Charlie Wilson's War

Year 2, Day 337 - 12/3/10 - Movie #703

BEFORE: Another film about war in the Middle East - but this film takes place during the war between Afghanistan and the Soviet Union in the 1980's. Remember when we didn't send a team to the Olympics in Moscow, and then 4 years later, the Russians didn't send a team to the Olympics in L.A.? Turns out there was a lot more to it than that...

THE PLOT: A drama based on a Texas congressman Charlie Wilson's covert dealings in Afghanistan, where his efforts to assist rebels in their war with the Soviets have some unforeseen and long-reaching effects.

AFTER: Essentially, this is the back-story to the Middle East mess that the U.S. found itself in over the last decade. In 1980, the enemy of our enemy (U.S.S.R.) was perceived to be our friend, and shipping arms to Afghanistan in a covert operation seemed like an elegant way to bankrupt the Commies and win the cold war. And it worked - right up until the time that it didn't.

They say half of life is just showing up - so what do we call the other half? Following through? I'm all about following through. The U.S. used the Afghan rebels for short-term gain, and where did it get us? Without funding to rebuild their country, and a decade or so to hold a grudge, the Taliban took control, and the U.S. ended up fighting soldiers that they trained and armed 2 decades before.

And that leads us rather neatly into tomorrow night's film...

Starring Tom Hanks (last seen in "The Man With One Red Shoe"), Julia Roberts (last seen in "Confessions of a Dangerous Mind"), Philip Seymour Hoffman (last seen in "The Talented Mr. Ripley"), Amy Adams (last seen in "Enchanted"), Emily Blunt (last seen in "The Wolfman"), John Slattery (last seen in "Bad Company"), and Ned Beatty (last seen in "The Russia House")

RATING: 5 out of 10 stinger missiles

The Men Who Stare at Goats

Year 2, Day 336 - 12/2/10 - Movie #702

BEFORE: I couldn't resist making the connection between lambs and goats...and it helps that both films take place during war in Iraq. The point of last night's film seemed to be that our military commanding officers don't know what they're doing, and I think this dark comedy (?) continues that theme.

THE PLOT: A reporter in Iraq meets Lyn Cassady, who claims to be a former member of the U.S. Army's New Earth Army, a unit that employs paranormal powers in their missions.

AFTER: This is a film that sort of defies rating, or even interpretation for that matter. It's not really funny enough to be a comedy, and it sure doesn't seem like it wants to be taken seriously - this is where the "dark comedy" label comes in. (I'd say "black comedy", but then it sounds like it stars Chris Rock or Richard Pryor...)

The film centers on a reporter, played by Ewan MacGregor (last seen in "Being Human") and his attempts to find a story during the war in Iraq (the first one, or the second one? not sure...) and gets involved with a strange undercover military man, Lyn Cassaday, played by George Clooney (last seen in "The Perfect Storm"). Through flashbacks, we see the development of Cassaday's unit, which seems to focus on the use of various psychic powers, and draws its inspiration from Eastern philosophy, martial arts, yoga, modern dance, California stoner mentality, and the "Star Wars" saga.

The members refer to themselves as Jedi, and seeing Ewan MacGregor learn the ways of the Jedi (again) was a huge inside joke - he's Obi-Wan Kenobi! He already knows how to use the force, and do Jedi mind tricks! And like the Jedi, the ways of the New Earth Army are filled with contradictions - like fighting for peace, or using non-violent hand-to-hand combat.

Another inside joke was including Jeff Bridges (last seen in "Tucker: The Man and His Dream") as the founder of the New Earth Army - who spent six years getting stoned on the army's dime, researching this new method of "combat". It's like he was playing The Dude from "The Big Lebowski" all over again (what, no bowling as part of their training?).

As for the goat in the title, a character supposedly develops the power to stop a goat's heart, by staring at it. But I've seen the footage on TV and the internet of the very real "fainting goats" - so I wasn't really impressed by the sight of a goat falling over "dead".

The movie states that "more of this is true than you'd believe" - but I don't know about that. I get the feeling that there are a lot of absurdities involved with military service, but this seems beyond the pale. I'm hesitant to take any part of this seriously - but who knows? Maybe the truth is even stranger...

As I've stated before, unless there's a really really good reason to tell your film's story out of order, I would much prefer that events transpire in the proper order. Excessive use of flashback or jumping around in time (unless time-travel is part of the plot) is often an indicator that the linear narrative is not very strong.

Also starring Kevin Spacey (last seen in "The Negotiator"), Robert Patrick (last seen in "Firewall"), and Stephen Root (last heard in "Tripping the Rift: The Movie")

RATING: 5 out of 10 acid trips

Lions for Lambs

Year 2, Day 335 - 12/1/10 - Movie #701

BEFORE: My BFF Andy recently compared me to Forrest Gump - and not because I've found myself interacting with famous people, or in the middle of key historical events. You remember that part where he felt like going for a run, and ran from coast to coast, and back again? Hitting a milestone number feels like I reached the coast of California, and now I'm turning around and running back the other way. If I had any sense, I'd suspend the countdown for a few weeks and get some holiday things done.

BUT, apparently I have no sense, because I'm starting the war-film chain. Spy films and war films are essentially different, like the two TV shows "Hoarders" and "Hoarding: Buried Alive", which tackle the same subject - people with compulsive collecting disorders - in different ways. TLC's "H:BA" show seems a little more like "Trading Spaces", with a professional organizer working with the hoarder, and a comparison of how their house looks, before and after the sorting and disposal process. But A&E's "Hoarders" show is more like the same network's "Intervention", with dramatic on-screen text reminding us that this is a show about an unwell person, and after sessions with a therapist or psychiatrist (who specializes in OCD or hoarding behaviors), progress is made - but the show doesn't feel the same need to end on a happy note.

In a similar way, spy films and war films both deal with complex international issues - but the spies are more likely to be the beautiful people, wearing beautiful clothes and seducing other beautiful people, while the soldiers are wearing camo and getting blown up - and there may not be a happy ending.

THE PLOT: Injuries sustained by two Army rangers behind enemy lines set off a sequence of events involving a congressman, a journalist and a professor.

AFTER: This film is sort of similar in structure to "Traffic", where three different sets of scenes are intertwined, and we the viewers have to figure out how the stories are related. We see a professor trying to inspire one of his lazier students, a senator explaining war strategy to a journalist, and two soldiers on an active mission in Afghanistan.

Taken as a whole, it's a portrait of America during wartime, as in right now, at the end (?) of the longest war in our history. Oh, wait I forgot, technically the war is now over, and our presence in the Middle East is not combat-based, but our troops are only there for support. I forget, did we win? The movie lays out the reasoning behind the "Surge" strategy in Iraq/Afghanistan from 2 years ago - remember how the U.S. was going to bring the troops home by sending more soldiers over? That's military reasoning for you - end the war by continuing the war.

There are several complicated issues explored here (and what was that I said about war films being more black and white?) - like, what is the responsibility of a U.S. citizen during wartime? How should one strike a balance between protesting the war, but supporting the troops? When does reporting our military strategy become a form of propaganda? What should our long-term strategy in the Middle East be, or should we even have one?

I found this extremely thought provoking - and well-timed, since it illustrates the type of war that the Condor predicted in last night's film, and it's given me a lot to think about while viewing the films coming up. I should keep in mind that I only get to enjoy the life that I have, sitting around watching movies, due to the sacrifices of others.

Still, 2/3 of this film is very talky-talky - I was thinking it could have been written by Aaron Sorkin, since everything tended to be over-explained, the way they used to talk on "The West Wing".

Also starring Tom Cruise (last seen in "Mission: Impossible III"), Meryl Streep (last seen in "Ironweed"), Michael Peña (last seen in "Observe and Report"), Derek Luke, Peter Berg, and Kevin Dunn (last seen in "Blue Steel").

RATING: 6 out of 10 ammo clips

Three Days of the Condor

Year 2, Day 334 - 11/30/10 - Movie #700

BEFORE: It's Big Movie #700, and the end of the spy-films chain, and the end of November as well. I'm still one day ahead on the numbers (365 + 334 = 699), so that means I've got a free day coming up, which I should use for Christmas shopping. What I WANT to do is to lay out a rough movie schedule for 2011 - which would take me up to Movie #1000, but I'll try to hold off on that until Christmas cards go out, the outdoor lights get hung, and some serious cyber-shopping takes place - otherwise those things just won't happen, and I'll have to explain to my family why there are no gifts from me under the tree. Yes, the "O" in OCD stands for obsessive - though I prefer to state that I have CDO (Compulsive Desire to Organize?) which has the extra advantage of the three letters being in proper alphabetical order.

THE PLOT: A bookish CIA researcher finds all his co-workers dead, and must outwit those responsible until he figures out who he can really trust.

AFTER: Now THIS is what Redford looked like in 1975 - even the glasses, the jacket with elbow patches and the 5-o'clock shadow can't hide his rugged good looks. Jeez, I'm 100% straight but Redford was truly blessed...no wonder my ex had a Redford obsession...

Redford plays Joseph Turner (code name: Condor), a CIA analyst (bookworm/nerd) who's forced to become a man of action after an attack on the CIA's secret NYC brownstone computer lab.

The 1970's were a strange time in New York, when a man could (apparently) kidnap a woman at gunpoint, say he worked for the CIA and that his life was in danger, then force her to take him back to her apartment, where he would tie her up. And you just know that they'd bond on a personal level, and he'd totally be shagging her by the end of the night...you mean that would actually WORK? Bear in mind, this was a New York City when there was actually a New York Times office in Times Square, Bell Telephone vans roamed the streets, New York City had ONE area code, and even the CIA had really crappy CRT monitors and dot-matrix printers. Plus this was back when police actually responded to the sound of gunplay - how quaint!

And the CIA (apparently) had an office in the World Trade Center - now that explains a lot (maybe?). A couple of scenes were shot in the WTC lobby (yep, still stings...) and in the streets around there, Fulton and Cedar and Liberty Streets, which is a neighborhood I know very well. As an added bonus, it seemed to be early in the Christmas season when this film was shot, perhaps even late November? Another bonus - it rained today in New York. Like the Condor says, "I can't remember yesterday, but I know it rained today..."

I like how Condor accidentally stumbled onto the root cause of the major wars coming up in the next few decades (ah, ah, that would be telling...) - that alone makes this film seem really ahead of its time. But even though Condor works for the CIA, this is still another spin on the "Ordinary Guy gets caught up in spy stuff" plot.

Perhaps this should have been movie #699, and I should have made "Spy Game" #700 - that was a bigger, bolder, more realistic (?) film - I didn't buy all the code-word mumbo-jumbo that Redford's character used in this film. But hindsight is 20/20 - anyway I had thought this film was more about political sniper assassinations - I guess maybe I confused it with "The Day of the Jackal"?

One of the older spies in this film waxes nostalgic about the "clarity" of war - and that's exactly what's coming up in the next few weeks - films about war, where it's a lot easier to tell who the "bad guys" are since they work for other countries, and not mysterious shadow agencies.

Also starring Faye Dunaway (last seen in "Chinatown"), Cliff Robertson, Max Von Sydow (always a favorite, last seen in "The Wolfman"), and John Houseman (last seen in "Bright Lights, Big City").

RATING: 6 out of 10 unmarked packages

Spy Game

Year 2, Day 333 - 11/29/10 - Movie #699

BEFORE: Today was "Cyber Monday" - which I didn't realize at first, otherwise I might have scheduled "Hackers", with Angelina Jolie, to follow "Mr. & Mrs. Smith". Oh well - for me it's more like "Catalog Monday" anyway, since I want to start looking through some catalogs to get ideas for Christmas gifts. I feel like I've only got 2 weeks to get it done, though I know it's really more like 4.

THE PLOT: Retiring CIA agent Nathan Muir recalls his training of Tom Bishop while working against agency politics to free him from his Chinese captors.

AFTER: Instead of Angelina, Brad Pitt carries over from last night's film.

Back in the 60's, the Beatles filmed their second movie "Help!" very expensively, on location in places like Jamaica, India and Switzerland, because that's where they wanted to go. They were famous, well-off, and could write their own ticket, so why not? I bring this up for no particular reason - except tonight's film takes place in Vietnam, Berlin, and Beirut - all former war-zones turned vacation spots. Good gig...

Brad Pitt plays Tom Bishop, the young army sniper recruited into the CIA by Nathan Muir (Robert Redford, last seen in "All the President's Men"). Most of the film's action takes place in flashback scenes of their shared operations, as Muir recounts the details to a CIA panel that's deciding whether to rescue Bishop from a Chinese prison, or cut him loose.

But something seems off with the timeline - there's no way that Brad Pitt's character could have been in Vietnam in 1975, not if the framing scenes were set in the present day (2001). Even if Bishop was 18 in 1975, that would mean he was born in 1957, and he'd be 43 in 2001, and he sure didn't look it. Pitt was born in 1963, so we're at least 6 years off - not that an actor can't play an older character, but still it doesn't add up.

Ah, the IMDB informs me that the framing sequences are set in 1991, not 2001 - this was referenced by a character watching a news report marking the 2nd anniversary of the fall of the Berlin Wall. This helps - Pitt's character would be 34 or slightly older, not 44. Still, he doesn't seem to age a day in 16 years...

But it's too bad this film was made before that technology that can remove wrinkles from an actor's image (as used on Patrick Stewart in "X-Men: The Last Stand") because Redford's character looks just as old in the 1975 scenes as he did in the 2001 scenes. Too bad, because Redford was a real looker back then, you might say he was the Brad Pitt of the 70's.

In fact a lot of this seemed like a metaphor somehow - with an older CIA agent training a younger one - could one infer that Redford was training his younger counterpart in the craft of acting?

Anyway, I found the movie surprisingly entertaining, and I usually hate films that don't unfold linearly, or use too many flashbacks. But during the whole framing sequence, with Redford's character being interviewed, he was also gaining valuable information about the situation in China, and using what he learned to go over and around his fellow agents - it was complicated, but what about international affairs isn't? And that's what a spy does, assesses the situation, gains intel, then comes up with a plan and puts it in motion. A neat little chess game, that.

Also starring Catherine McCormack (last seen in "The Tailor of Panama"), Marianne Jean-Baptiste, David Hemmings (last seen in "Gangs of New York"), Ken Leung (last seen in "Inside Man"), and Larry Bryggman.

RATING: 8 out of 10 satellite photos

Mr. & Mrs. Smith (2005)

Year 2, Day 332 - 11/28/10 - Movie #698

BEFORE: Almost finished with spy films - 2 Brad Pitt films are going to get me close to movie #700. I've seen plenty of films with regular people drawn into the spy scene, so this almost seems like something of a twist - two married spies pretending that they're NOT spies...

THE PLOT: A bored married couple is surprised to learn that they are both assassins hired by competing agencies to kill each other.

AFTER: OK, so they're assassins. Spies, assassins - Hollywood treats them pretty much the same. They work for the "company", who knows if that's the CIA or the FBI or some shadow agency...I guess that John and Jane Smith in this film work for two different Companies - does that mean that one of them is the enemy? I mean, if they were both working for the U.S. government, they'd be on the same side, right?

Is it believable? Of course not - this is a fake Hollywood interpretation of what it might be like to be an assassin (see "Wanted" for more unbelievability) - which means that the characters are essentially cartoon-like stereotypes. That doesn't mean that the movie isn't fun or exciting, it's just almost completely unrealistic. The stunts are amazing, and there's enough action scenes for two movies.

I guess it's campy fun, if you're in the right mood (I kinda was...) but it starts with unlikely (two spies meet and get married) and spirals into further ridiculousness from there. My other major complaint is that the story arc, the film's three acts, are so predictable. First act - hide their secret lives from each other. Second act - try to kill each other. Gee, you don't suppose that in the third act they'll have to put aside their differences and work together against a common enemy?

Hmm, there's a helicopter shot at the start of this film that, according to the IMDB, was originally filmed for "Clear and Present Danger", last night's film - what are the odds of that?

Starring Brad Pitt (last heard in "Sinbad: Legend of the Seven Seas"), Angelina Jolie (last heard in "Kung Fu Panda"), Vince Vaughn (last seen in "Be Cool"), Adam Brody (last seen in "Thank You For Smoking"), and Kerry Washington (last seen in "Bad Company") with cameos from Keith David (last seen in "Hollywood Homicide"), Stephanie March, Michelle Monaghan (last seen in "The Bourne Supremacy"), and the voice of William Fichtner (last seen in "Heat") as the marriage counselor.

RATING: 6 out of 10 zip-lines

Clear and Present Danger

Year 2, Day 331 - 11/27/10 - Movie #697

BEFORE: I'm getting a late start tonight, after attending a wedding - so I'll be up into the wee hours watching this one - and people wonder why I have insomnia...

THE PLOT: CIA Analyst Jack Ryan is drawn into an illegal war fought by the US government against a Colombian drug cartel.

AFTER: Harrison Ford, Anne Archer and James Earl Jones all carry over from last night's film... but in the scenes where James Earl Jones and Harrison Ford share screen time, I'm still hearing Darth Vader giving instructions to Han Solo...

In this film Ryan uncovers evidence of a secret military operation against the drug kingpins (because they are the clear and present danger mentioned in the title, see?) and the operation is led by John Clark, who Ryan met in "Sum of All Fears", and meets again here for the first (second?) time... The problem here is that the fourth Ryan book was used as a re-boot for the franchise, so somehow it became the "first" film. I guess you either have to read the books, or watch the films, but you can't do both.

This is mostly talky-talky for the first half, and then when Ryan shuts down the military operation, he goes in with Clark to rescue the stranded members. Do I believe that the acting director of the CIA would go on such a dangerous mission? Not really, but it did make for an exciting climax to an otherwise routine film.

This wraps up another franchise - I peeked ahead in the plotlines of the Tom Clancy novels, and I think Ryan becomes President at some point in the books. I doubt those movies will ever get made - or does "Air Force One" count as a stand-in?

Also starring Willem Dafoe (last seen in "Inside Man"), Benjamin Bratt (last seen in "Catwoman"), Miguel Sandoval (last seen in "Blow"), Harris Yulin (last seen in "Training Day"), Ann Magnuson and Dean Jones.

RATING: 7 out of 10 rocket launchers