned Romania, but I’ve forgotten the point that was being made. Reading the book, whether before or after seeing the film can only help. The transitional segments are good and usually relate to the upcoming major segment. So if you like coming at things from a different perspective, then see “Freakononomics”; it will engage your mind.


Film Facts: Directors/Writers/Producers: Alex Gibney, Seth Gordon, Directors/Writers: Heidi Ewing, Rachel Grady, Eugene Jarecki, Morgan Spurlock, Writers/Producers: Peter Bull, Jeremy Chilnick, Writers: Steven Levitt, Stephen Dubner, Cinematographers: Junji Aoki, Tony Hardmon, Darren Lew, Daniel Marracino, Rob VanAlkemade, Editor/Producer: Sloane Klevin, Editors: Douglas Blush, Tova Goodman, Nelson Ryland, Michael Taylor, Musicians: Paul Brill, Michael Furjanic, Human, Peter Nashel, Michael Wandmacher, Producers: Peter Cerbin, Rafi Chaudry, Joanna Chejade-Bloom, Christina Gonzalez, Alexander Johnes, Damon Martin, Dan O’Meara, Michael Rohan, Mary Rolich, Chris Romano, Michiko Toyoma, Chad Troutwine Production Company: Chad Troutwine Films

Film Type: Documentary, Cast: Zoe Sloane (Blake), Jade Viggiano (High School Girl), Adesuwa Addy Iyare (Temptress Mother), Greg Crowe (Jonny the Mechanic), Jalani McNair (Loser), Carl Alleyne (Boyfriend), Samuel Soifer (Jake), Andrew Greiche (Jake), Amancaya Aguilar (Mercedes), Hassan Brown (Father), Kelli Chaves (High School Girl), Alyssa Wheeldon (High School Girl), Kellli Gerardi (Lexus), James Leibow (Himself), Michael MacAllister (Himself), Length: 86’, Language: English, Country: United States of America, Year: 2010
Film trailer
United States release date November 2010


Images:
Left: Front side of ticket for “Freakonomics”
Center: Graphic interpretation of the “Freakonomics” segment “Pure Corruption” created by Adrean Darce Brent

Right: Poster of “Freakonomics” from the website imdb.com

Reel Rewind: "Mahler Auf Der Couch"

German title – “Mahler Auf Der Couch” / English title – “Mahler On The Couch”
The English title is a direct translation from the German and therefore the English title is perfect.

The structure of “Mahler Auf Der Couch” has the story of Gustav and Alma Mahler’s marriage told through the talks Gustav has with Sigmund Freud over the course of two days in the Netherlands. It was the discovery of Alma’s affair with the architect Walter Gropius that prompted Gustav to seek out Freud’s counsel. “That it happened is fact. How it happened is fiction.” - screen title. The interaction between Mahler and Freud begins as a battle of wills (and wits) as Mahler is resistant to Freud’s probes and rejects his implications regarding marriage to a woman nineteen years his junior. During a morning walk together among rustling trees, Mahler opens up to Freud and begins the story.

The film toggles between the session in the Netherlands and the unfolding tale, and throughout the film quotes from people who knew Gustav and Alma are presented. Alma is young, vivacious, and studying the piano and Gustav is older, staid, and an accomplished musician when they meet at a party. Although she is loved by Alexander von Zemlinsky, who “would have been the better choice” - Freud, Alma falls in love with Gustav and by doing so she loses her music. A condition of her marriage to Gustav, is that Alma no longer write musical compositions – only Gustav can. From a twenty-first century perspective, I find this deplorable. And what is more disturbing is that Alma knew she would have to give up her music before marrying Gustav. Even though she is in anguish over Gustav’s demand, Alma nevertheless freely enters into the marriage.

As “Mahler Auf Der Couch” progressed, I found that I enjoyed the scenes with Mahler and Freud, more than the ones depicting Gustav’s and Alma’s life together. This is probably due to the interaction between the two men that was at times amusing, as well as the appeal to the psychology student within me. Gustav is consumed with music, but does love Alma and their two daughters. It is the death of one of the daughters that causes Alma’s breakdown and subsequent stay at a spa where she meets Walter Gropius. In his session with Freud, Gustav at first blocks out the confrontation he had with Alma, but slowly the intensity of the event is revealed. Alma explodes the repressed feelings she had buried during the marriage. When Gustav tells her it has all been for “our music”, she retorts “your music!” - after all, hers has been forbidden. Amazingly, Alma decides to stay with Gustav, but she does continue to see Walter.

Mahler’s music in the film is performed by the Swedish Radio Symphony Orchestra and conducted by Esa-Pekka Salonen (former Music Director of the Los Angeles Philharmonic). Having experienced many times Salonen’s manner of conducting the LA Phil, I was happy to see (hear) his involvement in the film. Although my knowledge of Mahler’s works is limited, I am sorry that my knowledge of Alma’s works is non-existent. The lesson to be taken from this fictionalized real life story – don’t let love bar you from the passion and joy of what you do well or that which gives meaning to your life and defines who you are. Perhaps, before her marriage, Alma could have benefitted from sessions with Freud and there would now be a film about her - “Schindler Spielt Klavier” (“Schindler Playing Piano”).

At the end of the screening, Felix Adlon, a director/writer, as well as actors Barbara Romaner and Nina Berton of “Mahler Auf Der Couch” were introduced for the Q & A session. Felix said that it took a long time to find someone to play Alma and Barbara came to the project via the theatre. Barbara loved the two years of rehearsal time for the film, which was in contrast to the usual few weeks of rehearsal when doing a play. Although Nina didn’t speak, she had played the singer Anna von Mildenberg (Gustav’s former lover), who I believe would have been Gustav’s “better choice”. And the choice to see the film? No regrets on my part.


Film Facts: Directors/Writers: Felix O. Adlon, Percy Adlon, Cinematographer: Benedict Neuenfels, Editor: Jochen Kunstler, Musician: Gustav Mahler, Producers: Eleonore Adlon, Burkhard W. R. Ernst, Eberhard Junkersdorf, Wolfgang Jurgan, Heinrich Mis, Konstantin Seitz, Hubert von Spreti, Production Company: ARD Degeto Film

Film Type: Biography/Drama, Cast: Barbara Romaner (Alma Mahler), Johannes Silberschneider (Gustav Mahler), Karl Markovics (Sigmund Freud), Friedrich Mücke (Walter Gropius), Eva Mattes (Anna Moll), Lena Stolze (Justine Mahler-Rose), Nina Berten (Anna von Mildenburg), Karl Fischer (Carl Moll), Mathias Franz Stein (Alexander von Zemlinsky), Max Mayer (Max Burckhard0, Michael Dangl (Bruno Walter), Michael Rotschopf (Alfred Roller), Manuel Witting (Gustav Klimt), Simon Hatzl (Arnold Bruce), Johanna Orsini-Rosenberg (Berta Zuckerkandl), Length: 98’, Language: German, Countries: Germany, Austria, Year: 2010
Film trailer
No United States release date set as of this post.


Images:
Left: Front side of the ticket for “Mahler Auf Der Couch”
Center: Graphic interpretation of “Mahler Auf Der Couch” created by Adrean Darce Brent

Right: Poster title of “Mahler Auf Der Couch” from the website moviemaze.de

Los Angeles Film Festival

The Los Angeles Film Festival has been around in one version or another since 1971. Its current version began sixteen years ago in 1995. My first attendance at the current festival was its tenth year in 2004 where among the seven films I saw were – “I’ll Sleep When I’m Dead”, “Feux Rouges” (“Red Lights”), and “Confidences Trop Intimes” (“Intimate Stangers”) and all three of them at the Directors Guild. Prior to 2010, the last time I went to the festival was in 2008, its fourteenth year. I saw ten films that year and among them were “Encounters At The End Of The World” at the Majestic Crest, “La France” at the AMC Avco, and “The Poker House” at the Majestic Crest.

I am only attending the 2010 LA FilmFest today and seeing two films. They are:

“Mahler Auf Der Couch” (“Mahler On The Couch”)

“Freakonomics”

Part of the reason that I’m only seeing two films this year, is that the festival has moved from its recent Westwood location (more convenient for me) to Downtown Los Angeles. And as I didn’t purchase tickets in advance, it’s the Rush line for me and standing outside the Regal Cinemas until almost the films’ start times before being able to buy tickets. I hope the festival returns to Westwood, but I’m afraid that is unlikely. No matter, it is a good festival for seeing international films.


Image is of the Los Angeles Film Festival e-mail banner

Summer Solstice 2010: Stonehenge Style!

Welcome the Summer Sun! Happy Summer Everyone!

Reel Rewind: “Anton Chekhov’s The Duel”

English title – “Anton Chekhov’s The Duel” / Russian language title – “А. П. Чехова "Дуэль"
As I do not speak, read, or write Russian, and since, as of this post, there is no actual Russian version of this film, the Russian language title was obtained through an online translation site. Thought it would be interesting to see the film title in the language of the source material’s author.

The setting in which I saw “Anton Chekhov’s The Duel” was a preview screening presented by the Laemmle Sneak Preview Club, an activity of the Laemmle theatre chain. Since seeing the film was free, the small theatre was full, but I managed to sit in the general area that I like despite the fact I arrived a few minutes before the scheduled start time (a sporting event delayed me). A young man introduced the film and said that people should “stay put” after the screening for the Q & A with one of the film’s producers – Donald Rosenfeld. Gee, usually one invites people to stay for the Q & A or to join the after film discussion, or even a “please remain seated”, but the phrase “stay put” was a bad choice of words or perhaps he was channeling the character of Von Koren and his Germanic tendencies.

Von Koren is one element of the duality brought forth in “Anton Chekhov’s The Duel”, representing rationality and the other element is the main character, Laevsky, representing irrationality. Filming a work of literature is always problematic – how true to the story does one stay, which aspects can be eliminated, what can be added (or should anything be added). I am in the midst of reading Chekhov’s novella and the on screen depiction of scenes I’ve already read are very good and the film seems to have captured the pacing of the piece and the summertime life in the Caucasus. The conflict in the small Caucasian town is between Laevsky and von Koren, young men with different philosophies in the approach to living. Laevsky, a government official who is living with a married woman, spends his time sleeping, drinking, playing cards and working as little as possible. Von Koren, a zoologist who has ambitions to undertake a mapping expedition in the northeastern part of Russia, disapproves of the life Laevsky lives and its influence on the people of the town. Von Koren very much wants to eliminate Laevsky and prevent him from propagating and spreading his less-than-ideal way of life. Darwinism in practice.

Perhaps filming in the Caucasus would have been ideal, but the stand-in Croatia provides wonderful scenery for the pivotal picnic and duel scenes. Nadia, the married woman living with Laevsky, reveals aspects of her character (inebriation and flirtation) at the picnic that are not at all flattering, but certainly compliment Laevsky. A match in immorality? I like the location of the duel between one-time friends Laevsky and von Koren in the cave – the closeness and compactness adds to the tension of the event and affords limited physical and emotional escape. And yet escape is still possible for both – will they take it? Usually I am impervious to the music of a film, but the score of “Anton Chekhov’s The Duel” is lovely and contributes to the atmosphere of the slow, easygoing life in the Caucasus town. Secondary characters – Marya, Samoylenko, Sheshlovsky – add simpler perspectives to the intellectual discussions initiated by Laevsky and von Koren. I am looking forward to finishing the novella and the film has only increased my desire to do so.

I did “stay put” for the Q & A with Donald Rosenfeld, but only because the sporting event that delayed my arrival had ended and not in victory for the team I supported. No celebration for me. The interviewer was a film critic from the “LA Weekly” and Donald talked about wanting to go with unknowns for the film, but who did have acting experience. Financing the project and all the surrounding activities took four years for the film to be completed. Donald told the usual movie stories of substitutions, changes, and improvisations during the production. My departure from the theatre was less hectic than my arrival, but I went as quickly as I could home to minimize hearing the sounds of celebration for a victory that was not mine. At least the evening had provided enjoyment of another kind. The sporting event duel may have been a dud for me, but “Anton Chekhov’s The Duel” was a winner.


Film Facts: Director: Dover Koshashvili, Writer/Producer: Mary Bing, Novelist: Anton Chekhov, Cinematographer: Paul Sarossy, Editor: Kate Williams, Musician: Angelo Milli, Producers: Suza Horvat, Per Melita, Igor Nola, Frank Pavich, Donald Rosenfeld, Production Company: Duel Productions

Film Type: Drama, Cast: Andrew Scott (Laevsky), Fiona Glascott (Nadia), Tobias Menzies (Von Koren), Niall Buggy (Samoylenko), Nicholas Rowe (Sheshkovsky), Michelle Fairley (Marya), Simon Trinder (Postal Superintendent), Debbie Chazen (Olga), Graham Turner (Atchmianov Senior), Jeremy Swift (Deacon), Length: 95’, Language: English, Country: United States, Year: 2009
United States release date Friday 18 June 2010


Images:
Left: Front side of the ticket for “Anton Chekhov’s The Duel”
Center: Graphic interpretation of “Anton Chekhov’s The Duel” created by Adrean Darce Brent

Right: Front side of the “Anton Chekhov’s The Duel” postcard

Sixth At Sonny’s: So Sad And So Bad

For the first time during the 2010 NBA Finals I went to Sonny McLean’s to watch a series game between the Boston Celtics and Los Angeles Lakers. The Celtics were leading the series three games to two and I was looking forward to celebrating an eighteenth Celtics championship with others at the New England bar, or at least watching a high caliber professional basketball game from the team I support. Neither happened.

My arrival at Sonny’s was three hours before the start of the basketball game. I knew the place would become crowded and I wanted to get a seat in a booth. Plus I could watch some of the Red Sox game against the Diamondbacks. Saw Wayne while waiting for the Red Sox game to begin, and I tried reading The Duel by Anton Chekhov, but the rock music that was playing and Sharon’s (only one working the bar at that time) constant checking to see if I needed anything made that rather difficult. Eventually I ordered the Shrimp Avocado salad, sans olives and with ranch on the side, and began watching the Red Sox. By that time a dozen more people had arrived, including the former owner, Jim, and he joined Wayne in the small area at the top of the staircase. I was joined at my table by several nurses who were relative newcomers to Sonny’s (first and second timers). The number of people entering Sonny’s had increased, as well as the corresponding noise level, which made conversation a futile endeavor. So just ate and watched the Red Sox take the lead against the Diamondbacks before all the televisions were switched to the NBA Finals pregame show.

Most of the faces in the bar were unfamiliar to me, though over the course of the evening I did see some familiar ones (the working - Jen, Lauren, Scooter, Mike and the watching – Tom, Hammy, Dave. Unfortunately, the same could not be said of the Boston Celtics. The way they played basketball tonight was unfamiliar and nothing familiar showed up during the game against the Los Angeles Lakers. Where were the Boston Celtics tonight? Definitely not in the Staples Center - perhaps still in transit from Boston? They had better arrive on Thursday night! I was expecting a great basketball game tonight – one where the score was close and the lead would go back and forth throughout. And of course, the eventual win for Boston. Instead, I and others, were subjected to a subpar performance that set a NBA postseason record – not the type of record the Celtics should be setting. The shooting was terrible, rebounding was intermittent, and free throwing was more miss than hit – those points should be automatic. There was cheering and clapping in Sonny’s during the first half of the game, but less so in the second half as the point differential became greater. First quarter – Boston 18, Los Angeles 28; second quarter – Boston 31, Los Angeles, 51; third quarter – Boston 51, Los Angeles 76; fourth quarter – Boston 67, Los Angeles 89.

Earlier, when I first arrived at Sonny’s, I heard a woman exclaim that “This feels like being back home!” She was commenting on the physical sports ambience of the bar, but I’m sure the result of this game did not give her the positive sports emotion of back home in New England. The series is tied at three games apiece and the seventh and deciding game will be played on Thursday. I won’t be back at Sonny’s for that game, as I’m going to a movie preview of “Anton Chekhov's The Duel” that night. But I will immediately use one of the current technological instruments, i.e. cell phone, to check the score at the end of the screening. I’ll be hoping to see a Boston Celtics championship! The one positive sports outcome of the night was the Boston Red Sox winning the first game of their three game series with the Arizona Diamondbacks, by a score of 6 to 3. New Englanders still have something about which to cheer. On Thursday they will want another.



Images:
Left: Boston Celtics logo (facebook.com)
Center: Sonny McLean’s logo (sonnymcleans.com)

Right: Los Angeles Lakers logo (facebook.com)

Party Games Day

This afternoon I traveled to Mar Vista to join a group of liked-minded people who enjoy playing board games. Locations of the bus stops from my origination point have changed, so even getting to the venue was an adventure game of seek-and-find. Although the social group to which I belong, My People Connection, has no religious affiliation, the Party Games Day venue was at St. Bede’s Church which is a convenient location for the Event Coordinators, Brian and Jen.

As this event was cross-posted on a couple of other social sites, there were six tables of people already playing games when I arrived a half hour later than planned. Before I started playing games, I watched a game of "Moods" in which Jen was playing. I’ve played “Moods” at a previous Games Day and it definitely puts your acting skills to the test. When “Moods” was finished, I joined in a game of “Wits & Wagers” which combined the people from Jen’s table and another group who had finished playing “Ca$h ‘n Gun$”. Because of the number of people playing, we were put into seven teams. I was teamed with a woman named Pam, who I had not previously met. “Wits & Wagers is a trivia game that lets you bet on anyone’s answer. So you can win by making educated guesses, by playing the odds, or by knowing the interests of your friends. It can be taught in 2 minutes, played in 25 minutes, and accommodates up to 20 people in teams.” – boardgamegeek.com. I had played “Wits & Wagers” once before and as I like trivia/knowledge games, I was happy to be playing it again. Usually one round consists of seven questions to be answered and wagered, however, we ended up answering and wagering on eight questions. Do you know the answers? Here are the questions (answers below):

A. How many elevators are there in the Empire State Building?

B. In what year did John Smith settle Jamestown, the first British permanent in the New World?

C. How old was Wolfgang Amadeus Mozart when he wrote his first opera?

D. In what year was it discovered that humans have different blood types?

E. How many feet tall are the letters in the Hollywood sign?

F. As of 2005, how many horses have won the Triple Crown?

G. In what year was the Republican Party founded?

H. How many Starbucks locations worldwide were there in 1995?

Unfortunately, there was only one question to which Pam and I had the right answer – the Mozart one – and we ended the game in last place and with no chips. But I have added to my collection of trivia facts and that’s always a good outcome.

The second game I played was “Catch Phrase”. This was the first time I played this game. There were ten of us and we were divided into two team of five. I was on a team with Barbara, Rhonda, Stacy, and Terry. The other team consisted of David, Mary T, Melissa, Pam, and Steve. The game moved quickly (once everyone understood about the buttons) and movement was important - “'Cause if the buzzer goes off while you're holding the disk, the other guys get the point in CATCH PHRASE... the fast-passing, fast-talking game.” – boardgamegeek.com. The easiest on screen word I had was “Thanksgiving” to which I gave the clue “holiday in November”. The hardest word I had was “Machiavellian” and I had totally forgotten that Machiavelli had written The Prince, so I was stumped and I fumbled as to the clues to give the team. Needless to say on that word the buzzer went off and the team lost that round. And I won’t even tell you about “Drugstore Cowboy”. Ugh! Even though the team I was on wasn’t victorious, there was lots of laughter during the game and everyone seemed to enjoy playing. I definitely would play “Catch Phrase” again.

The final game of the afternoon for me was “Dixit”. This was the second time I played this game. Joining me were Barbara, David, Mary T, Stacy, and Terry. The official game instructions state that the storyteller should use a sentence to describe the card that will be played. However, the last time I played, as well as this time, we just used one word to indicate the “story”. The game has sort of an “if…then” scoring system. “If nobody or everybody finds the correct picture, the storyteller scores 0, and each of the other players scores 2. Otherwise the storyteller and whoever found the correct answer scores 3. Players score 1 point for every vote gotten by their own pic.” - boardgamegeek.com. I had two turns as the storyteller and my first story was “Complication” and that was a good turn as some people pick my card and some did not. The next time the storyteller turn came my way, I told the story of “Life”. Unfortunately, no one picked my interpretation of “Life”, so no points for me. At the end of the game, Stacy had won and I tied for last place with Terry. It is a challenging balance to give a word that describes a card that some people will get and others won’t, plus being dependent on the other cards played. If nothing else, I do like the “Dixit” card illustrations.

While we were playing “Dixit”, Jen came over and said that she was leaving to switch with Brian, who had returned home from an outing with their son Finn, and that Brian would come to the church to close out the day. Finally gave Jen the three DVD insert covers for “Star Wars: The Clone Wars” that I got when the Blockbuster near me had a closing sale in late 2009. Saw Brian for a few minutes before I left to go home. Fortunately the bus stop locations hadn’t changed in Mar Vista, so no adventure on the return home portion of my trip. Only one last item, the “Wit & Wagers” answers!


A. 73, B. 1607, C. 12, D. 1901, E. 45, F. 11, G. 1854, H. 676


Images:
Left: Box cover of "Wits & Wagers" from the website boardgamegeek.com
Center: "Catch Phrase" disk from the website boardgamegeek.com

Right: Box cover of "Dixit" from the website boardgamegeek.com