2006 ROUNDUP: SHERRYBABY (Collyer)

The night before last I watched APOCALYPSE NOW, and last night I watched SHERRYBABY. They're very different films in many regards, but they also share a couple of things in common. For one thing, they both feature Sam Bottoms. For another, they both, at first glance, seem to be about Important Things, but, by the time we reach the end, turn out to be about people instead. And most glaringly, both films give us people pushed to their absolute limits, and lets us watch as their ends showly fray and they cope the only way they know how.

Maggie Gyllenhaal is Sherry, just out of prison, three years clean from heroin, and left to reside in a women's halfway home. Given the set up, one might initially think of this as a Lifetime movie, but it quickly becomes clear that what you're going to be viewing is a totally different breed of animal. SHERRYBABY is not truly about drug addiction or the things that lead people to seek comfort therein. It is rather about Sherry herself and how her addiction affects her. It is very much a character study, and a wholly unsettling one at that. It becomes clear early on that Sherry is not seeking redemption and that it is not going to be coming to her. She never seems to give up expecting it, however, which is perhaps the film's saddest quality. Sherry expects her five year old daughter to love and admire her, despite the fact that she has been incarcerated for half of her life. She expects to get a job working with children, despite the fact that she is a convicted felon. (She does manage to get a gig working at a daycare center for urban youth, but only after blowing the intake director. The theme of the use of sex to achieve her own ends flows throughout all of the film, and presents us with questions about who is using who.) She expects to remain clean and for her PO to cut her breaks. But as the PO himself says, Sherry does not want to put in the work.

SHERRYBABY is a heartbreaking, emotionally devastating film that never gives us a glimmer of hope, never gives us any reason to believe that things are going to get better. It is not a picture about beginnings and ends, but rather the dull monotony and bleak self-analysis that makes up the majority of our days. There's a lot more to consider here, including whether or not Sherry is sympathetic (I think she is) and what tone the film wants to close on (I want to think it's hopefuly, but I know better). But like Sherry and the film about her, this review is going to remain incomplete, unfinished, because beauty exists in the imperfect, if you're willing to look for it. SHERRYBABY is not for everyone, but it is a film that everyone should see.

EVIL COMEDY IN THE NEW YORKER.

So, Tad Friend from The New Yorker has put together a piece on Sarah Silverman's new sitcom (which I await breathlessly, lustfully), which he has taken to calling "mean comedy". Ah, Tad? This particular brand of comedy, which Sarah is definitely a purveyor of, goes further than being "mean" and enters the realm of pure EVIL. It is not about just simply lacking sentimentality, but also about debasing the very structure that our country was founded upon. I am a New Yorker fan (Anthony Lane is my favorite film critic), but Friend's claims that Silverman's show is "much the meanest sitcom in years" totally ducks STRANGERS WITH COMEDY and IT'S ALWAYS SUNNY IN PHILADELPHIA, my two old standbys. And actually, add WONDRER SHOWZEN to that list. While not technically a sitcom, it has to be considered among the single most subversive, vile, completely ruthless TV shows ever filmed. That it is a spoof on children's educational shows only adds to the fun. But I'll have a longer writeup on WONDER SHOWZEN sometime in the coming future. As to Sarah's show, well, it's getting Brian Posehn and Jay Johnston on TV regularly, so it's got that going for it. It is, of course, also Sarah Silverman's, who I am starting to think might be wearing a little thin, but is still bitterly funny in smaller doses. Just the same, I am looking forward to watching the show. More evil comedy can never be a bad thing.

2006 ROUND UP: JESUS CAMP (Ewing & Grady)

Man. This is seriously one of my favorite documentaries I've ever seen, especially in this post-Moore age of picking a point and hammering it home, again and again and again, never giving the audience a chance to make up their own minds. JESUS CAMP stands in direct opposition to the mold that people like Morgan Spurlock and Michael Moore have created, as it is a shining example of simply giving people enough rope to hang themselves. Co-directors Heidi Ewing and Rachel Grady do a beautiful job of allowing scenes to play out naturally. The result is much more damning than anything Moore could concoct with ironic music and hand-wringing liberalism.

JESUS CAMP is a terrifying glimpse into the world of midwestern Christian fundamentalism. The main players are Becky Fisher, the creator of the so-called "Jesus Camp", and Levi, an unfortunate looking boy of ten or so who is intensely devoted to Jesus. I had obviously heard a lot about this film, as it garnered a fair amount of press for a release of such small proportions. It is also a quiet little picture, featuring none of the doom-saying or name-calling that has lead to several blockbuster docs in the past couple of years. JESUS CAMP emerges as a staggering, sedated little picture that aims to the heavens - and hits its mark.

Fisher is downright evil, of this I have little doubt. Word is she approved of the documentary, which goes a long way towards revealing several things. First, it shows that the filmmakers were fair and impartial in their portrayal of her. Secondly, it demonstrates the degree to which she believes. This belief, far from the comforting sense of knowing that some claim, is actually a certain kind of blindness, a belief which shields against logical discourse and scientific fact.

The people who populate the film are smug, sure of themselves, and unwilling to even leave any sort of dissenting voice into their lives. The children are all home-schooled, and the parents are all more than willing to show them videos which mock science and evolution. Every summer, they send the kids off to Bible camp, where they sing, read scripture, and are brought to tears on a regular basis by mean-spirited adults who want to tell them they are flawed, they are evil, they are sinners, and they are fallen. This doesn't resemble my childhood memories of lounging by the Atlantic Ocean or going camping with friends. I myself was raised in a Christian household, which also acknowledged that a world existed outside of my church and our religion. When young Levi says that interacting with non-Christians makes him uncomfortable, you get the sense that he has not had this same chance to experience the larger world, a world which the children in the film tell us is corrupt, morally bankrupt, and sinful. Again, these are children. The words they use can come from no other source except for their parent's own mouths.

The parents, for their part, deny "forcing" religion on their children, but it's hard to imagine a ten year old saying that she needs to be aware of when "I'm dancing for the Lord and when I'm dancing for the flesh". Perhaps the film's greatest lesson is the way in which we guide our children to be who we want them to be, irregardless of the fact that they are small and easily-manipulated. A key scene sees Fisher ask "Who here thinks God can do anything?" We see a mother pull up her daughter's arm, and then her son's arm, when neither of them were raising their hands. The mother physically forces the children to profess their faith. It is telling and it is chilling.

Perhaps JESUS CAMP's greatest strength is the way in which it debunks the argument that the Moral Majority, or the Christian Right, or Christian Fundamentalists, or whatever, are simply religious people and are in no way politically-motivated. After a week filled with seven year olds speaking in tongues, of being told that if Harry Potter were a real person, he would be in hell, of not being allowed to tell ghost stories because they don't glorify the Lord (of being told, in short, that children are naturally bad and in need of the strictest of supervision in order to become good, Christian people), Fisher and her co-horts bring out a cardboard cutout of George W. Bush and the children pray for him, wildly, frantically, with fervor. They also weap openly and loudly against abortion and pray for a more Christian government. Fisher, at the film's end, has a talk with Air America commentator Mike Papantonio, and makes the claim that there is nothing political about the camp, that they are simple people who want to share their faith quietly. The gloating image of the publicly disgraced Ted Haggard, who at the time of filming obviously believes himself to be nearing the White House at some point in the future, is haunting and hilarious, a grim reminder of the fact that these people have much darker intentions than they let on. They want to control this country (they pledge allegiance to "the Christian flag", after all). Fisher ultimately denounces democracy itself, stating that it is doomed to fail because it demands freedom for all.

If I can resort to mud-slinging that the film never demeans itself with, Becky Fisher is shown as a distinctly lonely, embittered person who spends all of her time around children, hugging and screaming at them. She lives alone, seems to have no husband or children of her own, and is almost certainly a closeted lesbian. I, personally, can't wait for her to be caught freebasing with Brazilian transvestites, or some such career-killing scandal. The only thing more rewarding than Haggard's fall from grace will be her's.

This is a staggering, heart-breaking work that stands as one of 2006's absolute, undisputed best pictures, a crushing depiction of childhood being taken from children and of the ways in which adults will warp the young to meet their own goals. Amazing movie.

2006 ROUNDUP: IDIOCRACY (Judge)

I saw Mike Judge's first film, OFFICE SPACE, in theatres with two of my girlfriends. (That sounds awkward, doesn't it? They were girls who were my friends, not like I was fucking both of them. I wanted to fuck one of them. All through middle school, actually. And high school. Ah, young lust.) We couldn't get into RUSHMORE because it was rated R, but we got into OFFICE SPACE. I was sort of disappointed. A couple of years later, all my friends "discovered" it on DVD and soon they were saying, "Heeeey, Peter" and "I'm gonna show you my O face." I still never got the hype, but watching it again recently, it struck chords with me, office drone that I currently am, which were previously only hinted at.

IDIOCRACY is a bit of a letdown, as well, or at least it is upon first viewing. What is so maddening is that it has the feel of a film taken from its creator too quickly and left inthe care of a butcher. IDIOCRACY hints at brilliance, and even achieves it in the dialogue, but the editing and pacing is convoluted and pulls the rest of the work down. Nonetheless, it is an ambitious, viotrolic work, penned by Judge and Ethan Coen, set in the year 2505, when American society has reached previously-unheard-of levels of stupidity. Luke Wilson plays Joe, a private in the Army who is frozen (alongside a prostitute played by Maya Rudolph) as part of a cryogenics experiment. Joe is exceedingly average in every regard, making him the perfect person to test the technology out on. But he's forgotten about due to a series of misadventures, and instead of being frozen for one year, he's left on ice for 500.

2505 is populated by dunces, cretins, and trash, who speak a mix of redneck slang, ebonics, and varying grunts. IDIOCRACY gives us devolution, the process of man unmaking himself by his own stupidity and inability to adapt. The film makes the conceit that man rules the world simply because he is too dumb to know when he should not be breeding. Overpopulation and a general numbing of the masses, by way of TV, fast food, and the ineptitude of America's leaders, gives us the world that IDIOCRACY creates. There is a Violence Channel, which features a show called "Aw, My Balls". Someone named Dr. Lexus states, "your shit's all retarded, and you talk like a fag". Joe is eventually placed on trial for failing to pay a hospital bill and because he does not have a UCP tattoo which are mandatory for the 2505 citizens of the country. He is sentenced to jail, and easily escapes, because the guards are idiots. Later, he is found to be the smartest man alive, despite the fact that at the beginning of the film, in 2005, we are told he is of merely average intelligence.

How do we end up here? Water is replaced by sports drinks ("It's got Electrolytes!"), which are used to feed the nation's crops. A character exists named Judge Hank "the Hangman" BMW. Dialogue consists of nearly incoherent strings of expletives and neanderthal taunts. There are no museums, no books, and Starbuck's sells HJs. What is probably scariest of all is that IDIOCRACY's America does not seem all that different from our own, just greatly exaggerated and blown out of proportion. The number one movie in 2505 is called ASS, and it's exactly what you think it is. The number one movie this week in 2007 is STOMP THE YARD, a movie where the world's problems are seemingly solved with dancing. The pieces are all in place for America to turn into the idiocracy. You can see it in AMERICAN IDOL, in THE DA VINCI CODE, in George W. Bush.

A friend told a story about how after the World Trade Towers were knocked down, they found all of these rats that were eating asbestos, and everyone figured they would die. But somehow, the rats managed to adapt to the asbestos and process it as food. Now, this particular friend has a tendency to embellish (OK, to lie), but his point was clear: consider what we consume on a daily basis, and how this affects us. Consider how many people don't even think about this, and the idiocracy does not seem so absurd after all. It is, after all, simply taking a time machine to our current situation. It is America c. 2007 taken to its extreme end.

Despite its satirical elements, IDIOCRACY is ultimately a failure in the technical sense (aside from the performances, which require little of the actors, but are essentially serviceable). The entire thing feels ripped up and glued together, perhaps by a citizen of the idiocracy. It is clear why Fox did not want this to play in theatres. It, of course, hilariously spoofs Fox News, but it also has the damning feel of a rushjob. As to whether this is Judge's fault, the editor's fault, or Fox's fault, I cannot say, but the end result is that of a flawed masterpiece. Which, of course, makes it endlessly interesting and worthy of debate. But it doesn't make it one of the best of 2006. Sadly.

2006 ROUNDUP: LADY VENGEANCE (Chan-wook)

"Living without hate for people is almost impossible. There is nothing wrong with fantasizing about revenge. You can have that feeling. You just shouldn't act on it."
--Park Chan-Wook

LADY VENGEANCE completes the loose "revenge trilogy" which Chan-wook began with SYMPATHY FOR MR. VENGEANCE (2002) and OLDBOY (2003), but odds are, you already knew that. I have only seen OLDBOY, but I've been meaning to get into MR. VENGEANCE for a long while now. While LADY VENGEANCE never reaches the soaring heights that OLDBOY attains, it does come close in its own right.

The guiding theme of the film (and, really, the very best revenge pictures) is the ultimate futility of revenge as means to an end. In our lives, we will encounter pain that feels unbearable and final. Sometimes, that pain will be caused by other people. We may believe that we can alleviate our own suffering by passing some of it onto others, by making them share in our misery, but, in the end, it is a pointless quest. In the end, by letting our rage guide us, we become no better than the people we sought revenge against. That's also a central theme in LAST HOUSE ON THE LEFT and ONCE UPON A TIME IN THE WEST and CARRIE, all classics of the revenge film sub-genre.

LADY VENGEANCE is the story of Geum-ja Lee, incarcerated for 13 years for a crime she did not commit (but did assist with). The events concerning her framing and capture are best left unknown to the potential viewer. (An aside: I typically don't give a fuck about revealing spoilers to people, but Chan-wook's films are ones that should be seen with as little knowledge of the films as possible. Thus, I make exception here.) LADY VENGEANCE unfolds in a non-linear fashion, unraveling slowly and revealing itself in subtle ways. While in jail, Geum-ja is granted the status of an angel, as she looks over the other, weaker female prisoners and takes them under her wing. She is well-liked by the guards and the Korean media. But quickly, we realize that her motives are not altruistic, and that she has a plan in mind for when she is released.

What sets LADY VENGEANCE apart (as well as MISS .45 and I SPIT ON YOUR GRAVE and the KILL BILL pictures) is that the main character is a female, seeking revenge on a male character. It never really becomes a feminist parable, though, as Geum-ja is too singular, too focused on her particular goal, to make any sort of comment on gender. But the fact that she is a female cannot be avoided or ignored. Females are treated horribly by males in this film (but females also treat other females cruelly, as well), and, in the end, the males get their come-uppance. But, again, once revenge is had, what becomes of the seeker? When you define yourself according to one goal, namely the ending of another human's life, how do you define yourself once you actually achieve that goal? LADY VENGEACE offers no answers, no resolutions, just raises questions and gives us one great, bloody climax. This will probably make my Top 10 of 2006.

2006 ROUNDUP: UNITED 93 (Greengrass)

I avoided this one for a long, long while. I recall the evening of 09/11/2001, lying in bed trying to process everything that happened that day. I recalled everyone saying, "It seemed like something out of a [Michael Bay] movie." This, of course, meant that the day's events would make perfect fodder for jingoistic CGIfests motivated purely by profit. I made my decision to never see a film about 9/11. And then I went and saw one five years later, and it was a lot better than I thought it would be.

I am in no way a patriot. I wouldn't serve this country in war and I actively dream about living in Europe or Canada. I cried while watching UNITED 93. Not just once, several times. It is a work of restrained beauty (yes, beauty) that takes a clinical look at the day's events. It is also, when necessary, extremely violent, as any story about 9/11 must ultimately be. The distanced approach to the material is juxtaposed with shocking acts of violence. Avoiding both cliche and explanation, Greengrass presents us with just the facts, as they happened, and because of this, he comes very fucking close to re-creating the utter confusion and senselessness of 09/11/2001. It is an extremely scary, extremely emotional place to be. It is a film that everyone should see, but that you're going to have to force yourself to watch. One of the absolute best films of 2006.

EVIL COMEDY - A PRIMER

Around the time that BORAT came out, critic Victoria Alexander stated that, "Evil comedy, a new genre, has arrived". She's certainly right, in that BORAT qualifies as evil comedy, but what he fails to realize is that the genre, which is really more of a sub-genre, has existed for a little while now. I don't know exactly what the definitions for qualification are, or what fits into the category, but I've been considering these things for a couple of months now. I've also been thinking about what my favorite comedies of the 2000s are, and I'm realizing that more and more of them could be considered Evil Comedy.



STRANGERS WITH CANDY debuted in 1999 on Comedy Central, and I never really caught onto it. I think I was still a little too young. Besides that, still being in high school, maybe the material hit a little too close to home. After all, it's easier to laugh at the stringent caste system that is public education when you've got a bit of distance from it. Now, five years out of high school and with a more refined sense of taste (and a copy of the complete series on DVD), I realize that STRANGERS WITH CANDY is perhaps the meanest, most brutal, least sentimental comedy series ever aired.

Created by Paul Dinello, Amy Sedaris and Stephen Colbert, the show satirizes after school specials as it follows 46 year old high school freshment Jerry Blank, who identifies herself as a "boozer, user, and loser". She is hideously ugly and has a dark and troubled past. The average after school special would thus turn her into an inspirational story, someone who turns their life around and realizes the inherent beauty of the world. STRANGERS, though, gives us Jerri's insides, and they're even more bruised than her outsides. She is a cruel, self-centered racist who likes "both the pole and the hole" but also cracks homophobic jokes and cooks up drugs in her bedroom for the pretty blonde future soriority girls to OD on.

STRANGERS pulls no punches in brutalizing high school life, but it's often the adults who are the cruelest. Teachers and administrators seem to view students as nothing more than means to realizing their own abandoned dreams. STRANGERS shows us how people are so easily victimized, but also how people will allow themselves to be victimized in order to seek validation or self-assurance. People are co-opted, certainly, but they're also eager to be co-opted, just so that they feel like they belong to something or are a part of something. STRANGERS is just as unsympathetic towards the victims as it is towards the aggressors. It is sick and twisted and so blackly funny and just utterly ruthless and unsentimental.

Perhaps the only show currently to go as far down this road is FX's IT'S ALWAYS SUNNY IN PHILADELPHIA. Maybe it helps that I've spent a great deal of time in the shithole city that the show is set in, but I realize what an absolutely miserable place Philly is, and how hilarious it is that people are so proud to be from there. The characters that populate SUNNY are the exact kind of people who would brag about the city they call home. The four main chracters are Charlie, Dennis, Dee, and Mac, who play four part-owners of an Irish bar. They are best friends, but they're also constantly exploiting and manipulating one another. Each episode sees some combination of the quartet divising ways of cheating the others out of money, prestige, humility, or some other equally valuable comedity. Along the way, they commit arson and welfare fraud, supply minors with alcohol, lie about having cancer, spew racism and homophobia at the drop of a hat, lie about being molested as children, ingest copious amounts of alcohol, anabolic steroids, and Elmer's glue, go America on everybody's asses, and run for public office. The list of people they offend is all-inclusive, but the show never seems purposefully edgy. It more has the feel of a bunch of guys goofing around, telling jokes in their shitty apartment, getting high. In other words, it's something more organic than calculated.

But that isn't what we're talking about here. SUNNY is evil comedy at its best, perhaps even funnier than STRANGERS. Each of the four characters is utterly self-obsessed and has no motivations outside of their own betterment. They are mean to their friends and they're all unlucky in love and life. Dee and Dennis obviously loathe their father, Frank (played by Danny DeVito), who only wants to get closer to them. Charlie and Mac are determined to get closer to Frank, who hates them, but also seems them as perhaps the children he always wanted. In other words, everyone is seeking validation and self-worth from everyone else. People are exploited endlessly and relationships mean absolutely nothing. The show's highlight is in "100 Dollar Baby" from season 2, when Mac and Dennis convince Charlie that he's a future underground fighting legend. The show has a training montage, set to "You're the Best Around" by Joe Espozito from that classic 80s story of underdog hope and heroes, THE KARATE KID soundtrack, but the training montage consists of Dennis and Mac drinking heavily and hitting Charlie with heavy blunt objects. Charlie, for his part, eats steroids, cries heavily, and has a nervous breakdown on screen. The imagery, juxtaposed with the schmaltzy song, illustrate the true, black heart of the show; a perversion of something pure and innocent (the 80s underdog story). Motherfucking EVIL.



Danny DeVito is also a producer of RENO 911!, the excellent Comedy Central series which has now reached four seasons. It was created by a lot of the people involved with THE STATE, chiefly among Thomas Lennon and Ben Garant. While RENO is certainly not SUNNY or STRANGERS in terms of the darkened tone, it perhaps surpasses the other two shows in terms of sheer volume of mean-spirited comedy. The difference is the way that the show is hued. RENO presents us jokes about (male and female) rape, incest, pedophilia, crystal meth, lost dreams, and crushed hopes, but it always does so with a smile on its face. The sherrifs from RENO remain optimistic even while they're sobbing. The show also has moments of hope and moments where we're supposed to sympathasize or identify with the characters. (A quick note: in no way am I saying that these facts are bad or that they hinder the show. I am merely suggesting that they ultimately keep it from the level of Evil that SUNNY and STRANGERS attain.)

Just the same, RENO just may be the funniest of all three of these shows. If I had to pick a favorite episode, it'd be "SARS Outbreak", where Brian Unger portrays Reading Ron, a fallen children's TV show host. He's airing on public television, and he takes a backseat to the stuffed talking animal who he co-stars with. He's also a former cocaine addict who lost his big house when the family took off. He has hopes of capturing some uplifting footage to show to the kids at home, but what he's given are the sheriffs talking about prostitutes (or "buckets") performing fellatio on Puerto Ricans, mothers dying while rollerblading and holding their babies, and, of course, rape. (Rape was at the forefront of LET'S GO TO PRISON also, which was co-written by Lennon and Garant.) The sheriffs want to give Ron some footage he can use, so they orchestrate a cat on a roof that they must save. Junior (Garant) climbs up on the roof and rescues the cat, while Reading Ron talks to the children on TV about cops and cats. And then the cat scratches Junior, and he drops it into a woodchipper, sending blood splattering on the side of the house. The sheriffs stand around, stunned, and Reading Ron has a nervous breakdown on camera. Hilarious, sick stuff.

Pretty much episode has things of this nature, but it's all balanced by the fact that the sheriffs all seem to like one another. This lends the show a warmer edge, but it also detracts from the ultimate EVIL of it all. CURB YOUR ENTHUSIASM, Larry David's amazing HBO series, is in a similiar vein. Larry is constantly being screamed and swore at by strangers and friends. He is complely self-involved and selfish. However, he also has a wife who stands by him despite it all, and his friends do things to help him out. Larry, also, is basically a good guy; he's just hopelessly self-centered and neurotic. This is in direct contrast with the characters who populate SUNNY and STRANGERS, who are self-centered, neurotic, and not at all good people. This ultimately sets it apart from CURB and RENO, both of which never seem to go as far as SUNNY and STRANGERS so gleefully do.

I have the first season of WONDER SHOWZEN to watch in the coming weeks. From the two or three episodes I have seen, it is perhaps the evilest of Evil Comedy. I am utterly excited to finally see it.

2006 ROUNDUP: THE PROPOSITION (Hillcoat)

THE PROPOSITION is a blood-soaked, gnarled, Australian take on the American Western written by the always-awesome Nick Cave and directed with style and grace by John Hillcoat. The action is visceral, the tone is analytical, and what emerges is a study of violence, guilt, and morality, and the ties that bind us together and, in the end, tear us apart. Cave takes the general themes of the Western (imperialism, the imminence of death, the search for redemption and definition) and applies them to the British settlement and "civilisation" of Australia. American Indians are swapped for Australian Aborigines and the Outback replaces the western US deserts.

This is a work of extraordinary restraint and outbursts of horrific violence. It is very much a meditation on violence and pain and sadness, but the contemplative mood is tempered by a sense of impending, looming doom. Guy Pearce portrays Charlie Burns, a member of an infamous family of Australian outlaws who slaughter a family and are targeted for termination by the incoming lawmen. Ray Winstone is Capt. Morris Stanley, charged with bringing peace to the savages and wild criminals who populate the Outback. Winstone is an absolute revelation; he's morally conflicted in that he realizes that Charlie and his fourteen year old, possibly-retarded brother, Mikey, are not the sources of evil in the family, and so when he captures them both, he gives Charlie a choice: kill his older brother, Arthur, and he and Mikey are free to go. If, however, he doesn't bring Arthur back by Christmas day, then Mikey's going to the gallows. Charlie sets out to find his brother and the remaining members of the "family", along the way encountering an awesome John Hurt as a bounty hunter and a group of Aborigines who put a spear through him.

Charlie's saved by his brother and the family, and so his moral quandry grows deeper. He knows in his heart that Mikey should not bear the brunt of the family's punishment. He also feels a deep loyalty to Arthu, all the while aware of the fact that he should be punished for his sins. Charlie, of course, is also dealing with his own guilt around the murder of the family (which included a pregnant woman). We watch Charlie weigh his options and choices and try to figure out which bond is strongest, which one he would least enjoy severing. It is a terrifying process, and the end result is a bloodbath of righteous vengence and gore. No one is saved in the end, and no one's hands are clean of blood.

Stunning visuals and audio (including music from Cave) that leads us down a nightmare path even as the film remains grounded firmly in reality. The cast, in particular Winstone, Danny Huston, Hurt, and Dave Wenham, is exceptional. This is without a doubt one of my favorites frmo 2006, maybe even top 5 on the year.

2006 ROUNDUP: RUNNING SCARED (Kramer)

RUNNING SCARED is a film that I enjoyed a great deal and which I believe would not exist were it not for Quentin Tarantino. It inspired perhaps one the worst discussion threads I have ever read (and imagine that, it's from the IMDb) and it stars a horrible actor, Paul Walker. It has Chazz Palminteri playing essentially a version of every role he's ever played and it features little kid actors promimently. To call the plot inane and absurd is to make a gross understatement. It is also to ignore completely the purpose of the film and the charms that it does contain.

RUNNING SCARED is described by writer/director Wayne Kramer as a patchwork of childhood fairy tales and the crime pictures of the 1970s. It is also very clearly designed to stun, shock, and thrill the audience into a kind of resigned numbness. Anyone who has been tattooed knows what it's like to have a needle rubbed over your skin for several hours at a time. Over time, the pain becomes a dull, irritating throb that only really hurts when new portions of the skin are being tattoed. RUNNING SCARED is over-reaching and tries its best to take on a variety of social issues, including child abuse, prostitution, police corruption, backyard meth labs and child predators. It solves all of these issues with the barrel of a gun. It is very much a continuation of the right wing vigilante wetdreams of John Milius and Walter Hill. The fact that it was made (and widely released) in 2006 is amazing and daring.

Hyper stylized in the style of David Fincher, the film is audacious, sometimes ridiculous, often cartoony. Standing in contrast to this is grisly, realistic violence that sends plasma flying across the screen. Kramer seems to want to hint at some subtext about it being a dark children's fable, but it's bullshit. RUNNING SCARED has nothing to say politically or socially. Characters spew ethnic pride and racist and homophobic rhetoric, little kids shoot adults, and the body count rises and rises and rises. It is trash of the highest order, but it is pretty to look at and never takes itself seriously. Which is ultimately refreshing. Even Walker, as afore-mentioned, a terrible actor, plays his role well, simply because it demands no emoting, nothing real or authentic, simply rage and fear and the knowledge that if you ever stop moving, you're dead. RUNNING SCARED attacks social issues with a gun rather than meditation because it realizes that slowing down is not an option. It is a homage to methods that I find personally detestable, but I also understand that it exists as fantasy and must be accepted on its own terms. In its own way, it exhibits style to burn and a rugged sense of individuality. It is very nearly a comment on the action genre, but in the end, prefers to be about nothing. Perhaps I find this admirable; perhaps this is why I enjoyed the movie. Clearly not 2006 Top 10 material by any stretch of the imagination, but it is unique in its own way.

KARAOKE REPORT 001 - 01/12/07

SONG #1 - "Let's Get it On" by Marvin Gaye: I had previously been informed by Nate that he was the new white soul singer at karaoke since I have not presented since October or so, and this just didn't sit well with me. I think that this proved I am still the king of Motown in this mostly-white, suburban town. Shows them! Pelvic thrust count: none, I think, amazingly.

SONG #2 - "Never Gonna Give You Up" by Rick Astley: I was inspired to tackle this one for the first time over the summer, after an episode of IT'S ALWAYS SUNNY IN PHILADELPHIA the night before featured it prominently (and hilariously). Brandie dared me to do it again. I think that I do it pretty well, except that I get into imitating Astley's voice (which I think I do pretty well), which is probably kind of irritating to those watching with fingers over their eyes. Pelvic thrust count: too many to fit on two hands.

SONG #3 - "It's Tricky" by Run DMC: This one I sang with Krista as a duet. It was the third or fourth time we've done it together and probably was the best of them all. It's hard to keep up with the rhymes but I know the song pretty much inside and out at this point, so it's getting easier. Did a bit of improv, breaking out a sort of call-and-response section with "WHAT!"s while Krista rapped. Pelvic thrust count: none.

SONG #4 - "She Don't Use Jelly" by the Flaming Lips: I have been meaning to do this one for a couple of months now, but every time I would put in a request, they would do last call before I would get called up to sing. This time it worked out, and I was in fact pretty good at it. Coyne's deadpan vocals are sort of hard to do but I think I was OK. There were howls from the crowd for this one. Pelvic thrust count: one or two, probably.

SONG #5 - "Closer" by Nine Inch Nails: Sung with Krista and Jody and one or two other people over the course of the song. I always feel ridiculous doing this one because it really just is the repetition of obscenity over and over and over, which I honestly never really noticed when listening to the song. Pelvic thrust count: more than pelvic thrusting, I at one point mounted by friend Billy's face and gyrated. I wasup to I think around ten shots of mezcal at this point, as well as a couple of gin and tonics and an entire shaker of dirty bong waters.

BONUS SONG #6 - "Bohemian Rhapsody" by Queen: This was done a capello after last call. It was started by my friend Brian after they refused to do another song. We got pretty much the entire bar to sing along. I did mouth guitar and the opera parts. You missed it, maaan.

Just when I think I'm out...

So, in the time since I last wrote, I have, in chronological order:

01. started therapy,
02. gotten my first tattoo,
03. watched a shitload of movies,
04. broken up with my girlfriend,
05. embarked on a weird sexual friendship with said girlfriend.

That about takes us up to the here and now. I decided that I missed writing about pop culture stuff and so I think that I will begin writing some stuff again. I've been catching up on 2006 films that I missed or are just opening around here, as is customary for the January month, and I've been watching and re-watching some old stuff that I want to process outside of my own head.

So, let's begin.