Movie & Video reviews

Ben Dugan

2/9/2006 - The Insider (1999)

  Back in the late 1990s a popular subject for 60 Minutes and other national news shows was the tobacco industry and how they lied concerning not knowing about the effects of nicotine. There were large court cases and executives of the large tobacco companies claimed they did not know anything about the effects of this addictive drug. Jeffrey Wigand’s 1995 interview with 60 Minutes was censured. Dr. Jeffrey Wigand was a former tobacco scientist who became a whistleblower. When The Insider began shooting, Jeffery Wigand was still on litigation against Big Tobacco. Director Michael Mann and his film crew were only privy to certain facts when they began shooting. Therefore the film crew had to take artistic license with the facts of the case. This is one of my favorite movies. I think they did a good job.

  When the story starts, Wigand is a well-paid research scientist for a cigarette manufacturer. Wigand's manicured home, family and circumstances mirror his life, but when the movie opens, there is a sense that it's already over for him. He's clearly had enough of the cigarette industry, but knows he could lose a severance package negotiated to keep him silent about the workings of his ex-employer's marketing tactics. Al Pacino as Lowell Bergman, a producer for 60 Minutes, proves at about the same time that he's not afraid to put his personal safety on the line for the story. Christopher Plummer plays Mike Wallace. Bergman and Wallace come together in a sort of manipulative morality tale about corporate greed and nicotine. Though there's no secret about the health risks of chain smoking, Wigand threatens to expose the industry's attempts to make cigarettes more addictive.

  Unfortunately, Wigand's attempts to expose his former employers - through both legal action and through an expose on "60 Minutes" - runs into obstruction by the industry. Losing his severance package and soon his pretty family, Wigand's life is soon turned upside down. On Bergman's end, his efforts to air Wigand's expose are morphed from a complex story involving well-meaning journalists rendered powerless by questionable law - into a simpler story of noble journalist Davids against the might of corporate Goliaths. Mike Wallace and Don Hewitt, who probably had no power to resist CBS's initial ban against the Wigand story, are now seen as craven corporate lackeys. Played by Pacino, Bergman is the hero here (the script seems to credit him for leaking the banned story to the print media, even though WSJ is credited with doing it themselves), while Wigand is well meaning to the point of martyrdom.

  Sound confusing? Well, it is not and it unfolds on film with excellent acting and direction by Michael Mann. It is definitely worth the price of a rental. Check this one out - you’ll be glad you did.

Sixth Sense (1999)

  This story is a psychological journey into the mind of a little boy who sees dead people. It is a clever ghost story with a poignant ending. It stars Bruce Willis and Hailey Joel Osment (who also played the little boy in Forrest Gump). It was the first film for director M. Night Shyamalan. After the success of this first thriller he made Unbreakable, Signs, and The Village. They were moderately successful but nothing like the furor of this film.

  Cole, the boy, is left with only his mother after his parents' divorce. This seems to be the main problem, but later on in the movie, we realize that it's not that at all. Cole sees dead people. These ghosts scare him, so he finds places where he feels safe. He often goes into the church, which has bright red doors. In the church, he plays by himself and stays there as often as he can. He also steals a small statue of Jesus, who is wearing a red robe. This stands out because the Jesus is the only statue wearing red. He then takes it back to his house, where he has a red fort in his room made out of blankets. Inside the tent, he has many figurines of Jesus and crucifixes. He feels that the fort is his sanctuary from the ghosts. Dr. Crow, played by Bruce Willis, is a child psychologist who tries to help Cole through his problems. Once a bond is formed between Cole and Dr. Crow, Cole tells him his secret of seeing ghosts. Dr. Crow is skeptical of this, of course, but later finds similarities between Cole and an old patient of his. He finds that not only is Cole telling the truth, but his past patient also had the "sixth sense" of seeing the dead. Dr. Crow finds his sanctuary in the basement of his house. In the basement, he holds all his past records of old patients, and does research in order to help Cole. Oddly enough, the door to the basement is all white, but the doorknob is red. This stands out against the white and shows that the basement is where he feels safe and where he can find some answers.
  Even though red symbolizes the feeling of being safe, it also shows fear and the first signs of ghosts. Cole doesn't fit in and he realizes this. He dreads going to school every day. The school is painted red, and shows his fear of not fitting in, and also shows that maybe something happened earlier there. Later on, Cole tells us that the school used to be an old courthouse where they hung people. He knows this because he sees ghosts hanging from the ceiling.

  There are many twists and turns in the movie and it is a highly recommended thriller. May be a little scary for the young ones, however.

28 Days Later

Review by Travis Lavan 

There is a Buddhist concept known as Dependent Origination which suggests that no thing, person or event can come into, or remain in existence by itself. Everything depends on everything else, and everyone depends on everyone else. At all times we are at one another’s mercy and dependent on one another in some small way for survival. At the most basic level, this is what holds society together, whether we all realize it or not.

  These are the things I was starting to think about twenty minutes or so into 28 Days Later, a brilliant variation on the traditional 'zombie' flick. The sense of isolation that would settle upon the last remaining survivors of a global catastrophe is deftly accentuated throughout this entire film, leaving the viewer with a constant sense of dread and anticipation throughout.

  Just the way a good horror film should make you feel. More often than not, our sense of fear is stimulated by what we cannot perceive. I’m hardly the first person to ever make note of this, but it doesn’t make it any less true.

  Another indication of a well-crafted film is that it is difficult to discuss much about the plot without giving away too much, so I'll be delicate:

  A group of activists belonging to an unnamed animal rights group break into an animal testing lab where a hideous new disease is being tested on primates. Thinking they are doing a good thing by releasing the apes, they unwittingly unleash a terrible plague that wipes out most of humanity in mere weeks.

  This is where I will remind you that there is a common element in all sci-fi/horror/fantasy films that requires you to suspend your disbelief to an extent; otherwise the story will not work.

  You either accept that a ludicrous device like a light saber works or you don't. You either accept that the Starship Enterprise can travel faster than light or you don’t.

  They’re just plot devices.

  You either accept that the most virulent pathogen ever known to mankind would be cultivated, tested and stored in a London science lab that looks about as clean and secure as a homeless shelter...or you don't.

  In reality such pathogens are stored at places like the Center for Disease Control in Atlanta, a facility so state of the art and secure that breaking into the Oval Office wearing Christmas lights and dressed like Bin Laden would be easier.

  You just have to accept it, because it is a tremendous, but necessary leap in logic. Without the virus there is no movie. I would even suggest that how the virus gets out is eventually irrelevant to the rest of the story. The act of merely escaping the creatures isn't the point of this film. The point is, this film centers more on illustrating what truly motivates us as human beings and how much we all are willing to accept our dependence on one another as a matter of survival.

  Twenty-eight days after the virus is released (it is transmitted by bodily fluid, which is graphically illustrated more than once in the film), a bicycle courier named Jim (Cillian Murphy) wakes up from a coma in an unspecified London hospital. He has been secluded from the rest of humanity for some time, and was therefore spared contracting the virus. He lets himself out of the hospital and quickly discovers he is seemingly alone.

  Jim quickly shifts from shock to denial. He stumbles upon a pile of hundred pound notes and begins stuffing them into his clothing. Without knowing what has happened, he naturally assumes he'll need money and that it will be worth something when he uses it. He quickly discovers otherwise, after his first run-in with the 'infected.' The virus they suffer from causes the victim to experience uncontrollable rage and desire to kill and maim. They lie dormant until they sense a 'non-infected' presence, then they come quickly, frighteningly alive.

  Lucky for Jim, he is discovered by a small band of survivors. After a rather poignant and unfortunate series of events, he finds himself alone with a brash and mouthy young lady called Selena (Naomie Harris), and they are forced to fend for themselves.

  The immediacy of this film is underscored by the fact that at this point I found myself constantly wondering what I would do in a similar situation. How would I find food - you can only live so long on candy bars and soda. How willing would I be to form alliances with others, knowing they may betray me when death is on the line, or I might be tempted to betray them! Would I be willing to kill an 'infected' to save myself, even if it were a child? All of these things are addressed quite convincingly in the film, almost making the dilemma of the virus itself seem trivial.

  At first Jim finds Selena's callous, self-centered nature repugnant, as he is still himself under the apparent delusion that compassion matters more than survival in a world that has literally gone mad. But soon he begins to empathize with her - she is simply responding to the crisis in a different way than he is, motivated by anger rather than fear.

  I was completely willing to accept that such a scenario was indeed possible. You cannot ask for much more than that from any film.

  Ultimately they join forces with a middle-aged father and his young daughter (Brendan Gleeson, Megan Burns). Gleeson does an admirable job of portraying a doting if somewhat naive middle-aged man, trying to make the best of an unthinkable situation for the sake of his only child. Burns is believable enough in her turn as his daughter Hannah, mainly by virtue of her disarming innocence.

  Selena is still rather loathe to make allegiances at this point, but one must assume she is beginning to see the futility of attempting self sufficiency in the predatory world of post-apocalypse London. Even predators have to depend on one another once in a while, and she eventually agrees to help them seek out other survivors. (Spoiler excluded.)

  The film lightens up briefly, allowing you to catch your breath, and then we begin to see Jim become more accepting of his situation, at times displaying better predatory instincts than Selena.

  Some important (although intentionally vague) observations on the last act of the film:

  Humans are tribal creatures, and the bonds that force us to depend on one another are part of what allows us to survive. But respect, tolerance, temperance and compassion – while important - become all the more important in a survival situation and the capacity to display these tendencies even in the face of hopelessness is what sets humans apart from the animals.

  The film suggests to us that while survival is the ultimate goal of any human being, living without the companionship of others is not survival - it is ultimately an empty experience. But companionship devoid of compassion is not living, it is an equally brutal existence that makes us no better than animals. In each case you are alive, but you aren't living a life with any meaning.

  There is a moment late in the film where Jim spots evidence that perhaps they are not the only survivors of the apocalypse after all (spoiler excluded). Whether or not this dictates his actions in the film from that point forward I will leave to your imagination, but I have to assume that for Jim, it validates his belief that even at the end of the world, being a good person still matters.

  This moment ties in with the controversial ending of the film. Without being specific, there is a moment where you are certain you have seen the end of the film, then there is something of an epilogue that feels very tacked on and superfluous. I've read that it was added due to the fact that test audiences reacted negatively to the rather inconclusive and morbid original ending. If this is true it is unfortunate, because things in life don't always turn out the way we want, nor are we always offered closure to our traumas. Moving on with life in such situations is simply part of being a healthy, well adjusted human being.

  There are several alternate endings available on the DVD for those who insist on happy endings to each movie-going experience, as well as those who prefer other, varied levels of reality. While the original theatrical ending to this film weakens it considerably, this shouldn't detract from the fact that this is one of the most thoughtful, engaging and exciting horror films I have seen in years.

  I can only hope that the unexpected success of this film will convince filmmakers to continue pushing the boundaries of horror into ever more thought provoking and challenging territory.