You hear it often enough, or perhaps read it would be more precise, "no one is bigger than the party," no single woman or man is bigger than the political entity to which they belong, present predicaments, as interminable as they seem, tax ephemeral in relation to its longevity, whose preservation remains crisp and paramount, whose agitations are as speculative as they seem foregone.
It's not that the speculations aren't sound or qualified by alluring probabilities, but multidimensional environments, those multifaceted enough to withstand authoritarian attempts to corral them, constantly change, thereby introducing unforeseen characteristics which can modify projected estimates and tarnish reasonable assumptions, some of them as wicked as Rowling's Grindelwald (Johnny Depp) or as progressive as Bernie Sanders, the point being that unless your jurisdiction lacks variety, your best laid plans may resoundingly fluctuate.
If you can't manage the fluctuation.
Politics isn't an individual branch of Esso or a fast food chain, although I wish it was much more boring again after seeing what it's wildly become.
Grindelwald isn't like most populists.
He's respectful and sympathetic and calm and rational, at least when he first meets someone and goes out of his way to woo them.
He's like the populist who catches more flies with honey, likely because he's grown tired of hiring new staff and training people who may quit anyway.
His song's sweet and humble and unassuming and non-confrontational, and it appeals to many of the upset or lost or downtrodden wizards and witches he meets behind the scenes.
As the first Fantastic Beasts film and the Harry Potter novels point out, he's clearly deluded himself into thinking bureaucratic dysfunction should by divinely remedied, and his remarkable power should be the agent which foments healing, the storm he unleashes at the end of Crimes telling another story, although Rowling doesn't shy away from bluntly critiquing stubborn decisions made by ministries emboldened by systemic pride.
Thus, the derelict and the disaffected find the lure of the populists enticing inasmuch as they promise order and utility for those have been objectively cast aside, an order that would be impossible to control even loosely without an efficient bureaucracy, the absence of which would likely cause their followers to dreamily recall bygone days of ill-temperament.
In the aftermath.
You can slowly take down a powerful establishment by gradually downsizing it for 20 years or so, but if you cut it all at once and destroy its infrastructure, the infrastructure your followers rely on to feed themselves and find shelter, their euphoria will quickly turn to disillusion when they realize there's nothing good left to eat.
Which they can afford.
Having a credit card bill that's hard to pay off is different from not being able to buy something.
The Crimes of Grindelwald paints a grim portrait upon which misfits are canvassed.
Newt Scamander (Eddie Redmayne), Tina Goldstein (Katherine Waterston), Queenie Goldstein (Alison Sudol), and Jacob Kowalski (Dan Fogler) persist interdimensionally within, as mad ambition contends with institutional privilege, and distraught lovers merge hopes and regrets.
I was sad when I realized "the greater good" was a double entendre, i.e., you can be altruistic like Spock at the end of Star Trek II, at all times really, which I initially thought was its sole meaning, or you can pursue good for the greater, or transfer all power and privilege to an unaccountable few.
The ministry may be somewhat obtuse but they maintain a peaceful mildly prosperous status quo.
And you can disagree with them.
It's quite strange, this disagreement that's supposedly so highly valued.
It's like if you disagree with the government you're delegitimized even if it simultaneously seeks profound criticisms.
The key is to not try to make sense of it, or at least not to think you've made sense of it, even if you've written or are writing a book that claims to have made sense of it, because it will never ever make much sense, at least for a very long time.
Keeps things interesting though.
Keeps things real.
Bewildering.
Mysterious.
Showing posts with label David Yates. Show all posts
Showing posts with label David Yates. Show all posts
Tuesday, December 4, 2018
Friday, November 25, 2016
Fantastic Beasts and Where to Find Them
Seemingly eccentric fey dissimulated nuances underscore the symphonically seminal seductive Newt Scamander (Eddie Redmayne), his offbeat orchestrations xylophonically zephyring crazed ritzy zigzags, since, you see, he's aware, he's aware, he's aware of woebegone wizarding wilt as stern and dismissive as ridden-stricked guilt, stilted passionless unyielding observant trusts, where difference remains shunned, locked-up in cuffs, hufflepuffed heart a beating in menagerie, secreting repleting so dissidently, to see attitudes change having decoded blunders, a transmuted sideline's reformed as a wonder!
In thunderous.
Zoology.
I doubt Queen Hatshepsut encountered such disdain.
And don't really know if he hopes to start a zoo. Or, a, magizoo.
Sigh.
Nonetheless, globe trotting in search of versed beasties, Scamander lands in New York heading west.
But his briefcase disappears, is accidentally switched with another, some of its residents escaping into feisty urban playgrounds.
He's also arrested by a disgraced auror (Katherine Waterston as Tina) with whom he eventually strikes up a friendship along with her nurturing sister Queenie (Alison Sudol) and a curious flabbergasted muggle (Dan Fogler as Kowalski).
Before he can stun the wizarding world with his dashing discoveries however, he must first find his tacit treasures and prevent a newfound obscurus (Ezra Miller as Credence Barebone)(a destructive force created when a magical child's gifts are violently suppressed) from joining forces with a wicked exclamation (Colin Farrell as Graves).
All the while NewYork's magical community manoeuvres to hide their existence from suspecting No-Mages (American muggles), who are afraid of their tremendous gifts, and hope to see them enervatingly exposed.
A bit of a pickle.
Spiked X-Men style.
Fantastic Beasts and Where to Find Them impresses as it expands Harry Potter lore.
Demonstrating that Rowling and Yates can keep delivering fresh thoughtful and entertaining narratives which provide hungry fans with fertile feasts even if they don't involve Harry Potter, it enticingly develops new characters with innocent depth and capably composes multilevelled meritorious measures (ethics, politics, the individual, the general, the new, the newt . . .).
Apart from the ruminations regarding war between muggles and magicians.
That is way way X-Men and seemed somewhat too grandiose, too tacked-on for a story about Newt Scamander.
These are epic times!
And the collective mindwash is so Jupiter Ascending.
Eddie Redmayne may currently be my favourite actor, his commanding poise and dignity subtly electrifying animated eccentricities.
Undeniably.
Note: I would have added at least 10 minutes to the exploration of Scamander's domain and an additional cheesy scene near the end where he romantically shows Tina his life's work, possibly with Queenie and Kowalski courting within as well.
Probably being saved for a sequel.
I wanted more fantastic beasts, less armageddon!
Can someone cast the independent Newt Scamander American Honeyesque spell?
Quickly, before there are 6 more big budget end-of-the-world blowouts!
Is working at a University really that tumultuous?
For heaven's sake!
In thunderous.
Zoology.
I doubt Queen Hatshepsut encountered such disdain.
And don't really know if he hopes to start a zoo. Or, a, magizoo.
Sigh.
Nonetheless, globe trotting in search of versed beasties, Scamander lands in New York heading west.
But his briefcase disappears, is accidentally switched with another, some of its residents escaping into feisty urban playgrounds.
He's also arrested by a disgraced auror (Katherine Waterston as Tina) with whom he eventually strikes up a friendship along with her nurturing sister Queenie (Alison Sudol) and a curious flabbergasted muggle (Dan Fogler as Kowalski).
Before he can stun the wizarding world with his dashing discoveries however, he must first find his tacit treasures and prevent a newfound obscurus (Ezra Miller as Credence Barebone)(a destructive force created when a magical child's gifts are violently suppressed) from joining forces with a wicked exclamation (Colin Farrell as Graves).
All the while NewYork's magical community manoeuvres to hide their existence from suspecting No-Mages (American muggles), who are afraid of their tremendous gifts, and hope to see them enervatingly exposed.
A bit of a pickle.
Spiked X-Men style.
Fantastic Beasts and Where to Find Them impresses as it expands Harry Potter lore.
Demonstrating that Rowling and Yates can keep delivering fresh thoughtful and entertaining narratives which provide hungry fans with fertile feasts even if they don't involve Harry Potter, it enticingly develops new characters with innocent depth and capably composes multilevelled meritorious measures (ethics, politics, the individual, the general, the new, the newt . . .).
Apart from the ruminations regarding war between muggles and magicians.
That is way way X-Men and seemed somewhat too grandiose, too tacked-on for a story about Newt Scamander.
These are epic times!
And the collective mindwash is so Jupiter Ascending.
Eddie Redmayne may currently be my favourite actor, his commanding poise and dignity subtly electrifying animated eccentricities.
Undeniably.
Note: I would have added at least 10 minutes to the exploration of Scamander's domain and an additional cheesy scene near the end where he romantically shows Tina his life's work, possibly with Queenie and Kowalski courting within as well.
Probably being saved for a sequel.
I wanted more fantastic beasts, less armageddon!
Can someone cast the independent Newt Scamander American Honeyesque spell?
Quickly, before there are 6 more big budget end-of-the-world blowouts!
Is working at a University really that tumultuous?
For heaven's sake!
Tuesday, August 2, 2016
The Legend of Tarzan
I suppose The Legend of Tarzan is an adventure film, an action film, a story, a, legend, not a penetrating critical essay examining European colonialist practices in Africa and the resultant horrors they unwittingly released.
Thus, in the final moments, as a British aristocrat who was raised in the wild by fictional mangani apes celebrates the fact that he thwarted the ruthless plans of a self-starting Belgian to brutally enslave the Congo, the entire country, human and beast alike, united behind this altruistic white man, I should have forgotten about the following century of violence and joined in the joyous festivities.
Oddly, The Legend of Tarzan is an American film that champions blue blood as opposed to hard work, the hard working risk takers's flagrant strategic planning unquestionably no match for his adversary's aesthetic environmental nobility.
In the context of the film, this is a good thing, for Tarzan (Alexander Skarsgård) succeeds and the ignominious Leon Rom (Christoph Waltz) is devoured by crocodiles, and the people of the Congo can continue to exist as they have for millennia, beholden to no one besides themselves, as Tarzan does not seek to divinely rule.
But if you dig deeper, it's more like a clever manifestation of white supremacy either way.
A no win scenario for Africans.
The evil religious one who clearly considers himself superior and wants to enslave the population is defeated by the good laissez-faire one whom everyone in the country, including the animals, regards as if he's an omniscient god.
African and American characters alike are given prominent roles within that are combatively fierce and strong.
But none are as strong as blue blood Tarzan, who is mightier than all and has therefore indirectly upheld aristocratic British class privileges.
Apart from all this, even if you overlook all of this, the film's not that great.
It starts out well, introducing characters I wanted to learn more about while establishing a narrative I wanted to eagerly follow.
But there's just way too much sentiment, too many stock characters having predictable diminutive conversations in cliché situations.
Apart from George Washington Williams (Samuel L. Jackson) who impressed and functioned like a colonialist conscience.
It moves too quickly, the scenes that try to slow down the pace a bit and develop some character are far too short and adversarial, like the production team's trying to accelerate the interactions so you don't have time to figure out how awful they are.
A lot of cool stuff does happen with the animals and I've always dreamed of seeing an ending like The Legend of Tarzan's within a different context.
Still though, gross historical aberrations, the double white supremacist whammy, and characters relying on underdeveloped merit.
Elusive indoctrination.
Clever in its villainous duplicity.
Thus, in the final moments, as a British aristocrat who was raised in the wild by fictional mangani apes celebrates the fact that he thwarted the ruthless plans of a self-starting Belgian to brutally enslave the Congo, the entire country, human and beast alike, united behind this altruistic white man, I should have forgotten about the following century of violence and joined in the joyous festivities.
Oddly, The Legend of Tarzan is an American film that champions blue blood as opposed to hard work, the hard working risk takers's flagrant strategic planning unquestionably no match for his adversary's aesthetic environmental nobility.
In the context of the film, this is a good thing, for Tarzan (Alexander Skarsgård) succeeds and the ignominious Leon Rom (Christoph Waltz) is devoured by crocodiles, and the people of the Congo can continue to exist as they have for millennia, beholden to no one besides themselves, as Tarzan does not seek to divinely rule.
But if you dig deeper, it's more like a clever manifestation of white supremacy either way.
A no win scenario for Africans.
The evil religious one who clearly considers himself superior and wants to enslave the population is defeated by the good laissez-faire one whom everyone in the country, including the animals, regards as if he's an omniscient god.
African and American characters alike are given prominent roles within that are combatively fierce and strong.
But none are as strong as blue blood Tarzan, who is mightier than all and has therefore indirectly upheld aristocratic British class privileges.
Apart from all this, even if you overlook all of this, the film's not that great.
It starts out well, introducing characters I wanted to learn more about while establishing a narrative I wanted to eagerly follow.
But there's just way too much sentiment, too many stock characters having predictable diminutive conversations in cliché situations.
Apart from George Washington Williams (Samuel L. Jackson) who impressed and functioned like a colonialist conscience.
It moves too quickly, the scenes that try to slow down the pace a bit and develop some character are far too short and adversarial, like the production team's trying to accelerate the interactions so you don't have time to figure out how awful they are.
A lot of cool stuff does happen with the animals and I've always dreamed of seeing an ending like The Legend of Tarzan's within a different context.
Still though, gross historical aberrations, the double white supremacist whammy, and characters relying on underdeveloped merit.
Elusive indoctrination.
Clever in its villainous duplicity.
Saturday, July 30, 2011
Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows, Part 2
The final battle between Harry Potter (Daniel Radcliffe) and Lord Voldemort (Ralph Fiennes) has been materialized in David Yates's Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows, Part 2.
Lacking the need to establish purpose and point, this is a film that gets right down to it.
And right down to it it does get.
On the hunt for Voldemort's remaining horcruxes, Harry, Ron (Rupert Grint), and Hermione (Emma Watson), with the help of the conniving Griphook (Warwick Davis), sneak into Gringotts in search of Helga Hufflepuff's besieged golden cup. Having discovered it, they then break out, riding the back of a dragon, only to eventually find themselves back at Hogwarts School of Witchcraft and Wizardry.
Ready for the final showdown.
The film focuses on Harry's pursuits as he searches for Rowena Ravenclaw's lost diadem and investigates Snape's (Alan Rickman) memories, and neither he nor Voldemort take an active role in the initial confrontation. Although, since Harry misses the majority of the action in order to hunt horcruxes, he arguably takes the most active and direct role possible.
Even more active and direct than Neville Longbottom's (Matthew Lewis), who steals every scene he's in and delivers an appropriately timed inspirational speech when victory for Voldemort's forces seems inevitable.
And shortly thereafter Harry springs back to life to face Voldemort head-on, autocratic versus democratic duelling to the end, the insatiable aggressor challenging the counterstrike of the momentum his voraciousness engendered. Harry's democratic counterstrike lacks the influence, resources, and bloodlust of their opponents but charges onwards nonetheless, the product of coerced ingenuity. As he faces Voldemort, it's as if two competing conceptions of Nietzsche's übermensch contend, one using cruelty and pain to solidify its response to its culture's perceived moral vacuum (the fascist response wherein creativity must fit within a one-dimensional frame approved by whomever occupies a corresponding position of power), the other enabling individuals to create their own place within that vacuum based upon the wisdom of the free choices they make in response to its sundry enlivening manifestations. It's as if Harry is the ideal superperson since he doesn't seek to rule or govern on his own, or have an invincible advantage, even though he could easily take advantage of his fame to occupy a prestigious position, preferring instead to work within a malleable system with a minimized degree of hierarchical structure which encourages creativity and innovation.
Many of the characters from the previous films make an appearance, even Professor Sprout (Miriam Margoyles), with Remus Lupin (David Thewlis) delivering some memorable lines. Love has been represented/depicted/rationalized/conceptualized/. . . billions of times, and one of its illustrations that I find the most endearing is that found within Deathly Hallows 2, in regards to Severus Snape, whose love for Lilly Potter (Ellie Darcey-Alden, Geraldine Somerville) is exceptionally motivating.
It still almost brings tears to my eyes whenever I revisit the related scenes and encounter their undeniably intense and patient beauty.
Lacking the need to establish purpose and point, this is a film that gets right down to it.
And right down to it it does get.
On the hunt for Voldemort's remaining horcruxes, Harry, Ron (Rupert Grint), and Hermione (Emma Watson), with the help of the conniving Griphook (Warwick Davis), sneak into Gringotts in search of Helga Hufflepuff's besieged golden cup. Having discovered it, they then break out, riding the back of a dragon, only to eventually find themselves back at Hogwarts School of Witchcraft and Wizardry.
Ready for the final showdown.
The film focuses on Harry's pursuits as he searches for Rowena Ravenclaw's lost diadem and investigates Snape's (Alan Rickman) memories, and neither he nor Voldemort take an active role in the initial confrontation. Although, since Harry misses the majority of the action in order to hunt horcruxes, he arguably takes the most active and direct role possible.
Even more active and direct than Neville Longbottom's (Matthew Lewis), who steals every scene he's in and delivers an appropriately timed inspirational speech when victory for Voldemort's forces seems inevitable.
And shortly thereafter Harry springs back to life to face Voldemort head-on, autocratic versus democratic duelling to the end, the insatiable aggressor challenging the counterstrike of the momentum his voraciousness engendered. Harry's democratic counterstrike lacks the influence, resources, and bloodlust of their opponents but charges onwards nonetheless, the product of coerced ingenuity. As he faces Voldemort, it's as if two competing conceptions of Nietzsche's übermensch contend, one using cruelty and pain to solidify its response to its culture's perceived moral vacuum (the fascist response wherein creativity must fit within a one-dimensional frame approved by whomever occupies a corresponding position of power), the other enabling individuals to create their own place within that vacuum based upon the wisdom of the free choices they make in response to its sundry enlivening manifestations. It's as if Harry is the ideal superperson since he doesn't seek to rule or govern on his own, or have an invincible advantage, even though he could easily take advantage of his fame to occupy a prestigious position, preferring instead to work within a malleable system with a minimized degree of hierarchical structure which encourages creativity and innovation.
Many of the characters from the previous films make an appearance, even Professor Sprout (Miriam Margoyles), with Remus Lupin (David Thewlis) delivering some memorable lines. Love has been represented/depicted/rationalized/conceptualized/. . . billions of times, and one of its illustrations that I find the most endearing is that found within Deathly Hallows 2, in regards to Severus Snape, whose love for Lilly Potter (Ellie Darcey-Alden, Geraldine Somerville) is exceptionally motivating.
It still almost brings tears to my eyes whenever I revisit the related scenes and encounter their undeniably intense and patient beauty.
Monday, November 22, 2010
Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows, Part I
Know then that Harry Potter is back once more in Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows, Part I, wherein he battles death eaters and fascists and feelings all the while coming of age. Most of the regular cast is also back for a scene or two and since the book has been cut in two even more depth than that found in The Order of the Phoenix is presented. Which doesn't mean many of the scenes aren't still curt and melodramatic full of noises and exclamations the kitschy insertion of which is supposed to tap into our preprogrammed dispositions and produce one of a variety of emotional responses. Short and to the point most of the time, yet supposedly exceptional due to the hype and reputations of the cast, the scene where Harry dances with Hermione still adds a nice touch. It's not that I didn't like the film, I certainly did. It's just as entertaining as any of the others, in fact, even more so, because it strays from the typical Hogwarts-and-they're-a-year-older-now format. It's just very rushed. A couple more extended scenes like that where Harry dances with Hermione would have been worth their weight in transitionary gold, or galleons, or something (why did they even include the Dursley's?). I'd really like to see an auteur like Werner Herzog or David Lynch take an aspect of one of these novels and transfer it to another setting within which its character is reconstituted yet traditionalized in order to provide it with more artistic depth. Or perhaps one of them could simply direct the Battle of Hogwarts. Could you imagine how amazing it would be if David Lynch directed the Battle of Hogwarts?
It would be amazing.
It would be amazing.
Sunday, August 9, 2009
Harry Potter and the Half-Blood Prince
David Yates's adaptation of J. K. Rowling's Harry Potter and the Half-Blood Prince brings the novel to life in a maturely adolescent fashion. Harry's (Daniel Radcliffe) back for his sixth year at Hogwarts and Lord Voldemort's Death Eaters are unleashing carnage and destruction in their wake. Professor Dumbledore (Michael Gambon) teaches Harry about Voldemort's past by means of a number of catalogued memories while Hermione (Emma Watson) and Ron (Rupert Grint) struggle with the complicated realities of their mutual attraction. The film sparingly presents a number of the novel's notable novelties such as the underground trade in love potions which keeps the narrative firmly rooted in Potter lore while also highlighting its youthful candour. When juxtaposed with its darkened domain, wherein the heroes must deal with confrontational pressures of position, age, and responsibility, the result is an entertaining synthesis of mirth and menace, well worth the 150 odd minutes.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)