Reviews

4 Reviews
Sort by:
Filter by Rating:
1/10
This Movie Is About Choices, Not Exploitation
31 May 2015
In modern America everyone wants to be a victim.

In this case we have a movie that tries to make the argument that somehow the porn industry, or men who make porn (specifically men, though plenty of women are involved in producing porn), or people who watch porn, or pop culture or SOMEONE is to blame for the choices these adult women make other than the women themselves. Another victim born.

Sure, there is a lot of manipulation and deception that occurs in the Porn industry. But it's not force, it's not rape, it's not human trafficking, it's not violence and it's not the threat of physical harm. The reality is the porn industry is already actually pretty heavily scrutinized by state and federal law. No one is forcing these women to get into porn in the first place and no one (certainly not the Porn studios) is forcing them to stay in it.

In fact, women show up to make these amateur videos in the hundreds these days, they've made themselves a disposable commodity.

Awful right? Well if it's awful who exactly is suffering? In the words of one of the women the film interviews, 'why work for 10 bucks an hour at a fast-food restaurant when she can make $2,500 having sex on camera in only a few hours?'.

The film makers want you to feel bad for women who decide to use their bodies as a shortcut to wealth. They only regret their choices once they decide the industry is difficult and the $10K to $20K they've made in from their handful of shoots is likely all the money they'll ever see from the industry.

However, this isn't deception as the filmmakers try to argue...of all the porn stars you know, only two or three have ever become millionaires doing it and most of them had to do hundreds (if not thousands) of films to get there. So these women, if they actually expect to become rich through making porn, are simply naive. That does not mean they were deliberately deceived by anyone.

The slippery slope where the movie makers cross the line is where they try to shame the people who work in a completely legal industry (making Porn) for trying to make selling what they make.

Should the government stop allowing the production of pornography? Should no sex scenes be allowed in movies? Should porn be regulated more actively? This implies the government should play some role in overseeing the production of hardcore adult films? Good luck with that.

OR perhaps the filmmakers no longer want women to be able to make choices for themselves. If so, who gets to make decisions for young girls now if not themselves? The Porn industry? The government? The parents? You?

I feel we should stop infantilizing women by implying they aren't smart enough to know EXACTLY what they are doing, why they are doing it, and what the repercussions will be.

Yes, these are young girls making poor choices. But the right to make poor choices is a responsibility of adults. According to the law these women are adults. Like all adults these women will live with the consequences of the choices they make, good or bad.

I rated this film a 1 for trying to force a moral argument when the actual 'documented' behavior shown on screen in this 'documentary' tells a different story. This is a story about delusional women who are looking for a quick path to fame and fortune, who are willing to use their bodies to do it and who want you to feel bad for them when they don't get what they want.

They should have titled it 'Bowling for Idiots'.
200 out of 379 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
Prometheus (I) (2012)
6/10
The Prometheus/Alien Connection
9 June 2012
Warning: Spoilers
Prometheus doesn't, in any way provide a narrative that directly leads to what happens in ALIEN or the subsequent films. What it does is provide additional context to the back-story and mythology of the ALIEN universe, explaining how profound 'the weapon' (the black goo) is. It also ties the very origin of humanity to this goo and may hint at our true creators.

Thus, Prometheus isn't giving us a direct line of continuity into the ALIEN Series, it's giving us the blueprint to how this universe works.

**CAUTION: SPOILERS AHEAD**

Ultimately it tells us:

  • The weapon is at the very least 2000 years old. - When combined with human DNA it causes mutation either in the host, or in the host's offspring, that usually turns against the host. - By mixing the goo with human or humanoid DNA (in the case of The Engineers) the result is something that looks like our 'Aliens'. Thus we can assume this is also how the Aliens on LV- 426 evolved. - We learn that 'The Engineers' seem to want to destroy life on earth using this weapon. Yet one of them seemed to go out of his way to create life on Earth using the same (or similar) stuff. - We learn that for 'the weapon' DNA to create sentiment creatures (versus only taking over the host), the host has to sexually transmit it to another host. This is why Holloway is consumed, but Shaw is impregnated. - We then learn that this impregnation process is rapidly sped up (versus normal human gestation). This tells us a great deal about what to expect in the later series. - While the androids in this universe are somewhat cold and calculating, they are far from 'soul-less'. - LV-223 is where this story takes place. LV-426 is where ALIEN takes place. Thus, barring events that we've yet to be shown on screen, absolutely nothing witnessed in this film shows up in ALIEN or its sequels.


We also learn some other interesting things:

  • Weyland lived a lot longer than anyone was aware of previously and actually traveled to 'meet his maker'. - We learn Weyland had a daughter. - It's implied that much of life on earth is still very much an accident. Though the humanoid Engineer apparently seeds the planet on purpose, because he himself dies in the process, there was no 'guiding hand' that lead humanity to where it is up the the point in the movie. - It's inferred that the events of this movie take place in the same star-system (but not the same planet) as the events in ALIEN. - We learn that The Engineers have traveled the stars for far longer than human civilization has existed. - We learn either The Engineers either left early warnings or early invitations about how and where to find them (the humanoid figure pointing to a four planet system).


Contrary to all the griping on this (and other threads) Prometheus is a very well thought-out story. It deftly serves as a prequel without having to maintain (or counter) any established continuity. It aims to be prolific in it's goals, while being subtle in how it crafts itself around ALIEN-lore. That said, do I think it made for a good movie?

Good? yes. Great? no. I rated this movie a 6 out of 10. Only slightly better than average. Though a great story is crafted here, it suffers from some really odd plot gaffes (let's not call them holes) and poor characterization. Examples:

  • A geologist who gets lost in a cave that he is the one responsible for mapping. - Another scientist who decides the strange creatures following him must be friendlies. - We have a rather annoying moment where two scientists can't figure out that, if an object is falling on you vertically, running horizontal or diagonally would be the advised choice. - A catatonic Engineer is awakened after 2000 years, yet rather than being dumbfounded or in awe that humans (and an android) have traveled light years to find him - he simply tries to destroy them all at first site. - Much like with the Star Wars Prequel/Sequels the technology on display in the (later filmed) earlier films is unnecessarily more advanced than in following films with no explanation.


Great story. Great addition to the franchise. So-so film.
0 out of 0 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
6/10
Princes, middle finger to the industry...and you.
27 July 2011
The people who dislike this film because it doesn't fit into popular convention or wasn't a bock office success are missing the point. At best it's an elitist point of view. Here's why:

This film is about control. It's about people who are the gatekeepers of things (wealth, a lifestyle, accolade, whatever.) and the lengths those people will go to to keep it.

Mary is one example, she thinks she's the odd, charming, center-of-attention. In fact, she is, until the strange gigolo, Chris, comes into her life and is even stranger and more narcissistic than she is. At first she hates him because he offends her, possibly poses a threat to her world view.

Mary's father is another example, he's clearly a control-freak reveling in the hold he has over his daughter, wife, and everyone else around him.

The third example is the film itself. It's genre-mashing and disjointed, juxtaposing many elements that seem to conflict from the presence of two black playboys in South France to the contemporary music and the choice of black & white. The movie deliberately is clearly and deliberately making a mockery of cinema standards.

He went to great lengths to cast some of the finest acting talent, execute beautiful cinematography, and evoke a certain feel just to walk in an unapologetically represent a point of view that isn't often referenced on screen.

Film critics love to cite films that speak to their own cultural references, their own aspirations for beauty and prestige, or their own tastes or history. But that's only a perspective, Prince not only challenges that perspective but defies it by being himself -- comedic, crass, sexual, even borderline offensive in his role.

Critics call UNDER THE CHERRY MOON awful, amateurish, a 'disaster' and all sorts of other names. But I often wonder if they've ever considered that maybe that was the whole point -- part of Prince's artistic point of view?

One could say as much about his entire career: he is a control freak, he plays all the instruments on all his albums, he writes songs that don't conform to popular convention, he isn't always at the top of the charts as a result - but in spite of all these this he remains a success. He thrives in the opposite of conformity and his three movies are perfect examples of that. This one, in my opinion, being the most "Prince".

Before he made this movie and after, he couldn't care less what you thought about it. Some might call that arrogant. I see it as a very distinct confidence in being able to do exactly what you want -- not expecting everyone to love it but equally not caring either way.

In the placing of two black-American hustlers in South France and telling a love story while shooting a contemporary film in the style of the early 20s, this film is deliberately challenging a lot of social norms.

The only real shame here is how dismissive the entire industry has been to a film that was clearly a carefully crafted message of disdain for their very existence. Razzie? This movie deserves an Academy Award.
1 out of 5 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
Trade (I) (2007)
10/10
Very Powerful Film
19 October 2007
This film was very powerful, deeply moving and excellently humanized the underground sex slave trade it portrayed. Both my girlfriend and I were near tears watching it. Truly remarkable.

The acting is nothing short of incredible, I really felt for everyone involved from Adriana's helpless brown eyes, to Jorge's honorable vigilance and and Kevin Kline's tempered patience.

The worst part of seeing this film was realizing that every day people get away with this kind of thing and the real victim's stories will never be told.

Warning for parents, some of the scenes are pretty difficult to sit through.
90 out of 114 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink

Recently Viewed