Posts Tagged ‘conspiracy’

Zeitgeist / Zeitgeist Addendum

Zeitgeist / Zeitgeist Addendum

Wednesday, January 21st, 2009

“It is no measure of health to be well adjusted to a profoundly sick society.” – Jiddu Krishnamurti, just one of the many great quotes these two documentaries are packed with.

This might not be a favourable comparison to some but – trust me I mean it well, I think – these reminded me a lot of What the Bleep do We Know? and its sequel Down the Rabbit Hole. I don’t have a lot to say about either, so I’m combining them into the one review.

Don’t let the lack of wordage here make you think I thought as little of them – there’s information in these four hours that make them certainly worth watching at least once by every man, woman and child on the planet. Many, as I did, will find a lot information they already had from other sources – for me personally, I’m a total liberal anyway so I gobble up information like this, I watch Colbert, the Daily Show, South Park, I listen to This American Life and Radio Lab, so a lot of what’s said here has already been “revealed” to me either in pure fact as here or just as part of a joke.

What has to be said about these documentaries, as often happens with these kinds of things, kind of hangs around that very word “documentary”. Like the What the Bleep films, the whole thing is just so one-sided and utopian (ahem … “weapons of mass creation,” I mean, come on …) you’d be a fool not to take them with a very large and healthy scoop of salt and skepticism. When, as here, they use footage of and quotes from Carl Sagan, the requirement for a baloney detection kit should be even more of a no-brainer. For if you watch movies like this, that basically tell you exactly what you want to hear – that your life sucks merely because of the failings of others and an evil superpower – and lap it up without question, you’re kind of playing into the core problem they’re addressing. I say this because I’ve read a lot of reviews that took the one-sided argument exactly that way.

One thing I found wrong with the first movie, which is perfectly – even exhaustively – methodical in putting forth its 9/11 argument, is that it gave no real thoughts regarding what exactly we’re supposed to do with all this information. Luckily, this is fixed in the Addendum which closes with a shopping list of ideas, kinda like those at the end of “The 11th Hour” or “An Inconvenient Truth,” or ways in which we might fix this. Many have pointed out that none of these ideas have really been thought much beyond the idea(l) stage. The fact remains though that however one-sided or idealistic these docs may be, if you’re gonna be one-sided and idealistic, there are worse things to be one-sided and idealistic about than what these movies are suggesting. They do manage to convince you that it’s possible. They’re more visually interesting than the average documentary to boot – the second one vastly improving on the first. And anything that includes footage from Network and lines from Carl Sagan – even if, as was the case in Frost/Nixon you may as well just watch the interview, you may as well just watch Network and read Sagan, LOL – really, I just can’t argue with.



Burn After Reading

Burn After Reading

Tuesday, December 23rd, 2008

Okay, let’s try and get through all of these before Christmas and the New Year proceedings begin proper, hehe …

This is one of those movies where I only realised just how conflicted I was approaching it as the opening credits rolled. On the one hand, the movie looked plain hideous to me and the reviews only confirmed it. Though Ocean’s Thirteen won me over to these kinds of ensemble comedies it wasn’t to the greatest extent, and with the Coens at the helm it seemed like however good it could be, it’d still be a monumental waste of time and talent. On the other hand, I too quickly forget how it’s often been their wackier projects, like Hudsucker and The Big Lebowski, that I’ve loved the most (I even quicker forget how much I liked Intolerable Cruelty).

Ultimately it’s neither here nor there. I’m not going to be one of those who says, “following No Country for Old Men, what do you expect?” because frankly, I’ve yet to give that movie the second viewing that will or won’t make it the masterpiece to me that it is to everyone else. Much as I appreciated the quality of No Country and loved it winning Best Picture, etc, I’d sooner watch Lebowski or Fargo yet again. This movie isn’t up there with any of those movies, I’m quick to add … but it made me laugh a hell of a lot more than expected and at no point even threatened to annoy me; which, given the way I feel about Brad Pitt lately, is kind of amazing.



Redbelt

Redbelt

Friday, July 18th, 2008

“There’s no one here but the fighters.”

I was pretty damn loathe to watch this without any prior knowledge of what it was about etc after Spartan completely failed to ignite me. That I’ve been terrible at keeping up the movie-watching habit lately (I’ll get better soon, I promise) made me even more apprehensive: I thought a stupid comedy might’ve been an easier option to get me writing again.

But dammit, it’s Mamet. I decided that if this movie couldn’t hold my attention then there must clearly be something wrong with me or it, lol, and I dove in. The opening credits didn’t let me down – all the names you want in a Mamet movie, Rebecca Pidgeon, Ricky Jay, a couple of surprises in Tim Allen and Jennifer Grey, the brilliant Robert Elswitt on photography duties. And then the madness begins.

The movie is pretty convoluted for the first 40 minutes. Speaking of Elswitt, the quirkiness of the plot points actually kind of reminded me of Paul Thomas Anderson. A strange and frazzled girl walks out of the rain into a martial arts place and almost shoots a police officer and we’re just expected to accept that “these crazy things happen all the time” as the Magnolia narrator might say. The moment is “forgotten” and we move onto something else. I think the one reason none of this bugged me because it was scored – yes, scored, I think that’s the only word for it – at all times by Mamet’s unmistakably perfect dialogue (something else that’s familiar in Anderson movies, in fact – I don’t think I’d ever entirely made the connection). It’s like Brian De Palma’s Snake Eyes plus the old world meets new world ways of Ronin meets Rocky and Mamet’s edge.

But fear not, because it all comes together in the end, in more astonishingly powerful ways than I’d ever have seen coming. The strange girl turns out to be an attorney who has issues with physical contact after being attacked before the story begins. There’s a scene where a trainer from the martial arts place at the start, our hero Chiwetal Ejiofor, who must surely be headed for an Oscar some day if not today, breaks through the wall and holds her in exactly the way she doesn’t want in order to help her. It’s an outstanding scene ending in the line above that speaks volumes about how the good guys, the honest guys, maybe avoid such confrontations too much. The movie is ultimately about having enough of the bullsh*t and speaking the truth and it’s done in such an overwhelmingly brisk and unique fashion … one should expect no less from David Mamet, but like I said, after Spartan … it’s practically phenomenal. Double bill it with In Bruges. Even I’m inclined to dub it a “man movie” despite it’s leanings towards very womanly issues in that attorney subplot that really made the movie for me – those two times Ejiofor and the attorney touch are cinema at its best to me.



National Treasure: Book of Secrets

National Treasure: Book of Secrets

Tuesday, May 13th, 2008

As with the first movie, this is clearly “Meh-” material: as Mark Kermode put it I think, it passes the time until Indy 4 well enough. But as with the first movie, it must be said that it’s mostly a good “meh-”. It’s bookended by a build-up and finale that are almost identikit copies of their original counterparts (“it’s a little gold man …” anyone?) but it has its moments like a chase down the tiny backstreets of London, a foray into Buckingham Palace, a nice scene around Paris’ Statue of Liberty (which reminded me I really must remember to see that next time I go).

It’s a Bruckheimer movie, so you should expect plausibility to go entirely out of the window, and that it certainly does around the point where Nicolas Cage manages to kidnap a President who seems almost willing to be kidnapped – even that’s a fun sequence, though, I’ve gotta admit. Likewise the stuff with Helen Mirren and Jon Voight as “mom and dad” feel often hideously like pandering to the older audience, but, y’know, it’s Mirren and Voight, it’s hard to complain. If you don’t watch movies often then it’s the last thing you want to waste your time on; otherwise, knock yourself out.



Michael Clayton

Michael Clayton

Wednesday, January 9th, 2008

I could’ve probably guessed how much I’d like this – in fact, I guess I did, in its relative absence from my Oscar predix :P Actually, were it not for my admittedly unfortunate habit for drawing parallels between movies and spotting even before it started that this is basically Erin Brockovich meets The Insider, both of which I’d rather see a second time (even Julia Roberts just beats out Clooney in my interests; though probably only in that movie) I might’ve really enjoyed this more than expected. I can take or leave George Clooney in just about anything, I don’t really see the big worship of his acting except that he’s a looker (in my opinion he’s much more interesting behind the camera) but (though they’re a little underused, I fear too little for any awards recognition) Tilda Swinton, Sidney Pollack and Tom Wilkinson more than held my focus in their supporting roles. The use of overlapping sound from scene to scene really keeps things moving forward making 2 hours seem like a lot less, and information is fed in such a way that the best is saved for last but it’s far from dull early on. I think the big Oscar buzz, especially over Clooney, is coming from the final shot, which I’ll admit, like the thing in Atonement, like a lot of the fleeting moments of wonder in the mostly overrated crop of this years’ Oscar hopefuls, certainly left me thinking I’d seen something better too. I don’t think I’ll be coming back to double check, though.



Breach [2007]

Breach [2007]

Monday, December 31st, 2007

“I disapprove of women in pantsuits. The world doesn’t need any more Hilary Clintons.”

Thus begins the story of a man who makes Swimming with Sharks‘ Buddy Ackerman look like a pussycat, lol. I loved director Billy Ray’s Shattered Glass – in fact I’m annoyed that I haven’t seen it a second time in the past four years – and this is kind of a neat inversion of the story there, despite still being based of course on a true story. Ryan Phillippe sort of does the Hayden Christensen part, posing as a clerk for Robert Hanssen, played by Chris Cooper. It’s Hanssen, however, who turns out to be the deceptive one; but not before Phillippe has warmed to him in quite a deeply human way – and maybe we have too. Cooper is fantastic enough to make that seemingly impossible thing occur – I like the almost comic presentation of Hanssen at times, he almost reminds me of George C. Scott Sterling Hayden in Dr. Strangelove or something, like the thing about Catherine Zeta Jones and his paranoia. It’s good to see Laura Linney again, too.