When I saw the title my first thought was, “Why is it plural? A movie about John Dillinger starring the illustrious talented Johnny Depp should clearly be called, ‘Public Enemy.’ Unless of course, Michael Mann is going to make a moral equivalency argument that the government that hunted down Dillinger was just as “criminal” or immoral as Dillinger. Therefore, the real public enemies are Hoover and his FBI gang.” And this is what I believe Mann has tried to do. Dillinger is depicted as a man without a country in that he is a Romantic, a “criminal with a heart of gold”: he doesn’t take individuals’ money at the bank, only bank money; He is a devoted and gentle lover of one woman in a world of sleaze; and he lives for the moment, being fiercely loyal to his friends. He doesn’t look beyond tomorrow, so eat, drink and be merry for tomorrow we die. This existential worldview is depicted in the movie as being anachronistic in a modernizing era as crime syndicates learn to build a regular established illegal income through gambling rather than dangerous one-off bank robbing. Crime has lost its romance of the individual and become big business. Dillinger cannot continue to exist in this world with his fun loving devil may care Robin Hood romanticism. If you don’t change with the times, you will die, survival of the fittest. J. Edgar Hoover is depicted as a fool without any experience, therefore unworthy of his position. And the “good guy” tracking down Dillinger, Melvin Pervis, is depicted as cold and emotionless, a man of science who represents the future of the FBI, as he relies on new scientific techniques of forensics to track down bad guys, thus taking out all the glory of the human intuition. Pervis’ henchmen beat Dillinger’s woman, making them look more cruel than Dillinger. The Untouchables, this is NOT, as the good guys are portrayed as villainous and traitorous as the bad guys, in fact, quite often, simply stupid or neanderthal. So this is also a movie about the death of the romantic notion of Robin Hood redistributive justice in favor of the modern scientific method (forensics) and the big business of criminal syndicates. The real public enemies in this movie, as embodied in the FBI characters as well as crime syndicates are Enlightenment science and “corporatism” that has crushed the individual zest for life.
Action
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.
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.
Superman Returns
Comic Book Action. Superman returns to earth after a five year absence of soul searching and psychoanalysis. “I have sent you, my only son,” “The son becomes the father and the father, the son.” With these words, Jor-El, an obvious derivative of a name for God in Hebrew (“El”), casts this new installment of the Superman franchise into its original religious mythical status. Singer, in an attempt to bring another unique twist to the comic book saga, does what is original in our secularized society, but is actually old hat to us religious people. He emphasizes the deity aspect of the caped crusader (and for that matter, all superheroes). One character likens the Superman situation to Prometheus and the gods. To which, Lex Luthor, the villain responds, “The gods are selfish beings, who don’t share their powers with mankind.” Thus expressing the hubris of all humanity alienated in sin from their Creator.
Lois Lane gets a Nobel Peace Prize for her article “Why the world doesn’t need Superman,” thus illuminating the real life tragedy that Nobel Peace Prizes are more about reflecting the hegemony of political power than promoting actual Peace. Oh, kinda like Yassir Arrafat getting a Peace Prize, maybe. In one particularly powerful moment of the film, Superman flies up into the stratosphere and he hears the cacophony of billions of people in need of his saving powers. He then brings Lois Lane up there (How she is able to breathe at this altitude, Superman only knows) to show her his response to her claim that “the world doesn’t need a savior and neither do I.” He tells her, “Everyday, I hear people crying for one.” This was particularly moving to me because I have thought of this “God’s-eye view of the world of pain and evil many times, and this scene captured it so beautifully.
There is also a resurrection scene where Superman is dying in the hospital bed after being infected with Kryptonite. But then, they go to the room to see how he is doing, and alas! The stone is rolled away and the body is gone! Or rather, the window is open and Superman has flown away.
Unfortunately, regardless of some of this beautiful religious correlation, I think that the Savior mythology is more akin to The Da Vinci Code than the New Testament. This is more a Gnostic Jesus of Joseph Campbell than a Hebrew one of the Four Gospels. Because, here, Superman fathers a child with his “Mary Magdalene,” Lois, just as he was fathered (the son becomes the father), who of course, has superpowers, thus affirming a mythology of Christ as an office that is appropriated by a succession of avatars (Much like the Mask of Zoro handed on to the next generation), than an individual who is the culmination of all history and hope.
But I still think it’s better than a secularized Superman.
Mission Impossible 3
Action Adventure. Tom Cruise must rescue his new wife from the clutches of an evil criminal who wants some secret weapon that Cruise has. Well, in terms of action, it delivers, but so what. Most of these James Bond movies have a cliché criminal who wants to take over the world with some elaborate plot. This one, you don’t even know what it is about. The McGuffin that Cruise is trying to retrieve has some biohazard markings on it, but we never know what it is. All we find out is the conspiracy theorizing that an Executive branch representative is trying to sell the biohazard thing, which is basically a WMD to some country that will then allow the US to invade it in the name of WMDs and establish democracy, because “that’s what we do best,” the Judas betrayer says. So this is a not-so-subtle political agenda by the storytellers that the US is empire building in the name of democracy. Anyway, it had some good stuff about courage and loyalty and trust under high pressure. But ultimately forgettable to me because it lacked the real humanity that can make an action movie so much more.
United 93
Terrorist Thriller. This docudrama recounting of the true story of United Flight 93 on that fateful day of 9/11, is the most important movie for America in years. Every American should see this film. These people are the heros of this generation. I am not exaggerating. These people are the heartland of America and they are what makes America great. When they discovered that these cowardly Muslim terrorists were going to kill them, these normal everyday people like you and me, stood up and fought back. They did it with knives and forks and extinguishers. They rose up together as one and fought evil. And they saved America. These people died for our country, folks, and that is no exaggeration.
This is a training film for every American. It is the only way to stop this evil. Just like Hitler. Hitler had to be killed or he would have killed millions more and enslaved the rest (just like radical islam). Appeasement would not work.
And to think that it was ordinary Americans who saved the Capitol, the most important of all the symbols that were attacked that day. That is why it is so mythic. And they did by fighting evildoers, not by appeasing them. Very excellent point in the film when the German passenger was telling everyone to appease the terrorists and do what they say and everything would be all right. Yes, this is Europe.
My one problem with it was that it focused too much on the technical and distant side of the air traffic controllers and the NORAD people. I wanted more of the personal. I wanted to see a bit of Todd Beamer’s life and the other guys who stormed those cowards. I wanted to know their humanness before they did this heroic act. I would have loved to see what Todd’s and some of the other’s goals were that day on their way to the airport, or whatever. It would have even been better to replace some of the documentary type tedious technical details in the air traffic controller’s room with more of the character’s development in the plane. But it was still phenomenal, AND MUST BE SEEN BY EVERY AMERICAN.
Ultraviolet
Sci-fi female action. The human race has been compromised by biological viruses that turned some into vampires. Now, the state has almost completely eradicated the vampires, but one of them fights against the huge police state machine to bring freedom for her persecuted minority. Well, this is all just a little too goofy to be able to suspend one’s disbelief. Poor persecuted vampires? Come on. And the plot is very convoluted so that I could not really tell you what it was about anyway. This is part of a series of movies, probably playing off the intelligence of the Matrix series, that have these labyrinthine plots of mythology and detail that become too confusing to follow. Aeon Flux was exactly like this. So the fight scenes are okay, but you really don’t know any of the characters and so you don’t really care about any of them, let alone, Ultraviolet. Therefore, it results in a very expensive feast of BORING special effects action sequences. I was literally yawning and talking to my movie buddy through the film about other stuff.
And the other problem is that Ultraviolet is an invincible heroine, which means that her fight scenes are boring because she never appears to be able to lose, so you don’t really root for her because there is no risk, no humanness to her. As every increasing numbers of soldiers array against her and she says, “You’re all going to die,” I said to myself, “whatever.” And it just gets ludicrous that they pile up in the hundreds against her. When will these action filmmakers realize that its good story that ultimately makes a good film, and lots of box office bucks?