The Dangers Of Nostalgia

I'm not exactly old by any standards that matter, but it is clear to me that I already live in the throes of nostalgia. I would even hazard to say most people my age are starting to become focused on the past in many different modes of their lives. I have friends that feel the golden age of music was in their high school years. We are interested in the shows and movies of our youth, which is probably why the media is 'ransacking' our youth and handing it back to us (i.e. Transformers, GI Joe, the obsession with retro-futurism). Scholars attribute this to a post-9/11 feeling of trying to get back to the "good ol' days". Chances are though, this happens with every generation. The main difference is that we can readily access our past due the recent obsession and ability to record our lives in a depth that has never existed before.

The problem in being able to peer so easily into our past is that we can start to see the cracks in our rose-tinted sunglasses. This is where I got into trouble, when I couldn't just let sleeping dogs lie. Granted, I often get some good results by drudging up the past, but it wasn't true in this particular case. I re-watched The Thirteenth Floor about a week ago. Although, it's probably more apt to say I attempted to re-watch the movie. I failed to continue it after eating a meal and sighing a huge, "meh," when I sat myself in front of the TV. I decided my time was more worth its use somewhere else.

Walking towards an empty landscape is quite an apt allegory

I had very fond, if murky, memories of the movie. I remember it being an absolute blast when I watched it, which happens to be same year that Matrix came out. I even recall asking myself why no one was talking about it, when it was in its own way as original as Matrix. Now I know why. Because it's garbage. It makes me want to go back in time and slap past-me for misleading present-me so badly. Couldn't I tell that the pacing was wonky? Couldn't I tell that the characters were horribly written? Couldn't I tell that I had seen better love stories in Saturday morning cartoons? Couldn't I tell that the acting was as wooden as a medieval Viking ship? I guess not. Apparently, I've traded youthful gung-ho-edness in movies for better taste. To tell you the truth, I think present-me has gotten the short end of the stick. But that's just the way life works, and being somewhat of a realist, I know I can't unsee 13 years of film to like something awful.

Be careful what you look back at. Sometimes the fuzzy memories are much more beautiful on their own. Not every itch needs to be scratched. Stupidly, I know I will continue to break this rule. In fact, I already did, again, 2 days ago by watching a nicktoon from yore. So far it hasn't let me down, but I know now it won't present anything new to me. That's possibly the true danger of revisiting our childhood past, though. A stagnation with of our views and culture. I have never heard anyone say, "it was better than I had thought as a childe!" It's always, "it holds up" or "it's as good as you remember it." Take a mini-vacation to the past, but please don't reside there. It's more seductive than you think, but it's not going to expand your horizons by even a centimeter.

- piecar

A Prophet

It's time for another indie movie flick review to get you all revved up for something that deserves a bit more than some fringe viewership. When I heard about A Prophet what hooked me was the promise of a unique and exceptional mob movie. I don't think I'm alone in that regard. After all most American's would hold one of the two Godfather movies in high esteem, as has been proven over and over in movie polls. Adding to the pique of interest is the fact that it's a French movie. Over the past year I've watched over 10 French films  (absolutely unplanned, if I made add) and this one is my favorite so far.

So how to describe it? Okay, here's the quick, dirty and overly general breakdown: Take Godfather, include the added emotional heft of Godfather II, take away the operatic aspects, add jail and some rather distracting supernatural aspects, and you've got the general sense of the movie. Somehow that felt disrespectful, but also not entirely untrue...

Our main focus is Malik, a young Arab thrown in jail for reasons that are never expounded. Right from the first scene we learn that he has no friends and no enemies. If we've learned anything from the oft-filmed politics of prison, is that this kid is in a serious bind. The story is about Malik's ascendance into power within the ranks of the mob through cunning and his willingness to commit where others let opportunities pass by. And unlike the first Godfather, which primarly dealt with the Corleone family as a whole, A Prophet specifically hinges on Malik's growth and final corruption.

I've never been in a French prison, or any prison for that matter (albeit, I guess that's technically not true...), but the movie has the gravity of 'realness'. The director has the deft hand in being able to create a sense of life within the confines of endlessly stained concrete.  The prison is not romanticized, it is shown as a hard and cruel place, but also as a place where men continue to live their lives. Not everyone is a badass or a weakling ready to get trampled over. You're not only witnessing prison life, but inhabiting it.

And this points towards the flaw of the film, which you may have picked up on in my second paragraph where I transparently choose to include foreshadowing: the supernatural. There is a character that Malik is haunted by, which I at first took this to be psychological in nature, but as the movie progressed it became clear that he was actually being haunted by a ghost. Malik can also 'see' the future, which is where we get the title from. It's more than a bit difficult for the viewer to accept these two worlds living side by side, the stark realism and the supernatural. I guess it can be taken as magical realism, but to be honest, it never felt like it added anything. It seems like even the corrupt can have their heroes, their holy man. But what of it? It doesn't add to Malik's character, it slightly cheapens his ability to navigate the treacherous waters of prison and the movie never makes enough of a comment on the prison community to give a sense that they need a 'savior', even a dark one. It feels like all that aspect could have done away with and we would have been left with an improved version.

But even with that negative aspect of the film, I cannot help but recommend it. The movie feels honest, it is truly moving (without resorting to tricks), and has some insanely tense scenes. Also, and this is a minor point, but I was also thankful there wasn't the usual requisite prison rape scene. I'm glad a director and a writer were able to get passed that by now. I also found that it is geared more towards men, (and no, that doesn't mean women shouldn't watch it, Fight Club is a movie made for men and I've found just as many women who like it as men) and speaks directly to their situation. You read it here: You should watch A Prophet.

- piecar

Finally!

Hey everyone... LOOK! new podcast!

The show is still a work in progress, but we feel we are definitely getting used to recording and developing our own voices on the show. As a bonus I'm also including a rough cut of a conversation I had with Piecar about Cabin in the Woods (spoiler free). We are testing out some new equipment and editing techniques, so let us know what you do and don't like about the podcast. 

-Alex

The Discreet Charm of the Bourgeoisie

The 20th century is rife with artistic movements of all kinds, but undoubtedly one of the most popular is Surrealism. It has seeped into a plethora of mediums: Fine art, movies, even video games. As such, it's part of our culture, of our meta-mind, whether you like it or not. It deals with our dreams, desires and the unconscious, which often leads to a severe break with the classic narrative style. This is why surrealist films are so "artsy".  One of the greatest and well known directors of this style was Luis Buñel. The Discreet Charm of the Bourgeoisie showcases many of his talents as an artist and as a director. Unfortunately, it left me feeling empty.

Let's start off with what works here: Form. Buñel's film is set up as a loose narrative of the lives of six aristocratic men and woman. When I use the term loose, I really mean it. The movie is best seen as a collection of vignettes tied together by the regular cast or one-shot characters. As the movie goes along it all becomes more and more...ungrounded. You feel less sure of anything. To the point that maybe you're not sure of anything being real at all. And yes... that's the good part, and no... I'm not being sardonic. Surrealism is meant to upend your sense of contentment, and Discreet Charm does that in spades, by constantly having you question what's a dream and what isn't. By showing ridiculous situations as regular or unsurprising happenstance.

What doesn't work well is most everything else. The characters aren't likable, and that's okay, but they're barely unlikeable either. They're not really there. Absolutely shallow. That may be the point, true... but even the characters that aren't part of the elite can't be classified as human. They're just symbols: guilt, fear and pleading sadness. But none of it is explored, not even on an unconscious level. The problem I see with this film is that it doesn't go far enough. Buñel shows us the stuff hidden behind our heads and those inside of our society's (or at least that of the 1970s) but gives no emotional depth to it. These small stories leave nothing in me. He touched many of these same themes in his seminal Un Chien Andalou by completely getting rid of narrative and truly hitting the emotional edge of the human conscious. I was left with images from that movie for a long time and can still recall many of them. With Discreet Charm I'm already starting to forget it.

This is not to say that I can't see why this film is so approved by critics. It tries to balance the absurd witha semi-narrative in what many would say is a success. It's also often funny, like when one of the characters takes that last bit of ham. There's quite a bit of symbolism involved in that. In the end though, it doesn't amount to much. If you want to watch great work inspired by this movie, you'll have to watch David Lynch's films. He saw the merits of this film and ran with them to their true artistic ends. I have a lot to be thankful from this film, but that doesn't mean I have to like it.

- piecar 

May the Odds be Ever in Your Favor.

Aaaaaaaaand we're BACK!

Heads up! Changes are coming. We have dusted off the mugs, and re-open the cafe. My cohorts and I will be recording a new episode of the podcast this week. The website should see some significant changes as well as a relocation in the next few months. We also have some cool ideas and surprises in store for the future. NOW, back to business.

The buzz surrounding the release of The Hunger Games was unique. It seemed to fuel itself on word of mouth. While there certainly were ads and even a free iOS game to raise awareness; people were already excited about the flick when it was announced. Even I was cautiously intrigued by the movie.

For those who don't know, the Hunger Games is the story of a girl living in a distopian society where every year children are selected to fight to the death in an arena until only one remains. This premise is made even more perverse by treating the Children as celebrities for the brief time between when they are selected to compete and thrust into the arena. This celebrity treatment is what makes the story unique. At times it was as though I was watching a perverse American idol. What hooked me was the contrast between the televised interviews and the opulence of the Capitol along side the sick violence of the 'Games' themselves.

Now, this is a film based on a young adult book; thus it must cater to a younger audience. As a result the movie is good, but cannot explore the disturbing themes as deeply as an adult film (gotta keep that PG-13 rating). However, it is important to know your audience, as The Hunger Games clearly does. Also, DO NOT sit in the front row, you may suffer a violent reaction to the EXTREMELY shaky camera work.

Aside from the movie being limited by it's audience, it is a very competent work. Since the book is told from a limited point of view, it is great the film makers were able to tell the story so well. It is a very loyal adaptation of the source material in spirit. What I mean by this is that the same messages and information are conveyed to the audience through different means (due to the strengths and limitations of the film medium vs. the written word).

The only criticisms I have heard is that the character development is limited/non-existent. While that is not evident in the film, the only way you would know what she is going through is to know her thoughts. What I mean by this is that Katniss is a stoic and cold character in the book, the only way we know what she is going through is because we are reading her thoughts. In the film the actress Jennifer Lawrence does an excellent job playing her exactly as she was in the book. I would expect her to have a deeper character arc as the trilogy continues and she accepts her role as a patriot. In this first chapter she is simply a survivor by necessity, unaware of the repercussions some of her actions are having across Panem. Instead the draw of this film is the perverse society, the Games themselves, and seeing all the pieces fall into place for the coming sequels.

The supporting cast is great (especially Stanley Tucci and Woody Harrelson). The direction also helps convey the violence of the film without gore, it reminds me of a documentary. That said, it is difficult to tell what is happening during some of the action sequences because of the shaking camera.

I was entertained through the entire film. Even if it isn't a perfect, or excellent movie, it is certainly worth seeing on the big screen. I am absolutely looking forward to the sequels and am excited to watch some of the young actors mature over the course of the franchise. Happy Hunger Games!

Twilight, Ugh

Where or where do I begin? Should I defend my man card here for even watching this movie? Should I try and find the good points in a movie that was made entirely and exclusively for women? Let’s see if I can do both.

First, I do believe that a man can watch this movie on one condition: There is a woman in his life. There is absolutely nothing about the movie trailer or the way that the movie is described that would entice a man to watch it. And you can’t say that men don’t like it’s just because it is a romance, because even women admit that the love story is terrible and cheesy. So, why would any self respecting man even sit through this movie? Because of women. Women are so obsessed with this movie and we are so obsessed with women, that we’ll cave in and watch it or just watch out of shear morbid curiosity for what goes on in that female mind (I sure as hell don’t know).

Great, so now that I’m watching this, is there anything good in this movie? The short answer is no. If you can avoid this movie, do so for as long as possible. As a man, there is nothing in it for you. Any man that tells you otherwise is lying to you and to himself. The movie is one big eye roll after another. I swear to you there’s an “I can show you the World” moment from Aladdin in this movie. At least Aladdin was a good movie.

If you’re a woman, and specifically a 12 year old girl that doesn’t fit in at school but still has a fantasy of some dreamy guy coming in like prince charming and noticing the good in you that nobody else sees, then yes it’s for you. The plot is so extremely clichéd. The recluse girl with deeper in beauty that nobody sees, the handsome prince charming, it’s all a big fantasy. None of the love is natural, or earned for that matter. Other than some pretty good music, and creative comic book style cinematography, there is nothing in this movie for us guys.

Women know it’s bad yet they still want to see it, the same way we know that Arnold flying a harrier jet, with a broken cockpit, in the middle of downtown Miami, holding onto his daughter in one hand, shooting a missile THROUGH a building at a terrorist, all to finally deliver in cool deadpan voice,“you’re fired,” is bad yet we still want to see it. The love that is being told in this story is to that level of shear hilarity. You ever wonder why women say we’re idiots? Because we are to them! Tell me that Arnold scene I just described from True Lies isn’t awesome? It’s AMAZING! Women don’t get that about us, and this is exactly why this movie does give us men something very important that we need: Insight into the female mind. Watching this lets you know how they feel during mindless action movies.

Yes, women know what goes on this movie is cheesy over the top romance, but they love it because women’s brains must work differently. Right? That MUST be the explanation. Maybe it’s our primal urge to kick ass and destroy, and their primal urge to nurture and care…but clearly the intellectual parts of our minds are not operational when we watch Twilight and action movies. And that’s what Twilight is, the female summer block buster.

One thing is for certain, any man who tells me that he legitimately like this movie, or even worse, watched this movie without having a woman forcing him to, deserves props for keeping an open mind but absolutely loses a man card.

[More funny images can be found at: http://funnyscrapsorkut.blogspot.com/]

Guilty Pleasures

Some may have noticed a decline in content recently. It is an unfortunate bi-product of a personal necessity. As I am now preparing for a very important examination my updates will be rather infrequent over the next few months. That said, I intend to return at full effort by March of next year and anticipate many positive changes to the site.

With that out of the way, I have to talk about Constantine. The three of us are fans of this film, yet we are aware that many people rapidly dismissed it because.... actually I'm not entirely sure. It certainly isn't a perfect film, but it gets a lot right and has so many cool characters and concepts that it is certainly worth a viewing.

I don't want to link you to the trailer because I find it somewhat misleading (as movie trailers often are). The movie is based on a comic book series about a man who is part supernatural private detective and part con-man. Which makes sense as he is doing battle with a variety of super natural creatures, so the best way to combat them is with his wits (as he is only a man). While the character from the graphic novel is more akin to a darker interpretation of Sherlock Holmes (with Satan playing the role of Professor Moriarty); hear Keanu Reeves plays him more like Clint Eastwood. Not to say he is an action hero, rather that he carries the grimace and foul attitude of the man with no-name. Reeves' Constantine is an experienced, and cynical, exorcist for hire preparing for his final showdown.

This is more so a film noir than an action film. Most of the movie is spent unraveling the rules of it's universe as well as the apocalyptic scheme that is unfolding. Unfortunately, there are reasons this is widely considered a guilty pleasure by those who enjoy it. While I am a fan of Reeves and Rachel Weisz, they have absolutely ZERO chemistry together. This works to the movie's credit initially as Constantine should be disconnected from the people around him given his perspective on life. But, as the plot unfolds and these characters have this significant experience together I would have expected some evolution on his part towards her. Though it is there on paper, the performances don't really convey this. That said, I like both of their performances individually; but this is definitely a movie where the supporting cast is even more interesting to me than the headliners. We have a priest with psychic powers, a divine arms dealer, a witch-doctor/bar-tender who operates a club where angels and demons can mingle, and what is one of the best interpretations of the Devil I have seen in a film... just to name a few. There are so many cool supporting players in this movie, you are bound to get attached to some of them. They are what make this world believable, as you aren't given a great deal of time with them; yet they all feel as though they have their own stories to tell (it just so happens this isn't their story).

I'll save some of my other opinions for a future podcast, but suffice to say it is certainly worth seeing. Let me know what you guys think of Constantine; I'd like to know (besides a bias towards Keanu Reeves, since folks seem to be split when it comes to his acting) why you did or did not enjoy this film.



-Alex