The Girl Who Owned a City

Call me obsessed with revisiting my childhood and I probably wouldn't call you wrong. I mean, I just saw Toy Story 3 for the second time yesterday, I just finished the final installment in the Confessions of Georgia Nicolson series that I first picked up in my early teens by the suggestion of a friend, and I just reread The Girl Who Owned a City for the first time in nearly ten years.

When I first read The Girl Who Owned a City, I was 11 years old and in sixth grade. We read it for class, although I don't remember the why. I loved the book but it terrified me as well. I mean, I was eleven and the book depicts the story of an adult-less world where the oldest people still alive are twelve. I would've been the older generation. Not to mention that as much as my parents sometimes frustrated me, I didn't want them to die. I remember, after finishing the book, going up to my mother, crying and hugging her and telling her that I didn't want a plague to kill her.

Well, luckily it hasn't and now being well over the age of twelve, if the plague came true, I'd be dead. I expected this to be a reassuring thought, but honestly, the book still struck me just as much as it did when I was eleven. I won't be crying and hugging my mother not to die, but... wow, what a depressing book.

There were two major thoughts that ran through my head after I finished it. Firstly, where was the sequel??? I mean, what a cliffhanger! Lisa is returned to power in her city of Glenbard, but only after provoking a far-away army who is off to join the King of Chicago and his army of roughly 5,000. Even Lisa acknowledges that the army of Chicago was bound to come after them sooner or later at the end of the book. I'm just left there wondering what the hell happens next in this post-apocalyptic world.

The second, of course, was how much I want this book to be a movie. It would be such a glorious failure. The problem, of course, is that it is such a dark book, really. Dead bodies are never explicitly stated to be anywhere, but their presence is implied. Not to mention small children learning how to fire weapons and make molotov cocktails. Tom Logan gets oil burned down his face, Lisa gets shot, and Jill has to remove the freakin' bullet. The Girl Who Owned a City is an R-rated movie, but all of its characters are children. The thing is, not a one of them is innocent.

Which is simply twisted and hard to forgive. I love the story and, though it isn't the best-written thing in the universe, I think it is fascinating and I want to read it again and again. Not everyone, however, can appreciate children being violent and doing adult things. Just take a peek at the uproar over Hit-Girl in Kick-Ass and multiply that times a thousand because The Girl Who Owned a City is full of hundreds of Hit-Girls, all trained to kill and torture. I mean, they literally mention torture in the book! Children torturing each other for information!

The Girl Who Owned a City reminds me of The Road, unsurprisingly. I mean, they're both these post-apocalyptic stories of the fight between "good" and "evil" but the lines are really blurred. The only thing that truly separates The Man and his son from the rest of the survivors is their refusal to turn into cannibals. Aside from that, they are equally violent when need be. All the children in The Girl Who Owned a City have to turn violent, whether it is for attack or defense. And though The Girl Who Owned a City gives a supposedly brighter future, the last page is so depressing that I can't help but wonder how long the city of Glenbard can last before the world turns into a world not unlike The Road where civilization is too far gone for anyone to even dream of rebuilding it the way Lisa does and instead all they can do is what the gangs do - steal and kill to survive. Both tales are incredibly depressing and though The Road is much more wonderfully written and definitely more depressing and incredibly inappropriate for children, The Girl Who Owned a City also tells a compelling take and is still quite depressing and is a bit inappropriate for children. Granted, I heartily appreciate having read it when I was young enough to fit myself into the story.

I don't normally dedicate this blog to books because, not going to lie, I do not do a lot of book-reading anymore. I was a much more avid reader when I was younger (although, to be fair, I did just read three books in less than twenty-four hours). But, my goodness, do not make the mistake of thinking that I don't love them. The Girl Who Owned a City does not need to be a movie, of course. My only inclination to bring it in that direction is to make up for some of the weak writing in the book. And I love the book so much, I would just want to work on a project with it, whether it be a sequel or a movie, because I simply want to continue to live within that sad, awesome world.

Again, that brings me back to my earlier point, about how a movie version would be a total failure. I cannot see an audience who would want to watch children suffer and toil in a world with no help and little hope. They would call it insensitive and cruel and depressing. But this is one of those moments when I really feel like a filmmaker, like an artist rather than an entertainer. I don't care about the audience, to be frank. I'd want to make this movie because it is a beautiful story, whatever you say, and it deserves to be told over and over again.

Lisa, for all her bossiness, never would have made me think of myself when I was younger. I was whiny and did not want to live in her world - most of the time. Maybe it was after reading the book, maybe it was before, but I tried to imagine a harder world where I would have to fight to survive. What if my parents died? What if we had a fire and lost everything in our house? What if I lost my voice or my hearing or my sight? All these "what if"s and more plagued me and I would make secret loots in case of anything. A "just in case" bag filled with things if I needed to run away. Hotel shampoo bottles that had been cleaned out and filled with water hidden around the house "just in case." And Lisa's attitude, her beautiful, brilliant attitude, that if she can toughen up then everyone can toughen up, reminds me so painfully of myself that it hurts. It is not an uncommon flaw, but it is a harsh one, to forget that it is hard work to grow and some people just have not gone through it. It is also not uncommon and just as harsh to forget that no matter how much we've grown, there is so much more growing to do. Both of Lisa's major flaws are ones I see in myself which, though I am nearly twice her age, make me feel like a child again.

Sure, I may be revisiting my childhood, but what is so wrong there? There are so many beautiful lessons and important messages to be found and reminded of. Only just a few days ago was I listening to Harry Potter and the Philosopher's Stone on audiobook, listening to the chapter, "The Mirror of Erised" and Dumbledore's conversation with Harry toward the end of the book when I remembered why I fell in love with Harry Potter all those years ago. It was for the wonderful things J.K. Rowling had to share about life and death and friendship and courage and fear and so on and so forth. I am so excited for my Introduction to Children and Young Adult Literature class this coming fall where I will get to read literature supposedly for children and young adults, but really for all of us.

After all, many animated movies aren't just for children either, even if they can be - thank you Pixar and DreamWorks.

Ego: Anton Ego and yours.

When I think about which Pixar movie is my favourite - and believe me, as a clear lover of everything Pixar, I think about this often enough - Ratatouille usually isn't at the top of my list (though it is never at the bottom). But that isn't because I don't love it - I truly do. Ratatouille was a grand experience - my first real foray into appreciating animated "kids" movies as, well, not an adult, but a seventeen-year-old, who might normally think they're too good for an animated movie and fully capable of seeing every movie at that age (three years later, I still get thrown off when I get carded 'cause I'm just so used to seeing everything regardless of rating, something my thirteen-year-old self would be jealous of). I'd seen most of the other Pixar movies, I'd lived through the Disney renaissance, but not like this.

The main thing I take away from Ratatouille is not the beautiful main message of the film, the one whose slogan rings throughout - "anyone can cook" - and translates into a tale of rising above one's circumstances based on talent and drive. The most beautiful and meaningful message any film has given me is also the most grounding of them - Anton Ego's stunning review of his meal at Remy's hands.

"In many ways, the work of a critic is easy. We risk very little yet enjoy a position over those who offer up their work and their selves to our judgment. We thrive on negative criticism, which is fun to write and to read. But the bitter truth we critics must face, is that in the grand scheme of things, the average piece of junk is probably more meaningful than our criticism designating it so. But there are times when a critic truly risks something, and that is in the discovery and defense of the new. The world is often unkind to new talent, new creations, the new needs friends. Last night, I experienced something new, an extraordinary meal from a singularly unexpected source. To say that both the meal and its maker have challenged my preconceptions about fine cooking is a gross understatement. They have rocked me to my core. In the past, I have made no secret of my disdain for Chef Gusteau's famous motto: Anyone can cook. But I realize, only now do I truly understand what he meant. Not everyone can become a great artist, but a great artist can come from anywhere. It is difficult to imagine more humble origins than those of the genius now cooking at Gusteau's, who is, in this critic's opinion, nothing less than the finest chef in France. I will be returning to Gusteau's soon, hungry for more."

One reason I admire film critics and all people who love film is how they love finding something new to share with everyone else. It's such a pleasure to ask a friend, "have you seen ___?" and to hear them reply in the negative. Then, you are granted the opportunity to open their eyes to that world.

But it is that same admirable quality that I also can't stand in film critics, people who love films, and oftentimes even in myself. Because, as much as I love film myself, most people do not care nearly as much as people like me and people who dedicate themselves to a life of loving, understanding, and analyzing film.

We all have different opinions. Like everyone else, I fall prey to being upset when someone disagrees with something I feel so strongly about - people who refuse to see Star Wars or people who avoid animated movies because they're "for kids" or people who are too stuck up to appreciate the badassery of Death Race or people who are too bored with film to listen to my recommendations. But all of those people exist and I'd be a fool to hate all of them for those reasons. I love film, but people who only like it or don't like it at all are not any worse or better than me by that mere characteristic.

Ego's speech from Ratatouille, particularly the first few sentences, often give me the swift kick in the rear I think everyone involved in film (other fields too, I'm sure, but the entertainment and art fields in particular fall prey to this most, I feel) really needs. We all need a reminder that our opinions, what we say and what we write and all the time and energy we dedicate to our field isn't the be all and end all. So many people simply do not care about what we have to say or what we do. Saying that one movie sucks or one movie is awesome doesn't really matter at all, because we're all going to make up our own minds, and so many people won't even bother to do as much as they simply don't care enough to see the movie. You might praise some obscure title non-stop, but that won't it an instant classic. You might get a few more viewers, but there's no guarantee, no matter how influential your position is. Even Oprah doesn't reach everyone.

Our dedication and love for our craft matters to us, but not to everyone, so we shouldn't get frustrated or try to change the world to fit our style. I would never discourage anyone from doing what they love - considering my life as a film student, this is not news - but I would recommend not obsessing over it to the point where you simply cannot accept a contrary point of view.

Now, where does this all come from? Of course, it comes from a combination of Ego's speech always being with me and from the few negative reviews Toy Story 3, which I previously reported brought me to crazy-ass tears. There are two ways I can spin this little speech of my own. Firstly, I can say that it is totally the opinion of the reviewers to say what they will. As much as I may be prejudiced against and frustrated by the reviews, they're just opinions and they don't change how the movie made me feel.

The other thing to take away, though, is where the reviews are coming from. I won't dare to presume that these couple reviews come from anyplace unnatural or forced, but I know there are critics in the world who do enjoy being mean or contrary for the sake of their own enjoyment and to be different in some way or another. Or they choose to only look at a movie or other work of entertainment/art from a certain perspective so as to find the negative angles. To those critics, I say shame on you. Let your opinions come from your heart as well as your head. We can praise the technical achievements or complain about ordinary dialogue, but what really matters is what the film does for you, personally, and that's all we can take away. Each review is individual to the person who writes it and we might agree or we might not. We all appreciate different works for different reasons, and that's fine by me. I mean, my love for Toy Story 3 comes from somewhere deep in my heart, though I'd also defend most other aspects of the film. Other films, though intelligent and well-made and good in so many respects, may still leave me wanting more or totally emotionless.

I want to be involved in a movie I watch, not detached and watching it for the sake of observing it. As a film student, I do plenty of observing and, though it's useful, it's also work. Some films take work and it pays off, but others don't give me anything. And I like films that can absorb me and fill me up - there are good films that give and good films that take.

Anyway, I'm rambling. My point, simply enough, is that first and foremost, no man is an island and no one should ever assume that what they love would capture anyone else in the same way. As a film major with so few film major friends, I am reminded again and again that my friends really don't want to talk about movies 24/7, although I most certainly could. We lovers of cinema shouldn't be so full of ourselves... and believe me, plenty of us are that full of ourselves.

Second and final point: Within that larger scope of life on Earth in general, there is the smaller scope of the film world. Within it, none of us are the same. There are those who make film for entertainment and those who make it for art. There is plenty of success and plenty of failure in both categories. Let's not be snooty or untrue to our own tastes. I won't pretend I like something because other people do, but I also won't trash on something other people like just to be different. I wish more people lived by that.

Toy Story 3

This is a comment I posted on awardsdaily.com on this newspost.

"I need to see this again. I was too emotionally crazed to really be able to tolerate anyone saying it was less than perfection. But I was in tears from the beginning, when we saw how many toys had disappeared over the years (not unlike my own storage units in the family garage, which are missing most of my old childhood toys), and barely held it together in the end when Andy played with his toys one last time with Bonnie. I was afraid I was going to audibly sob I couldn't stop crying.

Toy Story 3 may not be the best storytelling of some of the other films, but it is also clearly an installment in a franchise, which makes it different from most of the films. It is, indeed, its most emotional though. I have never been more touched by a movie in my life, but that's something my generation, who were kids when Toy Story first came out, and Toy Story 2, and now are coming back for thirds having been in Andy's exact place, is bound to experience. But I think it's something all adults can relate to and all kids will dread relating to (if I were young enough to still have toys in my room, you know I'd have gone home to instantly play with them for hours). Watching Woody, Buzz, and the gang go through all their trials is like watching what happens to your childhood, hoping that it doesn't get destroyed, but knowing it will never be the same as it was before, which is just as heart-breaking.

I don't know if I'll ever be able to rationally discuss Toy Story 3 because it just touched a place in me I'd forgotten I had. The first two feel so quaint and sweet these days, but this movie just feels too real, almost too personal, though I was never as cool a kid as Andy was, and I didn't love my toys quite the same way he did. But I think that just proves all the more what a fantastic movie it is, that it strikes a cord so strong that everything else beyond the tears and laughter is creates, doesn't really matter. It reminds me of Ego's review in Ratatouille, like all brilliant things do, and how technicalities and hard-hearts and reality aside, beauty is beauty and there are some things that are simply beyond proper criticism."

It'll be a long time before I can sum up my feelings on Toy Story 3 (I only left the theater about two hours ago), but I think the first reaction matters almost as much as the last. And, boy oh boy, have I got a first reaction. I know it's still soon after, but this was just one of those movie-going experiences where I feel like I'm a different person on the other side and I have no idea how I've changed, but I just feel it, but it could also be the emotional overload from the past few hours... it's too confusing.

But I do know that I dug my stuffed animals out of a trash bag in my brother's room, gave them a talking to about how much I love them, and set several of them around my room, including my poor, mistreated American Girl dolls.

Not quite seasons of love.

With two days left until the Oscars, I haven't entirely slowed my blog reading. Of course, sometimes I am infuriated with the level of snobbery I encounter (and people call me a movie snob), but then I acknowledge that I'm just an undergraduate film student and my opinion matters pretty much not at all.

Doesn't mean I don't have one though.

So I wanted to offer my wishful thinking winners for the Oscars. I haven't seen all of the films and I am not commented on foreign, documentary, or the shorts. But here goes anyway...

Best Picture: The Hurt Locker
Best Actor: Colin Firth
Best Actress: Meryl Streep OR Gabourney Sidibe
Best Supporting Actor: Christoph Waltz
Best Supporting Actress: Mo'Nique
Best Director: Kathryn Bigelow
Best Original Screenplay: A Serious Man
Best Adapted Screenplay: District 9
Best Editing: District 9
Best Cinematography: The Hurt Locker
Best Art Direction: The Imaginarium of Doctor Parnassus
Best Sound Mixing: The Hurt Locker
Best Sound Editing: Star Trek
Best Costume Design: Bright Star
Best Original Score: Up
Best Animated Feature: Up
Best Visual Effects: Avatar OR Star Trek
Best Makeup: Star Trek
Best Song: "The Weary Kind"


This is, of course, ignoring those nominees I wish were there at all. If they were nominated, I would change...

Best Actor: Sharlto Copley
Best Cinematography: Bright Star
Best Makeup: District 9
Best Original Score: A Single Man

But for the most part, I'm not DISPLEASED with the nominees. Not much of it particularly thrills me as this wasn't a year where I was particularly passionate about too many of the movies. There were several films I really, really liked, many I really liked, lots I liked, and several that had some awesome elements. But, unlike last year, there was no Dark Knight or WALL-E that made me fall in love with it (over and over and over again; I've seen both films probably a dozen times and they've been out for barely more than a year and a half). I'd go with Up as my favorite movie of the year, but it's still not on par with most other movies I've ever loved. The Hurt Locker is magnificent, in my opinion, but I don't love it quite like I've loved other movies. If anything, this year, I found several elements of movies that I loved (i.e. A Serious Man's script and leading man, Sharlto Copley's performance in District 9, the escapist feeling of Avatar, the artistry of The Hurt Locker, the haunting beauty both in Colin Firth's performance and in the score of A Single Man, the fantastic crafts of Bright Star, and so on and so forth). But none of those made for movies I can say I love as much as many other films. I've seen Up about five times now, but I don't know that I want to see The Hurt Locker for a third time now, or Avatar, or Inglourious Basterds.

Essentially, what I'm saying is that, I loved Avatar, Star Trek, and District 9, but I've loved other sci-fi more. I loved Up, but I've loved other Pixar more. I loved The Hurt Locker, but I've loved other war films more. I liked Inglourious Basterds, but I've liked other Tarantino more.

If I had to argue that any of the films this year were among the best of a category in my mind, I'd go with Bright Star. Period romances are pretty to watch and fun, but Bright Star was also beautifully made, well-written, and all around stunning. If any period romance were to rival it in my mind, I might go with Sense and Sensibility, but really, I'd love to see Bright Star again.

But even then, I've loved other movies more.

I look forward to the Oscars nonetheless. I always do.

Top 16(!?) of 2009... well, in my opinion...

16 is a weird number.

This list is really more for myself than for anyone else because, well, to be frank, I doubt anyone but me reads this blog. But I have compiled the list of my favourite 16 movies from this year. It was a nice 15, but then I saw The Hurt Locker today and changed it... but anyway, this list is seriously lacking because, obviously, I haven't seen every movie released this past year. I have, at the end of this post, a list of movies I haven't seen but want to just to make clear that, yes, the reason this movie or that movie might not be included is because I just haven't seen it. But, without further ado, here is my ridiculously long list, because I just HAD to write this and that about each of the movies. The comprehensible full list, in proper order, can be found at the end.

---

#16 Duplicity
I love a good caper and this one was legitimately very enjoyable. It had fun twists and turns, it had Clive Owen charming and sly and wonderful again (no wonder I wanted him for Bond during the Brosnan/Craig transition), Julia Roberts was similarly enjoyable, and simply overall it was a fun, time-twisting, delightful heist movie. Not the most memorable film of the year, but right up my alley.

#15 I Love You, Man
An unfortunately forgotten and incredibly enjoyable comedy from early on in the year, this is one of the funniest films I’ve seen this year (and yes, I saw The Hangover. Twice, actually; no Zombieland yet though). It didn’t set me off quite like Role Models did last year, but it was clever and fun and featured one of my favourite things: a well-done bromance.

#14 An Education
I’m not sure if I’m pleased with the direction the movie took, although that’s due to its source material I am sure, but I do know that the movie itself felt like a great journey that Carey Mulligan’s Jenny brought us along for. Seeing the new world, albeit a bit skeptically, as the fun and delightful and shady place she entered, growing up, getting her brand of education, learning and eventually, at the end, returning to where she belonged, but with a better sense of her life. Carey Mulligan is stunning, as is the supporting cast, from Alfred Molina as her gullible father to Rosamund Pike as her ditzy new-life friend to Olivia Williams as Jenny’s intelligent, guiding teacher who makes it all better.

#13 Adventureland
I saw this movie as part of a weekend home to celebrate my nineteenth birthday back in April, and it was such an honest film that I fell into it with ease. It wasn’t really trying for gimmicks and it wasn’t regurgitating anything I could recognize other than the nostalgia of something quite like an amusement park and the reality that they’re all pains in the ass (I went to two this past week while I was in southern California and I can’t see a single thing enjoyable about working there). But then, in the stupidest parts of life are some of the most fun and memorable bits, and a strange and great romance within. Adventureland has a great big heart and is so easy to access and enjoy. I still don’t understand why I was the only one so in love with it as we left the theatre.

#12 (500) Days of Summer
Many movies try to do things out of order to build suspension or to hint at future events or whatever, but most of the time I find these attempts to be useless and dull or sometimes too much (I’m looking at you, The Blind Side, for your weird flashforward to a confusing and utterly useless scene that does not build anything at all for your viewers). But with (500) Days of Summer, the out of order setting might not be necessary, but it doesn’t hurt the ride in the least, making it interesting rather than confusing, tantalizing rather than frustrating. The dance through time and between Joseph Gordon-Levitt’s Tom and Zooey Deschanel’s Summer is well-done and incredibly enjoyable and, well, the movie features one of the most satisfying endings of a film that is not necessarily happy I’ve seen recently. But in the interim between the beginning of summer and the beginning of autumn, the ride is fun and real and understandable. I give the movie a bit of shit for its similarities to How I Met Your Mother, but it’s not as if the television show’s premise isn’t any good. (500) Days of Summer was essentially a well-told story wrapped in a package wrapped with delightful scenes and a very cool dance routine.

#11 The Brothers Bloom
I said before that I like a good caper, and The Brothers Bloom is at the very minimum a clever caper of a film. Featuring a broody Adrien Brody and a charming Mark Ruffalo, not to mention an enjoyable eccentric Rachel Weisz and a scene-stealing, albeit silent, turn by Rinko Kikuchi, The Brothers Bloom is simply a brilliant sophomore work by Rian Johnson, who directed one of my favourite films of all time, Brick. But while his newest work focuses on something different, the stylistic flair of a confident director remains, allowing The Brothers Bloom to be something aside from your generic Ocean’s movies, featuring the typical leads (although, don’t get me wrong, I quite enjoy the Ocean’s franchise). Its plot is fun and twisty and quite fitting as it is, but it is mostly its flair that really gets me going, much like Rachel Weisz’s Penelope with that weird drunken montage with the train and the moans. Like Brick, The Brothers Bloom oozes with style and an air that the characters are not your everyday kind of people, but clearly something beyond the norm, people who will do these fantastic crazy things provided for them. I can’t wait for Rian Johnson’s third film.

#10 Bright Star
I have a mixed record with period romance types of films. I can be a sucker for them without really liking them, but there are some genuinely great ones, such as Sense and Sensibility, and, in this case, Bright Star. Featuring a romance that is sweet, real, and yet very untouchable, Bright Star isn’t obsessed either with chastity or bodice-ripping, something period romances tend to fall into traps with, but rather providing us with an intimate and sweet story. Jane Campion’s directing of Bright Star is among some of the most underappreciated of the year to me, and Bright Star also features stunning cinematography as well as art direction, costuming, and etc. It is one of the most visually beautiful films I saw this past year, watching with my eyes round as saucers as Fanny sat on her bed and the curtain blew in at her, sunlight streaking through, giving the movie an other-worldly feel, but not removing any connection I could feel. The acting was brilliant and it’s sad to have seen Abbie Cornish’s praise diminished nearly as soon as it had begun, but the work by Ben Whishaw and Paul Schneider especially was also very good, very moving, but nothing that felt forced or wrong. I expected to be a bit bored by the movie, not really involved, as when I went in, all I had heard was that Abbie Cornish was great in it. But I was surprisingly pleased when the whole movie fell so well with me. One of my favourite romances of the year, Bright Star is much more than that, showcasing a beautiful relationship much more than simply the romantic parts of it.


#9 Up in the Air
Up in the Air was a great ride to me, but, like An Education, some of the twists and turns I didn’t want to go down, particularly concerning the resolution of Ryan and Alex’s relationship. But all three leading actors were magnificent, getting the chance to see Clooney as more than just the self-assured man he was, but also as someone genuinely lost, Farmiga taking a character I normally wouldn’t be able to like but managing to, and Anna Kendrick pleasing me beyond all measure as, if not for Mo’Nique in Precious, the best supporting actress I’d seen all year. The story’s background, which Jason Reitman brought to great attention, was best described by some short silent moments, like Natalie in the empty room full of chairs, she and Ryan arriving in a cleared out building with a few terrified employees left for them to dispose of in Detroit, and, of course, the memorable scene of Natalie firing a man by video who is only in the next room. The movie is torn between the characters and the overarching theme, which don’t necessarily match up so easily, but finds a good balance and managed to strike a strong emotional chord with me.

#8 A Serious Man
I had some weird unknown beef with this film about the lack of ending that is so like the Coen brothers and so unpleasant for me about a movie supposedly based roughly off of The Book of Job which I had read earlier in the year for a class entitled Narratives of Suffering, which was a wonderful class that made me strongly appreciate different facets of storytelling that I hadn’t grasped previously. And if A Serious Man was not supposed to be based off of The Book of Job, I wouldn’t have any complaints… but The Book of Job is extremely important for its bizarrely happy ending, in which Job goes back to life with tenfold what he had before, not potentially dying or with his children facing an ominous and symbolic tornado. Ending aside, the movie itself is a great work by the Coen brothers, featuring a great turn by Michael Stuhlbarg and a good supporting cast (Stuhlbarg is on my ideal Oscar ballot for Best Actor and that ballot was one of the hardest for me), and the rest of the story struck me so strongly, as I spent the whole semester looking through fifteen different texts, trying to find the meaning of suffering, just as Larry does in A Serious Man, so I could sympathize with his journey, and I understood when he was forced to simply go back to life and ignore the questions (so like Job, until the extra couple minutes at the very end). I think my frustration simply comes from a place of great investment in the film, where Larry too feels such frustration and can understand it as easily as I do.

#7 Inglourious Basterds
I’ve been a fan of Quentin Tarantino’s work for, well, not a long time since I only really began dedicating myself so heavily to movies a couple of years ago, but about since that began. I’ve missed a few of his features (Jackie Brown and Grindhouse/Death Proof), but both Kill Bill movies and certainly Pulp Fiction would end up being some of my personal favourite movies. Inglourious Basterds has been lauded by many as perhaps his best film and, while I’m not sure I agree, I certainly do believe that it is a fantastic film unto itself. There was nothing more satisfying in cinema this past year than seeing history turned on its head with such appropriate irreverence. There was no performance as electrifying as Christoph Waltz’s all year. Not to mention the cast at large being great and Tarantino’s script being a fun masterpiece all on its own. The very cool film references to the time, which were fun (I had two classes last year where we talked at least a little bit about Goebbels, one of which was my documentary class with, of course, a section on propaganda, most famously on Triumph of the Will and other such projects of the WWII era). Regardless of my attachment to the littler parts of the film, there is such unpredictability when it comes to Tarantino’s works. Many films, you see a formula at work and you know what’s coming, who will survive, who will die, but when it comes to Tarantino, I’m not sure if he’s going to kill nobody, everybody, or some number in-between. There’s a whole different kind of suspense at work in Inglourious Basterds than can be found in other, more grim features such as The Hurt Locker, but this suspense isn’t nail-biting, it’s fun.

#6 Avatar
I know that there are a lot of people out there who are vehemently against Avatar, or who want to see it fail because of its populist image, or who simply just didn’t like it all too much or find it too reliant on the CGI and not enough on being original. And, as I tell most Avatar-haters, far too few “original” films have ever been made. But that is hardly a problem to me. Because one of the best things about Avatar is the familiar epic touch it has, unafraid to attempt a new language, a new species, a new world, all in the name of creating something truly escapist and enjoyable. Normally, I scoff a little when people say that they go to the movies to escape (which is a normal reaction, but movies are much more than that to me), but Avatar really was an escape, 160 minutes on Pandora, somewhere I want to return to and explore more and more of. Yes, the CGI is brilliant and there have been better scripts this year, but I hardly think that the script suffers because of too much emphasis on the CGI, or that the script suffers at all. There was no cheesy dialogue that made me cringe, nothing that made me roll my eyes or groan in disbelief. Everything was fitting and right and, well, it is certainly quotable (I have said “You’re not the only one with a gun, bitch” several times since I first saw it, actually, as, although hardly poetic, it is a great line). I see no reason to nitpick at Avatar, to complain about its similarities to other (mostly great) films, to make jokes about the Na’vi being smurfs or cat people, because it’s stupid to reduce such an epic to something so base (something I was responsible for doing to the Harry Potter book series before giving it a chance, reading it, and unabashedly loving it). Avatar is not the best film made this year, but it is one of the most enjoyable, stunning, and engrossing. It stole me away in a manner few other films managed to this year, and I cannot ignore the longing I feel within me to keep going back, to want more of Pandora, more of this new world. As cheesy as this sounds, far more cheesy than anything from Avatar, my heart is what assures me that I loved that movie. And, honestly, if your heart isn’t in a movie, if you can’t feel it tugging at you, then there’s no legitimate connection.


#5 Star Trek
Raised on Star Wars as opposed to Star Trek, I’d never had an interest in the franchise, and since I saw the new Star Trek movie, I tried my hand a bit at some of the older fare, two of the movies (Voyage Home and Wrath of Khan) and a few minutes of one of the original series episodes and I realized that no, the reason I like the new Star Trek movie has nothing to do with the source material and everything to do with it being, on its own, a fantastic ride. Star Trek features a fantastic cast, which is one reason it originally caught my attention. Led by the before-unknown (although I’d had a celebrity crush on him since The Princess Diaries 2) Chris Pine as the fantastically cocky and amazing Captain Kirk, and Sylar’s Zachary Quinto proving that his brilliance as Sylar (even as Heroes fell further and further into suckage) was only the tip of the acting iceberg. The supporting cast was also built up with two-time sci-fi stars this year Anton Yelchin (one of my favourite parts of Terminator Salvation) and Zoe Saldana (in that little film a lot of other people saw called Avatar), Eomer’s Karl Urban, Brit Simon Pegg, Harold and Kumar’s John Cho, and Eric Bana in a limited, but strong, villainous role. All of the supporting cast, although faced with generally limited screen time, made the most of their appearances on camera. Star Trek also featured probably my second favourite opening sequence of this year (the first being Up’s story of Carl and Ellie): the brilliant space battle where George Kirk died and James Kirk was born. Upon second viewing, this opening nearly brought me to tears it was so grand. I’d really like to give some credit to Star Trek’s great score here too. Beyond the opening, Star Trek didn’t waste any time. It told a good story, strong, but nothing spectacular, and introduced familiar characters (well, to other people) in a way that someone a Star Trek newbie like me could understand and appreciate them without thinking that too much is being thrown in at once. I’m a sucker for quality space operas, and Star Trek is, at the heart, exactly that. The film is stunning in every manner and has a humour without selling itself short, without resulting in the camp I later saw in the original version. Star Trek is one of the most delightfully and simply enjoyable movies I saw this year, not the smartest but smart, not the best but excellent, and not the wildest but incredibly entertaining.

#4 The Damned United
The Damned United is probably the best sports movie I have ever seen, and my prior knowledge of British football is that my friends all tend to be Manchester United fans and that Chelsea supposedly sucks and we Americans have David Beckham now. I went into the movie, fearing that I might be confused or lost, but that was hardly true. The Damned United was extremely accessible and highly gratifying. Not to mention that it contained one of my favourite bromances of all time, led by two talented actors, Michael Sheen and Timothy Spall. I hate that Michael Sheen will once again not be recognized for his masterful work here, and that Timothy Spall has been equally ignored, but I feel extremely privileged to have gotten the chance to watch the film and fall in love with it. It felt so good, watching Brian Clough and Peter Taylor kick ass and move up the ranks in the sport they clearly have a talent for working at. Not a moment is wasted and there is nothing in the film that bothered me in the least. Michael Sheen played Clough with impeccable talent, making a man that we root passionately for and yet don’t groan too loudly in frustration when he makes a stupid mistake, and then cheer for as he grows up and learns his place and begs for his dearest and best friend back on his knees (an amazing, amazing moment). It is such a flawless portrait of a man and his ambition and arrogance, but also his care and love and understandable determination. Not to mention that the sports part is very entertaining, something that doesn’t always catch my eye in a film (or in sports in general, as they tend to bore me).

#3 District 9
It’s been a little while since I went to Johannesburg with Sharlto Copley and the aliens derogatorily called the “prawns,” but I remember how satisfied and pleased I was with the movie. One of my biggest upsets with the awards season thus far is, not only the lackluster love for the movie, but also the total neglect for its heart and soul, no matter how blackened that heart seems at time, Sharlto Copley as perhaps my favourite lead performance of the year: Wikus. Wikus is ordinary and boring and he doesn’t transform into the hero in the end, doesn’t undergo some miraculous personality shift and change his allegiance because of deep love the way Jake Sully does in Avatar. Rather, Wikus distrusts his new allies to the end, wants more than anything to be human again, although he clearly has come to understand the hardships of the imprisoned aliens in the process. The effects and technology of the movie boast of a gigantic budget the film never had and never needed, giving us proof that while some movies like Avatar can prove that their big budget was worth it, you don’t need such a budget to make a sci-fi epic. With its excellent story straight out of reality, showcasing any instance of segregation (most notably Apartheid, of course), District 9 moves to become more than a sob story of a repressed race and doesn’t come around to have the natives win at life, but gives us a real portrayal of a struggle and the slow resolution that comes with real stories. There’s nothing I dislike about District 9, and it makes me confident in the ability of unknown filmmakers to provide us with a stunning vision where the movie doesn’t need stars, big names, or lots of money to get the story out… and make a great deal of money while at it. Paranormal Activity might be the low budget film story of the year, and I haven’t seen it, but District 9 is all the more impressive for the scale it dishes out, the epic quality of it, without trying too hard or selling out.

#2 The Hurt Locker
The most recent of the films I have watched, it reminded me of something a few of my friends complained about when watching The Dark Knight, about how the movie felt like it was always at a climax, building and building and building. That was one of my favourite things about The Dark Knight and the constant intensity and anything-can-happen spirit of The Hurt Locker made it instantly shoot to the near-top of my list of my favourite movies of the past year. I skimmed the Wikipedia article just now and was pleased and impressed to see how influenced the film was by Kathryn Bigelow’s excellent vision, even when talking about something that to passer-by fans is totally useless, like the type of stock used, Bigelow amazes me; I’ve used 16mm film and it doesn’t look anything near the artistic mastery shown in her piece (granted, she used Super 16, but regardless, they’re ultimately quite similar in my humble, barely educated opinion). The cast itself is stunning and it was a nice surprise to see beyond the amazing three leads some familiar faces; I kept arguing with myself “That’s Ralph Fiennes! Is that possible? Could it be?” and he’s barely in the movie, but even characters like his that only appear for short bursts are excellently portrayed. You can see writer Mike Boal’s experiences and trust in them to show such a stunning and engrossing adaptation of the real events of the War in Iraq (though, technically, as my documentary film professor reminded me, war was never officially proclaimed, but let’s not get into technicalities like this just now). The focus on the bomb squad, specifically on that 38 day rotation we saw them through, made the movie so much better than it could have been if it had tried to be any of the other sappy, dramatic epics trying to capture the whole thing. I’ll be sad to see the supporting cast, Anthony Mackie and Brian Geraghty, not get the attention they deserve, but awards season is always tough. I do hope that The Hurt Locker pulls out to be the winner. I know some audiences don’t like it when the little unknown wins (well, that is, if it didn’t make as much money as Slumdog Millionaire, Little Miss Sunshine, or Juno, which I’d reckon a guess The Hurt Locker hasn’t), but The Hurt Locker is definitely the more masterfully made movie over its main competitor, Avatar (although it is also on my list of favourite movies this past year). All in all, I will stop weighing its awards chances and leave it at this: I am so glad I got the chance to rush into danger along with The Hurt Locker, feeling the experience very strongly, and although not wanting to go back to Iraq like one would want to go back to Pandora, understanding the other-worldliness and relishing it nonetheless.

#1 Up
There were a lot of good films this year that I saw and that I didn’t see, but Pixar has a habit of stealing my heart, ever since I first saw Toy Story when I was only just learning to spell. I first saw Up at the drive-in with my friend, her boyfriend, and her mom, and so I put a lot of effort into not crying during the movie. Then, a couple weeks later, after being in a horrible mood all evening, I rushed out at night and went to see Up and cried several times, feeling wonderful the whole time. Up is a beautiful portrait of, excuse my sort-of lifting of The Lovely Bones’ tagline but, a beautiful marriage and everything that came after. As many have said before me and many will say after, the first ten-odd minutes of the movie are enough to prove the movie’s excellence, much like people said of WALL-E’s opening half an hour. But then, the movie goes on past Ellie’s death and proves to us, like Pixar is so skilled at doing, that although the introduction is a story onto itself, stories are vaster and more grand than even the span of seventy years in the life of Carl Fredricksen. And those seventy years, illustrated in mere minutes, seemingly insignificant to the rest of the film, were everything and represented more than any words could ever say. When I first showed my mother the film recently after acquiring it on DVD, she saw Carl, older, alone, walk past the empty “Paradise Falls” coin collector and sighed, “It’s so easy to forget your dreams.” But I glanced over at her and told her to keep watching the movie, because as the movie teaches us, Carl’s life wasn’t one into which he settled and was deprived of the adventure he wanted when he was young, nor was Ellie’s – they both lived full and wonderful lives of strong love between them, many years of affection and care that are impossible to count out. The rest of the movie, beyond Carl and Ellie’s story, is a wonderful example of the adventure that Carl had wanted, but never needed, but it did allow him to appreciate, as Russel mentions, “the little things,” like eating ice cream on a curb, playing pointless, silly games, and so on. Dug too, although I was initially wary of having talking dogs (especially talking dogs that fly fighter planes), plays a beautiful role in the education of Carl, especially when complemented by the separate, but equally heart-warming, short film “Dug’s Special Mission.” Up is visually beautiful, the score is extremely fitting and one of my favourites of the year, but its story is, unsurprisingly, its best element. I will never tire of the masterpieces Pixar manages to churn out.

---

FULL LIST:
#1 Up
#2 The Hurt Locker
#3 District 9
#4 The Damned United
#5 Star Trek
#6 Avatar
#7 Inglourious Basterds
#8 A Serious Man
#9 Up in the Air
#10 Bright Star
#11 The Brothers Bloom
#12 (500) Days of Summer
#13 Adventureland
#14 An Education
#15 I Love You, Man
#16 Duplicity

And as a special treat, I’m taking the People’s Choice Awards categories (because it’s funny) and naming my favourites:

Favourite Movie Actor: Sharlto Copley
Favourite Movie Actress: Meryl Streep
Favourite Action Star: Jeremy Renner*
Favourite Breakout Movie Actor: Sharlto Copley
Favourite Breakout Movie Actress: Anna Kendrick
Favourite On-Screen Team: Michael Sheen and Timothy Spall
Favourite Independent Movie: District 9 or The Hurt Locker
Favourite Comedy Movie: I Love You, Man
Favourite Movie: Up


*Because his character’s attitude to defusing bombs is totally that of an action star.

---

Disclaimer of movies I've missed:

I haven’t seen several movies I might enjoy as much if not more, or at least want to see, including, but perhaps not limited to: Nine, Zombieland, A Single Man, The Lovely Bones, Crazy Heart, The Road, Bad Lieutenant, Broken Embraces, The White Ribbon, The Beaches of Agnes, Good Hair, The Cove, Food Inc., Every Little Step, Anvil! The Story of Anvil, A Prophet, The Messenger, The Maid, Whip It, Capitalism: A Love Story, Ponyo, Cloudy with a Chance of Meatballs, In the Loop, and Moon.

Sequels, Threequels, Franchises, oh my!

Last night, as I was trying to sleep, a thought kept coming into my head. And that thought was no, not about Anton Yelchin or Alexander Skarsgard you fools, but about sequels and threequels.

Now, it has become a long-standing fear of fans of something quality that a mediocre or bad sequel will come of it. However, ever since 1972 and The Godfather, Part II, this fear has been ruled with some notable exceptions. However, there have been over the past several years, particularly in recent years with the heightened popularity of franchises, several examples of sequels that are considered to be nearly as good as, as good as, or better than the original film on which they are based. For example, there is the aforementioned Godfather, Part II; Empire Strikes Back; Terminator 2: Judgment Day; I-haven't-seen-it-but-have-been-led-to-believe-it-fits-here Aliens; Toy Story 2; Shrek 2; Spider-man 2; The Lord of the Rings: The Two Towers; The Dark Knight; X2. To name a few, that is.

Obviously, this is a totally non-scientific manner in which I am determining whatever the hell I am rambling on about.

Sequels have been proven to not simply be a marketing ploy for Disney to sell a bunch of Direct-to-VHS/DVD movies (although, in its defense, The Lion King 2 is actually quite enjoyable... moreso than most of its sequel counterparts via Disney). There are loads of bad sequels or sequels that incredibly disappoint.

But I remember seeing both Shrek the Third and Spider-man 3 and easily disliking the both of them. Shrek the Third had its moments and Spider-man 3 had James Franco being the only good thing about the entire movie, but overall, they were far cries from the first two movies. Even the unsteady X-Men franchise had a decent opening film, an improved second film, and then a blah third film. Other franchises start off with a strong first film and then settle into two mediocre sequels (Pirates of the Caribbean and The Matrix, for example).

Even Return of the Jedi and The Godfather, Part III, while both being good films in their own rights, are still mere shadows of the brilliance of their first two installments. The third Terminator movie was only mediocre. And while Lord of the Rings: Return of the King should disprove this theory that threequels nearly always never measure up, it's an unfair comparison, as all three Lord of the Rings films were made in a grouping, all principal photography done together during the same stretch of time, a nearly identical team of production and post-production for the three films, and the like. And the James Bond franchise also doesn't count in my book, like the Harry Potter franchise (although, it is my personal opinion that Harry Potter and the Prisoner of Azkaban is rather poor), because the two although in the same franchise, really seem to differ between the films. Which is one of my main beefs with the entire Harry Potter film franchise. Keeping the same cast does not unite films. Look at James Bond! You've got to settle on a unified, continuous plot, filming style, and set design. But, alas, this isn't the place for my Harry Potter film rants.

Besides that, however, when a franchise like James Bond has made as many films as it has, each "sequel" tends to differ based on its own natural merits and not on its relation to the past film(s). But, in this vein, yes, both From Russia with Love and Goldfinger are good "sequels."

While I have gotten over the understandable fear of sequels to good material, because there are so many excellent exceptions, many of which are some of my favourite films of all times, it is difficult for me to think of many threequels that have really stood up well. I suppose I could argue that Ocean's Thirteen was a good threequel, after the okay sequel of Ocean's Twelve, but it feels odd comparing Ocean's Eleven to The Godfather or Star Wars, even if it is a fun romp.

Mostly, I am hoping that Pixar might help eliminate my fear of threequels with Toy Story 3. Pixar hasn't disappointed yet, but the odds seem more against them than ever, in my opinion. Other people were pleasantly surprised by the quality of Ratatouille, WALL-E, and Up, but Pixar has been making odd concepts into great films ever since Toy Story. And they made a brilliant sequel to one of those films. But a threequel? Pixar has earned my trust, but threequels haven't. I've met very few threequels I've really liked. I suppose Return of the Jedi and Ocean's Thirteen might be saving graces, but it's hard to get over Sofia Coppola's poor acting in The Godfather, Part III, or everything but James Franco in Spider-man 3.

In conclusion, there really isn't much that can be got out of this roundabout ramble. My point is simply that the fear of sequels has been calmed a bit, despite the annoyance of clear box office bait that is a sequel to The Hangover, Sex and the City 2, Transformers: Revenge of the Fallen, and so on and so forth. There are some great cinematic experiences that are sequels. However, few threequels have ever risen to any form of glory. I'm hoping Pixar disproves that and then Christopher Nolan makes an assist by making that third Batman movie and making it awesome.

At least in the meantime we've got Inception.

Stealing From My Livejournal Part XXXII

As I use my livejournal for little else except for movie rants and decided to switch over here, I thought I'd recruit some older posts so as to show a history. I'll bother with new ones as they come to me.



From June 30, 2009:

"I saw Up again. I cried at least on three, maybe four, occasions. Although it's not my favourite Pixar films because, as good as it is, it's no WALL-E/Toy Story, it definitely got to me more than probably any of those other films ever has. I mean, I cry during most movies I see, or at least tear up, if I like them at all, but I don't usually cry more than once or twice. Kudos, Up!

Speaking of movies, let me count how many people want to go see Public Enemies with me. Hmm... seven off of the top of my head. This will be interesting to actually make happen. BUT I AM PSYCHED. I am way excited to see that movie.

I was thinking yesterday, as I fled the house and my dramatically upset pissiness, about why I love movies, and I realize that it's for the same reasons as everyone else, really. I went to go see Up to escape my life, to thoroughly enjoy a good-looking, well-written story, and that's really why I see all movies, even the prestigious ones, even the bad ones, even the BAMF ones - I see them because I love getting lost in movies.

It's also really sad to think about too because there is this deep love I have for movies that is just so different than love I have for anything, or anyone, else. And when I'm not experiencing that, it's hard for me. It's like I suffer from withdrawal (isn't this just a wee bit pathetic when you think about it?). I have to see movies, and I particularly enjoy seeing new, amazing movies.

I admit, I am deeply upset that there is nothing like The Dark Knight coming soon to theatres. I was so excited for that movie and it was just so unbelievably amazingly awesome on so many levels (it satisfied my childhood Batman-fanatic geek, my Heath Ledger-loving soul, my Morgan-Freeman-Is-The-Awesomest-Badass-Ever side, my action-adventure love, my Deep-Yet-Not-Pretentious-Storyline obsession, and my fangirl like obsession with awesome filmmaking - the soundtrack! the editing! the cinematography! the sets!) and there isn't a movie quite like that this summer. Granted, I am hyping for Public Enemies like there is no tomorrow, but I know it won't be the same.

Regardless, I love movies, if you all didn't already know.

I rented a bunch recently. I watched The Forbidden Kingdom the other day and I liked it a lot. I remember the previews for it and I thought it looked wicked cool but I never got to see it in theatres (I admit, I was pushing for it on senior skip day, but nobody really cared and Liz was all like "NARNIA! NARNIA!" ...at least Ben Barnes is hot...) and I got to see it now and it was very cool. I'm returning to my action-adventure love, I think, especially since I also watched Hero today. It started with the English dub and I was like "uh, no" and went to setup to change it back to Mandarin.

Hero was awesome. It felt so Rashomon in the story-telling style, but with the action flair of the best martial arts films ever. And I loved Tony Leung in that movie. Everyone was great, but he always stands out to me when I see him (i.e. 2046, Infernal Affairs) for whatever reason. The art direction was fabulous, and although the moral of the story, the stance it takes, has a really frightening political meaning, there's a part of me that agrees with the idea that sometimes we do have to make sacrifices to have peace. Of course, this depends on the peace, and we don't want something like the third ending of Jade Empire (aka: totalitarianism and militaristically forced peace) to hold true, but fighting gets tiresome and not all battles are worth fighting.

Anyway, enough of my rambling. I just thought I'd share my latest film feelings since, as I said, there is this inexplicable relationship between me and the movies, a bond that I feel so strongly, and that allows me to bore everyone with extensive movie-chatter.

But I hope y'all love me anyway.

Peace (the good sort)."