Skip to main content

If a picture says a thousand words, then our eyes can see a thousand lies.

One by One
(2014)

(SPOILERS) This first came on my radar last year, loosely labelled as “the film that got Rik Mayall killed” (although he managed to shoot another first). And more particularly, noting its importance as a portent of current times. I didn’t bite until now, as I didn’t think it sounded much cop. And... It is certainly topical, I’ll give One by One that. Unfortunately, however, it falls into the great yawning trap awaiting all dramatised polemics: being both patronising and preachy. And not very dramatic. It’s very rare that such approaches do work – JFK (1991) is a rare exception – and the more problematic that Diane Jessie Miller’s film finds itself following a path that closely resembles the Christian conversion movie. Dion (Heather Wilson) is “born again” as a conspiracy believer – and more to the point, a believer in the population-reduction agenda – by means of induction by a small cadre of proselytisers to the cause headed by Mayall’s Ernest.

I’ve seen a few other reviews reference the quartet – quintet with Dion – as a cult, but they’re only a cult in as much converts to The Celestine Prophecy – which unsurprisingly gets a mention – bigging it up at Book Group are. Although, they admittedly share the self-righteousness that afflicts the religiously devout, waxing holier than thou about their new acolyte being “enslaved in a society unable to do anything but consume”. Of course, that’s widespread amongst the awake generally, a malaise requiring one to exclaim “I’ve been saying this from the start” – or in David Icke’s case, “for THIRTY years!” – at every opportunity. A pose guaranteed to put off anyone on the fence, let alone anyone disinclined to learn more and convinced you’re a loony anyway.

That said, Mayall’s a welcome restrained presence, avoiding a nutty or over-didactic performance. Which rather suggests the subject matter was close to his heart or – given the movie’s evidently ultra-low budget and limited resources – he had pals somewhere in the production. The insufferable smugness mostly comes from John (Duncan Wigman), constantly cracking an inanely knowing grin as Ernest explains some new titbit to gormless Dion.

Jeff is introduced as a character devoted to crude innuendos, but he soon drops this façade when his true self, that of a sensitive seeker, is revealed. He informs Dion that nobody owns their car, offers the lowdown on the 2012 Olympics logo, and “cleverly” confronts climate change protestors on their implicit support of population reduction (but, such is the messy characterisation, he’s also required to offer scepticism to more overtly spiritual leanings: “Jesus Christ, what are we, the fucking Waltons? Man up”).

Dion works with upbeat Lily (Katina Nare), prone to speaking in Celestine Prophecy/Conversations with God platitudes: “Everyone’s got a story to tell, and we’re all on the same path”. Her dad (Steven Macaulay, who doesn’t look nearly old enough) is also given to such sage pronouncements as “You don’t need money to live” before backtracking somewhat when put on the spot.

The problem here, besides the rudimentary nature, is that there’s nothing to hang the message on. Dion doesn’t know the real deal. Chum Lily dies. Dion gets with the programme via a crash-course montage of laptop research (“She’s got to do it herself” John tells Ernest, presumably in much the same way one has to ask Jesus into one’s life oneself). Dion ditches slimy police boyfriend Jeff (Sean Meyer). She then tries to wake Jeff, who reacts in the kind of incredibly daft fashion one might except from a daytime Aussie soap, waving a gun about (to be fair to him, this might be because he spent an entire night with a laptop microwaving his testicles). Fortuitously, that’s just when martial law is declared, with the result that he leads the charge in population reduction.

Utopia dealt with many of themes mooted here, and whether or not Dennis Kelly’s piece was expressly designed as predictive programming – as a Channel 4 commission, it was implicitly sanctioned, even if did get cancelled – the reason it succeeded was that it found a storyline in which to weave its conspiratorial musings (I say succeeded guardedly, as I was much less impressed with its second run). For the most part, Miller frequently has only the rather lumpen speechifying. Which leads one to wonder whether a documentary narrated by Mayall might have better served the mission (of course then we wouldn’t have encountered the galvanising force of Lily’s tragic demise. It might also have highlighted that, however accurate the film’s gist is – and it is, accurate – there’s not really that much in the way of bona fide evidence that doesn’t involve inference and extrapolation).

Nevertheless, if the execution leaves a lot to be desired, One by One still makes for an interesting document in terms of best guesses at the agenda’s path to fruition, currently in full effect from the Gates-keeper himself, the proud product of a line of eugenicists. Presumably, Miller is basing her 500-million figure on the Georgia Guidestones (which is closer to 7% of the population than 5% on 2014 figures, but who’s counting). There’s a concern here, though. Miller may be right to puncture the climate-change agenda (little Greta’s handlers would be irate, were they one of the ten people to have seen Miller’s movie), but she’s taking as gospel many of the same facts promoted by those she denounces as liars.

Are we really even sure the world’s population is seven-eight billion? Can we be certain ice ages occur as part of natural climate change (maybe Miller would have jumped aboard the mudflood wave if she’d made this a few years later)? Can we know the Guidestones and not deagle.com represent the true face of the depopulators? Or neither? And how far does this predictive programming go? Back to material suggesting “Greys” are a devolved, sterile future tense of humanity? Further, to Rudolf Steiner’s warnings of the same (which manage to avoid telling us how this will come to pass)?

At one point, Ernest offers his opinion “…I believe that this planet can support two billion humans perfectly comfortably”, adding that it’s a question of space: “Almost seven billion humans use too many resources. This leads to a very uncertain future for us all” and “Soon we will have depleted the resources so much, that life can’t be sustained, and then everything will die”. Which sounds a little like Miller buys into overpopulation as an issue, even as she denounces the elite’s means of dealing with it. Which is curious. I’d suggest the last thing on the Elite/NWO order mind is a Thanos-like concern for preserving an imperilled planet, but delving into Satanic agendas appears to be beyond Miller’s remit. Besides which, Buckminster Fuller – who knew a thing or two – was of the view that the Earth could support ten times its current population; it isn’t a matter of insufficient resources, but of how those resources are allocated.

Elsewhere, Miller leaves the question open but is clearly leading the audience in the right direction when a character finds herself “wondering if global warming and climate change is just another way of making us live in fear”, before extending that to the Cold War and nuclear testing. Ernest brings the War on Terror into the conversation as he explains the fall of the Twin Towers (“Play building blocks with me”) feeding fear of terrorist attacks and so fuelling the acceptance of such police-state measures as chips in passports, ID cards and pervasive CCTV (“They’re using this orchestrated ruse to convince the public to accept Big Brother type controls”).

As to the method, she casts her net wide, since “There are a mass of ways they can introduced population slaughter”. These range from “being frog-marched away from our homes in a martial-law type of way” (on the grounds of climate change), to invoking internment camps (see Canada’s leaked plan for 2021), to “The armed forces are going to kill us. What they’re trained to do”, to using “fear to fuel racism”, and “We’ll do the job for them”. Then there are “Staged events, bioengineered diseases, vaccines” (in fairness to the diseases part, few outside of GNM were really questioning virus theory prior to March 2020).

Ernest doubles down: “It could come in vaccines. Not this generation. The next… Prevention and cure for cancer. Or having babies”. Which is one of the prevailing – and reasonable – assumptions behind the guise of an entirely humanitarian mass-vaccination programme. Of course, the other is that this programme carries a feast of other functions beyond the usual cocktail of nasty ingredients, that it’s designed to alter our DNA and switch on/off our immune system at will (Miller covers this with Ernest’s realisation that simple sterility wouldn’t be enough: “You’re right. They’d never wait two generations!”). Most astutely, Miller suggests “This global holocaust will probably come out from under the banner of the United Nations”.

One might argue Miller’s protracted discussions don’t take things far enough, that focussing on depopulation represents only the tip of the iceberg, that the explanations given aren’t nearly compelling enough unless you are already in the know, and by emphasising just that element she is buying into the fear her characters are decrying. The Celestine Prophecy-style oneness rather goes out the window once the focus is on our mortal coils, or the shuffling off thereof. Nevertheless, Miller gets five out of five for good intentions. As far as inserting her content into a successful storytelling, though, One by One is a bust.

Popular posts from this blog

Your Mickey Mouse is one big stupid dope!

Enemy Mine (1985) (SPOILERS) The essential dynamic of Enemy Mine – sworn enemies overcome their differences to become firm friends – was a well-ploughed one when it was made, such that it led to TV Tropes assuming, since edited, that it took its title from an existing phrase (Barry Longyear, author of the 1979 novella, made it up, inspired by the 1961 David Niven film The Best of Enemies ). The Film Yearbook Volume 5 opined that that Wolfgang Petersen’s picture “ lacks the gritty sauciness of Hell in the Pacific”; John Boorman’s WWII film stranded Lee Marvin and Toshiro Mifune on a desert island and had them first duking it out before becoming reluctant bedfellows. Perhaps germanely, both movies were box office flops.

If I do nothing else, I will convince them that Herbert Stempel knows what won the goddam Academy Award for Best goddam Picture of 1955. That’s what I’m going to accomplish.

Quiz Show (1994) (SPOILERS) Quiz Show perfectly encapsulates a certain brand of Best Picture nominee: the staid, respectable, diligent historical episode, a morality tale in response to which the Academy can nod their heads approvingly and discerningly, feeding as it does their own vainglorious self-image about how times and attitudes have changed, in part thanks to their own virtuousness. Robert Redford’s film about the 1950s Twenty-One quiz show scandals is immaculately made, boasts a notable cast and is guided by a strong screenplay from Paul Attanasio (who, on television, had just created the seminal Homicide: Life on the Streets ), but it lacks that something extra that pushes it into truly memorable territory.

No one can be told what the Matrix is. You have to see it for yourself.

The Matrix  (1999) (SPOILERS) Twenty years on, and the articles are on the defining nature of The Matrix are piling up, most of them touching on how its world has become a reality, or maybe always was one. At the time, its premise was engaging enough, but it was the sum total of the package that cast a spell – the bullet time, the fashions, the soundtrack, the comic book-as-live-action framing and styling – not to mention it being probably the first movie to embrace and reflect the burgeoning Internet ( Hackers doesn’t really count), and subsequently to really ride the crest of the DVD boom wave. And now? Now it’s still really, really good.

Other monks will meet their deaths here. And they too will have blackened fingers. And blackened tongues.

The Name of the Rose (1986) (SPOILERS) Umberto Eco wasn’t awfully impressed by Jean Jacques-Annaud’s adaptation of his novel – or “ palimpsest of Umberto Eco’s novel ” as the opening titles announce – to the extent that he nixed further movie versions of his work. Later, he amended that view, calling it “ a nice movie ”. He also, for balance, labelled The Name of the Rose his worst novel – “ I hate this book and I hope you hate it too ”. Essentially, he was begrudging its renown at the expense of his later “ superior ” novels. I didn’t hate the novel, although I do prefer the movie, probably because I saw it first and it was everything I wanted from a medieval Sherlock Holmes movie set in a monastery and devoted to forbidden books, knowledge and opinions.

Say hello to the Scream Extractor.

Monsters, Inc. (2001) (SPOILERS) I was never the greatest fan of Monsters, Inc. , even before charges began to be levelled regarding its “true” subtext. I didn’t much care for the characters, and I particularly didn’t like the way Pixar’s directors injected their own parenting/ childhood nostalgia into their plots. Something that just seems to go on with their fare ad infinitum. Which means the Pixars I preferred tended to be the Brad Bird ones. You know, the alleged objectivist. Now, though, we learn Pixar has always been about the adrenochrome, so there’s no going back…

All the world will be your enemy, Prince with a Thousand Enemies.

Watership Down (1978) (SPOILERS) I only read Watership Down recently, despite having loved the film from the first, and I was immediately impressed with how faithful, albeit inevitably compacted, Martin Rosen’s adaptation is. It manages to translate the lyrical, mythic and metaphysical qualities of Richard Adams’ novel without succumbing to dumbing down or the urge to cater for a broader or younger audience. It may be true that parents are the ones who get most concerned over the more disturbing elements of the picture but, given the maturity of the content, it remains a surprise that, as with 2001: A Space Odyssey (which may on the face of it seem like an odd bedfellow), this doesn’t garner a PG certificate. As the makers noted, Watership Down is at least in part an Exodus story, but the biblical implications extend beyond Hazel merely leading his fluffle to the titular promised land. There is a prevalent spiritual dimension to this rabbit universe, one very much

Piece by piece, the camel enters the couscous.

The Forgiven (2021) (SPOILERS) By this point, the differences between filmmaker John Michael McDonagh and his younger brother, filmmaker and playwright Martin McDonagh, are fairly clearly established. Both wear badges of irreverence and provocation in their writing, and a willingness to tackle – or take pot-shots – at bigger issues, ones that may find them dangling their toes in hot water. But Martin receives the lion’s share of the critical attention, while John is generally recognised as the slightly lesser light. Sure, some might mistake Seven Psychopaths for a John movie, and Calvary for a Martin one, but there’s a more flagrant sense of attention seeking in John’s work, and concomitantly less substance. The Forgiven is clearly aiming more in the expressly substantial vein of John’s earlier Calvary, but it ultimately bears the same kind of issues in delivery.

He tasks me. He tasks me, and I shall have him.

Star Trek II: The Wrath of Khan (1982) (SPOILERS) I don’t love Star Trek , but I do love Star Trek II: The Wrath of Khan . That probably isn’t just me, but a common refrain of many a non-devotee of the series. Although, it used to apply to The Voyage Home (the funny one, with the whales, the Star Trek even the target audience for Three Men and a Baby could enjoy). Unfortunately, its high regard has also become the desperate, self-destructive, song-and-verse, be-all-and-end-all of the overlords of the franchise itself, in whichever iteration, it seems. This is understandable to an extent, as Khan is that rare movie sequel made to transcendent effect on almost every level, and one that stands the test of time every bit as well (better, even) as when it was first unveiled.

In a few moments, you will have an experience that will seem completely real. It will be the result of your subconscious fears transformed into your conscious awareness.

Brainstorm (1983) (SPOILERS) Might Brainstorm have been the next big thing – a ground-breaking, game-changing cinematic spectacle that had as far reaching consequences as Star Wars (special effects) or Avatar (3D) – if only Douglas Trumbull had been allowed to persevere with his patented “Showscan” process (70mm film photographed and projected at 60 frames per second)? I suspect not; one only has to look at the not-so-far-removed experiment of Ang Lee with Billy Lynn’s Long Halftime Walk , and how that went down like a bag of cold sick, to doubt that any innovation will necessarily catch on (although Trumbull at least had a narrative hinge on which to turn his “more real than real” imagery, whereas Lee’s pretty much boiled down to “because it was there”). Brainstorm ’s story is, though, like its title, possibly too cerebral, too much concerned with the consciousness and touting too little of the cloyingly affirmative that Bruce Rubin inevitably brings to his screenplays. T

They say if we go with them, we'll live forever. And that's good.

Cocoon (1985) Anyone coming across Cocoon cold might reasonably assume the involvement of Steven Spielberg in some capacity. This is a sugary, well-meaning tale of age triumphing over adversity. All thanks to the power of aliens. Substitute the elderly for children and you pretty much have the manner and Spielberg for Ron Howard and you pretty much have the approach taken to Cocoon . Howard is so damn nice, he ends up pulling his punches even on the few occasions where he attempts to introduce conflict to up the stakes. Pauline Kael began her review by expressing the view that consciously life-affirming movies are to be consciously avoided. I wouldn’t go quite that far, but you’re definitely wise to steel yourself for the worst (which, more often than not, transpires). Cocoon is as dramatically inert as the not wholly dissimilar (but much more disagreeable, which is saying something) segment of Twilight Zone: The Movie directed by Spielberg ( Kick the Can ). There