I’m striking.
…not that I was exactly writing here frequently anyway…(quiet you)…BUT
Check this out.
PROTECT IP / SOPA Breaks The Internet from Fight for the Future.
You can also sign with Google HERE.
Don’t let them censor the internet.
Take action.
I signed. Did you?
Filed under Click Here, Shop Talk
HUNGER GAMES IS HERE!
Well, the first real trailer is here!
Let’s be real, people – I was always going to go see this in theaters no matter what the trailer looked like. Sure, I don’t want the film to get it wrong, but I am a huge fan of the series. I read the second and third books in something like a day and a half. Straight.
BUT it is really nice to see that it doesn’t look like they’ve gotten it wrong at all. In fact, it looks very very right. The internet is buzzing with excited people right now and you can officially count me among their ranks. Yup, I’m one of those people. This looks freakin’ awesome.
Verdict: Opening Day
I am a little surprised by how interested I am, mostly based on the rather cool imagery presented in this trailer. Versus the few over-the-top-colorful, perfectly coifed photos I have seen for the “other” Snow White movie, I am definitely more curious where this one will take the story. The tone of the trailer fits with what I’d already heard… darker, fight-ier, real-er (as much as a fairy tale turned epic fantasy war story is real). And so far, Kristen Stewart hasn’t spoken, which is maybe a good thing?, so I’m not sure how that will work out. I don’t really want her to be Joan of Arc, but based on what I have seen so far, this looks like it could be kind of badass. Though I am not convinced by Charlize Theron as a narrator at all.
Verdict: Intrigued
Young Adult
More Charlize Theron (she’s also the Evil Queen in Snow White and the Huntsman). I don’t know about this one; I get that she’s an unlikeable character and, well, that didn’t exactly make me want to go watch the movie. I like the people in it, love the director, will probably be interested, but my first impression is that I don’t want to shell out the money to see it in theaters. She was a bit too successful at being unlikeable.
Then again, I have a cold and the fact that my face is all stuffy doesn’t make me feel like going outside for anything. And this doesn’t exist in theaters yet, so it’s a moot point.
Side Note: I really like that the poster looks like a book cover (particularly effective as a smaller image icon). They* should do that more.
Verdict: Netflix
My Week with Marilyn
I had certainly heard of this movie, but I now realize I had no idea what week we were going to be seeing and somehow I was not expecting it to be one in England. There are some great people in this cast. I’ve been hearing good things about Michelle Williams and based on the trailer, she certainly seems to be embodying Marilyn quite well. I saw Eddie Redmayne on Broadway in Red and he’s good. And oh, look, there’s Kenneth Branagh, and Judi Dench, and Hermione Granger! Don’t worry, I know that’s Emma Watson and no, I don’t think she’s pigeonholed forever at all. I just didn’t expect to see her in this. I’m guessing…jealous regular** non-movie star girlfriend-type character?
I have difficulty getting excited for biopics sometimes (J. Edgar anyone?). The lure of knowing what that person was really like or really going through is not always enough for me. Especially if their life included something really difficult; something that might, say, make them the subject of a movie. Sometimes that’s just hard towant to go see. But based on this trailer, I am more interested that I expected to be.
Verdict: Potential Theatre/On-Demand
The Lorax
What to do here? I LOVE The Lorax, by which I mean the original book and original cartoon from 1972. I was not looking for a remake. I think some people like the human remake of The Grinch and I’ve seen pieces of it, but no matter how good it might be, it could never replace the cartoon for me. I have a feeling The Lorax will go the same way. I don’t need a new cartoon.
Certain parts of this trailer surprised me in that I like the idea there – he starts his journey for a tree because of a girl? But I was not feeling Danny DeVito as the voice of the main man, the Lorax himself. I’m sorry, but no. I recently rewatched Matilda, which the boyfriend had never seen, and he was surprised to hear that DeVito was the narrator. He has a unique growl of a voice and it seemed an unusual choice. It relatively works in Matilda, though I think he overemphasizes a lot of his words, falling into the trap of trying to be clear because it’s a CHILDREN’S movie. It is yet to be seen how his signature voice will work for the Lorax (clearly, this is a trailer, the whole point is it’s not out yet), but it felt a bit corny to me.
Verdict: Skeptical but not Written Off
And to throw in one I’ve never even heard of til now… (what? I KNOW!)
ParaNorman
This looks SO AWESOME. It’s an animated movie from the makers of Coraline (yay), with what looks like an exploration of the cannon of horror movie tropes from the perspective of a boy who loves zombies (my friends will all be happy). This looks like a really cool off-beat kid’s movie. The trailer only has a soundtrack, no dialogue, so I’m not very clear on things like plot, but that makes me even happier. I don’t want it all given away in the trailer; I want to see a taste of something that makes me excited enough to run to the theatre but still be surprised and have a unique experience when I get there (trailer-makers TAKE NOTE). Also, stellar use of music. I almost hope there is no dialogue, just music and sound effects, a la The Triplets of Belleville. I would be totally down with that.
I am the first to admit that I’m not great with scary movies, but I’ve learned that i can really enjoy anything you might call comedy horror and anything spooky and weird in the realm of “appropriate for younger audiences” (i.e. Coraline). So I think this is right in my wheelhouse.
Also, best tagline EVER: You don’t become a hero by being normal.
YES.
Verdict: Hell Yeah!***
*Hollywood in general?
**I was refraining from writing “mousy.” She’s clearly not mousy, she’s just not Marilyn Monroe, or that’s what I’m guessing this movie might be implying.
***As you can see, this is a clearly defined grading rubric.
Hello again! Yes, I’ve been gone a long time. This is due to some combination of the following reasons:
a. Crazy wedding season that included lots of flying around the country and/or choreographing dance routines for people
b. Going to Africa (!!!)
c. Being a no good very bad blogger.
I will be posting soon about some of the above reasons (can you guess which?). But first, it’s Halloween and I love my costume.
And it has to do with movies. So here we go.
Saturday night I attended a part with the theme of Classic Movies (“classic” to be interpreted as you saw fit), which was particularly perfect for someone who, y’know, likes movies or something.
The boyfriend and I were pretty darn excited when we came up with our idea, and so I thought I would share.
"Oh, Mr Arnold..."
No! Samuel L. Jackson! Ack, wait, a raptor!
They can't see you if you don't move...
It’s all in the props. And I must say, I really enjoyed carrying around Sammy J.’s arm all night.*
Pretty close, right?**
But my reenactments of Jurassic Park scenes don’t end there…
Last year, we went on a trip to Kauai and I was very excited to see some of the sites used in the filming of this “Classic” film. I meant to post about it all last year, and that clearly didn’t happen, but it’s applicable once again so just go with it.
We were lucky enough to take a helicopter ride around the island and got to see the waterfall where they landed…in a helicopter! (this is my own video)
And we went on a tour of the Allerton Garden, which, #1, is beautiful and if you are ever in Kauai you should visit it, and #2, includes the giant Moreton Bay Fig Trees featured in the film. These are the trees up which Dr. Grant and the two kids spend the night (where the brachiosaurus…es…- um, brachiosauri? – say hi in the morning and one sneezes on Lex) and between whose GIANT roots Alan finds the eggs proving that the dinosaurs are breeding.
Where's Waldo?
They're breeding!
The moral of this story? I dunno. I like Jurassic Park? I AM Laura Dern? Um…
HAPPY HALLOWEEN!
*In case you’re curious – yes, we found that severed arm AS IS at the Halloween Store.
** Yes, I know she was wearing shorts and that was the plan… until it started SNOWING.
Filed under Movies
Reaching back into my Saved Posts that I never actually posted, I came across this one and thought I would share it. I only meant to post it…oh…I don’t know…in 2009? February 2010? Whatever. Here you go!
Welcome back, dear reader(s). I have returned from my journies both across the country and into foreign lands.
The holidays and my varied travels also meant that I did not see Avatar until last week. What did I think, you ask? I really really liked it. I’d tried to mainly only read articles about technical and technological aspects beforehand (and not reviews) so as to have as clear a head as possible. But I had also heard from friends and the general consensus seemed to be that it was beautiful, but that the story was exactly what you would expect. By this, I believe they all meant that it was predictable. They weren’t bowled over. They weren’t in love.
I have to say that I don’t agree. I found the story epic and wonderfully so. I am hesitant to use that word, “epic;” the implications that come to mind are…well, it seems to set up unfair expectations (as well as possibly sound a little pompous and too full of itself) so maybe actually it’s perfect. I think that Avatar‘s critics have been holding it up to an unbelievable standard, based on all of the hype of the new CG technology, the amount of time James Cameron spent preparing this movie, the fact that it’s James Cameron at all, etc… They want it to be so mind-blowing that pretty much nothing would be good enough. On that front, seeing the movie a month after everyone else has huge advantages.
As to epic, I think it was epic storytelling and that we don’t have enough good epic storytelling anymore. It’s what the new Star Wars movies were trying to do (and they failed miserably). And when you have such a sweeping story, when it still has a ways to go to complete the arc at two hours in, and when it deals with the possible downfall of an entire civilization, well then, my friends, that is when you are in the realm of the Epic.
And I loved the epic storytelling. I thought it was so well done. It went where I would have wanted it to, but I wasn’t predicting things hours before they happened and getting annoyed that I was right. I think it introduced things in good time so that we were ready for them. I thought it was great.
When you get into the realm of the Epic**, then I think you are tapping into ancient archetypes – these things keep coming up in our collective stories and are satisfying for a reason. Good vs. evil. Technology/machines vs. nature. Colonizers vs. Indigenous peoples. Finding your place in a new world. Learning to belong. Finding something worth fighting for. It may feel familiar but that’s because these are themes that will always come up for humans, and if someone can tell an engaging story about these ideas in a beautiful way, then I think that is worth something.
But like I said, I’m also of the opinion that we don’t get enough stories like that “nowadays” (harumph harumph, I’m shaking a cane at all the whipper-snappers…). I certainly don’t mean that every film has to be that way, but so many big blockbuster/expensive/massive studio movies are sequels, remakes, based on a toy from the 80s, or simply pandering to the lowest common denominator within the audience and don’t necessarily take the time to develop the story within the franchise. Or just plain leave it out. What? The audience might want a story with their popcorn? What tosh!
And an original story? Pish posh!
We need good storytelling and if it is a good story told well, then sign me up.*
Then again, I never saw Dances with Wolves. 
*Extra points for pretty things to look at. Like things that look like flying jellyfish. That was my other main point about Avatar, back when I started this review. How much I loved the FLYING JELLYFISH SEEDPODS!
**Okay, I’ve used this phrase twice now, I think it’s time to coin it.
Fair warning: I fully admit that this post is rather rambly and long, but this movie seems to take a bit of rambling. If you’ve seen it, I’d be curious to hear what you think too…
Last week I watched Another Year, and, to say the least, it was not what I expected.
But do you really think I’m going to say “the least?” I thought I was going to write you a list of some sort, but I just can’t. This movie is taking thinking and I’m still figuring out what I think. And the fact that it’s making me think this much is actually making me like the movie more and more.
I knew that it was a Mike Leigh film and was therefore going to be more of a character study than anything else, but I knew that I liked the people in it, had heard great things about it last year, and I love Happy-Go-Lucky. Actually, I wasn’t sure about that one the first time I watched it either, but I liked it more and more the longer it percolated, watched it again and loved it, and have since bought it to own and rewatch forever and ever. Amen.
So I went into Another Year with high hopes.
Another Year is the story of Tom and Gerri,* a lovely couple who live somewhere in London and like to tend their community garden plot. He’s a geologist, she’s a therapist at a hospital, they do everything together, seem to be very content and happy, and aren’t they just so lucky.
Here’s the IMDb logline:
A look at four seasons in the lives of a happily married couple and their relationships with their family and friends.
Another summary adds on “…who are all miserable.”
That’s pretty much what I had heard going into this and it’s true, but it also led me to believe that Tom and Gerri were the center of the story. I think they are the sun around which their friends and family revolve, but if that’s the metaphor we’re going with, then this is really a story about Pluto. By which I mean that I found this to really be a story about Mary (about whom there’s always something, right?**).
Mary is a secretary at the hospital where Gerri works and the two are friends. Maybe not good friends, but Mary comes to their house for dinner a few times a month, and we learn that she has been doing so for twenty years. She’s known Tom and Gerri’s thirty-year-old son Joe since he was a little boy.
Now, Mary has clearly been having some problems. Over the course of the movie, she goes from drowning her problems in wine and putting on a brave face to alienating her good friends to showing up on their doorstep unexpectedly, depressed and bedraggled and barely able to keep from crying at all times. Mary is both fascinating and incredibly annoying; a toxic friend if ever there was one.
Which can make for a fascinating and also sometimes annoying movie.
There are some really great moments, but I found myself wondering how they all related into the story. Is this a story or just a sketch of some people and the world around them? Would that be such a bad thing?
If you want a story arc, besides the year structure to which the movie adheres, I think you could also sum it up thusly: The Saga of Mary’s Car. As you might guess from the aforementioned crying… it does not go well. First we hear about her plans to get a car and how it’s going to change her life for the better. It even gets said out loud that this will be the big turning point to make her life better, so, of course, everything goes downhill from there. In the end, Mary has sold her lemon of a car off for just 20 pounds because it is no longer worth the price of fixing. She tried, the woman really did try. She bought the damn thing, didn’t she? But the arc of “Mary Gets a Car” is a tragic one.
There is a larger turning point in her friendship with Gerri, when she goes from being the friend they put up with to crossing a line that she can’t take back, but I’m trying not to totally spoil it. Even that moment relates into the saga of the car (the changes are reflected in how she talks about it). Mike Leigh seems to have a thing with driving, doesn’t he?
When I finished the movie the other day, it left me a little depressed and I wasn’t sure I liked how I felt or liked the movie that much, but I have found that I am really enjoying thinking about it all. Mary so clearly wants to be part of this family; in fact, all of Tom and Gerri’s friends want what they have, and there’s nothing anyone can do to really fix the situation. There’s no quick fix for Mary or any of the others – life just didn’t work out so well. They’re divorced or widowed or drunk or obnoxious or plain unlucky. And we realize how lucky Tom and Gerri are. They’re not patronizing, they’re not pushing their good fortune in others’ faces. Things are what they are. Mary tries to change things for herself, she really tries with the car, but it’s not so easy. And she can’t just switch lives. As Gerri points out, it’s her family, not Mary’s, and she is going to defend it as such. So where is the line of responsibility? How much help can Gerri really give? What does it take from her to do so?
There’s also a large theme of getting older and what happens to you, especially if you are on your own, which I think is an important and interesting and also very difficult topic to address well. This quiet film does a pretty nice job of it.
The performances are all really wonderful; subtle and quiet and very very real. Ruth Sheen plays Gerri, Jim Broadbent is Tom, and Lesley Manville plays Mary (for which she was nominated for and won a bunch of awards). I also loved Karina Fernandez as Joe’s new girlfriend, Katie.
Manville does a brilliant job – it’s one of those situations where you can see how amazing she is by how much you react to the character, even if it’s in disgust. She’s so fully committed, and has created such a fully fleshed out woman, even if that woman can be annoying and rather pathetic. I thought I was going to be writing about how much I disliked her character, because I did a lot of the time. She makes you cringe a little. But that also puts you in the same position as Tom and Gerri. What would you do with a woman like Mary?
Gerri doesn’t give away too much as a character. She and Tom often communicate simply by looks, and they are clearly happy to be in each other’s presence in silence. She comes across as a solid, soothing, presence. I think she is the sun that Pluto is frantically orbiting. And in the end, Pluto is told that it’s no longer a planet, not really part of the solar system anymore. (this metaphor is totally working, you guys)
The film ends on a rather depressing note: Mary is still at Tom and Gerri’s dinner table but now almost completely excluded (and rather rightfully so). She retreats into herself, realizing that there is now a great distance spanning the kitchen table. The soundtrack goes silent – she no longer hears the conversation, there is no more music. This was an odd note to finish the overall portrait, not to mention that it cemented my feelings that Mary was the true subject of Leigh’s story. It made me start questioning her sanity and what her relationship with Gerri had really been during the rest of film – she had definitely been getting some free therapy, even just the therapy of warm, well-adjusted friends. Did Gerri see her as a patient? Were their dinners together just charity? Mary needed her time with them, they anchored her into real life a bit I think, but that also means she was using them.
In trying to figure out the ending, I remembered the beginning of the film, when Imelda Staunton appears for two scenes as an insomniac housewife at the hospital for treatment. The doctor recommends therapy to get to the source of her problems and she visits Gerri once, never to be heard from again. The scene sets up Gerri’s profession, but I realized we never got a resolution to that little snapshot and so began to ponder the reason that scene was included. It feels a bit odd and latched on and at the end I realized I had forgotten that that was where we began! In thinking it over, it seems this isolated patient scene helps set the tone for the story, and possibly gives a theme that can later apply to Mary. Staunton’s character has been unable to sleep for…you guessed it…a whole year. Gerri is trying to get her to address the possible emotional reasons for this, and asks her to name her happiest moment. She cannot name any happy moment in her life and, when asked what could make her life better, she says, “A different life.”
So is it that some people got lucky, got the warm happy family they wanted rooting them to life, while others are floating lost, trying to make the best of what they’ve been handed but sometimes just getting the shit end of the stick? How much of a role do these people play in their own fate? Where does the responsibility lie?
Pretty fascinating stuff. I thought the film was too loose a sketch of some characters, without enough focus, to really satisfy. But maybe this is going the way of Happy-Go-Lucky. Maybe in a little while I should try watching it again. Maybe this is my relationship with Mike Leigh’s work.
Or maybe I’m just thinking too much.
* Their names would have been #1 on my list of Things I Like.
**Rim shot
_____________________________________________________
Extra Reading:
If you want more, I think this is a fabulous review from Ion Arts, able to place Another Year within Leigh’s greater cannon of work and taking his particular style and method of creation into account.
Filed under Movies
Proud Member of:
