Review: "Tennessee Queer"

The more things change, the more they stay the same. I’ve heard and used this phrase more times than I care to count, but, much like its meaning, it never gets tired despite the more it’s used. And yet, the lessons that can be learned from it often go in one ear and out the other. Repeating a phrase over and over to people who are constantly repeating the same actions over generations makes me ask; Is an uphill battle worth fighting?

With a sense of humanity and an optimistic radiance, Tennessee Queer says yes.

Review: "Life Itself"

In his review of the 3D re-release of Titanic, film critic Roger Ebert wrote:

"James Cameron's film is not perfect. It has some flaws, but I hate the way film critics employ that word "flaw," as if they are jewelers with loupes screwed into their eye sockets, performing a valuation."

This is a line that I not only agree with wholeheartedly, but something I have taken as advice when criticizing
a movie. In college, a good friend of mine would often ask me to define what art is, and if it can be confined to just a few mediums. The answer lies in the mind of the beholder - anything can be considered art, from brick laying to murder (my college friend suggested that last one). To expand further, an art form should not and cannot be confined to a strict standard. Sure, there are basics in storytelling and expression through film, but they can be creatively manipulated and re-imagined in all sorts of ways. Basically, movies are not to be examined as one would a diamond. A movie can be more than one thing.

Roger Ebert spent his career as a film critic observing and picking apart cinema, explaining why and how, from his point of view, what kind of thing or things a particular movie was. His body of work was elegant, evocative and accessible, enlightening many a reader. This I knew. What I didn't know was that Roger was initially assigned to be a film critic. Fate?

Review: "Jack Ryan: Shadow Recruit"

There is much I can (and have already) said about America's post 9/11 attitude towards global politics. Despite term limits and all, Dick Cheney's empirical plan for perpetual war appears to still be in effect, and worst of all, wholeheartedly believed in and endorsed by a populace frightened over another attack. Through all of the preemptive bravado and violent rhetoric (and bombs), there was a sliver of time when fighting felt, gasp, like the right thing to do.

In Hollywood's latest prequel/continuation/reboot/re imagining, this gung ho spirit is infectiously presented and executed.

Hit & Miss Review: "Pacific Rim" and "R.I.P.D."

This past month has seen some high profile movies do very poorly at the box office. Lack of interest from the audience, poor marketing and horrible word of mouth aside, I feel the urge to discuss two of them - one that deserved to be shunned and one that didn't. If either or both are still playing at a theater near you, hopefully my quick words will sway you in the right direction:

Review: "World War Z"

In This is the End (which I quite liked), Emma Watson remarks to her celebrity friends that she believes the disaster that has hit Hollywood is a zombie apocalypse. Now, it turns out to be the rapture in that movie, and not a single zombie is actually seen. But This is the End does share some common ground with that horror genre. The setting is a tight space (a house), and the characters pose an equal threat to each other when compared to what is happening outside.

Traditionally, the zombies are merely a catalyst for getting the characters together, and presenting the real threat - humans. We bicker, fight, make selfish choices and even kill one another. The looming danger outside only heightens the true danger inside. Commentary through horror. If only we had just gotten along.