Rants, reviews, and reflections

Mike's Comments

Monthly Archives: November 2012

388 ARLETTA AVENUE

Posted on by Posted in Movies
388 Arletta Avenue

An interesting concept, that loses a bit in the execution. Described by many critics—incorrectly—as a “found footage” pic, it can be more accurately said that the movie uses the device of surveillance video for much of the proceedings. While the pace is a bit slow for my taste, the final reveal makes it all worthwhile.

As the pic opens, James (Nick Stahl) and his wife Amy (Mia Kirshner) are being observed via a number of hidden cameras, the first one located in the car of the perp, parked across from their house—located at the eponymous address. One of the things observed is that James carelessly leaves his house key in a front porch planter. As such, the stalker gains access to the house, and installs many more cameras.

We find that relations between the couple are not the greatest, in that a compilation CD placed in James’ car (obviously by the stalker) leads to a big argument. The tension could be related to James having had an affair with a woman at his office, although this is not well-established. Then again, why else would Amy’s sister Katherine (Krista Bridges) hate him so much?

Soon after, Amy is gone, and a note appears on their kitchen table explaining that she had to get away for awhile. Trouble is, “awhile” turns into way too long, and all attempts to reach her fail. Not surprisingly, Katherine suspects that James did something to her. Meanwhile, James is desperately trying to solve the mysteries of his wife’s disappearance and the identity of the stalker, who is now making himself quite apparent by his actions—which include killing James’ cat.

A clever turn involves Bill (Devon Sawa), a former classmate that James bullied. Under the notion of Karma’s a bitch, he suspects that Bill is the perp. By the time the police investigate these matters in earnest, it may be too late.

 

***SPOILERS AND OTHER COMMENTS***

The identity of the perp is not nearly as important as why he is doing the stalking, and that I won’t reveal.

One theme here is how little it takes to drive someone nuts— a concept that goes back in the movies at least to Gaslight (1944).

Despite what he’s going through, little sympathy is created for James, suggesting that he has done far worse than has been hinted at, and deserves his situation. But what about the collateral damage?

Even though cameras are deployed all over the house, there is absolutely no sexual voyeurism. Our perp is after something much bigger—and much darker.

SKYFALL

Posted on by Posted in Movies

SkyfallA new kind of Bond picture, which delves into 007’s backstory, as it expands him from whiz-bang action figure into a more fleshed-out character. Still, there’s plenty of plot, extreme action sequences, and a few surprises.

As the movie opens, James Bond (Daniel Craig) is in Istanbul, hoping to retrieve a computer on which is a list of all NATO agents embedded with terrorist cells worldwide. However, the safe house has been attacked, leaving a number of dead agents, and the computer’s hard drive has been taken.

Bond and newbie field agent Eve (Naomie Harris) pursue suspected assassin Patrice (Ola Rapace) in an extended chase that includes the Grand Bazaar, and finally ends up on a train. Bond and Patrice are duking it out, and Eve is ordered to take her shot, but hits Bond, who falls into the river below.

No worries, though, since this IS a Bond pic, and he can’t die. Instead, he reappears in M’s (Judi Dench) flat, and wants back in. This surely is a good time for him to return, as MI6 itself is under attack. Bond continues his pursuit of Patrice, and this eventually leads him to the real quarry, Silva (Javier Bardem), a talented, but very disaffected former agent.

Bond and M are now on the run from Silva’s army, and must resort to old school spycraft to defend themselves.

 

***SPOILERS AND OTHER COMMENTS***

“Skyfall” ends up being the name of Bond’s boyhood home in Scotland, and becomes a retreat—of sorts—during the pursuit.

Silva’s personal vendetta against MI6 and M herself took considerable planning, not to mention considerable expense. Supposedly, with his masterful computer skills, Silva had no problem garnering the necessary funds.

Silva takes the stolen computer data, and starts outing the undercover NATO agents, who are summarily executed within their terrorist cells. This is being done to kill M’s career, with the added “benefit” of embarrassing MI6 at the same time.

While Silva’s revenge motivation drives the story, it is more than a bit far-fetched, as are his supernatural cyber skills. But then, in an era of PC, finding good villains is becoming increasingly difficult.

POST-ELECTION THOUGHTS

Posted on by Posted in Current Events, History, Politics

The results are in. So, the Left rejoices while the Right is despondent. Some suggest that Team R should disengage from the morality business, and devote themselves solely to fiscal issues, in an effort to capture today’s young, hip, and minority voters. Selwyn Duke effectively destroys this notion, and so did the late David Yeagley.

Plenty has already been written about the poor Republican ground game, and how its candidates were not appealing enough. The changing composition of the electorate has also been analyzed, with the suggestion that old-fashioned “Republican” values—whatever those are—simply do not appeal to these new voters.

Allow me to take a different tack…

Every American knows about July 4th, 1776, the day that our Declaration of Independence was signed. Less remembered, but no less important, is when our Constitution was ratified. The document itself was written during the summer of 1787 in Philadelphia, by 55 delegates to a Constitutional Convention that was called to amend the Articles of Confederation.

In accordance with Article VII, ratification by nine states would be sufficient, and this was accomplished on June 21, 1788 when New Hampshire ratified. Ratification by all 13 states occurred on May 29, 1790 when Rhode Island signed. Notably, the first elections under the new Constitution were held late in 1788 and our federal government started operations on March 4, 1789.

I give you this history to set the stage for the very first raw exercise of governmental force. No, it was not the War Between the States. Rather, it was our government’s response to the Whiskey Rebellion, and that occurred in 1794—a scant five years into the life of our new republic.

Small farmers in rural areas (especially western Pennsylvania) operated distilleries, and the spirits were sold, and even acted as informal currency in certain locations. An excise tax on distilled spirits had been proposed by Alexander Hamilton in 1791, which was hated by the farmers. In fact, they attacked the Federal “Revenuers” who came to collect it, with well-organized contingents.

President George Washington intervened, first with negotiations that went nowhere, and then finally brought 13,000 troops into the area. Not surprisingly, the rebellion was quickly put down, but a large number of Americans—particularly those sympathetic to the opposition Jeffersonian Republican Party—were appalled by the overwhelming use of governmental force, which they feared might be a first step to absolute power. (You think?)

Remember “No taxation without representation”? Well, these dirt-poor farmers were represented, in theory, but their way of life apparently mattered little to the powers that be. If they were the first target of Article I Section 8:

The Congress shall have Power To lay and collect Taxes, Duties, Imposts and Excises, to pay the Debts and provide for the common Defence and general Welfare of the United States; but all Duties, Imposts and Excises shall be uniform throughout the United States;

other victims would soon follow. The point here is that our freedoms have been under assault from the beginning.

I suggest that the Left’s current jubilation is based on its perception of America as a land where the government will correct all social ills. Inasmuch as this has been the express policy since 1964, and possibly even 1932, who’s to say that they are wrong in their vision?

Likewise, the despondency of the Right is based on an America in which our lives were at least relatively free from government interference. If this America ever even existed, today there are only slight remnants.

Thus, any perception of a declining or improving America is strictly in the eye of the beholder. Perhaps, those on the Left should better appreciate what they have and the gains they have made, while the Right re-evaluates the myths that they stubbornly accept as reality.

FLIGHT

Posted on by Posted in Movies

Flight

A study of the harmful (and maybe positive) effects of addiction, with sensational flight crash FX, along with elements of courtroom drama. Relentlessly depressing until the very end, except for a comedic turn from John Goodman channeling his Walter Sobchak, from The Big Lebowski (1998).

As the pic opens, pilot Whip Whitaker (Denzel Washington) has just finished up a bit of mufky-fufky with girlfriend Trina (Nadine Velazquez), later revealed to be a flight attendant on his upcoming trip. Whip’s co-pilot Ken Evans (Brian Geraghty) seems as by-the-book, as Whip is unconventional. And this means more than just being an alcoholic, who has consumed a couple of vodkas while on-board.

Their flight is a short one, just from Orlando to Atlanta, but problems occur straightaway, in the form of serious turbulence. Whip handles it brilliantly, only to then be faced with complete loss of hydraulic control, so that the plane is headed for sure disaster. At this point, he maneuvers the aircraft into a position of flying inverted, which prevents the nosedive, letting him right the craft into a glide, and a landing that minimizes casualties.

At the same time, we are introduced to the sad life of heroin addict Nicole (Kelly Reilly). The paths of Whip and Nicole will cross at the hospital where Whip is taken after the crash, and Nicole is taken after a near-fatal overdose. As they battle their demons, they become friends, even as Whip’s situation is deteriorating.

Although he saved most of the passengers and crew with his almost supernatural flying heroics, the fact that he survived, and six souls on board did not, makes him a target. Naturally, it won’t help that he was flying while intoxicated, even if there was definite mechanical failure of the aircraft.

This will all play out against a backdrop of personal as well as institutional meltdown.

 

***SPOILERS AND OTHER COMMENTS***

I’m not sure what helmer Zemeckis was going for with the extraordinary amount of gratuitous nudity (of Velazquez) at the beginning of the movie. Maybe it has something to do with her dying in the crash. “Exposed” and all that.

Hinted at, but not explored, is the notion that Whip could perform his incredible flying only BECAUSE he was intoxicated, with added cocaine to sharpen him up.

It is distressing, but not at all surprising, that his flight heroics are soon overshadowed by an aggressive attempt to destroy his reputation, as well as put him in jail, because of the drinking. In a perfect world, he would have merely lost his license, and could have gone on the talk show circuit. In the real world, though, someone must pay.

Ironically, the obvious cause of the accident—inadequate maintenance of the aircraft—would likely have been lost had a major crash ensued, but since Whip saved the day, this was discovered, and he screwed himself. Talk about being self-destructive. No coincidence that the specific part that failed was a jackscrew.

Much is made of the accident being an “Act of God,” as well as contrasting examples of people’s understanding and attitudes with respect to God’s will. Whip’s encounter with a terminal cancer patient at the hospital, who has a remarkably cheerful viewpoint regarding his imminent death, plays well against the zombie-like pronouncements of co-pilot Evans’ wife.

Missing from the proceedings was any hint of backstory, as to how Whip became such a raging alcoholic.