#2. Red State - Review

Red State - BannerIt seems quite rare to witness an actual turning point in a director’s career. Sure many directors perhaps stray from what brought them initial acclaim, I immediately think of Alfonso Cuaron following up his critically heralded and sexually charged Y Tu Mama Tambien (2001) with a Harry Potter sequel. A decision no one could have seen coming, and yet his Prisoner of Azkaban is considered by many to be the best of the series. Robert Rodriguez has his successful Spy Kid series, a shock to those expecting only El Mariachi pulp fests. But for every Azkaban there is the heartbreak film nerds feel when a good director turns hack. After the surprise impact Hard Candy had on the film universe in 2006, David Slade went from being one of the most exciting premiere directors in Hollywood to message board troll bait when he signed on to helm one of the Twilight sequels. People think they want artists to venture out of their comfort zone and explore foreign characters, situations, and themes, but in all honesty those artists (be it in film, music, or any other medium) are not only putting their identity and fan-base on the line, but their integrity as well. Not moral integrity mind you, but that creative rectitude that seems to be so important to the devotees of all things indie. That solidarity teenagers and twenty-something hipsters feel with their band that no one has heard of or the director of that amazing film no one will see.Red State Film Poster

For a filmmaker like Kevin Smith fan base is everything, and he knows it. Hell, I am pretty sure he just legally changed his name to @thatkevinsmith and for good reason. He has been the trail blazer for bypassing the middleman that has controlled the movie industry since the 1950s and went straight to the consumer. And for the last 15 years or so Smith has been comfortable hocking his familiar wares to the same base he built with Clerks and Mallrats, consistently cranking out recognizable comedies set in the View-Askew universe, quietly establishing a particular genre of R-rated comedy that Judd Apatow and company have exploited in the last decade.

Apparently not one to be stifled, Smith’s new film Red State is unlike anything the Jersey born auteur has attempted before. There are very few pop culture references (Star Wars or otherwise), not a single Quick Stop in sight, and no one even resembling Jay and Silent Bob – although Caleb, a prominent character in the film played with surprising ferocity by Southern California radio legend Ralph Garman, does not speak a single word throughout the film. No, this is not a traditional Smith effort, and he would probably be the first to say that is a good thing. He wanted to try something different and fresh, at least for him, and in the process gambled his image and his fanbase for a new chapter in his career. Luckily for everyone involved, Smith bet on Red, and it paid out big time.

Red State Film BannerRed State is many things; a dissection of the ever cracking wall of separation between church and state in this country, an (hopefully) exaggerated interpretation of the hyper-religious leaders consistently making news with their doggedly desperate reactionary protestations against anything they deem immoral or against their God’s will, and it also makes interesting assertions to our post 9/11 government locked and loaded with the Patriot Act and how the power granted them has absolutely corrupted. Red State is a heavy film, and succeeds at reaching its lofty goals of social and political criticism.

Red State Michael ParksTo find out this has been a grass roots style labor of love from Smith should firstly be of no surprise and secondly be of no consequence. Red State is as biting and relevant as his more regarded films from the 1990s, specifically Clerks, Chasing Amy, and Dogma. He has always been a man with something to say, and while the camera has not always been his most effective means of communicating his point, words empowered by a unique incite coupled with sheer bluntness have been the director’s greatest weapon.

The film’s set-up is generic, but not to a fault. It is obvious that Smith has affection for the horror films of the late 70s and 80s. After three Middle American high school friends turn to the Internet for an anonymous hassle free hook-up, they are quickly captured by Abin Cooper (Michael Parks), the leader of a fundamentalist church looking for fresh sinners to sacrifice in the name of the lord. Again, not exactly groundbreaking, and yet it must be said Smith’s take on the punishment of teenage deviants is an interesting one. Traditionally evil has been personified in the form of psychotic madmen on film. Donning a mask and a machete, these horror villains hunt down sexually corrupted teenagers and brutally dispense with their own unique brand of punishment. Red State is more terrifying than any other film dealing with the subject of righteousness because it is those that look to God for guidance that are the most malevolent.

Red State The Boys PosterWith more pizzazz than any other Smith undertaking, what he achieves here along side his usual cinematographer David Klein is an honest accomplishment. As the film’s intensity ramps up, so to does the camera, aiding Smith’s narrative drive and thematic campaign to achieve an illustrious cinematic crescendo. Red State does tonally trip up from time to time, but honestly I think that is more of an issue of the genre than the script. Any faults with the screenplay or Smith’s less technical directing style is quickly compensated by the acting, particularly that of Parks. Like what Blue Velvet did for Dennis Hopper, Sin City for Mickey Rourke, and Kill Bill for David Carradine, Red State will be remembered for reintroducing the world to Michael Parks.

With so much build-up to my viewing of Red State, my immense enjoyment brings more relief than surprise. Kevin Smith is a director that should never be discounted; he has done more for the evolution of not just comedy in this country, but is one of the main reasons it is okay to be a nerd in 2011. He has been and will continue to be a rebel and an innovator in Hollywood, and I cannot wait to see how he will change the game next.

Have you seen Red State? Am I on the money or just a blind Kevin Smith fanboy stuffed on Mooby Muffins? Let me know your opinion of the flick and/or my review, and what you think of the divisive director and his new foray into horror. Click the "share" button below and help get the word out!

#1. Robin Hood (2010) - Review / Analysis

Robin Hood - Ridley Scott 2010The legend of Robin Hood seems to have been birthed out of convenient necessity. Cobbled together by bits of heroism and flights of fancy, town minstrels and inspired storytellers meshed the plausible with the fantastic to provide a subjugated society with the hope that one man can not only confront his oppressors, but against all odds be a champion for the downtrodden and the persecuted. With some 700 varying versions of the legend, Robin Hood is likely a phantom of want. The want felt buy all those too browbeaten to stand up for themselves, too weak to fight back. The belief that a hooded crusader could daringly defend the honor of his people, and return to them the wealth and dignity that was rightfully theirs, was a promising notion.

Taking inspiration from the mouths of bards in the 1200s to the adventurous tale “The Jest of Robin Hood “ in the 15^th Century, Hollywood wasted no time bringing the esteemed archer to life on the big screen. In 1908 he was the basis for the silent film Robin Hood and his Merry Men, and from then on the medium has been cluttered with interpretations and silly translations of the urban myth. Ridley Scott’s latest incarnation, simply titled Robin Hood (2010), is concerned more with aesthetic precision than historical authenticity.

Robin Hood - Ridley Scott 2010Taking full advantage of the leniency granted by his well-earned artistic license, Scott forgoes the trivial aspects imparted by documented events and melds fact with cinematic machinations. Not unlike the singing minstrels of ancient Europe, Scott plays with circumstance to produce an engaging narrative. Perhaps not quite the “untold story behind the legend” the Blu-Ray promises, this adaptation does attempt a unique account of Robin Hood’s origin story. The film opens with Robin Longstride, played by Russell Crowe, serving under King Richard the Lionheart (Danny Huston) as an archer during an attempted siege on a French castle. In this genuinely brutal recreation of warfare, King Richard is shot through the neck by a French soldier with a crossbow and dies during battle. However dramatic and engaging this scene may play on screen, it is not entirely accurate. King Richard’s death did in fact take place during the taking of a French castle on his return trip from the Crusades, but while the film’s version has the king’s army struggling against a well-fortified French defense, in truth the castle was not as safeguarded as Scott would have his audience believe. The castle was taken without much effort, which makes the King’s demise that much more shocking. Pride and confidence got the best of Lionheart; it is believed the king was approaching the French gate without his proper chainmail when a crossbow lethally struck him. On screen Richard dies almost instantly in the arms of the Knight Robert Loxley, but in fact it took the king nearly two weeks to finally succumb to his wounds.

This latest adaptation is not the first film to begin with Lionheart’s death, Robin and Marion from 1976 starring Sean Connery as the man in tights also had a similar inciting incident. Although most Robin Hood adaptations all utilize the same basic plot points, Scott’s version does strive to find a unique angle for the original characters. Marion for instance is not the helpless damsel so often personified on screen. Here, played by the enchanting Cate Blanchett, Marion is put upon and even vulnerable, but far from being an incapable ingénue. Robin’s customary entourage is also in attendance; archers Allan A’Dayle (Alan Doyle), Will Scarlett (Scott Grimes), and foe turned comrade Little John (Kevin Durand). The trio gives perhaps the most familiar performance of the film, playing into the recognized conventions of the legend of Robin’s “merry men.”The Real Little John... or is that just Baloo?

Despite the fact that nitpicking the historical inaccuracies of Scott’s muddy epic is easier than most historians would prefer, the director did a supreme job of bringing 12^th Century Europe to life. The Crusades was an era of both filth and elegance, and the disparity contrasted between these conflicting ways of life are beautifully rendered on screen. The wealth of King John and his bootlicking aristocracy is beyond opulent, only made more noticeable by his wanton and lecherous greed. Outside the castle gate is in all respects a completely different world.  While Eleanor of Aquitaine (Eileen Atkins), the wearily helpless mother of King John and King Richard, attends to her pet owl with the beguiling profile of the castle surrounding her, the stark images of those struggling in the grimy village of Nottingham provide a repugnant polarity. Even those lucky enough to own land, like Sir Walter Loxley (Max Von Sydow) and his daughter-in-law Marion, are shown struggling to just make do.

Director Ridley Scott’s personal take on the myth of Robin Hood, like most historically based films, does its best to bring to life a time and place in vivid detail. The battles are accurately violent and barbarous, taking an almost fetishistic affection to every bloody detail. So to do Scott and his crew impressively recreate the relentlessly harsh way of life in 12^th Century England. However, Scott’s artistic and historical liberties are at times down right indulgent. The film would lead you to believe that King John had introduced heavy taxation on his subjects, but in fact burdensome taxes had been a problem for years (someone had to finance King Richard’s war). Scott even goes so far as to have Robin’s father responsible for the Magne Carte, a dramatically engaging turn of events if it weren’t so preposterous. Unfortunately, preposterous inventiveness does not a good movie make, and while Scott may have out done himself when it came to set design and innovative plot twists, Robin Hood in the end failed to hit its mark.

What did you think of Scott's latest? Inspired, or just another hack job from the once king of the sci-fi epic? Let me know, and please click the "share" button below.

#153-331. The End Of Year One

Sleepy Gif by volcboy84 on WeGIF

Well, I must admit my 1st attempt at watching 500 films in one year was not a complete failure, but a failure all of the same. When all is said and done I watched 331 movies, and probably more but thats how many I have remembered and documented. Although I only wrote about 152 flicks out of the 330+ I watched, I now have a better grasp of what is expected of me to get closer to my goal in the next year. Yes, I am going to try again, and yes I still think I can do, but i will definitely have to manage my time better. Anyway, here is my list of movies I watche and never got around to talking about. I did watch some awesome films that I had never seen before like: Hunger, How to Train Your Dragon, Sante Sangre, The Night of the Hunter, Catfish, Salo or 120 Days of Sodom, Tree of Life, and this year's Hanna. And there were some terrible flicks: Eden Lake, Trash Humpers, The Children, The Lovely Bones, MacGruber, The Beaver, Don't Be Afraid of the Dark, and the completely overated Bridesmaids. 

All in all I am pretty proud of myself for being able to figure out how to build and run my own website totally on my own, but I am bummed I couldn't closer to 500. Oh well, I have 365 more days to try and hit the mark!