It's Time

I don't really like the idea/want to get in the habit of citing Gawker as a good authority on social issues, but in this case they're dead on: the US absolutely does need ads like this one:

Getting Stoked for 'Shame'

I've been meaning to write about the upcoming movie Shame for a while now. The sophomore feature-length release from director Steve McQueen, Shame stars the incredible Michael Fassbender as a sex addict living in New York. When his younger sister (played by the increasingly daring Carey Mulligan) moves in with him, Fassbender's life begins to spiral out of control.

What's gotten me so excited for Shame is the bold approach distributor Fox Searchlight is taking with the film: they're embracing its NC-17 rating. More than that they're wearing it like "a badge of honour." This move is unusual in the extreme and it's strange but inspiring to see such a brave step forward coming from a member of the Fox family. Here's an incredible quote from Fox Searchlight director Steve Gilula:

I think NC-17 is a badge of honor, not a scarlet letter. We believe it is time for the rating to become usable in a serious manner. The sheer talent of the actors and the vision of the filmmaker are extraordinary. It’s not a film that everyone will take easily, but it certainly breaks through the clutter and is distinctive and original. It’s a game changer.

The NC-17 rating has traditionally been a death mark for films that push the limits of social norms. When a film gets this rating most theatres typically won't play it, fearing public backlash against deviant content. Germaine Lussier over at /Film explains it best:

When a film gets branded with an NC-17 rating, most studios do one of four things. They re-cut it hoping to get an R-rating, release it unrated, doom it direct-to-DVD or suck it up and go for it.

That last option is a rarity because embracing the NC-17 rating means fighting an unfair, almost pornographic, connotation. The MPAA website itself explicitly states “NC-17 does not mean ‘obscene’ or ‘pornographic’ in the common or legal meaning of those words, and should not be construed as a negative judgment in any sense. The rating simply signals that the content is appropriate only for an adult audience.” But that doesn’t stop major theater chains from not playing the movies, major video distributors from not stocking the movies or TV channels from not advertising the movies. It’s a huge mountain to climb.

The resultant battles between filmmakers (at every level of the process) and the MPAA over ratings have been well documented. This phenomenon has spawned an interesting (albeit very one-sided) documentary, This Film is Not Yet Rated, that everyone who's interested in film should see.

Now to see a major indie distributor like Fox Searchlight coming out in support of a film that's been branded with the NC-17 rating is both refreshing and encouraging. Hopefully it's a sign that the stigma associated with the rating is deteriorating and that we'll be seeing more daring and unique cinema as a result.

Anyway, I bring this all up now because the red band trailer for Shame has been released and it is, in a word, electric. It's embedded below, but seeing as it's red band I'll warn you that it's definitely NSFW. The score and the acting are the highlights of this minimalistic but powerful taste of what we'll see. Without a single line of dialogue Fassbender manages to establish an incredible sense of tension and forced restraint. On top of that the music evokes memories of The Social Network and There Will Be Blood, two of my favourite film scores.

The trailer's gotten me excited for a film I would already have gone to see solely for the cinematic-political reasons stated above. Shame has received great reviews and this trailer gives credence to that buzz. Hopefully this film's success will match its quality so that it has the opportunity to positively impact the entire industry.

Red State

Red State is the latest film from Kevin Smith, the writer/director of 90's classics like Clerks, Chasing Amy, and Dogma. Set in an unnamed (but distinctly Texas-like) small town in the southern USA, Red State is about a familial religious cult known as the Five Points Church. The cult espouses some rather extreme interpretations of the Bible, particularly with regards to homosexuality, and has a distinctly holier-than-though type mindset. An incident early in the film results in the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, and Firearms (ATF) being called in to raid the Church compound, and the ensuing conflict is the basis for most of the film.

As that brief plot summary indicates, Red State conflates elements from the real-life stories of the Waco siege, the Manson Family, and the Westboro Baptist Church. The film attempts to tell "both" sides of the story, intermittently showing the perspectives of the ATF force, the people of the cult, and the surrounding community. Given that kind of humanized engagement with highly controversial political topics, it seems natural to assume that Smith would use the opportunity to take a stance on the issues. At the very least you'd expect some sort of coherent message, something to give meaning to a story about belief-based hatred and killing. And I guess we sort of get that. Eventually.

In what is surely meant to be a P. T. Anderson-esque haunting monologue near the conclusion of the film, John Goodman as the head of the ATF force explains his prior actions to his superiors by stating that "People just do the strangest things when they believe they're entitled... But they do even stranger things when they just plain believe."

... Ok? 

This half-hearted attempt at depth fails to justify or add weight to the events of the film. It feels less like an explanation and more like an observation, and doesn't really do much to make sense of the proceedings. I'm not trying to suggest that movies have to be comprehensible as a rule. Rather it's clear that Smith is trying to take a political stance in this film, and unfortunately his writing fails to convey his position. The entire thing just feels unintentionally senseless and aimlessly political.

On that note, I can't help but feel that Red State would have been more topical around 2004 or so. "What's that you say Kevin Smith? The Patriot Act is bad? Oh, do tell me more!" Granted the topics covered in the movie are still alive in the American political landscape, but they're more like the basic context behind today's headlines. Given the fact that we're firmly entrenched in the post-Bush era, the conversation surrounding these types of issues has evolved in significant ways.

Maybe it's just that the politics don't fully resonate with me because I'm Canadian, maybe these issues really are the kinds of things keep Americans up at night. But I don't think so. I think that people have more or less gotten used to the fact that the Westboro Baptist Church is objectively evil, and that the political/corporate powers-that-be are maybe a little out of whack. With regards to that last one, I think people have not only gotten used to the fact but moreover have become fed up and started to do something about it, but I digress. That's a whole other discussion, and for now it's enough to say I don't think Red State says much that we don't already know, and says it poorly at that.

It's not that the movie is bad per se, on the contrary it's quite well made in many regards. The cinematography, lighting, special effects, and sound design are all incredible. Moreover the acting is perhaps the strongest ever featured in a Kevin Smith movie. John Goodman puts in a great performance, and Michael Parks is absolutely mesmerizing as the paternalistic cult leader. In a lot of ways Red State is the most mature thing Smith has ever produced, exhibiting real vision and control as a filmmaker.

Given all these positives it's especially tragic that the writing is so disappointing. That's usually Smith's one reliable strength, but here it's underwhelming and strictly functional. The minute-to-minute dialogue between the characters is natural and effective in driving the plot forward, but it never really adds up to anything. Nothing in the script establishes much of a perspective with the exception of the aforementioned monologue. Even there, where Smith speaks directly to the audience through Goodman's character, the closest thing we get to a message is a vague sentiment that extremism is bad in any form. Given that I suppose it's appropriate that Red State is moderate to the point of irrelevance, but that's way more cynical than I wanted to be about this movie.

(Originally published in The Weldon Times)

R.I.P. Anne McCaffrey

I just learned from Topless Robot that Anne McCaffrey has passed away. The author of over a hundred books, McCaffrey will be sorely missed by fans of science-fiction and fantasy.

Anne McCaffrey, 1926-2011

McCaffrey leaves a wonderful legacy behind and hopefully her works will continue to be enjoyed for years to come. The Dragonriders of Pern series was particularly important to me when I was growing up and so I was sad to hear the news. If you're at all interest in sci-fi/fantasy then I strongly recommend picking up either Dragonflight or Dragonsong and letting yourself get lost in Pern.








PS: It might be wrong/insensitive to say this right now, but I don't see myself getting another opportunity: the photo of Anne McCaffrey on her Wikipedia page is the worst photo I have ever seen of a person, ever. Like, wow. So unfortunate.

The Way the Occupy Cookie Crumbles

Occupy Sesame Street

A commenter over at The Onion's AV Club who writes from the perspective of Sesame Street's Cookie Monster has put together the most coherent and concise explanation of the Occupy Movement that I've seen. I'm reposting it here because it's both hilarious and so clear that it needs to get spread around as much as possible. Lately I've noticed too little understanding and too much misinformation about OWS going around for my liking. Especially with regards to the reasons behind the protests and the "lack of clear goals." This short piece doesn't pull any punches and gets right to the heart of the issue by responding to the far-too-typical "You're just complaining that you're poor" critique.

Anyway, enough talk, here's the post:

Yes, there always going to be rich and poor.  But we used to live in country where rich owned factory and make 30 times what factory worked make.  Now we live in country where rich make money by lying about value of derivative bonds and make 3000 times what factory worker would make if factories hadn't all moved to China.

Capitalism great system.  We won Cold War because people behind Iron Curtain look over wall, and see how much more plentiful and delicious cookies are in West, and how we have choice of different bakeries, not just state-owned one.  It great system.  It got us out of Depression, won WWII, built middle class, built country's infrastructure from highways to Hoover Dam to Oreo factory to electrifying rural South.  It system that reward hard work and fair play, and everyone do fair share and everyone benefit.  Rich get richer, poor get richer, everyone happy.  It great system.

Then after Reagan, Republicans decide to make number one priority destroying that system.  Now we have system where richest Americans ones who find ways to game system - your friends on Wall Street - and poorest Americans ones who thought working hard would get them American dream, when in fact it get them pink slip when job outsourced to 10-year-old in Mumbai slum.  And corporations have more influence over government than people (or monsters).

It not about rich people having more money.  It about how they got money.  It about how they take opportunity away from rest of us, for sake of having more money.  It how they willing to take risks that destroy economy - knowing full well that what could and would happen - putting millions out of work, while creating nothing of value, and all the while crowing that they John Galt, creating wealth for everyone.

That what the soul-searching about.  When Liberals run country for 30 years following New Deal, American economy double in size, and wages double along with it.  That fair.  When Conservatives run country for 30 years following Reagan, American economy double again, and wages stay flat.  What happen to our share of money?  All of it go to richest 1%.  That not "there always going to be rich people".  That unfair system.  That why we upset.  That what Occupy Sesame Street about.

(Via SF Weekly. Thanks Sarah!)