Grinding Out Sausages

Last night, Jen, Manish and I saw V for Vendetta. My first thoughts were that this film was going to under-perform, especially since we were seeing the 8:00 show opening night yet there was no line outside. (Inside was a good-sized crowd, although not the sell-out I was expecting.)

The movie, however, was amazing. I wasn't familiar with the graphic novel, but I loved the world and the characters the film set up - a very cool update on the fascist future dystopia genre and reminiscent of Orwell's 1984. Natalie Portman is brilliant - just like in Closer, whenever she's on screen, the film is at its best.

There are plenty of not-so-subtle references to the current political climate and leaders, complete with Karl Rove, Rush Limbaugh, and our own anti-V, W.

But I think it'd be easy to make too much of that. Just as when 1984 was first published in the late 40s, readers saw every character as a thinly veiled WWII figure. I think the real point is that fascism isn't going anywhere and we must maintain a constant vigil against our govnernments and ditto-heads.

It is just too easy for people to surrender their individual liberties as soon as their fear level gets high enough. And it's human nature, at least as a first reaction. (After all, who in the middle of the LA Riots wasn't relieved when the national guard arrived and implemented a city-wide curfew?)

But the real danger comes when politicians try to prolong this state of fear and emergency so that they can keep their unlimited power. Our current administration and its supporters are obsessed with emphasizing that we are at war and reminding us what the current terror alert level is and that the enemy is out there lurking.

This too is nothing new. The McCarthyites did it during the early cold-war. Or as Big Brother put it, "Eastasia has always been at war with Eurasia."

The entire notion of a "War on Terror" is absurd and dangerous, just like a "War on Poverty" or a "War on Drugs".

Posted by Mark at 11:46 PM | Permalink | Comments (1) | TrackBacks (0)

Last night, Tabitha and I hosted an Oscar-watching party. We ended up with 19 people in our living room, which was a lot of fun.

Despite the naysayers, I think Jon Stewart was the best host yet. The awards themselves were tame and enjoyable as usual.

Although I think Philip Seymour Hoffman is a brilliant character actor, I was disappointed that Joaquin Phoenix didn't win. He may have picked some lame scripts in the past ("Swing Away, Merrill"), but like his dead older brother was quickly becoming, Joaquin is a movie star.

I think everyone agrees that the biggest surprise of the night was Best Picture, the producers' Oscar that I hope to win someday. I imagine most people were surprised that Brokeback Mountain didn't win, which as you know I was glad about. But I was surprised that neither of my top two films won.

My friend Mark always says that Best Picture should be called Most Picture, since the movie that usually wins is simply the biggest production or the film with the grandest theme. He uses this to explain why movies such as Titanic or Gladiator win.

But I love huge movies. And I think there should be an award for Best Production (the original name for the Best Picture Oscar). This year, the film that I think clearly embodies the most picture principle was Munich, and it didn't win a single award.

Posted by Mark at 12:42 PM | Permalink | Comments (4) | TrackBacks (0)