THINKING BACK ON RECENT HISTORY : "W."

When Oliver Stone, one of the directors most associated with political films – be it bios or cautionary tales, made a biography of George W. Bush, I am sure none of us was particularly surprised. I mean, if you think about it, with Stone’s anti-war record behind him and with the war going on in Iraq at the moment, I personally would have been a tad surprised if he hadn’t made one. I watched this film in a period when I was researching war films, specifically about the war in Iraq. And it surprised me – a lot. But before I go into the reasons why, let’s briefly remember the story first. Not that the story needs much in the way of remembering, in its essence. The biography of George W. Bush is now pretty well known around the world. Starting off as a trouble maker and an alcoholic, George W. Bush then found religion and rose to become the president of the United States of America. Stone’s biography takes a very close – fly on the wall, you know, re-enactment style – look at his life “behind the scenes” as it were. Stone shows us a not so public side to Bush. His relationship with his father, also a onetime president, and like any son who follows in the family business George W. Bush struggles to get out from under his father’s shadow. September 11 happens, decisions have to be made and like anyone now ex-President Bush must make tough decisions and maintain his work – life balance. The thing is, a lot more hangs in the balance in this case than with your average folk… Now this film, like I said, surprised me. Because with Oliver Stone’s track-record I would have fully expected him to “rip into” the ex-president, as it were. But no, not at all. No matter what you think of his politics, when you look at the personal side, the George W. Bush we see is not in the least bit a caricature, he is very, very human – a fact we tend to forget with a lot of public figures whether we agree with them or not. Stone has made it quite clear that he doesn’t agree with the war in Iraq – to the best of my knowledge anyway – and the view he takes of the people surrounding ex-President Bush is a tad harsh, be it Colin Powell, Dick Cheney or Paul Wolfowitz. But I almost feel that with George W. Bush Stone was trying to say “Hey. I don’t agree with you but it’s nothing personal. It’s your politics.” A mature view, and in a way one should expect nothing less from a director of Stone’s caliber. And a rare thing in our polarized times. Another point you might want to bring up is “well this is technically a bio – are you sure you can call it a war film with a clear conscience?” My answer would have to be yes. One needs to be neither a political analyst nor an expert in film studies to realize that in the case of the ex-president, he personally and his presidency is now inextricably tied to the events of September 11 and the War in Iraq. So yes, I think when talking about a war, both the decision making process that started the war and the life of a man who was the main decision maker – the president at the time of the United States no less – is well worth examining. And very pertinent. A good film in my opinion both technically and in its handling of a historic moment and its personages. Definitely worth watching.

SURREAL TV : "NATURAL BORN KILLERS"

Having sampled some of life’s bitter truths with Kusturica, let us now turn to some light entertainment. As I was preparing for the review on this one I realized something… This film can be likened to a family fight. In it, under the direction of Oliver Stone, the cinema takes a massive bite out of its younger cousin, the television. And put like that I know it sounds a touch unfair, but really it isn’t anything the TV culture doesn’t deserve… I honestly feel sometimes that the “media” has gone completely barmy and could have disastrous results… And I liked this film because it is precisely this hypothesis that Stone explores. If the film is completely surreal, it is more to set us in the type of universe where everything is possible and where the more outrageous possibilities can be explored; this is akin to the sense of liberty the medium of animation affords… It also has the added benefit of rendering the film watchable; even though the amount of bodies that pile up all over the screen can only be described as carnage, the whole thing is so unbelievable it just doesn’t sort of you know… Hit you… (Excuse the bad pun)
Mickey (Woody Harrelsson) and Mallory Knox (Juliette Lewis) are “Natural Born Killers”. They love each other and they love life, and for them, “life” means rolling round the countryside, getting drunk, getting high and killing pretty much whoever they want whenever they want. The manhunt that begins is massive, as is the media frenzy. And of course the whole thing does nothing but get worse when, in a hail of bullets, the couple actually get caught. Now they are safely behind bars, it’s the press that wants its pound of flesh. In depth reports, close ups… The natural born killers love the attention, the problem is, they are NOT as dumb as some people seem to make them out to be… And the fact that they love the attention doesn’t mean that they don’t know how to use it to their advantage…
Oliver Stone’s attack on “TV Culture” is two-pronged. First of all there is the very obvious interaction of Mickey and Mallory with the media who takes the form of Wayne Gale (Robert Downey Jr.), the uber-cheesy reality-show host who thinks of nothing but his own face on TV and his ratings. And then, just in case you missed that one, there is the media in general’s “feeding frenzy” – Mickey and Mallory become super-stars overnight, their faces are all over the front pages of newspapers, morbid fascination pervades and as the audience we receive a little poke ourselves… Come on, admit it, you DO read all those gory stories in the newspaper… But there are also a few more slightly less-obvious attacks going on. First of all, as I already mentioned, the whole film is very OTT. So much so that the overly cliché characters in it just pass one by. But in fact these men, Wayne Gale, the police officers, everybody is the epitome of B-movie characters. So intelligently enough, the film criticizes what television has become by becoming rather disturbing itself. Here, the credit that is due must be given to the actors, especially Tom Sizemore as detective Jack Scagnetti and Tommy Lee Jones as the prison warden, one of the most laughable yet psychopathic characters I have ever seen on screen… Then of course, there’s Mickey and Mallory. In actual fact, what they are doing is no more than simply copying what a lot of us see in bad action movies all around the world late at night (I assume some things don’t change no matter where you go). Even though their love for eachother is genuine – as far as we can tell – the things they use to show that love (apart from the murders of course) are again all the old clichés we’ve all seen a thousand times before. They are not educated, they are not cultured, this is the only means they know of self-expression…
Oh yes, the movie may seem all innocence and light, however, Oliver Stone actually has a lot of scathing things to say about where media and modern culture are today… Just don’t get mesmerized by the fast- moving script, open your eyes and ears, and listen.

UNFORGETTABLE TALES FROM THE PAST : "PLATOON"

Now, as you know, I am on a mission to watch as many of the big classic movies as fast as possible. I am, generally speaking, quite “hungry” for movies, planning ahead what I will watch the next day, constantly failing to decide… But boy oh boy did I drag my feet when it came to watching Platoon… I had never watched it before like so many of the greats but I just knew it was going to hit me like a freight train… There is, however, no earthly point in putting off the inevitable so I went for it this morning. It did not disappoint in more ways than one : It was a brilliant movie AND it hit me like a freight train…
The year is 1968 and Chris Taylor (Charlie Sheen) is a college student. Or rather he was a college student. He “wasn’t learning anything” so he actually dropped out of college and volunteered to go and fight in Vietnam. He arrives at the base camp, as green as you please and stuffed to the gills with ideals. He is full of hope and thinks that by fighting the war and doing his bit he will become a man. The constant danger, sleepless nights filled with violence and the in-fighting in his own platoon split down the middle by two rival commanders will definitely make a man of him… The question is, however, what kind of man he will end up becoming…
One of the main reasons I gave this film a wide birth was the fact that I assumed, being a war film, that it would be all blood guts and gore. First of all, let me reassure you, it isn’t. I mean, it’s the Vietnam War for Christ’s sake, naturally there is blood and guts but they do not take such prominence on the screen. What the film is mainly interested in, and what is profoundly more frightening than any amount of blood and guts, is the changes that take place in the minds and spirits of the men themselves, from the foot soldiers right up the chain the lieutenant. The film questions mankind’s seemingly endless capacity to harm one another and be cruel, and violent. It also wonders whether or not this potential is actually latent within all of us… You may point out – and rightly too – that there have been a LOT of films who have tried to capture this change in their heroes and heroines and point out the cruelty and pointlessness of war. You would, however, be hard put to find a film that captures this waste of human life, be it the fallen on the battlefield or the survivors, so deeply scarred that they can never be the same again, so well. It may have something to do with the fact that it is partly based on director Oliver Stone’s actual experiences as well… Partly, it is the outstanding cast of the film, starring veterans such as Tom Berenger, Willem Defoe and Forrest Whitaker (and as a bonus a VERY young Johnny Depp!) In any case there is definitely a reason for this film to be awarded all the Oscars® and awards it got. In view of what is going on in the world these days, I am also rather sorry to add that the sentiment it portrays is still very, VERY relevant today. Watch it. It will give you a lot to think about. Oh, and have some tissues handy, unless you are actually made of stone you will be needing them…

WALL STREET

OK, let’s move things up a notch – a notch being 10 years. We are now in the 80’s. And having drunk our fill on um… Sensuality… Let’s move on to the next big thing. Money. And where to find copious amounts of the stuff? Why Wall Street of course! That’s precisely what Bud Frank (Charlie Sheen) thinks and dreams of. One day, he finds a way of making his dreams come true… However, as it says on the back of the DVD cover, every dream has a price…
So, so let’s back-peddle and hear the story from the beginning. Buddy. Buddy Frank. He is an account executive in a Wall Street firm. And like most people in or around his position, he dreams of one thing… Money. A lot of it. His father is an old-fashioned kinda guy. He’s worked in the same airline for 25 years now, he’s a union representative, well loved and respected. He has never had his son’s lofty ambitions but respects his son’s dreams – and lends him money whenever he can. Because Buddy wants to play with the big boys and thus “has to” live in Manhattan and wear 400$ suits. Anyhow, Buddy is not completely clueless as to how he will achieve this lofty dream. As an accounts executive, all he needs to do is “bag an elephant”. That is to say, get to manage the account for one of the really REALLY big players. Then the only way is up. He also has his eye on one particular “elephant”. The biggest elephant of the day: Gordon Gekko (Michael Douglas who SHINES in this part) Then one day, Buddy strikes lucky. Through sheer persistence, he works his way into Mr. Gekko’s office and begs him for a chance. Mr. Gekko “graciously” decides to accord him one. In the beginning, it all works out the way Buddy planned. Soon, he is swimming in money and has a high-class girlfriend. Sure, some of the things he has to do for Gordon upsets his conscience from time to time, but compared to what he has gained, that is actually nothing… As the stakes continue to rise though, Buddy will have a tougher and tougher time balancing his conscience… And then one day… It gets personal…
Now, seeing as this film takes place largely on Wall Street and the stock market, I think basic knowledge of how it all works would enhance the film GREATLY. Take heart though, I don’t posses one of these qualities and still loved it. (I don’t know the first thing about the stock exchange - I’m not even sure what a “stock” is much less how you would exchange it.) You are, however, able to “get” the story line; and by the end of the film I actually was getting quite excited about a certain stock maneuver so we can even say it was educational. And not only is it a basic story of good and evil cleverly transposed into economics, it is also (apparently) a quite sincere account of business in the 80’s. Oliver Stone says in an interview (if I remember rightly) that if Gordon Gekko is not exactly a “real person”, he is an amalgam of a few real people and the things he does are real actions taken by different people. Admittedly, it would take a lot to be so OTT when you come to think of it – he is quite a Dickensian bad guy; however, just as in Dickens, you are swept along with the story and the excitement to such an extent that you barely notice this fact until you are coolly discussing / thinking about the film later on. There are a few more “Dickensian” things about the movie. One example is Mr. Lynch who warns Buddy (rather like the spirit of Christmas Future) at every turn that he is heading for doom. Ok, I get it, Oliver Stone (the director) is trying to offset Buddy to the “new breed” of trader with the old school traders and ways of thinking. However, this is something he already achieves with the character of Lou (a real person now deceased) and more importantly Buddy’s father. Another scene I found Dickensian is what I will call “Gordon and Buddy’s final discussion”. It came out of the blue I felt, and too many things were said too openly. I mean, far be it for humble little me to say a master such as Oliver Stone is a bad director; these are just things that bothered me, but all in all I loved the film – I mean, I wouldn’t put it here otherwise or advise you to watch it. And I definitely advise you to watch it…