I will admit...I was very prepared to dislike this movie...at the most be tepid towards it. But, I was nicely surprised by Charlie and Chocolate Factory(2005)...I actually liked it.
Maybe because all the hype is a few years old (hype is the worst thing for a movie sometimes) or maybe because the movie is much more like the book, but I enjoyed almost everything about this Tim Burton/Johnny Depp team up. (And I loved these books growing up...Charlie and the Chocolate Factory and Charlie and the Great Glass Elevator).
First of all, it was kinda dark and a little creepy. But the books were both of those. The kids invited to the factory were perfect, and the Oompa Loompas songs were outrageously funny. But about Johnny Depp as Willie Wonka (I put a nice pic of Johnny in here for you Sharon). He is one of those actors the interprets roles unexpectedly. His Willie Wonka was very flawed, with dark secrets of childhood. And though he seemed to channel Michael Jackson at his pedophilic worst, he also dealt in sub-conscious places, of childhood hurt and exile. I can't say that I enjoyed his part altogether, but his (and Burton's) view of Willie Wonka was intriguing and really interesting.
And he really reminded me of a co-worker. Way too much.
I enjoyed the focus on Charlie and his family, and how Charlie acted throughout the film and especially in the tour of the factory. One thing left out that made the book more interesting, is that Charlie and Grandpa Joe did get into trouble in the factory...the just figured their own way out, and did not get caught. I nice element I wish they had put in the movie.
Overall, I was intrigued, surprised and laughed a few times. The visuals were amazing, and the acting was good. Not bad for a movie I expected to dislike.
Sunday, August 30, 2009
Movie-The Garden
The Garden was nominated for an Oscar, in the best documentary film category. It did not win.
The Garden (2008) is a terrific documentary. I love documentary films that take a subject that few know about, and really show how important it is, and how it pertains to all of us, and The Garden did that to the Nth degree.
The story really starts after the Rodney king riots tore up LA, especially south-central. One of the things to come out of the mis-justice and subsequent urban unrest was that a 14-acre abandoned plot in the district was offered as an urban garden for residents.
And it thrived. Aerial shots show a swath of verdant green amidst warehouses and concrete. Worked mostly by people of Hispanic culture, it thrived, growing food for residents of this blighted area.
Until 2004. When suddenly all the farmers faced eviction from the land they had tended for a decade. A land with fully grown fruit trees and plowed fields that produced corn and squash and myriad other fruits and vegetables. The urban farmers were heart-broken, but felt there was no way to fight it, as they did not even understand why this happened.
But there were a few leaders in the group that were determined not only to find out why, but to fight it. What they found out was a political payoff plot, between a LA city-council woman, a urban activist that sold out for huge profits, and selfish, piggish son-of-a-bitch man, who "owned" the property.
After the King riots, the city used eminent domain and bought this land for 5 million. But in 2004, in a closed door, behind-the-scenes deal, they sold it back to him...for the SAME amount of money! Why did the city not profit? Because the city council woman and the urban activist had a scam going.
You see, this film is not just about the garden. It is about politicians run amok, who no longer care about the people the represent, but only about their power and profit. And it starts locally and works its way up to Congress and the White House. It is about people fighting with all their might for what is right and good and just, and still getting screwed by a political system that is no longer about justice, but about power.
The Garden is a lesson, a fable. The bad part--- it is true.
This movie is by turns uplifting and sad. It can break your heart and move you to action, to at least watchfulness and concern. It is a excellent piece of documentary film making.
The Garden (2008) is a terrific documentary. I love documentary films that take a subject that few know about, and really show how important it is, and how it pertains to all of us, and The Garden did that to the Nth degree.
The story really starts after the Rodney king riots tore up LA, especially south-central. One of the things to come out of the mis-justice and subsequent urban unrest was that a 14-acre abandoned plot in the district was offered as an urban garden for residents.
And it thrived. Aerial shots show a swath of verdant green amidst warehouses and concrete. Worked mostly by people of Hispanic culture, it thrived, growing food for residents of this blighted area.
Until 2004. When suddenly all the farmers faced eviction from the land they had tended for a decade. A land with fully grown fruit trees and plowed fields that produced corn and squash and myriad other fruits and vegetables. The urban farmers were heart-broken, but felt there was no way to fight it, as they did not even understand why this happened.
But there were a few leaders in the group that were determined not only to find out why, but to fight it. What they found out was a political payoff plot, between a LA city-council woman, a urban activist that sold out for huge profits, and selfish, piggish son-of-a-bitch man, who "owned" the property.
After the King riots, the city used eminent domain and bought this land for 5 million. But in 2004, in a closed door, behind-the-scenes deal, they sold it back to him...for the SAME amount of money! Why did the city not profit? Because the city council woman and the urban activist had a scam going.
You see, this film is not just about the garden. It is about politicians run amok, who no longer care about the people the represent, but only about their power and profit. And it starts locally and works its way up to Congress and the White House. It is about people fighting with all their might for what is right and good and just, and still getting screwed by a political system that is no longer about justice, but about power.
The Garden is a lesson, a fable. The bad part--- it is true.
This movie is by turns uplifting and sad. It can break your heart and move you to action, to at least watchfulness and concern. It is a excellent piece of documentary film making.
Sunday, August 23, 2009
Restaurant-Cucina Urbana 2
We went back to Cucina Urbana again, with friends this time. I have to tell you, I want to try everything on their menu!
This time I started with a drink, Italian Iced Tea. This is the first drink I have had there that I was not thrilled with. They made up for it though with the Aquae Fresca I had later, with Gran Marnier, Campari, muddled watermelon and lemon juice. Now Campari is somewhat astringent, but it was great mixed with all that, and was cold and delicious.
We were also able to try other appetizers. We had some Vasi, little mason jars filled with good stuff and some pieces of bread to spread it on. In one Vasi we an excellent hummus, and in another the creamiest goat cheese with a little apricot jam on it...both were good, but I would go for the goat cheese one again in a split second.
For dinner I had the Short Rib Pappardelle---short rib meat with long pappardelle noodles (think narrow, thin lasagna noodles) with cremini mushrooms and parmigiana. Yummers!
We did skip dessert, so as not to be total pigs, though it was REALLY tempting. I cannot wait to go back and try more!!!!
This time I started with a drink, Italian Iced Tea. This is the first drink I have had there that I was not thrilled with. They made up for it though with the Aquae Fresca I had later, with Gran Marnier, Campari, muddled watermelon and lemon juice. Now Campari is somewhat astringent, but it was great mixed with all that, and was cold and delicious.
We were also able to try other appetizers. We had some Vasi, little mason jars filled with good stuff and some pieces of bread to spread it on. In one Vasi we an excellent hummus, and in another the creamiest goat cheese with a little apricot jam on it...both were good, but I would go for the goat cheese one again in a split second.
For dinner I had the Short Rib Pappardelle---short rib meat with long pappardelle noodles (think narrow, thin lasagna noodles) with cremini mushrooms and parmigiana. Yummers!
We did skip dessert, so as not to be total pigs, though it was REALLY tempting. I cannot wait to go back and try more!!!!
Book- Like Water for Chocolate
Like Water for Chocolate is a little hard to describe. To say it a novel seriously undermines its originality, and mythic qualities. It is fable-like in many senses too.
Each chapter is a month, and features one recipe. The main character is Tita, the narrator's great aunt, and tells the story of her life, loves and heartbreak. It also tells the story of the wonderful food she cooked.
The story of Tita---who is told by her mythically strong mother, Mama Elena, that she can never marry because as youngest, she must stay at home and take care of her mother...forever--- is organized by food. The month that begins the novel is December, so the recipe for Christmas buns are the first to be told. And the events seem to follow the food, rather than the other way around.
Fable like its use of odd events to show a moral, the novel shows Tita tears falling into the icing of a wedding cake made for her sister, who was marrying the man Tita loves. The tears carry so much of her passion, as everyone eats the cake, they get horny as hell, and must leave to make passionate love. The book also mixes the erotic with food, meals bring out the sexual, and the making of the food brings out the sensual.
Tita's story is odd, but wholly enjoyable. It has an original voice, and is reminiscent of an older literature, more seeming an oral tale than a written one, a story passed down through generations. An excellent book, I would recommend it easily.
Each chapter is a month, and features one recipe. The main character is Tita, the narrator's great aunt, and tells the story of her life, loves and heartbreak. It also tells the story of the wonderful food she cooked.
The story of Tita---who is told by her mythically strong mother, Mama Elena, that she can never marry because as youngest, she must stay at home and take care of her mother...forever--- is organized by food. The month that begins the novel is December, so the recipe for Christmas buns are the first to be told. And the events seem to follow the food, rather than the other way around.
Fable like its use of odd events to show a moral, the novel shows Tita tears falling into the icing of a wedding cake made for her sister, who was marrying the man Tita loves. The tears carry so much of her passion, as everyone eats the cake, they get horny as hell, and must leave to make passionate love. The book also mixes the erotic with food, meals bring out the sexual, and the making of the food brings out the sensual.
Tita's story is odd, but wholly enjoyable. It has an original voice, and is reminiscent of an older literature, more seeming an oral tale than a written one, a story passed down through generations. An excellent book, I would recommend it easily.
Movie-High Tension
A French horror movie? Yep! High Tension (2003) is a French horror movie. And as these things go, it was not terrible. It did keep up the tension, though the plot was pretty standard, though with a weird, and not very believable twist at the end.
And it did not hurt that the protagonist (Cecile de France) was a hot, repressed lesbian. You know, somehow that always makes a horror movie better. Just adds so much...uh...human interest...yeah...that's it...human interest! HA!
OK, but wouldn't really recommend it.
And it did not hurt that the protagonist (Cecile de France) was a hot, repressed lesbian. You know, somehow that always makes a horror movie better. Just adds so much...uh...human interest...yeah...that's it...human interest! HA!
OK, but wouldn't really recommend it.
Movie-Charlie Bartlett
I read a couple of other reviews of Charlie Bartlett (2007) that said it was too derivative of other teen comedies, and not as well done. And while it may be true that it used a similar formula, it isn't true that this wasn't well done---it was humorous and also touching, with a nice mixture of teen angst and bravado thrown in.
Charlie is a high schooler, very well off, and somewhat troubled. He keeps being thrown out of private schools for his entrepreneurial capers...like selling very good fake IDs. So he off to a public school and an psychiatrist.
At the shrink he is prescribed ritalin, and while it doesn't help him much, he figures out he can sell it and make a ton, getting other kids high. He keeps adjusting his symptom to the shrink, and other shrinks, and keeps getting more prescriptions...xanax, prosac etc. He then acts as the school shrink and re-prescribes the meds (at a nice markup) to other students. He is popular and happy.
Of course it all comes crashing down, and he has to find real happiness.
Anton Yelchin does a terrific job as Charlie...the right mix of earnestness, innocence and cockiness. And Robert Downey Jr. as Charlie's principal and father of his maybe girlfriend, brings his magic to a role that could have been very so-so with another actor. I swear he could turn a National Lampoon role into an Oscar contender.
Look, Charlie Bartlett is not ground-breaking, and it will not be considered in a all-time-greats list. But it was fun, funny and very entertaining. That ain't so bad!
Charlie is a high schooler, very well off, and somewhat troubled. He keeps being thrown out of private schools for his entrepreneurial capers...like selling very good fake IDs. So he off to a public school and an psychiatrist.
At the shrink he is prescribed ritalin, and while it doesn't help him much, he figures out he can sell it and make a ton, getting other kids high. He keeps adjusting his symptom to the shrink, and other shrinks, and keeps getting more prescriptions...xanax, prosac etc. He then acts as the school shrink and re-prescribes the meds (at a nice markup) to other students. He is popular and happy.
Of course it all comes crashing down, and he has to find real happiness.
Anton Yelchin does a terrific job as Charlie...the right mix of earnestness, innocence and cockiness. And Robert Downey Jr. as Charlie's principal and father of his maybe girlfriend, brings his magic to a role that could have been very so-so with another actor. I swear he could turn a National Lampoon role into an Oscar contender.
Look, Charlie Bartlett is not ground-breaking, and it will not be considered in a all-time-greats list. But it was fun, funny and very entertaining. That ain't so bad!
Saturday, August 22, 2009
Movie-Born Free
I have only ever seen parts of this movie before, and of course I know the theme song, but I wanted to the whole thing so put it in my queue.
Born Free (1966) is the true story of the Adamsons and their friendship with a female lion in Africa, named Elsa. Now I was expecting a pretty hokey movie, with a bit of saccharine sweetness, and it was some of that. But it also wasn't half bad!
Admittedly, I am not sure how "true" this story is, it seems a bit far-fetched. But if I take it as fiction, it was actually a pretty good story. Yes, a bit "Disney" in its telling, with somewhat stilted acting. But the filming was on location in Kenya, so we saw some great scenery, and everything fit together well---the story fit the acting fit the treatment etc. The lion was especially good in her starring role.
Fun for a trip to the more innocent past. And fun for an animal lover too.
Born Free (1966) is the true story of the Adamsons and their friendship with a female lion in Africa, named Elsa. Now I was expecting a pretty hokey movie, with a bit of saccharine sweetness, and it was some of that. But it also wasn't half bad!
Admittedly, I am not sure how "true" this story is, it seems a bit far-fetched. But if I take it as fiction, it was actually a pretty good story. Yes, a bit "Disney" in its telling, with somewhat stilted acting. But the filming was on location in Kenya, so we saw some great scenery, and everything fit together well---the story fit the acting fit the treatment etc. The lion was especially good in her starring role.
Fun for a trip to the more innocent past. And fun for an animal lover too.
Play-Wicked
Wicked is at the Civic Theater, and we went and saw it last week. What a fun show!
It is the pre-story, in a way, to the Wizard of Oz. The twist is that the Wicked Witch of the East (WWOTE)...she really is just misunderstood, she is trying to help Oz, the Wizard and Glinda are actually evil, and the WWOTE is standing up for minorities such as talking animals, munchkins and, well, green girls.
Very fun, with a ton of nice messages in it, Wicked has really high productions values. Great stage settings, acting, dancing and the singing was amazing!
I loved how they brought in all the mythology from the Wizard of Oz, explaining who the Tin Man, Scarecrow and Cowardly Lion were, and why they had a grudge against the WWOTE. For me, the biggest lesson in the story was that the WWOTE needed a better PR firm! LOL! Seriously, she never had the chance to tell her side, she was drowned out by all the people spouting off about the Wizard. If she had a good PR agent even, she would have ruled Oz!
This is a wonderful show, though still I love Les Miz and Fiddler more, it is right up there with Phantom for me. And now I really want to get the book it is based on.
Such a fun night, with drinks beforehand at Downtown Johnny Browns, it was perfect!
It is the pre-story, in a way, to the Wizard of Oz. The twist is that the Wicked Witch of the East (WWOTE)...she really is just misunderstood, she is trying to help Oz, the Wizard and Glinda are actually evil, and the WWOTE is standing up for minorities such as talking animals, munchkins and, well, green girls.
Very fun, with a ton of nice messages in it, Wicked has really high productions values. Great stage settings, acting, dancing and the singing was amazing!
I loved how they brought in all the mythology from the Wizard of Oz, explaining who the Tin Man, Scarecrow and Cowardly Lion were, and why they had a grudge against the WWOTE. For me, the biggest lesson in the story was that the WWOTE needed a better PR firm! LOL! Seriously, she never had the chance to tell her side, she was drowned out by all the people spouting off about the Wizard. If she had a good PR agent even, she would have ruled Oz!
This is a wonderful show, though still I love Les Miz and Fiddler more, it is right up there with Phantom for me. And now I really want to get the book it is based on.
Such a fun night, with drinks beforehand at Downtown Johnny Browns, it was perfect!
Friday, August 21, 2009
Restaurant-Fred's Mexican Cafe
So our friend Kelli invited us out for drinks and tacos at Fred's in Old Town (http://www.fredsmexicancafe.com/Old-Town-San-Diego.php) on Tuesday. She mentioned they have taco specials on Tuesdays and drink specials too!
Well, that did it. Fred's Taco-licious Tuesday's were a draw for us! Oh, and of course the company too! LOL! And boy, we were happily pleased. $2 and $3 tacos. I had the calamari for $2 and the carne asada for $3 and they were great. Of course I had margaritas...and not just the house, but the Cadillac, and even they were discounted a buck. And Patron shots for $5 (OK, I HAD to do one of those too).
We got there early, about 4:30. And when we left at 7 there was a huge line! So get there early if you are going.
We were happy to see Chris again, of Chris and Chris fame, and of course Lorena came along, and we are always glad to see her. And as ALWAYS, we had a blast with Kelli!
We will return to Fred's on Taco-Licious Tuesdays. Hopefully with as nice a company as we had when we first went!
Well, that did it. Fred's Taco-licious Tuesday's were a draw for us! Oh, and of course the company too! LOL! And boy, we were happily pleased. $2 and $3 tacos. I had the calamari for $2 and the carne asada for $3 and they were great. Of course I had margaritas...and not just the house, but the Cadillac, and even they were discounted a buck. And Patron shots for $5 (OK, I HAD to do one of those too).
We got there early, about 4:30. And when we left at 7 there was a huge line! So get there early if you are going.
We were happy to see Chris again, of Chris and Chris fame, and of course Lorena came along, and we are always glad to see her. And as ALWAYS, we had a blast with Kelli!
We will return to Fred's on Taco-Licious Tuesdays. Hopefully with as nice a company as we had when we first went!
Book-The Fall
I have been reading some of the existentialist writers lately...reading Sartre's trilogy and now The Fall by Albert Camus, and I am still trying to figure out this "philosophy."
I remember once hearing in a lit class that it means that the only reality is the one that you perceive...if you perceive it is real, nothing else is. People can tell you that it is different, but your perceptions are the only things that count and so there are as many realities as there are people perceiving them, and further, that no two people have the same reality. Sounds a lot like mental illness too, but I won't get into that.
Camus seems to be saying in The Fall, that everything is a bunch of BS. Everything we do is an affectation. If we are nice, we do it to prove to ourselves that we are good people. If we are mean, we are doing to get attention of others or out of desperation. But nothing is real, except...nothing.
Now The Fall is not a bad book...a small novel that is a long monologue from a French man living in Amsterdam and hanging out at a dive bar called Mexico City. He meets another man at the bar and engages him in conversation, to illustrate why everything is ultimately BS. It is somewhat interesting at first, but I also found he was hitting us over the head with it too much...really, 145 pages to get to that point? It was pedantic and after a bit, boring.
I'm glad I read this to be sure that I will give up on this philosophy. It seems pointless and lazy to me. I mean, if everything is BS, why bother to write about it? Hmmm?
I remember once hearing in a lit class that it means that the only reality is the one that you perceive...if you perceive it is real, nothing else is. People can tell you that it is different, but your perceptions are the only things that count and so there are as many realities as there are people perceiving them, and further, that no two people have the same reality. Sounds a lot like mental illness too, but I won't get into that.
Camus seems to be saying in The Fall, that everything is a bunch of BS. Everything we do is an affectation. If we are nice, we do it to prove to ourselves that we are good people. If we are mean, we are doing to get attention of others or out of desperation. But nothing is real, except...nothing.
Now The Fall is not a bad book...a small novel that is a long monologue from a French man living in Amsterdam and hanging out at a dive bar called Mexico City. He meets another man at the bar and engages him in conversation, to illustrate why everything is ultimately BS. It is somewhat interesting at first, but I also found he was hitting us over the head with it too much...really, 145 pages to get to that point? It was pedantic and after a bit, boring.
I'm glad I read this to be sure that I will give up on this philosophy. It seems pointless and lazy to me. I mean, if everything is BS, why bother to write about it? Hmmm?
Thursday, August 20, 2009
TV-Season Premier-Madmen
The third season of Madmen started this past Sunday, and it was good to see how the boys at Sterling-Cooper were faring under their new ownership.
One of the things I like about Madmen is that it never knocks you over the head. There was a lot of hype about this premiere, but it did not try to do too much...and what it did do, the storylines that will emerge more this season, it did so carefully and delicately, for the most part, weaving a story rather than pounding it out.
As viewers, we all know that Sal is gay, but he doesn't know it really. Well---he may have a hint now! And Don's not-so-subtle warning to him, coached in a tag line for the London Fog account was classic, "Limit Your Exposure." But there was no big scene, or confrontation about what Don saw, and that is in keeping not only with Don's character, but with the time. What can Don say? First of all with his secret life?, and second of all, he has no experience in confronting a man with a different sexuality. And also, he needs Sal's talent at the office.
The new boss is an interesting character. Pitting Pete and Ken against each is either genius or suicide. He obviously sees creating conflict as a good thing, and I think we will see more of his manipulation as the season progresses. And Pete is so good at whining..."Why can't I get anything good all at once?" he whines to his wife!
And has Don changed? He is acting like a good family man, but he was ready to get it on with the stewardess. But was he somewhat reluctant? It seemed to me like he really needed to be talked into it. Almost like he was doing it very half-heartedly, as if it was a remembrance of how he is supposed to act as a macho guy, an alpha male.
A good start to a season that seems like it may be even more complex and layered that the last. Ah what a tangled web we weave, when first we practice to deceive. Looking forward to more deception and great entertainment from Madmen.
One of the things I like about Madmen is that it never knocks you over the head. There was a lot of hype about this premiere, but it did not try to do too much...and what it did do, the storylines that will emerge more this season, it did so carefully and delicately, for the most part, weaving a story rather than pounding it out.
As viewers, we all know that Sal is gay, but he doesn't know it really. Well---he may have a hint now! And Don's not-so-subtle warning to him, coached in a tag line for the London Fog account was classic, "Limit Your Exposure." But there was no big scene, or confrontation about what Don saw, and that is in keeping not only with Don's character, but with the time. What can Don say? First of all with his secret life?, and second of all, he has no experience in confronting a man with a different sexuality. And also, he needs Sal's talent at the office.
The new boss is an interesting character. Pitting Pete and Ken against each is either genius or suicide. He obviously sees creating conflict as a good thing, and I think we will see more of his manipulation as the season progresses. And Pete is so good at whining..."Why can't I get anything good all at once?" he whines to his wife!
And has Don changed? He is acting like a good family man, but he was ready to get it on with the stewardess. But was he somewhat reluctant? It seemed to me like he really needed to be talked into it. Almost like he was doing it very half-heartedly, as if it was a remembrance of how he is supposed to act as a macho guy, an alpha male.
A good start to a season that seems like it may be even more complex and layered that the last. Ah what a tangled web we weave, when first we practice to deceive. Looking forward to more deception and great entertainment from Madmen.
Movie- The Class
The Class is a Oscar nominated film, nominated as best foreign film. It did not win.
I had heard a lot about The Class (2008) most of it very praise worthy. How it was innovative and showed how life in French schools really is, using the real kids to play out the scenarios of the film.
You know what? It was not real at all, and its innovations left the movie boring, and worse, pointless.
I am pretty open to new forms of story telling and innovation in films, but this just did not work for me. It is about a tough classroom in Paris, and acts like it is a documentary, but it isn't. All the situations are set up, and the people (not actors) improvise the scenarios. People acting like they are teachers and students, but not really actors.
Now the premise is that this is a tough school...well maybe in Paris it is, but here, it is not really so tough. And that the teacher gets into debates with students about things like his own sexuality, which the kids question, is absurd. He lets the kids totally control the classroom, and he seems to have no clue about how to enact any discipline or standards.
The film was a mess. As I said, boring and pointless. I would not recommend it to anyone.
I had heard a lot about The Class (2008) most of it very praise worthy. How it was innovative and showed how life in French schools really is, using the real kids to play out the scenarios of the film.
You know what? It was not real at all, and its innovations left the movie boring, and worse, pointless.
I am pretty open to new forms of story telling and innovation in films, but this just did not work for me. It is about a tough classroom in Paris, and acts like it is a documentary, but it isn't. All the situations are set up, and the people (not actors) improvise the scenarios. People acting like they are teachers and students, but not really actors.
Now the premise is that this is a tough school...well maybe in Paris it is, but here, it is not really so tough. And that the teacher gets into debates with students about things like his own sexuality, which the kids question, is absurd. He lets the kids totally control the classroom, and he seems to have no clue about how to enact any discipline or standards.
The film was a mess. As I said, boring and pointless. I would not recommend it to anyone.
Movie- Chaplin: The Movie
I had never seen this movie, that put Robert Downey Jr. on the map as one of the top Hollywood actors, but I always wanted to...And after seeing Chaplin: The Movie (1992, I realized I should have seen this masterpiece years ago.
The movie traces the life and career of Charlie Chaplin, one of Hollywood's most legendary figures and the creator of the iconic character, The Little Tramp. From his beginnings in Vaudeville on the London circuit, the movie is beautiful to look at, and the settings are perfect...the dirtiness of London at the end of the 1800's is almost visceral. The acting of the kids portraying the young Chaplin, from boyhood through adolescence is excellent. You see the underpinnings of Chaplin's sadness (that is the basis of all good comedy) and his enmity towards the establishment is seeded in his early experiences of being sent to the work house as a boy.
And then taking on the role of Chaplin from a young man to an old man is the absolutely brilliant Downey. He was Chaplin. He embodied him, he breathed him, he became him. From his start in the early comedic, silent movies we see his creation of The Little Tramp, the character who starred in hundreds of short and long movies.
The grand Hollywood legends are here...especially Douglas Fairbanks, who was one of Chaplin's closest friends. The atmosphere is rich with star power and with Chaplain's poor choices in women. One failed relationship after the other and as his true relationship, the one he valued over all the others, was his craft, his art.
The talkies are coming, and Chaplain reluctantly adapted, taking on Hitler and the Nazis in his satiric and biting "The Great Dictator." But along the way he crossed paths and made an enemy of J. Edgar Hoover, who saw in "The Great Dictator" a indictment of all authority, and goes after Chaplin in the McCarthy hearings.
We follow now into his old age, living away from the U.S. And Downey stays with the character so well, and looks like him as an older man too. He is given an honorary Oscar and allowed to enter the U.S. for that. I looked at the actual clip of this on YouTube...Wow, Downey has him down pat!
A great film, Downey is surrounded by a supporting cast that is up to the task, Kevin Klein as Fairbanks especially, with small roles for Dan Aykroyd, Marisa Tomei and Diane Lane among others.
This film is funny, touching, moving, thoughtful and thought provoking. And above all, is Downey at his best.
The movie traces the life and career of Charlie Chaplin, one of Hollywood's most legendary figures and the creator of the iconic character, The Little Tramp. From his beginnings in Vaudeville on the London circuit, the movie is beautiful to look at, and the settings are perfect...the dirtiness of London at the end of the 1800's is almost visceral. The acting of the kids portraying the young Chaplin, from boyhood through adolescence is excellent. You see the underpinnings of Chaplin's sadness (that is the basis of all good comedy) and his enmity towards the establishment is seeded in his early experiences of being sent to the work house as a boy.
And then taking on the role of Chaplin from a young man to an old man is the absolutely brilliant Downey. He was Chaplin. He embodied him, he breathed him, he became him. From his start in the early comedic, silent movies we see his creation of The Little Tramp, the character who starred in hundreds of short and long movies.
The grand Hollywood legends are here...especially Douglas Fairbanks, who was one of Chaplin's closest friends. The atmosphere is rich with star power and with Chaplain's poor choices in women. One failed relationship after the other and as his true relationship, the one he valued over all the others, was his craft, his art.
The talkies are coming, and Chaplain reluctantly adapted, taking on Hitler and the Nazis in his satiric and biting "The Great Dictator." But along the way he crossed paths and made an enemy of J. Edgar Hoover, who saw in "The Great Dictator" a indictment of all authority, and goes after Chaplin in the McCarthy hearings.
We follow now into his old age, living away from the U.S. And Downey stays with the character so well, and looks like him as an older man too. He is given an honorary Oscar and allowed to enter the U.S. for that. I looked at the actual clip of this on YouTube...Wow, Downey has him down pat!
A great film, Downey is surrounded by a supporting cast that is up to the task, Kevin Klein as Fairbanks especially, with small roles for Dan Aykroyd, Marisa Tomei and Diane Lane among others.
This film is funny, touching, moving, thoughtful and thought provoking. And above all, is Downey at his best.
Book-The Conspiracy
John Hersey continues to impress me with his writing. He never hits the same subject twice and always has a different style, but every book I have read of his is impressive, smart and enjoyable.
In The Conspiracy, Hersey handles historical fiction with a great panache, tackling the Roman emperor Nero. Nero has become corrupt and his secret police think there may a conspiracy to assassinate him among the intelligentsia of Rome. This story is based on a lot of historical documents, and actually did happen. Hersey uses the names of the real people involved in this "conspiracy" some of the leading figures of Rome at that time, like the philosopher Seneca.
But how he tells this story is what makes it work---Hersey uses letters, (actually more like memos) from Tigellinus, Nero's right hand man, and the head of the secret police. Today these would be e-mails back and forth between the two. In these notes you see the two paranoid and wanting to hold onto power, pretty much suspicious of everyone who did not kiss-ass to Nero. They start inventing little traps for the leading figures to fall into. "If they say this, then that means they are after him."
When the leading men do not fall into the trap, they become even more suspicious. They figure if they have not found anything on Seneca et al, then the conspiracy is even deeper than they thought.
When they finally arrest the men, and torture them for names of other conspirators, they congratulate themselves on a job well done, protecting a corrupt and depraved emperor. Until they are executing Lucan, one of the last of the bunch. He mocks them as he is dying, and tells them plainly...there was never a conspiracy. You made this all up, and set up so many traps that we could not help but be seen as having this plan.
When Hersey wrote this book, is was considered to be a thinly veiled challenge to the Nixon White House...and that was before Watergate. But I think this kind of political paranoia is also reminiscent of a more contemporary White House...one that saw anyone who did not agree with them as a terrorist ally. One who would resort to endangering CIA agents lives, and the worst kind of character assassination, to put down "enemies," and keep power.
I don't usually quote from the books I review, but there is a passage in this one, about the abuse of power and tyranny, that I found really spoke to me. It is from a woman who comes from low birth, to a friend who is a poet and considered a leading man of Rome:
"The effects of tyranny, my dearest one, are to be seen not so much in executions, privations, surveillances, matricide and fratricide, ruined reputations, unjust trials, exile and murder, shocking event of the capital; no, tyranny has finally achieved its foul purpose when among the many, scatter at large, there are acquiescence, apathy, complacency, bland acceptance of outrage, pride in vulgar triumphs, blurring of the meaning of words, confusion in moral standards- in short, a blight of communal character. It is when people who are thought of as good solid citizens, whose who make up the backbone of the populace, become touched by this blight and do not realize it, become not only infected but the infectors-this is when tyranny has won the day. The 'good' citizens then say: What a beautiful day! What a fine year this has been! Are you going to the amphitheater this afternoon?"
John Hersey was not just writing about the Roman Empire.
In The Conspiracy, Hersey handles historical fiction with a great panache, tackling the Roman emperor Nero. Nero has become corrupt and his secret police think there may a conspiracy to assassinate him among the intelligentsia of Rome. This story is based on a lot of historical documents, and actually did happen. Hersey uses the names of the real people involved in this "conspiracy" some of the leading figures of Rome at that time, like the philosopher Seneca.
But how he tells this story is what makes it work---Hersey uses letters, (actually more like memos) from Tigellinus, Nero's right hand man, and the head of the secret police. Today these would be e-mails back and forth between the two. In these notes you see the two paranoid and wanting to hold onto power, pretty much suspicious of everyone who did not kiss-ass to Nero. They start inventing little traps for the leading figures to fall into. "If they say this, then that means they are after him."
When the leading men do not fall into the trap, they become even more suspicious. They figure if they have not found anything on Seneca et al, then the conspiracy is even deeper than they thought.
When they finally arrest the men, and torture them for names of other conspirators, they congratulate themselves on a job well done, protecting a corrupt and depraved emperor. Until they are executing Lucan, one of the last of the bunch. He mocks them as he is dying, and tells them plainly...there was never a conspiracy. You made this all up, and set up so many traps that we could not help but be seen as having this plan.
When Hersey wrote this book, is was considered to be a thinly veiled challenge to the Nixon White House...and that was before Watergate. But I think this kind of political paranoia is also reminiscent of a more contemporary White House...one that saw anyone who did not agree with them as a terrorist ally. One who would resort to endangering CIA agents lives, and the worst kind of character assassination, to put down "enemies," and keep power.
I don't usually quote from the books I review, but there is a passage in this one, about the abuse of power and tyranny, that I found really spoke to me. It is from a woman who comes from low birth, to a friend who is a poet and considered a leading man of Rome:
"The effects of tyranny, my dearest one, are to be seen not so much in executions, privations, surveillances, matricide and fratricide, ruined reputations, unjust trials, exile and murder, shocking event of the capital; no, tyranny has finally achieved its foul purpose when among the many, scatter at large, there are acquiescence, apathy, complacency, bland acceptance of outrage, pride in vulgar triumphs, blurring of the meaning of words, confusion in moral standards- in short, a blight of communal character. It is when people who are thought of as good solid citizens, whose who make up the backbone of the populace, become touched by this blight and do not realize it, become not only infected but the infectors-this is when tyranny has won the day. The 'good' citizens then say: What a beautiful day! What a fine year this has been! Are you going to the amphitheater this afternoon?"
John Hersey was not just writing about the Roman Empire.
Monday, August 17, 2009
The Andrew Awards-2008 Best Foreign Film
This is for the 2008 awards ceremony, 2007 movies in the category of Best Foreign Film, which finally was closed out when we saw Katyn.
I have to digress just a bit here. When people ask what movie I recently saw, and I say , "Oh a foreign film..." they inevitably hear me say "porn film." So I am having to enunciate and make foreign tow syllables..."For-in." Now c'mon... I know I have a reputation, but seriously...I watch a lot of For-IN movies too!
Anyway the nominees for best foreign film are: Beaufort from Israel, The Counterfeiters from Austria, Katyn from Poland, Mongol from Kazakhstan and 12 from Russia. The Academy picked The Counterfeiters.
Never really got into Beaufort. While good, I did not feel any connection to the story or characters. 12 was again very good, but it did not have the flow, and was overly long. Both Katyn and Mongol were excellent, and Mongol will have a second part chronicling the rise of Genghis Khan. But nothing else could compare to The Counterfeiters. They win the Andrew Award for Best Foreign Film.
This movie was all you could want from a movie. Deeply moving, made you thing, a compelling situation (based on truth). Moral dilemmas are faced by the residents of a German concentration camps: live and help the Nazis by making counterfeit money to weaken the British economy, or die for not helping. The Counterfeiters was a masterpiece in every way.
All these films deserve watching. I love that I can so many of these films on Netflix...watching the movies gives you a different world view, and I like seeing things from a new standpoint.
I have to digress just a bit here. When people ask what movie I recently saw, and I say , "Oh a foreign film..." they inevitably hear me say "porn film." So I am having to enunciate and make foreign tow syllables..."For-in." Now c'mon... I know I have a reputation, but seriously...I watch a lot of For-IN movies too!
Anyway the nominees for best foreign film are: Beaufort from Israel, The Counterfeiters from Austria, Katyn from Poland, Mongol from Kazakhstan and 12 from Russia. The Academy picked The Counterfeiters.
Never really got into Beaufort. While good, I did not feel any connection to the story or characters. 12 was again very good, but it did not have the flow, and was overly long. Both Katyn and Mongol were excellent, and Mongol will have a second part chronicling the rise of Genghis Khan. But nothing else could compare to The Counterfeiters. They win the Andrew Award for Best Foreign Film.
This movie was all you could want from a movie. Deeply moving, made you thing, a compelling situation (based on truth). Moral dilemmas are faced by the residents of a German concentration camps: live and help the Nazis by making counterfeit money to weaken the British economy, or die for not helping. The Counterfeiters was a masterpiece in every way.
All these films deserve watching. I love that I can so many of these films on Netflix...watching the movies gives you a different world view, and I like seeing things from a new standpoint.
Sunday, August 16, 2009
Movie-Katyn
Katyn was nominated for the 2007 (presented in 2008) Oscar as best foreign film. I t did not win.
The name Katyn is a place...a forested area of Poland where 20,000 Polish officers and intelligentsia were systematically executed by Soviet troops invading the country in WWII.
The Soviets blamed the Nazis, and described in detail the Nazi atrocities. The Nazis of course blamed the Soviets. And with all this blame, the Katyn tragedy kept being swept under the carpet. But his movie follows the saga, the blame game and the repercussions on the families of those who were killed.
Katyn (2007) is more series of chronological vignettes with many of the same characters, from the Soviet and Nazi invasions of Poland in 1939 through the end of the war and beyond. And it really follows the back and forth of the propaganda machines. It also shows how people could not even mention Katyn without causing controversy. So this film is a breakthrough event about a terrible event, that no one has been able to talk about much.
It is well acted and well produced. But it is hard to watch, especially when the get to the truth of the executions, and show how they were done graphically.
This is an important movie in world cinema, and probably for Poland. It is cathartic and devastating. And for those who are interested in history, another important event that we never learned about in school is brought to light.
The name Katyn is a place...a forested area of Poland where 20,000 Polish officers and intelligentsia were systematically executed by Soviet troops invading the country in WWII.
The Soviets blamed the Nazis, and described in detail the Nazi atrocities. The Nazis of course blamed the Soviets. And with all this blame, the Katyn tragedy kept being swept under the carpet. But his movie follows the saga, the blame game and the repercussions on the families of those who were killed.
Katyn (2007) is more series of chronological vignettes with many of the same characters, from the Soviet and Nazi invasions of Poland in 1939 through the end of the war and beyond. And it really follows the back and forth of the propaganda machines. It also shows how people could not even mention Katyn without causing controversy. So this film is a breakthrough event about a terrible event, that no one has been able to talk about much.
It is well acted and well produced. But it is hard to watch, especially when the get to the truth of the executions, and show how they were done graphically.
This is an important movie in world cinema, and probably for Poland. It is cathartic and devastating. And for those who are interested in history, another important event that we never learned about in school is brought to light.
Movie-Eternal
Eternal (2005) was not that great a movie. Acting was sub par, and the story was not that great. But any movie with hot, lesbian vampires can't be all bad!!! LOL!
Women are disappearing in Montreal, including the wife of police detective Raymond Pope. He starts tracking clues down and it leads to a mystery woman (hot lesbian vampire). There is some fun, hokey stuff here, but it is very B movie. If you are the mood for that though (and I was this night) it works just fine.
It was also nice to see Montreal scenes. Still love that city!
Did I mention hot lesbian vampires and seduction scenes?
Women are disappearing in Montreal, including the wife of police detective Raymond Pope. He starts tracking clues down and it leads to a mystery woman (hot lesbian vampire). There is some fun, hokey stuff here, but it is very B movie. If you are the mood for that though (and I was this night) it works just fine.
It was also nice to see Montreal scenes. Still love that city!
Did I mention hot lesbian vampires and seduction scenes?
Movie- Dot the I
Dot the I (2003) is a tricky little movie, with twists and turns that surprise, but actually make sense.
Starring Gael GarcÃa Bernal, it is a love story, at least seemingly. Woman is engaged, and at her bachelorette party in a French restaurant, an old tradition is broken out...she gets to kiss any man she wishes to for a last kiss before getting hitched. She chooses Kit (Bernal) and the kiss goes on, and is intense. The spell is broken and she leaves the restaurant, but Kit finds her and woos her.
The guy she is going to marry isn't a bad guy it seems, but there is no real fire for him in her. She is doing it because it is safe.
And then the twists begin!
And I won't tell them here, because if you watch it, it gives too much away.
The chemistry between Kit and Carmen (Natalia Verbeke) is palpable. And the two actors are excellent in their roles, Carmen, slightly damaged; Kit so intrigued with her, wanting to give her passion.
A decent story, good acting and unfamiliar. but smart twists. This was a pretty good movie.
Starring Gael GarcÃa Bernal, it is a love story, at least seemingly. Woman is engaged, and at her bachelorette party in a French restaurant, an old tradition is broken out...she gets to kiss any man she wishes to for a last kiss before getting hitched. She chooses Kit (Bernal) and the kiss goes on, and is intense. The spell is broken and she leaves the restaurant, but Kit finds her and woos her.
The guy she is going to marry isn't a bad guy it seems, but there is no real fire for him in her. She is doing it because it is safe.
And then the twists begin!
And I won't tell them here, because if you watch it, it gives too much away.
The chemistry between Kit and Carmen (Natalia Verbeke) is palpable. And the two actors are excellent in their roles, Carmen, slightly damaged; Kit so intrigued with her, wanting to give her passion.
A decent story, good acting and unfamiliar. but smart twists. This was a pretty good movie.
Saturday, August 15, 2009
Movie-Imagining Argentina
Imagining Argentina (2004) is the kind of movie that warns against too much mixing of genres...at least if you do it, you have to be careful about it.
It seems at first to be a social film, about the military dictatorship in Argentina in the 70's, where thousands of people "disappeared" if they spoke out against the government. And it could have been good at that. But the main character, played by Antonio Banderas, suddenly develops psychic powers when his wife becomes one of the disappeared, and he can tell if they have lived or died, or what their fate will be in the future.
And it just doesn't work. Be one or the other, in this case, but it did not work in any way to try and be both social and supernatural.
And by the way, I LOVE Emma Thompson, but she should never try a Latin accent again. No no no.
It seems at first to be a social film, about the military dictatorship in Argentina in the 70's, where thousands of people "disappeared" if they spoke out against the government. And it could have been good at that. But the main character, played by Antonio Banderas, suddenly develops psychic powers when his wife becomes one of the disappeared, and he can tell if they have lived or died, or what their fate will be in the future.
And it just doesn't work. Be one or the other, in this case, but it did not work in any way to try and be both social and supernatural.
And by the way, I LOVE Emma Thompson, but she should never try a Latin accent again. No no no.
Movie-Arranged
This 2007 movie, though small in scope, was very good with its premise...At a New York school, 2 young teachers meet, one Muslim and one an Orthodox Jew. Many expect them to dislike each other, but they find themselves developing a friendship based on all the presumptions people make about them.
As they get to know each other, they find another commonality, they both live in a culture that arranges their marriage. And this tie binds their frienship, as they share each other's stories of bad picks and meetings with potential husbands.
Both actresses in Arranged are exceptional. Both show a naturalness and an array of emotions, that seem true. That both characters show their cultures in a mostly positive light, and that their journey into friendship is not without some bumps, also seems very true.
They are not trying to change the world, but in forming their friendship, they are, in a small way. Because really, if people are friends, in opposing cultures, that is a small miracle...maybe a start to changing the world after all.
As they get to know each other, they find another commonality, they both live in a culture that arranges their marriage. And this tie binds their frienship, as they share each other's stories of bad picks and meetings with potential husbands.
Both actresses in Arranged are exceptional. Both show a naturalness and an array of emotions, that seem true. That both characters show their cultures in a mostly positive light, and that their journey into friendship is not without some bumps, also seems very true.
They are not trying to change the world, but in forming their friendship, they are, in a small way. Because really, if people are friends, in opposing cultures, that is a small miracle...maybe a start to changing the world after all.
Friday, August 14, 2009
Book-Novel Without a Name
This is a grim book, a book about war and the effect constant fighting has on one person, a fighter in the North Vietnamese army. Novel Without a Name by Duong Thu Houng is a book about Quan's disillusionment, not only with the political institutions and propagandas perpetuated by them, but with everyone around him...maybe even in himself.
While Americans are the enemy in the book, it is universal. How young men fight the wars that old men start, and how wily politicians make money off the misery of others. Quan initially is a big supporter of the war, he gladly and proudly joins up. After 10 years of fighting, and losing so many friends, he is seeing the hollowness of the propaganda phrases, he sees the negative change that has been come to his friends and him, the hardness and the meanness, and he longs for the days of simplicity.
This book is grim, and very introspective. It is not about glory and honor, but about dirt and blood and starvation. It is about a journey of one fighter, a journey both physical and psychological. It is about being alone and the realization that with all the killing Quan has done and the dying he has seen, life has become worse for him, and his country. Slogans be damned, they do not reflect the truth.
It is a very good book. The writing is terse at times, and not given to sympathy. It describes, and lets us know Quan's thoughts, but does not imbue them with nobility or great visions of clarity. Quan stumbles to his insight, slowly and painfully, with death his constant companion. It is a book about war, that I think has the ring, or the stink, of truth about it. The author herself was a soldier in the war, and herself became disillusioned with her leaders. I think the authenticity shows.
While Americans are the enemy in the book, it is universal. How young men fight the wars that old men start, and how wily politicians make money off the misery of others. Quan initially is a big supporter of the war, he gladly and proudly joins up. After 10 years of fighting, and losing so many friends, he is seeing the hollowness of the propaganda phrases, he sees the negative change that has been come to his friends and him, the hardness and the meanness, and he longs for the days of simplicity.
This book is grim, and very introspective. It is not about glory and honor, but about dirt and blood and starvation. It is about a journey of one fighter, a journey both physical and psychological. It is about being alone and the realization that with all the killing Quan has done and the dying he has seen, life has become worse for him, and his country. Slogans be damned, they do not reflect the truth.
It is a very good book. The writing is terse at times, and not given to sympathy. It describes, and lets us know Quan's thoughts, but does not imbue them with nobility or great visions of clarity. Quan stumbles to his insight, slowly and painfully, with death his constant companion. It is a book about war, that I think has the ring, or the stink, of truth about it. The author herself was a soldier in the war, and herself became disillusioned with her leaders. I think the authenticity shows.
Thursday, August 13, 2009
Where the Turf Meets the Surf
I took a day off work last weeks, and Sharlynn and I went to the Del Mar Racetrack to see the horses run. This is something we enjoy almost every year, and this year Sharlynn got us grandstand seats. Now we did not stay in our seats the whole time, we wandered around, but it was really nice to have them to relax a bit. And we stayed for all the races because we had them.
Nine races that day, and Sharlynn did great, making money in the last 8 races STRAIGHT! She even brought in some hauls of over $50!! Basically she paid for our day and my margaritas (which are, shall we say, PRI-CEY).
You can see some pics on the blog site, and we had a lot of fun! Seeing the horses, shouting for your bet to come in the money! Having some drinks and people watching! And wow! Very pretty women there! Of course my own wife included! We ever ran into Mo and Sarah, some people we had met at a MeetUp group.
Very fun day with my baby!
Nine races that day, and Sharlynn did great, making money in the last 8 races STRAIGHT! She even brought in some hauls of over $50!! Basically she paid for our day and my margaritas (which are, shall we say, PRI-CEY).
You can see some pics on the blog site, and we had a lot of fun! Seeing the horses, shouting for your bet to come in the money! Having some drinks and people watching! And wow! Very pretty women there! Of course my own wife included! We ever ran into Mo and Sarah, some people we had met at a MeetUp group.
Very fun day with my baby!
Tuesday, August 11, 2009
Movie-Religulous
I must admit, as I am getting older, I am becoming more liberal and more suspecting of the institutions of the world that seem to be keeping all of us from having peace and prosperity. Chief among the intuitions on my skeptical list are all organized religions.
So when I saw the movie Religulous (2008), it spoke to me. I mean, it was side-splitting funny, as Bill Maher takes on religion, and even the concept of god. But it also meant more than that...here is someone who has the platform to say..."This is Bullshit!" and does it.
Look, and this is not the movie but my own thoughts for sec...I was raised very Catholic...an altar boy and everything. But I learned that the "church" is not about god...it is about sustaining the church. Whether that means hating others, collaborating with the Nazis, hiding priests who have molested children or ordering assassinations as many popes have..."Well," they say, "we are protecting the church."
I don't remember that being OK in Jesus' words, do you?
Bill Maher says this a lot...because he has read the bible, and he calls people out on what they believe that is not ...well...actually in the bible. And he does it brilliantly. And absolutely hilariously!!!!
He takes on the Catholic church, evangelists, Mormons, and many other believers, using what is actually in the bible to question their beliefs. He calls them on their hypocrisy, and their un-Jesus like thoughts. And he does this interspersed with video that left me gasping for air I was laughing so hard.
But his message is a serious one...his question really. Are we not worse off as species, because we believe so strongly that our religion is right, and others wrong? And more basically, how can we believe a lot of the utter CRAP uttered by leaders of religions? How can we believe in the infallibility of popes, when they have proven to be so fallible? How can we believe that Jesus, as one evangelist says, wore the best linen and was rich? Must have missed that passage in the New Testament. I thought he said it was easier for a camel to pass through the eye of a needle than for a rich man to enter heaven---Oh there I go..actually paying attention to what Jesus was saying, rather than to the preacher. Silly me!
A fantastic movie!
So when I saw the movie Religulous (2008), it spoke to me. I mean, it was side-splitting funny, as Bill Maher takes on religion, and even the concept of god. But it also meant more than that...here is someone who has the platform to say..."This is Bullshit!" and does it.
Look, and this is not the movie but my own thoughts for sec...I was raised very Catholic...an altar boy and everything. But I learned that the "church" is not about god...it is about sustaining the church. Whether that means hating others, collaborating with the Nazis, hiding priests who have molested children or ordering assassinations as many popes have..."Well," they say, "we are protecting the church."
I don't remember that being OK in Jesus' words, do you?
Bill Maher says this a lot...because he has read the bible, and he calls people out on what they believe that is not ...well...actually in the bible. And he does it brilliantly. And absolutely hilariously!!!!
He takes on the Catholic church, evangelists, Mormons, and many other believers, using what is actually in the bible to question their beliefs. He calls them on their hypocrisy, and their un-Jesus like thoughts. And he does this interspersed with video that left me gasping for air I was laughing so hard.
But his message is a serious one...his question really. Are we not worse off as species, because we believe so strongly that our religion is right, and others wrong? And more basically, how can we believe a lot of the utter CRAP uttered by leaders of religions? How can we believe in the infallibility of popes, when they have proven to be so fallible? How can we believe that Jesus, as one evangelist says, wore the best linen and was rich? Must have missed that passage in the New Testament. I thought he said it was easier for a camel to pass through the eye of a needle than for a rich man to enter heaven---Oh there I go..actually paying attention to what Jesus was saying, rather than to the preacher. Silly me!
A fantastic movie!
Sunday, August 9, 2009
Movie-Forgetting Sarah Marshall
I must admit, I am often disappointed when it comes to comedies. Many times when others are saying LOL, I am saying stupid or just not very funny.
Forgetting Sarah Marshall (2008) was a very pleasant exception to the rule. Not only LOL funny, but also has some touching moments, and a few life lessons. Who woulda thought all that from a Judd Apatow film?
One of the reasons I LOVE Netflix is that I can get the unrated version of the film. So we are treated to one of Apatow's stock in trade---yes---full frontal male nudity! LOL!!!! I read an interview with him in Playboy, and he just finds this funny. But has has very strict time limits for how long male genitalia can be shown, becomes it quickly becomes unfunny or gross.
Anyway, this movie, about Peter (Jason Segal) losing his girlfriend, a hot TV actress named Sarah Marshall (Kristen Bell), and going to Hawaii to get over her, with her and her new boyfriend staying at the same resort...well, it is damn funny. It is in the deatails first of all. Sarah stars in a TV crime procedural show, aka CSI. And the scenes from the show are hilarious, as we realize that we have actually watched shows like this. Details like this make the movie.
And the acting is great! You feel like much of it is somewhat improvised, and it makes the dialogue and interactions feel very natural. Jason Segal and Kristen Bell both have comedic chops, and Mila Kundis as the other woman/ true love exudes a pretty amazing free spiritness...you feel like this is really her personality.
Most of all, as I mentioned...it is funny. You feel like it is familiar, but then it comes at you in a new direction, with details that you can relate to, and an awkwardness (another Apatow staple) that makes it very fresh.
Forgetting Sarah Marshall (2008) was a very pleasant exception to the rule. Not only LOL funny, but also has some touching moments, and a few life lessons. Who woulda thought all that from a Judd Apatow film?
One of the reasons I LOVE Netflix is that I can get the unrated version of the film. So we are treated to one of Apatow's stock in trade---yes---full frontal male nudity! LOL!!!! I read an interview with him in Playboy, and he just finds this funny. But has has very strict time limits for how long male genitalia can be shown, becomes it quickly becomes unfunny or gross.
Anyway, this movie, about Peter (Jason Segal) losing his girlfriend, a hot TV actress named Sarah Marshall (Kristen Bell), and going to Hawaii to get over her, with her and her new boyfriend staying at the same resort...well, it is damn funny. It is in the deatails first of all. Sarah stars in a TV crime procedural show, aka CSI. And the scenes from the show are hilarious, as we realize that we have actually watched shows like this. Details like this make the movie.
And the acting is great! You feel like much of it is somewhat improvised, and it makes the dialogue and interactions feel very natural. Jason Segal and Kristen Bell both have comedic chops, and Mila Kundis as the other woman/ true love exudes a pretty amazing free spiritness...you feel like this is really her personality.
Most of all, as I mentioned...it is funny. You feel like it is familiar, but then it comes at you in a new direction, with details that you can relate to, and an awkwardness (another Apatow staple) that makes it very fresh.
Book- One Day in the Life of Ivan Denisovich
A grim book, about the Soviet gulags, One Day in the Life of Ivan Denisovich is an account of what one day, from waking to sleeping, is like to a prisoner in that prison system.
The gulags are a staple of Alexander Solzhenitsyn, himself an unwillingly participant, as the USSR did not like what he wrote. His Gulag Archipelago series is non-fiction narrative of the atrocities that took place in the gulags. But One Day is a more intimate look, through the eyes of Ivan Denisovich, a man imprisoned because he escaped from the Nazis during WW II, and so was suspected of being a spy for them.
The book is dark, and I got a feeling of hopelessness, as Ivan can't allow himself to even think of getting out one day...it would drive him crazy. So he thinks only about surviving one day...no... one hour at a time. How to get some extra food...how to get a couple of more minutes of sleep...how to be out of the freezing weather for a couple of extra minutes---this is what occupies Ivan Denisovich's mind and existence.
Solzhenitsyn does a masterful job of keeping that tension, of hour by hour living, and yet, I always felt that part of the work Ivan did was to keep himself from thinking of the outside. Those thoughts would come unbidden, and he would have to try to keep them away, so as not to succumb to abject sorrow.
One of things that stood out to me was that our freedoms are on a fine line. We cannot let government decide what we can read and write. We can't give in to the fear that may shackle our minds, in the hope that we may be only a slight bit safer. Reading One Day, you realize we have come perilously close to many of the abuses of the USSR system.
And so, however grim this book may be, it also re-ignites the hope for freedom, the wish that we may remain free to read and write what we wish, without government censorship. And that these types of political prisons, however we may feel they keep us safer, ultimately lead to abuses and the killing of the freedoms we strive for.
The gulags are a staple of Alexander Solzhenitsyn, himself an unwillingly participant, as the USSR did not like what he wrote. His Gulag Archipelago series is non-fiction narrative of the atrocities that took place in the gulags. But One Day is a more intimate look, through the eyes of Ivan Denisovich, a man imprisoned because he escaped from the Nazis during WW II, and so was suspected of being a spy for them.
The book is dark, and I got a feeling of hopelessness, as Ivan can't allow himself to even think of getting out one day...it would drive him crazy. So he thinks only about surviving one day...no... one hour at a time. How to get some extra food...how to get a couple of more minutes of sleep...how to be out of the freezing weather for a couple of extra minutes---this is what occupies Ivan Denisovich's mind and existence.
Solzhenitsyn does a masterful job of keeping that tension, of hour by hour living, and yet, I always felt that part of the work Ivan did was to keep himself from thinking of the outside. Those thoughts would come unbidden, and he would have to try to keep them away, so as not to succumb to abject sorrow.
One of things that stood out to me was that our freedoms are on a fine line. We cannot let government decide what we can read and write. We can't give in to the fear that may shackle our minds, in the hope that we may be only a slight bit safer. Reading One Day, you realize we have come perilously close to many of the abuses of the USSR system.
And so, however grim this book may be, it also re-ignites the hope for freedom, the wish that we may remain free to read and write what we wish, without government censorship. And that these types of political prisons, however we may feel they keep us safer, ultimately lead to abuses and the killing of the freedoms we strive for.
Saturday, August 8, 2009
1 Magazine
Well, now that Playboy is a every other month publication, I only have one magazine to blog about right now, National Geographic.
The August issue was not one of my all time favorites. Don't get me wrong it was good, as it always is, but nothing REALLY captured me like some issues do. The Yellowstone Supervolcano story was....sobering, and a little bit scary. Wow, the explosions in the past have been world-changing! The Art of Deception, the photo essay on creatures that disguise themselves had GREAT images. Amazing the adaptations animals evolve. And the article on Venice made me want to go, but also made me sad, as the Venetians are being pushed out, and the city becomes one big tourist trap.
Good issue, and as always, I learn so much from the magazine!
The August issue was not one of my all time favorites. Don't get me wrong it was good, as it always is, but nothing REALLY captured me like some issues do. The Yellowstone Supervolcano story was....sobering, and a little bit scary. Wow, the explosions in the past have been world-changing! The Art of Deception, the photo essay on creatures that disguise themselves had GREAT images. Amazing the adaptations animals evolve. And the article on Venice made me want to go, but also made me sad, as the Venetians are being pushed out, and the city becomes one big tourist trap.
Good issue, and as always, I learn so much from the magazine!
Movie-The Devil's Advocate
OK, so Keanu Reeves was ALMOST decent in this movie. He is still the worst actor EVER! Maybe Al Pacino as Satan inspired him, but Reeves is actually OK as the young defense lawyer (named Kevin Lomax) in Florida who is hired by a law firm in New York City for a special case.
What he doesn't realize is that the law firm is run by John Milton (Pacino) who is really Satan. As Milton leads John into temptation, and away from the good things in his life (like his hot wife, played by Charlize Theron), things become spookier. Meanwhile, John wins the case he was hired for, even though he knows the man is guilty as hell. But he is so proud at never losing a case, he still defends him and wins. Ahhhh...one of the seven deadly sins...Milton can use that!
The Devil's Advocate (1997) was a fairly good film, entertaining and slightly scary and slighty erotic. But the highlight is Pacino, near the end, talking about god, and the role of satan. He is compelling...I mean, he really gets you thinking about it...he is the devil, leading us all into temptation. I haven't seen Pacino this good in awhile.
As for Reeves...I wish the man could act. I mean, he does Ok here, but still rarely emotes, or does any action that is not wooden and stiff. Really, he needs to stop, or hire an acting coach or something.
What he doesn't realize is that the law firm is run by John Milton (Pacino) who is really Satan. As Milton leads John into temptation, and away from the good things in his life (like his hot wife, played by Charlize Theron), things become spookier. Meanwhile, John wins the case he was hired for, even though he knows the man is guilty as hell. But he is so proud at never losing a case, he still defends him and wins. Ahhhh...one of the seven deadly sins...Milton can use that!
The Devil's Advocate (1997) was a fairly good film, entertaining and slightly scary and slighty erotic. But the highlight is Pacino, near the end, talking about god, and the role of satan. He is compelling...I mean, he really gets you thinking about it...he is the devil, leading us all into temptation. I haven't seen Pacino this good in awhile.
As for Reeves...I wish the man could act. I mean, he does Ok here, but still rarely emotes, or does any action that is not wooden and stiff. Really, he needs to stop, or hire an acting coach or something.
TV on Netflix- Mad Men: Season 2
We just finished Mad Men: Season 2 on DVD, and are all ready to catch the new season on AMC, starting Aug. 16.
What an amazing show. First of all, who ever designs the sets, the clothing...everything about the setting feels like you are in 1963. there is a scene in one office, and on the wall were these three wood and metal flying ducks...each with the wings in a different position. I had forgotten that we had had those in MY house growing up! So authentic!
And then you get to the story lines. Don Draper, ad man par excellence,,,husband, not so much. And the mystery of Don's past, his current marital problems, the sale of Sterling Cooper to a big British firm---all this made a remarkable season: intriguing and deep, multi-layered and provocative...the writers are excellent.
And the acting---John Hamm as Draper, January Jones as his now-rebelling wive, Elizabeth Moss as Peggy Olson, independent and smarter than most of the men at Sterling Cooper, Christina Hendricks as Joan, the head of the secretarial pool---with these great performances, the writing looks even better. And the rest of the cast is equally as good. The actresses really filled out their roles in the second season, and though the early 60's was not the best times for women, the actresses portraying this time are powerful.
Mad Men is an excellent show, well deserving of all the prizes and plaudits it has won. We are looking forward to season 3!
What an amazing show. First of all, who ever designs the sets, the clothing...everything about the setting feels like you are in 1963. there is a scene in one office, and on the wall were these three wood and metal flying ducks...each with the wings in a different position. I had forgotten that we had had those in MY house growing up! So authentic!
And then you get to the story lines. Don Draper, ad man par excellence,,,husband, not so much. And the mystery of Don's past, his current marital problems, the sale of Sterling Cooper to a big British firm---all this made a remarkable season: intriguing and deep, multi-layered and provocative...the writers are excellent.
And the acting---John Hamm as Draper, January Jones as his now-rebelling wive, Elizabeth Moss as Peggy Olson, independent and smarter than most of the men at Sterling Cooper, Christina Hendricks as Joan, the head of the secretarial pool---with these great performances, the writing looks even better. And the rest of the cast is equally as good. The actresses really filled out their roles in the second season, and though the early 60's was not the best times for women, the actresses portraying this time are powerful.
Mad Men is an excellent show, well deserving of all the prizes and plaudits it has won. We are looking forward to season 3!
Wednesday, August 5, 2009
Why Don't We Bowl More Often?
A Midsummer's Night's Bowling! We had a group of about 15 at Mira Mesa Lanes the other night, with 4 lanes reserved for us, and had so much fun!
We had a really nice mix of old and newer friends, and drank (bowling alley bars are a great price!!!) and ate bad for you, but good, bowling alley food. And we laughed as we made gutter balls, and cheered for each other as we bowled strikes.
It was great to see Angela and Gerardo again, and my niece and her boyfriend Max came out, and I could legally buy her a drink! Not that THAT doesn't make me feel aged! And Lorena, feeling better and looking fine, came out with boyfriend Kurt.
Newer friends Kelli (with her friend Tami who it was really nice to meet) and Vera (with friends Christine and Noni) came out and mingled with Bill and Yvette and Tandora.
We had 3 hours of fun, and I did not think it was very expensive at less than $20 each. It really made me ask myself...why don't we do this more often?
So, maybe in the winter we will have another bowling party. Hopefully this time at Kearny Mesa Bowl, so we can hit the karaoke afterwards! And maybe more friends will be able to join us as we always try to keep friendship and laughter at the forefront of our lives.
Besides, the shoes??? So rockin'!!!! LOL!
We had a really nice mix of old and newer friends, and drank (bowling alley bars are a great price!!!) and ate bad for you, but good, bowling alley food. And we laughed as we made gutter balls, and cheered for each other as we bowled strikes.
It was great to see Angela and Gerardo again, and my niece and her boyfriend Max came out, and I could legally buy her a drink! Not that THAT doesn't make me feel aged! And Lorena, feeling better and looking fine, came out with boyfriend Kurt.
Newer friends Kelli (with her friend Tami who it was really nice to meet) and Vera (with friends Christine and Noni) came out and mingled with Bill and Yvette and Tandora.
We had 3 hours of fun, and I did not think it was very expensive at less than $20 each. It really made me ask myself...why don't we do this more often?
So, maybe in the winter we will have another bowling party. Hopefully this time at Kearny Mesa Bowl, so we can hit the karaoke afterwards! And maybe more friends will be able to join us as we always try to keep friendship and laughter at the forefront of our lives.
Besides, the shoes??? So rockin'!!!! LOL!
Movie-Son of Rambow
Son of Rambow (2007) is a little hard to describe. Whenever I have tried, it comes out sounding boring, or trite, or both. And it is neither. It is funny, touching, and really fun to watch.
Maybe the best way to describe it is a coming of age story...two boys, Will, living in a strict religious house that does not allow him to watch TV or movies. Lee, the school trouble maker, and aspiring film director.
When Will inadvertently sees his first movie, First Blood, he wants to be Sly Stallone, and he and Lee start to make their movie. Their attempts are funny, and sweet, and a little malicious at times.
The actors that portray these two are really great. Lee, a bully and blowhard, really just a product of his environment, tempered by the sweet-natured Will. But as Will becomes more out in the world, he changes too, to Lee's dismay.
It is a quirky film, but very much on the good side of quirky. And it is devilishly funny. I still am not doing it justice, after 4 attempts to describe it. But maybe that is good, because sometimes original things are hard to put down in words. And Son of Rambow is original, that is a sure thing.
Try this movie--despite my poor attempts--- it is really good.
Maybe the best way to describe it is a coming of age story...two boys, Will, living in a strict religious house that does not allow him to watch TV or movies. Lee, the school trouble maker, and aspiring film director.
When Will inadvertently sees his first movie, First Blood, he wants to be Sly Stallone, and he and Lee start to make their movie. Their attempts are funny, and sweet, and a little malicious at times.
The actors that portray these two are really great. Lee, a bully and blowhard, really just a product of his environment, tempered by the sweet-natured Will. But as Will becomes more out in the world, he changes too, to Lee's dismay.
It is a quirky film, but very much on the good side of quirky. And it is devilishly funny. I still am not doing it justice, after 4 attempts to describe it. But maybe that is good, because sometimes original things are hard to put down in words. And Son of Rambow is original, that is a sure thing.
Try this movie--despite my poor attempts--- it is really good.
Monday, August 3, 2009
Movie- Mail Order Wife
Mail Order Wife (2005) is a strange little independent film. Filmed, as if it is a documentary, it has a film maker, taking on as his subject a man about to order a mail order bride. This man, Adrian, a Queens doorman (who describes himself in the mail order bride catalogue as in real estate and security) is pretty obnoxious and not very attractive, though he thinks he is a rare catch.
And he gets Lichi to come over from Burma and marry him. But he treats her like a servant, and the film maker, Andrew, starts having concerns about her well-being. When Adrian starts using Lichi in homemade porn movies, Andrew steps in, and offers her refuge in his house.
The faux documentary style works fabulous here. Even though we knew it was not a documentary, we had to double check a couple of times early on. The characters do not seem like actors reading lines at all. Later it becomes more evident that this is not a true story, but it has you guessing at times.
Andrew, for all his good will, has intentions for Lichi too. He ends up marrying her, and much to his chagrin, she turns out to be a terror--crazy wacko nut job, not the sweet little Burmese girl he had thought.
The film loses some of its innovation towards the end, and becomes too much farce. But even with that, this is an interesting little movie.
And he gets Lichi to come over from Burma and marry him. But he treats her like a servant, and the film maker, Andrew, starts having concerns about her well-being. When Adrian starts using Lichi in homemade porn movies, Andrew steps in, and offers her refuge in his house.
The faux documentary style works fabulous here. Even though we knew it was not a documentary, we had to double check a couple of times early on. The characters do not seem like actors reading lines at all. Later it becomes more evident that this is not a true story, but it has you guessing at times.
Andrew, for all his good will, has intentions for Lichi too. He ends up marrying her, and much to his chagrin, she turns out to be a terror--crazy wacko nut job, not the sweet little Burmese girl he had thought.
The film loses some of its innovation towards the end, and becomes too much farce. But even with that, this is an interesting little movie.
Book-The System of the World
I must admit, I breathed a sigh of relief as I finished the last page in this book, the end of a long trilogy, The Baroque Cycle, by Neal Stephenson.
The third book, The System of the World, was better than the first two...I finally felt like there was some payoff for going through the other two books. But still Stephenson's style, his overabundance of detail, grated on my nerves.
There was one scene, where Daniel Waterhouse, one of the main characters is in a prison yard. Stephenson tells us where he is in relation to every building around him..."to his left 100 yards away was..." and so on. When Dr. Waterhouse moves, Stephenson tells us again where the building have shifted in relation to his new position..."so now that building was 50 yards on his right.." It is too much, and did not advance the story line. It could have been told as effectively with far fewer words.
The book continues the exploits of Dr. Daniel Waterhouse, Jack Shaftoe, Eliza and Sir Issac Newton, and actually brings all the characters together, with interaction between them all, not separate story lines, like the other books. This was one reason I enjoyed it more. It just should not have taken so long to get here.
The storyline itself was interesting, the change the world saw in this period was amazing...from philosophy, religion, government, finances, science...almost everything was undergoing dramatic change. And these books chronicle much of it through a few main characters and dozens of minor ones. Again...as is Stephenson's habit...too many.
I thought I would enjoy this 2600 pages trilogy much more than I did, and a probably will not be reading Stephenson again.
The third book, The System of the World, was better than the first two...I finally felt like there was some payoff for going through the other two books. But still Stephenson's style, his overabundance of detail, grated on my nerves.
There was one scene, where Daniel Waterhouse, one of the main characters is in a prison yard. Stephenson tells us where he is in relation to every building around him..."to his left 100 yards away was..." and so on. When Dr. Waterhouse moves, Stephenson tells us again where the building have shifted in relation to his new position..."so now that building was 50 yards on his right.." It is too much, and did not advance the story line. It could have been told as effectively with far fewer words.
The book continues the exploits of Dr. Daniel Waterhouse, Jack Shaftoe, Eliza and Sir Issac Newton, and actually brings all the characters together, with interaction between them all, not separate story lines, like the other books. This was one reason I enjoyed it more. It just should not have taken so long to get here.
The storyline itself was interesting, the change the world saw in this period was amazing...from philosophy, religion, government, finances, science...almost everything was undergoing dramatic change. And these books chronicle much of it through a few main characters and dozens of minor ones. Again...as is Stephenson's habit...too many.
I thought I would enjoy this 2600 pages trilogy much more than I did, and a probably will not be reading Stephenson again.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
