Archive for July, 2006

h1

The Libertine

July 13, 2006

The Libertine was a good, funny movie with some dark spots, but was overall entertaining.  Johnny Depp is always a pleasure to watch.  I really don’t have too much to say since it wasn’t really a lifechanging event, and there wasn’t a whole lot to complain about.

The one thing I really liked about it was how they mentioned that life on stage (in movies) is so much more interesting than real life, because everything happens for a reason.  If you meet someone on stage they will have an impact on your life, whereas meeting people in real life is boring and unimportant.  Thousands of people come in contact every day without really effecting each other.  And everything you do on stage is important, if you break something it means something, if you forget something it will come back to haunt you.  I guess people like me just really want more meaning out of things, which is why my head makes up stories about the number 4 and Abraham Lincoln.  I think during my life I’ve drifted between “nothing really matters” and “everything happens for a reason” but I think maybe just thinking about it should make someone more determined to take responsibility for their own lives.  You’d think that, but it doesn’t.  I’m still just drifting down the river of life, letting it take me where it does, and I don’t really mind anymore.

Advertisements
h1

His Girl Friday

July 13, 2006

This script is praised for it’s quick-witted conversations and speedy dialogue but I think the script is very unrealistic.  People simply do not talk that fast, and they don’t reply to other people that quickly UNLESS they are reading something that is scripted.  So the inherant problem is, you cannot suspend belief long enough to get past that these are actors reading lines, very well-rehearsed lines.

So much of the dialogue has no point either.  I don’t want to hear people bicker in record time for an hour and a half.  The plot makes up about 10 minutes of the movie and the rest is just the writer trying to show off.

For most of the movie I didn’t even look at the screen, I got so bored.  A movie should be an experience of sight and sound, but they people on the screen weren’t doing anything, and they weren’t anywhere interesting, so why bother looking?  I suppose it would have made a nice radio show if you were on a long drive and had nothing better to listen to.

h1

Sullivan’s Travels

July 13, 2006

Hollywood seems to like movies about movies.  I don’t know why, but somehow Adaptation was well recieved at the Oscars.  But what is this movie, really?  A comedy?  A drama?  A social commentary?  How about if we just call it a big pile of steaming poo.

From the first scene I knew I wouldn’t like the movie.  A bunch of old men talking in an office about how in order to make “Oh Brother Where Art Thou” one must go out and find “trouble” (as if trouble was a place or state of being).  The lead, Sullivan is wearing pants up to his chest with his tie tucked into them.  It repulsed me to see fashion being abused in such a way, with no purpose in the movie for it.

When they started off in the bus following Sullivan I thought it was a bit similar to Domino.  But I don’t think people have a special spot in their heart for watching the realities of the underprivileged or “troubled”.  People watch reality TV all the time for the rich and famous, the glamourous, the extraordinary and the everyday, from kitchens to islands.  What makes something interesting is that there are interesting people involved.  Tyra Banks doesn’t cast girls because they are beautiful, she casts them because they are religious freaks, have weird illnesses and disorders, are complete bitches or piss themselves while wearing a diaper on TV.

Then the movie goes into an absurd chase scene with fastmotion speed similar to those Benny Hill shows where he gets chased around with women.  Again, is this a comedy, drama, wtf?

The movie picks up when Veronica Lake enters the scene.  Her cool but girly voice and beauty make the film watchable.  However, her character is poorly developed.  They don’t even give her a name, she is just “The girl”.  She seems a contradiction, as she has not enough money for food and a place to stay, but when offered the use of a rich person’s house for a few weeks, she says she wants to go out with a guy she just met and find “trouble”.  First off, I think this girl would already know what hardship is like, and secondly if she liked the guy enough she would have been content to wait at his house a couple weeks.

Fake sneezes- bad in movies.  Always bad.  Stop putting them in movies, please.  They’re bad in every single movie where an actor pretends to sneeze.  Thank you.

Anyhow, they go off and live like bums for a few days, and we see a nice little montage with happy music as they play off some cute little physical comedy like itching bedbugs.  But don’t give money to poor people, because they will just mug you anyway.  Poor people aren’t really people, they’re just like extras in a movie.  So much for social commentary.

So in the last part where he really is in “trouble” because he hit a guy in the head, he is immediately release when they find out he’s some big name director.  So even though I know the moral they’re trying to push in this movie is “The world needs comedy because film should be an escape for those less fortunate”, the moral I got out of it was “If you have money you can buy yourself out of a 6-year prison sentence”.  I think the latter is more true anyway, since I don’t really like comedies.  When I want escapism I go for a good sci-fi or action flick.