Because SEALs are not actors, the most common criticism that I read before watching the movie is that the dialogue comes off as a bit wooden. This is true, although that wasn’t the biggest drawback for me. Rather, for me it was the lack of character development. In one part, it’s because of the realistic aspects they were trying for. While they were trying to put two of the SEALs forward as main characters, since it would be physically impossible for two people to do all the action shots, the jobs were split up among several different characters. Which means that unlike movies where Bruce Willis kills all the bad guys and you know he’s the star, there’s no true “star” doing all the action. And in fact during the heat of battle, it becomes difficult even to tell who is who on the screen.

Again, that all plays well to the realism of the film, but not to the character development. In order to care more about the characters, the audience needs that development.

This is not to say it was a bad movie. Far from it. I would give the movie a B+, and perhaps even an A- depending on the mood I’m in. Is it worth watching again? Not at the theater—but on DVD, yes. And for those who do spend money watching movies at the theater, it’s worth the night out. (For those who never spend money at the theater, this isn’t the type of movie that you should change your mind about cinema habits over, however.)

Update: One thing I should clarify about the dialogue sounding “wooden” is that it only did so in the situations that were more dramatic oriented. When it was the inter-squad banter and the briefing reports going on, the dialogue sounded absolutely incredible. Plus, the reviews I read about how awesome the interrogation scene was were spot on. It was some incredible writing, and a great delivery by the actors involved.

Of course, a big part of that is being an American when this is dealing with the English royalty. For the most part, I don’t care all that much about British royalty, and there’s a reason we never read about it in school—because we’re too busy with American history. And in that regard, I’m quite sure that the British are the same toward us (how many of them know about Herber Hoover? But by asking that…um, how many Americans know anything about Hoover?).

Anyway, The King’s Speech is about Prince Albert who became King George VI when his brother abdicated the throne right before World War II. He had a speech impediment, but happened to become king right when radio addresses became necessary. If he had been born a century earlier, it wouldn’t have been much of a big deal; but now the English people needed to hear his voice.

The movie is about Albert/George and his speech therapist. The acting is very well done (Colin Firth plays the monarch, Geoffrey Rush—who I kept expecting to lapse into pirate speak—played the therapist, and Helena Bonham Carter played Liz, who would become Queen Elizabeth). The movie is rated R solely because of language (to help with the speech impediment, George VI is encouraged to use profanity at one point). I’ve read that they are planning to re-edit the film to take this out so that it can be rated PG-13 and get a wider audience. I think that’s a bad mistake though. If they edited it because it wasn’t historically accurate for him to do that (I don’t know if it is or isn’t), then that would be fine; but for the film, and in this context, the profanity really isn’t profane. It’s like Tourette’s Syndrome, where the word are just noise and sounds and they don’t really have meaning.

As for the audience, however, it is true that it appears to be very…how shall we put this? In the words of Spinal Tap, there aren’t fewer people going, it’s just that the audience has become more selective. Now, my numbers are a bit skewed because I went on a weekday when I’m on vacation. Most other people are at work or in school. So it’s probably not that much of a surprise that I’d estimate the audience in the theater I was in to be about 25 people. Of that, maybe 5 were under the age of 50 years. Oh yes, that includes me.

The movie experience was, therefore, quite similar to me watching a movie with my grandparents. For instance, the therapist in the film insisted on calling Prince Albert “Bertie” so they’d be on familiar terms instead of according to royal custom (i.e., “Your highness”). Every time Rush’s character said, “Bertie” the woman behind me said, “Why did he call him Betty?” And her husband would say, “He said, ‘Bertie.’” “Oh. Why?” “Because his name’s Albert.” “So why did he call him Betty?”

Yeah, so it was pretty much exactly like watching a movie with my grandparents :-)

In any case, the acting was superb. I haven’t seen much of the competition this year, but Firth definitely did an Oscar caliber performance. However, the movie as a whole isn’t really my style. I commend it for its excellent job, but will most likely not be purchasing this film when it comes out on DVD. I would still say it’s worth watching, though.

When I left the theater, I was thinking “That’s one messed up movie. But in a good way.” And it’s true. The violence is, as typical Tarantino, over-the-top, and as he has consistently shown through all his movies it contains elements of satire within it. Indeed, part of what makes a Tarantino movie compelling is his extremely dark sense of humor, and the fact that he will go places that any other director would consider lame. It works for Tarantino, however—instead of being lame, when a handwritten scrawl with an arrow points out who one of the Nazi leadership is it just fits in as being something Tarantino does. Sorta like the anime in the middle of Kill Bill Volume 1. It doesn’t make sense on its own, and no other director would have done it, but it’s perfect in the Tarantino universe.

In any case, this will be a movie that you’ll either love or hate. If you like other Tarantino, you’ll like this one. And if you hate Tarantino, well this won’t improve your opinion of him. Still, you won’t walk out of Inglorious Basterds feeling like you’ve just watched every clichéd movie ever written. You’ll leave thinking: “Well, that was certainly different.” And Tarantino’s best skill—his ability to craft realistic dialogue—shines through in many examples in this film.

One final note is Brad Pitt. For the first time since…well, ever, Pitt actually acts well in a movie. A large part of it is due to the simplistic nature of his character. The only real skill Pitt needed to master was a Southern drawl, since he played a man from the hills of Tennessee. Indeed, that led to one of the funnier moments in the film when Pitt’s character has to pass himself off as an Italian film director, and you get Pitt’s redneck drawl mixed with Italian words. It’s similar to listening to a Texan try to pronounce Spanish, only more so. You’ll have to watch it to fully understand what I mean there—although I’m sure soon enough it’ll be on YouTube too.

Major Spoiler Alert!

In fact, if you haven’t seen the film (it came out in 2002, so there’s no excuse for you!) and wish to do so, then don’t read anything that follows.

Directed by M. Night Shyamalan (before he lost his talent), Signs tells the story of an Episcopalian minister, Rev. Graham Hess (Mel Gibson) who has a crisis of faith after losing his wife Colleen (Patricia Kalember) in a tragic accident. Graham’s brother Merrill (Joaquin Phoenix) moves in to help Graham raise his two children, Morgan (Rory Culkin) and Bo (Abigail Breslin). But all this happens chronologically before the opening scene of the movie.

The Hess family was excellently developed by Shyamalan. In addition to Graham’s struggles with having lost his faith, Merrill is the story of a great baseball player who could have been. He has the record for the longest home run (and the bat is proudly displayed in the Hess house), but also held the record for most strike-outs. As a result, he’s going through life as a sort of drifter, and in one scene he’s flipping through brochures for the Army.

Bo has an odd phobia of water—she takes two sips and says, “This water is contaminated” and puts the glass down. In one scene, Graham finds two glasses of water and picks them up to return them to the kitchen when he finds several other glasses on another cabinet. In frustration, he gives up and leaves all the glasses where Bo puts them.

Morgan is the closest person resembling a “normal” boy, but he has asthma, which makes him somewhat physically weak—a failing he makes up for with his intelligence.

With this backdrop, the story unfolds. The movie opens with children’s screams of terror. Graham and Merrill rush out to find Graham’s children, and discover a crop circle in their farm. This unnatural phenomenon sets the stage for the action of the movie.

The title Signs obviously refers first to the crop circles; they are signs used by aliens to navigate on Earth for a hostile takeover. If that was all the movie depicted, it would be little better than an expensive B-movie. But they are much more than that, as viewers discover. Indeed, while it is almost certainly not M. Night Shyamalan’s intention, Signs eventually becomes one of the greatest illustrations of deterministic compatibalism ever released in Hollywood. The question was first raised in an interaction between Graham and Merrill after alien lights are seen in the sky. Graham says:

People break down into two groups when they experience something lucky. Group number one sees it as more than luck, more than coincidence.
They see it as a sign…evidence that there is someone up there watching out for them.

Group number two sees it as just pure luck, a happy turn of chance. I’m sure the people in group number two are looking at those lights in a very suspicious way. For them, the situation isn’t clear. Could be bad, could be good. But deep down, they feel that whatever happens, they’re on their own. And that fills them with fear.

Yeah, there are those people. But there’s a whole lot of people in the group number one. When they see those lights, they’re looking at a miracle. And deep down, they feel that whatever’s going to happen, there’ll be someone there to help them. And that fills them with hope.

So, what you have to ask yourself is, what kind of person are you? Are you the kind who sees signs, sees miracles? Or do you believe that people just get lucky? Or look at the question this way…is it possible that there are no coincidences?

After Merrill assures us “I’m a miracle man” he asks Graham where Graham stands. After trying to avoid the question, Graham finally responds:

There is no one watching out for us, Merrill. We are all on our own.

After this exchange, the aliens turn hostile. The Hess family boards up their home and is eventually forced into their basement. While there, Morgan has an asthma attack and Graham realizes in horror that Morgan’s medication is in the kitchen, unavailable. Graham stays with Morgan through the night, trying to calm his son. It brings him to his breaking point. Graham, in the basement, is as low as he can go physically, spiritually, and emotionally. He looks up to heaven, thoughts of his wife clearly on his mind, and says:

Don’t do this to me again. Not again. I hate you! I hate you!

But after venting his anger at God, Graham continues, trying to soothe his son:

Don’t be afraid of what’s happening. Believe it’s going to pass. Believe it. Just wait. Don’t be afraid. The air is coming. Believe. We don’t have to be afraid. It’s about to pass. Here it comes. Don’t be afraid. Here comes the air. Don’t be afraid, Morgan. Feel my chest. Breathe with me. Together. The air is going in our lungs. Together. We’re the same. We’re the same.

And Morgan stabilizes through the act of belief. Then morning comes.

The family has a radio and learns that the attack is over. Humans have found a way to defeat the aliens, but the news doesn’t know what it is.

Morgan is still in trouble from his asthma as the Hess family come out of the basement. And as Merrill goes to get his medication, Graham retrieves the TV so they can watch the news, when a remaining alien captures Morgan. As Graham stares at the alien, he has a flashback to the night his wife died, and everything clicks into place:

And here, literally in the last ten minutes of the film, comes the payoff. All the things that occurred beforehand have explanations. Why did Colleen die? So that Merrill would move in with his brother. Why was Merrill able to do so? Because he held the strikeout record and couldn’t make it in baseball. Why did Bo have her strange water phobia? So water would be all over the house in the time of need. Why did Morgan have asthma? So that he never inhaled the poison the aliens secreted. And why did Graham go through his crisis of faith? So that in the end he could “see.” When Morgan asks if someone saved him, Graham responds: “Yes, I think someone did” (a definite reference to God).

The movie then wraps up after some amount of time has passed. Children’s screams are heard again, but this time they’re screams of joy. And Graham leaves the bathroom wearing his priest’s collar, his faith restored.

Within the context of the story, all the events are determined. By this I don’t mean that M. Night scripted the events—obviously that’s true, but irrelevant to our discussion. Instead, if you consider the story as if it were true, the end is still deterministic. It all served a purpose, and there were no coincidences.

More importantly, however, and what sets this movie apart from others such as Final Destination is that this determinism is not fatalistic. That is, the characters are not trapped by fate and unable to alter their final destination no matter how hard they strive. Instead, every single member of the Hess family behaved exactly as they would have under those circumstances. Indeed, they acted freely and were never coerced.

Yet they did exactly what was determined that they must do.

As the characters proceed through the story, there is no indication that they feel that they are being manipulated by some higher power or purpose. Bo’s water phobia, for instance, is never perceived as being intended for some end result; it’s just a “weird tick” that she has. It is only in the end, looking back, that the hand of God can be seen working through all the events that occurred.

As a result, Signs exemplifies the Christian concepts of predestination, foreordination, and compatablistic free will.

The movie is blatantly right-wing, and gets bonus points in my book because of that. Liberals are going to hate this movie with a passion. It has everything in it that could possibly offend them. In fact, it reminds me of a Stephen Colbert episode in reverse…

It will be interesting to see what reaction all the liberals who say conservatives have no sense of humor will do now that they are the ones being lampooned. The reviews I’ve read so far are not promising. But then, consistency never has been a liberal strong point.

For the record, if Public Transit ever did become a movie, I’d love for David Zucker to direct it.

That said, the movie isn’t perfect, even for someone who is in the tank for the right wing. Instead of an A+, I’ll have to give it an A-, borderline B+ even. Again, a lot of this has to do with the fact that I’m not a huge fan of the style of humor, and I’d give the same marks for Airplane! for instance. So if you loved Airplane! then you’ll love this movie, assuming you’re not Michael Moore.

One final note. The irony of the movie extended beyond the movie itself. Indeed, it began during the previews for coming attractions. We got to see previews for Zack and Miri Make a Porno and Sexdrive. In other words, the typical liberal fare that constitutes “humor.” The contrast between that and the humor of An American Carol is something that David Zucker would have loved to have planned, I’m sure. Instead, he got it for free. The rest of Hollywood will miss this; but for some reason I doubt “fly-over country” will…

What makes The Dark Knight so good isn’t just the great acting that Heath Ledger did. It’s the strength of the story that the Nolan brothers wrote. The Dark Knight works well because it’s such a well crafted story that it transcends the superhero genre.

I just rewatched Batman Begins, which was also directed by Christopher Nolan. I remember the several times I watched it before that I thought it was a great movie. Watching it today, I still think it’s a good movie but the growth between Batman Begins and The Dark Knight is astronomical. The Dark Knight makes Batman Begins look weak in comparison.

There is just something about a story that is well done, one that has all the pieces in place. It hits on many levels. My friend Travis is letting me borrow the third season of Lost (he’s let me borrow the first two before too, since I don’t watch much TV). Lost is also (usually) very well crafted. In this case, I think it’s because the creators knew the entire story arc before they began. They also made a conscious decision to have a definite end point to the series. They wanted a set number of episodes to tell the story in, and then they’d finish up.

Granted, there are times when you wish they’d get on with the story already, but by and large the tension is enough to keep you going. And when you watch it on DVD without commercial interruption and without having to wait a week between episodes, it works well. Even the episode that Travis said was the most wasted hour of television ever created (the explanation of Jack’s tattoos, for those wondering which one that was) wasn’t that bad in my opinion. I do agree that it’s one of the weaker episodes, but I’ve seen plenty worse on TV.

Having a well crafted story is difficult work. It’s not just the inspiration factor that you have to deal with, it’s communicating that message to everyone else in a way that is relevant and meaningful to them. The best stories are those that encompass more, that are not limited to one framework or one view. Because the more people who can relate to your story, and the more often they can do it, the better the story is.

What is the point of a story? Sometimes it’s simply to escape from reality and provide a measure of relief. But sometimes it’s to confront reality in a different way, a way that helps us learn from it. Escapism is great to relieve stress, and there is benefit to it. But when I think about those stories that are the best written, all my examples are in the latter category. They all depict reality (even those that occur in fantasy stories!) in a way that is more than escaping. They’re educational. They’re inspirational. They’re honest. They’re real. They’re true.

Perhaps life itself is just a well crafted story written by an Author who reveals Himself in His work…

Where the movie shines is in the character development. This film isn’t a typical Hollywood film. It certainly isn’t a typical “superhero” movie. The Nolan brothers have crafted a story that would have worked in any setting–it would not have needed Batman or the Joker at all. And because of that, it gives a sense of reality to the series. You actually feel like you can understand the inner workings, the motivations, of each character.

The result is a movie that I already rank within my top 5 favorites, and I’ve only seen it once. I will, however, see it many more times, and will definitely buy it when it comes out on DVD (although you really need an Imax screen to appreciate the film…and some awesome speakers for the killer soundtrack that Zimmer and Howard put together).

One final word. For those of you who read my Thirty Days of Night review, take everything in there and reverse it and you’ve got the level of movie that The Dark Knight is.

I’m sure the theater will be packed since it’s opening night and all…but I’m sure it’ll be a good movie too. I’ll naturally blog about it after I see it, but if the movie is half as decent as the trailers make it look Heath Ledger rawked in this movie. Unfortunately, some movies have better trailers than they do movies (The Heartbreak Kid, The Happening). I doubt that’s the case here, but you never know until you know and if that’s not a tautology you can bank on you can at least write it on a memo and put it on your fridge. Not that I know what that means, but hey I’m only writing this. You’re the one who has to read it.

INT. CLASSROOM – DAY

MARK W is teaching a class. He is a complete dork and couldn’t act to save his life.

All the bees are dead.

I’m allergic to bee-stings.

Where did their bodies go?

Global Warming!

Could be.

Bush did it!

Exactly! Bush did it.

There are sudden screams from outside.

What is it? That noise. I mean, what
is that noise?

Someone just jumped off the roof of
the bank!

(with cell phone camera)
I’m so gonna put this vid up on MySpace!

The SUPERINTENDENT of the school rushes into the room.

We’re all going to die!

He throws himself out the window. The kids continue filming it with their cell phones.

CUT TO…

EXT. WOODS IN THE MIDDLE OF NOWHERE – DAY

Why do we have to walk? The train
was running perfectly well.

I think M. Night’s been reading The
Stand. God, I hope we don’t have to
walk all the way to Boulder.

They stop five feet away from a fifteen-story building.

Where do we go now?

I don’t know. Hey look, a building!

Good thing you saw that or we’d be
stuck here forever!

They go the door of the building. It has a giant red screen reading “LOCKED”, a huge padlock on the door, etc. Mark W. tries the door anyway.

Oh no! It’s locked!

We’re doomed!

Behind them, a BUSH appears looking menacing.

We’ll be safe as long as the wind doesn’t
blow.

The wind blows.

MAN THIS MOVIE BLOWS!

They run into a conveniently placed cottage, but Mark W. goes in one door and Zooey in a different one!!!!

Zooey! I love you! Where are you?

I don’t know! It’s dark. I’m scared.

Just stay alive! I WILL FIND YOU!

We get a top-down view, showing Zooey and Mark in two rooms at the end of a long hall. The doors are not locked.

I can’t live without you.

He walks as slowly as possible outside. Zooey does too. They meet in the field and kiss.

We’re not dead!

Our careers are.

The end credits begin. The camera pulls back from the screen showing…a dead audience.

The credits end. We see the fifteen story building. The screen changes from “LOCKED” to “UNLOCKED.” The door opens.

An AVALANCHE OF BEE CORPSES falls out.

How shall I sum this up?

I think that was about as subtle as the point M. Night Shyamalaladingdong was trying to make.

It’s difficult to believe this is the same guy that wrote Signs and The Sixth Sense. I don’t know what M. Night was smoking when he thought This is a great idea for a movie!, but for the sake of the universe whatever it was needs to be criminalized.

The Happening was supposed to be a scary movie, one that would thrill you. Instead, it’s so bad you couldn’t even spoof it. We’re treated to an endless montage of the worst dialogue ever penned coming from characters so flat they disappeared when they turned sideways (and Wahlburg had to have what’s got to be the absolute worst delivered “Oh no” ever put on film). To make up for it, however, there was no plot. The motivating force of the movie was simple: “See everyone who’s not Mark Wahlburg, Zooey Deschanel, or Ashyln Sanchez? They’re going to die.”

Normally, that fact would rank up there as a SPOILER ALERT but unless you’re dumber than a package of mislabeled UPS bubble wrap (which, incidentally, would have written a better script than M. Night), you figure this out pretty much 27 seconds into the movie. Ergo, I haven’t ruined anything for you.

This movie is Shyamalan’s first R-rated movie. I agree with Travis, who said it would have worked better as a PG-13 movie. It’s rated R for gore, and the gore just doesn’t fit. There are movies where gore is appropriate (We Were Soliders, When Harry Met Sally), but The Happening is not one of those films. Instead, it’s distracting. The film is set up just so that M. Night can kill each character in more gruesome ways.

The problem is that for a horror movie to work, you actually have to care about the characters who are at risk of death. That’s where the scary part comes in. You empathize with them and you don’t want them to die. In this film, each death scene is so abrupt and so over the top that it’s closer to a comedy than a horror flick. This sets a dangerous precedent.

The film is also so on-the-nose that it’s pathetic. The Earth is dying and we are the problem. It’s so bad, after the guy gets run over by a lawnmower, you see the real estate sign proudly saying, “You got what you deserved!” Yeah, nothing subtle about that, M. Night! Where’s the skill you had when you weaved the threads of Signs together?

Also, this whole notion that everyone from the Midwest is a militia gun nut? Pathetic. Go back to your progressive cave and spawn a stalk of asparagus or something.

To conclude, the only good part of this movie was The X-Files trailer. And I could have watched that on You Tube for free. If I wanted to see something on the caliber of this movie, I’d watch a compost heap for a few hours. For the first time ever, I asked for my money back after watching a film. The theater probably was not surprised. But if this movie is still showing on Friday, I’ll be surprised.