Vampiric Highlights

Okay I think I've decided that I do indeed like True Blood, a lot. And it's all thanks to Eric, ripping up a human asshole... with the foil from getting highlights in his hair still in. I find it absolutely wonderful that Eric was in the middle of getting his gorgey vampire blonde hair highlighted and was like "I think I'm going to go down to my creepy dungeon/basement place and see some human scum." I just hope he didn't ruin his highlights with all the blood, poor Lafayette watching from the shadows getting blood splattered on his face...

Other points/questions from the season two premiere which I watched last night: WTF IS Maryann? And isn't it at least a little creepy how she just had sex with some random seventeen-year-old robber? I also look greatly forward to Jessica's girl's night out with Sookie. And I could continue to ramble, but there's no real point. I just wanted to comment on how BADASS Eric is. I sortakinda love him just for those last couple minutes.

Also, currently watching Defiance. It's nice seeing Daniel Craig play NOT-Bond because he's an excellent actor but I do not like him as James Bond. Liev Schreiber's awesome. Aaand now I'm going to pay attention. Also, my blog is reacting really slowly to my typing so signing off. Gonna go watch some WW2 Jews kick ass.

Re: True Blood

Okay, maybe I just misheard my friend, because there was definitely just some graveyard sex, however, there was no digging up corpses for sex. Just a little clarification I thought might be necessary. >.>

True Blood

I am a legit fan of opening credits for television series. It's always exciting to see some sort of (hopefully) professional mash-up to give a hint as to what the series is about, the characters in it, the recaps (I also like recaps and "next week on" segments... it's no shock that I am one of those people who hates missing movie previews), and on and on. When I recently started watching True Blood (currently at the start of episode 8), the opening credits were really something. These opening credits are awesome. No, they don't introduce us to the characters or give us a recap, but they give it such a feel in so many creepy yet intriguing ways (the way the entire series plays out for me). From the snake curled up and hissing to the one scruffy dude leaning back and forward in his rocking chair, the clips are just so intriguing. None more so to me than every time I see the one part that strikes a chord more so than any other part: when we see some surely 15-year-old girl grinding her ass into some middle-aged redneck. It's absolutely horrifying to watch, and every episode as I see the opening credits roll, I watch out for that part, watching the sad movements of this desperate-looking girl and this lecherous guy eying her as she, in all her way-too-much-eyeliner glory, rubs up against him like that's all she can do. Granted, all the clips are incredibly fascinating to watch, and the opening credits of True Blood are honestly one of my favourite parts of the show (granted, I like most of it, save Jason Stackhouse whose character annoys me more and more every episode in all his useless drug-and-sex-addicted assholery).

Here are the opening credits for any who have no idea what I'm rambling on about. Regardless, the show itself has really drawn my attention. I started watching, hesitant, because one friend described it to me as just a bunch of people digging up graves to have sex with corpses (none of which I've seen so far, but I'm only so far in), but got hooked pretty quickly. Minor (first season) Spoiler: you KNOW I was waiting desperately for Sookie and Bill to finally hook up and it was glorious when it happened, so much more enjoyable to watch than all of Jason's hookups... it got boring to watch him have sex really quickly but it just KEEPS HAPPENING STOP SHOWING IT... anyway... I'm totally annoyingly about pairings in series and if it works, it works. I find one or two OTPs (one true pair) in most shows I watch and I CLING to them (i.e. I will never get over Mohinder/Eden from season one of Heroes, I stood by Kara/Lee throughout all of Battlestar Galactica, etc.)

Anyway, as I was saying, True Blood has turned out to be good so far. As I was telling my friend, it's like if Twilight was any good. It has this same sort of forbidden romance appeal, but the characters are actually actual characters and well-rounded and vampire lore actually applies and if Sookie had caught Bill watching her sleep (before properly getting together and all) she would have been pissed. I feel bad comparing True Blood to Twilight though, because the former is actually good, but they do share certain similarities (even though it hasn't been said yet, I'm pretty sure Sookie's other suitor, Sam, is a shape-shifter). Also, forget Edward freakin' Cullen (god I hate him), I would much prefer Bill Compton any day (on top of being attractive and a gentleman, he has a personality, which is always a plus).

End point: the opening credits are fascinating to me and the show itself is totally addicting. Why else would I be up at 5am blogging about it while having episode 8 currently paused? Alright, enough writing, I got to get back to seeing what's up in Bon Temps. x)

Character

Oh right! Maybe I can enjoy dramas. Because I now recall that I also recently viewed a very good Dutch film, the 1998 winner of Best Foreign Language Film at the Oscars, Character. I paid attention to the whole thing and thoroughly enjoyed it. Although, I tend to pay far more attention to foreign films because I can't focus elsewhere because I have to read subtitles.

Regardless, I think this just means that the "adult dramas" I have viewed lately are boring or just not that great (apologies to Last Chance Harvey, Pride and Glory, and Public Enemies).

Anyway, Character. My mother and father viewed it before me (we all share a lovely Netflix account which means that movies rot in front of our TV because my parents are workaholics and I sneakily move my film choices up the queue but then my parents want to watch the same movies... so the movies still rot) after it had been sitting in front of our television for at least two weeks, and my mother cryptically ranted "if only he hadn't kept visiting his father." And I think to myself, "what, is his father a gangster? Is he rebelling but failing? Dude, no matter how shit their parents are, some kids just get attached." But my mother has this thing where she actually expects characters to be perfect. Watching Battlestar Galactica with her is a pain in the ass. I love her, but characters are flawed.

As is Jacob, our protagonist. Majorly flawed, but who can blame the kid? (Mind the following spoilers if you haven't seen the film.) He was raised by a mother who didn't care and was the illegitimate son of a prick whom he was indebted to. If he and his mother got along better, I'd totally call this a Oedipus complex (he rivals his daddy lots, physically fighting toward the end. It was awesome seeing this adorable little lawyer beating up his big, buff bailiff daddy). I, for one, thoroughly enjoy flawed characters, ones who have these major problems that they just can't fix. They're interesting, not to mention well-rounded and sensibly-crafted. Jacob can't help but try to tell his father, "despite all the shit you put me through and the way that you weren't there, I STILL WON."

And considering how he got a rather happy ending (aside from the not-to-die-for-in-attractiveness-but-mildly-pretty Miss Le George getting married and strolling about with her baby) and was discovered to be innocent of his father's death, I really don't see how it was such a bad thing that he kept going back to visit his father. Of course he did! Sure, he shouldn't have nearly killed him, but characters don't do what they should; they do what is in character.

James Bond is a majorly flawed character (he's essentially a boozing, womanizing assassin, but he works for the good guys). Pretty much all superheroes are massively flawed, all the best protagonists are. Even Harry Potter, for all his ridiculous Chosen One skills is still a whiny angst-ridden emo/i-miss-my-mommy-and-daddy kid. Even my mother's beloved Bill Adama and Laura Roslin have definite issues.

So I switched topics a little bit, from my issues with focusing on dramas to characterization (something that frustrates me when it isn't done right... I'm looking at you, Heroes, for shitting on your original concept of ordinary people doing extraordinary things and making it into this-character-does-this-because-we-want-them-to... lezzie!Claire is not going to help your show's issues), but I'll conclude with this: Character was a great film featuring a fascinating and well-portrayed (and fairly attractive) protagonist. Maybe I just need to watch more foreign films. I've met very few foriegn films I haven't liked. Granted, Yo-Yo Girl Cop was more ridiculous than good... but it was still fun to see Japanese school girls trying to kill each other with yo-yos.

A Stroll Down (Movie) Memory Lane: Rashomon and Do the Right Thing

Isn't one of the most fun parts about watching movies seeing how they unfold? No matter if it's a romantic movie or an actual mystery, a horror film or a dramedy, there is a want for some sort of resolution. That doesn't mean everyone needs to have a happy ending, of course, or even a proper ending. As much as the "end" of Broken Flowers, as uninformative and useless as it is, frustrates me, it's still some sort of end as we see Billy Murray knocking on the door; presumably there is an ending beyond the "ending" we see. Although many movies refuse to find resolution, very few dare to take the Rashomon step and absolutely refuse to endorse any ending to the story. Part of me is very glad of this, as I am a huge fan of endings. I am one of those people who totally did not mind in the LEAST the zillion endings of Lord of the Rings: Return of the King. But then, I'd also be lying if I said I did not genuinely enjoy the twister that is Rashomon.

Possibly incomparable, I also think that Spike Lee's Do the Right Thing is, in many ways, lacking resolution. Sure, it ends, life goes on beyond the deeds of that day in the movie, but there is, once again, never a real endorsement for any character's path. They all tried to do the "right thing" and audience members walk away differing in their opinion as to who did the right thing (at least, kids in my film class definitely had varied opinions) or if anybody did at all or even if they intended to or not. But without going beyond any knowledge aside from having watched the film itself, I would make a guess that that is part of the film's premise, not telling us who is right or who is wrong.

But am I saying that Akira Kurosawa and Spike Lee are soulmates? Hardly, especially since this bizarre lack of commentary is used in different ways by the two films. The story within Rashomon is never resolved, but there is a clear story in Do the Right Thing, rather, it's the meaning of the actions, not the actions themselves that are difficult to discern.

Is this making any sense? Perhaps not. I was simply revisiting my old film journals from my History and Aesthetics of Film class from last fall and, although I have thought about this before, I was really bringing it back. This isn't to say that there aren't other films that behave in this way, as I'm sure I've seen plenty, but these are two films that stick with me with their "messages" that aren't the typical message, telling us that sometimes you can't resolve things, sometimes it's impossible to figure out who did the right thing or who is telling the truth, and there is a great beauty in that that I deeply appreciate in both films.

To maybe help make some more sense, here are excerpts from my original film journals for the two films. The parts cut out, about half of each journal, have to do with the visual style (it was a class about the history and aesthetics of film) of each film, which isn't really pertinent to the subject at hand.

Rashomon:

"Plot-wise, from the very beginning, we are told that this is an unsolvable tale, but like the man listening in, we too believe we can determine the truth of it all. So we, like the man on screen, hear the four different tales. But how can we know which one is true? Do any of them have any truer elements than the others? They all share common aspects: the same characters, the same location, the same props and costumes, and sometimes similar or the same dialogue. From the bits of evidence we have, shouldn’t we be able to deduct who is telling the truth and who is lying? But then, how could we? There is nothing more honest in one of the stories than the other and none of the characters is painted as trustworthy. Like the listening man, we are left disappointed in our inability to solve the mystery in the end, and like the depressed monk, we too are left with a little less faith in humanity. But the epilogue was a comfort, and although the mystery remains unsolved, that doesn’t mean every mystery cannot be solved or that every person is untrustworthy."

and then here we have...

Do the Right Thing:

The title of the film is perfect as it is near impossible to really say that anybody did the right thing. Maybe the audience ought to do the right thing rather than any of the things we saw the characters do. Or maybe each character thought they were doing the right thing. Nobody really wanted trouble, but they all seemed to find it unavoidable throughout the day. Sal was trying to do the right thing by serving the neighborhood. Buggin’ Out thought he was doing the right thing by protesting the hall of fame, which he saw as racist. Mookie thought he was doing the right thing by enacting some kind of revenge on Sal’s for the atrocity of Radio Raheem’s death. Nobody really tried to do things wrong. But people don’t really know what the right thing to do is. They just try.

Pride and... Ooh, shiny!

Is my taste in movies suddenly bad? Did I acquire ADD recently or something? My prior concern about not being able to pay attention during adult dramas/slow-moving movies reared its ugly head yet again as I sit down to watch Pride and Glory. By sort of paying attention, I gleaned that it wasn't a bad movie, boasting albeit not a strikingly original or amazingly interesting plot but still something good and moving (the theme of loyalty is always an interesting one in crime dramas; although it's definitely been done better, the double bonds of family and police are interesting to watch). But once again, I just couldn't focus. Even after Colin Farrell's character threatens to iron a baby's face I still couldn't pay full attention. I did a little laugh toward the end as Edward Norton confronted Colin Farrell in a bar called Irish Eyes, however.

And the ending in its entirety was good. Getting there was a bit boring at times, but overall the movie was decent, the acting good, and my attention span coming and going. How bad was my attention span? I started twittering in the middle of the movie (they were some interesting tweets though, if I may say so myself). And I played a bunch of Solitaire and Scrabble during the movie too.

Granted, it's always harder to pay attention to DVDs than in movie theatres, and with a laptop right next to me... the temptation to check "hmmmm so how many times DOES the word fuck appear in this movie anyhow?" is difficult to resist (291 times for those interested to know). This is a recurring problem lately and I'm not sure if it's me, summer, or the movies. I'm going to have to find some sort of undeniably brilliant and captivating drama to experiment with this. Recommendations?

I Actually Liked a Harry Potter Movie! (this is big)

So it deviates from the book. What else is new with the Harry Potter movies? Since it's been a decently long time since I've read the books, I didn't freak out at any of the changes. And because of this, I actually got to enjoy this Harry Potter movie. Although, I have to say, the Harry/Ginny romance was frustratingly tame. What happened to the snogging in the book? It's not like they get to see each other AT ALL during the next book, so you can't be holding off any epic snogging for that. My only other complaint is that the Snape/Harry tension wasn't revisited properly. Considering it is so important in this installment, I am surprised at how few chances Harry and Snape got to seethe at each other. I've always been disappointed by the lessons being left out in the movies, but that's understandable as they would get boring and repetitive. But a couple Defense Against the Dark Arts lessons, or at least one, would have helped to cement Snape and Harry's hatred for each other, which would have made the final chase much more dramatic. Harry's confrontation with Snape at the end of the movie lacked the same passion and drama it had in the book.

But that's really my major complaint. Although the burning burrow scene was a bit useless and ridiculous, there's no reason for me to be upset about it. Considering how much Weasley subplot they've cut out and how we're not seeing any wedding there since Bill never appeared and Fleur's been absent since forever, why not burn the place down? So whatever, I don't give a rat's ass about that scene. It wasn't particularly productive, but it was a nice moment of drama, so I can't really complain. I've given up being a Book Purist. So long as it's good and keeps the general story alive while being entertaining and doing it well, I'm happy. And I think HBP: The Movie did a pretty good job of that.

Mind you, my friend and I spent half the movie making sex jokes. I blame it all on a friend of mine who, once upon a time, spent ages trying to convince me that Harry was in love with Draco based on the happenings of Half-Blood Prince, as Harry obsesses over Draco. It's all her fault.

But all in all, the movie was shot very well. The special effects were brilliant, and the acting was good. Honestly, this is the movie I think the kid actors finally hit their stride in. For the first time, I was not distracted by Emma Watson's eyebrows! In every other Harry Potter movie, her eyebrows are a massive distraction for me, but I didn't notice them this time, so either I didn't pay very close attention (I'll rewatch the movie and keep you posted) or else she actually started acting without them. MAJOR kudos to her if she stopped abusing her (lovely) eyebrows. Daniel Radcliffe, whose acting pissed me off in Prisoner of Azkaban and Order of the Phoenix (but that one's not his fault; Harry is OBNOXIOUS in OotP), did a good job this time. The Felix Felicis scene was pretty darn awesome, I have to say.

So overall, for once, I was genuinely pleased by a Harry Potter movie. It isn't the book in the least and I definitely like the books far more than the movies, but I enjoyed the movie and would deem it a job well done. Hardly OSCAR-worthy, as some critic baffled me to say (maybe save the effects, of course), but good. I could nitpick for ages, but that'd be useless. Good work. You finally got me, Warner Bros.

Also: HOLY SHIT @ Harry Potter and the Half-Blood Prince's gross revenue thus far. It ALREADY broke $100 mil!? I mean, that's worldwide, but still... oh no, don't tell me The Dark Knight's records are going to go bye-bye this soon. D: