http://blogcritics.org/ A sinister cabal of superior bloggers on music, books, film, popular culture, politics, and technology - updated continuously. en Copyright 2005-2007 by the authors Mon, 5 Dec 2005 00:19:15 EST http://backend.userland.com/rss Blogcritics.org custom software http://blogcritics.org/ Phillip WinnSunday, August 26, 2007, marks the switch of all Blogcritics.org article feeds from full-content to short-content. This is the result of several converging factors, and is unfortunately a permanent decision (as permanent as any decision can be on the web, that is). We are aware of all of the reasons that this is a Bad Idea, and we are aware that some of you will be quite upset about having to click on something to read the free content, and we're sorry. Unfortunately, despite great effort, full-content feeds are not currently economically viable. Two other factors are involved: full-content feeds have resulted in an unprecedented level of content theft, with BC content appearing on many websites, usually spam sites, without attribution or permission. This duplicate content causes a cascading set of problems, not the least of which is that search engines generally aren't favorable to duplicate content, and don't always guess correctly. Finally, our RSS advertising partner is strongly in favor of short-content feeds. We hope that you'll continue to subscribe to BC via RSS, and when an article grabs your eye, it's only a click away, still free on the BC website. Thank you for your understanding. Administration0@blogcritics.org Sun, 26 Aug 2007 12:00:00 EDT http://blogcritics.org/archives/2005/12/05/001915.php 10ClubsAeon Flux (2005) begins by sketching details of the history and political society of its story universe. There is an epidemic caused by an industrial disease where only a few million survives it. There is now a monarchy and for some reason, the discoverer of the cure became king and a dynasty resulted. Material prosperity makes the authoritarian political environment acceptable. Extensive survellience capabilities enable the monarchy/chairmanship to maintain almost complete political control without totalitarian conditions. There are unexplained and officially denied abductions, which are a source of discontent. Those claiming to have lost family members are not silenced, so a degree of 'dissent' is tolerated with certain boundaries. There is an underground movement seeking to overthrow the monarch.Initially the movie suggests that it is making statements on political themes of authorianism, but this quickly falls to the background. Instead, the story throws up a series of existential questions. Aeon Flux examines issues related to reincarnation and has a character who seems to parallel the Dalai Lama. It ingeniously brings such questions down from the realm of metaphysics, of religious faith via technological considerations so that these questions now become a matter of practical consideration. It is a brilliant examination of the close parallels between reincarnation and a certain level of technological advancement. Just this part of the story makes it well worth the admission price.The heart of its examination is the personality identity problem created by reincarnation and past life memories. It changes the motivation of the primary characters in the story and there lies the problem with the movie. It ends with a three quarter empty feel (or maybe more) because the ability of the narrative to explain the personality identity problem is inadequate, virtually absent. The main character will changed her motivation because all of a sudden a personal identity problem she were barely aware of suddenly becomes the centre of her world. There is little explanation of the social problem posed by these sudden personality changes. The explication of this issue is limited to showing Aeon having dream like flashbacks and a dramatic scene where Charlize Theron gets one of her few chances to actually emote for a line or two. The issue becomes a nagging problem but is never resolved in the action of the movie. To go into greater details of these points will require revealing part of the plot and it is done here.With a running time of about an hour and a half, Aeon Flux could have been longer to work out some of these issues. At the end of the movie, we have Aeon stating that one life with hope is better. This is a sell of the one life then Heaven or Hell metaphysic, that it is less problematic philosophically and practically, and that it is more emotionally satisfying. Hence God, being perfect, would not have chosen this arrangement. Screw politics. Metaphysics rules here. This is Aeon Flux, not Serenity (2005).Charlize Theron's largely emotionless portrayal of Aeon Flux together with her stylised wardrobe and action sequences does help with establishing the atmosphere that society in her world is stylish but largely empty inside. This movie could have been another Matrix if it had worked out a way to fully explore the personal identity issues with reincarnation, showing how the problems which would be created for individuals and the society. Pity.I Originally published this at blog. Video40420@blogcritics.org Mon, 5 Dec 2005 00:19:15 EST http://blogcritics.org/archives/2005/12/01/003709.php 10ClubsTom Yam Goong (2005) represents a step backwards for Tony Jaa compared to his 2003 movie Ong Bak . First, unlike in Ong Bak, story takes second place to action and has in fact become the excuse for action sequences. Second, and worse still, the action sequences are inconsistent in style and tone, and they suffer from logic breaks.In Tom Yam Goong, Jaa tells another story close to his heart. Jaa comes from a mahout family, and his childhood was closely involved with elephants. In the film, he plays a young mahout, Kham, who is also trained in the Jaturongkabat martial art, Koshasarn. Jaturongkabat soldiers were trained to protect Thai war elephants in battle, similar to armoured infantry squads that assist tank units. When the elephants in his family's care are stolen and taken to Sydney, Australia, Kham goes to their rescue.Unfortunately, the very first chase sequence in the streets of Bangkok suffers an event flow break. When the container truck carrying both elephants finally manages to break free from traffic, the next shot shows Kham giving up the chase even though it wasn't possible for him to know that the truck had broken free - there was no reason for him to stop chasing, according to the way the sequence was shot. So how does Kham locate the elephants? He seeks out an old woman who locates the elephants by performing an oracle ritual with a pendulum, while doing a dance.Once in Sydney, the story becomes all about fighting. On the plus side, these action sequences still retain certain superb characteristics of Tony Jaa's pugilistic skills and choreography. Form (kata) or stances are visible, which is a mark of skill, contrary to what many have been told. While Jaa is a fan of Bruce Lee (who advocated a free style form of fighting with his Jeet Kune Do), fortunately he has not abandoned his training and begun to "fight like children." The phrase "fight like children" is used by Shaolin Wahnam founder, Wong Kiew Kit, to describe the free sparring seen in martial art tournaments where little form can be seen.In spite of their good form, the action sequences suffer from inconsistency in style, in part because Jaa incorporates the signature style of other action movie stars into them. Jaa's own fighting style comes across as a present day Mas Oyama, forceful and brutal. His hallmark high jumps, done without wires, are as amazing as ever. But Jaa also uses a lot of arm breaking techniques, which are similar to Steven Segal's conversion of his Aiki-do to Aiki-jujitsu. Unfortunately, Jaa lacks Segal's speed and fluidity. Jaa does demonstrate speed in one scene where he kicks a knife out of an opponent's hand, but the angle of the shot was uncomplimentary and didn't give a good indication of how fast it was. The lack of speed in the fight sequences could be deliberate or for the safety of the stunt crew/other actors. On the upside, the relative slowness does give the appearance of forcefulness and brutality.The master of speed still remains Bruce Lee, whose fight sequences were marked by their sheer speed. While Jaa can't match Lee's speed, the movie does incorporate a Bruce Lee concept: a David vs. Goliath showdown. Kham's confrontation with the Capoeira fighter, is novel but, unfortunately, poorly choreographed. The Capoeira fighter should have been easily dispatched given his types of attacks, and the fight ends on a whimper. Nathan Jones' appearance reminds me of Bruce Lee versus basketball giant Kareem Abdul Jabbar in Game of Death (1978). But at least Nathan Jones is/was a WWE wrestler rather than someone, like Jabbar, with a non-pugilistic background.After borrowing from Segal and Lee, the movie takes on Jackie Chan. The action sequence involving roller bladers and bikes seems to imitate a Jackie Chan type of action sequence. This particular sequence has a very dangerous stunt where Jaa runs up a glass wall and somersaults off it just before a beach bike crashes through it. Jackie Chan's action sequences are more for comedic effect having little blood or brutality and with lots of acrobatics for effect. So this action sequence, where Jaa primarily uses acrobatics to evade or subdue his opponents, doesn't fit with other sequences (later and prior to this), where he just simply bashes them up in brutal combat. The sequence highlights the problem with the action sequences in the movie as a whole, the lack of consistency.A different type of consistency problem arises in sequences that show Kham to have different levels of prowess or skill. For example, in one sequence (sequence A), Kham demonstrates a certain level of prowess or skill. In a later action sequence (sequence B), the skill level shown drops, and then in the next sequence (sequence C), the prowess level demonstrated is even higher than in sequence A!In addition to the action sequence problems, the movie contains an amateurish, though humourous, statement about buying pirated DVDs. While not as bad as Jackie Chan's efforts in The Myth on behalf of his pet causes, it was still too obvious. Fortunately, the statement came across as being more on the cute side rather than being irritating. But this had the same effect as would if a character suddenly started playing out of character, breaking the immersion. Jaa also addresses the exaggerated PETA claims about elephants in Thailand. Jaa shows that while there are Thais who would exploit elephants, to say that this reflects the majority or the tradition of elephant keeping in Thailand is clearly an exaggeration.I think Tony Jaa, with his "no sling, no stunt" motto, is set to replace Jackie Chan as the Asian action movie star for the next decade or two. But Tom Yam Goong looks to be and hopefully is more of a learning experiment. The movie's story isn't very strong, and an action movie still needs a story. Otherwise, it becomes like a porn flick: people just wait around for the "banging" sequences.Jaa also still seems to be finding his action sequence style. His attempt to incorporate Jackie Chan type of acrobatics doesn't blend into his main style, a modern day Mas Oyama. To take up the mantle of Jackie Chan doesn't mean one has to be like Jackie Chan. Jackie Chan, after all, didn't appear as the best of the numerous Bruce Lee clones -- he came across as Jackie Chan. And Tony Jaa needs to do just that, to come across as Tony Jaa. We saw that in Ong Bak, but it was adulterated in Tom Yam Goong.Original published at this blog. Video40157@blogcritics.org Thu, 1 Dec 2005 00:37:09 EST http://blogcritics.org/archives/2005/10/07/174126.php 10ClubsThe reworking of the original folk tale in this movie changes the story for the better. In the original Jewish story, the corpse bride remains bitter and unfulfilled. In the movie, the story is more uplifting, making clearer the premise in the original story about the nature of love, that love liberates. (Actually, the reworking of the folk tale draws inspiration from a fairy tale, "Beauty and the Beast.")The movie traces the steps of how love grows and deepens and becomes more God-like through the interaction of Victor (Johnny Depp) and the corpse bride, Emily (Helena Bonham Carter). "The more one looks for love, the more one doesn't love.""People need each other and think it is love. There's no hanging on to, or fencing in, of the other one when one loves."The movie starts with Emily at this stage. She drags Victor to the realm of the dead despite knowing that he had not intended the vows to her."Love attracts love."When Victor ceases to treat Emily as a freak and begins to feel compassion for her, enough to willingly marry her ("Beauty and the Beast" reversed), this empowers the spark of true love in Emily. Emily will not allow Victor to sacrifice himself for her."When one really loves, one can never be hurt."And the movie ends with Emily neither hurt anymore by her past tragedy or by Victoria's (Emily Watson) love for Victor. Victor's love "has liberated her" and allows her to liberate him from her previous self-love.Noticeable are compromises in depicting religion. The church is bereft of Christian icons, looking more like a crypt and the vows seem Jewish. This perhaps reflects on marketing concerns. A Jewish tale Christianized might grate on nerves hearkening to the times of forced conversions. At the same time with the current Zionist situation, rendering it as a Jewish story will put off hordes of people from it. Perhaps it be a good time to break certain memes about Judaism and Zionism by acquainting readers with this site, JewsnotZionists.The musical elements in the movie, while witty, as was the satire of the landed gentry and class differences, wasn't haunting in that there's no hook effect. Also, Victor came across more like Frasier's Dr. Niles Crane (David Hyde Pierce) than Johnny Depp. Johnny Depp up to his playful tricks again?A Chicken Soup for the Soul movie wonderfully rendered! Glad I finally did decide to see it.(The quotes are from Lester Levenson)Originally post at The 10 of Clubs MovieWATCH. ED/PUB:LM Video37573@blogcritics.org Fri, 7 Oct 2005 17:41:26 EDT http://blogcritics.org/archives/2005/10/06/062413.php 10ClubsInto The Blue (2005) is a straightforward morality play. "A spoonful of sugar helps the medicine go down." And to smooth over the morality, the sugar among other things is the eye-candy cast, Jessica Alba as Sam is the top billing and Paul Walker as Jared is the main protagonist. The medicines are the subtexts and premise. Into The Blue's premise is that honesty is the best policy and there are loads of goodie subtexts like don't do drugs, don't work with criminal syndicates, make sure you explore all possibilities before resorting to underhand avenues (more of this in the analysis section), it's never too late to make things right, be able to admit your mistakes, money can't buy real love, etc. The things that parents tell their kids. Parents should send their kids to watch it.Even the bad boy Bryce goes, "Drugs are for losers". The really bad girl, Amanda (Ashley Scott), who gets told to cover up by the marine police, which goes to show she is that bad besides being willing to do drugs, gets her just desserts in the end.The drama of the ethical dilemma faced by Jared is very well fleshed out. But the problem is, the unfolding of the story is largely predictable. There is a surprise discovery, one that is not seen in the trailers, but that's it. While it was predictable, it wasn't boring, as there are enough thrills, spills, beautiful underwater marine life scenes, and Jaws. About Jaws, the first time the crashed plane is approached for the sake of its contents, as an omen, it is the first time we see a tiger shark. That is how much subtexting the movie has.So don't let the posters fool you. This isn't an airhead movie. The dense subtexting on ethics all over the movie makes it a modern-day catechism without being preachy. You will walk away surprised that the story is better than it looks.Originally posted at The 10 of Clubs's Movie Blog ed/Pub:NB Video37451@blogcritics.org Thu, 6 Oct 2005 06:24:13 EDT http://blogcritics.org/archives/2005/10/05/162659.php 10ClubsThe Skeleton Key (2005) is a good horror/suspense movie. It maintains the suspense by sustaining the rate of discovery and slowly doling out more and more information as the film goes along. Then when the time comes to reveal almost everything, it uses another technique to maintain the suspense: enough is hinted for the audience to know who the intended victim is, but the victim doesn't know or get it yet. Then when the victim realises it, there is a short chase or struggle sequence and then comes the psychologically horrifying ending.The ending and its surprise twist is "uncommercial." It might not go down with everyone, but it's this ending that makes the film truly horrifying. The premise, dabbling with the occult (hoodoo in this case) is dangerous regardless of whether you believe in it or not. Because as you dwell in it, even from an academic standpoint like with the protoganist, Caroline (Kate Hudson), you will start to believe in it whether you want to or not. And this point has some basis to it. In cognitive psychology research, it has been shown that when people are frequently exposed to a stimulus, it gains acceptance. If the stimulus is picture of someone, in the end, people find that picture more likeable, more attractive than at the start. An idea that is repeatedly presented becomes more acceptable, seems more reasonable and even deemed true.There are some plot ambiguities that you become aware of at the end but these will have to be dealt with in the analysis section. The Skeleton Key is a fine example of psychological horror. You have been warned.Originally posted at The 10 of Clubs's Movie Blog. The analysis section (spoiler alert) can be found there. ED/PUB:LM Video37455@blogcritics.org Wed, 5 Oct 2005 16:26:59 EDT http://blogcritics.org/archives/2005/09/29/182915.php 10ClubsFlightplan (2005) is a fine example of polished movie making coupled with a superb performance by Jodie Foster. Her immersive and engaging acting smoothes over the plot holes. It's not that the script is poorly written, just that one aspect of the plot is implausible. The script's pacing is tight and that together with Jodie Foster's performance as the mother, Kyle, who finds her daughter gone.The tight pacing and engaging acting maintains the suspense. It keeps you wondering how psychologically stable Kyle is and how far she would go to find her child. And Kyle does get quite extreme. Flightplan approaches the issue of Authoritarianism from a different tangent by dramatising the psychological processes exploited rather than examining sociological, political or technological impacts, like, for example, Orwell's 1984, Gattaca (1997) or Minority Report (2002). The movie draws upon well-documented psychological phenomena regarding group and intergroup process in social influence. Conformity to the group is so strong a force that most individuals (70 percent) succumb to it. You could say, this movie pays tribute to the work of social psychologist, Dr. Solomon E. Asche.Asch's most famous experiments set a contest between physical and social reality. His subjects judged unambiguous stimuli "lines of different lengths" after hearing other opinions offering incorrect estimates. Subjects were very upset by the discrepancy between their perceptions and those of others and most caved under the pressure to conform: only 29% of his subjects refused to join the bogus majority. This technique was a powerful lens for examining the social construction of reality, and gave rise to decades of research on conformity. Stanley Milgram's studies of obedience to authority were inspired directly by Asch's studies.The premise of the movie is how independent can your reasoning be in the face of geniune disbelief or dissent from your peers. Nowadays, a common tactic used in the media to influence public opinion is to make the targeted viewpoint or interpretation have the appearance of widespread acceptance or have majority support. This is to activate the Conformity phenomena. Flightplan dramatises how it could be used in a small-scale situation. So will Kyle break or will she not? Watch and see. There is a nice subtext about racism. Kyle, on the edge, suspects that the Arab passengers have taken her child and gets into a claw fight with one of them. How the two make up is a rather nice piece of understated acting.So will the polished script, tight pacing, fine acting, and strong premise make you forgive the movie for the implausibility of its antagonist's plan? For me, it somewhat did. Though I do wonder if an old school mystery writer had been brought on, would there be a flawless plot? Originally posted here.Ed/Pub:LisaM Video37073@blogcritics.org Thu, 29 Sep 2005 18:29:15 EDT http://blogcritics.org/archives/2005/09/20/073443.php 10ClubsThe Brothers Grimm is basically a fun adventure movie but comes off being less fun than, say, The Mummy (1999). We know from the movie trailer and website that the two Grimm brothers are the heroes and have an ally in the form of a girl ranger, Angelika. Together, they have to thwart the evil Mirror Queen's plan for beauty and save the day. What we don't know is how the abducted girls are to be used and how the Queen is to be defeated. But from the clues already given, one can guess that a mirror will have the same function the portrait painting in the Dorian Grey story. Despite knowing significant elements of the plot, the movie still manages to pull off enough surprises to keep the suspense and fun. Movies of this genre typically rely on a story architecture that draws on the metaphor of a mythic journey (as in Campbell's The Hero of a Thousand Faces) to give the plot substance. Fast pace action sequences (hopefully that are original) are used to smooth over the formularic nature of the story. The problem with The Brothers Grimm is that its action sequences aren't fast paced enough or very original. Because of this, compared to say The Mummy (1999), it's not as fun even though it has more depth. Furthermore, the two Grimm brothers and Angelika get special treatment from the antagonists. The dangers they faced aren't as real for them as for the others accompanying them. Somehow, they aren't targeted for death blows unlike their companions. So they survive because of the pulled punches and this reduces the tension. These flaws make the movie less fun than it could have been. In updating the old folktales, a positive revision on gender roles is made. The two brothers Jacob (Heath Ledger) and Will (Matt Damon) saves the damsels in distress at the end but not before Angelika rescues them from certain death. Some might say, such a revision is not unnecessary. In the old folktales, when the villian is a witch, the witch kicks ass and reigns undefeated for a long time. However, this revision positions feminine power in a positive rather than negative role. Towards the end of the movie, there is one shot that gets your attention. It starts with a Crucifix that is positioned at the upper right side of the frame. The colour of the sunshine is enhanced in that it is more golden than normal. The camera then moves downwards diagonally to the left, not just sideways, as if the golden light is emananting from the Crucifix. The camera then proceeds to show the heroes and the saved victims running towards to the village. So where did this Crucifix come from? There is no church spire nearby. The subtext here is not a humanist one. In the end, the Mirror Queen is defeated by an enchanted axe, brawns, brains and not least of all, a love that will sacrifice itself, true love. But it is also hinted that the brothers were watched over by divine forces. So is this an explanation for the pulled punches witnessed earlier? An analysis of this instantiation of the mythic journey will reveal spoilers, so it is left in the analysis section. But as a guide, the two brothers are one unit and can be taken to represent Conscious Reason (Will) and Intuition (Jacob). Angelica represents practical wisdom, Calvadi (Peter Stormare) as the process of disbelief to belief and General Delatombe (Jonathan Pryce), a closed scientific mind and the Mirror Queen, the prime adversary who wields of occult power. Overall, The Brothers Grimm remains a fun movie despite the two flaws undercutting the fun factor. I wasn't bored, but it could have been a lot more exciting. Analysis portion is after the review section at here. Video36493@blogcritics.org Tue, 20 Sep 2005 07:34:43 EDT http://blogcritics.org/archives/2005/09/18/030039.php 10ClubsWhatever grade you give Constantine (2005) or Matrix (1999), Nightwatch matches and exceeds. It is not a Blade (1998) nor is it an Underworld (2003) clone. The story is based on novels by Russian author, Sergei Lukyanenko. The overt storyline is given at the movie's website. With the first Matrix movie, the story premise is: question reality. Are you sure what you and the others with you perceive is real? The premise in Nightwatch is: question what and who you have been told to be good and evil. Nightwatch's premise is far more complex than the premise in Matrix. In Constantine, the premise is that the intention behind the act determines whether it is good and evil. Nightwatch handles the question of good and evil in deeper detail and from different angles or tangents.In Olympic diving, there is this thing called the "degree of difficulty score modife"r. The "dive" Nightwatch has done has a degree of difficulty higher than Matrix or Constantine.Matrix and Constantine, in my head, scored like 9.5-10/10 for how well they they told their story's premise. Nightwatch, with its more difficult story premise and successful execution of it has made me rescaled. Nightwatch 10, Matrix/Constantine 9.This Gothic tale uses two plot lines. The first plot line concerns the main protagonist, Anton, who discovers that he is an Other after he encounters them. The other plot line concern Svetlana. There is a good deal of subtexting within the two plots lines.The subtexting deal with issues of fundamentalism, supporting a pro-life stance to abortion, the nature of Good and Evil and the importance of forgiving. Nightwatch espouses a conservative outlook without being fundamentalist. In its philosophical exploration about Good and Evil, Nighwatch does so without being ponderous. Better than Matrix (1999) in this regard.The story premise in Nightwatch is that of independent thinking - to think independently and deeply, and come to your own judgement following the example of Anton as he resists both the Evil Others and fundamentalists within his own faction.The uniqueness of the Nightwatch universe (compared with made in Hollywood Gothics) and the density of the subtexting make it easier to create a review of Nightwatch via its subtext topics in order to preserve foreknowledge of the story.The truce between Others who chose Good (Nightwatchers) led by Geser and those who chose Evil (Daywatchers) led by Zavulon comes about because a parity in power. Each faction is led by an individual who appears to be either immortal or has a lifespan rivaling Methuselah's. The truce started in 1342, France and the story then moves to 1992 and then 2004, Moscow. It was agree all Others are to be able to choose sides freely and that each faction will set up units to police each other to maintain the truce. This resemblance of Manicheanism is illusory. As the story progresses, the Manicheanist position on Good and Evil is rejected.The wedding of technology and supernormal abilities also figures in Nightwatch. The Nightwatchers have a research section armed with software that provides amazing information in a matter of mouse clicks.The CGI used, while not cutting edge, more than suffices for the task. Any sense of realism is not compromised. There is an interesting sequence that uses animation, probably to save cost. The Russians after all, simply brought up pencils to space rather than spend millions as the Americans did, to develop a pen that works without gravity. The transition to animation is very smooth. Geser is seen doodling and his doodle is then use to begin the animation shortly after. Another nice touch is that the subtitles are sequentially highlighted in certain dialogues as a means to place emphasis of them. The whole movie is very well executed with great polish.The movie ends with a message about hope and Millennialism. There is cause for hope not because of a return of some kind of messiah who will overpower evil. Instead, there is cause for hope as long as good men for continue to fight for good in the face of overwhelming evil.The following are dealt in the review, while the subtext on forgiveness and family has to be touched on lightly in the review section and is discuss in greater depth in the analysis section. 1. Good as not causing harm to others. 2. Good and Evil are not absolutes, the rejection of fundamentalism. 3. Good as refusing temptation rather than its absence. 4. Being too eager to sacrifice an individual for the Common Good.Good as not causing harming others: Humans with supernormal capacities are called Others. Different Others have different abilities but all share the ability to perceive an alternative realm (The Gloom) that coexists with the normal world. Anton is a seer, has involuntary visions of the future and can perceive supernatural conditions. The metaphysics of the Other's universe is not explained much in this first part of a trilogy. The focus is on delineating what makes for Good and what makes for Evil.The Daywatchers don't consider themselves humans. The Daywatcher butcher whom Anton meets, refers to humans condescending as "them". Nightwatcher Anton on the hand, when asked what is the difference between humans and Others, replies that their abilities just makes different, not necessarily better or more special than humans. But Nightwatch's exploration of Good and Evil and the treatment of ordinary humans goes further and deeper than X-Men (2000) does.The Manicheanism position views good and evil as characteristics of groups of people rather than of behaviors (thus encouraging people to think of themselves as good and to ignore their own failings). Manicheanism has become taken mainstream respectability in recent years, if Peter Singer's identification of George Bush as being Manicheanist is accepted. See The President of Good and Evil: The Ethics of George W. Bush.Vampires are drawn to become Daywatchers as their condition makes them predispose to "harm" humans. The Nightwatch does not appear to have any vampires. Shapeshifters whose abilities don't require harming ordinary humans are the combat grunts for the Nightwatch. Things still look Manichean at this point. But wait, vampires as a result of the truce, drink the blood of pigs or some other substitutes.Good and Evil are not absolutes, the rejection of Fundamentalism: Fundamentalism has set in on both sides, but Anton is untouched by it. Anton is a friend to a non-killing vampire who lives next door opposite him. He defends him against his new partner, Olga. Olga is prejudiced by self-righteousness against the Daywatchers. They are vampires, so they are evil.For Anton, being a vampire itself is not sufficient cause for condemnation. That his friend does not kill humans makes him not evil. As "faith without works is dead", so too being a vampire but not killing humans is not evil to Anton as no evil proceeds. This is the common sense position rather than an ideologue one. Our seeing of Olga's prejudice comes right after learning that Geser had incarcerated her for committing unspeakable crimes. This is a nicely done subtext on fundamentalism.The antagonism between Daywatchers and Nightwatchers continue on despite the truce. Besides genuine violations, they entrap each other into committing violations. Anton condemns Geser, Leader of the Light side, for ignoring the entrapment tactics. Geser, to his credit, is not authoritarian about Anton criticism of him. The positioning of Good and Evil as absolutes is being recast here as political labels.Good as refusing temptation rather than its absence: We see the Daywatchers go around in expensive cars and are fashionably dressed while Nightwatchers are in lorries, in worker overalls, etc. One female vampire is a pop star dressesd in cutout dress that show that she isn't wearing any underwear. (Subtext: Movies are okay I guess, but pop culture is not?)While Olga too, is concerned with being fashionably dress, (she having been imprisoned in Owl form for a long while and unaware of current taste), she nonetheless wears the borrowed clothes. The impulse for vanity is present but is not given into. Good is not the absence of temptation, it is not giving into temptation.Geser also states explicitly, man tends towards evil not because he is by nature evil. Rather, it is easier to destroy the light within than to resist the evil without.Being too eager to sacrifice an individual for the Common Good: Geser argues that the common good overrides any individual's welfare, Nightwatch notes how this stance has been abused as sacrificing an individual is so easy. Contrast Anton's attitude and action during the assassination mission with those around him.Forgiveness, its rejection leads to Evil: Observe what happens after Svetland confesses what she has done, repents and forgives herself. Compare this to another character's refusal to forgive Anton and ignore all the previous good he has done for that person previously. This comes about at the end of the movie during when "debriefs" the audience. The pro-life stance on abortion is seen here. Also posted at The Movies I Have Watched. ed: JH Video36330@blogcritics.org Sun, 18 Sep 2005 03:00:39 EDT