Movies III

Just watched Vantage Point (2008) - a shoot-em-up thriller about an assassination attempt on POTUS. Don't these shows give ideas to the "bad guys?"

I saw it.  It was good but not great and a little too long (almost 3 hours I think, longer counting previews, commercials etc.).  I found myself getting a little bored towards the middle but then it picked up around WWII (he is born at the end of WWI).  The special effects used to make Brad Bitt look old and then young were very impressive.  And there were a couple funny scenes which had the audience laughing out loud.   Also, I didn't really Benjamin's choice towards the end of the movie.  I don't want to spoil it so won't go into detail (tried making the font white, but it wouldn't work...)

Summary:  good rental on a night when you are not in danger of falling asleep half way through

I read Thompson's articles in Rolling Stone as they were published, and then the books, and I hated Johnny Depp playing the guy - he is nothing like Hunter S. Thompson at all in my opinion.

Did anyone see Boy in the Stripped Pajamas?

Has anyone seen this Irish movie Once (2006) directed by John Carney? I was ab it scpetical when my partner told me it was a 'musical', which it kind of is, but only if The Commitments is a musical. It's a very touching romance that avoids any of the clichéed pitfalls of the genre, as well as treating poverty, immigration and class very sensitively. Even the music is pretty good. I loved it!

I watched The Big Chill (1983) twice today, mostly for the great soundtrack, played through my 125w/ch stereo played at almost full blast. Hey, my neighbours are away, so why the hell not?

I have not seen it!  Most movies I end up going to in the theatre are rated PG or less (because I am usually with my son).  I'd like to see it though!  Thanks for the review.  And these other movies mentioned above - I'll have to check them out.

I just watched Napoleon Dynamite with my son yesterday.  I just noticed it by chance at the video store yesterday when we were looking for a movie to watch together.  It was cringetastic!  I think I like it better today than I did when I was watching it. 

SPOILER ALERT - I don't tell what happens in the plot (which is mostly non-existent anyhow), but I do mention a few things that happen throughout the movie.

I liked it, but I didn't find it as hysterically funny as my son did.  He was killing himself laughing at a lot of it.  He declared it "stupid" at the end, which is his highest praise for a comedy - he likes "stupid-funny".  Much of the humour came from the deadpan delivery and editing cuts.

For the first half hour of the movie, I found it somewhat amusing, but I found myself thinking, "Is that all there is?"  I think I've gotten used to the more obvious humour that you get in G and PG affairs these days.  But then I started getting into the rhythm of the movie and thought it was pretty funny, although I cringed through much of it.

I thought it was interesting, the way they portrayed Napoleon.  He wasn't the "loveable geek" that you really, really like and therefore identify with.  He was actually pretty unlikeable and an unsympathetic character most of the way through, maybe so that you don't feel so guilty about laughing at the awful things that happen to him.  I found myself feeling impatient with him.  His brother, Kip, was hilarious.  And I fell in love with Kip's girlfriend, LaFawnduh, from Detroit.

One thing I found really strange - if it weren't for the internet stuff, I'd have assumed that this movie was set in the 80's.  Everyone was wearing 80's styles (even the popular kids), the houses were all decorated like they were 80's or even leftover 70's, most of the technology (except for aforesaid internet and e-mail) was 80's, including the cassette tape that LaFawnduh gave Napoleon.  (I was waiting for my son to say to me, "What's that, Mom?")  Even my son recognized the 80's from the movie.  So I'm not sure what that was all about, unless it's supposed to give you a small-town Idaho 20-years-behind-in-fashion feeling.  Which it definitely did!

One thing I found was that the only two people of colour in the movie, Pedro and LaFawnduh, were very stereotyped.  Maybe this was a a statement about how fish-out-of-water they are in a small western town that is so whitebread and unfashionable it hurts.  (Which I guess is the stereotype of the white hicks.)  Pedro, with the two gangland-style brothers in their souped up convertible who offer "protection" to Pedro and his friends.  LaFawnduh with the over-the-top name, skintight, shiny clothing and makeup, looking like a guest from the Springer show (although she turns out to be absolutely lovely, understanding, and sweet), and turns Kip from geek into hood, complete with "bling".  I guess everyone is an exaggeration in the movie, and I suppose they were trying to make clear the huge difference between the blandness of the locals and the way "outsiders" don't fit in there. 

Also, I had the feeling that the stereotypes were introduced so that they could then turn them on their ear a bit.  So, LaFawnduh steps off the bus all sexy-hottie and you might expect her to totally reject this horrid, unfashionable, geeky hick from Idaho, but instead she is kind and accepting and treats both Kip and Napoleon with respect.  Pedro's gangbanger brothers don't actually do any gangbanging - they kindly pick up Napoleon, who needs a ride to the dance, and they use their intimidating looks to protect a geek at school who is about to be roughed up by a jock-prep bully.  Pedro starts out with the "Latin lover" stereotype in that he finds it easy to ask out the girl Napoleon has a crush on, but he doesn't seduce her - he just becomes friends with her and gives Napoleon ideas about how to make her like him.

Anyhow, overall it was pretty funny, and we enjoyed it.  Vote for Pedro!

I've seen Ratatoille several times and love it. It's my favourite animated film after Walt Dizzy's Fantasia.

I saw Underworld: Rise of the Lycans last night, that was a fun movie.

I'm about near the end of Hank Williams: The Show He Never Gave (1982) starring Sneezy Waters. I watched Sneezy start out as a street busker n the Sparks Street Mall in Ottawa in the early 1970's, then become a folk singer playing often at Le Hibou on Sussex, and then this fantastic but sad movie. His version of Hank's I'm so lonesome I could cry just tears my heartstrings apart. It's a sad, sad movie, but very well done. (Hank died of heart failure at 29, leaving a legacy of 700+ songs)

I watched Rec, a Spanish horror film, last night. It is absolutely great! Gorey as anything with a great plot and an excellent set up for suspense. The film utilizes the documentary style that is happily sinking into horror film right now, but actually manages to pull it off (unlike Cloverfield, which I quite enjoyed despite a few glaring flaws). The ending will have you at the edge of your seat, because it is just so screwed up. It eventually had a North American remake made last year called Quarantine. I did not see that film, but Rec is good.

Also, the recent spat of Marvel and DC animated films are damn good. Superman Doomsday, Justice League: The Final Frontier, The Next Avengers, Hulk vs.. They are all great and I suggest particularly the Justice League flick.

Apparently I had this wrong. It is all Pitt's face but CGI-enhanced and digitally grafted onto the bodies of the two other actors who played the aged Benjamin. What a task. The transition that appeared so obvious to me is the shift from CGI to Pitt with makeup. 

Hah, that's a strange coincidence, Webgear. My officemate was just telling me about that movie since I've never seen it.

I should add that the discussion was born from a rather intense conversation about the David Bowie movie Labyrinth, which is enough to terrify both children AND their parents.

I always enjoyed watching David Bowie in Labyrinth. It was a great movie on so many levels.

The Last Unicorn is a great movie for kids.

______________________________________________________________________________________________ We are like cloaks, one thinks of us only when it rains.

Che - Directed by Steven Soderburgh, with Benicio del Toro in the lead role, a cameo by Matt Damon and a more significant role for Franka Potente.

 Part 1 covers the period of the Cuban revolution and Part 2 covers Che's time in Bolivia. I'm glad I watched both parts (the movie theatre I went to only charged me for seeing one movie; does this happen a lot?) although a viewer could watch part 1 only and not miss much. Part two deals with Guevara's death in a simultaneously voyeuristic and incomplete way but it does complete the story. Africa is conspicuously missing from the two films, as are the formative events in Guatemala circa 1953. 

The film adequately represents Che as a revolutionary and the moral qualities of revolutionaries in general. An educational film. It is in Spanish with English subtitles as it should be. Recommended.  

Bad genre confession time!

I recently watched the movie Botched. I have to say, if you like a stupid, nonsense sense of humour, then this is for you. To sum it up, Russian-American Jewel thief, a sweet holy relic in Moscow, and a crazed Viking ballerina in a death maze full of traps...and disco!

Ignore the 5.8 star rating on IMDB, if you have the requisite sense of silly and you glumly understand the fact that we've been living in an awful Saw age of horror cinema, well this is a great send up.

I give this movie 4 holy relics out of 5 (this translates to me giving it an eight on IMDB)

I usually like J. Demme's films, particularly Silence of the Lambs and Jimmy Carter Man From Plains (a really well done doc with great music). Rachel Getting Married was not my cup of tea. I thought Hataway's performance was amazing, but the rest of the movie just didn't engage me. Then again, as you can see from my previous post, I have very discerning and high brow tastes in film ;)

I recently got back from Spain and I'm on a binge of Spanish language movies from the library so I don't completely lose my ear, I just watched 'El Bulto'(The Lump)a Mexican family comedy about a leftwing journalist who wakes up after twenty years in a coma brought about by a smack to the head obtained during a political protest in 1971.  The title is taken from the nickname his family gave to him while they visited him in the hospital.  I liked it alot, its kind of silly and the premise is a bit unrealistic but I watched it with my parents and we all enjoyed it which is a bit of an achievement in itself.  Next up is El espiritu de la colmena(The Spirit of the Beehive) which I've heard really good things about. 

Dinka, don't link to spam/advertising sites. Thank you.

Regardless, in that movie, Depp is completely lacking in gravitas, and is much too young for the part. He looks like an eternal teenager.

ps: I read all of Hunter's articles in Rolling Stone as they were published, and his Hells Angels book. I also read his Fear and Loathing books. Depp may have been his friend, but he looked nothing like Thompson, in my opinion. Casting Depp ruined that movie for me. YMMV, obviously.

The Spectacle of Spectacles - Cleopatra (1963).

When this was first released I saw it in the finest theatre in Ottawa (which has since been torn down to make way for new development) and, because of my severe hearing loss which was not alleviated very much by a powerful body hearing aid, there were many dialogues that I missed, including at the end when Antony is mistakingly mislead into believing that Cleopatra is dead, and then commits suicide. With the advent of Closed Captioning (CC) and these films being shown again on the tube, I've had a wonderful experience of seeing and understanding movie dialogue really for the first time. Despite all of its many flaws, Cleopatra strikes me as a masterpiece, especially for 1963 (when the Beatles, Elvis, and the Beach Boys were at the height of their popularity!).

ETA: I just watched a documentary on the making of Cleopatra. $44 million to make in 1963, would cost ten times that amount today. Liz Taylor earned $7million for her performance - in 1963! My God.

ETA: Cleopatra was originally meant to be two four-hour movies; however with costs escalating, the decision was made to pare it down to one movie of three hours and fifteen minutes. The documentary today said the deleted (and lost) footage is being searched, with the aim of fulfilling the original goal of two four-hour movies, and re-releasing it, eventually. Several of the deleted scenes are shown in the documentary, and they're quite interesting - although it's difficult for me to be more specific because I can't think of where in the movie these deleted scenes belong.

I agree.  Before this movie I had only seen movies the showed the Nazi soilders from the camp point of view - ie the prisoners in their bunkers and then being taken into the soilders houses that were such a contrast from the bunkhouses of death and torture that were shown (Shindler's List being a good example of this). 

This was the first time that I had ever seen the time period from the soilders point of life where they showed a fairly normal existence and then in walks a starving tortured man in rags into their beautiful country kitchen.  In fact it was because I have the background where I have seen so many pictures, heard so many stories and seen so many dramatizations from the death and torture of the camps that as soon as I saw him I started to cry and couldn't stop crying.  His presence in such a normal looking movie up until that point, to me, really brought the suffering to the forefront in a way that no other movie has made so real to me.

*******POSSIBLE PLOT SPOILER***********

I also thought it was a very powerful message about do unto others as one do unto youself for reasons I won't mention so as not be to much of a plot spoiler.

Is Arnie in T4?

I havent seen the movie, but apparently there are some historical inaccuracies. One Jewish rabbi said about it, there were no nine year-old children living at Auschwitz. Anyone not old enough or strong enough to work was murdered right away. Unless of course, if  they were twin children, then they were usually sent to Mengele who basically tortured them to death slowly.

And apparently the movie has the Polish blue army liberating Auschwitz. That's completely false as far as I know

Thanks 500_Apples. I had read sopmewhere that Arnie wants to return to the screen. And maybe get out of politics.

I watched Passchendaele recently on a DVD I bought from a "previously enjoyed" bin.  I had intended on going to see the picture at the cinema, but the trailers I had seen on TV made me skeptical about the content.  There was a little bit too much mushy stuff going on between the matinée idol leading man and his female sidekick for my liking.

Anyway, my suspicions were confirmed upon watching the film.  This is basically a chick flic with a couple of perfunctory battle scenes thrown in to make it seem like a war movie.  The plot is implausible and there are a few inconsistencies that didn't sit right.  For one, Paul Gross' character is supposed to have shell shock, but during the final battle scenes he is cool under fire instead of going to pieces as anyone with neurasthenia ought to have done.

The filming of the battle scenes was well done, though.  I recognised a lot of the scenes and images used in the film from photos and film clips I have seen before.

I caught Star Trek the weekend it came out.  Loved it.  I really liked seeing all the familiar characters introduced as newcomers.  lot's of subtle little references to other episodes (like Scotty losing Admiral Archer's favourite beagle in a transport experiment) but it's totally accessible for non-trekies.

My son had to sit me down after, and explain the different parallel universes and timelines currently extant, and having now grasped that, I'd like to see it again.  Spock is perfect.

Just watched "Eagle Eye" (2008). Fast paced thriller, tries to instill paranoia in the audience but ultimately fails, because it's too weak on plot development and too heavy on action. Interesting line on cell phones: "Your non-phone  conversations can be monitored even when the phone is switched off through the built-in microphone - the only way to defeat this is to remove the battery". That's all BS, right? (I've never used a cell phone)

Tonight I'm watching Vinyan:

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1029241/

The acting, particularly Anne Hathaway, was excellent.  It was long and repetitive and times, but so are real weddings.

I love watching Tim Robbins when he goes stark raving bonkers on camera - like in Noise and Cadillac Man.   Both are on TMN today.

Transformers 2 was everything I expected it to be.

We just checked Rocky out of the library, so I'm off to watch that now! Mr. Jrose says that it's a must-see, plus I've been slowly checking off titles from the American Film Institute's top 100 movies for the last ten years ... and Rocky just happens to be #78. Gotta love the library for movies! It's been over a year since we've rented a movie.

I agree josh, I would say that anyone who thinks that abortion should be illegal should see that movie.  It shows the reality in a way that no amount of debating ever could.

Just saw Harry Potter 6.

Nice popcorn movie. Those Death Eaters are frikkin scary, but I can't stop seeing Helena Bonham Carter as she was in "A Room with a View".

Alan Rickman simply owns Snape. So calmly evile. He rocks! I giggled at each of his dastardly lines. Except when he kills Dumbledore. 

8th Wonderland is to Internet politicking what 2001: A Space Odyssey was to space exploration. (Please credit me in your will for having introduced you to it.)

"Coventry," from the Draconian Swamp of Unholy Souls, writes on IMDB: The concept of "8th Wonderland" is simultaneously simple and genius. The title refers to the very first virtual nation in which people of all nationalities, religions and cultures unite in chat rooms to debate and vote on how they could improve ruling the outside world. And this time the members - citizens, if you will - of 8th Wonderland aren't loud-mouthed geeks hiding safely behind their computers, but devoted and resourceful academics that put their words into deeds as well. On a weekly basis, the citizens of 8th Wonderland democratically vote on an initiative during a referendum and subsequently appoint someone to execute the agreed actions. Whether it concerns placing condom vending machines in the Vatican, abduct world class soccer players to have them fabricate their own shoes amidst child laborers or boycotting the nuclear energy negotiations between Russia and Iran, the initiatives of "8th Wonderland" always make the world press and the virtual nation becomes immeasurably popular very fast. Parallel with the success, inevitably the first obstacles and issues arise as well. Frauds declaring themselves the mastermind behind 8th Wonderland, the safeguarding of loyal members after they risked their lives, dealing with the public opinion in case of false advertising or unpopular initiatives or feeling the burning breath of hunting FBI services in their neck.(...)

48 hours ago, this film had no North-American distributor yet, but if the standing ovation it got at the Montreal Fantasia film fest is any indication, it shouldn't take long.

You can even join this virtual country yourself at www.8thwonderland.com/

Phew! I thought it was just me.

In each movie, I keep expecting/hoping/praying for more screen time for Alan Rickman's Snape. But it's never enough. This time around, we could have done with much less of Draco Malfoy's fussing about with that damn cabinet and much (much!) more of Snape.

'The Yes Men Fix the World'

http://www.democracynow.org/2009/7/23/yes_men

"Anti-Corporate pranksters and gonzo political activsts are back with a new flik"

I saw L'Auberge Espagnole last night, that was a load of fun. It's got a very realistic portrayal of life imo. I bumped Russian Dolls way up my netflix queue.

Bruno: A Glimpse into Zionism?

http://www.counterpunch.org/atzmon07242009.html

'symbolism and the grotesque'

movies today aint even that good anymore the one kind I used to watch like hood movies aint even made no more they gone lol

I`m watching Désaccord parfait (2007), with two of my favourite people in film, Charlotte Rampling and Jean Rochefort. It has great dialogue, scheming, sexualty, and the landscape filming is exquisite.

I agree with Naomi Klein (as usual) in her interview with Michael Moore this week.  Capitalism: A Love Story is well worth a boo. It attempts to background us, uses some history (from the 1930s onward) to make the point about a takeover by finance capital, the despoilation of a working society that he idealizes from childhood.  There are lots of gaps, but I would think that the average moviegoer might be empowered to demand a better deal - if not another New Deal. 

Moore leaves us with the thought that Roosevelt's promise of a new Bill of Rights in 1943, "guaranteeing" work, medicine, housing and food for the American people would have come about if FDR had lived into the pastwar period.

We know that that in England the Bevridge Report of 1943 led to a state medical plan (since eroded), and the Education Act of 1944 made education for the working class more likely, for a while.

But how would the Democrats and Labour and socialism everywhere been able to resist the rot that came with enthronement of finance capital, speculative fever for 55 and out retirement plans,  and the attendant globalization of markets and trade that were legitimized by pure self concern? 

(And I hope I haven't missed discussion of Moore's latest work elsewhwere in babble).

I found a great movie in MPIX on demand on Rogers with Walter Matthau, Ozzie Davis and Amy Irving. Its a hidden gem.....

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0116601/

Okay good luck. Have a shot or two if you need it.

 I enjoyed it. Did you, 500 apples?

With terrible weather here last week, I became a couch potato for much of it, and watched Lou Reed's Berlin, A Dog Year, Tootsie, Seven Pounds, Flash of Genius, and Shine a Light (Rolling Stone's concert movie). I'm a huge fan of both Lou Reed/Velvet Underground and the Rolling Stones, so no surprise there, and I play my TV through a powerful stereo system, and the house was rockin', man. I guess my favourite of this bunch was A Dog Year, because I really like animals, and dogs in particular.

Forgot to mention The Reader !  Like Nussy, I saw it on TMN, along with all the othr stuff I mentioned earlier. I thought it was well done.

Well, in anticipation of the release of Where The Wild Things Are, here's an article I wrote back in 2003 bemoaning the project:

Reviving the Rumpus

By Michael Nenonen

November 3 2003

If you're having a bad day, then you'd better stop reading this right now, as the next sentence is a depressing one.  Universal Studios is planning on turning Maurice Sendak's "Where the Wild Things Are" into a full-length, live-action movie.  While we're waiting for this latest act of Hollywood butchery, let's take a few moments to consider the significance of Sendak's tale.

This book first graced children's lives in 1963.  In thirty-seven sparsely worded and lovingly drawn pages it tells the story of Max, a boy who puts on a wolf costume and makes mischief until his mother sends him to his room.  That room wondrously becomes a vast wilderness in which he finds an ocean and a sailboat.  Max sails "off through night and day and in and out of weeks and almost over a year to where the wild things are."

The wild things are a varied lot of rotund and furry woodland monsters.  Max stares unblinkingly into their yellow eyes, astounding the creatures with his courage and ferocity.  They make him their king, and he declares a rumpus.  Together, they stomp and howl and roar throughout the night.  At daybreak, Max, missing his home and family, decides to sail back to his room, where he finds a warm supper waiting for him.

This book has many virtues, but, for me, one stands out above the rest.  In its celebration of strangeness and monstrosity, it expresses a vision of beauty that's quite familiar to the very young and, I believe, quite relevant for adults uncomfortable with their age. 

For little children, beauty lies in whatever compels one's curiosity.  Things that are alive and odd are the most compelling, and mysterious forests, where life and oddity abound, are best of all.  This vision of beauty is inherently ecological.  It goes beyond humanity to the complex and inscrutable glory of nature.  It opens the heart and enriches the soul.  Promising nothing, it delivers immeasurable happiness.

When children enter school, their world begins to darken.  Whereas before they might have spent their days among people of all ages, suddenly they're segregated into age-defined ghettos.  Without the tempering influence that comes with age-integrated communities, strong and charismatic children soon dominate their weaker and less popular peers.  Their society stratifies as play gives way to politics. 

With each passing year, status becomes more important.  The threat of humiliation fuels a craving for acceptance and prestige, driving out all other concerns.  Those without status crave the emotional and material rewards it brings, while those who have it fear losing it, and therefore frantically tighten their grip.  Puberty's hormonal surge only intensifies and complicates the situation.

As the struggle for popularity accelerates, the criteria for success become more restrictive, and children need to force themselves into shrinking moulds.  Tyrannical rules soon govern nearly every facet of their appearance and behaviour.  In this process, beauty is redefined to fit the images of competitive success.  No longer associated with diversity and vitality, beauty becomes identified with obedience to unyielding, homogeneous, and deadening norms.  We turn from the forest to the city, from the wild things' world to a labyrinth of morbid fetishes.

Promising everything, this new aesthetic delivers nothing but chronic anxiety.  Though it's spiritually frigid, it perfectly suits our consumer economy, and so trillions of dollars are spent promoting it.  People are compelled to submit to it earlier and earlier in life, and many never escape its grasp.  We're seeing prepubescent children starve themselves, advertise their sexuality, and flock to shopping malls in search of the most expensive designer labels.  Meanwhile, adults are pouring fortunes into cosmetic and pharmaceutical remedies for their maturity.  The kind of beauty we're chasing could be called "adolescent"; it could also be called "necrophilic".

Children are powerless to change this state of affairs.  As adults, it's up to us.  The first step is to regain our ecological aesthetic.  We can start by noticing how much we're coming to resemble the wild things-those chubby and hairy weirdoes whose appearance delighted Max so much.  In learning to appreciate this transformation, we'll lose our interest in viagra and liposuction.  The companies that sell colas and cars will no longer be able to tempt us with subliminal promises of eternal youth.  We'll stop trying to prove our erotic appeal through compulsive sexual intrigue.  Most importantly, we'll discover the energy and motivation to protect our planet's ecosystems, our society's safety nets, and our children's spirits.  Age isn't punishing us by giving us the bodies of monsters, it's rewarding us, it's providing an opportunity to again rejoice in the strangeness of life.  In doing so, we'll leave the necropolis and return to where we truly belong, where wild things like us are supposed to be.

In the end, this article is a very poor substitute for Mr. Sendak's precious story, which I hope you'll read at least one more time before the machinery of adolescence mangles its magic, ruining it forevermore.          

I've had that book almost 30 years, will look for my copy for a quick read. I expect I'll find it beside my copy of Toller Cranston's storybook.

Okay, I have to make a retraction.  In the article I posted above I raged against the film production of Where the Wild Things Are.  I just saw the movie, and my God, it was beautiful.  I strongly recommend it. 

I saw Gran Torino a couple of days ago.  I laughed, I cried.

I went to the cinny  a while back to see Men Who Stare at Goats.   'tweren't bad, but it was kinda goofy.  The scene where soldiers on LSD got the munchies was bogus, man.

Last night the fambly gathered 'round telly to watch Land of the Lost.  The science was good, although one bit of FX, where Will Farrell skied down a dinosaur's tail, didn't come off very well.

Closing for length