The Trials of Henry Kissinger

The Trials of Henry Kissinger

Henry Kissinger is by far one of the most interesting political figures of the 20th Century. Much like former President Richard Nixon, under whom he served, Kissinger is both a brilliant political strategist, but in addition to that – or perhaps because of it – inhabited throughout his career many morally grey areas.

The Trials of Henry Kissinger is a documentary that examines recent charges that the former Secretary of State engaged in activities that would be considered war crimes under international law.

Eugene Jarecki’s documentary was inspired by, and takes its name from the book ‘The Trial of Henry Kissinger’ by Christopher Hitchins. Not having read that book, I cannot comment on it. I will however say the film itself both includes interviews with Hitchins as well has his detractors, so bias is no greater than any other documentary. The film lets the viewer make up their own mind about the situation, including interviews with those who support Kissinger’s policies. It’s pretty clear that while the majority of the film speaks toward the premise of Kissinger as war criminal, that is mostly because Kissinger himself has had the minutes of the majority of his meetings concerning the primary incidents either destroyed or sealed until 5 years after his death.

Regardless of the outcome of his policies (and totally leaving aside for a moment their legality), one can see that they were clearly shaped by a profoundly logical mind; and herein lies the challenge in analyzing and passing judgment on him. There is no question that Henry Kissinger was Machiavellian in his approach to international relations, but isn’t that what’s called for in a National Security Advisor? Is it also what’s called for in a Secretary of State? Is it even extricable from politics itself?

see the trailer

The problem with Machiavellian types is that they tend to apply the same techniques toward consolidating their own power for themselves as they do in their work as Civil Servants for the people. An idea which at it’s very core is un-American, and which for one such as Nixon proved more disastrous as his own personal paranoia grew. But for Kissinger, who managed to keep his wits about him through his work for multiple administrations (and perhaps in his post political lobbying career) it has allowed him to keep doing the work – some would say damage – he has been doing for most of his life. Or maybe he was just better at not getting caught. There is no question that Kissinger was a corrupting influence within the Nixon Administration, but as with all presidents, we expect them to weigh the advice of their advisors and act responsibly regardless of the advice of their advisors.

To this day there has never been a successful prosecution of a head of state anywhere in the world for war crimes. Nuremburg succeeded merely in providing relatively minor sentences to minor players in the Holocaust, but none of the major architects of the genocide ever saw their day in court. Likewise, from Pol Pot to Idi Amin, from Bosnia to Rwanda – the leaders of these massacres have never been brought to justice, despite the best attempts of the International community. It has been 65 years since the end of WWII and not a single head of state has ever been executed for war crimes by an international court (why do you think Saddam Hussein was tried in Iraq and not the Haig?).

Why is that? The Trials of Henry Kissinger may provide some answers.

Echoing Nixon himself, who said in the famous Frost interview regarding the Huston Plan, ‘but when the President does it, it is not illegal’, Kissinger has come out against the very idea of war crimes trials saying that ‘heads of state often have to choose between two evils’.

The Trials of Henry Kissinger is a thought-provoking documentary, which while focused on the career of one individual raises questions about power and responsibility in general. A must see for anyone interested in global politics.

Keep posting?

I was out of the country for awhile, but I'm back now and wondering if I should pick up where I left off.

Movie reviews in a blog was a bit of an experiment.
I got lots of readers in various other places - Amazon, imdb, Netflix, Facebook, etc.

This seems to get the least traffic, but I like that it's just devoted to the reviews.

But do you guys care?
Are you still interested?

I have many more obscure and mainstream titles that I've reviewed, I'd be happy to post them, if there's anyone out there who actually cares.

So let me know - if even 1 person is still reading

Alice in Wonderland - the Versions You've Never Seen

Alice



Czech animator Jan Svankmajer’s trippy Alice, may only claim to be “inspired” by Lewis Carroll’s Alice’s Adventures in Wonderland, but it’s actually closer to the text than you might think if all you’ve ever seen are stills photos of this obscure gem. While this stuff is nightmare fuel to be sure, when you get down to the brass tacks and marmalade, it’s actually more faithful to the absurdity and dark wit of the original than the sugary-sweet Disney version and it’s imitators.
Highly recommended.

Phoebe in Wonderland




Here’s a great Alice in Wonderland inspired tale that was nominated for a few minor festival awards, but never won any. Which is a shame, because Elle Fanning gives an Oscar-worthy performance as the title character a little girl who has difficulty following the rules - but why? That’s the mystery at the heart of the story. But it’s not just Phoebe’s story, it’s also the story of her parents (Felicity Huffman and Bill Pullman), who are embattled by Phoebe’s problems, and the baffled school administrators and counselors who try to deal with this problem child. But one misfit drama teacher (Patricia Clarkson) may hold the key, in the form of a school play – Alice in Wonderland.

Probing the line between creativity and mental illness, with seamless blurring of fantasy and reality ala The Fisher King, this movie is a masterpiece. I cannot recommend it highly enough.

Religion on Film

Religion on Film

Someone once said, atheists make the best religious films, and there may be some truth to that. The problem with most religious films made by the faithful is that they are either church-lady style “fast track” to heaven films where the filmmaker lionizes some religious figure, totally whitewashing any possible misdeeds and creates a boring, one dimensional, 3 hour sermon on celluloid. Or, they create a film made to appeal to a religious market with all the edicts of that market – anything controversial avoided (safe for the kiddies) – and/or based on religious tenets that make no sense to outsiders.

Here are a couple religious films that I think do a good job.




The Jesus of Montreal

A group of actors put on a Passion Play in Montreal. But not being religious himself, the director relies on historical sources and archaeological data for his script. The play grows enormously in popularity, but also angers church and city officials. Ultimately, through his play and through his life, he does a better job of representing Christ’s teachings that the hypocritical powers-that-be.





The Message

This film about the birth of Islam is a grand epic in the vein of The Ten Commandments. It was made in accordance with Islamic law, so Mohammad is never shown – but the filmmakers do a very good job of telling the story without showing the prophet.

Anthony Quinn does a great job as Hamza, one of the leaders of the new sect. It also features some of the best large-scale desert battle scenes since Lawrence of Arabia.

Old Fashioned Serial Killer Films

We tend to think of serial killers as a fairly modern thing. I tend to think of the 1970s, the time when Robert Ressler coined the term “serial killer”, and the period during which many of the most famous (Bundy, Gacy, Son of Sam, Zodiac, etc.) were most active.

But of course serial killers probably predate civilization itself. Someone asked me to recommend some classic films (movies from the pre color era) that involved serial killers.

So, here are a few choices:

Sweeney Todd




No, I’m not talking about the recent film with Johnny Depp, nor am I referring to the Stephen Sondheim musical. This is the original 1936 version of the film made in the UK; it has an authentic cockney flavour to it – and best of all, no cheesy songs.

Bluebeard




This atmospheric thriller from 1944 features the talents of the great John Carradine as an artist who kills his subjects.

The Lodger



Also made in 1944, this film is about a Lodger (of course) who may just be Jack the Ripper; very moody and atmospheric. There was also a very good silent version of this made in 1927 that is also free to watch online: http://www.archive.org/details/AHtheLodger

Bloodlust!



This is a “B” movie from 1961. Essentially a version of The Most Dangerous Game, despite it’s limited budget it’s actually pretty good. Best of all, you can watch this one for free online too: http://www.archive.org/details/Bloodlust.mpeg

Claymation!

Wallace & Gromit



Some of the best claymation ever put to film was coming out of Nick Park’s studio in the 1990s. For those who missed them, they can be found in a collection called Wallace and Gromit in 3 Amazing Adventures.

‘A Grand Day Out with Wallace and Gromit’, released in 1989, is probably the weakest of the three – and that’s only a relative term, since it pretty much blew away 90% of all animated shorts that year out of the water. In this adventure, W&G go to the moon in search of cheese. Good, but gets caught up in slapstick at the expense of storytelling. But, like I said before, that’s only relative to other W&G films, when compared to the competition, it is light years ahead.

The series really hits it’s stride in 1993 with ‘Wallace & Gromit in The Wrong Trousers’, a story in which an evil penguin uses Wallace as a pawn in a heist. This should make the list of best animated shorts of the 1990s.

And then, just when you thought it couldn’t get any better, in 1995, Park released ‘Wallace and Gromit in A Close Shave’. Gromit is framed for sheep rustling, by the best villain since the evil penguin. Nominated for an Academy Award, and justifiably so. Should make the list of best animated shorts of all time!

Success, and a partnership with Dreamworks brought digital animated techniques into the world of Wallace and Gromit for their feature film debut, Wallace and Gromit: The Curse of the Were Rabbit. The film is excellent, and very entertaining – and the use of newly found digital tools does not take away from the charm of the series. However, this feature length film, at times feels more like ‘A Grand Day Out’ than the latter two shorts, particularly at the climax where the slapstick gags come rapidfire for a bit too long. Still, it’s great fun, worth checking out!

Japan's Edo Period - on film!

Kwaidan



Kwaidan (sometimes Kaidan) literally means “ghost story”. Given the generic term, there have been several movies that have had this title, but the one we are referring to is Masaki Kobayashi's Kaidan from 1964.

Basically this film is something like a Japanese Tales From the Crypt, containing four horror stories in vibrant color Tohoscope, all set in Japan’s Edo Period.

The first story, ‘The Black Hair’, is reminiscent of Ugetsu, wherein a man leaves his wife to attain social status, only to encounter supernatural ruin. The second story, ‘The Woman in the Snow’ is a haunting ghost story of the kind that is universally familiar. The third story, ‘Hoichi the Earless’, is the longest, but perhaps the best, including a historical recreation of a Japanese naval battle. The final story, ‘In a Bowl of Tea’, is probably the weakest, but it does have some of the best martial arts.

Overall, Kwaidan is full of beautiful set pieces and costumes. The sparse, haunting Japanese music is a stark contrast to American film scores, and really works to give these stories an eerie feel. Winner of a Special Jury prize at Cannes, it’s a cultural experience recommended to everyone, but particularly to American audiences who’ve been turned on to Japanese horror in the last decade thanks to imports like The Ring and The Grudge.




Kagemusha

When talking about Japanese cinema, one sooner or later, inevitably runs into Akira Kurosawa. While Kurosawa needs no introduction, I am constantly astounded at how many people never went to see Ran in its initial release. To read the reviews on the web, it seems like the majority of Americans never saw this film until the re-release in the 2000s! What did they think the rest of us had been gushing over for the past 25 years?

Well, if there are any new converts to that epic Kurosawa masterpiece, I encourage them to seek out Kagemusha (literally ‘Shadow Warrior’), the film Kurosawa made just prior to Ran.

The story concerns petty thief who is hired to masquerade as a deceased Clan Lord, and who turns out to be more true to the spirit of the Clan's Lord than the actual generals who are his handlers.

There is no doubt that this is a flawed gem. The subtitles are verbose, and having to read them takes away from appreciating the cinematography – which is gorgeous. There is also an overabundance of long takes that contributes to the film’s extensive 2 hour and 40 minute run time. But by far the biggest flaw is the music score, which is annoying and repetitious, with a reliance on brass instrumentation, giving it a distinctly un-Japanese (or at least un-Edo Period) flavor.

Still, with all it’s flaws, it’s still excellent, and comes across like a rough draft for Ran.