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.