THE DAY AFTER TOMORROWRated: PG-13
I have seen two movies in my life where I honestly feel the atmosphere in the theater turned a good movie into a great one. The first was Waterworld which I saw at a theater down in Wildwood, NJ at the beach. The theater's air conditioning has gone down, so we were watching the movie in 90-degree heat in the dark. It added greatly to the sense of a "desert of water" that the filmmakers were trying to create, and made the film one of my favorites despite the fact that everyone else in creation hated it. The Day After Tomorrow is the second such film to fall into this category. For those not in the know, Day After Tomorrow is the story of a climatologist who discovered that Global Warming was disrupting the warm currents of the northern hemishere, and would thus lead to several "super storms" which would bring on another Ice Age. The first half of the film is the story of "harbinger storms" - strange weather catastrophes that are warnings of the super-storms to come: to!
rnadoes in LA, hail storms in Tokyo, etc. Frankly, while this is clearly the big special effects portion of the movie, it is pretty boring. While amazing things are happening on-screen, it is happening to people we do not know and simply don't care about. Remember how you felt through the American Godzilla film a while back? Where the only character you related to was the monster, and the only reason was that it might eat Matthew Broderick and stop him from whining? That is pretty much the first half of the film here. But then, we turn to the story of a few survivors of the harbinger storms who now need to try and survive the super-storm in New York City. When the super-storm passes right over Manhatten, it brings down supercooled air from the highest parts of the atmosphere, and you see everything freezing INSTANTLY. At that precise moment, I was sitting by the window in my Connecticut apartment and a chill autumn wind blew and suddenly I was experiencing (albeit far less special effectsy) some of what the characters were feelings. And right then, the story grabbed me. Is this a great film? No. Frankly, if it were not for the second half, there would be no reason to see this film. But it is a good film, and if you can manage to be sitting in the right place when a breeze comes along, it may just capture your imagination and carry you away. (Even if the politics of it are pretty much on the level of Michael Moore.)
Fahrenheit 9/11Rated: R
I have been a fan of Michael Moore since I saw his first major documentary, "Roger and Me." While I am definitely nowhere near the left-wing views that Moore holds (I voted for Bush in 2000, and plan to vote for him again this time around) I always appreciated his showmanship, his good humor, and his ability to present his side of the issue without getting mean. I realize that his on-air personality has been different from his movie personality, but it is the movies that he wants to be remembered. Anyway, after laughing through both "Roger and Me" and "Bowling for Columbine" and being amazed at Moore's ability to walk the fine line between comedy and disrespect, I was looking forward to seeing his latest film "Fahrenheit 9/11" which is his take on the 2000 election and the post-9/11 world. Unfortunately, in his quest to unseat President Bush, Moore has apparently forgotten what made him a success. F911 is Moore's first movie - his first on-film effort at all, if you include his short-lived TV shows - THAT HAS NOT ONE FUNNY MOMENT IN IT. Instead of using his strengths - making us think, while making us laugh - Moore has simply put down on film every angry, paranoid, or conspiratorial thought that has gone through his head. The film even lacks the signature Michael Moore outrageous comedy stunt. In "Roger and Me", the whole movie was about the stunt - his various attempts to get an interview with the head of GM. In "Bowling for Columbine" the stunt was ingenious - attempting to "return" the bullets used in the Columbine Incident to the KMart from which they were bought... in the bodies of the victims from which they could not be removed. But in F911, the "stunt" was simply an attempt to get Congressmen to sign up their kids for the military. One, it was uninspired. Two, it failed miserably. Most congressmen either would stop to listen and mention that THEY had served in the miliary, or would keep right on going. Nothing funny, nothing even interesting. And of course, none of this reacts to the factual nature of the documentary which has been called into question. Still, stay away from this one unless you want to see what all the fuss was about. In the end, it is simply not a good movie and not even a decent display of Moore's considerable talents.
FahrenHYPE 9/11Rated: Unrated
After being so disappointed with Michael Moore's F911, I found this DVD at Wal-Mart on sale for cheap and thought it was worth a viewing. It is a documentary response by Dick Morris (yes, the one who used to work for Bill Clinton) to Moore's documentary. Chock full of New York politicians and personalities, it brings into stark contrast the opinion of Moore - who lives in either Flint, Michigan or Hollywood, CA depending on the month, either way a LONG way from any attack sites on 9/11/01 - with those who were in New York City or the Pentagon on the day of the attacks. It also reveals a startling fact about many of the interviews Moore used in his documentary - they were used without permission of those quoted and leave the impression that all of the people are anti-Bush WHEN MOST OF THEM SUPPORT HIM UNRESERVEDLY. The film overall does not bring any major new facts to the table, and mostly focusses on answering some of Moore's claims and exposing his manipulation of some information. For instance, the fact that he displays a headline "Gore Wins Every Recount" in one montage of headlines from the 2000 election debacle in Florida, alongside other reports from the NYTimes, Washington Post, USA Today, and the London Times... but this documentary notes that the article was actually an opinion piece in an obscure Southwestern newspaper... and not even by a reporter or statistician, just by a concerned citizen. This film also has its weaknesses, however, and its most glaring is considerable use of Anne Coulter for comment and analysis. While Ms. Coulter is quite photogenic and makes for good soundbytes, anyone who has read even one of her commentary pieces knows that she is NOT a reporter or dispassionate commentator. She is a highly partisan apologist for the Right Wind of American politics. Interviewing her is like interviewing Michael Moore or Rush Limbaugh. Still, this film is a worthy response to F911 and a viewing of both films would leave a voter far more informed than they were before... although I suspect the humorless F911 combined with the anger in this film, would tend to leave most voters pretty depressed about the state of our political system at the moment.
And just in time for November Sweeps, too.
) However, some new security procedures have apparently been put into place since the Seattle trip that caused some hassles for CRChair and me. On trips, we always bring a few film cases filled with quarters, for vending machines and the like. Last flight, no problem. The X-Ray guys did not even blink. This time, it apparently raised a serious red flag. They searched both of our carry-on bags, stem to stern, to find the film cases, check every quarter inside them, and dust the whole thing for explosives. We were clean.
Not that I am saying I don't.
