Quick Hit: The Crazies (2010)

Stripping away a lot of the more overt political/counterculture message that permeated George A. Romero's original film, the Breck Eisner re-make of THE CRAZIES is a surprisingly tense, thrilling and fun movie.  Timothy "Justified" Olyphant plays David Dutten, the sheriff of a small Midwestern town that has the unfortunate luck of a having a military jet carrying a "population de-stabilizer" crash into a lake, poisoning the town's water supply.  Pretty soon people start acting strange, and before you know it the town's run over by its now bat-shit insane citizens, who are compelled to kill anyone who's not (for reasons the film doesn't make clear, but who cares) a "crazy" as well.

Sounds pretty bad for Dutten, his doctor wife, his deputy and another young women who so far have not been affected, but things get exponentially worse when the government comes in to quarantine the town.  The question of who's more crazy: the monsters or the military still plays into things, but takes a back seat to the intense set pieces, including a great chase through a car wash and a standoff in a bedroom that ends in a hilarious burst of violence.  There's nothing in THE CRAZIES you haven't seen before, but the combination of good acting, a plot free of convolution and a tone that takes itself seriously (but not too seriously) makes this one of the big surprises of the year for me.

Snippets: Black Narcissus and Armond White

The films of Michael Powell and Emeric Pressburger have been a blind spot in my film watching for years, so when my local Best Buy slipped up and put both THE RED SHOES and BLACK NARCISSUS on the Blu-ray shelf for sale a week early, I had to indulge myself in the name of furthering my film education.

I'm still reeling from my viewing of BLACK NARCISSUS, which will be written up over the next week as a quasi-Binder Challenge (I cheated and bought something new, but it's too damn good to review in a quick write-up), but I wanted get out there that the new print courtesy of Criterion (which, btw, is having a 50% sale over at Barnes & Noble) is absolutely stunning: as much as is discussed about the erotic overtones of the film and the lush visuals, I think there's so much there that addresses the old saying, "you might be through with the past, but the past's not through with you."  Just all around a great film, and one you should check out if you're unfamiliar with Powell and Pressburger's work*.

----------------------------------

I wonder how many people are familiar with Armond White's actions and controversies as a film critic without actually having read any of his reviews?  Over the past few weeks I've been catching up on his work to better understand his point of view.  At this point I'm no closer to understanding the man, although I did laugh out loud to see him favorably compare the Adam Sandler comedy GROWN UPS to Jean Renoir and Paul Mazursky.  I do think, however, that he shouldn't be as easily dismissed as I often see him him be in comments and posts online.  I'll be writing a little more clearly about him in the next couple of weeks, but first I'll be listening in as he's tentatively scheduled to be on the /Filmcast tonight to discuss INCEPTION.  Knowing the tone of Dave Chen and the gang over at /Film (which I love), this might be the closest we get to a direct confrontation between White and those typically aligned against him.

*A lot of people might be inclined to recommend a different P&P film as a good starting place - please do so.  I chose BLACK NARCISSUS for the simple reason that unlike THE RED SHOES or THE LIFE AND DEATH OF COLONEL BLIMP, it's reasonably short - so if you don't like it (although how could you not), you won't feel like your day's been wasted

Here is No Why

The majority of the morning was spent sitting at my desk thinking of a title for a new blog (don't worry just yet - I'm not sure this means Geek Monkey is going away, or that the 5 of you who follow this will have to immediately change your URL links), and Here Is No Why was the first thing that came into my head.  The fact that it wasn't available was probably for the best since it is, after all, the title to a Smashing Pumpkins song I can't for the life of me recall, and - nothing against Billy Corgan - the last thing I want is for people to come looking for news about their favorite 90s alternative glam/rock band and find themselves looking at one more weblog that will in all probability be abandoned in a few months.

So what do I do instead?  I settle on another name that most people will read and immediately connect to yet another 90s rock sensation.  Granted, one that has a lot more credibility (if that even matters) but, in the end, amounts to about the same thing.

But before talking about Stranded Below Nirvana, let's talk a little more about Here Is No Why, specifically why I thought it was a pretty cool title for a blog.

Next to "Where?" as in, "Where do you get your ideas," "Why" has to be one of the more infuriating questions people who write get asked.  It gets even worse when the person doing the asking is yourself.  In my case, it was a circuit of repetition, starting with "Why don't you write more in your blog?" to "Why do you have so many blogs?" to "Why are you even considering another blog when you're not writing in the ones you have now?"

Why why why why why...

This is meant to be a place where there is no "why", no reason other than that most infuriating of responses:

"Because."

----------------------------------------------

The title "Stranded Below Nirvana" conjured in my mind a hand reaching out, grasping toward nothing in a black and white desert, someone stuck but in sight of where they want to go, only with no way to get there.  It's not hopeless - being stranded isn't the same as being lost - but the three words together captured the sense of floundering I've been feeling for months.  This isn't the first time it's happened: back in 2008 when I originally left Blogger for the creamy streamlined goodness of Squarespace Geek Monkey this is what I wrote:

So why do I blog? I suppose for two reasons that work together as polar opposites: to get closer to some things, and to distance myself from others. Blogging has allowed me to examine and solidify thoughts, beliefs, and issues that have nagged me to the point of frustration. It's allowed me to track some of the most difficult and rewarding moments in my life, and at the same time give me some distance from those things that were in danger of becoming too overwhelming. It's introduced me to a host of incredible writers who in many instances turned out to be incredible people and who, although I may never meet or even really know, affected me for the better and continue to inspire me to chase, rope, and wrangle the things I'm interested in writing about.

I think every once in a while we need to answer the question of why we do this: for me there's a definite danger of running on autopilot, and simply writing to put something down was never my goal in keeping a blog.

There it is again, that nagging voice in the back of my mind always asking the same thing, "Why are you doing this?"  And maybe this constant asking of the question is getting in the way of actually writing anything of merit, anything of consequence.

So the purpose of this blog is to put aside that question.  Here is no Why.  Which of course is still me answering the Devil's question, and because doing it this way gets me a little bit further than just...

...because. 

My 4th of July Image

It's always wonderful to look at the joy on Jack's face as he attempts his first Slip-N-Slide.  Every year we spend the 4th at my brother-in-law's house, cooking massive amounts of barbecue to go along with the endless trays of pasta, all the while re-connecting with relatives and friends that we see all the time in endless functions, but rarely in an environment where the only thing we're celebrating is being together.

Hope your 4th of the July, whether you celebrate or not, was filled with fun and family.