It's a Ginsoaked World

Time to Revisit Some Films from the Past

2010-07-09T13:35:00.000-07:00

I recently started re-watching some movies that I had liked in the past, but with a certain degree of ambivalence. In these cases I had the feeling that I was watching something important, or at least meaningful, but my perception was usually marred by a state of advanced inebriation. The three movies that I revisited this week were Barton Fink; Synecdoche, New York; and Young Adam.

SYNECDOCHE, NEW YORK

This movie made many “Best of the 2000s” lists and was declared to be the best film of the decade by Roger Ebert. Upon re-watching, armed with a notebook and relative sobriety, I found the movie to be much less incomprehensible than the first time around. It's a film with almost infinite layers of detail that could be endlessly picked apart and debated. In my opinion it's an interesting and profound film, but also happens to be marred by an exceptionally dark worldview.

I don't feel qualified to make any sort of deep analysis of the film (which would be impossible after only two viewings at any rate), but I feel like a few possible broad readings exist. One would be that the entire film happens in the main protagonist's mind, possibly as he's hallucinating on his deathbed. Another is that the entire film happens in some sort of alternate universe that doesn't really follow our universe's laws of space and time. Regardless of how the movie is viewed, the main character Caden Cotard (played by Phillip Seymour Hoffman) is shuffling through his life in a state of extreme depression, unable to enjoy even one small moment because of the knowledge of his impending death. He has grand ambition and wants to leave behind something which will last after he dies, and does this by staging an ever-growing theater production that ultimately has the scale of an entire city. Caden is stymied by his mind which endlessly runs in self-defeating circles, and as a result the play is always stuck in production.

There are clues that suggest the movie is taking place in the protagonist's mind, such as Caden's appearance in cartoons and commercials on the TV set, and a sudden cascade of horrific medical complaints that would never occur simultaneously in real life. The conventions of how time is portrayed in movies is also thrown out the window, and it's difficult to tell whether it's minutes or years that have passed between successive scenes. These could also just indicate that Caden is too solipsistic to even attempt to see things from anything but his own perspective.

Other clues suggest the movie is taking place in a different universe: A war is raging in the streets outside (although all the main characters are oblivious to it), people walk down the streets in gas masks, and a huge blimp floats over the city, searching the streets below with a giant light. The movie does not allow you to get a solid sense of time or place and has a vaguely hallucinatory quality as a result.

I believe the basic theme of the movie is stated explicitly: “The end is built into the beginning.” Armed with the inescapable fact that he will die, Caden attempts to stage his grandiose play in an attempt to break through the facade of humanity and reach “the brutal truth.” Unfortunately in this film, the brutal truth can only mean the basic facts of sickness, sadness, and death, ignoring the infinity of other possibilities contained in a human life. I certainly hope that the director Charlie Kaufman doesn't share Caden's worldview (at least not all the time - his other films have shown considerably more lightness), because if this is indeed his perspective, it must be awful to be trapped in his head.

BARTON FINK

This movie is also about a playwright, named Barton Fink (played by John Turturro). He has reached a certain level of success as a writer in New York, and is hired to write for the “pictures” in Los Angeles. Fink thinks that he is an important artist and continually sets himself apart from others, but also ironically tries to empathize with “the common man” by portraying his plight. Once he arrives in Los Angeles he discovers that the producer wants him to work on wrestling pictures (which he considers beneath him) and is only concerned with profit, not art. This begins an internal struggle which results in a severe case of writer's block, during which he meets and converses with his neighbor, Charlie Meadows (John Goodman.)

This is another film which may take place in large parts entirely in the protagonist's mind, and although the structure and setting are much more simplistic than those of Synecdoche, New York, it is not any more obvious what is really happening. Word gets out that a serial killer is on the loose in L.A., and Barton Fink becomes convinced that Charlie is the killer. Then there's the troublesome box that Charlie left for him to watch, neatly wrapped with a bow, and just the right size for a human head...

In spite of the tone of uncertainty and dread, I was never completely engaged by this film (and felt the same way the first time I saw it, many years ago.) It's nice to see the Coen Brothers' regular actors in one of their earlier films, and the film is concise and carefully paced. In spite of all this the movie seems slight - there are so many unknowns by the end of the film that rather than discuss or argue the possibilities, I'd rather just forget it and admit that it could mean anything, but we'll never really know.

YOUNG ADAM

I saw this movie when it was new in the theaters, and haven't seen it since then. It struck me then as a minimal masterpiece of existential angst, sort of a modern spin on The Stranger by Albert Camus. All the details are different of course, but the tone is nearly identical. I have to admit I have not read the source material, a novel by Alexander Trocchi.

The setting is a constantly gray and overcast Scotland in what seems to be the early 1960s. The sexual revolution is in full swing, but the characters are just going through the motions out of what seems to be a basic, animal necessity. I thought this movie was released in 2004 as an unrated version, but the only DVD available in the U.S. is rated R. The sex scenes (and there are many) are relatively graphic, but I don't recall anything from the theater version which is missing on the DVD. There is a scene which would have entered the lexicon of disturbing cinematic sex scenes if only Young Adam had been better-received; it's an homage to the infamous butter scene from Last Tango in Paris, only this time custard is involved. And of course even the casual moviegoer knows by now that Ewan McGregor is uncircumcised.

The main character played by McGregor, named Joe, works on a coal barge in Glasgow, which must be one of the least glamorous jobs of all time. He initiates an affair with his boss's wife (Tilda Swinton, amazing in everything) by staring at her creepily until she finally gives in to his advances. In fact, he seduces every woman in the movie with this same creepy-stare technique, which I should point out will only work for guys who happen to look like Ewan McGregor. Joe and his boss fish a female corpse out of the water, and through a chain of flashbacks that I won't discuss here, it's revealed that Joe knows more about the situation than he admits to; later he discovers that an innocent man is being prosecuted for the woman's murder. It's difficult to determine whether Joe is amoral or simply incapable of action; earlier in the film it is established that Joe is an aspiring writer, but ends up merely getting drunk every day while his girlfriend goes to work to earn money. Later in the film while he is working on the barge, he nearly always has a book in hand, and conveys a general sense of profound intelligence merely by being quiet and reading a lot. In the end I think the movie may depict not a profound man having an existential crisis, but rather a self-centered man who merely gets away with whatever he can get away with, and who seems profound only because of his total emptiness of character.

MY DEFENSE OF SOLARIS

2010-06-22T19:32:00.000-07:00

I remember seeing a teaser trailer for 2002's Solaris: The 30-second spot showed an image of the purple planet with its computer-generated currents of twisting, turning energy, followed by the words “produced by James Cameron.” I remember scoffing aloud, and maybe even cursing at the screen. Solaris was a Serious Film directed by one of the world's greatest filmmakers, Andrei Tarkovsky, not to mention a very important and influential work of science fiction by Stanislaw Lem. Solaris seemed like the last movie that would need an American remake... seriously, what could be the point?

Years later, I'm still trying to figure out why this movie almost instantly found a place in my top 10 favorite movies and hasn't budged since. There are a few movies that I enjoy rewatching multiple times, some of which find a spot in my personal top 10 only to be bumped out later by a rediscovered or new movie which I've fallen in love with. The American Solaris directed by Steven Soderbergh, however, has crept into my top 10 for what seems to be a permanent spot. I could seriously be offered a bin of world film classics, many of which I would concede are more important movies than Solaris, and still would chuck them all to the curb if it meant I could just keep my DVD of Solaris.

“We don't want other worlds, we want mirrors.”

This movie is precise and minimalist on the surface. Nearly all the action (if you can call it that) takes place on a space station orbiting a distant planet Solaris, which has rendered the inhabitants of said space station insane by generating facsimiles of dead loved ones. The key point of the regenerated dead is that they have not been merely brought back to life, but are projections of how the living remembered them, and therefore are incomplete by nature. This film very carefully tackles the idea that we are not who we think we are, but exist only as an amalgam of how others perceive us. Soderbergh neatly brings this point home by filming long takes of dialog where the camera is not watching the person who's speaking, but rather the person he is speaking to. Thus the audience watches the reaction of someone who is watching the main character speak, adding another layer of distance and changing our perception of the dialog that is being spoken. Everything is a reflection in this movie; there is no pure and simple truth.

The Russian Solaris is an undisputed masterpiece with one of the greatest “shock” endings of all time. As an American, I found it difficult to sit through. Yes, I'm an American who was raised on art films and literature, but even I have problems sitting through austere, quiet Russian epics. There's something about the old Russian film aesthetic that seems particularly inaccessible to me. The films display an almost surgical lack of emotion, and move along at the pace of paint drying. As much as I love Tarkovsky's films, I've had to stop every single one halfway through for an “intermission,” apart from his transcendent film The Mirror (Zerkalo, 1975.) I had the same problem when reading the original novel by Stanislaw Lem. I admit that I don't speak Russian and am probably missing quite a bit in translation, but the novel was just so dry and cold that I constantly put it down, even though it was quite short.

I've spoken to many of my friends about Solaris, and very few of them are willing to watch it with me. I saw it in the theater with a good friend who also enjoyed it, and I know one other person who loves it. Everyone else's reaction ranges from boredom to disgust. My sister falls asleep every time I try to make her watch it. The movie currently registers a 65% on the Tomatometer (actually higher than I expected, I remember it being pretty universally panned.) Even George Clooney has made quips about the movie (it was not a box-office success, to put it kindly.) But there's something about this film that just brings me back to it over and over again; I watched it yesterday and could watch it tonight, and tomorrow...

For me, all the parts fit together. The casting is perfect, and the camerawork is simple and effective. Most of the actors are doing a deceptively incredible job, and layers of meaning seem to open up with each repetitive viewing. On my new 50” TV I realized how much the camera dwells on peoples' faces, and how their eyes light up with a liquid glow. In most movies these days you're lucky if the camera lingers on an actor's face for one second before cutting away; even supposed “indie” films have fallen prey to this trend. In Solaris there are many scenes where the camera stays fixed on one person for a minute or more. George Clooney and Natascha McElhone are incredibly emotive actors (and are unfortunately rarely utilized as such).

The flashbacks in the American version are a major departure from the novel and the Russian version, and really make the movie in my opinion. They provide an emotional accessibility lacking from the other interpretations, and as much as I'm not a romantic person by nature, I lose it during these brief interludes. They take place in a slightly bizarre, futuristic Chicago, where the weather is always dreary and rainy and everyone wears high, severe collars. The dreamy soundtrack by Cliff Martinez (formerly of the Red Hot Chili Peppers) is heavy on the marimba, strings, and horns, and is tonally perfect. Overall Solaris is a perfect example of good science fiction not being about explosions and action and weird aliens, but rather being an exploration of the unknown depths of the human soul.

All of the other actors are fabulous: Jeremy Davies plays another of his trademark quirky characters, but this time with a dark secret; Viola Davis is wonderful as the disturbed but logical scientist; John Cho stars as a blink-and-you'll-miss-him courier. There is a lot more to recommend about this movie, but I don't want to go into any more detail in the very rare chance that someone who hasn't seen either of the versions is reading this. I really feel that Solaris has something profound to say about life, human interaction, and how we perceive everything around us, and will resonate strongly with anyone who has been haunted by a loss. Many of us may regret our actions in the past, but if we could redo them, would we? Or should we?

HAPPY-GO-LUCKY

2010-06-17T20:21:00.000-07:00

I have recently become underemployed due to one of my employers shutting down because of the “difficult economic climate” or something like that. If Disney can't keep their businesses open, the rest of us just may be screwed. I still work three days a week but that's not a whole lot to keep me occupied, especially in Chicago in the summertime. So I've made a vow that I must use my brain at least one time each day, and the least painful way for me to do that is to go back and start watching all the films I've missed recently. I'll try to write something about each film that I watch whether I like it or not, and may revisit some of my old favorites for the hell of it. I haven't been on my blogspot since early 2007 apparently, so I'm not even sure I can write anymore.

Mike Leigh's latest movie, Another Year, premiered at Cannes this year to generally great reviews, so I decided it was time to go back and watch his other recent film which I had missed, Happy-Go-Lucky. The movie feels slight even by Leigh's standards - his scripts are not plot-heavy, and his characters generally show no development whatsoever. This results in the majority of people who are not film nerds agreeing that his movies are boring. Some of his movies showcase characters who are such pathological losers that it's difficult to get through them without feeling acute discomfort (Naked and All or Nothing come to mind, as well as Life is Sweet.) In general his films come from the viewpoint of rather nihilistic people, but in Happy-Go-Lucky he acknowledges the possibility of another way of looking at things, even though it's clear this is not the view he shares.

The main character, Poppy, is a cheerful schoolteacher who chatters incessantly to strangers and spends most of her free time getting wasted with her girlfriends. Most of us know someone who is so relentlessly positive that she ends up being an annoyance rather than an inspiration. Poppy is that person, and Eddie Marsan, who plays Scott, is her driving instructor and polar opposite. As a plot device, having her thrust into an inescapable situation (a car) with Scott is neat, but it doesn't quite ring true. Scott's vile outlook on life quickly results in casual racist remarks and clear warning signs of an impending psychotic breakdown, but Poppy doesn't seem to pick up on these, which I think would be hard not to notice when trapped with a person in a car. Her interactions with her potential suitor also seem a little off; usually talking to your date in a squeaky baby voice and referring to yourself in the third person is the easiest way to scare a man off, but apparently not in this movie. There is also an extended scene where Poppy tries to have a meaningful conversation with a homeless man who randomly lashes his fists out towards nothing and gibbers nonsensically. I doubt any person in the world would try to cozy up to someone in that state unless they were being paid to do some sort of outreach.

A couple scenes stand out as vintage Mike Leigh, however: When Poppy and her sister visit their third sister Helen who is supposedly living the “dream life” in suburbia (pregnant and married, living in her own house), the situation quickly swirls down the drain as Helen berates Poppy for living an irresponsible and carefree life. It is clear that Helen is insecure in her situation and can't admit that two people living such different lives could each be happy in their own way. The premise of the movie is that you can choose to see the world however you wish to, and expresses this by focusing on the stark counterpoint of Poppy and her driving instructor; it might have been interesting to use more of the interactions between the sisters as a less extreme, but just as uncomfortable, example.

Trailer:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cMwD7Zy6Vno

BEST OF 2006

2007-02-03T14:07:00.000-08:00

I’ve been postponing this for awhile… for some reason, I found the Best of 2006 list a little more difficult to assemble than usual. I’m certain about the first 7 I’m listing; the rest I keep switching, so I’ll tack on an additional list of must-sees/movies to look for in the following year.

Best of 2006, in no particular order (except for the first three):

#1 – THE SCIENCE OF SLEEP
I think most people have heard me go on and on about this… so, enough said.

#2 – CHILDREN OF MEN
This seems to be dividing people, and I have no idea why. Everyone should agree, it’s great enough to be the second best film of the year!

#3 – THE FOUNTAIN
One of the prettiest and most ambitious “pretentious art films” ever.

QUINCEANERA
This one slipped by me in the theaters, but I recently caught it on DVD and have been forcing my friends to watch it ever since then – so far, 100% of them love it. This is a perfect little film, and it deals with some heavy issues without being overbearing (Mexican/American culture clash, being gay in Latino cultures, gentrification, teen pregnancy, alternative family units, etc.) It’s rare to find an independent film with such honest performances from the lead actors, and the Echo Park, L.A. locale is beautifully used.

SON OF MAN
This movie is two things I usually skip: A musical, and a religious film. It wasn’t widely released in theaters, and it might not be, because it’s South African and has an all-black cast. It’s a modern retelling of the Jesus story, and it made me hopeful for humankind, however briefly. It seems pretty clear that if Jesus came to earth today (as he was in the Bible, basically a dirty hippie), the conservative right-wingers and politicians wouldn’t recognize him in spite of their professed faith – this movie expresses that idea, somehow without being preachy. And the music is phenomenal!

THE DEPARTED
Great job by Martin Scorsese – I wasn’t crazy about his last couple of films, even though I like the fact that he’s working with Leonardo DiCaprio – the dude is a solid actor. This remakes the Hong Kong original in a way that gives remakes a good name. And it’s a lot darker! I’m looking forward to seeing it again.

THE PRESTIGE
Another Hollywood film that I’m looking forward to rewatching. I can never tell if I place unfair importance upon movies that star certain people (Christian Bale, Gael Garcia) – but does it really matter?

BIG BANG LOVE, JUVENILE A
This movie made my brain explode – something I wasn’t really expecting at 10 a.m. in the morning. Since I saw this at Toronto, I’m not sure when or if it’ll be released here… but if you see it, I’m sure you’ll agree that you’ve never seen a movie like it before.

THE WIND THAT SHAKES THE BARLEY
Am I being a jerk for picking movies that haven’t technically been released yet? Well, this came out in Europe ages ago, so I’m going with it. Check it out when it’s released here, whenever that may be.

INSIDE MAN/RESCUE DAWN
Should I put Inside Man on my list? I saw it so long ago, I’m not sure – but I’d love to see it again, and thought it was one of Spike Lee’s most successful recent movies. Rescue Dawn is being released soon, I think, and probably deserves a spot on this list. It’s a nailbiter, and Christian Bale is beyond perfect, as usual.

HONORABLE MENTIONS: Here are some movies which I loved and want to rewatch soon, but decided not to put in the top ten for some reason or another:
NOTES ON A SCANDAL
ASK THE DUST
CASINO ROYALE
HARSH TIMES
SHORTBUS
MIAMI VICE

Here are some more movies which I loved, and which should be released in 2007… Keep your eyes open!
CANDY
DIGGERS
THE FALL
PARIS JE T’AIME

Hmmm… the golden boys of 2006 appear to be Christian Bale, Clive Owen, and Hugh Jackman.

2006-11-26T18:41:00.000-08:00

WHAT I CAN’T STAND

Recently somebody wrote into the “Ask a Critic” feature in Entertainment Weekly with the question “What subject matter can’t you stand in movies?” – in other words, what makes a great movie so incredibly painful to sit through that you don’t want to watch the movie again? The EW critic answered “anything with needles.” That would rule out any junkie movies. I have no problem with needles, as you all know.

For me, there is a triumvirate of painful scenarios. Here they are, in no particular order:

ANIMAL CRUELTY
This is an obvious one. I have to avert my eyes anytime an animal is hurt or killed onscreen – it makes me panic. I’m not talking about fake animal violence, where I’m able to keep repeating, “the ASPCA was supervising, no one was hurt, that’s a fake doggie!” One example of that is American Psycho.
However, some of my favorite movies contain scenes of animals being slaughtered: Apocalypse Now and Cyclo both come to mind. I can’t handle this, and still look away every time I know the throat-slashing is about to occur.

FINGER-MANGLING
I hate watching people’s fingers being cut off. It sends a chill to the very core of my being. I would rather watch someone’s leg being crushed with a sledgehammer than someone getting a paper cut underneath their fingernail. The other night I had this bizarre image of razorblades under my fingernails; I couldn’t get it out of my head and it tortured me for hours. I know that sounds crazy, but that’s just how it is. To me, a leg stump is less gross than someone who’s missing the tip of one finger. This general category also includes fingernails getting pulled off. Some great movies which fall into this category are The Wind That Shakes the Barley, The Machinist, and the grand-prize winner: The Piano.

WHEN PEOPLE ARE ABOUT TO DIE AND TOTALLY LOSE THEIR SHIT
In a lot of movies, a person is about to be executed, or murdered, or whatever, and they stand there stoically, being brave and noble before the end. I find it pretty easy to sit through scenes like this. In a lot of other (probably more believable) movies, a person is about to be killed, and totally flips out. This is my cue to panic. Plenty of great movies contain these delightful scenes, including The Wind That Shakes the Barley (again), and the mother of all such movies, Dancer in the Dark.

I’ll add others as I remember them. There are so many other movies that fall into these categories, but I honestly feel like I’ve mentally blocked most of them out.

Lessons from Season One of the X-Files

2006-11-11T23:06:00.000-08:00

Well, it’s taken me a little longer than I thought it would to watch and dissect the X-Files season by season. That might be due to the fact that I once again have to work for a living… talk about cramping my style… Anyway, here is what I learned from season one when I watched with a critical eye (at least, as critical as I can be).

1. Scully is not a bitch (yet). Don’t get me wrong, I almost always love Scully, but I forgot that in the first season she was actually pretty flexible and open-minded. She goes along with Mulder’s conspiracy theories almost all the time and rarely butts heads with him. She smiles at least 15 times (not counting smirks and insincere smiles, by the way). She only doubts Mulder’s conclusions outright on five occasions.
2. Scully and Mulder are due for some major worker’s comp already – Scully is knocked down and/or unconscious on five occasions and gets to stay in a quarantined hospital ward once. Mulder requires medical attention on three occasions (including the aforementioned quarantine and one gunshot wound), gets beaten up once, and is taken hostage and fried by the gas escaping the body of an alien-human hybrid.
3. No one is too trigger-happy yet. Mulder and Scully each kill only one person (Mulder kills two, if you count Tooms as a person). At least 12 people have been killed for “The Truth” by others at this point.

4. On the fashion front, Scully suffers egregiously while Mulder escapes relatively unscathed. Yeah, the early 90s were basically still the 80s, and this season proves that fact over and over again. Scully is forced to trudge around in clothes at least two sizes too large for her; she swims in shapeless trenchcoats with linebacker-style shoulderpads. The color palette of her clothing ranges from bad to worse – some examples:
A mud brown skirt suit paired with white tights
A lacy Victorian schoolmarm shirt, worn on a “date”
A pink collarless tee under a trenchcoat, with accompanying duckbutt hairstyle
Another mud brown ensemble with diagonal navy stripes
It goes on and on…
Mulder looks snazzy, even in his not-exactly-fitted suits. His hair sometimes teeters dangerously close to being feathered, but mainly looks like a cute ‘do in the style of Chris Isaak. Time has been much kinder to men’s early 90s fashion, apparently.
5. In case you care, aliens and/or spacecraft are seen a total of 7 times, and Mulder and Scully commit a total of 7 illegal break-and-enters. Evidence is also lost forever a total of 7 times. Wait a second… I think this is a case for Mulder and Scully…
6. The X-Files are shut down forever (but not really) twice.
I think that’s about all the insight I have at this moment. Yet to come: Season Two – the plot thickens. If my memory serves me, Scully’s clothes improve slightly and Mulder’s hair worsens.

SOMEONE IS THE NEXT WHOEVER

2006-10-01T22:43:00.000-07:00

Is it annoying when people proclaim that a certain actor is the incarnation of a revered actor from a previous generation? I don’t know, because I do it all the time. I’ve been mulling over a couple of possibilities recently.
1. Sacha Baron Cohen is the next Peter Sellers. It seems like I’ve seen this claim in print somewhere, most likely Entertainment Weekly or another of those idiotic entertainment magazines I’m addicted to. Cohen has the ability to completely disappear into a persona like Sellers did. He’s also disturbingly culturally relevant, and manages to make smart, cutting commentaries on modern society while still entertaining the drooling masses.
To seal the deal: Now someone just needs to create a Dr. Strangelove type vehicle for him. Is it possible that he’s not the next Peter Sellers? Yes, if he stays in Borat character for the rest of his career, but somehow that seems unlikely.

2. Cillian Murphy is the next Jeremy Irons. I thought this one up all on my own! For a long time I thought James Spader was the next Jeremy Irons because of his propensity to play dark and sexually aberrant characters. But in interviews Spader seems downright benign, approachable, and fun. Jeremy Irons has this bizarre edge that never completely goes away, even when he’s not acting. Yeah, I’ve had a crush on him for twenty years, but I still find him slightly scary. Cillian Murphy has that same weirdness about him. He’s a truly great actor for starters, and already has a corner on ruthless villains that you end up rooting for. He’s also a great against-type leading man. Also, he’s far too thin and seems kind of creepy onscreen, just like Jeremy Irons!
To seal the deal: The one thing Murphy hasn’t done is play a sexually disturbing character (Breakfast on Pluto played with sexuality, but was more of a quirky character study). Once he does this, I think my point will be proven.

DAY FIVE – TIME TO LEAVE

2006-09-15T15:56:00.000-07:00

Boo hoo. The only film we saw today was Love and Other Disasters. It’s a British gay-themed film starring Brittany Murphy. Sounds hideous, right? I was more than skeptical because I loathe Brittany Murphy. As far as Murphys go, she’s pretty much the opposite of Cillian Murphy. She blows chunks. This movie, however, was totally charming, clever, and hilarious. I would recommend it to anyone looking for a fun, light movie. It was the perfect end to the festival – I’d seen enough nightmarish and heavy films to last me awhile.

More celeb sightings, up through the last day:
Christian Bale, Jeremy Davies, Werner Herzog, Adrian Grenier (who cares, right? He’s much cuter in real life though), Zach Braff. Steve also saw Christina Ricci, James McAvoy, Cara Seymour, and Peter Dinklage. I might be missing some. I found out Gael Garcia Bernal wasn’t even there, so I’m glad I didn’t go out of my way to see Babel. I talked to some women on the bus who said that it wasn’t a good movie and was too superficial, and Gael’s part was really tiny. They also said Brad Pitt was there, and waved at the crowd in a really condescending way. Dude is full of himself.

Standout performances: Cillian Murphy in the Barley movie, Christian Bale in Rescue Dawn, both Heath Ledger and Abbie Cornish in Candy, and the little girl in The Fall.
Cillian also gets an extra prize for being one of the most beautiful men I’ve ever seen.

TORONTO – DAY FOUR

2006-09-14T10:16:00.000-07:00

Sunday. I was seriously exhausted by this point.
Film one – Palimpsest. A Polish psycho-thriller full of interesting ideas, but I didn’t care for it that much. It was really dark and murky, and kind of exists in an altered reality, and it’s terribly difficult to watch things like that at 9 in the morning while swilling the first cup of coffee of the day. Steve liked the movie quite a bit though. The director was there and he helped clear up some of the lingering questions after the film.

Film two – Chronicle of an Escape. An Argentinean film about men who are captured by some right-wing paramilitary group (or maybe even the government? It was unclear to me) and held in a house to be tortured for months. As you can tell from the title, they do pull off an escape. But I officially call a moratorium on films about political prisoners who are tortured and have to escape. Two within two days is enough!

Film three – Paris Je T’aime. This was a collection of short films, each set within a different neighborhood of Paris. A few standouts were by Tom Tykwer, Alexander Payne, and the Coen Brothers. The whole film was really excellent, the only weak short being one directed by Christopher Doyle (dude can do the cinematography, but his short only succeeded in emphasizing the fact that he’s a lecherous old dude obsessed with rail-thin Asian women). Alexander Payne was there for the Q&A, and kept making eye contact with me. That may be because I was staring at him while beaming the entire time. He is super hot. Plus, he kind of made a bit of a fuggery mistake – the shape of his penis was clearly visible through his khaki pants, which weren’t even that tight. Steve swears that he did it on purpose because a guy would never accidentally wear pants which made his penis visible. I guess I believe Steve. But Alexander Payne is really charming and hot, regardless of whether he’s an exhibitionist.

After the third film, we went out to an excellent Italian restaurant. The waiter seemed to love both of us (we probably gave him a lot more of our time than the typical guests they get there – it was right by The Four Seasons). He gave us free drinks and we promised to come back to the restaurant next year, but only if he would wait on us. Then we hit a gay bar, and went to a convenience store in order to buy junk food that’s not available in the U.S. The only thing that I bought was a variety of Kit Kat flavors: Dark chocolate, double chocolate, cinnamon, and peanut butter. We are seriously deprived of Kit Kat flavors in the States! Anyway I managed to get pretty wasted that night (at least by the time we got back to the hotel room). It was really fun.

TORONTO - DAY THREE

2006-09-13T17:44:00.000-07:00

I was sitting in the row in front of the person who took this picture. So close.

FYI – Celeb Sightings so far:
Maya: Cillian Murphy, Michael Moore, Guy Maddin, Sacha Baron Cohen (dressed as Borat), Heath Ledger.
Steven: Robert Duvall

So, on Saturday Steve offered me $20 to wake up at 5:30 and get in the daily line for movie tickets. By the way, 5:30 in Toronto is 4:30 in Chicago. Yes, I did it, and it was fun. I got there at 6:20, and was 14th in line. The box office opened at 7:00 and by 7:03 I had gotten the tickets I wanted (for Volver). One of the films I had a ticket for, Diggers, was completely sold out. That made me happy.

Film one – Volver. One of Almodovar’s great lighter films. Even though it’s a comedy it has some dark elements. The acting is great all around (including Penelope Cruz, who I usually can’t stand). For a supposed lower-class person, her makeup and clothing were way too glamorous. I really stand by my belief that Almodovar is one of the great humanist directors of our time, and I love the way that he is somehow privy to the connections that women can make with one another. I was still pissed that nobody from the film showed up for a Q&A, even though they were on the red carpet the previous night.

Film two – The Fall. The second feature by Tarsem (aka Tarsem Singh – director of The Cell). A visually stunning and really creative film. I wasn’t convinced for the first ½ hour, but then I sank into the movie and really, really enjoyed it. He takes the typical Hollywood epic genre and turns it on its head. The happy ending at the end is totally deserved, but still isn’t completely happy. It’s both uplifting and painful at the same time. The lead actress is a chubby six-year-old who was delightfully childish. None of the Dakota Fanning school of acting here! Her dialog was so close to what children actually say, I almost think she wrote her lines herself. The plot and visual effects were a perfect mix of children’s fairy tales and adult drug hallucinations. The end of the film is a joyous celebration of film and stunt actors, and I got teary-eyed. Anyway, the whole cast was there (it was the world premiere) – the lead actor is unknown and was great. In real life – GOOD GOD. The dude was a 6’3” hunk of blonde gorgeous studliness. Holy shit. Usually actors look better in person than onscreen (Cillian Murphy) or the same as onscreen (Christian Bale) – but this dude looks SO much better than his photos or than in his films, it’s not even describable. Watch this movie!

Film three – Diggers. Paul Rudd wasn’t there – dammit! It was the world premiere of the this movie, by the way. This is another movie that everyone should see. It’s a dark comedy, but still one of the funniest movies I’ve seen in ages. It’s about a community of clamdiggers in the 70s. Paul Rudd takes off his pants and also shows his ass. Oh, and he also shows an awesome acting range. Lauren Ambrose is in it, and I’m afraid to say that she seems so much like Claire (from 6 Feet Under) that I really think she IS that person – in other words, the stuck-up, pretentious, artsy, sarcastic girl.

Film four – Rescue Dawn. I SAW CHRISTIAN BALE. Not only did I see him, but this was the world premiere of the film, and he was sitting directly 5 rows behind me the whole time, along with Werner Herzog (the director) and Jeremy Davies (the co-star). I heard he was sitting close by me, and the girl behind me was saying, “See Herzog? A little to your left, move over, do you see him?” I finally caught a glimpse, and he was signing something for someone, and I lost my breath. Oh my god, he’s beautiful in real life. In the movie he’s an emaciated wreck (AGAIN) – but in real life he gained the weight back, his cheeks are full, even though his hair is oddly long and feathered, he’s beautiful, gorgeous, he’s FUCKING CHRISTIAN BALE.
The movie was really good. It was oddly mainstream, and superbly paced. I was on the edge of my seat the entire time, and Steve kept grabbing my arm. I was gasping, and had my hand over my mouth for a good 1/3 of the film. It was intensely suspenseful and amazing. It’s still not mainstream enough to be really popular in the American marketplace, however. It was also creepily patriotic (weird for a director who isn’t even American). But Herzog isn’t really a political director – in this case, it’s one man’s struggle, and this movie nails it.
Christian Bale lost a ton of weight for this film (again). He is tied by the ankles and dragged through the mud by a water buffalo (it’s not a stunt man), and he hacks his way through leafy bushy traps, and he spends entire days submerged in dirty river water up to his neck, and he pulls giant leeches off his body, and he chews handfuls of live maggots. It’s all real, and none of it was done by body doubles. Werner loves to torture his actors, and they eat it up and beg for more. Jeremy Davies, who is a skinny mofo, lost 33 pounds for this film.
By the way, the same day that this film was screened, Werner Herzog’s mother died. In spite of that, he was sitting 5 rows behind us with Jeremy Davies and Christian Bale, watching the world premiere with us. That was such a monumental occasion - seriously! Most actors show up and go to the green room to wait for the Q&A. Alternatively, they don’t show up at all. But these guys were there, and watching the premiere with an audience. That meant so much to me, I almost want to puke. After the film, Christian was leaning against the railing, just waiting around. I put my shoes back on and we made our way over there. He wasn’t very mobbed, and he signed things for about 4 people. As we approached, I decided I would just shake his hand and say thanks (I never ask for autographs – what’s the point?) When I was 3 feet away, I started shaking uncontrollably. I started whispering to Steve, “I can’t do this, I can’t do this!” Luckily, Christian said he really had to go, and took off right before I got there. I was seriously in passing-out mode.

DAY TWO – FIVE FILM FRIDAY

2006-09-13T08:58:00.000-07:00

Film one – Big Bang Love Juvenile A. This was a typical Takashi Miike film - completely and utterly predictable at every point. Some directors specialize in weirdness and unpredictability, but after time their weirdness becomes expected (David Lynch for example). Miike, on the other hand, has just made a film which is mind-blowing in spite of being nearly the 70th one of his career. The story is a gay murder mystery about two prisoners, and somehow they still exist as children, and every moment of time in a person’s life exists somewhere in the universe if you only look a different way, and a ray of light hitting a person can change his fate forever. It’s also about the dead haunting the living, and awesome kung-fu beatdowns, and a stunning interpretive dance done by a super-hot tattooed Asian guy. It was moving and profound without being pretentious – it was amazing.

Film two – Time. This was a Korean film which I thought would be totally depressing, but was actually a charming and hilarious character study of two fucked-up, insane people. Then the rest of the movie was dark, gory, and full of bizarre insanity. Interesting and well-done, and I really liked the lead male actor.

Film three – 2:37. An Australian film made by a first-time director at the age of 19. First of all, let me stress that my critique of this film shouldn’t deter anyone from seeing it. It was really masterful for a first film, and the actors were all very good. The subject is a suicide in a high school, and before the film even started the director came up to talk about how the film was based upon the suicide of one of his close friends, and he started going into detail about his own failed suicide attempt… uhhh…. I know that younger generations are used to pouring out their guts, but I was a little taken aback by his frankness. Anyway the film is basically a copy of Elephant. There are good aspects to it, but the camera work, sound editing, and structure were so close to Elephant that I really wondered what was going on. In the credits the director thanks Gus Van Sant, and during the Q&A he admitted that he started work on the film after seeing Elephant, and that Gus Van Sant watched his film and said he liked it ‘but it reminded him of Elephant with a more coherent plot.’ Uh, OK. So instead of a new generation of Tarantino copycats, we have a Gus Van Sant copycat? This movie doesn’t really take Van Sant’s style any further, and I hate to say that because the movie is obviously very heartfelt.

Film four – Brand Upon the Brain! – This was a world premiere of Guy Maddin’s new silent film with orchestral accompaniment, narrator, and live foley artists. I’m glad I saw it because there’s no chance this will be shown anywhere else, ever (according to the notes, one showing cost $20,000). Maybe he’ll record a soundtrack so it can be released in regular theaters – who knows. It was a pretty typical Maddin movie – reminiscent of the 20s, very funny in a quirky way, and full of dream logic plot twists. It’s basically just like an avant-garde film from the 20s, cut and edited by a schizophrenic on acid. Unfortunately I had to leave 10 minutes before the end – since the film started 40 minutes late, I would have been late for my next film. The only problem I had with the film was the fact that the live foley artists were within my line of vision, and instead of watching the screen, I was watching what they were doing at least half of the screening time.
And also, I hate to complain about a film festival that I have nothing to do with – but this was the WORLD premiere of the movie, and there were a couple hundred people waiting in the rush line. Yet, when the movie started, the seat directly in front of me and one seat to my side were empty the whole time. I know for a fact that there were people in the rush line that got turned away, but there were actually seats to accommodate them. This also happened at the world premiere of Diggers the next night. The Toronto Film Fest also seems to always seat people with rush tickets AFTER the movie starts. If volunteers at both the Wisconsin and the Chicago Film Fest can manage to get people to squish together, count empty seats, and sit people with rush tickets before the film starts, I have a hard time believing that it’s impossible for the Toronto volunteers to do the same!

Film five – Candy. Right off the bat, let me stress that everyone must watch this movie. As my friend Dan recently said, “Every heroin movie is a good movie!” He’s right. This follows in the tradition of junkie movies, but the two lead actors (Heath Ledger and Abbie Cornish) were beyond excellent. The script was perfect, it was entertaining, depressing, funny, beautiful, etc., etc. Please see this movie. I really have to say I’m a fan of Heath Ledger ever since I saw him in 10 Things I Hate About You, possibly the best high school film ever made.
Now – another major complaint. This one has nothing to do with the festival, but actually with the people at the festival. I sat down in the fourth row, and there were three single 20-something guys right next to me. One was having an argument with his girlfriend on the phone before the movie started, one of those “Baby, please, Baby, please,” arguments – while eating nachos, in a fucking crowded theater. Before the movie started, Heath Ledger was standing in the wings ready to speak, and I could tell just by looking at him that he was absolutely petrified. I gave him a huge smile (thinking I would send some positive energy his way) but honestly I don’t think it helped him at all. He got up to the mike and started stammering “I didn’t have any idea I had to speak here, I really have nothing interesting or great to say at all,” with lots of ums and uhhhs. I found it endearing that a major movie star was so nervous before a crowd like that. But the douchebags to my right started shouting things while he was talking, like “I feel a Brokeback moment coming on!” and “Casanova! Casanova!” One of them shouted “Casanova!” right while Heath was in the middle of a stammered sentence, and he stopped and said, “Sorry, what was that?” Then the guy again shouted “CASANOVA!” And Heath kind of stopped, looked around really confusedly, pointed at the blank movie screen, and said, “Ummm…. Yeah.” It was awkward and horrible – fucking Heath Ledger was announcing his movie, and clearly nervous, and some fucktards in the audience are HECKLING him. I don’t think I’ve ever been more upset during any moment of any film fest in my life. I mean, seriously, Heath was really charming and nervous and polite, and these guys were like retarded frat boy demons from fucking hell.
So then, the movie starts, and these guys are TALKING the whole time. There’s a film fest volunteer on the other side of them, and he’s not doing anything. About 15 minutes into the movie, I turned to the guy closest to me, and spat, “Could you shut up? I’m trying to watch this movie!!!” The guy responded, “I’m trying to watch it too.” Then I turned, caught his eye, and gave him my trademark icy death stare. He started babbling and saying stupid things, and turned to his friends to say something (much more quietly though). Then, five minutes later, they all got up and left. Who knows what the fuck that was about. At least they left – but I’m really embarrassed that they were heckling Heath Ledger. Seriously, what the fuck?

TORONTO FILM FESTIVAL - DAY ONE

2006-09-11T21:21:00.000-07:00

We missed our first movie of the day (The Magic Flute) due to a combination of incorrect flight arrival time and an underestimation of time-standing-in-line for ticket pickup. Actually, if the line had been ten minutes quicker, we would have made it. Well, how many people should an international film festival have working the ticket counter for people who bought packages and need to pick them up? One is enough, right? The Toronto Film Fest seems to think so.
Anyway, I’m not complaining. I have more than enough to see. So here goes:

FILM #1 – THE WIND THAT SHAKES THE BARLEY (aka “The Barley Movie)

This was a really great, complex film with top-notch acting and a superb story structure. A couple of points got in the way of my total immersion: 1. My utter and complete ignorance of Irish history 2. The accents – so thick! I probably understood about 60% of the dialog and inferred the rest. I couldn’t fill any dialog blanks in with my knowledge of Irish history, so that kind of left me in the dark. But the sheer emotionality of the actors carried me through. This deserves a second watch (on DVD, with English subtitles).
Q & A SESSION – I took out my notepad to take notes, which was mostly to help my memory, but also made me feel more important. Little did the people around me know that I am going to post these notes on a dumb-ass blog that a tiny (but important) handful of people will be reading. Ken Loach couldn’t make it because he’s currently filming something – the bastard! Cillian Murphy was there, however, and my 10th row seat afforded me a prime view of those killer cheekbones. He’s a chameleonic person who tends to look either really creepy or occasionally hot on film, depending on the camera angle and lighting. But in real life – seriously – he’s so, so pretty. I fully appreciate actors who have unusual or atypical features – especially the ones who can act their pants off. It’s so much better to have an interesting but odd face than a blandly pretty one.

Cillian made a few jokes about Ken Loach’s directing style, saying the script exists ‘but the cast is not privy to it,’ his films are undiluted by commerce which includes the exclusion of trailers and food for the crew (big laugh there), and usually uses a faraway, non-intrusive camera with a long lens which allows the actors more freedom. Someone asked a question about how he personally felt about the Irish independence issue, and he sort of dodged it by stating that the film takes place only two generations ago so everyone was careful to acknowledge the sensitivity of the project. He said he feels strongly about the issues from the level of his DNA, but couldn’t compress all his feelings into a simple anecdote.
A woman asked him about a book written by Ernie O’Malley (?), and he made a self-deprecating joke about how it was ‘very advanced reading’ so he only dipped in and out of it. She followed up by mentioning a specific historical person with the last name of Murphy. He clearly didn’t know who the hell she was talking about and finished by saying, ‘Uhhh… ehhhm… I don’t think he’s my… cousin.” It was funny. Come on, lady! You can’t drill actors on the historical facts of an era just because they made a movie taking place during that time. That’s a totally unfair, impromptu history test in front of a huge crowd. At least he got a laugh out of it.

Random Thoughts of the Day

2006-08-16T15:40:00.000-07:00

PIGEONS
I saw one of the grossest things I’ve ever seen yesterday. While parking in the Jewel-Osco parking lot (also the parking lot for the clinic) I saw a recently run-over pigeon. I didn’t get too close, but it appeared that its gullet (stomach, whatever) had burst open, and one of its fellow pigeons was eating the food that spilled out of the corpse of his dead brother. It was completely disgusting, but almost impossible to look away. I didn’t feel like waiting around to see if the pigeons would actually eat one of their own, however. I’m pretty sure they would.

JAMES FRANCO
I find this fellow to be extremely good-looking. He doesn’t even have the advantage of being a liminal Hollywood actor, however: Every movie he’s in seems to be pure shit. I should modify that – he was in Robert Altman’s ballet film The Company, and I loved that. Nobody else even bothered to watch it though. It was a small, contained picture, but expertly filmed and really enjoyable. Everything else he’s in appears to be completely without merit. Just look at his output from the last two years: Tristan + Isolde, Flyboys, and two films that he both directed and starred in called The Ape and The Great Raid (I’m assuming they both went directly to DVD). Either he’s seriously trying to be a director, or he’s stuck in vanity project hell. I guess he wins bonus points for the audacity of directing and starring in those films, but I’m also afraid to watch them.

I should be fair and point out that I haven’t seen any of those movies, and don’t think anyone else saw them either. A pretty face isn’t enough to get me to drag my ass into the theater to see something like Annapolis (sorry, Justin Lin).

JAMES WOODS
James Woods is a legitimate Hollywood character. He’s a great actor (kind of the opposite of James Franco) and has made some really smart career choices, notably starring as Max Renn in Videodrome and as Ray Cohn in Citizen Cohn.
I’ll grant him these achievements in spite of the fact that he is supposedly a Republican. Who knows if he goes so far as to be an actual Bush supporter – I’d rather not know. What I know for sure is that even though he’s 30 years older than me, if I wanted to date him (which I don’t), I am WAY too old for him. I have absolutely no problem with age-difference relationships, and like the idea of dating older men in general. But, seriously, James Woods and his 19-year-old ex-girlfriend? That’s creepy. And here’s a tidbit gleaned from imdb: “(James Woods) was engaged to actress Missy Crider in 1997; they met when she played his daughter in the TV movie Jane's House.” Ewwwww.....

LIMINAL HOLLYWOOD CELEBRITY

2006-08-06T22:06:00.000-07:00

My college Latin teacher’s favorite English word was liminal, and I was recently thinking about how I don’t use this word enough.

LIMINAL:
Etymology: Latin limin-, limen threshold
1 : of or relating to a sensory threshold
2 : barely perceptible
3 : of, relating to, or being an intermediate state, phase, or condition

There are many opportunities to use this word on a daily basis. All you have to do is start to step through a doorway, and then hesitate, and while you’re between one room and the next… You’re a liminal creature! You’re neither in one room nor the other…. You’re a creature of the threshold… you might not exist at all! It’s just that fun!

I was thinking about using the word “liminal” to demarcate the space between a cool celebrity and a lame celebrity. If the celebrity in question took one small step towards coolness, he would be completely safe from the “lame” realm. If, on the other hand, he stumbles the other way… it’s too late, he’s no longer liminal, but a full-fledged lame-o. Many celebrities embody both cool and lame qualities, and I’d like to explore this further. So, without further ado, my first Liminal Hollywood Celebrity:

JARED LETO

Jared Leto embodies the nature of a liminal Hollywood creature. He is really teetering on the brink between coolness and lameness.

WORKING FOR HIM:
1. This is a big one: He took an axe in the face as Paul Allen in American Psycho. Anyone who has a starring role in American Psycho wins major bonus points for all of eternity.
2. Has actually had roles in a large number of indie flicks (Requiem for a Dream, Fight Club, Girl, Interrupted).
3. Was in My So-Called Life, and was darn cute while in it.
4. Gained a considerable amount of weight to play Mark David Chapman in Chapter 27, and appears to have lost it again, easily.
5. Seems to have a nice ass.
6. Starring role as Hephaistion in Oliver Stone’s Alexander. This counts as either a liability or a bonus point, depending on who you ask. I’m not even sure myself.
WORKING AGAINST HIM:
1. Vanity band 30 Seconds to Mars – this is a major liability. He wears tons of mascara, dresses in pleather, and wails like a banshee for no perceptible reason.
2. My roommate saw 30 Seconds to Mars today at Lollapalooza, and she said Jared Leto kept encouraging the crowd to shout “Lollapalooza!” and “Chicago!” That’s pretty lame. Also, we saw him on The Tonight Show a couple nights ago, and his singing voice is downright bad.
3. Apparently slept with La Lohan. I shouldn’t even include this – after all, you can’t judge people by who they date (and/or sleep with). If this were the case, I should scorn Chris Isaak for all eternity just because he dated Bai Ling…. That’s not entirely fair, is it?

THE FINAL VERDICT:
So, Jared Leto appears to have more strikes for him than against him. A vanity band is a major liability, and his is apparently gaining some amount of attention. Jared Leto is a true liminal creature: He has shown some true acting chops, and needs to focus on this instead of his band in order to pull himself out of the threshold…

I CONTINUE TO WATCH MOVIES

2006-08-03T21:16:00.000-07:00

#1,981 – VARIAN’S WAR – Does this count as a movie even though it was never released in the theater? I say yes (after all, Adrian Lyne’s Lolita was never released in the theater). Anyway, it’s part of my “William Hurt” queue. This movie was not very good – you can tell it’s made for cable.

#1,982 – TRUE COLORS – This is a great early 90s flick with John Cusack and James Spader. It’s weirdly homoerotic, but I love me some James Spader.

#1,983 – GORKY PARK – Another entry from the William Hurt queue. This movie fits solidly into one of the film categories that bother me: Movies that ostensibly take place in other countries, but all the dialog is in English. This movie takes place in Russia, but everyone speaks English in a variety of strange accents.

#1,984 – RAGING BULL – Can you believe I’ve never seen this movie before? I can’t believe it, either.

#1,985 – PIRATES OF THE CARIBBEAN: DEAD MAN’S CHEST – see 25 blog. What do I think about this movie? Eh, whatever.

#1,986 – ANOTHER WOMAN – An old Woody Allen/Mia Farrow collaboration that I’ve never seen before. It was pretty interesting, although it’s somewhat depressing to see his Mia Farrow films in retrospect.

#1,987 – 16 BLOCKS – Bruce Willis is drunk and old. Mos Def has a weird voice. Hijinks ensue. Actually this movie wasn’t bad.

#1,988 – MIAMI VICE – see 25 blog. I don’t know why I love Colin Farrell’s greasy shoulder-length locks so much. It’s a hairstyle that really doesn’t work on anyone else, in my opinion.

#1,989 – RICK – This was a little-seen independent film starring Bill Pullman. It’s a updated version of Rigoletto, so that much is interesting. But they tried too hard to make this a satire along the lines of American Psycho, and failed in that respect.

#1,990 – INTACTO – This is a Spanish film with an X-Files premise. There were some interesting ideas and visuals, but I found it needlessly convoluted. To enjoy this film you have to really suspend all disbelief (much more than you would while watching The X-Files, even).

#1,991 – PORCILE – A late 60s Pasolini film about bestiality and cannibalism and other charming subjects. The best part of this was the bonus feature – a short documentary about Pasolini, which includes a fake “interview” with an American. He’s this dopey blonde surfer dude who says, “Pasolini? Whatever. I love Antonioni! I saw Zabriskie Point (an Antonioni film) 5 times! I saw The Gospel According to… Matthew, or whoever (a Pasolini film)… that was a piece of crap!” Yes, the director makes fun of another director from his home country in a documentary by using the “American Asshole” stock character. Priceless.

On the Way to #2,000 – Continued

2006-07-09T22:19:00.000-07:00

#1,966 – FIRE IN THE SKY – I maintain that this is essential viewing for anyone interested in The X-Files, or Robert Patrick and his hotness, or aliens in general. Nothing too spectacular, but a very solid B movie with some pretty frightening sequences. I do not want to be abducted by aliens. Apparently all of the people involved (it’s based on a true story) are sticking to their story… cue the Twilight Zone music…

#1,967 – MY OWN PRIVATE IDAHO – This batch of movies included some really great ones. How have I not seen this movie before? I love Gus Van Sant, even when he’s being difficult, and I’m always at least mildly fascinated by Keanu Reeves. The dialog and settings are brilliant – everything about this film is great, in fact. Worth multiple viewings, which I’m sure I’ll do later on at some point. This is one of those movies which I feel I need to see again in order to say anything intelligent about it.

#1,968 – KISS KISS BANG BANG – Uhhhh…. I couldn’t get into this movie. I was drinking, and chit-chatting, and it was too scattered and self-assured and smug. Yes, this movie was smug. Love Robert Downey, Jr. though – he’s a trip.

#1,969 – A DAY WITHOUT A MEXICAN – I wanted to like this movie, but couldn’t really get behind it. It was a little amateurish, and felt like a short that was extended in too many different directions (which it actually was). It elucidates some important points though.

#1,970 – GOZU – This is one of the strangest movies I’ve ever seen in my life. That includes all of the other 1,979 movies I’ve seen to date. I’d probably put it in the top 10 as far as sheer unmitigated weirdness goes. If you have a fear of people with cow heads, or full-grown men crawling out of vaginas, stay away. Thanks to Takashi Miike for keeping us guessing after all these years.

#1,971 – THE DEVIL WEARS PRADA – see 25 blog.

#1,972 – FOOTLOOSE – I’m catching up on classic 80s films which I missed as a child. Yes, somehow I avoided seeing Footloose for my entire life (until recently, anyway). This wasn’t a bad film, actually. I’m unable to judge it on its own merit, unfortunately; I only see it as a vehicle for 80s nostalgia.

#1,973 – THE BREAK-UP – see 25 blog. I keep hearing more and more stories about people who hated this movie because it wasn’t “Hollywood” enough for them. That’s reason enough to go see it.

#1,974 – SILVER CITY – This is another movie that was scattered in too many directions. I loved Chris Cooper’s spin on George Bush. But why in God’s name would you hire Tim Roth and only include him in 10 minutes of your movie? WHY?

#1,975 – EVERYTHING IS ILLUMINATED – I can’t say enough about this movie. I LOVED it. We’ve been listening to Eugene Hutz nonstop in our apartment for the last two weeks (that would be Gogol Bordello), and I was shocked at how perfectly he played Alex the translator. I thought he’d be good, but not THAT good. He starts out as a hip-hop Ukranian goofball along the lines of Ali G, and somehow morphs into a character of great depth and insight along the way. This movie plays an emotional trick similar to ‘Life Is Beautiful’ but is somehow less manipulative. I almost want to write Leiv Schreiber a letter and tell him to keep directing. I get the feeling that no one in Hollywood is encouraging him to tackle any more projects…

#1,976 – TOP GUN – Another 80s flick that I missed when I was young. My roommate wanted me to watch it as a drinking game where we’d do a shot every time the camera lingers on Tom Cruise’s ass. We didn’t actually do that, but the movie is pretty silly. All I can say is that the shots of him riding his motorcycle down palm tree-lined streets really made me want to play Vice City.

#1,977 – BEND IT LIKE BECKHAM – Cute chick flick. They really beat you over the head with the “Girls Should be Allowed to be Themselves” message, but I suppose it’s still necessary in this day and age. Someone please feed Keira Knightley a cheeseburger!

#1,978 – STAY – OK, here’s another movie I was initially ambivalent about, but I ended up really liking it. This movie was a blip in the theaters last year, in spite of its top-notch cast (Ewan McGregor, Naomi Watts, Ryan Gosling). Everyone panned this film. Either my brain is turning into mush from too many movies and too much booze, or I’m right about this movie and everyone else is wrong. It’s basically like an X-Files episode, and there’s some stilted, stupid dialog (which makes sense in retrospect). The editing was superb, and they do some really, really clever things with the camera (especially the transitions between scenes). When you get to the end of the movie, you’ll know why this is a keeper for me. I’m a sucker for this particular genre of film (people keep saying it’s been done before, which is true… but actually, not that often). Just watch it, and confront me later if you think I’m wrong.

#1,979 – STRANGERS WITH CANDY – See 25 blog. And watch this movie, goddamnit! You’ll learn that you’re racist (among other important lessons).

#1,980 – HAPPY ENDINGS – Just finished this film tonight. Lately I’ve been really peeved at the way that modern movies insist on TELLING you something (usually via voiceover) instead of SHOWING it, which should be easy, since they have a camera and all. That’s why I give more points to movies like Stay (which shows everything but doesn’t explain it while it’s happening) than to movies like Happy Endings (which requires written titles on the sides to update you on what’s happening, because there’s too much to keep track of). I still liked the film though, and appreciate the fact that it tackled some difficult issues (anyway, issues which the media would have us believe are difficult). Worth watching, I suppose.

More to come!

My Week As a Bored Housewife

2006-06-23T20:27:00.000-07:00

This week I wasn’t able to do anything constructive. I had a ton of things to do: Clean the house, finish my Chinese medical history paper, study for finals, finish the book I’m reading, watch any number of movies which are out now, catch up on my netflix queue, etc. The list goes on and on. Instead, I’m exhibiting more signs of girlishness… in fact, I’d go so far as to say I’m acting like a bored housewife. Facts to support this conclusion:

1. An increased interest in wedding hair and makeup, goaded on by Sandy
2. I impulsively bought a plane ticket/hotel package to go to the Toronto Film Festival. Put it on the credit card! Why not?
3. I got my first pedicure, and spent an hour obsessively trying not to chip it, before I finally did chip it (only slightly – you can’t notice it unless you stick your face right up to my big toe)
4. I spent a considerable amount of time on youtube.com last night, watching clips of the Ellen show. OK, they were clips of Colin Farrell, but still…

So, I can exhibit all the wasteful qualities of a wife… what does that mean? I’ve got the nightly bored drinking (while scrubbing various parts of the kitchen) down COLD. My big achievement for the day was brushing all four of the cats, what does that mean? My friend Ryan told me that since 4 is the unluckiest number in China (it’s the same word as ‘death’), we should actually have eight cats instead of four (eight is the luckiest number). That last part is irrelevant, really.

ON THE WAY TO 2,000

2006-06-19T22:46:00.000-07:00

OK – here are the movies I’ve seen since I determined I’m only 50 movies away from cracking the 2,000 movie milestone.

#1,951 – REIGN OF FIRE: This movie involves Dragons and Christian Bale. Good potential, mostly wasted. But Christian Bale takes his shirt off, in case you’re interested in that sort of thing (and I know you are, whoever’s reading this – it’s a given that everybody in the world wants to see that guy shirtless. Unless it’s in The Machinist).

#1,952 – THE BOONDOCK SAINTS – Marc forced me to watch this movie. Um, I mean, he suggested it. But I really did like large parts of it, and although I think a lot of it was gratuitous and overdone, it merits another viewing. There are some interesting ideas in there.

#1,953 – THE DAVINCI CODE – See 25/25/25 blog.

#1,954 – X-MEN: THE LAST STAND – See 25/25/25 blog. Yay for Ian McKellen!

#1,955 – JUST A QUESTION OF LOVE – This was Ryan’s choice, a gay film from the gay foreign film section at Blockbuster (that’s how you know you live in a big city, when Blockbuster has that section). Not bad at all – most French gay films are just better than their American counterparts. Probaby because they’re French.

#1,956 – THE RINGER – Ummm… what is this movie again? Oh yeah, it’s the one where Johnny Knoxville pretends to be retarded in order to fix the Special Olympics. Many opportunities to be offensive are wasted, but then again, who wants to see a movie that takes pot-shots at mentally challenged people? Not me, really. They gave big roles to a lot of mentally challenged people, and that’s commendable. A few laughs, a little too heart-warming for my tastes, but worth watching.

#1,957 – EYEWITNESS – An early 80s films with a truly stellar cast (Sigourney Weaver, William Hurt, James Woods). William Hurt and James Woods are supposed to be janitors/maintenance men, which is absurb, considering the fact that they’re generally recognized as two of the more literate and genius-level talents working in the Hollywood system. But James Woods totally pulls it off, somehow. I didn’t buy William Hurt as a janitor though. He’s just too suave, and has those Waspy good looks… plus, the movie is completely baffling. I just watched it a couple weeks ago, and can’t really remember what it was about.

#1,958 – THE STUNT MAN – Another early 80s classic. This was a really overwhelming movie – too many themes, too many motifs, too many subplots and layers… Usually that’s my cup of tea, and it’s worth rewatching for sure. I don’t feel qualified to make a brief review of it by any means. So I won’t.

#1,959 – AN INCONVENIENT TRUTH – See 25/25/25 blog.

#1,960 – DEEP SEA 3D – See 25/25/25 blog.

#1,961 – BIRDY – How and why do I avoid classic films like this my entire life? This movie was totally brilliant (in spite of the many netflix reviews to the contrary). It was filmed in the junky backlots of Philadelphia (I think it was Philly? Don’t quote me on that). This movie really ties humans to animals better than any film I’ve ever seen. I also think it just might be the most effective anti-war film ever made. You know the old quote, about how every war film is really a pro-war film, because you can’t help but glorify the actions of soldiers when filming them – it automatically makes them seem heroic? Well, this movie only shows the gory aftermath, both physical and mental, and has some really amazing statements about animal rights (really connecting them directly to human rights). I love movies that are filmed far away from studio lots. The cinematography and mise-en-scenes alone are reason to watch this film, even ignoring all the weighty issues it brings up. This is one of the most important movies I’ve seen in recent memory. And it’s really funny too.

#1,962 – ANDREI RUBLEV – A classic by Tarkovsky. OK, this movie is about a Russian monk/painter, who apparently is quite famous to Russians and art historians, but unknown by everyone else in the universe. I have a bone to pick with Tarkovsky, which is too bad, because he’s dead. His movies are frustrating, baffling, and too long. I had to watch this film in three installments (it’s 3.5 hours long). Still, there were a handful of moments where I thought, “Wow, this image is so incredible, I can hardly believe I’m seeing it…” And then you sit through a half hour of boredom before the next amazing image comes up. I think that’s why I loved his film The Mirror so much… it was like he took out all the expository material, and plot, and time-wasting, and just filmed a bunch of disjointed, hallucinatory, timeless episodes, that somehow add up in the end to a mindblowing epiphany (if you’re me, anyway). According to the reviews, supposedly The Mirror is his least accessible film. But somehow that movie tapped directly into my mind, whereas his other films kind of float on the surface and really don’t affect me that much. I think if I were Russian I might understand his epic films more (Andrei Rublev, Solaris, etc.) – but I think The Mirror hits a nerve that’s Human more than Russian.

#1,963 – V FOR VENDETTA – See 25/25/25 blog. I stand by my original thought – which is that this movie is completely brilliant. I plan on buying the DVD and watching it numerous times. It’s great to see big-budget films that take on so many heavy issues, and do them in a pulp setting, but somehow succeed completely in making them emotionally resonant and relevant to our lives, both personal and political… it’s a good one.

#1,964 – ONE TRUE THING – Early 90s chick flick. Watched it because it’s in my William Hurt queue. Renee Zellwegger plays his daughter, and she’s less bony and stringy than she is now. Meryl Streep plays his ailing wife, and in spite of the triteness of the film, one of her speeches moved me to tears… she’s just that good, or I’m just a pussy. Anyway, William Hurt is hot, blah blah blah.

#1,965 – THE FAST AND THE FURIOUS: TOKYO DRIFT – See 25/25/25 blog.

MY NEXT PROJECT

2006-06-13T22:41:00.000-07:00

An Attempt to Out-Geek all the X-Files Geeks Out There

All right, I just finished watching season 9 of the X-Files. Over the past year and a half or so, I’ve purchased seasons 1-9 of the X-Files and watched them all in order for the first time ever. Yes, I watched them in order when they were on the air, of course, but I only started watching during season 3 – more specifically, the eighth episode of the season, “Oubliette.” I was instantly hooked and for the first and only time in my life, was absolutely devoted to watching every episode. At the time I was in college and didn’t even have a TV in my room. I would watch the X-Files every Sunday in a campus rec room, with anywhere from 5 to 20 people crammed in there (this room was about the size of my living room now). I never missed an episode of the X-Files under any circumstance – except for the time I was in Guatemala, and the time I was in a coma. Unavoidable circumstances, in other words.

I’m feeling a little overwhelmed, having finished all these episodes. I’m showing signs of X-Files overdose. You know what I’m talking about, it happens to everyone who watches an entire season over the span of a few days: When you hear a strange noise, you think “This is a case for Scully and Mulder.” When I think, “If only Agent Doggett were here, he could help me figure out where I parked my car,” it seems totally logical.

Anyway, I know I seriously can’t out-geek the real geeks out there. But I created some Excel spreadsheets and I’m going to keep tally while watching seasons 1 through 9 again. Some of the categories include:

Number of People Mulder Kills
Number of People Scully Kills
Number of Times in Hospital (seriously, they should be earning some major worker’s comp)
Number of Times Abducted
Number of Times Scully Sees Definitive Proof of Aliens but Still Doesn’t Believe
Number of Times Saved in the Nick of Time by Other
Illegal Break and Enters
Number of Times Mulder is Thought to Be Dead

You get the idea. Am I missing any categories? Anything else I should keep track of when I make my next pass through my favorite alternate TV universe? I briefly thought about “Number of Times Doggett Says Something in His Gravelly, Sexy Voice While Looking Damn Hot,” but that seemed too silly.

Top 100

2006-06-08T18:47:00.000-07:00

Italic titles are in the top 10. There are 11… I can’t explain that.

Abre los ojos
Akira Kurosawa's Dreams
Alice (Woody Allen, 1990)
Altered States
Amadeus
American Psycho
Animal Crackers – had to pick a Marx Bros. movie, and this is my favorite by far
Apocalypse Now
Babe – greatest vegetarian propaganda film ever made
Badlands
Basquiat
Being There – Peter Sellers not being funny… a great film that not enough people have seen
Before Sunset
The Big Lebowski – obvious choice, dude
Blow Up
Blue Velvet
Brazil – this maybe should be in my top 10 as well
Bringing Out the Dead – brilliant cinematography, so I can include it even though I’ve only seen it once
Chungking Express
A Clockwork Orange – another obvious choice, my droogies
Close Encounters of the Third Kind – you guys must have forgotten about this one
The Company
Crouching Tiger, Hidden Dragon – we all agree that this movie kicks butt
Cyclo
Dead Man
Dead Ringers
Donnie Darko
The Double Life of Veronique
Down with Love
Ed Wood
The Empire Strikes Back
Enter the Dragon
E.T. the Extraterrestrial
Fallen Angels
Fear and Loathing in Las Vegas
Fellini Satyricon
Fist of Fury (Jet Li)
The 400 Blows
The Godfather
The Godfather: Part II
The Graduate
Hable con ella – Almodovar’s best
Harold and Maude
Heathers
A History of Violence
House of Flying Daggers – could have been alternately titled “Forest Sluts”
Jacob's Ladder – this movie closely parallels part of my hospital/coma experience… not many people can watch Jacob’s Ladder and be reminded of something that actually happened to them
The Jerk – still the best Steve Martin movie ever
Jules and Jim
Labyrinth
Lolita (Adrian Lyne version)
The Long Goodbye
Lord of the Rings: Fellowship of the Rings
The Loss of Sexual Innocence – self-indulgent art flick that I think is brilliant, and I can’t get enough of it – nobody else likes it except my sister and Roger Ebert
La mala educacion
The Man Who Fell to Earth
Marathon Man
The Mirror – one of the few movies that I would actually say shifted my entire consciousness
The Mission
Mississippi Mermaid
Monty Python's The Meaning of Life – they really do a good job of simplifying everything that you think you can’t understand in the universe
My Life as McDull – the only animation on my list
The New World – another consciousness-shifter
North by Northwest – Cary Grant runs across America! The classic action film
Oldboy
Pecker
The Piano
The Pillow Book
The Princess Bride
Psycho
Repo Man
Repulsion
Run Lola Run
Scarface
Schizopolis
sex, lies, and videotape
Shadow of a Doubt – a Hitchcock film that everyone should see
Sherlock, Jr. – I had to have a Buster Keaton movie on this list, and this is his best. It’s shockingly ahead of its time
The Shining
Shoot the Piano Player
Short Cuts
Sleeper
Solaris (Soderbergh version)
Star Wars
Tampopo
Terminal U.S.A. – funniest Asian-American movie ever made (sorry, Harold & Kumar)
Thirty-Two Short Films About Glenn Gould
Time and Tide
Trainspotting
Twin Peaks: Fire Walk With Me
Two English Girls
2001
Vertigo
Videodrome
What's Eating Gilbert Grape
The Wicker Man (1973)
Willy Wonka and the Chocolate Factory (1972)
Wings of Desire – another consciousness-shifter
X-Files: Fight the Future – OK, when you think about how excited I was for this movie, I’m totally justified in adding it to my list. And guess what? They’re working on the second X-Files movie right now
Young Frankenstein
Zentropa – Lars von Trier, before he turned into the biggest misogynistic, sadistic asshole in the world

Time for the TOP 100

2006-06-06T00:55:00.000-07:00

OK – this is kind of a big project. When I was in Portland, I wanted to make some lists (keeping in mind that this is a favorite activity of Sandy’s, and also one that I don’t mind so much!) But we ran out of time. I wanted to make a list of our 100 favorite movies. So let’s do it, now! And if there are any films in our top 100 which our friends haven’t seen, it’s their (or our) sworn duty to see that film ASAP.

I’ve done my top 10 before – this is easy, since it changes very rarely. The only addition to my top 10 in the past 5 years has been The New World, and I honestly don’t know which film it bumped out of my top 10 since I haven’t done the list in awhile. I’ve figured out my top 25 as well, and that’s pretty easy. But when you get to 100, you have to make some serious decisions about what to cut and what to keep. So I think it’s important to give it a try!

Please, if you have the time and the energy - post your Favorite 100 Movies of All Time list – and any explanations why.

P.S. – this is not a list of the “100 Greatest Films” of all time. This is a list of the movies you love, not the ones your teachers (or Maya) told you to love.

Ciao, and Good Luck!

COUNTDOWN TO 2K

2006-06-04T21:52:00.000-07:00

All right, according to my authoritative film database, I’ve now seen 1,950 movies (#1,950 being An Inconvenient Truth, which I highly recommend). I would have seen far more than 2,000 movies by now if I didn’t insist on seeing the same damn ones over and over and over again.

That’s besides the point, the benchmark is quickly approaching! I’m going to list all the remaining 50 movies as I see them, good and bad, and add comments as necessary. I should definitely hit #2,000 sometime before the end of July.

In praise of Colin Farrell

2006-05-22T23:34:00.000-07:00

I think this is my favorite picture of Colin Farrell. He looks like possibly the sleaziest guy ever. But come ON, you KNOW you would still hit that! This picture is perfect: It sums up his (very strong) appeal, but also his drawbacks.

First things first: The New World. I’ve been a follower of Terrence Malick for awhile, and was extremely excited and agitated when I saw the first theatrical trailer for The New World. The trailer was beautiful, and breathtaking, and… Colin Farrell? Huh? My exact thoughts were, “Oh well, Terrence Malick knows what he’s doing, and I’m going to trust him on this one…”

When I saw The New World for the first time in the theater, I was really transported to a completely different time and place. The first shot of Colin Farrell in the movie is so perfect that all doubts I had about the casting were immediately erased. It’s not just that he has a gorgeous face and is a decent actor; there really is no other actor who could have played the part of John Smith so perfectly. Trust me, when you watch this movie, his sex tape is the last thing in your mind. The film is an immersion into a totally foreign experience. I mean The New World, not the Sex Tape. Oh, this is where the drawbacks come into play.

When I find a new actor or director that I’m interested in, I follow a typical pattern: I watch every damn thing they’re even remotely connected to. And I found out something interesting about Colin Farrell that not everybody is aware of: He’s actually a really good actor. Not all of his movies are good, but he doesn’t give a bad performance in any of them. He chooses unusual projects, and is definitely not afraid of looking bad, or gay. He’ll apparently take off his pants anytime a director asks him to (ask any woman, this is not a bad trait). Yeah, he goes overboard with the drunken public celebrity persona… but you know damn well that if you ran into him on the street, he would stop and talk to you. Who cares if it’s because he’s an attention whore? He’s Colin Farrell, and he’s talking to you!

All I can say is, go back to the picture. He’s Colin Farrell, and he’s drunk, and smoking, and on a boat, and possessing great, beefy arms. Would you really pretend that you’re too good to be on that boat with him?

I Want To Go On a Date With This Man

2006-05-19T20:51:00.000-07:00

Somebody please help me find William Hurt so I can go on a date with him. I heard he lives in Portland, Oregon (the internet wouldn’t lie about that to me!) and I’ll be there next week.

He’s one of the most brilliant American actors working today. Altered States is one of my favorite movies. I just watched Children of a Lesser God, and he was so hot in that movie, it made my eyes hurt. It’s not so much about appearance as it is about intensity. He’s clearly had a hair transplant which wasn’t entirely successful, but so what, I can see past that.

Some people might say he’s too old for me, but he’s only a tiny bit older than my last boyfriend. We’ll have plenty to talk about – I even loved his extra-hammy performance in A History of Violence! I already know what shirt I’ll wear for the date, I bought it today at Target specifically for this purpose. Yeah, maybe I shouldn’t wear something from Target on a date with a legitimate actor, but I’m unemployed and really can’t justify buying something more expensive.

In praise of Robert Patrick

2006-05-16T13:56:00.000-07:00

An Unlikely Heartthrob

OK, he can be a little scary-looking, and tends to play unsympathetic murderers, angry fathers, and killer robots from the future. An icy-blue death stare is usually not what I look for in a man. His ears are a little bit demonic. When he was in his early 40s, his face was already super-wrinkly (is THAT what a man without plastic surgery looks like?) He has gone on record admitting that the vast majority of the movies he’s been in are total crap. But Robert Patrick is dreamy!

I’ve been watching The X-Files in order for the first time since the show was on the air. I finally made it to the eighth season, and it’s even better than I remembered. A lot of people got disgusted by the show’s 7th season and stopped watching. The easiest way for a great TV show to turn into a terrible parody of its former self is to lose one of its main characters, and the loss of a lead as charismatic and good-looking as David Duchovny should have put The X-Files in its grave once and for all. But the show’s writers created a new male character that was a stark contrast to Agent Mulder. Robert Patrick plays John Doggett, an ex-Marine and former New York City cop. He’s full of no-nonsense advice and dry one-liners. It only took about three shows of the 8th season for me to be totally won over by him.

I think the exact moment when I fell in love with him was when Scully is trapped in a bedroom by the crazy cult members, and the prophet slug is crawling up her spine and trying to get in her brain, and Doggett busts the door down and grabs Scully around the waist (all semi-conscious and sweaty) and carries her out. That’s such a softcore romance cliché, but sometimes that stuff works.

I can’t really recommend any of Robert Patrick’s films. He turns up as a character actor in small roles constantly, but is never the lead in anything good. Actually he played the lead in “The Cool Surface,” which is pretty decent in spite of being a total B-movie. He’s a good actor and has really great range, which is probably why nobody quite remembers who he is or even recognizes him half the time. I’d love to run into him on the street – he’s in solid “Hey, it’s that guy” territory and would probably be terribly impressed that I know him by name.

Not-So-Great Reviewers: Videodrome, Crash, and Crash

2006-04-27T22:32:00.000-07:00

Review of “Videodrome” by Mr. BadGas – one star
Watching this film steals two hours from your life. The only thing even slightly redeaming about this film is when james woods puts on a pair of stupid glasses. Of course you have no idea why he went to the glasses shop, or who the salesman is talking to him, or why they go in the basement and put a weird device on his head but other than that the scene was ok

(OK… I admit that Videodrome is an extremely confusing film. But I don’t think it’s quite as confusing as Mr. BadGas makes it out to be.)

Review of “Videodrome” by TK from Garwood, NJ – one star
Was this supposed to be scary? It was more annoying than scary. The best part was seeing Debbie Harry's boobie for about three seconds. This film looked out dated and admitedly is not in my relm of taste. It's a horror movie that atempts to tell a storie and make scense . But it is nothing more that bad eighties cheese that is bogged down by a psudo science fiction pretence which acts only as an excuse for violence and grose out scenes meant to make you squirm but instead I just cringed. Another thing I did'nt like is that you only got to see one of Debbie Harry's boobies not both and for only 3 seconds. A terrible movie.Suitable for Troma.Actualy there's alot of good stuff on Troma.I certainly perfer it over this. P.S.James Woods is a good actor if he has a good role,but This is not one of them.

Review of “Crash” (David Cronenberg’s Crash, that is) by DS from Cranston, RI – one star
I'm only giving it two stars because James Spader is in it. I love him. However, this is the dumbest and weirdest movie I've ever seen. I know he likes the oddball ones, and I can take those ok, but this one just really pushed it. Not recommended, unless you're a freak.

Review of “Crash” by BH from La Mesa, CA – one star
I accidently rented this, mistaking it for the 2005 "Crash" with Sandra Bullock. Didn't realize it until I started watching. I figured it had James Spader in it, who is extremely HOT, so I watched. All I have to say is "ewwwwww." Believe me, I am no prude by any means, but I do like a movie to be mostly believable. This was just a bunch of weirdos getting off to car crashes basically. I expected to find out at the end that it was just James Spader's freaky dream/nightmare. No such luck. It was just mine.

(Ha, ha! Cronenberg unsuccessfully tried to sue Paul Haggis and prevent him from using the title ‘Crash.’ Looks like it might have worked in his favor… people are accidentally renting Cronenberg’s Crash. What an excellent film to rent by mistake. Imagine that… you try to rent a heavy-handed morality play and end up with a film revolving entirely around truly aberrant sexual behavior. Ha, ha!)

Review of “Crash” by PT - five stars
I hardly know where to start raving about this film. It is fabulous. Remember learning about the ripple effect in science? Or maybe 6 degrees of separation? Well envision that effect on a group of otherwise dissimilar people whose lives happen to CRASH. The actors are phenomenal, the story line is totally believable and this movie makes you realize that it's a true representation of everyone's life - yours, mine, his, hers, theirs....

(I'm not even going to start on how worthless the 2005 version of Crash was. It was only redeemed by a few unintentionally hilarious lines and the presence of Brendan Fraser. This reviewer can only be cured by an accidental viewing of Cronenberg’s Crash.)

Review of “Crash” by CH from Dinuba, CA – five stars
People who were upset about this movie winning the Oscar for Best Picture must be supporters of Brokeback Mountain. I'm glad that Crash beat it. This film is more reality than fiction. There is racism and prejudice in not just L. A., but around the world. Everyone is gets racist and prejudice against. The reason why this movie won Best Picture is because is more real. The American Motion Picture Arts and Science made the right decision of giving this movie the Best Picture Oscar instead of Brokeback Mountain. I recommend this movie.

(That’s right, Crash was about prejudice but Brokeback Mountain wasn’t… And Crash is more “reality” than Brokeback, because a story about two gay people in the closet is really unbelievable. This person also needs to accidentally watch Cronenberg’s Crash.)

MY GROSS LIFESTYLE

2006-04-27T14:37:00.000-07:00

I remember my Mythology professor telling us never to use the word “lifestyle” because the only people who have lifestyles live in L.A. I suddenly realized today that it’s not completely true – I now have a lifestyle! You know how sometimes your apartment gets kind of messy, and it happens so gradually and you spend so much time there that nobody seems to notice? Then one day you look around and ask yourself “HOW did this happen?” For Whitney Houston, that day probably came when she saw pictures of her crack den bathroom published in O.K. Magazine. Nobody’s going to publish pictures of my apartment in any gossip rags, so I’m going to post one here with an accompanying explanation. You can learn a lot about somebody from just one picture. This is my living room coffee table which I made in shop class. It sits between the TV and the couch. This is its natural state as of right now (I didn’t add or pose anything in order to make it more pathetic):

Far Left: April 14 “Restaurants Special” issue of the Chicago Reader, which I have yet to read. Coffee thermos and mug. Cat (Pepino). Almost empty bottle of Rene Junot table wine, the best cheap wine you can buy. Kelly’s weed box (the only thing in this picture which is not my fault, in other words). Purple Easter bag and partially eaten chocolate rabbit. Assorted dirty dishes (all from breakfast today, so not that bad). Nailpolish, hair scarves (couldn’t make the trip to my bedroom apparently). Solaris by Stanislaw Lem (I keep trying to read it, but end up watching Battlestar Galactica instead). One of my school binders. An explosion of Star Magazines (I’m working on my celebrity acupuncture journal). A to-do list for today which reads 1. Jobs (meaning, apply for jobs I don’t want) 2. Jerry Springer (call for tickets) 3. Dresser bedroom (meaning clean the goddamn bedroom so I can move out the dresser which is currently falling apart). Guess how many things on my to-do list I’ve actually done today? Remote controls for TV/DVD. Bottles of hot sauce. Weights (for those inspired moments).

OK – just wanted to post this snapshot in time. I’m going to clean now. Ciao.

Not-So-Great Reviewers, French Film: PART ONE

2006-04-20T00:19:00.000-07:00

DISCLAIMER: I LOVE FRENCH FILMS. Not everybody loves French films. I realize that. Anybody who loves film in general, however, needs to realize that France has had an immense influence on the trajectory of world cinema. And if they don’t realize that, they need to start watching a bunch of French films from the late 50s to early 80s. I won’t say which ones – it’s pretty easy to figure out. Now, on to the crappy reviews written by insane people on Netflix!

My friend Steve (nowadays referred to as Steven) gets the biggest kick out of the crazy MPAA ratings these days. Just a few years ago movies were rated R for violence or language, PG-13 for language, PG-13 for adult situations, etc. They kept it brief and to the point. Now there is a different description for every film released. I found it very funny that “He Loves Me, He Loves Me Not” was rated PG-13 for “Thematic elements and some obsessive behavior.” THEMATIC ELEMENTS. That phrase means nothing more than “Something that means something.” Or perhaps it would be easier to just say “Stuff.” How could such a meaningless phrase be used as justification for a PG-13 rating? And what about the “Obsessive Behavior?” I’m not even going to start on that one. Yes, I agree that this particular movie should not be seen by small children, but that’s besides the point.

Review of “He Loves Me, He Loves Me Not” by SR from CA – four stars
We liked this movie, a lot. Usually nothing happens in French movies. They are very slow, too slow for Americans. But this had some interesting twists. Give it a try.

(Actually, I was going to make fun of SR, but I think she/he has a point – French movies ARE too slow for most Americans. This one really isn’t. I liked it quite a bit, but within the spectrum of French film this would be towards the bottom. Yeah, I’m one of those snobs, but from time to time I can appreciate a movie that isn’t completely esoteric. Let’s face it, this is probably the most action-packed French film made EVER.)

Review of “The 400 Blows” by EE from Prior Lake, MN – one star
I saw this movie based on all the five star ratings I saw for it. Don't fall for them as I did. This film is boring and uninteresting from the first to the last moment, I had to force myself to watch it all the way through. There is no element in this film to recommend it other than to see what Paris looked like forty five years ago. Don't waste your time on it.

(Somebody gave “The 400 Blows” one star! ONE STAR! Wow, I have no commentary on this one. Actually I do – if you haven’t seen this movie yet – watch it immediately. If the film seems trite to you, please remember that’s only because every “lonely kid” movie in the past 40 years has stolen ideas shamelessly from this one… and if it seems boring, please remember that it’s French. Trust me, this is one of the best films ever made by my all-time favorite director.)

Review of “The 400 Blows” by JB from Philadelphia, PA – one star
I can't begin to express how disappointed I was in this film. There isn't one character, including the boy that is sympathetic. The main point of the film was to show how painful this boy's childhood was supposed to be. In the film, the boy is neither physically or sexually abused. He is not thrown out on the streets. While his parents are not June and Ward cleaver, they do feed him, clothe him and seem in their own way to care about his safety. The boy is genuinely unappealing. He's a liar, thief and does all he can to disobey his parents and teachers at every turn. His "harrowing" experiences with his parents do not compare to the horrible experiences millions of children face each day with genuinely abusive parents. At the end of the film, I not only didn't feel sorry for this boy, but had a genuine dislike for him. All in all, the film is incredibly boring and unsatisfying.

(I’m sorry that JB was apparently an abused child. But I think he’s truly missing the point. Seriously, how could anybody find the main character unappealing? It’s Jean-Pierre Leaud’s first movie – his acting style is so pure it can hardly even be called acting. And he played Antoine Doinel (the main character in The 400 Blows) again for four more movies, until he was in his 40s. Leaud is one of the most charismatic actors in the history of film… perhaps THE most charismatic… And until rather recently (when he got kind of fat) he was also one of the best-looking. So please back off of Leaud – he’s my boy! I’m going to Philadelphia to kick some JB ass!)

Review of “Jules and Jim” by Tim Foley – two stars
Normally, I like french films, and this had a lot of nice things going for it. The quirky direction was probably pretty revolutionary at the time, and at times made me think of Amelie with the playful way the movie played with the whole idea of 'calling attention' to itself as 'film', but overall, I was more than a little bored with the whole pointless mess. The love triangle was interesting in its way, but I've seen it done much more effectively elsewhere, and I had a hard time seeing exactly what it was that drew these two men towards this messed up woman.

(I guess I can’t expect everyone to view films with an open mind. But seriously, how could you watch Jules and Jim and compare it to AMELIE? These two movies should never be mentioned in the same sentence (unless you’re saying the sentence Jim and Jules is a French movie, and so is Amelie, but who fucking cares?) You do not need to be a film historian to appreciate a movie that was made before you were born - or a movie from a different culture. Trust me, I’ve done it. I just watched “The Mirror” by Tarkovsky and thought it was probably one of the best films I’ve ever seen in my life. I know next to nothing about Russian history (OK – more than the average American, but still not much), and I’m embarrassed that I’ve seen so very few Russian films. But I didn’t feel the need to compare it to anything else in the world. And film is really a pure art form – you can be involved with a film without completely understanding its particular cultural context. But Tim Foley watches a French film that predates Amelie by a good 40 years and still feels the need to use Amelie as the benchmark. Good job.)

Review of “Jules and Jim” by Mike Habetz from CT – one star
I know Truffaut is supposed to be some kind of genius, but this is a really stupid movie, and it's endless. My brother made me watch it and it was torture. (Then my wife made me watch the second half of Moulin Rouge, making it one of the most painful nights of my life.) I didn't find it remotely insightful into life, love, friendship, or any of the other topics it seems to be trying to treat. It's just three hours of 2 1/2 really annoying male characters obsessing over one really annoying female character and saying a lot of really stupid things that are supposed to be profound.

(Oh, this is truly painful. Somehow Mike Habetz is conflating one of my favorite movies (Jules and Jim) with the worst movie I’ve ever seen (Moulin Rouge). Maybe the pain from watching the second half of Moulin Rouge somehow tainted his memory of Jules and Jim. I’d like to think so. More likely – he was just pissed that his gay brother and wife ganged up on him, and there was some sort of sporting event on at the same time which he missed).

Not-So-Great Reviewers, Pedophilia Version

2006-04-16T23:42:00.000-07:00

I saw Mysterious Skin at Landmark Theater - a matinee show. I swear 50% of the audience (about 20 people) had to be pedophiles, or closet pedophiles perhaps. It made me feel gross. The person in line behind me at the ticket counter was an awkward 40-something man who had to get directions to the theater from the ticket booth. Usually people who go to matinees in Chicago are movie buffs who damn well know the way to the theater. The person behind me in line had clearly not been to a movie in years. Maybe I'm reading too much into it, but the fact stands that many men saw both Lolita and Mysterious Skin, and they sympathized with the pedophilic characters NOT because they were well-written parts which were brilliantly acted, but because they finally got to see some part of themselves reflected on the movie screen. That's disturbing. Now I'm going to make fun of some amateur reviewers.

Review of “Lolita” by Synesthesia, one star
Because he is a terrible director. This whole movie is heavy handed, the way the cherry drips of the whipped cream to represent a loss of innocence, and how the viction, a 12 year old is practically blamed for Humbert Humbert's pervertedness. Every second of this terrible movie makes me cringe and twitch in horror.

Review of “Lolita” by Katie, four stars
at first i thought this movie would be sick but i saw all of these good reviews and the high rating. the movie isn't sick at all. I thought the man would be this nasty pervert but it wasnt like that. The story line was great and its one of those movies that makes u think about what happened after its over.

(Honestly, I would LOVE to see Synesthesia and Katie in a debate. I really would.)

Review of “Lolita” by Mike Robbins, three stars
Feeling kind of weird in a sick way for even wanting to see a movie like this, but being the Doiminique Swain fan I am. I figured I'd give it a try. Only thing I found good about this movie was all the shots of Dominique's feet. For those with a foot fetish this would be a good one to see, however I found it hard to believe Jeremy Irons would be this kind of guy after seeing him take on Bruce Willis in Die Hard 3.

(Dominique Swain fan? There is no such thing. This review makes me feel queasy. He’s clearly a pedophile/foot fetishist who feels that leaving a review on netflix somehow partially exonerates him from his guilty feelings… oh, it’s terrible. It’s so much easier to justify watching this film because you’re a Nabokov fan… or a Jeremy Irons fan... or both.)

Review of “Mysterious Skin” by AH from New York, NY, one star
After reading all the positive hype I saw on this film, I expected something really special. Instead I suffered through a long, pompous and preposterous waste of time. And for once in my life I'd like to see a gay hustler played by someone not so painfully physically unattractive.

(It’s funny… you can learn so much about somebody in just three sentences. AH from New York is sick of all these ugly gay hustlers! Too many ugly gay hustlers in movies, enough! I can’t tell you how many times I’ve watched a movie and GOD DAMN IT, ANOTHER ugly-ass gay hustler! Wait a second… what movies is he talking about again? And which gay hustler is ugly? Is it Gordon Joseph-Levitt? God knows he’s way too boyish and scrawny for my tastes, but I don't think anyone besides an Aryan Nation member would consider him truly ugly… wait… confused…)

Review of “Mysterious Skin” by JE from Portland, OR, five stars
This is a Gay movie and follows the lives of two boys from adolescence to adulthood. It's blunt be trail of young & emotionally needy young men learning about the Gay Lifestyle and how the survive as they grow.. This could be a movie to watch with supervision, (AdultGays) & those who are under age but have & are questioning their lifestyle..

(Oh, dear. JE from Portland thinks that gay youths should watch this movie with supervision. I really don’t think this is a gay coming-of-age movie, unless you’re a truly unfortunate gay coming-of-age person.)

Review of “Mysterious Skin” by RH from Cypress, TX 2, one star
I like to be entertained by movies. This is the most unetertaining movie I have ever seen! Too much graphic sex involving children. My wife and I HAD to turn it off. I feel like I need to go to confession for just having rented it.

(Well, I have nothing to say. Maybe they rented the movie because they planned on praying for the eternal souls of the actors, director, writer, producer, line producer, makeup artist, best boy, etc… but, um…. I don’t know, it sounds sketchy to me. If you’re from Texas, DON’T watch this movie. Save some time - just go to confession and tell the priest you THOUGHT about renting the movie.)

Not-So-Great Reviewers, Spanish Language Version

2006-04-16T22:55:00.000-07:00

Oh, this is the most fun I've had on the internet in ages. I get to combine my love of film with my love of making fun of people. More reviews of films done by amateurs, this time all Spanish movies. I also came to the realization that I need to see more Central and South American films. Oops.

Review of “Talk to Her” by AB from Washington, DC 2, one star

the suspension of disbelief does not come with this self consious movie. Although the subject matter would seem to be moving-the reality is somewhat tedious.

(Huh? I thought this was one of the best films ever… oh well, guess I was wrong.)

Review of “Abre los ojos” by Rita Youkers

As I was watching this movie, it seemed like I had seen it before. I didn't realize until the end of the movie, I did see it before! It was a generic copy of Vanilla Sky with Tom Cruise and Penelope Cruz. Why did she do a foreign version after the American version? It wasn't that great of a movie the first time.

(Oh, ouch! Rita doesn’t know that just because she saw Vanilla Sky before she saw Abre los Ojos, it doesn’t mean that Vanilla Sky was actually filmed first. Why the hell did Amenabar sell the rights to this brilliant film? Did he need the money that badly? Was selling the rights the condition which allowed him to start making Hollywood movies?)

Review of “Amores Perros” by Katrina Steidler

This movie was highly recommended to me, it was portrayed as a movie about peoples/dogs lives. Now I donýt mean to say that I thought this was some sort of Disney like dog portrayal movie. I was just very offended by the cruelty of the dog fighting. This movie warrants a strong warning for dog and animal lovers. Yes I am a dog lover my dogs lead better lives than most of the world population, I just had a hard time dealing with the reality of the movie. Looking past this issue, I did find the movie to be very Tarrentino like and I would watch another movie by this director sans the animal rights violations!!

(Poor Katrina. She actually thinks Mexicans kill puppies for entertainment. One thing I love about DVD technology is the bonus features, and one great thing about this DVD in particular is the very long and informative making-of featurette which details exactly how they filmed the entire movie without harming a single dog. Amores Perros is a painful movie to watch for animal lovers, but being one myself, I always sit through movie credits to wait for the “no animals were harmed in the making of this motion picture” disclaimer at the end… and it was sure there. Oh well.)

Review of “Bad Education” by Tom Fischbach, one star

I could not even get thru 10 minutes of this movie, it was terrible. It was also very, very sexual. Gay men in drag having oral sex in the first 5 minutes of the movie. I would not let anyone watch this under the age of 21. This is what is wrong with movies today. You did not need to have those scenes to get your point across Mr. Director. We as movie watchers are not dumb we get the drift without having to take it that far. The director went to far with the sex scenes. Even if the characters were not gay but a heterosexual couple, it was to much. The only people that will like this movie are people who are into gay porn. It was utter crap!

(OK – I might be overstepping my bounds after reading this, but I’m pretty sure that Mr. Fischbach is a closet homo. Who else would rent the gayest of gay films and then be mad about how gay it was?)

Great Films, Not-So-Great Reviewers

2006-04-15T14:05:00.000-07:00

Here’s yet another installment of film reviews by amateurs (this time all from netflix). I find the opinions of dullards to be quite entertaining. All typos and misspelled words are left as they appeared in the original reviews.

Review of “A History of Violence” by ia, one star
First something good, Ed Harris was in the movie. Other than that, where to start. Poor acting by Vigo, predicible plot, Gandhi-killer idea, 15 wasted minutes in sex scenes (not bad on their own, but nothing to do with the plot), karate kid junior, cheap usage of shocking and sex scenes to raise adrenalin, no humor, no suspense, no drama, no twist ... Watch any Tarantino movie if you want violence, any Steven Seagal movie if you want "I am invincible" fights, any xxx movie if you want sex scenes. Do not waste 96 minutes on this unless you want inferior mix of the above.

Review of “The Loss of Sexual Innocence” by The Champ, one star
I fast forwarded through most of this doo doo of a film. What are people thinking when they think of ideas like this for films? I mean, who is crazy enough to finance mess like this? The person or persons obviously has money to burn.

Review of “Body Heat” by Veggivixen, one star
Though I am in the minority it seems, my opinion isn't totally out there from what I have read from the other reviewers who didn't rate this highly. There was nothing sexy or erotic about this film. Did zilch for me in that respect. Came across as a really desperate attempt to come across that way, but failed miserably. 1 huge issue is William Hurt as the "sexy" male lead. Sorry, but he has zero sex appeal and it's actually just gross to watch him in sexual situations as he's so unappealing to look at. Reminds me of the casting of Ed Bagley Jr. in She Devil as the "sexy" male lead (just as out of place) and I know Kathleen Turner was supposed to be a sex symbol then, but I have never figured out why. She has no body and a manly voice. She'd be a great drag queen if she were male, but as a woman she barely cuts it looks wise. So we have to lead roles here of people who are not sexy in the slightest. The sex scenes are very sub-par and very few and far between. Dialog is very forced and fake. I guess for one to actually think this is a hot sexy film you must be really disassociated from the world and films in general. And to think this is actually a good film, well I guess you ain't seen many films cause this is not a quality film in any respect.

Review of “Solaris” by Greedy1, one star
I too have read the shamelessly biased reviews of many a paid movie critic of this nightmarishly shallow, poorly scripted, unimaginative sled. How anyone of sound mind or conscious could call this callously packaged ‘chic flick’ anything short of a theatrical debacle is beyond me. The movie is slow, the cinematography is weak, scenes just drone on endlessly, and the ending is about as shocking as a jack in the box. To add insult to injury they shamelessly feed the twisted desires of many a female movie going with three gratuitous Clooney bare butt shots. Can I get a ‘GIVE ME A #$%*%* BREAK!’ The first shot was enough, at least tastefully done and well lit…but the other two, COME ON! Notice that the movie was absent of any female nudity…maybe then I would have been less pressed to bury a straw in my eye after the first 30 minutes. I feel for ANYONE who was fooled by the reviews that has to endure this disaster. Clooney should be beyond embarrassed that he signed on to this bomb

(Oh, too much male nudity… boo hoo! This is perhaps the only non-gay film in the history of cinema which contains more male than female nudity, and Greedy1 wants to begrudge us that? Gee, thanks. I rarely review films based on their nudity content alone, in spite of my twisted desires.)

Review of “Altered States” by Inkybrown, four stars
Ok, I confess, I got this movie because I am a Drewbie (Drew Barrymore fan) and this was her first movie. She's so cute in her brief scene! Otherwise it is really an interesting story that is very engrossing and trippy.

(OK… I’m glad this reviewer enjoyed the movie, but does Drew Barrymore’s barely post-toddler performance really merit mention? I have to say I’ve seen this movie at least 5 times and never noticed it was her. I guess that means I need to watch it again.)

Review of “Dead Ringers” by elena laura, one star
It was the most disturbing, disgusting, distastful movie i have ever seen.... i was so dissapointed and outraged that it compelled me to write a review.

(In case you were wondering, this isn’t the first sentence of the review. This is the entire review.)

Review of “The Mirror” by Melody from ABQ, one star
I hated this movie. It is not my kind of film. There is no story, nothing linear. I found myself asking what is going on? Who is this? I gave up after 30 minutes.

(Just one question… how does somebody rent a Tarkovsky film from Netflix without knowing exactly what they’re getting into?)

Review of “The Man Who Fell To Earth” by SF from Fayetteville, AK
Man, David Bowie can be kind of cool, suck or really suck. Labrynth would be an example of him being kind of cool in a movie. This would be an example of him really sucking. I mean I really like weird movies and, was sure I'd like this one. But this is just gross and stupid. When the girl carries Bowies naked body around like a baby I poped this one out and stuck it in the mail.

(I disagree... I don’t think David Bowie can ever be really suck!)

I’m Incapable of Feeling Emotions Unless I’m Watching a Film

2006-03-23T20:07:00.000-08:00

Well, that’s not entirely true, but lately it seems that the only time I get excited is when I think about/watch/read about movies. “Lately” being the last 13 years or so. Now that I’m unemployed and actually have the time to catch up on films, I’m immediately feeling overwhelmed by how much there is to catch up on. Sure, I changed my Netflix subscription to 4 at a time, thinking that I could make some headway into the 450+ movie queue… but then I added about 30 more movies. Sure, January through March is supposedly the hell-pit of every movie-going year, but in Chicago you can find something worth watching every damn day, even in January… but instead, I found myself repeatedly drawn to The New World as if I were a crack whore and that movie was my sweet pipe. In spite of my constant ravings, not a single one of my friends saw that movie. I did decide, however, that I’m going to name my first-born son Malick.

Anyway, here are a few things in the film world that I am excited about lately:

Ask the Dust

Why haven’t I seen this movie yet? I don’t know, but I’ll see it this week. Colin Farrell looks yummy, and apparently was cast in the film before he became the world’s most over-the-top adorable Irish dipsomaniac. And in a brilliant stroke of casting, Salma Hayek plays his romantic interest, which allows him to appear tall.

Reverse Shot Names The New World the Best Film of the Year:

The New World Is Super-Duper

The critics of Reverse Shot had already named their favorites of 2005, but neglected to see The New World. Upon seeing it, they overhauled their website to write one of the most insane reviews I’ve ever read. They basically surmise that The New World reinvents not only film, but also all art. I have to say that as crazy as it sounds, I pretty much agree with them. Why don’t I know any of these people? A good quote from the review, which is part of why the film is so alternately exhilarating and depressing:

“Upon exiting my second viewing on a cloudy matinee Sunday, I found that Malick’s vision had rendered our world drab and cheap—as if … Captain Christopher Newport’s (Christopher Plummer) warnings to his fellow settlers in the film had fallen on deaf ears, allowing America to grow up stunted, deformed, tainted, and gross. In short, into the world we inhabit today.”

Awesome!

Inside Man

I love Spike Lee. I go to see all his movies, and I love them, even the ones everyone else hates (example: I thought She Hate Me was pretty darn good, and only suffered from an overabundance of ideas). I find it peculiar that all of the posters and TV ads for Inside Man don’t mention the fact that Spike Lee was involved at all. It’s as if mentioning his name in connection to the movie would be a liability.

Brick

I mentioned this movie in the post where I raved about Joseph Gordon-Levitt. I had no idea Brick was actually going to get released (although probably only in big cities at first… I’m honestly not sure). People, please see this movie. It’s truly innovative. Even if you don’t like it, I’m sure you’ll admit you’ve never seen another movie quite like it. It seems like it’s getting a pretty big advertising push (at least on the internet)… so who knows, maybe it’ll do well.

Junebug

2006-03-18T13:40:00.000-08:00

Yesterday, Kelly and I watched a really awesome movie that should be added to my Best of 2005 List. Junebug is one of those “independent” films that succeeds 100% - the characters are vividly portrayed and moving without being cloying or artificial, the cinematography instills a real sense of place without being self-consciously artsy, and it moves along at a pace that feels leisurely but is never boring. I don’t really have much to say about the movie – it’s just a perfect snapshot of a particular family in a specific place and time. I know that doesn’t sound really enticing, but it’s rare to see films like this. The last “indie” film I saw that I felt the same way about was The Station Agent. Sorry to keep using “indie” in quotes, but I really don’t know what term to use for this type of movie anymore.

I mostly wanted to post about this movie to reiterate how much I hate some of the people who share this earth with us. I’m going to highlight yet another Movie Review By a Total Retard, this time from Netflix:

By reviewer Kate Jones:
“The performances were wonderful. The characters were extremely believeable, and portrayed so well you felt what they felt, whether you liked it or not. However, that's not what I personally watch a movie for. I want entertainment, and that's not what I got from this film at all. 2 Stars.”

How anyone could be so soulless is really beyond me. I find this review to be much more offensive than the one directly beneath it:

By reviewer Joe:
“Even though the movie's only a hour and 45 minutes, it felt like 4...soooo long, sooooo boring... “

This person is clearly just a total idiot, but the first viewer actually felt some connection to the story and characters, and STILL somehow hated the movie. I like to read these reviews, because they make me extremely glad that I’m NOT one of these morons… nor are any of my friends.

Oscar Took a Poo On You, 2005

2006-02-27T21:08:00.000-08:00

Viggo Mortensen

No comment necessary. Maybe he’ll get another chance at a nom, maybe not. But Oscar surely took a poo on Viggo.

David Cronenberg

OK, so Paul Haggis, who we’ve never heard of before, got a nomination. I hate to dump on a movie I haven’t seen (Crash is the only Best Picture nom I haven’t seen)…. But COME ON. Not only did Paul Haggis yank away the nomination that should have rightfully been Cronenberg’s, but he STOLE the name of his movie from a very recent Cronenberg film. If Cronenberg wasn’t Canadian he would probably beat Paul Haggis up.

Clifton Collins, Jr.

As I’ve said before, I thought that Clifton was a shoe-in for a Best Supporting Actor nomination. He didn’t get one… what can I say, this isn’t the year of the Hispanic. He did play a character of questionable sexuality though… I guess his performance wasn’t full-on Brokeback enough to get a nomination.

Q’Orianka Kilcher

I honestly think that the only reason Q’Orianka didn’t get a nomination is because the young, ethnic newcomer Oscar nod was given to Keisha Castle-Hughes last year, and the Academy couldn’t possibly nominate a different young, ethnic girl the very next year. Better to nominate people who certainly don’t need another nomination… like Dame Judi Dench, who gets nominated so often she sells her spare nominations on ebay. Seriously, Q’Orianka carries The New World, and her transformation in the last third of the movie is remarkable. She does it all with her eyes and her breathing patterns. It’s amazing, I swear.

I’m actually having people over to watch the Oscars this year… and I don’t care about any of the categories, honestly. The only one I’m going to be rooting for is New World for Cinematography. Come on, the two best movies of the year were released by New Line… maybe they should have followed Lion’s Gate suit and sent out 30 bazillion screeners of A History of Violence and The New World.

Thanks, Canada!

2006-02-22T20:32:00.000-08:00

I think it’s about time for me to thank our liberal neighbors to the North for providing me with such high-quality entertainment over the years. Here is a brief list of some of my favorite Canadian exports, in no particular order:

KIDS IN THE HALL

I’ve been rewatching this show for the first time since high school. The Kids in the Hall are simply brilliant. Bruce McCulloch was always my favorite – he’s a short, intensely bitter, perpetual-loser kind of guy. Anger always leads to good comedy. Upon rewatching the episodes, I find myself more consistently drawn to Scott Thompson. Not only is he gloriously faggy, but his heart is also full of hate. He’s sublimely derisive and always says incredibly offensive things during talk show appearances. That’s also good comedy.

SKINNY PUPPY

Thanks to their liberal upbringings in liberal Canada, the members of Skinny Puppy manage to be about 200% more liberal than their American industrial music peers. Every liberal political complaint that has ever existed since the beginning of time can be found detailed in Skinny Puppy’s songs. And they’re animal rights activists to boot, too. Thanks, Canada!

THE NEWSROOM

My favorite new TV show – so what if it’s suspiciously close in theme and tone to the Larry Sanders Show and The Office? The Newsroom predates The Office by quite a few years, and since it’s Canadian, it’s more liberal. And I get to add Ken Finkleman (the writer/star/producer/director/etc.) to the growing list of brilliant, studly older men I’d like to… meet.

SEASONS 1-5 OF THE X-FILES

OK, The X-Files is not a Canadian show. I realize that. It is, however, my favorite TV show of all time. A huge part of why I found it so appealing initially was the consistency of tone, which was due in large part to the fact that it was shot in the creepy woods and creepy towns of Canada. The show began to falter during the sixth season when it moved location to L.A. - no coincidence there. Of course, I remained a loyal fan to the bitter end, and the show picked up some good steam during the last two seasons in spite of its lack of Canadian surroundings.

DAVID CRONENBERG

Long Live the New Flesh! Cronenberg is my favorite living director, enough said. Only Canada could produce somebody who is so entirely demented but yet civilized at the same time. I just discovered that two of my Canadian interests converge – David Cronenberg stars in several episodes of The Newsroom (I haven’t seen them yet, but will as soon as the DVDs arrive in the mail). I ordered them from Canadian Amazon.com, and they sent the shipping information in both English and French. Thanks, Canada!

THE NEW WORLD

2006-02-16T21:40:00.000-08:00

All right, time to wax poetic about my favorite movie of the year, The New World. I’ve only seen it in the theaters four times, and would have seen it several more times if it hadn't been unceremoniously yanked from the theaters already.

I’ll be the first to admit that this movie is not for everyone. People always ask me what good movies are out in the theaters, and lately I’ve been telling them The New World is the best one out right now, but also recommending that they not watch it. It really is a great example of a transcendental film, but if you’re not in the right mood or frame of mind you’ll miss it entirely and think it’s just a beautifully shot snooze-fest. Terrence Malick really has a knack for creating films that exist outside of time, and that’s a very interesting choice to make for a film that purportedly covers a historically significant episode of our country’s past. I would say that although the film switches perspective between the main characters and an omniscient perspective (maybe Nature), the overall film technique is definitively non-Western, which makes it especially effective during the scenes shot from the Native American perspective.

Another interesting technique that Malick uses (another thing that most people would just find obtuse and obnoxious) is his peculiar presentation of dialog and narration. One example is towards the middle when Christopher Plummer is giving a momentous speech to the settlers. I don’t remember the particulars of the speech, but in the middle the volume just fades away and the camera wanders elsewhere. Scenes like this aren’t really allowed to begin or end – it’s as if Malick is reminding us that none of this really happened, or at least none of it really happened in the way it’s been presented to us by Western historians. At other points the dialog between characters is overlapped by narration. Even after two viewings there are whole sequences of dialog that I was unable to understand – and this in a movie that’s very sparse with the words to begin with.

Without giving too much away (since I know no one has seen this film) – the final chapter of the film really is the most moving sequence I’ve seen in recent memory. It takes place in England, and after a couple hours of being lulled into a trance in the swamps of Virginia, the buildings and bustle of England appear bizarre and foreign (even to us city folk). The scenes shot in the topiary gardens are absolutely brilliant. Seeing the Native American character walk around the obsessively groomed and restrained topiary garden is really touching – there’s no dialog, but you know exactly what he’s thinking. Malick manages to film this scene as if it takes place in an alien world. And the final scene between Q’Orianka Kilcher and Colin Farrell is amazing – hey, maybe the whole point of the movie really is “Men are Stupid.”

So, I guess to wrap it up, I should really recommend that everyone see this movie, even if you’ll be bored. Take a chance – anyone interested in non-Western historical ideas, or Native American culture, or atypical filmmaking, or hot sweaty Colin Farrell and Christian Bale should really give it a shot. And it’s an easy movie to drag the boyfriends to – Q’Orianka Kilcher is stunningly beautiful, and although she was only 14 when the film was shot, she looks about 24, so that makes it all right (I think?) And although I’d like to look forward to Malick’s next movie, that’ll happen either ten years from now or never, so I’m not getting hyped up quite yet.

Oh, and I updated my Best of 2005 list below...

My Namesake?

2006-01-26T19:39:00.000-08:00

So Disney is coming out with another life-affirming movie for the kids. Have you seen the commercials yet? It has something to do with people almost dying in the North Pole or somewhere else really cold, and their eight sled dogs who also almost die. In the trailer, they read through the eight dogs’ names slowly and dramatically while flashing the pictures of the dogs on the screen (even though they all look the same, they’re freaking sled dogs)… and that’s right, the first dog’s name is… MAYA. I think this name is reaching a total saturation point since it’s being used for dogs in Disney flicks. Ho-hum. Time to switch to Consuelo?

In praise of Mathieu Amalric

2006-01-10T22:28:00.000-08:00

I just found out today that Mathieu Amalric is in Munich. I got so excited I was ready to cut out of work and head directly to the theater. I restrained myself, but will certainly be seeing it this week.

Mathieu Amalric is pretty much ubiquitous in the French arthouse films that manage to be released in the US. Still, nobody except for me seems to know who he is. At one point I had seen him in so many films, I wondered whether he was the French equivalent of Tom Hanks. But then I asked some French friends about him, and they hadn’t heard of him either.

Why do I love Mathieu Amalric so much? First of all, he’s a brilliant, entirely natural actor who always works with the best French directors. He has huge, expressive eyes. Regardless of what role he’s playing, he looks like he spent the previous night drinking numerous bottles of wine, passed out for five hours, rolled out of bed and skipped showering, and showed up on set ready to film. He is the most consistently scruffy actor working today. That’s not usually what I look for in a dude, but it works for him. I want to marry him.

It’s hard to recommend films that he’s in. Either you love French films and you’ll love them, or you hate them, etc. Probably the safest one to recommend is Late August, Early September.

Ones to check out if you’re feeling able to deal with a movie not only being French, but also being over three hours long:
My Sex Life… Or, How I Got Into an Argument
Kings and Queen

And of course, Munich. I also read that he’s in Sofia Coppola’s newest movie Marie-Antoinette… unfortunately he’s billed as “Man at the Masked Ball” which isn’t terribly promising. Don’t even get me started about him playing second banana (or more like fourteenth banana) to Diaper-Face Kirsten Dunst. How in the world could they even be in the same movie? Something is definitely amiss. Well, I’ll take Mathieu whenever I can see him.

Time for the Best of 2005 Movie List! Yeah!

2006-01-07T14:43:00.000-08:00

All right, I have a huge problem picking the year-end “Best of Whatever” lists, but for some reason I feel compelled to do it anyway. So here is my list of the top ten (plus one) movies of 2005, with accompanying excuses.

Usurpation of Cronenberg?
The New World
All right, not the best movie of the year, and I don't see why it should be on the 2005 list at all since it was only open in New York for like 2 minutes during 2005... But it's my favorite movie of the year, and don't be surprised if it heads my best of 2006 list as well.

A History of Violence – Easily the #1 movie of the year. Even if David Cronenberg directed a movie that was a steaming pile of shit, I would name it the best movie of the year. I’m just that devoted! But incidentally, A History of Violence is not a steaming pile of shit. It’s pretty much the opposite of that.

Munich
My favorite Spielberg movie of recent memory. It's really quite good. I intended to see it in the theater again, but I keep watching The New World instead.

Brokeback Mountain – I never was a fan of gay cowboys before. I guess I’m still not. But I am a fan of this movie, even though Anne Hathaway and Jake Gyllenhaal cannot be convincingly aged to look older than 26. And who would have guessed that Heath Ledger was actually awesome? Not me.

Brick – OK, this movie wasn’t released in 2005. It may never be released. That’s what you get for making obtuse independent movies. But I found this movie intriguing and experimental enough to include it on my list. And it’s got a great, tense climactic scene that is just spectacular.

Sympathy for Mr. Vengeance – Truffaut said something along the lines of “Every war movie is a pro-war movie,” because war movies inherently glamorize war. Jonathan Rosenbaum made the obvious deduction from this statement and said something along the lines of “Every war movie can be either a pro-war movie or an anti-war movie depending on who’s watching it.” I think the same applies to revenge movies. Watch this movie and discuss it with me later. And I’m sorry I’m too lazy to look up the exact quotes.

Me and You and Everyone We Know – A tad precious, but not in the way that makes me want to barf. It was really well-filmed, and that little kid should win a Kiddie Oscar!

Save the Green Planet! – OK, along with the other two Korean movies on this list, it technically wasn’t released in 2005. But it opened in Chicago for the first time in 2005, so here it is on my list. And why are the only three foreign films on my list Korean films? I have no idea.

Batman Begins – Best action movie of the year, and most miraculous recovery of hotness by a hot leading man (Christian Bale, after The Machinist).

Mysterious Skin – This movie has its goofball moments, but also has some of the most powerful scenes filmed in recent memory.

The Interpreter – Favorite straight-up Hollywood movie of the year. I don’t care what anyone else says, I thought this movie was great. It was filmed more in the style of 70s thrillers (slow-building tension with very little action – but when the action happens, it’s worth the wait). I’m sick of seeing an explosion every 1.5 seconds.

The Hitchhiker’s Guide to the Galaxy – Best comedy of the year, and cutest movie to boot.

Oldboy – See comments for Sympathy for Mr. Vengeance above. Probably the most visually stunning movie I’ve seen in recent memory.

Of course I’m leaving out the movies I haven’t seen (a miserable 65 in the theater this year). So, the movie I haven’t seen yet, but seem to be popping up on Best-Of lists everywhere:

The Squid and the Whale
Syriana
The New World
Caché

I have especially high hopes for The New World. Terrence Malick rocks, and I get to see Christian Bale on the big screen again. So I may revise this list later.

In Praise of Joseph Gordon-Levitt

2005-12-03T18:23:00.000-08:00

Pretty much everyone who knows me has heard me blab about this bizarrely young-looking and creepily talented actor. He’s 24 years old but will probably be stuck playing teenagers for the next ten years… however, so far in his career that hasn’t really been a problem. He stars in three of my favorite movies in the past few years: Manic, Mysterious Skin, and Brick (unreleased so far, but I caught it at the Chicago Film Fest).

Think about it, if you were primarily known as that kid from Third Rock From the Sun, wouldn’t you be desperate to throw yourself in the limelight and shed your reputation as a child actor on a television show? True, he’s done the Sundance thing, and he’s been in indie movies… but he’s in the indie movies that everyone’s ignoring, and is still known by everyone as that kid from Third Rock From the Sun. And somehow he must be all right with that, because he’s not doing any big Hollywood productions, and he’s not dating any starlets, and as far as I know he hasn’t been in Star Magazine even once. So good for him.

I would bet money that he and Gael Garcia Bernal are the best actors of their generation. I would bet every penny I have at the moment (OK, so that’s $21.22 because of my recent stolen money fiasco, but even if I had more I would bet it). I’m not going to go on and on about why I think he’s such a great actor, but it’s a testament to his skills that I loved Manic in spite of its stomach-churning hand-held camera techniques. He also managed to be utterly convincing in Mysterious Skin and Brick, which both were great movies, but full of artificial situations that would have been ruined by a lesser actor.

All right, enough of that. Time to go out and eat. Hooray for Joseph Gordon-Levitt.

I HATE THE PERSON WHO STOLE MY MONEY

2005-11-26T13:52:00.000-08:00

Some doodyhead got my debit card info and withdrew $325.00 from my bank account! Ah yes, the miracle of technology. I guess I understand how they could have gotten my card number, but how did they get my pin? That's a super-secret number that nobody knows! I feel so violated. If anyone has any information related to this crime, please post it below.

Movie Insanity, Part I

2005-11-22T20:53:00.000-08:00

Last Sunday I watched a truly crazy movie, Zazie dans le metro (Zazie in the Metro). They’re showing a series of Louis Malle films at Facets, and seeing as he made eleventy thousand movies, there are a few I haven’t seen. I hadn’t read anything about this film and thought it would be a typical early New Wave film, all black-and-white artsy glances and minimalist shots of French people watching scenery move by the train windows. I couldn’t have been more surprised. This movie was a total trip, and frantic to the point where I was tired by the end. Most importantly, it was hilarious, and had some truly insightful and touching movements in the midst of the frenzy. It’s interesting to see something like this – in glaring contrast to the frantic film style that’s in vogue these days, it’s frenzy with substance. I think my favorite part was when the torch-juggling polar bear accidentally burned down the nightclub during the drag Flamenco rehearsal. I’m pretty sure the Circus Circus scene in Fear & Loathing in Las Vegas (with the spinning bar and man in the bear suit) is a direct homage to this scene.
So I’m wondering, is it all right to name my first daughter Zazie? Or is that too much like the dreaded Zowie Bowie phenomenon?

The Bane of My Existence

2005-11-19T13:49:00.000-08:00

I live in Logan Square near the intersection of Milwaukee, Diversey, and Kimball. If you go to this intersection and look towards the south corner, you will see the bane of my existence: A giant billboard advertising Garfield: The Movie. This billboard has been up since March. No, not March of this year, but MARCH OF 2004. Every time I drive past this billboard I have a fit of rage. Other billboards in the area change very frequently – the one just one block north on Milwaukee avenue changes about every 2 weeks. For those of you who aren’t familiar with Chicago geography, this is not some wee little intersection with no traffic. Generally it takes five minutes just to get past the lights while driving. This is one of those intersections where 80 year olds ambling by manage to outpace your car dramatically. For whatever reason, the Powers That Be have decided that we get stuck with the same shit billboard for over a year and a half. I swear if the billboard isn’t down within another year, I’ll be forced to write an angry letter or something. I can’t even remember a time when this eyesore wasn’t a fixture in the neighborhood, I seriously started complaining about it over a year ago. And why hasn’t it been tagged yet? Sure, the building is 5 stories tall, but I’ve seen plenty of taller billboards get tagged the day after they get put up. This has got to be some sort of sick joke.

Jeremy Irons Film Festival

2005-11-17T22:46:00.000-08:00

I recently discovered that my roommate Kelly has “kind of a thing” for Jeremy Irons. True, it’s not quite the same as what I have for him (that would be a passionate, all-consuming 18-year-long crush), but it’s enough to justify holding a Jeremy Irons Film Festival. The screenings will be at my house and the attendees will most likely be Kelly and me. She first became interested in him after seeing his utterly convincing portrayal of Humbert Humbert, so the first film on the schedule will be Lolita. If I could get Jeremy Irons to make an appearance, that would be super. If anyone knows how to get ahold of him, please let me know. I think he lives in a castle in England somewhere. More film festival updates to come.

Somebody Please Give These People Some Oscars

2005-11-16T20:08:00.000-08:00

Here’s my pick for the best picture of the year. Anyone who knows me will know that I’m slightly biased when it comes to David Cronenberg. As for Viggo Mortensen, in spite of being close to two of his biggest cheerleaders (hi Sandy and Mom), I’ve never felt anything for him beyond admiration for his facial bone structure. That being said, I still had high hopes for the film before I saw it. I somehow knew that the meeting of Viggo and Cronenberg would be an exceptional one.

Cronenberg’s direction is brilliant as usual. I honestly don’t expect him to win an Oscar, though I wouldn’t be surprised to see him nominated. The big surprise for me was really Viggo’s performance. His eye-acting is in perfect form. I’m talking about SERIOUS eye-acting here, not just looking hot while staring into the distance (Lord of the Rings) or looking hot while sweating (Crimson Tide). In my opinion there are only a handful of actors who fall into the category of superb eye-actors (Gael Garcia Bernal and Tony Leung Chiu Wai come to mind as obvious examples). Who knows if Viggo will get a chance to put his eyes to good use again, but he proved himself more than capable. The second viewing is even better - the conflict he manages to express is startling.

And what about Maria Bello? The woman needs a veggie burger or fifteen, but I’ve read accounts that she was forced to starve herself for the role (I’m assuming that was the producers’ choice, not Cronenberg’s). She is absolutely Viggo’s match… I’m probably not as excited about her because she’s a chick. She’ll probably get nominated for an Oscar too – and certainly deserves it.

And how about some Best Supporting Actor nominations? Ashton Holmes was fantastic as Viggo’s son, but a nod would more likely go to Ed Harris or William Hurt. The entire cast was absolutely top-notch with the exception of the little girl. Let’s be honest, she sucks, but she’s basically nothing more than a prop. Do you really expect the person who brought you The Brood to accurately portray a child in any of his films?

Well, the point of this long-winded post is: Time to hand out some Oscars. If this movie gets the nominations it should, the Oscar party is at my house, and I’ll be making A History of Violence banners to wave at appropriate points during the broadcast.