Since “The T.A.M.I Show” was released on December 29, 1964, the film industry has been trying to capture the definitive cinematic concert experience.
In the 70’s, we had “Woodstock” and “The Last Waltz.” In the 80s, we had “Stop Making Sense” and “U2: Rattle and Hum.” In the 90s, we had “Madonna: Truth or Dare” and the appalling, flag-burning abattoir known as Woodstock ’99 on pay-per-view.
Now, in 2009, we have Michael Jackson’s “This Is It,” an electrifying last-minute exercise in self-aggrandizement from an embattled visionary desperate to reclaim his throne as the undisputed “King of Pop.”
If you ask me, the tagline for this film should’ve read “Caution: Mad Genius At Work,” because that’s exactly what we’re seeing here.
It’s a lavish eruption of whimsical sights and vociferous sounds guaranteed to make you question every drug-addled, skeletonian image trotted out by Nancy Grace during the months following his death.
We’re given a behind-the-scenes glimpse into the opus of a 50-year-old artiste in search of whatever sense of absolution he can attain and, had the concerts been able to go on as scheduled, I think we would’ve been looking at one of the greatest musical endeavors of modern times.
Whether it was the towering, Peter Jackson-esque production value or the pulsating finesse of 24-year-old Orianthi Panagaris on guitar, everything seemed to be pointing toward Jackson’s return to prominence. He had the look, energy, personnel and ever-present air of youthful exuberance needed to pull off such an ambitious task, which director Kenny Ortega makes sure to highlight on more than one occasion.
The only thing standing in his way appeared to be his reluctance to surround himself with people willing to tell him “no,” because the more he wanted, the less likely it became for others to resist giving into his demands. He lived his entire life in the midst of people so enamored by his genius that they seldom questioned what direction he was taking, so I guess it’s only appropriate that the circumstances of his death be clouded by a sea of proverbial “What ifs.”
As for the set-list, does it really need to be revealed?
You know the songs, you know the albums. Go experience it for yourself and, hopefully, you’ll gain a deeper appreciation for just how unique he really was.
- **** out of 4
Sunday, November 15, 2009
Antichrist
It’s been almost a month since I’ve seen Lars Von Trier’s “Antichrist” yet I’m still not quite sure what to make of it.
Is it the most vibrantly insulting decimation of society’s moral fiber ever created? Does Von Trier deserve to be institutionalized for even suggesting that civilized filmgoers would find entertainment in a soporific tale involving the slow-motion death of a child and female genital mutilation?
Honestly, I wouldn’t know where to begin with those questions, but I can say that the veracity with which the material is handled makes it one of the most challenging cinematic experiences you’ll find all year.
Willem Dafoe and Charlotte Gainsbourg star as a couple who retreat to a cabin in the woods following the tragic loss of their son and what unfolds is frightening, appalling and mesmerizing all at once, because the plot is always measured and never simple.
I’m fighting the urge to reveal just an iota of what the plot entails, because a film this dichotomous deserves to be seen minus any preconceptions. The austere reality present here is so stunningly alive that I can’t help but think of it as a piece of gothic performance art that won’t be appreciated until much later on down the line.
- *** ½ out of 4
Is it the most vibrantly insulting decimation of society’s moral fiber ever created? Does Von Trier deserve to be institutionalized for even suggesting that civilized filmgoers would find entertainment in a soporific tale involving the slow-motion death of a child and female genital mutilation?
Honestly, I wouldn’t know where to begin with those questions, but I can say that the veracity with which the material is handled makes it one of the most challenging cinematic experiences you’ll find all year.
Willem Dafoe and Charlotte Gainsbourg star as a couple who retreat to a cabin in the woods following the tragic loss of their son and what unfolds is frightening, appalling and mesmerizing all at once, because the plot is always measured and never simple.
I’m fighting the urge to reveal just an iota of what the plot entails, because a film this dichotomous deserves to be seen minus any preconceptions. The austere reality present here is so stunningly alive that I can’t help but think of it as a piece of gothic performance art that won’t be appreciated until much later on down the line.
- *** ½ out of 4
Thoughts on Health Care #2
In my opinion, changes in the public perception of physicians are becoming more and more common as the years progress, because everyone has their own idea of what a doctor’s purpose should be. While shows such as “House” and “ER” often portray them as unflappable, all-knowing gurus who can effectively tackle any illness in front of them, the reality is that they aren’t always as personable or confident as the media leads you to believe.
People need to realize that they are fallible human beings who use their knowledge and intuitive skills to help people to the best of their ability, which is rarely accomplished in the course of one evening visit. Gone are the days when being a doctor was universally considered as an elite status symbol because, if the recent death of Michael Jackson taught us anything, it’s that doctors can cause more harm than good if they succumb to the pressure.
Cases such as the Michael Jackson debacle can be seen as major contributors to the growing distrust of people in the medical profession, because the public is already skeptical of health care and seeing Dr. Conrad Murray become somewhat of a professional drug dealer only adds to the hysteria.
With so many people turning to home remedies or alternative medicine, it appears that the idea exists that people no longer have to trust or rely on their family physician to solve every problem, especially with health insurance rates skyrocketing out of control.
I know plenty of people who would rather consult Web MD than take time out of their day to wait at a clinic, so I think that the more information people receive from outlets such as newspapers or the Internet, the more they’ll begin to second guess a doctor’s ability to treat them successfully.
People need to realize that they are fallible human beings who use their knowledge and intuitive skills to help people to the best of their ability, which is rarely accomplished in the course of one evening visit. Gone are the days when being a doctor was universally considered as an elite status symbol because, if the recent death of Michael Jackson taught us anything, it’s that doctors can cause more harm than good if they succumb to the pressure.
Cases such as the Michael Jackson debacle can be seen as major contributors to the growing distrust of people in the medical profession, because the public is already skeptical of health care and seeing Dr. Conrad Murray become somewhat of a professional drug dealer only adds to the hysteria.
With so many people turning to home remedies or alternative medicine, it appears that the idea exists that people no longer have to trust or rely on their family physician to solve every problem, especially with health insurance rates skyrocketing out of control.
I know plenty of people who would rather consult Web MD than take time out of their day to wait at a clinic, so I think that the more information people receive from outlets such as newspapers or the Internet, the more they’ll begin to second guess a doctor’s ability to treat them successfully.
Thoughts on Health Care #1
What irritates me most about American health care is the amount of statistics that are often unjustly downplayed by the national media. Facts such as “1/3 of all deaths are attributed to infectious disease” and “life expectancy in the United States has increased from 47 to 77.8 since 1900” are both upsetting examples of how even a technological superpower like the United States can be so unequivocally behind countries that are less complacent in their superiority (The US ranks 45th in life expectancy).
We’re constantly fed words and images portraying America as being the greatest place on Earth yet this country’s true prominence should really be measured by its ability to recognize weakness and, in turn, discover ways to rectify the crisis before it spirals out of control.
People think that Michael Moore is nothing but a shameless self-promoter who profits from the very institutions he condemns, but when he put forth the notion that “America has the best health care in the world until you get sick,” he may have been onto something.
Another element I find particularly illuminating is the idea that Malaria had been all but eliminated by 1965, because it’s one of the most treacherous diseases in the world today. With over 400 million people infected each year, I can’t help but wonder how exactly the medical community deemed it to no longer be an international threat.
It seems that political pandering has a lot to do with the way society views certain diseases, because while cases such as SARS and the so-called Swine Flu are paraded ad nauseum in the public eye, Malaria is simply accepted as a part of life allowed to persist unabated.
Policy makers have the ability to control how certain stories are covered, so I would like to believe that the obligation to truth would overtake everything else, but rarely do things ever play out in such uncontroversial fashion.
I’ve long been fascinated about health care in America and I have an eerie feeling that the more I learn, the less likely it is that I’ll be enamored by what I’m finding out.
We’re constantly fed words and images portraying America as being the greatest place on Earth yet this country’s true prominence should really be measured by its ability to recognize weakness and, in turn, discover ways to rectify the crisis before it spirals out of control.
People think that Michael Moore is nothing but a shameless self-promoter who profits from the very institutions he condemns, but when he put forth the notion that “America has the best health care in the world until you get sick,” he may have been onto something.
Another element I find particularly illuminating is the idea that Malaria had been all but eliminated by 1965, because it’s one of the most treacherous diseases in the world today. With over 400 million people infected each year, I can’t help but wonder how exactly the medical community deemed it to no longer be an international threat.
It seems that political pandering has a lot to do with the way society views certain diseases, because while cases such as SARS and the so-called Swine Flu are paraded ad nauseum in the public eye, Malaria is simply accepted as a part of life allowed to persist unabated.
Policy makers have the ability to control how certain stories are covered, so I would like to believe that the obligation to truth would overtake everything else, but rarely do things ever play out in such uncontroversial fashion.
I’ve long been fascinated about health care in America and I have an eerie feeling that the more I learn, the less likely it is that I’ll be enamored by what I’m finding out.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)