Movie Review Jupiter Ascending

Jupiter Ascending (2015) 

Directed by The Wachowskis

Written by The Wachowskis

Starring Mila Kunis, Channing Tatum, Sean Bean, Eddie Redmayne, Tuppence Middleton

Release Date February 6th, 2015 

Published February 5th, 2015 

My cynical 30-something armor can no longer be pierced by the earnest arrows of the artist trapped in commercial hell. Yes, while there is a deep seated part of my soul that wishes for a day I could once again appreciate the trappings of those wounded souls willingly baring themselves before us, as they wring their hands over cashing studio checks but alas, it is for naught. I've been too ironically distanced from my own emotions for too long. 

It is, therefore, impossible for me to appreciate "Jupiter Ascending," the latest work of the wonderfully open and earnest Wachowski siblings. Like their previous effort, "Cloud Atlas," "Jupiter Ascending" is a daringly original piece that attempts to elevate pop to art via pop philosophy with a dash of liberal/progressive politicking. It's an effort I can admire but in a package I can't help but mock ceaselessly.

"Jupiter Ascending" stars Mila Kunis as Jupiter, a house cleaner by trade who happens to be the human replicant of a dead alien queen, destined to inherit the Earth. A mostly shirtless Channing Tatum plays Caine, Jupiter's wolf-like, Spock-eared protector in rocket boots. That's a literal translation of who these characters are and their relationship to one another. How am I expected to take this seriously? 

To be fair, Luke Skywalker was a descendant of an ancient race of spiritual ninjas who fights alongside robots, Wookies, and tiny aliens, but I find myself capable of loving the goofiness of "Star Wars." So why not love the goofiness of "Jupiter Ascending?" Maybe I've reached my “goofy” limit. Or maybe "Star Wars" is simply a superior effort from a more dedicated master of earnest goofiness. 

"Jupiter Ascending" grows only more goofy as it rolls along, picking up the story of three goofball villains. Brothers Titus (Douglas Booth) and Balem (Oscar nominee Eddie Redmayne) and sister Kalique (Tuppence Middleton) hope to trick or kill poor Jupiter in order to usurp her birthright as the owner-operator of the Earth. You see, kids, Earth is really just a farm for the universe, where people are cattle used as commodities to be harvested. If poor Jupiter can't stop them, the Earth becomes the beauty product equivalent of Soylent Green. 

One cannot help but admire the wont of the Wachowskis to create something wholly original. "Jupiter Ascending" is that rare breed of modern movie blockbuster that is not based on a comic book or a young-adult novel. The Wachowskis took great care to assemble this brand-new universe, and their dedication is admirable even as the product of that dedication is incredibly risible. 

"Jupiter Ascending" is not unlike the spiritual cousin of “Avatar,” another overly earnest attempt at pop politics. Like that monstrosity, "Jupiter Ascending" is a massive work of pop art that attempts to smuggle politics under the guise of science fiction. Unfortunately, the politics of both films are so obvious and under-cooked that even as I find myself agreeing with both films’ philosophies, I can't help but mock how simpleminded they both are. 

Modern progressives are growing more open and earnest with each new generation. This is both a blessing and a curse. It's a blessing in that stances in favor of the poor and those affected by the ills of discrimination now have vocal defenders. But it's also a curse as these most vocal progressives tend to run headlong into the buzz-saws of political commerce without the ironic armor that protected generations before. 

My generation wielded humor as a dangerous and divisive weapon against our political foes. We could swing the hammer of cynical humor at our earnest conservative opponents and expose their whiny cores in the process. The more earnest, modern progressive-liberals are far too quick to believe that their opponents can be reasoned with or shown the error of their ways via earnest conversation. This leads to movies like "Jupiter Ascending," where the progressive message is ladled heavily and humorlessly over easy-to-consume-and-destroy pop science fiction. 

For people like me, raised on the misanthropic, self-protective, liberal politics of the past, I feel the need to destroy "Jupiter Ascending" before my opponents get their hands on such an easy and shallow target.

Movie Review: V for Vendetta

V for Vendetta (2006) 

Directed by James McTiegue 

Written by The Wachowski's 

Starring Hugo Weaving, Natalie Portman, Stephen Rea, Stephen Fry, John Hurt 

Release Date March 17th, 2006 

Published March 16th, 2006 

The most controversial movie of 2006 has arrived. V For Vendetta, based on the graphic novel by Alan Moore, has been accused of subversion and supporting a terrorist agenda. The question then must be: Does V For Vendetta put forth a terrorist agenda? The answer, because this is such a wonderfully smart and complex film, is yes and no.

Yes, the character of V, portrayed by Hugo Weaving, uses terrorist tactics and his goals are most definitely subversive. However, in this dystopian vision of the future, V's reign of terror is aimed at a totalitarian government that can only be fought with guerrilla or terrorist tactics. Those who can think with both sides of their brain will understand this complex division of ideas. For the myopic and agenda driven however V For Vendetta is a threatening shot across the bow.

In the year 2020, England has fallen under the sway of a militaristic dictator named Adam Sutler (John Hurt). Exploiting a tragedy that killed hundreds of thousands in the early years of the 21st century, Sutler was able to impose his dictatorship by playing on the fears of society, especially fears of the kind of chaos that had thrown the U.S, in this vision of the future, into a wildly violent civil war.

The new English dictator censors all art forms and removed or edited British history to match the new dictator's worldview. However, one thing he cannot censor is a bizarre masked character calling himself V (Hugo Weaving). Hiding behind the grinning porcelain veneer of the 17th century English terrorist Guy Fawkes, V strolls the darkened streets of London righting injustice and launching masterpieces of violent uprising.

In the early hours of the 5th of November, the date that, in 1606, Guy Fawkes attempted to blow up parliament in what was called the gunpowder treason, V has hatched an elaborate plan to wake up the citizens of London to the tyranny of their government. But first V intercedes when he finds three of London's secret police, known as Fingermen, attacking a young woman named Evey (Natalie Portman). Saving Evey's life, V invites her to witness his symphony of violence that includes major fireworks and the destruction of the British landmark the Old Bailey courthouse.

Later, V tells a captive nationwide audience, in a pirate broadcast, that one year from that date, he will blow up parliament and invites everyone with an issue with the government's fear tactics to join him. In the meantime V will be exacting revenge on the men who turned him into a masked vigilante. A series of murders, all connected to the tragedies that lead to Adam Sutler winning power. Stephen Rea plays the head of the British police charged with finding V who, in the process, ends up uncovering more than he wants to know about his government.

Evey and V have a past that is linked in ways neither is fully aware of. Her parents and younger brother were victims of the plague that gave rise to the current government as was V. Evey (as played by the lovely Ms. Portman) gives the film its conscience and story arc. Her slow awakening to radicalism, and what some would call terrorism, is where the film finds its socio-political backbone. At first she questions V's tactics and motives, giving us in the audience a chance to do so as well. Once she comes around we likely already have but it makes for a few of the films big dramatic moments.

The cast of V For Vendetta is sprawling and spectacular from top to bottom. John Hurt perfectly embodies the vengeful power-hungry chancellor. His presence also offers the ironic humor of his having played protagonist Winston Smith in Orwell's 1984, now graduated to playing Big Brother. Stephen Fry appears, all too briefly, as a talk show host, Evey's closest friend, and a man with a deep secret that provides yet another deep and abiding principle that the writers Andy and Larry Wachowski wish to exploit.

Many nods to the British stage also mark this cast, from Timothy Pigott Smith as the Chancellor's hatchet man, to Rupert Graves as Rea's detective partner, to Roger Allam as an unctuous TV commentator who evinces more than a little Rush Limbaugh in his bombastic oratory.

Written by Andy and Larry Wachowski, V For Vendetta has the excitement of the Matrix films but with a bigger brain. Directed by Matrix second unit director James McTeigue in his feature debut, V For Vendetta is also as visually accomplished as The Matrix pictures--high praise for a first time director. I don't mean to imply that V For Vendetta is superior to The Matrix, though it is superior to the lackadaisical sequels.

What separates V For Vendetta is the ideas behind it. There are a myriad of interpretations of exactly what the Wachowskis were attempting to say with this picture. When V For Vendetta debuted as a graphic novel from Alan Moore, it was an allegory for the Margaret Thatcher administration in England in the '80s. Updated to our times some see this version of V For Vendetta as veiled attacks on either George W. Bush, Tony Blair, or both. If you want to follow that line you can, but V For Vendetta is not that simple to pin down.

Yes there are references to America's war leading to the chaos of this future society. Director James McTeigue also makes an obvious visual reference to the Abu Graib prisons in Iraq. But the film is more accurately an attack on a government out of control and the way absolute power corrupts absolutely. The films ideology could be compared with the logic offered by the National Rifle Association in America which posits that the people have the right to bear arms so that if the government ever became a threat the people could fight back.

V For Vendetta takes that theory to a particular conclusion as the people of Britain, lead by V, begin to fight back against the tyrannical leadership. Yes, V's tactics and ideas could be defined as terrorism. When V talks of how blowing up a building can be a revolutionary act you cannot help but make the queasy connection to 9/11. That however is not necessarily the context of V For Vendetta.

Taken specifically within the guidelines of the plot this line of logic from V is merely the only way for the people to fight back against a government run amok. Think of it in terms of North Koreans rising to blow up symbols of dictator Kim Jong Il, or the people of Iraq attacking Saddam's palaces and you have a better corollary to the mindset of V For Vendetta.

V For Vendetta is bathed in coolness from beginning to end. The reflected glory of rebellious writer Alan Moore should inspire fanboys despite Moore's disassociating himself from the film after reading the script. Then there are the Wachowskis, whose cache of cool remains intact despite the mixed results of the Matrix sequels and the brothers' personal stories which have made for some interesting tabloid fodder.

The film's outlaw spirit and exceptionally well-staged violence are the big draws and they do not disappoint. V For Vendetta is exciting, thought provoking and darkly humorous. The film encompasses the ideas of revolutionary politics and righteous martial arts violence in ways we have never seen before on film and that makes it at once relevant anti-establishment filmmaking and kickass blockbuster action movie.

If watching a movie can be a revolutionary act, then V For Vendetta could inspire generations. Not inspire them to blow up buildings, but rather to watch closer for the signposts of corruption and fear mongering, which many fear are already being seen throughout the free world. V For Vendetta is powerful filmmaking with the punch of social commentary wrapped in the popcorn goodness of the mainstream blockbuster. This is one of the best films you will see in 2006.

Movie Review: The Matrix Revolutions

The Matrix Revolutions (2003) 

Directed by The Wachowskis 

Written by The Wachowskis 

Starring Keanu Reeves, Laurence Fishburne, Carrie Ann Moss, Gloria Foster 

Release Date November 5th, 2003 

Published November 4th, 2003 

I was not of an age of reason when Return Of The Jedi was released. I did not understand the historical significance of Godfather Part 3. Now, years later and hopefully much wiser, I see those two films for what they are, the weakest films of two historically brilliant trilogies. So it should come as no surprise that the third film in The Matrix franchise, that one Critic I know called “Our Star Wars” is the weakest film of the three. Matrix Revolutions may not have anything as disappointing and sad as Ewoks in it, but its many flaws are almost as egregious.

Picking up exactly where The Matrix Reloaded left off, Revolutions begins with Neo on an operating table, comatose. Across from him is Agent Smith (Hugo Weaving), now in human form having just sabotaged a number of Zion's defenses. From here we learn that Neo is trapped in between the Matrix and the real world. With the advice of the Oracle (Mary Alice, taking over for the late Gloria Foster) and under the protection of Seraph (Collin Chou), Morpheus (Laurence Fishburne) and Trinity (Carrie Ann Moss) enter the Matrix to save Neo.

To re-enter The Matrix and rescue Neo, Morpheus and Trinity must battle the Merovingian (Lambert Wilson), an all powerful evil inside the machinery of The Matrix, and track down a new character called The Trainman (Bruce Spence). This is done in no more than 20 minutes into the movie and we are once again out of the Matrix and headed for Zion. First however we must wade through another 20 minutes of dull exposition before we reach the first of the films to major set-pieces, the battle for Zion.

Here is the odd thing about the battle: it takes place without Neo, Morpheus, Trinity or any other character that we have come to identify with The Matrix. This major sequence leans entirely on Nona Gaye's Zee and Clayton Watson as The Kid. There is also plenty of screen time for Nathaniel Lee as Captain Mifune, and though he is quite the badass fighter, we have had no time to invest anything in his fate until now. Without the major players involved, the battle for Zion feels like a completely different and far less involving film.

Once major fighting in The Battle for Zion halts in we get another agonizing 20 or so minutes of dull exposition as we wait for Neo and Trinity to make their way to the machine city and Neo's final showdown with Hugo Weaving's Agent Smith. There is a good deal of dialogue along the way meant to build Smith into the ultimate evil which I found deeply confusing because wasn't the Matrix itself the ultimate evil? Now, because the movie needs someone for Neo to punch, Agent Smith steps into the lead villain role and we lose the innate conflict of the first films in the trilogy, or at least that goes very much on the backburner in favor of ugly CGI fight scenes. 

Whether or not the Matrix is destroyed you will have to see for yourself and hopefully you will find something in it that I did not. This was an odd experience for me because I had given up on the metaphorical and philosophical ideas behind The Matrix after the slick, stylish The Matrix Reloaded showed the series to be merely about special effects. Yet as I watched Revolutions I couldn't help but search for those mythical metaphors and an inkling of the philosophy that so many said lay in the heart of the trilogy. To my disappointment, I was right. The philosophical roots of The Matrix are just not there and without that, The Matrix Revolutions and the franchise in general nothing but cold sterile computer generated special effects.