A good movie and... a bad movie

I saw 500 Days of Summer today and thought it was very good. Both Zooey Deschanel and Joseph Gordan Levitt give good performances, but I was particularly impressed by Joseph Gordan Levitt. In fact, I've been a fan of Joseph Gordan Levitt since 2005 when he starred in both Brick, an excellent film, and the disturbingly heartrending Mysterious Skin. To be honest, I was actually impressed with him in the underrated comedy 10 Things I Hate About You. So, that was the good movie.

Now for the bad movie. I recently went to Blockbuster to rent some entertainingly bad horror movies and I came out with two gems: Puppet Masters vs. Demonic Toys (don't check your screen, that is the actual title) and Fear of Clowns. Wow, both movies were spectacularly horrible.

Puppet Masters vs. Demonic Toys was a ridiculous sequel in the Puppet Masters series (which I actually think is a solid horror franchise). The film focused on a toymaker/scientists played by Corey Feldman, who is truly terrible in the role. I remember actually being impressed by Feldman's assured acting style before in films like Lost Boys, Stand By Me, and the Goonies, but in this movie he is astoundingly incompetent. The plot was surprisingly labyrinthine:

1. Corey Feldman's character uses his blood to animate his grandfather's puppet collection.

2. The prickly female head of a toy making conglomerate finds about his this and seeks to steal his secret formula so she can animate her own toys. But wait, there's more.

3. This head of the toy making conglomerate has secretly made a deal with Satan to distribute deadly toys to children in exchange for being given a group of animated toys to do her bidding. Oh yeah, years ago Satan was conned by Corey Feldman's grandfather, which is why Satan wants Feldman's daughter as his personal sacrifice.

Now, if you just read that plot and are still slightly confused, don't be alarmed. This only proves that you are still sane.

The second mind numbingly bad horror film I rented was the ultra-low quality Fear of Clowns, which followed a young female painter who specializes in painting terrifying clown portraits. Suddenly, she finds that she is being stalked by a psychopathic clown-man, who oddly never wears a shirt. By the time in the film we find out the killer is a partially retarded mental patient who is simply trying to "get better" I and a friend stopped watching the movie. See the photo below to get an idea of how unbelievably terrible that movie was.

Beyond the Gates

I was watching television with my brothers and came across the film Beyond the Gates (2005). The film depicted a particular massacre that occurred in Rwanda during the genocide in 1994 and starred the still-wonderful John Hurt and the emerging Hugh Dancy as westerners caught in the chaos.

I only saw the last hour of the film, but that portion of the movie was brilliant. I'd need to see the rest of the movie first, but what I saw was possibly better than the great Hotel Rwanda. The film was directed by Michael-Caton Jones, who also directed Rob Roy, The Jackal, and the GREAT Basic Instinct 2 (I don't why he directed that movie?). Despite the unevenness of his career, I was very impressed by with his work in Beyond the Gates.

Much like Hotel Rwanda, the film highlights the supreme moral failure of the United Nations and the United States in preventing in any of the genocide in Rwanda. Every time I watch something about the Rwandan genocide, the same question invariably comes to mind:

"Where was the United Nations?" I know this seems like a capricious and useless question. After all, we can question all we want but that doesn't make any of the 800,000 dead come back to life. But I actually think this question is relevant for today. Has the UN changed significantly since 1994? Obviously not, since thousands of have been killed in a similar genocidal event in Darfur, Sudan.

Listen... I strive to be a citizen of the world, so I support the United Nations. I thought Bush's decision to invade Iraq-without substantive international support-was WRONG, WRONG, WRONG. That is not the way major powers should further their interests in the world, and unfortunately it was a case in which we caused the genocide. But part of me also understands the argument that the UN has in many ways been in an ineffective institution. How I differ from the neo-conservative hawks is that I think the remedy to that arrangement is to STRENGTHEN the United Nations. And, in cases when the United Nations is not strong enough, then the United States should step in.

I know that statement might surprise some people, considering my general foreign policy views, which stress international negotiation over force, but in cases of genocide it is morally imperative that some power take the initiative. This is actually an area in which I differ with other liberals, who believe the United States should leave Iraq, Afghanistan and recede fully from non-domestic involvement in the world. While I do believe we should leave Iraq, and possibly Afghanistan, it is not because I disagree with the principles of a global activism.

Barack Obama: The First 200 Days

Periodically judging a president's performance every one hundred days may be arbitrary, but considering the tremendous activity coming from Washington D.C. recently it may actually be relevant in this case.

This might surprise some people, but I'd actually give President Obama a C+ for his first two hundred days. I don't give him this grade because I fundamentally disagree with his policies, rather I think he's allowed his policies to be implemented to moderately.


I absolutely give him credit for the early accomplishments of his administration. That's go over them because the media doesn't necessarily advertise all of the nuts-and-bolts things he has done which have positively changed our government.

1. Obama set aside millions of acres of land for environmental protection. After the Bush administration played fast and loose with environmental standards for 8 years, Obama's EPA is actually taking the preservation of land seriously.
2. He issued an executive directive establishing the right of women to sue for wage discrimination. Women still make less than men on average and this action might lead to significant change in that area.
3. Reversed the Bush administration ban on embryonic stem cell research. What do I have to say about this? I'm just glad we have a president in the White House whose not afraid to act morally without being moralistic.
4. Reversed the Bush administration's "Mexico City" policy, which barred the government from giving federal aid from international organizations that perform abortions or give information about abortions. I give Bush credit for how dramatically he increased funding for AIDS relief in Africa, but I shutter to think about how seriously our international aid efforts were undermined by this crudely religious policy.
5. Obama's administration declared that future military interrogations will strictly follow the prescribed methods laid out in the Army Field Manual. In other words, no more TORTURE.

Okay... those are all wonderful accomplishments, but not everything has been that smooth. For instance, Obama plans to close Guantanamo Bay, which is critically important, but as far as I can tell, there are no guarantees that the new facility which will hold those prisoners will be any less victimizing.

Also, I actually think the expansive bailout and stimulus packages that have been implemented by Obama's administration were absolutely necessary, but they haven't been carried out as effectively as they could be. So much of the stimulus money hasn't even gotten to the states yet (albeit that has something to do with the resistance Republican governors like Jindal are giving him); also, in terms of the bailout, I learned recently that the same companies and firms which allowed the government to nationalize their debt have been doling out extravagant bonuses again.

And then there's health care. It might be premature to label his health care reform efforts a failure... in truth, I don't think they will be. I'm confident that Obama will push through some kind of reform legislation that hopefully reduces the amount of people who don't have health care insurance in this country. My only concerns is that the reform legislation won't go far enough because Obama has allowed obstructionist Republicans and spineless, moderate "blue dog" democrats to hijack the agenda. There are nearly 50 million people in this country who don't have health insurance and there are thousands who die each other because the insurance they do have denies them the most critical care, and still Republicans have the temerity to propagandize about the dangers of socialized medicine. Republicans like to believe that they have better values than the Democrats, but how can that be true when they are taking the side of the insurance companies over millions of Americans who should have the RIGHT to health care? Democrats should call Republicans out on it and say it how it is. Not supporting some universal health care program is IMMORAL.

So, there it is. If Obama comes out this health care debate with a better than average national health care plan, then I'd probably elevate his score to B+ or even an A. We'll see.

(Tentative) Top Ten Films of the Year

After watching the preview to Peter Jackson's upcoming The Lovely Bones, adapted from the Anne Sebold novel, it occurs to me that the best films of the year obviously haven't come out yet (not all of them at least), but I still felt compelled to compile a preliminary list.

10. Watchmen (dir. Zach Snyder)
Okay... anyone who's read my most recent blog-post knows I wasn't terribly enthusiastic about this film, and the truth is I stand by my initial review. In fact, I fully expect Watchmen NOT to be on this list by the year's end, and the only reason it's on the list now is because it was either Watchmen or the Friday the 13th remake (a horrible film, but at least it was comically inept), and Terminator: Salvation. All that being said, I didn't think the film was bad, only very flawed. I rate it at about a 6/10. On the positive side, I thought the film was bracingly evocative and the performances of Jeffrey Dean Morgan as the Comedian and Jackie Earle Haley as Rorschach were both very good.

9. Star Trek (dir. J.J. Abrams)
Again, I wrote in a previous blog-post that I wasn't wowed by this film as others were, but I did think it was a reasonable entertaining blockbuster, maybe even one of the most entertaining blockbusters in recent years. Personally, I thought the ----

SPOILERS - SPOILERS - SPOILERS - SPOILERS - SPOILERS - SPOILERS





... aspect of time travel in the film was convoluted and unnecessary, but it was still a good movie; however, I do hope it is replaced by something better.

8. Public Enemies (dir. Michael Mann)
Was this Michael Mann's best film? No. Was it his second best? No. Third? Fourth? Fifth? Sixth? No. In my opinion, this was Mann's seventh best film (I have The Insider, Last of the Mohicans, Manhunter, Collateral, Thief, and Heat all ranked ahead of it). The fact that it's seventh is not necessarily a bad thing-those other six include some great films. Now, Public Enemies. Well, I thought it was just good, but with moments that were extraordinarily interesting. I appreciated the thought behind Michael Mann's direction, but I didn't think it was his strongest effort. In my view, he relied too much on the sheer grittiness of the digital cinema-verite aesthetic and didn't take it to the next level. Also, aspects of the narrative certainly left some things to be desired, particularly Christian Bale's story. If the film had any chance of being great, it went by the wayside when the filmmakers decided to give Christian Bale's character the emotional complexity of beige wall.

7. UP! (dir. Pete Docter, Bob Petersen)
This is probably the first great movie on the list, although I think its 25 ranking on imdb overrates the film. It continually impresses me how complex and emotionally nuanced Pixar films have become while still being enormously entertaining and this film is no exception.

6. Away We Go (dir. Sam Mendez)
I've been less than awed by Sam Mendez' post-American Beauty career. I thought Road to Perdition was technically well-crafted but lacking in many respects, and to me Jarhead was an entertaining mess of disconnected ideas that never came together. Mendez is clearly a very talented director, but I've always felt his style was overly controlled at times. However, Away We Go might be his best effort since American Beauty (I haven't seen Revolutionary Road). This film is funny, moving, and emotionally resonant and has wonderful performances from most of the cast.

5. The Hangover (dir. Todd Philips)
Flat-out hilarious. Todd Philips' best since Old School.

4. Adventureland (dir. Greg Motolla)
I was extremely impressed with Motolla's Superbad, which I think is one of the best comedies of the decade. With Adventureland though, I think really confirmed his talent as an independent filmmaker. This movie is both incredibly funny and touchingly honest.

3. Harry Potter and the Half Blood Prince (dir. David Yates)
I rewatched this film recently and less impressed the second time, but it's still the third best film I've seen this year. It's one of the most purely entertaining Potter films yet and also the best acted. Also, it was beautifully directed by David Yates.

2. Bruno (dir. Larry Charles)
The conventional wisdom seems to be that this movie is funny but not as good as Borat. Well... I'll go on the record and say I think this film is SUPERIOR to Borat. It's just as funny and I think it's much more SUBVERSIVE. It exposes the homophobia of American society with deft, piercing satire.

1. Hurt Locker (dir. Kathryn Bigelow)
A marvelously intense film. I'm glad to see Kathryn Bigelow back in top form. I've admired her for films like Point Break, which is a minor 90s classic, and Near Dark for some time. Put simply, Hurt Locker is the first definitive statement on the Iraq War. It perfectly expresses the dread of the aimless mission and the perverse position of American soldiers in that country.

Watchmen... the movie

Okay.. I know this seems like a terribly belated post, but I've just recently finished watching Zach Snyder's Watchmen (2009), and... well, let's just say I had some thoughts.

First, I feel compelled to admit that I have read the original graphic novel and although I think it's wonderful, I did approach Synder's film with an open mind. That being said, I ultimately felt the movie was seriously flawed, if also occasionally dazzling.

Ironically enough, I thought the main problems with the movie weren't in how it deviated from the graphic novel, but in the ways it FAILED to differentiate itself. That's right, I said it. The film failed because it was TOO faithful to the graphic novel. I love the graphic novel, but it's scope is so vast and intricate that it can't merely be transcribed. The only way the source material could have been molded into a good feature length movie is if major editorial changes had been made. And... they weren't. Here were some of my problems with the movie:

1. Rorschach's narration: I don't think it was necessary, at least not at the excessive level it was used in the movie.

2. Soundtrack: I wasn't as upset by the film's music choices as some of my friends were, but I do think they did more harm than good. First, I think the use of some songs disconnected the flow of the movie, making it a progression of fragmented sequences rather than a contiguous narrative. Particularly, the use of Sound of Silence and 99 Luft Baloons come to mind. Also, I think the soundtrack damaged the consistency of the movie's tone, creating a mish-mash of feelings and atmospheres that were different from the overall flavor of the movie itself. Finally, I think the real problem with some of the more prominent songs that were used is that they undermined the alternate reality the film was trying to portray. Some of the songs held such a specific connotation in mainstream pop culture that to have them featured in a parallel 1985 America created a disconnect for me.

3. What's the plot?: I've read the graphic novel so I'm fully aware of what the plot is, but watching the movie for the first time I somehow felt lost. Initially, I thought everything was pretty clear. "A Comedian died tonight...", okay, I get it. We're looking for the Comedian's murderer. Simple enough. But then the film goes in so many separate directions that by the time we're halfway through we've almost forgotten why we were watching.

4. The Ending -- SPOILERS! -- SPOILERS! -- SPOILERS!





Okay... first, let me say I don't have any problem that there was no giant alien octopus. I think Zach Snyder made a good decision changing that part of the ending. My problem was with the ending's anti-climaticism. It's just so deflating (and not in a good way) when Adrian turns to Rorschach and Nite Owl and tells them the catastrophe they were trying to prevent has already happenned.

This is where I think I probably differ from a lot of fans of the graphic novel, who would most likely tell me that the point of the ending is that it is anti-climactic. The "heroes" don't save the day, at least not the heroes we thought and not in the way we thought they would. I'm perfectly fine with Adrian Veidt winning in the end, although the appearance of Rorschach's diary at the end obviously compromises Veidt's "victory". My problem is that the main characters never even remotely threaten Veidt.

It's like the end of 300. King Leonidas doesn't kill Xerxes, but he does prove he can bleed. That's all I'm saying should have happened to Veidt. Someone should have shown he could bleed.

The film is visually arresting, though. I actually like Zach Snyder to some degree. I thought his 300 was a bold and riveting piece of filmmaking.

Happy Birthday, Rashedah

First of all, I'd like to give a shout out to my good friend Rashedah Mohammed, who turned 21 tonight. Happy birthday!!

I spent most of my night actually hanging out with her at her apartment and having an extremely good time. Well... an extremely good time except for one thing. I came to the party knowing I might do a slight amount of drinking, so I bought some whiskey and sprite for myself (I've been told by more than a few people that the combination seems strange, but it works for me). All good, right? Wrong? You see I made the terrible mistake of making sure the whiskey I purchased was Jim Beam, and... well, let's just say now I know not to buy Jim Beam in the future.

Harry Potter and the Never-Ending String of Fans who will never be satisfied by the movies because the books are so darn perfect

I know... this blog title is long, awkwardly phrased, and a even a little mean, but there's really no other way for me to put it. I have to admit I was one of the many who crammed into movie theaters Wednesday for a midnight screening of the new Harry Potter film, and I felt like I was one of the few who came out the theater truly impressed. You see I was with a group of people composed largely of fans who read all of the books and the immediate discussion after the movie was dominated by arguments over what was included and what wasn't and how the film ultimately measured up.

For my own part, I thought the film was very good. It was possibly the most emotionally nuanced and involving of all the movies and the performances were great. Most surprising about this movie was really just how fun and entertaining it was. I know this is when the series is supposed to be getting darker, but I laughed in this movie more than I did in any of the others. The reason of course was that much of the film focused on the wonderfully squemish romantic relationships of the group. Now I thought the depiction of the relationships was affecting and often hilarious, but they weren't developed in great depth.

Spoilers****

At the beginning of the film, Harry and Jenny lock eyes and suddenly their secret love for another is ignited. The same could be said for long-brewing romance between Ron and Hermione, which grows further in the film despite the fact that Ron continues to ingnore and take Hermione for granted.

That being said, I still thought that aspect of the movie was very entertaining. The film was also exceptionally beautiful. I've been nothing but impressed by the job David Yates has done with the Harry Potter series, turning in two stunningly photographed and well-directed films.