The libertarian Adam Smith Institute opines that Toy Story 3 is an animated allegory on the pitfalls of socialism. I never thought about Toy Story 3 in stark political terms, but I’ll be damned if it’s not true!
However, there are more movies that harp on the evils of capitalism. One clear cut example is Chicken Run, an animated film about a group of chickens plotting to escape from the clutches of an evil farmer, who is bent on turning them into chicken pot pies in order to maximize profits. The chickens, acting collectively (like good Marxists), manage to thwart the farmer’s plans and fly the coop, so to speak. On the surface, it is a fun little movie, but the underlying theme is more insidious. On this score, Toy Story 3 is a welcome antidote.
Whatever the political themes, both films are a joy to watch.
Showing posts with label movies and television. Show all posts
Showing posts with label movies and television. Show all posts
Wednesday, August 4, 2010
Thursday, April 1, 2010
Thursday, February 11, 2010
New Toy Story 3 Trailer
The official theatrical trailer for Toy Story 3:
The movie rocks!!! I will definitely go see it, and bring my 4-year-old nephew along.
The movie rocks!!! I will definitely go see it, and bring my 4-year-old nephew along.
Sunday, February 7, 2010
Thursday, January 28, 2010
Wednesday, January 13, 2010
The Ghost Writer Trailer
Here's the international trailer for Roman Polanski's new film, The Ghost Writer:
It looks really, really good. I don't know if I want to watch a movie made by a director who is arrogantly flouting justice living in splendid exile in Europe, while, at the same time, claiming to be exempt from the law because he is an artiste.
And it's not like he is being falsely accused, he readily admits to raping a young girl after plying her with drugs and alcohol. That the victim no longer wants to press charges is immaterial. It's not about her any more, but the rule of law.
It looks really, really good. I don't know if I want to watch a movie made by a director who is arrogantly flouting justice living in splendid exile in Europe, while, at the same time, claiming to be exempt from the law because he is an artiste.
And it's not like he is being falsely accused, he readily admits to raping a young girl after plying her with drugs and alcohol. That the victim no longer wants to press charges is immaterial. It's not about her any more, but the rule of law.
Friday, January 8, 2010
Monday, December 28, 2009
New Christopher Nolan Movie
Christopher Nolan is becoming one of my all-time favorite directors. Just check out this teaser trailer for his new movie Inception:
Looks fantastic.
Looks fantastic.
Sunday, November 1, 2009
Trailer for Green Zone
Check out this trailer for Green Zone, starring Matt Damon:
Another movie to add to my must-watch list.
Another movie to add to my must-watch list.
Wednesday, October 28, 2009
Remake The Third Man? No Way!!!
The web site First Showing is reporting that actors Leonardo di Caprio and Tobey MaGuire are involved in a project to remake film noir classic The Third Man. Alex Billington, who reported the story, concludes: “It's a true noir classic that really can't be topped.”
Hard to disagree with this assessment. Leonardo di Caprio and Tobey MaGuire are good actors, but none of them have the presence, diction, or talent of Orson Welles, a giant among giants (see Citizen Kane, if you already haven’t done so).
What is it with certain Hollywood types who can’t leave something perfect like The Third Man well enough lone, but must submit to their massive egos, thinking that they can do better, or their new “interpretation” would be more relevant. It’s simply bullshit built on vanity and money.
I personally hope the project never comes to pass.
And for those who haven’t seen The Third Man, here’s the trailer:
If you are intrigued, I highly recommend watching the DVD from Criterion, which is filled with extras only a ciniphile would love. The Third Man is a film film, I would be very disappointed if you did not enjoy it it.
Hard to disagree with this assessment. Leonardo di Caprio and Tobey MaGuire are good actors, but none of them have the presence, diction, or talent of Orson Welles, a giant among giants (see Citizen Kane, if you already haven’t done so).
What is it with certain Hollywood types who can’t leave something perfect like The Third Man well enough lone, but must submit to their massive egos, thinking that they can do better, or their new “interpretation” would be more relevant. It’s simply bullshit built on vanity and money.
I personally hope the project never comes to pass.
And for those who haven’t seen The Third Man, here’s the trailer:
If you are intrigued, I highly recommend watching the DVD from Criterion, which is filled with extras only a ciniphile would love. The Third Man is a film film, I would be very disappointed if you did not enjoy it it.
Sunday, October 18, 2009
Toy Story 3 Trailer
It is finally here: the official trailer for Toy Story 3:
Looks really good. Can't wait to see it!
(h/t: FirstShowing)
Looks really good. Can't wait to see it!
(h/t: FirstShowing)
Wednesday, September 9, 2009
Coming Soon: Up In the Air
Walter Kirn's delightful Up In the Air - about a "downsizing" expert (he fires people for a living) and his quest to be the ultimate frequent flier - is coming to the silver screen, starring George Clooney. Here's the trailer:
I'm so looking forward to this film.
I'm so looking forward to this film.
Thursday, September 3, 2009
Video On-Demand Cures Boredom
Was perusing TVGuide.com to see if there was anything worth watching tonight, but found absolutely nothing that interested me.
I need to watch something! Reading at night is not an option for me (I prefer to read in the morning), and I have no hobbies to speak of. And listening to music for the sake of listening to music is not my bag. I need visual stimulation, and television is the only effective delivery system.
Then I realized I have video-on-demand through my cable company. So I’ve decided to watch a couple episodes of No Reservations I somehow managed to miss. So the night is not a total loss at all. Thank you, Anthony Bourdain and video on-demand
I need to watch something! Reading at night is not an option for me (I prefer to read in the morning), and I have no hobbies to speak of. And listening to music for the sake of listening to music is not my bag. I need visual stimulation, and television is the only effective delivery system.
Then I realized I have video-on-demand through my cable company. So I’ve decided to watch a couple episodes of No Reservations I somehow managed to miss. So the night is not a total loss at all. Thank you, Anthony Bourdain and video on-demand
Thursday, August 27, 2009
Review: Inglourious Basterds
Who hasn’t dreamed about killing fascists at least once in their life? I know I have. I want to massacre the bastards by the truckloads, moral and legal constraints be damned. But thanks to Quentin Tarantino’s new revenge fantasy flick, Inglourious Basterds, I can vicariously live the experience without getting my hands dirty or suffer moral qualms.
The movie is about a fictitious squad of Jewish-American servicemen whose sole purpose is to slip behind enemy lines in occupied France in order to kill (and sometimes torture) as many Nazis as possible. Body count is important here. Led by a Tennessee hillbilly named Lt. Aldo Raines, played by Brad Pitt, they rampage through the French countryside, ambushing German soldiers, scalping them like Apaches. No prisoners are ever taken, but a token survivor is always left behind as a living monument, with a swastika carved into their forehead, to scare the shit out of the Germans. And believe me, the Germans are scared shitless, including the Fuhrer himself.
Quentin Tarantino being Quentin Tarantino, naturally, this movie does not work as a conventional narrative, but in the patented Tarantino style of going forwards and backwards. His movies often read like novels, and Inglourious Basterds is no exception.
But in addition to the novel-like elements, Tarantino has added another storyline that complements, but does not compete, with the first. The movie opens up on a French farm, with a farmer cutting wood. He is met a by a charming German SS officer named Col. Hans Larda, who is called the “Jew Hunter” for his single-mindedness to rid France of all Jews. Col. Larda is played with such evil joy by Christoph Waltz; he alone is worth the price of admission. You want to like him but are reminded that his is a Nazi, and a ruthless one at that. Col. Larda suspects the farmer of hiding Jews. With wit and the interrogation skills of an experienced detective, Col. Larda manages to squeezes the truth out of the farmer. No violence is used in the process, but the Jews, on the other hand, their fates were sealed by a hail of bullets.
There was a lone survivor of the massacre, a young girl named Shosanna Dreyfuss, played by French actress Melani Laurent, who manages to escape to Paris, where she ends up running a movie theatre playing nothing but Nazi films. All the while, Shosanna nurses a grudge that eventually develops into full-blown homicidal rage: the targets of which, of course, are Nazis, a theatre full of them, in fact.
The film is derivative like many of Tarantino’s films and include his trademarks: long dialogue scenes about philosophical issues and meditations about German films of the 1920s, unconventional camera angles, and his trademark penchant for violence. It should be said, however, that Tarantino-style violence is not the cartoonish violence that are is found in bonehead Steven Seagal and Chuck Norris films. On the contrary, it is never gratuitous. One of the more interesting aspects of the film is that more than half the movie is in both French and German. For moments, I thought I was watching a foreign film. Surprisingly, it did not detract from the enjoyment of the film at all.
But why did Quentin Tarantino decide to make a film about a Jewish revenge fantasy in the first place? It this article published in Atlantic magazine, he explains why:
The problem, I suppose, is both a philosophical and religious one, so I will leave it there.. Nevertheless, Inglourious Basterds is a welcome addition to both World War II and Holocaust genres, if only for its cathartic effects. The thirst for revenge must be slaked once in awhile, in my opinion, even if it is only on the silver screen.
The movie is about a fictitious squad of Jewish-American servicemen whose sole purpose is to slip behind enemy lines in occupied France in order to kill (and sometimes torture) as many Nazis as possible. Body count is important here. Led by a Tennessee hillbilly named Lt. Aldo Raines, played by Brad Pitt, they rampage through the French countryside, ambushing German soldiers, scalping them like Apaches. No prisoners are ever taken, but a token survivor is always left behind as a living monument, with a swastika carved into their forehead, to scare the shit out of the Germans. And believe me, the Germans are scared shitless, including the Fuhrer himself.
Quentin Tarantino being Quentin Tarantino, naturally, this movie does not work as a conventional narrative, but in the patented Tarantino style of going forwards and backwards. His movies often read like novels, and Inglourious Basterds is no exception.
But in addition to the novel-like elements, Tarantino has added another storyline that complements, but does not compete, with the first. The movie opens up on a French farm, with a farmer cutting wood. He is met a by a charming German SS officer named Col. Hans Larda, who is called the “Jew Hunter” for his single-mindedness to rid France of all Jews. Col. Larda is played with such evil joy by Christoph Waltz; he alone is worth the price of admission. You want to like him but are reminded that his is a Nazi, and a ruthless one at that. Col. Larda suspects the farmer of hiding Jews. With wit and the interrogation skills of an experienced detective, Col. Larda manages to squeezes the truth out of the farmer. No violence is used in the process, but the Jews, on the other hand, their fates were sealed by a hail of bullets.
There was a lone survivor of the massacre, a young girl named Shosanna Dreyfuss, played by French actress Melani Laurent, who manages to escape to Paris, where she ends up running a movie theatre playing nothing but Nazi films. All the while, Shosanna nurses a grudge that eventually develops into full-blown homicidal rage: the targets of which, of course, are Nazis, a theatre full of them, in fact.
The film is derivative like many of Tarantino’s films and include his trademarks: long dialogue scenes about philosophical issues and meditations about German films of the 1920s, unconventional camera angles, and his trademark penchant for violence. It should be said, however, that Tarantino-style violence is not the cartoonish violence that are is found in bonehead Steven Seagal and Chuck Norris films. On the contrary, it is never gratuitous. One of the more interesting aspects of the film is that more than half the movie is in both French and German. For moments, I thought I was watching a foreign film. Surprisingly, it did not detract from the enjoyment of the film at all.
But why did Quentin Tarantino decide to make a film about a Jewish revenge fantasy in the first place? It this article published in Atlantic magazine, he explains why:
“Holocaust movies always have Jews as victims,” he said, plainly exasperated by Hollywood’s lack of imagination. “We’ve seen that story before. I want to see something different. Let’s see Germans that are scared of Jews. Let’s not have everything build up to a big misery, let’s actually take the fun of action-movie cinema and apply it to this situation.”I feel the same way any book I read or any movie I see on the Holocaust, Jews are always depicted as defenseless victims. They never fight back, accepting their fate because it is God’s will, for punishment of sins, real or perceived. It is so maddening. This is one of the reasons why I admire Israel, at least it fights back whenever it is attacked.
It is true that most—some might even say all—films about the Holocaust focus on the persecution of Jews. The Holocaust was very bad for Jews; this is an immovable fact of history. But Tarantino isn’t wrong to suggest that the cinematic depiction of anti-Semitic persecution can become wearying over time, particularly for Semites.
The problem, I suppose, is both a philosophical and religious one, so I will leave it there.. Nevertheless, Inglourious Basterds is a welcome addition to both World War II and Holocaust genres, if only for its cathartic effects. The thirst for revenge must be slaked once in awhile, in my opinion, even if it is only on the silver screen.
Tuesday, August 18, 2009
Do You Know Who I Am
Bollywood superstar Shah Rukh Khan was briefly held (for two hours or so) at Newark International Airport by the Department of Homeland Security. It seems Khan's name matched a name on some terrorist watch list, but after ascertaining Shah Rukh Khan's identity - with the help of the Indian government - he was promptly released
Of course Shah Rukh Khan was upset by his mistreatment, especially given the fact that he is an oft visitor to the United States. And the entire country of India is upset, as well, as if the nation's character was impugned in the process. Naturally, the Indian press is having a field day with countless articles and editorials blasting the United States for what is perceived to be a racist and bigoted slight.
It's hard not to notice an air of arrogance by Shah Rukh Khan and his supporters. It's the type of attitude celebrities are known to take whenever they don't get their way.
"DO YOU KNOW WHO I AM!" This is a common refrain used by celebrities the world over, and Shah Rukh Khan is no exception.
Personally, I think Shah Rukh Khan was more upset that he was not recognized by immigration officers as the legitimate superstar that he is.
In defense of the immigration officers, they did their duty safeguarding American security: they discovered a problem, investigated it, found out there was nothing there, and promptly released the Indian actor. Khan was held for two hours. He wasn't thrown in some hole, renditioned to Cuba, and tortured by the CIA. But according the India press, he might as well have.
I hope this incident doesn't become an ugly diplomatic row between India and the United States, simply for the reason that it's a petty issue.
Of course Shah Rukh Khan was upset by his mistreatment, especially given the fact that he is an oft visitor to the United States. And the entire country of India is upset, as well, as if the nation's character was impugned in the process. Naturally, the Indian press is having a field day with countless articles and editorials blasting the United States for what is perceived to be a racist and bigoted slight.
It's hard not to notice an air of arrogance by Shah Rukh Khan and his supporters. It's the type of attitude celebrities are known to take whenever they don't get their way.
"DO YOU KNOW WHO I AM!" This is a common refrain used by celebrities the world over, and Shah Rukh Khan is no exception.
Personally, I think Shah Rukh Khan was more upset that he was not recognized by immigration officers as the legitimate superstar that he is.
In defense of the immigration officers, they did their duty safeguarding American security: they discovered a problem, investigated it, found out there was nothing there, and promptly released the Indian actor. Khan was held for two hours. He wasn't thrown in some hole, renditioned to Cuba, and tortured by the CIA. But according the India press, he might as well have.
I hope this incident doesn't become an ugly diplomatic row between India and the United States, simply for the reason that it's a petty issue.
Thursday, April 23, 2009
Thinking About Tony Soprano...
Finally settling down to watch the last nine episodes of the Sopranos.
Monday, April 20, 2009
Funny Family Guy Episode
One of the funnier episodes of The Family Guy I have seen in awhile. Stewie essentially builds a transporter and kidnaps the the cast of Star Trek: The Next Generation so he can spend the day with them. The voices are those of the original cast.
Monday, February 2, 2009
Best Super Bowl Ad
Enjoyed watching the Super Bowl this year; the Cardinals kept it close but lost it in the end. Anyway, the second great thing about the Super Bowl are the ads, and most of them were stupid or dull as dirt, except for this one:
Alec Baldwin can't fail in my eyes.
Alec Baldwin can't fail in my eyes.
Monday, October 6, 2008
Review: Dexter, Season One

There series is more a mini-series than episodic television. The story arc’s is spread over 12 tightly-knit episodes, and you really have to watch from the beginning to follow the rather twisted storyline. Not surprisingly, Dexter is based on a series of novels by Jeff Lindsay. Trust me, it’s well worth it. It’s a well-written show and contains some fine performances. Michael C. Hall, who plays Dexter, has – no offence - the face of a serial killer: the vacant, serene eyes, the serious demeanor.
No one knows Dexter is a serial killer, but Dexter emits a vibe,which is readily picked up by Sgt. Drakes, a tough detective. Doakes doesn’t like Dexter, and thinks there is something creepy about Dexter and the way he carries himself. Doakes doesn’t know how right he is. Doakes suspicions are piqued with the arrival of the Ice Truck Killer, a serial killer who dismembers prostitutes and uses their body parts to create morbid sculptures. The Ice Truck Killer is doing this for a reason: he wants to impress Dexter, who the Ice Truck Killer knows is someone like him. A natural born killer. The Ice Truck killer is doing it all for him. And suffice it to say, Dexter is quite impressed by the Ice Truck Killer’s intricate handiwork, a type of envy seen only in fellow professionals. The answer why is revealed later in the series. You’ll all just have to watch it to find out.
Though Dexter is a crime series, its central theme lies in the relationship of its characters. And relationship is dangerous ground for Dexter who cannot feel sadness, love, and sympathy. Dexter, as he admits, is an empty shell. Yet Dexter pursues them by pretending, knowing full well that they keep his homicidal tendencies in check. Dexter comes from a loving home, where his father, who realized his adoptive son’s true nature, taught Dexter how to deal with his nature by teaching him a code; it’s the only way Dexter feels human. Because of his aloofness, Dexter has a rocky relationship with his sister and his girlfriend. The reason for Dexter’s trouble is simple: he just doesn’t open up to them. They don’t realize is that Dexter can’t open up to them because Dexter is afraid they will find nothing there, and if they do fine something, they won’t like what they see. Dexter walks an emotional tightrope, but he has to lest he wants to survive. As Dexter reminds us, almost all serial killers get caught.
Sunday, September 28, 2008
Review: Michael Clayton

Clayton is a lawyer by trade, but he’s mostly a fixer, or janitor, cleaning up messes created by clients of a super humongous law firm Clayton works for. A lawyer with great promise, Clayton is a recovering gambler, divorced, penniless, and in debt after a restaurant that was to be his salvation goes belly-up. Clayton wants out but he has no choice but continue to be the firm's fixer. A job he does very well a senior partner, played by the late Sydney Pollack, often reminds him.
Clayton's latest headache is when the firm's top litigator, Arthur Edens, played wonderfully by British actor Tom Wilkinson, decides to strip naked during a deposition and then run into the parking a lot. The client, a major agro-business, who is being sued for poisoning small farmers with its fertilizer, is not very happy about the turn of events. Clayton is sent to defuse the situation and bring Arthur in from the cold, so to speak. Clayton realizes Arthur, a manic-depressive, is not only off his medication, but is happily working for the plaintiffs, making their case. The corporation’s chief counsel, an ambitious lawyer named Karen Crowder, played by a rather underutilized Tilda Swinton, takes matters into her own hands. She employs a couple of thugs to murder the litigator and make it look like a suicide. Clayton is deeply disturbed by the litigator's sudden death, and finds out that he was murdered. Crowder decides it would be better to get rid of Clayton as well.
I guess we are suppose to hate Karen Crowder for the power hungry corporate tool that she is, but she comes off more pathetic than evil – lame rather than diabolical.
Clayton manages to survive a car bomb, but how he manages to make the connection to Karen Crowder is never bothered to be explored, leaving me, and the probably the audience, scratching their heads. It's a movie that clocks in around two hours, but the directors try to explain it all in the last five, failing miserably at it and leaving me with a bad taste.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)