Anyway, I was listening to Seth Harp talk about his book The Fort Bragg Cartel and it suddenly hit me: this is why I find James Bond intriguing. The very nature of being a killing machine is antithetical to our natural state, yet the government breeds men to commit crimes against humanity. Of course James Bond’s actions are portrayed as necessary and even ethical but the truth is that lots and lots and LOTS of people die. And for our own consumption, death becomes spectacle. So the truth is I see James Bond as a perverse and almost Paul Verhoeven-esque tale.
Harp talks about how crimes that are committed by Delta Force operators are swept under the rug. In a sense, these guys have a license to kill with impunity. He goes further and explains that operators can even put up James Bond-like numbers on their kill count for each mission. That ain’t cool. That’s pants-shittingly terrifying. Imagine if you had that as a job. What kind of person would that make you? Meanwhile, Hollywood and the propaganda machine portray this kind of endeavor with fantastical reverence.
So James Bond isn’t escapism. it’s a horror story; a horror story that you play a part in by making it escapism.
Anywho, hope Seal Team 6 doesn’t come after me for buying that book 😬
Martin Scorsese has gone on record saying that he’d like to make (another) film about Jesus Christ. I mean, Jesus Christ! How many movies do we need about this guy?
Actually, I don’t have a problem with it. I just wish someone made a movie that questions the Gospel narrative. That’s why I find Scorsese’s other Jesus flick The Last Temptation of Christ to be an interesting (but not great) film.
This is probably the only instance where filmmakers should actually follow real history to provide a dramatic narrative. In filmmaking, or storytelling in general, sometimes it helps to deviate from history to provide a more engaging story. Not that we know a lot about Jesus’s life anyway, but what we DO know about life in first century Judea would provide a fascinating backdrop. If a writer used this knowledge and took creative liberties with the Gospels, they’d have a unique – and violent – story about Jesus of Nazareth.
This is why Paul Verhoeven needs needs to make his Jesus movie while he still can. According to my research (that I will not cite), Verhoeven was the only atheist admitted to the controversial Jesus Seminar back in the day. He’s also written his own biography on Jesus, simply called Jesus of Nazareth. So needless to say, he’s a scholar on the subject.
But Verhoeven is one of the great unsung directors of our time. He’s not afraid of…nay, he INVITES…controversy. And he’s 84 years old. So if Mel Gibson gets to make an unnecessary sequel to his Jesus film, Verhoeven deserves to get his shot.
You know what the internet needs? Another list of greatest movies.
So, in no particular order:
–The Deer Hunter (1978): I’ve discussed this movie at length numerous times. I think it’s the greatest example of the power of filmmaking.
–Robocop (1987): For the simpletons, this is just another 80s action film. For those that know better, it’s the greatest satire ever made. But each time I watch it, the more horrified I become. The idea of “Robocop” is terrifying. Imagine getting killed in the most violent way, then you get revived and made property of an evil corporation and begin to struggle to understand who or what you are. Hollywood is a lesser place without Paul Verhoeven.
-The Thin Blue Line (1988): This, along with Errol Morris’ (currently known for directing Chipotle commercials) Vernon, Florida are my two favorite documentaries. This is the story about a killing of a Dallas cop and a man getting rear ended by the justice system. I love Randall Dale Adams. He’s an everyday dude that took an unfortunate trip to Texas. We’ve all been there.
–Star Trek II: The Wrath of Khan (1982): Yes, I’m a Trek fan. While every nerd has seen this movie dozens of time, I don’t think it gets the credit it deserves. It’s not really sci-fi, it’s more of a Shakespearean tragedy in space. In many ways, this film revived Trek. And director/writer Nicholas Meyer, who knew nothing of Star Trek prior to this, deserves credit.
–Dances With Wolves (1990): I will go to my grave saying Kevin Costner deserved his Oscar. Fuck Martin Scorsese.
–Taxi Driver (1976): We all know Martin Scorsese is a genius. And Paul Schrader may be the greatest screenwriter of all time. In the era of angry, lonely young men roaming the internet, this movie was well ahead of its time.
–2001: A Space Odyssey (1968): if you’re gonna do science fiction, do it right. Everybody knows this movie. And because this movie rightfully gets the credit it deserves, we take it for granted. But, to this very day, it is the most ambitious film ever made.
–The Taking of Pelham One Two Three (1974): I love movies that satirize a very serious situation. It’s kinda like Dr. Strangelove, albeit this film is dealing with a much less serious subject: the taking of hostages. Every actor is great, but Walter Matthau was an unusual talent. His face alone could carry a film.
–No Country For Old Men (2007): The best movie made in the last 20 years. Cormac McCarthy may be the greatest living author and it ain’t easy adapting his work for the big screen. The nihilism, the existential themes, Javier Bardem, the vast, empty Texas landscape… “okay, I’ll be a part of this world.”
–Blood Diner (1987): Most fans of the B-movie, cult genre are familiar with this film but it should be more widely known with general audiences. Probably the funniest fucking movie I’ve ever seen.
First off, thank you to those who continually read this blog. I love all of you like a bastard child I never knew I had. But if we did have a child together, then I don’t know you and please don’t reach out to me.
Now on to the subject at hand:
RoboCop 2
The first RoboCop is one of my favorite movies. Paul Verhoeven really knows how to tell a story from the perspective of the film’s ideology while simultaneously letting you in on the joke.
It’s a tough act to follow, and most claim that RoboCop 2 failed to live up to its predecessor. But I disagree. The reviews on IMDB are all over the place. Many say that it’s not a great movie, but there’s no consensus on why it’s not a great movie.
Yes, certain plot details go nowhere. This is probably the result of studio interference, which is typical for highly anticipated sequels. But my question is: who gives a shit? RoboCop 2 was made in the same vein as another infamous sequel released a week earlier: Gremlins 2: The New Batch and it should be viewed in that light.
Is it a GREAT film? Lol, no. It’s not supposed to be. When you make a sequel, you have two options: do something entirely different or double up on the same shit that was done before. The filmmakers chose the latter (which was the right choice).
Now Verhoeven definitely handled the gratuitous violence much more effectively in the first film, but that’s his specialty. At its heart, RoboCop is a satire on consumerism and corporate culture. The horrific violence and sci-fi aspects, which most people remember it for, was just the vessel to tell the story. RoboCop 2 threw up its arms and said “fuck it, we’re just gonna be satire”.
The villains are much more over-the-top, the commercials are much less subtle, and even RoboCop himself is more exaggerated. Many praised RoboCop for its self-awareness, well the same is true for RoboCop 2. In fact, it’s straight up mocking itself.
I’d say that RoboCop 2, along with Gremlins 2, might be the two most self-aware films ever made.
Does it deserve the 5.8 rating it currently has on IMDB? No.
The Internet Ruined Everything 