Screenwriters: Judd Pillot and John Peaslee
Director: Tim Allen
Actors: Sigourney Weaver (Avatar), JK Simmons (Extract), Ray Liotta (Smokin' Aces), Tim Allen (Redbelt), Jeanne Tripplehorn (Waterworld), Julie Bowen (Joe Somebody) and Kelsey Grammer (An American Carol)

Labels: film, Jeanne Tripplehorn, JK Simmons, Julie Bowen, Kelsey Grammar, movie trailer, ray liotta, Sigourney Weaver, Tim Allen

Labels: film, James Cameron, movie review, Sam Worthington, Sigourney Weaver, Zoe Saldana

Short Review: A long movie without one humorous scene. But that doesn’t mean it isn’t laugh-out-loud funny.



Avatar is a half a billion dollar toilet seat of a movie. Because Home Depot toilet seat movies like Dances with Wolves or Pocahontas aren’t good enough. No expense is ever too great to remind us of a central dogma of our age: that our culture is bad, bad, bad and “indigenous cultures” are oh so very good. Throw in a couple of corollary doctrines relating to new age spirituality and Gaia worship, and you have the perfect leftist didactic fairy tale disguised as a sci-fi adventure.

But a strange thing occurs to one as the expensive toilet seat comes crashing down on one’s head. How disconcerting it is, how un-humanizing it is to turn indigenous peoples into aliens. Cameron’s intention is to make we humans into the aliens, but because of the film’s central metaphor, that’s not how things work. Usually metaphor is employed to get someone to see something from a different angle. The central metaphor of this movie is that hominid Na'vi of the moon Pandora are just like the aboriginal inhabitants of North and South America and Australia. Except that their blue skin and tails are about the only thing different. Their rituals, weapons, religion, even war cries, are pretty much the same. So why did we have to go to Pandora to listen to this Rousseau-ian sermon? Beats me. The metaphor eventually becomes so thin and the parallels so heavy-handed that you may find yourself, as I did, laughing.

While the plot is a tedious checklist of the civilized-savage-meets-enlightened-primitive genre, the visuals help to redeem the effort, at least as purely aesthetic diversion. The word is beautiful and richly realized. The creatures are wonderful, with a subtle, unspoken evolutionary backstory*. The huge CGI budget can’t make this thing successful, however.

One final, disconnected note: this movie fails utterly as science fiction. The central science fictiony element (the telepathic link between human minds and Na'vi bodies) is never explained or explored. It functions only as a convenient plot device.



* A thoroughly inconsistent one, however. The animals we see close up have a six-legged body plan and four eyes. The Na'vi, however are humanoid. Where are their evolutionary cousins?

Labels: Avatar, film, guest review, James Cameron, movie review, Sam Worthington, Sigourney Weaver, Zoe Saldana

Short Review: I want to put this as plainly as I can. This film is so uniquely awful that it should be legal for me to enslave and neuter any movie critic who gives it a positive review. They should be forced to do my yard work and clip my toenails.

But then again, I can be an extremist about such things.



This is the worst movie I have ever seen.

Consider that statement. I have seen thousands of movies over the course of my lifetime. This is worse than any other film I can name.

Troll 2, Deuce Bigalow: European Gigolo, Leonard: Part 6, Speed 2: Cruise Control, Battleship Earth, Ballistic: Ecks vs. Sever, Glen or Glenda, Exorcist II: The Heretic,

Kazaam, even Kazaam. It is worse than an embarrassment starring Shaquille O'Neal as a genie who comes out of a magic boom box. Look at this:



This is better than Avatar.

How? Easy, no one within a thousand miles of Shaq in his hammer pants thought for one minute they were making a great work of cinema.

Everyone involved with Avatar has made it clear that this is supposed to be a game changer like Star Wars or The Matrix. This is meant to be one of the seminal moments in cinematic history. When future generations refer back to this time we're to believe that Avatar will be one of the cultural milestones.

I do think this film will go down in cinematic history. Hands down, it is the most self-loathing, insufferably pretentious works of human invention ever to be put before a paying public.

The film takes place on a planet call Pandora. PANDORA - get it? Astronomers, upon finding a planet that can sustain life, felt compelled to give it an ironic name warning of impending doom. Humans, after destroying the Earth's environment (this is mentioned a few times during the film), have shown up on Pandora to claim a mineral called Unobtanium. UNOBTANIUM - get it? Geologists, upon finding a valuable mineral, felt compelled to give it an ironic name warning of impending futility. The humans want the mineral so they can make money. One problem, on top the indigenous humanoid species known as the Na'vi live where the minerals are found. So, of course, the humans plot a pogrom against the planet's peaceful people.

Jake (Sam Worthington - no you don't know who he is), a paraplegic marine, arrives at the planet as a mercenary for the Resources Development Administration, the evil corporation who wants to displace the primitive Na'vi.

Jake is given an avatar, a body that looks like a Na'vi (meaning he looks like a big, blue kitty). He gets closed in a tanning booth and can control the body with his mind, or something like that, its not well explained. As one would expect, he meets up with the Na'vi, falls in love with the pretty one. Then the whole thing turns into Dances with Wolves in Space.

(Spoiler warning for the rest of this paragraph) Jake eventually becomes one of the Na'vi and after the humans attack a Na'vi's sacred site, he leads the attack on the marines. Yes, for half of the movie Jake leads an attack on his own species. Thus, everyone who would ever watch the film is his enemy. Jake and the Na'vi are victorious and send the humans back to their "dead world". Uh, doesn't that mean he sends his fellow humans to their extinction?

The story is a patchwork of other movies and various strains of the noble savage motif. Cameron provides the world with a shockingly unfiltered look at the modern, white liberal mindset. The primitive culture is idealized to the point of being laughable. Everyone is happily equal. The genders are on equal footing. Everyone is in tune with nature. Heck, they literally are wired into their world. The Na'vi have wires at the end of their ponytails that they actually link into dino-birds and trees so they can "talk" to them.

No, I'm not kidding.

Yes, this is a serious movie.

Back to the hippie stuff. The primitive culture is so perfect, so wonderful that every time they are on screen they are celebrated with sweeping World Music. Honestly, during every moment with the Na'vi, Cameron unloads the demo tapes for The Lion King. Now, when the humans are around, he plays the discount version of Wagner's Ride of the Valkyries. Apparently, he couldn't get the rights to play the theme music for Darth Vader.

So we're clear:

Primitives = happy, natural, honorable and spiritual
Humans = destructive, greedy, violent and conniving.

There is not a moment in the film that isn't noticeably crafted. There is nothing organic. The dialog is self-aware and often corny "Why did you save me?" "Because you have a strong heart!"

No, I'm not kidding.

Yes, this is a serious movie.

Characters act completely against their history and/or better interest. My personal favorite is when a mercenary who is collecting a paycheck to kill aliens is ordered to kill said aliens yells "I didn't sign on for this!" and then leave the battlefield. This is done without any character development leading to the decision, it just happens because Cameron needs the character for later on.

You will hear many people say that you see the budget up on the screen. Yes, they put all $300 million up on the screen. Too bad they didn't put one dime into the script. The film is visually full. However, the imagery is too intentional. The environment of Pandora is full of flashing lights, day-glo plants and the grass glows when it is stepped on at night. It is like the whole place is paved with Michael Jackson's sidewalk.

The expansive scenery in all of its intricate glory is so forced that I never lost the feeling I was looking at created scenery. I can say the same about the animated figures. Cameron has managed to get beyond the dead-eyes issue with animated humanoids. There are emotions in the eyes of his characters but they still looked unreal. The visuals are entertaining, but in the end the movie looked like a real long video game trailer. I kept expecting the game menu to pop up.

What puts this film over the top in its road to crapville is that it is a self-loathing racist screed.

The Na'vi are all played by African-American or Native American actors (CHH Pounder, Zoe Saldana, Wes Studi, Laz Alonso). The Na'vi are blue, but their society is an idealized hybrid of African and Indian tribal cultures with some white, middle-class New Age mumbo-jumbo tossed in for flavor.

The humans are almost all white. There are a couple of minority actors who have lines, but almost all of them turn out to be on the side of the natives. Now, let it be known that I don't normally go counting races when I watch movies. I normally don't care one bit. But in this case it was so obvious, you can't avoid it.

The Na'vi are so transparently supposed to be minorities and the humans are blatantly supposed to be oppressive white Capitalists that it is unsettling. I haven't seen a more open case of white guilt casting since the last time I saw a Brinks Home Security ad. Don't believe me? Then listen to Cameron who tips his hand with his own self indulgent dialog. Jake comes clean of his intentions to try to save the Na'vi. Col. Quarich (Stephen Lang - no you don't know him, although you should) turns to Jake. Quarich squints his blazing blue eyes and snarls "You don't want to be a traitor to your race."* The guy in charge of military operations swaps out "race" for "species" when he's dealing with a society of alien humanoids who are a) blue, b) seven-eight feet tall, c) have carbon-binding bones d) look like big kitties. Cameron intentionally uses the word race because that is his point.

The casting and the dialog may not tag Cameron as a self-hating bigot. But this does. (Spoiler for the rest of this paragraph) At the end of the film, Jake (the white boy) only achieves wholeness and his full heroic stature after he leaves his white boy body and enters the body of a Na'vi. In other words, until he kills all the white people (by sending them back to their dead world, remember) and then leaving his own white body behind can he be complete.

No, I'm not kidding.

Yes, this is a serious movie.

Try switching the races around and see how comfortable you feel with this plot. Cameron was one step away from showing white people and then flashing images of rats on the screen. Why not just have everyone chant "kill whitey!"

If all of this isn't enough here are some other problems with this, a great leap forward in world cinema:

• A character leaves the battlefield against orders. The next time we see this character he/she isn't in the brig. He/She is smiling, casually walking around with a gun. No reason is given to how he/she managed to avoid being arrested or shot on the spot for cowardice.
• The film is loaded, LOADED with anachronism. The film takes place in 2154 but people still use terms like "bitch ass", "bitch", "come git sum!" and "he's got skills". One character smokes - INDOORS. Heck, I can show you outdoor parks you can't smoke in. It goes on from there.
• It is stuffed full of Mother Earth/Gaia nonsense.
  
• We are never told why Unobtanium is so critical. The only reason given is financial. What if it cured cancer? What if it was used to revive the dying Earth? This is an important fact to leave out because it gives a fuller context to Jake intentionally killing off his own species.
• The pretty Na'vi Jakes falls for and has sex with (yes, he has sex with a big, blue kitty) knows he is an avatar and really an alien. It is illogical she would allow herself to be taken in by what amounts to a big blue sock puppet sent by the enemy.
• All of the Na'vi and their animal friends are glowing bright colors. Which makes them all easy targets in the brown and green jungle world they live in. Yet, no trained marine can seem to hit them.
• Speaking of marines, (spoiler warning) we are asked to believe that after years of engaging with the Na'vi the marines are finally done in by a full frontal assault by the primitive warriors using spears and arrows. This is like asking us to believe the modern American military would be taken down by the Sioux.
  
• Every time Jake returns to the human world his avatar body (made of flesh and bone) drops like a discarded rag doll. This is shown a few times. When this happens the Na'vi are accepting of it. Sure one says he's a demon but other than that they're cool. This is a culture that hasn't invented the wheel yet, let alone any complex tools (which is why they still fight with spears and not catapults). They could not conceive of why he would keep dropping over. They never bury or burn his apparently dead body?
  
• Jake's avatar is left laying prone in a jungle for an extended period of time. No animals or insects devour the warm flesh of his dormant body laying on the jungle floor

I can go on for about another six posts.

I know you will feel compelled to see this in the theater and I don't blame you. It is a tempting flick to see. I will say that if you insist on seeing it you should do so on the big screen. I will also say that if you can find the will to resist its pull, of any movie I have ever seen, this is the one you want to miss.



Related Reviews:
Other movies that stink
Transformers: Revenge of the Fallen (2009)
Drag Me To Hell (2009)


Other Critic's Reviews:
Roger Ebert (get mowing, tubby)
Big Hollywood (Nolte avoids clipping my little piggies)



* - I'm paraphrasing, I don't have the exact words, but this is dang close. The important point is the replacement of "race" for "species".

Labels: film, James Cameron, movie review, Sam Worthington, Sigourney Weaver, Zoe Saldana

Screenwriter: James Cameron (Rambo: First Blood Part II)
Director: James Cameron (The Terminator)
Actors: Zoe Saldana (Star Trek), Sam Worthington (Terminator Salvation), Sigourney Weaver (Alien), Michelle Rodriguez (Girl Fight), Stephen Lang (Gods and Generals), Giovanni Ribisi (Saving Private Ryan) and CHH Pounder (Orphan)

Labels: CHH Pounder, film, Giovanni Ribisi, James Cameron, Michelle Rodriguez, movie trailer, Sam Worthington, Sigourney Weaver, Stephen Lang, Zoe Saldana

The first act of this film is quite good and sets up what promises to be an enthralling thriller. The rest of the film works diligently to dismantle this effective opening. Dennis Quaid heads up an ensemble cast in this film about an assassination attempt on the President of the United States. The film unfolds by showing multiple viewpoints of the crime while also uncovering the conspiracy that lead to the shooting. The film presents these layers carefully and does well to keep things clear and unconfused. The film fails because the conspiracy just isn't that interesting and many aspects of the film are predictable. This is a properly structured film but it's not a smart one.


Related Reviews:
Dennis Quaid movies
The Rookie (2002)
In Good Company (2004)


Other Critic's Reviews:
The Daily Beaconline
Desert Entertainer

Labels: Dennis Quaid, film, Forest Whitaker, Matthew Fox, movie review, Sigourney Weaver

Do we need to see the fluid on the ground?

Do we need to see her squatting in the sink?

The trailer lays out what the film is about in traditional fashion and what I'm seeing here is that the jokes are telegraphed and are good for smirks and not laughs.

visit videodetective.com for more info

Labels: Amy Poehler, comedy, Dax Shepard, film, Greg Kinnear, Maura Tierney, movie trailer, Sigourney Weaver, Steve Martin, Tina Fey

The first movie in a series is almost always the best and that’s the case here. A classic of both suspense and science-fiction, this film is a must-see. Ridley Scott genius is in full effect in this dark, haunting scarefest. Scott relies on the interplay of characters to build upon the tension set up by the mysterious alien creature set loose on a spaceship. With inspired casting (a young Sigourney Weaver in the lead, supported by Ian Holm, Tom Skerritt, John Hurt and Veronica Cartwright) and a thoughtful script. Scott masterfully built a film for the ages.

In true horror tradition, the monster (the alien) is highly symbolic. In this case it is rather sexual as well. Ninety percent of you just said “huh?” Do you think that the jutting second mouth is just a jutting second mouth? Listen, there is a reason why it is that Lambert (Veronica Cartwright) is raped at the end of the film. Don't remember that? Watch it again, you’ll see.

Beyond the sex stuff, the alien also a result of capitalism. I’m a capitalist, so this irks me some but it is true. Who is the real bad guy here? The corporate suits that are giving the orders from back home. The alien is to be saved for the military-industrial complex back on Earth. The intrusion of capitalist greed is the alien in an otherwise tranquil universe…or something like that. Who cares, they built a billion dollar franchise off a metaphor complaining about big business. Ain’t that rich?

The film itself is a remarkable feat and is worth seeing at least once. Note that some may be disturbed by the frightening, and somewhat demonic, images. If you're sensitive to horror you may have to skip this one.


Related Reviews:
Sci-fi movies
Sunshine (2007)
The Thing (1982)


Other Critic's Reviews:
A.V. Club
In Film Australia

Labels: alien, film, Ian Holm, movie review, science fiction, Sigourney Weaver

What do ya' know, a trailer for a kids movie without a fart or belch joke. I didn't think we still made those. No veiled references to sex, no double-meanings...the studio knows this got out to the general public right?

Looks good.



Director: Sam Fell (Flushed Away) and Robert Stevenhagen
Actors: Emma Watson (Harry Potter and the Order of the Phoenix), Dustin Hoffman (Marathon Man), Christopher Lloyd (Who Framed Roger Rabbit?), Sigourney Weaver (Alien), Matthew Broderick (Godzilla), Kevin Kline (A Fish Called Wanda), Robbie Coltraine (Harry Potter and the Goblet of Fire), William H. Macy (Magnolia), Stanley Tucci (The Devil Wears Prada), Frank Langella (Frost/Nixon) and Tracey Ullman (Corpse Bride)

Labels: animated, Christopher Lloyd, Dustin Hoffman, Emma Watson, film, movie trailer, Sigourney Weaver

Short Review: A bad ending to a good movie is like eating a sub sandwich only to find the final bite has a toenail it in.


If you’ve seen Capote, there is no compelling reason to see this film. This aside, there is much to recommend this piece. There is some fine acting and directing and the story itself is inherently interesting. The issue is that the overall point sullies any positive effort made by the production. The film tells the same story as Capote: New York big shot writer/raconteur/human squeak toy, Truman Capote goes into a small Kansas town to report on the events of the murder of the Clutter Family. While investigating the story, Capote gets drawn into writing about the two thugs who brutally murdered the family. It is clear the story behind the story is a riveting human drama.

This film succeeds in a couple of ways. The performances are quite good. After seeing Philip Seymour Hoffman as Truman Capote it seemed impossible for anyone else to successfully pull off this strange character. Toby Jones’ portrayal of the impish writer is in many ways superior to Hoffman’s work. Hoffman deserved the Oscar he received for his performance. His rendition of Capote fit his production perfectly and is a brilliant piece of acting. To his credit, Jones’s Truman is one step more real, more human and his physical likeness is striking. It would seem that Jones was born to play this role.

The other strong point of the film is writer/director Douglas McGrath’s polished script. Much of his script is taut and plays to the best parts of the story. The interactions of the Kansas residents and Truman, a flamboyant, gay banshee is priceless. McGrath smartly juxtaposes the elite world of Manhattan and rural Kansas to great effect. Each of the characters, even those with a moment of screen time are, if not fully realized, quite interesting to watch. The writing allows for the actors to act. The fullness of the piece even allows Sandra Bullock to achieve what is easily her best performance as Nell Harper Lee.

In spite of its successes, the film ultimately fails. In the final act a homosexual relationship between Truman and killer Perry Smith (Daniel Craig) develops. I have no idea if this relationship was factual, but it doesn’t matter. The film concentrates so much on this love affair and the complications it forces on the conflicted Capote it overwhelms the story. While this is effectively used to support the climatic scenes where Smith is executed for his crimes, it pulls the focus away from what Capote was doing. In Cold Blood is a brilliant book but it is also a product of Truman Capote serving his (and on a larger scale our) needs by trampling on the tragedy of a dead family. He also used the deaths of the killers to advance his goals. Through his development of the true-crime novel, Truman Capote watered down the immoral behavior of profiting from the dead. The film Capote deals with this issue in the end. This film gives Capote a pass.

In the end of the film Sandra Bullock, as Nell Harper Lee (author of To Kill A Mockingbird) complains that Capote’s final years of drunkenness and stagnant creativity were the result of American culture and not Capote’s guilt. She complains that America isn’t as fancy as a place like France where things more "effervescent" can survive. Our memories are short and we Americans want things now. Are you kidding me? I do not know if these were Lee's words but even so, can someone take Miss Congeniality aside and explain that she’s a part of the sickness not the cure? I know she’s playing a character and I’m sure she’s a nice lady, but that complaint coming out of that actress’s mouth? Sandra Bullock, the star of Speed and Speed 2 complaining on camera that American culture is too hurried? Why not have Paris Hilton on camera bemoan our culture has gotten too flippant?

To bring this to a close, this is a well done film but its lack of moral clarity drains the movie of the potency it could have contained. Proof that there is more to a good movie than solid dialog and quality scenes. You must always have a good point.


Related Review:
In Cold Blood (1967)
Capote (2005)


Other Critic's Reviews:
Reel Talk
The Movie Boy

Labels: film, movie review, Sandra Bullock, Sigourney Weaver, Toby Jones, Truman Capote

Pixar has released a number of vignettes for their new film WALL-E. I've posted most of them below.

I'll be taking my children to the film, but I'm not expecting I will find it as enjoyable as their other releases. It all seems a bit too cute for my tastes. Check out the vignettes below.

Labels: animated, Fred Willard, JohnRatzenberger, movie trailer, Pixar, Sigourney Weaver