Movie Opinions

Tess of the d'Urbervilles

2011-10-22T20:53:00.000-07:00

This is a mini-series of a book written by Tomas Hardy.

It was on PBS tonight as a Masterpiece Classic.

I, however, evidently don't read enough classics.

I have always trusted PBS. I have rarely been disappointed.

But...I shall never watch a series based on a classic book without reading the book summary again.

The author's name should have been a red flag for me. Thomas Hardy is only followed by Dickens when it comes to tragic stories.

I've only read one of Hardy's stories and it still haunts me to this day.

Hardy breaks your heart.

I think I'll skip part two (and part three if there is one.)

If you like dramas where things go from bad to worse, if you love watching injustices, this is the movie for you. The movie, like all Masterpiece series, is very good. Scenery and costuming and the way the cloud shadows move across the landscape.

Acting is good. I enjoyed watching the actress, what's-her-name, because she looks like a younger version of the girl that plays Lisbon the boss of the Mentalist.Don't watch it if you're alone and depressed and have no gun. On the other hand maybe it's good for manic depressives to see someone worse off than they are. I don't know.

I, for one, like sad stories if they end up happy not the other way around. I'm funny that way.

I'm glad I read the synopsis and also sad because I'll never forget the ending anyway.

Thanks Wikipedia, for nothing.

WHERE HAVE I BEEN?

2011-09-08T18:42:00.001-07:00

Okay. I'm trying this new formatting for blogspot. I like change but I'm treading water here keeping up with technological advances.

Where have I been?

I truly have been watching movies. Netflix DVD's and streamed movies to my computer.

Right now I've rented enough Poirot movies and am now hooked on Midsomer Murders. It's a British detective series. I like British mysteries. There is less violence...the coppers don't hit, yell or shoot people. They don't show the gory details of the murders. And they actually have numerous suspects with motives, give clues, toss in red-herrings, and have sympathetic characters. Midsomer Murders with Chief Inspector Barnaby don't tell stories of evil, they're just detective stories.

I was going to watch the PD James series but some of the movies are out of sync on streaming and that is so frustrating to see lips move and not hear what they said for several seconds later. It's amazing how dependent my hearing is on vision...lip reading.

I have nothing else to add. I hope all of you are missing me.

I actually went to a movie theater. Had to see the last Harry Potter movie. And get the taste of movie theater popcorn.

Reminder: I'm still waiting for a new Matthew Goode movie. (SIGH)

Hey! I totally love this new formatting. Pick your font, color, and size. Can I pick young, thin and taller, too?

Gattaca

2011-07-24T11:31:00.000-07:00

I really appreciate my local library for stocking old movies. I still have a VHS player which increases my viewing variety. They'll soon be obsolete and, sadly, filling landfills.)

I watched a really really old movie (well, old as Hollywood goes) Gattaca from 1997, staring Ethan Hawke and Uma Thurman.

The movie was eerie. That seems to have made it unique...I think.

I enjoyed the cinematography. It was a bit monotonous but I think that was one of the points.

I wanted to see more of Jude Law. He did well but not enough of him.

It was amazing that the casting crew found children and teens that resembled Vincent and Anton so well. (I often suspect them of casting the stars' children as their younger versions. But seldom since most natural children don't resemble their parents at all.)

Anyway, the movie was a milder form of science fiction--what Asimov liked to call sci-fi, what I call fake science fiction. (I suspect he was referring to a a science fiction story written by a non-science fiction writer. I could be wrong about Gattaca though.)

The plot was secondary to the visual scenes. A good deal of it was left open to interpretation...like what planet were they on? Was that really the sun or a simulation of a sunrise? And how come nobody recognized that Hawke's Jerome was wearing contact lenses? Did they just help him see clearly or did they alter his eye color?

Anyway, if you like mystifying sci-fi and moderately old movies from 1990's you might like it.

It's not bad (regardless of the negative viewer comments I read on the Internet. I don't know what the critics said, but who cares?

Revenge?

2011-07-22T11:05:00.000-07:00

I'm very disturbed that movies and even TV shows are doing themes and plots showing revenge as a good idea.

That's scary. Encouraging people to take the law into their own hands is seriously wrong. Killing someone who killed a friend or family member of yours makes you exactly like the person who did the killing in the first place. Worse, since revenge includes hate.

A hero of a movie going after the cops and judge that put him in prison for something he didn't do, it just proves prison is where he belongs. DUH

Why would revenge be worth going to prison and then being killed yourself in revenge be a good idea?

The ignorance of some of the human race never fails to amaze me (or sadden and disgust me.) I'm trying hard not to judge people, but hell...when did naive come to mean stupid?

Aren't gangs bad enough with their revenge killings? Young people recruited into gangs, younger children of rival gang members plus innocent by-standers are getting killed for no reason other than a false idea that violence is a fun game.

Let's not add the general population to revenge killings.

The revenge I do approve of is honest law enforcement clapping handcuffs on a bad guy and tossing him into jail for trial. I do believe in the legal system including it's flaws. Some bad guys do get away without punishment and some innocent people get locked up, but by-passing the whole system is not the way to fight injustice.

Justice can sometimes be unjust. But we need to get rid of the idea that revenge is a good idea. One person or a gang of people do not have the right to decide how justice should be carried out.

I never used to believe in "evil", thinking it was just an "absence of good". Now I'm pretty sure evil exists and it's not just wrong, illegal, or bad choices. It's...well...it's evil.

To stop evil, stop thinking violent revenge is a fine idea.

And stop watching those damn movies and television shows based on revenge.

Thank you.

New Matthew Goode Movies?

2011-07-16T20:50:00.000-07:00

IMDb listed four future movies for Matthew Goode in starring or co-starring roles. I'm anxiously awaiting their airing on the big screen. Or on Netflix (DVD.)

Hopefully they will actually make these movies not just plan to make them.

The reason I'm questioning it is because some of the future movies that IMDb listed for Gerard Butler never materialized. Though it's hardly IMDb's fault. I waited for those movies since I was totally in love with Gerry before I abandoned him for Matthew Goode.

Movie stars really do need to make movies now and then or people will forget them.

By the way, there really is a difference between actors and movie stars.

I just love that funny story George Hamilton told about himself. He was walking some place--maybe the beach?--and a little girl said, "Hey. You're that actor." George laughed and said, "I'm not an actor, I'm a movie star!"

Matthew is has evolved into an amazing actor. He doesn't merely play a role, he becomes a character. Watch The Lookout or Watchmen. As I've said before about Leap Year, I still can't believe Declan is really Matthew Goode. He's that good.

I sure wish they'd hurry up and release Burning Man. I've heard from other fans through this blog that it was filmed in Australia. I assume it's a British movie. It's not about THE burning man (like the big straw thing they lit on fire in ancient times -- the wicker man and/or Zozobra) but about a guy that owns a diner. I hope he doesn't really burn the hamburgers despite them name (where did they get that name anyway?) This guy has a daughter which is good since Matthew now has a real daughter and knows how a father ought to behave (One would hope.) (Wait, I just found out it's a son in the movie. Same difference. I also think he plays a broken-hearted man which is usually the usual for Goode movies.

Matthew played a pub & restaurant owner. He was a minor cheft chef in Leap Year. Maybe that's why they hired him for Burning Man. He looks good with a knife. He also had a knife in The Lookout, I believe. For different reasons.

Burning Man may just jump to DVD in the United States and never open in theaters here--the way some of Gerry Butler's movies did. (Dear Frankie, Shattered/Butterfly on a Wheel.)

DVD's are okay with me. I can watch a DVD over and over as many times as I want. I must have seen Leap Year 100 or 150 times.

I often exaggerate to make a point, a funny point.

I think actors like Matthew and movie stars like Gerry ought to stick to the British movie industry. American movies, especially romantic comedies, are so immature and well... I hate to say it, bad. (Though Lear Year was NOT bad. It was a movie you either loved or hated. Not many people ever said "Oh, it was ok.")

A stupid romantic comedy can ruin someones career. Look what happened to Gerry. That was quite a step down from 300 to dumb comedies. I won't mention those, you know which ones.

I'm glad Chasing Liberty didn't nip Matthew's career in the bud. It was a practice movie. A long screen test. Those don't count as real movies. I can forgive him for that one since he made up for it in Imagine Me and You where he played a real person. Well done.

Here's the movies IMDb lists on their Matthew Goode page:

2011 Burning Man (post-production)

2012 Overdrive (pre-production)

2012 Stoker (pre-production)

2013 Crooked House (pre-production)

Yipee and hurry, hurry.

Dark Matter

2011-07-07T17:39:00.000-07:00

I checked Dark Matter out of my local library and slipped it in the DVD player. I had an idea (from the cover) that it was a mystery or a crime solving story.

When I realized it wasn't and being puzzled, I paused it and looked it up on IMDb.

Dark Matter staring Liu Ye, Aidan Quinn & Meryl Streep, was loosely based on the graduate student that flipped out a number of years ago and opened fire on several of his classmates and professors.

I researched the true story behind it...and then how the movie differed as to character and motive development and decided I didn't like the true story or where the movie headed with it.

I stopped the DVD player, put the DVD back in the case and returned it to the library without taking another look. (It's nice we don't have to rewind DVDs.)

I can't handle difficult plots (based on true incidents or otherwise) that bring out the unfairness and/or tragedy of human life in a too realistic way.

I don't necessarily want everything to be funny, happy, light and sugary. But this just wasn't my "cup of tea" even though it's about some subjects I do like: academia and astronomy.

[Aside: Don't ask me about that stuff. I was under the mistaken impression that A Beautiful Mind was science fiction. Imagine my shock when it really wasn't spies chasing John Nash around campus.]

Even if stories about pain and/or tragedy are not for me, you can still watch DM and decide for yourself. This might be one of the good movies. It's good acting, good script, fascinating and classy. Great music, too.

Perhaps you might decide it's NOT about pain or tragedy.

We don't all have to like the same cup of tea (or movies). Earl Grey?

The Young Visiters

2011-06-28T08:50:00.000-07:00

Click on title above for particulars about this movie.

This felt like a strange movie to me. It wasn't bad, but I'm stumped what to say good about it. But being a highly wordy person, I will try.

To start, it's not like any other movie I've seen (I skipped the Johnny Depp version of Alice in Wonderland as too bizarre for me. And too animated.) Visiters was remotely similar, I suppose, but not intended as bizarre. More in the cute category.

Jim Broadbent pays the main character and since he is in every other British movie he's evidently a big star. It also stars Hugh Laurie (of House fame), Lyndsey Marshal who's fabulous, and Bill Nighy who is also magnificent as a character actor--I hardly recognized him, though I did in the Pirates movies (joking,of course.)

It's refreshing to see films starring normal-looking people instead of beautiful-eyed, glistening-toothed, muscular hero-actors young enough to be my grandsons. (Except Miss Marshal who's pretty and by no means too old to be my granddaughter. And her costumes and acting weren't bad either.)

I saw Broadbent recently as title character in Longford. Everyone was good and he was exceptionally good. He probably won some sort of award for it.

Visiters was based on a book written by 9-year old Daisy Ashford. It has all the qualities of romance and royalty (characters, settings and costumes) as understood by a nine-year old.

This circumstance creates a strange humor--maybe not laugh-out-loud funny, but witty humor with a large dose of silliness we have come to know and love (?) in British movies (think of Hyacinth Bucket for example.)

If you want a break from inane American TV sitcoms, computer-graphics or severely obscure feature length films, rent Visiters. It's not exactly The Tudors, but very British and refreshingly different than the usual fare dished up to American viewers--meaning viewers who still possess a sense of humor not the comatose ones who can stick to their reruns of WWF SmackDown and My Name is Earl.

PS: I didn't misspell Visiters. It was Daisy's way. In addition, it's not a kid-movie. It's a look at the world through the eyes of a child and would be baffling to a child that already sees the world like that.

SHADOW OF THE VAMPIRE

2011-06-11T21:19:00.000-07:00

Click title above for a list of awards and wins for this movie and cast.

Beaucoup beaucoup awards. That's French for "mucho" or "a lot" in English.

I don't know how I missed seeing this movie up until now. It hit the theaters January 1, 2001.

It's a good movie. Everyone was great. John Malkovich has a little trouble with accents but it was easy to overlook them.

Willem Dafoe was unbelievably good considering most people haven't got a clue who he is. His costume and make-up were so well done no one would recognize him anyway.

I don't know why Dafoe was nominated and won Academy award for that. He clearly stole the show. (Maybe Malkovich's agent was better at contracts.)

The movie was clearly a fantasy and in no way "horror" genre. It wasn't exactly a drama either.

In fact, it probably doesn't fit any category other than weird. It stands alone. This is true, take my word for it.

There are some funny elements undoubtedly designed to make fun of the original movie: A German silent film in 1922 called Nosferatu-Eine Symphonie des Grauens (Nosferatu-a Symphony of Horror). It was the movie that this movie was about filming it. Or however you say that. (English teacher please forgive me. I really WAS listening.)

See it for yourself. I can't figure out what else to say about it other than I liked it.

La Vie en Rose

2011-06-07T12:18:00.000-07:00

I haven't been writing about movies lately. Frankly I finally feel recovered from my recent illness, spine and heart surgeries and bad bouts of depression (not to mention dealing with grief over the death of my husband of 20+ years.) All occurring all in the space of the last 3 years. Whew.

Since I am recovered (except for occasional pain in my hip and walking with a cane) I feel restored to nearly full mobility (and learning to carry things with one hand--quite a challenge).

Being well again means I've been busy!

Since I'm busier and more active I just haven't taken the time to write/blog. When I'm not spending time with friends (usually eating out), I study, knit, cook, spend time with my dog (who seems just as peppy in the morning as I do and just as creaky and stiff in the evening), I also squeeze in time to read mysteries and watch movies.

I've been watching my way through Masterpiece PBS series--Marple, Poirot, Inspector Lynley. (Anxious for second season of Sherlock.)
______________________________________________

Last night I watched the DVD of La Vie en Rose. I started it rather late and it wasn't over until midnight, but I didn't miss one second of it. (And of course I read it since it was in French with English subtitles.)

The fact that it was in French with subtitles faded from my awareness as I fell deeper and deeper into the story and the movie. It was one of those movies where I suspend reality and am unaware of my surroundings and myself.

What can I say about this movie that has not already been said? It won numerous awards the world over especially for the lead Marion Cotillard. *See below. (She has most recently appeared in Inception with Leonardo DiCaprio.)

It was ... I don't know. It's beyond description. A ton of praise cannot be adequate.

It was BEAUTIFUL. At the end I felt awe and thankfulness that I was able to experience it.

Edith Piaf's life was full of difficulties and heart breaking events but done in such a way as to inspire endearment and gratitude for ones own life. You'll want to turn your life into a song.

I recommend this movie to everyone over the age of 12 and under the age of 110.

Even if you know the life story of Edith Piaf and the entire plot of the movie in advance, it is still a GOOD GOOD movie.

The songs were fabulous. I can see why Piaf's singing was so beloved. She must have held audiences enthralled. The singing, though not in Piaf's voice, was wonderfully done.

The acting was beyond good especially for the lead Marion Cotillard. I could not tear my eyes away from her while she was "singing." It was exceptionally amazing.

This movie will never fade away. It'll be a classic.

Please do watch it. Watch it. Watch it. Watch it.

P.S. I'm not sure if I saw whatever they call "Extended Version" or not. But it's good no matter what, if nothing more than the songs and performance of Cotillard.

*Marion Cotillard won seven Best Actress Awards for her portrayal of Édith Piaf in La Vie en Rose:
The Academy Award for Best Actress in a Leading Role
The Golden Globe for Best Actress in a Leading Role, Motion Picture (musical or comedy)
The Prix Lumière for Best Actress
The Golden Space Needle Award for Best Actress in a Leading Role at the 2007 Seattle International Film Festival
The BAFTA Award for Best Actress in a Leading Role
The César Award for Best Actress in a Leading Role
The Czech Lion Award for Best Actress in a Leading Role
info from Wikipedia

La Vie en Rose (2007)
The life story of singer Édith Piaf.
Director: Olivier Dahan, Writers: Olivier Dahan, Isabelle Sobelman
Stars: Marion Cotillard, Sylvie Testud and Pascal Greggory

Lots of Movie, Lots of Opinions

2011-05-28T07:30:00.000-07:00

I have been watching old movies. (So I can advise people what movies to stream or order from Netflix, or buy if they're rich enough and love movies as much as I do and love tossing away money for pleasure rather than saving for they're old age.

I will mention the movies/my opinions when I have time (in between watching movies and thinking.)

Laterz

THE SOCIAL NETWORK

2011-04-08T09:40:00.000-07:00

Click on title of the movie to link to IMDb (Internet Movie Database)

My latest rental from Netflix: The Social Network about the guy(s) that invented Facebook. True story or as true as you can get from Hollywood.

It was done in flashbacks (I think) during the court cases where a bunch of guys were suing the dude that made millions of dollars on the idea. (He's now the youngest billionaire in the country. Or maybe the world.)

The movie was mostly talking. A lot of it was in computer programming jargon. But that wasn't really important to the plot so you can tune out the details of that unless you actually understand it. (It might be humorous for all I know.)

The movie was basically a bunch of computer nerds and a couple of jocks, all talking way too fast and getting drunk.

I did get the feel of what it's like on a modern college campus. Harvard wasn't exactly like the college in Animal House but close. (Wasn't Animal House a true story too? I seem to remember I was at that college?)

I got the feel of what a young people's party constitutes now-a-days. It's probably similar to when I went to college. But I was drunk and don't actually remember.

I found this movie to be a study of a guy who didn't have a clue about life and finally realized he was a minor jerk who traded in friends for making money.

It wasn't a comedy but wasn't really a drama either. I suppose it could be called a docu-drama, whatever that is.)

My favorite line: the college guys who thought Mark Whatever stole their idea were discussing whether to sue the guy or beat him up. One of the jocks in the debate said they didn't need to get the Sopranos to beat him up. "We can do that ourselves. I'm 6 foot 5, two-hundred and twenty, and there's TWO of me." He was a twin. (Heck, I spoiled the only funny thing in the movie. Sorry.)

The Social Network was okay, but not great, maybe one notch above The King's Speech but way below Avatar. It was aimed at a specific audience (and much younger than me.)

If you find stories about computer programming exciting, go for it.

Movies and Books

2011-04-04T07:16:00.000-07:00

I'm doing something, rather two somethings, that I just LOVE to do (especially since I'm old & widowed. Think about it.) I'm reading books and watching movies.

I just finished a wonderfully long biography of Julia Child Appetite for Life and the "last" Matthew Goode movie my list.

It was actually Matthew's first movie--South from Granada, a 1920's memoir by author Gerald Brenan. It's a Spanish movie but worth the trouble of reading the subtitles while keeping an eye on the actors and action. There was a delicious scene of a younger Matthew, with golden reddish hair, dancing with his young senorita completely nude. They were both well-endowed. Gotta love those foreign movies.

Now I'm watching my way though Murdoch Mysteries from my local library. They're hour-long Canadian TV series episodes. Good, funny and free. And all the actors and actresses are good-looking with their Victorian clothes and "new-fangled" inventions like portraits/profiles, fingermarks/fingerprints, prototype X-rays and lie-detectors. The episode with the hooded figure that shoots arrows into people, is my favorite so far. I guessed the culprit right away, but it was fun watching Detective Murdoch guess it the same time he took an arrow in his upper arm. (Oops. Is that a spoiler? Sorry.)

Another thing, Canadian shows evidently allow all the actors to speak with their own accents--so you have Canadian, British, Irish, American and some undecipherable accents all in the same show. Unless, of course, they're doing it on purpose and it's not really real.

So. Recently I streamed a movie from Netflix about the romance of George Sand and Franz Liszt. George Sand (her pen name) was evidently a liberated woman who wore pants and smoked cigarettes years before the rest of us, and Liszt was a bit effeminate. They made a perfect match.

"The world will know and understand me someday. But if that day does not arrive, it does not greatly matter. I shall have opened the way for other women." George Sand

George Sand, so they say, was a magnificent writer in her day. So I downloaded her novel Mauprat on my Kindle. Her writing IS good, at least in translation, but it's damn slow and I can only take it in small doses.

Amazing fact: I used to read a book first and then catch the movie. Loved the books but often found the movies lacking. Now, I do the opposite, love a movie and then love the book.

I loved Julie and Julia based on the book by Julie Powell who cooked her way through Julia Child's Mastering the Art of French Cooking and blogged about it. She's now an author. Darn, I wish I'd thought of that first.

I read some reviews on Amazon from people who didn't like this book. I, on the other hand, loved the movie so much that after watching it nearly as many times I did Leap Year, I had to take a look at the book. I downloaded a "sample" on my Kindle. I found her style of writing so funny I just had to get it. So I did. Yay, Kindle, instant gratification.

I guess a lot of people don't get her witty sense of humor. I have that problem too--people don't seem to get my sense of humor. They think I'm serious. And stupid. Or at least weird, which is okay with me. But until they catch up, I'm still going to keep it up. As George said, "The world will know and understand me someday. But if that day does not arrive, it does not greatly matter..."

Julie Powell mentioned her mother's horrified at her choices of where to live. Julie said she once lived in "an adobe in Middle-of-Nowhere, New Mexico."

Now, since I DO live in Middle-of-Nowhere, New Mexico, I got a good laugh-out-loud.

Julie uses a lot of cliches but in new and unexpected ways. Genius.

So, here I am in the middle of nowhere, reading two books, watching movies and old TV series on DVDs in my pajamas. You gotta love being a writer.

Since the weather's warm and sunny now I get outside often to play with the dogs and my grandkids (not necessarily in that order.)

And of course, I blog.

I tried to write for profit once but it cost me money to try to sell the damn books. So now I give them for presents and toss my writing out here in cyberland for free.

Enjoy. There's more where this came from. Toodle-Ooo

SUNSHINE CLEANING

2011-03-20T08:06:00.000-07:00

I've been watching movies and not writing about them. So here goes.

I saw Sunshine Cleaning on Netflix streaming a few days ago. It was a 2009 movie opening first at the Sundance Film Festival in 2008.

The movie had closed-captioning but was wide-screen format (with a wide screen computer the characters looked short and wide. Fortunately my eyes can adjust that, making it appear in proportion.)

Main Cast: Amy Adams as Rose Lorkowski, Emily Blunt as Norah Lorkowski, Alan Arkin as Joe Lorkowski, and Mary Lynn Rajskub as Lynn (who also appeared in Julie and Julia with Amy Adams.) Written by Megan Holley. Directed by Christine Jeffs.

I expected a comedy. It was a semi-serious movie with a few laughs. It was a professionally done movie, acting flawless, but the plot was not exciting.

The best part of the movie (for me) was the fact it was filmed in Albuquerque, NM, where I live. I recognized many of the buildings and roads.

However, Jonathan Miller, criminal lawyer and author of Rattlesnake Lawyer mystery series who spoke at SouthWest Writers organization in March, said that NM is so unique and different, a writer has to make NM one of the characters. This was missing in Sunshine Cleaning.

For instancee it had only one Hispanic character who didn't even use the NM accent. I don't know why I included this. No one really cares. I find accents fascinating. As it was a "blue collar" story, maybe I missed something.

It was a "slice of life story" more than plot or even character driven.

It was some what dull but not boring. Watching it is up to you.

Impromptu

2011-03-16T09:33:00.001-07:00

I watched this movie via Netflix streaming. I had to watch it on my computer's smaller screen with no closed-captioning. The upside is that close up I can hear and understand everything.

It hardly seems appropriate to watch and talk about movies when there are thousands of people suffering in Japan from the earthquakes, tsunami nuclear power plant explosions, not to mention their lack of homes, water, food and gasoline.

I think an escape from reality isn't all a bad thing. If you can avoid feeling guilty for being so well-off and wasting electricity, it's not "bad" to sit down with a movie for a couple hours instead of constantly being worried about the world situation.

Impromptu is a 1991 movie about the woman writer who used the pen name George Sand and the start of her relationship with the composer Chopin. As with all stories based on real people, we have no idea if it was even remotely historical. It was entertaining.

The acting was good. It starred Judy Davis and Hugh Grant with a good supporting cast which included Mandy Patinkin.

The costumes and accents were also good. I think it's beneficial to the audience when the producers keep the accents from all characters the same. It was a modified English probably spoken by early Americans as influenced by British. The accent used by Chopin was not overly done. None of them tried to do French and Polish. (It was set in France and Sand was French. Chopin was Polish.)

Anyway, I finally understood why the movies use costumes and accents. It's not to portray people accurately (though that helps) but it's so that the actors can get into and remain in character. That's wonderful.

So, if you want to find a movie to stream from Netflix, it's one of the movies available. (Many of the movies from Netflix are only on DVD and that's takes time to mail, receive, mail, receive...

PS: I was just wondering the other day why I have never seen Hugh Grant in anything other than a comedy. He was young in this. It was a serious role. He was believable and did well.

Bridget Jones's Diary

2011-03-08T19:23:00.000-08:00

Click title above for IMDb info about this movie

Bridget Jones' Diary is shown on television every now and again. I certainly hope they continue to show it. There are always new "fans" and repeat "fans" to make it worthwhile.

As romantic comedies go it's one of the classier ones. It's cute and well done. I think people of all ages are able to appreciate it, watch it over and over with as much enjoyment as the first time they saw it. The story line is good, though I think we all know true love doesn't really happen that fast with as little basis the movies show us.

It starred Renée Zellweger, Hugh Grant and Colin Firth. The movie came out in 2001 when Hugh and Colin were both 40 years old. Everyone spoke with British accents including Rene who is, as far as I know, not British, so I assume it was a British movie. (And I have no idea how old she was or is.)

I was musing the other day that even Colin Firth himself has been cursed with the responsibility of all motion picture stars, that of having to do at least one romantic comedy in their lives if they want to further their careers.

I suspect part of the reason is that audiences LOVE romantic comedies, even the sappy ones, regardless what the critics think of them. A good or even so-so romantic comedy can put you on the map and grant you hundreds of die-hard fans forever.

Colin Firth is rather the stiff-upper-lift type of Englishman. He is able to convey a well-rounded character while showing little emotion, just a well placed, intelligent comment. One would hope he gets a role in which he can smile for a change.

Hugh Grant is a bit more silly in his roles even when he is revealed to have a serious or mature side. He plays the attractive, smooth-talking bad-boy
in Diary. Actually he is the type of man I like both in movie roles and unfortunately in real life. He's good in this role without stealing the show away from everyone else.

In short, Renée is adorable, Colin is desirable, and Hugh is lovable. And the script, direction and editing were good.

I would like to see the sequel to Diary again mostly because I have only seen it once. In that one, if I recall correctly, Bridget makes the mistake of falling for the bad-boy's lies AGAIN (haven't we all done that?)but ends up with the sweetie after all.

Man, he's a forgiving guy. Are all British men like that? One would hope that all men were...but, you know, romance is fantasy after all.

Thanks to everyone for bringing this movie to the big screen and now a lot small ones. It's enjoyable.

Another thing, I have a feeling Matthew Goode probably hoped Leap Year would be a popular mainstream movie like Bridget Jones's Diary instead of just a regular romantic comedy. Maybe the critics didn't like Leap Year, and Matthew didn't either, but millions or at least thousands of people loved it. And Matthew, like I said before in this blog, all movies aren't Shakespeare or, in this case, Bridget Jones's Diary.

TV MOVIES: Lying to Be Perfect

2011-03-08T17:59:00.000-08:00

Click on title to see IMDb entry on this movie

Photo of Poppy Mongomery

Some of the good movies don't get their start at the theater box office. They're the made-for-a-particular-channel movies. And I don't particularly mean HBO or other premium channels or even PBS mini-series.

I'm speaking of the movies made for Hallmark and Lifetime and other channels. Many of them feature one or two known television stars (mostly from a popular series or a previous series) and a lot of supporting actors no one ever heard of unless they've seem them in another TV series or movie.

Several other merits of TV movies is that they have breaks for commercials built in and don't just cut for a break in the middle of a sentence. They don't have to cut out pieces of them to fit in commercials. And they don't have much cussing that needs to be bleeped out. (And heck, I remember the days when a movie that was in color instead of black and white was considered a good movie.)

I just watched one today. I use that term loosely 'watched.' Often I have the television on for company or just plain noise when I'm doing something else. Today I was knitting and straightening my room. (That usually mean I move things around from from pile to pile or stick them in another room.)

It was Lying to Be Perfect. I think that was a take off on Dying to Be Perfect. I suspected it would have something to do with dieting and was curious if they were going to spread a bunch of crap about dieting can save you, etc.

It starred Poppy Montgomery who played an FBI agent on Without a Trace. She's British but does a good American accent. I assume it's because she lived here now.

In this movie she played a "fat" girl with two "fat" friends. She worked as an editor at a publishing firm. She was an aspiring writer and when her proposal was turned down by her firm she invented a young beautiful British girl who won fame and a book contract with her firm.

In the meantime, she and her two women friends made a pact to start living healthy, exercising and eating right, and raising their self-esteem so they could start living the lives they wanted.

Of course the main girl had to confess to lying about her secret (which I would just claimed was my pen name, of course.) She had to reveal her identity eventually and by then, of course, she was a knockout.

But all the girls realized that it was their sense of self-worth and their attitudes towards themselves that needed healing not just their overweight.

I think they did a tolerable job of showing women losing weight without giving women the world over the idea that just looking good is the solution to all their problems. I think a couple of the lessons they "taught" was about finding courage to be yourself, learn to accept and love yourself, and if you're good at something you just have to express yourself with your talent as yourself and the truth will prove it to you. And the truth never hurts.

To be absolutely clear, some of the movies on LMN, Lifetime and Hallmark and other fancy channels can be quite awful. But some of them are quite good. Written by real writers and played by good actors even if they aren't famous or looking perfect.

If you happen to tune in to one you don't like, turn it off. Remember my rule "Life is too short to read crappy books and watch crappy movies." (So stop doing that unless you're attempting to write a movie blog.)

CEMETERY JUNCTION

2011-03-06T13:34:00.000-08:00

Writers & Directors: Ricky Gervais, Stephen Merchant
Staring: Christian Cooke, Felicity Jones, Tom Hughes, Jack Doolan
With: Ricky Gervais, Ralph Fiennes, and Matthew Goode

I watched two movies yesterday. Black Swan at 4 Hills Theater, Albuquerque, NM, and the Netflix rental I saw at home afterwards was Cemetery Junction. I rented it to see Matthew Goode in yet another role. He had a smaller part but was, as always, good. I enjoyed seeing yet another hair style, and hear him use a different British accent than his own.

It's a UK movie from 2010, set in 1973, in a neighborhood where Ricky Gervais grew up. Cemetery Junction is an actual road junction in Reading, Britain. According to this story, it's a town in which people get stuck and live the same lives as their parents, never quite getting away to the outside world. I don't know if that's true, I've never been there (and never plan to visit.)

I am beginning to notice the subtle differences between English accents in Great Britain. They have a distinctive accent in Reading. I enjoyed hearing it in Cemetery Junction.

The movie is a comedy. Three boys--changing into men--discover themselves while in repetitious pastimes that they realize they must soon give up. They find themselves changed by these circumstances and by their own choices.

The town in the movie did look pretty dull. (And some of the residents were quite weird.) No wonder the kids had to create their own excitement. A couple times it landed them in jail. Luckily they had an older lovable cop friend who gave them some guidance.

It's not a laugh-out-loud comedy. It's not silly. It's touching and funny and thought-provoking. Oddly enough, Ricky Gervais who co-wrote and co-directed this story, played a non-funny part as one of the boy's father.

It has a happy ending and nothing awful happens in the movie. My favorite kind of movie.

I liked it better than Black Swan which I also saw yesterday.) I would watch Cemetery Junction again. (I might even rent Black Swan after it's on DVD awhile. I will have forgotten most of it by then.)

Enjoy Cemetery Junction if you like British comedy. (I wish more young adults would watch movies like this one, they might learn something. Though didn't we all have to learn to grow up the hard way?)

Black Swan

2011-03-06T06:58:00.000-08:00

Click Title above for link to IMDb.

I saw two movies Saturday. I find that when I have some free time I have to stop in for popcorn. When I got home my Netflix DVD was in the mailbox, so I popped it into the DVD player. I wanted to see it right away mostly because there was nothing worth while on satellite TV. I will NOT watch Wheel of Fortune. It's the longest half hour on television. The slowest and most boring show in American. Maybe the world.

Anyway. The two movies I watched Saturday can't be compared to each other. They were completely different genres. Not even similar. Yet they were opposites. One was American and one was British. One was good. The other one was bad. Guess which one?

All I can say is that I am not watching my way through all the Academy Award Nominees for Best Picture this year. In fact, I may never trust the Academy Awards again.

I already saw The King's Speech several weeks ago before it won Best Picture in the BAFTA & the Academy Awards.

I was expecting more from Black Swan. I thought Black Swan was so-so. It was not one of those movies you say "wow" when you come out of the theater. Not like, for instance, Inception.

I think some movies are done as "art." I usually appreciate them. Then there are the movies that are "art for the sake of art." Maybe that's what the Academy is looking for. I'm just looking for good movies.

The movie I didn't like was Black Swan. I must admit I went to see it out of curiosity so I passed on the 3-D version. Even so, the movie was mediocre. I suspect the 3-D version was also mediocre because there was nothing in the movie impressive enough to warrant 3-D except the performance of the black swan.

Natalie Portman won the awards for best actress both in America and Brittan. I never really cared for, or noticed, Natalie Portman (her acting, I mean. She's probably a great person in person.) I never thought she was a major star in major movies. So I'm baffled that she won the Academy Award. I had the sense that she was holding back in this movie. Strange that the movie was about a ballerina holding back in her performance.

Unusually when I come out of a movie about an insane person I feel a little insane. I'm impressed with movies that can draw me in like that. That's the test of a true psychogical drama. Black Swan didn't do that for me. (It was either the lack of intensity within the movie or my meds are working really well now.)

I think all Black Swan does is convince it's true what they say in psychology: a psychotic person doesn't know they are. If someone thinks they might be insane, they aren't.

The costumes were monotonous except in some of the fantasies. The whole movie was done in monotones. Albeit intentionally. I liked the dashes of pink. And the stuffed animals; they were good.

I'm still curious just what character Mila Kunis was playing. But she was super. I wonder why she didn't get the nomination for best supporting actress?

I realize other people have other tastes and, of course, we all appreciate and rave about different movies. Others love the movies that I think stink. That's why there is a wide range of diversity in entertainment. I think that's wonderful.

I thought Black Swan was an OK movie. It's worth watching but I recommend waiting til it comes out on DVD and pop your corn at home.

A Single Man

2011-02-26T07:00:00.001-08:00

Directed by Tom Ford, novel by Christopher Isherwood, written for screen by Tom Ford and David Scearce. Produced by Artina Films, Depth of Field, Fade to Black Productions. Rated R for adult content (and brief nudity--barely.) (This movie was distributed in too many countries to list. It received numerous nominations and awards. See below.

I saw (Netflix rental) A Single Man Feb. 25, 2011. I now see this title can be taken two ways. A Single Man as in not married. And A Single Man as in one man in a population of millions--does that make him insignificant or more important to the overall culture?

I seem to be a couple years behind the rest of the world in viewing relevant movies. I have been on a trek to experience all of Matthew Goode's roles. I still marvel at his ability to be a different person in each movie. He's amazing. Minus Chasing Liberty. Oh well, "you can't win 'em all," so they say.

And I can't seem to find the perfect word to describe this quality in a movie...it's beyond good. (There are the B movies, I am sure you know what they are (lowbrow?) I suppose the really quality movies are A movies. Well, this one was definitely an A+ movie.

I was hesitant (heck, struck with anxiety) to turn on my DVD player. I read Wikipedia entry which said it was a movie about a depressed man who was still grieving the loss of his long-time partner. Since I have been battling severe depression as well as grief over losing my husband, I wondered if I should consider this movie.

This movie was not frightening to me after all. It was not depressing. (Maybe that's my Zoloft talking.) It seemed to be more of a British movie than an American one (i.e. not sappy.)

If you don't want to know the plot in advance, I suggest you not read the Wikipedia or IMDb entries. The important thing is, even read them I was more interested in watching it. (That and wanting to see Matthew Goode my favorite actor in all his roles.) The movie and the enjoyment of seeing it was not based on the plot. The movie is not "ruined" by knowing the story. It's not what it's about, it's how it's done.

A Single Man is not entertainment per se, it's art and a study in complex human nature. I'm happy to say, there were no stereotypes in this movie. It was a fresh take on these subjects even set 50 years ago in 1962.

The laid back performances were understated yet sincerely emotional. The cinematography was excellent. (Example: the way the colors were drab until George really looked at them with appreciation when they suddenly became bright and vibrant.) You're taken into the story with such skill you are no longer aware you're watching a movie. I think this movie was a joyous study of life and death. Also, I found a good deal of ironic humor in the movie.

Matthew as supporting actor was just as perfect as Colin Firth as were Julianne Moore and Nicholas Hoult. A mass of talent was obviously assembled.

Matthew used the generic American accent similar to the way he spoke in The Lookout though not as gruff, of course. It was impeccable from what I heard. (Is there such a thing as an American accent without dialect? It's as varied as UK accents. Though I do think Matthew sounds better with British and Irish accent, but maybe that's just me. I heard he's finished a movie about an Australian. I'm curious to hear how he does that.)

Good-bye for now. Sit down and WATCH it.

From Wikipedia: The film was nominated for the Golden Lion at the 66th Venice International Film Festival and won the festival's third annual Queer Lion.[19] Colin Firth was awarded the Coppa Volpi for Best Actor at the film festival for his performance in the film.[20] He received a BAFTA for best actor.[21] Firth received a Golden Globe Award for Best Actor in a Motion Picture Drama nomination, a Screen Actors Guild Award for Outstanding Performance by a Male Actor in a Leading Role nomination, and an Academy Award for Best Actor nomination. For her performance, Julianne Moore was nominated for a Golden Globe Award for Best Supporting Actress in Motion Picture. Abel Korzeniowski was nominated for a Golden Globe Award for Best Original Score. On January 14, 2010, the film was nominated for, and later won, Outstanding Film - Wide Release at the 21st GLAAD Media Awards.

Buried

2011-02-22T09:49:00.001-08:00

Click on word Buried above to see IMDb website

I can see now I have to add why I like a movie and and give illustrations (not pictures but examples.)

I didn't watch Buried. I rented it from NexFlix at the request of my daughter-in-law Rachel. She likes Ryan Reynolds.

Here's the IMDb blurb for this 2010 movie which was billed as "brilliantly twisted suspense."

Paul is a U.S. contractor working in Iraq. After an attack by a group of Iraqis he wakes to find he is buried alive inside a coffin. With only a lighter and a cell phone it's a race against time to escape this claustrophobic death trap.

Billed as Director: Rodrigo Cortés, Writer: Chris Sparling
Stars: Ryan Reynolds, José Luis García Pérez and Robert Paterson

Why I didn't watch it: I feel the same way about watching movies under ground as I feel about movies under water. Suffocated. I hold my breath. (Makes it hard to eat popcorn.)

Also, I can't stand those "race against time" movies.

I can't give you any tips on the acting. But if the subject matter of the movie is horrible, who cares how good or bad the acting is? Do you ever see a horror movie, for instance, for the acting? Right. You just want to be scared out of your head. No thanks, not me.

Buried might rival the movie I accidentally watched about the couple floating around in the ocean. It was just the two of them (deserted on a pleasure boat tour.) They talked and then disappeared one at a time. Besides being painfully suspenseful, it was boring.

If you want to watch Buried, fine, but be prepared.

Hollywood Teeth

2011-02-18T19:06:00.000-08:00

I am so pissed off (I mean angry) that everyone in movies and on television has to have perfect, bright white teeth now.

What the hell? One's teeth are supposed to be as different from other's teeth the way fingerprints are different.

And let's face it. Bright white is NOT the color real teeth are "supposed to" be. White teeth aren't natural. They look rather like neon signs.

I've have heard of the new "dentures" that slip on OVER one's own teeth. I wish these contraptions could be removed along with costumes and make-up so the movie stars can go home to their real lives wearing their real teeth. Or they could go back to their "old" teeth in movies if their fans wanted them to.

I hate to see everyone on the screen getting their teeth straightened, capped, bleached and other miserable procedures so they can all have "perfect" teeth so they can all look alike. But at least the days are over when movie stars had all their teeth pulled and wore those sets of dentures that come out and soak in a glass all night. I'm not disparaging anyone who actually needs dentures, but movie stars who didn't need them got them. It was probably required in their contracts.

The fans don't really want their favorite celebrities to LOOK perfect. We want them to look unique and charming. We want to recognize them underneath the role they're playing.

Take Matthew Goode for instance (I know, I know, you're getting sick of me writing about him all the time.) I now know why he looks so different in Leap Year than in his other movies. It's his teeth. His teeth were different as well as his accent, hair and beard.

In his previous movies he had a charming way of talking. His front teeth were slightly misaligned with each other, and there was a small gap in his teeth on the left side. Evidently adapting over the years gave him a distinctive way of speaking. He no doubt felt he had to "protect" his irregularities from the camera, but his talking and smiling with the right side of his mouth was charming. I loved it. It was part of his delightful performance in Imagine Me and You.

I often notice the way an actor speaks and smiles. Maybe other people don't.

I can see why a person might feel conspicuous over less-than-perfect teeth. Crooked teeth, missing teeth, they may think, makes them look "bad." They want to get their teeth fixed, especially if they are very crooked or if they've had an injury to the face or mouth that altered their teeth. It's not just an ego thing because they're wanting to correct something unfortunate that they feel "ruined" their appearance. Even if it were the result of falling out of a tree when they were children or getting clonked in face with a football as a teenager.

So I don't blame Matthew Goode for having his teeth fixed. After all, he and other celebrities can afford the dental work when they become successful.

But I'm rather disappointed because I LIKED the ways Matthew talked and smiled in his various movies. He was adorable. (Additional COmments: I watched Matthew closely in Leap Year again and I think his smile is still his old one. Tho I saw him on YouTube in an interview and it did look like his teeth were different. It remains to be seen. His last movie was Jan. 2010. It's been a year. It's time we saw his new movies. Rah-rah.

Photo of Matthew Goode with cute smile

So if anyone can tell me more Matthew Goode and his teeth and/give me your own opinion, leave me some comments. Thanks.

Movies only

2011-02-18T10:16:00.000-08:00

I've have eliminated discussing books on this blog.

I will only blog about movies here.

Movies old and new. Movies in theaters, on DVDs, Cable/Satellite and TV.

I will occasionally blog about books on my other blog ADVISING MYSELF

www.sandyschairer@blogspot.com

Thanks for reading me.

LONG LIVE THE MOVIES

The King's Speech

2011-02-18T08:31:00.000-08:00

Clik on title above for BAFTA 2011 Awards

I saw The King's Speech yesterday. The theater is littered with retirees who don't have anything better to do in the afternoon. Including me.

Mostly I go to the theater for the popcorn. (I hope someone does a study to see how much each kernel costs in bag that's more than the cost of the movie tickets.) I don't go very often. I notice the theaters aren't popping as much popcorn anymore. You'd think if they lowered the price they could make it up in volume.)

I prefer to watch movies at home so I can rewind and listen again to the words I didn't catch. (I think with all the big movie complexes they ought to set up one with subtitles for the hard of hearing people and those who can't listen fast enough for the way people talk today. Especially the young people.) I love British movies but, you've heard me write before that I find that accent the hardest to understand. Though in King's Speech I believe they tried to tone it down for non-British listening audiences.

OK. So. King's Speech. It was a well-done movie. Nothing to rave about after you see it. Not being blown away with excitement by the story nor the acting. I would say it was good entertainment for an afternoon. But that's it. No feeling of amazement coming out of the theater. Though, not "What the hell was that about?" like after seeing Inception.

King's Speech is a bit understated. Perhaps that's how British like their movies? It's a bit tame for American viewers, though it's a movie that reaches a more cerebral viewer in the US.

I didn't know a thing about King George VI prior to seeing this movie. I certainly hope scriptwriters adhere to more of "the truth" than they did in older biographical movies.

The sets and costumes were impressive.

The King's Speech was nominated and won a series of awards from BAFTA (British film awards.) Best picture, best British film, best actor, best supporting actress, best supporting actor, and several other categories such as best original screenplay.

It's also nominated for numerous Academy Awards which air Feb. 27, 2011. It's probably going to be the same as watching the British Academy Awards this year.

The awards are seldom given to the movies I feel are the highest and best. Then sometimes I'm pleasantly surprised like when American Beauty won best picture number of years ago. And Little Miss Sunshine got an award for something. I did think that Phantom of the Opera should have won more than best song. It wasn't even the best song in that movie.)

I would like to see my favorite actors and actresses win sometimes too. I don't necessarily choose them for just that one role. I think you have to watch a number of movies of that actor/actress to appreciate just how good they are based on versatility and ability to act well from one movie to the next. I often choose them just because I like that person and their qualities in real life.

So, go see The King's Speech if for no other reason than to support the movie making industry and keep theaters from being overtaken by DVDs and Blue-ray. You can skip the popcorn.

The Lookout

2011-02-12T08:34:00.000-08:00

Click on title to see IMDb info on The Lookout a 2007 crime/thriller drama

Written & Directed by Scott Frank
Starring Joseph Gordon-Levitt, Jeff Daniels, Matthew Goode, and Isla Fisher
Distributed by Miramax Films (USA) & Buena Vista International (Non-USA)

What can I say about this movie? (You know me, I can always say a lot.) It was reviewed (according to IMDb) 368 official times, not to mention all the clips and interviews and trailers all over the Internet, plus the amateurs like me who throw in their 2-cents worth.

I don't do reviews, I give my opinions. I try not to post spoilers. However, I'm sure everyone in the known Universe knows the story by now.

The plot is not the biggie here, though the script is excellent. It's what "they" say is a character-driven-story. I believe it was more thought-provoking than entertainment. I experienced this movie rather than just watching it.

Part of the problem in being a writer is that I can't just watch a movie without analyzing it. This movie created a feeling of impending doom, especially when I knew what was inevitably coming. The suspense became heightened with the premonitions woven into the story.

I watch a movie a second time (or more) just to enjoy it, rather than sitting there biting my nails dreading possible surprises. I can appreciate the details in subsequent viewings. I admit I am a coward when it comes to suspense especially if it hints at emotional pain and violence.

Joseph Gordon-Levitt was, without saying, wonderful. He carried the movie. I believe he was in every scene. He portrayed a complex character using a good deal of subtlety and power. It was his story, told from his point of view. The other characters/actors fully supported Gordon-Levitt. Not one of them tried to overshadow him or steal the attention for themselves.

Jeff Daniels, who received second billing (over Matthew Goode who got third billing) was the best I've ever seen him. He's gone from a weak but charming actor (mostly as Mr. Nice Guy in those made-for-Hallmark type movies) to a good actor who created here a multifaceted character integral to the story/movie.

I got the impression his was the type of character like Andy Taylor on Mayberry who could go from "Well, howdy there, y'all. Welcome to our quaint little village," to a guy who can say "Okay, asshole, cut the bullshit." Jeff Daniels showed this quality without an in-your-face attitude as an important character as Gordon-Levitt's closest friend.

Matthew Goode was good in his role as the leader of the bad guys. He did a fair American accent. His deep voice and the accent he affected reminded me of another actor's that I couldn't' quite place. He looked completely different in this movie (a given for him.) In the Special Features (which was excellent in itself) he surprised them by wanting to audition for the part appearing so inappropriate for the tough guy role based on his role in Match Point. Everyone was amazed that he literally transformed himself when he read for the part. The director said he felt that Matthew could do anything. I was pleased to hear that someone else noticed Matthew literally becomes a character. (The only other actor I have heard this about was Meryl Streep.)

I was relieved that the violence was underplayed as an inevitable part of the story. It wasn't one of those typical shoot-em-up, violence for violence's sake, or added for shock value. The one thing I felt bad about was the tragedy of one character who died who shouldn't have.

The movie was well-done and worth seeing, even the Special Feature section. It was enjoyable seeing the cast and crew talk about the movie and its production.

I hope you enjoy it. If you don't, push the eject button, send it back and miss a quality film.

Movie and Book Opinions Today

2011-02-09T11:02:00.000-08:00

I haven't watched any new or used movies lately. So no reviews. Reading the same book--not finished yet. So no book reviews either. Sorry.

When I order a DVD to watch from NetFlix (mostly all of Matthew Goode's movies) I love them (except Chasing Liberty [yuck].) After I mail them back I miss them (him.) I want to watch it again. And again. It's a dilemma because I also want to mail them back as fast as I can so I can receive the next rental.

I like Matthew Goode because he's a real actor not just a movie star. He's so different in each role, it's mystifying. He tosses himself out and becomes the character. (You have to see it to believe it.) (In fact, he's such a good actor that if I were in a relationship with him, I'd NEVER believe a word he said.)

My first experience of him was in the romantic comedy Leap Year. After seeing that I assumed he was a bearded Irishman with curly black hair off screen too. But when I saw his internet interviews I was flabbergasted. He's nothing like his character in Leap Year. In fact, I still can't believe it's the same guy.

To make a long story short (no wait, I can't make a story short to save my life) I have a habit of buying a movie after I rent it, see it on TV or in the theater. (Fortunately my kids buy every new movie ever made so I can watch movies all day and night if I want to.)

I have graduated from watching Leap Year (about 50 to 100 times.) Then I saw Imagine Me and You. Then I bought it. I don't think I'll watch it 50 to 100 times, but, heck, why not? (I watch it for Matthew, not for the girls, by the way, in case you wondered. LOL)

Another movie I just love = Julie and Julia. I watched that a few times, and a few more times. Now I put it on to help me fall asleep at night. If I fall asleep during a movie that I've seen a zillion times, I don't worry about missing anything. I know what's going to happen and I can drift off. I guess I turn off the DVD player and the TV in my sleep, because it's off when I get up in the morning.

I do prefer falling asleep with movies that have no suspense, violence or gore. Maybe not even sexuality since it makes me too aware that I'm sleeping in a single bed alone now. (My husband died in 2009. He was a sexy little devil.)

I used to read myself to sleep. I read to escape into an alternate reality and therefore avoid this one--20th and now 21st century Earth. But that doesn't seem to work anymore. I find myself reading and reading and not sleeping. I get more into the book and unable to stop.

It's either absorption to the point of insomnia, or finding that the words just go in one eye and out the other with no comprehension whatsoever. (Is that adult on-set ADD?) Reading that way doesn't help me at all to stop thinking too much. I think about bad stuff like old age, the economy, the weather, sugary food...

So, if anyone can recommend any other movies to rent, let me know, so I can do more reviews in between Matthew Goode's movies. (I don't want to bore those of you who have no idea who he is.)

I am reading my way through my Agatha Christie library, if you recall.

In addition, I donated about 500 books out of my huge collection. (Still have too many.) So no book recommendations, please. I am a recovering bookaholic. I can't slip and go into the book store for anything more than coffee and a Danish.

Toddle-ooo for now. And thanks for reading me.

Oh, if you see Matthew Goode, please kiss him for me.

A Suitable Vengeance, Inspector Lynley Mysteries

2011-02-06T12:02:00.001-08:00

Click title of movie above to see IMDb info

Director: Edward Bennett,
Writers: Elizabeth George (novel), Valerie Windsor (screenplay)
Staring Nathaniel Parker & Sharon Small and a cast of dozens
March 2003, BBC & PBS Masterpiece Theater

Jolly good mystery. Not your average detective story the way most Inspector Lynley cases are. This was one of those old-fashioned mysteries where the family and guests are all assembled in a gigantic old estate. When a crime or two happens, Inspector Lynley is drawn into helping local law-enforcement solve the case even if he suspects the perpetrator might be one of his own family.

The story begins with preparations for the dinner party for the Inspector, who happens to be known as Tommy, and his fiance Helen. The type of dinner party and mystery that happens around a 10-foot long table complete with candelabras, three forks and tuxedos, reminiscent of parties in the 1930's.

As the characters are introduced, we begin to see the relationships between them and more and more of their personal lives. Gradually we begin to see all -- the secrets, problems, resentments and unhappiness.

There are so many characters and story lines that one must pay close attention to follow the story and pick up on all the clues. And use closed captions or rewind button if you have trouble deciphering the Queen's English.

Now. You must remember the "rules" for screenplays. One, if it's a good script, there is nothing in the movie that does not relate to the plot and advance the story. In a true mystery there are clues as well as "false" clues (red-herrings.) But as a matter of fact, there are not many red-herrings in this movie. Everything has importance. Even though I doubt you'll figure out this mystery easily.

Two, in a good screenplay all the characters are shown or at least mentioned at the beginning of the movie (this also applies to well written novels.) This way no characters are brought in at the end to explain the solution. It's very frustrating when an author does that. It cheats the reader/viewer.

Three, cutting to another scene can indicate more happening than we are privilege to.

I particularly like the fact that British movies don't spoon feed us the way American movies do. By not handing us clues and explanations, they expect the viewers to understand the story for themselves. The cinematography is excellent, too, providing a good deal of the clues. Expressions and tones of voice are well done. Plus it was not overwhelmed with music in an attempt to manipulate our feelings.

Matthew Goode, again, was good, as was everyone else. As Inspector Lynley's younger brother, he plays a perfect combination of resentment and innocence. (Not to mention being the most handsome man in the movie with that black hair, big blue eyes and full lips. I could see his character Declan in Leap Year, more in this movie than in his other movies, especially the frowns and his delightful deep voice.)

It's an hour and a half long, but remember it's a made-for-TV movie. British television drama is often better than the average American drama on big or little screen.

This movie is excellent. You can rent or buy it along with other Inspector Lynley movies. This one was from Season 2. I hope you will enjoy it as much as I did.

My NetFlix DVD Rentals

2011-02-05T18:52:00.000-08:00

My most recent DVD rental has been snowed-in in my post office box (the one on the end of Juan Tomas Rd. not INSIDE the post office. Duh.)

I am going to watch it now. I might write about it here, or not.

It's an Inspector Lynley Mystery (a PBS movie) only one and a half hours long.

It's one in which---guess---wait for it--Matthew Goode plays the Inspector's brother. I hope he's on more than two or three scenes. Heck, I suspect he might be the suspect.)

As you all know, or maybe didn't know me then, I was madly in love with Gerry Butler a few years ago. I realize he was just a movie star. I think I was hypnotized by all that singing in Phantom of the Opera. It was a few of the scenes where they were singing, "The Phantom of the Opera is now within your mind." Uh, ye-ah.

Quite a few middle aged (and heck, old) women fell for Gerry at that time. We used to discuss him on a fan yahoo group. It couldn't have been his handsome good looks, because he isn't really all that good-looking unless the role calls for him to be--wonders with make-up and costumes--but it was his sex appeal.

The one scene I loved in Phantom was him walking slowly down the stairs at the masquerade in that red suit and black mask. And oh, those tight black leather gloves.

So, my point is(I got side-tracked talking about Gerry for a minute) I fell out of love with Gerry and was thrashing around for someone else to love, especially in movieland, and came up with Declan in Leap Year played by Matthew Goode, the young British actor.

The big thing I noticed right off, is that Matthew Goode is an ACTOR not a movie star.

So wish me luck with Inspector Lynley tonight and seeing my sweetie Matthew Goode. (I can call him that because I'm old enough to be his mother. (Matthew's mother not Inspector Lynley's -- but maybe his too.

Good night. (PS--I also loved the scene in Dracula 2000 when Gerry Bulter is walking through the music store with his curly long hair and his long coat and that alpha male strut. Ummm.)

Turner Classic Movies

2011-02-04T10:33:00.000-08:00

Turner Classic Movie channel is having 31 Days of Oscar Winning movies, which started Feb. 1 through March 3. Uncut and commercial free.

Click on Turner Classic Movies above to see their website and schedule.

I like the movies from the 1930's and 1940's the best.

I was just wondering why the actors all spoke like Franklin Roosevelt. Was that supposed to be THE American accent denoting educated, upper class people? It sounds strange now.

The FX of the days weren't half bad either. I saw part of Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hyde with Fredric March (1931.) The transformation of the doctor into his "evil twin" was well done. And it was all done without animation. Cool. The make-up was very well done even though Mr. Hyde looked a bit like a glorified ape.

The old movies give us a very good idea of what the fashions, hair designs, and style of make-up were popular in those days, as well as what the various buildings, furnishings and establishments looked like in those days. This was way way before the computer graphics used today.

Some of these old movies can be quite funny especially when they are serious. The seriousness may seem overly dramatic today.

The lines, too, are just so strange to us now. Take the line from Dr. Jekyll speaking to his fiance. "Marry me, darling, marry me. Marry me. I can't WAIT any longer." Now-a-days, we don't wait...if you catch my drift.

Enjoy an old movie on a TV near you today!!!

THE CHAMBER

2011-02-02T16:42:00.001-08:00

Click on title above for website of movie

Director: James Foley
Written by: John Grisham (novel),William Goldman & Chris Reese(screenplay)
Stars:Chris O'Donnell, Gene Hackman,Faye Dunaway & Lela Rochon

I broke one of my own rules and watched a painful drama. It was accidental. I noticed the name of the movie on HBO. I had the book by John Grisham but never read it. Probably donated it to VA hospital, whatever.

Since I have enjoyed his other novels and the movies based on them, I let it play while I was playing on the computer. After the start of the movie, it got my undivided attention. Compelling. Even when I knew what was coming & the suspense built up, I couldn't stop watching.

This was a damn good movie. It pulled no punches. Brought up some serious issues. Very thought provoking. Be warned it uses some of the words that have become politically incorrect in order to stay true-to-life.

It was about a young lawyer (Chris O'Donnell) who seeks out his family whom he has not been close to and decides to take on the death penalty (in the South) and petition for an appeal for his grandfather (Gene Hackman) who was raised in the KKK and sentenced to death for murder. The movie takes us through a great deal of emotional scenes. There is some violence but the real drama is mostly psychological and emotional. The flashbacks are intense but bearable.

Chris O'Donnell and the supporting cast were good and held their own with the big star Gene Hackman. The days are over, I suspect, when Hackman is in every other movie made. So he puts a big performance into the roles he has. You can tell he's still got it.

So does Faye Dunaway. Excellent. Best I've seen her. Great role.

I recommend it so try to catch it on HBO or rental.

CHASING LIBERTY--YUCK

2011-01-30T19:19:00.000-08:00

I got the next Matthew Goode movie from Netflix yesterday.

Director: Andy Cadiff; Writers: Derek Guiley, David Schneiderman

Stars:Mandy Moore, Matthew Goode and Mark Harmon .

I got the feeling the cast were "phoning in" their parts.

This was one of Matthew Goode's earlier films (2004.)

Chasing Liberty was a terrible movie. The actors were totally unconvincing. They looked as bored as I was. The girl was still a teenager, the guy was a bit older and should have been ashamed of himself. The general premise was stupid. It was just not believable. No heart. No intelligence. Dumb, dumb, dumb. I got the feeling they were rushing through the movie. I am also sure that the only people who would like this movie are 12 year old girls. Maybe not.

Wait, the scenery was good. But probably faked. The best parts of the movie were done by stunt people. So much for that. The bungee jumping was cool. And the crowd scene was awesome. That was it for me.

I can understand what Matthew Goode meant when he said in an interview that Leap Year was just Chasing Liberty all over again. (I see that but disagree.)Many of scenes in Leap Year were repeats of scenes in Chasing Liberty . The big difference is, in Chasing Liberty , these scenes were awful. In fact the whole movie Chasing Liberty was awful.

In Leap Year the the script was well written, the acting was more than good especially Matthew Goode and Amy Adams. That movie showed a great deal more heart & sensitivity. The young people were older and took life a bit more seriously. It was a comedy but touching. Believable. (The only bad thing about Leap Year was the editing and cutting. Too bad.)

So if it snows here for four days like the weather channel predicts, I will be snowed in with Chasing Liberty instead of the next Matthew Goode movie on my Netflix queue. WAAAAAAAAAA

Agatha Christie

2011-01-29T15:51:00.000-08:00

Click on title "Agatha Christie" to see internet bio and book list

I've been a long time fan of Agatha Christie. I have a library of all her books. I've read all of them and some of them more than once. She wrote a number of mystery novels and short stories (in collections) and a few other stories under a pen name.

I have decided to read my way through her books starting with the mysteries. (Since I have forgotten most of them or gotten them confused in my head. I'm reading the whole library straight through IN THE ORDER they were written (published.)

I finished THE MYSTERIOUS AFFAIR AT STYLES (1920) her first book which introduced Hercule Poirot, her famous private detective.

What I like about Agatha Christie's books is the lack of description; it's kept to a minimum. I just can't stand too much description. I am not a visual person. I am an auditory person and I prefer to read dialog. I actually hear the dialog in my head as if it were really being spoken.

I also like the fact that Poirot and her other crime solving characters think a lot. (I once submitted a story in a contest and received the comment from the critiquer/judge that my characters spent too much time thinking. I disagree. I like characters who think a lot. I once read a novel that was ALL thinking. So there!)

In Christie's novels, besides talking and thinking, there is very little cliff-hanging adventure/action. I don't like those fast paced thrillers (well, maybe Davinci Code.) Not much suspense. I get too nervous if there is too much suspense.

I perfectly enjoy joining Christie's characters in there English country estates and reading about all their family and friends as they help Poirot solve the mystery.

Agatha Christie's mysteries are amazing in that she gives tons of clues to help the reader guess the culprit, as well as lots of red-herrings (false clues to mislead readers.) In some of the books she actually tells who committed the crime, but most of us read right over those and are surprised at the end that she really DID tell us who did it.

And I have never guessed any of them (except the one that had a list of characters in the front which gave descriptions of all of them. So don't read those lists, they tend to give away too much information.)

I love mysteries. My favorite genre. I read every word and never peak at the end. That would be ruining everything for myself.

They are fun books with nothing scary or gross. So join me in reading your way through Agatha's books.

WATCHMEN

2011-01-27T12:43:00.000-08:00

Click on title to see IMBd listing

Watchmen was shown on MAX which doesn’t repeat movies as many times as HBO does. I caught Watchmen a few days ago...missed the beginning and most of the end. (Not a good idea.) I finally got to see it from beginning to end. Whew.

Watchmen is based on a graphic novel about “retired” superheroes that come out of retirement to find the person responsible for killing them one by one.

It’s in “cartoon” cinematography but not animated, except for the usual type of FX used to make a movie more “realistic.”

It’s a GOOD movie. I couldn’t get over how good it is. It’s about 3 hours long, so do what you have to do before you sit down to watch it. (I suggest watching it on a premium channel or a DVD rather than seeing it on a channel with commercial breaks.) It’s rated R, mostly for violence and sexuality.

One thing that makes the movie so good (surprise!) it’s dark but it’s FUNNY! There’s so much satire and parody. Many of the characters look like other actors and characters, i.e., Laurie Juniper looks like Xena and Rorschach sounds like a Clint Eastwood’s character. Another word- play: vicious dogs named Fred and Barney (remember The Flintstones?) The sets are another source of humor, i.e.: the restaurant across the street called Gunga Diner (remember Gunga Din the old old movie?)

I won’t point out anymore humor. No spoilers. But keep and eye and ear out. Take a good look at Jon (he’s the big blue guy.)

The movie is a bit gory. This movie is in a category by itself, but it’s worth seeing for the overall fun of it. It’s not for everyone, especially kids or sissies. Feel free to close your eyes if you can’t stand the sight of assorted mayhem.

One more thing. As you know I am watching my way though sweetie Matthew Goode’s movies. In this, he’s blond; in his fight scenes not one strand of hair gets mussed. I knew it was him from his voice and the fact he’s tall and thin. He has an unrecognizable accent, though. Maybe it was done as humor, but it sounded like an Englishman trying to mix American and German accents and coming up with Irish. (As a matter of fact he sounded, near the end, a bit like Declan his Irish character in Leap Year. And I daresay the Irish had a good laugh at his Irish accent.) It was gratifying to hear him get mean and angry. And actually cuss—he called someone a son-of-a-bitch. So Brits can be macho. Way to go!

The Tudors

2011-01-27T12:29:00.001-08:00

The series originally seen on Showtime is now showing on BBC America (cable and satellite) with commercial breaks, and I daresay, it's censored for adult content, but not much. It will probably never make it to network TV or PBS.)

The focus of the story is Henry the VIII played by Jonathan Rhys-Meyers, the good-looking British hunk from Match Point (already reviewed.)

I loved it on Showtime but missed a great deal of it. I was glad to see it on BBC on Wednesday nights at a reasonable hour. It’s done with big screen quality in one- hour episodes. You can see the previous episode the hour before the “new” one in case you miss an episode. I believe there are three seasons, but I’m not sure if BBC will carry all of them. It helps to start from Season 1 and Episode 1 when Henry becomes King. (I think you can see them on the internet, too.)

The acting, costumes and sets are super. It’s emotional without being painful. Literary and artistic but comprehensible. Music is period and unobtrusive, but most scenes are done with no musical background. Exceptional television show. British series often are. Try to catch it. It’s worth watching if you can on watch one episode. It’s spell-binding.

I don’t know how true to history the series is, but Jonathan is beyond good. (I’m running out of superlatives. Groan.) GOOD, truly, GOOD.

You get the message now I love movies and “critique” most of them as good (for lack of a better word.) In fact, I don’t think I’d watch a bad movie just to review it. I’m a reviewer not a critic. I think critics enjoy bad-mouthing movies. Not I.

Match Point 2005

2011-01-26T08:09:00.000-08:00

Click on title above to see IMDb info about movie

Director: Woody Allen, Writer: Woody Allen
Stars: Jonathan Rhys-Meyers, Scarlett Johansson, Emily Mortimer, and Matthew Goode

Story is about a former tennis pro who falls for a sexy American girl who happens to be involved with his friend and soon-to-be brother-in-law. It takes him into a world he has never know before. Most of the movie is about falling deeper and deeper into that world. Does he ever really get out?

There's not much more I can say about this movie other than pointing to the list of nominations and wins in the film industry. Too many to list here with the acception of the Academy Award nomination for Woody Allen. (See link to these nominations and awards on IMDb.

Previous Woody Allen movies have not been any of my favorite movies--perhaps because of their type of humor. However, this was different (a drama thriller) and one of his best if not his the best. (Woody Allen agreed with this himself. See Wikipedia entry for Match Point.)

This movie was so suspenseful I could hardly stand it. It's impossible to figure out what's going to happen in advance (and I'm usually good at guessing since I'm a writer and have studied various types of writing including screenplays.) I always appreciate a story that keeps me guessing.

Everyone's acting was exceptional. And I got to see my favorite actor Matthew Goode. He's always good. (I don't ever expect to see him do badly in a movie even a bad movie.) Definitely rent and see this one.

See Jonathan Rhys-Myers as Henry the VIII in The Tudors series now being shown on BBC. (as of Jan. 2010.)

Night at the Museum: Battle at the Smithsonian

2011-01-24T09:42:00.000-08:00

Click title to see IMDb page for this movie

HBO puts on the same movie a number of times in a month, spreading it out onto all the HBO channels to reach viewers at all times of the day and night.

Recently I have been watching Night at the Museum: Battle at the Smithsonian (2009, Ben Stiller, Hank Azaria, and Amy Adams, Robin Williams,and a large cast of other actors both big and small. (Some were very small--about 2 inches high not to mention the ones in Black and White. (You've got to see it.)

Ben Stiller is Ben Stiller. Sometimes more silly, sometimes less silly as he was in this movie. He's nearly the "straight man" which means setting up the scenes and jokes for the other characters, allowing them to be funny. He's less obnoxious in this movie than in some of his earlier movies. His newer movies seem to have more substance.

I thought the first Night at the Museum was a kid movie and wasn't impressed with it. But I thoroughly enjoyed this sequel. Enough to watch it more than once just for the enjoyment. It's one of the movie sequels that are better than the original.

First of all, the FX graphics and animation were very good. None of it looked goofy or fake. Well, maybe the Einstein bobble heads.

Hank Azaria was the funniest I've ever seen him. In fact, his acting was great. (I really haven't seen him "acting: before, he usually just plays Hank. He's done mostly television but he does well in this movie plus his costumes, the voice--all good. (Bravo, Hank. Hope to see more of that kind of role for you.)

Amy Adams did a great rendition of Amelia Earhart. She did well with speaking like Amelia and only slipped into the "Amy Adams accent" a couple of times. Though, I don't think half* the population would notice. Her clothes looked painted on. (*The men half of the population and some of the women. You know who you are.)

This is a movie worth seeing by kids and adults. Clean fun (whatever that is.)

Catch it on HBO or rent the DVD. (I love Netflix.)

Watchmen

2011-01-21T17:07:00.000-08:00

Click title to see IMDb movie info

Oh man. I put Watchmen on my NetFlix queue and then moved it to the end of the list. But tonight I stumbled across it on MAX tonight. Missed the first 40 minutes so I am going to have to watch it again.

All I can say is this is a totally awesome. It's funny though gory. The retired superheros came out of retirement to track down the guy that was killing them off. There were flashback to things that happened when they were superheros in action.

Matthew Goode, again, is unrecognizable, hidden in his character. Blond with an American accent (sort of.) The other actors were unrecognizable, too. The girl in the movie (Malin Akerman) looked so much like Lucy Lawless (who played Xena, Warrior Princess.) Some of the puns, funny dialog, visual jokes are really funny.

One sticks out in my mind. One character asks, "What ever happened to the American Dream?" The other answers, "It came true."

Other tongue-in-cheek humor--the leader of the criminals in prison is a little person, and the Comedian wears a smiley face button (while he was shooting people.)

This movie is not for everyone. Especially not for children. Or squeamish sissies.

But it's a good movie. I say rent it if you like this genre.

Below: Malin Akerman and Matthew Goode (click to enlarge)

Imagine Me and You

2011-01-18T17:26:00.001-08:00

As my loyal readers may remember, I fell in love with Leap Year and Matthew Goode's acting. I vowed to watch my way through all of his movies, even those in which he was a supporting actor. I joined NetFlix to expedite that end.

I recently did a review of Matthew Goode's movie Brideshead Revisited and frankly, I wasn't truly impressed with it, nor with Matthew's performance.

Tonight I watched Imagine Me and You (2005) on DVD. I thought it was a romantic comedy. Maybe it's just me being too manic-depressive, but I cried at the end. I realize now that it was a drama with a few laughs in it.

I was happy for the two women falling in love and finding a will and a way to be together. In a romance or a romantic comedy everyone ends up happily-ever-after. But not really this one. It was sad for at least one person. And for me.

It was Matthew Goode's character, Hector. The husband of one of the lead characters. In fact, he himself was one of the leads (is that...tri-stars instead of just co-stars?)

Matthew's performance was overwhelmingly good. Mainly, through his acting, I felt what Hector felt. Once again, in the same way he did in Leap Year, he convinced me that the character was completely real. Goode is a magician as I've said in other posts. He's an amazing actor. He had me in the palm of his hand. He was only 25 or 26 when this was filmed, so think how many more movies he can delight us with in the rest of his career. YES!

This movie was well done so please do watch it. (Even if you cry.) It much more than a comedy/drams It went much deeper than that. (Is that the way with European movies over American? We're spoon-feed movies in America.) And keep watching the start of the credits to see the real end of the movie.

The movie is a study in human nature. Personal. Touching. Believable. The title refers not just to a song, but to the fact that everyone imagines a relationship with a person they admire, including the 11 year old girl.

Both the woman leads in the movie are beautiful. And Matthew is gorgeous. His lovely blue eyes. And sweet smiles of which he has a magnificent repertoire, he a master at subtle but vastly varied facial expression.

I'm going to sign off now. No, not to cry but to watch it again, and as many times as I can before I need to send it back to NetFlix in order to watch the next Matthew Goode movie in my queue.

Incidentally, I told you that I have trouble understanding British accents. In this movie, the young people talk so fast, I found it impossible to listen, read the closed captioning, and watch the beautiful actresses and actor at the same time. That's a very good reason to watch it a time for each aspect.

IMPORTANT NOTE: Oh hell. I wish they would stop putting the end of a movie after the credits start. It's too easy to miss them. So be aware of this and watch it to the real ending. I'm glad I caught it after my second viewing of the movie. You will see a happier Heck. Happier ending for all. I loved Matthew's big smile at the end.

Yes. Good movie. Go for it.

Thanks and appreciation to: Director: Ol Parker, Writer: Ol Parker Stars:Piper Perabo, Lena Headey and Matthew Goode. Rated R. Fox Searchlight Movies.

Sherlock (PBS TV, Masterpiece Theater)

2011-01-14T14:57:00.000-08:00

New series on PBS: Sherlock (a 21st century "consulting detective") starring Benedict Cumberbatch and Martin Freeman as Dr. John Watson. EXCELLENT. WONDERFUL. FABULOUS.

I loved the "old" Sherlock, too. But this show is phenomenal.

Cumberbatch is good, fascinating, and strikingly handsome in an exotic way (love that curly hair and blue blue eyes) but Martin Freeman is funny, cute, and a wonderful actor and I adore his Dr. Watson struggling to maintain equilibrium while following along on the radical adventures of the young Sherlock Holmes.

Watch it. It's good.

MORE MORE MORE ! We want more ! Tell BBC and PBS!!!

Brideshead Revisited

2011-01-14T11:17:00.000-08:00

I watched the Matthew Goode movie Brideshead Revisited after falling in-love with Matthew, his character Declan and his performance in Leap Year.

First of all, I must say there is no comparison between a comedy and a serious drama, especially if the drama happens to be a rather artistic, British movie, and comedy an America fantasy (which romances happen to be.) American movies might not be the height of artistic endeavor but at least Americans and "Irishmen" know how to show emotions and laugh.

The second thing, I can't get over how different Matthew Goode looks, not just from movie to movie, but scene to scene. Some scenes he looks amazingly exotic, sometimes extremely good looking, in other rather strange with his receding chin, painfully thin physique, and rounded shoulders (are tall people that way because they tried to hide their height when they were growing up?)

Brideshead Revisited is a British movie, indeed, and I think one really has to be British to appreciate it fully. It was a bit dry, if not bland. I was rather disappointed with the lack of emotion (other than the emotions that the characters were feeling but not showing by intent.) Even the sex scene wasn't particularly sexy (at least the British are finally putting sex into their movies.)

The movie was good but not great. Matthew was good but not great. It had a strange flow as if it were a documentary. The scene I liked the most was at the end when Charles comes into the chapel,dips his fingers in the holy water with which, it was revealed, he intended to snuff out the chapel candle. Good for you, Charles, diehard atheist til the end.

Quite frankly, I feel no need to ever see this movie again. I think I will go back to watching Leap Year again and again until I find another Matthew Goode movie (or any movie)I like as much. I think perhaps Matthew'll be better in movies (and even more good-looking) as he gets older.

Another thing I would like to mention. I don't know if the articles on the internet are correct saying that Matthew wasn't happy with his performance in Leap Year, and in fact, didn't like the movie. I find that insulting to the viewers that loved it and/or enjoyed.

Personally, I have something to say about that: "Matthew, you are an actor. To be in the movies you have to be a whore. Not every movie is Shakespeare."

Good and Dead by Jane Langton

2011-01-13T14:22:00.000-08:00

Image is from Jane Langton website
.
I just finished reading an early book of Jane Langton's. It is loosely defined as a mystery and Homer Kelley as the sleuth. Good and Dead, about a group of people that all attend the same church.

It's less of a mystery than a study of human nature. Her characters are fascinating with humorous names. They do strange things. They're funny. Funny Ha-Ha, and Funny Strange. The narratives are funny.

And then, Jane's descriptions are rich and poetic. A new way of looking at things. Great metaphors and unique way of looking at things. Her stories are inventive and different. Entertaining and delightful.

It's refreshing to read a book with out a lot of creepy details about death and murder. (A few of the characters in this book die of natural causes.) It's not depressing or gory.

It's fun to read Jane's novels in the order they were written. I read one of the early ones recently (Transcendental Murders) in which Homer meets his wife Mary for the first time. I read the ones where they are a retired couple first, so it was a delight to see how they got together. Homer is a literary scholar and so is Mary. Homer is retired from the District Attorney's office as a law enforcement officer. The theme of the series revolves around people who love and study the New England poets and old American authors.

It's good to read a book from earlier years that doesn't have a lot of technology involved. The library had card files instead of computers to find a book (if you recall what they were.)

None of the characters is calling anyone from a cell phone. In fact, if cell phones had been invented, one of the guys wouldn't have gotten stuck in a snow storm.

So. Get yourself a Jane Langton novel. Enjoy yourself.

Matthew Goode

2011-01-10T11:18:00.001-08:00

.
.
.
.
.
SEE WHAT I MEAN ABOUT MATTHEW GOODE NOT EVEN RESEMBLING HIS CHARACTER DECLAN IN LEAP YEAR AT ALL?

Picture one: Declan, Picture 2: Matthew. Picture 3: Even when Matthew is "wearing" his hair and beard like Declan's, he still doesn't look like Declan. Declan was a scruffy, surly Irishman with a broken heart and a grudge. And a rather poor attitude towards life and women, until Anna from Boston came into his life much by accident than desire.

Matthew Goode looks like a young, sweet guy in his pictures. His interviews show a soft spoken, witty man with a British accent.

I am sure Matthew has played characters in other movies where he didn't remotely resemble himself. Like Watchmen for instance. And A Single Man either for that matter.

HOW DOES HE DO THAT?!?

AMAZING.

HE'S MORE OF A MAGICIAN THAN AN ACTOR.

I guess I am one of those women who are attracted to the "bad boys." I prefer Declan to Matthew. No offence intended.

All I can say is thank you to Matthew for creating Declan.

And thanks to the screenwriters. Good script. Good job.

Movies vs. Books

2011-01-02T18:24:00.000-08:00

Okay, I admit I am not reading as many books as I used to. I was reading 52 books a year. Average one per week. Except for Diana Gabaldon's which count as three books on my lists. In 2010 I was a bit below that goal. I have a lot of excuses. My grandkids live here...so I'm busy, distracted, interrupted, too tired at night to do anything but fall asleep. I had a serious illness and stroke in 2008 and had to learn how to read again...knew the meanings of the words but read really slow at first. I had open heart surgery and my husband died in 2009. I sit around crying a lot with grief. Going places and doing more, I think. Worrying about getting old. Who me? Never.

So. Watching movies and TV is getting me out of myself for awhile. Does it solve problems or cause them?

Anyway, I read a review someplace about Amy Adams where someone said Amy looked and sounded, in Leap Year, exactly like she did in Enchanted.

WHAT!??!?!

I'm watching Enchanted now and (besides it being a kid movie) Amy Adams isn't even recognizable in Enchanted. Not only doesn't she look and sound the same as Anna in Leap Year, she doesn't even look and sound like Amy Adams.

In Enchanted, I think she sounds and looks more like Brenda in Catch Me If You Can. Except for the braces. I think putting her in Enchanted was akin to casting a grown-up in Wizard of Oz, but okay...

Having mentioned Amy Adams my thoughts jumped right to her costar in Leap Year, Matthew Goode. I realized tonight that I when I said in an earlier blog I have never seen Matthew Goode's other movies, I was wrong. At least I have seen a couple of them. I just never noticed him. First of all, it's that British accent. I simply cannot understand, out of all the accents in the world, the British accent in movies or on TV. At least if I'm in a conversation with a Brit, I can ask them to repeat. I have to rely on closed captioning for British accents. Unfortunately they don't usually have CC on foreign movies (filmed and DVD'd in other than the United States.) And they never have closed captioning in movie theaters. YET.

Anyway, Matthew Goode has had some supporting parts in a few movies and TV shows I have seen. (Inspector Lynley on PBS for one, Match Point.) But he's starred in some artsy movies that I never considered watching. I guess I'll have to go back and try them if even to verify my assertion that he is an amazing actor.

I am sad to say, without that growling, knitted eyebrow look he used in Leap Year, he's really not appealing to me. He's so youthful looking, way too slender, and, what is it? Clean-cut? White-bread? British? And witty to the point of sounding sarcastic. Oh well. It's not like anyone is going to set me up on a blind date with him. (And good since I am old enough to be his mother. In fact, I have kids older than he.)

Regarding Enchanted. Did Amy Adams really do her own singing? (I can't believe she even did her own talking.)

I guess Amy Adams, Matthew Goode (and even Leo Dicaprio) are the lucky ones that will still look 16 when they are 50. Sigh.

Leonardo DiCaprio

2010-12-28T15:26:00.000-08:00

A word about Leo's movies. I loved Leo when he played nice, sweet, young guy roles. He was good. And cute. Some serious roles and he has been fantastic. I can't believe he hasn't won an academy award by now (since he has been nominated.)

But I don't trust his movies anymore. I think maybe he's stuck in the horror genre.

First it was Titanic, that started it all for me. I refused to see it until someone told me the end. They advertised it as a "love story." I know enough to know the difference between love stories and romances. Romances have happy endings. In love stories, one or both of them die. so I knew in advance his character didn't survive the north Atlantic icy waters.

Then was in that true story where he played the guy who went through life as an impostor and forger, Catch Me If You Can. (By the way, I can remember seeing the original guy on "What's My Line" about a hundred years ago.) Leo's character languished in a foreign jail for years and nearly starved. Icky. However, my BFF movie star Amy Adams is in this one too. Brava.

Then it was Blood Diamond. It was a violent, politically apropos story. And he dies at the end. Heart breaking. Horrible.

And then The Departed. I should have known better. Hel-lo!!! Departed means dead. Everyone died at the end but that one guy and I can't remember if he was one of the good guys or bad guys. They had undercover good guys in the nest of bad guys, and bad guys serving as cops. Leo was an undercover good guy but did everything the bad guys did, so it was hard to decide. I was disappointed to see Leo bite the dust but glad to see Matt Damon finished off. (I seriously don't like Matt. It's not that he's a bad actor. He just doesn't act at all. He may have made a turn for the better in Hearafter. Clint Eastwood actually squeezed a real performance out of Matt.)

I was recently freaked out by the DVD of Shutter Island. This movie makes Leo a bonafied horror movie star. He is insane in this movie and undergoing some weird & awful therapy. When he remembers the real circumstance of why he is in an asylum for the criminally insane, believe me, the most sane thing he could have done was go insane. It was genuinely horrible. And it's unusual that I saw it in the movie theater about a year ago and don't even remember it. Maybe I belong in an asylum for the forgetfully insane. (Is bonafied a word?)

So, I would love to see Leo in a romantic comedy. Come on, all the other popular actors have had to endure them, why not you? Get into a chick flick and learn to be a little lighthearted for us women. Laugh it up a little.

Jane Langton books

2010-12-26T14:03:00.000-08:00

I have been watching movies (quality ones) that I have forgotten about books.

That's a joke because even tho I have recently donated about 500 books to thrift stores in my neighborhood, I still read despite the movies that are keeping me enthralled.

Just for the record, I love Jane Langton's books. They are loosely described as mysteries, are well-written, the characters are charming, the author is delightful and witty with her descriptions.

Thankfully these books are older and might be out of print, but you can look for them in the thrift and used book stores.

And I wonder if Amy Adams has read any Jane Langton? (See my movie reviews below.)

I know authors don't like used book sales, but if it turns on the readers to a certain author so that they begin to buy the new editions, I say "Why not?"

Julie and Julia, Meryl Streep and Amy Adams

2010-12-26T13:45:00.001-08:00

To rent or buy. Go for it.

I have been watching several movies with Amy Adams and feel, by now, that Amy Adams is my best friend.

I absolutely love Julie and Julia. Both actresses are wonderful.

It's well done and parts of it are delicious.

It is destined to sell a lot of books..Julia Child's cook books, memoires, and bios, and Julie Powell's books, too, if you like her sort of book. I am told not to base her readability on this movie, but you may if you prefer.

As the credits say at the beginning, the movie is based on two true stories.

In my opinion this movie, as far as true stories go, is more entertaining that Eat, Pray, Love.

Don't miss it. Fun movie and good acting all around.

I can't be called a critic because I love most movies. Except The Departed. Even Attack of the Killer Tomatoes is better than The Departed. Oh, that goes for the HORROR movie, too, Shatter Island. Horrid movie. Broke my heart. Avoid it.

Leap Year --Good Movie with Amy Adams and Matthew Goode

2010-12-25T20:14:00.000-08:00

Leap Year is now on DVD and HBO with Amy Adams and Matthew Goode in leading roles.

The last time I fell totally in love with a movie as much as I have Leap Year it was The Phantom the Opera. (As some of my friends remember, I fell totally in love with Gerard Butler too, but that's another story.)

I LOVE this movie. I might have set a world record in how many times I've seen it. Every time I see it, I still enjoy it. It's cute and funny but often serious and sensitive.

It's a "feel-good movie." I know it might be classified as a romantic comedy and a chick flick. But it's a genuine, enjoyable entertainment. The plot goes much deeper than just a formula romance.

Amy Adams is always good. She put in a perfect performance and made the movie into a worthwhile & mainstream movie.(Amy Adams could be in a movie about dead mice and still be great.)

Adam Scott was good playing the rather bland boyfriend...I mean that's what he was supposed to be and did it well.

I haven't seen any of Matthew Goode's other movies yet, but all I can say based on Leap Year is that Matthew Goode is an AMAZING actor.

I fell in-love with his character Declan O'Callaghan Matthew created. Matthew is a creative genius. What makes him even more amazing is the fact that he completely submerged himself into Declan O'Callaghan. I couldn't find any resemblance whatsoever between the character and the actor.

Declan is a scruffy, obnoxious, quiet man with an Irish accent. I was surprised to see Matthew is a young, clean cut, witty, Englishman (and a bit stuck on himself in my opinion.) He acting such a feat of magic, a conjuring trick, he completely submerged himself into the character. (Even with 300 I could still see Gerry Butler inside that costume.)

I think the story is best revealed in the facial expressions, so watch carefully. Matthew Goode is excellent in conveying so much more than expected with a look and body language.

One of the most important keys to the story is what happens in the B & B. If you decide it's "yes" the rest of the movie and the interplay between the characters makes absolute sense. If you think it's "no" then watch it again assuming you're wrong, and you'll see what I mean. Many things after that become clear.(I have a list of 38 "hints" that support a "yes" decision on my other blog Advising Myself.) An example of how good Goode is at conveying what's really going on between the main characters, watch his expression in the scene on the bridge when Declan says, "Apparently not" and first looks towards Anna and then directly at her. He's saying so much more than "apparently not."

I can't really say anymore without giving it all away. (Well, we know a romance has a happy ending, the enjoyment is seeing just how that unfolds. In this case, I think the romance is done with a reverse plot--a man is waiting for a girl to grown up and take things seriously, rather than the typical plot of the girl waiting for a guy to come to his senses. Very innovative.)

If you are good at reading hidden clues and facial expressions, you are going to like this movie. It's well written with good direction as well as being extremely well acted. Director: Anand Tucker and Writers: Deborah Kaplan, Harry Elfont.

On a scale of 1 to 10, I give it a 9 (less than a 10 because of some cutting/editing problems that aren't that noticeable.)

Hearafter

2010-10-26T14:14:00.000-07:00

Hearafter: GOOD movie. Even Matt Damon was good. I thank Clint Eastwood for getting Matt to act. Wonderfully done movie. Loved it. Go see it.

NaNoWriMo

2010-10-26T14:09:00.000-07:00

I am taking the challenge. National Novel Writing Month 2010. I am writing a novel in Nov. I have two rought drafts under the bed but must come up with a new idea by Nov. 1 and write my fingers to the bone all of November. I hope a character speaks to me in my dreams tonight and lets me know what s/he thinks the plot should be, heck, the genre. Wish me luck.

I have been reading a lot of non-fiction books

2010-03-16T20:37:00.000-07:00

Hello. I am out searching for my true self. If I should get back before I return, please keep me here and ask me to wait. Confusing? Yeah, tell me about it...

OK. I am reading a lot of non-fiction books. Mostly to help me with my tendency to get depressed. I mean, basically, to deal with it and get over it!!! Believe me an illness and a compulsion is not something people do to enjoy themselves. We don't intend to get depressed and don't choose it and when we try to stop it--it's nearly impossible. Unfortunately it gets worse if we try to ignore it.

My doc took me off the antidepressants and my depression lifted immediately. It also stopped my compulsive eating. I wish I had realized this would happen. I would have stopped my meds (and emotional eating) 10 pounds ago.

I am on a low dosage of mood stabilizers and thank goodness I am feeling hopeful now and occasionally joyful.

Wowee.

I am currently reading, among other books by Beverly Engle and Pia Melody about emotional healing and codependency, FACING LOVE ADDICTION.

All can say is "WHEW." I thought I was going crazy. I have been under the influence of a an addiction of sorts, similar to overeating, codependency, and alcoholism, and attempting to relate to a person who has some "addictions" that mesh with mine and trap us both in a toxic non-relationship.

I decided to be the wise and strong one and break out of the pattern and call it quits. It is out of respect for myself and my buddy. The relationship was working, just in a way opposite the way we hoped and wanted. Sort of love/hate relationship with attraction/avoidance cycles that were making us both worse and worse.

I am wanting to recommend that my partner in crime, my former bestfriend will read it too, but it's not my job anymore to fix him anymore that it was my job to contribute to the whole relationship of love/avoidance addictions in the first place.

I want to thank the author Pia Mellody with Andrea and J. Keith Miller co-authors as well as my therapist who recommended the book.

I feel like I am born-again and on the verge of a new style of life as a single/widowed middle-aged woman.

I am thinking of changing my name to JOY like I always wanted to.

Hope and Joy, Ahhhhhhhhhh

Sandy

DVD & VHS movies at the Library

2010-03-16T20:19:00.000-07:00

The Rio Grande Library system has movies to "rent" for free. They are donated, so if you have some movies you don't want anymore, drop them off at the library.

I go to the Tijeras Branch of the Bernalillo County Rio Grande Library System.

I redcently watched:

Miss Pettigrew Lives for a Day

Really really good. Amy Adams was adorable. Frances Dormand was wonderful. It's a chick flick but especially for everyone of all ages.

Also:

An Unmarried Woman

Wow. Jill Clayburg was in great shape back then. What ever happened to her? Don't see her in movies now. It was good to watch because I am single now that I am a widow. But I'm a little bit older than she was. It was a good movie.

Of course, I've seen some movies at the theater. Avatar in 3D twice. Loved it.

And Shutter Island with Leo. He's one of my favorites along with Johnny Depp and Gerard Butler. Leo D. sure did a lot of frowning in that movie. I liked it a lot because it kept me guessing. As a writer I love to watch a screenplay that is new and different and keeps me guessing. It's a good movie when I can't guess what's coming next and don't guess the ending. WQrth watching. It's a suspense/thriller and detective mystery (maybe) not a horror movie like the trailers on TV seemed to present.

I watched a movie I'd seen before. I always enjoy watching Gerry Butler in anything. I could watch him just standing on the stage smiling.

Movies: Our modern mythology where we learn about the secret meanings of life.

Avatar

2010-02-02T14:26:00.000-08:00

Awesome. Fabulous. See it twice, better the second time. 3D is wonderful. And I am going to see it in HD 3D on a Dynamax screen (Century Rio 24) next. Then prob. buy it. I think it should be KEPT on a screen at all times for the next 20 years...especially in 3D.

See it.

Star Trek

2009-12-01T13:38:00.000-08:00

Ahhhh.

Rented it. Watching it. Loved it.

For trekkies, of course, but also good for science fiction and space adventure stories. Excellent movie.

The actors were great!!! Especially the actors playing Spock (his voice could have been a little deeper) and Bones--Dr. McCoy-- was dead-on. Delightful. The rest were good, too.

I wondered for a long time where Scotty was, then theyadded him to the crew--he was one of the cuties that played Dr. No on BBC series. Too small, too thin. But just as lovable.

And the romantic interest was a surprise as was the appearance of an actor and character from the old TV series.

The familiar Kirk personality from the 1960's was brought in by the actor at the very end of the movie when we got a glimpse of the good old Captain Kirk-to-be coming forth. It was very satisfying. (Of course I missed Jeffery Hunter as Capt. Pike but many people won't even remember him.)

Definitely worth renting and watching.

NOTE to the producers: Bring Star Trek series back to the big screen, and we wouldn't mind a weekly series with the new, younger cast.

I'm gonna buy this one.

Insomnia

2009-11-23T00:43:00.000-08:00

My inner child is being so bad....she will NOT go to sleep.

She is playing on the computer.

It is 1:50 AM and I have to answer to NOBODY. (Except God, and I doubt He judges me for what time I fall asleep.)

Why am I worrying about I should this, and I should that?

Serious RULE: Do not should on yourself.

Sandy Insomniac and/or Night Owl

Gamer -- Possibly the best Gerard Butler movie to date

2009-11-02T20:46:00.000-08:00

I am so glad I got to the movies to see Gamer on the big screen. It is possibly the best Gerry Butler movie to date. Not only was he exceptional, so was the entire cast. Excellent. The cinematography, the script, the acting, the FX, some of the best I've seen.

The fact it was filmed in Albuquerque made it more exciting to see our "hometown" on the screen and guess or recognize the sets in Albuquerque. I remember being in the downtown Albuquerque area when they were filming parts of the movie in Nov. two years ago, and stopped to watch with a small crowd. Unfortunately the actors were far at the end of a long street and smoke machines were puffing smoke all over the scene, so the actors were not only a half an inch high from were we stood, but were hazy too from the smoke. (Also, I think the screenwriters were on strike and picking about that time, and did see them on the streets with signs--or was that on the nightly news? I don't know who wrote this script, but I loved it. Thank you, thank you.

I fully intend to buy this movie and watch it again & again. And not just to gaze on GB's glorious muscles. It's a shame the movie wasn't more popular when it was in the theaters but should have a DVD splurge as soon as it comes out. I recommend seeing it at the "last-chance" movie theaters in your hometown. Or rent it (better yet, buy it and tell all your friends to rent or buy it too.)

Let's stop ordinary Americans from saying "Gerry who"? every time his fans mention one of his movies. He's been in over 30 movies and numerous TV shows in Scotland and England, and on recent talk show appearances here--Jay Leno even in the new 9 PM slot. Gerry does romantic comedy (PS I Love You), silly drama (RocknRolla), and ... DUH ... Gerard (pronounced Jarod) Butler, the lovable and talented Scot was THE PHANTOM OF THE "FRIGGING" OPERA. Get a clue.

He now owns production company called Evil Twins, I believe, which was listed as one of the producers of Law-Abiding Citizen. He's in that too. so he may be the only actor this week with two movies in the same theater! AND he was in nearly every scene of Gamer and was clearly the featured star. The story revolved around his character/him.

The R rating of Gamer was unfortunate. I think it's an excellent movie and the violence and sexuality wasn't any worse than that graphic-novel movie 300. (If you recall, Gerry Butler was the scrumptious King and leader of the 300!)

Gamer is fast paced and keeps your interest throughout. It keeps you guessing unlike most American movies that seem to spell everything out and clarify everything at the end. Instead it unfolds for the viewer with suspense and surprise and is never predictable. It gives you the opportunity to pay close attention so you can realize exactly what is going on and when. Very good. Very good.

And the popcorn at the dollar-movies (Cinemark) isn't bad either.

Thanks. Sandy, Critique who loves movies.

Dark Knight

2009-04-28T15:27:00.001-07:00

I must admit I am not a fan of Batman or any of those other cartoon fantasies, although Robert Downey Jr and Iron Man were very was a good movie regardless.

My grandson loves Spiderman but I am hoping that his mommy and daddy will NOT take him to Dark Knight.

I must also admit that I wanted to see it solely for Heath Ledger's performance. After all, it was probably his best acting and as a matter of fact, he won a posthumous scar for it. Seeing throw his heart into the villain was heartbreaking when you consider his death due to overdose of medications didn't have to happen. Very tragic when we lose a young person.

Anyway, the whole movie was dark (not enough light on the set--that kind of dark.) Much of it was gory and disgustingly violent. And I basically had trouble figuring out what was going on--mostly because of the title. Did Batman want the world to think he was The Dark Knight? And if so, why?

I think the average adult would do well to skip this one. It could be handled by mature teens, but not the psycho portion of our population.

See Iron Man instead.

Sandy Schairer, DVD Critique

Rent

2009-04-28T15:23:00.000-07:00

I had a chance to go see RENT on the stage at Popejoy Hall (UNM.) There were times when we could afford season tickets...many of the productions are just music or just dance. Some are dramas--for instance Phantom of the Opera which I have seen on stage twice.

I didn't have a clue what the movie Rent was about so when my husband brought it home, I joined him in watching it on a rental DVD.

It was very moving. The acting and songs were very positive and uplifting.

And the movie was very very sad.

It was a movie that you want to call up the author and director and tell them "Thanks."

I burst into tears when it was over and placed a call to a gay relative to see if she had seen it. Yes, she saw it on Broadway.

So, watch it if you want a more deep almost spiritual awakening from this movie.

Sandy Schairer, DVD Critic

Junkdog Millionaire

2009-04-28T15:18:00.001-07:00

Watched the "best" movie of the year -- received Oscar at least -- on DVD a couple of weekends ago.

Several scenes of the main character's youth (movie was done with a great deal of flash-backs) were hard to watch, they were in someplace like India and very different from the United States.
It was amazing that the child survived until adulthood.

It was a well done movie but a definite eye-opener. It was not a pleasant movie to watch, so don't rent it to escape from life for a couple hours. It makes you think. And feel.

The acting was excellent. So I recommend it if you have the guts to watch it.

Sandy Schairer, DVD Critic

Bones Season Finale

2008-05-20T08:53:00.000-07:00

Bones was becoming one of my favorite shows...mostly because of the interplay between Tempe and Booth...reminiscent of Skully and Mulder's unacknowledged attraction. (And wasn't Booth magnificent in the bathtub scene--quite a physique!!) Plus the characters are all beautiful and have delightful personalities. They were a joy to watch...

But it was ruined for me last night with the season finale. They didn't continue the suspenseful cliffhanger from last week...they just opened with everyone at Booth's funeral. I saw him wounded the week before, but it wasn't in a fatal place. So hey, when did he die? How? If he'd died, wouldn't Tempe have been at his side in the ambulance or the hospital and said good-bye? She would have known. Right?

The way they did that whole thing was harsh and unrealistic.
,
But the capper was making Zack into a hostile character before, evidently kicking that character off the show for good. There was little story line to follow there...they just summed it up and charged and convicted him in about 2 minutes at the end. It made no sense whatsoever.

There is NO WAY the real Zack would have turned evil or gone insane. That is just bad writing. They should have just killed him off if he was going off the show and let us mourn him and then wonder for a few months if he were coming back next season the way they faked Booth's death. By the next season we would have gotten over it if he were truly gone. We could have had a happy memory of him and moved on. Thanks for nothin'.

Now the show is ruined for me completely. I was going to watch all the previous shows I'd missed (like buying the DVD's of the first and second season so I could watch them over and over like I do Sex and the City.) But not now. Knowing that Zack is not what he appears to be in the previous shows, has ruined it for me past, present and future.

Hint, hint, if a character is bad, you have to write in some evidence throughout the show, not just spring it one us in the last show. DUH. It's OUT OF CHARACTER. I'm a writer, I know that element. It was just bad writing.

You'd think the writers' strike wasn't truly over yet and one of the stagehands dashed off a script, such that it was, for the last show. (No offense to stagehands. They might know better!)

Give it up. Bones is history.

It was reminiscent of the way MASH writers killed off Col. Blake when we thought he was going home. Cruel. And then they had that woman strangle what Hawkeye thought was a chicken and it was really her own baby. (Doesn't Dr. Phil say if we witness abuse we are also abused? I think so.) Tsk. Tsk.

People of intelligence do watch TV shows. We want enjoyment as well as sensibility. We don't care much for being tricked or emotionally abused. I mean isn't the viewer important to the show? Why would they risk running off viewers with stupid story lines and poor writing?

It was similar feeling for me with Numbers when they made that one FBI agent into a bad-cop in league with the terrorists. I thought the female lead with in love with him...what was that about? I couldn't watch the reruns again because he was a bad guy and by then I knew it. I didn't trust him or the writers. And up until then, he'd was one darn good agent. Not consistent.

Besides, where do the producers get off leaving the viewing public with a painful, negative view of law enforcement? Teach a whole generation of young people (who are already running wild) that law enforcement can't be trusted?

Whatever happened to promoting some respect and trust? Is there nothing to trust in America? Well, of course there is. Just not the TV industry. Not anymore.

I worked at Las Vegas Metro PD for a long time and we had only ONE cop misguided enough to commit a burglary while on duty and then got called to write up the crime report which was how they caught him...too many details that only the perp would have known. [Oh, and the one cop that married two woman at the same time and got divorced by both (not to mention fired) while he was jail.]

It was a shock to see Warick killed at the end of CSI the other night...but I saw it coming and I guessed who the bad buy really was...he was a disagreeable mean guy throughout the whole series. They had been setting up Warick for worse and worse things all season. So, it was well-written and believable when he got assassinated at the end. It was a tragedy but sympathetic for the viewers.

Thank goodness when Sarah left the show she just got in a cab and rode away. It was sad to see her go, but not traumatic. Though, I thought that she should have just married Gil and then stayed home as a housewife making pottery or doing scrapbooking. Maybe have a baby eventually. Gil could have mentioned her from time to time. They missed out on a satisfying ending for women!!!

So, I'm saying good-bye to Bones. OH, I still love Kathy Reichs and and her Temperance Brennan novels. But this TV show has little to do with them anyway. I like the Tempe in the books, older and and wiser with a daughter, ex-husband and a cat (plus part-time dog.) And she's smart enough to be in-love with her Detective Ryan. Yes!

I was thinking TV had something better to offer in recent years. Medium is good. They had a HAPPY ENDING this season. Thanks for that.

Bye for now. Live and learn from your mistakes, huh?

Nim's Island -- A Kid Movie, Sort Of

2008-04-22T17:28:00.000-07:00

I don't think I'm the one to review Nim's Island competely because I am a dyed-in-the-wool Gerard Butler fan...and they pronounce his name right in the trailer...it sort of like Gerald except with an r or ah, or like Jared. Good.

I will say the story was good--well-done screenplay. Special effects were believable. No one was killed, even the strange lizards that allowed themselves to be lobbed at the island "invaders."

Abigail Breslin was wonderful...she is the Academy Award winner for Little Miss Sunshine. The otheractors took a back seat to her performance and allowed her to be the star. In fact, Gerry Butler took a very far back seat and downplayed his parts...he played the Dad and the character of the author's adventure novels.

Jodie Foster was wonderful. There is nothing more to say, she blew me away. Perfect in a fantastical comedy, taking it seriously throughout. Bravo, Jodie.

Worth seeing even if you aren't a child.

Go.

Books, Books, Books

2008-04-01T13:25:00.000-07:00

I love mysteries--written, TV series, and movies (of which there are very few.)

I recently joined a large print book club -- Doubleday -- and chose a couple of mysteries in my introductory offer.

One was Bones to Ashes by Kathy Reichs.

My husband noted that the TV series Bones is based on the character from Kathy Reich's mystery series...the forensic anthropologist Temperance Brennan.

After I read it, I headed to the library to find more of Kathy Reichs.

All I can say is having a Kathy Reichs book in the house is like having a bag of M & M's. Once you open it, you can't stop.

I've read three now with two more waiting in the wings.

To say Kathy Reichs is a good writer would be a watered down comment. The books are habit forming if not addictive.

Be prepared to be educated, entertained, delighted and your funny bone tickled with the author's witty metaphors that take the place of dull descriptive text.

They're not all action...but they're good, good, good.

The Holiday

2008-01-31T21:40:00.002-08:00

I loved this movie. I saw it in the theater last Christmas time. I bought it and watched a bunch of times.

It's delightful.

See it.

Really. Rent it, better yet, buy it so you can watch it again and again.

Cameron Diaz and Kate Winslet are wonderful. The boys are good, too. Best I've seen from Jude Law. And Jack Black played a wonderfully real guy. I loved all of them. I loved the story. And Eliah Wallach was great, I've been a fan of his my whole life. What can I say? I love old guys now that I'm getting up there...especially the ones with white goatees and little ole Jewish guys, wow.

Thanks. GREAT MOVIE> >>>

Sandy the movie critic

3:10 to Yuma

2008-01-31T21:33:00.001-08:00

This was the western version of The Departed. (As you may recall, I hated The Departed.)

Everyone in 3:10 except the real bad guy got at the end. He turned himself in. Yeah, right.

I love Christian Bale. I love Russell Crowe. But this movie was sort of cold-hearted bloody.

I would say, skip it unless you are a Crowe or Bale fan.

Thanks. Sandy the movie critic

PS I LOVE YOU

2008-01-31T21:14:00.000-08:00

PS I Loved it. I saw it twice...first time the same day it opened and took me 3 hours to drive home in the snow and ice storm...30 miles...we were going 4 miles an hour through the canyon...fun fun.

But Hillary Swank was fabulous, of course, she aways is. She was in every scene and stole the show. The other girls were good, too. I love the costumes.

2nd time I saw I took my honey. He said he liked it, it was good. it I loved the movie even more the second time. Butler can do that to me. (Yes, my honey knows about my mad crush on Butler. Heck, I'm old enough to be Gerbear's mother, duh.)

I was thrilled that Gerry Butler sang...we want more of his delicious deep sexy voice.

True the movie was a corny romantic comedy...but it had its serious side. I laughed and cried. What more could you want from a movie. Two beautiful young people doing what they love best...acting.

The guy at the end of the movie with the dimples that the girl meets in Ireland? He was cute, looks a little bit like Gerry. But Gerard Butler (actually pronounced correctly in the trailer--Jerod) can act circles around any one of those men. And they were all good, especially Harry Connet Jr.

Kathy Bates was superb as the mother. I've never seen a bad performance from her, even naked in the hot tub with

The only shortcoming of the movie was the outdoor scene depicting the day the couple met--more than 10 years before the time of the movie...they didn't even try to make the actors look younger. Swank acted a little younger with her voice and mannerisms, and let's face it, she's young and doesn't have to fake it even tho she was supposed to be about 18 or 19 then. But Bulter's face looked all craggy and wrinkled...tsk tsk for smoking all those years-- it ready does cause wrinkles--and he looked fantastically young in the other flashbacks filmed indoors.

What can I say? I would stand in line and pay a fortune to watch Gerard Butler just stand in the middle of blank stage -- quiet doing nothin'. I love the boy.

Thanks for a great romantic comedy. KEEP 'EM COMING.

Thank you, Hillary too, for bringing Gerry into the American Hollywood spotlight. Maybe someone will remember him now...if 300 and Phantom of the Opera obviously didn't make him a household name maybe this one will.

HOLLYWOOD: Put him in more movies!!!! PLEASE.

Gerry, thanks for being you. Best of everything to you. I understand you are filming in Albuquerque and quit smoking. GREAT. That makes me and all the rest of your fanatic fans happy. I live near Albuquerque. Would I like to meet you in dark elevator...

Watch the movie. It's a "feel-good" movie. Really. See it.

PS I Love Y'All.

Sandy the movie critique (I went for more than popcorn this time.)

Sweeney Todd

2008-01-31T21:06:00.000-08:00

What was THAT!?!

A dark comedy? Goofy. Gross. Couldn't understand most of the dialog/singing or half the storyline.

And Johnny Depp nominated for best actor??? (Heck he was my favorite actor from the time of Edward Sissorshands...until I flipped for Phantom=Gerry Butler.)

We had a good laugh when Sweeney was over and laughed all the way to the car. I told my honey, as awful as that movie was, Depp will probably win the Academy award for it. That's just like Hollywood. Another group of young men leaving (heck there were at least 20 people in the theater -- it opened more than a month ago) were also quite amused when it ended...one guy sarcastically said in a little kid voice: "Hey, let's go watch it again...." NOT.

What do I know? The girl selling the tickets said she loved the movie. A friend in the popcorn line said she hated the movie. I'm still neutral. I think it has to do with age. The older you get the ickier ICK becomes. I admit I had to cover my eyes when I got the parts that made me go EWW.

Like I said, what do I know? I go to the movies for the [overpriced] popcorn. YUM.

Sandy the movie critic

V for Vendetta

2007-09-06T10:20:00.000-07:00

V for Vendetta

The movie that almost squeaked by me.

This is a FABULOUS movie.

It is not pleasant to watch in places...most disturbing. But it is a worthy, meaningful movie and no one ought to let it slip by them without seeing it once and for all. Please rent or buy it, and watch at least once all the way through.

The Wachowski brothers, who did the Matrix Trilogy, once again showed use their genius--not only in movie making but in delivering a powerful, consistent message to speak to our times through drama, action, head and heart. It was artistic, literary, action-filled...and above all packs a high voltage shock to the mind and heart of America and all the world. It goes beyond mere story-telling, beyond movie-magic, beyond political and social commentary. It's perhaps more of a warning today than when it was made.

Please rent this DVD and watch it!!! It can influence anyone who is willing to watch it with an open mind, and has the power the change the course of history.

Aha, for me, it has yet another great, ambiguous character is a cape and mask. Just as I fell in love with the Phantom of the Opera--the "evil hero" of that movie--I must admire the man in Vendetta in the cape and mask. Is he evil? Or is he a hero? Or is he neither or both?

Either way Hugo Weaving, the actor who also played Mr. Smith in the Matrix movies and an elf in Lord of the Rings, was magnificent. He is a rare and delicious talent. I love his voice...he can say so much with his voice; in this movie alone he overcame the limits of wearing a mask throughout the entire movie and being unable to display any facial expressions whatsoever. He played his role above and beyond what a dedicated Shakespearean actor must have done in the 1400's. Bravo, Hugo. Thank you.

The only weakness of the movie was the fake blood splatters in the fights--it perhaps should have been done the way 300 was--slash and stab with painted drops of blood placed on the film without a drop on the actors. But the graphics can be over-looked with a movie as powerful and meaningful as V for Vendetta.

So get it and watch it. You might be "sorry" you did while you experience it unfolding before your eyes, but you will never see things in the world the same way again afterwards. It is much worth the investment of time, money and emotions, not to mention deep thought that will plague you for a long time afterwards.

Thanks, Sandy your movie critic

Planet of the Apes, I think

2007-09-05T09:27:00.000-07:00

This was a strange movie. It was very, very good as far as cinematography, acting, costumes, settings--it was wonderful. The actors playing the various types of apes were amazing!!!

However, the script was, while not terrible, rather lacking.

The movie was nothing like the original Planet of the Apes. The surprise ending everyone was expecting, myself included, was a bigger surprise than we expected because it made absolutely no sense. It was beyond confusing and didn't appear to have anything to do with the movie. It didn't solve any of the mysteries, it created an even bigger one that had no solution.

So if you enjoy action and elaborate cinematography and good acting, rent this DVD (I bought it myself -- not suspecting it is probably not a keeper.) If you are the type to want some meaning and intellectual and/or philosophical stimulation from a movie, skip this one.

I ordered the original Planet of the Apes movie....awaiting it's delivery to my PO Box now.

I have a link to Amazon on this website if you'd like a shortcut to purchasing books and DVD's.

Thanks, Sandy "Movies are our modern era's mythology."

Eye Candy, and OHHH that accent!!

2007-06-08T10:06:00.000-07:00

Well, I'm old enough to be Gerry's mum. [sniff, sniff] Anyway, here he is on Leno with a good clip from 300. He's funny and good-looking and his Scottish accent is cleaned up so much you can acutally understand him. I guess the accent from Glasgow in Scotland is a lot like the deep south accent in America...say, wha?

http://justjared.buzznet.com/2007/06/03/gerard-butler-area-nightclub/

Did you hear that 300 made over $300Million so far!!! I am going to get a big screen TV when the DVD comes out and I can get a brand new copy of 300. (Oh, heck it's mid-June now, and 300 has drawn in over $440,000 so far.)

Gerard, pronounced JERahd. See photo and his award below. Yumm. Congratulations, Gerry, in case you see this!!! WE LOVE YOU.

Premonition

2007-05-25T09:14:00.000-07:00

“Depressed housewife learns her husband was killed in a car accident the day previously, awakens the next morning to find him alive and well at home, and then awakens the next day after to a world in which he is still dead.”

I enjoyed this movie. The screenplay was excellent. Plenty of foreshadowing. And the end was adequately supported throughout the movie and it came to an “of-course” ending.

Sandra Bullock was basically the only star of this movie. She was excellent. But I don’t think this type of thriller (hinting at paranormal? I don’t know.) is ever nominated for Academy Awards. (Well, I take that back Martin Landau won best supporting actor for that sleeper Ed Wood − which was a great movie (to some of us.)

I urge you to avoid this movie is you have suffered a loss recently. Unless you are in the mood to cry for awhile.

If you want some philosophical messages about death and living, this is the movie for you. It’s not done like a horror movie, not creepy, etc. It mostly deals with a woman desperate to handle her own feelings, and make sense of changes in her reality. And of course the inborn drive of humans to take control of their own destiny.

Worth the rental fee, especially if you are a Bullock fan. She does her acting with great natural grace and ability. She's flawless in this regardless of what reality she is dealing with.

CSI

2007-04-28T08:52:00.000-07:00

I must make a comment here even though it's not about a movie. The CSI shows.

The original CSI is set in Las Vegas, thought I doubt it is really filmed there. Having lived there I don't think they have big or numerous trees, grassy yards, and real soil--it's all sand. We're talking about the desert, severe desert. I lived there for 14 years. And there has not been a shot of the front of any police station in Las Vegas in the show. But the illusion of being in Vegas is good, I'm okay with that. I think the police procedurals are very true to life as it pertains to crime investigation and legal matters, except when the detective sits in a room and badgers a suspect into talking without legal counsel. I worked at the LVMPD for 10 years and I know what's legal and what isn't as far as investigating and prosecuting. No, I wasn't a cop. It was "support."

Anyway, I forgive them for any errors as they appear to be minimal.

I like the dark setting. In fact, I often compare CSI show to The X-Files, one of my all-time favorites. CSI's done the same stylistic way, only without aliens. (And I think next week CSI is bringing in the aliens! YAY.) It's great that they show a little of the personal lives of the characters but nothing overwhelming, which would make it into a soap opera. One show that shows more of the personal life is Numbers. It's just enough. I really enjoy the fabulous acting of all the characters in Numbers. Although, I wish they would stop tampering with Larry's personality and keep him consistent. But that's a topic for another blog.)

CSI is stylized and creepy and sometimes tongue-in-cheek funny like the one April 26th.

I think the most handsome man and the most realistic is the coroner who does the autopsies.

The imitators of CSI: CSI NY and CSI Miami fall short of the excellence that the original CSI attains. The characters in those two spin-0ffs are wooden. The settings, especially Miami, are strange because they use the computerized backgrounds of bright yellow, as if they are in Miami and filming in bright sunlight.

The plots on CSI Miami are unrealistic and very seldom show a realism according to the way police matters are actually handled. The "star" (hat strawberry-blond man who ruined NYPD and surely must be old enough to be turning grey by now?) seems to wander into the set and make a short one line quip and that's it!!! He could phone that in. He sounds mysterious like a Dicken's character only in way fewer words.

Well, I am sticking to CSI and leaving the others to the people who think CSI Miami & NY are good.

And since I seldom watch CSI NY, I don't have any further comments on that one. I do think Without a Trace is the more realistic show set in NY.

Comments are welcome. But, no "flaming" comments, please--let's keep it academic and intellectual and refrain from flinging insults in a childish manner. Unless you are a child and what they heck are you doing watching CSI?

300

2007-03-21T11:34:00.000-07:00

I went to see 300 on March 9th, 2007, the day it opened in theaters all over the United States. So did a lot of other people. It grossed over $70Million dollars that weekend making it the top box-office movie for March 9 - 11th (those figures were estimated, it might be even more now.)(U.S. Box Office as of May 18, 2007: $208,323,517WOW.)

Several types of fans showed up, I'm sure. It hit all the bases. Frank Miller and graphic novel fans, of course. And fantasy lovers--especially the ones that are amazed by computer graphics and FX in movies. Then all the fans of the vast cast. Those people that enjoy hero and war movies came, too. And some that like stories based on real events (and this was) and/or movies about ancient Greek and Roman times like Gladiator.

Of course, a big group of those fans who are wildly in-love with Gerard Butler who stared in the movie as King Leonidas flocked to see this movie. (These are the women that would pay big bucks to see a movie of Gerry Butler just standing there or sitting in a chair. I admit I'm one.)

The movie was exceptional. I know y'all think that I am gaga over all movies, especially Gerry-movies, but this was a way different movie than I am used to going to. First of all it was about war and I'm not a war-lover. And of course the battles and violence of which I am not fond.

This movie was set in 480 BC when the King of Sparta took three-hundred Spartan soldiers trained in hand-to-hand combat and the resolution to fight to the death if necessary (plus some Greek soldiers) and held off the Persia Invaders for two days in a mountain pass near the sea.

The graphics were well done. Exceptional. Excellent. Totally believable and amazing. They looked real or at least they blended into the body of the movie without a trace of detection. They didn't look like graphics or cartoons (think of the Titanic and realistic those graphics.)

All I can say about graphics is--go see it. You will know what I mean. I think you'll agree.

Give up your preconceived ideas about this movie and watch it with an open mind, not expecting anything....except something new and great.

This movie was such a work of art that it didn't appear to be "gory" regardless of the intense fight scenes and violence. (I am usually one to cringe at gory scenes and hide my eyes during suspenseful fight scenes even on TV. So if I didn't cringe on this one, you can take my word for it, the violence is manageable.)

This movie was so artistic that even when a particularly well-loved character fell (his body slowly fell, hint hint,) it was a beautiful image. (In comparison to Frank Miller's other graphic novel movie Sin City, which was completely different and left a far different impression and feeling during & after the viewing.)

In fact, when 300 ended, spontaneous applause broke out in the theater. I haven't heard that in ages...maybe since Star Wars or earlier. Wow.

Of course, all of Gerard Butler fans hope this puts him on the celebrity map once and for all, and he'll achieve big-time stardom in American movies SOON. We want more of him and his talent. (He's been in over 25 different movies, shows and TV series/specials (in the British Isles mostly.) AND he played the title role in the Phantom of the Opera by F. Lloyd Webber. But since he is a character-actor and wears costumes (and looks different in every role) not enough people are aware of who Gerard "Gerry" Butler is. This movie is going to make a difference.

Thank you cast and crew and WRITERS for 300. A wonderful masterpiece.

Sandy your movie "critic"
(PS: The only disconserting things about this movie was--Gerry's eyes looked brown, not bluish green as they really are. I guess when you play Greek royalty, you have to look Greek. Not to mention buff. THANK YOU.)

Academy Awards

2007-02-25T22:01:00.000-08:00

Well, the Oscars are over.

My favorite part every year is the obituaries...I like to cry over my old favorites who have passed on.

I was thrilled that the screenwriter for Little Miss Sunshine won!!! YES. Very good.

I didn't mind that Marty won for best director for The Departed. But I was appalled that the best picture of the year in America, with all the really really good movies out there was the most bloody, negative, and violent of all the movies. With no "message" or if there was, I missed it. The other sad, bloody, and violent movies in the run-down had messages about the inspirational and strong spirit of mankind. Oh well. (The Departed was well acted but the story itself was a downer.) I guess I am just sick of America picking violence as our most representative quality. Ahh.

I was disappointed that Leo didn't win best actor. He is a very talented man. What does he have to do to win!?! He is magnificent in the two movies he was in this year. I don't want to see him sitting there when he's as old as Peter O'Toole with umpteen nominations, still waiting for his award.

I certainly hope the voters at the Academy actually watched some of the movies they voted for instead of just calling each other on the phone and picking one their friends recommended for unknown reasons.

Congrats to all the foreign movies in most of the categories, and foreign film-makers that won. It's about time Hollywood gave them equal consideration in the biggest film industry award.
Glad to see the black people being included equally now. Once we include all minorities and ethnic groups in the running, we don't have to make a specific point to give it to someone just because of that...we can actually pick the best of each category regardless.

So long for tonight. Your movie critic, Sandy S

Infamous--Glorious Review of a Work of Art

2007-02-24T18:27:00.000-08:00

How pathetic am I? Sitting home on a Saturday night watching a movie? Not only did I sit and watch the whole movie (and what a wonderful work of art it is) but I watched the whole movie again with the commentary voice over by Douglas McGrath.

What a fabulous tool for a writer--the commentary of a movie. Previously I have listened to the commentaries of directors on movies that I was wild about. But this is a special case. Douglas McGrath was the screenwriter as well as the director.
.
Now here I am sitting at the computer writing about it. Wow.

If you are a writer and enjoy stories about other writers and have a yen for "literary" quality to your movies, presented by talented directors, writers, actors, then you will certainly appreciate my glowing opinion of this movie. I am sure many of those involved in this production consider it the master-piece of their careers. And they should. (Until the next great movie they do, of course!)

I am STUNNED that it received NOT one nomination for an Academy Award!!!!

I think perhaps we have here the subtle resistance of Hollywood against talented actors from other countries. Toby Jones and Daniel Craig are both British actors. They were so good, I can't even think of any more superlatives to use. Just...just...gosh. Fabulous.

I suspect too, for some reason, there is, in Hollywood, a slight "rejection" of a highly dramatic, even artistic, movie using stars better known for light-hearted comedies. But Sandra Bullock and Jeff Daniels were also superb in supporting roles. As was all the supporting cast. I had not one complaint. Everyone seemed so real that I was right there in the movie with them.

I have never seen Bullock and Daniels so clearly into the expression of the roles with their voices, facial expressions, exuding emotions, just wonderful. Thank you, thank you. I will never take you for granted again.

When a movie goes together like this one does, with all the elements--cinematography, costuming, music, script, true story elements, plus all the little things like foreshadowing and uses of color to convey mood...you have a classic work of art that takes the sting out of seeing so many Hollywooded-up movies that are lacking or downright terrible.

This screenplay was based on the book about Truman Capote and his own book In Cold Blood, as well as the story of his whole life actually, by George Plimpton. It brought the man Capote really was, truly alive to a depth that is breath-taking. And nearly all the scenes in the movie were accurate as to the actual event...right down to Capote's merciless gossiping.

As I said, the subject matter of a writer, to a writer, is gold when you can find it. If you are a writer, don't just watch this DVD and listen to the commentary by the screenwriter/director, study it and take into you soul.

All, I can say about the movie is mmmm, mmmm, mmmm. Magnificent.

I saw the other movie about Capote a year ago or so, and unfortunately it was before I got my hearing aids so I couldn't hear a lot of it. I thought it was a good movie, and the starring actor deserved his award, but it definitely spoke of Capote in a very different interpretation. It didn't have the depth and meaning and raw emotion that Infamous has.

Rent it, or buy and watch it.

Much impressed movie "critique" blown-away by a REAL movie, Sandy your movie critic.
Hey is anyone reading this blog? Let me know. Please. Post your comments below.

The Good Shepherd, Notes on a Scandal -- Movie Reviews

2007-02-24T11:50:00.000-08:00

The Good Shepherd

The Good Shepherd. Thumbs down.

I thought I could ignore my better judgment and go to a Matt Damon movie. Certainly there were enough others stars and a story about the CIA to distract me from him.

Unfortunately, I couldn't ignore him in this movie any more than I could ignore Tom Cruise in a Tom Cruise movie. The movie was very confusing...switching back and forth from one era to another--and since Matt Damon didn't change much between the decades except for wearing different glasses, it was hard to follow.

I failed to see why Angelina Jolie took a small part in this movie (heck, any movie!) And why the heck wouldn't a man fall in love with a wife like Angelina even if he wasn't particularly thrilled to get married? That makes no sense.

What I did see was Matt Damon's character getting more and more stoic and withdrawn from life and displaying little to no emotion until the end he was like a rock...nothing...no feelings.

I failed to see the point of the whole movie--oh sure the history of the CIA, but why focus on that one character then? And through in a bunch of other characters that didn't seem to have much to do with the story?

There were characters and small diversions in the movie that had nothing to do with the forward movement of the plot. For the screenplay writer that gave us movies like The Postman, Forest Gump, and The Horse Whisperer, I was surprised to see such a hacked-up story line. Then again it might have been the editor's fault, not the writer. Sorry.

Oh well. I suggest you skip this movie unless you know someone who worked on the movie and want to do them a favor by going. Or watch it when it comes on network TV when nothing better is on and they cut out the really creepy parts and you just want to fill up with popcorn and diet coke (or beer.)

And what the heck was the significance of the title? Were they trying to compare the "sacrifice" the "leader" of the CIA to the REAL Good Shepherd and his sacrifice?

I think somebody is going to hell.

Monday, February 5, 2007

Notes on a Scandal

Notes on Notes on a Scandal....I went to the movies last week prepared to be entertained...no, amazed...by the acting if nothing more. Judi Dench and Cate Blanchett are the cream of the crop in both British and American movieland.

And while I was not disappointed with the excellent performance by both actresses, I was a bit disappointed with the movie. I am not sure it was the script, it was perhaps the forward movement of the story...I felt as if it were more of a horror movie unfolding and the uncomfortable suspense was not pleasant...sort of like "In the Bedroom" was--you watch and watch and hope the events take a turn for the better and everything will come out fine...and ultimately it doesn't. It just ends, still all unsatisfactorily.

I never once "forgot" it was a movie, never got lost in it. I didn't lost in the movie except having a good a bit of anxiety over where the movie was going to go next. (American Beauty had this effect on me, but ended up to be rewarding and almost metaphysical in its resolution.)

This movie could well have been entitled "Abusers and Users" if not "Users and Losers." All the main characters were either abusive, manipulative, or downright domineering. And not one character was "improved" by the events in the stsory...like it's supposed to do in proper story-telling and screenwriting. If anything they continued their unsatisfactory behavior--not learning from it (though they appeared to be punished for it.)

The secondary characters seemed to be put in the story to bounce the two stars off of--i.e. to react emotionally to their behavior(s.) They did an exceptional job but were just not important to the story. What a waste. Bill Nighty's skill was to play an ordinary man which he did wonderfully. (You might not recognize him from having been Davey Jones in Johnny Dep's most recent pirate movie.)

It was a scandal and all the characters behaved scandalously, even though they were all lost in their own little worlds, interacting but not relating somehow.

I realize that "foreign" movies are different than American movies, mostly British movies don't explain things, they let the viewer try to figure out what is going on by themselves. I feel that most foreign movies/dramas seem to be from a "dark" side (except for the one that are downright silly humor, which this was NOT.) There is an undercurrent of disturbing suspense, as I already mentioned. I assume it was supposed to be a "literary" story where the events just unfold andleave it up to the viewer to determine the "message"--no message seemed to be written into the movie, actually.

Only really good thing about this movie was that the two star actresses did good a job, the day I went to see it was free popcorn day, and all the abusers and users seemed to get what was coming to them.

SPOILER:

I felt that Judi Dench's character was especially pathetic and sinister. She was just not an honest person. She used manipulation and trickery to try to obtain what she wanted. In our 21st Century western society, I believe we are able to get closer to what we desire in life, I would home, if we are honest about what we want with ourselves and with others. And are more open about it. Having to trick someone into a "relationship" with a deceitful method of false friendship and support, is particularly distasteful and immoral. Her "crimes" were no less immoral than the woman who was caught and had to do time.

And Cate's character and her student--well, they exploited each other if you ask me.

Enough said. See the movie for the acting. But be warned...it's not a great movie. Have some popcorn, it's always good.

LITTLE MISS SUNSHINE: DON"T MISS IT

2007-02-24T11:24:00.000-08:00

I LOVED this movie. I saw it in the theater and then rushed out to buy it as soon as it came out on DVD.

It was great, well-written, funny funny funny. Everyone was wonderful. Some are proven talents. The script was fabulous.

I sincerely hope that this movie finally gets Greg Kinnear a lot more serious attention. He's a talented man mostly just playing funny, ordinary guys. In fact, I have never seen a movie of his that I didn't love. Go, Greg!!!!

My favorite line of Greg's, the give away to the theme of the movie, "Okay, everybody, pretend to be normal."

The movie has everything, makes fun of a lot of things (in a kind, fun way,) and uses everyday occurrences as basis for humor. Genius. Superb. More. More. Please.

The movie family is from Albuquerque and since I am from near there, I had a strange craving to jump up in the theater where I saw the movie in California last summer, and shout "Albuquerque ROCKS!" when the scene gets wild and exciting and wonderful near the end.

It's a "feel good movie", not sappy but it leaves you with a delightful attitude of joy and amusement. Pleased that you have really been entertained in a genuine, honest way.

Definitely SEE this movie. You won't be sorry. The characters are "characters" -- funny funny funny... this cast made even the most outrageously impossible, unbelievable characters come alive and REAL. Magnificent.

I want it to win the BEST PICTURE at the Annual 2007 Academy Awards. But they rarely give the award to the real best picture...except that time, for one amazing, unpredictable moment when they actually noticed that American Beauty was the best picture that year, possibly one of the best movies ever made.

Go, Little Miss Sunshine!!!! Thank you, thank you. If they will Best Picture, I will "win" best picture at the same time.

Sincerely, Sandy your movie "critic" -- in this case a movie rave.

The Departed Review SPOILER

2007-02-24T10:46:00.000-08:00

Okay, I broke my "vow" to never go to a Matt Damon movie ever again...yet again. But I love Leo DiCaprio so much, I thought I would take a chance on this movie. And the fact that it is almost an all star-cast and nominated for best picture made me curious.

When will I learn? !!???!?

I should have taken a clue from the title... The Departed, hello!???!

Departed means dead. Duh-uh!!!!

And Jack Nicholson's character sums it up in the first part of the movie, the basic premise of the movie. He says something about people being either good guys or bad guys and then "When you're looking down the barrel of a gun, what's the difference?" (He said this to a little kid, too.) That was absolutely on the mark for the theme of this flick.

I would not go to see Titanic until someone told me which of the main characters lived and which died. I can take a shock if I know it a head of time. It is sort of like that axiom, "If it's a romance they live happily ever after. If it's a love story one or both of them die." I wish I had known who was the bad guy and who was good guy and who got croaked before I switched on my DVD player.

I was delighted to see Matt Damon playing a bad guy and wanted him to get justice not just "getting dead" (which was postponed until the last 30 seconds and then, no blood, no body falling to the ground. I wanted to see the girlfriend turn in the letter and get the SOB into trouble and see him squirm while she triumphed over him. But alas, no feminine triumphs in this movie. At least in this movie they weren't victims.)

What kind of agent does Damon have that gets him him all the breaks in his movie contracts? Geeze.

The good guys got just as dead as the bad guys. What kind of justice is that? Was the point that the cops and bad guys are the f' ing SAME? It seems so in this script.

I would not have watched this if I had known it was both anti-crime and anti-cop. In other words, they wuz all bad-guys and nobody wins in the end. Everybody loses. Especially the viewer, at least, this viewer.

Is this is what our country is coming to? Not just the criminals but the cops and the average citizens taking the law and justice into their own hands? I don't believe in that. That is not right. I don't think it's true, either. Not yet. I still believe there are some good guys left in our organizations and institutions.

I wanted the good guy, even tho he was doing some pretty bad stuff (not by principle but because he was undercover) to live happily ever after. Or at least survive after he was put into a no-win situation and badly and immorally taken advantage of by everyone for his newbie dedication and willingness to participate in the fight over evil. Maybe he was too "innocent" or something and they had to "punish" him for that? I don't know. Are we doing that to our children now to "make" them grow-up? God forbid. And I doubt that guys are going to be lining up to go to prison and beat the crap out of someone just so they can get a wonderful, dubious, job of undercover superhero.

If I had know that the shocking scene that upset and angered me most about the movie was in there, I wouldn't have touched this DVD with a ten-foot pole. It felt like I GOT SHOT in the heart and mostly the mind. A thinking person shouldn't expose themselves to this kind of genre.

I can't believe it's nominated for a couple Academy Awards. Or yeah maybe the acting was good. Leo was fabulous and not just because I love him. He has matured as an artist and a man and is an exceptional actor in all his movies now. (He was actually the main character in this movie, so why the hell did Matt Damon get the "good" scenes?)

I don't think the screenplay nor the directing is worthy of an Academy Award, but that is just my opinion. They might give the award for directing to Scorsese because they admire him as a director regardless of the movie. I wouldn't be against that...the way they gave a bunch of black people all the awards one year to prove a point in equalization. That's cool.

Leo yeah he deserved a nomination for this movie role, the way Russel Crowe deserved the nomination and award for Beautiful Mind, but couldn't get it because he had one the year before in Gladiator. Or was it because he made a fool of himself with the press one time? The American public is very hard on foreign actors.

But Leo was already nominated for another movie role, so I guess you can't "run" against yourself. What would happen if someone is nominated for ALL the slots for best actor since they are so good all their movie roles prove it? I don't know. I doubt many people in the Academy even give a rats arse what movie or actor wins if it's not themselves.

This movie was an average, typicl cops and crime syndicate Hollywooded-up movie with some pretty gross special effects.

It was not so much suspense but a guessing game...Guess what's coming up next, HUH? Not the same thing.

And if it weren't for cell phones, this movie couldn't have existed.

This was a supermacho-macho, low-brow, caveman type movie for people who just delight in seeing people get offed in inventive and gross ways. They all did, get offed, I mean. Most of the main characters. The Departed. No intellectual integrity in that. Not literature. Just an updated form of the Godfather. The "grosser" the better I guess.

Go ahead and watch it. Some of you will love it. I was disappointed, especially with the end. You don't have to be a pussy to like "happy" or at least rational endings with some justice.

I have had it with violent graphic movies. This was not a horror movie. Just a cop/bad guy movie with a lot of talent crammed into it. Too bad. I would like to have an apology, but since they got my money already, fat chance.

Signing off, Sandy -- your movie critic.

Black Dahlia -- Poor

2007-02-23T13:15:00.000-08:00

Shortly before I watched the DVD of Hollywoodland, I watched the Black Dahlia with Josh Hartnett, Scarlett Johanssen, and Hilary Swank.
.
It, too, was based on a true story back in the old Hollywood days. However, many of the facts. situations, and characters were purely fiction.

It was a subject matter I was interested in and was anxious to see the movie as soon as the DVD came out, because I missed this one, too, on the big screen. I don't think the big screen would have helped at all, and I sure am glad I didn't buy the movie.
.
The scene changes back and forth from the past to the present were done really poorly as were the time switches in The Good Shepherd. It would have been disconcerting in this movie IF the movie weren't so terrible to start with. As it was, it didn't matter.
.
Sorry to those who made a valiant effort to bring us a good-old-time movie, but even tho I love old vintage type detective stories and true events...this one was awful. Dialog was bad, I suspect so was the script. Characters were confusing and underdone--too many of them without one real main character to focus on.
.
What a shame because it has a potentially good subject matter and really talented actors. They just didn't edit and cut it well, write it well, or something. don't know what could have fixed this movie except leaving it in the can and using it as a write off. Luckily, Scarlett and Hilary have enough good movies under their belts to keep this from hurting them.
.
Skip this one unless you are drunk and home alone some Sat. night when it's the only thing on TV. On second thought, if Simpson's reruns are on or anything else like a documentary on bird feathers -- go for that instead.
.
Stinker of a movie. I watched a documentary of the Black Dahlia murder a few days later and it was better presented and the facts way more interesting than his dramatization. All I can say is more research guys. Better writers. Don't try to rely on special effects to carry the movie. (The actual published photos of the victim were not a gross as the FX shots in the movie.) And the resolution/solution was sensationalized and unbelievable.

Better luck next time, Josh. Potentially a good move to go to the big screen in something besides a silly comedy, but not with this movie. Too bad. Try again if they give you the chance.
.
Sandy Schairer, writer & movie critic

Hollywoodland--Movie REVIEW on DVD now

2007-02-23T11:51:00.000-08:00

Starring: Adrien Brody, Ben Affleck, Diane Lane, with Bob Hoskins, Robin Tunney, and Lois Smith, among a extremely talented supportive cast. The movie was excellent. So was the screenplay and the cinematography, editing, and even the music was superb. Everyone gave a fabulous, professional acting performance.

I wanted to see this movie on the big screen but didn't get there in time, so I rented the DVD.

Surprisingly enough, it was Adrien Brody that played the movie's main character despite the fact that Ben Affleck played George Reeves, the original television Superman back in the 1950's, whose life was the basis of the movie.

However, the "real" story was Brody's character's story. His private investigator and and George Reeves' life story (especially the time around his death) were intertwined and paralleled. It was well-done.

Brody private investigator was trying to make a name for himself and impress the press and the police department as a professional sleuth. He began to investigate the allegations that Reeves's death may not have been a suicide.

As I said, everyone was exceptional in their performances. They were equally good, which is mind-boggling. The story was easy to follow even though there were many flashbacks into the lives of the two men and the people in their worlds. The story switched back and forth from Brody to Affleck's characters, and included a dramatization of all the possible scenarios of Reeve's death as seen through the imagination of Brody's private eye. It was easy to follow and well edited.

The impact of the story was not what I expected. I was a fan of Superman when I was a child and loved George Reeves as a good-lookin' television actor. As the facts about his death were uncovered, snips of his real life were revealed. My picture of Mr. Reeves changed considerably and gave me a deeper more complete perspective into the man he was.

As it frequently happens, the movie as a slice of life, gave a broader picture of "the everyman" and his struggles for success, love, and self-worth. Without being preachy or sappy. We know that Reeves either committed suicide and/or died under suspicious circumstances and the movie explores all of these possibilities, and it is left up to the viewers to decide for themselves.

Watching the interviews with the various people involved with the production of the movie, I was reassured that the facts about Reeves were portrayed as accurately as possible as far as the facts were know. I appreciate that sort of honesty in movies. [Otherwise, I spend hours researching and reading about true-life characters which sometimes makes the movies about them somewhat tainted for me.]

Not much was known about George Reeves' private life, and I appreciate the lengths the movie went to bring together the snippets and portray the real man. Perhaps this movie will send him down in history as one of many suffering heroes of the Hollywood era. I certainly hope so.

I won't give any of the conclusions away, but will venture to say the movie made me cry when it was done--thinking about the lives of the two men and most importantly my own life. I sat through the credits, listening to the music, sobbing. If a movie can provoke people to this kind of self-investigation, it is well worth the esteem given it.

I think this movie was perhaps overlooked by many because they did not realize the bigger significance of the story. It was more than just a plot, some characters and some action.

However, it was also a poignant portrayal of the real man and his life long struggle in the world of Hollywood. And also the heart-felt struggle of the private eye who became so involved with the actor's life that it changed his own life dramatically.

If you are a fan or Superman, George Reeves, private eye mysteries, true stories, old vintage Hollywood stories, or really good movies, DON'T MISS THIS ONE.

Thanks for reading me, Sandy Schairer, writer, movie critic.
Author of 123 ABC, flash fiction anthology

P.S. The significance of the title Hollywoodland refers to the Hollywood sign on the side of the hill over Hollywood…back then it said Hollywoodland. The other reference might have been the fact that the golden days−the beginning of Hollywood−were perhaps reference to it being a foreign or alien land with it’s own fantasies and values.

ABC 123 and My Poetry

2007-02-08T10:19:00.000-08:00

If you like humor and don't have a lot of free time to read--check out the newest craze--Flash Fiction. I have an anthology of short short stories still available in softcover. Contact me for more information!

Phantom of the Opera: Deconstruction

2007-02-05T12:31:00.000-08:00

Phantom of the Opera Part I

Phantom of the Opera—May Contain Some Spoiler Information

The Phantom of the Opera, original Broadway show, is coming again to Popejoy Hall, UNM, Albuquerque, NM, in October 2006. It played here two or three years ago. From what I understood, the set took two weeks to put up, was carried in seven semi-trailers, and took two weeks to tear down and repack for the next city. It was magnificent, the lake and candles looked real. If I recall correctly there was an actual horse used on stage to carry Christine to the depths of the opera house/phantom’s lair. Unfortunately, I sat in the very back of the theater and the actors appeared to be about an inch tall. I didn’t follow the story well, because when Christine kissed the Phantom, I couldn’t figure out why. He was supposed to be horrible and evil, right?
.
Also, so far back in the theater, I couldn’t see the faces and I had no idea how disfigured the phantom might have looked. Oh, another thing, were the characters such fools that they couldn’t see the slender, shorter phantom take the place of the tall, heavy opera singer in Don Juan Triumphant? But basically, the musical thrilled me—the music, the set, the chandelier that came to life at the beginning and fell to the stage during the disaster scene. Oh, what can I say? It made me laugh and it made me cry especially Christine’s song in the cemetery to her late father—it was all so bittersweet. I LOVED it.

I have tickets for Oct. 28th this year. I am not sitting in the balcony again! I have orchestra seats, even if the orchestra is on tape. I have already ordered a long opera cape with a hood, black with red lining, and am shopping for the perfect dress to wear with it. I am even considering wearing a phantom mask since it is so close to Halloween. And carrying a rose with a black bow and the little rhinestone ring that looks like Christine's ring (that's featured in the movie if not the play.) Heck, if the music is loud enough, and I'm sitting close enough, I'm going to sing along, since I know all the words to the songs by now, thanks to the CD from the movie.

I understood the plot much better after I saw the movie. My brother said he and his wife went to see it at the movie theater in Dec. 2004, and it was great. They loved it. Said the music was great, the actors excellent, and the settings mind-boggling. I was still thrilled with the play and didn’t go see it on the big screen myself, telling him it couldn’t possibly be as good as the stage play!

Ha! Was I wrong! I didn't go see it on the big screen, I rented the DVD. I am now considering buying a big screen television so I can see it lifesized. (Heck, I wish it was on Virtual Reality machine.)

Now, I understand, the whole Phantom of the Opera phenomenon is as amazing as it was unexpected and unexplainable! First of all, Andrew Lloyd Webber and Joel Schumacher wanted a young cast. They wanted to show this as a love story, a triangle with people young enough to show the passion and romance that they had written into and directed into the screenplay.

The movie was a bit ambiguous as far as marketing. A lot of people didn’t like it, some even told me they got up and walked out of the movie theaters!

People wanted it to be more like the stage play/musical, perhaps. Or they expected a horror movie and it wasn’t. Some wanted opera music and thought it had too much rock music tempo. Those that wanted more pop or rock music were turned off by the Broadway tunes and some of the songs, which bordered on the operatic. (Webber himself said he considered it more of a rock opera.) A lot of people didn’t like the Phantom himself. After all, he was a bad guywith serious anger management problems that crossed the line into murderous; and the character was portrayed perhaps as a sympathetic tortured soul, which turned a lot of people off. (Gerard Butler, the movie phantom, said he thought it was tragically sad even thought they kept urging him to play it "sexy.")

The most amazing phenomenon that couldn’t be predicted was the huge, vast masses of women that fell in love with the actor Gerard Butler. If you don't know by now, he’s a Scottish actor, former drunken rock singer, and actor in many B- and violent action movies, who did the whole Phantom (he sang not only his songs but his lines as well) in a broad upper crust British accent, which is not his usual way of speaking being from Paisley. And, if truth be told, he's really not all that good looking or outstanding as an actor. (For instance I saw him in other movies and didn’t even notice him.) However, once we fans got a taste of him in Phantom, we were swept away with his--what ever it is --"IT"--that can't possibly be explained by using the word "attractiveness." (What a mundane word for such a colossal experience.)

But I am one of the women who fell madly in-love with the 36-year old actor. Actually, he was only 34 when the movie was filmed, the co-star playing Christine being only 16 at that time. She was half his age, and therefore the illusion of the Phantom being much older than Christine was maintained. I thought Gerry was older and told one of my friends I finally had a favorite movie star that wasn't young enough to be my son. And she informed me that was sure wrong. (I have two sons older than Gerry Butler.)

There was something in Gerry Butler’s performance that captured heart and soul of viewers. He threw his own heart and soul (as well as his whole magnificient physique) into his singing and performance and it showed. He doesn’t appear entirely comfortable in some scenes, but he radiated a certain who-knows-what that just amazed and overwhelmed the viewers, some more than others!

Many women also fell in love with the Phantom character, seeing him portrayed as a suffering villian/hero who had serious psychological problems that could be forgiven, so to speak, because of his miserable life of being abused and mistreated as a freak simply because of a congenital disfigurement. As a result he was a talented and spectacular person who didn't know it, and had terrible self-esteem and an extremely big chip on his shoulder.

Actually, Andrew Lloyd Webber was a genius with this screenplay, putting layer and layer of meaning and symbolism into the musical and the character(s.) He went well beyond the orignal story by Gaston Leroux, which is good read if you happen to run across a good translation of it. It was written in French.

I rented the DVD of the movie first, then went and bought the CD with original songs from the movie that I play nearly non-stop on my car CD player. (I like to sing when I'm commuting on the long drive from the mountains to town. I guess the other drivers think I'm yelling at them.)

I then bought the movie and watched it a number of times. In fact, the first time I saw the movie, I back-tracked the DVD and played the scene where the Phantom sings Music of the Night to Christine in a very sexy, passionate, beautiful way. (Why are there no words that indicate something much more fabulous than “beautiful.” It was overwhelming.) I watched it over and over about 25 times. I thought at the time that it was the absolute best "love scene" ever put on film. At the end of all that, needless to say, I was a hopeless pile of melted putty in the Phantom’s hands.

In a later post I will explain the depth of the character of the Phantom and why he touched so many hearts, and how that occurred. Not to mention explaining why it made Gerard Butler, while still not well-known, a very much loved and exciting international actor.

The Phantom of the Opera II

The Phantom of the Opera Part II—Warning: Spoiler

Please read the previous post first. Thanks.

Why millions of women fell in love with the Phantom…based on the movie with Gerard Butler and Emmy Rossum by Andrew Lloyd Webber.

Many people disliked the phantom character. Let’s face it, he was a sly, deceitful murderer. He was disfigured and as mean as a hornet with his tail stuck in a screen door. He was also a talented musician and composer. He lived for his music. Until, he fell in-love with Christine. She was half his age, and he came to her as (what she thought of) as The Angel of Music that her father promised to send her from Heaven, when she was a child. (And even if you hated the Phantom, you must admit the performance given by Gerard Butler was superb. Thank you, Gerry!)

Later in the story, the Phantom refers to himself as The Angel in Hell. He was not an angel from Hell—he felt he was in Hell, having suffered all his life for the congenital deformity of his face, which nowadays we could easily correct with modern medical science. In those days, people perhaps believed that God was punishing the mother or the child for something they had “done.” Disfigurements were seen as a negative indication of a defective soul or even being “owned by the devil.” Even today, we believe those who don’t “fit-in” deserve to be teased and/or scorned for things that are obviously not of their own doing. This would echo even racial bias and prejudices that have plagued mankind for most of its existence, hatred of people because of their appearance, i.e., skin color.

The Phantom was an object of fear and hatred just because of his looks. In fiction, stress of physical appearance is indicative of a superficial value system—those who care more for appearances are, if nothing more, missing out on a deeper meaning of life, at least until they get their “Aha!’s.”

The Phantom felt unloved and unwanted, had the passionate soul of a musician, and the innate intelligence and creativity to make him a great composer. In the movie, we are shown a segment of his childhood that attempted to explain a few things, but could easily have been left out of the movie, especially since it does not appear in the original novel by Gaston Leroux. I urge those who see the movie, to ignore this scene if possible, it is not in the screenplay/musical either. A good read about the Phantom's life is Phantom by Susan Kaye.

As I said, Christine thought he was the angel of music, so she took voice lessons from the Phantom, trusting him, though never seeing him, and loving him because she thought her Father sent him (prior to the opening of the movie.) She shares the Phantom’s love of music, which bonds them together. They both have sensitive, artistic souls. (And raging hormones, at least in the movie.)

At the beginning of the movie Christine is a capable singer without an opportunity to show off her talents, actually being in the chorus line as a background dancer, or bit player. The Phantom, because of selfish reasons, plots to have her take center stage as a star. One of the lyricsis Christine singing, “I am the mask you wear,” and the Phantom singing in reply, “It’s ME they hear.” He wants his talents displayed in Christine.

At some point, the Phantom falls madly in-love with his “creation.” Here we have the Pygmalion theme…the artist Pygmalion falls in love with the statue he created in the ancient Greek myth. (This is also the theme of My Fair Lady the musical, too.)

However, as a recluse who hates people as much as they hate him, the phantom suffers from a selfish, possessive, jealous, domineering type of love. In fact, he hasn’t got a clue how to love someone, having never been loved himself. He attempts to control Christine. When the Viscount Raoul, the patron of the opera house, makes his appearance in the story as the good-looking, young, blond tenor, the phantom sings, “He was bound to love you, when he heard you sing,” he realizes that in making Christine’s singing so beautiful, he has basically given her to the Viscount to love. This is just one of the ironies that the Phantom realizes too late for his own salvation.

It is interesting to note that when the Phantom is wearing his mask, he is suave, handsome, elegant, powerful, talented and appears to be have poise and self-esteem. He seems to get a kick out of scaring people, which boosts his own arrogance. (He actually kills a couple of people in cold-blood, unemotionally, in the story, so watch out!) However, when his mask is removed, he reverts back to an almost childish stage of life, a pathetic victim displaying abject misery or overwhelming rage—both extremes of emotion. This would echo the Dr. Jekyll/Mr. Hyde symbolism, which has also been done in numerous plays and movies since Robert Lewis Stevenson wrote it. That book was undoubtedly based on a more ancient theme itself.

When the Phantom realizes he's lost Christine to Raoul, he declares “war” on both of them. But his helpless longing and distorted love for Christine will not be eradicated by intention. It basically becomes his downfall. Not because he continues with the "war" but recause his love cannot be escaped…well, let me explain further.

When he forces Christine and the rest of the opera house patrons/staff to put on his opera Don Juan Triumphant, he’s still under the illusion that he's in control of the situation—even though he knows deep inside that he's lost it and/or never really had control over anything. He has the power that he can “create” with fear--and we all know that people (especially in dramas) overcome fear as unfounded and illusory. We all know the tale of the softhearted monster being nothing more than a fake, for example in the Wizard of Oz.

In Don Juan, the Phantom hears Christine singing words of love that he places in her mouth as song lyrics only...so he knows they’re insincere. At this point, Christine has lost all respect for him, knows he's a serious deceiver, murderer, and controlling, over-bearing monster of a person. She's afraid to get close enough to him to allow the authorities to capture him, but does it anyway because she's a pawn in in the opera's and authorities' hands, as well as in the Phantom’s hands. All she wants to do, as many a maiden has desired for eons, is to get out of the spotlight and get married and live happily ever after. This is the theme of nearly every fairy tale ever written.

So, in the middle of this “play within a play” the Phantom’s real desire comes out at the end of his duet with Christine--he sings to her the love song that Raoul sang to her earlier in the story—only his words transmit his true desperation. Instead of singing the words Raoul sang to her about wanting to love her, protect and save her from her solitude…the Phantom sings of his own wild desire for her to love him, be with him, and save him from his solitude. Cleaver reversal by the lyricist!!!

On the verge of being powerfully attracted to him again (which we know is real since the Raoul has tears in his eyes while he watches them,) Christine snatches off the Phantom's mask and reveals his true appearance to the entire opera house. The Phantom was lost in his own fantasy--the delusion that there is a future possible for him and Christine together. He blames her for betraying him, hurt & cut to the quick.

Continued in Phantom of the Opera III. Next blog

posted by Sandy Schairer @ 12:35 PM 0 comments

The Phantom of the Opera III

The actor Gerard Butler as he did NOT appear in the movie. He can squeeze my neck anytime!

Continued: Please read Part I and Part II first. Thanks.
~~
Of course, as in all good melodramas, the phantom runs off with the girl, but she's rescued by her true love.

Only there’s a twist in this particular ending. The phantom, after kidnapping her, gives Christine the choice of letting her “lover” live (there was only implied sexual attraction in this movie, no actual sex. As Jack Sparrow said in Dead Man’s Chest, “There will be no “knowing” here.) If she stays with the Phantom, he will not kill her true love Raoul. (If she leaves with Raoul, the Phantom will kill Raoul anyway and maybe her, too. DUH.) I will have to give the heroine credit for having a great deal of intelligence in reasoning this out. In so many movies the characters make the mistake of following their hearts when they know it will lead to their own destruction. People aren’t really that stupid. (Are they?)

Christine, loving Raoul, wants to save him. At the same time, she’s loved the Phantom for years since she was a young orphan. This love isn’t easily tossed away. Her compassion, too, comes into play. She chooses to stay with the Phantom, not only as “a sacrifice” to save Raoul, but she realizes that the Phantom didn’t really intend to be “evil.” He's behaved abominably because he's in dire need of love and approval.

She sings to him, “Pitiful creature of darkness, what kind of life have you known? God give me courage to show you, you are not alone.” This indicates that Christine’s love is a spiritual love. I believe, against her own better judgment, she had to admit she really did love him even if it is only as one human being loves another with human compassion.

She approaches the fearsome Phantom with his disfigured face just as he becomes exhausted with his own rage and confused desperation. And she kisses him! And he lets her. And he kisses her back.

(The lucky girl has an on-screen kiss with Gerard Butler.)

This kiss is what I didn’t understand in the stage play. In the movie the purpose is obvious. She chooses to show this “evil” man with a “suffering inner child,” compassion and unconditional love.

This is the Phantom’s undoing. You can read it on his face. You can see the battle that’s going on inside of him. The veil is lifted from his dark, twisted understanding…he feels unconditional love coming from Christine—something he has never felt in his entire life not even from himself or from God (whom he’s rejected, not vice versa, I am sure.) And he suddenly realizes that he could have had Christine’s love if he had not been controlling, domineering and murderous. His attitude of jealousy and possessiveness has driven her away! He realizes, too late, he’s ruined his own chances with his own behavior.

Not only that, but his heart is opened at that moment and he feels "real" love—unselfish, true, caring, deep inner love that Christine has shown to him. He can no longer keep her captive at the mercy of his possessive love. He truly loves her unselfishly when he allows her to leave and frees her to go with the man that's best for her, Raoul.

Of course, the Phantom (who never was given name in the movie to make him less than human?) is still caught in habitual self-hatred. With a sudden awareness that he's to blame for all his own misery in life, that it's not his deformity that caused it entirely, and the fact that with his talents and intelligence, he could have overcome his appearance by merely making different choices in life, he smashes the mirrors in horror. (Too bad there weren't 12-step programs back in those days to help set oneself aright, huh? Thank God there is now.)

Can you imagine the towering regret he must have felt when he realized that Christine’s love had been within his reach, and, with his own selfish, hateful ways he prevented himself from having that? It’s heartbreaking. (Reminder to myself: take Kleenexes to the theater on Oct. 28.)

So you see, the millions of women that fell in-love with the Phantom, perhaps were and are the women who have fallen for the “bad boy” in their lives—you know “the suffering child-man" who is his own worst enemy. They're the neediest, most pathetic of men that could be heros if only they would realize it, damn it! We women who have fallen in love with the wrong man, perhaps married him (and reproduced male children with him, for godsake; forgive me, world) and suffered for it, do understand the love for this Phantom character.

We have, like the Phantom, regretted causing our own suffering in life with our own delusions, i.e., thinking that the love of “a good woman” can change a defective man into what he ought to be and what he could be. (Forgetting that what he is and what he chose to be are out of our control and out of his own control, too.)

Most of us realize these things in life too late to fix the past, hopefully not preventing us from going on and having a better future, if we live long enough to become wise. (I know I have and I’m married to a wonderful, regular, ordinary, nice guy, now.)

The ring in the movie symbolizes this revolutionary story resolution perfectly. Raoul gave the ring to Christine as a symbol of their commitment. She's reluctant to wear it on her finger for everyone to see, because she’s afraid to let anyone know, especially the Phantom. Basically no one wants that happiness for her—marriage and family, except Raoul--and she wants to protect her dream. The Phantom wants to own her--body and soul--and the opera house wants to own her career and so keep her single and singing.

The Phantom appears at the masquerade ball where everyone else is attempting to hide behind masks just as he has done his whole life. There he snatches the ring from her. Only he can’t take away the love she has for Raoul—the ring is only a symbol of it. A hollow victory for him.

Later, he gives Christine the very same ring, and insists she wear it as a token of his ownership and love. She puts it on when she acquiesces to his demand she stay with him in the underground lair.

When he releases her, she returns it to him. The Phantom gave it as a show of power over her and as a blow against Raoul’s love for her, but when she gave it back she returns his love. This can be taken two ways—she hands his love back to him (refusing it) or she gives it as a symbol of her continuing love for him.

At the same time, when she gives the ring back, she’s accepting the Phantom's "gift." This is the ultimate gift her can give besides desiring, admiring and loving her--that is: loving her enough to let her go and be happy with Raoul.

At the very end of the movie, the ring turns up on Christine’s grave years and years later. On the same day that the Viscount puts the Phantom's monkey-music-box on her grave (symbolic of his surrender to Christine's love for the Phantom,) the Phantom puts the ring on the grave with his rose. (Red roses symbolize never-ending love.) With this, he shows his surrender to Christine's love for Raoul. Therefore, it's "a gentlemen’s agreement," after the fact, that they both loved her and admitted that she did, indeed, love both of them. (Again Susan Kaye's novel Phantom develops this concept a good deal more.

I have probably put this crudely, but the screenplay was magnificent with symbolism. It has given me much to marvel at over the past year or more.

When a group of individuals band their creative talents and powers into a collaboration and work of art such as this, the work becomes an entity of its own. It has a sum total much, much greater than the individual parts and even the group effort or final product. I believe this story is a genuine modern myth that will become part of our culture for years and years to come.

I would like to see it shown in movie theaters on a regular basis someday, just as The Rocky Horror Picture Show has become a cult movie showing, appearing in theaters for audience participation on Halloween all over the country. The fans of Phantom would LOVE to come to the movies at midnight, dressed as their favorite character and have a chance to sing and celebrate this exceptional phenomenon known as The Phantom of the Opera.

Thank you, all, for reading me. Best Wishes.

posted by Sandy Schairer @ 2:55 PM 0 comments

More About The Phantom of the Opera

Part IV

An important part of the media, is realizing the power it has over people's minds. Psychologically and even physiologically.

It's a known fact that music with a certain tempo (60 beats per minute) can put a person's mind into a mild state of altered consciousness. It seems to reach the mind at an unconscious or subliminal level, opening up the subconscious (perhaps) for easier absorption of stimuli and information.

If you know this, you can use this type of music to open your creative talents and write more easily from a subconscious level, if you happen to be a composer or an artist for instance.

But I noticed that certain songs from The Phantom of the Opera were subtly programming the minds of some viewers. Whether it was the beat of the music or the over-all emotionality of the movie scene, or a clever arrangement of words, this may explain why so many people were effected by the movie and the music.

Consider the lines in The Phantom of the Opera theme that the Phantom and Christine sing together (number 5 on the official CD.)

The Phantom of the Opera is now inside your/my mind.

So, getting hooked on the movie and the music and even the actor might have been a result of subliminal hypnotism.

They are certainly in my mind!! How about you?

Use the hyperlink on the sidebar to see Gerard Butler's Fan Website.

And use the convenient Amazon icon on my site to find the Phantom of the Opera movies, books, CDs, DVD's etc.

For information about the movie, click on:

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0293508/