Ugly Truth

You will not enjoy The Ugly Truth. At least, for your sake, I hope you don’t. When I saw it, I was repeatedly asking myself two questions: One: why am I watching this? And two: do members of our culture really have so little hope that they can’t aspire to anything more than this?

The Ugly Truth might be interpreted by some as a “chick flick,” however it attempts to bring the male perspective into the ugly picture it draws of relationships. I emphasize “attempts.”

At the beginning, we meet Abby Richter (Katherine Heigl) a high-power TV producer who is successful in all things except love. By far the most entertaining scene is one of the first, in which she goes to a restaurant and meets (for the first time) a bachelor that she has been paired with by a computer dating service. Their conversation goes something like this:

She (opening black leather folder): I was so excited to meet you, because your profile had nine out of the ten characteristics on my checklist.

He: You brought my profile to our date??

She (turning pages): Oh, my assistant put it in my bag. She doesn’t like me to be caught unprepared – not that I am ever not prepared. Kudos on your comprehensive car insurance plan, by the way.

He: That wasn’t in my profile.

She: No, but it was in your background check.

He: Uh …

She (after a pause): Oh, don’t worry, I brought a list of conversation topics in case this happened.

He (rubbing his face): So, I take it this has happened before…

Director Robert Luketic figures we can probably guess how the rest of the date goes, and cuts to a scene of Abby returning home, dejected. She starts channel surfing and comes across Mike Chadway (Gerard Butler), a brash, shallow, foul-mouthed guy in tight pants doing his call-in show called “The Ugly Truth.” Chadway is throwing relationship books into a barrel and setting them on fire like the refuse they are.

He declares “Men are simple! You want a relationship, ladies, here’s how. It’s called a Stairmaster …” Scrub out a lot of profanity and stomach-churning innuendo, and Mike is essentially saying women need to get an ideal body, put on a revealing outfit, and then men will want to have sex with them. Only then is a relationship (albeit a fairly one-sided one) possible. Incensed, Abby calls him and demands “Do you really expect us to believe men are incapable of feeling love, and are all as perverse as you?” He asks if she knows a man who is not. Abby takes a breath and begins describing the ideal man who lives in her mind. He replies:

“Oh, I get it, you’re a lesbian.”

“What??”

“You must be; you just described the perfect woman!”

The next day, Abby goes to work and finds out, to her horror, that her boss thinks their programming has gotten boring, and has hired Mike to spice it up. Mike’s first appearance on Abby’s station is to be with unhappily married anchors Georgia (Cheryl Hines) and Larry (John Michael Higgins), who are more-or-less Regis and Kathy Lee. Abby coaches the two of them before the show to humiliate him on the air.

Mike and Abby have a stare-down over makeup

Mike and Abby have a stare-down over makeup.

However, once on the air, Mike gets them to admit to all of their marital problems, finally getting Larry to acknowledge that he is so embarrassed by the fact that Georgia makes more money than he does, that he has been impotent for several months. After some coaching by Mike, Larry demands, “Georgia, let me be a man!” He suddenly attacks her with passionate kisses and then throws her over his shoulder and carries her off the set. Everyone in the control room is cheering, Mike’s popularity is now assured, and Abby is next seen curled up on the floor of the closet in her office.

In between all of this, Abby meets her neighbor, Collin (Eric Winter). Collin is an orthopedic surgeon who has somehow found time to maintain the body of a professional weight lifter. He loves poetry, cooking, and giving foot massages (when I saw this, I rolled my eyes hard enough to pull a muscle). Hoping to take Mike down a peg, Abby announces to him that she has actually met the perfect man she has been dreaming of. Mike asks “has he asked you out yet?” Abby immediately marches to her phone, and calls Collin to ask him out. When Collin hesitates, Mike hangs up Abby’s phone with the comment “He was blowing you off.” Abby is angry, but it gets her attention when Collin calls back, as Mike predicted. Mike instructs “Now make him suffer. Put him on hold.” Once again, Collin reacts as Mike predicts. Mike and Abby make a deal that if she does as Mike says and she lands Collin, she will cooperate with his efforts at the network. If not, he’ll quit.

The rest of the movie is scenes of Mike giving Abby tips on seductive dress, flirting and teasing. None of it is funny, however, and a lot of it is disgusting. Every exchange follows this pattern:

He: We need to change your hair/clothing/eye color/butt.

She (indignant): What is wrong with it?

He: It makes you look sensible/professional/mature.

She: What is wrong with sensible/professional/mature?

He: Nothing, except no-one-wants-to-f.ck-it.

Eventually, Abby does land Collin. But by this point – you guessed it – Mike has fallen for her. We also learn a little more about Mike’s background; how he has been burned by a lot of girls that didn’t really like him, and made him what he is today. He eventually goes on a rant about how women don’t care about you, they only care about their checklist. All of this could have been fairly interesting if Luketic had taken the time to really get us inside the characters heads, but he seems to prefer to spend the time on shock value. By the end of act one, I was looking at my watch.

Mike, after wrestling with twins in jello. Don't worry; he only slept with the one that could read.

The script for this film was written by three women, and Mike Chadway seems to be their attempt to incorporate the male perspective on relationships. Mike is a tad likable for a minute here and there just because he’s not ashamed of being a guy. But in the end, what his lines amount to is a restatement of the same things that bitter, sexually frustrated women say about men. In other words, Mike has only found a more phallocentric way of saying “men are pigs.”

For example, in one scene where he coaches Abby, he tells her “Never criticize. For men, self improvement ends with toilet training.” Doubtless a lot of women feel this way. It is nonsense, however. Men have plenty of interest in self improvement. The problem is women tend to think that they can mold a man into who they think he should be through nagging and criticizing. It doesn’t work on them, so I don’t know why they think it will work on us.

The worst thing about The Ugly Truth isn’t the gross dialogue or the choppy editing. It’s the utter sadness I felt for anyone who could actually connect with this movie. As I sat watching it with my beautiful wife curled up next to me, I wondered what it would be like to have to believe that there is no hope of anything better than the occasional cheap thrill in relationships.

Because that’s what the writers seem to believe. Neither Abby nor Mike ever really grow or learn anything; they just inexplicably fall in love with each other on a hot air balloon. Cut to the final scene of the two of them in bed. There was actually another ending filmed that involves the two of them getting married. Mike gives a speech in which he says “It’s true that every woman has a checklist, but occasionally a regular guy like me can sneak onto that checklist by using good old fashion true love.” They could have at least partially redeemed the movie if they had used this ending. Sure, the theatrical ending fits better with the spirit of the movie, but why would you want to do that?

So I hope you’re as repulsed by The Ugly Truth as I am. If nothing else, watching it made me appreciate my love-filled and passionate marriage. Which brings me back to the question: why was I even watching that tripe? The reason was, she asked me to watch it with her, and I knew it would make her happy if I did. Yeah. I’m a stud.

[Rating:1/5]

Wild Wild World of Batwoman

What could be better than kicking back with a good movie? Well, every so often, you don’t have the appetite for the meat and potatoes of a well-crafted film, and you just want a light cinema snack. Hence of the profitability of mediocre (and worse) films like Transformers, Twilight, and 300. Our culture has a fascination with bad movies (unlike with other mediums), and much has been written about which films are the worst of all time. In 1980, critic Michael Medved and his brother Harry published The Golden Turkey Awards, in which they listed their picks for the worst movies of all time. They ultimately selected Plan 9 from Outer Space (Dir. Ed Wood) as the Worst Movie Ever Made. People tell me I’m competitive, which might be why I felt compelled to find a worse one. Recently, I did.

For an unending source of putridly bad movies, it’s hard to beat Mystery Science Theatre 3000, a serial in which host Mike Nelson (usually) and two robots are silhouetted in front of one of the worst low-to-no-budget flops the producer can find. Mike and the ‘bots make the movie bearable by inserting lines, yelling out jokes and generally lampooning the movie. It turns what would be a traumatic experience into a load of laughs. Usually.

Even Mike’s sense of humor was no match for the horrendous work of Jerry Warren, however, as shown by the colossally bad movie The Wild, Wild World of Batwoman (1966).

WWWB is about … well, that’s the problem, you really can’t tell. The character who seems to be the lead (Katherine Victor) wears a costume, vaguely reminiscent of a superhero costume, complete with a bat logo painted on her breasts. She doesn’t do much to fight crime, however, throwing one punch in the entire movie. Her response to “crisis” situations is usually to call bureaucratic meetings with her underlings, a cult-like troupe of teenage girls who carry guns but spend more time dancing the Jerk than anything else.

All this dancing makes them vulnerable because the “super villain” in this movie, whose costume basically amounts to a bowler hat and a ski mask, and who has an equally ridiculous name (Rat Fink), attacks them by serving them drugged drinks that make them begin dancing uncontrollably. There’s one particularly painful scene in which Batwoman confronts Rat Fink (Richard Banks) while one of her sidekicks is slowly doing an involuntary jig in the background – for about 10 minutes. These “Batgirls” are always doing odd things in the background, e.g. fighting over a horseshoe, and are sometimes more interesting to watch than the characters in the foreground.

Warren offered the role of Batwoman to Victor, but, having worked on Warren’s  Teenage Zombies and The Curse of the Stone Hand, Victor was not eager to work with Warren again. To convince her, Warren promised Victor large production values, color photography and her own bat boat in the film. None of these promises were kept.

Our herione.

Our herione.

Our Mystery Science heros are clearly overmatched by this one, as evidenced by Mike’s sudden plea (whether to the director or God, I’m not sure) in one of the most pointless scenes “Please, God, cut away to anything, please!” I felt pretty much the same way. Even Mike and the ‘bots’ lampooning wasn’t enough to ease the pain of this one.

As bad as this film is, you still might ask why I say it’s worse than Plan 9. With Plan 9, if you have the stamina to sit through it, you can sort-of figure out what it’s supposed to be about. It starts with an alien invasion, then we see the dead rising from the grave; eventually the movie sort-of  ties the two together, leading to a climactic scene inside a spaceship that looks oddly like a wood shop.

The villain.

The villain.

The production of WWWB was downright schizophrenic, largely due to the director’s egocentricism. Victor told Wikkipedia that, on set, if an actor rubbed Warren the wrong way, their lines would be cut out or given to other actors. Victor claimed “the pretty brunette who was kidnapped in the beginning of the picture was supposed to be the lead girl, but for some reason Jerry thought she was getting to big for her britches and gave all her lines to the girl in the leopard tights”. All of this sudden mind-changing by Warren left its mark on the movie. WWWB features, among other things, a man who wears a Hitler mustache for no reason, and another who shambles around the set like a dog, being treated like a pet by a guy who is apparently supposed to be some kind of mad scientist (George Andre). This mad scientist never really does anything, however. He does venture into a cave under his lab once, where he witnesses monsters that are just recycled footage from The Mole People. We see these creatures for two seconds and no explanation for their presence is ever given. At the end, Dog Boy comes off of … whatever he was on, and tells some kind of story about an atomic bomb made out of a hearing aide.

Warren first released the film under the title Batwoman. Then, after being sued, he re-released it as She was a Hippy Vampire (there is no vampirism in the movie). As you can imagine, the film suffered a quick and painful death at the box office. Decades later it was released on video under its current name.

If you’re someone who combs through vaults of old movies, looking for unsung classics, this is one to avoid. It’s astonishing production wrapped before too many cast/crewmembers simply stormed off the set. Even the MST3K version is unbearable. Ed Wood must be spinning in his grave.

[Rating:0/5]

Time Machine

60s poster 2In 1894, H.G. Wells published his novel The Time Machine, which, while short and simplistic, was in interesting thought experiment regarding mankind’s hopes for the future. Wells, a student of Marx, expressed a belief through metaphor that there could never be true equality, and there would always be those above, and those who served them. None the less, he told an ironic tale of how those on top would eventually get theirs.

Wells’ novel was made into a movie by George Pal. The film was released in02 poster 1960. A second version, starring Guy Pierce and Directed by Simon Wells, H.G.’s grandson, was released in 2002. I have yet to meet someone, besides me, who has read/seen all three versions, which is really too bad. People often ask me which version is the best. The truth is, it’s really hard to pick one, because they are all so different, and each one is strangely apropriate to their time. You might say, reading the book and then watching the movies is a trip through time in itself. I’ll explain.

book coverIn the book, the “Time Traveller,” who is never named, believes that if he travels far enough into the future, he will find mankind in a perfect state. No further explanation of this belief is ever given. Wishing to see mankind’s triumph, his first time-trip is a non-stop journey to the year A.D. 802,701. (Does this seem strange to anyone else? I mean, there’s a reason the Wright Bothers didn’t take their first flight over the Grand Canyon, and early sailors didn’t try to cross the Atlantic.) Once he stops, the Time Traveller first meets the Eloi, a society of childlike people. They live in small communities in futuristic yet deteriorating buildings, doing no work and eating a frugivorous diet. His efforts to communicate are hampered by their lack of curiosity or discipline, and he concludes that they are the result of humanity conquering nature with technology, and adapting to an environment in which strength and intellect are no longer advantageous.

Returning to the site where he arrived, the Time Traveller finds his time

Artist's conception

Artist's conception

machine has been dragged into a nearby Sphynx with heavy doors, locked from the inside. Later, he is approached menacingly by the Morlocks, pale, apelike people who live underground, where he discovers the machinery and industry that make the above-ground paradise possible. He alters his theory, speculating that the human race has evolved into two species: the leisured classes have become the ineffectual Eloi, and the downtrodden working classes have become the brutish, light-fearing Morlocks. Deducing that the Morlocks have taken his time machine, he explores the Morlock tunnels, learning that they feed on the Eloi. His revised analysis is that their relationship is not one of lords and servants but of livestock and ranchers, and with no real challenges facing either species, they have both lost the intelligence and character of Man.

Rod Taylor as H. George Wells

Rod Taylor as H. George Wells

In the 1960 film, the motives of the Traveller (now bearing the name George, and a license plate on his Machine that reads “H. George Wells”) are a bit more clear, if not much more sensible. In 1899, George (Rod Taylor), a brilliant physisist, has been offered a contract by the government of England to design weapons. Being a pacifist, he finds this horrifying and longs to discover man in a perfect, peaceful state. Believing that somewhere in the future he will find such a civilization, he sets off through time. He watches the world change rapidly around him until he sees his windows boarded up in the year 1914. Curious, he stops the Machine and gets out. He strolles across the street and meets the son of his friend from the beginning, David Philby

The Morlocks of 1960

The Morlocks of 1960

(both played by Alan Young). He learns that Philby has been killed in the First World War. Obviously, he decides to keep going. Back in the Time Machine, he makes a brief stop in 1940, where he sees London being bombed by the Nazis. He then continues to 1966 (six years in the future at that time) where he sees everyone walking around in radiation suits. He once again meets Philby’s son, who remarks that he saw George on the same spot in the same clothes 52 years before. Sirens begin blaring and every one runs, shouting “get to the shelter!” Philby points to the sky and says to George, “There, an atomic satelite zeroing in!” He tries to drag George to the shelter, but George refuses to leave his Machine, so Philby abandons him and runs for safety. Seconds later, a blast rips through London, resulting in some impressive (for 1960) miniature work. George, narrating, lamants “The labor of centuries gone in an instant!” A lava flow heads for the Time Machine, and George has to rush to activate it before the flood hits. He suddenly finds himself traveling through time inside a wall of rock. He is forced to keep traveling through time at breakneck speed, lest he be crushed. Unable to move his machine in space, he has no choice but to wait for time to wear down the mountain he is inside of.

George meets Weena.

George meets Weena.

When it finally does, he sees futuristic buildings springing up around him, and notes there doesn’t seem to be weather. He asks “had man finally learned to control the elements … and himself?” He stops at the year A.D. 802,701 once again, and meets the Eloi, who in this version are still human, although their frail bodies and pale skin are reminiscent of the creatures from the book. The Eloi still speak broken English (no explanation for this), and have little interest in technology or the past. George is so disapointed by the “perfect” world he has discovered that he berates he Eloi “What have you done?? Thousands of

The Sphynx.

The Sphynx.

generations of men struggeling and sacraficing, and for what? So you can swim and dance and play! I’m going back to my own time. I won’t tell them about the useless struggle, but at least I can die among men!” Upon attempting this however, he finds that his Machine has again been dragged into the Sphynx and he is trapped.

Lambs to the slaughter.

Lambs to the slaughter.

In this version, the Morlocks provide the Eloi with food and clothing, as in the book. However, instead of snatching them one at a time, they use (of all things) air-raid sirens to lure them underground in droves (left). In one scene, the siren cuts off, and the door to the Morlocks’ slaughter house slams shut, denying entrance to the Eloi still outside. George shakes one who seems to be in a trance (below), and the Eloi tells him “it is all clear,” meaning the air raid has ended, essentially.  Apparently, the Morlocks are able to do this because humans are so conditioned from fleeing underground at the sound of sirens ever since 1960. shake

Eventually, a girl named Weena (Yvette Mimieux) leads George to a room full of “talking rings” which seem to be surviving records of Earth’s past. The rings hold the voices of people describing nuclear and other wise horrible wars; the last recording annouces that Earth’s atmosphere has been all but destroyed and most of the human race is fleeing underground to escape the Sun’s harmful rays. A few have decided to “take our chances in the sunlight, however small they might be.” George deduces that those who fled underground were the ancestors of the Morlocks and those who remained were the ancestors of the Eloi.

And so, in both the book and the 1960 film, the division of humanity is caused by a social evil that preocupies the author, resulting in one side becoming a race of monsters that preys upon the other. In 1894, when Marxism was popular among the wealthy elite of Europe (did you note the irony there?), the division was caused by the oppression of the lower classes. This resulted in a kind of ironic justice, when the upper classes became food for the lower classes. In 1960, when everyone feared the Bomb, the division was caused by the continuing folly of war, which finally drove one side underground. The element of ironic justice is

George fights the Morlocks in their labyrinth.

George fights the Morlocks in their labyrinth.

conspicuously lacking here, which may be why the script calls for George and the Eloi to triumph over the Morlocks. While the Traveler simply returned to his own time in despair of Man’s future, George follows his beloved Weena into the Morlocks’ slaughterhouse. Once there, he is able to inspire the Eloi to join him in fighting against the Morlocks. Once they escape, at George’s direction, they throw large amounts of dry wood down the wells that connect the surface to the underground to stoke an underground inferno. The Morlocks’ lair caves in. Shortly after, George returns to his own time and tells the tale of his adventure to several collegues who leave, scoffing at him. Except Philby. A few minutes later, Philby and George’s housekeeper (Doris Lloyd) discover that George has once again disapeared in his Time Machine, and that he has taken three books from his library with him. Having searched for his purpose for years, George has apparently found it in rebuilding civilization in A.D. 802,701. And, of course, being with Weena.

Joey Film GeekIn the 2002 version, which also starts in 1899, the time traveller is Alexander Hartdegen, a physics professor who wants his students to abandon the expectations of society and conquer nature with technology. His fiance, Emma (Sienna Gullory), feels like he’s more attracted to model T cars than to her. Philby (Mark Addy) asks Alexander if he thinks Man could ever go too far whith technology. Alex scoffs “No such thing.” That night Emma is killed by a mugger in the park. He decides to use his skill with technology to change the past and bring her back. He works for four years on a time machine. When it’s complete, he

"In a week, we'll have never have had this conversation."

"In a week, we'll have never have had this conversation."

dresses in his best and gets into a chair with parasol-like apparati above and below it that spin, generating a sphere around the machine in which time does not pass. The scene changes before we see his journey. He goes back to the night Emma died, meets her, and steers her away from the park. He extracts a promise from her to go home and stay there until morning. Just when he thinks he has triumphed, a model T goes hay wire and runs her over.

The Time Machine of 2002. Also makes a great cup of jo.

The Time Machine of 2002, often mistaken for a coffee maker.

In the next scene, Alex mutters to himself “Why can’t I change the past? I could come back a thousand times; see her die a thousand ways. I can’t find the answers here … not here … not now…” Only then do we see his now archetypal journey forward as the sun becomes a blurred line overhead and trees spring up like gysers around him. We see a pull-back shot in which a biplane, then a twin prop, then a modern jet and finally a satelite fly over Alex, before we see a shuttle landing on the moon. Alex’s attention is caught by an advertisement declaring “the future is now!” and he stops in 2030 (28 years in the future at that time). A pedestrian looks at his time machine and remarks “bet that makes a hell of a capuchino.”

The advertisement is for realestate on the moon, where a colony is being built. Alex walks into the Fifth Avenue Public Library, drawn by all the new techonology, where he meets Photonic (Orlando Jones), a sarcastic computer program who walks inside panes of glass and offers to retrieve data from the library’s system (below). When Alex asks to learn about time travel, Photonic

"Live long, and prosper."

"Live long, and prosper."

rolls its eyes. Disapointed, Alex gets back into the time machine and travels forward another 7 years. When he sees chaos around him, he stops. Military vehicels race through the streets, and the ground shakes violently. Upon dismounting, Alex is accoasted by several soldiers who urge him to come with them underground. He demands to know what’s going on, assuring them “Yes, I’ve been living under a rock!” They tell him that the demolitions for the lunar colony over the past 7 years have changed the moon’s orbit, and caused the moon to start breaking up. Alex looks skyward and sees the moon, much larger than ususal, and riddled with cracks. At that moment a crack opens in the earth. Alex races to his Machine before the crack destroys it, and mangaes to throw it into gear just in time. However, his Machine is rocked by the disaster, and he hits his head, and is knocked uncouncious.

Samantha Mumba as Mara.

Samantha Mumba as Mara.

Out of control, the Machine hurtles through time. We see glacers come and go and the ground rise above the timeless sphere and then fall back below it. Rivers carve canyons in the blink of an eye. Alex eventually regains conciousness just long enough to stop the Machine at (you guessed it) A.D. 802,701, before slipping back into oblivion. He awakens in a bed somewhere with a bandage on his head. He walks out into a community of huts built on the side of a cliff. He is confronted by people he is unable to communicate with, until a woman named Mara (Samantha Mumba) asks “Do you know my words?” in perfect English. It turns out that the Eloi in this version have discovered “the Stone Language” carved in stone and concrete relics from our time, and have kept it alive as a tradition. Most Eloi lose the ability to speak it by adulthood, but Mara teaches children, so she has retained it.

Quite different from the Eloi in 1894 and in 1960, the Eloi of 2002 are highly industrious, growing crops, and building windmills. There is no evidence of anything being done for them by anyone else. However, they live under the opression of a fear that they refuse to speak of. Alex suspects it has to do with the reason none of the Eloi seem to be older than their early twenties. He awakens one night from a nightmare in which he is being drawn toward a frightening statue in the forest. Mara tells him “we all have that dream,” but refuses to say more. We later learn that that same night, Alex’s pocket watch was stolen by Morlocks, which explains why the Eloi have no machines. Alex gazes up at the remains of our moon, now a collection of chunks that make a spectacular stream across the sky, and thinks “You were right, David. We did go too far.”

He learns what the Eloi’s unspoken fear is when the Morlocks first attack. The Morlocks of 2002 are considerably more formidable than in the other versions, traveling fast on all fours, and then fighting on two legs. They bear more resemblance to the Uruk Hai from The Lord of the Rings, stalking between rows of their machines. After Mara, along with others, is dragged underground in an

Guy Pierce gets mideval in the 8000th century.

Guy Pierce gets mideval in the 8000th century.

attack,  Alex demands to know why the Eloi will not fight back. An Eloi replies “those who … ‘fight’ are taken first.” So between 1894 and 2002, the relationship has made a full transition from ironic justice to shameless opression. The Eloi lack technology not because of laziness, but because the Morlocks use coordinated attacks to keep them helpless. The end result, however, is essentially the same, as Alex finds out. He discovers Photonic again, its panes of glass tarnished and cracked, but still functional (after 800,000 years. Right). Photonic directs him to the statue he dreamed of, this version’s Sphynx. He climbs down into it and discovers a grizly slaughterhouse scene that audiences were spared in 1960. After being captured, he sees Mara locked in a cage and meets the “Uber Morlock,” brilliantly played by Jeremy Irons, though he is well hidden in a great makeup job.

Spy Morlocks mark targets for Hunters.

Spy Morlocks mark targets for Hunters.

The Uber Morlock extends peculiar hospitality to Alex, protecting him from the bestial Morlocks, answering his questions and even returning his Time Machine and pocket watch. He explains:

“After the Moon fell from the sky, the Earth could no longer sustain the species. Some managed to stay above, while others escaped below, and centuries later when we tried to emerge into the sunlight, we found we could not. So we bred ourselves into casts.”

The hunter Morlocks are bred to be predators but also to be controlled. The Uber Morlock is of a cast that concentrated on expanding its cerebral abilities. He says that without control the hunters would exhaust the food supply in a matter of months. He also controlls the Eloi and keeps them fearful.

The Uber Morlock calls Alex by name and knows who he is and why he has traveled through time. He also projects pictures into Alex’s head, putting him back in his laboratory with Emma. Alex learns learns that some Eloi, like Mara, are not consumed, but instead are used as“breeding vessels” for Morlock colonies (yuck).

Alexander is reunited with Mara.

Alexander is reunited with Mara.

Finally, the UM explains to Alex “You built your time Machine because of Emma’s death. If she had lived it would never have existed, so how could you use it to save her? You are the inescapable result of your choices, just as I am the inescabable result of you (?).” He then shows Alex the Time Machine. “You have your answer. Now go.” At this point, Alex has to be thinking “I came 8,000 centuries for a lame explanation like that?” This is the first version that tries to adress paradox in time travel, but it completely ignores exerything besides Emma’s death that Alex changed by going back.

Tell me this isn't scary.

Tell me this isn't scary.

Long story short, Alex kills the UM. After outsmarting a creature that has demonstrated the ability to read and controll his thoughts, Alex uses his pocketwatch to jam his Machine. Mara asks “What are you doing with it?” He replies “Changing the future.” The jamming results in a sort of explosion of time, that rusts metal and rots Morlocks in the blink of an eye, and destroys their lair. This, while undeniably ham-fisted, is also undeniably cool. He saves Mara and they live happily ever after.

Rather than inequality or war, this version is concerned with rappidly

The Time Machine of 1960, now in a museum.

The Time Machine of 1960, now in a museum.

expanding technology. Once again, the social evil warned of in 1899 creates havoc in the near future that forces part of humanity undergroud to evolve into monsters, who return to feed on those above. The time traveler once again abandons what he set out to find, and finds happiness in the time he has traveled to.

All three versions suffer a certain weakness. The problem with basing a story that covers 800,000 years on a single societal concern should be obvious. 800,000 years eclipses all of recorded history aproximately 100 times. And yet, even the near future is hard to portray acurately. George Pal’s portrayal 1966 looks quite droll only 50 years later. Simon Wells’ portrayal of 2030 will no doubt look the same in 2050. It’s rediculous for a writer to asume that what’s on his mind at the moment will be shaping the world so far down the road. Good science fiction will, of course, include some social critisism, but there’s a reason most science fiction stories don’t take place so far into the future. The book comes the closest to acknowledging this, as it doesn’t try to tell a story that weaves all the centuries together. Wells’ hero simply leaves Wells’ time, goes to a time when the world was unrecognizable, comes back, and tells the tale. However, this also makes the book the least engaging and most depressing version.

George comes home, looking how I felt at 1 am after finishing this review.

George comes home, looking how I felt at 1 am after finishing this review.

For dramatic purposes, Pal’s version is a clear improvement over the book, because it takes the same basic plot and makes it into a story of rebirth, rather than degeneration, and of good triumphing over evil. It’s rather hard to buy the hippie philosophy 50 years later, however. The 2002 version seems to be the least preachy of the three, and while it does at times sacrafice thought for Hollywood sensationalism, it has some good messages about facing your fears and finding what’s truly important in life. Each version is a noteworthy embodiment of the values of its time. In sum, I would have to say I liked the version from my century the best. But of course, I would.

The book

[Rating:2/5]

1960 version

[Rating:3/5]

2002 version

[Rating:3/5]

Dr. Horrible’s Sing-Along Blog

Dr. HHave you ever found a movie sufficiently interesting that you watched the director’s commentary, hoping it would enhance your enjoyment of the film, only to waste two hours listening to pointless self-congratulations? Dr. Horrible’s Sing Along Blog (Dir. Joss Whedon) has one of those few commentaries that I actually watched a second time – and just might watch a third. What makes the commentary so good is the same thing that makes the movie so good – the music. Dr. Horrible revives a dying art: musical theatre. Many genres of music are exhibited in the film, and in Commentary: the Musical.

Neil Patrick Harris of Doogie Howser fame stars as Dr. Horrible, an aspiring megalomaniac who is striving to be admitted into the Evil League or Evil (ruled by a horse – go figure), but is hampered by his aversion to murder. Meanwhile, he gazes longingly at Penny (Felicia Day), a girl he sees at the laundry mat (“I’m just a few weeks away from a real audible contact!”). As the script would have it, Dr. Horrible’s crucial heist of “wonderflonium” to fuel his freeze ray is the same occasion that Penny first talks to him. He succeeds in stealing the wonderflonium, but is nearly foiled, and badly beaten, by his nemesis, Captain Hammer (enthusiastically played with ample cheese by Nath3an Fillion). Captain Hammer is an unsympathetic super hero who fights crime mainly for the pleasure of beating up on mad scientists and taking advantage of groupies (“this is so nice, I just might sleep with the same girl twice!”). To add insult to injury, the chaos gives Hammer the chance to save Penny, and Dr. H. watches them fall for each other (right). Hammer’s bullying eventually pushes Dr. H. over the edge and leaves him willing to do what he must to get into the E.L.E. (Penny may cry, but her tears will dry when I hand her the keys to a shiny, new Australia.)

This film debuted in the summer of 2008, being broadcast over the internet. Whedon funded the project himself, at just over $200,000, and used his home as a studio. The production is a bit rough. One thing you’ll notice is that the actors wear little-to-no makeup, showing their blemishes to the world. Gutsy. Hammer’s “costume” is a T-shirt with an iron-on. The movie was blogged while in production, and the marketing was immediately taken over by Whedon’s internet-savvy fans. When the film was finally broadcast, the network almost crashed from the number of viewers.

I rented this one on Netflix and wound up watching it over and over, not so much for the movie as for the songs. At 43 minutes, the film doesn’t develop its story very well. Then again, that doesn’t stop people from loving The Phantom of the Opera. Much like Phantom, Dr. Horrible is more of a concept album with a moving picture in the background than a real movie. That said, also like Phantom, Dr. Horrible is worth watching just for the music. Harris in particular demonstrates some real voice talent. The lyrics have a depth to them that you don’t see in contemporary pop music, and keep coming up with different rhyming patterns. Almost every scene involves a well written and well performed musical number, my two favorites being the anguished “My Eyes” and the ominous “Brand New Day.”

As if that wasn’t enough, they added Commentary, in which they brought back virtually everyone who was involved in the movie to sing at least one song. Just about every type of music you can think of is covered, including a rag, jazz, and lounge singing. To top it all off, Marissa Tancharoen, co-writer and “groupie #1” sings a rant about how “no one’s Asian in the movies” (not sure where she gets that).

The DVD also includes videos of applications for E.L.E. membership that fans sent in. Each one has an original song. Be warned, some of them are what you’d expect from geeks filming in their living rooms. Some, however, are quite good, most notably an evil rabbi who pitches a plan to blow the tip off the Washington Monument, and a Catholic priest who has a disturbing take on Catholic theology in the form of a rap.

I have to say the writers really dropped the ball on Act III of the film, because the ending sucks. It’s the kind of ending that gives the impression that they meant to do more, but just ran out of time/money/steam. The idea seems to be that Dr. H. get everything he ever wanted, except that he inadvertently destroy the thing he wanted most. But it’s implausible to the point of not making sense. It tries to do in 5 minutes what would have taken about 50, and leaves the audience feeling like they’ve been plunged into nihilistic darkness for no reason.

The decision of what rating to give this film was a difficult one. It’s a bit too simplistic and unintentionally comical to be considered a true contribution to the world of cinema, which would justify a four-star rating. In fact, with an ending that falls flat on its face, I can’t even consider it a solidly good movie, which would merit three stars. On the other hand, it’s too well done and innovative to be passed off as just another piece of mindless entertainment (two stars). Hence, I have decided to give it

[Rating:2.5/5]

Zombieland

Z-land posterWhat is with all these zombie movies?? Is our culture really so morbid that we can’t get enough of seeing human bodies hacked to pieces? Zombieland (Dir. Ruben Fleischer) is only the latest in a veritable flood of ketchup-splattered, limb-laden flicks from the past few years in which humans are transformed into flesh-eating monsters and terrorize the few souls unaffected by the radiation, virus, or whatever.

The zombie phenomenon began as a trickle in 1968, with Night of the Living Dead (Dir. George Romero), whose two sequels didn’t arrive until 1978 and 1985. Those three movies were later re-made, however, along with new sequels City of the Dead and Land of the Dead. Add to that the Resident Evil series (Dir. Russell Mulcahy) and 28 Days Later and its sequel 28 Weeks Later (Dir. Danny Boyle), and it becomes clear that what once appeared to be a few strange but isolated incidents is now an epidemic sweeping the world. Indeed, a trip to the movie section at Wal-mart will turn up no end of little-known, low budget zombie flicks that never made it to theaters, each boasting its “gruesome” and “shocking” qualities. And now, we are soon to be hit with a remake of the Worst Movie Ever Made, Plan 9 fom Outer Space.

Night of the Living Dead; the first zombie movie, and probably the best.

Night of the Living Dead; the first zombie movie, and probably the best.

The term “zombie” originated in Afro-Caribbean folklore, in which the dead could be revived by a “bokor” or sorcerer. By the 1950s, zombism (well, it’s a word now) was caused by radiation, just like everything else back then. More recently, zombism is usually caused by a virus, as in 28 Days or Zombieland.

As the bard will tell you, all fiction eventually becomes a satire of itself. Such was the case in Edgar Wright’s Shaun of the Dead in 2004. Shaun is not the best of films, but nonetheless demonstrates a certain comedic brilliance in the way it backhands the zombie sub-genre. Our hero, Shaun (Simon Pegg), is staggering through his mediocre life, working the same dead end job, day after day, having problems with his girlfriend, etc. Which is why the trailer asks “do you ever feel like you’re turning into a zombie?” As luck would have it, Shaun’s world is overrun by real zombies. But even with a zombie apocalypse is in full swing, it takes Shaun a long time to notice that anything is amiss. One morning, he stumbles, half awake, across a street, past a burning car and a distant crowd of zombies into his neighborhood quick shop. He retrieves a beverage from a refrigerator inside, oblivious to the bloody handprints on the glass door, and proceeds to the counter, barely pausing when he slips in something all over the floor. Finding no one at the counter, he drops some money on it and heads for the door. As he’s leaving, the clerk, now a zombie, comes shambling out of the back room. Shaun yells “hey Eric, I left the money on the counter,” and leaves.

Shaun: A hero must rise. From his sofa.

Shaun: A hero must rise. From his sofa.

Shaun and his friends survive one scene by pretending to be zombies; something that Zombieland borrows. Perhaps uniquely among zombie movies, Shaun ends with the crisis actually being solved by the authorities – and the zombies being employed in the service industry. The final scene is of Shaun playing video games with his roommate, who is now a zombie and chained to the wall, lest he take a bite out of Shaun. The point of it all being: If the recently dead did reanimate and seek to feast on human flesh, things really wouldn’t be that different from the way they are now.

But is that such a fresh message? Zombie stories always implied that civilization was inherently fragile and left us wondering if humans were that different from zombies. Dawn of the Dead takes place in a shopping mall, after all. Heck, zombie fiction was probably spawned by the breakdown of societal relations.

Zombieland is definitely more comedy than horror. It’s not even scary, unless you count the occasional cheap shock (industry term for when something jumps out at you). I laughed pretty hard, though. It’s hard to believe a movie that goes through so many drums of corn syrup could be this lighthearted. The main part of the action kicks off in Garland, Texas (“it might look like zombies destroyed it, but that’s just Garland”), where we meet our narrator (Jesse Eisenberg), who identifies himself only as “Columbus,” the city he’s from. He explains his rules for surviving Z-land, which are superimposed on the screen as amusing graphics. He then has a chance to demonstrate them in an encounter with three zombies (below).

Columbus practics Rule 3: Beware of bathrooms.

Columbus practics Rule 3: Beware of bathrooms; only one way out.

This 3D text actually provides a major source of entertainment for the film, being knocked over by running characters and spattered with gore.  You kind of have to see it to appreciate what I’m talking about. Columbus, a virginal nebbish who spent his pre-Z-land life playing World of Warcraft, comments “I might seem like an unlikely survivor, with all my phobias and irritable bowel syndrome, but I have the advantage of not having any family connections or close friends.” However, as he trudges down an abandoned highway, he has to admit, it would be nice to see a familiar face, or just any face without blood dripping from its lips and bits of flesh between its teeth. His wish is granted when he meets Tallahassee, a gun-slinging, whisky-swilling, zombie-killing machine (Woody Harrelson). No sooner have the pair begun to get along than they meet Wichita (Emma Stone) and her sister Little Rock (Abigail Breslin), who swindle them out of their guns and transportation – time after time. Once again, it seems that even those unaffected by the virus are behaving like zombies – as Sweeny Todd put it, man devouring man. Columbus comments, “I’m not sure which was more depressing, the fact that all my family and friends were gone, or that fact that I’d never really had a family.”

Zombie kill of the week?

Zombie kill of the week?

Z-land diverges from from most of the sub-genre however, because amid all the gore, what it’s really about is the forming, not the destroying, of relationships. After risking his life to save Witchita’s, Columbus concludes “In Zombieland, if you don’t have somebody, you might as well be a zombie.” It’s an odd feeling as the credits roll, and you suddenly realize that what you just saw was actually a feel-good movie.

This flick has some genuinely fun moments, including one of the cleverest cameos I have ever seen, and a climactic scene in which Tallahassee runs through an amusement park with a huge arsenal, doing what he does best. All this, of course, is set amidst a giant playground of unlocked doors and all manner of goods and material comforts, abandoned by man kind. Maybe that’s what it is about all these zombie movies: the thrill of having everyone else out of the way and the world at your fingertips. Plus there’s the allure of a fun war – no remorse about “killing” the enemy. I have yet to meet a reanimated corpse or virus-induced cannibal in real life, but I think with our materialism and violent tendencies, a zombie apocalypse would be the least of our worries.

[Rating:3/5]

Nanny Diaries

TND posterIt’s hard to put my finger on why I like The Nanny Diaries. There isn’t a single shootout, car wreck, or fist fight in the entire thing; not even one punch thrown to accent a dramatic moment. Not only that, but (male audience members be warned) this is very much a chick flick – be prepared for a lot of whining by several characters about how hard it is to be a woman.

I guess it boils down to two reasons: first, for all its fashion tips and feminism, Diaries is ultimately a movie about kids and family life, two areas that are just as important in the end to men as they are to women, whether we like it or not. And second, it is one of those few movies that succeeds in telling a very engaging story with nothing more than everyday life.

The lead, Annie Braddock (Scarlet Johansson) graduates from college with honors in business. Her mother, a nurse, has spent the last 22 years pulling extra shifts, in between raising Annie alone. (Just for the record, in the book, the protagonist, Nanny, or “Nan,” had a very involved father, who, being a teacher, was a key part of her life and a mentor in her career as a nanny.) She has done this to give Annie something better than what she had, and wants her to go on to an illustrious career in finance.

Annie’s first love is anthropology. Her mother’s reaction, of course, is “how are you going to make a living at that?” Grudgingly, Annie accepts an interview at the prestigious Goldman, Sachs firm, but gags when the interviewer asks her “who is Annie Braddock?” She suddenly realizes she doesn’t know. She rushes out of the interview and into Central Park, where she saves a child from being run over. The mother, Mrs. X (Laura Linny), breathlessly runs up and showers her with thanks. Annie introduces herself as “Annie” and Mrs. X blurts out “Did you say you were a nanny??” Annie immediately finds herself buried in the calling cards of moms from the Upper-East-Side of Manhattan, including Mrs. X.

Repulsed by the finance profession, Annie decides to adopt the persona of

The "ideal specimen of an Upper-East-Side female" pushing her son out of the way.

The "ideal specimen of an Upper-East-Side female" pushing her son out of the way.

an Upper-East-Side nanny for a summer and treat the experience as an anthropological case study. She narrates the rest of the movie as though dictating a field diary. She finds herself being wined and dined by moms all over Manhattan until she accepts the job with Mrs. X. She tells her mother she’s gotten a finance job and moves to the city.

Much like with a human trafficking syndicate however, once a Manhattan family has a nanny hooked, the sweet talk is over. As Annie arrives at the Xs’ Fifth Avenue apartment, expecting a fun, easy job, she suddenly finds herself stuffed into a bedroom that is more like a closet, and expected to learn to cook and work 24 hours, single handedly raising the X’s five-year-old son, Grayer (Nicholas Art). The first thing Grayer does on seeing her is kick her in the shin and scream “I hate you I want Bertie! (The last nanny).” Annie battles through the next several scenes, trying to find a way to Grayer’s heart, reminding herself that anthropologist “Margarette Mead didn’t run home every time she contracted malaria.”

Grayer soon becomes the least of Annie’s worries, however, as an Upper-East-Side Nanny must also serve as the punching bag for an Upper-East-Side mother’s anxiety, anguish and insecurity. Mrs. X loads Annie down with non-child-related errands to give herself time for shopping, and vents her pain over Mr. X’s infidelity on her. In one scene, she barges into Annie’s room holding a negligee, and demands “This is not mine so it must be yours, right? Right??”

Annie observes “Male monogamy remains an elusive … practice throughout the world. In many Bedouin tribes, powerful men are encouraged to take multiple wives. In contemporary France, mistresses are de rigour and quietly tolerated. But for the women of the Upper-East-Side, adultery is pathologically ignored.”

It takes a while for the audience to meet Mr. X (Paul Giamatti), who the authors of the book describe as a common example of an Upper-East-Side Male, who is “bashing his brains out on Wall Street, so that his wife can have thousand dollar curtains … but he’s missing out on what he has … a wife who craves his attention, and a son who thinks he hung the moon.”

"Nanny" is singing to Grayer in French when he drops the "L" bomb.

"Nanny" is singing to Grayer in French when he drops the "L" bomb.

With the strife between his parents, Grayer transfers his affection to his Nanny. In a pivotal scene (above), Annie narrates that “three little words made it a thousand times harder to leave” the job she has learned to hate.

One darkly comic scene was eerily reminiscent of my experience at a “Bar Bench Conference,” where lawyers and judges are “allowed” to voice their grievances against each other. Of course, with things going back to normal the next day, you can probably guess how much the lawyers had to say. Likewise, Mrs. X takes Annie to a Mother-Nanny Conflict Resolution meeting, where Annie joins a collection of third-world women standing against the wall who know better than to say anything.

"Nanny" assists the tyrant queen in her chamber.

"Nanny" assists the tyrant queen in her chamber.

Laura Linny has a glare that can truly freeze the blood. After awhile, Annie starts jumping in fear every time Mrs. X comes around a corner. One of the most memorable scenes in the movie is when Grayer gets upset and runs straight past his open-armed mother, throwing his arms around Annie. Mrs. X is starring daggers at Annie while Annie frantically begs Grayer “Go to your mom! Go to your mom!”

Having also read the book, I know that it just begged to be put on the screen. Believe it or not, director Robert Pulcini asked the authors of the book if he could make a movie out of it a year before the book was even published. I’d have to say the changes that he made to it are for the better. He starts it off with a fantasy sequence of Annie wandering through the museum of natural history looking at dioramas that depict child-rearing customs from all over the world – coming eventually to dioramas of Manhattan life, where they have “the most prosperous, but idiosyncratic social structure in the world.” In the book, Nan was a veteran nanny, explaining the field to the reader. As she is, Annie is more of the audience’s character, discovering the world of the Upper-East-Side the same time we are. Pulcini also flavors the soundtrack a bit with a few throwbacks to Mary Poppins, and plays jungle sounds and tribal drums over several scenes to emphasize the bizarreness of the rituals Annie encounters.

Johansson plays the role well, involving the audience in her reactions to this bizarre world, and entertaining us with her native New Yorker acting. Giamatti is creepy and devilish as Mr. X, and for a child actor, Art is very impressive. The rest of the cast also does a great job. Pulcini definitely paints a bleak picture of our world, but illustrates a number of excellent points, including that being rich doesn’t guarantee any happiness. Unfortunately, after doing such a great job with the darkness, he feels the need to force in a text-book happy ending in the last five minutes of the movie.

Overall, The Nanny Diaries is an excellent film about an unusual and very thought-provoking subject. And despite the fact that it’s a chick flick, I have to admit it is genuinely touching.

Rating: [Rating:4/5]

Surrogates

Surrogates posterBruce Willis has spent a lot of his career kicking in doors, but I bet this is the first time he’s had to do it just to get his wife out of bed. Surrogates is a disturbing story of man kind’s dependence on technology and susceptibility to control by fear.  In the not-too-distant future, mid-Sunday A.D., 98% of all humans live vicariously through life-like robots. They lie in chairs that look like the offspring of a La-Z-Boy and a virtual reality entertainment center (“stem chairs”), and rarely leave their homes. Their work, and all other interaction, is done by their “surrogates,” androids connected to their brain stems.

You may, of course, choose your own “surry.” You can be whatever gender, race, body type, or hair color strikes your fancy. It’s sort of a universal Stepford Wives. You see what your surry sees, and feel what it feels (except the pain, of course).

In the future, all murder scenes will look like this.

In the future, all murder scenes will look like this.

Needless to say, the casting crew had their work cut out for them on this one, even by Hollywood standards, searching for enough perfect-faced, perfect-bodied people to fill out the future streets full of sculpted robots. These, of course, are to be contrasted with the recluses controlling them from home, who have really let themselves go. Willis plays Tom Greer (and his surrogate), an FBI agent whose wife refuses to even set foot outside her bedroom “in the flesh.”

Greer plugs into a stem chair.

Greer plugs into a stem chair.

Greer has bigger problems, however, because early in the movie, what starts as a routine vandalism investigation (below), soon appears to be a double homicide – the first two homicides in the western world in several years. It seems that someone has developed a weapon capable of sending a signal through a surry that not only destroys the surry, but liquefies the brain of the user.

Robocop meets CSI. Got enough crackers for all that cheese?

Robocop meets CSI. Got enough crackers for all that cheese?

The initial theory is that this is subversive action by “Dreddies,” members of a colony where surrogates are outlawed. The Dreddies follow the leadership of  “The Prophet” (Ving Rhames, below), claim sovereignty over a small patch of ground, and spurn all advanced technology, using horses and buggies, and the like.

Ving Rhames, trying way too hard.

Ving Rhames, trying way too hard.

In chasing his man, Greer narrowly survives, and has his surry destroyed. The FBI takes him off the case and refuses to issue him a new one. Now, for the first time in years, he must leave his home and track the killer (you didn’t really think he’d obey his captain and stay off the case?) with only his own weak flesh at his command. His investigation takes him first to the Dreddie colony. But is The Prophet what he seems? (I’ll give you a hint: I brought it up.)

Would you tell this it wasn't your wife? Some guys are just never happy.

Would you tell this it wasn't your wife? Some guys are just never happy.

Willis could have earned a lot of kudos for this film if he’d allowed the makeup department to make his human self ugly. It appears however, that his agent fought not to lower his image one bit. Everyone else is hideous, giving a realistic portrayal of people who haven’t shaved, showered or brushed their teeth for several days. Willis’ acting is passable. His most memorable scene is probably one where he begs his wife, through the eyes of her surry, (Rosamund Pike) to let him see her again (above). The best acting in the movie is probably done by Rhada Mitchell, as the blond, buxom surry of Greer’s homely (work) partner, Peters. I say this because this surry is taken over by several different people in the course of the movie, so she’s always switching characters. She also gets a scene where she runs at incredible speed through the street, doing flips over cars, and so forth. Which raises a question that the movie never resolves: if the streets are now populated with super-strong, super-fast robots, why are there still so many cars?

It’s hard to say more without spoiling a decent flick. I’ll just say if you like sci-fi, or crime stories, Surrogates is worth a look. Not a classic, but exciting, involving and thought-provoking.

Rating: [Rating:3/5]

Glory Road

GR posterHistory has often shown us the power of sports to inflame people’s passions and sway their opinions. Hollywood, of course, wouldn’t miss a chance to cash-in on this fact. One such attempt is Glory Road.

The movie is a good illustration, however, of just how hard it is for movies to do what sports do. They rarely do anything to challenge our views, but rather reinforce our comfort in what we already assume. Ironically, they have a habit of acting as if they are saying something revolutionary. Consider, for instance, the end of Remember the Titans, from Jerry Bruckheimer, also the producer of Glory Road. The end of the film jumps to several years later, at a funeral, when the narrator, Sheryl Yoast, says “They say it can’t work, black and white. But when they do, we remember the Titans.” I found myself wondering “Just who are ‘they’?”

Glory Road sets the same mood as Titans, starting off at about the same time (mid-sixties) when schools, and therefore sports, were generally segregated. Josh Lucas of Secondhand Lions becomes a white Denzel Washington as Texas Western’s head basketball coach. What do you call a white man surrounded by five black men?

Frustrated with the lack of good players who want to play for TW, Lucas’ Don Haskins combs the ghettos and recruits seven black players for the team. This gives rise to the film’s first really cheesy line: “I don’t see color; I see skill and I see quick.” In the predictable spirit of Titans, for the most part, all black schools and black basketball teams seem to disappear, so the unsympathetic characters are all white (although they meet one team with a few black players midway through the movie). They win consistently, until the black players, angry over a graffiti incident, refuse to pass to the white ones, resulting in the season’s only loss. In spite of this, or maybe because of it, Haskins decides to play only black players in the national championship game, and they go on to narrowly beat the all-white Kentucky team. So the question becomes, is Bruckheimer trying to convey the message that he was in Titans that the discipline brought on by working through racial tension builds strength, or is he simply saying that black guys play basketball better than white guys?

Either way, it’s nothing we haven’t heard before. It’s never been any secret that competitive basketball became widely black as skill began to show through prejudice, and then became almost exclusively black when television took over and skill took a backseat to image. Ironically, the film has to establish a mentor-student relationship. Consequently, there are a few scenes of Haskins schooling black players on the court.

Glory-Road-movie-05

Let’s look at some of Hollywood’s other efforts to cross-breed sports and race. In 1992, The Mighty Ducks was released. A hot shot attorney (Emilio Estevez) is caught driving drunk and has to do the community service of coaching a washed-up athletic team from a poor district. In the tradition of Hollywood happy endings, he turns the team around completely and they win the league championship. At the championship, they meet the team that haunts Estevez’s memory – his childhood team, sponsored by a wealthy district. The players on this team are all essentially identical to one another, forming a single character more than a team of individuals. The Ducks, conversely, represent a schmorgasboard of cultures and personalities and provide the colorful characters that every movie needs (and that sports teams tend to suppress for unity).

It was no accident, of course, that Disney chose the sport of hockey as a setting for this story. It was the only sport where the “bad” team could be all white with any credibility. Once hockey was used up, Little Giants and The Big Green couldn’t present quite the same hegemony. I always looked forward to a similar movie about basketball. It figures that when one finally came, it would be set in the sixties.

I’ve been around the block enough that I’m comfortable saying a lot of black people will not find Glory Road particularly inspiring. Average black people have often complained  that the most athletic members of their culture hog the spotlight, leading their young men away from solid careers in a hopeless bid for stardom.                                                              Coach C poster

To round out my perspective I rented another basketball movie, Coach Carter, which addresses exactly that concern. Quite different from Road’s images of grandeur and triumph, Coach Carter ends with crushing defeat – on the court. But the epilogue shows success in much more important areas. Coach Carter is also more fun, because the team has a token white guy.

Here’s an idea for a basketball movie that would follow the standard formula, and would be a lot more fun. Start with a black coach in a ghetto neighborhood. Have him get pegged as an “Oreo,” or otherwise ostracized from the community. So he has to put his team together from neighborhoods outside his own. Naturally, this would involve including some white, Asian, and Hispanic members. Throw a few women onto the team just to shake things up. When his team goes up against a district full of all black, all male teams, no one would expect them to win – but hey, it’s a movie! Now you just need to figure out a way for the fate of the universe to hang on the championship game, and you’re set.

Can a basketball game really change the world? If it does, count on Hollywood to pretend they got there first. Perhaps the line from the Texas Western assistant coach rings true: “This is just proof that knuckle heads come in all shapes, sizes and colors.”

[Rating:1.5/5]