Livetweeting THX 1138

• Watching THX 1138: "It's in technicolor. And the color is yellow." "Wait. Now it's blue." "Maybe they could only afford one at a time."


• "That's not good. I think their yellow camera just exploded." EXPLOSION IN RED SECTOR "Oh, it was the red one"


• "Apparently they also couldn't afford skin for the extras"


• The church confessional, automated: "forgive me, for I..." "Please insert plenary indulgence token"


• "He's got a 12-sided die! He's a witch!"


• "Look, commentary on the 21st century" "yeah, little did he know he was making a documentary"


• "Look, it's just like Parker. The only black people you see are on TV"


• "I think I'm dying" "could you be more specific?" "Well, I'm coughing up blood and my heart just stopped."


• "Blessings of the state" "worst plenary indulgence token ever"


• "Apparently they couldn't afford brains for the extras either"


• We could be gone before the next series started. "Thank goodness. Most of the audience will be by then, too"


• "If I have nowhere to go, why are you picking me up?"


• "Dammit, they put the cards into the probulator in the wrong order. Now it's playing chess."


• "Oh, they're teaching him kung fu. *Drunken* kung fu"


• "The nice thing about the white camera is that it removes the walls." ... "What the heck, does it also remove their clothing?"


• "I think he's dead now." "Well, they'd better bring in another subjecte"


• Here, take a biscuit. "What would he want a biscuit for?" "He's all out of business cards."


• "What's with the inifinite featureless white plain?" "They ran out of money for sets"


• "So, basically, this is The Matrix, only more boring. And more kung fu."


• "I wonder if they're going to stop chasing him when they go over budget? You know, like they did with the writers for this movie"


• Stand down. We are here to help you. "You have exceeded the plot budget and are in violation"


• "I think he's trying to get to 88 MPH. That way he can go back in time and prevent this film from being made."


• So, to review, this movie had no plot, no character development or really characterization, no scenery and camera issues. 1.5 hours GONE!


• Just when you thought it couldn't get any more boring... a sound effects only track. Not that the dialogue added much anyway.

WALL*E (2008)

Pixar Animation Studios, Walt Disney Pictures
Directed by: Andrew Stanton

The Earth, from space. (Surrounded by a thick layer of satellites.)

Music plays:
Out there
There's a world outside of Yonkers
Way out there beyond this hick town, Barnaby
There's a slick town, Barnaby

Long zoom in. The Earth, circa 2800. The oceans are dry, and no vegetation can be seen.

The zoom continues. Now we can make out towering buildings, teetering slightly.

Zoom in further. The music fades in and out as a tiny speck moves across the screen.

More zoom. They're not buildings, but enormous towers of trash. And the tiny speck is a robot--the last robot on Earth.

For this opening scene alone I would buy the movie when it comes out on DVD.

The robot is, of course, the movie's titular character WALL*E (Waste Allocation Load Lifter Earth-Class), the last survivor of many thousands (millions?) of robots designed and built by the Buy'N Large Company (BNL) to clean up the Earth after it had been spoiled by humanity.

WALL*E spends its days compacting trash and collecting the few rare treasures it finds amongst the waste, until a spaceship visits Earth and leaves behind a probe called EVE, which is there to discover whether the planet has become inhabitable again. (And is, of course, the eventual romantic interest for the solitary WALL*E.)

I loved this movie. I knew I would enjoy it from the moment I heard it was from Pixar - how's that for a reputation? - but the film exceeded my expectations completely. From the opening shot described above, to the dance in space, to the cinematography, to the social and political commentary, it's a rare piece of true science fiction in film that's approachable and entertaining. (I read a review that compared WALL*E to Kubrik's 2001: A Space Odyssey, and let me say, while the comparison may be apt in terms of cinematography, WALL*E is a film I will watch again.)

The main themes of the movie are environmentalism, consumerism, conformity/self-identity and, of course, love. Love is explored through EVE and WALL*E - WALL*E's personality has developed through ages of operation, and EVE's slowly develops through its interaction with WALL*E (though there are some hints at it from its first appearance, and also in the other robots throughout the movie). I find it somewhat unfortunate that EVE and WALL*E are gendered (EVE is the aloof exotic, barely even aware of WALL*E, who is the goofy lonester that eventually wins her heart), even though it is fairly minimal overall. I understand, though, that it is done to help the movie be more approachable to a mainstream audience.

Consumerism and conformity are wrapped up together in the surviving humans and their "benevolent" ruler, the Buy'N Large Corporation. By the time the Earth is evacuated, 700 years prior to the movie's setting, BNL has taken control of the entire planet - no service provided is not touched (or offered outright) by BNL. As the refuse problem spirals out of control, BNL constructs vast space ships to carry Earth's population away; ostensibly on a 5-year cruise while the robots clean the planet. It reminds me greatly of the fiction of Frederik Pohl, particularly The Merchants' War.

Modern humanity, of a much expanded sort, continues to live in these space ships; or at least on one, the Axiom, where all needs are tended to by an army of robots as people are rushed about upon hover chairs, drinking the latest Cupcake-in-a-cup and chatting with their neighbors via the chair's screens. Unfortunately, two of these supposedly mindless creatures are pulled out of their chairs and begin to discover the world around them. The concept would be much more terrifying if they didn't, much more impactful, although it does allow the filmmaker to point out the wonders - simple and grand - that everyone else is missing, so I suppose it's not all bad.

Environmentalism is the most obvious theme, of course. The Earth has been ravaged beyond habitation. No plants grow in this wasteland. And yet, this disregard is continued on the Axiom, where garbage is fed into the bowels of the ship, to be compacted by enormous WALL*As before being jettisoned into space (can you tell the ships were designed by BNL?).

This leads me to my biggest complaint about the movie: believability. There were moments when I was cocking my head to one side and saying, "Does not compute!" The physics is not terrible, and most of it could probably be easily explained away, but some of the physics problems were: were does the gravity on the ship come from? Why does everyone fall to the side when the ship turns, exactly like on a sea-faring ship? Where do they get the energy or raw materials for everything consumed by the humans? How can humans - big, fat humans - that have spent their entire lives in their hover chairs stand up and walk at the end?

But the most important believability failure is something I've only just now realized: we are left with the presumption at the end that everything will be all right now: the humans have learned their lesson and will now become the proper stewards they should've been all along. But how? These humans have spent their entire lives not having to think about stewardship and conservation, not to mention several generations before them as well. They hadn't changed when WALL*E arrived, as evidenced by the tons of waste jettisoned each minute. While I will admit the events of the movie are certainly a life-changing experience, I can't believe they could change so drastically so quickly.

However, despite all of these nit-picks, I still highly recommend WALL*E for everyone. You won't be disappointed.

(PS I almost want to call this WALL*E: An Ambiguous Dystopia, because the contrast between Earth and Axiom remind me of Ursula K. LeGuin's The Dispossesed: An Ambiguous Utopia. But that's probably discourse for another time.)

EDIT:
Please read UniversalCitizen's comment as well; he addresses many other troubling points with the movie.

Cloverfield (2008)

Bad Robot, Paramount Pictures
Directed By: Matt Reeves

(This review may contain spoilers!)

I wasn't interested in this movie when I first saw the trailer for it (and I had been blissfully unaware of the viral marketing campaign that was apparently used to promote it); I'm not a big fan of monster/disaster movies, and the first-person-limited camcorder-style reminded me of the Blair Witch Project, which I found terrible and boring. So, I wasn't particularly looking forward to seeing it last night with Steve and most of the DLP brothers.

However, my (admittedly low) expectations were exceeded. Cloverfield makes much better use of the camcorder POV than Blair Witch. I didn't even experience any motion sickness (which is quite a feat for me), although some of the others I was with did.

The premise of the movie is that it's the recovered footage from a personal video camera found in New York's Central park following a monster attack. It begins with some footage from the "Best Day Ever", a day on the town by Rob (one of the protagonists) and his best friend/lover, Beth. However, the tape (ok, it's actually an SD card, but for the purposes of this review I'm calling it a tape) is then reused, and partially overwritten, to record the going away party for Rob, who's leaving for Japan. Because of this, the movie is interspersed with short scenes from this earlier day, which add a poignancy to the unfolding events of the monster attack.

This on-the-ground perspective gave a fresh twist to the "monster movie" theme for me (though I've read elsewhere that it's been done fairly frequently). The usual plot for a monster movie takes place from the perspective of an omniscient narrator, and although we have a narrator for the movie (Hud, who's operating the camera), he's annoying, unintelligent, and as clueless as we are. All these people are trying to do is to save themselves and those they care about, futile though that may be, and we're kept in suspense because we're thinking about what we would do in the same situation (and how we might not fare as well).

My favorite part of the movie is at the end, when Rob is addressing the camera to let anyone who might find it know who he is. It's somewhat subtle, but Rob mentions that it's 6:42am, which is exactly the time when he began recording the Best Day Ever, nearly a month before.

So, I enjoyed this movie. I was never frightened, but it was certainly tense. That being said, there are a few nitpicks I have to make.

1) There's no reason to see this in the movie theater. None at all. Unless, of course, you want to sit in the front and get motion sick. The special effects are relatively limited, and nothing that couldn't be enjoyed on a television.

2) The party scenes are WAY too long. The film is only a scant 84 minutes, and the party takes up 10-20 of those minutes without providing...

3) ...character development. There isn't any, to speak of. I couldn't care less when Marlena, Jason and Hud die. I was more excited to see the little space parasites (or whatever they are) than anything else.

4) Inaccuracies and unlikely behavior. Others have mentioned this, but apparently Liberty Island would NOT be visible from the Brooklyn Bridge. Beth's building stands at an unlikely angle. Everyone I went with found it hard to believe that Rob would continually risk himself to rescue her, even though it was likely she was already dead and he had already lost his brother, and that the others would be willing to tag along. (As Steve put it, "Honey, I love you, but if something like that ever happens to you, you're on your own!") Also, Hud sure held on to the camera for a long time (as long as he could, in fact); we'd have dropped it much sooner.

But these don't really take away from the film overall (with the exception of the party), so I still recommend seeing it - when it comes out on DVD.

I, Robot (2004)

Canlaws Productions, 20th Century Fox
Directed By: Alex Proyas

I had avoided seeing I, Robot when it first came out for various reasons. I had heard it was a large departure from the book (which is a collection of short stories by Isaac Asimov that explore the consequences of Asimov's Three Laws of Robotics), and that it was full of crass commercialism. Additionally, although I enjoyed Will Smith in Men In Black, my opinion of him as an actor was not high at the time.

So, it was interesting to watch I, Robot for the first time on Friday, and not because I had particularly wanted to, but because Steve had to for the SciFi class he's taking. Some of the faults that had kept me away from it were true, such as the obvious and annoying product placement and a not-terribly-good performance by Will Smith, but others weren't. For example, although the plot didn't follow any story contained in the book, there are similarities to another Asimov short story - Robot Dreams, although the similarity is brief (and Susan Calvin is decidedly more badass in the short story than in the movie). The movie also explores the potential consequences of the Three Laws, keeping it in line with Asimov's stories.

I really enjoyed the special effects, though, especially the look of the robots (I prefer the NS-4-style robots to the NS-5s). There was some very nice cinematography, and everything had a nice, not-too-distant future look and feel to it.

Overall, I probably wouldn't watch this movie again on my own, but I wouldn't object to seeing it again.

Beowulf (2007)

ImageMovers, Shangri-La Entertainment
Directed by: Robert Zemeckis

Beowulf - the movie - is a film adaptation of Beowulf - the epic Anglo-Saxon poem. It tells of Beowulf, of how he slew the monster Grendel, Grendel's mother, and a fierce dragon. (If you think those are spoilers, remember: the poem is more than 1000 years old!)

Although the movie follows the main plot of the poem, it does diverge in a number of ways intended, I believe, to give a more coherent plot, and to create the distinction between 'good' and 'bad', as opposed to 'man' vs 'nature'. For example, Grendel is merely a monster - nature - in the poem, but it is part the sin of a man in the story (the issue is a little more complex than that, but I'll leave it be).

However, the plot changes notwithstanding, the film is action-packed and enthralling. The music is well-suited (I'm considering buying the soundtrack, not something I do often) and engaging. Most impressive, however, is the fact that the entire movie is computer-generated. There are times when it's obvious that it is, but there are many times when it's very difficult to tell, and the camera motion that is enabled by the CG more than makes up for the deficiencies.

One of the nice touches was that Grendel speaks in Anglo-Saxon, which is a nice touch. The (partial) recitation of the Song of Beowulf is also in Anglo-Saxon.

There is a bit of nudity, but it is mostly covered (sometimes cleverly, sometimes not so cleverly) to garner a PG-13 rating. But what's surprising is that all the violence didn't push it into R; it's very graphic, and fairly realistic (though not completely, which is probably what saved it).

I certainly recommend Beowulf on the big screen, and it's probably amazing in Imax 3D.

Pirates of the Caribbean 3: At World's End (2007)

Jerry Bruckheimer Films, Walt Disney Pictures, Second Mate Productions
Directed by: Gore Verbinski

I wanted to write an in-depth review for Pirates of the Caribbean 3: At World's End, but, firstly, my writing skill doesn't seem to be improving, and it's been a couple weeks since I've seen it.

So, briefly: I really enjoyed this movie. I liked the cinematography especially, particularly of the scene in Davy Jones' Locker (with the crabs). The plot was convoluted and everyone had his or her own agenda (these turn out to be good things in this movie, though others disagree). My complaints would be: c'mon, seriously, you can do better than "The Amazing Growing Fifty-Foot Tall Woman!" Seriously, turn her into a crab fountain instead. Much more awesome. Also: Calypso talks big, but when it comes down to it, what does she do? Effectively nothing. Three ships in the maelstrom. Whoop-de-do.

As usual, sit to the end of the credits for a treat.

Pan's Labyrinth (El Labertino del fauno) (2006)

Warner Bros. Pictures, Tequila Gang, Esperanto Filmoj, Estudios Picasso, OMM, Sententia Entertainment, Telecinco
Directed by: Guillermo del Toro

Pan's Labyrinth, set in 1944 Spain, is a dark fantasy centered around a young girl, Ofelia, and the fairytale that engulfs her. Ofelia is brought to the countryside by her mother to join her mother's new husband, a captain in the Spanish Army. Capitán Vidal has been sent to put down guerrilla resistance fighters at any cost, and it is against this cruel backdrop that Ofelia's fairytale plays out.

Although I had never heard of this movie before we rented it, I was immediately hooked by it. The rich, dark fantasy setting is well juxtaposed with harsh reality, and though the fantasy is gruesome and mysterious, reality is far darker. All the performers did a wonderful job, from Sergi López who made me want to put a bullet between the eyes of his character, to Maribel Verdú, whose Mercedes nearly made me want to join the resistance.

I highly recommend this film, but be warned: it has very violent moments and is certainly not for children.

Night at the Museum (2006)

1492 Pictures, 21 Laps Entertainment
Director: Shawn Levy

Start with a museum, add one unsuspecting but well-meaning loser and the fact that everything in the museum comes to life at night, and hilarity ought to ensue. Unfortunately, this is a Ben Stiller movie, which means we're treated to a series of poorly-executed bits of physical comedy combined with thinly-disguised penis jokes (the cowboy, Jed).

Despite the promising premise, Night at the Museum fails to deliver. Although the development of the premise is alright (once you get past Stiller's attempts at comedy), it seems that about halfway through the script, the writers suddenly realized that they had no plot, and had to tack on one about the previous night guards!

The rest of the movie suffered from inconsistancy. The wax Teddy Roosevelt remembers his making, but no one else does, meanwhile Sacagawea has memories from her historical counterpart? The Egpytian mummy has been restored to full flesh-and-bone, and was apparently aware enough to learn English while in the British Museum, but the replicas of Genghis Khan and the other Huns didn't? (Ok, so they weren't in the British Museum, but come on). Oh, and the Pharoah can also speak Hun, despite being born centuries (millenia?) before the Huns existed (maybe he learned that at the British Museum, too). And Octavius speaks English, too. (At least the kid—of course there's a kid—questions why the mummy can speak English, even if the answer is ridiculous).

Sadly, Robin Williams, while giving a decent performance as Roosevelt, can't save the movie. Nor can Dick van Dyke or Mickey Rooney, although getting to see a crazed van Dyke was fun.

All in all, don't bother with this movie. It should have been much more, much better, much funnier than it was. It doesn't have to be a political commentary or insight into the human condition, but it should at least be funny.

Quotes from last night's viewing of Eragon

"I wish my sorcerer were emo, so he would cut himself!"

"Oh, look, a whole theater full of people that will be disappointed."

"And here, behind this tapestry, is where I keep my DRAGON!"

"BTW, George Lucas called. He wants his PLOT back."

"And so did Peter Jackson. He wants his SET back."

Stranger Than Fiction (2006)

Mandate Pictures
Director: Marc Foster

Kate Eiffel has writer's block. She doesn't know how to kill her main character, Harold Crick, but she knows he has to die, and soon. Unfortunately for Harold, he's real.

One normal Wednesday, Harold starts hearing Kate's voice in his head, narrating his life. This, of course, sets him down a path that will lead, eventually, to his death. In the meantime, he tries to figure out who the voice in his head is, and how to save himself.

The plot and dialogue in Stranger Than Fiction are good, and captivate throughout the movie. You want to know the same thing that Harold does: how is he going to die, and can he stop it? Harold begins the movie as a one-dimensional character, a compulsive bean counter working as an IRS agent. He is, perhaps, the dullest person you'd ever meet. But throughout the movie, he grows on you, and although you begin the movie from the clinical perspective of the narrator, you gradually come to care about Harold and the other characters in the film, even the two characters who play a pivotal role in Harold's death, although they never speak. Most of which is yanked away near the end when Kate must complete her novel, and you are left contemplating: will he die, or not? and how?

Will Ferrell plays an excellent Harold Crick, growing throughout the movie and yet not going over-the-top, and Maggie Gyllenhaal, Emma Thompson and Dustin Hoffman turn in good performances as well.

I recommend seeing Stranger Than Fiction. It has its moments of comedy and suspense, but it is a drama, and a compelling one at that, asking us to examine ourselves and our roles in life.