Some Films I Am Anticipating...

I am working as quickly as I can to get back to the blog...

First of all, many thanks to everyone who has posted The Fine Art Diner on their blogs, Facebook and Twitter! Traffic has greatly increased and I can't thank you enough for passing on the word! 

Secondly, I have been given the great honor of editing one of the most remarkable stories I have ever read; regrettably, it has required more time than originally foreseen, however, I should be finished with the project this week and will be posting more frequently thereafter. In the meantime,...

Here are a few of the upcoming films I am anticipating and why...

This poses a very deliberate moral dilemma to Americans: when is it acceptable to do unto others as they have done unto you? Unlike, for example, Ocean's 11, where all involved were really career criminals, "Stealing from other thieves," (the casino), in Tower Heist, these are working Americans trying to get back their savings. The reason I am interested  in this film is I am hoping the lines between victims and perpetrators, between right and wrong, will be upheld, not blurred. I am going to be looking for what role--if any--the characters put on the government's role in having their savings swindled and what responsibility they take themselves (whether or not any of them consider themselves guilty of "greed" in investing unwisely for greater gain).Tower Heist will be a barometer about the state of America's soul, and if our morals have been downgraded as well as our credit.

Will they prove to be better than the one who robbed them?

The second issue is the "little joke," about residents in the Tower buying "white neighbors." This is not a little joke, especially given that the "thief" hired is Slide (Eddie Murphy) and the seemingly docile white staff are training to become thieves to gain back from Arthur Shaw (Alan Alda) character what he stole. Consider these nice lines of analysis: Slide is in a jail cell, Arthur is under house arrest in a multi-million dollar penthouse; Slide plays with cards, Arthur plays chess; both reference back to Josh's childhood (Ben Stiller) but one to the medical condition that didn't exist, the other to the school affiliation that didn't exist. There is the potential for some very, very explosive racial issues within this seemingly main-stream flick. Tower Heist opens on November 4.

Cover for first U.S. edition of John Le Carre's novel.

Tinker, Tailor, Soldier, Spy was one of many best-selling novels for author John Le Carre, . . .  in 1974. It was made into a fabulous adaptation with Alec Guinness and Patrick Stewart in 1979 (and is available, along with the follow-up film, Smiley's People of 1982, on DVD through Netflix).

Why would a film about a double agent during the Cold War be remade, . . . now? With great films of the might, power and prestige of the British Empire being released (The King's Speech, the James Bond franchise and Guy Ritchie's Sherlock Holmes), I am anticipating what "dark message" maybe encoded in this film, since it centers upon betrayal, a very intimate betrayal; not to mention that it is Oscar winner Colin Firth playing the double agent; that has to be a strategic move. What are the forces within the British Empire working to bring it down? Whenever there is a remake of a film, changes are inevitable, and that signals the passing of one generation who enjoyed the narrative for their own reasons, to a new generation who might enjoy the altered narrative for their own reasons: what will be added, what will be left out? What will be emphasized, what will be down-played? I have a feeling that this is an anti-Socialist film and amidst the protests of austerity measures in the U.K., it will seek to support the free market and captialism.

A man in a mask could be an important clue...

One clue is John Hurt who played the lead in The Elephant Man (1980). As the character of "Control" in Tinker, Tailor, Soldier, Spy, he is the one who suspects the double-agent and knows where to look for him; I think, when you have two major actors in a film like this, there are going to be a lot of references to past films being made. This might be a sleeper on its November 18 release date, or it might be the vital clue to what is really lurking within the psyche of the British Empire.

Basil Rathbone as Sherlock Holmes.

I am a huge fan of Basil Rathbone, so when my mom gave me Guy Ritchie's Sherlock Holmes, I regretted her decision; I am happy to say that mom was right: I have watched it at least two dozen times. I will be writing on Sherlock Holmes in my upcoming series on British Imperialism (along with The Elephant Man) and, closer to the December 16 release date of Sherlock Holmes: Game of Shadows, I will be posting even more on Guy Ritchie's hit.

Here are a few points upon which we can deduce what Game of Shadows will be encoding:
First, homosexuality: it would be very tempting for the liberal media to form a suppressed homo-erotic bond between Robert Downey Jr. and Jude Law, however, Ritchie seems to be deliberately bucking that interpretation. Holmes' awkward dressing as a woman (in the above trailer) clearly demonstrates that crossing the lines of sexuality doesn't work. At a time when the Smurfs features a openly gay male lead (Neil Patrick Harris who has adopted children with his male partner), this "mockery" of effeminate sexuality by Holmes is very counter-cultural.

The scratch indicates that Holmes will be "scarred" by this adventure.

Go ahead and say that I am jumping to conclusions, however, what is it that Watson (Jude Law) says in the trailer? "I'm supposed to be on my honeymoon!" Not only is Watson in a traditional hetro-sexual relationship, he has the audacity to be in a monogamous state of matrimony. For this reason, Watson is correct, he is on his honeymoon, because being in a monogamous, hetro-sexual state of matrimony is a battle in and of itself, not to mention, that if it is a "genuine" honeymoon (and at this depicted time in history, we really have no reason to doubt it) then they are both virgins. Hooray for the man once married to the "Material Girl."

"A Web of Conspiracy" and of references.

Secondly, Holmes' sanity is going to be questioned. In the 2001 Oscar-winning film A Beautiful Mind starring Russell Crowe as John Nash, there is a part where Nash has constructed a giant board intersected with red lines: he's tracing conspiracy theories and the same happens in the above trailer for Sherlock Holmes. The obvious reference to the film about a seriously disturbed genius will lay the foundation for a deeper exploration of Holmes' own psyche, but it also follows a long-standing trend in movie-making: the destabilization of reality. I will be elaborating on this trend at greater length later, but the question of what is real and not real has become a stable hallmark of contemporary films and it appears that Ritchie is going to follow in this stead; not necessarily a bad thing, it will depend on what he does with it.

King Leonides and King Xerxes and their epic battle in 300.

Thirdly, references to other "battle films": 300 and Van Helsing are both visually referenced in the film's trailer. The slowed-down motion was perhaps first successfully used in the film Brotherhood of the Wolf but widely exposed and celebrated in 300, wherein, the Spartans took on the powerful Persian Empire; in Van Helsing, the monster-slayer takes on the great Dracula, whose masquerade ball is referenced by Ritchie in the two, upside down trapeze artists flying above the table. When Holmes tells Watson about to pull the trigger, "Make it count," that's referencing Quantum of Solace just before Bond and Camille enter the desert hotel and he tells her how to kill Medrano. What's the significance? Ritchie encodes these references to let viewers know that he, too, is fighting a battle with this film as in the two prior films mentioned, which is significant in and of itself. These aren't, of course, flesh and blood battles, but metaphysical battles over a way of life and moral integrity and Ritchie is constructing those visual references to make a point; I am hoping that he will "make it count."

Now, I have to be the first person to admit that I am a SNOB when it comes to film: I am very particular about what I will watch and what grabs my interest as far as seeing potential ingredients of symbols to be decoded; Warrior actually has my interest.

I am not into martial arts or cage fighting, but what has my curitosity peaked is that these are brothers fighting for the championship, and they are both from important, professional backgrounds, a teacher and a military man (so they symbolize those professions). This suggests a civil war within America and I want to know what it's about. For example, in The Black Dahlia the severed body--a body divided in two--suggests a civil war in America over homosexuality:

I didn't see The Black Dahlia because it looks like homosexuality is pretty rampant in the film, but from information provided in the trailer, it looks like the division in America between those who do not believe/practice it and those who practice/advocate it; in other words, between mainstream America and Hollywood. What will Warrior pose as the basis of the civil war in America? I am curious and will probably take a look at it September 9.

Before that, I am going to see The Debt:

There is never a historical movie made about a historical event: the way a historical event is interpreted is based on contemporary circumstances, so The Debt isn't about the Cold War, it's about something happening today for which the Nazi war crimes is an apt vehicle of expression. It opens August 31, I'll be there.

There are two, tiny details that set this apart from common disaster films: first, Gwyneth Paltrow's character is "gambling," when (at least the trailer leads us to believe) she contracts this virus; the second detail is that the virus comes from birds. Birds represent the Holy Spirit, so it appears that this film could be exploring deep-seated anxieties about God's wrath on the world and I think the gambling bit is going to be the key to understanding the film. Given the enormous cast for Contagion, this film is a huge investment for Hollywood so I hope it will yield some interesting results when it opens September 9.

The film that I am NOT looking forward to seeing, Conan the Barbarian:

The reason I am not looking forward to this film, is I have the sickening feeling that "evil" is actually going to be defined by the film as "religion." The reason being, a "barbarian," at the time this film is taking place, is synonymous with "pagan," and for Conan not to be a knight--one who had vowed to protect the Church--raises my suspicions that the "monster of evil and control" Conan sets out to destroy will be the traditional values and morals of society; I could be very, very wrong, but according to what information the trailer presents, this is what I am formulating the this weekend's opening film to be about.