edited by Jonathan Doyle

Cloverfield [BLU-RAY] (Paramount Home Entertainment, 6.3.2008) Disguised under deliberately goofy, yet deliciously edible-sounding, aliases such as Cheese and Slusho, Matt Reeves' Cloverfield was produced and rushed into theaters under an equally appetizing shroud of secrecy. From last year's incredibly elusive Super Bowl ad to the film's viral marketing campaign, Cloverfield had everybody scratching their heads and drooling in anticipation. Aside from the as-yet untitled title and the Blair Witch-ian visual style, the film's biggest appeal was the enigmatic creature who was last (un)seen hurling the decapitated head of the Statue of Liberty onto the crowded streets of New York City. All we knew about the mysterious beast was that it was big and angry. Now that the highy-anticipated project has come and gone, one question has fortunately been answered: Cloverfield was a major success. (continued)

Upcoming

November 12

Slumdog Millionaire

November 14

A Christmas Tale

B.O.H.I.C.A.

Dostana

The Dukes

Eden

House of the Sleeping Beauties

How About You

Quantum of Solace

We are Wizards

November 21

The Betrayal

November 30

"Bourne" is ant-government?

email this story
read comments (35)
post a comment

Believe it or not, Bill O'Reilly will be advancing a view that The Bourne Ultimatum is antigovernment propaganda during the second hour of The Radio Factor, starting at 1 pm today. As the Radio Factor website puts it, "Ultimatum has a political message that may surprise you... we'll break it out for you and explain why it may make you mad." Flash: Arizona Daily Star critic Phil Villarreal was supposed to be a guest, presumably arguing against the O'Reilly view, but his bosses stepped in at the last second and said "no, you can't do that."

Carlisle taking Schwartz's job<< previous | next >>Pollack off "Recount"; Roach is in

Posted by Jeffrey Wells on August 7, 2007 at 9:25 AM

comment #1

christian says ...

there's no better poster child for the intellectual failures of the modern republican party than bill o'reilly. he screams that "media matters" website somehow distorts actual audio/video of his spoken inanities and lies; he changes his tune on iraq on a weekly basis; he says something one day then refutes that he said it the next; he calls the daily kos a hate site while he screams that if san francisco is attacked we should leave it alone; and he's overall your typical right wing media bully.

he's as anti-american as they come.

Posted by christian at August 7, 2007 10:06 AM

comment #2

snackyx says ...

This is the same Bill O'Reilly who is running a personal Jihad against the Daily Kos--the well known left-wing hate website. Screw 'em.

Posted by snackyx at August 7, 2007 10:09 AM

comment #3

Scott Feinberg says ...

Jeff, as much as I dislike Bill-O, I do think the film has political undertones--I happen to agree with them, and I happen to like the film, but let's not kid ourselves. Just pulling a few thoughts from my initial review of the film (http://andthewinneris.blog.com/1969939/):

Presented with the chance to take out Bourne, CIA big shot Strathairn gives the go-ahead, even though Stilesâ€™ CIA agent would be killed with him. Allen nobly confronts him and asks, "Do we have no boundaries? If we donâ€™t stop here, then when do we stop?" He sharply responds, "When we win!" This is textbook Bush... "Stay the course... If we donâ€™t fight them there, weâ€™ll be fighting them here... We wonâ€™t stop until we win the war on terror." Neither Strathairn nor Bush can achieve--or even define--victory because they cannot first define their enemy.

Additionally, the film repeatedly depicts the waterboarding of Bourne during flashbacks. This form of torture has been the source of great controversy for Bush Administration, since they have consistently refused to rule it off the table, despite its inhumane nature. By graphically portraying this grotesque method, particularly on a sympathetic (not to mention innocent) character, it indirectly criticizes it and makes it much harder for people to deferentially support.

Posted by Scott Feinberg at August 7, 2007 10:12 AM

comment #4

cjKennedy says ...

The government has been the bad guy in each Bourne film and O'Reilly is just now catching on? Or is it the open jabs this time around at how we're fighting our current war that has his panties in a bunch?

Whatever. If I was a conservative, I would be embarassed by folks like O'Reilly.

Posted by cjKennedy at August 7, 2007 10:12 AM

comment #5

AH says ...

All that one needs to know about Mr. O comes from the quote that you posted: "Ultimatum has a political message that may surprise you...we'll break it out for you and explain why it may make you mad."

Not make you think, but "make you mad." That says it all.

Posted by AH at August 7, 2007 10:26 AM

comment #6

Geoff says ...

I heard some of his rant on radio. It's ridiculous hearing him talk about movies. He repeatedly says the Bourne film is "a big cartoon" and his tone implies that he could easily make something similar.

Posted by Geoff at August 7, 2007 10:26 AM

comment #7

Midwest Doug says ...

It's funny, I thought the private office scene between Voson and Landy was a little artificial. Voson says something to the effect of "Come on, Pam, you know that we need this kind of program." Landy never responds to that in the affirmative; she just moves on with the next question.

If anything, the CIA looks more competetent than how it normally is portrayed. And the film is more anti-bureaucracy than anti-CIA. The CIA agents know that the Bourne-Landy meeting is suspicious, but the bureaucrat (Voson) plunges ahead with it anyway. And Landy doesn't send the Blackbriar stuff to the Times; she sends it internally and Congress investigates and cleans it up -- part of the American process, whether Dems or Republicans control it.

Posted by Midwest Doug at August 7, 2007 10:30 AM

comment #8

cinefan says ...

Bill O. is nothing but a blowhard jackass. I love how he holds himself up as this great paragon of moral virtue, except of course for the times when he's sexually harassing female employees over the phone or asking porn stars to hook him up with free samples.

Posted by cinefan at August 7, 2007 10:33 AM

comment #9

PhilVillarreal says ...

The newspaper management stopped me from appearing on the show.

Posted by PhilVillarreal at August 7, 2007 10:36 AM

comment #10

Howlingman says ...

Do people still take O'Reilly seriously? Hasn't he already become a punchline?

It's unfortunate that so many people can't just watch and enjoy any sort of art without first filtering it through their rigid political ideologies. And that applies to both sides of the fence, both of whom are equally guilty of that sort of cultural retardation.

Posted by Howlingman at August 7, 2007 10:38 AM

comment #11

foxnewsisfake says ...

I look forward to an enlightened, objective discussion.

Posted by foxnewsisfake at August 7, 2007 10:39 AM

comment #12

Josh Massey says ...

Even though I hated the film, I do give Transformers credit for being about the most anti-government popcorn film I've ever seen.

Posted by Josh Massey at August 7, 2007 10:40 AM

comment #13

christian says ...

he's still the most popular FOX personality.

nuff said.

i liked him better back in the 80's when he was hosting tabloid shows about topless car washes.

Posted by christian at August 7, 2007 10:41 AM

comment #14

christian says ...

"The newspaper management stopped me from appearing on the show."

whoa, back up. what do you mean?

Posted by christian at August 7, 2007 10:42 AM

comment #15

LYT says ...

Jeff, ever read Movieguide? Ostensibly a "Christian" site, it also bashes any movie that even has a hint of anti-Republicanism in it.

Check out their review of Bourne:

http://www.movieguide.org/index.php?s=reviews&id=7514

Posted by LYT at August 7, 2007 10:53 AM

comment #16

Stephe96 says ...

Maybe if Greengrass had held the camera steady for more than a half-second I would've noticed if the movie was anti-government.

Posted by Stephe96 at August 7, 2007 11:01 AM

comment #17

DavidF says ...

O'Reilly probably hasn't found a good spy movie to like since the Reagan singlehandedly beat the Commies, leaving James Bond to battle a series of succesful, misunderstood capitalists.

I mean, Breach was OKAY but they hardly explained exactly HOW evil the Russians are. They really played down that angle.

Was it Colbert who noted that "Reality has a well-known liberal bias?"

Posted by DavidF at August 7, 2007 11:09 AM

comment #18

TL says ...

"...and explain why it may make you mad."

Seriously, you can't make up shit like that.

Posted by TL at August 7, 2007 11:14 AM

comment #19

malibugigolo says ...

THE Phil Villarreal!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!?????????????????????/

Posted by malibugigolo at August 7, 2007 11:53 AM

comment #20

swordandpen says ...

Because our government's actions during the last few years have really earned our sympathy and trust.

As said before, O'Reilly is anti-American.

Posted by swordandpen at August 7, 2007 12:02 PM

comment #21

PhilVillarreal says ...

Malibugigolo, you sound like the girls I used to ask out in my single days.

Posted by PhilVillarreal at August 7, 2007 12:41 PM

comment #22

DarthCorleone says ...

LYT>> Interesting read.

I'm mystified by this comment:

"Also, the action is so intense that the plot points are not in the right position to sustain complete interest in the movie. There are points where the movie lags. Whether a movie is action or a parlor drama, to sustain interest you must put the plot points in the right place."

The plot points are in the wrong place? What does that even mean?

And this comment is just stupid:

Ultimately, however, finding his identity seems to solve his angst, and the issue of guilt, apology and the need for redemption fades. This is too bad because the movie could have set up a very powerful story of the fallenness of mankind and the need for God’s forgiveness."

On what basis? Bourne doesn't solve the mystery until the end of the movie. We don't know what Bourne does next. There is no evidence that his guilt and need for redemption fade. If anything, they are on full display during the final action sequence when Bourne spares the life of the enemy asset and later makes the philosophical remark: "Look at what they make you give." It's like this reviewer wasn't even paying attention to the film.

Posted by DarthCorleone at August 7, 2007 1:25 PM

comment #23

Mike Schaefer says ...

So, Mr Villareal... were you supposed to dispute Bill-o's claims or back them up?

Posted by Mike Schaefer at August 7, 2007 1:29 PM

comment #24

PhilVillarreal says ...

I think any anti-government leanings "The Bourne Supremacy" shows carry as much weight and relevance as Matt Damon jumping 5-foot walls on a motorbike. I'm guessing it would have turned into a debate.

Posted by PhilVillarreal at August 7, 2007 3:35 PM

comment #25

cjKennedy says ...

"Look at what they make you give." That was the same thing said to Bourne by Clive Owen in the first film, no?

Posted by cjKennedy at August 7, 2007 3:40 PM

comment #26

malibugigolo says ...

Phil:

Your witty rejoinder solidifies my first instinct: Oâ€™Reilly / Villarreal would have been this decades Vidal/ Buckley.

Alas, I am forlorn.

In any case: Oâ€™Reillyâ€™s bizarre take on Bounre which has the least context, politically, sexually, even emotionally (outside of adolescent male adrenaline) of any action movie in a very long time makes me think that after one viewing of HOPSCOTCH he would claim that Walter Matthau was an extremely dangerous anarchist and all his movies should be kept under lock and key.

Posted by malibugigolo at August 7, 2007 3:56 PM

comment #27

DarthCorleone says ...

cjkennedy>> That's correct. I really dug that they came full circle with that and paid some respect to "The Professor."

Posted by DarthCorleone at August 7, 2007 4:11 PM

comment #28

cjKennedy says ...

Yeah but Darth...the plot points!... they're... they're out of place! Somebody take away that guy's copy of Syd Field.

Posted by cjKennedy at August 7, 2007 4:30 PM

comment #29

Howlingman says ...

Darth C: "Somebody take away that guy's copy of Syd Field."

And give him a first grade grammer textbook; that is seriously the most poorly written review I've read -- and I visit AICN . Although the Almighty Movie Guide gets props for calling the fights "reminiscent of Bruce Willis."

Posted by Howlingman at August 7, 2007 5:45 PM

comment #30

Howlingman says ...

Sorry, cjKennedy, your Syd Field quote.

Posted by Howlingman at August 7, 2007 5:47 PM

comment #31

malibugigolo says ...

"the need for redemption fades"

Only aluminum and glass are redeemable.

Posted by malibugigolo at August 7, 2007 6:23 PM

comment #32

BurmaShave says ...

"you may be upset"

This is representative of the Fox mindset, all the way down to local weather. Does anyone remember last year when Hannity and others were raising a stink about Perry White saying "Truth, justice, and all that stuff" instead of "The American Way"? These people almost have more time on their hands than blood. Almost.

Also, if it makes anyone feel any better, while his TV jamboree is pretty huge, O'Reilly's radio program is a relatively large failure. Here in DC it was recently replaced with sports talk.

Posted by BurmaShave at August 8, 2007 1:34 AM

comment #33

Movie Watcher says ...

I have tried to watch O'Reilly's show, but he leans too much to the right. He's always bitching about the left-wing sites, but barely a peep about the right-wing sites, basically ignoring them. What a joke. Does anyone take this guy seriously? I guess he used to be a journalist;now he's an entertainer, and not a very good one.

Posted by Movie Watcher at August 8, 2007 2:45 AM

comment #34