I haven't blogged in a while, though I haven't stopped seeing movies. I see AVATAR today, saw SHERLOCK HOLMES yesterday (enjoyed it a lot, but it feels like they were just getting started - film suffers a tiny bit when Jude Law isn't onscreen with Downey). So far my favorite film of the year remains INGLOURIOUS BASTERDS.

I missed BNAT this year due to some unfortunate accidents and situations that frankly I could have prevented had I been a little bit more responsible in my driving. I'm still in a funk over it, but slowly I'm getting over it. Next year, people, next year.

Nothing much else to write about, although I'll try to have something in the pipe about AVATAR in the next couple of days.

"Childhood is messy and joyful, dangerous and crude. Everything is truly an adventure, and nothing is certain. The kids cuss, like I certainly did. They ride their bikes recklessly, just one skid or sharp turn away from slamming into the pavement and serious injury. There is a sense of danger every day. And when you're a kid, you LOVE it. There's nothing, absolutely nothing, like waking up a summer's day and having no idea what the day will bring."

I wrote that two years ago for a retrospective on E.T. THE EXTRA-TERRESTRIAL. I think I may have overromantized childhood a bit. Much of childhood contains fear, confusion, and a questioning of your place in the world. When you're a kid, it's all about you, which seems very self-centered but it's really not. Kids aren't capable of seeing the big picture most of the time. That's what growing up is - a slow, incremental build-up to the real world and everything it brings with it. It's not necessarily a loss of innocence as it is a loss of a certain kind of perspective.

Spike Jonze's new film, WHERE THE WILD THINGS ARE (based on the bestselling children's book by Maurice Sendak) understands that perfectly. Jonze understands that kids mold their reality for easy consumption. Mom's new boyfriend, her job, your sister's alienation of you as she gets older - these are difficult concepts to swallow. Giant monsters, vampires that eat buildings, forts - that's easy. The rules are clear because they're your rules. You dictate the terms and lay the foundations. And then, slowly, you let the real world creep in in ways that you can handle. WHERE THE WILD THINGS ARE is that rare film about childhood as opposed to being for children. It's about that moment in your childhood, that first step - and it's a tiny one - to adulthood where your perspective starts to shift into that larger sense of things.

The first time we see Max (Max Records), he's in a joyful rage, chasing the family dog around the house, not caring what's in the way. Jonze shoots much of the film in a handheld style but it's never incoherent like so many other shaky-cam films. And here, he captures full-on childhood in about 15 seconds. It's a wonderful beginning and sets the film up for the audience - a mainline injection of childhood wonder straight to the brain. It's interesting that Jonze uses his experiences on JACKASS, of all shows, to great effect to show the general mayhem and chaos of childhood. Max goes outside and plays with his imaginary friends and builds himself a snow fort. Then he sees his sister and her friends, and what starts out as a snowball fight quickly escalates into more than Max can handle. Frightened and emotional, Max retreats home.

Max's mom (Catherine Keener) is both frustrated and deeply loving to Max. He's too much to handle, but there's a creative mind there that's so beautiful that every moment has to be captured somehow. This scene of the film, in a way, I related to the most. When I was 9 I bubbled up with stories, wrote them down, and even when I was a very young child I wanted to tell stories. There's a need to express yourself at that age, as real a need as hunger or thirst, and when you can't articulate something it sends you in a rage so deep and wide you can't see the end of it. That's where Max is in his life, and when that rage springs out after an evening of confusing messages and a strange new man in his mom's life, he bites her and runs out the door. There, he comes to a sea with a boat, and Max travels the vast ocean to an island of giant monsters, the Wild Things, who need someone to guide them. Now THIS Max can understand, and so Max, using his creativity, becomes their king. But Max soon discovers that, much like the real world, things change in life and he's not equipped to handle all of those changes.

The effects work on the Wild Things is absolutely wonderful. The mix of giant suits and CGI faces is essential for the film to work. There's no sense of disconnect with them - they occupy space, they breathe, they even have snotty noses. It's some of the best use of digital effects I've ever seen. The main monster, Carol (voiced by James Gandolfini), seems to represent Max's childhood resistance to change, but it's not exactly that simple. All the monsters represent aspects of Max, from his family relations, to his creativity, to his inability to communicate, but there's never a moment when you can pinpoint what one monster is to Max as it's constantly shifting perspective. In his way, Max is working out his tumultuous life in easy ways that he can understand.

I'm really resisting getting into how emotional the film made me. For one thing, it's probably going to affect everyone who sees it in different ways. The parts that really emotionally moved me the most were actually very early on in the film. Like Max, I have an older sister, and I completely understand Max's frustration at how she slowly grows apart from him as siblings tend to do, and how Max retreats into his fantasy world to deal with that. It was the family scenes before Max runs off to the island that deeply affected me. Sitting by your mom, telling her a story off the top of your head - I've done that. Max is extremely creative and intelligent, but he isn't capable yet of understanding the world around him - not yet.

WHERE THE WILD THINGS ARE is about that first step out of childhood, in dealing with the pain and confusion that it brings, and seeing the world with new eyes. Spike Jonze has made a film for the ages here. It's not exactly a film for children as it is a film about childhood, and the deep emotions and ideas it evokes probably won't be understood by younger kids who are still in the thick of it. They'll probably wonder why their parents are brushing tears away from their eyes. Enjoy it why you can, kids. Because it never, ever comes back.

The Best Films Of The Year So Far...

I've been neglectful of this blog this year. I've been lazy and not very inspired to write much. It's becoming clear to me that I need to push myself out of whatever funk I'm in and get back to writing. So, this will be fairly short, but something to prime the pump so to speak.

I think 2009, as far as films go, has been fairly amazing. I haven't seen nearly everything that I want to, and most of the films I have seen have been terrific. I figure I'll leave this list to 5 for now, and I anticipate by the end of the year I'll have an awful lot more to add.

In my opinion, Quentin Tarantino's best film. Before IB, I considered him an already great filmmaker, but with this film he eschews much of the pop culture references and instead concentrates on a solid, engaging story. All the characters feel alive in a way that feels very different from his previous works. The performances are top-notch, especially Christoph Waltz as Colonel Hans Landa, the Jew Hunter Nazi investigator. Menacing and intelligent, Landa stops at nothing to manipulate events to get what he wants. And even then, he's caught off guard by the blunt instrument that is Brad Pitt's Aldo Raine. This film's operating on multiple levels - we can cheer the bloodthirsty ending and at the same time question what exactly we're cheering. So far, my favorite film of the year.

Pixar is in the business of making masterpieces, at least so far. UP is no exception. A moving tale of an old man seeking resolution with his loss in life, this could have been a dour, dry enterprise. Instead, it's at times very funny, the imagery is wonderful (especially in 3D) and the story and characters are compelling. I can't ever get tired of proclaiming that Pixar is the best thing since the wheel, and they never cease to amaze me.

A hell of a directing debut by Neill Blomkamp. A science-fiction film that embraces a thoughtful premise instead of just having things blow up (although D9 does blow up things exceedingly well). Sharlto Copley gives a performance that reminded me an awful lot of Daniel Day-Lewis in the fact that he disappears in the part, and you stop thinking that it's "acting." I don't think a studio would have touched this in a million years, so it's a great thing that Peter Jackson and Blomkamp made this film without interference. Only time will tell what kind of filmmaker Blomkamp will turn out to be but you can't ask for a better start out of the gate than DISTRICT 9.

Kathryn Bigelow's Iraq War film is great for one reason - it doesn't pass judgment. That's why all the other films on this subject, in varying degrees, don't work. They pass judgment. Instead, Bigelow makes a film of real verisimilitude. It feels true and accurate. Jeremy Renner's performance of an adrenaline-junkie soldier probably won't be recognized by any awards ceremonies, simply for the reason thathe doesn't show off. Instead, he embodies it. There's action sequences in this film, shot with a first-person view, that reminded me (in a good way) of the intensity of a great video game, but with consequences. Intense and difficult to shake off.

Duncan Jones' debut feature is science fiction in the purest sense. It doesn't rely on explosions or silly toy lines, and Jones understands that the best special effects are the ones in the mind. Sam Rockwell, in an amazing performance, plays a labor worker on the moon who, after three years, is headed back home to his family. But he discovers that he's been manipulated in a way that he never imagined, and to tell more would be cruel. It's a hell of a performance, one that the Oscars simply won't recognize. Jones makes a film about ideas and it feels bigger than it's $5 million budget would suggest. Another amazing debut.

These are simply 5 I've picked for the year. I've left out quite a bit. ADVENTURELAND, WORLD'S GREATEST DAD, IN THE LOOP, WATCHMEN, OBSERVE AND REPORT, and there's still a lot to see this year, like AVATAR, WHERE THE WILD THINGS ARE, A SERIOUS MAN, UP IN THE AIR... it's been an exceptional year for movies and I anticipate a lot more good films to come. See you at the theater.

WATCHMEN

I'm seeing WATCHMEN again today, likely, but as far as my opinion goes of the film...

I loved it. I have a few nitpicky issues, but as a whole, I think Snyder's brought the comic to life. I've inundated myself with reviews, good and bad, so that by the time I actually sat down to the thing I was pretty numb to all of it. And I'm finding some of the larger complaints to be, well, a little ridiculous.

Malin Akerman was fine. Better than fine - she was good. It was never a struggle for me to believe in her character at all. The way some people were describing it, she couldn't even deliver a line of dialogue well. But I really liked her character a lot, and I understood what motivated her. Her relationship with her mother was well done. No complaints at all about Akerman.

The Nixon makeup weirded me out some, but it wasn't any kind of dealbreaker. Carla Gugino's makeup was fine. My wife, who hasn't read the comic, had no difficulty following the plot, even the endgame. She's a film fan like myself, and I barely had to explain anything plotwise to her. 

Would a better-known actor, a "star" for lack of a better word, been preferable to Matthew Goode as Ozymandias? Well, yeah. But Goode held his own. The action scenes were amped up and heightened, but I thought that was Snyder basically riffing on action scenes in superhero movies in general. I had no issues with that.

Patrick Wilson, in his way, had the hardest job of all the actors. He doesn't get great big moments like almost everyone else gets, and he plays him as an impotent, restrained and terrified loser. It's not flashy, but it's not meant to be, and Wilson sells it perfectly. You believe in the character, believe in his reality, and that's due to Wilson's work and performance.

But there's something that needs to be stated: Jackie Earle Haley and Billy Crudup deserve massive recognition for their work here. In the comic, when Rorschach meets his end, to me there was nothing of the emotion to the scene that Haley brings here. It was devastating to watch. His Rorschach is one for the ages - I'd put it up there with Ledger's Joker - and people may give Snyder shit, but he got some tremendous performances out of his actors, which brings me to Billy Crudup.

His Dr. Manhattan is one of the most compelling, fascinating, enigmatic characters ever to be in a film. It's stunning how CGI can catch the absolute subtlety of a facial expression, how in the entire film Manhattan is denying that he feels anything but the screen, and his face, don't lie - Manhattan is such a deeply emotional person, so divorced from human contact but at the same time remembers everything about it as vividly as I remember what I did only 5 minutes ago. I don't know how much Crudup was on set - from what I understand he was on set all the time - but whoever rendered him did an amazing job. Like Gollum before him, this merging of acting and technology won't be recognized because it's too difficult to grasp what that performance means in the larger scheme of things. But if it were up to me, I'd happily hand an Oscar to both Haley and Crudup for their work here.

What do I think of the ending? I think for the most part, it works. Something the comic has over the film is that the ending was set up fairly early and hints of it were strewn throughout all the books, so that when the final event occurs, the impact is extremely powerful. In the film, I could feel, especially after the prison scene, everything started to speed up and some of the tragic nature of Veidt's plan was lost. When the heroes (save Rorschach) in the book decide that they have to keep Veidt's secret, there's something horrifying about it, but here, things are simply moving too fast to take real stock in the emotional reality of 15 million dead people. Those lingering shots on the bodies in the comic strike home the evil, horrible nature of Veidt's plan, but in the film it trades that for some cool special effects and very little emotional weight. Possibly some of those minor characters that die in the comic will be given some more time in the extended version and we can feel the loss then. But for the theatrical cut, oddly enough, the film really needed to slow down at that point, for the audience to feel it. But the nature of the act, blaming it on Manhattan as opposed to a giant alien squid, plotwise that works just fine. Veidt's explanation was concise and I don't understand how anyone could complain about any difficulty following what happened. It made perfect sense to me, and more importantly, my wife, who didn't know the source.

I think Snyder's made an amazing film here. I think he adapted the "unadaptable". Some reviews complain that he's too loyal, some complain that he's not loyal enough. Personally, I thought he got it just right, injecting his own take and his own style on the material and yet letting the work stand for itself. I wish Moore would see this, but since he won't, maybe Dave Gibbons will understand that. WATCHMEN is a terrific film, one that demands to be seen twice, and it's been a while since a movie's come out where one could make that claim. That said, I'm glad Snyder's doing his own project now, as I'd like to see what his personal vision is, as opposed to others. But he's one of the best visual directors working today, in my opinion, and barring a truly exceptional year for film WATCHMEN will likely be what I consider one of the best of 2009.

Nordling's Top 10 of 2008!

2008 was an odd year.  The summer crop was strong, and the fall releases seemed watered down in comparison to last year's multiple masterpieces.  Maybe the writer's strike cut into the schedule a bit.  But there were still many wonderful films to see this year, and although this is a Top 10 list, there's several films that could have made the grade.  Without further blah-blah, here we go!

10. IRON MAN

Robert Downey Jr. is better in IRON MAN than Johnny Depp was in PIRATES OF THE CARIBBEAN, and yet I don't think he'll get the accolades that Depp did for his performance as Tony Stark.  Not my favorite superhero film of the year, but it's a solid film regardless, the happy-go-lucky in comparison to THE DARK KNIGHT's gloom and doom.  Knowing what Stark goes through in later stories, it won't be smiles for long, but IRON MAN has a clever script and confidently directed by Jon Favreau.  As for Downey, this is the film that gave him his real second act in American cinema, and I'd like to welcome back a true actor's actor.  His turn in this and TROPIC THUNDER might have squared him that Oscar nomination (and still might) if not for Ledger's performance.  Looking forward to next year's SHERLOCK HOLMES.

9. MILK

Sean Penn doesn't play Harvey Milk as any kind of victim or martyr.  He simply plays him as a man happy with his lot in life, who saw an injustice and wanted it corrected.  Yes, MILK is upfront with its characters sexuality, and it doesn't shy away from it.  And at the same time, it shows us as an audience that these people have the same goals and passions as everyone else - to live their lives free from persecution, to have good jobs, to find love, to raise a family.  The film even makes a hilarious point - straight or gay, no one likes stepping in dog shit.  The passing of Proposition 8 was a dark spot on an otherwise amazing political year, and I wish that MILK had been released earlier and wider.  It may have changed some minds.  What's great about Penn's performance is that the usually morose Penn plays Milk as a pretty happy guy.  There's tragedies in his life, to be sure, but it's inspirational that Milk gets up from them and continues.  Josh Brolin plays Milk's assassin Dan White as a man trapped in his environment, and while you feel sympathy for him the film doesn't excuse what he did in any way.

8. FROST/NIXON

This film, Ron Howard's best since APOLLO 13, may seem ill-suited for the big screen, as it would seem that the subject matter doesn't warrant that kind of attention.  Don't believe it.  Frank Langella doesn't play Nixon with broad strokes, but instead, internalizes the man and his performance is all the more powerful for it.  He doesn't play Nixon, he simply is Nixon.  Michael Sheen is more elusive as David Frost - we never really get inside the man - but when Frost decides to become a real reporter instead of a Cheshire-cat's-grin celebrity, the film in it's way becomes a love letter to what journalism used to be about before they got in bed with politics simply for access. The faux-interviews are unnecessary, but other than that, Howard's made a very compelling drama.

7. SLUMDOG MILLIONAIRE

I was almost ready to write this one off because although it was getting lots of raves, it felt to me like this film was going to be that one film every year that gets all the buzz but in actuality didn't deserve it (see CRASH, A BEAUTIFUL MIND).  I'm happy to discover that that wasn't the case.  This rags-to-riches story's been told before but not like this, with Danny Boyle's film sensibilities and the backdrop of Mumbai, India.  I never thought I'd see the day when WHO WANTS TO BE A MILLIONAIRE became poignant, but SLUMDOG MILLIONAIRE manages to do it.  Add to that the amazing score, Bollywood by way of techno, and an instant must-own.  You simply can't miss SLUMDOG MILLIONAIRE.  If you're a film fan of any caliber, you must see this.  If you don't, I'm not sure I want to know you.  It must be hard, walking around with a piece of coal for a heart.

6. SPEED RACER

Yeah, I'm going to say it.  This for me was the most entertaining film of the summer.  This movie's like a kid's breakfast cereal made of rainbows.  You'd think the Wachowski Brothers invented colors for this movie.  I've seen this film wind up on several worst of lists and that absolutely stuns me.  There is no way in hell this is a bad film, and I feel completely comfortable listing it as one of this year's best.  For one thing, as a family film, it's completely appropriate for kids.  Watching the dynamics of the Racer family play out in this story, I felt that in it's way the Wachowskis were making a film about the sheer joy of family, of all these disparate people coming together and making something wonderful.  Is it perfect?  No, there's stretches in the film that are slow.  It could do with about 20 minutes shaved off it.  But that final race, where 2001: A SPACE ODYSSEY blasts through Willy Wonka's Chocolate Factory, is as beautiful as film art can be.  

5. THE DARK KNIGHT

Is it a comic movie?  A crime film?  Happily, it's both.  We've got some distance now from Heath Ledger's death, and I think we can judge his performance fairly without that tragedy clouding the issue, and it's safe to say that Ledger probably gives the acting performance of the year.  He made the Joker completely his own, and lived up to the potential of that role.  I'd say my favorite scene of his is when the Joker corrects Gamble when he say the Joker is crazy: "No I'm not.  No.  I'm.  Not."  And everyone gives good performances in this film, especially Aaron Eckhart, who if not for Ledger would be getting some accolades of his own.  Sure, I could do without Batman's Oscar The Grouch intimidation voice, but that's a minor nitpick.  The best Batman film yet, and it suggests the superhero genre can be taken seriously now.  Perhaps if all the lawsuit crap can get sorted out, next year's WATCHMEN can elevate the genre more.  Can't wait to find out.

4. WALL-E

There's just no way that this film wouldn't make the list.  I claim no objectivity here - Pixar is the God-studio.  Even their lesser films are classic.  Next year's UP,  if they don't drop the ball in the second half, is probably a guarantee to be on next year's Top 10.  As for WALL-E, I first saw it with an enthusiastic crowd in Austin and I knew it was special when the audience applauded at the end of the film, watched the credits, and applauded again.  It's a wonderful love story, an environmental cautionary tale that's never preachy.  If people are tired of me praising Pixar, then tell Pixar to start making lousy films.  The track record is astonishing, and expect more greatness with UP next year.

3. DEAR ZACHARY: A LETTER TO HIS SON ABOUT HIS FATHER

You want superheroes?  I've got two for you: Kate and David Bagby, parents of Dr. Andrew Bagby.  In 2001, Dr. Bagby was murdered by his ex-girlfriend, Shirley Turner.  In a fit of rage Shirley shot Andrew 5 times and fled to Canada, where the byzantine extradition laws kept her from being tried in the United States.  Then a bombshell drops - she's pregnant with Andrew's child.  Desperate to keep some kind of link to their son alive, the Bagbys move from California to Newfoundland to fight Shirley for custody.  It gets to the point where they have to get visitation to see Zachary from the woman who murdered their son.  When she's sent to prison in Canada to await extradition, The Bagbys bond with their grandchild.  And Kurt Kuenne, filmmaker, decides to make a movie documenting his good friend Andrew's life by driving cross-country to interview Andrew's many friends and acquaintances, hopefully for an historical document for Zachary.  But life hardly coincides with what we expect.

Bring boxes of tissue for this one.  As far as documentaries go, DEAR ZACHARY doesn't exactly break the mold.  It's mostly talking heads telling the many stories of Andrew's life.  Kurt Kuenne doesn't even attempt to claim objectivity - this was his good friend murdered, and his rage at that act is palpable, and his bias to the subject gives the film much of its power.  But when the film takes a horribly tragic turn, it becomes a testament to the bravery of two people - Kate and David Bagby, who more than any of the other cinematic heroes of 2008 earn that description.  This film isn't for the emotionally squeamish - it's a hard, hard road.  At times I thought that the way the film reveals its story was approaching manipulative, but Kuenne wants the viewer to feel how he felt as each event happened, and what he's made here is one of the most riveting and powerful documentaries I've ever seen.  And if you want to learn more or order the DVD, go to www.dearzachary.com for more information.

2.  THE WRESTLER

Mickey Rourke is extraordinary as Randy "The Ram" Robinson, a professional wrestler whose age and life choices catch up with him, but he still wants that final go round in the ring.  I'm a big fan of Darren Aronofsky - his FOUNTAIN is my pick for best film of 2006 - but as broad and as emotional as that film was he's remarkably restrained here and the film is all the better for it.  Marisa Tomei continues to make superb acting choices with her roles and she's terrific in this as well.  What I loved most about the film is that while it follows the plot of most sports films to a t, what we're feeling emotionally is the direct opposite of what we're seeing on screen.  When he steps into that ring at the climax, it's an abject failure and the final shot, while on the surface seems victorious, is actually a lie.  The love that the Ram seeks is fleeting and he rejects the loves that last.  It's a hell of a movie, and like RAGING BULL, a study of a deeply flawed man.  I made a real attempt to not let Rourke's public story cloud how I viewed his performance and it would be easy to say that he was born to play this role.  But there's moments where the Ram as a character is emotionally stripped on screen, and that can't just be Rourke's past.  It's an acting triumph, and he's deserving of all the accolades thrown his way.

1. LET THE RIGHT ONE IN 

It's very easy to overhype this movie.  Much of it is quiet, and it's not paced like most films of this genre.  Much of the gore is only suggested, and there isn't one single cheap scare to be found in the film.  On one level it's a tender coming-of-age romance, and on another it's a chilling master/slave story, and what makes it so amazing is that both levels work as well as they do at the same time.  This come-out-of-nowhere instant horror classic blew me away the first time I saw it, and on subsequent viewings it just grows stronger.  Most child performances feel phony, but Tomas Alfredson pulls amazing work, seemingly without trying, out of Kare Hedebrant and especially Lina Leandersson.  I haven't read the novel on which the film is based, which expands Eli's history, but I love how the film suggests aspects of Eli's relationships without being overt.  I love the pool scene, easily the best climax of a movie this year.  I love everything about this film, and it's sure to be talked about for quite some time to come.  A stunning achievement.

Worst Film Of The Year: INDIANA JONES AND THE KINGDOM OF THE CRYSTAL SKULL - This hurts, it really does.  As everyone who knows me can attest,  I'm a Spielberg freak.  So it comes to this, the worst Spielberg film since HOOK (I have a warm spot in my heart for 1941, so don't bother).  People keep telling me that you shouldn't hold SKULL to the RAIDERS OF THE LOST ARK standard, but that's bullshit.  Maybe it can't be as good, but it sure as hell can try.  Instead of real guys under real trucks, we get CGI to choke a supercomputer.  Instead of compelling performances, we get a director who, it felt, would obviously rather be making something else and actors who are seemingly just trying to make it through the next take so to get some of that top-notch catering. Harrison Ford, at times, seemed to be engaged, but mostly, it just wasn't the Indiana Jones of the first three films.   And as for George Lucas, he's not interested in any kind of art.  He's sure interested in commerce, though.  I can't wait to see LINCOLN or INTERSTELLAR or any other film that gets Steven Spielberg excited again.  But this is definitely a low point in the man's catalog, and I guess I can't blame him for being bored with this story.  It certainly bored me.  A vine-swinging Shia LeBeouf?  Really, George?

And that about wraps it up.  2009 has the potential to be fantastic.  2008 wasn't terrible, but it can't compare to the juggernauts of 2007.  Still, LET THE RIGHT ONE IN can hold itself high as the real genuine masterpiece of 2008.  Thanks for reading.

Nordling

SLUMDOG MILLIONAIRE

To the rest of the world, or at least the authorities in Mumbai, India, it is simply not possible for Jamal Malik (Dev Patel) to know the things he does.  He was born a slumdog, living among the scraps and garbage, and he hardly went to school in his youth.  So how is it that Jamal is answering every question put to him in India's version of WHO WANTS TO BE A MILLIONAIRE?  He must be cheating.  Amid torture and harsh questioning, Mumbai's police inspector (Irrfan Khan) will get answers from Jamal.  And so begins one of the most compelling, best films of 2008.

It's very difficult for me to restrain myself, writing about this movie.  Directed by Danny Boyle (TRAINSPOTTING, 28 DAYS LATER) and co-directed by Loveleen Tandan (MONSOON WEDDING) in an exhilarating style that is never once incoherent, the film feels like a joyous burst of adrenaline straight to the heart.  This is what movies were made for - to entertain, to enlighten, and to elicit real emotions.  It is completely accessible, and even among the atrocious slums of Mumbai there's a loveliness to the cinematography (shot by Anthony Dod Mantle).  Even the subtitles (of which there isn't as many as you might think) pop off the screen.  Through SLUMDOG MILLIONAIRE we see a part of the world that we ordinarily might have missed.  Like another film, CITY OF GOD, there's real beauty in the squalor, and although the kids of the film are very poor, there's never a sense of depression or hopelessness in their lives.

As we learn about Jamal's life in the streets of Mumbai, we discover that he also has a brother, Salim (Madhur Mittal), and after their mother is killed in an anti-Muslim riot, they make their way to Mumbai, along with Latika (played as an adult by Freida Pinto).  It becomes obvious quickly that Latika is the love of Jamal's life, and yet through their tribulations they manage to become separated.  Salim turns to a life of crime, and drags Latika along with him.  But although they are apart, Jamal and Fatika's love is ever powerful.  It may be fate, or destiny, that they will be together.  Or it may be that external forces will drive them forever apart.  Either way, it is written.

I can't think of one false note in this film, except for a nitpicky moment when the money that some Americans use to pay young Jamal is too modern for the year that it took place in.  The film's very funny, and when the precocious brothers get into some bad situations Jamal never lets those situations break him.  It's difficult to talk about the acting in SLUMDOG MILLIONAIRE because they don't seem to be acting in this film, but living it in the moment onscreen.  But all the performances are real and wonderful.

I never thought I'd see the day when WHO WANTS TO BE A MILLIONAIRE became poignant, but SLUMDOG MILLIONAIRE manages to do it.  I didn't mention the amazing score, Bollywood by way of techno, and an instant must-own.  You simply can't miss SLUMDOG MILLIONAIRE.  If you're a film fan of any caliber, you must see this.  If you don't, I'm not sure I want to know you.  It must be hard, walking around with a piece of coal for a heart.

PUNISHER: WAR ZONE

Move over, Kathryn Bigelow.  There's a new sheriff in town.

I never liked the character of the Punisher in the comics.  In a weird way, I thought he was inappropriate.  In Marvel, everyone's got superpowers, they're heroes, and killing just isn't an option for any of them.  Not so the Punisher, who happily perforates any bad guys who cross his path.  It was as if the writers thought, "Wouldn't it be cool to have Batman... WITH GUNS?!" (Which pretty much misses the point of Batman, but I digress.)

I haven't seen the other two PUNISHER films, but Lexi Alexander has created something pretty damn fun here.  I'm a big fan of dumb action movies that know just how dumb they are.  They aren't ashamed to look ridiculous.  Like xXx or BAD BOYS 2.  In BAD BOYS 2 Will Smith and Martin Lawrence invade Cuba in a Hummer and then rain destruction on some poor shanty village.  It's as if Michael Bay declared war on poverty by literally killing poor people.  Well, PUNISHER: WAR ZONE never met a problem that it couldn't blow the face off of.  And that happens several times in the film - to mob bosses, to grannies, to fat tubs of shit sitting in an elevator - enough to satisfy any action fan's blood lust.

Oh yeah, there's a plot.  Punisher goes after bad guys, bad guys shoot back.  Punisher kills someone he shouldn't and spends half the film feeling guilty about it as we tap our feet and beg for the gun raping to begin.  And then we get a legitimately wonderful performance by Dominic West as Jigsaw, who plays it so hammy he must have said his lines between apple bites at a luau.  We get parkour-hopping bad guys who are hilariously dispatched in unsubtle ways.  And we get Ray Stevenson (ROME) who actually is the first actor to really look the part of Frank Castle.  I think he maybe had 10 lines of dialogue in the whole film, and yet he was very good as the character.

Someone didn't tell Lexi Alexander that she didn't need to make this movie look as amazing as it does.  This may be the best shot action film that I've seen in a while.  One scene that takes place in a church was so impressively shot that I'd like to see Alexander get behind a film that really shows her talents.  Instead, she gets this movie, which feels way below her talent pay grade.  And yet, thank goodness she directed this, because she knows how retarded the whole thing is, and just amps that to 11.

How many people get their faces cratered in?  I lost count after the Punisher punched his fist through one of Jigsaw's goons.  When more people get their faces literally blasted off than you can count, that's always a good thing.  This is a film to have a beer with.

I am an atheist. 

Just putting those words in the white space on my computer is a kind of battle cry.  And yet, it’s not completely true.  I’m nowhere near a pure atheist in the sense that I absolutely do not believe in the possibility of a Supreme Being. But, I’m fairly certain there isn’t one.  I would never be so arrogant as to claim absolute knowledge of the subject, just as people of a religious bent shouldn’t be absolutely certain that they have that same knowledge.  But I think that the evidence, for me, is fairly clear.

 

Now, to those who would be upset by this personal revelation of mine, why?  How does this change your view of me?  Do you somehow think me less moral, less understanding of the ideas of what is right and what is wrong?  My morality was taught to me at a young age, but more importantly, it has been enforced by my life experiences.  Doing the right thing works.  It’s not just some code to live by.  I’ve seen it in action.  Being kind to your neighbor, giving to charity, helping those less fortunate than yourself – these things promote and strengthen our way of life and they make it much more difficult for people and groups with agendas of hate to gain a foothold.  I just don’t need the idea of a reward in Heaven for me to do these things.  I got over the whole gold star bit once I left elementary school. 

I cherish my family just as strongly as before, and just as strongly as you cherish yours.  My passions have not abated, and they will stay as strong as they always did.  I love my daughter no less than you love your child or children.  My love is reinforced by the fact that if this is all there is, then I want more than anything for my daughter to make her mark on this world. As for myself, it is my moral imperative to leave this world just a little bit better than when I arrived.  It is as strong a moral code to me as perhaps the Ten Commandments, or Jesus’ Golden Rule, is to you.  Do unto others what you would have them do unto you.  It’s a rule that doesn’t require a Supreme Being to enforce, but rather the idea that everyone has a personal dignity and greatness to their existence, and that for us to persevere and to co-exist in this world, to do this simple act betters our place in the world as well as our neighbor’s.

 

No offense, but I’ve had far more fulfilling Sundays sitting at home reading a compelling book or watching an amazing film, spending time with my family, than I ever have in church.  It’s not about what faith is right, either.  I’ve been to many different churches in my life, even a synagogue or two, and it just never took hold.  I understand how people need church.  It gives people a sense of community and a structure to their lives.  My community is different than yours, that’s all.  My life structure is just as strong.

If I don’t believe in anything beyond our existence on this planet, if there’s nothing more than our lives, our loved ones, and our place in the world, then that serves as a much more powerful motivation to me that we must better ourselves NOW, and help others NOW.  Because if there’s nothing else, then it is imperative that we make this world better before we leave.  I may not believe in a Heaven, but I do believe in the future.  And in that future is an existence of wonder and beauty, unfettered by our ideologies separating us from each other while amoral people profit from those things that keep us apart.

 

Do I believe in good?  Absolutely.  I’ve seen it.  I’ve seen it in the beauty of the natural world; I’ve seen it in the selfless acts of people helping others without any regard for themselves.  Some have been done through the province of religion.  Some have not.  Hunger doesn’t need a dogma to be cured.  It needs bread, education, and understanding.  Goodness is a healing act meant to build and reinforce the pillars of civilized society.  I know what good is, and how to spread it.  You spread it with education, understanding, and sheer determination of will.

 

Do I believe in evil?  Absolutely.  I’ve seen it.  I’ve seen evil in a plane slamming into a tower, and I’ve seen it in the treatment of a gay man because he was gay.  I point out that it is religion that causes much of this evil but to be fair a faith in a higher power isn’t necessary for people to do destructive things in this world.  Stalin.  Hitler.  And at the same time, with the same breath, I can name Pope Sixtus IV, who allowed the Spanish Inquisition to happen, or the Salem Witch Trials, done in the name of religion.  Evil is a destructive act meant to take down the pillars of civilized society.  I know what evil is, and how to fight it.  You fight it with education, understanding, and sheer determination of will.

 

You would be wrong to assume that I don’t believe in something greater than myself.  I do.  I see it every day.  In a piece of amazing art.  In the power of justice truly enforced, as wrongs are made right.  In the beauty of the natural world.  I am humbled by these things without the need to attribute them to a higher power.  In point of fact, because I do not believe in a higher power, I am well aware of the significance of my life.  Many religious people believe that God validates their existence, and that their God is a personal God who hears and responds to their prayers.  I do not have that luxury.  Instead, I must have faith in the goodness of my fellow man and in the hope for a better day.  And yet, I am comforted in this, because it means that I must behave in a rational manner, bound by rules, instead of submitting my fate to a spurious belief structure.  If I fail in following those rules, I also understand that the consequences for those actions will be paid for in this life.

 

If you believe that my being an atheist is somehow an affront to your faith, you would be wrong.  I would like nothing more than to live my life, and for you to live yours, and I wish nothing but happiness for everyone.  I will be polite, understanding, and compassionate, and I ask you to be the same.  I don’t need a God for these things, but rather empathy towards the human condition and a willingness to be able to stretch my hand out to those less fortunate than myself, not because it is right, but because it is best.   All I ask is for you not to force attribute a higher power to my motives.  They are mine, and mine alone.

 

I am an atheist.  I am proud of that.  And I love you all.  This love is mine, undiminished, which should make it even more important, because I love you not because I have to, but because I want to.  You may come to understand these things, or you may not.  All I ask is that you try to understand me.  Thank you.