Author: Jandy Page 139 of 145

Harry Potter casting

I hope Emma Watson doesn’t leave the Harry Potter films! I understand if she wants to consider other options than acting, and I understand that she may be reluctant to commit four more years of her life to the Potter films, but…for the sake of the films, I hope she decides to stay. It’s interesting that she’s reconsidering acting as a career, while both Daniel Radcliffe and Rupert Grint seem to be trying to stick with acting (they both have indie films out, as well…Emma doesn’t). Reason being, she’s a much better actor than either of them, IMHO. If she wanted it, she could easily have a future acting career. And I want to see every bit of it!

Eeeeee!

So I had this poetry explication that I wrote last week, about which I was a bit concerned. Firstly, because I don’t like poetry too much, and it’s always difficult to write about something you don’t like that much (although at least I understood the poem I was writing about, which was a plus). Secondly, I haven’t written a poetry explication since sophomore year, which was…six years ago. Thirdly, the professor has a reputation for being a tough grader (great teacher though, he’s quickly become my favorite; he’s also the one who goes to Redeemer). Fourthly, because I’m always concerned about papers, especially the first one for a professor I haven’t had before. The fact that he’d had complimentary things to say about the rough draft for a book review I showed him made me a bit more confident, but not much.

Got the paper back today.

A few scattered notes on things that could’ve been more concise or better stated, which he was totally right about…there’s only so much one pair of eyes can see, even through a few drafts. But on the last page: “Jandy, there isn’t much I can suggest to improve this paper. Its reading of the poem is penetrating and convincing, and your prose is supple and fluid, yet precise and pointed. This is outstanding work!”

I tend to think of myself as independent enough not to need validation, but validation really feels good now and again. Especially when certain other classes keep making me doubt whether I’m even where I’m supposed to be. And validation from him, with both the respect I have for him as a teacher and a person, and his reputation as a hard grader? Super-good.

Howards End

Thing number one: I am so so so so so so glad to be doing novels in 19th-20th Century Brit Lit now instead of poetry. (This doesn’t help my Donne problem, since that’s a whole other class, but still.)

Thing number two: Howards End is one of the best novels I’ve ever read. I read it several years ago, and remember thinking it was really good, but this time through? Wow. I’ve read more than half of it today, and usually when I have to read that much of a book at one time, it’s sort of a chore. I can’t put this down. Even though I have read it before, and half-remember the story. That almost makes it better, because I can notice all the little details that set up what’s going to come later. Just in nuances of narration, the off-handed introduction of a character of future importance, the one-line paragraphs that say so much, the differences in tone of character that you feel even before Forster makes them explicit. My only criticism right now is that perhaps the characters are a little too exemplary of the points Forster is making about class and the changing of class structure in the early years of the century in England, but I can already see at least a couple of the characters becoming more complex. And even when you think you’ve got a character pegged as to their position and philosophy in life, he’ll throw in a different nuance that doesn’t so much change the character, but changes your perception of the character.

He can say so much with just a few words. I have to confess that I’ve started marking in books…I held off for the longest time, because a) I hate reading marked up books and b) I feel like I’m defacing them. But now, there are so many things I want to remember and draw attention to (in class, but also to myself later) that I had to do it. In pencil, mind you. I haven’t been able to use a pen yet, but perhaps that’s for the better. At least now I can erase my defacements if I feel so inclined. Anyway, I’ve been marking probably a sentence every other page or so. It’s all so good.

I don’t want to read past what we were assigned for class, because that always confuses me and makes me want to bring in things from later in the book that don’t fit yet in discussion, but I cannot wait until after class tomorrow so I can finish it. It’s been several months since I felt quite this way about a book. I love it. This is why I wanted to study literature. To read (and reread) things like this, have other people around who’ve also read things like this, and learn to be able to articulate why I like it so much. I’m not sure I’ve quite gotten to the second part yet…I still tend to fall back on “because it’s awesome!” Which isn’t terribly descriptive.

But yeah. Read Howards End. See the movie, too, if you so desire. It’s very good as well (Emma Thompson won an Oscar, blah blah jaffa cakes), but, as usual, the book is better. ;)

The Last Kiss (spoilers)

I saw a movie opening weekend! And I feel like writing about it! I’ve been looking forward to The Last Kiss since I first read about it on Zach Braff’s blog. He stars in it, but doesn’t direct it, which makes it slightly less squee-worthy than Garden State, but still. Braff was largely responsible for the soundtrack, which is excellent. In honor of it, I have updated the music player to play Braff picks–from The Last Kiss, Garden State, and Scrubs. Okay, I cheated and also threw in some from Grey’s Anatomy, because they’re similar-sounding. And also very good.

Back to the film. Braff plays Michael, a twenty-nine-year-old guy with a good job, a great girlfriend (Jenna), and a baby on the way. Everything’s perfect in his life, but that scares him–he’s afraid that everything in his life is planned out, and there won’t ever be any more surprises, and he’s afraid to be an adult and have his life settled. In addition to that, of his three best friends, one is single and happy, one just went through a nasty breakup with his long-time girlfriend, and one is constantly fighting with his wife about caring for their infant son, not to mention that Jenna’s parents’ thirty-year marriage seems to be coming apart at the seams as well. It’s really not surprising that he’s wary of marriage and commitment with these sorts of examples around him. He winds up making eye contact with Kim (Rachel Bilson), a college student, at yet another friend’s wedding, and is rather vague with her about the existence of his girlfriend and even more vague about the existence of his unborn child, and Kim goes after him. I was so terribly concerned that Michael would end up throwing Jenna over for the new experience of Kim (he does, briefly)…I came so close to screaming at him in the theatre more than once. The actress playing Jenna (Jacinda Barrett) was excellent, and really made it hard to believe that Michael would even consider leaving her. It also stretched belief a bit that Kim would go after Michael so quickly–I mean, I love Zach Braff, but it’s his whole persona…certainly not his looks, which is all Kim had to go on when she first started pursuing him.

But overall, the end turned me toward it. Kim’s philosophy when Michael told her he couldn’t leave Jenna was “Relationships either work or they don’t; the fact that you’re here with me now proves yours isn’t working, so give it up…I could be your last chance at happiness.” And I was concerned that the film would end up endorsing that. It certainly could have. But instead, Jenna’s father came through with: “Love isn’t about what you feel. It’s what you do to the people you love, that’s what counts.” In the final analysis, the film came through strongly that you’ve got to work at relationships…they don’t just happen.

There were some sexual scenes I wish they’d left out–as I’ve said before, I tend to ignore such things, but in this case it really seemed unnecessary to show as much as they did. So I’ll give that as a definite caveat this time. But there’s plenty of good here, especially in the good acting turns from Braff, Barrett, Bilson (who seems a little flip for most of this, but is actually just being her character…wait for the moment when Michael tells her about the baby), and Tom Wilkinson and Blythe Danner as Jenna’s parents. Although Danner’s hair is seriously scary. And also, we need to set these people up with some marriage counselors, stat. It blows my mind that people jump straight from frustration to leaving without even trying to talk with each other…well, I get it a little bit, given my own avoidy tendencies. But when you’ve been with someone for years, and you both clearly love each other (or the little betrayals wouldn’t matter so much) how could you just give up without trying all available avenues first?

Did I mention the music is awesome?

(I post this with trepidation, as I’ve already discussed procrastination-via-blogging with my parents, and now I’m adding procrastination-via-moviegoing to the mix. But I swear, everything is done now, except reading for Tuesday and Wednesday! I’m golden.)

August Recap

Movies

Night Watch (imdb)
This was Russia’s entry to the Academy Awards in 2005, and judging from that and the trailers I’d seen, I was really hoping it would be great. It’s the first of a proposed trilogy dealing with the on-going supernatural battle between good and evil, fought unseen to most humans by races of superhuman creatures (they’re human, or were at one time, but with special senses and powers–it’s sort of like Star Wars force sensitives put into the vampires vs. werewolfs milieu of Underworld). The underlying mythology is extensive and detailed, and pretty interesting as a premise. Unfortunately, the movie was so torn between its concern for plot complexity and its preoccupation with cool visuals that the whole thing ended up coming out a muddled mess. It’s like the scenarist handed them a perfect, pristine backstory, and then they called in a bunch of rewriters and editors who said “okay, take that, leave that out, put that over there, throw this in on top, etc” until you can’t hardly keep track of who’s doing what, much less why or what the consequences will be. This is a problem. I wanted to like it so badly, and on one level, I did. The visuals are good (though the quick editing–pandemic in action films these days–lessens rather than magnifies the effect), the themes are intriguing (the main character, a good guy, has to protect his son, who is becoming aware of the supernatural powers he has, from the bad guys, but in doing so, may in fact lose him to evil…each person must choose his own side), and if the other two parts of the trilogy are made, they may in fact make this one clear enough in retrospect that the entire work is much greater than the sum of its parts. I think that potential is there. Unfortunately, Night Watch on its own doesn’t work.
Average; I don’t know whether to upgrade it because I liked the underlying potential so much, or downgrade it because it failed so nearly completely to realize that potential, so Average it stays.

Scoop (imdb)
You never know what to expect from Woody Allen anymore. I was hopeful going into Scoop, based on the quality of Match Point, and his recasting of Scarlett Johanssen, but also a little trepidatious, because Match Point, after all, was a thriller/drama, and Scoop is a quirky comedy, though still with a mystery/thriller angle; perhaps Woody hasn’t yet regained his comedic ability. Also of concern was the fact that Allen refrained from acting in Match Point, but took a rather large supporting role in Scoop…Allen is a director to be reckoned with, but adding the paranoia and neuroticism inherent in his films to his extremely neurotic acting style is often too much, especially as he’s gotten older. Thankfully, he continues his now two-film streak, and Scoop is an extremely enjoyable, if slight, entertainment. Granted, Allen does go overboard as an actor, and repeats his character’s jokes a bit too often, but Johanssen stands out as a calming force, despite the fact that she does, in some ways, share Allen’s mannerisms (a piece of directorial advice that’s a little iffy, but seems to work for the film overall). She is a journalism student who is visited by the ghost of a preeminent journalist who has recently died before getting a chance to follow up on a tip to an extremely juicy scoop–a series of unsolved murders attributed to the Tarot Card killer may, in fact, have been committed by the son of a prominent English Lord. Johanssen jumps on the story and insinuates herself into the English gentry to try to expose this Lord’s son, who turns out to be Hugh Jackman looking extremely, um, exposable (take that how you will). Tagging along is Allen, as a vaudeville magician who gets roped into playing Johanssen’s father for her little charade. There’s nothing really deep or profound to think about here, as in Match Point or Allen’s best films of the ’70s and ’80s, but it’s a rollicking good time without pretensions of being anything more.
Well Above Average

Little Miss Sunshine (imdb)
I have never been to a film that roused the audience as much as this one did–the entire theatre erupted into delighted laughter so often it became impossible to keep track. It would have been worth it just to experience the audience enjoying itself so much, but the film deserved every outbreak of emotion, both laughter and near-tears. It is, in fact, a great example of the quirky independent film–each character is well-defined with dreams and aspirations, quirks and weaknesses. If they get a little caricaturish at times, it’s due to the necessarily short amount of time we have to get to know them. Think of Arrested Development smashed into an hour and a half. Greg Kinnear plays Richard, the father of a family which includes: himself, a motivational speaker trying to get a book deal; his wife Sheryl (Toni Collette), overworked and stressed as she tries to care for her family without a real income from her husband, but who cares deeply about the desires and goals of her children; their teenaged son Dwayne (Paul Dano), who has taken a vow of silence until he gets his pilot’s licence and reads Nietszche constantly; their young daughter Olive (a remarkable turn by Abigail Breislin), who wants desperately to win the Little Miss Sunshine beauty contest; his father (Alan Arkin), an irascible and outspoken old man who supports Olive unequivocally, but in a somewhat unorthodox fashion; and Sheryl’s brother Frank (Steve Carrell, who is awesome), a recent addition to the family due to his recent suicide attempt. Put all of them in an old Volkswagen van with a faulty clutch for a three-day road trip to the beauty contest finals, and chaos ensues–but so does love. It’s a very successful amalgamation of comedy and pathos, of quirkiness and relatability, of witty dialogue and spot-on performances.
Superior

Ossessione (imdb)
Ossessione is based on James M. Cain’s novel The Postman Always Rings Twice (which was filmed by Hollywood in 1946, and more unfortunately in 1981), and also ranks as one of the first films considered to be part of the Italian neo-realist movement. Personally, it didn’t seem terribly “realist” to me, but that’s largely because the acting style hasn’t caught up with the other elements. The woman particularly overplays her character to the point of incredulity at times. The story, as in the book and American film versions, concerns a drifter who stops in at a gas station and insinuates himself into the life of the propietor and his much-younger wife. Before long, the drifter and wife have planned to get rid of the husband, who is decidedly in the way of their being happy together. That scene is particularly well-done, as neither of them explicity says what they’re planning to do, yet it’s completely clear. There’s also a young girl whom the drifter takes up with at one point (he’s not quite as committed as his murder accomplice is to the relationship), and I laud her performance as indicative of the sort of freshness and realistic acting that will characterize much of the neo-realist movement once it really gets going. Basically, the film has a lot of great elements, but they didn’t add up to a great film for me.
Above Average

The Island (imdb)
Great premise, average execution. Pretty much what I should have expected from Michael Bay. Ewan McGregor and Scarlett Johanssen are part of large group of people confined to a futuristic, sterile outpost due to the contamination of the earth…all except for “the Island,” where everybody hopes to be chosen to go. Except, all that’s a lie created to keep the inmates content; in actuality, they’re all clones created for the very wealthy as organ donors. There are a lot of very interesting ethical dilemmas that could be explored here–the rights of clones as opposed to their “owners,” the fact that the head of the corporation creating the clones has lied to the public (who all think that the clones have no consciousness), the knowledge that Johanssen’s double is going to die within hours without an organ transplant and leave behind young children–but the film doesn’t explore them hardly at all. Once the McGregor figures out what’s going on (a conclusion which isn’t sufficiently explained, either), the film goes into total “free the clones, preferably with as many explosions and chase scenes as possible” mode. Which, again, to be expected from Bay. McGregor and Johanssen are very pretty. And there are a lot of explosions. Sometimes that’s enough, but in this case, with so many big ideas hovering below the surface, it simply wasn’t.
Average

Triumph of the Will (imdb)
Welcome to an all-but-impossible film to review. Triumph of the Will is the record of the 1934 Nazi Party rally, held very soon after the death of Hindenberg, which essentially made Hitler the supreme leader of Germany. It is the propoganda film to end all propoganda films. The question that has plagued film critics for decades is this: is it possible to evaluate this film on its own terms as a documentary film, and separate it from its propogandistic purpose and the knowledge of everything that the Nazi party would do over the next ten years? And of course, being me, I was like, of course! Technique can always be evaluated separately from ideology, right? But now I’m not sure. Because the whole time the camera was proudly surveying Hitler’s Youth Camps, and the whole time the hundreds of batallions were marching through the streets of Nuremberg, and the whole time the people were cheering themselves hoarse for the Fuhrer, I couldn’t help but be horrified, thinking of what would happen–what these boys, some of them ten, twelve years old, would be doing in ten years time. And it’s not as if the whole agenda was kept quiet–in the speeches preserved from Hitler, and Himmler, and Goebbels, and others, though it’s not emphasized as much as the desire for a strong German fatherland, there are explicit references to the necessity of preserving the Aryan race, no matter what, and retaking the lands that were split up after WWI, etc. It’s all there, already. And the most unbelievable thing is how small a man Hitler was. He doesn’t seem to be a strong leader at all. But boy did his speeches get everyone riled up, even though they were little more than patriotic drivel. It’s really incredible, the power he was able to gather to himself. I noticed that watching Downfall as well, but here…this is actually Hitler. One thing that did come out was how demoralizing the reparations of the end of WWI were to Germany, which goes a long way to explaining how quickly Hitler was able to rise to the position he did. See, I did an entire reaction that’s all about ideology. Wow. There’s a lot of rather boring marching and stuff, but even there, Triumph of the Will is chilling to watch. Must-see if you’re at all interested in Germany or WWII history.
Above Average

Grand Illusion (imdb)
You ever watch a film and have the feeling while you’re watching it that it’s a great, great movie? Sometimes I feel that when the credits roll, sometimes I feel it a few weeks later, and once in a very long while I feel it before the first reel is through. Grand Illusion is that sort of movie. For some reason, I expected Grand Illusion to be one of those anti-war movies that’s good, but not terribly enjoyable. But those fears were gone a mere ten minutes into the film, and my only concern was whether the rest of it would keep the same high. And it does. The story concerns two French officers in WWI captured by the Germans in the first few minutes–the rest of the film is about their time in the prison camp and their escape attempts. Along the way is some wonderful comment on the way WWI totally changed war, not only in actual combat (of which there’s almost none), but in the conception of the army. The German commander of the prison camp gives preferential treatment to one of the officers, because they are both noblemen, holdovers of a time when military leadership was the province of the nobility, and this–at least according to the German man–gives them more in common with each other than either has with their own fellow officers. I was a little skeptical of the easy time all the Frenchmen had as POWs, but director Jean Renoir claimed he took many of the scenes from firsthand stories from relatives in the war. I don’t know. Anyway. The scenes of cameraderie as all the POWs plan their escapes, the grimly triumphant joy that breaks into “La Marseillaise” when the prisoners hear that France has taken a town from Germany, and the despairing disappointment when the next day, Germany takes it back (“there won’t be any of it left,” one of them realizes), the passing of an entire way of life in the figures of the gentleman officers, the extremely beautiful section near the end, after the commoner officer escapes and hides out with a young German widow and her daughter–so many scenes worth remembering. In a way, it feels like three films in one, but it makes one whole that’s absolutely perfect. And every once in a while you’ll hear me caveat an older film by almost apologizing for the acting style…no need to do that here. There isn’t a wrong note hit, there’s not a hint of overacting (even by Erich von Stroheim as the German commander); in fact, all taken together, these are some of the most natural and fitting performances I’ve seen in a long time. I wanted it to keep going forever.
Superior

Books

A Scanner Darkly by Philip K. Dick (audiobook version read by Paul Giamatti)
I must admit to finding it pathetic that the only book I finished in all of August was an audiobook that I listened to in its entirety while driving from Waco to St. Louis. And I can’t even really blame school, because it didn’t start until the third week of the month! Still, if I only had one book in the month, A Scanner Darkly deserved to be the one. It’s an excellent example of the paranoia school of sci-fi, and honestly, it helped me understand the movie (which I saw last month), a lot better. I think I ran down the story when talking about the film, but I’ll do it again. In the future, a drug known as Substance D has taken hold of the population–it’s highly addictive and mind-altering, and eventually causes death. The main character, Bob Arctor, is a user and dealer, but he’s also an undercover cop working to out dealers, and he spends a good deal of the time surveilling himself and his friends. As the story goes on, the D affects his brain more and more, causing him to really split into two people, the dealer and the cop. This is MUCH clearer in the book than in the film. In the film, it’s unclear whether he knows at the beginning that he’s both Arctor and the cop, though by the end he certainly does not. In the book, he certainly knows at the beginning that he’s spying on himself, trying to find out who his supplier’s supplier is. His self-knowledge grows successively weaker, though, and by the end, he’s completely shocked when the police psychiatrists inform him that he is Arctor. I thought the book did a much better job with that part of the story, but I’ll need to rewatch the film to make sure. Like the film, it’s very trippy, but it does explain things a little more–that can be good or bad, I guess, depending on how into ambiguity you are. Also, since I listened to the audiobook version, it’s appropriate to point out how awesome Paul Giamatti is. I already knew he was an awesome actor, and it was the fact that he was reading that pushed me into getting the audiobook (normally I disagree with the way the reader reads a book so much that I can’t listen to audiobooks), and it was well-worth it. Even if you’ve read the book, I recommend checking this out from the library or something, just to experience Giamatti’s genius.
Well Above Average

Page 139 of 145

Powered by WordPress & Theme by Anders Norén