SWING VOTE: A REVIEW

Bud and Molly in a lighter moment at home in Swing Vote (2008)

This is a better than average political satire. It is also a better than average social satire. Folks, that’s not bad. Kevin Costner, as a human being, as his “issues” which he likes to touch on in his films. In that sense, he’s something of a preacher. In this film he doesn’t “seize you by the throat” and “shake you good” to make his points. I, at least, appreciate a film production that respects my space. In so much as Kevin Costner “casts his vote” for the working poor in America in this film, he gets my “Oscar.”

Movies are getting a bit expensive now, and therefore the moviegoers may tend to be well-heeled yuppies, who aren’t too concerned with “the great unwashed” of America. Therefore, this film doesn’t seem to be doing too well. Disney may retreat to the “Batman” and “Spiderman” moneycows. That would be a shame.

I thought that Costner’s “Bud Johnson” was well realised generally. A character such as “Bud” may have some “pith” to him, which gets loss during a “slump” in his life but which can resurface to good effect. As a matter of fact, this has happened regularly in film stories. In a loose sense it is a variation of the “Return of the King” theme. It is also a bracing, if unlikely, idea that one man can make a difference nowadays.

So, what could make a “Bud-loving” no-count man do anything good? Cherchez la femme! In this case it is little “Molly Johnson” (Madeline Carroll), who is Bud’s daughter. She looks to be ten or eleven years old. She is a bright kid who has had to shoulder a load, as Mom (Mare Winningham) has split to “pursue” a musical career in Tucsin, AZ. Incidentally, Dad at one time had a pretty fair Texas band, specializing in singing Willie Nelson songs. In both cases music lifted them up and, after dashed dreams, left them next door to the “Streets.” Dad has settled into an anesthetized West Texas existence, working at a chicken processing plant by day (drinking on the job too), as well as “whooping it up” at the local tavern at night. Little Molly has had to grow up fast and in a “bummer” situation. She does have a school chum who has something of the same problem. She’s got some determination in her. Further, she has ideals. Now, any woman with these ingredients, whether young or old, has the stuff to “move mountains”–well, men anyway.

There are good supporting performances offered by Dennis Hopper as the Democrat Presidential nominee, “Donald Greenleaf,” and by Kelsey Grammer as the incumbent Republican President, “Andrew Boone.” Hopper’s character sort of blends the George McGovern and Walter Mondale political personalities with a touch of Ralph Nader. He is interesting to watch as a study of how “the race” for public office conflicts with personal beliefs and is destructive toward ones best aspects. As is usual with Hopper, he looks a little weird. Kelsey Grammer is very good as President Boone. Surprisingly, I was reminded of Hubert H. Humphrey, of all things, blended with George H.W. Bush. Go figure! Again, one witnesses the data banks gattering info on Bud Johnson, after which a script could be written, touching on major issues with Bud Johnson, for the president to use in “one-on-one” meetings.

Along the way the moviegoer sees Bud Johnson going about his routine, working-poor life, and pick up a few issues and interests, here and there. Although he is clearly on the benign, live-and-let-live side, he does seem to be a little bit influenced by friends, daughter, and “the local view” around West Texas. These loose conversations are gathered into the data banks as “important to Bud.” Sometimes the views are just things he has heard said, and he latches onto them under media pressure. This leads to a snowballing comedy of political satire as the candidates key off these “views” of Bud. Each candidate rolls out a celebrity to “schmooze” with Bud. The Republicans bring Richard Petty out of mothballs, and he and his Nascar vehicle come knocking at Bud’s door. The Democrats remove Willie Nelson from his cryogenic device to meet bud, who idolizes him.

At one point Molly gets so disgusted with Bud that she decides to go live with her Mom. She was under the impression that she could go to her Mom’s at any time and be welcomed. When she gets there, her Mom, well-played by Winningham, clearly doesn’t want her there. However, as she seems AWOL to Bud, he gets shook up about it, finally retrieving her from the Mom, who may have a booze/drug problem besides her “pipe-dream” of making a successful career in music. Molly seems to her an impediment to her imminent success.

The film opens in Bud and Molly’s trailer situated in a park. Molly is trying to rouse Bud from his bed. He’s feeling the affects of some excess booze from the night before. She gets him up and gets him fed. She reminds him of matters he has promised to do. She does this often. She must, if there is any hope of getting him to keep an appointment or the like. This is not an auspicious beginning to the story.

The story capsule: A man and his young daughter are trying to make ends meet in West Texas. Mom is off to Tucsin, trying to “make it” in music. The daughter, Molly, has to keep Dad going, so he won’t lose his job at the chicken processing plant. This isn’t easy because he’s dispirited and drinks too many beers too often. She’s a good student and takes to the academic challenges with earnestness and idealism. She even gives an oral report to her class on civil responsibilities. The national election is coming up, and it is important to her that her Dad vote. Incidentally, a local, ambitious reporter at a TV station “caught” Molly”s report and “aired” it locally. This reporter, Kate Madison (Paula Patton) becomes something of a model for Molly, who respects her intelligence, goodlooks, and successful media career. She seems pretty square. However, Molly would come to see how professional ambition and pressure can turn a local star into a “paper moon.” (There is ultimate redemption, after a fashion). Yet, Molly is not a saint, for all her ideals and earnestness. Fearful that her father would not make it to the voting station in time, she goes in and manages to forge his name on the registration count sheet, get a voting ticket, go into a booth, and start to vote. At that precise moment, the switch is pulled, and the voting machine goes dead. The ticket is stuck in the machine, but Molly tears off the receipt and runs home. Bud, of course, had forgotten the vote, and was drinking and playing at the tavern. So it goes. The story contrives an election that is so close that only one vote could decide the election. There are camera cuts to various “talking heads” from TV, et al. The next day the ticket is discovered, and Texas law provides that the voter must be allowed to vote. As the voting ticket had not actually been voted, the selection was still open to the voter’s decision. The authorities quickly honed down the possibilities to Bud’s district. By canvassing voters they focused on Bud Johnson, and went calling. He saw them as possibly from a goverment Family Relation’s Agency, planning on taking Molly away, and he was a bit panicky. When he learned that they were there about the vote, then he “schlepped” right into the role (helped by Molly’s receipt), and the big deceit began. (Social responsibility? Hmmmnn!) This led to the realization that he was going to choose the next President of the United States of America. He was an instant celebrity. Bud Johnson–Man of the Year? To put it mildly, he is surrounded by media representatives both night and day. Both President Boone and Democrat hopeful Greenleaf fly down to win Bud’s vote. Molly’s idealistically motivated attempt to get her father to be civilly responsible produces a vast arena of mounting corruption. The only phrase that captured this film moment’s character was: The end justifies the means. It operates across the board. Most everyone is caught up in it. Only Molly indicates doubt, regret and foreboding. From this point the moviegoer can sit back and enjoy the satire. The script is decent-to-good. The film concludes with a sort of reconciled and rededicated Molly and Bud (“Fine!” “Fine!”), Bud has had his day in fame and got to quiz the candidates in behalf of the working poor (and directly, also, from their written letters of concerns [old filmstory device]), and is finally seen entering the voting booth to cast his vote. The film fades away. There is never any certainty which way he voted. Maybe the point is that it doesn’t even matter, as they are actually a double-headed coin.

All rights reserved. Gobigfoot, 2008.

HANCOCK: A VIEWPOINT

HANCOCK GOES "FLY" IN HANCOCK (2008)

This film had talent on its side, so you would think that they would “score” a lttle more for their fans. Not the case, alas. Will Smith right now is at his professional peak. He wasn’t bad either. I’ve liked Charlize Theron since I first saw her in Mighty Joe Young. She was strikingly cute and pretty, a flukey throw-back to the days of Screen Goddesses, which are nearly forgotten, now, as Hollywood made a “U Turn” to pick up the “gal in the street” look for its female leads. More and more, Hollywood actresses began to look like Sean Penn in drag. Not good! Yet, critics should be more objective. “Will, we hardly knew ye.”

What’s wrong with this film? It’s hard to “put your finger on just one thing.” The story is goofy beyond belief, but that isn’t by itself a necessarily bad thing. The key concepts are incredible and implausible, yet that does not necessarily “deep six” a film–it might add to the fun. The various scenes are linked together by “faith, hope and charlty” as much as anything else. The script wasn’t terribly written, and yet, some damn “egghead” might decide to make it a class project, scheduled for dissection at Script Writing 101. The film had an obvious sense of humor–but why weren’t people actually laughing? I won’y fault the acting of the primary players, but a lot of this film seemed to be more akin to “mugging for the camera” than acting. There was professional direction of the photography, lighting, camera angles and the like, and these cannot be held accountable for the film’s failure. The fact that there was a certain staleness to some of the scenes may have been a contributing factor. Although Will Smith is liked by moviegoers, I guess the thought of him as a derelict super-hero just didn’t “click.” Further, there may be some sort of psychological transferance from crowds gathered to “boo” and “hiss” and “diss” “John Hancock in the movie body to the passively observing viewing audience. Then the moviegoer says irately, “I don’t like the way he’s behaving! That’s not the Will Smith I know.”

I missed the opening of this flick but gather that it focused on the derelict “street” persona of John Hancock. Hence, the “down and dirty” (and “hungover”) awakening on typical day in his life. If I’m correct that would be good, as this film is about an “awakening” by Hancock and a “make-over” as well.

The Big Capsule: “John Hancock” goes about his days with reluctance and loathing, partially anesthetized by hard liquor. He looks derelict. He looks like he may stink. His clothes are worn and suggest that, if he’s not a “street person,” he must be preparing to do some repair work under the truck. He’s brings a confrontational attitude to the victims of crime, those standing by as ewitnesses, as well as the perpetrators thereof. His gestures in behalf of people often present a kind of “Pyrrhic Victory” to those saved from disaster, as he invariably squashes their car, or knocks a big hole in their house or shop, destroys a tresured item, and the like. One of the clever touches in this film is to render his landings from the sky as invariably destructive to the road. I don’t believe I ever saw that touch before. Hancock has no friends. He is different and alone. One of the premises of this film is that he is “acting out” an internal discalm. So, what’s gnawing on his Id? Well, for one, he doesn’t even know who he is. His name “John Hancock” came about when a cop or hospital official asked him to “put your John Hancock on this form.” Smith’s character signed, “John Hancock.” You see, folks, according to the film, he couldn’t remember at that time who he was or where he came from. Bummer. Does hr have a “soul-mate” out there? Let’s face it! Deep down John Hancock is a little sensitive. When people call him names such as “asshole,” he’s not sure that it isn’t his name. NOT KNOWING!!! It’s killing him. At least he can fly. There is an implication in this film that when the world starts getting him down, John Hancock flies up on the “roof” (moon). Therefore, the moviegoer must watch this “insecure” anti-hero. However, there is another storyline that has been brewed up by the diligently typing writers, The ultimate “nice-guy” and his family. They are an All-American Family, except that she’s a crypto-hero. She bends forks, flies, and so forth, when she wants to. Ray and Mary Emrey are an attractive middleclass family, possessed of a stand-alone house, nice kid, nice car, nice neighbors, and so forth. Ray believes in “love.” It’s what the world needs now. He is trying to sell the idea to American capitalist pigs. Give back to the world community most of the loot you’ve wring out by hand. Has he lined up Condoleezza to be the world community spokesperson? Well, no, not exactly. He does have a nice logo: A heart variation. The capitalist executives think he “nuts.” He drives homeward and gets jammed tight in a line. Rush hour! His real problem is that he’s parked on a railway crossing aand a train is coming. what to do? He drives back and forth, banging into cars only a foot or so from his fenders. Why, you ask, doesn’t he just open the door and run as fast as he can away from the imminent collision? Folks, that’s you and me. In this film the people await the arrival of Hancock, employing in the meantime “me-firstism” and vanity to ineffectively deal with a given situation. Guess what? Hancock shows up, picks up the car, and tosses it away from danger, but creating new peril in the process as the car comes to a halt upside-down on top of another car. Fortunately, no one was injured. This leads to the usual group denounciation of Hancock by people observing the potential disaster. The man in the stuck car, Ray Emrey (Jason Bateman), comes to Hancock’s defense,  calling him a hero. Then he is inspired. He asks Hancock to consider a personality “make-over.” He gives Hancock his card. Email me–or just drop by. This initiates a mentoring of the hero series of scenes. Hancock has some past legal problems, but sense no one can arrest him, no one tries. Hancock does drop by, as he flies Ray and his totaled car back to Ray’s. Mary and the boy are home. The moviegoer knows right off that there is some Mary-gram being sent out that reads: Stop! You’re not welcome, Ray won’t have any show of inhospitableness. He invites Ray to eat dinner. Now, it should be added that Hancock is pretty strapping-looking for a street derelict. He brings a healthy appetite along, roo. Now, almost from the outset the moviegoer suspects some kind of relationship had existed between Mary and Hancock, if only in her dreams. Charlize is excellent at connoting this relationship with her eyes and feature generally. Hancock seems to be attracted to her, also, for reasons beyond the norm–but which he couldn;t put his finger on. Good-guy Ray suspects nothing. Incredibly, he doesn’t yet know that his wife is so strong and “different” that you stick a knife or fork in her, and the metal bends. She feels nothing. Hit her on the head with a baseball bat, and it splinters. She feels nothing. How could he have not stumbled upon this aspect of the woman wirh whom he sleeps and who bore his son? (And what about the genetic structure of the boy?) Food for thought–except in this movie. The moviegoers suspicions about these two (Hancock & Mary) pans out. But before the revelations come pouring forth concerning these “different” folks, let’s mention that Ray has so won over Hancock to his personality make-over, that Ray has agreed to “do time.” There, Ray “cleans his system of booze, practices his three point shot, and shoves convict Matrix’s head up convict Man Mountain’s butt. It’s an unusual special effect. I’m not sure that it helps one’s film ouevre’s ranking. Ray also arranges to have constructed a neat hero outfit, including an eagle, which seems to be favored by Hancock. “Tis said: clothes make the man. Now, Hancock can look the part, and he’ll be able to hold his head high at gatherings of heroes. As crime goes up, the crimes of Hancock seem mere foibles, and authorities want him released to thwart heavily-armed bank-robbers, led by “Red” Parker (Eddie Marsan), which he does in a relatively lengthy scene. Meanwhile, the relationship between Hancock and Mary heats up to a kiss, a physical fight wherin Hancock realises that she’s more like him than like ordinary humans. All this presses on his “I gotta know who I am” button. Mary then tells him: You’re an angel. The startled viewer exclaims: “Say what!?!” That’s what we are to believe, folks. However, not only are they immortal angels, but they are paired angels. At one time there were many (the heroes of classic myth?) such angelic pairs, but they have all died, excepting Hancock and Mary. She recounts at one point the wounds he suffered on his body, while rescuing her from travail. (It’s not clear why she would need his help, being incredibly strong and able to fly.) One possibility is that because proximity seems to cause them to weakon, maybe the humans had a window of opportunity. Soon enough Ray learns about his wife’s gifts. He’s cool. Now, “Red” Parker and a few convicts have escaped prison and are gunning for Hancock. Mary gets seriously wounded (weakened by too much Hancock), and Hancock himself is weakoned. He and Mary have been too close! They drained their angel dust from each other. Ray is helpless, as the medical people try to keep Mary from going “flatline.” Twin deaths? What this situation needs is a hero. Hello? Hello? Is there a hero in the house? Yes! And dig! He’s dressing the part.

All rights reserved. Gobigfoot, 2008.

STEP BROTHERS (2008): A VIEWPOINT

Dale & Brennan tussling hard in STEP BROTHERS (2008)

This film often hits the right notes in regard to adolescent rivalry and the difficult period of adjustment such rivals must pass through. It is sometimes zany after the fashion of the Marx Brothers, sometimes manic after the fashion of the Three Stooges, cruder than the worst “stand-up” comedian, and immensely aided by the longsuffering parents, ably played by Richard Jenkins (“Dr. Robert Doback”) and Mary Steenburgen (“Nancy Huff”). The “square offs” between Ferrell and Reilly near the outset of the movie were remarkably well conceived. Still, for a lot of folks “getting long in the tooth,” this film had a number of scenes that went over the top, and spills are never good. As for myself, I’ve always liked slapstick comedy, which–besides making “dirty-mouth”–is the primary form of humor offered. There is a sort of comedy of adolescent manners also involved, which can be amusing to watch, as it is done well.

Will Ferrell and John C. Reilly approach their roles with suitable whining, mini-tantrums, bitter name-calling, and “dirty deeds,” so that one might suppose they’d never get along. Then, a word–an expression–a citation of some hero figure, and suddenly it dawned on one or both that they had the same view on something. Then more common viewpoints were found. The inevitable occurs and they realise that they have a lot of the same views, tastes and habits. They exult at the equality of their maleness. They become pals.

However, this process is so wearing on the newly wed couple, Dr. Doback and Nancy Huff Doback, that they decide to split up. The last straw was the final and best means of “rearing” the two boys, as Robert Doback was now in the no-nonsense, tough-love stage, while wife Nancy seems bogged down in neo-Dr. Spockism.

Most people will get a laugh out of portions of this film, but some may wonder if the verbal stink (and some scenes) overwhelmed the fun.

The film opens with the Huffs at home one morning. Mom is getting ready to attend a conference, featuring and honoring Dr. Robert Doback for services rendered. Brennan Huff is preparing a microwave delicacy, Cheetos melted over Nachos (or other chip), which ultimately creates a sort of pizza.

The Big Capsule: A middle-aged doctor, Robert Doback, who is being honored for medical services rendered, at the podium tries to express himself in a little speech that gets tangled up as he spots the pretty Nancy Huff, wearing a dress with revealing decolete. She notices his interest and seems to respond favorably. Before you can say, “Your place or mine,” they are set to get married. Each tells his own child that there will be a marriage and that the child will have either a new Daddy or Mommy, as the case may be. What makes this situation unique is that Dale Doback is 40 years old and Brennan Huff is 39 years old (or vice-versa). Also, Brennan has a very successful brother named Derek. This allows a separate rivalry to play out. Needless to say, both Dale and Brennan suffer from a condition which might be dubbed: “Adolescent Paralysis,” characterized by an intractably frozen state of boyhood. In a sexual sense they are at an early teenager stage, although later in the flick, Dale graduates, thanks to his sister-in-law, “Alice.” Neither boy welcomes the news. Dale proves rather imaginative in his objections, as he floats the scenario past his father of the new bride seeing Dale naked and going into uncontrollable sexual excitation. All objections are brushed aside, and, after a wedding & reception, the two families join at the home of the Dobacks. There is a well-conceived front yard encounter between the two boys. They freeze like dogs some ten paces from each other, staring directly at one another. Finally, Dale states that he is known as “Dragon.” After a pause, Brennan avers that he is known as “Night Hawk.” In this bit of tense “first meeting” the moviegoer can infer the potential for reproachment. They are told that they will have to share a bedroom–not a popular decision. Dale shows Brennan the room, taking time along the way to point out a room where his drums were set up and to warn Brennan never to touch his drums. Naturally, this would be the site of desecration and tussling. The first night sees the boys in single beds, thinking up & hurling insults at one another (Dale started it). Although, it’s pretty silly so far, it revs up in low comedy & slapsticks. All the parents dream about is taking the doctor’s ample yacht on a transoceanic tour of the world. He needs to work a couple of more years for the sake of money, then its time for their romantic dream trip. ‘Tis said: “The best laid plans of mice and men oft go agley.”  One problem resolves itself when the boys discover their common “favorites,” and become pals. Yet, there are other problems the boys must overcome. Neither has a job–nor shows too much interest in one. Robert and Nancy are determined that the boys get a job. The boys dream of starting and controlling a multimedia company, Prestige, producing rock videos and the like. Brennan would sing, and Dale play the drums. There are comic moments during the job hunt, as well as in the depiction of street perils caused to the boys by a gang of tough eleven-year-olds, led by “Chris Gardoski” (Hogan Manus) and a stout redheaded kid (Travis T. Flory). Finally, to keep the status quo, the boys managed to seriously wreck the yacht, thus preventing the world cruise. If there is no world cruise, there is no need for jobs. What about Dad? Absolutely incensed. He’s in the mood to “roll up the sleeves” with these overgrown twin “Dennis the Menace” act-a-likes. The doctor’s ill-temper draws condemnation from Mom, and the marriage, as with the yacht, is headed for the rocks. There is a separation of the two sets of parents into status quo nuptuals. Now, brother Derek has dropped by a few times, too, usually bringing his wife, “Alice” (Kathryn Hahn), and two kids. Unaccountably (and incredibly), she has taken a passion toward Dale that surprises the “dickens” out of him. Derek’s not liked by either Dale or Brennan. Still, he is in the position to give Brennan a shot at a job that might work for him: manage the Catalina Wine Festival, where he would put the people gathered in the mood to buy Derek’s quota of boats. Brennan agrees to put it on, and, on that day, gets things going well. As it happens, Dale is working for the catering company employed to wine & dine the crowd. There, both Doctor Doback and Nanct Huff watch over their “little rascals.”  They meet and almost immediately get “that old feeling.” There is an amusing scene with the band hired to entertain the crowd. This leads to a problem that may jeopardize Derek’s sales that day. Their parents urge Brennan to go on stage and sing, and for Dale to go, too, and play the drums. They succeed! Maybe their multimedia dream, Prestige, may not be a “pipe dream” afterall. To reward the boys, Robert and Nancy give them a yacht-remnant treehouse. The parents laugh as the boys go aboard to find their favorite sorts of treasure. They have come to terms with the fact that they have a couple of - somehow or other - ”challenged sons.” The kids are loving it. All in all, moviegoers who can deal with “dirty-mouth” aspect will probably get a lot of laughs from this flick. Those who can’t, or don’t choose to, should avoid it. I don’t see this flick as suited to children, although the “munchkins” are often as lewd as Dale and Brennan can be. Caveat emptor.

All rights reserved. Gobigfoot, 2008.

X FILES 2: A VIEWPOINT

Father Joe leads FBI skirmish line in quest for psychic clues in X FILES 2.

Without faith, where would we be now?

This film doesn’t embrace the issue od extraterrestrial beings in any of the X Files usual modes. It provides a barely noticeable “nod” toward the concept via a poster featured in Fox Mulder’s office, as well as conversational allusions here and there. The chief tie-in with the TV series, other than the stars, is the prominent featuring of “extrasensory perception” embodied in only one character, “Father Joseph Crissman” (Billy Connolly). There were a few characters who had an Earthly appearance that dovetailed approximately with the alleged appearance of extraterrestrial visitors; that is, they were baldheaded, had long, thin fingers, and “stick-out” ears.

This film was not focused too much on carnal romance, but there was an odd scene with Scully and Mulder in bed. Scully can’t sleep, and she and Mulder draw close to discuss what may be troubling her rest. I thought that it was odd that she barely ever looked at him, given their location and proximity. Bad breath?

Helping to distract moviegoers from the fact that there were no “sightings” and such, was the introduction of two subthemes. One involved a pedaphile priest (one can’t be too topical!) struggling with memories and urgings, trying to keep his faith going (movie theme), AND having paranormal “visions” of Earthly travail. The second subtheme involved Scully’s attempt to save a lad from a rare (what else?!!) and always fatal disease of the brain (Sandhoff), and getting little support from the hospital administration at Our Lady of Sorrows Hospital. The primary storyline involves the abduction of an FBI Agent from her abode in snowy West Virginia. Presumably she was one of the stalwart commuters who drive from Pennsylvania, West Virginia, and the Shenandoah valley (and the like) to their jobs in Washington, D.C.

The rendering of “Mulder” (David Duchovny) and “Scully” (Gillian Anderson) by their famed actors is tedious and portentous beyond reason. I had hoped for a dash of humor when first I saw Duchovny’s character, as he was bewhiskered and bore more than a passing resemblance to Robin Williams. While at this point, I might also say that Mulder is depicted as a very irregular type for an FBI Agent, as “brick-in the-wall” types seem to be de riguer there. The “book” rules. Hence, to give Mulder that “something else” quality, the moviegoer first sees him with beard and mustache, covering the entire lower face. Further, to help suggest ideosyncratic brilliance on Mulder’s part, his walls are literally covered with newspaper clippings. Shades of A Beautiful Mind ! This tie-in helps to draw the viewer to the position that maybe he is some sort of “genius,” abiding reclusively and “dwelling on things” that no man dreamed before. He is rejected by the ordinary because he is not ordinary. This brings us back to his unfortunately adversarial relationship with the FBI.

There is an unusual play on religion in this film. In most films out of Hollywood the stars may bear the name “Christian” and the movie may use the name “Jesus” several times as a substitute for a curse word, but rarely do moviegoers discover two characters bearing the name “Christian” and “Crissman.” The latter is usually pronounced so as to seem to be “Christman.” Further, there are numerous Roman Catholic priests and nuns stocking many scenes. Crosses and crucifixes adorn walls. At one point Farther Joe bleeds “tears” from his eyes, seemingly. Furthermore, in one bitter scene Scully blasts God for bringing little boys into the world and then giving them terminal brain cancer. This is the old argumentative inquiry: Why does God allow pain and suffering to fall upon His human creation, whether they be good or bad in their ways? For me it was surprising to witness the medically experienced Scully reverting to high school-type whining.

Additionally, in this film, as they leave off the heterosexual romancing so common in films today, they seem to attempt recouping their titillation quotient by introducing “buggering” by priests, same sex marriage, and “head” transplants. Crazy? In retrospect, yeah, it’s kind of nutty. [Mulder can tell his children one day: "I was bitten by a two-headed dog." His child may then ask: "Which head bit you, Daddy?" "Honey, I can't remember; it was dark."]

A caveat: some may be uncomfortable with this rather open delving into a subject that has proved to be the wrong kind of “revelation,” for Roman Catholic faithful. Still, even here the director & team try to suggest forgiveness and healing through faith. At one point or other, Mulder, Scully and Father Joe all say: “I want to believe.” Each has his/her own faith issue to cope with. In the battle against evil, everyone is an army of one.

The story opens near twilight on a snowy road in West Virginia, as a small car makes it way over a narrow, icy lane. The car is driven by a 30ish woman. She’s ”beaky” strawberry-blonde, Monica Banan (Xantha Radley [possibly a "stage name" for Pamela Adlon]), an apparently lean and possibly athletic gal. The vehicle pulls up to a fairly isolated abode, where the woman parks her car inside an attached garage. Now, as she does so, there is a brief camera cut to an FBI skirmish line in which the men hold long, slender poles to pierce the ground as they move over snowy, open terrain. Each strike of the sticks makes a sound like a tapping, or tolling, drum. At the head of this tight skirmish line are a couple of FBI Agents issuing orders, and a strange, bespeckled, older man, whose hair is long and flowing. He walks as if on a mission. There is a distracted quality, separating him from the others as they set forth. This is a very brief glimpse, and the camera returns to the woman, who is exiting her car. She notices “frosty breath” wafting from a hidden spot to the right into which she must turn to enter the abode. Then she notices a fresh shoe print across tiremarks in the snow. She knows that she is in danger. She secures a gardening claw from the wall and poses the instrument, defensely. Almost immediately she encounters two men who try to grab her. She “claws” one pretty hard on face and hand. Then she attempts to escape in the snow but is captured and carted. Once again, the camera cuts to the FBI skirmish line. Suddenly, the longhaired man speeds up then falls to the snow, digging with his hands while yelling “its here!” The FBI join in and assist in the dig. Soon, they uncover two male arms, which had been cut off at the elbow area (rather neatly). These two vignettes, though presented intercut, sre not occurring at the same time. The skirmish line is basically trying to locate her and help the “seer” see a vision of the abduction and subsequent events so that the FBI can possibly find Agent Banan alive. Hence, there is a sense of a vision occurring to the priest of the abduction, even as the skirmish line seeks her. 

The Big Capsule: After discovering the severed arms but not the abducted woman, Agent Banan, FBI Agents, led by ASAC Dakota Whitney (Amanda Peet), decide that they need someone with peculiar skills–someone like fugitive former FBI Agent Fox Mulder–to deal with the oddball psychic, “Father Joe” (Billy Connally). Most of the FBI are uneasy about dealing with the serial buggerer, Fr. Joseph Crissman, who has made half the Irish lads of his parish walk funny. Dr. Scully, retired from the FBI also, is approached to find and team with Fox Mulder for one last FBI assignment. She resists taking the “dark side” but finally agrees to seek out Mulder, at least, as Agent Whitney indicates that the past is done, and Mulder need fear no arrest by the FBI. She drives to a rustic site, opens a gate, and drives a lengthy private country road to Mulder;s “hideaway.” Inside she discovers the fuzzy Mulder. Although his back is toward her, he reckonizes that it is Scully. They powwow, and Mulder agrees, buying into Scully’s “It could have been us,” argument, as well as the fact that a pedophile priest was the psychic leading the “vision quest.” Neither Mulder nor Scully are very confident about this priest’s abilities, and Scully is not only a nonbeliever but is contemptuous of the priest for buggering thirty-seven altar boys. Father Joe is presently at a holding center that works on the “honor” system and is comprised of several clustered dormitory-like facilities. He is debriefed and insulted by Mulder and Scully. Mulder, nevertheless, indicates some agnostic orientation in regard to the priest’s psychic abilities. After all, he might be legit. There are a few brief camera cuts to the captured Agent Banan, who seems to be kept in a box at perhaps a dog kennel. There is a cut or two to Scully at Our Lady of Sorrows Hospital, where she is trying to save “Christian Fearon” (Marco Niccoli) from terminal Sandhoff disease by means of a new experimental treatment, using “stem cells.” The hospital administration, dominated by Roman Catholic clergy, would prefer to transport him to a hospice where he will be comforted until succombing to death. This administrative group is led by lean, stick-out eared “Father Ybarra” (Adam Godley), whose point of view is “let’s free up the bed for a patient we may be able to help.” His lack of faith in Christian’s prospects contrast sharply with Scully’s “let’s try” experimental treatments. She has googled up a stem cell procedure occurring in Russia that seems promising. Fr. Ybarra thinks that it is wrong to put the boy through such a painful experiment. The procedure means a brain operation and injection of the stem cell material directly into the deteriating part of the brain. Why would it be very painful? you may ask, as the brain cells would feel no pain? Scully also believes that the treating doctor should have the last say. The debate about the source of stem cells for such usage isn’t broached, but I believe implied. Hence, the issue of Church vs. science is also implied. The camera cuts from the primary story allow the viewer to see the lad and witness the two sides argue their cases. Incidentally, at one point the lad, Christian, expresses fear to Dr. Scully about a man who “looks strangely at me.” The man turns out to be Fr. Ybarra. It is suspicious, but seems to be a false trail. It does serve to keep the issue of clergical pedophilia near the surface of the film. Proceeding with the main storyline, the viewer gets to witness a second woman (Nicki Aycox) abducted after a swim at an inside pool operated for members. The nabber predictably operates a pick-up truck, which he uses to force her off the snowy road where she wrecks. Muilder and the psychic priest have a couple of tete-a-tetes, where the credibility of the priest is an issue being tested by Mulder. He can’t prove or disprove the visions but knows that at least some things have–against all odds–proved correct. They go forth again and the priest is intentionally led to the wrong house, but then he startles them by saying, “No, you’ve taking me to the wrong place.” He gets out and wanders to another spot at a house nearby and declares, “This is the place they took her. Put her in a truck.” After bleeding tears from the eyes and finding a “stiff” frozen in ice, Mulder is definitely moving into Father Joe’s “camp following.” The good doctor is not buying into a “gifted” buggerer. The visions can’t come from God; therefore, they must come from the devil. There are opportunities to do some amateur speculation about God and His doings. Meanwhile, we’ve had the plot thicken as Dakota Whitney’s team at the FBI has dug up other materials on Father Joe’s victims and have established that one of the nabbers was a Russian who was part of an illegal body organ banking house. Not only that, he and his same-sex partner (married in Massachusetts) are tied in with Father Joe, because the Russian’s marital partner was one of the altar boys that the priest “backsided.” Hence, the bald-headed man on the Russian doctor’s surgical table is the “Altar Boy Bride,” now dying of lung cancer. He has AB-type blood, which is the type of the abducted gals. As the film progresses, Scully operates on Christian, while a Russian doctor and his team operate on various people, removing organs and such. At their “hospital” where they specialize in the doctor’s avant-garde head-transplant procedure, using stem cell material, a two-headed dog guards the entrance ways. [This suggests Cerberus, the mythic three-headed dog guarding the entrance to Hades (hell).] Agent Banan is in a cage and we get glimpse through her eyes via holes in her cage what’s happening. The viewer can see that the second abductee is being put on ice for a procedure that looks suspiciously like a head transplant. Is the Russiand planning to give his “wife” a real female body? What’s going on here? The “wife” has terminal lung cancer and must shed his body. Is medicine advancing or going “Frankenstein”? Mulder fights his way past “Cerberus” to interupt the procedure, and the Russian surgeon-genius was none too happy. However, Mulder is not alone. Good Dr. Scully walks in to save the chick in cold water. Folks, as “Oprah” watchers can tell you, “There’s so much confusion in the world.” Oh, along the way, Mulder comes clean, Scully professes her love, and it looks like Christian is going to go to treatment number two. Remarkably, Father Joe dies at precisely the same time as the “wife” does, as well as the exact time of the liberation of the second abductee. Chance? Scully and Mulder kick it around in a sort of brief epilogue. They divide on the issue in predictable Mulder-Scully fashion. Is this some sort of syndrome, too?

It’s best to try to see this flick in a silly mood.

All rights reserved. Gobigfoot, 2008.

HINTS AND CLUES IN ART

The Emperor Walks Down The Street Proudly Showing Off His New Clothes.

For many people literature is just a fraud. Neither people nor events actually occur. It’s “make-believe” and fit only for toddlers. The people who populate the literary scene are often, it seems, aware of the mess their peers have made, and they try to get around this problem by “gimmicks,” such as “the nonfiction novel.” In modern times no one would assume that a literary figure was interested in the public good. Certainly, they–in time–can be counted upon to “join the marches” to protest “injustices,” it is always for the few–not the many. Why? The powerful ruling circles use “the few” as ramming instruments to batter down the gates of the “city of the many”–the better to loot, maim and pillage. The many rarely perceive the words “bloody revolution”–even when it is shouted at them and lettered placards are waved in their faces. The general view is: it will all blow over in time. At any rate sheep are not so smart.

In days gone by, there were famous literary figures who tried to warn their wide readership of the danger in their midst. Strangely, none understood the danger, even when they correctly identified the targets. Today, there are no mentions of these literary clues and hints among academia. Education has been co-opted, and the Rule of Material Omissions prevails.

Let’s observe two 19th century writers and the warnings they expressed to their readers by means of literary characters. Firstly, let’s briefly consider Mr. Charles Dickens.

In his famous book David Copperfield  Dickens included a period in David’s early manhood in which he had “eyes for” the sweet young daughter of a prosperous figure in the business area of rents and other money matters. This man employed a clerk, named Uriah Heep, whose personal mannerisms were obsequious, oleaginous and characterized by false modesty. He tried to seem to be “Mr. Nice Guy” at this counting house. He declared himself to be of modest situation, almost begging for sympathy. He was certainly not worthy of his boss’s daughter’s hand, he indicated. Yet, quietly he was buying up his boss’s debt instruments. Finally, the day came when he had papers sufficient to claim ownership of the house of his former boss, who he was willing to keep on as a clerk. He demanded the boss’s daughter in marriage, not because he loved her, but to degrade the once “high-and-mighty” family by union with such a modest fellow as he. This plot was undone by David Copperfield before the woman he loved was lost. He also restore the father to his former position–now wiser in the ways of the world.

In this small section of Dickens’ lengthy novel, he was warning his fellow Englishmen of the danger of the Jews in England. It was actually prophetic, as Jews did gain control of England, as did their literary “stand-in,” Uriah Heep. The “take-over” commenced in the dawn of the modern era when the Bank of England was established, which allowed its principals to loan money, which was uncollateralized by anything other than the right to tax the labor of workers. This began to initiate a vastly increasing debt and tax level in England through the years of its operation. Guess who came to control the debt? Guess who used this leverage to influence policies in ways that also increased their power? The ruling circles of Jews, who had also begun the process of marrying into the aristocracy, had gained control. Edom had broken his brother’s ( Jacob-Israel’s) bonds, and was plotting to slouch back to Jerusalem to be born.

Over time, all of the nonJewish Elites of England were characterized by Godlessness and corruption. World Wars I & II largely eliminated the virtuous masculine remnant from England, leaving the larger world to contemplate Boy George, Sir Elton John, and the like.

Yet, the brilliance of Dickens’ choice of names cannot be nay-said. One recalls the Canaanite warrior, Uriah, who married Bathsheba, who in turn found favor in the eye of King David. Although in the Biblical account, there was no reason to find blame in Uriah’s comportment of himself as a soldier fighting in King David’s army nor as a husband, he did come from the accursed line of Canaan, one of the lines of which was the Hittites. The Will of the Most High could hardly arrange for His promised Messiah to come through a geneology that included the bloodline of accursed Canaan. If David did not marry Bathsheba, King Solomon would not have been born. Incidentally, the name “Bathsheba” was probably originally “Bethshua,” having a meaning of “comes in the name of the House” or “the Salvation of the House” or “the House Saves.” At any rate I believe her name pointed toward The Savior, Yahshua.

The fact that David Copperfield bears the same first name is no accident in my view. The fact that Charles Dickens did not follow the Biblical story to the letter does not alter the fact that he found his warning upon this Israelite foundation. As King David prefigured the Messiah to a degree, it was only mete and just that Dickens named the hero of his story David, as well, for he saved the bloodline.

Now, it is a fact that Edom bears the bloodlines of accursed Canaan, through Esau’s marriages to Canaanite women initially, bringing much grief to the hearts of Isaac and Rebecca. Since it is perfectly reasonable to suppose that these women did not come alone, but that they brought along an entourage of Canaanites at the time of the betrothal. Further, over time they were probably joined by additionally Canaanite, who either wished to enjoy Edom’s prosperity or were fleeing danger from the hands of invading armies. At any rate the seedline of Edom became a mixed multitude over time. When the difficulties with the House of Israel and later the House of Judah ensued, the Edomites moved northward, eventually occupying a land known as “Idumea” ["Edom" in Greek]. Parenthetically, Wolfgang Amadeus Mozart wrote an opera by that name. During the 2hd century B.C., the Edomites were subdued by John Hyrcanus, and they were forced to convert to Judaism. Thereafter, Edom was no more, and there were only the Jews. At the time of the Messiah, the king, Herod, and High Priest, Caiphas, and Chief priests (and probably the Temple Guard) were all Edomite Jews.

Therefore, the historical ancestry of the Jews of Jerusalem came to bear the bloodline of Esau-Canaan. The Sephardic Jews were especially likely to bear this bloodline. The colonies of Edom along the Silk Road probably eventually merged into that of the Babylonian Jews, who probably already absorbed some of the bloodlines of Amalek, after the Esther revenge caused scores of thousands of Babylonians and clandestine Amalekites to convert to Judaism. It is about this time in Babylon that Israelitish religious practices ended and rabbinic Talmudism began.

Therefore, Charles Dickens’ masterpiece both implied his understanding of England’s now powerful immigrant Jews’ lineage and the lineage of the British people, but also served as a prophesy of what the future holds for England, until a savior comes to restore the sheep to their pastures. Until such time, It is the Time of Jacob’s Trouble.

The other writer I wanted to discuss briefly is Hans Christian Anderson. As with Charles Dickens, he tried to provide warning to his readers of the folly of their leaders, Anderson was a Dane (Tribe of Dan). He created a collection of “children’s stories,” which were meant to provide educational messages to better arm children for adult life. One important story was the tale about “The Emperor’s New Clothes.” In this story “two tailors” advised the king on his royal garments. One day they brought to his attention an especially magnificent robe. The king remarked on its unusual quality. The tailors commented on the extraordinary sheerness of the textiles employed–quite grand and suitable for the discriminating Royal Person. There was no robe its equal in all the world. When the king disrobed and donned the fancy new robe, which the tailors ably assisted him into, he commented on how light it was. Why, even a feather has more weight! And it was so fine that light easily pierces it–as if mere air. When the king asked his nobles present to comment on his new royal robe, none wanted to seem vulgar by stating that they saw none, so each extolled its beauty. At last, the king decided to walk through the streets so that his people could see his gorgeous robe. Crowds gathered to witness the extraordinary event. As the king walked, crowds of people stared–none made a sound, as none wanted to seem to be a fool. Finally, a tot cried out: “Look! The King wears no clothes!” Then all the commoners began to laugh, the king, embarrassed hurried back to his palace, and the tailors caught “the first train to LA.”

In the continent at the time of this story, “Court Jews” were numerous amongst the royal and aristocratic sites of political (and therefore monetary) power. They advised the kings, dukes, counts, barons, et al, on many matters. The also offered their services as spies and couriers. The latter allowed Jews to be privy to royal planning even before its intended target. They may have even introduced the use of “counterfeit nessages” to put a different and advantageous spin on things from the point of view of “connected” Jews. This process started slowly as money changers and financiers (providing royals opportunities to increase their wealth in coin through advantageous loans). The process was somewhat similar to that of modern dope dealers who went to parties and provided “free” cocaine or heroin to the weekend “chippers.” In time they had a lot of these same people knocking at their doors for “a hit.”

Needless to say, the royal and aristocratic crowd kept coming back for more. This automatically increased Jewish leverage to pray to the royal/aristocratic client for “some favor” (which often resulted in longterm Jewish advantages). The royals became deeper in debt. The wise advice of Jews might be to declare war on a wealthy neighbor. Not only did this offer the royal a means of replenishing depleted coffers, it also alowed Jews the opportunity of lending the funds needed to pay the soldiers, suppliers and armorers what was required for their services. As their equivalents might be advising the proposed adversary, it allowed these Jewish advisers to coordinate their advice to the great advantage of Jews. In time Jews also came to control some of the most important munitions companies, such as Vickers. Always advocates of free trade since their “heydays” in Petra, on the Silk Road with their colonies, and on their well-travelled, trading ships, the Edomite Jews knew just what precious trinket might please a given royal.

Well, if the royal & aristocratic crowd flourished, and if the Jews flourished, who was left holding the stick? Naturally, it was the general subject population who had to give the lion’s share of their labor to the royals, either in tax or some sort of feudal share-cropping. This same populous group was expected to provide the manpower in a war. The advisers in these matters were ever more importantly Jews.

Now, Anderson’s story of  “The Emperor’s New Clothes” is a gentle warning of the folly of having aliens, or strangers, counciling the king. They make fools of the king, and they mock and despoil the subjects. At this time in Europe few would fail to connect “the tailors” with “Jewish advisers,” as tailoring was a form of business which Jews especially populated.

In our time in the West, Jews appear at the moment ready to shed their role of “adviser” and assume the role of ruler directly. Many 20th century American presidents have been of Jewish extraction, including the present “Mad Bomber,” W. No matter what these presidents profess in terms of their “Christian” beliefs, the Jewish State and the Jewish World Agenda always have priority.

All rights reserved. Gobigfoot, 2008.

MUMMY 3: A Viewpoint

The Mummy: Tomb of the Dragon Emperor (2008)

This is an entertaining adventure story. In this sequel the moviegoer finds Brendan Fraser with all cylingers running well. This version was directed by Rob Cohen. I thought he, along with his team, did well, utilizing my premier qualifications: Does the film look good and move at a reasonable pace? Yes, to both. Way to go Rob & Co.!

At first I missed the old Evie (Rachel Weisz), but as the film progressed, the new Evie (Maria Bello) won my acceptance as a good replacement. The son, Alex O’Connell (Luke Scott), was suitably dashing as a “chip off the old block.” John Hannah served up Rick’s brother-in-law, Jonathan Carnahan, consistent with prior renderings, except for a few scenes at his nightclub, “Im Hotep,” where he briefly struck cords reminescent of Bogart’s “Rick” in Casablanca blended with John Cazale’s ”Fredo” in Godfather II.

The dialogue in this film was pretty good, and there were several occasions when I “LOL.” The scriptwriters were Alfred Gough and Miles Millar.

The rendering of the story was generally well done. One must concede certain implausible and/or impossible aspects as part of the fun of the adventure. It can get rip-roaring at times. There are several well-done special effects, such as the Abominable Snowmen, and the chariot & truck chase. Still, much of the special effects in this story, and the story itself, are, by now, familiar aspects of this series, as well as other movie.

The primary settings are London, England and The Peoples Republic of China. The latter gets the lion’s share (or should I say “dragon’s”) of filmtime. The renderings of Shanghai are interesting, whether real or construct in a Hollywood backlot. The camera shots of western China’s Ningxia Province was “nothing to write home about.” The time period is 1946. China is not an altogether stable place. Rebellious forces lurk in several provinces. Some leaders believed that only an “Iron-fisted” man could restore order to China.

The movie opens with a rather extended prologue in which a historical and mythic narration provides the moviegoer with a foundation from which he draws all need direction. This prologue establishes the nature of the emperor (Jet Li), the Faustian deal he makes, the triple betrayal involving the emperor, a witch (Michelle Yeoh), and General Ming Guo (Russell Wong), and the subsequent pregnant sleep.

The Big Capsule: The body of the film opens in western China in Ningxia Province in 1946, where the son of famed adventurers, Rick and Evelyn O’Connell, “Alex” (Luke Ford) is presiding over an archaeological “dig.” Alex was assigned this task by British Professor Roger Wilson (David Calder), who will soon be arriving to oversee the promising site of the Tomb of the Dragon Emperor Han at which he and a large team of “diggers” are toiling. Unbeknownst to Alex & Company, someone is watching there excavation, which has already revealed the top part of a large “bust” of Emperor Han. The professor arrives, receives a briefing, and they prepare to enter the tomb soon, as the dicovery of the entrance gate is imminent. They find it, enter it, and discover (shades of Indiana Jones: Crystal Skull) that it has a “key,” is “booby-trapped” and is a craftily engineered structure having qualities of “transformers” (if there were such mechanical toys in 1946). Also, a ninja (Isabella Leong) attacker appears on the scene. She and Alex strife, and she makes a getaway under a “hail of bullets.” Although they don’t know it, this ninja is part of a mother-daughter team, who seek to protect the sleeping emperor–and keep him sleeping. The mom, “Zi Juan” (Michelle Yeoh) also happens to be the good-looking witch of the film prologue, who had caught the eye of both the Dragon Emperor and his “right hand” man, General Ming, This may puzzle the reader, but one may rest assured that magic is required of some sort. As a matter of fact, this mummy sequel weaves into the storyline the legendary Himalayan land of immortality, Shangri-La. For today’s adventure stories, one legend is never good enough. This side trip to the Himalayas does provide a pretext to show the moviegoer some attractive snowy mountain terrain. Also, there is the pretext in this lofty sidetrip for introducing the Abominable Snowmen (aka, “Yetti”), who turn out to be “righteous dudes.” Incidentally, the Yiddish word, “Yenta” may be derived from “Yetti.” (In either case you have a difficult person to deal with.) Be that as it may, the successful dig results in the discovery of The Emperor’s burial remains and entourage. Unbeknowst to Alex, the witch had put a curse on the emperor and his soldiers that left them encased in clay-like material, which soon hardened. By use of certain magical tools and the special golden pagoda of Shangri-La, the awakened emperor would gain immortality and bring global tyranny. So, what awakened him to begin with? Let’s just say that England lay an egg. The camera cuts to England and the stately manor of The O’Connells. Rick and Evelyn are dwelling in a safe, wealthy and –for Rick–boring “retirement. Evelyn has written a few books based on her and Rick’s adventures which proved to be popular, especially with the ladies who secretly dreamed of adventures themselves and lived Evie’s vicariously. There are transient moments in which amour is suggested by one or the other. Writer’s block or napping seem to get in the way. There are references to son Alex, and the moviegoer is introduced to a counterpoint to the lively young archaeologist encountered at the dig in prior scenes. There is a stab at fisherman humor at a trout stream running through the estate. Soon enough, the O’Connells are visited by one of HRM’s lesser officials, who inquires if the retired couple might like to do one last service for their government. They feign a lack of interest but are clearly curious. It seemd that the British Museum has possessed an ancient Chinese relic, known as the Eye of Shangri-La, which it wants to return to its ancestral locale of China, as a show of good intentions toward the politically unstable Chinese government. The trick was to get it to the right people. Naturally, HRM’s government recalled the very able assistance provided by the O’Connells during the war years and wondered if Rick might consider the task. The “Eye” is housed in a sort of grillwork of serpents, which included a shield-scroll on which were engraved ancient script, which amounted to a code for opening the egg of the Eye. Obviously interested, the O’Connells recall that Evie’s brother, Jonathan, has a restaurant in Shanghai. One not pay him a visit. Who knows? Maybe visit son, Alex, too. And, since we’re going there, may as well take the egg along. By now, the moviegoer realises that General Yang is determined to awaken the Dragon Emperor to save China from chaos. He has a “tough cookie” of a woman as his devoted subordinate officer, always at his side, except when out trying to assassinate someone who is interferring with General Yang’s vision. When the O’Connells arrive at Jonathan’s Im Hotep Night Club, the find not only Jonathan but Alex as well. Alex is still in the John Lennon stage of “not needing anybody’s help in any way.” He and his father are slightly estranged, and Mom is trying to keep her boys together on good family terms. There are a few brief scenes that indicate some competitive feelings (Oedipus Complex?) that suggest “burying Alex’s father” under the glory of his achievement(s). At any rate Alex does show the terracota image of the Dragon Emperor, posed on his chariot, which had been removed from the “dig” to a site in Shanghai, to his Mom and Dad. Professor Wilson is on hand, and he and Rick greet each other warmly. however, General Yang, his Gal Friday, aka, “Scarfacess,” are also on hand, but they don’t plan to shake any. They’ve thoughtfully brought along some “strongarm” support.  They want thr egg so that they can awaken the Dragon Emperor and swear fealty to him. (Please recall that the Dragon Emperor feels that he’s been betrayed before by a general, and, therefore, General Yang had entered into a risky business here.) General Yang & Co. get “the drop” on the O’Connells, and he demands that Evie translate the engraved script. She feigns lack of expertise in the language, which is ancient sanscrit (dovetaiks well with Shangri-La/Himaiayas story ingredient). Finally, Evie translates the clue as requiring the blood of an innocent to open egg grillwork, so they could get at the “Eye” (a large, cut, blue diamond). Parenthetically, it’s well-cut, and I doubt the skill existed at that time, as well as helpful tools, to accomplish this task, Be that as it may, a third ingredient arrives in the form of ninja Lin, who has on her person the only weapon in the world that could kill the emperor before he wreaked havoc on the world. It’s a fancy-handled dagger, given to her by her witch Mom, Zi Juan. Which way will the Eye go? General Yang takes a fake “kill-aim” at Rick, and Evie leaps to the rescue. She is secured by Scarfacess,” while the General wonders if their can be more innocent blood than that which is given to save another. He cuts Evie’s finger and drips blood upon the sanscrit letters. This leads to a very “kool” opening of the egg. About this time, Rick has been forced to and has achieved the lifting of the heavy top to the imagined remains of the Dragon Emperor. Almost immediately, ninja Lin leaps into the “coffin” and stabs the bones of the man in the burial container. She gets him in the “heart”–the only spot that will kill him. during the confusion, the elixer inside the egg which was to be a first stage launching of the emperor into life orbit get splashed on the statue of the emperor upon his chariot, fronted by four strong warhorses. When Lin realises that she has stabbed a eunique–not the emperor, she looks about puzzled. Where is the emperor buried? By now the statue is cracking and a semi-molten mummy, revitalized, accepts the homage of General Yang–with due threat against betrayal issued. This leads to a chase. Alex’s has taken a “shine” toward Lin, who has joined the O’Connell clan in their determination to stop the Dragon Emperor from reaching Shangri-La. However, awkwardly, Rick has been impelled by a flung sword by the Dragon Emperor, and it looks real bad for him. His only chance is to get to Shangri-La, where the good witch, Zi Juan, can work her healing magic. Lin knows the way (heh,heh,heh!). She’s been there once before. When they get there, it is their intention to blow up the golden pagoda on which the Eye of Shangri-La perches. Once in place, it casts a beam to the location where immortality awaits. Incidentally, when it finally casts its light, I saw only icy peaks, so I must have missed something. Anyway, the good guys are trailed by bad guys, including General Yang, his soldiers (a company or so), and the “Bad” emperor. While Jonathan sets the dynamite bundles, carefully wiring them, Rick and Alex compare armament. There are Abominable Snowmen, avalanche, and a firefight coming on the heels of one another. The welling powers of the emperor allow him to thwart the dynamite scheme. Rick offers a last-ditch effort which fails. The emperor beams up with the Eye. Although the “Yetti” have caused havoc to General Yang’s soldiers, after Zi Juan explained to one that General Yang and his men were evil and must be stopped, the Dragon Emperor proved too much for them and they split. The Dragon Emperor heads to his tomb to collect his troops for the walk to immortality. Rick calls for Mad Dog Maguire who is periodically brought into the film to get the O’Connells to unlikely terrain, so they can get to the Wall before the emperor and his troops. Zi Juan gives up her immortality (an example for her daughter) to summons the killed adversaries of the Dragon Emperor, who had been buried beneath the Great Wall of China, to rise up against the tyrant who had killed them and avenge themselves and preserve freedom for the people. This is pretty heady stuff. Who could refuse? So, the great battle is formed, as the Dragon Emperor and his ancient army, joined by General Yang and his more modernly equiped soldiers, gather in rank and file, phalanx and cavalry, to march beyond the Wall to immortality and invincibilty. Facing them, the wrathful horde of skeletal adversaries, led by old General Ming, eager to defeat the emperor and avenge their ancient wrongs at his hands. There is some good tongue-n-cheek humor, as well as slapstick comedy, as the individual “warriors” cope with their disabilities. The O’Connells and the witch and her daughter expend all their effort at stopping the emperor from crossing the wall, but his “shape-changing” abilities make him more formidable than an “eight hyndred pound gorilla.” (Previously, he had changed into a three-headed flying dragon to get to Shangri-La.) There is a brief moment when General Ming sees old lover, Zi Juan, and they gaze at one another briefly recalling what had been and what might have been. Then he raises his sword in victorious salute–and dissolves away in dust. About here in the film, a deadly “mano-a-galo” fight ensues between the Dragon Emperor and the good witch, Zi Juan. She sees that he is wearing the magic dagger in its hilt at his waist. When he perceives that she is now mortal, he relishes the thought of killing her. Before he can act, she impells herself on his sword, while at this distracted moment, withdraws the magic sword from his hilt, and gets it to Lin. There is also a tussle going on between General Yang and “Scarfacess” and the team of O’Connells and Lin. Yang gets yanked between crushing gear teeth, as does his loyal gal Friday, when she refuses to release him. Rick takes the magic knife and tries for the heart of the emperor but misses. The knife is flung fiercely away and breaks in two. Not to worry! It’s a long knife. While Rick is looking at the enraged Emperor coming his way, Alex retrieves the front end of the magic knife and, leaping from behind, drives it deeply into the emperor’s back. When the emperor begins to change colors–not talking royal purple, now–the moviegoer perceives that the world has been saved from his New Weird Order. However, since he is still staggering about, Rick thinks it is expedient to “stick him” with the remnant of the magic knife stretching out from the hilt on the floor nearby. He grabs it and plunges it into the front heart side of the “disco-lighting” emperor. This does it, signified by the dissolving of his terracota troops into dust, as well as himself. For all the witches and magic in this film, when all is all said and done, the moviegoer is left with the Biblical imagery: “Dust thou art, and unto dust thou wilt return.”  There is an epilogue. We find that Jonathan has given Mad Dog Maguire ownership to his night club. He’s tired of China. Maybe, he’ll just try Peru. After all, the blue diamond should bring him a nice piece of change, and he flashes it at the moviegoer. As for the O’Connells, they are all warmly bonded again, and headed for England and the stately O’Connell manor, where they can enjoy privacy, comfort, and plenty of servants. Evelyn has plenty of material to use in new adventure romances. Dash it all! Life is good!

All rights reserved. Gobigfoot, 2008.