Category: Movies, Entertainment & Media

The Infinite Wisdom of Trey Parker and Matt Stone


ImagesI have two confessions to make.

First of all, I have been a fan of Trey Parker and Matt Stone since the premier of the first episode of South Park on August 13, 1997 – nearly 14 years ago.  I love everything they've ever written themselves (note to those who don't know: they did not write BASEketball, which I hated) and my feelings for them were only further solidified in Eugene O'Neill Theater two weeks ago, when they nearly killed me with The Book of Mormon.

I count them among a small number of the most brilliant people in entertainment and consider their satiric abilities unmatchable.  But it's not just that.  They are incredibly sharp intellectuals, which, in my book, is probably the biggest compliment.  They just get shit like only very few people do.  And don't get me started on the courage – these two do not bow their heads in front of anybody: whoever deserves it, gets it.  It's really breathtaking.

The second thing I have to admit is that I am sick and tired of people still (for nearly three years now) asking me the same questions about the Global Financial Crisis (aka Credit Crunch).  Just the other week someone wanted "to pick my brain" about it again.  So, I started explaining (again!), trying to make it simple, but still using unavoidable terminology so familiar to my fellow CFOs and Controllers, but apparently still a foreign language for the laymen: federal reserve rates, sub-prime lending, securitization, predatory lending, blah, blah, blah… I am looking into the man's eyes and see no understanding of what all of this has to do with his pension fund.  Why am I doing this? 

And then… Eureka!  "Margaritaville!!!"  In the aftermath of The Book of Mormon, I re-watched a few of my favorite South Park episodes, including the blessed Episode 3 of Season 13 (2009), Margaritaville.  The boys did it better than all analysts on screen or in print (of course!), but more importantly, they made it comprehensible like nobody else can.  As always, they managed to marry their uncanny perceptive powers with the  signature concise delivery, which resulted in the most  brilliant analysis and summation of the bizarre economic situation. 

So, please people, don't ask me anymore about this.  Click on the video below and you can have a four-minute taste of the Misters Parker and Stone's genius, and then go to THIS LINK and enjoy the full episode, so generously provided for your viewing by SouthParkStudios.com.  

And if you still don't get it, then, pretty please with the sugar on top, don't talk to me anymore – I don't have time for your lame asses. 

 

Warning: “Horrible Bosses”!


ANISTON-HORRIBLE-BOSSES A quick warning to my readers, dealing with difficult bosses on daily basis as a part of their job descriptions:  You will not be able to relate to the protagonists of "Horrible Bosses."

It  is not a comedic representation of the workplace environment, which I always welcome when it's done well.  It's a physical farce of the "Hangover" kind.  It has nothing to do with the reality of professional life.  As the matter of fact, it did not need to be about work at all.  The preposterous premise that three men, who know each other (!), abhor their bosses to the point that they (all three of them at the same time!) decide to commit murders, cancels any possibility of intellectual thinking behind the story (what story?!).  The people depicted in the movie – both bosses and employees could have been anybody.  This could be about husbands vs. wives (or other way around), students vs. teachers, athletes vs. coaches – you get it, right?  And everyone acts like a clown.  I wouldn't mind the shenanigans if the heroes had any recognizable characterizations.  Do you know anybody who would agree to drink a full glass of Scotch in his boss's office at 8:15 AM?

It's just so sad that it always happens like that in Hollywood.  First someone has a commercial success with a certain concept – vampires, zombies, ordinary people getting themselves into rediculously farcical situations, etc.  Then bunch of unoriginal "filmmakers" follow suit – concept remains the same, but characters and circumstances change slightly.  AND NOBODY CARES ABOUT THE STORY!  It's all tricks and gimmicks.

How unfortunate that fantastic Kevin Spacey, whom I deeply respect and who gave me two of my top twenty theatrical experiences (in "The Iceman Cometh" and "A Moon for Misbegotten") has agreed to make this.  I know he needs money for all the great artistic endeavors he champions, like TriggerStreet and The Old Vic, but still.  You want to see him play a really scary boss, get Swimming with Sharks (1994) from Netflix.

Just watch the two videos below for comparison.

 



        

CFO Folklore: Dealing with F@&ing Lawyers


Blog image As CFOs and controllers, we are constantly exposed to a variety of legal documents: security and financing agreements, leases, employment contracts, NDAs, new ventures formation, demand letters, term sheets, etc., etc.  And even though most of the financial professionals I know, including myself, are well-versed in these matters and can write a decent legal document themselves (hey, you cannot even get an MBA without taking Contractual Law), or at the very least can fully understand them, we are forced to deal with attorneys: a CEO feels more comfortable if he gets a bill. 

Hello!  This is business law.  We are not talking about defending anybody in court on murder or ponzi scheme charges, or suing somebody for fraud!  So, here is what usually happens.

Scenario 1:  I compose a document or construct an agreement outline addressing all necessary points, and send it to the corporate attorney.  He comes back with either, "This looks good," or he takes my points and, without changing anything, puts it into the format that he didn't even create himself – nowadays they all download templates from Blumberg's Law Products, which anyone can do.  A couple of weeks later I get a $2,000 bill.

Scenario 2: We receive a contract (let's say a Credit Line Agreement), I read it, make a long list of all the points that I believe need to be further negotiated with the bank, and send the contract with my list to the corporate attorney.  He comes back with, "I agree.  Let me know when it's ready for my final approval."  A couple of weeks later I get a $2,000 bill.

Ahhhhhh! 

Of course, there are special occasions when the intricacy of legalese needs to be explored and attorneys must be involved.  But, why the hell it's so intricate, anyway?  Doesn't it seem like a conspiracy to justify $450+/hour rates?  In organizational management we are always taught that some employees deliberately confuse their records to make themselves indispensable: nobody else can figure out what's going on.  Sounds familiar?

And the arrogance!  I can only think of one other profession that can compete with lawyers on the level of insolence – doctors.  They have no respect for anyone expect themselves.  Well, I am willing to forgive a cardiologist who has a courage to hold a human heart in his hands, or a neurosurgeon who may need to drill into my brain one day. 

But these legal MoFos?  The complex of knowledge I possess is far greater than that of any specialized attorney I know.  I ask, for example, if there are grounds for fiduciary violation in a case, and he ($550/hour) responds, "I have to look it up."  Yet, they dare to be condescending nevertheless!  Just last week a lawyer sent me a retainer agreement and wrote in the cover note, "It's a bit formal, but I hope you will understand it."  Are you fucking kidding me?!  I have four academic degrees and 20 years of executive experience (and he knows), and my own retainer agreement for consulting services, which I wrote myself, has more substance than your copied bullshit.

The worst thing about them, though, is that fucking professional camaraderie.  Try to talk to an attorney about a harm caused to you by another lawyer.  You think you are going to see fairness so wonderfully shown on "The Good Wife", or any other of those TV court dramas?  Nope!  They stop listening – THEY DON'T WANT TO HEAR ANYTHING ABOUT IT!  That's why ABA had to create grievance committees and appoint people who are obligated to review the complains, because otherwise there wouldn't be anybody you could tell about lawyers' violations.  Why do you think legal profession is not regulated by any government agency?  Because the legislature consists mostly of legal professionals.  They will never do anything against one another.

In "Philadelphia", just before dying, Tom Hanks (a gay attorney) tells Denzel Washington (another attorney who just won a discrimination case for him) an old joke: "What do you call a thousand lawyers chained together at the bottom of the ocean?  A good start."  They both like the joke.  Denzel's character even repeats it to someone else right away.  A very hopeful movie in many respects: the case is won, a formerly homophobic Mr. Washington's character finds in himself to defend a gay guy, AIDS-ridden Mr. Hank's character dies knowing he won, and his partner (played by Antonio Banderas) is somehow is not infected.  And the lawyers like the joke!!!  Very hopeful, very far from reality.            

Arnold Schwarzenegger: Just Your Average Opportunistic Boss


220px-Terminator1984movieposter Who can resist this?  The Governator has cheated and lied?  Noooo, you are kidding!!! I am sure millions of bloggers hit the keyboards running.

But wait a minute, I already wrote about this – just little over four months ago: CFO Folklore: When Your Boss's Secretary Becomes His Girlfriend.  Well, not about Arnie per se, but about bosses having affairs with their employees. 

Obviously, it was based on incidents I have witnessed in business, as a financial professional.  I wrote the piece from the inside perspective of frustrated CFOs and Controllers, who are forced to deal with that.  Yet, I used very generalized terms, because it is the most typical type of infidelity. 

I don't think I have to remind you about all political scandals with exactly the same premise.  I never thought that the only reason these incidents ignited public attention was people's relishing the dirt.  It is the relevance of these situations to every-day life that attracts people: "Oh, he is just like that dick I work for."  As the matter of fact, that January post is the third most popular item on this Blog – people relate.

There is always an enterprising (rarely smitten) young and ambitions intern/staffer/secretary/page (she or he) in the office of a powerful older man, who,  driven by desire to excel in life without too much effort, will pursue the boss with all her (his) youthful enthusiasm.  And of course, the older person is weakened: his male nature already has a propensity for imprudence; his morals are corrupted by power; he is ridden with temptation to taste something 20-25 years younger…  "What a poor man to do?"

As the matter of fact, small business owners have it better than more powerful public figures like Arnold Schwarzenegger or Bill Clinton.  The latter risk public humiliation and popularity votes; the former have almost nothing to fear in their little absolute monarchies.  

The truth is, I liked Mr. Schwarzenegger up until he went into politics.  I admired his drive to rise above his muscles.  He actually always seemed liked a pretty decent man to me – someone who, if he fell out of love, would just come clean, divorce her and then go on making babies with another woman.  I should have known that as soon as "political reasoning" kicked in, lying would commence.  That they kept quiet, so he wouldn't loose his supporters – it's just disgusting.  

It is uncanny, but the former action star's news of an out-of-wedlock child, hit much closer to the real-life prototype of Boss and His Secretary story I wrote in January – I've just recently learned that the secretary in question is actually pregnant, while the boss is still legally married to his wife of twenty years.  

I would like to propose a little contest.  My readers, if you know of a single male business owner over 50 year old, with the staff of more than 20 people, who never had any indiscretions, please let me know.  I will sing praises to him in these virtual pages.

How to Read People Through Their Communication Styles


If you are a business executive, CFOs and Controllers included, you cannot avoid the necessity of being able to grasp people's motivations based on external behavioral indicators.  Every person we encounter has his own hidden agendas and incentives, which we must decipher in order to be successful.  I previously talked about the effect people's priorities have on their attitudes (see Priorities and Attitudes).  It is a proven fact that humans' motivations can be read from the way they move, talk, look at you, even from the poses they strike. 

Filmmakers frequently speak about the subtext.  One of the basic rules of screenwriting is "show, don't explain."  Some theorists attribute the importance of this aspect to the visual nature of cinematic art. But the truth is exactly opposite: the ability to read subtext is natural.  This is what makes a movie believable and real to the audience: people watch an actor perform (especially, if he is a good actor) and pick up on the little clues of the character's inner-workings, because this is what we do in real life too.  

Subconsciously, we are all capable of recognizing particular body movements and voice intonations as expressions of motivations and intents.  The trick is to find this innate ability in yourself, isolate it, bring it into the prefrontal cortex, perfect it and use it to your advantage.  Start by observing people's communication styles – the fastest way to identify their intentions, to read into their primary concerns.

When people speak in a staccato style and quickly move from one subject on to the next one, what can we tell about their intentions?  Wouldn't it be reasonable to assume that they are determined to minimize the time consumption of every task they undertake or direct, that they driven by desire of accomplishment?

On the other hand, someone who apologizes for expressing his opinion three times within the same sentence and asks to be corrected if he makes mistakes, obviously is striving for amicability.  The ones who wait for your cues or keep quiet all the time are obviously unsure of themselves and don't want to be noticed.  Yet, if someone doesn't say anything, but flares his nostrils and drums his fingers on the desk, don't mistake him for anything else but the passive-aggressive about to explode.  And so on, and so forth.

So, let's go back to the movie-making.  Of course, I had a good reason to bring it up.  Films provide us with an enormous cache of visual references familiar to millions of people.  I have chosen a trailer for Mike Nichols's "Regarding Henry" to illustrate this topic because the 24-year-old screenwriter J. J. Abrams (yes, that very same J. J. Abrams who screwed us out of a satisfying "Lost" ending) used a dramatic turn in the plot that fundamentally affects the protagonist (played by the great Harrison Ford).  His life, attitude, tastes communication style- everything changes within the same movie.  It's a stark example of how a person's inner life affects his behavioral traits.