ClownCarBlog.com

(UPDATE) Like A Bite From A Fresh Cow Patty

Weird Wednesday is upon us again. The 10pm offering is once again something too horrible to describe. A REMAKE, no less...

UPDATE: I was informed, not about tonight's Walken flick specifically, but about

THIS CRIME AGAINST HUMANITY

... about bloodthirsty insane apes or something. As if that changes anything. It's for 9/22. Juggle your calendars now.

Sunday Dinner a la Uber

For all who were extended an invite and saw fit to clean the sock drawer instead, you missed an exemplary feed at chez Uber, featuring Chicken Uber, Green Beans Uber and Bread Uber.

You should have been there and were not; I therefore fart in your general direction. Fortunately, not only did I posess an invite but I was motivated to be on the west side due to a certain criminal investigation going down on the east side...

And I once again took this opportunity to phone Ulysses for the Uber phone number, which I had anyway but still called for, in line with my traditional request of Ulysses to provide unpredictable items of info at inopportune times. This reminds me of the time I called him at 9pm on a Tuesday night and asked if he knew if Loudon Wainright had covered "Nineteenth Nervous Breakdown" or not. Or if he knew the song set of the opener band at the Communist Party's nomination convention this year. Or if he had a connection in the SCO Unix company, in order to satisfy my curiousity about certain dirty limericks in the comment sections of a few out-of-the-way video configuration files.

We now return to our regularly scheduled programming.

Good Gravy!

First this offensive toy, then this follows. Criminey! What next, Cracker Jacks boxes with cheap tattoos depicting Auschwitz?

How did your favorites do?

IMDB Bottom 100

Penguin Prostitution

Pick up a penguin

On some occasions the prostitute penguins trick the males. They carry out the elaborate courtship ritual, which usually leads to mating.

Having bagged their stone, they would then run off.

"The courtship display is a head-bowing display," Dr Hunter said. "It usually starts with the male, who bows his head and looks out the corner of his eye."

She said she does not think the female penguins are doing it just for the stones.

"The female only takes one or two stones," she said. "It takes hundreds to build the nest to get their eggs off the ground.

"I think what they are doing is having copulation for another reason and just taking the stones as well. We don't know exactly why, but they are using the males."

She said the female penguins could also be testing potential future mates, in case their existing partner died before the next mating period.

The single male penguins appeared to have only their own pleasure as a motive.

I'm truly speechless upon reading this.

Rock Stars Today

Dave Matthews Band Could Face Criminal Charges

This is the problem with younger bands today (yes, I'm calling Dave Matthews "young"): they can't even do the cool Rock & Roll stuff like their elders. Take Ozzy Osbourne, for example ... pissed on The Alamo & got banned from San Antonio for it. While I think there's a place in hell for him for pissing on The Alamo, a certain part of me has to admire the resoluteness of his convictions. The man stood up, unzipped his pants, said "I am rock star, hear me pee" and lived with the consequences. The Eagles, hardly hard rockers they, at least have tales to tell about pouring water on TVs, tossing TVs from hotel balconies into swimming pools, etc ....

But Dave Matthews' bus driver merely deposits their tour bus' waste-water over a bridge, leaving several Chicago-area architectural enthusiasts a little stenched up.

Sorry, guys ... that just doesn't cut it. That doesn't spell "Cool Anti-Social Behavior," it says your a bunch of yuppies who thought the bus was smelling a little foul and didn't care to take notice of the fact that there were people below your bus' bathroom.

Kids today .....

Geek Horoscopes

Thank goodness for the randomly generated Geek Horoscopes at BBSpot:

The Brown Bunny

Confusing ...

Sevigny Explains Graphic Scene in New Film

NEW YORK -- Actress Chloe Sevigny says a notoriously graphic sex scene in "The Brown Bunny," which opens Friday in New York and Los Angeles, will make "more sense" after audiences see it for themselves.

"I knew people would not understand it," Sevigny told The Associated Press. "It's a shame people write so many things when they haven't seen it. When you see the film, it makes more sense. It's an art film. It should be playing in museums. It's like an Andy Warhol movie."

The explicit oral-sex scene, which has garnered all sorts of attention since the movie's premiere, occurs between Sevigny and Vincent Gallo, who also wrote, directed and edited the film. Gallo shot the scene using remote cameras while he and Sevigny were alone in the room.

"This particular scene is the most complex, it's the most evolved thing that I've ever done in my life," Gallo said at a news conference during the 2003 Cannes Film Festival.

Sevigny, 29, has an eclectic acting resume that includes "Kids," "Boys Don't Cry" and "American Psycho." She can next be seen in the HBO drama series "Big Love" and Woody Allen's "Melinda and Melinda," scheduled for release next year.

"I've always made films that are sort of avant-garde-y or whatever you call it," she told the AP last week at the opening of the Hard Rock Cafe inside Foxwoods Resort and Casino in Mashantucket, Conn.

WTF??? This better be the Citizen Kane of blowjob scenes, because lemme tell you ... I've seen a few shots of porn in my time and there is absolutely nothing complex or evolved about it in similar scenes.

UPDATE: There's this from the Landmark email list (flick opens on 9/17 here in Houston) ...

Last year, Vincent Gallo's unfinished film was perhaps the most controversial ever screened at the Cannes Film Festival. The finished film became a hit at the Toronto Film Festival and won the prestigious International Critic's Prize at the Viennale. Gallo's visual poem to a lost America tells the story of Bud Clay (Gallo), a man so haunted by the loss of his true love, Daisy (Chloë Sevigny), that he travels across the country desperately trying to forget her. Building to a notorious climax, the film presents one of the frankest portrayals of male sexuality ever seen in American cinema. No one under 18 admitted.

Matt Groenings Portland

Holy Crap, this is cool ... Matt Groening has famously ripped off his hometown of Portland for names and places to incorporate into TV's The Simpsons. But this gives a more graphical version of the story and its pretty fun to play with.

Agitprop for Elites

Musings on Murkier Aspects of Humans, War and Politics

Didn't we all just know that the outgrowth of Michael Moore's revived propoganda artform would make its way to the next level of portrayal: THEATER!?!?!?

Well I never would have guessed it, but then again, I never would have contemplated the concept of "John Walker: The Musical," a glorification of the life and times of John Walker Lindh ... erstwhile Taliban member from California.

But put all that aside for now, because here's one play listed in this alternate gaggle that really has my interest:

Irrepressible Goofball But, Please, Not a Victim
'Gork! The Retard Always Wins'
Next Stage

When Autumn Terrill calls her developmentally disabled brother a retard in her new solo show, "Gork! The Retard Always Wins," some of the more politically correct audience members might feel a little uncomfortable, but that of course is precisely the point. For much of her lovingly crafted and occasionally indulgent performance piece, Ms. Terrill, a good-humored Midwestern blonde, offers a joking portrait of her brother that uses humor to demystify the disabled. She can't stand the sentimental treatment of the mentally ill that we've come to expect from Hollywood or a television movie of the week. Through a series of cute anecdotes and precise physical and vocal tics, a vivid picture of Adam emerges as a confident and irrepressible goofball who refuses to see himself as a victim.

In between stories of family spats, she performs gently satirical scenes of a stuffy psychiatrist trying to diagnose what's wrong with Adam. The whole show has the tone of a late-night bull session in the family den. Ms. Terrill even shows home videos, which will increase your appreciation of her imitation of her brother, who resembles a chubbier version of the lead character in the current film "Napoleon Dynamite.'' In one extended sequence, he stomps around an empty stadium twirling a flag like a drunken cheerleader. Ms. Terrill advises us early on, "Trust me: you can laugh.''

This show cannot get to Houston fast enough for my taste. Be sure to check the Multimedia show on this story. From the dead-tree version, I'll attest to the fact that Autumn Terrill is a looker. While normally all the selling point I'd need, I'm sold on material content of the show, as well. Check out the production company's website also ... it offers a video clip of the subject himself and mentions news of a documentary forthcoming in 2005.

Sweet!

The Long Shadow Of Francis Albert

Bill Zehme's 1997 book about F.A.S. (THE WAY YOU WEAR YOUR HAT: Frank Sinatra and the Lost Art of Livin') is one to which I return often for recalibration of all kinds. One story is one regarding "Omerte", or silence among friends. As Bogart originally intoned during the Holmby Hills rat pack days, "Never rat on a rat". Sinatra and later, Dean Martin, took the words to heart. Those two had been a little loud in a bar and when leaving, another patron on the way out said "there goes the two loud Dagos". Punches were quickly thrown (Martin following FAS in quick support); beat cops arrived. According to an eyewitness, Martin told the cops "I just turned around and saw this guy laying there, passed out on the floor. And since that's usually me, I didn't pay any attention."

Omerte.

Wired Java Cafe

I was in for a treat tonight. The strip shopping center up the road, which has been under construction for the better part of 5 months, has started yielding fruit. The first juicy plum to be picked is the Wired Java coffee house & internet cafe. At first glance, this little corner store features a dark interior, comfy sofas & chairs, free WiFi and a few free terminals in the back. The menu board showcases standard fare for a coffee house, with a small dessert selection in a coldcase at the front. They also serve appetizer-style foods, which I didn't sample tonight. Friday & Saturday nights they also have live music, with a stage setup in the back corner.

Tonight's experience included a hot chai latte which was kind of weak on the chai mix, a tasty caramel macchiato coffee and a strawberry-mango smoothie which was originally going to be just mango, but they ran out of mango mix. The clientele varied in age, and since they just opened this week, will probably evolve. Since there is no alcohol served, there are people of all ages running about. The bar also had a rather spirited game of NTN trivia going on at the front couch section. I staked out a table, plopped the trusty work laptop down and proceeded to go through the bandwidth. The WiFi was strong, free and easy to connect to, which is always a plus. No passwords or WEP keys here. I arrived around 9:00, which is when the band started. Tonight's band was a 4-piece blues combo going by the name of "Ramzus". The band's first set was somewhat unsteady, perhaps due to a fill-in at bass and the configuring of the sound board for the new venue. But in the second and final set, the band was jamming. They brought on a kid who was perhaps all of 17, and the 5 of them proceeded to make some swank tunes. They covered some Clapton favorites of mine, which I showed my appreciation for. The singing was a little weak, but that's something they could clear up just by bringing on someone who has a decent blues voice *cough yooohoooo cough*

If you're up in the Cypress area and are looking for some tasty coffee without supporting the Starbucks chain, give Wired Java a try. They're on Barker Cypress Rd. about 2.2 miles west of Hwy 290. The shopping center is hard to miss. And if you see an advertisement for Ramzus around your neighborhood, give them a shot as well.

Explored Realms of Crap

So the Alamo showed "Don't Go In The House" from 1979, a tale of a nobody who was burn-tortured by mom for being bad for his whole childhood, and whose later life shows some sort of strain stemming from these experiences. Wow. Random females are flame-broiled with a Vietnam-era flamethrower, etc. D-.

Unexplored Realms of Crap

OK, so last night, I taped a copy of ABC's "The Best TV Shows That Never Were." The easiest call on here for most craptacular show/movie concept was a show called "Fuzz Bucket." Right off the bat, I'm thinking what a cool name for a basset hound that'd make. But then they rolled tape. Oh man ... the imaginary creature is something like an overgrown possum, but the kicker (there's a kicker in a line about an overgrown possum???) is that they try to make it cute, adorable, and lovable. Huge problem ... its a freakin' possum!!! It was so bad, it must be located and viewed by local clowns for whatever punishment we truly deserve.

Perhaps to noone's surprise, the actor who played Fuzz Bucket himself was also cast in "The Garbage Pail Kids Movie." Dude also played a Star Wars ewok, was cast in Troll ... as a troll, and even one of the lovable midgets in a fave of mine: Under the Rainbow (perhaps not Chevy Chase's best movie, but it WAS Billy Barty's!)

Mark my words ... one day, Fuzz Bucket will be released on DVD. That, my friends, will be the sweetest day in the history of the world. Oh ... and the day I ever get a basset hound to name Fuzz Bucket will be pretty sweet, too.

A few other offerings via the show last night:

Uber's Scathing Rocky Review

Much like the show on 8/14, this one is not going to be pretty...

After about a 3-month hiatus, I ventured down to Webster to see the latest offering from Sadistic Pleasures. Let's just say I was not impressed. It was an adequate show, but by no means a barnburner. Another attendee reported that this show was better than other recent shows. And in looking at the cast, there has been a lot of turnover of performers due to various reasons. The rustiness of some of the cast showed, but that is to be expected. There was just something else keeping this show from being what it could have been. Perhaps there was a bad vibe from being in a different house in the theater. Or perhaps the cast just wasn't drunk enough.

Preshow Entertainment (The Brads performing "Wig in a Box"): A+. I really do like your chemistry together. Jim on guitar is Jim at his most reserved, which is a nice contrast from crackbaby, bouncing-off-the-walls Jim. It throws the audience for a loop when they see the same guy who was strumming his guitar behind Jeff start going crazy later in the night as Riff. While Jeff's singing isn't the strongest in the world, he has a good look to add to this combo. Don't get me wrong, he's tone-deaf like other Rocky alumni who have sung in bands. Just remember, your diaphragm is your friend.

Preshow Speech (Carlos): D-. The only way this would have been worse is if goat-boy had started stuttering in spanish. Come on, Carlos! At least have the basic points memorized. Or failing that, bring up some notecards. That's actually an idea for a preshow I have been wondering about. What if someone were to go full-on schoolmarm to the drooling masses and presented the rules in a slower, more organized manner. Of course this would require a nice short plaid skirt, half-buttoned starched white shirt and horned-rimmed glasses. Subtly could sometimes be a nice contrast. Just don't put Carlos up there in the skirt...

And now on to the main stage performers:

Trixie (Marcus): A-. Let me just state that I dislike male Trixies. I really enjoy a lovely lady up there warming up the crowd. However, Marcus is one heck of a performer, and can make me forget this bias. Always inventive in costuming and makeup, it shows that he has a background and future in theater. Of all the entries to the cast in the last year, I think he stands above and beyond all others.

Frank (Jeff): A-. Jeff has become one of my favorite Franks in the last year. He's refined his look to stand out more when he's on stage and is one of the better performers at using body language to his advantage. A little rustiness from not performing in a while, but that should shake off and change the - to a + in no time.

Brad (Carlos): B. Carlos just doesn't work for me in this role. I know he's been playing this role more often lately, but I really don't like his jokester attitude as Brad. I like my Brads to play as straight-laced as possible, perhaps taking the uptightness to a self-parodying degree. Carlos does better in this role than others, but he's by no means the best Brad out there.

Janet (Liz): C-. I've said it before and I'll say it again, Liz really needs to do something to make herself stand out when she's on stage. She just has no stage presence about her. I'm sure taking a few months off didn't help matters any, either. Janet's a hard character in that I feel she shows the most change throughout the movie, moving from the shy, demure girl to a more outspoken woman.

Riff (Jim): D- for old times sake...just kidding. He gets an A. Jim is always a delight to watch onstage. The one problem is that Jim has this little little that flips on when there's a great show going on around him. This switch kicks Jim into high gear, where I think nobody can touch him in this role. Unfortunately, this show wasn't strong enough to flip the switch. Still one of the strongest performers in SP.

Magenta (Allie): C+. A hard grade to give, but I just didn't enjoy the performance that much. I have seen her do better, but this time she was just kind of flat. A few times I saw her just standing there grinning. Magenta just doesn't grin that much. Again, I have to say rust had a lot to do with this performance, because I haven't seen her on cast lists that much. The chemistry I look for between Riff & Magenta just wasn't there to the degree that I have come to expect.

Columbia (Lindsay): B+. Mesmerized....by.....giant.....knockers..... Now that may be rude, but it's all too true. After her recent return from Italy, Lindsay shows she still has some good Columbia performances in her. A bit rusty, thus the lower than normal grade, but that will get knocked off with time. Her dance skills really come in handy in this role, as she does more during the dances than flail her arms about wildly.

Rocky (Fly): C. A decent debut performance, but there's room for improvement. I didn't see anything to make him stand out from the rest of the cast. He has a decent look for Rocky (lanky boy who's decently built). Body language goes a million miles for this character with minimal lines.

Eddie (Kenneth): D+. Wow, just amble around the aisle, why don't you? In my eyes, there's only one way to play Eddie: balls to the wall, 100% for 5 minutes. That's all you get. 5 whopping minutes to make an impact, so you better make a lasting one. Put it all out on the line, and hold nothing back.

Dr. Scott (Kenneth): C+. Talk about a disappointment. Not in you, Kenny. I mean, it was an adequate job in a very limited role. However, I came expecting to see the master, Pete, in this role. Also, poor work on the part of the person running main spot really hurt your big moment in the sun in the middle of floorshow. I've seen you playing this role before, and think you put more energy into it when you didn't have to pull double duty. As it is, concentrate on making one role your own, then move onto others.

Crim (John A): A-. It's Crim, for goodness sake. What is there to really say?

Well, that wraps up the individual reviews. Trannies get an F-- for being nonexistant, and the spotlight person gets an F for incomplete work.

Think I'm king of the assholes? Then you just don't remember when Greg used to do these things...

Review: Garden State

I have to admit, there hasn't been much I've really been looking forward to viewing at the gogolplex this summer. Sure, there has been the occasional popcorn movie I've enjoyed. And yes, Napoleon Dynamite just might turn into a cult classic before it's all said and done. But one film I've been looking forward to since the day I first watched the teaser trailer has been "Garden State". Written by, directed by and starring Zach Braff (of TV's "Scrubs" fame), this is one of those films that will appeal highly to one generation. In this case, mid to late 20-somethings are the object of the cinema's affection. And wouldn't you just know it, that's the age group some people put me in!

If you go into this film expecting a movie version of "Scrubs", you will be sadly disappointed. While Braff did inject some of that brand of humor into his screenplay, this movie is a fantastic example of a problem I think plagues our generation: the overmedication of youth. The main character, Andrew (or "Large" to his friends), is someone who has been doped up with anti-depressants since he was 10. After 16 years of lithium, Xanax, Paxil and other assorted happy pills, the character is basically a walking zombie. Summoned home to New Jersey from his life in California, Andrew takes himself off his medication. You may guess that it's not all sunshine and roses from this point, as he rekindles friendships with old friends, meets a kook of a girl and starts to feel human again. The plot is simple, folks. There are no big twists here. Go look for that in the googolplex down the street.

Natalie Portman, who I have admired since her debut in Leon: The Professional, turns in a spectacular performance as Sam, the somewhat whacked-out girl. Between exhibiting her poor hamster-caretaking abilities and a penchant for kicking dogs in the nether-regions, she drags Andrew out of his shell without trying too much. Portman's smile goes a long way to offsetting the expressionless Andrew, and turns out to be a good foil for him. Just like everyone in this film, the character isn't perfect. But Portman managed to show an energy in the performance I hadn't seen from her in a while. It's nice to know that Lucas didn't crush her spirit altogether.

One of the ideas brought up by Andrew mid-movie is the concept of home. Now this is where the movie really hit me with a sucker punch. Andrew theorizes that the concept of home really disappears in your 20s. Sure, you have a place to keep your stuff, but it isn't your home. Home for his character disappeared when he moved out. That's the way I have felt in the last few years. For me, the concept of home disappeared when I went to college. Even today, I have no feeling of home when I walk through the doors of my house. I know that I could leave at any minute, and really not be missed from there. Sure, there would be friends who would question my disappearance, but it would take days or even weeks for them to realize I was gone. I later talked with some of my coworkers about this concept. They all agreed that home really didn't feel like home anymore, and that there was no place we could call home right now. There is the place where our parents live, but it's not our home. We each own a house, but it's not home either. Perhaps we will, as Andrew puts it, find someone else who misses that concept of home and bring it back to life. But my coworkers and I all agreed that it would take someone very special to make a home for any of us.

Here's the lowdown on Garden State: Zach Braff has an ear for dialogue he picked up from his days on "Scrubs". If you like the offbeat give and take you see on that show, he makes liberal use of it here. And it's a movie you will probably laugh many times throughout. However, if you're a single 20-something, you might just laugh all the way through the movie, only to come out depressed. It's not going to be the next great American movie, but it beats much of the claptrap you will have shoveled at you during the summer.

The Sacred Harp: Another Clown Calling

First, a note of irony: I've run into two former Rocky Horror types in the course of 8 days. First, the Amazing Randy was encountered. Note to self: I need to call him about the Wednesday movie. And right now, I'm typing alongside the Equally Amazing Jonathan.

I'm also being pitched on a play running at Barnevelder: The Sacred Harp - a southern gothic play.

It runs for two more weekends: 8/20,21,27,28 ... 8pm all nights.

Ulysses will recall Barnevelder from All That Jaws. Not dissimilar, this play will incorporate the usual dancing, singing, and other sounds of joy. I'm also told there's a musical scene involving a slaughterhouse hoe-down. I'm thinking we need to carve out some time for this one.

Worst Movie Of Its Decade

... whichever one it's considered in. The film ANTITRUST (Ryan Phillipe, Tim Robbins 2000) is a disaster in every manner in which it treats its subject. A fictional treatment of a dishonest software company magnate's project methodology, its thesis is that such successful companies literally steal the code from cleverly murdered programmers. If you put ANY stock in such conspiracy theories, perhaps one should go back to school and start over.

What a more robust film treatment may one day show is that the field of information technology is one in which, regardless of formats, protocols or platforms and regardless of proprietary or open source coding, it's possible for both good and bad ideas to have their say, and for the advocates of same to reap the rewards and/or suffer the consequences that result. Fictional conspiracies do not add to our understanding of the above.

Clown Gathering Alert

Weird Wednesday: Don't Go In The House

How can you lose with this:

Released in 1980, this slasher B-flick is full of wanton violence and features a horrendous disco music soundtrack. The plot involves Donny Kohler, your average young man who just happens to have been burned on the stove by his mother every time he was naughty as a child. Until he comes home one day to find his mother has died. Freed from her overbearing clutches, he decides there is only one thing to do. Stalk women and burn them alive with a flamethrower! This is Weird Wednesday schlock at its best!

Wednesday, the 18th ... 10pm ... Free admission ... be there. Oh, and I need a ride home ;-)

Which of you's been BUSY?

Hmm.

The Mother of All Zombie Movies?

Zombie Pic Utilizes Post-Nuke Vibe

No, not just any zombie flick ... its "Return of the Living Dead 4: Necropolis." And that's not even the coolest part ... the truly coolest part is that the filming is taking place in Chernobyl.

*drool*

Secret Agent Tourist?

So some guy with a Pakistani passport was just caught with a camcorder full of very sober shots of urban vistas in Dallas, Austin, Atlanta, etc. - and inconveniently, he allegedly has connections to some baddies and also acted defensively (not touristy) when questioned in the act of being a private citizen photographer.

Thought: if it takes 5 years to plan a major attack and you've got volunteers, amateurs and third-world types with which to work, you need the element of surprise. Without that, it's harder to use Richard Reid - style shoe bombers effectively, even if they light the fuse correctly. Not to say that guys who have no cover story prepared, no acting ability and who can't shoot straight STILL can't be dangerous, but the rank lack of professionalism in shall we say, foreign intel organizations may prove a big advantage to the West.

Movie Review: The Village

I'll start off by stating that, much like Ulysses' review, spoilers are included. So beware ...

------------------
Worth noting that after the initial draft of this review, I stumble upon a point raised in the aforementioned review that I thought worth exploring: the concept of evil arising from innocence. However, due to an utterly craptacular day at the office, I'm unable to explore that point in depth here. In place of it, I enter my initial take on the movie with further exploration on the above point to be posted tonight.
------------------

Starting with the big picture of things, I'll say I liked this movie ... moreso than I thought I might ... and despite knowing precious little of the surprises in store for me as a viewer. Despite the movie being pimped with the name of the director, M. Night Shyamalan - one whom I've not viewed his previous big releases, the trailers at least built up a decent amount of mystery and intrigue. With a few good horror movies on the horizon, I opted to put my toe in the pool and test the waters for this latest onslaught (The Grudge and The Exorcist prequel also seem appealing).

The buzz is this: it's a "message movie." Back in the old days, it used to be called Science Fiction, but there's nothing really science-fictiony about this flick. Shyamalan borrows most heavily from Rod Serling, so the proximity this movie has to a well-done Twilight Zone movie is not unintentional. As for how it compares, I count it as a mix ... in some regards, its a nicely updated version of a Twilight Zone-ish story, but the execution is done poorly compared to the master.

Ulysses hits on one point worth putting in the debit column: there's a sense of predictableness to this movie. Not unlike Ulysses, I thought the vagueness to which the elders utilized town names and even more vaguely referenced 'those that were not spoken of' that there was a setup in the process. My first hunch was that the outside world had to be something more recognizable to us modern types. The comic within me kept thinking it'd be great if they were safely ensconced within South Central LA. But then I realized the movie would seem really crappy - as was the case when this very theme was played out in the recent Brady Bunch movies. I at least felt it would be a worthwhile idea if the contrast was something more civilized than a freakin' wildlife refuge, as it turned out to be. I'll credit Shyamalan with being cohesive, if not creative.

The reason I don't think the contrast works as well in the movie is that when "the secret" is out, we see a picture of the elders that may as well be Peoria, IL, circa 1950. Is that really the stark contrast of modernity that we're supposed to feel? In the end, I just didn't buy it. OK, so all of the elders had a tragic experience in their previous lives that forced them to create The Village. I get that part. But why go from the depiction of a modern small town to a colonial style village enclave? Its one of several loose ends left exposed at the end of the movie. I felt this movie might have a host of loose ends upon immediate reflection. One that I have to credit to my own confusion perhaps: the situation with William Hurt's character and Ivy's mom. So he refuses to touch the woman despite some obvious feelings between them. Am I to think this is fitting with the meme of self deprivation? Maybe. Personally, I felt there was perhaps about 10 minutes of character development that could have been devoted to those two. Or perhaps a second viewing on my part ... dunno.

As for the bulk of "the message," this is admittedly where the movie is exciting. Not because of the movie itself, but because of the conversation and debate it sparks. Take Ulysses' wordy review as Exhibit A. Take my meandering review of a movie I was kinda on the fence with as Exhibit B. One major point I will applaud this movie for: the casting of Ivy ... HOT! Even in colonial-style garb.

The burning question from all of this is, I think, exactly what drives Ulysses nuts in his review: WHAT IS THE MESSAGE? Is it that big "towns" are evil and small "villages" are safe havens? This seems to be the easy-to-grasp answer. But its just that obviousness that drives many of the rest of us who cannot live without contemplating such things as a 100 minute movie to fits of outrage.

I'll go with a dose of Uly's own spin: that each new generation faces the shackles of previous generations. Why do I go with this? The segment where the park security officer deals with his seen-only-from-behind coworker (performed by Shyamalan), we get a small dose of how the village was secured ... in other words, you see how the older generation of park security shackles the younger security officer today. Its but a minor point that amplifies the more ongoing, but seemingly chaotic message that we see back in the village.

One quick sidetrack on those loose ends ... this one bothers me: the scene with Noah donning the monster outfit and harassing Ivy in the woods. If Noah has discovered this outfit accidentally, I'm led to believe he's not been "in the know" on this whole elders-as-monsters gambit. YET HE ACTS AND BEHAVES JUST LIKE EVERY OTHER MONSTER WE SAW! Another is this ... the small animal maimings left to be discovered. This is one of the niftier elements used throughout, but there's still a loose end. We see a town meeting where one of the villagers (an elder? I don't recall) tries to convince us that the animals are being maimed by a wolf, not one of "those who we don't speak of" types. Sorry, I missed the point in all of that.

One excellent feature of the movie, the use of the redheads (Ivy, in particular) as symbolic of the color red being the "bad color." It has a dose of obviousness and subtlety that I love seeing in movies. Doesn't hurt that I love redheads, too. The power of the symbolism comes into play, I suggest, when we see evil approaching Ivy (as the monsters are supposedly attracted to all things red throughout). A monster approaches Ivy's house just as Lucious arrives to join them. Noah-as-monster approaches Ivy as she heads out to the town, and we get a nice little bit of suspense as we see the blind Ivy standing in a patch of the red berries that dot the forest. I'm not sure Shyamalan's use of symbollism qualifies as masterful, but its at least better done than most others in the major release business.

In the end, the debate that ought to rage is whether or not the real message of this movie is generational or geographical. I'm not sure if I go so far as Ulysses in reading a Patriot Act rant in this, but its debatable. First impression is that its just a standard need of "an enemy to unite us" that Shyamalan is employing. That can read just as easily as a Cold War statement as it could a Patriot Act commentary, and I'm more inclined to think that it would have been a stronger statement had it been made in Serling's era than today. That said, this movie also would have been better had it been made by Serling himself. But as a fan of most every musical band that ripped off Van Halen back in the 80s, there's a place for imitation, and Shyamalan doesn't do too badly on his own. With Shyamalan's name being the primary billing name on the promo, look for more attempts in this vein. Eventually, I suspect he'll find his own stride.

The Latest In Film

... that I've seen, anyway:

THUNDERBIRDS -
The live-action redux of the 60's marionette children's show is concieved as kid programming as well, though with pretty plausible appearances and renditions of hardware and procedure - for a kids' show. As in the old days, it's a mix of positives and negatives; the positive attitudes and exitement of big rockets and jets is counterbalanced by the age-old quandry of the superhero's motivation. Where it's not necessary to doubt the appeal to kids of flying cars and green goo-shooting fire engines, there's a lack of underlying argument as to why a family should sequester itself on an island and dedicate itself to rescuing people due to some "duty". The plausibility of personal or justified motive is done sometimes with appointment (as in Batman with deputization by Com. Gordon) or pseudo-immortality (as in Superman) or medical circumstance (as in Spider-Man), and the Thunderbirds Group could have used a shot of some such approach. But what's there is pretty good, as the uncontroversial saving of the innocent relieves conflict after conflict. Good integration of the CGI with the live, and good use of CGI to convey senses of speed. B+

THE NIGHT STALKER (Darren McGavin, Elisha Cook, Jr. 1971) -
Marginally interesting time capsule that should have been more powerful. Produced by Dan "Dark Shadows" Curtis and written by sci-fi vet Richard "I Am Legend" Matheson, the Vegas-setting tale of a modern vampire had a lot going for it. I remembered it as having been the best thing in made-for-TV Halloween stuff in its decade, but lately I've judged any non-Christopher Lee creeper as a bit lacking. C+

Just to make UZ & Ralphie's head explode...

Sadly, I'll be consuming free beer on Saturday night. Perhaps some other clowns will be in attendance...

Saturday, August 7th: 7:30 pm
OUTFOXED: RUPERT MURDOCH'S WAR ON JOURNALISM
Directed by: Robert Greenwald

"Outfoxed" examines how media empires, led by Rupert Murdoch's Fox News, have been running a "race to the bottom" in television news. This film provides an in-depth look at Fox News and the dangers of ever-enlarging corporations taking control of the public's right to know. This documentary also reveals the secrets of Former Fox news producers, reporters, bookers and writers who expose what it's like to work for Fox News. These former Fox employees talk about how they were forced to push a "right-wing" point of view or risk their jobs. Some have even chosen to remain anonymous in order to protect their current livelihoods. As one employee said "There's no sense of integrity as far as having a line that can't be crossed."

The film will be screened at the Rice Media Center.

Rice Cinema is located on the Rice University Campus at entrance #8: Univeristy Blvd. and Stockton Dr.

For more information see houston.indymedia.org.

The Village

It is advised that if you haven't seen The Village, you should wait to read this until after.

**SPOILER ALERT**

I believe M. Night Shyamalan has made his first "message" movie with the Village. The question is whether this film is an indictment of urban living and its attendant dangers, or if it's cleverly subverting that very idea as a means of refuting it. If it's the former, then M. Night is a deluded, leftist-utopian dreamer whose film is constantly up-ended by his desire to be ambiguous and is remarkable only in that it is somewhat less preachy than, say, The Day After Tomorrow; if it's the latter, then he's at least a realist, but this film is still a mess.

I want to give Shyamalan the benefit of the doubt that he had a single perspective in this film, but I wonder whether he is relying too strongly on the goodwill of discerning moviegoers. Frankly, there are few films worth contemplating these days and it's a welcome relief to attend one whose implications simmer well beyond the post-film cup o' joe. But that's no excuse for making an addled mess that takes longer to untangle than the Gordian knot. Indeed, I am tempted to take a hacksaw of considerable (ex)calibur to it in this review, but nevertheless, I'll be as patient as I can.

The film concerns a close-knit group of simple people who live their lives in an isolated village: idyllic, except for the occasional threat of red-cloaked monsters that roam the perimeter and keep the villagers cowed. Lucius, a brave member of the younger generation, yearns to go beyond the border for the betterment of this clan and, when he is stabbed almost to death, his blind bride-to-be Ivy does in fact venture forth through Covington Woods into "the towns" to procure medical assistance.

Now, I've warned about spoilers, so don't be alarmed when I start unloading these salient plot points. There really isn't any mystery to this film and it likely suffers because its creator has developed a reputation as rather a one-trick pony: he like-y the surprise ending! Well, unfortunately, he also has viewers on the lookout for any such twists and one is wary of accepting anything that happens at face value. For that reason, and to my regret, I had figured out almost immediately that the villagers were not actually keeping something from breeching their border, but were being kept from breeching it themselves. Wow! Wonderful inversion! How Rod Serling of you!

I hope I don't oversimplify the theme here when I describe thusly: civilization sucks. Actually, it's more complex than that and I think that Shyamalan is saying that we shackle each new generation with our own fears - that we have met the enemy and he is us. This point becomes nearly unmistakable when it is revealed that the red-cloaked monsters are in fact the village elders who, in their perverse way, are trying to shield the children from the pain and suffering of the outside world. "Better we do it than a stranger," I suppose. There's an interesting wrinkle to this that I've been wrestling with, but more on that in a moment.

Much has been made of the affectatious dialogue and delivery throughout the film. This is so because the village that's created has the atmosphere of Puritan America and the actors perform accordingly. Some have argued that the actors just aren't doing it very well, and others counter that it's purposeful on the part of the director to have them speak this way so as to convey the shallow and one-dimensional nature of this endeavor: the entire project is artificial and the elders have no obligation to "get it right" inasmuch as the children have nothing to compare it to anyway. This may be a legitimate argument, but it begs the question as to why the elders chose this particular milieu to enact. Was Puritan America a respite from generations of inhumane savagery? The pinnacle of peace? Hey, why not put 'em all in togas and emulate ancient Greece or Republican Rome? Or maybe The Renaissance (be sure to show lots of turkey legs being consumed)? As far as I can tell, Shyamalan wants you to accept the artifice as indicative of cracks in the foundation, but I think it's presumptuous of him to give himself an esoteric out to a question that needn't have been asked. You can create a Luddite fantasy without making everyone talk like Benjamin Franklin. He used the accents not so the elders can fake out the children, but so that he can fake out the audience. Nice try, no cigar.

There is enough about this film to lead you to believe Shyamalan wants you to reject the aims of the elders. I have to assume that his conclusion is that their project is inherently flawed. No matter how much the elders want to protect and keep their children from harm, children's brave nature will out and the young will always seek to explore, to go beyond, and to improve their lot in life - whatever the cost. William Hurt's character essentially subverts his own design in the end, but Shyamalan doesn't give us the full-throated refutation or endorsement we expect. In a more definitive film, Hurt would either have sacrificed Lucius to maintain his principle, or he'd have opened the borders and set the children free (so to speak). He does neither, and I guess we're supposed to decide for ourselves whether he was right to cut procedural corners to save Lucius's life. Or perhaps we are to conclude that he's held the tide this time, but the deluge is sure to come one day. I lean toward that conclusion.

But what does all this mean? Is Shyamalan right to indict each generation as it attempts to keep its children from harm but in the process creates its own scary monsters? I'm even tempted to see this as an anti-Patriot Act screed - that the real threat comes from within when we give up our liberty for security. But here's where that wrinkle comes in: the character of Noah. If we judge the elders wrong for employing their scare tactics, regardless of their good intentions, what are we to make of Noah, the character who dresses up in the red cloak in order to play out his cruel behavior unchecked? M. Night gives himself cover by making that character retarded, but I think that's disingenuous: there is real evil out there and it will dress up in the guise of concern to accomplish its deeds. Noah finds the costume accidentally and against the design of the elders, but one cannot write off such a clever tactics in the real world as innocent mischief. Though Noah limits himself to small animals at first, the elders (unaware that it is Noah's work) genuinely fear that such violence may extend to their children. To further my Patriot Act metaphor, it's arguable to worry about the threat of John Ashcroft's Draconian security measures, but one must remember that the real threat is the wolf in sheep's clothing, the murderer/terrorist who thrives under the cover of such protection and kills wantonly. I have to wonder how Noah came to be in this village: was he brought there under the impression that he/d never really be a threat? Was he born into it and the elders hoped that under those circumstances he'd never be corrupted? Interesting that Noah is undone by the blind girl - her blindness, I believe, being the only reason she is allowed to make this journey, in that she won't be seduced by what's out there. But we can't really rely on innocence to counteract the real dangers in the world, and I think Shyamalan is wrong to equate innocence with moral superiority. It is indeed a blindness and that sort of obliviousness to our enemy's nature is the kind of thing that leads to slaughtered children and even smoking craters in the ground.

Anyway, I believe I've exhausted the reader's patience (not to mention my own), but I do truly appreciate a movie that can generate this much ink from me. The length here doesn't mean to imply the film itself is a complete success - I could have easily gone on twice this long demolishing Little Nicky if ever I had the stomach to sit through it - but I hope it is seen as an evenhanded attempt to make sense out of the film.

One final point: It occurred to me last night that the film might have been better served if it had been made as a B-movie and avoided the not-deliberate-but-tedious pacing and sure-to-be-considered-Oscar-caliber acting. I'm aware of how hokey this film might have seemed in that event, but I think it would have worked because you wouldn't have been so conscious of its supposedly serious appeal and you'd have been freer to enjoy it. As it is, the tone and pacing are reminiscent of Rosemary's Baby without quite working up to that film's level. If it had gone full-bore and approached Invasion of the Body Snatchers sensibility, it might have been a more enjoyable summer film.

Interesting Ad ...

So, I check out a friend's site, notice that my Opera browser changes ads (I'm too cheap to get the one without ads), and this is what pops up for it:

There's a message there, somewhere ....

Good Bets: PRISCILLA: QUEEN OF THE DESERT

If only to see what the actor (Hugo Weaving) who did the agent in MATRIX (one) was doing in Australia at one time, this one is one to which you should return now and again. A journey of self-discovery leading through outback deserts and villages, mountaintops and city streets, the plot offers life lessons framed by music and events in the lives of three Melbourne drag artists. If you can wrap up an episode of your life on stage in costume and shaking it to "MOMMA MIA", you're a success.

Open Water (or: how I learned to rip off Jaws and the Discovery Channel)

Last night, I caught a free sneak preview at the River Oaks of the new shark thriller "Open Water". Frankly, it was not my cup of tea and I'm glad it was free. Here's what I saw wrong with this movie:

* No emotional investment in the lead characters. In the very brief character introduction, all we learn is that the woman is very stressed out. Whoopdeedoo. You just described 90% of America. The writer & director seemed to just want to get them in the water as soon as possible. This would work if there were more thrills. And that leads me to point #2
* This was a weak thriller. The few suspenseful scenes were basic ripoffs of Jaws, with music coming up to a crescendo and dialog like "something just brushed against my foot". Mmmm, cliche. Sure, the sharks were more realistic, but in an age where Jaws is over 25 years old, you have to bring more to the table than realistic-looking sharks. And speaking of realistic-looking
* OK, I get it. The sea is pretty. It has a lot of pretty fish and coral and stuff. However, if you want to spend about an hour of film on that, why don't you just go to work for the Discovery Channel? The director tried to give this movie a Cast Away vibe by showing a lot of the ocean scenery surrounding the two lead characters, but it just didn't work.

So, long story short, go rent Jaws. Open Water was about on par with Piranna 2. The one bright spot of the night was watching the trailer to Saw beforehand. Now THAT looks like a thriller I can get into.

Movie Review: Hum Tum

What to say of my first true Bollywood experience? Well, first off ... who's cow do I have to butcher to get a hot dog at the local Bollywood 6?!?!?!? OK, obligatory, crass, offensive joke now aside, allow me to make a more poignant note of the movie: damn, the lead actress in this movie has the most luscious knockers I've ever seen in my life! I mean, its weird ... this is a conservatively shown movie, as my reading tells me much of Bollywood movies are. So there's no nudity, there's not even a lot of cleavage. But what we do have presented reflects VERY positively. Not in the Dolly Parton way, just in that simple, innocent way that leaves a little to the imagination while still compelling you to the screen to suckle on what may be the two most perfect breasts never bared on a movie screen.

Now for some details that affect us non-Indians ... the theater is pretty nice - comparable to a decent dollar cinema. BUT ... there was no air conditioning. A massive fan was blasting the lobby, the theaters weren't unbearable, but it was noticable. I had some paper to fan myself for about a third of the time. By comparison, I caught Soul Plane in a theater with a busted AC, and I'm not sure whether it was the AC or the bad movie that made it such a hideous experience. No idea if this is a long-lasting thing, or a temporary issue with the theater. This was tolerable, if one is predisposed to experiment. Yes, there were no hot dogs ... and yes, there were subtitles. But the movie itself bounced around between Hindu and English, so the subtitles went from nonexistant to poorly translated. It takes some getting used to, but given how long the movies run, you have ample time. Oh ... TIME ... this one is new to many of us ... there's a freakin' intermission in the movie!!! The run time of "Hum Tum" was 142 minutes. Standard Bollywood, I'm led to believe is 2.5-3 hours. So clear some time for this. One notable downside to the theater (besides no AC?) was that this film literally STOPPED twice in the first 20 minutes. Simple projector issues, but it was annoying. Given my own tight schedule, this ticked me off a little more than the AC. To each their own.

Now ... the movie, itself. Allow me to state a point of comparison. As a fan of Christian rock back in the heyday (mid-80s), there was a common knock that "Oh, all those people do is try to sound like a popular secular band but put Christian lyrics in the tune." There's something to the point ... there's also something to the point of "So what ... every secular band does the same thing, too." Point here is that this movie, in particular, was a take on "When Harry Met Sally" mixed with some John Gray "Mars/Venus" stuff, told just differently enough to make it somewhat of an original.

And then they danced ... and sang ... and held weddings.

Make no mistake about it, there's a distinct culture you're peering in at. It takes a lot of getting used to, but I found it fun. Seeing the hottie in the flick done up in kaballah stuff, a wedding outfit that had every color under the rainbow, and a nose ring the size of Saturn's rings ... even more getting used to. Oh, and one will note that Indian film makers do not bind themselves to the traditional western views of beauty.

Let me sidetrack on that point ... this is one movie, but I'm tempted to extrapolate a bit. Indian women seem to have most of their outward beauty from the neck up. The lead actress here is a case in point (ok, technically, I've established she's got it from the bustline up). The hips are just a bit wider than we're used to seeing, and the concept of "heroin chic" may never catch on in Mumbai. That's as much good as it is bad. Good because ... well, I just think it is. But bad in the sense that one of the dancing bridesmaids had no business wearing an outfit that left her midsection to jiggle just a bit out of beat with the tune.

Back on subject ... this movie is not necessarily anything I'd want to watch if it was an American film. Another chick flick? No thanks. Yet, throw in a few weddings and a half-dozen dance numbers, and I'm sold. Oh, on a completely superficial note, I'm truly in love with the redhead who dances in the tune the couple does while in Paris. That's worth repeat viewing for my taste.

On the whole, this is something for us crackers to add to our "To Do" list for those experimental moments. Personally, I think there's something the more politically conservative set might enjoy ... the family ties seem to be more pronounced and positive, there seems to be a more wholesome presentation to the movies (taking this one as an example of what I'm told about the rest of em, at least). I've got to think there's an alternative counterculture to Bollywood that might make for interesting viewing, but for now, this is good enough.

Oh, and the concession prices were cheap ... just don't ask for a hot dog.

In short, no excuses for avoiding the Bollywood 6. I've got to do this again.

New & Improved Weird Wednesday

OK, so the other clowns have chickened out. I, however, will prevail. Since The Alamo Drafthouse switched plans on me, I'm headed over to the Bollywood 6 for a little culture tonight. On the agenda is a little romantic comedy entitled: "Hum Tum." Place your bets now that the concession stands serve curry.

Movie Preview: CAMPUS CORPSE

Wednesday @ the 'Mo ... a fully sanctioned Clown Car Blog event. 10pm and admission is free. Be there! Ouchy compels you.

UPDATE: DAMMIT!!! Bastards pulled this movie and are now running the first repeat of a Weird Wednesday flick: Angel's Wild Women (which was really subpar)

Movie Review: America's Heart and Soul

Nevermind the political backstory to this movie, with the attempt to portray it as a right-wing answer to Michael Moore's latest. This movie was pretty damn enjoyable. Having been informed it was something of a feel-good video panorama of various people in their ordinary lives (few of which are actually ordinary), this one exceeded expectations.

The method employed here was to give 1-2 minute montages of a variety of lives and, in the end, show a connecting thread of hope and freedom that exists in them all. We start off with a cowboy from Telluride who is rarely seen apart from his horse, even when bar hopping. Before its all over, we've witnessed Ben from Ben & Jerry's; a dairy farmer from Vermont; a gospel singer from Mississippi; an aerobatic pilot from Florida; a farm wife from Appallachia; a steel worker from Weirton Steel; a hard rock band from parts unknown ... and a whole lot more. In the process, we see more similarities than differences.

The movie relies a great deal on providing a visual montage even when allowing the subjects to speak. The visual mixes with the audio so seamlessly, that I should note that I caught the movie with open captions - something that normally distracts because I personally find myself reading the movie rather than watching it. This time around, I began by reading the movie, but about 10 minutes in, the captions may well have been nonexistant. The visual was so strong in the movie that you realize the audio in the documentary is almost playing off of the landscape shots, or the scenes of these "everyday lives." In that regard, it was rather impressive in and of itself.

One humorous aside: the theater was next to empty - myself and one other viewer were in attendance. After the movie started, a kid walks in. A few minutes later, kid walks up to me and asks "Is this Anchorman?" Anchorman was playing in the theater next door, where I had just seen it moments ago. That one could watch "America" for 10 minutes without realizing that it was not a Will Farrell sendup of the 70s sex wars ... that confounds me. But its still funny as all hell.

Movie Review: Anchorman

I've been sold something of a bill of goods on this movie. Typical comedy, I maintain ... watch the previews and you'll get most of the laughs the movie has to offer. It was funny, but not drop-dead-with-hysterical-laughter funny, as hoped for. About the only unexpected comedy not provided by the trailers was the street fight with all the local news teams. Outside of that, about the only thrilling part of the movie was savoring Kelly Bundy's gracing of the big screen with her presence. Outside of that, I think I'd rather watch "Nine To Five" next time.