Cred Confessions: Star Trek II: The Wrath of Khan

I never really got Star Trek. I saw"Star Trek: First Contact" mainly because my buddy Ryan described "The Borg" as villain on par with Bobba-Fet. Of course Bobba-Fet is one man and the Borg are collected hive mind....whoah I'm getting ahead of myself. So in order to see what the old "Trek" was all about, I recently watched the highly acclaimed "Star Trek II: The Wrath of Khan" on blu-ray. And yes Trekkies, I did watch the episode "Space Seed" first, so put your phasers down.

From what I understand part of the reason the film is so beloved is Khan, played by Ricardo Montalban is so damn money as the villain. This dude chews up scenery like a hungry Rancor feasting on people Jabba doesn't like (wrong series...sorry nerds). His quest for vengeance against Kirk does make for a exciting film and the action and story beats hold up very well. However some of the acting is a little over the top and the special effects are pretty janky. Scenes of torpedoes being fired from ships that look like glowing golden orbs are just pretty bootleg. I'm not sure if it's cool to judge old films on their special effects but if nerds are gonna worship something, then I'm gonna hold it to a high standard.

I was also struck how the film isn't afraid to address some real deal themes, you know like life, death, religion, and if you should strike things up with old flames. But seriously, the "Kobayashi Maru" test which popped up in the reboot is a plot point in the film that effectively muses about being prepared for death. Scenes involving McCoy and company ruminating on the "Genesis" project, kind of an atom bomb of planet creation are a noble attempt at something more substantive.

Director Nicholas Meyer does a solid job and there is some memorable camera work, particularly with scenes set outside the spaceships, yet the best part of the movie is the highly quotable space dialogue that is highly memorable and always touching. Spock's "I have been...and always shall be...your friend," is the real deal when it comes to emotional moments and McCoy's simple comment about Kirk getting out there to "hop galaxies" makes Kirk sound like the space age Don Draper (which maybe he just is).

So is it worthy of me doing a cred confession (i've done some pretty serious films)? Yeah, it is, it's a successful genre film that succeeds at becoming something more. Guess I'm starting to get it.

Cred Confessions: Dirty Harry

Is there anyone on earth cooler than Clint Eastwood? After watching "Dirty Harry" for the first time yesterday, I seriously doubt that anyone can hang with this dude, and I when I say anyone, I mean anybody in the past, present, or future. Often times the film is remembered for Eastwood's legendary performance, but I found the film appealing for other reasons as well. Think of it this way, if "Dirty Harry" was a loaded .44 magnum, half of those 6 rounds would be full of Eastwood, the others, they would be full of the other geniuses involved with the film.

Who are these geniuses? Let's start with the script, initially written by Harry Julian & Rita M Fink, and revised by John Milius and Terrence Malick, the story succeeds by keeping things simple. There's a good guy and a bad guy. The good guy is extremely good, casually saving the day on his lunch break, stopping dude's from jumping off buildings, and dominating perps, you know the drill. The bad guy is well, just really evil. He kills civilians, punches kids, and gets his face pounded for fun/cunning motives. You know there's gotta be a showdown and man, that showdown is badass!

Besides Eastwood I was struck by how "cool" the film is. The score from Argentinian Lalo Schifirin is full of 70's funk, jazz, and Latin music and enhances the mood of the film. Director Don Siegel and cinematographer Bruce Surtees take some serious risks with the film, including some really interesting shots that position the hero as tiny in the scope of the San Francisco landscape. These two elements combined give the film a certain artistic vibe that I wasn't expecting. I mean, let's be honest here, I was expecting Eastwood kicking ass and I got it, I just didn't see the groovy stuff coming brah.

Earlier in that last paragraph I talked about how risky the film was. This is a film that came out forty years ago and still feels bold. It made me wonder if Hollywood has lost some of it's risk taking mentality. If "Dirty Harry" came out today it probably would be ultra-violent and star Jason Statham. It probably would have a lot of metal on the soundtrack and would open to 15 million dollars. Hopefully one day, we'll take more risks and see more movies like "Dirty Harry" today. Now, who's feeling lucky and wants to step up?

Cred Confessions: Blade Runner & The Robot Uprising

Considering the robot uprising is imminent, the fact that I hadn't seen Ridley Scott's humanoid masterpiece "Blade Runner" was a massive hole in my preparation for my future enslavement by the machines. I heard many things about the film, some good and some bad, so I was intrigued to see if it would provide me some answers. I got a copy of the film* on Blu-Ray, notified my roommate John Connor that I would definitely fight against SKYNET, and dove into the world of Blade Runner.

Watching the film on Blu-Ray was an incredible experience, the cinematography by Jordan Cronenweth is astounding. I read here how Cronenweth and director Scott wanted the film to look like a noir and they totally succeeded. And it's not just the look of the film screams noir, it's the entire story. You have a detective played by Ford, his fat tubby boss, a femme fatale, a pure evil bad guy, a damsel in distress, and the wise-cracking partner. They're all here, granted with a wild sci-fi twist.

But beyond the fact that it's a very well put together future noir, what really struck me about the film was the ideas it presented. Sure they weren't as mind blowing as the space mind melt extravaganza that is "2001," but they seem more timely. With Watson on "Jeopardy," and the singularity on the cover of TIME, the issues of sentient computers is still prevalent almost 20 years after it's initial release. Shit, some people even think that Watson got that last question wrong on "Jeopardy" on purpose to keep us calm (before the uprising). Ridley Scott was ahead of his time with this one and I'm happy to report the film still holds up as a borderline masterpiece. No word if the film will serve as a template to stop the robot uprising though.

* I know there are like 7 versions of the film, I watched the 1992 directors cut.

THIS IS FACE OF OUR FUTURE ROBOT ENEMY

Cred Confessions: 2001

My credibility confessions continue with my screening of 2001 last night. When I say screening it means I watched it on Blu-Ray with my three buddies who have seen at least 10 times each. When I asked if they wanted to watch, one of my friends simply referred to it as "The Masterpiece." And I gotta say, this movie really took my mind, blasted into outer space, than grilled it in a english muffin pizza with extra mozzarella. I'm not sure I have truly recovered.

Now I will say, I did see this film with my Dad when I was really little and I remember thinking "where the hell are the aliens?" Now that I'm older, wiser, and more informed about the nature of space, time, and extra-terrestrials I found myself mesmerized by it. Every camera movement in this film feels revolutionary and every shot feels like a space painting. Any other statement I make about how technically amazing this film is, both now and when it came out, just makes me sound like a rookie.

However what struck me about about it was the overall message about the relationship between men and machines. As we progress further into the future, our dependency on our machines (Droids, Iphones, Ipads, TVs, space-ships) all seem to be developing to a point that is reflected accurately in the film (the year is a little off, but who cares). However it seems that in the film that technology eventually leads us to understanding what it means to be human, and I'm not sure that is the case today. Facebook, twitter, four square, and everything else seems to connect us to each other even more, but at the same time it limits our face to face interaction. So are the machines making us or more less human? I guess we'll have to wait for the monolith to answer that!