*
Blogging is not writing -
it's graffiti with punctuation.
- from Contagion, and the only funny thing in the movie
*
Showing posts with label movie. Show all posts
Showing posts with label movie. Show all posts
May 13, 2013
April 03, 2012
The Hunger Games is Watching YOU
In which we shall see: First, a movie review. Second, some socio-political commentary (more on the socio, less on the political) with a healthy dose of self-flagellation. Seriously. (You never see a good flagellation these days.)
* * * * *
I'm not a huge fan of The Hunger Games trilogy - which is to say, I read and appreciated the books, but did not get particularly invested or Twilight-y about them. I think they've got some fascinating ideas and pertinent warnings, and that Suzanne Collins did an excellent job with the storytelling. They're also such a MASSIVE presence in the States that it was a bit of a surprise when the movie came out and I found that most of the people I know hadn't read and were even barely aware of the books, let alone the movie. (Most of my friends, to be realistic, probably fall into that 'between' zone that comes in the middle of 'teens'/'YA target audience' and 'older readers who've rediscovered/jumped on the YA bandwagon'.) After all the buzz and the generally good reviews that came with the opening weekend of the film, I decided to check it out. I wasn't really sure what to expect, as the books had been plenty disturbing on their own.* I headed over to a matinee with a friend who'd heard of but not read the books, and who asked (in his customary way) if I would 'sum up (the backstory) in a Tweet'. Surprisingly, I found that I could. This is one series that you don't need to have much context for (dystopian, autocratic government, yearly subjugation of population with fight-to-the-death reality TV) in order to follow along.
And I thought it was an excellent movie. (Although I thoroughly enjoyed this contrary review by someone who's opinion - and writing skills - I very much respect.) I liked the look of the majority of the movie, I thought several of the performances were excellent (although, Gale? Oh, dear. I hope Liam Hemsworth got at least some of the same acting genes and not just the 'bulk' genes that his brother got... fingers are crossed for the next movie). Even the shaky-cam didn't bother me after the first few minutes - I think I may have been desensitized by the Bourne films. Yes, it felt very true to the book, but in a way that acknowleged skillfully that a good movie adaptation is going to have to move and squeeze and cut some things in order to get the highly detailed world of the book onto the less-detailed (odd as that may sound) world on the big screen. No, it wasn't art, but there were some beautiful, effective shots; in part I think I appreciated the experience more because it was better than your typical summer popcorn flick. (I also think the music is pretty great.)
No, I didn't 'like' the movie, I wouldn't say I 'enjoyed' it - I was far too aware of the actual nature of the action and themes and content to enjoy it, and I am glad that I was engrossed in the experience without forgetting to be disturbed by it. I'm also glad that the movie wasn't more graphic - I read the books, after all, and I'm much 'happier' (if that's the right word) with my mental perception of the killings than I would be with seeing them acted out. Again, I was plenty disturbed already. Any more, and I would have shut off from all of it completely. I like that it wasn't glossy enough to lump me with the Romans cheering for the gladiators, and not 'gritty' or realistic enough to try to convince me it was reality TV or a documentary. For me, the balance was good, and I appreciated that.
However...
* * * * *
You ever have one of those moments when you realize you've been completely, stupidly naive? The older I get, the more they seem to happen - which in a way is a good thing, because it means you're really THINKING about things. I was shocked to hear, in a few different articles, about people who have been Tweeting their disappointment over the casting for a few of the parts in The Hunger Games; specifically, using black actors for the parts of Rue, Thresh, and Cinna. Bottom line, of course, is that these Tweeters are stupid. They're not complaining about lack of talent, they're complaining about skin color - and a few of them go on to sniffily try to justify their complaints by wondering if the movie production team actually read the book. The book, The Hunger Games, in which Rue and Thresh are described BY THE AUTHOR as having 'dark brown skin.' (Cinna, incidentally, is not given a biological - racial? Skin-based? description, so anyone complaining about the movie casting messing with the book is, again, just plain stupid.)
A few weeks ago I had a conversation with a friend of mine about an interview with Morgan Freeman that was making the rounds in which he says the key to ending racism is to 'stop talking about it'.** I agreed with him, and told my friend that I didn't think racism was such a problem anymore because the younger generation had grown up knowing better - or at least not knowing that it was an issue; that it WASN'T an issue because kids today didn't know to talk about it as if it were something that needed to be solved. People are people now, I argued - skin color is just a fact and not a point of concern. She disagreed with me. I was surprised then, but I'm not now. Now, I'm horrified and appalled and more than a little disgusted with those who think the movie was 'ruined' because the 'producer[s made] all the good characters black.'
First, I'm honestly disgusted that people would feel this way, regardless of how the characters were described in the book. (None of the Tweeters seem to be upset that blue-eyed English rose Jennifer Lawrence, described in the book with straight black hair and olive skin, which generally brings to mind Hispanic, Mediterranean, or Native American genotypes, was cast as Katniss - I'm not particularly upset, as I think she did a fine job with the part.) I don't understand how anyone can think that skin color affects talent or story-telling ability, I really don't. (In fact, I thought the main scene with Rue was the most emotionally effective - I cried - in the entire film. That little girl was fantastic.) Really, movie or book or job or guy sitting next to you on the bus - I don't understand how people can feel this way. I've understood that racism has to be taught; I'm shocked, but have to acknowledge that somehow, people are still teaching it. How is this possible?!?
Second, I am truly mystified as to WHY anyone who does have that particular belief would blog, Tweet, or publicly talk about it. I understand and accept that people are entitled to their own beliefs, repugnant as they may be to the general population, but you have to be a complete moron to express a bigoted perception in the Internet age and not know that others are going to pick it up, pass it on, and flail you alive. How can you NOT know that you are being racist, a bigot? And if you do know, why would you SAY it?!? I just don't get it. Seriously. You are as foolish and self-deceptive as those in Suzanne Collins' books who watch The Hunger Games for fun and entertainment. Of course the world is watching you. That is what the Internet IS.
So - I recommend the movie. I recommend the books. I'm going to go read them again, and think a little harder about what we don't want the world to turn out to be. I don't know what the answer is, the way to stop people teaching others to be racist - but at least now I'm more aware, now I will think about what I can do (since I've become a little less naive) - like blog, maybe - to try to make sure the world doesn't get stupider. Not on my watch.
Falling turtles ahoy! Pay attention.
Cyd
* It really is a credit to an author to have written a series of books that are socially and politcally relevant, full of unlikeable and completely disturbing content, and still totally compelling. (The Twilight books, for example, are two out of three, AND Collins is a better writer. Sorry, Stephenie.)
** The link is essentially a summary of the interview - there are other, more complete, versions.
*
* * * * *
 |
| Picture from The Hollywood News |
I'm not a huge fan of The Hunger Games trilogy - which is to say, I read and appreciated the books, but did not get particularly invested or Twilight-y about them. I think they've got some fascinating ideas and pertinent warnings, and that Suzanne Collins did an excellent job with the storytelling. They're also such a MASSIVE presence in the States that it was a bit of a surprise when the movie came out and I found that most of the people I know hadn't read and were even barely aware of the books, let alone the movie. (Most of my friends, to be realistic, probably fall into that 'between' zone that comes in the middle of 'teens'/'YA target audience' and 'older readers who've rediscovered/jumped on the YA bandwagon'.) After all the buzz and the generally good reviews that came with the opening weekend of the film, I decided to check it out. I wasn't really sure what to expect, as the books had been plenty disturbing on their own.* I headed over to a matinee with a friend who'd heard of but not read the books, and who asked (in his customary way) if I would 'sum up (the backstory) in a Tweet'. Surprisingly, I found that I could. This is one series that you don't need to have much context for (dystopian, autocratic government, yearly subjugation of population with fight-to-the-death reality TV) in order to follow along.
And I thought it was an excellent movie. (Although I thoroughly enjoyed this contrary review by someone who's opinion - and writing skills - I very much respect.) I liked the look of the majority of the movie, I thought several of the performances were excellent (although, Gale? Oh, dear. I hope Liam Hemsworth got at least some of the same acting genes and not just the 'bulk' genes that his brother got... fingers are crossed for the next movie). Even the shaky-cam didn't bother me after the first few minutes - I think I may have been desensitized by the Bourne films. Yes, it felt very true to the book, but in a way that acknowleged skillfully that a good movie adaptation is going to have to move and squeeze and cut some things in order to get the highly detailed world of the book onto the less-detailed (odd as that may sound) world on the big screen. No, it wasn't art, but there were some beautiful, effective shots; in part I think I appreciated the experience more because it was better than your typical summer popcorn flick. (I also think the music is pretty great.)
No, I didn't 'like' the movie, I wouldn't say I 'enjoyed' it - I was far too aware of the actual nature of the action and themes and content to enjoy it, and I am glad that I was engrossed in the experience without forgetting to be disturbed by it. I'm also glad that the movie wasn't more graphic - I read the books, after all, and I'm much 'happier' (if that's the right word) with my mental perception of the killings than I would be with seeing them acted out. Again, I was plenty disturbed already. Any more, and I would have shut off from all of it completely. I like that it wasn't glossy enough to lump me with the Romans cheering for the gladiators, and not 'gritty' or realistic enough to try to convince me it was reality TV or a documentary. For me, the balance was good, and I appreciated that.
However...
* * * * *
You ever have one of those moments when you realize you've been completely, stupidly naive? The older I get, the more they seem to happen - which in a way is a good thing, because it means you're really THINKING about things. I was shocked to hear, in a few different articles, about people who have been Tweeting their disappointment over the casting for a few of the parts in The Hunger Games; specifically, using black actors for the parts of Rue, Thresh, and Cinna. Bottom line, of course, is that these Tweeters are stupid. They're not complaining about lack of talent, they're complaining about skin color - and a few of them go on to sniffily try to justify their complaints by wondering if the movie production team actually read the book. The book, The Hunger Games, in which Rue and Thresh are described BY THE AUTHOR as having 'dark brown skin.' (Cinna, incidentally, is not given a biological - racial? Skin-based? description, so anyone complaining about the movie casting messing with the book is, again, just plain stupid.)
A few weeks ago I had a conversation with a friend of mine about an interview with Morgan Freeman that was making the rounds in which he says the key to ending racism is to 'stop talking about it'.** I agreed with him, and told my friend that I didn't think racism was such a problem anymore because the younger generation had grown up knowing better - or at least not knowing that it was an issue; that it WASN'T an issue because kids today didn't know to talk about it as if it were something that needed to be solved. People are people now, I argued - skin color is just a fact and not a point of concern. She disagreed with me. I was surprised then, but I'm not now. Now, I'm horrified and appalled and more than a little disgusted with those who think the movie was 'ruined' because the 'producer[s made] all the good characters black.'
First, I'm honestly disgusted that people would feel this way, regardless of how the characters were described in the book. (None of the Tweeters seem to be upset that blue-eyed English rose Jennifer Lawrence, described in the book with straight black hair and olive skin, which generally brings to mind Hispanic, Mediterranean, or Native American genotypes, was cast as Katniss - I'm not particularly upset, as I think she did a fine job with the part.) I don't understand how anyone can think that skin color affects talent or story-telling ability, I really don't. (In fact, I thought the main scene with Rue was the most emotionally effective - I cried - in the entire film. That little girl was fantastic.) Really, movie or book or job or guy sitting next to you on the bus - I don't understand how people can feel this way. I've understood that racism has to be taught; I'm shocked, but have to acknowledge that somehow, people are still teaching it. How is this possible?!?
 |
| A. Dor. A. Ble. |
So - I recommend the movie. I recommend the books. I'm going to go read them again, and think a little harder about what we don't want the world to turn out to be. I don't know what the answer is, the way to stop people teaching others to be racist - but at least now I'm more aware, now I will think about what I can do (since I've become a little less naive) - like blog, maybe - to try to make sure the world doesn't get stupider. Not on my watch.
Falling turtles ahoy! Pay attention.
Cyd
* It really is a credit to an author to have written a series of books that are socially and politcally relevant, full of unlikeable and completely disturbing content, and still totally compelling. (The Twilight books, for example, are two out of three, AND Collins is a better writer. Sorry, Stephenie.)
** The link is essentially a summary of the interview - there are other, more complete, versions.
*
December 31, 2011
Movie Round-Up
I've got one more Christmas movie for a quick review, but just today I found recommendations for four more that I hadn't considered! They may or may not merit an after-Christmas download, but they'll definitely go on the list for next year.
* * *
12 Dates of Christmas
So, you know how ABC Family produces (buys, repurposes, etc...) OODLES of Christmas movies for their '24 Days of Christmas' (or whatever they did this year)? And you know how the vast majority of them are incredibly sappy and generally forgettable? Well, there are a few exceptions. (Not the exceptions: a friend mentioned they were watching 'Holidays in Handcuffs', so I checked it out on Amazon and iTunes, and... no. I just CAN'T. Also, I did download 'Christmas Caper', starring Shannon Doherty - I have such a soft spot for 'Charmed', '90210 - Original Style' and 'Girls Just Wanna Have Fun' - but I haven't been able to get past the first 15 minutes. Me no caro. Me no thinko SD caro, either.)
One of those exceptions is '12 Dates of Christmas', which is charming and delightful and features real chemistry between the lead characters! I know! The movie (er, 'TV special') is an unapologetic copy of 'Groundhog Day' (which I also love) and stars Amy Smart (you've seen her in at least something before, you just didn't know it) and the former Zack Morris, Mark-Paul Gosselaar, all grown up and looking much better after he cut off the long, greasy-romantic-poet mop he'd grown for some law show that flopped. I don't need to tell you the plot (see: Groundhog Day) but I will say that one of the things I enjoyed was that instead of just learning things about herself (which she did), each day Amy Smart's character tried things a little bit differently and that allowed her to learn all kinds of new and surprising things about the people around her. The leads are intelligent and fun to watch together, but the show also uses the supporting cast really well. There is quite a bit of cheese, of course, (including the last line - urgh) but it's generally sprinkled liberally and lovingly over the top rather than drowning the whole dish in a dairy soup. I've actually watched it twice since I got it, and there is a very good likelihood that I'll watch it again soon. (Like, tonight.)
The movie is also a great tutorial on What To Do and What Not To Do on a blind date, so, bonus. And guys, if your set-up's name is Phyllis, don't bother - she's not coming.
* * * * *
My (Currently) Comprehensive Christmas Movie List - in No Particular Order:
- Arthur Christmas
- The Holiday (bonus Christmas AND New Year's)
- Last Holiday (ditto)
- Christmas in Connecticut
- Miracle on 34th Street (I'm partial to the original B&W version, but Dylan McDermott is just. so. pretty. in the remake...)
- Nightmare Before Christmas
- A Christmas Carol (choose your poison - Mickey, Muppets, Patrick Stewart, Albert Finney, etc... just not Jim Carrey in motion-capture. Brrr.)
- How the Grinch Stole Christmas (ORIGINAL. Thank you very much.)
- While You Were Sleeping (also a holiday bridge)
- White Christmas
- It's A Wonderful Life (I can actually only do this one about every five years. Next year for sure.)
- The Thin Man
- A Christmas Wish
- Holiday Affair
- Christmas Angel
- 12 Dates of Christmas
- Borrowed Hearts (ABC Family/Hallmark/Lifetime... it's still a keeper. Ah, Eric McCormack's HAIR...)
- Sleepless in Seattle (Christmas Eve, New Year's, and bonus Valentine's Day!)
- Doctor Who Christmas episodes
- Downton Abbey Christmas Special (will also be watched again shortly)
- Joyeux Noel (HOW did I not know about this before?!?)
- Edward Scissorhands (oh... yeah.... next year!)
- Little Women (*headslap* Of course.)
- Catch Me If You Can (Really? I had no idea.)
Of course this is completely subjective, but by next year ABC Family and/or Hallmark may have churned out two more winners in their slew of entries for holiday programming, and I'll get a full set of 24! (I'm not counting the TV episodes - I'll leave those for the remaining 7 days of the month.)
* * * * *
It's not a holiday movie at all, but I did see 'Mission: Impossible - Ghost Protocol'** today and quite enjoyed it. So much, in fact, that I'm nearly tempted to go watch the others to get a handle on the backstory. But only nearly. I might now have a little crush on Jeremy Renner, too. Might.
* * * * *
Looking forward to all the (potentially) great (fun) movies on tap for 2012 - Avengers, The Hobbit, The Dark Knight Rises, etc, etc... must also settle in for a Harry Potter marathon to re-watch the whole series before someone decides to start re-making them!
Bring it on! And watch out for falling turtles!
(You never know.)
** I wonder who had to work out the punctuation here. You've already got a colon built in to the title, so you can't really add a second or it's 'Mission: Impossible: Ghost Protocol' which suddenly becomes hugely Shatnerian. It's OK for the poster, because you can just go to the second line, but I'm curious as to whether the official paperwork has the dash or not. I mean, really, is there another option? Inquiring (and apparently easily distracted) minds want to know.
* * *
12 Dates of Christmas
So, you know how ABC Family produces (buys, repurposes, etc...) OODLES of Christmas movies for their '24 Days of Christmas' (or whatever they did this year)? And you know how the vast majority of them are incredibly sappy and generally forgettable? Well, there are a few exceptions. (Not the exceptions: a friend mentioned they were watching 'Holidays in Handcuffs', so I checked it out on Amazon and iTunes, and... no. I just CAN'T. Also, I did download 'Christmas Caper', starring Shannon Doherty - I have such a soft spot for 'Charmed', '90210 - Original Style' and 'Girls Just Wanna Have Fun' - but I haven't been able to get past the first 15 minutes. Me no caro. Me no thinko SD caro, either.)
 |
| 'Shall we gaze delightedly at the Christmas miracle provided by ABC Family?' 'Sure, but just for fun, let's do it like we MEAN it. And like we have actual talent.' 'Deal.' |
The movie is also a great tutorial on What To Do and What Not To Do on a blind date, so, bonus. And guys, if your set-up's name is Phyllis, don't bother - she's not coming.
* * * * *
My (Currently) Comprehensive Christmas Movie List - in No Particular Order:
- Arthur Christmas
- The Holiday (bonus Christmas AND New Year's)
- Last Holiday (ditto)
- Christmas in Connecticut
- Miracle on 34th Street (I'm partial to the original B&W version, but Dylan McDermott is just. so. pretty. in the remake...)
- Nightmare Before Christmas
- A Christmas Carol (choose your poison - Mickey, Muppets, Patrick Stewart, Albert Finney, etc... just not Jim Carrey in motion-capture. Brrr.)
- How the Grinch Stole Christmas (ORIGINAL. Thank you very much.)
- While You Were Sleeping (also a holiday bridge)
- White Christmas
- It's A Wonderful Life (I can actually only do this one about every five years. Next year for sure.)
- The Thin Man
- A Christmas Wish
- Holiday Affair
- Christmas Angel
- 12 Dates of Christmas
- Borrowed Hearts (ABC Family/Hallmark/Lifetime... it's still a keeper. Ah, Eric McCormack's HAIR...)
- Sleepless in Seattle (Christmas Eve, New Year's, and bonus Valentine's Day!)
- Doctor Who Christmas episodes
- Downton Abbey Christmas Special (will also be watched again shortly)
- Joyeux Noel (HOW did I not know about this before?!?)
- Edward Scissorhands (oh... yeah.... next year!)
- Little Women (*headslap* Of course.)
- Catch Me If You Can (Really? I had no idea.)
Of course this is completely subjective, but by next year ABC Family and/or Hallmark may have churned out two more winners in their slew of entries for holiday programming, and I'll get a full set of 24! (I'm not counting the TV episodes - I'll leave those for the remaining 7 days of the month.)
* * * * *
It's not a holiday movie at all, but I did see 'Mission: Impossible - Ghost Protocol'** today and quite enjoyed it. So much, in fact, that I'm nearly tempted to go watch the others to get a handle on the backstory. But only nearly. I might now have a little crush on Jeremy Renner, too. Might.
* * * * *
Looking forward to all the (potentially) great (fun) movies on tap for 2012 - Avengers, The Hobbit, The Dark Knight Rises, etc, etc... must also settle in for a Harry Potter marathon to re-watch the whole series before someone decides to start re-making them!
Bring it on! And watch out for falling turtles!
(You never know.)
** I wonder who had to work out the punctuation here. You've already got a colon built in to the title, so you can't really add a second or it's 'Mission: Impossible: Ghost Protocol' which suddenly becomes hugely Shatnerian. It's OK for the poster, because you can just go to the second line, but I'm curious as to whether the official paperwork has the dash or not. I mean, really, is there another option? Inquiring (and apparently easily distracted) minds want to know.
September 09, 2011
Pride & Prejudice LITE
I'm picking through my stuff, trying to decide what to keep, what to give away, and what to mail home (if I haven't used it/worn it/watched it/read it in a year, it can go, right?) and apparently that is a really good excuse to watch some of my DVD's I haven't seen yet (y'know, to figure out if I'll want to watch any of them again in the next year).
And I just have to say: the 1940 'Pride and Prejudice' starring Laurence Olivier (alum!) and Greer Garson is a TREAT. It is the soapiest, sit-com-iest, fluffiest, most Gone-With-the-Wind-iest version of JA's story that I've ever seen, and it is hilarious. I have heard it rumored that the costumes actually were left over from GWtW, which makes me laugh - I suppose that those particular fashions did happen in Britain at some point, but it messes with my head to find all the clothes out-of-period when none of the rest of the story is. And how can you claim to be 'poor' when every female member of your family has got enough fabric in each of her puffed sleeves for a parachute? (Anne Shirley would be SO jealous.) Greer Garson is delightful, of course, though she veers into the melodramatic on occasion (a hazard of the movie era), and Laurence Olivier is a hoot - he's actually pretty cute as Darcy, though it's truly remarkable that the actual English lead actor sounds so very stiffly wannabe-English. Greer's got a better accent than he does! It's also interesting to watch his training and skill with 'naturalistic' acting compete with the wooden directing - the conflict is not so much about Darcy longing for Elizabeth, it's about Olivier wishing someone would just allow him to really ACT.
The adaptation is fascinating - I won't spoil all the 'twists' and character shifts for you here, but they are truly mind-boggling (as in: 'Who in the world thought THAT was a good idea?!? Didn't ANY of the writers READ THE BOOK?!?').
I want to share the 'blurb' from the back of the DVD cover with you:
"Like the arrows she launches at an archery target during an elegant lawn party, Elizabeth Bennet's wit is pointed and unerring. 'If you want to be really refined, you have to be dead,' she says, skewering the imperious airs of her hosts. Jane Austen's timeless 1813 novel of unlikely romance is richly adapted in the lavish Academy Award* winner. Greer Garson portrays spirited Elizabeth, one of five Bennet sisters hoping for matrimony. Laurence Olivier plays Darcy, whose arrival at a nearby estate sets maiden hearts aflutter. But first impressions mean so very much. Elizabeth and Darcy find reasons to view each other with disdain, setting in motion a velvet struggle of Pride and Prejudice, perception and reality, forgiveness and love. You'll be irresistibly caught up in it."
A.MA.ZING. And so, so ridiculous.
- Yes, archery. And Elizabeth, 'poor' Elizabeth is an expert shot. Who needs to be an 'excellent walker,' anyway, when you can manhandle a bow and arrow instead?
- Worst fake quote ever. She says it in the movie, but JA's Elizabeth never would. Ever.
- "richly adapted'. That's one way to put it.
- "lavish" - see: recycled costumes. Oh, again, you're talking about the script. Right.
- Darcy's arrival sets maiden hearts aflutter.... HAHAHAHAHA.
- What is a 'velvet struggle', anyway? Is that a euphemism?
- WHO WRITES LIKE THIS?!? DIDN'T ANYONE READ THE BOOK?!?
Oh, and WAIT until you see what happens with Lady Catherine. It's like Pride and Prejudice did a crossover with Stargate, or something.
The DVD is going to be shipped home, but man, is it ever a keeper!
*The Academy Awards were for Best B&W Interior Decoration (WHY is that not still a category?!?) and Best Short Subject/Two Reel, or in other words, best short film that accompanied the feature. It had nothing to do with the actual movie! Awesome.
And I just have to say: the 1940 'Pride and Prejudice' starring Laurence Olivier (alum!) and Greer Garson is a TREAT. It is the soapiest, sit-com-iest, fluffiest, most Gone-With-the-Wind-iest version of JA's story that I've ever seen, and it is hilarious. I have heard it rumored that the costumes actually were left over from GWtW, which makes me laugh - I suppose that those particular fashions did happen in Britain at some point, but it messes with my head to find all the clothes out-of-period when none of the rest of the story is. And how can you claim to be 'poor' when every female member of your family has got enough fabric in each of her puffed sleeves for a parachute? (Anne Shirley would be SO jealous.) Greer Garson is delightful, of course, though she veers into the melodramatic on occasion (a hazard of the movie era), and Laurence Olivier is a hoot - he's actually pretty cute as Darcy, though it's truly remarkable that the actual English lead actor sounds so very stiffly wannabe-English. Greer's got a better accent than he does! It's also interesting to watch his training and skill with 'naturalistic' acting compete with the wooden directing - the conflict is not so much about Darcy longing for Elizabeth, it's about Olivier wishing someone would just allow him to really ACT.
The adaptation is fascinating - I won't spoil all the 'twists' and character shifts for you here, but they are truly mind-boggling (as in: 'Who in the world thought THAT was a good idea?!? Didn't ANY of the writers READ THE BOOK?!?').
 |
| There's a full-on kiss in this scene as well, and it is SO. AWKWARD. Austen knew what she was doing, people. |
I want to share the 'blurb' from the back of the DVD cover with you:
"Like the arrows she launches at an archery target during an elegant lawn party, Elizabeth Bennet's wit is pointed and unerring. 'If you want to be really refined, you have to be dead,' she says, skewering the imperious airs of her hosts. Jane Austen's timeless 1813 novel of unlikely romance is richly adapted in the lavish Academy Award* winner. Greer Garson portrays spirited Elizabeth, one of five Bennet sisters hoping for matrimony. Laurence Olivier plays Darcy, whose arrival at a nearby estate sets maiden hearts aflutter. But first impressions mean so very much. Elizabeth and Darcy find reasons to view each other with disdain, setting in motion a velvet struggle of Pride and Prejudice, perception and reality, forgiveness and love. You'll be irresistibly caught up in it."
A.MA.ZING. And so, so ridiculous.
- Yes, archery. And Elizabeth, 'poor' Elizabeth is an expert shot. Who needs to be an 'excellent walker,' anyway, when you can manhandle a bow and arrow instead?
- Worst fake quote ever. She says it in the movie, but JA's Elizabeth never would. Ever.
- "richly adapted'. That's one way to put it.
- "lavish" - see: recycled costumes. Oh, again, you're talking about the script. Right.
- Darcy's arrival sets maiden hearts aflutter.... HAHAHAHAHA.
- What is a 'velvet struggle', anyway? Is that a euphemism?
- WHO WRITES LIKE THIS?!? DIDN'T ANYONE READ THE BOOK?!?
Oh, and WAIT until you see what happens with Lady Catherine. It's like Pride and Prejudice did a crossover with Stargate, or something.
 |
| "Why am I wearing a necklace, again? Oh well, since they won't let me act I'll just LEAN... I hope I don't fall onto Greer's fake flower, though. That thing's a slapstick ink-in-the-eye joke just waiting to happen - DO NOT ENGAGE." |
The DVD is going to be shipped home, but man, is it ever a keeper!
*The Academy Awards were for Best B&W Interior Decoration (WHY is that not still a category?!?) and Best Short Subject/Two Reel, or in other words, best short film that accompanied the feature. It had nothing to do with the actual movie! Awesome.
June 19, 2011
(Civilized) Ranting About Rating
I had an interesting movie experience last night - I saw how a PG-13 film is made.
Back in 2006 (sheesh, that long ago?) a sweet, quirky movie came out called "Penelope". It is about a girl who is the victim of a family curse and comes equipped with smarts, charm, great hair (extensions), and the nose of a pig. It also features a scruffy, greasy-haired, emo-enabled James McAvoy (still swoon-worthy, though - and ironically playing an American while most of the movie was shot in London. Great accent). In the States, at least, the movie was rated PG, which meant I was guilt-free when taking my niece to a showing while on a girls' day out.
Yesterday, I pulled up what is evidently a British version of the movie - it's longer by at least a few minutes, since there were scenes I'd never seen before. One of those scenes involved a rude gesture, one with the aftermath of a family member's infidelity. Others were sprinkled with a few more (relatively mild, but still) swear words. There was nothing there that was massively offensive (especially if you watch prime-time TV) and some of the additions were interesting expansions on the characters, which I liked. The thing that really stood out to me was that I could absolutely see how the cuts from yesterday's version to get it to the in-the-American-theaters (and on DVD) version made it so distinctly a PG movie instead of PG-13. (Now, versus almost 5 years ago, the longer version would probably actually rate a PG, but it's very clear how things were thematically cut.)
So, swear words, rude gestures, thematic issues that had no bearing whatsoever on the story being told were all the things that were cut out to make a good, clean movie. The movie didn't suffer from not being "real" - it's a movie. It wasn't ever real anyway. In the end the editing focused on the plot and not on interesting distractions. This certainly can't be the only movie that would benefit from that kind of focus - and I mean 'benefit' in a literal sense.
There was an article in the Deseret News recently that talked about the dearth of PG and G-rated movies. The author writes that in the years from 1995 to 2011, there were "...more than 4,300 PG-13 and R-rated movies making an average of $29 million compared with almost 1,200 PG and G flicks that make an average of $38.4 million per show." Granted, there were far fewer of them made, but they're averaging almost 10 million more per movie than those with darker ratings! I might be crazy, but I would think that clean, family-friendly shows that cost less to make (since you don't tend to be blowing things up and such) and have a higher average return would be a good investment. At a guess, I figure you'd need at least another thousand PG or G movies before you started skewing the average... and it's going to take another several years in which we'll see many, many more PG-13 and R before we hit that thousand. Just think - spend the money you would have used to make one crappy, formulaic blood-and-guts action movie to make two or three smarter, funnier (or sadder) movies that parents and kids can see and talk about together, and you're practically guaranteed an extra 20-30 million before you've even started.
Surely I'm not the only person to have figured this out - come on, Hollywood, we don't need sex and violence and bad language. (We've got the news for that.) We need good storytelling and new ways to see ourselves and the ones we love, interesting ways to talk about people and ideas. Yes, you can do all this with the 'reality' of sensuality and obscenity and violent behavior - but Ima gonna call you out, Hollywood, and tell you to lay off the trash. I'm better than that, smarter than that, and so is most of the rest of your audience. We don't NEED any of that junk.
So stop trying to sell it to us!
Thank you.
Back in 2006 (sheesh, that long ago?) a sweet, quirky movie came out called "Penelope". It is about a girl who is the victim of a family curse and comes equipped with smarts, charm, great hair (extensions), and the nose of a pig. It also features a scruffy, greasy-haired, emo-enabled James McAvoy (still swoon-worthy, though - and ironically playing an American while most of the movie was shot in London. Great accent). In the States, at least, the movie was rated PG, which meant I was guilt-free when taking my niece to a showing while on a girls' day out.
Yesterday, I pulled up what is evidently a British version of the movie - it's longer by at least a few minutes, since there were scenes I'd never seen before. One of those scenes involved a rude gesture, one with the aftermath of a family member's infidelity. Others were sprinkled with a few more (relatively mild, but still) swear words. There was nothing there that was massively offensive (especially if you watch prime-time TV) and some of the additions were interesting expansions on the characters, which I liked. The thing that really stood out to me was that I could absolutely see how the cuts from yesterday's version to get it to the in-the-American-theaters (and on DVD) version made it so distinctly a PG movie instead of PG-13. (Now, versus almost 5 years ago, the longer version would probably actually rate a PG, but it's very clear how things were thematically cut.)So, swear words, rude gestures, thematic issues that had no bearing whatsoever on the story being told were all the things that were cut out to make a good, clean movie. The movie didn't suffer from not being "real" - it's a movie. It wasn't ever real anyway. In the end the editing focused on the plot and not on interesting distractions. This certainly can't be the only movie that would benefit from that kind of focus - and I mean 'benefit' in a literal sense.
There was an article in the Deseret News recently that talked about the dearth of PG and G-rated movies. The author writes that in the years from 1995 to 2011, there were "...more than 4,300 PG-13 and R-rated movies making an average of $29 million compared with almost 1,200 PG and G flicks that make an average of $38.4 million per show." Granted, there were far fewer of them made, but they're averaging almost 10 million more per movie than those with darker ratings! I might be crazy, but I would think that clean, family-friendly shows that cost less to make (since you don't tend to be blowing things up and such) and have a higher average return would be a good investment. At a guess, I figure you'd need at least another thousand PG or G movies before you started skewing the average... and it's going to take another several years in which we'll see many, many more PG-13 and R before we hit that thousand. Just think - spend the money you would have used to make one crappy, formulaic blood-and-guts action movie to make two or three smarter, funnier (or sadder) movies that parents and kids can see and talk about together, and you're practically guaranteed an extra 20-30 million before you've even started.
Surely I'm not the only person to have figured this out - come on, Hollywood, we don't need sex and violence and bad language. (We've got the news for that.) We need good storytelling and new ways to see ourselves and the ones we love, interesting ways to talk about people and ideas. Yes, you can do all this with the 'reality' of sensuality and obscenity and violent behavior - but Ima gonna call you out, Hollywood, and tell you to lay off the trash. I'm better than that, smarter than that, and so is most of the rest of your audience. We don't NEED any of that junk.
So stop trying to sell it to us!
Thank you.
April 27, 2011
Happies
Naturally, with a title like that, this post will include references to chocolate. (Naturally.)
I have a hunch that the Lord is compensating for me hating to leave the States and come back to London by helping me to be quite a bit happier than usual now that I'm here. It's been sunny (for a day or two right when I got back it was actually a little too warm to be comfortable, but now it's cooled off to where I can have the window open all day (with nifty improvised screening!) and snuggle cozily in my bed at night. SO. NICE), I've managed to get a little work done, I've stopped feeling bad about staying up late, and I've done a few really fun things.
Today I ran a quick errand to the school, then bused-and-Tubed up to a movie theatre I hadn't tried before in the hopes of catching the first showing of the day of Thor (evidently, sometimes the first showing has a little better matinee discount) ((also, don't mock - it's getting good reviews and you know you're going to go see it, too)). I was trying for the 2D version, as the 3D doesn't seem to have much point. The cineplex is in a London "village" called Muswell Hill, and it's actually right on the bus route I take to get to church. Turns out the online movie times were wrong, and the first showing wasn't until 3:30... so I took the opportunity to walk around, check out the charity shops, and have lunch at a pub/pizza place I'd been eyeing every time the bus drove past it on Sundays. I had a couple of books with me (surprise) and at least one of them was even a school book - so I ate pizza and read and felt productive and it was good. A few more shops, then a stop at a cafe for a hot chocolate (sunny, but the breeze today was a little chilly) and check it out...
... IT'S SO PRETTY. Still not the greatest hot chocolate (Stephen's owns me) but it's not bad and I'm getting used to it and everything's easier when it's pretty. (Amen.) Happy!
Then I headed over to the movie; it wasn't advertised as 3D, but that's what it ended up being. (Grumble.) I bought the glasses (apparently I could have brought my own - now I know) and headed in. People: this right here is a good time.
Not my favorite poster ever, but I wanted to make sure you recognized the main character. You do, right? Kirk's dad from Star Trek! Who saves everybody and then dies in the first 10 minutes! Who is totally hot and loveable and noble and stuff! And who also (as evidenced by Thor) is incredibly ripped as well as a solid, charismatic actor. I'm good with all of those choices, personally. I'm also good with this movie. It was directed by Kenneth Branaugh, which is a little left field but really really works. The script is smart, the whole thing looks good, and the chemistry is off-the-charts. (Okay, the one plot-transitional flashback is choppy and the fight scenes are - literally - shaky, but other than that... Who knew?)
Everybody sold their characters, the feeling of the whole was consistent with the other pre-Avengers movies (Iron Man, The Incredible Hulk ((?)) ), and it was really a lot of fun. I didn't mind the 3D, though I wouldn't recommend it, and I could have easily sat through another 20 minutes. (Psst - stay through the end credits.) I may not see it again in the theatre, but that's only because movies here are so expensive, not because I wouldn't. I still might. First, though, I have to go re-watch Star Trek.
Another happy for the day:
That's right - not only do they have Bounty bars over here, they have ICE CREAM Bounty bars. Seriously seriously happy.
And, because it's law or something that nothing written this week may not mention a particular event that's happening on Friday, here's this:
Yes, those are corgies munching on the wedding cake, which I feel is only too appropriate. And funny. Apparently, people are knitting dolls of the wedding party (you should be able to purchase patterns next week!) so it's fortunate this cake topper didn't go that route. I don't know that this makes me happy, but it does make me giggle! Close enough.
I have a hunch that the Lord is compensating for me hating to leave the States and come back to London by helping me to be quite a bit happier than usual now that I'm here. It's been sunny (for a day or two right when I got back it was actually a little too warm to be comfortable, but now it's cooled off to where I can have the window open all day (with nifty improvised screening!) and snuggle cozily in my bed at night. SO. NICE), I've managed to get a little work done, I've stopped feeling bad about staying up late, and I've done a few really fun things.
Today I ran a quick errand to the school, then bused-and-Tubed up to a movie theatre I hadn't tried before in the hopes of catching the first showing of the day of Thor (evidently, sometimes the first showing has a little better matinee discount) ((also, don't mock - it's getting good reviews and you know you're going to go see it, too)). I was trying for the 2D version, as the 3D doesn't seem to have much point. The cineplex is in a London "village" called Muswell Hill, and it's actually right on the bus route I take to get to church. Turns out the online movie times were wrong, and the first showing wasn't until 3:30... so I took the opportunity to walk around, check out the charity shops, and have lunch at a pub/pizza place I'd been eyeing every time the bus drove past it on Sundays. I had a couple of books with me (surprise) and at least one of them was even a school book - so I ate pizza and read and felt productive and it was good. A few more shops, then a stop at a cafe for a hot chocolate (sunny, but the breeze today was a little chilly) and check it out...
... IT'S SO PRETTY. Still not the greatest hot chocolate (Stephen's owns me) but it's not bad and I'm getting used to it and everything's easier when it's pretty. (Amen.) Happy!
Then I headed over to the movie; it wasn't advertised as 3D, but that's what it ended up being. (Grumble.) I bought the glasses (apparently I could have brought my own - now I know) and headed in. People: this right here is a good time.
Not my favorite poster ever, but I wanted to make sure you recognized the main character. You do, right? Kirk's dad from Star Trek! Who saves everybody and then dies in the first 10 minutes! Who is totally hot and loveable and noble and stuff! And who also (as evidenced by Thor) is incredibly ripped as well as a solid, charismatic actor. I'm good with all of those choices, personally. I'm also good with this movie. It was directed by Kenneth Branaugh, which is a little left field but really really works. The script is smart, the whole thing looks good, and the chemistry is off-the-charts. (Okay, the one plot-transitional flashback is choppy and the fight scenes are - literally - shaky, but other than that... Who knew?)Everybody sold their characters, the feeling of the whole was consistent with the other pre-Avengers movies (Iron Man, The Incredible Hulk ((?)) ), and it was really a lot of fun. I didn't mind the 3D, though I wouldn't recommend it, and I could have easily sat through another 20 minutes. (Psst - stay through the end credits.) I may not see it again in the theatre, but that's only because movies here are so expensive, not because I wouldn't. I still might. First, though, I have to go re-watch Star Trek.
That's right - not only do they have Bounty bars over here, they have ICE CREAM Bounty bars. Seriously seriously happy.
And, because it's law or something that nothing written this week may not mention a particular event that's happening on Friday, here's this:
Yes, those are corgies munching on the wedding cake, which I feel is only too appropriate. And funny. Apparently, people are knitting dolls of the wedding party (you should be able to purchase patterns next week!) so it's fortunate this cake topper didn't go that route. I don't know that this makes me happy, but it does make me giggle! Close enough.
September 03, 2010
"NERDY!"
Four times.
* * * * *
I don't JUST watch movies - today, for example, I built a Swami snake-charmer pipe (no, that is not a euphemism) out of a bagpipe chanter, a broken carved mariachi shaker, a dowel, gold paint, trim, and rhinestones, as well as working on finishing two safari parasols that I had made out of domed picnic food covers, heavy wood handles, finials, and fringe (originally intended for Pirates of Penzance, now given a second chance with The Drowsy Chaperone) ((also, NOBODY makes safari parasols. What is up with that?)) all while listening to and snidely commenting on Dr. Laura. (It was on, and we didn't bother to change the station. Don't judge.)
I was going to offer up this activities list as proof that I am actually "deep", but the mention of Dr. Laura kind of ruined that idea. Poop.
* * * * *
Someone asked me today what the strangest prop was that I had ever made, and the answer then was "dead body". I think I just might change that now to "Swami snake-charmer pipe".
June 30, 2010
A Cinematic Lunar Event (Twitter-Style)
There have been two major lunar events this month - an eclipse of the moon, which I missed since it happened around 4 AM some days ago, and "Eclipse" the movie, also known as "Eclipse: the Twilight Saga - Yes, This Has Become a Cultural Icon and Will Be Seen Repeatedly and Adored by Millions Regardless of Actual Quality (Fortunately, It's Pretty Good, Relatively Speaking)". I did make it to the movie, thanks to a friend of mine (yay, Amanda!) who offered me a couple of tickets. I invited another friend (yay, Tara!) to come along, and here I document the event as a Twitter feed (since I don't have one).
11:30 PM: Almost ready - leaving for the movie. Updated Facebook status.
11:38 PM: Did not expect this many people. Stupid, I guess. Parking lot is packed - must be more showings of the midnight movie than I thought.
11:40 PM: Going in to meet up with Tara and Amanda. 95% of the people milling around (and there are TONS) are girls. Conversely, beginning to feel a little silly in my "I Kissed a Vampire and I Liked It" t-shirt. Not enough irony?
11:41 PM: Found Amanda and her sister. Got tickets. Found Tara. Tara's "Team Jacob Taylor Lautner" shirt makes me feel better.
11:50 PM: In huge line for concessions. Choosing favorite fan shirts out of crowd: "A-Team" (um, OK). Cardboard cutout of Edward sticking up the back of girl's shirt (awkward). Full-on Napoleon Dynamite; hair, glasses, moon boots, "Vote for Pedro" - excellent execution. Ironic eyebrow for timing. Embroidered "Team Alice" - that's one committed guy!
12:00 AM: As far as I can tell, all eight theaters at this end of the complex are showing "Eclipse". If the entire building is full... whoa.
12:10 AM: In seats, front row of middle section. Nice, Amanda! Only a few previews - "Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows". Harry looks so grown up!
Movie moments (POSSIBLE SPOILERS - SORTA, MAYBE):
- Edward to Bella, re: Jacob - "Doesn't he own a shirt?"
- Jake (shirtless, natch) to Edward - "Face it, I'm hotter than you."
- Bella and Charlie, conversation re: marriage - Bella: "Why didn't you ever get married again? You know, after Mom?" Charlie: "Um, well, I guess I never met the right woman." Me: *raises hand* Tara and Amanda: "Bwahahaaaa!"
- Seriously, I want a "Team Charlie" shirt.
- The tent scene with Jake and Edward talking and Bella pretending to sleep is pretty awesome - and I can totally envision the J/E bromance. They really are cute together. When they're not trying to kill each other. (Lame.)
- Evidently, once Jasper got lines he (or the screenwriter) realized he should have a Southern accent. Listen to it magically arrive!
- Esme gets waaaay fierce and intense in this one. She's super-scary. She's also this film's Jasper, as she has practically no lines.
- This is an incredibly kissy movie. Even I started to feel a little awkward. You could maybe almost get drunk if you chugged something every time somebody kissed somebody else.
- Watch the credits - Seth's (who is adorable, BTW) real name is "Booboo Stewart". No joke.
- I will be owning the soundtrack shortly.
(END POSSIBLE SPOILERS.)
2:35 AM: We waited for an "extra" scene where Jake gets the wedding announcement. Nothing doing.
2:40 AM: Heading to car.
2:55 AM: Still waiting in parking lot in car. Feels longer than the movie. (Honestly, pretty good pacing in this one!)
2:58 AM: I wish I'd brought a book. Always bring a book!
3:05 AM: On my way home. Pretty sure I'll see this one again - maybe marathon the first two to make the third look even better.
Good times, fun show - Riley was HOT, yay for the big fight, boo for the shaky-cam; Taylor's getting better every movie, there were moments when I finally bought R.Pattz as Edward (who knew!) and K.Stew was pretty much the same.
Charlie - he was AWESOME. Could I get a (fake) documentary on the Forks PD, please? Thanks.
October 28, 2009
Creepy Week Continues
Day 3 (Tuesday): Went with the traditional black-and-orange jewelry, and got into a great conversation about books with my "office"mate (heh). This reminded me that LM Montgomery (she of Anne of Green Gables fame) also had a bunch of short stories collected into volumes, one of which was themed for all things mystical and/or creepy. My favorite story is "The Tryst of the White Lady", about a boy who sees and is ensnared by the family ghost (a beautiful flirt murdered on her wedding day) and his subsequent return as he unexpectedly rescues a real, live girl. The collection's really only moderately creepy, but very atmospheric. Then watched Corpse Bride - it always surprises me just how beautiful that odd and freaky little show is... love the dead folk, love the art design, and the butterflies at the end always make me cry.
Day 4 (Wednesday): Strangely, this week already feels about 8 days long. Not sure why. The black nail polish is chipping rather horrifically, even after a patch job last night (this is one reason why I don't usually put polish on my fingernails). Must re-do before Saturday. Helped my amazingly awesome cousin by putting together a pretty cool (if I do say so myself) Prince Charming costume for her pretty awesome husband... one of 
the perks to working at a theatre is easy access to the costume stores! Made at least a little progress on my own costume, with help on my wig from a very talented employee (another perk: people who know and are VERY good at wigs). Oddly, not in the mood to watch anything - read a murder mystery instead ("Shakespeare and Smythe"! Very fun!) and called it thematic enough to count.
the perks to working at a theatre is easy access to the costume stores! Made at least a little progress on my own costume, with help on my wig from a very talented employee (another perk: people who know and are VERY good at wigs). Oddly, not in the mood to watch anything - read a murder mystery instead ("Shakespeare and Smythe"! Very fun!) and called it thematic enough to count.August 23, 2009
Arrested Development Revisited (The Condition, Not the TV Show)
Interesting.
I didn't plan to see the movie, and that plan hasn't changed - and I'm more interested now in asking the same question the reviewer does. Retro is for fashion and design influences, not gender attitudes and perceptions. I can think of a few favorite books where the heroine becomes the person she wants to be AND gets the guy, and doesn't do what she does in order to get the guy. I can think of a lot of movies where the girl gives up everything to get the guy - are there any out there that illustrate the point the reviewer is talking about? In Legally Blonde, the fact that Elle ends up dating Emmett is something of an afterthought - she doesn't sacrifice for him, or compromise her goals or change her vision of who she can be in order to be with him.
Illustrate, discuss - is there hope for Hollywood and the Happily Ever After?
I didn't plan to see the movie, and that plan hasn't changed - and I'm more interested now in asking the same question the reviewer does. Retro is for fashion and design influences, not gender attitudes and perceptions. I can think of a few favorite books where the heroine becomes the person she wants to be AND gets the guy, and doesn't do what she does in order to get the guy. I can think of a lot of movies where the girl gives up everything to get the guy - are there any out there that illustrate the point the reviewer is talking about? In Legally Blonde, the fact that Elle ends up dating Emmett is something of an afterthought - she doesn't sacrifice for him, or compromise her goals or change her vision of who she can be in order to be with him.
Illustrate, discuss - is there hope for Hollywood and the Happily Ever After?
July 21, 2009
Official Geekhood
I saw Star Trek for the fourth time tonight (yes, it's still in a few theaters).
Liked it very nearly as much as I did the first time.
Wowsers.
* * * * *
After talking to a friend today, I've decided to try pre-natal vitamins to make my hair grow, rather than cutting it short. I'll get a good "trim" just before I leave for school.
* * * * *
"School", you say? Details coming soon.
* * * * *
"Redouble" is an odd word, and I don't think it's used correctly. Say, for example, the phrase "Redouble your efforts" - that would imply that you'd already been told to "double your efforts" and that's just not something you hear often. Plus, if you're going to redouble something, you're doubling it again - or double-doubling, if you will... which could be acurately described as "double-squaring" or "quadrupling". Telling someone to quadruple their efforts has the benefit of specificity (though telling someone to double-squared their efforts is just silly), especially if those efforts have already been doubled... but I suppose it smacks of overkill. "Redouble" is merely redundant. (Speaking of, why don't you ever hear the word "dundant"?)
Liked it very nearly as much as I did the first time.
Wowsers.
"She's seen it HOW many times? Sheesh, I could never sit still THAT long!"
* * * * *
* * * * *
After talking to a friend today, I've decided to try pre-natal vitamins to make my hair grow, rather than cutting it short. I'll get a good "trim" just before I leave for school.
* * * * *
"School", you say? Details coming soon.
* * * * *
"Redouble" is an odd word, and I don't think it's used correctly. Say, for example, the phrase "Redouble your efforts" - that would imply that you'd already been told to "double your efforts" and that's just not something you hear often. Plus, if you're going to redouble something, you're doubling it again - or double-doubling, if you will... which could be acurately described as "double-squaring" or "quadrupling". Telling someone to quadruple their efforts has the benefit of specificity (though telling someone to double-squared their efforts is just silly), especially if those efforts have already been doubled... but I suppose it smacks of overkill. "Redouble" is merely redundant. (Speaking of, why don't you ever hear the word "dundant"?)
October 03, 2008
Day 3 - "Strong" ly Recommended
So last night I ditched out of R & J rehearsal and got in a little extra exercise - I walked down the street to catch a movie. (Seriously! 15 minutes both ways!) My movie choices were Nick and Nora's Infinite Playlist or Forever Strong - and since the former hasn't opened yet, I went with the latter. I know it's being pegged as a "Mormon movie", since it was filmed in Salt Lake and directed by an LDS filmaker, but at the most it has only very indirect references to the Church or gospel doctrine. There are no references to scriptures, attending church, or missionary work of any kind. That being said, I thought it was an excellent movie. It's a "sports movie", which means it has lots of cliches, but it also has a decent script (no swearing - odd for a sports movie ;-)), good directing and editing, and some very nice acting. I was engrossed by the story, and I don't know anything about rugby! I'd be happy to see Forever Strong again, and I'm thinking this is one I'll buy on DVD, too. (Also, I am once again motivated to exercise.)
* * * * *
Yesterday I went in for a trim and ended up having three inches taken off my hair - came into the office today, and NO ONE NOTICED. I guess I change my hair a lot.
* * * * *
It has taken me about four hours to compose this post, we've been so busy today with International Visitors. I am REALLY looking forward to Sunday afternoon. I may have to take a "buy" on working out tomorrow - I'll be in the office from 6:00 AM to 6:30 PM, and then my family is going out to dinner... We'll all be out tonight until after 10:00 PM, and I don't think I'll be able to get up at 4:00 to work out before I get ready for the day. I see much chocolate in my (near) future.
May 02, 2008
Bonus Content #4 (Plus Zombies!)
The only thing I like better than seeing a movie on Opening Day is seeing a movie BEFORE Opening Day... and last night, I saw Iron Man! (In theatres today.)
And it was MADE OF AWESOME.
This was one of the smartest comic book movies I've ever seen - and I was interested to read (on Wikipedia, so don't bet the farm on this tidbit) that the cast was allowed to improvise much of their own dialogue. If true, I'm now even more impressed with Robert Downey Jr., who was absolutely brilliantly cast as Tony Stark.
When you go, stay all the way through the credits - evidently, there's a surprise at the end, which I missed. I guess I'll just HAVE to go see it again! Darn.
***
This morning in class the Question of the Day was: "In the event of the Apocalypse, what is your Zombie Contingency Plan?" (potential illustrations were included). Take a look at this article (if you dare), and then feel free to post your own ZCP here. I'm interested! (Plus, I want to know who to go stay with in the event of the Apocalypse.)
P.S. My ZCP definitely involves Tony Stark - if anybody is going to figure out a way to save me from hungry zombies, he is. (Huh. Maybe that should go on my list.)
March 29, 2008
Bonus Content #3
For a surprisingly good, fluffy, pretty, fun example of my last post ("why not to settle"), try Miss Pettigrew Lives for a Day. No eternal perspective here, of course, but there are people re-evaluating their priorities, finding what's important, and looking beyond the surface to the great things underneath. I very much enjoyed it!
Also, yummm.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)