<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:wfw="http://wellformedweb.org/CommentAPI/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	xmlns:slash="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/slash/"
	>

<channel>
	<title>Obsessed With Film &#187; Unfiltered Lens</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.obsessedwithfilm.com/category/unfiltered-lens/feed" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.obsessedwithfilm.com</link>
	<description>Movie News, Movie Reviews and Movie Trailers</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Sat, 21 Nov 2009 08:52:32 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.8.5</generator>
	<language>en</language>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
			<item>
		<title>On REPULSION And Roman Polanski</title>
		<link>http://www.obsessedwithfilm.com/reviews/on-repulsion-and-roman-polanski.php</link>
		<comments>http://www.obsessedwithfilm.com/reviews/on-repulsion-and-roman-polanski.php#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Mon, 13 Jul 2009 18:04:30 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Ray DeRousse</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Review]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Reviews]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Unfiltered Lens]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Catherine Deneuve]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Chinatown]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Repulsion]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Roman Polanski]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.obsessedwithfilm.com/?p=24985</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Filmmaking is  a collaborative process typically involving hundreds of people, and often it shows in the finished product. Most films seem to be made-by-committee products, rather than personal statements. Perhaps that's why truly visionary directors receive so much praise, because their talents can transcend the din of collaboration and create something personal and unique.

Of such directors, Roman Polanski is near the top. Regardless of your feelings about his films, it's obvious that the man puts himself onscreen, warts and all. His films pulse with a nervous and psychotic energy. Most Polanski films start off slow, and then unravel into a psychological or sociological madness. As much as any director in history, Polanski's films reflect the inner mental and sexual turmoil of the man himself.

I do not consider myself a fan of Polanski or his films. Of the ones I have seen, my favorite is CHINATOWN (although that had a perfect script), followed by ROSEMARY'S BABY (thanks to a mesmerizing Mia Farrow performance). Polanski's post-scandal films have been largely a mess; TESS and PIRATES are ridiculously over-praised, and THE NINTH GATE is a joke. I thought THE PIANIST was his finest film since CHINATOWN. Generally, though, I do not like Polanski's ...]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.obsessedwithfilm.com/reviews/on-repulsion-and-roman-polanski.php/feed</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>8</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>MACGRUBER And The End Of Modern Civilization</title>
		<link>http://www.obsessedwithfilm.com/ryan-phillipe/macgruber-and-the-end-of-modern-civilization.php</link>
		<comments>http://www.obsessedwithfilm.com/ryan-phillipe/macgruber-and-the-end-of-modern-civilization.php#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 08 Jul 2009 15:56:12 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Ray DeRousse</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Unfiltered Lens]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Val Kilmer]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[ryan-phillipe]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[ANL]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Lorne Michaels]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[MacGruber]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Ryan Phillippe]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Saturday Night Live]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Stop-Loss]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.obsessedwithfilm.com/?p=24954</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Sometimes I pick up the Bible and read it when I'm severely troubled and anxious. For some reason, reading about God killing hundreds of thousands of people through plague, pestilence, and fiery hailstones brings me a sense of comfort and peace.

One passage that always interests me is the book of Revelation, and its terrifying depiction of the end of the world. In my imagination, I wonder what events might lead to the ride of the four horsemen, the battle of Armageddon, and the new world to come.

Certainly a MACGRUBER movie must play a part, right?



In several lifetimes, you'd be hard-pressed to uncover a sadder or more bewildering news item than the one that The Hollywood Reporter ran today, namely, that Val Kilmer and Ryan Phillippe are in talks to star in a big screen version of the Saturday Night Live short MACGRUBER. The film will hit screens next year, two years before the actual end of civilization predicted by the Mayan calendar.

Almost every single film fashioned from the huge roster of SNL skits has failed miserably. Of them all, only WAYNE'S WORLD succeeded. However, unlike WAYNE'S WORLD, MACGRUBER wasn't even a full-fledged skit. It was a minute long insert to ...]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.obsessedwithfilm.com/ryan-phillipe/macgruber-and-the-end-of-modern-civilization.php/feed</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>4</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>The Problem With Funny In FUNNY PEOPLE</title>
		<link>http://www.obsessedwithfilm.com/unfiltered-lens/the-problem-with-funny-in-funny-people.php</link>
		<comments>http://www.obsessedwithfilm.com/unfiltered-lens/the-problem-with-funny-in-funny-people.php#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 01 Jul 2009 23:20:02 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Ray DeRousse</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Unfiltered Lens]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Adam-Sandler]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Funny People]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Seth-Rogen]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.obsessedwithfilm.com/?p=24897</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[

We all know the old saying: "Dying is easy. Comedy is hard."

Unlike most other genres, comedy taps into something entirely subjective in each audience member. A horror film can trigger our collective "fight or flight" instincts. A drama can force us into painful situations or face uncomfortable realities. A thriller can engage our adrenaline and our mind simultaneously (excluding ANGELS AND DEMONS, of course). But comedy relies on our past and current definitions of funny, and often what makes us laugh is as unique to each of us as our own fingerprint.

Most comedies attempt to make us laugh at absurd situations and comments. The successful ones combine outrageous character moments with endearing business that helps the audience relate to the onscreen antics. Think about your favorite comedies of all time, and you will probably identify with the characters and situations in it. For me, a film like MR. MOM is funny because Michael Keaton's plight is instantly identifiable to men everywhere. TOOTSIE works as a comedy because the situation, no matter how bizarre, plays on our collective understanding of gender roles (not to mention several brilliant performances). Films like KINGPIN or DUMB AND DUMBER appeal to our baser instincts, but ...]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.obsessedwithfilm.com/unfiltered-lens/the-problem-with-funny-in-funny-people.php/feed</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>5</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Don&#8217;t Stop &#8216;Til You Get Enough: Ray Reflects On Michael Jackson</title>
		<link>http://www.obsessedwithfilm.com/unfiltered-lens/dont-stop-til-you-get-enough-ray-reflects-on-michael-jackson.php</link>
		<comments>http://www.obsessedwithfilm.com/unfiltered-lens/dont-stop-til-you-get-enough-ray-reflects-on-michael-jackson.php#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Fri, 26 Jun 2009 05:27:05 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Ray DeRousse</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Unfiltered Lens]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Bad]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[death]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[dies]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[drugs]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[King of Pop]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Michael Jackson]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[movies]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[music]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[singer]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[The Wiz]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Thriller]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.obsessedwithfilm.com/?p=24770</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[I have never been much of a fan of Michael Jackson or his music. But I am a fan of his talent. And tonight, that talent - including so much unfulfilled potential - disintegrates on a coroner's slab.



From the beginning, Michael Jackson was a star. As a six year old, he fronted a band with the raw sexuality and charisma of a person many decades older. As he grew into adulthood, his fame grew to astronomical proportions while his self-esteem shrunk inversely. Despite the bewildering successes he achieved in his life - massive albums like THRILLER and BAD, generous charitable organizations, and culturally-defining moments of pure performance - Jackson's promise remained strangely unfulfilled.

It is a lesson to those generations most affected by Jackson's enormous influence : Never wait on what you could do today.  While most of us do not have the opportunity to have the kind of stunning and unique talents that Jackson once possessed, each one of us has gifts to contribute to the world, or at least our smaller version of it.  It's easy to become distracted by the everyday cares of life. But sadder than the loss of life itself is the loss of what might ...]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.obsessedwithfilm.com/unfiltered-lens/dont-stop-til-you-get-enough-ray-reflects-on-michael-jackson.php/feed</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Transformers: Revenge Of The Fallen (Ray&#8217;s Review)</title>
		<link>http://www.obsessedwithfilm.com/reviews/transformers-revenge-of-the-fallen-rays-review.php</link>
		<comments>http://www.obsessedwithfilm.com/reviews/transformers-revenge-of-the-fallen-rays-review.php#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 24 Jun 2009 18:01:18 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Ray DeRousse</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Review]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Reviews]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Unfiltered Lens]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Megan-Fox]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Michael-Bay]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Revenge of the Fallen]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Shia LeBeouf]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Transformers]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.obsessedwithfilm.com/?p=24693</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[First of all, I actually DO realize that TRANSFORMERS: REVENGE OF THE FALLEN is a film about giant alien robots beating the crap out of each other. I get it - it's not supposed to be CITIZEN KANE 2: ELECTRIC BUGALOO.

Even so, it is still a very bad film. Possibly a contender for worst of the year.



The "story" cannot be summed up or even partially described. In fact, I dare anyone - even members of the production itself - to describe the storyline of this film. Phrases like "incomprehensible" or "indecipherable" or "mercy kill me with a hatchet" spring to my pulverized mind. Even the Flying Spaghetti Monster would have difficulty touching a single plot point with his noodly appendage.

But it isn't the fact that the film is just DUMB in terms of having giant robots fight each other. No, the film is DUMB in terms of basic filmmaking attributes like plot and character development, editing, and screenwriting. Let's look at a couple of ridiculous moments to illustrate the point:

1. At the beginning of the film, our "hero" Sam Witwicky (Shia LeBeouf) grabs his old jacket from the first film, and a shard from the energy cube falls out and ...]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.obsessedwithfilm.com/reviews/transformers-revenge-of-the-fallen-rays-review.php/feed</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>24</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Sony Is Puffin&#8217; What???</title>
		<link>http://www.obsessedwithfilm.com/movie-news/sony-is-puffin-what.php</link>
		<comments>http://www.obsessedwithfilm.com/movie-news/sony-is-puffin-what.php#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 03 Jun 2009 15:54:58 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Ray DeRousse</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Movie News]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Unfiltered Lens]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.obsessedwithfilm.com/?p=24185</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[The most subversive children's show ever produced is the infamous H.R. Pufnstuf. The show makes Teletubbies look like Howdy Doody. You can find more cohesive story construction in your average episode of Yo Gabba Gabba.



The show involved a young boy named Jimmy (played by then-star Jack Wild) who is tricked by the evil Witchiepoo into a boat that takes him to a place called Living Island. There he meets a bizarre lizard man/sheriff named H.R. Pufnstuf, who vows to protect Jimmy from the witch's evil clutches.

Oh, and did I mention that Jimmy has a magical "flute" that talks to him??

The show's opening is the longest in history, and gives a little of the flavor of the strange contents of the show:



Show creators Sid and Marty Krofft have insisted for decades that the show was not meant to be secret ode to drug use, but that's obviously a bunch of bullshit. Pufnstuf?? Magic flutes? The colors alone look like a magic mushroom-enhanced trip through time and space. In fact, the show might be the most obviously drug-related entertainment property in history ... including Cheech and Chong movies. You can't find more drug references in a Richard Pryor routine than you can ...]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.obsessedwithfilm.com/movie-news/sony-is-puffin-what.php/feed</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Where Does Pixar Go From Here?</title>
		<link>http://www.obsessedwithfilm.com/unfiltered-lens/where-does-pixar-go-from-here.php</link>
		<comments>http://www.obsessedwithfilm.com/unfiltered-lens/where-does-pixar-go-from-here.php#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Tue, 02 Jun 2009 19:53:59 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Ray DeRousse</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Unfiltered Lens]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.obsessedwithfilm.com/?p=24161</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[A recent post by the always brilliant Piper over at Lazy Eye Theatre caused me to start thinking about Pixar's continued brilliance. In some ways, we are starting to take their craftsmanship for granted. The colors don't seem quite as vibrant. The carefully-woven storyline tapestries reveal their seams more often. It's like watching Tiger Woods make ten fifty-yard putts in a row. When you're on top, there's often nowhere to go but down.

So what can Pixar do (or not do) to remain at the head of its class? Several ideas leap to mind:

1. WIDEN OUT THE PERSPECTIVE. To date, all of Pixar's movies have been male-centric films. All of the main protagonists in every single film have been males. Female characters have been, for the most part, relegated to love interests or companions. They have also been the least interesting characters in any Pixar film, the lone exception being Dory from FINDING NEMO. And that was due to Ellen DeGeneres' perfect voice acting more than any other factor.

While I realize that Pixar is the animation equivalent of a treehouse gang of boys, they desperately need to let some girls in to play with their toys. I'm not suggesting that Pixar ...]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.obsessedwithfilm.com/unfiltered-lens/where-does-pixar-go-from-here.php/feed</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>7</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>The MOON Really Is Made Of Cheese!</title>
		<link>http://www.obsessedwithfilm.com/movie-news/the-moon-really-is-made-of-cheese.php</link>
		<comments>http://www.obsessedwithfilm.com/movie-news/the-moon-really-is-made-of-cheese.php#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Mon, 01 Jun 2009 04:44:02 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Ray DeRousse</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Movie News]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Unfiltered Lens]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.obsessedwithfilm.com/?p=24133</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[

TWILIGHT sucked. Yeah, I realize that millions of teenaged girls entered puberty in theaters across America at the sight of Robert Pattison - who gives a shit? As former tween girl phenomenons Leif Garrett, Scott Baio, and Zac Efron demonstrably illustrate, young girls have no fucking taste.

I give credit to series creator Stephanie Meyer. She could barely out-write an opened can of tuna, yet she managed to tap into that pulsing vaginal vein of the American teenaged girl fantasy. We all know that the average thirteen year old girl only thinks in hoary romantic cliches, and then screams at lead-shattering decibels when something approaches that imagined ideal. So Meyer, sensing a vast fortune left untapped, set about creating a world of glittering vampires and a dark, rebellious antihero for a perky heroine. For a teenaged girl, it was crack on a stick.

But I am not going to judge Meyer for barfing out this tripe. Had I thought of it, I might write it also. Hey, don't we all want to be millionaires at some point??

But the movies are another beast entirely. The first film was embarrassing, visually showcasing some of Meyer's more ludicrous ideas (glittering vampires? Baseball-playing vampires??). Even worse ...]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.obsessedwithfilm.com/movie-news/the-moon-really-is-made-of-cheese.php/feed</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>8</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Tom Rothman Must Die</title>
		<link>http://www.obsessedwithfilm.com/specials/tom-rothman-must-die.php</link>
		<comments>http://www.obsessedwithfilm.com/specials/tom-rothman-must-die.php#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Thu, 28 May 2009 23:38:02 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Ray DeRousse</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Feature Articles]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Features]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Unfiltered Lens]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.obsessedwithfilm.com/?p=24117</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[This world makes me sick. It's filled to the brim with indecent and unending horrors that squash your dreams and turn your stomach. Every day we are forced to stare at hideous injustices like warfare, poverty, crime, and Miley Cyrus. But the most revolting thing in this world - lower than the fly-riddled fluke shit of a pedophile's rotting corpse - is Twentieth Century Fox head honcho Tom Rothman.



Mr. Rothman has one of the greatest jobs on Earth - he works for the richest studio in Hollywood's dream factory. Basically, whatever Rothman imagines can become reality. He earns millions of dollars a year to spend hundreds of millions of dollars a year making feature films. It's a pretty nice gig.

So why does he insist on producing the most vapid, pointless, and artistically bankrupt films in the history of the medium? Rather than create films that break new ground or forge new pathways, Rothman continues to remake the back catalogue of Fox, or turn toys and board games into movies. It's bewildering.

Rothman held the previous record for most unimaginative production slate in Hollywood history; almost everything currently in production is either a remake or a sequel/prequel. Do we really need another ...]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.obsessedwithfilm.com/specials/tom-rothman-must-die.php/feed</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>14</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Between Two Ferns</title>
		<link>http://www.obsessedwithfilm.com/movie-news/between-two-ferns.php</link>
		<comments>http://www.obsessedwithfilm.com/movie-news/between-two-ferns.php#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 27 May 2009 03:59:50 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Ray DeRousse</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Movie News]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Unfiltered Lens]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.obsessedwithfilm.com/?p=24082</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Our buddies over at Cinematical mentioned a little show called Between Two Ferns With Zach Galifianakis today. Since I'd never heard of this show before, I went to check it out.

Hilarious.

It stars Zach Galifianakis (duh) from the upcoming comedy THE HANGOVER. He plays himself as the host of an awkward and very NSFW celebrity interview show.

This one caused me to nearly pass out with laughter. In it, Zach interviews the delicious Natalie Portman. Enjoy!

 ]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.obsessedwithfilm.com/movie-news/between-two-ferns.php/feed</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>3</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Discovering Stanley Kubrick</title>
		<link>http://www.obsessedwithfilm.com/specials/discovering-stanley-kubrick.php</link>
		<comments>http://www.obsessedwithfilm.com/specials/discovering-stanley-kubrick.php#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Sat, 23 May 2009 04:22:27 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Ray DeRousse</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Feature Articles]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Features]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Unfiltered Lens]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Kubrick]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.obsessedwithfilm.com/?p=24069</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[

Last week I gave myself a gift that has been occupying my time. I bought The Stanley Kubrick Director's Series collection from Warner Home Video. The set contains the last five films of Kubrick's life, minus the poorly-received BARRY LYNDON - 2001:A SPACE ODYSSEY, A CLOCKWORK ORANGE, THE SHINING, FULL METAL JACKET, and EYES WIDE SHUT.

I had seen most of these films at some point in my life, but none in many years. Amazingly, I have never owned a Kubrick film in any form. I must admit, placing this set in my collection is much like owning an original Monet. It is art.

Here are my thoughts on these films:

2001: A SPACE ODYSSEY - Beautiful, profound, boring, annoying, joyous. The film defies explanation because it refuses explanation. Concepts and ideas are painted with forms, light, and images; words are irrelevant. The special effects still work because they are not treated as special; rather, they are crafted as a series of iconic images that are just as symphonic as the overlaid score. It is science fiction distilled and purified.

A CLOCKWORK ORANGE - This is like a mixture of DR. STRANGELOVE and 2001. It is comical, yet realistically futuristic. MY favorite aspect of ...]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.obsessedwithfilm.com/specials/discovering-stanley-kubrick.php/feed</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>12</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>The Tarantino Problem</title>
		<link>http://www.obsessedwithfilm.com/specials/the-tarantino-problem.php</link>
		<comments>http://www.obsessedwithfilm.com/specials/the-tarantino-problem.php#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 20 May 2009 18:49:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Ray DeRousse</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Feature Articles]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Features]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Unfiltered Lens]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.obsessedwithfilm.com/?p=24035</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Think about those directors you would consider to be the greatest of all time. For myself, I would choose Stanley Kubrick, Steven Spielberg, Martin Scorcese, and Alfred Hitchcock. They are all directors with a signature style, yet the stories they tell are always front and center. Even a directorial style as eccentric as Kubrick's manages to work in service to the story.

And that is my basic problem with Quentin Tarantino, and the instantly ejaculatory praise he regularly receives from fanboys and the media. He doesn't deserve the immense praise he receives because he doesn't care about telling an engaging and complete story.



Let's look at Tarantino's meager output in the fifteen years he has been making movies:

RESERVOIR DOGS - His first film contained electric dialogue and dynamic shot selection that kept the viewer's eye off the low production values. Unlike CLERKS, Tarantino made his low budget film look professional and intentional.

PULP FICTION - His one true masterpiece. This is the film that catapulted him to the level of automatic auteur. It has style up to its eyebrows, yet the characters and situations are engaging. It also helps that there is an underlying point to the snappy dialogue and mixed-up structure.

JACKIE BROWN ...]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.obsessedwithfilm.com/specials/the-tarantino-problem.php/feed</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>60</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Is ANTICHRIST Art?</title>
		<link>http://www.obsessedwithfilm.com/specials/is-antichrist-art.php</link>
		<comments>http://www.obsessedwithfilm.com/specials/is-antichrist-art.php#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Mon, 18 May 2009 15:33:59 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Ray DeRousse</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Feature Articles]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Features]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Unfiltered Lens]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[2009]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Antichrist]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Cannes]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Lars Von Trier]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.obsessedwithfilm.com/?p=23882</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[This year's Cannes film festival has been mostly uneventful. A few sales, perhaps one break-out hit, nothing spectacular. Of course, leave it to Lars von Trier to shock the place into action.



His newest kick to the groin is ANTICHRIST, which is shaping up to be von Trier's ugliest and most controversial film yet. It features a married couple played by Willem Defoe and Charlotte Gainsburg who, after the accidental death of their child, retreat to their cabin in the woods (named Eden, of course) for healing. Then all sorts of bizarre things happen. Here's the trailer:



Reviews have been all over the map.

The Bad:
Variety: “Lars von Trier cuts a big fat art-film fart with Antichrist. As if deliberately courting critical abuse.”

Reuters: “Antichrist elicited derisive laughter, gasps of disbelief, a smattering of applause and loud boos ...”

Hollywood Elsewhere: " ... easily one of the biggest debacles in Cannes Film Festival history and the complete meltdown of a major film artist in a way that invites comparison to the sinking of the Titanic."
The Good:
Movieline: “beautiful, violent, and cringe-inducing … Antichrist is the most original and though-provoking work von Trier has done since Breaking the Waves. That said, I might entirely change my mind ...]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.obsessedwithfilm.com/specials/is-antichrist-art.php/feed</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>6</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Now I Start To Hate The STAR TREK Reboot</title>
		<link>http://www.obsessedwithfilm.com/specials/now-i-start-to-hate-the-star-trek-reboot.php</link>
		<comments>http://www.obsessedwithfilm.com/specials/now-i-start-to-hate-the-star-trek-reboot.php#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Mon, 18 May 2009 08:34:40 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Ray DeRousse</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Feature Articles]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Features]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Star-Trek]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Top Stories]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Unfiltered Lens]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.obsessedwithfilm.com/?p=23854</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[

Reboots and prequels are a bad idea for everyone except studio executives and their shareholders. Creativity is shackled to previously-formed ideas and developments, and everyone involved vainly attempts to recreate what everyone loved about the previous version.

Don't get me wrong - J.J. Abrams did a pretty good job rebooting STAR TREK. The alternate timeline gambit paid off, giving the movie a certain lift since it was no longer tied to the events of later years. This avoids what was, of course, one of the worst aspects of the STAR WARS prequels, as well as the recent WOLVERINE abomination - you knew what was going to happen later, so everything had to play into that eventuality. It not only saps the movie of drama, but it also causes an instant comparison to previous films rather than create its own identity.

But I didn't really care for all of the time travel nonsense in the film. While necessary for Abrams' alternate universe idea, it came off as a convoluted gimmick. This was particularly true of Old Spock's magical reappearance in the ice cave, thereby converging the two timelines in a ridiculously haphazard way. However, by the end of the film, I wanted the ...]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.obsessedwithfilm.com/specials/now-i-start-to-hate-the-star-trek-reboot.php/feed</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>18</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Yet Another Hollywood Fuck-Up</title>
		<link>http://www.obsessedwithfilm.com/specials/yet-another-hollywood-fuck-up.php</link>
		<comments>http://www.obsessedwithfilm.com/specials/yet-another-hollywood-fuck-up.php#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Fri, 15 May 2009 03:23:17 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Ray DeRousse</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Feature Articles]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Features]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Unfiltered Lens]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.obsessedwithfilm.com/?p=23780</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Cormac McCarthy's THE ROAD is one of the greatest novels I've ever read. I don't love it for the story, which is fairly ordinary. I also don't love it for the characters, since they are barely sketched throughout.

No, I love it for its language. THE ROAD is narrative poetry. The words blot the page like random tears, each one quivering there alone waiting for discovery. Sentences run together in waves, or squat in dangling fragments, their shattered forms reflective of the apocalyptic setting in the novel. I would dare say that no novel ever written portrays desolation, despair, fear, and longing better than this one. It is so beautifully written that each page deserves to be displayed in an art gallery.

As you might imagine, my heart sank slightly when I heard of a film adaptation of this searing and singular work. When I had finished the novel, I secretly hoped that an adaptation might wait until I could somehow be involved in its production, because I felt I knew exactly how it should be done. Alas, as does often happen, opportunity is knocking while you're still trying to get out of bed.

Rare news trickled out about the production over the ...]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.obsessedwithfilm.com/specials/yet-another-hollywood-fuck-up.php/feed</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>16</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Money Where My Mouth Is&#8230; Ray&#8217;s Directorial Debut hits OWF!</title>
		<link>http://www.obsessedwithfilm.com/daily-vid/money-where-my-mouth-is-rays-directorial-debut-hits-owf.php</link>
		<comments>http://www.obsessedwithfilm.com/daily-vid/money-where-my-mouth-is-rays-directorial-debut-hits-owf.php#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 13 May 2009 21:17:59 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Ray DeRousse</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Daily Vid]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Unfiltered Lens]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.obsessedwithfilm.com/?p=23727</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[The world is full of critics. Grumpy, negative, and generally sour critics. Ask anyone who has ever faced the sting of a critic's words, and they'll tell you it hurts.

They'll also tell you that most critics are talentless nobodies who have never attempted to do anything themselves. Instead, they'll say, a critic merely sits back and judges the efforts of others rather than create their own art.

It's a fair call. The internet is filled with fanboys and wannabee critics who piss and moan over the efforts of those with actual entertainment jobs. Of course, most of those people collectively have less creativity than the ball sweat of a schizophrenic homeless man, but that's beside the point. The fact is that these people are trying to create something to entertain millions of people ... and critics do nothing but bitch.

That's why I'm interested in making my own films. Not content with bitching about Hollywood, I feel I should be willing to, in the spirit of that old cliche, put my money where my mouth is and try it for myself.

So, without further ado, here is a short film I made with several friends for a short film competition. We only had ...]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.obsessedwithfilm.com/daily-vid/money-where-my-mouth-is-rays-directorial-debut-hits-owf.php/feed</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>5</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Resisting The Urge To Gawk</title>
		<link>http://www.obsessedwithfilm.com/specials/resisting-the-urge-to-gawk.php</link>
		<comments>http://www.obsessedwithfilm.com/specials/resisting-the-urge-to-gawk.php#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Tue, 12 May 2009 00:17:50 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Ray DeRousse</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Feature Articles]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Features]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Unfiltered Lens]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[cancer]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Farrah Fawcett]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Patrick Swayze]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.obsessedwithfilm.com/?p=23594</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[We've all been there. Traffic ahead of us is stop-and-go, slowly winding around some unseen sight. As we creep up on the blockage, we see a twisted heap of metal that once resembled a car. And inside, a badly mangled and bloodied body that once resembled a living person.

So what do we do? We slow down and take a long, hard look at the scene before moving on.

It's a natural human tendency to gawk at hideous and obscene sights. For instance, we might never have the desire to see our friend's dick, but if he pulls it out at a party, we'll stare and laugh at it all night. There are countless websites making great money by attracting people with disgusting pictures and videos; they are the modern-day version of the freakshow. We like to be horrified, grossed-out, and bewildered. In some ways, this urge makes us lower on the evolutionary scale than animals. When an animal sees a dead creature, it freaks out or becomes sad; meanwhile, we crane our necks to get a better look at the brains on the pavement.

This revolting aspect of human behavior has allowed tabloids to flourish in modern society. Every week is a ...]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.obsessedwithfilm.com/specials/resisting-the-urge-to-gawk.php/feed</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>1</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Whatever Happened To Smart Sci-Fi?</title>
		<link>http://www.obsessedwithfilm.com/specials/whatever-happened-to-smart-sci-fi.php</link>
		<comments>http://www.obsessedwithfilm.com/specials/whatever-happened-to-smart-sci-fi.php#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Sun, 10 May 2009 16:07:33 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Ray DeRousse</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Feature Articles]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Features]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Top Stories]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Unfiltered Lens]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.obsessedwithfilm.com/?p=23567</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[

Late the other night I watched ALTERED STATES for the very first time. The film, released late in December of 1980, stars William Hurt as Edward Jessup, a university professor of abnormal psychology interested in researching sensory deprivation. To achieve this, he takes psychoactive drugs and locks himself inside a box for extended periods of time. Eventually, he regresses back to primitive forms of man ... and beyond.

Here is the trailer:



While watching the film, I found myself asking, "Why don't we have more challenging science fiction films like this one anymore?" It was actually startling to see a film in which every character in it has a college degree, and is able to discuss intricate and complex scientific ideas with some amount of conviction. Nobody showed up in a fat suit and farted. The characters didn't need to make awkward pop culture references at any time. These are intelligent and thoughtful people tackling disturbing questions about the universe. I thought it was refreshing.

Intelligent science fiction films are not made today partly because of the expense of films like this. Most science fiction films require larger budgets, which means they need to recoup those costs on the backend. With the costs ...]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.obsessedwithfilm.com/specials/whatever-happened-to-smart-sci-fi.php/feed</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>24</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Can STAR TREK De-Geek The Franchise?</title>
		<link>http://www.obsessedwithfilm.com/movie-news/can-star-trek-de-geek-the-franchise.php</link>
		<comments>http://www.obsessedwithfilm.com/movie-news/can-star-trek-de-geek-the-franchise.php#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Fri, 08 May 2009 15:30:59 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Ray DeRousse</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Movie News]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Star-Trek]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Top Stories]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Unfiltered Lens]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.obsessedwithfilm.com/?p=23539</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[

By most standards, the STAR TREK franchise has been a success. It's spawned many imitators, found an audience among a variety of entertainment platforms, and has enjoyed an enduring appeal with a rabid base of fans.

Yet, the property has had one of the narrowest demographics imaginable: young male science fiction fans. No matter what any incarnation of the show has tried, the franchise has never managed to break through that small but loyal core to a wider audience. And by wider audience, I mean one that includes normal people like women. Or non-virgins.

The movies reflect this disparity. Adjusting for inflation, only two of the previous ten STAR TREK films have grossed above $200 million dollars: STAR TREK THE MOTION PICTURE, and THE VOYAGE HOME. While that figure is nothing to laugh at, one must remember that the first TREK film barely made a profit due to its high cost, which led to the scaled back production of WRATH OF KHAN. The last film in the series, 2002's awful NEMESIS, earned an anemic $53 million adjusted dollars.

While J.J. Abrams has loaded his reboot with some high-tech special effects and hot young bodies, it's hard to divine how well this flashy new ...]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.obsessedwithfilm.com/movie-news/can-star-trek-de-geek-the-franchise.php/feed</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>27</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>A Newfound Love For J.J. Abrams</title>
		<link>http://www.obsessedwithfilm.com/specials/a-newfound-love-for-jj-abrams.php</link>
		<comments>http://www.obsessedwithfilm.com/specials/a-newfound-love-for-jj-abrams.php#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 06 May 2009 16:19:25 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Ray DeRousse</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Feature Articles]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Features]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Unfiltered Lens]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Charlie Rose]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[J.J. Abrams Star Trek]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.obsessedwithfilm.com/?p=23455</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[

Up until this point, I have been cold to J.J. Abrams and any of his projects. They all have the whiff of gimmick about them. He has seemed, in his relatively short career, as a younger, hipper version of P.T. Barnum, desperately seeking to outmarket everyone else in the Hollywood circus.

His television shows have been the best examples of his worst instinct. FELICITY was designed with an annoying bookend device that allowed for narration throughout the show. ALIAS saw Abrams pioneering the mystery plotting that became more famous later in his hit series LOST. While supporters of LOST claim that Abrams has an end in sight, it's fairly clear that most of this stuff is made up as the show continues, cleverly stringing the viewers along on a rapidly evaporating mystery. Remember the last few seasons of THE X-FILES?

Then came CLOVERFIELD, which was a marketing campaign in search of a movie. Like THE BLAIR WITCH PROJECT, the marketing for CLOVERFIELD was so saturated and so mysterious that the film could never really match the hype. Even though I moderately enjoyed the final film, I have never had the desire to rewatch it. It was an event motion picture rather than ...]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.obsessedwithfilm.com/specials/a-newfound-love-for-jj-abrams.php/feed</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>11</slash:comments>
		</item>
	</channel>
</rss>
