Horror. A police officer investigates a missing child on an obscure island of Puget Sound, only to discover the island is controlled by a mysterious pagan cult. This is a story that shows Feminism/neo-paganism/Gaia Earth worship as evil. Hollywood always shows patriarchy as the oppressive subjugation of women by abusive men. But this movie is rather unique in that it communicates the opposite: that matriarchy is the oppressive subjugation of men by abusive women. In this story, little school girls are taught to recite that the purist form of the male is the phallic symbol. Men’s tongues appear to be cut out and they are reduced to breeders and physical laborers who are forcefully uneducated. These men-haters of this isolated isle disparage patriarchy and then attempt to replace one form of perceived oppression of women with their own oppression of men. The writer/director, Neil LaBute uses this commune to make his point that the “earth” religion that Wiccans, witches and radical feminists all point to as the glorious original pristine Garden of Eden is actually a Garden of Snakes that is rooted in the same human sacrifice that all paganism is ultimately rooted in. A sacrifice that is a twisted parody of the need for atonement that the living God has embedded into the universe. This is a unique and original voice. Put into Pomo lingo: This story is a subversive narrative that delegitmizes radical feminism and its neopagan counterpart as gynophilic male-hating imperialism.
Author: admin
The Path to 9/11
Espionage Miniseries. The story of how 9-11 came about based on the 9-11 Commission report. Directed by David Cunningham, the director of my movie, “To End All Wars.” This is going to be on TV, but it is so astonishingly powerful, that I had to blog about it. It completes the incredible “trilogy” of 9-11 movies that I would say every American should see. The others being “United 93” and “World Trade Center.”
“The Path to 9-11” shows the political realities that the other two neglect. Shot like the series 24 in handheld very shakey style, this 6 hour extravaganza is a miracle any Hollywood Network would actually make it. Why? Because it shows George Tenet of the CIA, and Sandy Berger of National Security and Bill Clinton are all directly responsible for Osama Bin Laden being alive and carrying out 9-11. (It reveals Clinton’s sexual immorality being a distraction from his ability to lead, in missing the opportunity to actually catch or kill Bin Laden. It shows that Clinton and his administration had the opportunity to catch Bin Laden and he did not give the order to do so (This is a compilation of several events). This is why Clinton has sought to persuade ABC to re-edit the program. It shows that the US Embassy head in Yemen (played brilliantly by Patricia Heaton) was so concerned about “offending” Islam and following their social customs with sensitivity training that she quashed the investigations after the USS Cole bombing. It shows that “racial profiling” was responsible for missing the terrorists. It shows that the little people like a Canadian border guard and an airplane pilot educator were heros because they ignored the rules against racial profiling and caught Moussaui and another terrorist. It shows that the Clinton administration, including Madeline Albright, betrayed the “only true friend” we had, the head of the Northern Alliance, and failed to support him when he needed our help the most. It portrays Richard Clarke as a hero who kept telling everyone this was going to happen and we should attack the terrorists and take them out, and no one listened. And it is not one sided in it’s critique either, for it shows the capture of Ramze Youssef and Moussaui, so it shows the positive movements of the Clinton administration as well. But it also critiques the Bush administration in showing that embarrassing moment for Bush at the elementary school during the attacks, and how the military was confused and incompetent in scrambling their jets. And it also shows Condi Rice “demoting” Clarke into a lesser job, when he was the one guy who was pointing out the danger and what they should do. So it is not a politically biased movie.
There is a beautiful moment which highlights the difference between Islam and Christianity. As firefighters are carrying people out of the WTC towers, a priest, dressed in firefighting garb is heard to be praying for the men who are heroically rescuing others as well as for the victims to keep them safe. This God of mercy and grace and self sacrifice juxtaposed against the previous 5 hours of Muslims praying to their god of war and rationalizing hatred and murder. EVERY AMERICAN MUST SEE THIS FILM. Thank you, David Cunningham and the writer, Cyrus Nowrasteh, for your courageous storytelling.
P.S. I just heard that ABC is re-editing the film in response to Clinton’s demand to make him look better. And that some US Senator has threatened to pull ABC’s license if they don’t pull the show. Wow, censorship. Where is the ACLU? That’s what I want to know. Now, let’s see, do you think ABC can be relied upon to tell the truth about anything when it capitulates to politicians like this? And then this lying Sandy Berger, who is a criminal who stole classified documents from National Security Archives and stuffed them in his pants to steal them — and this criminal scumbag is complaining about truthful portrayal? Jeesh. And by the way, the scene that Clinton is griping about, is a dramatization of the fact that the Administration failed to take several opportunities to catch Bin Laden (As documented in the 9/11 Commission Report, page 136-137).
The Descent
Horror. A group of women go spelunking in an underground cave and fall victim to evolved human predators crawling around in the dark. This is the same exact story as The Cave, which I blogged on last year. But this one is better. The premise is just as ridiculous because it maintains that some humans evolved deep in caverns into blind grocking spiderlike creatures without any real humanity, and yet, they somehow had access to the surface in order to find prey to catch and eat. But alas, it’s only a horror movie and I don’t consider that all that bad of a contradiction for horror.
The point of the movie is much deeper. It is about what makes us human or not, and the answer is not hopeful. For in evolution, there is no ultimate difference. We are all reducible to our animal natures, our biology. And that is what this film suggests. There is a dilemma between the heroine and the “action woman” of the piece. Evidently, the “action woman” had an affair with the heroine’s husband before he got killed in a car accident. The action woman regrets it to some degree, though not totally, since she still carries around a token of the husband’s betrayed lust in the form of a piece of jewelry. Anyway, as the monsters start to attack, the action woman and the heroine turn into battling mommas, while the others fall apart. Only the heroine turns a bit more bloody in her rage.
So action momma refuses to leave when she finds the exit until she goes back for the heroine. This is her redemption or human conscience and guilt over her friend. Unfortunately, the heroine has discovered her friend’s betrayal and when she shows up at the escape exit, and have the last chance to leave, the heroine wounds the action woman and leaves her to be eaten by the monsters. This to me is a clear attempt to be consistent with an atheist evolutionary worldview that claims that morality is an arbitrary social convention, since these monsters, separated from the rest of society simply are reduced to survival of the fittest. The movie could have been a heroic affirmation of humanity if, at that moment of revelation between the women, the heroine would forgive “action woman,” and they escape. Because you see that would be what would make them different from the raw animal tooth and claw of their predators. The ability to forgive would be the sense of morality that humanizes us, that is, separates us from the rest of the animal kingdom as created in the image of God. That is what would give the characters their true “victory” to survive beyond the beasts. But instead, the storytellers chose to have the heroine capitulate to revenge and murder, to in fact become like the beasts that were chasing them.
This materialist mythology spoils the movie for me and shows just how unsatisfying atheist evolutionary storytelling is if one is consistent with one’s worldview. There is no heroism or hope or atonement, there is only survival of the fittest and revenge.
The Illusionist
Romantic Mystery. In turn-of-the-century Vienna, a magician uses his skills to win the heart of a woman above his class status. Paul Giametti plays the police captain who tells the story and is torn between his loyalty to a corrupt prince and justice. I found this story engrossing. Although one could tell that all the illusions were simply camera tricks, not true magical skill, which sort of made it harder to believe. On the other hand, it was still a great story of love and the pressure of social standing.
World Trade Center
Rescue Drama. Based on the true story of two cops who survived the collapse of the twin towers and their rescue from the rubble. I must admit, I was amazed that Oliver Stone made this film. This is a very human exploration of courage, hope, pain and heroism that touched my soul with the value of family, faith and country that is usually feverishly attacked by Stone. He should be applauded for the beauty which he has created in this film. Perhaps one of the reasons why his conspiracy theorizing is absent is because he chose to focus exclusively on individual New Yorker’s reactions to the events and almost completely avoided the bigger picture of what is happening, even to the extent of reducing the planes hitting to a mere shadow on a sky scraper passing by, and the sound and thunder of the hits from a distance. Of course, it is entirely possible that Stone may believe the insane theories that the American government or “the Jews” did it, and this is merely the ant’s eye view of the common man. Be that as it may, this was a truly great story and film.
What I love about stories like this is the existential factor that places the heros in such peril that you project yourself into them and wonder how you might face death, or wonder how much of your own life you have squandered in missing what’s really important.
It is important to note that the Marine who went alone into the rubble was positively portrayed as a man of Christian faith, courage and duty, who entered the rubble as a symbol of how the Marines are the first to arrive and often unspoken heroes in that sense. When he walked into those ruins alone and willing to die to help find survivors, it may have been the most moving part of the film for me. He says, “You are my mission,” to the trapped officers, which reminded me of the symbolic heroism of Saving Private Ryan, “The mission is a man.” So there is this entirely positive symbolic portrayal of the military in this film that is diametrically opposed to his other films. Why? I don’t know. Maybe he considers the military only good if it rescues people from the aftermath of evil, rather than being a positive force against evil on the battlefield. But then again, this good Marine says that there will be pay back and the story notes that he went on to two tours of duty in Iraq, so that softens that theory. Anyway, thank you, Mr. Stone, for portraying Christian faith and the Marines as positive in this picture. God knows, the negative stereotypes in movies are more typical.
Some may claim that the heroism is weakened because the cops that got buried in the rubble didn’t do anything, they just went in and got covered. But this misses the point, They DID act heroically. They went in to the building to help. Sure, it was their job in a way, but it was also a choice. Not everyone went. And they were there trying to help people, so they are clearly heroes.
As for those who say, “it’s too soon,” Balderdash! It’s not soon enough. We need to revisit September 11 intimately, because already too many people have forgotten and have reduced the war on terror to political grandstanding and party politics.
V For Vendetta
Sci-Fi espionage. Anti-Christ bigoted hate-speech. A futuristic dystopic England that is ruled over by maniacal Christian fanatics is undone by an anarchic terrorist. (The Public Relations mouthpiece uses God talk in his speeches, the symbol of the state is a double cross, and the government posters all say, “Unity through faith,” an obvious reference to “One nation under God” Some government agents quote Proverbs, “Spare the rod, spoil the child” to justify beating the hero with a police baton). It is entirely beyond rational explanation how people like these storytellers, the Wachowskis, can be so blind as to see the world the exact opposite of the way it is. It is on the level of insanity. Or rather, shall we say, they are themselves trapped in the Matrix.
Do these Wachowskis have any clue that it is Muslim countries that would chop off the Wachowski brothers’ heads for their alternate sexual lifestyles? They are worrying about some non-existant Christian government in a fever-brained hallucination of the future oppressing gays when actual existing MUSLIM governments are actually oppressing and killing gays and Christians right now! My God, these kids must have gone to public school.
Actual Muslim totalitarian regimes of genocidal maniacs right now all through the earth killing Christians and outlawing the Bible, and the Ws are “sending the alarm” to watch out for Christian regimes THAT DO NOT EXIST as if they would make Islam and the Koran illegal? This cannot be mere stupidity that causes this kind of upside down view. It can only be pure hatred and bigotry. It boggles the mind, But then, when you are Nietzschean, as these blokes are, you give up your mind for a Dionysian blood bath of hatred and the will to power – all in the name of freedom. Interesting, that their hero Nietzsche’s views actually led to the very totalitarian Nazism that they warn about in Christianity.
Interesting that the V hero says “words are more powerful than truncheons” and that in words lie the power of truth, but according the THEIR Nietzsche, there is no truth to words but mere will to power, the very thing they accuse others of. To Nietzsche, there is no absolute truth behind words, only perspective mastering words to enslave others. V says that enough people blowing up buildings can change the world. So the Ws are actually supporters of terrorism and murder.
There were a few moments of truth, such as the comments that “people should not fear their governments, governments should fear their people,” and “ideas are bullet proof.” And guess who said comments like that in real life history, W bros? Those lunatic Bible believing religious fanatics who founded our country on Christian ideas that provided your freedom to spout hate speech.
The Lady in the Water
Mystery Thriller. A pool man at an apartment complex discovers at nymph-like woman in his water, who is a mysterious figure of change in people’s lives. In fact, she is to mystically influence a man who will write an important book that will change the country in its effect on a future leader. But there’s one problem, there is a beast that wants to kill her before she can find her freedom. The movie starts with Neanderthal cave-like drawing animations of a New Age myth of how “land people” lost their way into wars and evil by losing their touch with the “water people.” So if we can only connect with the water people, we will find redemption and cure the evil in the world. Being a Shyamalan film, this is unapologetically mythical. So fans of realism will react with dread as obvious connections are made of the various allies that are predestined to help the nymph achieve her freedom. The Guardian, the Healer, the Circle of Sisters, the Interpreter, etc. I actually liked that about it.
It was also quite self-aware. A writer character in the story helps Paul Giamatti discover who should fulfill each of the roles from the characters at the apartment complex. And as he explains, it is an obvious explanation of the literary genre of myth for the viewer. It was a great character because, as a movie critic, he was a cynical know it all, who could not appreciate any movie cause it was all the same and there is nothing new. He just could not appreciate the power of genre. No doubt, a jab at the film critics who don’t like Shyamalan’s movies. A particularly funny moment is when the writer, who is a jerk, is caught in the hallway with the monster and he talks to himself about how this is just like a horror movie, where the jerk gets cornered, but gets away just in time, etc. etc. But of course, he doesn’t. He gets chomped by the monster. A very clever postmodern “Scream-like” play on stories about stories.
Being mythic, this tale has many references to “predestined purpose,” “finding your prupose is a profound thing, but its something that’s not what it seems,” and “man thinks he’s alone, but it’s not true. We’re all connected.” Also, “The universe will give us signs to reveal we’re on the right path.” I really liked how it stresses the quirky uniqueness of each person, with each of their faults, but they turn out to each have unique purpose in working together. The crazy Korean woman who knows the myth that this story embodies and helps Giamatti figure it out; the crossword puzzle guy whose sensitive son turns out to be the code breaker interpreter, the bizarre guy who is building the muscles on only one side of his body becomes the Guardian. And Giamatti, the broken man (from his family’s murder) is the healer in his brokenness. The scene where Paul is supposed to help heal the Nymph, he is supposed to do some kind of incantation, and he doesn’t have any idea what that is, so he just confesses his feelings of failing to his family. This purging of the soul becomes the source of healing. Nice touch. There are these tree monkeys that are the guardians of the laws of the world, who bring retribution on those who do not follow the “rules.” A nice symbolic reference to the lawlike nature of the universe in relation to good and evil.
All this mythic storytelling is really more of the Hindu pantheistic elevation of an impersonal fate-oriented universe invested with magical fortune that Shyamalan was raised to believe than it is a symbolic reference to the living God. New Age gobbledygook. Although, I reckon in true relativistic pantheistic nature, Shyamalan would say that it could be a symbolic reference to God if you like, I don’t think it rings with that kind of connection. At least not to me. This is more of a pantheistic play of magical characters in an impersonal universe that is harmonized in a “mother earth” type of harmony (land and water united) than it could be a reflection of a loving personal Creator who is in control of all things and cares for us—Which is more like his previous movie, Signs. But this only makes my point that Shyamalan’s worldview believes all religions reflect the same ultimate truth, so that is why he can make a “Christian worldview” in one movie, and a pantheistic worldview in another. I really do appreciate though his sense of they mystery of life and indeed, the magic of it all. It’s just a different kind of magic than I believe in. I believe in the Deep Magic of Aslan.
The Devil Wears Prada
Comedy. An unfashionable girl gets a job with the Queen of the fashion industry and is educated in the ways of outer beauty. A thoroughly enjoyable moral tale about fashion as a metaphor for life. Anne Hathaway is brilliant as the neophyte thrust in over her head and Meryl Streep is even more brilliant as the Devil herself. What I liked about this story is that it was pretty fair to the fashion industry, even while critiquing it. That is, the moral was of course that you should be yourself and not some fake façade of nouveau, but it gave the devil her due as well. That is, one scene was the most brilliant in the film is where Ann chuckles at the pettiness and apparent irrelvence of the designer’s design choices. Meryl stops and turns it back on her by describing to Anne, the origins and development of the poor taste turquoise blue in the sweater Anne is wearing, all the way up to the point where Anne buys it in a half price bin, thinking she is making her own choice, without being aware that the entire fashion industry dictated her options to her right down to what she is wearing. It was one of those moments where you say the villain is not all that wrong, though she may be an extreme. Favorite line in the movie, Anne questions Meryl about the legitimacy of the fashion world, and Meryl says to her, “Don’t be ridiculous, everyone wants to be us.” There is a particularly poignant punch to that line that hit me about our culture. That is the entire world of advertising/marketing/fashion simply works because everyone DOES want to be the impossible unattainable icon. Fashion is the deity of perfection which we all desire or are drawn to, whether we know it or not.
What I did not like about the movie is that a triangle is set up between Anne and her current boyfriend, a nobody nothing student of some kind, and a writer of the fashion world that is hitting on Anne. Well, the boyfriend is set up as the guy who represents conviction and the world she left but should have stayed with and the fashion writer represents the false world of temptation into emptiness. And yet, I thought the boyfriend as a loser and undesirable non-convictional man. So, I think their moral was not quite incarnate in that character as depicted. Another failing I think is that Anne sleeps with the fashion guy and then leaves him for the boyfriend, as if that liason did not affect her spirit at all. This was dishonest. Something that The Breakup storytellers were more observant about. In the Breakup, they break up but never sleep with anyone else because the storytellers realize that that changes you in a permanent way and alters the hope for true reconciliation. Not that reconciliation is impossible, but surely that the relationship loses the true unity that it had. Sex is sacramental. It changes you and your relationships forever. It takes a piece of you and loses it to another person. To deny that is dishonest.
Little Miss Sunshine
Quirky Comedy. A family of dysfunctional misfits takes a road trip to bring their little daughter to a beauty pageant for children. This was a fascinating story to me with fascinating characters, and a touching theme about the value of family love and acceptance in the midst of imperfection. Alan Arkin as the 60s hippie grandfather who cusses too much, Greg Kinnear as the Success motivational teacher who is a loser, the brother who reads Nietzsche and hates everyone and takes a vow of silence. Steve Carrell as the gay professor of Proust who tried to commit suicide because of unrequited lust. Toni Collette as the mother and a newcomer as Olive, the little girl who appears to be the only sane one in the family.
What I liked about this film was it’s sense of reality, that none of us are perfect and that love and human connection can occur even within messed up families. More importantly, that perhaps the “functionality” of the “normal world” is maybe not so right or even desirable after all. When they all get to the pageant, it’s a circus of Jon Bene Ramses, strutting their little 6-9 year olds around like Miss America, looking way too adult for their age, and being coaxed to be a commodity of commercial success rather than just being little girls and enjoying life and family. If this is normal life, you can keep it. One of the themes is about how each of us is special and important, even with our quirky dysfunction or problems. At the pageant, Olive is about to be totally humiliated when she does her little dance because the family realizes that all the other girls have professional routines and they know Olive just doesn’t match up to them. So, when Olive starts to be rejected at her dance, the whole family joins her on stage dancing like fools to diffuse and even absorb her rejection. It’s really quite a moving moment of unity within this motley crew called family, and shows their concern for her more than the other parents who have culled their little girls to be things of entertainment.
What I did not like about it is that the dance that Olive had learned was from her grandfather, who was a dirty old man. So Olive does a strip dance. Okay, she has a sequined little outfit underneath, so it is not a pedophile thing, but the point is that it is a truly immoral thing and NOT a worthy thing to support in the little girl. This element sullied the moral of family support. We simply should not support such impropriety in little girls, it will destroy them if we do. Also, another scene tries to create a moment of family unity, when the father, who is obsessed with being a winner and not a loser, challenges Olive not to eat her ice cream because it makes people fat and fat people are losers, or more precisely, the Miss Americas that she idolizes do not eat ice cream, so if she wants to become a winner like them, then she shouldn’t. The other family members mock and deride the dad as insensitive and they all take a spoonful of ice cream to get her to take some as well. Later, the little girl asks a Miss America if she likes ice cream and she says, yes! The point here is that I think the filmmakers intended this to be a moral statement about the obsessive preoccupation with health as destructive on children’s psyches. But I have a completely different moral compass that says that the epidemic of obesity in children today – and it is an epidemic – is caused precisely by this politically correct rejection of guilt and elevation of the impulses. After all, it’s what all addicts do to each other, comfort each other in their problem. The father was actually right and was in the better interest of the child. She was already chubby, which indicated that she was already eating TOO MUCH CRAP (read: SUGAR). So, yes, commodification of women is wrong, but so is psychobabble about making children feel good and giving them whatever they want instead of teaching them discipline and giving them what they need.
Click
Romantic Comedy. A family man discovers a magical “universal remote” that allows him to fast forward through undesirable parts of his life. But tragedy strikes when the remote gets stuck and he can’t stop it from fast forwarding all the way to his old age. This is a brilliant touching story that made me deeply consider my own life and the things that I neglect now that I will regret at the end of life. I absolutely love these movies that do this to me. They take you to face death so you reevaluate what you are doing with your life. Too crude for kids, but some very poignant truths about the simply profundity of smelling the roses of life and making family important in your life choices.