Movie Star Drool: Victor Frankenstein

*There may be spoilers. You are warned.

Howlers are more fun with friends. I saw this with my friend Kate and we clearly have way too much SCIENCE in our brains (I have a degree in epidemiology, she's finishing a PhD in linguistics) so we did some snickering and "no, that is not correct"-ing and generally had a good time 'shipping McAvoy and Radcliffe.

The plot for Victor Frankenstein is mostly cobbled together with a vague idea of what the original Mary Shelley book was about. The movie focuses on Victor Frankenstein's demons through the lens of Igor/no-name abused circus clown and his super-genius talent for correcting Frankenstein's experimental blockages. Plot connections are tenuous (did we need Andrew Scott's Scotland Yard detective, except as deus ex machina in reverse?) and half-baked (Jessica Brown Findlay's Lorelai is saved from dying in hospital by a wealthy Baron to be in his cabaret - which we don't see, ever - and also to be his beard in public but is apparently just accepted into society (which speaks to how someone didn't do his/her research into Victorian Society behavior and class beliefs) and also drags Radcliffe's Igor upstairs during a ball....the Baron wouldn't take that well). It all turns out as one expects. Particularly if you go into this expecting nothing but ridiculousness.

There is some great casting. Louise Brealey, of Sherlock and Bleak House fame, has the unfortunate and super offensive/inaccurate screen credit of "Sexy Society Girl" in a fantastic bit part where she gives excellent "shocked and offended because I am a LADY and we are discussing procreation" face during a fancy dinner. Freddie Fox can make a career playing upper-class Old Money Englishmen, because he is that good at it.  Victor's father is cast so deliciously I won't spoil it but for 5 minutes of screen time that actor was worth every second.  As Igor, Radcliffe wears two of the worst wigs currently in cinemas (although I am worried the second might have been his own hair with FAR too much mousse - not a good look) but he does some good physical acting as a hunchback and as the owner of a newly-straightened spine after Victor miraculously cures him through a combination of zit popping and chiropractic (it was gross, part of it). James McAvoy, though, drank the Kool-Aid for this movie.  He was SELLING that dialogue like the rent was due tomorrow. He had a lot of commitment and that went a ways toward making this movie less terrible than it could have been. A long way, LOOOOONG way, from being a good movie.

A+ set decoration and costume design. We commented a lot on the waistcoats McAvoy and Radcliffe wore, the textiles were very pretty. Jessica Brown Findlay wore beautifully vibrant clothes (guys, someone needs to cast her as Lena Heady's younger sister ASAP because man, does Findlay look like Heady did when she did some period films in the late 1990s/early 2000s).

In short: a fun popcorn movie, not a good movie in any way (has a really weird title card at the end of the credits that states how many people worked on the movie).

Previews:
1. Deadpool - in it, and I really hope the soundtrack is that dope.
2. Krampus - I get a distinct Drag Me To Hell vibe off this trailer and since I spent most of that movie with my hoodie pulled over my face like Kevin from South Park, I pass.
3. In the Heart of the Sea - I might be up for Ben Wishaw as Herman Melville and a sea-soaked Thor, er, Chris Hemsworth.
4. The Revenant - I think this was the movie that had some reviewer saying something like this wasn't a movie for women (yep).  Technically, Victor Frankenstein isn't a movie for women, either, since it clearly ranked only one named female character who did not audibly talk to another female character (there's a Mrs. Winthrop (uncredited) in the IMBd listing that I don't remember from the credits roll in the actual movie because it was really short) and a plot that is so full of holes it might be cinematic Swiss cheese.  And yet I paid 8$ plus tax for it.  If I don't see The Revenant in the theatre it's more likely due to the fact that I have yet to really like an Iñárritu film (haven't caught Birdman, yet).  I have seen my share of "brutal" movies (raise your hand if you've seen Salò).
5. The Hateful Eight - Tarantino.  I usually catch up with him after the DVD release.  And a three-hour movie really tests limits on my bladder.  However, if I luck out and any of the nearby theatres get the 70mm film (which I highly doubt) I might try for a screening.  (There are two named female characters! And Tarantino known for brutality onscreen! Now I'm on a rant....guess I need to take my new Mulholland Dr. Blu-ray out for a spin).

As If!: The Oral History of Clueless as told by Amy Heckerling and the Cast and Crew by Jen Chaney

Summary from Goodreads:
Acclaimed pop culture journalist Jen Chaney shares an oral history of the cult classic film Clueless in the ultimate written resource about one of the most influential, revered, and enduring movies of the 1990s—in celebration of its twentieth anniversary.

Will we ever get tired of watching Cher navigate Beverly Hills high school and discover true love in the movie Clueless? As if! Written by Amy Heckerling and starring Alicia Silverstone, Clueless is an enduring comedy classic that remains one of the most streamed movies on Netflix, Amazon, and iTunes even twenty years after its release. Inspired by Jane Austen's Emma, Clueless is an everlasting pop culture staple.

In the first book of its kind, Jen Chaney has compiled an oral history of the making of this iconic film using recollections and insights collected from key cast and crew members involved in the making of this endlessly quotable, ahead-of-its-time production. Get a behind-the-scenes look at how Emma influenced Heckerling to write the script, how the stars were cast into each of their roles, what was involved in creating the costumes, sets, and soundtrack, and much more.

This wonderful twentieth anniversary commemoration includes never-before-seen photos, original call sheets, casting notes, and production diary extracts. With supplemental critical insights by the author and other notable movie experts about why Clueless continues to impact pop culture, As If! will leave fans new and old totally buggin' as they understand why this beloved film is timeless.

The motion picture Clueless opened the summer between my junior and senior years of high school.  By the time we started school in the fall my classmates and I were fluent in Clueless-speak, "Whatever!" (complete with hand gesture) being the most popular by far. The over-the-knee-socks trend with Mary Janes and plaid miniskirts made an appearance (I had the Mary Janes).  We bought the VHS and watched it a lot - my crowd was mostly music and drama kids so quoting along with the dialogue was a frequent activity.

Now that Clueless is officially having its 20th birthday (and totally partied with the Haiti-ans) - ugh, when did I get old - Jen Chaney has pulled together the cast and crew for a delightful, dope oral history of the production and staying power of the movie.  She originally started the project for a magazine article but there is so much information here that I can't imagine having to pick and choose what parts to highlight in a magazine article, even a long one.  Almost everyone from the producers to the stars to the set decorators agreed to be interviewed and Chaney pulled in quotes from previously published pieces from the last 20 years.

The absolute best parts of this book are the sections dealing with casting, costuming, locations, and the soundtrack.  What would Clueless have been like had the producers pushed to use Lauryn Hill as Dionne rather than Stacey Dash who was so great in the role? Or if Seth Green was Travis?  The costume designer essentially created an entire fashion trend to put the Clueless girls at the cutting edge of fashion and work against the grunge aesthetic.  Turns out the liquor store with the creepy clown is a real place in LA (Chaney even interviewed the actor who played the robber).  And what Oasis song almost ended up on the Clueless soundtrack?  And what did the Bosstones really think about doing a teen movie that wasn't really in their target audience?  (And find out how "outtie" is really spelled....spoiler, that isn't the correct spelling or derivation, to my surprise.)

The only drawback to the book is that everyone is so darned nice about everything.  If you're looking for juicy Hollywood gossip, this book just doesn't really have it.  With the exception of some side-eye between producers, no one reports anything crazy happening on set or on press tour.  Amy Heckerling (the writer and director) was so great.  Wallace Shawn is very gracious.  Alicia Silverstone worked so hard (which she did, given that Cher was in almost every shot of the movie).  Paramount really got what Heckerling was going for.  Everyone thought the world of Brittany Murphy and her wide-eyed innocence and mourns her loss.  Etc, etc etc. Though we all look for drama in any Hollywood story, it is actually a little bit reassuring (though my cynical side feels like perhaps everyone was on their best interview behavior) to find that Heckerling's pastel-colored, happy, inclusive world of Clueless was supported by a lot of hard-working, gracious, talented people who worked as a team to put out an iconic, groundbreaking piece of art.

As If! is available July 7, wherever books are sold.

Dear FTC: I received a digital advance of this book from the publisher via Edelweiss.

The $11 Billion Year: From Sundance to the Oscars, an Inside Look at the Changing Hollywood System

Summary from Goodreads:
This chronicle of 2012 is a slice of what happened during a watershed year for the Hollywood movie industry. It's not the whole story, but it's a mosaic of what went on, and why, and of where things are heading.

What changed in one Hollywood year to produce a record-breaking box office after two years of decline? How can the Sundance Festival influence a film's fate, as it did for Beasts of the Southern Wild and Searching for Sugar Man, which both went all the way to the Oscars? Why did John Carter misfire and The Hunger Games succeed? How did maneuvers at festivals such as South by Southwest (SXSW), Cannes, Telluride, Toronto, and New York and at conventions such as CinemaCon and Comic-Con benefit Amour, Django Unchained, Moonrise Kingdom, Silver Linings Playbook, Les Misérables, The Life of Pi, The Avengers, Lincoln, and Argo? What jeopardized Zero Dark Thirty's launch? What role does gender bias still play in the industry? What are the ten things that changed the 2012 Oscar race?

When it comes to film, Anne Thompson, a seasoned reporter and critic, addresses these questions and more on her respected daily blog, Thompson on Hollywood. Each year, she observes the Hollywood machine at work: the indies at Sundance, the exhibitors' jockeying at CinemaCon, the international scene at Cannes, the summer tentpoles, the fall's "smart" films and festivals, the family-friendly and big films of the holiday season, and the glamour of the Oscars®. Inspired by William Goldman's classic book The Season, which examined the overall Broadway scene through a production-by-production analysis of one theatrical season, Thompson had long wanted to apply a similar lens to the movie business. When she chose 2012 as "the year" to track, she knew that box-office and DVD sales were declining, production costs were soaring, and the digital revolution was making big waves, but she had no idea that events would converge to bring radical structural movement, record-setting box-office revenues, and what she calls "sublime moviemaking."

Though impossible to mention all 670-plus films released in 2012, Thompson includes many in this book, while focusing on the nine Best Picture nominees and the personalities and powers behind them. Reflecting on the year, Thompson concludes, "The best movies get made because filmmakers, financiers, champions, and a great many gifted creative people stubbornly ignore the obstacles. The question going forward is how adaptive these people are, and how flexible is the industry itself?"

We've all been there - sitting in the full-to-overflowing movie theatre, having forked over our $10-12 (or more, depending on your market), and wondering how the heck the movie we're watching, and had been anticipating for some time, got made?  Or the reverse - a movie we anticipated never seems to appear in a movie theatre anywhere, except maybe in a second-run theatre months later, then very quietly appears on streaming and DVD and is probably the best movie made that year?  The motion picture industry seems a bit like a crapshoot sometimes and is a mechanism that I don't quite understand very well.  When It Books offered me a copy of The $11 Billion Year by Anne Thompson I immediately jumped on it.  Thompson is an excellent film critic and reporter - cf. Thompson on Hollywood - and has been doing her job long enough that she can write with authority (and get the good interviews). 

Thompson chronicles the 2012 year in film starting more-or-less with Sundance in January, skipping over the March 2012 Oscars (a reflection of the 2011 year) to head to Cannes, and then the summer blockbusters and conventions before heading into the serious Oscar contender season and holiday family movies.  She ends the book with the outcome of the March 2013 Oscars and how specific events during 2012 helped shape the eventual outcome of the ceremony.  Along the way, the 2012 domestic box office year was stuffed to overflowing with nearly $11 billion (only a few thousand shy, so just round up) - a fact that Thompson could never have predicted when she started the year.  That fact is actually what makes the book so interesting.  Motion picture financing and distribution is changing as so much of the world goes digital and forgoes the purchase of physical media, as evidenced by declining DVD sales and what had been a declining box office.  Blockbusters (aka summer tent-pole movies) take so much more money to make that a failure could ruin a company (i.e. John Carter - Disney was lucky to have both other revenue flows and also distribute The Avengers, because they had another tent-pole turkey in 2013, The Lone Ranger).  Independent filmmakers may choose to release via on-demand services after a festival premiere if a distribution deal isn't ideal or forthcoming.  Streaming services can either offer original content or do exclusive pre-DVD/blu-ray release rights.  And then there's the angling and scheduling releases to get the best coverage in awards season.

It's enough to make your head spin but Thompson does a great job at presenting all the information in a very balanced and readable way.  You do get her opinion on quality of movie on occasion but you can tell she is a film lover and wants good films to find their audiences.  I learned quite a lot - like the fact that a film must gross twice its production budget just to break even.  Who knew?  A glossary is provided in the back of the book but I found it rather selective (though funny in her examples).  A side effect of reading the book was the reminder of why I have trouble finding movies I want to watch in the theatre: I (25-39, female) am not the target demographic (male, 18-24).  A definite recommend for those who want to know more about the motion picture industry.

Dear FTC: I received a finished copy of this book for review from the publisher.

Matilda, read by Kate Winslet

Summary from Goodreads:
“The Trunchbull” is no match for Matilda!

Matilda is a sweet, exceptional young girl, but her parents think she's just a nuisance. She expects school to be different but there she has to face Miss Trunchbull, a kid-hating terror of a headmistress. When Matilda is attacked by the Trunchbull she suddenly discovers she has a remarkable power with which to fight back. It'll take a superhuman genius to give Miss Trunchbull what she deserves and Matilda may be just the one to do it!

Jackie gets full credit for finding this new audiobook edition of one of my favorite, favorite childhood books (apparently, Matilda is only 25 this year...which is weird because I would swear that I read it before age 10). Penguin Audio put out a Matilda audiobook READ BY KATE WINSLET!!

Breathe, breathe.

It is so, so, SO good. Winslet has an excellent reading voice and distinctive accents for each character (who knew that she had all those different voices in her?). I loved all of it. The only complaint I had (if it is a complaint) is that she's so dynamic in her reading that it was hard to get a middle-range volume set (was listening in the car so road noise was an issue) so perhaps the sound engineer needs to take another look.

BUY BUY BUY!  Run, do not walk to the store and BUY!!

Living With Shakespeare: Actors, Directors, and Writers on Shakespeare in Our Time

Summary from Goodreads:
Why Shakespeare? What explains our continued fascination with his poems and plays? In Living with Shakespeare, Susannah Carson invites forty actors, directors, scholars, and writers to reflect on why his work is still such a vital part of our culture.

We hear from James Earl Jones on reclaiming Othello as a tragic hero, Julie Taymor on turning Prospero into Prospera, Camille Paglia on teaching the plays to actors, F. Murray Abraham on gaining an audience’s sympathy for Shylock, Sir Ben Kingsley on communicating Shakespeare’s ideas through performance, Germaine Greer on the playwright’s home life, Dame Harriet Walter on the complexity of his heroines, Brian Cox on social conflict in his time and ours, Jane Smiley on transposing King Lear to Iowa in A Thousand Acres, and Sir Antony Sher on feeling at home in Shakespeare’s language. Together these essays provide a fresh appreciation of Shakespeare’s works as a living legacy to be read, seen, performed, adapted, revised, wrestled with, and embraced by creative professionals and lay enthusiasts alike.

The only drawback to working in a bookstore is that your fellow booksellers very quickly figure out all your book soft spots.  So I silently cursed the merch manager when he very casually said "Oh, hey, there's a new book of Shakespeare essays and one of the contributors is Ralph Fiennes" and handed over my dollars.  The other bonus on this collection is that it was edited by Susannah Carson who previously worked on the Austen collection A Truth Universally Acknowledged.

Living With Shakespeare has a very good range of essays on Shakespeare as man, playwright, and the plays as entities separate from their author by actors, directors, scholars, and writers (similar to the breadth in her volume of essays on Austen). So many of the contributors have "lived" with Shakespeare in so many ways.  Eleanor Brown, who wrote the wonderful novel The Weird Sisters, pops up.  As does James Franco, which seems on on the face of it but makes sense when you read it.  There is a 40 page essay by James Earl Jones about setting Othello that would probably have great merit for an actor (somewhat less for the lay-reader, I wasn't as interested in that level of nitty-gritty).  My favorite is by Harriet Walter (known to Janeites as Fanny Dashwood in the Ang Lee/Emma Thompson Sense and Sensibility adaptation) who gets into how Shakespeare may have viewed gender roles - great ideas there.

Very enjoyable and thought-provoking.

The Hobbit: An Unexpected Journey

So Peter Jackson has made a triolgy of movies about hobbitses and dwarves.  First up, The Hobbit: An Unexpected Journey.

I'm down for that.  Eh, yeah, it is nine hours of film, broken into three movies, which makes me a bit apprehensive since the book isn't even remotely that long, but I'll watch it.

And I liked it.  There were a few things I could have done without:  having obvious "jokes" simply because Martin Freeman is very funny and can do funny things when a troll farts in his face, Radagst the Brown was unnecessary, and the foreshadowing about a rise in evil things during a coucil between Elrond, Galadriel, Saruman, and Gandalf was way too heavy handed.  I don't know if this was due to the 48fps the film was shot in (I saw it in 2D, not 3D or I-MAX) but there was a glaring difference between practical and digial SFX work.  The Great Goblin and the Pale Orc were so obviously digitally created that it looked terribly next to the actors wearing SFX make-up.  The only time this wasn't obvious was in the Gollum scenes which makes me wonder why more care wasn't taken with the rest of the film.

But I have two words for you:  Richard.  Armitage.  Oh, my God.  That is the hottest dwarf king/prince/mercenary around.  It is a huge departure from the book, creating a conflicted hero in Aragorn's likeness (who is an even more conflicted character than he is in Tolkien's original), but it works if only because Armitage is such a great actor.

Previews
1. After Earth - didn't Will Smith already make a movie like this?
2. The Host - which totally does not seem like the book, but whatever; I'll only watch it Jackie or Jessica want to, I'm not going to watch it of my own volition
3. Warm Bodies - this looks pretty funny and I have a soft spot for Nicholas Hoult
4. Beautiful Creatures - possibly awful, but I might watch this just for the cast (Emma Thompson and Jeremy Irons)
5. Pacific Rim - Guillermo del Toro + Idris Elba + Real Steel + alien invasion...this might be pretty watchable

Anna Karenina (on screen)

I practically stalked all the local movie theatre listings until one (the one across town, of course) started showing Anna Karenina.  There was no way I was going to not see this - Joe Wright direction, Tom Stoppard adaptation, Dario Marienelli score...I am so in.  I even turned down an extra shift at the store because I essentially had one shot to see this.

I loved it.  The idea to set the story in a proscenium theatre and use the backstage, the floor, the seats, the loge, everything was genius.  It served to heighten the distinction between the false world of rules inhabited by Anna/Vronsky/Karenin and the natural world that Levin adores - when the camera finally breaks through the back-wall of the stage and move out into the fields was amazing.  Also amazing were the trademark Joe Wright tracking shots - one single take with a spiraling camera to follow Levin from Oblonsky's office to the restaurant was just mind-boggling to think of all the set-up involved.

The casting - with one glaring exception - was excellent.  Although not my favorite actress, Kiera Knightly did well as Anna.  Jude Law played against type as the older, very staid, very Orthodox Karenin.  Alicia Vikander (who I didn't realize was both Swedish and about twenty-five) was perfect as the young, starry-eyed Princess Kitty.  Even the small roles were perfect - Kelly MacDonald as Dolly, Matthew MacFadyen as Oblonsky, Olivia Williams as Countess Vronksy, and Ruth Wilson (who I absolutely did not recognize as a blonde) was the insipid yet dangerous Princess Betsy.  Loved the cameos - Michelle Dockery and Emily Watson as ancillary Russian aristocracy - with Shirley Henderson and her wonderful cutting voice as a disapproving matron at the Opera.

Which brings me to my glaring exception - Aaron Taylor-Johnson as Vronsky.  What an annoying, unconvincing little brat.  He isn't that attractive, he doesn't even look seductive.  Just a poseur with a wimpy little moustache.  He had big shoes to fill (Kevin McKidd, Sean Bean, Christopher Reeve, and Fredric March) and just didn't pull it off.  I didn't believe that Anna forsakes her husband and the child she can't hardly bear to leave behind for him.  Ugh.  There must be a thousand and one other young, talented, smoldering actors they could have cast instead.

To end on a happier note, I have to mention the music.  The music.  Dario Marianelli (who previously won an Oscar for his work on Atonement, was nominated for Pride and Prejudice, and also wrote the music for Jane Eyre, Salmon Fishing in the Yemen, and V for Vendetta) is like a chameleon.  Every score sounds different from the previous one because he fits the type of music to the film.  For Atonement the music is very longing, but stoic.  Pride and Prejudice is very late-eighteenth/early-nineteenth century in feeling with a lot of solo piano mixed with reels and period-sounding pieces.  Jane Eyre is free-spirited and lonely, like the moor Jane wanders across.  For Anna Karenina, Marianelli has created a score reminiscent of classic Russian ballet (the great walzes of Tchaikowsky and Prokofiev) mixed with the simplicity of Russian folksong.  It is so, so wonderful to listen to, especially "Dance With Me" which makes me want to twirl around the room (caveat: this is a choreographed ballroom scene which Aaron Taylor-Johnson makes a mockery of by not adequately performing the choreography, making it yet another thing I don't like).

Sorry, no previews.  The new Blogger app for iPhone apparently ate my original draft post so I can't remember the previews aside from Promised Land (eh....) and the one where Ewan MacGregor and family are in the tsunami. Oh, Great Gatsby, too (which looks both crazy and amazing).

Skyfall

James Bond is fifty years old this year - he has never looked better.  I've been excited about Skyfall since shooting started after MGM got itself out of financial trouble.

Daniel Craig, at the behest of M and Her Majesty's government, is after a terrorist who has acquired a list of embedded MI-6 agents.  During pursuit one of the terrorist's minions Bond is accidentally shot by a fellow agent, falling into a river (leading to one of the best opening title sequences, with theme song by Adele).  He is announced as deceased.

Which any Bond fan knows is false because that would make a really short movie.  C.f. You Only Live Twice.  While Bond recuperates on a desert island the terrorist begins releasing agents' names - deliberately taunting M.  A decidedly shaky, out of shape Bond returns to service.  M trusts him, a fellow government wonk (played brilliantly by Ralph Finnes) disagrees.  Bond does his job and brings in the terrorist: Silva.

Silva, as played by Javier Bardem, is the Bond villain to end all Bond villains.  He's a megalomaniac.  Without conscience.  He pushes the envelope (there's a brief hint of a homoerotic interplay with Bond).  Silva has this weird, creepy little laugh.  And don't get me started on the amazing SFX work done when Silva takes out his partial plate/bridge.  Ack, ack, ack.

But the greatest part of this movie is Judi Dench in this, her best M outing yet.  While she had a greatly enlarged part in The World is Not Enough, Dame Judi brings gravitas, humor, and a beautiful performance as someone who can't afford to second-guess or doubt her decisions.

I loved the score, the cinematography (there is an amazing fight sequence with a sniper in a high-rise that is backlit with rotating neon ad signs - wow), and the casting (Ben Wishaw as the new Q was genius, pun intended).  It got a little dusty in the theatre toward the end.  My only issue was the standard-issue "expendable Bond girl", Severine: if she's just confessed to being a child prostitute/abused woman Bond really ought not to sneak into her shower like a creeper.  Just saying.

Previews:
1. Jack Reacher - totally looks just like Mission Impossible
2. Iron Man 3 - aw man, please tell me they aren't going to kill Pepper off just for kicks
3. Hobbit - Richard Armitage, squeee!!!
4. Red Dawn - No.  Just no.
5. Django Unchained - Tarantino and Christoph Walz reunited.

Cloud Atlas (on the screen)

Cloud Atlas is a book that has been circulating in my periphery for some time.  As a Booker short-lister, I would likely be reading it as part of my Booker Project.  It was also rumored to be "unfilmable" which really got my attention when the Wachowski's announced they had finally managed to adapt the novel and turn it into a film co-directed by Tom Twyker (who directed the Perfume adaptation, another novel said to be "unfilmable").  It had apparently taken years - no studio really wanted it, the funding was unstable, but they had managed to cast good A-list actors (Tom Hanks, Halle Berry, Susan Sarandon, Hugo Weaving).  The more I read about the film, the more I knew I wanted to see it.

I didn't care about the reviews (which were kind of a mixed bag, judging from what I saw on Twitter, ranging from "breathtaking" and "beautiful" to "pretentious art-house" and "boring").  I didn't care that it was over three hours long.  I saw one trailer and Cloud Atlas immediately went on my "must-see" list for Fall 2012.

Jessica and I chose a 500pm-ish showing of the movie which conveniently gave us the matinee price for a movie that would let out around 830.  Ha. 

Cloud Atlas is one of the best movies of the year.  I thank the creators for pursuring the project throughout all the obstacles placed in their way.  It is beautiful and breathtaking and a work of art.  It is wonderfully composed, shot by shot.  The score by Twyker, Johnny Klimek, and Reinhold Heil is so lovely and perfect that I immediately bought it on iTunes.  This is a long movie, so make sure you visit the ladies' before you settle in, but it didn't feel like an obvious three-hour movie; it felt like perhaps two hours, but I wasn't checking my watch like I have with other, shorter films (Transformers 2, I'm looking at you).  The cross-cutting of the six timelines was fantastic.

I liked the multiple-roles-per-actor idea and it worked well on the whole, although it is very apparent that Tom Hanks really isn't good at accent work (his Scottish mobster role was actually pretty nails-on-chalkboard).  Even though his Zachry character resembled Forrest Gump more than I expected he did make the "dialect" used in those Far Future scenes understandable.  Hugo Weaving was wonderful as the dreadful Nurse Noakes, playing off Jim Broadbent's indignant elderly gentleman.

Although all the sections were beautifully done my favorite timeline was the neo-Seoul/Sonmi-451 section. It was obviously one of the Wachowskis' sections with visuals reminiscent of the Matrix and a similar type of rebellion at its core.  I had never seen Doona Bae's work before and she absolutely blew me away.  There were tears.  She was able to convey so much emotion and compassion just by being so calm and still when there was so much other action around her.  I was also impressed with Jim Sturgess.  I hadn't yet liked many of his movies and his performance of Hae-Joo was better than I had expected

This isn't a perfect movie.  Some of the special effects makeup is funky (the "aging" makeup looks too crinkly and dry and the prosthetics used to make the non-Asian actors Korean gave everyone an odd Botox look) and I've mentioned the issue with the accents.  I will agree with some critics who said that the message of the movie did tend to bash viewers over the head by the end.  But those things didn't detract from my enjoyment of the film.  Cloud Atlas is the reason why independent films exist, especially those requiring larger budgets - it could never exist otherwise.

Previews:
1. The Impossible - follows a vacationing family through the aftermath of the 2004 tsunami in Thailand.  Good cast (Ewan MacGregor, Naomi Watts).
2. Parker - Jason Stathem, doing what he does best, this time with JLo in a plot similar to that of The Italian Job (which he was in, oy)
3. Silver Linings Playbook - looks kind of goofy in a fun way
4. Gangster Squad - Ryan Gosling does LA Confidential?

The Bourne Legacy

I liked the first three Bournes (maybe the second not as much, since they shot his wife) so a new Bourne movie sounded great.  As a plus, Jeremy Renner and Rachel Weisz were cast in this movie.  The original release date was listed for my birthday but it didn't arrive until the week later (boo).

I liked it.  Sure, it's an attempt to extend the Bourne franchise without Jason Bourne himself but I think it's good move.  Renner's character, Aaron Cross, has different motivations than Bourne and Weiszs's character, as an insider, gives a different spin on the program Cross is in.  Edward Norton plays a fantastic beaurocrat/govenment bad guy willing to burn everything just to keep it out of the Congressional hearings (the movie seems to start just around the time Bourne 3 gets going and then continues after Pam Landy has started whistleblowing).  The narrative arc of the story gets a bit murky once the action moves to the Philippines but I enjoyed the movie greatly.

(Rumor has it that both Aaron Cross and Jason Bourne will be in the next movie - please, please give me a five-ten minute fight between them before they realise they're on the same side.)

Previews (lots!):
1. Despicable Me 2 - cute teaser trailer, the little yellow dudes are the way to go
2. Silver Linings Playbook - looks really good, Bradley Cooper as a nutjob is sort of appealing (plus Jennifer Lawrence)
3. Life of Pi - haven't read the book yet, but this is Ang Lee and looks gorgeous
4. Flight - well, this doesn't seem as interesting to me
5. Zero Dark Thirty - I'm not sure about this one but I'm sure other people will see this in droves
6. Les Miserables - I love the musical but I really can't figure out why this one is a Christmas release...not very Christmas-y

Magic Mike

So, having heard Magic Mike was pretty good (and I'm all for hot men wearing not much in the way of clothes) I went to see it with Jessica.  I would have gone earlier but decided that going to see a movie about male strippers by myself smacked of desperation.

It's good.  It makes the most of Channing Tatum's limited range and has really nice cinematography (uses the beachy locales well).  I am absolutely convinced that Matthew McConnaghey's character was a closeted gay man - there was just something off about how he interacted with women and how touchy-feely he got with The Kid during the "dance lesson" plus he's a terrible stripper.

Two points:
- I wouldn't have opened the movie with Dallas's soliloquy.  It was too much a shift from him to Tatum's character heading to his contruction job without explaining much.
- Alex Pettyfer has some really unfortunate tattoos, not attractive at all

1. The Campaign - eh, maybe...sometimes Will Farrell gets on my nerves with these characters
2. Paranormal Activity 4 - please, make it stop!
3. The Words - is it a thriller? or a love story?  I can't tell
4. House at the End of the Street - I've never been a big horror fan, maybe when it's out on DVD?

Spiderman

So I went with some friends (who are better Spiderman fans than I am) to see the new The Amazing Spider-man.  After the mess of the last three, I was definitely not going in with high hopes.

Well, it was really enjoyable.  Andrew Garfield is really funny and he fits the role of high school misfit/smart kid very well.  Emma Stone is the cutest as Gwen Stacy (except her clothes, who dresses like that in high school?).  Rhys Ifans is quite believable as the bad dude.  Good scriptwriting, too, which was sorely lacking in the previous two films.

I was glad we didn't go to see it in 3D - there were many swooping shots and I'm pretty sure those would have been motion-sickness inducing.

Previews (and you know these are going to be killer):
1. The Dark Knight Rises - longer trailer sequence (finally); it finally looks like a good movie
2. The Bourne Legacy - THIS OPENS ON MY BIRTHDAY!! (at least, the trailer said August 3 - stupid IMDB says August 10, boo)  I'm totally going to see me some Jeremy Renner (also, I heard a rumour that the next Bourne will have both Jason Bourne and Aaron Cross - please be true!)
3. Paranorman - no, no, no, no, no (what are they, desperate??)
4. The Watch - eh, maybe...it does look funny. 
5. Total Recall - I was pretty skeptial about this until I saw the preview.  Not too bad.  I also find Kate Beckinsale more believable as a super-assassin masquerading as Quaid's wife than Sharon Stone (drawback - Beckinsale and Jessica Biel look way too much alike, got them confused at times in the trailer).

Brave

Being at loose ends for the July 4th holiday (wow, a whole day where I don't have to work either job...what will I do with myself?) I decided to take myself to see Pixar's Brave. 

Note to self: please don't go to a children's matinee alone.  On a holiday.  Ever again.  Not worth the ticket discount.

I loved this movie.  It didn't tug on the heartstrings as much as Toy Story or Up but it was snappy and funny like Monsters, Inc.  Kelly MacDonald was such a great choice as Merida (according to IMDB, they'd originally wanted Reese Witherspoon - WTF? bad idea) and then Pixar threw in a whole raft of known Scottish actors (Billy Connolly, Kevin McKidd, Craig Ferguson) plus my very favorite Emma Thompson.

I loved the soundtrack (went out and bought it on the way home).  And, in typical Disney fashion, the comic relief was perfect - Merida's three little, always-hungry brothers. 

(And there was a short ahead of Brave, the lovely La Luna - don't be late!)

Previews:
1. Hotel Transylvania - appears to have a good voice cast but, meh?
2. Paranorman - I've seen this trailer 5 times now, the exact same trailer...now I don't want to see the movie (not that I ever did)
3. Ice Age: Continental Drift - I was cracking up.  Maybe one for DVD veiwing later
4. Finding Nemo 3D - I'll see this with friends.  Dori!!
5. Monsters University - A most excellent teaser trailer.  Totally going to see this.

Snow White and the Huntsman

Snow White and the Huntsman had me when Charlize Theron got cast as the evil queen.  I mean, seriously - she's absolutely gorgeous and she got the Oscar for playing Eileen Wournos.  Shit just got real.  Admittedly, I was not as enthusiastic about KStew playing Snow White.  She looks the part, granted, but I haven't been impressed with her acting since Speak and that's going back a ways.  The rest of the cast (Chris Hemsworth, Sam Claflin, and the always-ready-to-play-a-supporting-Dad-role Vincent Regan) had me intrigued.

And then the stills were released - yes, this was an opening weekend movie for me.

I really liked it.  Yes, the story is predictable, and, yes, KStew didn't blow me out of the water with her acting but it was better than her performances in the Twilight films.  But Charlize Theron makes this movie - she's not just a bat-shit crazy queen, behind all that she's a woman determined to never let a man rule her again, obsessed with beauty as her only "power".  There's a depth to the character that isn't seen in the fairy tale.

The cinematography was excellent.  There was an amazing shot of the castle in the morning light.  It had to be a composite - the sun on the water was real but the castle had to be CGI - and you really couldn't tell the difference.  The SFX work with the "glass" soldiers was inspired and this movie needs an Oscar nomination at minimum for the make-up work on Charlize Theron.  I also liked they way the fairy tale was manipulated to be less prince-saves-princess and more princess-saves-her-own-skin (with the exception of the kiss to wake her up, but there's a twist on that, too) and the set-up of a love triangle.

I have a few quibbles.  One, the overt Christian/Catholic religion stuff clashed badly with the overt paganistic/child-of-nature overtones and also went nowhere.  If you're going to have Snow White say the Lord's Prayer and have cardinals at her coronation, then throw in a priest or two trying to condemn Ravenna as a witch or something.  Two, the Ravenna's castle take-over makes little sense timeline wise - wouldn't it be better to wait until the wedding guests leave?  Then you can kill the King in private and no one is the wiser...unless you're a bat-shit crazy evil queen with a revenge streak a mile wide (I guess this is less of a quibble and more of a logistics thing).  Three, I find it ridiculous that they did face-replacement, etc. to put normal-height actors' faces on little peoples' bodies.  I recognized Eddie Marsan, Nick Frost, Ian McShane, etc. but their presence didn't seem integral to their parts.  There had to be eight (or more) male actors of the little people persuasion available - if Willow can find a whole movie full, there have to be enough for Snow's dwarves (hey, Mirror, Mirror managed).

Previews
1. House at the End of the Street - Jennifer Lawrence, suitably creepy, not quite ready to view Elizabeth Shue as a mom of a teenager.
2. Step Up Revolution - the story is secondary to the dancing, definitely a talent showcase for different dance forms (and it looks slick)
3. Katy Perry: Part Of Me - I dunno...meh?
4. Les Miserables - um, heck yes!  I am a little worried about Russell Crowe as Javert...will Stars be the same?  (and no, Taylor Swift is NOT Eponine)
5. The Bourne Legacy - Jeremy Renner!  Looks like a great action flick

Mirror Mirror

Call me crazy, but I got a hankering to see Tarsem Singh's Mirror, Mirror before it left the theatres.  I've never been disappointed in his visual style...just in the scriptwork (and I'm not too sure where the fault lies in that).

Mirror, Mirror is no different.  Shot composition is excellent.  The use of color made the screen seem like Technicolor made new - bright, showy tones for the Queen's court, warm browns and greens for the dwarves' home.  The costume design, courtesy of the late Eiko Ishioka (her last movie), was fanciful and character-appropriate.  The music - provided by one of my favorite film composers, Alan Menken - brought the fairy-tale charm.  The prologue (voice-over aside) could stand on it's own as a short animated film: ceramic puppetwork that acts out the backstory.

And then there's the script and dialogue work. 

This is marketed as a children's movie.  I get it.  But couldn't Mare Winningham get better dialogue than what she does (and a better character name - Baker Margaret? Is she the lady's maid, too?)?  And couldn't Nathan Lane avoid overtly Nathan Lane lines like "When I was a cockroach a grasshopper tried to take advantage of me!"  Funny...but out of place in this movie.   Armie Hammer suffers from having almost nothing to do except have Julia Roberts fawn over his naked chest (and speaking of that, there were really young kids in my audience and they got super bored during the sexual tension scenes - I was snickering because it was so contrived).

The dialogue and accents were all over the map.  If you're going to build a world, make it believable to some extent.  You can't have Julia Roberts attempting a mid-Atlantic/soft English accent, Armie Hammer as himself (Midwest US), Nathan Lane as himself (Timon the Meerkat all the way), the dwarves all sound like they're from New York, and Lily Collins sounds nothing like her father (who is played by Sean Bean using his own North Yorkshire accent).  And the costumes are vaguely French mid-eighteenth century.

Mirror, Mirror also relies way too heavily on Chekhov's Gun: "If in Act I you have a pistol hanging on the wall, then it must fire in the last act."  The audience is told in the prologue voice-over (done by Julia Roberts) that we must remember that the King gives Snow his dagger, it will be important later.  There's also overt shots of a certain necklace....this all ties in with the casting: don't advertise that Sean Bean is the King, then keep him out of the action until the last FIVE MINUTES of the film....I had the outcome of the film called once the live action started.  Sorta boring then.  And kids aren't that stupid.

Previews:
1. Paranorman - eh, still not impressed.
2. Three Stooges - No.  Just....no.  Ugh.
3. Madagascar 3: Europe's Most Wanted - this does look cute (and great line in the trailer: You can't drive a car, only people and penguins!)
4. Pirates: Band of Misfits - meh, still not interested
5. Dark Shadows - this looks stupid and I don't remember the TV show as being stupid

The Avengers!!

Midnight premiere!  Whee!  I'm almost certain we had the theatre full of Joss Wheedon geeks. And Joss Wheedon douchebag fans - had a few of those, too.

With the buildup of the other Marvel movies (Captain America, Thor, two Hulks, and two Iron Men) The Avengers movie was going to succeed or fail on an epic scale.

I'm glad to say that the balance tips in favor of succeed.  Nick Fury's ragtag-ish band of demigods, geniuses, and super-soldiers mixed well.  It's a superhero/comic book movie with a buddy-cop vibe.  Wheedon picked through his characters' big personalities and let them pick on each other: Tony Stark and Bruce Banner trade mild barbs while simultaneously designing a hightech tracking system; Thor, Iron Man, and Captain America beat the tar out of each other school-yard style; Agent Coulson gets a fanboy moment.  As with Wheedon's well-known TV shows, the dialogue is snappy and comebacks crack one after another.

A note for the fanboys and girls out there:  THERE IS NO NEED TO BE THE LOUDEST ASSHOLE IN THE THEATRE.  You like Joss Wheedon, great.  There is no need to yell at the screen during a very poignant moment in the film.  You ruin it for the rest of us.  Save it for the DVD release.

Preview goodness:
1. Prometheus - I. Can. Not. Wait.  Michael Fassbender in an Alien movie directed by Ridley Scott.  Will be amazing.
2. The Amazing Spider-Man - I'm not sure how I feel about this.  I've never been super interested in Spider-Man as a character...I've got friends who are excited about this so I'm pretty sure I'll be seeing this in the theatre.
3. Frankenweenie - What? Oh, Tim Burton has an entire movie based on a meh picture book. Yawn.  I'm so over Tim Burton.
4. The Dark Knight Rises - I feel like the trailers are failing this movie.  Then again, this is a movie that will make serious box office money even if it's terrible.
5. Brave - SQUEEEEE!!!!!!!!!

A Horrible Experience of Unbearable Length: a mini-review

A Horrible Experience of Unbearable Length (a phrase drawn from Ebert's review of Transformers: Revenge of the Fallen) is a really nice collection of Ebert's movie reviews for movies he felt were on the failing side. He and I almost always have the same opinion on movies so I enjoy both his opinion and the seemingly effortless way he writes them. I've read his first two collections of bad movie reviews (I Hated, Hated, Hated This Movie and Your Movie Sucks), would love to read the next.

We disagreed on Thor (I had so much fun watching this movie, I bought the Blu-ray+digital copy, but he only gave it 1.5 stars - did we watch the same thing?  In the gamut of movies to hate on, this is not one them) and Your Highness (I hated it so much - thank god I didn't actually pay extra money to see it since I have HBO - I would have given it maybe 0.25 stars only because there are things like Human Centipede that exist to deserve zero stars but Ebert gave Your Highness a full star).

The Hunger Games: On the big screen!

22 bookstore employees and assorted friends and family members.  2 rows of a movie theatre booked.  Midnight premiere.  Hmm, must be The Hunger Games.



This had to be one of the best book-to-movie adaptations I've seen in quite a long time.  Being a first-person narrative, it probably wasn't easy.  There wasn't too much exposition so the story didn't feel bogged down in trying to explain how Panem came into being or why Katniss and Gale are out hunting beyond a dead electric fence or why the citizens of the Capitol treat the Hunger Games like the World Cup soccer tournament.  The two small added scenes were quite clever and created the layer of manipulative government Katniss suspects in the book.  It was a good two hours of entertainment.

The casting for this movie is spot on.  Jennifer Lawrence owns Katniss inside and out.  Josh Hutcherson as Peeta is effortlessly charming.  President Snow (Donald Sutherland) looks sweetly paternal.  Stanley Tucci as Cesar-the-TV-personality is almost exactly like I imagined him in the book - charming, smarmy, false, and an outrageous blue bouffant.  Liam Hemsworth looks good as Gale (capable, big, strong, quiet) but doesn't have much to do so the adaptations for Catching Fire and Mockingjay (why these three movies weren't shot back-to-back since it was practically a given that The Hunger Games would make bank for Lionsgate...it out-pre-sold the last Harry Potter and Twilight movies) are more important for him.

Now, there are two drawbacks.  One (minor spoiler if you haven't read the books - and if you haven't read the books then you really ought to), I never felt Katniss and Peeta were in mortal danger at the end of the Games.  There are serious concerns about their injuries in the book but neither of them have more than a few scratches in the fight with Cato.  This doesn't provide enough of a contrast with the love angle Kaniss has to play with Peeta.  I fault the directing on that one.

As to the second drawback, this is a major fault of both the cinematographer and director.  Nearly every part of this movie was shot using shaky-cam/handheld work (exceptions are Cesar's segments which were obviously steadycam/crane/dolly shots).  The shaky camera combined with quick cuts running segments through woods with light filtering through leaves and foliage flashing past the camera added all up to one thing: motion sickness.  I don't get motion sickness - you can put me on the craziest roller coaster and I am good to go - but this really got to me (a quick poll of the group members revealed that most of us started feeling queasy during the movie).  We were sitting near the front and that probably made it worse so I would recommend sitting in the back to you have other places to look during the movie if you need the room to stop spinning.  There wasn't any need to have the shaky camera work throughout the movie.  The fast cuts were enough.

Previews:
1) Movie the Movie: ??? was this for real?  or is it a spoof of a trailer??  I dunno.
2) ParaNorman - looks like Coraline, possibly might be cute
3) The Amazing Spiderman - not sure what to think; since I'm not a Spiderman afficionado I'll defer to my friends who are and they say this looks good
4) Titanic 3D - Yarf; money-making grab by Cameron and I don't get WHY they had to post convert it to 3D because it's going to look icky and dark (although, confession, even though I ding this movie for the story it has great effects and I get all choked up every time the theme music comes up)
5) The Host - the most low-rent teaser trailer ever; it's currently filming so they just put pictures representing all genders and cultural types with the "alien" ring around their pupils culminating with Saoirse Ronan...boooooorrrrrrinnnnnggggg (and the book is just Twilight with Aliens instead of Vampires, trust me I know; I read it)
6) What to Expect When You're Expecting - this does look very funny ("my kid ate a cigarette" "no judging") so I might break my rule about seeing comedies/rom-coms infested with celebrities
7) Breaking Dawn Part 2 - also a low-rent teaser; seriously, all they had ready was a shot of Bella stalking a deer?  That movie is already in the can.  Boring.

(I was disappointed in the trailers this go round - with all the super-awesome movie due out this summer this wasn't a great selection; I get that this is a "teen" movie but there are more things to pick that are shot/have better trailers)

Beauty and the Beast: 3D!!!!!

As I've said elsewhere, on various platforms, Disney's Beauty and the Beast is one of my favorite movies.  Maybe because of the Ashman/Menken score, maybe because it's my favorite fairytale.  So when Disney put B&B back in theatres, I merrily went off to the movie theatre with Jackie and Mediazombie.

It was in 3D.  I didn't really care - I'd have gone if it were plain, old 2D - but it was good in some sections.  The "Be Our Guest" sequence did have some nice 3D effects, as well as "Kill the Beast."  Obvious new smoke effects stood out.  I was glad that Disney didn't recut the movie to insert any new sequences.  They could have - "Human Again" was originally written for the movie, taken out, used in the Broadway musical, then fully animated for the DVD release - but it was nice to watch the movie just like I did the first time.

Idea for marketing:  Sing-along showtimes?  We all commented that we wanted to sing all the songs.

Preview goodness:
1. The Pirates! Band of Misfits - completely dense, unfunny-looking ClayMation children's movie (and apparently changed now that some groups took offense to a leprosy joke - needless to say, the Wallace-and-Gromit crowd aren't old enough to know what leprosy is)
2. The Lorax - wan't my favorite Seuss book but nice to hear Danny DeVito again
3. Star Wars - fail
4. Brave - looks like so much fun, complete with Scots accents (and Billy Connolly!!  Kevin McKidd!!  Emma Thompson!!!  Kelly MacDonald!!); WANT to see this
5. Finding Nemo 3D - awww, cute!

NC-17: Yes, please!

Steve McQueen's new movie Shame - about a New York man's sex-addiction problem, portrayed by Michael Fassbender - has received an NC-17 rating for "some explicit sexual content" (it's pretty well-publicized that there is full-frontal nudity).  The rating isn't terribly surprising to me.  The MPAA has had its collective head buried up its tailpipe for years and movie theatre chains treat the ratings as marketing tools.  I knew since the project was announced I'd have to wait and catch Shame on either Netflix or just buy the DVD because, although I live in a pretty progressive college town, both large theatres are owned by chains and we don't have a good indie/art house movie theatre (the Bijou on the University campus does it's best but it only has one screen and limited seating).  Y'all have seen this rant before back when Jane Eyre released.

What surprised me, and I completely applaud McQueen and Fox Searchlight for the decision, is that the rating will stand.  They aren't appealing or re-cutting the movie to get it down to an R.  The movie is what it is - a raw, unflinching portrait of a successful, polished man with a secret whose world comes crashing down when his sister winds up moving with him.  It can't be told with innuendo and still get the same emotional impact.  Besides - and get this, movie theatre chain owners - in no way do I want to watch this movie with a pack of immature teens.  This is not a movie you watch just to see some hotties in the buff* (and if that's the reason you want to see it, I think you'll be bored).  McQueen's earlier film Hunger (also starring Michael Fassbender) is also a raw, unflinching film with a good deal of male nudity but it's also violent, brutal to the point of savagery.  Watching naked men getting beaten and violated (and staving themselves to death) is not sexy.**

HixFix.com has a great interview with Carey Mulligan (she plays Fassbender's troubled sister) where she expresses irritation over the NC-17 rating - not because the film has nude scenes, but because those nude scenes aren't "sexy":

“You know, so many of the teen movies will have so much sex and so many people walking around in bikinis and bare-breasted and that all seems to be okay. And then the minute you show it and its not funny, and it's not sexy, and it's actually unattractive, then it becomes a problem, which seems so odd."

The article points out that Shame has no more physical nudity than Forgetting Sarah Marshall which earned an R rating.


So, bring it, NC-17 rating.  I am totally down with it.

*Er, I will grant you that Michael Fassbender nude is a plus in my book.  He is easy on the eyes.  But that's not the reason to see either Hunger or Shame.  Sort of like Daniel Craig in Love is the Devil where he played Derek Jacobi's boyfriend - yeah, he's in his birthday suit for a few scenes, and he's got a good body, but the scenes aren't titillating.

**However, violence against women - especially sexualized violence - always seems to get a pass.  The Girl with the Dragon Tattoo (curently not yet rated) will probably get an R rating even though Lisbeth experiences a horrific rape scene (if you've read the books you'll know what I mean).  That movie ought to be an NC-17 for the violence alone.