The Big Who

The episode starts out with a very tragic moment as Vincent Van Gogh goes through a nightmarish cry over his latest painting he's created from his own stark imagination. And they are using the very same actor to reprise his role.

He’s shouting and wailing in the middle of the night. It is a painting of the Doctor's time traveling machine exploding done in Van Gogh's typical style with wavy lines. However, it sets the tone for the rest of the two-parter Doctor Who finale. And then you see a sting of scenes with other important historical figures who appeared throughout the series this year. They are passing on a message to the Doctor.

Steven Moffat wrote the very first episode "The Eleventh Hour" of this year. So it is only fair game that he wraps everything else in the final show. And what a beautiful finale it is, like a space opera, only better. This is what you call pulling together all the loose strings of the series to round off Doctor Who. I wasn't disappointed.

The episode “Pandorica Opens” is like a festival of many characters thrown into a party. There are many players pushing the story forward and we finally learn about what the Pandorica is from the many mentions made in “Flesh and Blood” episode.

The Prisoner Zero mentions it in the first episode of this year. Then River Song talks about it. However the Doctor claims that it is nothing more than a fairy tale.

But it's real enough in this episode. The Pandorica rests beneath the crowded nest of Stongehenge which is one of the greatest wonders of the world.

Moffat is going out at all stops to bring everything together into a very wonderful story that surrounds the Pandorica. Many viewers, including myself, thought a greater threat would come out of this strange box. That's when it really throws us off.

Ultimately, it's something you put inside the box. The Pandorica box is a trap by a number of hated creatures who form a temporary truce to put away the most dangerous being in the universe.

Who is this threatening man?

The Doctor.

And who comes to the party to get their last laugh on the Doctor? It's a pretty big party. They are the Daleks (who wouldn't miss this chance), Cybermen, Sontarans, Nestene, Drahvins, Sycorax, Zygons, Atraxi, Draconians, and a bunch of others with a grudge. Some of not seen since the old days of Doctor Who.

It's a brilliant mix that you would not have expected. But the cliffhanger of this episode leads to the next part which builds up with a very momentous pace. It's a brilliant show from start to finish.

The second part of the story, “The Big Bang,” maintains a complex layering of ideas. But it's Moffat. What else did you expect? It starts off with one of the best lines in the finale when it is Amy who comes out of the box to meet her younger self. She says, “Kid, this is when things start getting really complicated.”

There's so much packed into this episode that it needs to be slightly longer. And it's one of the perks of the BBC that allows for shows to run a little longer than the usual 45 minutes. I was impressed that it became a “smaller” story on a grand scale. And I love how the time travel plot device is used to tell the story. The Doctor is all over the place in this story going back and forth in time... and he uses time itself to cheat his way out of death several times. Such time travel device was well used in the “Back to the Future” movies and also “Slaughterhouse Five” written by Kurt Vonnegut. Here, time travel becomes a useful way for Moffat to tell a story.

There’s a nice bit with Capt. Jack’s time traveling wrist band that the Doctor uses throughout to make his way around and making short jumps to keep the story going at a frantic pace.

Yes, it's a very complicated story.

You'll have to get used to it.

Many people will probably criticize it because it's not the explosive conclusion that will go out with a bang. (And it does sort of go out with a bang with the reset that recreates the universe). Many critics will complain that it is too complex. But I have no problems with the episode.

It really comes down to the Doctor saving the relationship between Amy and Rory so they can get married on the very important date of June 26. It becomes a love story that spans the cosmos. It's a very lovely romance story that is shrouded by the fate of the universe hanging in threads. And the Doctor ties up all the loose ends to make sure it runs smoothly. The universe becomes the engines. And the Doctor becomes the engineer.

There's a lot of great humor in the story. So much that it feels like old Doctor Who once again. There is a funny bit with the Doctor picking up all sorts of crazy stuff during his time traveling jumps. He gets an Egyptian hat that he wears on his head throughout a portion of the episode. Then River Song finally says in the middle of a conversation to the Doctor: “Where in the name of insanity did you get that hat?” Amy rips the fez off the Doctor's head to throw it in the air while River blasts it out of the sky. The death of a hat. Truly, a loss. I'm sure the Doctor feels bad.

This is a great ending to a very special season indeed. It has been one of the most consistently good seasons with a number of very strong stories. I believe this is the very best season to come out in Doctor Who since Tom Baker's departure season in 1981. Matt Smith, Karen Gillan and Steven Moffat has really come through for us to deliver an excellent series.

Not everything is explained in these episodes. In fact, some of it will be revealed in the following series for us. But isn't it what Doctor Who is all about? It's always been something of a mystery. And that is the driving force being Doctor Who. Along with the changing creativity in the series.

Who is River Song? What is she doing here? What are her connections to the Doctor? How should I know? Perhaps you’ll need to stay tune for the next series of episodes.

Doctor Who has done it again. I'm thrilled to see that it'll return much stronger next year. It'll be a long wait. Damn.

Oh yes, the Doctor dances like a super geek at the wedding in the end. I'm glad he's such a geek. I think it'll be the rage for children now who'll dance at weddings in England.

A Movie In Hell

There comes a time when westerns have been plentiful in the cinema. Nowadays, the western is more scarce than a discovery of a gold nugget.

But we got one in theaters which is a kind of mix, not a straight out western shooting across the screens because there are bits of horror thrown in, some science fiction. It's called Jonah Hex.

It's not a bad movie. But it's clearly not a good movie either. I could call it a wildly uneven film with some stylistically good material scattered between even longer chunks of awfulness. Sadly, the awful stuff happens more often than good. It's a missed opportunity.

Such a movie directed by Jimmy Hayward like this may very well turn anyone away from making a good western for a long time again. That's too bad.

Some of the good points? Josh Brolin does his very best with the material he's working with and can make a convincing Jonah Hex when he rises to the occasion. John Malcovich is excellent in his role as the opposing villain hell-bent on taking over the United States.

There are some nice scenes too where Jonah goes to the cemetery to dig up a coffin. When he first strikes the stone marker, making a crashing sound, all the crows in the cemetery flap up into a hurricane of darkness. It's a very nice scene. The film captures the style of the original comic books in some portions.

But it all stops there.

And the awfulness simply begins.

Megan Fox is such a terrible actress as she couldn't act her way out of a paper bag. She looks more like eye candy. There's no doubt she's an attractive woman with her slender thighs and curvy features. But her acting leaves little to be desired. If she was in a movie called “Babes in Bondage,” she would be terrible in that one.

Some of the plot really can get messed up as threads weave into confusion, and it loses its focus. But it clearly needs better editors. There is no way for a horse, any horse, to carry a gattling gun that's bigger, heavier than the state of Texas. That horse would never have been able to carry it. And the horse would have sustained burn marks if the gattling gun spat out all those chunks of lead. I feel sorry for the horse. I feel even more sorry for this movie.

There are a lot of dumb stuff in this movie.

The secret weapon is very dumb. It's a giant cannon. It's a dumb design with a dumb approach. I'm figuring they are trying to harken back to the excellent “Wild,Wild West” shows of the 1960s... but the old shows made their creations more interesting. This particular secret weapon makes no sense. It shoots out several lead balls, then finally shoots out the final ball which detonates the entire area in which the scattered balls span. What's the point of this? It takes too long. And you can do the same thing with one, giant explosion.

I don't understand why they give Jonah a supernatural power... giving him the ability to talk to dead folks. All the information he got from the dead could have been easily obtained somewhere else. Jonah didn't have such powers when he is in the comic. Unless I'm missing something here. But this power is probably given because he's supposed to be a “comic book” hero. That's not the point. The original book is a western with elements of horror... Jonah's simply a bounty hunter with a strict code of honor.

The final fight between Jonah and his foe is dumb. This is a dumb fight that goes back and forth between them fighting and another sequence where they must be fighting in hell. I could never make head or tail of this. I'm probably confused like the rest of the audience. Which only made up about ten people where I went on Friday night.

Jonah isn't a nice guy. He never is in the comics he starred in. He shot a man in the ear once and another through his foot. He didn't let a bandit finish his sentence before shooting him through the mouth in a hostage situation. No, he's not nice at all. He isn't nice to his women either. He's a loner, a man standing on the edge of hell itself. He prefers it this way.

There's one scene where Jonah shoves a guy near a giant spinning fan on the boat, and the machine lopped off the back of the guy's head off. But Jonah in the comics would've probably let the fan chop off the guy's ear first, then maybe his other ear just because he didn't like him. Another missed opportunity.

The comics are awesome. I would recommend the comic books instead which started in 1971 which is nearly four decades of interesting storytelling especially. Jonah starred in his own book in the mid-1970s. The series revived recently with some stellar writing and drawing, bringing to life the western on the pages of a comic book. It breathes with greater creativity. I love the new comic books because they keep true to the character of Jonah Hex, a brutal man, a renegade, always looking for a way to satisfy his lust for violence. Yeah, he's a violent man. He's good with his guns.

You may want to read the comic books instead. They're better made. For the movie? If you want to take a ticket to hell itself, go right head. It's a pretty painful one to watch.

Scary Shadows

Val Lewton.

Remember that name.

He’s considered to be in behind-the-scenes guy as an American screenwriter and producer who made a series of excellent horror films during the 1940s.

You might not know his name.

But you’ll know the movies he was involved with.

He produced several films including both Cat People films, “I walked with a Zombie” and “The Body Snatcher” which remains the more well known titles. There are others that didn’t get as much notoriety as these did. But all of the nine horror films in which he was involved with were known for one thing: a stark sense of atmosphere bleeding through the shroud of black and white footage.

He was able to create a scenes with plenty shadows and lighting, always in conflict with each other. And you can feel the unease which spreads through the background like a greater blackness. I have just re-watched the 1942 version of the film “The Cat People” which holds up so very well. Some of the brilliant use of atmosphere rarely shows the horror in its physical sense. It leaves you to use your imagination to think about the horror that lives in shadows.

There is a great scene with a pursued woman in a swimming pool in “The Cat People” as the whirling of darkness comes close to attacking her, growing more wild, disturbing. But it’s all in the mind.

This is what Lewton does best.

He doesn’t throw things at you in the movie. He has a sense of poetry which builds stronger, bringing the feeling of claustrophobia to you. And it strangles you with its closeness.

“I Walked with a Zombie” is a beautiful mood piece set in the African world of voodoo magic and ghostly images. And yet, some of the most stark scenes in the film is the portion where the lead female antagonist wielding her way through the sugar cane plantation where the weeds stand taller than she. Then she runs into the tall, gaunt voodoo figure in the outdoors field. It gives a notion of impeding doom to her.

Val Lewton worked with a ton of very intelligent directors during the time he brought to the screen these horror films: Robert Wise and Jacques Tourneur (Who also worked on another well known horror film “Night of the Demon” in which Lewton did not work on). However, Lewton did work with many good actors such as Boris Karloff.

Lewton was asked to work under certain time constraints and a very clipped budget when doing this series of movies. Every movie must run under seventy five minutes. Each film must be under the budget of $150,000. It’s a very good rule for modern day directors who run amok with their blatantly insane budgets and let string a series of awful movies that are far too expensive to make. Here the Lewton movies are made with excellent restraint. And with a considerably small amount of money, he was able to create movies that leaves an etching memory on your thoughts.

Here’s a very nice strategy in how to make money the right way. The film “I walked with the Zombie” was made at a very small $134,00 or somewhere around that area. It’s small potatoes, isn’t it? Then the movie went off to make something like $4 million which is a far wide margin. Now that’s big potatoes. You can see the difference in how much money is made here.

But it’s the exact opposite these days. Some movies are made at such a mind numbing budget like the fool director Michal Bay and his ultra-awful “Armageddon” has. Sure, it’s made plenty of dough. But they didn’t have to spend so much money on it. In fact, they could have avoided those issues. But today’s answer to making movie: throw some money into it so it’ll make some money back. Isn’t that what the politicians do when they go on their campaign runs?

So well done were Lewton’s horror movies that it was all he was known for. Lewton tried bravely to make a break from the cycle of horror movies to produce something that was considered a drama set in the World War II period. But the film did not receive the audience attention as did the horror films. Which was unfortunate.

Maybe he was able to make such a remarkable production out of nothing. This is where his horror films come in. I’m able to remember the blackness that seeps into his movies as a river of night rather than anything the new movies are able to create these days.

I’ll tell you what new movies make today… a lot of computer graphics and special effects. And very little else. Sometimes the eye candy of FX is all what carries today’s horror movies.

I miss Val Lewton.

So does Hollywood.

It was during the time of Lewton when horror movies were created with an intelligent approach, good stories and a remarkable use of back-story to create a monster that exists only in our minds. The imagination can become an effective tool when handled properly. Many modern day directors, too stupid to list here, should learn well from one of the masters of American cinema.

Lewton could charm the socks off you when you’re watching one of his films and still manage to scare you out of your wits. So I suggest renting any one of the Lewton movies tonight, and see how long you can keep the lights off while watching. It’ll be a contest of wills.

Good old Lewton. I wish there were more like him these days. But I find myself pining for the old memories of yesterday’s movies. Not a very good sign for today’s horror movies being cranked out these days. Or any movie for that matter.

Paintings in Full View

Doctor Who continues to embellish and grow as a series this year. And the episode “Vincent and the Doctor” is no exception. It is a telling story of sentimentality in the life of Dutch painter Vincent Van Gogh.

The story is done in a very minimal way as it deals with his private life, his depression and the inspirations of life which can make things worth living for. This episode is written by the dependable Richard Curtis who has a tendency to make things sappy. Which is fine with me. I don’t mind sappy. It didn’t derive from the center of the story.

Something bothers the Doctor when he takes his companion Amy to the art museum to gather in the sights from Vincent Van Gogh works. However, the Doctor sees something slightly different as there is a strange creature appearing in the window of the church from “The Church at Auvers.” So the Doctor decides to go back in time and ask the painter himself what is going on.

What they discover is an invisible creature that is driving the Dutch painter mad… and the Doctor tries to understand the reason for its attacks and hope to bring a resolution to the problem. It is right for show runner Stephen Moffat to say, “The creature is invisible, so you don’t have to worry so much about the special effects. It’s brilliant.” Because of Van Gogh’s sensible nature, he is able to see it though his own eyes.

However, the gist of the story really revolves around the character Vincent Van Gogh who is the historical figure here… but he is also an interesting, peerless man of complex background. Also the subject of the depression is handled very deftly here. None of it overwhelms the character as there are many different sides to him. Not the bleeding man painter. But a man of dreams, passions and desires.

I liked the actor who plays him: Tony Curran. He was able to bring a right amount of passion to the part. I suppose I am being a little subjective here when it comes to Vincent Van Gogh who I have always admired as an artist, and consider him to have a very great imagination. I’m also Dutch as my grandfather on my father’s side came from Netherlands in 1929 to settle here in Wisconsin. So I feel a common bond with the artist himself.

It is a very sad story, tragic. The sad ending spills with a very emotional spark when the Doctor realizes the Krafayis, the creature, is also blind… which is why it lashed out with anger. It was not an enemy, but a frightened animal. And Van Gogh protects the Doctor and Amy by fending the creature off with an easel. But the creature impales itself, perhaps on purpose, in an accidental struggle. The sadness is that the Doctor realized too late about the creature and couldn’t help it in time.

Curtis’ writing focuses on the emotional side with a beautiful voice. You might recognize Curtis’ writing from “Four Weddings and a Funeral.” His other writing credits include some sparring co-writing with Rowan Atkinson on the Black Adder along with Mr. Bean. Curtis knows how to write comedy very well. But he writes a pretty damn good drama as well.

The episode makes great use of seeing the world through the eyes of the Dutch painter himself as he lets the Doctor and Amy focus on the surroundings in the same way as he does. The brilliant use of special effects here is well done… and it allows for us to see the strange lines and wonder of Van Gogh’s sight seeing tour through the heavens. And it looks like the formation for “Starry Night,” one of his most famous paintings.

The production crew are having fun with Doctor Who this year as many of the crazy gadgets seen look like something that was designed for the movie “Brazil” because there’s a real retroactive note. And it’s great to see the Doctor using these machines which gives a fantasy element to the stories. The Doctor was able to use the machine with the mirror to see the creature for himself. It’s a nice touch.

The Doctor makes his final good deed for the day by bringing the despairing Van Gogh, who feels left out of world, always feeling as a refuge from humanity. But the Doctor takes him to a 2010 art exhibit which shows Van Gogh’s paintings in full view… and the painter realizes that his work has not gone in vain.

And he understands now that there is always some good in the world that can be captures in the essence of art. And nothing could ever take that away from him. It’s a very poignant moment augmented by the tender music from the song called “Chances” by Athlete, giving it a very surreal feeling.

“Vincent and the Doctor” is another fine addition to the gallery of excellent shows this year on Doctor Who. And it allows for Doctor Who to expand its horizons to include a historical episode with a human conflict in the story. You don’t have to be a fan of Doctor Who to enjoy this one. And you don’t have to be a fan of Van Gogh either to like this one. And yet, somehow, the show is able to give a reflection of humanity at its best.

Look for great actor Bill Nighy who played the art museum curator in a brilliant scene. It looks like he is having fun with the show. And so are we. It’s a good sign that the series is still going strong.

Humor in the Movies

Sometimes people tend to miss the mark when it comes to seeing movies in theaters. My blog revolving around the Iron Man 2 film complains about the critics who complain about the movie. And it doesn’t stop there. I was a little tetchy when I described the critics have having no sense of humor. Iron Man 2 is a good popcorn movie for the summer. That’s the point of the movie.

I believe critics seem to have missed the point when they saw the Wolf Man movie as they panned that one too. I saw this and thought it was a rather good homage to the old Universal horror films. This one offers plenty of atmosphere along with a very good storyline regarding the father and son who have a falling out between them. And their family ties turned into a savage duel between wolves. The critics hated it. I didn’t. But then again, I found something worthwhile in the Wolf Man film.

Critics seem to have no sense of horror films. Or humor. Or whatever.

Now it seems to happen again with a very good cartoon film called “Aliens Vs. Monsters” which is a great homage to the old 1950s monster films. I have enormous respect for Robert Ebert of the Chicago Sun Times, though he said of the film: “I suppose the kids will like it. But I didn’t find the movie rich with humor.”

Ebert has missed the point of the film like so many critics have.

“Aliens Vs. Monsters” tells of a story of a simple girl named Susan who was hit my a meteorite on her wedding day. The turn of events lead her to being captured by the government and thrown together by other monsters to be set aside in a refuge, top secret. So secret the mere mention of it is a criminal offense!

However, Susan finds out that she likes her new powers and uses it for a force of good. She is a genuinely nice girl, very soft spoken, and pretty. Why would not any man want to be with her? Even if she is only 49 and a half feet tall. But she becomes the central character to the defeat of a robot probe during the rampage over the Golden Gate in sunny San Francisco. It’s a beautiful setting and perfect with its wielding buildings, long streets and thundering hills which picture perfect in the film. The crew who created the film did a nice job of capturing the essence of the Californian city.

What makes the film very good? They have a remarkable eye for detail. The buildings are always in scale with the gigantic woman leading the monster squad against the alien invasion. The film crew took pictures of every hook and cranny of San Francisco and brought it to the table to create a solid scene filled with details and rich design.

There are some other great bits in the film. But the heart of the story is the relationship between Susan and her boyfriend Derek who is the news anchor wanting to go nationwide with his popular persona. He ditches her because of her size. And she falls into a funk. But she realizes that she doesn’t need a boyfriend for an oaf when she can find her own calling fighting off aliens from outer space. That’s what she is here for. Being a heroine for the people.

I like the fact that the film remains soft hearted, sentimental. The monsters have personalities of their own. And Hugh Laurie, best known for his role in “House” and “Wooster and Jeeves,” gives a great performance as a mad scientist type. Stephen Cobert gives a very dry performance as the President of the United States. And who wouldn’t want Cobert for President? He would get my vote.

The film looks great. There are some good action scenes bursting with colors, confetti of details, and filmed entirely with the intention of being in 3D. But I look at the film as another opportunity to tell a story. Yes, the kids will like the movie. It’s goofy fun. But I hope many adults don’t forget to feel like a kid again when watching some movies. Especially a cartoon film.

Maybe the critics who don’t like the movie are overgrown, depressed adults working late hours and feeling the long stretch of doom over their lives. And they forget how to be a kid again. But this is what “Aliens Vs. Monsters” do for you. If you come away the film still being grumpy and grouchy, then the film didn’t do what it’s intended: making movies fun.

There isn’t a second movie coming out simply due to the poor performances in the international market. I don’t know why. But it’s unfortunate. However, one mustn’t forget there was a time when you grew up with old 1950s horror and science fiction movies with awful bug eyed creatures. It’s also one of the funniest as there are many talented comedians thrown together to create a story out of humor. And it’s a good kind of humor.

I hope others may enjoy “Aliens Vs. Monsters” for what it is. A fun movie for children and adults alike. Others with no sense of humor should beware.