Libertas Responds to The LA Times’ Patrick Goldstein … on the Alien/Communist Invaders in our Midst!

Daniel Craig in "Iron Man" director Jon Favreua's "Cowboys & Aliens."

By Jason Apuzzo. Many thanks to the LA Times’ Patrick Goldstein for noticing what we’ve been talking about a lot here recently at LFM, namely the new trend toward alien invasion pictures – both of the Hollywood and indie variety.  As I mentioned in my Hollywood news round-up from Tuesday, and have otherwise discussed on countless occasions here recently, we’re facing an interesting new wave of films that feature villainous aliens, communists and even space Nazis (!) in our midst.

Aaron Eckart combats aliens in "Battle: Los Angeles."

The sheer number of major films following this trend is striking.  On the alien invasion front, we’ve got Jon Favreau’s forthcoming Cowboys & Aliens with Harrison Ford and Daniel Craig; Battle: Los Angeles with Aaron Eckhart and Michelle Rodriguez; J.J. Abrams’/Steven Spielberg’s Super 8 (coming soon on the heels of Abrams’ Cloverfield); Oren Peli’s Area 51; the feature film remakes of The Thing and The Outer Limits; Robert Evans’ feature film remake of Gerry Anderson’s influential British TV series UFO; Spielberg’s forthcoming TV series Falling Skies; the ongoing alien invasion series V; Ridley Scott’s forthcoming reboot of the Alien franchise; the untitled Bobby Glicker-Michael Bay alien invasion flick that just got picked up by Paramount … and in the indie scene, there’s Skyline (to be released this fall by Universal), Gareth Edwards’ MonstersIron Sky (still in production) and The Mercury Men (the hotly anticipated web series that was just at Comic-Con) and a few others I know about in the pipeline.  And really we shouldn’t forget the obvious recent examples of Avatar, the Transformers series and Predators, all of which involve intense warfare between humans and aliens.

Angelina Jolie fighting communist infiltrators in "Salt."

What’s interesting is how this trend toward alien invasion is being matched by a new trend toward communist invasion and/or infiltration scenarios.  We just had the Angelina Jolie thriller about retro-communist sleeper agents in our midst, Salt (we loved it here at LFM); at some point in the fall or early next year we’re presumably going to get MGM’s Chinese communist invasion thriller Red Dawn; there’s the ambitious indie web series Red Storm; not to mention the recent Soviet espionage thriller Farewell (read our glowing review); and I even detect certain Cold War themes evident in things like the recent Karate Kid remake (set in communist China) and the forthcoming Mao’s Last Dancer.  [In this context I should also mention Chris Gorak’s forthcoming alien invasion thriller The Darkest Hour, which is actually set in Moscow.]

I locate the beginning of this recent trend with Indiana Jones and the Kingdom of the Crystal Skull (a movie I loved, by the way) – which managed to feature both aliens and Soviet communist infiltrators, who are intent on using alien technology for mind-control purposes against the West.

So what’s going on here?  Here’s what the LA Times’ Patrick Goldstein thinks:

This sudden obsession with alien invaders has me wondering: Why now? Trends usually happen for a reason, even if it isn’t always clear at the time what that reason might be. There were a host of similar alien invader films in the early-mid 1950s (my personal favorite being “The Thing”), which film historians theorize were inspired by fears of the U.S. being invaded, either physically or ideologically, by communism. If you get two film professors together and let ’em watch the original “Invasion of the Body Snatchers,” they’ll argue over the hidden meanings of the film for weeks on end.

But what’s up with all these new films? What new hidden fear do we have that is being sublimated into our movies? Glenn Beck, for one, seems almost grotesquely overwhelmed by fears of all sorts of hidden conspiracies, but I doubt that whatever is bugging him is the same thing that’s bugging this generation of filmmakers. Could the collapse of the economy have spooked so many Americans that it’s created an intense level of fear and unrest that is being channeled into film projects? And, of course, there’s always the possibility (WOO-HOO) that there really are a few aliens poking around, looking to abduct a few of us. I guess anything’s possible.

My own opinion, more or less along the lines Patrick describes, is that we are seeing a revival of the 1950’s anti-communist sensibility (Crystal Skull was even set in the 1950s) that’s getting sublimated into fantastical fears of domestic alien invasion.  And I think all of this was more or less predictable, as our society gets increasingly re-engineered along progressive-liberal/pseudo-futuristic lines, and as we face an increasingly hostile and dangerous threat from nuclear-armed terrorists and/or their client states.  What’s more, this trend is being super-charged by James Cameron’s recent revival of that old, stand-by technology that emerged directly from 1950s science fiction: 3D.  One thinks here in this context of such 1950s 3D classics as It Came From Outer Space and Creature from the Black Lagoon.

In "Crystal Skull," Soviet agent Cate Blanchett hunts alien technology.

[I should mention, incidentally, that the best analysis of this 1950s anti-communist/alien invasion mentality certainly comes in Peter Biskind’s marvelous book, Seeing is Believing: How Hollywood Taught Us to Stop Worrying and Love the Fifties. Biskind goes into this stuff in great detail in close-readings of Them!, The Thing, Invasion of the Body Snatchers, It Came from Outer Space, etc. I can’t recommend Biskind’s book highly enough if you want to understand the mentality depicted in these films.]

And so ultimately this is a trend that I lustily endorse … with one proviso: pace this return to the 1950s sensibility, does this mean we can now go back to those optimistic bosoms and/or brassieres of that era?  Because the problem with most of these films – Salt very much excluded – is that they just don’t have the 3D feminine firepower, so to speak, that they should.  And even in Salt we never see Angelina in a dress!  Which is really a crime.

Kathleen Hughes, from 1953's "It Came From Outer Space" in 3D.

But there’s more to be said about this revival of the 1950s/Cold War mentality, actually.  I think the filmmaking world is gradually coming around to the side of freedom.  It’s happening in fits and starts, and sometimes awkwardly – but it is happening.  There’s no way that movies like Salt or Red Dawn or Four Lions or Mao’s Last Dancer or The Infidel would be getting made, otherwise.  It’s something that we’re talking about all the time here at Libertas, and I think this is a trend very much to be celebrated.  [We even just posted today about Frank Miller’s new project Holy Terror, which pits a superhero called ‘The Fixer’ against Al Qaeda baddies; this follows directly on the heels of Frank’s quasi-metaphorical look at the current War on Terror in the forthcoming Xerxes.]

So for every occasion nowadays when a Captain America or Wonder Woman get their patriotism downgraded by Hollywood censors (and, yes, censorship is what’s happening there), there are now counter-examples where freedom – and America’s role in promoting it – is being championed.  And that’s a very positive sign.

Some of you, for example, may be wondering why we haven’t been harping on the latest scandals involving Oliver Stone or Roman Polanski here.  The reason, in part, is because these guys are old and irrelevant and very much out-of-step with what’s going on in the filmmaking world right now.  These trends that we’re talking about here toward invasion and/or infiltration scenarios are major trends that are affecting what projects get funding at the moment – particularly among the younger, more active crowd of filmmakers.

And so on with the invasion!  Just don’t forget the brassieres.

Posted on July 29th, 2010 at 2:54pm.

Frank Miller Takes on Al Qaeda Threat in Holy Terror

Frank Miller takes on the terrorist threat in "Holy Terror."

By Jason Apuzzo. According to today’s Los Angeles Times Hero Complex blog, Frank Miller – best known as the writer and artist of The Dark Knight Returns, 300 and Sin City – is in the final stages of completing a long-developing project of his that will pit a brand-new superhero character called ‘The Fixer’ against Al Qaeda.

This long-awaited project, which began initially as a storyline for Batman – and was supposedly rejected for political reasons by D.C. Comics (Miller disputes the long-standing rumors to that effect) – will apparently be published next year (Miller is speaking to publishers right now) with the title, Holy Terror.

This is wonderful news, as I’d thought this project had been abandoned by Miller some time ago.  Here’s Miller:

“It’s almost done; I should be finished within a month,” Miller said. “It’s no longer a DC book. I decided partway through it that it was not a Batman story. The hero is much closer to ‘Dirty Harry’ than Batman. It’s a new hero that I’ve made up that fights Al Qaeda …

“The character is called The Fixer and he’s very much an adventurer who’s been essentially searching for a mission,” Miller said. “He’s been trained as special ops and when his city is attacked all of a sudden all the pieces fall into place and all this training comes into play. He’s been out there fighting crime without really having his heart in it — he does it to keep in shape. He’s very different than Batman in that he’s not a tortured soul. He’s a much more well-adjusted creature even though he happens to shoot 100 people in the course of the story …

“I pushed Batman as far as he can go and after a while he stops being Batman. My guy carries a couple of guns and is up against an existential threat. He’s not just up against a goofy villain. Ignoring an enemy that’s committed to our annihilation is kind of silly, It just seems that chasing the Riddler around seems silly compared to what’s going on out there

“It began as my reaction to 9/11 and it was an extremely angry piece of work and as the years have passed by I’ve done movies and I’ve done other things and time has provided some good distance, so it becomes more of a cohesive story as it progresses,” Miller said.

Needless to say, we’re very excited to learn this and wish Miller the best.

"The hero is much closer to 'Dirty Harry' than Batman."

What Miller touches on here is one of the things that’s been bothering me the most about the post-9/11 boom in comic book movies: which is their tendency to feature narcissistic heroes who almost never (Iron Man excepted) are asked to face the current terrorist threat.  This is something that is a complete betrayal of what happened in the 1940s, when so many of the original comic book heroes were asked to face down the Nazi/fascist threat.  So good on Frank for pushing through and completing this, and bad on D.C. for ripping this storyline away from the Batman series if indeed that’s what happened.

Miller is also right now of course working on his 12-part Dark Horse comics series called Xerxes, which is a prequel to 300.  And Zack Snyder and Kurt Johnstad are already at work on the screenplay for that.

Posted on July 29th, 2010 at 10:36am.

Hollywood Round-up, 7/26-27

Jolie in Tokyo.

By Jason Apuzzo.Angelina Jolie premiered Salt in Tokyo yesterday, as her world tour of the film continues.  I’m not trying to turn LFM into a Jolie fansite, but she’s making that awfully difficult.  [Re: the picture to the left … I’m still wondering why they couldn’t dress her like this in the film, even for one scene!]  In other Salt news, producer Lorenzo di Bonaventura does an interesting interview about the film and his many other projects today.  He might be the hottest producer currently working in Hollywood.

Did you know that Vaclav Havel is directing a film? [All he ever wanted to do was direct!]  The name of the film is Leaving, an indie production based on his stageplay of the same name.  With nods to King Lear and The Cherry Orchard, Leaving is apparently a (characteristically for Havel) witty and autobiographical story about a former chancellor of an unnamed country who’s been unceremoniously booted from his sumptuous government villa.  I’m very eager to see this once it’s completed.  Havel has always been a hero of mine, an almost inconceivably perfect mixture of intellectual and statesman, a courageous man of letters who stood up to the communists when doing so could easily have cost him his life.  Would that we had such men here in the States rather than the charlatans of both parties we currently have to put up with.

Alien invaders from "Skyline."

• How much do you care about what happened at Comic-Con?  Personally, I’m still trying to keep myself from confusing The Green Hornet with The Green Lantern.  It all seems like one, big, infantile, hyperglycemic blur – you know?  Here’s what I can tell you: the trend toward alien invasion pics is now officially out of control. Comic-Con saw presentations on Jon Favreau’s Cowboys & Aliens (Harrison Ford showed up to that panel), Battle: Los Angeles, Steven Spielberg’s forthcoming TV series Falling Skies, and the latest example of an FX-laden indie sci-fi invasion project (we’ve been talking a lot about those here lately) called Skyline (see here, here and here), that will be released by Relativity Media in December.  Oh, and if that’s not enough for you, word comes today that Bobby Glicker (I loved his Iraq/zombie short Road to Moloch – why did he pull it off Vimeo?) made a spec sci-fi trailer that Michael Bay loved (supposedly it’s a cross between Paranormal Activity and Cloverfield) … and now the project has been greenlit by Paramount as a $12 million sci-fi alien abduction feature.  And there isn’t even a script yet!  So we’re going to get that project from Paramount next year … along with J.J. Abrams’ alien movie Super 8, and the Paranormal guy’s new movie Area 51, and the alien invasion movie set in Moscow called The Darkest Hour … and why are all these alien invasion projects suddenly being done?  Is it that we feel that we’re being invaded?  Lucas and Spielberg ignited this trend with Crystal Skull, and it still hasn’t let up.

Harrison Ford at Comic-Con.

• In related Comic-Con news, Machete has a new Red Band trailer out (very gory, but funny – emphasizing Danny Trejo’s lethal abilities with machetes); a new trailer is out for 300 director Zack Snyder’s Sucker Punch (so-so; too many images, too little narrative); Rihanna will be starring in the new adaptation of the Battleship boardgame; and Die Hard 5 is apparently soon to be greenlit.  Hey Bruce – will you be fighting terrorists this time?  Or is that beneath you now?  I’m hoping the title of the next film is simply Dead.

Amanda Bynes, age 24, has now officially un-retired from acting. Even better than that, though, is the news that Carla Bruni is back before the cameras in Paris … unfortunately for the benefit of Woody Allen’s new film.  Oh, well – you can’t have it all!  It’s hard to watch anything Woody does this days without feeling that you need to take a shower afterward.

• Oliver Stone has been behaving badly lately (see here and here) – so badly that I think he’s probably cooked this time.  Unfortunately he still has several projects in the pipeline that he’ll be inflicting on us, starting with Wall Street 2.  [Sigh.]  When will the long, public nightmare of this person’s career end?

• Poor Snooki!  Over the weekend the “Jersey Shore” star got semi-blasted by The New York Times, and now even the Governor of New Jersey is condemning her show.  [She did, however, get to open the New York Stock Exchange today.]  My favorite piece of reportage about this diminutive Italian American firecracker is the great Q&A she did recently with Meghan McCain for The Daily Beast.  You’ll learn that Snooki voted for (Meghan’s father) John McCain, for example, “because he was really cute and I liked when he did his speeches.”  Here’s my other favorite exchange from that article:

Snooki: Um, I really don’t see the reason why there would be a tax on tanning, because so many people go tanning even though they’re not, like, Guido/Guidettes. People go tanning because they like to feel tan. You feel more sexy when you’re tan and I don’t understand why you would tax on that, because you’re making yourself feel more happy about yourself. So I really don’t understand why that would be, but you know, whatever.

Meghan: Got it.

Katy Perry, on the cover of her new album.

• AND IN TODAY’S MOST IMPORTANT NEWS … I’m getting the distinct impression that Katy Perry is about to take over the entire planet, or something.  She seems to be everywhere.

It’s impossible to turn on the radio without hearing her and Snoop do “California Gurls,” which I now learn has 25 million views on YouTube?!  Does this mean we have to do a Teenage Dream review?  I don’t know who to ask, because I’m in my 30s.

All I can say is, if she can keep Lady Gaga out of the media for the next month, I’m all for it.

Posted on July 27th, 2010 at 10:45pm.

Rockin’ The Wall Premieres Sept. 9th at National March on D.C.

By Jason Apuzzo. Filmmaker, best-selling author and former rock drummer Larry Schweikart recently sent me the trailer (see above) for his forthcoming documentary, Rockin’ The Wall.  Rockin’ The Wall is about the liberating force of rock music for young people living behind the Iron Curtain during the Cold War.  The film is based in part on a segment of Larry’s book, Seven Events That Made America America.  Many of you also may remember Larry as the co-author of the #1 New York Times best seller A Patriot’s History of the United States.  [Both of these books are available in the LFM Store below.]

Rockin’ The Wall deals with how rock music served as a source of hope for young kids growing up in the communist world, and how the music subverted the grip that totalitarian regimes held over societies within the Eastern Bloc. Larry and his team interview rockers from the Cold War era, including the band Mother’s Finest – a black funk-rock band out of Atlanta who played East Berlin two weeks before the Wall came crashing down.  Also interviewed are young eastern Europeans from that era whose lives were changed irrevocably by rock music and the cracks that music opened up – literally and figuratively – in their otherwise repressive world.

One of the great details that Rockin’ The Wall apparently goes into is how the communist regimes – seeing what a powerful force rock music was among the youth – tried to co-opt the music for their own purposes.  In the Soviet Union this lead to the Russians actually creating a ‘Ministry of Rock'(!).  I’m hoping Larry has some samples from that Ministry’s music – it must be hilarious.

Rockin’ The Wall reminds me of a marvelous film from the Los Angeles Film Festival that we recently reviewed here at LFM, called Disco & Atomic War.  Disco & Atomic War is an extraordinary new Estonian documentary about the so-called ’soft power’ influence of American and Western culture on the minds of Soviet citizens living in Estonia during the Cold War, who were able through clever means to watch Finnish television broadcasts emanating from just over the border.  As Disco informs us (in amusing detail), American popular culture – especially in the form of glamorous TV shows like “Dallas,” or movies like Star Wars and even Emmanuelle – was deeply feared by Soviet authorities due to the ideas and expectations such programming planted in the minds of Soviet citizens.  This led to amusing co-optings, such as the Soviets creating their own officially sanctioned disco instruction course for TV (shades of the ‘Ministry of Rock’?).

You can read the LFM review of Disco and Atomic War from the LA Film Festival, and also read LFM Contributor Joe Bendel’s review of the film from yesterday.

Rockin’ the Wall premieres in Washington, D.C. on September 9, at the national Tea Party “March on D.C.” event. You can also pre-order the DVD here, and follow the film on Facebook here.  We wish Larry and his creative team the best with this project.

Posted on July 27th, 2010 at 11:49am.

Arguing the World and ‘Neo-Conservatism’

Irving Kristol in 1976.

By David Ross. The word “neo-conservatism” suffered a wild and unfortunate distortion during the last nine years, coming to mean something like “the neo-fascist philosophy of George W. Bush and his Satanic cohort,” or even more simply, “the wicked tendency to invade other countries.”

Given this slippage of meaning, I cannot recommend highly enough Joseph Dorman’s documentary Arguing the World (1998), which provides a thoughtful and accurate account of neo-conservatism as it traces the careers of literary critic Irving Howe, political thinker Irving Kristol (father of Bill), Columbia/Harvard sociologist Daniel Bell, and Harvard sociologist Nathan Glazer. The story will be familiar to conservatives who know their own lineage: bookish, Jewish New Yorkers arrive at City College; fall under the spell of Trotsky; revolt against the murderous tyranny of Stalin; begin to qualify their leftism; cast their lot with the high modernism of Partisan Review; found Commentary; begin to take seriously the Soviet threat; increasingly recognize the perverse incentives and disincentives created by LBJ’s Great Society; recoil from the brainless nonsense of the counter-culture; begin creating the intellectual foundations of modern conservatism in a series of groundbreaking books and articles; preside over conservatism’s return to power on the back of their own ideas.

While remaining strictly neutral and objective, Arguing the World explains these weighty developments in American political and intellectual history and rescues an important tradition from cartoonish caricature.

Posted on July 27th, 2010 at 10:11am.

Mad Men Season Four Premiere: “Public Relations”

By Jennifer Baldwin. The Boomers love making TV shows and movies about the 1960s; it fulfills their narcissistic desire to relive their own adolescence and young adulthood – and it makes their generation seem “important,” the most important generation of all. Naturally, most of these shows and movies about the turbulent 60s approach the era from the point of view of young people: teenagers, college students, the youth movement and the hippie scene.

The reason AMC’s original series Mad Men was such a sensation when it debuted four seasons ago, and what continues to make it one of the best shows on TV, is that it approaches the 1960s from a somewhat different angle. It’s the angle of men in suits, women in tasteful and elegant clothing, cocktails and business meetings – in other words, the world of grown ups. This is the 1960s from the point of view of the adults. What makes the show so brilliant is that by focusing on the adults of the era it shows where the real breakdown of society occurred in the 60s:  not with the kids, but with their parents.

Kids will always rebel, in any era, in any time period. It’s part of our adolescent development to test boundaries and question our world. But it’s up to the adults in a society to maintain civilization in the face of this adolescent upheaval. Where the 60s went wrong – where the rot set in – wasn’t that the youth started tuning out and turning on, it’s that the adults did as well.

At the end of the third season, there was quite a lot of upheaval in the adult world of Don Draper (Jon Hamm) and his cohorts: JFK was assassinated; Betty (January Jones) went to Reno to divorce Don and remarry Rockefeller Republican Henry Francis (Christopher Stanley); British firm Putnam Powell and Lowe were preparing to sell Sterling Cooper; and in perhaps the most exhilarating finale of the show’s entire run, Don, Roger (John Slattery), Bert Cooper (Robert Morse), and English newcomer Lane Pryce (Jared Harris) all joined forces and left Sterling Cooper to form their own advertising agency (Sterling Cooper Draper Pryce) – taking Peggy (Elisabeth Moss), Pete (Vincent Kartheiser), Joan (Christina Hendricks), and Harry (Rich Sommer) along with them.

Season three ended with the show going through such a radical change that fans have been anxiously waiting to see just where things would pick up in season four. Would Sterling-Cooper-Draper-Pryce still be in existence and would they be successful? Would Betty finalize her divorce and marry Henry? Would Don be happy in his new role as bachelor and big shot creative director and face of the company at his new “scrappy underdog” agency?

In the season four premiere, “Public Relations,” Matt Weiner has jumped ahead one year in the story – to Thanksgiving, 1964 – and the changes we witnessed in the last episode of season three are now in full bloom. Weiner doesn’t reset anything. Don is living the bachelor life; Sterling Cooper Draper Pryce is now an established agency (though not without the headaches and anxieties of being a small upstart); Betty is remarried to Henry Francis; and Don Draper is faced with a new professional challenge: promoting himself.

In the past, Draper has always emphasized that the goal of advertising is, first and foremost, to sell the product. An ad may be cute or clever, but if it doesn’t sell the product, it’s worthless.

Now in season four, Don is confronted with a new paradigm. He’s not just selling other people’s products; he must sell himself. It’s an uncomfortable role for a man who has stolen another man’s name, a man who has spent most of his adult life constructing a new identity for himself. As we open the episode, a reporter for Advertising Age is interviewing Don, asking him, “Who is Don Draper?” Don can’t/won’t answer that question. He says he’s from the Midwest where he was taught that it wasn’t polite to talk about oneself. Don’s trying to be modest, to remain the man behind the scenes who is just doing his job.

But when the article comes out mid-way through the episode, the reporter has mistaken Don’s modesty for aloofness, his humility and professionalism for coldness and mystery – and mystery is a killer for someone who is trying to be a salesman. It’s a huge misstep for Don, because as Roger and others point out, Don is the agency’s biggest asset – he needs to sell himself to the world in order for Sterling Cooper Draper Pryce to get more business.

The thematic counterpoint to this storyline is the plot with the Jentzen bathing suit executives, who make two-piece bathing suits (not “bikinis,” as the prudish executives are always pointing out) and who want to sell their suits without resorting to salacious sexiness the way their bikini-making competitors do. Again, the theme here is modesty. Whether it’s modesty in dress or modesty in terms of humility, this first episode is drawing a contrast between the traditional way of thinking and the new, more “authentic” way of thinking. The world is becoming more sensationalized, more in your face. It’s about not holding back anymore when it comes to your wants and desires. It’s about, as Don puts it to the Jentzen men, “would you rather be comfortable and dead, or risky and possibly rich?”   In other words, standards, decorum, modesty – these are the things which must be sacrificed in order to stand out in the world, and standing out in the world is what will get people’s attention, and getting people’s attention is the key to success. Continue reading Mad Men Season Four Premiere: “Public Relations”