Reel Reviews

From Russia With Love -- More Bond movies in order. Quite the step up from the first flick. Everything in the execution of the story seems more confident and skillfully done. It's all there: the action is almost non-stop, the familiar Cold War setting is firmly in place, the gadgetry plays a key role, and Bond gets a metric ton of tail. No wonder the next film in the series is widely regarded as the best of them all -- they already had the template down cold by the one before it. Sweet.

Reel Reviews

Dr. No -- Kicking off a project to rewatch all the Bond movies, in order, we begin at the beginning, as they say. Viewed today, this is a strange mixture of rough draft of a very familiar story yet also featuring fully formed aspects of the genre--considering Bond flicks as their own genre--right there, present and accounted for from the beginning. Either way, it’s a good watch, and no wonder folks decided they’d be up for more (and boy did they ever get it). Works for me.

Reel Reviews

Blade Runner: The Final Cut -- I’m pretty sure I’ve seen BR before, in one of its many incarnations, but I never remembered it enough to have much of an opinion on it. Hence this viewing of what it supposedly director Ridley Scott’s preferred version of the movie. The verdict: it’s pretty good; not spectacular, just pretty good. The film certainly scores by the questions it raises; not so much “Is he or isn’t he?” as “What does it mean to be human? To have a life? To be?” Beyond its philosophical implications, this movie holds up rather well for a sci-fi flick; its vision looks less dated and more like just an alternate version of the future. There’s just a little something lacking; hard to say what’s the fault (story? characters? action?). But some crucial element is just not quite there. Ultimately, a decent diversion, but not really a monument in filmmaking history, whatever anyone tells you.

Reel Reviews

Harvey -- The proof that this is a fantastic movie? When the moment of crisis comes, the moment when Elwood P. Dowd is in danger of becoming just an ordinary guy--maybe--the viewer will most likely be moved, possibly even heartbroken. That’s quite a bit of work for what is a fairly restrained film, one that gives its comedy a lot of room to breathe and injects just enough pathos to give it all some heft. It’s been remade at least once, but that was a quixotic idea, for without Jimmy Stewart and his essential self, the role of Dowd and the entire story would be either too silly (and not in a good way) or absurd to the point of falling entirely flat. Thankfully, we have this one result of when Stewart and company teamed up to do it right.

Reel Reviews

Dumb and Dumber To -- I went in wanting to hate this movie. It seems like such a no-brainer--pun intended--target for the reviewer's venom: a sequel to a movie that didn't need a second act, and a lengthily delayed sequel at that. Plus at least one of its stars, Jim Carrey, seems to be well past his expiration date. And yet...I have to admit, there are enough chuckles and outright belly-laughs in this flick to justify its existence. It's not a classic by any stretch of the imagination, but for killing an otherwise empty two hours while watching it on cable? Sure, go for it.

For The Record, Scale Check

This is something of a "false positive" here. This is from July 4, taken the morning after I came back from a camping trip. Normally, I lose weight when I'm on vacation, so there's no real surprise that I would hit a new low mark in the immediate aftermath of that. However, on this occasion I was driving home from a camping vacation in Nevada, on what was generally a hot day, with the sun beating through the windshield most of the time (traveling almost directly west). Hence, my car was a sauna most of the trip, and I sweated out a lot of moisture.

So most likely, this number is the result of a lot of lost water weight--not necessarily actual body mass sent away. I've since rebounded a bit (weighed 267 on a different scale yesterday), but not a tremendous amount, so that's good.

I'm off to Disneyland on Tuesday, and should spend five whole days walking miles around those two parks, which may hold the promise of more weight lost. The questions then will be: Can I hit a new low mark when I get home? Can I keep any lost weight off thereafter? We shall see.

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.