Ieri sera sono stato a vedere WALL•E.
Si, è vero, sono un po’ in ritardo…

Dico subito che non parlerò come ogni altro Apple–maniaco dei vari richiami disseminati all’interno del film; oggi l’immagine di Obama con un Mac mi ha già fatto venire il voltastomaco per il numero totale di presenze in rete, per cui basta.

Da quando avevo visto il trailer, molti sono i paragoni che mi son venuti in mente, e ora posso confermarne alcuni (anche dopo il piacevole pranzo a discutere di questo e altro con colleghi e amici).

Tralascio l’evidentissimo Johnny 5 di Corto Circuito e la stessa EVE (il vui nome si pronuncia –non volutamente immagino, ma– allo stesso modo di Ive, Jonathan, non so se mi spiego…): molti ci hanno visto il prossimo iPod –io spero vivamente di no!– però è innegabile che le linee dei prodotti del designer della Mela abbiano influenzato anche lei, ma in fondo il bianco/lucido fa così tanto futuribile, THX docet!

Ma parliamo di Auto: chi si è accorto che è una copia sputata di HAL?

Tanto per rimanere in tema, di 2001: Odisea nello Spazio cito anche la più geniale ellisse temporale della storia del cinema: i 2 fotogrammi giustapposti che descrivono perfettamente l’evoluzione dell’uomo dalle origini allo spazio, attraverso la “trasformazione” dell’ossea arma in navicella.

La cito non soltanto per la “storicità”, ma anche per il fatto che WALL•E non è semplicemente il film di un robot con una personalità o la storia di un amore tra macchine: è il ritorno dell’uomo sulla terra: una nuova genesi, ecco da dove viene il nome di Eva!

Infine i titoli di coda, altro asso nella manica assieme ai Corti iniziali, che rapprentano proprio questa rinascita sfruttando le tecniche pittoriche e artistiche dell’umanità dalle sue origini ai giorni nostri, passando dalle pitture rupastri ai gerglifici e da Van Gogh a un po’ di sana “8-bit art”.

Solo una cosa mi chiedo: BNL non rcedo che sia Banca Nazionale del Lavoro, ma messo così da solo in fondo, un po’ mi fa chiedere se dietro non ci sia –anche– qualcos’altro…

1.Frank Herbert - Dune (1965)
2.Orson Scott Card - Ender’s Game (1985)
3.Isaac Asimov - Foundation (1951)
4.Douglas Adams - Hitchhiker’s Guide to the Galaxy (1979)
5.George Orwell - 1984 (1949)
6.Robert A Heinlein - Stranger in a Strange Land (1961)
7.Isaac Asimov - I, Robot (1950)
8.William Gibson - Neuromancer (1984)
9.Ray Bradbury - Fahrenheit 451 (1954)
10.Robert A. Heinlein - Starship Troopers (1959)
11.Aldous Huxley - Brave New World (1932)
12.Larry Niven - Ringworld (1970)
13.Arthur C. Clarke - 2001: A Space Odyssey (1968)
14.Philip K. Dick - Do Androids Dream of Electric Sheep? (1968)
15.H.G. Wells – The Time Machine (1895)
16.Arthur C. Clarke - Rendezvous With Rama (1973)
17.Robert A.Heinlein - The Moon is a Harsh Mistress (1966)
18.H.G.Wells – The War of the Worlds (1898)
19.Arthur C. Clarke - Childhood’s End (1954)
20.Dan Simmons - Hyperion (1989)
21.Joe Haldeman - The Forever War (1974)
22.Ray Bradbury - The Martian Chronicles (1950)
23.Kurt Vonnegut - Slaughterhouse Five (1969)
24.Neal Stephenson - Snow Crash (1992)
25.Orson Scott Card - Speaker for the Dead (1986)
26.Niven & Pournelle - The Mote in God’s Eye (1975)
27.Ursula K Le Guin - The Left Hand of Darkness (1969)
28.Orson Scott Card – Ender’s Shadow (1999)
29.Isaac Asimov - The Caves of Steel (1954)
30.Jules Verne - 20,000 Leagues Under the Sea (1870)
31.Roger Zelazny - Lord of Light (1967)
32.Frederik Pohl - Gateway (1977)
33.Philip K Dick - The Man in the High Castle (1962)
34.Stanislaw Lem - Solaris (1961)
35.Isaac Asimov - The Gods Themselves (1972)
36.Robert A Heinlein - Time Enough For Love (1973)
37.Madeleine L’Engle - A Wrinkle In Time (1962)
38.John Wyndham - The Day of the Triffids (1951)
39.Neal Stephenson - Cryptonomicon (1999)
40.Alfred Bester - The Stars My Destination (1956)
41.Michael Crichton - Jurassic Park (1990)
42.Kurt Vonnegut - Cat’s Cradle (1963)
43.Philip K. Dick – UBIK (1969)
44.Isaac Asimov - The End Of Eternity (1955)
45.Anthony Burgess - A Clockwork Orange (1962)
46.Daniel Keyes - Flowers for Algernon (1966)
47.Carl Sagan - Contact (1985)
48.Vernor Vinge - A Fire Upon the Deep (1991)
49.Mary Shelley - Frankenstein (1818)
50.Kim Stanley Robinson - Red Mars (1992)
51.Walter M. Miller - A Canticle for Leibowitz (1959)
52.Jules Verne - Journey to the Center of the Earth (1864)
53.Ron Hubbard - Battlefield Earth (1982)
54.Neal Stephenson - The Diamond Age (1995)
55.Niven & Pournelle - Lucifer’s Hammer (1977)
56.Michael Crichton - The Andromeda Strain (1969)
57.Kurt Vonnegut - The Sirens of Titan (1959)
58.Ursula K. Le Guin - The Dispossessed (1974)
59.Harry Harrison - The Stainless Steel Rat (1961)
60.Iain M. Banks - Player Of Games (1988)
61.Greg Bear - Eon (1985)
62.David Brin - Startide Rising (1983)
63.Gene Wolfe - The Shadow of the Torturer (1980)
64.Alfred Bester - The Demolished Man (1953)
65.Peter F. Hamilton - The Reality Dysfunction (1996)
66.Philip Jose Farmer - To Your Scattered Bodies Go (1971)
67.Iain M. Banks - Use of Weapons (1990)
68.Robert A. Heinlein - The Puppet Masters (1951)
69.Philip K. Dick - The Three Stigmata Of Palmer Eldritch (1964)
70.Arthur C. Clarke - The City and the Stars (1956)
71.Robert A. Heinlein - Have Space-Suit - Will Travel (1958)
72.Robert A. Heinlein - The Door Into Summer (1956)
73.David Brin - The Uplift War (1987)
74.Margaret Atwood - The Handmaid’s Tale (1985)
75.John Wyndham - The Chrysalids (1955)
76.Connie Willis - Doomsday Book (1992)
77.Robert A. Heinlein - Citizen Of the Galaxy (1957)
78.H.G. Wells - The Invisible Man (1897)
79.Ursula K. Le Guin - The Lathe of Heaven (1971)
80.William Gibson - Burning Chrome (1986)
81.C. S. Lewis - Out of the Silent Planet (1938)
82.Mark Twain - A Connecticut Yankee in KA’s Court (1889)
83.Clifford Simak - Way Station (1963)
84.Arthur C. Clarke - The Fountains of Paradise (1979)
85.Robert A Heinlein - The Past Through Tomorrow (1967)
86.Dan Simmons - Ilium (2003)
87.Edgar Rice Burroughs - A Princess of Mars (1912)
88.Julian May - The Many-Colored Land (1981)
89.John Brunner - Stand on Zanzibar (1969)
90.E. E ‘Doc’ Smith - Grey Lensman (1951)
91.David Brin - The Postman (1985)
92.Greg Bear - Blood Music (1985)
93.Philip K Dick - VALIS (1981)
94.Theodore Sturgeon - More Than Human (1953)
95.Lois McMaster Bujold - Barrayar (1991)
96.Clifford Simak - City (1952)
97.Stanislaw Lem - The Cyberiad (1974)
98.Edwin A. Abbott - Flatland (1884)
99.John Varley - Titan (1979)
100.Robert Louis Stevenson - Strange Case Of Dr Jekyll & Mr Hyde (1886)

Bu listede Stephen King ve Dan Brown gibi yazarların yer almaması şaşırtıcı…

”Man is something that must be overcome; and for that reason you must love your virtues — for you perish by them.“ — Thus Spoke Zarathustra.

DUMMMM…….. DAHHHMMMM……… DEEHHHMMM…….. DEEMMMMMM…….. DA-DUM……. to the accompaniment of an orchestral overture, somewhere in America four mechanics in white shirts and slacks push a shaved albino carrot of a motorcar onto the launch pad of a drag strip… the rocket car is shrouded by four motorcycle tires and looks rather docile, like a soapbox derby racer with a slight thyroid condition… horns blare out of a series of lo-fidelity loudspeakers wired in parallel, with cables sagging down the length of a drag strip… DUMMMM………. DAHHHMMMM………. DEEHHHMMM………. DEEMMMMMM…….. DA-DUM… BOUMP…. BAMMPP…. BOUMPHH… as tympanies rattle, smoke silently wisps from hydrogen peroxide gas chilled to near absolute zero… the caustic vapor stings those close enough to read the lettering POLLUTION PACKER stenciled onto the race car’s aluminum-skinned fuselage.

The Pollution Packer. The moniker itself served as a fantastic portent of an age when outrageous hyper-velocity will be absolutely effortless and won’t degrade the Air Quality one iota. The rocket car is a postcard from the future, a day when there is no smog and warp speed for the populous is commonplace. The fuel is hydrogen peroxide, suggestive of experimental hydrogen-burning engines that produce water instead of smog.

Although hardly as pure as the driven snow, as far as rocket fuels go, hydrogen peroxide is decidedly less toxic than, say, hydrazine, a radically unstable fuel additive that would explode upon contact with just about anything. Vintage film of Nazi Luftwaffe pilots with nasty and gruesome burns from dicey landings with experimental rocket airplanes are testament to the chemical’s volatility. In the 1960s, a few of the braver nitro dragster racers would splash hydrazine into the fuel tank after the motor was lit and the dragster was running on the start line, creating a cocktail of nitromethane, benzol and 2% hydrazine. Surreptitious use of hydrazine is credited with the first 200 mph clocking by a fuel dragster (Chris “the Greek” Karamesines in 1960, a feat not matched for another four years). As per the instability of hydrazine, one top fuel driver said that, “I do know if you spilled the straight stuff in the trunk of the tow car you had instant fire. Had first hand experience with that one. I really think there were more guys running it than were willing to admit (it).”

∞

”… it didn’t take the Talmud to see that folks would pay good money to see death-defying displays of horsepower and cockpit acumen at their local drag strip… jet and rocket dragsters became a way to subvert the system and ensure that the racers were in the loop in a fiduciary sense… it was a means for hot rodders to be paid in full…“ — Gus Levy, SCHTUPPING THE SYSTEM WITH MAXIMUM THRUST, previously unpublished.

”NHRA was founded in response to a demand among thousands of hot rodders in all parts of the country to organize a legitimate, purely American motorsport. And NHRA, under Wally Parks’ guidance, did just that. We’re all very proud of 50 years of achievements.

”If you’re so fond of airplane engines, race ‘em the air, in airplanes, where they belong. Yes, drag racing is about automotive engines, and as long as I have any say over it, the sport will stay that way.“ — NHRA muckety-muck, Dick Wells.

Meanwhile, back at the drag strip’s launch pad, the music is all midrange and sounds like a hangover feels. As a string section joins the horns and the percussion, and everything swells toward a crescendo that distorts the speaker cones and attempts to cloak the lack of any real noize out of the race car resting in a wistful and dormant manner on the drag strip’s starting line. Noise from the twisted and besotted crowd swells in time with the trumpets’ flourish and a smattering of beer cans and trash are tossed ineffectually in the general vicinity of the track.

From the rocket motor comes a discordant harmonic, a high-pitched whistle — like the sound of a negligent housewife’s tea kettle set to a high burn. The opera overture reaches its apex and continues blaring out of tin speakers, oblivious to the whistling, which is in a different key altogether. Every head hurts just that much more from the atonality.

As the start lights turn green, the rocket car smokes in the drag strip with a heavenly mist of steam. The air stinks like ammonia with a hint of rubber gloves burning in a landfill faraway in Valhalla. As it zips down the race course, the Pollution Packer burns H2O2 in a quantity and concentration that would keep an Aryan nation of Rita Hayworths platinum blond for life. The white vapor is a gentle and clandestine nerve gas, silently tweaking central nervous systems and fogging the brains of those assembled like mosquitoes in a culvert.

It is fitting that the soundtrack to the launching of a rocket car is “Also Spake Zarathustra,” Richard Strauss’s ode to Frederik Nietschze, a pompous piece of music appropriated by motion picture director Stanley Kubrick as the opening theme in his space epic, 2001.

Nietschze was a firm believer in the elevation of the human spirit, and how man could take his endeavors to ever-spiraling heights. If life had any meaning, he reckoned, it was to raise the bar on all matters spiritual and intellectual — and by extension, technological.

2001 was a 1960s production and an exercise in inscrutable bombast. The movie’s message was garbled by the gobbling of w-a-a-a-y too much LSD by its filmmakers as they read the Arthur C. Clarke book upon which the script was based… one precept of 2001 was the notion of uroboros or bookends and how everything in the spacetime continuum comes full circle… at the beginning of the film, barbaric simians gather at a monolithic totem left behind by a future civilization of humans who have vaporized their very existence… during a total eclipse of the sun, the monolith generates an unheard cosmic wail that tweaks the psyches of the primordial chimps who have discovered technology in the form of a zebra bone that can be used as a billy club… they haven’t yet discovered the wheel nor fire, but these hairy precursors to humanity have found a way to beat each other’s brains into a pulpous ooze… this same totem mysteriously manifests on one of Jupiter’s moons, whereupon the nervous sounds of a planetary eclipse drives a handful of space explorers to their doom… civilization has gone full circle, back to the species upon which humans evolved…

There is an echo of Kubrick’s ethos by the whooping and hooping of beer-battered bleacher bums, dangling precipitously by the top rails of a temporary grandstand. The drunks are an embodiment of verisimilitude and simulacrum, an example of 2001’s apes either somewhat evolved or somewhat de-evolved. The shrill pitch of the rocket engine is a physiological device that tweaks the primitive id of the beastly crowd of trackside tipplers.

The rocket whizzes by and the drunks scream even more belligerently, dazzled by the raw display of speed and stoned by the surreal cloud of rocket vapor. Up in the grandstands just shy of the finish line, two hippies blowing weed drop their jaws. “That was too fast,” one exhales, like he had just seen the monolith and thy monolith’s name is the Pollution Packer.

And perhaps it was too fast. Or perhaps tossing beer cans in the presence of a rocket car is just a monkey throwing a bone to the heavens.

SOUNDTRACK–NADA SURF-Lucky (2008).

Just as I was thinking that Nada Surf had dropped off the face of the earth, I discovered that they were releasing Lucky.  Lucky continues Nada Surf’s fantastic output of beautiful melodies and poppy, almost folky songs.  I hate to make it sound like Nada Surf have mellowed, but they certainly have.  Nevertheless, their song craft has risen to even newer heights.  The first three songs are some of the best singles you’ll hear (and you may have heard “Whose Authority” which got some airplay…. If you liked that then you’ll love the rest of the album.)

There are obvious precedents for who Nada Surf now sound like, but it’s not an aping of sounds where you say, oh they sound just like Matthew Sweet or Semisonic or something, but they have that kind of vibe.  If the jangly alternapop of the late nineties were still popular, Nada Surf would be leading the pack.  As it is, they don’t sound retro in any way, the songs just exist, almost timelessly.

The middle songs culminate with “I Like What You Say.”  There’s no reason this song shouldn’t be a huge hit.  The lyrics are slightly hard to sing along to (which usually makes for the kind of song that people like to learn) “You say, I like what you say, I like what you say, you say,” but the chorus of “Baby, I only want to make you happy” lifts your spirits.  All eleven tracks are solid, and there’s enough diversity, even within the limited palette to keep you interested.  There’s even a short oom-pah-pah at the end of “Ice on the Wing.”  I’m not sure why it’s there, but it adds a nice bit of texture to the album.

This disc came with a bonus EP (something Nada Surf seems to like doing) which comes with acoustic versions of two of the songs from the album, and two new songs.  The last one, “Everyone’s on Tour” shows a rare glimpse of Nada Surf really rocking out.  It’s something of a throwaway song, but it shows off an interesting side of the band, just in case you were afraid they were getting too mellow.

[READ: Fall 2007] To Kill a Mockingbird.

There was some impetus that made me want to read this book and watch the movie.  I think it’s because Sarah likes to repeat her favorite line from the movie (see below) and I wanted to see it myself.  I wasn’t entirely sure what it was even about.  I think it was simply that I knew so many cultural references to this book without knowing the original.  It made me say, okay, time to read this thing.  (Similarly, if you’ve never actually seen 2001, A Space Odyssey, you are missing hundreds of cultural reference points every day).

And I am so glad I did.  Now, obviously, its a Pulitzer Prize winning story, and everyone is supposed to read it in school (why didn’t I?), so I’m not the only one to think it’s good.  But in addition to being Substantial and Substantive, it was also a really enjoyable read.  I admit that some of the classics are difficult to get through, but this one was so great I practically rushed through to the end.

So, of course, this is where Boo Radley comes from.  It’s also where Atticus Finch comes from.  It’s also a story about race, rape and a lawyer who is willing to stand up for what’s right even in the face of violence. That’s a lot to pack into a small book.

The book is set in Alabama during the Great Depression.  The narrator is Scout, a six-year old girl who looks up to her brother Jem and their friend Dill, who is visiting for the summer. Jem and Dill are of the age where they don’t want a six year old girl hanging around with them, but Scout is up for most of the rough-and-tumble fun that they enjoy so they allow her to come along.

Scout and Jem live next door to Boo Radley.  Boo is the town’s recluse.  No one has seen him for years, yet every day the stories of him grow weirder and scarier.  The kids play games to see who is brave enough to touch the Radley’s front door, or even their fence.  Over the course of the book the kids feel compelled to try and draw Boo out of his house.

At some point, the kids find small gifts–gifts that must be from Boo–in a tree between their houses.  He seems to be reaching out to them.  This provokes Scout and Jem into more audacious behavior, including on one instance Jem losing his pants in a garden fence while trying to escape detection.

Their father, Atticus is a distinguished, well-read, and respectable man.  He is calm and patient, and is doing his best to raise the children after his wife died.  For the most part he knows that his kids, although high spirited, are decent and respectful.  However, he cannot tolerate their behavior towards Boo Radley.  He has known the Radleys for most of his life, and knows the story behind Boo, but he will not reveal it to them.  He asks them to respect his wishes.  However, his children, being children, are even more drawn to the mystery of Boo.

As if this weren’t an intriguing enough premise, there’s the whole other story that happens simultaneously.  Atticus Finch is a public defendant.  He is called to defend Tom Robinson, a local black man who is accused of raping a young white woman, Mayella Ewell.  Mayella is the daughter of Bob Ewell, the town’ abusive  drunk. Atticus is called every name in the book for defending a black man against the word of a prominent white man’s daughter, but he believes that Tom is innocent.  Many in the town turn against him.  Atticus tries to protect his family from the racial slurs he receives, but he can’t stop Scout from getting into fights trying to defend him.

Tom Robinson is a decent man.  He does work around the town because he is young and strong.  However, his left arm is shriveled and useless.  (It is this fact that leads Atticus to believe in Tom’s innocence).  Mayella invited Tom in to do some chores (in one of Sarah’s favorite lines, he is asked to “bust up this chiffarobe”), and a little bit more. When Tom is found in the house, Mayella’s father beats her, causing Tom to flee…and you see where this is going.

By agreeing to defend Tom, Atticus humiliates Bob Ewell, who vows revenge.  Revenge comes at the hands of Atticus’ children.  And the ending of the book is just as exciting as the rest.

Even though most of you have read the book, just in case you’re new to it, I’m trying my best not to spoil any of the main events.  You should have the joy or sadness of learning what happens.

It’s really a tremendous book.  In many ways I’m bummed that I hadn’t read it earlier, as I wonder how it would have impacted me as a teen; however, I’m glad I read it now because, as an adult, I could appreciate the impact the book had.

The movie, by the way, is also excellent.  Gregory Peck is outstanding as Atticus Finch, and the kids, especially Scout (Mary Badham) put a lot of emotions into the role.  Some things have been changed from the book, but not the essential spirit.  Some events are also made a little more clear in the movie.   Although I wouldn’t want to have seen the movie first, it makes an excellent companion to the book.

2001: A Space Odyssey 6.7/10
2001 is a 1968 movie loosely based on the short story “The Sentinel” by Arthur C. Clarke, and adapted into a novel by him while the movie was being produced. The movie is mainly about a mysterious black monolith left behind by an advanced alien race which is never shown or named.

The film opens in the deserts of Africa, an unknown amount of time in the past; around the dawn of man. A group of ape-like creatures are foraging for food, when they are attacked by a cheetah, and one of their group is killed. They retreat to their cave and upon awakening find a mysterious black slab sitting in front of the entrance. The apes cautiously approach the monolith, and one of them appears to be taught by the monolith telepathically how to use tools. The ape tribe then kills the cheetah that had been terrorizing them, and takes control of the nearby water hole the next day. Another tribe fights them for it, but are easily defeated by the rock and bone wielding tribe, who kill the leader of the other tribe.

The movie jumps to around 2000 and shows an orbital satellite/nuclear weapons platform. A pan-am space flight flies its crew and single passenger, Dr. Heywood Floyd to Space Station 5. The ship docks with the station an Floyd disembarks. He makes a videophone call to his daughter to tell her happy birthday and apologize for not being able to be at her party. He meets with a group of soviet scientists and mentions he’s going to Clavius Base, a US moon base, and the men ask if the rumors of an epidemic on the base are true. Floyd tells them he doesn’t know and then moves on to his flight.

2001 A Space Odyssey is a movie hailed for pioneering visual effects, and scientific realism. The musical score for the film is composed of classical music such as The Blue Danube Waltz during the space sequences and Thus Spake Zarathustra at the beginning and end. The space sequences are visually stunning, especially for a movie made in 1968. I give 2001 a 6.7/10.

Sunshine 10/10
Sunshine is a 2007 British film directed by Danny Boyle, written by Alex Garland and starring Cillian Murphy… sounds familiar right? This movie has cast members from both 28 Days and Weeks later, but is unrelated in storyline.

The film begins aboard the Icarus* II in 2057. We are told the sun is dying, which will end all life on earth. A group of scientists is sent to use all the Earth’s remaining fissile material as a bomb to reignite the Sun, a bomb roughly the size of Manhattan. The reason the ship is called Icarus II is because there was a first one, which was lost 7 years prior when nearing the sun due to unknown complications. As the Icarus II nears the sun it receives an emergency transmission from the Icarus I, which has apparently been sitting near the sun for 7 years. The Icarus II’s crew decides that because the probability of success is incalculable having a second bomb would mean 2 chances to succeed, so they override the computer navigation system and go towards the Icarus, but Trey (the ships navigator) forgot to reset the heat shield to the new trajectory. This causes damage to the ship and Kaneda (the captain) and Capa (physicist) go on a space walk to repair the shield. The computer aboard the Icarus tries to turn the ship to avoid further damage, and Capa returns to the ship but Kaneda is killed by the solar radiation after repairing the shield. The ships oxygen garden was also mostly destroyed which severely depleted their reserves, making a return trip impossible. The Icarus II docks with the Icarus and the crew goes aboard. Everything in the Icarus is covered by a thick layer of dust. In the solar observation room the crew finds the charred bodies of the Icarus I’s crew who committed suicide by turning the solar shield off.

Sunshine is one of the most amazing movie’s I’ve ever seen. There are a few scientific fallacies, but the story and underlying themes make up for that. If you liked 28 Days Later, or 2001 A Space Odyssey, you’re bound to like Sunshine. I give Sunshine a 10/10.
~Sean Bertoniere

*Icarus in Greek mythology tried to escape from Crete with his father using wax wings to fly, but Icarus didn’t listen to his father and flew too high, so the sun melted his wings and he fell to his death.

Não sou muito chegado em copiar notas inteiras, mas essa precisa ser colada.

A Internet está provocando uma mudança evolutiva
(Blue Bus)

Pesquisadores da UCLA, University of California, Los Angeles, afirmam que os cérebros de ‘nativos digitais’ estao se desenvolvendo para lidar de maneira mais eficiente com as tarefas de pesquisar e filtrar uma grande quantidade de informaçao. E também tomam decisoes mais rapidamente. Por outro lado, o comportamento dessas pessoas está mudando padroes do cérebro, prejudicando as habilidades sociais dos ‘heavy users’ de internet e até mesmo propiciando um aumento em condiçoes como Attention Deficit Disorder (em português, Transtorno do Déficit de Atençao com Hiperatividade). Para os pesquisadores, há uma “mudança evolutiva” ocorrendo. O neurocientista Gary Small acredita que na próxima geraçao “aqueles que realmente estarao na liderança serao os que tiverem muita habilidade com tecnologia e tambem nas relaçoes pessoais”. Noticia do PDA, blog do Media Guardian.

Mas não foi sempre assim, desde a aurora do homem? Como bem ilustrado no genial 2001 - Uma Odisséia no Espaço, de Arthur C. Clarke e Stanley Kubrick? (cena abaixo)

A mach-cut is a cut between two shots which match graphically. This match establishes a sense of continuity and interconnectedness between two different spatial or temporal spheres (space and time). The matching between a shot Z and shot X tends to produce a sense of importance in the connection. The match cut is an editing technique which imbues the different spheres with a sense of metaphor or symbolic relationship. If shot Z has a violent connotation and is matched with X then the action of X will also be imbued with that violent connotation [Although a part of the continuity editing style the match cut is linked to and could be argued inspired by, the montage style and theory of parallelism].

In the beginning of the film Strangers On A Train (1951) we see two different pairs of shoes walk towards a train. The two characters’ footsteps are linked together by a match cut which indicates an inevitable meeting and connection between the two characters’ fate. Essentially the characters are walking the same “footsteps” towards a linked fate. The match cut is primarily a graphic or visual connection between two different spatial or temporal locations. The second function is metaphorical or symbolic and a tool in which to produce meaning by matching two ideas together producing a synthesis of major importance. 2001: A Space Odyssey(1968) matches the throwing of a bone to a space station. The throwing of a bone, after the use of it as a weapon, indicates a leap forward towards humanity [evolution] and a movement forward in scientific progress and the use of tools. These concepts are linked to the space station firstly as the station itself is a tool as such and an indicator of scientific progress but also in larger context of the film as the technology of the space station is a movement towards another leap in evolution: that of artificial life.

Moonraker (1979)
Lewis Gilbert
Bond, James Bond: Roger Moore
Arch Rival: Hugo Drax (Michael Lonsdale)
Bond Girl: Holly Goodhead (Lois Chiles)

Moonraker (1979)

The central piece in Moore’s seven part odyssey as the world’s most famous spy was the costliest and most successful Bond till then. In this episode, Bond investigates the disappearance of a US space shuttle Moonraker. He finds out that a California based tycoon, Hugo Drax, with hardware supplies from Venice and chemicals from near Rio de Janeiro is behind this. If The Spy Who Loved Me (1977) showed us a maniac who tried to build an underwater world, Moonraker follows another trying to take the finest of the human race to space. Bond takes the help of a NASA astronaut/CIA agent/babe Holly and travels around the globe trying to track down his arch rival’s base station.  He finally ends up in the deep interiors of Amazon where he finds out that his enemy is out of the world, literally.

I am sure I’m going to be flamed for telling this, but Moonraker is a solid Bond film. Agreed that the plot and action is much over the top, but hey, what did you expect, Bergman?  Superior stunt choreography includes a jaw-dropping free fall, a boat chase in Venice and a fistfight over a winch. Bond is funny except for the lines where his puns fall flat (Even then he is funny, but unintentionally so). Jaws arrives as a gem and is as stylish as Bond at many places. Amusing references to both Close Encounters Of The Third Kind (1977) and 2001: A Space Odyssey (1968), but don’t even think about comparison.

The Hamilton watch company has a long and extensive history. Although I love the older manual winding Hamilton’s, lately I have been obsessed with the Hamilton Electrics. Research for the first battery operated watch began by Hamilton in 1946. It wasn’t until 1957 that Hamilton announced the release of the “Ventura” the world’s first battery powered watch. For the next 12 years, Hamilton would produce some of the most interesting and highly sought after “Space Age” designs. Check out the Meteor, Altair, Flight, Ventura, & Regulus below. If you watch some of the original Twilight Zone episodes, you might notice Rod Serling wearing the Ventura. Rene Rondeau is considered the leading expert on the Hamilton Electric and also has various models available for purchase from time to time.

A space mission that could reveal man’s destiny is jeopardized by a malfunctioning shipboard computer. A dazzling journey that tops them all ? and showed the way for other effects-packed films that followed.

When Stanley Kubrick recruited Arthur C. Clarke to collaborate on “the proverbial intelligent science fiction film,” it’s a safe bet neither the maverick auteur nor the great science fiction writer knew they would virtually redefine the parameters of the cinema experience. A daring experiment in unconventional narrative inspired by Clarke’s short story “The Sentinel,” 2001 is a visual tone poem (barely 40 minutes of dialogue in a 139-minute film) that charts a phenomenal history of human evolution. From the dawn-of-man discovery of crude but deadly tools in the film’s opening sequence to the journey of the spaceship Discovery and metaphysical birth of the “star child” at film’s end, Kubrick’s vision is meticulous and precise. In keeping with the director’s underlying theme of dehumanization by technology, the notorious, seemingly omniscient computer HAL 9000 has more warmth and personality than the human astronauts it supposedly is serving. (The director also leaves the meaning of the black, rectangular alien monoliths open for discussion.) This theme, in part, is what makes 2001 a film like no other, though dated now that its postmillennial space exploration has proven optimistic compared to reality. Still, the film is timelessly provocative in its pioneering exploration of inner- and outer-space consciousness. With spectacular, painstakingly authentic special effects that have stood the test of time, Kubrick’s film is nothing less than a cinematic milestone–puzzling, provocative, and perfect. –Jeff Shannon When Stanley Kubrick recruited Arthur C. Clarke to collaborate on “the proverbial intelligent science fiction film,” it’s a safe bet neither the maverick auteur nor the great science fiction writer knew they would virtually redefine the parameters of the cinema experience. A daring experiment in unconventional narrative inspired by Clarke’s short story “The Sentinel,” 2001 is a visual tone poem (barely 40 minutes of dialogue in a 139-minute film) that charts a phenomenal history of human evolution. From the dawn-of-man discovery of crude but deadly tools in the film’s opening sequence to the journey of the spaceship Discovery and metaphysical birth of the “star child” at film’s end, Kubrick’s vision is meticulous and precise. In keeping with the director’s underlying theme of dehumanization by technology, the notorious, seemingly omniscient computer HAL 9000 has more warmth and personality than the human astronauts it supposedly is serving. (The director also leaves the meaning of the black, rectangular alien monoliths open for discussion.) This theme, in part, is what makes 2001 a film like no other, though dated now that its postmillennial space exploration has proven optimistic compared to reality. Still, the film is timelessly provocative in its pioneering exploration of inner- and outer-space consciousness. With spectacular, painstakingly authentic special effects that have stood the test of time, Kubrick’s film is nothing less than a cinematic milestone–puzzling, provocative, and perfect. –Jeff Shannon

2001 - A Space Odyssey (Two-Disc Special Edition) is available at Amazon for $11.49. To Order click here
Amazon Product Pages contain a lot of other details on this product as Customer Reviews, Sales Ranking, Special Offers, Alternate products that customers are going for and much more.Want to read these details? click here

Want to get some other Format / Binding / Version? You can search for them from here

Other Products of Interest

• Close Encounters of the Third Kind (30th Anniversary Ultimate Edition)
• 2010: The Year We Make Contact
• Pixar Short Films Collection: Volume 1 [Blu-ray]
• Galapagos [Blu-ray]
• Twilight Zone - The Movie

This is, in my opinion, my most regal, awe-inspiring piece of music of all time, narrowly displacing the B-52’s “Love Shack” from the top of my list.

It’s Richard Strauss’ “Also Sprach Zarathustra”, which real geeks would recognize as either one of the following:

1. The recurring theme throughout Stanley Kubrick’s “2001: A Space Odyssey”
2. “The Nature Boy” Ric Flair’s ring entrance music
3. The music that plays in my mind after successfully taking a large and particularly satisfying crap

This is now my ringtone, so I hereby beseech anyone and everyone to give me a call, so I can bask in its sublime bad-assery. Just dial 1-800-SEXY-BEAST.

Here are the lyrics, as far as I can remember:

Also Sprach Zarathustra
by Richard Strauss

Dun…
Dunnn…
DUNNN…..

DUN DUN!!!

(bom bom bom bom bom bom bom bom)

Dun…
Dunnn…
DUNNN…..

DUN DUUUUN!!!

(bom bom bom bom bom bom bom bom bom!)

(Repeat in different variations until climax)

To this day, I dream of working in a company that will, as I enter the doors of the main lobby with a posse of hulking bodyguards, a 22-year-old French-Korean personal assistant/part-time model, and a bevy of nubile Cebuana school girls (don’t ask me why I mention them again… they’re just hawt!), play this music over the PA system of the entire compound.

“Ladies and gentlemen… The Superstar has arrived.”

Hey guys, I decided it was about time to contribute to the Fabakis family blog. My human name is Daniel, but since this is the cyber world you can call me redfordisredford. It doesn’t make any sense other than the fact that I think Robert Redford is a pretty awesome character in today’s world. I am not that intellectual of a writer, so don’t expect a whole lot of well developed sentences.

I was born in Seattle, Washington and consider myself “from the west coast”, even though I’ve lived the past 9 years of my life in Fairfax, Virginia. Currently I am enrolled as a student at Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University, and am unsure about what I plan on doing with my life. I have already been a student of two colleges before Virginia Tech, so you can probably conclude that I am incredibly indecisive. I am also very bad at confrontation. I guess one of my few redeeming qualities is I know something or two about films and filmmaking. Its something I’m kind of passionate about, so if you would like to discuss a certain film or aesthetic field of cinema, I’ll be completely down for that.

I don’t think I’ll be contributing a whole lot to this blog mostly because I don’t have a lot to say in the realm of hipsters and Indie music, even though I find both very interesting subjects. I will, though, follow the trend of my friends, and other authors of this blog in naming my favorite albums, and movies.

Music:

Boys and Girls in America - The Hold Steady

Graduation - Kanye West

The Bends/OK Computer - Radiohead

A Rush of Blood to the Head - Coldplay

The Chronic - Dr. Dre

Le Bleu - Justin King and the Apologies

Giant Steps - John Coltrane

Blood Sugar Sex Magik/One Hot Minute - Red Hot Chili Peppers

Summerteeth - Wilco

Movies:

2001: A Space Odyssey

Raging Bull

The Godfather

Lock Stock & Two Smoking Barrels

Back to the Future

The Big Lebowski

I don’t work out much these days, and while I would like to partly blame work for that (COCA-COLA GODDAMN IT HOW CAN I LOVE YOU AND HATE YOU SO MUCH AT THE SAME TIME???), the bigger culprit is that I am spending entirely too much time with movies lately.

Here’s what I watched, all in the span of one weekend:

Monty Python And The Holy Grail
A wonderfully quaint comedy classic that had me cracking up at the rate of about five times every sixty seconds. From such strange non sequiturs as the discussion on the airspeed velocity of an unladen swallow, or such absurdly cool villains as the Knights Who Say Ni, the never-say-die Black Knight, and the Black Monster of Aaargh (who isn’t even black, which I thought was a brilliant joke), I thoroughly loved it. I love love love British comedy, and this movie reminds me precisely why I think the genre is such cool beans.

2001: A Space Odyssey
I was SO EFFIN’ BORED while watching the actual movie (seriously, a twenty minute opening sequence consisting of ZERO DIALOGUE following the mundane day-to-day existence of a group of apes? It was like watching out-takes from Animal Planet!), but when I got to thinking about it afterwards, it totally blew my mind. The Star-Child rules the world, and I swear to God if I ever get married, the “Also Spake Zathustra” theme (which ends in an irresolute B-C dissonant chord btw, for you music nerds out there) will be my groomal march. HAL was bad-ass, and I will never see “Daisy Bell” in the same light ever again.

Adaptation
It was meh. Moving on.

Tropic Thunder
Now THIS was the cinematic highlight of my weekend! And that’s saying something, considering Ben Stiller/Robert Downey Jr/Jack Black and LANCE FUCKIN’ BASS were up against Stanley Kubrick, Monty Python, and Spike Jonze in MDJ Superstar’s movie-overloaded brain. I laughed so hard all throughout, and Kaken and I totally threw a fit when Tug was doing “all that” with the director’s head. Sigh. Ben Stiller is truly a genius, and completely deserves an Oscar (or at least a very nice back rub) for this very pleasant piece of comic relief. Seriously, Robert Downey Jr. as a black man? GENIUS!!!

Picture the scene….. The FED EX plane you’re travelling in has been struck by lightning, causing it to plunge into the ocean. You get washed up on the beach of a nearby island which is apparently without habitants. Instead of a football for company you find a 50 inch plasma TV with attached DVD player which was miraculously wrapped in waterproof packaging. Somehow you discover a power supply and are delighted that 10 movies have escaped unscathed in the over the shoulder folder holder you had on your person at the time of the tragedy.

These are the 10 films that will prevent you going insane whilst you wait for McDonalds to discover this is the one place they don’t have a restaurant….

My picks are:

REAR WINDOW, Alfred Hitchcock (1954)

THE BIG LEBOWSKI, Joel & Ethan Coen (1998)

2001: A SPACE ODYSSEY, Stanley Kubrick (1968)

HEAVEN CAN WAIT, Ernst Lubitsch (1943)

MEAN STREETS, Martin Scorsese (1973)

MANHATTAN, Woody Allen (1979)

RASHOMON, Akira Kurosawa (1950)

RIFIFI, Jules Dassin (1955)

IF…., Lindsay Anderson (1968)

PAN’S LABYRINTH, Guillermo Del Toro (2006)

This was a really hard thing to do, and the selections could well change as I think about it more. There’s no Welles, Antonioni, Bergman, Ozu, Lynch, Powell & Pressburger…. God, the list is huge. These are the 10 films that tick as many boxes as possible whilst being infinitely watchable. I also think that each of these 10 films gives you something very different, from the half an hour of silence during the robery scene in Rififi to the technicolor joy of HEAVEN CAN WAIT. Although there are many other top ten lists that could be made, these movies would keep me going for a LONG time.

Although this post could be considered cliche, arbitrary or even downright lazy, there are rules…..

Trilogies are allowed, maximum of 4 (no more than a trilogy though, so you can’t select the POLICE ACADEMY series, not that you would…. I hope)
TV shows aren’t.
Box sets aren’t (unless it’s specifically a trilogy)
I say DVD, this of course includes blu ray. (That’s for Matt, the high def philistine )

So over to you good people. The ten movies that would keep you happy in times of hardship, let’s have it.

My birthday today — I made out like a bandit!

Actually the 2001 and Lubitsch set were swaps I made with Comrade K, the Brooklyn Brahman, but they arrived just before the big day, so I’m including them. The Nick Ray films came from my folks, who are superb people. One doesn’t like to brag, but I think I exercised superb judgement in arranging to be born to such a couple.

The DVD of THEY LIVE BY NIGHT (LES AMANTS DE LA NUIT to the French, a pretty good alternative title, although reverting to the original THIEVES LIKE US might have been an idea too) comes complete with I’M A STRANGER HERE MYSELF, a terrific documentary on Ray as he shoots his final feature (discounting as one surely must Wim Wenders’s NICK’S MOVIE/LIGHTNING OVER WATER) WE CAN’T GO HOME AGAIN. And to add to the sense of a Nick Ray festival chez Shadowplay, I recently acquired a copy of WE CAN’T GO, as well as two edits of THE JANITOR, Ray’s late-period short made for the porno-art anthology film WET DREAMS. Which should make an interesting posting for the forthcoming Sexy Week here at Shadowplay.

As will those lubricious Lubitsch musicals…

A.I.: Artificial Intelligence
[ 4 stars out of 4 ]

I remember watching this film when I was about thirteen years old and I instantly fell in love with it. I own the DVD and whenever I watch it with people, they either love it or hate it, so I almost always prefer to watch it alone. Those that belong in the latter category claim that it’s unreasonably long, depressing from start to finish, and not having a lot of action scenes (this bit really bothers me). I love this movie because it is a total stylistic hybrid of two of my favourite directors, Steven Spielberg (who provides light and hope) and Stanley Kubrick (who provides edge and darkness). If I were to divide the film into three parts, I would say the first and the third part were Spielberg’s forte. The middle part is Kubrick to the core… but it is not fully realized because he did not get to helm it. Hence, I think that’s the weakness of this minor masterpiece. Still, there are a lot to recommend: the visual effects, the moral conundrum regarding the relationship between humans and machines, and the overall message when it comes to the capacity to chase after one’s dreams. I actually prefer my science fiction films as insightful (”2001: A Space Odyssey”) instead of adrenaline-fueled (”The Core”) but a bit of both is refreshing (”Children of Men”). I believe that this is Haley Joel Osment’s best performance because of the way he changed from having a robotic personality to having a completely human-like drive and heart. There are many undertones that can be found in this film with repeated viewings as well. I think this is one of Spielberg’s best work because he is able to craft a story with a great balance of imagination, intelligence, and heart.

About a Boy
[ 4 stars out of 4 ]

Every time I watch this movie, it makes me want to give Hugh Grant a big hug because his character needs some serious lovin’! I love that this film is a bit off-beat but not to the point where it feels too indie or trying too hard. Therefore, Grant was able to play his usual self but with a bit of an edge (which was surprisingly interesting). The fact that Grant does not play a prince charming, like in most of his films, is a big plus because he reminded me that can act outside of his comfort zone. The cinematography is crisp and the setting actually feels like they’re in England. There were several inside jokes, one of them was “The Sixth Sense” bit about the main kid, played by Nicholas Hoult, being able to take care of his mom if he were Haley Joel Osment. Small scenes like that made the whole picture more enjoyable because it shows that even though some of the material here are serious, it’s not afraid to be silly. It’s a great flick to see if it’s raining outside and you don’t feel like going out.

Alpha Dog
[ 4 stars out of 4 ]

Emile Hirsch is pimp in this movie! As embarrassed I am to say that, I believed him to be the leader of the pack. Even though he was short, he overpowers everyone because his character has the money and his limits extended more than anyone (arguably). Critics loved Justin Timberlake in this movie and I must agree with them. He gave heart to this movie and in the end he ends up to be the one audiences got to know most. But I must say I also loved Anton Yelchin’s performance. His character’s innocence was demolished during the last thirty minutes of the film and the way he did it took my breath away because he was so convincing. Even though the dialogue is kind of “ghetto,” I advise you to not let that hinder your decision to watch this amazing sleeper film. I can’t recommend this film enough.

The band Lewis and Clarke took their name, not from the American explorers Lewis and Clark (note that there’s no ‘e’ at the end), but from a correspondence between C. S. Lewis (the famous Christian apologist and author of books such as The Chronicles of Narnia and the excellent Mere Christianity) and Arthur C. Clarke (the Sci-Fi author who is probably best known for 2001: A space Odyssey).  And according to one website, this correspondence can be yours for only £70!

I’d personally categorise them as ‘alternative’ myself. But their musical style is described as ‘avant chamber folk, or neo-baroque’ on the band’s website. So we’ll just have to take their word on that.  If you happen to have a spare 10 minutes handy (yes, 10), check out the beautifully delicate and ethereal song Before It Breaks You, taken from their wonderful 2007 release Blasts of Holy Birth.

Before It Breaks You

Website | MySpace | eMusic | iTunes

Contrived, derivative actioner keeps its eyes on the product placement prize.

One of my favorite movie quotes comes from 1995’s vastly underrated Strange Days: “Paranoia,” one of the characters explains, ”is reality on a finer scale.” Later, another character asks the story’s protagonist, “The question isn’t ‘Are you paranoid?’ It’s ‘Are you paranoid enough?” Misunderstood as a Virtual Reality rock video, that film was really an examination of the way technology was steadily eroding the individual will at the turn of the millennium. In the thirteen years since its release, thanks in no small part to the shabby example set by our government, America has become more paranoid than ever, both as a people and as a nation. And the worst of it is that that condition shows no sign of going away.

Eagle Eye wants to be about paranoia, and about how 21st Century Americans are all ghosts in a giant machine of computer files and encrypted data that define us as individuals and place us within society itself. Subject to some expert hacking and a little determination, we are liable to having our lives turned upside down and twisted inside out, because we are all “on the grid” of the Information Age. Such an idea is a compelling if not wholly unprecedented theme, and that idea sometimes bubbles to the film’s shiny surface. But arrhythmic pacing, far fetched plotting and too many product placements ultimately make it collapse under its own cumbersome weight.

Can you hear me now? LaBeouf, Monaghan

Shia LaBeouf (Transformers: The Movie) plays Jerry Shaw, a minimum wage slave and designated prodigal black sheep of his career military family. When his (contrivances begin here) twin brother is killed, Shaw finds his bank account stuffed with cash and his apartment loaded with enough ordinance to stage a guerrilla war. Then a mysterious female voice begins giving him directions over his cel phone, directing him from Chicago to Washington, D.C. in the company of single mom Rachel Holloman. (Michelle Monaghan, Kiss Kiss Bang Bang) The same voice is threatening to kill Rachel’s young son, who’s himself away on a band trip to the nation’s capital. It turns out Shaw’s dead brother was actually an analyst with a top-secret Pentagon intelligence project, one that seeks to assassinate most of the federal government in one fell stroke.

LaBeouf didnt realize the Decepticons already had him surrounded.

Rather than try to describe any more of the plot, I’m just going to list some of the plot devices: runaway artificial intelligence; explosive crystals detonated with sound frequencies; robot loading cranes; hidden floors at the Pentagon; preemptive military strikes on Arab villages; drone planes; pinwheeling eighteen wheeler trucks; twin sibling biometrics; and finally, the staggering credulity and incompetence shown by law enforcement officials in hundreds of other movies just like this. Perhaps more audacious, and more egregious, are the cribbed plot points and story elements lifted wholesale or in part from other films, including 2001: A Space Odyssey, Enemy of the State, The Man Who Knew Too Much, Wargames, The Parallax View, and The 39 Steps. Recognizing which parts of this film came from those better ones makes for a good diversion when Eagle Eye’s pacing falls slack, as it does several times.

LaBeouf, Monaghan enter the Circuity City Home Theatre of Despair

Director D.J. Caruso (The Shield) takes his directing style from a single page of the Michael Bay/Armageddon playbook, the one that says keep everything slick and glossy while stacking the supporting cast full of respected character actors in order to give the outlandish script some gravitas. Armageddon had Billy Bob Thornton, and he appears here as well. Actually, his flair for snarling lines like “You’ll be demoted to some kind of job that involves touching shit with your hands” brightens the film at several moments. Michael Chiklis, William Sadler, Rosario Dawson, and Anthony Mackie also appear as various military and/or police personnel.

Pretty: Monaghan

As for the leads, LaBeouf does his best but is neither compelling as a man distanced from his own twin or forceful enough to convey any fugitive intensity while hunted halfway across country. Monaghan’s character is better written, and she does a fine job of making Rachel both strong and terrified without whining or playing to the camera. But there’s only so much any woman can do in a film about computers, guns, robots and soldiers. Monaghan is a beautiful and promising actress who, after this and Made of Honor, needs to pick better scripts immediately and from now on.

The true stars of the film, however, are in many ways the products and corporations shamelessly and relentlessly marketed throughout. Executive producer Steven Spielberg has never been shy about putting products into his films, and here that commercial instinct overheats and very nearly explodes. The use of the Sprint phones alone, the company logo always prominently displayed, defies any claim to artistic integrity.

A couple of times lately I’ve written about movies that had something on their mind besides action and suspense. It seems an exaggeration to say the same about Eagle Eye, which feels in every way like screenwriters John Glenn and Travis Wright tried to write a blockbuster based on what they perceived as zeitgeist in the age of identity theft and government wiretapping. In other words, the film’s topical resonance is only a launching platform for semi-mindless boom boom boom action sprinkled with what the producers, studio, and director think people care about. But such second-guessing and condescension happen everyday in the movie business, regardless of whether the public realizes it or not. It’s enough to make any filmgoer feel manipulated, maybe even paranoid.

-Michael Kabel
:: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: ::

People are saying that Director Caruso’s movie Eagle Eye is being compared to the Alfred Hitchcock movie “North by North West.” 

I saw this movie on Friday. This movie was more like “2001 A Space Odyssey”. A super computer that running city goes crazy and causes all sorts of havoc with the main character’s life.

Anyway Caruso said, “But everyone at Dreamworks and Paramount knew we were not remaking, Rear-Window, Eagle-eye does contain one scene in a open field that references “North by North West”, a sequence in which Cary Grant runs from a crop duster. Caruso insists, that middle-of-nowhere scene, “Was just in a location I loved.” Rear view window has filed a copy right suit against producers.

SOURCE: Daily News, weekend, cover-story by Bob Straus

I’ve seen four Stanley Kubrick films and they’ve pretty much covered the gamut on my ratings scale:  Loved It; Liked It; It Was OK; Hated It Oh Why Did I Watch This Please Cleanse My Mind With Holy Fire.  The latest of these was 2001:  A Space Odyssey, which I watched in two parts this past weekend (I’ll let you determine which of the above ratings I give it).  If its possible for something to be simultaneously mezmerizing and dull, than 2001 is it.  To try to explain what the movie is about is pointless really, because it isn’t really about its story or its characters, but about images and the ideas they are meant to convey.  There isn’t a word of dialog that isn’t the grunt of an ape spoken for the first twenty minutes and the plot doesn’t become clear until nearly a full hour into the running time.  Though to say the plot is clear is a misnomer because it isn’t really.  I’ll just try to sum it up by saying a big black rectangle is discovered, first by prehistoric apes then again on the moon by people millions of years in the future.  This second time it is found transmitting a signal in the direction of Jupiter which, of course, must be explored.  On the way to Jupiter however, the ship’s crew end up having problems with their super intelligent computer, the HAL 9000 and man and machine are pitted against each other.  After the man vs. machine episode, the story jumps ahead in time about a year and a half and possibly alligorical weirdness ensues.  I’d explain the alligorical weirdness in more detail, but I honestly can’t. That’s basically it for the story, but like I said it isn’t really about the story.

Its about images, and there are some stunning visuals to be sure.  They’re perhaps less stunning to our eyes now then they would’ve been in 1968 when the film was released, but by and large they hold up alright.  As I watched the space scenes, particularly the ships involved, I found myself comparing it to Star Wars, which came out nine years later.  Or maybe contrasting is a better word.  Unlike Star Wars, 2001 has an air of reality about it.  The ships aren’t sleek Buck Rogers types, but they aren’t the fantastic looking “lived-in” craft of Lucas’ universe either.  They’re from our universe; sterile and institutional, like something NASA would actually design.  The way everything moves about space in Kubrick’s (and our) universe is also much different than in Lucas’s.  There are no hyperdrives or nimble speeders darting every which way.  The movements are slow and deliberate, again like the kind of thing you’d see on a NASA broadcast from space.  This was an interesting concept to see on screen–and shockingly prophetic given its release just prior to the moon landing and nearly a full decade before the space shuttle–and at times made for some mezmerizing, almost hypnotic, visuals.  But it also served to make the movie reallllly, reallllly long and a little dull.  There were times I felt myself just sort of, if I may pun, spacing out, kind of like you might if you were watching the visualizations on your media player on your computer.  In fact, that’s quite literally what is was like for the last forty minutes or so.

I’m sure those last forty minutes are loaded with all sorts of important symbolism and deeper meaning, but either I’m not deep enough to really get it, or in order to fully appreciate it you have to be high.  In reading other reviews, by people who are actually paid to analyze this kind of thing, I was relieved to find I was not the only one to not totally grasp what was supposed to be being said.  I’m not a total blockhead, I think it had something to do with man and technology and humanity’s future, but needless to say it was pretty freaking weird.  There’s something to be said for a film that doesn’t answer all its questions and leaves the viewer with their own thoughts on what it all means, but there is a point where the abstraction can become too abstract and leave the viewer feeling frustrated and confused rather than thoughtful and satisfied.

I watched 2001 because it is widely regarded as a masterpiece and so I naturally, as a novice film enthusiast, wanted to see what all the fuss was about.  While I can appreciate what it is cinematically and can recognize its achievments, in my estimation its repuation is propped up by the belief that it is strange and beautiful and not easily understood and therefore must be important.  For me, it is not without its merits, but too abstract (and long) to be truly great.

There is a difference between the “natural” story time and narrative, plot or screen time. Essentially recording natural time would require filming every movement in real time. If a woman leaves her house after receiving a phone call. If this sequence was recorded in natural time it would require at least 30 minutes. This would include collecting her keys, her handbag, putting her shoes on, going to the toilet, walking to the door, opening it, locking it and walking to her destination. Instead of showing all this extended action in natural time the director can cut out all of the ‘unnecessary’ action and reduce 30 minutes into 1 minute.  A simple cut, fade or dissolve [All indicating different amounts of time passes] can facilitate the movement in natural time. Instead of the long sequence we could be shown the end of the phone call, a cut to her placing her shoes on then a cut to her walking down a highstreet into a block of flats. Three simple cuts reduce the screen time but, one logically accepts, retains natural times’ affects on the temporal environment of the screen world and the characters’ involved- in essence if it was twelve at her leaving then it should be half twelve at her arrival at the flat. This simple and basic technique allows narratives to span large spatial and temporal distances without the need to follow dull action. This editing technique could transform a boring home movie of forty minutes length watching a whale performing tricks into a snappy interesting scene of a few minutes; the manipulation of time, through elliptical editing, is central to the movement of a narrative. Elliptical editing at its most extreme can be used to make two vastly different spatial and temporal arenas collide. This technique is famously used in Stanley Kubrick’s 2001: A Space Odyssey(1968), in which the spatial temporal environment of the ape is linked, or matched to give its correct term, to a space station orbiting around earth. [ A match-cut is where two spatial environments and actions are linked by a cut, however I will explore that basic film technique in another post].

I know I promised you this one this weekend, but it was a jammed, sports-packed weekend for me. Plus, I needed a little bit of a break from writing. But now we’re back and ready for the home stretch of our list. I’ll give you 6-10 today, and then I’ll go one by one, but I’ll throw in two honorable mentions in each post, since there are PLENTY of movies which could have easily have been on our list. You’ve waited long enough so here we go!

10. Forbidden Planet (1956)

All I should have to say about this film is Robby the Robot. Not to mention the fact that it is an adaptation of Shakespeare’s The Tempest, which would be reason enough for any of you English majors, Shakespeare enthusiasts, or just plain literary buffs to want to watch and see the similarities with one Willy’s more interesting plays, as well as one of the most enchanting (A Midsummer’s Night Dream wins of course). The audience is intertwined in a story of romance and artificially created (boosted) intelligence, as well as in the middle of the battle between patriarchal repressed sexuality and the desire to experiment. Another classic tale of the exotic nature of difference. Special effects were groundbreaking for a film of the late 50’s, and the music was all electrically composed. If that isn’t enough, maybe a young, pre Mr. Magoo Leslie Nielsen will make you watch. IMDB: 7.8 Rotten Tomatoes: 94%

9. Metropolis (1927)

Clearly the oldest movie on the list, Metropolis pioneers the genre, perhaps beginning the trend of sci fi films being a prominent source of social scrutiny. Director Fritz Lang constructs a world plagued by a duality of sorts. The audience encounters a heavenly utopia of skyscrapers amidst the clouds, dominating scenes at points in the film. Here, the literal upper class reside, the “thinkers.” Yet supporting this lavish lifestyle is a world dystopian in nature where the labor class work in order to support the lifestyles up above. What ensues is a brilliant critique of the capitalist system, as the city is pushed to the brink of non-existence by a revolution by the lower class, thus causing the system to collapse. Another interesting duality is that of Maria and a robot created in her likeness. And of course, there is some corporal imagery, such as the impending mediation between the hands (workers) who run the heart (the power plant to the city) and the head (upper class). IMDB (Rated #72 on 250 Greatest Films): 8.4 Rotten Tomatoes: 99%

8. Alien, Aliens (1979, 1986)

The pair of movies are probably the most popular movies from the time of the generation before us college graduates (Yes, our parents went to movies too in their heyday). These films, more than a quarter of a century later STILL have an effect on popular culture such as the AVPseries of films, cultural references to these movies, and conceptual representation of alien life. We still imagine either little green men, or the vicious intelligent creatures of Predator and Alien. This was the film that put Ridley Scott on the map as a master director, and truthfully, the film is a mastery of all aspects of film making. The cinematography is stellar, and perhaps the best of modern films. The use of color imagery, particularly light and dark, add an unique artistic touch to this sci fi - horror hybrid. Acting is believable and excellent. All you could ask for in a movie. IMDB (Rated #49 and #65 respectively, top 250): 8.5, 8.4 Rotten Tomatoes: 97%, 100%

2001: A Space Odyssey (1968)

A Stanley Kubrick film HAD to be on here somewhere, and you can expect it to be a biting satirical commentary on society of the late 60’s. Many critics have clamored for Odyssey to be considered as the best sci fi film of all time, and we believe that it certainly was that at the time of it’s release. It fulfills strongly our own qualifications we looked for while we made our list here. Many say that Odyssey IS sci fi, providing the definition of what a sci fi flick should be, and we agree. While the concept isn’t the most groundbreaking, it takes pieces of earlier films and pretty much perfects them, while at the same time poking fun at present possibilities, and the colossal-ness of the “space odyssey” itself. IMDB (#80 of 250 on the list): 8.4 Rotten Tomatoes: 96%

6. The Matrix (1999)

While I do like the entire trilogy, the first movie is the best one of the three and is really the one which has become an essential sci fi must see. Again, the ideas aren’t too new, as it roughly uses the premise of Terminator. BUT, The Wachowski Brothers offer the audience a twist, suggesting that the world we live in is nothing but a mechanically induced dream, and the real us is nothing but a tool, a resource for dominant beings. Highly symbolic, highly psychological, and action packed. A pleasant collusion of mythologies, and in particular, the Christian tradition. Not to mention perhaps the best possible part for Keanu Reeves- one where he can look clueless for most of the time and he doesn’t have to talk too much! IMDB (#32 of 250 on the list) 8.6 Rotten Tomatoes: 86%

So there you have it. We’re down to the final five! Our first list is almost complete here at the heap. If you have any suggestions for the next list we should tackle, feel free to leave comments!

2001 - A Space Odyssey.

The Dawn Of Man.

Torsdagskvällen såg ut att bli en slapp historia framför tv-spelet “Uncharted” tills Koreru ringde och frågade om jag ville komma över till Micke och avnjuta Stanley Kubricks episka rymdäventyr på en 42″ LCD i fin HD upplösning.

Efter lite betänketid så blev svaret “Ja, det vill jag.”

2001 är verkligen en speciell film. Kubrick väljer att berätta historien så viskande långsamt, med väldigt sparsmakad dialog och med långa passager där filmen bara är helt tyst. Det skapar en väldigt realistisk stämning om hur det faktiskt skulle kunna vara att sitta i en plåtburk uppe i rymdens ingenting. Kubrick lyckas med små enkla, nästan motstridiga medel, skapa en klaustrofobiskt spännande film där frågorna alltid är fler än svaren.

Vi hade alla sett filmen förut och vissa av den flera gånger så det gjorde inte så mycket att det blev en del pratande och diskuterande om filmen (och annat) under de passager som kan upplevas som tråkiga. Jag skulle dock säga att om man ska se 2001 första gången så bör man nästan se den själv alt. med max en person till. Det är annars väldigt lätt att prata sönder just de passager som är stämningen med filmen. Tystnaden, mörkret, långsamheten i varje rörelse, bild… ord som yttras.  

Att filmen i år fyller 40 år gör bara att man blir ännu mer imponerad över bilderna, effekterna, kameravinklar och klipp. Rätt intressant är också att trots att vi, inte ens 2008, lever upp till denna framtidsvision så är det inte mycket i filmen som känns orealistiskt, d v s om man bortser från just sci-fi elementen som exempelvis obelisken. Men just teknologin och världen runtomkring känns väldigt trovärdig, långt från många andra nutida och dåtida framtidsvisioner. 

Att inte förklara i stort sett något av de stora frågorna i filmen är ett intressant grepp och det som gör att filmen går från att bli en bra film till ett mästerverk i mina ögon. Den sista delen, när Dr. Dave Bowman, når målet med sin resa är både vackert, skrämmande, oförklarbart och magiskt. Visuellt och känslomässigt når Kubrick verkligen fram med de sista ögonblicken. Att låta kameran vara Daves ögon är lysande då vi som åskådare verkligen får stiga in i filmen, just där i slutet, och ta del av hur Dave upplever de sista förvirrande scenerna.

As Bowman flies over the monolith, it suddenly changes from a towering slab to an infinite tunnel. As this happens, he utters the final phrase: “The thing’s hollow! It goes on forever, and… oh My God, it’s full of stars!”

Samtidigt är 2001 lite som tanken på att Universum är oändligt d v s man bör inte fundera för mycket. Det är bara acceptera hur det är. 

Har du inte sett den?  Se den snarast! Men se den med rätt inställning. Detta är så långt från en snabb actionfilm man kan komma. Utan att vara för dryg, jag älskar ändå filmen, så kan jag nog med stor säkerhet säga att det finns många som somnat framför 2001. Det krävs en del av åskådaren helt enkelt.

Men nog om det, arbetet kallar.

Btw, ikväll är det lite afterwork på Kvarnen … så ni sönderdräggade poeter och annat löst pack som läser detta kan ju komma dit, säga hej och krama mig om ni vill

Tjo!    

นอกเหนือจากจะมีหลายส่วนคล้ายคล�