Bagel and a movie

Movies on ipad?

2010-04-12T13:00:00.000-07:00

Dana Stevens at Slate just wrote a piece on using the ipad to watch movies...Sounds fairly thumbs down to me. Every time I think about this thing--or read a new commentary--all I can think is, why not just get an itouch and do the same thing--with more portability?

Spike on "Where the Wild Things Are"

2009-10-14T19:21:00.000-07:00

I loved this interview with Spike Jonze on the concept for his new movie, "Where the Wild Things Are." I can't say that I was initially particularly attracted to the movie, but this interview made me want to see it.

Departures

2009-08-07T12:50:00.000-07:00

I kept seeing this one—a Japanese movie which won the Academy Award for best foreign feature film—in The Quad listings and trying to get to it, but the timing during the day (my usual movie-going time) just wasn’t working. I was so happy when Paul noticed it, too, and suggested we use some sitter time to check it out.

Departures is the story of Daigo Kobayashi, a passionate cellist, with a dream job in an orchestra, who finds himself abruptly out of job—and in huge debt for a very pricey cello-- when the orchestra dissolves.

What do you do when your dream has fizzled and you’ve got to re-group?

You go home, and you look for another job. Daigo and his apparently unflappable wife, Miko, head to Hirano, in northeastern Japan, where Daigo grew up. Daigo has inherited the house he grew up in from his mother, who died while he was abroad some years earlier. (His father abandoned the family when he was a child.)

Daigo sees a job listing for handling “departures” that doesn’t require experience, and, assuming its some sort of job with a travel agency, figures he’ll apply. Turns out that “departures” was a typo. It’s the departed that he’ll have to handle.

The business is all about “casketing,” i.e. a Japanese ritual in which dead bodies are prepared for the casket, and, at the end of the ceremony, placed in the casket. And it pays really well.

Daigo, who has never witnessed a death nor been part of memorializing one, can’t say no. He’s enticed by the money and Sasaki, the endearing curmudgeon who owns the business, and he’s frankly too nice and well intentioned to find a way to back out of the situation. He ends up going along for the ride.

It’s a great ride.

Departures, like Ghosted, is a window into another culture’s approach to death. And it’s an interesting one. On the one hand, the ritual of casketing is truly gorgeous—a reverential process that involves symbolically wiping away the pain accrued during time on earth, dressing the body in burial clothes, and making the person up (if the family requests it), to look their best, before placing them in the casket. All things that happen here, at a mortuary, but behind closed doors.

Here you, and the family, who sit nearby, see it up close. You’d think that a culture that created this lovely ceremony would be better at handling these situations than we are. Nope, at least, not according to the movie. Turns out the Japanese are just as death-leery as Americans. Daigo is too embarrassed to tell his wife what he’s up to. He lets her assume he’s working for a travel agency. (There’s a predictable reveal and accompanying drama over this one.) And he's ostracized by people in the community who disdain what he's doing.

And the grief-stricken families are just as un-done and un-resigned to death as those we know. Each death, each family, brings it’s own assortment of heartbreaking and sometimes funny complications. The beautiful young woman, a suicide, who they discover, in the process of casketing her, is actually a man, leaving the two casketers in a quandary: make “her” up as a woman or man? The fight that breaks out, among the family and friends, over the question of who’s responsible for death of a young girl killed on a motorbike.

We see it all. So do Daigo and Sasaki. And we watch as people struggle to come to terms with their losses. Along the way, there’s a nod to the “ambiguous” ceremony-less losses in life—people, gone but not dead, and dreams, for instance—and how hard it is to wrestle with them, as well.

It’s all very real, and very touching. Ultimately there are many opportunities for one realization: It’s a privilege to be here, walking around, living our lives, and the death of a loved one, and even someone you don’t know well, is an opportunity to honor that fact both for the other person—and for yourself.

I left the movie humming with appreciation, both for the movie and my life.

Ghosted

2009-08-07T11:53:00.000-07:00

All I needed to hear about this movie was that it explored the aftermath of grief and loss and, of course, I was interested. (To anyone unfamiliar with my history, the loss of my brother when I was 14 left me with an apparently life-long interest in these topics.)

So, last Thursday, on a pre-school day when we should have been working, Paul and I caught the 1 p.m. show at The Quad. Ghosted is the story of Sophie Schmitt, a Hamburg-based video artist, and her lover, Aing-Li, a young woman from Taiwan. They meet when Aing-Li travels to Germany to visit an uncle, work in his restaurant, and uncover a secret about her birth.

We learn all of this in flashback. The movie actually begins the tale after Aing-Li’s death. We don’t know how it happened for quite awhile. Or why. All we know is that Sophie, who we first meet as she opens a video installation entitled “Remembrance” in Taiwan, featuring Aing-Li, is sad, confused and lonely.

Enter Mei-Li, a Taiwanese journalist who first appears at the opening, trying, earnestly, to cajole Sophie into an interview about her relationship with Aing-Li. Both women are drawn to one another, so much so that Sophie drops her guard and agrees to hang out with Mei-Li for the day, though she knows Mei-Li plans to write about it.

The day doesn’t end well. And so unfolds a push-pull storyline in which Mei-Li keeps popping back up in unexpected places, trying to investigate the story of Aing-Li’s death. For a while, it feels very much like a detective story—with the potential for an unexpected truth looming around the corner. Ultimately, it's about searching from both sides--the living and the dead.

And I’d love to say more about that, but I’d spoil the tension for you if I did.

I really liked this movie. There’s not a whole lot of depth or “ah-ha” to it. There aren’t any huge revelations about the nature of grief and loss. When the credits were rolling, I leaned over to Paul and said, “What I like most about these movies is the sense that they’re visual travelogues.”

It’s true. We see Taiwan. We see Hamburg. We see it from an urban perspective. And we see it from the perspective of strangers visiting those countries. It’s also a travelogue on death and lost loved ones from a Taiwanese perspective.

As I said, it’s not a huge movie by any means, not in financing or in its point. But I did really enjoy it—and I was only a tiny bit wistful about not having spent the time working (huge for me). I’m grateful to co-writers Astrid Stroher and Monica Treut (who also directed) for this small window on the way another culture sees loss.

And now, a brief pause for a public service announcement...

2009-08-03T09:01:00.000-07:00

Here's a story: A few years back, pre-Henry, so at least three, and probably four, I was at a movie theater (19th and Broadway) watching "Kill Bill." I was really enjoying it, but I had a familiar quandary on my hands: When to pee? (Apologies to the squeamish, who might want to cut and run, because it only gets worse from here.)

If was not a question. I always get the big Diet Coke. I LOVE the big Diet Coke. I can FINISH the big Diet Coke. But, inevitably, it means at least one trip, sometimes, two, to the restroom. And that means I've become rather good--or let's say rather interested in--learning to pick the best time to bolt for five minutes.

I'm pretty good at picking the right throw away moment in films to do this. Sadly, there are a lot of them. But in this case, we're talking Quentin Tarantino, who, with his cut-and-paste, out-of-sequence style, can be pretty hard to read. (Is he TRYING to mess with people who dare to eat and drink during movies? I wouldn't put it past him.)

I picked a quiet moment, when Uma Thurman is on the plane, crossing out names on her hit-list, to run. I was gone for maybe five minutes. When I came back, I couldn't get in, because the doors were open and people were streaming out the doors. Turns out, the movie was a two-parter, and, true to Tarantino's style, he'd concluded the first one at an unexpected out-of-sequence moment.

It was funny. Sort of.

So I was in hysterics (and very grateful) when Paul, my husband, who is quite familiar with my Diet Coke issues (and is frequently counted upon to recount what I've missed), sent me this article, about a guy who has established a web site telling you the opportune moments to bolt for a restroom break during new releases.

What a guy!!!! (Mr. Runpee, not Paul, though I like him, too.)

The site is http://runpee.com. And it's available as iPhone App. Too bad I don't have an iPhone. But I can check out the website, pre-movie, if I'm motivated enough. This won't help, I might add, in those movies that are so good, or so tight, that there really IS no opportune moment for a break. (I call these don't-get-the-big-Diet-Coke movies...creative, eh?).

But there are few like those, alas. Most of them are eminently intermission-able. And when they're not, there's always Paul.

Drag Me To Hell

2009-05-29T13:36:00.000-07:00

I know, I'm lame. I have a huge list of movies to write up, and no time to do it. My dry spell doesn't end here, sadly. But I am going to link you to a GOOD review of "Drag Me To Hell" by Dana Stevens of Slate. In a million years, I would not have guessed that this was or could be a good movie. But Stevens likes it, and I like her taste, so now I'm intrigued. (Those of you who've spent some time on my blog know that I'm partial to horror movies.) Happy reading!

Star Trek Rocks

2009-05-11T09:01:00.000-07:00

I'm so embarrassed that it's been so long since I posted. I've been extremely busy catching up after my month in Florida, my two fun-filled weeks of viral infections, gratis of pre-school, and one thing or another. And this, I'm also ashamed to say, will not be a long post. But I did want to express one movie-related thing here today, which is that the new Star Trek movie is great! I grew up on Star Trek, thanks to my cool older brother, Ted, who wasn't about to let me pick what went on the one T.V. in the house. So I watched, and loved it, and later went to Star Trek conventions and made Star Trek models with my brother, and played Star Trek (needless to say I never got to be Kirk) and...well, I was a big fan. It's not easy to win over die hard fans with re-makes. But J.J. Abrams, the director of this one, did a wonderful job--new enough, but connected enough to the old one. A nod to the backstory and mannerisms of some of the original characters, without making them caricatures. I immediately got on the ride--and stayed on it. I can't wait for the next one. Okay, that's my film thought for the day--hopefully more soon. Meanwhile, check it out, friends--and live long and prosper.

Greg Mottola and The Comeback

2009-04-13T18:43:00.000-07:00

I got curious about Greg Mottola, the director of Adventureland, so I did a quick IMDB search on him (when I should have been doing “real” work). I discovered that he directed two episodes of The Comeback, Lisa Kudrow’s all-to-brief series on HBO.

It was a smart show that I thought had real potential and I was sorry to see it go. Occasionally, it shows up on HBO In Demand, so if you’re ever caught without something to watch, and you see it pop up—give it a shot.

The Comeback is the story of Valerie Cherish, a forty-something actress who’s fighting desperately to re-claim the adoration and status she enjoyed as a twenty-something hottie on what appears to have been a popular but dorky show (something along the lines of Threes Company. Ouch.)

At the start of the series, she lands her big chance—a small role on a new show, and a reality show documenting her “Comeback” (though like Nora Desmond, she laughs of the idea that she was ever gone). Valerie, with her feathered hair and seventies wardrobe, is every bit as awkward and self-conscious as Larry David, and what’s worse, she’s always smilingly trying to deflect the moments (and there are many) that show her in an un-fabulous light.

Other characters include her dorky but loyal husband, her bitchy step-daughter, who’s scornful of Valerie but loath to turn down a few moments in front of the camera and a shot at Nicole Richie-dom, a gay hairdresser who keeps Valerie’s hair in seventies fabulosity, and some snarky twenty-somethings (mainly writers on the show) who think being nice to her will diminish their coolness. Episode after episode, they try to humiliate her, and she gamely takes it all in, insisting on seeing it as peers teasing a peer.

You know, it wasn’t a perfect show. It was occasionally unwatchable in that I’m-so-uncomfortable-I-can’t-watch way that Curb Your Enthusiasm sometimes is. And it hadn’t quite found it’s pace—kind of like the first season of Seinfeld, in which the jokes are a little slow yet.

Seinfeld was given a chance to mature, though. I wish The Comeback had been given the same chance—and with directors like Mottola. I think we would have seen some great stuff.

Was James supposed to be played by Michael Cera?

2009-04-12T17:33:00.001-07:00

This one's for Deborah, who asked if the part of James in Adventureland was possibly supposed to be played by Michael Cera (of Juno fame), i.e. was Eisenberg a substitute? Never occured to me until you mentioned it, but I did a Google search and found an interview with Greg Mottola, Adventureland's director, in which the interviewer raised the same question. (It's an especially relevant question because Mottola has directed Cera before....which I didn't know. I only know Cera from Juno.) Unless Mottola is doing some very diplomatic dancing here, it sounds like Eisenberg was meant to play the role. (Though I'm sure Cera would have been up to it.)

It’s hard to avoid some comparisons with Michael Cera and Jesse Eisenberg. Who would win in a cage match?
A cage match of awkwardness? Who’s the awkward king of America? Of young adult America?

Well, I knew of Jesse before I knew of Michael Cera, actually, because I had seen [Jesse’s] first film Roger Dodger when it came out because I was friends with Campbell Scott. I really liked him and I liked the movie, and that came out before I did Arrested Development. When I did Arrested Development, I was very excited because I was already a fan of Jason Bateman and Jeffrey Tambor and the whole cast, pretty much, and Michael was the only person I didn’t know, and he was the one who I was like, “I can’t believe this fifteen-year-old kid is the funniest person in the room.” It kind of blew my mind.

Michael is a very specific ... He’s unique. I mean, there’s no one like Michael Cera. He’s his own thing, and I feel the same way about Jesse. I mean, Jesse has a slightly more neurotic New York Jewish energy to him, but Jesse, I think, is a little more sexualized than Michael. Michael is so sweet that some of the stuff, some of the yearning in Adventureland I wanted to have something of a sexual component, and I think that felt better, that felt more correct with Jesse, although Jesse has a lot of the sincerity and sweetness. You know, I’m glad that there are two actors like that out in the world because there’s not a lot of young people who could have played parts like that, in either Superbad or this, so I’d say it’s a toss-up. I love them equally.

Adventureland

2009-04-12T12:47:00.000-07:00

I didn’t really know what this movie was about. I just knew it had gotten some nice reviews, and that my friend Nancy, who has very trustworthy taste, had actually read them—and wanted to see it. (Apologies to Nancy for seeing it without her.)

In truth, I’m not very good at the what’s-it-about question—with regard to movies OR books. Generally I enjoy the ride, and then puzzle over what it all means, later. Sometimes I just savor a few seconds or minutes of them, over-and-over again, and forget about worrying over the big picture.

After I saw Doubt, for example, what kept coming back to me was not so much thoughts about the nature of doubt itself (though this was clearly the intention of the movie), but a 20 second or so scene in which the kids are learning to dance in the school gymnasium, and Amy Adams is sitting in a chair on the side, clapping awkwardly. She clapped the way my mom might clap if she were watching me do something I was enjoying, even though she’d never want to try it herself. There’s something so piercingly right and true about those moments. And I felt it again and again in that movie. Does the total movie add up to the greatness of those few moments here and there? I don’t know yet. I’m still enjoying the moments. Haven’t totally gotten to the big picture yet.

That’s sort of where I am with Adventureland right now, too.

It’s 1987. James Brennan, a nerdy but sweet kid with annoying hair (a shelf of bang-curls…were the eighties really that egregious?) is graduating from college and making his plans. He’s going to travel in Europe for the summer with his best friend, then go to journalism school at Columbia.

That’s the plan, at least, until graduation weekend, when his bitchy mom and passive-aggressive dad inform him that his dad’s been demoted and plans have changed. If he’s going to make it to journalism school, he’s going to have to kiss the summer in Europe goodbye and get a job to earn his keep in the fall.

This is one of those movies where the parents are kind of set up as oblivious assholes—the kind who don’t realize that fair’s fair and a deal’s a deal. (The kid only needs 200 bucks to make Europe happen, and it was his graduation gift, for God’s sake.) Other parents are similarly dim-witted or incapable of handling situations with their kids fairly. It reminded me of Peanuts, where we see Charlie Brown and his buddies tangling with painful kid issues (and a few existential ones), while the parents are notably absent or prattling nonsensically in the background.

At any rate, James gets home, only to discover that his nerdy intellectual resume doesn’t get him far. The only job he can get is at a kind of embarrassing local theme park, run by a husband and wife team, Bobby and Paulette (Bill Hader and Kristen Wiig), who met while Bobby was running the horse-racing game. The interview consists of him asking for the job. Five seconds later, he’s handed a “Games” t-shirt, because Bobby and Paulette proclaim him "definitely" a games guy, not a ride guy, and he’s good to go.

It’s at this point where we meet the freaks and geeks who will people his summer—and the next hour-and-a-half or so of our time. A friend of mine wanted to know if this was a movie about intellectual slackers. Not really. James and a few others are there because they simply can’t get jobs elsewhere and they need the money. Other vacillate between attractive enough but not distinguishable in any other way, or dim-witted, or stuck. It’s a pretty good cross-section of humanity, albeit one within a certain age-range.

And I suppose you could say it’s a growing up movie, which normally wouldn’t appeal to me, except that the lesson learned here is one I wish I’d learn at the tender age of 21: You can’t just avoid the people you fuck up with. I’m not sure I’m quoting that correctly, but I love it. Because we all fuck up, so if you start the avoiding game, you’re going to run out of people to hang with, or need a constant supply of new friends and lovers, on a pretty regular basis.

I’ll say it again, Oh, if I’d only learned this at 21. Or even 31.

There are some great performances here. Jesse Eisenberg (who was in The Squid and the Whale, though I don’t remember him). And Kristen Stewart, as Em, whose performance actually makes me want to see Twilight. Oh, and Martin Starr as Joel, James’s buddy. The coolest nerd you’ll ever encounter.

What’s it all about (Alfie)? I don’t know. I’m not really prepared to say yet. But I’m definitely still savoring its bits….the tube socks, the turquoise jewelry, the way James uses his line about wanting to be a travel writer in the same way that Charles Dickens was several times, knowing that, with the right audience, it makes him sound cool. The scene were Bobby goes after a thug with a baseball bat, and, a second later, goes back to tabulating his accounts.

I could go on.

Friday the 13th

2009-04-10T14:04:00.000-07:00

(A still from the ending of the first Friday the 13th--the dream sequence that allows for the possibility of a sequel. Ha. Little did we know we'd be enjoying Jason's antics twenty years later.)

I trudged off to see this one rather guiltily. Guiltily because, let’s face it, I knew I was going to while away a few precious work hours, not to mention babysitter time, on a crap movie. I mean, Friday the 13th the original was a crap movie (though I loved it). The re-make was bound to be crap, too, no?

Well, it was, but…I still loved it.

It has what feels like three beginnings. It starts with a little montage from the very first story, just in case you don’t know the back-story (though they used different actors to depict it, rather than footage from the original…maybe they couldn’t buy the rights?)

Then it goes to what seems like the real, modern-day beginning—a bunch of hormonal kids go camping too close to the former site of Camp Crystal Lake. Predictably, they get slaughtered by our pal, Jason. But it happens so fast—they’re all dispatched within about ten minutes—that you’re left wondering how the hell they’re going to fill in the next hour or so of the movie.

On to part three. This is where the brother of one of the randy campers (I think his name was Clay) comes to town looking for his sister, Jenna. The locals are mum about goings on at Camp Crystal Lake, though one particularly odd one does allow that smart people know where not to go thereabouts.

Clay runs into some kids at the local gas station, while posting flyers of his missing sister. One of those kids, a snarky forgettable jerk, has a family cabin in the area. He’s brought a bunch of his buddies (all pretty annoying) and a sort-of girlfriend up to party/exercise their hormones for a few days.

Long story short, they all end up at the snarky guy’s house, getting slaughtered in one way or another. (I think there might be a few colorful dismemberings on the lake, but most take place in or around the house.)

There are a few attempts at Jason-psychology—a suggestion that he thinks Jenna looks like a younger version of his mother (killed in the end of the first Friday the 13th). I’m not averse to a little pop-serial-killer psychology…but in this case, it really didn’t go anywhere.

I really tried to remember some of the horrendous dialogue so I could repeat it for you here. But it’s been awhile now. (I really should have written some of it down.) The only line I think I’m remembering correctly is: “Your tits are spectacular!” (Fab, huh??)

The ending is sort of a nod to the ending of the first movie…but to tell you the truth, I’m not sure if it was supposed to be a dream (like the end of the first one) or real…Either way, I suspect Jason will live to kill on another day.

You know what I found myself utterly amused by, as I was walking out of this movie? I realized that the kids in this movie were SO obnoxious, I kind of found myself rooting for Jason.

Kill, Kill, Kill, Now, Now, Now.

Coming soon: Adventureland

2009-04-09T12:18:00.001-07:00

I saw this last night and adored it. I'm on a deadline right now, so more to come, but for the moment just wanted to share one of my favorite lines: "You can't avoid everyone you've fucked up with."

DVD: Then She Found Me

2009-04-05T13:35:00.000-07:00

I actually had a lot of fun checking out Blockbusters when we were in Florida. At one time, a membership at a movie rental place (a place you actually have to go to, and browse) was a must. Now, with Netflix, it seems so passé….I don’t mean to sound snotty. It’s just that I’m so computer dependent now---services like Netflix, Fresh Direct, and Diapers.com have made my disorganized life so much easier. It’s hard to imagine voluntarily taking more time to do something I can do online.

I do occasionally go to Alvin’s Alley, the goofy rental place—half antique store, have DVD/VHS rental—on 9th between 22nd and 23rd. They have almost everything, even the very obscure. And they’re always willing to dig it out of a back recess of the store. Plus most of the people who work there are the nerdy movie types who’ve actually watched everything in the place and are happy to chat movies or make a recommendation. (And they’re only a block away.)

But a suburban Blockbusters is a different deal. What shocked me more than anything was that they have stuff that’s still in the movie theaters, or just recently out of them. I had NO idea. In other words, it’s possible to do some pretty sophisticated and current viewing with just the aid of a little suburban store. It was, I must say, a pleasant surprise. I mean, I love Rachel Maddow, but sometimes (a lot of times) I don’t want to think, I want to be entertained.

Anyway, I was looking for something I’d wanted to see, but missed. Looking, I might add, while occasionally disentangling Henry from a rack of DVDs, or pulling three bags of gummy bears out of his enthralled little hands. Once he scared the cr*p out of me by utterly disappearing and not answering when I called, thus raising the specter of myself on national T.V., begging for the return of my son, who I lost while checking out the current releases in the video store. I’m sure people would be VERY sympathetic.

But I was spared the humiliation. I found him. (Gummy Bear aisle again.) And I also found “Then She Found Me,” Helen Hunt’s directorial debut (she also co-wrote the screenplay, which is based on a novel by Ellen Lipman), which I wanted to see when it was out in 2007.

I wanted to like it. I like Helen Hunt. She’s a capable actor who, I think, knows what she’s doing—as an actor, anyway. But I guess there’s more to directing than that. My assumption was that someone who has been in the field as long as she has would get it, but there’s clearly more to it than having been in a zillion films since you were a teenager. In fact, one of my thoughts, after watching this movie was “Wow, I guess Ron Howard really has a unique talent.”

At any rate, here’s the plot: April (Helen Hunt) gets married at 39 (or possibly late 38, it’s not spelled out), to Ben (Matthew Broderick), a fellow grade school teacher. We learn, shortly thereafter, that she herself was adopted, and desperately wants to have a biological child. She and Ben have been trying, we discover (about ten months into the marriage), but to no avail.

Helen’s adoptive mother, Trudy, keeps telling her to adopt. To which April responds that she wants the biological connection, that she always knew there was a difference in the way Trudy looked at her and Ben (April’s brother, not adopted). Trudy glares at her, tells her there’s no difference, but April is adamant. There is, and she’s having a baby biologically, come hell or high water.

Then hell and/or high water arrives. Ben decides the marriage isn’t for him after all, Trudy dies, April discovers she’s pregnant after a round of goodbye sex with Ben, and April’s biological mother, Bernice (played by Bette Midler), tracks April down. Oh, and April meets a guy, Frank (Colin Firth), who’s very charming, for the most part, but also very fucked up after having been left by his wife to raise two kids on his own. Phew.

The tagline for this movie is: “Life can change in a heartbeat.” April certainly experiences a lot of changes. And I think, in the end, we’re to take away the idea that our hearts often have a greater ability to love and take risks than we give them credit for. It’s our fears of the heart’s limitations, not their actual ones, that get in our way. But, frankly, I’m digging, based on the last minute or so of the movie. Because most of this movie is a mess that doesn’t lead much of anywhere.

It’s possible that Hunt just can’t get past relatively surface, quick-to-resolve sitcom scenarios at this point. Because no character really totally makes sense. And no storyline really goes much of anywhere. When you see Helen Hunt, Colin Firth, Matthew Broderick and Bette Midler in a movie, and it still can’t come together, you know it’s because there’s just crap writing underneath it all.

Maybe Hunt should have skipped the writing credit and just gone with a tried and true screenplay. But I suspect that Hunt, who had a baby at about 40, was trying to do something personally meaningful here. No harm in that. But…it kind of sucks to have done that when the movie, well, kind of sucks.

Things that particularly bothered me:

*Hunt is distractingly gaunt and aged looking in this movie. She can’t be much above 40, but she looks 50, and she’s all bony and hunched over. I know there’s pressure to be thin in Hollywood, but God, she looked AWFUL.

*Colin Firth’s character…charming in stereotypical Colin Firth way, but there’s one outburst scene from him that made me think his character was irretrievably fucked up, mean and awful…though that was not, I think, what you were supposed to take away from it. I think you were supposed to think the outburst was endearing and honest. But….yikes. Psychotic is more like it.

*The non-exploration/resolution of the there’s no difference/there is a difference between a biological and adoptive relationship. I think in the end you’re supposed to come away with the there’s no difference attitude. But though this question is the premise of the movie, they don’t explore it at all. Okay, there’s one weird scene with April and Ben in which he talks about how hard it is to be the biological child…. embarrassing at times, he tells her. And…that’s the end of that exploring.

*Paul also felt that the music was strangely paired with the scenes….I didn’t notice this so much, but he’s much more attuned to music than I am. It kind of did feel like Hunt chose music she liked, more than music that fit the scenes, though.

And there you have it. High, or reasonable hopes, not such a great movie. Oh well. I wonder if she’ll try it again.

DVD: Rumor Has It

2009-04-04T14:02:00.001-07:00

Okay, normally I wouldn’t be caught dead watching a movie starring Jennifer Aniston. No offense to Jennifer, but her presence in a movie connotes adjectives like dumb, surface, and cute. (Okay, I’m willing to bet she’d find that summary a tad offensive. But what can I say? It’s true.)

But, here we were in the Florida rental, Henry in bed, limited cable…and no Netflix. We turned the place upside down and found a few DVDs the owners had left, the most palatable of which was “Rumor Has It,” the 2005 flick, directed by Rob Reiner and starring Aniston, Kevin Costner, Mark Ruffalo, Shirley MacLain, Richard Jenkins and Mena Suvari.

Here’s the plot summary: A young woman from Pasadena realizes that her now-dead mother both knew (and slept with) the guy who was the inspiration for the character, Benjamin, in “The Graduate.” And she wonders if she might be his daughter. (And whether her grandmother, played by MacLain, was Mrs. Robinson.) The rest of the movie is Aniston trying to figure out the truth.

It’s cute. In fact, it was better than I expected it to be. Shirley MacLain is good for a laugh or two, as usual. And there’s a bit of physical comedy from Jenkins, as Aniston’s father, that left us laughing out loud for a good five or ten minutes.

In short, if you’re ever stuck in a beach house with nothing else to watch, I wouldn’t suggest that you, say, play backgammon instead of watching this movie.

Two Lovers

2009-04-04T13:24:00.001-07:00

It made a lot more sense for me to work than to go to a movie last Friday. I mean, I’d just gotten back from a month in Florida, I’m way behind, and I’d hired a sitter for the day. Isn’t that a scenario that spells catch-up?

But I woke up hearing the sound of tires on wet streets, and rain pattering the window. And it was gray out. It was a day, in short, that just screamed buy a bagel, a ticket, and a huge Diet Coke (in that order) and settle into a nearly empty theater. So, I did. Bliss.

(Bliss except for the peculiar, slightly dead-in-the-eyes, afternoon movie-goer ahead of me at the concession counter, who peppered me with questions as we waited…I let some distance accrue between us as we both made our way to the same theater, to make sure he wasn’t going to suggest we sit together. Shiver.)

So, Two Lovers, a movie that was suggested by several other movie fans.

It’s a lover’s quad, I guess. On the one hand, there’s the depressive, and, in her words, “fucked up,” Michele, played by Gwyneth Paltrow, and her boyfriend, the much older, cringe-inducing, married-lawyer boyfriend, Ronald (Elias Koteas).

And then there’s Leonard (Joaquin Phoenix), the oafish, endearing, slightly unstable son of Jewish immigrants who own a dry cleaning business in deep dark Brooklyn. Leonard’s heart was broken by his former fiancée, who ditched him (I’ll let you find out why). He’s home with his parents after a stint in an institution, trying to put his life back together.

He seems like a hopeless case, frankly, until he finds himself in the spotlight of a woman’s gaze—at which point he turns into an endearing clown who wants to please, amuse and entertain. And he does. The transformation is striking. And though it’s jarring, Phoenix makes it believable. Here is a man who comes alive at the prospect of love.

Leonard is torn between Michele, whom he’s technically friends with, but really pines for, and Sandra, the beautiful daughter of family friends, who doesn’t give off even the slightest whiff of crazy. Obviously Sandra is the right choice. Even Leonard knows that, occasionally blowing off Michele’s histrionics to focus on Sandra.

But crazy, as many of us know (okay, maybe just those of us with a checkered relationship history) has a strange allure. And, of course, it’s Gwynie, who looks like Gwynie in a photo shoot for Harper’s Bazaar for most of the movie. Kind of hard to turn your back on that, I imagine. Plus she’s needy in a way that lights up that male I’ll take-care-of-you gene. (Leonard lights up the female version of this gene in Sandra.)

The performances in this movie are really good. I loved Isabella Rossellini as Leonard’s mom. She didn’t need dialogue. It was all in her beautiful, worried, aging face. Phoenix is great. (I really do hope he hasn’t gone off the rails.) And Gwyneth seems to have a knack for depressive characters. (Though, with the exception of a gum-smacking, big hair club scene, she seemed a little too pretty and polished to me.)

It’s a solid movie, though a bit like an emotional horror flick (“Oh, no, don’t go in the basement/answer Michele’s call!”) Nowhere was I as horrified, however, as at the end—which, I lift my hat to the director, James Gray—I could not predict.

I think what troubles me is that I don’t ultimately know what it all MEANS. Is it, I thought, as I left the movie (after checking that dead-in-the-eyes was gone) about the lies we tell ourselves, and the compromises we accept, in love and relationships? Or is it merely a portrait of some hapless attempts at love?

Either way, it rang unnervingly true.

Apologies....

2009-04-03T19:11:00.000-07:00

(This was the pier in Deerfield Beach, Florida. We spent a lot of time taking walks on it, checking out the pelicans, and seeing what people were catching.)

Hi all. I was away all of March in Florida without a close movie theater (or sitter, even if there had been one). To make matters worse, my internet access was spotty. Which is more of an explanation, I suppose, than an apology, for why this blog has been so quiet of late. There WAS, however, a Blockbusters nearby....(boy did browsing those aisles recall junior high school) so I did some good renting. And I've seen two movies this week, so there'll be more activity soon.

The Quad Newsletter

2009-03-06T06:03:00.000-08:00

Remember I mentioned The Quad, and Elliot Kanbar's email newsletter in an earlier post? He always summarizes what's playing at the theater, and ends the newsletter with an interesting commentary. Here's this weeks offering (and p.s. I think he's right about all of them):

THE LAST WORD (AT LAST) ABOUT THE OSCAR WINNERS. Matt Damon recently remarked that "the only way to judge movies is at least 15 years down the line. You'll be able to see if the films and performances endured, divorced from the heat of the race and the craziness of the costly Oscar campaigns".

The magazine "Entertainment Today" launched an extensive survey asking Academy members: " In the last 15 Oscar races would you vote today for the same performers and films who won then?" Here are some answers including some of my own.

I think it should have been:

RALPH FIENNES ("Schindler's List") over Tommy Lee Jones ("The Fugitive") for Best Supporting Actor. 1993.

SAVING PRIVATE RYAN over "Shakespeare In Love" for Best Picture. 1998.

CATE BLANCHETT ("Elizabeth") over Gwyneth Paltrow ("Shakespeare In Love") for Best Actress.1998.

KATE WINSLET ("Sense and Sensibilites") over Mira Sorvino ("Mighty Aphrodite") for Best Supporting Actress. 1995.

DANIEL DAY-LEWIS ("Gangs of New York") over Adrien Brody ("The Pianist") for Best Actor. 2002.

SEAN PENN ("Dead Man Walking") over Nicolas Cage ("Leaving Las Vegas") for Best Actor. 1993.

EDWARD NORTON ("American History") over Roberto Benigni ("Life is Beautiful") for Best Actor. 1998.

David Denby on the Oscars--and why the picks were off

2009-03-03T08:24:00.000-08:00

I'm just catching up on New Yorkers, so I'm late in remarking upon this...but David Denby's piece in the February 9/16th issue, entitled "Curious Cases" really nails it. Below are a few of my favorite observations....but click on the link and read the full piece. It's worth it.

-As you may have noticed, 2008 was not a great year for movies. There was nothing comparable to the hair-raising "There Will be Blood," or the ravishing "Diving Bell and the Butterfly," or the sinister "No Country for Old Men," from 2007. Even so a nod for best picture could have gone to more deserving movies, such as Jonathan Demme's "Rachel Getting Married," which settles down into a revelatory examination of a family's anguish and joy; or "Happy-Go-Lucky," Mike Leigh's startling look at the power and the limits of goodness....

-The total of thirteen nominations for "Benjamin Button" has to be some sort of scandal. "Citizen Kane" received nine nominations, "The Godfather: Part II" eleven, and this movie, so smooth and mellow that it seems to have been dipped in bourbon aging since the Civil War, is nowhere close to those two.

-Boyle has created what looks like a jumpy, hyper-edited commercial for poverty--he uses the squalor and violence touristically, as an aspect of the fabulous.

Charlie Rose and Mickey Rourke

2009-02-21T20:29:00.000-08:00

Thanks to Rebecca Skloot for posting this on twitter, where I stumbled upon it....

Science at the movies

2009-02-21T20:22:00.000-08:00

Check this out....

Why are re-makes necessary?

2009-02-20T13:38:00.000-08:00

I was just reading that they're doing a re-make of Karate Kid, starring Will Smith's son...a child who already poses like an unbearable Hollywood star. I don't mind re-makes of bad movies, i.e. the Friday the 13ths...it's not like the new versions have a lot to compete with. But why mess with the good ones? I'd like to hear a smart movie producer/director on the subject of re-makes and why they are as inevitable as bad movies in January......

Coming soon: Friday the 13th

2009-02-20T13:17:00.001-08:00

(An image from the original Friday the 13th...recognize Kevin Bacon?)

You know, it was right in the spirit with good-bad movies. And I forgave it for not having that dated '80s look (tube socks, short cut-off shorts on guys, etc) that I adore (in retrospect). It was, dare I say it....fun! (killkillkillnownownow)

More to come...

Wow--someone else not raving about Slumdog....

2009-02-18T17:35:00.001-08:00

I'm having a hard time getting as excited about this movie as most people. I found it adept movie-making with an absolutely disturbing undercurrent--not uplifting at all. Here's a reviewer who felt similarly.

And more on Joaquin Phoenix

2009-02-18T17:30:00.000-08:00

Here's a really interesting article that says Phoenix is dead serious about his new career. Shrug.

Jane Austen Meets Aliens and Zombies

2009-02-17T12:15:00.000-08:00

Actually (to use one of Henry's favorite words), I'm not kidding. Or making it up. There are two movies in the work that merge Austen's Pride and Prejudice (aka the Bible, for some people) and storylines involving zombies and/or aliens. I don't know whether to laugh or cry. I'm always game for a little ridiculousness....but Jane, well, Jane is kind of sacred. I'm not at all sure how I feel about this. Click here for more details.

Joaquin Phoenix--Crazy or Kaufman-esque?

2009-02-17T08:31:00.000-08:00

Chances are you've been encountering snippets of gossip about the decompensation of Joaquin Phoenix. I'm not accusing you of reading Perez Hilton (though I do). It's just hard to entirely avoid celebrity gossip, especially when it increasingly makes the headline news.

Here's the short version: Phoenix said he was giving up acting for a music career. He had one spectacularly bad performance, raised eyebrows with some pretty diva-like behavior, and apparently (though I missed it) was absolutely bizarre in a recent interview on the David Letterman show.

Some say he's falling apart, others that this is an Andy Kaufman/Sacha Baron Cohen-like bit of performance art--the latter theory supported by the fact that his brother-in-law, Casey Affleck, is supposedly making a film about his fledgling music career.

I confess, I don't know what to make of it all, though I hope he's not falling apart. I really like him as an actor. So I perked up a little when I read this piece about Phoenix (and his new movie) on Slate.

Quentin Tarantino Trivia

2009-02-17T07:29:00.000-08:00

I had so much fun with that Hitchcock trivia I dug up a tidbit on Quentin Tarantino, who, for the record, dropped out of high school at 16 to pursue a future in movies. Guess it worked out for him.

Anyway, here's a quote from him that I really like:

"When people ask me if I went to film school I tell them, 'no, I went to films.'"

Source: IMDB

Hitchcock trivia

2009-02-17T06:54:00.000-08:00

My friend Nuna just gave me a great book on Alfred Hitchcock---The Alfred Hitchcock Triviography and Quiz Book. It's chock full of stuff I don't know. And, I have to confess, I'm doing terribly on the quizzes--mainly because (and this shocked me) there are still so many of his movies I haven't seen. This guy was prolific--he made more than fifty films. I've got work to do!

Meanwhile, here's a trivia question for you: Who inspired Hitchcock to make suspense films? Scroll down for the answer.............

Edgar Allen Poe!

The Class

2009-02-17T06:22:00.000-08:00

Read a synopsis of this movie on Moviefone or Fandango and you're likely to go...eh, maybe I'll see Doubt again. The idea behind The Class is not so riveting--watch a teacher wrangle with a bunch of 13 and 14 year old French kids, trying to teach them the finer points of the language over the course of a school year. But if you, as I did, decide that there must be something behind the talk about this movie and go so far as to buy a ticket, you'll be pleasantly surprised.

The kid actors are amazing--so real it feels like a documentary. The teacher, Francois Begaudeau, who is playing a fictionalized version of himself, is also thoroughly convincing. I would say that's hardly surprising, except I think it would actually be hard to play a slightly fictionalized version of yourself. Which parts do you fictionalize?

The movie, incidentally, is based on a book written by Begaudeau, and he also helped write the screenplay. And the realism of the performances? The product of a year long process of improvisational workshops. I don't know what impresses me more--the idea, and the committment to making it feel so real, or the final product.

There are a lot of things to chew on here:

What's the better way to be, as a teacher, with unruly kids--understanding and flexible? Or strict and no-nonsense?

Should teachers be authority figures or friends?

When do you give up on a kid?

And how do you impose one identity (in this case, French--though there are certainly parallels in our country) on an increasingly diverse population? And how do they take to that? We see that process at work here, via what would be any culture's most difficult sell--13 and 14 year-old kids. (Having heard some horror stories, mostly second-hand, about well-intentioned friends of friends who attempted to teach in the New York City school system, I actually expected these kids to be a lot tougher.)

I liked this film a lot, was thoroughly engaged while watching it, admire the way it was made--but I have to confess I haven't thought about it that much since leaving the theater. I don't know why. I did really like it.

For those of you who want to read more about this film, I think the Times did a really nice review, which I just stumbled across.

Guest Blog: He's Just Not That Into You

2009-02-15T19:50:00.000-08:00

It takes a village to run a movie blog. Seriously. Just when I think I can't---or won't--go to a certain movie, a friend steps up and does it for me, and agrees to write about it! Here's Wesley Clark on "He's Just Not That Into You"...Hint: He wasn't all that into it, either. -EDR

In a fraternity-basement temple somewhere in Hollywood, a group of men in The Business, upset at the three-dimensional, strong, interesting women in such movies as Happy Go Lucky and Revolutionary Road, were praying to the Misogyny God. And lo, he answered their prayers. “I will give you,” he said, “a devilish entertainment. On the outside it will look like a chick flick, luring women and their dollars from all across the land. Once they are comfortably seated, however, settled back in their chairs in the dark, I will heap them with insults, make them look shallow, devious, and self-centered, and show them to be obsessed with you, my tribe, yea, even unto the least attractive and most boring among you.” And therewithal he delivered unto them a script, and on the cover of the script it was written: “He’s Just Not That Into You.”

Apparently, this is the top-grossing movie in America right now (which makes me wonder how much “change” we’re really in for in the next few years). I can’t give a full review of it, since I eventually walked out, something I almost never do. Suffice it to say that it involves a number of very smart and attractive women, played by a crew of extremely capable actresses, who spend the entire movie thinking of, apparently, nothing else but how to attract and keep a bunch of men with all the appeal, interest, and charisma of a local news anchor.

There’s Gigi (Ginnifer Goodwin), who waits by the phone for days and days (and days), hoping for a call from Conor (Kevin Connolly), with whom she has had one utterly generic date. There’s Beth (Jennifer Anniston), who frets after leaving Neil (Ben Affleck), a man who apparently has no job (although he has a very large boat), and whose explorations of why he doesn’t want to get married after living with Beth for seven years display all the nuance and perceptiveness of a 15-year-old boy. And let us not forget Mary (Drew Barrymore), who, although she is smart, confident, and stylish, just goes all SHAKEY when, egged on by the obligatory crew of gay-man friends, she calls her voicemail to see if last night’s date has left her a message.

Oh, I lie. One of the women (Scarlett Johansson’s Anna) does think about something else. She thinks about how to break up the marriage of Janine (Jennifer Connelly) to the Bud-Light-ad-ready Ben (Bradley Cooper). As the prospect of doing this seems to cause her no anxiety whatever, I suppose she could be called one of the movie’s happy characters. Extra happy, no doubt, that she manages to escape arrest when, having agreed that Ben and she should be “just friends,” she strips naked and jumps into a health-club pool.

The offensiveness of all this – women are not only man-obsessed, incapable of self-direction, hell-bent on marriage, and willing to abase themselves for any dumb jock who happens to pass by, but ruthless and backstabbing, as well – is impossible to overstate. But the movie has more to offer. Dialogue that is often, to put it kindly, daytime-TV-level. Black actresses who are allowed on screen just long enough to do a little “street-talk” vignette about how their men have made them, yes, fat. Some jolly ribaldry on the subject of Beth not being married. And I didn’t even stay for the whole movie.

It all raises some questions. Did the people behind this actually think they were making a “hip” or “modern” film (I know slightly one of the people who wrote the book that inspired it, and she seems, anyway, like a normal, interesting woman)? Did they INTEND to insult half of the human race? Is this some sort of real-life version of “In the Company of Men,” where a movie acts all fun and funny, only to get its ya-yas by sticking the knife in and twisting it as soon as you let your guard down? Was it made by a bunch of small, bitter, angry men? Was it made, maybe, by the driving instructor from Happy Go Lucky?

Mostly what I want to know is, what were all those actresses thinking? Drew Barrymore, for God’s sake – she’s a funny, quirky, go-your-own way sort of presence. Was she really willing to become a spokeswoman for idiocy for a few million dollars? My only hope is that the original version of the script was substantially different, and more intelligent, than the finished product. Otherwise, I’m going to begin believing that women out there – or, at least, actresses – really are that desperate.

Well, that’s about it. Boring, conventional, embarrassing, insulting. Just what you’ve come to expect from America’s top films. I’ll be curious to hear if anyone found anything to like in it.

-Wesley Clark

Friggatriskaidekaphobia and other fun facts about Friday the 13th

2009-02-13T14:43:00.000-08:00

I didn’t quite make it to see Friday the 13th today…but soon. Meanwhile, here are some fun facts, gratis of Livescience.com

*Fear of Friday the 13th - one of the most popular myths in science - is called paraskavedekatriaphobia as well as friggatriskaidekaphobia. Triskaidekaphobia is fear of the number 13.

*The next Friday the 13th comes in March, followed by Nov. 13. Such a triple whammy comes around only every 11 years, said Thomas Fernsler, a math specialist at the University of Delaware who has studied the number 13 for more than 20 years.

*President Franklin D. Roosevelt would not travel on the 13th day of any month and would never host 13 guests at a meal. Napoleon and Herbert Hoover were also triskaidekaphobic, with an abnormal fear of the number 13.

*Superstitious diners in Paris can hire a quatorzieme, or professional 14th guest.

Flicks are for kids!

2009-02-13T14:22:00.000-08:00

The Quad, that great little theater on 13th between 6th and 5th, is starting a new movie series for kids ages 5 and up. Elliott Kanbar, president of The Quad says that if people like the program, he’s likely to add another kid’s movie slot at 4 p.m. on Mondays. I so wish Henry was old enough. This weekend’s fare: Charlotte’s Web (the animated version, not the human version I bought by accident, which is vastly inferior...has anyone else got Dakota Fanning fatigue?) All tickets $7. Oh, and take a moment to go to The Quad's web site and sign up for Kanbar's email newsletter--he updates you on what's coming and opines on such topics as the 10 best movie entrances of all times and who really deserved The Oscar. It's a lot of fun.

Coming soon: The Class

2009-02-12T21:14:00.000-08:00

Saw it, extremely engaged while watching it, haven't thought about it much since. The performances--particularly the kids--were AMAZING, however. I think I might be more interested in the process of making this movie, the casting, etc. than the actual movie. More later....

Random un-deep thoughts on un-deep movies

2009-02-12T19:02:00.000-08:00

I just caught the last ten minutes of Best in Show, a movie I love to pieces. I adore pretty much every one of Christopher Guest's movies (not to mention his great go-to cast), but this is the most perfect of them, I think. Waiting for Guffman may be my second favorite.

I'm currently (like, at this very second) watching Blades of Glory on HBO in Demand. (Will Ferrell and the dude from Napolean Dynamite, wearing a curly blonde wig instead of a frizzy red one, this time). It's kinda dumb....well, that's kind of the point, right? But in the genre of dumb movies, I really like it.

And p.s., I saw Will Ferrell walking in front of my building today, wearing a baseball hat, trying not to be recognized, and seeming not at all as light and amusing as he comes off in movies, interviews, etc. In fact he gave off kind of a cranky vibe. Maybe he was just having a bad day?

Jason is coming sooooooon.....

2009-02-10T19:12:00.001-08:00

Jason is coming sooooooon.....kill kill kill now now now....I may see it Friday.

The Reader

2009-02-10T11:41:00.000-08:00

Let’s say you have an astounding, soul-etching affair with someone you admire—a lot. You have nothing bad to say about him or her, except that suddenly, without warning, that person is gone.

Now let’s say that, years later, you find out that this person has allegedly done horrible—really horrible—things to other people. Does it un-etch this person from your soul? Change the good things you remember about the affair?

Who is the “real” person? The one you knew? Or the one to whom these other deeds have been ascribed? Can humanity and evil co-exist in the same person? What does it say about you if you feel compassion for someone who has committed an atrocity?

These questions (and more) are at the heart of The Reader, which tells the story of Michael, a 15-year-old innocent who accidentally encounters Hanna, a thirty-something trolley-worker with a healthy libido and no problem with younger men.

(SPOILER ALERT: I found it hard to talk about this movie, beyond this graph, without giving away some details….if you want to go in blind, don’t read further. If you like knowing the details….read on…)

Through Michael, we see Hanna as a gruff, tender, and sometimes bossy and dictatorial lover. Their most intimate moments are when Michael reads to her. That’s because the key to Hanna’s soul is the beauty of words and music. The affair comes to an end—leaving Michael heartbroken.

Fast forward seven or eight years to the mid-sixties. Michael is now a law student, and like many of his generation, he’s trying to make sense of his country’s behavior during the Holocaust. He’s attending a Holocaust trial for a class taught by a camp survivor. And there, lo and behold, is Hanna—on trial. It seems she was a guard in one of the camps, and that one of her jobs was to select ten women, periodically, for execution. Testimony reveals that she tended to single out the ones she’d made pets of—those who read to her.

One of the key moments in this movie is a speech given by one of Michael’s fellow students, which indicts all the older generation of Germans. He says they all knew what was happening to Germany’s Jews, even if they didn’t actively take part, and that they are all guilty.

What interests me is the notion that individual Germans behaved the way they did for different reasons. And that even people with a discernible soul were capable of it.

The temptation is to say that the people who were capable of atrocities were just evil. That let’s a lot of us who don’t perceive ourselves as evil off the hook—we’d never do that. And perhaps it makes the world feel safer—how many Hitler-like monsters can there be? It divides the world into us and them, which is the way we tend to like it. It makes a neat kind of sense.

This story doesn’t buy that explanation. Evil behavior and, tenderness can live side-by-side. It’s a much harder truth to live with. We watch Michael struggle with that—pitying Hanna, repulsed by her, wanting her to pay for her crimes, embarrassed by his pity and the enduring mark his first lover has left on him.

I don’t think, as some have said, that this take makes light of the guilt of those who participated, one way or another. I think it just makes it harder to separate ourselves from them. At the Holocaust museum in Washington, D.C. , there used to be (may still be—it's been awhile) an exhibit celebrating non-Jews who put their lives on the line to help Jews escape. My reaction: God, I hope I would have been one of them. But would I? It’s kind of a chilling question.

OH MY GOD: LAND OF THE LOST MOVIE TRAILER

2009-02-07T05:02:00.000-08:00

Okay, my friend Alex (of Star Trek opera fame) mentioned this trailer earlier, but I just got a chance to watch it. It's clearly a re-worked version of the story, but....it's awesome! I helps, I suppose, that the original show was so bad (I'll confess this, much as I love it) to begin with. In the trailer, at least, Will Ferrell makes the movie both funny and true to the story. I'm LOVING it so far.

Coraline

2009-02-07T04:47:00.001-08:00

I doubt I'm seeing this animated kid's feature. Not because I don't like kid's movies.

I saw Toy Story and Toy Story II IN THE THEATER. Now I watch them a minimum of three times a week because my two-year-old, Henry, loves them.

Recent conversation:
ME: "Hey, Henry, you look like Buzz Lightyear!"
HENRY: "No, I NOT look like Buzz Lightyear! I not pretend to fly in the sky!"

Even Henry gets Buzz's problem. I love it.

Anyway, Coraline does not hold huge appeal. At least at the moment. So I'm linking you to Dana Steven's review in Slate. I like Dana, and her taste, so you're in good hands. If I actually see this I'll comment more, but in the meantime....

Also, look out for a future post on crossover kid's movies that work for adults.

The Wrath of Kahn...The Opera!

2009-02-06T21:02:00.000-08:00

Thanks to my friend Alex for finding this beautiful rendition of The Wrath of Kahn as an opera...Sweet!

Let the Right One In (Lat den ratte komma in)

2009-02-06T15:14:00.000-08:00

Let the Right One In, a Swedish horror/thriller based on a book by John Ajvide Lindqvist, who’s been described as Sweden’s Stephen King, has been at the Angelika, one of NYC’s arty theaters, all fall. The Angelika has pretty good taste. And no theater is going to keep a movie in their queue if it isn’t pulling in customers. So there was every reason to think this movie was worth seeing.

Rationally, I knew this, and yet…I couldn’t make myself see it.

Why? Two words that kept showing up in every synopsis: Bullying and Vampires. Ugh and blech, in that order. I really (really) didn’t want to see either in action. But, I finally ran out of things to see. Almost every theater in Manhattan is either endlessly showing all the Oscar nominated films, all of which I’ve seen (with the exception of Brad Pitt and Angelina Jolie’s “gifts” to us) or they’ve got Paul Blart Mall Cop on three screens. And, though I have willingly seen any number of really bad movies, that one has utterly no appeal for me.

So, dear reader, we went. (That would be me and Paul, my husband and movie sidekick. He’s my Alice.) And an eerier, cooler, movie I have not seen in a long time. Having just posted about my soft spot for sucky 80’s horror flicks like Halloween, I have to say, this brings horror movies to a whole new level. Sure, there’s The Ring, which I adored, and which, incidentally, scared the pants off me. But, with its Japanese revenge-theme, not to mention that the main victims tend to be high school kids, there’s still something of teenage/pop flavor about it.

Let the Right One in, which stars Kare Hedebrant as Oskar, a lonely 12-year-old boy who lives with his high-strung mom in a depressing apartment development in Stockholm, and visits his dad (who’s okay as long as he’s not drinking) on weekends. His co-star, is Lina Leandersson, as the gamine, sensitive, ferocious, vampire, Eli, who has been about 12 “more or less” for a long time. How long is never clarified—but we’re led to believe she’s actually quite old. Oskar, who is an innocent 12, never seems to entirely grasp this.

We’re never told exactly what happened to Eli, but based on intelligence from the movie (no spoiler, me!) I’m guessing she was bitten by a vampire at age 12, survived, but got stuck that age forever more. She was also stuck with all the vampire traits, i.e. an overwhelming thirst for blood, a rather thrilling agility, and an inability to tolerate light, among others.

There is shockingly little of the stereotypical vampire movie in this vampire movie. In fact there’s none, it’s directed as a real story, not a horror movie, which makes it that much bleaker and scarier at times. Here’s a bit of an interview I found online with the author of the book, who also wrote the screenplay. In it, he talks about what he was trying to do in the film:

“I wanted to approach my subject completely seriously and absolutely reject all sort of romanticized notions about vampires, or what we’ve seen earlier of vampires, and just concentrate on the question: If a child was stuck forever like, in a 12-year-old existence and had to walk around killing other people and drink their blood to live – what would that child’s existence really be like? If you disregard all the romanticized clichés. And then it struck me when I wrote the book that it would be an absolutely horrible existence. Miserable, gross and lonely. And hence, the way Eli is depicted.”

There IS a bleak and melancholy feel about this movie. There’s Oskar’s loneliness, his game attempts to take it all in stride, and, of course, the hideous bullying I didn’t want to see. (I’m now afraid to send Henry to school…Okay, I was already afraid to send him. Now I’m NOT sending him.) And there’s Eli—emaciated, dark circles under her eyes, drawn, in spite of herself, and despite the fact that she knows it’s a bad idea, to Oskar’s tentative attempts to befriend her. Did you ever think you’d be touched by the sight of a vampire, bent intently over a Rubik’s Cube? I sure didn’t.

Somehow, as Paul and I both remarked later, you find yourself rooting for the vampire, who’ve you’ve seen—with your own horrified eyes—do some pretty bloody things. Of course you worry about Oskar’s fate, throughout, too—that’s part of the tension.

This is a real movie about childhood loneliness and friendship, with a vampire theme thrown in. (By thrown in I don’t mean it’s haphazard…it’s obviously carefully crafted…it’s that it’s not JUST about the blood and gore.) Because the writer, as well as the director, Tomas Alfredson, went for the real story, instead of the special effects cliché version, I found myself utterly drawn in and moved.

I can’t believe how much I liked it, in fact, and now, of course, feel stupid for avoiding it for so long. (Incidentally, there are a number of people who are incensed that it got snubbed by the Oscars in the best foreign film category…that’s how good it is.) The only thing that’s spoiling it for me is the fact that, as I noted in an earlier post, there’s an American version coming out soon. That, my friends, is bound to be the cliché Lindqvist was trying to avoid.

Star Trek

2009-02-06T06:04:00.000-08:00

How could I have done that little nostalgia binge a week ago and not mentioned one of the best things coming down the pike (May 9th)---Star Trek! And directed by J.J. Abrams of Lost and Alias fame, no less. Click here for a trailer.

Speaking of Gwyneth

2009-02-05T20:28:00.001-08:00

Those of you who dislike Gwyneth as much as I do should really invest a couple of hours in Duets, the last movie directed by the late Bruce Paltrow (sorry, Bruce) and starring his daughter, Gwyneth (who actually, I have to confess, does have a pretty voice). It's one of those so-bad-it's-good train wrecks that just won't let you look away. Especially gratifying is Gwyneth's dorky attempt to clap while singing (see above). You can actually see the concentration...all for naught, alas.

NOOOOOOoooooooooo

2009-02-05T20:18:00.000-08:00

(An image from the REAL Shall We Dance)

Excuse the profanity. But a little googling just revealed the fact that an English-language re-make of Let the Right One In is in the works, by director Matt Reeves (who also directed The Pallbearer--a gag-fest starring what's-his-name from friends and the precious Gwyneth Paltrow.) That's never good. (American re-make or Gwyneth, for those of you who need clarifying.)

Three little words: Shall We Dance?

That's a reference, for those of you who didn't see it, to the Japanese movie Shall We Dance, which was a beautiful poem of a flick that Hollywood utterly dumbified for the English-speaking masses with the help of Jennifer Lopez and Richard Gere. Lopez I get. It's the perfect I'm-a-serious-actress delusion for her. But Gere? Maybe he had some alimony to pay? Needed another house in the Hollywood Hills?

At any rate, tragic. And lord only knows what they're going to do with my precious vampire movie. If Jennifer Lopez is in this one, I'M gonna go bite someone. In Hollywood.

And p.s. rent Shall We Dance--the Japanese version. It's lovely.

More Sally Hawkins

2009-02-05T20:04:00.000-08:00

Okay, she didn't get nominated for an Oscar. (F*ck you, Academy). But she's on to bigger and better things. Sally Hawkins is rumored to be signing on to a new flick called We Want Sex, the story of a bunch of female auto industry works who went on strike in 1968 to protest sexual discrimination in the workplace. Rumor is Imelda Staunton (the fabulous star of Vera Drake, also a Mike Leigh film) is also in negotations. F you, Oscars! Can't wait to see what she's up to next.

Coming soon: Let the Right One In and The Reader

2009-02-05T19:56:00.000-08:00

Okay, I am way, way behind. I owe you some deep thoughts on The Reader. And since I saw that, I saw Let the Right One In...a Swedish vampire flick I've been avoiding for months (for obvious reasons). But all the Oscar nominees are hogging the line-ups at all my theaters so I've had a dearth of options. Long story short, we went last weekend. And it was...AWESOME. More soon. Sorry. I'm tired and it's been a nutty week. But let me just say the 12-ish year old female lead of this one is DA BOMB.

HBO On Demand: Juno

2009-01-30T13:56:00.000-08:00

(I want this T-Shirt)

I missed this one last year and watched it, yesterday, on HBO on Demand, as I "enjoyed" the bug Henry passed on to me. (Thanks, pre-school.) I liked it, it was fun, great dialogue, but as someone else (Hi Andrew!) pointed out, the dialogue and delivery was a little too snappy and clever to be believable. It bugged him. I'll say I NOTICED it, but still appreciated the humor.

The plot in a nano-second, for those of you who didn't see it: 16-year-old hip, but sweet, girl has sex (once) with a geeky guy she has an inexplicable crush on, gets pregnant, and decides to go through with the pregnancy.

There aren't a lot of deep ah-ha moments in this one. But it's nice to have a non-movie-of-the-week version of this age-old story, isn't it? The performances, especially Ellen Page, as Juno, are first-rate.

Other things I liked, aside from Juno--who is, I must say, an incredibly appealing character:

All the cultural references--slasher movies, classic rock, Les Pauls, etc etc.

Jason Bateman's understated and cool performance as the potential adoptive dad...I didn't know he had it in him

Jennifer Garner...Her character was uptight, but in a believable way, not in the OCD, unsympathetic way people of this ilk are usually portrayed. Again, a nice understated and real version of a stereotypical type of character. I didn't want to be her, thought she was annoying, but liked her and felt sympathetic toward her...that's a lot to pull off.

Allison Janney...Again, too witty, but her delivery is so great I totally forgave her.

Blue Slushies. I need a blue Slushy, like, now. Though I'd prefer not to throw it up upon consumption. (Bit of a spoiler, sorry)

I also need that Slinky t-shirt Juno is wearing toward the end.

All in all, great rental. I was happy I got to check it out.

It just keeps getting better: Friday the 13th out February 13th

2009-01-30T13:30:00.000-08:00

Full disclosure: I watched Halloween about three times in a row, just for fun, about a month ago. Yes, that's the kind of person I am. I cut my teeth on the 80's horror flicks and have a ridiculously warm attachment to them. So while I'm a little apprehensive at the idea of a slick new re-make, I'm also game.....I think I need a Camp Crystal Lake T-Shirt, though. (Kill Kill Kill Now Now Now)

Holly Marshall: Where is she now?

2009-01-30T12:41:00.000-08:00

Kathleen Coleman was born on February 18, 1962. Her claim to fame is for her portrayal of Holly Marshall on 'Land of the Lost', a show which first ran on Saturday mornings on NBC from September 1974 to December 1976. Her straight bangs and braids, along with her red and white checked shirt and corduroys became her trademark. Holly was the first love for many who grew up watching the show. She married at age 18 and had two sons. She worked on her father-in-laws dairy farm in Fallon, Nevada with her husband for several years before they divorced around 1987, after which she moved back to the Los Angeles area.

(p.s. I have no idea who the guy in the picture is, but if I were Kathleen, I'd watch out for him)

(p.s.s...a little more research has revealed that the due gripping Kathleen is Enik, from the original series...I'm still scared of him.)

(Source: IMDB)

Trivia for Land of the Lost Fans...

2009-01-30T12:34:00.000-08:00

When Spencer Milligan left the show after the second season, his absence was explained by having Rick Marshall disappear after he was trying to use one of the pylons to get home.
The producers came up with a very interesting idea to keep their viewers looking at the show during the hiatus between the first and second seasons. In the first season's final episode, the Marshalls discover that for some reason they aren't supposed to be there. Enik later informs them that due to a time disturbance that they never really arrived in the Land of the Lost and must go back in time and relive the accident that brought them there. By going back in time, they also would experience everything that happened to them up to that point in a sort of time loop.
During the final season two new monsters were introduced, a two-headed monster named Lulu and a fire-breathing monster named Torchy. Lulu was based on the Pleisiosaur, an aquatic reptile from the Cretaceous period, while Torchy was based on the Dimetrodon, a reptile that died out before Earth's Paleozoic Era transformed into the Mesozoic Era.

During the final season, the Marshalls and Chaka moved from their cave to a Sleestak temple. This was partially forced because of a fire that destroyed substantial portions of the studio between the show's second and third seasons.
Wesley Eure would often perform songs at the end of several episodes with lyrics pertaining to the lesson learned in the course of the episode.
Former Clevland Cavs and Detroit Pistons center Bill Laimbeer was a Sleestak during the show's first season

-Courtesy of IMDB

New in Town

2009-01-30T11:09:00.000-08:00

Okay, I didn't really have any plans to see this one, but just in case you're considering it, here's a review from Slate. Looks like Rene's nipples made an impression...

Tragic News: There's going to be a Mall Cop sequel

2009-01-30T10:56:00.000-08:00

In two weeks, Blart pulled in $64 million. And it's expected to make at least $100 million at the end of its US movie theater run. That's got Sony excited. Read it and weep.

Oh Joy: Land of the Lost is Coming Soon!

2009-01-30T10:21:00.000-08:00

It's baaa-aaaack.

It is Land of the Lost, the Saturday morning show that I adored when I was a kid. For those of you unfamiliar with this brilliant piece of work, it starred Rick, the dad, and his two kids, Will and Holly, who were on an innocent rafting trip when something happened and they fell back in time to when the dinosaurs roamed the earth. All kinds of hijinks ensued, including some involving a race of creepy aliens called Sleestaks.

To say that I loved this show, which ran from 1974 to 1976, is actually an understatement. I Netflix-ed it awhile back and showed it to my son, Henry, who was still teething at the time. It was hopelessly dorky when I saw it again, but I didn't care. I still loved it.

At any rate, there must be other middle-aged fans as lame as I am, because there's a Land of the Lost MOVIE coming out, starring Will Ferrell. I didn't recognize the rest of the cast list, but there are AWFUL lot of Sleestaks on the list, so I'm expecting loads of Sleestak shenanigans in the re-make. Release date is June 9th. Can't wait!

More on Wendy and Lucy

2009-01-29T10:00:00.000-08:00

As you know, I didn't rave about Wendy and Lucy when I saw it. But it's growing on me. For another take--from a movie lover who dug it from the get go--click here.

Kelly Reichardt---okay, she's great

2009-01-29T09:40:00.000-08:00

Remember in an earlier entry, when I said I didn't get Wendy and Lucy and all the fawning it--and its director, Kelly Reichardt--got from the critics?

I thought maybe I needed to see some of her earlier work to get why they were so excited about her. So we rented Old Joy (2006), an award winning movie about two old buddies who take off to check out the hot springs in the backwoods of Oregon.

We're only part-way through, but it's spectacular. Quiet, observant, beautiful and atmospheric. In parts, I felt like I was in the passenger seat of the car, watching the landscape--which, of course, tells its own story--roll by. Given that that's one of my favorite things to do, I'm really enjoying the movie so far.

I think I'm going to end up a Reichardt fan. I'll post more about Old Joy soon. Meanwhile, here's a Q&A that ran in the NYT with Reichardt when Wendy and Lucy came out.

She sounds very cool.

Best actress in a leading role: Oh please don’t let it be Angelina

2009-01-26T10:56:00.000-08:00

Okay, that’s a little mean, I admit, especially because Changeling is the one movie, among this group, that I didn’t see. I couldn’t. The previews were so unbearable I knew I couldn’t stand two hours of it. I think Angelina Jolie can be good. But this movie just smacked of the same kind of Hollywood drivel that afflicted Benjamin Button. (I guess she and Brad were in lightweight mode this year.) So, what am I looking for here? Nothing less than a whole-hearted lunge into the character.

Anne Hathaway, Rachel Getting Married. At times, I thought Hathaway was brilliant. The toast scene, in which Hathaway, an unpredictable recovering addict takes the microphone at a pre-wedding dinner and proceeds to deliver a toast that made me want to crawl under my seat, is a tour de force. It was wonderfully written, and Hathaway ran with it. There were other times, though, were I was thinking, “eh, princess-y Hollywood pet is trying to be ugly.” That’s not what you should be thinking in the presence of an Oscar-worthy performance. So…I don’t think so. (But I suspect the academy might vote differently.)

Angelina Jolie, Changeling. Didn’t see it. Don’t want to see it. Please don’t make me see it. To quote my two-year-old: “No, no, NO!”

Melissa Leo, Frozen River. Leo is so convincing as a down-and-out woman living on the edge that I was shocked to see her looking considerably less stressed out in a photo in the NYT. I loved her in this. It’s one of those movies that almost didn’t get made, finally got funding and eked its way out. Which is to say, it was a labor of love for the director and Leo, who was attached to the project for a long time. And it shows. I adore the beginning, in which we see Leo, sitting in her beat up car, realizing she’s been ripped off by her husband (and from this, all the action ensues), and the end—which manages to side step the usual movie clichés.

Meryl Streep, Doubt. You know, I enjoyed this performance, but…I don’t know. It doesn’t feel BIG enough, somehow, for the little gold guy. Yes, we have Meryl Streep in a nun’s habit. (I heard her, on The View, saying she loved the habit—covered all kinds of body issues.) Yes, we have her with a slight Brooklyn accent. Yes, we have her being kind of a bitch, which is kind of fun. But…Streep, at this point in her career, faces an extra challenge—can she be good enough to make you stop thinking, Oh, there’s Meryl Streep in a nun’s habit? Not quite, for me, at least. And I think Leo’s performance was gutsier.

Kate Winslet, The Reader. What can I say? I have yet to see Winslet be anything but 1,000% in character. I love her taste, and the fact that she’s deliberately circled around the kinds of movies that make me quote my two-year-old. She’s getting a bit of Meryl Streep syndrome, i.e. hey look, there’s Kate Winslet dressed like a dowdy haus frau! This is accentuated by the fact that she’s in two big movies this season (loved Revolutionary Road). I actually liked her a little better, in RR, I think. But also thought she was great as the brusque and slightly tender Hannah Schmitz, ex-Nazi prison guard with a bit of a heart—albeit one we will never understand.

My vote goes for Leo, but I don’t think she’ll actually get it. That’s because I doubt anyone in the academy owes her a favor or wants her in their next blockbuster, etc etc….I’m betting it’s going to go to Hathaway or Winslet…probably Winslet. And, honestly, she’s earned it. I would be disappointed for Leo, but happy to see it go to Winslet.

SAG Awards

2009-01-25T21:42:00.000-08:00

Ever wonder what goes on at these things? Me too. Click here to learn more...

Riddle me this: Who deserves best supporting actor?

2009-01-25T12:09:00.000-08:00

Here’s my problem when pondering the Oscar nominations, or rather, who will win…am I trying to guess who will based on merit of the performance, or who will win based on merit of performance plus all the behind-the-scenes studio politics (and other influences we outsiders know little of)…? I guess I’ll go for the former, since it’s the only one I can speak semi-intelligently about….So, here are my thoughts

Josh Brolin, Milk. I like Josh Brolin, I thought he did a great job in No Country for Old Men, and I thought he did a good job capturing George Bush’s physical mannerisms in W (though I didn’t like that movie at all), but I thought this was just an okay performance. It was mostly about the hair (lordy, am I glad sideburns are out of style) and the suit. In fact, when I left this movie—which suffered from high-expectation-syndrome—my main criticism was that I didn’t really understand Brolin’s character (or his actions), beyond the fact that he was conservative and insecure. That could have been a problem with the script, or editing, ergo not Brolin’s fault…but the end result just didn’t add up to best actor for me. Sorry, Josh.

Heath Ledger, Dark Knight. Funny to see a movie like this in the Oscars. (And ditto Tropic Thunder, below.) But it says something that, when I think about this movie, I can’t remember who Batman was…i.e. Ledger most definitely stole the show. It was, I must say, an incredibly edgy, scary and believable performance. I adore it when an actor brings an element of reality to characters that have been played as caricatures (Daniel Craig as James Bond being another recent example) in the past. I would love to have seen more of this character in sequels. The image that keeps coming back to me is of Ledger in nurse’s uniform, biceps bulging, stalking through the parking lot in white orthopedic shoes as the hospital blew up behind him. A definite contender. I so wish this young, talented actor was around to do more work.

Robert Downey, Jr. Tropic Thunder. Okay, I love Ben Stiller’s stuff, and Robert Downey Jr is always an interesting draw…but this one just looked too dumb for me and I didn’t see it. If I had time to see every movie, as I did in my pre-toddler life, I probably would have seen it. A clutch of relatives watched it over Christmas on DVD, however, and one said it was so bad he was embarrassed to be watching it. That made me feel glad I hadn’t wasted 12 bucks, until I saw this nomination. I can well believe that in a crappy and embarrassing movie, Downey managed a virtuoso performance. (He’s that kind of actor.) But I can’t give him my vote without having seen him, alas. And I sort of think, re: the REAL Oscars, that the dumbness of the movie might hurt his chances.

Philip Seymour Hoffman, Doubt. I adore this guy. I loved his brash, ugly offensiveness in The Talented Mr. Ripley. I loved his calm kindness in Magnolia. I loved his compassionate and believable Capote. But, though I thought he was great in Doubt, I don’t think this is his Oscar year. (If Elizabeth were awarding the Oscars, that is.) The reason: I think, that it’s a pretty understated role, and some of the “louder” characters played by other nominees stand out more, in contrast. Ergo I love you Philip, but maybe next year.

Michael Shannon, Revolutionary Road. Speaking of louder characters…It doesn’t get louder, or more startling, than Michael Shannon in Revolutionary Road. I keep referring to him as RR’s Greek Chorus because, in the midst of fifties niceness and the self-delusion of the main characters, he’s the one who cuts to the chase and rudely states the truth. No one likes it, and he’s so brusque and, in some scenes, angry, that it’s hard to watch without squirming…but I was still cheering for him. I was still thinking, he’s the only sane one. It’s an electrifying performance. When I went home and IMDB-d Shannon I realized he’d been in Before the Devil Knows You’re Dead (mean blackmailer), too. I remembered him, then—another scary, unpredictable guy. Is he playing himself? Typecast? Or a really great actor? Hard to know yet, but I know I want to see MUCH more of him.

So in Elizabeth’s version of the Oscars, it’s between Ledger and Shannon. Sentiment says Ledger. I’d like to acknowledge an up-and-comer says Shannon. Otherwise, I’m torn….If push came to shove, I might have to say Ledger, mainly because he had more screen time and, odd as it sounds, a more developed character. (In Batman? I know, crazy, right?) But I would not at all be unhappy to see Shannon take it.

More movies you hated---and others loved

2009-01-24T19:47:00.000-08:00

Okay, here's what we have so far on movies we hated and others loved (in no particular order)

Bull Durham
Shakespeare in Love
E.T.
Schindler's List
I'm Not Here
Slumdog Millionaire
Rachel Getting Married
Titanic
Crouching Tiger Hidden Dragon

Surely we can add to this list...anyone else? Any other detested movie sweep the box office, or the Oscars????

Coming soon: The Reader

2009-01-24T06:30:00.000-08:00

I know, I know. Late to to the party. I just saw it last night, and I have to say, I really liked it...I love all the ambiguities we're left with in the end. Lots to talk about over a beer at...Chat and Chew, the groovy restaurant, near Union Square, we went to after the movie. More later....but feel free to weigh in in advance!

Confession: I’m not sure I really care about the Oscars

2009-01-23T13:29:00.000-08:00

It’s true. If it weren’t for a vague sense of obligation to write something about them on this here movie blog, I might be ignoring all this Oscar stuff. Part of it is a vague sense that the winners are based on political maneuvering on the inside (remember the campaign for Shakespeare in Love?), and I’m just a dorky outsider with my nose pressed against the window, taking it at face value. (That’s kind of how I feel about Wall Street, too. I’m a hair away from stuffing my money in my mattress.)

But I think it’s also that it threatens to make Hollywood’s views more important than our own. I mean, I thought Sally Hawkins was brilliant in Happy Go Lucky. If she didn’t get a nomination, am I supposed to take my own opinion less seriously? Am I really supposed to think that Angelina Jolie was better in The Changeling? I don’t think so. And I don't have a lot of faith in the taste of someone who does.

Hence my irritation as I perused the list of nominees yesterday—which ultimately culminated in the I-don’t-know-if-I-care attitude.

Viewers’ opinions count when it comes to box offices, but beyond that….nope. I guess our ticket is our “vote,” so to speak. And we’re supposed to leave it at that. But it’s hard when some movies, actors and directors make us care enough to want them acknowledged for their artistry. And yes, I know it’s all subjective.

But for those of us who care, it hurts to see Hawkins dissed, while Angelina Jolie is nominated for standard Hollywood crap. Meanwhile, seeing the deserving Melissa Leo nominated for the much smaller picture, Frozen River, just confuses me. (Leo, fyi, played a mother of two, living on the edge, with a modest but almost unattainable dream of getting a better trailer for the family. Her performance is gutsy, believable and heartbreaking.) Great, but why not Hawkins, too? Did someone pull a string to get Angelina on the list?

Wait, I don’t care, right? Breathe, Elizabeth.

I’m a little confused. And weary. In the end, as I said, I’m not sure I care about the awards, especially when they’re so perverse. I don’t really need Hollywood’s validation. I just want to keep seeing good movies, and the bottom line is that seeing some of the crap that’s on the list this year—and knowing what isn’t on it—makes me fearful that 2010 and (shiver) maybe even 2011 is going to be full of yet more Benjamin Buttons.

Trouble the Water nominated for best documentary feature!

2009-01-22T13:19:00.000-08:00

I loved this movie and am thrilled to see the suffering of the Katrina survivors in New Orleans recognized--even at this late date.

The Visitor? Never heard of it!

2009-01-22T13:03:00.000-08:00

I really like Richard Jenkins, who was nominated for an Oscar for actor in a lead role in the movie, The Visitor. He's a great character actor, and I loved him as the morose and wry dad in Six Feet Under. But I have to say, the first I EVER heard of this movie was this morning when I looked at the list of nominees. Weird. Anyone else seen or heard of this one?

Benjamin Button: Curiously Bad

2009-01-22T12:28:00.000-08:00

I have a love hate relationship with Brad Pitt. On one hand, I think the guy can act. On the other hand, I loathe it when movie stars with talent take on what seem to be movies primarily geared to push our collective buttons and make lots of money. Some actors have such great taste, you can always trust the movies they’re in. William H. Macy, for instance. Or Phillip Seymour Hoffman. But Pitt isn’t trustworthy. And neither is Cate Blanchett (also a good actress), on this front. Which is a long way of saying I was dragging my feet about seeing this movie, and was DELIGHTED when my friend, Nancy Wartik, said she’d not only seen it, but would be happy to spare me the trouble (not to mention the twelve bucks). So here, without further ado, is guest-blogger Nancy Wartik…….

Benjamin Button: Curiously Bad

Often when I go to a movie that's gotten glowing reviews, I wind up disappointed because my expectations were too high. (Wall*e fit that category, for me.) On the other hand, when I have lower hopes for a movie, I'm often pleasantly surprised. I thought my husband might enjoy Iron Man and The Dark Knight, but didn't think I’d get much from either film; I wound up loving them both.

The other night I went with two friends to see The Curious Case of Benjamin Button, even though it wasn't high on my list. I knew it was about a man who aged backwards, from old to young, and I'd seen director David Finch and Brad Pitt discuss it on Charlie Rose, though Brad's main contribution to the conversation seemed to be "uh..." and "ummm..."

Not such a promising omen. But The Class didn't seem to be playing anywhere; I'd promised my husband not to see Revolutionary Road without him; and one of my friends didn't want to see The Wrestler. So I went.

This should be the point at which I write that, in fact, against all expectation, The Curious Case of Benjamin Button turned out to be one of the best movies of this, or any other, year. Unfortunately, that would be completely untrue. It's one of the most mediocre movies of this or any other year.

The movie has its entertaining moments, but on the whole, the acting is flat, the story line disjointed, the settings and characters often gratuitous, and the ultimate "message" unclear. And one of my pet peeves is when movies about time travel or other explorations of the fourth dimension don't follow their own internal logic about how the rules should work. Benjamin Button is a prime offender.

Here's the plot, based loosely on an F. Scott Fitzgerald story: Somehow or other, a clock running backwards in a New Orleans train station in 1918 causes Brad Pitt, aka Benjamin Button, to be born looking like a baby-sized 86 year old man. His mother dies in childbirth and Benjamin, left on the steps of a nursing home, is taken in and grows up there, aging backwards.

When he's five, he has a five-year-old's mind in a child-sized 81-year-old body. When he's 13, he's got an adolescent's mind in a teenage-sized 73-year-old body. And so on, and so forth. (Throw in some theoretically humorous situations involving prostitutes, drink, and a 70-year-old adolescent, along the way.)

What else befalls Benjamin? For some reason, he's befriended by a pygmy living in New Orleans. Eventually the pygmy leaves town. Benjamin goes to work on a tugboat and then sails to Russia, where he stays in a hotel while working on the tugboat during the day. He meets Tilda Swinton, an elegant British spy, who for some reason is staying at a hotel were tugboat day laborers board. At this point, Benjamin should look as if he's in his mid-60s, and yet he's already shed enough makeup to be looking dapperly Brad Pitt-ish and maybe 50 at the most. Brad and Tilda fall in love. They have lots of good sex. Then Pearl Harbor is attacked and they each have to skedaddle. They don't have sex anymore.

Back in New Orleans, Brad/Benjy meets a childhood love, Daisy, who's grown up to be Cate Blanchett, radiating little in the way of warmth or charm in this role. Daisy tries to seduce him, telling him she likes older men (though at this point, Benjamin ought to be in his early 60s while she's 20 or so, which gives the whole scene a creepy feel, or would if Pitt looked the appropriate age). Benjamin and Daisy part. Then they meet again in New York. Then they part again. Then they meet again in Paris. Then... well, you get the idea.

Finally, when their ages are close to meeting in the middle, they both show up in New Orleans and fall in love. They have lots and lots of good sex, despite seeming to have little onscreen chemistry. Daisy accumulates crow's feet while Benjamin loses them. But the sword of Damocles always hangs o'er the relationship because, when two lovers are aging in different directions, at some point one of them is going to wind up facing a charge of statutory rape.

The idea of a life lived backwards and how it intersects with the lives of loved ones isn't without inherent interest; it's easy to see why the movie was tempting to make. The make-up and special effects people have also done great work. But Brad Pitt is actually most convincing in his role as a little old boy-man. As Pitt's layers of make-up grow thinner, he starts to turn back into his movie star self, and that's when the movie starts faltering most seriously.

For instance, in the 1960s scenes, when Pitt should have the same long-haired hippie look everyone else did, he's clean-cut and blindingly handsome in his t-shirt and shades, looking as if he'd just stepped out of the pages of last week's People magazine.

The movie is framed by a deathbed dialogue between the aged Daisy and her daughter (Julia Ormond) who's a bit of a lost soul, though we never find out why, or very much about her at all.

Inexplicably, the movie is also set in a New Orleans hospital at the very moment Katrina's about to strike, meaning nurses periodically pop onscreen to say things like, "Well, they think the storm is probably going to blow right past us," or "Now they're saying we've all got to get out." The device does little but add to the overall choppy, inconsequential feel of the movie.

The closing minutes of the movie must have had some kind of weight because they left one of my friends in tears. Still, she insisted she's the sort who can sob over a Kleenex commercial, and she was right there with the rest of us at the cinematic post-mortem, toting up the movie's various lapses and implausibilities. Watch the movie backward or watch it forward: I found Benjamin Button's tale to be ultimately a time-waster.

-Nancy Wartik

And the nominees are....

2009-01-22T07:00:00.000-08:00

Some predictable, a few surprises. I'm thrilled that Michael Shannon was nominated for best supporting actor for his work in Revolutionary Road. More later!

Oscar nominations tomorrow! Stay tuned!

2009-01-21T13:25:00.000-08:00

Dan Zanes in Revolutionary Road

2009-01-21T08:31:00.000-08:00

Parents of toddlers might do a double take in one of the later scenes of Revolutionary Road. Yep, that's Dan Zanes playing guitar in the Steve Kovac band (really Vince Giordano and The Nighthawks). Zanes, for those of you not familiar with him, was a member of the 80's band, The Del Fuegos. After he and his wife had a baby, he started playing with other fathers he met at the playground and now does non-kid-like music for kids--often with cameos with people like Natalie Merchant, Sheryl Crow and Suzanne Vega--that's truly great. We just got one of his CDs for Henry for Christmas.

A note on Leo in Revolutionary Road

2009-01-21T08:14:00.000-08:00

The one criticism Paul had after RR was that he didn't find Leonardo DiCaprio quite believable as Frank Wheeler. "He just seemed to young, or soft, or something," Paul said. I found him pretty believable. But I was reading Dave Denby's review the other day and saw that he had a tiny quibble with DiCaprio that sort of echoed what Paul said.

Here's Denby:

"DiCaprio, by turns cocky, supplicating, and enraged, gets the externals right, but he seems a little afraid of revealing the depths of Frank's shallowness. Frank is a liar, an adulterer, and a compromiser who betrays himself as much as his wife, but DiCaprio projects a natural heroic sweetness--it's in his movie-star genes--which, in this case, is at odds with the character he's playing. If you think of Paul Newman's acid moments in The Hustler and Hud, you can imagine how the role might have been done."

What did you think?

Revolutionary Road’s Greek Chorus: Michael Shannon

2009-01-21T08:11:00.000-08:00

Shannon has a smallish role in Revolutionary Road—he appears as the “not well,” i.e. mentally ill, son of a local real estate broker. But when he’s on screen he is absolutely riveting. I didn’t recognize him, but he’s had roles in Vanilla Sky and Before the Devil Knows You’re Dead. (I think he played the shady brother–in-law of Hawke’s unfortunate accomplice.) He was so good in RR that I’d go to another movie he was in—even if it’s a small role. A guy to watch. Here's a really nice profile of him in New York Magazine.

Wendy and Lucy

2009-01-21T07:52:00.000-08:00

I kept catching glimpses of good reviews of this movie. (I say glimpses because I don’t read reviews before I see movies…maybe just a first line to see if the thing is a total abomination or intriguing.)

And it won awards for best actress (Michelle Williams) and best director (Kelly Reichardt) from the Toronto Film Critics Association. It was also nominated for best feature and best lead by the Independent Spirit Awards.

AND it appeared on something like 80 critics top ten lists.

All of which is to say I had kind of high expectations that it was going to be one of those indie gems. But I walked out thinking, well, it was a nice little movie but it felt kind of…. film school. Which isn’t a bad thing, mind you. I guess I was just expecting something different.

The premise is so simple I’m at a loss for how to describe it without literally giving away the entire story. I saw it at Film Forum, where they had posted A.O. Scott’s review in the New York Times on a big poster board, and Scott gave the story away in the span of about 8 words. I didn’t count, but I’m actually not exaggerating.

This isn’t a movie about a lot of action, or big ideas (though Scott had a lot high falutin’ notions paralleling Wendy to today’s economic crisis). It’s a little poem, a close up photograph, of a young woman living on the edge, with not a lot to call her own, or a friend, but her dog, Lucy. And that’s as much as I can tell you without blowing it for you.

One of the reviews I read AFTER the fact called it a political movie without any political grandstanding…which is an interesting thought, and possibly true, and makes me like the movie better…I’d be curious to hear what any of you think.

I don’t want this to sound like a pan. It’s not. The movie is very focused, very intimate—there’s almost no soundtrack, other than Williams humming a haunting little tune—and paints an interesting portrait…it’s just…little in scope, like looking under a magnifying glass.

Reichardt, the director, is regularly described as an up-and-comer. Two of her earlier movies, River of Grass and Old Joy were pretty highly celebrated. She’s known for her “narratives of the road” and landscapes—two themes which definitely run through Wendy and Lucy. In fact, I think one of my favorite moments in the film was a scene in which Wendy is standing, contemplating the woods, and you actually hear the wind rustling the trees. In a bigger budget movie, we’d be hearing a soundtrack.

Ultimately I’m on the fence on this one…it could be that this movie suffered from being seen on the heels of Revolutionary Road, which was definitely a big budget movie, and big on ideas and action. It could be it isn’t as good as the critics say—though there are certainly a lot saying it’s good. It could be I need to see Reichardt’s earlier films—and that if I do, I’ll see this movie as part of the continuum and find her more interesting. Though shouldn’t a movie stand up on it’s own?

I don’t know. I may have to Netflix those earlier movies. I’ll let you know if I do.

Enterpise, do you read me?

2009-01-20T11:38:00.001-08:00

Word is that J.J. Abrams updated his Facebook page with the news that the new Star Trek movie is almost done and will be out in May. If he's playing with us, he's gonna get a Vulcan neck pinch thingie from me.

Mickey Rourke Rumor

2009-01-20T11:24:00.000-08:00

Seems that Mickey Rourke is in talks to be in Iron Man 2. I wanted to see that one in the theater...Robert Downey was supposed to be amazing. I hope it works out, but in any case, I'm psyched to see where Rourke will show up next, given his resurgence in The Wrestler.

Remember when John Travolta was a has-been-sad-sack, and Quentin Tarantino gave him a chance in Pulp Fiction? I'm hoping the same thing happens with Rourke. As I said, I wasn't a huge fan of his before, but he totally won me over in The Wrestler. Let's see more of this guy.

(The picture is Mickey Rourke back in his still-cute era. That was before he left the film business and decided to be a boxer for awhile, thus ruining his face and undergoing lots of unfortunate plastic surgery.)

Movies about Suburbia

2009-01-20T07:09:00.001-08:00

Seeing Revolutioary Road gave me an idea: Movies about suburbia. It's definitely a modern theme, isn't it? And one that intrigues me (and, okay, sometimes repels me).

I grew up in the suburbs--Bethesda, Maryland, to be exact--on a block in which most of the houses, if not exactly identical, were pretty damn close. The funny thing was that even an attempt to be different was usually foiled. "Oh, I like your deck, I think I'll add one to my house, too!"

I always felt like I was the only different one/family in the bunch. Back story: My brother had an immune deficiency disorder that required him to live in a sterile "bubble" room at the nearby National Institutes of Health. His story, and that of a little boy in Texas, were merged to create "The Boy in the Plastic Bubble" (a movie that, for the record, I loathed). So, yeah, life...not so normal.

But given that the point of many movies and novels about suburbia tends to be that all KINDS of craziness goes on behind those identical doors, and that many of us grew up feeling like the black sheep in the universe, I guess I wasn't unique after all.

This is a long wind-up to a top ten list, isn't it?

Okay...I'm working on it. Here's what I've got for you so far (in no particular order)..and feel free to contribute your own nominees!

1) The Ice Storm (Ang Lee, 1997).

2) American Beauty (Sam Mendes, 1999) Same director as Revolutionary Road.

3) Little Children (Todd Field, 2006) Kate Winslet again. She and Mendes, who is her husband--and a Brit, like she is--must have a pet fascination.

4) Happiness (Todd Solondz, 1998)

5) Welcome to the Dollhouse (Todd Solondz, 1995) Talk about pet fascinations...

6) Far From Heaven (Todd Haynes, 2002)

7) Stepford Wives (Bryan Forbes, 1975) O.k., it's not a great movie. (And fyi, I'm talking about the first one. The re-make, a few years ago, surpassed not-great and earned the adjective "unbearable.") But given that "Stepford" has become such a much-used adjective, i.e. "That's so Stepford!" I think it merits a place on the list....

8) ?

9) ?

10) ?

A Year of Movies....

2009-01-20T06:41:00.000-08:00

Paul and I have a problem, which is to say that we're interested in everything and we have limited time to learn/do it all. Even less time now that Henry has become part of our lives. So Paul came up with the idea that each year, we should choose just one interest and devote whatever spare time we have to it. That way, we have a shot at avoiding the stop-and-start frustration that so often plagues us ("I was getting so into x and then totally lost track of it...") and, as he says, "start ticking them off."

This was going to be my year to learn French, an interest which wasn't even in my top five until I went to something like four French movies in a row. But we're going to be travelling a bit, so I can't sign up for a class (which, I think, I need), and I seem to be devoting more and more time to this blog. Ergo I decided to switch my 2009 project from French to...movies. My goal: See at least one in the theaters a week, watch at least one on DVD a week, and read/experience everything I can related to movies and the making of them.

Oh yeah, and write about it all.

I'm hoping to check out the film festival scene, too. I looked up a list of them the other day and was blown away by how many there are, and the specificity of some of them--one is devoted to horror movies, for instance, another to films made from stories by H.P. Lovecraft, an American author with a distinct Poe sensibility. I think this is going to be fun.

So, there it is in writing...it's the year of...MOVIES! Ticket, please.....

Wendy and Lucy

2009-01-19T19:09:00.000-08:00

Well, once again, our plans got a bit messed up and we saw a different movie than we intended to. This time, we ended up putting off seeing Secrets of the Grain at the IFC and seeing Wendy and Lucy, starring Michelle Williams (of Dawson's Creek and Brokeback Mountain) at Film Forum instead. It was getting all kinds of raves, lots of talk about the up-and-coming director...so we went. We were kind of disappointed. I'll post more later, but for now, suffice it to say it kind of felt like a film school project. It's a case where the advance hype did NOT do the film any favors.

Read it and weep: Mall Cop #1 at the box office last weekend

2009-01-19T18:55:00.000-08:00

Yes, it's appalling, and true. Mall Cop was #1. Followed by Grand Torino, My Bloody Valentine, and Notorious. Speechless, really. Assuaging my disgust with gumdrops. Enough said.

Mall Cop: Fuggedaboutit

2009-01-18T20:16:00.001-08:00

Hell, I'm not seeing this one, either. Tomorrow I'm seeing a fancy pants French movie called (translation) Secrets of the Grain. So I'll leave the likes of Mall Cop to Dana Stevens of Slate, who gets paid to watch this crap. Read on, and caveat emptor, baby.

Notorious

2009-01-18T20:08:00.000-08:00

I'm not seeing this one, so click here for a review. Enjoy.

Marisa Tomei on her role in The Wrestler

2009-01-18T13:55:00.000-08:00

For all you Marisa Tomei fans, here she is talking a bit about her role in The Wrestler. A must see--really.

Revolutionary Road

2009-01-18T12:55:00.000-08:00

Every once in awhile, Paul and I have the "I'll never" conversation. Those of you of a certain age might recognize it. It's the one in which you take stock of your age and realize all the things that are now out of reach...as in, "I'll never compete in the Olympics," "I'll never play professional baseball," "I'll never be a doctor."

For the most part, I'm really happy with my life, but it is sobering, occasionally, to realize that you've passed that point in your life when ALL things are possible.

When we meet the Wheelers--April and Frank (Kate Winslet and Leonardo DiCaprio), they're both just about 30, living in the suburbs of Connecticut, with two kids. And they're having the "I'll never" conversation. Not out loud. Not even consciously, yet. But it's apparent in their misery, and rising panic, as they contemplate where they are in their lives.

April wanted to be an actress. Frank didn't know what he wanted to be--he just didn't want to be like his father, a mid-level business guy, which is exactly what he's turned out to be.

They're floating through, losing their youth and the "specialness" they thought made them different from all the other drones they disdain in the suburbs. It's decision time. What are they going to do about their lives?

That's the business of the movie. And I must say, it's pretty spectacular watching it all play out.

Every aspect of this movie is spot-on, from the 1950's clothes (I wanted ALL of April's clothes, and a dress with a daisy pocket worn by another character) and hair and house decor, to the incredible performances. Winslet is, honestly, riveting. And DiCaprio certainly holds his own. But even smaller parts--Frank's secretary, and the "not well" son of a local real estate broker, who serves as the Greek Chorus of the movie--are brilliantly cast. I also loved the music. Simple, yet haunting.

I usually find that it's impossible for a movie to live up to the kind of fan-fare that's surrounded this one. But in this case, it did. Paul and I went out afterward because we had to talk about it. And, today, I'm still thinking about it, still seeing scenes in my head. Is RR my favorite movie if the year? I'm not sure yet. I think I might still prefer The Wrestler--but only by a hair.

When you hate movies other people love

2009-01-16T10:29:00.000-08:00

For some reason, I was thinking about Shakespeare in Love today. God, I hated that movie. And everyone else loved it. It was bizarre, being on the other side of that cultural divide...seriously. It really pissed people off/concerned people that I didn't like that movie. It reminded me of the Seinfeld episode in which Elaine let it be known that she loathed The English Patient, and her boss was so appalled he a) forced her to see it again and b) fired her when she still didn't like it. The other movie I loathed and others loved was Bull Durham. How about any of you? Which hits did you hate? Hmmmmm....?

Coming soon: Revolutionary Road

2009-01-16T10:24:00.000-08:00

We've got a sitter lined up so we can see this tomorrow night, and this being NYC, we're getting our tickets early. As a kid, the only movies I ever remember selling out/having a hard time getting into were Indiana Jones and Star Wars movies. But in NYC, Friday and Saturday nights--sometimes even Thursdays--are brutal. Anything pas 6 p.m. gets sold out FAST. Can't tell you how many times we've lined up a sitter only to find there was no way in hell we were getting in to the movie. Last time, it was fortuitous--we ended up seeing Happy-Go-Lucky instead of Slumdog Millionaire. And I ended up loving HGL. But we really want to see Revolutionary Road....so we're planning on being uncharacteristically organized and getting tickets in the a.m. Insane.

Go Clint!

2009-01-15T20:42:00.000-08:00

As you can see from my earlier review, I don't think Grand Torino is the best thing Clint Eastwood has ever done...but I'm damn glad it's pulling it's weight against Bride Wars at the box office--#1! Go Clint! Go Clint!

The Wrestler

2009-01-15T13:11:00.000-08:00

I was pretty ready to skip this movie, despite all the hype over Mickey Rourke’s performance. For one, I was never a huge fan of Rourke’s…he was always so creepy. Secondly, the sight of his—the only word I can think of is melting—face in the previews freaked me out. I didn’t think I could spend two hours in its company.

But I sat next to Dana Stevens, film critic for Slate, at a meeting the other day, and she said she really liked the movie. And I trust Dana’s taste. (Check out her top ten of 2008 list.) So I went.

I am so glad I didn’t miss this one. It’s an incredible movie. The Wrestler chronicles the last gasps of Randy the Ram’s career as he wrangles with disability, mortality, success and what it all means.

Rourke, as Randy, is every bit as grotesque as I feared when I watched the previews. Long, straggly bleach blonde hair. Too tan. Overly muscled. Ravaged by abuse and age and steroids. If you made an itemized list of what you, the average viewer, had in common with this man, you’d come up with zero. In fact, it’s almost enough to make you skip the movie, right?

And yet…the movie, Rourke, utterly sucked me in and made me not only care about this hulking wreck, but root for him, and, in a few spots, identify with him, spangly tights and all. I’m not sure how Rourke does it. Maybe it’s the antithetical little details--the sight of that long hair pulled up in a messy, girly bun. (My first thought: “Hey, Randy and I are wearing our hair the same way!”) Maybe it’s the delicate little granny glasses Rourke perches on his nose in order to read the instructions on his prescription bottles.

All these tiny character details build to create a portrait of a f*cked up (to use Randy’s daughter’s words), but sweet and kind man, who wants to be loved and to love, but never quite figured out how it all worked outside the ring. In the end, here’s a guy trying to take stock of his life, trying to make his time here matter, trying to connect. Which left me with the thought—oh yeah, me too. It’s a hell of a self portrait.

What's your favorite horror movie?

2009-01-13T12:00:00.001-08:00

My friend--let's just call her Partytape--called my attention to a New York Times article on the vampire movie, Twilight, that generated a bunch of online commentary--more than a thousand responses--on the best horror movies, ever. Take a look and see what you think. Meanwhile, here's my working list....

Halloween. I cut my horror movie teeth on the Halloween movies, so, they make me really nostalgic...not for adolescence, mind you, but the beginning of a certain kind of movie-lover's experience.

The Ring. I caught this one while killing time in a hotel...and it truly scared me. How often does that happen? I like the Japanese version, Ringu, too.

Night of the Living Dead. Also saw it as a teenager--it might have been my first horror movie. I saw it in the gym of the junior high school on a Friday night. And I think I eyed the sliding glass doors we had on two floors of our house (what were my parents thinking? they were a field day for zombies!) with suspicion forever after.

The Birds. You just can't look at a group of birds sitting on a telephone wire, or on a jungle gym, the same way after you've seen this one.

Jaws. Does this count? I can't really decide. It definitely horrified me when it came out--enough so that I was scared of the ocean for...o.k. I'm still scared of the ocean. I'll get in it, but not without a vigilant and constant watch for fins. Oh, and while we're talking sharks, let's not forget Open Water. Shiver.

I love The Shining, yadda yadda

2009-01-12T20:37:00.000-08:00

Did you know that the hotel in The Shining is based on The Stanley Hotel in Estes Park, Colorado? Stephen King stayed there once (room #217), and was apparently inspired--though the movie wasn't shot there. Meanwhile, The Stanley Hotel shows the original, un-cut version of The Shining on continuous loop on Channel 42 on the guest T.Vs....Which means I need to go stay there...really soon.

Redrum, etc. etc.

2009-01-12T20:32:00.000-08:00

Okay, I have a habit of getting a little obsessed. Couple that with the fact that The Shining is on T.V., a mere two days or so since I blogged about a random fact about the movie, and I'm humming along....

I mentioned the annoying kid--Danny Lloyd--in my original post. I actually noticed that, aside from the finger-voice (his finger "talks"....ugh), he's a decent actor. In fact, he's a hell of a lot better than Shelly Duvall, who plays his mother, Jack Nicholson's wife...

What actually fed (feeds) my irritation with him is the special bonus feature of the DVD, which features a behind-the-scenes take on the movie in which the kid comes off about as modest as Russell Crowe...yech

So here's the update on Danny...he now teaches "hard sciences" (I'm quoting IMDB) in Missouri. Ta-da!

Coming soon: Interview with Mia Inderbitzin of Slumdog Millionaire

2009-01-12T20:14:00.000-08:00

Wonder what it's really like to live in India? Got questions about the making of Slumdog? Ask actress Mia Inderbitzin, who plays one of two Americans in the film (Taj Mahal scene). Mia lives in India, and is available to answer questions--as soon as she sees the film, which is just opening in Mumbai. More soon--but shoot me some advance questions for Mia, if you like.

DVD: Lost in Translation

2009-01-10T19:38:00.000-08:00

I saw this in the theater and loved it. We bought it and put it away, and I can't even remember the last time we watched it--until now. Paul stuck it in the DVD player the other night and we've since watched it twice, delighting in almost every detail.

I don't know if it any of it is ad-libbed (with Bill Murray, I expect so)...but it is so damn funny and spot on about being a stranger in a foreign country...especially when that country is Japan. It's also very believable on the disconnects within relationships...we're not just talking gaps in communication between people of different nationalities here....enough said. This is a movie more to experience than analyze.

Sofia Coppola (yes, she's his daughter) has an exquisite eye, incredible restraint, and a great sense of humor....Rumor is she hounded Murray for eons until he agreed to be in this movie. It was worth the effort. And I'm not a huge Scarlett Johanssen fan, but she's got mercifully few lines here, and she's beautiful to watch.

Best moments are all Murray's, though. Fabulous movie that translates well to DVD.

Redrum and other movie-isms

2009-01-10T10:23:00.000-08:00

The other night Paul and I were in the liquor store looking for a bottle of wine when we noticed one bottle labelled "Evil." The word Evil was printed upside down. I pointed at it and said, "That's so redrum!" And Paul laughed.

It occurred to me that there are some words/phrases that come from movies that are equally obscure, but iconic enough that people get them without explanation.

(And now, for those of you who haven't seen The Shining, I should explain that the word "redrum" is murder spelled backward, and is a key moment in the movie....God, I love that movie...even though the kid in it is annoying.)

I started to wonder what other movie-isms fit this bill--obscure yet iconic and gettable. The only other one I could think of, at the time, was gaslight...I remember a friend of mine talking about "gaslighting" her boss by periodically removing random cards from her filofax (years ago, obviously). Ergo, to gaslight...

(And this, for those who haven't seen it, is from the movie, Gaslight, in which Charles Boyer goes to great lengths to make Ingrid Bergmann thinks she's going nuts.)

At any rate, anyone else have any to contribute?

Gran Torino

2009-01-10T09:49:00.001-08:00

We set up a sitter for last night so we could catch a Broadway show, but by the time she arrived, at 4, we were too tired to make the trek up to TKTS for cheap tickets, so we ended up at a movie instead. Which was, I must say, awesome. It gave us, the too-tired parents of a toddler, the illusion of spontaneity (“Hey, let’s go to the movies! Whaddya want to see?”) that we haven’t felt in…awhile!

Paul wanted to see Gran Torino because there’s a Detroit connection—Walt Kowalski, the main character, played by Clint Eastwood, who also directed the movie—is a former Ford factory worker (like Paul’s dad and many of the dads on the block he grew up on).

When we meet Walt, it’s at his wife’s funeral. He’s clearly a curmudgeon—and not a lovable one. After the funeral, we see him at his neatly appointed house, along with his unappealing sons, daughter-in-law, grandchildren, and other assorted funeral-goers.

Soon we understand that Walt’s neighborhood, like many of Detroit’s working class suburbs, has been claimed by various immigrant populations. In Walt’s neighborhood, it’s the Hmong, a group of Asians that sided, as one character explains it, “with you guys” during the Vietnam War--and paid for it later. Hence their exodus to the U.S.

To say that Walt isn’t too happy about sharing his turf is putting it mildly.
He’s racist, intolerant, angry, gun-happy (Dirty Harry fans will feel a little nostalgic) and burdened by experiences in the Korean War that are mostly only alluded to. The tension of the movie is Walt being forced, via his neighbors, to confront his past—and how he puts his ghosts to rest.

Atonement is a big theme here (the priest hounding him to make confession, the car, the finale---all of which will make sense to you later). But I wish they’d played with it more. In fact, there are a lot of things I wish they’d developed more. Maybe it’s because Eastwood is actually in this movie, and it’s hard to stay on top of everything and play a character. Maybe it’s because Sean Penn wasn’t in this one. (Sean Penn makes just about any movie better...Milk would have been a total snore without him.)

But after Paul and I left the theater, we went out for a drink, talking about the movie all the while. That’s generally a good sign…but many of our comments were along the lines of: “I wish that character hadn’t been quite so friendly right away, it wasn’t totally believable” and “He was just a little too black-and-white curmudgeon to believe the later transition.”

In short…it’s a good movie, an enjoyable ride (though the gun squeamish are going to find themselves watching through their hands at times). But it’s just a hair black-and-white, undeveloped, stereotypical, predictable, at times. Bottom line: It’s good, but it’s no Mystic River.

Bond, James Bond

2009-01-02T13:47:00.001-08:00

We just rented Daniel Craig’s first turn at James Bond, “Casino Royale,” and were blown away by it. Here’s a Bond you can actually believe—a little mysterious, a little cruel, and a hint at why. He has a glimmer of a heart, but we don’t see a whole lot of it. But hey…in the end, he’s licensed to kill, right? A trained assassin. This Bond, like no other, makes SENSE.

The second movie, “Quantum of Solace,” which is still in theaters, is also great—though I liked it a tad less than the first one. It’s worth renting the first one before you see “Quantum of Solace”—it’s a sequel.

Whoever is behind this new set of Bond movies has clearly decided they’re going to develop this character, and his stories, in a credible and serious way. The Bond theme is used sparely. The Bond motifs—martinis, shaken, not stirred, etc.—are, if anything, made fun of.

There are no more scenes in which Bond gets tripped up by his Achilles’ heel (or rather, the one Hollywood has developed for him over the years), i.e. the chance at a romp with a gorgeous female.

Nor do we see him getting attached to a lot of them. If anything, he uses them to achieve an end—always spy-related—and appears to feel a little befuddled, and guilty, when they pay the price for his use.

There are also no more goofy double entendres.

What’s left? Great, hair-raising movies. I’ve been bored for years with the limp fare they’ve been trying to pass off as Bond movies. This is a Bond to anticipate.

p.s. Craig has amazing chemistry with Judi Dench as “M.”

Coming soon to Bagel and a Movie...

2009-01-02T13:20:00.000-08:00

Here's what's on my in-the-theater to-see list these days:

The Wrestler

The Reader

Moscow, Belgium

Secret of the Grain

Gran Torino

The Spirit

Revolutionary Road

Let the Right One In

As to DVDS, we're in the process of watching the movies of Arnaud Desplechins (director of "A Christmas Tale," blogged below). And we're about to watch "Brick."

Milk

2009-01-02T13:16:00.000-08:00

I can’t say I was dying to see this one. I didn’t know anything about Harvey Milk. And seeing Sean Penn, who plays him, with his hair matted down in a greasy and unflattering seventies style in the previews and posters didn’t really make me want to know more. But…there’s my rule, anything by Sean Penn. (See the same reasoning afoot in my thoughts on “Doubt,” below.) So….

I respected this movie…but I didn’t love it. I ended up being interested in Milk’s story, even amazed by it. The movie begins on the eve of his fortieth birthday, at a time when he was still a) in the closet and b) not proud of anything he’s done in his life. Over the next eight years, he utterly changes both those facets of his life—becoming, ultimately, a groundbreaking politician who changed the legal framework so prejudiced against gay Americans.

The guy had heart, and guts, and compassion—and sometimes, if the movie is to be believed, they overshadowed his reason a little. (Boyfriend #2, for instance, gives off unstable vibes from the get-go.) As someone who is fortiesh herself, Milk’s story gave me hope that I can still do things that matter. And it made me sad that Milk didn’t get the chance to keep plowing on.

But that’s sort of where the “wow” factor in this movie began and ended for me. (I would also have liked some more information about James Brolin’s character….I could tell he was a crackpot from his first scene, but what kind, and why? No insight there.)

I don’t know, I just felt kind of flat when I left the theater. Nothing like the brain percolation that happened for me after seeing “Doubt.”

Is it an important story to tell? Absolutely. Is it told well? Yes. Is the acting good? Yes, especially Penn. But, in the end, I have to confess, it just didn’t add up to a whole lot of movie experience for me. I wanted to like this movie more than I actually did. Sorry, Sean.

Doubt

2009-01-02T12:46:00.001-08:00

I went to this movie with low expectations. Partly it was some vague sense that it was not getting great reviews (I don’t trust reviews, but it’s hard not to be influenced), and the fact that it’s a movie based on a play. (How often does THAT work out?) It was also seeing the previews…Meryl Streep in a nun’s habit? Being an uber-bitch? Come on!

But…it also starred Phillip Seymour Hoffman, and, as I’ve said earlier in this blog…I never miss anything he’s in. So, dear reader, I went.

Well…I was wrong. I really loved this movie. It has the spareness—in a good way—of a well written play. (It’s directed by the playwright, John Patrick Shanley, which might explain the loving translation.) There are no extraneous shots or words. Every scene, every line, every camera shot, is meant to tell you something. (Warning: Do not get the big Coke…bathroom break=missing something.)

And the performances—Meryl Streep as Sister Aloysius Beauvier, the head nun and principal of St. Nicholas School, Phillip Seymour Hoffman as the priest, Father Brendan Flynn, and Amy Adams as Sister James, a young nun and a teacher at the school—are wonderful.

But what I love most is that the story of the movie—Sister Aloysius’s accusations regarding Flynn, and the question of whether he abused a boy—are really just vehicles with which to make you ponder the nature of doubt.

A friend asked me, after the fact, if Hoffman’s character did it. “You can spoil it for me,” she said. I told her the truth, “I don’t know, and it doesn’t matter.” That’s just the story. This movie is really about ideas.

The movie begins with a great sermon by Hoffman’s character on doubt. And it’s beautiful. And then the story unfolds, leaving you to chew on your questions—what is doubt? What does it mean to live with it? What are you certain about? What is enough certainty to say no, I’m not in doubt. It’s really stunning. When I left the movie, my brain was percolating away...a feeling I loved.

And there are scenes that keep coming back to me—always a sign of a good movie. The gym scene, in which the kids are learning to dance and Sister James is sitting on a nearby chair, watching, and clapping awkwardly. The scene in which Sister Aloysius and Sister James first confront Hoffman. The scene in which Sister James catchers herself becoming Sister Aloysius—and then apologizes to a student.

Really, it’s a gorgeous movie. Not visually, necessarily. We’re talking a Catholic School in the Bronx circa 1964, autumn, and nuns. But it’s gorgeous, nonetheless.

A Christmas Tale (Un Conte de Noel)

2008-12-10T06:45:00.001-08:00

A dysfunctional family Christmas—in French.

At the heart of the family madness is the death of the oldest child, Joseph, as a boy. (This isn’t a spoiler—they tell you in the first few minutes of the film.) The only possible cure for Joseph, who suffered from a blood disease, was a bone marrow transplant. None of the family—his parents, Junon and Abel, or his younger sister, Elizabeth—were a match. So as a last ditch effort, they conceived another child—Henri—in hopes that he would be able to save Joseph. But Henri isn’t a match, either.

The rest of the movie is how that set of circumstances plays out over the years in this sometimes crazy but usually charming family. It all comes to a head at this particular Christmas gathering.

Catherine Deneuve, as the matriarch, Junon, is not to be missed. But honestly, they were all wonderful. This is one I might well have to see again—not only because I enjoyed it so much, but because there’s so much going on, at any given time, that I’m sure there were things I missed. In fact, I think Arnaud Desplechin, the director, wants to leave you with question marks. Not in the sense that you don’t understand the film, but in the sense that all your neurons are firing.

Desplechin is a fan of Truffaut’s idea that four ideas should be introduced in a film every minute. Not necessarily serious ones. But four, none the less. You definitely feel the largesse at the end of this movie. Yeah, I definitely think I need to see it again.

DVD: “The Assassination of Jesse James by the Coward Robert Ford”

2008-12-09T08:16:00.001-08:00

I’m in mourning that I didn’t see this one in the theater. I meant to, but it’s long—over two hours—and it was always a battle between work to be done and babysitter time and an afternoon at the movies. Work won. But I wish, now, that I’d put whatever deadline I was on aside.

It is just gorgeously shot—not in Missouri, where it’s supposed to take place—but in Alberta, Canada. No matter. Beautiful, moody. Great music. Brad Pitt, whom I would love to disdain for being a Hollywood pretty boy (and let’s face it, he is), is fabulous. He’s Jesse James and we know, per the legend, that he’s temperamental, prone to outbursts, and violent—something that, not surprisingly, terrified those around him, even his “friends.” Pitt managed to make me feel as edgy as if I’d been in the room with him, or Jesse, enduring the discomfort. It’s an impressive performance.

There are a couple of small parts for big actors in this film, too. Mary Louse Parker as Z, Jesse’s wife, barely utters a word. Sam Shepard appears briefly as Frank, Jesse’s older brother. Nice performances, both of them. I love it when big actors take small parts—it’s this kind of detail, or rather fine-tuned addressing of the details, that can really elevate a film. A bit part, poorly performed, is like a mosquito buzzing in your ear.

I’m on the fence about Casey Affleck as Robert Ford. He’s so…creepy. I’m guessing that he’s meant to be—shifty-eyed, creaky voiced, fidgety. That this is part of who Ford was, or was supposed to be—an identity-less wannabe who, one way or another, was going to make his name via Jesse James. But he’s so convincingly creepy that I had a hard time watching him.

In fact, early in the movie, Frank James says something to him along the lines of: “I don’t know what it is, but the more you talk the more you give me the creeps.” (Um…yeah! Well said!) Then he aims a gun at him and prods him on his way. It would be a relief, except he doesn’t go away. He keeps creeping along.

This movie gave me a new fascination for Jesse James—a story we all know about, but I’m guessing few of us know in the details. And seeing the dynamic between him and Ford made me think of it as a paradigm for other assassinations, or attempts. I’m thinking particularly of John Hinckley, Jr., who tried to kill Ronald Reagan in order to get Jodi Foster’s attention, and Mark David Chapman, who seemed to both admire and hate John Lennon. What the incidents have in common--people who were angry at their own invisibility, in love and hate with a celebrity for being so…celebrated…and acts of violence that were supposed to re-sort the equation somehow. Oh, and probably some mental illness mixed in there, too.

It didn’t work in Chapman’s or Hinckley’s cases. And it didn’t work for Robert Ford—who, unlike the others, wasn’t charged as a criminal for what he did. It seems people were angry that Ford had the nerve to take down the legend Jesse James in such a mundane manner. And Ford paid an ironic price for it.

Definitely a good rental—but make sure you set aside the time to watch it all the way through. (We didn’t the first time—and ended up watching it again.) It’s moody, and watching it in pieces breaks the mood.

"Slumdog Millionaire"

2008-12-09T07:25:00.000-08:00

Finally saw it. And I have mixed feelings that I’m having trouble sorting out. The beginning brings Robert Redford’s 1994 “Quiz Show,” about the exposure of game-show cheat Charles Vandoren, to mind. But it quickly evolves that the cheat question—Jamal, our main character, is a contestant on India’s version of “Who Wants to Be a Millionaire”—is just a vehicle through which to tell a love story. It’s clever storytelling, it’s well done, it works. And it’s fascinating to get a glimpse of India.

I think what’s giving me mixed feelings is how appalling it is to see extreme poverty, particularly children living in that situation. I had a brief—and uncharacteristic—sense of goodwill toward Angelina Jolie. (I’m not a fan of spoiled celebrities.) If I had money and found myself confronting kids like this, I think I’d end up bringing a few home, too.

The other think that makes me squeamish is how, as a pampered American who kids herself that she is somewhat aware of the world around her—I have no idea how accurate this glimpse is. Is all of India like what they show? Or just the slums? Is this an India past, not present?

I have no idea. The realization makes me uncomfortable. Hence my mixed feelings. I’m having trouble separating my thoughts about the film from my unease.

I’m hoping to get at some issues related to both—the movie and my questions, as an American, about India—by shooting some questions to Mia Inderbitzin, who is in the film. Mia was my next door neighbor growing up. And has it happens she lives in India, and has a part in the film. I’ll be posting our email interview sometime in the near future, I hope. Meanwhile, very open to any thoughts others might have—and questions they might want to pose to Mia—about the film, about the difference between Indian film and U.S. film, or even about the recent tragedy in Mumbai, where Mia lived until recently. (She’s safely in New Delhi now.)

Oh, and if you’re going to see the film, make sure you sit through the credits. Your reward will be an old-style Bollywood dance scene featuring the cast of the film. Lots of fun.

"Happy-Go-Lucky"

2008-12-08T09:17:00.000-08:00

Here’s my one sentence summary: It’s a cheery “Waiting for Godot.” I liked it—a lot. Which is especially gratifying because it was an accidental see.

We started out trying to pick up “Slum dog Millionaire” at the theater next door. But it was sold out (at 3:15 on a Sunday, what the hell?) so we ran for a newspaper (sitter was already installed, so we had to use the time) and found this one playing a short cab ride away.

I’d been vaguely aware of it. When we went to see “Rachel Getting Married” it was playing at the same theater, and the guy behind us in line was seeing it. He said it was supposed to be good. The guy was a serious movie-goer, but you just never know about other people’s taste.

I also read a brief blip in The New Yorker on it, too, but it was a forgettable review. Part of my, “eh, so what?” response to it, after reading this review, was also that the main character was described as, well, happy. I think the NY-er review said something about the unexamined life. What’s interesting about that?

Had I realized the writer and director was Mike Leigh, the same guy who wrote and directed “Vera Drake” and “Secrets and Lies,” however, it would have been in my top five.

I saw “Vera Drake” a couple of years ago and found it a grim but incredibly moving, compassionate and thought-provoking profile of Vera Drake (played by Imelda Staunton), an abortionist in 1950’s England. Ditto “Secrets and Lies,” which stars Brenda Bleythn as Cynthia Purley, a woman ravaged by life, who also has a secret she is forced--very unwillingly, at first--to confront.

Both earlier movies are profiles of deeply interesting women. So is “Happy-Go-Lucky.” But unlike the earlier ones, HGL is, by and large, an easy ride. You really can’t help but like the unbelievably cheerful and giddy Poppy (Sally Hawkins) and her “mates.” In fact, her friendship with Zoe (Alexis Zegerman), made me envious--I wanted to hang out with them. And as the movie unfolds, you find she actually does have a deeper side, she just doesn’t blather on about it. In fact, she almost never says anything serious.

It’s kind of interesting how Leigh manages to convey a serious message in a mostly un-serious way. Based on the two earlier movies, I would never have believed him capable of such a light touch. The movie does skirt around a couple of grim characters and scenes, but it’s not the stomach-twister that Vera and S&L can be. (In a good way, but still.)

I looked up Leigh when we got home and discovered, to my awe, that though he is credited as the writer on his films, he does not actually write the scripts. He comes up with ideas, frameworks—and then he and the actors go through a careful rehearsal in which they improvise the lines. But it’s all done pre-shooting. “You will find hardly any improvising on camera anywhere in my films,” he has said. “It's very structured, but it's all worked out from elaborate improvisations over a long period.”

His biggest lament is that, because he won’t cast big stars and can’t tell producers exactly what his movies are about, it’s hard to get them made.

“My tragedy as a filmmaker now,” he says, “is that there is a very limited ceiling on the amount of money anyone will give me to make a film. Because they don't know what it's going to be about and because I won't use stars and because there isn't a script. And I really passionately want to have the resources to paint on a much bigger canvas.”

I seriously hope he keeps managing to get his movies made. He’s damned interesting.

"Lake City"

2008-11-29T13:52:00.001-08:00

We went to this one on the 26th, for Paul’s birthday. We even managed to pick up a sesame bagel with whitefish salad en route. (Not quite as nirvana-like as I remembered-- my half was loaded with bones.)

At any rate, we went in knowing almost nothing except that it was a “southern thriller” and that Sissy Spacek was in it. Oh, and it was playing at the Quad, which tends to pick small, arty films that don’t get a lot of play elsewhere. All three things sounded interesting—southern (see my Louisiana blog), Spacek (her presence in a movie is generally a sign that it’s going to be good—both because she’s fun to watch, and because she tends to pick movies with depth), and the Quad—I’ve seen great stuff there.

The funny thing is that though the story had problems—problems that became even more apparent the more I thought about them—I didn’t get bent out of shape by them, as I did, say, with “W.” In fact, I enjoyed this movie, and even as I saw the flaws, I forgave them. Paul, who liked it, too, had a similar experience.

We spent a good amount of time wondering why we were so wiling to ignore its problems. The answer—it was shot beautifully (mostly in Richmond, Virginia…I WANT that house) and it was cast exceptionally well, i.e it was all about the characters. They were, as Paul pointed out, people you enjoyed spending time with.

Sissy Spacek, as I said, is always worth watching. She’s one of those old timers (I don’t mean she’s particularly aged, just that she’s been acting a long time) who can do a lot with a little, acting-wise.

Her son, Billy, is played by Troy Garrity (son of Jane Fonda and Tom Haydn, who gave him a different last name—his maternal grandmother’s, I believe, to shield him from attention). I actually thought he did a lot of over-acting, but not to the point that I loathed him as a character. He has a really interesting face.

There’s a small role for Rebecca Romijn, who you’ll barely recognized as a brunette sans make up. I liked her quiet, understated presence in the film.

And there’s an even smaller role for Drea Di Matteo (Adriana from “The Sopranos”). It’s literally about a five minute cameo, but she’s good.

Best of all, though, is Keith Carradine (you might have seen him recently as Detective Lundy in “Dexter”), who plays a gas station attendant with a crush on Sissy Spacek. Really, I could have spent a lot more time with him. When this guy is on screen, either in “Dexter” or in a movie, I can’t stop looking at his face and the way he moves. He’s magnetic. I hope he’s going to start showing up in more films.

At any rate, so there you have it, a character, not plot, driven movie. Not on purpose, mind you, but it works out. I’m not sure I’d advise shelling out full price for a ticket and popcorn on this one. But it’s definitely worth checking out in DVD.

“Religulous”

2008-11-23T13:07:00.000-08:00

It's looking doubtful that I'll get to Bill Maher's "Religulous" so I called upon Mike Carolan, my former next door neighbor (go Julliard Drive!) and partner in bee torture (you don't want to know) to give us all the run down. So without further ado...here's Mike...

One bit of information discussed in the news last week was the detailed questionnaire Obama and his transition staff were using to screen applicants for positions in his administration. As NPR pointed out, controversial blogs and potentially embarrassing Facebook postings could easily jeopardize one’s ability to survive such scrutiny. This stuck in my mind as I pondered launching my own thoughts about Bill Maher’s “Religulous” into the blogosphere. But then, I’m probably not the political appointee type, and all the choicest appointments I can think of (Ambassador to Ireland, Spain, Hawaii…) are probably going to much smarter and way more generous contributors anyway.

So let me start by saying that I find Bill Maher to be somewhat annoyingly arrogant – and not just because he seems like the type of person that probably knew Hawaii doesn’t need a US Embassy (because it’s such a close ally?...), but because he seems to be the type of guy that would point it out to you in a condescending way. I did however, really enjoy his film.

Bill was raised Catholic until he was thirteen or so – when his family decided that they’d just had enough. (I, on the other hand, nobly stuck it out right up to college.) As it turns out, Maher’s mother is Jewish, though she didn’t bother telling her kids until after they were grown. The movie reminded me that Bill was a pretty capable stand-up comedian in his day. In some ways it was reminiscent of Julia Sweeney’s one woman show “Letting Go of God,” which I also enjoyed. Julia’s show concentrated on all of the super crazy things you can find in the Bible, while Bill’s movie tackles the nutty and bizarre aspects of most of the major religions and one or two of the not so major ones, including one in Amsterdam centered exclusively on smoking pot.

His chutzpah is well on display as he places various representatives of the different faiths on the spot, asking questions most people are too polite to ask, and getting some answers that you wouldn’t expect to hear. It wasn’t all that different from watching “Borat” – you find yourself in situations where you expect a major conflict, and instead you get an uncomfortable laugh, an outright cringe or, in a few cases, a kernel of understanding about the human experience.

As a parent of three, I am somewhat reluctant to raise my children without any kind of religion – at least, that was my feeling for the brief period when we did attend the Unitarian Church. In this era of renewed religious zeal in America, however, I think a lot of us are left feeling like a person’s lack of religion means a deficiency of morals and an absence of faith or spirituality. As Maher points out, this was not the attitude of the early shapers of our country – Thomas Jefferson especially.

Though I’m at an age where I’m getting pretty comfortable with myself - deficiencies and all, as a parent, I still sometimes worry that maybe I’m denying my children something important. A good friend of mine’s wife, who also shares this fear (and lack of religion), has actively engaged their only child in a church as an act of what she calls “inoculation.” Her idea is that by having a solid religious upbringing her son will be less likely to fall prey to some REALLY crazy church when he’s grown (if you haven’t guessed, she’s quite a character, and, unsurprisingly, a preacher’s daughter).

Along this vein, Bill Maher’s movie gives us a creepy look at the much darker side of religion, including some of the “rapture-esque” geopolitical goals in play. These dark apocalyptic scenarios seem eerily less implausible when you consider the mindset of many of the people he interviews in his movie. The upside is that I feel much less guilty about my religious “failings” as a parent – though I admit that the inoculation argument I mentioned seems a little less loopy. His point seems to be that you need to take it all with some salt – if not a grain than a pillar.

This movie left me wondering about a lot of things, though it certainly wasn’t a forum for providing answers. On the other hand, it did provide a few laughs, and I find that answers are a lot more meaningful when I’m allowed to figure them out for myself.

-Mike Carolan