Society is, and always has been, at the mercy of its leaders. Though rebellions, riots, and revolutions have occurred throughout history, there is no denying the amount of control that is held by those in government positions. The thought of having intelligent, decisive, and respectable leaders at the head of societal responsibility has been, and should be, a comfort to basic citizens who have simply set out to live their lives. However, when circumstances change and become more dire, will those decisions made, in people’s “best interest,” always be best? The idea of nonconformity as a felony seems ridiculous in this day and age, but how close is the world to handing over even the simplest of freedoms in order to retain the comforts that society has become accustom to. What circumstances could force the world to take such a turn for the worst? Feelings such as fear and hopelessness demonstrate the possibilities of such circumstances. Although fictional, media works such as “Children of Men,” “V for Vendetta,” and “’Repent Harlequin!’ Said the Ticktockman,” a short story by Harlan Ellison, demonstrate how such societal qualities can lead to tyrannical submission.

Fear is a very powerful emotion. It can be, in fact, one of the most powerful emotions; pushing a man to do irresponsible, reckless, and even dangerous things. Harlan Ellison’s “’Repent Harlequin!’ Said the Ticktockman” is  a story that paints the picture of fear leading mankind into an abyss under the rule of one person whose character is strong than the rest. The ticktockman holds the power to control the lifespan of society based upon their punctuality throughout life. The fear this power instills in people to follow schedules is undeniable. “Somewhere nearby, he could hear the metronomic left-right-left of the 2:47 PM shift, entering the Timkin roller-bearing plant in their sneakers. A minute later, precisely, he heard the softer right-left-right of the 5:00 AM formation, going home,” (Ellison, 292). With the installation of fear in people’s hearts, society falls in line and conforms to the precise schedule set out for them. Another example, the film “V for Vendetta,” is a perfect example of a person’s use of fear in order to obtain leadership, control, and conformity from the population. With the skillful manipulation of a virus, leaked into the population then suddenly controlled with the promise of order and control, the people look to the leader (and in this case, the villain at the same time) as their hero and savior from an otherwise scary, unknown problem. As stated previously, these examples are merely fictional. Nevertheless, these stories exemplify, if not magnify, human nature under the presence of fear. This human condition is one of the characteristics that would will society to submit to any power to retain the possibility of order, stability, and safety in their lives; even if individuality may be the sacrifice.

The second theme that is noticeable is hopelessness. When people feel there is nothing left to fight with, or for, is another instance when they would hand over simple freedoms to regain comfort. The film “Children of Men” is a perfect example of such feelings of hopelessness. Mankind is facing the brink of extinction, as women have succumbed to the inability to reproduce. Beginning with the death of the world’s youngest man, the world that is demonstrated for the audience is a bleak one. Individuals pass by one another with sadness, fear, and even vague disinterest in the world around them. With no hope of continuing the generations that mankind had come to treasure, the people submitted to the ruling of border closure, the weeding out of immigrants, and quarantines of anyone deemed dangerous or viral to be around. Throughout the movie, the examples of violence, discrimination, and tyrannical power only proves humans desperation in the face of no hope for the future.

Although the world is not filled with such terrifying, dire circumstances that have backed mankind into a corner, continuing to follow leadership blindly without education, questioning, or resilience may someday lead society down a similar path. The previous examples are all works of science fiction, but it would be ignorance to say they do not speak themes of truth that are applicable to present day. Society may require leadership and government, but it does not have to be done blindly. Without education, faith and confidence, humans will fall victim to the consequences of fear and hopelessness, and everything that had been worked for will be lost in a new order.

Works Cited

Children of Men. Dir. Alfonso Cuaron. Perf. Clive Owen and Julianne Moore. Universal Pictures, 2006. DVD.

Ellison, Harlan. “”Repent, Harlequin! Said the Ticktockman”" Decades of science fiction. Lincolnwood, Ill: NTC Pub. Group, 1998. 290-300.           Print.

V for Vendetta. Dir. James McTeigue. Perf. Natalie Portman and Hugo Weaving. Silver Pictures, 2005. DVD.

As it seems that every other film critic or keeper of a weblog that deals with film is compiling a ‘best of’ list as the end of the Noughties approaches at speed, I feel compelled to offer one of my own (which might mean I am conformist at heart, but I hope not).  In no particular order and in full recognition of the futility of the exercise, eleven of the best films from the last ten years that touch on matters of religion or the religious:

Frame Capture from Sunshine

Sunshine (Danny Boyle, 2007): Working from an unusually thoughtful script by the novelist Alex Garland (who in The Tesseract gives us a compelling distillation of the fractures of the contemporary world), Boyle gives us another science fiction meditation on the possible end of the world.  The film is also a haunting allegory for the deep darknesses that still exist out there waiting for us to find, whether that darkness is the relentless, uncaring power of nature or the madness of believing one to be uniquely chosen by the divine for a mission of extreme violence.  At the same time, it is possibly the most taut, visceral and simply exciting film on this list.

Children of Men (Afonso Cuaron, 2006): This is the most chilling and most believable of any of the dystopian futures we have seen in a century that seems to be revelling in the fact that it may or may not have much of a future. The quick glimpses we get of the religious reactions – hopelessness, self-flagellation – to a potentially world-ending crisis are telling and perfectly in line with what could happen.  This is stunning science fiction at the same time that it is a deeply felt and well-considered meditation on the way we live now, and the ways we may not live in the future (it is also the only film on this list whose DVD special features include a documentary starring Slavoj Žižek rambling on about the sorry sate of the world, which makes it worth a rental even if for no other reason).  In the end, chilling as it may be, the film’s only fault is that it may be too hopeful, too firm in its affirmation of the human capacity for good.

There Will Be Blood (Paul Thomas Anderson, 2007): This is a bluntly subversive film, an argument in narrative form that American capitalism and American Christianity are two sides of the same corrupt coin.  Told in the from of a character study of the most deeply and convincingly misanthropic figure in contemporary popular culture, Anderson’s best film to date tells the story of the intertwining of the religious and the economic that can be read as a condemnation of the Prosperity Gospel movement or as a critique of violence perpetrated in the name of profit that is given a slickly religious gloss. or even as a repudiation of the whole language of family values.  Regardless of how you look at, this is strong stuff, the kind of challenging, socially aware cinema that we can never have enough of.

Frame Capture from Heaven

Heaven (Tom Tykwer, 2002): Working from a script by Krzysztof Kieslowski and Krzysztof Piesiewicz, originally intended as part of another trilogy for Kieslowski, sho gave us the lovely Trois Colours, the great German director Tom Tykwer turns this simple tale of two damaged people in love and on the run into something altogether remarkable.  It resonates with biblical and Christian themes and language and offers a very strange and very effective kind of aesthetic redemption to its protagonists, both of whom are murderers.  At the same time, this is no simple religious parable or morality play; there is so much going on here below the surface of what seems to be a very simple story that it is almost staggering.  The second script in the series, L’Enfer, a bitter tale about the hell of other people, was made into a film in 2005 by Danis Tanovic.  The third, dealing with the theme of Purgatory, sadly, remains unfilmed.

The Dark Knight (Christopher Nolan, 2008): This might seem like a stretch, but bear with me for a moment or two.  When the butler Alfred tells Bruce Wayne, Batman’s playboy alter-ego, that some men – the Joker in this case – just want to watch the world burn, he nails the character of religiously-motivated violence in the contemporary world, which is more performative and symbolic than strategic or tactical.  In the final analysis, this is a startling depiction of the deep irrationalities and the dark magics that underlie the surface of the rationalised modern world.  It is also a striking visualisation of the things that modern societies must do to combat these forces.  On this front, see also Tykwer’s brilliant 2006 adaptation of Perfume: The Story of a Murderer and to a lesser extent Nolan’s own 2006 film The Prestige.

The New World (Terrence Malick, 2005): Though it does branch over into Orientalist fantasy on occasion, this retelling of the seminal American story of the colonial captain John Smith and his relationship with an Algonquin girl, usually given the name Pocahontas, is a distillation of Malick’s decades-long meditation on modernity and its deeply destructive relationship with nature.  This bears as little resemblance as possible to the deplorable Disney film dealing with the same story.  In The New World, he does this primarily through a comparison, never forced, between the enchanted world of the Algonquin and one that is being violently disenchanted, and this with the help of the church that we see the British colonists building in their mudpit of a town, built for the film a few kilometres from the site of the historical Jamestown, first settled in the early seventeenth century.  It is also one of the most visually stunning films on this list, even if cannot compare with Malick’s 1978 Days of Heaven, arguably the single most beautiful movie in the history of movies.  For the curious, I’ve written more on Malick here.

Jesus Camp (Heidi Ewing and Rachel Grady, 2006): The only documentary to make this list, Jesus Camp, and one which is a little suspect in its own implicit claims towards objectivity, Jesus Camp, like no other film, gives us a window into the world of fundamentalist Christianity (and I know this is an unpopular term in the academy, but here it fits like a glove) in the United States.  That the film renders this world as one that is alien and largely incomprehensible to much of the world beyond the American heartland is only to its credit.  These people are out there, and there are more of them than we might care to think.

Frame Capture from Spring, Summer, Fall, Winter... and Spring

Spring, Summer, Fall, Winter… and Spring (Kim Ki-Duk, 2003): This is, I do realise, a cliché, and a film that seems to go out of its way to pander to Western preconceptions about Buddhism, but it is also a lovely little piece of work, a gentle but powerful parable about the weight of suffering and delusion that so many of us seem to carry with us.  It also features the single best cinematic use of a cat in recent memory.  See it as a double feature with Ki-Duk’s 3-Iron, which is just as much a parable and perhaps even more a Buddhist film than Spring, though in a far more subtle manner.

The Proposition (John Hillcoat, 2005): With the possible exception of the very different The Assassination of Jesse James by the Coward Robert Ford, Hilcoat’s Old Testament inflected story of the Australian Outback in the middle of the nineteenth century is the finest Western of the decade.  Working from a script by bad seed Nick Cave, the film takes on a veneer of biblical darkness and inhabits a moral universe that owes far more to the logic of the book of Job than to the myths of civilising European colonialism. At the end of the film, when two men, one barbaric and dying, the other alive and vaguely more civilised, sit facing the future, the film suggests that this is the heart of where we are now, and that heart lies in large part informed by the bloody stories of our past, both biblical and colonial.  For further reflections on the film and its place in contemporary Australian cinema, I’ve written more elsewhere on this site.

Spirited Away (Hayao Miyazaki, 2001): Miyazaki is one of our great filmmakers, a fiercely original voice and a deeply moral commentator on the world at large.  A classic story of a haunted amusement park and a paean to the complex spirit world of the Japanese religions, this is amusing, touching, terrifying and intellectually engaging all at the same time.

Frame Capture from The Bothersome Man

The Bothersome Man (Jens Lien, 2006): Another dystopian film that suggests that the modern city with all its cleanliness, order and impeccable taste, just might be hell (and I had such fond memories of Oslo, which this film has truly interrupted).  This little Norwegian gem is one of the few really original visions of the afterlife that we’ve seen in years and it is one of the most blackly comic films in a decade full of pitch-dark humour.  It is also a stirring demand that we all become bothersome to those things that require bothering (rationalisation, commodification, etc.).

And the worst (and this one was easy): The Passion of the Christ (Mel Gibson, 2004): Gibson’s infamous film is riddled with problems.  It is historically inaccurate (Jesus and Pilate conversing in Latin rather than Greek (the language that two men in their traditional positions would have had in common), the executioner’s nails being driven through the palms and not the wrists, etc., etc.), which is really only a problem given that the filmmakers made such a big noise about being historically accurate.  It is brutally, cruelly sadistic and in its cruelty becomes deeply suspect on a theological level, given that it transforms the suffering of Jesus into an endurance test that no man (not even a white guy with digitally-altered brown eyes and a prosthetic hook nose) could have survived such torture for so long, essentially denying the messianic figure the divinity that has so long defined Christianity’s theological understanding of its own textual history.  This is a Braveheart version of Jesus that avoids deeper questions and goes for the dubious pleasures of reveling in the torture, though crucifixion was absolutely a form of torture, something the film actually gets right.  Despite removing the vaunted ‘blood libel’ from the Gospel of Matthew from the finished film (though they did shoot it), it is also rabidly anti-Semitic as well as being deeply misogynistic – Satan takes the form of a woman who we often see stalking unseen among the Jewish crowds. It makes the Roman authorities into enlightened and sympathetic humanists while at the same time transforming the occupied Semitic peoples of Jerusalem into a vacuous rabble that is violent, backwards, bloodthirsty and in need of some civilising.  If this isn’t what a colleague here at Otago calls ‘a theology of empire’, and a thinly-veiled defence of the American occupation of Iraq, I don’t know what is.  It is also guilty of the most grievous of all cinematic sins in that it is flat-out boring and at least an hour too long.

Perhaps even more so than Jesus Camp, the film is a crystallisation of all that is perverse and troubling about Evangelical Christianity in the United States in the twenty-first century.  That it became the rallying point of an election and that any criticism of the film was labelled anti-Christian regardless of its source or motivation, made the very existence of the film deeply disturbing.  It was shot in part in Matera (in the region of Basilicata), the same Italian city as Pier Paolo Pasolini’s 1964 masterpiece Il vangelo secondo Matteo, but the two films could not be more different.  That this, still by far the best film about Jesus ever made, was made by an atheist who portrayed Satan as a Catholic priest, says something very interesting about the place of the story of the Gospels in Western culture.  If you’ve not seen Pasolini’s take on Jesus as a socialist revolutionary, you should.

What happens when you cross this:

With this?:

Answer? You get this:

ANNNNNNNNND this:

Scarlett Johansson as Black Widow in Iron Man 2. Oh ho ho, that movie will be good based on the cast alone. Casting WIN! The above is payback for my recent unexcused absense. Though I will now try to further excuse it. It has been a BUUUUUUUUUUUUSY last two weeks, boys and girls. No excuse for blog-laziness, I know, but still, its been crazers these past few weeks. That being said, time for shway updates!  SHWAYDATES!  Copyright! Here is a quick list of randomness I have found around the internets that is incredibly wunderbar.

The /Filmcast: After Dark has a wonderful discussion about film criticism and whether it is a dead/dying/overtaken by noobs art. Spoiler alert for  Children of Men, American Psycho, and Blade Runner.  Blade Runner? Really?

/Filmcast After Dark Ep. 77

Cinematical has a pretty spiffy article about the ability of gay actors to openly come out of the closet and what it will mean to their career in the long run. The article focuses on Rupert Everett, which is a shame, because Everett is known in the community as a whiny, narcissistic, troublemaker and giving him any agency to represent the LGBT community is a bad idea. Make sure to read the comments below the article, as well.

Cinematical

Sundance is coming up and indieWire has a decent account of the action that is in the works.

indiWire

Though it was published over two years ago, I stumbled upon a pretty great little article on /Film that had an excellent little spiel about the proliferation of promising directors from the late 90’s and what the hell actually happened to them. Short, yet to the point, the article ponders what factors are contributing to this general content malaise and what can be done to prevent it. Funny that two years later we just now seem to be getting back to a formidable level of content across the board, rather than just waiting anxiously for the next Pixar or Superhero franchise.  Which I wouldn’t have a problem with if they each released 2 films a month.

Vintage /Film!

And finally, ANOTHER /Film article (I just love them so much) written by the always-well-versed Hunter Stephenson. A new futures trading market named the Cantor Exchange is attempting to soon go public. The Cantor Exchange will be the first system to trade futures on box office gross’. /Film has a very well written and interesting article on what this overt commoditization will have on the entertainment industry and the art of filmmaking itself.

/Film

ANNNNNNNNNNNDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDD in smaller news…

_Zombieland 2 has been greenlit

_Justin Timberlake will star in the story of Facebook, The Social Network.

_Alec Baldwin insists that after 30 Rock he’s done acting. Personally? Not such a bad thing.

_Robert Duvall MAY be Don Quixote in Gilliam’s re-attempt at the tale.

_Spielberg drops his remake of Harvey.

_Oh, and did I mention that Comcast bought NBC Universal? No biggie, just wanted to put that out there…

Well, it’s fun list time. Everyone’s getting their decade “Best of’s” and “Most under/over rated movies” completed, turned in and flamed over their choices and omissions. Despite the fact that the decade didn’t officially start until 2001, and won’t end until the final days of 2010 (we don’t start counting numbers with zero, for the people forgetting their elementary math classes); but, I’ve decided to join in. Not with the best movies of the past ten years, but with the best movies from the past ten years, one year at a time. One movie, for each of the past ten years. Sadly, they’re mostly all mainstream fare; some more well-known than others, and I’m sure a lot of people – if a lot of people were to read this list – would deride me for the omissions and the gall to rate certain movies over others.

Fortunately, a lot of people do not read the blog, so it’s just you and me. Let’s get started, shall we.

2000: CAST AWAY – This Tom Hanks starring movie, directed by Robert Zemeckis brings the duo from FORREST GUMP back together again, in a whole new way. The draw to this movie was the fact that 2/3 of the movie was set on a desert island, with Tom Hanks alone – no pirates show up, no wild, indigenous species (human or otherwise) wreck his life, and he’s not secretly on the other side of some exclusive vacation resort – for three years; and how he survives, copes and ultimately escapes.

It’s a powerful movie, and gives us one of the best non-living supporting characters ever put on-screen. (It’s a volley ball.)

Wilson!!

2001: THE LORD OF THE RINGS: THE FELLOWSHIP OF THE RING – Everyone knows about this series of movies, but it’s the first one that I probably enjoy the most. It’s our introduction to Middle Earth, the characters and the plight of what’s to come. The fact that a fairly untested – if well, regarded – filmmaker like Peter Jackson was able to pull of the effects, the heart and the misery of the movies is a testament to the movie studios that financed it as well as the family of J.R.R. Tolkien, who saw what this man planned to do and allowed them the rights.

There are many amazing things about this movie. First of all, I love how they were able to combine the mixing of practical and computer effects, using miniatures and forced perspective (sometimes to wonky results). But, the attention to detail, from Legolas walking over the snow while everyone else is hip-deep, or the score – like in the mines of Moria, to just the magnificence of scale and wonder (the giant figures on the river, and the Balrog).

You shall not pass!

2002: THE 25th HOUR – This movie, directed by Spike Lee, is one that I don’t think a lot of people know or remember. But, from it’s opening credits of the lights commemorating where the Twin Towers once stood in Manhattan, to the montage in the middle denigrating everyone, then the final moments of fantasy as the main character’s father describes a life other than the one he’s headed for; this movie was powerful. It opened and poured salt in the wounds of 9/11; it covered the pain of leaving your friends and family to go to prison – or some other place that you don’t want to go; and it was a look into our modern lives. How we hold onto material objects, fantasies, and integrity.

I consider it to be my favorite, and possibly Spike Lee’s best movie.

Here's Champagne for my real friends, and real pain to my sham friends.

2003: BASIC – Another movie that is overlooked. This John McTiernan directed (he did DIE HARD, THE THOMAS CROWN AFFAIR and THE 13th WARRIOR), John Travolta, Connie Nielsen, starrer is about a DEA agent brought into a military base in Panama, when a group of Army Rangers on a training mission all seemed to go crazy and kill each other. Even the group’s leader, played by Samuel L. Jackson, seemingly bites the dust. The movie is a twisty-turny thriller about drugs, betrayal, and of course we have no idea what’s going to happen until the final moments play the amazing “Black Betty” performed by Peter Beckett.

And that was a looong day!

2004: MAN ON FIRE / ETERNAL SUNSHINE OF THE SPOTLESS MIND – Okay, I just couldn’t choose between these two movies. One is a violent voyage through Mexico City, as a man on a mission – to get revenge for the kidnapping and seeming murder of a little girl – rips the city apart. It’s not Denzel Washington as a villain, like in the equally good, TRAINING DAY, but I don’t think you can really call him a hero in this either. The other is a fantastic voyage of heartbreak, and misery as all the moles are shown on relationships and our incapability to let go of the painful moments involving the ones we love.

MAN ON FIRE, directed by Tony Scott, is an amazing portrayal of a man seeking redemption through the only means he knows how. When Creasy (Washington) is brought to Mexico to work as a bodyguard and driver for young Pita (Dakota Fanning), he is a broken, shell of a man. We don’t know, and never find out his history. But, he’s an alcoholic who fantasized about suicide and can’t deal with personal relationships. In a way it develops into a love story between this man and little girl. And when she’s taken away, the world that he had slowly awoken to comes crashing down. A lot of attention is paid to the violence in this movie – and there’s some horrific stuff that happens – but it’s the heart and the sacrifice, that make this movie memorable to me.

ETERNAL SUNSHINE OF THE SPOTLESS MIND, amazingly enough, fits pretty well with MAN ON FIRE, in this way. Sure, there’s none of the violence – at least physical – but this Michel Gondry directed, Charlie Kaufman scripted movie follows along the same lines. A man (played by Jim Carrey) who falls in love with a girl (played by Kate Winslett), they share a life together – or a few years – then they she has an operation that has erased him from her memory. So, to pay her back, he signs up for the same thing. Only once the procedure begins we travel through his mind, and see his memory erased and his ultimate fight to try and retain his memories of the woman. It’s powerful stuff, as has come to be expected from Kaufman, and it’s the way that the leads portray their relationship, that makes this movie real and relatable.

2005: MUNICH – Spielberg has created some of the most touching, most enthralling and adventurous movies of the modern era – if not ever. In the 2000’s he hit kind of a dark corner, starting in 2001 with AI: ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE, where he channeled Stanley Kubrick and created a dark vision of a future, where artificial beings had more heart and caring than the humans that were their masters and destroyers. But, it comes to a head in MUNICH, where he combines the most grown-up sensibilities of his greatest movies (SAVING PRIVATE RYAN), and this new-found dark edge.

The story about the Israeli group created to revenge the 1972 Olympics murder of a group of Jewish athletes, and how they go down the rabbit-hole of setting out on a specific mission and wind up in a deeper mess than they’d bargained for, should sound slightly familiar. But, it’s the performance of Eric Bana as he sees what he’s becoming, that gives the movie it’s heart. His supporting crew of Ciaran Hinds, Daniel Craig and Geoffrey Rush are all magnificent too.

I worry.

2006: CHILDREN OF MEN – This movie has probably affected me more than any other movie, I’ve ever seen. I came out of the theater and pronounced that you have to see this movie if you love movies, if you have kids, or even if you care about humanity at all. The powerful story of a future where humanity can no longer reproduce, told through the eyes of Theo (Clive Owen), as he tries to help a “fugee” named Key get to a boat, might very well be one of the best movies ever made.

The stylistic feats shown in the movie – in a number of long, one-take shots – help create an unblinking reality. The movie doesn’t use these tricks to glorify the violence – that they’re usually used for – but to show how traumatic and scary it truly is. Whether it’s the unexpected explosion of a coffeeshop a second after the main character walks out; or the minutes long scene in a car as the main characters are attacked. These moments are not created to look cool, or to show-off. They’re imperfect, and don’t give us the moments we expect from action/sci-fi movies. We are helpless to save a woman bleeding to death, we only have a ringing in our ears as a young woman comes out of a smoking building holding her amputated arm in her other hand.

Then there’s the final instant of the movie, where the screen goes dark and we hear the sounds of children playing. Is it hope, and the beginning of humanity anew; or is it the final memory of a man who won’t know what the answer is? If I had to pick a best movie of the decade, it would probably be this one.

But, this stork sure tastes good.

2007: ZODIAC – David Fincher has been a favorite director of mine, actually since ALIEN3, which I’m aware of being the lone fan of. But, it’s in ZODIAC that he seems to reach a full maturity, that his other serial killer/dark-themed movies hadn’t really shown. The movie moves beyond the murders, and into a procedural on obsession and celebrity. Robert Graysmith, played by Jake Gyllenhaal, is a political cartoonist for the San Francisco Chronicle. When his newspaper gets a letter from the Zodiac killer with a cypher, to hopefully declare his identity, the cartoonist is sucked in and seemingly won’t ever be released from this mystery’s grip. The flip side is the focus on the celebrity and near-worship of serial killers. Whether it’s the mysterious killer claiming to be responsible for victims he didn’t kill, or the effects of his threats like a newspaper staff wearing buttons declaring that they’re not Paul Avery (including Paul Avery, played wonderfully by Robert Downey, Jr.). The third aspect to this movie, is the procedural from the sleuth Graysmith and the police’s side of the story. Bungled crime-scenes, unreliable witnesses, and of course bureaucratic red-tape, all helped to keep this murderer free and the mystery in real life unsolved.

It’s Fincher’s probably least stylistic movie (which he returned to in a fashion with THE CURIOUS CASE OF BENJAMIN BUTTON), but I think it’ll probably be his most memorable.

Do you have any animal crackers?

2008: THE DARK KNIGHT – Okay, here’s where I get predictable. This movie blew my mind. It’s a super-hero movie, that’s deadly serious, (nearly) fatalistically real, and had a fantastic through-line of, “You either die a hero or you live long enough to see yourself become the villain.” And that’s the part of the story that hooked me, and made it not only one of the most thrilling movies, but most tragic. The story of Harvey Dent, is the backbone of this story, despite The Joker’s headlining and acquiring the most praise. ”I believe in Harvey Dent” was the motto for the character’s campaign, and the wish-fulfillment that Batman saw as perhaps the person that could do what Batman had intended. So, it’s this all-purpose hope invested in this normal everyday person, that leads to disappointment and ultimate downfall. Sounds kind of like the investment, and idolizing people had for Barack Obama. And now we see where that got us.

But, it’s also the lesson that Batman winds up taking from this, that made me feel that this is the perfect capper to the Batman franchise, and I don’t think that we need any more movies – at least until they’re ready to reboot the franchise in a decade or so. (I know this is wishful thinking.)

Wanna see a magic trick?

2009: STATE OF PLAY – It’s hard to say, with three weeks left if this decision will stand. I mean there is still the blue-alien adventure of AVATAR to arrive. But, this movie about journalism and politics really struck a chord with me. Maybe it’s the way that journalism is fading away. Newspapers closing down, writers being fired both in print and online, and the insurmountable leap of accepting online journalism as legitimate. These are topics at the heart of STATE OF PLAY. There’s also the murder-thriller aspect, but what’s really on the line is the sort of baton-handing from one medium to the next.

Russell Crowe’s Cal McCaffrey starts the movie off as the normal, movie cliche of a news reporter. Buying his tips and using wordplay to get his information from uncooperative mouths. Then he moves into the real world, when he stops into the office of the newspaper he works for, where they’re being bought out by some large media company; and he’s introduced to the head of the online branch of the newspaper, in the guise of Rachel McAdams. At first he chides her for thinking she’s a real journalist, then he schools her in how to seek out the full truth instead of just running with the latest bit of gossip to come over the wire. And in the end, idyllically, they’ve formed a partnership, that might someday become the happy medium in the news industry.

And I think that any and all comparisons to ALL THE PRESIDENTS MEN, that this movie received is well earned. The only drawback to the analogy, and weakness in the movie, is that it chooses fiction and allegory for it’s story instead of actually running with the real life equivalents that it’s based on.

Got a pen?

So, that does it. That’s my top ten of this last decade. One per year. This isn’t to say that these were all my favorites, but these were the movies that I felt best represented the movies that came out in their respective years, and still affect me today. Will the list be the same in the future? Probably not, but I’ll bet that a majority will still be near the top.

This is an out-of-the-blue ranting about one of my favourite books which was turned into one of my favourite movies (success story for adaptations!)

The book/movie I’m referring to is Children of Men, one of the smarter, slower, subtler of the Post-Apocalyptic genre of film/book. The main character, in fantastic noir style, is a reluctant but practical participant in the story which is set in an England after a severe decline in fertility, to the extent that the last child was born about eighteen years ago.

First things first, this is a damn fine setting for a story. This can create a great deal of damage to both the society and the small villages and towns that can no longer be maintained because of the aging population. But, it is certainly not the same sort of damage as in The Road, for example; there is still a society, there is still a government, there are still cars, cities, people to talk to safely, etc. So, the setting is grand, a great mix of decay and interesting conversation. Also, unlike something like Dawn of the Dead, there has been eighteen years for the population to reach this point, there is no scrambling for survival, etc. There is a quiet, depressed acceptance that the race will not survive more than fifty or sixty years.

Anyway, I won’t discuss the plot all that much since it’s the setting and the main character that interest me most. 

The film is truly gorgeous, certainly one that I wish I’d seen in the cinema. Everything is so bleak and grey, especially the scenes in some kind of detention centre/community which is basically a demolished town which has been fenced in to hold all the refugees. The action scenes are amazing, filmed with one, long shot that follows the characters through many different areas and situations without cutting. All of the background is amazing, even the graffiti is really great, crushing stuff like, “last one to die, turn off the light.”

The main character, played by Clive Owen in the film, is just the kind of emotionally scarred, morally confused, highly practical guy that I love in a protagonist. Add the growing sense of urgency and overwhelming chance of failure and you have one of my favourite kinds of stories.

Anyway, I don’t have anything important to say about all this other than: go and read Children of Men by P.D. James, then go and watch the film, directed by Alfonso Cuaron. 

‘They say, “Well, why do you think we can’t make babies anymore?” And he looks up at ‘em, he’s chewin’ on this great big wing and he says “I haven’t the faintest idea,” he said, “but this stork is quite tasty isn’t he?”‘

Your fertile protagonist,

TDE

I know that most of these picks are fanboy picks, but that’s just the way it goes.  I’m a fanboy.  Sure I don’t have critically acclaimed films making up my list, but I don’t care.  These are the movies I liked the best from the last ten years.

10. Minority Report (2002)

Spielberg really outdid himself with this modern sci-fi classic about a crime unit which uses seers to stop murders before they happen. This is a wonderfully crafted film with some very interesting ideas inside a great chase movie.

9. The Dark Knight (2008)

I know that I see like a fanboy for including this on my list, but my higher choices will make me seem like more of a fanboy, so I’m not bothered by this. Batman Begins was the Batman movie I have always waited for, and The Dark Knight took it up a notch, creating a great atmosphere and wonderful performances along the board.

8. Wall*E (2008)

WallE may be my all-time favourite animated film. I was blown away when I saw this movie. I did not expect to fall in love with these characters and become so engrossed in the story and moral background. But I did. WallE is amazing, through and through.

7. Crouching Tiger, Hidden Dragon (2000)

Martial arts films have never reached this level of artistic and literary brilliance. This film transcended genres and languages and became one of the most emotionally gripping films of the last ten years. The cinematography was absolutely beautiful, the story was enrapturing, and the over-all style was just incredible.

6. Children of Men (2006)

Its hard for me to pinpoint what I love about this movie so much. It might be the unyielding vision of the director, the fascinating psychological ideas and questions which arise from this situation, or the intensity of the action throughout. What a brilliant film.

5. The Passion of The Christ (2004)

Mel Gibson set out to make a massive, gripping, emotional religious epic, and he succeeded in every way. The Passion tells the story of Jesus’ last day without holding anything back, bringing the full weight of his suffering and sacrifice to the screen.

4. The Lord of the Rings: The Two Towers (2002)

The Lord of the Rings trilogy is a major milestone in movie history. The Tow Towers, as the middle piece, suffers from certain downfalls that the middle has, yet still succeeds on a very epic and visual level. The Battle of Helm’s Deep is one of the great battle scenes, which the ongoing struggles of the fellowship held us to our seats.

3. Star Wars Episode 3: Revenge of the Sith (2005)

I just can’t justify not having a Star Wars movie on this list. I am too big of a fan for that. Sure I had my problems with the first two prequels, however the third gave me exactly what I hoped for from the final installment of the Star Wars Saga. I was moved visually, cinematically, and emotionally.

2. The Lord of the Rings: The Return of the King (2003)

The final piece int he Lord of the Rings trilogy saw all of the story lines come together for one great climax. Sure there were parts which bothered me as an avid fan of the books, but the massive scope of the picture and the hard-hitting emotional punches left me awed.

1. The Lord of the Rings: The Fellowship of the Ring (2001)

The Lord of the Rings trilogy came onto the screen late 2001 and conquered the movie-going world. The epic scope and huge vision for these films was apparent to all who saw it. The quality of production was at the highest levels that film can reach, and Tolkien’s story and characters entranced audiences everywhere. Fellowship of the Ring is the best of the trilogy and set a new standard for movie-making which in my opinion has yet to be surpassed since its release.

Taken straight from the pages of L.W.A.P.D. this is a video by the Architect’s Journal showing their top five comic book cities. All are fantastic cityscapes but one of the complaints is that Gotham City (the skyline to Batman’s caped crusades) is destroyed to match Tim Burton’s description for his first two films. Films though can also be a fantastic source of beautiful cityscapes of the future such as Terry Gilliam’s Brazil or even animations like Sky Blue but also interpretations of what cities can become if the world goes horribly wrong such as Children of Men, is perhaps slightly more interesting, even if less spectacular.

2012: New disaster film by Roland Emmerich the same director of The Day after Tomorrow. In many ways it is almost the same film as that and the standard disaster films. But the main reason for going to see this film is not for the plot but the very good special effects which you have to make the most of by seeing the film in the cinema. Other than that there is not much to mention apart from a few funny jokes from the fat Russian Billionaire. *Plot Spoiler* I would like to see in these big budget special effects more invention. For example i would like to see some main characters die instead of them all surviving and living happily ever after. 6/10

Children of Men: I finally got round to watching this film after it been recommended by many people and critics for many years. I really enjoyed it. It is fairly dark which I tend to prefer. Its director is Alfonso Cuaron who directed the darkest of the early Harry Potter Films ‘The Prisoner of Azkaban’. Clive Owen gives his best performance in a film I have seen and it was a performance that changed my mind about his abilities. It looks great set in and world twenty years from now but not over technological advanced like most Hollywood films portray the future as. It kept gripped throughout and left me wanting more at the end which is always a good sign 8/10

Die Hard 4: I watched on Channel 4 the other weekend with mates and it is a god, but nothing special, action film. i.e better than transformers but not as good as the Bourne films. I didn’t really rate Timothy Olyphant as the bad guy but apart from that is was fairly watch able although Bruce is getting a bit old for these films. 7/10

Okay, as you probably know by now: I’m a fan of Superman Returns. I may or may not be listening to the soundtrack right now.  But YOU probably hated it so now I have to think of who else I’d want to direct another Superman movie. Fortunately, since V for Vendetta, James McTeigue, director of the upcoming Ninja Assassin, has been at the top of my list, and, pretty much since V for Vendetta came out, he hasn’t stopped talking about what HE would do with the movie.  And what would HE do with a Superman movie?  Well to  sum it up for him:  make it awesome.  And I’m okay with that.  Read more!

Next up on my fanboy wishlist is Len Wiseman, director of Live Free of Die Hard.  I don’t know what the hell he’s been up to since and I’m too lazy to look it up (I lied — not much.)   I’d also be interested in somebody like Paul Haggis getting a crack at a tent-pole like Superman.  Or I might give up my first born for Alfonso Cuarón.

If given the opportunity to post a pic of V on my blog, I'll take it.

Alexis sent me photos of the animatronic baby from the Children of Men. She took the photos on her recent trip to the States. It’s a bit creepy …

As the ’00s wrap up, I think it’s a good time to make a list for the ten best movies of the decade.

1. No Country for Old Men (2007)
2. Mulholland Drive (2001)
3. Let the Right One In (2008)
4. Eternal Sunshine of the Spotless Mind (2004)
5. Donnie Darko (2001)
6. Inglourious Basterds (2009)
7. Children of Men (2006)
8. Kill Bill (2003/2004)
9. There Will Be Blood (2007)
10. Unbreakable (2000)

I guess this list reveals my penchant for sci-fi and Quentin Tarantino.

The world of dystopia; a place where human civilization has finally hit rock bottom or are pretty damn close to doing so. Offspring of George Orwell’s 1984, the dystopian societies found in such films as Brazil, A Clockwork Orange, Blade Runner and the recent V for Vendetta are dark, dreary places of oppressive, totalitarian rule that despite their fictional origins often serve as a mirror to troubles in the real world.

Go here for more.

I have added a link to an article from Culturewatch on The Lives of Others that you may wish to read. Culturewatch  describes their work as exploring the message behind the media and it has a Christian focus.  Here is an extract:

The Lives of Others is one of the finest new films I’ve seen in a long time. Winner of the 2007 Academy Award for Best Foreign Language Film, it is all the more amazing as this is German writer/director Florian Henckel von Donnersmark’s first film. Set in East Berlin in 1984, it is the story of two men. The first is Georg Dreyman (Sebastian Koch), a playwright who is thought by the authorities to be alone among his peers in his loyalty to the Socialist Unity Party. The second, State Security (Stasi) Captain Gerd Wiesler (Ulrich Mühe), is absolutely committed to the Party and highly effective in his work. He has his doubts about Dreyman’s loyalty when he watches him at the premiere of his new play. Wiesler’s former classmate, Anton Grubitz (Ulrich Tukur), has become head of the Stasi culture department and laughs off Wiesler’s suspicions. But Minister Bruno Hempf (Thomas Thieme) has his eye on Dreyman’s girlfriend and leading lady Christa-Maria Sieland (Martina Gedeck). It would be useful for him if Dreyman was found to be disloyal, so he suggests to Grubitz that Dreyman should be placed under surveillance. Grubitz, eager to curry favour with the Minister, immediately agrees with the wisdom of this action, and entrusts the case to Wiesler. Wiesler has Dreyman’s apartment bugged, and sets up his listening post in the loft of the building.

 

By focusing attention on this one operation, Donnersmark examines the mechanisms of the entire German Democratic Republic. A title card at the beginning of the film informs us that the Stasi had nearly 100,000 employees at this point in history, and a further 200,000 informers. The goal was ‘to know everything’. The ruthlessness with which this goal is pursued is shown starkly by an opening sequence in which shots of Wiesler teaching a class of Stasi trainees are intercut with shots of one of his interrogation sessions. As he plays the recording of the interrogation to his students, he describes what he is trying to achieve: ‘The best way to establish guilt or innocence is non-stop interrogation. An innocent man becomes more angry; a guilty man becomes quiet and calm, or he cries. A liar has prepared statements; a man telling the truth can reformulate the truth.’ Donnersmark intensively researched the Stasi for four years before filming (which lasted just 37 days), including interviewing former employees and those who had been detained, in order to ensure the accuracy of the situation he portrayed. He was insistent on using original locations for such a film: notably the Stasi headquarters in Normannenstrasse and the Central Detention Centre in Hohenschönhausen.

 

They have also discussed Children of Men – Hinting at Hope and Children of Men Discussion Guide.

Babelor,

Tocmai am văzut un film mişto, cu actori mişto, cu o poveste mişto, făcut mişto, care m-a ţinut cum de mult nu m-a mai ţinut ceva. Se cheamă, cum poate că aţi dedus deja citind titlul postării, Children of Men, şi a fost făcut de Alfonso Cuaron. Tare, babelor, tare de tot. Ditamai distopia, film de film, foarte, foarte, foarte bun.

Povestea e aşa: Anglia, anul 2027. Lumea a ajuns o zdreanţă, pentru că toate femeile au devenit infertile. Anglia este singura ţară care mai funcţionează cât de cât, dar nu prea bine nici ea. Şi în tot haosul ăsta, un tip este rugat de fosta lui soţie, ajunsă acum teroristă sau aşa ceva, să ducă o puştoaică într-un oraş de pe malul mării.

Nu zic mai mult, că poate nu l-aţi văzut, şi tot ce aş putea spune v-ar strica distracţia. Vă zic doar să vă uitaţi la el neapărat, că nu vă va părea rău. Cam atât.

Hai vă pup, mă duc în sfârşit la culcare.

Here is link to the mp3 file of the talk I gave on October 23 at the UWM Center for International Education, retitled “The Ethics of Scarcity,” which focuses on the work of John Gray and J. G. Ballard.

From Rotten Tomatoes: 24% Rotten (Average Rating: 4.3/10)

Consensus: Unnecessarily violent and unflinchingly absurd, Law Abiding Citizen is plagued by subpar acting and a story that defies reason.

That quote sums up my feelings exactly. Here are some more choice words on this (wretched) film:

“Law Abiding Citizen is such a lazy action-drama underachiever, it seems unfair to target stars Jamie Foxx and Gerard Butler for bringing their C game.”

And finally,

“Law Abiding Citizen could be the movie of the year, but only if you’re a big fan of stupid.”

Here is an extract. Read the rest here.

The Single Take Process of Children of Men:

Owen’s recently been a part of a couple of films involving special technical processes, and the actor says he’s always aware of what’s going on behind the camera while he’s performing. “It’s one of the elements of making movies that I actually really enjoy. I love the collaboration of doing shots like those in Children of Men because there’s something about filmmaking that, you know, if it was just about putting great directors, great scripts, and great actors together and you’re guaranteed a great film, that’s one thing, but that isn’t the case. There aren’t any rules. There’s something sort of elusive that’s out of any individual’s control that makes a film work or not work, and when you’re doing one of those hugely ambitious long sequences of one shot, it’s a genuine collaboration. It’s everybody pulling together to try and make something happen. The responsibility is a collective one.

 

The strongest memory from the movie was how much, how closely I had to work with the [camera] operator on those sequences. We would rehearse for a very, very long time and it was very painstaking and specific. But then when we come to shoot it, it has to feel like we’re catching it on the run. You’ve got to feel like you’re in the thick of it and it’s all about pacing. If you hold a beat a bit too long, it will suddenly feel a bit manipulative. Like, ‘He’s held there so we see the tank just over his right shoulder.’ We work very, very specifically about what we want to see and what we want to catch. Then when we go for it, we’ve got to shape that up and keep an energy that is much looser than that.

 

They’re very adrenalized, those sequences, because there’s huge resets. It’s like some of those big ones are four, five-hour resets to try and go again for a take like that. So everybody is very adrenalized, gearing up to go in for one of those takes, and there’s something just a bit magical. I think that technically some of this film is pretty staggering. The operator…most of the film is hand-held and the operator did a really incredible job, I think.”

Children of Men (2006) presents an apocalyptic narrative in which the hope for redemption relies on the formation and expansion of new communities. Director Alfonso Cuarón invents a realistic, modern Armageddon by playing on contemporary fears about environmental destruction, nuclear warfare, terrorist attack, and the sense of cultural loss that accompanies rapid globalization. The film relies on Christian theological symbols to propose a new kind of messianism – one in which many messiahs will collectively restore human sacrality and fertility by dismantling rigid systems of social control. By envisioning the apocalyptic world as one that dehumanizes outsiders, Children of Men is able to merge religious messianic motifs with a cultural critique of political borders and ideologies of exclusion.

Read the article here.

Hunter Baker is a sharp dude out of Houston Baptist University who just published a piece on the Salvo magazine website entitled “Facts Evasion: When it Comes to Sex, the Left Hates Science.” I commend the piece to you–it’s apologetically quite useful.  Hunter just published The End of Secularism, I might add, which will make you much smarter than you are now if you read it.

In Hunter’s article, he takes aim at the common misconception that the political left works from a scientific standpoint on matters of social policy while conservatives work from a merely ideological perspective.  His article makes several excellent points, and I’m going to block quote a big section of it because it is highly worth your time as a thoughtful Christian person engaging cultural matters for the glory of Christ:

How well does it work to encourage promiscuous sex accompanied by birth control pills and condom use? Ask an obstetrician-gynecologist about the incidence of sexually transmitted diseases in young women. The rate is exceptionally high. We may well reap a demographic disaster of infertility down the road. Let’s pray that P. D. James, who wrote The Children of Men, is no prophet.

Abortions continue to be performed in huge numbers despite the past assurances of some on the left that modern birth control would eliminate the need for the grisly procedure. And of the children who are born, an alarmingly high number are born to single mothers. As a group, these children are substantially more likely to do poorly in school, abuse drugs, commit crimes, require governmental assistance, and serve time in jail—and to see the cycle repeated when they have children of their own.

Is it a scientific outlook that would maintain that this state of affairs is somehow conducive to human flourishing? Or would the evidence-driven observer be more likely to affirm that sex within marriage is far more advantageous to women than promiscuity? A more logical mind could also see very well that social support for traditional marriage would help with the recurring problem of convincing men to raise their offspring rather than simply siring them.

And let us dwell for a moment on the record of the secular left’s “rational” approach in the matter of procreation. In the case of the unborn child, for example, pro-choicers for a long time stubbornly clung to the notion that the child inside the womb was no more than a cluster of cells, undifferentiated tissue, and/or a tumor-like growth. They maintained this stance long after Lennart Nilsson’s landmark photos of fetuses were published in Life magazine in 1965, and even beyond the advent and regular use of ultrasound technology.

It has only been within the past decade, when major corporations began using images of unborn children in their advertising and parents began purchasing ultra-detailed images of their in utero babies, that supporters of broad abortion rights began to abandon the dehumanizing and, yes, anti-scientific language of the fetus as inert matter. Some years ago, the famed feminist Naomi Wolf broke ranks with her side just enough to plead for recognition of the humanity of the fetus, lest the battle be lost through a failure to acknowledge what is obvious to non-ideologues.

The whole piece is worth reading, and Baker’s chief argument is worth noting and using extensively.  We Christians are not behind the 8-ball when it comes to science.  We’re squarely in line with it.  To an extent that we too rarely cite, it is on our side.

Too often we operate culturally from a position of weakness instead of a position of strength.  Selections like this show us the importance of evaluating rhetoric and thinking clearly about science, faith, and the way in which the former, when handled well, serves the latter.

1. .THE GREAT GATSBY.

2. .CLEVER RINGS. Designed by Kiel Mead.

3. .CLASSY BLONDES.

4. .DREE HEMINGWAY. Literary offspring.

5. .THIS PHOTO. AND FAKE COUPLE. AND SHOW.

6. .EPIC MOVIE CREDIT SONGS. When the action ends and the credits roll. That song says so much.

American Beauty: “Because” covered by Elliott Smith

Lost in Translation: “Just Like Honey” by the Jesus and Mary Chain

Children of Men: ” Bring On The Lucie” by John Lennon

Romeo + Juliet: “Exit Music (For A Film)” by Radiohead [written specifically for the purpose]

7. .TRADING HALLOWEEN CANDY.

8. .ADORABLE EXES.

9. .THIS LOFT.

10. .BABY ANIMALS THAT GET TO GROW UP. Read this.

I will now enjoy my vegan Thai food tonight that much more.

Have a beautiful day.

Peace,

Sources: weheartit.com, kielmead.com, imdb.com, hippiefroufrou.blogspot.com

During a random sign on to AIM, Glenn and I got onto the issue of personal TOP TEN FILMS.  I love lists yet I’d never taken the time to assemble a top 10, top 5, or even a generic “Top” movie list!  Eager to know what movies I really do put up at the top based on random criteria, I went to work on a dynamic top 10 movie list and here is what I came up with.

Stephen’s Top Ten Films (in no particular order)

#1- Children Of Men//director: Alfonso Cuaron//starring: Clive Owen//release date: 2006
When I first saw the trailer for this film back in 2006, I flipped shit and knew I had to see it as soon as I was released.  Every trailer, ad, and commercial said “Christmas Day”, but when December 25th rolled around, there was no Children of Men at any theatre I knew of.  Almost every day after Christmas I feverishly searched for information about the movie trying to figure out when exactly I could feast my eyes upon it.  Not until late January did it come to AMC Cantera and at the time I was dating Danielle and she made me wait for her to see it.  Sadly every time we made plans to see it, she got busy and I had to miss it.  Finally one random day where we didn’t have school we were going to go and yet again she had to cancel.  Having no more patience to wait I went by myself and left the movie theatre amazed.  Never before had I seen such an awesome film.  Clive Owen is the perfect actor to portray such a defeated, sensitive, yet always courageous hero.  The imagery of a realistic dystopia was spot-on and I was always craving to see more of the world the actors worked in.  Some of my favorite cinema moments come from COM- which I won’t mention in case of spoilers- but the violent opener and the tear-inducing aftermath of the famous “no-cut action sequence” were both super intense and had me raving about the film long after the credits rolled.  For a haunting vision of the future that is supported by spectacular directing and passionate performances, Children of Men is your movie.

#2- Eternal Sunshine of the Spotless Mind//director: Michel Gondry//starring: Jim Carrey & Kate Winslet//release date: 2004
Oh gosh, I don’t even know where to start on this movie.  It’s imaginative, it’s heart-breaking, it’s beautiful, it’s evocative- it’s perfection in a film.  Writer Charlie Kaufman is a maniacal genius and Michel Gondry is creative beyond definition.  Jim Carrey also proves he is something of a pitch perfect actor in whatever role he’s called to do.  To not see this movie is a disservice to your imagination and intellect.

#3- Lost In Translation//director: Sofia Coppola//starring: Bill Murray & Scarlett Johannson//release date: 2003
The first thing to note about LIT is that you must watch the whole film to appreciate it.  Even a Japan-o-phile like me wasn’t really feeling the movie until the last few moments and when the credits rolled up on screen, everything Ms. Coppola wanted me to feel came rushing at me and left me in a state of wonder.  LIT is a beautiful film about life- about the people we meet and the decisions we make.  While it’s marketed as a comedy, don’t take it as such.  Granted, there are some hilarious moments- but even Braveheart had funny scenes.  Think of Lost In Translation as a ride you take through the neon-explosion that is Japan with characters who feel like people you know/people you WILL meet during your lifetime.  LIT is an experience.

#4- About a Boy//director: the Weitz Brothers//starring: Hugh Grant & Rachel Weiz//release date: 2002
Haha, so, I swear the descending order of release dates is not intentional.  The order was determined by what came to me first.  And in all honesty, seeing as I saw this movie when I was 12, I’m so very surprised that it’s still on my list/how did it get there?  At age 12 I managed to love this movie about intense adult themes (love, suicide, shattered dreams) and have it still entertain me seven years later.  About a Boy is just a great tale about a man… and a boy… who are totally different from each other and cross paths only to find a very unlikely friendship in each other.  The British flair combined with a phenomenal soundtrack from Badly Drawn Boy mixed in with the awesome performances by Hugh Grant, Toni Colette, Rachel Weiz, and everyone else involved make for a movie I can watch over and over.  What’s more is I actually love the book as well which proves to be a damn faithful adaptation with just enough GOOD tweaks in the storyline to make both the movie and the book worth enjoying on their own terms.

#5- 9 Souls//director: Toshiyaka Toyoda//starring: Ryuhei Matsuda//release date: 2003
9 Souls is a wonderful film I stumbled upon thanks to Netflix.  9 Souls is the story of nine prisoners who escape from jail to go in search of a treasure that one of their deceased inmates left behind.  While on the journey the nine men end up confronting parts of their pasts that present new tribulations for them to face.  It’s in these trials that the beauty and tragedy of humanity is captured marvelously.  One scene makes me show the most bittersweet smile I could ever display and another makes me cry without fail.  Another scene bedazzles me with tender sincerity juxtaposed to raw lust and another scene makes me cringe as it captures intense violence extremely candidly.  Alongside a brilliant, evocative soundtrack, 9 souls is a cinematic gem to behold and no fan of foreign films can pass it up.

#6- Away We Go//director: Sam Mendes//starring: John Krasinski//release date: 2009
It was between AWG and Almost Famous to see who actually made it to the top 10, and clearly we know who the winner is.  I chose Away We Go because of what it makes me feel.  When I see AWG, I see so so much of myself in John’s character and the journey him and his wife are taking to find a place to settle down is so wonderful to watch unfold.  The first time I saw it I thought of Harriet and I extensively.  In fact, that’s why I love the movie so much!  Parts of it are straight out of our lives while other parts are great simulations as to what’s probably going to happen.  Then the second time I saw it when I TOOK Harriet with me, all we could do was smile and laugh, staring at one another whenever something touching or comical happened.  We looked at each other because that’s exactly who we saw on screen: ourselves.  And with a running time of less than an hour and a half, AWG’s brevity allows me to watch this movie over and over without complaint.

#7- District 9//director: Neil Blomkamp//starring: Sharito Copley//release date: 2009
The allure of District 9 is that it’s a realistic sci-fi movie.  Everything feels like it could happen (or DID happen for that matter) and when I left the movie theatre I was discussing it endlessly with Harriet, going over theories about the different plotlines, talking about all the super sweet scenes- D9 was a ride from start to finish that couldn’t have pleased me more.  I loved how it started out like a documentary then seamlessly became a polished, well-directed film.  Most people didn’t care for that aspect, but I found it inventive and totally appropriate for the story at hand.  Something to note would be the special effects.  They were superior to any other movie I have ever seen and only one scene had a little goof-up that was hardly such.  The rest of the movie felt flawless, having the alien cultures blend seamlessly with real life footage.  I am awaiting the DVD release for this movie rather intensely and cannot wait to enjoy not only the movie, but all the special features I hope that will answer the questions I have concerning the film’s production.

#8- Hitch//director: Andy Tennant//starring: Will Smith//release date: 2005
Hitch is basically the ultimate romantic comedy (next to my #9 choice).  It paints love in a romantic light and leaves behind the lust that most movies accentuate.  Will Smith, as Hitch, even plainly states he is about getting GOOD guys a chance to BE with a good girl- not just hook up with her and go home.  The true success of this movie comes from the cast: Will Smith, Eva Mendes, Kevin James.  I’ve seen this movie well over five times (which is a LOT for me) and never really get tired of it.  The story about a man who messed up his first love trying to help nice guys get their chance at true love is heartwarming and unique and lets Hitch stand high above the other movies of its caliber.

#9- Love Actually//director: Richard Curtis//starring: Hugh Grant//release date: 2003
Oy.  Where to begin with this film dubbed as the “ultimate romantic comedy”?  It’s an ensemble British movie that tells various different stories of love among intertwined persons that is nothing less than amazing.  When LA first came out I couldn’t see it because of the R-rating.  However, senior year I finally sat through it and couldn’t believe how good it was.  There’s really only one way to describe LA, and that’s to say it’s entertaining.  Every “story” within the movie is entertaining and quite frankly, I was totally invested in each one.  I wanted to see what happens so badly!  Oh, did I mention it’s really a Christmas movie too?  Hoorah!  Harriet and I actually made it a tradition of ours to watch it every Christmas.  I probably won’t be with her this year for Christmas… but we’ll definitely sit in our respective homes and watch it together.  I adore this movie to pieces- so much so that it’s a part of a family tradition.

#10- My Neighbors the Yamadas//director: Isao Takahata//starring: Jim Belushi (English dub)//release date: 1999
The best way to describe “the Yamadas” is to call it charming.  I have watched this movie so many times I’ve lost count.  I love turning this movie on when I just want to sit back and relax.  I first saw it after my first day of work at Dominick’s in 2006.  I was beat tired and came home to left over Domo 77 fried rice and had myself a White Tea snapple.  It was about 4 in the afternoon when I started it, took a wonderful nap while watching, and upon finishing it completely, I didn’t quite feel anything towards it right away…  However, when I returned it to Netflix I realized I wanted to see it again!  If my memory serves me right I DID rent it again almost right away, watched it in full for the second time and fell completely in love.  From there I demanded to own it and upon acquiring the DVD for my own personal collection, I watched it once or twice a month for a good year or so.  The short, beautifully animated vignettes about a family (the Yamadas) and their adventures is a joy to watch and never gets old.  The opening sequence about how the mother and father got married and have children is possibly the best part.  Director Isao Takahata uses imaginative imagery like cutting through a bamboo stalk to find a baby showered in golden rays as a way to illustrate the son’s birth.  These delightful analogies always bring a smile to my face and without fail I try locating the cute, inspiring song that plays in the background.  In short, My Neighbors the Yamadas is a great movie that never loses its charm.  It’s a movie I will hold onto for the rest of my life and hope to make a Family Favorite with my children some day.

And that’s my list!  Let me know what you thought.  What are your favorite movies?  What do you agree with here?  Disagree with?  I’d love your feedback!  Thanks for reading.

The R1 DVD release of Alfonso Cuaron’s Children of Men features a 6-minute commentary from Zizek. Here it is-

(Background/Foreground)
“For me, Children of Men, I would say that the true focus of the film is there in the background, and it’s crucial to leave it as a background. Here comes his true art, Cuaron’s. It’s the paradox of what I would call this anamorphosis. If you look at the thing too directly at the oppressive social dimension, you don’t see it. You can see it in an oblique way only if it remains in the background. Children of Men is in a strange way a remake of Y Tu Mama Tambien. What attracted me immensely in to ‘Y Tu Mama Tambien’ is this wonderful tension between foreground and background. That is to say if you look at the film superficially, foreground, it’s just a sexual adventure, with desperate ending, but you can not say it’s really a movie about two young boys rediscovering their sexuality, the meaning of their life, whatever. It’s the other way round. You see this absurdity of their life. It’s so clear that the way they experience their sexual traumas and so on, is against the background, it throws the light on these signs of oppression, and it’s the same, I think in this film. It’s not really that all this infertility and so on is just a pretext for, I don’t know, the hero’s inner journey from this apathetic anti-hero mode to more active engagement and so on. No, it’s…This fate of the individual here remains a kind of prism through which you see the background even more sharply.”

(All That’s Solid Melts Into the Air)
“I think that the film gives the best diagnosis of ideological despair of late capitalism, of a society without history. This, I think, is a true despair of the film. The true infertility is the very lack of meaningful historical experience, and that’s why I like this elegant point in the film of importing all the works of art. All those classical statues are there, but they are deprived of a world. They’re totally meaningless because what does it mean to have a statue of Michelangelo or whatever? It only works if it signals a certain world, and when this world is lacking, it’s nothing. It is against this background, I think that the film approaches the topic of immigration and so on. By setting the movie in England, only there, despair can be felt. England’s one of the few countries in the world that doesn’t have a constitution. Because it can rely on its substance of traditions, you don’t need it written. And in such a country, the loss of this historical dimension, the loss of this substance of meaning is felt much worse.”

(Novel and Film Adaptation)
“Two changes between the novel and the film I want to mention. It’s to replace the anti-hero hero’s best friend, Jasper. In the novel, he’s just a kind of retired ex-official, whatever. Here, to make him into this, and everybody who is the after ‘68 generation knows what this is, this old, obscene, impotent retired hippie person…In all its ambiguity, on the one hand, many old leftists have fond memories of this generation, but, at the same time, there is something infertile, ridiculous about this. I think that the decadence started there in a way. This is a stroke of absolute genius. Another thing that I immensely appreciate, and this is a very risky thing to do, is to avoid sex. Here we have fertility reinstalled, but not through the form of a couple being created. The fertility is spiritual fertility. It’s to find the meaning of life and so on. So these are the reasons again for my admiration of the film, that precisely because it doesn’t directly make some kind of political, moralistic parable and so on and so on, it works perfectly.”

(Rootlessness)
“What I like is that the solution is the boat. It doesn’t have roots. It’s rootless. It floats around. This is, for me, the meaning of this wonderful metaphor, boat. The condition of the renewal means you cut your roots. That’s the solution. Look at films like Children of Men. This is the future. Only films like this can guarantee that cinema as art will really survive.