Neomedieval Times

For many years now, I've been in the camp that believes we are heading into--indeed, that we've already entered--a new medieval period in Western history. (And, since Western history is--after the European/American conquest of much of the world in the last century and a half--now basically world history, this applies to everyone everywhere.) I would suggest that future historians will probably mark the beginning of this "Neomedieval World" as having happened either in 1989 (the fall of the Berlin Wall), or 1991 (the collapse of the Soviet Union), or perhaps even 2001 (the September 11 attacks). Whatever comes to be the agreed upon date, it looks like the future world will look back on these days as the beginning of a new middle ages for the world.

I bring this up today, June 25, 2016, because we are still in the immediate wake of the UK's "Brexit" referendum, and it just occurred to me that the vote to leave the EU goes along quite well with the overall scheme of order in a Neomedieval World. After all, one of the characteristics of the original middle ages was political dissolution throughout Europe. The unity that was the Roman Empire dropped to the floor and shattered into almost innumerable pieces back then, and the straining that is fracturing the EU--which I've seen referred to as the highest peak of European unity since the Roman days--may lead to just the same sort of patchwork of kingdoms and principalities that ruled and shaped Europe for a thousand years during the first medieval period.

This desire to create break-ups and increase political fragmentation will not necessarily end with the UK leaving the EU. There's already some talk about a "Texit" hitting the United States, with Texans possibly angling to secede from the Union in one way or another. (I'm not sure how that would work--previous attempts to secede did not go well, as you know--but I wouldn't dismiss the matter out of hand, either.) More likely, other members of the EU may seek to leave the union now that the UK has shown the way. It's not out of the question that the whole thing could collapse in the coming years--and we're not talking about decades, either.

What will be the consequences of such a dissolution? Hard to say. But given the history of the continent, and the contours of history that the medieval world presents to us, it's quite possible that neomedieval Europe would see its multitude of states in competition and conflict with each other. (The same would apply to a dissolved former U.S.A.--or any other place in the world where fragmentation and Balkanization might occur. An American break-up may seem out of the question to some, but I'm not the first to have imagined such a thing.) In other words, war is a possibility in at least some parts of Europe, as it was back in earlier medieval times. If you're holding a passport and want to go see Paris and/or Rome, you might want to book your trip sooner rather than later.

If things do dissolve into war, over whatever issue might lead to violence, that would certainly give greater validity to the whole Neomedieval World idea. After all, most of the attributes of the medieval world--endemic violence, political fragmentation, severe polarization based largely on religious identities, and loss of knowledge and lowering of the education level of the general populace--are already in place now. We've just seen the political fragmentation in play; religious polarization has been a daily topic ever since 9/11; and this country's ongoing education crisis is providing the biggest thrust for the loss of knowledge and education level in the populace (which never got super high in much of the world outside the wealthy West anyway). Violence has remained endemic in most of the non-elite parts of the world; if tensions between former EU partner states rises to the point of actual armed conflict on the continent, then that chicken will have come home to roost in Europe, too.

So the Brexit vote may be just one more step down a path that began a couple of decades ago, a march that seems to be leading us back to a future in which a great deal of what we have come to see as the modern world may be lost, at least for a period of time.

How long a period of time? No one can know, of course. But one hopeful thing to consider is this: whatever the nature of the next few years, or decades, or centuries, one thing we have consistently seen in our recent history is an acceleration of the pace of change. So while the original middle ages lasted roughly a thousand years in Western Europe--almost evenly split between the Dark Ages and the High Middle Ages--there's a good chance that the Neomedieval World will run its course over a much shorter period than the previous medieval incarnation. And then a Neoenlightenment may usher in a new, better age of human history.

At least we can hope that's how it goes.

Reel Reviews

Ted 2 -- In familiar Family Guy style, Seth MacFarlane is not about to let a joke go without making sure to beat it all the way into the ground. While the original Ted was comedy gold, this one's closer to a bronze medal: a fairly steady steam of good laughs, but with just enough stupidities woven in--and recycled bits from the first--to take the overall quality level down a notch. And of course, in keeping with the flavor of both films, it probably helps immensely if you watch it when you're stoned.

Reel Reviews

Trainwreck -- Amy Schumer is definitely having her moment. I'm not sure how long her ride will be, but at least for now, in that given moment, she's making the most of it. This film is a case in point: very funny with a lot of laugh out loud moments, mostly thanks to Schumer's particular outrageous sense of humor, but also coupled with a charming and sweet romance that takes just enough edge off to allow even the most uptight to forgive the crudities. Good work.

Reel Reviews

Jurassic World -- Not bad. That doesn’t sound like a bang-up review, but this effort could have been much, much worse than it turned out to be. It might have been nice if there had been even more explicit recognition of the stupidity of going down the same rabbit hole again and again--including that idea’s meta aspects--but again, that would be raising the expectations much too high. Keep the expectations humble with this one, and you just get a satisfying action movie experience.

Reel Reviews

Metropolis -- The first great sci-fi movie? I'll go with that. Once you get past the disorientation of watching a silent movie--there's always a bit of that for a modern viewer--you very quickly sink into an absorbing story and visual presentation that is every bit as creative as most movies these days. And a story about out of touch elites and the dire consequences that can result from that inequality remains very relevant to today. Note: this review comes from watching the "restored" version of this film.

Reel Reviews

King Solomon's Mines -- (1950, with Stewart Granger and Deborah Kerr.) I often preach about old movies being better than you think they are; this one's not exactly a poster child for that concept. Not to say that it's bad; but the running time largely consists of a pastiche of wildlife encounters--which were probably fascinating back in the day but relatively bland for today's jaded viewer, who's seen all this and better in any number of nature shows--and a story that meanders to an ending with very little payoff. This one's probably only for the film buffs out there.

Reel Reviews

American Sniper -- Sometimes it’s good to be behind the times. Like, for instance, when you watch a movie a year after it hits theaters, and all of its accompanying controversy has receded into the background. This film would probably have been hard to judge when it first arrived, given the heated atmosphere surrounding it then. When viewed with some perspective, you can judge this film clearly: a very good movie featuring an excellent performance by Bradley Cooper, and not nearly as much jingo as its harshest critics believed. As usual, director Clint Eastwood brings much more nuance to a potentially propagandistic subject than the casual observer might expect. Certainly, he clearly shows that, for all his gung-ho, Chris Kyle paid an enormous price for his time in Iraq--and as such stands as an appropriate metaphor for the nation as a whole. Definitely worth a look.

Reel Reviews

Evolution -- How could a film with so much going for it be this stupid? A good cast--no meatheads a la Sandler or Diesel here--a good premise (with pretty good special effects) and a good director (Ivan Reitman, with one certifiable classic--Ghostbusters--on his resume)...where did it all go wrong? Well, the writing is stupid, without even an attempt to make the scientist characters anything near intelligent. (Yes, they’re supposed to be doofus junior college teachers, but then again Duchovny’s character is supposed to have a history with a more rigorous scientific background.) The humor indulges in “stupid fat guy” clichés (not something to get on my good side). And several of the characters (especially the villainous general and governor) are so cardboard cutout that they distract from the story, or the humor, or anything the film tries to achieve. No wonder this movie tanked at the box office; even the stupid multiplex crowd probably found it sub-par. Avoid it.

Reel Reviews

A Walk Among The Tombstones -- Perhaps it’s a product of the fact that I’m generally not into the mystery genre, but I found this film’s story/plot to be--mostly--genuinely surprising and opaque. One can argue that that’s not a good thing, but for me the lack of predictability (in details; the big picture remained fairly obvious) created a more enjoyable viewing experience. Certainly, Liam Neeson has this “world-weary cop” routine down pat by now; he’s played one variation or another on this character in most of his recent movies. But the role fits him like a glove, so instead of banality and too much comfort the repetition leads to expertise, and subtle shadings from one iteration to the next that the audience can appreciate. I think this is a good pic to watch, but others more familiar with the genre may find this outing somewhat pedestrian. It all depends on whether you’re a fan of Neeson, mysteries, or both.

Reel Reviews

The Interview -- You have to give Seth Rogan and James Franco credit for being willing to look really ridiculous for their art. The farce here is so broad that it’s probably stretching it to call this movie ‘art,’ but it delivers enough laughs that I suppose the guys should be given the benefit of the doubt. The only weird thing is, for all of its comedic intent, the film actually veers into some pretty violent territory now and then--a jarring lack of consistency which demerits the project overall (and may have been the reason that some people took the thing a little too seriously back when the movie was about to be released). Overall, this is a pretty good, funny movie; a little refinement would have gone a lot further.

Reel Reviews

Star Wars: Episode VII--The Force Awakens -- Those of a cynical mind might view the derivative nature of this outing--it is an almost blow by blow remake of the original 1977 story--as purposeful exploitation of a) an older, captive fanbase audience, and b) a new, younger generation of potential audience members who don't know from the original anyway, and won't be able to recognize the recycling. It is very likely that that cynical view is 100% true, but that does not necessarily toss this film onto the trash heap. The characters old and new are engaging (the newcomers acquit themselves very well), the movie looks beautiful, and at no point did I find my attention wavering during its relatively long running time. Ultimately, one should probably take this installment for what it is: a decent "soft" reboot of the franchise that, perhaps, raises a new hope for better things to come.

Reel Reviews

Taken 3 -- It would be too much to ask for a second sequel to be as close to as good as the original. This copy of a copy is, of course, nothing close to the first entry, and by the end the threads start to feel very frayed, and the plot twists border on the absurd. But for the most part, this is a fairly entertaining outing, another chance to see Liam Neeson's Bryan Mills do his lethal and chaotic thing, which is still a hoot. I wouldn't go out on a limb and call this flick necessary, but it's not as awful as it could have been. That may be grading on a very forgiving curve, but that's the benefit you get when you've previously built up audience goodwill (Avengers producers, take note).

Reel Revews

Avengers: Age of Ultron -- Oh, boy. I warned in the review of the previous Avengers movie that the property was dangerously close to being little more than empty--and not very intelligent--spectacle. It's hard to argue that this entry in the series (there will be a third, per the promise in the credits) doesn't tip over that edge and descend into utter schlock. This is really a baffling outcome; these characters somehow work far better on their own, and the humor that should be a big part of such a "fun" franchise is again largely missing here. Given the inputs--including the very sharp Joss Whedon directing again--it makes no sense that this movie should be the fairly joyless exercise that it is. I suppose, if you're into the genre, you must watch these Avengers flicks, just to keep pace with developments that affect the rest of the individual storylines. But please, don't pay for any more of this nonsense; check it out from the library if you need to get your fix.

Reel Reviews

The Martian -- This movie has its weaknesses; a large dose of predictability mixed with plenty of moviemaking and story clichés come immediately to mind. But its strengths are very strong, including an excellent cast in top form and an inherently interesting premise. And the film's greatest strength of all may be its most important trait: its high level of intelligence, particularly in its depiction of science not just as an airy concept, but as a practical way to solve problems. If enough people watch this movie, and absorb its scientific frame of mind, it might nudge this world towards being a place that's a little bit better than the ignorant, superstitious madhouse where we currently live.

Reel Reviews

Mad Max: Fury Road -- Talk about not taking the path of least resistance. This hyperextended action sequence--it strains the language to call it a story--can at least be said to be honest: it delivers exactly what you expect of a movie about everyone's favorite post-apocalyptic, insane Australian, without any other promises. The delivery in this case is an almost indescribable orgy of mayhem--a breathtaking spectacle of violence that does provide a rush of visceral fun. On the other hand, there's a bit too much predictability here, not to mention a sense, when all is said and done, that there really wasn't much point to the whole proceedings. The same thing could have been accomplished, apparently, with a simple assassination. If you're the type who gets his jollies from this sort of craziness, then sure, this is the film for you. But if you expect a little more from your mayhem than just, well, mayhem...then there may be better things you can do with your time.