Posts Tagged ‘political’

They Live!

They Live!

Tuesday, August 31st, 2010

“I have come here to chew bubblegum and kick ass! And I’m all outta bubblegum…”

Hmm… this, yet again, is a movie that’s been on my “to watch” list for far too long. I’m not sure I’d call myself a John Carpenter fan but I’ve liked a lot of his work, and this one had a lot of good things said about it. I’m not sure if I’d agree with them but I still enjoyed it a lot. The movie kind of plods along for a while like a standard thriller but really got interesting for me when Roddy Piper (yes, the wrestler) finds a pair of sunglasses that allows him to see the aliens that live among us. I mean you can’t get much more 80s than that lol.

What I really loved about this segment of the movie was the surprising touch that not only can Piper see aliens around him but it also “translates” various pieces of advertising. A typical billboard suddenly, through the glasses, reads “OBEY” in bold black and white, etc. I’m not sure if this was the first time anything like this had been done, but it’s about as succinct as it gets in damning our media-driven culture and it’s ridiculously bold to find in a movie like this. I don’t know if it stretches well over a feature running time, I kind of got over the wow factor quickly following that absurd line I quoted above, lol… but it’s certainly worth a look.



W.

W.

Wednesday, January 28th, 2009

I haven’t really gotten into expanding this idea in the relevant reviews, but here is just yet another 2008 movie that somehow managed to state the bleedin’ obvious and still get relatively decent reviews. I can understand how an artist like Oliver Stone would want to defy expectation as much as any artist, and that for him perhaps that means, as he did with World Trade Center, completely dodging the scathing political commentary and conspiracy theorising that characterises his best regarded work. This to me is okay. But World Trade Center and this movie are not the place to do it. This movie looks and sounds fine all over, but it’s a complete waste of resources – and in this case doesn’t even compensate for that as WTC did to an extent by making what it does show interesting.

Maybe Stone felt that doing a direct satire, spoof, a comedy of Bush’s error, he’d just be repeating material that had been done to death already. That’s true too. I think it would still have made a much more lasting, entertaining, and possibly even more insightful and worthwhile product. I kinda don’t know what else to say about this movie. None of it particularly impressed me technically, and if nothing else it merely showed how bland Bush’s journey to the White House really was. Maybe that was intended. Doesn’t make a good movie.



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.



Stand Up and Cheer!

Stand Up and Cheer!

Friday, April 25th, 2008

My first Shirley Temple movie in years (and I’ve only seen a handful at most) and one of my first truly “old” movies in far too long. I was pretty apprehensive on both counts but I probably couldn’t have picked a better movie to re-introduce me to old Hollywood.

There’s little to speak of by way of story – it’s the Depression and the White House appoints a New York theatre man as Secretary of Amusement (great idea, right? I thought so too, lol). There’s a slight love story in the mix. It’s really more an excuse for 70 minutes of lavish song and dance numbers, a lively comedy duo called Mitchell & Durant pre-empting Rik Mayall and Adrian Edmondson by decades throwing each other around an office, lol; even a talking penguin at the end. What it comes down to is, it’s a lot more than just a Shirley Temple movie, and considering the runtime that’s pretty impressive. I enjoyed every second of it and would certainly watch it again.



Charlie Wilson’s War

Charlie Wilson’s War

Sunday, January 6th, 2008

I feel the need to write this review as quick as possible because the more time that passes, that less I have to think about the movie. This is just a really generic tale that tells most of us nothing we haven’t heard before yet presents everything in this, “omg, did you hear?” kind of way. Even the poster is overly sensational – “What, you think we could make this up?!” Like, wow – the US kinda-sorta funded the current hash in the Middle East; a selfish senator saw a skinny orphan and had a change of heart; this is not news to me. I think the most succinct thing I can say of this movie is how about half an hour in I was saying to myself, “so, it’s not Catch-22 …” … I didn’t even like Catch-22 as a movie, lol, I much preferred it on stage. With Mike Nichols behind it, this movie should’ve been so much more scathing, even blatant, about what it’s saying; that there’s been even a whiff of Oscar buzz about it is laughable. The Eighties production design, the hair and makeup, are disastrous. It’s about the most epitomous of last year’s glossy but worthless movies I’ve yet seen.



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.



Lions for Lambs

Lions for Lambs

Saturday, December 22nd, 2007

I can’t for the life of me explain why I loved this but I did. Had I time to watch it again before the year is out (not that I’ve much of an excuse – at 88 minutes it’s astounding how much it covers), it’s likely it’d be topping my end of year list, and along with Away From Her it’s one of two films I really think should be up for Best Picture at the Oscars in February though I know there’s not a cat’s chance in hell with either (not to say I might not get ballsy and switch them into my predix at the last minute).

It’s ultimately the work of a liberal smart and world-wearied enough to know that a lot of the politics he once fought for have today gone too far just like the politics of the “enemy” – to the point where there are a lot of people like the student here who are supremely intelligent but so jaded by cynicism they feel not only that the world is beyond saving but also that they’re “above” saving it … that the world doesn’t “deserve” their help because of the way it’s beaten them down.

It’s been said many times that one doesn’t need sex, violence, and coarse language if you actually have something to say. It’s amazing that this movie manages to be just as scathingly political a film as Brian De Palma’s Redacted while being resolutely, humblingly mature about it and giving time to the other side too. It kind of made me feel ashamed for having praised the starkly crude De Palma movie so much. This one leaves you really thinking twice over the cynicism about politics so many of us have not so much taken for granted as absorbed into a status quo. I think this is that rare thing of a movie that could change people – or at least make them think about changing … or indeed, just having an opinion to begin with.



V for Vendetta

V for Vendetta

Tuesday, November 6th, 2007

Another that really might, perhaps even should, become an annual tradition. I knew that this movie would be vastly improved on a second viewing and I wasn’t wrong. In fact, if anything, I understated it. This shoots up my list of faves on this viewing, it’s either amazing or downright frightening how the movie has “aged” in only 2 years, aged well I have to say, but the relevance is just shockingly tangible, and I think it will only become moreso in years to come (for better or worse).

I’m surprised by how much I wrote on the first viewing, because what I failed to mention then – what I thought I had said – was that I was honestly, bizarrely now I think back, underwhelmed by it the first time. What I also forgot to say there was, in short, it’s mindblowing … frightening, uplifting, hopeful, quirky, sexy, sleek, and at all times astonishingly consistent for all the turns and tones it takes.

Incidentally, I couldn’t help incorporating and egg-bread based snack into this viewing too, lol. Not quite eggy-in-a-basket – didn’t have the patience – but I think along with a November 5th viewing slot, this also should be incorporated into the ritual lol.

There’s tons more to say about it – luckily, there’ll be tons more opportunities to do so.

October 12th, 2006:

They’re comparisons I really didn’t want to make, but they’re kinda hard not to, so I’ll just get them out of the way – this is very much “1984” meets “Phantom of the Opera”. I kinda stole the Phantom reference from Roger Ebert’s review which I read while watching, but I think I would’ve come to the same conclusion myself by the end of the movie. Personally, I found V resembled less the Phantom and more Tim Burton’s Batman (certainly in the first 10-20 minutes, at least till he starts on the alliteration) or, even more than anything, Vincent Price’s Dr. Phibes (I think it was the jukebox in his lair that clinched it, I don’t know why) … but I definitely see the similarity. The “1984” comparison is particularly hard to avoid when you have John Hurt frequently appearing with in an almost emotionless face on a giant telescreen :-P

But for all its familiarity, this movie is still quite a marvel, peaking with a twist part way that truly blew my mind for a moment, and finally delivering the Natalie Portman performance that I’ve been waiting for ever since 1996’s Beautiful Girls (Closer was close but, on reflection, no cigar). And any movie that has you running out of the room halfway to make some eggy in a basket has got to be worth recommending. I think this is one that will improve exponentially on repeat viewings.

ps. Oh yes, and mustn’t fail to mention the wonderful little girl who says, “Bollocks!” to the BS news towards the beginning of the movie, lol. Such things no movie should be without.