TWELVE MONKEYS, FOUR TIMES

SO I have seen 12 Monkeys at least four complete times. It is still hard to describe, and harder still to judge. I know that I cannot look away any time it comes on TV. Bruce Willis is a time traveler, sent from the future to undo a single terrorist act that demolished the human race. Brad Pitt plays the insane terrorist with straggly hair and a ravaged face. His cause? A PETA-on-steroids plan to punish man for his mistreatment of animals. I was dazzled the first time by Brad Pitt and Bruce Willis as well as the double views of Philly now and in the corrupt future. The twin plots: the quixotic quest of Bruce Willis to stop the terrorists that end humanity from the future and the present unfolding of the plot to stop the animal terrorists from achieving their goal. Both characters become doppelgangers of themselves, and I could argue that they are doppelgangers to each other as well.

I always love director Terry Gilliam's style. Every future scene with Bruce Willis and his jailers/doctors is terrifying in its bleakness and its exhausting detail. The panoramic scenes of the city ruled by the animals are iconic: they are as dreamy and beautiful as the present day scenes of the wintry city are ugly, begrimed by mass transit and too many people. So dark, so lush, so beautiful. I believe it, every time.




- Posted using BlogPress from my iPad

NOT ALWAYS EASY TO WATCH...

but worth it every time. Even as a college kid, I knew his films were different, better, something to approach with respect. Watch this:

HOMAGE TO KUBRICK

link is gone! I think it was Spartacus.

Futuristic Movies Everyone Should See

I think about this topic, future movies, or dystopian movies, a lot. I am obsessed with them, but have never  been able to get them into one list. I tend to experience media--books, movies--randomly, so they do not "add up" for a long time. Works for me. Imagine my delight in reading this great list yesterday from  John Whitehead. I have not seen Land of the Blind, but all the others are on my list. Some of them are better movies than others. For instance, one should only view They Live when the need for schlock supercedes the need for artistic experience, as A Clockwork Orange is (my opinion). I do love art of ideas. It is not always successful, but satisfies me on certain days. Many would argue that Brave New World is a better novel than 1984, but I will always love 1984 more. Maybe this is my version of Dryden's essay in which he confesses that he admires Jonson, but loves Shakespeare. We love what we love. Here is the list of dytopian, futuristic movies I love:

Fahrenheit 451
2001: A Space Odyssey
Planet of the Apes
THX 1138
A Clockwork Orange
1984 (1984 version)
Brazil
They Live
Soylent Green

Blade Runner
The Matrix
Minority Report
V for Vendetta
Children of Men
Land of the Blind  

I would only add one movie and that would be TWELVE MONKEYS.




from
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/john-w-whitehead/dystopian-films_b_901579.html

TOMBSTONE: NEW CLASSIC

Our last movie of the year in Film Club was Tombstone, 1993. We had planned on a Western series, but started too late, so when we had time for just one more movie, I suggested this one. I struggled between this and some of the REAL classics like Gunfight at the OK Corral, The Searchers, anything with Clint, or maybe even The Magnificent Seven, but decided in the end that this was a good first Western for my young friends. If they liked it, it would lead them directly to OK Corral, and then they would be hooked.
What a good choice! They loved it: the story, the actors (who's not to like), the music, the guns, even the moustaches. What I had forgotten was the look of the film: just as you could not miss the defiant stance of Kurt Russell or the slimy swagger of  Powers Boothe, the sharp blue sky and long shots of men on horseback defied cliche as well as defined it. When I first saw the movie, I found myself evaluating the performances of some of my favorite actors unconsciously because I loved them all: Kurt Russell, Sam Elliot, Val Kilmer, Powers Boothe, Michael Biehn, Dana Delany, Bill Paxton, Stephen Lang.......the kids reacted the same way. They asked if these guys were famous!

I love behind the scenes........

it is almost as if watching the film itself in the theatre is trompe d'oeil. It looks so real, but what I am seeing is only a piece of the whole picture: everything you see is imagery and metaphor: meta-phor. This may be one of the reasons that seeing movies is one of my favorite activities. All of it requires metacognition, so I often feel as if though I could let myself become absorbed by the story, but I won't, because is it just as  much fun to think about what the director imagined and then how he or she decides to communicate that image to me. I love my movies.

Tarantino Does His Homework. EVERY NIGHT

Everything Is A Remix: KILL BILL from robgwilson.com on Vimeo.

and that obsession with feet never gets less creepy

THE SOCIAL NETWORK: THE NEW WORLD

  We finally saw The Social Network this weekend. It was absorbing, well-acted, and more interesting than I thought it would be. Jeff Zuckerberg always seemed like a jerk whenever I saw him in a news conference or elsewhere. Yup, he's a jerk. But a couple of things bothered me about the movie: I have occasion to know some defining characteristics of a person with Asperger's Syndrome or other diagnoses on the autism spectrum. He portrayed some classic aspects, as Jesse Eisenberg played him. So, I am left with the question: Is he a jerk? or is he autistic? In that case, some of his actions had different motivations that most people would recognize. And more importantly, what does it mean that he was played this way? I have no answers to these questions, just found myself bugged by them.

  So the film could win Best Picture tonight, and it just isn't the best picture. I am guessing it did not come from a great book either, just a timely one. The big story I was hoping to see was not told: Facebook itself is new, really original; we will never relate to each other the same way again because of it. There is a new level of community in our culture that has been created by Facebook and all the social media sites and games that have come after it. And the movie was more about the quest to find social acceptance ( was anyone surprised he could not keep a girlfriend? He's just not interested) and the  battle between the partners and friends (and enemies) in the early years of the company than it was about THIS NEW WORLD. I know it was  scripted from the book which used Eduardo Saverin as its major source, but I thought I was going to get more. And anyway, how is there a book about this before there is a movie? That just seems so 20th century.