Behold!
I have made it to New York, faithful readers, but am currently without Internet access (I'm texting this post) new posts forthcoming...I promise!
We Moved!!!
13 years ago
Monday, August 31, 2009
Tuesday, August 25, 2009
Thursday, August 20, 2009
Must See Foreign Film: Waltz with Bashir
I just rented this film after wanting to see it for about six months and it was moving, groundbreaking, and just amazing.
Synopsis: The film chronicles a Lebanon war veterans attempts to reconstruct his memories of the conflict. After speaking with a fellow soldier he realizes that he has no memories of the war. His only memory seems to be a dream and it forms the basis for his search. He decides to speak with other veterans to find out where he was and what he was doing. It is also a semi-autobiographical account of the director's, Ari Folman, experiences during the war.
Review: It was excellent. The visuals were at times frightening and poignant. Folman takes us on a journey not only of a singular experience, but also of the war as a whole.The music in the film was amazing. The score is both uplifting and haunting. The addition of Israeli pop songs adds another layer to the film as well (unfortunately these songs are not on the CD). Overall, the film was engaging and moving and I would definitely see it again.
I give it 5 out of 5.
Specs: The film is animated with some live-action footage. In Hebrew with English subtitles with a running time of about 90 minutes. It is now available to rent at Blockbuster and Netflix. The original title of the film is Vals Im Bashir (2008). It was nominated for an Oscar in the Best Foreign Language film category.
Synopsis: The film chronicles a Lebanon war veterans attempts to reconstruct his memories of the conflict. After speaking with a fellow soldier he realizes that he has no memories of the war. His only memory seems to be a dream and it forms the basis for his search. He decides to speak with other veterans to find out where he was and what he was doing. It is also a semi-autobiographical account of the director's, Ari Folman, experiences during the war.
Review: It was excellent. The visuals were at times frightening and poignant. Folman takes us on a journey not only of a singular experience, but also of the war as a whole.The music in the film was amazing. The score is both uplifting and haunting. The addition of Israeli pop songs adds another layer to the film as well (unfortunately these songs are not on the CD). Overall, the film was engaging and moving and I would definitely see it again.
I give it 5 out of 5.
Specs: The film is animated with some live-action footage. In Hebrew with English subtitles with a running time of about 90 minutes. It is now available to rent at Blockbuster and Netflix. The original title of the film is Vals Im Bashir (2008). It was nominated for an Oscar in the Best Foreign Language film category.
Wednesday, August 19, 2009
Retro Movie of the Week!
Since I would like to actually have some content on this site I now present: Retro Movie of the Week! I will recommend one classic film each week that I feel is really important to film or is just a personal favorite. Now without further ado this weeks Retro Movie is...MILDRED PIERCE!
Synopsis: When most people think of the forties they think of Nazi's, Hitler, and World War II. What many don't think about is empowered women! All over the country everyday women were joining the WAAC or filling the vacant positions left by men at factories (Rosie the Riveter!). This theme was picked up in Hollywood with a slew of films like Stella Dallas, Jezebel, and The Women that revolved around and were driven by female characters. A great example of this is Mildred Pierce.
The film stars Joan Crawford as Mildred Pierce, a suburban woman who leaves her philandering husband. Rather than giving up she strives to (and eventually becomes) a successful and independent woman. Another theme of the film is the relationship between Mildred and her daughter Veda, played by Ann Blyth. While Mildred works tirelessly to provide a better life for her Veda grows up to be a spoiled brat who doesn't appreciate anything her mother does for her. These two themes come to a head at the end of the film, but throughout Mildred proves herself to be an independent and thoroughly autonomous character. It's a great film and Joan Crawford won an Oscar for her performance.
Specs: The film also stars Jack Carson and Eve Arden. It was nominated for five Oscars, including Best Picture. Running time is about 2 hours. I would recommend getting this through Netflix or your local library as blockbuster no longer carries films from the BEFORE TIMES (i.e. before DVD's, also anything in Black and White).
Future?: I read in Entertainment Weekly that their might be a remake in the works with Kate Winslet tentatively tapped (say that three times fast!) to star as Mildred herself. It would be a mini-series rather than a film and I would be excited to see it. The film definitely has themes that can carry over to modern times, but it would also be great as a period piece (think of the colors!). Though I'm not the greatest fan of made-for-TV movies (or remakes for that matter) I think this one just might be worth it.
Shout out to Prof. Despina Kakoudaki from the literature department at American University for her great class "Melodrama" where we watched some really great films!
Synopsis: When most people think of the forties they think of Nazi's, Hitler, and World War II. What many don't think about is empowered women! All over the country everyday women were joining the WAAC or filling the vacant positions left by men at factories (Rosie the Riveter!). This theme was picked up in Hollywood with a slew of films like Stella Dallas, Jezebel, and The Women that revolved around and were driven by female characters. A great example of this is Mildred Pierce.
The film stars Joan Crawford as Mildred Pierce, a suburban woman who leaves her philandering husband. Rather than giving up she strives to (and eventually becomes) a successful and independent woman. Another theme of the film is the relationship between Mildred and her daughter Veda, played by Ann Blyth. While Mildred works tirelessly to provide a better life for her Veda grows up to be a spoiled brat who doesn't appreciate anything her mother does for her. These two themes come to a head at the end of the film, but throughout Mildred proves herself to be an independent and thoroughly autonomous character. It's a great film and Joan Crawford won an Oscar for her performance.
Specs: The film also stars Jack Carson and Eve Arden. It was nominated for five Oscars, including Best Picture. Running time is about 2 hours. I would recommend getting this through Netflix or your local library as blockbuster no longer carries films from the BEFORE TIMES (i.e. before DVD's, also anything in Black and White).
Future?: I read in Entertainment Weekly that their might be a remake in the works with Kate Winslet tentatively tapped (say that three times fast!) to star as Mildred herself. It would be a mini-series rather than a film and I would be excited to see it. The film definitely has themes that can carry over to modern times, but it would also be great as a period piece (think of the colors!). Though I'm not the greatest fan of made-for-TV movies (or remakes for that matter) I think this one just might be worth it.
Shout out to Prof. Despina Kakoudaki from the literature department at American University for her great class "Melodrama" where we watched some really great films!
Blog Layout
I'm making some changes to the website since I discovered that my original format looked exactly like the Cake Wrecks blog. Let me know in the comments what you think and if everything is readable. I tend to favor darker schemes, but I don't want it to look depressing. Let me know. Coraline review still in the works for Thursday.
Tuesday, August 18, 2009
DVD Pick of the Week: Coraline
This is just a heads up with a fuller post to follow. I actually saw Coraline in the theaters (though sadly not in 3-D) and it was awesome, so I already think it's a DVD worth buying. But I'll check out the special features as well and give a buy/not buy verdict.
Still haven't been able to rent it yet...hopefully will get to it by Thursday.
Still haven't been able to rent it yet...hopefully will get to it by Thursday.
Monday, August 17, 2009
Love is in the Air: Harry Potter and the Half-Blood Prince
Directed by David Yates
Starring Daniel Radcliffe, Rupert Grint, Bonnie Wright, Emma Watson and the Royal Shakespeare Academy.
This is going to be a long one so brace yourselves. Also I dressed up and saw this on opening night so that tells you how much of a dork I am.
THE POSITIVE: I think most Potter fans will disagree with me, but I really loved this one. It's right up there with Prisoner of Azkaban with me. I'm a big proponent of "no movie will ever be as good as the book", which is why I'm always happy when a filmmaker deviates rather than produces a carbon copy of a work. I think David Yates did a great job trying to turn a book which is mainly about exposition and long memories into something that can be seen by the average non-Potterphile. The truth is that most people will not sit through the carbon copy version of "Half-Blood Prince." It's interesting from a narrative perspective, but in terms of film it's pretty boring. I thought focusing on the romantic relationships of our three heroes was a good way to create dramatic tension and it really helped drive a lot of the story. The acting also just keeps getting better and better from all of the kids (I guess I can't call them kids now can I?) in the films. I also loved the entire look of the film which made it seem more otherworldly and it helped take the film out of the realm of reality and into that of fantasy. A lot of Potter fans have griped that leaving out so much will make the seventh book hard to understand, but I have spoken to people who have not read the books and they have basically guessed the entire plot of the seventh book just from seeing the sixth movie! I think it's important to step back from the text and really look at the film as a stand-alone. This is an important example of how a movie can be separate from the book and still be good and convey most of the book's information. Now watch me be a hypocrite when "New Moon" comes out.
THE NEGATIVE: Not a lot to say here. The one scene that everyone hates (the fight scene at the Burrow), I dislike for a different reason. I liked having a break from all the teenage angst, however, I did think it was drawn out and I didn't really see how it connected with the film as a whole. I understand why they needed the action, but I would have liked to see the fight between Harry and Draco drawn out a little more and where did Quidditch go? I also thought some of the romance seemed a little forced, but I can understand that it's a hard transition to make from friends off-screen to lovers on, especially when you've basically grown up together. I thought all four of them did well considering their age and the abruptness of it.
THE VERDICT: Go see it! And then when the DVD comes out buy the extended version with 17 hours of extra footage. But seriously, it's a film worth seeing for Potterheads (how many names for Harry Potter fans are there?) and Muggles alike.
I give it 4.5 out of 5 stars.*
Starring Daniel Radcliffe, Rupert Grint, Bonnie Wright, Emma Watson and the Royal Shakespeare Academy.
This is going to be a long one so brace yourselves. Also I dressed up and saw this on opening night so that tells you how much of a dork I am.
THE POSITIVE: I think most Potter fans will disagree with me, but I really loved this one. It's right up there with Prisoner of Azkaban with me. I'm a big proponent of "no movie will ever be as good as the book", which is why I'm always happy when a filmmaker deviates rather than produces a carbon copy of a work. I think David Yates did a great job trying to turn a book which is mainly about exposition and long memories into something that can be seen by the average non-Potterphile. The truth is that most people will not sit through the carbon copy version of "Half-Blood Prince." It's interesting from a narrative perspective, but in terms of film it's pretty boring. I thought focusing on the romantic relationships of our three heroes was a good way to create dramatic tension and it really helped drive a lot of the story. The acting also just keeps getting better and better from all of the kids (I guess I can't call them kids now can I?) in the films. I also loved the entire look of the film which made it seem more otherworldly and it helped take the film out of the realm of reality and into that of fantasy. A lot of Potter fans have griped that leaving out so much will make the seventh book hard to understand, but I have spoken to people who have not read the books and they have basically guessed the entire plot of the seventh book just from seeing the sixth movie! I think it's important to step back from the text and really look at the film as a stand-alone. This is an important example of how a movie can be separate from the book and still be good and convey most of the book's information. Now watch me be a hypocrite when "New Moon" comes out.
THE NEGATIVE: Not a lot to say here. The one scene that everyone hates (the fight scene at the Burrow), I dislike for a different reason. I liked having a break from all the teenage angst, however, I did think it was drawn out and I didn't really see how it connected with the film as a whole. I understand why they needed the action, but I would have liked to see the fight between Harry and Draco drawn out a little more and where did Quidditch go? I also thought some of the romance seemed a little forced, but I can understand that it's a hard transition to make from friends off-screen to lovers on, especially when you've basically grown up together. I thought all four of them did well considering their age and the abruptness of it.
THE VERDICT: Go see it! And then when the DVD comes out buy the extended version with 17 hours of extra footage. But seriously, it's a film worth seeing for Potterheads (how many names for Harry Potter fans are there?) and Muggles alike.
I give it 4.5 out of 5 stars.*
Porkchop Sandwiches: G.I. Joe
Directed by Stephen Sommers
Starring Channing Tatum, Sienna Miller, Marlon Wayans, Joesph Gordon-Levitt, and Dennis Quaid.
Not the best movie to start out with, but I thought it was pretty decent. I never followed the TV series, so my only knowledge comes from the fake PSA's by Fenslerfilms: (Go watch them they're really funny!). So coming into it knowing nothing I have to say it wasn't that bad.
THE POSITIVE: I thought the story was actually pretty engaging and there were some twists that I did not see coming. The pacing was pretty good and if you completely believe that in the distant future we can don metal suits that accelerate our actions then you can have a pretty good time. I thought the fight scenes were actually very well choreographed, especially one that involved two nine year old kids. If you disconnect your mind this movie is a lot of fun and actually pieces together pretty well, there aren't really any plot holes and the cast is, in general, pretty good. I have to give props to Joesph-Gordon Levitt who did a lot with a small role. I also thought Sienna Miller did well in a pretty two-dimensional part.
THE NEGATIVE: Despite all the action there was a general lack of blood. It seemed that a lot of the actual violence had been toned down especially compared to something like Transformers 2. What also annoyed me is that every character seemed invulnerable. I don't know if this is part of the series, but if your car just got flipped I don't expect you to immediately get up and run up six flights of stairs-which is what happened.
I was most disappointed in Channing Tatum's acting, especially from what I've seen of his other work I expected more than just an unrelenting glare. I suppose he was trying to be the tough guy, but it came off pretty wooden. I won't go into any other actors since none of them had big enough parts to really do anything with-they were all decent.
THE VERDICT: If this is the one summer blockbuster you see then you missed the boat. I would save my money and maybe rent it, maybe depending on the special features. I didn't think it was worth it even for escapist fare like this. Definitely not even close to a fourth of the action as Transformers 2, which also had giant fucking robots!
I give it 2 out of 5 stars.*
Starring Channing Tatum, Sienna Miller, Marlon Wayans, Joesph Gordon-Levitt, and Dennis Quaid.
Not the best movie to start out with, but I thought it was pretty decent. I never followed the TV series, so my only knowledge comes from the fake PSA's by Fenslerfilms: (Go watch them they're really funny!). So coming into it knowing nothing I have to say it wasn't that bad.
THE POSITIVE: I thought the story was actually pretty engaging and there were some twists that I did not see coming. The pacing was pretty good and if you completely believe that in the distant future we can don metal suits that accelerate our actions then you can have a pretty good time. I thought the fight scenes were actually very well choreographed, especially one that involved two nine year old kids. If you disconnect your mind this movie is a lot of fun and actually pieces together pretty well, there aren't really any plot holes and the cast is, in general, pretty good. I have to give props to Joesph-Gordon Levitt who did a lot with a small role. I also thought Sienna Miller did well in a pretty two-dimensional part.
THE NEGATIVE: Despite all the action there was a general lack of blood. It seemed that a lot of the actual violence had been toned down especially compared to something like Transformers 2. What also annoyed me is that every character seemed invulnerable. I don't know if this is part of the series, but if your car just got flipped I don't expect you to immediately get up and run up six flights of stairs-which is what happened.
I was most disappointed in Channing Tatum's acting, especially from what I've seen of his other work I expected more than just an unrelenting glare. I suppose he was trying to be the tough guy, but it came off pretty wooden. I won't go into any other actors since none of them had big enough parts to really do anything with-they were all decent.
THE VERDICT: If this is the one summer blockbuster you see then you missed the boat. I would save my money and maybe rent it, maybe depending on the special features. I didn't think it was worth it even for escapist fare like this. Definitely not even close to a fourth of the action as Transformers 2, which also had giant fucking robots!
I give it 2 out of 5 stars.*
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
