The Great Debaters

Set in the 1930's, The Great Debaters is a movie portraying a debate team from an all black college in Texas that wins its way to make a name for itself, culminating with an invitation to debate at Havard University. The movie was inspired by the story of the debate coach of Wiley College, Melvin B. Tolson (Denzel Washington), who taught his students to use words in the ring of social justice, instead of violence. Faced with racial slanders, prison threats and even lynching, the coach encourages his students to see God as their judge and their only enemy being that of not speaking the truth.

Overall it is an entertaining movie, no doubt parading a strong cast. However its weakest point lay where it should have had its strongest: the debates themselves are cliche and predictable. For a movie boasting the title of The Great Debaters, it was disappointing to watch the young team discuss issues like welfare, civil disobedience, violence and anti-capitalism (all being in favor of the above), using emotion to appeal to the audience, which is the first thing taught NOT to do when debating. Instead of basing the debates on reason and evidence, the movie focused on feelings and victim-hood, contradicting the underlying principle of speaking the truth. Feelings are relative; the truth is not. It would have been better if the intrinsic dignity of man was highlighted, rather than the tears of a black mother when she looks into her child's eyes, who is down-trodden with hunger, for the same holds true for a white mother whose child is hungry.

In short, debate should be objective and reasonable, not subjective and hyperbolized with emotion. It is an intellectual process of critical thinking -- something Hollywood's techniques of dumbing everything down for the big screen has yet to prove it can accomplish.

Sweeney Todd: The Demon Barber of Fleet Street

Johnny Depp, Helena Bonham Carter, Alan Rickman: big names remaking a classic tale dripping with blood, betrayal and revenge. The new film, due in theatres this month, is Sweeney Todd: The Demon Barber of Fleet Street.

Benjamin Barker (Depp) is a carefree barber living in England. A wicked judge, played by Rickman, tries to seduce Barker's wife and in turn has the barber exiled to Australia. When Barker finally returns to England under the phony name of Sweeney Todd, he has only one thing on his mind: revenge. He doubles up with Mrs. Lovett (Helena Bonham Carter), a pie shop owner who knew Barker and his family´s history from the years past. The two form a pact in which Todd slits the throats of his unlikable clients and Lovett disposes of them in her minced meat pies -- no doubt an improvement on British cuisine.

Characterized usually as a "musical thriller", the movie is a cinematic version of the broadway musical composed by Stephen Sondheim. Box office sales will show if the Hollywood rendition has the same success as its theatrical counter-part. Being that graphic design can create the perfect murder, soaked in blood and gore, the movie version of Sweeney Todd will most likely take out the "music" and highlight the "thriller" in its description. Would be recommendation: go light on the sweets and popcorn...

JUNO

The movie Juno is a film about a teenager named Juno MacGuff (played by Ellen Page), who after having sex with one of her classmates finds out she is pregnant. She decides against an abortion and simultaneously becomes the laughing stock of her highschool, as she battles to confront the un-expected pregnancy. Her quick tongue and witt, ultimately help her in deciding who are to be the parents of her child.

It is interesting to think what would have happened, if this screenplay had been proposed to directors in Hollywood fifty or sixty years ago. What would the creators of Gone With the Wind, Roman Holiday, or Casablanca have done with a protagonist like, Juno: a pregnant teenager contemplating decisions like abortion and adoption? Hard to say who they would they have cast. Debbie Reynolds or Ingrid Bergman? Audrey Hepburn or Katharine Hepburn for that matter? She was a bit more feisty...

Juno is obviously and unfortunately a movie of our generation. And although her decision to not abort her baby is a good one, I find it hardly believable that she is capable of choosing the "perfect set of parents" for her unborn child. How does she know what good parents are if she is sleeping with her classmates, just for the fun of it? Shouldn't her mother have taught her otherwise? But today nevertheless, with a cute remark and a cheeky attitude, you can become famous on the big screen -- unlike back in the day, when feminine ladies and strong beauties were the stars of the show.

BELLA

Winner of the "People's Choice Award" at the 2006 Toronto Film Festival, Bella is a movie that is sweeping hearts across America and one can only hope the same as it heads for European Cinemas.

It is a film directed by Alejandro Gomez Monteverde starring and co-directed by the famous Mexican actor Eduardo Verastegui. The film takes place in New York city where an international soccer star named Jose (Verastegui) encounters a series of events prohibiting him from signing a multi-million dollar contract with a distinguished soccer club, consequently ending his career. He begins working as a chef in his brother's restaurant and there he meets Nina (Tammy Blanchard), a waitress who has recently found out she is pregnant. She resolves to have an abortion, however due to Jose's kindness she changes her mind, deciding to keep the child.

Some have called Bella a "disguised anti-abortion tract" whereas others have described it as being a tale about St. Joseph, himself. The Smithsonian Latino Center called it a "Poignant movie [...] that is a universal story of friendship, family, struggle and triumph in the face of the unexpected." Taking these opinions at face value, one could only hope that a movie such as this, which protrays values such as these, would be an interest and success in the public sphere even if it would cause a woman not to have an abortion...

The Golden Compass

A new controversial movie will be released worldwide next month. The movie is called The Golden Compass and is based on the first book of a trilogy written by English author, Philip Pullman, titled His Dark Materials. The movie is a distant cousin or rather imitation of previous fantasy successes such as Chronicles of Narnia and The Lord of the Rings trilogy.

In regard to the controversy, there are two clear sides. Pullman is a declared atheist and has admitted unabashedly that the theme of his books is "to kill God". To reenforce his theme, president of American Atheists, Ellen Johnson, described The Golden Compass as being a movie about questioning authority, going on to to acsert that that message ought to be taught to children.

On the other hand, Bill Donahue, head of the Catholic League, is imploring families everywhere to boycott the movie on the premise that the movie is completely anti-Catholic and anti-religion. The movie portrays a group of bad men called in the film "the Magisterium". The group is made up of a Pope and Bishops who convene regularly to plot kidnappings of small children. They do so in order to carry out scientific experiments like separating the soul and body.

After Tuesday night's premiere of the film in London, The Guardian pointed out that the film has,"No other challengers as this year's big Christmas movie." Christmas: a holiday theoretically remembering the birth of the Son of God -- no doubt an inappropriate occasion to teach young ones about the best way of eliminating him...

Hollywood holding on...

"As the home stretch of the movie year arrives, Hollywood has rarely been more in need of a holiday pick-me-up," said Wall Street Journal columnists, Peter Sanders and Sam Schechner. In their article titled Hollywood's Quality Glut
Fall's films fizzled. Can 'prestige' movies save the holidays? , they comment on the fight for gold and glitter as the last films of 2007 make their way to the theatres. With all eyes on opening night box offices sales, this is no small wonder for America's largest industry that makes its bread from supplying pleasure to the masses.

Some of the front-runners in the race include Seinfeld's animated Bee Movie, which reccounts the tale of a young Bee that sues humanity for stealing honey from bees. Then there is American Gangster (see previous post) and Will Smith's sci-fi epic, I Am Legend -- Smith's heroic journey in a post-apocalyptic New York. In addition New Line Cinema's The Golden Compass is aimed at the amateur audience with the basic theme of two adolescent in a quest to kill God. Finally, there is the last of the Bourne Triology (refer to previous posts) as well as another triology of anti-war propaganda, with movies like In the Valley of Elah, Rendition, Redacted. Lastly, old English revivals make there way to the screen: Beowulf and Grendel -- soon to be the supplement to high school English course -- and Elizabeth: The Golden Age.

What's my analysis? I agree with Mr. Sanders and Mr. Schechner in so far as most of the movies that people will shuffle themselves into see between now and the oscars seem to be made of limited creative material, yet packed full of star self-inflation and millions of dollars of computer graphics. While bees sue humans, Denzel, Russell and Mr. Smith shoot-up the streets of New York (what's new?) and two children try to eliminate the existence of God -- very nietzschesc. Meanwhile the Anti-war, Bush and military crowd press their agenda, while Angelina Jolie portrays Beowulf's "sexy mother". As for Queen Elizabeth, I don't think that the average American, Japanese, or Russian movie-goer cares much for her golden years, but at least Cate Blanchett is still employed...

American Dreamer

The hottest movie to be released this Fall is, without a doubt, American Gangster, due in theatres this November. Starring Denzel Washington and Russell Crowe, the film recounts the story of a clandestined druglord, Frank Lucas (Washington) who is sought out by a unpopular cop, Richie Roberts (Crowe). It seems as though, both are the best of professionals in their respective trades, making for a power-house movie packed with drugs, guns, blood, and money.
But behind all the drama, it is worth asking, what's the point? Sure the movie is "based on a true story", but somehow I doubt that a history class somewhere will be analyzing the ex-gladiator and ex-boxer duke it out on the screen in class. Additionally I doubt that the average movie goer will leave the theatre wanting to read-up on the life of the Lucas Family history. So we have a film, American Gangster which gives the masses an action fix, while presumeably pumping them up with values like "honesty" and "family" and the "American Dream", all the while blowing up cars, buildings and people -- some dream.
I guess the only answer left is "That's entertainment" with the true-story adjective nonetheless, implying to the audience that movies are in fact, a productive experience, at least for the pockets of Hollywood...

Bourne Immortal

The newest movie of the Bourne triology, The Bourne Ultimatum, was just released yesterday in Italy.

Once again starring Matt Damon as Jason Bourne, the film is an action pact melodrama, tracing the steps or rather riding the shoulder of an ex-CIA agent, who can't remember who he is, where he is from, or how he got to be involved in the life-threatening chase that takes him from Moscow to Morrocco, Sweeden to Spain, Paris, and England. Bourne is in and out of cars, trains, planes, boats and motorcycles, sometimes walking but most times running, as his tries to evade his predetors who seek to kill him. He is one man against the system, that being the CIA, which finds Bourne to be extremely dangerous, for reasons that aren't quite clear to the viewer. (Perhaps in the first of "the Bourne's", debuting almost five years ago, the cause can be noted but anyway...)

Bourne keeps running, jumping, shooting, crashing, and finally limping to New York City, as he employs his cell phone trickery to out smart the guys who should be the most intelligible in the world. Bourne breaks into CIA headquarters where he not only reveals the dirty secrets of the bad guys, but finds out who he really is: a boy from Missouri named David Webb. And that is the climax of the story. In short, The Bourne Ultimatum is a Gobal Village Thriller, using an orginal and fast-paced plot to create a sense of total confusion, not only for the protagonist but the viewer as well.

While people eat their popcorn, Hollywood grows fatter, as the gumbi farm boy from Missouri takes on the CIA. But other than that, nothing in the film relates to the reality of man. It merely keeps him on the tread mill of entertainment, running until the next sequel to the Bourne sequels come out...

Global Warning

In his award-winning film, An Inconvenient Truth, Al Gore rallies his audience behind a safe and secure agenda, which would in theory help prevent a fast approaching ice-age. The scientific movie convincingly persuades the captivated audience of probably the greatest threat to mankind since the beginning of time, causing a natural fear and jump-into-action attitude for the planet’s benefit. Its rhetoric is, well, scientific, therefore being passed off as factual and much too complicated to be questioned by the average Joe, who has to go ask his friends what he thinks. Its catchy title gives mixed emotions about the subject on hand because although inconvenient, Gore is telling the truth, and that is what in the end matters. The Gore-washed movie goers leave the film feeling educated and annoyed as they get into their SUV’s, which now they know, uhm, are causing that dirty little thing called, global warming. Sunglasses on, with the thought of buying a tree in Africa quickly chase the threat away.

Turn the title upside down, though and you have what most scientists (actual scientists) think about global warming: A Convenient Lie. Besides the fact that the movie has been banned from the British school system, scientists all over the world (including the United Nations Commission, Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change or IPCC) have found the movie thoroughly flawed and fictional, from its rising sea level assertions, to its ice-age predictions. Moreover, Gore’s little science project has cost billions and billions of dollars, for that special research done under the special eye of little guys in white coats. Naturally, Gores takes his little cut for expenses, and so conveniently enough, as global temperatures rise, so does the balance in his bank account.

In the end, to round out the two sides, the Nobel Peace Prize was given to both Mr. Gore and the IPCC. Both are researching the hottest topic of the present day and both claim a different story. Ask the guy on the street what he deems to be of utmost importance and his agenda seems to sympathize with Gore – planet first, people second. The Hollywood megaphone is heard again as the box office smash is hailed by many, and Kate Blanchett refuses to shower for the good of the planet, but to the expense of her boyfriend. Scientists are left speechless, or rather without a microphone, as the ex-senator from Tennessee sends down warming alerts from his jet-plane to any one of his followers who are kissing and smiling to him up above…

Romantic Realists

“Women are the only realists,” says G.K. Chesterton when describing the nature of Jane Austen’s books. A surprising novel (no pun intended) in light of the new romantic movie women must drag their husbands and boyfriends to see. The Miramax film, Becoming Jane, tells the love story of Jane Austen herself – the author made famous for her countless love stories, which highlight romantic love in the midst of ordinary life.

Starring Anne Hathaway and James McAvoy, the movie is set in 19th century England where balls and tea-parties, gowns trimmed in lace and satin gloves are part of everyday jargon. It depicts the courtship she had with the only man she truly loved. The story unfolds to reveal that the devoted author of books like Pride and Prejudice and Persuasion, once had a love of her own -- an experience from which she was likely to have drawn her delicate and sensitive approach towards the relationship between man and woman. The perplexing climax is certainly a shock to her readers, in so far as the author never married. In short, the man she loved was an idealist, Jane a realist.

Maybe men consider love stories to be a waste of time and of little practical value when dealing with the real world, whether on the screen or in a book. However, I would place the flying car or the space alien in that precise category, defending the romantic quality of any film (or novel) that portrays a love story based on truth and value. I say this not because I am a woman, but only because it is more likely to happen than the average action-packed film where men with masks fly around the world saving desperate people.

It’s possible the sexes will never agree when it comes to the debate on romantic love stories and action packed thrillers. Women will drag their husbands to the first, while men (whether they known it or not) will drag their date to the second. Unbearable as it may seem though, Chesterton in conclusion to his discourse on women authors found that, “Any masculine reader is really an intruder among this pile of books.” Perhaps the same holds true for both types of film in the present day. Movie-goers are accompanied to the cinema by “intruders”, bound willing and solely by that one thread lasting throughout all of man’s history: the divine existence of romantic love…