this is not a joke.

Since you've been gone...

2011-02-25T22:14:00.005-05:00

I must offer some profuse apologies. Or maybe not. I ran into Brunch Bird last weekend at, of all places, of course, the movies. (I was there to watch The Roommate. How was it you ask? Hysterically amazing!) She asked if I had a blog when I told her that I liked hers and I said "I do, but it sort of went defunct after watching Girl with the Dragon Tattoo." (Oh, and how was that you ask? Only the best movie I saw in 2010!) She said, "Well, it's never too late to start up again. I'd know." And she is right.

And I have seen some really worthy movies. I don't think I am an extraordinary writer, or maybe even that good, but my friends seem to enjoy it. So, back to movies. Well, all of the Swedish Steig Larsson movies were high points in my movie watching year last year. But I never wrote about them. I don't know if I ever will, but hopefully. So what has been going on with me, you ask? Well, lets do a photo run down, shall we?

According to my last post I stopped writing after I went to GA in March. Well, I went back in May. It was the epic Georgia trip. It will go down in the annals of the Georgia Trips. Well, until Lori and I go on our ten year anniversary road trip though Georgia.

Epic Georgia Adventure. May 2010.

Let's see. Then the World Cup happened, right? Well, I rooted for Germany, until they lost to Spain. That German support involved many hours at Lucky Bar and included me being interviewed at 7:30am on the CBS local news! Good thing my State Department colleagues knew I was drinking beer at 8am on a work day. Here is me and a bunch of other Germany fans after they beat Australia (? Australia, right?)

German Victory. And lots of Beer. World Cup 2010.

The World Cup era was also a celebration of new housing arrangements. I moved in May and therefore was able to acquire this little piece of toilet paper shredding heaven at the end of June. She is excellent. For the most part. Except she shreds all my toilet paper. Named after a 20th century Mexican Revolutionary, her name is

Emiliano Zapata. July 2010.

She's almost ten months old now (March 6) and is currently sitting in a reusable bag with a pair of my heels. Good work Zizzle.

August was epic because not only did I audition for the Capitals Red Rocker squad (and did not make the cut) but I also went to DISNEYLAND for the first time!!! Good god, if you haven't been there book your plane ticket now. It is the most wonderful place on earth. Even better than Niagara Falls. And I bet you never thought you'd hear that come out of my mouth!

The wonderful world of Disney. August 2010.

We also spent time with our good friend Steven while there. He took us around Los Angeles. Mel and I were re-united with high school friends. We ate at Spago. Saw the Hollywood sign (though I think we actually looked to the right to see the Hollywood sign). Saw the jail where OJ was kept. Saw a Soviet submarine. Ate Jack in the Box and had an all around fantastic vacation!!

Look to the left and I see the Hollywood sign.
Everyone here is so famous.
Including Craig Kilbourne.
I told him he looked like my grad school advisor. HAH!
August 2010

But the fun didn't stop in August. Oh no, no. September brought about three momentous events.
1. First UGA game day. We lost. Sad.

Imagine us in Game Day dresses. September 2010.

2. American Idiot on Broadway with Billie Joe Armstrong. Of course, now he is in the show for a two month run, but at the time he was only doing 8 shows. And I saw one of them!St. Jimmy died today/ He blew his brains out into the bay. September 2010.

3. Another Virginia inspired beauty. This time for my left arm.

You're looking at $300 of dogwood. September 2010.

October was confusing. Zombies invaded Washington and I was there to document it. I almost got ejected from the National Mall by the Park Service because they didn't believe I was not a professional photographer. Why? It wasn't because they saw this post and were amazed at all my photos (I took all of them except the one of Billie Joe). No. It was because he took one look at my camera and thought it was too "professional." Dude, hate to break it to you, but I'm not the only person in the city with a DSLR. Durr.

The Walking Dead invade Washington. October 2010.

In November I did play professional photographer though. I took my friends' engagement photos. I loved it. Does anyone have anything they want me to photograph? My rates are reasonable! You can email photography.jdh@gmail.com if you're interested. I am available in DC but will travel. I'm not kidding. You'll be impressed when you see my work below.

The real work. November 2010.

December was pretty standard. Heartbreak. Presents. New Years Eve in Georgia. The Caps won the Winter Classic (in your face Pittsburgh!) and the year started off more miserable than I could possibly imagine. Work upheaval. Henious sinus infection. The complete opposite of Love, Valour, Compassion. So I really needed one weekend in January to go well. Luckily the weekend I spent in New York for Mel and Barry's birthday was excellent. If it hadn't been I don't think I'd be here to type this right now. I'd still be crying in a gutter.

A new era of Hope. January 2011.

This brings us, more or less, to the present day. I tried to buy a scratching post for the cat but the pet store was sold out. It was very tragic. (UPDATE: I have secured said scratching post. VICTORY!)

But, this is neither a blog about my stupid cat nor a blog about my excellent photography skillz (though, seriously, email me if you want me to shoot something for you!), it is a blog about movies. So here, very very briefly, are my reviews of the movies I have seen since we last spoke (minus movies that weren't new to me--Dawn of the Dead, Interview with the Vampire, Titanic, Before Sunset, etc, etc, etc, etc.) And in no particular order...

The movies:

All the Swedish Steig Larsson movies. The Girl with the Dragon Tattoo--the best one of the three. I am so glad I saw the movie before I read the book. The movie was so shocking because I had no idea what was going to happen. It was the best movie I saw in 2010! The Girl Who Played with Fire-- Good. I think the book and the movie were actually pretty different. Again, I saw the movie first then read the book. The Girl Who Kicked the Hornet's Nest--The book is waiting to be read on my shelf. P.S. sweet Mohawk!
127 hours--very different then I thought it would be. I was actually surprisingly emotional. Go see it. Seriously. It is very good. Even though Danny Boyle annoys me. Though, I did enjoy 28 Days Later. A lot.
Black Swan--overrated I think. I didn't care about any of the characters and was in fact hoping bad things would happen to them. Plus, I want to punch Natalie Portman in the face. Seriously. I did like that Frenchy though. I hope it doesn't win all sort of Oscars.
Casino Jack--Erik and I wanted to go see a movie and there was nothing out. So he suggested this. It was fine. I was entertained. It was interesting to "learn" about Jack Abramoff. Plus, I like Kevin Spacey and I like drinking my pomegranate Italian sodas at E Street.
A Film Unfinished--I saw this after I got my tattoo. Another good thing about E Street is that you can order beer there. Which I did. To stop the arm throbbing. A Film Unfinished is the footage that was recorded to make a Nazi propaganda film. The film was somewhat interesting even though nothing Nazi related seems to shock me anymore. I guess that is what you get for being a history major. Nothing in it stuck with me to this day. Just watch The Pianist instead.
Easy A--Watched this with Lori on the last GA trip. It was entertaining. I like that Emma Stone. Her parents were ridiculously amusing and Dan from Gossip Girl was in it. What's not to like??
Jackass 3D--I will confess, the only reason I watched this was because the boy I was crushing on worked on this movie. He was the stereoscopic supervisor. Basically, his job was to make it 3D. (You can figure out who he is on imdb) Otherwise, it wasn't nearly as amusing as I remember Jackass to be. I guess maybe I am getting too old for this? There was one though where a guy got his tooth pulled out. It made me feel like I was going to puke. So, maybe, mission accomplished?
The Roommate--This one was a pretty recent view and I will admit it, I saw it because I love horror movies and Leighton Meester. What of it? Christ Almighty this movie was bad. If we hadn't seen it at Chinatown and had the "interactive" movie experience (ever noticed the audience at Ctown can't shut the eff up? They talk to the screen. They think it is interactive) this would have been a total waste. But by the end the reaction from the audience with the action on the screen was so hilarious that we were all dying of laughter. I imagine this was not the desired effect when they made the film.
Up--I know. I know. How is it possible I haven't seen this yet? IDK. I watched it on Christmas, perfect movie for that day, right?! I loved it. I thought the animation was so excellent and the characters were so sweet. I was chastised though because I didn't cry at the beginning. I guess I have a stone where my heart should be?
Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows: Part 1--I actually saw this movie twice! Once the day after Thanksgiving and once on Christmas. Don't you just love Harry Potter at holiday time? God, I do!! This is obviously the best HP yet. Why? Obviously because they split it in two so it can be closer to the story in the book. Love love love love love it. Can't wait till the end.
Blue Valentine--Ah yes, another E street wonder. What does it say about me, or maybe about that theatre, that anything I see there is more enjoyable than a movie anywhere else? And how do I remember that I had my pomegranate soda, resces pieces and a crab pretzel? They must pump some sort of hyper circulated air in, or something. Anyway. I liked this. It wasn't uplifting, but sometimes neither is life. Michelle Williams was way better than stupid Natalie Portman. SHE should win the Oscar. I also sort of realized I am in love with Ryan Gosling. I guess I should get in line.
Catfish--OH DAMN. Seriously. This was the other best movie of 2010. I want everyone to watch it. I wont say anything about it though, because I want you to experience it with fresh eyes. After Erik and I watched this we had to immediately go to another movie to cleanse the palate of this one. It was SO GOOD!!!
Devil--is the movie we saw after Catfish. What is with M.Night? Seriously. That guy can't make a good movie to save his life. Though. I did sort of like it. But it is really hard to tell if he is being serious or just thinks that he can make good previews and trick people into seeing his movies.
Inception--Yes, yes. A worthy Oscar contender. But lets be seriously. I love Leonardo DiCaprio. I would watch him read the phone book. I love him. Love, love, love. This was good. I liked it. I should watch it again. Oh Man... speaking of Inception and Up. Watch this. It is freaking HILARiOUS!!!!! Please watch it. Please. It is so good.
Let the Right One In--A Swedish vampire movie. I hear that the book is much better. Let's all just read the book, eh?
Dead Snow--Hahahahahaha. Yes. You know this movie. It has some of my favorite elements. Norway. Zombies. Nazis. Well, Nazis aren't my favorite, but they are historical. Yes, a somewhat historical zombie movie set in Norway. It was just as bad, or as good, as you expected. I watched this on Halloween. Totally viable.
Please Give--I watched this because I read something about it in Slate. The article was talking about this scene where the daughter wasn't a pair of jeans and how it was really sad and realistic. I don't know about that but I thought the movie was good. Entertaining. And the actors were quite good. And Amanda Peet was in it. Solved.
Saw 3D--Ok. Ok. This was just like Jackass 3D. Mel and I went to see this because her friend was in it. It was awful. Just awful. But we did see her high school friend get cut in half. Classic.
Waiting for Superman--I read something about this movie that said some of the scenes where the kids are waiting during the lotteries were actually fake. It was disappointing. I mean, I suppose what is more disappointing is that not everyone can go to school in one of the best counties in America, like I did. It is sad that people can't get quality education. I dunno that charter schools are the answer. I just wish people had more money so they could move to a good school district.
Survival of the Dead--This movie makes me sad. This is not George Romero quality. It was just atrocious. Just so, so, so so awful.
Rachel Getting Married--Here is the thing about this movie. It was actually pretty good. But towards the end Anne Hathaway has her hair highlighted and it was so hideous it was actually distracting. Like, I could not focus on the movie. Just ask Erik. He was there. Also, why was that family so weird? Maybe we will never know.
Midnight in the Garden of Good And Evil--Lori and I both read this book in preparation for our Georgia Road Trip 2011. It was an excellent book. Just excellent. It teaches you so much about Georgia history and prepares you to travel to Savannah. The narration was amazing. But Christ this movie was bad. Not even Kevin Spacey and Jude Law could fix it. Message to Hollywood: Just because a book is awesome doesn't mean it will translate well to film. Please consider why the book is good (narration and the character development) and make sure you can do that in the movie. Because they couldn't do it, it made the movie not good. We both fell asleep then had to return to watch it another day. Sad.
The Fighter--I just saw this last night. Yay for solo dates! This one was much better than Black Swan. Christian Bale should win an Oscar. Brother is scary good! I liked this one. I like that there is a character arc, and that I care what happens to them. And I am not sure, but were the sisters supposed to be funny, because hoo-boy. What was going on with them? Despite the fact it was a Thursday night and everyone in the theater was over 25 it was still interactive. Oh Chinatown.

The television...

True Blood Seasons 1 and 2--Fuck I love this show. It is pretty unusual that I am interested in a show from the first episode, but I was with this one. Thanks to RaeJean to recommending it. I can't wait till I can watch Season 3.
Peep Show Seasons 1-7--God this show is hilarious. Peep Show is a BBC production about two friends, Mark and Jeremy (though my favorite character is Super Hanz...which I thought was Super Hands for a long time). It is sort of like It's Always Sunny in Philadelphia but set in England. I discovered the show one morning when I woke up from a night out at like 5 and I needed to wash my face and brush my teeth. I turned on the telly, which was on BBC because I was watching Law and Order: UK when I fell asleep and I was absolutely hooked! It is on BBC America Saturday mornings from 4-6am... for those times when you're just getting home from the bar or are too drunk to fall asleep. Or you can watch all the episodes on Hulu. You wont regret it. It is hysterical.
The IT Crowd Seasons 1-3--The only reason I watched this show was because it was available on Netflix view it now. The first season was really funny. The other two, not as much. It reminds me of the show within a show on Extras. What was it called? When the Whistle Blows? It has the same sort of odd BBC production values... almost like it is a fake show.
The Walking Dead--Remember when I said the Walking Dead invaded DC? Well, these were the dead from this show. God. What didn't I like about this show? It took place in Georgia. Had Zombies. Was made by AMC. And it was one of the first scary shows I have ever watched. Other than MTV's Fear (god I miss that show) I have never actually been scared during a show. The first three or so eps of this show just made me so nervous. I loved it. The DVD comes out around my birthday. Hint. Hint.
Buffy the Vampire Slayer Season 1--To say Lori was mad when I liked True Blood would be the understatement of 2010. She was like, "those aren't real vampires. Watch Buffy. Otherwise I will hate you." So over NYE weekend we watched Season 1. I will tell you, the vampires in TB are so much sexier (ugh) than the ones in BtVS. Lori would say "They're not supposed to be sexy! They're supposed to be evil!! I hate you." So Season 1 was sort of ridiculous. The production quality was very low and the episodes were hysterical. But we made a drinking game out of it and now Season 2 is much much better. Ah, the things we do for love!

Wow. That took many days to complete. That is the full disclosure. Hopefully now that I have gotten those out of the way I can go back to updating regularly. Coming soon... (or what I have been watching, or have ready to watch...)

Glee: Season 1 (two discs left)
Buffy the Vampire Slayer: Season 2 (three episodes left)
The Tudors: Season 4 (how did I not know this was out?! I will watch it once Glee is over)
The Social Network (waiting at home to be watched Sunday)
Mighty Ducks and D2 (purchased with an amazon card I won at work!)

and thats all for now! Welcome back.

See you at the movies. Or something. (E street. Not Chinatown)

Scream

2010-04-26T20:13:00.001-04:00

So what is this one about?
If for some stupid, insane, inane reason, you don't know the plot of 1996's Scream, Netflix will tell you about it...

Horror maven Wes Craven -- paying homage to teen horror classics such as Halloween and Prom Night -- turns the genre on its head with this tale of a murderer who terrorizes hapless high schooler Sidney Prescott (Neve Campbell) by offing everyone she knows. Not your average slasher flick, Scream distinguishes itself with a self-parodying sense of humor. Courteney Cox and David Arquette co-star as a local news reporter and a small-town deputy.

Amazing.

And how much did I pay to watch?
Nothing. I actually watched this while I was visiting my beloved in Georgia. The state not the country. She is also a netflix member, because she is amazing--as is netflix--and we watched this after a night of drinking on view it now. It was pretty much the greatest decision ever!

And what did I think?
Wow. When I first saw this movie I thought my head was going to explode. I watched it when I was in middle school and I'd never seen anything so amazingly brilliant in my entire life. I am not even being hyperbolic. It seriously blew my mind! It was so surprising with the way Wes Craven used typical horror movie convention and turned it completely on it's head!!

The movie is so wonderfully quotable. So many amazing quotes. "What's the point? They're all the same. Some stupid killer stalking some big-breasted girl who can't act who is always running up the stairs when she should be going out the front door. It's insulting" and "Your mother was a slut-bag whore who flashed her shit all over town like she was Sharon Stone or something, but let's face it Sydney, your mother...was no Sharon Stone" and "Listen Kenny, I know you're about 50 pounds overweight. But when I say 'hurry,' please interpret that as 'move your fat, tub of lard ass NOW!'" It also has music that is so awesome and retro without being too much of a time warp. I listened to that soundtrack like a million times. It is hilarious to listen to a movie and be able to sing all the songs because I remember them from when I was 13.

This movie may be one of the most responsible for my love of horror movies. I don't just love slasher movies, though, I love all horror movies. This may have been one of the first ones I'd really seen by the time I could sort of understand what I was thinking about anything. It was just so incredible!!

So what is the rating? (out of 10)
Scream is just so gd clever it makes me sick! The characterization was amazing, with using horror movie cliches. And it paints an amazing picture of what was going on in pop culture in 1996.

It is amazing. It is 100% a 10.

I need to buy this on dvd like a million years ago. I have it on vhs somewhere...

Ghost Town

2010-04-26T19:53:00.001-04:00

So what is this one about?
Welp, my delightfully under-used friend Netlfix tells us,

British funnyman Ricky Gervais ("The Office," "Extras") stars in his first feature film lead as Bertram Pincus, a hapless gent who's pronounced dead, only to be brought back to life with an unexpected gift: a newfound ability to see ghosts. When Bertram crosses paths with the recently departed Frank Herlihy (Greg Kinnear), he gets pulled into Frank's desperate bid to break up his widowed wife's (Téa Leoni) pending marriage to another man.

ok.

And how much did I pay to watch?
Nothing.

One thing you might not know about me is I have recently (well, maybe not too recently, since the Olympics) started going 10 miles a day on Saturday and Sundays on the treadmill in my basement. For the most part this works well because I have recorded shows from the previous week that I can watch. At most, three episodes of Law and Order (and it's friends) and one episode of Gossip Girl. This seems to fit the time well.

Unfortunately, the weekend I watched this I had nothing left to watch, so I used my HBO on demand and settled on this one. And since I don't pay for cable it really was nothing.

And what did I think?
Well, I am a big Ricky Gervais fan. I like his insane laugh. And his British accent. And his fat little face. He doesn't seem to have a lot of range to me, because I've never seen a role where he wasn't just playing Ricky Gervais. Luckily, though, I like him. So, it works well.

As Bertram he was really playing himself. Grumpy old Ricky. There is something about him, though, that is so sincere, so his character arc was nice. He had a very nice chemistry with each other character in the movie, and you really wanted things to work out well for him.

Interestingly enough, since it is a stupid idiotic romantic comedy, things had to fail then could be built back up. Romantic comedies are so flipping dumb. In life, when you like a boy (or a boy likes a girl) and you do something stupid to fuck it up, you often don't get a second chance. Romantic comedies give stupid people too much ammunition for them to think that everything will work out for them too. Romantic comedies are the devil. (except Love Actually, and does Clueless count?) I sound way more bitter than I am.

So what is the rating? (out of 10)
It was funny enough, but mostly, anything with Ricky Gervais will likely be enjoyable for me.

I give it a 6.

Shutter Island

2010-04-25T17:29:00.001-04:00

So what is this one about?
My beloved tells us,

World War II soldier-turned-U.S. marshal Teddy Daniels (Leonardo DiCaprio) investigates the disappearance of a patient from a hospital for the criminally insane, but his efforts are compromised by his own troubling visions and by Dr. Cawley (Ben Kingsley). Mark Ruffalo, Michelle Williams, Emily Mortimer and Max von Sydow co-star in director Martin Scorsese's plot twist-filled psychological thriller set on a Massachusetts island in 1954.

Mmmmmm, Leonardo DiCaprio AND Max Von Sydow?!?! Sign me up!!!

And how much did I pay to watch?
Erm. Well, my mother and I went to go see this at Cinema Arts. I don't remember if she paid. I think she might have, and then I bought some snacks. mmmmmmm, Cinema Arts popcorn! So, i think I paid nothing.

And what did I think?
Well, the more I think about this movie the more I like it. Interestingly enough, when I first watched this I didn't really like it as much. It really wasn't what I expected from the ads. I wanted it to be much, much, much scarier. (Love me some scary movies!)

But now that I think about the movie, and its "twist" I think it is very smart. I'd like to see it again to see if there were any clues to figuring it out while the plot was moving forward.

And I love Leonardo DiCaprio and Max VonSydow. Yumm.

So what is the rating? (out of 10)
Like I said, the more I think about it, the more I like it. So I'll give it a 7. Or maybe an 8. Something like that.

The Pregnancy Pact

2010-03-21T20:53:00.001-04:00

So what is this one about?
Ah ha! Lifetime (yes, that Lifetime. Television for Women) tells us about their movie,

Inspired by a true story, the film explores the costs of teen pregnancy with a story of a fictional "pregnancy pact" set against the backdrop of actual news reports about teen pregnancy from June 2008. Sidney Bloom (Thora Birch), an online magazine journalist, returns to her hometown to investigate the sudden spike in teenage pregnancies at her old high school. Almost immediately, she comes up against Lorraine Dougan (Nancy Travis), the head of the local conservative values group and mother of Sara, a newly pregnant 15-year-old. Meanwhile, the school nurse (Camryn Manheim) tries to convince the school to provide contraception to students to address the pregnancy epidemic but is met with great opposition from the school and community. As the number of pregnant girls climbs to 18, a media firestorm erupts when Time Magazine reports that the rise in the number of pregnancies at the school is the result of a "pregnancy pact." As the mystery unfolds about whether or not "the pact" is real, Sidney soon realizes that all of the attention is disguising the much larger issues that are at the core of the story.

Shazaam that is long.

And how much did I pay to watch?
Zero dollars. I watched it on Lifetime. On my tv. At home. Awesome.

And what did I think?
Oh lord. One thing you might not know about me is that I love me some Lifetime movies. I mean, how the shit can you not?! Think about the fabulous Kirsten Dunst as star Fifteen and Pregnant. Or, Too Young to be a Dad with Paul Dano. Or Student Seduction with Elizabeth Berkeley. Or Co-Ed Call Girl with Tori Spelling. Do I really need to go on?! No. I do not. Lifetime movies are awesome. Awesomely bad. Awesomely awesome.

And man, they really hit the nail on the head for me. I love the whole teenage pregnancy focus on tv these days. Why? I don't know. It actually might be a little sick. Because while, when I watch 16 and Pregnant, often times these girls are stupid and unimpressive and I think they are dumb and sort of got what they deserve, I feel so incredibly bad for them. Because they are so unprepared and just sad.

So, this movie was awesome in that it was showing the typical tv teenage reaction to getting pregnant--you know, going to parties and drinking, saying ridiculous things like "I have to spend time with my friends, I can't spend time with the baby all the time!" (actually, yes, you can. When you decided to have a baby that is essentially what you decided. It isn't your fault. You're just a stupid 16 year old), and being clueless as to the fact that the boy who got you pregnant is pretty much not going to stick around. But, through wise old, old, old Thora Birch it also showed that teenage pregnancy isn't all the fun and games you think. Do people really think it will be all fun and games? Be serious.

So what is the rating? (out of 10)
It is a hard movie to rate because all lifetime movies are pretty much awful. So, is it good because it is awful, or is it just awful?

It certainly is not the best Lifetime movie I have seen, but lets be serious, if it is on some Sunday afternoon, I'm not gonna pretend like I am not going to watch it. And it isn't like I spend a few hours watching Lifetime movies today. Be serious.

So, I'll give it a 6. Better than average, but not by much!

F*#k You Sidney Crosby!!

2010-02-28T18:19:00.005-05:00

*I apologize in advance for all the cursing. I especially apologize if you are Canadian and reading this, because it must suck being Canadian.

So what is this one about?
my hate for Sidney Crosby

And how much did I pay to watch?
Nothing, thankfully. But I did waste a metric fuckton* of time on Olympic Men's hockey in the hope that Canada would not win the gold.

And what did I think?
If you know me in real life you will know that I have hated the Olympics since High School. One of my classic lines was "The Olympics are gay." Rachel then asked me, "Oh really, Julia? Are they gay? Do they love other Olympics?" at which point I said, "yes"

I think they are a colossal waste of time and money. Back in ancient times the Olympics were supposed to stop people from fighting. Ooh, sports! Lets take a break from our wars and conflict and do the whole sportsmanship thing.

But in the modern age, what is the point? Additionally, I've got an awesome idea. Lets give the Olympics to shitty fucking places like Beijing and Rio--places that are so colossally underdeveloped and could use $20billion (or however much it costs to stage the olympics) towards, you know, its citizenry. Heaven forbid. HEAVEN FORBID!

But, because of my renewed love of hockey (GO WASHINGTON CAPITALS!!!!), my love for Sergei Fedorov, and my desire to see Canada lose the gold medal (because they said it would be a national embarassment if they lost) I got real into the Olympics this year. The Russian roster was unstopable. The Swedes are powerhouses. And even Team USA has the best goalie, like, ever!

So I bought into the stupid competition--at least as far as Men's Hockey was concerned. I watched the opening ceremony and enjoyed it. I liked seeing Wayne Gretzky and the silly Canadians be into being Canadian. And, as someone who went to grad school in Canada, you rarely see things like that...Canadians are pretty calm.

Then one by one, the teams I liked were eliminated. My Russians (with Capitals Ovechkin, Varlamov, and Semin and former Capitals Fedorov and Gonchar and Kozlov) lost to the Slovaks (WHAT?) (with former Capital Milan Jurcina) but it was ok. Team USA was crushing and ended up at the top. They beat the Canucks last weekend while I was tapping my toes to a live Sweeney Todd show. I was so floored that they lost. I really got on the Team USA train. (I was slow to join because I thought they wouldn't pose much of a threat to Canada. My only hope for these 2010 games was that Canada would not win the gold. I thought team USA's only hope was Ryan Miller--and I don't blame him, not at all. He is wonderful. And the Capitals have to play Buffalo on Wednesday as their first game back. Ugh) Then my Russians lost horribly. But it was ok because Sweden (with Capital Niklas Backstrom, swoon) was still around. Then Sweden lost, shockingly...to the SLOVAKS!

The Slovaks almost beat Canada on Friday. Almost. Poor Jurcina and Halak were so sad. And I was too. Because if Canada went up against Team USA there was a chance Canada would win the gold. And if you've been following, that was what I didn't want more than anything.

But that life ruiner Sidney Crosby had to go and ruin that. Even after Zack Parise scored a goal that took USA into overtime. Fuck Cindy Cosby. I hate that guy.

Why? Because he is that girl in high school who got whatever she wanted. He is Casey Kemp. "Wah, I fell asleep driving because I had been cheerleading to much and I love god and all the boys love me." Nothing bad ever happens to him. He already won the fucking Stanley Cup (hah, look at that link. What a fag.) Now he gets to be a Canadian Hero. Going down in the annals of history with all those other Canadian heroes, like... um, uh. Well, are there Canadian heroes?! Nah.

And while we're on the subject of Canada. Why do they have thanksgiving? What do they have to be thankful for? And on a Monday?? You don't even get a four day weekend. What the shit is that?!?!?!!

So what is the rating? (out of 10)
The rating is a 0. I am back to not watching the Olympics. Ever. And my hatred of Cindy continues.

I am even thinking of buying this.

(I am glad to have my life back though. And now that the month of February is over I can resume shopping. Some J.Crew will make me feel better. But also, I don't really care. Because it is sports. And in 9 days the Julia and Lori Birthday Extravaganza 2010 begins. Thank Jesus up in Heaven!!)

Oh, and this too ;)

Chapter 27

2010-02-27T21:28:00.000-05:00

So what is this one about?
Netflix's description says,

An overweight Jared Leto stars as Mark David Chapman -- the young assassin who infamously killed John Lennon on the front steps of The Dakota -- in this independent drama from fledgling filmmaker Jarrett Schaeffer. Lindsay Lohan (who in real life is a friend of Lennon's son, Sean) co-stars as a Lennon fan appropriately named Jude, who meets Chapman a few days before the murder without realizing what lies ahead.

And how much did I pay to watch?
WAY more than it was worth. (Netflix'ed)

And what did I think?
Jesus. Why does this movie even exist? Honestly. The Netflix description is the most exciting thing about this movie.

Thinking back over the movie I don't even know what to say. I rented it because I wanted to see fat, fat, fat, fat Jared Leto. Apparently, he gained so much weight for this movie so quickly that he had a hard time walking. I thought to myself, "why would someone want to do that? wont' he get a lot of stretch marks?" This is where my brain was.

Ok, I also rented it because I like Lindsay Lohan. This was one of the movies that she was in that flew way under the radar.

Maybe it was because I don't really care much about The Beatles--I was raised as a hard core Rolling Stones gal--or John Lennon, or the fact that he was murdered (what is the difference between murdered and assassinated? Was Lennon actually assassinated?). And I certainly don't care about Mark David Chapman's pysche and his reason for killing John Lennon.

Seriously, why did I even think to rent this!? It was slow, and tedious, and weird. At least Jared Leto did some quality acting. It was the single thing that kept me from turning this off immediately.

So what is the rating? (out of 10)
I don't care. This movie was no good. 2.

Paranormal Activity

2010-02-27T21:07:00.002-05:00

Movie poster says: "Paranormal Activity is one of the scariest movies of all time. You will be affected as it's hard to ignore the imprint it leaves on your psyche. Nightmares are guaranteed"
Julia says: disagree.

So what is this one about?
The 'flix tells us,

When Katie (Katie Featherston) and Micah (Micah Sloat) fear their San Diego, Calif., home may be haunted by a demonic presence, Micah sets up a video camera to document all the jaw-dropping, hair-raising action over a series of several nights in fall 2006. The paranormal occurrences increase in frequency and significance, leaving Katie more and more distraught -- and determined to put an end to the terror.

oooooooooh. Scary! (Don't you like that the actors used their own names? I really like it when that happens.)

And how much did I pay to watch?
Eh, some amount. I got this bad boy on Netflix. In fact, I got this to watch on New Year's Eve. (Isn't it impressive it has taken me so long to update this?! So much for that resolution of only having two movies in the Coming Soon section at one time.) We went to Ruby Tuesday--the epitome of class and sophistication--then fell asleep while watching Jersey Shore. I actually had to watch this on New Year's Day...before the NHL Winter Classic.

And what did I think?
So, what did I think. Well, one of the reasons we didn't watch this movie at Mel's house on NYE was that she is scared of horror movies. But really, she had nothing to really be that scared of.

Despite the commercials that you have likely seen (and that I see all the time on FIOS) that are filmed in night vision watching an audience watch Paranormal Activity and they are all TERRIFIED, I was not. It really wasn't that scary.

On the one hand, I think I wasn't willing suspension of disbelief enough. I wasn't into it enough to buy into the whole premise. Yes, when I think about it, if I watched video of creepy shit happening to me while I was asleep it would freak me out. For some reason though, I just didn't find myself getting very scared.

The ending was good though. Shocking, I suppose. I also enjoyed watching the alternate ending.

Paranormal Activity is not that scary of a horror movie, despite what they all say. If you watch to watch a scary movie in the similar vein, watch [REC]. Now that is some scary shit.

Paranormal Activity gets a 5.
So what is the rating? (out of 10)

Jungfrukällan (The Virgin Spring)

2010-02-27T20:32:00.000-05:00

So what is this one about?
Netflix tells us,

On the way to deliver candles to a church, the virginal daughter (Birgitta Pettersson) of feudal landowner Töre (Max von Sydow) is savagely raped and murdered. But fate takes a vengeful hand when the killers unknowingly seek food and shelter at the girl's home. Will the grief-stricken Töre learn the truth about his visitors? Set in medieval Sweden, this disturbing tale directed by Ingmar Bergman earned an Oscar for Best Foreign Language Film.

However. I didn't read the netflix description before I received this disc in the mail. So I didn't have the plot ruined for me by the description.

And how much did I pay to watch?
Eh, some amount. Obviously, as stated above, I got this bad boy from the 'flix.

And what did I think?
Well, I love Ingmar Bergman. Love, love, love, love, love. If you have never seen an Ingmar Bergman film you simply must. I recommend The Seventh Seal. He is so wonderful! And the fact that Max von Sydow is in practically as his movies really does it for me too. (Holy smokes that guy is sure something! And he is acting all over the place still! The Tudors! Even Shutter Island!)

The disc that I received was the Criterion Collection version with an Introduction by Ang Lee. Foolishly, I watched the introduction and gd Ang Lee told me what happened in the movie!! Now, as I said, I hadn't read the netflix description before I watched the disc, so I forgot what the plot was. (Did you know, the plot of The Virgin Spring was the plot of The Last House on the Left? Oh Wes Anderson, Ingmar Bergman you are not)

Now, I didn't really care for this one. I was slow like The Seventh Seal but not nearly as pretty. It still had that theme of Christianity that Bergman seems to enjoy but, ya know, it just didn't do it for me. The woman who played Ingeri was gorgeous, but the woman who played Karin--or, I guess the character of Karin--was so annoying that I didn't really care that she died.

Oh well. Additionally, this took me like 5 months to watch, so I would recommend another Bergman movie before this one.

So what is the rating? (out of 10)
I like Bergman. He is great. The Virgin Spring, not as much.

5.

It's Complicated

2010-02-26T22:50:00.000-05:00

So what is this one about?
Wellllllllll, Netlfix tells us,

Ten years after their divorce, Jane (Meryl Streep) and Jake (Alec Baldwin) enjoy an amicable friendship. When the two unite for their son's college graduation, their romance is rekindled. But Jake is married, and Jane's architect, Adam (Steve Martin), has a thing for her. Now cheating on the younger woman for whom he left Jane, Jake wants his ex-wife back. But Jane's busy getting to know Adam. Nancy Meyers (Something's Gotta Give) wrote and directed this Golden Globe-nominated comedy.

Ok. So far, so good.

And how much did I pay to watch?
Actually, I paid nothing. Why? Well, Erik and I went to go see it at the Georgetown AMC, and this old guy in line asked what movie we were going to see. We said "It's Complicated" and he said, "if you wait a minute, I am waiting for my friend, and if he doesn't show you could just buy my ticket from me." We were like, "nah, that's ok". So right as Erik went up to buy his ticket this guy flagged me down and was like "tell him to stop!" His friend hadn't showed up, and since the movie was starting in like 2 minutes he just gave me his ticket. AWESOME!

Now, Erik, like a sucker, still had to pay for his. It's ok Erik!

And what did I think?
Well, I went in seeing a movie like this one knowing it wasn't going to be amazing. For some reason, though, when I saw the commercials I thought it looked really funny.

And it was pretty funny. We laughed quite a bit during this one. Some of the laughs were actually very uncomfortable--there was a lot of naked Alec Baldwin. An uncomfortable amount. That guy is seriously fatter and seriously hairier than one would expect. (Unless you have seen It's Complicated, I suppose.) We were also some of the youngest--if not the youngest--people in the theatre. It was like old folks' city in there!! And watching old Alec Baldwin be naked and having sex and to have him say creepy gross things to Meryl Streep was even creepier when the old folks around us started to laugh. unCOMFORtable!!

As far as something like characterization goes, Baldwin and Krazinski were completely ridiculous. They weren't even real people, they were absolutely absurd caricatures. They were not real people. The only man in the entire movie who wasn't a total freak was Steve Martin. The family in the movie was creepily close and Erik kept leaning over to me saying "I know you are totally that way with your brother"...as a joke. They were like REALLY close and comfortable with each other in a way that was weird for me to watch.

The plot was pretty predictable, which is about what you would expect in a movie like this. Additionally, it made me hungry because Meryl Streep's character was a chef. Making fresh chocolate croissants. Yummmmmm.

So what is the rating? (out of 10)
Honestly, it was about what I thought it would be. It was funny. I was entertained.

It gets a 5.

Up in the Air

2010-01-24T22:49:00.000-05:00

So what is this one about?
Netflix tells us,

Ryan Bingham (George Clooney) racks up miles flying around the country firing employees on behalf of companies. But he faces losing the job he savors to recent college grad Natalie Keener (Anna Kendrick) -- and losing the ability to escape emotional ties to anything. A connection he builds with Alex Goran (Vera Farmiga), however, might change his outlook on the future. Golden Globe winner Jason Reitman's smart comedy also stars Jason Bateman.

It should probably more accurately say "the ability to escape emotional ties to everything" because that is what it really seemed like he was trying to do. To be an island. (Also, I frequently mistake Jason Reitman and Jason Bateman, I know who both of them are...but their names are just too, too similar!)

And how much did I pay to watch?
For all those times my mother has treated me to movies, I treated her. So I paid $14. Interestingly enough, if we had gone to Cinema DeLux instead, that is what I probably would have paid for only one of us. Thank heavens for locally owned, independent theatres ;)

And what did I think?
When I see television ads for this movie they use a trite description that declares "Up in the Air is a movie for our time!" Except that is really, really, really is! It is an absolutely correct statement. Whether it is that I have never seen one, or that now I am much more aware of, well, everything, I have never seen a movie that so wholeheartedly encapsulates the zeitgeist of a point in time--specifically "these times".

Everyone in the film is so desperate for a connection. Isn't that sort of what popular culture is consistently selling us? All these dating reality shows--where 500 women fling themselves at one man because all of them so badly want that connection (or maybe they just want to be on tv...who knows?)--and the commercials for match.com and eharmony.com and dating.com, isn't that what they are telling us? That in today's world of go-go-go and digital communication instead of face-to-face communication, that we are really all very desperate to connect with people in a very real and authentic way? It seems like if someone wants to make a connection, they can't. And then those that are alone and like being that way, will realize that they actually don't really want to be alone.

So what does any of that actually mean? Well, as far as movie things go, the acting was excellent. Why? Because you really start out not liking the characters, or not caring about them. But at the end you are so wrapped up in them and their issues. It is funny and poignant and affecting. Everything about it was excellent. I don't know if America wasn't suffering from a recession, and the auto industry wasn't in the toilet, and people are trying to blow up airplanes on Christmas, that the movie would have been as absolutely spot on as it was. If the movie had been made in 2002 when Reitman started writing the screenplay it wouldn't have been nearly as excellent as it was when it came out in 2009.

I guess that can be the theme of today's entries. Right place, right time.

So what is the rating? (out of 10)
The movie was absolutely crushing. Just the way I like them. It was exactly, exactly, exactly the sort of sad I like, because sometimes it feels like the sort of sad that my life is when I get to thinking about it. (I am actually a pretty happy person, not really emo at all, but I understand Ryan Bingham's dealy).

This will likely win Oscars--and probably whatever other stupid awards they do before the Oscars--and it will deserve them. But it isn't so stupid and simplistic that it is like the typical Oscar formula (at least, I don't think so). I'd love to read the book, because I love to see the way movies slaughter good books--but I don't think this one was really close to the book, rather more of an adaptation--and then see the movie again.

But for now, I will give it a 10. It is certainly my choice for awards this year. Not that Precious movie... I swear...*shakes head*

9/11

2010-01-24T18:22:00.000-05:00

So what is this one about?
Netflix tells us

This heartfelt documentary was created by award-winning French filmmakers Jules and Gedeon Naudet, who simply set out to make a movie about a rookie NYC fireman and ended up filming the tragic event that changed our lives forever. The program includes additional footage and interviews with the heroic firefighters, rescue workers and the Naudet brothers, providing exclusive insight to their extraordinary firsthand experience of the day's events.

Woah. Talk about right place, right time.

And how much did I pay to watch?
Got it on the 'flix. But I am not sure how much I paid.

And what did I think?
Well, I rented this one because The Bob and Abe Show recommended it as Bob's favorite (or was it Abe's favorite?) documentary of the decade. (As you have seen, mine would be considered Children Underground). I was interested in what these guys saw in this film.

Now, as I said, right place, right time, for sure. I found the two Frenchie filmmakers very sympathique (as the French would say) and entirely adorable. It was actually the relationship of the two brothers that I found more affecting than the actual 9/11-New York stuff. I am pretty sure that doesn't make me an awful American. (It isn't that I find 9/11 stuff in general un-affecting, but for some reason this movie just didn't really do it for me. Now, if you want to see some 9/11 stuff that just rips your heart out, you gotta come to Washington, to the Newseum--yes, the museum of news--to the 9/11 Gallery sponsored by Comcast: Chronicling the Attack on America and the 11 minute video they have. Talk about the waterworks!)

The conclusion of the film was very shocking. But it was shocking in a nice uplifting way. It was really unexpected--maybe that is why I didn't find the movie that affecting?

I don't know. The footage was amazing. Like nothing you would ever imagine. Ever. I suppose the film is really worth watching for that alone. What was it like on that day on Ground Zero? This is 100% the closest you would ever get if you weren't there (which, of course, I was not. I was safe in my dorm when the 2nd plane hit and was away from Washington in my Political Science 101 class when the plane hit the pentagon--a mere 15 miles from my home) and for that insight this film deserves all the credit it has been given.

I suppose that is the thing about documentaries, eh? The filmmakers don't write scripts, and sometimes the things that happen in the subject's lives write the film and take it in a new direction. For this reason, I suppose, it is one of the truest documentaries that was made in the 2000s, if not in the 20th-21st century. The filmmakers explain in their narration that the events of the day really did change the direction of their film. So, kudos to them for being able to do so very well.

So what is the rating? (out of 10)
For all of the reasons above, I think this film deserves at least an 8. Like I said, it was the relationship between the filmmaker brothers that I was so intrigued by and for some reason the other "plot lines" weren't as affecting. However, it was an excellent achievement brought on by pure luck on the part of the filmmakers (maybe not so lucky for America) and by their ability to take what they had an make it work.

Sunshine Cleaning

2010-01-03T14:17:00.000-05:00

So what is this one about?
The 'flix tells us,

Financially on shaky ground yet determined to send her son to a top private school, Rose Lorkowski (Amy Adams) teams up with her unreliable sister, Norah (Emily Blunt), to start a new company that specializes in biohazard removal and crime scene cleanup. Tired of doing all of the work for other people, whether in her job cleaning homes or in her failed relationships, Rose is finally ready to use her entrepreneurial spirit to tidy up her own life.

Doesn't that description just make you smile? It makes me smile.

And how much did I pay to watch?
I got it via netflix. Though, it didn't take me as long to watch it and return it as other movies I've gotten recently. Less than a month, in fact. What an accomplishment!!

And what did I think?
Well, I thought this movie would be sort of quirky and cute, but it was pretty much quirky, dark and depressing.

As the audience you really want things to go well for Amy Adams (as an aside, I've never really liked her very much. She always looks like she is going to cry, but that really worked in this role, because I think she pretty much was always on the verge of tears), she really deserves to have something go well--be it in her personal or professional life--and it just [SPOILER], well, doesn't.

Emily Blunt, as her sister, is the same way. She is very, very "deep down sad. The kind of sad that just takes time" and apparently it will take a lot of time. She was just drifting in this very emo way. As their father, Alan Arkin was also depressing.

I will tell you who I really liked was the armless guy who worked at the cleaning supply store. Though I don't like for their to be romantic undertones in every movie, I really wanted Amy Adams to get with him. Alas.

So what is the rating? (out of 10)
This movie was just sort of meandering and depressing with not a whole lot of forward motion or positive character development. There was insight into why the characters were do depressive but that didn't really create a cohesive movie.

It was ok though. 5.

Top Ten Movies of the 2000s

2010-01-01T23:32:00.004-05:00

OOOOOOOOOOOOOOK. Happy New Years and all that good stuff. If you know me you know that New Years Eve is like my least favorite thing in the world. So, my friends and I ate some dinner, drank some beers, I fell asleep during Jersey Shore, went home, started watching Paranormal Activity and fell asleep. I know, I am a wild woman.

On big bad NYD I finished watching Paranormal Activity (review coming soonish--sooner than usual, because I am making a concerted effort this year to never have more than two movies to review at any given time), then I watched the NHL Winter Classic--go Boston, phuck Philly!--and the announcement of the Team USA men's hockey team (go team Russia! and who are those American guys? I knew like four of them..two of whom were goalies... GO RYAN MILLER!) Then I took a 4 hour nap. All in all, a pretty great way to start the new year.

So, everyone is putting out these best of the year/best of the decade lists. I normally wouldn't partake in this sort of craziness, however, my friends at The Bob and Abe Show already asked me for my best of the decade, movie-wise, so I have my list already. I spent a lot of time thinking about it while I was busy at work one day. This is what I came up with. Let's do this thing in reverse order, shall we?

My Top 10 of the 2000s:

10) Good bye, Lenin! (2003) Have you seen this? It is awesome! It is one of those fall of communism movies I am so into. And the relationship between Alex and his mother is just so freaking precious.

9) Black Hawk Down (2001) My BFF and I saw this movie together in the theatre. Ah, nostalgia. Holy crap, this one is awesome! One I can, and have, and will (so look for the review) watch over and over again. There is literally nothing I can find wrong with this one. And this true life story is amazing on screen!

8) Shaun of the Dead (2004) My love of zombie movies runs deep and this was one of the most innovative of the decade--though Romero made 2 (TWO!) movies this decade--Land of the Dead and Diary of the Dead (how I have not reviewed either of these?) and had a solid remake of one of his movies--Dawn of the Dead--again, how have I not reviewed this? I watch it all the time! I'd include it on this best of the decade list but I don't think there would be much agreement on it.

7) Love Actually (2003) This is included this high on my list hesitantly. I love it, and it is a great movie, but maybe it should be number 10 instead of number 7. Is Love Actually better than Shaun of the Dead or Black Hawk Down? I dunno. But like Chris--Bob's brother--said on the show, this movie is so classic because every single person who watches it can relate to one of the plot lines. My favorite one is the one with Laura Linney and her brother. Because remember kiddies, all love is not romantic love.

6) Donnie Darko: the Director's Cut (2001) Have you seen the Director's Cut? It is so much better than the original cut! Now, unlike Bob--clearly the smartest guy ever--I couldn't really figure out what was going on in Donnie Darko. My excuse was that I was just out of High School when it came out. However, when I was in college and the Director's Cut came out it made so much more sense. I will rarely admit that I am a little dumb, or common, but I liked this one better because I understood what was going on better.

5) The Pianist (2002) Love me some Roman Polanski. And Adrien Brody. And the music. This may be one of the most "obvious" choices on this list. It was an Oscar winner and it contains all those guarentees of one. (remember that Kate Winset episode of Extras where she said you either have to either play a retard or be in a Nazi movie to win an oscar?!) But Adrien Brody is just so good and Roman Polanski, I am sure, was waiting to make this movie his entire life. I think the fact that the movie concentrated on his music instead of like being in a camp makes it less trite--you know, so it wasn't like Life is Beautiful. *rolls eyes*

4) Gran Torino (2008) wow, why is this movie so good? And why doesn't it get the credit it is due? The fact that Clint Eastwood was not nominated as either director or actor in this film is entirely ridiculous. And like I have said a million times, the reason this movie was so good was that it was so unexpected. Unexpectedly hilarious, unexpectedly tragic, unexpectedly wonderful. Kudos Clint!

3) Children Underground (2001) I have told so many people to watch this, but I have a feeling no one has. It is a truly devastating film. Maybe if I give you the description you will want to see it. In Communist Romania the government wanted it's citizens to have children--as opposed to in the Soviet Union where the government didn't want people to have kids because it would distract from them being good communists--and provided all sort of material and financial incentives to parents when they had kids. It made parents have kids they didn't want and didn't care what happened to them. This is a story of the abandoned children who live in the Bucharest subway station. It is the truly devastating picture of the post-communist experience, much more devastating and realistic than 4 months, 3 weeks, and 2 days. It is also much better than Born into Brothels...though it was similar. Basically, I am biased because I do Eastern European stuff

2) Downfall (Der Untergang) (2004) There weren't a lot of foreign films on best of lists. Sad. Because this one was 100% the best. The first time I saw it I was just spellbound. Bruno Ganz is extraordinary as Hitler. I cannot, cannot, CANNOT emphasize how amazing his acting was. The film was captivating. It gives you chills to watch it. It is very long though and somewhat laborious. I would still recommend it. It is amazing. And it has one of my favorite foreign actresses in it (one of my favorites? really? who are the others??) Alexandra Maria Lara. She is great.

1) Eternal Sunshine of the Spotless Mind (2004) It actually sort of offends me that this wasn't at the top of every reviewer's "Best of the Decade" list. This movie is clearly the best. Think of how innovative, wonderful, sad, romantic, and visually amazing it was. 100%, unquestioned, the best movie of the Oughts.

Honorable Mentions:

~28 Days Later (2002) Also zombies (are they really zombies? they were infected with rage. Were they dead? oh, the intricacies of zombism!) and also pretty innovative. Good Work Danny Boyle. 28 Weeks Later was also enjoyable but not nearly honorable mention material.

~Band of Brothers (2001) A miniseries, but the best gd miniseries of the 2000s. The 2nd best one was clearly John Adams.
~Before Sunset (2004) I love it, and Linklater is kind of a big deal.
~Bowling for Columbine (2002) God that Michael Moore is a pain in the ass. But this one is pretty solid.
~Once (2006) when is the last time you saw a legit musical? I'm not talking Moulin Rouge! but like actually a reasonable, accessible musical. It was the last time you watched Once, thats when!
~The Ring (2002) How much did this movie re-define horror movies? Wasn't this one of the first creepy Japanese remakes? When she crawled out of the tv at the end I almost lost my shit right there in the theatre!
~Super Troopers (2001) I watched this movie once a week in college. That doesn't make it good though...but it is entirely quotable and entirely funny.
~Superbad (2007) God this movie is hilarious. HILARIOUS. The bromance, that is definitely one of the themes of the 2000s. And how sweet is Michael Cera?
~The Assassination of Jesse James by the Coward Robert Ford (2007) This movie didn't get any credit from anyone. It was great (but very slow) with amazing acting and haunting music.
~There Will Be Blood (2007) Easily the best movie quote of the decade came from this movie. Who drinks you milkshake? I drink your milkshake. I drink it up. SLUUUUUUUUUUUURP. Very slow with amazing music and Daniel Day Lewis? Come on. That guy is a ridiculous actor.

Dishonorable Mention:
Slumdog Millionaire (2008) give me a gd break. Typical Hollywood via 3rd world country bullshit. How can the guy who directed 28 Days Later come up with this? If you wanna watch an actual movie watch City of God, or Born Into Brothels, or even Children Underground. Glamorizing poverty is gross. When you see real unfortunate situations you wont think it is so great anymore. I guess the problem is that "the masses" don't watch movies like those.
Ok. The cinematography was pretty good.

_________________________________

Lastly, I want to plug PasteMagazine.com. I don't know much about them, but they provided that sweet best of the decade graphic. They don't know they did but I just credited them, so there shouldn't be a problem, right?! (yikes) (Maybe this year when I become a professional blogger they can be one of my sponsors. Wouldn't that be fun? Please don't sue me!!)

I want to post a link to their The 50 Best Movies of the Decade. They asked their readers to pick their 10 Best Movies of the Decade. This is what they came up with:

10. The Departed
9. City of God
8. Almost Famous
7. Memento
6. Pan’s Labyrinth
5. Lost in Translation
4. There Will Be Blood
3. Amélie
2. The Royal Tenenbaums
1. Eternal Sunshine of the Spotless Mind

I've clearly got to spend more time reading Paste Magazine, because their readers clearly know what is up.

As a final note, it was pure coincidence that the place that provided the sweet image had my #1 as their reader's #1. Isn't that fortuitous?!?!

Happy New Years, kiddies!!

Invictus

2009-12-31T22:18:00.001-05:00

So what is this one about?
Welp, the 'flix tells us

In this sports drama based on real-life events, director Clint Eastwood tells the story of what happened after the end of apartheid when newly elected president Nelson Mandela used the 1995 World Cup rugby matches to unite his people in South Africa. Based on John Carlin's book, the film stars Morgan Freeman as Mandela and Matt Damon as Francois Pienaar, the captain of the scrappy South African team that makes a run for the championship.

Additionally, the 'flix subtitles this film as "The Human Factor." Odd.

And how much did I pay to watch?
$14.25 (YIKES) in the director's hall. And that was after we had a delicious dinner and I spent like another $30. I'm spendin' it like I've got it friends!

And what did I think?
OK. So here is the thing--and if you've been here for awhile none of this will come as a surprise to you--I love two things about this movie very much: 1) Clint Eastwood (even though he didn't grace us with his on-screen presence) and 2) South African accents. Especially the South African accents.

The story itself was somewhat trite. Not really that surprising. However, I can't call it trite because it is an actual true story. But, it is pretty much exactly what you would expect. You have a country that has been suffering under apartheid-- well, you've only been suffering if you are black; with a new black president--who the white South Africans don't like--who is about to change the entire country, a shitty Rugby team that no one likes, and the 1995 World Cup of Rugby.

Hmm, in the Hollywood movie scripting of the universe lets think about how this will go...
1) the country will unite under the president--but only after some infighting among the blacks and whites
2) the team will get better and qualify for the World Cup
3) the country will unite in favor of the rugby team
4) the team will win the world cup

And I am not even giving anything away, because I am just telling you what the Hollywood formula would be.

There was a really, really good line from Nelson Mandela in the movie though, something about forgiveness (which is super important to me) but I wasn't able to remember it or find it. I didn't write it down right away. BIG mistake.

So what is the rating? (out of 10)
I am disappointed in you Clint Eastwood--you and your old hotness--and how not innovative this movie was in either story or direction. I mean, it was ok and all, but it wasn't that new or innovative or creative or anything. Personally, it wasn't even that emotionally affecting, which is what I think he was going for. But those twit-boxes at the academy will love it. Instead of Mr. Eastwood winning for Gran Torino (which he should have) he might actually win for this. The academy is SOOOO predictable. *lesigh*

It does get a 6 though. Why? Because you know it gets an extra point for the South African accents ;)

Away We Go

2009-12-21T20:22:00.001-05:00

So what is this one about?
The 'flix tells us

Buoyed by the news that they are expecting their first baby, Burt (John Krasinski) and Verona (Maya Rudolph) embark on a journey to locate the perfect place on the planet to raise their child. But their quest inevitably yields many unexpected surprises. Sam Mendes directs this quirky comedy while Allison Janney, Catherine O'Hara, Josh Hamilton, Jim Gaffigan, Maggie Gyllenhaal and Jeff Daniels co-star.

And how much did I pay to watch?
Honestly, with how few netflix movies I've turned around I wouldn't be surprised if it would have been cheaper to purchase it.

And what did I think?
I guess the thing I cannot comprehend at this point in my life is the idea that being married, or even being with another person, will become your life. Like, waking up with the person, doing whatever during the day, and coming back to that person becomes your life. That having a kid and spending all your time with the other person is your life. That whole two of us against the world thing. I just am not at a point in my life where I comprehend that.

I think about other people I know who have lives with a very significant other and I truly have a hard time understanding it. And I don't know if that says I am destined for a life of loneliness or what, but it is sort of depressing.

BUT, this movie was amazing! God, Jim Krazinski is just so flipping cute. And sweet. And adorable!

What was so amazing about it? Well, for one thing, it was hilarious. Allison Janey was out of control. When they go to Arizona we--I mean Mel and I--almost lost our shit. She is hilarious. Jim Gaffigan was funny too. But not nearly as funny as Allison Janey. Then Maggie Gyllenhall was hilarious too, again, not nearly as funny as Allison Janey, in the really uncomfortable Ricky Gervais way.

It was also poignant and heartfelt. The story in Montreal was so excellent and real and sad. And so necessary in the plot. I think this is probably the doing of Dave Eggers--you know, Mr. Depressing real life author of A Heartbreaking Work of Staggering Genius. He wrote this movie with his wife, apparently.

The only thing I didn't especially care for was the ending. And maybe it was because I didn't really want the movie to end or maybe it was because the final seemed sort of obvious. But, either way as a whole it was very enjoyable.

So what is the rating? (out of 10)
This is definitely one that I will purchase. Keep your eye out at Target... my birthday is in March.

I give it a high 9. Like I said, I didn't care for the ending too much but it was otherwise entirely enjoyable!

Eternal Sunshine of the Spotless Mind

2009-12-21T15:40:00.000-05:00

So what is this one about?
How is it even possible that I haven't reviewed this movie yet?!?! I started this blog in summer 2008 (when I was in Oregon with D) and I have reviewed every movie I have seen that I haven't already reviewed. How is it possible I haven't watched this movie since then?! How?!?! I barely believe that it is. But, well, here we go!

Eternal Sunshine is my #1 movie of the 2000s decade--as I declared to the Bob and Abe show--AND according to wikipedia

"The film was lauded by critics as one of the best films of 2004, and in recent lists, has been acclaimed as one of the best films of the decade"

so I find it nearly impossible that someone reading this blog wont know the plot, BUT, I will let you know anyway.

The 'flix tells us

"After learning that his mercurial ex-girlfriend, Clementine Kruczynski (Kate Winslet), has undergone an experimental medical process to purge all memories of him, mild-mannered Joel Barish (Jim Carrey) opts for the same procedure. But during the operation, he decides he doesn't want to lose what's left of their relationship and tries to conceal her image in his memory cells."

Brilliant.

And how much did I pay to watch?
I didn't pay anything for this. I own it. And you should too, because it is excellent.

And what did I think?
Well, like I said, I think this is the number 1 movie of the 2000s decade. In fact, I think I will put up my best of list before the end of the year (though, this is neither here nor there). It is not even a contest. But why do I think that?

Well, Michel Gondry is an excellently, creative artist. His films are mesmerizing and a little spacey--sort of cartoonishly hilarious like my favorite episode of Flight of the Conchords Season 2, "Unnatural Love" which he directed--but entirely fun and fresh. I would also recommend The Science of Sleep. Without Gondry's artistic eye this movie would not have been as excellent.

However, without Charlie Kaufman's (whose photo on Wikipedia looks a lot like Gondry's) script, Gondry's direction wouldn't have had the forward motion it needed. That is why ESotSM was so much better than Be Kind, Rewind. Gondry and Kaufman are like the Thomas Jefferson and the George Washington of 2000s film. They are both excellent alone, but they are wildly successful with each other--George Washington was an amazing leader, but without Jefferson's Declaration of Independence as a backing document what would General Washington have been fighting for? Likewise, Jefferson wrote the Declaration of Independence, but without Washington putting the military support behind it, he would have been just another hot intellectual. Wasn't that sort of off topic? Yes.

Ok, so back to the point. What do I love about this? Everything! I know I am being continually vague, so I will try and be more specific.

I love the actors/acting. Kate Winslet, Jim Carrey, Elijah Wood, Kirsten Dunst (sad, sad, Kirsten Dunst), David Cross, Tom Wilkinson and even Mark Ruffalo. Everyone is just so sad. But it isn't sad like Before Sunset sad, but it is a more hopeful sadness. The point is one that I really like. Something like, the people you love you'll love no matter what. The memories of both Clementine and Joel were erased and they still found each other. Even Mary and the Doctor found each other again. There is something so optimistic yet still depressing about that. It is optimistic because it shows that maybe there are people you are really supposed to love and be with in your life. It is depressing because, in Mary's case, sometimes things don't work out but you can't help being in love with the same person. She was right though, erasing your memories is wrong.

Every person you meet in your life--or date, or don't date but want to--they all teach you something about who you are, what makes you happy, or what you are looking for. You can't erase them because they've all made you a little what you are. You eventually stop caring, or missing them, or you wish they just weren't around anymore, but you can't just erase them. (Unless you erase them from facebook or your cell phone book--which is very cathartic and awesome!)

Lastly, it is Gondry's artistic direction. The visuals are so whimsical and they help to break your heart. As the memories are erased and the visuals disappear you, as the audience, feel that vanishing feeling. You want so badly for the main characters to not disappear from each other because you know that they are so good together. And because of the non-linear story you can't really tell that they are going to end up together.

Are those good enough reasons for loving this movie? Answer: yes.

So what is the rating? (out of 10)
The first time I saw this movie it was at the house of a boy who I really liked. He said it was one of his favorites, but I was too busy being excited about being near him that I didn't pay attention to the movie. It was a little too complex for 22 year old Julia to figure out when I wasn't even giving it my attention. I could tell it was good, but I couldn't tell how good. So I would have given it a 7 (but because Netflix has deleted the reviews I wrote I can't give you the official story).

So then I bought it and watched it again, and I felt like I had a grip on what was going on, but I couldn't be sure till I watched it again. And when I did it understood how fantastically amazing it is. So it very deservedly gets a 10. (As if there were any doubt)

Seriously, it is worth the effort. It is so pretty visually, with such a pretty/sad story. You'll like it. Go watch it.

The Haunting in Connecticut

2009-12-19T18:58:00.000-05:00

So what is this one about?
Well, the 'flix tells us,

In this supernatural thriller, the Campbell family's move to Connecticut takes a mysteriously dark turn when a series of shocking paranormal events reveals that their inviting new home is a former mortuary with a sordid past. Based on a true story, this terrifying tale stars Virginia Madsen and Martin Donovan as the well-meaning Campbell parents, Kyle Gallner as their cancer-stricken son and Elias Koteas as the enigmatic Rev. Nicholas Popescu.

Sweet! Popescu, a Romanian!

And how much did I pay to watch?
Oh, I don't know. It is impossible to tell! But, let me say what I've said before... likely too much compared to blockbuster, what it was worth, etc. etc. etc.

And what did I think?
The preview for this movie was scurrrrrrrry. And the opening credits were gross, bloody, and Ring-like creepy. So I had very high expectations.

Of course, like practically every horror movie I watch, this one was shit shit shit. Typical. And I even watched it on Halloween, but that didn't add to the "ambiance" of scary movies. Harrumph. In fact, there was really nothing about this movie that was scary at all--well, besides the gross/bloody credits.

The plot was sort of overly difficult and convoluted so it wasn't very easy to understand. There was actually so much explanation for the events that were going on in the house that I 1) stoped caring and 2) stopped paying attention. So, when they said the names of like old ass dudes who used to work at the mourgue I didn't really know who they were referring to. Why couldn't they have just said "the kid" or "the owners"? Don't you like how I act like I am impressive and then say I can't even follow, nay, didn't care to follow, the assanine plot of some retarded horror movie? Yeah, I like it too.

It even had an equally predictable/typical Ring-like twist at the end! Oh, did I just ruin it? No, because you really shouldn't be watching it anyway.

So what is the rating? (out of 10)
So what does this movie get? a 2. Lame!

Precious: based on the novel 'Push' by Sapphire

2009-12-14T20:41:00.000-05:00

So what is this one about?
The 'flix says,

Viciously abused by her mother (a riveting Mo'Nique) and pregnant by her father, Harlem high schooler Precious Jones (Gabourey Sidibe) has an unexpected chance at a different life when she enrolls in an alternative school. Teacher Blu Rain (Paula Patton) encourages her, but Precious must battle unimaginable barriers everywhere in her life. Lee Daniels directs his drama that features appearances by Mariah Carey and Lenny Kravitz.

That's a pretty accurate description.

And how much did I pay to watch?
I don't really remember, but I think I got in free for this one as well, at the Cinema Arts.

And what did I think?
What did I think? Hmmm.

Well, I see ads on the tv that call Precious "uplifting" and "inspiring" and I think to myself, um, did we see the same Precious? Would you call KIDS uplifting or inspiring? Dude, Precious was all kinds of effed up. I am sure you can tell that just from the Netflix description. This girl's life--this real girl, apparently--was beyond horrible. Two kids by her own father?? A mother who made her daughter her slave?? Oh yeah, that sounds real uplifting.

Would you like further proof? Let me provide you some more information from the description of the novel.

The novel is set in Harlem in 1987. Precious Jones lives with her mother, an invalid, and her father, a drug addict. She is obese, illiterate, and pregnant with her second child. In the beginning of the novel, she explains that she has been repeatedly raped by her father since she was seven, and is pregnant with her second child by him. She even tries to commit suicide to get away from it all but it does not work. Her father is married to someone else and living with Precious’ mother, who lives off of public assistance and social security checks she receives for Precious’ first child, "Lil' Mongo", who has Down Syndrome and lives with Precious’ grandmother. Precious cooks, cleans, and waits on her mother constantly.

Charming.

So, I was also interested to see this movie because I read somewhere that Mariah Carey is unrecognizable. That is a fallacy. I picked her out right away.

So, to return back to the novel, and it's plot which was shown in the movie,

While in the halfway house, Precious joins an incest support group where she meets other people who have suffered, finding solace in knowing that she is not alone. Attempting to transition to life on her own, Precious' mother unexpectedly appears to tell her that her father has died from AIDS. Precious discusses this with her friends at school and they convince her to get Abdul and herself tested. Abdul is negative and Precious is positive. In the end, Precious finds her freedom and security in knowing that she can care for her son and herself on her own.

Wow. How uplifting.

And look at me. I don't even feel bad to spoil this for you. It isn't like you don't see it coming.

So what is the rating? (out of 10)
I guess it was good enough, but I wouldn't really recommend this to anyone. I give it a 5.

An Education

2009-12-14T19:58:00.002-05:00

So what is this one about?
The 'flix tells us

Jenny's (Carey Mulligan) Oxford-bound teen life is undistinguished in 1961 London until she's given a different kind of education after being immersed in the beguiling but hazardous world of cultured and much-older David (Peter Sarsgaard). Even Jenny's father, Jack (Alfred Molina), is intrigued by him, but her school's unimpressed headmistress (Emma Thompson) works to keep Jenny's entire future from crumbling under David's influence.

le sigh. ooooh David.

And how much did I pay to watch?
Nothing, because my comrade at Cinema Arts let me in for free. And not just me but my mom and my host sister.

And what did I think?
In some ways, I'm a little jealous of the main character, Jenny. A guy like Peter Sarsgaard--so hot--and he opens her young eyes to fancy places, in glamorous clothes, with cosmopolitan friends, and the possibility of big adventure and happy ever after. How could I not possibly be wildly jealous, actually? Why can't I find a fabulous man like him. Even with his secrets, and his issues. Even though it all gets ripped away. Why can't I find someone like that? It'd be fun.

Actually, now that I think about that, I think it might help me have a more favorable opinion of this movie. If I were Jenny, thin, glamorous, with Peter Sarsgaard in love with me, I would maybe make the same decisions as her. EXCEPT--and maybe my pity for her is waning-- I wouldn't act like I was too fucking cool for school, too cool for my parents, too cool for everyone around me. That is why I don't feel bad for her.

Now, if it were me, and I were dating a guy who um {SPOILER} was dating someone else--or was married--and i HAVE dated someone who was dating someone else, and I had no idea, and I was sad. I mean, it just makes you feel so shitty that you were tricked. And you had no idea. And I had no idea. Now, I would know that I could come back from it, and I did. But it might have taken a while. Or it actually didn't because I was able to think to myself "Um, wtf? I am not wasting a second more thinking of him" Then again, I didn't tell everyone else in my life to eff off because I picked a guy over every other thing in my life.

So, the question is, Why did everything get to end so well for her? I mean, sometimes when you make really really stupid decisions you have to work harder then she did in order to come back from it. Everything was solved for her so easily. And it pissed me off.

It was hard to hate her because she was so adorable. like Jenny Lewis and Zooey Deschanel, sort of weak in appearance but a real fireball underneath. But that sort of made it easier to hate her, because why did everything get to be so perfect for her?

Not fair. Then again, what is?

So what is the rating? (out of 10)
Well, I liked it. The clothes were gorgeous. And the people were quite good looking. Especially my love Peter Sarsgaard. And I was surprised to find out David's secret.

But, like I said, I didn't have much sympathy for Jenny. Because she was an unapologetic bitch.

So I give it a 7.

The Death of Alice Blue (Part of Spooky Movie-- The Washington DC International Horror Film Festival)

2009-11-14T21:52:00.003-05:00

So what is this one about?
So, The Death of Alice Blue was screened along with four short films--Death in Charge, Thorns, Orla's Song, and Elder Song. Taken from the Spooky Movie website, here are the descriptions of all five films.

DEATH IN CHARGE – Don’t tell Mom the babysitter’s Death...The Grim Reaper is mistaken for a babysitter and learns a thing or two about life. (15m, U.S.A.)

THORNS – A gorgeous woman and an eccentric man spend a romantic evening together. The man is haunted by the memory of his past lover, and the woman’s seduction yields unexpected results. (7m, Czech Republic)

ORLA’S SONG – A sacrificed child calls for revenge from beyond the grave. (20m, United Kingdom)

ELDER SIGN – If you suffer from an overwhelming sense of dread brought on by the realization of your own insignificance in the universe, then you need Elder Sign. (2m, Canada)

THE DEATH OF ALICE BLUE - Alice Blue is a new creative intern at Raven Advertising. Unfortunately for her it’s run by vampires. A group of eccentrics enlist her aid in thwarting their nefarious schemes. But there’s a complication. There’s the possibility that she herself may be genetically predisposed to being the greatest vampire ever, and the only one who can save the dying breed. Alice is forced to confront herself and make a stand, whatever the outcome. One of the most original and exciting features that we have screened! (86m, Canada)

Ta dah!

And how much did I pay to watch?
Nothing! I was surprised that one of my old Cinema Arts friends from high school was back working at the theatre. I don't want to say too much more because I don't want to get him in trouble.

And what did I think?
Well, of the short films Death in Charge was the best. It was pretty clever. Orla's Song was ok too. Thorns was atrocious and Elder Sign was ridic.

As for The Death of Alice Blue, it was also entirely ridiculous. Probably one of the baddest movies I've seen. Not as in bad topic, but as in silly plot, silly scenery, and high camp factor.

There was an incredibly good looking actor in the film. Most of the men were ok looking--those silly Canadians. So, the actor in question was Kristen Holden-Ried. That is an actor? A male? Yes, and a good looking one. And when I got home I looked at him on imdb and realized that I knew him from somewhere else. He was in The Tudors! He was the hot one from the 1st season who died of the sweating sickness. You remember, the hot gay one! Yesssssssssssssssssss!In addition to KHR, the other high point of the movie was the single greatest line I've ever heard in a movie. The line was so great I wrote it on a post-it note and put it up in front of my desk so I can read it and chuckle whenever I want. What was the line? It was said by Alice's mom to Alice on her birthday at dinner. "My god Alice, you look like the ugliest girl in Toronto!" LOVE IT!

So, the plot of the movie was so ridiculously silly, apparently Alice needed to stop the vampires who were running the company she was working for. And all around the office the vampires were spacey and had iv bags full of blood for them to "eat" during the day. This was definitely the most B-movie I have ever seen.

But the scene where Alice was dancing the KHR's character in the club was hot, hot, hot!

So what is the rating? (out of 10)
I have to give this movie credit. It is a totally indie film made by Canadian film makers and it takes place in Toronto. I give it a 5 because it sure tried.

If you want to watch something silly, watch The Death of Alice Blue.

The Broken

2009-11-14T21:33:00.002-05:00

So what is this one about?
Well, I rented this one because I read the description on the 'flix. Which is,

From the very first moment Gina (Lena Headey) spots a woman who looks exactly like her driving down a busy London street, reality ceases to exist as she knows it. Tailing her doppelganger, Gina finds herself immersed in a surreal landscape of mind-bending nightmares and inexplicable events. Written and directed by Sean Ellis, this disturbing tale also stars Richard Jenkins and Asier Newman.

And how much did I pay to watch?
Again, I rented it on the flix, and I wasn't watching many movies, so probably way more than I should have, or would have at blockbuster, or what it was worth.

And what did I think?
Man, if this wasn't the biggest disappointment, I dunno what is! There was no explanation for what was happening in the movie. None. Now, I'm not such a dumb movie watcher that everything needs to be explained to me. But at least in Mirrors there was some explanation for what was going on.

Why do I compare this movie to Mirrors? Well, let me tell you. There was one scene in the movie that was shot for shot exactly the same as the one with Amy Smart in the bath tub in Mirrors.Honestly, it wasn't even a scary movie! I wasn't nervous, uncomfortable, or worried. I was sort of confused and sort of bored. A fairly boring combination for a horror movie.

Lena Hadley is very beautiful though and this movie did have British accents which are always good for a point or two.

So what is the rating? (out of 10)
The Broken gets a 3. And as I said in my netflix review,

"This was like Mirrors the UK version. Don't bother."

Gossip Girl: Season 2

2009-11-14T21:12:00.001-05:00

So what is this one about?
The 'flix tells us,

Expect even more shocking secrets revealed in this hit drama's second season, which continues to trail the privileged life of rich young Manhattan teens. The players, seen through the eyes of a blogger known only as "Gossip Girl" (narrated by Kristen Bell), include Serena (Blake Lively), who left Manhattan for boarding school, her friend Blair (Leighton Meester), who took Serena's place as the "popular girl," and Nate (Chace Crawford), Blair's boyfriend.

exxxxxxxxxxxxcellent

And how much did I pay to watch?
Well, I watched this when I went to go visit my bffloml Lori in Georgia (the state, not the country) and she rented it. But I flew to Georgia, so you could say something ridiculous like "I spent $249.31 to watch this" but that would be ridiculous. So I will say I spent nothing because Lori paid for the rental.

And what did I think?
Man, was Nate really still Blair's boyfriend? Boy have times changed as I am currently (well, not currently this moment, but currently as in these past two months) watching Gossip Girl Season 3. Nate is such an under utilized character. He is barely ever in the show. Which Lori doesn't like because he is so pretty. And he is.

I myself am more of a Chuck gal. The Chuck/Blair relationship was the savior of this season. They are 100% the new Jim and Pam. They are the best couple on tv, they are far better than Jim and Pam--they're married and preggers and uncool now.

There were a few things I really hated about this season. One of them was the Blair/Serena "relationship". Watching this season with my real BFF, we totally thought that Blair and Serena are not only not bff but they aren't really friends at all. They are so mean to eachother, that frenemies is a much more apt term. Another thing I hated was how the last few episodes of the season were really unrelated to the plot. As I was just reading the wikipedia entry on this season I may understand why. They say,

The penultimate episode of the season, "Valley Girls", was a backdoor pilot for a Gossip Girl spin-off series also titled Valley Girls. The series was set in 1983 and chronicled the teen years of the Gossip Girl character Lily van der Woodsen.

Oh, that helps to explain it. Does that show even exist? I've never even heard of it! And can I please ask about Dan. When did he become the biggest stud on the show? That guy gets more chicks than anyone else. And that is utterly ridiculous. I absolutely hated the teacher he had an "affair" with. She deserved all the bad shit that happened to her.

So what is the rating? (out of 10)
Anyway, Season 2 was ok. Season 1 and what I have seen of Season 3 are way better. So much so in fact that I will likely buy Season 3 but not season 2. burrrrrrrrn.

The show was still amazing for the Chuck and Blair relationship and the fabulous clothes. And for the quality time I was able to spend with Lori while we watched it on my last trip to GA.

It gets a 7.

The Last Days of Disco

2009-11-14T20:42:00.001-05:00

So what is this one about?
The 'flix tells us

Writer-director Whit Stillman captures the end of an era, chronicling love and heartbreak in a mirror-balled world of exclusive nightclubs packed with young singles who dispense wit drier than their martinis. A smart script and spot-on performances from an ensemble cast (including Robert Sean Leonard, Chloë Sevigny and Kate Beckinsale) distinguish Stillman's satire, the final installment in his so-called "yuppie trilogy."

Ok.

And how much did I pay to watch?
Well, I got it on netflix, about a bazillion years ago (actually less than a month ago), and I haven't been watching many movies, so I probably paid 1) more than I should have 2) more than I would have at blockbuster 3) more than it was worth.

And what did I think?
Well, reading this Slate article made me want to watch this movie. I mean, I'm a pretty smart gal. I enjoy quality, dense, smart films. The types of films that are Criterion Collection. But, jesus up in heaven, I did not get The Last Days of Disco at all! Maybe if I watched these other films in the "yuppie trilogy"--Metropolitan and Barcelona--I would have gotten what the heck was going on in this movie. Maybe if I had lived during the time that this movie took place in I would have understood it. But I seriously had absolutely no idea what was going on!

Was I somehow supposed to be moved by the crash in the 1980s? By these ladies trying to destroy each other and becoming "independent"? I seriously did not get it. Wikipedia talks about "themes" in the movie, and how for Chloe Sevigny this is her most asked about movie, but I really didn't see them or get that. Boys Don't Cry is so much better. (Don't bother watching Kids. That was likely my biggest movie watching mistake ever. Talk about effing depressing!)

Maybe I just like my "coming of age" 1990s movies more like Before Sunrise and Reality Bites and Clueless (ok, that one is a stretch).

So what is the rating? (out of 10)
I give it a 3. Maybe watch the other ones and then watch this one. Or maybe not.

Troop Beverly Hills

2009-11-14T20:22:00.002-05:00

So what is this one about?
The 'flix tells us

Shelly Long is a spoiled Beverly Hills housewife who decides -- in an effort to disprove her husband's characterization that she's a selfish trophy wife -- to become the leader of her daughter's wilderness group. Almost blowing it at first (she takes them on outings at the mall rather than in the woods), she later must prove her worth as a legitimate troop leader by instilling lessons of teamwork and selflessness in her young charges.

Huzzah!!

And how much did I pay to watch?
To watch this fine 1980s film I paid nothing. To own this fine 1980s film I think I paid either $4.99 or $7.99 at good ol Target. And let me tell you, that was under $10 well spent!!

And what did I think?
WHAT DID I THINK!? I thought it was amazing! It also totally transported me back in time to elementary school to Adele Paz's house. Man oh man.

So what did I really think? It is a totally fun, actual laugh out loud, silly movie from the 80s.

And do you know who plays Shelley Long and Craig T. Nelson's daughter? Well, let me tell you. Jenny Lewis. Yes, that Jenny Lewis! Jenny Lewis of Rilo Kiley! Jenny Lewis of Jenny Lewis and the Watson Twins! And she is just so ridiculously cute! It was hilarious to watch this movie after I knew who Jenny Lewis was, because when you look at her as a child actor there is no way you could have imagined her as the darling of indie rock (she better watch out for Zooey Deschanel) with the amazing soulful songs of Acid Tongue. But I digress.

There is nothing especially innovative, creative, or complex plot wise. You can sort of see the plot coming from a mile away, but it is still ridiculously fun. And there is catchy music! The song in the opening credits (done by the Beach Boys) I still remember from 20 years ago and was able to sing along, and the cookie song was the same way. Love it love it love it!

So what is the rating? (out of 10)
This is one of those movies that I like even though it isn't so great. I give it a 10 for the fun/enjoyment factor!

If you haven't seen it, just watch it. You'll like it. Well, if you're a girl you'll like it.

Der Baader Meinhof Komplex (The Baader Meinhof Complex)

2009-11-14T19:25:00.001-05:00

So what is this one about?
Netflix tells us,

Uli Edel directs this Best Foreign Language Film Oscar nominee charting the birth of West Germany's Red Army Faction, a radical left-wing terrorist group formed in the late 1960s amid a climate of revolution and a fallen generation. Staging a series of bombings, kidnappings and assassinations, the RAF waged a war against fascism with a direct assault against the powers of American imperialism and the fledgling German democracy.

Oh, I see.

And how much did I pay to watch?
Well, I watched at Cinema Arts (nearly two months ago...jesus) at night so it probably was something like $8.

What a deal!

And what did I think?
Well, I thought it was quite quite long. 150 minutes. In fact, that was my major problem with it. I think the film makers likely tried to adapt the book too closely (which i bet you never thought you'd hear me say) which meant it covered too many years. I wouldn't be surprised if it covered nearly 20 years, though the information I can find on wikipedia indicates it covers only 10. Well, then I think it was too in depth. The stories told in the film would have been better told in a mini series format. And trust me, I know mini-series.

Now, what I did like about the movie were the actors. Including both Bruno Ganz and Alexandra Maria Lara--who were both in Downfall. The acting was just spot on with the actors consistently demonstrating their characters and the changes they went through.

I went to see this film because there was a Law and Order Criminal Intent episode about a similarly motivated group in New York City. The motivations of both the RAF and the group in the CI episode were so irritating. I have so little patience for these "revolutionary" groups who resort to violence before trying anything in a civilized way. So, of course, watching a movie about a group like this was sort of trying on my patience.

So what is the rating? (out of 10)
It was good enough. I was surprised to see that it was Germany's entry for the Oscars last year, not so much surprised that it didn't win.

It'd have liked it a lot more as a mini-series, I wouldn't recommend it so much as a movie--unless you wanna sit for three hours.

yikes!

I give it a 6.

[REC]

2009-10-18T22:28:00.000-04:00

So what is this one about?
Well, I didn't really know what it was about when I rented it. I had seen ads for Quarantine and was interested in seeing it. Something about people being quarantined in a building in some city for some reason they didn't know. And I think it was about number 3 in my netflix queue.

Then brother Jack came and told me that the Cabinet of Dr. Calagari was rated number one in the horror movie section in the best of rotten tomatoes. He had said that he would have to rent CoDC and I told him he should. We then looked at the list to see what other movies I had seen. Jack asked if I had seen [REC]--which of course I hadn't. He then went and watched it and said it was awesome. So, I put it at the top of my queue. But I still didn't really know what it was about.

After seeing the movie, and then reading what netflix says, I am glad I didn't know before I watched it. It made the movie was more scary that way. And thus, I will not give you the official description. But, if you are curious, it is easy to find. But you should watch it without knowing what it is about. That is my recommendation.

And how much did I pay to watch?
$1.88 from the netflix. And if I could find this at Target (which will like never happen because it is foreign--Spanish) I would buy it in .09 seconds.

And what did I think?
Hot damn! This one totally deserves to be on the best of in the horror movie section. (I am also 100% glad that The Descent is in the best of list too. In fact, these two films remind me of each other and were scary in the same way). It is one of the few movies I have seen in the past 5 years or so that were so scary that I involuntarily covered my eyes with my hands or actually wanted to turn the movie off! Now, I know some people don't like to be scared, but by god I love it! But sometimes when I am watching these movies alone in my room at night, I want to turn a real scary one off so I don't have nightmares, because I know I very well could.

The movie started out slowly, as if to lull you into a very false sense of security, then it starts to pick up speed and you begin to feel uneasy, then it sucker punches you in the gut and maintains that intensity until the end where you feel so uneasy that you may think of just turning the whole thing off until morning. And the sucker punch scene I alluded to? It was so gd scary and unexpected that I literally had to catch my breath once it had happened. And at the end, I really did consider turning it off. I didn't want to watch it because i was really that scared that i wouldn't be able to sleep.

All of this just cements the fact that it is one of the best horror movies I have seen.

So what is the rating? (out of 10)
Rent it. Well, rent it only if you like horror movies. If you like horror movies, rent it. Immediately.

10.

Gossip Girl: Season 1

2009-10-18T21:40:00.002-04:00

So what is this one about?
Lori told me I had to watch this. Seeing as she is my bff, and knows the type of crappy crap that I like to watch, I had to trust her on it. I didn't really know much about GG, but netflix told me,

"When former queen bee Serena (Blake Lively) returns to New York's Upper East Side from a stint at boarding school, her old friend Blair (Leighton Meester) fears she'll lose all of the status and popularity she gained during Serena's absence. The once-close friends become bitter rivals, and their struggles for power are broadcast to the entire school thanks to Gossip Girl's blog, which always has the scoop on the juiciest info."

HUZZAH!

And how much did I pay to watch?
Well, there are 5 discs in the season, and at the time I was averaging $1.88/disc. So, times 5= $9.44. Then I went to Target and say that the season 1 set was on sale for $18.99. HOLY CRAP! From like $42.99 to $18.99?! How could I not??

And what did I think?
Well, like I said, I never thought about watching this show. Sometimes in the fashion magazines I read I see that they reference the show and I never knew what the hell they are talking about. Thanks to Lori and her prodding, I found one of the greatest shows on tv. (Notice I didn't say best, or classiest, or smartest...just greatest) It is also one of the most dangerous because it makes me want to buy beautiful clothes and excessive amounts of headbands.

Ok, so, like I've said before, sometimes I feel like I am regressing. I have gone from watching smart shows (well, I don't know that I ever stopped watching "smart" shows...Law and Order, Mad Men) to a LOT of teen shows (Secret Life of the American Teenager, Gossip Girl, Degrassi). I said this already. The thing is, they are just more fun! They take a lot less focus and energy, they are always filled with hot hot hot young people, and the story lines are usually scandalous and full of intrigue. And Gossip Girl is no different.

The cast is stupid good looking--Nate especially. Well, I take it back, I think Vanessa is weird looking. The clothes are amazing--like most other females who watch this show, I think Blair has become my fashion idol. The characters are complete caricatures of real people. Dan is "poor", Vanessa is "arty", Jenny is the "social climber", Blair is the "queen bee" but these people do not exist in real life. Well, at least I cannot imagine them existing in real life. Many of them are too horrible to actually exist in real life. Though, we've all seen NYC Prep and do know that they exist a little.

The Michelle Trachtenberg character is the worst thing ever. I thought Chuck Bass was a total rapist in the first few episodes, but he wasn't. In fact, I am totally in love with him. He reminds me so much of a boy I used to know who was horrible, just one of the worst ever, but so sexy and appealing and all that. Hot damn. So, I like watching Chuck Bass because he reminds me of him. Chuck and Blair are like the best thing ever. They are totally the new Jim and Pam.

The thing I like most about this show is that it really pulls you in. I would be at work thinking about getting home so I could watch more GG. You get caught up in the silly, ludicrous, simple-minded plot lines. And when things happened in the plot that were supposed to be dramatic I would react exactly like they wanted me to. I would be like "Holy Crap!" or "Oh no she didn't!" It was really great. Great fun!

So what is the rating? (out of 10)
You may think you are too cool for Gossip Girl, just like you think you are too cool to read Harry Potter. If you don't think you're too cool for that, then I would 100% recommend Gossip Girl. And if you know the men from my life, you'll have to tell me who you think Chuck Bass reminds me of ;)

I give it a 10!

Gigantic

2009-10-18T17:42:00.001-04:00

So what is this one about?
Netflix tells us,

"Unhappy with his life, mattress salesman Brian Weathersby (Paul Dano) pursues his lifelong obsession with adopting an infant from China. But when attractive customer Harriet (Zooey Deschanel) catches his eye, he starts pursuing her instead. Soon, Harriet's overbearing father (John Goodman) and Brian's parents (Ed Asner and Jane Alexander) become involved in their relationship, pushing Brian to take drastic action in this quirky romantic comedy.

And how much did I pay to watch?
Well, I watched it via netflix rental during one of my quick turn over periods--meaning I was watching movies quite quickly (unlike now when I've have the same dvds checked out for maybe over a month...jeeze) so I bet it was a few dollars.

And what did I think?
You know what I hate? I think Zooey is sort of annoying. I believe that I have said this before. (see 500 Days of Summer review, my opinion of her continues to be spot on in relation to this movie...) For one thing, her character's name is Happy. Yep, not a joke. She acts "quirky" and hot and yanks Paul Dano around in this movie. Classic Zooey moments? When she and Paul were waiting in the reception area of a doctors office while her dad (John Goodman) was seeing his chiropractor. She had basically made Paul drive them to the Dr's office. She asks him what he is reading. He tells her. He asks what she is reading, she says "mostly ads" then proceeds to describe one to him. After that she leans into him and asks "do you have any interest in having sex with me?" He replies, "mmmmhmm" and she says, "now?" and he says "mmmmhmmm."

Who does that Zooey think she is? She can just go anywhere and pick up a guy? Guys just fall at her feet? Haarrumph to her. And what is she always so moody about?!? She's gorgeous and guys are always falling in love with her. She needs to just get over it and start to be more cheery!

The movie was pretty quirky. I watched a large portion of it with a look of complete confusion on my face. It was just pretty bizarre. However, it was pretty funny at times. I had a huge lol moment during it, which I will not describe in case you'd like to watch it. And you know what? I love John Goodman. I think he is great. And does Paul Dano always need to look so emo? Get that kid some candy! He looks so depressed all the time!

So what is the rating? (out of 10)
I really liked my review on Netflix--I tend to do my two cents reviews way before I write them down--I wish this weren't the case. I said, "This was the strangest but most earnest film I have seen in a long time. It made me truly, truly smile." This is the type of movie that I would purchase on dvd, so again, if you see it in the $10 section at target, please let me know.

I give this one an 8.5.

Two Lovers

2009-10-18T17:08:00.000-04:00

So what is this one about?
Netflix tells us,

"After his engagement falls through, Leonard Kraditor (Joaquin Phoenix) juggles the affections of Michelle (Gwyneth Paltrow), his beautiful, self-destructive neighbor, and Sandra (Vinessa Shaw), the attractive, sensible daughter of his father's business associate. Writer-director James Gray's beautifully nuanced romantic drama is set in Brooklyn and also stars Elias Koteas. The film was nominated for the Palme d'Or at the Cannes Film Festival."

tah freaking dah!

And how much did I pay to watch?
Nerfffffffin. I watched this bad boy on netflix's view it now option. Well, I guess I did pay something, because if I didn't have my flix subscription then I wouldn't be eligible to watch this, but lets just ignore that for this moment.

And what did I think?
What I thought was that I loved that there were no value judgements from the director. In a story that is sort of complex like this one, with complex and damaged characters, it was SO entirely refreshing that the director or writer didn't write any of the characters as "the bad guy". There were really repugnant things about all the characters, really sad things about all the characters, and endearing things about all the characters. It left the action of judging who was good and who was bad and who deserved what to the audience. And it was likewise refreshing that the filmmakers thought the audience would be smart enough to decide who they liked and who they didn't. Filmmakers don't seem to give audiences enough credit these days.

In the same vein of this being complex, as a viewer it was hard for me to pick who I liked and who I didn't. I think that is quite an accomplishment. Usually I pick someone in a film I like--usually someone I can relate to for some reason--but I couldn't pick anyone. I just felt sorry for everyone. Sorrier for some, but I felt sorry for all of them. They were just so damaged.

The film also took place in Brighton Beach, so there were tons of Russians and other Eastern Europeans, and the weather was so overcast and depressing--the settings really seemed to match the story. I assume that was done deliberately. I give the production team a lot of credit on this one.

So what is the rating? (out of 10)
I think you should watch this. Sometimes I think that my opinions on film are sort of bizarrely skewed--I don't know why. But I thought this one was really good. It isn't the type of film I would buy and watch over and over, but I thought it was really good. Nuanced. (I love that word).

I gave it a 4 on Netflix, so I will give it an 8 here.

District 9

2009-10-11T21:57:00.003-04:00

There are a lot of secrets in District 9

So what is this one about?
Netflix tells us,

When aliens land on Earth, global business conglomerate Multi-National United forces them into rigid containment zones where they are compelled to labor, even as MNU commandeers their otherworldly technology for profit. As tensions build between human and non-human races, a rogue agent leads a resistance movement against MNU's ruthless consolidation of power. Neill Blomkamp directs this cinema verité-style sci-fi thriller.

And how much did I pay to watch?
Well, here is the thing. I saw this movie twice. Twice in the theatre. I paid for this movie twice! That like never, ever, happens anymore. It wasn't that it was so amazing I wanted to see it again--and it was that amazing-- my Ukrainian host sister wanted to see it, so I went to see it again. The second time it was $11, and I bet the first time it was $9 or so, so I'm guessing I paid about $20. DANG.

And what did I think?
Ok, so for one thing this took place in South Africa, so the accents were fabulously amazing. I love South African accents. They are weird like New Zealand accents, but pretty like Australian ones! I even had a South African professor in grad school--it took me forever to figure out where her accent was from. Bettina von Lieres--you can even look her up! And look at those crazy SA names! Like Wikus van der Merwe (pronounced Vikkus van der Murvah).

So, it def had the accents and location going for it. Also going for it was that the idea was so entirely fresh. I mean, when you think about it initally, you know that there is a large tendency for the treatment of this subject to be trite. And in some ways it was. I mean, it is pretty much what you expect in that the immigrants (aliens) are shunned and forced to leave--you know, just like immigration in a lot of places--and that "mixing" is totally looked down on (like it was back in the day), and that "its ok to have immigrants, just not where we live" attitude, and the whole immigrants live in slums and bring crime (like in The Jungle)...exxxxxxcept these immigrants aren't people, but aliens! Like from another planet!! I mean, who thinks of things like that?! Awesome!

The aliens were pretty fresh looking too. I mean, who has ever seen aliens that look like that? They also had eyes like Wall-E so they were very sincere looking. But, I suppose that is what you would expect, because the entire movie took place in 2010! in the future!!!!!

So what is the rating? (out of 10)
Here is the thing, like I said, I haven't seen a movie more than once in the theatre in like forever. The fact that I saw this one indicates I like it a lot. So much in fact that I could easily purchase this movie once it hits the under $10 section at Target. (What a glowing endorsement, right?)

So, I think I'd give it an 8. Or maybe a 9. Well, lets just settle for 8.5.

Roman Polanski: Wanted and Desired

2009-09-27T17:11:00.009-04:00

"I think he has a dark side. A sad side. A veiled side. Given his childhood, he has a relationship to life and death he can't talk about. He has a strong vision of sadness and death inside him, but since he has such energy, such working power, such desire to do extraordinary things, he prevails."
Pierre-Andre Doutang, Polanksi's friend

So what is this one about?
Netflix tell us,

Director Roman Polanski is the focus of this documentary that explores the tumultuous events of his personal life, including the murder of his pregnant wife, Sharon Tate, and the sex scandal that prompted him to flee the United States for France. Interviews with Polanski's victim, Samantha Geimer, Chinatown screenwriter Robert Towne, actress Mia Farrow and others help to reveal the many sides of this controversial figure.

And how much did I pay to watch?
Nothing. We had DVRed this one when it premiered on HBO. I had been waiting to watch it, but events have decreed that I watch it and discuss it today.

And what did I think?
When I woke up at 9am and saw "Swiss arrest Polanski on US request in sex case" on the front page of the Washington Post website I honestly though I would throw up. I hauled my sorry, pajama clad self out of bed and marched downstairs to my Roman Polanski loving parents--the ones who instilled the same love for him in me--and glared at my mom. I said, "I just saw on the Washington Post..." and she said, "I know. We saw it." I probably let out an explicative or two and marched back upstairs to fume and feel sick.

Just. leave. him. alone!!!!!!!

He only escaped the Polish ghetto in World War II, had his mother die in Auschwitz, then had his beautiful, movie-star, pregnant wife--who he was amazingly in love with--be murdered at the hands of the Charles Manson family. So, I say again, what is the point of all of this LA County District Attorney? This happened over 30 years ago. Flipping ridiculous.

In fact, this new article on the Post website essentially say as much! Lets break it down, shall we?
"Polanski, 76, was arrested at the Zurich airport Saturday night by Swiss authorities acting at the request of the Los Angeles district attorney's office. Prosecutors there had learned of the Oscar-winning director's plans to attend a film festival in his honor, and passed a request through the U.S. Justice Department." Are you really telling me that the Justice Department has nothing better to do with their time?

"The arrest outraged the government of France, which has declined to extradite Polanski since he fled to his native land in 1978" understandable. Good for France for looking out for one of it's talented citizens! "Culture Minister Frederic Mitterrand issued a statement saying he "profoundly regrets that a new ordeal is being inflicted on someone who has already known so many during his life."" Merci, Monsieur Mitterand! C'est vrai!

"Polanski also received support from Poland, where he moved as a toddler and avoided capture by the Nazis, who put his mother to death in a concentration camp. "I am considering approaching the American authorities over the possibility of the U.S. president proclaiming an act of clemency, which would settle the matter once and for all," said Polish foreign minister Radoslaw Sikorski, according to the PAP news agency." I hope that does happen. If his justice department can do something so retarded, surely Obama can take the ten seconds to tell them to back down and apologize.

"The arrest baffled some in Hollywood. "I think it's absolutely ridiculous," said Bill Flicker, a film editor who once worked with Polanski in France. "It's stupid and a waste of resources. I don't understand why they are doing it."" Yes, it is ridiculous. Why are they doing it?

Even the girl he had sex with has said to let it go, "I don't carry any feelings of anger towards Polanski," she told People magazine in 1997. "I even have some sympathy for him, what with his mother dying in a concentration camp and then his wife Sharon Tate being murdered by Charles Manson's people and spending the last 20 years as a fugitive. Life was hard for him, just like it was for me. He did something really gross to me, but it was the media that ruined my life." jerks.

As I am sure you can tell, I am just simply horrified that this has even come up. He is clearly not a sex offender who poses a threat to anyone else. Just. Let. It. Go!
_______________
Moving back onto topic, the film was incredibly interesting. It painted a detailed and nuanced portrait of the media attention hungry judge who presided over the case and the county of Los Angeles who was not really interested in putting Polanski in prison for the rest of his life--most of the people in the film thought that he had truly already suffered enough and that considering the facts of the case that all the recommendations the judge received were fair and reasonable. And it did this while not really passing judgement on any of the characters involved in the story.

I would say if you don't know anything about Roman Polanski and haven't seen any of his films--shame on you--this would be a good introduction to him. Through the archival reels you can see why he was so appealing. In the clips of his films you can see the contained elegance of his filmmaking style. And in the news reels from 30 -40 years ago you can see the hard life he had. And you'll understand, like I do, that we should just leave him be.

So what is the rating? (out of 10)
I give it a 10. I'm sad I waited so long to watch it, but I'm glad I did, because if I hadn't watched it today it wouldn't have had the immediate, emotional effect it had.

And if you haven't seen Knife in the Water (Nóz w Wodzie), just go rent it. If only for the beautiful Polish language. Then rent the Pianist...because, be serious.

Very Young Girls

2009-09-14T20:59:00.000-04:00

So what is this one about?
Netflix has a much better description of this movie than wikipedia does. In fact, it was Netflix's excellent description and recommendation of this movie that made me rent it. It says,

David Schisgall's startling documentary captures the heartbreaking stories of underage girls -- many as young as 13 -- who've been forced into prostitution in New York, exposing how pimps use isolation, violence and drugs to keep girls dependent. Many of the girls interviewed take part in GEMS, a shelter and mentoring program founded by activist Rachel Lloyd -- once a prostitute herself -- that helps them transition out of "the life."

And how much did I pay to watch?
I got it on the 'flix. I think my movie watching has been doing better... lets calculate the per disc amount. I have returned 10 movies in a month (and I watched on on the interweb on the 'flix site) So, 11 movies divided by the monthly rate of $16.99 is $1.54/movie. HUZZAH! Back down to a reasonable price!

And what did I think?
Ok, this one was sad. But uplifting as well. In my review for Orphan I referenced the saddest and best documentary ever--Children Underground. Very Young Girls was sad, but the girls---or a lot of them, were really trying to do better. I suppose that is thanks to Rachel Lloyd. Dude, RL's accent was SO mental! It reminded me of the chick from The Streets, she sounded like she was British. But she had a trashy accent like she was from New York. So the next day at work, you know, that is where I do a lot of movie researching, I looked her up on the internets. I found this article which told me

"Lloyd was just 13 when she dropped out of school to support an alcoholic mother. She slipped into a life of drugs and sexual abuse. She tried three times to kill herself. But even in the United Kingdom, with its network of social workers, lawyers and psychiatrists, Lloyd “continued to slip through the cracks of a system that would eventually give up.” Prostitution in Germany was what awaited her at age 17."

Yikes. So that explains the accent.

I think one of the awesome things she says in the movie was so true. She said, to paraphrase, "In America, people worry about child prostitution in Thailand or Ukraine, but when it happens in their own backyard they turn a blind eye." I feel like that is probably true. How often do you hear about child exploitation or human trafficking all over the world, but never in the US? I am sure it happens, and it happened to these girls in this documentary.

The thing that is even better about this documentary, is that it shows women who are really trying to make a difference in the lives of these girls and bring light to a situation that doesn't get enough coverage in the US. Rachel Lloyd and GEMS seems like they are slowly but surely building awareness about child prostitution in the US.

I don't want to see preachy, because this sort of social or crime issue isn't really the type I learn about...but you should really see this movie.

It really is very illuminating.

So what is the rating? (out of 10)
Solid, solid, solid, solid documentary. 9.

This is Not A Joke

2009-09-12T18:18:00.002-04:00

But it is where I tell you about all the movie stubs I just found...
I am doing a nice thorough cleaning of my room and I found some old ass movie stubs from who knows where they were hiding. I was getting ready to throw them all away but I thought it might be funny/fun to share

Once 7/11/07 (with Jared--E Street)
Sicko 7/6 (no year--Cinema Arts)
Vacancy 5/11/07
Evening 7/1 (no year--Cinema Arts)
Bourne Supremacy 7/30/04 (jeeeez)
Zodiac 3/3/07 (Toronto--with Ylber)
Evan Almighty 7/10/07
Hot Fuzz 5/7/07 (AMC)
Hairspray 7/20/07 (AMC)
28 Weeks Later 5/13/07 (AMC)
Spiderman 2 7/2/04
The Village 8/1/04 (Cinema DeLux)
Garden State 9/5 (no year--Cinema Arts)
Napoleon Dynamite 8/2 (no year--Cinema Arts)
License to Wed 7/5/07 (Cinema DeLux)
Shaun of the Dead 10/6/04 (with Joe--Cinema DeLux)
Hostel 2 6/8/07
Fahrenheit 9/11 6/27 (no year--Cinema Arts)
Bobby 11/26/06 (with Joe--AMC)
Waitress 5/24 (no year--Cinema Arts)
Pirates of the Caribbean 5/25 (no year--Cinema Arts)
Knocked Up 6/5/07 (AMC)
Talladega Nights 8/8/06
Pulse 8/15/06 (AMC)
The Night Listener 8/7/06 (Cinema DeLux)
A Scanner Darkly 7/16 (no year--Cinema Arts)
Who Killed the Electric Car 7/23 (no year--Cinema Arts)
The Devil Wears Prada 7/27/06
John Tucker Must Die 7/30/06 (Cinema DeLux)
Paris, Je T'aime 6/3 (no year--Cinema Arts)
Pirates of the Caribbean 2 7/8/06

What have we learned from this activity?
1) I clearly don't throw things out. Gross. (I bet I have a fair amount of tickets in my purse currently)
2) Summer is a big movie time for me. Especially in the summer before I went to Ukraine.
3) Cinema Arts Theatre doesn't put dates on their tickets. Sad.
4) I am very consistent with the theatres I choose. But, I guess most people probably are.

That's all for now. District 9 coming very soon!

Degrassi Goes Hollywood

2009-08-31T20:37:00.001-04:00

*thats sort of blurry...isn't it?

So what is this one about?
Well, since this isn't classy enough to be on Netflix (though, I'm pretty sure it will be at one point, because it is just. that. good!) so I had to get the description from the 'The N' website (did you know, like I do, that The N is changing to the new Teen Nick on September 28? Well, it is!). So, here it is

In Degrassi's first-ever feature-length movie, Manny's determined to become a real actress, and Paige will do anything to become a star. They've always been rivals, but now they're fighting for the ultimate prize -- a starring role in Jason Mewes' next film. Meanwhile, is Craig still keeping secrets from Ellie? Are the Studz headed for their big break? And why is Jay driving a school bus across the country? When Degrassi goes Hollywood, the only thing bigger than their dreams is their drama.

Because, don't forget, "Degrassi, it goes there"

And how much did I pay to watch?
Nurfin' because I watched this classic on the tv.

And what did I think?
Well, I thought it was amazing!!!

My mom has been on my back lately (within the past few months or so) about how I have "regressed" and turned back into a "teenager". She has come to this conclusion because "of the choice of shows you have been watching." What shows are those? Easy. Degrassi (awesome!), Saved by the Bell (awesome), The Secret Life of the American Teenager (awesome, but insanely ridiculous), Gossip Girl (my newfound, fun as hell, teenage related obsession), and Radio Free Roscoe (a show that should have had way, way more seasons, why else? because it is awesome! and shows on The N at 7 and 7:30am!!). The fact that I used awesome as a description for everything maybe shows that my mom is correct in my regression to teenager. (UPDATE: as I was sitting here updating and eating a cookie sized scoop of cookie dough my mom said "are you eating frozen cookie dough again?" and I said "yeah" and she said "thats another reason why you have regressed." Then I said, "I'm telling the internet on you!!!")

Ok, so I love Degrassi. It takes me back in Canaduh every time. I see those pretty red streetcars clanking down the street and I recognize that it is the King St car, or the Spadina car (HOLLER!) or the Union car (the prettiest trip, by far) and I miss good ol' Toronto. Thankfully I can watch this anytime... or sing it.

Anyway...that was certainly a lot of tangentially related backstory... So, what did I think of Degrassi Goes Hollywood?? I thought there needed to be much more Craig. I was also very glad that there was some love between Manny and Jay (I almost forgot his name, sad). But really, I was so glad to see Craig. Craig, played by Jake Epstein (I saw Jake in Spring Awakening at the Kennedy Center. He is a fabulous singer!) So I was floored that he sang in the movie! In fact, the song he sang, called "Rescue You", was so good that I had to buy it on itunes before the movie was even over. It was soooo Spring Awakening... see...Then I downloaded two other songs by him. And it was awesome.

Actually, the whole movie was quite awesome considering what it was. For a CTV show it was actually pretty well developed. Well, the characters were well developed. I liked that they all brought their backstory into the movie. Poor alcoholic Ellie and sad Marco and lame Paige and sincere Jay. It was really great.

Are you into Degrassi? You should be. In fact, watching the original Degrassi (Degrassi Junior High) was what I rented when I first got Netflix like over four years ago.

So what is the rating? (out of 10)
Man, this has gone way off the rails. Degrassi goes Hollywood was awesome, funny and heartfelt and totally teenagefabulous. It gets a 10.

Geez, I am ridiculous.

Orphan

2009-08-29T21:24:00.004-04:00

So what is this one about?
Netflix tells us,

Picking up the pieces after their baby's tragic death, the Colemans -- Kate (Vera Farmiga) and John (Peter Sarsgaard) -- adopt 9-year-old Esther (Isabelle Fuhrman) from an orphanage, but it doesn't take long for Kate to see through Esther's angelic façade. When John brushes aside Kate's paranoid suspicions, Esther wreaks havoc on the world around her in this chilling tale from director Jaume Collet-Serra.

Now, if you've seen the preview, you know that crazy, angelic little Esther is like the demon spawn and tries to kill like everyone in the house. AWESOME! I'm buying it... aren't you?

And how much did I pay to watch?
Well, this is another one I saw at good ol' Cinema DeLux, so something like 10 bucks. But you wanna know the better part?? Oh, I will tell you.

I invited Steven to see this with me. Now, Steven knows that I like rather, um, esoteric(?) movies. So, in the vein of the Children Underground (which is one of the most amazing documentaries I've ever seen, btw) Steven assumed that a movie called Orphan was prolly just another documentary about orphans. Well, as you can see, it wasn't.

But Steven didn't know this, because he'd just gotten back from Europe and hadn't heard of it. And when we were sitting in the theatre, after we'd already paid and all that, and I said I was excited about the sweet horror movie we were about to see. And Steven was like "Um, this is a horror movie?!?!" and I was like "yeah" and he started to look really nervous. Turns out that he doesn't watch horror movies at all and clearly had no idea that this was a horror movie. So I felt both really bad that he didn't know and guilty that I had taken him and wildly amused to see him cower in fear about a crazy movie that I knew the spoiler/twist for. I knew the plot was hilarious, but he was still scurred.

Sorry Steven!!

And what did I think?
"There's something wrong with Esther"

You ain't wrong about that.

Ok, so Christine and I saw a preview for this one back in who knows when. I thought it looked pretty cool, and Mel said every scary movie takes place in Connecticut. I mean, I guess it wasn't "pretty cool" but it looked cool enough. I like shitty horror movies enough to see them all the time.

Then I stumbled upon the Videogum Search for the Worst Movie of All Time blog-dealy when I was "working" at work. And then I looked at the rest of the videogum website and I found this entry...which said

P.S. There is a possible real SPOILER ALERT here of what the wrong thing about Esther is that you need to keep secret, and DO NOT READ FURTHER IF YOU DON'T WANT TO KNOW WHETHER OR NOT THIS POSSIBLY REAL SPOILER ALERT IS HILARIOUS. OK, if you're still reading: it is hilarious.

And if I wasn't so damned curious I wouldn't have looked. But the spoiler made me want to see the movie even more than when I had just seen the preview! So, because of my excitement about the SPOILER, I don't feel bad telling you the spoiler. Which is...

27. Jaycee Banks - July 6, 2009 8:43 PM

I know what's wrong with Esther.
SPOILER ALERT! DON'T READ IF YOU DON'T WANNA KNOW!
She is really a 33-year-old woman who was born with proportional dwarfism which causes her to have the appearance of a child. She also happens to be a former prostitute, who had wealthy paedophiles for clients. The reason why she has her neck covered is because she was once in asylum and she struggled so much in her straitjacket that it left with her deep scars on her neck.

Are you for effing REAL!???!?! Oh, let me tell you, they weren't kidding!

This "twist" might make this horror movie one of the most surprisingly best ones I have ever seen!

The rest of the movie, other than the twist, was fairly predictable. And poor, poor, Peter Sarsgaard. You are a good actor!! How did this end up happening to you?!

So what is the rating? (out of 10)

Ok, so as I've babbled on and on about how amazingly innovative and fresh the twist was, this movie gets serious points for having something new as a horror movie twist.

Add to that, the hotness of Peter Sarsgaard and the serious hilarity of sitting next to Steven who looked like he was going to jump out of his skin the entire time and you have a super fun movie going experience!

This gets a 7 for its fun, hilariousness.

PS. No seriously, aren't you impressed with that spoiler?! Seriously. Be serious.

Nick and Norah's Infinite Playlist

2009-08-29T20:36:00.001-04:00

So what is this one about?
I'm gonna tell you the truth. The netflix description of this one is pretty awful. I watched NaNIP and I loved it, but reading the description makes me wish I hadn't. It is just that awful! See,

Norah (Kat Dennings) wants to prove to her friend Tris (Alexis Dziena) that she's capable of having a boyfriend. So at a concert, she grabs the first guy she sees, Nick (Michael Cera), and asks him to pretend they're dating -- but it turns out that Nick is Tris's ex. Despite the fact that they started off as a fauxmance, Nick and Norah's relationship turns real as they traipse through Manhattan, sharing their love of music and all things weird.

vomit! (and, um, "fauxmance"?!?!? yikes!)

And how much did I pay to watch?
Some amount. I've been doing much much better with watching more movies. Actually, upon consulting my rental history I see that I have watched approximately 4 movies in a month. Woah. emmmmmbarassing!

And what did I think?
I think that Michael Cera is the sweetest, most earnest, most adorable guy in Hollywood. Good lord, if I were like maybe 4-8 years younger I would have the sickest crush on him! I mean, at my advanced age I do not have a crush on him, but if he wanted to date me I would have to agree. He is just too. damn. cute!!

I thought this movie was the classic teen girl flick. I mean, what was there not to like? God, does the fact that I liked this so much mean I am more like Norah than Triss?? Does this mean I am the nerdy girl with big boobs (factually inaccurate) who talks about music too much?!! AHHHHH. Nah, I wasn't that girl in high school and I am not that girl now. (I did recognize the voices of a lot of the artists who were on the soundtrack...Band of Horses, whaaaat?!)

I loved that the movie really used New York as another character in the film.(Oh, and did I mention I was on a bus to NYC as I was watching this? That might make my love for it a little unfair) Anyway, it was just like Law and Order or Sex and the City or Flight of the Conchords or any of those New York movies/shows. In fact, wikipedia tells us "this movie was one of the first to be shot in New York City after the State and City of New York enacted a 35 percent tax credit under the "Made in NY" incentive program." See? They wanted NYC to be a main character!

I just thought it was great. I loved that Norah's drunk friend was like a hybrid of Lori and I, and I was genuinely curious to find out what happened as the movie progressed. It had great pacing, and Nick and Norah were SO cute together. Nice, young, honest kids in love (or learning to love).

And lets face it, the fact that Nick drove a Yugo was hilarious, and the cab scene (from the commercials) was hilarious. As were Nick's gay friends.

So what is the rating? (out of 10)
Seriously, what was there not to like?

It was awesome, awesome, awesome. This is a dvd that I will be looking for a cheap Target copy of. If anyone sees that Target is doing a $10 copy, let me know and I will snatch it up!

I think it is probably a 10, but just for saftey's sake and because I've only seen it once I will give it a 9. Just go see Nick and Norah... it is so sweet!!!!!

(500) Days of Summer

2009-08-24T20:23:00.001-04:00

So what is this one about?
Well, I sort of knew what it was about when I watched it because Washington Post Express 1) had reviewed it and it sounded interesting and 2) had it as the cover for like 297423743927 days as an advertisement. So, in case you haven't heard about this one yet, Netflix will tell us...

When his girlfriend, Summer (Zooey Deschanel), unceremoniously dumps him, greeting-card copywriter and hopeless romantic Tom (Joseph Gordon-Levitt) begins sifting through the year-plus worth of days they spent together, looking for clues to what went awry. As he recalls the good and bad times he spent with the commitment-phobic girl, his heart reawakens to what it cherishes most. Marc Webb directs this uncommon love story.

And how much did I pay to watch?
$12.00 CAD. That's Canadian Dollars for all you out there in blog land who don't frequently visit xe.com and know all the currency abbreviations. Seems like a lot for a matinee, doesn't it? Yeah, and the conversion rate doesn't even really help that much. $12 CAD is $11.09 USD (obv US dollars). Oh yeah, because I watched this in the T-dot with Ylber. huzzzzzzzah!

And what did I think?
What did I think? I think that Zooey Deschanel continues to irritate me. She has absolutely no range as an actress as to the types of roles she takes/characters she plays. As a classic example of the type of "quirky/weird/sexy-hot" of girl she keeps playing I will offer something wikipedia tells us. (Keep in mind, Joseph Gordon-Levitt is Tom and Zooey Deschanel is Summer)

"While helping Mckenzie to a cab, Mckenzie tells Summer that Tom likes her. Summer asks if it is true and Tom, after some coaxing from Summer, says that he likes her (but adds "as friends"). Summer calls him "very interesting" and leaves Tom standing there on the sidewalk. The next day at work, she kisses him in the copy room. Once Summer's copies are finished, she simply ignores Tom and leaves the copy room."

And if that isn't just the g.d. essence of Zooey, I don't know what is. "Ooooh, look at me! I'm Zooey, I'm quirky, and unique and every man loves me! I can yank them around and they'll still love me because I am so quirky, and sexy, and unique!!" And, I can understand that. She is gorgeous (at least she is in movies, if you look at the photos of her on wikipedia they are unimpressive) and god, that singing voice. She sings in (500) days, and she also has a musical act with M.Ward. The act is called She and Him and I love their cd. Love, love, love it. And the lyrics that she sings are so beautiful (ie. "Cried all night till there was nothing more, what use am I as a heap on the floor?" and "I'm all outta luck, but what else could I be? I know he's yours and he'll never belong to me again, I did him wrong. So don't brag, keep it to yourself, I did him wrong. I was never (no), never (no), never enough, but I should try, I should try, to toughen up. I listened when they told me, if he burns you let him go. Change is hard, I should know" SOOO pretty!! essssspecially with her lovely voice) ANNNNNNNNNYWAY.

So, I thought that Joseph Gordon-Levitts acting was awesome. He is really quite a talented actor.

The writing in the film was also adorable. Tom's realization that he is in love with Summer and then using the same scenes when he realizes that she is a miserable shrew was classic. And, lets face it, it was pretty funny. AND there was a dance sequence!! How does that not have all the makings of a fabulous movie?

I do want to see it again though, to further formulate my ideas about this movie. I think this review is sufficient for now though....

So what is the rating? (out of 10)
I'll give it a 7. I think I can get behind that number.

Harry Potter and the Half-Blood Prince

2009-08-22T20:52:00.002-04:00

So what is this one about?
This one is about the movie version of my favorite Harry Potter book!! I love the sixth book, it was unquestioned my favorite. (The other favorites were 4 and 2...in that order. You know, just FYI) So, in case you've been living under a rock or (for shame) haven't read the Harry Potter books (come on, just do it. I read them when I was 25!! It is ok!! Just join in the fun!!) I will provide the 'flix descrip...

The sixth year at Hogwarts School of Witchcraft and Wizardry kicks off with a bang for young Harry Potter (Daniel Radcliffe) when he inadvertently discovers a mysterious book that sheds light on the sordid life of the evil Lord Voldemort. Preparing for inevitable battle, Harry and Dumbledore (Michael Gambon) turn to professor Horace Slughorn (Jim Broadbent) for help in pinpointing the weakness in Voldemort's forces.

Ta dah!

And how much did I pay to watch?
You know how my mom pays for a lot of movies I watch? Well, when I went to Toronto I accidentally used my parent's credit card to pay for the luggage fee (question: do you realize how incredibly messed up it is to have to pay luggage fee on an international flight because Toronto is considered "domestic" despite the point that you have to check in at the international flight desk?!)--theirs looks just like mine, so she said I could pay her back by paying for Harry Potter.

I think I paid like $12 or $13. I think I went with the student price for me and the adult price for her.

And what did I think?
What did I think?! I thought that I was horrified at what the horrible, atrocious film maker did to my favorite Harry Potter book!!!!! And it doesn't make any damn sense! The fifth movie was my 2nd fave of the movies (I really liked #1 because it was just so magical and whimsical!) it was so dark and evil and scary and unfair, just like the book. Delores Umbridge was the most annoying, worst person ever. And the whole audience hated her! It was a faithful and amazing adaptation of the 5th book (my 4th fave of the series) and David Yates directed it. Man, when I was watching this one (the 6th one) I thought to myself, "Jesus! What sort of half assed, bullshit, nonsense director has mangled my beloved Half Blood Prince so badly?! I hope this shitwad doesn't doesn't have anything more to do with the Harry Potter franchise!!"

Well, joke's on me! You will imagine my horror when I found out that the director was the same as the 5th! A faithful and authentic version of the book. And you will imagine my immense horror when I saw that David Yates is also directing 7, parts 1 and 2!!! AHHHHHHHHHHHHHH!! Why?! Why?!

So, what was it that I found so offensive in this movie? I will tell you. Harry Potter and the Half Blood Prince (the book) was scary, and slow, and you didn't know what was going to happen (aka) suspenseful, and so sad at the end (SPOILER: Do you know what happens at the end? I don't think I'm actually going to spoiler it, because when I read it I was just so, so sad and shocked!) And I have a very strong emotional association with the book because I was reading it while I was studying abroad in Hungary and then when I was on the train to Ukraine, and back, and on the plane back to the US. And like I said, sitting next to that old couple, with me in the aisle seat, I just couldn't believe the end of the book. I think I even teared up.

But the movie, oh, the movie, was frivolous, and teenager-y and not even serious! The stuff in the book was deadly serious but the movie was just like "oh, teenagers have crushes, and something really big happens at the end but it isn't a big deal because teenagers are emo!" God, it was horrible! And the scene where Harry and Dumbledore go out into the lake wasn't scary at all. Even the book was scary. Man, scary, scary, scary. But the scene in the movie was uninspired.

Even the love stories between Harry and Ginny was uninspired. I mean, who cared?! It didn't even make any sense! And what the hell was that scene in the field outside the burrow?? There were other scary scenes in the book...just. adapt. them!!!

I swear to god. I want to forsake my MA and the entire field I studied to start adapting books into screenplays, because I cannot imagine that it is as hard as everyone seems to think it is. Jesus, the horrible book to movie adaptations (in general) there is just no excuse for them!!

le sigh.

So what is the rating? (out of 10)
You wanna know what redeems this movie? I will tell you. Daniel Radcliffe is hot, hot, hot. And Emma Watson is so glorious, and effortless, and angelic. But Daniel Radcliffe is hot. Ginny is nowhere near hot enough for him. And that storyline wasn't even good!

So what redeems the movie is Daniel Radcliffe. So whereas I want to give this movie 4, because I was appalled by it, I cannot, because it is Harry Potter, and it is Daniel Radcliffe.

So I grudgingly give this a 5.

Alls I gots to say is 7 parts 1 and 2 better be better than this horrific adaptation!!! Work. it. OUT David Yates!!!

harrumph.

The Hangover

2009-08-21T21:36:00.001-04:00

So what is this one about?
Netflix tells us,

When three friends (Ed Helms, Zach Galifianakis and Bradley Cooper) finally come to after a raucous night of bachelor-party revelry, they find a baby in the closet and a tiger in the bathroom. But they can't seem to locate their best friend, Doug (Justin Bartha) -- who's supposed to be tying the knot. Launching a frantic search for Doug, the trio perseveres through a nasty hangover to try to make it to the church on time.

guh oh! Sounds like trouble/fun!

And how much did I pay to watch?
Well, I saw this at the big bad Cinema DeLux, with Christine and Steven and Mel (yes, Mel. Can you believe that? She aint been to the movies in years!) the day I returned from Belgrade in order to stay awake in order to stave off jetlag. Was this a smart decision? Answer: yes.

Oh yeah, how much did I pay? Um, maybe like $10 or $12. I forget.

And what did I think?
So, I picked the Hangover because I needed to watch a movie in order to stay awake. If I had stayed at home I would have fallen asleep--I had been awake for easily two days (Let me give you a piece of unsolicited advice: If you need to do a transatlantic flight at 7:05 am, it is just easier to stay up all night. So, I woke up on Friday and stayed awake all the way to Saturday. Then I arrived back in the USA and stayed up until like 12:30. MORAL--staying awake and getting back on "home time" immediately completely negates any effect of jet lag. I win!). Now, I'd heard the movie was amusing enough, so I thought I'd give it a go.

It was pretty much what I expected. I had hoped that it would be shockingly funny (a la Super Troopers), but sadly it was not. It WAS entertaining enough and I did get some good chuckles. Truthfully, the actors were very funny. Andy, uh, I mean Ed Helms was great and man, his lady was effing mental! Galifianikas was really good, awkward and funny. Even Cooper was pretty good, he plays crazy well. Also, the fat kid with the taser. And the chinese guy who reminded Mel of Steven's dad (I didn't think he seemed NEARLY as amazing as Steven's dad)
See...?

This has clearly gone far off the rails.

So what is the rating? (out of 10)
The Hangover is good enough. I'd give it a 6.5 Go see it. Why not?

Bruno

2009-08-09T18:37:00.000-04:00

So what is this one about?
Unless you have been living under a rock, you will know that

Flamboyantly gay Austrian television reporter Bruno (Sacha Baron Cohen) stirs up trouble with unsuspecting guests and large crowds through brutally frank interviews and painfully hilarious public displays of homosexuality. An incredible chameleon who completely disappears behind his flaming alter ego, the bold Baron Cohen serves up nonstop laughs in this comedy by successfully rubbing people the wrong way.

And can I just take this moment to point out the fact that the tagline for this movie on the poster is "Borat was so 2006" I will refer to that gem a bit later.

And how much did I pay to watch?
Interestingly enough, I didn't end up paying anything for this one. I am not quite sure why that happened, but I can tell you how it might have. Mike, his girlfriend Lucy, and I were at a party eating yak burgers--yes, like hamburgers, but make out of yak--and we decided we should go see Bruno. Lucy, or Mike, ordered the tickets online, and then when I offered to pay for mine no one would accept my money. I think it evened out because I bought snacks for the three of us. So, essentially, I paid $0 to watch this.

And it was about worth that much.

And what did I think?
Now, maybe this is just the Eurasia-ist in me, but I find it way more ok to make fun of people from Central Asia (I mean, really, it is funny... right?) than I do to stereotype and make fun of gay people. Of course I absolutely realize that Sasha Baron Cohen was probably pointing out that there are idiots in the US who do think that all gay men (specifically) are exactly like Bruno, but I think it wasn't really clear that he was satirizing anything.

Another issue I had with Bruno over Borat was that it seemed SO fake and staged. Who doesn't know who SBC is now, and that Bruno is another one of his characters? The wikipedia article helps to confirm this a little. The entry goes into how SBC was able to pull off some of the "stunts" that were in the movie. For example,

On November 7, while appearing as an extra in a scene for the NBC TV series Medium, Baron Cohen interrupted a scene in character and was removed from the set. Production on the episode was shut down temporarily,^[16] though actor Miguel Sandoval, who was told that a cousin of NBC executive Ben Silverman would appear as an extra in the jury, has stated that he recognized Cohen and played along, commenting, "It's one thing for Borat to go into an antique store in Georgia or Alabama. For Brüno to go on a TV show, he's among insiders. Most people knew who he was."^[17]

Exactly. Leave it up to NBC to not be total idiots. I mean, I guess I realize that the whole thing is fake, but it was just SO obvious that SBC had somehow tricked everyone into participating. And the tricks weren't really the harmless/funny ones that were in Borat. Borat is a good character because he is unintentionally ignorant (a sort of Kazakh Michael Scott) whereas Bruno is a total asshole on purpose who has very few redeeming qualities (more like an Austrian David Brent). [Do you see what I did there? Aren't you impressed?]

The movie existed for shock value only. Everyone in the audience gasped at the same parts...or let me rephrase, some people were laughing hysterically at the parts that I was gasping at. I will give SBC credit for one part that I thought was hilarous. That was the part with Ron Paul. For your convenience--I say that, because I don't think there is really much of a reason to see this one for yourself--here is what happened.

The production team also deceived former presidential candidate Ron Paul into being interviewed by Brüno by posing as an Austrian TV reporter looking to question the congressman about economic issues. According to sources at Slate magazine, the interview starts out normally, but after a staged technical error, Brüno suggests he and Dr. Paul wait in the other room while the crew fixes a light. It is there that Brüno turns on music and begins dancing, which Ron Paul ignores at first. However, as soon as Brüno drops his trousers, the congressman storms out of the room. A spokeswoman for Paul commented on the incident. She said Baron Cohen's people were very deceptive in their tactics. At the time, she thought they were "legitimate" but later confessed to some concern. "I'm familiar with his work, so you can imagine how I feel about it," she said. Jesse Benton, senior vice-president of Ron Paul's Campaign for Liberty organization and former campaign spokesman for Paul, said Paul was not familiar with Baron Cohen's program, Da Ali G Show. "If it's not on hard-core financial news, he doesn't follow it," Benton said. But, he added, "It sounds like it's going to be pretty funny."^[18]

Man, what a d-bag!

I also recommend that you check out the wikipedia article (hotlinked to the title of this entry) to see how he pulled off some of the other things in this movie, like the talk show, the army, and the gay cage match. It was quite illuminating.

Finally, to show what sort of animosity can come about from talking about Bruno (though, if you've seen it, you should totally comment and we'll get a little forum action going) please refer to an entry on the Bob and Abe Show blog. (boys, did you like that plug?) You will see yours truly, and a friend of a friend--Augustin--getting into a brawl, even though I was being highly sarcastic the whole time. Here you go.

So that just proves it, doesn't it. Even if you don't like the things that Sasha Baron Cohen does, everyone still talks about them. I guess that means he is a pretty good 'entertainer'.

So what is the rating? (out of 10)
Personally, I guess I just found the movie fairly offensive, though i don't really care. I mean, if people found it funny, that is ok. But I didn't really like it.

4.

Drag Me to Hell

2009-08-09T18:05:00.003-04:00

So what is this one about?
Well, Netflix tells us

After denying a woman the extension she needs to keep her home, loan officer Christine Brown (Alison Lohman) sees her once-promising life take a startling turn for the worse. Christine is convinced she's been cursed by a Gypsy, but her boyfriend (Justin Long) is skeptical. Now, her only hope seems to lie in a psychic (Dileep Rao) who claims he can help her lift the curse and keep her soul from being dragged straight to hell.

Of course the "bad guy" is a gypsy (why is that word capitalized in the description??). And really, how many gypsies are there in California. Be serious.

And how much did I pay to watch?
Well, Christine and I went to go see this sometime in JUNE (jesus, movie backlog!!) at Cinema De Lux (did you know that is a chain of theatres? well it is!) I think we saw it during the day, and I think they made us have reserved seats, which leads me to beleive we were in the "Director's Hall" which would mean we payed some insane ammount. Prolly like $12-$14. Maybe less, but I can't really remember.

And what did I think?
Well, one thing I really like about Christine is that she will watch shitty, shitty, horror movies with me. Its totally awesome!!

And one thing the netflix description neglects to mention is that the film is "written and directed by Sam Raimi, with a screenplay by Sam Raimi and Ivan Raimi." Now, you also may know that "Raimi wrote Drag Me to Hell before he had worked on the Spider-Man films and was his first horror film since directing the Evil Dead films." Or, likely you don't. But, I am sure you remember that Evil Dead is 100% ridiculous. And Drag Me to Hell was sort of as ridiculous as Evil Dead. (Also, Dead Alive, ah, Peter Jackson...which is also very, very, very ridiulous.) Part of DMtH were so bizarre that I didn't know wether they were intended to be scary or funny.

You know what I mean, the whole thing was kind of campy. Frankly, one of the only things I really remember from the movie was how gross the gypsy woman was. At one point I think she hacks up a big loogie and we see it on the screen. Narstay!

I will say, I was suprised by the ending, but Christine seemed to know it all along. I thought she was wrong, but I guess that was me.

So what is the rating? (out of 10)
Drag Me to Hell was entertaining enough to watch once. I will not be running out to buy this, but then again, what crappy horror movies am I really rushing out to buy anyway?

7.

In & Out

2009-08-09T17:39:00.001-04:00

So what is this one about?
Netflix tells us,

When dim-bulb actor Cameron Drake (Matt Dillon) wins an Oscar for playing a gay Marine, he outs his high school drama teacher, Howard Brackett (Kevin Kilne), in his acceptance speech. It all comes as a surprise to Howard -- not to mention his long-suffering fiancée, Emily (a hilarious Joan Cusack). With his wedding just days away, Howard's under the gun to get everything (ahem) straightened out.

Oh, har, har.

And how much did I pay to watch?
Well, I got this one on the 'flix, and like I've said a million times if I've said it once, I have really been neglecting my beloved. I am glad Netflix isn't a person, because he would have broken up wtih me by now.

But, I did watch three discs in rapid succession on my trip to NY, so I will finally get some new discs.

And what did I think?
Well, I basically rented this because Lori told me to. I vaguely remember this from when it was released (in 1997!!) but was urged, by her, to rent it bc we were talking about a person I work with who probably doesn't know that they are gay...or so we think. ANYWAY.

I was entertained enough, but I think my entertainment reached a new level when I read this about the movie on wikipedia this morning (...as an aside, do you have any idea how hard it was to find a movie poster for this guy? Most google searches yeilded In and Out burger stuff. harrumph)

The film was inspired by Tom Hanks's tearful speech when he accepted his 1994 Oscar (for his role in Philadelphia), in which he mentioned his high-school drama coach Rawley Farnsworth, and his former classmate John Gilkerson, "two of the finest gay Americans, two wonderful men that I had the good fortune to be associated with" - unaware that Farnsworth was still closeted.

HAHAHAHAHAH. Really?! Amazing. After that I thought the movie was much funnier, because really, Tom Hanks?! Man in Hollywood who can do no wrong?! Mr. John Adams, Band of Brothers, everything I make is gold?! Fabulous.

The movie was cute enough, and it was sort of hilarious to have a blast from the past in the form of a movie from 1997. Plus, I find Joan Cusack to be one of the most hideous actresses working today, so I didn't really feel bad for her when she found out her soon-to-be husband was a big ol' mo. And lets be serious, there is really nothing funnier than some gay male stereotypes. People thought he was gay because he was a nice dresser, and was well read, and rode a bicycle! I mean, seriously, how funny is that??

Answer: very.

So what is the rating? (out of 10)
As far as gay hollywood things go, it wasn't inappropriate, or lecherous, or making fun of gay people. It was good enough. Entertaining and all that. I'll give it a 7.

Play Misty for Me

2009-07-23T14:34:00.001-04:00

So what is this one about?

The beloved Netflix* tells us,

Silver-tongued radio disc jockey Dave (Clint Eastwood) can't help but notice the persistent calls from a female to "play 'Misty' for me." But when a chance meeting with infatuated fan Evelyn leads to a brief and steamy love affair, Dave quickly learns he's in for more than a little night music. Evelyn will stop at nothing -- even the return of one of Dave's old flames -- to have him all to herself. The film marks Eastwood's directorial debut.

Sweet, ain’t nothing I love more than one of those woman scorned/stalker psycho movies! (see Fatal Attraction, Swim Fan—especially good, The Crush, etc. And don’t forget that bizarre variant, the man scorned/ stalker psycho, see Fear)

*did you know that Microsoft Word recognizes Netflix as a proper noun and capitalizes it? Well it does!!

And how much did I pay to watch?

Gah! I think when I watched this I was also watching In Treatment, so maybe less because there was some serious disc shuffling. But, maybe I paid $16.99 (per month) Who knows?

And what did I think?

Well, if you didn’t know (I don’t know how that would be possible) I love Gran Torino. Kudos to Clint and all his amazingness! Then I watched The Changeling, which was also another awesome Clint movie. After that I decided to add a ton of Eastwood movies to my Netflix queue. This was one of them, I thought it sounded the most fun. Plus, it wasn’t a western, and it was his directorial debut. Well, let me tell you two things.

1) Clint Eastwood was a serious hottie when he was younger.

2) His directing skillz have VASTLY improved since his first days. And thank heavens for that!!

Play Misty for Me was so ridiculous I couldn’t believe it at times. It is funny when I watch a movie alone (which is where I watch most of them…you know, so I don’t get distracted by outside stimuli) and I laugh out loud at parts that aren’t even supposed to be funny.

I truly don’t know what Clint was thinking with this one. There is a lot of potential with the story—as we’ve seen in other movies—and the acting wasn’t horrible… Clint was good, the person who played crazy Evelyn was goodish, and the person who played his girlfriend was a little/lot annoying. But, the actual direction of visual shots and the addition of music was so irritating there were multiple times I almost (or did I?) fast forwarded through the visual/audio vomit I was experiencing.

What is that you’re saying? You don’t understand what I’m talking about since you haven’t seen this movie? I will give you an example, taken straight from Wikipedia. “The film features a romantic montage backed by Roberta Flack's recording of "The First Time Ever I Saw Your Face."” And when you follow that link over to the song wikipage you learn that the flipping song is 5:22 long. JESUS. Is that really necessary?? A five minute+ long montage where two characters are making out/doing it in the forest? I will answer for you. The answer is NO. Never is that sort of thing ok. Well, maybe in a porno, but that would be a different blog all together.

Another example? Sure. Wikipedia says “It is also notable for its use of location shooting, mostly in the area of Carmel-by-the-Sea, California, where Eastwood has long made his home, and where he was elected Mayor in 1986. Additional scenes were shot at the Monterey Jazz Festival in September 1970, featuring jazz greats Johnny Otis, Cannonball Adderley, and future Weather Report founder Joe Zawinul.” All those location shots were overly long and romantical. Soft focus and all that shit. And good god, if there is one thing I hate in movies (even in movies I like, like the Sound of Music) it is flipping soft focus!! So, add up the overly long shots of boring scenery that adds nothing to the plot and the ridiculous use of crappy music and you’ve got a movie that Julia did not like!

So what is the rating? (out of 10)

Even Clint couldn’t save this silly movie from ending up in the bottom part of my scale. I will give it a 4, because even though it wasn’t even passable as a halfway movie, it did have Clint.

I swear. *shakes head*

Outbreak

2009-07-16T20:38:00.004-04:00

So what is this one about?

Netflix tells us “As take-charge Army virologist Sam Daniels (Dustin Hoffman) strives to thwart a global biological meltdown in the form of a killer virus that has infested a California community, he must also battle those who say the only way to stop the disease is to firebomb the town. Silver-screen luminaries Rene Russo, Morgan Freeman, Donald Sutherland and Kevin Spacey join Hoffman in this edge-of-your-seat, doomsday thriller.”

Basically, this movie is about a fake Ebola virus. SWEET!!!!!

And how much did I pay to watch?

Some amount on Netflix. Lord, I have been SO slow in movie watching lately. (And not just watching, but UPDATING. I am ashamed)

And what did I think?

Well, if you know me IRL then you will know that lately (past month and a half –two months) I have been very interested in science books/ ebola. I read Panic in Level 4: Cannibals, Killer Viruses, and Other Journeys to the Edge of Science by Richard Preston. This book was FASCINATING! As someone who doesn’t really like science, I tore through this book…read it in less than a week! Then I read Preston’s The Hot Zone in less than a week too! And, as Wikipedia tells us, “The Hot Zone served as the loose basis of the Hollywood movie Outbreak (1995) about military machinations surrounding a fictional "Motaba virus." Huzzah! So, I figured I should watch this.

So, motaba is a hemorrhagic fever where the infected person bleeds out of all their orifaces and their guts turn to liquid. Sweet. But, it didn’t look a gross as I would have imagined it would. But, when I watched a documentary about Ebola, I was also surprised about how ungory the infected were. (Man, whenever I say “infected” I always think about zombies, sick.). But other than the lack of goriness, everything else in this movie was a hyperbolic form of its real world self! And I LOVED IT!

I found myself giggling at times that should have been suspenseful because the movie was just so extreme at times! For example, ebola tends to kill people within 7 to 10 days of infection, but this silly motaba virus killed people within like 24 hours…or maybe it was 2-4, I cannot remember, but it was super hyperbolic. And the Donald Sutherland character, he was the general, and he wasn’t just a mean general who was trying to mess up Dustin Hoffman, no, he was trying to [SPOILER ALERT] kill the whole town!!!! And the music was super, like, suspenseful and was supposed to be very dramatic. The whole thing was really just very silly.

And let me get this straight, I am supposed to believe that Dustin Hoffman (troll) and Renee Russo (not a troll, fairly good looking actually) were in love and married at one point. Um… what?? I cannot think of anyone not only less attractive, but less sexy, and appealing than Dustin Hoffman. (well, I probably could, and since I am typing this at work it isn’t like I don’t have so much time on my hands that I could just stare off into space for 15 minutes trying to think of someone else…but I digress). Maybe you should comment and leave me suggestions for who is less appealing than Dustin Hoffman.

Anyway, it was amusing.

So what is the rating? (out of 10)

So, was this as interesting as The Hot Zone? No way!!! Was it sort of fun anyway? Sure! It did take me quite a few sit downs to get through it (which might have had something to do with me being tired, because once I got into it, it was fun!) So, I’ll give it a 6. It gets that extra point because the disease ridden monkey was cute.

OH, and because Kevin Spacey was in it! (is he gay? I feel like I read somewhere that he is… weird)

In Treatment: Season 1

2009-06-27T23:36:00.005-04:00

So what is this one about?
In so many ways I feel like anything I say wont do justice to this show. So, instead of using the netflix description, I will show you what I saw, a preview from an hbo dvd, that made me want to watch this show...

And how much did I pay to watch?
You'll likely be shocked to find out, as I was, that this show is 9 discs. Nine. 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9. Now, I watch a lot of tv on dvd and I have never seen anything so long. So, nine discs over a time span that went from May 4 to June 27...probably cost as much as my membership for two months, because apparently for two months (or nearly so) this is all I have watched. I suppose I could have bought the dvds, but, well, too late now.

And what did I think?
One thing I like about Mad Men is that it is a show for grown-ups. Now, as it has become more popular, and as Season 2 smashed my heart to bits, it has gained more of a following. And the following isn't only grown-ups (this is probably one of the few, if only, times you will hear me refer to myself as a proper grownup adult). Now, In Treatment, on the other hand, is a show for proper grown-ups. It is slow. It is subtle. It is simply watching people talk. And of course because it is an HBO show it is flawless.

Gabriel Byrne's acting is so subtle and nuanced. His patients are full of pain, and are repressed, and are so exquisite in the way they hold themselves together sometimes. And Byrne is the same way. And lets face it, he is beautiful. The whole show is simply a masterpeice of acting, and writing, and storytelling. And pain. It is so striking to see such amazing acting which communicates so explicitly what the characters are supposed to be feeling. And as an audience we are pulled in. We feel for the characters when they hurt. We may feel like they've brought it on themselves. And we so badly want for everyone to be happy.

But, I suppose in therapy, as in life, that isn't always the case. And even if someone deserves and desires happiness, or love, or contentment, sometimes that doesn't happen. Sometimes people remain lost even if they are good people. And I suppose that is what I mean by the show is for grown-ups. Grown ups realize that life isn't always perfect, or happy, and sometimes even if you have all the access in the world to happiness and love it just may not happen.

I suppose it is the continuing on the path, the going back every day--or as in treatment, every week--that shows you are a grownup.

(And I suppose this meandering, vague, overly flowery description is why I don't tend to write reviews right after I have finished watching something. Usually I am too full of love and elation to seperate the way I feel about the show from what it is. However, in this case, the way I feel about the show is the way the show actually is. Magnificient)

So what is the rating? (out of 10)
Months ago when I had first seen the preview for this show I had mentioned it to my friend Joe. He told me that the show was stunning. I had the feeling it would be, and I was right.

Everything about this show is extraordinary. In fact, sometimes I found myself marvelling at the acting, because it wasn't really a therapy session I was watching--a therapy session full of raw emotions spanning the whole spectrum--no, it was only a tv show.

This is a 10. Perhaps one of the highest 10s I have given. It is an amazing example of the skill and talent that HBO uses to make their incredible shows.

Kissing Jessica Stein

2009-05-30T23:04:00.002-04:00

So what is this one about?
My beloved Netflix tells us,

Jessica (Jennifer Westfeldt) is a single, straight, successful New York journalist who, like most of her female friends, has had a history of dating (male) creeps. But when she answers an intriguing personal ad from Helen (Heather Juergensen), Jessica finds herself intensely drawn to her. As Jessica explores this new side of her sexuality, the two begin a friendship that ultimately leads to romance.

Isn't that the way it always works?

And how much did I pay to watch?
Zero dollars because I own this movie. It is one of my faves.

Though, back in the day I did see this in the theatre. I saw it with my mom at my belov'd Cinema Arts. And when the movie was over, do you know what my mom said to me? She said "You remind me of Jessica Stein." And to this day I have never been able to figure out what she meant. Though, it does make me feel a bit odd for her to say that to me.

And what did I think?
Well, here is the thing. Despite this movie being one of my faves, upon watching it I realize it isn't all that spectacular. What makes this movie so appealing is the characters.

It is empathizing with the characters that makes the whole thing relate-able. Hmm, how can I say this in a way that doesn't make me sound totally gay? Hmmm, see, the thing is, how can you--as someone who has likely met someone (no matter what gender) who is utterly intriguing--dismiss this film just because the storyline is somewhat gay? Answer: you cannot. If you think about it, of course you can relate to it.

It is like that line in Chasing Amy,

The way the world is, how seldom it is that you meet that one person who just *gets* you - it's so rare. ... And to cut oneself off from finding that person, to immediately halve your options by eliminating the possibility of finding that one person within your own gender, that just seemed stupid to me. So I didn't.

I mean, that, I think, is what Kissing Jessica Stein is about. It isn't about, like, realizing you are a lesbian, but it IS about opening yourself up to all that is out there.

Now, other than that, I realized way way later that John Hamm, of Mad Men fame, is in this movie, since Jennifer Westfeldt is his longtime girlfriend. But let me tell you, even as an avid Mad Men watcher, if I hadn't know he was in this, I never would have realized it was him. He is so much hotter in the 1960s than in the early 2000s.

So what is the rating? (out of 10)
Well, I love it. For realzies. But, I realize it isn't a 10. So I give it an 8, though it still remains one of my favorites!

Changeling

2009-05-03T20:55:00.001-04:00

So what is this one about?
Well, Netflix tells us

Christine Collins (Angelina Jolie, in an Oscar-nominated role) is overjoyed when her young kidnapped son Walter is brought back home. But when Christine suspects that the Walter who was returned to her isn't her actual child, the police captain (Jeffrey Donovan) has her committed to an asylum. John Malkovich co-stars as the crusading reverend who comes to Christine's rescue in this gripping, 1920s-set drama helmed by ace director Clint Eastwood.

And how much did I pay to watch?
Probably around $4. I guess it is still less than the $4.99 that I would have paid if I had watched it "on demand"...but still it is much more than it should be with my netflix love.

And what did I think?
Well, my love for Clint Eastwood has grown out of control (just like kudzu...). This movie looked exactly like something he would direct. It had this beautiful clear, yet smoky grey quality. It was slow and deliberate. He is an AMAZING filmmaker. In fact, I have added so many Eastwood directed films to my queue, so if there are a lot of his movies in the coming soon section, that is why.

So, what did I think? Well, when I saw the preview for this movie I thought it looked really interesting, because did her boy actually change, or was it not her son at all? I wont really give it away, I suppose, but it was rather unexpected. This movie even brought in my interest in both true crime stories and Canada! Joy! Oh yeah, and citizen activism...take that Los Angeles County!!

The costumes were amazing. I read on wikipedia (maybe) that Eastwood wanted to cast Jolie because he thought her looks fit the time period. Let me tell you, as someone interested in both decorative arts and costume/historical fashion the casting of Jolie as a woman of the late 1920s was absolutely spot on. She is the CLASSIC 1920s-1930s model type. She was a bit more glamourous than the normal woman in that time period, but I suppose Angelina Jolie has a hard time not being glam.

Eastwood even composed the music! What can that guy not do?! I will tell you what he can't do, he cant seem to get an oscar nomination for the amazing recent movies he is made. That is a flipping tragic injustice! Also, across the board, the acting was amazing. Jolie, Malcovich, Harner, and even Amy Ryan. They were all so nuanced and perfect. So subtle and powerful without being at all cartoonish. Fantastic!!

So what is the rating? (out of 10)
Changeling is pretty amazing. It is just perfectly spot on and I assign most of that to Eastwood and his incredible attention to detail and perfect astehtic eye. I give it a 9.

Crazy Love

2009-05-03T20:31:00.000-04:00

So what is this one about?
Netflix told me

This documentary from director Dan Klores chronicles the disturbing true story of an obsessive relationship gone awry in 1950s New York between Burt Pugach, a married lawyer, and his twentysomething mistress, Linda Riss. In a shocking reversal of the traditional "woman scorned" formula, it was Pugach who came unglued when Riss broke up with him -- and the subsequent fallout made headlines across the country.

And it was available on view it now, plus I was waiting for my laundry to wash, so I watched it.

And how much did I pay to watch?
Well, it is included in my membership fee, so, there you go. Also, I think I am getting back into the swing of watching more discs, so the cost will go down soon.

And what did I think?
Well, it was a little bit like a Lifetime movie or one of those episodes of Oxygen's Snapped (which is a show I really like). But it was still interesting, and shocking. I really don't want to say anything about what happened in the movie because I think there are people who read this who will really find it interesting.

Just go ahead and watch it...and then discuss it with me on the comments.

It was pretty well done for a crappy sort of low rent, low budget documentary (though I was unable to find any internet proof that the movie was cheap to make...I did find out how much it made though, which was just over $300k.) It also had the ability to make the audience react to what they were seeing. I can't say for sure what my reaction to the whole documentary was, but it was certainly something that was visceral. Yikes.

So what is the rating? (out of 10)
It gets an 8. It was so surprising and good in its own way...a documentary that makes you think or feel while also learning about something new is always my fave type of documentary.

Marley & Me

2009-05-03T19:43:00.005-04:00

So what is this one about?
Netflix tells us

Based on the best-selling memoir, this feature adaptation centers on Jennifer and John Grogan (Jennifer Aniston and Owen Wilson), who, as newlyweds about to start a family, learn many of life's important lessons from Marley, their lovable yet trouble-seeking canine. This heartwarming story examines the highs and lows of marriage, maturity and confronting ones' own mortality, as seen through the lens of family life with a dog.

And how much did I pay to watch?
I got it from netflix, and I think I've gotten enough movies this month to not have them be worth $16/disc. So, lets calculate...or, well, lets not. I've only gotten 3 discs in one month. YIKES!

And what did I think?
When I worked inauguration week I started out intros by having the students say their name, where they are from, and the best movie they'd seen recently--of course mine was Gran Torino. A lot of students said Seven Pounds and a lot said Marley & Me. Oh yeah, and they also said The Dark Knight. A student told me that she cried so much during Marley & Me. Well, we should all know by now...That was sort of an asshole thing to do, wasn't it? Well, I guess you should pretty much know that is what happens. Apparently it is what happens with most animal movies. Maybe because I knew that the dog dies I wasn't as suprised when he died. I will tell you, the part that got me a little choked up was when the oldest kid of Jennifer and John was so sad because he knew the dog was going to die.

Thankfully I have never had the experience of losing a longtime pet (you hear that Emmy? Don't die....) and I am sure it is very sad. Maybe because I haven't I didn't have as much empathy. Also, I didn't really care about the character of Jennifer, I felt much more for John. (Isn't this the first movie Owen Wilson made after his suicide attempt...god, that would have been so sad if he had died!)

I guess some parts of the movie were funny, and some were definately poignant, but overall it was just average.

So what is the rating? (out of 10)
I give it a 6. It gets that one more point because I love Owen Wilson. And Jennifer Aniston's body was amazing. Shit, I didn't beleive for a second that she was a mother of three who was almost 40. Not for one second.

Coraline

2009-05-03T19:25:00.001-04:00

So what is this one about?
Netflix tells us

Curious young Coraline (voiced by Dakota Fanning) unlocks a mysterious door in her family's new home and is transported to an alternate universe that strangely resembles her own -- only better. But when her Other Mother (Teri Hatcher) doesn't want Coraline to return to reality, our heroine must summon all her courage and ingenuity to go home and save her family. The breathtaking stop-motion animation is based on the best-seller by Neil Gaiman.

And how much did I pay to watch?
I saw this bad boy in 3-D because I heard that is the only way to see it. And 3-D at Cinema DeLux was $12. Or, at least it was on February 20, 2009...which was when I watched it (errrrrrrrrrr)

And what did I think?
Well, I think probably 3-D was the only way to see it. I've only seen a movie or two in 3-D lately (I think only Beowulf in Budapest) and this one was much much better. I think something that is a little more cartoonish is better in 3-D than "live action" movies (Beowulf wasn't really live action because it looked like it was computer animated live action...) Also, apparently Neil Gaiman wrote Beowulf...innnnnnteresting [Apparently the process is called "performance capture" and is explained here,

The cameras recorded real time footage of the performances, shots which Zemeckis reviewed. The director then used a virtual camera to choose camera angles from the footage which was edited together. Two teams of animators worked on the film, with one group working on replicating the facial performances, the other working on body movement. The animators said they worked very closely on replicating the human characters, but the character of Grendel had to be almost reworked, because he is a monster, not human.

Man, you're getting more production info than you'd have ever expected on this blog, aren't you?]

Anyway, Coraline was done in animated stop-motion

"an animation technique to make a physically manipulated object appear to move on its own. The object is moved in small amounts between individually photographed frames, creating the illusion of movement when the series of frames are played as a continuous sequence. Clay figures are often used in stop motion animations, known as claymation, for their ease of repositioning."

Interesting, right?

The 3-d in Coraline made it really spacey, and that is what the other world was supposed to feel like, so it worked really well. The story was interesting enough, but what I enjoyed about this movie was the way it actually looked. I mean, it was probably worth watching the movie just to see how it looked. Sort of like The Corpse Bride. I liked the other mother, and all of the characters in the other world.

I think this movie probably appeals to the kiddies who really like those spacey, sort of goth-ish movies and comic books. But for a straight-laced girl like me I liked the art of it all.

So what is the rating? (out of 10)
Yeah, so this def gets points because of how cool it looked. It gets an 8.

If you're gonna watch this you should watch it in 3-d...but now that it is out of the theatre I don't know how that is possible. Sad face for you...

Defiance

2009-05-02T20:45:00.004-04:00

So what is this one about?
You know, I was going to use wikipedia's description of this film, because I was sure Netflix would not say that the film took place in Belarus...BUT IT DID! So yay Netflix, they say

Daniel Craig stars as Tuvia Bielski, one of four Jewish brothers who escape from Poland into the forests of Belarus during World War II to lead a band of resistance fighters and create a safe haven for Jewish refugees. The real-life sanctuary established by the Bielski brothers saved more than 1,000 Jews from persecution and death. Edward Zwick directs this moving historical drama that also stars Liev Schreiber, Jamie Bell and George MacKay.

And how much did I pay to watch?
I have my movie ticket from, wait for it, February 6, 2009 from the good ol' Georgetown AMC and it tells me that I paid $10.75. Now I can throw this receipt away...since I only hung onto it because I knew I could refer back to it on this hurr bloggy.

And what did I think?
Now, Ima tell yous a secret. The first time I saw this preview I knew, I MEAN KNEW, it took place in Belarus. Now, how would I know that? Well, maybe two reasons. 1) I wrote my masters thesis on Belarus...so of course I am an expert. But, the real reason is 2) I once saw this movie, Idi i Smotri (Come and See) in this class I took in grad school called "Comparitive Totalitarian Culture" that is about how poor Belarus was absolutely slaughtered by the Nazis. And the color in the film was SO reminiscent of what I was seeing in the trailer for Defiance. (Have I written about Idi i Smotri before? I feel like I have...) Well anyway, when I saw this I thought, "If this isn't about Belarusian Partisans I will eat my hat!" but, it was. So there, my hat is safe.

Back in the day when I was working at the 'bux, I had this customer who always talked about movies with me. She said I absolutely had to see Defiance because she thought it was so amazing (she hadn't seen Gran Torino yet, but after she had she wanted to go see it again the next day). I disagree with that, and in all honesty I didn't think it was that amazing. I mean, it was ok, but perhaps because I knew the story of Belarusian Partisans I wasn't as taken because it wasn't as surprising. In fact, sitting here three months later I can't remember much I found very extraordinary about Defiance. I did like the girl who got preggers, and Billy Elliot (Jamie Bell) getting a forest wife. And the music was pretty good, but I didn't find the film especially moving or affecting or amazing.

On the wikipedia entry on Defiance they point out something that I missed in the film, but adds so much excellence and authenticity and is something that I would have given the filmmakers so much credit for that I am embarassed I missed it. Well, apparently it was on the entry when I first read it in February, but now it is gone. So, on imdb they talk about it a little... they say,

When Russians or Germans speak, there are subtitles, but the Bielskis speak English to each other, what language are they supposed to be speaking?

The Bielskis' native language is Yiddish, which is influenced by German, Russian and Hebrew. While growing up, the Bielskis learned Belarussian from their neighbors and also experienced various occupations by Russians, Poles and Germans. To varying degrees, they picked up other languages out of necessity. Tuvia also learned German during World War I when the Germans occupied their land.

So, what was the point of that? The old wikipedia entry explained that the English that the Bielskis spoke was supposed to be Yiddish and all the other languages would have had to have been subtitled for that. (Did you know you can go back and see edits on Wikipedia? Well you can...here is what I wanted to show you originally...

The movie was filmed primarily in accented English to represent speech by the Jewish characters that would have been in the Yiddish language.Whenever the dialogue was not in English, for instance when a Jewish character was speaking to a non-Jewish character or when a non-Jewish character was speaking, the dialogue was in the Russian language. The only exception to this were German soldiers who spoke in German. Some Polish reviewers have criticized this decision, arguing that many of the locals in the area would have spoken Polish and not Russian or Belorussian and that the Bielski partisans did not know Russian or Belarussian as well as or Polish. The actors' accents in English have also fallen under criticism because they were not distinctively Yiddish but instead varied and seemed to represent a general Eastern European accent.

Well, that long explaination was barely worth it. Harrumph. But it does illustrate my unecessary and undying love for authentic languages being spoken in movies. This is way going off track, but one movie that the use of language drives me nuts in was Enemy at the Gates. All the Russians were played by Brits with English accents and the Germans were played by Americans with American accents, but for some unexplicable reason when there were announcements over speakers they were in Russian, or when a newspaper was printed it was in cyrillic. Why?? WHY!?

So what is the rating? (out of 10)
So, on netflix I gave Defiance 4 out of 5. I would have given it a 3 but I said the extra star was because it was about Belarus, and Belarusian partisans. So, I'll give it an 8 here, because Belarus gets no love, and maybe it will introduce a wider audience to Belarus during World War II.

One other thing, though, is that not everyone thought the Bielskis were freedom fighters. If you're interested, you can see that history always has two sides. Just like Sarah yelled at Areta for her paper on the UPA, some people think the Bielski brothers were "Jewish-communist bandits" not great freedom fighters and heroes.

Mission: Impossible III

2009-05-02T20:22:00.001-04:00

So what is this one about?
Netflix tells us

Helmed by J.J. Abrams, the third entry in the explosive espionage series finds semiretired superspy Ethan Hunt (Tom Cruise) forced back into action to save his protégé, Lindsey Ferris (Keri Russell). To checkmate her investigation, badass arms dealer Owen Davian (Philip Seymour Hoffman) abducts Lindsey, sending Ethan and his crack field team to Berlin on a rescue mission. Meanwhile, Ethan's agency superiors may be double-dealing their operatives.

And how much did I pay to watch?
Nothing! I watched this at Mel's and the dvd belonged to her roommate. Huzzah!

And what did I think?
Um, what did I think? I mean, this movie wasn't all that good. Actually, it was about what I expected. But I will tell you one goddamned thing...Johnathan Rhys Meyers is so flipping hot, and his natural accent is so fabulously cute I didn't know what to do with myself when he was on the screen. I watch a lot of Rhys Meyer on The Tudors (even though it isn't such a good show, I pretty much love him...) and I have become quite a big fan of him. He is cute as a Brit, but man, with his natural accent...I don't even know what to do with myself!!

I also absolutely love Phillip Semyour Hoffman (PSH) so, anything with him is a-ok with me.

Also, this was supposed to take place in Virginia (sic semper tyrannis, bitches!) and the female love interest was named Julia. Ta-freaking-dah, right?!

Also Keri Russell was in it, and she is pretty great too.

Lets face it, sometimes my movie reviews are not insightful... *eye candy*

So what is the rating? (out of 10)
So, if you want a typical action movie tailored to Julia's specifications with hot boys, great actors (not Tom Cruise...PSH), super locations and pretty/talented ladies, I suppose you could do worse than MI3. I give it a 6.

The Hottest State

2009-04-28T23:14:00.004-04:00

So what is this one about?
It was brought to my attention that Ethan Hawke--yes, the actor!--is also an author. He has written two books, The Hottest State and Ash Wednesday (in that order). Now, I was told that Ash Wednesday was much better than The Hottest State, and it was. I also didn't realize that the first book was made into a movie, but it was! So I rented it.

Netflix tells us

Ethan Hawke wrote and directed this adaptation of his novel, the story of William Harding (Mark Webber), a struggling actor who falls for a beautiful musician named Sarah (Catalina Sandino Moreno). While she's largely indifferent to their affair, William continues to pursue her, hoping to make a connection. His quest eventually leads him to insight into his own need for love. Laura Linney and Frank Whaley co-star.

Uh-huh.

And how much did I pay to watch?
Like I've said, probably a lot, because I haven't been wating many movies. But, I got it on netflix, if that answers the question sort of.

And what did I think?
This is the thing I don't understand about the Hottest State. I have been yapping on and on about how movies haven't been doing books justice...so tell me if this makes sense. Follow me for a minute... Actor Ethan Hawke writes a book. He then makes his book into a movie which he directs and stars in. Now, one would expect the movie to do a good job of translating the book, right?

Well, I am sure you can all imagine what happened.

No. Not at all. How can an author direct his own book into a movie and still lose a shit-ton in translation?!?!

Now, to my beloved Mr. Hawke's credit, the feel of the book was pretty much encapsulated in the film. However, some of the deviations from the book were so egregious I just don't know what to do with myself.

Sarah, the female lead was supposed to be a pasty, chubby, frizzy black haired weirdo (for lack of a better word). The reader of the book doesn't really understand why William is so head over heels for this girl. William is supposed to be a hot, slick, ladies man. But Sarah, she isn't interested in him, she isn't nice, she isn't putting out, and she isn't even good looking. So it was just shockingly bizarre when Hawke cast a beautiful girl in the role. It just loses so much.

And then, William was supposed to be the good looking one, which made his love for Sarah even weirded, but he wasn't!! When I read the book I pictured William as hot Ethan Hawke from Before Sunset, because his character's voice read just like Ethan Hawke...but William looks like a trashy, hideous Ethan Hawke. WHY!??!?

The characters went to Mexico instead of Paris, which I buy alright, but there wasn't enough buildup to Sarah asking William to marry her. Whoops! Just ruined it. Actually, I didn't, because you shouldn't really bother with this, and you shouldn't really read the book either. If you wanna read some Ethan Hawke, you should read Ash Wednesday, which is so entirely much better than The Hottest State.

The music was trite. It was like Hawke was trying too hard to make the charaters deep, and the pain authentic, and the music sentimental...and it just didn't work!

But man, was Laura Linney good. I guess I will need to stop pretending, lets be serious. I love her. She isn't my new girl crush, but she is a pretty damn fine actress.

Also, Michelle Williams was good as Samantha, but there wasn't enough development of the Sam character, like there was in the book.

So what is the rating? (out of 10)
Oh Ethan Hawke, really, if you hadn't written this book, directed the movie, and acted in it, I wouldn't have watched it. Well, I might have, but I wouldn't have given it the same ammount of credit I do when you put your name behind it.

I mean, I guess I will give it a 5. It was passable. It would have been much better if Richard Linklater had directed this, and it starred a young Ethan Hawke...but I guess that is impossible by the laws of time and space.

I'd like to see more directed by Hawke, and I love the idea of him making Ash Wednesday into a film, but I just don't know if that book--or maybe books in general--translate well enough to film.

Le sigh.

The Staircase

2009-04-26T15:51:00.001-04:00

So what is this one about?
Netflix tells us,

From award-winning documentary filmmaker Jean-Xavier de Lestrade comes this real-life, gripping courtroom drama that chronicles the case of author Michael Peterson, who stood trial in 2003 for the murder of his wife, Kathleen. With unprecedented access to Peterson's lawyers, his family and others involved in the proceedings, de Lestrade offers viewers an intimate look at the judiciary process and the mystery surrounding this high-profile case.

Also, Lestrade is totally French Canadian. It doesn't add anything to this story or movie or anything, but you know how I feel about French Canadians.

And how much did I pay to watch?
Well, as you can probably tell I haven't been watching as many movies lately. I used to blame it on my former job when I had to be at work at 4:30am. But, now I have a normal, fabulous job where I have to be at work at a normal time, which thus means I can go to bed at a normal time, and I could watch movies before I went to bed if I wanted.

Now, maybe I haven't been watching them because I know I need to do the write up, and I already have too many to write up...Or, maybe I've been distracted by the Stanley Cup playoffs which require a great amount of emotional energy from me. Or maybe it is because I haven't been able to get movies that I am really excited to see. Whatever it is, I have no idea how much I am paying per movie a month now, I am scared to think I might be paying $8 a movie.

But, as far as the Staircase goes, I actually first got this rental when I had just started grad school--over two and a half years ago. But, I just couldn't get into it. So I sent it back. And then when I rented it in February, the same thing started happening!! The Staircase is broken into 8 episodes, and until about the 4th episode I thought I was going to send it back to Netflix without watching the whole thing. But I did, and I am glad.

And to answer the question, I have absolutely no idea how much I paid. Probably a lot.

And what did I think?
Well, like I said, I thought it was a little boring. I just could. not. get. into. it. But, I am glad I slogged through the slow and tedious beginning of the series, cause man oh man! It sure picked up speed!!!

I guess I understand why LeStrade had to make those boring first four episodes...to lay the foundation so the audience understands everything else that happens. Well, I don't understand why he had to make it so boring, but, I suppose it doesn't matter.

Ok, so what did I think? Well, I think without giving away the verdict...because you maybe should watch this (especially you, Lori)...that the thing that was best about this film was how LeStrade really tried to not insert his value judgements into the documentary. He showed what was happening, and then we as an audience were able to make our own judgements about wether we think Michael Peterson killed his wife. I think, especially after looking at the internet, that we tend to always assume people who are accused of murder are pretty much always guilty. And violent crimes are always henious--so someone is guilty. But, watching LeStrade's film it gives you some sort of feeling about what the American justice system might really be like.

It was also very interesting, because as an audience we saw Michael Peterson, and frankly, that guy was a dick. BUT, just because he was an asshole doesn't mean he is guilty. So as an audience we had to sort out our personal feelings about the accused to decide if the evidence that the prosecution presented was enough to make their case that Peterson was guilty beyond a REASONABLE doubt.

Anyway, it was interesting. And after I watched the movie I found some crazy websites talking about the murder and the case and theories and all that. So, if you're not gonna watch the movie I guess you can go to them. Or not. Whatevs.

So what is the rating? (out of 10)
Well, because it was so so boring at the beginning I cannot give it a 10. But, it was very interesting, and well done, so it gets a 9.

He's Just Not That Into You

2009-04-26T15:33:00.001-04:00

**really? two months after I saw this I am finally getting around to the summary?? I am embarrassed.**

So what is this one about?
He's Just Not That Into You is a book that revolutionized the lives of women all over America, probably all over the world. I am not ashamed (well, maybe I am a little ashamed) to admit that I read and loved the book! The point it makes is simple, but it is one that seems to elude most women. If he isn't calling you, if he isn't sleeping with you, if he is sleeping with someone else, if he doesn't want to be in a relationship with you...he just isn't that into you. Once someone accepts this fact then it becomes much easier to put things into perspective. "He didn't want to try our relationship again. If he was that into he would have, so he isn't the right guy for me." Silly Greg Behrendt yammers on and on about how "you" (the woman reading the book) deserve a guy who is insanely into you, and if he can't be, then you should move on, because someone will be. (eventually. hopefully)

So, the movie is basically the book in movie form (now, I had no idea how this was going to be done when I learned a year ago that this was going to be made into a movie...but, I'll go into that later). Netflix tells us,

Jennifer Aniston, Drew Barrymore and Scarlett Johansson lead an all-star cast in this adaptation of the bestseller that follows an ensemble of characters dealing with the pitfalls of love and human interaction. Set in Baltimore, director Ken Kwapis's film moves swiftly between a host of storylines and characters brought to life by a stellar lineup that includes Jennifer Connelly, Ben Affleck, Ginnifer Goodwin and Justin Long.

Ken Kwapis!! Of The Office Season 2 "Casino Night" (aka: the most perfect episode ever) fame?! Hot DAMN!!

And how much did I pay to watch?
Again, my mother paid for the ticket. I don't know how much, but I didn't pay anything. But she did buy me movie nachos...which was awesome!

And what did I think?
Well, I am embarrassed to say that this is the best book to film adaptation I have seen this year. I suppose, though, that the film industry should be embarassed by this, not me, because there have been amazing books that have been turned into films (Atonement, Revolutionary Road, The Reader, etc). Even though these books were better, and were written SO beautifully, they didn't translate well because there was no narrator to communicate what the author told us as readers. Now, what made HJNTIY work well as a movie was that the role of the author/narrator was made into an actual character in the film (played by Justin Long). This was what made the different questions/vingettes from the book translate to film. Frankly, I was amazed that this device was employed, and I was floored that it worked. Poor idiots who failed making better books into movies because they didn't have a narrator. Losers.

Now, the thing that was irritating and odd was that the characters and the narrator and the book's author kept emphasizing that you (the everywoman) are not special. Sure, you heard the story about the girl who liked the guy and he never called and treated you like crap, but somehow they ended up happily ever after anyway. But you are not that woman. And her story is the exception to the rule. You are the rule, not the exception. EXCEPT...every. single. character. in the movie ended up being the exception. So, what does that tell all the ridiculous, silly women in the world? You aren't the exception to the rule, but, for your specific love and relationship you probably are.

This seemed so ludicrous for a movie that was trying to communicate what it was. Ri.dic.u.lous.

But, other than that little flaw it was really quite good. Entertaining with characters that the audience cared about--good looking characters, at that--it was funny, and heartfelt, and honestly, everything I would expect from Ken Kwapis.

So what is the rating? (out of 10)
I give it a 9. No, maybe an 8.5. No, I guess a 9. Because it was a great book adaptation, smartly done and well acted for what it was. The message was quite trite, but, well, I suppose a lot of messages are these days.

One Missed Call

2009-03-14T21:27:00.003-04:00

So what is this one about?
Netflix tells us,

Cell-phone messages describing victims' last moments on earth are the only links connecting a string of deaths in this supernatural chiller. When two of her friends die after receiving such calls, college coed Beth Raymond (Shannyn Sossamon) contacts the police, who dismiss her story -- with the exception of Det. Jack Andrews (Edward Burns). The two team up to solve the mystery, but when Beth's phone rings with an eerie refrain, is her number up?

Gee, how original.

And how much did I pay to watch?
Nothing, because I watched it as an On Demand movie on one of the "premium subscription" channels. Maybe Cinemax? Who knows, who cares.

And what did I think?
"What will it sound like when you die?" Probably just like every other Japanese movie remake that came before. In fact, when I was done watching it I had to go to netflix and see if this one was a remake of a movie I had already seen a few years ago called Phone. Turns out it is a remake, but of a film called One Missed Call (duh).

The plot was pithy (shocker) but there were suspenseful parts. I didn't really care what happened to any of the characters. But, lets be serious. The only reason I watch stupid horror movies is on the off chance I might find an actual scary one. This one wasn't really. But, I was still entertained enough.

So what is the rating? (out of 10)
It gets a 4.

Milk

2009-03-14T21:08:00.004-04:00

So what is this one about?
If you have been under a rock, Netflix will tell us what this one is about.

Sean Penn (in an Oscar-winning role) stars in this fact-based drama about Harvey Milk, the openly gay activist and San Francisco politician who was murdered along with mayor George Moscone (Victor Garber) by disgruntled city employee Dan White (Josh Brolin, in an Oscar-nominated role) in 1978. Director Gus Van Sant's compelling biopic (nominated for a Best Picture Academy Award) co-stars Emile Hirsch, James Franco and Diego Luna.

And how much did I pay to watch?
Nothing, because Devin bought my ticket.

And what did I think?
There were basically two over-riding things I thought of while watching this one. 1) Sean Penn is such an incredibly talented actor. He is just fabulous. 2) Good god this movie was better than stupid, stupid Slumdog Millionaire. You may be able to tell that I saw this before the stupid Oscars, because those were my two immediate thoughts.

Other than those, though, I suppose I did have some other thoughts. I liked that Josh Brolin played the guy who killed Harvey Milk. I liked this because the last role I saw Brolin in was playing George W. Bush in W. Haha, George W. Bush hates gay people and kills them. Oh wait, that is just Josh Brolin. I also liked that the whole story was new to me. I suppose I knew that Harvey Milk was killed, but I didn't know how, or when, or why, or by who. So I liked that. I also liked that it was filmed in San Fransicso...cause hey, I've been there!

I thought the acting was very good. In fact, I thought all the actors were great!!

It was also whispered in my ear that the woman at the begining of the film who says that Milk and Moscone are dead was Dianne Feinstein, and that this basically catapulted her carrer. Or, well, thats what Devin said. I thought that was interesting, and the wikipedia article even refers to it. So, again, it must be true.

On the other hand, though, besides the awesome acting and the fact that it was much better than Slumdog, I think I might have to admit that I am getting a little sick of gay movies. I love gay people. I think they are great. I think they should have all the same rights as straight couples, and all of that goodness (and be serious, how adorable are Ellen and Portia? they are amazing!) but really, I am getting kind of bored of these movies. I guess they just don't tug at my heart like they used to. Maybe I am becoming horribly cold. But maybe I'm just getting bored.

So what is the rating? (out of 10)
Milk was good. Milk was great. Penn deserved his Oscar, because dude let's face it... he is so talented.

Overall, it was very good. 8.

Trade

2009-03-14T20:54:00.003-04:00

So what is this one about?
Netflix told me,

Based on a New York Times Magazine story, this crime drama starring Kevin Kline delves into a sordid world of international sex trafficking that leads from Mexico City to a New Jersey stash house. In a bid to save kidnapped 13-year-old Adriana (Paulina Gaitan) before she's sold into sexual slavery, her desperate brother (Cesar Ramos) teams with a Texas cop (Kline). Can they find her before she vanishes into a hellish underworld?

before I watched it...because I'd never heard of it, and I watched it on "watch it now", therefore...

And how much did I pay to watch?
Nothing. (Because like I just said, I watched it on "watch it now")

And what did I think?
Well, considering I had never heard that this movie even existed, and therefore had no expectations of how it would be, it was actually pretty good.

You can pretty much always tell if a movie about human trafficking is good by how uncomfortable it makes you feel. There were parts that just turned my stomach during this one, as it well should. That showed me that the movie was much more realistic than other stupid ass movies that deal with human trafficking. (Doesn't that dumb movie Eastern Promises deal with that topic sort of??)

In a lot of ways I really liked that it was so gritty and difficult (with bad, bad things happening to the characters). The story was compelling and suspenseful (though a bit unbelievable in the ending). There were even some Russian mob aspects! (and what trafficking movie would be complete without those?) And even though, apparently, this movie was only in very limited release it did a good job of giving human trafficking a realistic and not very Hollywood treatment.

So what is the rating? (out of 10)
Overall, I was very pleased with this film. It was good, and because I didn't know it existed, and therefore had no expectations for it, I was even more pleased.

So, I'll give it a 7.

Der Untergang (Downfall)

2009-02-27T19:45:00.000-05:00

So what is this one about?
I will leave this one to Wikipedia,

In the last days of World War II in Europe, the Soviet Red Army is fighting its way into Berlin. Deep within his bunker underneath the Reichskanzlei, Adolf Hitler celebrates his last birthday and lives out his final 10 days isolated from the world, desperately ordering counterattacks that will never happen, from armies that exist only on maps, commanded by men who are most likely dead. Hitler (Bruno Ganz) is presented as he was in the last months of the war: a sick, exhausted man but dreaming still of a Greater Germany amid the ruins of war-ravaged Berlin and callously ranting against the "weakness" and "deserved destruction" of the German people for their lack of resistance. As the Red Army draws nearer and imminent defeat looms over the Third Reich, Hitler is seen alone with his clique which consists of Joseph Goebbels (Ulrich Matthes), Albert Speer (Heino Ferch) and (briefly) SS leader Heinrich Himmler (Ulrich Noethen), along with his personal staff.
Most of the events are depicted from the perspective of Hitler's young personal secretary Traudl Junge (Alexandra Maria Lara). Events outside Hitler's bunker are mostly depicted from the perspective of SS doctor Ernst-Günther Schenck (Christian Berkel). On the day before his death Hitler marries his longtime mistress Eva Braun (Juliane Köhler) and they commit suicide together on April 30, 1945, ten days after Hitler's 56th birthday.

(Holy shit that is a lot of links!!!!!)

And how much did I pay to watch?
When I watched this I didn't pay anything, because I watched my own copy of the film on dvd. I did at one time see the movie in the theatre, which made me want to buy the dvd (which I did with an amazon.com gift certificate) so I did spend money on it at one time. But not this time.

And what did I think?
I think this film is amazing. Everything about it is just beyond extraordinary. But, the main thing that is so tragic and poignant about this film is that none of it needed to happen. The deaths of all the officers, the downfall of the whole of the German people. Its tough man. Its tough. And Downfall doesn't step back from slapping you in the face with the cruel and vicious and disturbing realities of that time.

You have to give a war movie that is really realistic a lot of credit. I once watched Come and See (a Belarusian war film that I will refer to in my write up of Defiance) and my professor told me that it is widely viewed as one of the most realisitic and therefore bleak war movies ever made. Downfall was sort of like that.

And, you know, now that I am reading the wikipedia entry on this movie I feel like maybe I shouldn't say a lot specifically about this film (a la Gran Torino, which I did see for a second time, and it was just as amazing the second time. Seriously, have you still not seen Gran Torino???) so that when you watch it (WHICH YOU SHOULD!) you wont have much of it ruined for you. I think that is what I should do.

I will say that the Russian history nerdo in me was very interested to see that many of the Germans who were in the bunker ended up in the Gulag once they were captured. And I will also tell you that the soft hearted, history aware, wimp in me tears up a lot during this one. It is just so, so, so, so, so, so good. It is really amazing.

So what is the rating? (out of 10)
This is a movie that I consider pretty much perfect. If someone was like, "Hey Julia, you seem to complain about how movies aren't amazing. So, if you had to pick, what would be a 10 to you. Not a film you like a lot like Love Actually, but a really amazing, flawless, piece of film making?" I would say Downfall.

So, a 10 it is. And, immediately after I saw it for the first time I knew it was one of the best films I had ever seen.

The Longshots

2009-02-27T19:22:00.002-05:00

So what is this one about?
Well, I wish I could have gotten the description from the United Airlines magazine, so I could communicate to you what I was faced with in the decision to watch this movie (as opposed to staring off into space for two hours), but, I cannot. We must settle for the Netflix description. Which is,

Eleven-year-old Jasmine Plummer (Keke Palmer) becomes the Pop Warner League's first female quarterback with help from her uncle (Ice Cube), a former high school gridiron star, in this true story directed by Limp Bizkit front man Fred Durst. Despite her skills on the playing field, Jasmine raises eyebrows in her small Illinois town -- until she exceeds expectations by taking her team to the Pop Warner Super Bowl.

And I wondered, "wait, is that Fred Durst from Limp Bizkit?! Yes, apparently it was." Bizarre.

And how much did I pay to watch?
Well, if you want to be technical, since I watched it on an airplane, I paid how much I paid to fly on the airplane...which was $446. Since that would be insane though, I will say I paid nothing, since I watched it for free on an airplane. Woo!

And what did I think?
Well, airplane movies are quite an interesting thing, like I already said. You can either watch a crappy movie or do some other fun activity. My activities of choice included reading a crappy book, or listening to the music I listen to every damn day in the car, or falling asleep. Besides, when you watch a movie that makes two hours pass sort of quickly. And, when you are flying on United you get to watch NBC on United after the movie. HOORAY!!

So, what did I think about the movie? Overall it wasn't that bad. And Ice Cube, actually, is a fairly competent actor! I know, I know, catch your breath and get over the shock of what I just said. Actually, all the actors were fairly competent.

I vaguely remember seeing ads for this movie when it came out, maybe, and I thought it looked like it was supposed to be a stupid sports comedy. It actually wasn't, and it wasn't really that funny at all.

It was actually much more related to civic things, with a community pulling itself up by the bootstraps because they were inspired by one of the community members. And if you know me, you know that any movie that even touches on civic activism is something that I love (see Hairspray... well, once I write it.) But, you could have tricked me, because I was positive the movie took place in Michigan, not Illinois.

So what is the rating? (out of 10)
Anyway, it was entertaining enough that I did watch it a second time on my return flight.

And it was surprisingly good, especially Ice Cube.

So, I give it a 7. Woah!

Meet Bill

2009-02-22T13:04:00.003-05:00

So what is this one about?
The 'flix tells us,

Beleaguered bank employee Bill (Aaron Eckhart) has his hands full with his wife's (Elizabeth Banks) infidelity with a local television reporter (Timothy Olyphant), his oblivious father-in-law (Holmes Osborne) who runs the bank, and his own frustrated attempts to change careers in this screwball comedy. But when he's persuaded to mentor a teenager known as the Kid (Logan Lerman), things just might turn around for Bill. Jessica Alba co-stars.

Ok, sounds normal enough, I suppose.

And how much did I pay to watch?
Nothing, because I watched it on Devin's Netflix view it now option. View it now is kind of amazing, but the choices are a little limited.

And what did I think?
So, this seems like it would be normal enough. I get that Bill is a doormat who never asserts himself and therefore never gets what he wants. I get that when he finds out his wife is cheating he wants to take some steps to get her back and maybe turn around his life in the process. I don't however understand what the hell was going on in this movie!

It was one of the oddest things I have ever seen. My netflix review read, This movie was so weird, like, where did it come from? and why? and what was I supposed to get from

it???

That is pretty accurate. There were just so many bizarre things in the movie that were never really explained. For example, this "Kid" that he mentors. The kid is a little odd, but we are never made to understand what his flippin' deal is. How and why is he so weird. If there had been some explaination as to his weirdness maybe the rest of the movie wouldn't have seemed so creepily off kilter. So much of the oddity that happens in Bill's life is this Kid's fault. It seemed rather jarring that he was so weird with no explation.

Now, I am not saying I constantly need explanations in movies for why things happen, but I am saying it likely would have made the movie more funny if there had been some funny reason the Kid was so odd.

Instead it just makes other things really uncomfortable. Like, why is this Kid so in love with Jessica Alba? He is so in love with her that he dresses up in women's underwear and parades around a mall store in such. He gets Bill to go on a double date with a girl (like maybe early 20s) when the Kid goes on a date with Jessica Alba. The Kid then gets Bill to let him drink alcohol in the tent that all four of them sleep in. Oh wait, but not before they have sex with their respective date...while they are in the tent together. Why was Bill doing these things???

And why did he want a doughnut shop? What the hell was going on!?!?

So little explanation/exposition made the movie creep, creep, creepy.

So what is the rating? (out of 10)
I gave it a 2 out of 5 on netflix, so I am going to give it a 3 here. Seriously, don't bother watching this. It was truly, truly bizarre.

Elf

2009-02-22T13:00:00.000-05:00

So what is this one about?
The 'flix tells us about this one. They say...

When young Buddy falls into Santa's gift sack on Christmas Eve and is inadvertently transported back to the North Pole, he's raised as a toy-making elf by Santa's helpers. After growing up to be a misfit who never quite fits in, the outsized elf (Will Ferrell) decides to go to Manhattan and find his real dad. Co-stars Ed Asner, Mary Steenburgen, James Caan and Bob Newhart. Directed by John Favreau.

I should have known. Flippin' Jon Favreau...the filmmaker, not the Presidential speech writer.

And how much did I pay to watch?
I didn't pay anything. I watched this when I went to go visit Lori in Athens, GA. This is amusing for two reasons. I went to visit her over New Years...which was nearly two months ago! Second, well, not as amusing, she is Jewish but loves Christmas movies. She has been telling me to watch this one forever...so I finally did.

Oh yeah, but it cost nothing, because it was her dvd.

And what did I think?
I guess I see why she has been telling me to watch this for so long, because it was such a nice little holiday movie. Even though I watched it after Christmas, it made me feel all Christmasy.

Will Ferrell is really hit or miss, I find. I often find myself thinking, "Okay Will Ferrell, we get it. You're funny. You don't need to make a crappy film every year in order to remind us. Just make one good one every two years and that will be fine." But, he was funny and endearing as Buddy. Now, Zooey Deschanel on the other hand, was as irritating as I usually find her. She is just so overly spacey in every role. BUT, she was super cute and we--as the audience--really wanted her to get together with Ferrell.

It followed a predictable story line, but it was endearing none the less. I even got a little misty at the end. It was nice to have all the people who are normally grumpy jerks, believe in something. esp, Santa.

So what is the rating? (out of 10)
It was a nice little Christmas movie filled with childlike wonder. It was certainly not an award winner, but it was nice, and amusing, and sweet. How can you not like that??

I give it a solid 7.

Frost/Nixon

2009-02-13T16:22:00.001-05:00

So what is this one about?
"I'm saying, when the President does it, it's not illegal!" (and then I shake my face around while I'm saying it, like a horse...) it is a pretty accurate impression.

But, what it is actually about will be told to us by the 'flix.

Ron Howard directs this adaptation of Peter Morgan's popular Broadway play centered on a series of revelatory TV interviews former President Richard Nixon granted British talk show host David Frost in 1977. Nominated for five Oscars, including Best Picture, the film stars Frank Langella, reprising his Tony Award-winning stage role, along with a stellar cast that includes Michael Sheen, Sam Rockwell, Toby Jones, Kevin Bacon and Oliver Platt.

And if you want more information about the play, or the film, OR the interviews!, the 'pedia (nice one, right?) has good information.

And how much did I pay to watch?
My mom paid for our trip to the movies, and she paid $14 total. So it cost $7. But, I didn't pay. As I've said, as per usual... besides, when we go to that theatre she normally expects that my friend will let us in for free.

And what did I think?
I think what was so different and awesome and refreshing about this movie as compared to Oliver Stone's W was that Ron Howard (or maybe the playwright, since this is another film based on a play) didn't try and smash his value judgments into the storyline.

Instead, an actual character was used to demonstrate the different opinions that people may have had about Mr. Nixon. One of the characters--an academic who judgementally wrote negative things about Nixon-- an American, was so pissed at David Frost, a Brit, because he felt that Frost was trying to build sympathy for Nixon. Now, what actually happened in the movie/play/real life was that Frost absolutely skewered Nixon in his interview. And then the public/audience felt bad for Nixon. Even though Frost got Nixon to admit that he was a jerk, and a liar, and a bad guy it was in admitting this that the public felt bad for him. Awesome. Howard/ Morgan (the playwright, Peter Morgan) didn't need to inject their value judgement, because they probably thought the audience would be smart enough to figure it out. Whereas Oliver Stone thought that he somehow needed to force some sort of judgment about George Bush down his audience's throat (now, as I said when I reviewed it, I could figure out if he was serious, or mocking the whole administration...bad job suckah!)

Now, otherwise the movie was rather slow. Just like during Doubt, I may have drifted off for a few minutes during this one (Keep in mind though, that I do wake up at 3:35am...so, it might just be that I am tired). I think what is tough about watching a movie that you know is a play (at least for me, since I did theatre in highschool) is that I think about what the play would be like. And I have come up with the idea that this play would be bor.ing.

As a movie it was passable, but, it isn't going to win the Oscar for Best Picture either. *mumbles*stupidslumdogmillionaire*mumble*

So what is the rating? (out of 10)
Not too bad. A little better than average because it didn't force a value judgment on the audience. So, I'll give it a 6.

The Tudors: Season 2

2009-02-12T17:33:00.002-05:00

So what is this one about?
Remember that song from elementary school? "I'm 'Enery the Eighth I am I am, I'm 'Enery the eighth I ammmm, I was married to the widow next door, she's been married seven times before, and all the kids say 'Enery, 'Enery, 'Enery the Eighth I ammmm" Yeah, remember that? Well, this is sort of like that. Except a little different.

Netflix tells us,

Hollywood icon Peter O'Toole joins the cast for a second season of the hit Showtime series. After King Henry VIII (Jonathan Rhys Meyers) secretly has his marriage to Katherine (Maria Doyle Kennedy) declared invalid and weds Anne Boleyn (Natalie Dormer), Pope Paul III (O'Toole) moves to excommunicate the king. Meanwhile, some of Henry's old friends and allies fall out of favor. The critically acclaimed drama co-stars Jeremy Northam.

Oh yeah, also, [NOT A SPOILER] Anne Boleyn gets hers. Thats what you get man! (sic semper tyrannis, bitches!)

And how much did I pay to watch?
Well, I gots this shit on the 'flix. It is four discs. According to my history I actually got nine discs this month (is that possible? I've been so lazy lately with the movies...) so they each cost $1.88 (woah) and then times 4 is $7.55 total. Certainly cheaper than giving my money to Showtime by buying the discs, AND more reliable than watching it on the internet (since I always feel like the internet is trying to trick me and will mess up the episode order or something. I think that makes me paranoid.)

And what did I think?
What did I think? I think "Ooooooh, look at me, I'm Jonathan Rhys Meyer. I'm a good actor because I can yell a lot. I played Henry VIII who was clearly weak minded and could be influenced at the slightest change of will, or the drop of a hat." That Henry, man, I keep looking at wikipedia to see if anyone adds anything about him being bipolar or something. He was ridiculous!

And Anne Boelyn, I spoke last season of how she was pretty much the worst person ever. This didn't really change with the second season, however, you did feel a little bad for her in the season finale, if only because she acepted her death, even though she had truly done nothing wrong. It was hilarious [spoiler] that the only person who actually did have carnal knowledge of her was not sentanced to death. Hilarious.

And that Jane Seymour...seriously, who was that bitch fooling?? She wasn't that innocent. Bitch please.

But other than the weird characters, I found this season much less annoying than last season. Maybe it was because I knew what to expect, or maybe I had just become desensitized, but it seemed like there was less gratutious sex in this season. Which I thought was good. I mean, since Jane Seymour was so "innocent" she certainly wasn't going to do it with him. suckah.

The historical stuff was a little less interesting (no sweating sickness, not really using leeches to "heal" people), what with the reformation and such, but I still found myself looking at wikipedia a lot to get more historical information. This season also took place over a much shorter span of years (it was odd to see Princess Mary age so rapidly when Henry barely aged at all) so it was a little less odd to see the passage of time. Or not. (see above).

I am very interested to see what happens in Season 3 (are they even making a season 3?) if only because it is very interesting to see history unfold--even if it is a total lie. Because lets face it, I am a history nerd who likes movies.

One thing I do have to say about this stupid ass show was that the bonus features were the suckiest thing ever! I mean, there was this segment where Natalie Dormer (who plays Anne Boleyn) went to see where Anne was kept in the Tower of London, was beheaded, and was buried. She then proceeded to go on and on about how brave and amazing Anne Boleyn was. Get over it. Come on.

OH! I just remembered something that was awesome about this season...there were more gay men. And one of them was Anne Boleyn's brother!!! SCAN-DAL!

So what is the rating? (out of 10)
It was good. Amusing for sure, and I didn't find it nearly as irritating as Season 1. I gave it a 4 on the 'flix so I will give it a 7.5 here.

The Curious Case of Benjamin Button

2009-02-10T18:27:00.005-05:00

So what is this one about?
Netflix tells us,

David Fincher directs this adaptation of F. Scott Fitzgerald's classic tale set in the early 20th century that follows Benjamin Button (Brad Pitt), a man who was born in his 80s and continually grows younger. The story throws linear conventions upside down to explore love, loss and memories from the perspective of a character living under incredibly unique -- and unexpectedly difficult -- circumstances. Cate Blanchett co-stars in this Oscar nominee for Best Picture.

And how much did I pay to watch?
Well, as like all the other theatre films I have watched recently, my mother paid. So it cost me nothing, but it cost her $8.50x2.

And what did I think?
Halfway through watching this film I thought to myself, "this is absolutely perfect." Without having read the short story I was certain that the screenplay adhered to his story perfectly because it so accurately captured the feel of Fitzgerald's writing style. He is beautifully flowery, and dreamlike, and wonderful. So, I was absolutely shocked when I consulted wikipedia after I got back from the movie to learn that other than the backwards ageing there are pretty much no commonalities between the film and the short story.

Well, here I proclaim for everyone to see, KUDOS. Kudos to Eric Roth and Robin Swicord, the writers and screenwriters. Kudos to cinematographer Claudio Miranda. Kudos to art directors Kelly Curley and Tom Reta. It had the absolute feel of F. Scott Fitzgerald. I was shocked to learn it was supposed to take place in Baltimore, MD. The second I head the southern accents I was sure that Fitzgerald had picked a southern city. The little cut aways to show black and white flashbacks in the style of the Smashing Pumpkin's "Tonight, Tonight" video--that sort of spacey 1920's feel--I was positive that Fitzgerald wrote those in. It was an inspired choice to add those. Everything that the art director, and cinematographer, and writers chose was like they were channeling Fitzgerald. I simply cannot comprehend that the film deviated so much from the book!! I cannot fathom it.

And I think that is what I found so stunning and perfect about the movie. Because, when I think about it, I suppose it is a little trite. Perhaps I would feel this excited if I had seen Forrest Gump in the theatre when it was released. I think, one of the reviews I found in wikipedia sums up my concern. They say,

Ashley Scrace from the Sheffield Star noted that: "It is a good film, but one of contradictions, some of which are far beyond the story of young versus old. It is surprising yet clichéd; sad yet hollow; visually impressive yet ordinary." He goes on to add "I just hope this year’s Oscars do not follow a tired formula: biggest budget, plus biggest stars, equals biggest awards."

And I agree. I mean, its sweeping in scope, and time, and place. And that seems to be something that people accept as a successful formula. And, yes, the visual effects were amazing. Astounding. I have no idea how they put Brad Pitt's face on a puppet-like oldman body. It looked like a puppet. I bet it was...

For me, it wasn't what the film was saying as much as the way they said it. The story with the clock going backwards was so perfect that I just knew it was Fitzgerald's (which it wasn't). Setting the story in New Orleans, with the backdrop of Hurrican Katrina, was perfect. The flooding from the storm enabled the story to end up wrapped in a neat package. Man, it was just perfect.

I think Benjamin Button was better than Slumdog Millionaire. But, I see that it is typical. However, Slumdog Millionaire's happy ending was more typical than Benjamin Button.

Maybe I am still just grumpy that Gran Torino wasn't gd nominated.

P.S. Brad Pitt is retardedly attractive. Really, he is so good looking it is stupid. Jesus god up in heaven. I swear.
So what is the rating? (out of 10)
Ok, now as I have been writing this I realize what I think was perfect about this film. Maybe it wasn't the whole film itself, though I enjoyed it a lot. What was perfect about this film was that it so accurately encapsulated F. Scott Fitzgerald--who I think is one of the most beautiful writers of the 20th century.

But, as I have shown on this little movie blog, I don't give 10s to just extraordinary movies. I give 10s to movies that are 10s to me.

So, 10.

Pu-239

2009-01-30T17:26:00.002-05:00

So what is this one about?
This is another film that Netflix recommended to me. One thing you might not know is that my recommended film categories on the 'flix are (in order) TV Sitcoms, Films from Russia, HBO, Films from France, and Films from the United Kingdom. (This shouldn't be surprising if you've been reading what I've been reviewing)...so, this movie combines Russian and HBO (sort of). Netflix describes it as

While staving off a power plant disaster, Russian worker Timofey (Paddy Considine) is exposed to radiation and blamed for the accident. With days to live, he steals some plutonium and tries to sell it on Moscow's black market in an effort to provide for his family. Along the way, he gets help from a low-level thug, with whom he forges an unlikely connection. Radha Mitchell co-stars in this gripping HBO adaptation of Ken Kalfus's short story.

Neato, an HBO adaptation of a short story?? Count me in!

And how much did I pay to watch?
All I will say about this one, is that this was shipped to me on the 18th of November. NOVEMBER!! Lord, it takes me a long time to watch movies!

And what did I think?
Well, as I was watching the movie I was thinking, "Man, the Russian who wrote this book is awesome." Joke is on me though because the guy who wrote this is totally from New York. Thus, I am very impressed with his ability to capture the essence of Russian-ness (or something). So, all in all I liked the feeling of the movie.

However, the narration was tough to follow (this is a good example of taking narration from a book that was beautiful and not being able to adapt it successfully to a film) though that might have been due to the lead actor's bizarre Russian accent. One thing I hate about films that are supposed to take place in non-english speaking countries is that they aren't always consistent in their use of English language or accents. For example, in Enemy at the Gates all the Russians are played by Brits with British accents and all the Germans are played by Americans with American accents. However, for some reason they thought it would be logical (why?) to have newspapers in cyrillic. Why? I mean, as an audience we are suspending disbelief that Russians and Germans are speaking English, so why do we need to bring Russian into the picture?? Well, in Pu-239 all the actors spoke in English with Russian accents. But, the accents were somewhat unintelligible. Why was this necessary?

I found the main character to be rather annoying, and the secondary characters to be more awesome. I wanted to know what was going to happen in their poor Russian lives, because it was clear that Timofey was going to die. Shoot, even the Netflix description says so!

So what is the rating? (out of 10)
I just thought that the director, or hbo, or the filmmakers, or the writer did such an excellent job of capturing the Russian essence.

However, I didn't find the film itself to be that captivating. SO, it gets a 7.