Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows: Part 1

I could not resist. I've haven't posted in a while, because, frankly I haven't been to see any movies (I'm in the Czech Republic after all- half the time I'm too lazy to look up the theatres that play movies in English). However, I went to see the midnight showing of Harry Potter, and I believe that warrants a blog post. For those of you who have yet to see it, just wait until tomorrow to read this. Or if you've read the books read it anyway, since nothing that happens is really a secret. 

sb_post_date = ""; sb_categories = ","; sb_url_to_rate = ""; sb_rated_title = ""; sb_when_to_load = "immediate"; try { var sb_dp = Date.parse(sb_post_date + ' ' + ""); sb_rated_creation = isNaN(sb_dp)? new Date() : new Date(sb_dp); } catch (e) { sb_rated_creation = new Date(); }

First off, I just want to congratulate the makers of this final installment of the Harry Potter franchise for FINALLY GETTING THEIR SHIT TOGETHER. I don't know what they did, but this movie was superb. Not incredible, not wonderous or insightful or the best movie I've ever seen, but I was able to follow the plot without having read the book for three years. My biggest complaint about the other films is that they jump from scene to scene without ever filling in the details, and although there were minor things that were unexplained, the movie was a lot more fluid and connected than any of the others (aside from #1 and 2, but let's face it, 200 page books are more easily adapted than 700 page books), and the events seemed to flow. This was the best HP flick I've seen since #3, and it's because they actually tried to make a movie rather than do random scenes from Harry Potter. 

One thing that surprised me about this film was how many laughs it got. In between the incredibly terrifying and creepy moments were genuinely comedic interactions between the three main characters, and it was a pretty consistent balance between serious and funny. On the flip side, the other thing I want to say is that I have never seen a Harry Potter movie this dark. It was epic. I was terrified out of my seat half the time, even the points where I knew what was going to happen. There was also no sparing you from the violence that occurred to various characters. It was like watching a murder mystery thriller/ horror movie.

My absolute favorite part about this movie, and I won't give too much away, is the creepily beautiful animation sequence explaining the story behind the three brothers. I don't know who Warner Brothers hired to do that, but it was incredibly well done. The monotoned yellowish colors contrasted with dark gray and black skeletal forms brought the perfect element that was needed in explaining the dark magic, and was far more artistic than any flashback I've seen in a Harry Potter movie. It was this creepy breath of air that allowed the rest of the story and the magic to sink in without being cheesy or overdone. I applaud Warner for this three minute sequence because it made the movie for me. It sort of brought a new kind of sophistication to Harry Potter and allowed the audiences to not be ashamed that they are adults at the midnight showing of an HP film. 

My biggest qualm about this movie that is different from what I haven't liked about the others is that the stakes just didn't seem high enough half the time. I wasn't convinced that any of the characters were out to save the world. It just felt like they were running from Voldemort. Which I guess is true, but I just wasn't sure whether they were more invested in just solving some school mystery or stopping a mass murderer. There was something missing in the reasoning behind what was driving Harry to do anything in this film. I also would have liked to see more of what was happening at Hogwarts, but they might have just saved that for Part II. 

Other than that, I was thoroughly impressed. Hopefully the final installment will only get better. 

Peace,

The Movie Mistress

Scott Pilgrim vs. the World (2010)

(photo credit to screencrave.com)

((((((( SPOILER ALERT!!!!! )))))))

I had no idea what to expect from this, but I can see now why it's pretty much the most talked about movie of the summer. It was so different than any movie I had seen in such a long time. The idea of combining a graphic novel and video game and making it into a movie was like.... it was....


... a breath of fresh air. 


Let's start from the beginning. Although the brighter-than-life credits were a bit long and jarring on the eyes to watch, I loved how they just threw them at you. The movie starts out with awkward conversation... more conversation.... and then


"WE ARE SEX BO-BOMB!! 1-2-3-4!!!!" 


What a BANG! start to a bangin' movie. 


I've gotten lots of people ask me to describe exactly what this movie is in a nutshell before they go see it. Because I want them to see it and think it's worth watching, I most often refrain from my immediate impression, which was "a fucking awesome video game with a Beck soundtrack!!" Instead, I take a more subtle approach, since Beck is about 15 years too old for a good number of people of my generation to appreciate and most of the people I talk to (myself included) aren't hugely into video games. I tell them that it is the most artistically genius movie I've seen in a while, but it still tries to pack as much action and humor into the mix that most people watching will understand... like watching a video game, but more satirical because you get stuff like "Scott Pilgrim has earned the power of TRUE LOVE!!!" thrown in. 


I think what I loved most about Scott Pilgrim was the honesty in the humor (that and the fact that Vegans are considered psychic :) I loved that there was a Vegan police who would strip away people's powers. "Why is he so strong?!" "Oh.... Todd's a vegan." Priceless). Four guys all sleeping in the same bed at once with absolutely no explanation? Sounds good. Next scene! There was no scrambling to keep up with the pace, no feeling of ahhhh-this-isn't-realistic-so-we-have-to-make-up-some-lame-excuse-as-to-why-it-would-happen. The truth of the matter is that the characters believed everything that was in that movie totally and completely, and so we went along with it. And the absurdity of the humor came through the projection of actualities into overdone scenarios. Sometimes your life does become an episode of Seinfeld, and sometimes people DO cheat without thinking about it. And in real life we often don't stop to talk about it because if you do, something else will bite you in the ass... or stab you, as is the case in the movie. 


I also loved the cuts. There's something about jumpy, unbalanced editing that really makes me happy. Take the party scene, for example: we didn't really ever see a full establishing shot of the party, but instead only saw Scott's conversations with people. And when someone couldn't give him the information he needed, there was an immediate jump to a different conversation. When he finally sees Ramona Flowers, we go from a jumpy, blip-y, fast paced scene to this large, white, empty space with a long, drawn out conversation about Pac-Man. The whole thing had a very role-play video game feel to it: going around and asking people for information until you finally get to the one person who will bring you answers and you fuck it up with mindless chatter. 


I guess what this whole movie sums up to is the concept of life being... well, a game. There are times when you lose, and other times when you win, but most of the time you come to a happy peace with yourself and accept yourself the way you are. This is most likely the cheesiest sentence I've ever written in a blog post. However, it's the truth: when it comes down to actually fighting ourselves, it's a lot easier and healthier to say "You're a cool person. I'll go out for drinks with you later. But first I'm going after the girl of my dreams." 


Peace, 


The Movie Mistress

AMERICA! Where Domestic Abuse is Comedic and Boundaries Don't Exist

sb_post_date = ""; sb_categories = ","; sb_url_to_rate = ""; sb_rated_title = ""; sb_when_to_load = "immediate"; try { var sb_dp = Date.parse(sb_post_date + ' ' + ""); sb_rated_creation = isNaN(sb_dp)? new Date() : new Date(sb_dp); } catch (e) { sb_rated_creation = new Date(); }

The Other Guys (2010)

I get it. I do. This movie was supposed to make fun of Buddy Cop movies, and in most of those movies, there are teams of two men, normally awkwardly paired, that have problems at home, have ridiculous potty mouths, and spend most of their cop careers crashing their police cars through walls. And in that respect, The Other Guys does a good job parodying these types of films. I have to admit that I laughed at the ridiculous scene in which Samuel L. Jackson and the Rock (yes, I still refer to him as the Rock) "aimed for the bushes" and crashed on to the pavement, showing that the absurd antics in most cop movies would end in death if they were actually performed on the streets of NYC. 


However, I cannot watch this movie and, with a conscience, ignore the blatant verbal abuse that Will Ferrel incessantly streams to Eva Mendes throughout. I don't care if it makes fun of the fact that in most cop movies, wives are perfect and submissive and often these glorified, angelic victims (Se7en, anyone?). But to watch Allen Gamble repeatedly tell his wife that she's plain and isn't dressed nice enough for company, to me, isn't funny. It's awkward and uncomfortable. Just because the entire audience knows that she's hot doesn't change the fact that this kind of comedy doesn't fit in this movie. 


I guess what bothers me is that, were this movie a dark, offbeat comedy that deconstructs social norms and uncovers situations that aren't brought to the public very often in an attempt to bring about commentary, maybe the scenes I'm talking about would be acceptable because it would be condemning the behavior and not satirizing it. But who am I kidding? This is a fucking Will Ferrel comedy. The humor comes in watching ridiculously crazy situations that would never happen in real life (as was in Blades of Glory, Elf, and Step Brothers). So it isn't funny that he puts down his wife because, oh wait, THIS ACTUALLY HAPPENS. And in real life, it isn't funny. It's called abuse. Rihanna and Eminem made a whole song about it. The more this kind of behavior is joked about, the more it will be ignored. 


I'm willing to ignore the jokes about a Prius being a woman's car, because if you listen to that and take it to heart, you're an asshole to begin with. I'm willing to laugh at the fact that Mark Wahlberg learned to dance and play the harp ironically. I'm also willing to enjoy watching Michael Keaton spout lyrics to TLC. I'm not willing, however, to sit back and laugh at uncomfortable spousal abuse. I don't care if he tells her she's beautiful later, especially because it's only to get laid. I was also bothered that the fact that she THREW HIM OUT (was I the only one who exclaimed, "Finally!" in the theatre?) was sort of dismissed completely and made to look like he left. He calls her and she says how worried about him she is! I was like, "Seriously?"


And then there was that ridiculous scene with her mother in which she serves as a go between for Allen Gamble and his wife, who are sharing dirty dialogue. I guess it's just exemplary of living in an age where, thanks to the internet, we have absolutely no boundaries. Not only did that sequence last waaaay too long (enough to incite boredom), but by the end of it, I wasn't laughing. I felt bad for the old woman. Not as bad as I felt for Eva Mendes, but still pretty bad. 


I'm not saying this was a terrible movie. As parodies go, it was still better than Vampires Suck (2010) and anything of the "______ Movie" franchise. I did laugh. But I can't see this and ignore what was on the screen. And if you can, either you didn't notice it or didn't want to, both of which I can respect. But if you see the movie after reading this, I just ask you not to laugh during those scenes. Because, in reality, they aren't funny. That's all. 


Peace,


The Movie Mistress

Inception (2010)

((SPOILER ALERT!!!!!!!!!))


Before I actually go into my review of this film, I want to take the time to share a little something I found on the internet: 

It pretty much sums up my feelings about Inception (except in a much cuter way that I could express)- it's an enormous, two and a half hour mind fuck. 

How do I go about describing my experience? Well, other than being detained in a bathroom for fifteen minutes due to a tornado warning (after listening to a collective "ugh!" from the audience when the screen shut off just as Joseph Gordon-Levitt is floating through the air with a semi-automatic), I haven't watched a movie that made me think that much in a while, and that's a good thing. I have to say that I'm pretty impressed.


Also, let me just say that this movie should be a testament to all the Hollywood producers that think we either need dumb action movies or intellectual “conversation” movies. I enjoy them both, but sometimes I really hate that in order to see an action film, I have to sit through Wanted and to see an intellectual drama, something like Frost/Nixon is automatically on the agenda. I loved being able to see a movie that encompassed both. I know, I know. You’ll undoubtedly say, “But there are lots of movies like that!” Not blockbusters that I’ve seen. And not in the past few years.

Let me start with the beginning… which is actually the end. At first, when the movie finished, I thought, “that isn’t necessary. This movie would have been intense enough without doing the start-from-the-middle gimmick.” But then I thought about it, and I realized that there was no flashback indication, no “36 hours earlier” text at the bottom of the screen, which made me think that maybe the beginning was actually the end of the travelled levels. Think about it- if Cobb was going to go anywhere else and we were supposed to see where he had been leading up to it, wouldn’t they have shown a different scene?

See, I feel there are three ways you can interpret this movie and its open end:

1. Cobb made it home to the real world (in my opinion, not likely- I mean, come on, his kids didn’t even age)

2. There is another level above the ending of the movie that started before the movie started that we didn’t see (i.e. Mal was right all along), or

3. He never made it out and is still in dream limbo.

To me, because of the start of the movie, the third option seems most likely. I loved seeing this movie in the theatre because when the top was spinning and spinning and the scene cut to black, the entire audience went, “Augh!” in frustration that we don’t get to see if it actually stops or not. As I alluded to before, I personally think it doesn’t.

My other thought is, if you need to be in dream limbo with someone who’s been there before and who has built some sort of structure, and the spinning top was Mal’s to begin with that he intercepted and took from inside her own thoughts, was that actually her mind they were entering into? Or did he just think it was hers, and it was actually he who was convinced that everything was not real? After all, when he was on the phone with his father he said he had to get back to the real world, and that his kids were the only thing real to him anymore. Just something to think about.

This is one of those movies where you come out of the theatre having an intense discussion, and then after it falters, you actually want to continue talking. It isn’t even that you want to understand the movie, it’s just that secretly, you want to be more confused. At least, that’s how I feel. I love spending hours just having my mind go in circles about all the different meanings a movie could have. To me, that makes a fantastic film.

And now, the million dollar question that has nothing to do with the plot of the movie but is still burning- did they use Edith Piaf as the indicator that time was running out as a nod to Marion Cotillard’s Oscar?

Tell me what you think! If you haven’t seen Inception, go see it! Although I doubt anyone would have read this post if they hadn’t seen it because of the spoiler warning (well, they’d probably just be confused as fuck because it really doesn’t make sense if you haven’t seen the movie). 

Peace!

The Movie Mistress

Despicable Me (2010)

I liked this movie. 

sb_post_date = ""; sb_categories = ","; sb_url_to_rate = ""; sb_rated_title = ""; sb_when_to_load = "immediate"; try { var sb_dp = Date.parse(sb_post_date + ' ' + ""); sb_rated_creation = isNaN(sb_dp)? new Date() : new Date(sb_dp); } catch (e) { sb_rated_creation = new Date(); }

(Don't you wish you could just write a review with just those words and be completely done?)  

I did- a lot. I thought it was funny, cute, and had a heartfelt story while still being believable (believable in the sense that all the changes that happened to the characters seemed genuine, not that the world created was believable- and it didn't have to be). It also KEPT YOUR ATTENTION, something that Pixar sometimes fails to do (I'm sure you've read any of my numerous rants about Up). If Despicable Me was, indeed, Universal Pictures' response to The Incredibles, then I give them a round of applause, because they've certainly captured the moon. 

Here's what I liked about it:

1. The backstory. You didn't get a whole lot of backstory on Gru, and you didn't really need any for the overall plot to work. However, the five minutes that we did get to see him as a child captured the entire meaning and motivation behind his character, which was to make his mother proud, which he does, in the end. As I'm sitting here writing about it now, I'm thinking about how well done this element of the film is and I'm speechless. I've written before about how much I don't like forcing nostalgia on kids because they don't and won't get it (Up, anyone?), and here we were able to see Gru as a child struggling without it ever feeling like we were looking back and reminiscing. It was very fast and comedic, which kids can register, while still subtly establishing that he has Mommy issues (which get introduced in the beginning and resolved in the end. Genius.). And they didn't feel the need to include any other history because it wasn't necessary. Maybe this is interpreting it too much, but this part of the movie was incredible well thought out. 

2. The minions. I get that they were comic relief of sorts, but their interactions were some of the best moments in the movie. I also loved that they ended up proving crucial to the overall plot (the ticket scene where one of the minions puts it in his pocket) because it's sort of like saying every character in the movie means something. So... not only were they absolutely hilarious, but also interacted with the main characters in a way that was real and touching. 

3. The kids. I have to admit that Agnes cracked me up several times, including the when she sang the unicorn song and also when she thought her cheetoh was a caterpillar. I felt that the portrayal of the kids in this movie was just so genuine and honest. They were funny because they did things that kids do, not because they were trying to be funny characters. Very, very well done. 

What I didn't like:

The violence. Some of the violence in this movie was reminiscent of old Looney Toons. It was a little bit disturbing to see a bunch of fireworks blasted at Gru even if he does survive, and the overuse of violence as comedy got a little bit weary. The minions punching one another is one thing, but to see characters blown up, flattened, squeezed, crashed, smashed, and rolled over and over with the moon was a sore sight on the eyes for a children's movie. And I'm not even going to go into how upset I was by the juicebox incident. That kind of humor should not be shown to kids. Not at all. 

Overall, a good film to go see in the theatres and rent, although I would honestly hold off on taking really young kids. 

Peace,

The Movie Mistress

The Girl With the Dragon Tattoo (2010)

sb_post_date = ""; sb_categories = ","; sb_url_to_rate = ""; sb_rated_title = ""; sb_when_to_load = "immediate"; try { var sb_dp = Date.parse(sb_post_date + ' ' + ""); sb_rated_creation = isNaN(sb_dp)? new Date() : new Date(sb_dp); } catch (e) { sb_rated_creation = new Date(); }

((SPOILER ALERT))

Let me just say that the last detective movie I saw before this one was Angels and Demons, so going in to see this one, I was not sure what to expect, since that one didn't exactly live up to my expectations.

But, man, do the Swedes deliver! 

This was a total thrill ride. The two main characters are not your typical American leading man and woman, but that, to me, makes them that much more enjoyable. I've never read the book, but I can say that the characters themselves were a large part of what made this movie so memorable, and if this movie HAD been made in America, I don't know how much I would have enjoyed it, since we probably would have gotten some generic Sienna Miller look-a-like and young version of Harrison Ford in the title roles (and really, who wants to see that....again?). Noomi Rapace is fucking HOT as Lisbeth Salander, and I loved that she's able to hide in plain sight by dressing as a blonde bombshell (and also that it's supposed to be humorous). That girl is a badass. 

I have to admit that I was pretty disturbed by the rape scene, but I think that was the point. Maybe it's just the American movie business idea of a taboo subject being instilled in my head. I mean, I wasn't as disturbed by this rape scene as I was by the one in Marnie (1964), but it was still uncomfortable. However, I think that because they included all the details it made the even more graphic revenge scene that much more satisfying (in a twisted sort of way). The fact that this was included not as a subject of the overall plot but as a character device is another great attribute to this movie because we were allowed to get to know each character as an individual and as a whole before they come together and solve a crime. That's something we don't exactly get with Se7en, now do we (not to say that that's a bad movie, but I thought I'd use it as a comparison due to the Biblical-themed murder plot)? 

Although I didn't find the whole father-passing-the-crime-to-his-son deal realistic, I did like that the crimes were about the very real and unfortunate issue of anti-semitism. (I get that a lot of the praises I'm making should be credited to the author of the book, but seeing as I haven't read it, I'll just praise him AND the filmmakers for staying true to the original plot, something they didn't have to do completely after buying the rights). I feel like there are so many detective story lines that avoid issues that actually exist for fear of offending anyone. Why? I don't know. It's a movie- you can't please anyone. And besides, if there were someone that were watching this that were a fan of anti-semitism, hell, I'd WANT to offend the shit out of them. 

Anyway, now that I've gone on a little rant about that, I also want to make one unrelated comment about how wonderful the color quality of this film is. It's been a while since I've seen a film where the film itself matched the content of the movie (although I'm sure they shot in HD). The film buff in me is giving props to the editors for making a movie with dark and disturbing content, well, actually dark. The saturated green tint that permeated most of this movie only added to the well constructed storyline and memorable characters. I can only hope that the sequel that's already in process will live up to the dark and ominous beauty of its predecessor. 

Peace!

The Movie Mistress 

The Runaways (2010)

sb_post_date = "";
sb_categories = ",";
sb_url_to_rate = "";
sb_rated_title = "";
sb_when_to_load = "immediate";
try { var sb_dp = Date.parse(sb_post_date + ' ' + ""); sb_rated_creation = isNaN(sb_dp)? new Date() : new Date(sb_dp); } catch (e) { sb_rated_creation = new Date(); }

I saw this movie last week, and while I enjoyed it, I had mixed feelings. Not because the film was bad; on the contrary, it was a lot better than I expected, given my general disdain for Kristen Stewart films. I had no problem with any of the performances in the film, and thought that Michael Shannon was especially creepy/fantastic as music producer Kim Fowley. What bothered me was the ignoring of age limits for the two stars, who are both incredibly high profile. 

I though that Dakota Fanning's performance was incredible as drug addict/ rocker/ social outcast Cherie Currie, but the fact that there was a ridiculously tripped out sex scene between her and Kristen Stewart really bothered me. Stewart is 20. Fanning is 15. Does anyone else see a problem with this? Granted, nothing was actually shown, but to me, that doesn't matter. What matters is that most people know the ages of both these stars, and it isn't appropriate. I don't care if they're the greatest actors in the world- you can't ignore casting someone in an age appropriate role just because they're famous. This isn't a Woody Allen movie. It would be one thing if both actors were fifteen, or both were of age. I think that the casting directors took for granted the fact that most child actors are viewed as ageless- if you're seven, you can play anywhere from five to ten, and no one pays attention. You're just "a child." However, just because Dakota Fanning isn't a child actor anymore doesn't mean she's an adult, and if you've seen the movie, that was a pretty "adult" scene. 

In the film, Joan Jett is clearly older to begin with, which is another thing that bothered me because it could constitute the drugged-out seduction as rape. I'm not saying this was intended on the part of the filmmakers. The fact that Kristen Stewart is older doesn't help, and had they cast an unknown in either part it would have lessened the reaction value. Or maybe that's what they wanted. 

Cherie Currie does have sex several times before her scene with Joan Jett (and I'm sure that the guys shown are older than eighteen), but the fact that both the stars are so well known as child actors with different ages was what set it over the edge. Had Dakota Fanning and Kristen Stewart been replaced by less well known actors, the sex scene wouldn't have been quite as unsettling. 

                                               


Other than that one scene, I found the movie really enjoyable. It had a kick-ass soundtrack and was darkly amusing, putting funny one-liners in what would ordinarily be sad situations. Example: Cherie's father has just collapsed from drinking too much and Joan Jett jacks his booze. The film forces you to think about the humor in dire ocurrences, an ironic snapshot of what goes into building rock and roll. Michael Shannon was awesome, playing Kim Fowley as both creepy yet necessary- the girls put up with his bullshit because without him, there's no band. And he knows it- serious discussions are made randomly funny because he is in total control (example: there's a phone conversation about food and supplies where he's hanging upside down with no explanation). 


If the filmmakers were trying to make a statement, they did. What it was, I would really like to know, so if anyone has any ideas, shoot them out. Until then, I'm going to just pretend that I don't know who Kristen Stewart or Dakota Fanning are, since that's how I can enjoy the movie. It's just a shame that their performances were clouded by what are considered to be incredibly important social norms. 


Peace,


The Movie Mistress

Alice in Wonderland (2010)

sb_post_date = "";
sb_categories = ",";
sb_url_to_rate = "";
sb_rated_title = "";
sb_when_to_load = "immediate";
try { var sb_dp = Date.parse(sb_post_date + ' ' + ""); sb_rated_creation = isNaN(sb_dp)? new Date() : new Date(sb_dp); } catch (e) { sb_rated_creation = new Date(); }

I saw this movie a week or so ago, and it's taken me a while to get a post up because I have mixed feelings. I thought it was well done, but I really wasn't that impressed. It might be because I'm not that big a fan of computer animation, or because I'm too big a fan of Tim Burton's early work (Vincent, anyone?), but while seeing this in theatres, I was actually quite bored. 


Don't get me wrong- I thought the actors did well with the material they were given, but there was nothing behind that material backing it up to make you want to pay attention. Oh, Alice doesn't remember coming as a little girl? No big deal- no one else is trying to convince her that she's the same Alice. Actually, almost every character is convinced she's a different person and wants to leave her. I thought that plotline dragged out way too long and that she should have remembered everything a lot earlier. There was no urgency, and the fact that she was still convinced she was in a dream an hour and a half into the fucking movie made it even less exciting. By that point I was like "Ok, we get it- the magical computer animated world of Wonderland is too whimsical to seem real and Tim Burton's animators are fantastic, blah blah blah. Either fucking wake up already or admit that it's real, but stop pinching yourself. It's getting old."


Also, that whole backstory with the prophecy of Alice slaying the Jabberwocky was not explained well, nor do we ever learn why the Jabberwocky is important to the Red Queen to begin with. It seems to me that she could still be ruthless and rule Wonderland without it, since we don't even see the thing until the very end. And by the very end, I actually mean it. During the battle scene, she releases how many other creatures for Alice and her friends to fight before the fucking Jabberwocky comes out? Honestly. If the Jabberwocky had been used since the beginning instead of that bear-like thing, I might not have been as bored because I would have gotten to see from the start what Alice was up against. Instead, we get backstory from the dog, the bear, and all the Red Queen's workers, but the supposedly most important villain Alice has yet to face? We get a fucking prophecy from Alan Rickman. Yup. 


I thought Helena Bonham Carter was great as the Red Queen, but I didn't find her to be a very oppressing figure as the only human character in the movie to be animated. It was kind of distracting, and I think if she had acted live in the film, she would have been terrifying. She's short enough (especially in comparison to Anne Hathaway). It could have worked. As it was, however, I just couldn't picture her winning against live characters. 

How much more effective would this have been?

On the whole, I just thought this movie was just another washed up, overdone production spit out of the Tim Burton machine. There really wasn't anything that struck me about it and made me say, "Wow." Sure, it was enjoyable, and the graphics were superb, but I want my $10 back. And just because you slay a Jabberwocky, Alice, doesn't mean that the world will suddenly accept you. In fact, you might even be rejected more, because no one in Victorian England knows what the fuck a Jabberwocky is. But Tim Burton, if you want to go all feminist on us, you go right ahead. It doesn't make a lick of sense in the context of the movie, but if it makes all the six-year-old girls going to see Alice in 3-D want to be explorers and business executives instead of princesses when they grow up, I'll let it slide. Until then, I'll just go watch Beetlejuice and hope Tim Burton decides to come back and be original again one day. 

Peace!


The Movie Mistress

The Secret of Kells (2009)

sb_post_date = "";
sb_categories = ",";
sb_url_to_rate = "";
sb_rated_title = "";
sb_when_to_load = "immediate";
try { var sb_dp = Date.parse(sb_post_date + ' ' + ""); sb_rated_creation = isNaN(sb_dp)? new Date() : new Date(sb_dp); } catch (e) { sb_rated_creation = new Date(); }

I don't know if I've ever said this, but Animation is always one of my favorite categories when it comes to the Oscars. This year, the only one I haven't seen thus far is The Princess and the Frog, and because Disney already submitted Up, I don't really feel the need. I've stated openly that Coraline would be my top choice, but upon viewing this film a couple days ago, I'm not so sure. I hadn't even heard of it before the nominations came out and so I had no idea what to expect. What I found blew me away. 


There's no question that the animation in this movie is spectacular. It was a collaboration between Belgian, French and Irish filmmakers/animators, and it was very clear that a lot of the film was hand painted and sketched out with intricate detail. I loved watching the background stay still while the characters moved, because even if it wasn't as true to life as a lot of computer animation, you could tell the animators had created actual art that the characters (who contrasted this detail with their sharp edges and stylized shapes) were moving through. The animation had an old-time, rustic feel that echoed the subject of illuminated manuscripts that much of the film centered around, and it was so easy to be completely sucked in to the gorgeous world that Brendan spends his time exploring. 


What surprised me about this film was its extremely dark subject matter. I found the Vikings to be legitimately terrifying, and had I been a child watching, I probably would have had nightmares. These are not your typical Disney villains- there are no comical pratfalls or obvious weaknesses, only looming, ominous killers dressed in black that bring destruction everywhere they go. The other demons Brendan must face- the wolves, the giant snake- all have some aspect to them that takes the edge off; Ashley protects him from forest villains and the things he faces in the Dark Place are all drawn in outlines, as if you're watching Harold and the Purple Crayon on the screen. Somehow, you know during these points that he'll be OK, but the Vikings? Anything can happen, which is a terrifying formula for an animated children's movie to adopt. 


What I loved about this movie was that it simply existed for what it was. What I mean by that is that it didn't try to sell itself to any particular demographic. There were no obvious slapstick jokes for young children, or modern references for adults to understand. The only thing you were focused on was the story of Brendan and the Abbey, and that was way more important than trying to feel like the movie was made for you. It's timeless, putting all its effort and attention into the moment that it is trying to convey, and there's no concern for making sure you enjoy yourself, a quality that movies like Up and The Fantastic Mr. Fox lack. In that way, I enjoyed myself immensely because the film was so easy to watch- I wasn't constantly trying to understand every reference for my age group, and I didn't feel the need to like it because the filmmakers wanted me to. There was a respect for the intelligence of the audience that you rarely find in animated films. 


I've written about how I would have liked Up had the animators just grew a pair and decided that it was OK for Pixar to make a film marketed at an older age group. Instead, they threw in some gimmicks to make children laugh in what would have otherwise been a beautiful, nostalgic film about love and loss. It therefore makes me really sad to watch movies like The Secret of Kells because they're always under-marketed, under-appreciated, and under-acknowledged, and I know this will be the case at this year's Oscars. Up will win Best Animated Feature, but honestly, if it were up to me, The Secret of Kells would be my pick because of the quality of the animation and the lack of commercial bullshit. Either way, I hope the animators understand that, award or not, they've created a beautiful collaboration that culminated in a film that can only be described as breathtaking. 


Peace!


The Movie Mistress

It's Oscar Time!!

Okay. There's only a week left. Oscar mode is in full swing. I will undoubtedly make a Predictions list because it's just what I do. I want to start, however, by highlighting one of this year's Best Picture Nominees (my personal favorite, actually). It didn't do too well at the Golden Globes, but maybe the Academy knows better. 

Precious: Based on the Novel Push by Sapphire (2009)


Right off the bat, this movie shines because it provides a perfect divide between the Precious' fantasy world and the sharp edge of reality, a theme repeated over and over throughout the bulk of the film. The opening sets the precedence for the excitement that occurs for the rest of the movie, and I loved how the opening colors and vibrant soft images of Precious' imagination immediately contrast with both the muted oranges of her home and sickly greens of her high school.


The use of color was not the only thing that stood out for me as an effective method of showing the distinct differences in Precious' personalities (her outward projected personality of being indifferent and her inward personality of caring deeply about herself and her children). I found the characters surrounding Precious to all be some sort of reflection of what she wants out life- Ms. Rain and her loving, homogenous relationship, Mrs. Weiss and her stable job, and of course Nurse John being a light skinned male (Precious asserts that she desires a light-skinned boyfriend). Each of Precious' encounters with her mother is contrasted with her encounters with the other people in the films until both worlds and personalities melt into a breakdown when Precious discovers she's HIV positive. 


It goes without saying that Mo'Nique totally deserved her Golden Globe, and completely deserves an Oscar. The last scene with her in the welfare office gave me chills the first time I saw it. I also can't imagine tossing a baby (even if it is just a doll, which it had to be, I'm sure) onto a couch with no regard to its well being. I know a lot of people are referring to her performance as a gimmick, something the Academy has to vote for out of sympathy for the character (a sort of "vote for her if you have any heart at all" type of deal), but frankly I think that's bullshit. I think people didn't expect that performance out of a comedian and therefore gave her a lot of press because she was a comedian first. That being said, I think she deserves an Oscar even more because of that. 


But I digress- I'm here to discuss the film itself, which is a gem among a year full of high budget blockbusters. The amount of realism in this movie astounded me despite its heavy, melodramatic content. I found myself totally engrossed in Precious' world and could imagine the entire plot as if it were happening in another part of the country at that moment, somewhere where I was not. I think that's the magic in this film- Precious is a character who is timeless, whose struggles with self worth and abuse could be happening to anyone, at any point in time. This movie exists within a small bubble of a serious issue, and for a couple hours you can enter that bubble, and come out of it a newly enlightened person. 


My one criticism with this film is the ending scene. I fully appreciated Mo'Niques powerful end monologue, but I didn't understand the need for her to come to the welfare office. Precious had obviously been living on her own for a while, so the only explanation I can think of for that scene was that Mrs. Weiss wanted to act as a mediator for Precious and her mother and resolve their issues. If that's the case, I can't imagine why a welfare worker would want to do that, although maybe that's the point of implying that she and Precious became close with their sessions. The defining line of the movie, however, comes when Precious says, "You're nice and all, but you can't handle any of this." 


Overall, I would give this 4 1/2 out of 5 stars. It's that good. Is it worthy of Best Picture? I certainly think so, although I could easily be happy with a lot of the others on the list of ten. We'll just have to see what happens. 


Peace! 


The Movie Mistress

Once Upon A Time in the West (1968)

sb_post_date = "";
sb_categories = ",";
sb_url_to_rate = "";
sb_rated_title = "";
sb_when_to_load = "immediate";
try { var sb_dp = Date.parse(sb_post_date + ' ' + ""); sb_rated_creation = isNaN(sb_dp)? new Date() : new Date(sb_dp); } catch (e) { sb_rated_creation = new Date(); }

6/10

I am not a huge fan of Westerns. I find them to be slow and monotonous, and the closest I can come to actually finding enjoyment in one is Butch Cassidy and the Sundance Kid (which, you can argue is more about the decline of the classic Western than being a Western itself). And, of course, Blazing Saddles. Still, I found this movie to capture the exact feeling of lethargy and ruthlessness that I imagine living in 1890s cattle country evoked. Within minutes, I found myself entranced by the take-no-prisoners attitude that I normally find to be dull. In my book, therefore, this movie was a success, although I apologize if I don’t use names because honestly, I couldn’t keep track of who anyone actually was.

The use of eyes in this movie is wonderful, although I suppose that’s the stereotypical “Western” technique. The scene following the jailbreak is brilliant, building tension by only revealing what is happening through the use of eyes and exterior sounds. I love the nonchalant look on all the customers’ faces, as though they can both sense what’s happening and not be surprised.

I found myself really liking the female protagonist in the film, although it might be because most women in Westerns are portrayed as weak and inferior (think Legends of the Fall), whereas Claudia Cardinale is strong and intelligent, someone you can actually see surviving against a sea of unruly gun-slinging men. I love the scene where she is approached by the man who killed her husband.

I’m not going to go into much more detail, but I found myself pleasantly surprised by this Western gem (much, much better than when I saw The Searchers- maybe I’ll write about that experience another time).

Watch out for the man with the harmonica!

The Movie Mistress

The Adventures of Priscilla, Queen of the Desert (1994)

9/10

“Just what this country needs: a cock in a frock on a rock.”

With a soundtrack that ranges from The Village People to Judy Garland to ABBA, this movie is, in my opinion, amazingly awesome, and every time I watch it I find it to be funnier and funnier. Though at times incredibly non-PC, I think half the reason it’s so successful is because it gives overdramatized accounts of real situations (example: Bob the hippie marrying an illegal Filipino woman while drunk). It’s this glam-ing up of characters both in the literal sense and situational sense that makes this movie brilliant.

One of the reasons I love this movie is because it’s legitimately funny without seeming too dated even though it was made over fifteen years ago. I like that when Bernadette goes for help, the people she brings back aren’t all that accommodating, and you actually laugh even though it’s sort of a shitty situation the girls find themselves in and has really offensive undertones. The idea of the characters being rejected by the over-conservative mainstream is both mocked and satired, creating a light-hearted flick with deep, complex problems and issues. It’s one of those films where you don’t think about what happened until after it already happened, so you’re left with something to discuss hours after the film has passed.

I also like that the tension Mitzi builds up before meeting his wife isn’t added to by an incredibly awkward situation. The flashbacks of his son being born heighten the drama, but rather than confront her with strange, I-haven’t-seen-you-in-a-million-years-and-don’t-know-what-to-do confusion, there’s a realistic reunion where the two of them realize that underneath everything, they’re still friends.

There’s not much to this movie that you can’t like, although the first time I watched it, I think I was a bit too young to look at ping-pong balls ever again. Now I can appreciate the ridiculousness of the burlesque mockery, where that type of sexual degradation is accepted more than drag queens. I realize the dark comedy and social statement the creators of this movie tried to get across, and I have the ultimate fucking respect.

If you haven’t seen this movie (which, if you’re in the 1001 Movie Club, I hope you did), go rent it now, or buy it even. It’s both outwardly and inwardly funny, as well as warm, sentimental, and intensely dramatic all in one. Hell, I might just go watch it again.

Peace!

The Movie Mistress