(via Mechazilla)

Os filmes envolvendo invasões extraterrestres tiveram o seu auge entre os produtores dos chamados “filmes B” entre o final da Segunda Guerra Mundial e meados da década de 50. Com o início da Guerra Fria e da corrida armamentista, o interesse pela ficção científica, e o relato, em 1947, de um homem de negócios que, enquanto voava em seu jato particular alegou ter visto à sua frente objetos com forma arredondada atravessando o céu, inaugurou-se a obsessão por discos voadores. A idéia de seres ou organismos alienígenas perambulando tão perto da Terra passou a fazer parte do temor e do imaginário popular e dos estúdios de Hollywood. Dentre os diretores que se aventuraram nesse gênero, destacam-se Don Siegel (Invasion of Body Snatchers), Roger Corman (Not of This Earth) e Ed Wood (Plan 9 for the Other Space), sendo esse ultimo, considerado “o pior diretor do mundo”, teve uma biografia filmada por Tim Burton em 1994.

O projeto de Tim Burton que sucedeu “Ed Wood”, coincidentemente ou não, envolvia todos os preâmbulos descritos no parágrafo anterior. Esse projeto se chama “Marte Ataca”, e se desenvolve a partir de uma invasão alienígena a Terra, onde, após tentativas fustradas de negociações, eles resolvem acabar com o planeta, diante da incredulidade e ineficiência das forças terráqueas em detê-las, até que a população descobre um meio de derrotá-los. Ao ler essa rápida sinopse, pode-se lembrar logo de cara de um outro filme com o mesmo tema feito um ano antes: “Indepedence Day”, dirigido por Ronald Emmerich. Mas é apenas nesse ponto que os dois filmes são semelhantes: enquanto que “ID4” é um filme de ação com uma forte carga de explosões de patriotismo, “Marte Ataca” aposta mesmo na homenagem aos seus homônimos da década de 50, com uma boa dose de sarcasmo e ironia, debruçando-se ainda sob a crítica social, construindo o seu crossover de histórias perante o panorama social norte-americano.

Sendo assim, analisemos rapidamente os personagens principais desse filme: temos o presidente totalmente inseguro, oportunista (aproveita a oportunidade de entrar em contato com seres extraterrestres para se promover) e covarde. A sua esposa é uma pessoa totalmente fútil e deslumbrada com o posto de “primeira-dama”, a ponto de querer trocar toda a decoração da Casa Branca. Como assessores militares, temos um General ausente, cuja motivação se resume em “esperar de boca fechada a oportunidade de uma promoção”, e um outro de temperamento turrão e totalmente belicista. O assessor científico (caracterizado com o seu jaleco branco e o seu indefectível cachimbo), no alto da sua sapiência, baseia a sua conclusão de que os seres extraterrestres são pacíficos pelo fato de serem uma “nação avançada tecnológica e culturamente”. Já na sociedade, o lucro comanda tudo, e o dinheiro está nas mãos de picaretíssimos donos de cassinos. Os heróis do filme são um boxeador aposentado, um adolescente nerd apaixonado pela sua avó caduca (cuja família é o perfeito esteriótipo da América redneck, representado pelos pais que vibram com a possibilidade do filho mais velho “servir a nação” como fuzileiro – personagem este que é o primeiro a morrer, segurando a bandeira Norte-Americana, uma imagem simbólica do teor do filme) e duas crianças negras fãs de jogos eletrônicos. Como pode-se perceber, os personagens desse filme são completamente antagônicos em comparação aos seus correspondentes em “ID4”, reforçando ainda mais o tom de paródia e crítica ao militarismo e, indiretamente, uma sátira aos filmes ultra-pratióticos.

Mas o filme, além dos fatores acima, se vale também de uma parte técnica primorosa. Usando como modelo para os extraterrestres, bem como as suas naves e armas, (e também como inspiração inicial para o roteiro do mesmo) uma série de figurinhas chamada Topps editada em meados dos anos 50, temos, como resultado, uma direção de arte fabulosa, com verdadeiras obras de animação em computador em forma de marcianos. Graças a isso, como resultado final, temos um ar quase retrô ao filme, mesmo com a ambientação (cenário, figurindo dos atores, etc) sugerindo que a história se passe nos dias atuais.

Aliás, falando nos extraterrestres, eles são mais uma constatação do tom irônico e subversivo da obra em questão. Ao contrário dos filmes mais usuais, onde eles são vistos como seres implacáveis e cruéis, ou mesmo, em alguns filmes, como seres bonzinhos, aqui eles estão mais parecidos com crianças crescidas no que tange as suas personalidades: seja fazendo experiências esdrúxulas com as espécimes humanas que são levadas ainda vivas á nave (incluindo uma inusitada troca de corpos entre a repórter vivida por Sarah Jéssica Parker e o seu cachorro), minituarizando militares fascistas para, logo em seguida, esmaga-los tal qual uma formiga, ou ainda fincar de maneira original a sua bandeira, os extraterrestres procuram não apenas destruir o planeta a todo custo, mas também atazanar e humilhar os seus habitantes.

Além disso, há um fato curiosíssimo envolvendo o filme: poucas vezes se vê um massacre tão exacerbado de astros. Jack Nicholson (que faz, além do Presidente, um excêntrico dono de cassino), Glenn Close (a primeira-dama), Michael J. Fox (Um dos repórteres da emissora de TV), Sarah Jéssica Parker, Pierce Brosnan (o consultor científico), Rod Steiger (o militar belicista), James Earl Jones (o militar sem opinião formada), Danny DeVito (o advogado), todos eles morrem com cerca de 1 hora de filme. Percebe-se também como, mesmo diante de morte certa de seus personagens, os atores estão bastante a vontade no filme, notando-se claramente que eles, de certa forma, estão também se divertindo com os seus personagens e suas excentricidades.

Com todos esses ingredientes, “Marte Ataca” se mostra como sendo um filme para não levar a sério. Encarado como ele realmente se propõe a ser (uma paródia á vários valores e características do american way of life, além de uma homenagem aos filmes B e, por que não dizer, como uma continuação natural do trabalho feito por Burton em “Ed Wood”), pode-se perceber um trabalho que, se não é maravilhoso, ao menos é interessante e extremamente divertido, assim como os seus predecessores de 50 anos atrás.

3/4

Adney Silva

Now I'm not saying that I dislike Joss Whedon or his work, I have simply not payed much attention to it. I didn't watch Firefly, or Buffy the Vampire Slayer. But I'm starting to think that I should give Whedon a chance.

There has been a lot of talk about Dollhouse from the Whedon fans and it got me curious as to what this show is going to be all about. So I search the interwebs  and found the promo photo (picture above) and noticed a familiar face, Tahmoh Penikett, aka Helo from Battlestar Galactica.  This got me even more interested, because I enjoy his character on BSG and think he's a good actor (although apparently I'm a minority among my friends for having this opinion).

Here's the trailer.

Also check out the clip that has just popped up on the net. Check it out here.

Summary and Review: Superhuman speed, eyesight and hearing sounds good to me but for Tally, as usual, being not only perfect but a special special just isn’t enough.  Specials is the third installment in the Uglies series and begins with Tally, Shay, and their gang (Specials known as the cutters) crashing a party to get more information about the New Smoke.  Tally enjoys her new job as a protector of the city more than she expected.  The Smokey they were trying to get to made an exciting escape that was full of twists and turns that made for a thrilling and page-turning beginning and the excitement didn’t stop there.  Zane, Tally’s boyfriend from Pretties, returns to New Pretty Town after his surgery.  Tally and Shay agree to help Zane escape and find the New Smoke, each is unaware of the secret plans of the other two along the way and they all get more than they bargained for.  While at times I still tripped over the word choice I am more comfortable with it this go around and find it mildly interesting.  Westerfeld continues to capture my attention with his exciting and oddly realistic world from a fantastic future.

In this issue we've got tonnes of action and we really don't know yet how this will end up.

Deena Shan is a great heroine and I really hope she survives though that's up in the air.

Will the Rebels make it back to save their friends? Of course they will, but someone won't make it...

On an Imperial station, Luke and Leia do their best to distract their cruel captor from the rest of Rebels still loose in the facility. Unfortunately, Imperials have found Deena Shan, the Rebel team's last hope for success. Deena is cornered into a decision of disastrous proportions for herself and everyone around her. By the time Ackbar deems a rescue mission worth the risk, there may be no one left to save.

Rod Serling - Interview Pt 1

Apart from that, I have an adventure to prepare for sunday and a dayjob (and a cat, and two budgies, and a girlfriend (not necessarily in that order) and-and-and ... and high blood pressure (I wonder from what?).

Anyway, just wanted to drop you a line. And to say that I have uploaded some new pix to the Art of AAS page. Enjoy!

You'll find new pix for a preview of Transfer there, a new setting for the Universal Roleplaying Game URPG. The preview file was distributed at a RPG convention in Germany and can be found either on the above mentioned URPG website or here:

Transfer Vorschauheft

"We come to bury Speed Racer, not to praise him" might as well have been imprinted on the foreheads of critics as they marched into their screenings of the new Wachowski flick. Sure enough, page after page of critical vitriol has been spewed all over this film, creating the widespread perception that Speed Racer is the "must avoid" movie of the summer.

So, it was with little-to-no enthusiasm that the Super Summer Movie Fun Club - Go!  took their seats last weekend, prepared to endure the headache-inducing groan-fest that we've all been warned about.

When the lights came up two hours later, we all blankly stared at each other for a moment and, almost in unison, began singing "I liked it!"

We all liked it. Every one of us. In fact, as we walked out of the theater, we all scratched our heads and wondered, "where's this terrible movie all the critics have been bitching about?"

Speed Racer  was fun. I think I had a smile on my face the entire time. Like it or hate it, the worst thing you can say about the unique style of the film is it's "too colorful." There was no forced over-use of hand held camera, no fast cutting for the sake of it nor any other "modern" technique that is usually the culprit in me wanting to rip the bulb out of the projector.

It was just colorful.

The action was fast and furious and the quieter moments of storytelling and character development were traditional and reserved - as it should be. In fact, the most impressive "bold, new cinematic style" that has been hyped about this movie is the use of long takes, where slow wipes and a montage of background images replace the music-video style editing that has been addling our brains for a decade.

The story was surprisingly complex for a "kid's movie" and, while two dimensional, you like the good guys and hate the bad guys. The dialog is snappy and smart and the moments of campy, over the top humor are always with a wink to the audience. Like any good "cartoon," there are layers of comedy and innuendo aimed at adults and, most importantly, the movie is consistent.  It always sticks to its own rules, follows its own logic and never strays from the path; this made it easy to immerse yourself in the world of  Speed Racer.

The problem with most summer action movies is that they try to make you believe the real  world is in trouble and these are real  people trying to save it - and then someone jumps off an F16, runs across an exploding bridge and uses a Palm Pilot to hack into the Treasury Department. All these leaps from reality to fantasy are what make you roll your eyes and say "this is so fucking stupid."

Not so with Speed Racer - it's always a fantasy and always a fun one. The worst thing I can say about the movie is it's a little too long and by the time we get to the last action sequence, we've seen it all so many times it just loses its impact.

Kind of like last summer's $100 million dollar action-fest based on a cartoon: Transformers.  But guess what?  Critics liked Transformers, and that movie was a huge, stinking pile of shit!    Here's what USA Today had to say about Transformers  last year:

"Yes, it's loud, explosive and silly, but it also perfectly embodies the concept of a summer blockbuster with its simple good-guys-vs.-bad-guys plot, cheeky humor and flawless special effects. Transformers is easily the best movie based on an adaptation of a cartoon TV series."

And what did the same critic have to say about Speed Racer?

"For a movie about velocity, the excitement factor is low and the races feel like a drag. Perhaps that has a lot to do with its length: 2 hours and 10 minutes, which is at least a half-hour too long for a movie based on a cartoon. Or maybe it's the predictable story about a guy who goes up against crooked corporate sponsors."

So let me get this straight, a simple plot with loud and silly action is a good thing for Transformers, but the nail in the coffin for Speed Racer?  And while I agree that 2 hours and 10 minutes is too long for a movie based on a cartoon, your beloved Transformers  was 2 hours and twenty  minutes long!

Bite me, USA Today.

Here's how the Hollywood Reporter  felt about Speed Racer:

"In this aggressively rudimentary emotional drama designed -- literally -- around impossible racing car action... the basic laws of gravity and aerodynamics aren't simply denied; they are totally repealed.  The possible miscalculation here are the wearying number of races that all look alike."

Let's see... Transformers:  Rudimentary emotional drama?  Check.  Disregard for laws of gravity and aerodynamics?  Check.  A wearying number of look-alike action sequences?  Check!  So, on paper, Transformers  is every bit as suck-ass as Speed Racer.   What did the same critic have to say about Transformers?

"The movie is noisy fun, with characters and plot lines kept simple and flashes of comedy that hit home more often than not.  The best thing in the script is how a teen plot line gets tied into the fate of the world."

Ok let's try this again: Speed Racer:  Noisy fun?  Check.  Simple characters and plot lines?  Yup.  Comedy that succeeds more than it fails?  Totally.  A story about a teen who ends up changing the world?  Check, check and check!

Sit on it and spin, Hollywood Reporter!

So what gives? Why all the hate for Speed?  What made the critics all decide to gang up on our innocent little boy racer and throw him under a truck?  Two things: hype and the Wachowskis.

Sure, lots of movies are hyped to death every summer, but I guarantee you're not going to see the critics face off with Batman or Indiana Jones... the difference is Speed Racer  was hyped as "an entirely new art form" and "a movie unlike anything you've seen before." Well fuck, that's like standing naked in front of your girlfriend with your legs spread and telling her she looks fat. You might as well ask  to be kicked in the balls. The last thing you want to do before showing a god damn critic anything  is tell him he's about to see an ingenious masterpiece. Can you blame them for rolling up their sleeves and saying, "Oh yeah? I'll show you  an ingenious masterpiece" and then telling the world your movie is about as clever as a hat on a toilet.

The other problem is our ever-reclusive Wachowski brothers. By laying low and refusing to talk about the movie or grant interviews, they give off an air of pompous superiority, as if to say "our masterpiece will speak for itself and we can't be bothered to answer your pathetic press questions about it." Good going, boys, why stop with shooting yourselves in the foot when you can just hack the damn thing off?

All of these things were like waving a giant red flag in front of the critics; you told them you were brilliant and then denied them access - result? Backlash reviews.

But Darth Mojo readers are above this! Look past the hype, ignore the reviews, unlearn what you have learned and get your ass in a Speed Racer  seat this weekend; the movie deserves to be seen in a theater and based on the box office performance, it may run out of gas much too soon.

                     *          *          *          *          *          *

Super Summer Movie Fun Club, GO!  members say...

STEVE:  8/10

Witness the power of lowered expectations!  I never watched much SPEED RACER as a kid, so I went into the movie with few preconceptions and a chorus of negative reviews echoing in my brain.  The movie tells a simple story with a surprising amount of narrative sophistication.  The cast is appealing and the visuals are endlessly inventive (although the racing sequences bear a lot of similarity to a recent series of Mattel Hot Wheels direct-to-video movies called ACCELERACERS).  If only it were about 20 minutes shorter...

DAVE: 7/10

It’s so discouraging that the critics can’t (or won’t) appreciate the creativity and sense of wonder present in every frame of the Wachowski’s adaptation of SPEED RACER. Yes, it looks garish and takes a bit of getting used to. Yes, it runs a half hour too long. And yes, the film shifts awkwardly between batshit-crazy, anime action and traditional family drama. But when the end result is this much fun, who cares? Congratulations critics, you’ve managed to torpedo an exciting and original family film that doesn’t condescend to it’s audience or resort to cynicism. Keep on hatin’, bitches!!

Basically it's a  futuristic post-apocalyptic setting where the cold war had gone horribly bad. The best comparisons I can think of would be to say the Fallout series of games, Mad Max/The Postman movies, or similar to television shows like Jeremiah but with more advanced technology scattered throughout and more savage in it's telling.

Sounds pretty interesting doesn't it? Well I only have 6 books so far, 5 Outlanders novels and one Deathlands. Only 120+ novels and I'll be all caught up! :P

Looking forward to getting started on a couple of these, but only after I read a couple more in the Ender series. The second one I'm nearly finished now and the third I'll hopefully be getting tomorrow.

I mentioned how I started to watch this show back in March.

Since then, there's been a couple of great blog breakdowns on the show that you can find; I personally relate to LucyVee of 'Write Here, Write Now' who says:

As far as I was concerned, it was OBVIOUS Sam Tyler was in a coma; not only did the phones give it away I thought, I was raised on an 80s/90s diet of Thomas Covenant, Labyrinth, Quantum Leap etc where people would enter other worlds thanks to accidents, invitations from goblin kings, time portals and so it goes on.

My own blog entry on the show prompted the following comment in the comment box (I love you readers, have I mentioned that? Unless, of course, you try to pimp your books or spam with links and then you can just go get puppet-cancer):

what I’m not enjoying is the way she dresses- yes it is very 80s but no self-respecting female police officer would have been seen dead dressed like that- this was the time when female officers were trying to prove they were as good - if not better than, male officers - none of the ones I know would have gone around dressed as a tart, showing her bra strap off and wearing that much makeup- that was not the way to get taken seriously back then.

Thanks "Psychodiva"! Now that I've finished the whole lot, I've got a few theories about how the show justifies the dress-sense and the style. 

Uh, it doesn't justify it very well. Darn.

After reading some work on portrayals of women, such as that reported on Jezebel; which draws on young women, hyper-sexualization and dress-sense in a few research papers, it does concern me somewhat (although the show is clearly not targeted at children). One site I mentioned in a previous blogpost is Commercial Free Childhood, which recently have a campaign against Abercrombie & Fitch: 

Thongs for 10-year-olds that say “eye candy.” Shirts with slogans like “Who needs brains when you have these?” and “Do I make you look fat?”. Ads touting group sex to sell clothing to teens and preteens. When it comes to sexualizing children, Abercrombie & Fitch is among the worst corporate offenders.

I'm also reminded of the ongoing efforts to address cat-calling, with surveys like the one done by Rutgers University in 2006 and 2007 of 550 women - who ranged in age from 15 to 64 in the international online component and from 18 to 24 in the Rutgers survey of women from central New Jersey - that were 'asked about their experiences with street harassment and how it "encourages women to look at themselves as body parts instead of as full, whole, intelligent human beings" and can cause women to fear for their safety'.

In addition, Emily May of hollabackNYC.blogspot.com says "I think sites like ours can help women see that they're not alone, that it happens to women in all walks of life by men in all walks of life, and that it's not okay."

In the end, what I see as being endorsed in Ashes to Ashes is a reflection of how 'culture contributes to what is the norm' - as demonstrated in a upcoming US study on 'Perceived Experiences with Sexism Among Adolescent Girls':

Teenage girls of all ethnic and socioeconomic backgrounds still experience sexism and sexual harassment – but cultural factors may control whether they perceive sexism as an environmental problem or as evidence of their own shortcomings...

Brown and Leaper note that it is important for girls to be able to identify sexism and sexual harassment as environmental factors, lest they attribute negative experiences to their own faults and suffer erosion of self-esteem. Frequent sexual harassment may lead girls to expect and accept demeaning behaviors in heterosexual romantic relationships, and sexist remarks.

DI Alex Drake doesn't need to dress the way she does, in much the same way no child should need to dress in an overtly sexualized way to be 'cool'. In the first episode, it she's thrown together a few items from the original 'tart' costume that she wore whilst undercover, as her options are limited: she finds the wardrobe in her borrowed flat is full of men's shirts. In the 'present time', she's without a dash of make-up and in a professional suit for the few scenes we see her in, before she gets shot.

Alex then asks Shaz to 'get me a change of clothes; I'd like to get out of red before Chris DeBurgh writes a song about me'. Is Shaz then responsible for buying the range of white silk parachute jumpsuits, Flashdance-inspired off-the-shoulder numbers, tight jeans and white-leather jacket? She's certainly never out of high heels for much of the series, although I struggle to remember an episode where she's ever running after a suspect as opposed to just watching the male cast pursue suspects or riding shotgun in the car.

Essentially from the first episode on, she indeed dresses in a fairly revealing fashion - or at least more suited to going to a disco than investigating crimes. I would probably argue that bra-straps showing is what you would kind of expect to happen if you're wearing an off-the-shoulder shirt... but no. You wouldn't expect that style when in a professional office situation and certainly not in the police-force, even in the 1980s.

I would argue that what other weak justification there could be for her adopting such dress-sense (or better, a wry playing up to the role that the time and situation appears to have for her) is due to Alex Drake's refusal to accept what is happening to her. Why should she take it seriously? Why shouldn't she dress in an ironic, fun or aggressively and overtly sexualized way? It's not real!

"A subconscious construct sustained by severe cranial trauma.... this is a full-sensory hallucination... no, no, this happened to him, it can't happen to me. The mind, fashions conduits to the real world... I need to know if I'm in hospital, I need to know if Molly knows where I am... I'm unconscious and I need reviving."

In short, she doesn't take it at all seriously much of the time - 'stop wiggling your fingers every time you say my name', snarls Gene, as she turns him into a construct complete with quote marks. 'I must constantly analyze... where does that leave me?' she asks, as she ends up writing DEAD on the whiteboard.

Therefore perhaps she fights against the sexism and prejudice by laughing at it, dismissing its power over her and focusing her main efforts on solving why she is there, rather than the image she is forced into? Maybe when faced with the coffee-room full of James Bond and 'tennis girl scratching' posters, perhaps she feels directing her efforts towards getting home to the year 2000 is going to have more success than reversing the laddish culture?

Interesting to note the comment it makes about the logical extension of feminism in Episode Four, where charmingly dopey Chris, when faced by 'wimmins-libbers' is argued into being so pro-feminist that he can't even buy Shaz a chocolate bar because 'I'd be patronizing you... what I'd be saying by getting it for you is that you're not able to get your own independent chocolate. You're a woman!'

Alex, like Sam in Life On Mars, stands aside wincing as the 'boys' punch suspects after a high-speed chase in Episode Three - 'just because I'm stuck here, doesn't mean I have to like it'. Yet unlike Sam, the violence doesn't give her the same nightmares. She just continually returns to her parents, to the unsolved mystery and the ghastly Bowie-esque Pierrot's shouting. During that same episode, she makes a firm statement about gender prejudice during a rape investigation: 

Alex: They say it's difficult for rape victims to be believed - I wonder why? ... It's not about sex, it's about control, power and revenge.

Gene: Maybe tell me about it some other time, when I'm in a coma, when I'm dead??

So, uh, sometimes she takes it seriously and sometimes not? Confused...

Alex's upper-class accent, vocabulary and education never escapes a snide comment - 'Is this la-di-da posh bollocks meant to impress me?', often contrasting her implicitly to the placidly cheerful Shaz Granger, who practically melts into the background when compared to Alex's flashy ensemble and assertive interpretations of crime scenarios. 

All of this boils down to my saying - sure. Alex Drake's character is indeed professional, articulate, intelligent, witting and confident enough to take on even the most misogynistic stock characters that appear in the show... but the costuming is a distraction. It really is. And makes for mixed messages.

I did note how when she gets smashed and has a one-night stand, that it leads Gene to be disappointed in her; how that indicates that she's lost some self-respect by taking on the attitude that 'this 80s time-period isn't real'. I did wince at how she brusquely allowed 'her arse to get stamped' even with the 'up-yours-this-means-nothing' attitude to the tradition (although her mother's appearance makes a great point about even taking it on your own terms doesn't make it any more acceptable).

I also liked the point made by the conclusion of the series that sexual freedom has ramifications in terms of endangering trust and love for both women and men - and those related to them. How far do you push it before someone snaps and says 'this hurts me when you selfishly think of your own desires first - and now I'll choose the ultimate selfishness in return'? If you haven't seen the show for yourself, I'll leave that as the closest I'll get to a spoiler!

But as 'Psychodiva' says at the start - no, professional women don't need to dress like that to prove anything. To choose to dress like that is distracting in that context and does tend to dilute the overall message about respecting the person underneath.

I also have a concern about how it appears to lead to other women being judged as 'why not you too if you are a woman in the same league' or 'you are less deserving of our attention because you don't dress like that'. Is it hurting other women's chances of being taken seriously unless they 'get with the tartchick look'?

I'll continue to watch out for Season Two, although I know that 'What Not To Wear' is a modern show and Trinny and Suzannah won't turn up to tell Alex that being powerful and confident doesn't require such costumes! 

By the way, the 'Write Here, Write Now' blog has a nice little interview by one of the ATA writers, Mark Greig: 

Who would win in a fight, Alex Drake or Sam Tyler?

Alex. Not only is she smarter, she'd smack Sam senseless whilst he was still discussing what the rules of engagement should be, and does Gene really have to be the referee? 

Keep fighting, Alex.

Looks like poor Wicket is getting a sphincter full of the man who gave us Jar Jar Binks as well while they fly trough the stars. Hot stuff. Only in Japan.

via: Topless Robot

Share It!

Directed by Richard Kelly

Starring Dwayne "The Rock" Johnson, Seann William Scott, Sarah Michelle Gellar

Welcome to Shitflix! Where we review only the worst movies that hit the screen. That's right, watching dozens of movies a month is inevitably going to result in the viewing of some truly awful films. Films that just make me mad that I wasted the time watching them, but I shouldn't think of them that way really, they're learning experiences on what not to do. For those of you who say, well it's easy to critique when you don't create, fuck that shit, I do create, I've even created and worked on some turds, and know a turd when I smell it. So we'll kick it off with this turd...turd.

Being an avid fan of Donnie Darko, Kelly's first feature film, I was excited to see his sophmore attempt. I tried to learn as much as I could about it, talking to fellow filmmakers who were involved in the film, hearing all kinds of crazy stories and descriptions about it being a musical, no a comedy, no a sci-fi film. Starring the Rock? Buffy as a porn star? I was intrigued.

Then the reports from Cannes starting pouring in. To sum them up in one word: scathing. A sampling referencing Wikipedia: "Salon.com critic Andrew O'Hehir called the Cannes cut "about the biggest, ugliest mess I've ever seen." Jason Solomons, in The Observer (UK), said that "Southland Tales was so bad it made me wonder if [Kelly] had ever met a human being" and that ten minutes of the "sprawling, plotless, post-apocalyptic farrago" gave him the "sinking feeling that this may be one of the worst films ever presented in [Cannes] competition." Ebert called it "The most disastrous since, yes, The Brown Bunny."

I saw Brown Bunny. It's a piece of shit. 2 hours of why Vincent de Gallo feels sad and simultaneously a worthy enough filmmaker to shove a fake mold of his dick in Chloe Sevigny's mouth.

So that was enough to get me not to see it in the theater, that and my cohort's luke-warm review of the film when most of his reviews are very forgiving. Still curious though, I flipped through the first graphic novel, but slapped it back on the shelf when it failed to grab me after the first few pages. It read like a college student's first road trip to Vegas, showing the author's age and experience. It reminded me of a coworker who went to school with Kelly and related his disgust with his daily hubris on the budding Darko script. How, in his words, it was just a blatant rip-off of Harvey. It made me wonder if he had an orginal idea to present.

Well I took the plunge last night, actually two nights ago cause I couldn't sit through the entire thing in one sitting. When I'm by myself and audibly sighing, I know there's something wrong. The story was like a 3 year old finger painting, dialogue was atrocious, the performances were noticably self-aware of the quality of material and as a result, were detached and a little embarrassing to watch. Specifically the forced quirkiness of the characters, the Rock's finger twiddling, Bai Ling's girations, Lovitz's monotone monologuing. Timberlake's musical number is probably one of the few redeeming things in the movie, but the end dance montage with Mandy Moore, Buffy, and the Rock was painful to watch, making me grab frantically for the remote.

Those of you looking for the depth and subtext of Darko will be disappointed with the heavy-handedness of the plotting and reiteration of story points. The film was overbloated with subplots that went nowhere and then hit a lazy climax that just felt sloppy. Even without knowing the back story, I felt like I was retreading the same material over and over again. I can't imagine what it must have been like to sit through the 160 minute version at Cannes.

This looks like a student film and reeks of inexperience and self-indulgence. Kelly self proclaims his Lynch influence, but you can't force weird, it just feels forced. He tries to make fun of the Hollywood system but instead entrenches himself further in said system. His next film stars Cameron Dias and James Marsden and after that he's rumored to be making Donnie Darko 2. You don't get more Hollywood sellout than that.

Mr. Kelly, I question your commitment to Sparkle Motion.

Other Notable Films by this Director: Donnie Darko (2001)

Based on Whitley Streiber's book by the same name, Communion charts Streiber's alleged abduction by Aliens and the effects that it had on him and his family. Streiber, played by Christopher Walken, is abducted and researched by aliens from his country get away. He and his family must then cope with the psychological impact of the event. The movie looks a bit dated now; the aliens look more like they came out of Jim Henson's puppet shop than like real creatures, and the abduction scenes are like Monty Python skits . . . Mony Python skits with Christopher Walken.

Abduction law:

1. Whitley's wife says that the shrink should be trusted because she gives "evidence [that] is accepted in court."

IMDB
Rotten Tomatoes

They all look different, yet the same. They seem to be saying, "I can only be Kirk's temporary girlfriend!"

(via Miss Cellania)

i feel like a complete geek for admitting that i like it but I'm not ashamed, it's really good! at least it means that i have something to watch while i should be revising! only have to watch 59 episodes and i will be up to date with American tv and with my friends. i highly suggest if you like sci-fi you should watch this show, its brilliant. but as i was told to do watch the mini-series first, it makes everything a lot clearer and you can understand it a lot easier

Plot:

A Las Vegas magician who can see into the future is pursued by FBI agents seeking to use his abilities to prevent a nuclear terrorist attack.

IMDB score: 6.2/10

Found at /film

ABC, Thursdays at 10:00PM

Genre: Sci-Fi Drama

Conceit: The Thinking Man's "Gilligan's Island".

There was this moment while I watched "Greatest Hits" last episode, where I started getting inexplicably excited.  Maybe its not inexplicable.  That episode really started moving stuff into place for the finale.  And Charlie's life was or wasn't going to end.  And it was all racing towards the end.  That's exactly how I feel during hour one of this three hour finale.  

Jack and Sawyer.  Cyclops and Wolverine.  One is the only one who can lead.  The other is the only one you'd ever want in a fight.  Both men reached the helicopter and were one step away from just taking it back and saving the world.  Except one thing: Hurley is with Ben.  Ever since the first episode this season, we've been trying to figure out what Hurley meant when he told Jack he was sorry he went with Locke.  Is this it?  Is this the decision that changes everything?

I guarantee that you could not have guessed who it was doubling back on Kate and Sayid's trail.  And when Nestor Carbonell walked through the leaves, all you thought was "that's the missing piece; that's what we need to make sense of this."  Meanwhile, back on the tanker, we may be setting out for quite possibly the most tragic finale Lost has had yet.

Our flash forward went only a couple days into the future as the Oceanic 6 finally touch down in civilization.  Jack finds himself finally burying his "dad" and giving a very touching eulogy, only to be blindsided moments later with the revelation that he left his half-sister behind and he's staring at his nephew.  Kate returned to the real world to remember that no one loves her except Claire's baby, who she's claimed as her own.  Hurley cannot escape the numbers, no matter how far from the island he gets.  His psychosis is just around the corner.  Sun shows that she has inherited her father's ruthlessness.  And Sayid finally gets the girl.  I said before that Desmond and Penny are the "under the radar awesome couple".  Sayid and Nadia are 2nd place for that award.  

I know this is only hour one of what was probably meant to be a three hour, one-shot finale, but I'm facing two realities.  First, I will be miserable waiting one week for the next episode.  Second, I will be beyond words, waiting for 8 to 9 months for the next episode.

Final Grade: A

Lots of fun stuff. Big thanks to Beth over at IconsOfFright.com for being so kind to us and letting people know who we are and what we're about.

YOU CAN READ THE ENTIRE INTERVIEW BY CLICKING HERE!

Enjoy and don't forget to come back here and leave a comment to let us know what you think! And don't forget... DIARY OF THE DEAD on DVD May 20th. That's this Tuesday!
SUBSCRIBE TO THE TRIPLE E PRODUCTIONS NEWS FEED VIA RSS

OR SUBSCRIBE VIA EMAIL

Subscribe to Triple E Productions's News Blog by Email

***WE WILL NOT give out or sell your email address to anyone.

Image Courtesy NASA/JSC

By Steve Hammons

This article also appears on AmericanChronicle.com and Joint Recon Study Group

Many researchers have hypothesized and attempted to prove that human consciousness is undergoing significant change.

This alleged change is not just increased intellectual knowledge or even social networking via the internet and other mass media.

Rather, people from diverse fields including, but not limited to, various sciences, education, defense and intelligence communities, psychology and spirituality have conducted research about the fundamental nature of individual and group changes in human consciousness.

That is, our individual awareness is purported to be increasingly linked with a larger energy or field in terms of quantum physics theories, spiritual concepts and Nature in ways we may not fully understand at this time.

Over the last few decades, research into extra-sensory perception (ESP), “anomalous cognition” (unusual or unconventional awareness or abilities), “remote viewing” (ESP methods developed in Project STARGATE by the U.S. military and intelligence communities) and similar areas have indicated that new ways of understanding human consciousness were emerging.

Sorting out the truth and the questionable claims and beliefs can be challenging.

Learning about theories of changing consciousness and changing realities around us can cause anxiety for some people, be interesting for others and a little of both for many folks.

With the difficulties facing us in terms of war and armed conflict, social problems, natural disasters, threats to our natural resources (including global climate change) and other developments, any help we can get in improving human intelligence, knowledge and consciousness would seem to be very helpful.

SCIENCE AND SPIRIT

Accompanying continued progress in understanding the potential and apparent direction of human consciousness, some researchers point out that a “unified field” or “zero-point field” probably exists around us and within us.

In addition to this hypothesized energy field underlying what we see and experience around us, there may be various dimensions that we may not always see. Some researchers propose that boundaries or membranes, sometimes referred to as “branes,” separate these dimensions.

For people who wonder about ideas like an afterlife, Heaven and angels, theories about other dimensions actually existing along with our normal reality might make sense. Individuals who say they have had a “near-death experience” or NDE report crossing a boundary, a tunnel of beautiful light, to a different reality.

Some spiritual researchers have hypothesized that there could be several layers or kinds of dimensions in the afterlife.

How do these ideas fit with emerging discoveries and theories in modern physics and other sciences? There seem to be some common elements between the scientific and spiritual views.

Spiritual philosophies and faiths often note that intellectual or brain-oriented thinking can only get us so far in understanding a larger intelligence or force around us.

Transcending our thinking minds, then using our hearts and what is often called a soul take us to new levels of perception, according to certain belief systems.

These same kinds of methods are used in ESP and remote viewing. Using internal resources that are not simply thinking with our brains, people can tap into perceptions we often call intuition, instincts, gut feelings, hunches, dreams and visions to gain new insights and information.

This is one area where science and spirituality seem to be merging. And it seems to be where new phenomena and insights are emerging.

GRADUAL AND SUDDEN DEVELOPMENTS

Will the human race continue to develop in awareness, intelligence and compassion at a steady pace so that we will gradually solve some of our problems and succeed as a species on our planet?

Or, might more sudden events trigger increased urgency or progress toward positive and constructive developments? It could be that both a steady trend in our understanding of new discoveries and certain significant events and breakthroughs will happen together.

Our trajectory of increased knowledge and understanding seems to be increasing steadily. And, the possibility of sudden jolts of events could also be on the horizon.

A reason for concern, of course, is that these jolts could be of a problematic nature.

Things like a significant increase in human warfare, including the use of nuclear weapons, are real and current concerns that we see in the news quite frequently.

Natural disasters such as earthquakes, volcanic activity and powerful storms are also occurring in devastating ways, causing loss of life and human suffering.

Global climate change with melting polar ice, rising sea levels, impacts on agriculture, fresh water supplies and other outcomes could also be very damaging.

Some people even talk about legends and theories of a global “pole shift” of the Earth’s crust, causing devastating damage to human civilization. A magnetic pole shift is reportedly already occurring, according to some reports.

Concerns about meteors, activity of the sun and possible events in or from space can make us wonder about possible threat scenarios.

Theories of a “Planet X” that may be heading for our solar system also can be interesting and alarming.

For those with very open minds, or maybe inside intelligence information, visitation to Earth of intelligent beings from other planets and/or other dimensions cannot be ruled out. In fact, the nature of possible visitation of this kind could include developing friendships and alliances with extraterrestrial visitors as well as preparing for conventional or unconventional and asymmetric defense and conflict.

The unidentified flying objects (UFOs) that are sometimes spotted in the skies around the world, and even closer encounters that some people report, make us wonder if something along these lines could actually be going on.

Very credible people within the scientific, military and intelligence fields seem to be gradually and carefully letting us know that it is wise to be prepared for more information about this kind of situation.

From the down-to-Earth views to the far-out scenarios of both positive and problematic trends and events, we can see an interesting range of possibilities. What will the future bring?

Native Indians of the Americas, for example, have many legends about the larger cycles of life on this planet and about different ways of looking at and interpreting the nature of Nature around us and within us.

From ancient Native American sources, we might look at prophesies about the year 2012, when some significant development might occur. But what?

As we go about living our everyday lives, many of us wonder about what could happen in the coming days. What disasters or miracles might occur? Are there wars and battles on the horizon or a new era of peace?

Will the human race develop into a more wonderful species or will we destroy ourselves in foolish warfare and destructive treatment of our planet?

Human consciousness is a key element of all of these possible scenarios.

Maybe now is the time to continue and improve our understanding about discoveries in human perception. Because time may be running out for us. Or, time as we know it may itself change in unusual ways.

We can all look into our consciousness. We might discover surprising new insights that can help us individually and globally prepare for the trends and sudden shifts that we face in the days ahead.

Genre: Sci-Fi Drama

Conceit: Superboy Meets World.

Supergirl was always an iffy concept, even in the comic books.  It was basically a girl Superman, who was more immature.  Not terribly compelling.  In Smallville, Kara Zor-El was suspect because Laura Vandervoort is not much of an actress.  From her introduction in the beginning of the season, it was obviously that Vandervoort was cast more for her looks than for any acting ability that she may have.  But give the girl some edge and she's actually interesting to watch.  Flying out of exploding planes, double dealing Lex, this is a Kara I can get with.  Unfortunately, it wasn't Kara, was it?  It was Milton Fine, Brainiac.  Kara was sent to the Negative Zone  Brainiac.  He has been the villain of choice this season.  I know that Brainiac is an important character in the Superman universe, but I've been terribly bored by him this entire season.  Which is why I took so much personal satisfaction in Clark's slow motion punching him in the face.  I also took personal satisfaction in Clark killing Brainiac.  This has always been central to the Superman mythos: when it means more than who he is, can Clark break his own moral code?

And Lana is gone.  Man, what a lame way to get rid of her.  I mean, I know that Kristen Kreuk wanted off the show, and I know the reality is that Lana and Clark don't end up together, and I even know that Clark and Chloe are more entertaining that Clark and Lana ever were, but that was a weak send off.  Here's hoping for the occasional guest appearance.  

We finally got the face off we've waited seven years for.  Lex finally knows.  No gimmicks.  No memory wipes (yet).  Michael Rosenbaum shows why he knows the character of Lex Luthor so well.  An even balance between a desire to do the right thing and flat out narcissism.  To "save" the world, Lex needs to control Clark.  And so the fortress collapses in on itself, in this less spectacular special effects.  And that's it. 

I know that season finales are supposed to be cliff hangers, but that was just...meh.  I mean, the show faded to black with no real pay off.  With nothing to wonder about.  Sure, Kara's in the negative zone.  Yawn.  Chloe's been arrested.  Ok semi-interesting.  Black Lex cradling Clark in a dying Fortress.  Lame.  Here's hoping that next season (which I'm pretty sure is the last season) finds a workable path and sticks to it.

Final Grade: C