Top 120 Movies, Continued (69-60)

This next installment consists of great dramas, primarily with absurdly phenomenal singular performances either by one actor (e.g., Cool Hand Luke) or by two or more actors (A Few Good Men) that overshadowed the fact that the movies would suck in the hands of mere mortals (except for Clerks...will explain below). There is no question these movies have other intangibles beyond the individual actors amazing skill, but seriously...put Nicholas Cage in any one of these movies and it blows. 


69. Cool Hand Luke. Raise your hand if (a) you've never heard of this movie or (b) you've heard of it, but never watched it. "What we've got here is, failure to communicate." Paul Newman's best. You can have the Hustler and The Color of Money, I will take this movie. It epitomizes the cool, unflappable tough guy before the metrosexual revolution destroyed masculinity. Newman plays a vet who is deep in the throes of anomie. He ends up in prison; his choice. And, among the men in prison he feels whole again. From one total institution to the next. He becomes a symbol of hope, determination, and freedom to a bunch of people who have lost all three. He is Christ-like...the movie is so good, you will kick yourself for waiting this long.

68. A Few Good Men. Should be higher up, right? Absolute career-defining job by Tom Cruise; a Barry Bonds-like 2001 season by Jack Nicholson who returns from the dreaded late 80's/early 90's swinging for the fences; a nearly standable job by Demi Moore; underrated perforamances by Kevin Bacon and Kevin Pollack (one of my all-time favorite Robert Horry/Derek Fisher like actors); and a surprising good job by Keifer Sutherland (so good, but overshadowed by everyone else, you forgot he was there!). Most of you have seen it, so all I will say is watch it again...if only for the courtroom scenes. This movie may be a 10 out of 10 in the re-watchable category. TNT puts it on like 100 times a year, and I will watch it from start to finish, or any other time...it gets this rating, perhaps, only because Tom Cruise is in it.

66. The Truman Show. Another career defining/altering movie. A better version of Ed TV which also was prescient in anticipating the reality TV craze of the 2000s, The Truman Show is a almost believeable 'what if' that finds Jim Carrey being adopted by a television corporation, a studio set large enough to be seen from space being constructed to film Carrey's birth, first steps, acne years, marriage, etc., and a whole cast of extras hired to fill the spaces in this make believe world. An entire life created for TV; ironically, people feel attached to him because they know him better than he may know himself. Everything, though, is carefully crafted from the girl who was chosen to 'bump' into him and eventually marry him, to the beer his best friend drinks while sitting on the dock. Maniacal, yet fantastic; cynical, yet so much of a mirror reflecting our real lives and our inordinate obsession with gossip and now reality TV. A serious role for a funny guy, but not like the death of Robin Williams.

65. What's Eating Gilbert Grape? Johnny Depp and Juliette Lewis (so absurdly underrated) dominate a movie that could not exist without them (much like Depp's performance in Bennie and Joon). Lucky for us, DiCraprio couldn't ruin the movie because he plays a retarded younger brother; a role perfect for him. This movie is touching, soft, and a beautiful moment in film.

64. Clerks. The only other Kevin Smith movie to make the list, but not entirely fitting of the others in this grouping. Smith shot this film on the cheap in a convenience store he worked at. His friends are the actors. And while the dialogue is really the selling point of this movie as well as his unique Seinfeld-ian ability to see the irony in the ordinary aspects of everyday life, the acting doesn't detract from the movie. If anything, the New Jersey-ness of the main character Dante adds to the realism of the whole thing. For example, Dante makes mundane, inane questions such as "are the contractors the Empire hires to build the death star in Star Wars to blame for their own decisions or innocent parties simply making a buck" matter to the viewer. As a person who has worked as a clerk at a liquor store, the laughs take on double meanings. But, at the end of the day, the dialogue is witty and intelligent, and will stand up on its own. 

63. Indiana Jones and the Temple of Doom. Don't expect the Holy Grail Indiana Jones to make this list. I personally wasn't fooled by the addition of Sean Connery to beef up the sagging series. I am also not fooled by the detractors of the second installment, The Temple of Doom, who prefer the first and the third over the second. Nonsense I say. Let's think about the movie from a cinematographical perspective first: the opening scene...Indy is poisoned, shot at, attacked, chases the antidote across the floor of a club with patrons running for their lives, cuts a huge gong off the ceiling and runs with it to avoid getting shot, jumps out of a window into a car. Ten minutes later, he is on a crashing plane where he jumps out onto an inflatable raft and shoots down the Himalayas only to find himself in an India village. Awesome. The scene where they are eating bugs and eels is great; the scene where Bradshaw has to put her hands in the hole full of bugs is as intensely tactile as any scene in the others. And while the Nazis are good as evil doers, the slave driving evil Indians are just as good for the moral effect. Topping them is the pulling out of the heart and the temporary evil Indy. This movie has it all. Imagine Nicholas Cage as Indiana Jones...we basically have that in National Treasure (a shitty movie!)

62. Indiana Jones and the Raiders of the Lost Ark. Except it does not beat the first one. The opening scene made every kid want to be an archaeologist. The Egyptian bazaar; the tomb of the ark with the snakes; the bar in the crazy Nepalese mountains where we meet Karen Allen (Animal House; and who may be the single cutest-in-a-70s-sense actress who never went anywhere) and watch her beat a bunch of eskimos at a drinking game; the weird Nazi guy with the portable coathanger; the French rival archaeologist; the scene where the Ark is opened and their faces melt off; and fight scene with the bald German and the airplane out of control. Any action movie would kill for that much action without losing the talent that Harrison Ford delivers. This movie was so awesome, people forget how good it really was. But, no one...and I mean no one...could do it but Harrison Ford coming off of Hans Solo. Don't believe me? Go rent Indiana Jones and the Crystal Skull...it blew.

61. The Pianist. Adrian Brody, the holocaust, and music. Three things that should tell you to have a box of tissues right next to you. I don't want to even ruin the plot or the movie, because if it wasn't for a series of unreal movies ahead of it, this movie would warrant a higher number. It isn't even the best holocaust movie on the list! But, Brody stands on an island in this movie, putting in a performance equal to or better than Hanks in Castaway. Both men are on an island; one literal, the other figurative. With Brody's performance ranking higher in my opinion.

60. American Beauty. Kevin Spacey; Annette Benning. Superstar performances. Throw in a compelling story with pretty good support acting and you have a good recipe. A dark drama about the meaning of American life, or more precisely, the loss of the meaning of life behind the trivalities we fill it with to hide the fact that we are alienated from the parts that make us human. If any movie captures Guatama Buddha's realization that all life is suffering, it would be American Beauty. Moreover, this movie captures the sociological significance of triads. Every plot twist, subplot, or character arc is immersed in a relationship, a third person brought in to either relieve the tension, to mediate, or to divide and conquer. The movie is fueled by the complexities born out of one-on-one relationships altered by the dynamics of third-parties. Spacey-Benning, and the King; Spacey's kid, her friend, and Spacy; his kid, the neighbor boy, and Spacey; the neighbor, his dad, and Spacy; hell both families are triads! Look for that when you watch it again, as it is a primer on social dynamics and organization.

Back to the premise of suffering. Every character is sad, looking for release from the cycle of rebirths. Spacey finds it in a buddhist sense: the world is illusory, so why continue to abide by the illusion. His daughter thinks she finds it in love, and perhaps if we could watch on, she would; he boyfriend finds it in love too...or so he thinks. The others are doomed. Mira Sorvino finds it in the attention that Spacey gives her, but it is narcissim and emptiness that fills her; Benning in her career aspirations, which turn out to lack all human qualities (which, incidentally, she lacks to); Chris Cooley, the neighbor, finds it in military discipline, conservative ideology, and patriarchal authority. All of which turn out to be fronts for his real identity. Thus, we have two options: world rejection (as exemplified by Spacey) or love...the movie seems to make a clear choice, or does it?

Your Quote for the Day

A tyrant must put on the appearance of uncommon devotion to religion. Subjects are less apprehensive of illegal treatment from a ruler whom they consider god-fearing and pious. On the other hand, they do less easily move against him, believing that he has the gods on his side. - Aristotle

Your Quote for the Day

I'm tired of hearing about money, money, money, money, money. I just want to play the game, drink Pepsi, wear Reebok. - Shaq

Top 120 Movies, Continued

All of these movies are all comedies that are great, worthy movies. But, they are lacking that very last oomph that the most brilliant comedies have. Some of these might make you say, "What!?! How could Casino be lower than these?" Well, let's face it...this is my list, and I think comedies have long been devalued, so I am ready to give them their due.


79. Trainspotting. A great book by Scottish author Irving Welsh (whose books, by the way are really good, but dark and in Scottish slang). The movie was Ewan McGregor's first real role, and he was brilliant in it. Essentially a movie about heroin, getting off of heroin, and getting back on to it. It is dark, but funny in an English movie sense. If you've never seen it, hit it up.

78. Hot Fuzz. If you don't know Simon Pegg's movies yet, you are severely out of the loop. Pegg is British, I think, and has done two excellent movies: Hot Fuzz and a great zombie parody, Shaun of the Dead. Hot Fuzz is superior for a number of reasons. First, Pegg gives a great British perspective on the American cop genre, mixing and matching every cliche to a point of absurdity. Pegg (Nicholas Angel) is a big city London cop who's arrest record is amazing; so good, the rest of the London force hates him because they make them look bad and are gradually taking work away from them. His punishment: transfer to some small village which has won the best village of the year award annually. Something strange is going on, but everyone assures him it is simply a big city cop bored and trying to make more out of nothing. As all of Pegg's movies do, it devolves rapidly into insanity and brilliant funniness.

77. 40-Year Old Virgin. A great movie that does not get ruined by a shitty love story or a strong first half, weak second half disease (see Wedding Crashers). Not a good name movie, as we never learn anyone's last name beyond Carell's character (Andy Stitzer). However, the supporting cast is awesome. Seth Rogen (who should stick to supporting roles), Paul Rudd (brilliant as a sidekick), Romany Malco, Jane Lynch (from Best in Show), and every other small bit part is so key to this movie's success. The love story is good, but really the memorable scenes are incidental: the speed dating skit, the poker game where Andy talks about sandbag boobs, nearly every electronic stores scene, the bar and using your peripherals, and my favoriate, the ride home with Leslie Mann where she sideswipes a car, has him blow into the breathelizer to start her car, and then throws up on him...always makes me laugh so hard. 


76. The Jerk. I will just say this now: I think Steve Martin is good, but overrated in the pantheon of great 70s-80s comedians. Some swear by his movies, and I think The Jerk is good, but I am not prepared to put him in the Chevy Chase early 80s/Bill Murray pantheon. As Navin R. Johnson, Martin inexplicably grows up in a big, southern, poor black family and thinks he is black...except he is so white. He travels to the city where he happens to invent something absurd, makes it rich, but is still a poor person, and then loses all his money. Some great laughs along the way. A solid performance, but nothing that transcends the genre. In my opinion, he is much better in ensembles like Parenthood or Three Amigos.

75. Slap Shot. Mr. Paul Newman...in a hockey movie...a sport no one watches unfortunately. Reeking of the 70s, machoness, and mysogyny it is really a last of its kind. The end of an era. Newman plays Reggie 'Reg' Dunlop an aging coach-player who has lost his chances in the NHL and plays on the Chiefs in a minor league. Full of mostly has-beens and never-weres, Ned Braden is a youngster on the road to the NHL. Except, Braden doesn't seem to want to be there. The team is on the brink of being folded, and Dunlop senses this could be it for him and a whole bunch of other guys. He decides to start emphasize toughness and fighting over skill and scoring -- and, they do start winning, but that is never the point. Mid-season, the Chiefs acquire three brothers each one year apart and wearing super thick black glasses. They use tinfoil on their knuckles, travel with toy trucks and race cars, and have no respect for the game itself. But, they are mean and tough and love Dunlop's plan. If you are easily offended by non-P.C. stuff, this is not your movie...but it is good.

Check out some of the names: Dave 'Killer' Carlson; the Hansen brothers (more on this in a second); Denis Lemieux; Tim 'Dr. Hook' McCracken; Ogie Ogilthorpe; Tommy Hanrahan; Dickie Dunn.

74. Mallrats. Every decade needs a movie or two to capture the ugliness yet nostalgia of a decade. The 80s had John Hughes and his running commentary, but likely peaked with The Breakfast Club. Well, Mallrats is this movie -- though, Clerks in some ways is even more dated. The thing that makes this movie great is that it emphasizes the shift in teenage patterns. In the 80s, every great movie revolved around high school and the problems kids faced in school, with dating, with dances, with drugs...etc. By the 90's the US economy had facilitated the shift from teens as students to teens as consumers. Not that they weren't buying things before, but the massive expansion in the 80s and then 90s brought wealth in unprecedented amounts to a larger chunk of America; coupled with the mushrooming of malls, the advent of the CD and MTV's incessant pushing of music, and Tim Burton's Batman revolutionizing the connection between movies and consumer goods, teenagers became a targeted demographic as never before. Mallrats captures this, as the setting for teenage comedy shifted from the school to the mall (though #70 was a precursor of this). Aside from the sociological implications, some witty dialogue (as always from Smith); good acting by Jason Lee, Shannon Daugherty, Ben Affleck (who is only good as the complete asshole supporting actor guy), and Joey Lauren Adams; and a bright, light, and clean story. Maybe being a teen of the early 90's makes me like this more than it deserves, but it really does connect to the hours I spent wandering the mall aimlessly, buying over priced CDs at Camelot and Sam Goody, and just people watching all day.

73. Blazing Saddles. Mel Brooks' classic cowboy tale. Gene Wilder in full form (has any other actor's strange, early retirement had more of an effect than Wilder's? I miss that guy). A basic story attacking racial discrimination in the workforce, but a farce of epic proportions. Great names: Lili Von Shtupp (the amazing, underrated Madeline Kahn); Hedley Lamarr; Taggart; and Mongo. Phenomenal acting. And, classic Brooks' punchlines delivered in ways only capable of Brooks himself (who plays the altercocker mayor).


72. Dazed and Confused. Another pick because it is my blog. I crave this movie. It is so awesome, so much fun, so nostalgic that I cannot even begin to speak to its merits. Let's see. It has an absurd soundtrack for the greatest rock era ever; so good, it required two cds to cover the entire soundtrack. Second, it has the great coming of age that we all know about: junior high to high school; but, before the PC police, hazing was much more intense and socially acceptable with little involvement by the police. Third, it has some great characters who demonstrate the rare moments (but real in my experience) where drugs, music, and the particular points in time bring together all walks of high school life. You have Ron (who knew that was his name) Slater, the resident pot head, hanging with Randall 'Pink' Floyd the star quarterback; you have Floyd and Pickford, who is the pot dealer/cool guy -- and his awesome stoner girlfriend played by Milla Jovovich; Floyd and his close friend also on the football team, Don Dawson who is sort of into the pot heads, but much closer to Pink and the football team. You have the girl cliques that kind of run together, with Parker Posey stealing the show as the uber-bitch (Darla). You have the football guys who are a little uneasy with the stoners, but really just love getting drunk and having a good time (Benny O'Donnell and Melvin Spivey, afro and all). You have the asshole football player who has failed and is repeating and ultimately gets his comeupance (O'Bannon played by Affleck). You have the graduated dirtbag/cool guy who preys on high school chicks, David Wooderson (Matthew McConaughey). You got the nerds who are friends with Pink and get invited to the big bash (Adam Goldberg steals the show). And, you got the super uncomfortable on screen, which is fitting for his role, soon-to-be ninth grader who Pink befriends, Mitch Kramer. You got all that?

The movie revolves around the last day of school with the primary players becoming seniors and some bit players becoming freshman. The beauty of this movie is that we all remember that last day of school so well; summer is here, no more teachers...no more homework. From there, Pickford's parents find out he was going to throw a big party because they were leaving town; they stay and the rest of the movie is the search for a place to party. So good. So classic. So simple.



71. Brazil. Perhaps the least recognizable of the movies on this list, and one of the most difficult to watch because it is dark, deep, and humerous in a twisted way. Running with the Orwellian 1984 theme, Brazil imagines a futuristic world in which bureaucracy highlights the irrationality of rationality to a tee. The selling points? Terry Gilliam (Monty Python; 12 Monkeys; Time Bandits; Fear and Loathing) directs this movie. If that is not enough, then I am not sure what will suffice. Robert DeNiro appears in perhaps his strangest role; but Jonathan Pryce (Kiera Knightley's father in Pirates of the Carribean) gives a strong performance as the classic 1984/Brave New World character: discontent with modernity, seemingly the only or one of the few aware of the darkness surrounding him, and powerless to do much about it. A beautiful woman, who is cleverly tied into the running plot of bureaucratic mismanagement, is his salvation. Or so he thinks. The movie is long and plodding at times, and you may not believe me when I say it is comedic. But, I think it is a masterpiece; a sociological innovation.

70. Fast Times at Ridgemont High."Aloha, my name is Mr. Hand." This movie cannot do anything but make you laugh. The cast is absurd: a young Sean Penn (as Jeff Spicoli); Forest Whitaker (Charles Johnson); Jennifer Jason Leigh (Stacy Hamilton); Judge Reinhold (Brad Hamilton). The other names of interest: Mark 'Rat' Rattner; Mike Damone; Mr. Hand. And, who can forget Phoebe Cates whose diving in and coming out of the pool scene that ends with Reinhold in the bathroom getting caught in perhaps the most embarrassing way any teen male could ever be caught.

Let's see...where do we begin? How about the job Brad has where he has to where the pirate suit? Or, the VW bus that Spicoli et al. roll up in, open the door with smoke billowing out, and fall out of? Or every scene with Spicoli and Mr. Hand? Or the mall scenes, where Damone (who scalps concert tickets to some seriously dated bands) hangs out at the movie theater where Rattner is a ticket stub tearer? Or, the crappy faux diner that Phoebe and Jason Leigh work at? Or the funny naivete in sex that Phoebe (who pretends to be experienced) feeds to Stacy? Or the older guy taking out the younger girl and trying to get in her pants scene? Or the guy fumbling with the bra? Every single coming of age cliche is here, but the movie puts it all together! And, its re-watchability is definitely above a 5 out of 10, closing in on a 7. I love this movie!

Morning Cup 'O' Joe

Strangely, I have been silent the last few days on matters of importance beside my countdown from the 120th greatest movie you should watch to the first...why? There have certainly been stories to address: the Senate health care vote for debate; the stretching of the truth in Palin's new book; the impending decision on Afghanistan; the fact that Allen Iverson's 3,000 useless Grizzlies jerseys are being sent to Tanzania to be distributed amongst the people (instantly making AI the biggest basketball star in Tanzania); and the recent stink made by the Catholic bishops about preventing Catholic politicians from taking communion if they are pro-choice.

But today, I would like to consider Global Warming, because I just finished reading a nonsensical article about how scientists have been 'cooking the books' (no pun intended) to make it seem as if there will be a rapid increase in temperature near the end of the 20th century. I am not sure whether he is right or wrong, or whether the hacked emails expressing doubt or discussing ways to fudge the data are genuine or not, but this is besides the point. It does not take a scientist to recognize things are out of whack and that humans leave massive ecological footprints, some of which can be slowed down to prevent massive harm.

Case in point: hunters and gatherers, some 13,000+ years ago, routinely exhausted the food supply in their area to the point where the foods lowest on their list of preferences (and yes, they could list what they liked and yes the best foods were typically the sweetest and fattiest available...like, savanna McDonald's) were all that remained. At that point they would pick up and move to the next spot on their seasonal/migrational rotation. Now, humans then were probably in the order of 1 to 4 million total spread out of the entire Earth. Fast forward 13,000 years and there are almost 7 billion. I had McDonald's the other day, and it always strikes me when I eat fast food just how bad things really are: for every egg mcmuffin sold, and how many do you think are sold daily, one egg must be consumed. If there are ten people eating, two or three chickens can suffice; if there are ten people ordering a mcmuffin every ten minutes at one McDonalds aggregated over 4 to 5,000 nationwide, you get my drift. We are living beyond the Earth's means, and while genetic engineering of food to increase its output seems plausible, I am not sure if I am ready to be the guinea pig for a science experiment (e.g., think about how the use of fluorocarbons, Styrofoam, and thalidomide worked out!).

Ok, this was just about the absurd need to eat food. How about waste? If 10 people eat an animal and throw its carcass out, scavengers finish off some of it and then it decomposes. If 350 million people are eating McDonalds which likely slaughters 100s of cattle every day, where do they go? And, when you concentrate thousands of cows, pigs, or chickens in a small, dense environment, the shit is condensed, so is the methane, and the water tables below are screwed. Just look at any early urban environment in Egypt, China, or Mesopotamia before sanitation was invented...Every item you buy comes with an inordinate amount of packaging that you toss away, right? That shit does not decompose. Every time you start your car and drive it, fossil fuels are gone and carbon monoxide is let out into the air.

How can anyone begin to assume, just with this anecdotal evidence, that humans are not impacting their environment in adverse ways? The evidence is overwhelming. In Los Angeles, and its neighboring counties Riverside and San Bernardino where three or four of the top ten most smoggy cities are, asthma rates are through the roof for children; this data is correlated to other polluted cities like Houston and their children's asthma rates. When I look up and cannot see the stars, buildings from 1000 feet, or the moon my common sense kicks in a says, wow this must have some effect on our ecological system because everything is connected. But, I suppose some don't use common sense. How about the fact that the polar ice caps will be completely melted within 30 years, only being frozen during certain months of the year? Well, it could be a natural warming cycle you might argue...but, we do now, with no fancy statistical techniques needed, that since fossil fuels first started being used for railroads, temperatures have gone up in relation to the amount of fossil fuels being burned. Not iron clad by any means, but certainly enough to tell me we should do something.

The age old historical question my students always ask is: why do people only respond during crises to their environment when foresight could have saved them? I tell them the famous Easter Island story to try and analogize to the US. There were competing chiefdoms on the Easter Islands who had decided that their prestige battle could no longer be fought by throwing bigger and bigger feasts -- (in the Pacific Northwest, Native American chiefs, like Polynesian chiefs, would collect food from their subjects all year just so they could give more stuff away at pot-latches than their rivals could...this brought them prestige, even if it brougt them 'poverty'). A drought set in that was puzzling to the chiefs, and the duel solution meant to please the gods and bring them prestige was to build those famous statues that still sit on the beaches and edges of the island. A veritable 'arms race' ensued to build the biggest statues and accrue the most prestige. Unfortunately, this simple decision sealed their fate. The stone to build the statues existed in the center of the island. Having no cranes or trucks, they faced the dilemma of moving them from the middle to the periphery. The solution came from cutting trees and rolling these massive stones to the edges. Unintentionally, they cut down the entire forest, killed their food source whose resource niche was lost in the deforestation of the island, and extinguished their own existence after a brief bout of cannibalism. No, I like to think we have learned from societies like theirs mistakes. But, my students are correct in assuming we haven't. Because ideological notions of what is and isn't happening, and beliefs in evidence vary, and interests are vested to oppose something like environmental engineering (most notably by those destroying the Earth), people only act when they are truly forced to. Unfortunately, those opposed to action are never around when things reach their worst. 

Your Quote for the Day

What ordinary men are directly aware of and what they try to do are bounded by the private orbits in which they live; their visions and their powers are limited. - C. Wright Mills

Your Quote for the Day

What else can human nature be than a trait of the primary group? Surely not an attribute of the separate individual--supposing there were any such thing--since its characteristics, such as affection, ambition, vanity, and resentment, are inconceivable apart from society. If it belongs, then, to man in association, what kind or degree of association is required to develop it? Evidently nothing elaborate, because elaborate phases of society are transient and diverse, while human nature is comparatively stable and universal. In short the family and neighborhood life is essential to its genesis and nothing more is - Charles Cooley

Top 120 Movies Continued

89. Immortal Beloved. A movie about Beethoven. Delicate, powerful, and a rare specimen as "biopics" tend to play poorly in my opinion. The biggest problem is the overestimation of individual people's worth. But, this movie was done well. Gary Oldman does a great job as Beethoven, and the most powerful scene occurs when he walks out to "hear" his Ninth Symphony being performed...amazing the man was so talented but could never hear his own masterpiece.


88. Raging Bull. Enter Robert DeNiro. A phenomenal actor who has done better for himself than Al Pacino, the closest actor in talent. Unfortunately, they have both headed the same direction: towards playing themselves over and over again. Anyway, this is a great Scorsese flick done in black and white about Jake La Motta a former boxer and his life. Little known aside, the real La Motta co-wrote the screenplay. Which is pretty cool. Anyway, this movie continues a great relationship between Scorsese and DeNiro, in which it netted DeNiro a much deserved Oscar for his performance. Unfortunately, it rates this low on the list because it is a tough movie to re-watch over and over, because it is slow at times and lacks a ton of action.


87. Natural Born Killers. If Tarantino had directed this movie, as he regrets now, it would have been even better in my opinion. But, hey, we can have everything we want, right? Woody Harrelson and Juliette Lewis are superb in a movie that was prescient about the decadence US society gradually descending towards. Good music, good cinematography, and good direction add to the Tarantino script. The movie embraces madness and violence in comedic, yet dark ways. Unlike the Coen brothers who have built a career demonstrating the senselessness and comedic or ironic nature of real violence, this movie shows the happier side of violence, from the killers' perspective. It also asks the Coen brother's question about the meaning of life where violence and suffering are normal, but has very different methods of answering it. Take, as a perfect example, the scene with Rodney Dangerfield as Juliette Lewis' dad. The blurring of lines between television and life are never approached any better than there.


86. The Rope. The only Hitchcock movie on here, and perhaps an unknown and surprising movie for many of you. I like Birds and, especially, Rear Window, but the Rope as a film is awesome. First off, the whole movie takes place in a single apartment.intensifying the already claustrophobic feel Hitchcock tends to bring. In fact, the movie is nearly all shot in the living room. Second, like a rope, the film starts and does not stop until the very end. In other words, aside from changing the reel in the camera, Hitchcock uses one camera and the action does not stop once. When characters move rooms, the camera moves with them...but, not like a handheld camera because the goal is not to feel like you are there, but that you are a voyeur. The film starts with a couple of upper class college guys who are suffer from ennui due to their money and lack of unique thrills. Killing somebody seems to be the answer: a thrill money cannot buy, that is beyond anything they have seen or felt, and a challenge in world where everything has already been handed to them. To enhance the challenge, they hide the body in a chest in the living room that they cover with a linen and put the food on. The "leader' is supremely confident they will succeed and even engages is discussion with some of the guests regarding the morality of killing. The other guys are not too sure. Anyway, the movie goes on, guests arrive -- including the dead guys fiancee and her parents...you can see why there is amazing tension and why this movie deserves to be on this list and watched by all. I won't ruin it, but you gotta watch it.

85. Misery. Keeping with thrillers and tense movies, how about Kathy Bates and James Caan in a great Steven King novel? Caan, an author, gets into an accident in the snowy woods of New England when Bates finds him and takes care of him. She, of course, is his number 1 fan. The new book he is writing is not up to her standards as a character is killed off that she doesn't want to be killed off. She wants him to rewrite. The scene where she mangles his legs to keep him from running or leaving is unreal. So normal it feels like it could happen to anyone. Bates won an Oscar for her role and Caan may have deserved one too.


84. Zelig. Woody Allen strikes again. This is a black and white flick and again a creative way of telling a story. It is documentary style, with Zelig being a guy who does not appear to have any personality of his own. Allen doctored old footage (before computers) so that Zelig seems to appear all over the place (i.e., in Germany at a Nazi rally next to Hitler), and he seems to change his persona wherever he goes and whoever he is with. Mia Farrow places a psychiatrist committed to digging into his psyche to find out who Zelig really is and relieve him of the overwhelming need to be liked by everyone and to fit in. This movie is great on so many levels, especially if you like Woody Allen. But, even if he is not your favorite, it is not standard Allen fare, so it may cross over to something more your style.


83. Ray. I hate Jaime Foxx. He cannot sing that well; his music is junk; and he normally appears in terrible movies with other terrible actors. But, I must hand it to him. The only other biopic you'll see on this list, but deservedly so. Ray chronicles the rise of Ray Charles and his life. Foxx spent 6 months before Ray died in real life, learning to play piano and sing from Charles himself. He would glue his eyes shut for days at a time to learn what it felt like to be blind. Needless to say, Foxx is supremely convincing and as with any movie well acted, you are convinced that he is Ray by the end. Sad at times, the movie never goes overboard with telling the story. And, I forgot how good Charles music was and how revolutionary it was at the time.

82. Blades of Glory. Will Ferrell. Jon Heder. Will Arnett. Amy Poehler. And, does it pass the names test? You bet. Ferrell as Chazz Michaels Michaels; Heder as Jimmy MacElroy; Arnett and Poehler as Stranz and Fairchild Van Waldenberg; Craig T Nelson as Coach. All classic names, especially Ferrell. Not his best, and probably bordering on the point where his shtick is getting old, Ferrell's farce about ice skating is awesome. The scene after he is fired and doing shows on ice as a wizard, but he is completely hammered are awesome. And, the Van Waldenberg's steal the show with their quasi-incestuous innuendo. I love this movie because it makes me laugh.

81. Zoolander. I debated about this movie, because it is good, almost great...but I have always had my reservations. Does it pass the "name" test? Derek Zoolander; Hansel (Owen Wilson); Mugatu (Ferrell); Matilda Jeffries; Maury Ballstein; Olga the Masseuse (Andy Dick is always a good addition). Not the top names, but clear thought. What are the secondary criteria? Memorable scenes? Absolutely. When Derek, Matilda, and Hansel hang out at his house and take a bunch of hallucinogens; or, the Dance Off; or the Break Dance fight; or the four models having a gasoline fight. A few others also stand out, but you get the point. Memorable lines? Where Will Ferrell is, this criterion is always filled. Cameos? David Bowie; Christian Slater; Natalie Portman; Gary Shandling; etc. So, in the face of overwhelming evidence, this movie does stand stronger than I would have first expected. Personally, I rarely re-watch it, but I am willing to concede it is indeed re-watchable and it is well liked beyond just being a comedy.

80. Casino. You will not see the Departed on this list because the ending sucked. And, I can promise you Goodfellas is here, but much higher up. Casino is like The Godfather meets Goodfellas, but too long. Great performances all around: Sharon Stone; DeNiro; and Joe Pesci to name three, but don't ignore James Wood or Kevin Pollack. Here is why I place it so high, despite it being a classically great movie: it is a standard Scorsese flick that does everything really well, but nothing stands out aside from the acting...but, most of his movies manage to squeeze the best out of his actors, especially with alum like Pesci and DeNiro. So why is it any better than his other ones? It isn't. Like Woody Allen who produces so many movies, we are spoiled and his average flicks would be many other directors masterpieces, Scorsese produces a ton of really good movies, but I am not comfortable just putting them all in the top 50 or 20. There are too many other really good flicks to see. So, watch Casino. Enjoy. Relish Stone in a non-over-sexed role...and remember how good DeNiro was.

Your Quote for the Day

Actual happiness always looks pretty squalid in comparison with the over-compensations for misery. And, of course, stability isn't nearly so spectacular as instability. And being contented has none of the glamour of a good fight against misfortune, none of the picturesqueness of a struggle with temptation, or a fatal overthrow by passion or doubt. Happiness is never grand. - From Brave New World

Top 120 Movies, Continued

We have reached the first installment in top 100! These movies are on the cusp of greatness for various reasons. I love all 10 of them, and strongly urge you to check 'em out.

99. Finding Neverland. Is it me, or is Johnny Depp really one of the best character actors in the history of humankind? For those that do not know, this movie is about the writer of Peter Pan, James Matthew Barrie, and his search for inspiration. Of course, his life is dull and tiresome as he deals with being in the middle class of Victorian England; he yearns for his own freedom from the constraints put on him by genteel society. His wife, a status seeker looking for upward social mobility, only makes things worse for him. He is the true artist...yearning for what he doesn't have, while having it pretty good.

He meets a family, sans father, and immediately takes to them. He has no ill intentions towards the widow, but Victorian society cannot understand his obsession with spending time as a surrogate dad/friend to the children and the widow. A rare movie that I would recommend that tugs at the heart strings in predictable Hollywood fashion. I suppose Depp saves the movie, though Kate Winslet pulls her weight.

98. Spies Like Us. Yes!! The first Chevy Chase flick...and Dan Aykroyd. The name test: Chevy as Emmett Fitz-Hume; Aykroyd as Austin Millbarge. Two great fake CIA names! The cast is awesome, with some very memorable scenes. First, the scene where Fitz-Hume and Millbarge meet: taking an exam to move up in the government ranks, Millbarge the anal, studious test taker finds himself late and sitting next to Fitz-Hume the slacker. Fitz-Hume has arrived with an eye-patch, a fake broken arm, and cheat sheets in every orifice and hiding spot possible. (Frank Oz, the voice of Kermit and Yoda is the test proctor). Fitz-Hume, realizing he cannot pass it, fakes a heart attack while Millbarge tries to save him thinking he really is in trouble.

Other classics. Every scene with the General, played by Tom Hatten is awesome. His seriousness is key to good comedy as everything else is incongruous he is playing the standard cold war general. The scene where Fitz-Hume and Millbarge meet the doctors in Afghanistan...Doctor, Doctor...Doctor, Doctor...awesome. And, I laugh everytime they go into training. Not Chase or Aykroyds best, but so good.

97. The Neverending Story. What do I have to say about this movie that you do not already know? In the childrens-fantasy-yet-adult category, a story that is eternally great. I refuse to ruin it for those who have never seen it, or rehash what those who have already know. Watch it.

96. Melinda and Melinda. Woody Allen at his cleverest. A strange cast, with Will Ferrell being the only person aside from Amanda Peet of real note. Set in a restaurant, some good screen writer/director friends are hanging out debating the classic Allen (stolen from Ernest Borgnine and, of course, the Greeks) question: are all stories really comedies and tragedies depending upon the perspective? Of course, all movies and stories must decide this at some point, but what if the same story was told from both angles? Allen proceeds to have both storytellers at the table build a story about a girl named Melinda; one a comedy, the other a tragedy. But, in standard Allen fashion, by the end, the viewer is still unsure which is the comedy and which is the tragedy. In life, what is ironic can often be construed either way. An overlooked Allen movie, and a great vehicle for Ferrell to not be funny. Many of Allen's life long themes are here, but the stories and the creative way he spins them dominate the movie hiding the redundancies that are the primary source of his bad movies failing.

95. Gran Turino. Clint Eastwood's most recent installment. I know it is said often, but think about this. A guy goes from being the lead character with no name in a trilogy of westerns, then follows this up with alternating westerns and vigilante cop movies, then some terrible comedy efforts (Every Which Way But Loose). Out of the murkiness of the '80s, he writes/directs/stars in The Unforgiven, one of the greatest movies ever made and he hasn't looked back since. I do not think Million Dollar Baby deserved the acclaim, but still, his career arc is unreal. Gran Turino uncoincidentally takes place in Detroit, MI, where Walt Kowalski (Eastwood) has lived nearly his whole life. Representative of the working class in the entire US, Kowalski's name speaks of early twentieth century immigrant parents (likely from Poland), again pointing to the historical trajectory of an immigrant people and their success through hard work. He stands for everything lost among the heterogeneity of a highly diverse and complex American society; his beautifully kept Gran Turino represents the lost halycon days of US manufacturing might, of the craftsmanship that the US was once known for, and at the same time, the disappearance of an entire sector of the economy and with it the jobs, livelihood, and security of the entire working class.

Exacerbating this are two intersecting trends. On the one hand, Kowalski's children are soft, white collar types who have little time for their father, nor do they understand his choice to remain in the city of Detroit. Of course, he is Korean war vet who was likely the patriarchal version of father -- lacking close ties with his kids and lacking emotions. At the same time, the neighborhood he raised his kids in has become Hmong (a Chinese ethnic group found in Vietnam, Thailand, Laos, and Burma). He is separated emotionally from his children, physically from his wife (whose dead), symbolically and ethnically from his neighbors. The ultimate irony is that he spends so much time denigrating the Hmong only to find that the kid he befriends has every bit of a work ethic as he did, and acts like any Eastern/Southern European immigrant every acted. The affinity he finds with this kid, as painfully opposed to his own kids, is amazing and so out of place as the neighborhood and everything else around him seems to be decaying. Sad ending...sort of; good movie...definitely.

94. The Three Amigos. The name test. Lucky Day (Steve Martin); Dusty Bottoms (Chevy Chase); Ned Nederlander (Martin Short); El Guapo (the enemy); Jefe (his right hand man); the German (enemy); Harry Flugleman (studio exec played by Joe Mantegna). Awesome all around. Especially the bad guys. This movies humor is not as sharp as some of the solo projects the all-stars did, but damn, who denies the Singing Bush and the Invisible Swordsman wasn't the funniest thing? Or, what about when they break into the studio with Steve Martin doing the best bird calls..."Hey you...look up here...look up here!" Brilliant.

And, in great eighties fashion, the enemies were absurd stereotypes of Mexicans and Germans. While un-P.C., stereotypes go a real long way in comedy. Comedy is the irony behind incongruent elements of social life, and stereotypes are always paradoxical (the lazy Mexican always put up against the hard working, four job having Mexican...no one can win!). This is a delightful movie, and I think that word delightful was invented simply for this movie.

93. The Man on the Moon. Jim Carrey being a real actor...hard to believe, but true. Moreover, Courtney Love off drugs and actually convincingly good for a few minutes. A little too long, but a great story about Andy Kaufmann that does little to settle the real debate: was he insane, a genius, accidently funny, or a guy with a good schtick? Kaufmann is a mystery, and Carrey's portrayal (especially when one can watch Kaufmann's old SNL routines on DVD finally) is dead-on. Perhaps even underrated. I liked it because it was a good character study that actually enveloped Carrey's usual larger than screen, larger than role acting. No rubber face or crazy movement; just Kaufmann. Just the dark, confused slash impish grin and eyes.I actually think this movie changed Carrey's career for the best. 


92. The Mighty Aphrodite. What, another Woody Allen flick? Yes...it's my list, so too bad. This movie is great on so many levels, and it is great because Allen used a different style to tell a somewhat familiar story of his: smart, older man meets naive, nearly stupid girl; attempts to raise her up. The key to the movie is the use of old Greek device of having a chorus tell part of the story, narrate to the audience, and provide some unique space in the story. Mira Sorvino won an Oscar for her role and deservedly so. She really plays the Hooker with the Heart of Gold perfectly.

91. Pirates of the Caribbean. The rare Hollywood blockbuster makes this list. Harkening back to the ol' swashbuckiling flicks of yore, Depp revives (forget the sequels...they were terrible) a great genre that every little boy grew up loving. What makes this movie great is that it combines a really good story, with superb acting from Depp and Geoffrey Rush (who, by the way was in a great movie called Shine that was about a pianist who was a savant, but totally crushed by real life...not making the list, but worth a check out). Orlando Bloom and Keira Knightly are good, but the supporting cast is much better. Jonathan Pryce (from Brazil) was great as the gov'nor, Lee Arnberg and British Office alum Mackenzie Crook as the two supporting pirates, and Jack Davenport as Norrington were all great at playing their roles.

Key to this movie was the way that no one took it too seriously. Russell Crowe, in every movie he makes, is so serious that he ruins the movie. Master in Commander is a great example of his nonsense. Depp brings his strange idiosyncratic behaviors culled from Fear and Loathing in Las Vegas and adds some cool Blackbeard stuff. I swear, when I watch it I can just make out that coconut smell you get on the ride at Disneyland as you turn the corner from the restaurant.

90. Tombstone. Aside from the cheesy scene where Wyatt Earp (Kurt Russell) walks across the water and no one can shoot him, this is a badass movie. Val Kilmer is perfect as Doc Holiday..."I'll be your huckleberry." Johnny Ringo, Ike, and Sam Eliot all stand out. The Shootout at the O.K. Corrall is awesome; the dialogue is memorable and quotable; and regardless of what you think, Russell is a macho mofo and Kilmer is the coolest dude in the west. Watch this...over and over and over again. You know you wish you were Earp or Holiday. The question I have to ask is, if you identify with one of them ove rthe other, what does that say?
 

Top 120 Movies Continued

This next set of movies are all great flicks, but are flawed in one way or the next. Ultimately, there are key criteria making a movie truly great. For a comedy, for instance, it has to be re-watchable over and over...like Caddyshack. Where the lines are truly epic, the performances timeless, and the story doesn't get in the way too much (e.g., no love story to water the jokes down!). Dramas are similar, but they require universal themes that touch the soul and the mind over and over. It is really hard to think Titanic does anything other than play to the most worn out Hollywood themes...alas...More important for Dramas, though, is their realism. I want to identify with the characters to the bitter end. I don't want victory where it is inappropriate or unlikely; I don't want defeat simply to tug at my heart strings; I don't want happily ever after when real circumstances would prevent it. I want pure, realistic outcomes. The ending destroys more dramas than anything else.

109. Major League. Charlie Sheen, Tom Berenger, Corbin Bernsen, Rene Russo, and the immortal Bob Uecker calling play-by-play. And who can forget pre-steroid era Wesley Snipes as Willy "Mays" Hayes? A great comedy by any standards with all of the classic sports cliches. Underdog, left for dead, finds a common focus and emotional center to rally to become winners. The best parts of this movie, though, are the fact we never learn whether they win the championship because we only see them win the one game playoff against the dreaded Yankees to go to the playoffs. How many memorable events though were in this movie? Willie Mays Hayes waking up during spring training and finding his bed having been moved to the parking lot because he wasn't invited; jumping the fence and winning a speed race he got into late. Or, any scene with the big slugger Cerrano from some unknown Carribean nation where voodoo was practiced juxtaposed against the aging, crafty left hander who was a hardcore Christian. What puts this flick, unfortunately, at the upper range of movies, is its overall weakness in dialogue, lack of large amounts of memorable lines, and a misuse of a really good cast. Don't get me wrong, good comedy, but no where near the best.

108. Austin Powers. Oh no, not this movie this high! Yes, this movie this high. Watch it again. It does not stand up against the passage of time. Why? Well, he had to go and make two more which were funny, but essentially redid some of the best jokes to the point where the first one lost its greatness. Of course, Dr. Evil steals the show, but the uneveness across the sequels effects the other characters. For instance, the Rob Lowe version of Number 2 is way better than the older version; Mini Me is great in the second one, but terrible in the third; Austin's love interest is better as Elizabeth Hurley who is more like a Bond girl than Heather Graham or...Beyonce (what the hell were they thinking!?!). But, it was a good movie and a good comedy and really is the pinnacle of Mike Myer's humor.

107. Born on the 4th of July. When I started compiling this list, a few actors were not going to make the cut no matter what. Nicholas Cage...like Zoolander, he has only one look; Russell Crowe (overrated and terrible); Leo DiCraprio (super overrated and boring); any of the numerous blond actresses always doing period pieces and really just the same girl with different eye color and hip width (see Gwyneth Paltrow, Kate Blanchett, Kate Hudson); any singer, rapper, or "artist" turned actor (sorry Ice Cube and J-Lo); Robert Redford and that class of boring old actors who do stupid romance movies; Matt Damon (I can only think of Team America when I think of him); and Denzel (not because I dislike him, but because I couldn't think of a great movie he was in aside from Training Day, and that was way more hyped than it should be.

The other name I thought of...Tom Cruise. I hate Tom Cruise. But, surprisingly he is on this list two or three times, because just when he does a string of shit movies meant to sell him, he ends up in a great role. This movie, Born of the 4th of July is that type of movie. Unwatchable a second time because of its length, intensity, and pace, this flick is worth a look. Classic Oliver Stone without the conspiracy. Rather, he handles a serious subject relevant today: what do we do with vets and why don't we treat them better? Check it out.

106. The Exorcist. Who doesn't like this movie? Scared me when I was a kid. Scared me when I watched it this last Halloween. Well written; well acted; lacking the absurdity that accompanies movies like this. I don't even know if there is subtext because it is so entertaining.

105. Gangs of New York. Wait, didn't I say Leo DiCraprio was not on the list? Well, this movie was great despite him because of Daniel Day-Lewis. The best actor of our time with the least amount of play (retiring for so long didn't help). Great period piece that should have won the Oscar because it was well directed, well acted, and beautifully shot. Better yet, it captured the real conflict between classes that was so explicit in old New York City both in visual terms and in the way the north was drafting for the Civil War. Scorsese is overrated, in my opinion, but movies like this are so good and so powerful, and so sweet, that I deny the statement I just made. Unwatchable over and over because it is long, and it does drag, and really, Leo DiCraprio paired with Cameron Diaz (another terrible actress) kinda makes me sick.

104. Boogie Nights. Awesome movie for about 1:45, then it becomes unfocused, unwatchable, and a mishmosh of fact, fiction, and nonsense. How awesome is the scene at Jack Horner's (Burt Reynold) house when Dirk Diggler (Marky Mark) meets Reed Rothchild (John C. Reilly)? Two things stand out. First, every great comedy or movie bordering on comedy requires great character names. A movie with bad character names is going to not be funny. Case in point: would you rather see a movie that had characters named John Beckwith, Jeremy Grey, Claire Cleary, and Zachary 'Sack' Lodge, or one with Horner, Diggler, Rothchild, Amber Waves, Buck Swope, Little Bill, The Colonel James, and Scotty J? The obvious choice is the latter, right? And, if you think it was easy for the writers of Boogie Nights to come up with good names because it was a faux porno, think again. The running theme in comedies will be names; I guarantee 99% of the time, good names = good comedy.

Ok, on to the movie. Here is the deal. It is too long, like most of these movies. Great beginning, great arc, and then it falls flat once Dirk and porn face the VHS revolution of the '80s. The characters are all really good, especially a surprising role by Julianne Moore (one of the best and most underrated actress of our generation). Don Cheadle cuts his teeth here as does Luiz Guzman (a really funny guy) as the token minority porn actors. The whole premise is great and cheesy in a classy way.

103. Scream. John Carpenter may be the best horror genius, but I would argue Wes Craven is 1A. The People Under the Stairs and the Nightmare on Elm Street series (save for #2) were classic horror movies, with the former being truly frightening in a real way. Scream, though, is his masterpiece. A scary movie that is aware of itself and the whole genre. An insiders look at a genre that is often considered silly and often left for dead, but which keeps coming back every 5 to 10 years with a vengeance. The actors are ok...classic teens in a movie waiting to die. The plot twists are great. And, the self-reflexive script is phenomenal. A must see even for those who do not like horror. 

102. The Wrestler. Welcome back Mickey Rourke. What a good movie, huh? I loved this the minute I saw it. The opening scene with him finding his trailer locked and having to sleep like a dirt bag in his van. As a kid growing up watching wrestling, I was always aware of those lower circuit "off-broadway" wrestling leagues, but here was the rock bottom. But, you had to feel for his character. Wrestling was his trade, but like any other person who loses what they once had that made them successful, yet knows nothing else (or cannot even imagine anything else), his story was tragic in a human way. The scenes as a deli clerk are so perfect, as he walks down the hall to meet the customers as if he is walking out of the locker room to throngs of waiting fans...yet, the disparity between wrestling and cutting deli meat is so distinct. Again, not a re-watchable movie because it doesn't have that extra special something, but so very good.

101. About Schmidt. Enter the man...Jack Nicholson. Where do we even begin? In some ways it is sad to see him aging and playing roles that seem to fit his real life problems (e.g., The Pledge and Bucket List). But, he is so good in this movie I can ignore it. Essentially, he plays a guy who has worked his whole life as an insurance salesman in Kansas (I think), and we enter into his life just as he is retiring after 40 years. He has to adjust to being home with his wife all the time, which is unnerving. And, to make things worse, his only child -- a girl -- is getting married to some strange dude who he hates because he is hippie-ish dorky. His wife dies nearly immediately after he retires...and, he is suddenly thrust into a state of anomie -- or directionless, normless, lawlessness. No one to talk to, his daughter living in Portland and having had little of a relationship with him, Jack looks to make peace with his existence and perhaps live more than he had been. Kathy Bates plays the mother-in-law to be (and does so awesomely), and that guy from WKRP in Cincinnati who was also the teacher in Head of the Class plays the father-in-law to be who is divorced from Bates. Very funny interactions with these people, and the contrasts between the middle of America and the Northwest are brilliantly exaggerated. Why can you not re-watch it? Well, you can. But, it is a very sad and empty movie in the sense that you feel only Jack's pain as he seems so lost. The movie never reconciles this, which is one of its strong features, so don't expect to walk out of it feeling great. It is on this list because Jack has done way better, and this type of sadness while a good emotion at times, is too painful to warrant higher mention.

100. Say Anything. Ladies and gentlemen, Mr. John Cusak! I love that guy too. This movie sums up the '80s in so many ways. He is a borderline loser/nerd (standard 80's Cusak); his dreams and hopes are realistic, but his means to reaching them seem impossible. He is the classic nice guy who finishes last, but unlike some cliched movies, he seems genuine in his portrayal. As if Cusak really is that guy in real life...And, if you can name a more awesome scene than the one where Lloyd Dobler (Cusak...and also a great character name) blasts Peter Gabriel's In Your Eyes out of a boombox in his overcoat as he tries to win back his ex-girlfriend. Iconic? Indeed. A great movie all around. re-watchable, but not quite a classic in the top 100 sense of the word.

Top 120 Greatest Movies Of All-Time

It is time to settle debates...all of them. I realize many people like movies. But, do you like the right ones? Are you really going to the right flicks or are you just another Titanic lover with little taste in movies? Did you root for Shakespeare in Love when Saving Private Ryan was a superior movie in acting, direction, story, and quality? Well, I am going to give you my top 100 in order of worst to best (and worst means superior to the crap beneath it). You might be asking yourself, though, why does Emile like movies when he rants about celebrities. I like good stories, convincing portrayals, and unique and thought-provoking ideas. That means I don't like Avatar already, or any thing with Jennifer Lopez, or anything that follows the nonsensical formulas of Hollywood. I hate Nicholas Cage (save for a very early flick which is on the list), because he is like Ben Stiller in Zoolander: he has only one look! Thus, to save you from having to think about these things, I am gonna count down with reasons for each choice. Comedies are in because the worst crime ever committed by the film industry was to underestimate, deny oscars to, and generally ignore comedic performances. I would say, not to spoil this, that the performances in Caddyshack by the four main characters are equal to any thespian on broadway...the point: they are truly convincing in their roles, fully embracing, and when you watch them, the actors embody the characters beyond what most of the Gwenyth Paltrow's and Leo DiCraprio's can do. More over writing a great comedy is not easy as demonstrated by the large number of American Pies and Harold and Kumars versus great comedies; it takes a very special genius to write a great piece of satire, to get a director who can truly do it right without being cheesy, and a cast who understand the way it works.

So, feel free to comment, disagree, agree, criticize...whatever...but, I strongly urge you to watch them in the order I present them as the beauty of film will crescendo! So without further ado, here are the first 10:

120. Casablanca. I am not going to pull punches here: I am not a big fan of classic movies because I think (a) too many modern movies are superior, (b) old movies tend to be much cheesier than the best of today, and (c) the dialogue typically is crappy. Just like sports (except for baseball) where athletes today are far superior because of incessant weightlifting, nutrition, and supplements, movies today are just better. It takes time for something to be perfected. So, I start the list with two classics worth watching because they are good movies. Casablanca, the standard Humphrey Bogart movies is not a bad movie. The scenes in the bar are good, but the ending is pretty damn cheesy. If you had never watched movies before, or seen anything with production value, I can understand why this movie would have been considered so epic. But, please...watch it. Enjoy it.

119. Citizen Kane. Now, this is a great movie. I will not even dispute it or attack it, because the story is good, the acting is good, the dialogue is good...and while the editing is that annoying 50's editing, the film absolutely stands up. It is really a critique of the unyielding lust for more and more and more. On the one hand, the most important and powerful people are never satisfied to sit on their laurels. On the other hand, the constant quest for more, for bigger, for better, for newer leads one to their Xanadu...or their lonely fortress. Perhaps an illusion, or perhaps a real psychological and physical state. Regardless, the ending is classic, important, relevant, and beautiful in its simplicity and its power. If you don't watch anything else on this list, watch this. 

118. Alien. The epic Sigourney Weaver flick that not only included the only known woman in the history of society named Sigourney, but it undoubtedly launched a period of bald-headed women who looked good. But, you had to be fighting against evil to truly pull that look off, so Britney, my apologies but cracking up is not a good enough reason. In all seriousness, this movie has an important subtext that challenges the modern version of capitalism. Weaver works for the "Company," hauling ore from planet to planet when her ship gets a strange SOS signal. She and a small crew board a ship upon which they find a very dead alien...because of which Ripley (Weaver) realizes its time to go. She is talked out of it by the science officer, and shit gets out of control. Underlying the entire movie it the lack of ethics displayed by the modern corporation, and more importantly, its true lack of concern for its own employees and perhaps all human life outside of consumers. Ripley and the crew are merely pawns used to acquire a specimen of alien to perhaps harness as a military weapon or for its technologically advanced exoskeleton. It becomes fairly obvious that the mining operation had darker implications. I give this movie 4 out of 5 in general, but I promise you it is worth a watch. Really well acted; dark plot; and deep thoughts.

117. Texas Chainsaw Massacre. Sticking with our horror flick run, I nominate this movie as one of the most important horror movies ever, and clearly one you should watch. Filmed in 1973, before the slasher flick genre, this movie maintains a strong sense of realism and true horror as it tackles the truly human problems associated with economic change in capitalist societies. The switch from human labor to the mechanization of factories that had already been occurring for years, but which became much quicker in the '70s, was having unimaginable effects on the most vulnerable peoples in the U.S. The working class, always on the precipice of poverty and starvation, was losing their once valued positions in the American economy. No one seemed to care, because the professional class, the middle-upper class, and other high end classes were protected through wealth (investments; housing equity; etc.). Even today, the most vulnerable group aside from what we call the "underclass," or those peoples who practically don't exist in our government collected statistics, is the working class who no longer get benefits, pensions, or job security. And re-educating a relatively uneducated class is nearly impossible. Anyway...this movie takes place in Texas during the recession of the early '70s when a group of hippie teenagers are driving. They end up stopping near an abandoned house and hanging out there for a bit, when the shit hits the fan. I won't tell you anymore about the movie, but let me quickly discuss the family.

The killers are crazy in any sense of the word. Literally, they represent the mechanization of the cattle slaughtering industry which put tons of people out of work (they mention this a few times I believe, but in passing). The patriarch of the family, or grandpa, is dead...but, kind of alive. He represents the old "contract" between capital and labor. Where a man could earn a living and feed his family...the American dream is on its death knell. The family is run by a matriarch, which represents the fact that families had come to need a woman's efforts equal to her husbands just to survive. The older brother was a sheriff, but a crazy, corrupt, blood thirsty sheriff. Working a job entirely unsuited to his makeup, he abused his authority. Finally, "Leatherface," was insane. No doubts about it. But, why did he wear other people's skin? Was it the shame of being unemployed? Unable to find honest work? Was it because the mechanization of labor had not only dehumanized the work force, but the workers themselves, and the only sense of humanity left was to wear others' masks? You might see this as just a slasher flick, but believe me, it runs much deeper with subtext that is still very relevant today.

116. Ferris Bueller's Day Off. Uh oh! My generations' purists are going to be up in alarm over the placement of their beloved movie this high up. Well, get over it. If you do watch these in the order I present them, this will (a) fit nicely after the macabre it follows and (b) will be delightfully playful, if vacuous. I suppose its "low" ranking derives from the improbability of the entire plot: could anyone possibly do what Ferris and his friends do in Chicago in an eight hour or less period? Not likely, right? So, we are left with a relatively good comedy that will tug at the nostalgic feelings of skipping school, playing sick, or just being a teenager and not digging the fact that everything seemed predestined and constraining. His best friend is the superego to Ferris' id. The dilemma we all faced: how much was too much? How do we become an adult when we still want to have fun? Heck, how do we become an adult when social forces like mandatory education have not allowed us to explore being a teen?

115. Love and Death. Ahhh...the first Woody Allen flick of what will be a long line of Allen flicks. For all of you haters of Woody, too bad. His biggest mistake has been to release a movie a year (which is incredible on many levels) because we have all taken for granted his brilliance. The problem is when he peaks, like in Annie Hall, he is untouchable except for, perhaps, Spielberg or Scorsese. When he flops, it isn't a bad movie, but it isn't much to write home about. His typical output, though, is good, benign, witty, but often redundant in his use of 40 year old running jokes. Love and Death is an underestimated farce...the last of his great 70s comedies. It is really nothing more than a vehicle for Diane Keaton and Woody to play with deep, penetrating dialogue in ironic, sarcastic, and absurd ways. A period piece taking place in Russia during the invasion of Napoleon, Woody Allen is the youngest of a set of brothers who go off to fight in the war, while he resists because he is a pacifist/neurotic -- surprise, huh? The humor is based off of his unrequited love for his cousin (Keaton), which eventually becomes requited but with disastrous consequences. This quote, which is an excellent quote, sums the movie up in classic Allen fashion: "To love is to suffer. To avoid suffering one must not love. But then one suffers from not loving. Therefore, to love is to suffer; not to love is to suffer; to suffer is to suffer. To be happy is to love. To be happy, then, is to suffer, but suffering makes one unhappy. Therefore, to be unhappy, one must love or love to suffer or suffer from too much happiness." Be warned: it is a lighthearted movie, with some depth, but truly just fun.

114. JFK. Maybe this movie would be higher if it wasn't so damn Oliver Stone-long. A great conspiratorial type movie, with very, very good acting. Kevin Costner, in a surprising dynamic role, plays a lawyer trying to piece together the murder, and keeps finding it is much more complex then he anticipated. I have little else to say, other than political buffs, historical junkies, and those who like good performances should watch this.

113. Broken Flowers. It is always strange to see someone transition from doing one type of role/acting to another. Bill Murray, who I love as a comedian, made this transition in the more popular Lost in Translation...which will not be on this list because I really think Scarlett is not very good, and I think this movie is better and so are his other flicks. An obscure movie, Broken Flowers is about an older life-long bachelor trying to piece together the meaning of life (loosely based on Don Juan). He goes on a wild goose chase, which I am sure you can grasp the meaning of, in search of his elusive youth. His ex-girlfriends are all supremely talented actresses in their roles, and Murray plays the perfect older guy going through a mid-life crisis, but staying calm. The music is exceptional, and while I rarely push music as a key to selling a flick, the music is excellent...and about as obscure as the movie itself. I will admit you may not like it the first time, but as with the other movies on this list, I will always let you know when a movie may need repeated viewings. The ending, which may appear anti-climactic, could not have happened any other way; it bucks Hollywood nonsensical trends towards unrealistic endings, and gives us the most real, true ending to a story that almost drives you crazy.

112. Pan's Labyrinth. The only foreign flick on the list...and a good one to boot. From a Spanish director, this is the classic "Children's Fantasy which is Actually Much Darker, Scarier, and Adult." Great movie! Takes place during the resistance of Franco's fascist regime, I believe during the Spanish Civil War, but I admit my Spanish history is limited. A child is locked in this violent, horrible adult world, when she discovers a half-demon, half-bull type of creature who tells her she is really a princess and must perform these tasks to return. Filled with children 'coming-of-age' tales, imaginary flights of fantasy, and very dark events. It is a great movie for so many reasons.

111. The Outlaw Josie Wales. I will not push too may Westerns as they tend to be played out. But, I will not lie: the whole vigilante brings justice theme fires me up. This is, in my opinion, the best of Clint Eastwood's old westerns. Not the Leone spaghetti westerns with the Man With No Name, but better and less cheesy. Nothing to say about this because it is predictable, formulaic, and awesome! If you like a good outsider brings justice the old biblical way, this one is for you.

110. Castaway. I dislike most long movies. Castaway was really, really long. But, who else could have pulled it off, right? The plot was unique, fascinating, and under most circumstances would have failed to work. Tom Hanks, though, does succeed very well. The ending leaves much to be desired, but the build up is so great and the slow pace is necessary to really chronicle the evolution Hanks underwent on the island. If you've never seen it, watch this movie. It is really a good movie, with a good heart, and some superb acting. It is not a top 100 movie, but I cannot deny its power. And, I will add, the use of silence is so much better than the din of shitty dialogue that Hollywood produces regularly.

Your Quote for the Day

It disturbs me no more to find men base, unjust, or selfish than to see apes mischievous, wolves savage, or the vulture ravenous. - Jean Paul Sartre

Stupid People Alert

Why do people think the end of the world is coming? Here are 10 prior moments of "revelations-like" prediction, among many. 

Reason #1 to doubt "end-of-the-world (EOTW) predictions: The social construction of time. Are we in the year 2009, or 5376 as the Jewish calendar states? Who knows? Who cares...The point is that time is invented, so any round numbers like 2000 or 1900 seem ominous to a human brain selected for seeing patterns (this article in Scientific American will give you a deeper idea of what I am talking about). Moreover, when the so-called Y2K thing was getting closer and those nutty millenialists started taking about the Christian Bible's "Revelations" (which many biblical experts believe originally was in the front of the Christian Bible, not in the back, thus throwing a loop in chronology of the four horsemen), other experts started noting that 2001 would really be 2000 years after Jesus' supposed death and would be the real time when revelations would come true. I suppose none of this matters to people, because they think numbers mean something more than they do. The calendar was really just a means to keep track of harvests, rainy seasons, times to pray (holi(y)-days) for rain and good harvests, and to try and predict the future (like when a flood was going to hit). The Mayans, I am sure, did not follow the Christian calendar as they would have had no contact with the Western world when they were flourishing as a civilization, thus, their predictions can not be meaningfully interpreted within the context of our system of time!

Reason #2 to doubt EOTW predictions: Um...hello...we don't need to predict some supranatural force will reign fire and brimstone or that some force from outside the Earth's atmosphere will reign down on us like a meteor that potentially wiped out the dinosaurs. We are killing ourselves and ecologists are getting better at giving us real dates (within a few decades) of human-made disasters. Who needs the clouds of smoke generated by a massive volcano which would throw the Earth into a mini-ice age for two to ten years and destroy our ability to farm, when we are releasing enough toxins into the air to do that for us...except, we will enter a long hot age which will destroy crops by making everything arid. Or, perhaps the ice caps in the poles melting within 30 years (a good estimate, and perhaps too conservative), leading to ocean levels rising up to 2 feet every summer. Or, the fact that 90% of Americans have deadly chemicals (found in their urine) which come from plastics and other toxins released in the water systems, found in fish, and contaminating every piece of processed food you buy? Or the fact we pump cows full of steroids to increase their output, perhaps causing girls to reach puberty faster, children to get autism more often, and other side effects likely unknown? Why does a space ship or other forces of doom have to kill us?

Reason #3: It has always failed before. The sun always rises in the East, sets in the West. That's a fact. Water contains 2 parts oxygen, 1 part hydrogen...that's a fact. Some forces destroying the Earth for no reason, or because we have sinned, or because of any reason is nonsense. Moreover, thinking you can predict it because you read some tea leaves, god talked to you, or because you see signs of the devil everywhere you look is even more insane. Anyone who reads the paper, follows the news, or pays attention at any time period probably thinks everything is really bad. Worse than before. But, go read newspapers from the '60s or the '80s and you will see a similar confluence of bad shit happening and people thinking the end is near.

Reason #4: Stupid people are behind these manias. It is clear that only a dum-dum would believe Nostradamus' predictions. Have you ever read one of his quattros? They are so ambiguous that it would take some serious contemplation and good imagination to make sense of them in real time. Or, those nutty cults that appear every decade, prophesy the end of the world, and then commit suicide. Nothing happens. We laugh about it nervously. Then, we go about our business. The real four horsemen of doom are war, pestilence, disease, and famine. You want to prevent a meltdown? Put a stop to these as best as you can.

I appeal to you to not go this movie 2012 because it is going to only embolden Hollywood to keep churning out nonsense. It is bad enough that Hollywood insults our intelligence by producing movies that are completely unrealistic beyond a shadow of a doubt. Read a book instead. Or, read the prophecy. Whatever you do, don't degrade your own intelligence.

Your Quote for the Day

I always turn to the sports pages first, which records people's accomplishments. The front page has nothing but man's failures. - Earl Warren

Some News for the Morning

A new study revealed that coed dorms are the awesomest place ever! Binge drinking was 2.5 times more likely (42% versus 18%); sex was more likely; and the watching of pornography increased. I am surprised this would come as a shock to anyone, especially the researchers or university administration. I lived in a coed dorm. It was great. Girls and boys intermingled all the time. Perhaps what exacerbated everything was the winter, which would frequently lock us in for days at a time, with nothing to do but interact. The solution? More global warming. Let's get the winters shortened so college kids stop drinking and having sex!

You may be eating cloned beef soon. Evidently, they eat less and produce more. Sounds too good to be true? Well, we'll just wait and see what happens next.

In a strange irony, something only Marx's "false consciousness" could explain, white women love the GOP (as do poor white people!). A group that just ended its insurance covering abortions, that has a guy like Rush Limbaugh who has ridiculed and demonized feminism, and a group with (I believe) 2 women senators and 12 house of representatives draws women. I think all the talk about security mixed with calling democrats pansies, pussies, and wusses pumps some women up. I call it the Neanderthal model.

I have long said I call out both political parties, though any reader would probably recognize my vehement opposition to the GOP thus far. Well, here you go conservatives: Robert Byrd is what is wrong with the Senate. He is 91 frickin years old!! I hated when they let Strom Thurmund go till he was 100, and I hate it now. Not that older people cannot be smart, functional, and even sharp; but, really, 56 years of governing? My grandmother is in her mid-80's and still has her faculties. But, I wouldn't trust her to vote on serious legislation for the rest of the country. Seriously. Term limits, no. Age maximums, yes. And don't accuse me of ageism because no one has a problem with a minimum age limit on entrance to the Senate or Presidency? So, why can't we just say 85 or 80, or even 90 is the max?

Musings on Palin (and Further Adventures on Stats)

Good article on the loony from Alaska who may just make 2012 an interesting election. One thing in this article that supports my running discontent with stats: 37% of the US thinks she is qualified. Now, this number is believable because it is an opinion number (which, ultimately, all are). It is more revealing to me that more than 2/3 of the electorate think a person with a two years of governorship experience, a failed campaign that she contributed to by going "rogue" and ignoring the discipline McCain was preaching, a beauty queen, and a woman who makes questionable choices as do her children would be ready for the presidency.

People, these are your neighbors. Next time you are at the grocery store, 1 out of every 3, or more likely 3 our of every 9 people in that line with you believe she could be a president (of course, 8 out of 10 Americans believe in angels, so that should tell you something). This stat proves my point inversely: those people also have opinions about other serious matters, like bombing Iran, whether Iraq and Al Qaeda were tied together, whether abortion should be legal, whether dinosaurs existed before humans, whether the earth is 5,000 or billions of years old...why should I care what they have to say? Their vote should be limited to American Idol where they can do no harm.

Your Quote for the Day

Man cannot be free if he does not know that he is subject to necessity, because his freedom is always won in his never wholly successful attempts to liberate himself from necessity...Economic growth may one day turn out to be a curse rather than a good, and under no conditions can it either lead into freedom or constitute a proof for its existence. - Hannah Arendt

A Rant on Celebritism

I think I have had my fill of the American obsession with no-talent ass clowns. Perhaps it is because I am near the entertainment mecca, but I am sick and tired of hearing about, reading about, being told about, or even knowing about the worst human beings alive. No, I am not talking about mass murders; at least they have an ethos, and are relatively intelligent. I am talking about the Kardashians, Paris Hilton, Britney, Lindsay, the douche bag Perez Hilton who is a parasite off of them, TMZ, E entertainment, and the entire support network.

We are not only the richest nation on the planet, but we produce the most useless resources known to human kind. Just like the cars we make lack complete quality, the celebrities we produce lack anything redeeming. I suppose the plebians have always been enamored with the aristocracy, but I think things are getting to a new level of decadence. Rather than educating ourselves politically, fighting for true financial sanity, for human rights, for stopping two ridiculously costly wars, for health care, for environmental sanity...we spend our time reading US and People magazine. I am currently looking for a job as a professor; working in California would be ideal, as would working in any major Western state. The problem you ask? The citizens, if you can even call them that, are so busy watching the shittiest crap on television, they aren't even aware that they are being raped by the government, the corporations who get tax breaks for staying in a community or relocating to a community while not creating jobs, yet destroying the environment and tearing communities apart when they move, and by lobbyists who continue to influence politics in ways that are not rational and do not benefit anyone but small constituencies. California, for example, is in the midst of a budget crises predicated on a few intersecting things:

(1) The electorate is full of people more interested in what celebrities wear, or what parties are happening and who is there, to actually do anything useful. Every year, a ton of propositions make the ballet and people just vote blindly. They constantly increase spending, while fighting the increase of taxes...except sales tax which hurts the poor more than anyone else because it is a level tax that all people have to pay. Meanwhile, property taxes are frozen at 1977 levels, corporations do not feed into the pot, and rich people have so many loopholes that nearly half of the schools are crumbling.

(2) The national education problem. At some point around 1980, with the hail to the chief entrance of Reagan, we decided education should be a business and the market should regulate it just like everything else. Stupid idea. Education is a right, not a privilege. Unfortunately, since 1996, the tuition at the University of California (all of them) has increased nearly 96%, while the State and Community college system have followed suit. Nobody cares. There are no jobs for me because Lamar Odom's marriage to a Kardashian is more important than voting, protesting, or doing anything else. Meanwhile, the taxes the electorate refuses to raise is being transferred to underprivileged college students who can either not afford to go or just settle for intense amounts of debt. Of course, nearly all college students in the US are now saddled with debt because tuition's rise when state budgets cut money from education can transfer it to stupid things like building more and more prisons, keeping people on death row, fighting a losing drug war, fighting any war, funding more weapons, and "securing" the border. The next generation is going to basically be retarded when it comes to writing, reading, and arithmetic. But, alas.

(3) The gas/electric companies great raping of the 2000's. Thanks to Grey Davis, and his predecessor and nearly everyone before him, untenable power agreements were made that essentially bankrupted the state. When he tried to fix it by raising car registration taxes, the electorate voted him out. Good job! We voted in a former steroid user who couldn't manage a paperbag.

(4) Populism! Yea populism! Nothing like being able to just vote people in and out whenever we feel like. Nothing like term limits that keep the government constantly turning over and giving way to ideological warfare. Nothing like people hiring poor people to stand on college campuses and in front of stores to get signatures for insane propositions which no one ever reads! Yea!!

This all is rooted in the infantile obsession we have with the most useless human beings in society. They do not entertain us. Madonna entertains. On the one hand, they make us pine for the nouveau leisure class. Think about it. There is no other society where people just acted recklessly, amorally, and with a complete eye towards pure, unadulterated hedonistic materialism other than ours. Sure, every society had crazy sex games. But, people like Paris Hilton would be selected against. They would not be allowed to reproduce because they did nothing for anyone else, let alone for the benefit of humankind. Alas, we celebrate these people's lives because we secretly wish we could do nothing and be famous. On the other hand, these people secretly disgust us. They revolt us. This is what I don't understand. Their uselessness, while often implicit, is really there on display. And we know it. We dislike them. We want them to fail because it reminds us where the moral boundaries of society should be.

Yet, we support them. We give them what they want, fame...prestige...status...validation that they are beautiful, and awesome, and worthwhile humans. Things their parents could never give them because they were too busy working, or partying across the globe and having them raised by nannies, or addicted to drugs, alcohol or other substances. They are a reflection of their shitty parents who failed at raising them. They are a product of endless amounts of money, never hearing the word no, and the dangerous of shallowness. You want irony. We should drop them out of planes onto our enemies...call 'em smart bombs.

Evolution Strikes Again...

Check out the evolution of a new species of finch! Go Evolution!!

Wine Country

Wine country was great...if you have never gone, you should go. Santa Barbara may not have the name of Napa, but the Dutch-ness of the area is pretty cool. Which brings me to the word or concept of the week: collective effervescence. Long hailed in my classes as the coolest sociological idea ever, effervescence is the bubbly, excited, ephemeral yet lasting feeling of group life. Emile Durkheim, the hero of this site and a French sociologist at the turn of the previous century, coined this term when he was considering what made people act voluntarily or conform to the basic normative structure of a society or in altruistic ways with close kin or really good friends.


In essence, we all know what it is like to be alive and deal with the drone of everyday life, right? Nearly all decisions, interactions, and thoughts in our head are self-interested or instrumental (means-->ends). The work world, going to the store to pickup something for dinner or shampoo or something like that, dealing with co-workers, dealing with strangers on the subway or bus, dealing with people on the highway in their little worlds with their music blaring, text messaging, putting on their makeup...everything is self-interested because there is little "moral" (nor religious, but a deeper word for social) bindings between most people - that is, we are Americans, and that is about the furthest most social ties go. How do you feel after work? After a week of work? Drained, right? Your batteries are expended.


Well, Durkheim reasoned that all groups (and a group could be two people in love with each other or just friends) have highly sanctified rituals ranging from how they greet each other to how they enjoy each other's company. A ritual, by the way, is three things: synchronized behavior, shared common focus (on some type of physical, social, or intellectual object), and shared emotional focus. In the process of being in a group and participating in its ritual, emotions which are exchanged normally and make interactions feel good or bad (you notice the bad most often when an interaction with another person turns sour and you get that butterfly feeling in your gut telling you something is wrong), become intensified to the point where you lose your self-interest temporally, or for as long as the interaction has occurred. Political rallies, religious ceremonies, concerts are all examples of large scale moments of collective effervescence, though going out to dinner on your anniversary or meeting up once a year with old college buddies can do the same.

The group recharges our batteries. For hours, days, or weeks afterwards we feels the buzz of the group. When we hear the music of our band or reminisce with someone about a great time in the past, we rekindle the faint emotions of the past and prime ourselves to feel them again. The wine trip was a good bonding time. It created a situation where emotions were heightened, by the fourth winery behaviors were synchronized, and the focus of our actions and attitudes was shared. The result: good feelings, continued buzz, and recharged batteries. Humans are emotional creatures in more ways than we realize. Relationships collapse when effervescence is no longer generated either because of a lack of effort or because of other factors. We need to engage in social rituals regularly with our significant others, otherwise we risk the unraveling of social fabric. The nation, albeit loosely connected, needs these things too; the intensified polarization of people along party lines has made this a difficult proposition. We are a house divided because we never come together and affirm the social order!

Your Quote for the Day

Conclusions prematurely drawn from social experiences daily occurring around us, are difficult to displace by clear proofs that elsewhere wide social experiences point to opposite conclusions - Herbert Spencer

Last Thoughts for the Day

In vino veritas...Off to Santa Barbara wine country...and, believe me, I am not drinking any fucking merlot. Take the time, if you haven't already, to read some of my prior posts. I realize things have been spotty, but as I said below, life sometimes catches up. But, if all goes well, more posts should be coming. I also don't want to just post for the sake of posting. Though, I am considering adding some sports meanderings. And, I am planning a bi-weekly delineation of the various religious systems, their dominant cosmologies, and their historical development. Something for myself to keep track of and maybe some new nuggets of facts for you.

Your Quote for the Day

A man who makes a beast of himself, is trying to kill the pain of being human. - Hunter S. Thompson

Ants are Pretty Cool

Some researchers found that certain types of ants express "rescue" behavior when one of their nestmates are in danger. They simulated a collapsed tunnel, while secretly tying an ant with a nylon thread to prevent it from moving. Another ant frantically dug the ant out, and rather than simply pull at the trapped cousin's legs or head, it proceeded to work on the thread to free it. The same response was not elicited with non-kin (something pretty standard in the animal kingdom).

How Do You Say...Ironic?

Guess what? The Republican National Committee, who have a plank in their political platform that refers to abortion as "a fundamental assault on innocent human life," have a health care plan that allows for abortion. Check this article out.

My first question is how did this go unnoticed for so long? My second question is did anyone under this insurance use it for an abortion? I love hypocrisy because it is delicious.

Your Quote for the Day

A great value of antiquity lies in the fact that its writings are the only ones that modern men still read with exactness.- Friedrich Nietzsche

Lesson for the Week (Esoteric Nonsense to Impress Your Friends With)

Eschatology (es-kuh-tol-uh-jee): Any doctrines or system of belief that deals with final matters such as mortality, second comings, heaven/hell, etc. Nearly every religious system, more so than any other system, deals if  not directly than in some fashion with the most pressing psychological problem that all homo sapiens sapiens experience: their own mortality. In fact, one could plausibly argue that as our brains grew bigger (an evolutionary process that appears to have stopped around 50,000 years ago meaning that our ancestors from that period on had the same cognitive functions as us), we became increasingly aware of our own mortality as well as our significant others' mortality. This is a frightening thought. Dogs and cats, for example, appear to "know" at the very end. They find a quiet place to pass on.


Humans, though, from a young age become cognizant of their impending fate when grandma or great-grandpa die; a younger sibling dies and everyone else reacts intensely; or a family pet dies. From there, the detached intellectual questions emerge: what is death? where do they go? An astute child may pose the eschatological question: what happens when we die and why do we have to die? Bam! Religion emerges because there are no natural answers to this question that satisfy. Cancer, for example, is a reason why we die, but not an explanation of why we have to die. The supranatural or transmundane world, filled with spirits we can exchange earthly goods with for things like immortality and salvation become real dealings. That is, just like you want to get a can of beans, you go to the supermarket and transfer monies for beans, when you want something intangible, or otherwise difficult to procure given the society's current state of technological advance, you must find a much more powerful partner. 


This simple axiom, presents us with a key process of religious change...and, especially, changes in eschatological thought. As humans settle down (12,000 to 10,000 before the present...B.P.) for good, they innovate more and more to deal with concrete problems like resource scarcity compounded by population increase. Hence the steady move towards intensifying agriculture through the plow and the use of animal-power. In the process, the things people sought from the supranatural change as well, and consequentially, so do the doctrines concerning the end. For example, the more science or proto-science does in terms of controlling the environment, the more religion recedes from the mundane problems of subsistence and shifts its focus to things like death, meaning/purpose, and salvation (not simply the Christian version...). Religious intellectual (and that is by no means oxymoronic) efforts are transferred from predicting floods or rain to matters of the soul. It is hard to convince people, as a priest or rabbi, you offer them anything useful if scientists or other non-religious role-players offer you the something with a higher "success" ratio. Thus, we turn to matters of eschatology, the one frontier of the human world and psyche seemingly impenetrable by other institutions.


Will religion disappear? Some who read this page are likely anti-religion, and I profess to not be for or against you. Religion, in itself, is a fascinating subject on many planes to me. What I can same, beyond a doubt, is religion will never disappear because of eschaological and soteriological (suh-teer-ee-ol-uh-jee) doctrines. (Soteriology are doctrines concerning the actual process of salvation. Whether it is escaping the rebirth cycle of karma-samsara in Buddhist, Hindu, or Jainist doctrine, passing on to the Kingdom of Heaven in Christianity, or reuniting with the "One," it all pertains to the release from suffering however a religion defines it.) Thus, I can tell you why your child died in a car accident (drunk), how they died (they fractured their skull and the steering wheel produced internal bleeding), but I cannot tell you why they were taken at a young age, why good people have to suffer while evil people seem to do fine, and what it all means. Religions can. The ultimate questions in life are unapproachable by science, because a true evolutionist must believe that (a) evolution has no direction...it is random; (b) human life is improbable; and (c) there is no telic (ultimate goal) for the human race...we socially construct meaning as we see fit. Not very comforting, huh?