Resident Evil, Arbitrage, Cold Light Of Day, Looper

This is the first of the Resident Evil series I have seen; fans who have seen them all might be privy to implied viewer moments which I missed, however, Alice (Milla Jovovich) does give a brief historical explanation in the start of the film to bring viewers, like myself, up to speed on pertinent events leading up to this installment. Having seen this one, I am now curious to see the others because, I am guessing, heretofore, the "battle" had been against the Umbrella Corporation and its bad policies, which is fine, however, I would like to see how much, if at all, the franchise intentionally altered its focus to battle socialism post-2008 or if these are narrative lines long embedded within its discourse.

HAPPY BIRTHDAY TOM HARDY!
Resident Evil: Retribution was awesome! Perhaps the most pro-capitalist and anti-socialist film yet released! The opening, reversed battle sequence was carefully executed and each and every fight scene was loaded with symbolic meaning and mirrors the "ultimate battle" taking place between socialists and capitalists today. Yes, it does critique capitalism, but capitalism always needs that, but it also clearly demonstrates how the ills of socialism far outweigh the temporary woes of capitalism. The battle/fight sequences were perfectly choreographed, and I could have gone through, punch by punch, decoding each breaking bone! There are parts where the acting does leave a bit to be desired, mostly because of the character of Leon doing such a bad job of delivering his lines, but it's so anti-socialist, it's worth it! On the other hand,...

I won't even begin to pretend to know anything about the nomination process for the Oscars, however, Richard Gere was in top form in each scene and, depending on the mood of the Academy, I honestly would not be surprised to see him nominated for Best Actor.  Gere had various highs and lows and he perfectly realized his character's deepest pains, fears, anxieties, desires and despair. Brit Marling, playing Gere's daughter Brooke, also did a well-rounded job in revealing how her character was hiding grief and disappointment over her father's failures and fraud. Nate Parker, Timothy Roth--the incomparable, excellent Mr. Roth--and Stuart Margolin all gave fabulous performances in a well-paced and tense story that works overtime to make sure you don't feel an ounce of sympathy for the main character.

Nicholas Jarecki's Arbitrage was carefully crafted and brilliantly acted and vehemently anti-capitalist. While it appears this is the story of just one family and one billionaire, it's not, art is never a specific statement about isolated incidents--and there's plenty of art in the film--rather, it's a general statement about the corruption within capitalism and America and it does a good job at specifically aiming at what capitalists--such as myself--hold up as the virtues of capitalism and tries to undermine why capitalists cling to the system that for the film makers doesn't work; the film does deconstruct itself--holding up a value that actually undermines what it wants to say--but we'll get into that in my review of it.

Mabrouk El Mechri's The Cold Light Of Day was surprisingly good!
Leading actor Henry Cavill (Will Shaw) did not impress me at all with his performance in Immortals, but he certainly did with this one (and Immortals had several technical flaws most likely due to poor directing) but Mechri is such a creative explorer of character and context, that if I were teaching a class on film, I would probably use this as an example of contemporary (philosophical) erasure and noise to advance character and plot ( of course I will be going into this more in the review). Culturally, what's the film about? That the relationship the US has with Israel is more important than our current economic woes, and the defense of Israel--being jeopardized from within the US--is a bedrock of American and global democracy; pretty impressive stuff. Yet that's certainly not all it's doing and I will be referencing this film in the future!

Disney's Wreck-It Ralph, due out November 2,  is just too complex for me to say anything right now,... except for what I am about to say. First, this takes place in the world of games, so what does that invoke for us? Game theory, one of my favorite approaches! It can't be ignored that Mr. Fix It is blue (Democrats) and Ralph is dressed in red (Republicans) and it certainly shouldn't be ignored that the big wrestler in the Bad Guys meeting has a thick Russian accent (like the Tiger in Madagascar 3 who condemned the Bolsheviks). It's animated and it's from Disney and it's about video games and it's appealing to children, but I promise you, this will be a sophisticated statement on politics and life in America today:

I am seriously looking forward to Rian Johnson's Looper coming out September 28. This is the newest trailer and we have only one question to ask to know how important the statement of this film is: who is it in today's political world that would be interested in getting rid of their opposition?

Time travel isn't the only way to go back in time, making a historical film is, too. American writer Jack Kerouac's 1957 On the Road became a thesis for the restless spirit and troubles of youth in that generation and has been remade by Walter Salles (being released in France next May). Here's the second trailer which could either attempt to serve as a re-animating of the wild, liberal ways of utopia and socialism, or serve as a warning for the dangers of shrugging off responsibility and living by your emotions:

I hope you have a wonderful weekend, and I am working at getting these posts up asap!

Eat Your Art Out,

The Fine Art Diner

Trailers: Lincoln, Arbitrage, The Master

The highly-anticipated trailer for the latest release from Steven Spielberg due out (early) in November is Lincoln which takes place as the Civil War draws to an end and President Lincoln argues with his cabinet about abolishing slavery:

The release was originally set for December but has been moved to November, perhaps to off-set the Chris Hemsworth film Red Dawn about communist North Koreans invading the United States and Daniel Craig's Skyfall about MI6 coming under fire and Bond has to defend it at all costs (at least the structure sounds pro-capitalist). Before I let loose the gate on Lincoln, let's take a look at Richard Gere's and Susan Sarandon's newest film, opening today, Arbitrage, about a zillionaire who tries to sell his troubled company as he wrecks with his mistress in the car, creating a nasty situation for himself and his family:

Long-time readers haven't heard me say this in awhile, but they'll remember it: history films are never ever never ever never EVER about history; they are always and always only about the here and the now. The attraction to a historical period in time only happens because of current events which we liken to things which have happened in our past and can serve as a vehicle for discussion our own situations and problems today. Looking at Lincoln, this isn't about President Lincoln, this is about President Obama; what is the "war on slavery" being discussed? The slavery to capitalism which Arbitrage is painting for us. Films such as Abraham Lincoln Vampire Hunter and Dark Shadows, Ice Age 4 and The Hunger Games, are desperate to convince us that capitalism is slavery and only Obama can free us from it. If this were a more patriotic and pro-America film, Daniel Day Lewis wouldn't be reciting the Gettysburg Address like he was reading a grocery list, rather, there would be fire and brimstone in his voice instead of this pathetic defeatism I am hearing.

On the other hand,... Paul Thomas Anderson's The Master, while reputedly about the founder of Scientology, might be a reference to Obama and his brainwashing of the American worker to tell us that we are enslaved and should be freed to live off the government (it opens next week):

First and foremost, this is a story about World War II and what happened to soldiers. Haven't I been harking on the importance of World War II for months now? We come to a large issue in art with the similarites to Scientology because, firstly, Anderson has denied it's about L. Ron Hubbard--the founder--but, secondly and more importantly, how would audience members know about either Scientology or that Anderson denied those rumors? This is the basic problem regarding "authorial intent," that if there is anything outside the artwork (in whatever medium) which the artist wanted the audience to know in order to understand the work of art, then the artist has failed if that information is not included within the art and accessible to the audience (e.g., you don't go to the theater and after you hand the usher your ticket, they give you a brochure with everything you need to know about the director, producer and actors and what you should "get" out of the film experience; it just doesn't happen that way because it's not supposed  to happen that way, we are supposed to engage with what is in the film, on the film's terms, which is often a difficult enough job to manage). Going off this, it makes sense that Anderson would deny those rumors and possibly--just from the looks of the trailer--create a sense of Americans (Democrats) who have followed Obama like he's a messiah (this, of course, reminds me of Martha Marcy May Marlene).

While The Master doesn't open until next week, and I am really looking forward to it regardless of Anderson's politics (he's a master at all things cinematic), we can count on a  powerful narrative for whichever side he decides to take in the current landscape of political unrest. I am seeing Resident Evil today, as well as finishing The Possession (I went last Friday and the electricity in the theater went out ten minutes before the end so I have to re-do the whole film,...) and I am really interested to see The Cold Light Of Day. Really, I am nearly done with my post on Lawless that has taken simply forever for me to get done, and I can only say that it is so anti-capitalist, my heart just hasn't been in it, but it's nearly done. Then I will post on films I am seeing today and then get done with The Expendables 2 (fabulous film), Paranorman, The Possession, and the other films that I have seen. Really. I will. Promise.

From The Possession, which I attempted to watch this weekend. I have not seen all the film, so I might recant what I am about to write, however, sitting in the dark theater for 45 minutes with nothing else to do, coming up with a pre-review was beyond temptation for me. What's the most important feature of the Dybbuk box? It's Jewish, originating from Poland in the 1930s. What has happening to Jews in Poland in the 1930's? Jews in Poland were being prepared to be obliterated in the Holocaust by Nazi Germany. Why would this be relevant today? The Nazis were socialists (yes, you've heard me say this before) and while some (who themselves are socialists) argue with me about whether or not the Nazis were socialists, they identified themselves with socialism, they are identified with socialism, they enacted socialist policies and anything that can be argued against this is a textbook technicality. Clyde, as a symbol for the "founding father," tries to save his little girl Em (symbolic of the future) from the evil spirit of socialism which threatens the future. This is the reason the film emphasizes the "Jewish origin" of the box and the Jewish ritual of the exorcism involved, because no one knows like the Jews what it is to suffer at the hands of socialism. Again, I haven't seen the ending, but will asap!

If I told you what happened last week, you wouldn't believe me, but here's just a snippet: I went to see The Possession Friday afternoon, and 10-15 minutes before the end of the film, the electricity went off! So the ushers come and tell us it will be about 30 minutes and we can wait or get refunds; I choose to wait (I'm there, I have to see it, I might as well get it over with). Forty-five minutes later, they come back (I'm the only one still sitting in the theater with nothing but the emergency back-up lights on) and they tell me it will be at least three hours,... so, to make a long story even longer, the usher asked me which film I was watching and he said, "Oh, it has a nice twist at the end, you'll want to be sure to watch it!" so, I now have to go back and sit through the rest of it! The film is loaded with wonderful symbols--historical and political--and this will be a fun one to decode, so look forward to that review. In the meantime, again, that's just one of the things that happened last week, so my sincerest apologies--as usual--for not getting up a new review for you!

Snow White and the Huntsman is due out on DVD/Blu-Ray this week! Due out in theaters is The Master about the founder of Scientology (Rotten Tomatoes gives it an 86% approval rating) and Resident Evil: Retribution.  

Here is the newest Sean Penn and Frances McDormand film, This Must Be the Place. Penn plays a retired rock singer living off his royalties in Dublin; realizing his estranged father is dying, he rushes to New York to reconcile only to arrive too late. Discovering that his Jewish father was humiliated during World War II at one of the concentration camps, he sets out to discover what happened and avenge him:

If that doesn't look good to you, try Billy Crystal's new film, Parental Guidance due out Christmas Day.

I am working desperately to get posts up; I have changed my mind dramatically on The Odd Life Of Timothy Green: I had originally said it was a capitalist film, but it was so intentionally sneaky, and the vocabulary intentionally robs capitalism of its traditional views, that I had to change my mind. So why do this? Because if we can keep up on how language is being used in the political debate, we can have better debates and better articulate our own positions and understand the other side's position better (this is a really politically correct way of putting it, but I think you know what I mean!).

Trailer: Hansel & Gretl Witch Hunters, Lincoln,

Traditionally, females symbolize the "mother land," and males can symbolize either the "founding fathers" or the economy. In the trailer below, we see the "father" (I guess it's the father) blowing out the lantern and there being total darkness.  The synopsis reads, "Although still recovering from their ordeal, their (Hansel and Gretel) work is relatively easy as for an unknown reason harmful spells and curses do not work well against them. The Mayor of Augsburg recruits them to rid the town and nearby forests of an evil sorceress (Janssen) who is planning to sacrifice many local children at the witches’ gathering during the upcoming ‘Blood Moon’ night in two days time. To make things worse, the duo also has to deal with the brutal Sheriff Berringer (Stormare) who has taken power in Augsburg and conducts a very indiscriminate witch-hunt of his own." While this is a fairly straight-forward kind of Hollywood story, put in today's political jargon and the culture of power struggles we are dealing with, this becomes pretty serious stuff and how it's going to weigh-in on the issues. The problem is, it will be weighing-in after the November elections (the film isn't going to be released until January, in 3D), but the "brother and sister" could either be taken to be America and the economy that went full-sail capitalist after World War II or America and socialism that has been resurrected because of the 2008 economic downturn. It breaks my heart to say this, however, given that some films such as The Great Gatsby, The Man With the Iron Fists, Lincoln and probably even The Hobbit, will definitely be pro-socialists, they are waiting until after the election to be released pretty confident that Obama will get a second term and their films can aid in creating a pro-socialist environment for Obama to continue making America socialist; it's highly probable that this is the case with Hansel and Gretel: Witch Hunters intends to follow their idea.

Tommy Wirkola's Hansel and Gretel: Witch Hunters, postponed for release until January, stars Jeremy Renner (The Avengers, Mission Impossible 4, The Bourne Legacy) and Gemma Arterton (Clash Of the Titans, Prince Of Persia, Quantum Of Solace) who, 15 years after the tragic run-in with the witch at the candy cottage, they have become witch hunters. Examining every little scrap of information I can find about the piece, at this point, I am going to say it can go either way, socialist or capitalist. For example, a capitalist--such as myself--would interpret the "candy cottage" as the promised utopia of people getting everything they want as promised by a socialist government (like "free" health care) then finding out it's poisoned and after they have wizened up, they go after the ones who made the false promises. On the other hand, a socialist would interpret the candy cottage as the feeding of the capitalist's appetites with luxury goods and the two children growing up to realize the inherent dangers of having to work for what you want and the state not taking care of your every need. Here's the trailer and we'll talk about more after you've seen it:

An interesting facet of the narrative is that a sheriff has taken over the town where five children have disappeared and are supposed to be sacrificed to the witches' coven in two days time. Since the film was originally set for release in March, and moved forward to January, we could take that as a link to Obama. There are, it appears, at least three witches in the film, and the relationship Gretel has with them will be a statement on the Feminist movement (they capture her at one point), in one way or another (for example, either the witches will symbolize the Feminist movement and them trying to oppress other women, or Gretel will be depicted as a Feminist and the witches are more culturally traditional women trying to kill her). Another important aspect of this film will be, of course, Hansel and how he is tempted or wounded in the film (because that just has to happen) and what he has to overcome or be converted from in order to attain the status as a hero (in the trailer he's seen briefly swimming with the blond headed woman pictured in the trailer still above; is that a sexual relationship? Probably, but several films are bucking this tradition, so it's possible Hansel and Gretel will as well, but not definite).

"How do you best kill a witch?" "Cutting off her head tends to work," replies Hansel, and that's because the head symbolizes power, specifically, what governs us (it's the functions within the head that controls the rest of the body, so the "head of government" is symbolized by the head). This reference, at least in the trailer, assures us that this will be a politically motivated film and possibly--because the socialists have been "head of government" a pro-capitalist film, especially given that the sheriff has taken over the village where the children are disappearing from. Children symbolize the future, so the missing five children means that the future has been robbed and must be restored; is this the future of socialism in America that has to be kept safe, or the future of capitalism that has to be safeguarded? We'll only find out in January. It is interesting, one of the town leaders tells Gretel that "I won't have you telling me what to do," and she head butts him, knocking him out; his authority as a "head" of government is being usurped by her authority as a witch hunter in that act of body language.

"Me and my sister, we have a past,..." and so, too, does the United States. Now, the approach to tracing down what time period a work of art discusses is called New Historicism and it's a great trick to know, I've used it many times. There are two historical reference frames for a film such as Hansel and Gretel: Witch Hunters: the first is the fifteen years from the time the film has been released, so the film wants us to think about roughly 1997 and the second historical context is if, in the film, it provides an actual year in which the events take place (such as 1754, or something). IF we look back at 1997, Democratic President Bill Clinton was sworn in for his second term in office, during which he would be impeached. If you recall, in Christopher Nolan's The Dark Knight Rises, a very definite anti-Obama and anti-socialist film, Nolan utilizes the same technique in having Bruce Wayne (Christian Bale) having retreated from the public life of crime fighting eight years ago, which correlates with the second term of Republican President George Bush (meaning, simply, that Nolan blames a lot of the current problems of what Obama has been allowed to do on Bush creating the situation to permit Obama to get elected).

Daniel Day Lewis as Abraham Lincoln in Steven Spielberg's upcoming Lincoln (December release). The trailer debuts on September 13, so I will post it asap.

What other time in American history (our past, like Hansel's and Gretel's past) have we engaged in "witch hunting?" The McCarthy Era, when Senator McCarthy was hunting out the communists lurking in Hollywood and other hiding places in American life. I made the comment in my review for Abraham Lincoln Vampire Hunter, that those film makers were reversing the McCarthy witch hunts and now they are hunting capitalists and business owners (the film is incredibly pro-socialist). If Hansel and Gretel Witch Hunters be pro-capitalist, this could be the reference, that we need to start hunting "witches" (socialists and communists) again, or if the film be pro-socialist, it could reference that the socialists/communists, having been persecuted in the McCarthy Era, are stronger for it now and are going to do to the capitalists what the capitalists did to them. Remember, in the synopsis listed below the first picture posted, it says that the sheriff  "starts a witch hunt of his own," and that will only complicate how to read and understand the film, yet, it also demonstrates the film is self-aware of the historical context in which it is being presented and seeks to accurately represent reality. The biggest problem with the film is that they have post-poned releasing it nearly a year; the good news is, it will be released in 3D.

The Expendables & American Super-Power-ism

Jean-claude Van Damme as Vilain (for "villain," of course) holding up Barney's (Sylvester Stallone) own knife he then uses to kill Billy (Liam Hemsworth). That's an excellent point: the knife symbolizes the power and technology America developed to keep law and order in the world that, in American hands, kept socialism from spreading; today, that very same weapon which safeguarded the world then is now being used against us (think, for example, of Iron Man and Tony Stark's (Robert Downey Jr.) dismay seeing the weapons developed by Stark Industries killing the American soldiers they were built to protect).

The Expendables 2 is excellent.
I assure you, it is a far more complex film than you might think, and takes pains at exhibiting "self-awareness" of, as the film itself puts it, "making a statement," which it does loud and clear. For example, in Lawless, just released, the town believes the Bondurant brothers, especially Forrest (Tom Hardy) to be invincible and even immortal; that is Lawless criticizing the American belief that the American Empire will persevere and endure through the symbol of what the Bondurant brothers' moonshine enterprise symbolizes (capitalism); while this is mocked in Lawless, American superiority and Empire is upheld completely by Expendables, and don't be fooled: as I watched the film, I was having difficulty keeping up with how current it is in employing common symbols and issues we're seeing in all the films being released. Even the humor is as deadly as the knives, bullets and punches! In short, if you haven't made plans for Labor Day, going to the movies would be well worth your while!

Lawless Is Flawless But Socialist

The highest compliment I can possibly give to director John Hillcoat and the cast of today's opening Lawless is that every aspect of every scene is perfectly and completely realized, leaving absolutely nothing to be desired; symbols and polar oppositions are well constructed and placed throughout the narrative and visuals that are perfectly constructed (a few people have thought the pacing to be off, but I thought it was exquisite). The cast of course, were all perfect fulfillments of their roles and so aptly directed by Hillcoat with their natural abilities in conjunction with his own vision for the film and characters that there could easily be Oscar nominations for himsrlf and any one of the actors.
It is, however, definitely an anti-capitalist and pro-socialist film. I do encourage you to go and see it because it's just amazing to see a perfect film such as this one, with such a perfectly harmonized cast (no one stealing the spotlight but each transformed into the time and the purpose of their roles, never overstepping nor underplaying their purpose) and these types of films don't come along often, not to mention, it's a great treat for the Wednesday hump. I am also going to see Expendables tonight (no, really, I all ready bought the ticket and have it in my pocket for the 10:15 show, really). Since Lawless opens this weekend, I am getting that up by tomorrow afternoon (probably a little late because there's a lot to write on it) and I want to just think on Paranorman a few more days...

2016 Obama's America & the Questions of Socialism

It has all ready set records for the year. The question poised by conservative political philosopher Dinesh D'Souza in his documentary 2016: Obama's America is: if Obama wins a second presidential term, where will America be in 2016? 

It's not a pretty picture of the future. 

D'Souza, born in India and immigrated to America to fulfill his dreams, does the first thing he should do: he tries to anticipate the liberal media's number one play in today's field of political rhetoric and he demonstrates that he's not a racist: he shows how--unlike myself, for example--he has an identity very similar to Obama's, how they both lived in poor (very poor) countries, they both went to Ivy League colleges, they got into politics (D'Souza was courted by the Reagan Administration) and how America permitted both of them to fulfill the "American Dream." Why is this important?

D'Souza's constructing a well-articulated argument about how he and Obama have so much in common, and yet, have chosen such dramatically different ideologies to embrace, and why the communists Obama grew up with are the ones who have influenced him, and why the liberal media's intentional failure to "vet" or report on Obama's past made it so easy for a communist to get into the White House and is making it so easy to ruin America for the rest of us.

Because the liberal media has made the field that way. (Permit me to insert that, at the end of the film, the audience--very diverse in age and ethnicity--applauded loudly!). Because I am white and Roman Catholic, if I say anything about the president, I am a racist; it doesn't matter that I am female, and the Democrats are supposed to be the party for women (as they say) I can't criticize the president because of my religion and my skin color because the liberal media has gagged me with a sticker over my mouth that says "RACIST."  D'Souza, however, can say things I can't according to the First Amendment as interpreted by the media (who does more to censor Americans than the KGB ever did to Russians); yet D'Souza doesn't stop there; he even has Obama's own brother--still living in Kenya in a tiny hut--articulate why he disagrees with the socialist and anti-capitalist policies of his presidential brother and why he doesn't hold it against the resident in the White House for not helping him out more (this is an actual clip from the film):

George and Barak have the same father, but not the same ideological fathers, and that's the real expose which D'Souza accomplishes so well with his documentary. D'Souza speaks the names of those communists which Obama's grandfather sought out to link his grandson with so Obama would have "role models" in place of his absent father (who was quite the bigamist). There really wasn't any dirt thrown in this film (for example, D'Souza clearly states that Obama was born in Hawaii, not Kenya) but what he does do is a research project into who shaped the mind and beliefs of the young radical Obama and the environment in which he grew up (Hawaii's anti-American government occupation and resentment over what America did to make Hawaii a state).

D'Souza goes to both Indonesia and Kenya to explore Obama's relationship with his mother, step-father, and the environment in which he grew, commenting that it would have been very similar to his own fate had he not been able to leave India and come to America. D'Souza, interestingly, talks about his college days and joining a international students' group, and how white-American students would come and talk dreamily about going to India and who amazing India was, to which D'Souza would reply, "What's so amazing about it? The caste system? The arranged marriages? The dowry? What is it you like about India?" and they wouldn't have anything to say in reply, which is usually the case. D'Souza acknowledges that, had he stayed in India, his life would have been spent within a one mile radius of where he had been born, his marriage arranged and his profession chosen for him. This is a man grateful for the opportunity of the American Dream and that he was able to work for it and make it real for himself.

After a brief glimpse back at the 2008 election, and Obama's acceptance speech, D'Souza makes a big claim: "Even Republicans would have been applauding that speech," because it reminded us what we thought Obama was promising (no, I didn't vote for him) but D'Souza goes through, point by point, act by act of Obama's first term in office, demonstrating how the "hope" and "change" hasn't been for Americans--the upper or lower class--but for socialists and communists who have been actively working to undermine America and Obama was their man and that was their night, not ours.

D'Souza had secured an interview with one of the matriarchs of the Obama's tribe in Kenya, Granny Sarah, and her "speaking fee" was a goat; so D'Souza plays it safe and brings her three goats. They start out with an interpreter, a member of the extended family, who then gets nervous and calls for Obama's half-sister who promptly shows up and tells D'Souza he has to go. Guards/cops in the area (there to protect Obama's family) also tell them they have to go so there is no interview...

Why would critics at Rotten Tomatoes give the film only a 53% approval rating? One, because they have a tendency to be liberal themselves and supporters of socialism. One critic, however, made a note that the film failed to interview anyone who supports Obama; so? The question isn't about whether socialism is good for America, and we need to hear Nancy Pelosi tell us that downsizing and collectivizing is really best for our future, because a supporter of Obama would only be doing that; D'Souza wants to open our eyes--actually, validate what we think our eyes have been seeing, but just couldn't believe it--and make sure that we understand what Obama wants for America and for the world. Using the facts of Obama's actions and his spiraling the debt out of control intentionally to use as a weapon against the future of capitalism in the country, this is a film everyone needs to see.

Please contact your local theater and request the film come to your area; because there are still some capitalists in the world, the big reception it received this weekend may make your theater want to show it if they know they have local support! Eat Your Art Out,

The Fine Art Diner

What I've Seen--

Dear Readers,
Things have been completely beyond my control for more than a week, and I deeply apologize for the silence; I did not take a sudden, unannounced vacation, but have been helping someone. Again, I do apologize, but I have gotten in some good film viewing and can't wait to get those reviews up!

First off, I am THRILLED to admit that I was wrong about Paranorman: it's not anti-Catholic, it's pro-Catholic! Hurray! (I just couldn't imagine a film being pro-Catholic! However, there were several children in the audience, and there were places in the film where kids started crying, so I wouldn't advise taking kids to see it). The Odd Life Of Timothy Green is pro-capitalist and pro-American Dream, taking great pains to really butt heads with The Hunger Games and it's a very touching, family film! I also saw 2012: Obama's America: the premise is, if Obama is elected to a second term, there won't be an America. It was very informative and educational and extremely conservative, so I loved it! All the shows have sold out at my theater, and I'm not surprised! If you can make it to see this, take someone with you because you will want to discuss it with someone afterwards.

Via Redbox, I also saw Witchslayer Gretl which was so bad, they didn't even get the title right. It was, however, anti-feminist, which I deeply appreciate, and one of three films involving the story of Hansel and Gretl due out within a year's time (the big one coming out in January with Jeremy Renner and at least one animated version due out soon) so, having seen it, I will be able to use it as a basis for comparison.

Clive Owen in Intruders.

Another film I rented was Clive Owen's Intruders, which I was very pleased with. Smart script and very self-aware, it was intensely psychological; I don't know if any average viewer who watches films for the sake of entertainment would enjoy it, however, if you enjoy busting through narratives like I do, this was enjoyable and I will be getting a review of it up!

Oh, yes, I knew there was something else I had seen: The Apparition. Of course, an easy pun would be, "It was an apparition of a film!" It seems that about 30 minutes of character development is missing and it has a 0% approval rating on Rotten Tomatoes. Apart from that, I can say with confidence that it is anti-capitalist, but--as it makes this anti-energy and anti-material statement--it leaves itself open to a moral critique that is crippling and I think that moral critique is what most reviewers pick up on and have downgraded it so dramatically for! I have not yet gotten to see Premium Rush, but hope to Monday or Tuesday. Again, dear readers, I am terribly sorry about the prolonged silence, but everything was beyond my control. Thank you so much for continuing to check back and I will have The Apparition review up shortly!

I have not yet gotten to see Premium Rush, but hope to Monday or Tuesday. Why? I can say with confidence that recent films have done something not particularly exercised in the past, i.e., employed the male body as a symbol or metaphor for the economy. In Premium Rush (full synopsis here), Wilee (Joseph Gordon-Levitt) is a cyclist in Manhattan, the financial capital of the world, and the mysterious envelope contains money for a family to enter America from China. Does the family symbolize communism entering America, or a family escaping communism in hopes of attaining the American Dream? Yea, I'll be catching this one!

Still haven't seen this one but plan to!

Again, dear readers, I am terribly sorry about the prolonged silence, but everything was beyond my control. Thank you so much for continuing to check back and I will have The Apparition review up shortly!