The Day I Wasted 2 Hours Watching This Film.

The original plan was to see The Reader but since it's only showing in 2 theaters in ALL of Manhattan, it was sold out and since I was already at the theaters and too lazy to walk back home I decided to see the movie with the next closest time which happened to be The Day the Earth Stood Still. I might or might not have been better off walking home.

I haven't seen the 1951 original, but I've heard really great things. Unfortunately, TDTESS version 2008 is nothing worth talking about. Alien Klaatu (Keanu Reeves) and his indestructible alien robot Gort come to Earth (to protect it from being destroyed by us humans) where Klaatu meets and befriends Dr. Helen Benson (Jennifer Connelly) and her stepson (Jaden Smith).

To its credit, the special effects and graphics in this film were amazing, which is pretty much what drew me to the film in the first place. Watching trucks, buildings and even Giant Stadium get ripped apart was way more fun than I thought it was going to be.

Unfortunately the dialogue was completely lame. Which is kind of what I expected given that they couldn't even find 10 seconds of decent dialogue in the film to put into the trailer. "If the Earth dies, you die...if you die, the Earth survives." Um right. The film was like the battle of the cliches. Who can say the most generic, sappy lines in 2 hours?! Also, Klaatu is supposed to be the humanity of Benson and her kid is what supposedly changes his mind about destroying the planet at the end, but I didn't see progression of that occurring at all. I'm still puzzled as to exactly what profound activities Benson and her kid did to save Earth. It was just suddenly..."oh I get it now. You humans are cool." And I'm left having no idea how that even happened.

I suppose this was the perfect role for Keanu Reeves who has pretty much played the expressionless drone in every role since Bill and Ted. Nothing I can really say about Jennifer Connelly either since her part pretty much just consisted of a lot of frightened running around and giving us the wide-eyed "wtf is going on??" eyes every 30 seconds or so. Always great eye candy though. Jaden Smith was adorable but so so annoying. I blame movies like this for stunting my maternal extincts (and also the fact that I'm not yet 22). Children who play huge brats in movies make me just not want to have kids ever.

Ultimately, I think this movie might have been awesome if it was just shrunk down to 30 mins of the craziest visual effect moments and scored to some great music minus all dialogue. Though what I just described pretty much just sounds like a long music video. Oh well.

Feel like a 'Millionaire.'

Director Danny Boyle is entirely unpredictable. He's done the disturbing, horrific and downright scary with Trainspotting, 28 Days Later and Sunshine. He's gone the romantic dramedy route with A Life Less Ordinary. And now he seems to be tapping into some warm fuzzies with heartwarm-ers like Millions and Slumdog Millionaire, and the latter might be the year's ultimate feel-good film.

Boyle's latest film centers around an Indian teen from the slums (aka slumdog), Jamal Malik (Dev Patel), who becomes a contestant on the Hindi version of "Who Wants to be A Millionaire?" He is one question away from winning the 20 million rupee grand prize when he is arrested under suspicion of cheating. In an attempt to clear his name, Malik recounts the experiences in his life that explain why he knows the answers to all the questions. With each flashback, his true intention for going on the show is revealed...to find the love of his life.

So they're all different genres, but one thing that all Danny Boyle films share are their graphic and brutally honest images (it's possible that the baby scene in Trainspotting still haunts my dreams). Slumdog Millionaire is no exception. Although a simple love story at its core, 'Slumdog' is a vivid trip through the heart of "real" India. There is no glorifying the poverty, misery and disgustingly downtrodden conditions of the slums where Malik and his older brother, Salim, grow up. All complaints I have ever had about my childhood seemed...seem irrelevant. I have never felt so lucky in my life just sitting in a movie theater...it suddenly seemed like heaven compared to what I was viewing onscreen.

What moved me was that this isn't just a story about two people who are kept apart by a few little mishaps and misunderstandings. These are two people kept apart for over a decade by obstacles presented by a society that allows few people to ever feel safe and secure...by a neglected and rundown country and the manipulative, cruel and greedy people who control it. What they have to overcome to just find each other is what makes the story so incredible.

I know Bollywood cranks out more films than any other industry in the world, but I still don't know very many Indian actors. I think I may need to start. Of course it might also help to be able to pronounce some of these names. Ayush Mahesh Khedekar and Azharuddin Mohammed Ismail who play Jamal and Salim Malik as little kids, respectively, were brilliant and totally adorable. Dev Patel plays the older Jamal on "Who Wants to be A Millionaire" and makes the perfect protagonist and underdog. He is slightly awkward but naive, sweet and witty. Jamal's love interest, Latika, is played by Indian model Freida Pinto who is absolutely gorgeous, but actually doesn't have that large of a part in the film.

Basically 'Slumdog' epitomizes the reason why I love going to the movies. You know that saying about how the journey is more important than the destination? Nothing could be more true when viewing this film. Although centered around "Who Wants to be A Millionaire," I really could have cared less at the end whether or not Malik correctly answered the 20 million rupee question. I know there are people out there who gag upon hearing this is a love story (I would normally be one of them), but it's a love story that successfully weaves in themes of family, trust, betrayal, redemption, destiny, courage and spirit. Even if you overlook all the potential cheesy moments of the film, you can't overlook the horrific beauty (oxymoron?) of a landscape depicted with such intensity and attention to detail without being patronizing. It's a world that we see too infrequently. Not to mention, the film features a great soundtrack (I'm a big MIA fan).

If you don't come out of this film feeling enthralled or inspired or uplifted or some combination of all these emotions, then what can I say? You have a cold, hard rock for a heart.

Help yourself to a tall glass of 'Milk.'

Now that I'm completely stuffed with enough turkey and potato salad to feed a small country, it's back to the movies...or as much as I can write before the food coma sets in.

First off, I apologize for the title of the post but I was too lazy to think of anything less cheesy. Secondly, I recall posting a few entries ago about how there are certain directors whom one can safely namedrop around film students without falling victim to judgment and Gus van Sant was one such director. His newest film 'Milk' is further proof as to exactly why this man is considered a moviemaking genius.

'Milk' is one of those films that manages to be powerful and emotional without seeming preachy or heavy-handed. One that manages to bring a smile to your face, a chuckle to your lips but also tears to your eyes. It is a film that is still so socially and politically relevant today that I had almost wished it had been released just a little bit sooner. It is a film that inspires and enlightens and moves you so deeply that the minute it ends you wish you had the time to just sit in the theater and wait for it to start all over again. It is a film that exceeded my already high expectations and it's been too long since a film has done just that.

Based on a true story, 'Milk' recounts the personal and political life of Harvey Milk (Sean Penn), from his struggle to become California's first openly gay elected official during the tumultuous times of the 1970s to his assassination by San Francisco Supervisor Dan White (Josh Brolin). Van Sant adds real archived footage from the time period throughout his film which not only serves to make the whole experience more realistic but also shows us that he's not exaggerating some of these characters...not shoving caricatures of people down our throats. Anti-gay activist Anita Bryant, for example, was portrayed entirely through archived footage.

This film has Oscar contender written all over it, and I have no doubt Sean Penn will be nominated. Of course never having known the real Harvey Milk, I can't say if Penn's portrayal of him is accurate, but I can say that his portrayal of a man struggling to find his voice and give one to a group of people desperately searching for a leader is flawless. He is not just a gay man facing a homophobic society but a man discovering his purpose in life at 45-years-old and risking everything to pursue it. Not to mention...I don't think I've seen Penn smile so much in a role since Fast Times at Ridgemont High which was what...25 years ago??

James Franco gives an admirable performance as Scottie Smith (probably his best in a dramatic role), Milk's lover during the early 1970s. Though any impressive acting was generally overshadowed by all the making-out he had to do with Sean Penn which one could consider to be more impressive. I also appreciated Van Sant and Josh Brolin's efforts to portray San Francisco Supervisor Dan White as a complex individual plagued by self-doubt and insecurities and not just a homophobic psychopath. It is very clear in 'Milk' that White's motivation for killing Milk (and Mayor Boscome played by Victor Garber) was the loss of his position and respect among his peers and not because of any real homophobic feelings. My favorite character, however, had to be Emile Hirsch's Cleve Jones, hustler turned gay activist, who worked alongside Milk for years. His sassy quips, witty remarks, and overall general attitude of childish naivete and excitement mixed with the jaded world view of someone who has had to grow up way too fast was absolutely adorable and completely lovable (not to mention he has the most amazingly funky dance moves).

A large part of the film deals with Milk's struggle to repeal California's Proposition 6 in 1978 which would've banned any homosexual and anyone who supported gay rights from working in CA public schools. I wish this film had been released a few weeks ago before the passing of CA's Prop 8. It is hard for me to imagine anyone watching this film and voting yes to Prop 8. It is hard for me to imagine anyone watching this film and not being inspired by this story. Not being filled with hope.

This wasn't merely a story about gay rights but human rights. It is something people of all ethnicities, races, genders and sexual orientations can enjoy and be inspired by. I know that when the photographs of the real Harvey Milk and his "crew" flashed across the screen before the credits...I couldn't help but wonder...where have all the good men gone?

Lighten up James.

So I'm aware that the point of reviewing a film is to do so before everyone on the planet watches it, but I didn't get a chance to see Quantum of Solace opening weekend as I had hoped so maybe some of you haven't watched it yet either (yes, i'm talking to all you Twilight-ers), and this post will still be relevant.

Hm so...I have to give the highly-anticipated 22nd Bond film an A for action but a D for missing the mark on what makes the 007 franchise so great. As in...a D for major disappointment. Then again, this tends to happen when I go into films with high expectations.

To start with the positive, this movie was definitely an hour and 40 mins (shortest Bond film to date btw) of pure adrenaline rush. Bond managed to do battle while operating every kind of vehicle possible...cars, boats, planes with explosions occurring around him every 30 seconds or so. I barely had a moment to catch my breath between action sequences. The hand-to-hand combat scenes were some of the longest I've ever witnessed on film and for some reason involved a serious amount of throwing people into and through all things glass. But as exhilarating and sensational as the action and special effects were, they didn't leave much room for a plot. Or even dialogue for that matter. Which is fairly surprising coming from such a plot-driven director like Mark Forster (Monster's Ball, Finding Neverland, Stranger than Fiction) or a writer like Paul Haggis (Crash, Million Dollar Baby, Flags of Our Fathers and of course Casino Royale).

The first 007 film to start exactly where the previous film left off, James Bond is trying to find the organization responsible for the death of his love Vesper (Eva Green) and well...kill them all. His efforts lead him to ruthless businessman Dominic Greene (Mathieu Amalric), a major player in this mysterious organization, whose villainous activity consists of trying to gain control of an entire country's water supply. Needless to say, it's up to Bond to stop him, but instead of the usual capture and questioning...Bond pretty much just kills everyone. And at the end of the film we still know virtually nothing about this organization other than the fact that they're called 'Quantum'. I found this to be a bit irritating. Then again...maybe I just have to wait til the next installment to get the big picture.

I don't care what anyone says though, Daniel Craig is one sexy man. A little leaner this time around but still looking pretty damn hot. While I adored Daniel Craig's hard-ass, rough-around-the-edges but still playful Bond in Casino Royale, I think they took the character a little too far to the dark place for this film. The suave and smooth Bond who never loses his cool, who delivers witty one-liners and double entendres and generally radiates confidence and control was totally buried by this angst-ridden, deadly serious, grim Bond out for vengeance. (I mean one of my favorite scenes from Casino Royale was the banter between Bond and Vesper when they first meet on the train, but there was none of that this time around.) Call me cheesy but as a diehard James Bond fan, I needed just a little more of the elements that were quintessential Bond to elevate this film beyond just another action flick.

So there were no catchphrases, shaken martinis or cool gadgets, but at least the Bond girl remained true to form. Olga Kurylenko was born to play a Bond girl. Although 007 unconventionally never nails her (sorry guys), she was just walking talking pure sex. Not sure what else there is to say beyond that since we all know no one really cares about her acting abilities. Judi Dench was business as usual as M, and Mathieu Amalric made an ok villain I suppose though I found his fight scene with Bond to be mildly awkward for some reason. Maybe it's the mismatch in sizes (Amalric is little!). A quirky cute Gemma Arterton provided a little playfulness to the film but her bit was over before it even began.

Overall, I expected something a bit smarter, a bit more stylish but all I got was just an endless chain of explosions. Instead of creating a Bond film that could stand in its own right, Forster's Quantum of Solace merely felt like an extension of Casino Royale. The film felt like a stepping stone, something that sets up Bond for potential future greatness but has fallen short in achieving anything on its own. Somehow, this Bond film has managed to end up as just another action flick with nothing to offer to the franchise.

Next time around, it might be helpful to be reminded just once that our hero is...Bond, James Bond.

A Model Comedy.

Role Models is quite possibly the funniest movie I've seen since I started this blog (which might not be saying much). While I enjoyed Zack and Miri, the problem I had with it (and all romantic comedies in general) is that the entire plot revolves around two people discovering they're madly in love but for some reason can't be together until the end of two hours of annoying antics. The writing prowess of Kevin Smith and the ever eloquent Seth Rogen is ultimately what saved Zack and Miri from becoming a total waste of two hours. But the much funnier comedies are the ones like Role Models that include a romantic element but are essentially about something else entirely. Then again, maybe I'm just biased because I want to marry Paul Rudd and have lots and lots of his babies all while laughing hysterically at everything he says the entire time.

Director David Wain (Wet Hot American Summer, The Ten) once again teams up with Paul Rudd (who also co-wrote the screenplay) to deliver this comedy about two energy drink reps who get sentenced to 150 hours of community service at a mentoring program. Of course chaos ensues as bitter and depressed Danny (Rudd) does NOT want to cooperate and irresponsible womanizing Wheeler (Seann William Scott) is way too much of a child himself to be mentoring one.

Normally, kiddie films are pretty lame since the funniest moment usually involves an uncooperative child kicking someone in the balls. But while this film does have its share of physical humor, the real laugh-out-loud moments is the dialogue. While Zack and Miri rely on the shock value of dirty humor and the outright filthy, Role Models is much dryer, much wittier and more sarcastic - courtesy of the impeccable comedic timing of the actors.

Like I said, I have been in love with Paul Rudd since Clueless and he wasn't even that funny in it. And I don't think I'm exaggerating when I say that every film he's been in has been made instantly funnier by his presence (sex panther? man o'lantern? yea I could probably continue but people at work are starting to wonder why I'm sitting here and just laughing to myself). Of course Rudd doesn't do it alone. After some misses in movies like The Rundown and Southland Tales and Mr. Woodcock, I was happy to see the return of Stifler, the role that put Seann William Scott on the map in the first place. Playing a sweeter (and buff-er) version of Stifler from the American Pie movies, Scott delivers some of the film's funniest lines including my favorite which taken out of context would make no sense at all so I'm not going to write it here but will tell you that it puts the words "butt-fuck" and "kids" in the same sentence. Christopher Mintz-Plasse of Superbad fame was appropriately awkward as Danny's mentee Augie Farks, but I'm still obsessed with him as McLovin and I don't see that changing anytime soon. It was 12-year-old Bobb'e J. Thompson who stole the film, however, playing Wheeler's hyperactive foul-mouthed smartass booby-watching 10-year-old little, Ronnie. Every line out of his mouth was pure genius, a credit to the writers for sure but also to Thompson for pulling them off so hilariously. Is it creepy that I want this little kid to be my new bff? Also at this point, I would like to point out that this is my THIRD Elizabeth Banks post in a row. WTF. I swear Hollywood has decided to just crank out tutorials on the various ways to get into Elizabeth Banks's pants.

All that being said, I think this film could've been funnier if the trailers didn't give away so many of the funny moments. Then again, unlike most comedies, I think Role Models definitely has more to offer beyond the one-liners delivered in the trailer.

Hm anyone else so ready for something besides comedies?! And by that I mean three words: Quantum. Of. Solace.

Zack and Miri Make...me want to make a porno.

Now that the election is over, what in the world is everyone going to talk about? Well, for starters, someone please explain to me why High School Musical has managed to top the box office again for the 2nd week running...beating out Kevin Smith's newest comedy - Zack and Miri Make A Porno. I mean...combining the comedic geniuses of Kevin Smith and Seth Rogen with an incredibly hot Elizabeth Banks and PORNOGRAPHY should be box office gold...no? What is happening to this world when a group of singing high schoolers is the most highly anticipated movie of the year? (if anyone actually read this thing, the shock and horror of what I just said would probably make them just stop reading past this point.)

I'm not saying I'm totally enamored with everything Kevin Smith does (Jersey Girl anyone?), but Chasing Amy and Dogma and the first 3 mins of Jay and Silent Bob definitely rank among some of my top favorite movie moments. Plus Smith's hometown is a 10 min. drive from my hometown. (Yes, I'm from Jersey. Don't judge.) That being said, only Kevin Smith is able to make a movie about making a porno...romantic.

So I think the title of the film does a pretty good job of summing up what it's about but incase further explanation is required...Seth Rogen and Elizabeth Banks play titular characters Zack and Miri who find themselves in desperate need of some cash and decide that making a porno would be the best way to make some. As these movies generally go, turns out it's much easier said than done. And of course there are all these unrealized feelings that begin to surface when two lifelong friends finally decide to do the dirty.

So because it's Seth Rogen, the Judd Apatow comparisons are going to come. I have to say that for all the less than PG moments Apatow manages to conjure up, his films generally give off a innocent vibe. Smith's films are just downright filthy. Not to mention that I don't think I have heard the word "fuck" that many times in one sitting since well...ever. Both Apatow and Smith, however, are able to deliver absolutely hilarious films and Zack and Miri is no exception. But because this is essentially a romantic comedy, it had it's fair share of awkward scenes as well. Some may call them sweet...I found they had very little place in a Kevin Smith film, and I was glad they were few and far between.

Surprising enough, Rogen and Banks had more chemistry than I thought a fat hairy guy and a totally hot chick would have on screen. Then again, I find it very difficult not to love any character Rogen plays. I'm just waiting for the day that someone tries to cast him as this evil, maniacal villain. My guess is that it would fail miserably, but who knows. And Elizabeth Banks is adorable and spunky as always. Though I'm pretty sure the Scarlett effect is going to take hold soon and I'm just going to get sick of her since she's in every friggin movie coming out in the next couple months and this is furthered evidenced by the fact that I'm blogging about her two posts in a row.

Kevin Smith's butt buddy Jason Mewes also appears in the film as one of the porno actors. Let's just say... the guy looks good. Anddd if anyone ever wondered what Jay's penis looks like...this is a great opportunity to find out. Hm...Justin Long makes a cameo as a gay porn star which might or might not have been one of the highlights of the film and Brandon Routh makes a cameo as his gay lover. Which I found slightly awkward cause well...he's Superman. (I mean...has the guy been in anything else?!)

Overall, Kevin Smith managed to deliver a movie that had me laughing for a good 2 hours (then again, I'm easily amused so don't blame me if the same does not occur for you), and those 2 hours definitely flew by. Unfortunately, I have to say that compared to some of his previous films, this one was a little too formulaic for me. A little too mushy in parts. And pretty predictable. Then again maybe not so predictable when the moral of story is...make a porno and all your dreams will come true. So if you're choosing between this film or those damn smiling prancing high schoolers, I would say go with this one. At the very least, you'll learn some new ways to jack yourself (or someone else) off.

P.S. I thought this appropriate given the nature and timing of this post.

dubya flubya.

Sooo this post is coming a week late, but I've been busy (and by busy I mean waking up after noon, catching up on tv shows and eating all the time). Anyway, I may or may not get yelled at for saying this, but Oliver Stone is getting senile. For all the controversy generated by his recent choice of film topics, his films are becoming relatively...soft. tame. dull (for lack of better words). I look back on classics like Wall Street, Born of the Fourth of July and (my favorite) Natural Born Killers, and I can't believe it's the same director who did Alexander, World Trade Center and now...W. Then again, I haven't seen JFK or Nixon so I don't know how Stone has tackled presidents in the past. Therefore, it's quite possible I have no idea what I'm talking about. Feel free to read on anyway.

This is the first time a film has been made about a president still in office and it has some people's panties all in a twist (and by some people I mean conservatives of course) since it doesn't depict the president in a particularly good light. I have no idea what the problem is though cause it doesn't seem like Stone depicts W. in a particularly bad light either. The film focuses primarily on the events surrounding the Iraq War with flashbacks piecing together Bush Jr.'s younger years from the boozing and the partying to the Laura wooing days and his first foray into politics.

So I'm not gonna lie, but I thought the film was going to end like 5 scenes before it actually did and maybe...it should have. I couldn't tell what Stone was trying to do. When I first viewed the trailer and promotional material, I thought this was going to be a satirical, funny and overall negative look at W's presidency (and judging by the outroar from the right, I'd say I wasn't alone on this one). The brief funny moments in the film weren't so much a critique by Stone, but just a reenactment of actual events. There are a few funny and ridiculous moments, but they're things Pres Bush has actually said or done. No exaggeration or satire here.

Like I said before, conservatives/Republicans/McCain camp really don't have to worry about this film at all impacting the election. Stone managed to do something I never thought possible (especially from someone who works out of a neighborhood as liberal as Hollywood) and that is make me sympathize for poor Bush Jr. He comes off like a boy desperately seeking his father's approval, doing what he believes to be best for the country, but being manipulated by his cabinet into making mistakes. His only flaw is that he's too dumb and goofy to realize what is actually happening and how to make it work. Yes, I know there are plenty of people out there who believe this is really the case, but I personally hate to believe that the people of this country managed to elect someone so sad and pathetic and naive into the most powerful position of authority in this country. I have to believe he is a little more calculating. A little more manipulative. And generally more aware of the consequences of his actions than he was made out to be. But who knows. Maybe Stone got it right.

While I did appreciate the palpable tension Stone created between Bush Jr. and Sr., nothing else about this film resonated with me. Not even the acting chops of Josh Brolin and James Cromwell could save it for me. Brolin did show an uncanny resemblance to Bush Jr. in speech, mannerisms and overall demeanor, but so does Will Farrell on SNL so who knows what that means (since Will Farrell generally annoys the shit out of me in any film). Props to Thandie Newton for maintaining a pinched facial expression throughout the entire film in an attempt to pass for Condie (that could not have been easy). But Elizabeth Banks as Laura Bush?? Um...what? Words cannot describe how this did not work so I'm going to have to rely on pictures for this one. I mean they made Bush grey and wrinkly, couldn't they do the same to Liz? Maybe they were relying on the eye candy for viewers. Who knows.


Anyway, for all the hype surrounding this one, I was expecting more. This film was a definite letdown. Then again, the same might be said for the presidency it was based on.

Art imitating Life imitating Art...wait what?

There are a small group of people in the film industry you can safely namedrop around film students without being judged (Gus van Sant, P.T. Anderson, Kubrick, Godard...to name a few), and then there is an even smaller number of people where the mere mention of their name triggers exclamations of adulation and in depth discussions about the quality of their films. Charlie Kaufman is one such person. As the bff so eloquently put it..."film students masturbate to Charlie Kaufman." Well film students...get ready to rub one out with the release of Kaufman's newest film (and directorial debut) - Synecdoche, New York.

Set for limited release (NY, LA) on Oct. 24th, I got a sneak peek of the film at the cast and crew screening Tuesday night. No, I was not cast or crew, but the bff was and invited me to be his plus one. And although I had a lab report due the next morning that I hadn't even started, I decided I could not pass up the chance to meet the wet dream of so many film students. (And by "meet," I mean awkwardly sidle up next to and stare. Yes, that is what happened.)

Needless to say, Synecdoche, New York is Kaufman to the tee. Maybe a little too much. Quirky. Funny. Deep. Convoluted. Beautiful. Essentially, this film is Kaufman's stream of consciousness and as writer and director, there was just no one there to edit his mind. And you know the mind behind films such as Being John Malkovich, Adaptation and Eternal Sunshine of the Spotless Mind, while brilliant, is probably not the most coherent and easiest to follow (you know the saying about how there's a thin line between insanity and genius? yea...) Of course this makes it nearly impossible to adequately summarize this film in a couple sentences, but I'll do my best.

Philip Seymour Hoffman plays theater director Caden Cotard (apparently the name comes from Cotard syndrome which is having delusions of already being dead) who is struggling with his health, all the women in his life and his desire to create the ultimate play- a life-size replica of New York City and the people who reside there, including himself. I guess you can say it's the ultimate example of art imitating life (see title of post) except much more complex.

It is impossible to take this film literally and to try would mean missing the beauty of it. The plot skips rapidly through Cotard's earlier years but slows down dramatically in the end as he nears death - an event he spends most of his life fearing. It is packed with ideas and metaphors (some seeming obvious, others much more subtle and up for interpretation). Unfortunately, the pacing makes the film difficult to follow at times (wait...his daughter is how old now? his wife is where now? he's married to who now? he's working on what now?), but eventually you realize it's not the actual events that are important but how the characters interact and cope with each situation. Or more importantly, how you, as a viewer, react to every setback, achievement, loss or failure. It's forcing you to face your own mortality. The inevitability of death. The unrelenting desire to leave your mark on the world before you are no longer a part of it. The futile quest to understand the meaning of your life. Finally discovering how to do it all and realizing it might be too late. Or is it?

Supposedly, Kaufman wanted to make a movie with all his favorite actors so just kept writing in roles, assembling an amazing cast. It probably helps that actors see a Kaufman script and their eyes glaze over with little dancing Oscars. Philip Seymour Hoffman. Catherine Keener. Samantha Morton. Michelle Williams. Emily Watson. Dianne Wiest. Hope Davis. Jennifer Jason Leigh. All provide stellar performances and to go into each one would probably be incredibly boring, even for the nonexistent reader. But in my eyes, Phil Hoffman can do no wrong, I would swing the other way for Catherine Keener, and I don't know where Samantha Morton has been hiding all this time, but I'm definitely welcoming her back with open arms.

Ultimately, I have to believe that what Kaufman intends from his viewers is a visceral, emotional response rather than a logical analysis of the plot events. Everything being up for interpretation. Although filled with moments of dark humor, I cannot in good sense call this film light by any means. Be prepared for something intense (I've been told I use this word wrong but I swear it's appropriate in this case) and thought-provoking. Love it or hate it, it's the kind of film film students love to discuss to no end. But not being a film student, I'm just going to call it quits right....now.

"Fistful of Assholes."

So I'm sitting here in class eating Halloween shaped gummies for dinner and counting down the minutes til I can go home and stuff my face with some real food, and I figure the best way to make this class go by faster is to not pay attention in it. That's where the blogging comes in.

Mostly because the bff is one of those hipster types who takes a certain pride in listening to music that no one else has actually heard of, I find myself knowing more about the indie music scene than I ever thought possible. Unfortunately, not nearly enough to appreciate Nick and Norah's Infinite Playlist. Simply put: the music is good, the movie is not.

For anyone who hasn't seen the trailer (which means you probably don't watch tv given that it runs every 30 seconds), Michael Cera and Kat Dennings play titular characters Nick and Norah in a quest to locate the band Where's Fluffy's latest show as well as Norah's lost drunk friend Caroline (Ari Graynor) in Manhattan. Nick is the only straight member of a band, The Jerkoffs, and is pining for his ex-gf who recently broke up with him. Norah has an on-and-off again ex-bf and a famous daddy (but the details are kept real hush-hush til the end for some reason). They're musical soulmates of course and what follows goes something like...boy gets girl. boy loses girl. boy gets girl back. yay. (and by yay I mean yawn.)

There's a strange pride that comes with seeing your hometown in a film. Of course when your current hometown happens to be downtown Manhattan, this tends to happen a quite a bit. But there is still something satisfying about seeing so many of the hangouts I frequent being used in the film (it's like my life...if I actually had one). Unfortunately, nothing else about this film really satisfied me at all.

First off, I'm pretty sure a snail race could've moved faster than this movie. Long awkward conversations (I think it was flirting but who knows) in Nick's car made me physically uncomfortable and the semi-climactic scene when Nick and Norah finally get together almost put me to sleep (though I was jolted awake by an unexpected onscreen activity...let's just say it involves fingers). It might just be me, but cutesy romantic comedies bore me - especially when the leads are somewhat pathetic. I know we're supposed to be rooting for male and female leads in romantic comedies to get together but it's so inevitable that I generally just save myself the trouble.

The actors were business as usual which wasn't always a bad thing but not anything worth talking about. Kat Dennings as the rebellious teen? Check. Michael Cera as George Michael? Check. I assume Dennings will outgrow this role eventually...people do get older right? And it's her character that utters the classy quote that is the title to this post. (Don't ask me the relevance...I don't know. I just like it.) Apparently many believe she's got big things ahead of her. I'd have to agree. Two big things. Right in front of her (see photo). Seriously kids, when did they get so big??!! Ok moving on. Cera really plays no other character but George Michael no matter what movie he's in. (No complaints here...I want GM to be my bffl as well.) His bumbling awkwardness and gentle sarcasm DID provide some of the film's more amusing moments. Hm...I suppose the one exception would have to be Ari Graynor. Her portrayal of the drunk mess was so spot-on, she must have been drinking on set. Though how she manages to remain that messed up for the entire night without refueling is a mystery I've been trying to solve for the past few years.

Overall, I was over it before it was over. I guess if you're looking for a makeout movie (you know the kind that gives you the warm fuzzies but doesn't require much attention to get the gist of what's going on), then Nick and Norah just might do the trick. Otherwise, I'd just stick with the soundtrack.

From One Addict to Another.

"I admire addicts. In a world where everybody is waiting for some blind, random disaster or some sudden disease, the addict has the comfort of knowing what will most likely wait for him down the road. He's taken some control over his ultimate fate, and his addiction keeps the cause of his death from being a total surprise.
In a way, being an addict is very proactive.
A good addiction takes the guesswork out of death. There is such a thing as planning your getaway." - Choke (the novel).

Here are some clear indications that I am an addict. It was 10pm Monday night. I still hadn't started a paper due 2 hours ago. My roommate asked me if I wanted to go see Choke with her. If I went, not only would my paper be very late...but I would be getting about 3 hours of sleep that night attempting to finish it. Needless to say...I went.

Choke is the novel that popped my Palahniuk cherry way back in the day so it holds a special place in my heart. Of course this also meant two very important things:

1. I went into this film with high expectations (never a good thing).
2. I remember very few details from the book (totally found the above quote online) seeing that I read it nearly 7 years ago.
(So it is highly unlikely that any kind of book vs. movie comparisons will be made here since I obviously don't remember the book, but I think it's pretty much a given that the book is better seeing that a. they usually are and b. Chuck Palahniuk is a literary genius.)

For all you non-Palahniuk lovers out there (yes, these people actually exist) who don't know what Choke is about...Sam Rockwell plays the main character, Victor Mancini, a sex addict working as a historical interpreter who pays for his mother's hospital bills by playing on the sympathies of people who "save" him when he pretends to choke in restaurants. Underlying all of this is Victor's attempt to connect with his mother, deal with the lack of father figure and understand who exactly he is and what he wants out of life. Actor Clark Gregg makes his directorial debut adapting Chuck Palahniuk's novel to the silver screen.

Although there were very few laugh-out-loud moments, there were definitely times where I found myself chuckling or gasping - mostly from the sheer absurdity of the characters. It's amazing how Palahniuk has a tendency to create incredibly flawed characters that you still want to be your bff. Yet, while Palahniuk's characters tend to fall more on the side of disturbing and extremely messed up, Gregg has adapted this particular slew of misfits to be more on the lovably eccentric side. Less shock value, hence less impact? Perhaps.

This is not to say that the film wasn't worth watching. As far as films go...this one is pretty solid in combining sardonic wit, utter dirtiness and emotional self-discovery. It just wasn't enough to completely satisfy. Perhaps a result of my high expectations, but it could've been funnier, wittier, dirtier and generally more insightful. Gregg could have taken more risks with the characters. Victor's bff is a sex addict who has the tendency to masturbate to well anything and everything, yet still comes (no pun intended) across as sweet and innocent. Even Victor himself, a con-man and sex addict who refuses to reform, is generally sympathetic...the full extent of just how messed up he is is just not adequately depicted. Surprisingly, the titular action on which the film is based isn't really explored too much at all but made for great comedy. (hm...choking is funny...does anyone else find that little bit disturbing?)

The actors, as expected, were incredible. Sam Rockwell is perfect as the incredibly flawed Victor. Angelica Huston gives a hilarious and touching performance as Victor's mother suffering from some form of dementia. Kelly McDonald is... Gosford Park. Clive Owen. Hot british accent. Mmm...wait what were we talking about...? Oh right. McDonald is absolutely precious as the love interest that basically triggers Victor's emotional breakdown.

Overall, I'd give this film a go. Especially if you're a Palahniuk fan. The roomie (a bigger Palahniuk fan than I) first voiced her disappointment but relented that the film got better as it progressed. Also, I know I basically said the film wasn't hardcore enough...but still not recommended for the weak of heart. Or anyone who is generally squeamish talking about sex. Yea, you know who you are.

P.S. Stop comparing this film to Fight Club. Different cast. Different director. Different feel. Different FILM.

P.S.S. I doubt THIS will work since no one actually reads this thing but it's worth a shot. Who knows...maybe Shia LaBeouf will play you in a film 20 years from now.

If you want to live you will...read.

Ok maybe not but I thought it was clever. No? Ok.

So I'm just going to throw this out there...I did not originally have any intentions to see this film. But then I became intrigued and really wanted to know the ending and surprised that no one had leaked it before the film came out. Anddd...this weekend consisted of too little sleep and a little too much booze so I figured I needed something that doesn't require too much concentration. Needless to say...that is what I got. (I also want to point out that my bff had been absolutely adamant against -alliteration!- the viewing of this movie but was eventually swayed to the dark side. A decision that I am sure he regrets now.)

So apparently director DJ Caruso (Taking Lives, Disturbia) has this thing for Hitchcock so supposedly Disturbia is to Rear Window as Eagle Eye is to North by Northwest. Um...aside from similar "being chased by planes" sequences, I failed to see the connection between the latter two films. Then again, I am not a film student so someone feel free to educate me please. What I did see was more along the lines of Michael Bay than Hitchcock, especially in entertainment value.

Essentially, the story is about how human dependence on technology is going to destroy the world (sound familiar?). Shia LaBeouf is protagonist Jerry Shaw (the name is repeated throughout the movie so often that I'm pretty sure it has been permanently seared into my brain) and Michelle Monaghan plays Rachel Holloman. They are two strangers thrown together by a mysterious woman contacting, monitoring and controlling them via the phone or any other random everyday technological device we humans are entirely dependant on. Hunted by all sorts of gov't people, they have to figure out what exactly is going on if they want to live.

So as stated above, the main reason I wanted to watch this movie was to know WHO IS THE WOMAN ON THE PHONE?! Needless to say...I did find out and it did not blow my mind. I won't ruin it for everyone else so if you're really desperate to know...watch the movie. Or go read some other blog (themoviespoiler.com is a good one). Or just ask me in person if you happen to know who I am. I can tell you that the mysterious lady is voiced by actress Julianne Moore. Yep...now you're going to listen real closely aren't you?

Anyway, the first hour of the film definitely made my adrenaline sky rocket. Huge scenes of flipping cars, endless explosions, car chases, running, screaming. Stuff that really gets you going...I think I might have been panting from the exertion of following everything that was going on. The bff literally had his hand over his mouth the entire time. But then it just descended into all kinds of madness...albeit predictable chaos (if such a thing exists). The movie was pretty absurd to begin with, but then it just becomes too ridiculous. Too over the top. And altogether too predictable.

I will shamelessly admit that I like Shia LaBeouf in a 'I want him to be my new bff' kind of way because c'mon...he's witty and a pretty decent actor and seems pretty cool to boot as long as we don't let him do any driving (sorry, had to do it). But all that aside, he is entirely unconvincing as an adult action hero. I know this is supposedly his transition from boy to man, but I think it might be a little too early. Watching Even Steven jump and fight and tackle grown men was just not believable...and trust me, I tried. Transformers worked because Shia was essentially a boy playing with toys (really big toys that had the potential to destroy the world but still...toys). And the Transformers did all the heavy lifting (and are just really cool - who can't wait for the second one?!). So...sorry Shia (and all you other boys out there) but sporting facial hair and a blazer does not automatically make you a man. As for Michelle Monaghan? One word: overused. This woman keeps popping up in all kinds of movies and has yet to impress me with a single performance. Plus she seems a bit too old for our little Shia. No real chemistry there.

Overall, I can't complain too much since it was pretty much what I expected - mindless entertainment with no lasting effects or value. Then again, the bff said a cell phone rang while he was in the john after the movie and he had to chuckle to himself. If anything, I might think twice now before answering a call from an unknown number...or not.

Two for the Price of None.

Random note: The real date of this post should be 9.14.08 as that is when I actually saw these movies and wrote about them. Didn't have a blog then though so it's going up now.

So being a broke college student, I pulled the two for the price of one movie deal. And by deal...I mean I paid for one film and snuck into another after. (Yes, I might have a little too much free time on my hands.) Well at least I'm not the only one that reaps the benefits of my deceitful ways...you lucky nonexistent readers now get two reviews for the price of well...none. Thrilled I'm sure.

Fargo, The Big Lebowski and No Country for Old Men are tough acts to follow. The Coen brothers' newest comedic farce doesn't quite make the grade, but is still far from disappointment. Dark. Hilarious. Surprising. Highly entertaining. Burn After Reading is made in typical Coens fashion though lacks the impact of the previous films (nothing beats 'the dude'). The story involves two (witless might be too strong here) rather "slow" gym trainers, Chad and Linda (Brad Pitt and Frances McDormand), who stumble upon "classified" gov't secrets and attempt to blackmail the CIA agent (John Malkovich) who owns it. Needless to say, they get in way over their heads and chaos ensues. Sounds like your basic action/espionage flick right? Wrong. What follows is a convoluted mess of mishandling and misunderstandings that even the CIA can't sort out. What exactly is resolved at the end of the film? Not sure exactly. The Coen brothers seem to be making something out of essentially...nothing. Yet, you can't help but be sucked in. Just when you think the film is getting a little slow...you're hit with something totally unexpected that makes you jump in your seat...in shock? In horror? In disgust? Who knows...who cares...it works.

What can't be denied are the characters in this film. Brad Pitt gives one of his most entertaining lighthearted performances since well...ever (anyone else notice this guy usually does his best work playing something dark and twisty?) playing the lovably clueless Chad. Frances McDormand is brilliant as Linda, Chad's self-absorbed image obsessed partner in crime. Even J.K. Simmons steals a few scenes as the CIA superior who is just as baffled as the audience as to what exactly is going on as events unfold. And of course 'Burn' would not be nearly as successful without John Malkovich's angry outbursts and the oversexed womanizing ways of George Clooney's random federal marshal character Harry Pfarrer.

So what did we learn at the end of this film? Perhaps nothing. Perhaps that Burn After Reading is still worth a trip to the theaters. And if nothing else...to always double-check the "security of your shit."

Moving on. What am I glad to have not paid for? Diane English's (um...yea I'm at a complete loss as to what else she did. Anyone?) The Women. As much as I enjoy doing and discussing womanly things, I couldn't help but be bored throughout 75% of this film.

You have your generic women characters...the single high-powered career woman sacrificing everything including a friendship to get ahead (Annette Bening), the messy unkempt stay-at-home mom who has way too many kids and is pregnant again (Debra Messing), the lesbian...'nuff said (Jada Pinkett Smith), and the angelic wife who is being cheated on and needs all the support of her friends (Meg Ryan). Sooo basically the story goes like this...husband having an affair with some hot young thing (Eva Mendes)...women rally around wronged wife for support. Friend betrays friend. Drama. Tears. Wife comes back stronger/better than before and discovers herself in the process. Everyone makes up in the end. Oops...did I give too much away? Or is that not the exact predictable plot of almost every chick flick? Then again, this is a remake of a 1939 film of the same name. I think we might be running low on original ideas people. Just sayin'.

It is ironic that a theme of the film seems to be the over emphasis society places on women to look and be perfect when all the actresses in the film look like they've gone under the knife more than a few times. Meg Ryan and Annette Bening (who I love and adore but come on...) don't even look real anymore. At least we got a cameo by a very realistic looking Carrie Fisher. Barely recognizable actually. We've definitely come a long way since the gold-bikini wearing Princess Leia days.
VS.

And English was NOT kidding around with the title. Absolutely NO men appear in this film. Even all the extras on set were women. I'm down with the girl power and all but I'm not gonna lie...some male eye candy might have kept me a little more captivated.

Ok so not to be a total Debbie Downer, I have to admit there were a few brief moments when I found myself smiling. Mostly when Debra Messing's character is giving birth...(I know it doesn't sound it, but that part was actually funny) and when Mrs. Will Smith was getting all lesbian (or was that just...awkward chuckling?). And to be fair...'Burn' might have been a tough act to follow.

So yes, if you're looking for some quality bonding time with the girlfriends that doesn't involve talking to each other...or just have some time to kill and happened to already be in the theater having just watched a different movie...then by all means...I say go for it. Otherwise...you might or might not have some better things to do with your life.

Hello.

Reality bites. (And no, I'm not just referring to the 1994 film starring Indie Queen Winona Ryder.) And to remedy this issue with reality, I've chosen to spend a considerable portion of my free time outside of it.

So welcome to the confessions of a film addict.

Mostly because I enjoy any activity that allows me to procrastinate and some pushing from the bff (who will probably be the only one to actually read this thing)...I have decided to essentially take a break from life by blogging about my breaks from life.

Please keep in mind that I actually know NOTHING about movies other than the fact that I love watching them and have watched a considerably large number of them. I am not a film student nor have I ever really studied film so there probably won't be any discussions about how meaning is derived from the subtle nuances created by a certain lighting technique blah blah blah. If you just want a simple breakdown of what a movie is about and if I think you should go see it or not...then this is the place for you. Otherwise...I guess this is really just a place for me.

So feel free to disagree or agree or just leave random comments or...not. Thanks.