—–

This is NOT a prequel to “Alien.”

Well, it’s 95% not a prequel…

—–

Here’s the IMDB synopsis:

A team of explorers discover a clue to the origins of mankind on Earth, leading them on a journey to the darkest corners of the universe. There, they must fight a terrifying battle to save the future of the human race.

Are we using “mankind” again? Have we been cleared for that?

I thought it was now “humankind,” so the womyn don’t get upset.

We’re a list-crazy culture, and movie buffs of all stripes can’t help but place certain films in their personal hall of fame.

This film scribe is no different. And, in response to a Big Hollywood reader who suggested I post my own Top Ten Movie List to better introduce myself to this site’s audience, here goes nothing.

A quick note: To me, a Top Ten Movie List is deeply personal. It’s not a list of films that are more poignant, or better directed, or more richly artistic, than most movies. These films spoke to me in some profound way, reflecting both my formative years and the person I eventually became.

1. “Raising Arizona” – I didn’t love “RA” the first time I saw it, but being date-less more often than I’d like meant plenty of time to re-watch films that at the least caught my attention. Not sure if it was the second or third viewing that won me over, but before long I needed to watch this grand Coen brothers romp as often as possible. Great quotable dialogue, slapstick delivered in a deliriously cockeyed fashion, and the single funniest sequence ever committed to celluloid – the Huggies chase. I wanna pop it in my Blu-ray player right now…

2. “Star Wars” – Is there a child from the ‘70s who doesn’t have this space saga on his list? George Lucas’s vision remains a near-perfect depiction of good versus evil set in a galaxy far, far away — no special editions or 3D upgrades required, please.

3. “The 40-Year-Old Virgin” – The funniest, raunchiest, sweetest comedy I’ve ever seen.

4. “Jaws” – Director Steven Spielberg may have, for better or worse, kick-started the summer blockbuster tradition with “Jaws,” but for me it distills everything I love about movies into one beautifully constructed package. Bristling tension. Lived-in performances. The fear of the unknown. It’s not summer unless I watch “Jaws” at least one time.

5. “Miller’s Crossing” – It’s the Coen brothers’ most overlooked masterpiece, brimming with dialogue so rich you wish you could print it out and frame it. “Crossing” is a gangster picture without peer, one which has little interest in aping other films in the genre.

6. “Once” – Proof that great movies don’t require big budgets, A-list stars or even a happy ending. The songs are magical, the acting heartfelt and the conclusion so sublime you wouldn’t want it any other way no matter how much your heart breaks.

7. “The Wizard of Oz” - Yes, the Toto connection can get tiring. But Dorothy’s trek to see the wonderful wizard is a testament to great art enduring time and taste upgrades.

8. “Raiders of the Lost Ark” – It’s the benchmark all action movies must be measured against, and 99 percent of them stumble along the way.

9. “Alien” – The ultimate fusion of horror and science fiction. Those seven stranded souls are no match for a killing machine aped by nearly every monster maker in Hollywood. Moody, atmospheric and heart-stopping, “Alien” is director Ridley Scott’s masterpiece.

10. “The Descent” – Horror junkies rank “The Exorcist,” “The Shining” or “Halloween” higher, and they may have a point. But this shock fest gave me gigantic scares while taking advantage of modern movie-making techniques along the way. The first half is a smart, assured look at women in charge of their destinies. The second — a monster mash for the ages.

Blue Valentine is one of those movies that chronicles the kindling and death knell of a relationship.  Think Annie Hall, but minus the wit and the New Yorker neuroticism.  It instead opts for a mumblecore feel, except with dialogue that doesn’t feel completely pointless and impenetrable.  Michelle Williams and Ryan Gosling co-star as a failing couple struggling to keep it together, despite the numerous problems facing them.  The film juxtaposes the complex beginnings of their romance with its subsequent floundering years later, the piece at the center being their awkward trip to a cheesy sci-fi themed sex motel in a limp effort to spice things up before the inevitable break-up.

The best thing I can say about Blue Valentine is that its tone does a good job of capturing that horrible feeling you get when you realize that you’ve fallen out of love with your significant other.  While critics have been using the dreaded word “brave” when describing her performance, Michelle Williams brings an intense emotional weight to it that makes the story more engaging than it otherwise would be.  While she shares some great moments with Gosling, such a lovely scene where she tap dances whilst he charmingly sings and strums a ukulele, her co-star doesn’t really come through at all times.  Gosling’s performance stinks of blue-collar working-class posing, like when a New Yorker thinks they can pass off a southern accent in a movie.  He can do the stubborn, occasionally drunken male well, but the other elements come off as forced.  Williams is the only thing preventing the lead performances from being anything other than self-congratulatory, though the film’s sexual content brings it damn close.

Movies that examine the complexities of romantic relationships always interest me, but Blue Valentine offers little to invest in.  As we watch the relationship unravel, there isn’t enough there for the death of their marriage to have any real meaning, we are asked to feel that it does simply because the movie asks us to.  Blue Valentine does have its moving moments, but it’s ultimately a cold experience.

Available on Blu-ray and DVD

For those of you who don’t want to buy every single one of the Alien films on Blu-ray in that big box set that came out a few weeks back, you’re in luck this week.  Alien, Aliens, Alien 3, and Alien: Resurrection are all getting individual Blu-ray releases.  It’s a foregone conclusion that the first two are universally loved.  Sure, people get fussy over which cut of Aliens they like, but for the most part, we can all agree that Alien and Aliens are solid slabs of tasty fried gold.  The last two is where we get into controversial territory.

A lot of people hate Alien 3, mainly because it’s such a Debbie Downer coming off the euphoric conclusion Jimmy Cameron gave us in Aliens.  But Alien 3 gives Ripley the best character arc possible, as the most interesting and challenging way to come off its predecessor would be to take away everything she has earned.  It also took an admirable risk in that it didn’t rehash the gung-ho space marine action that Aliens offered up.  Instead, Ripley finds herself stranded on a prison colony devoid of weapons, and filled with odd bald criminals.  Not exactly the action-fest fans were probably expecting, instead they got the slow-burn horror of the original with director David Fincher’s own twist.  That’s not to say it stands with the original, as the results are flawed, yet they are also fascinating.

Alien: Resurrection is another story.  Directed by Jean-Pierre Jeunet, a French guy more famous for movies like Amelie, the film is like violent, crazy funhouse that is only occasionally, um, fun.  Written by Joss Whedon, the ragtag group of mercenaries at the story’s center seems like a prototype for his cult TV series, Firefly, but I must stress the word “prototype.”  Michael “Top Dollar” Wincott plays the cool, roguish captain of the crew a la Nathan Fillion’s Malcolm Reynolds.  Unfortunately, they saw fit to kill him at the start of the film’s second act, it would be like Captain Mal getting unceremoniously offed in the middle of the Firefly pilot.

The rest of the film is like one of David Cronenberg’s nightmares, it has a minimal amount of the atmosphere found in its predecessors, and instead opts for whackadoo characters screaming and yelling their way through a freakazoid monster movie.  It’s all worth it to see an enraged alien-impregnated Leland Orser beat the crap out of a bad guy, grab his head, and make it explode like a watermelon when the screaming alien baby pops out of his chest.  That’s comedy gold right there.  Alien: Resurrection is a stupid movie, but dumb moments like this make me throw it on for cheap laughs every now and then.  Guilty pleasure?  Sure.  Pass me a beer, fast-forward it to that chestburster bit, and I’m amused.

But hey, now you can pick and choose which Alien flicks get to sit on your Blu-ray shelf, in case you didn’t stuff like Alien: Resurrection stinking up the place.  But methinks if you want Alien: Resurrection on your shelf, you’ve already been watching those awesomely gross monsters in HD.

(Note: the Alien Vs. Predator movies don’t count, because they just plain suck)

Alien is available on Blu-ray. Previously available on DVD

Aliens is available on Blu-ray. Previously available on DVD

Alien 3 is available on Blu-ray. Previously available on DVD

Alien: Resurrection is available on Blu-ray.  Previously available on DVD

Other Noteworthy Releases

No Strings Attached: Ivan Reitman directs this rom-com starring Natalie Portman and Ashton Kutcher.  Also known by its French title, “Sex Friends”.

Available on Blu-ray and DVD

The Illusionist: Not the one with Edward Norton, but the 2010 French animated film directed by Sylvian Chomet, the animator behind The Triplets of Belleville.  Based on a script by the late Jacques Tati, it seems Chomet brings his distinctive animation style to Tati’s form of physical comedy.

Avaible on Blu-ray/DVD combo

I Saw The Devil: The latest movie by Korean filmmaker Kim Jee-woon, who also directed the twisty psycho-thriller Tale of Two Sisters and the oddball western pastiche The Good, The Bad, The Weird.  Word on the street is that this one ain’t for the faint of heart.

Available on Blu-ray and DVD

Something Wild: Jonathan Demme’s odd-coupling road movie starring Jeff Daniels, Melanie Griffith, and Ray Liotta gets the Criterion treatment.

Available on Blu-ray and DVD

Some Like It Hot: Billy Wilder’s acclaimed comedy featuring cross-dressing Tony Curtis and Jack Lemmon starring alongside a dazzling Marilyn Monroe comes to Blu-ray.

Available on Blu-ray, previously available on DVD

The Misfits: Another Marilyn Monroe movie on Blu-ray, this one being her last before her untimely death.  Here she co-stars with the always-badass Clark Gable and Montgomery Clift, in a script written by Arthur Miller, directed by John Huston.  This movie was also the film Glenn Danzig’s legendary horror-punk outfit took its name from.

Available on Blu-ray, previously available on DVD

Justin Bieber – Never Say Never: I’ve never heard of this Justin Bieber kid.  Is he, you know, kind of a big deal?  Is a boy wearing a hoodie what the kids are into these days?  This one comes out May 13^th instead of May 10^th, so this Bieber kid must think he’s pretty special.

Available on Blu-ray and DVD

This article originally appeared over at Parcbench.com

Contrast that to the soul-crushing dismay when you realize that what you hoped would be a great couple of hours is instead going to be a dreary death-march of clichés, lazy writing and bad music broken only occasionally when you glance longingly at your watch and wish you could have your $11.50 and two hours back. 

—–

You know a great opening when you see it; if fact, you feel it.  My definition of “opening” is rather loose.  An opening can go up to, or past the credits, or it may just be the credit sequence itself.  Some openings are rather long, 10-15 minutes.  Some are just a couple of minutes.  There is no one formula for a great opening – the ten listed here as my personal favorites are as different from each other as Democratic Party governance is from competent leadership.  But there are some common threads.  A great opening tells you something about the story you will see.  It might be in words of formal narration, or a sequence that takes you into the story, or in some cases it’s just a few images.  There may be prominent music, or little or none.  But when the opening is over, you are ready – you understand enough to begin the journey.  And, more importantly, you are eager to go. 

It’s easy – and serves an important purpose – to point out where Hollywood fails.  But it’s a special pleasure to point out where it got it just perfect.  Here are my Top 10 favorite movie openings: 

1. The Guns of Navarone (1961) 

This is one of the great “men on a mission” WWII movies of the Sixties, a rousing story of a band of commandos led by Gregory Peck trying to destroy the titular cannons on a German-occupied Greek island.  This 5 ½ minute opening sequence is an example of narration and music in action.  Over beautiful shots of Greek ruins intercut with newsreel footage, James Robertson Justice provides a detailed prologue setting up the story (though, sadly, the narration track is not on YouTube) while Dimitri Tiomkin’s Oscar nominates score plays quietly. 

—–

It’s one of the screen’s great orchestral themes, and as the narration ends and the opening credits begin it sweeps up into its full glory – rousing, majestic and stirring.  You watch the Cyrillic-style star credits flash by – Greg Peck, David Niven, Anthony Quinn – as that score plays and you know you’re about to watch one of Hollywood’s adventures.  

2. Alien (1979) 

Ridley Scott’s extraterrestrial terrorfest is one of only two movies that every really, truly scared me.  In contrast to the crowded, familiar outer space of Star Wars (see below), Scott’s universe is silent and cold, at once claustrophobic and massive. 

—–

With the terrible emptiness of space as the background, the opening credits leisurely form the title “Alien” as Jerry Goldsmith’s superbly creepy and jarring score sets you on edge.  Audiences had never seen or heard anything like it, and it set exactly the right tone of dread and disorientation that would permeate one of the greatest movies ever made.  

3. The Wild Bunch (1969) 

A band of cavalry troopers led by the heroic William Holden slowly ride into a dusty western town – they’re clearly the good guys, right?  Director Sam Peckinpah takes it nice and slow while dropping hints – a bunch of kids torment some scorpions, and when the credits come on screen Peckinpah photo-reverses Holden’s image, like Holden is the opposite of what he appears to be. 

Holden escorts an elderly lady across the street.  Ernest Borgnine even offers to carry her boxes – how nice of him!  Then they enter the bank and draw guns as Holden throws a civilian to the floor and orders his men, “If they move – kill ‘em!”  And then they shoot their way out of town in a bloody gun battle that leaves criminals, bounty hunters and a score of innocent civilians strewn across the streets. 

—–

Can you say “Anti-heroes?”  Well, you don’t have to – after that amazing opening, you knew that you were watching something entirely new.  And you knew that it wasn’t going to have a happy ending. Just an awesome one. 

4. Se7en (1995)

Here, director David Fincher wants to take us into the mind of a serial killer, but not in the same way a thousand hack directors had.  Se7en’s opening credits, set to Trent Reznor’s “Closer,” are displayed over a series of icky, freaky images – many of which, in retrospect, turn out to relate to the story to come (Look for the shot of the book discussing pregnancy!).  You know you’re on you’re way to crazyland, and you know you have no idea what’s going to happen next. 

—–

The credits are not a particularly delightful experience, and neither is the film.  But, undeniably, there is nothing else like it, and Fincher created an opening that was worthy of it. 

5. Goldfinger (1964)

There had to be a James Bond film on this list, and the most James Bond film of all James Bond film is Goldfinger.  The third of the series (you can read much more about it in Lawrence Meyer’s Big Hollywood series), it set in concrete many of the Bond traditions that would follow through five decades of  Bonds up through today. 

A Bond opening has three parts.  The first is the MGM lion roaring and the dancing dot that becomes the barrel of a gun aimed right at 007, who pivots at the last second and fires, followed by the animated sheet of blood pouring down the screen as the dot finds a corner and expands into the cold open action sequence. 

The opening sequence rarely has anything to do with the plot (though the recent ones are going in a different direction).  Here, Bond infiltrates an enemy facility disguised with a duck on his head.  Yeah, unfortunately there’s a bit of silliness in some of these, but it fades into a nice fight in a hotel room (where the amoral Bond uses a femme fatale’s head as a shield) and gives us one of the earliest hero quips: “Shocking, absolutely shocking,” he remarks about the baddie he just electrocuted. 

—–

Now, the third part of a Bond opening is the main titles, and these – with the legendary Shirley Bassey singing the best of the Bond themes – are just great.  Scenes of the film play out on the golden skin of a naked model as the credits play.  That pretty much sums up our James Bond.  Pretty girl, beware of this heart of gold! 

6. Star Wars (1977) 

In nerdspeak, it’s Star Wars Episode IV: A New Hope.  But since I saw it in the theater, and I don’t put up with geek nonsense, this was, is and ever shall be known only as Star Wars.  And seeing it in the theater – as well as being around for the incredibly revolutionary effect Star Wars had on the movies – makes this legendary opening all the more memorable.  

We sat in the theater, the lights go down, the 20^th Century Fox intro played followed by the sky blue titles on a black field reading “A long time ago in a galaxy far, far away…”  Then BLAM!  John Williams’s unforgettable score hits you.  The iconic Star Wars graphic appears on the screen followed by the written explanation of the nonsensical plot.  Then the camera falls, a musical freefall supported by the score, and BLAM!   We are in a space battle with starships the likes we had never seen before that day in 1977.  

Maybe you had to be there…. 

7. The Dirty Dozen (1967)

Another terrific Sixties WWII “men on a mission” movie, but it could not be more different from Guns of Navarone in story, tone or opening.  It opens cold as a hearse enters a military prison.  The inmates are rioting as a condemned prisoner is being led to his doom.  On the gallows stands Lee Marvin as Major Reisman, who watches the proceedings with grim detachment, pausing only to glance at the priest’s Bible with a raised eyebrow.  The sentence completed, he departs.  A title card announces we are in London in 1944.  Reisman then gets his mission from our old pal, General Ernest Borgnine, in a great scene, snappy scene.  The jousting among the characters is marvelous – we learn just what kind of man Reisman is not just from dialogue describing him but from his actions.  He then returns to the prison to meet his team of convicts.  Only then, about 10 minutes in, do the credits play as the sergeant introduces each one with character name, crime and sentence. 

In one economical, fluid opening, we meet and understand the hero, learn about his challenge and get thoroughly introduced to each of the Dozen.  Now that’s how a movie is made! 

8. Gone With the Wind (1939)

Just a title card, credits and the lush, amazing score of composer Max Steiner provide a worthy opening to what many consider the greatest American film ever made.  GWTW was a huge event when released, and in those days they felt they had to make a film worthy of the hype.  It was also better than three hours long.  Sure, critics today have problems with it – they probably feel it lacks alienated hipster characters whining about their feelings, and they astonishingly expect a 70+ year old movie to share the same lockstep vision of political correctness that characterizes the Hollywood of today (conveniently forgetting the fact that GWTW was revolutionary in the dignity it bestowed on many black characters, a dignity you will not find in the average gangster rap video or Martin Lawrence “funny black guy in a fat suit” sequel.) 

—–

The opening is amazing.  Steiner’s music begins with a flourish that evokes the Old South with a hint of “Dixie” then turns into the sweeping, grand “Tara’s Theme” as a title card sets the stage and then the credits roll over an idealized backdrop of a life soon to be swept away.  As a son of the Union whose family’s home town of Chambersburg was burned by Confederates (and whose great-great grandfather preceded me as a U.S. Army cavalryman by 125 years), I have no illusions about where the pretty life the characters live early in the movie came from, but the opening still perfectly captures the sense of these characters whose way of life would be “gone with the wind” of history during the course of this magnificent film. 

9. Magnum Force (1973)

Yeah, this one tells you all you need to know about the next two and a half hours of awesome, prime Eastwood mayhem.  

—–

A disembodied hand raises up and holds a Smith & Wesson .44 magnum revolver over a red background for a couple minutes as the credits run and Lalo Schifrin’s awesome, swingin’ n’ jazzy theme plays.  That’s it.  That’s all. 

Then the thumb pulls back the hammer, the looming barrel swings toward the audience, and Clint intones his famous “Do you feel lucky?” line from the original Dirty Harry.  Wait a beat.  BLAM! 

Rad.  Well, a man’s got to know his limitations.  And if you don’t dig that opening, it’s your manhood that’s limited. 

10. The Road Warrior (1981) 

Wind.  “My life fades.  My vision dims.  All that remains…. are memories.  I remember a time of chaos.  Ruined dreams, this wasted land.  But most of all, I remember the Road Warrior”  

With these words, uttered by the now elderly Feral Kid, one of the best action films ever made begins.  You don’t need to have seen the original Mad Max – the narration and footage bring you up to speed on the scenario, and on Max, and on why he went out to the desert…. 

But the narration isn’tall.  No, it’s just the beginning, because as the narration ends and director George Miller’s camera swoops down onto the endless road, the white lines shooting past, into darkness as a roar overtakes you.  And the roar gets louder and louder, and then the camera pulls back out of a tunnel, but it’s not a tunnel at all – it’s the yawning mouth of the supercharger on Max’s car, “the last of the V8 Interceptors.”  And we are right in the midst of Max’s latest asphalt battle for his life. 

Okay Hollywood, that’s how it’s done.

Written by and starring British comics Nick Frost and Simon Pegg, the dynamic duo behind the brilliant cult hits “Shaun of the Dead” and “Hot Fuzz,” “Paul” centers on two nerdy British tourists named Clive (Frost) and Graeme (Pegg) who have come to America to visit the sci-fi nerd mecca of Comic-Con before driving an RV across the US to visit sites where alien encounters have allegedly occurred. Even they realize that they’re just being silly, and there’s no way they’ll ever encounter a real alien – until a car races around them in the dead of night before careening off the highway and exploding.

—–

Looking for human survivors, they instead encounter a surly, wisecracking, dope-smoking alien named Paul (voiced by Seth Rogen in one of the best voiceover performances I’ve ever heard) who’s on the run from federal secret agents (Jason Bateman and Sigourney Weaver) that he believes are out to kill him. Paul took his name from the dog his spaceship crushed when it crash-landed in rural Wyoming in 1947, and he’s spent the past 60-plus years being questioned at the clandestine Area 51 for his advanced alien insights and technological know-how.

Paul is just desperate to stay on the run and alive, but things keep getting more complicated as junior federal agents (Bill Hader and Thomas Lennon) get roped into the chase, and the on-the-lam trio also pick up a fundamentalist Christian named Ruth (Kristen Wiig) who’s desperate to make a getaway of her own: from her repressive life managing a desert RV park with her Bible-thumping father (John Carroll Lynch).

“Paul” is literally a wonder to behold, a smile and laugh-inducing romp from start to finish that is rated “R” for some profanity and a few dope-smoking scenes but which has such an inherent good-natured vibe that teens and even the children of liberal-minded parents should be allowed to enjoy it as well. Director Greg Mottola (“Superbad,” “Adventureland”) displays the best of his strengths from both those prior films as he weaves frenetically funny action scenes with revealing emotional moments that steer clear of sappiness.

Aside from its vast surface charms, the film’s brilliant script and perfect casting includes hilarious cameos from the likes of Jane Lynch, David Koechner, Jeffrey Tambor and in the most truly inspired gag, the voice of Steven Spielberg himself. Pay close attention and you’ll find countless sly references to other classic alien films, including the fact that Weaver is fighting an alien again in a completely different fashion than her epic turns as Ripley in the “Alien” series of films.

One big caveat to Christian viewers is the fact that Ruth and her father’s characters are played for laughs, as they dive right into stereotypical jokes as gun-toting creationists who believe the world is just 4,000 years old. She has never drank, swore, kissed a man or traveled outside her limited desert radius – all aspects that are quickly rectified as she hits the road with the gang.

Yet she’s also depicted as having an inherently sweet innocence that is respected, and at one point Paul expresses sadness that he’s shaken her faith. He also invokes Scripture respectfully when he talks her into letting him use his healing powers to cure a lifelong eye problem in one of the film’s more serious moments.

I complained about the fact that last fall’s sharp comedy “Easy A” was painfully stereotypical in its depiction of Christian teens as moralistic harpies, but many responded by saying that they were fine with that film’s portrayal since many Christian teens are actually often overly judgmental of their peers.

Since “Paul” is so funny in every other respect and doesn’t seem as hateful as I found that aspect of “Easy A” to be, I think that most Christians should be able to laugh a little bit at themselves through this role. I mean, if you’re there, you’re already sitting in a movie about a profane, dope-smoking alien.

Hopefully, American audiences won’t be dissuaded by the fact the film stars Pegg and Frost, who are relatively unknown here. These are two men who are long overdue for a major break here, and if audiences give this movie a shot, it could well become a word-of-mouth sensation.

That, of course, was just their public face; in reality, it soon became clear, they are ugly and reptilian under their human skins and have an agenda to exploit humanity in some way, either as slaves or as food or both, or perhaps some even worse and more horrible fashion. And a small group of people have divined this agenda and set up a small, loose, but dedicated resistance organization.

Central to the narrative is the resistance against an intrusive government that claims to be for nothing but the good of humanity but is in fact pursuing sinister, elitist, and exploitative hidden agendas. As such, the show makes a strong commentary on contemporary political issues and constitutes one of the most frankly libertarian TV series seen in many years. In addition, it suggests strong approval of religion, specifically Christianity, in a way that makes the resistance group a spot-on analogue to the current-day Tea Party movement.

In episode 5, “Welcome to the War,” for example, the “visitors” clearly display the trappings of an oppressive government: claims of exclusively benevolent intentions; a large, complex organization devoted to the will of a single leader and small cadre of elite satraps; exercise of raw power against opposition whenever it can be accomplished in secret; use of sympathetic media mouthpieces and propaganda techniques; highly advanced military power and surveillance capabilities; vastly greater power than the people over whom they want to rule; use of deception and scapegoating  in order to undermine resistance; and the like.

A member of the Christian clergy, Father Jack Landry (characterized excellently by Joel Gretsch), remains central to the resistance effort, along with FBI agent Erica Evans (likewise well played by Elizabeth Mitchell). Both are determined, kindly, and fundamentally decent and unselfish. Father Jack continually wears the traditional turned-around collar identifying him as a clergyman.

Leading the visitors, by contrast, is Anna, an extremely charismatic woman whose appearance includes both Caucasian and African characteristics. Anna claims to be for treating all people as equals and helping those who haven’t been successful in life, stopping just short of directly quoting President Obama and other progressive politicians. As the show progressed through its first season, however, she was increasingly revealed as a cold-hearted monster whose words of benevolence are entirely phony.

In episode 8, “We Can’t Win,”, for example, one of the V leaders describes flooding caused by a monsoon, which has possibly killed thousands of people, as a “tragedy.” “No,” says Anna, smiling triumphantly, “an opportunity,” echoing the words of former Obama aide Rahm Emanuel. Later, Anna tells a sympathetic journalist, “There’s tragedy every day all over your world. So many opportunities to help.”

In that same episode, Anna and the visitors continually refer to their takeover plans as “progress,” an apparent allusion to contemporary statists’ self-description as progressives.

As noted, the religious orientation of the show is strongly Christian. The leaders of the resistance use a church as their base of operations, and the climactic scene of “Welcome to the War” takes place in the church’s sanctuary. The church thus serves as a source of sound, eternal values and gives emotional strength to the resistance. The resistance members are clearly shown to be in the movement to protect their families, faith, freedom, and personal integrity.

In another positive allusion to Christianity, resistance member Georgie sacrifices his life to ensure that he won’t give away the identities of the other resisters, an evident allusion to Christ and to subsequent Christian martyrs. The show doesn’t avoid difficult moral quandaries, either: in “We Can’t Win,” Father Jack shoots a human agent of the Visitors.

The Visitors, too, recognize the power of religion, but they use it to their own ends. Erica’s teenage son, Tyler, becomes interested in “The Church of V” concocted by the Visitors as another means of distracting people from their real intentions.

In addition to the human resistance, among the aliens are some good individuals who sympathize with the humans. In fact, “John May,” the first V to turn against Anna, actually started the resistance. His name is of course reminiscent of John Galt, the hero of Ayn Rand’s novel Atlas Shrugged. Two prominent aliens working against their government are given biblical names, Joshua and Samuel.

Episode 9, “Heretic’s Fork,” includes allusions to Nazi eugenics programs, with V doctors performing experiments on live human subjects. These events also resonate with contemporary issues such as elective abortion and embryonic stem cell research, however, as when Anna refers to an unborn V-human hybrid baby as a “mongrel” and insists it should be put to death in the womb. In “We Can’t Win” she kills an unborn Visitor just to make a point in a personal conversation.

The media’s role in pushing for big government is also prominent in the show. Newsman Chad Decker (Scott Wolf), for example, offers to do a story about the Fifth Column, the small group of humans who distrust the visitors. “Just point me in the right direction,” he tells Anna. Later, he meets Father Jack in the latter’s rectory and asks him for information about the Fifth Column. Jack says he doesn’t know anything, and this and a subsequent scene leave it ambiguous as to whether Chad is really cooperating with the visitors or acting as a double agent.

As the season progresses we find that the resistance, have been falsely branded as terrorists, and FBI agent Erica is assigned to head task force to find fifth columnists, Visitors who oppose their leaders’ plan to exploit humanity.

All of that leads to “Red Sky,” the finale of season one. The Vs are about to attack the earth openly and take over. A fifth columnist willingly gives up his own life to save all of mankind and his fellow Fifth Columnists, in a Christlike sacrifice. Tellingly, the Fifth Columnist is named Joshua, the Old Testament translation of the Jewish name translated as Jesus in the New Testament. Later in the episode, Joshua is resurrected, literally brought back to life.

After Joshua’s killing, Father Jack preaches a sermon in which he tells his congregation, “You are going to have to choose who you’re going to follow: the V’s or God. Because you can’t serve two masters. . . . There is a war upon us: a war for our souls.”

The war resumes tonight.

“Predators” serves as yet another sequel to the original that starred Arnold Schwarzenegger. This one — the 4th in the series – finds new characters in a new locations battling multiple predators — unlike the original, which only featured only one.

To prepare for the sequel, I re-watched the 1987 original where a group of mercenaries are sent on a mission to rescue hostages in Central America. Led by Schwarzenegger, that team attacks a village that supposedly holds the hostages and only later discovers that the real threat is not the kidnappers but an alien that blends into the jungle and tracks its human prey using  body heat. One by one, the predator attacks the team leading to a showdown with the hero.

What’s enjoyable about the original is that it’s  more than just a simple monster movie where the monster attacks useless characters with no personality. This one slowly builds up the suspense before the first predator attack and by that time the audience has seen the human characters relate to and work with one another. There are numerous scenes of violence but the story is well-paced and shows real human reactions to the deaths of their comrades, as opposed to just focusing on all the action.

In the new sequel, the strangers dropped into the jungle face a group of predators bent of hunting and mutilating them. Many of the strangers do not know each other, but most of them have a background in the military. There is at least one prisoner in the mix but the odd one out  is a young doctor named Edwin, played by Topher Grace (“That 70’s Show”). This group of strangers follows Royce, a mercenary played by Academy Award-winner Adrien Brody (“The Pianist”), as he searches for a way to get them to safety and away from the alien marauders.

Like the original “Predator,” this one focuses on the characters and the story before the predators start their attack. Unfortunately, unlike the original, the characters here are dull and uninteresting. However, Edwin stands as the most interesting and relatable throughout and is given a few funny lines to lighten things up.

One of the best elements are plot developments above and beyond watching the characters knocked off one by one.  There are booby traps and many other intriguing and dangerous developments along with a few surprising twists that elevate the proceedings above the average monster movie. 

The movie does have numerous flaws in it, though. Although I enjoyed many of the twists, there is one late surprise that’s just not believable and nearly ruins the entire film. “Predators” does not live up to the original but there are enough surprises to make it worth hunting for.

Much has been written about the premiere of the new ABC drama “V” and its relationship to  the election last year of President Barack Obama. As an article from the Chicago Tribune noted:

Nominally a rousing sci-fi space opera about alien invaders bent on the conquest (and digestion) of all humanity, it’s also a barbed commentary on Obamamania that will infuriate the president’s supporters and delight his detractors.

While it’s true there are reasons why comparisons between the candidate of hope and the aliens who want change are plentiful, the show “V” is about much more than a critique of the Obama administration.

“V” begins as a show about aliens who suddenly appear in spaceships around the world and the reaction they receive.  At first, as can be expected, there is a lot of fear and anguish about the visitors (which is what “V” stands for) as the ships show up hovering above different cities. However, when the alien leader appears on a ship’s video screen and talks about the benefits they will bring to the people of this world, audiences applaud (an unrealistic action, but an important one nonetheless in the development of the program). As the show goes on, though, some people learn that the aliens have more in mind than providing “heal centers” and universal health care for people around the world (which they are in favor of).

As I noted above, there are reasons people are so eager to compare the Obama administration to the alien visitors. The Washington Post recently compared an HBO documentary about the election of Obama to the series premiere of “V.” It noted that…

In ‘V’ (a remake of the early-1980s series), the otherworldly ‘visitors’ want to bring us universal health care. They possess a knack for speechwriting and managing the message. In ‘By the People,’ well . . . same thing!

Another comparison between “V” and Obama’s campaign that many people have focused on, is that young people flock to the visitors in “V”  because they find something intriguing and possibly inspiring about them. Unlike many of the adults in the program, adolescents and young people are enticed by the visitors without understanding the consequences of aligning themselves with the alien race without questioning their motives or their intentions.

I do like the political aspect of the show and how it seems timely for many of those who have questioned or disagreed with the Obama administration. Deeper still, though, I think the idea of blind loyalty is a great aspect to the show. With little information known about the aliens upon their arrival, many people embrace this new group without knowing who they really are. The aliens may say the things that people support and they may have all of the right intentions (which they don’t), but people accept them without questioning their true motives. That blind allegiance, which could be compared to any number of people who accept things without asking questions, is a powerful and important aspect of the program.

In addition to that idea, the pilot of the new program introduces a variety of interesting ideas that will likely be explored as the show continues for the next several weeks and in the spring of 2010. One character, played by the boyish Scott Wolf (who has a knack for choosing quality television projects), is torn between being an “actual” reporter and exploring the truth about the visitors or getting attention as the “chosen” reporter who gets the high-profile interviews with the “V” leader (the Barbara Walters for extraterrestrial life forms). Wolf’s character chooses the latter option, at least in the pilot episode, which is the only episode that has aired thus far. 

On the show, as the softball interview airs, the show cuts to a meeting where rebels are talking about the hidden plans of the visitors. In other shows, this scene might have seemed too obvious but the scene works here because it creates a clear delineation between the image of the Vs that their leader is trying to present and the conspiracy theories about them that the visitors are trying to quell.     

Erica, one of the attendees at that meeting, played by Elizabeth Mitchell from “Lost,” is beginning to understand the true motive of the Vs while her son has been drawn, like a cult member, to them. For the sake of her son, she will likely need to convince him that the visitors are not who he hopes and believes they are.

On the show, there is also the story of a recently-engaged visitor, a traitor to his kind, who has to decide if he wants to join a rebellion against them, and if he wants to reveal the truth about himself to those he loves. Additionally, there is also a storyline about how priests and congregants react to these new alien visitors. With all of these interesting stories, “V” is a show that has a lot of potential to build on.

At the end of the program, Erica turns to a potential ally and notes that the visitors are “arming themselves with the most powerful weapon out there.” When asked what it is, she replies with one simple word: “Devotion.” Soon enough, her son is seen in an alien spaceship pledging his support to the alien race as the leader of the “V” looks on. The show has set up a basic premise with its first episode and if it is able to build on it effectively, it could end up being one of the most interesting and addictive programs of the 2009-2010 television season.

I got more and I didn’t want it. 

Why don’t sequels do well? Obviously, I’m not alone in feeling the way I do about Raiders or Star Wars or Jaws or any other great character-rich, dynamically set film that pulls you in and doesn’t fully let go even after the end titles trail up and we see that film certification symbol fade out. So, why is it that more of what we love, we hate? Well, maybe not hate, but not love quite so much. What’s going on here? 

Perhaps like many of you, I get excited when I hear shooting has started on a new installment of a film series I enjoy. Back when I saw the first leaked images of Jones on horseback going up against a German tank in the employ of the Afrika Corps, I was “giddy as a schoolboy.” I couldn’t wait to for that thing to be in the can and out in the theaters. I was thrilled, anxious and ready for the journey. But then another feeling took hold. Again, like many of you, when mention of a sequel or prequel leaks out, a small fear creeps up the back of one’s neck that somehow curiosity will lead to a deep regret, rivaling that of John Hurt’s as he poked his nose over that egg in Alien. And, like John, our feelings are often very well justified. Because many times, almost always, if anyone’s counting, sequels fail to capture the magic of the first film. “You just can’t repeat it,” many repeat.  Well, I’m not so sure about that. I don’t think it’s that the filmmakers are not trying hard enough, I think it’s more that they’re trying too hard. 

People change, and so should characters, right? Well, not quite. I have been wondering for a long time now, why it is I can’t fully enjoy Return of the Jedi, Aliens,  Alien 3,  Alien Resurrection,  any Rambo emptying a SAW past First Blood, or any Rocky beyond the bell where an out-of-breath voice gasped wisely, “No rematch!” And where an equally wise one gurgled out, “Don’t want one.” Well, a little voice, similarly exhausted, tells me this could be said of Hawkeye Pierce and Trapper John, Radar, Burns and Hot Lips Houlihan. Of the cast and crew of the Minnow, and that other ship, where some rogue muttered, “Look, I’m not in this for your revolution, sister. I’m in it for the money.” 

What am I talking about here? It’s what has been defined as Character Development. Somewhere along the way character development, the arc or course a character’s actions, words, and behavior take along a story line has been replaced with something different, something not-so-natural, not-so-healthy, something very formulaic. The increase in depth of a character’s personality, is, we are told, a sure sign of good writing, good acting, and lot’s of other good stuff. It signals to us that the characters are being fleshed-out, are growing, just like us. Changing, just like us. And doing the things we normally do, like becoming superhuman, multi-dimensional, and, best of all, not at all in it for the money.

I’m here to say that it isn’t working. Not for me, anyway. Using Joseph Campbell’s Hero with a Thousand Faces as a tuning fork, Lucas played the characters of Star Wars with perfect pitch and tone. He hit every note right. Yes, I happen to like Luke Skywalker as an innocent, awkward, and yes, sometimes dopey farm boy, a kid out of his element fighting a huge empire. I don’t know many farm boys who have much experience fighting huge empires (though that’s no reason to deny them the job). I also happen to like Han Solo looking out for number one, and of course, also watching his trusty sidekick Chewie’s back. Sure I want Han to come to the rescue every now and then, saving everybody and maybe the universe, too.  But not as a full-time job! And I want him complaining about his predicament with every discharge of his blaster all the way down the celestial pike. What I don’t want to see is his transformation into a benevolent, altruistic, selfless stick figure, volunteering for the toughest assignment without so much as a quip, an insult or at least a good joke. In Return of the Jedi, his character became flat and blocky, more inert than when he was frozen in carbonite. 

I have an idea. It might even pass for a theory. It goes something like this:

In Ridley Scott’s Alien, Ripley made a interesting heroine because we didn’t expect her to be the heroine. Let’s face it, Tom Skerritt had higher billing and thus, a greater chance of coming out of that pickle with a heck of a lot more than a highly lubricated pile driver alien jaw through his head, or worse. So did John Hurt, Yaphet Kotto, and Ian Holm. Sure, Sigourney Weaver’s Ripley, by rising to the occasion and becoming the hero achieved the unexpected, it’s true. Yet her actions were not out of character. Why not? Because we had already been shown hints of her strength. No, not in any oiled-muscle, gearing-up scene – as in Aliens,  and now almost every other film which has a David on the way to slay a Goliath – but in her behavior toward Ian Holm’s Science Officer Ash. When Ash makes the rash decision to violate quarantine protocol and let the landing party re-enter the ship and mind of Conrad’s Nostromo, she’s pissed. He blatantly disregards her authority. Soon after, she confronts him and lays down the rules. That’s all that was needed.  Hints are what we like. Not HITS, as in ‘…over the head.’

Aliens changed things. Don’t get me wrong, I loved this film, as I do many of James Cameron’s. But it’s another good example of writing going past the point of believability that is more distracting to me, and maybe others, than an audio pop, a jump cut, or violating the 180 rule. With this sequel the filmmakers decided to develop her character into a somewhat neurotic and unstable fusspot, suffering from insomnia, and having to still feed the same moody cat after 57 years. This is fine and understandable, and, very much in keeping with her character and what she’s been through, but it doesn’t really explain the superhuman strength and Delta Operator focus we see in her later on in the same film. Where did her fear go? And where did those skill sets mysteriously come from? Hicks? Spunkmeyer?  

Surrounded by goo-oozing aliens, pulsating eggs, and god knows what else, she charges back into the breech and certain death to find that darn cat again. Well, no, not really. But it might as well have been the cat. Instead, it’s the little girl, Newt, perhaps the most obvious in a long list of Cameron tributes to Gordon Douglas’ original “bug hunt” flick Them!  Ripley crawls into the growling belly of the beast with little more than a souped-up pulse rifle and spare magazines. And all through this mission, which would make John Rambo pause, she’s not even breathing heavy. While in the first movie, Alien, just one of those creatures hiding somewhere on a ship the size of Greenland made her hyperventilate into something resembling sheer panic. Justifiably so. But here, she calmly, and very professionally goes about her new task of rescuing a small girl from amongst several hundreds or maybe thousands of “Ripley’s bad guys”. Let’s not forget, this is within the dark, dank depths of a burning nuclear power plant that is about to do an impression of the Hindenburg at Lakehurst. Sure, the mother instinct is a crucial element of the theme here, mother vs. mother and all that. But, still, her behaviour takes on a super hero quality that transforms the story into more science fantasy than fiction. Where the original rules set down by the writers are being violated by who else, but the writers, in situations where anything, even the absurd is possible and to be expected. This is not to be confused with a suspension of disbelief. Rather, this is an expelling of belief that the setting and situation the writers have created for us is being transformed into a veritable Westworld run by renegade deus ex machina. 

Alien Resurrection displays more character development with our hero Ripley going gothic with touches of  arcade Street Fighter and left-over marine grunt mixed-in. Granted, to be fair she is merely a shadow of her former self, quite literally. She’s a clone. This time, an off-the-rack Ripley with a shelf life much longer apparently, than a synthetic Bishop, Ash and, while we’re at it, a Zhora, Priss or even Rachel could ever hope to get from the original manufacturer. But this unreasonable facsimile is just that, unreasonable. She’s not a whole lot of fun, either. Because we can guess rather confidently from the opening shots of her determination, that here sits our hero. This isn’t character development. This isn’t even a character. Unless you happen to be considering the cartoon variety.

Which brings me back to Luke, Leia, and Han (sorry Chewie). Principle players in the original Star Wars, they had their respective characters fleshed-out in fine form by the third act, the battle. We loved it, as did most of planet Earth. Which doesn’t really explain why the creators of the third installment, Return of the Jedi, would want to change that. Of course, we want change, but not at the expense of the things we have loved which connected us to it in the first place. I don’t want to see new facets of a character if I feel the filmmakers are showing me these new facets, these changes, these twists because they’ve exhausted all their original ideas in earlier installments and are now resorting to drastic means to keep the gravy train rolling, with add-ons that are more a product of meetings with merchandisers than anything else. If that’s the case, if in fact the characters are out of ammo, fleshed-out as far as their flesh will go – inevitable no matter how rich the character is written initially – then give us a new character or another adventure. For example, look what was done with the exceptional Leigh Brackett and Larry Kasdan penned Empire Strikes Back,  a rare winning sequel. It had taken the original idea, expanded on it and led us to places undreamed. Yet, all the while, retaining the character traits of all in attendance and firmly anchoring us to the original franchise without so much as a hiccup in believability or anything that a healthy smack on a cockpit control panel couldn’t fix.  That, Ladies and Gentlemen, is how you do it. You don’t pervert the characteristics of each member of a story, transforming them beyond believability, simply to get more mileage out of them or to justify a production, an episode or a sequel. Lovers of the original film, the fans, will rebel against that. They want to see more of what they love. They don’t want to see entirely new characters masquerading as the old ones for no other reason than to reel-in a duped loyal fan base at the box office. Not a good idea. 

Which leads us to Indiana Jones and Kingdom of the Crystal Skull.  Certainly, it was no Raiders, no Last Crusade nor my and many others’ least favorite, Temple of Doom. Simply, it just didn’t measure up. But, with that said, I did enjoy it and was happy to see the settings and the characters, well, some of them, again. I missed Sallah, and Marcus. Who didn’t? I wasn’t crazy about the time period, though I’m a big fan of cold war anything. But for me, Indy belongs in a pre-atomic age, when leather satchels, whips and dusty bomber jackets were worn by men other than those without a cause to rebel against. That’s a change that didn’t need to be. “Yeah but it’s twenty years since they made Last Crusade!”, they cried. So? Harrison Ford is an actor, so are the other people in the film who call themselves actors. Hollywood makes magic, doesn’t it?  Now, more than ever, we’re constantly told. There is no reason why we couldn’t have had this fourth Indiana Jones installment, and most likely the last, set in the mid-forties. In an attempt to make the story more ‘real to life’ they made it too real, and lifeless.  Was this another mistake by Spielberg? Judging not by the reviews, which I never judge anything on anyway, but by the fans and of course, my own feelings, that humorously understated line by Last Crusade’s last Templar knight comes to mind:  “He chose poorly.”  

Before I forget, I want to mention one other thing about Kingdom of the Crystal Skull that bothered me. Something on the poster, something about Indy was missing. His smile. Indy wasn’t really smiling. They continued the poster style, keeping it consistent with the serial nature of the cliffhangers that Raiders re-pioneered, if I can say that in mixed company. And I applaud that with gusto. But they changed the illustrated Indy too much by leaving out that cockiness, even after 20 years. If he’s not going to smile, not going to be displaying that adventurous grin, not going to display that false bravado, that winning lovable mixture of Joel McCray, Bob Hope, and yes, Han Solo that made Indiana Jones come alive for us, making even the most harrowing situation and death defying stunt seem fun and something we’d like to try at home, then why bother? They missed it with the poster. So, right out of the gate, they went in the wrong direction, with the wrong approach. Sure, he’s 20 years older, so what? Ever hear of people like John Glenn, Malcolm Forbes or Michael Korda? There are plenty of examples of men and women in their middle and senior years pursuing endeavors that healthy college kids would run from. So, for a character like Indiana Jones to run out of steam, it’s disappointing to say the least, and certainly not a topic for a sequel. Frankly, I think they played on the age element far too much in order to introduce a new angle to Indy. A big mistake. They didn’t need a new angle. I think even a poor story – and this one was not up to par with the previous three by any stretch of the imagination – could have been a heck of a lot more fun and much better cinema if they retained the Indy that we knew and loved in Raiders, felt a bit distanced from in Temple of Doom and re-united with in Last Crusade.  That’s my feeling. But heck, I’m making this up as I go along.   

Here’s a plea to budding writers out there: 

If you want to write such huge character changes, don’t experiment with an existing, beloved creation, adding-on simple shock value and steroids or fatigue and a lack of collagen. You may hit on a winner, and you may not. In the meantime, though, you’ll be changing irrevocably the things from the original that we grew with and held close to our hearts. Don’t do it. 

Start with a new, original story. There, you can experiment with a clean slate and see for certain why the lines are forming, along the story arc and around the block. In the meantime you may find quite unexpectedly that the big screen isn’t the only place where your character is being developed.