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 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*

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.

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! :)

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*

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*