All posts in Movies

It’s my guess that many of my viewers have never seen this film, and those of whom will, will not for quite some time. I’m not sure how long it has been playing in GR, or how long it will continue to, but its life in Grand Haven was quite fleeting.

This film is not what I would consider to be ordinary. At the beginning of the film, it become difficult to become comfortable with the story, or the characters in it. You are jarred by several abbreviated scenes in rapid succession that offer nothing but establishing a timeline for events. The specifics of the events are not given weight until the end of the film. So, after you see the film you are ok with it, but on the first viewing you are filled with a strong WTF is happening kind of feeling.

Ultimately, the story is a rather mundane revenge story that is told through a rather unconventional way using various twists turns, and other mechanisms of the trade. Essentially you are presented with the truth and the fiction flipping back and forth like a coin falling through the air. However, unlike most films it is not always easy to distinguish between the two. Furthermore, something more impressive to me was that each side was equally entertaining. Many movies like this only offer up the ruse as a lame ass cover for the real story and it always feels fake from the beginning. This is more subtle in its blatantness. Not unlike hiding something in plain sight.

There are several mechanisms of the film that feel rather uncomfortable during the initial viewing, but once all the pieces fall into play it all seems right. I do think that the film does warrant a second viewing in terms of the realities you learn in the end of it the first time. Perhaps on subsequent viewings the opening sequence of events will be familiar and logical. I’m just not sure about that. I would have went to see it again, but it only played for a single week here so I was not afforded the opportunity.

If it is still playing anywhere around you, you might want to check it out. It is a decent movie, I did not hate or love it, but I respect it. However, there is nothing special about seeing it on the big screen so I presume you would get the same impression if you wait until the DVD release.

This is probably the best movie of the year thus far.

This movie has a pretty simple message, you should have the right to choose for yourself. This is basically executed through the premise of, you should not smoke, but no one should tell you not to. Or, something along those lines.

Across the board, the acting was pretty good, and the jokes were funny. I dare say that everything in the movie was basically effective. This is probably the first movie since the remake of, Dawn of the Dead, that I have not thought of anything that I would change about it. It was just well done.

Also, I can not help but applaud the nice libertarian message it conveys. That is good stuff. There are far too many people out there legislating how you live your life, and if they cannot get it through law, they are flooding the media, or just plain telling you. It is sickening really. There is really only one key to solve these kinds of problems: information.

I honestly believe that is people have all the information, and/or are properly educated they will make the right choices. It is the responsibility of the individual to get all the facts and make informed decisions. This most certainly should not be done by legislatures who cater to whomever has the deepest pocketbooks regardless of their moral stance.

So, I guess the point of this post is to tell everyone to, “pick it up.” Be skeptical of what other people tell you, and do not “coast” through life.

As everyone might have noticed in the last couple of posts, I have been skirting some of my blogger duties by telling my readership to listen to an external podcast to get some info. So, trying to keep up with that, I listened to the Cinecast for A History of Violence, and I regret to say I cannot recommend it. Because their views are not exactly in concert with mine.

I know that for some reason, everyone seems to be checking this movie out lately. I think it must have come out recently on DVD or something. Anyhow, I have been hearing good things about it since its theatrical release. Also, during a conversation with Rusty, he mentioned that he hated it, and thought it might be the worst movie ever. This pretty much cemented my desire to view the film.

First let me get this out of the way: the movie was good.

Although this movie was not your typical hollywood fair, it was done quite well. I cannot really think of any particular parts that I would change, because due to the nature of the film, it does not really lend itself to alternatives. I guess really, the only thing that I wanted to see was full disclosure by the protagonist to his family. Now, when I say this, it does not mean that I think it should have been told to the viewer, because it was unnecessary. I would have been happy if at the very end of the movie, he would have said “I was born in…” in order to hint he was going to come clean, from the beginning.

One of the things I liked the most about this film is that it did not take the audience for granted, it was essentially a sequence of events that unfolded without bias allowed the viewer to make decisions about why they are seeing.

Violence was an interesting aspect of the film. What little there was, was done in a graphic way, and it was generally done in marginally plausible sequences with maximum impact. I think that if you felt violence was ok, or completely unjustified you might be able to see your arguments in the film. It is all a matter of perspective.

I know that Wes, and Eric thought the movie was decent. Though, Wes had perhaps…less that noble interest in the film. I am interested to find out why exactly Rusty did not like it.

If anyone else has any perspectives, I expect comments to that effect.

Remember, remember, the fifth of November…

Initially, I was planning on writing out a detailed post illustrating what I thought was done right, and wrong within the movie. Luckily, the folks at Cinecast spared me that chore, as they pretty much vocalized all my thoughts. You can download the podcast and listen to their discussion if you are interested. It is only 15 minutes long, and well worth it if you have seen the film. If that leaves you searching for me reviews you can check out rotten tomatoes.

If you are interested in checking out more information about V for Vendetta, you can check out the wikipedia entry, the official movie site, and the imdb entry.

Now that I have gotten those formalities out of the way, I can talk about the new purpose of this post: dystopian stories.

Personally, I have never understood why the idea of a dystopian society is so attractive to “artists.” I think that it must be a mirror of the bleakness within themselves that they see within those without. In this day in age, the idea of utopias have evolved to the point that people realize that no such thing could exist, because it requires a level of perfection that is impossible to obtain. There have also been any number of additional arguments as to why humanity could never achieve a utopian society. So, why do we embrace the opposite?

From a practical standpoint, it doesn’t make any sense. Certainly, throughout history there have been totalitarian regime, that is not a question. However, all these governments rapidly self-destructed, or were destroyed by neighboring nations. One of the primary reasons for this instability is that the leaders of these systems induce restrictive policies and actions that perpetually lead to opposition. I know the 1984 had “disappearances,” and several other dystopian works do as well (including V), however this notion is also problematic, as disappearance would lead to the cementing of opposition forces driven by friends and relatives. But, above all these reason I believe another is critically important.

Whether the system be totalitarian, or socialist, or some other system that supports oppression, they generally face an unworkable economic system. This is particularly apparently in socialist institutions. Centralized economies fail to meet the needs of the citizens with respect to very basic needs, such as food. Therefore, I think if someone really wanted to create a realistic dystopian vision of the future, they should look at what would happen in a free market system that was allowed to run without any kinds of checks of balances, one where corporations rule the world. That could happen.

[Addendum]

I was listening to the Cinecast for Inside Man, where they also handled viewer feedback for V. Basically, they just solidified my notions, and I was a glad a viewer wrote in noting how awful Portman was in the film.

Here is a great quote from Alan Moore (who did the graphic novel):

When I wrote “V,” politics were taking a serious turn for the worse over here. We’d had [Conservative Party Prime Minister] Margaret Thatcher in for two or three years, we’d had anti-Thatcher riots, we’d got the National Front and the right wing making serious advances. “V for Vendetta” was specifically about things like fascism and anarchy.

Those words, “fascism” and “anarchy,” occur nowhere in the film. It’s been turned into a Bush-era parable by people too timid to set a political satire in their own country. In my original story there had been a limited nuclear war, which had isolated Britain, caused a lot of chaos and a collapse of government, and a fascist totalitarian dictatorship had sprung up. Now, in the film, you’ve got a sinister group of right-wing figures — not fascists, but you know that they’re bad guys — and what they have done is manufactured a bio-terror weapon in secret, so that they can fake a massive terrorist incident to get everybody on their side, so that they can pursue their right-wing agenda. It’s a thwarted and frustrated and perhaps largely impotent American liberal fantasy of someone with American liberal values [standing up] against a state run by neo-conservatives — which is not what “V for Vendetta” was about. It was about fascism, it was about anarchy, it was about [England]. The intent of the film is nothing like the intent of the book as I wrote it. And if the Wachowski brothers had felt moved to protest the way things were going in America, then wouldn’t it have been more direct to do what I’d done and set a risky political narrative sometime in the near future that was obviously talking about the things going on today?

I’m glad to say that I did not watch any of the Academy Awards this year, as they have become far to esoteric. However, I was very pleased to find out Crash won best picture. Not because Crash was the best movie of the year (it wasn’t), but because the gay cowboy movie did not win. And, I’ll take a lame racism movie over female targeted emotional porn any day.

Personally, I think that Sin City was the best movie of the year. And, I enjoyed Serenity the most. Notably neither were nominated for anything. Essentially, in order to get in you have to be a drama, or have fancy special effects. This is because the Academy Awards are essentially the American Drama Awards, it treats all other genres as non-credible. Therefore, the special effects award is a count genre pick.