Larry Crowne (A)

Few comedies are as charming or as tender as Larry Crowne.

With the help of writer Nia Vardalos (My Big Fat Greek Wedding), Tom Hanks (That Thing You Do!) succeeds as the author, director, and star of a drama about a middle-aged divorced man (named, you guessed it: Larry Crowne) returning to college after being laid-off from his long-time retail job.

The film starts off rather poorly, with the lack of a consistant tone. The buisnessmen firing Crowne do so in such an unproffessional manner—in refferring to Larry’s lack of an education, oneman blurts out “Who would have thought I’d be premoted before you?!”—that the movie feels almost like a typical comedy with exaggerrated reactions from everyone. However, other scenes use a more quiet, tender mood. By the half-way mark, though, the picture stands firmly in the latter category, and that is a good thing—the audience might not roar with laughter like they did inTropic Thunder, but they care far more about the characters and are far more invested in the story.

Much of the reason the film succeeds is due to the excellent acting. Hanks, who has been nominated for 5 acting Oscars (including wins for Philidelphia andForrest Gump), does his usual mild-mannered, out-of-place routine, but he does it as well as ever (and without the dim-witted tone he showed in The Terminal). Julia Roberts, as an alcoholic proffessor going through a messy divorce, has almost as large a role, and succeeds in giving her character character (pardon the expression) without becoming too irritating—we see the hurt this woman has, and we see how her anger is misguided. More surprising, though, is the fact that even the smallest of supporting roles is done with perfect skill. Talent and effort is showcased by Wilmer Valderrama, Rami Malek, George Takei, and Cedric the Entertainer. With the third largest role in the movie (and a great role to play), Gugu Mbatha-Raw, best known as the female star of TV’s Undercovers, shines in what is hopefully the start of a great film carreer.

Of course, all of this acting talent would be trivial if it were not for such a touching, tender story to go with it. Larry Crowne tackles big issues without boring or berrating the audience, and it resolves them with a bittersweet, satisfying, and surprisingly moving conclusion, of which Hanks and award-winning Cinematographer Philppe Rousselot (Big Fish; Sherlock Holmes) give a soothing style and appearance that underscores the messages.

Few movies are as sweet and as thoughtful as Larry Crowne.

Horrible Bosses (F)

Horrible Bosses is such a bizarrely sickening film it is uncomfortable writing a review about it, seeing as I must open with the words "rape is not funny."

Three average Joes (Jason Bateman, Charlie Day, and Jason Sudekis) become fed up with their abusive employers (Kevin Spacey, Colin Farrell, and Jennifer Aniston) and decide to kill them. Jamie Foxx, Lindsey Sloane, and Ioan Gruffud have small roles. The picture is directed by Seth Gordon (Freakinomics, Four Christmases).

This is bound to disturb some viewers, but is also an interesting concept that appeals to all of us. Haven't there been authority figures who are total jerks that we really want dead? In this subject, Horrible Bosses acts like a typical dark comedy: presenting a disturbing premise and connecting it to our most primal urges so that we find it both revolting and appealing.

The movie can be funny at times, and the acting is great (especially Farrell, who is funny and yet sad as a sadistic crackhead). Still, this does nothing to fix the fact that this is a bad movie.

However, when the film gets to the subject of rape, they have lost that approach. The issue is not presented as something taboo--it is treated like just another slapstick comedy routine. The reason is that the sexual predator is a women.

Dale (Charlie Day) is miserable at work because his boss (Jennifer Aniston) keeps making inappropriate comments and gropes him. She then reveals that she drugged him unconscious and raped him and then blackmails him with the photos.

I ask for a second for us to consider what the movie would be like if it was the other way around--if the victim was female and the perpetrator was male. Would it be presented in a movie as normal slapstick comedy? Of course not. And if the movie came out with it in there, people would be furious.

Physorg reports that of reported sexual assaults nearly 6% are done by females, and that this number is likely inaccurate because people are embarrassed to report a sexual assault by a woman. This movie contributes to this problem. It presents sexual assault by a woman on a man to be not serious and in fact something for the victim to be ashamed of. Now, obviously people will point out that the victim is planning to kill the perpetrator. This is presented as ridiculously silly--that it really is nothing that deserves a large reaction. Actually, while murder is obviously not a good choice, it should definitely be reported.

Another problematic aspect of the film is that for most of the movies, the three protagonists are in a bar getting tipsy. The attitude is "oh the silly things men do when they are drunk." Sure, murder is presented as shocking, but the tone is that we all think about that things when we get drunk.

Yes, many people get drunk on a regular basis. But it isn't healthy. The movie is contributing to the myth that over-drinking is harmless. It is not. And it is very irresponsible to say it is.

Horrible Bosses's unhealthy and offensive jokes squash out any humor the film might have had.

3-D Report: June

3-D movies can be done well and they can be done badly. Unfortunately, people have seen too many movies with the bad kind of 3-D and thus think that they hate the format when in fact they really don't know it. I am compiling a report of the quality of 3-D for every month. Some of the movies could still be in theaters so you could consider seeing them based on this, or watch these if you have a 3-D player when they arrive on DVD. Or at least read this years later when 3-D home viewing is easier to come by. Still, the biggest reason I write this is that I hope readers who have seen the movies in 3-D will know how that movies' 3-D compares to other movies' 3-D. Then there might be less of a negative view towards what is in truth a great new invention. Before reading this some people willlikely think "I hate 3-D because the glasses darken the image so much." Sometimes this is the case but I will tell you if it is. Now, obviously, if you watch the movie in 3-D and take off your glasses in the middle you will notice how much brighter the screen is. THAT DOES NOTE MEAN THE 2-D IS THAT BRIGHT--a well-made movie will lighten the 3-D version with the expectation it will be darkened by wearing glasses. It sounds simple but you would be surprised how many people think that a 3-D version viewed without glasses is the same as an out-of-focus 2-D one. The movies are presented in chronological order.

Green Lantern

Overall, the visuals in Green Lantern are amazing. This could have so easily seen stupid or reused old tricks, but instead this comic book epic is brought to screen with an enthralling look that is neither disconnected the real world nor underwhelming. Also, the cinematography uses a broad color spectrum, unlike, say, The Green Hornet which gave everything a green tone and passed it off as "artistic." However, Director Martin Campbell has been making movies for a while and thus has some difficulty adapting to a 3-D format. The movie is converted (a good thing, since Campbell's style is not meant for bulky 3-D cameras), but as is often the case with the process the images are occasionally out-of-focus. Furthermore, Campbell is unable to maximize the 3-D opportunities--as a result the movie is simply in 3-D and does not use the format to enhance the story-telling or action-sequences beyond giving it an extra dimension.

One might think that the 3-D makes the movie be a few shades darker, but that is in fact the actual color scheme--the 3-D version has been adequately lightened.

Cars 2

CGI-animated movies do not use a camera and thus can be designed for 3-D much easier. As a result, they are usually the best looking 3-D.

Cars 2 is at the top-end of the spectrum for 3-D movies, but for an animated one is relatively unimpressive. The 3-D is focused and the colors are right, but the film uses few angles that would maximize the use of the format.

Also, Pixar (the studio behind Cars) makes sure not to ever use 3-D as a gimmick. The result is that it never interrupts the story and serves only as a subtle improvement to the viewing experience. The downside is that there is far less evidence for why you paid extra for a 3-D ticket.

Transformers: Dark of the Moon

Michael Bay is famous for giving us amazing, explosion-filled, mind-blowing action films. The third episode in Transformers, however, was the first time the director used 3-D, a technique he had been hesitant to do. Bay made the daring choice to shoot most of Dark of the Moon with 3-D cameras rather than converting. The cameras often yield better results, but are so cumbersome it seemed unlikely to work with Bay's constantly moving camera style, and furthermore has poor compatibility with IMAX.

Amazingly, Bay manages to make visually the best live-action 3-D film of all time other than Avatar. The details are amazing, the backgrounds are digitally blurred, the lighting is perfect, and the added dimension gives a whole new sense of scale the mayhem. Even more impressive, Bay shot the thing for under $200 million: A feat that recent 2-D pictures like Prince of Persia and Iron Man 2 could not accomplish even with shorter running times. The movie itself is not quite as incredible, but there are no complaints about the visuals.

Oddly, there were only two 3-D releases in June, so this concludes this month's list. As a final note I will mention that there are reports that many theaters are projecting 3-D films wrong (such as by using a dimmer bulb) which makes the image darker. Sure, some 3-D films are actually darker than their 2-D counterparts, but it is often worth considering that your local theater is playing it wrong and its not the fault of the actual movie. It could be worse trying out your next 3-D experience at another theater as an experiment.

Cars 2 (A-)

With the reputation Pixar has built up, it is understandable that adults will go to Cars 2 expecting another Up. Due to this, it is imperative to say, just like every other reviewer has, that no one should delude themselves into thinking Cars 2 is of that quality.

However, it is being very unfair to judge a movie based on how it compares to the studio or director's previous pictures. Cars 2 is not like Up, but that is because Cars 2 does not aspire to be Up. This is not meant to be a groundbreaking achievement which is certain to make everyone cry. This is meant to be a fun action comedy for children which anyone can enjoy. At that, Cars 2 succeeds. And, frankly, that is in many ways a good thing. Do you think children really liked silent montages of lonely robots trash compacting, or elderly men mourning the death of their spouse, or toys being abandoned by children who have forgotten the fun they had together because that is what happens when you grow up or you turn your back on your American Girl doll for one second little kid hahahahahahaha. As much as we deny it, Pixar has become less and less a studio that makes movies kids' will like, or even should see. Cars 2 gives a movie that everyone will enjoy, especially children. If that means some toilet humor and no deep messages, so be it.

The Cars universe is a world without humans, but with anthropomorphized vehicles (planes, helicopters, boats, and of course cars) that eat, sleep, make friends, kiss, and generally act like people. Racing superstar Lightning McQueen (Owen Wilson) enters the World Grand Prix, a race sponsored by Sir Miles Axelrod (Eddie Izzard) in order to promote alternative fuel sources. McQueen's competition against the cocky Francesco Bernoulli (John Turturro) is upset by the antics of Tow Mater (Larry the Cable Guy), McQueen's naive and easily confused best friend. When an American spy-car gives an important picture to Mater, MI6 agents Holly Shiftwell (Emily Mortimer) and Finn McMissile (Michael Caine) recruit the goofy tow truck to combat a crime syndicate's scheme to sabotage the race.

The main character of the original Cars was McQueen, but this time he takes a back-seat to Mater. The genre is also switched, from a small-town nostalgia trip to a adrenaline filled mash-up of Speed Racer and James Bond. The first change results in some undeveloped characters and a lot slapstick humor, the latter results in way more violence than should be in a G-rated movie (the MPAA received many complaints from angry parents saying their very young children were distraught while seeing the film).

The morals are not astoundingly deep, but they are nice, encouraging, and great for a family outing. The characters are kind and truly feel bad when they hurt each other. The environmentalist message is too heavy-handed, but is fortunately the only political issue discussed.

One of the best parts of the movie is that despite having cars for characters, the movie offers a genuine spy movie, not a parody. Director John Lasseter (Toy Story 1 and 2, A Bug's Life) uses automobiles to enhance the excitement instead of mocking it. The non-stop action is going to be thrilling for people of all ages (except for some toddlers), and Finn McMissile is so cool he deserves a spin-off movie. The 3-D illusion definitely improves the experience.

Cars 2 is best for children, but it is fun for everyone.

Predictions: Best Films of Third Quarter 2011

Believe it or not, another quarter has passed. And, even though Super 8 was not as a good as I predicted, I am making a prediction list for films coming out in the third quarter of 2011. A prediction of the best. I also, very reluctantly since this is only a list of five, did not include Don't Be Afraid of the Dark, but that doesn't mean you should not see it. Anyway, here goes.

5. Winnie the Pooh

July 15

A.A. Milne's charming works are a beloved part of most of our childhoods. This adaptation of his book is being promised by the studio as both a "tribute" and another timeless tale.

Meet the Robinsons' Steven Anderson and debut director Don Hall reboot the film franchise with traditional 2-D animation and a G-rating. Here is a quote from Character Animator Cesar Cueva: "Winnie the Pooh is not your traditional “modern” animated feature. It’s doesn’t offer any flashy effects or well planned out action sequences. There is no magic, no plot twists and no added adult humor or pop culture references to entice the older audiences. No, Winnie the Pooh is an old fashioned Disney 2D/ hand drawn animated film through and through. It knows its core audience and it’s an effective film for 3 reasons: simple storytelling, a subtle yet powerful moral message, and a creative imagination. All these add up to something that gets lost in today’s films of CG, bi

g action sequences, grand sets, and manufactured emotions… Innocence." If what he says is true, this will be a charming picture that will delight children most of all, but will be fun for older people as well.

Also, it is with sadness I mention that aside from a 3-D rerelease of The Lion King, Pooh is the only wide release animated film of the quarter. Unless you count Smurfs, in which case I must shoot you.

4. Take Shelter

October 14

This was a huge hit with critics at both Sundance and Cannes. Written and directed by Jeff Nichols (Shotgun Stories), tells the story of a middle-aged man (Michael Shannon) with a wife and kids who suddenly gets it into his head that imminent doom is coming and he must prepare for it. Is it madness? A premonition? Both? Whatever it is, the praise wasn't unanimous, but it was pretty strong. This is one of the year's first Oscar contenders.

Also, it comes out a week after the more publicized Sundance hit Martha Marcy May Marlene, which some of you (probably the ones on Screened) are wondering why I have not included. The reasons are 1) I'm getting pretty sick of dream/hallucination films, and 2) it has a pretty bad MPAA rating.

3. Life, Above All

July 15

A South African picture which has had no plot details released sounds like something most people would choose to pass by, but wait. This is apparently a touching mother-daughter story that was a hit at Cannes that made everyone cry and cheer. Sure, I got that from its trailer; even so, I think this might be and enlightening and powerful drama. It is based on a book calledChanda's Secrets which doesn't have any readily available descriptions and I will not investigate further for fear of plot details.

2. Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows, Part II

July 15 (Yeah, that's the third one with that release date)

Another little known indie flick, Harry Potter is probably going to be overshadowed by that South African movie in such a competitive weekend, but I think it deserves a mention.

In all seriousness, I think a moment of silence must be given in awe of the end of a phenomena. Only one franchise can in any form compare to the huge appeal and love these stories of a wizard growing up have been. It is the epic conclusion we have all been waiting for, and, as someone who read the novel, I can assure you its a good one.

Whether you yourself are not an avid fan of the franchise, it must be noted Potter has captured the imagination and heart of thousands of people. That is an incredible feat. And that is why it is important to note the release of this movie in my blog.

That said, it is worth noting that David Yates and Eduardo Serra have brought some of the worst cinematography ever to the franchise. Shot in tones of gray, black, and green, Harry Potter might be loaded with awesome visuals, but its coloring makes my eyeballs scream.

1. Life in a Day

July 29

Oscar nominated Director Kevin Macdonald (The Last King of Scotland, State of Play, The Eagle), who can do some pretty great stuff teamed up with Ridley Scott to ask people to send in Youtube clips of bits of their day and compiled it to portray a day on Earth. Edited into a finished product, the movie gets a theatrical release (albeit limited) in about a month. This is apparently similar to a 2004 project called "A Moment on Earth," which was made using videos from over sixty filmmakers. Still, I think Life in a Day seems a pretty original concept and could be something truly amazing. The few critics who have reviewed it have said as much.

Excited for the third quarter of 2011? See you at the movies.

X-Men First Class (D-)

I have always been a fan of the X-Men. The original trilogy was not amazing, but it was entertaining and captivating. The comics are usually not as good as Avengers or Thunderbolts, but I still read them.

Sadly, for the fifth installment in the X-Men film series, Fox picked the man worst suited for the job. As a result, the origin story for the most popular comic book super-team is a mess.

Matthew Vaughn is a self-proclaimed fanboy of pretty much every comic book ever written. Sadly, he has too little a grasp of what makes the stories so good, so every time he tries to adapt one of them he ends up ruining a good story. Originally contracted for X-Men: The Last Stand, he left after Fox ordered him to change his plan. Taking the helm of Kick-Ass, Vaughn attempted to change a dark comedy about current society into a straightforward superhero comedy. The result was a mildly entertaining but convoluted and utterly pointless train-wreck. Now, back in the X-Men universe as both writer and director, Vaughn once again gives us a picture that has a lot of interesting ideas pasted together into something that in no way makes a satisfying story.

To give Vaughn and the three other writers (Jane Goldman of Kick-Ass and the duo behind Thor) credit, they have not been given much to work with. The movie had to be a prequel, meaning that most of the interesting characters have already been used up. Gavin Hood's Wolverine Origins proved that it is possible to make a character driven back-story off of the X-Men comics, but Vaughn wants to have a team even bigger than the one shown in the original trilogy. Foolishly passing over the most obscure X-Men, Vaughn and his team choose fairly well-established comic-book mutants. Unfortunately, these characters make no sense in the kind of story First Class is supposed to tell, so the movie effectively changes them into completely different characters. This makes anyone who was a fan of the comics sorely disappointed. Just because someone renames Eat Pray Love "Wonder Woman Origins" doesn't mean fans of Wonder Woman are not going to figure out they have been played.

Worse, the first four films have used up the characters with interesting powers. In First Class, almost all of the mutants, be they hero or villain, have abilities which do not involve any physical contact with their opponent. As a result, while the original X-Men gives us super-strong, regenerative tough-guys who can exchange punches for hours, First Class's battle sequences are just people grimacing and grunting as the other characters tell us they are using a "psychic blast" or "force punch." The occasional CGI lightning bolt does not suffice for regular fist-to-face fight sequences, so despite being loaded with so-called "action," the end result is mildly boring. Even if the mutants are only wearing underwear.

The visual aspect is not helped by Vaughn's obsession with slowly revolving the camera continuously or a refusal to use 3-D.

The story, set in the early 60s, centers around Erik Lensherr (Michael Fassbender), who is to become totalitarian world-conqueror Magneto, and Charles Xavier (James McAvoy), who is to become Martin Luther King Jr-esque Professor X, leading a team of young mutants (of which there are far too many to list) against evil mutant Sebastian Shaw (Kevin Bacon) and his team of mutants (of which there are far too many to list) in a world that does not accept the new species due to their differences (of which there are far to many to list). Fassbender and McAvoy both do a good job, but the best performance comes from Caleb Laundry Jones (the brother in The Last Exorcism) as an awkward, charming mutant student. The saddest is poor January Jones, who was not told that visual effects would cause her to be a living diamond, and thus models her acting around one: rigid, stiff, transparent, and glaringly obvious.

The story allows for some interesting character development and themes, but it does not hang together right. Why doesn't Erik have a German accent? Why do Nazis let an American scientist experiment in their concentration camp? Why when there is a mutant with the power of mind control does any conflict occur when he could just force everyone to resolve the situation? Why does everyone say Mystique's body is ugly when it looks exactly like a normal naked Jennifer Lawrence just with blue skin?

Binge drinking is portrayed as a fun pastime. This cannot be ignored. This attitude towards such reckless behavior is unhealthy, even in a movie.

Lastly, there is the ridiculous retconning of history. Did you know JFK and J. Edgar Hoover covered up mutants existence and even allowed their extinction? Neither did I! It may seem trivial to complain about something so absurd, but it also shows a genuine lack of trust for society or the government. If we, as Americans, pretend, even hypothetically, that the courage of America in the Cuban Missile Crisis was really due to prejudice, hate, and a corrupt government, we are accepting a belief that we should not strive to respect and honor our society. First Class champions an anarchistic approach to crime fighting because the authorities are evil. It seems to me that this is the same type of arrogance that leads the series's villains to disregard all laws in order to create a society based on the beliefs of a few. If we refuse to accept the rules set forth by a nation elected by the whole people, we are putting us and those who are like us above the code everyone else follows.

First Class has much more in common with the beliefs of "ends justify the means" Magneto than it does with the law abiding heroes originally portrayed in the comics. And that is only one of the many mutations First Class brings to the story. I don't think anyone should accept them as the positive evolution of mankind.

Pirates of the Caribbean: On Stranger Tides (D-)

When the first in the new pirates series--Curse of the Black Pearl--opened in 2003, the story was about Will Turner, the blacksmith who set out on a quest to rescue the girl he loved from evil pirates. Aiding in his quest was Jack Sparrow, a notorious pirate who had agreed to help in order to 1) escape from prison and 2) avenge a marooning that he had miraculously survived from. Turner succeeded in his quest and rescued his true-love.

This was not a great story. At the end Turner aids Sparrow in escaping from execution despite being certain Sparrow has no intention of actually reforming. Piracy is romanticized. However, at its core, the story's hero is an honest man who does the right thing.

The second and third installments further glorified the pirate mystique, but still kept Turner a crucial part of the story. In the end of (what was then) the trilogy, Turner agrees to leave the woman he loves to sail the world delivering deceased sailors to the afterlife simply because he knows he is the only one who will do it right. Likewise, despite Sparrow's efforts to seduce her, Turner's love also chooses the righteous blacksmith.

These movies were flawed, yes. In fact, they were bad. However, they were still a conventional story where (for the most part) the right thing to do was the thing praised.

All of this is lost in the fourth movie. Turner is gone, and the once supporting character Sparrow is now the protagonist. I say protagonist over hero since "hero" is not a word that can describe such a despicable character. On Stranger Tides glorifies everything that society once knew as wrong: cowardice, theft, womanizing, vengeance over the most petty of things, anarchy, and overall selfishness.

Sparrow is press-ganged onto the ship of the ruthless pirate Blackbeard (Ian McShane) and must team-up with Angelica Malon (Penelope Cruz), an old flare who may or may not be Blackbeard's daughter, in order to reach the Fountain of Youth. Also on the way to the fountain is sometime-friend/sometime-foe Captain Hector Barbossa (Geoffrey Rush)--now missing a leg and working as a British privateer with Sparrow's sidekick Gibbs (Kevin McNally)--and a fleet of Spanish ships (Spain is at war with England). Complicating things is Blackbeard's captive Philip (Sam Claifin), a Christian missionary who doesn't want anyone killing mermaid Syrena (Astrid Berges-Frisbey), even if her tears activate the Fountain's water. Got all that? There is a test.

Berges-Frisbey and Claifin both give good performances that might bring them out of obscurity, and Cruz is charming enough. McShane's performance is passable, but his character (through no fault of his own) pales in comparison to the riveting personas of Barbossa and Sparrow. As the former, Rush (fresh off another Oscar nomination as The King's Speech's charming mentor) does an excellent job, revealing a corrupt yet exceptional captain who is by far the smartest guy in the crows-nest (this is also due to the script, which portrays the character in far more detail than its predecessors). As the latter, Johnny Depp (Sweeney Todd) is interesting enough this time around--hamming things up just a bit, and lacking the screen time to do something incredible, yet continuing his routine from the previous installments. All this doesn't matter, though: The better job Depp does, the more people become enamored with the character's moral depravity.

Director Rob Marshall (Chicago, Memoirs of a Geisha, Nine) demonstrates an aptitude for creating a captivating fantasy universe. After At World's End, which was the most expensive movie ever made and had incredible visuals, it seemed impossible for the series to give us more fantastical imagery, but time and time again Marshall surprises us. Particularly cool is a lengthy attack sequence featuring the mermaids, which are effectively aquatic vampires. That said, Marshall does not give up his habit of using nudity to put butts in seats--putting a sexual element in a series that has hitherto been mostly clean.

However, Marshall and veteran Pirates writers Ted Elliot and Tony Rossio do a terrible job on the story. Sure, it is funny, entertaining, and slightly better crafted than the original three; that doesn't mean it has any more artistic merit than a Corn Flakes' box's nutrition label. Every second of the Stranger Tides has gross glamorization of a disgusting lifestyle; moreso, the audience is subjected to a hideous mockery of basic values in the form of the Spanish and English soldiers. In one particularly sickening scene, a Spanish army descends on the fountain of youth with the Catholic commander shouting his orders from the prince--to destroy the pagan landmark. Since the British are Protestant, there orders are different: Claim the fountain as their own. This in and of itself would be bigoted, but the scene gets worse. Knowing it will result in certain death, a British officer brandishes a Union Jack and stands on the fountain declaring the land for his country. The Spanish captain promptly kills him, but earnestly states that he is "impressed by the man's courage" and he should be "mentioned in the records." The pirates--and the filmmakers--react as if both country's adherence to any remnant of nobility are fools, and laugh, fire upon the Spanish, then run away.

It is disturbing to see the degradation of society. There was a time where bravery, adherence to religion, and pride in one's nation were considered worthy traits. From the portrayal of the English king as a clueless cretin to the nonchalant way Sparrow reacts to his father (played by icon Keith Richards) murdering an innocent British soldier, this films tramples all aspects of honor. It was not that long ago courageous British and Spanish soldiers died to free the Caribbean from ruthless pirates who murdered civilians just for money. Even now, the United Nations fights against the same problem in the area around Somalia. It is tragic that being a good citizen and good soldier are now such ridiculed behavior.

On Stranger Tides is sickening.