Review of In the Heat of the Night

It's very interesting to think about how films age. Viewed from modern eyes, In the Heat of the Night is nothing special. To many, the primitive methods used by police to solve a murder mystery are cliched from countless detective stories produced since, and are pretty obsolete when compared to the high-tech and far-fetched ways in which murders are solved on CSI. The moralizing around racism in Mississippi is old news: we're modern people and most of us agree that violent lynchings are bad.



However, this was not the case in 1967. Then, America was in the midst of a raging civil rights battle. Songs like "Nigger Hatin' Me" received radio play. To many people, the idea of a black man slapping a white man was truly shocking. It happens in this movie, and it was apparently one of the first times something like that had happened on the big screen. As for the policing, I can imagine the forensic work was, at the time, considered to be quite clever and cutting edge.

But now, it's not. It's all been done countless times and developed in new ways since. While this movie may have done it first, but it's hard not to see it as cliche. During the screening, I told myself repeatedly that it wasn't cliche, it was iconic, but it didn't work. In short, it didn't age very well.

This is not to say I didn't enjoy it on some level. It had some great dialogue, including the very powerful and famous line, "They call me MISTER Tibbs!", which went on to become the title of a sequel. Sidney Poitier was a powerful screen presence. Taken together, all of these things added up to a solid "meh".

2 1/2 drunken rednecks out of 5

Review of Forrest Gump

Back in 1995, my first reaction to Forrest Gump was very unfavourable. You see, I watched it on video after the Academy Awards in which it won best picture. At the time, I REALLY wanted Pulp Fiction to win. I was a rabid fan, and in my young mind any film that competed with my favourite movie had to be utter shit.

My criticisms of the film were quite scathing. I came up with this whole theory about how it is the perfect Dumbass American movie. The soft-hearted and soft-headed Forrest gump blunders through life and succeeds utterly. The message seemed to me to be, "Don't think very hard, follow your heart and you'll succeed." Kindly semi-retardation was being glorified as the ultimate American virtue. Yet, at that time in my life I loved Homer Simpson. Funny, that.



I was fully conscious of my old feelings as I turned on the DVD player, but I was willing to give the movie a chance. I'm glad I did. It turns out that Forrest Gump is a decent show.

I'm not saying that what I thought in 1995 wasn't correct on some level: there is a certain sector of American society that rejects contemplation and introspection, glorifying rushing through life roaring and knocking stuff over. However, I'm no longer certain that this is what Forrest Gump is about. Rather, Forrest's governing trait is selflessness.

Forrest loves those he cares about without concern for appearances and strikes out at those who harm them without fear of physical or social retribution. It makes him fearless. His selflessness is what allows him to float (like the feather at the beginning and end of the movie) from opportunity to opportunity without fear for losing what he has. Near the end of the movie, Forrest addresses this himself: "I don't know if we each have a destiny, or if we're all just floating around accidental-like on a breeze, but I, I think maybe it's both. Maybe both is happening at the same time." Something about this line strikes me not as dumb Americanism, but rather Taoism. Is the ultimate message of Forrest Gump to approach each moment in life with love and without fear?



One symbol in the movie still perplexes me: "Run, Forrest, run!" Running appears everywhere in the film. Forrest runs from rednecks chasing him in a truck. Does this mean that he runs from his problems? No, because he also runs back into the jungle to save fallen soldiers. So he runs to solve his problems? No, because near the end of the movie, after a particularily awful jilt from the love of his life, he runs across America several times and it gets him nowhere. Answers.com is equally unhelpful. In answer to the question "Why was Forrest running?", it says "Because he felt like it." This answer is unsatisfying unless viewed from a Zen perspective.

Again with the Eastern philosophy. Some may accuse me of reading too much into a dumb movie like this. Well, I know enough about screenwriting to say that most scripts are written by brainy people. Even Transformers had hidden moral messages.

So it appears that Forrest Gump is a complicated movie about a simple man. It is definitely worth watching again, although many scenes are marred by some awful product-placements and an overly sappy musical score.
4 Presidential audiences out of 5

Review of All the President's Men

Here is a movie that truly strives for realism. In the dialogue, characters make slip-ups and have to correct themselves. Dramatic camera angles are not used, but rather shots that linger on a single character's face for minutes on end. There is no music for the first 25 minutes of the movie. It's an artistic technique that sets this movie apart and also fills it with tension.



From almost the first scenes, I was sucked into the plot. It is intensely thrilling. And here's the interesting part: nobody dies. Nobody fires any guns. How is that possible in a political thriller? It's all in the tone. Richard Nixon, the film's adversary, is only ever seen on TV. Yet, his menacing presence is felt throughout the entire film. It is not long before Woodward and Bernstien begin to feel their actions shadowed by mysterious adversaries that track their movement and hush witnesses. For most of the movie, the danger is implied.

The ending of this movie is very interesting (no real spoilers ahead, if you know the history). It ends on a down-note, with our heroes embarassed and frightened. They are at the height of the danger to their lives. Nixon has clearly won this battle. They are told they have to persevere to do this thing right and work hard by their boss. The rest of history is then told without dramatic action. It's an ending that is gutsy, if nothing else. Knowing the history, one would expect the film to end with Nixon resigning and the reporters basking in their victory. It is different and refreshing to have the dramatic action end with the reporters losing. Some might find it anticlimactic, but not I.

See this movie. Even if you have no interest in the Watergate cover-up or politics, you will enjoy it.
4 1/2 CRP Directors out of 5

Review of Modern Life

The opening image of Modern Times is a herd of sheep pouring through the gate of an open pen which melds into an image of men rushing to work. I'm not sure if this image was iconic then, but it certainly is now. It is also an icon for the whole movie: a satire of industrial society. Seeing this film, it makes sense that it alarmed many wealthy industrialists and their allies in government, and earned the ire of such men as J. Edgar Hoover, director of the FBI.

Charlie Chaplin's also iconic Tramp character and his thief girlfriend get jobs, systematically lose them, and waltz in and out of jail more times than you can count. It's all very funny. I also find it interesting that The Tramp, in one scene, is mistaken for a communist and gets in trouble with the authorities. Was this a prophetic vision of things to come, or was Chaplin already getting in trouble for his leftist leanings in the 1930's?

Although films had ceased to be silent many years in the past, Modern Times plays like a silent film, with only sound effects, music and brief snippets of dialogue. The only dialogue spoken is phrases like, "Get back to work!" Regarding the music, I wish I had read about the movie beforehand, because apparently the love theme from the movie became famous later as the song "Smile".



Watching this movie made me think about the 1930's as compared to the 1990's. While life must have surely been harder for people in the 30's, in retrospect, my time as a Gen-Xer in the 90's recession was similar. Jobs were scarce for young people and many found themselves depending on the elder generation for support. Droughts were common. Both eras were followed by a baby boom as the elder generation aged and the newer one took over their jobs.

The comparison is interesting when examining how each generation bore the hardships. In the 30's, throughout all media, including Modern Times, one can see a simple message: "Times are tough, but smile, because things will get better". Compare that with the 90's, when times were easier than the 30's, but still pretty bad (but not for rich people). My generation's culture was saturated with sarcasm, cynicism, disillusion, depression, anger and apathy. If Gen-X 90's culture could speak about life, it would sullenly say, "It's all bullshit anyway." Both cultures valued smiles, but my generation appreciated a sardonic, knowing smile.

I'm not saying one generation handled it better than the other. I'm just saying it's interesting how they coped.

This is, no doubt, a strange digression from the subject of the movie review. Returning, I heartily commend it for its courage in dealing with what must have been painful subjects with humour and smiles. It is fascinating and funny.

4 1/2 cogs in the machine out of 5