Yearly Archives: 2011

The Characters referenced in Woody Allen’s “Midnight in Paris” (Part 21,Versailles and the French Revolution)

June 29, 2011 – 5:34 am

In Woody Allen’s movie “Midnight in Paris” Gil and his friends take a tour of Versailles (pictured below). In a comical scene from that movie the detective that is following Gil finds himself at Versailles back at the time of the French Revolution and he intrudes in on the king and queen of France. Then he runs for his life because the king sends the guards after him with the instruction “Off with his head.”

What actually happened in the French Revolution? Did you know that Robespierre, who was the leader of the French Revolution, was himself executed? He was held in the same containment chamber where Marie Antoinette, the wife of King Louis XVI, had been held.  On July 28, 1794, Robespierre was guillotined without trial in the Place de la Révolution. Why did the French Revolution include 40,000 executed – many of them peasants? It could be traced back to philosophical origins of the French Revolution and the rejection of what Francis Schaeffer calls the Reformation base.

Robespierre was a follower of Jean-Jacques Rousseau (1712-1778) and Rousseau advocated the idea of autonomous freedom: that “man was born free,” but that “everywhere he is in chains.” What man must do, therefore, is to throw off the fetters of culture and religion. Therefore, there was no Reformation base (which the Bible gives) to make moral judgements concerning society. Schaeffer notes, “If there is no moral absolute by which to judge society, then society is absolute.” One is only left with what is, and as Marquis de Sade recognized, this leads to the conclusion that what is is right (cruelty to women for instance according to Marquis de Sade).

allen_woody

I am a big Woody Allen movie fan and no other movie better demonstrates man’s need for God more  than Allen’s 1989 film  Crimes and Misdemeanors. This film also brought up the view that Hitler believed that “might made right.” How can an atheist argue against that?  Basically Woody Allen is attacking the weaknesses in his own agnostic point of view!! Take a look at the video clip below when he says in the absence of God, man has to do the right thing. What chance is there that will happen?

Crimes and Misdemeanors is  about a eye doctor who hires a killer to murder his mistress because she continually threatens to blow the whistle on his past questionable, probably illegal, business activities. Afterward he is haunted by guilt. His Jewish father had taught him that God sees all and will surely punish the evildoer.

But the doctor’s crime is never discovered. Later in the film, Judah reflects on the conversation his father had with Judah’s unbelieving Aunt May during a Jewish Sedar dinner  many years ago:

“Come on Sol, open your eyes. Six million Jews burned to death by the Nazi’s, and they got away with it because might makes right,” says Aunt May.

Sol replies, “May, how did they get away with it?”

Judah asks, “If a man kills, then what?”

Sol responds to his son, “Then in one way or another he will be punished.”

Aunt May comments, “I say if he can do it and get away with it and he chooses not to be bothered by the ethics, then he is home free.”

Judah’s final conclusion was that might did make right. He observed that one day, because of this conclusion, he woke up and the cloud of guilt was gone. He was, as his aunt said, “home free.”

The basic question Woody Allen is presenting to his own agnostic humanistic worldview is: If you really believe there is no God there to punish you in an afterlife, then why not murder if you can get away with it?  The secular humanist worldview that modern man has adopted does not work in the real world that God has created. God “has planted eternity in the human heart…” (Ecclesiastes 3:11). This is a direct result of our God-given conscience. The apostle Paul said it best in Romans 1:19, “For that which is known about God is evident to them and made plain in their inner consciousness, because God  has shown it to them” (Amplified Version).

Crimes and Misdemeanors (Woody Allen – 1989) – Final scenes

It’s no wonder, then, that one of Allen’s fellow humanists would comment, “Certain moral truths — such as do not kill, do not steal, and do not lie — do have a special status of being not just ‘mere opinion’ but bulwarks of humanitarian action. I have no intention of saying, ‘I think Hitler was wrong.’ Hitler WAS wrong.” (Gloria Leitner, “A Perspective on Belief,” The Humanist, May/June 1997, pp.38-39). Here Leitner is reasoning from her God-given conscience and not from humanist philosophy. It wasn’t long before she received criticism.

Humanist Abigail Ann Martin responded, “Neither am I an advocate of Hitler; however, by whose criteria is he evil?” (The Humanist, September/October 1997, p. 2.). Humanists don’t really have an intellectual basis for saying that Hitler was wrong, but their God-given conscience tells them that they are wrong on this issue.

Below is a study by Francis Schaeffer that makes the point that the French Revolution and the Communist Revolution in Russia should be compared.

E P I S O D E 5

How Should We Then Live Pt 5

T h e

REVOLUTIONARY AGE

I. Bible as Absolute Base for Law

A. Paul Robert’s mural in Lausanne.

B. Rutherford’s Lex Rex  (Law Is King): Freedom without chaos; government by law rather than arbitrary government by men.

C. Impact of biblical political principles in America.

1. Rutherford’s influence on U.S. Constitution: directly through Witherspoon; indirectly through Locke’s secularized version of biblical politics.

2. Locke’s ideas inconsistent when divorced from Christianity.

3. One can be personally non-Christian, yet benefit from Christian foundations: e.g. Jefferson and other founders.

II. The Reformation and Checks and Balances

A. Humanist and Reformation views of politics contrasted.

B. Sin is reason for checks and balances in Reformed view: Calvin’s position at Geneva examined.

C. Checks and balances in Protestant lands prevented bloody resolution of tensions.

D. Elsewhere, without this biblically rooted principle, tensions had to be resolved violently.

III. Contrast Between English and French Political Experience

A. Voltaire’s admiration of English conditions.

B. Peaceful nature of the Bloodless Revolution of 1688 in England related to Reformation base.

C. Attempt to achieve political change in France on English lines, but on Enlightenment base, produced a bloodbath and a dictatorship.

1. Constructive change impossible on finite human base.

2. Declaration of Rights of Man, the rush to extremes, and the Goddess of Reason.

3. Anarchy or repression: massacres, Robespierre, the Terror.

4. Idea of perfectibility of Man maintained even during the Terror.

IV. Anglo-American Experience Versus Franco-Russian

A. Reformation experience of freedom without chaos contrasts with that of Marxist-Leninist Russia.

B. Logic of Marxist-Leninism.

1. Marxism not a source of freedom.

2. 1917 Revolution taken over, not begun, by Bolsheviks.

3. Logic of communism: elite dictatorship, suppression of freedoms, coercion of allies.

V. Reformation Christianity and Humanism: Fruits Compared

A. Reformation gave absolutes to counter injustices; where Christians failed they were untrue to their principles.

B. Humanism has no absolute way of determining values consistently.

C. Differences practical, not just theoretical: Christian absolutes give limited government; denial of absolutes gives arbitrary rule.

VI. Weaknesses Which Developed Later in Reformation Countries

A. Slavery and race prejudice.

1. Failure to live up to biblical belief produces cruelty.

2. Hypocritical exploitation of other races.

3. Church’s failure to speak out sufficiently against this hypocrisy.

B. Noncompassionate use of accumulated wealth.

1. Industrialism not evil in itself, but only through greed and lack of compassion.

2. Labor exploitation and gap in living standards.

3. Church’s failure to testify enough against abuses.

C. Positive face of Reformation Christianity toward social evil.

1. Christianity not the only influence on consensus.

a) Church’s silence betrayed; did not reflect what it said it believed.

b) Non-Christian influences also important at that time; and many so-called Christians were “social” Christians only.

2. Contributions of Christians to social reform.

a) Varied efforts in slave trade, prisons, factories.

(1) Wesley, Newton, Clarkson, Wilberforce, and abolition of slavery.

(2) Howard, Elizabeth Fry, and prison reforms.

(3) Lord Shaftesbury and reform in the factories.

b) Impact of Whitefield-Wesley revivals on society.

VII. Reformation Did Not Bring Perfection

But gradually on basis of biblical teaching there was a unique improvement.

A. With Bible the ordinary citizen could say that majority was wrong.

B. Tremendous freedom without chaos because Bible gives a base for law.

Questions

1. What has been the role of biblical principles in the legal and political history of the countries studied?

2. Is it true that lands influenced by the Reformation escaped political violence because biblical concepts were acted upon?

3. What are the core distinctions, in terms of ideology and results, between English and American Revolutions on the one hand, and the French and Russian on the other hand?

4. What were the weaknesses which developed at a later date in countries which had a Reformation history?

5. Dr. Schaeffer believes that basic to action is an idea, and that the history of the West in the last two or three centuries has been marked by a humanism pressed to its tragic conclusions and by a Christianity insufficiently applied to the totality of life. How should Christians then approach participation in social and political affairs?

Key Events and Persons

Calvin: 1509-1564

Samuel Rutherford: 1600-1661

Rutherford’s Lex Rex: 1644

John Locke: 1631-1704

John Wesley: 1703-1791

Voltaire: 1694-1778

Letters on the English Nation: 1733

George Whitefield: 1714-1770

John Witherspoon: 1723-1794

John Newton: 1725-1807

John Howard: 1726-1790

Jefferson: 1743-1826

Robespierre: 1758-1794

Wilberforce: 1759-1833

Clarkson: 1760-1846

Napoleon: 1769-1821

Elizabeth Fry: 1780-1845

Declaration of Rights of Man: 1789

National Constituent Assembly: 1789-1791

Second French Revolution and Revolutionary Calendar: 1792

The Reign of Terror: 1792-1794

Lord Shaftesbury: 1801-1855

English slave trade ended: 1807

Slavery ended in Great Britain and Empire: 1833

Karl Marx: 1818-1883

Lenin: 1870-1924

Trotsky: 1879-1940

Stalin: 1879-1953

February and October Russian Revolutions: 1917

Berlin Wall: 1961

Czechoslovakian repression: 1968

Further Study

Charles Breunig, The Age of Revolution and Reaction: 1789-1850 (1970).

R.N. Carew Hunt, The Theory and Practice of Communism (1963).

Charles Dickens, A Tale of Two Cities (1957).

Peter Gay, ed., Deism: An Anthology (1968).

John McManners, The French Revolution and the Church (1970).

Karl Marx and Friedrich Engels, Manifesto of the Communist Party (1957).

Louis L. Snyder, ed., The Age of Reason (1955).

David B. Davis, The Problem of Slavery in Western Culture (1975).

J. Kuczynski, The Rise of the Working Class (1971).

Edmund S. Morgan, The Puritan Dilemma (1958).

John Newton, Out of the Depths. An Autobiography.

John Wesley, Journal (1 vol. abridge).

C. Woodham-Smith, The Great Hunger, Ireland, 1845-1849 (1964).

Some may argue that Paris is one of the most beautiful cities in the world. Midnight in Paris takes you on a magical tour of the city in this Twilight Zone style.

Gil (Owen Wilson) is a screenwriter feverishly working on his first novel while in Paris with his fiancée Inez (played by the stunning Rachel McAdams). After leaving a wine tasting, Gil stumbles into an old fashioned cab and is transported into 1920’s Paris. While in this strange time portal Gil comes face to face with some of the great minds of our culture like Gerald and F. Scott Fitzgerald, Ernest Hemingway, Pablo Picasso, and Inception’s Marion Cotillard as Adriana. Each character Gil runs into allows him to develop his novel even further. He begins to travel each night to continue writing and soak up more of the Parisian culture.

Midnight in Paris may look and feel like a 100 minute postcard for Paris most of the film, but underneath it all, Woody Allen snuck in a thought provoking concept on how we view nostalgia. Allen questions the concept of nostalgia and how we view it. It was so nicely woven into the story that you don’t even realize it.

I’ve watched enough sci-fi to know the time travel logistics don’t really make sense. The film doesn’t even bother explaining it. I’m sure Woody Allen could take time to tell us, but who really cares? Any reason to visit 1920’s Paris was good enough. The characters were poorly developed – that didn’t matter either. All that matters is we watched the characters walked the beautiful streets at night. The most entertaining character is Corey Stoll as Ernest Hemingway. He plays Hemingway as a hilarious blend of Don Draper and Indiana Jones. It’s not how I pictured Hemingway nevertheless I did enjoy it.

My Grade B-

If you’ve been to Paris, this film will make you want to go back. If you’ve never been, it will make you want book a flight immediately. The shots of the city are amazing. The two-minute intro doesn’t even seem that long because the shots are so breathtaking. Midnight in Paris may not be the summer’s best movie, but it’s the cheapest vacation to Paris you’re ever going to get.

Other posts on “Midnight in Paris”:”

The Characters referenced in Woody Allen’s “Midnight in Paris” (Part 21,Versailles and the French Revolution)

In Woody Allen’s movie “Midnight in Paris” Gil and his friends take a tour of Versailles (pictured below). In a comical scene from that movie the detective that is following Gil finds himself at Versailles back at the time of the French Revolution and he intrudes in on the king and queen of France. Then […]

The Characters referenced in Woody Allen’s “Midnight in Paris” (Part 20, King Louis XVI of France)

  I am presently going through all the historical figures that are mentioned in the Woody Allen movie “Midnight in Paris.” Today I am discussing Marie Antoinette’s husband King Louis XVI of France. Pictured above you can see Gil and Inez on their visit to tour Versailles with their snobby friend Paul. Paul goes on to […]

The Characters referenced in Woody Allen’s “Midnight in Paris” (Part 19,Marie Antoinette)

Marie Antoinette: The Last Queen of France (part1/12) I am presently going through all the historical figures that are mentioned in the Woody Allen movie “Midnight in Paris.” Today I am discussing Marie Antoinette. In the movie you can see Gil and Inez on their visit to tour Versailles with their snobby friend Paul. Paul goes on […]

The Characters referenced in Woody Allen’s “Midnight in Paris” (Part 18, Claude Monet)

The British gardener who’s taking care of Monet’s water lilies   By John Lichfield in Paris Thursday, 5 May 2011 PA/ REX FEATURES James Priest, the new head gardener at Giverny. Monet’s White Water Lilies, 1899, right British gardener is to take over one of the most venerated plots of ground in the world: the […]

The Characters referenced in Woody Allen’s “Midnight in Paris” (Part 17, J. M. W. Turner)

J. M. W. Turner Biography   View Larger Image > ( 1775 – 1851 ) I have enjoyed going through the artists referenced in Woody Allen’s movie “Midnight in Paris.” Paul is the snobby expert on impressionist art that talks about Monet at the museum but he notes that Turner was actually really the author […]

The characters referenced in Woody Allen’s “Midnight in Paris” (Part 16, Josephine Baker)

I have been going through the characters in Woody Allen’s movie “Midnight in Paris,” and now I am posting about Josephine Baker. By the way, I know that some of you are wondering how many posts I will have before I am finished. Right now I have plans to look at Van Gogh, Picasso, Man […]

By Everette Hatcher III | Posted in Francis Schaeffer | Comments (1)

Brummett: Real reason the debt is so big is because the rich are not taxed enough (Real Cause of Deficit Pt 13)

June 29, 2011 – 3:08 am

John Brummett asserts that liberals are right about the cause of the deficit. He asserts in his article “Harry let us down,” Arkansas News Bureau, April 4, 2011:

He is right that the actual deficit is caused by direct government spending exceeding income, an imbalance mostly caused, he will tell you with some justification, by the fact that we don’t tax rich people as much as we did in happier and more prosperous times.

We have heard the liberals say for years that Bush put us into this horrible position of deficits because of his tax cuts of 2001 and 2003. However, if Bush was responsible for taking the 236 billion surplus he inherited in 2000 and turning everything downward because of the tax cuts, then why did we only have a budget deficit of 161 billion in 2007?

Brian Riedl is the author of the article “The Three Biggest Myths About Tax Cuts and the Budget Deficit,” (Heritage Foundation, June 21, 2010), and I have enjoyed sharing this article with you in the last few days. I also found a lot of good information in the Appendix too. Here it is below.

Brian Riedl is The Heritage Foundation’s lead budget analyst and has built a solid reputation for interpreting, explaining and reforming the often arcane realm of federal budget policy.

Indeed, much of the current backlash against runaway federal spending can be attributed to Riedl’s work. As far back as 2002 and 2003, his writings exposed the beginnings of a federal spending spree that was pushing real federal spending to more than $20,000 per household for the first time since World War II.

Appendix

Methodology

The purpose of this study was to create a budget baseline reflecting an extension of current tax and spending policies. The budget baseline is presented in Appendix Table 1.

Revenues

Revenue calculations begin with the January 2010 CBO current-law baseline and incorporate extensions of:

  1. The 2001 and 2003 tax cuts,
  2. The AMT patch, and
  3. Other expiring tax cuts that are typically extended annually, all using January 2010 and March 2010 CBO data.

The calculations also incorporate the CBO estimate of revenues from the new health care law through 2019, with the 2020 figure estimated.

Discretionary Spending

Discretionary spending figures are from the CBO’s January 2010 alternative scenario, which assumes that regular discretionary appropriations grow with the nominal GDP and that Iraq and Afghanistan spending remains on the “fast drawdown” scenario.

Entitlement Spending

Entitlement spending figures are the CBO’s January current-law baseline, adjusted to reflect:

  1. The annual Medicare physician payment fix,
  2. The outlay effects of 2001 and 2003 tax cut extenders, and
  3. The new health care law.

Medicare spending is net of offsetting receipts.

Net Interest Spending

Net interest spending figures are from January 2010 CBO current-law baseline, adjusted to include the CBO estimate of the interest costs of all of the above adjustments.

Historical Averages

Historical tax and spending averages are the averages for 1960 through 2009.

Current-Policy Budget Baseline - Nominal Dollars

Current-Policy Budget Baseline - Percentage of GDP

_____________________________________

By Everette Hatcher III | Posted in Uncategorized | Comments (0)

What does the Heritage Foundation have to say about our potential choices concerning federal spending:Study released May 10, 2011 (Part 2)

June 28, 2011 – 11:44 pm

Government Must Cut Spending

 

“Saving the American Dream: The Heritage Plan to Fix the Debt, Cut Spending, and Restore Prosperity,” Heritage Foundation, May 10, 2011 by  Stuart Butler, Ph.D. , Alison Acosta Fraser and William Beachis one of the finest papers I have ever read. Over the next few days I will post portions of this paper, but I will start off with the section on federal spending reform.

The Details

Returning Most Non-Defense Discretionary Spending to 2008 Levels.
Non-defense discretionary spending has expanded 21 percent faster than
inflation over the past three years. Returning to 2008 levels still leaves
typical programs nearly one-third larger than they were in 2000 (adjusted for
inflation). Freezing this spending at 2008 levels through 2015 and then capping
subsequent growth at the inflation rate would save more than $2 trillion in the
first decade and even more thereafter.

Many of these savings are achieved by reducing the size of the federal
bureaucracy, overhauling the federal pay system, permanently eliminating many
earmarked accounts, and consolidating duplicative functions. Yet not all
programs are affected equally. For example, Coast Guard and other important
security spending rises under the plan, while lower-priority spending, such as
subsidies to public broadcasting, AmeriCorps, the National Endowment for the
Arts, and the National Endowment for the Humanities, is left to the private
sector.

Devolving or Privatizing Most Transportation Spending. Under the
federal highway program, Washington collects the 18.3 cents-per-gallon gas tax
from states, subtracts a large administrative fee, and returns the remaining
funds to the states with numerous strings attached, including many requirements
to spend the dollars on congressional earmarks and for specific uses that may
not coincide with local needs. The Heritage plan reforms this inherently
wasteful system by devolving the highway program and gas tax to the states,
thereby eliminating the federal middleman and allowing states to retain the gas
tax revenues and spend them on their own highway priorities, provided they
maintain a minimum standard of interstate highway maintenance.

The Heritage plan ends federal funding for passenger rail, saving money on
projects that invariably have ridership that is far below projections and costs
that far exceed initial budgets. Amtrak subsidies are phased out over three
years, the President’s costly high-speed rail program is terminated, and
subsidies to for-profit freight railroads are ended. This relieves states of the
upkeep and maintenance burdens associated with rail programs that Washington is
currently pressuring them to undertake. The private sector and state governments
can either take over or terminate these rail programs as they see fit.

Finally, all non-safety functions of the Federal Aviation Administration
(FAA) are transferred to the private sector, and most FAA fees are eliminated.
The air traffic control system will be transferred to the private sector, where
it belongs, and financed by flight ticket user fees. The airport improvement
program is also terminated, with airlines, state government, and private
investment taking the place of the federal taxpayer.

By Everette Hatcher III | Posted in spending out of control | Comments (0)

Senator Pryor asks for Spending Cut Suggestions! Here are a few!(Part 73)

June 28, 2011 – 5:58 am

Senator Mark Pryor wants our ideas on how to cut federal spending. Take a look at this video clip below:

Senator Pryor has asked us to send our ideas to him at cutspending@pryor.senate.gov and I have done so in the past and will continue to do so in the future.

On May 11, 2011,  I emailed to this above address and I got this email back from Senator Pryor’s office:

Please note, this is not a monitored email account. Due to the sheer volume of correspondence I receive, I ask that constituents please contact me via my website with any responses or additional concerns. If you would like a specific reply to your message, please visit http://pryor.senate.gov/contact. This system ensures that I will continue to keep Arkansas First by allowing me to better organize the thousands of emails I get from Arkansans each week and ensuring that I have all the information I need to respond to your particular communication in timely manner.  I appreciate you writing. I always welcome your input and suggestions. Please do not hesitate to contact me on any issue of concern to you in the future.

Here are a few more I just emailed to him myself:

GUIDELINE #2: Turn local programs back to the states.
Only the federal government can handle national defense, international relations, and the administration of federal laws. But why should politicians in Washington decide which roads are built in Appleton, Wisconsin? Or which community development projects are funded in St. Louis, Missouri? Or how education dollars are spent in Cheyenne, Wyoming?
The federal government taxes families, subtracts a hefty administrative cost, and then sends the remaining tax revenues back to the state and local governmentswith specific rules dictating how they may and may not spend the money. In that sense, the federal government is merely an expensive middleman, contributing little more than meddling mandates that constrain the flexibility that state and local governments need to address their own issues creatively.
No distant bureaucrat in Washington, D.C., can know which policies are best for every state and locality. One-size-fits-all federal mandates rarely succeed as well as flexible programs designed by state and local officials who are closer to the people affected. Moreover, legislators have little incentive to design programs that work beyond their home constituencies.
State and local governments, which often consider federal grants “free money,” also lack sufficient incentives to spend this money well because they did not have to extract the taxes themselves. (Many seem to forget the high federal taxes that local residents paid for this “free money.”) Consequently, local officials rarely object to federal grants for unnecessary projects.
Few local governments, for example, would consider taxing their own residents to fund the following pork-barrel projects found in the 2004 federal budget:2
  • $725,000 for the Please Touch Museum in Philadelphia, Pennsylvania;
  • $200,000 for the Rock & Roll Hall of Fame in Cleveland, Ohio;
  • $150,000 for a single traffic light in Briarcliff Manor, New York;
  • $100,000 for the International Storytelling Center in Jonesborough, Tennessee;
  • $500,000 for the Montana Sheep Institute; and
  • $50 million to construct an indoor rainforest in Coralville, Iowa.
The federal government can promote accountability, flexibility, and local control by eliminating many of the mandates on how state and local governments address their own issues and letting them raise their own revenues and create their own programs without meddling Washington bureaucrats and politicians. Specifically, Congress should:
  • Turn back the federal gas tax, as well as all federal highway and mass transit spending, to the states (2004 spending: $37 billion, discretionary);3
  • Devolve federal housing programs to state and local governments and cut federal strings on how the programs are operated ($31 billion, discretionary);
  • Send job training programs back to the states ($5,600 million, discretionary);
  • Transfer economic development programs (e.g., Community Development Block Grants, the Appalachian Regional Commission, the Denali Commission, and the Tennessee Valley Authority) back to the regions that best know how to address their local economies ($5,952 million, discretionary);
  • Devolve Bureau of Reclamation and Army Corps of Engineers projects to state and regional authorities ($5,614 million, discretionary);
  • Allow states flexibility and control over their own education programs;
  • Send the Superfund program to the states and allow local flexibility in deciding how to clean contaminated sites ($1,108 million, discretionary);
  • Turn back law enforcement grant programs to the states ($3,041 million, discretionary);
  • Devolve the Natural Resources Conservation Service to the states ($3,046 million, discretionary);
  • Transfer the Institute of Museum Services and Library Sciences to the states ($262 million, discretionary);
  • Devolve Youth Opportunity Grants to local governments ($40 million, discretionary);
  • Send the Neighborhood Reinvestment Corporation to the cities it affects ($114 million, discretionary); and
  • Eliminate the practice of earmarking federal funds for local projects.
By Everette Hatcher III | Posted in Uncategorized | Comments (0)

The Characters referenced in Woody Allen’s “Midnight in Paris” (Part 20, King Louis XVI of France)

June 28, 2011 – 5:44 am

I am presently going through all the historical figures that are mentioned in the Woody Allen movie “Midnight in Paris.” Today I am discussing Marie Antoinette’s husband King Louis XVI of France. Pictured above you can see Gil and Inez on their visit to tour Versailles with their snobby friend Paul.

Paul goes on to discuss Marie Antoinette and her husband. Also later in the film the detective that is charged with following Gil actually finds himself in the presence of the king and queen. They are upset at this and they tell the guards to take his head off!!!

Louis XVI, 1781 Louis XVI, 1781  © Louis was king of France when the monarchy was overthrown during the French Revolution. He was guillotined in 1793.

Louis was born at Versailles on 23 August 1754. In 1770, he married Marie Antoinette, daughter of the emperor and empress of Austria, a match intended to consolidate an alliance between France and Austria. In 1774, Louis succeeded his grandfather Louis XV as king of France.

Louis initially supported attempts by his ministers Jacques Turgot and later Jacques Necker to relieve France’s financial problems. French support for the colonists in the American War of Independence had brought the country to the verge of bankruptcy. Meanwhile, accusations of frivolity, extravagance and scandalous behaviour against the queen, Marie Antoinette, further discredited the monarchy.

In 1789, to avert the deepening crisis, Louis agreed to summon the ‘estates-general’ (a form of parliament, but without real power) in order to try and raise taxes. This was the first time the body had met since 1614. Angered by Louis’ refusal to allow the three estates – the first (clergy), second (nobles) and third (commons) – to meet simultaneously, the Third Estate proclaimed itself a national assembly, declaring that only it had the right to represent the nation.

Rumours that the king intended to suppress the assembly provoked the popular storming of the Bastille prison, a symbol of repressive royal power, on 14 July 1789. In October, Louis and his family were forced by the mob to return to Paris from their palace at Versailles. In June 1791, they attempted to escape, which was considered proof of Louis’ treasonable dealings with foreign powers. He was forced to accept a new constitution, thereby establishing a constitutional monarchy.

Nonetheless, against a background of military defeat by Austria and Prussia, the revolutionary leadership was becoming increasingly radicalised. In September 1792, the new National Convention abolished the monarchy and declared France a republic. Louis was found guilty of treason and executed at the guillotine on 21 January 1793. Marie Antoinette was executed nine months later.

KYW Newsradio 1060

(6/2/11)

As the old joke says, nostalgia just ain’t what it used to be. And here’s Woody Allen’s latest comedy to prove it.

3 skirt Movie Review: Midnight in ParisIt wouldn’t be fair or accurate to call Midnight in Paris a comeback for prolific and accomplished Allen, even though his last outing, You Will Meet a Tall Dark Stranger, was certainly subpar.

That’s because the two films of Allen’s that preceded that one — Vicki Christina Barcelona and Whatever Works — were strong and memorable.

So we shouldn’t be surprised that Midnight in Paris, the writer-director’s 44th film, is a delightful and witty wish-fulfillment fantasy, a tightrope act that impresses us all the way across.

Like Clint Eastwood, Allen keeps delivering, going strong in the twilight of his directorial career.  And no longer anchored in New York, he has now concocted cinematic chronicles in London, Barcelona, and Paris as well.

Midnight in Paris opens with a montage, a tribute that celebrates the City of Light in the same way that the opening of Allen’s Manhattancelebrates the City That Never Sleeps.

Owen Wilson stars as Gil, a successful Hollywood screenwriter who wishes he could be the novelist he has always aspired to be.  He is writing a novel about a guy who owns a nostalgia shop, but he is stuck.

He has come to Paris with his fiancée (a thankless role played by a miscast Rachel MacAdams) and her parents.  They want to see the expected tourist attractions, but Gil — who idealizes and yearns for the Paris of days gone by (the Golden Age of the 1920s, to be precise) when artists would flock to Paris and would turn out important, lasting work in each other’s company, prefers to wander the streets.

Which he does, late at night, and suddenly finds himself in the company of some vaguely familiar writers and artists who couldn’t possibly still be partaking of Paris nightlife.

Because a good deal of the fun of Midnight in Paris is discovering just who Gil runs into and how and by whom they are depicted, let’s drop the narrative description at this point except to say that the literary Paris of the 1920s — of, say, Hemingway and Fitzgerald — is just that, and that Allen’s terrific supporting cast includes such luminaries as Kathy Bates, Adrien Brody, Michael Sheen, and Marion Cotillard.

Amazed, charmed, seduced, excited, and powerless to resist, and on the verge of some sort of romantic involvement of one sort or another, Gil finds reasons to return late each night — to the consternation and disappointment of his fiancée and her parents — eager to re-experience the good old days while the denizens of the 1920s look back longingly at the turn of that century.

The theme of depending on, and retreating into, fantasy beyond the point of reason has been an abiding one throughout Allen’s writing and directing careers, and this film plays as a companion piece to his earlier and similarly wistful comic fantasy, The Purple Rose of Cairo,in which a fictional Jeff Daniels reached out to living and breathing Mia Farrow from the other side of the movie screen.

Allen has addressed the theme in a winning, playful way, finishing off the soufflé with just a dash of magical realism, a pinch of time travel, and a sprinkling of in jokes and one-liners.

The ensemble is in good form, but it should be mentioned that Wilson, who does not come immediately to mind as a Woody Allen alter ego, does a splendid job of capturing the angst and yearning of his character, and getting the intended laughs with his incredulity and surrender, and does so without abandoning his style or persona by imitating the delivery of his director in the way of quite a few actors before him.

So we’ll always have 3 stars out of 4 for Woody Allen’s fine flight of fancy, Midnight in Paris, a lighthearted and clearheaded comedy that also serves as a love letter to Paris.

Play it again, Woody!

Other posts on “Midnight in Paris”:”

The Characters referenced in Woody Allen’s “Midnight in Paris” (Part 21,Versailles and the French Revolution)

In Woody Allen’s movie “Midnight in Paris” Gil and his friends take a tour of Versailles (pictured below). In a comical scene from that movie the detective that is following Gil finds himself at Versailles back at the time of the French Revolution and he intrudes in on the king and queen of France. Then […]

The Characters referenced in Woody Allen’s “Midnight in Paris” (Part 20, King Louis XVI of France)

  I am presently going through all the historical figures that are mentioned in the Woody Allen movie “Midnight in Paris.” Today I am discussing Marie Antoinette’s husband King Louis XVI of France. Pictured above you can see Gil and Inez on their visit to tour Versailles with their snobby friend Paul. Paul goes on to […]

The Characters referenced in Woody Allen’s “Midnight in Paris” (Part 19,Marie Antoinette)

Marie Antoinette: The Last Queen of France (part1/12) I am presently going through all the historical figures that are mentioned in the Woody Allen movie “Midnight in Paris.” Today I am discussing Marie Antoinette. In the movie you can see Gil and Inez on their visit to tour Versailles with their snobby friend Paul. Paul goes on […]

The Characters referenced in Woody Allen’s “Midnight in Paris” (Part 18, Claude Monet)

The British gardener who’s taking care of Monet’s water lilies   By John Lichfield in Paris Thursday, 5 May 2011 PA/ REX FEATURES James Priest, the new head gardener at Giverny. Monet’s White Water Lilies, 1899, right British gardener is to take over one of the most venerated plots of ground in the world: the […]

The Characters referenced in Woody Allen’s “Midnight in Paris” (Part 17, J. M. W. Turner)

J. M. W. Turner Biography   View Larger Image > ( 1775 – 1851 ) I have enjoyed going through the artists referenced in Woody Allen’s movie “Midnight in Paris.” Paul is the snobby expert on impressionist art that talks about Monet at the museum but he notes that Turner was actually really the author […]

The characters referenced in Woody Allen’s “Midnight in Paris” (Part 16, Josephine Baker)

I have been going through the characters in Woody Allen’s movie “Midnight in Paris,” and now I am posting about Josephine Baker. By the way, I know that some of you are wondering how many posts I will have before I am finished. Right now I have plans to look at Van Gogh, Picasso, Man […]

By Everette Hatcher III | Posted in Current Events | Comments (1)

Madison, WI Union Debate (part 3)

June 28, 2011 – 12:54 am

A helpful primer on the rise of government unions and the monopoly power given to them through collective bargaining.

Chris Edwards wrote an excellent article “Madison Protest: Unions are Angry– but Wisconsin Should Go Even Further,” Feb 18, 2011, Cato Institute and I will posted portions of that article the next few days.

High cost of “generosity”
Defined benefit pension plans are available to about four-fifths of state and local workers but just one-fifth of private workers. And public sector plans are typically about twice as generous as remaining private plans. That generosity has led to a $3 trillion funding gap in public sector pensions. That gap will create a huge burden on future taxpayers unless benefits are cut, and unions often stand in the way of such reforms.

Unions increase government costs in other ways. They often protect poorly performing workers, and they usually push for larger staffing levels than required. Unions typically discourage the use of inexpensive volunteers in government activities, and they create a more bureaucratic and inefficient workplace.

Unionism seems to coincide with poor state government management. States with higher public sector union shares tend to have higher levels of government debt. And the states with higher union shares do more poorly on grading by the Pew Center regarding the quality of public sector management.

Public sector unions are powerful special interest groups. The teachers unions, the American Federation of State, County, and Municipal Employees, and the Service Employees International Union have more than seven million members combined. They have well-financed political war chests and are very active in political campaigns.

Disaster emergency vehicle drives

A disaster emergency vehicle drives through debris in Minamisanriku, northern Japan, on snowy Wednesday, March 16, 2011, after Friday’s earthquake and tsunami

A disaster emergency vehicle drives through debris ...

By Everette Hatcher III | Posted in Current Events | Comments (0)

What does the Heritage Foundation have to say about our potential choices concerning federal spending:Study released May 10, 2011 (Part 1)

June 27, 2011 – 11:43 pm

Senator John Thune Discusses Federal Spending, Elena Kagan, and the new START treaty

“Saving the American Dream: The Heritage Plan to Fix the Debt, Cut Spending, and Restore Prosperity,” Heritage Foundation, May 10, 2011 by  Stuart Butler, Ph.D. , Alison Acosta Fraser and William Beachis one of the finest papers I have ever read. Over the next few days I will post portions of this paper, but I will start off with the section on federal spending reform.

Additional Major Spending Reforms

Summary

Over the past decade, Congresses and Presidents have undertaken a
surge of spending that has accelerated America’s speed along the road to
economic ruin. Since 2000, non-defense discretionary outlays have expanded 50
percent faster than inflation. Antipoverty spending has risen 83 percent faster
than inflation, and other programs have grown rapidly. Despite multiple
government audits that have shown many programs to be duplicative or
ineffective, no significant federal program has been eliminated in more than a
decade. Government continues to grow, financed by taxes on Americans and an
explosion of borrowing that is imposing huge additional burdens on future
generations.

Thus, although the major entitlement programs are the primary driver of
long-term spending and debt, Congress must take tough action on discretionary
programs and smaller entitlement programs to reach a balanced budget and ensure
that federal spending is smaller, more effective, and more efficient.

Under the Heritage plan, non-defense discretionary spending—appropriated
programs such as foreign aid, K–12 education, transportation, health research,
housing, community development, and veterans health care, which account for 4.5
percent of GDP—is reduced to 2.0 percent of GDP by 2021. These reforms will
reduce the burden of government, thereby empowering families and entrepreneurs
and promoting economic prosperity.

In addition, antipoverty spending is reformed. Obamacare is repealed, as
noted earlier, and replaced with an alternative solution to uninsurance and high
costs. Agriculture and education programs are structurally reformed. The central
goal for defense is to guarantee national security as prudently and economically
as possible. With improvements in efficiency, we estimate that defense needs
will require spending approximately 4 percent of GDP for the foreseeable
future.

Rather than across-the-board spending reductions, which would not set true
priorities for government, the Heritage plan follows six guidelines in designing
reforms:

  • The federal government should focus on performing a limited
    number of appropriate governmental duties well while empowering state and local
    governments, which are closer to the people, to address local needs creatively
    in such areas as transportation, justice, job training, the environment, and
    economic development.
  • Functions that the private sector can perform more efficiently
    should be transferred to the private sector.
  • Duplicative programs should be consolidated both to save money
    and to improve government assistance.
  • Federal programs should more precisely target those who are
    actually in need, which means reducing aid to large businesses and upper-income
    individuals who do not need taxpayer assistance and enforcing program
    eligibility rules better.
  • Outdated and ineffective programs should be eliminated.
  • Waste, fraud, and abuse should be cleaned up wherever found.

By following these six guidelines, the Heritage plan produces a more
effective and efficient government and promotes stronger economic growth.

By Everette Hatcher III | Posted in Healthcare, Social Security, spending out of control, Taxes | Comments (0)

Senator Pryor asks for Spending Cut Suggestions! Here are a few!(Part 72)

June 27, 2011 – 5:56 am

Senator Mark Pryor wants our ideas on how to cut federal spending. Take a look at this video clip below:

Senator Pryor has asked us to send our ideas to him at cutspending@pryor.senate.gov and I have done so in the past and will continue to do so in the future.

On May 11, 2011,  I emailed to this above address and I got this email back from Senator Pryor’s office:

Please note, this is not a monitored email account. Due to the sheer volume of correspondence I receive, I ask that constituents please contact me via my website with any responses or additional concerns. If you would like a specific reply to your message, please visit http://pryor.senate.gov/contact. This system ensures that I will continue to keep Arkansas First by allowing me to better organize the thousands of emails I get from Arkansans each week and ensuring that I have all the information I need to respond to your particular communication in timely manner.  I appreciate you writing. I always welcome your input and suggestions. Please do not hesitate to contact me on any issue of concern to you in the future.

Here are a few more I just emailed to him myself:

GUIDELINE #1: Build a constituency for limited government and lower taxes.
Interest groups are always ready to defend their special-interest subsidies. Taxpayers rarely fight wasteful spending because they do not believe they will ever see the savings. Policymakers can organize taxpayers in opposition to wasteful spending by linking specific reforms and spending reductions to specific tax cuts, such as legislation to:
  • Terminate corporate welfare and use the savings for capital gains and business tax cuts;
  • Reduce outdated and duplicative programs and use the savings to reduce income taxes across the board;
  • Privatize federal corporations by offering current public employees stock options at below-market prices;
  • Commercialize air traffic control duties and privatize airports, targeting the savings to airline security; and
  • Devolve programs to states while alleviating federal mandates and reducing federal taxes.
Using the military base closing commission as a model, Congress should create an independent commission that would present Congress with a list of all duplicative, wasteful, outdated, and failed programs that should be eliminated, and earmark all savings to an immediate across-the-board income tax cut.1 To prevent Members from preserving their own special-interest programs, the legislation should not be amendable. When faced with a clear decision between funding outdated government programs and reducing the tax burden, most taxpayers would encourage their representatives to let them keep more of their own money.
  • Discretionary spending is the portion of the annual budget that Congress actually determines.
  • Since 2000, discretionary outlays surged 79 percent faster than inflation, to $1,408 billion. The “stimulus” is responsible for $111 billion of 2010 discretionary spending.
  • Between 1990 and 2000, $80 billion annually in new domestic spending was more than fully offset by a $100 billion cut in annual defense and homeland security spending, leaving (inflation-adjusted) discretionary spending slightly lower.
  • Since 2000, all types of discretionary spending have grown rapidly.
  • Overall, since 1990, domestic discretionary spending has risen 104 percent faster than inflation and defense/security discretionary spending has risen 51 percent.
By Everette Hatcher III | Posted in Uncategorized | Comments (0)

Kate Middleton and Prince William: Marriage made in Heaven? (Part 62)

June 27, 2011 – 4:33 am
The Royal Wedding in Photos
Prince William, Duke of Cambridge, Catherine, Duchess of Cambridge and Prince Charles, Prince of Wales leave Clarence House to travel to Buckingham Palace for the evening celebrations. (John Stillwell/WPA Pool/Getty Images)

I really do wish Kate and William success in their marriage. I hope they truly are committed to each other, and if they are then the result will be a marriage that lasts their whole lifetime. Nevertheless, I do not think it is best to live together before marriage like they did, and I writing this series to help couples see how best to prepare for marriage.

I read an article recently that was very helpful on this subject. “The Seven Myths of Cohabitation,” by Patrick & Dwaina Six is an article that I will be sharing in this series the next few days. Here is the sixth portion:

“But we’re married in our own eyes.” No, they’re not. These couples have specifically decided not to marry yet or they would get married. Jesus made a distinction (in John 4:17) between marriage and cohabitation and we should, too.The seventh myth is that “We should live together before getting married to see if we’re compatible.” People who use this argument also use another one you’ve probably heard: “You wouldn’t buy a car without test-driving it first, would you?” Do you catch how that dehumanizes the other person? If you decide not to purchase a car, the vehicle doesn’t feel rejected! The car doesn’t need psychological counseling so it can trust the next driver, does it? You don’t pack your personal luggage in the trunk of a car you’re only test-driving. And deciding not to purchase a car doesn’t bring emotional baggage into your next test-driving experience. This kind of reasoning leaves an “easy way’ out of a relationship. The truth is that every couple is “incompatible”! That’s part of God’s purpose in marriage: that we consider one another as more important than ourselves (see Philippians 2:4). We must all learn to be compatible with our mate!

Chip Ingram – Moving Beyond Conflict (pt 6)

There are a few final thoughts on conflict resolution that I wanted to share with you. Think of these steps as the “finishing touches” that will enable you to move beyond conflict in a healthy way. After all, conflict doesn’t feel good to begin with, so if there’s no clear closure it can have deep emotional impact. My prayer for you is that these six messages on conflict resolution will give you practical tools and a Biblical perspective that will have transformational results in your relationships. Remember, you can listen to the full message for free at: http://bit.ly/hVjh7x

Benefits of Attending a Weekend to Remember

By Everette Hatcher III | Posted in Current Events | Comments (0)

The Characters referenced in Woody Allen’s “Midnight in Paris” (Part 19,Marie Antoinette)

June 27, 2011 – 12:16 am

Marie Antoinette: The Last Queen of France (part1/12)

I am presently going through all the historical figures that are mentioned in the Woody Allen movie “Midnight in Paris.” Today I am discussing Marie Antoinette. In the movie you can see Gil and Inez on their visit to tour Versailles with their snobby friend Paul.

Paul goes on to discuss Marie Antoinette and her husband. Also later in the film the detective that is charged with following Gil actually finds himself in the presence of the king and queen. They are upset at this and they tell the guards to take his head off!!!

Marie Antoinette Biography

Born: November 2, 1755
Vienna (now in Austria)
Died: October 16, 1793
Paris, France
French queen

M arie Antoinette was the queen of France at the outbreak of the French Revolution (1787–99). Her extravagant lifestyle, which included lavish parties and expensive clothes and jewelry, made her unpopular with most French citizens. When the king was overthrown, Marie Antoinette was put in jail and eventually beheaded.

A royal marriage

Marie Antoinette was born on November 2, 1755, in Vienna (now in Austria), the capital of the Holy Roman Empire. She was the eleventh daughter of the Holy Roman emperor Francis I (1708–1765) and the empress Maria Theresa (1717–1780). In 1770 she married Louis XVI (1754–1793). Louis was the French dauphin, or the oldest son of the king of France. He became king fours years later in 1774, which made Marie Antoinette the queen.

The personalities of the two rulers were very different. Louis XVI was withdrawn and emotionless. Marie Antoinette was happy and careless in her actions and choice of friends. At first the new queen was well liked by the French citizens. She organized elegant dances and gave many gifts and favors to her friends. However, people began to resent her increasingly extravagant ways. She soon became unpopular in the court and the country, annoying many of the nobles, including the King’s brothers. She also bothered French aristocrats, or nobles, who were upset over a recent alliance with Austria. Austria was long viewed as France’s enemy. Among the general French population she became the symbol for the extravagance of the royal family.

The queen intervenes

Marie Antoinette did not disrupt foreign affairs as frequently as has been claimed. When she first entered France she interrupted an official German greeting with, “Speak French, Monsieur. From now on I hear no language other than French.” She sometimes tried, usually without great success, to obtain French support for her homeland.

The queen’s influence on domestic policy before 1789 has also been exaggerated. Her interference in politics was usually in order to obtain jobs and money for her friends. It is true, however, that she usually opposed the efforts of reforming ministers such as A. R. J. Turgot (1727–1781) and became involved in court scandals against them. Activities such as the “diamond necklace affair,” where the queen was accused of having an improper relationship with a wealthy church official in exchange for an expensive necklace, increased her unpopularity and led to a stream of pamphlets and articles against her. The fact that after the birth of her children Marie Antoinette’s way of life became more restrained did not alter the popular image of an immoral and extravagant woman.

The last days of the monarchy

In the summer of 1788 France was having an economic crisis. Louis XVI yielded to pressure and assembled the Estates General, which was a governmental body that represented France’s three Estates—the nobles, the church, and the French common people. Marie Antoinette agreed to the return of Jacques Necker (1732–1804) as chief minister and to granting the Third Estate, which represented the commoners, as many representatives as the other two Estates combined. However, after such events as the taking of the Bastille on July 14, 1789 (French citizens overran a Paris prison and took the weapons stored there), Marie Antoinette supported the conservative court faction that insisted on keeping the royal family in power.

On October 1, 1789, the queen attended a banquet at Versailles, France, during which the French Revolution was attacked and insulted. A

Marie Antoinette. Courtesy of the Library of Congress.

Marie Antoinette.
Courtesy of the

Library of Congress

.

few days later (October 4–5) a Parisian crowd forced the royal court to move to Paris, where they could control it more easily. Marie Antoinette’s role in the efforts of the monarchy to work with such moderates as the Comte de Mirabeau (1749–1791) and later with the constitutional monarchist A. P. Barnave (1761–1793) is unclear. But it appears that she lacked confidence in them. On June 21, 1791, the king and queen were captured at Varennes (a border town in France) after trying to escape. Convinced that only foreign assistance could save the monarchy, the queen sought the aid of her brother, the Holy Roman emperor Leopold II (1747–1792). At this time, many French military officers left the country. Thinking that France would be easily defeated, she favored a declaration of war against Austria in April 1792. On August 10, 1792, a Paris crowd stormed the Tuileries Palace and ended the monarchy.

The queen is dead

On August 13, 1792, Marie Antoinette began a captivity that was to end only with her death. She was jailed in various Parisian prisons. After a number of unsuccessful attempts to escape, Marie Antoinette appeared before the Revolutionary Tribunal. She was charged with aiding the enemy and inciting civil war within France. The tribunal found her guilty and condemned her to death. On October 16, 1793, she went to the guillotine. (The guillotine was a machine used during the French Revolution to execute people by beheading them.) Marie Antoinette aroused sympathy by her dignity and courage in prison and before the executioner.

Midnight in Paris

Directed by: Woody Allen
Cast: Owen Wilson, Rachel McAdams, Michael Sheen, Marion Cotillard, Adrien Brody, Kathy Bates
Running Time: 1 hr 28 mins
Rating: PG-13
Release Date: May 27, 2011

PLOT: At the stroke of midnight, a struggling novelist in 2010 is strangely carried off by a car to the 1920′s, where he hangs out with the likes of Ernest Hemingway, Salvador Dali (Brody) and the mistress of Pablo Picasso (Cotillard).

WHO’S IT FOR?: Any romantic, urban or suburban, can be swept up by the charm of Woody Allen’s presentation of Paris. This film could be especially delightful for those who enjoy their literature, or in general, their famous artists. The more that one is aware of the works of artists like Hemingway, Bunuel, or even Cole Porter, the more likely you are to take part in the movie’s magic and big laughs.

EXPECTATIONS: The reception for this film from Cannes Film Festival was strikingly positive. Did it win audiences over with humor, or heart? Perhaps a mix of both, with a few doses of death thrown in?

SCORECARD (0-10)

ACTORS:

Owen Wilson as Gil: Whether we could have predicted it or not, Wilson is quite a natural in what feels like a loosely-based Woody surrogate role (but this progressively becomes not the case). Wilson’s excitement about what’s around him translates well to the audience, and his lack of upfront neuroses is relatively refreshing. With the history of Paris standing as the mistress he sneaks away to enjoy every night, Wilson is a charming fellow tourist into the city’s great legacy.
Score: 7

Rachel McAdams as Inez: On the other side of the tourism coin is someone like Inez, a person who bought into the chic images of a Paris, but not one who cares to enjoy “the City of Lights” for its humble beauty (or even its rain). Though her character is rather simple, McAdams does well with the moments she has, and makes for an amusing ugly caricature of the type of people Allen would probably prefer to keep out of Paris.
Score: 6

Rest of Cast: Midnight in Paris is full of big name actors playing bit parts, each of them leaving a certain mark on the movie’s allure. A clean cut Michael Sheen stands as a hilarious weapon of Woody’s crusade against faux-intellectuals whose pedantic nature precedes them. Adrien Brody’s impersonation of Salvador Dali is equally kooky and delightful, and Kathy Bates is a nice surprise. Midway through the film, Allen falls in love with Cotillard’s face, and just like his contagious love for Paris, so do we.
Score: 8

TALKING: With the neuroses of its characters toned down more notably compared to previous Allen projects, the script rarely has everyone stumbling over their words. Instead, the dialogue is crisp, with Allen basking in his opportunity to name-drop a whole slew of famous artists, for the sake of making the period more enchanting, and also the gamut of a good laugh.
Score: 7

SIGHTS: With its bright-eyed enamor with all corners of the city, Midnight in Paris always lights its interiors and exteriors (of all periods) with a certain golden glow. Moments of conversation are covered with subtle long takes that also make photographic use of locations like Versailles. Midnight in Paris even begins with an entrancing montage that captures the city at all times of the day, with the beauty of Paris presented by the camera’s own exquisite framing.
Score: 8

SOUNDS: Keeping both to the period and to the general musical library of Woody Allen, the Midnight in Paris soundtrack often hums along to notable tunes by the likes of Cole Porter and Django Reinhardt. In this case, tunes by Porter have an even more direct relationship with the material, as the song is actually played by someone acting as Porter.
Score: 7

PLOT SPOILERS

BEST SCENE: There are many laughs in the film, but the biggest moment(s) might be whenever Wilson and Sheen are interacting through various “educational” moments.

ENDING: Paris is most romantic when it rains.

QUESTIONS: Where can I find the time portal in New York City, so that I can give 1970’s Woody the idea for Crimes and Misdemeanors?

REWATCHABILITY: It’s uncertain whether the magic would be as strong in a second viewing, but it’s certainly an enjoyable film with a lightness that could be visited with ease.

OVERALL

Midnight in Paris is a pleasing little gift from a filmmaker whose lighter work can be just as fulfilling as his heavier stories. Here, the neuroses of characters are relatively tranquil, and the general magic of nostalgia is at the forefront. A large chunk of Midnight’s thrill is its presentation in showing artists that we have forgotten – even if the movie likes to slow itself down a bit in order to make these references, and for Allen to toy with the existence of art’s most important characters. Packing his sweet short story with quaint poetic irony and purely beautiful imagery, Allen succeeds in showing his audience of temporary tourists that Paris is indeed a city where history’s finest artists can create some of their most inspired work.

Other posts on “Midnight in Paris”:”

The Characters referenced in Woody Allen’s “Midnight in Paris” (Part 21,Versailles and the French Revolution)

In Woody Allen’s movie “Midnight in Paris” Gil and his friends take a tour of Versailles (pictured below). In a comical scene from that movie the detective that is following Gil finds himself at Versailles back at the time of the French Revolution and he intrudes in on the king and queen of France. Then […]

The Characters referenced in Woody Allen’s “Midnight in Paris” (Part 20, King Louis XVI of France)

  I am presently going through all the historical figures that are mentioned in the Woody Allen movie “Midnight in Paris.” Today I am discussing Marie Antoinette’s husband King Louis XVI of France. Pictured above you can see Gil and Inez on their visit to tour Versailles with their snobby friend Paul. Paul goes on to […]

The Characters referenced in Woody Allen’s “Midnight in Paris” (Part 19,Marie Antoinette)

Marie Antoinette: The Last Queen of France (part1/12) I am presently going through all the historical figures that are mentioned in the Woody Allen movie “Midnight in Paris.” Today I am discussing Marie Antoinette. In the movie you can see Gil and Inez on their visit to tour Versailles with their snobby friend Paul. Paul goes on […]

The Characters referenced in Woody Allen’s “Midnight in Paris” (Part 18, Claude Monet)

The British gardener who’s taking care of Monet’s water lilies   By John Lichfield in Paris Thursday, 5 May 2011 PA/ REX FEATURES James Priest, the new head gardener at Giverny. Monet’s White Water Lilies, 1899, right British gardener is to take over one of the most venerated plots of ground in the world: the […]

The Characters referenced in Woody Allen’s “Midnight in Paris” (Part 17, J. M. W. Turner)

J. M. W. Turner Biography   View Larger Image > ( 1775 – 1851 ) I have enjoyed going through the artists referenced in Woody Allen’s movie “Midnight in Paris.” Paul is the snobby expert on impressionist art that talks about Monet at the museum but he notes that Turner was actually really the author […]

The characters referenced in Woody Allen’s “Midnight in Paris” (Part 16, Josephine Baker)

I have been going through the characters in Woody Allen’s movie “Midnight in Paris,” and now I am posting about Josephine Baker. By the way, I know that some of you are wondering how many posts I will have before I am finished. Right now I have plans to look at Van Gogh, Picasso, Man […]

By Everette Hatcher III | Posted in Current Events | Comments (0)