Each film title (below) links to orthodox website descriptor. My reinterpretation follows below each title.

I'm all for drugs. I would take them routinely if the payback weren't so steep, like paying 500% interest on a loan. Actually, drugs are devastating and sold under false pretense. Knowing that drug companies are very interested in films and our cultural perceptions that influence film making, can make even bad movies interesting.

Many films, plays, news, and educational documents contain medical propaganda, promoting paradigms that lack peer review, lack independent substantiation, and which suffer from conflict of interest. They aggressively promote medical industrial products and concepts. Being aware of such propaganda makes watching bad movies fun. Propaganda can be detected, dissected, and understood. Films can be understood and enjoyed for their true merits. One realization though, is that the audience should be paid to attend the theatrics.

Product Placement

An article in the LA Times (which comes via Scott Kirsner at CinemaTech) reports on how specific corporations have ponied up money for films whose subject matter fits their market demographic. In "Advertiser cash flows to indie film projects," Lorenza Muñoz writes:

... Unilever brand Dove has agreed to invest $3 million — about one-fifth of the budget — into "The Women," the first theatrical movie by Diane English, the creative force behind the hit television series "Murphy Brown." Gatorade, the sports drink maker, quietly put up $3 million for the production of "Gracie," a story about a girls soccer team that is coming out this weekend.
www.filmmakermagazine.com/blog/

brand Integration

The holy grail of revenue growth, according to some, may be "product integration." Forget about product placement -- only squares and losers talk about product placement anymore. The in thing now is the pursuit of a "deeper experience" in which products are "seamlessly integrated" into the plot and dialogue of a series.

www.macleans.ca/culture/entertainment/article.jsp?content=20060626_129592_129592

I disagree with the above. "Product Placement" is a more accurate term. "Brand Integration" is a method of product placement.

Michael Moore: “It’s a government that’s funded by the pharmaceutical companies and the health insurers, so I’m not surprised they’re coming after me,” said Moore, who is being investigated by the U.S. Treasury Department for traveling to Cuba for one of the segments in his film.

http://seattlepi.nwsource.com/movies/316590_cannesmoore22.html

On Michael Moore, above: The drug gov is helping Moore publicize his film, which like other 'tell all' films about the drug industry, complain about the price of drugs, not their actual worth, which in reality would be an extremely negative number.

The following reviews focus on the subplot. They do not always describe the main orthodox version of the plot or characters. For a link to a mainstream review click on a film title. For me, the subplots of product placement are the primary plot, though those plots are unmentioned by orthodox reviewers. Films are as important as legislation, and thus those who lobby and fund films should be publicized, to clear up suspicions the audience may have. Reviews should focus, at least somewhat, on movie funding.

Won an Oscar. A version of Che Guevara's life. Guevara, as a recent medical school graduate, tours South America on a motorcycle with a friend. He describes his asthma condition as "I was born with weak lungs... it is something you must fight... adrenaline injections are the treatment."

Wonderful, intelligent, very funny film. Certainly should be a candidate for best comedy. Borders on corny, but stays unpredictable and witty -- skillful craft, photography, acting, writing, directing. Few if any medical products sold. This film was not mentioned at Golden Globe Awards 2008, nor was anyone mentioned, as being associated with this film (such as Steve Carrell (protagonist)).

Its main plot device equates "Bob Marley, social martyr" with "hero-virologist", like "Jonas Salk", and the nutcase that actor Will Smith portrays in this film.

I thought this might be fun to see -- hi-tech digital sci-fi craft and state-of-the-art propaganda -- but it is just more trash in the massive Hollywood river-sewer.

The Plot: A virologist hero tries to save the world from a virus epidemic (extending the theme of the previous movies, "28 Days...").

The hero-virologist is black, he is saved by a Latin-like woman, and the hordes of infected mutants are (you guessed it) raging white men.

At the film's climax, near the end, the virologist gives his life while destroying the last "infecteds" with a grenade and fire.

Before that moment, however, he offers to save them, as he has developed the magical VACCINE. The infecteds don't listen! They insanely rage against him, the doctor, the voice of reason, and so, he pulls the grenade pin. The film ends with songs by Bob Marley.

Marley's passionate work against the dark side has been crudely and thoroughly co-opted.

Many in the audience were gasping with sympathy, while I was laughing with disgust. Two different planets. I tried to comment on a movie blog and was censored.

A fake 'great film', slow tempo, etc. Great craftsmanship, but otherwise boring. Wear ear plugs as high db sound is not predictable. Exploits audience, especially those, like me, who admire the Coen brothers.

I always stay to the very last frame, watching all credits, etc. This film actually ended with a giant HORSE'S ANUS, which then resolved to a HORSE'S ASS, which then to confirm what you are looking at, reveals a horse head turning around and whinnying. Really. This film got scores of 100 from many moronic critics. But a few smart ones (remember their names) correctly trashed this film.

Here yea, here yea, critic Rosenbaum, of the Chicago Reader! He trashes this film, and also, as a bonus, he trashes "Lars and the Real Girl".

The first thing we demand of a wall is that it shall stand up. If it stands up, it is a good wall, and the question of what purpose it serves is separable from that. And yet even the best wall in the world deserves to be pulled down if it surrounds a concentration camp. —George Orwell

In the past, the Coens have gotten a lot of mileage out of ridiculing most country folk for their stupidity...

Extremely boring and stupid. One of the worst chick flicks. A man (actor) describes the movie accurately during the first section, "This is insane, this is crazy." The man is quickly suppressed by 'caring' women and he and the entire town then join the humor Lars for (in audience time) the next two hours. To date, this film has garnered to 2 awards and 9 nominations.

This film spends most of its celluloid demonstrating Dr. Mudd's honest and brave character and his unjust imprisonment. Then it has Mudd saving "hundreds" from Yellow Fever, and proving that disease paradigm true by acquiring Yellow Fever himself, via an inadvertent mosquito bite. Mudd was then pardoned by the U.S. President and glorified as a medical hero (like Jonas Salk).

'Fine performance by Warren Baxter as Dr. Samuel Mudd. There's John Carradine as the vicious Sgt. Rankin who after treating Dr. Mudd with sadistic brutality he in the end repents from what he did to the good doctor after Dr. Mudd saved his life as well as over a thousand others on the mosquito infected isle from Yellow Fever. Dr. Mudd himself got infected by what he called the "Yellow-jacket" that almost ended up killing him as well.'

Tom DiCillo wrote and directed this great comedy film. (See also his "Double Whammy" below). As usual he pokes fun at society and Hollywood.

Plot: Les Galantine, photographer (paparazzi), lets a young homeless guy (Toby) stay at his apartment in exchange for assistance. Eventually Toby and a casting director hit it off, and Toby also falls in love with a star singer -- Toby makes the big time. Toby stays behind. Drama and humor and touching moments are left out of this synopsis.

The audience file out as soon as the credits were listed at the end of the film, however, if they stayed they would have seen the film continue with an interview of Les Galantine, for having taken a great photo "shot seen 'round the world" of Toby and his singer girlfriend:

One great scene spoofs (as comical parody) "AIDS fund raising": Les and Toby venture into a convention, "Soap Stars against STD". The question is asked, "What's rule number one?" Les answers, "Don't let a hooker slip you the tongue!"

This is a biography of Edith Piaf the famous singer, who died at an early age of drug addiction. The film ennobles and rationalizes the life of druggie street waif, though Wikipedia writes that her addiction of morphine was the result of hospital procedures following a car accident ("In 1951 she was involved in a car accident, and thereafter had difficulty breaking a serious morphine addiction.").

A fun film, though often too blunt. I gave it a 65. All Moviefone reviews gave it 100, indicating tremendous industrial support for its 'message'. Note in contrast that the quality film, "Running with Scissors", which critiqued psychiatry, was voted "Worst film of the year" by high profile reviewers. www.imdb.com/title/tt0439289

"Knocked Up" is a virtuosic display of propaganda technique. The writer/director is listed as Hollywood veteran, Judd Apatow, though his tasks were likely coordinated with a team of medical industry advisors, writers, and other consultants.

Plot, Summarized In Two Sentences

Natural drug (marijuana) user grows up to become macho-hero-defender of pharmaceutical industry. Audience is aligned with his journey via cozy comedy and his witty character.

Plot Beginning

Three icons are established.

Icon #1 (Cultural and genetic contrast, at gender level):

The protagonist is portrayed as a slovenly, irresponsible, bong-toting, unattractive young Jewish man ("Ben Stone", played by Seth Rogen). Ben accidentally impregnates his opposite, i.e., a nice, successful, career-minded Teutonic blonde beauty ("Alison", played by Katherine Heigl), during a one-night stand. How will this resolve?

Icon #2 (Family ethics)

The gifted Alison is not short on options. With advice from her mother, Alison doesn't want an abortion and decides to have the baby while continuing her career as news anchor. She hardly remembers Ben, but phones him to determine if he would be of any help (money, helper, good father or husband, or litigation target). His potential roles are not limited before the phone call. Alison remembers during her one night with Ben that he was good-hearted, socially adept and witty, though obviously rough-cut.

Alison's sister ("Debbie") advocates against drugs and vaccination, and Alison agrees. The two woman distrust medicine. These attitudes will change.

Icon #3 (Mideast conflict)

Among Ben's four immature roommates, his one non-Jewish roommate, with beard/mustache, is a caricature of a dumb, Mid-Eastern terrorist, at odds with his clean-shaven Jewish roommates. Ben tells him, "There is a reason you were not chosen." The dumb terrorist image highlights Ben's innate wit and wisdom, my contrast.

The plot unfolds...

Plot Middle

Characters evolve towards the climax, which will be the childbirth scene. The cool Alison becomes traumatic, demanding, loud, argumentative, apparently due to her great and just anticipation of childbirth pain. During an argument she abandons Ben, throwing him out of her car in a strange neighborhood. Ben evolves towards supportive responsibility and intelligent behavior. He obtains employment. "Best job I've ever had", he tells his boss. He refrains from marijuana, moves away from his immature roommates.

Sister Debbie's husband labels her, "over-protective", and cites Debbie's anti-vaccination position. She responds, calling her husband "dipshit". The audience laughs. At this point, I was surprised to see anti-vaccination mentioned in a Hollywood film. However, the film increasingly portrayed Alison's character as unstable, small-minded, over-controlling, and humorless.

Alison spends much times to carefully select a doctor who seemed sympathetic to natural childbirth. However, at the critical moment, when her water breaks, that doctor, without notice, is available (abandonment). Alison goes to a hospital and is randomly assigned a doctor. A threatening image is established for those who might consider natural childbirth. (Note, Alison should have joined an natural childbirth group.)

Plot Apex (Childbirth)

A clever, odd scene: All of Ben's ex-roommates have "pink-eye" disease, which, as they explain, is an infection acquired from feces particles -- caused by -- the 'terrorist' roommate farting on a pillow. This odd scene appears unrelated to the plot except as humor, yet this scene is actually a definitive setup, which asserts by description, potential pathogen vectors of the groin region, and asserts by inference, that in the female, these pathogens could effect childbirth.

In the delivery room, with birth imminent, Alison objects to drugs. The doctor insists on "pain-killers" and forces Alison's compliance by (illegally?) abandoning her, "Be your own doctor, I'm leaving", and he leaves.

Ben follows the doctor into the hallway and quietly, skillfully, patiently urges the doctor to be diplomatic with Alison, though not in terms of Alison's interests (Ben is becoming a man). The doctor returns, and the desperately fearful Alison agrees to any and all medication, however, the doctor now expands his pharmaceutical terminology, referring to "antibiotics to fight infection". That statement, along with the "pink-eye" episode (from infective microbes at the groin region) reinforce pertinent germ paradigms. Thereby, infant vaccination and other pharmaceutical procedures are reinforced logically to the audience. The delivery continues with the doctor in command, and he states, "We're too late for an episiotomy", as if they missed their chance for that wonderful surgical procedure, due to the arguing.

Emotional Climax: Ben's becomes a full-fledged man (he too is birthed). At a moment when the doctor again (though briefly) leaves the room (to fetch a nurse), Debbie (sister and natural childbirth advocate) moves close to Alison to support her. Ben then takes Debbie into the hallway and with tremendous physical dominance, as the protecting father, verbally blasts Debbie, "Back the fuck off! This is my room! Your place is in the waiting room! If you don't leave I'll call security and tell them a nut-case woman is trying to steal our child!" The audio track is at peak volume, with Ben portrayed as a valiant roaring lion (earplugs are necessary).

Debbie attempts to reason civilly, however, Ben verbally blasts her out of the hallway. Ben's attitude towards Debbie (physical attack) and his attitude towards the doctor (quiet respect) are distinguished. Manhood is defined. Additionally, the audience is programmed to use the ad hominem attack against the unorthodox.

Plot Ending

Debbie obediently returns to the waiting room, sits down and quietly tells her husband that she actually "enjoyed" being reprimanded. The audience predictably erupts in laughter, with the trite scene of the over-controlling shrew put in her place.

All is well with the world. Icon #3 is resolved, that is, the 'terrorist' roommate appears shaven, no longer at odds with his shaven roommates. Social harmony reigns.

Omitted images

1) The very real danger of tragically spending one's life with an autistic child. 2) Suffering permanent maternal health damage. Both due to medical procedures developed out of a conflict of interest between the chemical industry and medicine, e.g., vaccines, pharmaceuticals, unnecessary surgery.

A fun film, not a great film, somewhat crude and stupid, put together; I'd give it a 65 (Moviefone reviews give it 100 across the board!), though only for entertainment value. For craft it gets 70. For message it gets -1000. Every element, device, and action, in this film is portrayed on-screen as 'humor'.

It is one of the best available examples of propaganda technique. Writer/director is listed as Judd Apatow, though these tasks were likely coordinated with a team of medical industry advisors and propagandists.

All-time horrible stupid boring film, funded by the Irish Film Board. Whining, stinking, repetitive, simple-minded, garbage pop songs, plot and acting, with a whining naive cast. All song melodies are based on a descending chromatic scale. I shudder at the memory.

An excellent, entertaining and skillful argument for the blue pill (reality avoidance pharmaceutical, as featured in "The Matrix" films).

Politically timely; the film coincides with CCD (Colony Collapse Disorder, bee epidemic of 2006/2007). Humans, instead of bees, have horrific lice burrowing into their skin. The 'bug' concept is nebulous. The 'bug' may be a paranoid illusion, and the illusion, not the bug is infectious.

"Bug", however, focuses on a one couple and a few intimates that wander into their space.

Some illogic. Example: A visiting shrink who worked with the male human vector (carrier) in the Army, claims to know the situation well, but naively puts himself in fatal danger.

Extremely well done horror film. Acting is very convincing, intense, focused, the result of great directing. Essentially this is the film "Conspiracy Theory" gone mad. Has the audience picking their scalp for lice.

Starts with wit and humor. Funny discussion of lice, thrips, and termites. La protagonista is impressed with el protagonista's intelligence, recognized by his use of the word "matriarchal". Resolution of bug problem is by murder and self-immolation in high-test gasoline.

Sales products: Insect-fear, pest-control, the blue pill, and definitely misandry (male hate),

A corporate teambuilding vacation turns into a horrific mass murder scene. Style is comedy/horror/drama.

Sales products: Pharmaceuticals. Those addicted to pharmaceuticals will survive horror, escorted to safety by young beautiful nude women. Abstainers die a fate worse than death.

Exciting action movie, well done, a blend of "Epidemic" and "Return of the Dead". It is based on a BS virus theme, very much like mad-cow-disease for humans.

Sales product: Virus paradigm. The movie effectively has the audience hating stupid children who don't realize just how dangerous viruses really are!

In the Land of Women (2007)
Cast: Meg Ryan, Adam Brody, Kristen Stewart, Olympia Dukakis
Director: Jonathan Kasdan, Screenwriter: Jonathan Kasdan

This film is a mumbling heap of garbage, filled with suburban women crying their problems to a sophisticated young porn writer guy from LA. The film seems to have a huge conflict of interest with the medical industry, over women's health (cancer, social, senior problems, psychology). Example, Meg Ryan confesses to Adam Brody that she's going to have her breasts removed, cancer surgery. His answer is a big dramatic wet kiss, and "It's going to be alright." If I were Adam I'd say, "You'd better spend the night researching the cancer industry on Google."

This film's primary propaganda topic is abortion. Yes, that's right, absolutely for sure.

Sigourney Weaver, the protagonista, is a brave, stoic heroine on a space ship. She is a sexy intelligent woman who contains in her evolutionary makeup (though unseen) some monstrous alien DNA.

She gives birth to a monster son who resembles a freakish 8-foot tall monster fetus, with big teeth and a long tongue. To save the world, during the final scenes, she hugs her son and then breaks a window in the space ship, as a strategy against this monster. The scene is agonizingly emotional because she obviously has strong motherly instinctive love for the son and the son for her. Yet she has her son sucked out of the space ship piece by piece, to save the world.

The parallel to modern abortion techniques is obvious, since the suction method is numero-uno for abortions. The space-ship is the womb.

Summary: The CARROT: Women must have abortions to save the world. They can be heroines by having abortions. Intelligent, beautiful, brave women have abortions. That is the carrot. The STICK: Humans contain original sin, evil DNA, and women must be willing to abort to save the planet. A lot of mothers probably woke up the next morning (after seeing this film), looked at their beloved infant and thought, "Oh my God! What did I do?"

She loves him, she loves him not. Good film, irreverent comedy, no drug promotion that I caught while laughing so much.

Harry uses a powerful sea herb which gives him gills and web feet for one hour so he can win an underwater contest.

Throughout the film, Harry's professor-advisor is taking swigs of some powerful drug to stabilize himself. At one point he is taken over by an evil entity, and just before that happens, he stumbles through empty bottles, unable to get his fix.

I told a friend of my observations and his reply was: "There is no pharmaceutical association there! Potions and spirits are often found in children's books and films!" My reply: "So? That's exactly my point. There are drugs, though with no realistic portrayal of drugs. Drugs are associated with magic."

John Le Carre's novel "The Constant Gardener" has been transformed into a Hollywood movie. I saw this in August, 2005.

The movie tells us that

1) Powerful, effective drugs are released to the market before their formula is tweaked to perfection.

2) Middlemen take too much profit, and divert effective pharmaceuticals from the desperately diseased.

3) The international pharmaceutical mega-corporations manipulate prices high, and thereby those who need the drugs are denied life-saving drugs.

4) Those who obstruct the flow of profits may be assassinated.

In essence, the movie dramatizes the infectious disease paradigms (HIV, TB, etc) the efficacy of related pharmaceuticals. Suspension of disbelief is powered by conspiracy drama, eg., the steady threat of death upon the female activist-heroine.

This commercial ploy for HIV is old. Since the early 1980s, pharma-funded 'activist' groups have been given media space to successfully demonstrate for greater access to AZT, etc. This movie is a continuation of the same promotional procedure.

The movie ostensibly 'reveals' the surreptitious politics of the pharmaceutical industry, but actually it merely enhances the orthodox thesis, which is that pharmaceuticals are powerful benefits for patients.

Missing is the real conspiracy, that pharmaceuticals are often well-promoted poisons that do not cure disease, and are a major form of disease causation, as they appear on www.virusmyth.com

From an inside source whom I cannot reveal, Le Carre writes that he was a fool, initially taken in by the AIDS industry.

Junebug (2005)

The film, Junebug, was viewed at Angelica Theater in Manhattan, September, 11, 2005. The title is the name of the infant that died at birth, near the climatic end section of the movie. The mother, Ashley is shown as a naive country woman.

Ostensibly, the movie is a typical 'independent' film, written by Angus MacLachlan, who happens to be a friend of the director. But the film has the odor of gov/industrial social propaganda. Why would any film be made anyway? To 'entertain' people as audiences think? What does that mean?

This film is a great refinement of the propaganda techniques I've become aware of within this arena of independent films, for now about a decade.

The movie appears to be a tragicomedy about a sexy, sophisticated young woman, through whom, or in contrast to whom, the audience views a strange (but not uncommon) country Protestant family and culture, in North Carolina. The city audience laughs throughout at, or with, the neurotic ignorance of this small town culture. Shown are the quiet, socially unsophisticated males, the repressive and manipulating mother, the silly, babbling, pregnant daughter-in-law.

The city woman is sexy, intelligent, business-like, sociable and proper. She gracefully handles an anti-semitic comment from a mentally deficient artist (a Forest Gump character) whom she is visiting in order to gain his work for her art gallery in Chicago.

The crux of the film is obvious to those who are aware of medical propaganda.

2) A few scenes later, Ashley is shown in her hospital bed, shaking her head in agony, yelling, "Why would God allow this to happen to a baby?!" Clearly, this urges the audience to think of step one, forming an image of causation, e.g., Ashley's non-acceptance of an authorized medical product.

3) Ashley, shortly later, is shown yelling again, in her hospital bed, "Doctors think they know everything, but they know nothing!" The audience is motivated to reflect, "ignorant woman."

From my discussions with audience personnel, there is no awareness of this medical crux. The film is to them an insightful and humorous ride through country life. I don't disagree with that view, however, I am certain that the climactic crux, Junebug's death is a medical ad, evidenced by the title "Junebug", and the three steps described above.

Summary of form: The form is a pastiche of folksy interaction, with cause, effect and blame unstated. The characters obviously lend themselves to criticism. Within this pastiche, at the 'climax', the birthing of the infant Junebug, there is to be found a triple punch of medical propaganda.

This technique of blending traditional folksy "ignorance" to promote medical products, is not unusual.

Extended research for this review -- I recently found that a drug company financed the film:

No online review could be found that mentions the obvious conflict of interest. Here is what they claim they think:

"Junebug is a movie about the faces people show to the outside..." Cinematical

Searching on keywords (pharmaceutical junebug maclachlan) brought this tantalizing fragment via Google, supposedly from Movie Review - Junebug - eFilmCritic

"Sadly, writer Angus MacLachlan provides us with too many stereotypes: the ... It’s as if Morrison’s film was backed by a pharmaceutical company who was..." (the truth almost comes out in this fragment)

However, the hyperlink to the review itself is broken, the cache, even, won't link to the original document, and a different review has been substituted for the review indicated by the fragment. Here is evidence someone wrote it before the phrase was removed. The phrase now no longer exists even in the Google cache.

The substitute review can be summed up with its phrase, "I love this movie... the most complex, fascinating people you’ll see in a movie all year..."

It was written by an unusually honest critic, Aaron Ducat, who writes, "painfully boring". The rest of his "pharmaceutical" sentence is found also: "It’s as if Morrison’s film was backed by a pharmaceutical company who was handing out tranquilizers on the set."

Hey Aaron, you almost woke up! It was backed by a pharmaceutical company... but you missed the primary motive. Yet, you are suggesting product placement, that is, the movie is about social futility, which could drive one to drink... and drugs.

A great comedy by Tom DiCillo. This film promotes the alternative, questioning culture as perfectly normal, where by example la protagonista throws food at a smoker in a restaurant and everyone laughs. Gratuitous violence is parodied excellently.

DiCillo's films are subverted by the distribution industry, as it seems to me and clearly to Tom DiCillo, per these interviews: www.indieking.com/doublewhammy.html. His films have great pop appeal (but are not promoted properly), are witty, funny, and poke fun at mainstream Hollywood, as did "Cable Guy" (starring Jim Carrey), which was subverted by New York Times critics leading the dog pack.

Like Tom DiCillo's wonderful comedy, "Double Whammy", this film promotes the alternative, questioning culture as perfectly normal.

Snipes, as advertisement director Max Carlyle, is married to a vacuous 'California' wife. Max's middle-class minded male friend is married to a sexy blond, who happens to be a brainy rocket scientist.

Throughout the movie Max is 'too serious', and says party spoilers like, "The mud slides in Los Angeles were purposefully done."

The movie ends up with Max sighing relief as he and the intelligent blond go off together, and Max's wife happily goes off with the other guy. Cool suspense all the way to the end.

The film is humorous, realistic, conversational, a wonderful film. Oddly though, Max doesn't critic the AIDS paradigm, while visiting his dying HIV-infected friend at the hospital. There, however, is the advertising crux, a silent and effective propaganda technique which confirms the orthodox AIDS thesis. (The orthodox view is contradicted by www.virusmyth.com)

The film has an insightful, conspiracy theorist (Max) endorsing the HIV paradigm.

The movie is slammed routinely by critics who don't understand, or pretend not to understand the plot.

Jim Carrey plays a lawyer, Fletcher Reede, who for 24 hours is obsessed with truth telling. When his four-year old son find out Reede's condition, he sits down with his father and asks a few critical questions:

2) Son: "Is fluoride really dangerous?" Father: With a loving but condescending smile, "Of course not, son."

In this biographical movie of Jerry Seinfeld, comedians were required to submit their jokes for censoring, before going on the air (David Letterman show). The word "Lupus" was censored.

This movie appears to be the worst movie ever made. Yet it is so bad, that I suspect this was purposeful, and thus I began to enjoy the film. It has a fresh, irregular approach to plot line, reminiscent of "The Forty-Year-Old Virgin", film. There are NO medical advertisements, and thus so rare an item that it deserves mention here. There is a plug (if one can construe it as such) for the more expensive tampons.

A superb film, based on a graphic novel. Every frame is carefully crafted. This will be a classic. No simple medical propaganda detected, however, the film can be summed up in terms of typical gender politics, which in modern language has been reduced to a form of medical biochemistry: Testosterone is bad. Man's original sin can be met, his redemption, his readmission into society, can only be found by killing other testosterone producers.

The Constant Gardener (2005)	One Night Stand (Snipes, 1997)
Junebug (2005)	Liar, Liar (1992)
Comedian (2002)	Double Whammy (2001)
Dirty Love (2005)	A History of Violence (2005)
Harry Potter And The Goblet (2005)	Just Friends (2005)
Alien Resurrection (1997)	In The Land of Women (2007)
28 Days Later (2007)	Severance (2007)
Bug (2007)	Once (2007)
Knocked Up (2007)	La Vie En Rose (2007)
Delirious (2007)	The Prisoner of Shark Island (1936)
Lars and the Real Girl (2007)	No Country For Old Men (2007)
I Am Legend (2007)	Dan In Real Life (2007)
Motorcycle Diaries (2004)