You know the thing about personal blogs, are that they are personal. So here I intend to dwelve into my feelings about some films I have seen, recently or not, and you are completely entitled to agree with them. You are also entitled to disagree, to hate my work, and to never read it again. But I prefer that if you disagree you give me a concise posted response on why you do, and leave about any insults pertaining to my weight, thought capacity, or political affiliation.
I run in fear of trolls and the power they have had over me in the past.
Now, from the title of this post, one can surmise that I LOVED Inception. I really did. And I am not so naive as to think it a perfect movie, or flawless, or any such thing you can think of. I had problems with parts of it, but I left the theater both times I have seen it with my jaw on the floor feeling good about the blockbuster for the first time in years. I don't intend to review it here, let me just say that if you haven't seen it, it is worth a watch on the big screen.
After the first time I saw it, I sat in my car in little old Santa Paula thinking about how my mind needed to be reassembled. While picking the pieces back up, I started a web of connections to other movies that I had been reminded of, and how rather than hindering my viewing of Inception, these movies had made it all the better. So, I thought I would write this out in a small essay (and I use the word essay loosely). Tell me what you think?
Memento:
Well, this is like a gigantic duh written in big letters across my blog. Memento, written and directed by Chris Nolan, is bound to have some connections to this movie. If I hadn't seen Memento and liked it so much, I probably would have liked this movie so much. Nolan knows how to make his shots interesting, how to get emotion from his actors, how to get emotion from his audience. I also propose this (spoiler?): Mr. M. Night Shyamalan may have once been considered the master of the twist, but I think this title should be firmly in Christopher Nolan's hands. Although, come to think of it, perhaps this is not a reputation someone would want, after all, it hasn't served Shyamalan very well of late.
Dark City:
Listen, if you haven't seen Dark City and you like sci-fi or comics, go out and rent it right now. It is one of my favorite movies of all time, and it EXTREMELY layered. I didn't realize how layered it was until I listened to the commentary track on the DVD. (spoilers for Dark City) So, if you have seen this one, the city building sequences in Inception had to have come to mind while watching the movie. Not to mention the manipulation of people while they are sleeping. There is a certain goofiness to the way John Murdock's (played amazingly by Rufus Sewell) power are shown in the movie, but the waves that come from his mind also remind me of the dreamscape of Inception, where when one becomes aware of the dream and ripples begin to appear and shake the very foundation. Dark City is brilliant, and I wish I could remember who turned me on to it in the first places.
Brick:
Maybe it is just because I love Brick so much, but I thought Joseph Gordon-Levitt was amazing in Inception. Brick is a Marlowe-esqe detective story that takes place in High School. You follow Brendan (J Gordon-Levitt) as he tries to unravel the mystery placed before him (can you tell I want to give nothing away?). Brendan is not smooth or suave, but determined and brave. He will get the job done even if it costs him his life. A warning, the way people talk in Brick is very stylized, and may require a second viewing. I have seen it 7 times at least, and once with the subtitles. How did this effect my viewing of Inception? Well, besides the Levitt love (<3) I walked in with my eyes wide open. When it comes to most movies now, I pay VERY careful attention to what is said, and what is shown. A good director does not waste any shots, so when they focus in on a decrepit looking house, it is not just to give you the creeps. It is because there is something important to see and remember.
Hard Candy:
Now this movie is not for the faint of heart. In fact, I imagine it can be quite painful for some people. I personally think that everyone should see it, because it shows a woman in control. A WOMAN. Can you imagine? Don't tell me that Hollywood is not run by guys for guys, because I have taken enough film classes with a liberal teacher to know the truth (Hi Riley!). So, why Hard Candy for this list? Purely because if I hadn't seen it, I would have expected CRAP from Ellen Page. "But she was great in Juno!" SHUT UP. Listen, Juno has its merits, and I can see how some parts of it are very good, but I was not a fan of the movie. No one talks like that. NO ONE. Its like The West Wing, it just doesn't happen that way. People are not that eloquent, myself very much included. Sorry, this isn't about Juno, its about Hard Candy. Ellen Page, is amazing in this movie, as is Patrick Wilson, who is quickly becoming one of my favorite actors. The movie is brutal, as I said before, but it is also very VERY clever. Ellen Page has my total respect for doing it, and I will see her in almost anything now. Oh, and she was good in Whip It!
G.I Joe: The Rise of Cobra:
BWAH? What the hell is THIS movie doing on my list? Well, it’s a funny thing, (spoilers for Inception, I don't give a crap about GI JOE) but during the snow scene, I kept thinking Man this is a good action scene! Now, where did I see snow in an action movie before recently? G I EFFING JOE. Not a movie I liked at all. If Joe had been shot like just that short set of action scenes in Inception, the movie would have been 200 times better, giving it a score of 8. 8 out of 100. Now, let us never speak of that Joe movie again.
So there you have it. I have heard people throw around titles like Eternal Sunshine and Paprika. Sure, they have the dreams in them and all, but this movie wasn't a fairy tale. There wasn’t any whimsy, and I am glad for it. If I want whimsy, I'll go watch Tim Burton from the 90's.
Agree, disagree, want to know where I buy my snazzy outfits? Please send an email to JDTMovies@gmail.com. Or post on the Facebook page. Thank you for reading, I love you.
Joel
Monday, August 9, 2010
Tuesday, June 8, 2010
Post Number 40: Back in the saddle again.
So what has been going on? I went through that great time at school called finals, and after the stress and pain associated with that activity I was done using my brain for at least a while. Trouble is now I feel like my brain is degenerating to a gelatinous mass never to resemble its former solid glory. So I gots to get back to work. I asked anyone who reads my stuff if they had any suggestions on how I can spice up my writing and I only got one response, and that was a suggestion to write about television, specifically Lost. NO! Listen, I don’t want to write and or talk about television. It’s not that I don’t see merit in the medium; it’s that television has a way of taking over a life. Yes, I know with today’s technology it is possible to watch TV at your convenience, but I have fallen to that maiden’s sweet siren song before, and I do not wish to revisit. Just like most video games, TV and I are on the outs till I find something really worth investing time in. All that said, I really enjoyed Lost but was disappointed by the ending. I don’t want to have to watch bonus material just to learn the secrets they didn’t explain on the show, I just want it ON THE SHOW.
So back to what I can do to spice up my blog. If there is one thing I feel is missing from my posts, it is my signature sarcasm. Oh, it’s there sometimes, sticking its head out of the ground to see if winter is coming, but I hold myself back, I really do. My fear is that with placing more of my personality into my blog posts, I would alienate some readers who do not know me IRL. Now that I think about it, that’s pretty dumb of me. I’m not writing for some well know periodical that is praised and renowned by anonymous readers worldwide. Hell, I’m lucky if 5 people read this thing. So, I am not going to hide my light under a bushel no more. And this means that from this point on, some of the things I write will be NSFW. I refrained as much as I could from cussing before, going so far as to write entire sentences to navigate around a few curses, but I am done with that. I assure you I don’t intend to cuss just for cussing sake, only to do it when it best sums up what I am trying to say. I hope that this doesn’t push anyone away from the blog, because I have the utmost respect for anyone who bothers to read this.
So, I don’t really feel like doing a weekly post today, so I am just going to skim over some movies I have seen recently. A couple of them are still in theaters, a couple are foreign. Stick around it should be fun.
Prince of Persia: The Sands of Time (2010 Mike Newell):
Video games and movies have a rocky relationship, and this movie didn’t help at all. At about 30 minutes into the film, I just could not have a good time with it anymore, and I was really trying to let go and enjoy a summer action movie! Let me just go over my complaints in a sort of list: The story was convoluted, I feel like the movie would have benefited from another 30 minutes just to flesh it out; The sets were extremely boring. When Destan (Jake Gyllenhaal) is swinging about fighting people and doing parkour moves in the city they invade, I felt like I was looking at a set from Universal Studios, or perhaps the Batman stunt show from Magic Mountain!; The edits DROVE ME INSANE! Ok, not literally, but the characters would say “we need to go here” and then snap! They are there. Or there was a completely pointless 2 second shot of people riding horses through the desert. And how in the HELL were the Hassansins running through a forest a night? I am not making this up. The trees must appear there magically so that we can feel like we are watching the Nazghul chase after Frodo; Why did they film the action the way they did? By doing quick cuts, slowing down things occasionally, and then moving on ASAP, I got absolutely no enjoyment out of any of the fights. EVEN THE BADASS NINJA TYPE PEOPLE SUCKED!!!! I am just getting more and more angry here. It was a bad movie, and I think it really could have been good. Don’t see it, save your money and see the Expendables when it comes out.
Mother and Child (2010 Rodrigo Garcia):
This was a brilliant drama about 3 women and their relations to being a mother, a child, and a grown-up. This would be a five star film for me except I got no sense of anything special in the direction or cinematography of the movie. The acting though is absolutely superb, as well as the storyline. I can’t do the movie justice trying to sum it up on my lowly blog. If you like any of the actors who are in it (Annette Bening, Naomi Watts, Kerry Washington, Samuel L. Jackson, Jimmy Smits) then you should most definitely go see the film. A little warning for guys, the first 30 minutes of the movie makes you think all women are terrible. It passes, trust me.
Just a little ditty here to get my brain juices following. I feel good after writing up just this part, so I am going to try to push myself to get back to writing each week at least once. I am also going to try to get a few pals of mine to do some writing on the blog, so that multiple views can be read, and so I can argue with them. Because that’s just how I roll.
Questions, comments, send them to JDTMovies@gmail.com. Or post them on my facebook fan page, which is linked to on the site.
So back to what I can do to spice up my blog. If there is one thing I feel is missing from my posts, it is my signature sarcasm. Oh, it’s there sometimes, sticking its head out of the ground to see if winter is coming, but I hold myself back, I really do. My fear is that with placing more of my personality into my blog posts, I would alienate some readers who do not know me IRL. Now that I think about it, that’s pretty dumb of me. I’m not writing for some well know periodical that is praised and renowned by anonymous readers worldwide. Hell, I’m lucky if 5 people read this thing. So, I am not going to hide my light under a bushel no more. And this means that from this point on, some of the things I write will be NSFW. I refrained as much as I could from cussing before, going so far as to write entire sentences to navigate around a few curses, but I am done with that. I assure you I don’t intend to cuss just for cussing sake, only to do it when it best sums up what I am trying to say. I hope that this doesn’t push anyone away from the blog, because I have the utmost respect for anyone who bothers to read this.
So, I don’t really feel like doing a weekly post today, so I am just going to skim over some movies I have seen recently. A couple of them are still in theaters, a couple are foreign. Stick around it should be fun.
Prince of Persia: The Sands of Time (2010 Mike Newell):
Video games and movies have a rocky relationship, and this movie didn’t help at all. At about 30 minutes into the film, I just could not have a good time with it anymore, and I was really trying to let go and enjoy a summer action movie! Let me just go over my complaints in a sort of list: The story was convoluted, I feel like the movie would have benefited from another 30 minutes just to flesh it out; The sets were extremely boring. When Destan (Jake Gyllenhaal) is swinging about fighting people and doing parkour moves in the city they invade, I felt like I was looking at a set from Universal Studios, or perhaps the Batman stunt show from Magic Mountain!; The edits DROVE ME INSANE! Ok, not literally, but the characters would say “we need to go here” and then snap! They are there. Or there was a completely pointless 2 second shot of people riding horses through the desert. And how in the HELL were the Hassansins running through a forest a night? I am not making this up. The trees must appear there magically so that we can feel like we are watching the Nazghul chase after Frodo; Why did they film the action the way they did? By doing quick cuts, slowing down things occasionally, and then moving on ASAP, I got absolutely no enjoyment out of any of the fights. EVEN THE BADASS NINJA TYPE PEOPLE SUCKED!!!! I am just getting more and more angry here. It was a bad movie, and I think it really could have been good. Don’t see it, save your money and see the Expendables when it comes out.
Mother and Child (2010 Rodrigo Garcia):
This was a brilliant drama about 3 women and their relations to being a mother, a child, and a grown-up. This would be a five star film for me except I got no sense of anything special in the direction or cinematography of the movie. The acting though is absolutely superb, as well as the storyline. I can’t do the movie justice trying to sum it up on my lowly blog. If you like any of the actors who are in it (Annette Bening, Naomi Watts, Kerry Washington, Samuel L. Jackson, Jimmy Smits) then you should most definitely go see the film. A little warning for guys, the first 30 minutes of the movie makes you think all women are terrible. It passes, trust me.
Just a little ditty here to get my brain juices following. I feel good after writing up just this part, so I am going to try to push myself to get back to writing each week at least once. I am also going to try to get a few pals of mine to do some writing on the blog, so that multiple views can be read, and so I can argue with them. Because that’s just how I roll.
Questions, comments, send them to JDTMovies@gmail.com. Or post them on my facebook fan page, which is linked to on the site.
Wednesday, May 26, 2010
Where have you been??!!
No, but really, I apologize. I stopped writing because of finals, and then I just got plain lazy. That doesn't mean I haven't been watching stuff, after all that is the easy part of the blog (for the most part). This is what I need: I need something to spice up the blog. Is there anything I could talk about that people would like? I really need some help here, and anyone's feedback would help. Send your sarcasm, send your essays and blurbs, you got an idea, I'll listen. JDTMovies@gmail.com or post on the facebook fanpage. PLEASE HELP ME!!!!
Oh yeah, Lost is also resposible for my absence, but I almost have that nipped in the bud. 12 more episodes to go!
Oh yeah, Lost is also resposible for my absence, but I almost have that nipped in the bud. 12 more episodes to go!
Thursday, April 22, 2010
April 22nd 2010, Week relating to 4/6/2010 – 4/12/2010
Movies seen: *first time viewed
Raging Bull*
Eyes Wide Shut
The Hurt Locker
Delicatessen*
In the Mood for Love (Fa yeung nin wa)*
How to Train Your Dragon*
I love movies, I don’t know if that is clear, but when pursuing one’s passion when it is not towards the betterment of human-kind (see what I did there?), how does one justify the time spent? The only answer I can give is that the improvement of one’s self is also to the betterment of everyone. I don’t believe that the expansion of my film knowledge is going to assist anyone, even myself necessarily, but the writing of this blog does help me organize my thoughts, making life seem a little less dizzy everytime.
Raging Bull (1980 Martin Scorcese):
You ever step into a situation without really thinking about the consequences? That intimidation you might feel, that’s what I have now. Raging Bull is required viewing for any film lover, considered one of the best movies of all time by almost any film critic of note. I have been thinking about this all week. See, what I do is at the end of each week of film (my film weeks start on Tuesday) I write up the first part of my blog entry, which is just a list of the movies as you can see above. If I am so inspired, and honestly I am usually too lazy to do this, I take a crack at writing up the first couple of films. Unfortunately, this time around I started off with a show stopper. My ego demands that I do not come off as an idiot when talking about important movies, lest people find out the truth: I am an idiot. Of course, part of me now is saying that this is only my cowardice coming up with an excuse in the case that I do not represent exactly what other people want. This is it! I have to tell that part of my brain only one thing: SHUT UP! So… Raging Bull. It was a mistake watching this movie right after Rocky, which I tried to. The first thing I noticed was how much more choreographed the fight scenes looked in Raging Bull. At this point, I am slapping myself upside the head. The fight scenes in Bull are not about being realistic. It is a representation of the “sweet science” as a ballet, and in that case it is done extremely well. The character study of Jake LaMotta (Robert DeNiro) is brutal in its honesty. This was not a wise man; this was an animal that had to be constantly handled by the people around him. I don’t know how he could have functioned in life without his brother and wife (Joe Pesci and Cathy Moriarty respectively). I love every piece of dialogue that was uttered in this film scripted or unscripted. Everything was so raw and so potent. The eruptions of violence, of passion, of madness and pain displayed in the film were felt all the way down my spine and back up again. After the movie was done I felt like I had gone 12 rounds with Sugar Ray. This is just my opinion, by I am guessing that Scorcese is some kind of genius. Alright, I’m done talking about the movie like I know anything. I am going to have to buy the film and study it if I ever want to get a true handle on it greatness.
Eyes Wide Shut (1999 Stanley Kubrick):
When it comes to a Kubrick movie, I have yet to be disappointed. Of course, I believe I have only seen two of his movie (this and 2001). Eyes Wide Shut was the first Kubrick directed movie I had seen, sent to me in the mail direct from Washington by a young Sarah, who even at that time had me heart and soul. I can admit freely that although I very much liked the movie at the time, I did not understand it. The sexuality and maturity of the subject matters were beyond me at that time in my life. Now with slightly more wisdom in my years, I believe I have a much firmer grasp on the material. I can imagine the direction of Stanley Kubrick, scene by scene, pain-stakingly slow to the point of madness for the victims (i.e. Cast and crew). That is the price of working with someone with such a clear vision of film. Tom Cruise and Nicole Kidman are amazing in this movie, playing the generic socialite couple who feel that every bit of their life is a blessing, but also WELL deserved. All it took was one drug induced discussion to send Cruise on a night of insanity, where his experiences shake him to the very core. How could they not? His mettle isn’t tested in the film because of the extremely odd situations he finds himself, but more because the man is not sure what he wants (and is at a reckless pace to do something about THAT). Is he motivated by revenge for an affair that did not happen? Or is it the same as in Raging Bull, the Madonna/Whore complex (which I just read about in a review of Raging Bull by Roger Ebert!)? That part makes sense to me, because for any man to even try to walk away from a life, so set on the right side of the tracks that it seems perfect, is someone who doesn’t see the woman he loves as anything but black and white. You are either with me or not. I love the film, in case that hasn’t come through. It is beautifully shot, which is just the way Kubrick works, and scripted very well. Something I am just learning about is editing, and from what I recall this film is almost flawless. A bit of advice, if you ever want to enjoy cheap movies again, do not get into editing.
The Hurt Locker (2009 Katheryn Bigalow):
Perhaps you have heard of this movie now? I heard it won an award or something. Third time I have watched the movie, once again on the big screen in my American films class. Now, why would we watch this movie you might ask (as I did myself)? It was because the topic of that day was stars. The concept of Hollywood stars is a heavy one, and there are quite a few books on the subject that are not just tabloid filth (no offense to tabloid lovers, but you know it’s dirty too!). The stars in this movie, and there are a few, are used for a specific purpose: To disarm the viewer. It is hard when watching a movie that has relatively unknown actors to gain an attachment to any character on screen, at least for the average viewer. Now, when you see someone perfectly recognizable (like say Guy Pierce?), you may feel a certain reassurance that a good actor is going to be in the movie, someone you can trust to deliver the goods a film needs to capture the imagination. And that my friends, is the perfect time to pull the rug from under your feet! When my teacher explained this concept to us, I was astonished at how it had gone right over my head. It seems to me, that this is part of what True Romance tried to do, but The Hurt Locker did it much more effectively for me. This is also a trick that can be over used, so I am hoping that not too many people catch on to it. What’s that? Executive Decision did the same thing with Steven Seagal? How dare you bring that up!
Delicatessen (1991 Marc Caro and Jean-Pierre Jeunet):
I believe Jean-Pierre Jeunet is the genius behind Amelie. I could verify this by looking it up, but I am feeling especially lazy right now. Delicatessen has the same surreal feel as Amelie, with a lot of morbid thrown in. One of my first reactions to the film was that this is what Tim Burton used to do, and do very well. I have to look back at his classics to be reminded of when he had a Edward Gorey like sense of humor and was not just into making goofy movies with Johnny Depp. Delicatessen was good, but it was not enchanting the same way Amelie was. It was a beautiful film though. Its dark tones were mixed with colorful people, and a spirit in the actors that makes everyone smile. Unless the child in you is dead (I’m talking to you Randy Jordan). I wish I had more to say. Delicatessen is worth a watch for sure. Oh, and although it has a morbid premise (a butcher in a post-apocalyptic world that serves only a certain kind of meat) it is hardly at all violent.
In the Mood for Love (Fa yueng nin wa) (2000 Kar Wai Wong):
In my World Cinema class, I am getting the feeling that my teacher is a fan of this director’s work. We have already watched his film Chungking Express, and now this. I did not get Chungking Express, and I can see why people refer to Wong Kar Wai as an MTV director. In the Mood for Love on the other hand is pretty much the opposite. It is slow paced and beautiful. It takes place in the year 1962, which is funny because while watching the movie it is easy to forget that time period. The lack of computers and other perfectly normal devices that are common place today should have made it obvious for me. Wong has such a way with shots. He emphasizes the colors of objects and the shapes of rooms. He does entire scenes filmed with someone’s head blocking the view, and swings the camera around to capture the same scene in an enlightening view. Long takes are prominent in this movie, and are very beautiful to watch. Chungking was full of cuts and edits and jumps, and I guess my brain had a hard time adapting to that. The best part of Mood for Love is a reliability of its script. The longing felt by the protagonists has been felt by everyone, and while the plot toys with audiences assumptions (did they get it on or not?), there are no tricks in the couple’s relationship. What happens in the film is this: The main characters pretend to be each other’s spouse and act out what might have happened, had there been an affair. And while that may seem weird, it isn’t so far-fetched that one cannot recognize themselves in the characters and their situation. Everyone has had imaginary conversations in their head; these people are just taking it to the next level. It was a wonderful movie, and I would like to own it. I can’t wait to watch more of Wong Kar Wai’s work.
How to Train your Dragon (2010 Dean DeBlois and Chris Sanders):
Why didn’t I write up a new movie review for this film? Well, it’s because to my knowledge, America had already decided that this movie was not going to be successful. Now I see that the movie is still making money and that audiences are warming up to it. GOOD! It was a real delight to see in the theaters, and I have been itching to go see it in 3D. Hopefully I won’t have missed my chance when I can afford to go again. How to Train your Dragon was an excellent adventure/comedy, something both children and adults should be able to enjoy. My favorite thing about it? Compared to Shrek, the DreamWorks franchise, there were ZERO pop culture references. Animated movies didn’t used to have to rely on jokes like that just to be funny, BACK IN MY DAY. I think that Dragon will go down as a classic, something that can be shown and loved by every generation. And I doubt it hinges on 3D like some features in the near future undeniably will. I cannot recommend the movie enough.
I was originally going to talk about A Serious Man (2009 Coen Bros) but after trying to remember details about the film, I find that I should probably watch it again. I liked it; it reminded me of the way Barton Fink and Fargo were. I hope you like how this blog entry turned out. I am kind of proud that I was able to write so much. Any questions or comments please send them to JDTMovies@gmail.com or post them on my Facebook page. Thanks for reading.
Raging Bull*
Eyes Wide Shut
The Hurt Locker
Delicatessen*
In the Mood for Love (Fa yeung nin wa)*
How to Train Your Dragon*
I love movies, I don’t know if that is clear, but when pursuing one’s passion when it is not towards the betterment of human-kind (see what I did there?), how does one justify the time spent? The only answer I can give is that the improvement of one’s self is also to the betterment of everyone. I don’t believe that the expansion of my film knowledge is going to assist anyone, even myself necessarily, but the writing of this blog does help me organize my thoughts, making life seem a little less dizzy everytime.
Raging Bull (1980 Martin Scorcese):
You ever step into a situation without really thinking about the consequences? That intimidation you might feel, that’s what I have now. Raging Bull is required viewing for any film lover, considered one of the best movies of all time by almost any film critic of note. I have been thinking about this all week. See, what I do is at the end of each week of film (my film weeks start on Tuesday) I write up the first part of my blog entry, which is just a list of the movies as you can see above. If I am so inspired, and honestly I am usually too lazy to do this, I take a crack at writing up the first couple of films. Unfortunately, this time around I started off with a show stopper. My ego demands that I do not come off as an idiot when talking about important movies, lest people find out the truth: I am an idiot. Of course, part of me now is saying that this is only my cowardice coming up with an excuse in the case that I do not represent exactly what other people want. This is it! I have to tell that part of my brain only one thing: SHUT UP! So… Raging Bull. It was a mistake watching this movie right after Rocky, which I tried to. The first thing I noticed was how much more choreographed the fight scenes looked in Raging Bull. At this point, I am slapping myself upside the head. The fight scenes in Bull are not about being realistic. It is a representation of the “sweet science” as a ballet, and in that case it is done extremely well. The character study of Jake LaMotta (Robert DeNiro) is brutal in its honesty. This was not a wise man; this was an animal that had to be constantly handled by the people around him. I don’t know how he could have functioned in life without his brother and wife (Joe Pesci and Cathy Moriarty respectively). I love every piece of dialogue that was uttered in this film scripted or unscripted. Everything was so raw and so potent. The eruptions of violence, of passion, of madness and pain displayed in the film were felt all the way down my spine and back up again. After the movie was done I felt like I had gone 12 rounds with Sugar Ray. This is just my opinion, by I am guessing that Scorcese is some kind of genius. Alright, I’m done talking about the movie like I know anything. I am going to have to buy the film and study it if I ever want to get a true handle on it greatness.
Eyes Wide Shut (1999 Stanley Kubrick):
When it comes to a Kubrick movie, I have yet to be disappointed. Of course, I believe I have only seen two of his movie (this and 2001). Eyes Wide Shut was the first Kubrick directed movie I had seen, sent to me in the mail direct from Washington by a young Sarah, who even at that time had me heart and soul. I can admit freely that although I very much liked the movie at the time, I did not understand it. The sexuality and maturity of the subject matters were beyond me at that time in my life. Now with slightly more wisdom in my years, I believe I have a much firmer grasp on the material. I can imagine the direction of Stanley Kubrick, scene by scene, pain-stakingly slow to the point of madness for the victims (i.e. Cast and crew). That is the price of working with someone with such a clear vision of film. Tom Cruise and Nicole Kidman are amazing in this movie, playing the generic socialite couple who feel that every bit of their life is a blessing, but also WELL deserved. All it took was one drug induced discussion to send Cruise on a night of insanity, where his experiences shake him to the very core. How could they not? His mettle isn’t tested in the film because of the extremely odd situations he finds himself, but more because the man is not sure what he wants (and is at a reckless pace to do something about THAT). Is he motivated by revenge for an affair that did not happen? Or is it the same as in Raging Bull, the Madonna/Whore complex (which I just read about in a review of Raging Bull by Roger Ebert!)? That part makes sense to me, because for any man to even try to walk away from a life, so set on the right side of the tracks that it seems perfect, is someone who doesn’t see the woman he loves as anything but black and white. You are either with me or not. I love the film, in case that hasn’t come through. It is beautifully shot, which is just the way Kubrick works, and scripted very well. Something I am just learning about is editing, and from what I recall this film is almost flawless. A bit of advice, if you ever want to enjoy cheap movies again, do not get into editing.
The Hurt Locker (2009 Katheryn Bigalow):
Perhaps you have heard of this movie now? I heard it won an award or something. Third time I have watched the movie, once again on the big screen in my American films class. Now, why would we watch this movie you might ask (as I did myself)? It was because the topic of that day was stars. The concept of Hollywood stars is a heavy one, and there are quite a few books on the subject that are not just tabloid filth (no offense to tabloid lovers, but you know it’s dirty too!). The stars in this movie, and there are a few, are used for a specific purpose: To disarm the viewer. It is hard when watching a movie that has relatively unknown actors to gain an attachment to any character on screen, at least for the average viewer. Now, when you see someone perfectly recognizable (like say Guy Pierce?), you may feel a certain reassurance that a good actor is going to be in the movie, someone you can trust to deliver the goods a film needs to capture the imagination. And that my friends, is the perfect time to pull the rug from under your feet! When my teacher explained this concept to us, I was astonished at how it had gone right over my head. It seems to me, that this is part of what True Romance tried to do, but The Hurt Locker did it much more effectively for me. This is also a trick that can be over used, so I am hoping that not too many people catch on to it. What’s that? Executive Decision did the same thing with Steven Seagal? How dare you bring that up!
Delicatessen (1991 Marc Caro and Jean-Pierre Jeunet):
I believe Jean-Pierre Jeunet is the genius behind Amelie. I could verify this by looking it up, but I am feeling especially lazy right now. Delicatessen has the same surreal feel as Amelie, with a lot of morbid thrown in. One of my first reactions to the film was that this is what Tim Burton used to do, and do very well. I have to look back at his classics to be reminded of when he had a Edward Gorey like sense of humor and was not just into making goofy movies with Johnny Depp. Delicatessen was good, but it was not enchanting the same way Amelie was. It was a beautiful film though. Its dark tones were mixed with colorful people, and a spirit in the actors that makes everyone smile. Unless the child in you is dead (I’m talking to you Randy Jordan). I wish I had more to say. Delicatessen is worth a watch for sure. Oh, and although it has a morbid premise (a butcher in a post-apocalyptic world that serves only a certain kind of meat) it is hardly at all violent.
In the Mood for Love (Fa yueng nin wa) (2000 Kar Wai Wong):
In my World Cinema class, I am getting the feeling that my teacher is a fan of this director’s work. We have already watched his film Chungking Express, and now this. I did not get Chungking Express, and I can see why people refer to Wong Kar Wai as an MTV director. In the Mood for Love on the other hand is pretty much the opposite. It is slow paced and beautiful. It takes place in the year 1962, which is funny because while watching the movie it is easy to forget that time period. The lack of computers and other perfectly normal devices that are common place today should have made it obvious for me. Wong has such a way with shots. He emphasizes the colors of objects and the shapes of rooms. He does entire scenes filmed with someone’s head blocking the view, and swings the camera around to capture the same scene in an enlightening view. Long takes are prominent in this movie, and are very beautiful to watch. Chungking was full of cuts and edits and jumps, and I guess my brain had a hard time adapting to that. The best part of Mood for Love is a reliability of its script. The longing felt by the protagonists has been felt by everyone, and while the plot toys with audiences assumptions (did they get it on or not?), there are no tricks in the couple’s relationship. What happens in the film is this: The main characters pretend to be each other’s spouse and act out what might have happened, had there been an affair. And while that may seem weird, it isn’t so far-fetched that one cannot recognize themselves in the characters and their situation. Everyone has had imaginary conversations in their head; these people are just taking it to the next level. It was a wonderful movie, and I would like to own it. I can’t wait to watch more of Wong Kar Wai’s work.
How to Train your Dragon (2010 Dean DeBlois and Chris Sanders):
Why didn’t I write up a new movie review for this film? Well, it’s because to my knowledge, America had already decided that this movie was not going to be successful. Now I see that the movie is still making money and that audiences are warming up to it. GOOD! It was a real delight to see in the theaters, and I have been itching to go see it in 3D. Hopefully I won’t have missed my chance when I can afford to go again. How to Train your Dragon was an excellent adventure/comedy, something both children and adults should be able to enjoy. My favorite thing about it? Compared to Shrek, the DreamWorks franchise, there were ZERO pop culture references. Animated movies didn’t used to have to rely on jokes like that just to be funny, BACK IN MY DAY. I think that Dragon will go down as a classic, something that can be shown and loved by every generation. And I doubt it hinges on 3D like some features in the near future undeniably will. I cannot recommend the movie enough.
I was originally going to talk about A Serious Man (2009 Coen Bros) but after trying to remember details about the film, I find that I should probably watch it again. I liked it; it reminded me of the way Barton Fink and Fargo were. I hope you like how this blog entry turned out. I am kind of proud that I was able to write so much. Any questions or comments please send them to JDTMovies@gmail.com or post them on my Facebook page. Thanks for reading.
Monday, April 12, 2010
April 12 2010. Week relating to 3/30/2010 – 4/5/2010
Movies Seen: *First time viewed
Ghost in the Shell*
Rocky*
True Romance*
Eternal Sunshine of the Spotless Mind
All the President’s Men*
Henry & June*
Ghost in the Shell (1996 Mamoru Oshii):
I think I missed my window on this one. All I know is, before I was watching any anime at all, people were talking about how bad ass Ghost in the Shell and Ninja Scroll were. I own and love Ninja Scroll, it is just a great little flick. Ghost in the Shell will not be in my collection. I just don’t see what the big deal is. Someone told me that for when it came out, people in this country hadn’t seen animation so cool out of Japan. All I can figure is, a lot of horny teenagers made this movie what it is today. To say it had a few boob shots is to say that a few people love Jesus. I didn’t really dig the voice acting either, but I only had the option of watching it dubbed in English. I am sure it’s better in Japanese, because most anime is. If you are one of those people who love this film, maybe you can fill me in on what I missed. I would be glad to hear about it.
Rocky (1976 John G. Avildsen):
This movie sure pulled a fast one on me. I was trying to take notes, doing my usual ADD thing (which involves stopping the movie every 15 minutes to do some random task), and then suddenly, I was not. The notes stopped, my eyes were glued to the screen. How did this happen? The dialogue is not particularly awesome, and the story is kind of predictable, so where did this movie go so right? My only intuition on this is that the reality of it made me love it. Well, I say reality accepting that heavy weight champions do not fight average Joes, unless they are drunk. Rocky’s plight was the realistic part to me. He was a man that did not have high expectations for himself. He had found a comfortable limit and had decided that was really it. So when the fight fell in his lap, he didn’t want it. The movie is probably most famous for the training scenes, but unless you see Rocky from front to end, you can’t really see the evolution of his character. That is why the movie is so inspiring, not because he was a nobody who became a somebody, but rather I think it’s due to the message, which to me was that your excepted limits are never your actual limits. And that’s why I intend to eat 5 hot dogs this time! I know I can do it! Sorry, off topic there. The music really is great, and the acting is pretty awesome too. I swear I’m not crazy, please tell me I’m not crazy!
True Romance (1993 Tony Scott):
Ok, it’s official, I’m crazy. For those of you who know me, I mean REALLY know me, what I like, what I hate, what I like to sniff, you know I should love True Romance. Written by Tarantino, having stars in it like Dennis Hopper, Christopher Walken, Gary Oldman, Michael Rapaport, sounds like the stuff of winners! I hate to say this, and I know many of you are going to go “WHHHHHAAAAA???!!!!” but I didn’t really like it. When I told Sarah this, her reaction was, and I quote “…I don’t know what to say to that.” I love her, have I ever mentioned that? Anyway, I don’t hate the movie or anything; I can certainly see the merit of it. The story is pretty entertaining, and I like Christian Slater in it a lot, which says something because I do not consider myself a Christian Slater fan. There are just something’s I could not get past. The music, I don’t care if you love the music in this movie, in my opinion the music was horrendous. Not just the digital score in the back ground that someone cooked up for the quirky touching parts, but also the actual songs they chose to put in scenes. The only thing tolerable in that soundtrack was the Elvis tunes, and I am not an Elvis fan. Next on my list of beefs (mmm, beef) is Patricia Arquette. Now wait, before you jump all over me for that, I thing she is a fine actress, emphasis on the FINE (!), but that squeaky southern accent she had the whole movie made me want to drive a railroad spike through my ear. Her narration of the beginning and end of the film had me turning the volume down on my speakers. My last little teensy weensy complaint is this: HOW COULD YOU HAVE AN AMAZING CAMEO BY CHRISTOPHER WALKEN AND NEVER HAVE HIM APPEAR AGAIN IN THE MOVIE??!!! Although I did really like James Gandolfini, at the end there were just a bunch of anonymous bad guys. Why did that do that? Tell me why, give me a good reason, and I will buy you a sandwich. I get to choose from where.
Eternal Sunshine of the Spotless Mind (2004 Michel Gondry):
If I were a smarter man, perhaps I could put my finger on what makes this movie so special. I have watched Eternal Sunshine several times since its initial release in theaters and it has yet to lose its magic for me. I don’t know if it’s the performances, the entire cast is amazing from the minor Mark Ruffalo and Elijah Woods parts, to Kirsten Dunst’s and Tom Wilkinson’s strange duo, to the main characters portrayed by Jim Carrey and Kate Winslet. I mean, just for instance, who knew that Kate Winslet was capable of that? And don’t you dare say “didn’t you see Titanic?” because I will digitally slap you silly. Perhaps it is the imagination of Michel Gondry that sky rocketed the film to pure greatness. About that I have my doubts, although I do love the man’s music video work, I did not really enjoy the science of sleep. I believe the man needs structure to contain all his creativity, and working within that structure, he is able to make amazing stuff. Perhaps it is the way the musical score blends in so well with the cinematography. I don’t know, at this point I am just throwing out ideas to chew on. What I really need to do is sit down with the movie and take a steady stream of notes. Eternal Sunshine is one of my favorite movies of all time, and I just want to point out that it isn’t because of some sentimental attachment (the main guys name is Joel, just to let you know). I watched this with my new critical eyes and I still did not see any holes. A magnificent movie; that is my opinion.
All the President’s Men (1976 Alan J. Pakula):
Have you seen this movie? It’s actually very good, and it isn’t just because it’s Hoffman and Redford. The representation of what Bob Woodward and Carl Bernstein did is fascinating. I am guessing almost anyone over the age of 20 has heard of Watergate, and has an idea of what went on there, but the idea that it almost got completely swept under the rug is amazing. Not that I don’t think that kind of thing has happened before or since, but the uncovering of said event by these two reporters is absolutely astonishing. What I learned from the film is that I will never have the back bone these two men had. Respect. I’d also like to point out some of the great camera work done in the movie. One part that stood out was in the library of congress, which you have to see to understand what was so great about it. The camera move a bit at a time, higher and higher to show the concentric circles of the library. They were so small in such a big world, that world being the US political system.
Henry & June (1990 Philip Kaufman):
So, that stinkaroo I mentioned on the facebook page? Yeah, this is it. Now, it may not be the movie people are thinking of. I do not mean the movie starring Johnny Depp. That movie is called Benny and Joon. This was an erotic piece of garbage, about a French woman named Anais Nin who meets the author Henry James before he became famous, and proceeded to have weird sexual encounters with him, his wife, her own husband, some other chicks I assume. I got through the first hour of the movie, stopped it and looked to see how much longer there was. Another hour and a half, translation, NO FLIPPIN WAY!!! It was all bad acting mixed with crappy story mixed with weird sex. Not my cup of tea. This marks only the second movie since I started the blog that I haven’t been able to finish. Not bad for someone as impatient as I am!
An explanation: I am not an expert. I do not want people to assume that I think what I say is right or wrong, that things are as black and white as that. Just because I did not like a movie, doesn’t mean it isn’t great. When writing out these little summaries, I am simply working out how I feel about the films I watch. I also use it as an exercise for writing in general. Just because we disagree on something (You being the reader, as opposed to me), doesn’t mean I think that your opinion has no merit. On the contrary, I am very glad to hear anyone’s opinion on these films I talk about. You never know, you might convince me. Any questions, comments, or secret information pertaining to the whereabouts of Jimmy Hoffa’s body, please send them to JDTMovies@gmail.com. Or post them on my handy dandy Facebook fan page.
Ghost in the Shell*
Rocky*
True Romance*
Eternal Sunshine of the Spotless Mind
All the President’s Men*
Henry & June*
Ghost in the Shell (1996 Mamoru Oshii):
I think I missed my window on this one. All I know is, before I was watching any anime at all, people were talking about how bad ass Ghost in the Shell and Ninja Scroll were. I own and love Ninja Scroll, it is just a great little flick. Ghost in the Shell will not be in my collection. I just don’t see what the big deal is. Someone told me that for when it came out, people in this country hadn’t seen animation so cool out of Japan. All I can figure is, a lot of horny teenagers made this movie what it is today. To say it had a few boob shots is to say that a few people love Jesus. I didn’t really dig the voice acting either, but I only had the option of watching it dubbed in English. I am sure it’s better in Japanese, because most anime is. If you are one of those people who love this film, maybe you can fill me in on what I missed. I would be glad to hear about it.
Rocky (1976 John G. Avildsen):
This movie sure pulled a fast one on me. I was trying to take notes, doing my usual ADD thing (which involves stopping the movie every 15 minutes to do some random task), and then suddenly, I was not. The notes stopped, my eyes were glued to the screen. How did this happen? The dialogue is not particularly awesome, and the story is kind of predictable, so where did this movie go so right? My only intuition on this is that the reality of it made me love it. Well, I say reality accepting that heavy weight champions do not fight average Joes, unless they are drunk. Rocky’s plight was the realistic part to me. He was a man that did not have high expectations for himself. He had found a comfortable limit and had decided that was really it. So when the fight fell in his lap, he didn’t want it. The movie is probably most famous for the training scenes, but unless you see Rocky from front to end, you can’t really see the evolution of his character. That is why the movie is so inspiring, not because he was a nobody who became a somebody, but rather I think it’s due to the message, which to me was that your excepted limits are never your actual limits. And that’s why I intend to eat 5 hot dogs this time! I know I can do it! Sorry, off topic there. The music really is great, and the acting is pretty awesome too. I swear I’m not crazy, please tell me I’m not crazy!
True Romance (1993 Tony Scott):
Ok, it’s official, I’m crazy. For those of you who know me, I mean REALLY know me, what I like, what I hate, what I like to sniff, you know I should love True Romance. Written by Tarantino, having stars in it like Dennis Hopper, Christopher Walken, Gary Oldman, Michael Rapaport, sounds like the stuff of winners! I hate to say this, and I know many of you are going to go “WHHHHHAAAAA???!!!!” but I didn’t really like it. When I told Sarah this, her reaction was, and I quote “…I don’t know what to say to that.” I love her, have I ever mentioned that? Anyway, I don’t hate the movie or anything; I can certainly see the merit of it. The story is pretty entertaining, and I like Christian Slater in it a lot, which says something because I do not consider myself a Christian Slater fan. There are just something’s I could not get past. The music, I don’t care if you love the music in this movie, in my opinion the music was horrendous. Not just the digital score in the back ground that someone cooked up for the quirky touching parts, but also the actual songs they chose to put in scenes. The only thing tolerable in that soundtrack was the Elvis tunes, and I am not an Elvis fan. Next on my list of beefs (mmm, beef) is Patricia Arquette. Now wait, before you jump all over me for that, I thing she is a fine actress, emphasis on the FINE (!), but that squeaky southern accent she had the whole movie made me want to drive a railroad spike through my ear. Her narration of the beginning and end of the film had me turning the volume down on my speakers. My last little teensy weensy complaint is this: HOW COULD YOU HAVE AN AMAZING CAMEO BY CHRISTOPHER WALKEN AND NEVER HAVE HIM APPEAR AGAIN IN THE MOVIE??!!! Although I did really like James Gandolfini, at the end there were just a bunch of anonymous bad guys. Why did that do that? Tell me why, give me a good reason, and I will buy you a sandwich. I get to choose from where.
Eternal Sunshine of the Spotless Mind (2004 Michel Gondry):
If I were a smarter man, perhaps I could put my finger on what makes this movie so special. I have watched Eternal Sunshine several times since its initial release in theaters and it has yet to lose its magic for me. I don’t know if it’s the performances, the entire cast is amazing from the minor Mark Ruffalo and Elijah Woods parts, to Kirsten Dunst’s and Tom Wilkinson’s strange duo, to the main characters portrayed by Jim Carrey and Kate Winslet. I mean, just for instance, who knew that Kate Winslet was capable of that? And don’t you dare say “didn’t you see Titanic?” because I will digitally slap you silly. Perhaps it is the imagination of Michel Gondry that sky rocketed the film to pure greatness. About that I have my doubts, although I do love the man’s music video work, I did not really enjoy the science of sleep. I believe the man needs structure to contain all his creativity, and working within that structure, he is able to make amazing stuff. Perhaps it is the way the musical score blends in so well with the cinematography. I don’t know, at this point I am just throwing out ideas to chew on. What I really need to do is sit down with the movie and take a steady stream of notes. Eternal Sunshine is one of my favorite movies of all time, and I just want to point out that it isn’t because of some sentimental attachment (the main guys name is Joel, just to let you know). I watched this with my new critical eyes and I still did not see any holes. A magnificent movie; that is my opinion.
All the President’s Men (1976 Alan J. Pakula):
Have you seen this movie? It’s actually very good, and it isn’t just because it’s Hoffman and Redford. The representation of what Bob Woodward and Carl Bernstein did is fascinating. I am guessing almost anyone over the age of 20 has heard of Watergate, and has an idea of what went on there, but the idea that it almost got completely swept under the rug is amazing. Not that I don’t think that kind of thing has happened before or since, but the uncovering of said event by these two reporters is absolutely astonishing. What I learned from the film is that I will never have the back bone these two men had. Respect. I’d also like to point out some of the great camera work done in the movie. One part that stood out was in the library of congress, which you have to see to understand what was so great about it. The camera move a bit at a time, higher and higher to show the concentric circles of the library. They were so small in such a big world, that world being the US political system.
Henry & June (1990 Philip Kaufman):
So, that stinkaroo I mentioned on the facebook page? Yeah, this is it. Now, it may not be the movie people are thinking of. I do not mean the movie starring Johnny Depp. That movie is called Benny and Joon. This was an erotic piece of garbage, about a French woman named Anais Nin who meets the author Henry James before he became famous, and proceeded to have weird sexual encounters with him, his wife, her own husband, some other chicks I assume. I got through the first hour of the movie, stopped it and looked to see how much longer there was. Another hour and a half, translation, NO FLIPPIN WAY!!! It was all bad acting mixed with crappy story mixed with weird sex. Not my cup of tea. This marks only the second movie since I started the blog that I haven’t been able to finish. Not bad for someone as impatient as I am!
An explanation: I am not an expert. I do not want people to assume that I think what I say is right or wrong, that things are as black and white as that. Just because I did not like a movie, doesn’t mean it isn’t great. When writing out these little summaries, I am simply working out how I feel about the films I watch. I also use it as an exercise for writing in general. Just because we disagree on something (You being the reader, as opposed to me), doesn’t mean I think that your opinion has no merit. On the contrary, I am very glad to hear anyone’s opinion on these films I talk about. You never know, you might convince me. Any questions, comments, or secret information pertaining to the whereabouts of Jimmy Hoffa’s body, please send them to JDTMovies@gmail.com. Or post them on my handy dandy Facebook fan page.
Tuesday, April 6, 2010
April 06 2010, Week regarding 3/23/2010 – 3/29/2010
Movies Viewed: *First time seen
Manhattan*
What? That’s it? All I can say about that is having the week off of school (or rather, taking it off) and American TV sucked away my film attention span. Lost season 1 finally got a hold of my soul and refused to let go for even a moment. Not that I missed much I suppose, although I have been sitting on a copy of True Romance for about 3 weeks now. I consider my time off a bit of battery recharging. Or on the other hand, I probably killed off my film brain cells by watching television for the first time in a long while.
Manhattan (1979 Woody Allen):
The movie is about the usual cast of characters in Woody Allen’s movie, including Allen himself as Issac. Smart people in the middle of New York living New York lives. I apologize if that sounds condescending, I really do enjoy Woody Allen movies, but the pattern is unmistakable after a few. While watching this with Sarah, I told her that I thought this movie must be Annie Hall Jr, meaning I thought that Annie Hall was basically a remake of Manhattan. I was wrong; it is actually the other way around. So the way I figure it, and spoilers for both movies, is that Allen took the character Annie Hall and separated her into two different characters for Manhattan; one played by Diane Keaton again, and the other played by Mariel Hemmingway. I even saw a few scenes that looked like they were pulled straight from the other movie, but I am sure it is just that Allen likes to film in certain spots in Manhattan (the city, not the movie). The café scene is the one I am talking about specifically, it seemed almost identical to the one in Annie Hall. I also noticed that Allen is a fan of the stationary camera, by which I mean he leaves the camera in one place and has the actors move around, using onscreen and off-screen space. I personally love this, because it adds a realism that Hollywood mainstream doesn’t usually go for. If you aren’t seeing the action, then how can you know what’s going on? Well, that’s real life isn’t it? It was a good movie, and I may have even liked it better than Annie Hall, probably because it was more serious.
And because I cannot simply ignore the hours I spent watching Lost, here is a list I came up with.
Things I learned from Lost season 1:
-If it’s bleeding, put pressure on it.
-Cardio may help a person survive on an island, then again there’s Hurley.
-Dynamite is dangerous.
-Almost everyone has something to hide.
-Everyone should be an expert at something.
-Never piss off the fisherman.
-If you speak more than one language, please tell everyone else.
-Reading too much is bad for your eyes.
-Sometimes all you really need is some peanut butter.
And that is my lame list! Any questions, comments, or sad tales of life on the open sea, please send them to JDTMovies@gmail.com. Or post them on my Facebook fan page.
Manhattan*
What? That’s it? All I can say about that is having the week off of school (or rather, taking it off) and American TV sucked away my film attention span. Lost season 1 finally got a hold of my soul and refused to let go for even a moment. Not that I missed much I suppose, although I have been sitting on a copy of True Romance for about 3 weeks now. I consider my time off a bit of battery recharging. Or on the other hand, I probably killed off my film brain cells by watching television for the first time in a long while.
Manhattan (1979 Woody Allen):
The movie is about the usual cast of characters in Woody Allen’s movie, including Allen himself as Issac. Smart people in the middle of New York living New York lives. I apologize if that sounds condescending, I really do enjoy Woody Allen movies, but the pattern is unmistakable after a few. While watching this with Sarah, I told her that I thought this movie must be Annie Hall Jr, meaning I thought that Annie Hall was basically a remake of Manhattan. I was wrong; it is actually the other way around. So the way I figure it, and spoilers for both movies, is that Allen took the character Annie Hall and separated her into two different characters for Manhattan; one played by Diane Keaton again, and the other played by Mariel Hemmingway. I even saw a few scenes that looked like they were pulled straight from the other movie, but I am sure it is just that Allen likes to film in certain spots in Manhattan (the city, not the movie). The café scene is the one I am talking about specifically, it seemed almost identical to the one in Annie Hall. I also noticed that Allen is a fan of the stationary camera, by which I mean he leaves the camera in one place and has the actors move around, using onscreen and off-screen space. I personally love this, because it adds a realism that Hollywood mainstream doesn’t usually go for. If you aren’t seeing the action, then how can you know what’s going on? Well, that’s real life isn’t it? It was a good movie, and I may have even liked it better than Annie Hall, probably because it was more serious.
And because I cannot simply ignore the hours I spent watching Lost, here is a list I came up with.
Things I learned from Lost season 1:
-If it’s bleeding, put pressure on it.
-Cardio may help a person survive on an island, then again there’s Hurley.
-Dynamite is dangerous.
-Almost everyone has something to hide.
-Everyone should be an expert at something.
-Never piss off the fisherman.
-If you speak more than one language, please tell everyone else.
-Reading too much is bad for your eyes.
-Sometimes all you really need is some peanut butter.
And that is my lame list! Any questions, comments, or sad tales of life on the open sea, please send them to JDTMovies@gmail.com. Or post them on my Facebook fan page.
Monday, March 29, 2010
March 29th 2010, Week relating to 3/16/2010 – 3/22/2010
Movies Seen: First time viewed*
Pee-wee’s Big Adventure
Sideways
The Jacket*
Mongol*
The Omega Man*
Remember how last week I was talking like the guy from There Will Be Blood? Now I am talking like Charlton Heston, and I CAN’T STOP!
SPOILERS AHOY!!
Pee-wee’s Big Adventure (1985 Tim Burton):
When it comes to Tim Burton movies, I am pretty sure this is my favorite. Or maybe Beetlejuice. Anyway, we watched this in my American Films class, and it was great seeing it projected on a larger screen. The movie gives an excellent sense of joy, goofiness, suspense, and all around fun. Pee-wee is the kind of person who should be annoying, but you cannot help but love. I really do love every bit of this movie. As soon as I see Francis (Mark Holton) on screen I want to yell “It’s Enrice Pellazzo!” but I am afraid the reference will be lost on younger audience members. I guess I don’t have much to say about the movie other than that.
Sideways (2004 Alexander Payne):
Something about this movie. I cannot help but love it all the way through. Miles (Paul Giamatti) is really a detestable person when you consider his actions throughout the movie. I guess you end up feeling sorry for the man. You get a sense of his unreached potential, and how he is acutely aware that his life is pretty crappy. Then on the other side you have Jack (Thomas Hayden Church) who is an overcompensating extrovert, and once again a detestable person. In the end though, I love both of these characters as if I know them myself. This has the male bonding buddy movie feel of a new Hollywood era film. It’s kind of amazing how well scripted and acted the whole movie is. You get such a feel for these characters in the short time you spend with them. As a side note to all the male bonding as well, you get Virginia Madsen, who does such an amazing job. The casting director for the film needs to be working on every movie I have high expectations for from now on. I want to say something nice about Susan Oh too, because I do really like her in this movie, but her character is the least fleshed out of the main four people. Love the scene where she beats the hell out of Jack though, it’s just really brutal. I always wish I knew things about wine after watching this movie, but I just don’t have a taste for them. They all taste like what I imagine dirty feet would taste like. See, I inserted the “what I imagine” part in there because I don’t want people to think I have ever licked someone’s feet. EVER.
The Jacket (2005 John Maybury):
After seeing this movie, I decided to look up what the general consensus was critic wise. It seems most professional critics really didn’t like it. I’ll admit, I can see some general holes in the plot, especially looking at it from a sci-fi angle, but otherwise I thought the movie was a solid psychological thriller. Adrien Brody is great, which is what I have come to expect from the man. Kris Kristofferson and Keira Knightly did just fine for, you know, them. The show stealer by far was Daniel Craig for me. I just did not recognize him! Talk about winning major actor points in my book, that man is a downright hero to me now. That is if it’s possible to be heroic as an actor who takes on roles. So, the story contains time traveling and messed up doctors and older people getting it on with younger people. Sorry, I just had to mention that the whole “going forward in time so it’s ok to sleep with someone I knew when she was a little girl” part was just creepy. It felt incestual to me. Hmm, according to Word, incestual is not an actual word. Oh well, you heard it here first! Or maybe you didn’t, because I am pretty sure I have heard it before. All things considered about The Jacket, I would watch it again, because it has some great performances in it. I recommend it if you are curious.
Mongol (2007 Sergei Bodrov):
When you hear the name Genghis Khan, do you think love story? Well, maybe if you consider how many offspring he had I guess you could stretch it to that, but one man one woman kind of stuff? No, I doubt it unless you are a historian and if you are WHY ARE YOU READING MY LAME LITTLE BLOG?? Just kidding, I love everyone who reads this crap, especially smart people who should know better. So, foreign movie about Genghis Khan, although he is called Temudjin in the film, I expected a lot of violence. I got that, so check. I expected a long arduous journey to the top, to the leader of a large amount of people (damn vocabulary, you have failed me!). I got that, so double check. But…. But… the whole time, all throughout the movie, he was pining away for this woman he met as a child and was determined to be with her, even to the point of betraying the trust of the other khans. I am not a history buff (although I do listen to Stuff You Missed in History Class podcast!), so I was caught totally by surprise by this part of the film. And I know it isn’t a big deal, and it wouldn’t have been, except there was a lot of cheese thrown in to emphasize the love in this movie. A lot of staring into each other’s eyes and promising eternal devotion to one another scenes. Just a lot of cheese. The ending also had that going for it, but it was a different kind of cheese. The kind that should make you want more, but just kind of left me with a bad taste. Now, don’t get me wrong, I know all I have done is complain about the movie, but I still dug it. It was almost 3 hours long, and it kept me pretty enrapt the whole time. The battle scenes were pretty tight. Although they were violent, there wasn’t an emphasis on the actions of violence themselves. It seems to me it was used simply to move the story along, and keep the watcher up to speed. I would watch this movie again, and I give it a little extra pass on the cheese factor because I believe it is part 1 of a trilogy. So I am looking forward to the next film, and I would say this one is worth a watch. Especially for the cute little Eskimo kids! What’s that? Sorry, I know, that was racist. I apologize in advance for my sense of humor.
The Omega Man (1971 Boris Segal):
My adventure into “classic” sci-fi movies continues thanks to the Filmsack podcast. I don’t know if you were aware of this, but this movie is based off of the story I am Legend, just like the Will Smith movie! Now that I have seen this film, I have to say that Will Smith’s version is seriously lacking in the jive talk area. And not enough hairy chests. I haven’t seen that much hair on a man since the third X-Men movie (you know, Beast). When it comes to the sci-fi movies I have seen recently, this is on the lower end of the scale. It had really terrible music, AWFUL dialogue, and awkward sex scenes (well, only one, but still). I did enjoy the irony of Heston sitting down to enjoy the documentary Woodstock, because you know in real life that guy was probably screaming about those damn hippies. Even though the movie was bad, and trust me it was, I think I can still look upon it fondly. You get that 70’s campiness here in a very pure and tasty form. Not much more you can ask for. By the way, why were the albino weirdoes talking about how they don’t use the wheel, and then decided that it was ok later? I must have missed the part where they had a meeting and decided that part.
So, I know I said I was going to talk about Raising Arizona on here too, but when it came time to write up something about it, I felt like I couldn’t remember the things I wanted to. I remember it being really funny, probably the funniest of the Coen brother’s movies I have seen, but not exact details. Maybe next time I shouldn’t ogle Sarah while watching a movie. Plus, we were doing a jigsaw puzzle at the same time. I have ADD, sue me. Any questions, comments, or autopsy reports on famous documentarians, please send them to JDTMovies@gmail.com.
Pee-wee’s Big Adventure
Sideways
The Jacket*
Mongol*
The Omega Man*
Remember how last week I was talking like the guy from There Will Be Blood? Now I am talking like Charlton Heston, and I CAN’T STOP!
SPOILERS AHOY!!
Pee-wee’s Big Adventure (1985 Tim Burton):
When it comes to Tim Burton movies, I am pretty sure this is my favorite. Or maybe Beetlejuice. Anyway, we watched this in my American Films class, and it was great seeing it projected on a larger screen. The movie gives an excellent sense of joy, goofiness, suspense, and all around fun. Pee-wee is the kind of person who should be annoying, but you cannot help but love. I really do love every bit of this movie. As soon as I see Francis (Mark Holton) on screen I want to yell “It’s Enrice Pellazzo!” but I am afraid the reference will be lost on younger audience members. I guess I don’t have much to say about the movie other than that.
Sideways (2004 Alexander Payne):
Something about this movie. I cannot help but love it all the way through. Miles (Paul Giamatti) is really a detestable person when you consider his actions throughout the movie. I guess you end up feeling sorry for the man. You get a sense of his unreached potential, and how he is acutely aware that his life is pretty crappy. Then on the other side you have Jack (Thomas Hayden Church) who is an overcompensating extrovert, and once again a detestable person. In the end though, I love both of these characters as if I know them myself. This has the male bonding buddy movie feel of a new Hollywood era film. It’s kind of amazing how well scripted and acted the whole movie is. You get such a feel for these characters in the short time you spend with them. As a side note to all the male bonding as well, you get Virginia Madsen, who does such an amazing job. The casting director for the film needs to be working on every movie I have high expectations for from now on. I want to say something nice about Susan Oh too, because I do really like her in this movie, but her character is the least fleshed out of the main four people. Love the scene where she beats the hell out of Jack though, it’s just really brutal. I always wish I knew things about wine after watching this movie, but I just don’t have a taste for them. They all taste like what I imagine dirty feet would taste like. See, I inserted the “what I imagine” part in there because I don’t want people to think I have ever licked someone’s feet. EVER.
The Jacket (2005 John Maybury):
After seeing this movie, I decided to look up what the general consensus was critic wise. It seems most professional critics really didn’t like it. I’ll admit, I can see some general holes in the plot, especially looking at it from a sci-fi angle, but otherwise I thought the movie was a solid psychological thriller. Adrien Brody is great, which is what I have come to expect from the man. Kris Kristofferson and Keira Knightly did just fine for, you know, them. The show stealer by far was Daniel Craig for me. I just did not recognize him! Talk about winning major actor points in my book, that man is a downright hero to me now. That is if it’s possible to be heroic as an actor who takes on roles. So, the story contains time traveling and messed up doctors and older people getting it on with younger people. Sorry, I just had to mention that the whole “going forward in time so it’s ok to sleep with someone I knew when she was a little girl” part was just creepy. It felt incestual to me. Hmm, according to Word, incestual is not an actual word. Oh well, you heard it here first! Or maybe you didn’t, because I am pretty sure I have heard it before. All things considered about The Jacket, I would watch it again, because it has some great performances in it. I recommend it if you are curious.
Mongol (2007 Sergei Bodrov):
When you hear the name Genghis Khan, do you think love story? Well, maybe if you consider how many offspring he had I guess you could stretch it to that, but one man one woman kind of stuff? No, I doubt it unless you are a historian and if you are WHY ARE YOU READING MY LAME LITTLE BLOG?? Just kidding, I love everyone who reads this crap, especially smart people who should know better. So, foreign movie about Genghis Khan, although he is called Temudjin in the film, I expected a lot of violence. I got that, so check. I expected a long arduous journey to the top, to the leader of a large amount of people (damn vocabulary, you have failed me!). I got that, so double check. But…. But… the whole time, all throughout the movie, he was pining away for this woman he met as a child and was determined to be with her, even to the point of betraying the trust of the other khans. I am not a history buff (although I do listen to Stuff You Missed in History Class podcast!), so I was caught totally by surprise by this part of the film. And I know it isn’t a big deal, and it wouldn’t have been, except there was a lot of cheese thrown in to emphasize the love in this movie. A lot of staring into each other’s eyes and promising eternal devotion to one another scenes. Just a lot of cheese. The ending also had that going for it, but it was a different kind of cheese. The kind that should make you want more, but just kind of left me with a bad taste. Now, don’t get me wrong, I know all I have done is complain about the movie, but I still dug it. It was almost 3 hours long, and it kept me pretty enrapt the whole time. The battle scenes were pretty tight. Although they were violent, there wasn’t an emphasis on the actions of violence themselves. It seems to me it was used simply to move the story along, and keep the watcher up to speed. I would watch this movie again, and I give it a little extra pass on the cheese factor because I believe it is part 1 of a trilogy. So I am looking forward to the next film, and I would say this one is worth a watch. Especially for the cute little Eskimo kids! What’s that? Sorry, I know, that was racist. I apologize in advance for my sense of humor.
The Omega Man (1971 Boris Segal):
My adventure into “classic” sci-fi movies continues thanks to the Filmsack podcast. I don’t know if you were aware of this, but this movie is based off of the story I am Legend, just like the Will Smith movie! Now that I have seen this film, I have to say that Will Smith’s version is seriously lacking in the jive talk area. And not enough hairy chests. I haven’t seen that much hair on a man since the third X-Men movie (you know, Beast). When it comes to the sci-fi movies I have seen recently, this is on the lower end of the scale. It had really terrible music, AWFUL dialogue, and awkward sex scenes (well, only one, but still). I did enjoy the irony of Heston sitting down to enjoy the documentary Woodstock, because you know in real life that guy was probably screaming about those damn hippies. Even though the movie was bad, and trust me it was, I think I can still look upon it fondly. You get that 70’s campiness here in a very pure and tasty form. Not much more you can ask for. By the way, why were the albino weirdoes talking about how they don’t use the wheel, and then decided that it was ok later? I must have missed the part where they had a meeting and decided that part.
So, I know I said I was going to talk about Raising Arizona on here too, but when it came time to write up something about it, I felt like I couldn’t remember the things I wanted to. I remember it being really funny, probably the funniest of the Coen brother’s movies I have seen, but not exact details. Maybe next time I shouldn’t ogle Sarah while watching a movie. Plus, we were doing a jigsaw puzzle at the same time. I have ADD, sue me. Any questions, comments, or autopsy reports on famous documentarians, please send them to JDTMovies@gmail.com.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)