March 19, 2007

Nicholas Cage whirls his MEGA LONG flaming iron chain from waist height

This is my first review at Leftist Movie Reviews. I was invited months ago or something by AradhanaD to post reviews here, but then I stopped watching movies.

This review has spoilers.  Not that it matters.

This is going to be a very short review. I saw the comic-book-based movie Ghost Rider, and was ROTFL the whole way through. What was it? A hypermasculinized mélange of stereotypes wrapped in a nonsensical enigma wrapped in a heavily overwrought resurrection of Faust. We are treated at the beginning to the usual glorified retelling of the White Man's conquest of the desolate, uninhabited West, and then we proceed from there to a tale about a budding motorcycle stunt man's heartbreaking take of a predictable loss caused by a deal with the Devil, a white man on a cane. A fairly good-looking young man eventually grows up to bear, sadly, the droning voice and completely wooden, expressionless face of Nicholas Cage, performing ever more ridiculous stunts to prove himself worthy of his father as well as challenging this limits of his Faustian bargain.

Finally, the Devil comes to take his due, and that involves turning Nicholas Cage into a FLAMING SKELETON IN LEATHER to fight his enemies, who are ghoulish creatures with few interesting characteristics and are all defeated in one way or by Cage waving a giant flaming chain from waist height. In the meantime, his ex-girlfriend, who has gone from alluringly naive but wholesome country girl to glamourous yet completely incompetent sports TV reporter---and is played by someone who must be some exotically objectified Hispanic pop star, I'm sure, I hardly pay attention to these people---endured heartbreak yet again, only to be take hostage by Cage's enemies and freed with minimal effort by the FLAMING SKELETON IN LEATHER.

One scene that particularly struck me was when Cage, in FLAMING SKELETON IN LEATHER mode, decides to rescue a young white woman being mugged by a young white man. Cage uses his Total Perspective Vortex powers on the young perp to destroy him. That really encapsulates what this movie is all about, which is merely the wish that the world would conform to a simple Manichean model, where powerful masculine hero defeats EVIL wherever it may be, with no distinction made between little perps and big perps.

And that, of course, is no different from 90% of superhero movies out there. What were you expecting? I'm sorry to disappoint AradhanaD, but I cannot bring any serious powers of class analysis to bear on this movie---or at least I can't bring anything new to it, because there is nothing new or unusual about this movie. It's primary quality is that it is so badly done, which is also its most redeeming quality: it is hilariously funny. I guess, to be fair to the creators of this movie, they didn't really stereotype dark skinned people, largely because they were absent---unless you count comically stupid supervillains with blue-tinged skin. I apologize to all blue humans if I have not done right by them in this review.

Alright: I will throw you one bone. This movie was clearly made to give voice to one cultural strand in North America: a certain segment of the working-class midwestern/southern white population. If these people exist that way, then the hero is intended to be seen as coming from among them. The chief villain is dressed in Gothwear, so perhaps---stretching it---he is intended to represent the decadence of urban liberal media or something. But that's all I can give you.

September 14, 2006

Nations: three vignettes

Some of you will remember "Prussian Blue", the twin girls who are, together, apparently the Spice Girls of the neo-Nazi world.  In a bout of idle Internet-surfery, I occured again upon their web site.  One of the things I discovered is that they have a little sister named Dresden.  I also took a look at their lyrics.  Let's just say that after reading them, you'd become a little more suspicious when someone invokes Norse mythology, and you'd feel more confident in a Wagner-Nazi ideological link!  But: this is a little less fair to Norse mythology than it is to Wagner.

These young ladies get letters of support every time the media gives them a justifiably horrified glance.  Some of these people claim that they'd never say such things in public.  They have jobs like bank tellars and the like.   So, if you're a darkie like me or a visible/seeming Joo, and you're at the bank, and you're being served by a white seeming-non-Jewish person, there's a chance that this person may be a closet neo-Nazi and believe that he'll have to shoot you in the coming race war.  Feel free to profile them as desired.

One interesting one:

I am a Black woman and I have a lot of pride in my race but I don't wish any ill will toward any other race. I think you girls are talented and you should keep your race pride alive. Be proud of your accomplishments and always thank GOD for giving you the gift of musical ability and having the support from your parents to persue your dreams. Your website is really cool and if I were your demographic I would pick up your CD. I read the lyrics and they are really good. Keep up the good work, and don't get discouraged and never forget where you came from. (A fan)

If this person really is black, one really wonders what was going through her head as she wrote this.  Is this some form of rhetorical judo based on fear?  It's normal for beleaguered groups to engage in that sort of thing.  Still, it's odd when the lamb goads the lion's self-pity.


Way back when the Web (as opposed to the Internet) was young, I had a slightly diffferent set of obsessions than I do now.  One of the things about which I was obsessed was the Helleno-Turkish conflect, particularly the intractable Cyprus problem.   So I used to follow, in that time, a (now defunct, deleted) Cypriot discussion board that was mostly populated by expats of the region in America.  It was run by Greek Cypriot in the California tech industry (or something), who wanted Ordinary People to discuss solutions to the conflict given the failures of the leaders.

Now that the web is older, it generally knows better.  Or, at least, many people on it do. 

The most striking figure on this forum was this Greek-from-Greece, an ultra-ultra-nationalist, who had only vicious things to say about the innate barbarity of Turks and whose (unwittingly ironic) desire for Cyprus was that the Turkish Cypriot inhabitants be swept from the island or otherwise dissipated (even by "peaceful" means such as obligate assimilation, I assume).  Of course, he desired this regardless of what Greek Cypriots themselves wanted, which, to their credit, involved at its strongest some form of compensation for lost property and an apology.

The presence of interfering irredentists and ultra-nationalists from the motherland is not in itself very remarkable.  What is remarkable are as follows:

  • A more reasonable Greek or Greek Cypriot once pointed out the fluidity of identity and the futility of establishing a firm definition of "Greek" by pointing out the existence of a Muslim Greek friend of his living in Greece.  Mr. Ultra-Nationalist responded by saying that if he ever met this person, he would kill him.  Because it's a worse crime to blur the definitions than it is to be a Turk.  And this Muslim Greek blurred the definitions---since proper Greeks, no matter whether they actually believe and behave as such, identify as Greek Orthodox Christians.
  • Mr. Ultra-Nationalist, like most of the discussion board, was actually living in America.  He had a Chinese-American friend who had converted to Greek Orthodoxy and was learning Greek.  Mr. Ultra-Nationalist believed that this individual was acceptably Hellenic, despite the inconvenient Chinese origin.  A Muslim Greek is a vile concept, but a Chinese Greek is not.  (Actually, he usually used the word "Hellenic" and objected to the term "Greek", because---and this is true---the word "Greek" is what the imperialistic Romans called them.)

Anyone who knows me will know that I'm a big fan of science fiction novels.  One notable author that I usually like is Mike Resnick.  But Resnick is quite a troublesome writer in some ways.  He's a man who went to Africa or something on a lot of safaris or worked there or...well, I have no idea.  But he---a white dude---writes a lot about Africa, including very good allegories for African politics, such as Purgatory.

Now I say that he is troublesome, because sometimes he is a subtle defender of colonialism in a Kiplingesque way.  Not always---sometimes he's a clear critic of colonialism---but frequently one is left with the impression that he occasionally mourns the end of colonialism in Africa.  That is actually what makes him a good writer.  (Or maybe he is not mourning it, but trying to tell us that the end of colonialism has consequences too.)

One of his best works, however, is an anthology of a series short stories he published in magazines.  It's called Kirinyaga, and its background is a futuristic, advanced Kenya centuries hence.  In this rich, futuristic Kenya, very little traditional African lifestyles are left.  Most of the tribes have urbanized and modernized and live wealthy, capitalistic lives.  Except one.

And that one remnant of traditional life, kept on a reserve of their own making (one of the troubling theme that Resnick rides) is led by a witch doctor with a modern education.  This man persuades an international council to give him a whole terraformed planet in another solar system (remember, this is far-future SF) to which he can take his tribe and re-establish the cultural life of his tribe in an environment similar to ancient Kenya.

Each of the short stories is thus an episode in the life of this colony as told by the witch doctor.  In each episode, a "leak" in his cultural utopia starts to form, and he must patch it up.  For instance, an old woman, his closest ally, decides that she wants to retain her independence in her old age---and he, in order to prevent the corruption of the traditions he is trying to save, must stop her.  And he uses every power he has, including contact with the terraforming maintence services, to break her spirit.

A young woman wants to learn to read.  But he cannot allow anyone to become literate but the witch doctor. (If they want an education, they can freely leave---forever.)  Otherwise the ideas would poison his paradise.  So she devises more and more devious ways to get what she wants.  And he must thwart her at every turn.  Eventually he wins, with tragic consequences.

And what is most striking about the way that Resnick paints his reaction (and Resnick writes it very well)?  The witch doctor does not feel that any of the consequences are his responsibility.  Instead, he crucifies himself on the gentle cross of martyred self-pity.  The witch doctor communicates with his people through the use of parables---these pervade each story---and the responsibility for the consequences is entirely subsumed by the truth he creates with his parables.  Every episode raises the stakes by raising the potency of the parables he invents---and the potential damage caused by a leak in the cultural dam grows every larger.

I don't know to what extent Resnick's whiteness and mentality afflicts his writing in this story, but he is trying to tell us that there is no single national moment.  The witch doctor's attempts to stop time will always be futile and probably never reflected the ancient reality of the tribe.  His parables were like the ancient parables---but they were all designed not to educate, but to justify.  To screw down the lid of the pressure cooker of human creativity and independent desire. Eventually the parables must rupture.

December 26, 2005

Movie review: King Kong

The movie was too long that this review will be short: this shouldn't have been Jurassic Park, but too much of it was, so I stopped caring about it half-way through.  The last hour would have had a lot of pathos for me if it weren't for the exhausting second hour, but it turned into bathos.  Peter Jackson is a genius but this was the wrong movie to be given to him.

December 19, 2005

The White Witch agrees with me

The actress for the White Witch agrees with me:

INTERVIEW: Tilda Swinton, The White Witch of Narnia Speaks! - MovieWeb. Why is Jadis so angry?



Tilda Swinton: I didn't see her as angry. She's interested in dominating absolutely and is irritated that there is this prophecy that says sooner or later four humans will turn up and make trouble for her reign. She wants to get rid of them fast and it's all going a bit wrong. She's confused and irritated. I don't see her as particularly angry. Have you read ‘The Magician's Nephew'?



No...



Tilda Swinton: I hope they make it. It's a prequel that explains where Jadis came from and how Narnia is created. She's so bad that she destroyed her empire to spite her sister. There's this one deplorable world, which we don't know what it is, that if it's spoken; everything is vanquished and she's the only one alive. She does it to spite her sister. She just wants to dominate. The idea of anybody having anything over her is confusing.

This obviously means that my analysis is correct.  There's no stronger form of authority than that of an actress.

December 12, 2005

Movie Review: The Lion, The Witch, and the Wardrobe

Note to the jackasses who were sitting at the back of the theatre: no, you don't look more sophisticated and clever by laughing uproariously at the most poignant parts of the movie, spoiling the experience for everyone else in the theatre.

Look, dudes, I can snark out with the best of them, but your fake, grating laughter does not actually convince us that we are stupid for our feeling during the sacrifice scene.  It instead convinces us that you have no heart.  Save this for the bad martial arts movies, bitte schön.

Moving along...

Continue reading "Movie Review: The Lion, The Witch, and the Wardrobe" »

June 07, 2005

Movie review: Madagascar

Having been (self) deprived of a television for the past, oh, year or so, I've explored various means of replacing this form of entertainment.  Lately, I've been watching more movies.  That's partly because I'm a fan of both the Hitchhiker's Guide and Star Wars, well, a reluctant fan these days of the latter.

Anyway, I've been lately rather stressed, so I decided to go for some more irrelevant humour fare, and that led me to watch the children's movie, Madagascar by DreamWorks.  And I have to say that I enjoyed this 3D animation.

DreamWorks is the studio that made Shrek, and that was funny, except that the moral was a little too cliché: that beauty is the eye of the beholder and a reversal of the Ugly Duckling moral.   Madagascar manages to find a less overused moral, and actually a quite comparatively complex one: the possible consequences of harmless self-indulgence on those who love the indulger and the need to exercise self-restraint and transcend our baser natures.  Aside from this, however, the premise is original and entertaining for a children's movie.

The movie begins with four neighbours and close friends, with very New York accents and attitudes: Alex, Gloria, Melman, and Marty.  They are neighbours...in that their pens are in the same area of the New York Central Park Zoo.  Yes, it is that old cartoon stand-by, anthropomorphisation of animals.  Alex is a very energetic lion, and he is the mascot of the zoo.  He lives a pampered life and is the star of the show.  He is completely tame, and loves to play with the children who visit.  He lives for the delicious juicy raw steak they feed him repeatedly every day. 

Gloria is a no-nonsense hippo who also loves the pampered, sheltered life.  Melman is a hypochondriac giraffe whose attention-seeking behaviour gets him a daily, anticipated CAT scan and huge quantities of pills.  Marty is a zebra, and he is Alex's best friend. 

It's Marty's 10th birthday, and he is having a mid-life crisis (I presume zebras only live 20 years).  He wants to experience the wild.  And a group of escaping psychotic military penguins inspires him to attempt to leave the zoo temporarily---to experience the wild in Connecticut.  How does try to escape?  Via New York's train system.  His friends panic when they find out about it and try to chase him through the system scaring the People (with whom they cannot communicate) in the process.

Eventually they are all subdued by the People using tranquilizer darts, only to find themselves being shipped to Kenya, since the People have decided that they want to be free.  This is exactly the opposite of what Alex wanted---he is now totally deprived of his life as the King of New York.  The military penguins instigate a series of events that lead them to being stranded on the coast of Madagascar. 

Marty is happy: he is in the wild, and he is learning to enjoy it.  Gloria and Melman eventually adapt too.  Alex sulks, but then he cheers up and tries to enjoy it as well.  But...there's a problem.  No steak.  And as his primal feeding instincts try to take over, Alex realizes what steak really is (he never knew, it appeared magically in the zoo), and that his closest friends are also his natural source of sustenance.

I find this actually pretty brave for a children's movie: viewing the world sympathetically from the point of view of a hungry lion, especially once you've anthropomorphized his prey as well.  But, like I said, a lot of the gags in the movie are pretty funny.  Even though eating your friends is not what you probably want kids to think about, this deals with Alex's dilemma in a funny and sensitive way, and eventually provides a solution to the problem before it gets too serious.  But I like stories where the main character eventually has to realize that he is a monster and come to terms with the dilemma of his existence.

May 22, 2005

SZ strikes again

OK, as usual, SZ at World O'Crap has the funniest posts on bad movies, and she has a truly amazing post up about The Phantom Menace, presumably in honour of the latest member of the trilogy.  This is part of a very long series of bad movie reviews called "Subliminal Cinema" that is apparently a book she and her coauthor, Scott C., are trying to publish.

World O'Crap - Sunday Cinema: Meanwhile, Future-Emperor Palpitation sends his apprentice, Darth Maul (a highly skilled assassin with a weakness for the face-painting booth at the Lions Club fish fry) to kill Slo-Jinn and Obi-Wan. Palpitation and Maul represent the Synth Lords, who have vowed to destroy the Republic with German techno-pop.

Anacin volunteers to pilot his home-built pod racer in an upcoming event in order to raise money for the spark plugs. Pod Racing involves blasting through Zion National Park in a highly polluting hotrod, while drunken, disgruntled fans look up from their 32-ounce beers long enough to take pot shots at you. So basically, it’s NASCAR. Anacin wins the race, and Slo-Jinn wins Ani in a side bet. He tells Mom that he’s taking Ani to teach him the ways of the Jedi. She has his room rented before he’s out the door.

After a brief run-in with Darth Maul, we arrive at planet ChorusGirl, home of the Republican Senate and the worst traffic since 5:30 PM on the Beltway. Queen Amidala wears a hat made of whole ox horns in honor of her appearance before this august assembly. But still no one will help her, so she and the Jedi head for Nanoo-Nanoo, where she seeks an audience with the ruler of the Dungans, a giant toad. When he asks her who she thinks she is, a skinny white girl like her wearing too much blush, she announces that she is Queen Amidala of the Nanoo-Nanoo. Then Padme jumps up and says that SHE is Queen Amidala of the Nanoo-Nanoo. It’s like an extraterrestrial version of "To Tell the Truth." Anyway, one of the queens asks the Dungans to serve as cannon fodder and the King agrees, because he finds his people really annoying too, and hopes they’ll get wiped out.

Read the whole thing.  I was rolling on the floor giggling.  The interview with Lucas at the end was amazing too.

May 21, 2005

Movie review: Star Wars: Revenge of the Sith

*cue music*

A long time ago in a galaxy far, far away, a man named George Lucas made a trilogy of movies that were original in their medium and became icons of their time, even though, objectively speaking, they were quite shallow in plot and characterization.  But there is no denying that Lucas developed a universe with a grandeur no movie had as yet managed to achieve, and his achievement lived on for decades after he released it.

Then he decided to make prequels.  But as with many noble intentions (if by noble you mean lucrative), he was tempted by the Dark Side, succumbing to the deep temptation of losing all subtlety in the search for greater grandeur in setting.  In The Phantom Menace he suffered from pandering to childhood, and opened himself to the old general critique of SF: "for children."  In Attack of the Clones, he proved he should not be permitted near any romance dialogue on pain of being subjected to horrible romance dialogue.

But now, in the final test, George Lucas makes Revenge of the Sith...

*pan down, music quietens*

But seriously, Revenge of the Sith is a considerable improvement over the previous two prequels.  Yes, Anakin/Vader is acted by a truly wooden actor...but I think his inability to act anything other than "petulant teenager" is a feature, not a bug.  It very much fits inwith someone who is easily twisted into evil.  Yes, there is still horrible romance dialogue...but less than last time.  What impressed me the most about it was that Lucas was willing to do horrible things to his characters, which was precisely what was necessary for writing this tragedy.  The irony of the ending was a nice touch; from then we can see how, psychologically, Darth Vader would have no choice but to bury his Anakin self once and for all (well, at least until the last scene in the throne room) and self-justify by devoting himself to the Emperor.

So there was lots of annoying stuff; C3PO could have been cut out of any number of scenes.  On occasion, Palpatine descends into caricature.  But the agony of the Jedi was worth it.

One interesting thing about the story is the essential necessity of patricide and fratricide among the Sith.  There can only ever be two, we are told; so to become an apprentice, one has to kill an apprentice, and to become a master, one has to kill him too.  We knew that this happened in Return of the Jedi, but we know in the prequels that it is systematic.  I can't help but see a political comment there, even if unintentional: the Jedi are the essence of solidarity, their fighting style invested in Force-coordinated action in concert, suffusedwith a mutual feeling that spans the galaxy.  The Sith are pure competition for power, where the apprentice is always the rival and near-enemy of the exploitative Master, and always seeking to dethrone him, and where the apprentice must stab the rival in his back.  Thus to bring "balance" to the force, Anakin/Vader must do both, once in the prequel and once in the original series.   In the original series, he must rejoin the collectivity of the Jedi by committing a sort of patricide, and agree to yield his own life for this.  Since many will not have seen the movies by now, I won't tell you what he has to do in the prequel.  But his destruction of the Emperor can be seen as resulting in a balanced force: destructive rivalry and creative solidarity.

Unfortunately, today I see us having tilted far over to one side...and bringing balance to the Force won't be easy but sadly quite painful.  I hope that we are spared this, and maybe if we're lucky we will.  May the Force be with you.

May 20, 2005

Movie review: The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy

Not bad!  It did what movifications always do: cut out a lot of important stuff, and provide a vision that doesn't necessarily match what fans might have had in their own heads.  But Mos Def definitely worked, I thought, as Ford Prefect, and Arthur Dent was suitably clueless, and the Infinite Improbability Drive was, well, Infinitely Improbable.  I remembered a number of those Guide entries, and the style in which they presented them was quite elegant.  Marvin was depressed.  The Vogons were too bloated, I think, and Zaphod Beeblebrox was a little overdone.

Yes, there was a romance, and the romance was campy.  But tHhGttG is campy.  So I think it worked out too, but perhaps not well enough to fit in with sequels.  It wasn't the best movie I've ever seen, but I don't regret spending the money: I had a sufficient chuckles to make it worth it.