Sunday, May 3, 2009

2009 Cannonball Catholic Blog Awards



Fame! I wanna live forever! I wanna learn how to blog! Fame!

My blog has been nominated in the 'Best Armchair Theologian' and 'Snarkiest Catholic Blog' categories of the 2009 Cannonball Catholic Blog Awards.

Don't worry, I won't let the prestige of being nominated for this award go to my head...Nope, it won't change me. Oh no...

Mwah-hah-hah-hah-Mwah-hah-hah-hah-hah!

Anyway, should I emerge victorious, I would like to thank God...and that's it. Oh, and Our Blessed Mother, the Virgin Mary, St Jude, my holy patron St Lawrence (Put another shrimp on the barby for me, Bro...if I ever make it to your place!), St Francis of Assisi and St Clare of Assisi, St Valentine and all you Saints and Angels. To anyone I've left out or forgotten, forgive me. I really couldn't have done it without you. You guys are great. You really supported me with your prayers and...

Ahem...Click here for the equivalent of the Catholic Blogosphere Directory 2009. Very comprehensive and good to have access to hundreds of blogs all 'under one roof' so to speak.

Right...now let's get back to plotting cunning plans to sabotage Dr Death's suicide workshops...Mwah-hah-hah-hah-Mwah-hah-hah-hah-hah!

My Darling Clementine



So, at long last on to John Ford. Our first encounter - as a blog, anyway - with one of America's most legendary, greatest and certainly most influential directors is his iconic My Darling Clementine (1946), his lyrical, elegiac account of the confrontation between Wyatt Earp and the Clanton Brothers. This is my second viewing of the film, and while a first watch left me cold, the rewatch caused me to completely revise my opinion. Although inevitably dated and hokey in spots (not to mention being among the historically inaccurate accounts of a real-life event out there), Clementine still works, not only as a showcase of one of America's legendary directors at his creative peak, but also as perhaps the best articulation of the old school myth of the American West.

The film tells a simplified version of the Earp Brothers' vendetta against the Cowboy gang, which turned much of Arizona Territory into a war zone throughout the 1880's. Wyatt Earp (Henry Fonda) and his brothers James (Don Garner), Virgil (Tim Holt) and Morgan (Ward Bond) are cattlemen moving West to start a new life, when they run afoul of Old Man Clanton (Walter Brennan) and his boys, a gang of thieves and cattle rustlers. The Earps spend a night in the raucous mining town of Tombstone, only to have James murdered by the Clantons - leading to Wyatt's appointment as town Marshall. He befriends Doc Holiday (Victor Mature), a shady, tubercular doctor-turned-gunfighter with a death wish, while trying to civilize Tombstone into a proper town. Also arriving is Clementine Carter (Cathy Downs), an old flame of Doc's who finds herself more attracted by the steady, heroic Wyatt than the increasingly reckless and fatalistic Doc. This all leads to the inevitable Gunfight at the OK Corral, where the Earps and Doc seek a reckoning slimy Clantons.

My Darling Clementine epitomizes the poetic, optimistic ideal of the American West. The Earps are basically good people driven to violence, rather than the conflicted, morally ambiguous gunmen history knows them as; their shady past as lawmen in the Midwest isn't even mentioned, and their relationship with the even shadier Doc is jettisoned entirely. Scenes like the lengthy Church christening and square dance (complete with the ubiquitous Shall We Gather at the River?) and the rather bland Clementine character may seem hokey or unnecessary to modern audiences, but they definitely serve a purpose in Ford's world: the inevitable progress of the American frontier relies on the coming together of people to form a stable community, the establishment of institutions like family and church, and a good man like Wyatt Earp to keep the peace. Scum like the Clantons are exceptions rather than the rule, and all Tombstone needs is a good man like Wyatt Earp to exterminate them, and life will continue its inevitable advance towards prosperity and progress. Relics of the past like the sultry saloon girl Chihuahua (Linda Darnell) and the tragic Doc have a place in settling the frontier, but no place in the future that results - an idea Ford would return to again and again, with increasingly tragic results (John Wayne in The Searchers epitomizing this). Ford's sense of idealistic liberalism and warm, optimistic faith in humanity is in full flower here; the simplicity of the message is what makes it work, even if jaded 21st Century audiences may dismiss or snicker at it.

By the '50s and '60s, this triumphalist view of the West was being challenged from all corners, from Anthony Mann's "adult Westerns" (The Tin Star, The Naked Spur) to the cynical, violent Vera Cruz, The Magnificent Seven and The Professionals, to the enfant terrible Sam Peckinpah (though his work is much more Ford-like than most of his peers) and the Spaghetti Westerns of Sergios Leone and Corbucchi. Even Ford himself, in his later works like The Searchers, The Man Who Shot Liberty Valance, and Cheyenne Autumn would show this myth to be ultimately hollow and empty - as the Cold War dragged on and America slipped into the violent chaos of the '60s, the idea of America as fundamentally good and virtuous became harder for many to swallow. But it's very much to the credit of Ford that through his films, the myth still endures - and however inaccurate or hollow it ultimately is, it remains a powerful one, a metaphorical representation of America as a force for good, progress, truth and virtue - the America we all wish existed, even if its reality is much darker or morally ambiguous.

The Wyatt Earp story has been retold time and again by Hollywood, from the straight re-tellings of Gunfight at the OK Corral and Tombstone to the revisionist Hour of the Gun, Doc and Wyatt Earp (even an episode of Star Trek would re-enact the famous OK Corral showdown). In truth, of course, the OK Corral gunfight was merely a bloody skirmish in a much larger land war, where the Earps, Doc Holliday and various other confederates shot it out with the Cowboys, a loosely-organized gang of gunfighters, outlaws, cowpunchers and rustlers for political power in Arizona Territory. However, Clementine never professes to be a history lesson; its mythic representation of the Earps as a righteous force seeking justice with their terrible swift Peacemakers is historically dubious, but as part of a larger fable of a young, growing America it has always been important.

John Ford is at the very top of his cinematic game. The cinematography by Joe McDonald is dark, moody, and heavily atmospheric - more fitting at times for a film noir than a Western. Certainly, however, Ford makes the usual striking use of his favorite locations in Monument Valley for the outdoors and landscape sequences. The movie is largely bereft of the bumptuous, overwrought comedy that plagued a great deal of his work (the Cavalry Trilogy, The Searchers, and The Quiet Man), which only benefits the film; a much subtler, gentler humor is well-utilized here. The film also has its share of iconic Western moments - notably, the initial showdown between Wyatt and Doc at the bar, and the wonderfully executed climactic gunfight, shot entirely without music, ambient sound and long shots building suspense as the Earps and Doc march to their date with destiny.

The cast is top-notch. Henry Fonda gives one of his most iconic roles, playing Earp as the straight-arrow, righteous Marshall with a clear sense of right and wrong. Victor Mature's performance as Doc Holliday is a bit off at times - he's never really convincing as the tubercular, trigger-fingered dandy gunfighter we know (or at least expect) Doc to be, but to his credit he brings a lot of dramatic weight and gravitas to the part. Walter Brennan gives us a truly nasty villain as Old Man Clanton, his scruffy brood including John Ireland, Grant Withers, Fred Libby and Mickey Simpson. Though not remotely convincing as a Mexican, Linda Darnell gives a fiery and memorable performance as bad girl Chihuahua; she's certainly more interesting than the fairly milquetoast Cathy Downs, whose Clementine never really rises above the level of stock love interest (and where is Josie Earp in all this, anyway?). Also in the cast are Tim Holt and the great Ward Bond as Earp's brothers, and Alan Mowbray in an amusing bit as a Shakespearean actor who runs afoul of the Clantons.

I hope to return to Ford and deal with some of his other great films - Stagecoach, The Searchers, The Man Who Shot Liberty Valance, to name but a few - but Clementine certainly isn't a bad introduction. It's one of the best and most straightforward representations of Western mythology, and it's well-made and damned entertaining to boot. You can't ask for much more than that.

Rating: 8/10 - Highly Recommended

Gladiator



In Rome circa 185 AD, General Maximus (Russell Crowe) leads a successful expedition against Germanic tribes in the northern empire. Dying Emperor Marcus Aurelius (Richard Harris) confides that he is to succeed as Emperor, to the chagrin of the vain, ego-maniacal Commodus (Joaquin Phoenix), who kills Marcus and usurps the throne. Maximus is expelled from the army, his family is killed, and he ultimately ends up in Rome as a gladiator for Proximo (Oliver Reed). Defying the will of the Emperor and eager to have his revenge, Maximus becomes a hero to the masses and joins Commodus's sister Lucilla (Connie Nielsen) and a cabal of Senators led by Gracchus (Derek Jacobi) in an attempt to bring down Commodus.

Gladiator is something of a paradox. As a well-made, entertaining action film, it's hard to beat. Its attempts to be something more, however... not so much. It's very entertaining, an excellent crowd-pleaser to be sure, but it's far from the great film it's widely considered to be.

Gladiator wants to be something significant. Its multi-faceted plot, its commentary on society, its distinguished cast of actors, epic battle scenes, and great musical score almost push it there. The movie borrows heavily from Fall of the Roman Empire (settings and characters), Spartacus and Ben-Hur (for the plot). This is not a criticism, merely an observation. And the movie does have an inkling of being something more than just another action movie. And yet it fails, because at heart it is basically Braveheart in a toga.

Perhaps I'm just not enthralled by the film's basic storyline. See if this sounds familiar: A successful warrior who wants only to live in peace is roused to ass-kicking action by the death of his family at the hands of cartoonishly evil villains. This is the plot of Braveheart, The Patriot, and innumerable Westerns, action films, and Steven Seagal/Chuck Norris slugfests. Death of family members is an easy motivation for a character, and dare I suggest a lazy one. Maximus isn't a thoughtful, conflicted hero like T.E. Lawrence or Spartacus, he's just a man of action who wants to wreak vengeance on those who wronged him. In spite of its attempts to convince us otherwise, the movie is basically a Schwarzenegger or Van Damme flick set in Roman times with a lead actor who can act.

The subplots of the film don't fare much better. The character of Commodus in particular is a disappointment. One of the few good things about Fall of the Roman Empire is Christopher Plummer's portrayal of Commodus. Commodus is an egomaniac with delusions of grandeur. He's not horribly complex in that film but Plummer makes it work. Whether it's the script or Joaquin Phoenix's acting, this film's Commodus is a sniveling weakling - basically Laurence Olivier's Crassus with his balls cut off. I appreciate the effort to give him motivation (his father never truly loved him) but in his big scene with Marcus Aurelius, Commodus doesn't come across as heart-broken, merely insincere. Commodus is a petulant child who lacks menace. David Schofield's duplictious Senator Falco is a much more effective bad guy. The Senate plot against the Emperor is under-developed and comes across as a bad pastiche of Spartacus.

On a purely action level, the movie is pretty good. The epic battle which opens the film is not particularly impressive in my opinion, but the gladiator combats later in the film are impressive. The visceral thrill of a gladiatorial match comes across well, particularly when Proximo's gladiators "upset" an enemy team. The fight between Maximus and the "Tigress of Gaul" is very well-handled, as is the final duel between Commodus and Maximus. The CGI is of mixed quality. It's impressive in some scenes (notably Commodus's entry into Rome) but in other parts it's murky and distracting. Hans Zimmer's score is haunting and helps drive the film's more powerful moments.

The movie excels largely because of Russell Crowe. FOTRE failed because Stephen Boyd is a block of wood; Crowe, playing a very similar role, excels. Maximus is not a particularly noble hero but he's a fabulous action star, and Crowe does bring a degree of intelligence and complexity to complement the ass-kicking. The supporting cast is mostly under-used. Djimon Honsou, Oliver Reed, David Schofield and Derek Jacobi give the most memorable supporting performances in the film despite very limited screen time. Richard Harris is disappointing as Marcus Aurelius, and Joaquin Phoenix and Connie Nielsen aren't particularly compelling either.

Gladiator is one of the best action films ever made, on a purely action level. But in its attempts to be something more... well, not so much, I'm afraid.

Rating: 7/10 - Recommended

Saturday, May 2, 2009

Email The Argus to Campaign Against Nitschke



You can email the editor of The Argus and ask him why his newspaper is not campaigning against the planned 'suicide workshop' at the Brighthelm Centre, Brighton.
Please, write to him. Alternatively copy and paste this letter and send it

UPDATE...UPDATE...Editor in Chief is on leave. In his absence send it to...

james.glover@theargus.co.uk
matthew.gaw@theargus.co.uk
news@theargus.co.uk or
Call 01273 544514


To join the Facebook group, click here.

Write to David Leppar MP for Brighton Pavillion, here.

Dear Mr Gibbs

I write to you urgently on an important matter concerning the safety of Brighton citizens. As Editor of The Argus, Brighton's premier local newspaper, can you please explain to me why you are not running a campaign against Dr Philip Nitschke, founder of Exit International, who will, very soon in May, be giving 'suicide workshops' at the Brighthelm Centre, at the invitation of the Reverend David Coleman, a supposedly 'Christian' minister?

Your publication has reported that the event is to take place. Mercifully, you have not printed the date. I am grateful that you have not done so, otherwise you yourself would be publicising the event.

Please, for the sake of the vulnerable, the elderly, the many sufferers of mental illness in Brighton, who are in danger of coming into contact with Dr Philip Nitschke and his 'suicide kits', for which he is taking £35 a time, campaign with vigour against the workshop he is planning.

Brighton is home to many vulnerable people. The suicide rate is among the highest in the UK. The last thing the citizens of Brighton need, is somebody who has no interest in defending the lives of the vulnerable, but instead, wishes to make a profit off the back of their distress, and at the same time, kill them.

I am astounded by the Argus's lack of a clear message on this issue. Please, for the sake of the people of Brighton, make the message clear. 'Dr Philip Nitscke is not welcome in Brighton!' That, Mr Gibbs, should be your message. I find it scandalous that you have not yet made it. Please do so, before it is too late.

Yours sincerely

Islamaphobe Wilders Barred...'Suicide Kit Vendor' Nitschke Free to Enter


Remember the Dutch MP who was thought to be too 'politically sensitive' to be allowed entry into the UK, because he expressed views which were 'islamphobic' and could incite religious hatred? Well, Dr Philip Nitschke, who sells suicide kits to the vulnerable for £35 has been allowed in...Go figure! Isn't that inciting, aiding and abetting suicide? A criminal offence? On his arrival to give his talk in Brighton, I have a cunning plan, and yes, it does involve guitars.


So 'doctor', you found it distressing you were interviewed by Customs on arrival in the UK? Just wait until you get to Brighton...

Courtesy of The Telegraph

An Australian doctor, Dr Philip Nitschke, has been granted access to Britain to hold workshops on euthanasia after initially being detained at Heathrow Airport.

Dr Nitschke was held under the Immigration and Asylum act after arriving from Australia on Saturday morning. He founded Exit International, a voluntary euthanasia and assisted suicide organisation, plans to hold a workshop in Bournemouth, Dorset, on Tuesday, where he would talk about his DIY suicide kit.

Dr Nitschke is also expected to hold a series of events in Brighton, Stroud, Glos and Glasgow. He said that he had previously been allowed into the UK to hold lectures and described his detainment as "troubling". He claimed he had been told his workshops could be in breach of British law.

"This is a very fundamental question of free speech – people want to know about this," he said. "We've had ourselves searched and fingerprinted and now we have been told we will be formally interviewed, whether or not what the idea of what I propose would be in breach of British law."

Dr Nitschke, from Darwin (Isn't that the name of the guy who came up with 'Survival of the Fittest'...How very apt!), administered lethal injections to end four patients's lives after voluntary euthanasia was made legal in Australia's Northern Territory in 1996. The Australian federal government overturned the law nine months later.

Mark Stephens, Dr Nitschke's lawyer, said misinformation had been spread about the medic's visit to Britain. He said he was due to give pro-euthanasia talks to groups of supporters of his organisation, and although he had invented a computer which would allow terminally ill people to take their own life, he does not have such a machine with him. He added: "We've had a film of someone going to Switzerland and dying, which is a stage further down the road than Dr Nitschke who is just giving talks."

His attempt to visit the UK comes two months after Peter and Penelope Duff died in an assissted sucide at the controversial Dignitas clinic in Zurich.

Alex Russell, the vicar of Pennington and chaplain of the Oak Haven Hospice in Lymington, Hants, said: "I'm not happy about the views that he expresses or these so-called suicide workshops. The difficulty may be if people who are psychologically unable to think as clearly as they might, or people who are still quite young and forming their opinions, might be influenced by him inappropriately. Clearly, if he is contravening a law then he has to be stopped. As a hospice chaplain I have had contact with several patients who because of long-term chronic conditions have attempted to take their own lives. In every case they have said afterwards that they are glad to be alive and they're glad it didn't work."

A spokesman for the Home Office confirmed that Dr Nitschke had been detained at Heathrow but declined to comment further.

He was told his workshops 'could be' in breach of British law. 'Could be?!' 'Could be?' His workshops are in breach of British law. He intends to sell suicide kits just 5 yards from the Brighton YMCA, home to some of the most depressed and vulnerable individuals in Brighton!

Apparently, he found it 'distressing' being interviewed by British Police on his arrival in the UK. When he comes to Brighton, I, and all the men and women I can gather are going to make his 'suicide workshop' as uncomfortable an occasion for him, as we humanly can, without breaking the law. Myself and some friends will be making our presence felt outside the Brighthelm Centre when Dr Death arrives. You are welcome to join us.

It might be worth bombarding St Joseph Benedict Labre with prayers requesting intercession, patron of the homeless, and St Christina the Astonishing, patroness of those with mental illness.

Evil triumphs when good men do nothing!

Bravo, Damian Thompson!





To which mast are you going to nail your flag?

Damian Thompson has done a good piece on the LGBT Masses at Warwick Street, Soho. It is interesting, whenever his comments box is flagging and news is not particularly, 'hot', if he does a piece on homosexuality and the Church he easily gets past 200 comments.

Clearly, the Masses, even on Holy Smoke, where one would expect to find a chorus of conservative disapproval and murmuring of reactionaries saying, 'Bloody queers!' under their breath, there are some in the lion's den defending the Masses.

According to Damian at Holy Smoke, this is an official ministry of the Diocese of Westminster. Let me quote from the press release:

'After the Mass, there will be a cutting of a specially made rainbow-coloured cake.

This lively community also includes a younger adults group and enables all who take part in the Masses various ways to grow in their faith and integrate this with their sexual orientation.

The 1st and 3rd Sunday celebrations offer a model of the kind of inclusive, welcoming community the Church aims to be.

"This is no holy-huddle or gay ghetto! We aim to be the kind of community pictured in the Church's earliest history, truly Catholic and universal, in welcoming a great richness of God's rainbow people where people of all sorts of background are welcomed. The difference is that our LGBT reality is recognised and named" the SMPC's Chairperson, Joe Stanley said.'

Let's be clear. These Masses are indefensible...perfectly patronising, childish and most important, divisive, rather than inclusive. I mean, can you imagine after Mass, when they go to the pub or have a coffee in the Presbytery, the conversation.

"Why are you here mate?"

"I'm here because I am a homosexual"

"Why did you come to Mass tonight?"

"Because I'm a lesbian."

"What about you?"

"Because I'm a transgendered."

"And you?"

"Because I, am a bisexual."

"Really? Crikey! Did anyone here come to Mass because they are Catholics!? Also, if this Mass is so inclusive, why can't I see any straight people here!?"

That's one good reason Brighton's 'Gay Scene' is so naff...It's full of men...largely only men...what's friendly and inclusive about that? Like, what about the other half of humanity! Holy Mother Church is Universal and inclusive. We don't have to go about shouting about how inclusive we are and how every kind of person and every kind of sinner is to be found in the pews. That is the reality. The Church preaches Salvation to all. The message of Salvation is not specific to any particular 'community'. The Church doesn't need to say, '...here is a special salvation for the gays, the bi's, the transgendered and the lesbians.' The Church is not the local town Council. We don't need equal opportunities!

Friday, May 1, 2009

Family Plot



Another day, another Hitchcock film. Today we'll be taking a look at Hitch's final film, the comic thriller Family Plot (1976). Family Plot is generally ranked in the bottom tier of Hitch's work, for whatever reason - the slight plot? The lack of big-name glamorous stars? Like Topaz, it has been unfairly maligned by critics as a general rule, when it really is a fun, entertaining ride - at the very least it's more enjoyable than our previous Hitchcock film. It's more Charade than North By Northwest, but that's not a bad thing.

Blanche Tyler (Barbara Harris) is a fake "psychic" who runs a con-game with her cab driver boyfriend George (Bruce Dern), swindling money off of old, rich widows. However, when one of her clients (Cathleen Nesbit) offers a reward of $10,000 to find her illegitimate nephew - the heir to the family's fortune - Blanche and George engage in a major investigation, finding their job not as easy as it may seem, given that the heir is presumably dead. Unfortunately, Barbara and George find that he is very much alive - only now he's posing under the name Arthur Adamson (William Devane), who along with his girlfriend (Karen Black) is running a lucrative business of kidnapping and extortion.

Family Plot is very slight in content; it lacks the style and depth that characterize Hitchcock's best films. It's Hitchcock lite, but it's much more enjoyable in this regard than many of Hitchcock's other day at the beach films (To Catch a Thief and the remake of The Man Who Knew Too Much). The film is consistently funny and well-written, allowing Hitch to indulge his dark sense of humor to the fullest. The movie is basically a very dark comedy of errors, expertly plotted by Hitchcock and screenwriter Ernest Lehman, the surprisingly intricate and clever plot providing. George and Blanche's oblivious investigations bring them in touch with a very dangerous criminal - and yet, they are extremely successful at their con game, making them interesting and sympathetic protagonists. The film only becomes truly dark towards the end, when Blanche and George find themselves in mortal peril, but it's very much in keeping with the rest of the film.

Hitchcock's direction is good if unspectacular: the movie isn't driven so much by direction as the plot and characters, which are expertly drawn. John Williams provides a nice early-career score. As with Frenzy, Hitchcock makes great use of a B-list economy cast: Bruce Dern is excellent as the faux-detective George, Barbara Harris is hysterical as the fake psychic Blanche, William Devane is appropriately slimy and menacing as Adamson, Karen Black alluring, sexy and sympathetic, and fine supporting performances are provided by Ed Lauter, Cathleen Nesbit, Nicholas Colasanto and Katharine Helmond.

Family Plot isn't one of Hitchcock's masterpieces, but it's a fun comic thriller and never really tries to be more than that. Am I saying that it's better than Vertigo? Maybe not artistically, but it's sure more enjoyable.

Rating: 8/10 - Highly Recommended