Possession Week Now Showing!

Who doesn't enjoy a tale of demonic possession? This week I will be reviewing films that entail the unwilling (or sometimes willing) hosting to an entity that is not of this world. Some of these films may be comedies, others will be straight up horrors, while some will leave you shaking your head and wondering "What the *BEEP* was THAT?". This won't be a religious debate (I don't have the time or the intellectual fortitude to meditate on such deep matters), this week was made purely out of fun and out of boredom and love for such a genre. If you are a person of faith and you cannot abide stuff of this nature, I urge you to skip this week. For those of you who can't stand my writing in general, I understand. Have a nice day.

But for those of you still here, sit back, relax and and have a cold one with Legion, Belial and Pazuzu- this week is all about you... AND YOUR SOUL! :D

Father's day

Often you will see films about in the wake of an apocalypse the collapse of society and the people who live in it. While these are natural developments, it's not often you see a film adapted from a book that reverses this aspect. In John Hillcoat's rendition of Cormac McCarthy's best-seller 'The Road' it is about the eternal bond between a father and son in a dead world. Both learn from each other, as a line in prose reads: "Each other's world entire..." and one cannot live without the other. You can guess just how hardy this dynamic is in a world where suicide is two bullets in a revolver away.

Although the cataclysm that has destroyed the Earth goes unnamed, that is not what this film is about- it is about family and the ties that bind. The rest of humanity has devolved into tribes of cannibalistic nomads, and the Man (Viggo Mortensen) takes it upon himself to raise the Boy (Kodi Smit-McPhee) to be a decent man so that he may 'carry the fire'. Although McCarthy' book is simplistically written (there is no grammar or chapter division), there is so much power in those words that translate effortlessly onto screen. While 'The Road' untowardly presents itself as a cautionary tale, it also reinforces the fact that deep love is indominatable, such as that between a parent and child.

As the two principal characters are really the only ones we see on screen for the most part, Mortensen and Smit-McPhee commit themselves to the piece. Although neither have a great many lines at a time, their connection can be seen through looks, body language and gesture. Mortensen's Man's only purpose is to protect the one he loves, and it is a job he fully intends to carry out, even if it means sparing his son from a fate worse than death by nearly shooting him several times. There are times that the Man's resolve to protect his son using extreme measures reach through the screen and grab onto your own state of mind- would you allow your flesh and blood to be raped and gradually eaten by strangers, or would you put an end to that misery by killing them yourself. They seem like extreme measures now, but if what happened in this film happened to you, could you go through with it? Mortensen and Smit-McPhee sell this relationship without ever devolving into schmultzy or ham-fisted territory.
But for every moment of moral distress we are shown, we also see the triumph of love. There is a sequence in which the Man gives his son a can of Coke. Given the son was born after the catastrophe, he has never seen or tasted such a basic luxury we take for granted now. It's so simple yet so poignant to see the look of delight on the Man's face when the son savours his drink.

 Addtionally, props must be given to Charlize Theron for not only does she understand her role, she also understands the nature of it that it never comes off as thankless. While the character of the Wife was only told in flashback and never makes an appearance in the story itself, I thought it was fantastic on Hillcoat and Theron's part to incorporate the Wife into the movie, because that way you are given a clearer picture of the Man's character. Theron's final scene with Mortensen is low-key but nevertheless absolutely amazing, and I am glad Hillcoat took the risk of showing us the only other connection the Man had in the aftermath of the apocalypse and the only other reason for his existence.

As depressing as 'The Road' can be, it also meditates on how important love and human will influences who we are and how we alter our environment. The world we have been given is as fragile as glass and we need to not only take care of each other, but it as well. All of what we have can be taken away in an instant, and it really is up to us to taking nothing for granted. These are generic words, but works like 'The Road' makes you believe that it is true- there is only so much of our fate we can control, so what will happen when something out of our control turns our world upside down? It's up to us to carry the fire.

So, how was YOUR day?

Jesus fucking Christ. I want to kill myself. That was a slight exaggeration, but trust me, my feelings in regards to this movie as below are not.

The threat of nuclear warfare has haunted each and every one of us since the atomic bomb was made and used in Hiroshima, and this threat only intensified during the Cuban Missile Crisis, when the world was literally watching the skies in fear. Countless films have been made about this aspect of our fears, and many of them have been met with a chill down the spine and a shudder (the dream sequence in 'T2' has been said to closely resemble what would actually happen in a nuclear attack- thanks James Cameron). But for every one of these dream sequences, 'The Day After's, and others of it's ilk, this well-made pill of arsenic makes you feel like your gut has exploded and makes you want to slit your wrists at the same time. 
As this film chronicles, society is a fragile tapestry made up of threads, and the moment they unravel, as does the entire thing.
The thing is, this is the type of movie people say "Well don't watch it", that makes you watch it anyway because the material compells you so strongly to do so. My advice is- watch it, but I wouldn't blame you if you never watch it again.


Mick Jackson is not a particularly prolific film maker, but that doesn't mean he has no skill, especially when it comes to presenting us with a more than bleak vision of the future should the world succumb to a nuclear apocalypse.
Although only set in the small British town of Sheffield, the effects of the attack will resonate within all who watch it wherever they may be. And here's the kicker- this was made in 1984. Now while this IS a movie and it has been called as such, what also makes it stand out is that it is filmed as if it were a documentary. The characters in this film are solid (though some performances are take it or leave it), but the major draw is showing how all of the social network goes to Hell in a hand basket in the event of an indiscriminate catastrophe. This isn't shaky footage- you see everything. You see decomposing, burned corpses, you see milk bottles burst apart when the nuke hits.

You see people with thousand-yard-stares wandering aimlessly about simply because they have no place to go. You see nameless faces succumbing to the devestating effects of radiation, malnourishment and diseases that run rampant. You see the feeble attempts made by the government to control this devastation with little to no effect. The situation is absolutely hopeless for everybody. Nobody wins, there are no heroes who save the day, there is no trimuph over adversity. There are no assurances that anybody could live because this is life, life that could potentially be real if the people of the world don't communicate with each other.
To make matters worse, all of this doesn't just take place over a matter of months, by the time 'Threads' ends, it is a full 15 years after the attack and civilization is the equivalent of the middle ages in terms of technology and labor with not one hope in sight. 15 years of nuclear winters, lack of resources, onsets of disease and nobody to help. To top THAT off, as if that wasn't enough already, human communication has since become a series of hardly recognizable goobledigook as there is no time for education. In once sequence we see a woman watching a video with no sound, mouthing the words of the presentend on screen but she does not know the meaning of them. What matters is merely staying alive, whatever measures must be taken. This makes 'The Day After' look like a preschooler's cartoon.

                                                                This is a GOOD day.

This is a must-see film, but it's not one I will ever want to see again because it gets the message very loud and alarmingly clear. There is no winning when it comes to warfare, espeically of the nuclear kind- the only thing you will gain is a scorched Earth with nothing else in it. Do you really want that?

Worlds Apart

                        YES, ANOTHER PERIOD PIECE! DON'T YOU LOVE ME!? :-D

BBC's re-telling of Elizabeth Gaskell's novel is gorgeous as it is depressing. I haven't actually read any of Gaskell's work to compare how this adaptation translates, but I must say, if this isn't one of the most passionate stories of repressed emotion in times of hardship and distress, I don't know what is. Think of this film as 'Pride and Prejudice' only more realistic and much more depressing.

Enjoy it while you can, love.

Margaret Hale (a lovely Daniella Denby-Ashe) is a dreamer from the idyllic south region of England who values her freedom as well as her right to speak as well as her good manners. When her father decides to pick up sticks and head for the heavily industrial north, all of the colour and love is sapped from her world and replaced by smog, cotton mills and poverty. Things don't get any better when she meets the proprieter of the local mill, a dark, brtual man by the name of John Thornton (Richard Armitage in his break out role), as he's beating the crap out of a factory worker.

                                            It doesn't help the mill is next to THIS lovely place...

Margaret and her mother don't share Mr. Hale's enthusiasim for the culture of the north, and how could they? All it is is work, death and an absolute dirge of society where the only place fully open to the public is the cemetary. When Thornton strikes up a casual friendship with Mr. Hale, Margaret is forced into closer proximity with Thornton, a prospect that frightens yet intrigues her. At the same time, as she is gradually getting used to the north's oppressive atmosphere, she becomes friends with several of the mill workers, all of whom have a different opinion of Thornton... which of course gives Margaret second thoughts about the brute's character...

                                     You wouldn't know it, but they secretly wanna make babies

I think one of the many reasons why I loved this miniseries so much is that it doesn't travel the road most walked. I mean, this tale is set during the Industrial Era- people were working, but due to the poor conditions that many places had, they weren't working very well. This was also the beginning of forming unions, worker's rights and trying to form a better working environment, something that not all business owners wanted. What I also loved was that the two leads are not like Elizabeth Bennett or Fitzwilliam Darcy, they are more like real people in a real environment who feel real emotions, and it doesn't shy away from the fact that the consequences of every action they make has consequences. The only 'soft' sequences take place in Margaret's beloved south, but it is truly the north that draws you in. However, there is an almost epic love story here that will not make you roll your eyes. Although it is not in your face, there is a passion between them, that were it not for the fact they are worlds and manners apart to begin with, they would act on in an instant. This passion is repressed, but boy is it ever there. You want these two to end up together despite the fact each thinks the other is a fool when they first meet. And if you have seen this or read the book, you know it happens, but not without some serious screw ups along the way.

                                                            How could you blame him?

Naturally, we need human anchors in a production like this to make this love story work. Denby-Ashe and Armitage are more than up to the challenge. Margaret essentially is us, the audience, and we see what she sees, and what she sees influences what we think. When she first sees Thornton beating that hapless worker, like her, we think he is some coarse creature, and as Margaret gets to know him, even if at first it is not volunatrily, as do we. Every scene they are in, they command, if not share with each other and their co-actors, and you feel you are seeing these people, not actors wearing wonderful costumes. For every sequence of the depressing state of affairs in the north, we are treated to ones of tenderness and sensitivity that are almost impossible to resist.

                                                                           Like this.

For those romanatics who are looking for another period romance to add to their collection, this may not be for you if you are all about dancing, gentility and light humour. If you are expecting something like this in 'North and South', you would be sorely mistaken (not to mention very misguided if you think every Victorian story has that stuff). This is one for romantics who don't mind that stuff, but are more realistic in their expectations. These are romantics who know that with with great passion comes great consequence, and 'North and South' fits that bill in spades. It hurts, but it hurts so good.

Ice Cold

'Basic Instinct' really is one of those movies you will either appreciate or say is utter trash, and it just so happens, if done cleverly, I love utter trash which has an entertaining face. While this film really makes no bones (he he, I said 'bones') about what it is on the surface (a lurid, early 90's erotic thriller), deep down, there are so many issues that can be discussed on an intellectual basis.We all know that this movie did not and never will win any awards for being a sterling look into the human spirit, but it is almost always overlooked as an important piece of cinema just because the audience saw va-jay-jay. To me, this is a very stylized look of the ever-going battle of the sexes on celluoid. While this battle has seen many arenas through drama, comedy and even action, 'Basic Instinct' takes this to the battlefied of sex, violence and mindgames, a clever option because those three sensationalist elements really do put bums in the seats. Paul Verhoven, you really are a sly bastard. 

Happy ending! Stabbity stabbity!

Upon viewing this movie recently, what surprised me is that despite the movie opening with a bang (literally), there really isn't a lot of the torrid sex this film is lauded to have. Yes, it is there and yes, it's explicit, but a distinct aura of sex is what truly permeates through this movie more than the sex itself. When we first see Catherine Trammell (Sharon Stone, in a performance which truly has defined her career for better or worse) she was the Hitchcockian icy blonde for the '90's- she doesn't give anybody the time of day unless it's for her own amusement. Despite her gorgeous looks, she is anything but vulnerable. She is feminine yet masculine in how she conducts herself around other men. She is for all intents a purposes a predator rather than prey in the male gaze. Although she isn't afraid to show off her body, she doesn't allow anybody to touch it without her permission- in short, she is a sex bomb, NOT a sex object, something which no doubt makes her a threat to the male characters in this film.

When vice-ridden Detective Nick Curan (Michael Douglas) decides he is the best man to bring Trammell to justice and in the process becomes involved in a dangerous affair with her, he knows she could very well be the death of him, but does that stop him? 

                                                                  Of course not, silly!

I am of several minds when it comes to this movie. I do not believe this is a terribly intelligent film, nor do I believe it is strictly an excuse to show flesh. Countless musings have been made about 'Basic Instinct' and how it symbolizes the on-going 'battle of the sexes', transgression, sexual preferances and a whole plethora of matters that concern society even today. Back in 1992, although bisexuality and homosexuality was indeed common, it held an enormous amount of shock value when it came to displaying its extremities on the big screen. One of the major selling points of this movie that has provoked so much discussion is the portrayal of these sexual culture- it is seen as highly sexual, but to the hetrosexual outsider Nick, it is an alien world filled with temptation and danger. 

                                               Well aren't you boys just the CUTEST?

On the flip side, others have said it is a film about female empowerment, with Catherine Trammell as the figurehead of this. Sure, it's not a wholly positive portrayal of pro-feminism, but it is a sensationalized example of it. Whatever was Verhoven's actual intent may always remain an mystery, but you can't blame people for analysing this movie and the two central characters. 

Personally, how I feel about this movie changes every time I view it. One day I may see it as this 'battle of the sexes' masked as an erotic thriller, others I may see it as a cheap yet entertaining tramp who only looks pretty but is otherwise a boring ride... so to speak. In saying that, I really have nothing new to add to this movie that hasn't already been said someplace else, but Paul Verhoven is a director who is (in my opinion only) dismissed unfairly just because he tends to exploit the more graphic elements of humans and their world. Okay, his films aren't ashamed of wallowing in exploitation (hola, 'Showgirls'), but at the same time, they never feel as if they are done PURELY for sensationalism for they actually have something to say (take a look at 'Starship Troopers' and 'Robocop'- both of them focus on the absurd lengths the propaganda machine goes, the excessiveness of violence in Western culture performed for our entertainment). Verhoven isn't saying EVERYBODY does it, his films come across as a general statement. In the case of 'Basic Instinct', Verhoven is possibly saying that people are too eager to be titilated about the unknown elements of sexuality and turning it into some whacked out adventure rather than focusing on what it really is. Dare I say, 'Basic Instinct' is masquerading as a form of arousal in order to make fun of how humans think and act.

Verhoven... you slick Dutch bastard.