The other night I took my lovely wife out to a movie that I was personally not all that thrilled about seeing. She was very excited about seeing the movie and had asked several of her friends and co-workers about the movie in anticipation of seeing the movie. The movie was not Bride Wars, Doubt or Seven Pounds. The movie was Quantum of Solace.
As much as I love going to the movies, I just could not get excited about another James Bond film. I saw Casino Royale in Hawaii and was OK with where the story was going until they displayed forty-five minutes of poker playing. I think there was actually less card playing in that Eric Bana/Drew Barrymore movie Lucky You (which I have flipped past on HBO but never watched for more than a few minutes). I thought Daniel Craig’s portrayal of Bond in Casino Royale was different than anything I had previously seen (I am partial to Roger Moore) and the action was certainly spectacular but I washed my hands of that film once the card playing started. Plus, you know there can’t be a high roller card game without a 120 pound white guy in a DC straight billed hat with the size sticker predominantly displayed, sporting a black hoody, oversized sunglasses and listening to gangster rap on an Ipod.
The movie started out fairly promising. There is a cool car chase to start the movie that involves tunnels, hairpin turns and lots of shooting. The action was so fast and furious I could not even tell who was shooting at whom. Of course, I have to admit I am something of a skeptic when it comes to car scenes. As a member of the Nichols family I was born with something of a curse. That curse is the inability to purchase a reliable car and/or have any chance of maintaining it at a reasonable cost (I encourage you to contact your Legislator and ask that we mandate more federal funding for early detection of this terrible curse). So, when I was watching this spectacular chase scene I kept thinking about how these cars were crashing into each other and into walls and being shot with hundreds of bullets and speeding around hairpin turns and stopping on dimes…and I can’t get my car to drive without sputtering on a wide open freeway at fifty-five miles an hour. The Bond car can take fifty rounds to the engine and tires without switching out of cruise control and my car can’t go a mile if my gas cap is loose.
After the initial chase scene, the movie progressed into a sequel to a movie I could not remember. Other than the aforementioned forty-five minutes of card playing I have no recollection of the plot points of Casino Royale. If I would have known that it was necessary to remember the story line and characters from that movie I might have brushed up prior to Quantum of Solace (emphasis on might). For most of the movie I had no idea who had done what to whom and why everyone was mad at each other. Some movies kind of fill you in as you go along as a refresher (The Jason Bourne movies do this well), but not this movie. This movie didn’t have a chance to fill you in on important plot building points because there was absolutely no dialogue. This movie had less dialogue than any Jason Statham movie you can name. In fact, this movie may have had the least amount of dialogue in history of talking pictures. About half way through this movie I was looking around the theater hoping that someone had brought their Mighty Wurlitzer along and could mix in some 20’s era dramatic escape tunes.
One of the more interesting scenes in this movie involves James Bond’s attendance at a giant outdoor play that sort of looked like the joining of the Shepard of the Hills and a Yanni Concert. I have no idea what this play was supposed to be about but I am fairly sure that at the end some caged prisoners got killed to the delight of the crowd. As I sit here contemplating the meaning of this scene my best guess is that the bad guys who were attending this play to discuss their plans to take over the world had their enemies killed as part of the show. However, wouldn’t this fuel at least some questions from the cast of the show? At least in theory, the killing of the prisoners scene must have been in the script (actors don’t like last minute re-writes). So, there must have been a set of prisoners that were casted initially, probably for their ability to act desperate and scared while being caged and preparing for death. But then on this particular show night the regulars were scrubbed for these actual prisoners (I wonder if the Evil Playbill listed all of the understudy names of the prisoners). Wouldn’t at least one cast member say, “how come we are replacing the original cast of the prisoners?” Do you think the Assistant Director of the show went to the principal actors that night and said “let’s really make it look real tonight. No matter how much the prisoners complain or resist really ruff them up good and shoot them in the head!”
One other thought about this scene is that James Bond identifies the bad guys attending the show by using what can only be described as the best digital camera ever made. I know that James Bond movies are known for introducing and displaying cool current and future technology but the camera he had was just unbelievable. It was hard to tell exactly how far away James Bond was when he was taking photos with this fancy camera (it looked like your run-of-the-mill Nikon) but I am guessing he was perched about 10 stories up and looking down at the audience about 100-150 yards away (as the crow flies). This camera was taking clear head shots without the use of a flash (the show was being performed outside at night) that were being sent back to 007 Headquarters in London, England for the facial recognition software to read. I don’t know about you, but I can’t get a photo of me next to the Christmas tree to come out correctly and I have every lamp in my house pointed at the tree and the camera flash engaged!
Anyway, the rest of the movie hums along with various running, jumping, driving, flying, crashing, shooting, punching, kicking, sleeping at the nicest hotel in Haiti (who knew the Haitians were so opulent), visiting a sweet one hundred room hotel in the middle of the desert (where there were no maids on staff yet spotless rooms…think about that one), and revenge (best served cold). All the while, James Bond said pretty much nothing.
So to wrap this one up, let me just say that this movie was action packed (I think the Director at some point said, “we need to come in under two hours, we just don’t have time for all of this plot development and talking”) but if I have to remember characters and story lines from both Casino Royale and Quantum of Solace for the next installment (my sources say the working title is Conundrum of Uranus), I may sit it out.
Warren
Monday, January 26, 2009
Saturday, January 24, 2009
I see your Kim Richards and I raise you a Bud Cort
So Warren's sister is travelling around the country and she stopped off in San Francisco to visit friends. Warren had given her my phone number and she called me and invited me out to see a movie with her and her friend, Jesus. Figuring that everyone needs a little Jesus in their life, I agreed to meet up with them. We went to see an old movie "Harold and Maude." Ashley, that is Warren's sister's name, told me that she enjoyed reading Warren and my post but she wanted us to review older movies. She figured that by enticing me out to see a movie, it would provide fodder for the blog. And it has obviously, because I am writing about the movie in the blog. So maybe Warren and I will begin reviewing older movies. Now "Harold and Maude" isn't really that old a movie. It was made in 1971. Not exactly the days just after "talkies" were beginning to be shown. But I see her point.
She has a blog also and has already written her entry about that night. You can read it at: http://ashontheroad.blogspot.com/. Ashley has already taken the best line from the movie and used it in her blog, so I won't reprint it here.
As she indicates in her blog she and her friend were walking down the street and noticed that "Harold and Maude" would be playing at the Castro Theater as part of the SF Sketchfest. And Bud Cort, one of the two stars of the movie, would be talking afterwards. In all my years of coming to SF to visit friends or family or just in the last year while living here, I have never been to the infamous Castro Theater. There is a reason. The Castro is in the Castro district of San Francisco. The gay district. Now there are gay people all over San Francisco, we don't herd them into one area and cordon it off. But the Castro is where gays know that they can be their most flamboyant. Think of all the gay stereotypical behavior and it is in the Castro; shops selling ass-less chaps, public displays of affection, etc. And it is home to a great old theater. I am sorry that I never saw a show there before this past Thursday.
"Harold and Maude" is about death. Not the old tired cliches about death, but seeing it as the integral part of life. The necessary and inevitable end. Harold, played by Bud Cort, is obsessed with death. He is a rich, privileged late-teen/early twenties kid who keeps faking his own suicide to shock his mother, Vivian Pickles (who gives a tremendous performance, only to be outdone [but just barely] by Ruth Gordon). His mother, having seen his fake attempts so many times, merely ignores his theatrics with a disgusted toss of her well coiffed head or shrilly castigates Harold for ruining a perfectly good evening. Hilarious stuff. Oh yeah, this is a comedy.
Anyway, Harold is so obsessed with death that he attends funerals. It is at a funeral where Harold meets Maude. She is an old lady just weeks away from her eightieth birthday. In contrast to Harold, Maude loves life. She is goofy and irreverent. She steals cars, saves trees, cackles as she tweaks the sensibilities of the established order, and just in general lives as her own person. The effect on Harold is intoxicating and he slowly begins to appreciate his own life as he engages in adventures with her.
The movie is life affirming. Essentially the message is don't obsess over the bad things in life, but embrace each day as if it were your last. That is a worthwhile message. But it is not as revelatory as the critics make it out to be and this movie is not, as some have stated, "The Best of All Time." It was a nice movie with incredible performances by Cort, Gordon, and Pickles. I laughed. I cried. I left the movie theater.
Bud Cort today looks just like he did in the movie. Not! He is forty years older. In the Q & A his fans asked many questions about his career. I didn't know that he had a career. They say that he was in "Mash" with Donald Sutherland and Elliot Gould. I'll have to go back and take a look at that movie. Maybe I missed him in it.
Matthew
She has a blog also and has already written her entry about that night. You can read it at: http://ashontheroad.blogspot.com/. Ashley has already taken the best line from the movie and used it in her blog, so I won't reprint it here.
As she indicates in her blog she and her friend were walking down the street and noticed that "Harold and Maude" would be playing at the Castro Theater as part of the SF Sketchfest. And Bud Cort, one of the two stars of the movie, would be talking afterwards. In all my years of coming to SF to visit friends or family or just in the last year while living here, I have never been to the infamous Castro Theater. There is a reason. The Castro is in the Castro district of San Francisco. The gay district. Now there are gay people all over San Francisco, we don't herd them into one area and cordon it off. But the Castro is where gays know that they can be their most flamboyant. Think of all the gay stereotypical behavior and it is in the Castro; shops selling ass-less chaps, public displays of affection, etc. And it is home to a great old theater. I am sorry that I never saw a show there before this past Thursday.
"Harold and Maude" is about death. Not the old tired cliches about death, but seeing it as the integral part of life. The necessary and inevitable end. Harold, played by Bud Cort, is obsessed with death. He is a rich, privileged late-teen/early twenties kid who keeps faking his own suicide to shock his mother, Vivian Pickles (who gives a tremendous performance, only to be outdone [but just barely] by Ruth Gordon). His mother, having seen his fake attempts so many times, merely ignores his theatrics with a disgusted toss of her well coiffed head or shrilly castigates Harold for ruining a perfectly good evening. Hilarious stuff. Oh yeah, this is a comedy.
Anyway, Harold is so obsessed with death that he attends funerals. It is at a funeral where Harold meets Maude. She is an old lady just weeks away from her eightieth birthday. In contrast to Harold, Maude loves life. She is goofy and irreverent. She steals cars, saves trees, cackles as she tweaks the sensibilities of the established order, and just in general lives as her own person. The effect on Harold is intoxicating and he slowly begins to appreciate his own life as he engages in adventures with her.
The movie is life affirming. Essentially the message is don't obsess over the bad things in life, but embrace each day as if it were your last. That is a worthwhile message. But it is not as revelatory as the critics make it out to be and this movie is not, as some have stated, "The Best of All Time." It was a nice movie with incredible performances by Cort, Gordon, and Pickles. I laughed. I cried. I left the movie theater.
Bud Cort today looks just like he did in the movie. Not! He is forty years older. In the Q & A his fans asked many questions about his career. I didn't know that he had a career. They say that he was in "Mash" with Donald Sutherland and Elliot Gould. I'll have to go back and take a look at that movie. Maybe I missed him in it.
Matthew
Wednesday, January 21, 2009
Samuel L. Jackson = Snakes?
So we have to sign our blogs now? Our regular readers couldn't tell who was writing what. I think that Warren and I have established our individual voices through our writing pretty well. And if the guy who is writing is referring to Warren and not stating that he is Warren than the guy who is writing isn't Warren and is in fact the other guy, Matthew. Again, pretty easy to figure out, but whatever. We'll do this the remedial way for the short bus people.
I like Samuel L. Jackson. I think that he is a great actor. I could watch his performance in "Pulp Fiction," all day. And I have been taking notice of him ever since he first appeared in "Goodfellas." Don't remember him in "Goodfellas?" Watch it again. He's in there. But lately, he, like other actors I have mentioned in this blog, has been resting on his laurels. And the past two movies he has been in have to do with snakes. Now that is just typecasting. I'm not going to review "Snakes on a Plane." I saw it. I thought that it was kind of dumb. Not much dumber than any other movies in the genre, but dumber than the movies I feel like writing about.
I just watched "Black Snake Moan." Mostly because I heard that it had a naked Christina Ricci in it, as well as Sam Jackson. The previews of the movie made the movie seem like it would be an old south, funky voodoo vibe kind of movie. And it was. A lot of blues music in the soundtrack and all the main characters had devils and demons in their minds. It was sensual and dark. The movie was written and directed by the same guy who wrote and directed "Hustle and Flow." So it came with pedigree.
The plot revolves around Christina Ricci playing Rae, a small-southern-town slut. Sorry for that bad word there, but really there is no other way to describe her. When she is drunk or high, she writhes on the ground, 'gets the fever', and has sex with whatever man is around. Easy to see what her demon is. A pretty, trashy, southern, young girl who has sex indiscriminately = child abuse. The movie reveals that truth as the plot develops. She keeps her demon at bay as long as her man, Justin Timberlake, is in town. Wait. How did he get in here? Yeah, Mr. Timberlake is playing a young man who intends to join the army, who is currently shacking up permanent-like with Ricci.
Anyway, Timberlake goes off to Memphis or somewhere to undergo basic training. Leaving Rae alone by herself. Well, you know no good will come of that. Rae parties with friends, drinks, takes drugs, loses her clothes and has sex. Later a friend of Justin Timberlake is driving a still addled Ricci home and he starts to get stirrings in his loins. Naturally he forgets what a good friend he is to Timberlake and makes a move on Ricci. Ricci is aware enough to reject him (this guy should have started his moves sooner) and he beats her up and throws her out of his truck on the side of the road.
Samuel L. Jackson (remember him, this blog entry started with a discussion of him) plays Lazarus, an old black man. Quite a stretch for Jackson to play. Lazarus lives by himself way out of town and grows vegetables to sell in town. Now I didn't think that in the 21st century people could still grow produce to sell in town and still hardscrabble out a real living, but apparently in rural Tennessee, you can. Lazarus finds Rae, cleans her up and is about to let her go on her way, when she does what she does whenever she is in the presence of a man and she catches 'the fever.' She strips down, makes googly-eyes at the old man and offers to pay back his kindness with a roll in the sack. Lazarus is astonished and appalled. And that is when he realizes that he must cure her sickness. So he chains her to his radiator in his house.
Thus we get to the controversial element of this movie. I seem to be seeing movies lately that have caused a stir. People protested at some showing of this movie because it depicts an old black man chaining up a pretty young white woman. This image is offensive on so many levels. But as preposterous as all of this sounds, the movie made it all seem plausible. Anyway, eventually Rae stops acting so crazy. Lazarus takes the chain off, buys her some real clothes, they go out for a night on the town and in the process both soften a little and they connect on some level wherein they now have an understanding of each other's internal pain.
Timberlake flames out at boot camp, something about his personal demons won't allow him to shoot a gun. He comes home, and misunderstanding the relationship Rae and Lazarus have developed, he threatens violence. Rae and Lazarus' relationship is purely platonic, but you can see why Timberlake would jump to the wrong conclusions given her previous behavior. The movie ends with no solid conclusion. There is no sappy - everyone's demons are exorcised - ending. I guess the message is, we all have to find someone to love and who loves us regardless of our demons.
It was a good movie. Catch it now that it is on DVD. But it didn't exactly live up to my expectations. I think this director, Carl Brewer is his name incidentally, just scraped the surface of the emotions and drama necessary to correctly portray the story he was trying to tell. Christina Ricci does get naked quite a bit, so it does have that going for it.
Oh yeah, I forgot to mention. Rae's mother is played by Kim Richards. Don't know the name? She was the little girl in the old Disney flick, "Escape from Witch Mountain." Carl Brewer had lusted after the actress since that movie was made and he was determined to have her in his movie. I just think that is cool. And creepy.
Matthew
I like Samuel L. Jackson. I think that he is a great actor. I could watch his performance in "Pulp Fiction," all day. And I have been taking notice of him ever since he first appeared in "Goodfellas." Don't remember him in "Goodfellas?" Watch it again. He's in there. But lately, he, like other actors I have mentioned in this blog, has been resting on his laurels. And the past two movies he has been in have to do with snakes. Now that is just typecasting. I'm not going to review "Snakes on a Plane." I saw it. I thought that it was kind of dumb. Not much dumber than any other movies in the genre, but dumber than the movies I feel like writing about.
I just watched "Black Snake Moan." Mostly because I heard that it had a naked Christina Ricci in it, as well as Sam Jackson. The previews of the movie made the movie seem like it would be an old south, funky voodoo vibe kind of movie. And it was. A lot of blues music in the soundtrack and all the main characters had devils and demons in their minds. It was sensual and dark. The movie was written and directed by the same guy who wrote and directed "Hustle and Flow." So it came with pedigree.
The plot revolves around Christina Ricci playing Rae, a small-southern-town slut. Sorry for that bad word there, but really there is no other way to describe her. When she is drunk or high, she writhes on the ground, 'gets the fever', and has sex with whatever man is around. Easy to see what her demon is. A pretty, trashy, southern, young girl who has sex indiscriminately = child abuse. The movie reveals that truth as the plot develops. She keeps her demon at bay as long as her man, Justin Timberlake, is in town. Wait. How did he get in here? Yeah, Mr. Timberlake is playing a young man who intends to join the army, who is currently shacking up permanent-like with Ricci.
Anyway, Timberlake goes off to Memphis or somewhere to undergo basic training. Leaving Rae alone by herself. Well, you know no good will come of that. Rae parties with friends, drinks, takes drugs, loses her clothes and has sex. Later a friend of Justin Timberlake is driving a still addled Ricci home and he starts to get stirrings in his loins. Naturally he forgets what a good friend he is to Timberlake and makes a move on Ricci. Ricci is aware enough to reject him (this guy should have started his moves sooner) and he beats her up and throws her out of his truck on the side of the road.
Samuel L. Jackson (remember him, this blog entry started with a discussion of him) plays Lazarus, an old black man. Quite a stretch for Jackson to play. Lazarus lives by himself way out of town and grows vegetables to sell in town. Now I didn't think that in the 21st century people could still grow produce to sell in town and still hardscrabble out a real living, but apparently in rural Tennessee, you can. Lazarus finds Rae, cleans her up and is about to let her go on her way, when she does what she does whenever she is in the presence of a man and she catches 'the fever.' She strips down, makes googly-eyes at the old man and offers to pay back his kindness with a roll in the sack. Lazarus is astonished and appalled. And that is when he realizes that he must cure her sickness. So he chains her to his radiator in his house.
Thus we get to the controversial element of this movie. I seem to be seeing movies lately that have caused a stir. People protested at some showing of this movie because it depicts an old black man chaining up a pretty young white woman. This image is offensive on so many levels. But as preposterous as all of this sounds, the movie made it all seem plausible. Anyway, eventually Rae stops acting so crazy. Lazarus takes the chain off, buys her some real clothes, they go out for a night on the town and in the process both soften a little and they connect on some level wherein they now have an understanding of each other's internal pain.
Timberlake flames out at boot camp, something about his personal demons won't allow him to shoot a gun. He comes home, and misunderstanding the relationship Rae and Lazarus have developed, he threatens violence. Rae and Lazarus' relationship is purely platonic, but you can see why Timberlake would jump to the wrong conclusions given her previous behavior. The movie ends with no solid conclusion. There is no sappy - everyone's demons are exorcised - ending. I guess the message is, we all have to find someone to love and who loves us regardless of our demons.
It was a good movie. Catch it now that it is on DVD. But it didn't exactly live up to my expectations. I think this director, Carl Brewer is his name incidentally, just scraped the surface of the emotions and drama necessary to correctly portray the story he was trying to tell. Christina Ricci does get naked quite a bit, so it does have that going for it.
Oh yeah, I forgot to mention. Rae's mother is played by Kim Richards. Don't know the name? She was the little girl in the old Disney flick, "Escape from Witch Mountain." Carl Brewer had lusted after the actress since that movie was made and he was determined to have her in his movie. I just think that is cool. And creepy.
Matthew
Friday, January 16, 2009
Speaking of Cox
A seminal line from "Forgetting Sarah Marshall," from Sarah after she has been informed that her TV show has been cancelled.
"Seemingly, the only actresses that can survive are the ones that show their cooter and I refuse to that. Excuse me, but I have a little dignity."
She is speaking out against doing nudity in a film. And she is equating being nude with being a slut. The time has come to set the record straight about nudity in film. First off you don't "do nudity," you just get naked. We have all been naked throughout our lives. There is no loss of dignity in being naked. And nakedness doesn't have to be about sex. I am naked everyday and I'm not having sex. I bathe daily. Being naked is a daily normal occurrance. So nakedness isn't always about sex and it isn't undignified. I recognize that we are in a society with prudish values. I understand that we shouldn't go walking around buck naked. Clothing serves quite well in our quest to protect ourselves from the elements. But being naked is a part of life. Films show all aspects of our lives. But somehow filmmakers have decided that nudity is the one thing they can't show. Or when it is shown it must be so limited or in such a distant shot, or filmed in such a way as to make it difficult to discern particulars. Nudity is labeled bad. There is plenty of bad in films. Certainly there are bad films; judgement of some films may be subjective, but there are objectively bad films. "Dan in Real Life," comes to mind. There are bad things in films: dismembered bodies, scenes of incest, racist depictions of ethnic groups, etc. But is nudity really the worst thing that they can display?
It is the recent incarnation of the ratings board that brought all this on. I remember in my youth seeing a PG rated movie called, "Hair." Argue the merits of that particular movie, if you will, but even back then a PG rated movie could display Beverly D'Angelo boobs. Even R rated movies have fallen under the ax of the resurgent prudishness. R rated movies made today aren't allowed to show nearly the amount or the extent of the nudity offered in such classics as, "Porky's." As I referenced before, shots with any actor being even partially naked are shot in such a manner that the camera shot distracts from the fluidity of the film. The camera pans through the bedroom at shoulder height level, displaying the full extent of the room - ceiling to floor - and then either zooms in to an actress's face only or suddenly drops its height to floor level and dips behind a chair back or side table leg or in some way obstructs the vision of the camera. Or, and this is not realistic in any sense, the actress gets out of bed at right angles - feet hit floor, and the sheet falls away to reveal a perfectly perpendicular flat space of the back. Who the hell gets out of bed in such a manner? The effect is jarring. The whole film is shot in realistic settings and angles, until it is time to show actors in situations where certain body parts may be seen. These actors are all self-conscious. The society has made them so.
Again, nudity = bad. I get it. The sickness extends beyond the actors themselves. The internet is ablaze with websites which exist for no other reason than to catch stars, or even non-stars (Paris Hilton/any Kardashian), naked. Gonzo photographers go to great lengths to shoot pictures of sideboob, internet sites exclaim that they have the shots, advertisers support the internet sites and encourage the photographer's behavior. And the stars feel stalked and violated and cheap. Nudity, in any form, becomes nasty. So actors refuse to ever be filmed naked. They don't want to be considered undignified.
Let's examine this. One bedroom scene where the actress didn't freak out about being naked and where the camera pan didn't have a jarring effect was in the movie "The English Patient," a movie made in 1996, starring actors all well respected for their craft. It won a total of nine academy awards, including Best Picture. Hardly a smutty, disreputable film. The scene is Ralph Fiennes and Kristin Scott Thomas lying around in bed, making cute, post-coital small talk. Ralph Fiennes absent-mindedly draws circles with his finger on Kristin Scott Thomas's belly. Kristin Scott Thomas unselfconsciously displays her upper torso. She languidly revels in her lover's presence. She is comfortable, even blissful. It is as if the film is being shot with the unacknowledged fourth wall. The actors are acting as if the cameras aren't there. Which is how films are supposed to be shot. Thus no jarring, self-aware, discordant body movements to avoid exposure nor swooping camera pans to avoid "inappropriate" displays.
All actors, if they are serious about acting, must be just as comfortable with themselves. Martin Sheen in an episode of "Inside the Actor's Studio," explains the true exposure that an actor must be able to commit to. He relays the story of when his father died. He was away, New York I believe, and not nearby when his father died. His siblings took care of the particulars of planning the funeral and he said that he would arrive late, but still make it to the wake and the funeral. Well, complications ensued and planes were late, the result being that he could not attend the funeral of his own father. There was no animosity between he and his father. He loved his father very much and was sorry that he couldn't pay his last respects. Life continued at its usual hurried pace and he never really in his mind got a chance to say goodbye. Some time later he was in a movie and there was a scene where he had to display deep sorrow. The director shot and re-shot the scene, but just couldn't get the right feeling out of Martin. He approached Martin with his concerns and asked if Martin could reach a little deeper into himself and bring out true emotion. Martin reassessed what he was giving out and how better to really act. And he told the director "Okay, I'm going to do this one time, so you better get the shot." And Martin called out from within his own subconscious all the emotions he had sublimated about the death of his father. Sheen let out all the anguish and sorrow he felt. He finally mourned the loss of his dad. To expose that much, to have that private a moment shared and permanently captured on film, is far more intimate than having your naked body filmed.
The current standard is that if you want to be taken seriously, you would never allow yourself to be talked into "doing movie nudity." What self-respecting actress would allow herself to be filmed nude? Helen Mirren, Helen Hunt, Halle Barre, Diane Keaton, Charlize Theron, Jessica Lange, Barbra Hershey, Meryl Streep, Anne Hatheway, Sally Fields, Kathy Bates. Oscar winners and respected actresses. You will be taken seriously if you do serious, good work, if you have respect for your craft. You add to your range of expression by not discounting nudity. Your job as an actor or actress is to expose yourself. All of yourself. Your humiliation in third grade. Your joy at the birth of your child. The loss of loved ones. The craft calls on actors to express all their privacy. All of it. Every aspect, including the body. There can be self-consciousness in acting. There can be no restraint.
In another part of his interview on "Inside the Actor's Studio," Martin Sheen reflects on his most infamous nude scene. The one in "Apocalypse Now." He had not been feeling well during the scene. He had wrestled these demons before and he thought "Maybe I should go here again. It is the search for a transcendent experience." He started doing some karate moves and he misjudged the distance to the mirror. He cracked the mirror and cut his thumb pretty deep. Francis Ford Coppala tried to stop the scene, but Martin Sheen was into something deeply personal. He had the demon by the throat and he was not going to let it go. For his own sake. And he said, "No. Let me have this." As the scene went on and on, Martin got more into his personal pain, into the guilt that he had been carrying. That should be the only concern of a true actor. How best to express the nature and feel of the scene. There should be no awareness of the camera, no awareness of the fourth wall.
Another actor, Daniel Radcliffe of Harry Potter fame, famously did a nude scene. On stage this time instead of on film. This kid obviously has a profitable franchise. Financially there is no impetus to extend beyond his comfort zone. There is no call for exposing himself. But a true actor desires to act. To take on a challenge. To explore his psyche. He relates that it was far more emotionally daunting to play his part in 'Equus,' in the clothed scenes versus the nude scene. "Doing it naked, you take on a vulnerability" He dismisses having qualms about the nude scene. "If you take the job, you take everything that comes with it."
Refusing to expose every part of yourself on screen is infantile and a repudiation of the nobility of the craft of acting. If the audience only shows up out of prurient interest, that is their issue. This is a call for actors to just do their job. Well. Completely. Unabashedly.
So tying this tirade to the title of the blog. Jason Segal, John C. Reilly (or whoever that was in "Dewey Cox"), and yes, even Will Farrell (see Old School), stay true to their craft, even if it is just comedy. They have all committed to doing what is necessary to perfectly convey the needs of the scene and the movies they are in. Can Hollywood start producing movies that are unashamed of the actors' bodies? Can the ratings board mature in their definition of what is appropriate viewing for adults? Can actors let go of their inhibitions and their stilted misconception of the indignity of nudity in film? Can nudity become as accepted in film as blood and dismemberment and other true indignities?
Matthew
"Seemingly, the only actresses that can survive are the ones that show their cooter and I refuse to that. Excuse me, but I have a little dignity."
She is speaking out against doing nudity in a film. And she is equating being nude with being a slut. The time has come to set the record straight about nudity in film. First off you don't "do nudity," you just get naked. We have all been naked throughout our lives. There is no loss of dignity in being naked. And nakedness doesn't have to be about sex. I am naked everyday and I'm not having sex. I bathe daily. Being naked is a daily normal occurrance. So nakedness isn't always about sex and it isn't undignified. I recognize that we are in a society with prudish values. I understand that we shouldn't go walking around buck naked. Clothing serves quite well in our quest to protect ourselves from the elements. But being naked is a part of life. Films show all aspects of our lives. But somehow filmmakers have decided that nudity is the one thing they can't show. Or when it is shown it must be so limited or in such a distant shot, or filmed in such a way as to make it difficult to discern particulars. Nudity is labeled bad. There is plenty of bad in films. Certainly there are bad films; judgement of some films may be subjective, but there are objectively bad films. "Dan in Real Life," comes to mind. There are bad things in films: dismembered bodies, scenes of incest, racist depictions of ethnic groups, etc. But is nudity really the worst thing that they can display?
It is the recent incarnation of the ratings board that brought all this on. I remember in my youth seeing a PG rated movie called, "Hair." Argue the merits of that particular movie, if you will, but even back then a PG rated movie could display Beverly D'Angelo boobs. Even R rated movies have fallen under the ax of the resurgent prudishness. R rated movies made today aren't allowed to show nearly the amount or the extent of the nudity offered in such classics as, "Porky's." As I referenced before, shots with any actor being even partially naked are shot in such a manner that the camera shot distracts from the fluidity of the film. The camera pans through the bedroom at shoulder height level, displaying the full extent of the room - ceiling to floor - and then either zooms in to an actress's face only or suddenly drops its height to floor level and dips behind a chair back or side table leg or in some way obstructs the vision of the camera. Or, and this is not realistic in any sense, the actress gets out of bed at right angles - feet hit floor, and the sheet falls away to reveal a perfectly perpendicular flat space of the back. Who the hell gets out of bed in such a manner? The effect is jarring. The whole film is shot in realistic settings and angles, until it is time to show actors in situations where certain body parts may be seen. These actors are all self-conscious. The society has made them so.
Again, nudity = bad. I get it. The sickness extends beyond the actors themselves. The internet is ablaze with websites which exist for no other reason than to catch stars, or even non-stars (Paris Hilton/any Kardashian), naked. Gonzo photographers go to great lengths to shoot pictures of sideboob, internet sites exclaim that they have the shots, advertisers support the internet sites and encourage the photographer's behavior. And the stars feel stalked and violated and cheap. Nudity, in any form, becomes nasty. So actors refuse to ever be filmed naked. They don't want to be considered undignified.
Let's examine this. One bedroom scene where the actress didn't freak out about being naked and where the camera pan didn't have a jarring effect was in the movie "The English Patient," a movie made in 1996, starring actors all well respected for their craft. It won a total of nine academy awards, including Best Picture. Hardly a smutty, disreputable film. The scene is Ralph Fiennes and Kristin Scott Thomas lying around in bed, making cute, post-coital small talk. Ralph Fiennes absent-mindedly draws circles with his finger on Kristin Scott Thomas's belly. Kristin Scott Thomas unselfconsciously displays her upper torso. She languidly revels in her lover's presence. She is comfortable, even blissful. It is as if the film is being shot with the unacknowledged fourth wall. The actors are acting as if the cameras aren't there. Which is how films are supposed to be shot. Thus no jarring, self-aware, discordant body movements to avoid exposure nor swooping camera pans to avoid "inappropriate" displays.
All actors, if they are serious about acting, must be just as comfortable with themselves. Martin Sheen in an episode of "Inside the Actor's Studio," explains the true exposure that an actor must be able to commit to. He relays the story of when his father died. He was away, New York I believe, and not nearby when his father died. His siblings took care of the particulars of planning the funeral and he said that he would arrive late, but still make it to the wake and the funeral. Well, complications ensued and planes were late, the result being that he could not attend the funeral of his own father. There was no animosity between he and his father. He loved his father very much and was sorry that he couldn't pay his last respects. Life continued at its usual hurried pace and he never really in his mind got a chance to say goodbye. Some time later he was in a movie and there was a scene where he had to display deep sorrow. The director shot and re-shot the scene, but just couldn't get the right feeling out of Martin. He approached Martin with his concerns and asked if Martin could reach a little deeper into himself and bring out true emotion. Martin reassessed what he was giving out and how better to really act. And he told the director "Okay, I'm going to do this one time, so you better get the shot." And Martin called out from within his own subconscious all the emotions he had sublimated about the death of his father. Sheen let out all the anguish and sorrow he felt. He finally mourned the loss of his dad. To expose that much, to have that private a moment shared and permanently captured on film, is far more intimate than having your naked body filmed.
The current standard is that if you want to be taken seriously, you would never allow yourself to be talked into "doing movie nudity." What self-respecting actress would allow herself to be filmed nude? Helen Mirren, Helen Hunt, Halle Barre, Diane Keaton, Charlize Theron, Jessica Lange, Barbra Hershey, Meryl Streep, Anne Hatheway, Sally Fields, Kathy Bates. Oscar winners and respected actresses. You will be taken seriously if you do serious, good work, if you have respect for your craft. You add to your range of expression by not discounting nudity. Your job as an actor or actress is to expose yourself. All of yourself. Your humiliation in third grade. Your joy at the birth of your child. The loss of loved ones. The craft calls on actors to express all their privacy. All of it. Every aspect, including the body. There can be self-consciousness in acting. There can be no restraint.
In another part of his interview on "Inside the Actor's Studio," Martin Sheen reflects on his most infamous nude scene. The one in "Apocalypse Now." He had not been feeling well during the scene. He had wrestled these demons before and he thought "Maybe I should go here again. It is the search for a transcendent experience." He started doing some karate moves and he misjudged the distance to the mirror. He cracked the mirror and cut his thumb pretty deep. Francis Ford Coppala tried to stop the scene, but Martin Sheen was into something deeply personal. He had the demon by the throat and he was not going to let it go. For his own sake. And he said, "No. Let me have this." As the scene went on and on, Martin got more into his personal pain, into the guilt that he had been carrying. That should be the only concern of a true actor. How best to express the nature and feel of the scene. There should be no awareness of the camera, no awareness of the fourth wall.
Another actor, Daniel Radcliffe of Harry Potter fame, famously did a nude scene. On stage this time instead of on film. This kid obviously has a profitable franchise. Financially there is no impetus to extend beyond his comfort zone. There is no call for exposing himself. But a true actor desires to act. To take on a challenge. To explore his psyche. He relates that it was far more emotionally daunting to play his part in 'Equus,' in the clothed scenes versus the nude scene. "Doing it naked, you take on a vulnerability" He dismisses having qualms about the nude scene. "If you take the job, you take everything that comes with it."
Refusing to expose every part of yourself on screen is infantile and a repudiation of the nobility of the craft of acting. If the audience only shows up out of prurient interest, that is their issue. This is a call for actors to just do their job. Well. Completely. Unabashedly.
So tying this tirade to the title of the blog. Jason Segal, John C. Reilly (or whoever that was in "Dewey Cox"), and yes, even Will Farrell (see Old School), stay true to their craft, even if it is just comedy. They have all committed to doing what is necessary to perfectly convey the needs of the scene and the movies they are in. Can Hollywood start producing movies that are unashamed of the actors' bodies? Can the ratings board mature in their definition of what is appropriate viewing for adults? Can actors let go of their inhibitions and their stilted misconception of the indignity of nudity in film? Can nudity become as accepted in film as blood and dismemberment and other true indignities?
Matthew
Thursday, January 15, 2009
I'm running hard towards the end of this week's reviews.
The movie "Walk Hard: The Dewey Cox Story," and I have an interesting history. I was all set to see this movie for free during my Phoenix days of weasling my way into free movie previews. But with free movie previews, there are always choices to be made. I also had tickets for "Sweeney Todd: Demon Barber of Fleet Street," playing on the same night. And Sweeney Todd had Johnny Depp. Johnny Depp is a great actor of renown. And all the important reviewers said that his performance was spectacular. And the movie was lauded as a wonderful movie. So I decided to see the great movie, Sweeney Todd. Yeah, bad move. You would think after all this time I would have figured out that official movie reviewers don't know squat. They don't speak for the common man. Sweeney Todd sucked balls.
Part of the reason it sucked is because it is a musical. Unless it is a Dracula rock opera with puppets, a musical sucks. The better way to incorporate music more fully into a movie other than having a great soundtrack is to have a comedic fake documentary on a rock icon. And that is what "Walk Hard," is. This is another movie that I had low expectations for. I saw the preview. Thought that it looked stupid. Saw the opening scene on the movie website. Thought that looked predicatable. Figured the whole movie would be like a recent Will Farrell movie; insipid, predictable, forced laughs. Yeah, I am still ragging on Will Farrell. He had such promise!
But again, I was pleasantly surprised. Walk Hard is a pretty funny movie. It stars John C. Reilly as the title character. It is co-wrote by Judd Apatow. Where have I seen his name before? I didn't set out to review Apatow movies. I don't think Warren did either. Judd, and his cohorts, are just talented, funny guys. Reilly lately has been playing the same hapless shnook for a few movies in a row. The latest being his movie with Will Farrell, The Stepbrothers, which Warren reviewed earlier. But I will give a pass to John C. for the moment. First, he hasn't done as many movies as Farrell reprising essentially the same role. Second, he is extremely funny in this role. Bluntly, I think that Reilly is a better actor and can probably pull off doing the same character over and over again longer than Farrell because Reilly adds enough subtle nuances to his performances and his movies have better scripts than Farrell's.
This script follows a fairly predictable arc. But that is the point. Rock biopics are fairly predictable. Rock star has humble beginnings. Tradgedy befalls the protaganist who resolves to overcome the initial setback. In this case, he slices his brother in half while playing around with machettes in the barn. He learns to play the blues from an old black man down at the county store. He plays a school talent competition where the demon music he and his band play incite a riot. He marries his 14 year-old high school sweetheart and immediately has three kids. He works as a janitor at a nightclub where he gets his big break. He records his seminal song, Walk Hard, which becomes a hit and rockets him to stardom. He tries marijuana. He ditches his high school sweetheart for a cute backup singer, Jenna Fischer from The Office. He does cocaine. Somewhere in there he does other drugs. His backup singer ditches him in disgust of the pathetic mess he has become. Decades later he cleans up his act, reconnects with his kids, reconnects with Jenna Fischer, and in the final scene he plays a new song which sums up his entire career at a benefit concert that he is being honored at. Immediately after which he dies. Rock Legend.
Like I said, fairly predicatble. And a perfect parody of all the rock documentaries that have come out lately. Instead of going blind like Ray Charles, he loses his sense of smell after cutting his brother in half. In many other scenes, cliches are played out. Funny stuff. On just the script alone it would be a good movie. I have to say, though, that it has one other thing going for it. I liked the songs. They were well written. Kind of catchy. I have found myself humming them on occasion. Yes, they are written for humorous effect and there are plenty of double entendres, but that adds to their appeal.
I end this review on a disturbing note. There is one scene in the movie, towards the middle. Dewey Cox has achieved success. He is usually away from his family, travelling on the road to give as many concerts as he can. We all know that the road can be a hard place. In the scene, it is after the concert (or maybe before, you can't really tell). Dewey and his band and various hangers on are in a hotel room partying. His wife calls him on the phone. At this point it is still his high school sweetheart. As he is talking to her, the camera pans back and we can see that there are naked people all over the place. And then off to the right of the screen, the bottom portion of a naked male torso appears. At face height is a dangling johnson. Dewey says something like "Wait a minute man. I'm talking to my wife." And then to his wife on the phone, "Oh, that was just so and so, one of the roadies." My point being, why must we have graphic nudity in films? Warren brought this up in an earlier post. I will need to address this issue.
Matthew
Part of the reason it sucked is because it is a musical. Unless it is a Dracula rock opera with puppets, a musical sucks. The better way to incorporate music more fully into a movie other than having a great soundtrack is to have a comedic fake documentary on a rock icon. And that is what "Walk Hard," is. This is another movie that I had low expectations for. I saw the preview. Thought that it looked stupid. Saw the opening scene on the movie website. Thought that looked predicatable. Figured the whole movie would be like a recent Will Farrell movie; insipid, predictable, forced laughs. Yeah, I am still ragging on Will Farrell. He had such promise!
But again, I was pleasantly surprised. Walk Hard is a pretty funny movie. It stars John C. Reilly as the title character. It is co-wrote by Judd Apatow. Where have I seen his name before? I didn't set out to review Apatow movies. I don't think Warren did either. Judd, and his cohorts, are just talented, funny guys. Reilly lately has been playing the same hapless shnook for a few movies in a row. The latest being his movie with Will Farrell, The Stepbrothers, which Warren reviewed earlier. But I will give a pass to John C. for the moment. First, he hasn't done as many movies as Farrell reprising essentially the same role. Second, he is extremely funny in this role. Bluntly, I think that Reilly is a better actor and can probably pull off doing the same character over and over again longer than Farrell because Reilly adds enough subtle nuances to his performances and his movies have better scripts than Farrell's.
This script follows a fairly predictable arc. But that is the point. Rock biopics are fairly predictable. Rock star has humble beginnings. Tradgedy befalls the protaganist who resolves to overcome the initial setback. In this case, he slices his brother in half while playing around with machettes in the barn. He learns to play the blues from an old black man down at the county store. He plays a school talent competition where the demon music he and his band play incite a riot. He marries his 14 year-old high school sweetheart and immediately has three kids. He works as a janitor at a nightclub where he gets his big break. He records his seminal song, Walk Hard, which becomes a hit and rockets him to stardom. He tries marijuana. He ditches his high school sweetheart for a cute backup singer, Jenna Fischer from The Office. He does cocaine. Somewhere in there he does other drugs. His backup singer ditches him in disgust of the pathetic mess he has become. Decades later he cleans up his act, reconnects with his kids, reconnects with Jenna Fischer, and in the final scene he plays a new song which sums up his entire career at a benefit concert that he is being honored at. Immediately after which he dies. Rock Legend.
Like I said, fairly predicatble. And a perfect parody of all the rock documentaries that have come out lately. Instead of going blind like Ray Charles, he loses his sense of smell after cutting his brother in half. In many other scenes, cliches are played out. Funny stuff. On just the script alone it would be a good movie. I have to say, though, that it has one other thing going for it. I liked the songs. They were well written. Kind of catchy. I have found myself humming them on occasion. Yes, they are written for humorous effect and there are plenty of double entendres, but that adds to their appeal.
I end this review on a disturbing note. There is one scene in the movie, towards the middle. Dewey Cox has achieved success. He is usually away from his family, travelling on the road to give as many concerts as he can. We all know that the road can be a hard place. In the scene, it is after the concert (or maybe before, you can't really tell). Dewey and his band and various hangers on are in a hotel room partying. His wife calls him on the phone. At this point it is still his high school sweetheart. As he is talking to her, the camera pans back and we can see that there are naked people all over the place. And then off to the right of the screen, the bottom portion of a naked male torso appears. At face height is a dangling johnson. Dewey says something like "Wait a minute man. I'm talking to my wife." And then to his wife on the phone, "Oh, that was just so and so, one of the roadies." My point being, why must we have graphic nudity in films? Warren brought this up in an earlier post. I will need to address this issue.
Matthew
Kristin Bell is Hot (and talented)
I saw "Forgetting Sarah Marshall" for the first time back in Phoenix when it first came out. I actually saw it with Warren, Jenny, and our good friend Tim. We all laughed so much during the movie that afterward when we compared notes of what were the funniest lines, we couldn't agree because 1) there were so many good lines, and 2) at various times one of us was laughing so hard we missed the particular line that another one of us was quoting. Needless to say, this movie is great. Or so I thought. After seeing it again, which I committed to do after seeing it in the theater because I wanted to catch all the good lines again, I have to say that this comedy is truly funny, but not as great as I remember. Still, if I were in the DVD buying mood, I would pick this one up. And I still highly recommend it.
View some of the great quotes at http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0800039/quotes. My favorite, the one I will be using the most is: "You don't need to put your P in a V right now." "No, I need to B my L all over somone's T's."
A quick summary of the plot is: hot Kristin Bell as Sarah Marshall of the title is a TV actress, star of the hit show, "Crime Scene: Scene of the Crime," is dating Peter Bretter, the soundtrack composer of the show. He is morose and self-loathing. She gets sick of his ass and dumps him. While he is naked. In another post, I will discuss my whole attitude about the nudity, but Warren has prefaced it in his post on "Eastern Promises, Southern Exposure." Oh yeah, Peter Bretter is played by the screenwriter of this movie, Jason Segal. Jason Segal is part of the Judd Apatow stable of compatriots. Judd seems to be getting quite the exposure on this blog. He is the producer of "Sarah Marshall." Warren references him in the Pineapple Express post. And a number of his acting stable make appearances here as well. Jonah Hill (part of the SuperBad twosome) is a waiter at the Hawaiian resort and a loser wannabe rock star. Well, he always plays a loser, I guess. He is really funny here. Paul Rudd, who was memorable in "The Forty-Year-Old Virgin" plays a goofy, loopy, surf instructor. Rudd is always good in anything he does.
Anyway, Peter goes to Hawaii to 'forget Sarah Marshall'. Sarah is at the same resort with a parody-perfect, English, post-rehab, rock star, Aldous Snow (Russell Brand). Peter is encouraged to forget Sarah by pursuing a cute, hotel desk clerk, Rachel Jensen (Mila Kunis). His chief wooing move is to go drinking with her at a local bar where he reveals that he has been working on a rock musical with puppets based on the Dracula story. {Little known fact: Screenwriter Jason Segal actually was working on an irony-free, Dracula, puppet, rock musical and incorporated it into the "Sarah Marshall," script.} Also in the bar, above the Mensroom urinal, is a wall of topless photos of various females who have frequented the bar. Rachel Jensen's photo is there as well. But research after the fact has confirmed that it is not in fact a real photo of Mila Kunis.
Through many hilarious scenes, Peter forgets Sarah, falls in love with Rachel, does something stupid and pisses off Rachel, Aldous Snow is stupid and pisses off Sarah, Sarah's show is cancelled, everyone goes home, Peter puts on his Dracula puppet musical, Rachel sees it and goes backstage, where we see Peter naked again. As they say, what a unique framing device. The movie starts with Jason Segal naked and ends with Jason Segal naked. Bookends. So to speak.
The plot is fairly predictable, but the particular scenes are unexpected and hilarious. The lines, as I said before, are hilarious. This movie, no doubt, will become one where whenever it is on TV I will watch it. Even if it is on network TV and they censor all the language. It just is a really funny movie.
Matthew
View some of the great quotes at http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0800039/quotes. My favorite, the one I will be using the most is: "You don't need to put your P in a V right now." "No, I need to B my L all over somone's T's."
A quick summary of the plot is: hot Kristin Bell as Sarah Marshall of the title is a TV actress, star of the hit show, "Crime Scene: Scene of the Crime," is dating Peter Bretter, the soundtrack composer of the show. He is morose and self-loathing. She gets sick of his ass and dumps him. While he is naked. In another post, I will discuss my whole attitude about the nudity, but Warren has prefaced it in his post on "Eastern Promises, Southern Exposure." Oh yeah, Peter Bretter is played by the screenwriter of this movie, Jason Segal. Jason Segal is part of the Judd Apatow stable of compatriots. Judd seems to be getting quite the exposure on this blog. He is the producer of "Sarah Marshall." Warren references him in the Pineapple Express post. And a number of his acting stable make appearances here as well. Jonah Hill (part of the SuperBad twosome) is a waiter at the Hawaiian resort and a loser wannabe rock star. Well, he always plays a loser, I guess. He is really funny here. Paul Rudd, who was memorable in "The Forty-Year-Old Virgin" plays a goofy, loopy, surf instructor. Rudd is always good in anything he does.
Anyway, Peter goes to Hawaii to 'forget Sarah Marshall'. Sarah is at the same resort with a parody-perfect, English, post-rehab, rock star, Aldous Snow (Russell Brand). Peter is encouraged to forget Sarah by pursuing a cute, hotel desk clerk, Rachel Jensen (Mila Kunis). His chief wooing move is to go drinking with her at a local bar where he reveals that he has been working on a rock musical with puppets based on the Dracula story. {Little known fact: Screenwriter Jason Segal actually was working on an irony-free, Dracula, puppet, rock musical and incorporated it into the "Sarah Marshall," script.} Also in the bar, above the Mensroom urinal, is a wall of topless photos of various females who have frequented the bar. Rachel Jensen's photo is there as well. But research after the fact has confirmed that it is not in fact a real photo of Mila Kunis.
Through many hilarious scenes, Peter forgets Sarah, falls in love with Rachel, does something stupid and pisses off Rachel, Aldous Snow is stupid and pisses off Sarah, Sarah's show is cancelled, everyone goes home, Peter puts on his Dracula puppet musical, Rachel sees it and goes backstage, where we see Peter naked again. As they say, what a unique framing device. The movie starts with Jason Segal naked and ends with Jason Segal naked. Bookends. So to speak.
The plot is fairly predictable, but the particular scenes are unexpected and hilarious. The lines, as I said before, are hilarious. This movie, no doubt, will become one where whenever it is on TV I will watch it. Even if it is on network TV and they censor all the language. It just is a really funny movie.
Matthew
Wednesday, January 14, 2009
Let's Go with a Comedy
Well I finally went and saw a bunch of movies. I actually saw movies over a three or four week period. So if I don't remember some of the details, it is because it has been a while since I saw the particular movie that I am talking about. I am tired of reviewing all these serious movies that play on Encore or HBO, So I rented a few. Actually I rented one and borrowed two from the public library. Yeah, that is what it has come down to. I borrow movies from the library. But this being San Francisco, a big City with rich people who endow the public institutions with decent arrrays of money, some of the more recent movies are acquired on DVD for the lending library. Anyway, I borrowed, "Walk Hard." And then rented, "Forgetting Sarah Marshall." And finally I borrowed, "Tropic Thunder." Until I read the review given by my cohort, I had intended to rent, "Pineapple Express." I still may. After all isn't the point of all this to compare notes and discuss movies in common.
Because my memory and impression of the most recently seen movie is freshest, I will begin with that movie. I never intended to see, "Tropic Thunder.' When I saw the previews in theaters, it looked stupid. The premise was retarded. More on the use of that descriptive word later. I do not like Ben Stiller. He has done one redeemable movie, "There's Something About Mary." That movie was genius. Other than that, all other comedies he has done are crap! Horrible crap! Various people that I respect have told me that, "Zoolander," is great stuff, but they are mistaken. That movie is crap. Not as horrendous crap as most of what Stiller has done, but still. Ben Stiller, much like Owen Wilson, Vince Vaughn, and Will Farrell, had a promising start in films and then pissed it all away mailing in insipid performances in staid, unfunny comedies. Will Farrell and Ben Stiller especially have simply fallen into the rut of doing the same movie over and over again. Owen Wilson and Vince Vaughn may not do the same movie, but they haven't portrayed anything but the same character over and over again. "Tropic Thunder," also stars Jack Black, yet another star who had potential and then pissed away his promise by portraying nothing but the same insipid character repeatedly.
So on story and stars alone this looked like a lame excuse for spending studio money. But then the movie also stars Robert Downey Jr. in blackface. Hello. Okay, Robert Downey, showed promise early in his career, pissed it away (he separates himself from the beforementioned crowd by pissing it away on drugs [but doesn't piss it away in a manner that is different from how so many hollywood stars piss away their careers]), and then resurrects his career by pulling himself together and scoring a summer blockbuster hit. I have always liked Downey, Jr. I followed his career in my (and his) youth. Just before he reappeared on everyone's radar by doing, "Ironman" (great movie, I may review it later), he appeared with Val Kilmar in "Kiss, Kiss, Bang, Bang." It was in that movie that you could tell that he had impecable comedic timing and the ability to bond with a fellow actor to create chemistry on the screen.
The story of "Tropic Thunder," is that these three star actors, played by Stiller, Black, and Downey Jr., begin shooting a Vietnam War movie with an inexperienced director. Each of these actors are a parody archtype of a typical hollywood star. Stiller is a parody of the aging action star, Shwartznegger, Stallone, Willis. His latest movie is a post-apocalyptic shoot-em-up version VI or so. Just before putting out the 6th version of that franchise he had tried to get serious and acted as a retarded farmboy who saves the day and wins the hearts of his entire community.
Stiller acting as an actor who portrayed a retard is what caused all the protests against "Tropic Thunder," this summer. Mentally handicapped people and their proponents were incensed at the insensitivity of the portrayal and the cheap laughs it engendered. For my part I think that 'retard' has been an epithet that has been used for comedic purposes long before "Tropic Thunder." Protesting this movie alone seems to be a disengenious publicity stunt.
Back to the movie. Black is the portly dumb-comedy comedian. I guess that he is a parody of himself. Downey Jr. is Russell Crow. Serious, Oscar-winning, Australian. There are two more, no name, actors who round out the primary cast. Brandon Jackson who portrays Alpa Chino, a rapper who is breaking into acting after already being a successful rapper and entrepeneur, (Booty Sweat energy drink and Bust-a-Nut candy bar). And Jay Baruchel as Kevin Sandusky, the requisite bland good white guy who through his naivite resolves all of this movies conflicts.
A few other important actors in the film are Nick Nolte as the ex-Vietnam vet who wrote the book that the movie screenplay is based on, Tom Cruise as the a-hole hollywood producer producing the film, Matthew McConaughey as Stiller's agent and Danny McBride as a pyrotechnics advisor for the film. Warren in this blog's previous post spoke of his disappointment with McBride. The disappointing career of Danny McBride continues. Mr. McBride is just mailing it in here. He isn't given much to do and he just barely does it. Now I really will have to see "Pinapple Express," just to compare notes.
Okay so the plot is the three prima donna actors screw around and screw up the movie. The hapless director can't control them. The grizzled Vietnam vet, Nolte, suggests taking the prima donnas into the wild Vietnam jungle to scare them into being more serious about their craft and to bond with one another. The director, pyrotechnics guy and Vet have planted cameras around the jungle to capture the true emotions of the prima donna actors as they complete the script. The helicopter drops the actors and director in the jungle. The director steps on a land mine and is blown to hell. The retarded (yeah, I'm using that term, bitches) Stiller thinks that it is all part of the plan and he continues to follow the script. Danny McBride and Nolte land elsewhere to watch the drama enfold and are captured by Vietnamese druglords in the area. Stiller, Black, Downey Jr., Jackson, and Baruchel slog through the jungle, get on each other's nerves, display attitudes with one another, and eventually the conflict of the film emerges. The band of actors encounter the druglord's compound with McBride and Nolte in it. And they eventually free the two captured guys. The movie gets made. The actors all realize how petty they have been. Tom Cruise, the producer, cashes in on a successful movie and does a memorable dance through the closing credits.
I couldn't hope to capture the brilliance of this movie. I started this review expressing my trepidation at seeing this film, but I must say this. It is hillarious. Parody has found its apex for the 2008 movie-going season. Downey Jr. was very impressive. Stiller played a parody of himself to some degree, but with conviction and very funny. Black pulled off his limited role with his limited skills. The writing was good and the pacing was good. As you would expect, there are some crude, cheap laughs, (aforementioned retard jokes and the like). But I was pleasantly surprised. It made me laugh and I needed to laugh.
Matthew
Because my memory and impression of the most recently seen movie is freshest, I will begin with that movie. I never intended to see, "Tropic Thunder.' When I saw the previews in theaters, it looked stupid. The premise was retarded. More on the use of that descriptive word later. I do not like Ben Stiller. He has done one redeemable movie, "There's Something About Mary." That movie was genius. Other than that, all other comedies he has done are crap! Horrible crap! Various people that I respect have told me that, "Zoolander," is great stuff, but they are mistaken. That movie is crap. Not as horrendous crap as most of what Stiller has done, but still. Ben Stiller, much like Owen Wilson, Vince Vaughn, and Will Farrell, had a promising start in films and then pissed it all away mailing in insipid performances in staid, unfunny comedies. Will Farrell and Ben Stiller especially have simply fallen into the rut of doing the same movie over and over again. Owen Wilson and Vince Vaughn may not do the same movie, but they haven't portrayed anything but the same character over and over again. "Tropic Thunder," also stars Jack Black, yet another star who had potential and then pissed away his promise by portraying nothing but the same insipid character repeatedly.
So on story and stars alone this looked like a lame excuse for spending studio money. But then the movie also stars Robert Downey Jr. in blackface. Hello. Okay, Robert Downey, showed promise early in his career, pissed it away (he separates himself from the beforementioned crowd by pissing it away on drugs [but doesn't piss it away in a manner that is different from how so many hollywood stars piss away their careers]), and then resurrects his career by pulling himself together and scoring a summer blockbuster hit. I have always liked Downey, Jr. I followed his career in my (and his) youth. Just before he reappeared on everyone's radar by doing, "Ironman" (great movie, I may review it later), he appeared with Val Kilmar in "Kiss, Kiss, Bang, Bang." It was in that movie that you could tell that he had impecable comedic timing and the ability to bond with a fellow actor to create chemistry on the screen.
The story of "Tropic Thunder," is that these three star actors, played by Stiller, Black, and Downey Jr., begin shooting a Vietnam War movie with an inexperienced director. Each of these actors are a parody archtype of a typical hollywood star. Stiller is a parody of the aging action star, Shwartznegger, Stallone, Willis. His latest movie is a post-apocalyptic shoot-em-up version VI or so. Just before putting out the 6th version of that franchise he had tried to get serious and acted as a retarded farmboy who saves the day and wins the hearts of his entire community.
Stiller acting as an actor who portrayed a retard is what caused all the protests against "Tropic Thunder," this summer. Mentally handicapped people and their proponents were incensed at the insensitivity of the portrayal and the cheap laughs it engendered. For my part I think that 'retard' has been an epithet that has been used for comedic purposes long before "Tropic Thunder." Protesting this movie alone seems to be a disengenious publicity stunt.
Back to the movie. Black is the portly dumb-comedy comedian. I guess that he is a parody of himself. Downey Jr. is Russell Crow. Serious, Oscar-winning, Australian. There are two more, no name, actors who round out the primary cast. Brandon Jackson who portrays Alpa Chino, a rapper who is breaking into acting after already being a successful rapper and entrepeneur, (Booty Sweat energy drink and Bust-a-Nut candy bar). And Jay Baruchel as Kevin Sandusky, the requisite bland good white guy who through his naivite resolves all of this movies conflicts.
A few other important actors in the film are Nick Nolte as the ex-Vietnam vet who wrote the book that the movie screenplay is based on, Tom Cruise as the a-hole hollywood producer producing the film, Matthew McConaughey as Stiller's agent and Danny McBride as a pyrotechnics advisor for the film. Warren in this blog's previous post spoke of his disappointment with McBride. The disappointing career of Danny McBride continues. Mr. McBride is just mailing it in here. He isn't given much to do and he just barely does it. Now I really will have to see "Pinapple Express," just to compare notes.
Okay so the plot is the three prima donna actors screw around and screw up the movie. The hapless director can't control them. The grizzled Vietnam vet, Nolte, suggests taking the prima donnas into the wild Vietnam jungle to scare them into being more serious about their craft and to bond with one another. The director, pyrotechnics guy and Vet have planted cameras around the jungle to capture the true emotions of the prima donna actors as they complete the script. The helicopter drops the actors and director in the jungle. The director steps on a land mine and is blown to hell. The retarded (yeah, I'm using that term, bitches) Stiller thinks that it is all part of the plan and he continues to follow the script. Danny McBride and Nolte land elsewhere to watch the drama enfold and are captured by Vietnamese druglords in the area. Stiller, Black, Downey Jr., Jackson, and Baruchel slog through the jungle, get on each other's nerves, display attitudes with one another, and eventually the conflict of the film emerges. The band of actors encounter the druglord's compound with McBride and Nolte in it. And they eventually free the two captured guys. The movie gets made. The actors all realize how petty they have been. Tom Cruise, the producer, cashes in on a successful movie and does a memorable dance through the closing credits.
I couldn't hope to capture the brilliance of this movie. I started this review expressing my trepidation at seeing this film, but I must say this. It is hillarious. Parody has found its apex for the 2008 movie-going season. Downey Jr. was very impressive. Stiller played a parody of himself to some degree, but with conviction and very funny. Black pulled off his limited role with his limited skills. The writing was good and the pacing was good. As you would expect, there are some crude, cheap laughs, (aforementioned retard jokes and the like). But I was pleasantly surprised. It made me laugh and I needed to laugh.
Matthew
Monday, January 12, 2009
The Slow Boat to Pineapple Express
As you may recall from some of the reviews I have already written on this blog, I am a big believer in the movie in a box machine at Fry’s Grocery Store. Although I sometimes wonder who is selecting the movies that are available in the machine (There are about fifteen different National Lampoon’s movies available), I have always gotten functioning movies at a great price. Last night as I was shopping for my weekly supply of lobster tails and popsicles I noticed that the machine had a $.50 special. I went over to the machine and looked for, paid for, and accepted Pineapple Express.
I think I overpaid!
Since I am currently on the third rate cable system I am stuck with at my McMansion, I get some weird channels that no one else seems to. Most of the time this is just a waste of broadcasting space (BYU, Telemundo 2, ESPN Poker, etc.) but once in a while I watch an HDTV channel called HDNet. So far, my two favorite shoes on HDNet are Art Mann Presents and Trailerama. Trailerama is a thirty minute showing of movie trailers. Sometimes they show old movie trailers and sometimes they show movies that are not yet out in the theaters. The last time I watched the show they had a wrap up of the 2008 movie year with a bald movie critic from the Village Voice (I think he said he was from LA). I do not know who this joker is or even what the circulation of the Village Voice amounts to, but I know he did not get off to a very good start with me. His #5 movie of 2008 was The Wrestler. This is a movie I am very excited about seeing and I hope is as good as everyone has been saying. His #4 movie was Slumdog Millionaire. I am also interested in seeing the movie but will probably wait for it to find its way into the movie in a box machine. Coming in at #3 was Pineapple Express. I initially scoffed at this rating but then the bald wonder waxed poetically about how it was not just a chronic picture it was a poignant movie about friendship and male bonding. Then movie #2 was revealed and it was Wall-E. When I stopped laughing after about 6 minutes I should have written on my hand “don’t rent anything suggested by this show.” Unfortunately, hindsight is 20/20.
The good news is, I will not be reviewing Wall-E. The bad news is, I am reviewing Pineapple Express.
Pineapple Express is basically a chase picture involving a stoner, the stoner’s dealer, the dealer’s middleman, the middleman’s supplier and the supplier’s competitor. This movie was written by Seth Rogan and the story was done by Judd Apatow. I think these two guys are generally great together and have produced or participated in some great recent comedies (Superbad, Knocked Up, Anchorman and Forgetting Sarah Marshall). Unfortunately, they stooped to a really low level here and came out with an all time blow-out. You might say, this movie went up in smoke early on.
Rogan stars as Dale Denton, a bud smoking process server who witnesses a murder. The rest of the picture is basically just slow moving marijuana jokes and a ton of kicks, punches, and knees to the groin of Dale’s dealer Saul Silver (played by James Franco) as they run from the murderers. The only other memorable character in this picture is Red, Saul’s middleman, played by Danny McBride. I say memorable character because I am still disappointed in the acting development of Mr. McBride. You may be saying: “Warren, what do you know about acting development?” I know nothing of acting development. But, as I have watched this guy in both this movie and The Foot Fist Way, I think he could be really funny. He seems to have excellent timing and he just looks funny. Unfortunately, I feel like he is not building on his gift. Some of my critique could be of the writing that he has to work with but it just seems as though he sets the viewer up with a good look or a funny physical action and then he might deliver a good line but then he wants to go back to square one and start all over. I just don’t think he is building on his success on a line by line, action by action basis.
Seth Rogan and James Franco meanwhile just kind of phoned this one in. I don’t know how many people in the world still smoke the reefer but I guess all it takes is one studio executive! Movies like this should never be made.
I really don’t have an opinion on the legalization of marijuana. What I do have an opinion on is why do we have to keep pushing the idea that marijuana smoking is cool and it makes you deliver slow jokes and it gets you into zany predicaments and makes you eat Cheetos and see the world differently and make stronger friendships? And best of all though, most of the time marijuana comedies rarely offer any consequences. Our Nation settled with the largest tobacco growers for billions of dollars to combat cigarette smoking and to remove ads from magazines and to stop actors from smoking on television. And yet, we continue to show smoking marijuana as being cool and fun and predominantly without consequence. I mean, who is speaking more to the teenagers we are supposedly trying to protect – the Marlboro Man or some of our most recognized young comedic actors?
So, I will get off my soap box now but I won’t get back on the Pineapple Express. I have seen several movies lately where the funny parts from the preview are the funny parts from the entire movie. In Pineapple Express the “funny” parts from the preview were actually less funny in the movie.
So, to wrap this one up let me just say that the Pineapple Express should have been derailed before it ever left the Station.
Warren
I think I overpaid!
Since I am currently on the third rate cable system I am stuck with at my McMansion, I get some weird channels that no one else seems to. Most of the time this is just a waste of broadcasting space (BYU, Telemundo 2, ESPN Poker, etc.) but once in a while I watch an HDTV channel called HDNet. So far, my two favorite shoes on HDNet are Art Mann Presents and Trailerama. Trailerama is a thirty minute showing of movie trailers. Sometimes they show old movie trailers and sometimes they show movies that are not yet out in the theaters. The last time I watched the show they had a wrap up of the 2008 movie year with a bald movie critic from the Village Voice (I think he said he was from LA). I do not know who this joker is or even what the circulation of the Village Voice amounts to, but I know he did not get off to a very good start with me. His #5 movie of 2008 was The Wrestler. This is a movie I am very excited about seeing and I hope is as good as everyone has been saying. His #4 movie was Slumdog Millionaire. I am also interested in seeing the movie but will probably wait for it to find its way into the movie in a box machine. Coming in at #3 was Pineapple Express. I initially scoffed at this rating but then the bald wonder waxed poetically about how it was not just a chronic picture it was a poignant movie about friendship and male bonding. Then movie #2 was revealed and it was Wall-E. When I stopped laughing after about 6 minutes I should have written on my hand “don’t rent anything suggested by this show.” Unfortunately, hindsight is 20/20.
The good news is, I will not be reviewing Wall-E. The bad news is, I am reviewing Pineapple Express.
Pineapple Express is basically a chase picture involving a stoner, the stoner’s dealer, the dealer’s middleman, the middleman’s supplier and the supplier’s competitor. This movie was written by Seth Rogan and the story was done by Judd Apatow. I think these two guys are generally great together and have produced or participated in some great recent comedies (Superbad, Knocked Up, Anchorman and Forgetting Sarah Marshall). Unfortunately, they stooped to a really low level here and came out with an all time blow-out. You might say, this movie went up in smoke early on.
Rogan stars as Dale Denton, a bud smoking process server who witnesses a murder. The rest of the picture is basically just slow moving marijuana jokes and a ton of kicks, punches, and knees to the groin of Dale’s dealer Saul Silver (played by James Franco) as they run from the murderers. The only other memorable character in this picture is Red, Saul’s middleman, played by Danny McBride. I say memorable character because I am still disappointed in the acting development of Mr. McBride. You may be saying: “Warren, what do you know about acting development?” I know nothing of acting development. But, as I have watched this guy in both this movie and The Foot Fist Way, I think he could be really funny. He seems to have excellent timing and he just looks funny. Unfortunately, I feel like he is not building on his gift. Some of my critique could be of the writing that he has to work with but it just seems as though he sets the viewer up with a good look or a funny physical action and then he might deliver a good line but then he wants to go back to square one and start all over. I just don’t think he is building on his success on a line by line, action by action basis.
Seth Rogan and James Franco meanwhile just kind of phoned this one in. I don’t know how many people in the world still smoke the reefer but I guess all it takes is one studio executive! Movies like this should never be made.
I really don’t have an opinion on the legalization of marijuana. What I do have an opinion on is why do we have to keep pushing the idea that marijuana smoking is cool and it makes you deliver slow jokes and it gets you into zany predicaments and makes you eat Cheetos and see the world differently and make stronger friendships? And best of all though, most of the time marijuana comedies rarely offer any consequences. Our Nation settled with the largest tobacco growers for billions of dollars to combat cigarette smoking and to remove ads from magazines and to stop actors from smoking on television. And yet, we continue to show smoking marijuana as being cool and fun and predominantly without consequence. I mean, who is speaking more to the teenagers we are supposedly trying to protect – the Marlboro Man or some of our most recognized young comedic actors?
So, I will get off my soap box now but I won’t get back on the Pineapple Express. I have seen several movies lately where the funny parts from the preview are the funny parts from the entire movie. In Pineapple Express the “funny” parts from the preview were actually less funny in the movie.
So, to wrap this one up let me just say that the Pineapple Express should have been derailed before it ever left the Station.
Warren
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
