I've been watching movies all month (as you'll see when I do a post on my May activity tomorrow). I've wanted to blog more and have wanted to jump into the Funny Games discussion, but I haven't had much to say about the films I've seen...and then with Funny Games, I basically agree with Jeff. And no one wants to read that shit!
Funny Games is overtly cruel, to the point that it's absurd. As Jason once stated, he likes to put himself in the shoes of the "victims" in horror films; I think most fans would admit to doing as much. For that reason, it was smart to conceive of this film and to fuck with the audience in the way that Haneke does.
During the remote control scene, I admit, at that point, I had already surrendered and accepted the fact that it's just a movie and there's nothing anyone can do to stop these sadistic villains. Though I did love it when the wife shot "Fatty" through the chest. How can you not cheer for that kind of violence?? Some people deserve to be shot. That story about the zombie crackhead in Miami is making its rounds, and I think we'd probably all pull the trigger on that guy...am I right?
Anyway, I think Jeff and Brandon both make some great points, and I can understand why Brandon would take issue with Haneke and his pompous attitude. But mostly it doesn't affect me; I liked Funny Games. No matter what anyone has said about it or will say about it, it was a unique experience and one that will be hard to forget. I can truly understand why it's CR5FC's official dead horse. I've recommended it to two of my friends since watching it.
Brandon talked a bit about Jesse and Becca's experience while watching Funny Games. That sounds awful...under those circumstances, I'd probably hate it too. But one point I want to bring up, without offending Jason or Brandon, is the idea that a lot of horror fans are too blood and flesh starved. I mean, sure, every genre has its douchebags, but if you look at the main appeals of the horror genre, they are: 1) the kills and 2) sex. It's not always sexual assault, but the slasher films feature plenty of sex and nudity. And then, yeah, I can't truly get behind a genre that thrives on inventively sadistic ways to tear the human body apart.
I'm not saying that all horror fans go for this cheap entertainment (Jason and Brandon couldn't be any more intelligent and pleasant about movies; I love you guys), but that idea corresponds with one of the main reasons why I'm not a huge fan of the genre. There's an over-reliance on sex and violence in these films, and each year they up the ante. And again, violence doesn't offend me and I don't want to see it removed from film, but some people react to it inappropriately. So there's that. And then even worse than that are the dudes who watched Funny Games with Todd, Jesse, and Becca. Seriously, fuck those guys. Detestable scum.
Other notes...
I bought the Game of Thrones season one DVD. Perhaps I foresee a John Owen marathon in the future...but only if he doesn't try to be a john-trarian about it. Season two is brilliant; can't wait for the finale this Sunday...but it will also come with some heartbreak - don't want it to end.
Jeff's trying to get me to watch The Innkeepers. I'm not sure I'll be able to overcome my cowardice, though. Like John, I haven't read any of the spoilers in the hopes that I may watch it someday...during the middle of a sunny day. This will also help to explain my paragraph about horror fans...mainly I'm just a wimp.
So John has cancelled his Netflix, eh? Is this the end of the movie selection project? Well, it did last longer than the Director of the Month project...so there is progress.
Make Way For Tomorrow tomorrow. I imagine I'll love it as much as you guys, but who knows? We all know, probably.
Wednesday, May 30, 2012
Friday, May 18, 2012
Shame
Hypothetically, if you were hired by a studio to write a low-budget drama about a sex addict, what do you think you'd put in your script? I imagine we'd all come up with the same ideas pretty quickly. We'd write a story about a guy who's distant and incapable of maintaining any sort of meaningful relationship. We'd write scenes with him trying to date someone, someone he really gets along with. And then when they go back to his place, he's unable to "get it up." His date would say, "it's nothing to be ashamed of," as she walks out the door. Smash cut to our sex addict "getting busy" with a prostitute.
Shame doesn't work because it's all too obvious - from Brandon's sex life, to his personal life and his relationship with his sister. I would say that there is more to analyze and discuss with that brother/sister relationship though. Clearly there's long and strange history between the two, given how comfortable they are around each other with their bodies and their sexuality. Like Jeff argues, though, there isn't enough to truly care about these two characters.
SPOILERS. I agree with Jeff's assessment on Sissy's suicide attempt; it's lacking in the emotional tug on your heartstrings. And yes, to sound like a broken record, it's completely obvious to have the film end in that way. The only thing Sissy can do to get her brother's attention is to slit her wrists. Suddenly, he realizes what he's about to lose. But has it truly changed Brandon? Of course we need to end the film with a shot of Brandon thinking about whether or not he's going to follow the married woman from the train.
But I do want to pause for a second. I enjoyed the brief moment when Brandon and Sissy are waiting on the subway platform and she rests her head on his shoulders. In that instance, we have a sincere and loving moment between brother and sister. I also enjoyed Carey Mullgian's singing; the rest of her scenes are mostly forgettable. Michael Fassbender is the best thing going for this film. He's very expressive and does a great job with the character. James Badge Dale does a nice job playing the outgoing douche...it showed me a whole other side to the guy I had only previously seen in Rubicon.
Jeff and I talked about this, but did Shame ever feel like American Psycho to you, Ben?
I don't know what to make of the shot of Brandon snorting cocaine. We only see him doing it once, but are we to assume that he's also a drug addict? I don't know why I'm so caught up on it, but for whatever reason it feels like an odd choice to me.
Another positive I will take away from this film is the date between Brandon and his co-worker, Marianne. I thought it was well-done in an awkwardly charming sort of way. I don't know, it felt very authentic to me, but maybe that's just because I can be very socially awkward at times. But Fassbender and Nicole Beharie have a lot of great faces during those scenes.
Anyway, most of my critiques stem from the script. I have no real problems with McQueen as a director. Maybe I'll see Hunger at some point here. But I had wanted to see Shame because it was one of the more talked about films of 2011. Now that I have seen it, I realize that it's mostly talked about due to its NC-17 rating.
Followers
I didn't think our Following discussion would get this heated...
All right, fine, but it's about to get HOT now that Chris Nolan's biggest supporter is jumping into the mix. I was going to surprise you, John, but I'm changing my twitter handle to "PrestigeFan36" -- 36 being the number of times I've seen it. Who would've thought that a movie about magic would be so magical?
Now that I've got that out of my system...
As stated on the Facebook, I had seen Chris Nolan's Following before and I do own the DVD. Like many people that John and Brandon probably hate :), I was a big fan of Memento back in the early 2000s (and still am). I was such a big fan that I wanted to track down Chris Nolan's first film. Because Netflix didn't exist yet, the only way I could see it was to buy it on-line.
When I watched Following last week, it marked only the second time that I've ever seen it. So yeah, two viewings in the past ten+ years doesn't exactly sound like the greatest of endorsements. My feelings are sort of mixed. I would be slightly shocked if someone was blown away by it. And I do admit, the twists and turns aren't clever enough to get you too excited about the film.
Having said that, like Jeff, I would argue against the idea that Nolan tried to make it overly clever. I fail to see any sort of labored effort on his part. I feel that Following uses "smoke and mirrors" in the same way that The Saint Takes Over does...or yes, more accurately, the way a neo-noir does.
What we have here is a solid first film. Nolan is not talentless; I think we've all seen enough shitty movies to realize this. To call him competent would be putting it mildly. He knows what he's doing, and each film he sets out to make is slightly more ambitious than the last. I can admire that.
I can also appreciate his talents as a storyteller. Even John admits that the premise for Following is interesting...though I will grant you the point that it isn't executed as well as it could've been. In fact, now that I'm thinking about that, I believe that was my main complaint when I saw it for the first time.
But the movie does play with some cool concepts, and the story is still interesting; I can't see too many people bailing on the movie halfway through. Cobb is an intriguing character and I enjoyed the last shot of him disappearing on the London streets. The main character's aimless existence leads him down a dangerous path. It's partly rotten luck, but he does bring it upon himself after breaking one of his own rules. Cobb's con involved a lot of planning and thought, and I get the sense that Chris Nolan does as much when he's writing his scripts.
I mean, the guy wrote/shot a movie about people who hack into someone's mind in order to plant an idea...and we're trying to curb him from filmmaking?? Sure he's overhyped and his films are over-analyzed; sure there might be moments when you get the sense that he's looking for a pat on the back (like most directors). But I admire what he has been able to do over the past fourteen years. I'm not sure why Nolan and Aronofsky get singled out. Maybe if I knew more of their fans I would understand.
Anytime I see one of the Joel Schumacher Batman movies on the TV, I thank the gods (the old and the new) for Chris Nolan. He turned what was one of the campiest, lamest piece of shit franchises and transformed it into something gritty, realistic, and enjoyable. I know many people say that all comic book movies are the same, but I don't get that sense with Batman Begins and The Dark Knight.
I do agree with a lot of what Jeff wrote about Following, but mostly I'm just speaking for myself here. I'll probably come off as the most defensive Nolan guy, unless Jason wants to be the Robin to my Batman. Also, I didn't really say a lot about the movie because I want leave room for others to jump in and talk about it.
But wait...
The final twist of this post is that I don't actually like any of Chris Nolan's films. I just support him because we have the same first name.
Smoke.
Mirrors.
Can't wait to see The Dark Knight Rises with you, John. I mean that sincerely. I love you.
Tuesday, May 8, 2012
Damsels in Distress
No one walked out of the Art Mission while I watched Whit Stillman's Damsels in Distress. I'm still not sure if that surprises me or not. The average moviegoer might find it to be too original, strange, and quirky...or they might walk out because they have no sense of humor. The married couple that sat in the row behind me laughed at ninety percent of the jokes. And when Zach Woods showed up on the screen, the husband whispered, "Look, it's Gabe from The Office." Anyone who is still watching The Office definitely has a strong sense of humor.
While I might've laughed once or twice, I mostly smiled throughout the film. Ben's right, there's something to the charm of the characters and the dialogue; it's easy to get swept up in Whit Stillman's style, and the actors do an exceptional job of achieving likability. With the damsels, you essentially have three female Homer Simpsons walking around. Most of what they say is silly, but every now and then, they'll give you something brilliant. And all the while, you'll enjoy their company.
I'm not too familiar with Stillman. The only connection we share is that Metropolitan has been in my Netflix instant queue for the past six months. It's among a small group of movies that I might choose when it's my turn to select something for all of us to watch. After having seen Damsels, I admit my interest in his films has certainly piqued.
I can appreciate his dialogue and its tone. The humor in Damsels is very dry and deadpan; I can always support that as long as the screenwriter is intelligent. And Stillman is. Whit's got wit...and he isn't the only one ;)
One of the reasons why I wanted to see the film was because I had a feeling it would help move our Girls conversation to a new phase. Now that I've seen the film, I'm not exactly sure where it move us; I have nothing new to add. Sure Damsels feels more honest and interesting than Girls, but that was never going to be difficult to pull off. John's investigative findings on Stillman and Dunham are pretty intriguing. I wonder which character Dunham was supposed to play. If it was Violet, then I'm glad Girls exists. I sit here convinced that no one could've done better than Greta Gerwig.
Truly, you can't say enough about Gerwig's performance...it's brilliant and loveable. Every word she says, every look she gives seems almost too perfect. She's so much more than an actress reciting dialogue and it's a lot of fun to watch.
Not once did I think of Eric Rohmer while watching the film, but that's mainly due to the fact that I've only seen Claire's Knee. I need to watch more Rohmer anyway, but now there's an added bonus of being able to see how he's influenced Stillman. Thanks for linking that review, Ben.
You'll probably take this as an insult, John, (it's not meant to be) but in some ways Damsels in Distress feels like a sophisticated version of Napoleon Dynamite. Mainly I'm referring to the comedic tone. The characters display plenty of weird behavior in both, but the respective weird behaviors do seem to reside in different worlds. It's not to say that I picture Napoleon walking through one of the quads at Seven Oaks, but there are slight similarities in the overall strangeness of the two films.
When I said that I was meh-ing at the film's song-and-dance ending, I was mostly joking. I don't think there was any other way to end the film. Although I did feel as if the story was dragging on a bit too long toward the end. I don't have specific cuts in mind, though.
I read a short review somewhere that griped about the level of stupidity displayed by the frat boys. Personally, I had no problems with it. If anything, it was justified (is it at all obvious that I agree with Brandon's feelings on frat boys?). But sure, John makes a nice point about them being loveable without seeming desirable or cool. Though we'd be surprised as to what certain people think is cool.
So it would seem that we're mostly in agreement on this one, fellas. I'm a little surprised that John was so impressed with the film, but then I read the "glorious waste of time" line in his review and everything made perfect sense to me. I agree with that statement. My "meh" attitude mostly stemmed from the fact that the film doesn't hold as much power as many of the others in my top ten from 2011. It's a poor man's Le Havre. That doesn't mean I can't appreciate it. Hygiene is important. Seeking growth/potential is important. Laughing/smiling is important.
And so, Damsels in Distress is now among my 2011 honorable mentions. I'm really fond of my top ten; it's become a hard nut to crack...to use a cliched/hackneyed phrase. But there's no shame in being grouped with The Mill and the Cross, Midnight In Paris, and The Girl with the Dragon Tattoo; I like those films a lot. Honestly, I was slightly disappointed to find out that Damsels was a 2011 film...had it been a 2012er, it would've been interesting.
Monday, May 7, 2012
Brothership Potemkin
If only Sergei Eisenstein's Battleship Potemkin featured a tale about self-entitled youths...or starred one of Brian Williams' relatives...then we'd have more to discuss and argue about.
I enjoyed the film for the same reasons that every cinephile seems to identify in his or her review. It's an extremely powerful film that captures both your attention and your emotions. Maybe there's hope for me with regard to watching some D.W. Griffith films now, but I'll probably just stick to Chaplin, Keaton, and Eisenstein. Comedies and Commies seem to be my thing.
This was my first Eisenstein film. Alexander Nevsky used to be on NWI. I wish I could watch it on there as a follow-up to Battleship Potemkin, but for no apparent reason it was taken down; supervillian Reed Hastings strikes again.
Anyway, no doubt, Battleship Potemkin is an extremely effective film. In Roger Ebert's review, he notes that certain scenes are so ingrained in people's minds that they're interpreted as being historically accurate. Many sequences from the film (especially the opening scenes on the ship) definitely have that "documentary" feel. Of course, a propaganda film needs that in order to accomplish its goals. But it does feel as if Eisenstein's ambitions aren't just limited to making the Tsarist regime look like a bunch of soulless fucktards.
Looking back on the film, I can't help but think of the word, "crescendo." I envision Eisenstein directing/editing the film the way a maestro conducts an orchestra. This a film that builds and builds; it's very skillfully done. And sticking with the idea of music, the score perfectly matches the power of the visuals; it's no surprise that the smallest members of the Owen clan rose up against John The Terrible (sure that reference is pretty old by now, but I really enjoyed that part of your post, John).
Like Jeff, I'd have to praise Eisenstein more for his technical abilities than his storytelling abilities. In fact, I'm sure most of us would agree with John's assessment that, in cases like these, the well-crafted nature of the film does trump the meaning and message.
I enjoyed the film for the same reasons that every cinephile seems to identify in his or her review. It's an extremely powerful film that captures both your attention and your emotions. Maybe there's hope for me with regard to watching some D.W. Griffith films now, but I'll probably just stick to Chaplin, Keaton, and Eisenstein. Comedies and Commies seem to be my thing.
This was my first Eisenstein film. Alexander Nevsky used to be on NWI. I wish I could watch it on there as a follow-up to Battleship Potemkin, but for no apparent reason it was taken down; supervillian Reed Hastings strikes again.
Anyway, no doubt, Battleship Potemkin is an extremely effective film. In Roger Ebert's review, he notes that certain scenes are so ingrained in people's minds that they're interpreted as being historically accurate. Many sequences from the film (especially the opening scenes on the ship) definitely have that "documentary" feel. Of course, a propaganda film needs that in order to accomplish its goals. But it does feel as if Eisenstein's ambitions aren't just limited to making the Tsarist regime look like a bunch of soulless fucktards.
Looking back on the film, I can't help but think of the word, "crescendo." I envision Eisenstein directing/editing the film the way a maestro conducts an orchestra. This a film that builds and builds; it's very skillfully done. And sticking with the idea of music, the score perfectly matches the power of the visuals; it's no surprise that the smallest members of the Owen clan rose up against John The Terrible (sure that reference is pretty old by now, but I really enjoyed that part of your post, John).
Like Jeff, I'd have to praise Eisenstein more for his technical abilities than his storytelling abilities. In fact, I'm sure most of us would agree with John's assessment that, in cases like these, the well-crafted nature of the film does trump the meaning and message.
Tuesday, May 1, 2012
I Think I Love My Life
My original title for this review was, "The Last Temptation of Chris Rock". When the issue was published I figured that my editor changed it because it could be viewed as controversial. Now I'm starting to think it was changed/shortened for layout purposes. Either way, I'm still not happy with that title. Reading the review again, it's clear that I didn't have much of a voice as a critic. Five years later and my critical writing is still pretty dull.
I was really hoping that I mentioned Eric Rohmer in this...not that I knew of Rohmer's existence at the time I wrote the review. BUT I can recall seeing on wikipedia that I Think I Love My Wife was a remake of Chloe in the Afternoon. Who knows, maybe I did mention it and my editor took it out; I'll stick to blaming her.
Monday, April 30, 2012
April Activity
Using the John Owen System:
* Hated it/Never want to see it again
** Didn't like it/Maybe I'll watch it again someday, though
*** Liked it/Enjoyable, but it'll be awhile before I see it again
**** Really liked it/A favorite to be revisited often
***** Loved it/A masterpiece that I can't live without
16 Features
Battleship Potemkin ***
Brief Encounter ****
The Cabin in the Woods ***
Cleo From 5 to 7 ****
Destry Rides Again ****
Every Thing You Always Wanted to Know About Sex****
Good Morning ****
Jules et Jim ****
The Kid (1921...not 2000, Jeff)*****
Ladies in Retirement ***
Le Plaisir ****
Meet Me In St. Louis *****
My Favorite Wife ****
Quai Des Orfevres ****
Seven Samurai *****
Young Mr. Lincoln ****
Notes: The Cabin in the Woods gets three stars from me, but only because I'm not a horror fan. I completely respect the film and have even recommended it to a couple of friends. I knew one of my friends would absolutely love it...turns out, he did.
Every Thing You Wanted To Know About Sex isn't one of Woody's best, but I have to say, very few movies cheer me up in the way that a 70s/80s Woody Allen comedy can.
Sorry I didn't get that Cleo From 5 to 7 paragraph to you, Brandon; I did watch the film after you asked me to, but things got busy and I completely forgot about sending a paragraph. I guess technically I could still send you one...since you haven't posted your 1962 list yet. But you've probably already written something up on it. Anyway, my favorite moment from the film is when Cleo meets the soldier towards the end. I love the bond they share through uncertainty and potential doom.
My Favorite Wife isn't necessarily a masterpiece, but it was incredibly enjoyable from beginning to end. It's one of the funniest classic comedies that I've ever seen and I can't wait to watch it again.
The Battleship Potemkin discussion will commence soon. I do agree that it'll be a little more difficult to discuss than the other film's we've watched together. I will say that as far as propaganda films are concerned, give me Commie propaganda.
Also, John, you had asked if there were any references to Eisenstein's film on The Simpsons...unless I'm forgetting something, there aren't any in seasons 1-10. Beyond that, I couldn't tell you because I haven't seen a lot of those episodes. BUT...on The Critic (created by Simpsons writers Al Jean and Mike Reiss), there is a nod to the famous "Odessa stairs" sequence (it's at the 22 second mark in the video below, which is of critic Jay Sherman's student film). How's that for nerdy?
TV
30 Rock season 6
The Colbert Report
The Daily Show
Game of Thrones season 2
Girls 1 episode
Mad Men season 5
Parks and Recreation season 4
Real Time with Bill Maher
The Ricky Gervais Show season 3
Seinfeld seasons 1, 2, 3
* Hated it/Never want to see it again
** Didn't like it/Maybe I'll watch it again someday, though
*** Liked it/Enjoyable, but it'll be awhile before I see it again
**** Really liked it/A favorite to be revisited often
***** Loved it/A masterpiece that I can't live without
16 Features
Battleship Potemkin ***
Brief Encounter ****
The Cabin in the Woods ***
Cleo From 5 to 7 ****
Destry Rides Again ****
Every Thing You Always Wanted to Know About Sex****
Good Morning ****
Jules et Jim ****
The Kid (1921...not 2000, Jeff)*****
Ladies in Retirement ***
Le Plaisir ****
Meet Me In St. Louis *****
My Favorite Wife ****
Quai Des Orfevres ****
Seven Samurai *****
Young Mr. Lincoln ****
Notes: The Cabin in the Woods gets three stars from me, but only because I'm not a horror fan. I completely respect the film and have even recommended it to a couple of friends. I knew one of my friends would absolutely love it...turns out, he did.
Every Thing You Wanted To Know About Sex isn't one of Woody's best, but I have to say, very few movies cheer me up in the way that a 70s/80s Woody Allen comedy can.
Sorry I didn't get that Cleo From 5 to 7 paragraph to you, Brandon; I did watch the film after you asked me to, but things got busy and I completely forgot about sending a paragraph. I guess technically I could still send you one...since you haven't posted your 1962 list yet. But you've probably already written something up on it. Anyway, my favorite moment from the film is when Cleo meets the soldier towards the end. I love the bond they share through uncertainty and potential doom.
My Favorite Wife isn't necessarily a masterpiece, but it was incredibly enjoyable from beginning to end. It's one of the funniest classic comedies that I've ever seen and I can't wait to watch it again.
The Battleship Potemkin discussion will commence soon. I do agree that it'll be a little more difficult to discuss than the other film's we've watched together. I will say that as far as propaganda films are concerned, give me Commie propaganda.
Also, John, you had asked if there were any references to Eisenstein's film on The Simpsons...unless I'm forgetting something, there aren't any in seasons 1-10. Beyond that, I couldn't tell you because I haven't seen a lot of those episodes. BUT...on The Critic (created by Simpsons writers Al Jean and Mike Reiss), there is a nod to the famous "Odessa stairs" sequence (it's at the 22 second mark in the video below, which is of critic Jay Sherman's student film). How's that for nerdy?
TV
30 Rock season 6
The Colbert Report
The Daily Show
Game of Thrones season 2
Girls 1 episode
Mad Men season 5
Parks and Recreation season 4
Real Time with Bill Maher
The Ricky Gervais Show season 3
Seinfeld seasons 1, 2, 3
Friday, April 20, 2012
A Real Man Makes His Own Luck
- Billy Zane, Titanic
First of all, I really enjoyed reading your Titanic stories, Adrienne and Brandon. Unlike the both of you, I did not see Titanic when it hit theaters back in '97; I was 10/11 years old at the time, so I only went to the movies when my parents took me. I guess they were unfazed by the craze (those hipsters), or they went without taking me, Jeff, and our older brother, Brent along. Perhaps the smart thing to do, given all of Titanic's hardcore nudity.
I think my first viewing of the film came at the hands of that double VHS box set, when DVDs were still young. I wanna say that I've never watched all 194 minutes in one sitting, instead opting to watch it in bits and pieces. And again, because I wasn't quite a teenager yet, the part of the film I was most interested in was Kate Winslet's nude modeling scene. I don't feel embarrassed in admitting that, because I know it's true of most of the males my age. This was also a time when Leonard DiCaprio was cool to hate. It's funny to think back on that now, considering he's the best actor of his generation.
America's fascination with the actual Titanic is interesting, to say the least. I remember first hearing the story in third grade, and for a short time, I was even fascinated by this story of an "unsinkable ship" that sank. So I'm sure the hubris of man has a lot to do with the story's appeal. Not to mention all of the mistakes and coincidences that needed to happen for that ship to rest at the bottom of the ocean.
Like Brandon I wasn't a fan of the film when I was younger because it wasn't cool to like it; it was The Notebook before there was The Notebook. Now that's it back in the theaters, in 3D of all things, I haven't felt the need to revisit it. I'm sure it's a solid film, but if I do re-watch it to find out what I really think, it'll probably be years down the road; I've got other movies that I want to watch and re-watch first. Also, while I do think it's cool to bring back movies to the theater, bringing Titanic back (in 3D) absolutely screams, "we love your money."
Anyway, I can't imagine being on the Titanic while it was sinking. I can't imagine being in the lifeboat knowing that everyone on the ship would drown or freeze to death. This is my segue back to our horror discussion, by the way. I guess I'm also not a huge fan of disaster films. Watching people die under shitty circumstances really gets to me. Jason says that he likes to put himself in the shoes of these characters; I do too, but I don't seem to approach those situations with any sort of optimism. The only foolproof way to survive the various situations in these films is to be in the leading role.
I don't think you need to walk away from every movie "changed," or with a new mindset. Sometimes we just need/want to be entertained. I realize most people seek entertainment from horror films, first and foremost...but I never seem to get entertainment from them. Again, I feel Jason's roller coaster comparison is extremely accurate. I can count the number of roller coasters I've been on in my lifetime with one hand; I've never enjoyed them, and I've never enjoyed horror films. If I want a rush, I'll play hide and seek in the dark. No downhill bike rides for me.
In other topics of recent conversation, I do think the usage of the word "hipster" has become too liberal nowadays. Great points from everyone. Similarly to what Brandon wrote about, seems like I hear someone being called a hipster almost every other day. While the word has been around as long as jazz, it has probably never been this widely used. A lot of that has to do with the age we live in, where we love to label things and people. Of course, young people will always conform to trends. Also, social media shines a light on everything.
Having said all that, I would not say John uses the word too liberally. Okay, no one is saying that, but the point is that I agree with the idea that many people (who aren't named John Owen) use the word as a pejorative to denigrate that which they find unusual or different or bearded. On a similar note (if you're still following me), I think people will often call something "pretentious" as a way to lazily criticize it.
Haha, Brandon, if I were to twist my nipples while watching Garden State, wouldn't that make me emo? Time to break out my old Dashboard Confessional CDs. Also, I always use "haha" when I think something is actually funny. I never use LOL (shit!), and if I'm ever bitter about something, odds are, I won't grant you a "haha."
John, I love your points about "nerd" culture being on the rise. As usual, style seems to be one of the driving factors. Nowadays NBA players wear Woody Allen/Jeff Howard glasses and dress in bow-ties and dress shirts. It's become fashionable to look nerdy, so of course there's going to be plenty of posers out there. Jeff brought to my attention a while back that many non-poser nerds are happy with the accurate nerd portrayal of Ben Wyatt (played by Adam Scott) on NBC's Parks and Recreation. I know for me, he's the kind of character that I can appreciate. Fuck The Big Bang Theory.
Lastly, it's time for some Girls talk. I told Ben that I wouldn't be watching HBO's Girls because I hated Tiny Furniture so much. I meant to hold on to that hate, but yesterday I gave in and watched the pilot. My reason: I began to read all of the criticisms that were being leveled at it. One of the main criticisms is the lack of diversity on the show. Fair enough; Girls does feature an all white cast. In fact, the only black character on the show is a homeless person (yeesh). Honestly though, I can understand where both sides are coming from here. The show is called Girls (not White Girls) and it takes place in racially diverse New York City. (I was thinking earlier today that a show like Girls with an all-black cast would be probably be a much better show.) Anyway, having said all that, I absolutely believe Lena Dunham when she says that it is an innocent mistake.
I don't dislike Lena Dunham; I wish the best for her...especially now, given the number of people who want to see her fail. I mean, I can understand where the film snobs are coming from with the Tiny Furniture Criterion Collection controversy. But that's mainly due to the fact that I didn't find Dunham's film to be all that interesting.
Another criticism of Girls is that the self-entitled characters aren't very interesting to watch. I actually don't agree with this point as much as I thought I would. This was my main criticism of Tiny Furniture. There was nothing redeemable about the characters; Dunham's character made a string of dumb decisions and I came away from the film with nothing. The knowledge that girls want to hook up with douchebags is something I learned back in middle school. Anyway, surprisingly, I feel that the show Girls does actually offer something and the relationships between the characters are more interesting and are more fully developed. This is positive because it tells me that Dunham is growing as a writer, director. Again, I'm rooting for her.
BUT...I still maintain that it's tough to get behind everything she writes. She's a pretty good comedy writer; I like her tone. But again, there's still too much self-entitlement here. New York City is one of the best cities in the world and it's difficult to garner any sort of sympathy for someone who gets to live in Manhattan for free. Another point is that Dunham's character, Hannah, is writing a memoir. If a 24-year-old gave me his/her memoir, I would probably throw it in the trash. And sure, this could be a commentary on the fact that everyone among the Facebook generation seems to think he or she leads an interesting life. But even if that's the case, Dunham will only end up preaching to the choir. That type of moron only watches Jersey Shore, and won't ever tune into Girls on a weekly basis.
The third criticism of the show is nepotism...it's also the stupidest criticism. I guess if you're a lazy critic, you'll focus on that. Although, I will say that I think much of the hate for Lena Dunham probably comes from the fact that she's Laurie Simmons daughter. I imagine certain people believe Dunham's success has always been handed to her. And yes, there's definitely some sexism behind all the hate, and it's unfortunate. But since I won't be able to solve the problem of sexism in this post, I'm gonna move on. I didn't hate the show. I'm not sure if I'll keep watching, but I am glad to see that Dunham has improved as a writer/director.
How's that, Ben?
First of all, I really enjoyed reading your Titanic stories, Adrienne and Brandon. Unlike the both of you, I did not see Titanic when it hit theaters back in '97; I was 10/11 years old at the time, so I only went to the movies when my parents took me. I guess they were unfazed by the craze (those hipsters), or they went without taking me, Jeff, and our older brother, Brent along. Perhaps the smart thing to do, given all of Titanic's hardcore nudity.
I think my first viewing of the film came at the hands of that double VHS box set, when DVDs were still young. I wanna say that I've never watched all 194 minutes in one sitting, instead opting to watch it in bits and pieces. And again, because I wasn't quite a teenager yet, the part of the film I was most interested in was Kate Winslet's nude modeling scene. I don't feel embarrassed in admitting that, because I know it's true of most of the males my age. This was also a time when Leonard DiCaprio was cool to hate. It's funny to think back on that now, considering he's the best actor of his generation.
America's fascination with the actual Titanic is interesting, to say the least. I remember first hearing the story in third grade, and for a short time, I was even fascinated by this story of an "unsinkable ship" that sank. So I'm sure the hubris of man has a lot to do with the story's appeal. Not to mention all of the mistakes and coincidences that needed to happen for that ship to rest at the bottom of the ocean.
Like Brandon I wasn't a fan of the film when I was younger because it wasn't cool to like it; it was The Notebook before there was The Notebook. Now that's it back in the theaters, in 3D of all things, I haven't felt the need to revisit it. I'm sure it's a solid film, but if I do re-watch it to find out what I really think, it'll probably be years down the road; I've got other movies that I want to watch and re-watch first. Also, while I do think it's cool to bring back movies to the theater, bringing Titanic back (in 3D) absolutely screams, "we love your money."
Anyway, I can't imagine being on the Titanic while it was sinking. I can't imagine being in the lifeboat knowing that everyone on the ship would drown or freeze to death. This is my segue back to our horror discussion, by the way. I guess I'm also not a huge fan of disaster films. Watching people die under shitty circumstances really gets to me. Jason says that he likes to put himself in the shoes of these characters; I do too, but I don't seem to approach those situations with any sort of optimism. The only foolproof way to survive the various situations in these films is to be in the leading role.
I don't think you need to walk away from every movie "changed," or with a new mindset. Sometimes we just need/want to be entertained. I realize most people seek entertainment from horror films, first and foremost...but I never seem to get entertainment from them. Again, I feel Jason's roller coaster comparison is extremely accurate. I can count the number of roller coasters I've been on in my lifetime with one hand; I've never enjoyed them, and I've never enjoyed horror films. If I want a rush, I'll play hide and seek in the dark. No downhill bike rides for me.
In other topics of recent conversation, I do think the usage of the word "hipster" has become too liberal nowadays. Great points from everyone. Similarly to what Brandon wrote about, seems like I hear someone being called a hipster almost every other day. While the word has been around as long as jazz, it has probably never been this widely used. A lot of that has to do with the age we live in, where we love to label things and people. Of course, young people will always conform to trends. Also, social media shines a light on everything.
Having said all that, I would not say John uses the word too liberally. Okay, no one is saying that, but the point is that I agree with the idea that many people (who aren't named John Owen) use the word as a pejorative to denigrate that which they find unusual or different or bearded. On a similar note (if you're still following me), I think people will often call something "pretentious" as a way to lazily criticize it.
Haha, Brandon, if I were to twist my nipples while watching Garden State, wouldn't that make me emo? Time to break out my old Dashboard Confessional CDs. Also, I always use "haha" when I think something is actually funny. I never use LOL (shit!), and if I'm ever bitter about something, odds are, I won't grant you a "haha."
John, I love your points about "nerd" culture being on the rise. As usual, style seems to be one of the driving factors. Nowadays NBA players wear Woody Allen/Jeff Howard glasses and dress in bow-ties and dress shirts. It's become fashionable to look nerdy, so of course there's going to be plenty of posers out there. Jeff brought to my attention a while back that many non-poser nerds are happy with the accurate nerd portrayal of Ben Wyatt (played by Adam Scott) on NBC's Parks and Recreation. I know for me, he's the kind of character that I can appreciate. Fuck The Big Bang Theory.
Lastly, it's time for some Girls talk. I told Ben that I wouldn't be watching HBO's Girls because I hated Tiny Furniture so much. I meant to hold on to that hate, but yesterday I gave in and watched the pilot. My reason: I began to read all of the criticisms that were being leveled at it. One of the main criticisms is the lack of diversity on the show. Fair enough; Girls does feature an all white cast. In fact, the only black character on the show is a homeless person (yeesh). Honestly though, I can understand where both sides are coming from here. The show is called Girls (not White Girls) and it takes place in racially diverse New York City. (I was thinking earlier today that a show like Girls with an all-black cast would be probably be a much better show.) Anyway, having said all that, I absolutely believe Lena Dunham when she says that it is an innocent mistake.
I don't dislike Lena Dunham; I wish the best for her...especially now, given the number of people who want to see her fail. I mean, I can understand where the film snobs are coming from with the Tiny Furniture Criterion Collection controversy. But that's mainly due to the fact that I didn't find Dunham's film to be all that interesting.
Another criticism of Girls is that the self-entitled characters aren't very interesting to watch. I actually don't agree with this point as much as I thought I would. This was my main criticism of Tiny Furniture. There was nothing redeemable about the characters; Dunham's character made a string of dumb decisions and I came away from the film with nothing. The knowledge that girls want to hook up with douchebags is something I learned back in middle school. Anyway, surprisingly, I feel that the show Girls does actually offer something and the relationships between the characters are more interesting and are more fully developed. This is positive because it tells me that Dunham is growing as a writer, director. Again, I'm rooting for her.
BUT...I still maintain that it's tough to get behind everything she writes. She's a pretty good comedy writer; I like her tone. But again, there's still too much self-entitlement here. New York City is one of the best cities in the world and it's difficult to garner any sort of sympathy for someone who gets to live in Manhattan for free. Another point is that Dunham's character, Hannah, is writing a memoir. If a 24-year-old gave me his/her memoir, I would probably throw it in the trash. And sure, this could be a commentary on the fact that everyone among the Facebook generation seems to think he or she leads an interesting life. But even if that's the case, Dunham will only end up preaching to the choir. That type of moron only watches Jersey Shore, and won't ever tune into Girls on a weekly basis.
The third criticism of the show is nepotism...it's also the stupidest criticism. I guess if you're a lazy critic, you'll focus on that. Although, I will say that I think much of the hate for Lena Dunham probably comes from the fact that she's Laurie Simmons daughter. I imagine certain people believe Dunham's success has always been handed to her. And yes, there's definitely some sexism behind all the hate, and it's unfortunate. But since I won't be able to solve the problem of sexism in this post, I'm gonna move on. I didn't hate the show. I'm not sure if I'll keep watching, but I am glad to see that Dunham has improved as a writer/director.
How's that, Ben?
Tuesday, April 17, 2012
Cabin in the Woods
SPOILERS THROUGHOUT
The best thing that Joss Whedon and Drew Goddard's film The Cabin in the Woods has going for it is its originality. And sure, as Jeff and John touched on, there's plenty of convention within the film. However, I do respect and give points to Whedon and Goddard for what they've done here. Their commentary on the genre wasn't so clever that it changed something in me, but it definitely held my attention and stimulated my intrigue. But more so than providing a commentary, I'm sure Whedon and Goddard's primary goal was to entertain. And unlike John, I do see a large audience for this film...from the "smug, hipster" Buffy fans to the morons who are so easily amused by the Ted trailer; they can all take enjoyment away from The Cabin in the Woods.
So yes, that's as far as I'm taking it...the movie is a fun way to kill an hour and a half (more puns!). You're right, John, there are no lessons learned; though we cringe (some more than others...referring to myself), we do walk away unchanged. But that doesn't mean we (or more accurately, I) can't give the film points for doing some interesting things along the way.
Like Jeff, I can appreciate the self-awareness about the character's conformity to the horror archetypes. These characters are definitely processed into their roles. The word "puppets" is used multiple times, so the film is fully aware that these characters aren't fit for John Carter's script. Yes, Whedon and Goddard have pulled on the strings, but they've also given life to surrogate puppet masters in the form of characters played by Richard Jenkins and Bradley Whitford; the two characters also serve as directors for a horror film that's been made hundreds of times and will continue to be made. In that sense, we have a meta-horror flick, and I like both the idea of that and the actual execution in film.
And with that last bit in mind, I like to think that the Company exists to create our horror movies. One thought I had while trying to figure out the mystery of the film was that this was some sort of near-futuristic story where society has become so obsessed with reality television that eventually we wanted to capture that "reality" in our films as well. That would also help to explain why the Company thrives to stick to the modern horror formula; they're looking to give the people what they want/expect. But I also understand that the script makes it clear that there's a need for specific sacrifices to be made (a whore, a fool, etc.).
The Twilight Zone also came to mind as I attempted to solve the mystery. I think Rod Serling would be a fan of some aspects. The mystery element drives the film and kept me interested. Having said that, the reveal at the end does come as something of a disappointment for me. While I do feel that it's a road that very few writers/filmmakers would have gone down, I admit that I don't care much for Elder God subplots. I would've preferred something a little more Rod Serling-esque. But that's me - a Twilight Zone fan who's never seen an episode of Buffy. But the larger point is that the mystery worked for me.
I like to think that Whedon and Goddard wrote back-stories for each of their monsters (the ones that could've shown up at the cabin, that is). I had the same thought as Jeff, too, that the DVD would be amazing if they had alternate scenes with those various monsters.
One thing that Jeff enjoyed that I did not was the "purge" sequence toward the end, where the monsters were unleashed on the Company. Granted, I, too, chuckled at the Merman sequence, but I didn't care for the rest of it. Call me old fashioned, but I don't like torture. Sure, most of us don't like torture, but I have an strongly adverse reaction to seeing it simulated in a film. I would never put this film on par with Saw or Human Centipede or any of the "torture porn" bullshit movies, but I hate that kind of chaotic bloodshed. So really, I wasn't able to enjoy that part as much as others, and even if those deaths were deserved, I still didn't like it.
Like John, I prefer swashbuckler adventure romances to horror, and I can't enjoy watching teens get butchered (even if they're a bit on the douchey side). I like my violence in movies when there's a fair playing field and when justice is served. In most modern horror films, premarital sex is usually the only thing the characters are guilty of. How is that worthy of death at the hands of a psychopath wielding a blade or a family of redneck zombies with farm tools? The moral and message doesn't resonate with me either, because I'm not exactly sure what the message is in all of that. With Cabin in the Woods, the commentary provides more of a message for me, but right, it doesn't mean as much to me as something like Seven Samurai or Young Mr. Lincoln (the two films I watched before seeing Cabin on Friday).
Lastly, I want to address John's line about the hero of Cabin in the Woods. He identifies the stoner, Marty, who throughout the film, questions appearances and digs deeper to find truth. I find it funny that the hero of the story is also a guy who selfishly wants the world to be destroyed along with him. I'm not challenging what you wrote, John, I just think it's interesting that our "hero" doesn't display a shred of heroism at the end of the film.
Tuesday, April 10, 2012
Rom Coms
1. Annie Hall
2. The Graduate
3. Ball of Fire
4. Roman Holiday
5. His Girl Friday
6. Knocked Up
7. The Apartment
8. It Happened One Night
9. Chasing Amy
10. The Palm Beach Story
HM (alphabetical): 10 Things I Hate About You, (500) Days of Summer, Adventureland, Bringing Up Baby, The Goodbye Girl, Harold and Maude, Moonstruck, The Philadelphia Story, Punch-Drunk Love, There's Something About Mary
Movies I love, but don't quite fit our critera: Amelie, Arsenic and Old Lace, Being There, Eternal Sunshine of the Spotless Mind, Groundhog Day, High Fidelity, Lars and the Real Girl, L'Atalante, Love and Death, Monsieur Beaucaire, Rushmore, Singin' In the Rain, Some Like It Hot, Unfaithfully Yours, WALL-E
Commentary: I used IMDb to help me sort through which films were strictly romantic comedies. If the website had a particular film listed as nothing but a "comedy," "romance," and "drama," then that film made the cut. More specifically, a film like Some Like It Hot, which seemed like an obvious rom com to me, was only tagged as a comedy, so that's why it's among the group of films below the honorable mentions. Additionally, one of Amelie's tags was fantasy, and High Fidelity didn't have a romance tag.
The reason why I have Annie Hall and The Graduate listed above great classics like Ball of Fire and Roman Holiday is because I've had a longer relationship with those two contemporary films. However, Ball of Fire and Roman Holiday are quickly becoming big favorites of mine.
I've discussed Annie Hall on my blog before and maintain that I don't care how popular it is or how much it's regarded as Woody's best film. Like Jeff, I'm a big fan of what Adrienne wrote about "what makes a good romantic comedy." With that in mind, Annie Hall is the quintessential choice; I'll always love it for its honesty and sincerity. It tackles love from many different angles and it's one of the funniest movies I've ever seen. Similarly, I find The Gradute to be a comical meditation on love and life; it's one of my all-time favorite films.
One of the reasons why I told Brandon we should make romantic comedy top tens is because I was watching Roman Holiday when he asked me. Many contemporary films have taken the plot structure from William Wyler's film, only now it is completely bastardized. I absolutely love Roman Holiday for it's ending. SPOILERS. Gregory Peck is never caught in his lie to Audrey Hepburn, he makes the choice not to write a story on Hepburn's character because he's in love with her. Additionally, Peck and Hepburn don't end up together in the end. It's a brutally realistic ending with a great shot of Peck walking out of the room and staring back, hoping for one last look of Hepburn. Brilliant stuff.
Knocked Up is Judd Apatow's finest work to date, and hopefully he can find that magic again. I grew up with Chasing Amy, and likewise, it's Kevin Smith's best work, though the odds of him writing something like that again are pretty much impossible.
10 Things I Hate About You was something we used to watch a lot when we were kids. I'm a big fan of Heath Ledger's character in the film, and I do like the moment when he sings, "You're Just Too Good To Be True" from the stadium stands.
I want to be able to put Punch-Drunk Love in my top ten, but I'd have to watch it again before doing so. I've only seen it once, though I've seen certain scenes multiple times. When I did watch it for the first time, I was young and didn't understand the genius that is Paul Thomas Anderson. I certainly didn't hate it, but I wasn't too impressed with it. I want to give it another shot soon.
Are the two Hal Ashby films (Harold and Maude and Being There) overrated or underrated? I honestly don't care too much, and I do enjoy both.
Lastly, I could've added multiple Woody Allen movies to my top ten list; there are plenty that I love so much more than the last few films on my list. I chose to go with one of his films instead to allow more variety.
2. The Graduate
3. Ball of Fire
4. Roman Holiday
5. His Girl Friday
6. Knocked Up
7. The Apartment
8. It Happened One Night
9. Chasing Amy
10. The Palm Beach Story
HM (alphabetical): 10 Things I Hate About You, (500) Days of Summer, Adventureland, Bringing Up Baby, The Goodbye Girl, Harold and Maude, Moonstruck, The Philadelphia Story, Punch-Drunk Love, There's Something About Mary
Movies I love, but don't quite fit our critera: Amelie, Arsenic and Old Lace, Being There, Eternal Sunshine of the Spotless Mind, Groundhog Day, High Fidelity, Lars and the Real Girl, L'Atalante, Love and Death, Monsieur Beaucaire, Rushmore, Singin' In the Rain, Some Like It Hot, Unfaithfully Yours, WALL-E
Commentary: I used IMDb to help me sort through which films were strictly romantic comedies. If the website had a particular film listed as nothing but a "comedy," "romance," and "drama," then that film made the cut. More specifically, a film like Some Like It Hot, which seemed like an obvious rom com to me, was only tagged as a comedy, so that's why it's among the group of films below the honorable mentions. Additionally, one of Amelie's tags was fantasy, and High Fidelity didn't have a romance tag.
The reason why I have Annie Hall and The Graduate listed above great classics like Ball of Fire and Roman Holiday is because I've had a longer relationship with those two contemporary films. However, Ball of Fire and Roman Holiday are quickly becoming big favorites of mine.
I've discussed Annie Hall on my blog before and maintain that I don't care how popular it is or how much it's regarded as Woody's best film. Like Jeff, I'm a big fan of what Adrienne wrote about "what makes a good romantic comedy." With that in mind, Annie Hall is the quintessential choice; I'll always love it for its honesty and sincerity. It tackles love from many different angles and it's one of the funniest movies I've ever seen. Similarly, I find The Gradute to be a comical meditation on love and life; it's one of my all-time favorite films.
One of the reasons why I told Brandon we should make romantic comedy top tens is because I was watching Roman Holiday when he asked me. Many contemporary films have taken the plot structure from William Wyler's film, only now it is completely bastardized. I absolutely love Roman Holiday for it's ending. SPOILERS. Gregory Peck is never caught in his lie to Audrey Hepburn, he makes the choice not to write a story on Hepburn's character because he's in love with her. Additionally, Peck and Hepburn don't end up together in the end. It's a brutally realistic ending with a great shot of Peck walking out of the room and staring back, hoping for one last look of Hepburn. Brilliant stuff.
Knocked Up is Judd Apatow's finest work to date, and hopefully he can find that magic again. I grew up with Chasing Amy, and likewise, it's Kevin Smith's best work, though the odds of him writing something like that again are pretty much impossible.
10 Things I Hate About You was something we used to watch a lot when we were kids. I'm a big fan of Heath Ledger's character in the film, and I do like the moment when he sings, "You're Just Too Good To Be True" from the stadium stands.
I want to be able to put Punch-Drunk Love in my top ten, but I'd have to watch it again before doing so. I've only seen it once, though I've seen certain scenes multiple times. When I did watch it for the first time, I was young and didn't understand the genius that is Paul Thomas Anderson. I certainly didn't hate it, but I wasn't too impressed with it. I want to give it another shot soon.
Are the two Hal Ashby films (Harold and Maude and Being There) overrated or underrated? I honestly don't care too much, and I do enjoy both.
Lastly, I could've added multiple Woody Allen movies to my top ten list; there are plenty that I love so much more than the last few films on my list. I chose to go with one of his films instead to allow more variety.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)