World Cinema Classic: Monty Python's The Meaning Of Life

Known for their intellectually sick and twisted sense of humor, the members of Monty Python are masters at satire. There is no better example of this then their 1983 film The Meaning Of Life. No one is safe as the Pythons pick apart everything from the Catholic Church to War. As the tag line states "It took God seven days to create earth, and Monty Python 90 Minutes to screw it up." So how is it a classic?


The film starts in very typical Python fashion, with a completely unrelated short film entitled The Crimson Permanent Assurance which tells the story of an office of old men who rebel against their corporate oppresses and turn their building into a moving pirate ship. They travel to the financial center of the world and pillage. This last for twelve hilarious minutes, and then the the actual film starts. The Pythons (John Cleese, Graham Chapman, Micheal Palin, Terry Jones, Eric Idle and Terry Giliam) are all fish in a tank. They see their friend Howard being eaten. Cleese remarks "Really makes you think." Thus begins The Meaning Of Life.This is by far the Python's darkest film with a mix of brilliant black humor and spectacular violence as well as a few interesting musical numbers. The film covers the Seven stages of a man's life: The Miracle of Birth, Growth and Learning, Fighting Each Other, Middle Age, The Autumn Years, and Death. Part I: The Miracle of Birth parodies how fast birth happens, yet how meticulous the process and why it costs so much (see here the meaningless machine that goes 'PING'). The section ends by parodying the catholic church's birth (or non birth) control methods and attitude towards conception with the elaborate musical number "Every Sperm Is Sacred". A man has to sell his kids to scientific research because he has too many (about 100) and has no way to feed them. The Pythons cover their bases by showing a protestant couple across the street denouncing the catholics because "Every time they have intercourse they must have child" to which his wife replies "But Thomas, we have two children, and we've only had intercourse twice.". He rants to her about the Catholics tolerance of having intercourse for fun, although his frustrated wife points out that they never do. Python brilliance.


Part II: Growth and Learning dives into school. A group of school boys are attending an Anglican Church where they recite the hymn "Oh Lord, Please Don't Burn Us". Again they Python's use a satirical approach to they schooling they were all brought up in. The act includes John Cleese as a headmaster leading the students in a sex ed. class to which he goes as far as actually physically demonstrating techniques with his wife as the students watch with bored expretions. Cleese berates the students for wanting to "Move too fast in the process." and asks the question "What's wrong with starting her out with a kiss boy? What's wrong with a simple kiss?" again Python satire at it's best but in a surprisingly subtle way. This section ends in a hilarious rugby game between the school children and the masters (an actual rugby team) who violently destroy the school children on the field.

Part III: Fighting each other is the Python's take on war and how silly it is. A commander (Jones) is trying to lead his troops through a battlefield in World War I. They feel this is the last time they will see him alive, plus it's his birthday so they reveal they have bought gifts (two clocks because "There was a mix up sir. Alan thought he was getting the clock") and they even made him a cake. This is revealed as a war film as an officer (Chapman) the plus side of a military because "If you don't share the same beliefs as one another than military action is absolutely necessary. And may God strike me down if I am wrong" to which God strikes him with a bolt of lightning. Outside a drill Sergent (Palin) is attempting to drill a platoon of soldiers, but dismisses them for their own personal leisure's. He then complains about the poor quality of the military. The power of authority is mocked in next scene when we flashback to the Anglo-Zulu War of 1879. After a horrific attack by the Zulus, the officers brush the death toll off in lieu of a more pressing matter, one of the officers has lost a leg, presumably to a Tiger (to which everyone who is told remarks "In Africa?!"). They begin to hunt for the leg and in typical Python fashion, the scene is cut off by a celebration of The Middle Of The Film. This includes a classic scene where the audience is told to find the fish. Jones appears in a tux and two disjointed, elongated arms and says, "I wonder where that fish did go? That fishy, fishy, fishy, oh." The fish from the beginning of the film return to comment "They haven't really said much about the meaning of life yet."


Part IV: Middle Age consists of an American couple (played by Palin with Idle as his wife) who visit a strange restaurant set in a Medieval dungeon but set to Hawaiian music. They order a conversation about the meaning of life. They feel that the topic is too boring and order another. Part V: Live Organ Transplants follows two paramedics (Chapman and Cleese) as they collect a donation of a liver (Gilliam as a Rastafarian Jew with a Hitler moustache). Being that he is still alive he initially refuses but the two paramedics burst through the door and violently and brutally disembowel him (All off screen. All the audience see is Chapman's face and white coat begin to have blood squirted on it and all we hear is Gilliam's comical yells and his legs and hands flailing) This is the peek of the Pythons violent humor in the film as we the audience finds themselves unable to not laugh at what they see the way it is presented. The execution is what makes it hilarious. Idle then appears in a pink suit and sings the infamous "Universe Song" about the wonders of our universe.


Part VI: The Autumn Years and the final section Part VII: Death go hand in hand. The Autumn Years includes the classic scene in which an overly outrageously large man devours all the food in a fancy French restaurant, only to explode when he eats a "Waffer" thin mint. This leads into Part VII: Death which starts by showing a funeral with an empty casket at the bottom of a cliff. A man (Chapman) is running because he is about to die. He has been convicted of "telling gratuitous sexist jokes in a moving picture" and has chosen his method of death. His method: to be chased off a cliff by a pack of topless roller derby women. The final scene is a parody of Swedish films (Particularly Igmar Bergman's The Seventh Seal) showing Death come collect a a group of people from a dinner table. He brings them to Heaven where the film ends on a massive musical note "Everyday Is Christmas in Heaven" (Which is bitter sweetly lead by Chapman who would die 6 years later). Then comes The End Of The Film where a lady in a chair (Palin) is handed an envelope containing the meaning of life which is:

Try and be nice to people, avoid eating fat, read a good book every now and then, get some walking in, and try and live together in peace and harmony with people of all creeds and nations.

Monty Python takes all of the serious matters in life and pumps out a satirical look at them. This is the brilliance behind Monty Python, particularly The Meaning Of Life. It shocked and offended when it came out but as Eric Idle put it, it shocked all the right people who take life too seriously. Monty Python showed us that if we are bottled up all our lives and take it way too seriously, then whats the point? The meaning of life is exactly that: Life. We should live it, enjoy it and it's surprising that we should be taught this lesson from the likes of Monty Python but it happened. It's at times silly, but also at times intellectually brilliant. It's punk cinema at it's best. This makes Monty Python's The Meaning Of Life not only a British Cinema Classic, and a Punk Cinema Classic, but a World Cinema Classic.

Photos Courtesy of:
www.bbcmedia.com
www.wikimedia.org

Analysis: The Top 5 Bond Films of All-Time

Since the release of the first James Bond Film, Dr. No in 1962, the films have become a distinct part of world pop culture. But believe it or not there was and is a time and place for Bond films to actually be films not just action romps. This is the list of the top 5 James Bond films of all time as of 2010.

5. Quantum Of Solace (2008)



The only underrated film to appear on this list. Quantum of Solace received mixed reviews upon its release on November 14, 2008. The film features what is arguably the darkest of all the Bond films, even darker then the highly overlooked On Her Majesty's Secret Service. Much like that film, Quantum of Solace digs into not the character of Bind, but what happens to the people around him due to his devil may care attitude. It is also a direct sequel to Casino Royale, being that the film's setting starts fifteen minutes after the previous film ended. Everyone Bond comes into contact with and gets remotely close to ends up killed. It shows that yes Bond is dangerous, but he leaves behind an aftermath of pain, sorrow and death. He tries to redeem himself in the second act and this films shows just why Bond is so reluctant to form attachments.

4. GoldenEye (1995)



The Bond franchise was in disarray. The 80's were not kind to Bond and ended on what many critics consider its worst films (the Dalton films get panned for their 'dark content'). But it was an even more stressful time. Dalton was fired after License To Kill and by the time a script was approved, the Cold War had ended and Bond's greatest nemesis was now defunct. So instead of cowering away and ending the franchise, MGM got a new script, a new bond (Pierce Bronson) and released one of the finest additions to the Bond film series. The story was well written and was filled with the typical Bond double crosses and twists. GoldenEye was not only a great film, but it revamped the dying franchise and introduced Bond to a new generation.

3. Casino Royale (2006)



Although the Bronson era had revamped the Bond series initially, critics grew tired and apparently so did the filmmakers (see the 2002 film Die Another Day if you can even call it a film). Bronson, much like Dalton before him, was fired and a new Bond search began. Insert Daniel Craig: the anti-Bond. He had blond hair and blue eyes, was mean, lean and tough. Not only did Casino Royale reinvent Bond's vision, it reinvented Bond. No more silly slapstick gadgets from the 80's and 90's (no more Q for that matter). The only remnants of the old films was Judy Dench returning as M because much like Bernard Lee and Robert Brown before her, she's the only actress one can envision in the role. Bond was updated if you will, rebooted for the 21st Century. He had to deal with international terrorists and schemes. Double crosses fly as well in this reboot, but Casino Royale still has so much more than all but two Bond films before it, it sets itself far above the rest.

2. From Russia With Love (1963)



Released in 1963, From Russia With Love was the second Bond film in the series. It is also the second best yet. One way of interpreting the genius of From Russia With Love is that in the 60's not many films were shot on exotic locations. From Russia With love was shot on numerous (Turkey, Russia and Scotland). The film is almost absolutely free from any gimmicky gadgets that would later define the series. Sean Connery is at perhaps his best in this film. He's not acting like James Bond, He is James Bond and this is one of films that solidified him forever as being the true Bond (now only recently challenged by Craig). From Russia With Love introduces S.P.E.C.T.R.E and the one Bond villain to make two more appearances, Blofeld although in this film we never once see his face we only see him stroking his white cat (Dr. Evil from the Austin Powers films is a direct reference to Blofeld). From Russia With Love is now and forever will be a classic.

1. Goldfinger (1964)



There are good Bond films, then there are classic Bond films, and then there is Goldfinger: THE Bond film. Released in 1964 the third Bond film was the first to become an international sensation and it single handily boosted Bond's status from cool spy to pop culture icon. The film itself is filled with what is now very highly regarded in pop culture. From classic lines, ("No Mr. Bond, I expect you to die."), to classic villains, (Odd Job and his hat of death), to classic Bond one liners (Right before the main title's run Bond kills an assassin by throwing an lamp into a bath tub and says "Shocking, simply shocking"). Iconic images are all fill this film, from the golf course scenes to perhaps the most recognizable and iconic, the woman on Bond's bed encased in gold. It even gets away with the most comically pun intended Bond girl name (Pussy Galore) and manages to make even that work. Goldfinger has what has to be hands down the single best Bond theme ever. Shirley Bassey's 'Goldfinger' has become instantly recognizable and was even inducted into the Grammy Hall Of Fame in 2008. There is and will never be a better Bond film than Goldfinger. It defines Bond, it is Bond. This is the film that propelled Sean Connery from the actor playing James Bond, to becoming James Bond. And not only that it rocketed Sean Connery into the legendary actor he is today. Goldfinger is the very blueprint of how to do a Bond film 110% right. There is no other way to put it, Goldfinger is not classic, it's legendary, which is contrary to Mr. Bond's statement not at all shocking.

Photos courtesy of:
www.shacknews.com
www.bbcmedia.com

Misunderstood Cinema: Star Wars Episode I: The Phantom Menace

Part Three of the Classic '99 series, which critiques films released in the last great cinematic year of the 20th century. The film is George Lucas' 1999 film Star Wars Episode I: The Phantom Menace.



It had been 16 years since the last Star Wars film, Star wars Episode VI: Return Of The Jedi, was released and fans had been starving for more. Since it's May 19, 1999 premiere, Episode I has been listed as either the worst or second worst addition to the Star Wars saga. There are many reasons for this, most of which are simply out of the hands of the filmmakers. The story is set years before the events of the first (but really the fourth) Star Wars film. It centers around two Jedi, Qui-Gon Jinn (Liam Nesson) and his padawan Obi-Wan Kneobi (Ewan McGregor). They must protect the Queen of Naboo, Queen Amidala (Natalie Portman) from the clutches of the evil Trade Federation Viceroy Nute Gunray who is in the pocket of the even more evil Sith Lord Darth Sidious. The two jedi come across a boy on Tatooine named Anakin Skywalker (Jake Llyod and yes I still cringe at the thought of his name) who will unbeknownst at the time, eventually become Darth Vader. The plot has been endlessly attacked for it's simply lack of...well story. This is a pretty shocking accusation considering it involves a complex story revolving around a trade dispute and intergalactic taxes and blockades (that's not a sarcastic remark that's the actual plot outline). A better way to describe the story is not to say there is a lack of one, just a lack of an interesting one. That being said, no one showed up to a Star Wars movie for it's deep story it's about a kid who gets trained by a ghost and a green Muppet. Fans just wanted more which leads into The Phantom Menace's next criticism: failure to awe.



George Lucas wanted to wait before he made his next Star Wars film citing the technology of the time (1983 at that point) wasn't up to the standards he envisioned his films should be created with. Fast forward to 1993 where close friend of his Steven Spielberg releases Jurassic Park which feature a CGI dinosaur without missing a beat of reality. Lucas now feels the time and technology are right for him to create his masterpiece part duex. He starts by recreating (or ruining in some die hard fan's eyes) his original trilogy, updating scenes with the new CGI technology. The format passes his test and Lucasfilm goes into production on the prequel trilogy. Lucas returns to the director chair and the hysteria ensues, which is just the issue. Lucas waited 16 years to make the next film. People lose their minds when they have to wait three months to see the next episode of their beloved TV show, let alone something as massive as Star Wars. Lucas inadvertently created such an insane amount of hype that he did himself in. A work firm, Challenger, Gray and Christmas estimated that nearly 2.2 million workers did not show up the day of the premiere resulting in over $295 million in lost profits. According to the Wall Street Journal so many workers made advanced plans to skip work that some companies simply closed for the day. Tickets bought in advance were sold for as high as $200. A teaser poster was released in early 1999 and there were wide reports of bus stop windows being broken so the poster inside could be taken. For the teaser trailer people would pay full price for a movie just to see the Star Wars trailer and leave. The Star Wars website gridlocked and crashed the day the trailer was made available because so many people were trying to view it. To basically no fault of his own Lucas created such a hunger for a product that it wouldn't have met expectations even if it had been a cinematic masterpiece. This is probably The Phantom Menace's most critical and fatal blow.



The next mark down is simple: Jar Jar Binks. Men have been shot for saying this name. Little children cry whenever this name is mentioned, buildings fall, bridges collapse. Well not quite but Jar Jar Binks has received the harshest criticism from fans and critics. Kids under six loved him, and this is why Lucas wrote the part, but a majority of his audience who was six when A New Hope was released in 1977, weren't six anymore and weren't pleased. I'd dive into it more but I don't have a spare keyboard to use after I smash the current one. Jar Jar Binks is simply something that cannot be defended.

Finally, to end on an up beat (much like the film did), The Phantom Menace does a lot of things right. It has what is widely regarded as the single most impressive lightsaber battle in any of the Star Wars movies between Darth Maul, Qui-Gon and Obi-Wan (a rare moment where the film meets and succeeds expectations). Despite expectations not being met the film still grossed $924,317,552 which was good enough to make it the highest grossing film of 1999. Most importantly it served as an entrance to Star Wars for a brand new generation. This is the key reason I defend this film and hold it so dearly close to my heart. Original trilogy fans who grew up with those films regard them as a significant piece of their childhood. Just because the quality of the first films in the respective trilogies don't' match in quality does NOT mean that they aren't regarded as a significant piece of our childhood. A New Hope takes the baby boomers back to when they were six and The Phantom Menace does that to Generation Y. Is it an award winning film, no. But does it define some of our childhood and inspire one viewer to want to make movies, you're damn right. Plus if that's not enough you can always say "At least it's not as bad as Episode II".

An American Classic: Giant

Based on the Edna Ferber novel of the same name, Giant is simply put; a tour De force. Released in 1956 the film was an instant classic and is still regarded as such some 54 years after it's theatrical release. Everything about Giant screams classic from dialogue, to scenes and behind the camera stories, and especially the actors in the main roles; Rock Hudson, Elizabeth Taylor and James Dean.



Giant is an epic in all forms of the meaning. Clocking in a over 3 1/2 hours long the film had to have an intermission in the middle. The 3 1/2 hours are brilliantly used by George Stevens who crafts every scene of this movie into a piece of art. You could take any still from the negative of Giant and you'd have a beautiful picture to hang in your home. The film tells the story of the Benedict's, a wealthy Texas family who own a ranch. Bick Benedict (Rock Hudson) goes to Maryland to get a stud and returns to Texas with a wife, Leslie (Elizabeth Taylor). This is approximately the first thirty to forty minutes of the film. Stevens creates a magical love tale that could be it's own movie and condenses it down to a mere forty minutes. The two return to the Benedict's' ranch in Reata where we are introduced to Bick's sister Luz, and the ranch handyman Jett Rink (James Dean). Jett is blatantly jealous of Bick's good fortune and wealth and continuously flirts with Leslie. Luz is soon killed when the stud Bick brought back bucks her off. In her will she leaves some land to Jett, who soon finds it is located on top of a large amount of oil. Jett quickly rushes over to the Benedict's, covered in oil, and mocks Bick and the family for doubting he would ever amount to anything (A classic scene). Soon after Leslie gives birth to twins and another daughter. Jett starts an oil company and this is followed by the start of World War II. During Giant's theatrical run this is where the intermission took place. From here the story shifts from being about Bick and Jett to the struggles inside of Bick's home. He wishes to have his son Jordy (Denis Hopper) succeed him, but Jordy wants his own legacy. Bick stubbornly denies this as he his slowly becoming a bitter older man. Jett stops buy (presumably to gush about his fortune) and falls for Bick's teenage daughter Luz Jr. Bick soon discovers the two are dating. The Benedict's show up to a gala Jett is having in his honor where tensions boil over. Jordy learns that he and his Native American wife were invited simply so Jett could turn her away at the door for being Native American. When Bick goes to confront Jett in the kitchen, he finds that Jett is alone and drunk, a shell of a man who has only money and nothing else. Bick leaves Jett without hitting him, but also without pity.



A major sub plot to Giant is racism. The Benedict's are a traditional Texas family and give no thought to how they treat their Mexican hands. They respect them, feed and house them but not as well as they should. Leslie is more willing to treat the Mexicans as human beings particularly in a scene where she helps a woman and her baby. Bick later shrugs this event off even when told that the baby could die. Jett is also racist in many aspects. He denies Jordy's wife entrance to his gala simply because she is a Native American. The film's final scene, an incredibly memorable and classic scene, has the Benedicts at a Texas diner some ten years after Jett's gala. Bick's daughter in law and grandson are harassed for being Native American and half Native American respectively. Bick picks a fight with the owner, defying all his previous actions towards racism the entire film, but gets knocked down (numerous times). He loses the fight, but earns the respect of his family.

The story of creating Giant is a fascinating tale as well. Rock Hudson and Elizabeth Taylor were big stars at the time, and James Dean was on his third film and a massive teenage star. The story was a tension filled story, but the set was a wild scene of pranks and bonding. The three main stars formed a close relationship with each other and the director George Stevens. An interesting sub plot to the making of the film revolves around James Dean. Dean was a massive star mainly among teenage girls, so the fact that he made this movie and showed the talent he did makes his death even more tragic. Dean finished his scenes early and left the set to go partake in his second love, racing. Dean died hours after leaving the set in a car accident. When news reached the set, the fun and games died with Dean. Stories have been told that Elizabeth Taylor didn't leave her trailer for a week. The even bigger issue concerned the gala scenes at the end, where because of Dean's style of delivering lines in a mumbled fashion led to much of the scene being inaudible. Warner Bros. was faced with the crisis of having to re shoot scenes with an actor who was no longer alive. The scene was instead re dubbed, but because of Dean's death (much like Heath Ledger's death during the shooting of The Dark Knight) the last scene's of Dean are the most precious because once they are being watched and the time ticks away on the scene, you realize that your time with Dean is ticking away as well. If there is an upside to Giant being a 3 1/2 hour film is that Dean is in a large chunk of it.



Giant was a massive success. The film was Warner Bros's highest grossing film until it released Superman in the late 70's. The film garnered 10 Academy Award nominations including a posthomunous Best Actor nomination for James Dean, Best Actor for Rock Hudson, Best Picture and Best Director which George Stevens won. It has since been re-released and is still a strong example of how to make an epic. This among many other aspects including classic scenes, memorable dialogue, the beautifully shot locations and the actors in the three main roles, make Giant and epic American classic.

Classic '99: How The World Is Not Enough is Misunderstood

1999 was an awesome year for movies and I find myself for some reason deeply attached and connected to films released this year. Perhaps they are the first large batch of films I remember from my childhood. Nevertheless this is part two (for part one see Fight Club) in series of film critiques from 1999. The film is the nineteenth James Bond film The World Is Not Enough.



Hot off the success of GoldenEye and Tomorrow Never Dies, The World Is Not Enough was released in November 1999. Since then it has been ranked among the worst James Bond films to be released. Many reasons for this have been cited includingthe story, the tone and most highly critized : Denise Richards as a nuclear physisist (perhaps THE worst casting decision ever made incinema history). But you can't put a film in a list of the worst based mainly on the fact it has an extremley bad actress in it. The 80's Bond movies had Riger Moore, the Bond equivilent to the Adam West Batman, and some of those movies make the top ten lists. There is no excuse for how absolutely horrible Richards is who was clearly chosen for mere eye candy (which she certaintly is mind you). The film cannot be dismissed for this alone. Behind the ugly mask of Richards terrible acting is actually a really solid Bond film. 

To have a good Bond movie you need to have the following: a good story, good Bond one liners and a good villain. The World Is Not Enough has all three plus the bonus point for an awesome theme song(sung here suprisingly well by Garbage). The film also starts with what has to be the best pre-credit sequence of any Bond film. From Bond roping out of a building using a henchman's body as a weight to the memorable boat chase scene on the River Thames, the pre-credit sequence leaves you breathless. The story is weak in some spots but this is expected in a Bond film. Contarary to criticsremarks the whole story is not weak just certain areas (again see Denise Richard's character).



The villain is one of the most underrated villains of the Bond films. This is in large part due to the fact that there are two. Robert Carlyle plays terrorist Renard who feels no pain because a bullet is slowly working it's way trough his brain killing his nerves. Elektra King is the daughter of a murdered millionare oil tycoon who turns out is actually the main villain. She was kidnapped and when her father failed to rescue her she felt betrayed and became a sort of Patty Hearst and joined her captors. Despite Richards having the bond girl name (Dr. Christmas Jones) it is actually Elektra who should be thought of as the Bond girl. French actress Sophie Marceau is perhaps the most beautiful actress to ever appear in a Bond film. On top of that she is an amazing actress. Robert Carlyle who is an amazing actor himself with an impressive resume is overshadowed by the negative critisim directed toward the film. He plays perhaps the most convincing villain since Blofeld. 

The film also features an intriguing plot. An oil tycoon Sir Robert King, is blown up inside MI6 headquters in London and the mystery begins. Who did it? Why did they do it? What's the big picture in all of it? Bond is sent to protect King's daughter Elektra who is building an oil pipeline stretching across Europe. It turns out that Renard(Robert Carlyle) is working with Elektra to destory the current pipeline so that her pipeline will be the only option for transporting oil to the world. This is because she wishes to erase her fathers name from history and replace it with her own, plus get rich in the process. M gets kidnapped and nearly killed by Renard who is trying to extract revenge for being shot in the head by an MI6 agent which caused the bullet that is slowly killing him to be lodged inside his brain. The World Is Not Enough is actually a really dark Bond film. It doesn't seem that way on the surface as over the years critics have made it out to be a slap stick comedy fest. But behind this facsade is a really dark and engaging Bond film.



Along with it's dark moments and characters, The World Is Not Enough has it's tender moments. The beloved Q makes his final apperance in this film played by Desmond Llewelyn. In the film an assistant to Q is introduced played by Monty Python alum John Cleese. In one if the films better one liners Bond goes "If your Q does that make him R?" Llewelyn had stated that he had no intention of retiring from the films despite the introduction of the new assistant. However Llewelyn was killed in a car crash on December 4, 1999. He had appeared in 17 of the 19 Bond films at the time. His last lines where "I've always taught you two things Bond. First never let them see you bleed and second, always have an escape plan." Llewelyn says these lines as he is lowered into the ground by a trap door he has built. In retrospect it is a very fitting, touching and heart warming of moments in any Bond film and is a somber good bye to one of the series most iconic and classic characters. It is also, given that Llewelyn died a month after the films release, now a high point in the film. 

It is this among many other points such as excellent villains portrayed by amazing actors, a good story with twists and turns and perhaps Pierce Brosnan at his best as James Bond that makes The World Is Not Enough a seriously misunderstood and underrated Bond film and just a general action film altogether. It's no Goldfinger or From Russia With Love but at it's core The World Is Not Enough is a damn good entertaining Bond film.

Analysis: Is Cloverfield a 9/11 Analogy?

When the film Cloverfield hit theatres it instantly became a phenomenon. But was there a deeper meaning behind it's story or was it just another disaster movie? There are many ways to interpret Cloverfield. Some consider it a knock off of previous movies such as The Blair Witch Project. It uses the same technique as Blair Witch but at a lesser level. Where the Blair Witch Project felt like a more realistic home video, Ckoverfield's image quality was far superior to any home video camera. But when looked at in deeper context an alarming feature of Cloverfield becomes noticeable; it's parrelles to the events of 9/11.



The first connection can be drawn in the most simple form, a mysterious creature is attacking New York City and no one knows who or what it is or what it wants. Buildings topple like Lego's as the creature lays waste to the city, leaving everyone in it in utter panic and shock. This alone is an interesting parallel to draw but it alone cannot serve as enough evidence to draw a conclusion. The second connection is the use of ammeter home video to depict the event. Because of the quickness of the events on September 11, 2001 the media(and the rest of the country) was so caught up in surprise and panic that most of the footage captured is either from amateur eyewitnesses, panicked news camera men or security footage. There is no sweeping shots of the city from a distance moving in between buildings. There is no dolly shots from safe distance. All the footage from that day is right in the middle of the action. It is in no way choreographed. This is much like Cloverfield where we only see glimpses of the beast. This is one of the main parallels between Cloverfield and 9/11; the sense of the unknown. It wasn't until later on that we find out that a Godzilla like creature is doing the damage much like the mystery of who was attacking us on 9/11.



Although the parallels are here to draw a conclusion that Cloverfield is indeed a 9/11 analogy, it seems that it is more a product of it's time rather then a straight up analogy. 9/11 changed he world and it changed movies as well in how they are made and how they are perceived. Prior to 9/11 when a building collapsed it simply collapsed. But now one is hard pressed to not see a building collapse then immediately think of dust filling the streets as this is one of the most vivid image memories of that day. This is not because buildings didn't do this before 9/11,we just never paid any attention to it. Now that image is ingrained into our minds. 9/11also put disaster moves on an indefinite hiaus. It seemed wrong and in extremely poor taste to produce a disaster movie as the events were so fresh in our minds that picking at that wound, and a wound so deep and painful, seemed like a death wish on a career.

Prior to 9/11 New York was destroyed numerous times from Godzilla to Deep Impact and Armageddon. New York was destroyed also in The Day After Tomorrow which is a rare post-9/11 disaster movie. So in conclusion Cloverfield is not a 9/11 analogy despite there being obvious parallels. Instead it is a product of it's
time and a prime example of how folks can be shaped and changed by the events of the world we live in.

Awards Special: The Oscar Predictions

Over the years the Academy Awards have become a pop culture event. From the 'Top Oscar Moments' countdowns in the days prior, to the red carpet event right before the show, one would be hard pressed to find someone who hasn't heard of The Oscars. Although the categories run deep and include so many diff rent technical aspects that all should be acknowledged and celebrated, for the sake of time we will just look at the 'top' categories: Best Picture, Director, Actor , Supporting Actor, and Actress.

Best Picture
Unlike years past where months before the awards the Best Picture can be predicted with ease, this year has proven to be more challenging. With the addition of five more movies, the the only thing easy to predict is the five films that are the front runners. These films are Avatar, The Hurt Locker, Inglourious Basterds, Up In The Air and Precious: Based on The Novel "Push" By Sapphire.

The Winner: Precious: Based on The Novel "Push" By Sapphire

Why?: Any of the films sound like they could be read off as Best Picture but Precious will get the nod. Avatar has James Cameron at the helm who won in 1997 for Titanic. The Academy hates repeats. Basterds seems too violent for voters and Up In The Air has just lost so much steam over the month while Precious is the PC choice, The Hurt Locker has everything it should and is supposed to have to win, except it's about Iraq. Precious has the steam, the right topic and to the voters it will be the best film. Also It would be the first time a film with a largely African American cast and production crew has won Best Picture.

Best Director
The Nominees: Kathryn Bigelow for The Hurt Locker, Quentin Tarantino for inglourious Basterds, James Cameron for Avatar, Lee Daniels for Precious: Based on The Novel "Push" By Sapphire, and Jason Reitman for up In the Air.

The Winner: Kathryn Bigelow - The Hurt Locker

Why?: Never has a female director won this award and this year will end that streak. Her film may not win the Best Picture prize because of its semi-controversial topic, Bigelow will surely win the award for directing it. It's almost like winning second place to win Best Director and not Best Picture, but Bigelow will do it. It seems the perfect scenario where everyone gets what they want (much like 2005 where the voters used this formula in the wrong case) where the voters honor the PC film with the Best Picture but still honor the true Best Picture through it's director(Crash won in 2005 while Ang Lee won Best Director for Brokeback Mountain). The Academy will feel they are righting a wrong by doing this and we the viewers will have to settle yet again. This time around though both films are deserved of the award.

Best Actor
The Nominees: Jeff Bridges for Crazy Heart, George Clooney for Up In The Air, Colin Firth for A Single Man, Morgan Freeman for Invictus and Jeremy Renner for The Hurt Locker.

The Winner: Jeff Bridges - Crazy Heart

Why?: I see this as The Wrestler part two. Last year Mickey Rourke was the feel good story of the Oscars winning the statue after resurrecting his long dead and destroyed career playing a wrestler who was trying to survive after his career had been long dead and destroyed. This is basically the same story expect substitute the wrestling ring for a bar and past his prime but still holding on wrestler Mickey Rourke with past his prime but still holding on country singer Jeff Bridges. But this goes to show that even if a role is redundant, if the right actor is cast he can make it into something magical to watch.

Best Supporting Actor
The Nominees: Matt Damon for Invictus, Woody Harelson for The Messenger, Christopher Plummer for The Last Station, Stanley Tucci for The Lovely Bones, and Christoph Waltz for Inglourious Basterds.

The Winner: Cristoph Waltz - Inglourious Basterds

Why?: Much like last years awards, you mine as well hand this one out now. It's a shame that such good performances won't be awarded but there is no doubt the best is winning. in 2007 it was Javier Bardem who was a lock to win playing a sinister villain. in 2008 it was Heath Ledger who was a lock to win for playing a sinister villain and this year Christoph Waltz is a lock to win as a charmingly sinister villain. I guess the hint is play a sinister villain really really good and you too might just win an Oscar, that is if your as good as Bardem, Ledger and Waltz were.

Best Actress
The Nominees: Sandra Bullock for The Blind Side, Hellen Mirren for The Last Station, Carey Mulligan for An Education, Gabourey Sidibe for Precious: Based on The Novel "Push" By Sapphire, and Meryl Streep for Julie & Julia.

The Winner: Sandra Bullock - The Blind Side

Why?: This will be the only award handed out to The Blind Side which did exactly that by actually getting nominations. But if the film was guaranteed one nod, it would deservedly go to Sandra Bullock who made everyone actually forget she was Sandra Bullock for two hours. That is worth an award any day.

Best Supporting Actress
The Nominees: Penelope Cruz for Nine, Vera Farmiga for up In The Air, Anna Kendrick for up In the Air, Maggie Gyllenhaal for Crazy Heart, and Mo'Nique for Precious.

The Winner: Mo'Nique - Precious

Why?: Again, the academy likes it's villains and unlike Christoph Waltz's charming villain, Mo'Nique plays quite the opposite. She is cruel, harsh and a downright disgusting human being. Throughout the whole movie you loathe her very existence, yet at the end she makes you feel pity for her. It takes an extraordinary actress to pull this off, far more the actress then Mo'Nique was thought to be(See Phat Girlz) but she did which again goes to show that if you cast the right actress in the right role, you will have yourself something magical.

Modern Classic: Seven

In 1995 David Fincher followed up his 1992 critical failure Aliens 3 with what is now hailed as a classic: Seven. Based on the seven deadly sins, two detectives, newly transferred Det. David Mills(Brad Pitt) and soon to retire Det. Sommerset(Morgan Freeman) have to hunt down the mysterious killer. But Seven, strangely unlike Fincher's other films, is more about the violent acts then explaining them. With the exception of the final murder, there is hardly any actual violence done on screen. The bodies are never seen being murdered, it's only the aftermath we see. The movie is almost like a buddy cop film if it where set in hell. This is also another major feature as to why Seven is a modern classic.



It's a visually chilling film. It is a very dark film in both content and tone. Bleach Bypass was used to retain the dark shadows on film as opposed to brightening them up. The scene's are set during the day but are still gloomy. It is always raining or dark. It gives the feeling that you are never comfortable. You feel if you were to break open any wall in any of the cities buildings it would be infested with cockroaches. Mills and Sommerset base their research on Dante's Inferno and if the fire is replaced with rain, the setting of Seven is the exact same. The murders add to the ugliness of the world we are put into. It doesn't hide from the gruesomeness, because after the first murder it feels like this type of thing happens all the time. Seven's setting reflects the moral decay of the people who live in it.

With every picture Fincher does, he seems to bring everything together in a human morale tale, or in this case inhuman morale. He's not trying to explain why John Doe has killed, he's trying to show how the people around it will react. Sommerset is calm and reserved and accepts what he sees and tries to solve the crime. Mills is hot headed and is sickened by what he sees and lets it effect his work. Where Seven differs from other movies of it's kind is it's a psychological character study of not John Doe, but the detectives trying to find him and having to swallow what he has left behind in his wake. John Doe, played brilliantly by Kevin Spacey, doesn't appear on screen until half way through the movie as a distant and isn't actually seen or heard from until thirty minutes before the films climax. This film is very much about Mills and Sommerset. Doe challenges thier morales by killing people that in a sick sense deserved to die, but must be brought to justice: A defense lawyer who defends child rapists and killers(Greed), an obese man stealing food from the homeless(Gluttony), a fashion model who changed her face 'that God gave her to sell her soul'(Pride), a 'disease carrying' street hooker(Lust), a man who lives off welfare just to stay in bed all day(Sloth), Doe who envy's Mill's perfect life(Envy), and Mills who ultimatley kills Doe out of rage(Wrath).

It feels more so about Mills though. At one point a photograpgher is trying to take tabloid pictures of the murders and Mills shoves him down some stairs. When the photographer asks his name his profanely yells "Detective Mills, M-I-L-L-S F*** Off!" When the two later raid a house thought to be Doe's house and they find the photographs of Mills showing that Doe was right in front of them (The photographer) and got away. This seems to break Mills. Doe seems to be having fun toying with the psychology of the two detectives. His master climax consists of leading the two out to the middle of nowhere(to where Doe said the final body was buried). He has a delivery man deliver a box to Sommerset who finds that it contains Mill's wife's head. He now has the task of somehow taking the gun away from his partner or verbally preventing him from killing Doe upon discovery his wife is dead. The final sin; wrath. Doe is the victim and Mills has now become what he was trying to hunt in the first place, a cold blooded killer. If Doe was an artist, this sick twisted act would be his masterpiece. Thankfully for the world he's simply a character and it is Fincher who is the artist creating his twisted psychological masterpiece.