Wednesday, 19 December 2012
"Blame the Playmakers!"
As reflexively incensed as I generally get about the "violent media" crusading (particularly when it's raised as a deliberate diversion from the real of what to do about gun violence, as is becoming the case on some ends here) I'm not terribly "worried" about the prospect of anything "bad" happening legislatively in the wake of this. The way "and also video games, and Hollywood" keeps getting dropped in during speeches about gun regulation by both Obama, congressional Democrats and left-of-center pundits reads to me as rhetorical "cover;" i.e. "we're going after the REAL problems and the REAL problem-makers, but hears an empty finger-wag at the movie/video-game boogeyman so The NRA can't say we're singling them out." I'm fine with that, politics is a game of double-talk and misdirection especially when in service of the good.
Team Obama is not stupid: They know that their (read: Democrats) overwhelming support among the Youth Vote would be horribly jeopardized if they threw-in full-force behind censorship the way they did (mistakenly and to disasterous political effect) in the 1990s. They know that the full-throated support of the "immoral" entertainment industry makes up their deficit in financial support from GOP-favoring corporate America. Most importantly of all, no matter how many white-haired Boomer liberals or "Blue Dog" Democrats in the senate actually do believe in a nonexistant causal-relationship between violent media and real-life violence; The President (read: their boss) belongs to a younger generation (and is highly in-tune with the psyche of an even younger one) that knows better.
The real danger to the arts is, as ever, the craven cowardice of the people running them. It's unlikely we'll see anything legislatively come of things like Sen. Rockefeller's useless proposal, but that Hollywood studios and game publishers might scuttle the release or promotion of this or that otherwise worthy work as a "sacrifice" to public anger? Very possible, and already somewhat in effect. That sort of gesture is not only empty and unhelpful - all it does is distract attention from where it ought be otherwise focused.
Hey, Guys! The Good Version of Michael Bay is Back!!!
Now there's a trailer, and if you've been missing this Michael Bay (love it or loathe it, this specific genre/setting/tone is what he's better at than any other living filmmaker) as much as I have you'll want to have a look:
Pain & Gain Trailer from Michael Bay Dot Com on Vimeo.
Kon-Tiki
Directed by Norwegian most famous directing duo, Joachim Rønning and Espen Sandberg, film tells another Norway's history not that much known tale. First was 2008 Max Manus and now Thor Heyerdahl amazing story where to prove he was right on his scientific findings crossed the Pacific on a balsa wood raft in 1947.The story is truly fantastic and one the world should be aware as he was the first to prove that the Inca traveled to Polynesia which before trip he hypothesized but no one believe him as then it was common knowledge that Polynesia inhabitants origin came only from Asia. So film presents us the character as a kid, an excerpt of his life in Fatu Hiva -where he creates his theory-, his inability to find interest in the expedition, his persistence until succeeding, and the 101-days trip across the ocean.
But as fascinating as the story is, the movie is not much entertaining as drama is built oddly, action takes too much time with the sharks and script needed much more development for viewers to sustain the almost two hours film takes to tell story. There are moments -when the group is at the sea- that you get tired as story doesn't built up but becomes repetitive and some of us knew the end, so movie was about the ride not about reaching an unknown end.
Then acting is too stiff for my liking even when I imagine that they had to represent Nordic behavior under extreme circumstances as close as possible to reality; but a bit of less stiffness could have been more emotions shown by actors while still being very Nordic.
As can be easily imaginable, film has many outstanding visuals; but the most extraordinary does not come with the men at sea, but from the beginning. The opening sequence with a still camera is impressive as also are most of the winter scenes. While watching spontaneously thought that movie keeps the same camera style no matter where they are (winter, hot weather, urban setting, etc) and perhaps if they had changed the style according to the setting then probable visuals would have been even more remarkable in the non-winter moments. Tech specs are great in general as is the biggest ever Norwegian production up to date - co produced with UK and Denmark-.
But if you wish to learn the story in a more engaging way I suggest you watch the "real" documentary directed by Thor Heyerdahl with the same name that went to win the 1951 Oscar in the documentary category. There are two versions, one narrated in English and the other in Norwegian, both narrated by Thor Heyerdahl himself. Still I know documentary is not easy to find, so many will have to conform with the 2012 film.
As we know film is Norway submission to 2013 Oscar, got a 2013 Golden Globes nomination, and more honors surely will come to film. I liked Max Manus as director's storytelling and filmmaking style was good for the story they were telling, but in this sense I find Kon Tiki not as good as their previous film.
Enjoy!!
Watch trailer @MOC
PODCAST 27: Christmas Evil & Silent Night, Deadly Night [Killer Santa Edition]
Tuesday, 18 December 2012
WEEKLY NEWSREEL – 3 1/2 TIME-OUTS TUESDAY (VOL. 55)
Good evening Mr. & Mrs. Catholic, and all you other Christians at sea. It’s time again for another Newsreel, brought to you as usual by the fine folks at Acts of the Apostasy, home of the 3 1/2 Time-Outs Tuesday and bane of liturgical puppets everywhere. Now off to press.
I
We give scientists (and occasionally Notre Dame) a lot of grief here at the Newsreel, so it’s nice to be able to report they’re both up to something reasonable for a change. To start off the new year properly, The University of Notre Dame's John J. Reilly Center for Science, Technology and Values has announced its first ever list of emerging ethical dilemmas and policy issues in science and technology. Among the concerns the center sees on the horizon for scientists and laypeople alike include the possible hacking of medical devices (boobytrapped pacemakers), driverless zipcars (the Googlemobile), the potential abuse of 3-D printing (please wait, your bomb is being queued). And because the Catechism explains that “medical and scientific experimentation on animals is a morally acceptable practice if it remains within reasonable limits and contributes to caring for or saving human lives.,” the center is very concerned over the possibility of human-animal hybrids. Because, you know, that never goes very well, does it…
II
Oh well, at least it will probably take a while for scientists to get around to creating manimals. They’ll probably start tampering with something small first, like say insects. Like sometime real soon. According to an article in the Daily Mail, “Hundreds of thousands of genetically modified mosquitoes are awaiting federal approval for release into the Florida Keys as part of an experiment aimed at reducing the risk of dengue fever… The trial planned by mosquito control officials and the British company Oxitec would release non-biting male mosquitoes that have been genetically modified to pass along a birth defect that kill their progeny before reaching maturity… Only female mosquitoes bite, so the modified genetic material wouldn't be passed on to humans, Mosquito control and Oxitec officials said.” Sure, why not? What could possibly go wrong with releasing genetically modified insects into the human population…
III
You know, if scientists just have to tamper with animals, maybe they should start with something that would have no affect on humans. For instance, ScienceDaily notes that “research conducted by Henkjan Honing, professor of Music Cognition at the UvA, and a team of neurobiologists headed by Hugo Merchant from the UNAM, shows that rhesus monkeys cannot detect the beat in music.” That doesn’t really seem fair, so we think scientists should spend some time teaching primates to read music. That way they could recognize the beat when it comes around. Wouldn’t that be a sweet thing to do for our simian friends? And besides, what conceivable consequences to humanity could possibly result from making monkeys smarter…
III 1/2
Well. It looks like we’re doomed if we do and doomed if we don’t. So what the heck, let’s just go ahead and make dragons…
And with that, we sign off this edition of the Newsreel, as is our custom, with the immortal words of the great Les Nessman. Good evening, and may the good news be yours.
Media Sandwich Finale w/Me
New Character Poster For OZ: THE GREAT AND POWERFUL
I am actually looking forward to seeing this native 3D production and I'm not really a fan of the original story. Did I just say that out loud?
Here's the storyline for the movie:
OZ: THE GREAT AND POWERFUL imagines the origins of L. Frank Baum’s beloved character, the Wizard of Oz. When Oscar Diggs (James Franco), a small-time circus magician with dubious ethics, is hurled away from dusty Kansas to the vibrant Land of Oz, he thinks he’s hit the jackpot—fame and fortune are his for the taking—that is until he meets three witches, Theodora (Mila Kunis), Evanora (Rachel Weisz) and Glinda (Michelle Williams), who are not convinced he is the great wizard everyone’s been expecting. Reluctantly drawn into the epic problems facing the Land of Oz and its inhabitants, Oscar must find out who is good and who is evil before it is too late. Putting his magical arts to use through illusion, ingenuity—and even a bit of wizardry—Oscar transforms himself not only into the great and powerful Wizard of Oz but into a better man as well.
OZ: THE GREAT AND POWERFUL opens on March 8, 2013.
Source: Cine1
