Today I saw a trailer for the 2008 remake of The Women, based on the 1939 original.
(trailers for the original and the remake )
I am not happy.
I had a sneaking suspicion that the remake would be awful, but the trailer confirmed my worst fears. It is not just going to be awful, it is going to be pure blasphemy.
(I should note here that I am not opposed to the concept of remakes in general. Some of cinema's beloved classics are actually remakes [like The Maltese Falcon] and sometimes an original and its remake are both good/famous and can happily coexist [the two versions of Scarface - 1932 and 1983]).
The basic plot is that a bunch of women backstab each other and steal each other's men, ascending and descending the social ladder in the process. Isn't that kind of a ludicrous premise to translate to the modern day - that your social status and your worth as a woman depend on who you are married to? Aren't we past this?
Let's take a look at what we're getting in the original as opposed to the remake.
- Director: The director of the original was Oscar-winning George Cukor, lovingly referred to as one of the "queens of Hollywood" due to his homosexuality. Working with the most respected stars of the day (largely female), he directed such classics as Dinner at Eight (1933), The Philadelphia Story (1940), Gaslight (1944) and Adam's Rib (1949), winning an Oscar for My Fair Lady in 1964. He directed five actors in Oscar-winning performances, and is largely considered one of the best directors of all time.
And the remake?
Directed by Diane English, who has never directed anything before and is known for writing for the TV show "Murphy Brown." Oh, but let's not forget that she served as a production accountant on a few Nickelodeon shows in the 90s.
- Writer: The source material of both films is the same: a play by Clare Booth Luce. The screenplay for the original, however, was written by Anita Loos, who was one of early cinema's foremost screenwriters. She had a long working relationship with D.W. Griffith, and also wrote the novel that became Gentlemen Prefer Blondes (1953).
And the remake?
Written by Diane English. See above.
- Role of Mary Haines: In the original, the main role was given to Norma Shearer, then known as "the first lady of MGM." She dominated this studio in the 30s, being nominated for six Oscars and winning one for The Divorcee (1930). She also starred as Juliet Capulet and Marie Antoinette, and was offered the role of Scarlett O'Hara.
And the remake?
Mary Haines is played by Meg Ryan. Yeah, Meg, you were cute in When Harry Met Sally (1989), and you might even be talented, but you're mired too deep in the romantic comedy ghetto for anyone to know.
- Role of Sylvia Fowler: In the original, Mrs. Fowler was deliciously portrayed by the inimitable Rosalind Russell, who was nominated for four Oscars and memorialized such characters as Hildy in His Girl Friday (1940), Mama Rose in Gypsy (1962), and Auntie Mame in the movie of the same name.
And the remake?
Sylvia Fowler is being played by Annette Bening. I actually don't have too much of a problem with this, although she's gonna have to play really bitchy, and not just that uptight and surprised thing she usually does.
- Role of Crystal Allen: In the original, this juicy part went to the ultimate screen bitch: Joan Crawford. She won an Oscar for her role as the titular character in 1945's Mildred Pierce, and was another of MGM's top stars, appearing in other classics such as Grand Hotel (1932) and Whatever Happened to Baby Jane? (1962). Mostly, she was known for her larger-than-life personality.
And the remake?
This role goes to Eva Mendes. Probably most known for her role in Hitch (2005), her primary claim to fame is being hot.
- Role of Miriam Aarons: In the original, this role was played with sass and wit by Paulette Goddard. Starting out in the Ziegfeld Follies as a young girl, she later married Charlie Chaplin and starred in two of his most famous films: Modern Times (1936) and The Great Dictator (1940). She was nominated for an Oscar for 1943's So Proudly We Hail!
And the remake?
This role is being played by Jada Pinkett-Smith. Yeah, she was pretty good in Collateral (2004), but her role in this movie, judging from the trailer, looks restricted to speaking in hilarious ebonics for the amusement of her white friends.
I'm confused about the other characters, because the names are changed, so I can't make a side-by-side comparison.
Anyway, watch the trailers. The remake just looks decidedly unfunny and bland. The original - the trailer of which is crippled somewhat by its old-timey style of including major plot points instead of funny parts - is a witty, bitchy classic that everyone should watch before this new piece of crap storms theaters.
June 2, 2008
A public service announcement regarding sex with celebrities
Picture this scenario: You are happily involved with a girlfriend/boyfriend/husband/wife/partner/significant other. You are at home alone, and they are out somewhere. Suddenly, without any rational explanation, the celebrity you have always fantasized about appears naked in your doorway and states their intent to make sweet, sweet love to you. What do you do? Forget momentarily that this would never, ever happen. Readers and friends - do you have a protocol in place for this situation?
I do.
My boyfriend and I, early in our relationship, each established our own List. The List refers to an assembling of celebrities chosen by your partner that you permit him/her to sleep with should the situation arise. The key is keeping the list short. Is it okay if your significant other hooks up with some reality TV slut at a party? No. But if they've been fantasizing about Jessica Biel for years, it's really only fair to let them have her if possible. Plus, that means you could shag your celeb of choice! (Retroactive additions to the list cannot be permitted.)
I think 3-5 celebrities is a fair number for your List. Mine includes Paul Rudd, Patrick Wilson, Simon Pegg, James McAvoy and Tony Leung. My boyfriend's consists of Scarlett Johansson, Tina Fey, Kristen Bell, and sometimes Kirsten Dunst ("drugs have not been good to her," he says). I conceded that Scarlett Johansson is so ridiculously attractive that if I found the two of them in a compromising position I would probably hop right in. I'm completely straight, but this line of reasoning provides a bonus for couples of a gay or partially gay persuasion: List overlap.
So, fair readers, I strongly recommend that you have this conversation with your loved one today - because somewhere down the line, it could save your relationship. One a more practical level, it proves whether or not they have the sense of humor necessary to engage in completely serious conversations about absurd hypothetical situations and can do so without freakish jealousy and possessiveness - because if not, you should probably break up with them anyway.
I do.
My boyfriend and I, early in our relationship, each established our own List. The List refers to an assembling of celebrities chosen by your partner that you permit him/her to sleep with should the situation arise. The key is keeping the list short. Is it okay if your significant other hooks up with some reality TV slut at a party? No. But if they've been fantasizing about Jessica Biel for years, it's really only fair to let them have her if possible. Plus, that means you could shag your celeb of choice! (Retroactive additions to the list cannot be permitted.)
Please do not send me hate mail accusing me of being a homewrecker. I am in no way endorsing the active pursuit of the stars in question, because obviously no one should be doing that in a relationship. This is only if said celebrities fling themselves at you.
I think 3-5 celebrities is a fair number for your List. Mine includes Paul Rudd, Patrick Wilson, Simon Pegg, James McAvoy and Tony Leung. My boyfriend's consists of Scarlett Johansson, Tina Fey, Kristen Bell, and sometimes Kirsten Dunst ("drugs have not been good to her," he says). I conceded that Scarlett Johansson is so ridiculously attractive that if I found the two of them in a compromising position I would probably hop right in. I'm completely straight, but this line of reasoning provides a bonus for couples of a gay or partially gay persuasion: List overlap.
So, fair readers, I strongly recommend that you have this conversation with your loved one today - because somewhere down the line, it could save your relationship. One a more practical level, it proves whether or not they have the sense of humor necessary to engage in completely serious conversations about absurd hypothetical situations and can do so without freakish jealousy and possessiveness - because if not, you should probably break up with them anyway.
A perfect day composed of movie scenes
What if you could construct your perfect day out of movie scenes? A whole day of movie moments that you’ve always wanted to experience for yourself. This task is harder than you think, because at the center of any good story is conflict - and while watching shootouts may be fun, participating in them probably wouldn’t be. You can completely disregard geography for the purpose of this exercise, however - I’ll grant you back-to-back escapades in New York and China, for instance. But aim for the general time frame - if it took place at midnight in the movie, you can’t do it at ten in the morning. There’s also flexibility regarding if you would take the place of a specific character, or just tag along a yourself (you can do both/either). Here’s what my day would look like:
- I would need to get an early start, and what better way to start my day than assuming the role of Marge Gunderson in Fargo (1996) in the scene where her adorable stay-at-home husband Norm gets up with her to make her breakfast?
- Time to see what the neighbors are up to - I’d indulge in some old-fashioned voyeurism like Jimmy Stewart in Rear Window (1954).
- Oh, what a lovely day it is! I'll frolic through the Alps a la Julie Andrews in The Sound of Music (1964).
- Time for lunch! Since I’ve decided that calories don’t count today, I’d join the five lucky kids and their chaperones to stuff my face in the all-edible factory center in Willy Wonka and the Chocolate Factory (1971)
- Uh oh! It started raining! No worries - I’ll find myself trapped in a gazebo with Fred Astaire in Top Hat (1935), where we’ll sing the song “It’s a Lovely Day” and tap dance.
- Since I’m already a little wet, I’ll join the gang of Center Stage (2000) in their sponge and soap fight that occurs when they’re sentenced to clean the mirrors in the dance studio.
- I’d spend some time at the Mayflower Dog Show from Best in Show (2000), because in addition to having tons of cute doggies, it features the absurd commentary of Fred Willard.
- Speaking of animals, I’d have an underwater adventure with the gang of The Life Aquatic (2004) - I want to see that glowing animatronic shark in person!
- I’d want to burn off some steam by mid-afternoon, so I’d join Peter, Michael Bolton, and Samir as they smash the copy machine out in a field in Office Space (1999). (Oddly enough, this is the first thing that came to mind when I came up with the idea for this post.)
- If I’m still a little stressed, I’ll hop aboard the old truck with Garden State’s (2004) Zach Braff and Peter Sarsgaard and scream into the rain.
- Move over, Kate Winslet - it's my turn for gratuitous sex with Patrick Wilson in Little Children (2006).
- Although I could get stuck on that last one for days, I'll have to eat eventually. For dinner, I’d replace Uma Thurman as John Travolta’s date to Jack Rabbit Slim’s in Pulp Fiction (1994), where we’d dance the night away, five-dollar shakes notwithstanding. (I think I’ll pass on the subsequent drug overdose though.) I considered the “Be Our Guest” scene in Beauty and the Beast (1994) for this, but then I realized I would have to be captive in a castle and surrounded by inanimate objects come to life. No thanks.
- After my meal is digested, I’ll go on a nice after-dinner magic carpet ride with Aladdin (1991). Good thing I already know all the words to “A Whole New World” (no joke).
- Late at night I’d wander around the abandoned mansion with James Dean in Rebel Without a Cause (1955)
- My late night/early morning would be spent wandering around Vienna and philosophizing with Ethan Hawke - basically the entirety of Before Sunrise (1995).
What would your perfect movie day look like?
- I would need to get an early start, and what better way to start my day than assuming the role of Marge Gunderson in Fargo (1996) in the scene where her adorable stay-at-home husband Norm gets up with her to make her breakfast?
- Time to see what the neighbors are up to - I’d indulge in some old-fashioned voyeurism like Jimmy Stewart in Rear Window (1954).
- Oh, what a lovely day it is! I'll frolic through the Alps a la Julie Andrews in The Sound of Music (1964).
- Time for lunch! Since I’ve decided that calories don’t count today, I’d join the five lucky kids and their chaperones to stuff my face in the all-edible factory center in Willy Wonka and the Chocolate Factory (1971)
- Uh oh! It started raining! No worries - I’ll find myself trapped in a gazebo with Fred Astaire in Top Hat (1935), where we’ll sing the song “It’s a Lovely Day” and tap dance.
- Since I’m already a little wet, I’ll join the gang of Center Stage (2000) in their sponge and soap fight that occurs when they’re sentenced to clean the mirrors in the dance studio.
- I’d spend some time at the Mayflower Dog Show from Best in Show (2000), because in addition to having tons of cute doggies, it features the absurd commentary of Fred Willard.
- Speaking of animals, I’d have an underwater adventure with the gang of The Life Aquatic (2004) - I want to see that glowing animatronic shark in person!
- I’d want to burn off some steam by mid-afternoon, so I’d join Peter, Michael Bolton, and Samir as they smash the copy machine out in a field in Office Space (1999). (Oddly enough, this is the first thing that came to mind when I came up with the idea for this post.)
- If I’m still a little stressed, I’ll hop aboard the old truck with Garden State’s (2004) Zach Braff and Peter Sarsgaard and scream into the rain.
- Move over, Kate Winslet - it's my turn for gratuitous sex with Patrick Wilson in Little Children (2006).
- Although I could get stuck on that last one for days, I'll have to eat eventually. For dinner, I’d replace Uma Thurman as John Travolta’s date to Jack Rabbit Slim’s in Pulp Fiction (1994), where we’d dance the night away, five-dollar shakes notwithstanding. (I think I’ll pass on the subsequent drug overdose though.) I considered the “Be Our Guest” scene in Beauty and the Beast (1994) for this, but then I realized I would have to be captive in a castle and surrounded by inanimate objects come to life. No thanks.
- After my meal is digested, I’ll go on a nice after-dinner magic carpet ride with Aladdin (1991). Good thing I already know all the words to “A Whole New World” (no joke).
- Late at night I’d wander around the abandoned mansion with James Dean in Rebel Without a Cause (1955)
- My late night/early morning would be spent wandering around Vienna and philosophizing with Ethan Hawke - basically the entirety of Before Sunrise (1995).
What would your perfect movie day look like?
May 14, 2008
A rebuttal to Armond White
Today I received an email from Dan over at FilmBabble, asking for my thoughts on Armond White's recent article in the New York Press (available here ). Specifically, my angry thoughts. The article is long, but you only have to skim it to get a sense of White's point, which is his passionate hatred for all film bloggers. Angry thoughts were not hard to come by after reading it.
First, a little background on White. Googling him reveals many interesting things, most notably a blog devoted solely to "parsing the confounding film criticism of Mr. Armond White" (to use their words). White is found to be a critic who has made a career out of making enemies, focusing more 0n films/directors he hates than ones he likes. He dismisses style, context, and production in films and claims that the only thing that matters is the message - which, by his logic, would make anything aired on C-Span the best movie of the last ten years. He is notorious for championing films that everyone else pans, including Little Man. Yes, Little Man. He criticized Zodiac for its excessive violence, although it featured only three murder scenes in the first 15 minutes of its 160-minute running time. He called A.I. - Artificial Intelligence one of the 10 greatest films ever made. And as a grammar and style nerd, I have to point out that in this article he does not italicize, underline, or use quotation marks for movie titles, which any tenth grader would know is necessary.
White’s first mistake is grouping all bloggers into one category. I personally think I might belong on the ivory tower that White believes himself to occupy. Though I belong to the unwashed mass of bloggers cluttering his precious cyberspace, I am a film major at a respected college. I could tell you what film stock any movie is shot on, and how they did the special effects. I have read Benjamin and Baudrillard. I have written lengthy papers on sexual transgression in the German silent film Pandora’s Box, recent trends in Korean popular cinema, and auteur theory as it pertains to Annie Hall. But none of this matters. All that matters is that I am a person, with a voice. If all I wanted to do was talk about how Mary-Kate and Ashley Olsen movies are the greatest cinematic achievement of all time, I have that right. Because we live in a democracy, the same democracy that affords Armond White a voice. The irony here is that White’s criticism is so far out that if the whole world subscribed to the same elitism that he did, his ideas probably wouldn’t stand a chance!
He also complains about bloggers ruining cultural discourse. Last time I checked, doesn’t “discourse” refer to people discussing things? And isn’t that what bloggers do? I noticed that on the page for his article, there was no option to comment or reply - heaven forbid he engage in discourse with plebeians!
Another tragic irony of this article is that White accuses film bloggers of “chipping away at the professionalism they envy.” Armond, honey. Were you ever a young boy that liked to talk about movies? Perhaps you would go to the theater with some friends and then afterwards discuss what you saw? Or was that banned in the apparent dictatorship you grew up in? No, it wasn’t, because you’re from Michigan, not Maoist China. So, what us bloggers did is take that discussion that I absolutely know you’ve had all your life and transplant it to the interwebs. We have no hidden agenda! We just like to discuss film! I started blogging because my filmic discourse was limited to myself and my friend Scott and, although fun, it often came to a dead end because we hadn’t seen very many of the same movies. So I opened my thoughts up to the blogosphere and started an ongoing discussion with hundreds of people about cinema. And as far as bloggers “envying” professionalism, that’s just poorly-disguised fear on White’s part that us peasants are going to put him out of a job.
Some of White’s observations about the current state of film criticism are simply insane, and seem to indicate that he doesn’t read any blogs or reviews at all, ever. “Movies are considered fun that needn’t be taken seriously. Movies contain ideas better left unexamined.” “Nowadays, reviewers almost never draw continuity between new films and movie history—except to get it wrong.” He claims that modern movies are escapist entertainment that perpetuates societal denial, which is funny because myself and my aforementioned plebeian friend Scott, after a viewing of There Will Be Blood, noted (without any help from critics!) the trend in modern movies to bravely depict the devastating and destructive consequences of hyper-masculinity. He accuses critics of blindly praising blockbusters (which they do, if they’re GOOD), then goes on to cite the Tom Cruise version of War of the Worlds as a movie containing moments of “personal emotion.” And he actually has the audacity, after all his nonsense, to bash elitism!
When I started reading this article, I was angry. By the time I finished it, I just felt pity for this sorry little man, kicking and screaming away at independent-minded movie lovers who manage to share their views without making atrocious puns like his “It’s entertainment - weakly.”
First, a little background on White. Googling him reveals many interesting things, most notably a blog devoted solely to "parsing the confounding film criticism of Mr. Armond White" (to use their words). White is found to be a critic who has made a career out of making enemies, focusing more 0n films/directors he hates than ones he likes. He dismisses style, context, and production in films and claims that the only thing that matters is the message - which, by his logic, would make anything aired on C-Span the best movie of the last ten years. He is notorious for championing films that everyone else pans, including Little Man. Yes, Little Man. He criticized Zodiac for its excessive violence, although it featured only three murder scenes in the first 15 minutes of its 160-minute running time. He called A.I. - Artificial Intelligence one of the 10 greatest films ever made. And as a grammar and style nerd, I have to point out that in this article he does not italicize, underline, or use quotation marks for movie titles, which any tenth grader would know is necessary.
White’s first mistake is grouping all bloggers into one category. I personally think I might belong on the ivory tower that White believes himself to occupy. Though I belong to the unwashed mass of bloggers cluttering his precious cyberspace, I am a film major at a respected college. I could tell you what film stock any movie is shot on, and how they did the special effects. I have read Benjamin and Baudrillard. I have written lengthy papers on sexual transgression in the German silent film Pandora’s Box, recent trends in Korean popular cinema, and auteur theory as it pertains to Annie Hall. But none of this matters. All that matters is that I am a person, with a voice. If all I wanted to do was talk about how Mary-Kate and Ashley Olsen movies are the greatest cinematic achievement of all time, I have that right. Because we live in a democracy, the same democracy that affords Armond White a voice. The irony here is that White’s criticism is so far out that if the whole world subscribed to the same elitism that he did, his ideas probably wouldn’t stand a chance!
He also complains about bloggers ruining cultural discourse. Last time I checked, doesn’t “discourse” refer to people discussing things? And isn’t that what bloggers do? I noticed that on the page for his article, there was no option to comment or reply - heaven forbid he engage in discourse with plebeians!
Another tragic irony of this article is that White accuses film bloggers of “chipping away at the professionalism they envy.” Armond, honey. Were you ever a young boy that liked to talk about movies? Perhaps you would go to the theater with some friends and then afterwards discuss what you saw? Or was that banned in the apparent dictatorship you grew up in? No, it wasn’t, because you’re from Michigan, not Maoist China. So, what us bloggers did is take that discussion that I absolutely know you’ve had all your life and transplant it to the interwebs. We have no hidden agenda! We just like to discuss film! I started blogging because my filmic discourse was limited to myself and my friend Scott and, although fun, it often came to a dead end because we hadn’t seen very many of the same movies. So I opened my thoughts up to the blogosphere and started an ongoing discussion with hundreds of people about cinema. And as far as bloggers “envying” professionalism, that’s just poorly-disguised fear on White’s part that us peasants are going to put him out of a job.
Some of White’s observations about the current state of film criticism are simply insane, and seem to indicate that he doesn’t read any blogs or reviews at all, ever. “Movies are considered fun that needn’t be taken seriously. Movies contain ideas better left unexamined.” “Nowadays, reviewers almost never draw continuity between new films and movie history—except to get it wrong.” He claims that modern movies are escapist entertainment that perpetuates societal denial, which is funny because myself and my aforementioned plebeian friend Scott, after a viewing of There Will Be Blood, noted (without any help from critics!) the trend in modern movies to bravely depict the devastating and destructive consequences of hyper-masculinity. He accuses critics of blindly praising blockbusters (which they do, if they’re GOOD), then goes on to cite the Tom Cruise version of War of the Worlds as a movie containing moments of “personal emotion.” And he actually has the audacity, after all his nonsense, to bash elitism!
When I started reading this article, I was angry. By the time I finished it, I just felt pity for this sorry little man, kicking and screaming away at independent-minded movie lovers who manage to share their views without making atrocious puns like his “It’s entertainment - weakly.”
May 3, 2008
Counting in movie titles
When I was deathly bored at work the other day from foolishly not bringing anything to amuse myself, I came up with a clever time-killer: thinking of movies with numbers in the title, and seeing how high I could count with them. I don’t get internet at work, so I couldn’t cheat by looking online. (Even later, I didn’t check the interwebs because that’s no fun.) I asked some friends for input though, which helped a little. I set some rules: cardinal numbers are okay (i.e. “fifth”), the number can occur anywhere in the title, and in the case of longer numbers, it’s how you pronounce it (i.e. 1984 is “nineteen-eighty-four,” not “one thousand, nine hundred and eighty four”). I set a goal of getting up to 30, which I did, sans three numbers. Thirty to 60 proved more difficult, but I got about half. Some numbers are obviously easier than others, but you only need one for each. Want to try it? Think about it, and scroll down if you give up and want to see what I came up with. Remember, don’t check the interwebs, that’s cheating!!
1. One True Thing
2. Two Weeks’ Notice
3. Three Kings
4. Fantastic Four
5. The Fifth Element
6. The Sixth Sense
7. Se7en
8. Eight-Legged Freaks
9. Plan 9 From Outer Space
10. The Ten Commandments
11. The 11th Hour (Leonardo DiCaprio environmental documentary - it was in theaters, don’t give me crap)
12. 12 Monkeys
13. Thirteen
14. 1408
15. 15 Minutes
16. Sixteen Candles
17. Edge of Seventeen (some gay independent movie we had at the video store where I used to work)
18. COULDN’T THINK OF ONE
19. 1984
20. 20,000 Leagues Under the Sea
21. 21 Grams
22. Catch-22
23. The Number 23
24. 24 Hour Party People
25. 25th Hour
26. COULDN’T THINK OF ONE - I had my friend IMDB it to see if there were any obvious answers, but he said there were none anyone has ever heard of
27. 27 Dresses
28. 28 Days Later
29. COULDN’T THINK OF ONE
30. 13 Going on 30
This game is dangerous, because it spurs an obsession - thinking of movies with a specific category of words in the title. It’s a great game for long car rides or for engaging shy/lame people you’re stuck hanging out with. It’s all I could think about for about a week afterward. Both solo and with friends, I thought up movie titles with color words (A Clockwork Orange, The Green Mile), body part words (Happy Feet, Hair), animal words (Dog Day Afternoon, Crocodile Dundee), food words (Mystic Pizza, Attack of the Killer Tomatoes), types of flowers (The Purple Rose of Cairo, Driving Miss Daisy), family words (Father of the Bride, Uncle Buck) U.S. states (King of California, Sweet Home Alabama), cities (Fargo, An American Werewolf in London), countries (My Voyage to Italy, Big Trouble in Little China), and even building materials (The Asphalt Jungle, Steel Magnolias). See, it’s addicting!
1. One True Thing
2. Two Weeks’ Notice
3. Three Kings
4. Fantastic Four
5. The Fifth Element
6. The Sixth Sense
7. Se7en
8. Eight-Legged Freaks
9. Plan 9 From Outer Space
10. The Ten Commandments
11. The 11th Hour (Leonardo DiCaprio environmental documentary - it was in theaters, don’t give me crap)
12. 12 Monkeys
13. Thirteen
14. 1408
15. 15 Minutes
16. Sixteen Candles
17. Edge of Seventeen (some gay independent movie we had at the video store where I used to work)
18. COULDN’T THINK OF ONE
19. 1984
20. 20,000 Leagues Under the Sea
21. 21 Grams
22. Catch-22
23. The Number 23
24. 24 Hour Party People
25. 25th Hour
26. COULDN’T THINK OF ONE - I had my friend IMDB it to see if there were any obvious answers, but he said there were none anyone has ever heard of
27. 27 Dresses
28. 28 Days Later
29. COULDN’T THINK OF ONE
30. 13 Going on 30
This game is dangerous, because it spurs an obsession - thinking of movies with a specific category of words in the title. It’s a great game for long car rides or for engaging shy/lame people you’re stuck hanging out with. It’s all I could think about for about a week afterward. Both solo and with friends, I thought up movie titles with color words (A Clockwork Orange, The Green Mile), body part words (Happy Feet, Hair), animal words (Dog Day Afternoon, Crocodile Dundee), food words (Mystic Pizza, Attack of the Killer Tomatoes), types of flowers (The Purple Rose of Cairo, Driving Miss Daisy), family words (Father of the Bride, Uncle Buck) U.S. states (King of California, Sweet Home Alabama), cities (Fargo, An American Werewolf in London), countries (My Voyage to Italy, Big Trouble in Little China), and even building materials (The Asphalt Jungle, Steel Magnolias). See, it’s addicting!
April 13, 2008
Six movies about movies that all (aspiring) filmmakers should see
This isn’t one of those things where I berate film lovers for not having seen certain movies, as in “How can you call yourself an aspiring filmmaker and never have seen Citizen Kane? You are a disgrace to humanity.” That is beyond annoying, and there are certainly plenty of people who already do it. Rather, I’ve compiled a list of movies that offer valuable lessons about the craft of filmmaking itself. They are by no means how-to guides, but offer insights that you might not get from Film 101.
1. Overnight (2003)
This is a documentary chronicling the creation of the film Boondock Saints. What was probably intended as a behind-the-scenes featurette, however, evolved into a portrait of a man turned monster. Troy Duffy is blue-collar bartender from Boston whose script is purchased for an unprecedented sum, with the chance for him to direct. He then proceeds to bite every hand that feeds him, and hasn’t found work since. He fucked up the biggest opportunity of his life not via creative shortcomings, but just for being a total douchebag. The problem is, you have to earn the right to be an asshole, by kissing the feet of all the other assholes. One of my film professors (who is also a professional filmmaker) says he watches this every year just to keep him in check.
2. Ed Wood (1994)
At the opposite end of the spectrum, we have the story of Ed Wood, who had all the earnestness and resourcefulness in the world, but none of the opportunity. So he made his own. He proved that if you want to get a movie made, you can, whether it’s financed by a Baptist church or a terrible actress who places herself in the lead. The scene where his film crew steals a mechanical octopus for a pivotal shot but forget to take the motor as well is a perfect summary of what life on set is like. Ed just shrugs and tells the actor to wrestle with it convincingly. Even though Wood was not taken seriously during his lifetime and given the title of “The World’s Worst Director” after his death, his films sparkle with a sheen of do-it-yourself enthusiasm and gusto. I think I’ll probably make a habit out of watching this before shoots…there’s always a way!
3. This Film Is Not Yet Rated (2005)
While some viewers criticized this film for being too exploitative and sensationalist, it’s still a disturbing and well-needed insight into the corrupt world of the MPAA (Motion Picture Association of America). In addition to being raucously entertaining, it’s also an unsettling primer for filmmakers on how audiences will ultimately see their work (if at all). Interviews with directors and actors are particularly revealing, such as a candid discussion with Boys Don’t Cry director Kimberly Pierce. She explains that the MPAA had no problem with a scene of a character getting her brains blown out, but objected to a shot of Chloe Sevigny’s face during an orgasm. The Puritan bias against sex (and the blind eye they turn to violence) is frustrating, but important to know about.
4. 8 ½ (1963) and Adaptation. (2002)
The reason I grouped these together is that despite their obvious differences, they both address a similar theme: the fine line between one’s creative work and personal life. Too often filmmakers fight to keep their own lives out of their work, which is a grave mistake. Some directors, like documentary filmmaker Ross McElwee, have careers that are solely autobiographical. Ideally, an artist can embrace his or her personal struggles and incorporate them into creative output, whether they concern women like in 8 ½ or writer’s block like in Adaptation.
5. Singin’ in the Rain (1952)
Besides being a ridiculously entertaining musical and a primer on cinema’s transition to “talkies,” this film drives home an crucial message to filmmakers: SOUND IS IMPORTANT! While you may roll your eyes at this and find it to be obvious, you’d be surprised at how many obnoxious film school students have not grasped this concept. My aforementioned film professor always reminded us that “sound is half your picture,” and there is no greater indicator of a shitty student film than shitty audio. The addition of sound also means that your script has to be solid, which distresses Gene Kelly’s character immensely when the movie he is working on becomes a sound picture (to which he protests and asks if he can just say the same silly things he always says). So many people I know get hung up on making their shot look pretty, and forget about its content. At the core of this movie is a look at what makes a movie work or not work, and how that changes over time.
Any (aspiring) filmmakers out there who have titles to contribute?
1. Overnight (2003)
This is a documentary chronicling the creation of the film Boondock Saints. What was probably intended as a behind-the-scenes featurette, however, evolved into a portrait of a man turned monster. Troy Duffy is blue-collar bartender from Boston whose script is purchased for an unprecedented sum, with the chance for him to direct. He then proceeds to bite every hand that feeds him, and hasn’t found work since. He fucked up the biggest opportunity of his life not via creative shortcomings, but just for being a total douchebag. The problem is, you have to earn the right to be an asshole, by kissing the feet of all the other assholes. One of my film professors (who is also a professional filmmaker) says he watches this every year just to keep him in check.
2. Ed Wood (1994)
At the opposite end of the spectrum, we have the story of Ed Wood, who had all the earnestness and resourcefulness in the world, but none of the opportunity. So he made his own. He proved that if you want to get a movie made, you can, whether it’s financed by a Baptist church or a terrible actress who places herself in the lead. The scene where his film crew steals a mechanical octopus for a pivotal shot but forget to take the motor as well is a perfect summary of what life on set is like. Ed just shrugs and tells the actor to wrestle with it convincingly. Even though Wood was not taken seriously during his lifetime and given the title of “The World’s Worst Director” after his death, his films sparkle with a sheen of do-it-yourself enthusiasm and gusto. I think I’ll probably make a habit out of watching this before shoots…there’s always a way!
3. This Film Is Not Yet Rated (2005)
While some viewers criticized this film for being too exploitative and sensationalist, it’s still a disturbing and well-needed insight into the corrupt world of the MPAA (Motion Picture Association of America). In addition to being raucously entertaining, it’s also an unsettling primer for filmmakers on how audiences will ultimately see their work (if at all). Interviews with directors and actors are particularly revealing, such as a candid discussion with Boys Don’t Cry director Kimberly Pierce. She explains that the MPAA had no problem with a scene of a character getting her brains blown out, but objected to a shot of Chloe Sevigny’s face during an orgasm. The Puritan bias against sex (and the blind eye they turn to violence) is frustrating, but important to know about.
4. 8 ½ (1963) and Adaptation. (2002)
The reason I grouped these together is that despite their obvious differences, they both address a similar theme: the fine line between one’s creative work and personal life. Too often filmmakers fight to keep their own lives out of their work, which is a grave mistake. Some directors, like documentary filmmaker Ross McElwee, have careers that are solely autobiographical. Ideally, an artist can embrace his or her personal struggles and incorporate them into creative output, whether they concern women like in 8 ½ or writer’s block like in Adaptation.
5. Singin’ in the Rain (1952)
Besides being a ridiculously entertaining musical and a primer on cinema’s transition to “talkies,” this film drives home an crucial message to filmmakers: SOUND IS IMPORTANT! While you may roll your eyes at this and find it to be obvious, you’d be surprised at how many obnoxious film school students have not grasped this concept. My aforementioned film professor always reminded us that “sound is half your picture,” and there is no greater indicator of a shitty student film than shitty audio. The addition of sound also means that your script has to be solid, which distresses Gene Kelly’s character immensely when the movie he is working on becomes a sound picture (to which he protests and asks if he can just say the same silly things he always says). So many people I know get hung up on making their shot look pretty, and forget about its content. At the core of this movie is a look at what makes a movie work or not work, and how that changes over time.
Any (aspiring) filmmakers out there who have titles to contribute?
March 14, 2008
The top 5 worst moviegoing patrons I have ever encountered
I love going out to see movies in theaters - who doesn’t? The only problem (other than skyrocketing ticket prices, gross overpriced food, obscurity of indie features, sticky floors, etc.) is that I cannot have the theater to myself. I am forced to share it with dozens of strangers who often seem hell-bent on making my theater-going experience unpleasant. And yet, some people go above and beyond the call of duty and make it downright miserable. Here is a tribute to the top five people who fall into this prestigious category.
1. Movie: Knocked Up
Offender: The snitch
So I’m at a theater in suburban New York with my boyfriend, and we’re meeting up with his friend there. Once we’re all in line waiting to buy our tickets, I discreetly show the friend the contraband bag of M&Ms I have purchased for the occasion. Suddenly, this guy, who is not even in line but awkwardly off the side, blurts out (in reference to the candy) “I know what you’re gonna do with those!” Um, yeah, eat them. OR BUILD A ROCKET SHIP! No, eat them. I didn’t really know what to say, except maybe that I was proud he had figured out what M&Ms were for? I stared blankly, my boyfriend and his friend equally confused, and then the guy added “What’s to keep me from telling on you?” Note: this guy did NOT work here. I think I said, “Um, karma?” We bought our tickets and went into the theater, but I ran out to use the bathroom right before the movie started. This guy was still in the lobby, with no apparent intention of seeing a movie at any point, and yelled, “There she is! There’s the traitor!” What this man was hoping to achieve through these tactics, I will never know.
2. Movie: V for Vendetta
Offender: Guy who probably thinks he’s going to marry Natalie Portman
My friend Scott and I went to a late-night showing of this opening weekend. It was Saturday night, and the theater was sparsely populated. Before the movie, Scott started eating some chips. A portly fellow sitting directly in front of us, who had clearly crawled out of his mom’s basement and through mountains of ejaculate-soaked pictures of bald Natalie Portman to be here for this occasion, suddenly whipped around and said to Scott, “Do you plan on crunching your food like that for the whole movie?!” Scott, stunned and shocked, whimpered “No.” We agreed later that he should have replied with a triumphant YES!
3. Movie: Borat
Offender: Hyena with epilepsy
Borat is a funny movie. I am aware of this. I knew this going into it, and expected a theater full of merry patrons’ laughter. What I did not expect was the guy I wound up sitting next to. He had a sort of frat-boy look, and enjoyed the movie immensely. The way he expressed this, however, was to erupt into a screeching, bloodcurdling laugh at EVERY JOKE, clap hysterically, rock back and forth like a crazy person, and repeat the hilarious line verbatim. It went something like this:
Borat on screen: High five!
Guy next to me: HIGH FIVE! AHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA! *Clap clap clap clap clap clap clap clap clap clap seesaw seesaw seesaw*
4. Movie: The Savages
Offender: The phantom puker
I never came face-to-face with whoever this was, which is good for them, because I would have kicked their ass. I saw this film on a weekday night in a pretty empty theater. The actual movie went on without incident. When I went to leave, I noticed two girls staring at the exit with hesitation. When I approached, I realized that the door was soaked in vomit. The strange thing was that the point of impact was the exact middle of the double doors, right where you would push them open. That absolutely had to be pre-mediated, because in a normal upchucking situation, the vomit would just end up on the floor (which isn’t to say that some didn’t get on the floor too). The doors were so evenly covered that these two girls and myself didn’t know how to get out without touching something sticky. Eventually, we devised a system where I kicked the door open on the one dry patch, and we all ran out. I’m not saying that this was a crippling inconvenience to my life, but it was just fucking disgusting.
5. Movie: A History of Violence
Offender: the entire audience
A History of Violence isn’t a comedy, right? I didn’t think so. But this entire audience did. It was like a huge crowd of teenagers had time-traveled here from the 1950s, where they had been watching a sci-fi B-movie at a drive-in and were anxious for it to be over so they could go to Lovers’ Lane. They behaved themselves for the first half, but the second half consisted of hysterical laughter, jeering, cheering, and lewd and rude shouted comments. Included in this ruckus was my then-roommate, as I had just gotten to college and was eager to bond with the person I lived with. Incidentally, this was the first and last time we ever hung out, because she turned out to be a wretched bitch who had already written nasty things about me on her easy-to-locate blog within the first week of school when I had been nothing but nice to her. Ha, sweet revenge! At least I have the class to keep her anonymous.
Who was the worst theater patron you ever had to deal with?
1. Movie: Knocked Up
Offender: The snitch
So I’m at a theater in suburban New York with my boyfriend, and we’re meeting up with his friend there. Once we’re all in line waiting to buy our tickets, I discreetly show the friend the contraband bag of M&Ms I have purchased for the occasion. Suddenly, this guy, who is not even in line but awkwardly off the side, blurts out (in reference to the candy) “I know what you’re gonna do with those!” Um, yeah, eat them. OR BUILD A ROCKET SHIP! No, eat them. I didn’t really know what to say, except maybe that I was proud he had figured out what M&Ms were for? I stared blankly, my boyfriend and his friend equally confused, and then the guy added “What’s to keep me from telling on you?” Note: this guy did NOT work here. I think I said, “Um, karma?” We bought our tickets and went into the theater, but I ran out to use the bathroom right before the movie started. This guy was still in the lobby, with no apparent intention of seeing a movie at any point, and yelled, “There she is! There’s the traitor!” What this man was hoping to achieve through these tactics, I will never know.
2. Movie: V for Vendetta
Offender: Guy who probably thinks he’s going to marry Natalie Portman
My friend Scott and I went to a late-night showing of this opening weekend. It was Saturday night, and the theater was sparsely populated. Before the movie, Scott started eating some chips. A portly fellow sitting directly in front of us, who had clearly crawled out of his mom’s basement and through mountains of ejaculate-soaked pictures of bald Natalie Portman to be here for this occasion, suddenly whipped around and said to Scott, “Do you plan on crunching your food like that for the whole movie?!” Scott, stunned and shocked, whimpered “No.” We agreed later that he should have replied with a triumphant YES!
3. Movie: Borat
Offender: Hyena with epilepsy
Borat is a funny movie. I am aware of this. I knew this going into it, and expected a theater full of merry patrons’ laughter. What I did not expect was the guy I wound up sitting next to. He had a sort of frat-boy look, and enjoyed the movie immensely. The way he expressed this, however, was to erupt into a screeching, bloodcurdling laugh at EVERY JOKE, clap hysterically, rock back and forth like a crazy person, and repeat the hilarious line verbatim. It went something like this:
Borat on screen: High five!
Guy next to me: HIGH FIVE! AHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA! *Clap clap clap clap clap clap clap clap clap clap seesaw seesaw seesaw*
4. Movie: The Savages
Offender: The phantom puker
I never came face-to-face with whoever this was, which is good for them, because I would have kicked their ass. I saw this film on a weekday night in a pretty empty theater. The actual movie went on without incident. When I went to leave, I noticed two girls staring at the exit with hesitation. When I approached, I realized that the door was soaked in vomit. The strange thing was that the point of impact was the exact middle of the double doors, right where you would push them open. That absolutely had to be pre-mediated, because in a normal upchucking situation, the vomit would just end up on the floor (which isn’t to say that some didn’t get on the floor too). The doors were so evenly covered that these two girls and myself didn’t know how to get out without touching something sticky. Eventually, we devised a system where I kicked the door open on the one dry patch, and we all ran out. I’m not saying that this was a crippling inconvenience to my life, but it was just fucking disgusting.
5. Movie: A History of Violence
Offender: the entire audience
A History of Violence isn’t a comedy, right? I didn’t think so. But this entire audience did. It was like a huge crowd of teenagers had time-traveled here from the 1950s, where they had been watching a sci-fi B-movie at a drive-in and were anxious for it to be over so they could go to Lovers’ Lane. They behaved themselves for the first half, but the second half consisted of hysterical laughter, jeering, cheering, and lewd and rude shouted comments. Included in this ruckus was my then-roommate, as I had just gotten to college and was eager to bond with the person I lived with. Incidentally, this was the first and last time we ever hung out, because she turned out to be a wretched bitch who had already written nasty things about me on her easy-to-locate blog within the first week of school when I had been nothing but nice to her. Ha, sweet revenge! At least I have the class to keep her anonymous.
Who was the worst theater patron you ever had to deal with?
February 27, 2008
Sweater from the dark side
A few weeks ago, I bought this delightful sweater at Old Navy.
A cute little number, don't ya think? Anyway, I've worn it a couple of times since. But yesterday I noticed something very alarming. Lurking in the midst of my lovely sweater was the unmistakable figure of...
DARTH VADER!!!
A cute little number, don't ya think? Anyway, I've worn it a couple of times since. But yesterday I noticed something very alarming. Lurking in the midst of my lovely sweater was the unmistakable figure of...
DARTH VADER!!!
Oddly enough, this stylized Darth Vader does not appear anywhere else on the sweater, just in the one place. I happen to think this is way cooler than the Jesus figure in the toast or the Mother Theresa in the cinnamon bun.
On an unrelated note, I've been getting nice emails and comments from readers saying that I do not write often enough. This is true. But in my defense, I'm a very busy lady who posts as often as time and inspiration will allow. I'm not just sitting here atop a mountain of unpublished posts and cackling maliciously as I build suspense, I promise.
February 25, 2008
5 kids' movies that aren't for kids
Kids' movies can be tricky. Ideally, a good kids' movie is entertaining and enriching for children, and does not incite in parents the urge to gauge out their own eyes. Mostly, though, the average kids' movie is just aimed at kids, who will drag their reluctant parens to the theater and force their wallets open. This does not assure quality, because kids are stupid and have dubious taste (Bratz, anyone?). But in trying to appeal to wider audiences, certain kiddie flicks (like the five below) have missed the mark and gone over the wee heads of their target demographic - often to the benefit of the wider population.
1. The Incredibles
Target audience: young Pixar fans and/or superhero enthusiasts
Actual audience: adults experiencing midlife crises
Even superheroes get the blues. That's the gist of Brad Bird's 2004 film, which also features great effects, splashy colors, great action sequences and excellently quotable lines such as "WHERE IS MY SUPER-SUIT?!" But mostly, it's about midlife crises. The titular Mr. Incredible is stuck in a 9-5 job and a challenging marriage, and is tempted by his old life and a hot villain. And in the first 20 or so minutes, he saves a man falling from a building, only to find out that the man was attempting suicide and was immensely annoyed by the intervention. It's fitting that footage of this flick was edited to audio from American Beauty, in a fun little YouTube diversion that underlines the eerie similarities between the films (check it out here). It's only rated PG, but most of these tricks ain't for kids.
2. The Emperor's New Groove
Target audience: kids who savor the exploits of funny animals and inaccurate Incan history
Actual audience: adults who savor the snarky, sarcastic humor of David Spade
This is a film about an emperor turned llama voiced by David Spade, and David Mamet, according to IMDB, called the script "one of the most brilliantly innovative which Hollywood has produced in recent years." That's right. David "Glengarry Glen Ross," "Fuck you, that's my name!" Mamet. Rightly so, because this film is absolutely hilarious. I had the good fortune of discovering it as a teenager, because I think that as a kid a lot of it would have gone over my head. It's not that the subject matter is complicated, but more that the humor is a sophisticated type that kids don't grasp yet. Little tykes will probably be drawn primarily to the stupid=funny shtick of the villain's sidekick Kronk, but adults will realize that the character is voiced by Patrick Warburton (known primarily as Puddy from "Seinfeld") and find new humor in that. There are a few pop culture references that may be lost on children as well, but for the full enjoyment of the humor, save this one for after puberty.
3. Ratatouille
Target audiences: young fans of cute animals doing outlandish things
Actual audience: viewers for whom the Food Network is porn
First of all, I have to give this movie kudos for having the balls to use a title that even educated adults can't pronounce, much less kids. Obviously, the cute rodent is the hook, but most kids don't give a shit about gourmet French cuisine. If you really wanted to just aim this at kids, it would be about baking cupcakes. Even I had trouble getting into the storyline when it got too foody. This is Brad Bird's work again, and I'm beginning to think he isn't even interested in the kiddie audience. One part that really startled me was when Remy the rat is crawling through a pipe over several apartments and witnesses a different scene in each one, because in one apartment he saw a couple who was fighting with each other and pointing guns in each other's faces. Then a shot is fired, but it doesn't hit anyone, and the pair starts making out. WTF? Another delicate matter with children's movies is that kids will believe a vast majority of what they see on screen. After Finding Nemo's claim that all pipes lead to the ocean, there was an epidemic of children flushing their pet fish down toilets to give them a better life. Ratatouille, through the eyes of a child, may read as propaganda for letting hordes of rats into your kitchen to help you cook. Think I'm exaggerating? There's a bonus feature on the DVD where Remy and his brother talk about how great rats are for 20 minutes, and make excuses for certain ratastrophes like the Plague. What I know, and what kids probably don't, is that while brown rats (Rattus norvegicus) are clean, intelligent, cute, and make good pets, black rats (Rattus rattus) live in sewers, spread disease, and most importantly, are not cute. That should be a disclaimer on the DVD cover, in my humble opinion.
4. Fantasia
Target audience: Mickey Mouse enthusiasts
Actual audience: Film nerds and/or stoners
This film I did actually see as a wee one. I remember liking the Mickey part (of course) and the dancing hippo, but I was pretty baffled/unimpressed by the rest. Because if there's one thing that kids love, it's classical music...except no, not at all. If you really consider the film's concept - animated vignettes set to classical tunes - it just sounds like a trippy laser show or something of that ilk. Even though that format should theoretically cater to kids' short attention spans, the most mindless of tots will still grow bored if there isn't some plot or coherence. I wouldn't be surprised if this gets remade in 3-D, featuring only the songs of Hannah Montana (shudder). Hopefully, the stoners and geeky critics who pontificate about this film's excellence will preserve its legacy from that wretched fate.
5. The Shrek sequels
Target audience: fairy tale fans with a bit of an edge
Actual audience: "Best Week Ever" addicts
The first Shrek was a fun film that appealed to viewers based on its creative retooling of well-worn tales, its voice talents, its pop culture references and its message about being yourself. But producers got blinded by green and cranked out two sequels that displayed a sharp decline in quality and intelligence. While the satire in the original was aimed at topics such as Disneyworld and popular fairy tales, the following two movies become like animated rejects from a VH1 show. In Shrek 2, for example, I'm pretty sure that audiences are supposed to find humor in the fact that Justin Timberlake did one of the voices, and he was dating Cameron Diaz at the time, voice of the princess Fiona. OMG!!! Kids see enough tabloid crap anyway - keep it out of their flicks, will ya, Dreamworks?
HONORABLE MENTIONS
- Beauty and the Beast. Um, this movie is about straight-up bestiality. And it also sends the totally backward message that intelligent, attractive young women should be romantically satisfied with snarling, borderline abusive half-animal men. Great. Not gonna deny that the songs are awesome though.
- Willy Wonka and the Chocolate Factory. Look, I don't care what Wonka says - all those kids who met gruesome (albeit creative) fates in the factory are not coming back. They're stone-cold dead. And the scene where all the characters go through the tunnel with distorted images of giant bugs and other such delights is terrifying at any age.
- The Spongebob Squarepants Movie. Patrick in drag and a David Hasselhoff cameo? This movie is exclusively for stoners.
February 4, 2008
Find the right Valentine's Day movie for you!
I am not going to take a stance on Valentine's Day here. Celebration of love? Hallmark holiday? The root of all evil? Sure. All of the above. I can say one thing though - it's a good movie holiday, if for no other reason than you don't typically have familial obligations cluttering the day. But people often get lazy. Hopeless romantics, are you really going to watch Casablanca again? Cynics, haven't you burned a hole in the anti-romantic movie of your choosing? Whether your day is going to be filled with chocolates and roses or sulking, at least do yourself the favor of checking out a different flick that satisfies your V-Day needs.
You: In a new relationship
Your movie: any of the Katharine Hepburn / Spencer Tracy romantic comedies, such as Adam's Rib
Why: So you have a new relationship, and it's going well, but you don't want to freak out your significant other with movies about marriage or passionate love or crazy sex. Tracy and Hepburn have a totally PG but adorable dynamic that resembles what's good about new love - you kid each other constantly, but have a massive crush on the other person.
You: In a long-standing relationship
Your movie: The Big Sleep or To Have and Have Not
Why: Humphrey Bogart and Lauren Bacall created unbelievable sparks on screen that amazingly slipped past the censors. At this stage in the game, your puppy love has (typically) given way to hot, sexy passion, which is no short supply in these Bogie/Bacall pairings. You could even make it a double feature, and treat yourself to a night of classic lines like, "You know how to whistle, don't you, Steve? You just put your lips together...and blow."
You: In a long-distance relationship
Your movie: A Very Long Engagement
Why: Did you like Amelie? Well, this film has the same director, actress, and feel, but takes place around WWI and features Mathilde (Audrey Tatou) searching for her fiancee who allegedly died in the trenches. The script and visuals are great, and the film is a testament to the power of love. Look for the random Jodie Foster cameo!
You: In a rocky relationship
Your movie: Gone With The Wind
Why: For a movie that's supposed to be one of the greatest romances committed to celluloid, has anyone noticed that Rhett and Scarlett just fight the whole time? Their feelings for the one another never quite align correctly, and between slapping and yelling and not giving damns, it's a pretty rough ride for these two. Maybe your relationship will seem a lot healthier after you watch this one.
You: Trying to get the girl
Your movie: City Lights
Why: Charlie Chaplin's little tramp character was as poignant as he was funny, and never more so than in this 1931 classic where he falls for a blind girl and tries to raise money for a vision-restoring operation by posing as a rich man. As Lifetime-y as that sounds, it's Chaplin, so it's also hilarious.
You: Think women suck
Your movie: Gilda or Double Indemnity
Why: What you need now is proof that you're not the only one who has fallen victim to the lures of a woman. The male leads of these flicks (or many other film noirs) get screwed over by dangerous dames that lead to their downfall. See, it could be worse! Your relationship could have ended up with you in jail or something! Feeling better yet? Maybe?
You: Think men suck
Your movie: Sweet Charity or Chicago
Why: Surely you'll be able to sympathize with poor Charity, who keeps getting gratuitously fucked over by guys. But in the end, she holds her head high. Watch it with a friend and cheer for her. Alternately, you can watch Chicago and revel in its philosophy of "men are pigs, shoot them and get away with it."
You: Are into MILFs.
Your movie: The Graduate
Why: Duh. And afterwards you can find yourself a Valentine on Craigslist (shudder).
You: Are alone because you have limited social skills, obsessive-compulsive tendencies and random outbursts.
Your movie: Punch-Drunk Love
Why: Adam Sandler, in a rare serious role, fits the above description in this film, and finds love. If an antisocial Happy Gilmore can get the girl, then there's hope for you.
You: Not sure you believe in this whole "love" thing.
Your movie: Annie Hall
Why: Modern ruminations on this thing called love, covering everything from lying to seem impressive to a compulsion to smoke pot before sex. No one actually says "I love you" in the film - the closest is Allen's character saying "I lurve you." Mercifully devoid of a Hollywood ending, it has a thoroughly fulfilling one nonetheless.
You: think that your gal pals are what matter most.
Your movie: Gentlemen Prefer Blondes
Why: Yes, technically it's a heterosexual romance, but the female bonding is the prevalent theme. Marilyn's character pretty much admits at the end that she's marrying her beau for his money. And the gals even have a joint wedding. Aw.
You: In an unconvential relationship (or wanting to be in one)
Your movie: Pumpkin
Why: Christina Ricci plays a sorority girl who falls for a mentally challenged guy. Lifetime movie? After-school special? Nope! Brutally satiric dark comedy (with a heart of gold).
You: a hopeless romantic in theory, but things just never work out.
Your movie: The Umbrellas of Cherbourg
Why: A 1964 French musical about love in which every word is sung. Sounds overly saccharine, but it actually gets kind of depressing in showing how time and circumstance can take their toll on romance.
You: your relationship is not allowed to flourish due to the prevailing social mores of your time.
Your movie: In the Mood For Love or Splendor in the Grass
Why: In the former, neighbors in 1960s Shanghai find out that their spouses are having an affair, but despite a growing attraction, feel wrong doing the same. In the latter, Natalie Wood goes literally insane in 1920s rural America because it's not socially acceptable for her to shag her boyfriend, played by Warren Beatty. Hey, if I was in such close proximity to 1960s Warren Beatty all the time and couldn't touch him, I'd go nuts too.
You: in an open relationship, or discussing the option of making your relationship open
Your movie: Bob & Carol & Ted & Alice
Why: ORGIES!!! Seriously. This is a movie with Natalie Wood and Elliot Gould and it's about orgies. It pokes fun at the "free love" movement of the 1960s in examining how those principles could realistically be applied within the framework of a marriage. Did I mention it's about orgies?
You: believe that love is a sick, twisted, and disturbing notion.
Your movie: Audition
Why: This Japanese squirmfest will support your thesis wholeheartedly.Additionally functioning as a commentary on gender roles in modern Japan, the film features a widower who stages an "audition" to find a new wife. The girl he picks seems a little odd, but he is still infatuated with her even when her references start to come up questionable. The jaw-dropping ending gives a whole new meaning to the phrase "love hurts."
You: like your romance a little supernatural
Your movie: Il Mare
Why: Remember the movie Sandra Bullock / Keanu Reeves vehicle The Lake House? Yeah. Don't watch that. Instead, watch the Korean film it was based on, which features lush cinematography, love that transcends time and romantic chemistry that surpasses that of two people trying to stop a speeding bus.
You: hot for teacher
Your movie: Rushmore or Notes on a Scandal
Why: I hate to be the bearer of bad news, but this situation is not going to work out for you. Either the teacher will ignore your advances, or will succumb to them, resulting in tragic consequences for both of you. But hey, these are both terrific movies on that subject that will possibly dissuade you!
You: torn between two or more suitors
Your movie: The Philadelphia Story
Why: If the triple billing of Katharine Hepburn, Cary Grant and Jimmy Stewart doesn't convince you, then the sparkling script and heartwarming message will. Kate learns a few things about herself in the process of choosing between the aforementioned two and yet another fellow. And since the male leads are both pretty famous, there is actual suspense as to which she will choose (not like in The Notebook, where Rachael McAdams was into James Marsden for what, like, four seconds?).
You: girls think of you as a "brother" and then date assholes
Your movie: The Apartment
Why: Jack Lemmon shares your predicament in this classic and refreshingly non-cliche Best Picture winner. Who wouldn't love a man who uses a tennis racket to drain his spaghetti? But will adorable 1960 Shirley MacLaine see the light?
You: into bondage
Your movie: Atame! (Tie Me Up, Tie Me Down!)
Why: Spanish director (and personal favorite) Pedro Almodovar has always tackled love and sex in unique ways. Here, Antonio Banderas is obsessed with a woman and essentially holds her hostage in her own home, but she kind of starts to like being tied up...
You: the only woman you've ever loved is your mother.
Your movie: Psycho
Why: Because it will serve as a cautionary tale for anyone who loves dear old mum a bit too much. Or you can save this for Mother's Day if you want to cause a stir at the annual family brunch
You: the only person you've ever loved is yourself.
Your movie: Citizen Kane
Why: Another cautionary tale. Who wants to die all alone muttering "Rosebud"?
You: believe in love, but acknowledge that it can be extremely bizarre.
Your movie: Crazy Love
Why: This is a documentary about Burt and Linda Pugach, told in their own words. Burt basically stalked Linda for years, eventually throwing acid in her face, which blinded her. After his release from prison, they got married and remain together to this day. Truth is stranger than fiction, folks.
What are your V-Day favorites?
You: In a new relationship
Your movie: any of the Katharine Hepburn / Spencer Tracy romantic comedies, such as Adam's Rib
Why: So you have a new relationship, and it's going well, but you don't want to freak out your significant other with movies about marriage or passionate love or crazy sex. Tracy and Hepburn have a totally PG but adorable dynamic that resembles what's good about new love - you kid each other constantly, but have a massive crush on the other person.
You: In a long-standing relationship
Your movie: The Big Sleep or To Have and Have Not
Why: Humphrey Bogart and Lauren Bacall created unbelievable sparks on screen that amazingly slipped past the censors. At this stage in the game, your puppy love has (typically) given way to hot, sexy passion, which is no short supply in these Bogie/Bacall pairings. You could even make it a double feature, and treat yourself to a night of classic lines like, "You know how to whistle, don't you, Steve? You just put your lips together...and blow."
You: In a long-distance relationship
Your movie: A Very Long Engagement
Why: Did you like Amelie? Well, this film has the same director, actress, and feel, but takes place around WWI and features Mathilde (Audrey Tatou) searching for her fiancee who allegedly died in the trenches. The script and visuals are great, and the film is a testament to the power of love. Look for the random Jodie Foster cameo!
You: In a rocky relationship
Your movie: Gone With The Wind
Why: For a movie that's supposed to be one of the greatest romances committed to celluloid, has anyone noticed that Rhett and Scarlett just fight the whole time? Their feelings for the one another never quite align correctly, and between slapping and yelling and not giving damns, it's a pretty rough ride for these two. Maybe your relationship will seem a lot healthier after you watch this one.
You: Trying to get the girl
Your movie: City Lights
Why: Charlie Chaplin's little tramp character was as poignant as he was funny, and never more so than in this 1931 classic where he falls for a blind girl and tries to raise money for a vision-restoring operation by posing as a rich man. As Lifetime-y as that sounds, it's Chaplin, so it's also hilarious.
You: Think women suck
Your movie: Gilda or Double Indemnity
Why: What you need now is proof that you're not the only one who has fallen victim to the lures of a woman. The male leads of these flicks (or many other film noirs) get screwed over by dangerous dames that lead to their downfall. See, it could be worse! Your relationship could have ended up with you in jail or something! Feeling better yet? Maybe?
You: Think men suck
Your movie: Sweet Charity or Chicago
Why: Surely you'll be able to sympathize with poor Charity, who keeps getting gratuitously fucked over by guys. But in the end, she holds her head high. Watch it with a friend and cheer for her. Alternately, you can watch Chicago and revel in its philosophy of "men are pigs, shoot them and get away with it."
You: Are into MILFs.
Your movie: The Graduate
Why: Duh. And afterwards you can find yourself a Valentine on Craigslist (shudder).
You: Are alone because you have limited social skills, obsessive-compulsive tendencies and random outbursts.
Your movie: Punch-Drunk Love
Why: Adam Sandler, in a rare serious role, fits the above description in this film, and finds love. If an antisocial Happy Gilmore can get the girl, then there's hope for you.
You: Not sure you believe in this whole "love" thing.
Your movie: Annie Hall
Why: Modern ruminations on this thing called love, covering everything from lying to seem impressive to a compulsion to smoke pot before sex. No one actually says "I love you" in the film - the closest is Allen's character saying "I lurve you." Mercifully devoid of a Hollywood ending, it has a thoroughly fulfilling one nonetheless.
You: think that your gal pals are what matter most.
Your movie: Gentlemen Prefer Blondes
Why: Yes, technically it's a heterosexual romance, but the female bonding is the prevalent theme. Marilyn's character pretty much admits at the end that she's marrying her beau for his money. And the gals even have a joint wedding. Aw.
You: In an unconvential relationship (or wanting to be in one)
Your movie: Pumpkin
Why: Christina Ricci plays a sorority girl who falls for a mentally challenged guy. Lifetime movie? After-school special? Nope! Brutally satiric dark comedy (with a heart of gold).
You: a hopeless romantic in theory, but things just never work out.
Your movie: The Umbrellas of Cherbourg
Why: A 1964 French musical about love in which every word is sung. Sounds overly saccharine, but it actually gets kind of depressing in showing how time and circumstance can take their toll on romance.
You: your relationship is not allowed to flourish due to the prevailing social mores of your time.
Your movie: In the Mood For Love or Splendor in the Grass
Why: In the former, neighbors in 1960s Shanghai find out that their spouses are having an affair, but despite a growing attraction, feel wrong doing the same. In the latter, Natalie Wood goes literally insane in 1920s rural America because it's not socially acceptable for her to shag her boyfriend, played by Warren Beatty. Hey, if I was in such close proximity to 1960s Warren Beatty all the time and couldn't touch him, I'd go nuts too.
You: in an open relationship, or discussing the option of making your relationship open
Your movie: Bob & Carol & Ted & Alice
Why: ORGIES!!! Seriously. This is a movie with Natalie Wood and Elliot Gould and it's about orgies. It pokes fun at the "free love" movement of the 1960s in examining how those principles could realistically be applied within the framework of a marriage. Did I mention it's about orgies?
You: believe that love is a sick, twisted, and disturbing notion.
Your movie: Audition
Why: This Japanese squirmfest will support your thesis wholeheartedly.Additionally functioning as a commentary on gender roles in modern Japan, the film features a widower who stages an "audition" to find a new wife. The girl he picks seems a little odd, but he is still infatuated with her even when her references start to come up questionable. The jaw-dropping ending gives a whole new meaning to the phrase "love hurts."
You: like your romance a little supernatural
Your movie: Il Mare
Why: Remember the movie Sandra Bullock / Keanu Reeves vehicle The Lake House? Yeah. Don't watch that. Instead, watch the Korean film it was based on, which features lush cinematography, love that transcends time and romantic chemistry that surpasses that of two people trying to stop a speeding bus.
You: hot for teacher
Your movie: Rushmore or Notes on a Scandal
Why: I hate to be the bearer of bad news, but this situation is not going to work out for you. Either the teacher will ignore your advances, or will succumb to them, resulting in tragic consequences for both of you. But hey, these are both terrific movies on that subject that will possibly dissuade you!
You: torn between two or more suitors
Your movie: The Philadelphia Story
Why: If the triple billing of Katharine Hepburn, Cary Grant and Jimmy Stewart doesn't convince you, then the sparkling script and heartwarming message will. Kate learns a few things about herself in the process of choosing between the aforementioned two and yet another fellow. And since the male leads are both pretty famous, there is actual suspense as to which she will choose (not like in The Notebook, where Rachael McAdams was into James Marsden for what, like, four seconds?).
You: girls think of you as a "brother" and then date assholes
Your movie: The Apartment
Why: Jack Lemmon shares your predicament in this classic and refreshingly non-cliche Best Picture winner. Who wouldn't love a man who uses a tennis racket to drain his spaghetti? But will adorable 1960 Shirley MacLaine see the light?
You: into bondage
Your movie: Atame! (Tie Me Up, Tie Me Down!)
Why: Spanish director (and personal favorite) Pedro Almodovar has always tackled love and sex in unique ways. Here, Antonio Banderas is obsessed with a woman and essentially holds her hostage in her own home, but she kind of starts to like being tied up...
You: the only woman you've ever loved is your mother.
Your movie: Psycho
Why: Because it will serve as a cautionary tale for anyone who loves dear old mum a bit too much. Or you can save this for Mother's Day if you want to cause a stir at the annual family brunch
You: the only person you've ever loved is yourself.
Your movie: Citizen Kane
Why: Another cautionary tale. Who wants to die all alone muttering "Rosebud"?
You: believe in love, but acknowledge that it can be extremely bizarre.
Your movie: Crazy Love
Why: This is a documentary about Burt and Linda Pugach, told in their own words. Burt basically stalked Linda for years, eventually throwing acid in her face, which blinded her. After his release from prison, they got married and remain together to this day. Truth is stranger than fiction, folks.
What are your V-Day favorites?
February 2, 2008
Requiem for a video store
I work at a video store. Come April, I won't anymore, because it's closing. Therefore, this is the conversation I will have to endure until the end comes:
Customer: OMG, you're CLOOOOSING?
Me: Yes.
Customer: OMG, you guys were like the last in the neighborhood!
Me: Yes.
Customer: OMG, it's cuz of Netflix, right? It's totally Netflix. You are clearly threatened by Netflix. Your demise is courtesy of Netflix. I use Netflix. It was only a matter of time before you succumbed to Netflix
Me: Actually, it's because our manager is a nasty bipolar coke addict with the business sense of an earthworm who singlehandedly destroyed a thriving business.
Customer: Oh. Can I rent Transformers now?
Sad but true. We still have a lot of business, due in no small part to our porn selection, so our impending doom seems incongrous. Which it is. In my opinion, it just boils down to the poor business decisions, notoriously horrendous customer service, and the stark resistance to change and innovation by a single person (the manager), who is the one of the dumbest and meanest people I have ever met. Stores in neighboring cities and regions are doing fine.
But what if it is Netflix? I doubt it, but there's no denying that Netflix and its imitators have changed the landscape of video rental forever. And it has its advantages and benefits. I've been a subscriber - two summers ago, when I lived at home in the suburbs and my only other source of movies was a Blockbuster that had 900 copies of RV and no movie made any earlier than 1989 (and the library, but I quickly exhausted their selection), it was a lifesaver.
Netflix is not the answer for everyone, however. It's not for the casual movie renter, who may end up paying exorbitant prices every month for a couple of movies. It's not for the spontaneous movie renter, because if you want to watch Superbad on a Saturday night, you need to think of that at least a week in advance. It's not for the high-volume movie renter, because Netflix can't maintain that, especially when you figure in turnaround time. It's not for the uneducated renter, who may rely on reading the backs of cases to determine what they want to get. And it's definitely not for the porn renter. Those preceding groups comprise the entirety of our clientele. As smug as they are about Netflix's conquest of America, when we close up shop they're going to be really upset that they can't get a lot of movies/a couple of movies for cheap/descriptions and recommendations/movies on a whim/porn.
This is a great example of the idea that just because you CAN do something, it doesn't mean you SHOULD. Technology moves forward so quickly that there isn't adequate time to think through whether something is the best option. A good example is the "digital readers" that Sony and Amazon are now peddling. You can download hundreds of books onto these little tablet devices and take them with you. Seems cool for a second, until you remember that books are one of the few gloriously low-tech amusements left. Imagine being bored to death on a long plane ride because YOUR BOOK CRASHED. Similarly, congratulations, you don't have to leave the house to get movies anymore, but oh by the way, your viewing habits are severely restrained.
Rest in peace, Place That I Work Which Will Remain Anonymous Because I Called My Manager Bad Names. You will be missed by the employees and community alike.
Customer: OMG, you're CLOOOOSING?
Me: Yes.
Customer: OMG, you guys were like the last in the neighborhood!
Me: Yes.
Customer: OMG, it's cuz of Netflix, right? It's totally Netflix. You are clearly threatened by Netflix. Your demise is courtesy of Netflix. I use Netflix. It was only a matter of time before you succumbed to Netflix
Me: Actually, it's because our manager is a nasty bipolar coke addict with the business sense of an earthworm who singlehandedly destroyed a thriving business.
Customer: Oh. Can I rent Transformers now?
Sad but true. We still have a lot of business, due in no small part to our porn selection, so our impending doom seems incongrous. Which it is. In my opinion, it just boils down to the poor business decisions, notoriously horrendous customer service, and the stark resistance to change and innovation by a single person (the manager), who is the one of the dumbest and meanest people I have ever met. Stores in neighboring cities and regions are doing fine.
But what if it is Netflix? I doubt it, but there's no denying that Netflix and its imitators have changed the landscape of video rental forever. And it has its advantages and benefits. I've been a subscriber - two summers ago, when I lived at home in the suburbs and my only other source of movies was a Blockbuster that had 900 copies of RV and no movie made any earlier than 1989 (and the library, but I quickly exhausted their selection), it was a lifesaver.
Netflix is not the answer for everyone, however. It's not for the casual movie renter, who may end up paying exorbitant prices every month for a couple of movies. It's not for the spontaneous movie renter, because if you want to watch Superbad on a Saturday night, you need to think of that at least a week in advance. It's not for the high-volume movie renter, because Netflix can't maintain that, especially when you figure in turnaround time. It's not for the uneducated renter, who may rely on reading the backs of cases to determine what they want to get. And it's definitely not for the porn renter. Those preceding groups comprise the entirety of our clientele. As smug as they are about Netflix's conquest of America, when we close up shop they're going to be really upset that they can't get a lot of movies/a couple of movies for cheap/descriptions and recommendations/movies on a whim/porn.
This is a great example of the idea that just because you CAN do something, it doesn't mean you SHOULD. Technology moves forward so quickly that there isn't adequate time to think through whether something is the best option. A good example is the "digital readers" that Sony and Amazon are now peddling. You can download hundreds of books onto these little tablet devices and take them with you. Seems cool for a second, until you remember that books are one of the few gloriously low-tech amusements left. Imagine being bored to death on a long plane ride because YOUR BOOK CRASHED. Similarly, congratulations, you don't have to leave the house to get movies anymore, but oh by the way, your viewing habits are severely restrained.
Rest in peace, Place That I Work Which Will Remain Anonymous Because I Called My Manager Bad Names. You will be missed by the employees and community alike.
January 14, 2008
My Golden Globe prediction strategies - and how successful they were
In the days or even weeks leading up to a major awards show, I usually have my assuredly chosen predictions in place. Friends will ask me how I can be so sure, and the answer is simple: both the Academy and the Hollywood Foreign Press Assocation exhibit some very predictable patterns. The Golden Globes, which aired Sunday night in a speedy half-hour press conference due to the writers' strike, copy a lot of their award patterns from the Oscars, but have some distinct ones as well. My friend and I have made a tradition of betting a quarter on each category at these awards shows, and I am proud to report that this year I walked away with a stellar 75 cents (meaning I got three more right than he did). Here's how my theories panned out - take note of the good ones if you want to get quality laundry money from your friends come Oscar time!
Category: Best picture, musical or comedy
Theory: The We Heart Musicals theory.
The Hollywood Foreign Press Association LOOOOVES musicals, and will give awards to them even if they aren't Best Picture contenders at the Oscars. This year, the category actually had more musicals than comedies (Sweeney Todd, Hairspray, and Across the Universe). I went with Sweeney Todd.
See also: Dreamgirls and Walk the Line winning
Successful? Yes! Tim Burton's macabre musical took home the gold.
Category: Best supporting actress in a motion picture musical or comedy
Theory: The Beautiful Actress Turned Ugly theory.
I would have applied this theory to the leading actress categories as well, but none of those nominees this year got substantially ugly enough for consideration. In the supporting category, Amy Ryan looked a bit worn-down in Gone, Baby, Gone and Julia Roberts sported a ludicrous hairdo for Charlie Wilson's War, but Cate Blanchett morphing into Bob Dylan for I'm Not There takes the cake for ugly transformations.
See also: Felicity Huffman winning for Transamerica, Helen Mirren winning for The Queen, Charlize Theron winning for Monster
Successful? Yes! Blanchett won.
Category: Best screenplay
Theory: The Reformed Sinner/Difficult Life theory.
Everyone is buzzing about Diablo Cody's debut screenplay, Juno, not only for its wit and charm, but for the fact that Cody used to be a stripper. Good heavens! What a success story! For this reason alone, I penciled her in for the win. Like Richard Gere says in Chicago, "There is one thing they can never resist, and that is a reformed sinner."
See also: "American Idol" loser Jennifer Hudson winning a Globe for Dreamgirls without previous acting experience (note: she is not a sinner - this is a different kind of rags-to-riches)
Successful? No. The Coen brothers won for the No Country for Old Men screenplay. I remain optimistic about this theory for the Oscars, however, because they separate the screenplay categories into original and adapted, and from what I hear the No Country screenplay is pretty much lifted verbatim from the novel.
Category: Best original song
Theory: The Aging Rocker Pity theory.
Come on, is anyone going to pay attention to Eddie Vedder ever again, besides the Golden Globes? They love making charity cases out of old rockers.
See also: Mick Jagger winning for the song "Old Habits Die Hard," from Alfie.
Successful? Yes! Vedder won for his song "Guaranteed," from Into the Wild.
Category: Best actress in a motion picture, musical or comedy
Theory: The Completely Left Field, Lighthearted Performance That Will Never Win an Oscar (Or Even Get Nominated) theory.
Sometimes I feel as if the Globes were like a version of the Oscars that got dropped on its head as a child. In the acting categories especially, there seems to be a tendency to veer off course and pick a winner that might even seem like a joke. For me, Amy Adams in Enchanted was that random-ass pick.
See also: Eddie Murphy winning for Dreamgirls.
Successful? No. Marion Cotillard won for La Vie En Rose. Oh well.
Category: Best foreign-language film
Theory: The Social Suffering theory.
This one is often the same at the Oscars - the award goes to whatever film features people of a foreign country experiencing the most dire sociopolitical suffering. I acknowledge that full-body paralysis (sans one eye) of the protagonist in The Diving Bell and the Butterfly sucks pretty hard, but it has nothing to do with the political climate. Even though the folks in The Kite Runner seem like they had a rough time, that film is in English, which is fucking ridiculous, so my pick was Persepolis. Women's issues in Iran - how very topical!
See also: Letters from Iwo Jima, No Man's Land, and Osama winning. I don't want to list all the nominees from those years here, but if you compare and contrast you'll agree that those films feature the most sociopolitical suffering of the crop.
Successful? No. The Diving Bell and the Butterfly won. I think I may have to change my theory for this category to films about paralysis, considering the win of the paralyzed-Javier-Bardem movie The Sea Inside in 2004.
Category: several of the TV categories
Theory: The TV ADD theory.
The HFPA seems to have an exceptionally short attention span. While the Emmys show no hesitation in giving the same awards to The Sopranos for about seven years in a row, the Golden Globes consistently go to the newest shows, and whoever stars in them.
See also: Last year, actress and comedy show awards went to newbie Ugly Betty. Desperate Housewives swept the ceremony in the year of its debut. Mary-Louise Parker won for Weeds in its first season. Lost won in its debut season, and hasn't won again since. Shall I go on?
Successful? Yes and no. The theory worked for newcomers Mad Men, Jon Hamm of Mad Men, Glenn Close of Damages and David Duchovny of Californication. Other awards went to the pre-established Extras, Tina Fey of 30 Rock, and Jeremy Piven of Entourage. This seemed like an unusual year for TV ADD, but I'm sticking with this theory.
Do you have any theories that seem to work?
Category: Best picture, musical or comedy
Theory: The We Heart Musicals theory.
The Hollywood Foreign Press Association LOOOOVES musicals, and will give awards to them even if they aren't Best Picture contenders at the Oscars. This year, the category actually had more musicals than comedies (Sweeney Todd, Hairspray, and Across the Universe). I went with Sweeney Todd.
See also: Dreamgirls and Walk the Line winning
Successful? Yes! Tim Burton's macabre musical took home the gold.
Category: Best supporting actress in a motion picture musical or comedy
Theory: The Beautiful Actress Turned Ugly theory.
I would have applied this theory to the leading actress categories as well, but none of those nominees this year got substantially ugly enough for consideration. In the supporting category, Amy Ryan looked a bit worn-down in Gone, Baby, Gone and Julia Roberts sported a ludicrous hairdo for Charlie Wilson's War, but Cate Blanchett morphing into Bob Dylan for I'm Not There takes the cake for ugly transformations.
See also: Felicity Huffman winning for Transamerica, Helen Mirren winning for The Queen, Charlize Theron winning for Monster
Successful? Yes! Blanchett won.
Category: Best screenplay
Theory: The Reformed Sinner/Difficult Life theory.
Everyone is buzzing about Diablo Cody's debut screenplay, Juno, not only for its wit and charm, but for the fact that Cody used to be a stripper. Good heavens! What a success story! For this reason alone, I penciled her in for the win. Like Richard Gere says in Chicago, "There is one thing they can never resist, and that is a reformed sinner."
See also: "American Idol" loser Jennifer Hudson winning a Globe for Dreamgirls without previous acting experience (note: she is not a sinner - this is a different kind of rags-to-riches)
Successful? No. The Coen brothers won for the No Country for Old Men screenplay. I remain optimistic about this theory for the Oscars, however, because they separate the screenplay categories into original and adapted, and from what I hear the No Country screenplay is pretty much lifted verbatim from the novel.
Category: Best original song
Theory: The Aging Rocker Pity theory.
Come on, is anyone going to pay attention to Eddie Vedder ever again, besides the Golden Globes? They love making charity cases out of old rockers.
See also: Mick Jagger winning for the song "Old Habits Die Hard," from Alfie.
Successful? Yes! Vedder won for his song "Guaranteed," from Into the Wild.
Category: Best actress in a motion picture, musical or comedy
Theory: The Completely Left Field, Lighthearted Performance That Will Never Win an Oscar (Or Even Get Nominated) theory.
Sometimes I feel as if the Globes were like a version of the Oscars that got dropped on its head as a child. In the acting categories especially, there seems to be a tendency to veer off course and pick a winner that might even seem like a joke. For me, Amy Adams in Enchanted was that random-ass pick.
See also: Eddie Murphy winning for Dreamgirls.
Successful? No. Marion Cotillard won for La Vie En Rose. Oh well.
Category: Best foreign-language film
Theory: The Social Suffering theory.
This one is often the same at the Oscars - the award goes to whatever film features people of a foreign country experiencing the most dire sociopolitical suffering. I acknowledge that full-body paralysis (sans one eye) of the protagonist in The Diving Bell and the Butterfly sucks pretty hard, but it has nothing to do with the political climate. Even though the folks in The Kite Runner seem like they had a rough time, that film is in English, which is fucking ridiculous, so my pick was Persepolis. Women's issues in Iran - how very topical!
See also: Letters from Iwo Jima, No Man's Land, and Osama winning. I don't want to list all the nominees from those years here, but if you compare and contrast you'll agree that those films feature the most sociopolitical suffering of the crop.
Successful? No. The Diving Bell and the Butterfly won. I think I may have to change my theory for this category to films about paralysis, considering the win of the paralyzed-Javier-Bardem movie The Sea Inside in 2004.
Category: several of the TV categories
Theory: The TV ADD theory.
The HFPA seems to have an exceptionally short attention span. While the Emmys show no hesitation in giving the same awards to The Sopranos for about seven years in a row, the Golden Globes consistently go to the newest shows, and whoever stars in them.
See also: Last year, actress and comedy show awards went to newbie Ugly Betty. Desperate Housewives swept the ceremony in the year of its debut. Mary-Louise Parker won for Weeds in its first season. Lost won in its debut season, and hasn't won again since. Shall I go on?
Successful? Yes and no. The theory worked for newcomers Mad Men, Jon Hamm of Mad Men, Glenn Close of Damages and David Duchovny of Californication. Other awards went to the pre-established Extras, Tina Fey of 30 Rock, and Jeremy Piven of Entourage. This seemed like an unusual year for TV ADD, but I'm sticking with this theory.
Do you have any theories that seem to work?
January 1, 2008
The most obsessive and ridiculous post I will ever write
I have a peculiar habit of stressing or obsessing about completely inconsequential matters - things like whether or not Jesus had acne. Often, due to my interest in film, this habit extends to the wide world of cinema. Just the other day I grew terribly concerned that in Beauty and the Beast (either version), Belle and the Beast had premarital sex , which is undeniably bestiality, and yet is the subject of a children's movie! (The Disney version, anyway). After I watched Jurassic Park recently, I was consumed by the central paradox: if this guy Hammond is brilliant enough to resurrect dinosaurs, wouldn't he also be brilliant enough to know that no man-made structure could tame and contain a T-Rex? And furthermore, if he's so smart, wouldn't he also know that an island of just plant-eating dinosaurs would still be a scientific miracle, make him billions and cement his place in history without anyone getting eaten? Alas. But there's one plot hole of sorts that I haven't been able to shake for years. Something way less catastrophic and/or disturbing than the previous examples, ultimately inconsequential, and probably present in dozens of other films. And yet I can't stop thinking about it.
I refer to the 2003 film The Recruit, with Al Pacino and Colin Farrell. Haven't heard of it? Don't worry, it is overwhelmingly insignificant. I watched it passively on DVD with my dad, an action movie hound who spent my childhood trying to get me amped about movies like this (unsuccessfully). Anyway, the film features Farrell training to be a CIA agent, with Pacino as his shady mentor and Bridget Moynahan as his love interest. I barely remember anything about the film, except the following.
So Colin and Bridget are in a parking garage, heading to his car to go home after a long day at the office or whatever. They can't control their passion and start making out in the garage. Then it cuts to them making out on Colin's bed at home. That sequence probably seems fine to you - a natural cinematic progression. But all I could think about then - and now - is HOW SEXUALLY TENSE AND AWKWARD OF A CAR RIDE THAT MUST HAVE BEEN.
In 2003, when the film was released, the average American commute to work lasted 24.3 minutes, according to a press release from the U.S. Census. So let's say Colin has to drive for that long to get to Casa de Farrell. He clearly just started something serious with his lady friend in the garage - I should specify that this wasn't a delicate peck type of kiss, it was more of a "fuck me now." But they kinda have to keep a low profile, what with it being the CIA and all, so bumping uglies in the car would be a bad idea. So they have to get in the car, buckle their seatbelts, and keep their hands to themselves for 25 minutes. That sucks! I can't get over this. Here's what I believe would have transpired during that car ride.
Bridget: (panting, feeling the luck of the Irish) How close is your place to here?
Colin: 24.3 minutes.
Bridget: Aw, seriously? But baby, I want you NOW!
Colin: Me too, baby, but I can't blow my cover. I'll drive as fast as I can.
Bridget: Alright, hurry.
(Bridget grabs Colin's crotch, Colin lurches forward)
Colin: What the hell are you doing? I can't drive when you do that. You'll get us both killed.
Bridget: You're in the CIA, I thought you liked danger.
Colin: There's danger, and there's getting your balls crushed by the steering wheel!
Bridget: Baby, I'm sorry.
Colin: It's okay. Hey look, it's a red light!
(He leans over and they make out. The light changes to green but they don't notice. Someone behind them starts honking.)
Colin: Hey, fuck you! (starts driving again)
Bridget: Sooo...are we almost there?
Colin: We have 21.8 minutes to go.
Bridget: (sighs) Oh. Um...
(awkward silence)
Bridget: If you could be any kind of tree, what kind would you be?
And so it's awkward for those remaining minutes, when the two realize that short of attempting the ever-hazardous "road head" maneuver, they must remain celibate until they arrive at their destination. I wonder if filmmakers ever worry that their carelessly constructed plots will make people like me ruminate on them for years. Probably not. Then again, good ol Roger Donaldson (the director of The Recruit) would probably just be glad to know that someone thought about his movie that much in any capacity.
I refer to the 2003 film The Recruit, with Al Pacino and Colin Farrell. Haven't heard of it? Don't worry, it is overwhelmingly insignificant. I watched it passively on DVD with my dad, an action movie hound who spent my childhood trying to get me amped about movies like this (unsuccessfully). Anyway, the film features Farrell training to be a CIA agent, with Pacino as his shady mentor and Bridget Moynahan as his love interest. I barely remember anything about the film, except the following.
So Colin and Bridget are in a parking garage, heading to his car to go home after a long day at the office or whatever. They can't control their passion and start making out in the garage. Then it cuts to them making out on Colin's bed at home. That sequence probably seems fine to you - a natural cinematic progression. But all I could think about then - and now - is HOW SEXUALLY TENSE AND AWKWARD OF A CAR RIDE THAT MUST HAVE BEEN.
In 2003, when the film was released, the average American commute to work lasted 24.3 minutes, according to a press release from the U.S. Census. So let's say Colin has to drive for that long to get to Casa de Farrell. He clearly just started something serious with his lady friend in the garage - I should specify that this wasn't a delicate peck type of kiss, it was more of a "fuck me now." But they kinda have to keep a low profile, what with it being the CIA and all, so bumping uglies in the car would be a bad idea. So they have to get in the car, buckle their seatbelts, and keep their hands to themselves for 25 minutes. That sucks! I can't get over this. Here's what I believe would have transpired during that car ride.
Bridget: (panting, feeling the luck of the Irish) How close is your place to here?
Colin: 24.3 minutes.
Bridget: Aw, seriously? But baby, I want you NOW!
Colin: Me too, baby, but I can't blow my cover. I'll drive as fast as I can.
Bridget: Alright, hurry.
(Bridget grabs Colin's crotch, Colin lurches forward)
Colin: What the hell are you doing? I can't drive when you do that. You'll get us both killed.
Bridget: You're in the CIA, I thought you liked danger.
Colin: There's danger, and there's getting your balls crushed by the steering wheel!
Bridget: Baby, I'm sorry.
Colin: It's okay. Hey look, it's a red light!
(He leans over and they make out. The light changes to green but they don't notice. Someone behind them starts honking.)
Colin: Hey, fuck you! (starts driving again)
Bridget: Sooo...are we almost there?
Colin: We have 21.8 minutes to go.
Bridget: (sighs) Oh. Um...
(awkward silence)
Bridget: If you could be any kind of tree, what kind would you be?
And so it's awkward for those remaining minutes, when the two realize that short of attempting the ever-hazardous "road head" maneuver, they must remain celibate until they arrive at their destination. I wonder if filmmakers ever worry that their carelessly constructed plots will make people like me ruminate on them for years. Probably not. Then again, good ol Roger Donaldson (the director of The Recruit) would probably just be glad to know that someone thought about his movie that much in any capacity.
December 30, 2007
Honoring the year's funniest in film
Everyone knows that the Oscars have always been a terribly serious affair. The last real comedy that won Best Picture was Annie Hall in 1977, and before that there were only a handful of others throughout the ceremony's history. (I am not counting Shakespeare in Love, because that's more of a "wave fans and giggle" period comedy, which are never actually funny.) This year was a great one for comedy, boasting everything from the crass chuckles of Knocked Up to the quirkfest that is Juno. Sadly, these comedic achievements will probably go largely unrecognized during awards season, despite often unanimous critical acclaim. Hot Fuzz has the same Rotten Tomatoes rating as Sweeney Todd, The Simpsons Movie has the same rating as There Will Be Blood, and Superbad has a slightly higher rating than Atonement - the latter example in each pairing being the Oscar bait (check out http://www.rottentomatoes.com/ if you want to do your own sleuthing). So, until the Academy wakes up, I will make it my duty to honor the movies and people that brought the funny this year.
BEST FUNNY PERFORMANCE, FEMALE: Ellen Page as Juno MacGuff in Juno
Is there any contest here? It's sad that funny female performances seem so rare (or good female performances period). I can die happy the day a female Superbad comes out, because I know girls who talk and act like that (I'm one of them!). That being said, I'm not trying to downplay Page's excellent work in this film. She's kind of like a typical best friend - but with substantially better one-liners.
RUNNER-UP: Keri Russell as Jenna Hunterson in Waitress
A different kind of funny in a movie you can watch with your mom. Jenna's sweet and Southern, but also spunky enough to refuse her obstetrician's offer for a coffee date with, "I can't have coffee, it's on the bad food list you gave me. What kind of doctor are you?" She also names homemade pies after how much she hates her husband, which is amazing.
FUNNIEST PERFORMANCE, MALE: Jonah Hill in Superbad (and Knocked Up)
Is it fair to include someone with two movies? Maybe not, but the fact remains that Jonah Hill is one funny bastard. His vulgar and profane tirades and comments in Superbad are nothing short of hysterical, and he proved to be a repeat scene stealer in Knocked Up. The best part is, you can tell that he's improvising most of what he says, and that he's just a funny person in real life. (Note to Jonah fans: check out the bonus features on the Knocked Up DVD to see his character complaining about the lack of man-on-man action in Brokeback Mountain.)
RUNNER-UP: John C. Reilly in Walk Hard: The Dewey Cox Story (and Year of the Dog, briefly)
The funniest thing about Reilly's role in Walk Hard is that he actually plays it completely straight. While the other cast members are clearly just goofing around (see the "Beatles" cameo below), Reilly almost makes you believe that Dewey Cox is real. Having said that, he perfectly embodies a parodied version of several decades in American music, ranging from a mumbly and Dylan-esque Cox to a LSD-fueled Cox who needs indigenous chanting in all his songs. He's also great in Year of the Dog, as Molly Shannon's hunting-obsessed neighbor.
BEST RUNNING JOKE IN A MOVIE: Beard mockery in Knocked Up
Who knew something so simple could produce so many laughs? Ben (Seth Rogen) and his roommates spend the entire film teasing pal Martin (Martin Starr) about his beard, trying to persuade him to shave it so that he will lose a bet. The insults include, but are not limited to "Robin Williams' knuckles," "Martin Scorsese on coke," "Matisyahu" and of course, a vagina. There's even a deleted scene on the DVD where Jonah (Jonah Hill) just torments Martin for a solid three minutes about the beard.
RUNNER-UP: The sink gag in Walk Hard: The Dewey Cox Story
Remember in Walk the Line, where Johnny Cash (Joaquin Phoenix) tears a sink off a wall out of rage and despair? Well, Dewey Cox does that EVERY time he's upset, culminating in ripping off all the sinks in a public restroom.
BEST MOMENT OF UNINTENTIONAL HILARITY: "Bad" Spider-Man in Spider-Man 3
I remember the uncomfortable wave of laughter that swept across the audience when I saw Spider-Man 3. Peter Parker gets possessed by the evil goo from space, which causes him to do such evil things as get an emo haircut, give suggestive looks to women, and...dance? Was this supposed to be funny? I don't know.
RUNNER-UP: Everything Billy Mitchell says or does in The King of Kong
Billy Mitchell would seem like the world's most poorly written character if he wasn't a real guy. His mannerisms and delusions of grandeur in this ridiculously entertaining documentary make you wonder how people like that exist functionally in this world.
BEST COMEDIC DUO: Michael Cera and Jonah Hill in Superbad
These two are like funnier versions of every adolescent male I know. Just when you thought the funny fat guy and skinny straight man pairing was getting old, Cera and Hill give it a fresh and raunchy spin.
RUNNER-UP: Simon Pegg and Nick Frost in Hot Fuzz
Pegg's overachieving and devoted cop Nicholas Angel and Frost's slacker slob Danny are - hey, it's a fat and skinny guy again!
FUNNIEST CAMEO: Jack Black, Paul Rudd, Jason Schwartzmann and Justin Long as Paul, John, Ringo and George (respectively) in Walk Hard: The Dewey Cox Story
One of the main reasons I wanted to see this movie in the first place was from the oh-so-brief clip of this Beatles cameo in the trailer, and it was even funnier in context. The four guys all play their own Beatle with a fair degree of accuracy, but at the same time act utterly absurd.
RUNNER-UP: Sacha Baron Cohen as Pirelli in Sweeney Todd: The Demon Barber of Fleet Street
I guess this isn't technically a cameo, since he's billed fifth. But then again, he's in and out of the story pretty quickly. His role would be hilarious even if he didn't open his mouth, because his hair and outfit are sublimely ridiculous. The icing on the cake, however, is his outrageous singing voice and demeanor. Plus, in the back of your head, you're definitely saying, "OMG it's Borat!"
THE WES ANDERSON AWARD: Mike White, for writing and directing Year of the Dog
No offense, Wes, but I think it was all downhill after Rushmore. The person I believe most fit to carry on your legacy at this point is Mike White, creator of Year of the Dog. The film was saturated with your influence - right down to squarely framed shots of random objects - but had actual emotion instead of just hipster music. And doggies!
RUNNER-UP: Jason Reitman for directing Juno
Juno doesn't have a whole lot in common with the typical Anderson output, save one thing: the music. The soundtrack kicks in at unorthodox moments and features a slew of fresh, quirky artists and songs that define the tone of certain scenes.
FUNNIEST MOVIE OF THE YEAR: Superbad
I didn't say best movie, or best-written, or most likely to change your life. I said funniest. Sheer volume of laughter. And that title, my friends, goes to Superbad. Finally, a film that acknowledges how funny teenage boys can naturally be. No stupid subplots, no contrived love stories, no moralizing. Just hilarious, rowdy, clever, and even a little touching comedy. All written by a pair of 14-year-old boys (a young Seth Rogen and Evan Goldberg). If that isn't a smack in the face to all other comedies, I don't know what is.
RUNNER-UP: Hot Fuzz
More people need to acknowledge the genius that lies in the triumvirate of Simon Pegg, Nick Frost, and Edgar Wright. Together they do great things, such as the top-notch British cop spoof Hot Fuzz. Their brand of comedy is hard to classify - it's British but accessible, lowbrow but smart, gruesome but funny, honoring but parodying. It's like nothing else. And accents make everything funnier.
I acknowledge that this list is incomplete, because I have not yet seen four films I believe would have a place on here: The Savages, Ratatouille, The Simpsons Movie, and Lars and the Real Girl. What do you think? What are your picks for the funniest of 2007?
BEST FUNNY PERFORMANCE, FEMALE: Ellen Page as Juno MacGuff in Juno
Is there any contest here? It's sad that funny female performances seem so rare (or good female performances period). I can die happy the day a female Superbad comes out, because I know girls who talk and act like that (I'm one of them!). That being said, I'm not trying to downplay Page's excellent work in this film. She's kind of like a typical best friend - but with substantially better one-liners.
RUNNER-UP: Keri Russell as Jenna Hunterson in Waitress
A different kind of funny in a movie you can watch with your mom. Jenna's sweet and Southern, but also spunky enough to refuse her obstetrician's offer for a coffee date with, "I can't have coffee, it's on the bad food list you gave me. What kind of doctor are you?" She also names homemade pies after how much she hates her husband, which is amazing.
FUNNIEST PERFORMANCE, MALE: Jonah Hill in Superbad (and Knocked Up)
Is it fair to include someone with two movies? Maybe not, but the fact remains that Jonah Hill is one funny bastard. His vulgar and profane tirades and comments in Superbad are nothing short of hysterical, and he proved to be a repeat scene stealer in Knocked Up. The best part is, you can tell that he's improvising most of what he says, and that he's just a funny person in real life. (Note to Jonah fans: check out the bonus features on the Knocked Up DVD to see his character complaining about the lack of man-on-man action in Brokeback Mountain.)
RUNNER-UP: John C. Reilly in Walk Hard: The Dewey Cox Story (and Year of the Dog, briefly)
The funniest thing about Reilly's role in Walk Hard is that he actually plays it completely straight. While the other cast members are clearly just goofing around (see the "Beatles" cameo below), Reilly almost makes you believe that Dewey Cox is real. Having said that, he perfectly embodies a parodied version of several decades in American music, ranging from a mumbly and Dylan-esque Cox to a LSD-fueled Cox who needs indigenous chanting in all his songs. He's also great in Year of the Dog, as Molly Shannon's hunting-obsessed neighbor.
BEST RUNNING JOKE IN A MOVIE: Beard mockery in Knocked Up
Who knew something so simple could produce so many laughs? Ben (Seth Rogen) and his roommates spend the entire film teasing pal Martin (Martin Starr) about his beard, trying to persuade him to shave it so that he will lose a bet. The insults include, but are not limited to "Robin Williams' knuckles," "Martin Scorsese on coke," "Matisyahu" and of course, a vagina. There's even a deleted scene on the DVD where Jonah (Jonah Hill) just torments Martin for a solid three minutes about the beard.
RUNNER-UP: The sink gag in Walk Hard: The Dewey Cox Story
Remember in Walk the Line, where Johnny Cash (Joaquin Phoenix) tears a sink off a wall out of rage and despair? Well, Dewey Cox does that EVERY time he's upset, culminating in ripping off all the sinks in a public restroom.
BEST MOMENT OF UNINTENTIONAL HILARITY: "Bad" Spider-Man in Spider-Man 3
I remember the uncomfortable wave of laughter that swept across the audience when I saw Spider-Man 3. Peter Parker gets possessed by the evil goo from space, which causes him to do such evil things as get an emo haircut, give suggestive looks to women, and...dance? Was this supposed to be funny? I don't know.
RUNNER-UP: Everything Billy Mitchell says or does in The King of Kong
Billy Mitchell would seem like the world's most poorly written character if he wasn't a real guy. His mannerisms and delusions of grandeur in this ridiculously entertaining documentary make you wonder how people like that exist functionally in this world.
BEST COMEDIC DUO: Michael Cera and Jonah Hill in Superbad
These two are like funnier versions of every adolescent male I know. Just when you thought the funny fat guy and skinny straight man pairing was getting old, Cera and Hill give it a fresh and raunchy spin.
RUNNER-UP: Simon Pegg and Nick Frost in Hot Fuzz
Pegg's overachieving and devoted cop Nicholas Angel and Frost's slacker slob Danny are - hey, it's a fat and skinny guy again!
FUNNIEST CAMEO: Jack Black, Paul Rudd, Jason Schwartzmann and Justin Long as Paul, John, Ringo and George (respectively) in Walk Hard: The Dewey Cox Story
One of the main reasons I wanted to see this movie in the first place was from the oh-so-brief clip of this Beatles cameo in the trailer, and it was even funnier in context. The four guys all play their own Beatle with a fair degree of accuracy, but at the same time act utterly absurd.
RUNNER-UP: Sacha Baron Cohen as Pirelli in Sweeney Todd: The Demon Barber of Fleet Street
I guess this isn't technically a cameo, since he's billed fifth. But then again, he's in and out of the story pretty quickly. His role would be hilarious even if he didn't open his mouth, because his hair and outfit are sublimely ridiculous. The icing on the cake, however, is his outrageous singing voice and demeanor. Plus, in the back of your head, you're definitely saying, "OMG it's Borat!"
THE WES ANDERSON AWARD: Mike White, for writing and directing Year of the Dog
No offense, Wes, but I think it was all downhill after Rushmore. The person I believe most fit to carry on your legacy at this point is Mike White, creator of Year of the Dog. The film was saturated with your influence - right down to squarely framed shots of random objects - but had actual emotion instead of just hipster music. And doggies!
RUNNER-UP: Jason Reitman for directing Juno
Juno doesn't have a whole lot in common with the typical Anderson output, save one thing: the music. The soundtrack kicks in at unorthodox moments and features a slew of fresh, quirky artists and songs that define the tone of certain scenes.
FUNNIEST MOVIE OF THE YEAR: Superbad
I didn't say best movie, or best-written, or most likely to change your life. I said funniest. Sheer volume of laughter. And that title, my friends, goes to Superbad. Finally, a film that acknowledges how funny teenage boys can naturally be. No stupid subplots, no contrived love stories, no moralizing. Just hilarious, rowdy, clever, and even a little touching comedy. All written by a pair of 14-year-old boys (a young Seth Rogen and Evan Goldberg). If that isn't a smack in the face to all other comedies, I don't know what is.
RUNNER-UP: Hot Fuzz
More people need to acknowledge the genius that lies in the triumvirate of Simon Pegg, Nick Frost, and Edgar Wright. Together they do great things, such as the top-notch British cop spoof Hot Fuzz. Their brand of comedy is hard to classify - it's British but accessible, lowbrow but smart, gruesome but funny, honoring but parodying. It's like nothing else. And accents make everything funnier.
I acknowledge that this list is incomplete, because I have not yet seen four films I believe would have a place on here: The Savages, Ratatouille, The Simpsons Movie, and Lars and the Real Girl. What do you think? What are your picks for the funniest of 2007?
December 16, 2007
Shameless self-promotion
Okay, so you guys like movies, right? That is SO convenient, because I just made one! It's a project for class that gave me increasing amounts of gray hair all semester, but I think it turned it pretty darn good. So check it OUT! If that didn't sell ya, this will: it's about Waldo. Yeah, that Waldo.
http://youtube.com/watch?v=4fOHrpWvhrY
Enjoy!
http://youtube.com/watch?v=4fOHrpWvhrY
Enjoy!
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)