The Most Wonderful-ish Time of the Year

I have been to three new movies in the last three weeks. It's a busy time in awards world, and the first two movies I saw are certainly award worthy. The third? Well, I'll get to that later. In lieu of a huge review of each one, which I don't want to write and you don't want to read, I'm going to write about my impressions from each.

#1 Milk

This was my favorite of the three. And the thing is, I didn't think it would be. I'm not a big fan of Sean Penn and honestly was expecting him to utterly ruin the whole thing for me. Luckily, he proved me 100% wrong, and I am extremely happy about it. This movie makes you go through a complete range of emotions more than any other movie I've seen in a very long time. Happy, awkward, frightening, rage-inducing, unbelievably sad, hopeful, indignant - I felt it all, and it was a direct reaction to the whole of the movie, not a reaction to terrible acting or lack of plot. Neither of these were problems for this movie.
All that said, I would not be at all surprised if Sean Penn wins an academy award. Completely and utterly deserving (as opposed to his character in Mystic River, which in my opinion sucked big time...but that's another story). Josh Brolin is nominated along with Penn for a SAG award, but quite frankly that doesn't make any sense to me. If anyone should be nominated for supporting actor it should be Emile Hirsch or maybe James Franco. Josh Brolin isn't bad, but doesn't deserve an award. Sorry dude.


#2 Rachel Getting Married

This was a much more predictable movie, plot wise, but still a very strong and overall very solid movie. One thing that's been complained about by reviewers a lot is the fact that it was filmed much like a documentary with footage by a camera man who can't seem to keep his hands still. It didn't bother me, but I can see why people find it annoying to have a bouncy Blair Witch-like view the whole time.
Anne Hathaway is phenomenal, and has come a long way from her Princess Diary days. But she's getting too much credit. She is phenomenal because the entire supporting cast is utterly amazing. Debra Winger, who has little screen time, is at her best and delivers the textbook definition of a quietly screen stealing performance. The father, played by Bill Irwin (remember him from The Grinch??), is such a layered character that it's hard to believe that he's an actor, not a an actual person inserted into the movie. Also, Anna Deavere Smith is in it and I pretty much am required to love anything she's involved in, so. Unfortunately, since none of the supporting players have been given any love, my guess is none of them will be nominated, but I will hold out a sliver of hope for Debra Winger. Cross your fingers!!


#3 The Boy in the Striped Pajamas

I had high hopes for this movie. Maybe too high, actually. It has a promising plot - an 8 year old son of a Nazi officer befriends a young Jewish boy in a concentration camp - but in the end falls short. Partly, I think it becomes a victim of what I think of as the Grey's Anatomy problem. Namely, that in trying to address something that in life is very messy and dirty, turns into something fake dirty where the dirt smeared on the faces almost looks realistic and the perfectly arranged set almost looks genuine and the characters almost do their job for the story. Does it surprise you to know that I don't watch Grey's anymore? No? Oh. Well, me either.
Honestly, the majority of the movie didn't bother me too much. The actors did a decent job, and the children's performances were certainly respectable. It wasn't great, but it wasn't a complete disaster.
That is until the end. I'm tempted to tell the whole ending....but I won't. To put it simply, it completely glosses over the complete and utter horrific tragedy that was the holocaust by focusing on something else entirely. I suppose you could say that it plays along the thread of sympathizing with one's captors, but it takes it in a terrible direction, and in a nutshell implies that the loss of one child's innocence is on par with, if not worse than, you know, 6 million innocent people being killed all in the name of prejudice. Needless to say, I felt a bit sick leaving the movie theater and the thought I kept coming back to while riding the bus home was something along the lines of "Seriously, WTF? That was NOT OK. WTF???" ad nausea.

One more thing about this, I saw a preview for Valkyrie before this movie and want to know one reason why this movie may be better than Tom Cruise's? Well, although neither movie is in German, nor do any of the actors seem to attempt German accents, in Striped Pajamas, everyone consistently talks in an English accent. In the trailer for Valkyrie, Tom Cruise talks in an American accent. Um, really? He couldn't even try to talk like the rest of the actors? I thought male actors usually stopped trying in their late 50's (Jack Nicholson, Harrison Ford) - TC's still in his forties, right? Wow. Way to reach for the stars little buddy.


So. You've been forewarned. I'm looking forward to Revolutionary Road, Doubt and the genius of one Phillip Seymour Hoffman in the next few weeks.

It's going to be a great time to go to the movies! Who's with me?!

This one's for all the squee-ing teens

Disclaimer: I have not read Twilight. Also, I can't honestly say that I plan to, because I don't. I have a bunch of other books at my apartment and in my room at home that I have a desire to read so, sorry all you 14-year-olds with your obvious high literary taste - OMG best book evaaaar!!!! - you will not convert me.

Except that, when I was home for a long Thanksgiving weekend, I went to see Twilight with my friends. First, the reasons for going, followed by a review.


Reason #1: Going to a movie = avoiding homework

"Homework?? On Thanksgiving break?!" you say? Yes. My finals are two weeks away and my professors apparently don't give a rats patootie that I, you know, HAVE A FREAKING LIFE let alone OTHER CLASSES (here's looking at you, Italian Professor!). This, however, did not stop me from finding excuses to put off doing stuff. So. There you have it.

Reason #2: Peer Pressure

All (except maybe one?) of my friends have read the books and were going to the movie. Since I hadn't seen any of them for a couple months, I thought it would be fun to spend a few more hours with some of my favorite people. Call it the Christmas spirit, I guess.

Reason #3: Low Expectations

I'm the kind of person who, if forced to see a crappy movie with friends, will make fun of absolutely everything, in real time, as to expose the true crapfest that it really is. If I'm lucky, my friends laugh along, if not, well, I get skittles thrown at me, but at least I had a good time. Needless to say, I was 70% confident this would not be too great, and would therefore make for some high entertainment possibilities.

Reason #4: Matinee Showing

I'm cheap.



The Review:

The good thing about going to a movie that was a book and sitting between two people who are fans, is that the whole time they lean over saying things like "she never said that in the book," "that never happens" and "This was supposed to be in the next one!"
Luckily, the people sitting on either side of me did this, and also let out preemptive gasps, laughter, and swooning sighs.

I, on the other hand, leaned over continually (especially in the first 20 minutes) to whisper, "Is he a vampire?? Oh. But she is, right?! No? But she's pale."

Yeah. That's basically my understanding of vampires. High degree of paleness = DANGER. PUT ON A TURTLENECK IMMEDIATELY!!!!

So...the movie! Right.

For someone who hasn't read the books, as an overall movie it was mostly forgettable. The plot is somewhat interesting, but aside from the vampire twist, it's not much different than other angsty teen movies.

Let me sum up the plot minus vampires.
- A pretty girl moves from a somewhat boring town to a seemingly more boring town.
- It is hard for her to adjust to school.
- Her parent (in this case, father) hasn't spent much time with her, and doesn't understand her.
- They have "conversations" boring to them and to the audience. There is tension.
- She meets someone interesting.
- Her life "changes" and she chooses her new life (friends/boyfriend) over her old life (family)
- There is a fight and generally bad things happen
- She and her family kiss and make up
- It ends happily

Add a dreamy vampire that doesn't want to suck your buhlud, and tahdah, Twilight.

Sound familiar? It should. Remember this movie? How about this one? I know the second one's a bit of a stretch but...actually it's really not. This has been done before, and it's been done better. "Oh, but the vampires!" No. Not different.

As far as casting and acting goes - meh. (It's a word!) As with most movies appealing to the prized 18-24 demographic, acting skill didn't exactly rank high on the list of priorities.
This is what I expect the conversation was like during the casting process.

Casting Director: "So what kind of actors do you want to see in auditions?"
Director: "Well, it's a teen vampire movie."
CD: "Yes. I'm familiar with the script."
D: "Oh, great."
CD: "....."
D: "What?"
CD: "Do you have any creative direction? Any preferences for actors?"
D: "Um....is Daniel Radcliffe available? He's kind of vampire-ish."
CD: "No, he's on Broadway. And I think he wants to be an actual actor."
D: "That's a shame."
CD: "So just teen-ish people that are really attractive?"
D: "You really are the best in the business!"

Yeah. Pretty much a no-brainer.
Being young and attractive doesn't mean you can act. At all. When child actors are 11 and younger, we overlook their weird eyes and stiff delivery because they're just kids! What do you expect? But when you get to the 17-22 range, it starts to get sad.

This movie was really no exception. Delivery wasn't great, and most of the time I felt like the actors playing vampires were thinking to themselves "Melodrama! Melodrama! Look more pissed off! Don't let yourself blush, you're a vampire, dammit! You can't be embarrassed, the un-dead are too good for that! Oh, and Melodrama!" Unfortunately, they weren't great at the whole non-creepy vampire sensibility. Makeup, after all, can only do so much.

As far as the non-vampires, it was mostly made up of the stereotypical cast of small towners. The annoying, yet shiningly innocent teens; their parents, with reserved dismay that anything bad could happen ever! to their kids/town; and the supporting characters - one with a drinking problem, another with a sunny outlook despite their less than ideal circumstances. None of them are very compelling or interesting, just run of the mill ho-hum.

Oh, and by the way, Billy Burke doesn't look older with a mustache. He just looks like an idiot.

The effects were decent, and by this I refer to the helicopter shot scenes which were very beautiful and well filmed. I do not refer to the fact that it was glaringly obvious that Edward was on wires during the really fast running-up-hill-scenes, which instead of looking impressive and manly, looked like the director couldn't decide if he was good at parkour or could fly, so there ended up being this weird half running half floating thing going on.

There seemed to be a lot of symbols that readers would understand immediately, but that I am still completely baffled about. For example, the cover of the book is a red apple cradled in someone's hands. Other than product placement (what could sell more books...why, a movie of course!) it was never clear to me that there was any reason for it to be in the movie. Seriously, ask yourself, when in real life do people cradle apples in both of their hands?!
Answer: NEVER

In the end, it was probably about what you'd expect from a movie based on a popular book. An outline of the original story, characters that are at least trying to be true to those created by the author and a mediocre experience leaving even the people who haven't read it thinking, "Damn, the book was waaay better."

Well, maybe that was just me.

What I'm Reading

Ok, so I'm nearing the end of the semester which means I need to read and study even more for class and so my free reading time has been cut very short. Instead of waiting until I've finished my current pick, I'm going to give you impressions so far of a book I'm about half done with.




There was really no question whether or not I'd like this book. Sarah Vowell is one of my favorite writers and I knew that this book would probably join her others in my 'favorites' pile. While I like the topics of her books - Presidential assassinations, American History, vacation stories - the thing I love about her writing is how she tells the stories. She is someone who obviously loves history, but at the same time, she isn't afraid or ashamed to poke fun at it or fearlessly compare it to pop culture. I feel like she's someone who would join in with sarcastic under your breath remarks that I frequently make at zoos and dead Presidents' houses.

This book is about Puritans in Massachusetts in the 1600's. It's really about people that helped found our nation and have been given characterization that is completely wrong: they were incredibly intelligent people who encouraged reading and learning and founded Harvard. They were not silly but gutsy and they referred to the Pope as the Whore of Babylon.
Like her other books, this one is hilarious, informative, and does not disappoint.

I was going to include a little funny excerpt, but there's one I keep thinking about that is not funny, but is rather appropriate, I think, given recent political happenings. It's from a sermon delivered by John Winthrop during the voyage to America. Read it a couple times.


"We must delight in each other, make other's conditions our own, rejoice together, mourn together, labor and suffer together, always having before our eyes our commission and community in the work, our community as members of the same body."

Classics to Puke On

I, like my darling little spud of a sister, have also been reading a lot of the "Top 10 Books of the last 5 minutes" lists and the like. One of the lists I came across was "30 books to read before you turn 30" (seeing as how, after 30, you default to Danielle Steele and Nicholas Sparks). After scanning the list and realizing I had read maybe 5 of the books listed, I decided maybe I should do something about that. I've got a solid 4 years to read 25 books or so. No problem.

The first one down was "Catcher in the Rye." I have always avoided this book because I thought it was akin to "Of Mice and Men" and "Moby Dick" (which I know, I KNOW are nothing a like, other than old and classic and therefore not my cup of tea...). I also avoided it because most high schoolers have to read it, which by virtue of 'required reading' I lump into the same category as "The Power of One" and being basic craptastic reads (as in books publishers couldn't sell on the general public as decent literature and therefore pawned off on poor public school teachers who couldn't afford good books, but I digress. Also, I drink wine. Probably not the best combo when ranting about a book review. Again, regression. Lemme take another sip and I'll get right back on topic.)

4 days of metro reading later, I'm done. And all together, rather unimpressed. Given that my expectations were low, this is not a good sign. Most of the reviews I read after the fact were very split - either they loved the book or they hated it because of the cursing/sex/bad behavior/disrespect for authority/prep school hating/pick your excuse. For me, my two main issues were 1) the complete and utter lack of character growth and 2) wasting 4 days of my reading life.

I don't expect rainbows, puppies and sunshine at the end of every book; I don't even expect a positive growth in characters, but I don't think it's too much to ask for something to change someone, somewhere. We've got about 15 characters to work with and the only real change is in an 8 year old girl, who appears for about 10 pages in the whole book. The plot felt like it was building to something looming, something pressing. Instead it pulled a Palin and built a bridge to nowhere.

More disturbing now is I find this article on Wikipedia. This is what I'm afraid of. All the teenagers filled with angst, frustration with unbelievable struggles (like being a pampered white boy at a prep school, having things handed to you, etc), and general distaste for life, take this book to mean these feelings are not only valid but should be celebrated. And now murders committed with the perps citing the book as reasons or justifications for actions. This is all crazy shades of wrong.

There is much discussion about whether this will ever become a movie. I certainly hope not. I've known too many "Holdens" in my life, who thankfully, don't have the patience to read a book (i.e. this one) -- can you imagine what would happen if this made it as a book on screen? Can you imagine the non-conformist-yet-identical mobs that would herald this as the movie of their time? Punching out windows, getting all sexy, necking with girls then tossing them aside, causing general havoc? No thank you. Maybe that's why Salinger hasn't sold the rights. Or maybe he's just holding out for more money. Or maybe he's threatening to hold his breath until you give back My Foolish Heart. Whatever the reason, I'll be glad to see it never made as written.

I don't always understand why classics are classics and this is no exception. The book puts this more eloquently than I could - "don't [read] it if you don't want to puke all over yourself."

Things I Like

Warning: This half-assed Friday post may become a weekly occurrence.

In light of the fact that the thing I actually want to write about on this here blog is not quite in the ready to write about category, I'm going to sell out and post links to other things.

So recently I've become slightly addicted to some of the videos on the Borders channel on youtube. They do this thing where authors/famous people that are making appearances at the mothership Borders in Ann Arbor walk around the store and talk about their favorite things. It's kinda like that one show Oprah does every year, but it's more believable that they actually do like the things that they're talking about. Also there's less "We've got John Travoooooooooooooltaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaahhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh!!!"

Oh, and it's awesome.

The best ones are Ira Glass and Wes Anderson/Jason Schwartzman. This may be simply because I love This American Life, and all Wes Anderson movies, not to mention my unabashed love for Jason Schwartzman. Jamie Lee Curtis' video is decent, but I can only stand her for about 2.3 minutes before ripping out my own hair.


Here's Wes/Jason.




Like I said, awesome.


In other "obsessed with" news, Jon Favreau had (has?) this show on the Independent Film Channel called Dinner For Five. Basically he asks four random actors (or comedians, writers etc.) to have dinner together and talk about their films, and other random experiences. Of course, during every single episode he talks about Swingers for about ten minutes, but it usually is really funny and very interesting. There aren't tons of episodes on youtube, but there are a couple of winners including the episode with Kevin Smith substitute hosting and the one with Henry Winkler as one of the guests. I've downloaded 3 or 4 from iTunes and there are some quality bits. Here's what I've learned so far:

Vince Vaughn is kind of a jackass. Ok, maybe I already knew that.

Kevin Smith is a lot funnier than I thought.

This was not in the actual episode, but comes from one of my favorites. It is, however, kind of hilarious.

Stan Lee = Awesome

Kevin Pollack does probably the best Christopher Walken impression I have ever seen.



Enjoy, and don't worry, I will update and you know, put some effort into this very soon.

For Your Information

Recently I have read a few lists of the "Top Ten" kind. Those of the cringe inducing absolutist variety like, for example, the 10 books not to read before you die, turning 30, having a child, graduating from high school, getting married, writing your own book....ad nausea.

I thought about adding my own little list, but realized that I really don't need to add gasoline to that bonfire. Favorite books (let alone good/bad/cliché /ripped off ones) are so subjective that it seems almost a waste of time to even make a list at all. Especially when every comment posted about these lists completely trashes half the books on each one before going on to suggest 3 that so totally should have taken the place of The Lord of the Rings or The Grapes of Wrath.

There are some books that are included on every must read list not to mention under everyone's favorite books that it makes me wonder whether or not people actually like these and honestly have read them or if they feel as though in order to be a respectable human being they are required to ABSOLUTELY ADORE (gasp, cry, clutch heart, slump over keyboard with hiccuping sobs) To Kill A Mockingbird, lest they be mauled to death by the ghost of Clark Gable. I'm not saying there's anything wrong with To Kill A Mockingbird, (Stay away, Gable. I have a metal baseball bat and I'm not afraid to use it!) but that there is something wrong with America that it is completely incapable of thinking of just one other compelling, heartbreaking, wonderful book to talk about and profess deep undying love for.

Luckily, I can.

And I'm just going to talk about one little (well, actually big) book, NOT a whole list, that I completely adore and think that more people should read and reread.


The Brothers K by David James Duncan



In my own personal top ten, this is very near the top, probably fighting for #1 with a pile of Dr. Seuss, a collection from Billy Collins and some E.M. Forster. At this point they are probably all out of breath, leaning against a brick wall somewhere, examining their various scratches and bruises. But I digress.

This book is a beautifully written, epic story of a family. It highlights their journey through the sixties and seventies related by one of the six children. It ranges from hilariously outrageous to jaw dropping in it's beauty and sadness. It's about history, love, religion, war, friendship and perhaps most importantly, baseball.

A few days ago I began to reread it and was reminded of exactly how much I thoroughly enjoy this book. It is a masterpiece in every sense.


You might want to think about reading it before you die. I won't make you, or anything, I'm just saying....

Brand New Day

This blog could probably be categorized as dead. Which sucks. (I had such great hopes for it!) I've been neglecting blogging in getting used to a new schedule and so the fault is solely mine. I am, however, determined to resurrect it, and in doing so, I must slightly change its objective. I had wanted this to be a log of books I read during the summer, but unfortunately I was a huge procrastinator and probably went to the beach too much to really do justice to my goal.

Henceforth, this will be a blog about both books and movies (maybe music?) that I'm currently enjoying or particular favorites that I want to highlight. I would promise to post well and often but I think I will pledge to not post often in hopes that I will in fact do the opposite. There.

Let it also be known that I am really proud that I used 'henceforth' un-sarcastically. Mostly, that is.

Thoughts While Watching Batman

I hope those people shut up.
Credits...yesssss.
Confusion. Why did I not netflix Batman Begins?
Stop talking! Bastards.
Bank heist = pretty damn brilliant.
Why is Batman's voice so gravely? Is it supposed to be like that? This may(will) annoy me.
Aaron Eckhart is awesome.
So is Morgan Freeman.
I need to stop eating these mini Charleston Chews. Why are they so delicious??
Too much is said about the disappearing pencil trick, but oh how it deserves it all.
Ok, so the Joker is actually funny. I wasn't really expecting that. Hmmm.....
I want my own plane fishing rod thingy. Scratch that, just a plane. Or not.
I figured out what would happen to the judge, but at the same time was completely shocked.
Again, Morgan Freeman -> awesome.
Why Gordon?!! Genuine sadness.
I'm guessing turning yourself in is probably the worst idea EVER. Oh well...
Wow.
Loving the car/semi/batmobile/motorcycle chase - on edge of my seat. Seriously.
Don't understand how the Joker didn't die. There is zero chance he was wearing a seat belt.
Rachel and Harvey weren't exactly where the Joker said they would be. DUH!!!
That suuuuuuuuucks.
Creepy.
Ok, but you wouldn't still have an eye if you didn't have A FACE.
This coin thing reminds me of No Country for Old Men. All he needs is that air compressor thing. That was creepy.
The social experiment thing is actually very interesting. I wonder if it would pan out the same way in the real world. Not that I want to try it or anything. Just curious.
I wonder if the Joker knew about Batman's thing with dogs. Probably so.
Will the Joker make an appearance in another movie? Those would be some big shoes. Will they make another movie?
Wow.



But the question everyone seems to be asking.....will Heath Ledger get a posthumous Oscar nomination?
I......don't think so. Does he deserve one? For his performance, yes I think so. But I feel like this is the wrong movie for a nomination. Sure it's uber popular and has made a ridiculous amount of money already, but it's a summer blockbuster sequel. But who knows, maybe I'm wrong.
Any thoughts?

Words and Pictures

After finishing Sense and Sensibility a few weeks ago, I decided to re-watch the movie as I could remember very little of it. I started thinking about all of the books that have been made into movies, and how terrible most people say they are. I'm not nearly as picky as some people are, but when movies suck, it's pretty obvious.

My main issue with books made into movies is that the spirit of the movie is completely different. Obviously the movie can't contain every single minute detail of the plot and there are going to be subtractions to the characters. This is a given, after all, who would sit through a nine hour movie? No one. My best example for this is the third Harry Potter movie. I know it's a silly example but the book, while dark, was also very funny. The movie completely missed it. It was all either dark or silly, and much more immature than the book. They added more things to the story than were subtracted (remember the singing toads?) which really is a recipe for disaster.

My biggest annoyance is when a character is completely different. My best example is, again, ridiculous. Oh well. I was a huge fan of the Princess Diary Books. They were quick, fun and hilarious - perfect for summer. The movie was cute. Princess Mia and her best friend Lilly (I'm ashamed to say I had to look this up on imdb) were pitch perfect. The Mother and Grandmother (Queen) however, not so much. I am not knocking Julie Andrews. She is a great actress and a wonderful person - but her character was a complete 180. The Grandmother in the book only speaks French, chain smokes, constantly drinks and has a hairless poodle. The Mother is a feminist that constantly tests boundaries and gets pregnant half way through the first - maybe second - book (with Mia's Algebra teacher's child). This plus the fact that Mia's dad dies in the movie instead of being unable to procreate because of testicular cancer, and that they moved the setting from New York to San Francisco, (random) ruined the movie for me. And don't even get me started on the sequel.

This is to say nothing of all the books I have not read and movies I have not seen that are either atrocious (The DaVinci Code) or amazing (The Godfather).

So. Is there any hope? Should we urge producers and directors to simply forget about all books ever written? No. Some movies make a good effort, and a good movie.

Which brings us back to Sense and Sensibility. This is a great movie, because so many things are right about it. A solid, beautiful and entertaining story is well translated to a very good (academy award winning) screenplay. The cast is amazing, their characters are spot on, and the director understood the story, mood - and luckily didn't need to break from the mold or use every freaking CGI effect EVER. There were discrepancies from the book, namely a missing sister and wife, but they aren't major characters in the book, and it makes basically zero difference to the overall movie.
I say two thumbs up.


I have more favorites (and disasters), but for now, let's just stick with this. Do you have any recommendations? My netflix is looking a little empty these days.....

The Challenge

Earlier this summer I decided that I would try to read a book per week. In theory, I knew I could do it, I could find the time to read and since there are a couple million books in the world that I haven't gotten around to reading yet, I knew I wouldn't run out of material. I also thought I would blog about the books I read to stay accountable or just to amuse myself.

In reality, this has not quite worked that well. I think my main problem is that I am a procrastinator, evidenced by the fact that I haven't gotten around to making a new blog until July 3rd. It also could be because I haven't seen all of the Jon and Kate Plus 8 episodes yet. Pathetic? Maybe. Entertaining? Heck yes.

So I'm making a promise to finish my first book, Sense and Sensibility, this weekend. I only have a little over 100 pages left and since it's a long weekend and I have literally nothing to do but eat watermelon and watch fireworks, I think that there's a good chance I'll be done by Monday.

With any luck I'll keep it up the rest of the summer and read some great books. Any suggestions?