Suppose most people are familiar with what happens in The Hunger Games so I won't spend too much time expanding upon the plot.
An uprising was launched by 12 impoverished districts which was crushed by the powers-that-be. In the aftermath, in order to brutally humiliate their subjects even further, they then created the Hunger Games, a competition wherein a youthful male and female representative from each district is selected to take part in a vicious fight to the death.
24 combatants are chosen and by the end only one remains.
The combatants, referred to as tributes, travel to the capital where they're elaborately decked out and paraded in front of the well-to-do in an ancient romanesque spectacle that's designed to showcase the oppressed and impress potential sponsors. These sponsors can provide you with assistance during the Games thereby enhancing your chances of survival. Ratings are provided to each contestant and they have their chance to prove their worth in front of a select group of interested parties and on television as well.
President Snow (Donald Sutherland) makes it clear that the Games were designed to instil a sense of hope within his destitute subjects, a sense that even though your chances of survival are slim, you still might win and be showered with riches forever after.
Obviously the hope he intends to cultivate isn't seen quite so romantically by the citizens of the districts.
Or the participants of the Hunger Games.
But those who have lucratively profited by the current composition of the state cheer and laugh at the hopeless in a disgusting exercise of affluent vanity.
Refusing to participate in the Hunger Games ensures your death.
Participating in the Hunger Games almost assuredly ensures your death.
So you have an extremist government that castigates the poor and suppresses any form of rational descent, demanding strict obedience to its self-serving whims and designs. Its supporters revel in the bloodthirsty celebration and the families of the participants forlornly sit back and watch.
But sponsors can assist you, give you critical support if you put on a good show.
Katniss Everdeen (Jennifer Lawrence) and Peeta Mellark (Josh Hutcherson) put on the best show they possibly can.
By falling in love.
Love in its true form enables them to change the rules of the game to the vouchsafed delight of their begrudgingly suppliant benefactors.
Thereby suggesting that true love saturated with sacrifice can momentarily defeat the agents of tyranny.
Or that true love fictions are at the heart of the tyrannical enterprise.
Working within a sensationalist frame to provoke a tear jerking deconstructive critical strike disseminating subliminal democratic aftershocks.
Perhaps I expanded upon the plot ad nauseum.
I can't figure out if the end justifies the means.
Sunday, March 25, 2012
Saturday, March 24, 2012
Carnage
Propriety is caustically deconstructed in Roman Polanski's Carnage as two couples meet to discuss a recent altercation between their contentious offspring.
And inadvertently try to get to know one another.
The situation is this: one kid was confronted by a group of kids mouthing him off so he picked up a stick and hit the leader of the group in the mouth, damaging his teeth. The parents of the former make an effort to apologize to the parents of the later by stopping by their apartment in a show of good faith. They discuss things amicably and the parents of the former are about to leave but one thing leads to another and their conversation is extended.
As the mother of the later (Jodie Foster as Penelope Longstreet) becomes more and more intrusive in her comments and suggestions, the father of the former (Christoph Waltz as Alan Cowan) becomes increasingly defensive and irate. The resulting polemic pits two couples from different socio-demographic backgrounds against one another and the children are soon forgotten as the animosity intensifies.
But each couple has their own internal struggles as well and the genders eventually square off while enjoying another round of afternoon scotch.
Known for its transformative curations.
Carnage works as a deconstructive piece which champions open honest airings of grievances over uptight formal indisputable appearances. Tearing away at the veneers which constitute a wide variety of social interactions, it finds catharsis through confrontation while productively disrupting and recasting established codes of conduct.
As everyone remembers their youth.
This could have been an exceptional film but there's something missing from its bitter tranquil blend. While I respected its formula, I couldn't find that cohesive regenerative spark which would make me want to wholeheartedly engage in subsequent viewings.
Some sort of kinetic catalyst.
Everything's reputably in place to make Carnage stand out and I think that may be the problem. This script may have found more life with a less successful cast and crew looking to make a resounding impact.
As they fight for recognition.
And inadvertently try to get to know one another.
The situation is this: one kid was confronted by a group of kids mouthing him off so he picked up a stick and hit the leader of the group in the mouth, damaging his teeth. The parents of the former make an effort to apologize to the parents of the later by stopping by their apartment in a show of good faith. They discuss things amicably and the parents of the former are about to leave but one thing leads to another and their conversation is extended.
As the mother of the later (Jodie Foster as Penelope Longstreet) becomes more and more intrusive in her comments and suggestions, the father of the former (Christoph Waltz as Alan Cowan) becomes increasingly defensive and irate. The resulting polemic pits two couples from different socio-demographic backgrounds against one another and the children are soon forgotten as the animosity intensifies.
But each couple has their own internal struggles as well and the genders eventually square off while enjoying another round of afternoon scotch.
Known for its transformative curations.
Carnage works as a deconstructive piece which champions open honest airings of grievances over uptight formal indisputable appearances. Tearing away at the veneers which constitute a wide variety of social interactions, it finds catharsis through confrontation while productively disrupting and recasting established codes of conduct.
As everyone remembers their youth.
This could have been an exceptional film but there's something missing from its bitter tranquil blend. While I respected its formula, I couldn't find that cohesive regenerative spark which would make me want to wholeheartedly engage in subsequent viewings.
Some sort of kinetic catalyst.
Everything's reputably in place to make Carnage stand out and I think that may be the problem. This script may have found more life with a less successful cast and crew looking to make a resounding impact.
As they fight for recognition.
Sunday, March 18, 2012
21 Jump Street
After royally screwing up their first arrest, rookie policepersons Schmidt (Jonah Hill) and Jenko (Channing Tatum) are reassigned to the undercover division 21st Jump Street, where they're tasked with discovering the supplier of a new narcotic which has recently claimed its first victim.
While preparing for life back in high school, Jenko, who played football, takes the lead, providing advice to the less intellectually challenged Schmidt, who was a member of the Juggling Society. Pretending to be brothers and bunking out at Schmidt's parent's house, they reacclimatize themselves to the young adult social predicament as best they can, before youthfully arising and plunging back in.
But things have changed since they came of age, and environmentalists are now just as popular as the jocks were back when Jenko tossed his tight spirals. Jenko and Schmidt quickly see their traditional roles reversed as the later makes headway with the cool kids and the former infiltrates the nerds.
But as Schmidt begins to socially prosper for the first time, he loses sight of their law enforcement objectives.
It's now up to Jenko to hold the team together and nerd where he has never nerded before.
Down, set, hut.
Ignoring the film's ludicrous structure and myriad implausibilities, the question of where 21 Jump Street sits in the political spectrum remains up for debate, and I'm sure it's currently being dissected in political philosophy classes across North America.
I may as well add my two cents.
The objective of the film: stop the flow of easily accessible trendy narcotics within high schools.
Point awarded to the Right Wing.
But it's not as if the Left Wing wants to see the proliferation of drugs proceed unabated, it simply recognizes that the traditional means that have been employed to prohibit them have had little effect (they're not going away), and since many of them are less harmful than alcohol, don't see an enormous problem with systematically controlling them and making a productive fortune off their taxation. However, the narcotics in 21 Jump Street are new and little is known about them so it would make sense that the Left would seek to analyze their contents and resultant effects before judging whether or not they should be legally regulated/distributed. A commodity is being trafficked off the grid and the government wants to step in and regulate it in order to understand its harmful effects more comprehensively and better educate the public: point awarded to the Right Wing withdrawn.
21 Jump Street Captain Dickson (Ice Cube) tells his recruits to focus on stereotyping everyone they encounter in order to fit within their high school social spheres more snuggly.
Point awarded to the Right Wing.
Yet by focusing intently on stereotypes, Schmidt and Jenko have trouble fitting into their new environment and only succeed after opening their minds to the possibility of difference.
Point awarded to the Right Wing withdrawn.
Drugs are demonized throughout insofar as curtailing their distribution is sought after yet the ways in which they are presented glorifies their consumption.
Point awarded to neither.
While the Left realistically understands that the war on drugs is futile, it still doesn't glorify their use, and neither does the Right.
The female officers working for 21 Jump Street close their first case long before Jenko and Schmidt are in a position to begin solving theirs.
Point awarded to the Left.
Chauvinism pervades Right Wing discourses and by making Schmidt and Jenko semi-incompetent buffoons who pale in comparison to their feminine coworkers, 21 Jump Street counteracts its "might is right" ethos. But at the same time, the heroes of the story are men, and even though the women obtain results much more efficiently, their achievements are still only ephemerally referred to and the point is by no means elaborated.
Point awarded to the Left withdrawn.
The principal student drug dealer is an environmentalist, directly synthesizing facilitators of intoxication with those who support initiatives such as sustainable development.
Point awarded to the Right.
Yet the student in question, Eric Molson (Dave Franco), is given some of the film's best lines and shown to be an understanding and compassionate person who cares about his fellow classmates with whom he gets along well. But still, when 21 Jump Street reaches its conclusion, he's dragged off in handcuffs to answer for his activities.
Point awarded to the Right sustained.
From the Schmidt and Jenko duo, it's the football playing jock who holds things together and ensures their success.
Point awarded to the Right.
Then again, while professional football seems at times like a prolonged jingoistic advertisement for the military, this doesn't mean the game itself is necessarily Right Wing, inasmuch as when you ignore the ways in which it's sensationalized, you can still sit back and enjoy an entertaining sport, played by many a Left Winger.
Point awarded to the Right withdrawn.
And ambiguity permeates 21 Jump Street insofar as it's difficult to strictly determine what its political motivations are.
Point awarded to the Left.
Although, even though the Left attempts to break down strict polarities and establish a level non-stereotypical playing field wherein historical factors play an inductive role, it still staunchly adheres to specific points within established dichotomies in order to ensure their ethical survival.
Point awarded to the Left withdrawn.
The only sustained point may have been awarded to the Right, but I still hesitate to classify 21 Jump Street as a conservative film. There's simply not enough evidence.
Is it still an entertaining film that I didn't want to leave half way through?
You be the judge.
While preparing for life back in high school, Jenko, who played football, takes the lead, providing advice to the less intellectually challenged Schmidt, who was a member of the Juggling Society. Pretending to be brothers and bunking out at Schmidt's parent's house, they reacclimatize themselves to the young adult social predicament as best they can, before youthfully arising and plunging back in.
But things have changed since they came of age, and environmentalists are now just as popular as the jocks were back when Jenko tossed his tight spirals. Jenko and Schmidt quickly see their traditional roles reversed as the later makes headway with the cool kids and the former infiltrates the nerds.
But as Schmidt begins to socially prosper for the first time, he loses sight of their law enforcement objectives.
It's now up to Jenko to hold the team together and nerd where he has never nerded before.
Down, set, hut.
Ignoring the film's ludicrous structure and myriad implausibilities, the question of where 21 Jump Street sits in the political spectrum remains up for debate, and I'm sure it's currently being dissected in political philosophy classes across North America.
I may as well add my two cents.
The objective of the film: stop the flow of easily accessible trendy narcotics within high schools.
Point awarded to the Right Wing.
But it's not as if the Left Wing wants to see the proliferation of drugs proceed unabated, it simply recognizes that the traditional means that have been employed to prohibit them have had little effect (they're not going away), and since many of them are less harmful than alcohol, don't see an enormous problem with systematically controlling them and making a productive fortune off their taxation. However, the narcotics in 21 Jump Street are new and little is known about them so it would make sense that the Left would seek to analyze their contents and resultant effects before judging whether or not they should be legally regulated/distributed. A commodity is being trafficked off the grid and the government wants to step in and regulate it in order to understand its harmful effects more comprehensively and better educate the public: point awarded to the Right Wing withdrawn.
21 Jump Street Captain Dickson (Ice Cube) tells his recruits to focus on stereotyping everyone they encounter in order to fit within their high school social spheres more snuggly.
Point awarded to the Right Wing.
Yet by focusing intently on stereotypes, Schmidt and Jenko have trouble fitting into their new environment and only succeed after opening their minds to the possibility of difference.
Point awarded to the Right Wing withdrawn.
Drugs are demonized throughout insofar as curtailing their distribution is sought after yet the ways in which they are presented glorifies their consumption.
Point awarded to neither.
While the Left realistically understands that the war on drugs is futile, it still doesn't glorify their use, and neither does the Right.
The female officers working for 21 Jump Street close their first case long before Jenko and Schmidt are in a position to begin solving theirs.
Point awarded to the Left.
Chauvinism pervades Right Wing discourses and by making Schmidt and Jenko semi-incompetent buffoons who pale in comparison to their feminine coworkers, 21 Jump Street counteracts its "might is right" ethos. But at the same time, the heroes of the story are men, and even though the women obtain results much more efficiently, their achievements are still only ephemerally referred to and the point is by no means elaborated.
Point awarded to the Left withdrawn.
The principal student drug dealer is an environmentalist, directly synthesizing facilitators of intoxication with those who support initiatives such as sustainable development.
Point awarded to the Right.
Yet the student in question, Eric Molson (Dave Franco), is given some of the film's best lines and shown to be an understanding and compassionate person who cares about his fellow classmates with whom he gets along well. But still, when 21 Jump Street reaches its conclusion, he's dragged off in handcuffs to answer for his activities.
Point awarded to the Right sustained.
From the Schmidt and Jenko duo, it's the football playing jock who holds things together and ensures their success.
Point awarded to the Right.
Then again, while professional football seems at times like a prolonged jingoistic advertisement for the military, this doesn't mean the game itself is necessarily Right Wing, inasmuch as when you ignore the ways in which it's sensationalized, you can still sit back and enjoy an entertaining sport, played by many a Left Winger.
Point awarded to the Right withdrawn.
And ambiguity permeates 21 Jump Street insofar as it's difficult to strictly determine what its political motivations are.
Point awarded to the Left.
Although, even though the Left attempts to break down strict polarities and establish a level non-stereotypical playing field wherein historical factors play an inductive role, it still staunchly adheres to specific points within established dichotomies in order to ensure their ethical survival.
Point awarded to the Left withdrawn.
The only sustained point may have been awarded to the Right, but I still hesitate to classify 21 Jump Street as a conservative film. There's simply not enough evidence.
Is it still an entertaining film that I didn't want to leave half way through?
You be the judge.
Saturday, March 17, 2012
Shame
Consumed and dominated by uncontrollable sexual desires which demand constant strategic salacious improvisations, Brandon Sullivan's (Michael Fassbender) unquenchable thirst for carnal pleasures is disproportionately interrupted by a visit from his little sister (Carey Mulligan as Sissy Sullivan).
Who, as it turns out, has no where else to go.
His private carnivalesque prurient pursuits must now adjust themselves to the potential impact of familial judgment and the threat of patronizing restraint. As it becomes clear that Sissy's economic circumstances are by no means self-sufficient, the resultant limitations psychologically materialize a contemptuous backlash which leads to a breakdown in their sustainable relations.
And a resurgent unfettered libidinous conflagration.
Shame works as an emotionless stark rigid character study which sociologically examines localized affects of satyriasis. Michael Fassbender's focused distant unattached self-absorbed performance seductively infuses Mr. Sullivan with a wantonly calculated individualistic purpose. Carey Mulligan's struggling confused desperate counterpoint functions as an effective curve.
Responsibilities bear their consequences in jolting destructive strikes whose unleashed immediate pressures instantaneously distill a sense of belonging.
Consequent reactions determine semantic interpretations incorporating previously manifested patterns built into historical socio-foundations established in relation to a kaleidoscopic point of view.
Director Steve McQueen's direct approach attempts to resist the interpretative labyrinth.
In so doing we're given the cold hard narrow unforgiving facts.
Which themselves impose additional limits on Brandon Sullivan's freedom.
Who, as it turns out, has no where else to go.
His private carnivalesque prurient pursuits must now adjust themselves to the potential impact of familial judgment and the threat of patronizing restraint. As it becomes clear that Sissy's economic circumstances are by no means self-sufficient, the resultant limitations psychologically materialize a contemptuous backlash which leads to a breakdown in their sustainable relations.
And a resurgent unfettered libidinous conflagration.
Shame works as an emotionless stark rigid character study which sociologically examines localized affects of satyriasis. Michael Fassbender's focused distant unattached self-absorbed performance seductively infuses Mr. Sullivan with a wantonly calculated individualistic purpose. Carey Mulligan's struggling confused desperate counterpoint functions as an effective curve.
Responsibilities bear their consequences in jolting destructive strikes whose unleashed immediate pressures instantaneously distill a sense of belonging.
Consequent reactions determine semantic interpretations incorporating previously manifested patterns built into historical socio-foundations established in relation to a kaleidoscopic point of view.
Director Steve McQueen's direct approach attempts to resist the interpretative labyrinth.
In so doing we're given the cold hard narrow unforgiving facts.
Which themselves impose additional limits on Brandon Sullivan's freedom.
Sunday, March 11, 2012
The Artist
Pride leads to a tragic fall in Michel Hazanavicius's The Artist, as silent film superstar George Valentin (Jean Dujardin) refuses to adapt to a technological paradigm shift. Losing everything after the advent of the Talkies, he descends into a self-obsessed alcoholic tailspin while remaining loyal to his preferred form of artistic expression.
To which he was an unparalleled sensation.
Paying hommage to an abandoned form of film making which was responsible for cinema's resounding success, The Artist works, presenting a remarkable synthesis of motion and sound whose historical resonances are fashionably festooned.
Ludovic Bource's original music playfully harmonizes with the action and temporally positions us within a revitalized inspirational epoch. Jean Dujardin and Bérénice Bejo (Peppy Miller) use the full range of their creative non-verbal subtly to emit an understated existential dialogue which encourages evocative sensual reflections as one tries to imagine what might have been said.
Even as Valentin seems destined for dereliction, a sense of innocent naivety permeates The Artist's being, as its expertly timed stylistic complexities leisurely conjure an effervescent cascade of childlike simplicity by delicately condensing multilayered supporting complements into an affective cry.
Nothing that surprising takes place in the narrative itself. It's the cohesive viscid micro-details which transform each moment into an exception of its own that make The Artist such a compelling film.
Nice to see Ed Lauter with a supporting role.
To which he was an unparalleled sensation.
Paying hommage to an abandoned form of film making which was responsible for cinema's resounding success, The Artist works, presenting a remarkable synthesis of motion and sound whose historical resonances are fashionably festooned.
Ludovic Bource's original music playfully harmonizes with the action and temporally positions us within a revitalized inspirational epoch. Jean Dujardin and Bérénice Bejo (Peppy Miller) use the full range of their creative non-verbal subtly to emit an understated existential dialogue which encourages evocative sensual reflections as one tries to imagine what might have been said.
Even as Valentin seems destined for dereliction, a sense of innocent naivety permeates The Artist's being, as its expertly timed stylistic complexities leisurely conjure an effervescent cascade of childlike simplicity by delicately condensing multilayered supporting complements into an affective cry.
Nothing that surprising takes place in the narrative itself. It's the cohesive viscid micro-details which transform each moment into an exception of its own that make The Artist such a compelling film.
Nice to see Ed Lauter with a supporting role.
Saturday, March 10, 2012
Like Crazy
Don't know if I'm the write person to be reviewing romantic films.
Drake Doremus's Like Crazy seems like a good one, with all the typical heartbreaking circumstances in place, presented in a harrowingly tranquil laid-back predictable manner, as a young couple falls in love but has trouble staying together because they live in different countries.
Marriage fails to solve their problems.
Long periods of separation lead to affairs.
There's nothing bizarre or distracting.
We're left wondering if the power of love will bring them back together in the end.
And it does and everyone's happy.
Hooray!
I liked the film's form. It's chill, non-judgemental, mature, flat and consistent.
But its content wasn't very surprising and lacked the distinct mesmerizing transitional scenes that could have differentiated it more prominently from typical tear jerking romances.
None of my tears were jerked.
Unlike the first time I watched Star Trek: Generations.
Drake Doremus's Like Crazy seems like a good one, with all the typical heartbreaking circumstances in place, presented in a harrowingly tranquil laid-back predictable manner, as a young couple falls in love but has trouble staying together because they live in different countries.
Marriage fails to solve their problems.
Long periods of separation lead to affairs.
There's nothing bizarre or distracting.
We're left wondering if the power of love will bring them back together in the end.
And it does and everyone's happy.
Hooray!
I liked the film's form. It's chill, non-judgemental, mature, flat and consistent.
But its content wasn't very surprising and lacked the distinct mesmerizing transitional scenes that could have differentiated it more prominently from typical tear jerking romances.
None of my tears were jerked.
Unlike the first time I watched Star Trek: Generations.
Sunday, March 4, 2012
My Week with Marilyn
Suddenly thrust into an accelerated kinetic critical creative complexity wherein two distinct approaches to acting clash on their way towards cinematic seduction, the youthful Colin Clark (Eddie Redmayne) finds himself balancing myriad egotistical dexterities while trying to maintain his liturgical nerve.
And pacify the deployments of irrepressible temptations.
Marilyn Monroe (Michelle Williams) has an undeniably perplexing presence whose improvised flexible non-linear magnetism has trouble adhering itself to Laurence Olivier's (Kenneth Branagh) by-the-book routine.
Olivier isn't the most forgiving figure either and Marilyn struggles with his disdain. She also misinterprets some of her husband's writing which accentuates her sense of ineptitude.
But as established unflattering men futilely attempt to control her, she combats their derision with a burgeoning youthful laissez-faire methodology which aesthetically appeals to the young and energetic Colin.
Whose working on his first film.
My Week with Marilyn studies the convoluted diversions and rewarding excursions to whose preponderant inconsistencies young professionals must rationally respond. Colin's seamless integration and exceptional ability to smoothly fluctuate perhaps doesn't offer the most transferable set of relatable interactive qualifications, but his success and good fortune can generate abundant ambitious daydreams, from whose integrated prosperous peaks one can fleetingly unearth kernels of truth.
After placing them within a poetic context and analyzing the resultant metaphorical flow.
And pacify the deployments of irrepressible temptations.
Marilyn Monroe (Michelle Williams) has an undeniably perplexing presence whose improvised flexible non-linear magnetism has trouble adhering itself to Laurence Olivier's (Kenneth Branagh) by-the-book routine.
Olivier isn't the most forgiving figure either and Marilyn struggles with his disdain. She also misinterprets some of her husband's writing which accentuates her sense of ineptitude.
But as established unflattering men futilely attempt to control her, she combats their derision with a burgeoning youthful laissez-faire methodology which aesthetically appeals to the young and energetic Colin.
Whose working on his first film.
My Week with Marilyn studies the convoluted diversions and rewarding excursions to whose preponderant inconsistencies young professionals must rationally respond. Colin's seamless integration and exceptional ability to smoothly fluctuate perhaps doesn't offer the most transferable set of relatable interactive qualifications, but his success and good fortune can generate abundant ambitious daydreams, from whose integrated prosperous peaks one can fleetingly unearth kernels of truth.
After placing them within a poetic context and analyzing the resultant metaphorical flow.
Saturday, March 3, 2012
The Lorax
Sustainable Development finds a pop cultural proponent in the new musical-comedy The Lorax, based on Dr. Seuss's children's book of the same name. Within, young Ted (Zac Efron) seeks the affections of Audrey (Taylor Swift) who loves the environment and would like to acquire a living tree.
They both live in Thneedville where their surroundings are predominantly non-organic.
Having never seen a living tree and possessing no knowledge of where to find one, Ted contends with a puzzling situation as his romantic daydreams complicate his ability to socialize.
Until Grammy Norma (Betty White) steps in.
She secretly tells Ted that if he wants to locate a tree he'll have to consult the Once-ler (Ed Helms) who lives in the treacherous badlands outside Thneedville's city limits.
To obtain the sought after information, Ted hops on his motorized bike and leaves the safety of Thneedville's uniformity behind. The Once-ler is discovered but before Ted can benefit from his stricken arboreal wisdom, a tale must be told in multiple instalments.
Wherein we meet the Lorax (Danny DeVito).
Guardian of the forest.
What follows is a harrowing reenactment of economic opportunism which results in the destruction of a lush wilderness and the displacement of its local bear population. The Once-ler capitalizes on the forest's marketable trees but his blind greed results in the harvesting of every last one.
And the devastation of a vibrant ecosystem.
The Lorax himself may be the guardian of the forest but there is little he can do to combat the forces of commercialization, besides trying to emphasize their folly before it's too late.
He's a secondary character in the film whose non-consequential fantastic presence is there to accentuate the importance of a realistic united environmental front, designed to disenchant extremist right wingers who like to preach about how environmentalism is the dream of children who can't understand that God is going to miraculously come down from heaven and clean up this mess some day.
Or just leave it behind and rapturously reward the extremist faithful.
Who for some reason haven't been diagnosed with a mental illness.
At least The Lorax makes it clear enough that divine intervention is not on the way and that we have to take matters into our own hands to find a progressive vision for a multi-generational solution to this misguided point of view.
Here on planet Earth.
They both live in Thneedville where their surroundings are predominantly non-organic.
Having never seen a living tree and possessing no knowledge of where to find one, Ted contends with a puzzling situation as his romantic daydreams complicate his ability to socialize.
Until Grammy Norma (Betty White) steps in.
She secretly tells Ted that if he wants to locate a tree he'll have to consult the Once-ler (Ed Helms) who lives in the treacherous badlands outside Thneedville's city limits.
To obtain the sought after information, Ted hops on his motorized bike and leaves the safety of Thneedville's uniformity behind. The Once-ler is discovered but before Ted can benefit from his stricken arboreal wisdom, a tale must be told in multiple instalments.
Wherein we meet the Lorax (Danny DeVito).
Guardian of the forest.
What follows is a harrowing reenactment of economic opportunism which results in the destruction of a lush wilderness and the displacement of its local bear population. The Once-ler capitalizes on the forest's marketable trees but his blind greed results in the harvesting of every last one.
And the devastation of a vibrant ecosystem.
The Lorax himself may be the guardian of the forest but there is little he can do to combat the forces of commercialization, besides trying to emphasize their folly before it's too late.
He's a secondary character in the film whose non-consequential fantastic presence is there to accentuate the importance of a realistic united environmental front, designed to disenchant extremist right wingers who like to preach about how environmentalism is the dream of children who can't understand that God is going to miraculously come down from heaven and clean up this mess some day.
Or just leave it behind and rapturously reward the extremist faithful.
Who for some reason haven't been diagnosed with a mental illness.
At least The Lorax makes it clear enough that divine intervention is not on the way and that we have to take matters into our own hands to find a progressive vision for a multi-generational solution to this misguided point of view.
Here on planet Earth.
Saturday, February 25, 2012
The Way
After Tom Avery (Martin Sheen) learns that his son Daniel (Emilio Estevez) has died while hiking El Camino de Santiago, he flies to France and decides to undertake the pilgrimage through Spain himself. Unprepared for the journey and approaching retirement, he buckles down and proceeds regardless to try and understand his son's bohemian spirit which he had routinely belittled throughout his life. While coping with his loss, he reluctantly befriends three younger adventurous subjects who take a mysterious shine to his rigorous no-nonsense elderly personality, each embracing the trek for different reasons. Their heterogeneous individualist assembly forms a peculiar undefined pact as they encounter a colourful cast of characters while seeking lodging along the way.
Emilio Estevez's The Way elastically populates a variety of different situations with thought provoking revelations towards its healing goal. Some of the dialogue and interactions could have benefitted from a careful study of Woody Allen or John Cassavetes, but I can't deny that he works well within his elevated wide-reaching down-to-earth frame.
Heated exchanges. Romantic musings. Acerbic challenges. Carefree suggestions. Confident purpose. Cohesive wanderings.
Unpredictable traumatic events necessitate change. Improvised determined responses supported by but not rooted within historico-cultural traditions can lead to revitalizing affects. Social opportunities and previously unconsidered theoretical trajectories abound after the embrace of the other. Letting go and enjoying the difference leads to spiritual rebirth.
The Way.
Emilio Estevez's The Way elastically populates a variety of different situations with thought provoking revelations towards its healing goal. Some of the dialogue and interactions could have benefitted from a careful study of Woody Allen or John Cassavetes, but I can't deny that he works well within his elevated wide-reaching down-to-earth frame.
Heated exchanges. Romantic musings. Acerbic challenges. Carefree suggestions. Confident purpose. Cohesive wanderings.
Unpredictable traumatic events necessitate change. Improvised determined responses supported by but not rooted within historico-cultural traditions can lead to revitalizing affects. Social opportunities and previously unconsidered theoretical trajectories abound after the embrace of the other. Letting go and enjoying the difference leads to spiritual rebirth.
The Way.
Friday, February 24, 2012
Safe House
Fittingly timed considering Canada's conservative government's introduction of the hated Bill C-30, Daniel Espinosa's new action flick Safe House presents a young CIA agent tasked with delivering a rogue fugitive possessing private governmental information to an undisclosed location in order to bring him to justice.
For agent Matt Weston (Ryan Reynolds), it's an opportunity to demonstrate his prowess and procure a more invigorating post.
For longtime fugitive (and former CIA agent) Tobin Frost (Denzel Washington), it's all just par for the course.
Frost has in his possession a file implicating several international intelligence agents in criminal activities. A mercenary by the name of Vargas (Fares Fares) seeks to pry it from his cold dead hands. Seeing nowhere to run, Frost turns himself in at an American Embassy in South Africa. He's taken to be interrogated at a safe house in Cape Town of which Weston is the "housekeeper." Vargas comes calling shortly thereafter, leaving Weston and Frost wondering which CIA agent coughed up the whereabouts of their hidden location as they frantically escape.
Into the unknown.
The film's anti-warrantless-police-online-surveillance agenda is highlighted during one of the chase scenes. Frost and Weston are fleeing Vargas and his men on the rooftops of a quiet shantytown. Some of the roofs aren't particularly sturdy and can't withstand the shock of the sudden tumultuous weight. Thus, as people simply try and enjoy their private life, mercenaries, fugitives, and intelligence agents come crashing unannounced into their homes, and then leave quickly, after having obtrusively disrupted their lives, in the pursuit of disparate self-serving agendas.
How does this relate to the ways in which Canada's conservative government has labelled environmentalist groups opposed to the development of the Northern Gateway pipeline as radicals within Canada and Bill C-30?
Well, it's cheaper to operate a mine/engage in oil and gas exploration/build a pipeline if you don't have to worry about reclaiming the land or behaving responsibly. But if you don't responsibly reclaim the land you create a toxic mess that leaves the area uninhabitable while people continue to live there. If you introduce a toxic substance into an ecosystem it has a lasting toxic effect.
Environmentalist groups seek to mitigate this effect so that such lands remain habitable and their drinking waters aren't irreparably polluted. If you are an environmentalist who has been labelled a radical by the government (as opposed to being labelled a responsible citizen who simply wants to have access to clean drinking water and doesn't want to have to clean up an industrial mess for the next century or so), whose to stop the police from monitoring your productive conscientious online activity and demonizing the sights you visit?
Demonizing is a strong word but so is radical and labelling environmentalist groups critical of the Northern Gateway pipeline development as radical is a form of demonizing, especially considering that a percentage of our elected opposition members of parliament are critical of the Northern Gateway pipeline, therefore I don't think I'm taking too much of a leap in thinking the police, through invasively monitoring your online activity after the passage of Bill C-30 because you are an environmentalist radical, can then take the next step of demonizing you within your community (hypothetically, some shitty anti-environmentalist law is passed after the passage of Bill C-30 [The Economic Stewardship Bill or something], it isn't debated in the House of Commons so media coverage is minimized, people aren't provided with the facts concerning the law and after someone breaks it they simply think that person's broken the law and are therefore a problem, the police having arrested the individual after monitoring their online activity without a warrant and discovering that by visiting a specific targeted sight they have engaged in radical illegal activity. They arrest that person, local media picks up on it, they are demonized within their community).
You think this is ridiculous? I repeat, labelling environmentalists critical of the Northern Gateway pipeline development as radicals is ridiculous, throughly undemocratic, and grossly irresponsible. Simply because they wanted to mitigate the environmental impact of industrial activity in their country in order to live a healthier life.
Environmentalists want jobs too and understand the necessity of mining and oil and gas exploration. They just want to ensure that it's done responsibly. The reason we have an environmental lobby is that these activities were not undertaken responsibly for centuries. It is not radical to believe that they will suddenly be responsibly undertaken without the influence of an environmentalist lobby.
In Safe House, Weston turns the situation around and releases Frost's file to the media who then begins to vilify the intelligence agents/governmental representatives mentioned within. Unfortunately, this ending indirectly supports Bills such as Bill C-30. Here we have a situation where invading the privacy of several organizations and making their private information public has positive results. By creating such a situation and making it seem cathartic, Safe House sinisterly supports the intrusive agendas of those seeking to freely invade our privacy and monitor our online activity by 'subliminally advertising' an example which motivates the invasion of privacy.
Although the roof crashing chase was a nice diversion.
For agent Matt Weston (Ryan Reynolds), it's an opportunity to demonstrate his prowess and procure a more invigorating post.
For longtime fugitive (and former CIA agent) Tobin Frost (Denzel Washington), it's all just par for the course.
Frost has in his possession a file implicating several international intelligence agents in criminal activities. A mercenary by the name of Vargas (Fares Fares) seeks to pry it from his cold dead hands. Seeing nowhere to run, Frost turns himself in at an American Embassy in South Africa. He's taken to be interrogated at a safe house in Cape Town of which Weston is the "housekeeper." Vargas comes calling shortly thereafter, leaving Weston and Frost wondering which CIA agent coughed up the whereabouts of their hidden location as they frantically escape.
Into the unknown.
The film's anti-warrantless-police-online-surveillance agenda is highlighted during one of the chase scenes. Frost and Weston are fleeing Vargas and his men on the rooftops of a quiet shantytown. Some of the roofs aren't particularly sturdy and can't withstand the shock of the sudden tumultuous weight. Thus, as people simply try and enjoy their private life, mercenaries, fugitives, and intelligence agents come crashing unannounced into their homes, and then leave quickly, after having obtrusively disrupted their lives, in the pursuit of disparate self-serving agendas.
How does this relate to the ways in which Canada's conservative government has labelled environmentalist groups opposed to the development of the Northern Gateway pipeline as radicals within Canada and Bill C-30?
Well, it's cheaper to operate a mine/engage in oil and gas exploration/build a pipeline if you don't have to worry about reclaiming the land or behaving responsibly. But if you don't responsibly reclaim the land you create a toxic mess that leaves the area uninhabitable while people continue to live there. If you introduce a toxic substance into an ecosystem it has a lasting toxic effect.
Environmentalist groups seek to mitigate this effect so that such lands remain habitable and their drinking waters aren't irreparably polluted. If you are an environmentalist who has been labelled a radical by the government (as opposed to being labelled a responsible citizen who simply wants to have access to clean drinking water and doesn't want to have to clean up an industrial mess for the next century or so), whose to stop the police from monitoring your productive conscientious online activity and demonizing the sights you visit?
Demonizing is a strong word but so is radical and labelling environmentalist groups critical of the Northern Gateway pipeline development as radical is a form of demonizing, especially considering that a percentage of our elected opposition members of parliament are critical of the Northern Gateway pipeline, therefore I don't think I'm taking too much of a leap in thinking the police, through invasively monitoring your online activity after the passage of Bill C-30 because you are an environmentalist radical, can then take the next step of demonizing you within your community (hypothetically, some shitty anti-environmentalist law is passed after the passage of Bill C-30 [The Economic Stewardship Bill or something], it isn't debated in the House of Commons so media coverage is minimized, people aren't provided with the facts concerning the law and after someone breaks it they simply think that person's broken the law and are therefore a problem, the police having arrested the individual after monitoring their online activity without a warrant and discovering that by visiting a specific targeted sight they have engaged in radical illegal activity. They arrest that person, local media picks up on it, they are demonized within their community).
You think this is ridiculous? I repeat, labelling environmentalists critical of the Northern Gateway pipeline development as radicals is ridiculous, throughly undemocratic, and grossly irresponsible. Simply because they wanted to mitigate the environmental impact of industrial activity in their country in order to live a healthier life.
Environmentalists want jobs too and understand the necessity of mining and oil and gas exploration. They just want to ensure that it's done responsibly. The reason we have an environmental lobby is that these activities were not undertaken responsibly for centuries. It is not radical to believe that they will suddenly be responsibly undertaken without the influence of an environmentalist lobby.
In Safe House, Weston turns the situation around and releases Frost's file to the media who then begins to vilify the intelligence agents/governmental representatives mentioned within. Unfortunately, this ending indirectly supports Bills such as Bill C-30. Here we have a situation where invading the privacy of several organizations and making their private information public has positive results. By creating such a situation and making it seem cathartic, Safe House sinisterly supports the intrusive agendas of those seeking to freely invade our privacy and monitor our online activity by 'subliminally advertising' an example which motivates the invasion of privacy.
Although the roof crashing chase was a nice diversion.
Sunday, February 19, 2012
Monsieur Lazhar
Immigrating. Searching for work. Adapting to the dynamics of your new surroundings. Quietly suffering from the trauma of your previous ones.
Philippe Falardeau's Monsieur Lazhar follows the activities of Bachir Lazhar (Mohamed Fellag) as he seeks refugee status in Montréal and finds a job teaching in an inner-city elementary school. Matters are complicated by the fact that he replaces a respected facilitator of learning who recently committed suicide in the classroom. His students are confused and shocked.
His antiquated teaching style doesn't placate things.
But his strict yet forgiving direct approach has its merits as he attempts to bring his students's pain out into the open. Simultaneously creating a cathartic outlet and an administrative backlash, he boldly proceeds while negotiating the consequences.
With neither teaching degree nor classroom experience.
His traditional signs and points of reference have been displaced, transformed and differentiated, yet his wit remains intact, enabling him to manufacture structured cultural resources through the process of active creativity.
Which facilitate his socio-economic recovery.
Flexibly managing the viewpoints of the other while adopting components of their constructive criticisms to his professional and social practices leads to his modest integration.
Synthesizing divergent contents with similar forms systematically acculturates his multifaceted tenacity.
Because he gives a shit.
Philippe Falardeau's Monsieur Lazhar follows the activities of Bachir Lazhar (Mohamed Fellag) as he seeks refugee status in Montréal and finds a job teaching in an inner-city elementary school. Matters are complicated by the fact that he replaces a respected facilitator of learning who recently committed suicide in the classroom. His students are confused and shocked.
His antiquated teaching style doesn't placate things.
But his strict yet forgiving direct approach has its merits as he attempts to bring his students's pain out into the open. Simultaneously creating a cathartic outlet and an administrative backlash, he boldly proceeds while negotiating the consequences.
With neither teaching degree nor classroom experience.
His traditional signs and points of reference have been displaced, transformed and differentiated, yet his wit remains intact, enabling him to manufacture structured cultural resources through the process of active creativity.
Which facilitate his socio-economic recovery.
Flexibly managing the viewpoints of the other while adopting components of their constructive criticisms to his professional and social practices leads to his modest integration.
Synthesizing divergent contents with similar forms systematically acculturates his multifaceted tenacity.
Because he gives a shit.
Saturday, February 18, 2012
Circumstance
At the risk of sounding melodramatic, falling in love is a beautiful thing. Suddenly there's someone there with whom you get along and/or enjoy fighting with regularly who saves you from the interminable tedium of your own personal thoughts.
And loves it when you suggest going at it.
Through the exchange of ideas you learn and grow constructively and destructively as you challenge one another while suffering/flourishing as your dependency increases.
Having the opportunity to do this is something a lot of people take for granted.
Maryam Keshavarz's Circumstance suffocatingly accentuates the torment of trying to embrace your mutual feelings in a homophobic socially conservative stasis, as Atafeh (Nikohl Boosheri) and Shireen (Sarah Kazemy) fall in love.
Atafeh is the privileged daughter of wealthy parents whose lifestyle is encouraged by the current Iranian regime. Shireen's parents were free thinking writers who didn't fare so well after the Revolution in 1979.
As they explore their affections in the Iranian underground, Keshavarz showcases their blossoming vitality before the morality police step in and rigidly crush it.
One of the policepersons is Atafeh's former drug abusing religiously reformed brother Mehran (Reza Sixo Safai).
If you're wondering how the affects of your socially conservative values and their associated misguided ethical conceptions can distort potentially productive members of your community and turn them into passionate iconoclasts, try and imagine a world where all you want to do is have a heterosexual relationship but everyone keeps telling you it's an unnatural crime for which you will be eternally punished.
And ask yourself, "why do I keep bullying gay people?"
Do you seriously think a loving God would encourage such behaviour?
And loves it when you suggest going at it.
Through the exchange of ideas you learn and grow constructively and destructively as you challenge one another while suffering/flourishing as your dependency increases.
Having the opportunity to do this is something a lot of people take for granted.
Maryam Keshavarz's Circumstance suffocatingly accentuates the torment of trying to embrace your mutual feelings in a homophobic socially conservative stasis, as Atafeh (Nikohl Boosheri) and Shireen (Sarah Kazemy) fall in love.
Atafeh is the privileged daughter of wealthy parents whose lifestyle is encouraged by the current Iranian regime. Shireen's parents were free thinking writers who didn't fare so well after the Revolution in 1979.
As they explore their affections in the Iranian underground, Keshavarz showcases their blossoming vitality before the morality police step in and rigidly crush it.
One of the policepersons is Atafeh's former drug abusing religiously reformed brother Mehran (Reza Sixo Safai).
If you're wondering how the affects of your socially conservative values and their associated misguided ethical conceptions can distort potentially productive members of your community and turn them into passionate iconoclasts, try and imagine a world where all you want to do is have a heterosexual relationship but everyone keeps telling you it's an unnatural crime for which you will be eternally punished.
And ask yourself, "why do I keep bullying gay people?"
Do you seriously think a loving God would encourage such behaviour?
Sunday, February 12, 2012
Le Havre
Loved Aki Kaurismäki's Le Havre.
The story follows the bohemian shoe shining Marcel Marx (André Wilms) as he manages his affairs and takes a refugee for whom the police are searching into his care (Blondin Miguel as Idrissa). Idrissa hopes to be reunited with his mother in London but circumstances suggest he'll be shipped back to Gabon. But Marcel, who can't even find enough cash to pay for his daily bread, rallies his friends to come to his aid. Forming an innovative impoverished indelible team, they create a potential working solution and boldly put their plan into action.
As the law rapidly closes in.
There's little pretence in this film as Kaurismäki's long patient shots of his cast showcase their hardened stoic demeanours. It's not trying to glamourize living off the beaten track or accentuate hardship. Rather, it modestly celebrates the crafty designs of a clever group of feisty individuals as they creatively stretch their limited resources in order to generate an emancipated opportunity.
Through the power of unification.
Detective Monet's (Jean-Pierre Darroussin) no slouch and has been ordered to make discovering Idrissa's whereabouts a top priority.
Marcel's wife Arletty (Kati Outinen) falls ill leaving everyone worried as he starts to take care of himself.
If you're searching for heartwarming, cheerful, humble escapes from the dominant discourses that consistently dehumanize underprivileged subjects, Le Havre should be high up on your list. The vitality constituting this wayward band of resilient ontologists temperately coordinates an immaculate sense of freedom.
The story follows the bohemian shoe shining Marcel Marx (André Wilms) as he manages his affairs and takes a refugee for whom the police are searching into his care (Blondin Miguel as Idrissa). Idrissa hopes to be reunited with his mother in London but circumstances suggest he'll be shipped back to Gabon. But Marcel, who can't even find enough cash to pay for his daily bread, rallies his friends to come to his aid. Forming an innovative impoverished indelible team, they create a potential working solution and boldly put their plan into action.
As the law rapidly closes in.
There's little pretence in this film as Kaurismäki's long patient shots of his cast showcase their hardened stoic demeanours. It's not trying to glamourize living off the beaten track or accentuate hardship. Rather, it modestly celebrates the crafty designs of a clever group of feisty individuals as they creatively stretch their limited resources in order to generate an emancipated opportunity.
Through the power of unification.
Detective Monet's (Jean-Pierre Darroussin) no slouch and has been ordered to make discovering Idrissa's whereabouts a top priority.
Marcel's wife Arletty (Kati Outinen) falls ill leaving everyone worried as he starts to take care of himself.
If you're searching for heartwarming, cheerful, humble escapes from the dominant discourses that consistently dehumanize underprivileged subjects, Le Havre should be high up on your list. The vitality constituting this wayward band of resilient ontologists temperately coordinates an immaculate sense of freedom.
Keyhole
Where to begin.
We've broken into a building that's surrounded. Some of us have passed on. A search must be conducted. The patriarch is in charge. Part of his family is in attendance. Memories are temporally fluctuating.
Clocks ticking, imperious and constant. Joy revels in an immediate departure. What's to be made of these meaningful incursions? Electronic fissures resonating incorporeally.
And there's need of wallpaper.
Guy Maddin harnesses a permanently detached constructive sensibility to his productively ironic surreal cheeky familial incandescent aesthetic in his new film Keyhole, and this time there's no foundation to which one can directly cling, other than Ulysses, or David Lynch's Black Lodge, perhaps.
Few filmmakers can successfully unleash structured serpentine points of disjointed transient distinct significations through the popularized lampooned esoteric intellectual constituency as multidimensionally as Maddin.
We are provided with clues to what in fact might be going on. From these clues, depending upon the ways in which they are strategized, specific arguments (rhetorical facts) can be generated. Supporting evidence can be gathered from interpretations based upon hypotheses framed by logic, inasmuch as they fit into the whole, insofar as they cohesively belong.
To this precise moment.
Ulysses Pick (Jason Patric) is in charge. This much we know. His authority is paramount to Keyhole's flexibly united incongruity as he tries to comprehend the motivations of the other.
He is also invincible.
He is trying to return to his family, some of whom he doesn't recognize. He seeks answers to questions he is in/capable of asking. The high seas have become his house as the internet minimizes geographic exploration. His omniscience is tempered by his forgetfulness as he struggles to determine what has been substantially dematerialized. An idea becomes pragmatic when historical echoes align themselves with its potent focused intent.
For the time being.
Leap frogging from estimation to realization for genuine enigmatic jaunts, from which catalysts instructively and divergently testify, while pliantly managing internal disruptions, his allegiances deteriorate as the hierarchy pulsates, made all the more hauntingly vivid by its enduring staggering lack.
It's about generating inextricable mysteries from which manifold dimensions (jurisprudence, politics, science) can find practical applications after mining their way through the discursive data.
And a good old-fashioned game of catch.
We've broken into a building that's surrounded. Some of us have passed on. A search must be conducted. The patriarch is in charge. Part of his family is in attendance. Memories are temporally fluctuating.
Clocks ticking, imperious and constant. Joy revels in an immediate departure. What's to be made of these meaningful incursions? Electronic fissures resonating incorporeally.
And there's need of wallpaper.
Guy Maddin harnesses a permanently detached constructive sensibility to his productively ironic surreal cheeky familial incandescent aesthetic in his new film Keyhole, and this time there's no foundation to which one can directly cling, other than Ulysses, or David Lynch's Black Lodge, perhaps.
Few filmmakers can successfully unleash structured serpentine points of disjointed transient distinct significations through the popularized lampooned esoteric intellectual constituency as multidimensionally as Maddin.
We are provided with clues to what in fact might be going on. From these clues, depending upon the ways in which they are strategized, specific arguments (rhetorical facts) can be generated. Supporting evidence can be gathered from interpretations based upon hypotheses framed by logic, inasmuch as they fit into the whole, insofar as they cohesively belong.
To this precise moment.
Ulysses Pick (Jason Patric) is in charge. This much we know. His authority is paramount to Keyhole's flexibly united incongruity as he tries to comprehend the motivations of the other.
He is also invincible.
He is trying to return to his family, some of whom he doesn't recognize. He seeks answers to questions he is in/capable of asking. The high seas have become his house as the internet minimizes geographic exploration. His omniscience is tempered by his forgetfulness as he struggles to determine what has been substantially dematerialized. An idea becomes pragmatic when historical echoes align themselves with its potent focused intent.
For the time being.
Leap frogging from estimation to realization for genuine enigmatic jaunts, from which catalysts instructively and divergently testify, while pliantly managing internal disruptions, his allegiances deteriorate as the hierarchy pulsates, made all the more hauntingly vivid by its enduring staggering lack.
It's about generating inextricable mysteries from which manifold dimensions (jurisprudence, politics, science) can find practical applications after mining their way through the discursive data.
And a good old-fashioned game of catch.
Saturday, February 4, 2012
Extremely Loud and Incredibly Close
An imaginative inquisitive highly organized youth sets out into the unknown to find someone who can help him solve a mystery left behind after his father dies in the 9/11 attacks on the World Trade Centre. A small envelope is discovered in his father's room after the fact containing both a key and the word "black" written upon it. Having no knowledge in regards to what/whom the word "black" refers nor the lock to which the key corresponds, Oskar Schell (Thomas Horn) looks up everyone with the last name Black in New York City and systematically sets out to question them. During his information search, he befriends an elderly man renting a room in his grandmother's apartment who can't speak and communicates through writing (Max von Sydow as The Renter). The two become friends as they travel throughout New York meeting new people, emboldened by purpose.
Stephen Daldry's Extremely Loud and Incredibly Close humanizes research while providing a matrix through which one can rationally seek solutions to seemingly interminable problems.
As long as you stick to the plan.
By populating his thesis with living breathing representatives of New York's undeniable particularity, Oskar indirectly creates a community while simultaneously emphasizing the tragedy of 9/11, thereby universalizing his personal loss.
The research process itself is romanticized as it becomes apparent that sometimes elucidating sought after truths is secondary to the divergent revelations of the quest wherein they are potentially sequestered, as new avenues of inquiry are brought to life.
If the actual question indeed finds an answer the secondary/tertiary/. . . tributaries can still be categorically synthesized through the production of a multidimensional social democratic topography, modestly celebrating the new (the collection of letters Oskar sends out in the end).
The degree of ease with which such a topography is manifested directly corresponds to the intensity of the author's desire to illuminate his or her original inquiry.
Stephen Daldry's Extremely Loud and Incredibly Close humanizes research while providing a matrix through which one can rationally seek solutions to seemingly interminable problems.
As long as you stick to the plan.
By populating his thesis with living breathing representatives of New York's undeniable particularity, Oskar indirectly creates a community while simultaneously emphasizing the tragedy of 9/11, thereby universalizing his personal loss.
The research process itself is romanticized as it becomes apparent that sometimes elucidating sought after truths is secondary to the divergent revelations of the quest wherein they are potentially sequestered, as new avenues of inquiry are brought to life.
If the actual question indeed finds an answer the secondary/tertiary/. . . tributaries can still be categorically synthesized through the production of a multidimensional social democratic topography, modestly celebrating the new (the collection of letters Oskar sends out in the end).
The degree of ease with which such a topography is manifested directly corresponds to the intensity of the author's desire to illuminate his or her original inquiry.
Underworld: Awakening
Vampires and werewolves are at in again in Awakening, the latest instalment in the Underworld series.
Fan favourite Selene (Kate Beckinsale) is set free from her chamber after having been preserved on ice for a dozen years at a medical corporation known as Antigen. Instantaneously regaining her combative flexibility, she terrorizes the surrounding security forces in order to acrobatically escape the premises.
In search of lover and vampire/lycan hybrid Michael Corvin.
Little does she know that during her cryogenic slumber she gave birth to a hybrid child known as Subject 2/Eve (India Eisley) whom the lycans now viciously seek.
She rescues her daughter from their clutches and is then fortunately provided with sanctuary at a secretive coven by the curious and friendly David (Theo James).
But the lycans soon come calling and successfully recapture little Eve before taking her back to home base.
Serene must now break into Antigen and rescue her daughter before the diabolical Dr. Jacob Lane (Stephen Rea) can cut her to pieces.
And proliferate his cure.
Oh, and humans caught on to the existence of vampires and lycans and killed most of them during The Purge which took place at the time Antigen acquired Serene.
If you really like the Underworld series and don't mind that its lore isn't significantly internally diversified or particularized, and are only seeking an hour-and-a-half of fast paced tormented action, Awakening will work for you, as it contains that which you desire.
If you are seeking the historical element that made some of its predecessors more noteworthy steer clear as there's little of tangential yet critical value within besides a brute examination of different generational attitudes concerning survival, a regenerative super-lycan (whose presence goes nowhere) (Kris Holden-Ried as Quint Lane), and a visionary cop (Michael Ealy as Detective Sebastian) who doesn't want to recondition The Purge's hysteria.
Headstrong, stunted and brief.
Could have used less hyperactivity.
Fan favourite Selene (Kate Beckinsale) is set free from her chamber after having been preserved on ice for a dozen years at a medical corporation known as Antigen. Instantaneously regaining her combative flexibility, she terrorizes the surrounding security forces in order to acrobatically escape the premises.
In search of lover and vampire/lycan hybrid Michael Corvin.
Little does she know that during her cryogenic slumber she gave birth to a hybrid child known as Subject 2/Eve (India Eisley) whom the lycans now viciously seek.
She rescues her daughter from their clutches and is then fortunately provided with sanctuary at a secretive coven by the curious and friendly David (Theo James).
But the lycans soon come calling and successfully recapture little Eve before taking her back to home base.
Serene must now break into Antigen and rescue her daughter before the diabolical Dr. Jacob Lane (Stephen Rea) can cut her to pieces.
And proliferate his cure.
Oh, and humans caught on to the existence of vampires and lycans and killed most of them during The Purge which took place at the time Antigen acquired Serene.
If you really like the Underworld series and don't mind that its lore isn't significantly internally diversified or particularized, and are only seeking an hour-and-a-half of fast paced tormented action, Awakening will work for you, as it contains that which you desire.
If you are seeking the historical element that made some of its predecessors more noteworthy steer clear as there's little of tangential yet critical value within besides a brute examination of different generational attitudes concerning survival, a regenerative super-lycan (whose presence goes nowhere) (Kris Holden-Ried as Quint Lane), and a visionary cop (Michael Ealy as Detective Sebastian) who doesn't want to recondition The Purge's hysteria.
Headstrong, stunted and brief.
Could have used less hyperactivity.
Sunday, January 29, 2012
Skyline
I like what Colin and Greg Strause set out to do in Skyline. As aliens invade Los Angeles and start harvesting humans it only focuses on one small group of friends and a concierge who helps them out (David Zayas as Oliver). Arguments regarding how they should proceed are introduced, some wishing to stay put in a high rise apartment, others seeking to make a break for the ocean and escape on a yacht. With no means of communicating with the outside world and discovering the extent of what is happening, they need to employ their best judgment and rapidly decide what must be immediately done.
Before they're transformed into inhuman monsters.
And when the unknown zealously threatens your survival what should you immediately do? Remain hidden in your inconspicuous shelter, cowering behind a bookcase in a corner, or directly engage the unforeseen, if necessary, as you attempt to navigate your way through its treacherous set of destructive circumstances?
On your way to freedom.
Freedom obviously isn't guaranteed but its appeal generates a degree of unquenchable hope in the breasts of its proponents who think the aliens won't scour the high seas as vigilantly as they harvest the city.
Skyline's streamlined specific focus would have been smoother had the group's internal interactions possessed a greater flair.
For what lies beneath.
But I suppose that's the point. When a crushing external force prevents you from accessing your terms of reference, nothing but a suffocated trepidatious version of those terms remains, anxiously clutching the surface.
That's the point I swear.
Before they're transformed into inhuman monsters.
And when the unknown zealously threatens your survival what should you immediately do? Remain hidden in your inconspicuous shelter, cowering behind a bookcase in a corner, or directly engage the unforeseen, if necessary, as you attempt to navigate your way through its treacherous set of destructive circumstances?
On your way to freedom.
Freedom obviously isn't guaranteed but its appeal generates a degree of unquenchable hope in the breasts of its proponents who think the aliens won't scour the high seas as vigilantly as they harvest the city.
Skyline's streamlined specific focus would have been smoother had the group's internal interactions possessed a greater flair.
For what lies beneath.
But I suppose that's the point. When a crushing external force prevents you from accessing your terms of reference, nothing but a suffocated trepidatious version of those terms remains, anxiously clutching the surface.
That's the point I swear.
Saturday, January 28, 2012
The Grey
A plane crashes in the sub-arctic Alaskan wilderness and its survivors find themselves hunted by a pack of blood thirsty wolves. Who knows why this particular pack decides to suddenly start attacking Liam Neeson (Ottway) and his co-workers (Neeson theorizes that they have crashed too close to their den) but they uncharacteristically do and Joe Carnahan's The Grey unreels in their pursuit.
Thinking they'll be safer in the woods and that a rescue team will never find them, this group of rugged drifters and loners leaves the crash sight and struggles to make their way across a barren stretch of frozen ground amidst brutal winds and freezing temperatures, one of them devoured en route.
After the rest of them make it, the wolves continue to circle and prey and in between confrontations we learn more about their troubled lives. They continue to move forward with the pack at their backs, arguing and conversing along the way.
In the end only one remains, having shockingly persevered longer than his fallen brethren.
Ready to battle the alpha.
Ignoring the logistics of everything that actually takes place in The Grey and focusing on how it recklessly pits a wild and brazen group of freewheeling hard-living workers up against their grizzled natural counterparts in a ludicrous unforgiving clash of human versus animal kind, may make the film more digestible.
In terms of the absurd.
Figuring that Neeson would be given the majority of the lines, I was interested in seeing whether or not his dramatic flexibility was still capable of motivating an entire film, from beginning to end. But my calculations were incorrect and the supporting cast is given plenty of room to manoeuvre, giving Neeson time to sit back and carefully structure his lines with shrewd deliberate nuances whose intermittent interjections and patient intonations carefully unify the supporting cast's dynamics in a thoughtful cohesive heterogeneity.
While the wolves constantly disrupt their unity.
Some of the lines seem like they came straight from an oil rig as well which gives them an endearing authentic quality.
In terms of what to do should your plane crash in a remote location, The Grey offers little practical advice.
Unless wolves begin to insatiably stalk you.
But as far as films celebrating derelict itinerant dispositions go, The Grey's not that bad, and perhaps by making its subject matter foolish, Carnahan tries to lure us into the narrative unconsciously, by harnessing the helpless qualities of our disbelief, thereby making us feel more like the characters in his film.
Thinking they'll be safer in the woods and that a rescue team will never find them, this group of rugged drifters and loners leaves the crash sight and struggles to make their way across a barren stretch of frozen ground amidst brutal winds and freezing temperatures, one of them devoured en route.
After the rest of them make it, the wolves continue to circle and prey and in between confrontations we learn more about their troubled lives. They continue to move forward with the pack at their backs, arguing and conversing along the way.
In the end only one remains, having shockingly persevered longer than his fallen brethren.
Ready to battle the alpha.
Ignoring the logistics of everything that actually takes place in The Grey and focusing on how it recklessly pits a wild and brazen group of freewheeling hard-living workers up against their grizzled natural counterparts in a ludicrous unforgiving clash of human versus animal kind, may make the film more digestible.
In terms of the absurd.
Figuring that Neeson would be given the majority of the lines, I was interested in seeing whether or not his dramatic flexibility was still capable of motivating an entire film, from beginning to end. But my calculations were incorrect and the supporting cast is given plenty of room to manoeuvre, giving Neeson time to sit back and carefully structure his lines with shrewd deliberate nuances whose intermittent interjections and patient intonations carefully unify the supporting cast's dynamics in a thoughtful cohesive heterogeneity.
While the wolves constantly disrupt their unity.
Some of the lines seem like they came straight from an oil rig as well which gives them an endearing authentic quality.
In terms of what to do should your plane crash in a remote location, The Grey offers little practical advice.
Unless wolves begin to insatiably stalk you.
But as far as films celebrating derelict itinerant dispositions go, The Grey's not that bad, and perhaps by making its subject matter foolish, Carnahan tries to lure us into the narrative unconsciously, by harnessing the helpless qualities of our disbelief, thereby making us feel more like the characters in his film.
Sunday, January 22, 2012
The Curse of Frankenstein
Dr. Victor Frankenstein (Peter Cushing) is at it again in Terence Fisher's The Curse of Frankenstein, a Hammer Films production. Having grown audacious after reanimating a small dog, the Doctor sets his sights on the construction of the perfect human being, to be made up of parts cut away from fitting lifeless specimens. His partner and former tutor Paul Krempe (Robert Urquhart) contends that his path can only lead to evil but Frankenstein refuses to heed his warning and proceeds unabated. But the local crop of corpses will not supply a top rate brain which leads Victor to wine and dine a revered scientist (Paul Hardtmuth as Professor Bernstein) before murdering him later on in the evening. Krempe discovers what he has done and in the ensuing struggle damages the sought after material. Is this what causes Frankenstein's creation to act childishly and violently or was it the fact that it was brought back to life in the first place that guaranteed its inability to cognitively function?
Having subverted the laws of nature.
Fisher's film doesn't answer this question but does provide those searching to see Peter Cushing play someone besides Grand Moff Tarkin with the chance to watch him at work early on in his career. His performance is convincing enough even though several scenes could have benefited from additional takes, and more crafty editing, and another round of dialogue adjustments, and a keener insight into the logical timing of key events which move the action along. But The Curse of Frankenstein isn't about editing and dialogue and presenting captivating enticing scenes. It's about shooting a readymade script in as little time as possible in order to capitalize on the product, reinvest, and do it all over again and again while cultivating a receptive audience and slowly learning to enhance your constructions as time steadily passes.
And spending most of the budget on the lab, wherein there are many pretty scientific instruments and bubbling beakers and frothing 'fermentations' and a Frankenstein (Christopher Lee).
Desperately seeking life.
Having subverted the laws of nature.
Fisher's film doesn't answer this question but does provide those searching to see Peter Cushing play someone besides Grand Moff Tarkin with the chance to watch him at work early on in his career. His performance is convincing enough even though several scenes could have benefited from additional takes, and more crafty editing, and another round of dialogue adjustments, and a keener insight into the logical timing of key events which move the action along. But The Curse of Frankenstein isn't about editing and dialogue and presenting captivating enticing scenes. It's about shooting a readymade script in as little time as possible in order to capitalize on the product, reinvest, and do it all over again and again while cultivating a receptive audience and slowly learning to enhance your constructions as time steadily passes.
And spending most of the budget on the lab, wherein there are many pretty scientific instruments and bubbling beakers and frothing 'fermentations' and a Frankenstein (Christopher Lee).
Desperately seeking life.
Saturday, January 21, 2012
Careful
Oedipal values. Strict discipline. Polished refinement. Unyielding dedication.
The Alpine village of Tolzbad is stricken with alimentary sentiments whose counterproductive yearnings threaten its cohesive fortitude. Silence and obedience are resolutely inculcated as objective reminders of embryonic resuscitations remain cast off and docile. Dreams serve to lacerate adhesions, while palpating intoxicating allegiances, whose nostalgic loyalties resist ethereal pressures and condemn those seeking both forbidden and propitious pleasures, arduously seek satisfaction.
In the flesh.
The vocal chords of animals must be cut. Hearts punctured after death ensure eternal sleep.
I will do anything for you.
Relinquished yet stilted rebirth.
A comedic sense of terror is dramatically worked into a stifling set of immutable characteristics which maintain a supple lighthearted generosity in Guy Maddin's imaginative Careful.
Multilayered scene after dynamic scene segregates its narrative from the realm of conscious production while providing a template for the remodelling of the expected whose boutique would most likely remain concealed.
Purposefully frustrating or frustrated with a purpose, Careful introduces a disengaged sense of disingenuous perplexity whose recalcitrant creative ethos should be heuristically taken seriously.
The Alpine village of Tolzbad is stricken with alimentary sentiments whose counterproductive yearnings threaten its cohesive fortitude. Silence and obedience are resolutely inculcated as objective reminders of embryonic resuscitations remain cast off and docile. Dreams serve to lacerate adhesions, while palpating intoxicating allegiances, whose nostalgic loyalties resist ethereal pressures and condemn those seeking both forbidden and propitious pleasures, arduously seek satisfaction.
In the flesh.
The vocal chords of animals must be cut. Hearts punctured after death ensure eternal sleep.
I will do anything for you.
Relinquished yet stilted rebirth.
A comedic sense of terror is dramatically worked into a stifling set of immutable characteristics which maintain a supple lighthearted generosity in Guy Maddin's imaginative Careful.
Multilayered scene after dynamic scene segregates its narrative from the realm of conscious production while providing a template for the remodelling of the expected whose boutique would most likely remain concealed.
Purposefully frustrating or frustrated with a purpose, Careful introduces a disengaged sense of disingenuous perplexity whose recalcitrant creative ethos should be heuristically taken seriously.
Sunday, January 15, 2012
Mission: Impossible - Ghost Protocol
Can't say I've spent too much time watching the Mission: Impossible films, but as far as thrilling, accelerated, turbulent action movies go, Ghost Protocol is a success, as Ethan Hunt (Tom Cruise) improvises his way through another set of death defying circumstances, this time without the assistance of IMF.
Split-second decision making is instantaneously necessitated as plans see their counterpoints meticulously materialized through the systematic art of strategic vivisection.
Such decisions are supplied with as much logic as can be rationally fastened to their temporal limitations in order to obtain their furtive objectives.
Such logic need not be brilliantly qualified, but must possess enough cohesive extensions to readily trick its antagonists into falling for its deception.
If these extensions lose their psycho-material appeal, the related temporal limitations become increasingly restrictive.
Requiring an ass kicking.
Hunt and his innovative team still manage to move undetected from Moscow to Dubai to Mumbai with enough resources at their disposal to technologically infiltrate seemingly inextricable defensive infrastructures without being backed up by headquarters.
Agilely keeping an ace in the hole.
Split-second decision making is instantaneously necessitated as plans see their counterpoints meticulously materialized through the systematic art of strategic vivisection.
Such decisions are supplied with as much logic as can be rationally fastened to their temporal limitations in order to obtain their furtive objectives.
Such logic need not be brilliantly qualified, but must possess enough cohesive extensions to readily trick its antagonists into falling for its deception.
If these extensions lose their psycho-material appeal, the related temporal limitations become increasingly restrictive.
Requiring an ass kicking.
Hunt and his innovative team still manage to move undetected from Moscow to Dubai to Mumbai with enough resources at their disposal to technologically infiltrate seemingly inextricable defensive infrastructures without being backed up by headquarters.
Agilely keeping an ace in the hole.
Saturday, January 14, 2012
We Bought a Zoo
What do you do after your partner dies, you quit your job, your son is expelled, and it feels like your thirst for adventure is wantonly drying up?
You move your family to the country after buying yourself a zoo, that's what you do, and do everything in your power to turn its fortunes around.
This is precisely what happens in Cameron Crowe's lively new film We Bought a Zoo, based on the true story of Benjamin Mee's purchase of the Dartmoor Zoological Park in Devon, England.
Full of entrepreneurial grit and zoological tenacity, Mr. Mee (Matt Damon) doesn't let minor details like having no experience at all in regards to zoo management get in his way, as he risks his remaining capital and gets to know his dedicated staff.
Will taking care of a wide variety of animal species in the hopes of bringing his zoo up to code so that the public can wonder at their ferocious longevity and provide him with the funds to stay in business enable him to get over his wife's death and develop stronger bonds with his two children?
Will the charms of stunning young feisty zoologist Kelly Foster (Scarlett Johansson) play an integral role in his personal transformation and demand that he learn to let go?
Will prickly zoo inspector Walter Ferris's (John Michael Higgins) dismissive demeanour teach him that the biggest adventure of all is learning how to play by the rules?
And will an escaped grizzly bear function as the catalyst that displaces one means of production for another?
Through the passage of time.
We Bought a Zoo makes me wish I could buy the shit out of a zoo and manage it and take care of all the animals and slug beers with my staff and analyze the porcupines etc.
It's an evocative enlivening testament to the strength of the human spirit which is challenged at every turn and rejuvenated through the art of sociozoology.
You move your family to the country after buying yourself a zoo, that's what you do, and do everything in your power to turn its fortunes around.
This is precisely what happens in Cameron Crowe's lively new film We Bought a Zoo, based on the true story of Benjamin Mee's purchase of the Dartmoor Zoological Park in Devon, England.
Full of entrepreneurial grit and zoological tenacity, Mr. Mee (Matt Damon) doesn't let minor details like having no experience at all in regards to zoo management get in his way, as he risks his remaining capital and gets to know his dedicated staff.
Will taking care of a wide variety of animal species in the hopes of bringing his zoo up to code so that the public can wonder at their ferocious longevity and provide him with the funds to stay in business enable him to get over his wife's death and develop stronger bonds with his two children?
Will the charms of stunning young feisty zoologist Kelly Foster (Scarlett Johansson) play an integral role in his personal transformation and demand that he learn to let go?
Will prickly zoo inspector Walter Ferris's (John Michael Higgins) dismissive demeanour teach him that the biggest adventure of all is learning how to play by the rules?
And will an escaped grizzly bear function as the catalyst that displaces one means of production for another?
Through the passage of time.
We Bought a Zoo makes me wish I could buy the shit out of a zoo and manage it and take care of all the animals and slug beers with my staff and analyze the porcupines etc.
It's an evocative enlivening testament to the strength of the human spirit which is challenged at every turn and rejuvenated through the art of sociozoology.
Monday, January 9, 2012
The Descendants
An Hawaiian lawyer's textbook life is adulterously disrupted after his wife has a boating accident rendering her comatose and their eldest daughter reveals the secrets of her infidelities. Her coma forces him to take an active role in the rearing of their two daughters to whom he has remained patriarchally aloof for most of their lives. His family is incredibly wealthy however his relatives have squandered most of their fortune and hope to sell off 25,000 acres of coastal land holdings in order to continue to support their lavish lifestyles. He is the sole trustee of the family trust which controls the land and has the final say in how it is managed.
Alexander Payne's The Descendants follows him closely as he gets to know his children, seeks to meet his wife's love interest, and decides what to do with his family's inheritance. As much of an exploration of shock as it is an examination of improvisation, the knowledge Matt King (George Clooney) relies upon to ensure his success in the legal realm finds itself curiously deconstructed when confronted with that of the domestic.
As he struggles to comprehend.
Acknowledging that the cookie-cutter approach to living has its share of unforeseen non-transmissible calisthenics, he still finds a means through which to visualize permanence. Less a reflection on the self-absorbed behaviour that results in partners seeking attention elsewhere than a thorough elevation of frugality, void of risk, The Descendants offers scene upon scene of pristine Hawaiian imagery without making them seem beautiful.
Not turning 25,000 acres of coastal land into a resort because you believe some wilderness areas should be protected from commercial development for future generations would be beautiful. Not turning 25,000 acres of coastal land into a resort because you believe its permanence represents your smug superiority is not beautiful.
Alexander Payne's The Descendants follows him closely as he gets to know his children, seeks to meet his wife's love interest, and decides what to do with his family's inheritance. As much of an exploration of shock as it is an examination of improvisation, the knowledge Matt King (George Clooney) relies upon to ensure his success in the legal realm finds itself curiously deconstructed when confronted with that of the domestic.
As he struggles to comprehend.
Acknowledging that the cookie-cutter approach to living has its share of unforeseen non-transmissible calisthenics, he still finds a means through which to visualize permanence. Less a reflection on the self-absorbed behaviour that results in partners seeking attention elsewhere than a thorough elevation of frugality, void of risk, The Descendants offers scene upon scene of pristine Hawaiian imagery without making them seem beautiful.
Not turning 25,000 acres of coastal land into a resort because you believe some wilderness areas should be protected from commercial development for future generations would be beautiful. Not turning 25,000 acres of coastal land into a resort because you believe its permanence represents your smug superiority is not beautiful.
Friday, January 6, 2012
The Girl with the Dragon Tattoo
A murderer has avoided detection for decades. A journalist's reputation has been publicly ridiculed. A brilliant young researcher's incredible talent flourishes. A family's dark secrets seek revelation.
Patterns lie hidden within eclectic sources. Technological expertise facilitates their synthesization. The resultant thesis can be investigated with meticulous precision. Alternatives and subterfuges staggeringly structure the aggregate.
David Fincher's version of The Girl with the Dragon Tattoo is a sombre subterranean endeavour. Deeply digging into clandestine contrivances frenetically attempting to function without restraint, it descends into the feverish dementia affluently prospering beyond the restrictions of amicability.
And exorcises demons.
Ostracized individuals use their resourcefulness to disentangle an established privileged network from within and bring its mastermind to justice.
Having recreated a foothold within their culture's social fabric, divisions remain which prevent them from socializing on their gains.
Patterns lie hidden within eclectic sources. Technological expertise facilitates their synthesization. The resultant thesis can be investigated with meticulous precision. Alternatives and subterfuges staggeringly structure the aggregate.
David Fincher's version of The Girl with the Dragon Tattoo is a sombre subterranean endeavour. Deeply digging into clandestine contrivances frenetically attempting to function without restraint, it descends into the feverish dementia affluently prospering beyond the restrictions of amicability.
And exorcises demons.
Ostracized individuals use their resourcefulness to disentangle an established privileged network from within and bring its mastermind to justice.
Having recreated a foothold within their culture's social fabric, divisions remain which prevent them from socializing on their gains.
Thursday, December 29, 2011
War Horse
Trudging through the war torn European countryside, using skills learned from a forgiving instructor to survive, a horse alertly struggles through World War I, making the most of his talents as he's haplessly acquired by different armies. Functioning as a valuable fortuitous representative of pluck, he resignedly forgoes his wild instincts until circumstances demand their acceleration. As a consequence, he becomes inextricably entangled with imperialist hostilities, an indelible illustration of apocalyptic freedom. External forces most then intervene to secure his release, employing logic and chance to facilitate its realization.
Steven Spielberg's War Horse successfully depicts the brutality of war without glorifying its retributive catharsis (without accenting the accompanying felicity that results from crushing jingoistic calamities). Simplified scenes exemplifying sincere trust or pastoral serenity (the French grandfather [Niels Arestrup] and granddaughter [Celine Buckens]) are juxtaposed with militaristic might to highlight the sharp distinction maintained between these domains. The concept of order is resultantly polarized as well since war represents an extreme form of total mobilization (organization) (you will be shot if you don't follow orders) while the trust built into an idyllic existence organizes necessity (you must work to continuously reproduce your quality of life) in relation to the imagination (it's still possible to enjoy yourself once the work is complete). One approach necessarily tethers fantasy to a definite specific goal while the other leaves it free to roam and discover/create concrete or abstract objects.
The discovery of these concrete or abstract objects may or may not relate directly to your work at hand but in War Horse's opening moments they certainly do. Ted Narracott (Peter Mullan) decides to outbid his landlord for a riding horse which he cannot afford. In order to make the payments, the horse must plow a rocky field that the village has dismissed as unmanageable. Ted's son Albert (Jeremy Irvine) teaches the horse to pull a plow and the land is thereby tilled. Thus, Ted's imagination allows him to believe that he can procure something which can then assist him in earning his living while also providing him with the means to pursue other interests (in his case, drinking, in his son's, horse riding). Unfortunately, a storm ruins his crops forcing him to sell his horse to the military.
And his son signs up for war.
Steven Spielberg's War Horse successfully depicts the brutality of war without glorifying its retributive catharsis (without accenting the accompanying felicity that results from crushing jingoistic calamities). Simplified scenes exemplifying sincere trust or pastoral serenity (the French grandfather [Niels Arestrup] and granddaughter [Celine Buckens]) are juxtaposed with militaristic might to highlight the sharp distinction maintained between these domains. The concept of order is resultantly polarized as well since war represents an extreme form of total mobilization (organization) (you will be shot if you don't follow orders) while the trust built into an idyllic existence organizes necessity (you must work to continuously reproduce your quality of life) in relation to the imagination (it's still possible to enjoy yourself once the work is complete). One approach necessarily tethers fantasy to a definite specific goal while the other leaves it free to roam and discover/create concrete or abstract objects.
The discovery of these concrete or abstract objects may or may not relate directly to your work at hand but in War Horse's opening moments they certainly do. Ted Narracott (Peter Mullan) decides to outbid his landlord for a riding horse which he cannot afford. In order to make the payments, the horse must plow a rocky field that the village has dismissed as unmanageable. Ted's son Albert (Jeremy Irvine) teaches the horse to pull a plow and the land is thereby tilled. Thus, Ted's imagination allows him to believe that he can procure something which can then assist him in earning his living while also providing him with the means to pursue other interests (in his case, drinking, in his son's, horse riding). Unfortunately, a storm ruins his crops forcing him to sell his horse to the military.
And his son signs up for war.
Tuesday, December 27, 2011
The Adventures of Tintin: The Secret of the Unicorn
An adventure accidentally presents itself as commodities are exchanged. A secret lies deep within unconscious depths hidden beneath years of unchecked alcohol consumption. A helpful dog continuously discovers solutions to associated problems. And innocent Tintin proceeds unrelentingly.
Three clues have been placed within the masts of three model ships which represent a sunken vessel known as the Unicorn. A resourceful scoundrel seeks to decipher these clues in order to harvest a bountiful treasure. Tintin (Jamie Bell) is kidnapped and forced to take part in his quest. After cleverly escaping his captor's clutches, he meets a saucy Sea Captain (Andy Serkis) with whom he was born to encapsulate.
Steven Spielberg's The Adventures of Tintin youthfully and energetically galvanizes this filmic variation of the Tintin franchise. Fast paced deliberate inquisitive action meets dedicated trustworthy crafty redemption as comic interjections intermittently lighten the tension and purpose unites difference in the bonds of collaborative friendship. Travel is a necessity. Responses must be made according to specific temporal restrictions. The competition is ruthless and eager to displease. And historical antagonisms have been built into the dynamic so that contemporary animosities take on a legendary character.
It's very athletic.
Amiable and fun and full of life and nimble energy, The Adventures of Tintin is an enlivening family friendly film which pleasantly cushions the holiday season.
Three clues have been placed within the masts of three model ships which represent a sunken vessel known as the Unicorn. A resourceful scoundrel seeks to decipher these clues in order to harvest a bountiful treasure. Tintin (Jamie Bell) is kidnapped and forced to take part in his quest. After cleverly escaping his captor's clutches, he meets a saucy Sea Captain (Andy Serkis) with whom he was born to encapsulate.
Steven Spielberg's The Adventures of Tintin youthfully and energetically galvanizes this filmic variation of the Tintin franchise. Fast paced deliberate inquisitive action meets dedicated trustworthy crafty redemption as comic interjections intermittently lighten the tension and purpose unites difference in the bonds of collaborative friendship. Travel is a necessity. Responses must be made according to specific temporal restrictions. The competition is ruthless and eager to displease. And historical antagonisms have been built into the dynamic so that contemporary animosities take on a legendary character.
It's very athletic.
Amiable and fun and full of life and nimble energy, The Adventures of Tintin is an enlivening family friendly film which pleasantly cushions the holiday season.
Sunday, December 18, 2011
Sherlock Holmes: A Game of Shadows
Wasn't as impressed with Sherlock Holmes: A Game of Shadows as I was with Guy Ritchie's first instalment. Holmes's (Robert Downey Jr.) remarkable wit and resilient problem solving skills are once again prominently on display and his whimsical interactions with Dr. Watson (Jude Law) continue to entertain. The fast paced reactive comedic drama moves the plot along with picturesque pinpoint precision. An erudite athletic warrior who constantly goes out of his way to massage his own ego still seeks to prevent the masters of war from obtaining their goals. And the meticulous attention to detail worked into his split second evaluations commands a heightened degree of respect as the concept of awareness receives a veraciously sharp intrepid exposition.
But these elements aren't tied together particularly well.
Professor Moriarty (Jared Harris) struggles to maintain Holmes's level of acute alacrity. Some of the novelties which worked well in the first film such as Holmes's pugilistic propensities take up too much time in Game of Shadows to the detriment of his observational acumen. While the dialogue energetically motivates the action while hypothesizing/researching/analyzing/synthesizing the script seems like it was written with an equal degree of haste and more care could have been taken to include harmonious linguistic formulations (some incredible synergies would have resulted had these been in place)(linguistic formulations whose appealing character could have matched the intellectual intensity of the action). Having Holmes attempt to halt the escalation of a major European war places him in a position too grandiose for the execution of a successful first sequel (it's too over the top). And the female characters become static cardboard cutouts as the action progresses, Irene Adler (Rachel McAdams) having been poisoned in the opening moments.
While exciting enough and possessing a rationalized frenetic frequency, Game of Shadows attempts to move beyond the constructs of its predecessor too quickly while relying on them too strictly, and comes across as rash rather than bold, violently crashing into the sun.
But these elements aren't tied together particularly well.
Professor Moriarty (Jared Harris) struggles to maintain Holmes's level of acute alacrity. Some of the novelties which worked well in the first film such as Holmes's pugilistic propensities take up too much time in Game of Shadows to the detriment of his observational acumen. While the dialogue energetically motivates the action while hypothesizing/researching/analyzing/synthesizing the script seems like it was written with an equal degree of haste and more care could have been taken to include harmonious linguistic formulations (some incredible synergies would have resulted had these been in place)(linguistic formulations whose appealing character could have matched the intellectual intensity of the action). Having Holmes attempt to halt the escalation of a major European war places him in a position too grandiose for the execution of a successful first sequel (it's too over the top). And the female characters become static cardboard cutouts as the action progresses, Irene Adler (Rachel McAdams) having been poisoned in the opening moments.
While exciting enough and possessing a rationalized frenetic frequency, Game of Shadows attempts to move beyond the constructs of its predecessor too quickly while relying on them too strictly, and comes across as rash rather than bold, violently crashing into the sun.
Saturday, December 17, 2011
Hugo
Time requires maintenance. Each ticking tock must be delicately managed in order to ensure punctual consistency and historical longevity. This is no easy task, and cataclysmic events can disrupt its narrative flow, as can the resurrection of the unforeseen, the one terrorizing established norms and constructs in the maniacal hopes of strengthening their resolve (the masters of war), the other invigorating traditional forms with revitalized content which in turn can redesign them if the insertion of difference is compelling enough to transmit a reconstituted concrete variability (inception) while (eventually) finding a receptive influential audience (innovative exoteric visionaries). Time will continue to pass regardless but its acknowledgement and associated terms of reference (habitual action X producing results D reinforced by the creation of pattern H) will need a cultural catalyst, from which things can begin anew.
We see both sides of this matrix at work in Martin Scorsese's exceptional new film Hugo, which examines the relationship between an orphan and an elderly toymaker. The orphan Hugo (Asa Butterfield) lives in the walls of a Parisian train station where he diligently keeps its various clocks running on time. From these walls, he eyes George Méliès's (Ben Kingsley) toyshop in the hopes of obtaining parts which will help him fix an automaton which was acquired by his father (Jude Law) before his untimely death. Inspector Gustav (Sacha Baron Cohen) monitors the station's passageways with a strong desire to uphold law and order (and send orphans to the orphanage). Monsieur Labisse (Christopher Lee) operates a dusty bookshop from which he encourages a love of lifelong learning.
Time was disrupted within Hugo's narrative by the introduction of film making to the Parisian artistic scene. Infatuated with the medium, a magician builds his own camera in order to share the dreamscapes of his imaginings. Having cultivated an audience, he continues to create profusely thereby compartmentalizing various tenants of his vision. But World War I annihilates many markets successfully established in France and beyond, and in its aftermath his audience fails to rematerialize and his films must be sold and melted down.
Time passes and due to the serendipitous reverberations of two curious youths an historical echo increases its volume. Hugo and his friend Isabelle (Chloë Grace Moretz) discover a mystery whose clues lead them to volumes housed in a local library. From these volumes, clues transform into probabilities and an unconscious cultural qualifier approaches remanifestation. An automaton whose ability to produce felicitous active images is brought back to life through the ingenuity of friendship, and returned to its creator.
And an innovative exoteric visionary's legacy is recognized and celebrated, having been resurrected from the ashes of the masters of war. One of time's great disruptions is rediscovered and catalogued in order to ensure its historical longevity.
We see both sides of this matrix at work in Martin Scorsese's exceptional new film Hugo, which examines the relationship between an orphan and an elderly toymaker. The orphan Hugo (Asa Butterfield) lives in the walls of a Parisian train station where he diligently keeps its various clocks running on time. From these walls, he eyes George Méliès's (Ben Kingsley) toyshop in the hopes of obtaining parts which will help him fix an automaton which was acquired by his father (Jude Law) before his untimely death. Inspector Gustav (Sacha Baron Cohen) monitors the station's passageways with a strong desire to uphold law and order (and send orphans to the orphanage). Monsieur Labisse (Christopher Lee) operates a dusty bookshop from which he encourages a love of lifelong learning.
Time was disrupted within Hugo's narrative by the introduction of film making to the Parisian artistic scene. Infatuated with the medium, a magician builds his own camera in order to share the dreamscapes of his imaginings. Having cultivated an audience, he continues to create profusely thereby compartmentalizing various tenants of his vision. But World War I annihilates many markets successfully established in France and beyond, and in its aftermath his audience fails to rematerialize and his films must be sold and melted down.
Time passes and due to the serendipitous reverberations of two curious youths an historical echo increases its volume. Hugo and his friend Isabelle (Chloë Grace Moretz) discover a mystery whose clues lead them to volumes housed in a local library. From these volumes, clues transform into probabilities and an unconscious cultural qualifier approaches remanifestation. An automaton whose ability to produce felicitous active images is brought back to life through the ingenuity of friendship, and returned to its creator.
And an innovative exoteric visionary's legacy is recognized and celebrated, having been resurrected from the ashes of the masters of war. One of time's great disruptions is rediscovered and catalogued in order to ensure its historical longevity.
Sunday, December 11, 2011
J. Edgar
Clint Eastwood's J. Edgar situates a cunning politico-ethical land mine deep within the socio-American filmic vortex which combusts a manufactured traditional market by highlighting the contribution of gay Americans to the creation of some of their most revered institutions.
According to this film, there is no doubt that J. Edgar Hoover (Leonardo DiCaprio) loved his country (or his conception of his country). His opposition to radical elements and disgust with the ways in which the media glorified gangsters is relentless as he pursues the incarceration of outlaws while demanding nothing but refined conduct from his employees. As director of the FBI, he significantly expands its agency through the acquisition of legal and economic resources while patiently and obsessively focusing on the cultivation of its public reputation. Deeply and resolutely committed to the idea that public figures must comport themselves with the utmost integrity, he sharply manages both the conduct of his agents and the public perceptions of the conduct of his agents while placing himself in the forefront whenever possible. Paranoid and power mad and willing to take down those whose popularity risks rivalling his own, he delicately balances the relationship between democratic efficiency and bureaucratic autocracy throughout the course of his lengthy career, agilely avoiding the sword of Damocles.
But there's one problem.
He has no interest in women and loves Clyde Tolson (Armie Hammer) who has been by his side for the majority of his career. His private life has been defined by the politico-ethical foundations of his public pursuits as undesirable, which encourages a significant degree of anxiety. This extra layer of anxiety adds additional pressure to his institutional position which already demands a heightened degree of caution.
Hence, paranoia.
But he still skillfully utilizes his considerable gifts to survive within a heteronormative domain wherein he succeeds in accomplishing remarkable feats, even though his memory of such feats may be somewhat exaggerated.
It can be argued that his achievements were the results of his repression and that he wouldn't have been able to survive in a cutthroat competitive professional climate without having had the added bonus of developing exceptional survival instincts through the art of concealment in his youth.
But who in their right mind wants to nurture a public sphere which necessitates the dissimulation of strengths when their cultivation could increase the intensity of said sphere's productive tendencies by enabling its representatives to energize their freedoms? There's no telling what else J. Edgar could have been able to accomplish had he been nurtured in an environment where sexual difference was respected and he didn't have to consistently expend psychological resources to distract attention away from the most beautiful parts of his personality.
According to this film, there is no doubt that J. Edgar Hoover (Leonardo DiCaprio) loved his country (or his conception of his country). His opposition to radical elements and disgust with the ways in which the media glorified gangsters is relentless as he pursues the incarceration of outlaws while demanding nothing but refined conduct from his employees. As director of the FBI, he significantly expands its agency through the acquisition of legal and economic resources while patiently and obsessively focusing on the cultivation of its public reputation. Deeply and resolutely committed to the idea that public figures must comport themselves with the utmost integrity, he sharply manages both the conduct of his agents and the public perceptions of the conduct of his agents while placing himself in the forefront whenever possible. Paranoid and power mad and willing to take down those whose popularity risks rivalling his own, he delicately balances the relationship between democratic efficiency and bureaucratic autocracy throughout the course of his lengthy career, agilely avoiding the sword of Damocles.
But there's one problem.
He has no interest in women and loves Clyde Tolson (Armie Hammer) who has been by his side for the majority of his career. His private life has been defined by the politico-ethical foundations of his public pursuits as undesirable, which encourages a significant degree of anxiety. This extra layer of anxiety adds additional pressure to his institutional position which already demands a heightened degree of caution.
Hence, paranoia.
But he still skillfully utilizes his considerable gifts to survive within a heteronormative domain wherein he succeeds in accomplishing remarkable feats, even though his memory of such feats may be somewhat exaggerated.
It can be argued that his achievements were the results of his repression and that he wouldn't have been able to survive in a cutthroat competitive professional climate without having had the added bonus of developing exceptional survival instincts through the art of concealment in his youth.
But who in their right mind wants to nurture a public sphere which necessitates the dissimulation of strengths when their cultivation could increase the intensity of said sphere's productive tendencies by enabling its representatives to energize their freedoms? There's no telling what else J. Edgar could have been able to accomplish had he been nurtured in an environment where sexual difference was respected and he didn't have to consistently expend psychological resources to distract attention away from the most beautiful parts of his personality.
Saturday, December 10, 2011
The Rum Diary
An outlet exists for the transmitting of information in Puerto Rico, a newspaper, thoroughly saturated with colonialist prejudices, at which a journalist interested in reaching out to the people finds employment. When not engaging in the act of writing, the adventurous observer explores his surroundings making friends, experiencing difficulties, encountering the well-to-do, and cultivating his desire. The love interest in question's disposition is strong and free, committed and versatile and capable of viscerally understanding the repressed needs of an impoverished body politic, to which she responds charismatically. The well-to-do see land on which hotels can be built regardless of the fact that people already live there. Difficulties arise based on socio-political differences which necessitate miscalculations in regards to the motivations of representatives of the dominant group on the part of the oppressed. Friends possess grassroots contacts, cultural leverage, and corresponding instinctual insights. From these particularities a story takes shape into which an historical approach coalesces with the habitualizations of the new to generate a point of divergence. But in order for this point to be transmitted ruptures within the traditional order of things must be accepted by the powers that be whose interests are lined up to the contrary. With nothing but conviction and a creative solution Kemp (Johnny Depp) attempts to take control of the means of production in order to nurture the needs of the many (and expose the will of the few).
The Rum Diary is an effective examination of the ways in which a talented writer lives in the moment in order to utilize its strengths in the expression of his art, blurring the line between reality and fiction. Accentuating the difficulties associated with establishing an enduring point of reference while using both rigid oppositions and malleable characterizations to motivate the action, it functions as both a playful poetic capriciously altruistic romance and a harsh stubborn warning as it investigates the relationship between young and old professionals. A remarkably sober structure for a film wherein the major characters regularly abuse substances, its pacing successfully introduces episodic crescendos, comic staccatos, and tragic climactic allegros. Nice to see more of a focus on Hunter S. Thompson the writer within, as his stand-in intuitively stumbles from one scoop to the next.
The Rum Diary is an effective examination of the ways in which a talented writer lives in the moment in order to utilize its strengths in the expression of his art, blurring the line between reality and fiction. Accentuating the difficulties associated with establishing an enduring point of reference while using both rigid oppositions and malleable characterizations to motivate the action, it functions as both a playful poetic capriciously altruistic romance and a harsh stubborn warning as it investigates the relationship between young and old professionals. A remarkably sober structure for a film wherein the major characters regularly abuse substances, its pacing successfully introduces episodic crescendos, comic staccatos, and tragic climactic allegros. Nice to see more of a focus on Hunter S. Thompson the writer within, as his stand-in intuitively stumbles from one scoop to the next.
Sunday, December 4, 2011
Justice for Sergei
Justice for Sergei is a powerful documentary which succinctly discusses incredibly distressing subject matter.
Sergei Magnitsky worked as a tax lawyer for Heritage Capital Management, a privately owned investment management firm formerly operating in Russia. From what I gathered, HCM was operating 3 Russian investment companies. These businesses had made profits of around 973 million and paid something like 230 million in taxes. One day, the police raided HCM's Russian offices and commandeered all of the documents proving they owned these organizations.
No reason was provided to explain the raid and employees who protested were beaten.
Around the same time, court proceedings were being held of which HCM had no knowledge during which ownership of the three companies was transferred to someone else who had previously been convicted for murder. The proceedings fined the companies 973 million thereby nullifying their most recent profits. As a consequence, the new owner of the companies was able to apply for a tax refund for which they applied and received 230 million.
When HCM protested stating that they owned the companies in question they were told to prove ownership by producing the documents then held by the police and therefore inaccessible.
Sergei uncovered this information (the largest tax fraud in Russian history) and consequently tried to have those responsible exposed. He was then arrested. He continued to try and illuminate the corruption in court and was ignored. He became sick while in a detention centre and was then sent to another with poorer facilities.
It is thought that the collusive individuals who put this plan into action, many of them government officials, tried to convince the incarcerated Sergei to change his testimony in order to draw attention away from their misdeeds.
Sergei refused, maintaining both his integrity and respect for the law.
He died shortly thereafter and no one was permitted to examine the body.
Many of the government officials involved in this fiasco and their cronies have since been promoted.
An investigation into the matter was called by President Dmitry Medvedev and after its first year no one had yet to be held accountable.
Sergei is described as a dedicated workaholic who devoted his life to his family and uprightly upholding the law.
His tragic death represents what happens when ethics confronts a thoroughly corrupt oligarchic body politic bent on using its judicial influence to obtain economic leverage from which it can nefariously continue to conduct its private business under the cloak of governmental justice.
Thoroughly revolting and reminiscent of Caligula, local, national, and international pressure can still bring about justice for Sergei if a committed campaign is sustained over time.
You can watch the film here.
Sergei Magnitsky worked as a tax lawyer for Heritage Capital Management, a privately owned investment management firm formerly operating in Russia. From what I gathered, HCM was operating 3 Russian investment companies. These businesses had made profits of around 973 million and paid something like 230 million in taxes. One day, the police raided HCM's Russian offices and commandeered all of the documents proving they owned these organizations.
No reason was provided to explain the raid and employees who protested were beaten.
Around the same time, court proceedings were being held of which HCM had no knowledge during which ownership of the three companies was transferred to someone else who had previously been convicted for murder. The proceedings fined the companies 973 million thereby nullifying their most recent profits. As a consequence, the new owner of the companies was able to apply for a tax refund for which they applied and received 230 million.
When HCM protested stating that they owned the companies in question they were told to prove ownership by producing the documents then held by the police and therefore inaccessible.
Sergei uncovered this information (the largest tax fraud in Russian history) and consequently tried to have those responsible exposed. He was then arrested. He continued to try and illuminate the corruption in court and was ignored. He became sick while in a detention centre and was then sent to another with poorer facilities.
It is thought that the collusive individuals who put this plan into action, many of them government officials, tried to convince the incarcerated Sergei to change his testimony in order to draw attention away from their misdeeds.
Sergei refused, maintaining both his integrity and respect for the law.
He died shortly thereafter and no one was permitted to examine the body.
Many of the government officials involved in this fiasco and their cronies have since been promoted.
An investigation into the matter was called by President Dmitry Medvedev and after its first year no one had yet to be held accountable.
Sergei is described as a dedicated workaholic who devoted his life to his family and uprightly upholding the law.
His tragic death represents what happens when ethics confronts a thoroughly corrupt oligarchic body politic bent on using its judicial influence to obtain economic leverage from which it can nefariously continue to conduct its private business under the cloak of governmental justice.
Thoroughly revolting and reminiscent of Caligula, local, national, and international pressure can still bring about justice for Sergei if a committed campaign is sustained over time.
You can watch the film here.
When China Met Africa
Mark and Nick Francis's When China Met Africa presents a modest portrait of Chinese investment in Zambia and follows the lives of three individuals trying to secure a place for themselves within its economic dynamic.
Mr. Liu grew tired of struggling to make ends meet in China and moved to Zambia in search of opportunity. He's done well for himself and his family and has recently purchased his fourth farm.
Mr. Li manages the construction of Zambia's longest road for a multinational Chinese business and runs into trouble after government funding dries up.
At the same time, Zambia's Trade Minister travels to China in order to secure finances to encourage his county's economic development.
External narration and constant statistics do not support the film's construction as it simply presents brief insights into the daily activities of these men and the ways in which they conduct their affairs.
Zambia is meant to stand in for Africa in order to demonstrate how Chinese investments are changing its economic landscapes but I hesitate to draw strict parallels between its experience and that of other countries insofar as Africa is an extremely diverse continent whose multidimensional politico-economic markets resist such characterizations.
The film may have been more appropriately titled When China Met Zambia.
Mr. Li's attitude is stoic and wise as he encounters setbacks and delays and his stable and calm disposition no doubt have facilitated his capacity to endure.
The influence of capital is examined at local, national, and international levels as Mr. Liu must pay his workers, funds must be secured to encourage infrastructure development, and that development encounters difficulties trying to ensure its structural integrity (which corresponds to Mike Holmes's comments regarding home building on Canadian Reserves).
While When China Met Africa provides an explicit grassroots examination of Chinese investment in Zambia and its related projects at micro and macro levels, its lack of accompanying statistics leaves you hungry for more information (nice).
The film also functions as a strong investigation of the ways in which English functions as a prominent international language of communication as the international characters negotiate, manage, and interrelate in different English dialects.
The ways in which business is conducted on the ground are eye opening in regards to the negative environmental effects of deregulation.
Mr. Liu grew tired of struggling to make ends meet in China and moved to Zambia in search of opportunity. He's done well for himself and his family and has recently purchased his fourth farm.
Mr. Li manages the construction of Zambia's longest road for a multinational Chinese business and runs into trouble after government funding dries up.
At the same time, Zambia's Trade Minister travels to China in order to secure finances to encourage his county's economic development.
External narration and constant statistics do not support the film's construction as it simply presents brief insights into the daily activities of these men and the ways in which they conduct their affairs.
Zambia is meant to stand in for Africa in order to demonstrate how Chinese investments are changing its economic landscapes but I hesitate to draw strict parallels between its experience and that of other countries insofar as Africa is an extremely diverse continent whose multidimensional politico-economic markets resist such characterizations.
The film may have been more appropriately titled When China Met Zambia.
Mr. Li's attitude is stoic and wise as he encounters setbacks and delays and his stable and calm disposition no doubt have facilitated his capacity to endure.
The influence of capital is examined at local, national, and international levels as Mr. Liu must pay his workers, funds must be secured to encourage infrastructure development, and that development encounters difficulties trying to ensure its structural integrity (which corresponds to Mike Holmes's comments regarding home building on Canadian Reserves).
While When China Met Africa provides an explicit grassroots examination of Chinese investment in Zambia and its related projects at micro and macro levels, its lack of accompanying statistics leaves you hungry for more information (nice).
The film also functions as a strong investigation of the ways in which English functions as a prominent international language of communication as the international characters negotiate, manage, and interrelate in different English dialects.
The ways in which business is conducted on the ground are eye opening in regards to the negative environmental effects of deregulation.
Wednesday, November 30, 2011
The Muppets
And The Muppets takes us back to a more cheerful time during which humour didn't consist of making jokes about blood diamonds and friendship meant more than exchanging vitriolic insults ad infinitum. Within the spirit of the The Muppet Show is reincarnated and acclimatized to a 21st Century comedic aesthetic, and the two differing ethical approaches subtly duel before creating a productive popular counterpoint.
A musical synthesis.
The film starts out with an insufferable musical number that immediately challenged the ways in which I've been cynically indoctrinated by shows such as Family Guy over the years. "Is this movie going to be this incredibly cheesy?", thought I, as I appreciated the choreography and prepared for an internal struggle. But as it progresses and the distressed Muppets decide to get back together in order to perform once more and raise 10 million to save their dilapidated studio from a greedy oilperson (Chris Cooper as Tex Richman), their naïve hope and innocent determination took root deep down and energetically confronted years of psychological conditioning propagated by ruthless patriarchs (goodbye Berlusconi).
But writers Jason Segel and Nicholas Stoller, fully aware of their audience's manufactured predispositions, cut Kermit (Steve Whitmire) off when he begins to explain how different things were way back then, and have their characters kidnap Jack Black to host their comeback special, who sits tied to a chair throughout allegorically representing the psychological mechanizations of the 1990s and 2000s, his exchange with Fozzie (Eric Jacobson), priceless.
And to add to the seemingly hopeless situation environmentalists find themselves in these days, enough funds are not raised and the oilperson seems to have won and an attempt at transforming the filmic/televisual sphere seems to have failed.
But then that insufferable number from the film's opening act commences once more, only this time it isn't unbearable, it's entertaining and fun and cheerful and happy, and Tex Richman decides not to destroy the Muppet's studio, and everyone's getting along, and the Muppets are a hit, and they're singing, together, dancing and swinging, to the beat of their own communal drum, positive and revitalized.
Note the fortuitous relationship between this ending and the Keystone Pipeline Protests which caused the Obama Administration to delay making its decision. My gut's telling me that they delayed the decision hoping that when it comes time for reexamination, the protestors will not return and they'll be able to conduct their business as usual (the same strategy the powers that be used in Hamilton, Ontario, for decades, in order to construct the controversial Red Hill Valley Parkway). Hopefully a bit of The Muppets's spirit will remain in 2013, and the Keystone Pipeline agenda will once again unify environmentalists across North America.
A musical synthesis.
The film starts out with an insufferable musical number that immediately challenged the ways in which I've been cynically indoctrinated by shows such as Family Guy over the years. "Is this movie going to be this incredibly cheesy?", thought I, as I appreciated the choreography and prepared for an internal struggle. But as it progresses and the distressed Muppets decide to get back together in order to perform once more and raise 10 million to save their dilapidated studio from a greedy oilperson (Chris Cooper as Tex Richman), their naïve hope and innocent determination took root deep down and energetically confronted years of psychological conditioning propagated by ruthless patriarchs (goodbye Berlusconi).
But writers Jason Segel and Nicholas Stoller, fully aware of their audience's manufactured predispositions, cut Kermit (Steve Whitmire) off when he begins to explain how different things were way back then, and have their characters kidnap Jack Black to host their comeback special, who sits tied to a chair throughout allegorically representing the psychological mechanizations of the 1990s and 2000s, his exchange with Fozzie (Eric Jacobson), priceless.
And to add to the seemingly hopeless situation environmentalists find themselves in these days, enough funds are not raised and the oilperson seems to have won and an attempt at transforming the filmic/televisual sphere seems to have failed.
But then that insufferable number from the film's opening act commences once more, only this time it isn't unbearable, it's entertaining and fun and cheerful and happy, and Tex Richman decides not to destroy the Muppet's studio, and everyone's getting along, and the Muppets are a hit, and they're singing, together, dancing and swinging, to the beat of their own communal drum, positive and revitalized.
Note the fortuitous relationship between this ending and the Keystone Pipeline Protests which caused the Obama Administration to delay making its decision. My gut's telling me that they delayed the decision hoping that when it comes time for reexamination, the protestors will not return and they'll be able to conduct their business as usual (the same strategy the powers that be used in Hamilton, Ontario, for decades, in order to construct the controversial Red Hill Valley Parkway). Hopefully a bit of The Muppets's spirit will remain in 2013, and the Keystone Pipeline agenda will once again unify environmentalists across North America.
Saturday, November 26, 2011
Immortals
And the Titans were imprisoned deep within Mount Tartarus after losing a war against the Gods of Olympus. Humankind prospered in the aftermath until such a time as one rose up from lowly origins to seek the destruction of Ancient Greece (Reason) through recourse to military means. But in his blood lust, he made the critical error of murdering the mother of another of humble birth, thereby inspiring his wrath. With no other alternative but to eventually seek the other's annihilation, their armies mercilessly clash, sparing no one from their antagonistic fury.
And the Titans are unleashed once more.
But what does all this have to do with socio-politics and religion and is there a social democratic agenda sequestered deep within Immortals's narrative, eagerly seeking emancipation?
We know that both Theseus (Henry Cavill) and King Hyperion (Mickey Rourke) are roughly members of the proletariat and that the former is primarily concerned with protecting his family while the later seeks to conquer Reason. Theseus is counselled by Zeus (John Hurt, Luke Evans) in disguise to protect the weak and the infirm, while Hyperion lives by the code that might is right. The Titans are incarcerated deep within the earth but they were equals to the Gods prior to being shackled (an ideological battle was waged which stripped them of their material resources). Mineral wealth often lies deep within mountains. Mineral wealth (or petroleum wealth) can be used to attain prestigious cultural god-like positions. With the attainment of wealth and prestige a challenge can be made against the resident Gods (many of whom made their fortune the same way hundreds of years ago and due to the passage of time had their 'royalty' naturalized) in order to obtain political control. Two simplistic traditional ways of examining those within the proletariat who rise through the ranks to positions of power is to regard them as maniacal control freaks (Hyperion, Stalin) or altruistic equalizers (Theseus, Tommy Douglas). Theseus defeats Hyperion and therefore Immortals upholds the altruistic equalizer. But his victory is dependent upon the constant intervention of the Gods or the established concrete ruling elite. In the final moments, Theseus leaves the mortal world and travels to Olympus to live amongst them, leaving humankind behind. There are certainly places within the upper echelons for altruistic individuals, but a social democratic film would have its heroes remain within the mortal realm in order to achieve a material surplus from which his or her compatriots could level out the upper echelons themselves. But if Mount Olympus is thought of as being a legislative assembly as opposed to the halls of the ever rich, then Theseus's position within suggests that he could represent a defender of social democratic values, those espoused by Zeus (or Thomas Mulcair, Brian Topp and Bob Rae), the established order making room for new innovations in order to diversify and remodel its means of production, and be leading the charge against the fallen nouveau riche who were freed by Hyperion's savagery. But Mount Olympus doesn't strike me as being the best place in which to situate a social democratic political aesthetic, inasmuch as the politics of the oppressed are often not resolutely upheld by immortals. And much of the anger felt by Hyperion comes from the Gods turning blind eyes to humankind, or creating elitist structures with no practical outlets nurtured by a culture of snobbery that alienates the proletariat and results in them voting for conservatives (who use the practical outlets ignored by liberal snobs to subliminally manipulate them into preferring divisive racist imperialist alternatives [wherein they mistake subservience for freedom]). And it's Hyperion who wants to destroy them as a consequence, conservatively placing Hyperion in the guise of the social democratic activist, whose out to destroy the liberally motivated yet aloof elite (with the goal of converting the liberal elite to team conservative).
Thus, Immortals doesn't strike me as being pro-social democracy.
In regards to religion, Immortals uses the win scenario to elevate it. The film's situated in Ancient Greece and thereby overtly distances itself from 21st Century religious agendas while metaphorically supporting them, as every character comes to believe (by using Ancient Greece, the film's support for religion doesn't alienate its audience by bombarding them with religious images with which they are familiar which is a win strategy when it comes to eventually converting cynical unbelievers).
Better than Clash of the Titans but not as entertaining as Troy, Stephen Dorff's character (Stavros) steals the show that is perhaps best left for a Saturday evening rental.
And the Titans are unleashed once more.
But what does all this have to do with socio-politics and religion and is there a social democratic agenda sequestered deep within Immortals's narrative, eagerly seeking emancipation?
We know that both Theseus (Henry Cavill) and King Hyperion (Mickey Rourke) are roughly members of the proletariat and that the former is primarily concerned with protecting his family while the later seeks to conquer Reason. Theseus is counselled by Zeus (John Hurt, Luke Evans) in disguise to protect the weak and the infirm, while Hyperion lives by the code that might is right. The Titans are incarcerated deep within the earth but they were equals to the Gods prior to being shackled (an ideological battle was waged which stripped them of their material resources). Mineral wealth often lies deep within mountains. Mineral wealth (or petroleum wealth) can be used to attain prestigious cultural god-like positions. With the attainment of wealth and prestige a challenge can be made against the resident Gods (many of whom made their fortune the same way hundreds of years ago and due to the passage of time had their 'royalty' naturalized) in order to obtain political control. Two simplistic traditional ways of examining those within the proletariat who rise through the ranks to positions of power is to regard them as maniacal control freaks (Hyperion, Stalin) or altruistic equalizers (Theseus, Tommy Douglas). Theseus defeats Hyperion and therefore Immortals upholds the altruistic equalizer. But his victory is dependent upon the constant intervention of the Gods or the established concrete ruling elite. In the final moments, Theseus leaves the mortal world and travels to Olympus to live amongst them, leaving humankind behind. There are certainly places within the upper echelons for altruistic individuals, but a social democratic film would have its heroes remain within the mortal realm in order to achieve a material surplus from which his or her compatriots could level out the upper echelons themselves. But if Mount Olympus is thought of as being a legislative assembly as opposed to the halls of the ever rich, then Theseus's position within suggests that he could represent a defender of social democratic values, those espoused by Zeus (or Thomas Mulcair, Brian Topp and Bob Rae), the established order making room for new innovations in order to diversify and remodel its means of production, and be leading the charge against the fallen nouveau riche who were freed by Hyperion's savagery. But Mount Olympus doesn't strike me as being the best place in which to situate a social democratic political aesthetic, inasmuch as the politics of the oppressed are often not resolutely upheld by immortals. And much of the anger felt by Hyperion comes from the Gods turning blind eyes to humankind, or creating elitist structures with no practical outlets nurtured by a culture of snobbery that alienates the proletariat and results in them voting for conservatives (who use the practical outlets ignored by liberal snobs to subliminally manipulate them into preferring divisive racist imperialist alternatives [wherein they mistake subservience for freedom]). And it's Hyperion who wants to destroy them as a consequence, conservatively placing Hyperion in the guise of the social democratic activist, whose out to destroy the liberally motivated yet aloof elite (with the goal of converting the liberal elite to team conservative).
Thus, Immortals doesn't strike me as being pro-social democracy.
In regards to religion, Immortals uses the win scenario to elevate it. The film's situated in Ancient Greece and thereby overtly distances itself from 21st Century religious agendas while metaphorically supporting them, as every character comes to believe (by using Ancient Greece, the film's support for religion doesn't alienate its audience by bombarding them with religious images with which they are familiar which is a win strategy when it comes to eventually converting cynical unbelievers).
Better than Clash of the Titans but not as entertaining as Troy, Stephen Dorff's character (Stavros) steals the show that is perhaps best left for a Saturday evening rental.
Sunday, November 20, 2011
Rubber
Quentin Dupieux intelligently and playfully pulls off a ridiculous off-beat puréed slice of incongruity with Rubber, a film which challenges you to keep watching even though its subject matter is incredibly discombobulated.
Question: can we improve upon the typical Hollywood horror-comedy by stripping it down to its bear essentials, presenting an inanimate villain, crafting a film within a film, and then virulently exterminating its audience?
Or to put it another way, is watching a tire that rolls around randomly blowing up things and people preferable to series such as Final Destination or I Know What You Did Last Summer (note that I did like Final Destination 2)?
Without providing any back story explaining why or how the tire gained consciousness and why it decided to start randomly destroying.
The answer is yes, it can be improved upon, and a back story is not required, if you don't care in the slightest what your audience thinks but still take the time to expertly craft an audacious non sequitur which appears as if it was haphazardly constructed.
Rather than simply destroying the minds of its audience with nauseating dialogue and unimaginative viaducts, Rubber simply destroys its audience half way through after they ravenously gorge on a roasted turkey.
Rather than trying to seem as if there's a point or introduce something saccharinely tragic, Rubber makes it quite clear that there is no reason structuring its dementia, and proceeds to unreel unabashedly.
But nothing can exist without placing itself within a multifaceted logical fulcrum, as each subject is free to express their interpretive difference in regards to the ways in which artistic objects are constructed (or sporting objects etc.), thanks to the freedom built into democratic societies made viable by the internet, and it's possible to gain constructive insights into complicated dynamics from bizarre examples of lucid frivolity, if you search for them (search for them within the new show Picnicface, especially the Lost Highway themed episode wherein the Mystery Man looks like John Waters).
Reason underlies Rubber's tracks although its content salutes insanity. But it's only insane from the point of view of the monotonous narrative that has been produced to shackle the many as the few exercise their free self-development (Terry Eagleton), and from this point of view, accentuating difference, it makes nothing but perfect sense, and a rational explanation is presented for its not so subtle ending.
Question: can we improve upon the typical Hollywood horror-comedy by stripping it down to its bear essentials, presenting an inanimate villain, crafting a film within a film, and then virulently exterminating its audience?
Or to put it another way, is watching a tire that rolls around randomly blowing up things and people preferable to series such as Final Destination or I Know What You Did Last Summer (note that I did like Final Destination 2)?
Without providing any back story explaining why or how the tire gained consciousness and why it decided to start randomly destroying.
The answer is yes, it can be improved upon, and a back story is not required, if you don't care in the slightest what your audience thinks but still take the time to expertly craft an audacious non sequitur which appears as if it was haphazardly constructed.
Rather than simply destroying the minds of its audience with nauseating dialogue and unimaginative viaducts, Rubber simply destroys its audience half way through after they ravenously gorge on a roasted turkey.
Rather than trying to seem as if there's a point or introduce something saccharinely tragic, Rubber makes it quite clear that there is no reason structuring its dementia, and proceeds to unreel unabashedly.
But nothing can exist without placing itself within a multifaceted logical fulcrum, as each subject is free to express their interpretive difference in regards to the ways in which artistic objects are constructed (or sporting objects etc.), thanks to the freedom built into democratic societies made viable by the internet, and it's possible to gain constructive insights into complicated dynamics from bizarre examples of lucid frivolity, if you search for them (search for them within the new show Picnicface, especially the Lost Highway themed episode wherein the Mystery Man looks like John Waters).
Reason underlies Rubber's tracks although its content salutes insanity. But it's only insane from the point of view of the monotonous narrative that has been produced to shackle the many as the few exercise their free self-development (Terry Eagleton), and from this point of view, accentuating difference, it makes nothing but perfect sense, and a rational explanation is presented for its not so subtle ending.
Saturday, November 19, 2011
Conviction
A brother falsely incarcerated. A sister dedicated to setting him free. Unwavering belief synthesized with focused raw acute determination. An inspiring film modestly elevating the power of hope while proving that it's not just for the naïve or the foolhardy.
Tony Goldwyn's Conviction could have been much more sensational, attempting to sentimentally cater to our manufactured desires for explosions and vindictive polarized constructs. It could have melodramatically situated its plot within a broader context, focusing on life in prison, media dramatizations, or the challenges presented by trying to raise a family, work, and finish law school with hardly any financial or social resources. But it doesn't examine these dimensions, preferring to zero in on an unbreakable bond forged between brother and sister, investigating their relationship primarily in order to provide extended insights into the constructive potential of an enduring commitment.
Betty Anne Waters (Hilary Swank) isn't about boasting or vilifying or emoting, she prefers to achieve her goals objectively and doesn't let anything or anyone stand in her way, most of the time, even though the odds stacked against her seem insurmountable.
Kenny Waters (Sam Rockwell) isn't quite so level headed seeing how he's serving a life sentence for murder, but his sister's prudent, logical, affable recurring presence helps temper his suicidal tendencies.
Swank and Rockwell play their parts well and one of the only things missing from their interactions is an extended scene, one which probes the depths of their characters more thoroughly, without resorting to heartbreaking platitudes.
But such a scene perhaps would have been misplaced in Conviction, since it effectively works within the mainstream to instructively use a generic form to reach a wide audience for whom its message is much more positive than one latently conditioned by cynicism.
The structures preventing Kenny from being exonerated are formidable and entrenched. But they can still be challenged and remodelled.
One day at a time.
Tony Goldwyn's Conviction could have been much more sensational, attempting to sentimentally cater to our manufactured desires for explosions and vindictive polarized constructs. It could have melodramatically situated its plot within a broader context, focusing on life in prison, media dramatizations, or the challenges presented by trying to raise a family, work, and finish law school with hardly any financial or social resources. But it doesn't examine these dimensions, preferring to zero in on an unbreakable bond forged between brother and sister, investigating their relationship primarily in order to provide extended insights into the constructive potential of an enduring commitment.
Betty Anne Waters (Hilary Swank) isn't about boasting or vilifying or emoting, she prefers to achieve her goals objectively and doesn't let anything or anyone stand in her way, most of the time, even though the odds stacked against her seem insurmountable.
Kenny Waters (Sam Rockwell) isn't quite so level headed seeing how he's serving a life sentence for murder, but his sister's prudent, logical, affable recurring presence helps temper his suicidal tendencies.
Swank and Rockwell play their parts well and one of the only things missing from their interactions is an extended scene, one which probes the depths of their characters more thoroughly, without resorting to heartbreaking platitudes.
But such a scene perhaps would have been misplaced in Conviction, since it effectively works within the mainstream to instructively use a generic form to reach a wide audience for whom its message is much more positive than one latently conditioned by cynicism.
The structures preventing Kenny from being exonerated are formidable and entrenched. But they can still be challenged and remodelled.
One day at a time.
Saturday, November 12, 2011
A Very Harold & Kumar 3D Christmas
Good God. What the hell happened to Christmas?
It seems as if the traditional Christmas special has been warped and welded into a devious pot smoking lingerie modelling gangster frolicking schism, just in time to usher in the 2011 holiday season. A special crafted for those who have grown weary of the predictable patterns worked into the yearly festive Frostyesque line-up and are hungrily seeking a palpable harbinger of mainstream subversion, of decadent diversions, of subterranean incursions.
Fully endorsed by Santa.
A Very Harold & Kumar 3D Christmas provides such content and insouciantly precipitates a brazen comical maelstrom into which the politically correct is unwittingly thrust.
As Harold (John Cho) and Kumar (Hal Penn) frantically search for a new Christmas tree.
Trying to make sense of the ways in which this film confronts stereotyping is challenging. It's as if representatives of two minority groups are saying that due to the institutional barriers firmly established by the Anglo-Saxon majority it's impossible for us to successfully integrate into the mainstream, but we'll still give it a shot, and playfully present you with exactly what you would expect, based upon your own preconceptions, while opening up a resultant critical space in your public sphere, and affectively plunging within full throttle.
You see, the mainstream often prevents minorities from successfully integrating into its culture. It does so in order to horde the prominent signs of achievement and associated luxuries for itself. As minorities still seek to earn a living and take care of their families, they must find a way to do so in the underground, using the only resources they have available to their general advantage (selling narcotics etc.). If racist institutional representatives and policies promote these stereotypes and they are upheld by their ethnic non-professional counterparts, and progressive legislation such as affirmative action is suppressed, you directly stifle an enormous degree of potential, and keep generations of prominent public role models from ever being able to productively apply themselves.
Therefore the underground becomes their outlet and they carve out an existence within while demonstrating that some of the 'demonized' resources they control (marijuana) aren't really that bad and would legitimize their 'unlawful' pursuits if legalized.
There's some of this in A Very Harold & Kumar 3D Christmas and they definitely take things to new levels as they nurture a tormented frustrated blockaded aesthetic while working within a form that has been culturally stabilized.
All the while applying new meanings to concepts like marriage, family, and friendship.
And smoking that reefer.
It seems as if the traditional Christmas special has been warped and welded into a devious pot smoking lingerie modelling gangster frolicking schism, just in time to usher in the 2011 holiday season. A special crafted for those who have grown weary of the predictable patterns worked into the yearly festive Frostyesque line-up and are hungrily seeking a palpable harbinger of mainstream subversion, of decadent diversions, of subterranean incursions.
Fully endorsed by Santa.
A Very Harold & Kumar 3D Christmas provides such content and insouciantly precipitates a brazen comical maelstrom into which the politically correct is unwittingly thrust.
As Harold (John Cho) and Kumar (Hal Penn) frantically search for a new Christmas tree.
Trying to make sense of the ways in which this film confronts stereotyping is challenging. It's as if representatives of two minority groups are saying that due to the institutional barriers firmly established by the Anglo-Saxon majority it's impossible for us to successfully integrate into the mainstream, but we'll still give it a shot, and playfully present you with exactly what you would expect, based upon your own preconceptions, while opening up a resultant critical space in your public sphere, and affectively plunging within full throttle.
You see, the mainstream often prevents minorities from successfully integrating into its culture. It does so in order to horde the prominent signs of achievement and associated luxuries for itself. As minorities still seek to earn a living and take care of their families, they must find a way to do so in the underground, using the only resources they have available to their general advantage (selling narcotics etc.). If racist institutional representatives and policies promote these stereotypes and they are upheld by their ethnic non-professional counterparts, and progressive legislation such as affirmative action is suppressed, you directly stifle an enormous degree of potential, and keep generations of prominent public role models from ever being able to productively apply themselves.
Therefore the underground becomes their outlet and they carve out an existence within while demonstrating that some of the 'demonized' resources they control (marijuana) aren't really that bad and would legitimize their 'unlawful' pursuits if legalized.
There's some of this in A Very Harold & Kumar 3D Christmas and they definitely take things to new levels as they nurture a tormented frustrated blockaded aesthetic while working within a form that has been culturally stabilized.
All the while applying new meanings to concepts like marriage, family, and friendship.
And smoking that reefer.
Friday, November 11, 2011
Tower Heist
Was incredibly disappointed by Brett Ratner's Tower Heist. Generic films don't have to be terrible. If their writers try to at least create four or five unexpected witty provocative scenes wherein something distracting takes place they can be salvaged. But they have to hold our attention before they can affectively destream it. Tower Heist presents one boring mundane predictable scene after another, as if they were trying to mimic the aesthetic built into a swiffer wet jet ad in order to peddle jokes that make television's Whitney seem hilarious by comparison. It was like the inspiration behind this script was vacuuming or cleaning behind the fridge. Unmitigated stubborn concrete tedium disseminated by performances who are only noteworthy because they managed to successfully convince me that they were taking their work seriously, regardless of the fact that they must of wretched upon first reading over the material. There's one moment where Matthew Broderick at least looks as if he's aware that he's starring in an cup into which you spit but it's subtle enough for him to still be able to convince the powers that be that he's a team player.
I like films wherein rich assholes who steal from struggling workers are punished and I like that this happens in Tower Heist, but the execution is uniformly lacking in skill, insight and perspicacity, and the plot, racist in structure.
Don't be sucked in by the cast or the ads. Tower Heist isn't worth it and reminds me why I haven't wanted to see an Eddie Murphy film since Bowfinger.
I like films wherein rich assholes who steal from struggling workers are punished and I like that this happens in Tower Heist, but the execution is uniformly lacking in skill, insight and perspicacity, and the plot, racist in structure.
Don't be sucked in by the cast or the ads. Tower Heist isn't worth it and reminds me why I haven't wanted to see an Eddie Murphy film since Bowfinger.
Sunday, November 6, 2011
SUPER
Some superheroes have vast financial and intellectual resources at their disposal which they use to champion justice. Others develop superhuman strength after having directly embraced science's unpredictable diversity. Still others are born with exceptional gifts for which they are ridiculed and ostracized by their fellow citizens. And others are simply nurtured by an alien land whose environment provides them with a permanent degree of invincibility.
But my favourite superheroes are regular average joes who grow tired of corruption's prosperity and take to the streets in a homemade outfit to distribute discipline and punishment with bluntly accurate precision.
Superheroes like SUPER's Crimson Bolt (Rainn Wilson) and his enthusiastic sidekick, Bolty (Ellen Page).
Crimson Bolt has experienced two perfect events throughout his life which have helped him to overcome an existence otherwise filled with depression and humiliation.
The day on which he helped a police officer fight crime, and that on which he married love interest and ex-drug addict Sarah (Liv Tyler).
But as SUPER begins we discover that Sarah has fallen prey to a local drug-dealing thug (played by Kevin Bacon) who encourages her latent addictions in order to steal her away from her loving and devoted trustworthy husband.
After complimenting his eggs.
That same husband decides it's time to fight back and save Sarah once more, and guided by the forces of instinct, love, and over-the-top Christian superhero The Holy Avenger (Nathan Fillion), he makes a red suit, picks up a wrench, and tells crime to shut-up as he bashes its representatives in the head with said wrench while wearing his red suit.
And playing by the unwritten rules.
As Serial Mom coalesces with Q-The Winged Serpent and becomes what Mystery Men should have been, SUPER psychotically delivers a sensationally laid back hard-boiled piece of cinematic mayhem, swathed in a deadpan frank ready-to-wear elasticity.
Not crafted for the feint of heart or those searching for technological hyperactivity, its comedic intuition and adventurous spirit still distill a universal sense of vigilante dexterity, as one short order cook rediscovers what it means to despair.
But my favourite superheroes are regular average joes who grow tired of corruption's prosperity and take to the streets in a homemade outfit to distribute discipline and punishment with bluntly accurate precision.
Superheroes like SUPER's Crimson Bolt (Rainn Wilson) and his enthusiastic sidekick, Bolty (Ellen Page).
Crimson Bolt has experienced two perfect events throughout his life which have helped him to overcome an existence otherwise filled with depression and humiliation.
The day on which he helped a police officer fight crime, and that on which he married love interest and ex-drug addict Sarah (Liv Tyler).
But as SUPER begins we discover that Sarah has fallen prey to a local drug-dealing thug (played by Kevin Bacon) who encourages her latent addictions in order to steal her away from her loving and devoted trustworthy husband.
After complimenting his eggs.
That same husband decides it's time to fight back and save Sarah once more, and guided by the forces of instinct, love, and over-the-top Christian superhero The Holy Avenger (Nathan Fillion), he makes a red suit, picks up a wrench, and tells crime to shut-up as he bashes its representatives in the head with said wrench while wearing his red suit.
And playing by the unwritten rules.
As Serial Mom coalesces with Q-The Winged Serpent and becomes what Mystery Men should have been, SUPER psychotically delivers a sensationally laid back hard-boiled piece of cinematic mayhem, swathed in a deadpan frank ready-to-wear elasticity.
Not crafted for the feint of heart or those searching for technological hyperactivity, its comedic intuition and adventurous spirit still distill a universal sense of vigilante dexterity, as one short order cook rediscovers what it means to despair.
The Exterminating Angel
As times change and different political aesthetics present themselves, a dinner party is held for Mexican elites in Luis Buñuel's The Exterminating Angel. Everyone gathers for a delightful evening accompanied by delicious food items and accomplished musical entertainments.
There's just one problem.
For some indeterminate reason, the majority of workers feel compelled to leave before dinner is served and after dinner none of the guests is capable of leaving the room within which the festivities have expired. Confined together with nothing but their social relations to sustain themselves as the limited resources at their disposal are slowly consumed/utilized, those theoretically possessing a heightened sense of proper and refined conduct descend into madness, as the pet bear freely wanders to and fro.
At his or her leisure.
The external world becomes curious regarding the status of the imprisoned professionals but also find themselves unable to penetrate the invisible, intangible barrier.
As if a feudal set of social divisions has been challenged by a mischievous deity who demands that the well-to-do intimately embrace the circumstances which those who uphold their lavish caprice negotiate daily.
Unable to acknowledge a system wherein opportunity is available to all, or the fact that their luminescence is dependent upon semantic classifications which have designated the activities of working others as undesirable, time exasperatingly passes, and knowledge desperately self-destructs.
There's just one problem.
For some indeterminate reason, the majority of workers feel compelled to leave before dinner is served and after dinner none of the guests is capable of leaving the room within which the festivities have expired. Confined together with nothing but their social relations to sustain themselves as the limited resources at their disposal are slowly consumed/utilized, those theoretically possessing a heightened sense of proper and refined conduct descend into madness, as the pet bear freely wanders to and fro.
At his or her leisure.
The external world becomes curious regarding the status of the imprisoned professionals but also find themselves unable to penetrate the invisible, intangible barrier.
As if a feudal set of social divisions has been challenged by a mischievous deity who demands that the well-to-do intimately embrace the circumstances which those who uphold their lavish caprice negotiate daily.
Unable to acknowledge a system wherein opportunity is available to all, or the fact that their luminescence is dependent upon semantic classifications which have designated the activities of working others as undesirable, time exasperatingly passes, and knowledge desperately self-destructs.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)