Welcome To America, Where The Woo Runs Deep…Even Unto The Military

Cross posted @ God Is 4 Suckers!

It is no secret to the informed, that even the US Armed Forces, those stoic warriors of the crew cut, polished shoes and bounce-a-quarter-off-the-made-bed are privy to superstition just as much as the rest of the populace.

Recently, I watched the very funny The Men Who Stare At Goats. The movie touts itself as being ‘based on a true story’. It was quite entertaining, but I’m exceedingly wary of movies that claim this – I’ve seen far too many of these fabrications to take these proclamations seriously. 

Yes, it is loosely based on the book of the same title. The film is prefaced with "More of this is true than you would probably believe."

A few minutes on the Internet, however, brings up some startling information:

The First Earth Battalion was the name proposed by Lieutenant Colonel Jim Channon, a U.S. soldier who had served in Vietnam, for his idea of a new military to be organized along New Age lines.

I’ve a deep and abiding dislike of ‘New Age’ philosophies – far too many of the modalities are reminiscent of stoner cosmology, and it tends to disdain empirical scientific validation.

When you read the components of this…woo stew is the best simile I can whip up at a moment’s notice.

Principles

LTC Channon believes the Army can be the principal moral and ethical basis on which politics can harmonize in the name of the Earth. Since "Earthkind" has grown from pack to village, to tribe, to territory, and then to nation, LTC Channon envisions going from nation to planet next, and thereby declares the First Earth Battalion's primary allegiance to the planet. Making the planet whole requires the ethical use of force based on the collective conscience. In his operations field manual titled Evolutionary Tactics, LTC Channon lists some of the important missions of the Earth Battalion as:

• Urban pioneers
• Counter hostage force
• Disaster rescue
• Eco pioneers
• Animal rescue

The First Earth Battalion will organize itself informally: uniforms without uniformity, structure without status, and unity powered by diversity, since its members will be multicultural, with each race contributing to "rainbow power." As a guiding principle, members of the First Earth Battalion seek nondestructive methods of conflict resolution because their first loyalty is to the planet.

Even I have to admit that sounds pretty cool.

The Warrior Monk Ethos

Service members of the First Earth Battalion would practice meditation, yogic cat stretches and primal screams to attain battle-readiness, and use tui na or shiatsu as battlefield first aid. First Earth Battalion trainees would learn to fast for a week drinking only juice and then eat only nuts and grains for a month. They would be able to: fall in love with everyone, realize the different paths of spirit, perceive the auras of living organisms, attain the power to pass through objects such as walls (phasing), bend metal by using the power of the mind (i.e. psychokinesis), walk on fire, operate based on spirit communications (e.g. mediumship), become a peacemaker, actually change a violent pattern in the world (e.g. the Maharishi Effect), organize a tree plant with kids, calculate faster than a computer, control their heart rate—including making it stop—with no ill effects, intuit information from the past (retrocognition) or future (precognition), have out-of-body experiences, live off nature for twenty days, be 90%+ a vegetarian, and be able to intuit other people's thoughts and feelings via telepathy LTC Channon coined the term "warrior monk" for these new service members of the First Earth Battalion, which is anyone who has the presence, service and dedication of a monk and the absolute skill and precision of a warrior. In “The Warrior Monk’s Vision,” Channon imagines an Army made up of awakened warriors. Channon’s ideal warrior monk would be proficient at every level of force. The warrior monk will learn different self-defense systems of martial arts (such as taiji, aikido, etc.), which are based on the notion of using the force of their attackers against themselves. To alleviate negative stressors and promote healing in self and others, the warrior monk will employ various affirmation, relaxation and visualization techniques, as well as a number of methods like yoga  qigong and reiki  to help strengthen and improve the mind/body connection with spirit.

This is exactly what I mean by ‘stew’. Some Eastern modalities are quite effective (e.g., yoga, taiji, aikido, and qiqong) while other items listed are complete junk (e.g., psychokinesis mediumship, retrocognition, precognition, and reiki). It illustrates quite bluntly that anyone embarking on a personal journey via meditation should be extremely careful, as the induced alpha state leaves one far too open to suggestion. The idea of using tui na or shiatsu as battlefield first aid is of course patently ridiculous. One cannot ‘imagine’ a gaping bullet wound away.

Of course it’s all good and fine for us to laugh at the hippie-dippie baroque meritocracy. As always, there’s a darker, less superstitious side to all this: the Psychological Operations department:

Psychological operations are planned operations to convey selected information and indicators to foreign audiences to influence their emotions, motives, objective reasoning, and ultimately the behavior of foreign governments, organizations, groups, and individuals.The purpose of United States psychological operations (PSYOP) is to induce or reinforce behavior favorable to U.S. objectives. They are an important part of the range of diplomatic, informational, military, and economic activities available to the U.S. They can be utilized during both peacetime and conflict. There are 3 main types: strategic, operational, and tactical. Strategic PSYOP include informational activities conducted by the U.S. government agencies outside of the military arena, though many utilize Department of Defense (DOD) assets. Operational PSYOP are conducted across the range of military operations, including during peacetime, in a defined operational area to promote the effectiveness of the joint force commander's (JFC) campaigns and strategies. Tactical PSYOP are conducted in the area assigned to a tactical commander across the range of military operations to support the tactical mission against opposing forces.

PSYOP? There’s a term I’d thought restricted to space operas.

It makes a sort of sense, to employ psychological warfare to the advantage of one’s country. Knowledge is power, and utilizing the knowledge of the human mind is incredible power. The ethical and moral considerations are staggering. Who wields this? Following the answer to that question: can the person/people who do wield these tools be trusted? How do we know that nationalism doesn’t overpower ethical considerations? The largest question is – who regulates these people?

At least Project MKULTRA was shut down.

It’s a frightening, dangerous world we live in – and we need to keep a close eye especially on the religious zealots, because while their superstitions are pure bunkum, their ability to persuade the populace is blaringly obvious as well as scary. To allow tools such as these to fall into the hands of the religious is foolhardy, and the cost will be more than we or our children can bear.

Quis custodiet ipsos custodes?

Till the next post, then.

Read More...

Summary only...

Fun Films For The Non-Believer – Whatever Works

Cross posted @ God Is 4 Suckers! 

I have to admit, I rather enjoy Larry David, regardless of whether he’s on one of my all time favorite shows (Curb Your Enthusiasm), or in one of my favorite films, Whatever Works. I’ve a keen eye for what I call religions-slammers, and I recommend this film highly. It takes unabashed slams at religion that people would have been aghast at 20 or 30 years ago.

Up in the top ten of course, is Dogma – one of the choice scenes (with the redoubtable George Carlin as a cardinal – talk about nice touch!):

And of course, what discussion about ridiculous religious beliefs in film would be without the funniest all time scene in Life Of Brian?

And of course, Monty Python And The Holy Grail:

I’ve only shared four of my own favorites here – please feel free to suggest more.

Till the next post, then.

Read More...

Summary only...

The Invention Of Lying – A Movie Review

Cross posted @ God Is 4 Suckers!

Imagine there's no countries
It isn't hard to do
Nothing to kill or die for
And no religion too
Imagine all the people
Living life in peace – Imagine, John Lennon

I recently watched this movie, and I have to say: I absolutely loved it.

Because, let’s admit it – as an atheist, I cannot abide dishonesty. It was the initial attraction it had for me after all. The uncompromising pedantry, the brutal clinical analysis of details, the utter logic of it. And religious people? They lie. Perhaps in small ways, even more so in large ways. The mental gymnastics of rationalizing their worldview, the  semantic dishonesty, the dance of belief so fragile that a light wind can shatter it and the denial afterwards.

So the plotline was a refreshing concept: a parallel world where nobody understands the concept of lying. Wow. What I wouldn’t give to live there, I tells ya. You’d know where you stood immediately with anyone you’d meet. Conversations where people never ever used ‘weasel words’. If you were going to score, you’d know it. Ask a question, and there’s no dancing about, just a straight answer.

And one of the more beautiful aspects of the flick, is that there was no such thing as religion. Not one jot nor tittle.

So one day, as shown in the trailer, Mark Bellison (Ricky Gervais) lies and gets more money from the bank than he has. He begins to experiment with this newfound ‘power’, much to our collective amusement.

And the big hit at the Judeo-Christian religion, is when his mother is lying in bed, scared of death, not wanting to go into cold nothingness, and Mark makes up a huge fib about what is obviously termed heaven here, and is overheard by the doctor and nurses. The ‘word’ spreads like wildfire, and people begin camping on his doorstep. So Mark writes the ‘nine commandments’ on the back of two pizza boxes, and addresses the crowd by telling them about the ‘man in the sky’. Much hilarity ensues.

I rather liked the subplot, where Mark is trying to woo Anna McDoogles (Jennifer Garner), who isn’t interested in him at all, and…well, watch the movie. Some critics didn’t like the idea of a dumpy little guy getting a hottie, but it does happen, and screw those shallow pricks anyways.

And some of the religious kooks weren’t too hot about it, anyways:

Roger Ebert of the Chicago Sun-Times awarded the film the three and a half stars out of four saying "in its amiable, quiet, PG-13 way, [it] is a remarkably radical comedy" while Empire gave the film 1 star out of 5 saying the "ramshackle plot detours into a hideously ill-conceived religious satire". The United States Conference of Catholic Bishops rated The Invention of Lying as "O - morally offensive"^] However, Xan Brooks of The Guardian was more favourable, giving the film four out of five stars, although he was critical of some aspects: "It is slick and it is funny. But it is also too obviously schematic, while that romantic subplot can feel awfully synthetic at times."

But hey, if you can’t take a joke, you shouldn’t have joined the race.

Anyways, till the next post.

Read More...

Summary only...

Speaking Of Equinoxes….

Here’s a film that I saw as a child – and even as a little kid, I realized how truly laughable the film was. Truly among the worst (and unintentionally hilarious) films ever made. It’s got everything: a mad scientist, visits to the loony bin, giant monsters, demonic possession – yes folks, a perfect example of Hollyweird’s effort to pack too much content into too little time.

Enjoy.

Read More...

Summary only...

Frida – A Movie Review On A Movie About An Atheist

I just got done watch Frida – and wow, this is one great film.

After being attached to a number of actors, directors, and producers, this long-gestating biography of one of Mexico's most prominent, iconoclastic painters reaches the screen under the guiding hand of producer/star Salma Hayek. Hayek ages some 30 years onscreen as she charts Frida Kahlo's life from feisty schoolgirl to Diego Rivera protégée to world-renowned artist in her own right. Frida details Kahlo's affluent upbringing in Mexico City, and her nurturing relationship with her traditional mother (Patricia Reyes Spindola) and philosophical father (Roger Rees). Having already suffered the crippling effects of polio, Kahlo sustains further injuries when a city bus accident nearly ends her life. But in her bed-ridden state, the young artist produces dozens upon dozens of pieces; when she recovers, she presents them to the legendary -- and legendarily temperamental -- Rivera (Alfred Molina), who takes her under his wing as an artist, a political revolutionary, and, inevitably, a lover. But their relationship is fraught with trouble, as the philandering Rivera traverses the globe painting murals, and Kahlo languishes in obscurity, longing to make her mark on her own. Frida was directed by Julie Taymor, whose Broadway production of The Lion King won her international acclaim. ~ Michael Hastings, All Movie Guide

And not only does Salma Hayek manage to make the uni-brow sexy (Salma being one of the women closest to being a goddess in my book), she also does a fantastic job in this film. Some critics say that Alfred Molina nearly steals the film, but I disagree. That Frida is crippled at the age of 15, and is in chronic pain is well conveyed by the actress, the seemingly indefatigable lust for life of the artist is well portrayed, and I say Salma should’ve gotten the Oscar for this.

Moments I particularly enjoyed:

Prior to Frida’s marriage to Rivera, her father (a German born Jew) and her mother (a Mexican Catholic) are discussing the impending nuptials. Her mother says (of Rivera), “How can you approve of this wedding? It’s like an elephant marrying a dove. He’s a communist and, “ spitting the word out “an atheist!”

At one juncture, Leo Trotsky (played by James Woods) is staying at the Rivera’s villa, accompanied by armed guards. The guards on the wall start shouting, “Back away! Get away from the bag!” Hub-bub ensues. Frida calmly waltzes to the gate, effortlessly lifts a revolver out of a guard’s holster, and goes out. Two old women are kneeling at the porch. “I’ll give you to the count of five to get out of here! One, two” BAM! off goes the gun, and the two women run off shrieking. She goes back in. “I’m sorry, it was my two aunts. They’re convinced you’re the Antichrist.” (Meaning Trotsky.)

Interspersed throughout the movie are wonderful illustrations of Kahlo’s work. Well written, well plotted, and chock full of talent (I kept recognizing people right and left: I rarely read the reviews or the cast list, because I like to be surprised), I highly recommend this movie.

(Note that it states here that Frida was an atheist, but in small print)

Two fists way up.

Read More...

Summary only...

Dune And Children Of Dune – Definitely Two For The Collection

I must not fear. Fear is the mind-killer. Fear is the little-death that brings total obliteration. I will face my fear. I will permit it to pass over me and through me. And when it has gone past I will turn the inner eye to see its path. Where the fear has gone there will be nothing. Only I will remain. - Bene Gesserit Litany Against Fear.

So I got these two films from Amazon – and wow! Talk about first-rate.

Bear in mind, that I’m not talking about David Lynch’s utter travesty from 1984. That one sucks like an Electro-Lux (note: don’t care if Herbert was involved in the production or not, so don’t bother).

I’m talking about this one. For one thing, I’m a bit of a bear about sticking to original story lines – the adage about ‘not broken, don’t fix’ may be a trifle cliché, but it stands the tests of time. And oh wow, these films are faithful to the original three novels, and still worth multiple watches.

I say three, because Children of Dune as well as the first Dune film also incorporate Dune Messiah, which was the bridge between books 1 and 3.

Obviously there is a lot of parallels between the Middle East and the planet Dune: the spice is clearly a variable subtext for oil (no spice, and the universe becomes crippled), the Fremen are obviously Arabs, but the analogies break down a bit, because I don’t see a lot of resemblance between Paul/Muad’Dib and Muhammad. There’s a few vocabulary parallels (jihad, maybe one or two others), and of course, it’s a desert planet. I suppose the Bene Gesserit could be an analogue for the Catholic Church, but again, the resemblances are barely superficial.

Anyways, I'll be watching this again sometime soon.

Read More...

Summary only...

'The Haunting In Connecticut' - A (Non) Movie Review

I can't help but get more than a little irritated when this sort of thing happens. ‘Based on a true story!’ trumpets the trailer (and/or headline). And when you delve into it? Utter horseshit:

The Real Story Behind 'The Haunting in Connecticut'

The new film "The Haunting in Connecticut" tells the story of the Snedeker family, who in 1986 rented an old house in Southington, Connecticut. Allen and Carmen Snedeker moved in with their daughter and three young sons. While exploring their new home, Carmen found strange items in the basement: tools used by morticians.

The family soon discovered — to their horror — that their home had once been a funeral parlor, and the eldest son began seeing ghosts and terrifying visions. The experiences spread to other family members and got worse: Both parents said they were raped and sodomized by demons; one day as Carmen mopped the kitchen floor, the water suddenly turned blood red and smelled of decaying flesh; and so on.

So – insanity’s hereditary, right?

Finally the family contacted a pair of self-styled "demonologists" and "ghost hunters," Ed and Lorraine Warren, who arrived and proclaimed the Snedeker house to be infested with demons.

The scariest part? It's all true, supposedly.

The Snedekers have told their story many times, including on national talk shows and in a Discovery Channel TV show. The film's poster states in capital letters at the top that the movie is "based on true events." Yet others aren't so sure.

Cue X-files weird ominous foreshadowing music. So, is there anything to it? Guess what:

Investigator Joe Nickell reports in the May/June issue of Skeptical Inquirer magazine that the Snedeker's landlady found the whole story ridiculous. She noted that nobody before or since had experienced anything unusual in the house, and that the Snedeker family stayed in the house for more than two years before finally deciding to leave.

Apparently being assaulted and raped by Satan's minions for months at a time wasn't a good enough reason to break the lease.

No doubt, there’s probably some nimbulb on a discussion board floating out on the internet who’s trying to float the argument that somebody’s trying to censor reality. I can hear it now: “Of course the landlady claims otherwise! She wouldn’t be able to rent the place if she told the truth!” Anyways, yes, insanity’s hereditary:

The Snedeker's story first came to light in horror novelist Ray Garton's 1992 book "In a Dark Place: The Story of a True Haunting." In an interview in "Horror Bound" magazine, Garton discussed how the "true story" behind "The Haunting in Connecticut" came about.

Garton was hired by Ed and Lorraine Warren to work with the Snedekers and write the true story of their house from hell. He interviewed all the family members about their experiences, and soon realized that there was a problem: "I found that the accounts of the individual Snedekers didn't quite mesh. They couldn't keep their stories straight. I went to Ed with this problem. 'Oh, they're crazy,' he said.... 'You've got some of the story — just use what works and make the rest up... Just make it up and make it scary.'"

I guess pandering is a true American art form.

Garton, who had accepted the job expecting to have a real "true story" to base the book on, did as he was told: "I used what I could, made up the rest, and tried to make it as scary as I could."

Though the Snedekers stand by their story, it seems there is little or no proof that anything supernatural occurred at the house. Whether or not the Snedekers actually believed their story, they stood to make money from the book deal. They were aware that the Lutz family — of Amityville, New York — profited handsomely from selling the rights to their "true story" of a haunted house. "The Amityville Horror" has long since been revealed as a fiction by investigator Ric Osuna and others. Interestingly, the Warrens were also involved in the Amityville case.

Fiction passed off as memoir or true story is certainly nothing new, from William Peter Blatty's book and film "The Exorcist" to James Frey's debunked bestseller "A Million Little Pieces." Filmmakers have a long history of touting movies as being based on true stories, when in fact they have little or no connection to any real events.

As for "The Haunting in Connecticut," Garton notes, "I suspect the movie will begin with the words: 'Based on a true story.' Be warned: Just about anything that begins with any variation of this phrase is trying a little too hard to convince you of something that probably isn't true."

So – caveat emptor and all that. I’ll be skipping this bit of skullduggery grounded on my principles: I ain’t throwing money to liars.

Read More...

Summary only...

From Beyond – Avoid At All Costs! A Movie Review

I’ve been casting about for a decent movie based on H. P. Lovecraft’s stories, and well, it’s been slim pickings.

So I watched From Beyond yesterday, and most of my reactions were “Oh, you’re kidding me!” and wild laughter. The crew at MST3K would’ve had a field day with this thing.

After inventing a way for creatures from the fourth dimension to come into his own world, Dr. Edward Pretorious (Ted Sorel) suffers a gruesome decapitation at the hands of those he brought "from beyond." But authorities suspect his assistant (Jeffrey Combs) is to blame. Barbara Crampton co-stars as a beautiful psychiatrist brought in to help police solve the case in this classic 1980s thriller based on a short story by H.P. Lovecraft.

Yeah, when I read that blurb, I thought, “I…dunno.” Not a big fan of what I term ‘over-modernization’ (you know what I mean – they bring the characters up to date with the current time, including cutesy little commentary, all that idiocy).

Half an hour into the film, it began spiraling out control. Whoever re-fitted this movie was obviously on a steady diet of cocaine and late night horror movies. Absolutely hysterical insertions include:

1. A monster design that obviously was rejected from the ‘Lost In Space’ movie debacle
2. The lady psychiatrist dressing up as a dominatrix while under  the influence of the Resonator
3. Crawford Tillingford actually (seriously!) developing a taste for human brains (a moment of high hilarity ensues when he attacks the bitchy doctor in the hospital: he pushes her up against the wall, begins sucking on her face, turns, spits out an eyeball, and begins to slurp out her gray matter).
4. Crawford gets eaten by his former mentor, but manages to battle his way out of the digestive tract to save the damsel in distress

Utter and thorough dreck. Good for a few laughs, though, if you like awful movies.

Read More...

Summary only...

The Mist – Definitely One For The Collection

Wow – I read the short story years ago, I knew what was going to happen, the characters, etc. But I gotta say: this film gave me the serious willies regardless.

The Mist:

After a brutal thunderstorm pounds a small town, the residents discover a malevolent mist hangs over their homes, killing anyone who remains outside. Trapped in a grocery store, a band of survivors must make a stand against the deadly fog. Based on a story by horror maestro Stephen King and directed by multiple Oscar nominee Frank Darabont, this spine chiller stars Thomas Jane, Marcia Gay Harden and Andre Braugher.

The casting was great, the CGI was pretty good (the pharmacy scene was especially shuddersome, when the MP fell down and erupted into ‘spiders’, eh-huh-huh-huh), and the woman playing Mrs. Carmody…well, the answers.com entry says it best:

When the old Mrs. Carmody (Marcia Gay Harden) becomes convinced that she is the true vessel of God and begins barking fire and brimstone to the frightened prisoners of The Mist, things shift from just supernatural scary to real-world terrifying. An enthusiastic but harmless zealot at the onset, Mrs. Carmody eventually manages to make even spiky-tentacled monstrosities from another dimension look like they might be kind of cuddly by comparison. It's fascinating to see how the alliances unfold as the situation grows increasingly tense, and Darabont handles the growing division and animosity among the fractured survivors with the kind of skill that really draws the viewer in.

And that’s no lie – she gave me the utter willies, as she’s that scary sort of theist we atheists have nightmares about.

Another big plus – usually most King vehicles suck. Once Hollyweird gets a hold of wonderful stories, they tend to ‘modify’ (read: shred) them. If you’ve read Graveyard Shift the story, and watch the movie, you’ll tell yourself, “Hey, that’s not the story I read.” Same with Children of the Corn. Up until now, I’d maintained that the only flick that held true to a King story was The Dead Zone (the Christopher Walken film, not that dreadful TV derivative knock-off).

So I give it two fists up and a ‘hell-YEAH!’

Read More...

Summary only...

Equilibrium – A Dystopic View Of A Chemically Induced ‘1984’

This was a very interesting movie – Equilibrium. The blurb reads as follows:

In a futuristic world, a strict regime has eliminated war by suppressing emotions: Books, art and music are strictly forbidden, and feeling is a crime punishable by death -- a rule that's enforced by feeding the denizens a mood-limiting drug. John Preston (Christian Bale) is a top government official responsible for destroying those who resist the rules. But when he misses a dose of his own medication, he experiences a pang of conscience. …

Central to the theme was the concept of ‘sense crimes’ – as the blurb suggests, if reading a book, viewing art, or listening to music elicits an emotion, that person becomes a ‘sense offender’. It’s an interesting approach. The intro states that when humanity came close to extinguishing itself, specific mechanisms (read: medicating the population) were implemented to prevent any such disasters from occurring again. Hence, ‘equilibrium’ is achieved. It’s a fun watch and a sobering thought. It relies heavily on Matrix-style CGI that really rocks, albeit a little over the top in some cases. In retrospect however, the ‘gun kata(s)’ are specific patterns, and I would think (as a practicing martial artist) that as such, there would be a degree of predictability. One thumb up, a wink and a nod for this one.

Read More...

Summary only...

Protagonist – A Look At Four Men's’ Lives

YouTube - Protagonist Trailer

Protagonist is a very interesting film, inasmuch as:

Academy-award winning filmmaker Jessica Yu offers an unusual look at the simultaneous diversity and commonality of four very different men in this documentary. In Protagonist, Yu recalls the structural format of the ancient Greek playwright Euripides -- whose stories were often marked by human tragedy, the commentary of a chorus of independent observers, and the sudden and unexpected intervention of the divine -- as she chronicles the lives of a thief, a student of martial arts, a preacher who has renounced his past as a homosexual, and a political terrorist. Protagonist was screened in competition as part of the 2007 Sundance Film Festival. ~ Mark Deming, All Movie Guide

The only problem I have with that blurb, was there was absolutely no ‘intervention of the divine’ (whatever the hell that means anyways), and there wasn’t a ‘chorus of independent observers’ (what constitutes a chorus?) – what film was this clown watching?

Anyways, as intriguing as all four of the gentlemen were (Mark Salzman’s observations about martial arts in Western culture as viewed by a teenager are especially apt), of major interest is Mark Pierpoint, homosexual-turned-preacher-turned-heterosexual-turned-back-to-gay. He recounts how he ‘prayed out the gay’, got married, had a major Christian following in Southeast Asia, and in the middle of a huge revival (25,000 people, is what he says), decides he wants a man. Right there. Preachin’ gospel, singin’ hymns, he decides that indeed he is gay (which is irreconcilable with his religion). Ends up marrying another man. Strangely, he still gabbles in the film about ‘you can’t know gawd until you know yourself’, most of that apologetic nonsense.

I give it a thumb up, I’d watch it again.

Read More...

Summary only...

Straight To Hell – That’s What This Movie Feels Like

Just finished watching Straight To Hell, and wow, the money used to finance this fiasco would’ve been better put to use feeding orphans.

The blurb reads:

After muffing a job for their boss, three ham-fisted hit men (Sy Richardson, Dick Rude and Joe Strummer) rob a bank and flee to a dusty desert hamlet with their gal pal (Courtney Love) in tow. But instead of finding refuge, they find a town run by a gang of coffee junkies who don't take kindly to the quartet's arrival. Dennis Hopper and Grace Jones are among the celebrities who turn up in director Alex Cox's bizarre spoof of spaghetti Westerns.

It’s supposed to be a spaghetti Western spoof, but it’s chock full of ham-handed cultural references that fall flat on their asses. From Pulp Fiction (the main honcho/bank robber is a near-Jackson lookalike who always wears a tie, even in a dusty crap town) to Dusk Till Dawn, to a vague reference to Dawn of the Dead. My main question is, was Courtney Love attractive while Cobain was alive? Because as the pregnant gal-pal, she’s just a whiny skank with a bun in the oven. I got maybe two minor chuckles out of an hour and a half, and since I’m the sort of fellow who laughs at EVERYTHING, that’s pretty sad. The Pogues are actually in this, and the accompanying clip makes it look like it’s way cooler than it is.

So my advice is – avoid this at all costs. Better off reading a book. Two middle fingers WAY up.

Read More...

Summary only...

Religulous - Two Fists In The Air

Well, I enjoyed the ever livin' hell out of this movie. It was a little like Root Of All Evil, only with more stand-up comedy, and a lot less intellectual meat.
The long silences that Maher received when he joked around about religion were...interesting. As well as being escorted out of the Utah temple grounds and being evicted from the Vatican.
It's a fun watch, but I expect the Scientologists to be filing a lawsuit any day now.

Read More...

Summary only...

Quis Custodiet Ipsos Custodes? – Watching The Watchmen

Quis custodiet ipsos custodes? is a Latin phrase from the Roman poet Juvenal, which literally translates to "Who will guard the guards themselves?", and is variously translated in colloquial English as "Who watches the watchmen?", "Who watches the watchers?", "Who will guard the guards?", "Who shall watch the watchers?", "Who polices the police?" or other similar translations.

I haven’t watched the movie, but I have read the graphic novel, and for an interesting change of pace, I decided to buy the Watchmen: The Complete Motion Comic.

It was a little bit of all right. Of course, there was no monkeying about with the storyline, so no liberties were taken. Kind of fun, though. My only complaint is that

1. They should have had more voice talent, and
2. It would’ve been nice to have actual women’s voices for the females characters

But other than that, it was an interesting way to spend some time. Be forewarned: we’re talking around 5 hours here. Luckily, it comes as a 2 disc set. If you enjoy the comics media, and like the idea of actually watching a motion comic, this is a must-get must-see.

Read More...

Summary only...

Into The Wild – A Movie Review

I recently watched this film, Into The Wild – and while I usually enjoy Sean Penn’s films, I wasn’t overly crazy about this one.

It was well-scripted, the wilderness scenes were lush, and it was based on a book by the same name.

Into the Wild recounts the life of Christopher McCandless, an actual student-athlete at Emory University, as told by his sympathetic sister. In response to his parents, whom McCandless perceives as materialistic, manipulative, and domineering, McCandless destroys all of his credit cards and identification documents, donates $24,000 (nearly his entire savings) to Oxfam, and sets out on a cross-country drive in his well-used but reliable Datsun towards his ultimate goal: to live alone and in the land between Alaska. Along the way, he leaves his automobile in the course of a flash flood, to hitchhike his way there after burning the remainder of his dwindling cash supply. Taking an unintentionally circuitous route, he encounters many unconventional individuals on his itinerary, such as a group of hippies, a farm owner (Vince Vaughn), and a lonely leather worker who offers to adopt and be a grandfather to Christopher (Hal Holbrook), as he purposefully trudges onward to his final destination, arriving in the wilds of Alaska nearly two years after his initial departure. He starts living in a "Magic Bus" serving as a shelter for people walking in the area (though in the film there is nobody else). Resourceful, McCandless finds joy in living off the land, and begins to write a book of his adventures. Unfortunately, as the spring thaw arrives, he is cut off from civilization by waterways. As his food supply lessens, he resorts to eating plants. Although he consults a brought-along book about the edibility of plants, he confuses an edible and a poisonous kind, which shuts down his digestive system forcing him to starve to death. As he dies, he continues to write, detailing his painful demise as a dramatic denouement to his autobiography.

The item that really got under my skin were all the GOD-NODS – he has a conversation with Hal Holbrook where they discussed this ‘gob’ character. What was the most irritating point was that the poor fellow ingested a poisonous plant that looked exactly like an edible one, a point that will escape most of the Jebus crowd.

His journal entry for that date reads, "Extremely weak. Fault of pot[ato] seed. Much trouble just to stand up. Starving. Great Jeopardy." McCandless had been digging and eating the root of the wild potato—Hedysarum alpinum, a common area wildflower also known as Eskimo potato, which Kari's book told him was widely eaten by native Alaskans—for more than a month without ill effect. On July 14 he apparently started eating the pealike seedpods of the plant as well, again without ill effect. There is, however, a closely related plant—wild sweet pea, Hedysarum mackenzii—that is very difficult to distinguish from wild potato, grows beside it, and is poisonous. In all likelihood McCandless mistakenly ate some seeds from the wild sweet pea and became gravely ill.

Really, what sort of creator makes two plants, one edible and one poisonous, so much alike? Answer: NONE. Other than that, it’s a fair movie. Exploration of the ‘noble savage’ myth, it was evenly casted, and the central character was quite likable despite all the GOD-NODS.

A reasonable expenditure of two hours, but I’d not watch it again. I give it a  mid fist.

Read More...

Summary only...

The Movie ‘M’ – Definitely One For The Collection

I kept seeing this pop up on my Netflix recommended list – and finally I thought, “Hey, what the hell?” and rented it.

Like most modern viewers, I tend to skip items that are black ‘n white in favor of something more up to date. But when I read the blurb -

German-American director Fritz Lang presents his first "talkie" -- and cinema's first serial killer -- in this 1931 classic. Plump pedophile Hans Beckert (Peter Lorre), propelled by a compulsion he can't control, escapes the eye of the law -- but not the wrath of the Berlin underworld being blamed for his crimes. The character of Beckert was later used in Nazi propaganda films to illustrate the evils of sexual deviance.

I thought, “Hmmm…okay.”)

It’s all black and white, there’s no music theme, and none of them thar fancy See-Gee-eye ee-fects, so anyone under the age of 18 would probably treat this the same way they treat classical radio stations – time to change the dial! There’s no sex, gratuitous nudity, or blood ‘n guts fight scenes. There’s some cussing. Sounds like a real snorer, no?

No.

Well, the long and short of it, is that this was a fantastic movie. As it turns out this was Peter Lorre’s breakout movie. Children keep showing up dead, everyone starts freaking out (understandably), and the Berlin underworld decide to hunt him down, and put him on trial. There is one scene where an old man chats with a little girl, cautioning her to be careful as she runs off, and he gets jacked up by this HUGE guy who demands to know what is his interest in a child. A crowd forms, and almost becomes a mob. One of the smaller shocks in the movie is when the Berlin police raid known underground hide-outs – a cop is physically hauling a hooker up to the street, and she’s shouting ‘Put me down you god-damned bastard!’ (It was filmed in 1931, which is why I double-blinked.)

And no GOD-NODS – nobody appealed to the sky, no priests, it was an entirely secular film.

Peter Lorre’s character (Beckert) eventually gets nabbed by the Berlin mob, and put on trial. Beckert’s ‘trial’ scene is magnificent, with M bellowing his pain and sickness at the crowd in German (and hey, you don’t need to speak it to appreciate it – it IS in subtitles).

And Lorre was nothing short of magnificent. Whenever he’d see a child and his compulsion took hold, he’d whistle ‘Peter and the Wolf’ (the only music in the whole flick). You could actually see the ugly desire take over, or when he was afraid, you believed it. Truly an actor’s actor.

But hey, rent it for yourself. I give it a full fist up.

Read More...

Summary only...

Blasphemy, The Movie - A Review.

This is a rare treat: an actual movie about atheism that makes the effort to see the worldview from the atheist's side.

The blurb reads:

In John Mendoza's Blasphemy, a young Hispanic man (Carlos Leon) declares to his family that he doesn't believe in God. His parents immediately disown him, and it's up to his aunt to bring him back into the fold. From here, he tries many religions and this comedy skewers every one of them.

You can safely skip that last sentence: it's a load of crap. There are actually a number of clips lampooning various religions (and some of them are fairly amusing).

I skipped to Part II on youtube, as many of you will likely bristle at the idiocies that come pouring out of the protagonist's parents' mouths. And the 'aunt' in the film is one  scary lady, the sort of fundie that has the bulk of online atheists using pseudonyms.

Enjoy.

Read More...

Summary only...

The Contender: Recommended Viewing!

Thanks to the modern 'miracle' of Netflix, I chanced across a pertinent, powerful drama titled The Contender.

No, it's not a boxing drama. It's a well-paced, powerful political insight into the way Washington is run. Here's the answers.com entry:

The hard-ball gamesmanship and casual character assassination of American politics sets the stage for this thriller from writer and director Rod Lurie. When the Vice President of the United States unexpectedly dies, all eyes in Washington D.C. are on President Jackson Evans (Jeff Bridges) as he chooses a new VP. Sen. Jack Hathaway (William Petersen), a respected career politician enjoying a new swell of popularity after a well-publicized attempt to save a drowning woman, is expected to be Evans' choice, but instead he picks Sen. Laine Hanson (Joan Allen), a decision that raises eyebrows on both sides of the political fence. Veteran power broker Shelly Runyon (Gary Oldman) is vehemently opposed to Hanson's appointment, in part because the Democratic senator was once a Republican, and vows to do everything in his power to prevent her from being confirmed. Runyon and his staff start digging for dirt on Hanson, and soon make a surprising discovery -- her personal morality is called into question when it's alleged that she took part in a group sexual liaison while she was a college student. The Contender also stars Mike Binder as one of Hanson's advisors, Mariel Hemingway as an old friend with a surprising secret, Christian Slater as an ambitious congressmen assisting Runyon, and Philip Baker Hall as Hanson's father; it was the second feature from former film critic Rod Lurie. ~ Mark Deming, All Movie Guide

I think it's germane especially in lieu of the upcoming Presidential race. A woman is nominated as Vice President (brilliantly played by Joan Allen), and Gary Oldman is savagely good as the patriot-gone-bad, with a magnificent Jeff Bridges playing the President-elect Jackson Evans. Noteworthy mentions include Sam Eliot (who is rarely bad in a movie - he's great as the POTUS advisor), and Christian Eliot (whom I've never been overly fond of - he's too smarmy in most flicks, but pretty believable in this one).

Joan Allen's character [Laine Hanson] is the liberal's dream: she's a strong, confident woman, who's switched parties (now Democrat), pro-choice, real strong on separation of church and state, and get this...drum roll please...she's an atheist!

Noteworthy moments worth savoring: Laine and her son are visiting grandpa while he's playing tennis. He tries to instruct the 6-year-old on using a topspin, and is informed it's great because Jesus created it! Gramps gets a little huffy after scooting the kid off ("I spent all those years trying to get that nonsense outta the public schools - they're paid to teach, not to preach!").

When questioned by the committee about SOCAS, Oldman's character quotes Laine as saying, "SOCAS isn't about the government trying to run religion, it's about keeping the government from being run by a fairy tale." [paraphrase].

And, in the speech she delivers to the committee (she's resisted the

"I stand for the woman's right to choose. I stand for the elimination of the death penalty. I stand for a strong and growing armed forces, for we must stomp out genocide on this planet, and I believe that is a cause worth dying for. I stand for seeing every gun taken out of every home. Period. [...] And, Mr. Chairman, I stand for the separation of church and state. The reason I stand for that is, I believe, the same reason our forefathers did. It is not there to protect religion from the grasp of government, but to protect our government, from the grasp of religious fanaticism. I may be an atheist, but that does not mean I do not go to church. I do go to church. The church I go to is the one that emancipated the slaves, that gave women the right to vote, that gave us every freedom we hold dear. My church is this very chapel of democracy, that we sit together, and I do not need God to tell me my moral absolutes, I need my heart, and my brain, and this church."

I don't mind saying, I wept a bit through the last part of this movie. She stood on her principles: she played no game but her own. She refused to discuss the alleged incident at ALL - even when provided with a devastating whammy from a friendly advisor that would've dropped Oldman's character into the dirt, clutching his groin. Why?

"Principles only mean something when you stick to them when its inconvenient."

Damned good movie. Worth adding to the collection. If I had prehensile toes, I'd give it two Big Toes Up.

And that's my 2¢ worth.

Read More...

Summary only...

'A Perfect Stranger' - A Perfectly Dreadful Waste Of Time

I keep trolling the waters of religion, hoping to catch perhaps something more substantial than an old boot, or some discarded flotsam.

Teach a man to fish in an ocean of delusion, and he will learn that old shoe leather properly prepared is quite tasty.

Case in point: I had another whopper of an argument with my religious buddy (we've stayed in touch and stayed close over 30-odd years, so it's a little hard to let go, embarrassing as some of the things he says are), and it began with his mentioning this flick.

We went off on a tangent, mostly with my having to repeat specific questions to him. One such occurred in (approximately) this manner.

I told him that I had no real problem with his worldview, but that folks with his mindset tend to spread disinformation (such as evolution) about specific topics.

I heard that 'Evolution is so full of holes!' I asked him, like what? Fum-fah, flubber blubber, he didn't know. But I heard the old 'It's just a THEORY!' I very specifically pointed out that he had no idea what the word meant. I then proceeded to read the dictionary definition to him. And pointed out that gravity is a theory also. He directly challenged the definition I'd read to him! "What's the source!?!? Huh?" I told him the same thing I told a conspiracy theorist at work (who I read a definition to, of another word, 'fascism': he, too, didn't like the definition he heard). I told them both the same thing: "It's the standard definition. This is what it means. I don't know what to tell you. This is the agreed upon definition."

He got quite upset at the idea that his fellow Christians were disseminating disinformation. "We don't talk about this, it doesn't come up in conversation." I had to ask, several times in fact, where he'd specifically heard the 'itsonlyatheory' crapola. "Oh, I don't know, probably from a pastor in church" (at which juncture, he began attacking my honesty - diversionary tactic).

(To my long-time buddy's credit, he conceded the 'gravity' theory point was a good one. He also called back the next day, and apologized for his behavior.)

Anyways, back to the point. I decided to rent The Perfect Stranger - it came nicely recommended.

Not impressed. Actually, it was pure dreck.

It varied (apparently) from the novel: the book features a man, the film's hero(ine) is an unsatisfied, harried modern working woman, apparently our 'representative' for skepticism. (I'd have preferred Richard Dawkins, but hey, it's a biased sample, too much to ask).

So she asks her husband (an overworked VP at a corporation) for a night out, as their daughter is on a sleep-over. He declines (too many hours).

She receives an invite to dinner from the big J himself. Thinking it a joke, she shows up. She's shown to a table where a stranger sits.

She considers bailing, but sticks it out. The fellow is, well, likable and down-to-earth, despite the extravagant claim of being Jebus hisself.

They discuss a wide range of topics in what are little better than fluffy soundbites.

I don't recall what came first, but the question came up: "What about evolution?" The answer? "Oh, they just don't like the 'made in his image part'. Another question was, "What about Hinduism?" He answers, "Remember that class you took? What did they say about the universe? The universe is eternal. We know better now."

Eye-crossing. Especially since the Old Testament pronounced the world flat. Some idiots claim it's only 6,000 years old, based on the bibble.

And then she brings up the contradictions in the bible. Ole JC spouts off about some crap about how one gospel says JC healed one blind guy, another says he healed two. The point? "Not essential to the story." Say what?!? Are you kidding me? There's so much disharmony, it's hard (say, impossible) to take the thing seriously! It's not about what color sandals somebody wore, or what kind of robe! There are nineteen (count 'em, nineteen!) discrepancies, and that's just in the crucifixion story ALONE.

And having a disjointed lost 'soul' representing skepticism (we have not only two strong legs to stand upon, we have teeth as well) - it's insulting, to say the least.

I couldn't finish the rest of it. It was stupid, and insulted my intelligence on a number of levels.

Emotional pablum.

Read More...

Summary only...

This Should Boost Readership - Readers Under 17 Require A Parent Or Adult Guardian

(Hat tip to Pharyngula)

As an aside, I just watched This Film Is Not Yet Rated.  A snippet:

Much of the film's press coverage was devoted to Dick and his crew's use of a private investigator to unmask the identities of the ratings and appeals-board members, a feat that had never been accomplished before, although 60 Minutes and other news organizations have tried.

Other revelations in the film include: the discovery that many ratings-board members either have children 18 and over or have no children at all (typically, the MPAA has suggested it hires only parents with children between the ages of 5 and 17); that the board seems to treat homosexual material much more harshly than heterosexual material (this assertion is supported by an MPAA spokesperson’s statement in USA Today that "We don't create standards; we just follow them"); that the board's raters receive no training and are deliberately chosen because of their lack of expertise in media literacy or child development; that senior raters have direct contact in the form of required meetings with studio personnel after movie screenings; and that the MPAA's appeals-board is just as secretive as the ratings board, its members being mostly movie theater chain and studio executives. Also included on the appeals-board are two members of the clergy (one Catholic and one Episcopalian, who may or may not have voting power).

I wish I could say I found all this amazing, or shocking, but sadly, it's not. Some cultural cabal is running interference in order to save our precious bodily fluids from being sullied.

And then there's good ole Ray Comfort, of banana fame:

Did you know that there was a time when the entertainment industry was bound by a code that forbade them from using any blasphemy in a movie? The “Hays Code” stated:
Pointed profanity--this includes the words “God,” “Lord,” “Jesus,” “Christ” (unless used reverently), “Hell,” “S.O.B.,” “damn,” or every other profane or vulgar expression, however used--is forbidden.
Hollywood is no longer restricted by the code. Many of today's movies don't simply blaspheme the name of Jesus. They go one further. For example, the award-winning Blow, directed by Ted Demme, is a typical R-rated film. The name of Jesus Christ is blasphemed eleven times in the movie. Three of those times, for some reason, the "F" word is used in the middle of His name.

Yeah, Ray-Ray, I knew about that (didn't know the name of the 'code').

Welcome to America. It's called Freedom of Speech. Don't like it?

Move.

Read More...

Summary only...