Firefly: Space 1999 for 2006
My college friends I work with, half my age, are in love with this series that was evidently a televised SciFi channel production, because I had never heard about it until this semester. I find it to certainly be an interesting cross between Western and Space. Nice cross-breeding! It's visually not unlike Space 1999, however, in that the sets are obviously TV, albeit the SFX are good later generation stuff. But what sets this apart is the characters, as a good show should. I love the characters, and love their humor. They lack a little complexity, except for the captain and the Bishop. They are the centerpieces. I love the girl mechanic, but mostly just because she makes me smile, because, well...she's always smiling, even when she's been shot in the gut.
But the Captain and the Bishop I believe make up the main conflict of the story, even though they certainly are getting along well enough to travel the same ship together. Every good company needs a captain, a mechanic, a second-hand who not-so-secretly wants to take control, a whore, and a misguided doctor. Oh, and a nutjob. All good ingredients for story.
Ok, I like it enough to keep watching, but if it remains as formulaic and polished, I'll lose interest because every show seems to keep going the same and there isn't the rich development that I would anticpate in something written more in depth. I give it 7 out of 10 so far. I'm on DVD #2.
Monday, December 18, 2006
Monday, November 27, 2006
Heroes Revisited
Written Tues. Nov. 14th, submitted: Mon. Nov. 27th
Ok, you don't have to believe that I wrote this earlier, but here it is.
My early expectations for plot have not gone completely askew, and my initial look at Heroes has not really gone wrong with respect to the general direction of the show, however, I now must admit, ahem, I did not stop watching at 3 shows. Nope; I am now addicted. I am totally ready to save the Cheerleader. We have now gotten a glimpse into the world of the Dad.
He was not who we expected now, was he. There are moments still when he makes the blood run cold as he looks through windows on what’s going on with the other characters. He is always looking through windows, and wears those signature glasses with the wire and black rims, his time period showing no love of modernism and no need of upgrading his appearance to please others. He is always spying, looking in, but as we know now more fully, manipulating and adjusting, and deeply involved in the race to discover the identity and whereabouts of Syler.
Syler, the dark one, the murderer, and demonic-like figure of mystery. We have been set up with a definite line of demarcation between the good and evil, and now that there is a time and a date attached, a showdown of sorts it seems. Next week is supposed to reveal at least the character and nature of this evil being, although I’d feel safe to say at this point not the total purpose of Syler (because there are quite a few shows left ).
But back to the Father. His smiling and knowing protective outer cover will probably come out at some point as well. The mother is absolutely oblivious, I’m sure, her and Mr. Muggles. If she’s in on it I am going to quit watching. But the wide-eyed girl helper who is involved with Mohandas Suresh and the painter and seems to have the gift of persuasion, and the quiet dark man that always seems to be the backup for the Father and “cleans people out” of their memory, while at first all seeming to be the suspected evil scourge, now seem more to the point to be the very good guys themselves.
So ok, now I’m going to go off into speculation. Before, I had estimated that this would be one more piece of postmodern mishmash with a pluralistic and pantheistic god omnipresent in the background, neither good nor bad but shifting in perfect harmony with the tides of metaphysical force and subatomic energy. Along with that is the basic atheistic materialist belief that the people involved are all subject to the domination effect of evolution, and that given it’s course we all can evolve in our abilities, and that sooner or later there could develop in us, by the pantheistic god’s effect and the shifting of the planets (notice the eclipse motif in the painting by the heroin addict, and the appearance of an eclipse in the second adventure, also of note the obvious circular planet effect in the show’s title sequence) a wave of supranormal abilities, shifts in time and space, and physical interactions through the body and minds of certain individuals, few at first, and then growing into a pandemic. The conclusion that the story seems that it has been heading for philosophically is that we are all superheroes, and if we can tap into the great metaphysical force all around us, nurture belief in the human mind, and believe in the triumph of goodness in the human person, then we can “evolve” into better mankind. I still pretty much believe this.
Notice please the fairly consistent pattern of duality in the characters. There are many who have a dark side, an unseemly persona, and personal weakness, even if it’s as simple as Hirohito’s naiveté’, or as deeply disturbing as what looks like demon possession by the painter, or the dual-personality of the blonde mother. And the surprises never seem to stop popping up as to who has abilities; take for instance DL, the blonde’s husband “escaped” from prison and “appearance” in the house. Seems like the eclipse brought on a wave of the supernatural.
So my early estimation was such, but now I’ve gotten a slight glimpse of something more. This is where the writing of the show is getting deep, and me, I’m always digging it seems deeper than may be there. I have this strange, almost supernatural ability it seems, as a media critic, to see beneath the layers of lens flares, special FX, and rhetoric. Hmm, maybe I’m growing in this ability?
Let’s just imagine for a moment that the Father is a type of God. He has an investment in the Cheerleader because she represents innocence and good, kind of like the Church. He is doing everything he can to protect this relationship and keep it intact, whole, like a family. He seems to have near omniscience, and omnipotent ability in getting around and getting to the right people. He certainly knows much more than Dr. Suresh ever knew. And here is where I think the story may go in another twist – I predict that the older Dr. Suresh is not really dead. He simply had to go into hiding and is working with the Father.
I still stand by my early prediction that this group of Heroes will band together to form a “league” if you will of working heroes, and now I believe that the Father will be their leader, and that their arch enemy will be this Syler, along with maybe many others that are also evil but less talented in their abilities, just like the good guys grow and learn about their talents and learn to harness them.
So we have a couple of metanarratives within the scope of the story already, and 2 of them very familiar with American culture: the story of the Church, and salvation and a watching over by a benevolent God cast against an unspeakable evil which wishes to destroy it, and also the Cheerleader as a type of America the Beautiful, and the preservation of freedom and purity. But these are narratives which I believe in the end the story of Heroes will try to enclose or envelop within the supposedly larger narrative of the godless mass of pantheistic physical nature, the yin and yang of balance, and the consummation of complexity and chaos theory. Will one win out over the other? We shall see.
Written Tues. Nov. 14th, submitted: Mon. Nov. 27th
Ok, you don't have to believe that I wrote this earlier, but here it is.
My early expectations for plot have not gone completely askew, and my initial look at Heroes has not really gone wrong with respect to the general direction of the show, however, I now must admit, ahem, I did not stop watching at 3 shows. Nope; I am now addicted. I am totally ready to save the Cheerleader. We have now gotten a glimpse into the world of the Dad.
He was not who we expected now, was he. There are moments still when he makes the blood run cold as he looks through windows on what’s going on with the other characters. He is always looking through windows, and wears those signature glasses with the wire and black rims, his time period showing no love of modernism and no need of upgrading his appearance to please others. He is always spying, looking in, but as we know now more fully, manipulating and adjusting, and deeply involved in the race to discover the identity and whereabouts of Syler.
Syler, the dark one, the murderer, and demonic-like figure of mystery. We have been set up with a definite line of demarcation between the good and evil, and now that there is a time and a date attached, a showdown of sorts it seems. Next week is supposed to reveal at least the character and nature of this evil being, although I’d feel safe to say at this point not the total purpose of Syler (because there are quite a few shows left ).
But back to the Father. His smiling and knowing protective outer cover will probably come out at some point as well. The mother is absolutely oblivious, I’m sure, her and Mr. Muggles. If she’s in on it I am going to quit watching. But the wide-eyed girl helper who is involved with Mohandas Suresh and the painter and seems to have the gift of persuasion, and the quiet dark man that always seems to be the backup for the Father and “cleans people out” of their memory, while at first all seeming to be the suspected evil scourge, now seem more to the point to be the very good guys themselves.
So ok, now I’m going to go off into speculation. Before, I had estimated that this would be one more piece of postmodern mishmash with a pluralistic and pantheistic god omnipresent in the background, neither good nor bad but shifting in perfect harmony with the tides of metaphysical force and subatomic energy. Along with that is the basic atheistic materialist belief that the people involved are all subject to the domination effect of evolution, and that given it’s course we all can evolve in our abilities, and that sooner or later there could develop in us, by the pantheistic god’s effect and the shifting of the planets (notice the eclipse motif in the painting by the heroin addict, and the appearance of an eclipse in the second adventure, also of note the obvious circular planet effect in the show’s title sequence) a wave of supranormal abilities, shifts in time and space, and physical interactions through the body and minds of certain individuals, few at first, and then growing into a pandemic. The conclusion that the story seems that it has been heading for philosophically is that we are all superheroes, and if we can tap into the great metaphysical force all around us, nurture belief in the human mind, and believe in the triumph of goodness in the human person, then we can “evolve” into better mankind. I still pretty much believe this.
Notice please the fairly consistent pattern of duality in the characters. There are many who have a dark side, an unseemly persona, and personal weakness, even if it’s as simple as Hirohito’s naiveté’, or as deeply disturbing as what looks like demon possession by the painter, or the dual-personality of the blonde mother. And the surprises never seem to stop popping up as to who has abilities; take for instance DL, the blonde’s husband “escaped” from prison and “appearance” in the house. Seems like the eclipse brought on a wave of the supernatural.
So my early estimation was such, but now I’ve gotten a slight glimpse of something more. This is where the writing of the show is getting deep, and me, I’m always digging it seems deeper than may be there. I have this strange, almost supernatural ability it seems, as a media critic, to see beneath the layers of lens flares, special FX, and rhetoric. Hmm, maybe I’m growing in this ability?
Let’s just imagine for a moment that the Father is a type of God. He has an investment in the Cheerleader because she represents innocence and good, kind of like the Church. He is doing everything he can to protect this relationship and keep it intact, whole, like a family. He seems to have near omniscience, and omnipotent ability in getting around and getting to the right people. He certainly knows much more than Dr. Suresh ever knew. And here is where I think the story may go in another twist – I predict that the older Dr. Suresh is not really dead. He simply had to go into hiding and is working with the Father.
I still stand by my early prediction that this group of Heroes will band together to form a “league” if you will of working heroes, and now I believe that the Father will be their leader, and that their arch enemy will be this Syler, along with maybe many others that are also evil but less talented in their abilities, just like the good guys grow and learn about their talents and learn to harness them.
So we have a couple of metanarratives within the scope of the story already, and 2 of them very familiar with American culture: the story of the Church, and salvation and a watching over by a benevolent God cast against an unspeakable evil which wishes to destroy it, and also the Cheerleader as a type of America the Beautiful, and the preservation of freedom and purity. But these are narratives which I believe in the end the story of Heroes will try to enclose or envelop within the supposedly larger narrative of the godless mass of pantheistic physical nature, the yin and yang of balance, and the consummation of complexity and chaos theory. Will one win out over the other? We shall see.
Sunday, November 26, 2006
book review
Greil Marcus seems to be waging an internal war and then displaying it on his own canvas. But he is doing it in a sort of Jackson Pollack kind of way. The cohesiveness must be all there, we tell ourselves, and we can see it, somewhat, but it is fraught with conflict that when pieced together is giving a picture in total of a cynical heart; a jaded soul. The three narrative historical landmark speeches he is using as foundation for his painting are all hopeful yet simultaneously dire warnings; all inspirational and incendiary. But he seems to spend a great deal of his initial energy separating the zeal and hopefulness of the speeches from a swathe of reality that he places liberally on the canvas in grey or black tones, separating as in distancing, in order it seems to point out the inevitable failure of the Union, the very grey-blue notion of America as only an idea, and not realized.
I am supposing after the initial burst of cynicism and a generally negative spirit, because of the title, itself being prophetic in nature and presupposing an answer, that Mr. Marcus is going to somehow redeem his text with some sort of replacement, revision, or reenactment of historical events that will enlighten us as to how it should be, was really, or could have been. It is yet to be seen what direction his “answer” will be to these supposed “voids”, but because he has written a book I’m supposing he has one. Or will he? Please tell me that this will not be another one of those high-language intellectual thrillers that destroy the past and current American system and waylay all paths of possible return to a reasonable rescue under that system, and then leave us to our own devices as to a solution, or offer very little in the way of redemption. I’ve seen this before. A writer of no mean political and intellectual talent splatters their frustration over the canvas with abandon, and then leaves the painting dripping red and black and blue; no flowers, no pointers to signposts up ahead.
But then again, I’m only on page 39.
Greil Marcus - The Shape of Things to Come - Prophecy and the American Voice
Greil Marcus seems to be waging an internal war and then displaying it on his own canvas. But he is doing it in a sort of Jackson Pollack kind of way. The cohesiveness must be all there, we tell ourselves, and we can see it, somewhat, but it is fraught with conflict that when pieced together is giving a picture in total of a cynical heart; a jaded soul. The three narrative historical landmark speeches he is using as foundation for his painting are all hopeful yet simultaneously dire warnings; all inspirational and incendiary. But he seems to spend a great deal of his initial energy separating the zeal and hopefulness of the speeches from a swathe of reality that he places liberally on the canvas in grey or black tones, separating as in distancing, in order it seems to point out the inevitable failure of the Union, the very grey-blue notion of America as only an idea, and not realized.
I am supposing after the initial burst of cynicism and a generally negative spirit, because of the title, itself being prophetic in nature and presupposing an answer, that Mr. Marcus is going to somehow redeem his text with some sort of replacement, revision, or reenactment of historical events that will enlighten us as to how it should be, was really, or could have been. It is yet to be seen what direction his “answer” will be to these supposed “voids”, but because he has written a book I’m supposing he has one. Or will he? Please tell me that this will not be another one of those high-language intellectual thrillers that destroy the past and current American system and waylay all paths of possible return to a reasonable rescue under that system, and then leave us to our own devices as to a solution, or offer very little in the way of redemption. I’ve seen this before. A writer of no mean political and intellectual talent splatters their frustration over the canvas with abandon, and then leaves the painting dripping red and black and blue; no flowers, no pointers to signposts up ahead.
But then again, I’m only on page 39.
Thursday, November 23, 2006
The Fountain - Darren Aronofsky - release Nov. 22, 2006
This was a great piece of art work in motion, and certainly a great story, but it was not a cinematic masterpiece. Art meets science fiction meets Darren Aronofsky meets real science through the eyes of the microscopic special effects. Nice. But is the North American crowd ready for art alone to stand? And also, I believe that Darren, still a growing director, has not shown us maturity in this piece for the simple fact that he does not trust his own work yet. His reliance upon repetitiveness was taken as style in Requiem, but in this piece I saw it as tedium and unnecessary. I’m not sure of what everyone else thought, but I “got it” early on and connected his dots, and did not need the many consistent reminders. The dots I did not connect were purposeful on his part, and well done. I'll explain that a little later in this article.
Darren has a fascination with symbolism in all of his work so far. This one was cinematically straightforward and powerful. All of the themes were central, circular, rotational, and consistent. One cannot deny the visually adept eye of Darren’s cinema awareness and his ability to craft an almost totally visual story. You could easily make a hundred or more wall-hangings from this work suitable for framing. Candles and deep black were abounding, and rich textures reminiscent of Rembrandt. Kudos to the furniture, costume, and lighting people. Huge accolades to the Cinematographer. This one could be up for set and wardrobe Oscar.
I’ve just sat through a vision that is quite beautiful, and certainly metaphysically complete. While the vision that I’m left with is of Buddhist completion, circles within circles, it lends credence and understanding to the Christian bedrock story of the Tree of Life as well. Brining it home, Aronofsky leaves us with reality, and dealing with death, and the promise of life. This giant allegory draws upon both traditions to simply illustrate the holistic principle of life from death, and the relinquishing of life has never been so visually stunning. This was a great offering from the standpoint of art and it’s ability to bring about the heightened awareness of spirituality without actually saying a word. And speaking of words, there were indeed very few. The lush visuals did all the talking. Ultimately we are left with hope and promise, and the vision of life beyond where we live. The fearless face of beauty and love squares against strife and anxiety and the face of science and our machinations against the reality of death. The winner is life, but on it’s own terms, God’s terms.
The ultimate failure of the tree, even at the end, I believe was not necessarily the failure of the story of the Garden of Eden’s Tree of Life, but rather the ultimate subjugation of the human story to that of death, and re-birth in another life. The Doctor’s strivings prove to be fruitless. His striving to find the source, just like that of the Spanish conquistador, and his ultimate acceptance, to “finish it”, to write that 12th chapter, was a transcendence that we all must face. Flowers do indeed grow from the ground. “Unless a seed fall into the ground and die it cannot produce fruit”.
The final scene of the star was reminiscent of the final scene in the film Brainstorm, which also took the partaker of that vision, in that case Christopher Walken, into the world of the eternal and was like the enfolding of eternal space upon space, a never-ending light and folds of light. This beautiful and yet limited vision of the eternal is about as descriptive as cinema can get visually, metaphorically. But because of the somewhat overdriven visuals I was left with the same effect that Big Fish had upon me; I knew it was fake, but I loved it anyway. And I stayed with the story because of the illustrations’ strength.
Yet there was much to be desired in regard to the story. I am putting pieces together in the aftermath. During the first viewing I wanted to know more about the future hero and his world. I wanted to know where that bubble starship came from. I wanted to see the background of just how that ship was created, and where he got the tree of life from, and how it was that he knew to take it to the galaxy. Was he indeed the year 2000 man, still alive? It turns out he had the original and faded tattoo, and the place where the ring was prior to it’s theft. That did not become completely clear until the end. The now extremely fragile-looking and worn pen that he used spoke of the years, and so I’m assuming that he was the original Dr. that did surgery on monkeys. And so Darren is here attempting to draw us on with the suspense and the fairly thin line of mystery about this future space traveler. That was actually a good ploy. It worked.
It does work, however I think it might have been fine, would have helped somewhat, to just simply show the context of that world to some degree, to see an origin of that time. Maybe just a shot of his preparation and takeoff from planet earth with the tree in partial bloom, and other people of similar nature watching him go, a larger-scaled vision of the world of 2600 that he finally comes to live in. And if indeed he was the inheritor of that tree, just how was it that only he could take it off-world and to it’s origin? There are many questions that never get answered. Those details don’t really need to be in the film itself. But the answers to these puzzles, indeed some of the questions do not come until reflection later. This is a great reflective piece, and may be lost on some younger audiences without sufficient background to understand either religion, death, cancer, experience with love, or other more mature themes.
I’d say for all of the above reasons while the story was certainly well-rounded, was succinct, it lacked scope (not depth – it’s plenty deep), but was also a visual feast worth seeing for it’s beauty and poetic, lyrical vibrancy.
This was a great piece of art work in motion, and certainly a great story, but it was not a cinematic masterpiece. Art meets science fiction meets Darren Aronofsky meets real science through the eyes of the microscopic special effects. Nice. But is the North American crowd ready for art alone to stand? And also, I believe that Darren, still a growing director, has not shown us maturity in this piece for the simple fact that he does not trust his own work yet. His reliance upon repetitiveness was taken as style in Requiem, but in this piece I saw it as tedium and unnecessary. I’m not sure of what everyone else thought, but I “got it” early on and connected his dots, and did not need the many consistent reminders. The dots I did not connect were purposeful on his part, and well done. I'll explain that a little later in this article.
Darren has a fascination with symbolism in all of his work so far. This one was cinematically straightforward and powerful. All of the themes were central, circular, rotational, and consistent. One cannot deny the visually adept eye of Darren’s cinema awareness and his ability to craft an almost totally visual story. You could easily make a hundred or more wall-hangings from this work suitable for framing. Candles and deep black were abounding, and rich textures reminiscent of Rembrandt. Kudos to the furniture, costume, and lighting people. Huge accolades to the Cinematographer. This one could be up for set and wardrobe Oscar.
I’ve just sat through a vision that is quite beautiful, and certainly metaphysically complete. While the vision that I’m left with is of Buddhist completion, circles within circles, it lends credence and understanding to the Christian bedrock story of the Tree of Life as well. Brining it home, Aronofsky leaves us with reality, and dealing with death, and the promise of life. This giant allegory draws upon both traditions to simply illustrate the holistic principle of life from death, and the relinquishing of life has never been so visually stunning. This was a great offering from the standpoint of art and it’s ability to bring about the heightened awareness of spirituality without actually saying a word. And speaking of words, there were indeed very few. The lush visuals did all the talking. Ultimately we are left with hope and promise, and the vision of life beyond where we live. The fearless face of beauty and love squares against strife and anxiety and the face of science and our machinations against the reality of death. The winner is life, but on it’s own terms, God’s terms.
The ultimate failure of the tree, even at the end, I believe was not necessarily the failure of the story of the Garden of Eden’s Tree of Life, but rather the ultimate subjugation of the human story to that of death, and re-birth in another life. The Doctor’s strivings prove to be fruitless. His striving to find the source, just like that of the Spanish conquistador, and his ultimate acceptance, to “finish it”, to write that 12th chapter, was a transcendence that we all must face. Flowers do indeed grow from the ground. “Unless a seed fall into the ground and die it cannot produce fruit”.
The final scene of the star was reminiscent of the final scene in the film Brainstorm, which also took the partaker of that vision, in that case Christopher Walken, into the world of the eternal and was like the enfolding of eternal space upon space, a never-ending light and folds of light. This beautiful and yet limited vision of the eternal is about as descriptive as cinema can get visually, metaphorically. But because of the somewhat overdriven visuals I was left with the same effect that Big Fish had upon me; I knew it was fake, but I loved it anyway. And I stayed with the story because of the illustrations’ strength.
Yet there was much to be desired in regard to the story. I am putting pieces together in the aftermath. During the first viewing I wanted to know more about the future hero and his world. I wanted to know where that bubble starship came from. I wanted to see the background of just how that ship was created, and where he got the tree of life from, and how it was that he knew to take it to the galaxy. Was he indeed the year 2000 man, still alive? It turns out he had the original and faded tattoo, and the place where the ring was prior to it’s theft. That did not become completely clear until the end. The now extremely fragile-looking and worn pen that he used spoke of the years, and so I’m assuming that he was the original Dr. that did surgery on monkeys. And so Darren is here attempting to draw us on with the suspense and the fairly thin line of mystery about this future space traveler. That was actually a good ploy. It worked.
It does work, however I think it might have been fine, would have helped somewhat, to just simply show the context of that world to some degree, to see an origin of that time. Maybe just a shot of his preparation and takeoff from planet earth with the tree in partial bloom, and other people of similar nature watching him go, a larger-scaled vision of the world of 2600 that he finally comes to live in. And if indeed he was the inheritor of that tree, just how was it that only he could take it off-world and to it’s origin? There are many questions that never get answered. Those details don’t really need to be in the film itself. But the answers to these puzzles, indeed some of the questions do not come until reflection later. This is a great reflective piece, and may be lost on some younger audiences without sufficient background to understand either religion, death, cancer, experience with love, or other more mature themes.
I’d say for all of the above reasons while the story was certainly well-rounded, was succinct, it lacked scope (not depth – it’s plenty deep), but was also a visual feast worth seeing for it’s beauty and poetic, lyrical vibrancy.
Sunday, October 08, 2006
Heroes
Besides the bad channel feed I get where I'm at, I'd say that at least the plot is not fuzzy. Yes, believe it or not I find the new TV series Heroes to be predictable. People are discovering their super powers and are being drawn together in an inevitable plot to form a league of heroes not quite the same as "other" leagues we've seen before.
I DO like the freshness of the characters and their believeability. That is refreshing. Also, the discoveries they make about themselves are creepy, and it seems that not just one but a few of them have a negative or uninviting personal life. This is good, but of course the stuff of comics past, already been written.
The interchanging of scenes is very good, and the special effects normal to ok, the acting is as I've said, believable, and also cast well. The show has a filmic quality and is not too TV like, so it looks good (as far as I can tell with my bad reception - ok it's a shared campus network cable, but even though it's satellite it's not that great). One drawback I saw so far that is a weakness is the use of a floating voice that sporadically interjects poetic and mysterious-sounding lines that may or may not have anything to do directly with the visual of the moment. So much for aesthetics, let's get to the meat.
This is where rerun #2 comes into play. If you close your eyes and listen to what's being said it's standard postmodern mixed with all-but-deserted humanism and fantasy thinking. This will entertain all those who do not have a life and wish they really had one. Well, ok, and those who like heroes and comics just because they do. There is a huge dose of positivism thrown in, and you can tell from the plot so far, even though it hasn't thickened yet, that there will be many obstacles to overcome to make the show addicting. But it's all psychological drivel that amounts to little more than faith in mankind, against of course great odds and unnamed evils, the worst evil of course being resignation to tedium and amalgamated homogeniety. Nobody likes to be homo (sic).
But I am waiting to see the next recorded episode off of the TIVO. I'm betting there is mention, if not outright dutiful recognition as some kind of player, of a deity or higher power source, most likely fitting neatly into the catagory of an atomically and metaphysically correct pandeity. Will most likely catch about 3 episodes and then drop this one from future consideration. No stars really or good tomatoes, cows, whatever....
Besides the bad channel feed I get where I'm at, I'd say that at least the plot is not fuzzy. Yes, believe it or not I find the new TV series Heroes to be predictable. People are discovering their super powers and are being drawn together in an inevitable plot to form a league of heroes not quite the same as "other" leagues we've seen before.
I DO like the freshness of the characters and their believeability. That is refreshing. Also, the discoveries they make about themselves are creepy, and it seems that not just one but a few of them have a negative or uninviting personal life. This is good, but of course the stuff of comics past, already been written.
The interchanging of scenes is very good, and the special effects normal to ok, the acting is as I've said, believable, and also cast well. The show has a filmic quality and is not too TV like, so it looks good (as far as I can tell with my bad reception - ok it's a shared campus network cable, but even though it's satellite it's not that great). One drawback I saw so far that is a weakness is the use of a floating voice that sporadically interjects poetic and mysterious-sounding lines that may or may not have anything to do directly with the visual of the moment. So much for aesthetics, let's get to the meat.
This is where rerun #2 comes into play. If you close your eyes and listen to what's being said it's standard postmodern mixed with all-but-deserted humanism and fantasy thinking. This will entertain all those who do not have a life and wish they really had one. Well, ok, and those who like heroes and comics just because they do. There is a huge dose of positivism thrown in, and you can tell from the plot so far, even though it hasn't thickened yet, that there will be many obstacles to overcome to make the show addicting. But it's all psychological drivel that amounts to little more than faith in mankind, against of course great odds and unnamed evils, the worst evil of course being resignation to tedium and amalgamated homogeniety. Nobody likes to be homo (sic).
But I am waiting to see the next recorded episode off of the TIVO. I'm betting there is mention, if not outright dutiful recognition as some kind of player, of a deity or higher power source, most likely fitting neatly into the catagory of an atomically and metaphysically correct pandeity. Will most likely catch about 3 episodes and then drop this one from future consideration. No stars really or good tomatoes, cows, whatever....
Tuesday, February 28, 2006
Syrianna
Kind of like Illiana, the combination of IN and IL. But no where near the midwest.
The strength of this film is visual, and the editing is minimalist. We are whisked from one scene to the next and made to put together the pieces. Now if you're a puzzle person you will like that. If you need things spelled out for you, this is not a good show. It is precicely, however, this type of editing that reflects the goals and ambitions of the project. We are kept engaged in a global spider web. We see bits and pieces of it, and very close up, and gradually we are drawn back until the entire web comes into focus. At first it looks like a few dewy, drippy lines of rope, and then when we get further back we see it for the huge trap that it is.
This is of course the filmmaker's view of politics. It's all tied together. But craftily they don't just want to spell it out for you. This does one of two things. We give up somewhere and proclaim "it's all too complex", or, and this is what makes the issues at hand compelling and believable (note that I'm not saying that the actual facts that are given to us are believeable in themselves), we come to the great "Ah hah!" that the story has been desigend to bring us to, and we therefore feel a great sense of personal discovery and enlightenment. This heightened state of involvement creates a buy-in for us. The buy-in is inclusive of Clooney's character, as we discover that he is an unwitting accomplice to destructive U.S. govt. policy and concurrent behavior; ergo, we side with him in his "quest for the truth". Dito with the Matt Damon character, and unwitting accomplace from the Swiss Banking end of the deal, and equally outraged at being used and abused, and wined and dined at the expense of his ethics. All of this is peachy if you buy into those kinds of politics. But of course who trusts their government any more, right? Since no one does it seems, we are open to this kind of thinking: the massive consipiracy. The reason that a film like this will succeed however, over and against a film like Farenheit 9/11, is because of it's understated agenda. It's much easier to buy into "fiction". We never feel as if we are being preached to in an action flick.
Very much in the vein of the original Manchurian Candidate, the gradual unfolding of the plot and the confidence we have in the hero of the story both lead us to the inexorable conclusion that all is not right with our current policy. We of course do not trust institutions that we rarely see the inside of or know of their policy, so the movement within the CIA, in particular by it's biggest directors and action figures, is belieable. We either believe that what they are doing is actually OUTSIDE the knowledge of the chiefs of staff or the presidency, or that somehow the upper management knows of it and is purposefully not directly involved, either way implicating a strong government involvement in direct manipulation of a foreign power's political choices, and all of that resultant from commercial concerns. The differnce between this film and the Manchurian Candidate would be that in the Candidate the manipulation takes place in the foreign power with designs on our own. You know, Candidate was banned for quite some time. I saw no smoke about this from any DC based committees...
Devil's Advocate Note:
Well, it certainly was a sad trip. The "good guys" get killed in the end, and all by our dear military. We are supposed to feel saddened by our own greed and licentiousness, and, according to the commercial at the end, start making an immediate gravitation away from our dependence on oil. We've got to stop encouraging the Arabs to just put up hotels and theme parks with their money and allow them to start building for the future without an oil based economy! That's what we're doing now folks: playing the whore and taking Vegas to them and not teaching them the value of savings! Without a fair shake from us now we will just be taking their money and leaving them with multimillion dollar roller-coasters and no electricity to run them with! Then where will they be, huh? You can't eat a roller-coaster! These poor ignorant Arabs can't think for themselves, so we've got to stop our government manipulation on levels like this! I'm so damned fired up about this I'm just liable to go jump in my SUV and ride right down to my congressman's headquarters, take him out to lunch, and give him a wake up call! So outbid the Chinese and give them what they need over there! Schools, and clinics, and football!
Kind of like Illiana, the combination of IN and IL. But no where near the midwest.
The strength of this film is visual, and the editing is minimalist. We are whisked from one scene to the next and made to put together the pieces. Now if you're a puzzle person you will like that. If you need things spelled out for you, this is not a good show. It is precicely, however, this type of editing that reflects the goals and ambitions of the project. We are kept engaged in a global spider web. We see bits and pieces of it, and very close up, and gradually we are drawn back until the entire web comes into focus. At first it looks like a few dewy, drippy lines of rope, and then when we get further back we see it for the huge trap that it is.
This is of course the filmmaker's view of politics. It's all tied together. But craftily they don't just want to spell it out for you. This does one of two things. We give up somewhere and proclaim "it's all too complex", or, and this is what makes the issues at hand compelling and believable (note that I'm not saying that the actual facts that are given to us are believeable in themselves), we come to the great "Ah hah!" that the story has been desigend to bring us to, and we therefore feel a great sense of personal discovery and enlightenment. This heightened state of involvement creates a buy-in for us. The buy-in is inclusive of Clooney's character, as we discover that he is an unwitting accomplice to destructive U.S. govt. policy and concurrent behavior; ergo, we side with him in his "quest for the truth". Dito with the Matt Damon character, and unwitting accomplace from the Swiss Banking end of the deal, and equally outraged at being used and abused, and wined and dined at the expense of his ethics. All of this is peachy if you buy into those kinds of politics. But of course who trusts their government any more, right? Since no one does it seems, we are open to this kind of thinking: the massive consipiracy. The reason that a film like this will succeed however, over and against a film like Farenheit 9/11, is because of it's understated agenda. It's much easier to buy into "fiction". We never feel as if we are being preached to in an action flick.
Very much in the vein of the original Manchurian Candidate, the gradual unfolding of the plot and the confidence we have in the hero of the story both lead us to the inexorable conclusion that all is not right with our current policy. We of course do not trust institutions that we rarely see the inside of or know of their policy, so the movement within the CIA, in particular by it's biggest directors and action figures, is belieable. We either believe that what they are doing is actually OUTSIDE the knowledge of the chiefs of staff or the presidency, or that somehow the upper management knows of it and is purposefully not directly involved, either way implicating a strong government involvement in direct manipulation of a foreign power's political choices, and all of that resultant from commercial concerns. The differnce between this film and the Manchurian Candidate would be that in the Candidate the manipulation takes place in the foreign power with designs on our own. You know, Candidate was banned for quite some time. I saw no smoke about this from any DC based committees...
Devil's Advocate Note:
Well, it certainly was a sad trip. The "good guys" get killed in the end, and all by our dear military. We are supposed to feel saddened by our own greed and licentiousness, and, according to the commercial at the end, start making an immediate gravitation away from our dependence on oil. We've got to stop encouraging the Arabs to just put up hotels and theme parks with their money and allow them to start building for the future without an oil based economy! That's what we're doing now folks: playing the whore and taking Vegas to them and not teaching them the value of savings! Without a fair shake from us now we will just be taking their money and leaving them with multimillion dollar roller-coasters and no electricity to run them with! Then where will they be, huh? You can't eat a roller-coaster! These poor ignorant Arabs can't think for themselves, so we've got to stop our government manipulation on levels like this! I'm so damned fired up about this I'm just liable to go jump in my SUV and ride right down to my congressman's headquarters, take him out to lunch, and give him a wake up call! So outbid the Chinese and give them what they need over there! Schools, and clinics, and football!
Sunday, February 12, 2006
Man on Fire
I will never forget that little face. It could be because I have a sweet little blonde on her way to being just like that. I’d be on fire too if my girl was taken like that, taking a shot in the chest and cutting off fingers to find out who dunnit. It wasn’t even his little girl. But somebody like that would get under a man’s skin without too much encouragement. This just took about 40 laps in a pool, a few hugs, and naming her bear after him. Replacement father happens while real one is away. Maybe the hypocrisy of the real dad came through by comparison, kind of like a silent effect. Kids know who real people are without a great deal of thinking.
I thought this was one of the most engaging thrillers/mysteries/action dramas I’ve seen in awhile, not just for its high tension but because of the deeply personal and believable background story. But mostly, and this is not a first, the on-screen presence of Denzel Washington is unbelievable. He absolutely sizzles, again. His understated tension can almost be felt in this story with your eyes closed; walking TNT with Nitro sweat rolling off of him.
Now deep into the story when the stakes are high and we are drawing to a conclusion, the friend played by Christopher Walken is a little overplayed in the scene where he begins to describe Creasey’s “Masterpiece” (albeit it is true). That made the whole thing just a little too melodramatic for me, and that was the first time in the flow of the story that I broke out of the story’s trance and became aware of the acting. However, it didn’t take long for the story to close in again. I just would have directed that scene somewhat differently. Right idea and timed well in the story line, but over the top.
Walken in all other parts of the story makes a perfect compliment to Washington. Their friendship is genuine and warm and immediately bankable. Their past is made equally mysterious and adds perfect weight to the story, and power. We really don’t need to know the full story to feel the power behind whoever Creasy might have been, or exactly what he had done. The line, “Do you think God will ever forgive us for what we’ve done?”, is just plain great writing. It is, of course the entire theme of the story carried forward to the beginning, ending with a close up of the failing grasp of a hand on the figure of St. Jude.
All through the poignant story is the search for redemption and justice. It is classic bad guys and corruption vs. lone ranger with an edge. And the Lone Ranger is flawed by the past and predilection to alcohol, turning to the relationship with the little girl, and to God to get a grip. His personal turning point of putting away the bottle is not cheesy or pretentious, and his character displays genuine struggle. The consistent putting aside of the self for another, and blatantly placing himself in harm’s way, seemingly without regard for the guns of the enemy, Creasy comes off almost as a superhero, and his life takes on a very supernatural air, defying death, all the while seeming almost nonchalant about his dance with it. Particularly powerful were the brief glimpses of Creasy in a pool with his continued bleeding mixing with the clear water, reminding us of his ongoing condition while also adding even more tension and the pressure of time to the already heavily climbing events.
So tension and more tension is the word for this film, and a strong sense of story that carries us forward and sticks with you afterward. I have not been this engaged and felt such dramatic buildup since my first experience with the Russian film “Come and See”. So if you haven’t “gone and seen” this one, rent the disk, and make sure the kids are asleep. Not for the squeamish, nor those who need sleep.
Rate: 7 out of 10 Klodneys.
I will never forget that little face. It could be because I have a sweet little blonde on her way to being just like that. I’d be on fire too if my girl was taken like that, taking a shot in the chest and cutting off fingers to find out who dunnit. It wasn’t even his little girl. But somebody like that would get under a man’s skin without too much encouragement. This just took about 40 laps in a pool, a few hugs, and naming her bear after him. Replacement father happens while real one is away. Maybe the hypocrisy of the real dad came through by comparison, kind of like a silent effect. Kids know who real people are without a great deal of thinking.
I thought this was one of the most engaging thrillers/mysteries/action dramas I’ve seen in awhile, not just for its high tension but because of the deeply personal and believable background story. But mostly, and this is not a first, the on-screen presence of Denzel Washington is unbelievable. He absolutely sizzles, again. His understated tension can almost be felt in this story with your eyes closed; walking TNT with Nitro sweat rolling off of him.
Now deep into the story when the stakes are high and we are drawing to a conclusion, the friend played by Christopher Walken is a little overplayed in the scene where he begins to describe Creasey’s “Masterpiece” (albeit it is true). That made the whole thing just a little too melodramatic for me, and that was the first time in the flow of the story that I broke out of the story’s trance and became aware of the acting. However, it didn’t take long for the story to close in again. I just would have directed that scene somewhat differently. Right idea and timed well in the story line, but over the top.
Walken in all other parts of the story makes a perfect compliment to Washington. Their friendship is genuine and warm and immediately bankable. Their past is made equally mysterious and adds perfect weight to the story, and power. We really don’t need to know the full story to feel the power behind whoever Creasy might have been, or exactly what he had done. The line, “Do you think God will ever forgive us for what we’ve done?”, is just plain great writing. It is, of course the entire theme of the story carried forward to the beginning, ending with a close up of the failing grasp of a hand on the figure of St. Jude.
All through the poignant story is the search for redemption and justice. It is classic bad guys and corruption vs. lone ranger with an edge. And the Lone Ranger is flawed by the past and predilection to alcohol, turning to the relationship with the little girl, and to God to get a grip. His personal turning point of putting away the bottle is not cheesy or pretentious, and his character displays genuine struggle. The consistent putting aside of the self for another, and blatantly placing himself in harm’s way, seemingly without regard for the guns of the enemy, Creasy comes off almost as a superhero, and his life takes on a very supernatural air, defying death, all the while seeming almost nonchalant about his dance with it. Particularly powerful were the brief glimpses of Creasy in a pool with his continued bleeding mixing with the clear water, reminding us of his ongoing condition while also adding even more tension and the pressure of time to the already heavily climbing events.
So tension and more tension is the word for this film, and a strong sense of story that carries us forward and sticks with you afterward. I have not been this engaged and felt such dramatic buildup since my first experience with the Russian film “Come and See”. So if you haven’t “gone and seen” this one, rent the disk, and make sure the kids are asleep. Not for the squeamish, nor those who need sleep.
Rate: 7 out of 10 Klodneys.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)