Dominatio Per Malum

X3: The Last Stand(2006) 6/10

Watched X3 today with the gang at Tampines, and the trailer for Superman Returns was showing during the pre-show adverts. I must say that Kevin Spacey looks absolutely diabolical as Lex Luthor. On the other hand, i was rather annoyed that the movie started almost 20mins late, and we looked at various adverts and trailers before the actual screening.

Moviewise, i went into the film with lower expectation, since its directed by Brett Ratner, a director i have little confidence in and also because of the mixed reviews at RT. Ultimately, X3 proved to be more or less what i expected- a flashy CGI laden film that has the bells, whistles and bangs. It dazzles but does not impress. As a brainless summer popcorn film, its entertaining enough, and certainly, it has enough star power to make several films.

The reason why X3 doesn’t reach its potential is clearly because of 2 main factors: weak direction and scattered plot. Plotwise, it actually has great potential as a social allegory. The first main plot is the ‘cure for mutants’ plotline. You could replace the word ‘mutant’ with another word: homosexual, Jew, disabled etc and it becomes a plotline that is socially relevant and can well touch on issues such as discrimination, genetics, eugenics, social engineering etc. The other main plot is the Jean Gray/Phoenix plotline which likewise has similar potential and the Wolverine-Cyclops-Jean Gray romantic triangle hinted on in X2 could be expanded and developed to its full potential. Instead, what do we get? An sloppy and uninteresting romantic subplot involving Iceman-Rogue-and someone else, complete with cliched ice-skating scene in a film so filled with excesses that one questions the ability of the scriptwriters.

Essentially that is the problem with X3 and it can be summed in one word: excesses. Its literally bursting at the seams with characters and plots/subplots. This results in each being given no more than a cursory treatment. The most clear example lies in the two main plots, viz the Jean Gray plot and the mutant cure plot. Either one of it, if fleshed out properly, could make for a compelling and engaging third instalment. But in trying to cram both main plots inside, together with the perplexing choice of further cramming needless subplots (the Iceman romantic saga being one of the unnecessary subplots, with the Angel subplot being yet another example of utterly superfluous characters) the result is a rojak of unfulfiled potential and superficially developed plotlines.

Another obvious area where Brett Ratner is weak at is his handling of the many characters in the film. Ratner is no Robert Altman, and his inclusion of so many, many, many mutants whose roles are more like cameos than actual substantial roles means that its a blink-and-you-miss-them situation. Its like a sub-par director was suddenly given a wealth of acting talents, among them Oscar winner Halle Berry, thespians Ian Mckellan and Patrick Stewart and A-list star Hugh Jackman and the director does not know what to do with all these characters! Again, the keyword is excesses. Too many characters, most of the not properly developed and/or quickly killed off. Most characters do not get enough screen time, and the best actors in the cast- Ian Mckellan’s Magneto and Patrick Stewart’s Professor X get woefully little screentime- and this becomes painfully obvious when you compare X3 with X2.

The characters with the most screentime- Wolverine, Storm and Jean Gray are unfortunately poorly developed. X2 hinted at Wolverine’s dark past, but this is totally ignored in X3. Storm, inspite of the nice CGI, really does not have much emotional gravitas and the actress who plays Jean Gray is really… unconvincing. This wasn’t so obvious in the previous films because Jean Gray was a smaller role then, but once she given more screentime, it becomes increasingly apparent that Jean Gray is miscast.

But what does work is the pacing and action sequences. Brett Ratner may not know much about character development or plotline, but at least he knows how to deliver the explosions and the CGI. One particularly impressive scene has Magneto transplanting the bridge to Alcatrez Prison. Also, despite their short screentime, Magneto and Professor X do manage to impress, as does the girl who can pass through walls. The pacing is fairly well done, and the film transitions from one scene to the next with frantic urgency and energy, although not always logically so.

Ultimately, X3 is a fat, lumbering behemoth that could have been edited down to a slick, lean machine, but alas that was not so. Entire subplots and wide swaths of characters could have been deleted and replaced with a more focused and better crafted film. There is enough acting talent in the film, as well as big budget effects to make for fun and action laden entertainment, but for those looking for plot or character development, look elsewhere. As a summer popcorn film, X3 delivers what is expected, but as a film, it clearly pales next to X2, and is around the standard of X1.

Inside Man(2006) 8/10

Tautly crafted, Spike Lee’s Inside Man may well be his most commercially accessible work to date. Ostensibly a heist thriller, the true beauty lies not in the heist, but in the details. The slice of american life, the setting, the conversations, the acting. As far as heist films go, Inside Man is not as twist-ridden, not as action packed and probably way too talky for someone expecting another Ocean’s Eleven. But this is a Spike Lee film. You don’t watch it for the explosions.

Generally excellent performance all round, although i was very disappointed with Jodie Foster’s character, which was totally superfluous. I suspect her role was scripted in just to provide for a female lead, which is a waste of Foster’s talent. Other than that, i’d say Inside Man is the example of what a well crafted, well written and and well directed film should be, even if it is a tad verbose.

Basic Instinct 2(2006) 4/10

Sharon Stone still looks smouldering, but this time round, Basic Instinct 2 feels like a dilluted version of the original. The plot is as usual, quite ludicrous, but whereas the original was enjoyable inspite of the gaps in logic, the sequel is bland and uninspiring because of the gaps in logic. Furthermore, although Sharon Stone still manages to steal the show as Catherine Trammel, the author who lives life on the dangerous lane, her co-star David Morrissey simply boring. There is no chemistry between Morrissey and Stone, unlike the Michael Douglas-Sharon Stone pairing in the original.

Given the bland characters and weak plot, Basic Instinct 2 is unimpressive and at time didactic.

The Edukators(2004) 7/10

A slice of youthful idealism greets you in the Edukators, a delightful film from germany. It is most original, and to say more would be to spoil the film. But here is what others have to say about this smart, and thoughtful film. While i do not agree with the anti-capitalist message of the film, it is still a remarkable work of filmmaking.

“This year’s most articulate statement on film about the current disillusion with politics among young people everywhere in the Western world.”- New York Observer

“Ambling drama shows an exasperating lack of economy and a weakness for diatribe dialogue, but becomes progressively more involving after a laborious start.”- Variety

“Captures the frustration of those who sense something deeply dysfunctional in the political and economic status quo but feel impotent do anything about it.”-Arizona Republic

Natural City(2003) 4/10

While visually impressive (at least by Korean and Asian film standards), Natural City is distant and looks like a rip-of of better films such as Blade Runner. Compunded by awkard action sequences, uninteresting characters and a predicatble plot, the only brownie points i can give is for visuals. Beyond that, Natural City is a film of immense medocrity.

Southland Tales

Despite the negative reviews at Cannes, Richard Kelly’s Southland Tales still remains highly anticipated, not least because it Richard Kelly you are talking about, the very same one who directed and wrote Donnie Darko. Plus, it has a really cool official website. The last time i saw such an intruiging website was for Donnie Darko and for Requiem For A Dream.

GameSpot:Neverwinter Nights 2

Ahem, to you-know-who-you-are, the idea that American RPGs are stagnating is most unlikely. Neverwinternights 2 clinches best RPG at E3, and of the top 5, 3 are PC RPGs, with one from PS2 and Xbox360 respectively.

And, that bit about same old medieval settings etc, you may want to check out Hellgate:London (from the creators of D2), which reads: Hellgate: London is a first-person role-playing game set in postapocalyptic London. Or Bioware’s Sci-Fi RPG Mass Effect (the first of a trilogy) which is described as such:

“In the distant future–the 23rd century to be exact–mankind has started to broaden its horizons through extensive galactic exploration. The relationship between humans and a myriad of other mechanical and organic creatures is shaky at best, so you have to walk on eggshells as you explore the farthest reaches of space in your space cruiser, Normandy.“

Persona 3 (PC) is the only Japanese RPG that merited a mention in the top 5 @ E3, while the last game to round up the 5 is Witcher, a polish game that seems rather intruiging.

Not only that, in New York Time’s listing of the best of E3, three RPGs merited mention, namely Mass Effect, Hellgate: London and Too Human. (On a side note, the only Wii game that got on the list was Madden NFL… not exactly confidence inspiring).

Meanwhile, Gamespy picks Mass Effect for Best RPG.

So, methinks you-know-who-you-are may want to reconsider the argument.

Singapore to install hundreds more surveillance cameras - Yahoo! Australia & NZ News

SINGAPORE (AFP) - Singapore will install hundreds more surveillance cameras on its streets, including around a central district where the World Bank and International Monetary Fund (IMF) meetings will be held in September, a report has said. The closed circuit TV (CCTV) cameras will be linked to a new system at the police headquarters which the Straits Times said “could eventually be smart enough to spot unlawful and suspicious acts, from theft to a person planting a hidden explosive.” Cameras will be installed to monitor traffic junctions and on lamp posts and poles around the city — where the World Bank and the IMF will hold their annual meetings in September. About 16,000 delegates from more than 180 countries, including heads of governments, finance chiefs, central bankers and chief executives of leading corporations, are expected to attend the meetings and related events. The cameras should enable authorities not only to monitor traffic but also to review street scenes to track down suspects in the event of a terrorist strike, the report said. Current CCTV surveillance of other areas have been credited for a reduction in crime rates. Last year, the transport minister said the government was “actively looking” into installing CCTV cameras on buses as part of stepped up security measures in the city-state, a staunch US ally which fears it is on the list of targets of regional and international terrorist groups. It has increased security at border entry points, the subway system, sensitive installations and public places frequented by foreigners. Among other measures are restrictions on the sale of pre-paid mobile phone cards in a bid to curb their use by terrorist and criminal groups, including detonating bombs by remote control. Authorities have also restricted the entry of trucks carrying petrol and other flammable materials into the central business district amid fears terror groups could use these vehicles as weapons.

Big Brother is watching…

Now, normally i would be dismissive of slippery slope arguments. Slippery slope arguments are like remoteness arguments: often speculative and exxagerated. However, having read Volokh’s excellent essay “The Mechanisms of the Slippery Slope“, i am forced to rethink my conceptualization of the slippery slope argument. Perhaps one day, we will truly reach the dystopian heights of a police state.

The Volokh Conspiracy - What Children Learn in Saudi Arabia:

Riddle me this:

Man walks over,
Man walks under;
in times of war he burns asunder

No sooner spoken than broken.

We are very little creatures,
All of us have different features.
One of us in glass is set,
One of us you’ll find in jet.
Another you may see in tin,
and a fourth is boxed within.
If the fifth you should pursue,
It can never fly from you.

In a tunnel of darkness lies an iron beast
It can only attack when pulled back.

Walk on the living, they don’t even mumble.
Walk on the dead, they mutter and grumble.

Emeralds and diamonds, lost by the moon
Found by the sun, and picked up soon.

Hell and Heaven, Satan, and Christian Superstition

When all has been considered, it seems to me to be the irresistible intuition that infinite punishment for finite sin would be unjust, and therefore wrong. We feel that even weak and erring Man would shrink from such an act. And we cannot conceive of God as acting on a lower standard of right and wrong. - Lewis Carroll (author of Alice in Wonderland), “Eternal Punishment,” Diversions and Digressions of Lewis Carroll

They say that when god was in Jerusalem he forgave his murderers, but now he will not forgive an honest man for differing with him on the subject of the Trinity.

They say that God says to me, “Forgive your enemies.” I say, “I do;” but he says, “I will damn mine.” God should be consistent. If he wants me to forgive my enemies he should forgive his. I am asked to forgive enemies who can hurt me. God is only asked to forgive enemies who cannot hurt him. He certainly ought to be as generous as he asks us to be. - Robert Ingersoll

I read in the Gospels that Jesus forgave the men who nailed him to the cross. He even promised “this day you shall be with me in paradise” to a thief crucified next to him - a thief who addressed Jesus simply as a “man” rather than as “the son of God.”

Yet, today, this same Jesus cannot forgive my kindly old aunt, nor allow her to dwell in paradise, simply because her “beliefs” do not match Pat Robertson’s? - Arthur Silver

Ben Franklin’s life-saving invention, the lightning rod, was condemned by many Christians as an insult to Almighty God, or at least, to his aim. Because the Bible says God “sends forth lightnings…He covers His hands with the lightning. And commands it to strike the mark. Its noise declares His presence?Under the whole heaven He lets it loose, And His lightning to the ends of the earth…Whether for correction, or for His world, Or for loving kindness, He causes it to happen.” [Job 36:27-33 & 37:1-13 & 38:35]

And Ben Franklin sang, “Nya, nya, nya, nya, nya. Can’t hit me!”

BBC NEWS | UK | Magazine | The Simpsons as philosophy

The Simpsons does this brilliantly, especially when it comes to religion. It’s not that the Simpsons is atheist propaganda; its main target is not belief in God or the supernatural, but the arrogance of particular organised religions that they, amazingly, know the will of the creator.

For example, in the episode Homer the Heretic, Homer gives up church and decides to follow God in his own way: by watching the TV, slobbing about and dancing in his underpants.

Throughout the episode he justifies himself in a number of ways.

*What’s the big deal about going to some building every Sunday, I mean, isn’t God everywhere?”
* “Don’t you think the almighty has better things to worry about than where one little guy spends one measly hour of his week?”
* “And what if we’ve picked the wrong religion? Every week we’re just making God madder and madder?”

Homer’s protests do not merely allude to much subtler arguments that proper philosophers make. The basic points really are that simple, which is why they can be stated simply.

Jasmine Women(2004) 7/10

–> 2004 Golden Rooster: Best Actress (Zhang Ziyi)
–> 2004 Shanghai International Film Festival: Special Jury Prize

Despite winning critical acclaim as well as several film awards and nominations, Jasmine Women was not released until fairly recently. Which is puzzling, given that it stars Zhang Ziyi, Lu Yi and Joan Chen, stars with drawing power. Granted, this is an art house film through and through, but still the delay is perplexing.

Anyways, in Jasmine Women, Zhang Ziyi plays 3 different characters (Mo, Li and Hua) spanning 3 different eras, from 1930s Shanghai all the way till the 1980s, and Joan Chen plays her mother in these periods. Needless to say, Zhang is onscreen virtually all the time, at least 90% of the film, if not more. In the hands of a lesser actress, the audience will be bored to death, but luckily, Zhang has the charisma and capabilility to helm the film. Of course, it helps that she is one of my favourite actresses, so i suppose there is a certain bias here.

Nevertheless, despite the excellent performance by Zhang, the script and directing are a tad diappointing. The direction is at times hamfisted and the emotions seem too artificial. There is one scene towards the end featuring a pregnant Hua trying to get a cab to get to the hospital in the rain. The scene was so annoyingly corny that i was cringing inside. This is excacerbated by the script, which is simply unremarkable. If you’ve seen one melodrama, you’ve seen them all and any consummate film junkie can predict the plot even before it happens. And you will probably be somewhat right.

Still, the generally stellar cast rises above the mediocre direction and plot to give a largely satisfying performance. Joan Chen is luminous as the mother to Zhang’s character, and at times threatens to steal Ziyi’s thunder, while Lu Yi and Liu Ye impress with their performances. Cinematography is excellent, giving a nice feel of the times and atmosphere, as well as providing a historical backdrop to the film, and some of the costumes (Mo’s dazzling green cheongsam, for example) and mise en scenes are remarkable.

Overall, Jasmine Women is a solid film featuring excellent performances but let down by mediocre direction and plot.

xXx(2002) 4/10

When Tom Cruise in MI3 leaps off a tall building, its cool even if we alll know Cruise doesn’t actually leap off a tall building. When Vin Diesel iceboards ahead of a cascading avalanche, all i can think of is how fake and obviously cinematically altered that scene is. That, my friend is why MI3 is much better than xXx.

xXx is the kind of dumb man’s action movie. Wham. Bang. Rinse and Repeat. There are some decent stunts, but the plot is so inane, and the star so lacking in charisma that you stop caring. Sean Connery has charisma. Tom Cruise has charisma. Matt Damon doesn’t quite have it yet, but that’s fine because Jason Bourne is suppose to act like a regular normal dude who forgets that he is a top spy so Damon’s nomalness acts to his advantage. Vin Diesel on the other hand, in addition to being a lousy actor, is also a bland action star. And that sinks this film to pointless mediocrity.

Volcano High(2001) 2/10

In the world of Volcano High, there is no law or semblence of order. Students engage in fights with powers straight out of Street Fighter. They can fly and seem to be able to do all sorts of silly hijinks. And plot? What plot? It doesn’t even have the decency to follow proper continuity. A student who is seriously injured in one scene suddenly pops up in the next with nary any discernable injuries. And everyone seems to be looking for some dumb mysterious scroll of something. Seriously, i suspect your IQ will drop a few point when watching something as brainless and pointless as this.

V For Vendetta(2006) 9/10

“Remember, Remember, The 5th of November!”

Currently my favourite film of 06 so far, V for Vendetta is brilliantly shot & utterly riveting. Definately going to be in my Top 10 list for this year.

Chock full of memorable quotes, with an excellent soundtrack, slick direction and memorable imagery, V for Vendetta is one of the most enjoyable and similarly thought provoking film of the year. In a post 9/11 world where a film glorifying terroristic behaviour would be an obvious taboo, V for Vendetta packages its defence of dissent in a fun and enjoyable package that can be enjoyed as a big budget spectacle or as a political allegory. Either way, it a winner, and Georger Orwell would have been proud.

Though some may have criticised the depiction of V, Hugo Weaving’s potrayal of this enigmatic, and shakepeare-spouting anti-hero is a most refreshing change. The mask may make him look a tad wooden but it gives him a Phantom of The Opera kind of mystic. Plus, his verbose soliliquay is one of the most memorable scenes of the film, the other being the domino scene. And speaking of Opera, the theatrical motiff features prominently in the film, and its mostly very well done.

Natalie Portman is, as usual, a fine leading lady and always a delight to watch, while the supporting cast is uniformly excellent. The film is tightly paced and while it is more a talky thriller than a wham-bam thriller, which fits me just fine, and the film’s pacing never sags. V is the thinking man’s hero and often the highlight of the film. The many subtle and not so subtle allegory, like the Chancellor as a Hitleresque figure, or the mention of a ‘red book’ and red rose is fertile ground for a film student to ponder what all the little nuaces are supposed to symbolise. Granted, its message of dissent isn’t exactly subtle, and the characters lack depth, but V still stands high above most of the other stuff Hollywood regularly churns out.

Directing is generally excellent, and i liked the parrallel opening with V and Natalie Portman in nice juxtaposition. The film is also remarkable in how it subtly shows the background and establishes the context of the film without having to use a voice over or explicitly stating that this is a dystopian future with authoritarian govt. using conservative morality as a grip to its power, but rather lets the audience infer from the happenings of the film. Other little nice touches include the final scene which shows the faces of some who died during the film and how that relates to Portman’s ending quote which says something to the effect that V is everyone.

Ripe with symbolism and allegory, V for Vendetta is a mesmerising piece of filmmaking that would make Shakespeare proud.

People should not be afraid of their governments. Governments should be afraid of their people.

Generally fun game. Funny and deprecating humor, plus its fairly easy to grasp the concept. Easy to learn and good for timewasting. First few games were a blast.

Having said that, this is a game where the diminishing returns quickly sets in. Once you are familiar with all the cards, the ‘funny’ factor quickly diminishes, and then the game will have to be judged on its gameplay value, which is decent but unremarkable. There seems to be some power balance problem with the game- some cards are ridiculously powerful and there seems to be a few degenerate combos that is very difficult to stop. There are expansion sets which add cards, but once you are familiar with all the cards, the novelty factor quickly loses its shine. Also, games can take very long- even a 3 player game can drag to an hour at least.

Overall, a very fun game- at least initially and good for ice-breaking and is easy to understand. However, some cards are broken and the novelty factor will eventually dissipate.

What can run but never walks,
Has a mouth but never talks,
Has a bed but never sleeps,
Has a head but never weeps?

Via xkcd.