Week 38: Big Trouble in Little China

Dear Avid Reader,

This is probably my favorite movie of all time. It RULES.

But why?

Tall Guy, Weird Clothes, First You See Him, Then You Don't

I first watched this movie when I was twelve. Or maybe eleven. And the reason I watched it was because my fifteen-year-old cousin, or was he sixteen, said that he liked it. Like. He used the word "like". And based on that shimmering review, I decided to memorize the entire movie.

I taped the film off of HBO. And I watched that bootleg copy so often that when I watch the film on my DVD copy, I am always thrown by first two minutes of dialogue. This is because I missed them when I was fumbling to get a tape in the VCR. But undeterred by those missing lines, I watched that movie over, and over and over again. I have seen this flick easily one hundred times. This is not an exaggeration.

This Is Gonna Take Crackerjack Timing, Wang

What is it about repetition that is so appealing to kids? It must be the feeling of imprinting things on a brand new brain. I can remember doing the same thing when I was a teenager; playing albums over and over memorizing the lyrics.

The only time I have done something similar in my adult life is watching episodes of The Office again and again, but I feel short of full on Teletubbies-style repeats. I guess it doesn't feel as good cutting memories into an older established brain.

May The Wings Of Liberty Never Lose A Feather

Now I know that I enjoy new albums and movies as much as I did when I was younger. But I guess I enjoy them in a different way. I can never have a formative experience with media again. And I wonder if I had chosen different films and albums to memorize, would I like different things now? Would the building change if the foundational slab was different?

I guess the question is whether I liked Big Trouble so I watched it a lot, or did I like Big Trouble BECAUSE I watched it a lot? I like to think that my cousin's recommendation only led me to the water, but I decided to keep drinking. But I was a kid eager to be cool. Maybe I just powered trough the viewings, eventually contracting some strange form of Stockholm's Syndrome. And now that I've brainwashed myself, I can never trust my memories. Maybe I hated this film all along.

You Know What Ol' Jack Burton Always Says At A Time Like This?

And because of the unnoticeable changes to my brain I would eventually take the driving rhythm and short duration of the soundtrack to find worth in punk music. This of course changed my disposition to larger, popular culture, turning me, essentially, into a curmudgeon at seventeen. This of course allowed me to develop a personality that constantly critiques the smallest cultural phenomenon and attempt to magnify them into larger truths. Perhaps in blog form.

Great. Now I have to burn this movie.

Until Next I Blog,

James

Week 37: Road House

Dear Avid Reader,

I really don't like thinking. It's kind of a pain.

Think about THAT!

Take The Biggest Guy In The World, Shatter His Knee And He'll Drop Like A Stone

I experienced a problem recently when I attempted to describe my level of interest in a band. I wanted to say that I like the group, but that they did not rank among my favorites. So in a misguided effort to be accurate I ended up back-tracking and qualifying my opinion into meaninglessness. It sucked.

But I got to thinking, maybe the reason that it's hard to describe one's favor to a particular thing is that this country loves to exaggerate. It's a nation of polarization. And I think if reasonable discourse can be reached when discussing music/movies/etc., then reasonable discourse can be had during politics. She go with me on this.

It's Two Nouns Combined To Elicit A Prescribed Response

Here are a few pillars of this new scale. First, there are no degrees of dislike. There is no fun in finding if you hate something as opposed to if you abhor it. Just dislike it and move on. Second, there is nothing wrong with stopping at one level and not proceeding to the other, and trying to change someone else's rating is counterproductive to this experiment. If Betty tells Jeff that she only likes Band XYZ, Jeff should applaud the Betty's ability to understand her own taste and not berate her for failing to fully embrace the majesty of Band XYZ. This leads us to the last rule.

Lastly, and perhaps most importantly, people are allowed to change their opinions over time. Let us use out previous example. Betty, since she last saw Jeff, has spent some more time listening to the Band XYZ canon and has grown to truly appreciate the subtle nuance of the guitar playing. She has upgraded to loving the ban. But Jeff becomes frustrated. he wonders why this sudden change has happened in Betty. Why couldn't she see the awesomeness before? Is she trying to appear as if she is a fan in order to look cool to strangers? Jeff shuns Betty and tells her that she will never be a "real fan". Betty kills Jeff with a flamethrower.

You're Too Stupid To Have A Good Time

Now both characters overreacted to the situation. There was no need for Betty to kill Jeff. While he was being a total dick about things, he didn't deserve to die. Similarly Jeff was way out of line with Betty. Does it really matter that Betty changed her mind about a band? Who really cares? Shouldn't Jeff have been happy that there was someone he could share his interests with? I think so. But instead he ended up dead. So sad.

When finding one's self in a discussion about culture, be sure to check your reactions. Be wary of overstating an allegiance to a particular film or book. Is it really that good? Is it really that bad? In essence, the goal is to eliminate exaggeration when possible. It helps everyone.

On with the new scale!

I'd Thought You'd Be Bigger

-1 : Hate/Dislike/Abhor

Save for things that are worthy of scorn. Is the work offensive? If not, think about upgrading to "OK".

Examples: The Pest, Cool As Ice, Creed, Nickelback, Godfather Part III

0 : OK

For works that are neutral. In all honesty, does the work create a feeling of ambivalence? Use when having a hard time remembering details of the work.

Examples: Most things that people think they hate/like, Step by Step, M. Night Shyamalan, Christina Aguilera

1 : Like

The overall feeling the work gives is positive. Do qualifiers appear when discussing the work (examples: PRETTY good, KINDA liked it, FAIRLY descent)? If so something may be preventing a leap into fully accepting the work.

Examples: Jerry Bruckheimer movies, Huey Lewis and the News, R.E.M, The Addams Family

2: Love

The positive feeling of the work creates a desire to convince others of the works worthiness. Do quotes from the work pepper conversation? Something deeper than like would drive a person to visit Wikipedia, IMDB, or the official website for more information.

Examples: The Andy Griffith Show, The Beatles, The Godfather, The Wizard of Oz, Seinfeld, Weezer's Blue Album

3 : Ardor/Devotion/Passion

The positive feeling may cause a desire to protect the work rather than proselytize. Was the work first discovered during the ages of 12-17? Is there a suspicion that others can never enjoy the work to it's fullest? Save for when the work is precious, deeply sentimental, formative, and or is perceived to describe a personal quality of the fan.

Examples (of what devoted fans look like): Star Trek, KISS, Rocky Horror Picture Show, Harry Potter, Star Wars

I Got Married, To An Ugly Woman. Don't Ever Do That. It Just Takes The Energy Right Out Of You.

So I say all of this to say, you probably don't hate Road House. You are actually ambivalent toward it and may even like it. So stop groaning in conversations when I say that i love this movie. Search your honest feelings before speaking. You may find that you don't have any.

And I won't have to spend an afternoon writing about it.

Until Next I Blog,

James

Week 36: Repo: The Genetic Opera

Dear Avid Reader,

Weather is nuts. You just can't control it.

It's serious biz-nazzz.

I'll Keep Those Vultures Guessing

I'm sure most folks would pick substance over style. I guess by choosing substance one feels superior to style choosers. Deeper. Smarter.

Well they are wrong. Style is better.

I Look Like A Crime Scene, Dad

After watching Repo: The Genetic, one is left with the sense that they just watched a terrible movie. They are in fact right. Repo is truly a terrible movie. But I think that description is incomplete.

In order to appreciate Repo, one must have had more than a passing brush with "geek-ish" culture during the past decade. During the first decade of the new millennium, nerds saw their favorite films, music, games, and books shoot right to the front of the line. Culture makers new that if they could make stuff for these hard-core consumers, the sky was the limit in terms of profit. No fan would by more of their project-related crap than this group of people that put their consumption up as a mare of honor. And lo how the dorks were exploited.

Chase The Morning, Yield For Nothing

Exhibit A in the trail of this exploitation is Repo. It basically goes down the list of things that these folks want. Brooding/tortured hero, and an innocent heroine. Hugely popular but insanely corrupt villain. Violence. Dystopian future. Black lipstick. Buffy's musical episode. And of course, snappy dialogue. Well...snappy-ish.

Of course there is one thing missing from the recipe. A story.

Here's what I mean about a missing story: when you have to pause the action and explain to the audience what is going on, you have failed at making a story. You failed so bad Repo. So bad.

Blame Not My Cheeks

Now I see no reason in critiquing the movie beyond that. I leave it to others to describe the two-dimensionality of the characters and the like. I am more interested in how Repo succeeds. Because it totally gets all the other things right.

Just look at the Graverobber character. He's shadowy and opportunistic. He's got great lines. He is who every nerd dreams of becoming when the big one hits. He's this movie's Han Solo. And the whole idea of capitalism gone so extreme as to repossess body parts is truly inspired. You have to completely turn everything off in your mind and just look around the movie and see the sights. Who wants to see the cranks and levers when they can just ride Space Mountain? In other words enjoy the scenery as the cast chews it.

A Mighty Small Drop In A Mighty Dark Plot

But the substance choosers will show up and demand an easily understood story and characters that make sense. They are the people who tell you how much fat is in the cake you are about to eat. They are the ones who think everything can be controlled. But they are wrong again.

Ultimately it comes down to what we think we want. Do we want substance? Do we want vegetables? Do we seatbelts? Do we want TV with a v-chip? Heck no. We want style, cake, convertibles, and American Gladiators.

Some would say that we may want the "bad" stuff but we need the good "stuff". But they'd be wrong about that too.

Until Next I Blog,

James

Week 35: Troll 2

Dear Avid Reader,

Rapture coming later this month. So the crazy people say.

People are crazy.

Let Me Give You Some Helpful Advice, You...Dwarves

People really are crazy. What is the difference between persistence and obsession? When is the line crossed?

Winners never quit. When the going gets tough, the tough get going. Walk it off. Get back on the horse. Pick yourself up, dust yourself off.

No wonder people are crazy.

Half Man, Half Plant, The Goblin's Favorite Food

The problem is that persistence does pay off. Keeping your nose down is a good thing. Victory IS just around the corner.

But what about when it isn't. What happens to the folks who believe in the May 21st Rapture and it doesn't happen? Do they keep believing? Shouldn't they quit? Isn't it obvious that they've failed? At what point did the folks working on Troll 2 realize they were going to fail?

Was it at the first read-through? Was it when the goblin masks arrived? The double-decker bologna sandwich? The plant set dressing? When Mike Hamil showed up in a mullet and began his "sermon" as the preacher Bells? When they referred to the church as a house?

No More, No More Popcorn

The important thing is that they did not quit. And the result is a truly mesmerizing film. Despite the fact that everyone is woefully under-prepared for the task of making a movie, they pushed onward. They got it done. Winners never quit.

And I don't know how they ended up with such a great product. A film that is infinitely re-watchable and gripping. That's why Troll 2 is no longer a "bad" movie. It's not even "So-bad-it's-good". It is simply good. To me, a bad movie is boring. If you want to watch a bad movie, watch Cool As Ice, or The Pest. Those films are totally unwatchable. They are painful. Troll 2, on the other hand, is a great ride from beginning to end. It is fun to watch.

It's Goblin Spelled Backwards

And that is what we need to make room for in our film vocabulary. High production value, or basic production value, should not be a requirement for kinematic greatness. Rather, totally focusing on the enjoyment the film gives is the ONLY measure for film. All other measures are academic and are best left to the elitists in the their ivory tower.

After all, the tower is where they used to stick the REAL nutjobs.

Until Next I Blog,

James