Wednesday, November 30, 2011
Wheat Board Transitions
Call me impractical, but as the Canadian Wheat Board is unfortunately dismantled, shouldn't some kind of fund be created to help farmers with no marketing experience learn to effectively market their grain, and to help them cope with this serious disruption?
The Muppets
And The Muppets takes us back to a more cheerful time during which humour didn't consist of making jokes about blood diamonds and friendship meant more than exchanging vitriolic insults ad infinitum. Within the spirit of the The Muppet Show is reincarnated and acclimatized to a 21st Century comedic aesthetic, and the two differing ethical approaches subtly duel before creating a productive popular counterpoint.
A musical synthesis.
The film starts out with an insufferable musical number that immediately challenged the ways in which I've been cynically indoctrinated by shows such as Family Guy over the years. "Is this movie going to be this incredibly cheesy?", thought I, as I appreciated the choreography and prepared for an internal struggle. But as it progresses and the distressed Muppets decide to get back together in order to perform once more and raise 10 million to save their dilapidated studio from a greedy oilperson (Chris Cooper as Tex Richman), their naïve hope and innocent determination took root deep down and energetically confronted years of psychological conditioning propagated by ruthless patriarchs (goodbye Berlusconi).
But writers Jason Segel and Nicholas Stoller, fully aware of their audience's manufactured predispositions, cut Kermit (Steve Whitmire) off when he begins to explain how different things were way back then, and have their characters kidnap Jack Black to host their comeback special, who sits tied to a chair throughout allegorically representing the psychological mechanizations of the 1990s and 2000s, his exchange with Fozzie (Eric Jacobson), priceless.
And to add to the seemingly hopeless situation environmentalists find themselves in these days, enough funds are not raised and the oilperson seems to have won and an attempt at transforming the filmic/televisual sphere seems to have failed.
But then that insufferable number from the film's opening act commences once more, only this time it isn't unbearable, it's entertaining and fun and cheerful and happy, and Tex Richman decides not to destroy the Muppet's studio, and everyone's getting along, and the Muppets are a hit, and they're singing, together, dancing and swinging, to the beat of their own communal drum, positive and revitalized.
Note the fortuitous relationship between this ending and the Keystone Pipeline Protests which caused the Obama Administration to delay making its corresponding decision. My gut's telling me that they delayed the decision hoping that when it comes time for reexamination, the protestors will not return and they'll be able to conduct their business as usual (the same strategy the powers that be used in Hamilton, Ontario, for decades, in order to construct the controversial Red Hill Valley Parkway). Hopefully a bit of The Muppets's spirit will remain in 2013, and the Keystone Pipeline agenda will once again unify environmentalists across North America.
A musical synthesis.
The film starts out with an insufferable musical number that immediately challenged the ways in which I've been cynically indoctrinated by shows such as Family Guy over the years. "Is this movie going to be this incredibly cheesy?", thought I, as I appreciated the choreography and prepared for an internal struggle. But as it progresses and the distressed Muppets decide to get back together in order to perform once more and raise 10 million to save their dilapidated studio from a greedy oilperson (Chris Cooper as Tex Richman), their naïve hope and innocent determination took root deep down and energetically confronted years of psychological conditioning propagated by ruthless patriarchs (goodbye Berlusconi).
But writers Jason Segel and Nicholas Stoller, fully aware of their audience's manufactured predispositions, cut Kermit (Steve Whitmire) off when he begins to explain how different things were way back then, and have their characters kidnap Jack Black to host their comeback special, who sits tied to a chair throughout allegorically representing the psychological mechanizations of the 1990s and 2000s, his exchange with Fozzie (Eric Jacobson), priceless.
And to add to the seemingly hopeless situation environmentalists find themselves in these days, enough funds are not raised and the oilperson seems to have won and an attempt at transforming the filmic/televisual sphere seems to have failed.
But then that insufferable number from the film's opening act commences once more, only this time it isn't unbearable, it's entertaining and fun and cheerful and happy, and Tex Richman decides not to destroy the Muppet's studio, and everyone's getting along, and the Muppets are a hit, and they're singing, together, dancing and swinging, to the beat of their own communal drum, positive and revitalized.
Note the fortuitous relationship between this ending and the Keystone Pipeline Protests which caused the Obama Administration to delay making its corresponding decision. My gut's telling me that they delayed the decision hoping that when it comes time for reexamination, the protestors will not return and they'll be able to conduct their business as usual (the same strategy the powers that be used in Hamilton, Ontario, for decades, in order to construct the controversial Red Hill Valley Parkway). Hopefully a bit of The Muppets's spirit will remain in 2013, and the Keystone Pipeline agenda will once again unify environmentalists across North America.
Saturday, November 26, 2011
Immortals
And the Titans were imprisoned deep within Mount Tartarus after losing a war against the Gods of Olympus. Humankind prospered in the aftermath until such a time as one rose up from lowly origins to seek the destruction of Ancient Greece (Reason) through recourse to military means. But in his blood lust, he made the critical error of murdering the mother of another of humble birth, thereby inspiring his wrath. With no other alternative but to eventually seek the other's annihilation, their armies mercilessly clash, sparing no one from their antagonistic fury.
And the Titans are unleashed once more.
But what does all this have to do with socio-politics and religion and is there a social democratic agenda sequestered deep within Immortals's narrative, eagerly seeking emancipation?
We know that both Theseus (Henry Cavill) and King Hyperion (Mickey Rourke) are roughly members of the proletariat and that the former is primarily concerned with protecting his family while the later seeks to conquer Reason. Theseus is counselled by Zeus (John Hurt, Luke Evans) in disguise to protect the weak and the infirm, while Hyperion lives by the code that might is right. The Titans are incarcerated deep within the earth but they were equals to the Gods prior to being shackled (an ideological battle was waged which stripped them of their material resources). Mineral wealth often lies deep within mountains. Mineral wealth (or petroleum wealth) can be used to attain prestigious cultural god-like positions. With the attainment of wealth and prestige a challenge can be made against the resident Gods (many of whom made their fortune the same way hundreds of years ago and due to the passage of time had their 'royalty' naturalized) in order to obtain political control. Two simplistic traditional ways of examining those within the proletariat who rise through the ranks to positions of power is to regard them as maniacal control freaks (Hyperion, Stalin) or altruistic equalizers (Theseus, Tommy Douglas). Theseus defeats Hyperion and therefore Immortals upholds the altruistic equalizer. But his victory is dependent upon the constant intervention of the Gods or the established concrete ruling elite. In the final moments, Theseus leaves the mortal world and travels to Olympus to live amongst them, leaving humankind behind. There are certainly places within the upper echelons for altruistic individuals, but a social democratic film would have its heroes remain within the mortal realm in order to achieve a material surplus from which his or her compatriots could level out the upper echelons themselves. But if Mount Olympus is thought of as being a legislative assembly as opposed to the halls of the ever rich, then Theseus's position within suggests that he could represent a defender of social democratic values, those espoused by Zeus (or Thomas Mulcair, Brian Topp and Bob Rae), the established order making room for new innovations in order to diversify and remodel its means of production, and be leading the charge against the fallen nouveau riche who were freed by Hyperion's savagery. But Mount Olympus doesn't strike me as being the best place in which to situate a social democratic political aesthetic, inasmuch as the politics of the oppressed are often not resolutely upheld by immortals. And much of the anger felt by Hyperion comes from the Gods turning blind eyes to humankind, or creating elitist structures with no practical outlets nurtured by a culture of snobbery that alienates the proletariat and results in them voting for conservatives (who use the practical outlets ignored by liberal snobs to subliminally manipulate them into preferring divisive racist imperialist alternatives [wherein they mistake subservience for freedom]). And it's Hyperion who wants to destroy them as a consequence, conservatively placing Hyperion in the guise of the social democratic activist, whose out to destroy the liberally motivated yet aloof elite (with the goal of converting the liberal elite to team conservative).
Thus, Immortals doesn't strike me as being pro-social democracy.
In regards to religion, Immortals uses the win scenario to elevate it. The film's situated in Ancient Greece and thereby overtly distances itself from 21st Century religious agendas while metaphorically supporting them, as every character comes to believe (by using Ancient Greece, the film's support for religion doesn't alienate its audience by bombarding them with religious images with which they are familiar which is a win strategy when it comes to eventually converting cynical unbelievers).
Better than Clash of the Titans but not as entertaining as Troy, Stephen Dorff's character (Stavros) steals the show that is perhaps best left for a Saturday evening rental.
And the Titans are unleashed once more.
But what does all this have to do with socio-politics and religion and is there a social democratic agenda sequestered deep within Immortals's narrative, eagerly seeking emancipation?
We know that both Theseus (Henry Cavill) and King Hyperion (Mickey Rourke) are roughly members of the proletariat and that the former is primarily concerned with protecting his family while the later seeks to conquer Reason. Theseus is counselled by Zeus (John Hurt, Luke Evans) in disguise to protect the weak and the infirm, while Hyperion lives by the code that might is right. The Titans are incarcerated deep within the earth but they were equals to the Gods prior to being shackled (an ideological battle was waged which stripped them of their material resources). Mineral wealth often lies deep within mountains. Mineral wealth (or petroleum wealth) can be used to attain prestigious cultural god-like positions. With the attainment of wealth and prestige a challenge can be made against the resident Gods (many of whom made their fortune the same way hundreds of years ago and due to the passage of time had their 'royalty' naturalized) in order to obtain political control. Two simplistic traditional ways of examining those within the proletariat who rise through the ranks to positions of power is to regard them as maniacal control freaks (Hyperion, Stalin) or altruistic equalizers (Theseus, Tommy Douglas). Theseus defeats Hyperion and therefore Immortals upholds the altruistic equalizer. But his victory is dependent upon the constant intervention of the Gods or the established concrete ruling elite. In the final moments, Theseus leaves the mortal world and travels to Olympus to live amongst them, leaving humankind behind. There are certainly places within the upper echelons for altruistic individuals, but a social democratic film would have its heroes remain within the mortal realm in order to achieve a material surplus from which his or her compatriots could level out the upper echelons themselves. But if Mount Olympus is thought of as being a legislative assembly as opposed to the halls of the ever rich, then Theseus's position within suggests that he could represent a defender of social democratic values, those espoused by Zeus (or Thomas Mulcair, Brian Topp and Bob Rae), the established order making room for new innovations in order to diversify and remodel its means of production, and be leading the charge against the fallen nouveau riche who were freed by Hyperion's savagery. But Mount Olympus doesn't strike me as being the best place in which to situate a social democratic political aesthetic, inasmuch as the politics of the oppressed are often not resolutely upheld by immortals. And much of the anger felt by Hyperion comes from the Gods turning blind eyes to humankind, or creating elitist structures with no practical outlets nurtured by a culture of snobbery that alienates the proletariat and results in them voting for conservatives (who use the practical outlets ignored by liberal snobs to subliminally manipulate them into preferring divisive racist imperialist alternatives [wherein they mistake subservience for freedom]). And it's Hyperion who wants to destroy them as a consequence, conservatively placing Hyperion in the guise of the social democratic activist, whose out to destroy the liberally motivated yet aloof elite (with the goal of converting the liberal elite to team conservative).
Thus, Immortals doesn't strike me as being pro-social democracy.
In regards to religion, Immortals uses the win scenario to elevate it. The film's situated in Ancient Greece and thereby overtly distances itself from 21st Century religious agendas while metaphorically supporting them, as every character comes to believe (by using Ancient Greece, the film's support for religion doesn't alienate its audience by bombarding them with religious images with which they are familiar which is a win strategy when it comes to eventually converting cynical unbelievers).
Better than Clash of the Titans but not as entertaining as Troy, Stephen Dorff's character (Stavros) steals the show that is perhaps best left for a Saturday evening rental.
Grey Cup Pick
Great to see Grey Cup Weekend start out with a Vanier Cup victory for the McMaster Marauders.
Wow bob wow.
Don't know if the same will happen for the Winnipeg Blue Bombers this Sunday at BC Place. Their defence stifled the Ti-Cats last weekend and looked capable of easily handling the CFL's best, but can they overcome the fact that the British Columbia Lions are playing at home, have an exceptional offence, and won the Grey Cup at home in 1994?
Winnipeg hasn't won the Grey Cup since 1990. They've lost it 4 times since then. In the NHL last season, the Boston Bruins overcame adversity to win the Stanley Cup after losing in the finals 5 times, meaning that a pseudo-precedent has recently been set for teams who have consistently faired poorly in championship games in recent decades.
But to defeat B.C at home with Travis Lulay playing at the top of his game and the crowd fanatically supporting their cherished Lions?
It can be done.
Winnipeg already beat B.C twice this season and look for more of the same tomorrow. With a formidable defensive stand and a career defining performance from Buck Pierce, the Grey Cup will soon return to Winnipeg for the first time in more than two decades.
*Should have been more precise in my Boston Bruins comparison.
Wow bob wow.
Don't know if the same will happen for the Winnipeg Blue Bombers this Sunday at BC Place. Their defence stifled the Ti-Cats last weekend and looked capable of easily handling the CFL's best, but can they overcome the fact that the British Columbia Lions are playing at home, have an exceptional offence, and won the Grey Cup at home in 1994?
Winnipeg hasn't won the Grey Cup since 1990. They've lost it 4 times since then. In the NHL last season, the Boston Bruins overcame adversity to win the Stanley Cup after losing in the finals 5 times, meaning that a pseudo-precedent has recently been set for teams who have consistently faired poorly in championship games in recent decades.
But to defeat B.C at home with Travis Lulay playing at the top of his game and the crowd fanatically supporting their cherished Lions?
It can be done.
Winnipeg already beat B.C twice this season and look for more of the same tomorrow. With a formidable defensive stand and a career defining performance from Buck Pierce, the Grey Cup will soon return to Winnipeg for the first time in more than two decades.
*Should have been more precise in my Boston Bruins comparison.
Sunday, November 20, 2011
Rubber
Quentin Dupieux intelligently and playfully pulls off a ridiculous off-beat puréed slice of incongruity with Rubber, a film which challenges you to keep watching even though its subject matter is incredibly discombobulated.
Question: can we improve upon the typical Hollywood horror-comedy by stripping it down to its bear essentials, presenting an inanimate villain, crafting a film within a film, and then virulently exterminating its audience?
Or to put it another way, is watching a tire that rolls around randomly blowing up things and people preferable to series such as Final Destination or I Know What You Did Last Summer (note that I did like Final Destination 2)?
Without providing any back story explaining why or how the tire gained consciousness and why it decided to start randomly destroying.
The answer is yes, it can be improved upon, and a back story is not required, if you don't care in the slightest what your audience thinks but still take the time to expertly craft an audacious non sequitur which appears as if it was haphazardly constructed.
Rather than simply destroying the minds of its audience with nauseating dialogue and unimaginative viaducts, Rubber simply destroys its audience half way through after they ravenously gorge on a roasted turkey.
Rather than trying to seem as if there's a point or introduce something saccharinely tragic, Rubber makes it quite clear that there is no reason structuring its dementia, and proceeds to unreel unabashedly.
But nothing can exist without placing itself within a multifaceted logical fulcrum, as each subject is free to express their interpretive difference in regards to the ways in which artistic objects are constructed (or sporting objects etc.), thanks to the freedom built into democratic societies made viable by the internet, and it's possible to gain constructive insights into complicated dynamics from bizarre examples of lucid frivolity, if you search for them (search for them within the new show Picnicface, especially the Lost Highway themed episode wherein the Mystery Man looks like John Waters).
Reason underlies Rubber's tracks although its content salutes insanity. But it's only insane from the point of view of the monotonous narrative that has been produced to shackle the many as the few exercise their free self-development (Terry Eagleton), and from this point of view, accentuating difference, it makes nothing but perfect sense, and a rational explanation is provided for its not so subtle ending.
Question: can we improve upon the typical Hollywood horror-comedy by stripping it down to its bear essentials, presenting an inanimate villain, crafting a film within a film, and then virulently exterminating its audience?
Or to put it another way, is watching a tire that rolls around randomly blowing up things and people preferable to series such as Final Destination or I Know What You Did Last Summer (note that I did like Final Destination 2)?
Without providing any back story explaining why or how the tire gained consciousness and why it decided to start randomly destroying.
The answer is yes, it can be improved upon, and a back story is not required, if you don't care in the slightest what your audience thinks but still take the time to expertly craft an audacious non sequitur which appears as if it was haphazardly constructed.
Rather than simply destroying the minds of its audience with nauseating dialogue and unimaginative viaducts, Rubber simply destroys its audience half way through after they ravenously gorge on a roasted turkey.
Rather than trying to seem as if there's a point or introduce something saccharinely tragic, Rubber makes it quite clear that there is no reason structuring its dementia, and proceeds to unreel unabashedly.
But nothing can exist without placing itself within a multifaceted logical fulcrum, as each subject is free to express their interpretive difference in regards to the ways in which artistic objects are constructed (or sporting objects etc.), thanks to the freedom built into democratic societies made viable by the internet, and it's possible to gain constructive insights into complicated dynamics from bizarre examples of lucid frivolity, if you search for them (search for them within the new show Picnicface, especially the Lost Highway themed episode wherein the Mystery Man looks like John Waters).
Reason underlies Rubber's tracks although its content salutes insanity. But it's only insane from the point of view of the monotonous narrative that has been produced to shackle the many as the few exercise their free self-development (Terry Eagleton), and from this point of view, accentuating difference, it makes nothing but perfect sense, and a rational explanation is provided for its not so subtle ending.
Saturday, November 19, 2011
CFL Playoff Picks
Another round of the CFL Playoffs are about to kick-off. Here are my picks for tomorrow's matchups:
B.C. Lions/Edmonton Eskimos: it's hard to envision Edmonton winning this game. They beat B.C. early on in the season but the Lions convincingly defeated them twice down the stretch, one game with a score of 36 to 1 (although if I'm not mistaken injuries were a key factor in Edmonton's loss in this instance). The game's being played at BC Place and the Lions have won 10 of their last 11. That being said, Ricky Ray's no stranger to big games and has demonstrated in the past that he knows how to win them. In the last 35 years, Edmonton has played for the Grey Cup 14 times and are statistically due for another appearance (they haven't made it since 2005). British Columbia only made it 7 times during the same time period although Saskatchewan has defied the odds in recent years. Travis Lulay doesn't have the same depth of experience as Ray but he has been compared by some commentators to Anthony Calvillo and he played exceptionally well this year. I think the game will be close with both teams playing well, the winner of the turnover differential emerging victorious, the winner of that turnover differential being B.C.
Winnipeg Blue Bombers/Hamilton Tiger-Cats: don't know how many times I've seen Hamilton lose big games to the Blue Bombers. Don't really want to dwell on it. Winnipeg beat the Ti-Cats 3 times this year and defeated them during their last playoff meeting in 2001, after Hamilton had eliminated Montréal. The Ti-Cats have also played inconsistently this season, being unstoppable one week and a total mess the next. But something about the only team to not enter the last week of the regular season with a 10 and 7 record winning the Grey Cup after stringing together three outstanding and unexpected performances in a row makes sense to me, logic be damned. Hamilton hasn't experienced much success in the playoffs since 2001 and are hungry for victory. I think Kevin Glenn dismantles his old team tomorrow and the Tiger-Cats play for the Grey Cup on November 27th.
*Ouch
B.C. Lions/Edmonton Eskimos: it's hard to envision Edmonton winning this game. They beat B.C. early on in the season but the Lions convincingly defeated them twice down the stretch, one game with a score of 36 to 1 (although if I'm not mistaken injuries were a key factor in Edmonton's loss in this instance). The game's being played at BC Place and the Lions have won 10 of their last 11. That being said, Ricky Ray's no stranger to big games and has demonstrated in the past that he knows how to win them. In the last 35 years, Edmonton has played for the Grey Cup 14 times and are statistically due for another appearance (they haven't made it since 2005). British Columbia only made it 7 times during the same time period although Saskatchewan has defied the odds in recent years. Travis Lulay doesn't have the same depth of experience as Ray but he has been compared by some commentators to Anthony Calvillo and he played exceptionally well this year. I think the game will be close with both teams playing well, the winner of the turnover differential emerging victorious, the winner of that turnover differential being B.C.
Winnipeg Blue Bombers/Hamilton Tiger-Cats: don't know how many times I've seen Hamilton lose big games to the Blue Bombers. Don't really want to dwell on it. Winnipeg beat the Ti-Cats 3 times this year and defeated them during their last playoff meeting in 2001, after Hamilton had eliminated Montréal. The Ti-Cats have also played inconsistently this season, being unstoppable one week and a total mess the next. But something about the only team to not enter the last week of the regular season with a 10 and 7 record winning the Grey Cup after stringing together three outstanding and unexpected performances in a row makes sense to me, logic be damned. Hamilton hasn't experienced much success in the playoffs since 2001 and are hungry for victory. I think Kevin Glenn dismantles his old team tomorrow and the Tiger-Cats play for the Grey Cup on November 27th.
*Ouch
Conviction
A brother falsely incarcerated. A sister dedicated to setting him free. Unwavering belief synthesized with focused raw acute determination. An inspiring film modestly elevating the power of hope while proving that it's not just for the naïve or the foolhardy.
Tony Goldwyn's Conviction could have been much more sensational, attempting to sentimentally cater to our manufactured desires for explosions and vindictive polarized constructs. It could have melodramatically situated its plot within a broader context, focusing on life in prison, media dramatizations, or the challenges presented by trying to raise a family, work, and finish law school with hardly any financial or social resources. But it doesn't examine these dimensions, preferring to zero in on an unbreakable bond forged between brother and sister, investigating their relationship primarily in order to provide extended insights into the constructive potential of an enduring commitment.
Betty Anne Waters (Hilary Swank) isn't about boasting or vilifying or emoting, she prefers to achieve her goals objectively and doesn't let anything or anyone stand in her way, most of the time, even though the odds stacked against her seem insurmountable.
Kenny Waters (Sam Rockwell) isn't quite so level headed seeing how he's serving a life sentence for murder, but his sister's prudent, logical, affable recurring presence helps temper his suicidal tendencies.
Swank and Rockwell play their parts well and one of the only things missing from their interactions is an extended scene, one which probes the depths of their characters more thoroughly, without resorting to heartbreaking platitudes.
But such a scene perhaps would have been misplaced in Conviction, since it effectively works within the mainstream to instructively use a generic form to reach a wide audience for whom its message is much more positive than one latently conditioned by cynicism.
The structures preventing Kenny from being exonerated are formidable and entrenched. But they can still be challenged and remodelled.
One day at a time.
Tony Goldwyn's Conviction could have been much more sensational, attempting to sentimentally cater to our manufactured desires for explosions and vindictive polarized constructs. It could have melodramatically situated its plot within a broader context, focusing on life in prison, media dramatizations, or the challenges presented by trying to raise a family, work, and finish law school with hardly any financial or social resources. But it doesn't examine these dimensions, preferring to zero in on an unbreakable bond forged between brother and sister, investigating their relationship primarily in order to provide extended insights into the constructive potential of an enduring commitment.
Betty Anne Waters (Hilary Swank) isn't about boasting or vilifying or emoting, she prefers to achieve her goals objectively and doesn't let anything or anyone stand in her way, most of the time, even though the odds stacked against her seem insurmountable.
Kenny Waters (Sam Rockwell) isn't quite so level headed seeing how he's serving a life sentence for murder, but his sister's prudent, logical, affable recurring presence helps temper his suicidal tendencies.
Swank and Rockwell play their parts well and one of the only things missing from their interactions is an extended scene, one which probes the depths of their characters more thoroughly, without resorting to heartbreaking platitudes.
But such a scene perhaps would have been misplaced in Conviction, since it effectively works within the mainstream to instructively use a generic form to reach a wide audience for whom its message is much more positive than one latently conditioned by cynicism.
The structures preventing Kenny from being exonerated are formidable and entrenched. But they can still be challenged and remodelled.
One day at a time.
Monday, November 14, 2011
Green Lantern
An ancient force of evil has been accidentally released from his secluded prison and now seeks the destruction of all. The only thing standing in the way of his vengeful assault on the Guardians of the Universe and their home planet of Oa is an interstellar police force known as The Green Lanterns. The Lanterns were created after the Guardians harnessed the green essence of the Emotional Spectrum of Willpower to forge fearless warriors. One of the Guardians attempted to harness the power of Fear as well, but was unable to manage its infernal malevolence, and it warped his once impeccable constitution, transforming him into Parallax.
Hal Jordan (Ryan Reynolds) is a test pilot on Earth, playing by his own rules and wary of responsibility. When Green Lantern Abin Sur (Temuera Morrison) is mortally wounded by Parallax, he expediently travels to Earth to allow his ring to choose a worthy successor (the ring being made of pure will, it possesses the ability to discover those who are pure of heart and have the mental fortitude to safeguard the Universe). The ring discovers young Jordan who reluctantly accepts its heroic demands and then travels to Oa to begin his intergalactic training.
At the same time, Abin Sur's body is discovered by the American military who then ask scientist Hector Hammond (Peter Sarsgaard) to perform an autopsy of sorts. Little does he know that Parallax has infiltrated Sur's body, leaving his essence behind. Hammond unknowingly absorbs this essence and begins transforming into an apprentice of pure evil. After Jordan fails in his initial attempts to join The Lanterns, he returns to Earth only to discover that he must protect it from Hammond's twisted momentum.
And Parallax's, who decides to destroy Earth in order to gain enough power to attack Oa. And since the best of his fellow more committed Lanterns failed in their attempt to defeat Parallax, he must defend his home planet, on his own.
With the help of the power of love.
It's a lot more fun to write about what happens in Martin Campbell's Green Lantern than it is to watch. Many of the scenes are rushed and packed tightly together which results in wooden and scant character development. Increased depth of character would have helped its script differentiate itself from similar films like The Last Starfighter, by creating distracting personalities whose insights construct a world of their own.
The Lanterns also give up on defeating Parallax far too quickly considering that they're supposed to be fearless and number over 3,000. This allows Jordan to demonstrate that he is the ultimate Lantern, thereby working within the old "the greatest heroes are the ones who distance themselves from their profession while performing exceptionally well day after day" aesthetic, but I'm afraid that my will still has trouble manifesting this particularity.
None of the other Lanterns help Jordan in the end either, which supports the idea that individuals need to make it on their own, but severely limits the roles social networks play in one's professional development.
Green Lantern basically lacks the backstories, crescendoes, wit, and depth that has made so many successful superhero films, as if they figured they could simply follow the traditional formula without introducing compelling contemporary content, more of a banal commercial calculation than an entertaining film.
Enjoyed how the Green Lanterns function nevertheless, having the freedom to materialize their creativity at will in order to leverage innovative productive and practical solutions.
Hal Jordan (Ryan Reynolds) is a test pilot on Earth, playing by his own rules and wary of responsibility. When Green Lantern Abin Sur (Temuera Morrison) is mortally wounded by Parallax, he expediently travels to Earth to allow his ring to choose a worthy successor (the ring being made of pure will, it possesses the ability to discover those who are pure of heart and have the mental fortitude to safeguard the Universe). The ring discovers young Jordan who reluctantly accepts its heroic demands and then travels to Oa to begin his intergalactic training.
At the same time, Abin Sur's body is discovered by the American military who then ask scientist Hector Hammond (Peter Sarsgaard) to perform an autopsy of sorts. Little does he know that Parallax has infiltrated Sur's body, leaving his essence behind. Hammond unknowingly absorbs this essence and begins transforming into an apprentice of pure evil. After Jordan fails in his initial attempts to join The Lanterns, he returns to Earth only to discover that he must protect it from Hammond's twisted momentum.
And Parallax's, who decides to destroy Earth in order to gain enough power to attack Oa. And since the best of his fellow more committed Lanterns failed in their attempt to defeat Parallax, he must defend his home planet, on his own.
With the help of the power of love.
It's a lot more fun to write about what happens in Martin Campbell's Green Lantern than it is to watch. Many of the scenes are rushed and packed tightly together which results in wooden and scant character development. Increased depth of character would have helped its script differentiate itself from similar films like The Last Starfighter, by creating distracting personalities whose insights construct a world of their own.
The Lanterns also give up on defeating Parallax far too quickly considering that they're supposed to be fearless and number over 3,000. This allows Jordan to demonstrate that he is the ultimate Lantern, thereby working within the old "the greatest heroes are the ones who distance themselves from their profession while performing exceptionally well day after day" aesthetic, but I'm afraid that my will still has trouble manifesting this particularity.
None of the other Lanterns help Jordan in the end either, which supports the idea that individuals need to make it on their own, but severely limits the roles social networks play in one's professional development.
Green Lantern basically lacks the backstories, crescendoes, wit, and depth that has made so many successful superhero films, as if they figured they could simply follow the traditional formula without introducing compelling contemporary content, more of a banal commercial calculation than an entertaining film.
Enjoyed how the Green Lanterns function nevertheless, having the freedom to materialize their creativity at will in order to leverage innovative productive and practical solutions.
Saturday, November 12, 2011
A Very Harold & Kumar 3D Christmas
Good God. What the hell happened to Christmas?
It seems as if the traditional Christmas special has been warped and welded into a devious pot smoking lingerie modelling gangster frolicking schism, just in time to usher in the 2011 holiday season. A special crafted for those who have grown weary of the predictable patterns worked into the yearly festive Frostyesque line-up and are hungrily seeking a palpable harbinger of mainstream subversion, of decadent diversions, of subterranean incursions.
Fully endorsed by Santa.
A Very Harold & Kumar 3D Christmas provides such content and insouciantly precipitates a brazen comical maelstrom into which the politically correct is unwittingly thrust.
As Harold (John Cho) and Kumar (Hal Penn) frantically search for a new Christmas tree.
Trying to make sense of the ways in which this film confronts stereotyping is challenging. It's as if representatives of two minority groups are saying that due to the institutional barriers firmly established by the Anglo-Saxon majority it's impossible for us to successfully integrate into the mainstream, but we'll still give it a shot, and playfully present you with exactly what you would expect, based upon your own preconceptions, while opening up a resultant critical space in your public sphere, and affectively plunging within full throttle.
You see, the mainstream often prevents minorities from successfully integrating into its culture. It does so in order to horde the prominent signs of achievement and associated luxuries for itself. As minorities still seek to earn a living and take care of their families, they must find a way to do so in the underground, using the only resources they have available to their general advantage (selling narcotics etc.). If racist institutional representatives and policies promote these stereotypes and they are upheld by their ethnic non-professional counterparts, and progressive legislation such as affirmative action is suppressed, you directly stifle an enormous degree of potential, and keep generations of prominent public role models from ever being able to productively apply themselves.
Therefore the underground becomes their outlet and they carve out an existence within while demonstrating that some of the 'demonized' resources they control (marijuana) aren't really that bad and would legitimize their 'unlawful' pursuits if legalized.
There's some of this in A Very Harold & Kumar 3D Christmas and they definitely take things to new levels as they nurture a tormented frustrated blockaded aesthetic while working within a form that has been culturally stabilized.
All the while applying new meanings to concepts like marriage, family, and friendship.
And smoking that reefer.
It seems as if the traditional Christmas special has been warped and welded into a devious pot smoking lingerie modelling gangster frolicking schism, just in time to usher in the 2011 holiday season. A special crafted for those who have grown weary of the predictable patterns worked into the yearly festive Frostyesque line-up and are hungrily seeking a palpable harbinger of mainstream subversion, of decadent diversions, of subterranean incursions.
Fully endorsed by Santa.
A Very Harold & Kumar 3D Christmas provides such content and insouciantly precipitates a brazen comical maelstrom into which the politically correct is unwittingly thrust.
As Harold (John Cho) and Kumar (Hal Penn) frantically search for a new Christmas tree.
Trying to make sense of the ways in which this film confronts stereotyping is challenging. It's as if representatives of two minority groups are saying that due to the institutional barriers firmly established by the Anglo-Saxon majority it's impossible for us to successfully integrate into the mainstream, but we'll still give it a shot, and playfully present you with exactly what you would expect, based upon your own preconceptions, while opening up a resultant critical space in your public sphere, and affectively plunging within full throttle.
You see, the mainstream often prevents minorities from successfully integrating into its culture. It does so in order to horde the prominent signs of achievement and associated luxuries for itself. As minorities still seek to earn a living and take care of their families, they must find a way to do so in the underground, using the only resources they have available to their general advantage (selling narcotics etc.). If racist institutional representatives and policies promote these stereotypes and they are upheld by their ethnic non-professional counterparts, and progressive legislation such as affirmative action is suppressed, you directly stifle an enormous degree of potential, and keep generations of prominent public role models from ever being able to productively apply themselves.
Therefore the underground becomes their outlet and they carve out an existence within while demonstrating that some of the 'demonized' resources they control (marijuana) aren't really that bad and would legitimize their 'unlawful' pursuits if legalized.
There's some of this in A Very Harold & Kumar 3D Christmas and they definitely take things to new levels as they nurture a tormented frustrated blockaded aesthetic while working within a form that has been culturally stabilized.
All the while applying new meanings to concepts like marriage, family, and friendship.
And smoking that reefer.
CFL Playoff Picks
The following are my picks for this weekend's CFL Playoff matchups:
Calgary Stampeders/Edmonton Eskimos: Edmonton has home field advantage but the Stampeders have played better as of late. In fact, after winning their first 5 games of the season, the Eskimos only won 6 of their next 13. Alberta's finest played 3 times this year with Edmonton winning twice but the Eskimos have yet to face Calgary's new starter, Drew Tate. I find predicting who will win when these teams play based on stats to be frustrating and even so I can't find any that give either team a significant edge. Edmonton didn't finish the season well but the game's being played at Commonwealth Stadium. If the Eskimos get to Drew Tate early and often, throwing him off his game, Ricky Ray should be able to lead his team to victory. I don't think this will happen. Stampeders by 7.
Hamilton Tiger-Cats/Montréal Alouettes: Hamilton finally rose to the occasion when playing the Alouettes this year and won 2 of 4 at home. That being said, they haven't won in Montréal for almost ten years. At McGill Stadium. This game's being played at Olympic and the Ti-Cats have a history of defeating Montréal in the playoffs in (somewhat) recent years. Hamilton hosted playoff games in the first round of each of the last two seasons, losing them both. I think the pendulum swings in the other direction this weekend and Hamilton pulls off their first playoff victory since 2001, on the road.
Calgary Stampeders/Edmonton Eskimos: Edmonton has home field advantage but the Stampeders have played better as of late. In fact, after winning their first 5 games of the season, the Eskimos only won 6 of their next 13. Alberta's finest played 3 times this year with Edmonton winning twice but the Eskimos have yet to face Calgary's new starter, Drew Tate. I find predicting who will win when these teams play based on stats to be frustrating and even so I can't find any that give either team a significant edge. Edmonton didn't finish the season well but the game's being played at Commonwealth Stadium. If the Eskimos get to Drew Tate early and often, throwing him off his game, Ricky Ray should be able to lead his team to victory. I don't think this will happen. Stampeders by 7.
Hamilton Tiger-Cats/Montréal Alouettes: Hamilton finally rose to the occasion when playing the Alouettes this year and won 2 of 4 at home. That being said, they haven't won in Montréal for almost ten years. At McGill Stadium. This game's being played at Olympic and the Ti-Cats have a history of defeating Montréal in the playoffs in (somewhat) recent years. Hamilton hosted playoff games in the first round of each of the last two seasons, losing them both. I think the pendulum swings in the other direction this weekend and Hamilton pulls off their first playoff victory since 2001, on the road.
Trickle
Unchallenged reiteration
formulaic inspiration
dismissed abrasive observation
morbid stoic incantation.
formulaic inspiration
dismissed abrasive observation
morbid stoic incantation.
Friday, November 11, 2011
Tower Heist
Was incredibly disappointed by Brett Ratner's Tower Heist. Generic films don't have to be terrible. If their writers try to at least create four or five unexpected witty provocative scenes wherein something distracting takes place they can be salvaged. But they have to hold our attention before they can affectively destream it. Tower Heist presents one boring mundane predictable scene after another, as if they were trying to mimic the aesthetic built into a swiffer wet jet ad in order to peddle jokes that make television's Whitney seem hilarious by comparison. It was like the inspiration behind this script was vacuuming or cleaning behind the fridge. Unmitigated stubborn concrete tedium disseminated by performances who are only noteworthy because they managed to successfully convince me that they were taking their work seriously, regardless of the fact that they must of wretched upon first reading over the material. There's one moment where Matthew Broderick at least looks as if he's aware that he's starring in an cup into which you spit but it's subtle enough for him to still be able to convince the powers that be that he's a team player.
I like films wherein rich assholes who steal from struggling workers are punished and I like that this happens in Tower Heist, but the execution is uniformly lacking in skill, insight and perspicacity, and the plot, racist in structure.
Don't be sucked in by the cast or the ads. Tower Heist isn't worth it and reminds me why I haven't wanted to see an Eddie Murphy film since Bowfinger.
I like films wherein rich assholes who steal from struggling workers are punished and I like that this happens in Tower Heist, but the execution is uniformly lacking in skill, insight and perspicacity, and the plot, racist in structure.
Don't be sucked in by the cast or the ads. Tower Heist isn't worth it and reminds me why I haven't wanted to see an Eddie Murphy film since Bowfinger.
Sunday, November 6, 2011
SUPER
Some superheroes have vast financial and intellectual resources at their disposal which they use to champion justice. Others develop superhuman strength after having directly embraced science's unpredictable diversity. Still others are born with exceptional gifts for which they are ridiculed and ostracized by their fellow citizens. And others are simply nurtured by an alien land whose environment provides them with a permanent degree of invincibility.
But my favourite superheroes are regular average joes who grow tired of corruption's prosperity and take to the streets in a homemade outfit to distribute discipline and punishment with bluntly accurate precision.
Superheroes like SUPER's Crimson Bolt (Rainn Wilson) and his enthusiastic sidekick, Bolty (Ellen Page).
Crimson Bolt has experienced two perfect events throughout his life which have helped him to overcome an existence otherwise filled with depression and humiliation.
The day on which he helped a police officer fight crime, and that on which he married love interest and ex-drug addict Sarah (Liv Tyler).
But as SUPER begins we discover that Sarah has fallen prey to a local drug-dealing thug (played by Kevin Bacon) who encourages her latent addictions in order to steal her away from her loving and devoted trustworthy husband.
After complimenting his eggs.
That same husband decides it's time to fight back and save Sarah once more, and guided by the forces of instinct, love, and over-the-top Christian superhero The Holy Avenger (Nathan Fillion), he makes a red suit, picks up a wrench, and tells crime to shut-up as he bashes its representatives in the head with said wrench while wearing his red suit.
And playing by the unwritten rules.
As Serial Mom coalesces with Q-The Winged Serpent and becomes what Mystery Men should have been, SUPER psychotically delivers a sensationally laid back hard-boiled piece of cinematic mayhem, swathed in a deadpan frank ready-to-wear elasticity.
Not crafted for the feint of heart or those searching for technological hyperactivity, its comedic intuition and adventurous spirit still distill a universal sense of vigilante dexterity, as one short order cook rediscovers what it means to despair.
But my favourite superheroes are regular average joes who grow tired of corruption's prosperity and take to the streets in a homemade outfit to distribute discipline and punishment with bluntly accurate precision.
Superheroes like SUPER's Crimson Bolt (Rainn Wilson) and his enthusiastic sidekick, Bolty (Ellen Page).
Crimson Bolt has experienced two perfect events throughout his life which have helped him to overcome an existence otherwise filled with depression and humiliation.
The day on which he helped a police officer fight crime, and that on which he married love interest and ex-drug addict Sarah (Liv Tyler).
But as SUPER begins we discover that Sarah has fallen prey to a local drug-dealing thug (played by Kevin Bacon) who encourages her latent addictions in order to steal her away from her loving and devoted trustworthy husband.
After complimenting his eggs.
That same husband decides it's time to fight back and save Sarah once more, and guided by the forces of instinct, love, and over-the-top Christian superhero The Holy Avenger (Nathan Fillion), he makes a red suit, picks up a wrench, and tells crime to shut-up as he bashes its representatives in the head with said wrench while wearing his red suit.
And playing by the unwritten rules.
As Serial Mom coalesces with Q-The Winged Serpent and becomes what Mystery Men should have been, SUPER psychotically delivers a sensationally laid back hard-boiled piece of cinematic mayhem, swathed in a deadpan frank ready-to-wear elasticity.
Not crafted for the feint of heart or those searching for technological hyperactivity, its comedic intuition and adventurous spirit still distill a universal sense of vigilante dexterity, as one short order cook rediscovers what it means to despair.
The Exterminating Angel
As times change and different political aesthetics present themselves, a dinner party is held for Mexican elites in Luis Buñuel's The Exterminating Angel. Everyone gathers for a delightful evening accompanied by delicious food items and accomplished musical entertainments.
There's just one problem.
For some indeterminate reason, the majority of workers feel compelled to leave before dinner is served and after dinner none of the guests is capable of leaving the room within which the festivities have expired. Confined together with nothing but their social relations to sustain themselves as the limited resources at their disposal are slowly consumed/utilized, those theoretically possessing a heightened sense of proper and refined conduct descend into madness, as the pet bear freely wanders to and fro.
At his or her leisure.
The external world becomes curious regarding the status of the imprisoned professionals but also find themselves unable to penetrate the invisible, intangible barrier.
As if a feudal set of social divisions has been challenged by a mischievous deity who demands that the well-to-do intimately embrace the circumstances which those who uphold their lavish caprice negotiate daily.
Unable to acknowledge a system wherein opportunity is available to all, or the fact that their luminescence is dependent upon semantic classifications which have designated the activities of working others as undesirable, time exasperatingly passes, and knowledge desperately self-destructs.
There's just one problem.
For some indeterminate reason, the majority of workers feel compelled to leave before dinner is served and after dinner none of the guests is capable of leaving the room within which the festivities have expired. Confined together with nothing but their social relations to sustain themselves as the limited resources at their disposal are slowly consumed/utilized, those theoretically possessing a heightened sense of proper and refined conduct descend into madness, as the pet bear freely wanders to and fro.
At his or her leisure.
The external world becomes curious regarding the status of the imprisoned professionals but also find themselves unable to penetrate the invisible, intangible barrier.
As if a feudal set of social divisions has been challenged by a mischievous deity who demands that the well-to-do intimately embrace the circumstances which those who uphold their lavish caprice negotiate daily.
Unable to acknowledge a system wherein opportunity is available to all, or the fact that their luminescence is dependent upon semantic classifications which have designated the activities of working others as undesirable, time exasperatingly passes, and knowledge desperately self-destructs.
Thursday, November 3, 2011
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)