In Brightest Day, In Blackest Night

...No Evil Shall, Escape My Sight.

The oath of the Green Lantern is to protect the universe.  In reality, the Green Lantern's universe is Carol.  Many of us have our soul mates, and while the Green Lantern (the alter ego of Hal Jordan) never really says it outright, he is letting his deeds do the talking. 

The story in Martin Campbell's Green Lantern (2011) starring Ryan Reynolds and Blake Lively is compelling.  I have never read DC Comic's Green Lantern series so I am not one to judge how closely the film follows the actual storyline.  I understand enough to know that fear lives in each of us.  We are afraid of the unknown.  We are afraid of life if we cannot see what's ahead of us.  We are fearful to tell someone, "I love you" for the very first time, and mean it. 

We can overcome our tendency of being afraid with the very word Carol described, courage.  Sometimes we can remove the fearfulness in life, and some regards we'll never replace that emotion.  But what we can do is light the ignition on the inner-courage within us, to drive us in moving forward in our daily lives.  We don't need a medal of courage as the Cowardly Lion did in Wizard of Oz to press on.  We need hope, faith and a prayer within our very selves to face each day triumphantly.

Some of us only see darkness, paranoid there's no good in the world.  Others see the good in everything, they're the ones who are more patient in overcoming fear.  We all can, but who is willing to try?  As Hal says, "...no matter how bad things get, there's something good out there just over the horizon."  Use courage to overcome any fear you may have, even if it takes courage to find courage.

I thought the film was great entertainment.  The moral of the story is good too.  However, I would like to feel the emotions Hal and Carol had for each other better.  I thought it was too tense, too...unnatural.  Maybe it'll improve in the second Green Lantern film.  Hopefully that film will be released in 2013, according to IMDB.  I rate this film 3 stars out of 5. 

A Modern Dances with Wolves?

I recently happened to come across an article that got my mind thinking.  I am in a class at UCCS that discusses race, gender, class, power and privilege in popular culture and this article was one of the required readings.  The article "When Will White People Stop Making Movies Like Avatar?" written by Annalee Newitz was published on 15 January 2010.

When Will White People Stop Making Movies Like Avatar?

"Critics have called alien epic Avatar a version of Dances With Wolves because it's about a white guy going native and becoming a great leader. But Avatar is just the latest scifi rehash of an old white guilt fantasy. Spoilers...


Whether Avatar is racist is a matter for debate. Regardless of where you come down on that question, it's undeniable that the film - like alien apartheid flick District 9, released earlier this year - is emphatically a fantasy about race. Specifically, it's a fantasy about race told from the point of view of white people. Avatar and scifi films like it give us the opportunity to answer the question: What do white people fantasize about when they fantasize about racial identity?

Avatar imaginatively revisits the crime scene of white America's foundational act of genocide, in which entire native tribes and civilizations were wiped out by European immigrants to the American continent. In the film, a group of soldiers and scientists have set up shop on the verdant moon Pandora, whose landscapes look like a cross between Northern California's redwood cathedrals and Brazil's tropical rainforest. The moon's inhabitants, the Na'vi, are blue, catlike versions of native people: They wear feathers in their hair, worship nature gods, paint their faces for war, use bows and arrows, and live in tribes. Watching the movie, there is really no mistake that these are alien versions of stereotypical native peoples that we've seen in Hollywood movies for decades.  And Pandora is clearly supposed to be the rich, beautiful land America could still be if white people hadn't paved it over with concrete and strip malls. In Avatar, our white hero Jake Sully (sully - get it?) explains that Earth is basically a war-torn wasteland with no greenery or natural resources left. The humans started to colonize Pandora in order to mine a mineral called unobtainium that can serve as a mega-energy source. But a few of these humans don't want to crush the natives with tanks and bombs, so they wire their brains into the bodies of Na'vi avatars and try to win the natives' trust. Jake is one of the team of avatar pilots, and he discovers to his surprise that he loves his life as a Na'vi warrior far more than he ever did his life as a human marine.

Jake is so enchanted that he gives up on carrying out his mission, which is to persuade the Na'vi to relocate from their "home tree," where the humans want to mine the unobtanium. Instead, he focuses on becoming a great warrior who rides giant birds and falls in love with the chief's daughter. When the inevitable happens and the marines arrive to burn down the Na'vi's home tree, Jake switches sides. With the help of a few human renegades, he maintains a link with his avatar body in order to lead the Na'vi against the human invaders. Not only has he been assimilated into the native people's culture, but he has become their leader.

This is a classic scenario you've seen in non-scifi epics from Dances With Wolves to The Last Samurai, where a white guy manages to get himself accepted into a closed society of people of color and eventually becomes its most awesome member. But it's also, as I indicated earlier, very similar in some ways to District 9. In that film, our (anti)hero Wikus is trying to relocate a shantytown of aliens to a region far outside Johannesburg. When he's accidentally squirted with fluid from an alien technology, he begins turning into one of the aliens against his will. Deformed and cast out of human society, Wikus reluctantly helps one of the aliens to launch their stalled ship and seek help from their home planet.

If we think of Avatar and its ilk as white fantasies about race, what kinds of patterns do we see emerging in these fantasies?

In both Avatar and District 9, humans are the cause of alien oppression and distress. Then, a white man who was one of the oppressors switches sides at the last minute, assimilating into the alien culture and becoming its savior. This is also the basic story of Dune, where a member of the white royalty flees his posh palace on the planet Dune to become leader of the worm-riding native Fremen (the worm-riding rite of passage has an analog in Avatar, where Jake proves his manhood by riding a giant bird). An interesting tweak on this story can be seen in 1980s flick Enemy Mine, where a white man (Dennis Quaid) and the alien he's been battling (Louis Gossett Jr.) are stranded on a hostile planet together for years. Eventually they become best friends, and when the alien dies, the human raises the alien's child as his own. When humans arrive on the planet and try to enslave the alien child, he lays down his life to rescue it. His loyalties to an alien have become stronger than to his own species.
These are movies about white guilt. Our main white characters realize that they are complicit in a system which is destroying aliens, AKA people of color - their cultures, their habitats, and their populations. The whites realize this when they begin to assimilate into the "alien" cultures and see things from a new perspective. To purge their overwhelming sense of guilt, they switch sides, become "race traitors," and fight against their old comrades. But then they go beyond assimilation and become leaders of the people they once oppressed. This is the essence of the white guilt fantasy, laid bare. It's not just a wish to be absolved of the crimes whites have committed against people of color; it's not just a wish to join the side of moral justice in battle. It's a wish to lead people of color from the inside rather than from the (oppressive, white) outside.

Think of it this way. Avatar is a fantasy about ceasing to be white, giving up the old human meatsack to join the blue people, but never losing white privilege. Jake never really knows what it's like to be a Na'vi because he always has the option to switch back into human mode. Interestingly, Wikus in District 9 learns a very different lesson. He's becoming alien and he can't go back. He has no other choice but to live in the slums and eat catfood. And guess what? He really hates it. He helps his alien buddy to escape Earth solely because he's hoping the guy will come back in a few years with a "cure" for his alienness. When whites fantasize about becoming other races, it's only fun if they can blithely ignore the fundamental experience of being an oppressed racial group. Which is that you are oppressed, and nobody will let you be a leader of anything.

This is not a message anybody wants to hear, least of all the white people who are creating and consuming these fantasies. Afro-Canadian scifi writer Nalo Hopkinson recently told the Boston Globe:

In the US, to talk about race is to be seen as racist. You become the problem because you bring up the problem. So you find people who are hesitant to talk about it.

She adds that the main mythic story you find in science fiction, generally written by whites, "is going to a foreign culture and colonizing it."

Sure, Avatar goes a little bit beyond the basic colonizing story. We are told in no uncertain terms that it's wrong to colonize the lands of native people. Our hero chooses to join the Na'vi rather than abide the racist culture of his own people. But it is nevertheless a story that revisits the same old tropes of colonization. Whites still get to be leaders of the natives - just in a kinder, gentler way than they would have in an old Flash Gordon flick or in Edgar Rice Burroughs' Mars novels.

When will whites stop making these movies and start thinking about race in a new way?  First, we'll need to stop thinking that white people are the most "relatable" characters in stories. As one blogger put it:

By the end of the film you're left wondering why the film needed the Jake Sully character at all. The film could have done just as well by focusing on an actual Na'vi native who comes into contact with crazy humans who have no respect for the environment. I can just see the explanation: "Well, we need someone (an avatar) for the audience to connect with. A normal guy will work better than these tall blue people." However, this is the type of thinking that molds all leads as white male characters (blank slates for the audience to project themselves upon) unless your name is Will Smith.

But more than that, whites need to rethink their fantasies about race.

Whites need to stop remaking the white guilt story, which is a sneaky way of turning every story about people of color into a story about being white. Speaking as a white person, I don't need to hear more about my own racial experience. I'd like to watch some movies about people of color (ahem, aliens), from the perspective of that group, without injecting a random white (erm, human) character to explain everything to me. Science fiction is exciting because it promises to show the world and the universe from perspectives radically unlike what we've seen before. But until white people stop making movies like Avatar, I fear that I'm doomed to see the same old story again and again."


 My thoughts on Avatar is the film is tremendously AMAZING!  James Cameron is brilliant.  I love the theatricals and the story.  I love the idea that we can change for the better, no matter what our cultural identities are, where we live and where we came from.  While I accept that Avatar may be a political dig at Americans, I believe this is a must see - no, make that must own film!  I give this film 4.5 out of 5 stars.

Sleazy "A"

Easy A should be renamed "Sleazy A".  Emma Stone stayed in character throughout the entire film, yet at the same time I am glad I didn't spend a penny on the film.  Good thing it was a loaner from the library.


Although the movie tried to depict a hodge-podge of cheesy '80s flicks with all of its innuendo and the Scarlet Letter, it did more damage than good.  I have no idea why in the world IMDB gave the film 7.1 stars out of 10.  To me, I understand the film was about not judging another person for their actions and still be friends with our friends no matter what the circumstances call for.  But I almost get the feeling the film is mocking social behaviors and the lessons Nathaniel Hawthorne was trying to convey when he wrote his book. 

Gossip is a horrible way to end a friend's good reputation.  No one will know the truth of what happened, except the parties involved with the gossiping - meaning the person who started the rumor, and the people stated in the rumors.  In society today, gossiping is easy.  There are a myriad of ways to begin a lie.  There's text messages, Facebook, blogs, emails, simple phone calls.  Director Will Gluck passionately got that point across.  The hardest part in life is undoing a lie.  Life is better, and easier, once you've told the truth...even if no one believes in you. 

I can do without all the sex innuendos, the teen parties, and the language in this film.  The idea was noble, the presentation was not.  I give this film 1.5 stars out of 5.

Never Too Old to Be Dangerous

Guest critique, and a wonderful friend, Casey R. Weber has agreed to write this review.  I figured he'd want to have some fun before (hold your applause please) he embarks on his new journey, the accelerated Masters and Teaching Credential program at the Calif. State University - Northridge.  G'luck matey.  The program is 18 months long and he has taken on 23 credit hours!  Now you can applause :)  Here's to Casey!

 

 

Bruce Willis, who performs as Frank Moses in "RED," has fulfilled the expectations of a modern-day action hero: tough, quick-witted, pre-determined, ultra-cool, and maybe even bald.  In the past, we focused on one-liners whereas today we concentrate on multiple lines that tickle us pink.  Thus, since the 80s, the experimentation of an ideal "action hero" continues to evolve.

In today's society, we accept that the retirement age has increased (though it's not universally accepted).  Moses, a former black-ops CIA agent, is a retiree to experiment with the idea of a simple life.  In actuality, he can't handle the pressure of sitting for a minute to relax.  So in essence, he requires some stimulation to explore the excitement to live up to the status of his operation name, RED, which stands for "Retired: Extremely Dangerous."  Although as humorous the acronym sounds, Moses proves that regardless of his age, he has the potential to compete against the general competition of CIA agents.  

Throughout the movie, Moses flirts with the young woman, Sarah Ross (acted by Mary-Louise Parker), who handles Moses' pension checks.  He realizes that the excitement will never dwindle, so he ends up getting into trouble with the crooks who work with the government--but of course, he did nothing wrong.  He meets with his old pals, Joe Matheson (Morgan Freeman), Victoria (Helen Mirren), and Marvin Boggs (John Malkovich) along the course of the adventure.  I have to admit, I found Malkovich to be the funniest.  For some odd reason, he has these ridiculous facial expressions and body language that got me chuckling.

Perhaps most disappointing about the film is the excessive use of force that is deemed less relevant to the account of today's society.  For instance, how is it possible to be exceedingly knowledgeable considering the circumstances of the CIA vet's situation?  And even at his retirement age, how is it that he is more than capable calmly stepping out of the spinning car then shooting his rival whereas when they meet again, he gets his butt kicked like everybody else?  I feared that the idea of consistency came to question.

However, the movie gave me an analytical thought: back then, we see the retirees finish with their careers then watch their grandchildren grow, sit on the porches to enjoy the sunrise/sunset, and even traveling on a cruise.  Today, we feel the drive to accomplish something we've always wanted to do.  Michael Jordan said he came out of retirement to "scratch the itch" he had been carrying since retirement.  Lance Armstrong wanted to promote cancer awareness.  Steve Jobs came back because he had countless ideas to make cool gadgets.  In sum, like Moses, we may become retired, but we'll want to come back to something we truly enjoy.

Since the movie gave me some insights about the aforementioned aspects of life, I've become somewhat biased neither to appreciate nor groan in disgust.  I'd say the movie did capture my eye, but not in its entirety.  It did, however, give me an idea that you're never too old to be dangerous (or even achieve, for that matter).  

I'd rate this film 3 stars.

Repenting for the Unknown Deed

Throughout life, each of us make choices on whatever path we are on.  Life would be simple if we could choose between one fork in the road.  However, as we know, life is not that simple.  We make choices, which leads to more choices, and yet more choices.  Sometimes, we have to make decisions based on survival, hiding from archaic predators.  Such was the life for Dr. Martin Harris (Liam Neeson) who finds himself lost, in Germany.  After a near fatal car crash which left Dr. Harris in a coma for four days, he discovers that his wife has left him for a man who assumes his identity. 

Now, the question implied in the title of this blog, is it possible that we can repent for doing the ungodly, devilish deed if we don't know who we are and even what we are?  We start to make choices to survive and choices for self-understanding.  I have never heard of director Jaume Collet-Serra and couldn't even guess if the director is male or female based on the name alone.  After googling the director, I've learned that Jaume is a he.  I almost thought the title of the film Unknown was perfect for the director, the story-line and the choices the character displayed.

After learning who we are, and what past deeds we've committed, both positive and negative, arises a very important question for self-reflection.  After realizing the wrong we've done, are we brave enough to repent and provide restitution for our actions?  Brave enough to sacrifice even our very own life to save another's? 


Unknown was given an average rating by many critics.  However, I thought the intention of the film was phenomenal.  The film seems like a short-take of the Bourne series, which may have contributed to a dis-satisfactory rating.  I thought the acting could be improved.  Liam Neeson and Diane Kruger (Gina) displayed AAA grade acting, yet the supporting cast was marginal. 

The film was very entertaining and caused me to think, and reflect upon my own actions.  I give this film 3 out of 5 stars.

Holy Jumping Catfish!

the following review was written by one of my very best friends, casey r. weber.  he is a graduate student at california state university-northridge (CSUN).  after this awesome review of It Happened One Night directed by the great Frank Capra, i hope he continues to write guest reviews for a long, long time.

Whether you're hitching a ride or falling in love with a rogue reporter, Claudette Colbert proves that "the limb is mightier than a thumb." Clark Gable demonstrates his usual versatile acting prowess in this slapstick comedy produced in 1934, an outdated yet prominent classic that is sure to carry the audiences into the world of laughter till their stomachs hurt for generations to come. Although cheesy to the point of wanting a pillow to your face the moment the couple acknowledges their feelings for one another, it is a sure sign that love is in the history of the making.


In the modern cultural lenses, we learn to see how men and women work together where most couples today can laugh about the silliness of male dominance and the ho-hums of female inferiority. For instance, Ellie Andrews (played by Colbert) is stuck with the idea of marrying someone she knows she doesn't love, yet the men continue to demonstrate corporeal acts where they feel obliged to take care of a female. In another instance, Peter Warne (performed by Gable) takes charge throughout the film, thus making sure Andrews is well-behaved to his expectations.


But in the end, the fabled "walls of Jericho" crumbles to the ground along with the sound of the efficacious trumpet, revealing the greatest feeling of romance. All in all, even in our present-day views, we continue to appreciate the background as well as the ensemble of the cast that makes the film truly a piece to behold in the face of motion picture history.


As Warne would say, "Holy jumping catfish!" I rate this a 4 out of 5 stars!

Families can be Unstoppable

family matters isn't the main plot in Unstoppable, but it is placed on the back-burner even though it is one of the most important story lines in director tony scott's film.  there must be a reason i like Unstoppable, other than the fact that tony scott also directed possibly my favorite movie of all time, Top Gun.  scott has not lost that lovin' feeling or the need for speed in his über-intense action films.

inspired by a true story in stanton, upstate pennsylvania, Unstoppable stars film veteran denzel washington and up-and-coming newbie chris pine.  washington was his usual spectacular self portraying an old engineer frank who has been given his 90-day notice and pine was the perfect choice for will, a young conductor who bears a big name in the train industry.  paired together, the two stars complimented each other quite well.

72 days into the 90-day notice before frank is forced to retire or quit, two boneheads at the train yard mishandle a half-mile long train.  mishandle is grossly understated due to the fact that the "coaster" turns into a full speed freight train carrying toxic chemicals.  the scary part is, it's headed toward an elevated s-curve in the industrial parts of stanton, near will's home.frank and will take it upon themselves to risk everything in life (and their own) to chase after the train known as "the beast."

that's the main plot.  throughout the film, will finds himself losing a battle with his wife in a case of miscommunication.  he thought his wife was in danger of cheating on him with a guy who had the hots for her in high school.  turns out that guy is a cop and will ends up punching him.  will is served up with a not so tasty dish in the form of a restraining order.  its been weeks since will has talked to his wife, and he's trying to say he's sorry.

frank has his own family problems.  since his wife died, it seems he's been fading from the lives of his daughter, forgetting one's birthday.

both men's family problems connect with many americans today.  with society placing a decreased importance of the family, scott does a tremendous job taking real life problems and placing the family unit on the pedestal.  no matter how big or small the problems are within the family, love and patience eventually leads to forgiveness.  the stronger the bond, the less likely the family will fall apart.  excellent job mr. scott.

the film does not leave room for character development like other hollywood films.  what you see is what you get.  and audiences see something far more realistic, tangible and relate to perhaps their own personal lives.  even if audiences can only imagine the train sequences, they can understand what the two men, a grisly engineer vet and the young ambitious conductor, are going through.

i give this film 4 stars out of 5 for a job well done.