Penis Jokes Not Included

Moving right along now...

I'm hoping everyone had a great Thanksgiving. Mine was actually really enjoyable. The few days leading up to it weren't great (understatement of the year). This is going to be the second consecutive weekend I haven't seen a movie, though. On the one hand it gives me an opportunity to catch up a little bit here. On the other hand...well...we all know how much I love seeing movies.

No installment of funny pauses today. Haven't stumbled upon a good one in a while. When I do I'll be sure to fill everyone in.

Video for today is by Rainer Maria. In part I'm posting it because I've been listening to and enjoying them lately even though I'm not huge on this particular song. Another reason I'm posting this, however, is because while looking for a video of theirs on YouTube I realized that--holy crap--this one was filmed in a diner that my friends and I eat at constantly. Weird...

#32: Stranger Than Fiction

I'm going to go ahead and guess this isn't one of Will Ferrell's more popular roles. That's probably because he isn't yelling, acting like a child, or dressed in some sort of half-hearted costume that makes his role less a character than Will Ferrell dressed as a character.

That makes it sound like I don't like Will Ferrell. I do. I loved Talladega Nights, Anchorman, Step Brothers and a variety of other deliciously immature and inappropriate slapstick comedies. His cameo in Wedding Crashers made an already fantastic movie that much more fantastic. The problem is Will Ferrell has gotten to a point in his career where he just plays himself. All of his characters are exactly the same--they deliver similar lines, act similarly, and have similar character flaws. They say if it ain't broke don't fix it, but the problem with this is that he's a talented actor. He's no, I don't know...let's say...Jonah Hill. A role like this proves his oft-forgotten versatility.

Incidentally, Will Ferrell doesn't need to yell to be funny. At least not all the time. Here he is (dare I say it!) completely charming. He plays a soft-spoken, mild-mannered, effectively boring IRS employee who only reevaluates his life once he finds out it's in danger. Maggie Gyllenhaal adds what happens to be my favorite of any role I've seen her in: a sassy anarchist bakery-owner. Along with a typical scattered and overly-intellectual college professor in Dustin Hoffman, a tortured method writer in Emma Thompson, and an audacious assistant in Queen Latifah, this relatively small movie boasts one of the most stacked casts of any film I've had the pleasure of reviewing thus far. Despite the strangely minimal interaction between all of the characters each of them complements the movie in such an invaluable way that none of the talent goes to waste.

I hate to refer to this movie as cute because that would make it seem like some easily-forgettable family movie. Puppies that chew on an old pair of your shoes are cute. Babies that don't realize they have something on their heads are cute. Good movies, though, are heartbreaking or exciting or hysterical. This movie is none of those, but it doesn't need to be. It gives you this sort of empty feeling (in a good way) as it presents strangely profound existential messages amidst a seemingly silly plot. There is, of course, no way for a man to all of the sudden find his life being narrated. And if, for whatever reason, this were to happen, this narrator would not be omniscient and would not be able to predict his impending death. But the concern is not, "How will Harold Crick save his life?" so much as it is, "How would you react if you knew your death was imminent?"

This film isn't especially deep as it doesn't leave you desperately seeking someone with which you can discuss it. When my sister and I watched it we both agreed we liked it and that sufficed. It does, however, get you to reconsider the more mundane elements of life if only for a little bit. And it helps that it has an indescribably talented cast, a unique plot, and a whole lot of intelligence behind a "cute" facade.

Undeniably artsy

Incidentally I came up with what might be a fantastic writing exercise for my students with regards to tone and narrative voice. On what would normally be an hour car ride home, instead sit in traffic for over two and a half hours with a dinner at home that is undoubtedly ice cold and then sit down and do your best not to sound angry at the world in a blog entry.

Here's my second installment of funny pauses.

Sorry, Lea Michele.

Video for the day is Insomnia by Electric President. Very pretty song. Enjoy.

How am I doing with the not sounding angry at the world?

#31: Unmade Beds

Seeing movies at IFC, however wonderful, is difficult because so few of the films have any reviews publicized before their theatrical releases and it's hard to find much information on them. You're often left with going by the movies' descriptions on the theater's website and the posters to get a feel for how interesting they seem. On this particular day I really wanted to see something at IFC and this looked intriguing. Additionally, it just happened to be showing at a time that was convenient for me.

Do I regret it? Not at all. It takes a lot for me to regret seeing a movie. Am I especially impressed? Not particularly.

While I hate to come out swinging in my approach to this film because I by no means disliked it, it's films like this that give independent cinema a negative image. Not every indie movie is pretentious and artsy. Not every one is set in some foreign city and utilizes dreamy voice-overs during love-making scenes with abstract existentialist musings. Not every one has a series of intertwining stories that only ostensibly come together at the end but are really never resolved at all. I don't mean to sound harsh, but Unmade Beds seemed more an indie movie parody than an indie movie.

My initial reaction is that the troubled, emotionally-unfulfilled youth caught uncomfortably between childhood and adulthood is getting to be a tired character. I couldn't identify with either protagonist in this movie. I don't suspect that the filmmakers hoped for the viewer to feel bad for either character, but if one can't even justify their actions or relate to their seemingly ungrounded emotions it's difficult to follow them for the duration of a feature-length film. One doesn't even necessarily want to like them because they don't offer much. The female was frustrating and the male just made me profoundly uncomfortable.

To be fair, there were some beautiful cinematic shots and lines of dialogue in here. There was also a really great soundtrack. These contributed to my acceptance of the film by its conclusion. I didn't walk out of the theater feeling as if I'd just gotten shafted. My concern is that the film's successes came fragmented. It isn't enough to like a few lines or a shot here and there. I don't even remember any specific scene from the movie. I remember the male character drank. A lot. And then proceeded to have some incredibly awkward encounters with his father. The female character just seemed completely impetuous. She had some interesting lines over the course of the film, but those could have been delivered by anyone and they would have been equally as intriguing. Looking back, she really didn't do anything.

So I guess that all this talk reveals my primary concern with the film: characterization. Plot could not have been my primary concern because there really isn't any. This isn't necessarily a shortcoming because I don't get the sense from the film that there was supposed to be a plot and it just didn't show up. Rather, the film was the study of two main characters. When those characters reveal themselves to be flat and lacking touch with reality, however, it's difficult to see the draw for the film.

Unless, of course, you're an indie movie fan.

Chi-Sci-Fi?

It's been a while, hasn't it? I've been so swamped lately I can't even describe it. Well, now that I've lost whatever minimal readership I may have had, why not get back into the swing of things?

I'd like to add a new segment I will periodically try out. It's called Funny Pauses. Here is the first installment.

Sorry, Paul Severino.

Video for today is a little obscure. It's a former band of a friend of a friend that you'd never guess isn't professional. Besides the fact that the video is surprisingly well done the sound beats the snot out of so much that is out there right now. I know that was a bit of an unbecoming description but....here's His and Hers by The Riflemen

#30: The Time Traveler's Wife

The problem with a shockingly long hiatus is the fact that it's been a solid three months since I've seen this movie so I won't be able to give too much brilliant insight into it. Not that I'm able to give too much brilliant insight into any movie. Hm...how humbling.

I don't know why I wanted to see this movie. I was somehow, for some reason, intrigued. I can't deny that I enjoy so called chick flicks but this one looked especially sappy. However, with the summer winding down and an end-of-break beach trip in the driving-home stage, we decided to give this a whirl.

I can't lie; I liked it. Maybe I need to go hunting and then to a football game to recover from that confession, but this movie bounced back from what was a slow start to become a really moving love story. I've heard that the book is The Five People You Meet In Heaven status--uber-popular but not really considered literature. It's a beach read. It's a train read. I can't agree or disagree with this because I've never personally read it, but I can see where that claim might come from. The story doesn't lend itself to profundity.

Love is an innate human desire (groundbreaking conclusion, no?) so stories revolving around it don't need to be profound because they appeal to everyone. This, however, was undeniably creative--a chick flick that doubles as a pseudo-sci-fi film. For those who didn't understand the premise (as I didn't upon entering the theater) the man in this film has a condition where he spontaneously time-travels to different points in his life. That premise in and of itself can make for some interesting scenarios, but putting the love story spin on it creates some real paradoxes. When old Eric Bana meets young (and I mean young) Rachel McAdams, for example, is it creepy if they also love each other later in life? Is it weird for her to talk to him? Is it weird for him to talk to her? Somehow the story helps the viewer avoid these questions; the nature of the relationship does not become a priority because how convincing the two are as a couple makes the pairing seamless.

Despite the distance from the time I saw this film I distinctly remember the beginning being a little rocky. It was a little too slow and a little too cheesy for me to take it entirely seriously. I thought that if the movie sustained that pace and tone I'd be in for a long night and a waste of money. However, as you get to know the characters, you find yourself expecting the time jumps at all the wrong moments but praying for just thirty more seconds before he disappears from an important moment in his life. During his wedding, for example, you find yourself desperately searching for an answer of when he's going to leave and if he's going to make it back.

The end, of course, as with most romance movies, is heartbreaking. You know it's coming, but despite its predictability the filmmaker does a good job of distracting the viewer long enough to keep the obvious out of his or her mind until it actually hits. And it does hit. It's that standard bittersweet sappy conclusion that makes you hate yourself for being so human. The creativity of the story saves it from being cast off as cliche.

Similar to what I've heard of the novel this was adapted from, The Time Traveler's Wife is not cinema. There's nothing brilliant about it. There are moments where the writing is silly and where the twists aren't really twists because you know they're coming, but the story appeals to basic emotions and accomplishes what it seems to have hoped to accomplish: an eccentric take on the age-old love story.

My second brush with Christopher Guest

I thought of an interesting list that dawned on me today: ways to address people you should know but don't:

1. Hey you!

2. Hello sir/ma'am

3. Hey! How ya doin'?

4. This guy!

5. Uh-oh! Here comes trouble!

6. Wo-oh-oahh where have you been?

7. Well look what the cat dragged in!

8. Look at this big shot!

9. I was just thinking about you!

10.

I'll leave number ten open for suggestions.

Video for the day is a fairly recent Cursive song. There's a lot of energy in it which is one of the things that drew me to it in the first place. It's called Dorothy at Forty.

#29: Waiting for Guffman

I think it's fine to have a thing. M. Night Shyamalan has his twists. Quentin Tarantino uses chapters. Francis Ford Coppola does a lot in black and white. And Christopher Guest has his mockumentaries.

In part it's a safety net--not necessarily in a bad way, but in the way that a director can ensure his or her audience knows what to expect, effectively weeding out potential critics by completely disclosing your style up front. It's also a testament to doing what you're good at. Cinema is not a field conducive to experimenting for the sake of experimenting. You need to be pretty firm in your presentation, and throwing the budget and time into something you aren't completely sold on yourself certainly would be a waste.

Additionally, though, it's a bit constrictive whether one realizes it or not. When directors make a conscious decision to exhibit some distinguishable consistency in their work they need to have mastered the craft and all of its requisites. By no means am I trying to imply that Guest hasn't; his mockumentaries are truly well-done and his films seem to improve chronologically. The problem is the nature of the genre calls for certain things that can't be compromised.

The one thing I feel that Guest failed to provide his viewers in this film is verisimilitude. Part of the beauty of a mockumentary is that it takes the world as we know it and presents it completely unfiltered, exposing just how nonsensical we can be sometimes. The reality is where the humor comes from--we laugh because we're uncomfortable, because we're in denial, and because we see a lot of what we find ridiculous in ourselves or in people we know. That's why The Office is so funny, because the business world can be that ridiculous without realizing it.

In part the problem might be that this review is coming from someone who has at least some experience with community theater. Simply put, based on the community plays I have seen, the community plays I've been in, and the community plays I've heard of, this just doesn't capture reality. The product is a caricature of community theater stereotypes that are simply too hyperbolized to get a laugh; the players were too delusional, the community was too naive, and the play was too awful.

There's no denying that I'm no professional screen-writer/director, but to me the potential humor in satirizing community theater lies in the nuances. The singers need to be good enough for the viewer to understand where they're getting the idea that they deserve a spot in a play but just amateur enough that their performance teeters on tolerable. The director needs to be obviously and knowingly amateur but can't care about that. The audience needs to be generally indifferent despite the profound amount of work that is going into it--superficially supportive. And the play itself needs to be bad only in small ways--minuscule mishaps and miscues that are noticeable and cringe-worthy but not downright appalling. I just feel like Guest's scenarios in this movie are too overblown.

There are moments where this movie really struck a chord with a particularly funny line or situation. The end, in particular, was predictable in the sense that you knew something was coming, but the viewer couldn't help but appreciate it. Best in Show came four years after Waiting for Guffman and the improvement is undeniable. However, on its own, Waiting for Guffman only shows glimpses of an entertaining movie.

Consistency is king

I've been gone for a while making sure that my work is in order, and although I should be continuing that right now everybody needs some solace. Right?

My Farmville is shaping up nicely. For anyone who doesn't know who that is I strongly suggest not pursuing the knowledge; it will absorb you.

I know no one is going to agree with me on this but the weather has been absolutely gorgeous lately. I love how quickly it got breezy and chilly. I can't even explain how great my morning commute has been: pitch black with virtually no one on the road on a blustery late summer/early fall morning. It's really an excellent way to start the day, believe it or not. Much better than that 8 a.m., 90-degree trek all the way down Route 1 over the summer.

The video for the day is an incredibly poor quality clip for one of the less impressive songs on a truly impressive album. Don't get me wrong; the song is great. But of all the songs, this isn't even one of the better ones. It's called I Believe in the Good of Life by a band described by the lead singer as "gay church folk band" called The Hidden Cameras. I can't advocate enough for this band if you're looking for something new to listen to.

# 28: Inglourious Basterds

I remember the days when I hated Quentin Tarantino: the days before I got it. I never was able to appreciate his over-the-top violence, abundant non-sequiturs, and annoying and seemingly out-of-place soundtracks. I didn't understand his popularity and I vowed never to see Pulp Fiction, Reservoir Dogs, or Kill Bill.

Flash forward a few years and I own the special edition of Pulp Fiction and consider it one of my favorite movies. I kick myself every time I hang out in the house watching something and forget to rent Reservoir Dogs. I own Kill Bill 1 & 2 having seen and loved both of them. I recently purchased True Romance despite knowing little to nothing about it solely because Mr. Tarantino wrote it. My favorite scene in Sin City just happens to be the one scene he directed. And I have been looking to pick up From Dusk Till Dawn for some time now. In short he's become one of my favorite writers/directors.

It took me some time to realize just how talented a writer he is. This movie is the perfect example. On the one hand you may not want a movie's best scene to come at the very beginning, but then again this opening presented to me what instantly became my favorite monologue of all time. Seriously. The film's villain--a man so vile and repugnant that you can't help but love him--casually delivers a sickeningly logical holocaust-defending argument to a man who is subsequently brought to tears. It undoubtedly chilled everyone in the audience and set the tone for a memorable World War II movie more throwback propaganda than historical fiction.

Despite setting the bar astronomically high for the film Tarantino was able to achieve consistency effortlessly. There were no lulls in this--no expendable scenes. Every character was necessary even if he or she didn't seem so at the time. Three distinct plotlines were penned, each so engrossing that it made you forget about the other two until the scene changed. He continues to be one of the most purposeful screenwriters in the business.

One thing that I think Tarantino does better than any other writer/director I've seen is tenseness. You won't find suspense done any better in a horror, action, or mystery film. In addition to the opening scene--which I absolutely cannot say enough about--four or five scenes stuck out as unforgettable if for nothing else than how uncomfortable you felt watching them, desperately waiting for the outcome. This is as much attributed to his writing and directing as it is his casting. I have yet to see a Tarantino film in which the cast doesn't collaborate flawlessly; the conflicts are always very real and the sound relationships--however few and far between--always have very tangible chemistry. The Basterds, specifically, in this movie exude camaraderie in the few scenes in which we see all of them together.

I have to mention Brad Pitt specifically here. Although his part isn't really as big as the trailers made it out to be, he played the brutish hero to a T and contributed the majority of the laughs to the movie. I think he is one of those actors who is easy to write off because he's become far better known for his looks than for his acting ability, but no one could have pulled this part off more naturally.

My initial qualm about Tarantino was the sense of pretension I got from him. I thought his stylized pieces--complete with chapters and ambiguous symbols--indicated that he took himself far too seriously. After all, his movies seemed far more absurd than profound. I rarely change my tune about things like that; when I get that sense from someone I generally stick to it. In this case, however, having finally experienced him adequately both through his work and through interviews, I've really come to appreciate this youthful creativity and enthusiasm in him. He's an incredibly smart and talented person--don't get me wrong--but it seems that his propensity for excessive violence, helter-skelter storytelling, and curveball detours can be attributed far more to an insatiable sense of humor and a conscious refusal to succumb to the conventional.

Far less relatable than you'd think

The doomsday clock is ticking.

Why do they not produce clothes in my size? Honestly. I understand that I'm short, but everything is either way too big or way too small. Maybe I should just get every individual outfit tailored to my liking.

I'm going old school with the song for this entry--well, sort of. It's a White Stripes song that many of you have probably heard, but probably not recently. It's called Fell in Love with a Girl, and it makes you want to dance--at least it does if you have a soul.

#27: Post-Grad

Unlike a lot of guys I dig a lot of so-called chick flicks: Big Fish, The Terminal, The Notebook, The Time Traveler's Wife, Mean Girls, What Dreams May Come, etc. Conversely, like most guys, I love Alexis Bledel. So I figured this was a no-brainer. I'm a recent college graduate. I love other films in this genre. I love the star of the movie. At the very least I anticipated this to be tolerable.

Boy was I wrong.

The movie clocked in at just under 90 minutes but you never would have guessed that if you were sitting in the audience. It wasn't even that the movie was slow-moving; simply put, the movie seemed to have no direction and as a result there was no logical progression to the plot.

It was virtually impossible to determine what the movie was exactly aiming for. I guess there was the general concept that Alexis Bledel's character was grappling with life after graduation, but the motif of familial relationships and the painfully flat romantic substory seemed to be added simply because they couldn't think of enough material for the more important adult-life conflict. As a result, all three storylines were thin and hastily wrapped up.

The family storyline was far and away the movie's weakest point. I'm hard-pressed to recall a more obnoxious movie family. In any other situation such an irritating family wouldn't be so hard to overlook; the typical frustrating movie family comes off as such because it is how they were written to be. Here, however, it was obvious the family was supposed to be quirky and endearing. The father was so bizarre and awkward that he was cartoonish in an off-putting sort of way. The grandmother was similarly annoying and virtually impossible to sympathize with. The son went beyond the unfortunate oddball pariah one may find in a show like Weeds and instead traipsed in the realm of bizarre to the point of disturbing. The mother ultimately became lost in the shadow of that rat pack, but in the few scenes she had she suffered by association: in her context, her excessive affection came off less motherly than irksome. Tack all of that onto a house littered with highly-prized garden gnomes, a revolving display case containing medicine and toiletries, and an ultimately illegal belt-buckle sales ploy that leads to a needless jailing and you have a group who got lost on the way to the studio for the filming of an indie movie that's trying too hard.

The romantic storyline had so little substance to it that any pain or joy the young lovebirds got out of the relationship seemed senseless. The only way the creators compensated for Zach Gilford's unsuccessful wooing of Alexis Bledel's character was his perpetual reiterating (almost word-for-word) of "You just have no feelings for me even though I'm in love with you." It's one thing to move the plot through dialogue, but the only way the audience could have been smacked in the face harder with that conflict is for the screen to have been blinking "WARNING: UNREQUITED LOVE." Similarly, the short-lived fling between Alexis Bledel and the suave, mysterious, exotic older neighbor was non-sensical and nauseatingly rapid. Besides being a completely unconvincing couple, whoever determined the necessity of this quirky motif relinquished the opportunity of having this character contrast starkly with the bothersome family and instead made him fit in this apparently alien community perfectly with his strangely furnished house and bizarre job. Granted, the bizarre job allowed for one of the few genuinely humorous scenes in the movie thanks to a Demetri Martin cameo, but the movie's creators failed to understand that quirky is only quirky when there is something to compare it to. When every character is a pod-person, the charm is lost.

Finally, as a recent graduate myself, I fail to sympathize with the apparent 6 or 8 months it took the protagonist to find a job. If the entire movie were to be about Alexis Bledel's struggle with adjusting to the real world there would have been ample opportunities to laugh at awkward scenarios and root for her character. Instead, though, when it seemed that the movie's focus was about to remain with job-hunting, it switched gears to her love life. When it seemed that the movie's focus was about remain with her love life, it turned to the quirky family. By the time her new job comes up at the end the audience has forgotten that that was her primary concern in the first place. And it certainly didn't take too long for her to land on her feet.

I'm not sure where I'm supposed to get my Alexis Bledel fix if movies like this fail so miserably. Sure, her cameo in Sin City was fantastic, but I WILL NOT see any of those Traveling Pants flicks and she doesn't have much else in her filmography. She has the talent to make good movies and I certainly hope the future of her career holds brighter spots than this or I'm going to need to petition for a Gilmore Girls comeback. Yes. I like Gilmore Girls. Sue me.

In the not too distant future

The end of summer is approaching quickly--or summer is running out--and it certainly shows in the disposition of the general populus. I know I'm finding myself a little more lethargic, a little more antsy, a little more stressed. Let's hope the promise of the new year flushes that. Watching friends go back to school one by one certainly didn't help.

Anyone know where I can get decent dress clothes? I spent 45 minutes in Macys only to realize that they do not have a single shirt in any style of any brand in the size small. Pleeennntttyyy of XL though. You know, for a country that is constantly being criticized for our weight problem, I can't help but wonder why every single store's XL products go untouched until they make it to the clearance rack where they are (probably) eventually thrown out. It just doesn't make sense.

Video for the day comes from an EP that I avoided picking up for about two years before I finally realized that I had to own it. It was far too expensive considering its length, but it's really an excellent bunch of songs. This one is by far the best; it's called The Nature of the Experiment and it's by Tokyo Police Club:

Anyone know a good store in NJ for teaching supplies? Posters? Boxes for holding things? Etc.? Sorry...digression...

#26: District 9

I was torn about seeing this because I couldn't help but be reminded of Cloverfield: a sci-fi movie loaded with unmaterialized potential. The trailer suggested that it would far outperform the aforementioned disappointment because I love that fake-documentary presentation and, however brief the appearance on screen was, the creatures seemed well-crafted. Once I found someone willing to go with me I decided I probadbly have seen worse movies this summer and I had to roll the dice on this one.

My friend didn't really like it, but I had a dilemma somewhat similar to the one I had with Public Enemies or Best in Show earlier this summer. I didn't dislike the movie by any means. I certainly didn't consider it a waste of my time or money. It was a solid enough effort, but while nothing tipped the scale in favor of cons nothing was able to push it into the "great" category, either.

The first half of the movie was excellent regardless of whether or not it was sustained. This is probably what the majority of the trailers you've seen consist of. The sociological implications of the aliens being first welcomed and then held in Johannesburg were perfectly depicted. The documentary was so realistic that it was able to retain the contemporary setting while effortlessly integrating something as foreign as an alien. What's funny is that the word "Alien" has gotten such a poor treatment in the media through B-movies and laughable renditions that it's hard to take the word seriously, but District 9 utilized both dimensions of the word to successfully avert coming off as silly--the creatures were as much social outsiders as they were visitors from another planet.

Unfortunately my perception of the alien design shifted between the trailer and the movie in its entirety. For the brief moment the alien is being interrogated in the one version of the trailer it's truly unnerving with its giant insect look. I've always subscribed to the philosophy of less is more, however, especially when it comes to creature design in sci-fi and horror movies. Watching them for two hours is really detrimental to their appearance; they look more like something out of Men in Black than a serious alien movie. A lot of the situations the aliens were put in didn't help the matter. One scene had one of the creatures wearing a hair-net and bright pink bra despite the fact that no other creature in the camp wore clothes. Another scene had one of the creatures urinating even though something like bodily functions could have just as easily gone unaddressed in the movie without it being distracting. Inclusions like this were hard to justify or even simply make sense of.

The protagonist of the story, Wikus Van De Merwe (I suggest not even trying to pronounce it as it's even jumbled whenever someone says it in the movie) represented a very strong performance by Sharlto Copley at times, but he ultimately succumbed to inconsistency in the grand scheme of the plot. His timid, well-intentioned, naive character at the film's strongest point spontaneously transformed into an aggressive, heartless law-enforcer. The audience was given every indication that he would show compassion for the creatures but from his very first encounter with them a little while into the story his disposition took a turn for the worst. The biggest problem here is that Copley played the timid character flawlessly and had the movie focused the conflict upon Wikus' unfortunate position between the untrusting but unfortunate aliens and the inhumane but powerful government it would have been much easier to become invested in him as a character. Instead sympathy becomes only partially restored for him by the end of the film.

But there seems to be a common complaint for where the movie went wrong--the complete change in focus from the first half to the second. What started as a tense, interesting, and intelligent film ended up in the ranks of the summer's shoot-em-up action flicks, which is all well and good if that's what you're gunning for. District 9 initially seemed to want more for itself until it sacrificed psychological drama for futuristic violence. All of the sudden the dimensions of the film faded as the public's voice receded, the government was reduced to a single army general serving as a foil for Wikus, and the aliens were reduced to one representative seemingly isolated from his ilk. The documentary style was abandoned for the usual wide shots and quick cuts of a self-aware blockbuster. Essentially the film devolved from something truly memorable to another passable appeal to the senses.

Just a few little things: I understand that giving the aliens pathetically common names was supposed to signify oppression and forced assimilation, but without addressing this calling the main alien Christopher Johnson throughout the last half hour of the film really just served for awkward humor. My friend and I giggled every time his name was said because it sounded like something out of South Park. And speaking of something out of South Park, for as well-written as so much of the dialogue was (again, especially at the beginning), I can't help but wonder where that cringeworthy line from Wikus came at the film's end: "Just go! Go before I change my mind..." Melodrama at its finest.

For whatever reason it's easier to point out why something didn't live up to its potential than it is to acknowledge what kept it afloat. With that in mind, District 9 really wasn't a bad movie by any stretch of the imagination. It was an incredibly interesting concept in a generation when unique ideas are becoming increasingly rare. As I mentioned before, its first half was one of the most entertaining things I've had the pleasure of watching all summer. Even the second-half shoot-'em-up extravaganza would have been enjoyable had that been the direction the movie originally seemed headed. My major complaint is that the movie seemed to take the easy way out when it could have been one of the few science fiction stories capable of transcending the genre to become an investing drama. It was a really enjoyable movie that could have been so much more if it didn't let the big "What if?" go unaddressed.

False advertising

Hey there readers! Dell promptly shipped me a replacement for my faulty RAM so now my computer is back to 100%. It's a real beaut. I'll still be getting that netbook for lesson planning (and, of course, for funsies) but my baby is back to speed. I missed her.

I've decided this year to keep myself from burying myself in work 24/7 I am going to try to attend some New Jersey Nets games. Tickets should be cheap because A) they're looking to move to Brooklyn and B) they're going to be awful. I want to see them before they move and before they end up good and they're a big ticket team. Any takers?

You're going to have to do me a favor and not watch today's video if you are prone to epileptic seizures. It's a fantastic song, but the band has a propensity for psychedelia. What I mean by that is this video is a little too trippy for the average viewer. It's called So Begins Our Alabee and it's a few-year-old single from the band Of Montreal:

#25: Funny People

I'm not a Judd Apatow fan. He sees like a nice enough guy, but whenever I see even bits and pieces of the things he has had some hand in I generally walk away disappointed. When my friend and I were discussing what he's done and Wikipedia informed me that he wrote Don't Mess with the Zohan, I vowed never to see a movie of his again.

Unfortunately that vow came after Funny People. I'd wanted to see this movie since the very first trailer came out because I thought it'd be in the same vein as Spanglish: a film where Sandler shows glimpses of his classic personality but also displays his range with a solid dramatic performance and subtle humor. Not so. Not that Sandler was the only weakness of this movie, but he sure didn't help.

I'll grant that this was really just the character he played, but I can't think of a character more detestable than Sandler's who wasn't explicitly supposed to be a villain. I get the impression that he was meant to be an anti-hero of sorts, but he was a whole lot more anti than hero. You feel some sympathy for Willy Loman. But after finding out that Sandler's character is on his death bed and after getting to know him a little, it's tough to find a reason to root for his recovery. He's cynical to a nauseating degree, rude, emotionless, childish, and disgustingly vulgar.

I can take vulgarity. I think, when done properly, it can make for good comedy. Tarentino, for example, does vulgarity beautifully. The vulgarity here, however, was so obviously simply for the sake of vulgarity. None of the vulgar jokes were funny because they were simply too much--both too far and too frequent. Sandler's character in particular was way too over-the-top to tolerate, but Jonah Hill and Seth Rogan's characters were similarly frustrating. Jason Schwartzman toed the line periodically, but if there were a character who remained acceptably unlikeable as opposed to downright annoying it would probably have to be his.

The thing about annoyance, too, is that it sometimes can be overlooked when it occurs, say, in a manageable ninety-minute film. This was over two-and-a-half hours long. I have NEVER been more eager to get out of a theater in my life. There was nothing about this movie that could sustain that sort of running time.

That isn't to say that it was completely devoid of positives. There were hints of an enjoyable movie in here, namely the stretches when Adam Sandler's character is likeable and it seems as if he'll stay like that (even when he never does), or the stretches when Seth Rogen's character is awkwardly charming and it seems as if he'll retain the viewers' sympathy (even when he never does), or the stretches when the drama begins to become investing and it seems as if things will fall into place enough for your emotions to be appealed to (even when they never do). That was the true shortcoming of this movie; any potential positive never materialized.

I left the theater not really understanding the point of the movie--both the message and the plot. First it seems as if the movie is about Sandler's character and his struggle with learning that he's going to die. Then it seems as if the movie is about Rogen's character and his observation of the drawbacks of fame. Then it seems as if the movie is about Sandler's character and his new lease on life when he finds out he isn't going to die. Then it seems as if the movie is about Sandler's character trying to get back his old flame. Then it seems the movie is about Rogen's character learning what not to become in his pursuit of a stand-up comedy career. Simply put, for a movie with little to stand on, there were far too many conflicts and far too many balls in the air which would go neglected and fall to the ground as quickly as they were tossed up. I guess it had a happy ending in the sense that it was optimistic, but problems lacked resolutions--they were simply abandoned--and nothing really got wrapped up. I got the sense that the film only ended because they ran out of reel.

The cameos within the film were one of its strengths. James Taylor has a funny moment, and an unlikely angry exchange between Ray Romano and Eminem makes for a decent scene. Watching bits of stand-up from a variety of other comedians is interesting, too. But a question that lingers throughout the film is that for a movie so packed with comedic talent--and, for that matter, for a movie entitled Funny People--why is so little of the stand-up funny? Sandler's character's stand-up in the movie is uninspired and received as such, and Rogen's character's is forced and flat. Maybe it was intentional on Apatow's part to make the stand-up in the film weak for irony's sake, but all I got out of it was that it made a long movie seem even longer.

I'm surprised critics were as generous to this film as they were. I didn't see many straight condemnations of the film when there was so much neglected potential in it. I get the feeling that if it weren't for the success of Superbad, Apatow would become the M. Night Syhamalan of comedy with a comparable fall from grace.

Adding to my collection

So my computer is fixed. Sort of. My hiatus has been a combination of an obsolete computer, training for South Brunswick, and not sitting in front of a screen for 9 straight hours at TCNJ on a daily basis with a desperate need to pass the time. I've seen a bunch of movies between now and my last entry, though!

Training at South Brunswick was simultaneously horrifying and exciting. On the one hand, there are so many people to know, so many policies to remember, and so many things to keep in mind that I am finally realizing why everyone makes that first year of teaching out to be, as the ever-comforting principal of Bridgewater High School called it, "A bloodbath." Conversely, however, watching the administrators and teachers model potential teaching strategies for us while giving presentations about the school got me excited to get back into the classroom. Part of me wants summer to be extended another month and another part of me wants to start planning and get in there now.

I can't seem to find a single version of today's song's video on YouTube that can be embedded, but I encourage you to find the video on there if you're bored. For the sake of time here I will just be posting a regular old still-shot that someone graciously put up so that I can deliver the video to you here today. Honestly, record labels: how does disabling embedding save you any money? This band has virtually disappeared, this song is, like, 6 years old, and if anyone wants to listen to it he or she can just go to YouTube anyway. Here's An Honest Mistake by The Bravery:

#24: The Collector

I think one of the smartest moves movie trailers make is using the phrase "Critics are calling it the..." That way, when I'm sitting on my computer or organizing my records and have the television on in the background my interest is piqued. So when the trailer for this movie professed that critics are saying that this movie is giving our generation a new horror movie icon and my eyes weren't on the screen, I hadn't considered that the critic that made that claim was from some no-name horror movie website in the same vain as Fangoria that isn't especially judicious when it comes to uber-violent slasher films.

I believe I've said this in an earlier entry and I need to reiterate it now to establish context for this review: there is no such thing as a good horror movie. 99% of horror movies consist of bad actors, awful writing, and distractingly farfetched scenarios. The Collector, unsurprisingly, is no exception. It should have been a red flag for me when two weeks after its release I discovered that only one large movie theater in my area was playing it. Add this to my list of mistakes in my approach to this movie.

To its credit, it's from the makers of Saw--a series I am not particularly fond of but which I can acknowledge for inventive deaths that if nothing else arouse interest in a "What is going to happen next?!" sort of way. The Collector similarly succeeded in presenting some nauseating, cringe-worthy scenes where your visceral reaction trumps the obvious issue of how this man acquired and set up some 18 bear traps in a room by himself... Oops! Spoiler!

But so many of the brutal kills here absolutely could not overcome the issue of the innumerable discontinuities. When exactly did this man set up all these boobie traps? How did the person who broke into the house without any awareness of the presence of the collector not encounter any traps when he first entered the house? How were a handful of exposed standard nails able to support the weight of a human being suspended on a wall? These questions didn't just go unanswered; they have no answers. They're rhetorical. They were all the shortcomings of a paper-thin plot.

And I hate to allude to any possible spoilers, but it would be almost laughable if I found out that the creators of this movie hoped for the revealing of the collector's identity to be any sort of shocking moment. Early in the movie there was that ominous man that looked at the camera just a few seconds too long not to be anyone of note, and even though it didn't even matter who the collector was this would have had to be your first horror movie ever not to recognize such a hackneyed cliche within the genre.

But by far the most absurd part of this movie lies in the unique opening credits--and I don't mean unique in a good way. The shadowy shots of gruesome jars and the musky corners of an ill-kept lab punctuated by shots of the collector shrouded in darkness set to out-of-place industrial song put the audience smack in the middle of what seemed to be a Prodigy video--and for all I know it could have actually been. I don't know if it was trying to pull off something different or if the director's little brother was in a struggling goth band but I sat there with my 0_0 face in awe at what was clearly meant to be intense but what was actually ridiculous. It was actually kind of funny, in retrospect. Maybe I should give kudos for it?

If your id is looking for some sick satiation and won't be offended by soap-opera-quality dialogue and second rate acting then you'll have to see The Collector when (if) it comes out on DVD. As for me, I'm still on my quest for a member of the few, the proud, the actually good horror movies.

Better late than later

THIS COUGH AND SNEEZE WILL NOT GO AWAY! Hm...bubonic plague? What are the symptoms? Web MD?

3 more hours left at ITS before I'm officially done and have to look towards training at SBHS. I know I should really start planning for my first few weeks of class at least regarding basics, but I just don't know where to begin. I guess that's another hold-up with first year teachers: where to begin.

I have a feeling I'm in for another unsatisfying weekend. ::sigh::

Apparently Zooey Deschanel and Joseph Gordon Levitt collaborated on a music video for She & Him's Why Do You Let Me Stay Here while filming 500 Days of Summer. I've heard he's a good dancer so I guess the majority of the footage is actually him. Not sure about that backflip though...



#23: Almost Famous



Let me begin this entry with a conversation I'm tired of having.

Random Person: It's exactly like that part in Almost Famous! Remember that part when-
Me: I've actually never seen Almost Famous.
Random Person: Woah, what? No way! You'd love it! It's-
Me: Yea I bet I'd really like it. I own it I just never got around to-
Random Person: Dude you HAVE to see it. You'd love it. I can't believe you haven't seen it!
Me: Yea I really want to see it. Like I said I own it I just haven't got-
Random Person: That's crazy...haven't seen it...

I never had any doubt that I'd love this movie. For one, the love of my life Zooey Deschanel is in it. Secondly, although I'm not really a fan of the music the movie is about (no, I'm a heathen...I don't like Zeppelin or the Doors or any of those bands...) I love music enough that I can appreciate any movie that devotes itself to the topic. Finally, the movie lives up to its hype as one of those inspiring, mind-expanding, life-altering movies that sticks with you from the very first viewing. My sister got me the DVD a year or two ago and I just never got around to giving it a go. But here I am. And the aforementioned dialogue shall never be had again.

I don't know if this would still be considered a cult hit (or if it ever really was) because it's acclaim is now fairly wide. I know it didn't do well in theaters, but I haven't met anyone who did not enjoy this movie. Kate Hudson, an actress I normally dislike immensely given her apparently unjudicious approach to accepting roles, was excellent in this movie as an ostensible free spirit with a lot more to her than she lets on. Patrick Fugit (a.k.a. the ceaselessly likeable William Miller) gives one of the most endearing performances I have ever had the pleasure of viewing. And Billy Crudup, an actor who is (justifiably) gaining acclaim with recent roles in big-ticket movies such as The Watchmen and Public Enemies plays Russell Hammond to a T--that is, he makes a fictional character seem so real you'd think he and his band Stillwater released a record sitting in your collection somewhere between Janis Joplin and The Who.

But this movie is one of those cases in which a supporting actor stole the show. Phillip Seymour Hoffman's role as journalist and oft-absent mentor and spiritual guide for William Miller is a part that you can't help but love, and one you wish had more screen time. His devotion to Rock and Roll with capital R's is entirely convincing--so much so that it's admirable. Any dialogue he is a part of instantaneously becomes a profound monologue in which he muses frantically over the state of music, hardly seeming to compact all his thoughts into whatever passes through his lips. While his part in the movie couldn't really have been expanded upon more than it was, every second of screen-time he was given was a delight.

The wide scope of approaches to music that Almost Famous covers is just one more notch on the film's belt. You get the popular musicians, the up-and-coming musicians, the managers, the industry, the groupies, the fans, the fanatics, the journalists, and the mothers of the world desperately trying to suppress anything that could spoil innocence. Each category is subtly different and the power struggle is evident throughout the movie--and I believe very deliberate. A sort of harmony is reached by the end but no identities are compromised. The happy ending successfully avoids cliche status.

The scene--I mean THE scene, the crux, the climax, the fulcrum--of this movie is the infamous plane scene. Watching the members of Stillwater spew confessions at each other convinced that they've met their end, and all getting cut off by a suddenly brazen William Miller, is simultaneously intense, hysterical, and heart-breaking. The expressions on their faces upon survival are priceless as they walk down the airport corridor more distraught than thankful. It's one of those priceless movie scenes that is able to invoke emotion in the viewers who suddenly sense that the movie is drawing to a close, even if they aren't ready for it.

My inevitable viewing of this film was long overdue. It didn't disappoint. Every positive word you hear about this movie is true. So for those of you who haven't seen it...wait..you haven't seen it? You'd love it! What's wrong with you?! You have to go see it! I can't believe you haven't seen it...

The problem with pleasing the public is...

Let me start by saying I thought I'd be done with jammed fingers when I stopped playing soccer. I was wrong.

I also didn't think I'd get an awful cold with a chest-rattling cough in the middle of August. I was wrong.

I'd like to say that this weekend was relaxing but instead I ended up with an awful case of cabin fever. Everyone was busy and although I was sick I desperately needed to get out of the house. The only solace I had was a trip to the record store that I took at my most fidgety moment and stretched far longer than it needed to be by looking through virtually every row of records and engaging the clerk in conversation.

On a related note, my Wii baseball team had a hell of a weekend.

Video for the day that I won't say any more about for reasons you may soon find out: St. Andrews by Bedouin Soundclash.



#22: Visioneers



I saw the preview for this movie not long after it premiered at a few minor independent film festivals and I immediately wanted to see it. Unfortunately it wasn't available for a long time and I somehow missed a very limited offer to view it for free online. When I found Zach Galifianakis' Twitter (God bless technology) the first update I saw was that Visioneers was finally to be made available on DVD. I immediately went on Amazon and preordered it.

I got it in the mail (along with my Watchmen preorder) and it had what I thought was a sticker on the DVD. As it turned out it was not a sticker but actually printed on the cover. The label read "Featuring star of The Hangover Zach Galifianakis." That is, of course, a true statement, but it has absolutely no bearing on this movie. Anyone out there who loved The Hangover would probably hate Zach Galifianakis' stand-up and the rest of his work. Similarly, anyone who actually appreciates Zach Galifianakis probably would hate The Hangover. Anyone who wants a true feel for him needs to see his bizarre but hysterical Absolut ads, some of the skits he does online with other equally-talented comedians, or his disjointed and irreverent stand-up comedy complete with over-the-top tantrums and hilarious non sequiturs. By the way, I had a link for the last one but it is far too vulgar for me to be promoting here. Youtube him if you're interested.

The point of that whole anecdote is this: Visioneers is the true Zach Galifianakis--the comedian I have adored since the first time I saw his act. So much of his material seems to have been written because he, himself found it funny, and if anyone who watches finds it funny as well then that's just a nice bonus. I firmly believe the best comedy comes from that philosophy because it isn't forced or cliche like so many of the punchlines in the stereotypical teen comedy that's recycled in theaters every month.

I have a strange obsession with works of art that represent dystopias (1984 and A Scanner Darkly are good examples) and this film created a memorable one. The story was incredibly similar to that of Orwell's but less as a knock-off than an homage. The plot revolves around the Jeffers Corporation which employs Visioneers--but the movie makes it a point never to elaborate on the nature of their mundane work or what it is exactly that the company does. The interesting twist comes with the fact that those employees who harbor a dissatisfaction with a highly-restricted life and a seemingly meaningless job reach a breaking point at which they explode. No, not metaphorically. They actually explode. The KA-BOOM kind.

Despite obvious social commentary in the same vain as 1984, the movie is punctuated by dry humor flawlessly delivered by Galifianakis. Some times it resides in an absurd line he delivers with a completely straight face. Every character, for example, inexplicably pronounces the word "chaos" with the ch sound (an affricate for you English enthusiasts out there!) and it is obvious that the writers went out of their way to include the word enough times to establish an inside joke with the viewers. Other times it can be found in simple but intelligent slapstick that is funny not in the mere act of one person hitting another or someone made to look silly but rather through the contrast with the serious context of a genuinely numbing society. If any of you can watch the scene in which Zach Galifianakis and his brother grapple ultimately swinging each other into an awkward fall without laughing you have no sense of humor.

However absurd the movie seems the tone remains brilliantly dark. Don't let the bright scenery and silly physical humor fool you; there's a great piece here. The deterioration of the protagonist's marriage coinciding with devolution of his wife all at the hands of a frightening dystopia makes the film a focused work of art first and a crazy comedy second. Writing and directing duo Jared and Brandon Drake have as much to say as Orwell, Gilliam, or Bradbury but are still able to seamlessly integrate comedy to emphasize the darkness of society through contrast.

The difference between 1984 and Visioneers is a happy ending for the latter. This may be the nature of comedy--dark or otherwise--that an unhappy ending would seem incongruous--simultaneously hampering the humor and succumbing to bathos by naively appealing to sentiments. The ending, though, is one of my favorite parts about this movie. It's exhausting living in a world that reminds us you can't spell critical without critic and that repeatedly suggests that "reality" connotes disappointment and dismality. While dystopian art is obviously dismal in nature, happy endings don't have to be mawkish--reserved for the romcoms and grocery store novels of the world. I think the Drake brothers make a bold statement in wrapping up their memorable dystopia with a personal victory. Sometimes Goliath needs to fall.

I have to apologize for the daunting entry but I think it adequately expresses how much there is to be said about this film. Having secured a physical release I think the Drake brothers' work has paved the way to become a cult success in the same vain as Brazil. Galifianakis is a truly talented actor that should trademark the intentionally awkward scenario as he's the king of the trade. The supporting cast makes the most of minimal roles acting appropriately conflicted--at times emotionless, at times distraught. And the concept, while seemingly immature, holds much more grandeur than it suggests on paper. Visioneers is a true success that few are likely to see--at least not until its celebrated in retrospect.

If only that were true

I can't put it off any longer: today I must both look at the first of my two curricula and I must start at least one of the books I'll be teaching that I haven't read yet. September's creeping in...ominously...intimidatingly...quickly.

I hope everyone had a wonderful weekend. There are so few summer weekends left (AAHHHHH) that we must all make the most of them while we can.

Bought some slammin' records this weekend. Two (2) Belle and Sebastian albums, Bad Brains' self-titled album, a Bouncing Souls album, a Please Inform The Captain This Is A Hijack album, Bright Eyes' LIFTED: Or the Story is in the Soil Keep Your Ear to the Ground album, and a Pavement album. This, in addition to finding the normally very expensive Spiritualized CD I've been wanting used for only $5, made for an excellent city trip.

And in honor of these purchases I am presenting to you my song selection for the day. It's the ultimate pump-up anthem--a delightful pop-punk romp. Without further ado I give you True Believers by The Bouncing Souls:



#21: 500 Days of Summer



Anyone who knows me knows how excited I've been for this movie. Ever since my dear friend Brenda (she always appreciates shout-outs) introduced me to the trailer (primarily to make fun of how pretentious and stereotypically "indie" the elevator scene is) I have been waiting impatiently for its release. I'll be upfront: it didn't disappoint. I've seen it twice. And I'd see it a third time if someone's interested...

Everything about this movie was exactly what I hoped it would be. I love Joseph Gordon Levitt and he gave a fantastic performance. I love Zooey Deschanel and this was my favorite role of hers--even moreso than a fantastic scene I stumbled upon from a movie I will never see (Failure to Launch) in which she is absolutely hilarious. I love the songs on the soundtrack and the music was used perfectly in appropriate scenes. All of the standard movie-rating categories checked out.

What makes this film great rather than good, however, is that it goes beyond what would be just another movie to throw on a list of favorites with a handful of unique and unforgettable techniques. Its non-linear format, for one, compliments the nature of the film so perfectly that I can't believe I initially imagined the story being told from day one to day five-hundred. I think narrators can sometimes be extraneous, but here his intermittent commentary adds a fairy-tale sense to a story that benefits from that atmosphere. And for anyone who hasn't at the very least seen the trailer, it is absolutely imperative that you do. The scene where Joseph Gordon Levitt is in the park dancing to Hall and Oates' You Make My Dreams Come True is infinitely better in context than in the trailer. The entire audience was rolling when that scene came up--and rightfully so. Right down to the cheesy grin on Mr. Levitt's face, it was absolutely perfect in every way. Allow me to pay the scene the ultimate compliment: it trails only the float scene in Ferris Bueller's Day Off on my list of movie scenes I would have killed to be a part of.

But for all of its unconventional successes, there is one scene in particular that will stick with me--and may go down as my favorite movie scene of all time. Yes, even beyond the float scene in Ferris Bueller's Day Off. I hate to cough it up now when it knocks you on the floor the first time you see it, but it simply has to be written about. Director Marc Webb oh-so-creatively utilized a split screen to represent two things simultaneously: main character Tom Hanson's expectations for a specific event versus the reality of that event. Seeing the two diverge is heart breaking not only because of its nature but because of a complete sensory overload that emulates an emotional trainwreck. I don't want to give any more away, but I don't think I will have the pleasure of a more profound scene in a long, long time.

Even the small roles in the movie were invaluable. Tom's two friends were the quintessential peanut gallery who consistently provided comic relief for the more sentimental moments. The humor was mature in its immaturity--seeing two grown men act so childish at certain moments was hysterical. Tom's little sister's precocious demeanor and deadpan delivery posited next to Tom's often immature rationale heightened both of their characters. Even down to the smallest role, 500 Days was perfectly casted.

Although initially reserved for select theaters, I've heard that this movie is up for wide release either this or next week. It certainly deserves it. If you get the chance I really suggest catching this while its in theaters. Although it seems like a movie that would be just as good as a rental, there are a handful of scenes the benefit from the big screen. This is a perfect summer movie. (How clever of me!)

Actual return to form

I've never been prouder as a brother. Ladies and gentlemen my sister has won scholarships, had incredible soccer games, performed heart-breakingly-beautiful solos in concerts, done good deeds for people, and helped me in times of my greatest need. I love her with all my heart. But never have I been prouder of her than during our drive home from work the other day:

[Scene: Late July, year 2009. A brother and sister pair are seated in a white car, stuck in traffic. They are meditative: the former humming to the song flowing softly and warmly from the stereo, the latter tapping gently with her finger upon the steering wheel. With sunlight pouring into the car and bathing them, the two can't help but flash gentle smiles expressing a distinct contentedness. Finally the reflective silence is broken by a thought instinctively turned to words.]

Alex: I love this soundtrack so much.

Em: Hm?

Alex: The 500 Days of Summer soundtrack.

Em: Oh, me too. I'm glad you brought it in the car. It's gorgeous.

Alex: When we get home I'll burn you a copy of it.

Em: That's okay. I want to get my own copy. Thank you, though.

Curtain

If there's anything every brother wants to teach his younger sister it's how to build a legitimate and impressive music collection. A tear nearly came to my eye. It was a beautiful moment.

I won't add anything. Nothing can follow that.

Oh, except a song. Lately I haven't been able to think of funny bad movies, so I'm going to call it quits on that series until I come up with a really good one. As for the song of the day, though, I stumbled upon it today and I really like it. Passion Pit - Moth's Wings (Manners). Enjoy:



#20: Kicking and Screaming (1995)



This fell into my hands thanks to Barnes and Noble's 50% off Criterion Collection DVDs sale. I hesitate to advertise that because I love the series so much and don't want other people going out and snatching them away before the sale is over, but I've already gotten most of the films I wanted, save a few.

I didn't know anything about this movie besides its premise, which seemed simple but really intriguing for obvious reasons: a group of recent college graduates who can't come to terms with an emergence into the real world, so they spend a year hovering around campus refusing to move on. It's a lot more mature than I'm making it sound.

Noah Baumbach has a short but impressive list of accomplishments. Though I haven't seen it I've heard excellent things about The Squid and the Whale, which he wrote. This film was written by him, as was (much to my surprise) what is probably my favorite movie of all time: The Life Aquatic with Steve Zissou. Assuming The Squid and the Whale is as good as everyone says it is--I own it but I have yet to watch it to verify this--Mr. Baumbach is a solid three for three, and with regards to the two I can speak of he's got two grand slams.

This was an absolutely hysterical smart comedy with a perfect cast, a rare sense of naturality and reality, and strong sentimental value. I only recognized any of the actors from small parts in TV shows and other little-known movies, but each of them can boast such spot-on deadpan delivery that I can see why Criterion decided to rerelease it less than ten years after its box office release.

There's a distinct 1990's feel to it despite the film really making no effort to highlight its era. I wasn't sure what to make of this but I've resolved that it's because of this wonderful nostalgia that punctuates the film as you follow the characters who have a reluctance to release (or, at the very least, briefly forget) the past. One of the most telling lines in the film (and one beautifully penned by Baumbach) is when one of the characters frustratedly confesses, "I'm already nostalgic for conversations I had yesterday." I can't speak for others but I know this is an emotion that is embarrassing to admit but often felt. The fact that he could capture this is an accomplishment.

And even beyond that line one of the strengths of this movie is just how quotable it is. The Criterion Collection cover is especially apt; while the other movies the series releases often utilize a famous image from the movie in some creative way, this one looks like a chalkboard littered with many of the clever quotes that can be found in the film. And there are plenty. One thing that you should know if you decide to see this film is that you will be reciting the lines with whomever you watch it with for the next three days.

And speaking of quoting (my paragraphs starting with the word "And" should communicate just how excited I am about this movie) it is here that I found what is now one of my favorite dialogues of all time. Maybe I'm simply feeling dramatic today after my little performance piece at the beginning of this blog entry, but I feel compelled to transcribe it for you. It involves the main character, Grover, and his girlfriend, and it strips the scene of the fabricated profundity that is often found in the typical love scene in lieu of an awkward but beautiful sentiment:

Grover: Okay, the way I see it, if we were an old couple, dated for years, graduated, away from all these scholastic complications, and I reached over and kissed you, you wouldn't say a word. You'd be delighted. ...probably. But if I was to do that now it'd be quite forward, and if I did it the first time we ever met you probably would have hit me.

Jane: What do you mean?

Grover: I just wish we were an old couple so I could do that.

It may seem sappy to some, but to me that was the college version of Jerry Maguire's infamous "You. Complete. Me." It resonates when you first see it.

The humor, the heartbreak, the numbness of the bridge from youth to adulthood is recreated flawlessly in this movie and I can't recommend it highly enough. Although I'm reluctant to because I love it, I'll lend it out if I have to. Just know I will kill you if I don't get it back.

Return to form (sort of)

Ladies and gentlemen, what have I done in a past life to deserve this:

1. I spend 45 minutes preparing the Mac for capturing one of the videos I've been working on for a month.
2. The computer begins to capture the video.
3. A customer walks in to laminate something, asking to check her e-mail while she waits.
4. My boss calls my name and nods to me to indicate that of the 20 computers in this room the woman selected the computer that I was capturing video on.
5. In less than 10 seconds she clicked around enough to cancel everything I'd captured over the course of an hour and a half.

Why not?

I didn't want to nap after work but now I'm almost certain that I'm going to have to. They've had half of the lights off today (as they sometimes do for reasons of which I am unsure) and that is the kiss of death. Only five and a half more hours. God help me.

Song for the day is one of my all time favorites: Your Ex-Lover Is Dead by Stars. Reading that as a single sentence is pretty humorous. Anywayyy:



Yesterday while at Best Buy purchasing Shoot 'Em Up, The Ice Harvest, Definitely Maybe, and Blow (all on sale for anyone who is interested) I thought of a potentially hysterical proposed Blu-Ray release. Unfortunately I forgot it within the hour. I decided as a form of mourning I won't have one today. Yes, it was that good.

Someone brought to my attention that my list of potential Blu-Ray releases is, in effect, nothing more than a list of awful movies. I completely understand that. But it's funny to think of them going through the trouble of making these movies super high quality.

Before I begin my review I have an odd experience to document. I went into Best Buy yesterday to purchase The Wrestler (also on sale). I had seen the movie in theaters when it first came out and I really liked it. I had a bit of a spontaneous crisis when I picked up the movie in the store, however. It had never happened to me before. I realized that although I loved the movie I couldn't picture myself ever wanting to watch it again. After brief debate I put it back on the shelf and picked up Definitely Maybe instead which has a high rewatchability value, in my opinion. Funny how things work out...

#19: Public Enemies



It's strange that this is one of those movies that seems to have been in production for ages but when it finally came out there was little interest. I heard very few people talk about this movie and I know even fewer who have even seen it. When I went to see it on the 4th of July (its second week, I believe) my friend and I were two of eight people in the theater. I know it was the 4th of July, but it was a late enough showing that I figured people might go just for something to do in the wee hours.

While I can't say that this blog signifies a return to positive reviews I can at least say it represents a lift in tone from the last few entries. I enjoyed this movie. I didn't love it and I don't anticipate buying it when it comes out on DVD unless there are some truly killer special features, but it was a nice enough way to spend my 4th.

My mom told me about a review for the movie that called it all style and no substance. I'm willing to admit that this is largely true but I don't think it necessarily detracted from the film. The basic story of John Dillinger is known well enough that the filmmakers had the liberty of glossing over the details in favor of some interesting cinematic choices. For example, there was a film noir sort of feel to the movie that made it feel vintage but not dated. The perpetually dimly lit cities posited against the white-washed country helped convey the sense of the dramatic changes in setting that Dillinger had to make to keep himself concealed, and it also contributed to the vintage air. One of my favorite scenes was a premature raid on the hotel Dillinger was staying at and the subsequent scuffle that broke out. The lighting here was done perfectly--dark enough so that you get the sense of the complete lack of visibility, but lit as a movie has to be in order for the viewer to know what's going on.

Johnny Depp's performance was (unsurprisingly) wonderful. He played the cocky, charming protagonist flawlessly and his quiet but confident challenges of authority never got tiring. What was actually disappointing, in my opinion, was Christian Bale's performance. There were moments where his character seemed so forced that you sensed an actual struggle for him to keep it up. This, of course, makes me wonder if Depp IS the Riddler in the final Batman movie if he will completely overshadow Bale and ultimately end the series on a sour note, but that's just because I'm a Batman fanatic and that is a legitimate concern of mine. It could just be that Bale had to play the stern, humorless cop hell-bent on finding Dillinger at any cost.

If we are to assume that Bale played the character the way he was supposed to, I think that it adds even more to the film's final scene--by far the highlight of the entire piece. Bale was left out of it entirely because it involved an outpour of emotion that Bale's character likely would have had no reaction to despite the fact that his character seemed to be necessary at the conclusion. I can add this to my list of summer movies that included perfect endings that resonated the way a good ending should.

Unfortunately there isn't much more to say about the movie besides I liked it. The reason I included my little anecdote about The Wrestler at the beginning is because when that happened I realized how I felt about Public Enemies. I enjoyed it when I saw it and can acknowledge it as a solid movie, but I don't think I could ever watch it again. Bale, Depp, and Marion Cotillard (who also gave an excellent performance) collaborated on what was an entertaining movie that will likely be forgotten when scanning lists of their roles ten years from now.