Angels & Demons

This will be short and sweet...unlike the movie, Angels & Demons.

Anti-Catholic or not? I do not really care and quite honestly it does not matter. The film was a poor effort at making a carbon copy of The DaVinci Code's successful template. The problem is that Tom Hanks' character is still flat and the suspense that is supposed to be created throughout the movie is un-suspenseful. From very early in the film we know who is going to die, who/what are the red herrings and who the bad guy is.

There is more suspense watching a Barney the damn dinosaur shows than there was in Angels.

As I try to find words to describe the plot I am suddenly reminded of basic training. In basic training we always had to "hurry up and wait". The same futile cycle exists in Angels: "run and race to run and race some more".

Short and sweet, unlike the 130+ minute movie that served best as an excuse to eat movie theater popcorn.

Grade: D

Movie Review: Happy Feet

Okay, First a disclaimer… If you read this, first, you'll hate the movie. Having gone through a year of film study, and my loathing for Agendas in media that don’t agree with my own, I can sometimes see things, like agendas in a film, where others tell me I'm over-reacting. But this time, it was made pretty clear. Our children were being brainwashed by this movie: Happy Feet. I know, I know… I’m a sick, twisted freak.

Having said that, I saw Happy Feet tonight, which scored Number 1 at the box office this weekend, beating out the premier of Casino Royale, the new James Bond movie (of which I also saw, as you’re no kind of man unless you see the new James Bond movie on opening weekend).

Happy Feet was all cute and special at first: A true kids movie. In a world… where penguins rule the land… one penguin… named Mumbles Happy Feet… can not sing like the other penguins do. Instead, he can dance. Now, this queerness causes Mumbles a lot of drama, because each penguin’s song... well… it’s kind of a mating ritual thing. Bow Chicka, Baow, Waow… You know what I’m say’in.

Well, the penguins are in the middle of a food shortage, as the fish are scarce…

Okay, here it comes… its Human’s fault isn’t it?

As all the fish are scarce, and there are stories of strange creatures that are taking all the fish. Yep. Human’s fault. Now, to make a long intro short, Mumbles ends up setting off to “talk” to the strange creatures (humans) to try to find a way to co-exist. He ends up swimming after a fishing boat, and “propelled by his rage” ends up washing ashore next to some sort of industrialized area, what looks like a oil refinery or something equally as evil… next to a large city. Those damn humans.

Mumbles wakes up in a zoo, caged like some sort of animal (which he’s not… he’s a penguin… wait… never mind) and after going crazy locked up in the zoo, he dances for a little girl, who then brings apparently everyone to see him, and they slap a radio collar on him, and put him back into Antarctica… where he finds his home group of penguins, some guys fly in and see them all dancing… then the Media shares the video with everyone, the whole world is angry that humans are taking the penguin’s food supply… the UN gets involved (yes, the UN) and human fishing is barred from anywhere around Antarctica, and now there is enough fish for all the penguins and the movie ends with a warm fuzzy.

Wait… the UN?

Yes. The frick’en UN.

Happy Feet, is mentioned on the site Boycott Liberalism, as Robin Williams is in it, but I saw it anyway because I have a nephew, and that’s what he wanted to see despite my warning that seeing that movie would help promote liberalism. I know, he’s got a lot to learn.

Now, in movies, I’m pretty good with the whole suspension of disbelief thing. Self aware penguins, swimming to some far away land, the far out possibility that Mumbles would end up at home… but then the UN got involved and bahm! There went the movie for me. I leaned over to my mommy (yes, I still call her my mommy) and mentioned something that had to do with brainwashing, and pointing out how I’m right again about the media and their ever-present agenda.

Oh yea, and the pursuit of "Aliens" (as humans are called) trumps the pursuit of the penguin's religion also. It wouldn't be a true liberal agenda driven movie without a stab at religion.

So, movie go’ers, I would give the first 2/3 of ‘Happy Feet’ 3.5 stars. The last 1/3, brings the average number of stars for the whole movie down to a total of 1/2 star. When you do the math… carry the Liberal Agenda… and that’s a pretty low rating. Bring your kids to Casino Royale instead. America will thank you.

P.S. If that wasn't enough to keep you away... the Star Tribune loved it.

The Prestige

I saw The Prestige this past weekend and have been meaning to write my brief reaction. Thank you to Vodka-Yogurt for inspiring me.

Every great magic trick consists of three acts. The first act is called "The Pledge"; The magician shows you something ordinary, but of course... it probably isn't. The second act is called "The Turn"; The magician makes his ordinary some thing do something extraordinary. Now if you're looking for the secret... you won't find it, that's why there's a third act called, "The Prestige"; this is the part with the twists and turns, where lives hang in the balance, and you see something shocking you've never seen before.

What is "the Prestige" in this film? THAT is what you must answer. To me, the movie's "prestige" is underdelivered. And that is the only real downfall.

This was a well acted, well directed and well produced movie. It is well cast and it is almost well written. More on that in a moment.

First of all this seems to be a Batman Begins reunion. And since that movie was a very well done movie I have no complaints about that. Two of the main actors (Christian Bale and Michael Caine) appear in both movies. And when they say in The Presige's trailers, "from the people who brought you Batman Begins" they were not kidding. Christopher Nolan wrote, directed and produced both films (as well as the coming Batman sequel, The Dark Knight). Emma Thomas is also a producer for all three movies. Wally Pfister is cinematographer, Lee Smith the film editor, John Papsidera the casting, and Nathan Crowley the production designer for Batman & the Prestige.

Casting...great job. From the Judge (Daniel Davis, who was Prof. Moriarty in Star Trek: TNG) to David Bowie as Nikola Tesla to Tesla's assistant, Alley, played by Andy Serkis (best known for his role as Gollum in the Lord of the Rings trilogy) all of the minor roles were given strong performances.

The supporting roles were also fabulous. Scarlett Johansson (previously in Lost In Translation), Rebecca Hall and Caine turned in stellar performances that helped to sell every aspect of this movie.

Of the two leads, Hugh Jackman and Bale, Bale was much stronger. His strongest aspects of his performance may be lost on most people...pulling of subtle differences that account for some important details in the plot. Jackman was not bad, but of the entire cast Jackman was the least convincing. He was not bad...just he was the unfortunate on to be last on the list of the cast from best to worst.

Some of my most favorite movies are the ones where you are left leaving the theatre thinking. Putting some of the pieces together, solving unanswered questions or simply figuring out how you were duped for so long...those, in my view, make movies better.

The story was intriguing. Two magicians who start as co-workers and through a tragedy become competitors. Each event in their lives cause them to try to outdo each other. How far are they willing to go in order to get to the next level? Are they willing to "get their hands dirty" and how dirty? Are they willing to be totally immersed in their art...and how immersed?

The theme was compelling as well. Obsession can destroy the obsessed.

***** SPOILER WARNING *****
Why couldn't he remember which knot he tied? How come he only meant "I love you" on some days? Why did he use a different name with his assistant?

The only complaint I have with the movie, and it is a big one to me, is how late the movie asks the audience to suspend aspects of reality. At the moment we see all of the top hats and cats my wife & I knew what was going on and how it fit in with the story...essentially we knew the ending. I was disappointed in the sudden demand of the suspension of reality by the audience, to me, is as bad as a deus ex machina.

While that was a huge downer for me there were many other very cool things that took a while to sink in. Why couldn't Alfred remember which knot he tied? How come Alfred only meant "I love you" to Sarah on some days? Why did Alfred use a different name while he was with Olivia? So many things like this.

Those minor or subtle things that leave you putting them together after you leave the theatre are great.

In fact, while looking for a certain quote I was reminded of this exchange in the movie:

Cutter: Remember when I told you about the drowning sailor?
Rupert Angier: Yes, he said it was like going home.
Cutter: I lied. He said it was agony.

At the time it seemed HORRIBLY out of place. Reading again a few minutes ago it just hit me that another subtle link was just connected. Another "orphan" moment, one that seems to have no significance, actually has a huge purpose.

So many good things and only one problem. The underdelivered prestige of the film...and why was it underdelivered? Because of the attempt to jump to science fiction to resolve the plot.

Forced to give a grade, I would give it a B-...ignoring the belated suspension of reality and resulting disappointment it would have been an A.

Path To 9/11 Receives Un-Due Criticism

Democrats Getting a Taste of Their Own Medicine .

A movie will be released on ABC this Sunday September 10th at 7 central called "The Path to 9/11." This movie, mind you, is not advertised as a documentary, like Michael Moore’s movie Ferment 9/11 or Al Gore’s piece (of crap) An Inconvenient Truth, this is advertised as a Dramatization, based around fact.

What is upsetting all the democrats is that this film talks about what leads to and has causation to the 9/11 attack. Which, for those who don’t know, have to do with Clinton’s presidency.

Yep. There it is. Its not enough for the political left to get angry whenever 9/11 is talked about, because, of coarse, whenever you talk about the events in history that led us to the path we are on, that’s called “pollitizing the events” and “lying” and “underhanded tricks to support the administration.” But whenever you show a film that is not supportive of the administration its called… where are those quotes:

"No documentary takes you through the range of emotions the way that Michael Moore's controversial film does"
Reel.com

"Fahrenheit 9/11 does make a convincing argument that Moore is the country's most celebrated and socially significant filmmaker."
Korea Times

"Michael Moore is a masterful filmmaker, because his films elicit intense emotional responses from all who view them."
Trades

Moore makes a persuasive and unrelenting case that there is another way to look at things beyond the version we've been given.
Los Angeles Times

Masterful? The Corvette Z06 is Masterful. Moore is hardly the Z06. He is more like… an old Honda Minivan. Rusty and full of trash.

Moore’s farce was claimed to be a documentary, when clearly it was one guy’s interpretation and splice of people’s views to fit his own.

Michael Moore: [referring to the Saudis] Do they give you any trouble?
Secret Service Agent: I'm not at liberty to answer that.
Michael Moore: Okay, I'll take that as a yes.

Anyway, I could talk for days about how much of a liar Moore is, but this isn’t about Moore, its about the Bias in the complaints behind “A Path to 9/11.”

MSNBC tells us how Clinton officials protest the miniseries. And of corse, with a statement like this, they show that they are just sitting on the fence:

A “terribly wrong” miniseries about events leading to the Sept. 11 attacks blame President Clinton’s policies, former Clinton administration officials said in letters demanding that ABC correct it or not air it.

I will have to watch it before forming an opinion (much like Moore or Gore’s flicks) but according to a MSNBC vote: 60% of people (as of 9:17am) voting thing that ABC is misleading the public through its dramatization, and they haven’t even watched it!

News and papers are all over this thing too, and not in a good way:

Accuracy aside, ABC's '9/11' deserves to bomb
-Chicago Sun-Times

Hindsight is heartbreaking and disturbing to watch, even in a made-for-television movie. But it’s even harder to take when those steps continue to contaminate the present.
-New York Times

Look, friends. Here is The Bottom Line:

• Liberals dish crap for years, and the moment something doesn’t support them, they cry bloody murder.
• Its too soon for anyone to judge because no one has watched it
• Face Facts, that President Clinton had more to do with the 9/11 attack the President Bush did.

**********Update 9/12/06 10:38pm**********

Many reviews are in about this thing.

CNN: Controversial '9/11' still powerful

Accuracy in Media: ABC's 'The Path to 9/11' Is Outstanding

MSNBC: ‘Path to 9/11’ tells a sad, riveting tale
This one is kind of interesting. In reading the review, you don't get a great sense of "love" for the movie, but then again, MSNBC I can site all over for showing their left-wing BIAS. This is as close as you'll get to hear MSNBC bash Clinton:

Whatever its flaws may or may not be, "The Path to 9/11" makes clear there's ample blame to go around.

Of the negative criticism, I think my favorite is this one:

Chicago Sun-Times: Accuracy aside, ABC's '9/11' deserves to bomb

I like that... Even if its accurate, it should bomb. Why? Because it doesn't make Clinton look like he farts roses.

But then again, what would you expect when they call Fahrenheit 9/11 a:

A compelling, persuasive film, at odds with the White House effort to present Bush as a strong leader. -Roger Ebert

In an e-mail conversation with a friend, a good question/statement was brought up:

Would the capture have Bin Laden accomplished anything? Someone else would have taken his place--possibly someone worse. Capturing one man would not have seriously damaged Al-Qaida, in my belief. They would have continued onward, probably even angrier than before. The root of the problem needs to be addressed.

I can't answer that, however, in "The Path to 9/11" they mentioned wanting to bomb or wipe out a terrorist training camp, then bomb/wipe it out when it got rebuilt or moved, and keep doing so because of a couple of terrorist attacks that have been committed against the US at that time span of the Docudrama.

Without capturing the bastard and having him honestly tell us how instrumental he was in the 9/11 attack, there is no way of knowing, but if we had been destroying terrorist/Muslim extremist training camps one after another since the mid 90s, I would be more willing to say it would have probably had an impact on the whole "Lets blow up the Infidels" game plan. (It should be noted, BTW, that we did capture the 'Mastermind" of the 9/11 attacks: Khalid Shaikh Mohammed as of March 1st, 2003)

This brought up the question:

What would you consider to be the root of the problem and what might be a way(s)
to address and correct it/them.

I think the problem (and mind you, I’m no expert) is Muslim extremists in a crappy part of the world, who have nothing better to live for, and who are bitter/jealous because there are places in the world who have it better then they do (probably because we haven't been fighting wars of religion non stop for several decades) is the root of the problem. not all Muslims are like that. Look at all those who voted in Iraq, after all.

1. If you can bring peace and freedom from dictators to the region (and by force, because bringing peace by way of peace hasn't worked), but as we have discovered with Iraq, bringing peace and democracy to the middle east is kind of difficult.
2. Terminate the opposition. None of this 'trial' crap. when the 'bad guy' stands in a court room and says "If i would have had enough money, I would have killed you all," there is nothing better you can do besides drop the f***er.

How do you forcibly bring peace and democracy to an area?

First, they have to want it. the fact that a greater percentage of Iraqis voted under fear of getting blown up then Americans did in the last election will tell you something about whether or not they want it. But once you bring one powerful country in the area up and running, others should follow... it may take some 'seed planting' or just plain gett'in dirty, but don't forget... Our nation was formed on the violent overthrow of another country's system. (This is why we have the second amendment). To say that you can do this with nothing but Peace, doves, and Koohm-by-yah is naive at best... Dangerous at worst.

It would be something different if we were never attacked. But we were. And we have to deal with that.

I don't have enough information to know whether or not capturing or killing OBL 10 years ago would have helped. But then let me ask:

If England could have killed George Washington and/or Benjamin Franklin during our rebellion back in the 1700s, do you think that would have hurt our country's formation?

The Bush-Hater's Wet Dream

A UK drama thing (I would hardly call this a "Film") has been created depicting a future (2007) Assassination of President Bush.

Directed by Gabriel Range, this feature-length pile of tightly-coiled colin reject from europe will be shown on More4 (some channel 4 in the UK) later this month, but not before being in the Toronto Film Festival.

What does Gabe have to say about this... whatever you want to call it?

The film is based on meticulous research and interviews with FBI agents and people on the other side of the war on terror,"

It is a serious and sensitive film. There is no way it would encourage anyone to assassinate Bush and usher in Cheney’s America."

ah huh. Cheney's America?

Peter Dale (the head of More4) had this to say:

gripping detective story

thought-provoking critique

"It’s a pointed political examination of what the war on terror did to the American body politic. I’m sure that there will be people who will be upset by it but when you watch it you realize what a sophisticated piece of work it is."

ah huh.....

More4 has also showed such... "Works" as: The Trial of Tony Blair, a comedy showing Mr. Blair "Seeking absolution from the Catholic Church as he seeks to evade a war crimes tribunal over his role in the Iraq invasion."

oh good. I felt it was a little too low key without a link to why we should hate Catholics.

I can't make this garbage up, people. Are there any liberals out there who would like to make a film about eating my heart and pissing on my cat while wearing a black beret and singing "We're Out of the Woods" from the Wizard of Oz soundtrack while their at it? Because... screw it. I'm done with this entry.

so... pissed.