Hobo with a Shotgun (2011) and Machine Girl (2008)

Where do you go when over the top isn't far enough? I'm not sure, but when you get there, you'll find the team behind the 2011 Canadian grindcore/splatter film, Hobo with a Shotgun.

Trouble starts when a Hobo (Rutger Hauer) gets off the train in a town that is run by a sadistic criminal known as The Drake. He and his sons torture, rape and terrorize the population that seems to consist of: terrified average folks, angry mobs, prostitutes, a large number of homeless, and children who should have long ago been relocated to other towns by family services.

The movie has three acts: the first introduces us to the horror that is this Twilight-Zone worthy town (if Rod Serling had subcontracted to Rob Zombie); the second, is the battle between good and evil (it involves a lot of blood and gore); and the third act is the epic conclusion (with even more blood and gore).

Machine Girl is a Japanese action movie with the same "gore is good" mindset but with slightly better special effects and slicker overall production. Ami (Minase Yashiro), a girl with a tragic past and a brother who gets mixed up with the wrong crowd, is kidnapped and tortured, losing her arm in the process. After escaping, a machinist builds her a customized machine-gun arm attachment. (This may remind readers of Planet Terror, the Robert Rodriguez half of Grindhouse (2007) in which Rose McGowan is fitted with a machine gun leg or even of the much earlier Army of Darkness (1992), the Sam Raimi cult classic in which the hero, Ash fits a chainsaw on to his injured arm -- both are apt comparisons).

With her weapon in place, Machine Girl has only one goal: revenge. This motivation may be the only real difference between the mood of the two films. Machine Girl is full of the kind of rage that is spun from true hatred; the Hobo is seeking justice in a system where the police don't just turn a blind eye to the violence and crime, some play an active role in a number of very unsavory acts and activities.

It's possible that there is a deeper political message buried under the blood and guts in Hobo with a Shotgun. Watching it with my husband, he said, "It's the Republican Dream! The Hobo just wants to be an entrepreneur but the welfare state won't let him get ahead." I also appreciated the not-so-subtle take on sleazy reality-tv and film producers (a not-so-veiled dig at the infamous Bumfights) and on the complicit role that media plays in sensationalizing violence.

The sidekicks in both films are strong, if flawed women. Miki (Asami), who also lost family at the hands of those who tortured Ami, choses to get her violent revenge with the help of a chainsaw (there's those echoes of Army of Darkness again). The Hobo is helped by Abby (Molly Dusnworth), the archetypical hooker-with-a-heart-of-gold who also seems to have some daddy issues.

Splatter films like these are not for everyone; they are extremely graphic, spending more of their budget on fake blood than actors' salaries. Both films contained scenes that turned my stomach and offended me on some level but they each balanced those moments with some truly surprising, imaginative laugh-out-loud scenes. As such, I recommend them both, if you can manage the gore.

Hobo with a Shotgun ****

Machine Girl ***

NOTE: Even the trailers below are pretty graphic... consider yourself warned!

Roadtrip entertainment: four audiobooks

During our recent roadtrip travelling the highways through British Columbia and Alberta, our choice of entertainment was audiobooks. We finished four during the 10 days of travel:

• Planet Simpson: How a Cartoon Masterpiece Documented an Era and Defined a Generation by Chris Turner (abridged)
• World War Z: An Oral History of the Zombie War by Max Brooks (abridged, with full cast)
• The Poisoner's Handbook: Murder and the Birth of Forensic Medicine in Jazz Age New York by Deborah Blum (unabridged)
• Bossypants by Tina Fey (unabridged)

We had started Planet Simpson before we left on this trip but I am including it here because I haven't reviewed it yet elsewhere. For a family who watches hours of The Simpsons every week, this seemed to be a no-brainer as entertainment. For the most part, it was ridiculously enjoyable since we could all picture the exact sequences that the narrator was discussing as he led us through the show's inception and the many ways that The Simpsons have drawn from and contributed to popular culture.

Toward the latter chapters, we were noticing more repetition and the convention of using the episode numbers was annoying (7F01, 7F11, 8F13... they are meaningless to all but the most hardcore fans). It was also disappointing that for a show that spanned 20 seasons, the book only really discusses the first three or four. Suitable for almost any age though it does delve into some themes such as family values, politics and religion that may be a bit too academic for younger listeners.

***

Mike had already read World War Z and was disappointed that the audio book skipped over one pretty critical plot point (i.e. how the infection spread globally) but having a full cast (including big names like Carl Reiner, Rob Reiner and Alan Alda) made it more like a radio play than a novel. The story is told through a series of interviews with survivors following a war against ZACK (the Army code for Z, or Zombie). There is lots of descriptive gore from the front line but equal time is given to narrative about global politics and the different styles of warfare in which each nation engages.

While it was nice to have the full cast, I'd have liked the audio engineers to have paid more attention to balancing the levels from actor to actor -- I found myself needing to adjust the volume between each interview. That aside, I was kept entertained for the duration and it made me think about pandemics and how poorly most governments are prepared.

***

I had heard an interview with Deborah Blum about The Poisoner's Handbook on a Scientific American podcast last year; it had been on my wishlist ever since. The unabridged audiobook is read by Colleen Marlo who does a great job with the script. The book introduces the listener to two of the key players in the development of forensic toxicology: Charles Norris and Alexander Gettler. The two worked in New York from the late 1800s through early 20th century as Medical Examiner and Chief Toxicologist/Chemist respectively. They worked without much of a budget or staff but both were determined to find ways to measure various poisons scientifically and consistently so that the results could be used in court to convict, or clear the accused. They weren't always right and they also made a few enemies (including rather famously New York Mayor LaGuardia) but they did succeed in creating a new field of scientific study that had an immeasurable impact on 20th century criminal investigations.

Toward the end, we were growing tired of the constant discussion about methyl alcohol and its role in hundreds of deaths during Prohibition but aside from that, the story moves through a series of suspicious deaths, murders and crime sprees that mystery writers love and investigators hate. Some, I'd heard of before like the "Radium Girls" who worked in a factory painting glow in the dark paint on watch faces and many that were headlines in the 1920s but would be forgotten were it not for authors like Blum. There are some grizzly sequences, as can be expected and one section that was unexpectedly lurid; parents consider yourselves warned.

****

Tina Fey is definitely someone I admire -- I totally get her sense of humour and I respect the place she made for herself inside the Old Boy's Club of late-night and prime-time comedy. While she makes fun of her "nerd/librarian" vibe it has worked well for her. In Bossypants, she discusses her life from childhood traumas through her discovery of improv and how it changed her life, to her time with NBC and her life outside work as a parent and a celebrity. It's not a long book but there's not a five minute stretch that I didn't find entertaining.

If however, you are not a fan of Tina Fey you will not be won over by this book. She is, as always, unapologetic about being a woman, being liberal, and moving forward. Of all the books we listened to, this was the most "adult" -- Fey swears and discusses all sorts of subjects easily classified under the "parental discretion is advised" banner.

****

Starter for 10 (2006)

Starter for 10 is a British romantic comedy based on David Nicholls' novel of the same name. It stars James McAvoy as Brian Jackson who has been obsessed with quiz shows his whole life. When he leaves his working class neighbourhood to attend University, he leaps at the chance to join the University Challenge team.

On his first night in town, his new roommates drag him to a "Tarts & Vicars" theme party where he meets Rebecca (Rebecca Hall). Their paths cross again on his way to Challenge try-outs but he almost completely forgets her when Alice (Alice Eve), the clever blonde, catches his eye. From here, the film takes a well-beaten romantic path of falling for the wrong girl even though the right girl is clearly under his nose. However, even in this standard arena, the writing is good enough to rise above the average romcom. While Brian is pursuing Alice he is also in pursuit of general knowledge. His main obstacle to that goal is the petty competitiveness of Patrick Watts (Benedict Cumberbatch), the University Challenge team lead. The audience presumes from the outset that the climax will have to occur at the quiz show and the screenplay does not disappoint on that level.

Nichols' Starter for 10 feels very much like a Nick Hornby story -- both authors seem to write about young male adults awkwardly navigating through life. It also features a great soundtrack full of early to mid-80s British chart toppers: The Cure, early Wham!, Buzzcocks, New Order and more -- though I could have done without The Smiths' "Please Please Please Let Me Get What I Want" on yet another soundtrack. The 80s retro-ness is not over the top, however, the movie could take place in almost any era.

Clocking in at just over 90 minutes, the film is well paced with just enough awkwardness to keep it from being saccharine and the cast strong enough to give well-rounded performances to even the smallest roles.

***

Mad Men before Mad Men

All out of Mad Men episodes? Get the flavour of 1960s advertising from a retro double feature of How to Succeed in Business Without Really Trying (1967) and Lover Come Back (1961).

Lover Come Back showcases Rock Hudson, Doris Day and Tony Randall performing their usual screwball comedy shenanigans in this film about competing advertising executives, the drinking, womanizing charmer Jerry Webster (Hudson) and the hard working, ethically-superior Carol Templeton (Day). Randall is Webster’s boss, uneasy in his role under the shadow of his late father. As Webster’s unscrupulous tactics threaten to take down the agency, he cooks up a way to hush up a witness by making her the new “VIP girl.” Unfortunately, VIP doesn’t exist and Webster has to create a product to go with the pitch. When Templeton tries to track Webster (and VIP) down, a mistaken identity leads to madcap adventures.

Lover Come Back is typical of the 60s screwball comedy -- if you’ve seen Pillow Talk (1959) or the more recent Down With Love (2003) then you’ve already seen Lover Come Back -- but by watching it through the eyes of a Mad Men fan, you can interpret it on another level. t’s fun to see the characteristics of Webster and Templeton in Don Draper and Peggy Olson and maybe just a bit of Pete Ramsey in Pete Campbell. It’s also got the same feel for the cutthroat competition between agencies and the lengths to which agents will go to get an account.

The first thing you notice about How to Succeed in Buisness is lead actor Robert Morse who fans will recognize as agency head Burt Cooper from Mad Men. A much younger Robert Morse is J. Pierpont Finch, a window-washer who stumbles on a book that teaches him how to bluff his way up the ladder in an ad-agency. It’s a musical, albeit an uneven one, and Morse also played the role on Broadway. Also reprising his role from the stage is Rudy Vallee as Mr. Biggley.

Unlike Lover Come Back which more or less glamorizes the industry, How to Succeed lampoons it, every step of the way, from the opener about "The Company Way" to the era’s take on sexual harassment with the musical number "A Secretary is Not a Toy" to the constant sarcastic narrative from the booklet. Unfortunately How to Succeed tends to lag in the third act but does eventually redeem itself. Worth seeing just for Morse’s performance.

There is no doubt in my mind that the Mad Men set directors, costume designers, and even the writers took some crib notes from these two films, so while we wait for the next season, why not treat yourself to these two classics.

Lover Come Back (1961) ****
How to Succeed in Business... (1967) ***

Inception (2010)

Inception, like The Matrix and Waking Life, challenges the viewer's concept of reality. All three films do so by wrapping the philosophy inside a grenade of visual effects. The risk taken by these films is that viewers may not "get it" -- that they will walk away more frustrated than amazed. Of the three, The Matrix is still the benchmark for mass appeal but Inception should be a close second.

The definition of inception is "the beginning of something, a commencement or origin" and for the purposes of this film, it is the seed of an idea that can be planted deep in a person's subconscious through a shared dream state. To believe that this is possible, one must first accept the film's premise that dreams can be not only shared but also built, directed, and manipulated by others. Cobb (Leonardo Di Caprio) and Arthur (Joseph Gordon Levitt) work together with a carefully selected crew of chemists, architects and forgers to infiltrate minds and secure secrets for their clients. We learn that extracting information is much easier than planting an idea and that both activities are not only illegal but also very dangerous.

It's not the first film to illustrate the dangers of messing with people's minds -- both Eternal Sunshine of the Spotless Mind and Being John Malkovich also explore this realm. While the crumbling memories of Eternal Sunshine are well-represented in Inception, I also think writer-director Christopher Nolan picked up on Malkovich's pride of self in building believable worlds for the dreamer.

Nolan wrote the first draft of the script about 8 years ago but has said that the idea grew from his own attempts (and apparent success) of lucid dreaming. Nolan's scripts frequently delve into the mind's corners, dragging the viewer into situations that seem just barely plausible. In lesser films I would be not so forgiving of the apparent lack of internal consistency afforded one key plot point, the kick. I won't discuss it here but for a great summary of my problem with it, check point #39 in "50 Things About Inception" by Adam Best (but be warned, the article is wall-to-wall spoilers).

My only other complaint is that I would have preferred to see better use of some of the supporting cast -- Levitt's Arthur is particularly strong as the straight man who just wants to go in and get the job done but is also able to adapt to Cobb's penchant for bending the rules. On the other hand, if Inception were to ever become a franchise, Nolan could easily develop a film around Arthur or almost any one of the other characters.

While there is grumbling across the net about the ending, I appreciated it, just as I don't mind following Nolan's breadcrumbs through a film. The breadcrumbs are what make Memento and his adaptation of The Prestige so much fun to watch again and again; once you know how each film ends, watching one from the beginning adds a new layer to your understanding. Inception is very similar in its structure and while I can't say I will rush to see it a second time in its first run, I am already looking forward to seeing Cobb and his crew again.

**** 1/2

P.S. If you've seen the film, or if you want a better idea of the world in which it takes place, check out Inception: the Cobol Job, a prequel in comic form.

The Dark Side of Dancing.

Saturday Night Fever (1977), Fame (1980) and Flashdance (1983): three films about finding fame as entertainers shaped my teenage views of the industry -- or did they?

At only 8, I was not old enough to see Saturday Night Fever in the theatre so all I knew of it at that age was from the soundtrack and the many pop-culture references to Tony's (John Travolta) famous dance sequence on the disco floor. To me, it was all about the dance competition; it wasn't until years later that I saw the full movie and got to see just how crappy the rest of Tony's life was.

Again, with Fame, I'm not sure I saw the film in the theatre but I did watch the TV show, at least in its early years (did it really run until 1987?). I know that I eventually saw the film on Pay-TV (Superchannel, likely) and/or VHS. Unlike the TV show, the film included nudity, swearing, and even drug use, highlighting the inner-city side of the students' lives.

Flashdance I definitely saw in the theatre and I watched it over and over through my teens and early 20s on VHS. I was willing to overlook that the dancing was done by a body double and that the movie started the trends of torn sweatshirts and leg-warmers simply because Alex taught me how to take off a bra without removing my shirt.

More important though, was what the movies taught me: if you work hard enough, you can be an entertainer. There was never a question of luck, or money, just hard work and determination, oh, and making the "right" choices (don't do topless lap-dances, come back and work at the skeezy artsy dance house!) -- your basic American Dream scenario.

Unfortunately, it the characters lives are actually all pretty dark and miserable. They are surrounded by suicides, teen pregnancies, crappy day jobs and estranged parents. The films even look filtered and muted -- while this was typical of the era (a more realistic view of the world in contrast to Technicolor), in comparison to today's hyper-color-corrected and digitally enhanced films they just seem that much more gritty and depressing.

Perhaps I succeeded in distilling these films down to their dance sequences through listening totheir soundtracks; eventually, the scenes in between just faded away. Seeing each of them recently, I kind of wish I'd let those sleeping dogs lie.

I still recommend all of these films -- maybe even as a triple bill over a weekend -- but be prepared for the bumpy ride before you get to the inevitable happy ending of each one.

Date Night (2010)

Tina Fey and Steve Carell are such an obvious comedic pairing it's almost a shame that this is their debut. Almost. The two of them are good enough comedians to be able to elevate this rather average mistaken-identity action-comedy beyond simply "watchable" to "amusing."

Date Night takes average people out of the suburbs and drops them into the middle of an unlikely evening of excitement in the big city -- think of After Hours, Adventures in Babysitting, even Harold & Kumar Go to White Castle. The mistaken identity plot line isn't particularly fresh either -- think of North By Northwest, The Big Lebowski, and countless others -- but Fey and Carell have a genuine screen chemistry and make the most of a thin script.

All they want is a nice dinner in Manhattan; what they get is a not-quite-madcap dash throughout New York City, complete with gunfire and car-chases. Unlike couples in so many romantic comedies the Fosters are happily married and, while they might be in a rut, they seem to genuinely enjoy each other's company and support each other. They work together to get out of the mess they are in -- from finding unlikely help in Manhattan to the saw-it-coming-down-Main-street showdown at the climax.

Date Night is not a long movie. Clocking in at only 88 minutes, the movie doesn't have too much time to drag. Throughout, there are plenty of laughs that run the spectrum from knee-slapping guffaws to uncomfortable chuckles and while most are care of lines delivered by Fey and Carell, other actors get to shine, too. I doubt that Date Night will find a place in the rom-com cannon but it's a decent date flick, worth the admission price.

If you go, be sure to stay through the credits; two of my biggest laughs were at the out-takes.

***

Two Polanski Films: Rosemary's Baby and Chinatown

Following the storm around Roman Polanski's arrest and pending extradition from Switzerland, Mike and I decided it was time to watch two of his films that were on our fill-in-the-canon list. (Canon may be too strong here but they are oft-referenced films by academics and other reviewers that we hadn't seen.) Both films were available at our local library so I placed holds on both titles and the stars aligned to make them both available last night.

Rosemary's Baby does have some creepy moments but overall it is a ridiculous film. The most unsettling scenes are in the first act where a young couple moves into an odd apartment building and soon meets the Castavets, possibly the world's most invasive elderly couple. From the time that Rosemary (Mia Farrow) and her husband first dine with the Castavets, the film takes a turn from creepy to off-balanced and from there it rockets to just plain silly. The biggest problem comes from the connection that the screenplay (and Levin's book before that) makes between witchcraft and satanism. This not only dates the film (more so than the Vidal Sassoon haircut and 60s wardrobe) but makes it almost unwatchable for anyone who is familiar with wiccans and modern witchcraft. That aside, Polanski does manage to make the film tense right up to the last scene (which let me down), if you believe that the protagonist was unable to put two and two together until someone sent her a book filled with underlined passages. Her fogginess is due in part to being perpetually drugged by the Castavets and her complicit husband. His cooperation was one of many plot points that was poorly supported. It's clear that Rosemary's Baby is a horror film -- most of the truly frightening events are left to the imagination of the viewer -- but it is a weak representation of the genre.

Chinatown, on the other hand, is a much more watchable movie. Set in 1930s Los Angeles, the film centres on Jake Gittes (Jack Nicholson), a private eye who deals in relationship issues but .ends up getting drawn into a much bigger case. Chinatown is considered a "neo-noir" -- it bears all the marks of a Film Noir but was made 25 years after the golden age for that genre. Throughout, it reminded me of L.A. Confidential (if you have seen one, you'll likely enjoy the other). Nicholson is at his best here, playing a detective with a conscience -- he just wants to get to the bottom of it all. Faye Dunaway plays the femme fatale and she does it well; it's hard to tell just which side she's on until the end. I was not expecting the political intrigue or the other drama that unfolds; there's a lot to tell in Chinatown and it is all worth watching. The movie has aged well, perhaps due to being set in the past and, despite its age, still manages to be shocking.


** Rosemary's Baby
**** Chinatown

Hard Candy (2005)

What happens when the predator becomes the prey? In Hard Candy, we watch a 30-something photographer, Jeff lure Hayley, a precocious honor-roll 14 year old from an internet chat room to a meeting at a local coffee shop and then to his home. Unfortunately for Jeff, Hayley already knows what she's getting into.

Everything about the production -- from the direction to the sound editing -- is well executed but the performances from the two leads, each intensely emotional and raw, are the cornerstone.

Watching Hard Candy is an intellectual tennis match as the audience is torn between rooting for the creepy pedophile and the violent teen. Is it exploitation? That's hard to say although the suggestion algorithms on some movie sites put it in the same category as Saw and other "torture porn" horror films. Personally, I would put it in the same category as some of David Mamet's and Neil LaBute's work such as Oleanna and In the Company of Men. Like those films, Hard Candy humanizes people who are normally shown as one-dimensional villains and also forces the audience to consider the repercussions of vigilante actions.

****

Coraline in 3D (Focus/Laika/Alliance 2009)

Coraline is a young girl whose parents always seem to be too busy for her. To make matters worse, she is stuck living in an old house with strange neighbours in the adjoined suites. Having just moved in, her mother suggests that she passes the time unpacking; her father absently suggests that she explore the new house, counting all the windows and doors. She decides to do the latter which leads to the discovery of a strange, locked door in the front room. When she unlocks it, she finds only a brick wall on the other side.

Later, however, the door opens to quite a different place, a place that is familiar and yet, better. Her "other" parents dote on her and make sure she is always happy. She is confused but happy and has no idea at first how much is really at risk.

Coraline is based on the best-selling book by Neil Gaiman. While the plot stays fairly true to the original text, additional characters have been added to explain things which, in the book, were left to the reader to figure out. Happily, though, the movie is just as tense and scary as the book -- scary enough that many reviewers are suggesting it is not suitable for young children. Our not-quite-8 year-old accompanied us, however, and loved it but we also took her to see Tim Burton's Corpse Bride in the theatre at age 5.

Technically, Coraline is a wonder to watch. Filmed in stop-motion animation on sets filled with hand-crafted wonders, there is far too much in each scene to take in during a single viewing. Coraline is also being released in 3D format (which we saw) which can be a bit disorienting but is a good fit for this movie. I will admit that I am not a huge fan of 3D as a rule but it is used well here, giving dimension to her world rather than making the audience jump.

Often, animated films depend on good vocal performances and the actors here did a fine job. Terri Hatcher was ideally cast as the mother/other mother and what the other mother turns into and Spink and Forcible were played perfectly by Dawn French and Jennifer Saunders.

Overall, this film is well-worth seeing on the big screen. It may scare small children but most will be fine and a few may even want to read the book which I highly recommend.


****

X Saves the World by Jeff Gordinier (Viking Press 2008)

Jeff Gordinier is unflinching in X Saves the World: How Generation X Got the Shaft but Can Skill Keep Everything from Sucking. The book is as much a call to action for Generation X as it is a rant about the generations between which it is sandwiched -- the ubiquitous Boomers and the up-and-coming Millennials (aka Generation Y).

Gordinier echoes demographers' arguments about the parameters of Generation X while adding another level by suggesting, via Douglas Coupland, that Generation X is as much a mindset as a birthdate. He is also careful to admit that he is making broad generalizations throughout the book and that being born during a given year does not automatically make one fall into step with everyone else born that year.

That said, no matter how you slice the Gen X pie, I fall squarely into the demographic both by birth and by attitude. I'm not sure how non-Xers would react to this book; likely call us all whiners and write it off as more gloom but the crazy thing is, there's a lot of hope in this book. It feels a lot like the end of V for Vendetta; I won't spoil the ending but I left the theatre feeling an overwhelming sense that change -- real change -- was achievable.

There were sections I skimmed -- personally, I could care less about Nirvana but Gordinier hangs an awful lot of his book on the impact of both "Smells Like Teen Spirit" and also on Kurt Cobain's suicide. I also skimmed Gordinier's take on the Poetry Bus -- something I had never heard of prior to this book and will not bother to research further.

On the other hand, I reveled in his descriptions of the internet boom and bust, about the movies and the directors who speak for and to our generation, and about Stephen Colbert and Jon Stewart who brought Generation X's brand of subversive humour to the main stage.

Throughout X Saves the World, I found myself laughing ("By 1999 a fecal tide of suckitude, suckness, and suckronicity was upon us..."¹), nodding (oh, yeah, I have definitely encountered the "grey ceiling"), and making note of suggested ways I could help keep my world from sucking.

****

------------
¹ Introduction, p. xxiv