Movie Picks 1

It's been a week in the making, but I'm ready to release "Mike's Movie Picks"

I'll come right out and say it. I'm not a perfect judge of movies. Some may even say I have poor taste. Anyone who has heard me recommend "Jacob's Ladder" for its spiritual profundity knows this. But I am nonetheless an avid fan of movies good and bad alike. I always have at least one or two films on my radar that are coming soon to theaters. Now that I have someplace to write it down I'd like to catalogue the films that I'm looking forward to.

What do I base my picks on? Well, I'm ashamed to admit very little. I find the list on IMDB to be a pretty good place to start, although I don't always agree with their reviewer about what films to watch out for. Certain actors or directors will bias me one way or another. Production studios or effects houses will too. The preview (or if one isn't available the synopsis) will often be the basis of my decision whether to list a movie or not. Comedies trump dramas, action trumps comedy, sci-fi trumps action, and CG is the wild card.

So, what follows is what I hope will be a rolling 6-month preview of upcoming movies. As films get closer to release and more preview information is made available, I reserve the right to alter my judgment of them. I'll list the movies I would want to see, but I'll also add those that I think deserve honorable mention, those that I'm still undecided on as well as those to avoid.

September:
Fearless - Jet Li and Michelle Yeoh, two of China's finest action stars. Li was fantastic in "Hero" and is a favorite of mine in the genre. There's another martial arts film "The Protector" also releasing this month starring a new up and coming action star Tony Jaa. I'll be keeping an eye on that one too.
Flyboys - A WWI version of "Top Gun" with all the CG flight sequences you could hope for. I only hope that the CG is believable and not too over the top. The previews make it look a bit like the latter, but it may be really exciting to watch nonetheless.
Open Season - After "Over The Hedge" this one looks to be the next best CG movie. Although another CG movie will also be released in September "Everyone's Hero", "Season" looks like it'll have more laughs.
Honorable Mention: Renaissance - This one gets honorable mention because of the unique cinematography. We've seen this sort of thing before in "Through A Scanner Darkly" and "Sin City" and there will likely be more CG-enhanced, live-action films like this in the future as the affects of the computer revolution continue to be felt in the cinema.
AVOID: "Sleeping Dogs Lie" See my earlier post on this one.

October:
This is a slow month for serious movie-goers since this month is typically plagued by the usual suspects of horror films in homage to the secular world's favorite demonization of a Catholic holy day. However there are two films that stand out:
"Flags of Our Fathers" is a Clint Eastwood film about the six men who wound up in the famous Iwo Jima flag raising photograph. I don't want to get too excited about this one yet because "Million Dollar Baby" was a gigantic disappointment. I'll give him credit for being a good director, however. So if the screenplay is right and this turns out to be a heartwarming, patriotic, uplifting homage to the men who became icons of America's determination in the face of adversity, then I'll give it all the praise it deserves.
"The Prestige" - is one of a couple of very similar films coming out this year. "The Illusionist" which came out this month is about a couple of turn-of-the-century magicians who battle for the title of "best magician" with ever impressive trickery that ultimately goes supernatural. That also perfectly describes "The Prestige". And while I really like Edward Burton, and think "Illusionist" will be worth watching, I'll bet "Prestige" will have a bigger box office draw because of the big three: "Batman's" Christopher Nolan and Christian Bale, and "X-Men's" Hugh Jackman.
AVOID: "Saw III" - These films are a little more than a vision of hell. Anyone who would enjoy actually watching films like these need an exorcism and clinical attention.

November:
"Flushed Away" - The first CG project from Aardman Animations Studio (the claymation masters behind Wallace & Grommit). I'll be excited to see how they translate their old-school animation savvy to the new technology.
"Casino Royale" - The long-awaited new Bond film with Daniel Craig as the new Bond. A couple of things make this a very different movie from previous editions: It's the first remake of an old Bond Film, and it features the first blonde Bond.
"Happy Feet" - The first preview for this sold me. This just looks really cute and funny.
Honorable Mentions: Stranger Than Fiction (Will Ferrell & Emma Thompson); The Fountain (A Kubrickian time travel film with Hugh Jackman); Deja Vu (Tony Scott, Jim Caviezel, and time travel again); For Your Consideration (the next 'mockumentary' from Christopher Guest)3
AVOID: "F*ck" - Yes, you read correctly; there really is a movie the title of which cannot be said in polite company. Worse, it features all the Left's favorite comedians (and porn stars!) exploring the entomology of the word. It's like a bad chain email being made into a feature length movie.

December:
"Apocalypto" - Mel Gibson is back with his next big, mysterious movie that some think is an allegory to the demise of our culture. I'm excited to see it despite all the lame buzz in the entertainment media surrounding Gibson.
"Night at the Museum" - A great-looking Ben Stiller comedy and CG fest.
"The Good Shepherd" - I don't know much about this movie yet, but Damon, Jolie, and DeNiro are all favorites (not for their politics, mind you). I'll keep my eye on this one.
"Children of Men" - This could turn out to be a real surprise. If the movie is anything like the preview makes it out to be, this could be a huge pro-life film.
The Jury Is Still Out: "The Nativity Story" See my past blog on this. The potential problem with this film is its depiction of Mary. From the few things I've read, it appears to be a Protestant version, not a Catholic one. Which would mean that despite the pretty packaging the film may offer, the substance of the film would be junk.

January:
It's sad to say that there's really nothing worth watching in January '07. This is definitely the low point of the cinema year. The only film that is worth honorable mention is "The Last Legion" and only because it has Colin Firth and Ben Kingsley starring in this historic epic set during the fall of Rome. The preview doesn't do it much credit, but we'll see. Otherwise, stick with Blockbuster.

February:
"Superhero!" - A spoof of super hero films as the "Scary Movie" franchise did for the horror genre. Could be fun.
"Music and Lyrics By" - The first romantic comedy of the year with Drew Barrymore and Hugh Grant. An odd pairing, but then so was Grant and Sandra Bullock in "2 Weeks' Notice" and that went alright.
The Jury Is Still Out: "Ghost Rider" - Not sure if Nicholas Cage can pull this off, but we'll keep our eyes on it. The trailer didn't' impress.; "Bridge to Terabithia" - The first "Narnia" spinoff film, this one is earmarked to be a blockbuster, but we'll see.; "The Number 23" Jim Carrey once again trying to move away from comedy. Joel Schumacher directs, so it could be good. Stay Tuned!

So that's the 6-month scoop. Once a month I'll revisit my list and add the next month at the end. Have fun at the movies!

Congratulations!

After surveying the headlines today, I thought some congratulations were in order.

Congratulations to Tom Cruise for proving that running your mouth in public the way he did can and does have an affect on your life. Paramount announced their decision to sever ties with Tom Cruise from their studio "amid disputes over money and style." Viacom chief Summer Redstone "cited Cruise'’s infamous 'Oprah' couch jumping, his interview with Matt Lauer on the 'Today' show as well as his attack on Brooke Shields over pharmacological drugs." Steven Spielberg was surprised to hear the news. Well, hopefully Cruise has learned that certain ideologies will get you in trouble. And hopefully the rest of Hollywood will too.

Congratulations to the Vermont liberazzi as they celebrate the news of the end of the first gay civil union. The two women who stood in line not so long ago in July of 2000 anxious to be the first to take advantage of Vermont's new law legalizing civil unions have decided they made a mistake. This news is coupled by the new ruling that gay couples can file for joint custody of children who had the great misfortune of being brought into this social train wreck. Way to go Vermont.

Congratulations to the rest of the country as we celebrate the final approval of the "Plan B" pill. Now more women than ever can retain a promiscuous lifestyle without fear of consequences. At least, not any consequences that can be seen. At least none that will be seen for the time being. Well, at least not this week. Maybe. There will still be the risk of STDs, there will still be the harmful side effects of the drug, and there will now be an even greater number of conceived human lives that will be unknowingly aborted.

In addition to the documented abortions (as reported by Planned Parenthood and other abortion providers, and tallied by counters like this one) there is an unreported and therefore unknown number of lives lost to chemical contraceptives. One report says that 3% of healthy women (5% of overweight women) get pregnant on the pill. That means that at least 3% of the time, the first function of the pill failed and an egg was released, the second function of the pill failed and the sperm made it to the egg, and the third function of the pill failed and the newly conceived human implanted in the woman's uterus. If this happens 3% of the time, then one can surmise that a greater percentage of the time the third function of the pill -- the prevention of implantation -- works. So in over 3% of all women, they are aborting a child without ever knowing it. Congratulations to them. They're parents and will never know it. At least not right away.

So way to go, America. Our culture will take the gold in the downhill slalom.

Trojan Horse Alert

In July 2003 a book was written by Alan Sears, the president, CEO, and general counsel of the Alliance Defense Fund, an organization dedicated to the defense of religious freedom, the sanctity of human life, and traditional values. The book was titled The Homosexual Agenda: Exposing the Principal Threat to Religious Freedom Today. I along with several other friends decided to read the book and meet on occasion to discuss it. It has turned out to be one of the most prophetic books concerning our culture that I've ever read.

Sears and co-author Craig Osten reveal that a six-point strategy was defined in the late 80's by two homosexual activists Marshall Kirk and Hunter Madsen (see here and here) to radically change America's perception of homosexual behavior. Their six points were:
1. Talk about gays and gayness as loudly and often as possible.
2. Portray gays as victims, not aggressive challengers.
3. Give homosexual protectors a 'just' cause.
4. Make gays look good.
5. Make anti-gay victimizers look bad.
6. Solicit funding from corporate America and major foundations to financially support the homosexual cause

The principle of the first point is basically this: "Almost all behavior begins to look normal if you are exposed to enough of it at close quarters and among your acquaintances." Kirk and Madsen put it this way: "First let the camel get his nose inside the tent - and only later his unsightly derriere!"

Kirk and Madsen knew that the media would play a crucial role in the implementation of their strategy: "The average American watches over seven hours of TV daily. Those hours open up a gateway into the private world of straights [non-gay people], through which a Trojan Horse might be passed."

Now, consider for a moment the development of homosexual characters in film and television over the past 20 years. I won't compose a list for you, but clearly gay characters have moved from being quirky secondary characters with a vague sexual orientation to being full-blown main characters in academy award winning films. Besides the obvious success of "Brokeback Mountain", television shows like "Will & Grace", "Ellen", "It's All Relative", and "Queer Eye for the Straight Guy" are good examples of the kind of success the activists have had in implementing their strategy.

Sears and Osten give us the results: "Using data from the National Opinion Research Center at the University of Chicago, the study showed that in 1988, 74.9 percent of respondents said that sex between two people of the same sex is always wrong. By 1998, that number had dropped to 54.6 percent."

The authors go on to demonstrate how all of this is intended to break down public resistance to the goal of redefining the terms "marriage" and "family" so that homosexual relationships can be legitimized and given equal legal footing with heterosexual relationships. As Kirk and Madsen reveal: "This won't just be a change in the law either; it will be a change in society. For if we do it right, the struggle to win the freedom to marry will bring much more along the way" [emphasis added]. Madsen and Kirk appear to be winning.

So, why do I write about this today? Well, there is a new movie coming out that pushes the camel a little further into the tent.

The movie is called "Sleeping Dogs Lie". In this "new breed of romantic comedy", a young couple decides to test the limits of their relationship by revealing their dirty little secrets to each other. The woman reveals that she once orally pleasured a dog.

That's right. A dog.

The other characters in the film naturally act repulsed by this. But keep in mind this is a romantic comedy, and one must presume (the film is not out yet, pardon the pun) that the movie ends happily. I would expect that by the end of the movie the boyfriend will come to terms with her past indiscretion. Whether the general public does, is yet to be seen.

So far, the reviews seem to be negative mostly due to the fact that people didn't like having to watch the opening scene where the offensive action takes place (albeit off-screen). In fact, an early title of the film was "Stay", and one can guess that the filmmakers changed the title when they realized that it sounded too much like a plea to the audience.

I don't know if this is the first major motion picture to reference beastiality like this, but it may be the first to make such an act the central story point. Romantic comedies have been the Trojan Horse of the homosexual agenda for a while now. It appears that more ugliness is spilling from its belly. Perhaps we should keep an eye out for more animal-love film references in the years to come. That's how desensitization works.

And it's all according to plan.

Communicators for Barbarians Service (CBS)

This is a great article by Dennis Prager. I particularly like his suggested questions. Eat your heart out Mike Wallace.

Every film needs an antagonist.

The newest Oliver Stone movie hits theaters this week. Stone is a good movie maker. By "good" I mean that he knows his craft and is adept at making pictures that move us. The problem is that by conservative standards, Stone is a political wacko who likes to make his films as a contribution to the left-wing agitprop (to use my new favorite word). The problem, then, is that his well-crafted propaganda is attractive and sells lot of tickets. The big question surrounding this movie then is, "will he get it right?" How will Oliver treat one of the most significant events in recent U.S. history?

Well, there are of course, two types of reviewers: those who like the movie and those who don't. This one calls it "a damn good movie". The emphasis of the review and the film is on its two central characters and the gut-wrenching ordeal they and their families go through. The reviewer warns that, "ignoring this film...dishonors the filmmaker, the actors and mostly the men [portrayed in the film]. 'World Trade Center' is about them, not about us. We a’re only being asked to appreciate what they endured." Well that's nice. We wouldn't want to dishonor the filmmaker.

Debbie Schlussel, on the other hand, sees the film another way. She writes, "this version will make conspiracy theorists--and extremist Muslims--very happy." Why? Because this version of 9/11 has been completely stripped clean of any and all references to the perpetrators of the attack. But, some may say, the focus of the movie is on the two policemen who are trapped in the rubble, not about the people who carried out the attacks. As one commenter on Schlussel's site puts it, "showing a movie about 9/11 without mentioning Islam or at the very least Al Queda terrorists is like making a movie about the Holocaust without once showing a Nazi or mentioning Germany." Quite true. So, what was the strange force that brought the buildings down? Who is the phantom enemy?

"United 93" beat "WTC" to theaters, but Stone hopes by being the first to reflect on the New York attacks to influence the films that will come after his by making the focus on the victims -- and on the U.S. (Schlussel gives us this insight from Stone: "Maybe later, I'll make another one, from a different perspective. . . " Like from Osama's perspective, perhaps?) The end of "WTC" is punctuated by a statement that reminds us that people "from 87 countries" died on 9/11. What's he trying to say there? That America wasn't the only victim? That the U.S. wasn't the sole target of the attack?

Maybe "attack" is too strong a word for the likes of Stone. As one of the stars of "WTC" put it, the U.S. has done "reprehensible things". Get that? After watching "WTC", we are supposed to believe that the U.S. is somehow the enemy. Sure, our cops and firemen in NYC are brave, but it was our own country's geopolitical/geomilitary action (in at least 86 other countries?) that ultimately brought those buildings down on the international representatives in New York.

So that's why there's no enemy in the movie. They're all sitting in the theater.

Oh boy... Oh boy, oh boy.

The next big movie for me to get excited about.

Welcome to Pallywood

Def: "AGITPROP" -propaganda; especially : political propaganda promulgated chiefly in literature, drama, music, or art

You remember the Dan Rather kerfuffle a while back... forged documents used in a television news article to smear President Bush were proved false by the Blogosphere. A recent article by Rush Limbaugh reveals that this sort of thing is getting worse. Photographs are being doctored to make the story fit the agenda. Worse still, photos and video are being staged to simulate newsworthy material so that the "sight-byte" will make the evening world news. This video on YouTube.com is just fascinating to watch. Michelle Malkin's "Vent" is also worth watching.

That the truth about these things is only getting out via the Blogosphere is more proof that the traditional media outlets are less and less trustworthy. "According to Palestinian sources..." is a tagline to watch out for.