A priest (Donald Pleasence) summons a professor (Victor Wong) to an old church to see a canister of liquid Satan.

If you’ve seen the movie, you’ll recognize that the description is technically accurate, but fails to capture the real essence of the film. A better description might have been:

Trapped in an old church, a priest (Donald Pleasance) and a professor (Jameson Parker) try to prevent Satan’s return to Earth.

Not much longer, and yet it sells the story better. But I don’t get the sense that the TV Guide writers are trying to be accurate or sell the movie. They’re just cranking out copy.

Anyway, this got me thinking about TV Guide and whether it may actually be challenging to sum up a movie that badly in one short sentence. So I figured I’d give it a try. Consider this my audition to write for TV guide. (Feel free to leave a comment with your own movie summaries.)

• The Bourne Identity – A man with memory trouble (Matt Damon) kills people.
• Top Gun – A pilot with daddy issues (Tom Cruise) flies Naval aircraft recklessly.
• Jaws – Three men (Richard Dreyfuss, Robert Shaw, Roy Scheider) who need a bigger boat go fishing.
• Titanic – Two young lovers (Leonardo DiCaprio, Kate Winslet) experience extreme moisture.
• American Beauty – A man (Kevin Spacey) and his wife (Annette Bening) have marital problems.
• Jurassic Park – A team of scientists led by Sam Neill visit an amusement park accompanied by a lawyer.
• The Day After Tomorrow - The adventures of a climatologist (Dennis Quaid) studying weather.
• Rocky – A boxer (Sylvester Stallone) who may be mentally disadvantaged and has an aging coach (Burgess Meredith) tries dating.
• Forrest Gump – A mentally challenged man (Tom Hanks) waits for a bus and tells stories.
• The Silence of the Lambs – FBI agent Clarice Starling (Jody Foster) deals with a difficult inmate (Anthony Hopkins).

As with most topics I write about here, the subject of zombies has prompted some interesting discussions with friends and colleagues. In the case of World War Z, my only complaint about the book is its reliance on the slow moving, arms raised, schleppy zombie made famous by George Romero films. I, as a matter of preference, would much rather have seen the speedy, violent zombies of 28 Weeks Later / 28 Days Later or the Xbox 360 game Left 4 Dead.

I firmly believe that when the zombie apocalypse (ZA) finally comes, it will look more like the rage virus. Honestly, it would have to. The fact is a slow zombie is simply not that hard to defeat. They’re kind of like cows. You could hunt them with a dent mallet. Granted, if you were set upon by a pack, it may be harder to fight off. However, the spread of the contagion would either have to be immediate or a single mass event would have to hit most of the population at once.

In World War Z, the contagion is slow to spread. Brooks gives the impression that a year or two passes between the first outbreak and the pandemic. That’s simply too slow for a zombie virus to move unless the zombies themselves are so fast, and so hard to kill, that they can rapidly turn new zombies. Compare Brooks’ approach to that of 28 Days/Weeks Later or even the disaster of a film called Quarantine. (If you haven’t seen Quarantine, think of it as the Blair Witch Project of zombie movies – shaky handicam story telling that rapidly becomes painful to sit through.) The contagion in those movies spreads rapidly enough, and the zombies become fast and violent enough to quickly become a problem.

What has been interesting to me is the almost universal agreement on the topic of fast versus slow zombies. Just about everybody I have raised the issue with agrees that fast zombies are much scarier, much harder to kill, and much more likely when the ZA is upon us. I have to wonder, then, why franchises like Resident Evil or the remakes/knock-offs of Romero films generally portray the zombies as stupid and slow.

It seems to me that the future of zombie films has to lie with fast, violent zombies. Purists may disagree, but the only movies I can see remaining true to the schleppy zombies would be flicks like Shaun of the Dead that actually mock the speed.

Forrest Gump is “an amiable dunce who is far too smart to embrace the lethal values of the 1960s.” Uh, yeah. You know the character is mentally retarded, right?

I have to agree with his general assessment that by these standards liberals hate everything about America and its values. But looking deeper, there’s something much more troubling about the list – the fact that most of these reviews gloss over significant flaw with their own argument.

Don’t get me wrong. I’m committed to the concept of small government, fiscally responsible conservatism. I’m not an adherent to social conservatism (whether by big government or small) because social conservatism is all about telling you how to live your life. I consider that antithetical to small government conservatism.

I’m also a huge film buff, and don’t appreciate the people who try to look for hidden political agendas in film. We get it. Liberals are in charge of Hollywood. That doesn’t mean they accidentally make pro-conservative values movies.

So let’s look at a few of the NRO choices from a different perspective:

• 24. Team America: World Police – There’s really nothing I can say that Parker and Stone haven’t about this. Yes, the movie is brilliant in its satirical depiction of the American left. Anderson’s synopsis, however, glosses over what the creators have said – that just as dangerous as liberal philosophy is that “overzealous” defense of America. The movie clearly regards those “defenders of freedom” as inept and likely to cause as much or more damage to the world they’re trying to save. The movie actually makes a broad point about the happy middle, and should be regarded as the #1 Movie for Moderates.
• 20. Gattaca – Contrary to the Wesley Smith’s take on the movie, Hawke’s inability to become an astronaut is not due to lack of “enhancement” it’s due to his congenital heart defect – a defect which could have been ‘fixed’, not ‘enhanced’ genetically. The “calamitous results” described are not caused by his theft of Jude Law’s genetic identity, they’re caused by his lies and decption. To hear Smith tell it, though, we should cease all medical advancement and rejoice in disease and deformity. To me, that’s not a conservative ideology.
• 16. Master and Commander – Underlying quite a few of the pics on this list is something almost diametrically opposed to Smith’s Gattaca review – a sense that everyone should know their place, and not aspire beyond it. We’ll see that again in “Blast from the Past” (more in a bit), but it’s best summed up by John J. Miller’s use of a New York Times quote. “It imagines the [H.M.S.] Surprise as a coherent society in which stability is underwritten by custom and every man knows his duty and his place.” Since when is “knowing your place” a conservative principle?
• 12. Batman: The Dark Knight – this review seems to be justification for violating constitutional rights of the innocent citizen in pursuit of safety. “Batman has to devise new means of surveillance, push the limits of the law, and accept the hatred of the press and public.” Andrew Klavan goes on to explain that the things we liked in Batman we hated in GWB. True enough. I don’t mind a ficititious character eavesdropping on fictitious citizens of Gotham. I surely do mind them listening to my conversations in a nation protected (at least theoretically) by the constitution. Since when did conservatisim entail ignoring the document that specifically spells out our freedoms? If we ignore that, then the freedom we’re defending is an empty myth.
• 9. Blast From The Past – Clearly the message here is the 1950s were a wondeful time, women should just be happy being housewives, and should spend most of their time self-medicating with champagne cocktails the way Sissy Spacek does. James Bowman needs to rewatch that movie sometime. Spacek is miserable being “trapped” in that life. She’s drunk throughout the movie and yearns to be free to wander and experience, but is literally locked into childcare by the man that seals her in her living tomb. Yet Bowman holds her up as the model of the idyllic woman’s life. My very conservative wife would take issue with that.
• 7. The Pursuit of Happyness – This may arguably be only one of two movies on the list that I would include in my own Top 25 conservative films. However, I don’t think that drive, determination, pride, and an overwhelming desire to provide for your children are uniquely conservative. I have a lot of liberal friends that want to get ahead without handouts and provide for their kids. They work damn hard and also identify with this movie.
• 6. Groundhog Day – As Paul said when we discussed this list, Bill Murray’s problem wasn’t that we was pursuing the fads of modernity. His problem was he was a jackass living only for himself. He was forced to relive the same day over and over until he learned that there was a world beyond himself and that he needed to be an active participant in it. If anything, I would list this movie as one of the Top 10 liberal movies of all time. It’s clear message is to deny oneself for the common good or you’ll be fated to an unsatisfying life.
• 5. 300 – I’m not even sure that Michael Poliakoff and I watched the same movie. This is more a story about a vastly outgunned group of insurgents defending their home against foreign invaders intent on toppling their leaders. Keep in mind that the people of Sparta were also not exactly adherents to democracy – estimates are 80% of the population of Sparta were slaves. In both Iraq and Afghanistan, we were the invading force. In both cases we told their populations, the world, and ourselves that we were doing it for their benefit. Xerxes would likely have said the same.
• 2. The Incredibles – This would be the other of the two films I think may actually belong on this list. There is a clear message that being a standout in society is frowned upon. There is a clear message that overly litigious trial lawyers are ruining the world. There is a specific sense that homogeneity is bad. However, there is also the same recurring theme that being “supers” is a protected class and only those born to it can belong. Syndrome’s sin is that he aspires to greater than his station. He’s not content being a deckhand on Mr. Incredible’s HMS Surprise. This just reinforces the recurring elitist theme on this list – just be happy with your lot in life.

Now maybe I’m a film fan first, and a political junkie second. I think that may flavor my perception of this list. However, I think the NRO list reinforces the stereotype of conservatives as elitists who believe the 1950s were some sort of panacea; that women should be barefoot and pregnant in the kitchen; and achievement is something you should be born into, not something you aspire to.

It’s kind of surprising that this list would perpetuate those stereotypes since their antithesis, in the form of Sarah Palin, got such high marks from NRO.

To answer the unasked question, my previous favorite stop action animation was Juke-Bar. You can view it at the National Film Board of Canada’s website.

Today I decided to kick off @MusicIn120 or less for much the same reason – it’s a way to share good music, concert reviews, and artist info quickly.

As a huge fan of both music, I thought it would be a fun outlet to share some thoughts and hear from others about what they’re listening to. I hope you’ll check it out.

Finally, as a housekeeping note, the reason for “120″ is two-fold. First, I retweet reviews from others and the 20 characters between 120 and Twitter’s limit of 140 allow me space for a byline. Second, I’m in the process of developing a pseudo-SocNet at both MoviesIn120.com and MusicIn120.com that will allow people to upload two minute (or 120 second) video and audio clips to review (or recreate or reenact) the music/movie in question, search for and find short reviews for movie they’re interested in, or simply discuss the topics.

Something got me thinking about them today. I figured I would put the power of the Internet and YouTube to work and see if they have since resurfaced. I found Balance on YouTube. It’s below.

Juke Bar turned up on the website of the National Film Board of Canada and is linked below. You should check them both out.

What came first? The music or the misery? People worry about kids playing with guns and watching violent videos, we’re scared that some sort of culture of violence is taking them over. But nobody worries about kids listening to thousands — literally thousands — of songs about broken hearts and rejection and pain and misery and loss.

Did I listen to pop music because I was miserable, or was I miserable because I listened to pop music?

However, when I watched Cho Seung-Hui’s video tonight, I broke up laughing. I couldn’t help but think of how much this guy reminded me of a really pissed off Napoleon Dynamite. I kept waiting for him to say Tina, you fat lard, come get some dinner. Tina, Eat. Eat the food. Eat the food!

Does that make me a bad person?

Update: Had to drop the picture of Cho from this post, I, and apparently others were getting tired of looking at it…

The Departed

First up was The Departed, the Martin Scorsese directed Oscar winner. The only other nominee I have caught so far is Little Miss Sunshine, so my gauge may be a little off, but the rest of the BP nominees must have been pretty mediocre if The Departed scored the win. It wasn’t a bad movie, but it wasn’t terribly good either.

DiCaprio and Damon both did a very good job as undercover agents who have infiltrated the enemy territory and convinced their respective bosses of their loyalty. Toward the end of the film, DiCaprio tells Damon that he had the favor and trust of their boss – Jack Nicholson. The clear implication is that DiCaprio the rat, was more convincing to Costello than Damon the employee.

Unfortunately, the same can’t be said of their acting. Damon (and I know a lot of people disagree with this) is simply a much better actor than DiCaprio. Maybe the problem is Damon is just much more comfortable with the Southie accent, but he’s just more convincing. The two, however, completely outclass Nicholson.

Jack has reached the end of his career and apparently decided to keep playing the same character again and again. He’s now revised the same role for Batman, Witches of Eastwick, and The Departed, to mention a few. He’s going to end up like Marlon Brando – able to charge exorbitant amounts of money for the draw of his name, but ultimately unable to capture any of the magic of his earlier roles.

The biggest problem with The Departed, however, is the story. It’s predictable, there is little intrigue, and the ending is so contrived it’s pathetic. The story builds up this semi-adversarial relationship between DiCaprio and Wahlberg, and you figure the end will feature Wahlberg coming to the defense of his undercover agent. Instead, they conveniently suspend Wahlberg’s character in some sort of other-world where he completely ceases to exist. That is until he appears at the end of the film to tidy up the damage.

The ending is evidence of Quentin Tarantino’s impact on Hollywood. In just about every one of his films, the ending is the same – everybody dies. Scorsese took a page from that playbook and came up with a concocted story, and a weak ending to achieve the same effect. If that’s what they were after with this story, they should have gone to the master and let Quentin helm the pic.

The movie was entertaining, but of all the films that could have earned Scorsese the Oscar, Raging Bull and Taxi Driver were much better. This, to me, has the feeling of “we’re sorry” Oscars. They wanted to recognize Scorsese for being passed over by rewarding a rather mediocre movie with the Best Pic and Best Director nods. If you want to see Scorsese at his best, skip this and rent Goodfellas.

The Covenant

The Covenant is one of those films that has a great premise, and yet completely fails to deliver through a combination of poor acting, poor direction, poor writing, and poor special effects. If you stirke out on every one of those, you’re done. That’s where this movie comes in. Skip it on DVD, skip it on cable, and try to avoid the overwhelming sense of shame you’ll get from watching it.

The premise is, like I said, intriguing. What if the Salem witches were, in fact, actually witches? What if they had remarkable powers, some went into hiding after the trials, and their bloodlines continued with those powers through to present day. Sounds like it could make a good movie, right? Yes. But not this one.

Instead, the writers implement the cliché machine and start cranking out pablum. About five minutes into this flick, I turned to Mrs. Quip and asked if she had figured out the storyline. She replied that she had figured out the plot, the character development and the ending. It really is that bad.

We kept watching. We were hoping for, at the very least, an awesome battle to the death between the good guy and the bad guy. What we got though, was a weak version of catch featuring sparkling orbs of goo that make the ground explode when you drop the ball. Compound that with the typical plot device of “We never found the bad guys body… hmmm… what could that mean?” and you end up with a lame set up for a possible sequel.

If you don’t mind watching a movie, knowing full well that it may make you retarded, then this is the flick for you.

This weekend was a rare treat, however. We actually arranged an adult outing to a meal and a movie. The flick of choice was Music and Lyrics. I thought I’d take a moment and share some thoughts.

First, let me say Hugh Grant and Drew Barrymore have both done this movie about a dozen times before, albeit with other people in the opposite gender’s lead. The movie itself was pretty boilerplate for the romantic comedy genre as well. The story follows the usual storyline, the two meet through odd circumstances, become close, eventually sleep together, Grant does something stupid to make Barrymore go away, and in a big public display of his love, Grant gets the girl back.

Despite the rather formulaic production and casting, though, the movie was really pretty good. Grant gives his usual performance as the oafish, egotistical, but still somehow personable songwriter. He was the Andrew Ridgely portion of a British pop band (appropriately named Pop!) in the 1980s. After an ugly split, he watched his former partner (think George Michael, but without the gay bathroom escapades and drugs) go on to huge success.

Barrymore is a woman who stands in for the woman who normally waters his plants and was the inspiration for a best-selling novel about a woman with limited talent who seduces a college professor. Her former lover, a college professor who never revealed his marriage, is the author of the book.

Both question their worth after having been dumped by their former partners, and are wallowing in a sea of mediocrity.

What is truly refreshing is the sub-plot of the song they’re trying to write and the movie’s depiction of the music industry. As a big fan of music, I have been fairly disappointed for a number of years now that the industry seems to support whatever “it” girl happens to be gracing the pages of Us magazine, and really no longer cares about creating music.

Cases in point, Hayden Panettierre and Paris Hilton. I understand the music industry, through the application of technology, can make a barking dog a Grammy winner, but do we really need to keep proving that? Do we need to keep giving goofy teen actresses and billionaire heiresses record deals simply because they have a high Q rating?

Sorry, I digress…

The movie does a great job of skewering these vacuous pop princesses. The cover of a magazine featuring the movie’s version of the next Shakira – Cora Corman, played by Haley Bennett – features an appropriate quote, “I don’t want to think anymore, I just want to exist.”

That could be the motto of the music industry. Its inclusion in the film sums up the apparent disdain the movie’s writers have for the music biz. The acting is good, the story is predictable, but for me, the open mocking of the music business makes Music and Lyrics worth a look.