**Movie reviews are back. Expect a whole bunch this week.**
I watched The Sound of Music this afternoon (at a big sing-along. Great fun. This theater gives you a goodie bag of props at their sing-alongs and suggestions of characters to cheer or boo***). Of course I've seen it a thousand times (and I'm guessing you have too. Spoilers abound in this review) but I love it every time.
Synopsis (even though you probably know): a young nun-to-be keeps getting into the trouble in just barely prewar Austria. The Mother Superior decides maybe this isn't the best place for her and sends her to be the governess for a family with seven children. She reintroduces music into the stuffy home she is working in and accidentally falls in love with the father. When the father's new fiancée points the love situation out to her, she runs back to the abbey. The kids are sad, the dad is sad, she is sad. She comes back, the dad realizes he's in love, the fiancée leaves, the family is happy for like a minute and then the Nazis come in. They sing a bunch and then run away.
The Sound of Music, starring Julie Andrews and Christopher Plummer, came out in 1965, which is why you may have seen a special performance at the 2015 Oscars by Lady Gaga commemorating it. It's 50 this year, so everyone is kind of excited.
As I said, at this sing-along they suggested cheers and boos. Specifically, they said to hiss at the Baroness (the Captain's fiancée). On paper this makes sense. When you think about the plot, the Baroness seems like the almost evil stepmother and the thing that was keeping the Captain and Maria apart. The thing is, that's not true.
The Baroness is a friendly and, I think, genuinely sweet and kind woman. She's shallow, she's very interested in money, and she's not a great match for the Captain or the children, but she. Is. Not. Evil.
She. Is. Not. The. Villain. Of. This. Movie.
(That would be the Nazis)
The Baroness is uninterested in being mother to seven children (and I don't know that we can really blame her for that. Parenting seven kids sounds like quite a big thing. And the kids range in age from 5 to 16. That's a huge endeavor. You really can't hate on someone who doesn't want that) and says she'll send them to boarding school. You can be down on her for the boarding school thing (because when you marry a single parent you marry their children too), but she seems to truly care for the Captain. She shouldn't marry him but THAT DOESN'T MAKE HER BAD.
In fact, if it weren't for her, Maria and the Captain would never figure out they were into each other. It takes her telling Maria after the big party scene for Maria to realize and the Captain knows something is missing but can't even figure out that he misses Maria until Maria comes back and the Baroness points out that he likes her.
If the Captain hadn't been courting the Baroness when the movie opened, Maria would never have even gotten the children singing. Remember, the morning after Maria arrives, the Captain heads off to Vienna to spend time with the Baroness and then bring her back to Saltzburg. If he'd been in the house with Maria and the kids, she wouldn't have been able to loosen up the rules and discipline.
Basically, the Baroness, while the wrong woman for the Captain, is not the villain people make her out to be. She may be foolish. She may have the wrong goals, but she is not bad.
Other things about this movie: Maria transforms personality completely when she gets married. It's weird and kind of blech. Ignore the characterizations and look at the pretty Austrian countryside and listen to the pretty music. You'll be happier.
And seriously just stop with the ant-Baroness thing. She's isn't the bad guy.
***If you're curious: we had a card with a picture of Maria on one side and the word "flippertyjibbit" on the other, a card with a question mark and a will of the wisp on either side, an invitation to the Captain and Baroness's party, a swatch of curtain fabric, a plastic twig of white flowers, and a champagne popper to celebrate Maria and the Captain kissing*
*Obligatory special shout out to my parents, brother, aunt, and cousin for chilling with me and waving our little Edelweisses high as we sang*
*Little house keeping note, November kind of wiped me, as did a variety of life-type things this month. My New Years resolution is 3-5 movie reviews each week though, so keep your eyes out for me. As always, if you have a movie suggestion or request, comment (here), tweet (@wendywatchmovie), or email (wendywatchesmovies@gmail.com) me. Happy watching!*
Monday, December 28, 2015
Sunday, November 22, 2015
Bond. James Bond.
**We're back to movie reviews. Yay! Thanks for the support re my icky cat calling evening though :)**
***There are some Skyfall spoilers here, but no Spectre ones. You've been warned!***
I saw Spectre (2015, Daniel Craig, Christoph Waltz, Léa Seydoux, Ralph Fiennes) last night. Definitely highly enjoyable.
Let's talk plot:
Basically, Bond has received a cryptic message in the wake of Skyfall (2012) (by the way-although you probably would be fine watching this if you haven't seen Skyfall, you'll be happier if you go back to the previous Bond first. Plus, that was a good one. Just watch Skyfall. Don't live your life with regrets) so he has some shenanigans in Mexico City. This starts him on an unofficial wild goose chase.
Meanwhile, M (Ralph Fiennes as we discovered at the end of Skyfall. Still weird seeing him with a nose, by the way...) is dealing with a new guy-C (Andrew Scott. You know him as Moriarty on Sherlock from BBC). C wants a massive global intelligence network. Whether it is actually a good idea or not is kind of debatable for most of the movie (3 guesses whether we've discovered whether or not it's a good idea by the end...).
Since 007 wasn't really supposed to be blowing up city blocks in Mexico (he did it to make sure a whole stadium didn't blow up. I know they filmed this ages ago and it's been out since before the Paris attacks but that still hit a bit close to home...), he's grounded. Q (who gets a lot of screen time in Spectre. It's great) won't give him anything except a watch (although he shows him a very pretty new Aston Martin that's already been marked for 009 and the pieces of the car he accidentally destroyed during Skyfall. Q remarks that he told Bond to bring it back in one piece, not to bring back one piece-the steering wheel. He is repairing it though, and we can all expect it to, at some point, be good as new). "What does it do?" Bond asks about the watch. "It tells the time," Q tells him, before warning him to watch out for the alarm because it's "quite loud."
Q does, however, give him a medical exam, which includes some funky blood technology that allows his coordinates and vital signs to be under surveillance world wide.
Naturally, this means 007 needs Q's help to sneak out of the country.
So, Bond begins his wild goose chase, Q starts lying to M, C starts playing politics, and Moneypenny joins Q in covering 007's tracks.
More things explode, Bond has some fight scenes. Bond has some sex. Secrets start to come out, and eventually all hell breaks loose. It's pretty standard, frankly.
But I loved it. Bond movies always have great cinematography and soundtracks and this one absolutely holds up. One particularly great moment came when our secret agent man was in a car chase in Rome, driving an Aston Martin. The Italian man chasing him was driving a fancy Italian sports car. My brother (a car fanatic) leaned over to me to point out that this wasn't just a race between a British guy and an Italian one. It was between a British car and an Italian one. It seemed very appropriate.
It wasn't nearly as homoerotic as Skyfall was but then the creepy villain from Skyfall wasn't there, so who's surprised. It did have a lot of naked people hanging out with octopuses (octopi?) in the opening credits, though, so your slightly weird and highly sexual moments were there anyway.
It didn't pass the Bechtel Test, but when a woman character who had previously never demonstrated any fighting skill starting fighting there was an explanation as to why she could fight (and it wasn't a practice fighting montage that made it look like she mastered her skills in, like, two hours. So yay plausibility?).
Bond only had, like, one martini. Said "shaken, not stirred" out loud (yay! I always look for it. Also, why does he drink vodka martinis in this movie?? Go for gin, people. Tastes like Christmas tree. Delicious).
*Side note: I looked up Bond martinis on Wikipedia for this review (plus this is me not doing my NaNoWriMo. I'm at like 40,000 words though. Totally fine). Apparently scientists have done tests to find the difference between shaken and stirred martinis. And here I always thought President Bartlett on The West Wing was right that "he's ordering a weak martini and being snooty about it." Also, apparently he's inconsistent about vodka versus gin. Go figure.*
All in all, kind of predictable but also fun. So yay. Go see Spectre. But maybe don't be like me and keep wondering if M is going to disappear in a cloud of dandruff because you still haven't forgiven David Yates for ruining Voldemort's death (HE'S SUPPOSED TO DIE AS A MAN. COME ON). But I digress. I will review all the Potters at some point. But not now. Now is Bond. Ok.
*obligatory special shout out to Megan Beckett. A fictional character in my head who is finally coming to life this month and whose name is finally being publicized in the world in this blog as soon as I hit publish*
***There are some Skyfall spoilers here, but no Spectre ones. You've been warned!***
I saw Spectre (2015, Daniel Craig, Christoph Waltz, Léa Seydoux, Ralph Fiennes) last night. Definitely highly enjoyable.
Let's talk plot:
Basically, Bond has received a cryptic message in the wake of Skyfall (2012) (by the way-although you probably would be fine watching this if you haven't seen Skyfall, you'll be happier if you go back to the previous Bond first. Plus, that was a good one. Just watch Skyfall. Don't live your life with regrets) so he has some shenanigans in Mexico City. This starts him on an unofficial wild goose chase.
Meanwhile, M (Ralph Fiennes as we discovered at the end of Skyfall. Still weird seeing him with a nose, by the way...) is dealing with a new guy-C (Andrew Scott. You know him as Moriarty on Sherlock from BBC). C wants a massive global intelligence network. Whether it is actually a good idea or not is kind of debatable for most of the movie (3 guesses whether we've discovered whether or not it's a good idea by the end...).
Since 007 wasn't really supposed to be blowing up city blocks in Mexico (he did it to make sure a whole stadium didn't blow up. I know they filmed this ages ago and it's been out since before the Paris attacks but that still hit a bit close to home...), he's grounded. Q (who gets a lot of screen time in Spectre. It's great) won't give him anything except a watch (although he shows him a very pretty new Aston Martin that's already been marked for 009 and the pieces of the car he accidentally destroyed during Skyfall. Q remarks that he told Bond to bring it back in one piece, not to bring back one piece-the steering wheel. He is repairing it though, and we can all expect it to, at some point, be good as new). "What does it do?" Bond asks about the watch. "It tells the time," Q tells him, before warning him to watch out for the alarm because it's "quite loud."
Q does, however, give him a medical exam, which includes some funky blood technology that allows his coordinates and vital signs to be under surveillance world wide.
Naturally, this means 007 needs Q's help to sneak out of the country.
So, Bond begins his wild goose chase, Q starts lying to M, C starts playing politics, and Moneypenny joins Q in covering 007's tracks.
More things explode, Bond has some fight scenes. Bond has some sex. Secrets start to come out, and eventually all hell breaks loose. It's pretty standard, frankly.
But I loved it. Bond movies always have great cinematography and soundtracks and this one absolutely holds up. One particularly great moment came when our secret agent man was in a car chase in Rome, driving an Aston Martin. The Italian man chasing him was driving a fancy Italian sports car. My brother (a car fanatic) leaned over to me to point out that this wasn't just a race between a British guy and an Italian one. It was between a British car and an Italian one. It seemed very appropriate.
It wasn't nearly as homoerotic as Skyfall was but then the creepy villain from Skyfall wasn't there, so who's surprised. It did have a lot of naked people hanging out with octopuses (octopi?) in the opening credits, though, so your slightly weird and highly sexual moments were there anyway.
It didn't pass the Bechtel Test, but when a woman character who had previously never demonstrated any fighting skill starting fighting there was an explanation as to why she could fight (and it wasn't a practice fighting montage that made it look like she mastered her skills in, like, two hours. So yay plausibility?).
Bond only had, like, one martini. Said "shaken, not stirred" out loud (yay! I always look for it. Also, why does he drink vodka martinis in this movie?? Go for gin, people. Tastes like Christmas tree. Delicious).
*Side note: I looked up Bond martinis on Wikipedia for this review (plus this is me not doing my NaNoWriMo. I'm at like 40,000 words though. Totally fine). Apparently scientists have done tests to find the difference between shaken and stirred martinis. And here I always thought President Bartlett on The West Wing was right that "he's ordering a weak martini and being snooty about it." Also, apparently he's inconsistent about vodka versus gin. Go figure.*
All in all, kind of predictable but also fun. So yay. Go see Spectre. But maybe don't be like me and keep wondering if M is going to disappear in a cloud of dandruff because you still haven't forgiven David Yates for ruining Voldemort's death (HE'S SUPPOSED TO DIE AS A MAN. COME ON). But I digress. I will review all the Potters at some point. But not now. Now is Bond. Ok.
*obligatory special shout out to Megan Beckett. A fictional character in my head who is finally coming to life this month and whose name is finally being publicized in the world in this blog as soon as I hit publish*
Wednesday, November 18, 2015
Don't Tell Me To Smile
*This isn't a movie review. This is a discussion of cat calling and street harassment*
Smile, young lady!
I'm not smiling for you.
Aww why not? You'd be so beautiful if you smiled!
This is the conversation that happened in Harvard Square at about 11:20 tonight, at the intersection of Mt. Auburn St and Brattle St.
This is the conversation that ruined my favorite part of my walk back to my car.
On Tuesday every week, I go blues dancing. It's fun. It's a big part of my social life. I love it. Sometimes I carpool with a friend, which has all kinds of perks and I love it. When I go by myself, I have a little tradition.
See, I love cities. I love walking in cities and I love being in cities alone and at night. Unfortunately, cities alone at night can be really creepy. That's part of why I like Harvard Square. It feels safe.
When I walk alone in cities at night, when it's all empty and quiet, I get to imagine I'm in a movie. I always hear Marlon Brando's voice (from the Guys and Dolls movie) going "now is the time you can hear footsteps on Broadway." Sky Masterson loves New York at night and I love Cambridge.
So when I walk back to my car after bluesy tuesy when I'm not carpooling with my wonderful friend, I get to play a little pretend.
The garage where I always park has a big brick covering with columns along the sidewalk right before you get to the entrance. The acoustics are amazing and at 11:30 at night no one notices or cares if you want belt a little bit.
It's fun. Walking alone when everything is quiet and empty is fun.
But I didn't get to have that fun tonight.
I was walking down Mt. Auburn, about to cross the street, thinking about how excited I was to get to those bricks and how I could sing Once Upon a December (from Anastasia which has been stuck in my head all day) and hear it in the cool acoustics. I was lost in thought and excited. I was planning this.
And then I hear it.
Smile, young lady!
I didn't think about what I should say back. I forgot that you're supposed to ignore it. I forgot that saying no could mean literally taking my life in my hands.
I said no, I'm not smiling for you.
You could hear that he was surprised. He hadn't expected me to say anything.
He was crossing the street about 20 feet from me. He couldn't have actually seen my face, but he'd seen my heels and maybe a flash of red lipstick. And he wanted a smile.
He told me I'd be so beautiful if I smiled. He wanted to know why I didn't want to smile.
I have a few things to say to this man on the street.
#1 I don't owe you a smile or beauty. Beauty is not the tax I pay for being a woman. Beauty is not the tax I pay for being on the street. A smile is not the price of courtesy in public. A smile is a gesture I can bestow or not on whomever or whatever I choose.
#2 I'm writing this sitting in my bedroom, where I can see my mirror across the room. I'm not smiling. I'm looking at my own face and you know what? I'm goddamn gorgeous. I don't need to smile to be pretty. Fuck you.
When I walked away from him, I walked fast. I pulled out my phone and called a friend. She didn't pick up. She texted me that she couldn't talk. I texted her what happened. I told her I was nervous to finish the walk to my car.
At that point, I could see the brick columns. I was almost to the spot where I would get to sing. I didn't want to sing any more. I wanted to cry. This stranger ruined my favorite part of driving by myself.
When I got to the columns I told my friend I was walking to my car but that I was still nervous. If she didn't hear from me in 20 minutes she should be nervous too. I put my phone away, sucked it up, and belted Once Upon a December. I was convinced I couldn't let him destroy everything.
I was, quite frankly, terrified when I got to the garage. I had had to park on the lower level and the elevator at first wouldn't work. I nearly ran to my car when I finally got down to it and locked the doors the instant I was inside.
Why was I so afraid?
Because a man ran his car over a 14 year old girl who turned down his advances on the street. Because a woman in Detroit who wouldn't give a stranger her phone number was killed. A New York woman was killed when she wouldn't go on a date.
I found these with a single google search. They were the top couple of results. I've heard the stories before. They're all less than two years old.
All women know: any time you say no to a stranger on the street, he might kill you.
That is fucking terrifying.
I was alone. I was wearing high heels. I was carrying a big tote bag.
The guy was big, he was with a friend. If he had wanted to hurt me, there would have been nothing I could have done.
"But Wendy," you might say, "if you didn't hear all these stories about street harassment escalating into violence, it would be okay, right? Because you wouldn't have had to be scared."
Actually does it matter if it might escalate into violence? Isn't the fact that MY SMILE AND BEAUTY ARE NOT THE PRICES I PAY FOR EXISTING IN PUBLIC enough to show that you DON'T TELL STRANGERS ON THE STREET TO SMILE???
I've been cat called at times when I had no fear of it escalating. A cabbie has commented on my bright red cheeks. Cars have honked as they've sped by. Guys have winked, hooted, and generally hollered as they've passed.
Not all of them are scary. All of them suck.
I. Do. Not. Exist. For. Your. Approval.
I do not want you to tell me I'm beautiful. I don't want to hear that my cheeks are rosy red.
You know what? I know I'm gorgeous. I know my cheeks are red. I know my ass looks good. I know my boobs are big. Do you really think you're telling me something I don't know?
If you actually wanted actual conversation you can probably come over and say "excuse me, I know we're strangers but I just wanted to say, you look really nice and I wanted you to know people notice too" because, yeah, it's always nice to hear everyone else knows you're pretty. But when you yell it at me, it's not a compliment. You can stop me and say "hey, wow, you have such bright cheeks! You don't see too many people with such rosy cheeks!" That's fine. What's not cool is the yelling that roughly translates to "I approve of your body and it is here for public consumption."
I'm not a drinking fountain. I am not a park bench. I am not here for the public.
Don't tell me to smile.
Smile, young lady!
I'm not smiling for you.
Aww why not? You'd be so beautiful if you smiled!
This is the conversation that happened in Harvard Square at about 11:20 tonight, at the intersection of Mt. Auburn St and Brattle St.
This is the conversation that ruined my favorite part of my walk back to my car.
On Tuesday every week, I go blues dancing. It's fun. It's a big part of my social life. I love it. Sometimes I carpool with a friend, which has all kinds of perks and I love it. When I go by myself, I have a little tradition.
See, I love cities. I love walking in cities and I love being in cities alone and at night. Unfortunately, cities alone at night can be really creepy. That's part of why I like Harvard Square. It feels safe.
When I walk alone in cities at night, when it's all empty and quiet, I get to imagine I'm in a movie. I always hear Marlon Brando's voice (from the Guys and Dolls movie) going "now is the time you can hear footsteps on Broadway." Sky Masterson loves New York at night and I love Cambridge.
So when I walk back to my car after bluesy tuesy when I'm not carpooling with my wonderful friend, I get to play a little pretend.
The garage where I always park has a big brick covering with columns along the sidewalk right before you get to the entrance. The acoustics are amazing and at 11:30 at night no one notices or cares if you want belt a little bit.
It's fun. Walking alone when everything is quiet and empty is fun.
But I didn't get to have that fun tonight.
I was walking down Mt. Auburn, about to cross the street, thinking about how excited I was to get to those bricks and how I could sing Once Upon a December (from Anastasia which has been stuck in my head all day) and hear it in the cool acoustics. I was lost in thought and excited. I was planning this.
And then I hear it.
Smile, young lady!
I didn't think about what I should say back. I forgot that you're supposed to ignore it. I forgot that saying no could mean literally taking my life in my hands.
I said no, I'm not smiling for you.
You could hear that he was surprised. He hadn't expected me to say anything.
He was crossing the street about 20 feet from me. He couldn't have actually seen my face, but he'd seen my heels and maybe a flash of red lipstick. And he wanted a smile.
He told me I'd be so beautiful if I smiled. He wanted to know why I didn't want to smile.
I have a few things to say to this man on the street.
#1 I don't owe you a smile or beauty. Beauty is not the tax I pay for being a woman. Beauty is not the tax I pay for being on the street. A smile is not the price of courtesy in public. A smile is a gesture I can bestow or not on whomever or whatever I choose.
#2 I'm writing this sitting in my bedroom, where I can see my mirror across the room. I'm not smiling. I'm looking at my own face and you know what? I'm goddamn gorgeous. I don't need to smile to be pretty. Fuck you.
When I walked away from him, I walked fast. I pulled out my phone and called a friend. She didn't pick up. She texted me that she couldn't talk. I texted her what happened. I told her I was nervous to finish the walk to my car.
At that point, I could see the brick columns. I was almost to the spot where I would get to sing. I didn't want to sing any more. I wanted to cry. This stranger ruined my favorite part of driving by myself.
When I got to the columns I told my friend I was walking to my car but that I was still nervous. If she didn't hear from me in 20 minutes she should be nervous too. I put my phone away, sucked it up, and belted Once Upon a December. I was convinced I couldn't let him destroy everything.
I was, quite frankly, terrified when I got to the garage. I had had to park on the lower level and the elevator at first wouldn't work. I nearly ran to my car when I finally got down to it and locked the doors the instant I was inside.
Why was I so afraid?
Because a man ran his car over a 14 year old girl who turned down his advances on the street. Because a woman in Detroit who wouldn't give a stranger her phone number was killed. A New York woman was killed when she wouldn't go on a date.
I found these with a single google search. They were the top couple of results. I've heard the stories before. They're all less than two years old.
All women know: any time you say no to a stranger on the street, he might kill you.
That is fucking terrifying.
I was alone. I was wearing high heels. I was carrying a big tote bag.
The guy was big, he was with a friend. If he had wanted to hurt me, there would have been nothing I could have done.
"But Wendy," you might say, "if you didn't hear all these stories about street harassment escalating into violence, it would be okay, right? Because you wouldn't have had to be scared."
Actually does it matter if it might escalate into violence? Isn't the fact that MY SMILE AND BEAUTY ARE NOT THE PRICES I PAY FOR EXISTING IN PUBLIC enough to show that you DON'T TELL STRANGERS ON THE STREET TO SMILE???
I've been cat called at times when I had no fear of it escalating. A cabbie has commented on my bright red cheeks. Cars have honked as they've sped by. Guys have winked, hooted, and generally hollered as they've passed.
Not all of them are scary. All of them suck.
I. Do. Not. Exist. For. Your. Approval.
I do not want you to tell me I'm beautiful. I don't want to hear that my cheeks are rosy red.
You know what? I know I'm gorgeous. I know my cheeks are red. I know my ass looks good. I know my boobs are big. Do you really think you're telling me something I don't know?
If you actually wanted actual conversation you can probably come over and say "excuse me, I know we're strangers but I just wanted to say, you look really nice and I wanted you to know people notice too" because, yeah, it's always nice to hear everyone else knows you're pretty. But when you yell it at me, it's not a compliment. You can stop me and say "hey, wow, you have such bright cheeks! You don't see too many people with such rosy cheeks!" That's fine. What's not cool is the yelling that roughly translates to "I approve of your body and it is here for public consumption."
I'm not a drinking fountain. I am not a park bench. I am not here for the public.
Don't tell me to smile.
Sunday, November 1, 2015
Always Nice When An Old Movie Holds Up To Its Hype
I'm doing NaNoWriMo (National Novel Writing Month. Basically write 50,000 words in November) so expect very few reviews and updates (although I have a schedule for my writing which should allow for some movie viewing. I will at least have reviews for Suffragette, the new Bond, and Mockingjay Pt 2. We'll see if I get to anything else.....). But I'm doing NaNoWriMo so right now I'm gonna write about the 1963 Cleopatra instead of my novel.
Cleopatra. Starring Elizabeth Taylor, Richard Burton, and Rex Harrison. Mostly I enjoyed it. Somehow, this is only the second movie I've seen with either Elizabeth Taylor or Richard Burton (the other being Who's Afraid of Virginia Woolf, 1966), but I am well acquainted with Mr. Burton's VOICE because he played Arthur in Camelot (onstage with Julie Andrews. The 1967 movie starred Richard Harris as Arthur and Vanessa Redgrave as Guinevere) so I've heard him singing at least all my life. Rex Harrison, of course, also starred on stage with Julie Andrews in My Fair Lady and then reprised that role with Audrey Hepburn in the movie (I could've sworn I'd seen him in many other movies, but apparently I've only seen him in MFL. Maybe I've just seen it enough times...).
Let's talk plot: it's pretty standard. I don't know THAT much about Cleopatra's life, but this fits with what I do know: Egyptian politics get funky, she needs Caesar's help and delivers herself to him in a carpet. They begin a love affair. Eventually he is stabbed and she begins an affair with Marc Antony. Throughout this second affair, Caesar's heir, Octavian (calling himself Augustus) makes life very difficult for them and is constantly warring with them.
It's pretty much what you would expect, particularly if you've seen or read Julius Caesar or Antony and Cleopatra (both by the Bard himself) or All For Love (by John Dryden, a retelling, and frankly kind of watered down, version of A&C). Or any book about Cleopatra (there's a good young adult fictionalized book about her-part of the Royal Diaries series). Basically, it's her life story.
And it is really good. The point of it is absolutely the visuals. Rich and glamorous costuming, opulent sets, phenomenal make up. The acting holds up pretty well and Elizabeth Taylor can throw a fit while maintaining her glamor like nobody's business.
Of course, it has some downsides. It was originally planned as two movies, each three hours long, one of Caesar and Cleopatra, on of Antony and Cleopatra. Between the budget (which over the course of the shoot and many many delays ballooned from $2 million to over $130 million. It took 10 years to break even) and the fear that the public (which was excited for Burton and indifferent to Harrison) would only turn out for the second half, the studio insisted it be cut together into a single 4 hour movie. 4 hours is, frankly, an awful lot of movie, especially when each half has a pretty clear story arc. The two halves fit together very well, but in the middle it feels like you've gotten to the end of a movie and then the second half takes a little while to really get going. Plus, honestly, eventually (if you are me) you start yelling at the movie to stab Caesar already because Rex Harrison has started to get on your nerves (I started channeling Gretchen Weiners in my tweets about the movie. It wasn't pretty. Unless you're a Mean Girls fan, in which case, yeah it was pretty great).
Aside from the drawing out of the plot, it was actually pretty good and definitely did hold up after the hype I had heard.
Fun thing to note about this movie: although there are no explicit references to the famous Shakespeare plays which cover the same material, I, ever a theater dork, could not help but notice that when the senators started meeting to conspire, the words "honor" and "honorable" got thrown around an awful lot (as in Antony's famous refrain in his famous speech in Julius Caesar-"Brutus is an honorable man" etc).
So, would I recommend? Absolutely. It clearly is a good movie, it has stood the test of time, and, quite frankly, it's a good thing to watch the great epic films of time gone by. They don't make movies like they used to. Green screen is cool, but this has these giant, crowded, *epic* scenes without CGI and we should savor that. Unfortunately, the reason I made a point of watching this movie this week is that as of today, November 1st, Cleopatra is gone from Netflix (sad) so I can't say "hey super easy it's streaming on Netflix." I'm sure it's available in a thousand other ways though so no excuses. Go watch movies, people! It's good for you.
And now I'm off to write. Stay tuned though, I should be seeing Suffragette soon and I'm sure I'll have things to say.
*obligatory special shout out to my personal Antony-my Watson with just a coat-thanks for asking me if you were getting laid yet every 5 minutes, that was funny. Also asking if you were dead yet. <3*
Cleopatra. Starring Elizabeth Taylor, Richard Burton, and Rex Harrison. Mostly I enjoyed it. Somehow, this is only the second movie I've seen with either Elizabeth Taylor or Richard Burton (the other being Who's Afraid of Virginia Woolf, 1966), but I am well acquainted with Mr. Burton's VOICE because he played Arthur in Camelot (onstage with Julie Andrews. The 1967 movie starred Richard Harris as Arthur and Vanessa Redgrave as Guinevere) so I've heard him singing at least all my life. Rex Harrison, of course, also starred on stage with Julie Andrews in My Fair Lady and then reprised that role with Audrey Hepburn in the movie (I could've sworn I'd seen him in many other movies, but apparently I've only seen him in MFL. Maybe I've just seen it enough times...).
Let's talk plot: it's pretty standard. I don't know THAT much about Cleopatra's life, but this fits with what I do know: Egyptian politics get funky, she needs Caesar's help and delivers herself to him in a carpet. They begin a love affair. Eventually he is stabbed and she begins an affair with Marc Antony. Throughout this second affair, Caesar's heir, Octavian (calling himself Augustus) makes life very difficult for them and is constantly warring with them.
It's pretty much what you would expect, particularly if you've seen or read Julius Caesar or Antony and Cleopatra (both by the Bard himself) or All For Love (by John Dryden, a retelling, and frankly kind of watered down, version of A&C). Or any book about Cleopatra (there's a good young adult fictionalized book about her-part of the Royal Diaries series). Basically, it's her life story.
And it is really good. The point of it is absolutely the visuals. Rich and glamorous costuming, opulent sets, phenomenal make up. The acting holds up pretty well and Elizabeth Taylor can throw a fit while maintaining her glamor like nobody's business.
Of course, it has some downsides. It was originally planned as two movies, each three hours long, one of Caesar and Cleopatra, on of Antony and Cleopatra. Between the budget (which over the course of the shoot and many many delays ballooned from $2 million to over $130 million. It took 10 years to break even) and the fear that the public (which was excited for Burton and indifferent to Harrison) would only turn out for the second half, the studio insisted it be cut together into a single 4 hour movie. 4 hours is, frankly, an awful lot of movie, especially when each half has a pretty clear story arc. The two halves fit together very well, but in the middle it feels like you've gotten to the end of a movie and then the second half takes a little while to really get going. Plus, honestly, eventually (if you are me) you start yelling at the movie to stab Caesar already because Rex Harrison has started to get on your nerves (I started channeling Gretchen Weiners in my tweets about the movie. It wasn't pretty. Unless you're a Mean Girls fan, in which case, yeah it was pretty great).
Aside from the drawing out of the plot, it was actually pretty good and definitely did hold up after the hype I had heard.
Fun thing to note about this movie: although there are no explicit references to the famous Shakespeare plays which cover the same material, I, ever a theater dork, could not help but notice that when the senators started meeting to conspire, the words "honor" and "honorable" got thrown around an awful lot (as in Antony's famous refrain in his famous speech in Julius Caesar-"Brutus is an honorable man" etc).
So, would I recommend? Absolutely. It clearly is a good movie, it has stood the test of time, and, quite frankly, it's a good thing to watch the great epic films of time gone by. They don't make movies like they used to. Green screen is cool, but this has these giant, crowded, *epic* scenes without CGI and we should savor that. Unfortunately, the reason I made a point of watching this movie this week is that as of today, November 1st, Cleopatra is gone from Netflix (sad) so I can't say "hey super easy it's streaming on Netflix." I'm sure it's available in a thousand other ways though so no excuses. Go watch movies, people! It's good for you.
And now I'm off to write. Stay tuned though, I should be seeing Suffragette soon and I'm sure I'll have things to say.
*obligatory special shout out to my personal Antony-my Watson with just a coat-thanks for asking me if you were getting laid yet every 5 minutes, that was funny. Also asking if you were dead yet. <3*
Thursday, October 29, 2015
Who Doesn't Love A Princess Story?
I've been in a royal mood lately, so let's talk about the 2011 movie about Prince William and Kate Middleton. William and Kate stars Camilla Luddington and Nico Evers-Swindell as Kate and the prince and tells the story (with some artistic license) of how they met at St. Andrews and went on to have their famous fairy tale romance.
The plot is pretty much what you'd expect based on what we know of their lives. They meet in university, Kate is dating someone else, they are in class together and make friends, Kate is in that famous fashion show, Kate and her boyfriend break up, they move into a flat with a couple of other friends, they eventually start dating. They hide from the press and then deal with the press. They break up, they get back together, the movie ends with shots of the *actual* royal wedding (it's kind of fun to watch the highlights again).
Is the movie any good? It is highly enjoyable but it also is clearly a made for TV movie. It's cliché, it's corny, it's sappy. It's also very clearly written by Americans. It features a lot of American slang and turn of phrase. For example, the Prince of Wales says "typical college experience" about 2 minutes into the movie. It also features a lot of "I'm a sad widower" from Prince Charles. Obviously, I actually have no idea what he is like with his sons, but he and Princess Di were separated for 5 years before she died, which was 4 or 5 years before the start of the movie (and a few years before he would marry Camilla). It's always possible that Charles was like that, but I doubt it. My guess is that it was added specifically because it's a cheesy made for TV movie.
Other funky characterizations: Mr. and Mrs. Middleton as sappy sitcom-y suburban parents. Partially it's subpar acting, partially it's the lousy writing, and partially it's just funny. Pippa and James Middleton are goofy siblings who are [completely legitimately] awed by their sister being friends with "Wills" (Pippa gets very excited when Kate refers to him as "Wills"). The other famous sibling-Harry-is seen a single time. He is eating a weirdly awkward and formal meal with his brother and father sometime over Christmas. He has lines like "I just want to be done with school so I can go to Sandhurst and do something that *actually* matters" and commenting that he doesn't seem so bad now, when William says he is considering transferring. Harry should be about 17 for this scene (at least based on my math...). I have no idea if there's any basis for Harry being a whiny and petulant teenager (he kind of reminds me of Order of the Phoenix era Harry Potter actually), but there you have it.
Finally, would I recommend it? Oh yes. It's on Netflix and I watch it all the time. It's way more fun than it should be.
*obligatory special shout out to my darling Poof who encourages me to watch this all the time just because*
The plot is pretty much what you'd expect based on what we know of their lives. They meet in university, Kate is dating someone else, they are in class together and make friends, Kate is in that famous fashion show, Kate and her boyfriend break up, they move into a flat with a couple of other friends, they eventually start dating. They hide from the press and then deal with the press. They break up, they get back together, the movie ends with shots of the *actual* royal wedding (it's kind of fun to watch the highlights again).
Is the movie any good? It is highly enjoyable but it also is clearly a made for TV movie. It's cliché, it's corny, it's sappy. It's also very clearly written by Americans. It features a lot of American slang and turn of phrase. For example, the Prince of Wales says "typical college experience" about 2 minutes into the movie. It also features a lot of "I'm a sad widower" from Prince Charles. Obviously, I actually have no idea what he is like with his sons, but he and Princess Di were separated for 5 years before she died, which was 4 or 5 years before the start of the movie (and a few years before he would marry Camilla). It's always possible that Charles was like that, but I doubt it. My guess is that it was added specifically because it's a cheesy made for TV movie.
Other funky characterizations: Mr. and Mrs. Middleton as sappy sitcom-y suburban parents. Partially it's subpar acting, partially it's the lousy writing, and partially it's just funny. Pippa and James Middleton are goofy siblings who are [completely legitimately] awed by their sister being friends with "Wills" (Pippa gets very excited when Kate refers to him as "Wills"). The other famous sibling-Harry-is seen a single time. He is eating a weirdly awkward and formal meal with his brother and father sometime over Christmas. He has lines like "I just want to be done with school so I can go to Sandhurst and do something that *actually* matters" and commenting that he doesn't seem so bad now, when William says he is considering transferring. Harry should be about 17 for this scene (at least based on my math...). I have no idea if there's any basis for Harry being a whiny and petulant teenager (he kind of reminds me of Order of the Phoenix era Harry Potter actually), but there you have it.
Finally, would I recommend it? Oh yes. It's on Netflix and I watch it all the time. It's way more fun than it should be.
*obligatory special shout out to my darling Poof who encourages me to watch this all the time just because*
Wednesday, October 28, 2015
The Point of This Movie Was Totally Chris Pratt Dancing
When it rains, it pours. Two reviews in one day, woooo!
I watched Guardians of the Galaxy (2014, Chris Pratt, Zoe Saldana, Dave Bautista, Vin Diesel, Bradley Cooper, Lee Pace, Karen Gillan, Glenn Close, Sean Gunn.... It's a Marvel ensemble movie. It had everyone in it) last night. Where to begin.
If you haven't seen it or haven't seen it recently and want a written synopsis, there's a pretty long one on IMDB. For brevity's sake, I will reference the Honest Trailer for it (by the way-it is fantastic): it is Marvel's attempt to do Star Wars with the knowledge that they (Marvel) have us completely in the palm of their hand and we will go see anything they make, regardless of the source material. "IT'S IN THE MARVEL CINEMATIC UNIVERSE, PEOPLE. WE HAVE TO GO SEE IT. COME ON." It's completely true. We will see anything if you tell us it ties back in with the rest of the Avengers. Marvel has some kind of magic hold over us.
So, their attempt to do Star Wars. Basically, evil Lee Pace is auditioning for Blue Man Group and wants to do something evil? There's space politics that I never really followed. I think he was trying to destroy a planet and needed something fancy (an infinity stone-ties into MCU remember) to do it (really he shoulda just built a Death Star but than again the Death Star has a huge weakness so maybe not). He has blue Zoe Saldana and green, bald Karen Gillan to help him retrieve this orb thingy.
Meanwhile Chris Pratt was abducted by aliens, has an obsession with music, and likes to dance. He steals the orb from someplace that isn't explained after having a dance party with some creepy and icky rats.
Eventually Chris Pratt (who has a code name no character can remember) teams up with Bradley Cooper the Raccoon, Vin Diesel the Ent, Dave Bautista the Literal Man, and Zoe Saldana (who it turns out hates blue Lee Pace and the guy he's working for).
They get into shenanigans and work really hard to save the galaxy, all the while quipping and bantering like nobody's business.
In the end they learn the importance of working together and friendship. Also sacrifice because #WeAreGroot.
Is it good? Meh. It really wanted to be another Avengers but the world isn't explained nearly as well (there's politics and other species and it's in space. Is it now? Is there time travel? Hopefully when these characters start bumping into the Avengers these will start getting answered). Is it fun? YES. Will I watch it over and over again until the end of time? Oh yes.
*special obligatory shout out to English breakfast tea. It keeps me going while I type away for hours. Those Brits know how to wake up in the morning*
I watched Guardians of the Galaxy (2014, Chris Pratt, Zoe Saldana, Dave Bautista, Vin Diesel, Bradley Cooper, Lee Pace, Karen Gillan, Glenn Close, Sean Gunn.... It's a Marvel ensemble movie. It had everyone in it) last night. Where to begin.
If you haven't seen it or haven't seen it recently and want a written synopsis, there's a pretty long one on IMDB. For brevity's sake, I will reference the Honest Trailer for it (by the way-it is fantastic): it is Marvel's attempt to do Star Wars with the knowledge that they (Marvel) have us completely in the palm of their hand and we will go see anything they make, regardless of the source material. "IT'S IN THE MARVEL CINEMATIC UNIVERSE, PEOPLE. WE HAVE TO GO SEE IT. COME ON." It's completely true. We will see anything if you tell us it ties back in with the rest of the Avengers. Marvel has some kind of magic hold over us.
So, their attempt to do Star Wars. Basically, evil Lee Pace is auditioning for Blue Man Group and wants to do something evil? There's space politics that I never really followed. I think he was trying to destroy a planet and needed something fancy (an infinity stone-ties into MCU remember) to do it (really he shoulda just built a Death Star but than again the Death Star has a huge weakness so maybe not). He has blue Zoe Saldana and green, bald Karen Gillan to help him retrieve this orb thingy.
Meanwhile Chris Pratt was abducted by aliens, has an obsession with music, and likes to dance. He steals the orb from someplace that isn't explained after having a dance party with some creepy and icky rats.
Eventually Chris Pratt (who has a code name no character can remember) teams up with Bradley Cooper the Raccoon, Vin Diesel the Ent, Dave Bautista the Literal Man, and Zoe Saldana (who it turns out hates blue Lee Pace and the guy he's working for).
They get into shenanigans and work really hard to save the galaxy, all the while quipping and bantering like nobody's business.
In the end they learn the importance of working together and friendship. Also sacrifice because #WeAreGroot.
Is it good? Meh. It really wanted to be another Avengers but the world isn't explained nearly as well (there's politics and other species and it's in space. Is it now? Is there time travel? Hopefully when these characters start bumping into the Avengers these will start getting answered). Is it fun? YES. Will I watch it over and over again until the end of time? Oh yes.
*special obligatory shout out to English breakfast tea. It keeps me going while I type away for hours. Those Brits know how to wake up in the morning*
Why Is Tom Hiddleston SO Redeemable?!
(There will be minor spoilers in this but no major ones. Also, apologies for the length. I loved this movie and I guess I like to talk about it)
Yesterday, I saw Crimson Peak (2015, Mia Wasikowska, Tom Hiddleston, Jessica Chastain). First off, IT WAS AMAZING. I loved it. I've never seen a horror movie before but decided the interviews with the cast and director where they insist it's more gothic romance than horror convinced me that I could brave this in order to see Tom Hiddleston (one always needs more Hiddles in your life).
I believe it can be best summed up like this: naive American, handsome Brit, creepy sister, loads of ghosts.
(Full disclosure: Part way through writing this I realized I was using "creepy" in every other sentence. Rather than edit and get creative with word choice I continued writing. After I finished, I replaced some of them with creepy synonyms that were suggested by thesaurus.com. Please enjoy)
So, a synopsis: Edith Cushing (Mia Wasikowska, you might know her from the 2011 Jane Eyre or the 2010 Tim Burton Alice in Wonderland) is an aspiring young American novelist who wishes to be more like Mary Shelley, who died a widow, than Jane Austen, who died a spinster. She says as much to a forgettable yet annoying character. She doesn't say so, but given that she gets told by her would be publisher that she should write a romance instead of her "ghost story" (she insists it's a story with a ghost in it), I can't help noticing that she aspires to Mary-certainly a ghost writer, rather than Jane-a romance writer.
Edith's father is an industrialist who worked his way up to fortune. Her mother died of black cholera when Edith** was young. After the funeral, her mother came back to creepily warn her to "beware of Crimson Peak."
Years later, Edith is an adult. She believes in ghosts and writes about them. While typing her novel, a handsome British stranger comes across her. The man introduces himself as Sir Thomas Sharpe (Tom Hiddleston. You know him as Loki and all around real life Disney prince. He is too sweet and charming for his own good), a baronet. His sister, Lucille (Jessica Chastain, you may recognize her from The Martian, Zero Dark Thirty, and Interstellar) is severe, beautiful, wears red marvelously, and kind of creepy.
After Mr. Cushing is murdered by a black gloved attacker (but the characters don't realize it's murder), Edith marries her handsome stranger (who definitely feels a little dangerous in a "everyone will fall in love anyway" kind of way. Like a more mysterious Guy of Gisborne from the BBC Robin Hood or, well, the handsome guy in a gothic romance....) and moves to his home in England.
The house is big, it is falling apart, and it is sinister. Lucille (who is referred to as Lady Lucille throughout the movie even though the children of baronets don't get curtesy titles. Fun fact. I do have a wrought-with-spoilers theory about why it artistically makes sense to do this though, so I'm giving them the benefit of the doubt) gets more disturbing and weird when they get home and refuses to give Edith a set of house keys.
Edith begins to experience all kinds of creepiness (which is constantly written off by her husband and sister in law, but it's not fully clear if they are purposefully gas-lighting her) which is made creepier by All The Fricking Clay. The house has a red clay depository (I'm now making up the language of clay mining. Please forgive me if you are a clay expert) and the red rises to the surface. There are parts of the house where the red oozes between the boards of the floor and runs down the walls. It's macabre. It's clay, not blood, but it still looks like it. When Edith first takes a bath, Thomas warns her that the water runs red before the clay clears from the pipes. It's weird and it's creepy. It's like the house bleeds.
Eventually Edith learns too much and her childhood friend shows up (having learned some things about the Sharpes). This launches events into over drive and the movie has it's climax.
So, how was this movie, really? Well, let's start with the obvious: despite what the makers would have you believe, it is absolutely a horror movie. There are ghosts. They jump out at you. I sat with my scarf balled up in my lap and kept scrunching it to my face, all ready to close my eyes. It was scary. It was eerie.
It was also fantastic. Guillermo Del Toro wrote and directed and of course he is marvelous. The visuals are absolutely stunning. They actually built the full house with a working elevator (I got really irritated every time the characters would stick their head into the elevator shaft though. Do they know nothing about elevator safety?? Also, I'm super sad because they built the house on a soundstage and had to tear it down after the shoot to make space). And then there are the colors. THE COLORS. There was so much red, which is great and makes sense. Red is usually sex, danger, and sometimes love (but kind of depends on the shade). Perfect for this. All the red of course is super obvious but it was done SO deliberately. I didn't notice during the movie but IMDB has since informed me that the only characters who wear red are the Sharpes and it never occurs in the sets except for the house and the estate. That's absolutely brilliant.
As a costumer type, I loved the wardrobe choices. Both Sharpe siblings dress incredibly well (but their clothes are just a touch shabby). Thomas wears nearly all black while Lucille wears incredibly rich, vibrant but dark colors, especially red. She is wearing red when we meet her and wears it often later as well. Edith, on the other hand, has clothes that are much newer (her family has money *right now*) and her colors are much fresher, younger, and lighter. Edith is blonde, the Sharpes are both dark haired. The juxtaposition could not be plainer.
Now: the acting.
Holy cow, these people are like gods. Mia Wasikowska was naive and innocent and curious and brilliant. Tom Hiddleston was dark and mysterious and completely someone you could fall very dangerously for. Jessica Chastain was basically a giant ball of perfect. She was terrifying and horrific and her character completely believed everything she said.
But here's the thing that got me: I FORGAVE TOM HIDDLESTON'S CHARACTER AT THE END.
Without giving more spoilers than what you otherwise might have predicted, Thomas Sharpe is absolutely in on the creepiness. He knows what's up. He is lying, he is watching his sister connive and scheme, but I still left the theater thinking he is a perfect little cinnamon roll.
That got me thinking, is it the character or is it the Hiddles himself? I think it's the Hiddles. Benedict Cumberbatch was originally cast in the Thomas Sharpe role but pulled out for unknown reasons (he has stated that everything is still good between Guillermo Del Toro and him), so I started thinking about other Hiddleston and Cabbagepatch characters. I typically think Loki is redeemable while Khan is less so. I love Billiardball Frumblesnatch and he plays dark magnificently well but I don't find myself falling in love with his characters and insisting that they're "just misunderstood" the way I do for Tom.
I don't have an answer for this, by the way, it's just my question: what is it about Tom Hiddleston that makes his despicable characters lovable? Richard Armitage is similar, his dark and dangerous characters (like Guy from Robin Hood) are still people you want to fall in love with. With Richard, I think it comes from his marvelous angst (best demonstrated as John Thornton in North and South, 2004. Also as Thorin in the Hobbit franchise) but Hiddles doesn't get angsty the same way. He is just straight up lovable, I think. I wonder if maybe knowing what he is like out of character (incredibly sweet, polite, and basically a perfect little ball of awww) influences how I watch him, except I was late to the Hiddles train and had seen (and loved) Loki long before I saw all his adorable interviews. I really think it's something else.
And I'm not the only one who thinks so: there is footage, I think from ComicCon (maybw 2014? Now that I'm talking about it I can't find the video) of Guillermo Del Toro saying that people could find Tom Hiddleston in an alley grinding puppies and they would still just go "awwwww." It's completely true. It's like the man can do no wrong. It is baffling and marvelous and now I need to go rewatch every Hiddles movie ever so I can attempt to comprehend what is going with his characters.
Final judgement? 10/10 would recommend. The creep factors are well demonstrated in the trailers, so you're pretty well prepared there. There is also some violence that is not in the trailers but is not overly gory (plenty of blood though, but all incredibly deliberate. Less Tarantino, more... I dunno, someone artsy and ruthless). The big question, though, is it horror or gothic romance? Meh. I don't know that the distinction is important. If your worry (like mine) of horror movies is it's a lot of scary without a lot of explanation while gothic romance is a lot of scary but with a plot and everything explained, than this is gothic romance. But it is scary so don't go into this thinking it won't be. It's plenty scary, but it's good.
*obligatory special shout out to my friends who came to see it with me and only laughed at me a little when I commented that Tom Hiddleston had taken my horror movie virginity*
**Stupid language complaint. I wanted this sentence to be "Her mother died...when she was young," but then it's not clear whether I mean Edith or her mother was young. Grumble.
Yesterday, I saw Crimson Peak (2015, Mia Wasikowska, Tom Hiddleston, Jessica Chastain). First off, IT WAS AMAZING. I loved it. I've never seen a horror movie before but decided the interviews with the cast and director where they insist it's more gothic romance than horror convinced me that I could brave this in order to see Tom Hiddleston (one always needs more Hiddles in your life).
I believe it can be best summed up like this: naive American, handsome Brit, creepy sister, loads of ghosts.
(Full disclosure: Part way through writing this I realized I was using "creepy" in every other sentence. Rather than edit and get creative with word choice I continued writing. After I finished, I replaced some of them with creepy synonyms that were suggested by thesaurus.com. Please enjoy)
So, a synopsis: Edith Cushing (Mia Wasikowska, you might know her from the 2011 Jane Eyre or the 2010 Tim Burton Alice in Wonderland) is an aspiring young American novelist who wishes to be more like Mary Shelley, who died a widow, than Jane Austen, who died a spinster. She says as much to a forgettable yet annoying character. She doesn't say so, but given that she gets told by her would be publisher that she should write a romance instead of her "ghost story" (she insists it's a story with a ghost in it), I can't help noticing that she aspires to Mary-certainly a ghost writer, rather than Jane-a romance writer.
Edith's father is an industrialist who worked his way up to fortune. Her mother died of black cholera when Edith** was young. After the funeral, her mother came back to creepily warn her to "beware of Crimson Peak."
Years later, Edith is an adult. She believes in ghosts and writes about them. While typing her novel, a handsome British stranger comes across her. The man introduces himself as Sir Thomas Sharpe (Tom Hiddleston. You know him as Loki and all around real life Disney prince. He is too sweet and charming for his own good), a baronet. His sister, Lucille (Jessica Chastain, you may recognize her from The Martian, Zero Dark Thirty, and Interstellar) is severe, beautiful, wears red marvelously, and kind of creepy.
After Mr. Cushing is murdered by a black gloved attacker (but the characters don't realize it's murder), Edith marries her handsome stranger (who definitely feels a little dangerous in a "everyone will fall in love anyway" kind of way. Like a more mysterious Guy of Gisborne from the BBC Robin Hood or, well, the handsome guy in a gothic romance....) and moves to his home in England.
The house is big, it is falling apart, and it is sinister. Lucille (who is referred to as Lady Lucille throughout the movie even though the children of baronets don't get curtesy titles. Fun fact. I do have a wrought-with-spoilers theory about why it artistically makes sense to do this though, so I'm giving them the benefit of the doubt) gets more disturbing and weird when they get home and refuses to give Edith a set of house keys.
Edith begins to experience all kinds of creepiness (which is constantly written off by her husband and sister in law, but it's not fully clear if they are purposefully gas-lighting her) which is made creepier by All The Fricking Clay. The house has a red clay depository (I'm now making up the language of clay mining. Please forgive me if you are a clay expert) and the red rises to the surface. There are parts of the house where the red oozes between the boards of the floor and runs down the walls. It's macabre. It's clay, not blood, but it still looks like it. When Edith first takes a bath, Thomas warns her that the water runs red before the clay clears from the pipes. It's weird and it's creepy. It's like the house bleeds.
Eventually Edith learns too much and her childhood friend shows up (having learned some things about the Sharpes). This launches events into over drive and the movie has it's climax.
So, how was this movie, really? Well, let's start with the obvious: despite what the makers would have you believe, it is absolutely a horror movie. There are ghosts. They jump out at you. I sat with my scarf balled up in my lap and kept scrunching it to my face, all ready to close my eyes. It was scary. It was eerie.
It was also fantastic. Guillermo Del Toro wrote and directed and of course he is marvelous. The visuals are absolutely stunning. They actually built the full house with a working elevator (I got really irritated every time the characters would stick their head into the elevator shaft though. Do they know nothing about elevator safety?? Also, I'm super sad because they built the house on a soundstage and had to tear it down after the shoot to make space). And then there are the colors. THE COLORS. There was so much red, which is great and makes sense. Red is usually sex, danger, and sometimes love (but kind of depends on the shade). Perfect for this. All the red of course is super obvious but it was done SO deliberately. I didn't notice during the movie but IMDB has since informed me that the only characters who wear red are the Sharpes and it never occurs in the sets except for the house and the estate. That's absolutely brilliant.
As a costumer type, I loved the wardrobe choices. Both Sharpe siblings dress incredibly well (but their clothes are just a touch shabby). Thomas wears nearly all black while Lucille wears incredibly rich, vibrant but dark colors, especially red. She is wearing red when we meet her and wears it often later as well. Edith, on the other hand, has clothes that are much newer (her family has money *right now*) and her colors are much fresher, younger, and lighter. Edith is blonde, the Sharpes are both dark haired. The juxtaposition could not be plainer.
Now: the acting.
Holy cow, these people are like gods. Mia Wasikowska was naive and innocent and curious and brilliant. Tom Hiddleston was dark and mysterious and completely someone you could fall very dangerously for. Jessica Chastain was basically a giant ball of perfect. She was terrifying and horrific and her character completely believed everything she said.
But here's the thing that got me: I FORGAVE TOM HIDDLESTON'S CHARACTER AT THE END.
Without giving more spoilers than what you otherwise might have predicted, Thomas Sharpe is absolutely in on the creepiness. He knows what's up. He is lying, he is watching his sister connive and scheme, but I still left the theater thinking he is a perfect little cinnamon roll.
That got me thinking, is it the character or is it the Hiddles himself? I think it's the Hiddles. Benedict Cumberbatch was originally cast in the Thomas Sharpe role but pulled out for unknown reasons (he has stated that everything is still good between Guillermo Del Toro and him), so I started thinking about other Hiddleston and Cabbagepatch characters. I typically think Loki is redeemable while Khan is less so. I love Billiardball Frumblesnatch and he plays dark magnificently well but I don't find myself falling in love with his characters and insisting that they're "just misunderstood" the way I do for Tom.
I don't have an answer for this, by the way, it's just my question: what is it about Tom Hiddleston that makes his despicable characters lovable? Richard Armitage is similar, his dark and dangerous characters (like Guy from Robin Hood) are still people you want to fall in love with. With Richard, I think it comes from his marvelous angst (best demonstrated as John Thornton in North and South, 2004. Also as Thorin in the Hobbit franchise) but Hiddles doesn't get angsty the same way. He is just straight up lovable, I think. I wonder if maybe knowing what he is like out of character (incredibly sweet, polite, and basically a perfect little ball of awww) influences how I watch him, except I was late to the Hiddles train and had seen (and loved) Loki long before I saw all his adorable interviews. I really think it's something else.
And I'm not the only one who thinks so: there is footage, I think from ComicCon (maybw 2014? Now that I'm talking about it I can't find the video) of Guillermo Del Toro saying that people could find Tom Hiddleston in an alley grinding puppies and they would still just go "awwwww." It's completely true. It's like the man can do no wrong. It is baffling and marvelous and now I need to go rewatch every Hiddles movie ever so I can attempt to comprehend what is going with his characters.
Final judgement? 10/10 would recommend. The creep factors are well demonstrated in the trailers, so you're pretty well prepared there. There is also some violence that is not in the trailers but is not overly gory (plenty of blood though, but all incredibly deliberate. Less Tarantino, more... I dunno, someone artsy and ruthless). The big question, though, is it horror or gothic romance? Meh. I don't know that the distinction is important. If your worry (like mine) of horror movies is it's a lot of scary without a lot of explanation while gothic romance is a lot of scary but with a plot and everything explained, than this is gothic romance. But it is scary so don't go into this thinking it won't be. It's plenty scary, but it's good.
*obligatory special shout out to my friends who came to see it with me and only laughed at me a little when I commented that Tom Hiddleston had taken my horror movie virginity*
**Stupid language complaint. I wanted this sentence to be "Her mother died...when she was young," but then it's not clear whether I mean Edith or her mother was young. Grumble.
Tuesday, October 20, 2015
STAR WARS MARATHON STAR WARS MARATHON STAR WARS MARATHON
AMC (my theater of choice) is having a Star Wars marathon at select theaters around the country on December 17th. Looks to me like you get there at 1AM, you get some goodies, you watch the first 6 movies (I'm guessing in episode order not release order but that's better anyway. You need episodes IV-VI as a cleanser) and then you get the premiere of VII. It looks like it'll be a huge amount of fun. It also costs $59.99 (which actually isn't that bad-for 7 movies it's less than $10/movie) and at least my nearest theater doing it is one that hasn't been redone-so stadium seating and not the big fancy plush seats. Between that and my ordinary movie date still being in high school (WHY DOES IT HAVE TO BE A THURSDAY), I don't think I'll be going (I've gotten spoiled by the big comfy seats, plus we're talking about a solid ALL DAY LONG [all 6 movies take about 14 hours] and that's an awful lot of time in an ordinary movie theater seat), but I definitely would support anyone who wants to go and I'll definitely be organizing a home marathon (the kind I can pause to go pee or get popcorn). Plan your home marathon to match mine and we can tweet along together! :)
Monday, October 19, 2015
We Spend An Awful Lot of Money Retrieving Matt Damon
Over the weekend, I saw The Martian (2015, Matt Damon, Jessica Chastain, Kristen Wiig). First of all, I loved it. I thought it was funny, I thought the science all sounded believable (this from someone who knows nothing about science. I believe everything Tony Stark or the Doctor says too), and I thought it demonstrated the "OH CRAP SOMEONE COULD DIE FOR REAL LIKE RIGHT NOW" very well, even as Matt Damon's character (Mark Watney) talked about his commander's terrible taste in music (disco) and whether or not he could call himself a pirate. He was alone for most of the movie, talking only into video diaries or to himself, and clearly the character is funny and likes to quip, so he quipped even as he stared death in the face.
Over all, The Martian was pretty well written, the acting was decent, and the cinematography was cool. We followed Mark Watney around Mars both with your standard omnipresent narrator type lens (which was really nothing special) and also with the video footage he was recording-using security cameras and his video log. It was a cool and completely appropriate to the situation way of making the cinematography not stand out, plus the video logs gave lots of chances for exposition and explanation. The acting was good enough that I didn't get pulled out of the movie to be all "oh look at Matt Damon making acting faces." The only exception to this was the most brilliant Sean Bean scene in all of history:
Sean Bean played a NASA administrative type and they named something "Operation Elrond." A character didn't know who Elrond was so Sean Bean had to explain about the Council of Elrond. It was the most fun and obvious Easter egg ever in the history of Easter eggs and definitely got a big laugh in the theater.
I saw the movie in 3D, which is usually fun. Unfortunately, I was sitting in the front row of the theater looking up at the screen at a funny angle. Everyone's feet looked big and their heads looked small. The dimensions were weird enough that somehow I spent the whole movie NOT recognizing Sebastian Stan's face (although I recognized his voice and was very confused as to whether or not it was him).
On the whole, The Martian was great, I recommend it, apparently most of the science is legit, and I will seriously consider acquiring the DVD when it comes out.
*obligatory special shout out to the babiest of brothers for his companionship for the seeing of aforementioned movie*
Over all, The Martian was pretty well written, the acting was decent, and the cinematography was cool. We followed Mark Watney around Mars both with your standard omnipresent narrator type lens (which was really nothing special) and also with the video footage he was recording-using security cameras and his video log. It was a cool and completely appropriate to the situation way of making the cinematography not stand out, plus the video logs gave lots of chances for exposition and explanation. The acting was good enough that I didn't get pulled out of the movie to be all "oh look at Matt Damon making acting faces." The only exception to this was the most brilliant Sean Bean scene in all of history:
Sean Bean played a NASA administrative type and they named something "Operation Elrond." A character didn't know who Elrond was so Sean Bean had to explain about the Council of Elrond. It was the most fun and obvious Easter egg ever in the history of Easter eggs and definitely got a big laugh in the theater.
I saw the movie in 3D, which is usually fun. Unfortunately, I was sitting in the front row of the theater looking up at the screen at a funny angle. Everyone's feet looked big and their heads looked small. The dimensions were weird enough that somehow I spent the whole movie NOT recognizing Sebastian Stan's face (although I recognized his voice and was very confused as to whether or not it was him).
On the whole, The Martian was great, I recommend it, apparently most of the science is legit, and I will seriously consider acquiring the DVD when it comes out.
*obligatory special shout out to the babiest of brothers for his companionship for the seeing of aforementioned movie*
Welcome, earthlings, to my new blog.
This is gonna be pretty straight forward: I watch and rewatch a lot of movies. As I watch stuff, I will tweet about it and then review it here.
There will be spoilers, sometimes, but I will give warnings and they'll be on movies that I sort of expect you to have seen.
If you have any movie suggestions, feel free to share :)
*obligatory special shoutout to the lovable Poof*
This is gonna be pretty straight forward: I watch and rewatch a lot of movies. As I watch stuff, I will tweet about it and then review it here.
There will be spoilers, sometimes, but I will give warnings and they'll be on movies that I sort of expect you to have seen.
If you have any movie suggestions, feel free to share :)
*obligatory special shoutout to the lovable Poof*
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)