5th Monday Ugh: Spider-Man 3 (Movie)

This promo photo just screams "coolness."

As promised, on fifth Mondays I will be "reviewing" artworks which I consider "terrible".  This is the first installment.  I understand that most of the people reading this blog already consider Spider-Man 3 (2007) to be a terrible film, but maybe some of you don't fully realize just how bad it is.  I'm not going to dwell on the fact that the acting is bad, the dialog is bad, or that the action scenes have an inexplicable Three-Stoogesque quality; you already know those things.  My focus is on the level of coincidence involved with the plot.  I'm going to go ahead make an unsubstantiated claim here which I wouldn't be surprised if it's true: Spider-Man 3 is the most coincidental non-farce ever created.  It probably goes without saying, but if you want to avoid spoilers for the movie don't read on.

It would be too complex to try to list the coincidences in a logical order--such as chronological or stupidilogical--so I'm just going to state some of them and let you sort them out yourselves.  First off, let's set the stage.  All of the coincidences in the film are compounded by the fact that the events take place in one of the most populous cities on Earth.  New York has over eight million residents.  Keep that in mind.

Disclaimer:  I understand that every specific situation (even in real life) is made up of unlikelihoods, such as a train that might arrive between 12:15 to 12:20 is less likely to arrive at 12:17 then from 12:15-12:16.  But I doubt the filmmakers are going to claim that this list of coincidences (which I lovingly call "coince-ables") was created in the spirit of life's unpredictability.

1.  The meteorite that carried Venom to the earth landed about thirty yards from Peter (one of only two super-people in the city at that time), hopped on to his moped and followed him home.  It could have landed next to anyone, it could have gone home with Mary-Jane, but it didn't.  It followed Peter.  Then, it didn't do anything until the plot required further action.

2.  The man that (apparently) killed Peter's uncle landed in an unexplained atomic sand-pit during his escape, becoming the third super-person in the city.  What are the odds that someone so intimately connected to one of the two super-people in the city becomes the third?  The sand-pit operators heard the warning sound alerting them of foreign matter in their pit, but assumed it was a bird that would fly away when the experiment started.  It seemed there were no cameras to allow them to monitor whatever the heck it was they were doing in that pit, and none of their super high-tech sensors could differentiate between a large human male and a bird that would fly away.

3.  Peter's almost-flame, Gwen Stacy, knows Peter from school, but she is also the almost-girlfriend of Eddie Brock, Peter's number-one work rival.  She does not know Peter through her almost-boyfriend, nor does Eddie know Peter through her.

"The greatest battle lies within" is another way of saying, "This film's greatest enemy is it's script."

4.  Gwen's father, Captain Stacy, is the investigator in charge of Uncle Ben's murder investigation.  How unlikely is it that the man in charge of your uncle's murder investigation is the father of a girl you know from school?  How unlikely is it that the man in charge of your uncle's murder investigation knows your number-one rival?  How unlikely is it that both are true?

5.  Just as the problems with Venom and Sandman are ramping-up, Harry remembers that he hates Peter and wants revenge on him.  Why this moment?

6.  When things get really bad for Spidey, Harry's butler tells Harry that Peter didn't kill his father.  He's known this for years, but has never said anything until just that moment.  Why?

*7.  On Peter's first date with Gwen Stacey they unknowingly go to the same bar where Mary Jane has just started working.  Perhaps you are starting to see a pattern here; this is not likely.

8.  The moment before Peter proposes to Mary Jane, Gwen walks up to their table.  Not only is it coincidental that she would even be in the same restaurant as them, but she could have approached the two and any point during their date.  Instead, she just happens to walk up at the exact point of almost-proposal.

9.  Eddie Brock is in the same church that Peter is on top of when he removes Venom from his body.  He is the only person in the building who responds to Peter's loud grunting and stands directly below him as venom drips down, becoming the forth super-person in the city.  Also coincidentally, he had just been praying for Spider-Man's death.

I'm sure there's more to add to this list; post any others you notice in the comments!

Lastly, I know it has been claimed that one of the biggest failings of this film is the fact that it had three villians, but this is simply not true.  One of the biggest failings of this film is the fact that it had four: Green Goblin, Sandman, Venom, and Eddie Brock, who wanted Peter dead before Venom even touched him.  Four.  Get it right.

-MA 10.29.2012

*Contested, see comments

Son of the Endless Night - John Farris (Novel)

Just in time for Halloween, here's a review of one of my favorite horror novels, Son of the Endless Night by John Farris (1984).  At it's heart Endless Night is a tale of demonic possession, which the Liberty Journal refers to as, "The first really worthy successor to Blatty's The Exorcist".  Having read and enjoyed both books, I can tell you which is more in-depth and truly haunting, and it's Endless Night.

Farris is unlike other horror novelists whose work I've read in that he begins by creating a world of deep basic humanity before getting down to the real horror.  His characters are not flat walls of opinions and identifiable quirks; they are complex and changeable.  They are not simply hand puppets used to present two sides of an argument; many of them seek to understand the world around them, and be just to others  These characters have motives and desires and interact fully with their counterparts.  Above all he creates characters we feel we understand; even when we don't agree with them, we sympathize with them.  We want them to succeed.  In other works, the ability to create such engaging characters is often used to cover inadequacies in plot, pacing, and structure, but not here.  This is a meticulously researched and carefully executed novel, always sensitive to the religious nature of exorcism even in its darkest and most disturbing moments.  I'm not saying it will effect you so dramatically, but while I was reading it late one night I woke my wife when I went to use the restroom, so I wouldn't be totally alone walking around the house.

An excerpt from the book with important character names removed.

The plot is unpredictable, but never random.  (With a few forgivable exceptions of fantastic indulgences in the name of excitement and interest.)  While the book starts as a terrifying horror story, it eventually culminates to including another genre entirely, although I won't spoil it by saying which.  This shift is unexpected and satisfying, very little is sacrificed artistically along the way.

The included excerpt is, admittedly, a little melodramatic, but it gives the distinct impression that Farris knows exactly what he's going for, knows how to make it happen, and isn't embarrassed about it.  These are qualities I find lacking in a lot of art, especially from the last fifteen years or so.  Of course artists should be able to view their artwork objectively, but I feel they are sometimes too self-aware, too afraid of scrutiny.

I would also like to mention that Farris has a strange ability I've never run across before, with any writer or genre: he tells or shows the reader something important, something vital to the story, then (and I have no idea how he can do this) he makes the reader forget what he just told them or showed them, only to have it resurface in their mind at the most intense possible moment.

He also takes the time and effort to make the ideas of possession and exorcism both credible and plausible, as if the people in the world who are really in-the-know all accept the reality of possession and the recognized modes of treatment.  He adds even more reality to the tale by showing that an exorcism is almost as bureaucratic as it is spiritual.

It's hard to tell here, but that demon has a very lumpy head.

The book is fun, but quite dark and often disturbing.  It's a long, but fairly easy read, carrying the reader from one tense and fascinating scene to another.  There are a lot of ideas in the book, but also a lot of action, perfect for a long plane ride.  It is also the kind of book that stays with the reader long after finishing it as it is interesting to rethink the events and their meaning.  It is an adult work, with adult language and situations, so keep that in mind if your interest is piqued.  Personally, I edited mine as I went, but I know a lot of people are against that.  Pshh.

-MA 10.22.2012

Primer (Movie)

Before I begin allow me to offer a warning: If you do not know what Primer is about, consider yourself blessed to be able to watch it with no preconceptions of what you are seeing.  Do not look it up on IMDb or Wikipedia, do not talk to friends about it, simply go out, rent the film and watch it.  More so than any other film of which I am aware, it is important to watch Primer for the first time without knowing what it is about.  I won't tell much about the actual plot here. 

I recently decided that Primer (2004) is my favorite movie, dethroning Groundhog Day.  Anyone who knows me well has heard me talk about this movie.  I post about it, I think about it, I quote it. I have seen it thirteen or fourteen times and I would gladly watch it again.  Primer, to me, is just about the perfect film.

Primer was a labor of love.  The man behind the masterpiece, Shane Carruth (Writer, Director, Lead Actor, Composer, Producer, and Editor of the film), began with a dual idea of what he wanted to portray.  a)  He wanted to present a more realistic depiction of technological invention, having been disappointed over the years by how far the movies depicting invention had strayed from the reality of it, and b) to write a morality play about the acquisition of power.  The purity of this genesis is to be applauded, if more filmmakers began their films with these kinds of ethereal goals (as opposed to, "I want a movie with good explosions" or, "I want a movie that would be fun for a young couple to watch together") I think we'd see a lot fewer achingly predictable films.

Carruth was not a movie maker before the creation of Primer, he was (and probably still is) an engineer. Perhaps this is a part of what makes the film so comfortable about being non-conventional.  Unfortunately, despite the film's critical success he has yet to make another (although Arrested-Developmentesque talk about another film has floated around for the past few years).  Primer was produced for the meager sum of $7,000--which is not even enough to film a decent commercial these days--and yet the film looks flawless.

Aaron looks on as Abe drops little circles of paper on the plates.

The plot of Primer is beyond complex.  It is not the kind of film that twists the mind a little bit, but becomes clear by the end or after a second viewing (such as Seven Pounds or Inception, which I like to think of as "Primer Lite").  The film intensely challenges the attention and intelligence of its audience.  The characters (engineers themselves) speak confident technical jargon one strains to keep up with.  The events of the film do not unfold as a clever brain teaser like so many other "cerebral" movies, rather the scenes pan out in frustrating confliction with one another, mirroring the confusion the characters are feeling, creating an near-impossible web of convolution and interest that preys on the mind.  Though the subject matter is not horror fanfare, the film often takes on sinister notes of dread, because we fear what we don't understand. 

The music (again, composed and performed by Carruth) is beautiful and unearthly.  Moving from more concrete acoustic instruments to fragile synthetic sounds.  It would have been easy to just through in a few notes and low noises and call it good, but the more I hear it, the more I realize the music was as carefully thought out as the rest of the film.

Primer is humorous and entertaining, the acting and cinematography is superb, but all of that is swallowed up in our need to understand what is happening on screen.  It can seem more laborious than fun to watch Primer, but once you begin to see what it is about, how its various parts connect, and how many vital scenes are implied but never shown, you start to feel that the tremendous payoff is worth the work.  The ending alone opens the door to an imaginative frenzy of possibilities in the mind of the astute viewer.

I'm not going to pretend that there are no flaws in the movie.  A few of the lines fall a little flat on the part of the actors, and some viewers might feel cheated about a few of the "side-effects" shown not being adequately explained.  In one or two shots you can see a boom mike, if you look very closely.  My biggest complaint with the film (which really is not a serious infraction) is that I think it would be difficult to know the film was meant to be a morality play if you didn't know it was intended as such.  Carruth mentions this in the DVD commentary, but I don't feel like it's really possible to know that's a main point of this film just by watching it.  But every film has at least a few weak points. 

If you are the kind of person who is only interested in a movie that helps you relax or that demands your attention with surface level twists, conflicts, and gags then Primer is probably not the movie for you.  Certainly, there are people who hate it, who see it as a gross waste of time.  I've read several reviews regarding the film as "nonsense" of one sort or another, I assure you that is not the case.  If you like art to challenge you, if you are interested in the experimental, the strange, (if you liked Faulkner's "As I lay Dying" in other words...) then I definitely recommend watching Primer several times, preferably back-to-back.  I suggest watching with the subtitles on, as the characters sometimes talk over each other and speak quickly.

As you unlock the treasures of this film you might find yourself asking, "How could I ever have been satisfied by finding out that Bruce Willis was dead?"

"I was dead the whole time, sry!!"

If you have already seen Primer, click here for some of my thoughts on particular scenes.

-MA 10.15.12

P.S.  The internet is trying to tell me "confliction" isn't a word.  No matter.

See You Dead - Helmet (Song)

The first great work is the third track from Helmet's 2004 LP "Size Matters", titled "See You Dead" (feel free to click on this link for a YouTube video of the song, or look it up on Spotify for a higher quality version).  This song is an interesting mix of quintessential Helmet trademarks such as Hamilton's alternatively calm and aggressive vocals and relentless metal-esque guitar riffs as well as some lesser-heard qualities, such as a very catchy chorus and a build-up that actually leads to a triumphant climax near the end of the song.  Helmet's songs rarely have such a conventionally satisfying hit to them, tending to lean more toward angry and unresolved feelings.

As much as I love the musicality of the song, what really pushes this into the unusual territory of being a truly great work are the lyrics, specifically how they seem to grow organically from a single thought.  Here are the lyrics in their entirety:

I'd like to see you in two pieces.
You won't be walking, barely breathing.
I'd like to see you at my door,
We're together like before.
 
I could miss you more right now or I could slit your throat.
Sometimes I get so down, you're not around and I'd rather see you dead.
Sometimes I get lonely and all I need is just to see you dead.

Tonight you're sleeping by his side,
I tried to see you, but you let him decide.
I'm a threat now, are you scared?
It's just murder, at least you know I care.

I could miss you more right now or I could slit your throat.
Sometimes I get so down, you're not around and I'd rather see you dead.
Sometimes I get lonely and all I need is just to see you dead.

Specifically, pay attention to the line "I'm a threat now, are you scared?"  To me, this song tells the story of a man who would like to be able to at least talk to his ex, but her new boyfriend sees the man as a threat.  The speaker here is angry and a little bit amused to be viewed in this way, when in his mind all he's trying to do is keep up some contact with an ex, being polite and/or friendly.  The violent lyrics are a satirical renouncement of being called dangerous, which is a level of subtlety you don't often see in popular art, for the author will always run the risk of people passing over the irony, and missing the point completely.  He's finding and showing the humor of the boyfriend's overreaction.  In a way "owning up" to the insult gives the speaker power over it. 

But the speaker betrays himself, and we see in the lyrics that he does miss his ex sincerely, and does actually long for her company, which could make him a legitimate threat to a new relationship, an interesting extra layer to add.  I like the admittance of need which seems almost out of place in a very "male" song.

It's an awesome song, successful on so many levels, and much deeper than it at first appears to be.  Raw, yet catchy, a perfect example of Hamilton's prowess behind the mic, with a guitar, and with a pen in his hand.

-MA, 10.8.2012