Network

On what's supposed to be a news program the anchor is simply chosen because he's mentally unstable and it produces ratings. For standard programing the network films criminals doing dispicable things in real life and broadcasts it on television for the public. When you hear that you might think of modern television with Glen Beck's tearful rants and reality telivision. But this is actually the events of Sydney Lumet's 1976 satire Network. Despite the slight confusion in tone the movie is a brilliant, scathing and eerily prophetic look at the the television industry and it's loss of integrity for the sake of greed.

Network centers around the news division of the struggling television network UBS (effectivly a fourth version of ABC, NBC and CBC) which has just been taken over by the large corporation CCA. Howard Beale is the longtime news anchor for UBS's nightly news and he learns that in two weeks he will lose his job due to low ratings. He responds by announcing during a live broadcast that he will shoot himself on live television in a week and claiming that life is bullshit. But instead of removing him from the news CCA decides to keep him on the show anyways once they notice that his mental instability has dramatically increased ratings. Eventually the news show has a live studio audience, a fortuneteller predicting the news, and Beale giving firey yet intelligent rants on the evils of television.

The first thing you notice while watching this movie is the oscar winning script written by Paddy Chayefsky. While at points brutally funny, it's also brutally tragic. It takes simply the subject of a corporation taking over a television network and uses it to talk about the sterilizing effect it has on our knowledge, relationships, and effectivly our entire lives. We spend so much time watching television that we effectivly live and plan our lives like bad cliched TV dramas. Huge tragedies reduced to 30 seconds on a newsbroadcast. It's drained us of our sense of outrage, rendering us almost like robots. In the words of Howard Beale, we should be mad as hell and not want to take it anymore. But the thing is, is that we continue to take it. Howard implores his viewers (and effectivly us as well) to turn off our television sets and we don't. That's the brilliance of the the movie, because it involves the viewer directly in the tragedy of the story. We trap ourselves in a system that simply destroys our humanity.

The second thing you notice is the performances which took home three of the four acting Oscars the year it was released. The flashiest and probably best performance in the film is Peter Finch as Beale. I have two clips of him below and they speak for themselves. He takes an extremely difficult part with three-quarters of the film's important monolouges and infuses it with so much passion and outrage that it's invigorating just watching him. Then there's Faye Dunaway playing constantly talking head of programing Diana. She takes what could have been an irratating and one note part and makes her sympathetic and full of heart, so despite the fact she represents all the film is against you can't help but root for her. Even the smaller parts are fantastic. Robert Duvall is great as the merciless corporate hachet man Frank Hackett and Beatrice Straight is heartbreaking as Louise Shumacher (the shortest performance ever to win an Oscar). This is a massive ensemble film and there's not a single weak link which is a remarkable achievment in itself.

The one flaw of the movie though is that it seems at points that it dosn't know what it wants to be. While at points its very over the top and silly in it's exagerated satire, and then at other points it aims to be a realistic drama about the loss of integrity and humanity in television and humanity as a whole. The tone shifts back and forth rapidy, sometimes several times in a single scene and it makes the movie seem slightly disjointed. But if you think about it possibly that was intentional because now what was viewed is satire is real life, so mabye the ridiculousness was intended to be mixed right in with the humanity.

The film's great achievement is it's humanity. The film is just bursting with emotion from the greatest depths of sorrow, to hell like anger, to incredible happiness. It even manages to stir some of the same feelings in you as you realize that the state of telivision and entertainment as a whole is very much like Network's. It's so brillant and immersive that it makes you a character yourself. The film breeds a very personal relationship with the viewer and because of that I couldn't recommend it more.

Splice

Splice opens with a first person view of Adrian Brody and Sarah Polley delivering what seems to be a baby. They look at it with pride at what they have created. Then you discover that what you thought was a baby was actually a genetically created dog sized worm. This misplaced feeling of parenthood is what Splice is all about.

I'm going to begin by saying that Splice is a very strange movie. But despite how bizare it might get at points it's incredibly interesting and genre bending. It takes the plot of what would be a cliched horror movie and they turned it into a character driver drama about family. So even though it has several flaws its premise is intriguing enough to make up for them.

The movie follows two scientists, who are also in a relationship, named Clive and Elsa (played by Adrian Brody and Sarah Polley) who work at a bio-engenering lab. Effectivly what they do is splice the DNA of different creatures together and then use the chemicals in those creature's bodies to make medications. Their ultimate goal however is to create something using human DNA because they believe that it would lead to a great medical breakthrough (cures to cancer, parkinsons, ect...). However due to economic and social reasons the pharmaceutical company they're working for forbids it. So in stardard horror movie fashion they do it anyway and create a creature that they name Dren (nerd backwards). As it begins to grow older it matures rapidly, eventually looking very similar to a human female (besides the strangly jointed legs and the tail with a stinger). And inevitably it dosn't end well.

Now just by hearing the summary above you would assume that its basically a bad rip off of Species, but it's so much more than that. As Dren begins to mature Elsa begin to treat it almost like a child by giving it toys, dressing it in peoples clothing, even putting makeup on it. And in their handling of the creature you realize that each character isn't who you think they were. Elsa turns out to be incredibly emotionally damaged, and you begin to realize that her motives for creating it in the first place were less than scientific. Clive initially reacts with disgust which gradually morphs into something very different. The movie turns into a character study and isn't really a horror movie at all as the advertising would lead you to believe. If anything the creature is more sympatetic than frightening. In fact the movies weakest moments are when it's attempting to be scary, because it seems that they were just tacked on so the movie could be more commercial. Also Vincenzo Natali can't direct horror very well so some of the sequences near the begining and the end fall flat.

Splice is also acted extremely well. I think it says a lot about how clever Natali is when you look at the casting of Adrian Brody and Sarah Polley. First they're fantastic actors, particularily Polley who brings out Elsa's quirks and tendencies in a really interesting and believable way. Also though they are both very interesting looking and aren't generically attractive like the characters are in most horror movies (AKA Nightmare on Elm Street remake) and this in a way makes them more believable and interesting characters. the performance that is really scene stealing though is Dren, partially played by Delphine Chaneac. The creature effects in this movie are just fantastic, probably some of the best I've ever seen, especially in the early parts. The way it interacts with the environment and how the actors react to it is simply breathtaking.

I will warn you though, there's a certain point in the movie where you're either on board or you're off because things get a little crazy and more than a little wierd. I won't spoil it for the people reading who havn't seen it but it's messed up. It makes sense in the genral ark of the story, and is VERY Freudian, but in the theatre where I was watching the movie it was divided between people laughing hysterically and people really wierded/grossed out. I personally liked it and it's something very memorable, but you might not be able to get past it.

In a way the film reminded me of some of David Cronenberg's early stuff (wow, second Cronberg reference in row) like The Fly. It deals with metamorphosis, identiy, and what really makes you human. But it also confronts way the strange aspects of parenting in a very upfront way. Splice is crazy, facinating, sometimes disgusting, and thought provoking. It's different than anything in theatres, or mabye even out of theatres, and I highly recommend it.

Red Dead Redemption

Now I don't usually review games, nor will I make this a regular thing, but what Rockstar has done with Red Dead Redemption is just fantastic. They take every ounce of this game and make it fit the genre perfectly, make it incredibly polished, and even make it encompass complicated themes. It's taking storytelling in the medium to a different level, and I can saftely say that it's the best game I've ever played.

Red Dead is set in the early 1900's and follows John Marston. John is a former outlaw who attempts to go straight but the government threatens to kill his family unless he hunts down his old friends. Effectivly it's the plot of A History of Violence set in the west, but that's no bad thing. During this time John comes to terms with the bad things he's done, reflects on what kind of a person he really is, and debates on wheather or not a person can truly change. Just like Cronenberg it intelligently disscusses indentity in a moving way. Not only is John a total badass he's a fantastic and relatable character who I really grew attached to as the story progressed. In fact by the end of the game I really became attached to most of the characters John met, and unlike the somewhat jokey GTA series they approached the characters and relationships in a really honest way. The fact that they dedicated two hours at the end of the game to John spending time on his farm with his family is a sign of how they care more about the story than just shooting guys in the face.

However John's story also functions as a metaphor for the death of western culture. Due to the spread of trains things like the Model-T Ford and automatic weapons are begining to make appearences. What's so tragic about this though is that you spend the first fifteen minutes of the game out in nature. Rockstar obviously put a huge amount of work into the surroundings because this game is beautiful. Simply watching the sunset in this game is a treat. They even created a realistic ecosystem in this game, with animals that behave realistically and prey on each other. So when you finally arrive in Blackwater and it begins to looks like modern society it seems so ugly and brutish it compared to the beauty that surrounds it. And it's tragic because you know that soon everything will look just like that. But another thing that Rockstar does is they paint John's old comrades actions as if they are simply fighting to preserve their way of life. So it's very sad when you actually have to hunt them down (reminded me of Shadow of the Collosus). So John's actions and surroundings serve the overarching themes of the story, making the gameplay itself completly relevant. That's a brillant example of how games can approach storytelling because if that isn't art I don't know what is.

The final thing that I found impressive was how it completly captured the genre. After finishing Red Dead I watched Butch Cassidy and the Sundance Kid and I was awestruck. To the way all the plants looked, the mountains, the way people talked and dressed, even the way the trains looked it was dead on. The amount of detail put into this game is awestiking. You can enter every building in the game and all the interiors are detailed. The world itself is huge, covering miles and miles of terrain. It's like you stepped into the largest, most detailed Western ever, and you're the director.

This game conjured up more emotion in me than almost any film recently has, and if you have a Xbox 360 or a PS3 you have to get this game. It's evidence of how games are becoming a more sofisticated form of media and is maturing rapidly (other equally good examples include Mass Effect 2 and Heavy Rain). Even if you aren't a gamer this is a great time to start, because Red Dead is something everyone should experience.

Alien

Recent news that Ridley Scott would be directing an Alien prequel made me curious to visit his original sci-fi horror masterpiece, and it really is a stunner. It combats cliches, piles on an incredible amount of atmosphere, and sports several great performances. It really is a modern masterpiece.

The film follows the crew of the mining vessel Nostromo who are on there way home in stasis having completed their original task. However the ship receives a distress signal from a nearby planet and they stop to investigate. Needless to say this leads to nothing positive. Some exploded stomachs later the crew is trapped in space with a bloodthirsty alien hiding in the ventilation.

The main thing that stands out while you watch the film is the sets. Scott constructed massive sets to compose the ship and they are truly impressive things. The set of the crashed ship on the alien planet is particularly impressive with towering walls and creepy engravings. Even the ship that they pilot is frightening. The walls are pitch black and covered in markings, tubes and notches. Not only does it almost seem to provide camouflage for the alien, it creates a mood of fear and evil that can't be matched by any other film I've ever seen. It's refreshing in a time were so many movies are filled with artificiality to have these very real and impressive backgrounds.

Another thing that is impressive is the remarkable restraint of Scott. He sets up a scenario where their ship is trapped for 17 hours on an alien planet and you'd expect to have it become a fight for survival on their planet. But he waits a full hour before having any blood actually spilled. He simply drenches you in atmosphere so by the time the violence arrives you're scared out of your mind. Another example of this is the presence of the alien. It's only actually shown a couple times mainly because the puppetry wasn't advanced enough to have it be shown on screen for a long time, but because of this it undertakes a Psycho like vibe where you're more scared of what's off screen then you ever are when it's actually in front of you.

Even the special effects have aged quite well. With the exception of a few scenes (the fake decapitated head of Ash looks nothing like Ian Holm) everything looks very good and the alien is truly a very monstrous and terrifying thing. All in all this is a very thrilling and visceral movie, even though it was made 30 years ago, and I highly recommend it.

(Warning: Scene is a wee bit graphic.)

Memento

Memento, directed by Christopher Nolan, is one of the most inventive, mind-bending movies I have ever seen. It follows Leonard Shelby, played by Guy Pearce, a man who is unable to make new memories. The film follows his attempts to track down and kill the man who murdered his wife. How he manages to keep track of what he's found is a series of tatoos and polariods that he uses to reconize important people and places.
What makes this film so interesting is that the story is told out of order and told in the sections that he remembers (the non-chronological story telling kinda reminded me of Pulp Fiction). Because of this it effectivly puts you in the shoes of Leonard. People seem to reconize him but you're not sure, people may have good intentions or they might be exploiting his condition. It really puts you on your toes because even with the characters you've spent so much time with could actually have totally different intentions. Even the polaroids that he completly relies on might be inaccurate. When I approached the movie I was partially expecting it to be just a gimmick, but it really shows you in a sense how it feels to be Leonard. Nolan took what could have been incredibly confusing and stupid and made it more coherent than most regular movies today. It creates such a strong feeling of darkness and confusion, and I feel that it accomplishes in a lot of ways what Veritgo failed to do. Basically it was incredibly cool. And in addition to the innovative storytelling the film has great performances by Guy Pearce and Carrie-Ann Moss and the cinnemotography is supperb. Memento is one of those films that makes you reevaluate the way you approach movies, and it's one of my favorites. Go see it, I implore you.