Consider The North Koreans

   Here we are, just a couple weeks after the terrible Boston bombings.  People are dead, more people are still in the hospital recovering, and even more people are struggling to try to deal with this situation.  If you're like me, you're pissed off.  But you're also hurt.  You're probably asking yourself something like "why in the world would anyone want to do this to us?  What did we ever do to them?  Why are people so crazy?"  You probably have a lot of hatred inside you, but you're not sure what to do with it.  That's understandable.  The assholes who instigated this attack deserve the penalties that have already come and will continue to come to them.  And I do believe there is a special place in hell reserved for them both.

   But I'm about to propose something that, honestly, may cause you to turn some of that hatred towards me.  That's fine.  I'm not asking you to agree with what I'm about to say.  All I'm asking is that you read it with as open a mind as you can find, considering everything we've been through as a country these past couple weeks.  From there you can judge me all you like.

   I am going to ask the same questions that may be on your mind.  Why would anyone ever want to do this to America?  What did we ever do to them?  Well, unfortunately I think the answer in many cases is "a lot."  Now before you start railing off, just hear me out.  I am a die-hard american, I love this country, and I want us to continue to be the best country in the world.  But there are things going on that you and I don't know about, things that I think if you DID know about them, you might think twice about some aspects of your life.  The unfortunate truth is that a lot of the reason why our lives are so great here in America is because life is so shitty for those other parts of the world, many of which hate us so much.

   Consider Afghanistan.  That country bred the people who brought us 9/11.  From what you see on TV, it's a bunch of thugs running around with rocket launchers, ruling by fear and killing over things like religion and tribal affiliation.  It looks like a hellhole.  But did you know at one point we were actually on their side?

   Afghanistan was to the Soviet Union what Vietnam was to us.  It was a proxy war location where the REAL combatants were the Soviets and the US, but it was all fought through the Afghans.  We supplied them with weapons, we armed them to the teeth and showed them how to bring down Soviet fighters and soldiers.  And most importantly, we promised them that we would be there to help the rebuild.  The Afghans pushed the Soviets out, which was a huge victory for them -- but an even bigger one for us.  And then we just left.  No rebuilding, no fulfillment of our promises.  We just gave them the middle finger and came back to our country.

   Now, chances are that had nothing to do with you.  You can say it's stupid or that it's not founded, or that there is no excuse for 9/11 (and you're right there, but we'll get to that).  But the reality is, the hatred that country felt towards us when we abandoned them has played a huge role in the way things have played out.  And entire generation of children grew up thinking of us as the assholes who promised them great things, made them sacrifice their lives, and then bailed on them when it came time to pay up.  Those kids grew up and passed the message on, etc etc etc, and now here we are.

   Movie to watch: Charlie Wilson's War

   Consider Iraq.  Saddam Hussein was a complete prick.  He may not be the worst dictator the world has ever seen, but he was certainly up there.  The things he did to his people were unimaginable, and because America is so awesome, we wanted to rectify the situation.  So it was a nice little blessing when Saddam decided to invade Kuwait.  There was our in, our chance to get into that country and blow the ever living shit out of an asshole.

   That's what we did.  And the Iraqis loved us.  We were their liberators, their heroes.  We were finally going to free them from oppression.  And then, when we had Saddam backed up into his shitty little palace at the end of Desert Storm, what did we do?  We bailed.

   I don't know why we bailed.  Political reasons?  Was there something militarily that we didn't know about?  I don't know, and we may never know.  But once we were gone, what do you think Saddam did?  Do you think he came out of hiding and was like "hey people of Iraq, it's cool, I get what you're saying, I'm going to be a better person having learned a lot from this experience."  Hell no.  He went on the warpath.  And all these people who thought they were going to be liberated, were instead being tortured.

   So you can imagine when we went BACK into Iraq a few years later, the atmosphere was a little different.  How would YOU feel in that situation?  Would you trust us?  Especially knowing that chances are we were really in there for the oil anyway?  Of course they aren't going to welcome us with open arms.  Why would they?

   Movie to watch: Three Kings

   Consider North Korea, Iran, Palestine, anyone else we're "dealing with."  Kim Jong Un is a psychopath.  Amenijad or however you spell it is a whacko.  They have been a thorn in freedoms's side and America's side for a long time, and I am in no way going to make excuses for them here.  But let's talk about their countries for a minute.  Let's talk about their people as a whole.

   We deal with these issues by declaring "sanctions" on them.  We cut them off from money, from resources, from food.  We are basically telling the people of the country "if you want to get out of this hellhole of a life, you need to overthrow your leader and start being a stand-up country."  This mindset comes from a good place.  Here in America, there's no way we would stand for a leader like either one of those guys.  We would overthrow them just like we overthrew the tyrants back in the colonial days.  But see, we understand this concept because we as a country lived it, and taught it to our kids, passed it on, indoctrinated ourselves with it.  It's almost impossible to imagine, but try to understand what it would be like if that type of thinking had never even entered your mind!

   That's the situation we're in here.  Brain washing is a powerful thing -- don't laugh, because in a lot of ways you and I fall for it just like they do.  These people are so lost in their own minds, so convinced that they can never overthrow their leaders, so confused about what America is and who we are and what we represent, that it's almost impossible for us to get through to them.  And in these instances, sanctions actually HURT our chances more than they help.

   Do you think the sanctions are hurting Kim Jong Un?  I doubt it.  He probably still eats good meals every day, lives a fairly luxurious life, etc.  Same with Iran's dude.  But it's the people who are suffering as a result of these sanctions.  They are the ones who can't eat, can't make a living, can't get on their feet.  And while the goal of these sanctions is for them to look at their leaders living comfortably and get pissed off, instead they look at US as the reason they are so miserable.  And they do get pissed off.

   My point is, we are breeding our own enemies.  Am I making excuses for these guys?  Absolutely not.  From what I can tell, it appears these two Russian assholes were just trying to make names for themselves.  There is NEVER an excuse for killing innocent people.  And like I said, I do think America has good intentions abroad.  We are trying to make this world better for everyone who lives in it.  But at the same time, we are abusing our power and position.

   We're like the guy who won the Monopoly game but wants to keep playing.  Our competitors continually land on our properties, and we could break any one of them and force them out of the game... but instead, we say "oh, well, I'll cut you a deal -- as long as you cut me one in return."  Then, when we land on their properties, we don't pay a dime because of the slack we cut them.  Then they land on ours again, we cut them slack, etc etc etc it just cycles in on itself.  The difference is, while in Monopoly you can kick the board and throw it away, you can't really do that with the world.  The only real option for these countries is to try to find a way to start the game over, to get us all back on even footing, and for many of them that means trying to do things like what we saw on 9/11.  It's not right -- it's desperate.

   Back to my point on brainwashing.  If you're still reading this, chances are you have a pretty open mind.  But think about back when Ron Paul started to bring points like this up at a Republican party debate.  He couldn't get six words out of his mouth before the audience started booing.  The look on his face said it all.  He realized this was not a fight he could win, that this was an audience that would never listen to him, and in a lot of ways I think that moment killed any kind of momentum he may have had. 

   But why did the audience boo him there?  Was it because he was wrong?  Or was it because we don't want to hear what he was going to say?  We don't like to think about the darker side of things, especially when it comes to international politics.  If you knew every time you filled up your gas tank that other people were paying six, seven times as much just so it could be cheaper here, would that change your driving habits or what kind of car you owned?  If you knew that buying a diamond potentially promoted a trade where people work terrible jobs and even get killed, would you still be excited to see a rock on that ring?  Do you see where I'm going here?  We have it so easy in this country, and it's easy to take for granted the fact that we're here because we're stepping on the backs of others.  It's much easier to just not think about it, to ignore it so that we can sleep better at night.  Believe me, I understand, I do it too.

   The reality, whether we want to believe it or not, is that Ron Paul was exactly right.  If China, or any other country in the world, tried to treat the United States like we have treated the countries I'm referencing here, we would be exploding the planet right this very minute.  Imagine if Germany decided they wanted to set up a military base in Oregon.  Or if China decided they would perform "naval exercises" in the Gulf Of Mexico. It would be a shitstorm!  And yet these are the kinds of things we do to the rest of the world every single day!  We control the world.  It's good for us, but it's also bad for us, because while we might like to think we're seen as knights in shining armor, an inspiration for the rest of the world, we're more often seen as overbearing assholes who think way too much of themselves.  It's not a positive message.

   I want you to consider this before I stop jabbering.  Consider what would happen if we, as a country, decided to say "F-you" to the rest of the world, and pull ALL of our resources and forces back to within our own border.  Consider what would happen if we no longer had any kind of military presence in Europe.  If we no longer helped Iraq or Saudi Arabia mine their oil.  If we didn't give Africa any money to help educate their populations.  If we stopped backing up South Korea or Japan.   It's very hard to think about that kind of world, isn't it?  Just typing it makes me nervous -- consider how exposed we would be.

   But would we be, actually?  I would wager that if we actually did completely pull back to within our own borders, the world would change quite a bit.  There would certainly be some fighting.  Countries like Israel and South Korea would have a tough time of it without our support.  Countries like China or even Russia might try to take the opportunity to do the same thing they hated us for doing -- controlling the regions around them.  But I would guess most of these guys would leave America itself alone.

   This scenario would never happen of course.  I for one think it would be disastrous, and I wouldn't be able to live with myself knowing we basically left entire countries out there to die.  But just think about what it would do, really.  Take the death and unrest out of it for a second, and consider the long-term.  Once things found their balance, the rest of the world would have to wake up and realized all of the good we have done for them over the years.  Their lives would be radically different without us there.  In the meantime, our country would be more defensible than ever.  Our entire armed forces would be sitting here on our shores, basically saying "come and try your luck" to the rest of the world.  We could put a soldier every ten feet on the border -- no need for a fence.  We wouldn't be spending such large amounts of money on our military, think about how that would help the deficit!  We could bring employment back to our country by focusing on our own resources.  We would be fine, and we could sit back and watch as the rest of the world tries to figure out how to function without the Monopoly Winners helping things along.

   It's an interesting, if ultimately unrealistic, idea.  It's what we did at the beginning of World War 2, and when we finally said "alright fine we'll help," boy were the Axis forces sorry.  America is every bit as strong a country now as we were then, the only difference is now we're spread much thinner.  We really ARE the world's police force... and while I would rather it be us than anyone else, is that really what we should be doing?  Are we ultimately setting ourselves up to fail by trying to do to much?  In our never-ending quest to do good, are we actually doing harm?

   I don't know.  I just want you to think about it.  Or don't.

There's Not Much On TV...

...so I've been watching a lot of movies lately.  Sue me.

Everything Must Go

   From Netflix:  Director-writer Dan Rush makes his film debut with this dramedy based on a Raymond Carver short story about Nick (Will Ferrell), a good-hearted but relapsed alcoholic who decides to live on his front lawn after losing his job and being thrown out by his wife.

   My Take:  There were two things that surprised me about this movie.  One, it was shot right here in the Phoenix area, and two, it was way more depressing than I thought it was going to be.  I was expecting something along the lines of "Stranger Than Fiction..." heartfelt, sort of sad at times, but overall something that made you feel like a better person.  I didn't get that vibe from this movie.

   Instead we see a guy who is, I guess as Netflix put it, a good-hearted alcoholic trying to figure out what the hell he's doing with his life.  Now I've never had to deal with a true alcoholic (though I know some people who like to pretend they are), so I can't say for sure how I would act, but don't you think there's a moment where you tell the guy "hey you know what?  I'm gonna lock you in this room without booze until you're over it."  And to top it off, this guy drinks PBR.  That shit isn't even good, I don't care what the hipsters say.

   Still, it's nice to see that Will Ferrell is capable of holding his own in a serious role.  I'm holding on to faith that this means he won't suffer the same fate as Adam Sandler, destined to make shitty half-comedies for the rest of his career.  He was believable, and he also was able to keep some semblance of his sense of humor throughout, so props to him on that.

   Ultimately, I look at movies like this as similar to the one-off action movies that come out every other week.  There's always some little story that I figure some director or producer was like "we're going to make a difference!" and then the movie comes out and barely makes a ripple.  I don't even think this one made it into theaters.  And I certainly wouldn't stack it up against movies like "Henry Poole Is Here."  But it wasn't bad, either.

   So I guess what I'm saying is, if you like Will Ferrell, or if you want to see what Will Ferrell can do when he's not an idiotic anchor man or a stupid race car driver, then check this movie out.  It's not his best (I still prefer "Stranger Than Fiction"), but it's not bad.

Looper

   From Netflix:  In the year 2042, Joe (Joseph Gordon-Levitt) is a Looper, a hired assassin for the mob who kills people sent from the future. But what will he do when the mob decides to "close the loop," sending back Joe's future self (Bruce Willis) for assassination?

   My Take:  Here's one I that I knew, the second I saw the trailer, I wanted to see it.  The concept is brilliant.  A murder-for-hire who kills people that are sent back in time by some futuristic mob, only to discover that he himself has made the hit list?  Craziness.

   Well, it's not quite what I expected, but it's close enough that I was still more than happy to sit through it.  The idea of the movie, while not what the trailer promised, is still sound: in the movie this is commonplace, and running into your old self is nothing new.  In fact it's a way for you to see that your contract is "up" and you have 30 years to live your life before you are the one getting shot in the face.  Interesting.

   What I loved about this movie was the way the story was told.  So many flash-backs and flash-forwards, showing what the future would have been, or was for each of the people.  I love how they had memories from the young guy carry over to the old guy, along with the injuries.  I love how it all kept a sort of sordid sense of humor (the bit where Bruce suggests that Levitt could have used a shorter name cutting into his arm, great stuff).  The different perspectives were awesome, both visually and from a storytelling standpoint.  I actually wasn't sure how to feel about Willis' mission -- I mean, killing kids, come on.  But when you see what the future holds, that clouds things up a little bit.

   And that ultimately leads me to what bothered me about this movie.  I guess we got a taste of how the director/writer/producer/whoever saw time travel when the two main characters were sitting in the diner.  Bruce Willis yells "IT DOESN'T MATTER."  Well, except it does.  The fact that you guys don't care about time travel doesn't give you the freedom to make a shitty ending.  And that's kind of what we got.  Oh sure it was a nice twist when he says he's going to change the loop.  But if you think it through, that doesn't make sense.  In the previous future, Bruce didn't exist and therefor would not have killed that kid OR his mom... and yet the kid still turns out to be the "rainmaker" or whatever his name was.  So how does breaking the loop change anything?  In reality, breaking the loop would have been killing the kid.  Now my head hurts.

   I'm also not seeing how this great makeup job on Levitt helps him look any more like Bruce Willis.  Don't get me wrong, it was an awesome job of changing his facial features... if I didn't know what that guy actually looked like, I would have thought this was his real look.  But I didn't see the resemblance with Brucey either.   And speaking of Brucey, this was the most like homer simpson I think I've ever seen him look.  Awesome.

   Ultimately, "Looper" is a great flick that is definitely worth seeing.  And no I didn't spoil anything for you here -- the movie still stands even knowing what I've revealed.  Time travel movies are always a bitch, and considering how badly they could have screwed it up, I think this one actually does a pretty good job of keeping everything in order.  Almost.

Oblivion

   From Netflix:  High above a war-torn future Earth, Cmdr. Jack Harper is maintaining the planet's defensive drones when a crippled starship enters his territory. Its sole occupant, a mysterious woman, leads Harper to shocking truths about humankind's legacy.

   My Take:  Because this movie just came out, I'm going to start off this review by letting you know if you should see it.  You should.  Don't fall for the "oh this is just another Tom Cruise Action Flick" thinking.  Yes, it's Tom Cruise, and yes he's in typical form (and yes he even runs at one point).  But this is a beautiful movie with an interesting story, and something you owe it to yourself to see.

   Okay... ***SPOILERS*** beyond this point.

   Easily my favorite part about this movie is how closely it mirrored the styling of "Mass Effect."  That is such a sweet series of videogames, full of incredible artistic design, and while this is not a "Mass Effect" movie (please?  Anyone?)  it does capture a lot of the essence of the style that makes up those games.  The visuals are gorgeous, and I love how the movie doesn't shy away from using iconic or shocking landmarks to show us what happened to the world.  I don't know why that it is, but it just seems like post-apocalypse movies don't show enough of the planet for it to really sink in.  Kudos for that.

   The soundtrack is the same.  So close to "Mass Effect" I was blown away.  A great mix of the orchestral and the tech.  Sound design overall is what really made this movie stand out to me.  The sounds the drones made, the threatening tone they carried, even with Cruise's somewhat stilted acting, you got the uneasy feeling that at any moment those things could turn around and blow you the fuck away.  I would say this movie did an even better job with sound design than "War Of The Worlds," which to this point was my favorite (and also, interestingly, starred Tom Cruise).

   There were a couple of big holes in this movie, unfortunately... and even more unfortunately, those holes had to do with the story.  First of all, I didn't like how they set the whole thing up with a long voice-over monologue from Tom Cruise.  It was completely unneeded, since he essentially says the same exact thing to the survivor when she first regains consciousness.  It was probably some idiot studio executive like "I don't think the audience is going to get it, hit them harder, in the face, with a hammer."  Ahhhhh facepalm.  The only benefit of the opening monologue was that you got to see some sweet visuals, so I guess it wasn't all bad.

   My other big problem was the bad guy.  If that thing was a machine, why in the world did it need to suck up all of earth's water?  Why did it care about the earth in the first place?  Having a non-organic enemy, I think it would have done them better to change the reason why it was there.  Of course, that would also involve rewriting the bulk of the story.  Better to have an organic enemy and leave it at that.  Even though man, the visual effects in that Tet were so sweet.  Also, why in the world would the thing use Tom Cruise against its own race?  Infiltration would have made sense, but having "him, pile out of the ships, by the thousands," as Morgan Freeman says... that just doesn't make sense.  Surely using robots or machines would have been more effective.  

   And finally, if you're going to have #52 come back at the end and be the same guy with the same mindset as #49, why would you also have him fight against #49 so hard when he's trying to stop the drone from coming back online?  Wouldn't #52 be a little more likely to jump on board with #49's cause?  I mean I know that's a fucked up thing to see, yourself, fighting against you, but I'm guessing neither of them had any affinity toward the drones, so why would #52 be so adamant about protecting one that wasn't even his?

   Even with all of that, I thought this was a fantastic movie.  Brilliantly told and portrayed, it takes its time yet has a great amount of action.  Could it have been better?  Yeah I suppose.  But I'd see it again, and even if you are a moron and read my review, thus spoiling a lot of the movie, you should see it too.

Hey guess what?  I'm cooking up another entry that doesn't have anything to do with movies -- but it's sort of sensitive, especially considering what we've gone through with Boston in the past week.  I'll probably write it up for next weekend, so stay tuned...

Wrecking The Green Zone (Movie Time)

Green Zone

   From Netflix:  U.S. Defense Intelligence Agent Clark Poundstone doesn't want to hear what Army Chief Warrant Officer Roy Miller has to say about not finding the weapons of mass destruction he's been sent to Iraq to unearth. Why the cover-up?

   My Take:  I'm behind on this one, and I'll admit I almost sent it back.  The problem with topical movies like this is once the topic is over, the movie loses some of its luster.  We didn't find WMD in Iraq.  I get it.  I remember.  But if you'll notice, no one cares anymore.  Hell, no one even cares about Iraq anymore.

   Quick sidetrack: remember when Iraq was a huge deal?  It was everywhere!  And then Obama was elected president, and suddenly everything just disappeared!  This had nothing to do with Obama, but it was a nice reminder of just how much power media has to shape our daily lives.  Iraq was tied to President Bush like a ball-and-chain.  It was "his war," and as soon as he left office, the interest in Iraq went out the window.  No more reporting on how things were going, the latest car bomb to explode, the successful turnout at elections, nothing.  And likewise, many of my friends who couldn't shut up about Iraq were suddenly trying to focus on something else to whine about.  That turned out to be Afghanistan, which has sort of become "Obama's war."  I just think it's very interesting how we move on as a society and how the media can shape everything we do.

   Okay back to the movie.  Like I said, I almost sent this one back because I figured it was going to be something that didn't really interest me.  But I have to say, I was pleasantly surprised.  First of all, Matt Damon has had a much better career since "Goodwill Hunting" than his buddy Ben, but he hasn't always hit homeruns.  He does here.  While he may not be as memorable a soldier as, say, Tom Hanks, he did play the role well and was believable all the way through.

   I really liked the way this movie was shot, and also the way everyone was playing sides against one another.  Sure you've seen plenty of movies where the CIA  is at odds with the government, but I can't think of a movie in recent history where the hatred between the two organizations was so palpable.  The casting was perfect, the dialogue was great, and what I liked most was that everyone had dirt on them, no one in this movie was perfect.  Not even Matt Damon's character.  While it might not leave you feeling as wholesome, it is a much more realistic interpretation of how people really are.

   My only complaint about this movie is that there is no reference to what really happened during these days.  If there was ever a movie that needed the text over black at the beginning or end, it was this one.  How close to reality was this movie?  Was it even based off of actual events?  Or was it completely fictional?  I think it's a filmmaker's responsibility to let the viewers know... especially if you're going to reference real-world events or use actual footage (like Bush on the aircraft carrier) to propel your message.  We need to know if you're doing an expose, or if you're just bullshitting something that could have happened.

   For being an older movie that is based on a very topical event, I think "Green Zone" holds its own pretty well.  At its core, it's a nice mysterious flick, full of unclean and not-wholesome people.  Lots of twists and turns, very gritty.  And enjoyable.

Wreck It Ralph

   From Netflix:  Wreck-It Ralph longs to be the good guy instead of the villain in an old-school video game. He sees his chance and sneaks into the arcade's newest game, a flashy first-person shooter. But in doing the forbidden, he unleashes a deadly enemy.

   My Take:  If there were ever a movie catered specifically for me, it was this one.  I'm so glad I got to grow up in the time I did, a time where I got a taste of the classic "arcades," a time where it actually made sense to go put a quarter in a machine (and just one quarter, mind you), because what you got was SO much better than the home gaming experience.  That's not the case anymore... now you go to arcades and you're like "really?  That's it?"  It's sad, but it was inevitable.

   "Wreck It Ralph" was in itself not the greatest movie ever.  It lacked the epicness of "Wall-E" or even "Up."  It had a nice message hidden within it, and it was a message that I think most kids would get.  But it just didn't feel like the movie I thought it was going to be.  The story was kinda meh, and most of it was spent in that candy game -- it just didn't cover a whole lot of ground.  But that's not to say it was all bad.

   The animation was very clean, and also really cool.  I love that they took the time to animate the different characters so closely to the games they portrayed (for example, older game characters moved jerky, or with lower frame rates).  The music was good, and the voice acting was spot on.  Some of the dialogue was a little rough, and honestly the special effects were sort of creepy.  If I had little kids and they were watching this, I might be a little upset because of the intensity of some of the weird effects.  

   But what really sold it for me were all the of the excellent tie-ins this movie accomplished.  There were just so many, and all of them were inserted so cleverly, it really was quite an accomplishment.  Seriously, everywhere you look is a tie-in... whether it's a character from a classic game, or "All your base belong to us" being spray-painted on a subway wall, these guys definitely knew their game.  Though I have to say, they did screw up the Contra code.  It's up-up-down-down-left-right-left-right-b-a-b-a-select-start (or select-select-start if you're playing two player).  For everything they nailed, that was a very important one.

   "Wreck It Ralph" was a great trip down memory lane, and it was a great way to explain what happens to video games when the arcade closes.  Hanging out in the surge protector?  Brilliant!  However, it never explored these ideas to their fullest.  It was a relatively short movie, which may have been by design, but I think if they had been allowed to let this story breathe a little bit, they could have had something truly epic on their hands.

More Than A Movie

You ever watch a movie and realize that it's way more than just a movie?  It either opens your eyes to something, reveals something interesting about the world or us or whatever?  Yeah, they're called documentaries.  But every now and then there are purely fictional, entertainment-driven movies that can do that same thing.  Sometimes they even do it by accident.

Olympus Has Fallen

   Take the recent Gerard Butler Ass-Kicking-Fest "Olympus Has Fallen."  It's about a secret service operative who has a scar in his past that he has struggled to get over, yet he is thrust into a situation where he is the only person standing between the bad guys and the annihilation of the United States.

   Let's get this out of the way right now.  This movie is terrible.  The only -- and I mean ONLY -- redeeming factor in this movie is that Gerard Butler beats the ever-living shit out of some folks.  But they seriously could have just cut the rest of the movie out and let us watch Butler knife, punch, and shoot his way through the White House and I would have been happy.  But no, they had to ruin it by trying to make some semblance of a story.  

   First of all, if one retro-fitted cargo plane can take down three F-22 Raptors, and kill hundreds of people as it circles D.C., then we are in serious trouble.  Honestly, other than the fact that they look badass, what good are F-22s if they get wrecked by a pelican from the 90s?  I love that North Koreans are initially blamed for this whole operation, but then the movie stealthily gets away from any "official" North Korean knowledge.  It's like "hey we want you all to hate North Korea, but we don't want to be blamed if something goes down between our two countries."  I'll hand it to them, considering how ham-fisted the rest of the movie was, that was a nice little bit of maneuvering.

   I'm shocked at the caliber of talent that agreed to take part in this pile of crap.  Aaron Ekhart?  Morgan Freeman?  I get Gerard... I mean if you told me I got to play a secret-service badass who beats the crap out of everyone, I'd be in that movie no matter how bad it was.  But these are top-notch actors playing roles that would be better suited for, oh I dunno, Michael Ironside maybe?  The dialogue was absolutely horrible.  I'll never forget one exchange between a group of soldiers standing outside the White House:

   Soldier: "Sir we're ready to move in with our forces right now!"

   Commander: "Okay but not until I give the order!"

   Soldier: "Yes Sir!"

Now in plain text, that looks pretty harmless I'll admit... but it was the most stilted, painfully awkward exchange I have EVER heard in a movie.  And I've seen a lot of Arnold Schwarzenegger movies.  It's like they found two chumps on the street, slapped uniforms on them, and fed them lines from just off camera.  

   They couldn't even get real military gear to help them with this movie.  If nothing else, this could have been a nice sales piece for the military, showing off their fancy new hardware and letting us watch as the incredible White House Defense System shredded everyone and everything.  But no, they had to CGI all of the military hardware, except for the beat up old trucks that they used to transport in the troops.  Maybe some of the technology was "classified" (i.e. fake), but still, come on guys.

   Now to the WORST part about this movie.  In a rare turn of events, I decided to watch this one in theaters.  I'm always a little on the fence about that, preferring to watch movies at home whenever possible... but I decided what the hell I'll give it a shot.  I'm glad I did, because it was a mind-blowingly disturbing look at where our society is today.  Forget the fact that the theater was jam-packed with everything from fat people, to little kids, to groups that look like they came out of the woods to check out the fancy technology civilization had developed.  Forget the fact that all of them (and I) were duped out of 12 bucks to watch a piece of crap.  What really shook me was the way the audience as a whole reacted to this movie.  The guy directly in front of me was particularly vocal, so I'll use him as an example.

   1) The North Koreans punch the President: "uh uh!  UH UH!"

   2) Butler stabs a North Korean in the throat: "YEAH!  Get that bastard!"

   3) The President makes a bold move assuring everyone they will never get his code: "That's RIGHT!"

Again, I'm writing this and seeing that there's something lost in the translation.  But my point is, this was the most emotionally involved crowd I have ever seen in my life.  Literally thousands of people were brutally killed in this movie, and it was a TERRIBLE movie, and yet the crowd was totally into it!  They cheered when Butler killed North Koreans, they shouted when the North Koreans killed Americans, it's like they were watching something real unfold.

   And that's when it hit me.  This country, our society, is ready for war with North Korea.  It appeared that nothing brought them more pleasure than watching us beat the crap out of their little strike team.  I've seen a lot of action movies... a lot of action movies about war... and I've never seen an audience so into the idea.

   So this terrible, awkward, ridiculous movie, was actually a positive experience for me.  It opened my eyes to the state of our union right now, as it stands with North Korea anyway.  Of course there's a pretty big margin of error, and this was certainly not a scientific poll.  Maybe I'm just grasping at straws, trying to justify how I could have spent 12 bucks on such a terrible, awful, waste of my time.

Samsara

   The IMDB description for this movie says it was filmed over about five years in a bunch of different countries.  The whole thing was shot on 70mm film, which I understand to mean it is shot at a higher resolution than your average movie.  I believe it.  If you have a badass TV, this is a great way to show it off.

   The visuals in this movie are absolutely stunning.  The music is stirring.  There is no VO track.  No real "story."  At its core, it's just a collection of random, beautiful shots.  But there is a story weaved in there, as certain shots definitely lead to others and an overall message and theme starts to develop.  But the visuals are what really sell it here.  I consider my TV to be pretty awesome, and I only saw one or two shots where the noise in the dark areas became apparent.  And seriously it was probably the blu-ray compression more than the movie itself.  

   I do, of course, have a couple of complaints.  This movie does get repetitive.  I understand that the film makers were most likely trying to bring things home by showing us some of the same stuff they'd shown us before, but when there is no defined story it can get to a point where, as a viewer, you're like "seen it."  Also, because there was no defined story, I honestly found myself forgetting what I had just seen.  The movie assaults your brain, and while that is good, I do think they would have benefitted from some kind of break-up in the action... something that works as a change-over for us.  But that's debatable... there's definitely something to be said for the pure form that they went with.  No story, just the world.

   The worst part though is the mechanic of having people stare longingly, frozen, right into the camera.  It works well in some instances, like when we see a poor little girl who has been rummaging through garbage, turn and look at us.  Look through us.  But after 10 or 11 times, that concept gets a bit stilted.  The worst one for me was when we had a family standing in their garage, each of them holding a gun, and the little girl holding a rifle with a pink stock.  For literally one solid minute they just stand there, staring into the camera.  I don't get it.  I mean I get what they were going for, but that felt like wasted time.  

   This movie, like "Olympus," transcended the movie itself and moved me.  Though while "Olympus" moved me to ask for a refund, this film moved me to really think about the world.  On the one hand it made me feel very small, like what in the hell is my life worth when this is all going on around us?  On the other hand it was an awesome way to look at the world, most of which I will probably never see otherwise.

   I'll probably pick this movie up just so I have something to play in the TV during the next party.  That is, of course, if we're not having a mad dance-off.

I leave you with this.