Worm Cakes & Scream Cheese: Hotel Transylvania

Essentially, it's Moonrise Kingdom with different costumes.
Genndy Taratkovsky's Hotel Transylvania follows the line of pro-socialist films we have been seeing for months now and follows the same manner as well with a critique of capitalism to turn people away from it, while failing to glorify socialism, and show how the same drawbacks inherent in capitalism are "solved" by socialism. How does it establish itself as being against capitalism? There are plenty of clues and they are the same ones which have continuously showed up in other films, but I would like to start with that feature which would draw a viewer such as myself to the film: the collection of old horror film monsters.

Why is "fire bad" in the film? Fire not only destroys, and purges, but it''s also the sign of a mob! The monsters are afraid of fires because capitalists are afraid of French & October styled Revolutions overthrowing them and killing the upper-class, like the one in The Dark Knight Rises.The absence of fire in the hotel means the monsters and upper-class who can afford to take vacations in today's terrible economy are safe from being killed/punished. Because Dracula risks being burned to death by the sun in the end of the film, Hotel Transylvania suggests that a mob isn't needed to overthrow the upper-class, they will be purged naturally (the burning of the sun).

Both Hotel Transylvania and Frankenweenie (opening this weekend) know that the "old monsters" have always been culture's catharsis for labeling, identifying and overcoming our fears, like the Boris Karloff classic from 1932, The Mummy, which I have identified as being about the Great Depression (please see The Curse and the Mummy for more). In those films, however, the "monsters" were usually symbols of abnormal sexuality (as in Nosferatu, please see  The Undead: Nosferatu on World War I and homosexuality in the trenches) or other social taboos film makers wanted to keep taboo such as promiscuity (Dracula has often been the primary threat against woman's sexual purity; please see both For the Dead Travel Fast: Dracula and False Light: Interview With the Vampire); now, with a film such as Hotel Transylvania, it's the general population, which is still capitalist, that has become the "taboo faction" of society with socialists inverting the ideas of "normal" and "abnormal."

Dracula with his teenage daughter Mavis who wants to see the world. The film makes us think capitalists are the ones who habitually create "false worlds" to deceive others, but forget how the Soviet Union, North Korea and China have all deceived the world in the past by creating false impressions of prosperity and freedom that did not exist.

Just as (both book and film versions of) Abraham Lincoln Vampire Hunter establishes itself as being pro-socialist by making all the vampires business owners and wealthy, Hotel Transylvania makes the vampire Count Dracula a business owner and developer of the luxury resort for monsters (and he's a "count," which Frankenstein refers to him mockingly as being "His Lordship," a point of class structure we shouldn't overlook). The point at which Hotel Transylvania negatively illustrates business ownership is two-fold: first, Dracula has to take care of all his guests--so the work itself is drudgery--and, secondly, a legitimate point, Dracula's running of the business tends to come between he and his time with Mavis (and no one would argue that this happens). Before we move onto the other characteristics the film depicts amongst capitalists, and why capitalists, such as myself, are monsters, we should look at the "hero" who depicts socialism and the better standards of living for which the film argues.

Dracula is shown to be a bad employer on numerous levels (a device utilized in Arbitrage, as well) but the film intentionally displays Dracula's superiority complex by his categorizing everyone as either a guest of the hotel--his customer--or his employee, and it's as an employee that Dracula disguises Jonathan, thereby putting Jonathan beneath him economically and socially, although the film reverses that by everyone liking Jonathan and getting upset with Dracula, to the point that, the famous climax of old horror films when the townspeople would mob and go to "get the monster," in Hotel Transylvania, the monsters mob together to go "get Jonathan" and bring him back to Mavis.

How do we know that Jonathan is a "hero of socialism?"
The film erects a series of diametrical oppositions, such as "good and bad," "black and white," "freedom and imprisonment," "fun and boring," "human and human eater," etc., and guess who comes out on the "positive side" of those oppositions each time (The Dark Knight Rises does the same thing, but demonstrating the positives of capitalism, instead)? While Jonathan is the only human with any real involvement in the story, he's also the one who "livens" up the Hotel and brings fun to the entertainment that makes everyone like him (instead of liking Dracula, the owner, so Jonathan is a better "business owner" than the business owner, even). Jonathan's primary identification as a "socialist" however, comes from his limited possessions (he has only a back pack and no known job) and his staying in youth hostels throughout his wide travels (as well as being a vegetarian, more on that below). 

Mavis, Dracula's daughter, symbolizes the future of America, like all young females in narratives, but in Hotel Transylvania, the film makes it clear that the "future of America" is being falsely led: on her 118th birthday, she wants to go meet humans for the first time and Dracula has given her permission because he has built a false village not far away "peopled" with his zombies in disguise. They mock an attack against Mavis for being a vampire and she returns home heart-broken. She falls for Jonathan, thinking he's a cousin of Frankenstein, even as Dracula tries to get Jonathan out of the hotel so she won't "fall for his kind," which Frankenstein tells him is "racist." A vampire making a statement that his vampire daughter and a human can't be together romantically suggests a post-Twilight world wherein there is no moral values separating humans from their greatest enemy, the vampires (and a reference is even made to Twilight in the film). Even though the statement is made by a monster, Frankenstein, it shows the influence Jonathan has over the monsters. No, if you were about to ask, there is no discussion on how Jonathan will be "converted over" to becoming a vampire to live forever with Mavis, or what Mavis will do when Jonathan dies and she's still alive; yes, it's important, because it demonstrates how adverse to reality socialists are in their arguments for their side; we also saw this in Ice Age 4 with the mammoths having possum in them (how did a possum mate with a mammoth? They don't care, neither do they care about a mammoth mating with a ground hog, and this "unnatural" mating shows up in Hotel Transylvania as well).

Food plays a big role in the film, from pancakes filled with live, wriggling worms, to Jonathan himself becoming food for the monsters, and this is one of the (now) typical attacks on capitalism we have seen consistently brought up. The gross food order Frankenstein makes is meant to show that "we are what we eat," and for those eating such disgusting food, we must ourselves be disgusting to want it; Jonathan, on the other hand, orders the vegetarian meal, demonstrating that he is "natural" and "healthy," and for those who want to go the natural route in life, they should also go the socialist route. Dracula, being a blood-sucking vampire, of course symbolizes an employer who "sucks the blood" out of his employees.

The Wolf Man, Wayne, and his wife Wanda, are a sore point of contention with me on this film. Werewolves have had three prominent appearances in films as of late: Underworld: Awakening, Dark Shadows and The Cabin In the Woods. Typically, a werewolf symbolized a man unable/unwilling to control his sexual appetite, thereby reducing himself to an animal (please see The Bright Autumn Moon: The Wolf Man).  The plethora of bratty children Wayne and Wanda have, as well as her being pregnant again, testifies to Wayne's breeding habits; the terror the children wreck is a message for birth control, possibly even pro-abortion. At one point, Wayne is red-eyed and still awake with his pups all around him in bed, sleeping soundly, and he can't get to sleep. This negative image of not just paternity, but of children in general lays out a pro-socialist/Obamacare agenda of the government implementing birth control amongst Catholics who generally favor large families (myself included).

As the owner of a large, upscale hotel, Dracula has the staff needed to run the place: shrunken heads on all the doors constantly saying, "Do not disturb," witches on broom sticks as "housekeeping," zombies as the bus boys and bell hops, as well as knights who act as middle-management (pictured below). After an incident in the hotel, Dracula gets angry with the knight and yells at him, "What do I pay you for?" and takes off; the knight takes the moment to mention, "He doesn't pay me!" and that is intentionally planted in the narrative to create discord between employees and employers and to make people think, "The government would be a much better employer than my current employer!"

An additional facet to the knights acting as middle-management is that it makes capitalism look ancient and silly, whereas, in Resident Evil, we will see, this is actually an advantage. It was the disadvantages of feudalism and the changing work force which gave rise to the open-markets and competition leading to capitalism; Hotel Transylvania thinks this long history is silly and automatically means the American economic model needs to be updated.

We've discussed "vehicles" as symbols of economic stimulation and a great contrast is made between the two in the film. One of the opening shots is of a hearse with the license pate "Undead" which is the shuttle service for the hotel while Jonathan pulls out a green foot-scooter from his back pack, aptly articulating the difference between the two economic models of capitalism and socialism: the hearse, while the car of the dead (because socialists want us to think capitalism is dead) is driving fast and confident through the wild terrain; Jonathan''s portable little scooter is self-operated (the newest green energy) and is promoted as the "it" and exciting thing to have! We saw a similar situation in Madagascar 3, when the bear (symbolic of Russia) tottered around on a tiny tricycle, then exchanged it for a roaring motorcycle, recalling how the Soviet Union went from the inefficient communist system to the fast-paced world of market capitalism. 

Gremlin with Jonathan's scooter. Not only is this a great way to contrast the personal possessions between Dracula and Jonathan, but their lifestyles as well. Dracula has a castle and a successful hotel that serves the needs of his guests; Jonathan has nothing but what is in his backpack and no home, no job, he just "rolls with it." At one point, desperate to get rid of Jonathan, Dracula takes him through a secret entrance and then can't remember the tunnel to take them outside, the castle is so big, mocking the abundant wealth Dracula has. The film also makes it look like anyone can live like Jonathan, and that induces Mavis to go with him but who is going to pay for it? Whose tax dollars will sustain this kind of lifestyle, China's? The ignorance of who pays for the socialist lifestyle--like Jonathan's free-roaming--is a ploy to make people vote for a socialist government because what they think they will personally get out of it.

We recently saw contact lenses being used in The House At the End of the Street and they are used in Hotel Transylvania (funny, the things that film makers pick up on to use?). In Hotel Transylvania, Dracula looks into Jonathan's eyes to erase his memory of what he had seen, but, due to Jonathan's plastic contact lenses, Dracula is unable to. Because the eyes are the window of the soul, Jonathan's plastic covering over his eyes demonstrates how materialism covers over the soul in a socialist government; well, you might ask, if that's what it really means, and the film makers are pro-socialism, why on earth would they put something that negative and condemning in the film? Because they don't believe there is a soul! Everything is material to a socialist, evidenced by the plastic lenses of the contacts, and if you can't shake a stick at it, then, for a socialist, it doesn't exist. Jonathan tries to get the lenses out of his eye with his finger, sending Dracula into a fit of disgust because even the great enemy of humanity knows people have a soul and Dracula can't bear to see Jonathan doing that to his eye! (Please refer to For the Dead Travel Fast: Dracula for more).

Jonathan, not believing he's seeing  a real, walking skeleton, sticks his hand inside its rib cage and another skeleton comes along and says, "Get your hand out of my wife!" (and Jonathan sees her showering later). This is actually an argument we saw with Magic Mike and the "sharing" of a wife because in matrimony, your spouse belongs to you; socialism makes fun of a spouse being personal property of the other (mainly because of feminists) but it also drives home for capitalists the license of sharing in a socialist government and the total break down of morality.

Last but not least, is the role art plays in the film.
Mavis asks Jonathan if he's ever been endangered of being eaten and he says no, except once at a Slipknot concert, a guy was going to eat him; what does that mean? Slipknot has been surrounded by controversies, but, most importantly, they would be considered a product of capitalism because they have been so commercially successfully, introducing the art in capitalism or socialism argument once more. By linking up a controversial, heavy-metal band with being eaten, introduces a lousy moral argument into the fray, namely, that capitalism produces "human eating" art, like the vampire employer/business owners and that such art doesn't exist in socialism. Well, that's partly true, because art doesn't exist in socialism, it's controlled by the government so it's all propaganda. 

You are probably sick of all the capitalist and socialist interpretations as of late (although, really, it's not my fault, it's what all the films are discussing!) but we will take a short break: I am seeing Taken 2 tonight (which has scored $50 million this opening weekend) and getting that up, but then I will be posting on Paranorman and The Cold Light Of Day, both of which will take us away from the socialist/capitalist dialogue for at least a breather!
Eat Your Art Out,
The Fine Art Diner

Everything Is a Secret: House At the End Of the Street

While this poster doesn't seem that impressive in design, psychologically, I think it's well done. First and foremost, a house always symbolizes the soul, because the body houses the soul the way an actual home houses the body so windows always symbolize "interior reflection" and "meditation" because self-examination of the soul can only be achieved by "looking inwards." So, what's Elissa (Jennifer Lawrence) doing? She's looking outward, and that's the first key element that's important: part of our inner-growth depends on our exterior surroundings and how we understand what's going on. Where is Elissa standing? Within the frame, suggesting that she has "been framed" and, when the film ends, we know how. Also important is that well-placed piece of wood (the window frame part) going across her throat. Technically, Elissa is never in danger of being decapitated, as in The Omen, however, when we remember that the "head" symbolizes the "head of government" and how Ryan (Max Thieriot) tries coming between Elissa and her mother Sarah (Elisabeth Shue) even as he appears to be upholding Sarah's request that they not be alone together, we can see by the teaser-poster that Elissa is symbolically endanger of "losing her head" when she falls for the guy that everyone tells her she shouldn't. Next, the curtain on the left side of the poster has been drawn back. We saw a curtain being drawn back in The Chernobyl Diaries and I can say with confidence that symbolized the Iron Curtain of the Cold War; in general, curtains--especially during the Middle Ages--meant that knowledge was being kept hidden or knowledge was being revealed, especially mystical knowledge. Once Elissa has finally "pulled back the veil" and looks at the house at the end of the street (where Ryan lives) knowledge has been revealed and she's better able to reflect on where she is and why but only when Elissa willingly pulls it back herself, she won't let anyone else do it for her, so she's really framed herself.  Lastly, what does she see? The house, the house where the father and mother died, "Mr and Mrs Dead People," as she calls them, and the house is supposed to be abandoned, but they realize it's not abandoned because there's a light on there. Light symbolizes "illumination" because our intellect can't see and gain knowledge in the dark, so a house (symbolic of a soul) which should be abandoned has been illuminated? That's not completely satisfying, is it? Because there was a double murder committed there, a mother (the motherland) and a father (the founding fathers) we can take another typical understanding of a home and expand that, not to the "soul of an individual," rather, to the soul of a country or an institution and that yields a far more interesting and consistent interpretation when other aspects of the film are coalesced together. And the last last thing I will address is the shirt Elissa wears: why is it gaping open like that? Sex appeal? Possibly, but I think a more direct and rewarding understanding is that she's "been exposed" and since it's the area of her heart which is "exposed," it not only means her emotional involvement with Ryan, but also that she's exposed to danger because there is an attempt to stab/shot her in the heart.

If you haven't seen Mark Tonderai's The House At the End Of the Street, you're going to be mad when you read the spoiler below and wish you had gotten the surprise because it is, so far thusly, the most targeted, intellectual assault against socialism I have yet seen in films of the past year.  There has been creative and metaphysical screenwriting in films as of late, and HATES' David Loucka and Jonathan Mostow have certainly demonstrated their skills; not all will think so and I can understand complaints however I am genuinely impressed with their staged manipulation of my compassion and sympathy, then how they slam me with the reality reflected by this narrative. As usual, I am judging the film based on cultural context, not a general entertainment value; the 11% approval rating HATES has received on Rotten Tomatoes might be because it's so anti-liberal.

What I thought the film would be about is Carrie Ann, a female child, symbolizing the future of America; killing the mother, i.e., the "motherland" would mean the changing of America from the old capitalist ways to the new socialist program and the killing of the father would be the killing of the founding fathers and the Constitution in favor of a new government, Karl Marx; Ryan, keeping Carrie Ann safe and alive, would be an unwilling patsy to the mayhem she was reeking but would be unwilling to put her in danger and he would have to make a decision that would show Elissa to be a model of liberal upbringing and progressive social thinking. Was I wrong!  (This is your last chance to stop reading and not spoil it!).

"It's a long way back to Chicago," Sarah tells Elissa as they wait for the owner of their new rental to arrive and let them in at the start of the film. Chicago is a major city in the US, but we also have to consider films invoking Obama's hometown, like Lawless and The Vow; if these two came from Chicago, they probably are Obama supporters, but having left Chicago, they are now in a position to leave Obama. Why is this shot of Elissa slanted? Somethings "askew" such as there is something askew about Elissa that we wouldn't know if the director wasn't using this angle to communicate it to us, in other words, we are being alerted to something "off center" about Elissa and we discover from Sarah that Elissa tends to take someone she finds broken and tries to fix them. In and of itself, there is absolutely nothing wrong with this in real life, yet this is a work of art, so this characteristic takes to a new level especially when we discover more about Ryan. It's an important angle in the film that Elissa is a singer/songwriter because HATES adds another vote in the cinematic battle on art and capitalism or art and socialism; whereas films such as Men In Black III and The Artist, The Raven and The Words argue that art is better off under capitalism, while films such as Arbitrage argue that art is better without capitalism.

What the film, in my estimation, is really about, is the way people who voted for Obama/International Socialism started being drawn to him and defended him from the "unrealistic" and "harsh" criticism of people only concerned about their property values and money because he was trying to do something good and better for America but now, going through the trash that he has done and said, people have started to piece together that he has kept socialism alive in spite of it having died so long ago, and socialism has constantly resurrected itself killing "new governments" to keep up the image that it's still a living form of government and possible today. Only by "illumination" will those "shackled" to Obama be able to free themselves and stop the threat he poses to this country. This is what I am confident the film is saying, now let me demonstrate how and why, because this is the fun part!

In this scene, Ryan and Elissa look at a tree in Ryan's backyard; Ryan tells Elissa, my mother said everything was a secret, secrets are everywhere waiting to be found, and he shows her how the tree they stare at "has a face" hidden within it. To be perfectly honest with you, I didn't see the face, and neither does Sarah at the end when Elissa asks her about it, but the invitation to "see a face" is an invitation for us to see a face in the film, and I certainly saw that in our President. Because the film tells us that "secrets are everywhere, waiting to be found," that includes secrets within the film itself, waiting for us to peer into them deeply enough to discern the features they have created.

It's important, as you saw in the trailer above, that Elissa first meets Ryan "on the road" as she walks home and she first rejects the ride he offers, but then it starts raining and so she gets in. Elissa had been at a party with a group of the rich kids from school who were partying and Tyler hits on her while he's drunk, so she decides to walk home; this scene is the heart of the film. Symbolically, this is all a great way to understand what happened in 2008: Tyler, the overachiever and upper-class jerk wanting to "get it on" with Elissa, can be seen as the Republican party who was drunk on power--having held the presidency for so long--and turned off voters more drawn to the offer of Obama, here symbolized by Ryan who shows up "during a storm" (the economic problems) as voters disillusioned with the Republicans "got on board" with the new guy and the blunt stating of "Your parents died," by Elissa refers to how--at this point in the film, with the information we have--the electing of Obama changed history (the motherland of America) by adding a black president to the long list of white presidents (the white founding fathers) and altered the race relations of Americans.We eventually realize how mis-informed we have been and a "reliable narrative" becomes imperative (after having listened to so many lies, people are entitled to the truth).

Just before the scene described above, Sarah and Elissa have been to a neighborhood party and heard what the neighbors had to say about Ryan and their understanding of how Carrie Ann died. Whereas all the neighbors are against Ryan, Sarah and Elissa feel sorry for him, and let me tell you, I, as a viewer, did not want to sympathize with the neighbors and their complaints, and this is a part of the screenwriting genius, because these are exactly the people who end up being right at the end, the same way liberals mock Republicans and the Tea Party for being "racist" against Obama and his policies. It would be typical of us, jaded as we have become by excessive Hollywood sexuality, to see Elissa's constant wearing of tank tops and shirts hanging off her shoulders, to be titillating and a mere means of enticing men to come see the film; however, there's a great conflict structured upon Elissa's sexuality vs. her mother's, Sarah's. We passively discover through Elissa's outburst of anger against her mother that Sarah was a slut in high school, supposedly getting pregnant by Elissa's father, marrying him, and then divorcing him years later because he was always gone. Sarah assumes that, because she was sexually active in high school, Elissa is or will be as well, and Elissa makes the clear case that she's not, and we see her "protection" of her body when Tyler hits on her and she refuses his advances. So, does Elissa wear rather tantalizing clothes to be a tease? No, they accurately describe "who" she is in the film, the future of America. Please note, for example, that Elissa's arms are usually bare throughout the film: arms symbolize strength, and not just physical strength, but stamina and determination, which we see in Elissa several times, not only while escaping from Ryan, but before, when she defends him from everyone. Elissa wears two tank tops, the bottom one being a faint pink, symbolizing femininity, which accurately re-enforces her role as the earth/America, and is again re-enforced by the necklace of open, round circles (circles are traditionally feminine, and if you don't believe me, please watch a funny monologue by Will Smith in Men In Black III).  The white tank top Elissa wears symbolizes purity, innocence, and this accurately reflects history: the future of America is innocent of why socialism is so deadly and even evil, because they don't have real experience with what occurs in socialist societies, whereas Sarah--the previous generation--does. (I'm going to discuss Sarah's role a bit further down in relation to Ryan's mother).

Let's go back to a previous scene: during the first night at the new house, Sarah wakes up around 3 in the morning and sees a light go on in the house across the street, Ryan's house. She didn't think anyone lived there, but the second scene is the next day at a neighborhood party when Elissa finds out more about Carrie Ann and about Ryan still living in the house all by himself, which shocks them. The neighbors discuss how they offered to buy the house to raze it because their property values were being dragged down by it (that's an important point in identifying who is who in the film). What is the light going on in the house that should be deserted? Symbolically, the institution of socialism shouldn't have anyone still living in it after after the fall of communism and the dissolution of the Soviet Union because that proved that socialism is an untenable means of government,... didn't it? The light being turned on in a house that should be abandoned means that someone is still "turned on" by what some think socialism "illuminates" about society and politics. It's particularly interesting that it's from her landlord, an owner of personal property, that Sarah finds out Ryan still lives in the house.

The first day at the new house, Elissa takes a walk in the state park (yes, read government sponsored program here, not that there is anything wrong with state parks in reality, but in art, during a socialist takeover of the American government, a state-run park is important) and she sees a blanket and pillow on the ground in the woods, like someone had been sleeping out there. Why is this important? If you think about the film, and how we see Ryan keeping Carrie Ann locked up, whenever she does get out, he immediately goes after her, so she wouldn't just be "living off the land" as we are led to believe in this encounter in the woods or in this shot above, when Elissa peers into the woods wondering "If someone could really live like that" in the wilderness and we, the viewers, see someone move, knowing someone has been looking back at her without her knowing this. Is this a inconsistency in the film, or are the film makers inviting us to peer into the dark woods and discover something? I like the invitation, personally, so, going off that this can't be Carrie Ann, who can it be? Well, as I discussed in Trailers: Ingenious & Mama, in the upcoming Mama film with Jessica Chastain, there have been a number of films as of late using the idea of "living in the wilderness" and both socialists and capitalists have employed it to degrade the other side. This person we witness peering back at Elissa with Elissa seeming to be aware that someone is there is like The Chernobyl Diaries when Uri finds the smouldering camp fire and realizes there must be someone there in the "abandoned" town with them, and the Fallout Zombies are watching the group's every move, unknown to them (please see Extreme Tourism Through History: The Chernobyl Diaries for more). In other words, in spite of the capitalist revolutions of the 1990s and the "Fall Of Communism," socialists were not murdered, they just moved to the margins of society, like the wilderness, to wait for "the perfect storm" to move back in again. So this "person" in the woods isn't Carrie Ann, and that's part of what's eerie about it, because we never meet this person although they are watching everything that's going on, and I think that's the "underground socialists" waiting to take advantage of the situation in America and turn the political socialist revolution into a more October-styled Russian revolution. (Analysis on this point continues below under a shot of Ryan).

Let's go back to Ryan.
When Elissa first meets him, he's driving and he mentions that it's his father's car he inherited. Because a car symbolically signals a "vehicle" for a character (something that drives them in life or spurns them onwards), we have to ask who has inherited a "vehicle" from their father? President Obama's memoir Dreams From My Father discusses what ideals he inherited from his father that "drive him" to be the man that he is and, knowing what a communist his father was, this all makes perfect sense (the car plays an important role in the film, discussed below). So Elissa initially doesn't want to ride with Ryan, but when the rain comes--read "the economic disasters of 2008"--she does, and she finds something that seems inconsequential, but is actually quite interesting.

In this scene, Elissa is getting ready for the Battle Of the Bands at their high school; whereas she had been in a band in Chicago, members of her new school found her information online and were able to access a sample of her singing and decided to invite her to be a part of their band and help them compete in the upcoming competition. This competition is inherent and imperative to capitalism, because it brings out the best in artists and creates an environment of exchange and inspiration, professionalism and reward. As we saw with the skateboarders in Dredd who were practicing a skill that, in America's capitalist economy can become a profession for them with their unique talents and skills, so Elissa in competing in the Battle of the Bands, is preparing her future for a career in music, but Ryan's plans for her are terribly different, as he tells her, I want you, but I need Carrie Ann, and that means no more Elissa. Just below, I discuss how Elissa finds a copy of STP's Core in Ryan's car; in my post Tongues: Rock Of Ages, I examine the difference between Rock and it being the artistic ammunition against communism during the Cold War, and Alternative music being a turning in on ourselves and replacing ourselves as the enemy after the fall of the Soviet Union. Alternative music's intense self-examination of ourselves, found in the music of groups such as Bush, Pearl Jam, REM and Nirvana, is a psychological study in our inner-weaknesses and, what is it that Ryan is studying at college? Psychology, and over the "failed dinner" Sarah stages to get to know Ryan better, Elissa throws out that Sarah went through therapy after she left Elissa's father (symbolic of the founding fathers of America that were "left" in the 2008 election, more on that below in the discussion on the Penn State girl). To know your enemy, you study their weakness, and to put it bluntly, no other music genre has been so philosophical and meditative as the Alternative genre of the early 1990s. Ryan, in other words, feasts on the buffet of our own self-hatred preserved in the music of STP (which was cathartic at the time) but which he (as a socialist) intends to use against us (as a capitalist country).

When Ryan picks up Elissa in the rain, it's ten miles to their street, so Elissa goes through Ryan's cassette tapes and picks up his copy of Stone Temple Pilots' 1992 album Core (which I recognized because Core is one of my favorite albums); what does this mean? Two things. First, it's a commentary that Ryan's taste in music is being contrived because, unlike myself who was in high school when Core was released, Ryan is 19, so he was born in 1993, a year after Core's release, so he was introduced to this alternative band somehow (it's probably by his father--who would have really been too old to listen to Alternative music , having two kids--so, why does Ryan's father listen to music intended for teenagers and young college students?); Core was released just months after the fall of the Soviet Union on December 25, 1991, so Ryan is "stuck" in this warp of the Cold War's ending and hasn't been introduced to any new music. This is typical of socialist states where, because there is no competition, art tends to stagnate and fails to evolve because the avant-garde is considered decadent, like Adolf Hitler's burning of degenerate art. Further, that Ryan is still listening to cassette tapes, demonstrates a tendency of socialist countries to fail in adapting new technologies and mediums (please see notations in caption of image above for more on "artistic competition").

What attracts Elissa to Ryan? He's sweet, gentle and misunderstood. We see, however, his incredible strength and even brutality when Carrie Ann escapes her room and runs out into the night, rushing upon a couple making out in their car until Ryan grabs her and drags her to cover, breaking Carrie Ann's neck. What does this scene mean? The couple in the car are only concerned with having sex, and totally unaware of the danger they are in, a typical horror genre device, but still a powerful one, because that could be any of us, going about our private, intimate lives and being in the middle of terrible danger and completely unaware of it. It's unclear, knowing what we know of Carrie Ann by the end of the film, if she is going to them for help or she's so drugged out that she really could kill them. What is clear is that we think Ryan has been protecting her but he's really been keeping her hostage at his own will and he kills her (by the strength of his rage) when she has threatened to break his hold on her and expose the truth. In this shot above, Ryan wears a blue shirt over a red one because blue is the color of depression, which we can see Ryan having, and red is the color of love usually, but it's also the color of wrath/anger ("I'm so mad I'm seeing red," as the saying goes) so Ryan dresses himself in depression to hide the rage which propels him on. This is a bit of a stretch and I admit, but because of the way blue is used on the Penn State shirt, we can also say that Ryan/Obama came dressed as a Democrat (blue is the party's official color) but was really a "red communist" underneath (red being the official color of the international socialist movement). Just one last little nugget referring to the Cold War: when Elissa sees all the food Ryan has bought on the table, she smirks, "Stocking up the fallout shelter?" Fallout shelters were important during the Cold War because people never knew if a nuclear attack was going to come from the Soviet Union or not. Fallout shelters are not a part of the American experience Elissa is familiar with--the way kids in the 1950s-1970s were--so Elissa has been "introduced" to the idea of fallout shelters (television or history books) the same way Ryan was introduced to the Stone Temple Pilots, and her alert reaction means that she's not as ignorant of the harms of socialism as first thought,...

One last reason why this relationship between socialism and art is so important: the "courting of Hollywood" by Obama, and all the stars who seemingly support him. While art hasn't played a big role in films of the last year (with the exception of Arbitrage) art has played a consistent role in films, everyone commenting to a greater or lesser degree on what is the best environment in which to produce art/film, and juxtaposing Elissa's cutting edge singing and her self-marketing on the Internet against Ryan's cassette tape from 1991 is a definite statement of how poorly art fairs in a socialist society and how art becomes a weapon in the hands of our enemies. In other words, the artists Obama has been courting (like the love songs we hear Elissa singing about her waiting for love), and have supported him so much (like Elissa defending Ryan) are the ones in danger of suffering the greatest loss and oppression because of their art and lifestyles. Now, it's time to talk about Carrie Ann and why Ryan symbolizes a socialist state.

Again, Ryan's car, being inherited from his father, references Dreams From My Father, and the vehicle which Ryan uses; before we fully realize who Ryan is and what he has done, the film makers show us the jerk Tyler and his friends smashing Ryan's car and attacking him, then they turn to beat up Ryan and he snaps Tyler's leg and escapes.Tyler's mom tells the cop that Ryan is a monster and is sick of him defending Ryan all these years, but then we realize that Tyler and his mom are right: the trashing of the car shows Republicans "trashing" Obama's bail out programs and how he has retaliated against criticism by the Tea Party and Republicans: he has "broken their will" (snapping Tyler's leg) by using the Constitution's power for the president. When Tyler's friends set fire to his house, that's conservatives trying to "burn down" the house of socialism Obama has been building. In the picture above, Ryan has explained to Elissa how he wants to rebuild his grandfather's house and sell it, i.e., the system of thought created by Karl Marx and spread it throughout the world.  In his political commercial, Obama has former impeached president Bill Clinton talk about "rebuilding America from the ground up," and that means taking down the structures of capitalism and replacing them with the ideas of socialism.

Towards the end of the film, after finding tampons and blue contact lenses in the garbage, as well as a green wallet from Peggy in the diner, Elyssa starts to realize that--in spite of being told that Carrie Ann had drowned in the surge during the storm in which she killed her parents--Ryan has been keeping her below the basement in a underground cellar (a basement usually symbolizes where we keep our dark desires, our base appetites, but Carrie Ann is kept even further down than the basement). The truth is, Carrie Ann died when she was a little girl on the swing set, Ryan's father buried her and the parents turned Ryan into "Carrie Ann," causing him to kill them in rebellion of "being punished" for revolting at not being his dead sister. The "Carrie Anns" we see in the film are girls Ryan had kidnapped and forced into the identity of Carrie Ann and this, as we also see in Resident Evil, is the primary means of identifying Ryan as a symbol of socialism: Carrie Ann is wholly dependent on Ryan for all her needs, and he frequently drugs her, just as in Resident Evil, The Bourne Legacy and Dredd. When we finally discover the truth about what Ryan had been doing, the entire film is cast in a new light.

What Ryan and Elissa are doing is forbidden, not by my Puritanical morals, rather, by the film itself: Sarah explicitly stated that she didn't want Ryan and Elissa alone together, and Ryan agreed, but here Elissa is and they are making out, just as Carrie Ann, locked up below, under the basement in a cellar, is getting out. Now, what else in the film is "forbidden?" Stone Temple Pilots' album, Core, the title of STP's album, Core, refers to the apple core from the Tree of Forbidden Knowledge in the Garden of Eden (to which is what their song Wicked Garden also refers) and that's why Carrie Ann escapes when Elissa is in a state of disobedience, the "crazy" socialism is let loose when the guard is down and the motherland has been disobeyed. We are led to think that Elissa is in danger and that's why Ryan wants her out, but in reality, Ryan is in danger of being "found out" for what he's done and is afraid of his Carrie Ann getting away.

Let's take another look at the opening sequence.
The first thing we see in the film is a house under water in a snow blizzard, then realize it's a house in a snow globe and it's Carrie Ann holding it; she puts it on a shelf, walks down the hall, trips on a power cord and she knocks over a lamp; there is a storm going on and her mother comes out and Carrie Ann takes her out with a hammer, then kills her father on his bed with feathers flying everywhere, she then runs out into the woods. This sequence is presented as the truth of how Carrie Ann killed her parents, but it's not truth because Ryan killed his parents, so why are we given this story? Because this is the story we the voters have been given in America. The house in the snow globe symbolizes how voters in 2008 thought America was "drowning" and "underwater" and the "new America" (Carrie Ann) did away with the old motherland (the mom) to build a new America (the hammer murder weapon, in contrast to Thor's hammer of justice he uses); she then killed the founding fathers in their luxury (the feathers) and went "natural" and to the government (the state owned woods outside the house). This isn't what happened though, and the film wants us to know that this isn't what happened.

Like the Disney film Brave, HATES also demonstrates the intense conflict between mother and daughter, the older vision of America and the future in opposition. (Please see Brave: Two Bears & the Lessons Of Soviet Union for more).

The reality of Ryan killing his parents goes back to the reality of how Carrie Ann died: when they were little, she swung too high on the swing set and he was holding her hand and she fell backwards. Ryan's mom was freebasing drugs when the accident happened; Ryan's father buried Carrie Ann and his parents started calling Ryan "Carrie Ann" in a fit of denial about her death, then Ryan later killed them for punishing him for not going along with their act. What does this mean? Like Elissa being the future of America (Carrie Ann and Elissa are competing models of America's future, and Ryan chooses Carrie Ann) Carrie Ann, in this part of the story, is the future of socialism, and the swing is the swing of revolution (because it's like a pendulum, going one way and then going in the opposite--political--way) and Ryan is the bearer or carrier of socialism, a future father to spread the seed of socialism. His mom doing drugs symbolizes the "death" of socialism in the Soviet Union and the world because the motherland on socialism (the Soviet Union) was drugged (like in Dredd and The Bourne Legacy) on glasnost and perestroika which led, eventually, to the death of communism there, the "swing" from communist to a capitalist system. It's the tight "hold" on a socialist country that the Marxist philosophy has to have in order to keep it working (Ryan holding Carrie Ann's hand as she kept swinging higher and higher) but the lessening of restrictions and censorship (the mom not paying attention to the kids) meant the "communist revolution" died. The parents transferring "Carrie Ann's" identity to Ryan shows that socialism has to have a country, a government to exist, it's not sufficient to be just a bundle of ideas, socialism wants to be in the world, governing.

The doomed dinner. Sarah has invited Ryan over for dinner so she can better keep track of what Elissa does, the exact opposite of Ryan's mom who is free-basing drugs when the original Carrie Ann dies. Sarah makes it clear that she doesn't want Elissa and Ryan alone together; Elissa manages to fool Sarah by having the calls on the home phone forwarded to her cell phone so Sarah will think she's at home. What does this mean? Elissa isn't taking the "call" of her destiny seriously because a phone symbolizes the "call to action" we are meant to make in our lives which fulfills who we are and what we believe (please see My Favorite Zombie: Night Of the Living Dead on the importance of "the call" in art).

This is where the girl from Penn State comes in, Peggy.
After burying a "Carrie Ann," Ryan goes to a diner where he's given a piece of pie and glass of milk "on the house." Perhaps that's why he decides Peggy will be his next Carrie Ann, because she likes to give things away, the popular conception of a socialist government. Ryan takes her, because of her kindness, and forces a new identity on her, that of his dead sister. When we later see the blue Penn state shirt in Carrie Ann's room, reminds us that in the 2008 presidential election, Pennsylvania voted for Obama, and Peggy's brown eyes made blue by Ryan reminds us of Hawkeye in The Avengers when Loki puts him under his control. In other words, the actions of Ryan in controlling Carrie Ann, taking girls and altering their identity, drugging them, keeping them locked up and dependent upon him for all their needs, then being ready to do that to Elissa, illustrates what history proves socialist governments do to those they control: they control them.

Ryan has captured Elissa and tied her up in the Carrie Ann room. She will knock over the lamp on her right to burn through the bandages after getting her legs untied while Ryan is off killing the cop who has come to check on her (the cop, as an embodiment of the "law of the land," symbolizes the Constitution protecting the socialists--the cop is always sticking up for Ryan--even as socialism threatens to destroy the country).

It's only after most of the film, and Elissa hearing everyone call Ryan a "monster," that she finally digs through the trash--all the things Obama has "thrown away"--and learns what Ryan has done (the trash containing the real identity of our country, our wealth and home values--symbolized by Peggy's wallet, which Ryan says belongs to him because socialist governments believe everything belongs to them, not to us--the tampons symbolic of Peggy's ability to bear children that she won't bear because a socialist system "doesn't bear fruit" and, the contact lenses being a piece of plastic that covers the eye--the window of the soul--because socialist governments put Materialism over religion and individuality so people cannot reflect on their own being (which is part of the reason why art does not thrive in socialist countries).

When Ryan ties her up, Elissa has to free herself after she's discovered the truth (like Obama supporters who refuse to examine all he's done since being in office and see where he intends to take the country). Elissa being tied to a chair shows she's in a "seat of power" (voting) but she frees her legs first, that is, her will power (she's determined not to be lied to anymore) and then, like Carrie Ann in the opening sequence, she trips the lamp (the light of illumination) and frees her arms from the shackles that have bound her but she has to endure the pain of "being burned," that is, as the lamp burns the shackles and her skin, she has to admit she was wrong and was lied to.

The tagline, "Fear its secret," is meant to be taken seriously: what secret? That socialism never died and intends to take over the whole world, including the United States. In 1966, The Quiller Memorandum, with Alec Guinness and Max von Sydow, was released, and its thesis was that, in spite of the Nazis being defeated in World War II, they were still everywhere and teaching in the schools and planning a comeback; people believed it ridiculous but it was precisely that incredulous behavior allowing it to recover from the War; HATES has many similar elements to it and its attempt to uncover how Obama is using the same tactics.

Like Elyssa and Sarah renting their house, we are only renting America, it's a land always owned by the future generations which we have to turn over to them, and we have to be the good tenants of today so there is an America for them tomorrow. HATES tries to show what has happened, and importantly, how we have been lied to four years, what we need to do to escape and what will happen to us if we don't. 
Eat Your Art Out,
The Fine Art Diner

"Fear reaches out, for the girl next door." This is an interesting poster because, if you will kindly note, there is an open door (we can tell by the door knob in the lower-center of the poster and the light illuminating the back of Elissa's arm). So what door has been opened (like the opened, bolted door in The Apparition or the opened box in The Possession, or the box in The Odd Life Of Timothy Green)? The door to America has been opened to socialism and a way we can tell is the gold highlights on Elissa's body, probably here referring to the great wealth of America that is now at risk because of who is coming through that door to put an end to it (Elissa is trying to avoid being killed by Ryan in this scene).

Skyfall First Clip

This is the first clip from the newest James Bond to be released:

This is my MOST ANTICIPATED film for the rest of this year!
Bond (Daniel Craig) employs a construction machine to stop a fast-moving train,... the key to this scene is the kind of car he crushes: the Volkswagenn Beetle, or the People's Car, was ordered by Socialist Nazi leader Adolf Hitler and built by Nazi trade unions. Bond crushing the cars acts to verify the crushing of socialism and his "bridging over" the gap that will leave. Bond confidently landing on his feet with an unwrinkled suit contrasts with his physical abilities in Casino Royale (please see James Bond: Beyond Boundaries for analysis on why Bond fights and chases the way he does and evolves to get stronger) but demonstrates that the feats of this scene have left him "unscathed" (his suit still neat and no "defacing marks" on him) because he has successfully built up his strength and skills to be in top form for this battle (we know from the trailer that the woman following in the car will shoot him later in this scene, so he will still be "brought down" when he falls, but that attests to the virtue of this hero that he can still come back for more). Bond wears a gray suit, however, so it means he either is in a state of penance (not out of the question because a click scene in the second trailer shows M (Judy Dench) looking a computer screen that says, "Think on your sins,") or Bond is, like Gandalf the Gray in The Lord Of the Rings, a pilgrim to attain an even greater degree of power (or, of course, it could easily mean both).

Hotel Transylvania

It's not just that Adobe Flash player keeps crashing, it's messing up the whole computer,... if it's not one thing,... see, even Blogger is messing with me today, the font isn't right!

I did see Hotel Transylvania last night and, like so many other pro-socialist films from the last several months, it is anti-capitalist. I really would have had this post up in just about an hour, but I am having so many computer problems today, I can't believe it. I am working on the post and, as always, will get that up asap, along with Paranorman and Frankenweenie, since they are all in the same genre of the old horror classics, then it makes sense to do them together for comparison and contrast.

This & That

Right now, I am wrapping up replying to some wonderful reader comments and emails! It's no secret that I am terribly behind (The House At the End Of the Street, Arbitrage, Odd Life Of Timothy Green, ParaNorman, Expendables 2, Resident Evil, Cold Light Of Day, The Possession, The Campaign and Savages are all getting posted--not in this order--I am just behind). I am also behind (insert great big blush all over me!) on watching the newest releases; since Hotel Transylvania was the big record-setter this weekend, I am watching that tonight! Looper, Pitch Perfect, The Master, Frakenweenie and Taken 2 are the films I am wanting to watch this weekend/next week and will be getting those up as quickly as possible!
In the meantime, here is the long-anticipated trailer for The Lone Ranger, due out in theaters July 2013:

What do we make of it?
Until another trailer is released supporting the opposite theory, it appears this will be anti-capitalist. The train symbolizes, as you have probably guessed, the "engine of the economy," and the wealth and power shown decadently throughout the trailer--the showgirls, the lavish saloon and train cars--is (probably) meant to, once again, stir up animosity between the classes, specifically, against the upper-class. The Native American Tonto (johnny Depp) has had numerous films leading up to his appearance: Moonrise Kingdom (they follow the Indian harvest trail), Oliver Stone's Savages, House At the End of the Street and even, to some degree, The Apparition in that Tonto might symbolize a return to a "simplified" form of life against the civilization the "iron horse" trains represent against Silver, the Lone Ranger's (natural) horse.
Until next July, we have more immediate concerns,...

With Hotel Transylvania and Frankenweenie opening just a week apart from each other, it's interesting to see, once again, how the symbols from the past--the monsters--have been "resurrected" to be once again introduced into mainstream society's cultural debates. Frankenweenie, specifically being about a dog, utilizes a growing trend in films employing "man's best friend" to make a point: The Apparition had little Pepper the dog, Seven Psychopaths is about dog-knapping and Frankenweenie is about bringing back to life a dead-dog. In general, and there are exceptions (which we may have to touch upon) but dogs--as man's best friend--symbolize loyalty, so in The Apparition, Pepper dying in such a strange way may be a testament to how some of us--myself included--are still clinging to the seasoning of life (Pepper) that capitalism brings to us (the competition, the fulfillment of dreams, the owning of your own business, etc.). I won't say anything else until I've seen Frankenweenie--okay, I will say this: it's from Tim Burton so it's a pro-socialist film, but other then that, I won't say anything else until I have seen it--but all those films it will be referencing should be on our minds!
Eat Your Art Out,
The Fine Art Diner

Entities Of 'Power': The Apparition & Thomas Edison

This post is graciously dedicated to John Wilson who requested it and has patiently awaited its posting! Thanks, John!

"Entities manifest themselves through energy," Patrick (Tom Felton) explains in Todd Lincoln's supernatural thriller The Apparition and herein lies the heart of the problem the film sets out to tackle, the play on words of "energy," and "power," because we think we're in for a ghost story, but it's really a history lesson on where America's policy on foreign oil and our dependency on the power grid has gotten us. The two keys to understanding the film is that the first "experiment" takes place in 1973, and the second key is a photograph during the credits (there are always several valid ways of understanding a work of art, and this is just one of them).

This is actually a well-done poster: Kelly (Ashley Greene) is being "handled" by nasty looking hands and her mouth is gagged. It's probable that she's naked in this shot. So, as a young female, we know Kelly symbolizes America/ the future of America who is "exposed" (her nakedness) and who would be "grabbing" at us? Well, it appears that those are the hands of the owners of foreign oil the US imports every day to keep this country running, meaning that we should interpret the tagline, "Once you believe you die," to mean, "Once you believe we need foreign oil to run this country, you die to alternative energy sources and being "freed of" foreign influence" (the hands keeping Kelly trapped). A slightly different interpretation--but still consistent with the film--is once you believe you need all the gadgets you live with in your daily life, you die to the possibility of being "free" from them and living a clean life (a life "clean" of gadgets and electronics).

The film begins with a seance type home-movie from 1973, the "Charles experiment," when a group of six people attempted to communicate with the spirit of Charles and "opened a door"; what door was opened in 1973? Probably the energy crisis resulting from an embargo Arab countries launched against the US because of the US arming Israel during the Yom Kippur War that same year. Of all the things happening in the tumultuous year of 1973, how can I focus in on that?
A photograph.

This is the second experiment after the 1973 version; Patrick, in the middle and Lydia, on the right. The film keeps going back to the 1973 seance so the year is important. Besides the 1973 energy crisis, and the Watergate scandal, something else happened upon which the film probably isn't commenting but still makes an interesting angle: the US Supreme Court overturned all state bans on abortion in Roe vs. Wade. Lydia gets "sucked" into the wall as if a fetus in her mother's womb and she's never seen again, making a case against abortion in that women kill other women in the womb when they abort their baby girls (and this case was made in The Dictator; I could elaborate on this, but won't).  What's important, however, is that white, clay statue in the middle, supposedly an image of Charles Reamer from the 1973 experiment Lydia made in engineering class,... what? She had time to make a clay model of some guy during an engineering class? That doesn't make sense, but what does make sense, is that it is an engineer, just like Thomas Edison in the photograph in the credits, and the "focus" they give to the engineer is rather like an act of idolatry, which the film seems to be making the point is what we as American consumers do to engineers: worship them for the supreme gifts they bestow upon us to make life easier (more on this below).

As the film ends, there are some interesting special effects during the credits, mostly involving seance pictures (so I thought) and ghostly or haunted images,... and then there is this picture below:

Thomas Edison, American inventor, with his phonograph and the photo of him appearing in the credits of The Apparition. In the opening narration of the trailer, the commentator says, "There is a scientific theory that ghosts only exist because we believe them to," so how would this possibly tie up with Thomas Edison? Well, listening to Pavarotti singing on a CD, for example, kind of makes him "ghostly" since he's dead but I can still listen to him, and we have Edison to thank for that, or, as The Apparition may be making the point, BLAME Edison for that. Savages, Moonrise Kingdom, the socialist commentary in House At the End Of the Street (which was a capitalist film, but still it depicts socialism) and now The Apparition, all align a socialist state with a state that is closer to nature and off the grid. This is an interesting situation, because--in The Bourne Legacy--we find Aaron Cross (Jeremy Renner) doing exercises in the Alaskan wilderness because he went off the grid for a few days in revolt over the bad intel they had received on a bad job they had to do, so he was punished, but he doesn't stay in Alaska, he has to come back to civilization and take care of business, so to speak. So some films are making this suggestion that we should totally abandon anything electrical and modern and live as the Indians did but, because of the "ghosts" of Thomas Edison and all his inventions and how dependent upon them we have become, we now believe we can't live without them and so we are being held hostage to this entity that enjoys short-circuiting security cameras and decreasing our home values with exploding light bulbs. 

Why on earth would a picture of Thomas Edison, inventor extraordinaire, be in a ghost story film? Because it's not a ghost story film, it's a film condemning America's use of power and oil and The Apparition lays the blame at the doorstep of the man who created America's electrical grid, Thomas Edison. In other words, there wouldn't have been an energy crisis in 1973 if Edison hadn't invented the light bulb or the means to "power" American homes. "Entities manifest themselves through energy," Patrick tells us, and all the strange shots of Kelly's and Ben's home beside the Anaheim power grid now makes more sense.

The film makes quite a do about camping; in this shot, they have become so nervous about staying in the new house (Kelly's parents' investment home in a new neighborhood next to the electrical towers) they have put up a tent on the back patio porch and plan on spending the night there.  It's a bit of a creepy scene (part of which is in the trailer above) with Kelly sleeping and a security camera coming off the house and mysteriously moving across the patio to film her while she sleeps; well, if they didn't have electricity, or security cameras, that kind of thing wouldn't happen now, would it? That seems to be the point.

Patrick tells Ashley that her "house isn't haunted, you are," and if we pay attention to Kelly's shopping habits and spending of money, it's easy to see her as a typical American consumer the film probably intends to criticize (her shopping at Costco and wanting to get something that would end up in the garage), invoking the "Mountain Man" genre of the 1970s, films such as Jeremiah Johnson of 1972 (Robert Redford) and 1970's A Man Called Horse with Richard Harris and even Dustin Hoffman's Little Big Man also from 1970 (demonstrating that, leading up to the 1973 "Charles Reamer experiment," there was at least a trickle of revolt against "modern life" in America and a questioning of American materialism and how it was effecting us; these are only a few of the films, and I won't profess being an expert on them, just that, at the initial date mentioned by the film, there were movies being made highlighting the same type of concerns The Apparition appears to be making).

The Charles Reamer statue which was created by Ben's ex-girlfriend Lydia who disappeared in their college experiment and mysteriously comes out in a cracked manner when a huge,... mold spot (?) appears in the ceiling corner of the house and Ben prods it with a broom. This scene suggests, symbolically, that we have reached "the ceiling" of our filthy, electrical lives and the moldy substance is a good inward look at what such consumerism has done to our souls; the statue (engineer) coming out is the giving up of the idol that has been the cause of all the decadence in our lives; Ben utilizing a broom handle to prod it suggests a "cleaning up" or a "sweeping out" of the problems but, we're so dependent upon our lifestyles, we just aren't strong enough to break the cycle and not believe that we can live without modern conveniences.

Here is a well-done scene of the film in which they (Kelly, Ben and Patrick) are going to try another experiment in Kelly's house and over-power the entity to "clean" the house of all its ghosts:

Just as they are trying to get the house "cleaned" of the "ghost," a ghost--looking an awful lot like Kelly herself--appears in the glass reflection of the "washing machine" (symbolic of the electrical devices being used to "wash the house" so to speak) and the eerie, distorted reflection we see of the "ghost" is actually a reflection of how Kelly is haunting the house herself, hence, the reason why she nails up the door only to find herself locked inside with herself in her most undesirable, unclean form (which is what all the best horror films do, they show the main characters in their everyday life and then, when they see the "monster," it's actually their own self they are coming "face to face with" and what they have unknowingly become, such as with Ichabod Crane in The Legend Of Sleepy Hollow). Hence, another interpretation of the poster pictured above, with Kelly surrounded by hands grabbing onto her, is the "reality" of all the things she is "holding onto" in life that are holding her prisoner.

The irony the film intentionally depicts is that Kelly and Ben use electrical devices to try and rid themselves of their dependency on electrical devices.

I pointed out that camping is important in the film, first being mentioned in the Costco where Ben and Kelly go shopping, again when they move out onto the back patio and at the very end when Kelly, in some altered state of reality (?) wanders absently through Costco and into a tent, etc.

 In this "sheet mummy" clip, it appears The Apparition attacks the very act of sleeping in a bed--instead of a tent or on the ground, which we shall see in House At the End of the Street--and that act erases or suffocates her identity by "whiting it out" with the sheets, which is an interesting way of putting it. The film mysteriously ends with Kelly walking into the Costco where they were shopping earlier in the fillm and getting into a tent, zipping it up, and the mysterious hands coming to slowly grip her and cover her mouth when the film ends and the credits begin,... so, Kelly has to die because she refuses to believe that she can live life wtihout foreign oil and live without modern contraptions. Why bother watching a film such as this? It articulates the arguments surfacing in the current culture wars, and the more we know about what each side is saying, the better we know what we ourselves think and we can articulate our own arguments.
Eat Your Art Out,
The Fine Art Diner
P.S.--This is being posted much later, but I think the seance at the beginning, to contact Charles Reamer, is really trying to contact the American engineer "spirit" in this country, that same spirit of Thomas Edison, and those--according to the film--participating in the seance would be people like myself who believe in this great country and the great people in this country, "summoning" the American greats of our history to our modern time as inspritation, but--according to the film--we are getting "sucked in" (the girls disappearing in the walls) to their "lies" of greatness (again, according to the film) and the film wants to show how us looking at the past is keeping us from living with green energy in the future,... according to the film...

What Does 'Piss Christ' Mean & Why Is It Important?

Piss Christ by Andres Serrano, photograph, 1987.

It is perhaps the most controversial work of art in America.
My mother has gotten upset, as it's been in the news again, and asked me to write about it and its significance, if it has any. Of course it does, and I think it's a very important work of art. I say this as a Christian, someone continuously trying to live up to the teachings and commands of Jesus Christ, because, I have to be honest with you, when I look at Andres Serrano's Piss Christ, I see what I do to the Cross every time I sin.

Photograph 60 x 40 inch Cibachrome print on display now at Edward Tyler Nahem Gallery, Manhattan. Because the art was funded by the National Endowment for the Arts, it is often cited as a reason why government funding should not be used to support "degenerate" artists. This is up to each person's individual will, however, I hope to demonstrate how we can have a meaningful engagement with the art and not be offended by it, at least, not the way Christians have been heretofore. 

Serrano takes photographs, so what you see above is what is on display (should you decide to go see it). It is described as being a plastic Crucifix in a jar/bottle of the artist's urine and, by some, as being "the most deplorable, despicable display of vulgarity " produced by an American artist. Why? The initial reaction of people such as my dear mother, is that disrespect is being shown to the Cross and the image of Jesus Christ. It is absolutely possible that Mr. Serrano intended only to create a sensational piece to infuriate Christians, but as Christians, does the piece contain a message which we should be in tune with, and, instead of being controversial, Piss Christ becomes instructional?

Please click on the image to expand to full size. The rich color scheme is well created for such a piece. Whereas gold/yellow usually symbolizes royalty and dignity--which should be applied to Jesus Christ, the King of Kings--instead, it's the reflection of yellow urine stripping Him of dignity instead of investing Him with dignity (our recognition of Him as our King and Savior by making sacrifices and denying temptations and sins). There is quite a bit of red in the image, especially along the bottom portion of the Cross, because red can symbolize love--we willingly shed our blood when we love someone--or wrath, and we get so angry at someone, we could shed their blood over it. Christ made His Sacrifice for us out of Love, but Serrano seems to be mildly suggesting that, when we sin, we are actually in a state of wrath; why would that be? Because we have to sacrifice instead of taking, we have to become one with Christ on the Cross instead of staying in our comfort zones (and please know, I am fully aware of how I myself fail in this every hour of every day). We are, in other words, full of wrath when we sin, to the point of "taking life" from Christ by our sin (we can't take God's life, but we take the Life of God given to us--Grace--when we sin). Lastly, please note the brown tones in the top and bottom portions. "Learn from Me for I am meek and humble of heart," Christ told us; brown is the color of humility, for one makes their self low as the dirt in the eyes of the world; there is another side to the symbol of brown, however, and that is, literally, filth: instead of righteously being lowly and humble, we debase ourselves in our appetites and roll in the filth of sin. So Piss Christ is the exact opposite of a Christ Enthroned painting, this is, rather, a very personal depiction of Calvary that we have created on the private stage of our sins.

The purpose of the Cross, and Christ's Suffering, was to redeem us from our sins, to pay the price that we could not. What is it that transforms the Wood of the Cross (invoking the wood of Noah's Ark which saved the righteous from the flood waters of the world) into the cheap plastic cross of today's culture? When we ourselves cheapen the price Christ paid for our sins, because we, as Christians, know what that price was and, instead of worshipping the Cross, we steep Our Savior in the filth of our sins, again and again. Whereas we have been cleansed of sin through Baptism, "urine"--as an anti-thesis to the symbol of spiritual cleansing--is the willingness we have to wallow in the ways of the world instead of following the narrow path which we profess to believe and hold as True. Piss Christ isn't a work about Jesus, rather, it's a work about Jesus' followers, me and you, and Serrano calls to our mind an important lesson we tend to (easily) forget.

If I chose sin over Christ, then I have "pissed on Christ," and I have transformed the wood of the Cross into the throw-away, cheap plastic of a world condemned by its own appetites and I have knowingly rejected the Path of Salvation and chosen the path of damnation, hell over heaven. Piss Christ is my doing, no one else's, and I have to take responsibility before God every second of my life and at the Hour of Judgement, however, therein is the irony of the piece and the inherent victory it contains!

Sometimes Christians see Jesus on a Cross and think, He died for everyone, but not necessarily for myself. What Serrano has done is shown us how Christ died and continues to suffer for my sins, the "piss" I drown his image in when I have sinned and not just a nameless mass of people, but for the individual children He lovingly created, knowing we would sin; so why create us if we were just going to sin, or at least, why not create us perfect so we wouldn't sin at all? Because to forgive is divine. Nothing shows someone you love them more than when you forgive them, and when we go to Our Father, confess our sins, and ask Him to Forgive us, we gain more in that act of humility and trust than what we lost when we sinned (this is never a license to sin, it's an encouragement to overcome our weakness prompting us to sin).

In spite of what I have done in sinning--I and I alone in the abuse of my free will to chose sin over God's Love for me--Jesus is there, patient and waiting for me to come and ask His Forgiveness, even while "drowning" in the filth of whatever it was I did, and I know He will Forgive Me and restore me to Grace; Serrano provides for us a graphic image, a singular image for each follower of Christ, of how the King of Kings takes the filth of my individual sins and wears them Himself so I might become clean and enter His Kingdom of Heaven. This image, so despised by the media and most Christians, is a triumph of Love and God's devotion to us His Children, and testifies to how He willingly endures His Sorrowful Passion for each of us every moment of our lives.

Piss Christ provides an excellent example of how art means to engage us with a mirror of ourselves; rarely will it show us what we want to see, but it will always show us something if we meet it on its terms and try listening to what it has to say, the message, the secret door into our own soul that will open if we give it the chance.

Ultimately, Piss Christ is a triumph of Love for Christians, because it reminds us so graphically (as Mel Gibson's The Passion Of the Christ did) the Love that Jesus has which caused Him to Suffer and continues to Suffer for our sins so we can be cleansed, so, in this sense, we can call it a graphic message of Divine Mercy that Jesus really love us, really wants us to be forgiven for our sins and lovingly wants us to overcome our sins. Likewise, it shows us--which we all need to know--what sin is, the no-nonsense, graphic reality of what we do to ourselves and our Lord every time we commit the smallest sin. We should not be upset with Christians getting upset with Piss Christ, Christianity is so attacked in our culture and no one defends it, that the desecrating image of Our Lord troubles their heart, however, Jesus is willing to suffer this--as He suffered on the Cross--if it means saving us from our sins.
This is LOVE.
Eat Your Art Out,
The Fine Art Diner