An appeal to baser instincts

The historic goings-on in our government are most certainly divisve - especially here in Alberta, where the tired 'western alienation' arguement is being bolstered with words like "coup," "take-over," and "coalition of seperatists." And that's exactly how Mr. Harper likes it.



Regardless of your stance on the proposed coalition - and for the record, although I think it's less than ideal, I am for it - it's hard to deny that the blame for this whole brouhaha lies at Harper's feet. A number of staunch Conservitave supporters with whom I have spoken have gone off on tirades about his gigantic misstep, the poisoning of what was supposed to be a 'new era of cooperation' in Parlement with the first bill put forward.



And yet, rather than try to regain the confidence of the House, Harper and his team immediately embarked on a campaign of sound bites, twisting the facts and ignoring recent history. Just over three years ago, Harper was in negotiations with the Bloc to form a coalition and take down the Liberal government, and the Conservatives 2006 budget passed only because of support from the BQ, yet the main talking point is to charicterize the current coalition as one threatening national unity because of the Bloc's involvement. Clearly, the Conservatives had no problem accepting Bloc support in the past, and anyone who follows politics knows this - but Harper's targeting those who aren't paying attention, looking to rouse the ire of those who take his words at face value. He knows his supporters won't be turned off by the misrepresentation, so it's all upside from a partisan perspective.



Harper is a master of the soundbite, and chooses his words carefully - there's a reason we don't have quotes from him explaining why he violated the spirit of his own fixed-election date law, why he criticized the Martin Liberals for postponing a confidence vote when defeat was imminent yet is doing the same thing himself, why a coalition that was a good idea when his party was in opposition becomes undemocratic when the tables have turned. It's because there's no upside to being on record addressing these things; better to keep plowing forward, consitency and accountability be damned. It frustrates his opponents and stirs up the base.



I'm sure some who are reading this are aginst the idea of a coalition, and hope Harper finds a way to hold onto power. Fine - the beauty of our country is that we can disagree, and there are doubtless many valid arguements against a coalition govenrment at this time with these players. But please, before you settle, immovably, on a position, read some of the generally well done journalism being practiced over the past few days. As opposed to the shamefully shallow coverage of the election campaign, that accepted every premise the Conservatives put forward ("Not a leader") with little scruitiny (uh, the Conservatives didn't even have a platform), there are reams of intellegent articles being written on both sides of the current debate. Take some time, have a look, and make up your own mind.

I need a Hero(es)

What's with 'Heroes'?

After a bang up first season filled with mystery, humour, and a phrase that bored into the public consciousness ("Save the cheerleader, save the world!"), it's now halfway through an altogether lackluster third season, itself preceded by an interminable second.  Things started out well enough, but by this point we're watching characters we don't particularily care about repeat virtually the same scene over and over, episode after episode, making baby steps toward the revelation of what's sure to be a vast and complex conspiracy thatzzzzzz.

In tonight's show, Peter and Claire have a scene where he tries to convince her to go home and protect her innocence, but then bad guys start closing in and she tells him to run - she'll fend them off.  Peter abruptly drops his manhood and takes off.  Insert a couple of scenes following other plotlines, then we return to Peter and Claire, still on the run from the baddies.  Once again, he tries to talk her into going home.  Once again,  villains close in, Claire tells Peter to run and he complies.  Seriously, was this a cut and paste job?  Did some sort of screenplay program malfunction?  And worst of all, the episode was written by series creator Tim Kring!

Sadly, I think it'll probably take two more seasons before it's run out of town like a gunslinger cheating at poker, but the show has officially worn out it's welcome for me.

Hancock Revisited

My review of the Blu-ray release of Hancock was posted today - the film is now available in a somewhat longer unrated version that solves some, but not all, of my issues with the picture.  Overall, it's a much improved experience, even if it's still kind of short.

Back in the Saddle

So I've returned to my post at DVD Verdict, offering detailed DVD and Blu-Ray reviews for your reading pleasure.  Posted yesterday was my take on American Gangster, while in the coming weeks you can look forward to reviews of The Perfect Holiday, This Christmas, and the documentary Family Name.  Hope you enjoy.

There's always an escape - Movie Review: Redbelt

David Mamet - he of dialogue in iambic pentameter and double crosses so slick they could lubricate your kneecap - approaches the traditional fight film in a non-traditional way with Redbelt.  Protagonist Mike Terry is a martial arts master for whom honour and respect are paramount, but when he gets mixed up with an aging movie star and a bi-polar lawyer, he finds that the messy state of the world is the ultimate test of that honour.

The brilliance in this film is that it follows all of the traditional tropes of the fight film - specifically the reluctant fighter ultimately choosing to battle the antagonist for the prize  - yet in a completely original manner.  Without giving too much away, Terry has no intention of fighting for anything but self defense, yet he inadvertently gets drawn into training for and executing the battle anyway, winning a prize he didn't even know he was after.

Acting is great across the board, and Robert Elswit's cinematography, as per usual, is sumptuous (see  Michael Clayton and There Will Be Blood, two films he shot last year, for more proof).  This is a thinking man's fight picture, totally engrossing and unencumbered by Hollywood gloss.  

"I was born under unusual circumstances"

Here is the link to the film I am most looking forward to this fall, The Curious Case of Benjamin Button, featuring Brad Pitt as a man aging backward from elderly to newborn.

Director David Fincher is a visionary filmmaker, always pushing the boundaries of whatever genre in which he finds himself working, using bleeding-edge technology and perfectionist focus to make cinematic miracles happen.  After being fired by the studio on Alien 3, Fincher made the definitive serial killer film with Se7EN, a movie whose popularity seems to continue to secure him financing for projects that don't seem quite commercial enough to warrant the budgets he manages to get.  The Game, Fight Club, Panic Room, and last year's masterpiece Zodiac (my favorite film of 2007) were artistic triumphs but didn't quite connect during their theatrical run (although DVD has likely pushed all well into profitability).

Benjamin Button looks to be a turning point for Fincher, a film that's all heart (at least judging by the trailer), still using amazing visual effects but to move forward an unconventional epic love story rather than a comment on the human condition.  The wife finds Fincher's films technically enjoyable but lacking in warmth, so I hope this'll be the one that changes her mind.

If you can, watch the trailer in HD - it's well worth the wait for the download.

Doomed

Writer/director Neil Marshall, who was noticed by genre fans in 2002 with Dog Soldiers, really cemented himself as a talent to watch with the taut, almost unbearably tense horror/suspense film The Descent, easily one of the most frightening and original horror flicks I've seen.

So I was looking forward to his follow-up, and even though the trailers were less than stellar, I expected to wholeheartedly enjoy Doomsday.

Unfortunately, the movie's a bit of a mess.

Doomsday wears its influences on its sleeve: its storyline is not only inspired by John Carpenter's classic Escape From New York, but marshall fashions the rudimentary computer graphics in the prologue and the font in the titles directly after that picture.  Other movies directly cribbed from include The Road Warrior, Aliens, and The Warriors.  Which is fine - one of my favorite flicks of recent years, the brilliant Hot Fuzz, make an art out of recycling elements from popular action movies.  But where Marshall stumbles with Doomsday is tone.  

At first, we think this is going to be a fun ride, with the heroine plucking out her fake eye to peer around corners, and mustache-twirling villains plotting the way they can destroy British and Scottish citizens.  Then a character gets cooked and eaten, and suddenly things aren't so much fun anymore.  

The movie struggles to erase the mean-spiritedness of this sequence with subsequent explosions, gunfire, and chase scenes, not to mention a bizarre trip to a feudal castle with everyone dressed in armor (absolutely the most original turn of events in the film), but despite some good action and copious amounts of in-your-face gore, overall Doomsday makes me wonder if The Descent's greatness was a fluke.  Time will tell, I suppose.