Change Your Image
gendreau_neil
Reviews
The Day the Earth Stood Still (2008)
Not deserving of the respect to warn about any spoilers
Warning - Major spoilers!: This movie was by far the dumbest excuse for elitist Hollywood to ram another subliminal morality message down our throats. Ironically, Klaatu and his consortium of allegedly advanced civilizations left more damage to the planet than they were trying to conserve.
Furthermore, Klaatu never offered any explanation as to how humans were destroying the Earth - it was simply assumed to be an incontrovertible truth without any scientific evidence whatsoever. That's not factual at all, but typical to liberal propaganda.
And if Klaatu and his crew were supposedly so much more fair minded and advanced, then why did they resort to any level of violence? There should have been no need to defend themselves at all. As a species, they could have simply persuaded us through electrical telepathy, like during Klaatu's lie detector test, similarly to how liberals play their zombie mind games anyhow.
I especially appreciate the part when Klaatu informs the police officer who is about to shoot him, "This will only hurt for a moment.", then proceeds to roll a vehicle to crush the officer between cars. Of course, Klaatu jump starts the officer back to life, but advanced beings would never place themselves in these predicaments in the first place.
Symbolically, the final message is - the world would be a better place if civilization crumbled without a trace and without further consumption of our natural resources. I suppose that would leave us to run around in the forests subject to random predators and elements much like our ancestors did more than 10,000 years ago. Yes, I can definitely see how that existence would mark a tremendous improvement to our quality of life! Leave it to liberals and their hair brained fantasies. They should stop making movies and seclude themselves in their bass ackward communes where they belong.
10,000 BC (2008)
An entertaining fable (as a matter of perspective)
It's best to view this movie with the proper expectations. It certainly wasn't designed to be a realistic or historically accurate portrayal of the times, but better serves as a mythological tale of human struggle as experienced by a fictional tribe somewhere North of the Himalayan mountains, and what they were able to learn from the interaction of their leader D'hel while on his journey with other tribes to recapture their people who were taken as slaves by a more advanced civilization.
Yes there are many inconsistencies with this film as it relates to time, place, and languages spoken. Even more amusing is the existence of jungle roaming, carnivorous ostriches (which never existed), along with sabre tooth tigers and wooly mammoths that had long been extinct. What is to be appreciated from this movie is the struggle of mankind against each other, including personal insecurities, overcome by co-operation of those who developed a vested interest to unite and vanquish a common enemy. In this respect, the movie should be compared with those challenges faced throughout history which continue to this day.
Some other embellishments include the protagonist and his modest crew crossing the Himalayas while keeping pace with "the demons with four legs" (Egyptians on horseback) who captured their villagers, including the cherished Evolet. The extreme distance of their journey by far exceeds the possible range covered these peoples, who though nomadic, usually never wandered more than a few hundred square miles from their origins. Despite harsh realities, we witness their grim meanderings across the Himalayas, through Indian jungles, across the Middle East, and lastly as they join forces with African tribes along the Nile, even while dragging their injured. A journey of this magnitude would not have been possible for another 5,000 years until Mesopotamians had domesticated horses in the first place.
However, considering the movie for its context rather than its content, 10,000 B.C. becomes an intriguing diversion, and a more realistic entertainment alternative than reality television.
Family Guy (1999)
Freakin' Sweet!!!
Family Guy will force you to spill a puddle of guts, either from repulsion or laughing yourself silly - your call. To put it bluntly, Family Guy distinguishes itself mercilessly from The Simpsons and pushes far beyond common proprieties with more pungent absurdities. Whether or not you appreciate Family Guy's surreal irreverence, one would be hard pressed to criticize Seth MacFarlane's creativity given his multiple voiceovers, hyperbole of characters, and fly by the seat of your pants, in your face humor.
Because of certain extremes, this cartoon will have more of cult following than its peers, and if you are not a member of "Generation X", some references will be harder to follow. Nonetheless, Family Guy invokes a powerful nostalgia for the minority of "adults" who grew up during the 70s and 80s, and from MacFarlane's iconic perspective, is basically suggesting that everyone else who doesn't "get it" should just **** off! The reason why the cartoon is cancelled so frequently only to return by popular demand is because it flirts so closely with the edge - no one is quite sure whether to love or loathe it, but the truth is hard to deny! That's why it's so funny!
Another unique twist involves the numerous "swing" musicals that appear suddenly from nowhere, enhancing the random zaniness which more consistently relates to "those values we used to rely". Subversive yet striking, Family Guy conjures a consistent theme of social sarcasm.
Some may argue there is less comedic substance to Lois - the show's straight shooter, but balance is also necessary for the proper level of chemistry to work. As with any family, some members have stronger personalities than others, but when the most prescient members are a precocious infant and a terrier with a penchant for martinis, well, that's just plain hysterical!
Meanhwile, Peter Griffin is a gigglesome oaf. If Peter was any dumber, he wouldn't have a pulse. One episode entitled "Petarded" didn't do him sufficient justice! Peter is far more incompetent than any prudent censor should respectfully allow and an enormous insult to retarded people everywhere - "Heh, heh, heh, heh, heh!" Despite the profundity of his stunts, Peter wouldn't even qualify for the Special Olympics!
Unfortunately, you could say the Griffins are a perfect replica of American family average, probably similar to MacFarlane's background from which he draws his twisted humor, having risen far beyond those expectations himself!
In summary, this cartoon will be most thoroughly enjoyed by thirty something rebels who have their own sense of morality and direction. Conformists and other good doobies need not apply.