What the F*** is Wrong with Japanese Movies Part II

Continuing my slog through some of the easier to find Japanese films populating my list I finally sat down and watched Vampire Hunter D (1985) and Vampire Hunter D: Bloodlust (2000) and Blood: The Last Vampire (2009). While I had been informed both Hunter D movies were on youtube pretty early on, I dragged my feet on them. To put it bluntly, part of it was the fact that they're anime films. I wouldn't go so far as to say I hate anime, I just don't see the appeal.

They were later slain

Animation in the United States, while mostly geared towards children, does come with the sensibilities I have grown accustomed to. The jokes work, the story works, the themes just work. In anime, nearly everything is lost in translation. The jokes don't always work because they come from a different culture with different customs, the story isn't presented with any kind of nuance, at least not in the translation and the themes are often dark, depressing and incredibly bloody. There are of course exceptions. By no means am I saying Spirited Away (2000) or Akira (1988) are bad movies, their are just one too many levels of difficulty in understanding for me to fully enjoy and appreciate them.

All that being said, the Vampire Hunter D movies are both excellent. While they are fifteen years apart, both have an acute attention to detail and imagination to spare. The creatures the titular character has to face are all interesting and often very scary, the secondary characters are all interesting and the themes, while a shade darker than My Neighbor Totoro (1988) are astounding.

If pressed I'd have to say Bloodlust is my favorite of the two. While being more of a chase movie than its predecessor, the love story between the young woman and the villain put an interesting emotional spin that translates very well. The cast is also much larger and their "allegiances" to each other are much stronger this time around. Plus more options were available to the animators as far as cell detail, so it looks a little more completed and doesn't recycle images as often.

While being a mix of post-apocalyptic and Gothic sensibilities the stories are true and true westerns. The 1985 movie is about the mysterious Hunter D arriving in a small hamlet and tries to protect a young woman and her family from the local vampire Count who has the entire town under his influence. Is anyone seeing a few parallels to Shane (1953)? How about in the 2000 movie; Hunter D has to compete with the Marcus brothers for a bounty which involves a girl unwilling to leave her captor. Shades of For a Few Dollars More (1965) and The Searchers (1956) instantly come to mind.

The only way to get to third base by yourself

My only real quarrel with both movies is the "Left Hand" character who is essentially a super-powered talking mouth possessing Hunter D's hand. Not so much the character himself, though he can occasionally be an obnoxious troll; I just want to know a little bit more about him/it. How did Hunter D come across such a parasite? Is it a parasite or is it some kind of spirit or demon? How can the main character find any sort of privacy living with a face in his palm? We're never made privy to this information.

You got a better agent? What's his name?

I would readily recommend both movies unlike another Japanese vampire film I had the misfortune of seeing. The film was called Blood: The Last Vampire (2009). I won't spend too much time on it because I barely remember anything about it...and I just watched it. Allegedly based on an anime series, the live-action adaptation is an absolute waste of 90 minutes. Its a B-movie whose random assemblage of parts are completely unoriginal and boring. Avoid it if you can.

What the F*** is Wrong with Japanese Movies?

Ten days late and a few dollars short, I finally managed to get to the halfway point of my movie watching journey. On more than a couple of occasions now I have debated giving up on the list and going back to my regular watching schedule. But just like the time I took a vow of silence for a week, I am simply too stubborn to submit, even though all of this was my idea.

Fun Fact: Monkeys throw poo

There are a couple of films I watched a while ago that I haven't yet mentioned. Those films are Bronson (2008), Animals (2008), When Good Ghouls Go Bad (2001), Centurion (2010) and Pirates! Band of Misfits (2012). I won't spend too much time on them since they don't exactly go with the theme of this entry. I will say that Pirates! Band of Misfits is by far my favorite of the five. I watched the midnight premiere with my girlfriend and besides us there was only one person present. It kind of makes me question the wisdom of having a midnight premiere for a movie geared towards kids with a 10pm curfew.

The film was good for a family film; I try to avoid monikers like "kids films" because I personally find it insulting. Kids film is essentially code for: parents will hate this and children will learn nothing from this. Cats & Dogs: The Revenge of Kitty Galore (2010) is a kids film. Hop (2011) is a kids film. When Good Ghouls Go Bad is a kids film; Pirates! is a family film accessible to all, if a little too silly for its own good.

Now, on to the main event. I sat down and watched two movies both recommended to me by an acquaintance I used to work with. My first encounters with him involved long, mostly one way conversations about Anime porn. Needless to say he was slightly off-putting at first. That being said he recommended quite a few movies I added to the list, most of which are Japanese or Korean. I accepted them largely because I am not well acquainted with Asian cinema...that and he assured me they weren't porn. Yo-Yo Girl Cop (2006) does have a softcore parody of it out there somewhere, because, why the hell not? The movie's lesbian undertones and ridiculously rendered action sequences are ripe for parody but I'm getting ahead of myself.

You're just never going to make this look cool so why try?

 Yo-Yo Girl Cop starts with the incarceration and attempted escape of a juvenile delinquent (Aya Matsuura) deported from America. A mysterious group known simply as "K" believe she has the necessary skills and motivations to infiltrate a terrorist cell within a local high school. Do they train her? No. Do they give her a gun to protect herself? No. Do they give her information on possible suspects? No. They do give her a sexy school girl outfit and a yo-yo...so there's that.

For as ludicrous a title as Yo-Yo Girl Cop you'd think that it'd at least live up to its premise. There is a girl and she is a cop of sorts but the yo-yo is largely absent until the inevitable final showdown. The first time she brings it out she hits herself in the face which made me convulse in laughter. In fact, the film's only saving grace is the inclusion of so many sporadically and unintentionally funny moments. Characters get thrown around like rag dolls by semi-decent martial arts while bombs explode with all the might of Microsoft Movie Maker. In one spectacularly perfect slapstick moment, the main character outright face-plants into a pile of gravel and rubble leaving me and the friend I saw it with to laugh until we couldn't breathe.

Not to mention every make-up shop in Tokyo

On the flip-side Tokyo Gore Police (2008) was not funny in the least. Not even unintentionally. It was however, incredibly gross. Knowing the title won't prepare you for the sheer amount of fake severed limbs and blood that squirt and drench everything within a twenty foot radius. Somewhere in Japan there is a Kool-Aid factory that's missing more than a few shipments.

aka the Party Bus!!!

In fairness to such a film, I'm not a big fan of blood, guts and gore in films. At least not gratuitous amounts of it. I say this so you know where I'm coming from. But in addition to being languished in violence, the film is also just plain stupid. The characters are stupid, the plot is stupid and the concept; about a mutant hunter becoming the hunted, is also just stupid. You may be a big time fan of retched horror like this so therefore you aren't swayed by whatever petty insults I can lob at this bomb. Just keep in mind that if you decide to watch it, and despite its crudeness you enjoy it, you may need to seek psychiatric help. That or start taking the short bus to school.

Chapter 27: The Muddled Morals of Movies

While enjoying some spare time between the hustle and bustle of a record-breaking theatrical weekend, I sat down and watched Aaah! Zombies (2007). Also known as Wasting Away, the film was creative in its high-concept. A group of twenty-somethings are infected by a top secret military serum and turned into lifeless zombies. They don't realize what has happened and the entire movie is told from their perspective as they slowly realize they have become the living dead. Some of the in-jokes can be a little contrived and silly (you don't think something is amiss when you're eating human brains?) but everything for the most part was decent if inconsequential.

We Want Equality!...and brains

 When the group finally realize it isn't the rest of the world that's gone mad but them, the movie makes a half-serious attempt at a civil rights message. Zombies were people too, and shouldn't be persecuted for being different. Whoa? Don't get me wrong I'm all for civil rights but zombies aren't exactly known for their co-mingling abilities. Plus unlike other groups suffering from discrimination, you're not really born a zombie, you become one and most of the time its against your will.

If anything, Aaah Zombies! got me thinking about other movies with questionable lessons. Movies that, despite being of high caliber explain things in just such a way as to make you cock your head. Need a few examples?

Scent of a Woman (1992)
Scent of a Woman concerns a prep school student named Charlie (Chris O'Donnell) who takes on a job taking care of a blind ex-colonel (Al Pacino) over the holidays, to pay for his school expenses. What is supposed to be a pretty easy babysitting job turns into a three day excursion into New York City involving Tango, Ferrari racing and an awkward family dinner.

Why do the kids at Hogwarts get all the cool stuff?

While trying his best to keep up, Charlie's mind is occupied by his shaky standing with the school's dean who has threatened him with expulsion. Charlie had been witness to a ballsy practical joke conducted by the school wise-ass (Philip Seymour Hoffman) and his friends. The usually straight and narrow Charlie is torn on whether or not he should tell on them. Spoiler alert! He doesn't; and faces a dramatic disciplinary hearing in front of the whole school. Al Pacino shows his face and makes a heartfelt speech in defense of Charlie's honor, the hearing members back down, case closed.

If the kid don't snitch you must acquit, hoohah!

So what exactly is wrong with this picture? Well it's basically a diatribe against informing authorities of wrong doing disguised as a platitude about honor. Charlie risks absolutely everything for a group of guys who aren't too keen on him and honors his promise not to narc, even when he's screwed over in the end...all for what? For a moral code that can be best summed up as "no one likes a tattle-tale." This is exactly the mentality of neighborhoods riddled with gang and mob violence and arguably the biggest reason why it takes officials so damn long to prosecute dangerous criminals. Granted going to the opposite logical extreme isn't much better but its not like Charlie was protecting the French Underground.

What up, comrade?

The moral of On the Waterfront (1954) is the perfect example of a lesson that is diametrically opposed to the one posited by Scent of a Woman. Watch them both side by side and see which one you would agree with more. What? On the Waterfront was director Elia Kazan's response to those who accused him of narking on supposed communists during the red scare? Never mind.

The Lion King (1994)

...And that is why poor people must remain poor son

Hear me out. At the beginning of the movie Mufasa brought Simba to the top of Pride Rock and explained the hierarchy like this; "When we die, our bodies become the grass, and the antelope eat the grass. And so we are all connected in the great Circle of Life." If you ask me the antelope still get a bum deal but his basic point is you must have respect for the balanced system that has and will always exist.

Hyenas however don't have a say in this balance and are forced to live in deteriorating conditions and scavenge on the outskirts of the kingdom. Now along comes an ambitious revolutionary named Scar who wants to include them among the lions. True Scar was also motivated by his desire to be king but as the sequel showed, its not like he didn't already have his supporters among the pride. Scar could have used them in his plans to kill Mufasa and Simba. Failing that he could have just started the stampede himself! So why would he include the hyenas? Simple, because he was a genuine political game-changer and had a clear vision for organizing his kingdom. Distribute the wealth sort of speak. This is seen as absolutely evil? He kept Zazoo around so he couldn't have been all bad.

Simba was gone for about five years (lion's manes are fully grown by five). A lot could have happened in that time. There could have been a great amount of food until that last year. Simba could have just arrived at the tail end of the dry season and the pride just didn't think things through. A mistake, sure but not a coup-able offense. Scar could have also inherited a lot of the problems from Mufasa. He may have been a good father but a shitty king; after all he kept Scar around. However the movie paints Scar as absolutely evil and his reign as a bleak and terrible time when the balance was disrupted. So the lesson then is don't rock the boat.

Lets face it, there are too many "rights"

Dirty Harry (1971)
A San Francisco detective known as Dirty Harry Callahan (Clint Eastwood) kick ass and takes names with little regard for the rules or human rights. Things however get messy when he comes face to face with The Scorpio Killer. Because Harry searches Scorpio's home (a hobble in Kezar stadium) without a warrant and tortures him to find the location of a victim he buried alive, Scorpio is let go to kill again. You can probably guess what the moral of the story is. Fuck habeus corpus and criminal rights.  Now anyone who doesn't know a thing about the law would probably rant and rave about the "stupid" rights criminals have in our country. "There is just too much red tape dammit!" they would exclaim.

Such luxury

First off, time restrains, like the one posed by a victim being buried alive is considered probable cause to search someone's living quarters. It's a legal precedent known as "running out of time." Secondly, if the D.A. was smart (as I like to think most are) he would have shaved off the charges that provided questionable evidence. Worst case scenario that still would have left three cases of 1st degree murder! But lets leave out the improper application of the law for a moment. Lets say everything that is presented in the film is completely accurate; a serial killer can walk out of a police station scott free because a vigilante cop went ape shit on him and the amount of red tape protecting criminals is staggering. There is this pesky thing called the Bill of Rights that explicitly enumerates criminal rights. Specifically the fourth Amendment which states: "The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation...". That's a lot to overcome when the moral of the story is criminals are just too pampered.

Frankenstein (1994)
The lesson I felt was brought forth was essentially, the human impulse for discovery is a hollow and dangerous pursuit. There are just some things only God is meant to do or know. I already discussed Frankenstein in a previous article so I won't go into too much detail. There's a youtube clip featuring Neil deGrasse Tyson which I feel best sums up my feelings about Frankenstein so here it is.

Yea, I'm kind of a big deal

Ferris Bueller's Day Off (1986)
Ferris Bueller (Matthew Broderick) is probably one of the most gleefully egocentric main characters to ever exist in mainstream cinema. On the surface, Ferris is just a upper middle-class white boy who wants to have some fun. Nothing wrong so far except the fact that he's a psychopath. What really gets to me is his complete disregard for his friends; his lady Sloane (Mia Sara) and the deathly ill Cameron (Alan Ruck).

jackass won't even let me drive

The day starts after Ferris pretends to be sick then calls Cameron who is at home bedridden. He doesn't want to go on an excursion which is reasonable given the fact he's white as a sheet, but Ferris basically bullies him into not only going, but boosting his dad's prized Ferrari. Sloane (yeah I didn't know that was her name either) is a bit more willing but certainly didn't have plans to skip school on that fateful day. She was likely shoehorned at the last minute because Cameron was too much of a damp towel to let loose in Chicago. You basically know the rest of the story, they go to the city, con their way into a four star restaurant, ruin a parade, total the car and Ferris gets away with everything. So the lesson is essentially, its okay to run amok and treat your friends like shit; so long as you have a good time doing it.


Sleepers (1996)

And they turn into perfectly adjusted adults

I have plenty more examples but I'll give you just one more. Sleepers tells the tale of four Hell's Kitchen yutes who are sent to a reform school after a prank goes horribly wrong nearly killing a man. There they are raped and abused by a group of guards which include Kevin Bacon in the creepiest role of his career. Years later two of the four boys are accused of killing Kevin Bacon and its up to the other two to help them out.

You know the old saying the truth shall set you free? Yeah that doesn't really happen here. Not that "he raped me" is a justification for murder...well not a foolproof one anyway. The two guys not accused of murder conspire with underground elements, falsify evidence and even involve a priest (Robert De Niro) in their web of lies. To make matters worse, the one played by Brad Pitt works for the D.A. office and is the freakin' prosecuting attorney for the case! Someone should have told these four men revenge and justice are not one in the same, and breaking nearly every code of ethics to get that revenge is probably one of the most backwards moral of all.

Chapter 26: The Midnight Screening

For those who don't know or don't remember, I work at a movie theater. As a movie theater employee I have seen the horrors of a midnight premiere from the other side of the concession stand counter one too many times. Those who have been to a theater on a busy night can no doubt recall a handful of long irksome lines you've had to deal with. Times that by a hundred and you have a midnight premiere to a summer blockbuster. At least after you get your popcorn and drinks you have the ability to walk away. We have no such luxury and have to contend with a barrage of hungry, excited, and/or slightly pissed off customers all at the same time, all wanting an ever decreasing supply of shovel ready snack foods they can't afford.

Working there however does have its perks. Free movies are a plus of course, but that privilege isn't exactly a boastful bonus to the gaggles of crafty minors who sneak in through the back doors. No the real treat is once in a blue moon we get to screen movies before they're released! This does not happen all the time. Back before the digital age when projectionists had to hand splice the reels, volunteers would stay after work to watch the movie just to make sure all the reels are functioning properly and in the right order. I must admit, I volunteered often and got to see a lot of movies days ahead, though sometimes it really wasn't worth it. Anyone ever seen 2010's Chain Letter? Don't. Because our projectors were switched out in favor of sleek new digital models, screenings have gone the way of the dodo. That is unless a manager is willing to stay behind a couple extra hours so you can catch a sneak peak of something. Those instances are rare as no sane person would stay after work until 2am and not get paid. Most nights they just wouldn't do that, but in the case of The Avengers (2012), more than one was willing to make an exception. So with a tight knit group of theater employees all wearing IMAX glasses and munching on snacks, we sat down as the lights dimmed and watched one of the most anticipated movies of the summer before anybody else.

Defense budget well spent!

I'll try not to ruin too much for you though interested parties will no doubt know the basic plot. A group of super-people; Captain America/Steve Rogers (Chris Evans), Iron Man/Tony Stark (Robert Downey Jr.), Thor/...Thor (Chris Hemsworth) and The Incredible Hulk/Bruce Banner (Mark Ruffalo) are brought together by a top secret task force known as S.H.I.E.L.D. to form a super team known as The Avengers. S.H.I.E.L.D., headed by superspy Nick Fury (Samuel L. Jackson) and a huge, expensive looking, airborne armada, face a serious threat in the form of super-villain Loki (Tom Hiddleston). Can The Avengers' divergent personalities come together to face such a large external threat? If they do, will the audience care?

The answer is of course yes, and yes. The Avengers is less of a movie than it is a dazzling visual experience. My bet is those who lived in the time of 5 cent Captain America comics would have their minds blown by the sheer size and grandior of this flick. Its big, its bold and it delivers. But enough with general platitudes. What specifically makes The Avengers such great summer fare? Well for one it takes four characters who have dawned their own movie franchises and brings them together for the first time. Since we all know their origins, their powers and their basic personalities, this spin-off is in a unique position to expand the world in which these superheroes exist. This world of course has a lot of explosions and movie monsters, but it also has a fair amount of heart and humor.

...and of course some required T & A

All due credit must be given to its smart script provided by Joss Whedon and Zak Penn who seemed to have had just as much fun writing the movie as I did watching it. Every scene has a purpose and nearly every joke hits its mark. That not to say the movie is all fun and games. The movie wisely shines a light on the back story of Black Widow (Scarlett Johansson) and Hawkeye (Jeremy Renner), two characters who have been largely in the shadows in the past. This allows, especially Black Widow's character arc to become the convincing emotional core of the film. There is one confrontation between Black Widow and Loki that provided no whizz-bang vulgarities but nonetheless was an uncommonly dark and emotionally charged moment. One I wouldn't expect from such an unabashedly popcorny flick.

Be honest, is it too much?

The character of Loki has improved greatly from the last time we saw him in Thor (2011). I found him a bit too unassuming and snively to really be threatening in 2011. This year however Tom Hiddleston has wisely cranked the diva dial up to 11 and lets loose. Its hard not to soak up all his bravura. Or Samuel L. Jackson's for that matter. He's supposed to be Nick Fury and god love him for trying but he'll always be Samuel L. and that's not all together a bad thing.

There are however some slight faults to this otherwise solid film. I know its unfair since The Avengers is a sequel of sorts but there seemed to be too little development or back story about our main heroes. I don't want to say that those who haven't seen the other Marvel movies will be completely lost but I doubt they'll have the same emotional investment in the characters coming in from the cold. A few lines of exposition without them sharing witty banter would have been enough; I'm not greedy. Also, and this is just my personal bias, Mark Ruffalo did his best but I was not convinced he was Bruce Banner. His lax, California, too-cool-for-school delivery just didn't mesh well with the sci-fi jargon he and Tony Stark were spewing.

Regardless of a few shortcomings, The Avengers is a profoundly entertaining movie with great action, great acting and a fun script. It sets the new gold standard comic-book superhero films have to reach in the years to come. Watch it, then watch it again.