There have been various articles, posts and blogs written about the political messages appearing in Wall-E. This begs two questions. Are there left-wing political messages in the film? And if there are, does it really matter?

First off, I have to preface this by saying I loved Wall-E. It’s a smart and fun movie made with incredibly detailed animation and impeccable production value. The direction and writing were spot on. Pixar did it again, creating their best film to date.

Second, I did not notice any “left-wing propoganda” in this film upon first viewing. This is a fictional film telling a fictional story. Hundreds of years in the future, mankind has left Earth after it has been overrun by garbage. While in space, living in the lap of luxury, they have become fat and content and don’t realize all that they were missing on Earth.

There are some messages in there. I stress the word messages. That is completely different from propoganda. The first message is: Maybe we shouldn’t be creating so much garbage. The second message is: Maybe we should get outside and exercise more. The third message is maybe our society is focusing too much on consumerism. So what is wrong with that? Three very valid messages that everyone should heed.
Is it wrong to have messages in kid’s films? No. I don’t think so. Kid’s should be exposed to all sorts of information. It’s the parents job to steer them in the right direction. Talk to them about the films they see. Explain to them the ways of the world.

If a child is old enough to see Wall-E and get more out of it than just a cute robot and cool sci-fi action, then that child is old enough to be given a message and be part of the discussion. If they are too young to be exposed to messages that their parent’s don’t provide, they won’t even understand that part of the movie anyway.

I don’t think you can read any more into it then that. It’s just a movie. I have always been a proponent of films being more than films. Of films changing the world. But a piece of art does not force anyone to think a certain way. It just illustrates a message, or an emotion. Or in the case of Wall-E, both.

This film does have messages, and deeper meaning. It presents those messages in an exaggerated sci-fi world with an exaggerated story and characters. But it is just a film. A smart, entertaining and beautiful film that kids and adults will enjoy seeing.

I think the bigger issue in the world is that there are still people around who don’t think the messages in Wall-E are important and relevant, and want to stop artists from expressing themselves.

There are probably about a dozen different types of film-productions being made in America today. I went to the theater three times recently, and saw three distinct types of productions. I felt it would be helpful to briefly review each film and explain what I think the differences are.

Keep in mind that I have absolutely no insider knowledge or experience when it comes to Hollywood. Years of reading and watching films have just taught me a few things that I would like to articulate.

So for now, here are three broad categories:

Big-budget Hollywood Production

It’s summertime, and that means its big-budget summer movie season. It doesn’t get any bigger or greener than The Hulk. This film was exactly what I thought it would be. Entertaining most of the time. A bit tedious in between the action scenes, but each time Edward Norton became LCD-sized, it was invigorating enough to recharge the movie. I enjoyed watching this film in the theater, as did everyone else there.

This type of production is a pure money-maker for the studio. They know that everyone will go see the movie, and they do everything in their power to make sure that nothing in the film is too demanding or too different. No one wants to take any chances when they are spending hundreds of millions of dollars.

The money behind it certainly makes some great actions scenes, but the film is far from great. It’s a throwaway piece of popcorn entertainment, but it did its job. It got me into the theater.

Smaller Hollywood Production

The second film I saw was M. Night Shyamalan’s The Happening. This film was absolutely dreadful. The story of a mysterious event across the east-coast that is causing people to commit suicide, it goes from campy b-horror, to lifetime melodrama, to stupid comedy every few minutes.

With acting that is bad on a legendary scale, this is easily the worst film of the year. An interesting premise with an interesting message ruined by incompetent writing and directing.

This is a smaller budget Hollywood film. The studio realized that spending less money gave them the opportunity to try something a little different. Hopefully the public would take hold of it and it would become another underground hit.

This production is usually a combination of the directors vision, and the studios supervision. They will allow the director to make his or her film, but they will be in control of the final product. Changing and adjusting it so that it will make the maximum amount of money possible.

If the director is good, the film will usual work unless the studio makes a horrible mistake. If the director is bad, then you will get The Happening.

Independant Film

The best film of the three is The Fall. This is the brilliant tale of a injured stuntman in a 1930’s hospital. He befriends a little girl and tells her increasingly elaborate stories in order to get her to steal him morphine to commit suicide with. The stories are elaborate visual fantasies that star the members of the hospital. It’s all very inventive and beautiful, and the performance of the little girl, Catinca Untaru, is just amazing.

The director, Tarsem, made this film with his own money, and was able to bring his unique vision to the screen, un-altered. There was no studio intervention. He wrote, directed, and and produced it. This is why the film is so out there and so different. He did what he wanted to do, and was concerned about the film, not about the money it would bring in. The result is truly unique and inspiring.

The problem with the Independent film is that most people will never get to see it. There may be not enough money for the production value to be at a high enough standard, and there might not be enough money to give it a decent release. Companies may be scared to buy the rights because the subject matter or style is so different. Also, if the director is bad, there is no studio around to save the film. A poor artist will create a poor film.

On the other hand, the reason independent film can be so good, is that a great artist can create a great film, without someone else ruining it.

I feel like I have to stand up for a film that has recently hit the theaters. Critics seem to hate it, kids seems to hate it. When I mentioned I have seen it, people assume that I thought it was bad even though they themselves haven’t seen it. It was a critical and financial failure, but I loved it. The movie is called Speed Racer, and its the first movie from the Wachowski brothers since the horrendous Matrix sequels.

Going in, I was excited to see a colorful cartoonish romp on the big screen. But I was worried, based on early reviews, that the script would be nonsensical and the action unintelligible. On the contrary. When the film began to roll, I was enthralled from the first minute to the last. It’s an incredible feat of film-making and storytelling. Yes, storytelling.

I won’t tell you with the details of the plot. I would, however, say that the story is too advanced for children. Most of them will not understand the twists, the character motivation, the corporate intrique. For what has been perceived as a kid’s film, the story and characters are very full and well-rounded. Motivations are clear and meaningful. The script builds up well to the intense action scenes and the film really balances them with the drama. Family and honor. Death and desire. It’s heady stuff for a candy-colored action extravaganza.

What’s great, is that it never plays like an action film. It essentially is a drama. The intense race scenes are excellent and fit well, but where the film really shines is making those races integral and meaningful to the plot. Nothing feels tacked on. It’s an amazing mix where everything fits perfectly together.

I think people are ignoring the script and focusing on the style. The style is great. Live-action anime. Just like you would imagine, visually, except buoyed even more by the deft direction and writing. I was emotionally invested in the characters and story the entire time, which made the race scenes that much better.

Watching this film in the theater was amazing. I felt like crying during the emotional family scenes. The acting is spot on, turning the cartoonish characters into real people. Emile Hirsch, John Goodman, Susan Sarandon, and Christina Ricci all have the look and the talent to make characters with names like “Speed Racer” and “Pops Racer” and “Trixie” feel real. During the race scenes, I felt like jumping up and cheering. I cannot begin to imagine how the Wachowski’s created such a look and style, and did it without dispensing of the story and emotion.

I have raved about this film, and people think I’m crazy. The funny thing is, everyone who thinks I’m crazy hasn’t even seen it. Don’t dismiss this film. It is an advanced work made with considerable talent and heart. I think I know the reason it isn’t making any money and getting bad reviews. The story is far too advanced for young children. They won’t appreciate the intricacies and construction of the plot. And adults and critics are dismissing it because of the crazy visual style and the fact that it is based on an old kid’s cartoon.

Just give it a chance. It’s a film that deserves to be seen in the theater. I got swept up in the world and story the filmmakers created. From the brilliant setup to the amazing, invigorating ending. I can quite confidently say, knowing that I will be ridiculed, that it is by far the Wachowski brother’s best film to date.

No, no matter how much LCD wishes it was true, this is not a new Olympic sport. The film is called Water Lilies, and it’s directed by Celine Sciamma. It came out in France last year, and its going to get a theatrical release here sometime soon.

The original French title is Naissance des Pieuvres, which translates to “Birth of the Octopuses”. I’m not quite sure where they got that from, or what it actually means in French. But the English title does fit the film.

The story involves a young girl, Marie, struggling with her feelings for an older girl. Marie’s overweight friend, Anne is on a synchronized swim team. During visits to watch her perform, Marie becomes obsessed with Floraine, an older teenager, and the captain of another team.

Anne has her own issues. She yearns to kiss a boy, one in particular, but he happens to be obsessed with bedding Marie. There are never any adults around, and Marie and Anne spend a lot of time together. This changes when Marie starts trying to get close to Floraine.

Floraine has a reputation for being promiscuous. The film hints at affairs she has had with many men. Maybe that is what makes Marie so obsessed with her. The motivations are never clear, and that is where this film falls apart.

Its not that I don’t mind unclear motivations. In fact, thats what drives one of my favorite films. The problem is that the characters in this film do things that feel like they are just to set up some sort of memorable scene.

For example, it feels like the film-makers wanted to make a film full of young teenage sexual tension, so they start the film off with one character already obsessed with another. This leaves out any buildup that would allow the audience to understand more of the characters.

It’s not just the premise. At one point, the older girl, Floraine, falls for another character in the same way. No explanation, it just felt like that was an excuse to get them into bed together, which does happen. Then, after that, she changes her mind again, with no clear reason.

Anne’s story evolves the same way. She is obsessed with a particular boy. They fumble around with sex. Afterwards, she is still obsessed with him, but just before she is about to get the kiss she has longed for she inexplicably changes heart. It’s just too much left unexplained, which really makes the film seemed forced.

The cinematography and directing is great. The film has a nice blue look, and the young girls turn in very great and bold performances. I just felt like the film was exhibiting their young flesh in sexual situations for no other reason than to be edgy and make a memorable film.

It reminded me of Larry Clarke, who makes well-directed films with naked teenagers who give great performances. Water Lilies is the same. It may look good, but without the core of story and character, it falls apart and ends up being an exploitative mess.