Accepted

Starring Justin Long, Jonah Hill, and Blake Lively          
Directed by Steve Pink
Year: 2006
IMDB / Wikipedia

There will never be a shortage of raunchy college-based comedies in this world. They are everywhere. Every generation wants its crack to top Animal House and, to date, none have come close. But it’s a fun ride that includes the likes of Back to School, Van Wilder,  and Accepted.

What could be referred to as Old School-lite, Accepted tells the story of Bartleby Gaines (Long) and his friends who find themselves at the close of their high school career with no college acceptances and parents demanding they decide what to do with their lives. As any rational person would do, Bartleby and his friends open a fake college to dupe their parents and get themselves out of the house. A problem arises when the website for the school goes live and throngs of other rejected young people come pounding at the door wanting in.

And, of course, hilarity ensues.

Dare I say I’m one of the few people who actually enjoys this movie. It’s never going to win any awards, but that’s OK. the jokes are pretty clean, there’s no nudity and limited cursing (hence the PG-13 rating), and the story is pretty original if you think about it. It may never live up to the great heights of college comedies but it’s certainly not the worst (I’ll bestow that tag on all of those insipid straight-to-video American Pie and Road Trip bastards).

If you’re curious, take a watch. It’s a lighthearted comedy that you can let your older kids watch (they do say the word shit 62 times) and it only takes 82 minutes of your day. In the end you’ll feel it was a good use of time and it’ll make you chuckle, too.

Most Valuable Actor:  Lewis Black as Ben Lewis, the Dean of the South Harmon Institute of Technology. As deranged he is as a stand-up comedian, Black brings that same energy and mentality to this character that stands out in this film. He also have the privilege to drop two F-bombs, though the one at the end is bleeped.

The Avengers

Starring: Robert Downey Jr., Chris Evans, and Samuel L. Jackson        
Directed by Joss Whedon
Year: 2012
IMDB / Wikipedia

I rarely see movies in the theater. When I do, it’s usually for a landmark cinematic event or the wife wants to see something especially cute. This post is a document of the former.

This has been a long time coming. Even when Iron Man was just coming out there was talk about how it would be the first movie in a line of movies that would culminate with an Avengers movie. The studios wanted it, the fans wanted it, and it happened. Just under four years since Tony Stark burst into theaters worldwide, the Avengers have assembled ready to defend the Earth from a force that is more than once superhero alone could handle.

This movie was everything I expected it to be. The team assembles, they don’t really like each other, there’s tension, there’s lack of understanding, there’s the threat of dissolving, there’s tragedy, there’s the immense swallowing of pride, there’s the CG extravaganza, there’s the resolution, and the set up to the eventual sequel movies. I knew this formula before I even stepped foot into the theater on Sunday evening. I knew this formula from the trailers and the spoiler-free articles I have read online. I knew it all and it played out just as I had foreseen.

Despite it all, I really enjoyed this movie. You will find, as I have, that some of my favorite movies don’t have to be unpreditable, just well-executed. The Avengers was more than well-executed, it was almost poetic. Well, maybe not poetic, but it was well-written and well-visioned by director/screenwriter Joss Whedon. The events played out and they were so breathtaking that I didn’t care that I had predicted most of the peril and conflict in the movie.

I’m not saying I’m a know-it-all when it comes to movies. Honestly, there’s a lot of movies I have not seen that some would call commonplace for any film aficionado. But this film I was easily able to decipher and unlock before I sat down and I would see it all again in the theater. That is a testament to the way this movie developed characters that had entire films dedicated to them. Even Robert Downey Jr’s Tony Stark was able to grow further still even after two excellent movies. It is something to behold, for sure.

My wife went with my two friends and I to see this movie. She hasn’t seen any of the movies in the Marvel Cinematic Universe so she had really no understanding of any of these characters’ back-stories or motivations. But she loved it anyway because, in her own words, “It’s a comic book movie.” Sure, it may seem simplistic to people like her and I, but we still liked it. She came out wanting to watch all of the movies starting with Iron Man. I’m more than willing to oblige her in this respect. So, in the coming weeks, you may see the other movies in this series posted out of order. Those entries will be about what my wife thinks of them and the connections she will make to this movie. It’s going to be a fun ride. Now, if I can only get her to sit down and watch the Star Wars films with me.

Most Valuable Actor: Mark Ruffalo as Dr. Bruce Banner / The Hulk. I enjoy Edward Norton as an actor, but he was a terrible pick to portray Bruce Banner in 2008’s The Incredible Hulk. I think it may have to do with Norton’s inability to make me believe he could be a strong, silent scientist who is trying to keep a raging beast in check. Ruffalo, on the other hand, was able to do this in spades. He was calm, calculated, and actually played the role of a scientist very convincingly. Plus, for the first time in movie history, someone other than Lou Ferigno provided a speaking line for The Hulk, giving credence to Ruffalo’s ability to play this part.

The Abyss

Starring Ed Harris, Mary Elizabeth Mastrantonio, and Michael Biehn          
Directed by James Cameron
Year: 1989
IMDB / Wikipedia

James Cameron has a love affair with the sea. If he wasn’t making movies, he’d be in The Calypso in place of Jacques Cousteau, exploring the wonders of the ocean. Even as a film director, he still manages to find time to design, build, and pilot a one-man submarine craft to the deepest depths of the ocean.

But he also knows how to tell a good story as well. In The Abyss, Cameron spins a tale of an underwater oil rig that is taken over by the Navy after a submarine goes down in the middle of the ocean. While protecting the sub’s precious cargo, the crew finds they are not alone on this planet and the next form of intelligent life does not come from the sky, but from the watery depths.

I have the privilege to own a copy of the special edition of the movie. This cut of the film is longer and, in my opinion, tells a more complete story and gives the viewer a little more background into the aliens, their power, and their role in the greater story. Without giving too much away, the special edition adds almost 30 minutes of footage to the movie and it tells a richer tale. There are some special edition or director’s cuts to movies that add nothing special or unique to their stories, let alone another level of thought and drama. There is an entire sequence that was restored that must have coust millions to produce and was left on the cutting room floor prior to the film’s theatrical release. I have a theory about why that was.

The special edition of the film elaborates and expounds on the international relations tension that the downed sub has caused. It is played off as Lt. Coffey’s (Biehn) cold war paranoia in the theatrical version, but in the special edition there seems to be some root justification for his actions (not just the deep pressure psychosis). Even the additional sequences with the aliens, there is a distinct political rhetoric in play that rivals the ending speech in Rocky IV. Though it is not as syrupy-sweet as that one, the message is clear. On the Wikipedia page (link above), there is talk that the movie was cut for length, ILM’s limitations, and a fear that audiences may not sit through the entire film. I want to call that bullshit because what was taken out was so blatantly political. I’m not calling cowardice, I’m just citing that everything cut had a slant on it that many not have sat well with a general audience. It’s an artistic choice that I am not able to exercise myself in the DVD menu when I choose the special edition over the theatrical one.

But James Cameron sure does know how to tell a story. I don’t know if there’s another writer/director (because he did write The Abyss, also) who can rival the talent and the fortitude that James Cameron possesses. He also knows how to find the right people to make the story work and come alive on screen. This movie will go down as his forgotten classic as it failed to make over a billion dollars at the box office, but it may be the finest film he has ever made.

Most Valuable Actor: Michael Biehn as Lt. Hiram Coffey. I have to admit, this role could have been played by anyone. However, this role also appears to be one that would allow an actor to play it his own way and make the character rather personal. I have to imagine a Bruce Willis type would have been more quiet and calculating while a Carl Weathers would have played it much like The Hulk. But Biehn’s character was more than a psychopath, he was scary. The fight scene with Ed Harris in the moon pool is one that still gets my heart racing because it doesn’t look staged and I keep thinking that Ed may not make it off set alive if it doesn’t turn out right. Truly remarkable acting by an underrated and underused actor.

About Schmidt

Starring Jack Nicholson, Hope Davis, and Kathy Bates          
Directed by Alexander Payne
Year: 2002
IMDB / Wikipedia

There is something about Alexander Payne’s movies that draw me to them and then make me almost regret my decision. It is true, I am a person who does not like to dwell on the more serious aspects of life. I would much rather crack a joke or submit to someone else’s will rather than create conflict. But, because I have lived my life like that, I find myself secure but somewhat unfulfilled. The easy path is not always the best one. I don’t have any great stories, I don’t have a lot of friends, and I think it is because I choose to live  rather bland and flavorless life.

Jack Nicholson’s character in About Schmidt is much like I am. He is someone who has lived his life in a way that has not caused any waves, not ruffled many feathers, and has been rather easy. Because of this, his wife becomes a distant stranger, his daughter cannot tolerate him, and he feels this pit of loneliness that consumes him right after he retires from his career as the vice president of an insurance company. I watched his life for two hours and I felt two things: this is who I am and this is not who I want to become.

I watch the events of this movie unfold and, though I laugh at the funny parts (whomever described this as a comedy has a sick fucking sense of humor) I find myself cringing that this is what is ahead of me., like looking into a crystal ball. Will I be crossing the country when I’m 66 in a Winnebago I didn’t want but was thrust upon me by circumstance? Will I find distraction from my sadness in patronizing tourist traps that take my money for a modicum of satisfaction? I see the follies and the missteps of Walter Schmidt’s life and I keep repeating to myself, “this is not going to be me … this is not going to be me.” But what am I doing about it?

Like Walter, I am not one who makes changes easily but I do know things about myself that have yet to surface. I don’t want all of my esteem to be wrapped up in my career. I would rather have a few close friends than many acquaintances. When I eventually die, I want people to be sad that I’m not around anymore. But, more than anything, I want to be remembered as someone who contributed something positive to this world, not just someone who took up space.

If I were to bring these kinds of things up to my wife, my parents, my sister, I would get bombarded with grand gestures I could undertake to prove my worth and value to the world. But, as I found out about myself several years back, I’m not cut out to be the guy at the soup kitchen every weekend handing out coffee and sandwiches to the homeless. I’m the guy who cuts a check to a worthy cause and leave it to those better angels to make a difference. I don’t want to change the world; one life, maybe two would suffice.

A while back I made a conscious decision that one of my contributions in life would be to not be in anyone’s way. My value: not make life harder for anyone else. I have taken it a step further in the past few years by trying to make life easier for those I care for and who matter to me. I try to pick up checks, I listen to other people instead of waiting for my turn to say something, and I’m trying to live a good life. Walter Schmidt felt he was doing a good thing, too, but he still had that pit of loneliness in his soul that, through this brutally honest character study, he found some resolution for. I may find my resolution, I may not, but knowing what I wants and what I don’t want is now cemented. Now, I have to find something to fill in the middle.

Wait, this was supposed to be about the movie. Maybe next time …

Most Valuable Actor: Jack Nicholson as Walter Schmidt. No other actor could have pulled this off. I keep using that line during these MVA grafs but, as casting for major movies gets better and directors such as Payne get the most out of them, it keeps being true. No one else could be Walter Schmidt, a macabre character with a positive outlook that masks an ocean of melancholy and despair over a life lived in futility. This character is a well-drawn warning on how not to live your life.

About a Boy

Starring Hugh Grant, Toni Collette, and Nicholas Hoult          
Directed by Chris Weitz and Paul Weitz
Year: 2002
IMDB / Wikipedia

This is the movie that made me like Hugh Grant. Before, I thought he was a cliche, being the charmingly befuddled guy who makes all the ladies swoon and is always the hero. In About a Boy, the film adaptation of Nick Hornby’s excellent novel, Grant is still the protagonist, but he’s more the anti-hero. He’s a self-absorbed ass who thinks only of himself until he befriends a 12 year-old boy named Marcus (Hoult). Though the movie takes a cliche look at Hornby’s source content (which plays out in a much different fashion than the movie) Grant’s character is pretty true.

There is this idea that most young men have in thinking that “every man is an island,” or someone who only needs himself to get by in this world. Men who never abandon this are trapped in what is known as a Peter Pan Complex where they never really mature. This movie (and, in many respects, the book) challenge one such man to face his shortcomings and realize that without a support system his life is pretty meaningless. But, is this true?

I prescribe to the Hilary Clinton doctrine that “it takes a village” to raise a child and support a person throughout his or her life. Not a novel or unique idea, but I find it to be true. I like to think that I am the sum parts of everyone I have ever known, to bastardize a quote from another wonderful author, Chuck Palhinuik. This film shows Will (Grant) and the impact he has on others just through his actions to fulfill his own selfish needs. It is the chain of events in the film that teaches him that you cannot be a member of society without making some sort of impact on everyone else. You cannot interact with someone on a one-sided level and that is what Will’s character comes to realize by the end.

To digress from my point, I have to admit that, every time I watch a movie with predominantly UK actors, I find myself speaking with that accent for a day or two. I also catch myself saying things like lift when I mean elevator, and pronouncing garage much like I would pronounce the word carriage. It’s a side effect of the immersion, albeit very brief, and it’s not very troubling to me. It does, however, disconcert my wife who is now hearing her Omaha-born husband speaking as if he’s auditioning for Monty Python’s Flying Circus. I’m trying to temper it but it doesn’t always work.

Now, where was I? Oh yes … this movie is wonderful though it doesn’t explore the deeper relationships forged by the characters as it does in the book. It does, however, fulfill the spirit of the book by confirming that, not all men are islands; some are island chains.

Most Valuable Actor: Nicholas Hoult as Marcus. In his breakout performance, Hoult captures the character of Marcus brilliantly and delivers the best performance on screen. It was essential to find a dynamic young actor to play the role as so many of the interpersonal relationships stem from him. They found a great young actor who has made a name for himself in some great films in a little less than a decade in the business.

The A-Team

Starring Liam Neeson, Bradley Cooper, and Jessica Biel        
Directed by Joe Carnahan
Year: 2010
IMDB / Wikipedia

I love it when a movie comes together.

Were you expecting a refined and sophisticated action movie? Were you not watching all those years as these characters blew stuff up on TV in the 80s? You weren’t expecting a wink-at-the-camera, self-depracating, adrenaline-fueled, funny movie that didn’t take itself seriously? Are you fucking kidding me?

Movies like this make us appreciate movies that take action to a darker place. without these kinds of movies that make blowing stuff fun for a couple of hours. Sure, the story isn’t the best, but it’s better than some. Sure, the acting isn’t the greatest, but whose bar were they trying to clear? George Pappard and Mr. T? I think they cleared that without error.

So, why is this movie despised? Is it because it is mindless explosions and lots of stupid, improbable shit going on from first frame to last? Is it because you have to completely shut down your disbelief sensor for a couple of hours to restrain the cynical side of you from calling BS on everything B.A. did? Probably all of the above, but it’s still fun to watch.

People who crapped on this movie are the same folks who decry CSI for making us all think that zooming in on an image will make it clearer. Well, if you’re stupid enough to think that the audience will not understand that tanks cannot drive out of a lake, that people can survive a container ship crashing around them, and all of the other ludicrous stunts done in this movie, then you can remain angry with that rod up your ass. This movie is just as fun as the original series and the cast lineup makes it all the better.

So, the next time you’re sitting around on a Saturday afternoon and want something fun and loud to watch, give this movie a spin. Just remember to check your disbelief at the door.

Most Valuable Actor: Patrick Wilson as CIA Agent Lynch. One thing this movie tried to do, and did a fairly successful job at, was making you wonder who the bad guy was in this story. Well, from the first moment he was on screen, Lynch just oozed bad. But, his character was damn-near likable for much of the movie and had some of the best lines. Any other actor would have done it with a little more charm, but Wilson brought an edge to this character that was needed to keep him from being too likable.

1984

Starring John Hurt, Richard Burton, and Suzanna Hamilton         
Directed by Michael Radford
Year: 1984
IMDB / Wikipedia

I remember deliberately waiting until I had read the book t watch this film the first time. Orwell’s haunting first-persona narrative was stirring enough and I thought that to put it to film would paint such a dreary and violent image of our “future” that it may have the same impact as the Big Brother character in the book.

Though careful to follow the very spirit of the book, the film does fall short on several occasions to capture the pure brutality and the manipulation of this government and the effects on the people. I wanted this movie to be so much more than it was but, in the end, it was like every other book-turned-movie in that it kept much of the spirit, but along the way some of the substance was lost.

It’s not like this was a terribly hard book to transform. None of it took place in space, none of it required huge amounts of special effects, and the story in the book was not long enough to warrant four hours of screen time. I can only imagine that it was the producers and the directors who chose to put selected part of Orwell’s book on screen and fill in the rest.

I was glad to see that, though the ending in the movie differed from the book, the scenes leading up to it were left mostly intact. The scenes of torture seemed to fit the brutality of the source work and the dialogue that surrounded it held mostly true to the original, and it was best that it did so. The first 75 minutes of the movie could have been scrapped or carried on in silence as long as these scenes of explanation and motive were left untouched. I have a feeling the film-makers felt the same and that’s why it remained. And no one could have played O’Brien other than Richard Burton, the cold calculating timbre of his voice delivered each line as deliberately as imagined in the book. The company man explaining the need for control, the need for fea, and the need for an almost divine presence for the government to maintain control and order. Haunting then as it is now, especially with the political landscape fo the last decade.

I read the book and watched this movie for the first time in 2004. This is in the days when 9/11 was still very much in the public eye and the Bush administration and the Patriot Act sought to stifle the civil liberties of the American people in the interest of national defense. It was also around this time I was in an teacher education program working toward my teaching certificate and noticed more and more English teachers assigning this book to their classes. I’m sure many of them saw the parallels of Orwell’s story to the real-life events happening every day and they probably wanted to assign the book before it became a seditious act to do so. This piqued my interest and I read the book and was blow away at the symbolism, the foreshadowing, and the unmistakable sense that this was more than just a piece of fiction conjured in the mind of a political anarchist. The movie could not stifle the spirit, but the substance was watered down. Back in 1984, I’m sure this was also done for political reasons, but as long a the book is still in print, the message will never vanish.

Most Valuable Actor:  Richard Burton as O’Brien. As stated prior, the only actor that could have pulled off such a performance at the time is Burton. His cold and sturdy stature, his delivery, and his body language made it seem like the character was written just for him. He never overplayed his hand, he was monotone at times, but gave what was required for the character to come off as cold and as sadistic as he did in the book.

1776

Starring William Daniels, Howard Da Silva, and Ken Howard          
Directed by Peter H. Hunt
Year: 1972
IMDB / Wikipedia

It’s weird watching this movie all in one sitting. This another one of those movies that came into my consciousness because it was shown in class. In fact, I watched this movie three times in high school in classes helmed by two different teachers. But when I watched this movie all those times I had to watch it parceled out in 45-minute chunks. I would like to have said that such abrupt stops and starts would be a detriment to the flow of such a story, but that was never the case. Merrily, I picked back up every time without missing a step.

But it’s a curious piece of film making for sure. Yes, there have been adaptations of stage musicals set for the silver screen, but this is the only one that I know of  that takes place in a historical setting with actual fervor and uncanny historical accuracy. Such a very odd combination that, in my mind, does very well for itself. The story is quite well put together, the songs are magnificently memorable, and there’s just enough humor to make it family friendly without betraying the subject matter. Sure, there’s the need to suspend your disbelief for some of the longer musical scenes (I doubt that Ben Franklin and John Adams performed a waltzing tag-team on Martha Jefferson in a courtyard) but that’s not the standout of this production.

By itself, without the music, it’s a wonderfully acted and photographed representation of the Tony Award-winning play. The main cogs of this production are certainly John Adams (Daniels) and Ben Franklin (Da Silva), but the supporting company of players that really make everything come together. From John Hancock (David Ford) to the secretary (Ralston Hill) to the lowly courier (Stephen Nathan). And though the ending is known, it is the journeythat makes the film so satisfying.

But I would be remiss without mentioning the political gravity of this film coming out when it did. Much like Arthur Miller’s play, The Crucible focusing and paralleling  the events of McCarthyism and the Salem Witch Trials, this play and film take aim at the partisan dissension in the country in the late 60s and early 70s. The question of the need for an unpopular war to emancipate the colonies from the grip of British rule is set against a back drop of another unpopular war and the motives the conservative establishment has always taken up that war is what the Founding Fathers would have wanted. This film shows that no, war was not a popular answer and not everyone was on board to give Britain the boot. This film’s production was so controversial that Nixon himself asked producer Jack L. Warner that the song “Cool, Cool Considerate Men” be taken out of the final cut of the film because it showed the true colors of the conservative movement that has not evolved much since this country’s inception. It was removed but later restored on the DVD version of the film and I was happy to see it put back in as it gave additional depth to the film.

I may be alone in my feelings of this film, but I enjoyed it. Legendary film critic Roger Ebert slammed it decrying everything from the portrayal of the Founders to the songs he found to be unmemorable. The truth is the actions and the wishes of the Founding Fathers rest in what they wrote. There are no recordings of their words, there is no video of the Congress, and there is no definitive way to know, for sure, their hopes or wishes would have been almost 200 years after the signing of the Declaration of Independence. To say these portrayals are insulting is insulting in itself. If I were part of something as monumental as this, I would be honored to be remembered at all and no be so picky about how I was remembered.

But this film will still be shown on rainy days in classrooms all over this country because it is not only educational but also entertaining. I remember sitting in one of my education courses in college hearing that students will only absorb information if it is entertaining; a thought that is remnant of the film Dead Poets Society and it is largely true. But, if the images of our Founding Fathers our nation’s youth remembers are those in this film, I would be OK with that. I would just be concerned with those who say that Ben Franklin’s greatest accomplishment is his singing voice.

Most Valuable Actor:  Donald Madden as John Dickinson (PA). Many would agree that the antagonist roles in films are some of the most challenging and the most rewarding in film and on stage. Madden did a splendid job playing John Dickinson, a congressman who followed his on conscience on the matter of Independence much to the chagrin of others around him. His was a conservative view but, like anyone who holds true to their principles in the face of adversity, he should be remembered as a man of conviction and not as a dissenter.

(500) Days of Summer

Starring Joseph Gordon-Levitt, Zooey Deschanel, and Geoffery Arend           
Directed by Marc Webb
Year: 2009
IMDB / Wikipedia

There’s a reason why creating a plot around the male-female relationship dynamic will never grow old: because it is so unique. There is no quintessential romantic comedy, there is no RomCom where everything that happens is just like something that happened to you. Good romantic comedies should focus on the good and the bad, just like a real relationship. I have a hard time grouping this with all of the other insipid movies that share the “romantic comedy” label, but it is as good as I can get without breaking some new ground. But, I’m so emotionally wiped out from watching this movie to do that, so it will stay what it is.

Though not everything that happened here happened in my life. I never dated a good looking woman I worked with, but I did meet someone who turned my entire perspective on the world on its ear. I never enchanted anyone with my choice of music, but I did date a girl who swore she would never get married only to not only get married but have a kids as well. I never was as devilishly handsome as JGL, but I did try to use what I had to make myself stand out and attract someone, anyone. To compare and contrast my love life and the events of this film is a needlessly masturbatory exercise I will spare you, but let’s just say that much of this movie hits close to my heart.

It’s hard to watch a movie and not put yourself in the shoes of at least one of the characters. In (500) Days of Summer, we see a young man (JGL) fall for an attractive co-worker (Deschanel) and, though they both have different wants out of the relationship, they make it last for a while. The film inter-splices the beginning, middle, and end of the relationship so you know where things are going. As a film-making  tool, using this kind of method can be done very well or very poorly, and director Marc Webb does a great job to to tell the story outright. He shows what needs to be shown, he takes the brilliant screenplay and transforms it into a movie of a haunting memory of lost, unrequited love.

Every time I watch it, I try my hardest not to cry during several point in the film, but I always have to wipe away some mist from my glasses. It is so heartbreaking because, on whatever levels you as the viewer can identify with, it is true. No relationship is perfect. There will always come a point where, as a couple, you will need to decide to move forward or move on. It’s harder for some more than others. I can speak for myself that, in every relationship I had that ended poorly, I was the one on the receiving end of the gut-punch. This movie is that gut-punch that reminds us that love is sweeter when you have to go though a lot of misery to find it.

Most Valuable Actor: Joseph Gordon-Levitt as Tom, the lovable but severely flawed protagonist. JGL is quickly becoming one of my favorite actors and I’m dying to see him in this summer’s The Dark Knight Rises. He has a tendency to throw himself in th part to make it all the more believable and real whereas Zooey just seemed to be playing herself. There are plenty of other titles coming that feature JGL and I’m looking forward to every single one of them.

300

Starring Gerard Butler, Lena Headey, and Dominic West         
Directed by Zack Snyder
Year: 2006
IMDB / Wikipedia

There are many who take issue with this movie. Some decry its use of stylized violence and gore, others with the script and its overuse of cliched battle cries, while others still take issue with Zack Snyder’s film-making style. I can admit that there are portions of this film that wear on me, I still find some enjoyment and entertainment in this movie. It’s a movie I can watch time and again because it doesn’t require thought or even much attention to follow.

My biggest problem with this movie is the obvious political slant it does not pretend to hide. Though it takes place in a fictionalized account of the Battle of Thermopylae, there are obvious allusions to the United States’ wars in Iraq and in Afghanistan. The imagery of the attack on the homeland as an act of war (a war that cannot be declared because of political/diplomatic reasons) and the provocation that leads to escalation behind the actions of a leader that has gone rogue for the good of the nation. Even the catchphrases of the Bush administration seep through the queen’s lips when she reminds another that, “freedom isn’t free.” Even at the end, the theme of battling tyranny and mysticism for the right to be free sounds like it was ripped from the lips of John Ashcroft. It’s just too much at times.

But, despite all of that, I still enjoy the movie. It’s the type of movie I believe my maternal grandfather would have enjoyed, as it follows along in the same spirit as Clash of the Titans and Jason and the Argonauts, stories of honor and bravery that are timeless indeed. It’s a good film to watch on an overcast afternoon when you just want to escape for a couple of hours.

Most Valuable Actor:  Gerard Butler as King Leonidas. The entire movie is nothing without Butler’s raw and seminal acting ability that breathes life into the character. Though the real Leonidas probably wasn’t as eloquent as Butler makes him out to be, nor as quick with the marketing-friendly catchphrases, the intensity is probably real. This is one of the few film roles where being over-the-top was required and celebrated.