Unforgettable

1932-2011

Spring Break Playlist

Last week was my much-needed spring break. I was going to head down to Mexico for some fun in the sun, but then decided it would be more fun to stay at school and chill at home. Luckily, that gave me plenty of time to catch up on my movie watching. Between schoolwork, seeing old friends, and an extraordinary amount of sleeping, I watched the following films...

Happy Ever Afters (2009, directed by Stephen Burke, starring Sally Hawkins)
This quirky British film depicted two weddings -- one, a marriage of convenience and the other, the second wedding of a dysfunctional couple -- and the shenanigans that ensue when their receptions turn out to be in the same hotel. There is not a whole lot more I can say about this movie because it was not very good. It was definitely fluff, but it lacked even the mainstays of trash cinema, such as chemistry between protagonists, good jokes, or a discernible style. Thumbs down.


The Adjustment Bureau (2011, directed by George Nolfi, starring Matt Damon and Emily Blunt)
The Adjustment Bureau was a lot better than I expected it to be. It was about Matt Damon and Emily Blunt trying to beat the odds to be together -- and by odds, I mean supernatural dudes in suits who manipulate peoples' lives in order to keep them on a pre-destined plan. The film utilizes aspects of science-fiction, romance, and fantasy make the audience believe in the obstacles that the couple faces and the existence of the "Adjustment Bureau." The agents of the Adjustment Bureau are played by Anthony Mackie, John Slattery, and scary-as-shit Terence Stamp, among others. They have the ability to be transported miles simply by passing the threshold of a doorway. On screen, the effect itself looks really cool and it brought a whole new dimension to the chase scenes, as agents would defy the laws of nature and pop up any ol' place. The ending was a bit hokey, but acceptable. Matt Damon and Emily Blunt were adorable together. I think this is my favorite of Matt Damon's performances because he was smart, cute and absolutely lovable. A very enjoyable film.


Middle of Nowhere (2008, directed by John Stockwell, starring Eva Amurri and Anton Yelchin)
I caught this movie on TV, though it is on Netflix, and I'd my eye on it for a while. It is about Grace (Amurri), who teams up with Dorian (Yelchin) to deal drugs for the summer in order to make money for college. It also deals with Grace's family -- her train wreck of a mother (Susan Sarandon) and emotionally neglected sister (Willa Holland). The film worked through issues well and broke conventions by not having Grace and Dorian get together. It was unexpectedly good and presented well-rounded characters. I would certainly recommend it.



Red Riding Hood (2011, directed by Catherine Hardwick, starring Amanda Seyfried)
Well, it seems that Catherine Hardwick is carving out a niche for herself. Unfortunately, that niche seems to be teenage love triangles with a sprinkling of danger, accented with birds-eye views of forests. Red Riding Hood presents a new take on Little Red Riding Hood. It presents a voluptuous, all-growed-up Red flanked by two smokin' hot villagers vying for her attention. Said villagers are played by Shiloh Fernandez as the dark and continuously brooding Peter (and the Wolf, get it?) and Max Irons as equally-cute village golden boy Henry. Oh, and there's a wolf -- a werewolf that is terrorizing the village. The citizens, with the 'help' of Scary Gary Oldman, must then figure out who the wolf is before he kills everyone. The film starts out weak but gets stronger as the story progresses. It has a good cast -- including Billy Burke, Virginia Madsen, and Lukas Haas -- who all give good performances. The best part of this movie is the cinematography. It's lit and shot like an old story book, utilizing shadows, candlelight, and distinct colors. My favorite part was definitely the cinematography and set design. Verdict: wait for it to get to Netflix Instant Play.


Hunger (directed by Steve McQueen, starring Michael Fassbender)
I'm working on project about the Irish War of Independence, so my professor suggested that I look into this film. Although my piece and this film are set sixty years apart, many of the same issues appear in both. This film depicts the prison conditions in Northern Ireland and the treatment of convicted IRA terrorists (or freedom fighters). The film is artistic, poetic even in the way that it frames characters and holds shots longer than necessary. The film is shot with a lyricism that distinctly conflicts with the subject matter. Hunger pulls no punches with presenting the struggles of the prisoners, as they are brutally beaten and forced to lived, literally, in shit. In terms of narrative, the film is strange. It follows three storylines. The first introduced is of a prison guard. He says little to nothing, but still becomes familiar to the viewer. The second is of Davy Gillen, a new prisoner. Through him, the audience sees the lives of the average IRA prisoner. About half way through the film, his story abruptly ends and we pick up with Bobby Sands (Michael Fassbender), a seasoned prisoner who is preparing to begin a hunger strike. The rest of the film -- about a half hour -- watches Bobby deteriorate into a shell of a man and finally pass away. It is strange because the only complete story we see is the prison guard's. The others either end early or begin late. This is my major complaint because I wanted to know what happened to Davey and I wanted to know Bobby better. Fassbender was very good, and proved himself to be in the Christian Bale league because he lost 30 pounds, going down to 130 pounds to play the emaciated, near-death Sands. Overall, it was not a great film, but certainly very interesting for the subject matter and style.

Drive-In to Dine-In

In the past, Drive-In theaters were an average way to see new movies. Today, they are few and far between, but attractive for their simplicity and the sense of nostalgia they inherently exude. In contrast, Dine-In movie theaters are attractive for their luxury and may become a norm in the future...but I hope not.

As you may be have guessed, I recently lost my Dine-In theater virginity. I went to see The Adjustment Bureau with the parentals at a local theater, which was recently transformed into a luxurious Dine-In theater. Since I unfortunately have months before I turn twenty-one, we had to go to the "Fork and Screen" theater (rather than the super kushy "Cinema Suites," where alcohol flows like a river and each guest gets a private tray and a barcalounger; I imagine it was designed with a schematic of Heaven in mind). In this kiddie theater, there were four seats grouped together behind a common table, somewhat reminiscent of the setup at Medieval Times if you have ever had the pleasure of going there. The seats were nice; they were super comfy and reclined. All that was peachy.

The food was average. I had expected the food to be mediocre and over-priced, and that's what it was. For food from a movie theater, it was okay, but it wasn't movie theater food. That is, I would have preferred the classics -- popcorn, nachos, or possibly a hotdog -- to sandwiches and pizza margarita. Further, in order to have table service, one must also have waiters, who walk around and talk through the movie. I may be more sensitive that the average movie-goer, but that bugged me.

So, the Dine-In theater was a cool experience and nice as a treat, but I wouldn't make it a habit. For one thing, it was much more expensive than a regular theater and it disrupted my movie-going experience. When I got to the theaters, I want to gobble down popcorn and focus on the movie without distractions like servers or tea-lights on the table. So take it or leave it, but I'm pretty satisfied with the get-your-own-crap state of most of today's movie theaters.

Film is about art – art of acting, art of directing, and art of writing, among other things. Hollywood is about glamor. And one night a year, the epitome of Hollywood and film come together to celebrate the little golden man named Oscar. I love the Oscars. Let’s just get that out there. There are countless other awards out there for films nowadays, but it still holds true that it ain’t over til the fat lady sings and nothing sounds better before an actor’s name than “Academy Award Winner.” So let’s hear it for the Oscars. I enjoyed this year’s show very much and here are a few things I learned from this year’s Academy Awards...

1. Jesse Eisenberg is actually as awkward as Mark Zuckerberg.
I caught one of Jesse Eisenberg's interviews on the red carpet and realized that his portrayal of the socially inept Mark Zuckerberg in The Social Network may not have been all that much of a stretch for him. His speech was hesitant just like his character in the film and some of his answers were just plain awkward. Even during the show, he often looked pained and rarely smiled. Why so serious, Jesse?

2. Kirk Douglas rocks.
Unlike Eisenberg, Kirk Douglas, who walked onto stage at 95 years old, was a hoot. He commented on Anne Hathaway's appearance, wondering where she was when he was making pictures, and on the reaction of the audience to the Best Supporting Actress reel, pointing out that Hugh Jackman was laughing, but Colin Firth was not -- he's English. Then, when it came time to announce the winner, he kept looking at the card and then making another comment to psych out the Supporting Actress nominees. He was simply delightful, a lively old man who has obviously not let a stroke or anything else get in his way. It was a tremendous treat to see him.

3. Dear God, I hope I look like Helen Mirren when I'm a senior citizen.
jk -- already knew that...


4. Technology never ceases to amaze me.
Mid-way through the show, legendary Oscars host Billy Crystal appeared to introduce another legendary figure and host, Bob Hope. Seeing as Bob Hope has been dead for some time now, this may seem impossible. However, the theater lights dimmed, an old-timey podium was rolled out and an film clip of Bob Hope at the Oscars was projected just above the podium, so that it looked as if he was standing there, addressing the crowd. I realize this is a fairly simple task of projecting a video, but the ingenuity and precision with which this was done was amazing. Following this marvel was the presentation of the award for best special effects, when films like Harry Potter, Inception and The Wolfman showed us just what magic Hollywood special effects technicians can make.

5. I love the memorial montage.
I apologize if this sounds morbid. I don't want to bum anyone out, but I really do love the memorial montage. I didn't just realize it this year; I watch it intently every year, but this year, I'm writing about it. The montage depresses me, but in a good way and it forces me to look to the past -- to the golden age of Hollywood and remember some of the figures that make cinema what it is. This year, Lena Horne, who became an inspiration to women of color everywhere when she broke racial barriers, was honored. Pioneer of the post-studio age, Easy Riders/Raging Bulls era Dennis Hopper was also included. Other figures we remembered this year were actor Tony Curtis, who I love, and director Arthur Penn.


If fact, I particularly like this year's Academy Awards because it focused so much on remembering and honoring Hollywood history. I suspect this was to ensure that, even with all the steps that were taken to draw a younger crowd (ex. Hottie McHosts), an appreciation and a respect for the past were not lost. This was especially evident through Kirk Douglas's appearance, the spotlight put on the Governor's awards, and the references to classic films such as Gone with the Wind. I remember thinking that last year’s Oscars were a bit boring, but this year’s were a success. Can’t wait for next year!

Just yesterday, my friend was telling me about viewing Guess Who's Coming to Dinner in her race class. This 1967 film was obviously groundbreaking in its depiction not only of an interracial relationship, but also of a black man who does not fit black stereotypes. However, over forty years later, "Where is equal racial representation in Hollywood?" is still a question unanswered. The New York Times published an article examining the dearth of diversity in this year's Oscar nomination party. You may want to check it out: http://www.nytimes.com/2011/02/13/movies/awardsseason/13movies.html

Thank you, Joss Whedon!

Dear Joss Whedon,

Thank you for your years of service to the entertainment industry. Thank you for giving the world the hip supernatural and science fiction television shows that you have so brilliantly created. But most of all, thank you for creating a group of independent ass-kicking female characters. In film and television, female characters are too often written into supporting roles, only allowed to be wives, mothers, or figures within the madonna/whore dichotomy. But you, Mr. Whedon have changed things, placing women into roles and situations that were new to us.

First, there was Buffy. The 1992 movie was great and the television show was even better. In Buffy, we found a girl who could kick some serious vampire booty and make corny jokes in the process. She wasn't a robot (though there was a Buffy bot at one point) -- she had good traits and bad traits, but she always got the job done, protecting mankind from evil supernaturals. Buffy's scooby squad of sidekicks included her best friends Willow and Xander. While a loyal friend, Xander often took the back seat to Willow, the super brainy witch with a dark side. Later in the series, Willow discovered she was a lesbian. She's not a stereotypical butch lesbian or a man-hating lesbian or a super-sexy, man-titillating lesbian, but a representation of a real lesbian, who has relationships with other real lesbians. For a couple early seasons, Buffy worked with a fellow slayer, Faith. Eventually, Faith decided to drink the cool aid and turned to evil. Nonetheless, she was tough and proved that women don't always have to be good. We can be dark and mean just like male villains, thank you very much.

Then, we have Angel. The central character is the super-cute, soul-bearing vampire Angel, but his spot atop the supernatural detective pyramid is held steady with the help of his assistant Cordelia and Fred. Cordy, who was the Sunnydale bitch-who-owned it on Buffy, moved to LA and helped Angel solve mysteries. She is outspoken and tough; spiders might make her scream by she can kick a demon's ass. Throughout the series, she matured and became invaluable to Angel's agency. Part-way through the series, a succession of hi-jinks led Angel to find the brainy mathematician Fred in a cave in an alternate dimension. She joined the team and blossomed as their personal think tank.

Last but not least, we have Firefly. Firefly was gone too soon, but its short run showed us a host of awesome female characters. The ship, Serenity, was captained by Malcolm Reynolds. However, it could easily be argued that his tough-as-nails first mate Zoe outdid him in brains and balls. She wore the pants in her relationship with Wash, and saved the rest of the crew time and time again. The ship's mechanic, Kaylee, was bubbly and broke stereotypes because she knew everything there is to know about machines. In one episode, we learn that she beat out a guy for the position on Serenity. Then, we had Inara, the ship's resident companion (aka courtesan). She spoke her mind and was in control of her sexuality. She took a commonly stigmatized and marginalized social figure and made it elegant. In fact, she was the only one on the ship who was not on the run from something or someone. Last, there was River. Held in a government facility before being rescued by her big brother, she was slightly nuts, but wicked smart and incredibly insightful. In Serenity, the movie based on Firefly, we learned that River, with her pixie dresses and army boots, was a serious badass with the ability to face her demons and fight off hordes of commandos all by herself.

So, thank you, Mr. Whedon. The characters you have created show weakness, but it is because they are human, not because they are women. As women they show strength, intelligence, and sensitivity that makes them role models for all of us. You also show that femininity and non-violence do not necessarily go hand in hand, a misconception that has been reinforced for far too long. I am truly grateful that someone finally put these figures on TV and only regret that they can only be found in science fiction.
Sincerely,
Alexandra

P.S. I haven't seen Dollhouse, but I can only expect that Eliza Dushku's character is awesome.

Introduction to Italian Cinema

I know, I know, you've been thinking for some time now that your film education isn't quite complete without a familiarity with Italian cinema. As I said in past posts, I recently fell in love with Italian cinema, so it would be my pleasure to suggest a few films to get you started...

1. The Bicycle Thieves (Vittorio de Sica, 1948) -- Okay, so you knew this one was coming, but really -- no education on Italian film or even Italy itself is complete without The Bicycle Thieves. It is the story of a man in dilapidated post-war Rome whose livelihood depends on his bicycle, which he needs for his job. However, his bike is stolen within the first twenty minutes and the rest of the film follows him and his young son Bruno as they try to find it. This film is also has the key hallmarks of Neo-Realism, as it incorporates social issues, on-location shooting, and non-actors. The title in Italian is Ladri di Biciclette, which means Bicycle Thieves. This is actually a much more accurate and appropriate title. Once you watch the film, you'll know why...

2. La Dolce Vita (Federico Fellini, 1960) -- Possibly Fellini's most famous film, La Dolce Vita is a commentary on Italian life after the economic miracle of the 1950s, when the standard of Italian living shot up. The film centers around a journalist, played by Fellini's "alter-ego," Marcello Mastroianni and his sordid affairs with the rambunctious Roman in-crowd. Known internationally, La Dolce Vita depicts a time in which Italian sensibilities shifted and displays the Felliniesque artistry that influenced later generations of filmmakers.


3. Divorce, Italian Style (Pietro Germi, 1961) -- Also starring Marcello Mastroianni, this film about a man trying to divorce his wife takes place before divorce was legalized in Italy. Therefore, his only option is to kill his wife in a fit of passion and partake of the archaic Honor Laws, which state that if someone kills their spouse after finding him or her cheating, jail sentences are minimized. Mastroianni is wonderful as an over-the-top caricature of himself in this hilarious social commentary on the backwards nature of the legal system and Sicilian social codes.

4. Cinema Paradiso (Giuseppe Tornatore, 1988) -- Cinema Paradiso is a film about people who love films. Set in Sicily, it tells the story of a young man and how he came to admire the cinema with the guidance of his mentor, a theater projectionist named Alfredo. The film displays the beauty of the Sicilian landscape and also shows the changes in the island over the main character's lifetime. It is a poetic and beautiful tribute to filmmaking.


5. The Best of Youth (Marco Tullio Giordana, 2003) -- This film/TV mini series is six hours long and spans about forty years of Italian history. It follows brothers Nicola and Matteo through their adult lives, as they take very different paths both politically and personally. The film takes place all throughout Italy and has a soap opera like tone, which will keep you hooked. The Best of Youth is a crash course in modern Italian history and depicts the changing sentiments throughout Italian society.

So there are just a few movies I would suggest to get you started. If you enjoy these, the fun doesn't have to stop! There are hundreds more that you would like. If there is a special place in your heart for Italian cinema as there is in mine, you may also like to check out my discussions on select films on my "Cinema Italiano" page, coming soon. Until then, Ciao!