Legion – The Worst Movie I Ever Loved

02.08.2010

There’s spoilers in this review. I’m far too lazy to install some sort of onClick or onMouseOver javascript thingy on my blog. I’m going to mark the spoilers, but if hearing about movies before you see them bothers you, you might want to skip this.

Alright, this movie was awesome. I’m hard pressed to think of a time I enjoyed rolling my eyes and groaning so much.

First off, the acting was horrible. Even though the special effects looked like they had to have been expensive, they used a lot of those editing tricks of the scary B-movies of old that were meant to save money, but in this case I think it’s more homage than limited budget. The plot was silly, and even though I don’t normally dig horror movies that pick off the cast one by one (totally a George A. Ramero rip-off/tribute), the whole movie was fun in spite of itself. It’s like junk food. I enjoyed it in the same way I enjoyed Janet Evonavich books. It’s junk food for the mind. Salty, fried, greasy mind food.

I didn’t expect to enjoy a movie about an Archangel, and yet I did. The thing is, I think that in the same way that a religious person would like Book of Eli, this movie might very well offend followers of Abrahamic religions. I’m an outsider, so I can only imagine how much this movie would piss of religious people, but you see, the plot of this movie is…

[spoilers below]

The god of the Bible/Torah/Old testament exists, as do his army of angels led by his Archangel generals like Michael and Gabriel. As an atheist, I always say “If you really believe that the God of the old testament really did the things in the Bible, like the Great Flood, how can you have any respect for such a cruel and unjust creature, let alone worship him?” In this movie, God is the bad guy, and his zombie minions of terror are none other than his loyal angels.

Although it ends with the unseen, but often referenced, God being somewhat redeemed. he is portrayed as a literal interpretation of the God of Abraham with all the human-like flaws that non-believers like me see in that interpretation. He’s the kind of person who is a slave to his emotions and known for throwing out the baby with the bathwater (or flood water), but you can kind of relate. I mean, if I was as powerful as God and lost faith in humanity, I just might be so corrupt from my power that I would have a “Kill ’em all and let Me sort ’em out” mentality. I’m a little surprised I haven’t heard more outrage over a movie where God and his Army of Heaven are unmistakably the villains.

There’s a couple vague plot devices that never make sense or are explained. Maybe I’ll find more satisfaction listening to the commentary track on the DVD.

A Mountain By Any Other Name

02.03.2010

Man Wants Mt. Diablo To Be Mt. Reagan

I was alerted to this news story when I saw one of those adorable Facebook groups that people join to protest things, support things and try to get 1,000,000 people for the sake of getting 1,000,000 people. I saw a lot of alarmist posts from freaked-out people, but I didn’t want to dignify the group by joining it so I could calm some very angry people.

So I’m doing it here.

Mt. Diablo is not “going to be renamed Mt Reagan.”

There, don’t you feel better? The beautiful and famous sticky-uppy-groundy thing in the San Francisco Bay Area’s Contra Costa county is going to keep it’s name. It was never in danger of being anything except “Mount Diablo”. Not “Mt. Yahweh”. Not “Mt. Miwuk”. Not even “Mt. Ohlone”, which I even kind of like. Definitely not “Mt. Reagan”.

It’s one guy. He’s been filing paperwork on this for five years and has gotten nowhere. He’s really, really into the Big Jeezy, and having a mountain whose name references the devil offends him to no end. (And it’s in Spanish… the language of PASSION. That makes the mountain like three times as sinful.)

The proposals were all rejected. Though he was always given the polite courtesy and consideration of any concerned citizen filling out the proper forms and filing them correctly in the name of trying to change something about his community, none of his attempts were ever given serious consideration. Unfortunately, one of the times he made a suggestion the people doing the rejecting were lazy and instead of tossing it out on the grounds that “there is no compelling reason to change the name at this time”, they tossed out his Mt. Reagan suggestion because Ronald Reagan hadn’t been dead long enough.

And that’s why it’s in the news again. Since President Ronald Reagan has finally been dead long enough, he’s put in some more paperwork. It was in the news before. Remember? It’s still Mt. Diablo, just for the record. This too will end in Mt. Diablo staying Mt. Diablo.

Your historical geological feature and its history remains safe. Worry not, Northern California. March 31st will be the first day of the rest of Mt. Diablo’s life as Mt. Diablo.

The guy makes my brain hurt, and I could probably double the length of this article by making fun of him or getting my panties in a bunch about oversensitive busy-bodies. I mean, he cites his religion as the reason for his offense with the name, so does he not realize that the people who named the mountain in the mid-1800s were also very much Christian? I won’t be too hard on Mr. Mijares. See, I appreciate a person who actively and tenaciously uses the system as it was designed in order to change something. For that, he gets a dash of respect from me.

Mr. Burns: “Welcome fellow Republicans. To start on new business, brother Hibbert will read a report on our efforts to rename everything after Ronald Reagan.”
Dr. Hibbert: “All Millard Fillmore schools are now Ronald Reagan. The Mississippi River is now the Mississippi Reagan.”

When you think about it, Mt. Reagan really isn’t a bad choice. I mean, of all the people up in arms, freaking out as if there is even the slightest chance for a name change, who amongst them DOESN’T think Ronald Reagan was the devil?