I just got home from the Cinematheque, where I went to see Zooey & Adam.
I enjoyed it. A lot. One of the first things I noticed while watching the film, was the lack of a score. I can't recall if I have ever seen a film that did not use a score. I am sure I have, but none come to mind right now. But it didn't need it to create emotion. The main actors (Tom Keenan and Daria Puttaert) do a fantastic job themselves. They had great chemistry, and played every scene with a fantastic realness. One scene that really stood out for me was the scene where Zooey told the police officers that she had been raped. She said it very offhandedly, and even laughed a little bit. People might be shocked that she gave her line in that way, but I wasn't. I find that when people talk about traumatic or painful experiences, they often try to sound casual, and even laugh about it. You know, cracking a joke so you don't burst into tears?
Another scene that felt really human to me was when Zooey did burst into tears in the supermarket. I am sure most of us have either had or witnessed moments like that in their lives. When the emotional burden is so heavy that you just have to let it out, even if you're in public. I had a moment like that last spring, so that scene resonated heavily with me.
The way the film progressed actually really surprised me. I had assumed that the film would end with the birth of Carl, and that it would be about her pregnancy. Therefore, I was very surprised when Zooey went into labour so early in the film...for the first few minutes after that scene, I found myself wondering if this was Adam's fantasy of what the future would bring.
I've heard people talk about the movie as if it were just about the rape that occurs at the beginning. It isn't about that. To me, it's about trauma, and about relationships. Zooey and Adam deal with the traumatic event very differently, and serve to contrast each other. These two characters, who love each other very deeply, end up feeling very differently about the event, and the after effects of it. One character refuses to allow themselves to be defined by the trauma, but for the other, it does become the big defining moment of their life. It made me understand just how easy it is for a relationship to be ruined by a trauma. Human beings react differently to bad situations and if you're spouse or loved one has a different way of coping that you do not like, it really can cause damage to a relationship.
I found myself thinking about how one would react when placed in the situation these two characters were placed in. But how can you know how you would react until you're in it? The position they were placed in is not one I'd wish on anyone, but one obviously makes the best of it, and the other tries, but ultimately, fails, to move on from it. Everyone has events that are traumatic to them and that help define them as a person. But I think there are healthy and unhealthy ways of dealing with trauma, and in this film, we saw an extreme example of a very bad way of coping with a traumatic event. I'm curious about how common such an extreme reaction is. There must be fathers out there raising children that may be the product of a sexual assault, and I wonder what that must be like.
I stayed behind after and listened to Sean Garrity and Arthur Schafer, an expert on ethics, speak about the film. I found it fascinating, though it did focus a bit much on abortion which, to me, was such a small part of the film. A member of the audience asked an interesting question, "what if the roles were reversed?" As in, what if Adam had wanted to keep the child, and Zooey had wanted to abort. Schafer did mention a court case where the woman involved wanted an abortion, and the man didn't want her to have one...and the man lost. It's an interesting thing to think about, but I believe that a woman should have the right to choose whether she wants to carry a child to term, regardless of what the contributing party believes. Certainly the father has a right to voice his opinion, but in the end, it is the woman's decision--as it should be.
Am I glad I saw it? Very. It is not an easy film to watch by any measure; and it made me very emotional, but I like movies that are hard to watch. I was in the car with my Mom afterwards and she brought up the fact that film festivals have refused to screen it. I told her that it did have some controversial subject matter, but it generates discussion and it wasn't explicit in anyway. I recognize that I am a fairly open minded person, but I did say that the people who "banned" it had to be a little closed-minded. Garrity explained that they thought the decision Zooey made was not one any woman would make, but he also quoted a statistic that said that 36,000 women in the States get pregnant from a rape, and from those, half carry to term, and most of those women do keep and raise their babies. So perhaps there was a little bit of misunderstanding on the parts of the festival organizers, but I wish they would reconsider the film. It's fantastic and well worth a viewing.
Saturday, January 30, 2010
Wednesday, January 27, 2010
Did You Hear About the Morgans? And Romantic Comedy Talk
Yes, I saw this film. You can laugh all you want, but I had a really good reason to see it.
I went with my Mom, who really enjoys light hearted comedies, particularly of the romantic sort. When my Dad and I got home, she asked my Dad if they could go to a show tonight, but my Dad had to attend a convocation, so was unable to. I immediately offered to go with her, since I have not had time with just her in quite awhile. I'm really blessed, in that I have a close relationship with both of my parents, and I am not embarrassed to be seen in public, with either of them. She asked me if I would be willing to go see it, and I agreed, because that was the movie she wanted to see. It has been something like six months since she last saw a movie in the theatres, since she has a hard time getting around, so I was happy to take her out. And you know, I even would have gone to see Valentine's Day with her, if it was out and that was what she wanted to see. I'll do a whole lot out of love.
It was not as bad as I thought it would be, but it still was not anything special. We went to the second run theatre, so it only cost something like a dollar fifty for each ticket. So I don't feel like I lost anything by seeing it. I got a giggle or two throughout the movie, but the real satisfaction was hearing my Mom laugh hysterically throughout it--she loves stuff like that. She said she knew she loved the movie when she got out of the theatre and didn't know what time it was, because she hadn't looked at her watch once.
I wrote briefly in my previous entry about my dislike for most romantic comedies that are made now. I feel like they are too predictable and formulaic, and that if you've seen one, you have probably seen them all. Did You Hear About the Morgans is no different. Going into the movie, I knew exactly what would happen, and had the entire plot arc in my mind...and I really was not very far off. Another problem I have with many romantic comedies is that the characters are paper thin. They rely on stereotypes (in this movie, they are: the "charming" British man, the pampered New Yorker, the Republican, the hunters, the redneck, et cetera), because it seems that it would take too much effort to create fully formed, original characters.
I must say though, that I am glad this movie did not turn to the oh, so standard stereotype of the "sexist pig with a heart of gold". I see that in movies (or in trailers of movies) way too often, and it kills me to know that the female protagonist (who is portrayed as a "strong" woman) ends up falling for him in the end. Sexism is desperately uncool, and the thought of a strong, independent woman falling for someone who is perhaps one step away from demanding she camp out in the kitchen makes me sick. Why does Hollywood feel that characters like that are likable, or even charming? Maybe it is just me, but I do not find the idea of being treated as anything less than an equal to be sexy, so I would never find myself rooting for a "happily ever after" with a character like that.
All in all, I am glad I saw the movie, because I know it made my Mom really happy. And I know it could have been a whole lot worse. I just remembered Bride Wars, which came out last year at about this time. I never saw it, but the thought of two grown women turning against each other over something as frivolous as a wedding day and location made me want to weep for what "entertainment" has become in this society.
I went with my Mom, who really enjoys light hearted comedies, particularly of the romantic sort. When my Dad and I got home, she asked my Dad if they could go to a show tonight, but my Dad had to attend a convocation, so was unable to. I immediately offered to go with her, since I have not had time with just her in quite awhile. I'm really blessed, in that I have a close relationship with both of my parents, and I am not embarrassed to be seen in public, with either of them. She asked me if I would be willing to go see it, and I agreed, because that was the movie she wanted to see. It has been something like six months since she last saw a movie in the theatres, since she has a hard time getting around, so I was happy to take her out. And you know, I even would have gone to see Valentine's Day with her, if it was out and that was what she wanted to see. I'll do a whole lot out of love.
It was not as bad as I thought it would be, but it still was not anything special. We went to the second run theatre, so it only cost something like a dollar fifty for each ticket. So I don't feel like I lost anything by seeing it. I got a giggle or two throughout the movie, but the real satisfaction was hearing my Mom laugh hysterically throughout it--she loves stuff like that. She said she knew she loved the movie when she got out of the theatre and didn't know what time it was, because she hadn't looked at her watch once.
I wrote briefly in my previous entry about my dislike for most romantic comedies that are made now. I feel like they are too predictable and formulaic, and that if you've seen one, you have probably seen them all. Did You Hear About the Morgans is no different. Going into the movie, I knew exactly what would happen, and had the entire plot arc in my mind...and I really was not very far off. Another problem I have with many romantic comedies is that the characters are paper thin. They rely on stereotypes (in this movie, they are: the "charming" British man, the pampered New Yorker, the Republican, the hunters, the redneck, et cetera), because it seems that it would take too much effort to create fully formed, original characters.
I must say though, that I am glad this movie did not turn to the oh, so standard stereotype of the "sexist pig with a heart of gold". I see that in movies (or in trailers of movies) way too often, and it kills me to know that the female protagonist (who is portrayed as a "strong" woman) ends up falling for him in the end. Sexism is desperately uncool, and the thought of a strong, independent woman falling for someone who is perhaps one step away from demanding she camp out in the kitchen makes me sick. Why does Hollywood feel that characters like that are likable, or even charming? Maybe it is just me, but I do not find the idea of being treated as anything less than an equal to be sexy, so I would never find myself rooting for a "happily ever after" with a character like that.
All in all, I am glad I saw the movie, because I know it made my Mom really happy. And I know it could have been a whole lot worse. I just remembered Bride Wars, which came out last year at about this time. I never saw it, but the thought of two grown women turning against each other over something as frivolous as a wedding day and location made me want to weep for what "entertainment" has become in this society.
Sunday, January 24, 2010
Some "Bad" Previews I've Seen Recently
I haven't actually been to the theatre at all this year, which is rather unusual for me. This Friday I'll be going to see Zooey & Adam, however. I did want to bring attention to some really poor trailers I've seen recently (let's face it, I just want to mock something).
Valentine's Day
Here's a checklist:
-Knock off of Love Actually-check
-Padded cast for no real reason, other than being able to say "look at all these FAMOUS people"-check
-Stupid movie about an even stupider holiday-check
When I first saw the trailer, I thought of the deplorable He's Just Not That Into You, which I wrote about here. Clearly, they're aiming at the exact same audience. Here's another thought: Bradley Cooper is a pretty funny guy. Why is he doing movies like these? Give me more of The Hangover and less He's Just Not That Into You, please.
And Hollywood, please churn out some intelligent and witty romantic comedies. Stop making drivel like this.
The A-Team
You will notice that Bradley Cooper is in this one as well. I understand this one a little better, because the guy's career is on fire right now, it's a major blockbuster, and he's probably getting a decent paycheque for it. Same with Liam Neeson. This movie looks like it will be similar to G.I. Joe: The Rise of Cobra, which I have not seen (and don't intend to, unless I'm making some sort of game of it). I didn't know a lot about The A-Team before I saw the trailer, and my parents told me the basic premise after I told them a movie version was being made. It sounded like campy fun to me, but I find that many TV to movie adaptations fall flat. Generally you have to recast the roles, and most actors can't capture the "magic" of the original actors.
The new Star Trek is an obvious exception though, but it was placed in the expert hands of J.J. Abrams, creator of Lost; the best show on television.
Clash of the Titans
I don't much care for trailers that are merely a display of all of the "action scenes" to be contained within a film. I find this one cuts from clip to clip far too fast, so it's difficult to follow, and I had difficulty concentrating when I first saw it before Avatar. That being said, I might actually see this one. There are a lot of movies out there with terrible trailers that have ended up being fantastic. The cast is what makes it seem a bit more promising to me. I like Liam Neeson, and Sam Worthington probably has a great career ahead of him. I think Avatar will do for him what Titanic did for Leonardo DiCaprio. Worthington was also pretty good in Terminator: Salvation.
And here is one that I shouldn't find enjoyable...but I just can't help myself.
MacGruber (this is the 'Red Band' trailer, therefore it is not safe for work)
It looks enormously stupid, but I'm a sucker for the MacGruber sketches on Saturday Night Live, so I'll be going to see this. At least it'll be rated R, which means they can go farther with the humour than they ever could on the show. I'm not overly familiar with Val Kilmer, but I've liked everything I've seen him in, and he was very funny in Kiss Kiss, Bang Bang.
The movies based off of SNL sketches have had mixed success. Wayne's World is legendary, but there is also It's Pat!, which bombed magnificently at the box office. I have hopes for this one, it looks like it will be dumb fun at the very least.
Valentine's Day
Here's a checklist:
-Knock off of Love Actually-check
-Padded cast for no real reason, other than being able to say "look at all these FAMOUS people"-check
-Stupid movie about an even stupider holiday-check
When I first saw the trailer, I thought of the deplorable He's Just Not That Into You, which I wrote about here. Clearly, they're aiming at the exact same audience. Here's another thought: Bradley Cooper is a pretty funny guy. Why is he doing movies like these? Give me more of The Hangover and less He's Just Not That Into You, please.
And Hollywood, please churn out some intelligent and witty romantic comedies. Stop making drivel like this.
The A-Team
You will notice that Bradley Cooper is in this one as well. I understand this one a little better, because the guy's career is on fire right now, it's a major blockbuster, and he's probably getting a decent paycheque for it. Same with Liam Neeson. This movie looks like it will be similar to G.I. Joe: The Rise of Cobra, which I have not seen (and don't intend to, unless I'm making some sort of game of it). I didn't know a lot about The A-Team before I saw the trailer, and my parents told me the basic premise after I told them a movie version was being made. It sounded like campy fun to me, but I find that many TV to movie adaptations fall flat. Generally you have to recast the roles, and most actors can't capture the "magic" of the original actors.
The new Star Trek is an obvious exception though, but it was placed in the expert hands of J.J. Abrams, creator of Lost; the best show on television.
Clash of the Titans
I don't much care for trailers that are merely a display of all of the "action scenes" to be contained within a film. I find this one cuts from clip to clip far too fast, so it's difficult to follow, and I had difficulty concentrating when I first saw it before Avatar. That being said, I might actually see this one. There are a lot of movies out there with terrible trailers that have ended up being fantastic. The cast is what makes it seem a bit more promising to me. I like Liam Neeson, and Sam Worthington probably has a great career ahead of him. I think Avatar will do for him what Titanic did for Leonardo DiCaprio. Worthington was also pretty good in Terminator: Salvation.
And here is one that I shouldn't find enjoyable...but I just can't help myself.
MacGruber (this is the 'Red Band' trailer, therefore it is not safe for work)
It looks enormously stupid, but I'm a sucker for the MacGruber sketches on Saturday Night Live, so I'll be going to see this. At least it'll be rated R, which means they can go farther with the humour than they ever could on the show. I'm not overly familiar with Val Kilmer, but I've liked everything I've seen him in, and he was very funny in Kiss Kiss, Bang Bang.
The movies based off of SNL sketches have had mixed success. Wayne's World is legendary, but there is also It's Pat!, which bombed magnificently at the box office. I have hopes for this one, it looks like it will be dumb fun at the very least.
Thursday, January 21, 2010
My Tribute to Conan O'Brien
Conan and NBC have signed a deal.
I knew this was coming, and I have been more than a little opinionated this past week about this entire situation. I've been taping every episode of The Tonight Show this week, and while it has been consistently hilarious, it has also gotten very bittersweet. I'm going to be watching the episode from last night sometime this evening, and it makes me sad to know that I only have three more episodes of The Tonight Show With Conan O'Brien left to watch. I know I've made it clear numerous times just how much I respect Conan, but I just wanted to write a bit of a tribute.
Just before getting into it, I was searching Conan, and Canada, and found this opinion piece, in which Matthew Hays calls for the CBC to hire Conan. It'd never happen, but if it did, I'd be the happiest woman on the planet.
I was 14 years old when I first really "discovered" Conan. He did four shows from Toronto in 2004, and I watched three out of the four. I'd watched a bit of late night television at that time, and a talk show host doing his show from Canada seemed like a big deal to me. I watched--and I laughed. I was still far from a regular viewer though, I'd say that started when I was 17 or so. Even then, as a student, I could only watch his show daily over the summer. While I was in University, Friday nights were the nights I'd sit down and watch Late Night With Conan O'Brien, at least on the nights I was home. Even if I only watched the monologue, I always got a good laugh, and he was my favourite of the late night personalities (far, far above the boring and tired Jay Leno).
I remember being thrilled in 2004 when it was announced he'd be taking over The Tonight Show. This came after he did his shows in Canada, and I was still very impressed with him. That, and I was happy because it meant he was on an hour earlier. On June 1st, I sat eagerly on the couch upstairs and watched the brilliant cold open with glee. He had been off he air for three months, and I was happy that he was finally back on the air. I had a rough summer last year, and I was often feeling a little down on the nights I was at home. Since I never had any reason to wake up early, I'd watch Conan, and he never failed to bring a smile to my face.
When I started school again, obviously I was not always able to stay up and watch the show. I rarely taped it, because I thought he'd be on for years and years, so catching it twice a week would be enough. Had I known NBC would do what they've done, I'd have taped every episode. Some nights, I'd be really stressed out from homework, and I'd tear myself away from the computer at 10:35 to watch The Tonight Show, because it was the best way to unwind for me. I don't know what I'm going to do to unwind after Friday, but I'll find something.
I'm sure Conan will find work on another network, but apparently he won't be able to start up again until after September 1st. Wherever he lands, I'll be sitting on the couch the day he starts, watching. After I graduate, I'm hoping to fly down to the States to catch a taping of whatever his new show is.
Here are some great clips:
Conan in Finland, knocking on Forss Fagerstrom's door. From Late Night
Tom Hanks gets hit by a meteor.
Conan's Na'vi assistant.
One of the many great Norm Macdonald interviews.
And part 2 of that interview.
From behind the scenes: Macdonald ruins the promos.
So here's hoping Leno crashes and burns in the most epic way possible. Surely he won't find success...so many people have made it clear they're on "Team Coco", so why would they choose to appear on Leno's Tonight Show after he helped shove Conan under a bus? I'll maintain what I've said before: I will never watch an episode of The Tonight Show that is hosted by Jay Leno.
I knew this was coming, and I have been more than a little opinionated this past week about this entire situation. I've been taping every episode of The Tonight Show this week, and while it has been consistently hilarious, it has also gotten very bittersweet. I'm going to be watching the episode from last night sometime this evening, and it makes me sad to know that I only have three more episodes of The Tonight Show With Conan O'Brien left to watch. I know I've made it clear numerous times just how much I respect Conan, but I just wanted to write a bit of a tribute.
Just before getting into it, I was searching Conan, and Canada, and found this opinion piece, in which Matthew Hays calls for the CBC to hire Conan. It'd never happen, but if it did, I'd be the happiest woman on the planet.
I was 14 years old when I first really "discovered" Conan. He did four shows from Toronto in 2004, and I watched three out of the four. I'd watched a bit of late night television at that time, and a talk show host doing his show from Canada seemed like a big deal to me. I watched--and I laughed. I was still far from a regular viewer though, I'd say that started when I was 17 or so. Even then, as a student, I could only watch his show daily over the summer. While I was in University, Friday nights were the nights I'd sit down and watch Late Night With Conan O'Brien, at least on the nights I was home. Even if I only watched the monologue, I always got a good laugh, and he was my favourite of the late night personalities (far, far above the boring and tired Jay Leno).
I remember being thrilled in 2004 when it was announced he'd be taking over The Tonight Show. This came after he did his shows in Canada, and I was still very impressed with him. That, and I was happy because it meant he was on an hour earlier. On June 1st, I sat eagerly on the couch upstairs and watched the brilliant cold open with glee. He had been off he air for three months, and I was happy that he was finally back on the air. I had a rough summer last year, and I was often feeling a little down on the nights I was at home. Since I never had any reason to wake up early, I'd watch Conan, and he never failed to bring a smile to my face.
When I started school again, obviously I was not always able to stay up and watch the show. I rarely taped it, because I thought he'd be on for years and years, so catching it twice a week would be enough. Had I known NBC would do what they've done, I'd have taped every episode. Some nights, I'd be really stressed out from homework, and I'd tear myself away from the computer at 10:35 to watch The Tonight Show, because it was the best way to unwind for me. I don't know what I'm going to do to unwind after Friday, but I'll find something.
I'm sure Conan will find work on another network, but apparently he won't be able to start up again until after September 1st. Wherever he lands, I'll be sitting on the couch the day he starts, watching. After I graduate, I'm hoping to fly down to the States to catch a taping of whatever his new show is.
Here are some great clips:
Conan in Finland, knocking on Forss Fagerstrom's door. From Late Night
Tom Hanks gets hit by a meteor.
Conan's Na'vi assistant.
One of the many great Norm Macdonald interviews.
And part 2 of that interview.
From behind the scenes: Macdonald ruins the promos.
So here's hoping Leno crashes and burns in the most epic way possible. Surely he won't find success...so many people have made it clear they're on "Team Coco", so why would they choose to appear on Leno's Tonight Show after he helped shove Conan under a bus? I'll maintain what I've said before: I will never watch an episode of The Tonight Show that is hosted by Jay Leno.
Monday, January 18, 2010
Another List: 5 of the Saddest Movies I've Seen
As many of you know, I've faced a bit of a set back in my life in the past few days. As a result, I'm feeling rather down, but I'm a strong woman, and will bounce back from this. Plus, it has only shown me that what I am doing with my life is absolutely the right thing. I'm right where I want--and need to be.
But since it is on my mind, here are 5 really sad movies that will either bring you right down...or remind you that your life really is not that bad. I always find it cathartic to watch sad movies when I'm down, because for a time I'm crying about something else, instead of whatever is bothering me. Though sometimes, what I really need is a good laugh--but that's for another list.
I will note where there are spoilers.
5. Osama
Trailer.
I saw this years ago, and it has stuck with me ever since. It is the story of a young girl who must disguise herself as a boy in order to work to feed her family in Afghanistan while it was under Taliban rule. It made me think, how many young girls had to do what she did in order to feed their families? The entire situation presented in the film, and the tragic ending make it a downer, but it really puts your life into perspective. We live in a free and democratic country, and hopefully we'll never have to live under oppression. But at the same time, it's depressing that people in this world have to live like that...I just can't imagine it. I suppose that's a very good thing.
4. A.I. Artificial Intelligence (will contain spoilers)
Trailer.
I first saw this in Florida when I was 11 years old. My parents took us to it because they thought it was a light hearted movie about robots. Boy, were they wrong. I was traumatized by the "flesh fair" scene, and found it overly long, and boring. Thankfully, several years later I watched it again and loved it.
I do feel that the movie goes on a bit too long, and should end with David repeating his wish to the Blue Fairy until the end of eternity. But the "real" ending has grown on me somewhat.
This movie is full of tragedy. From Monica abandoning David, to the aforementioned "flesh fair", to the ending, it's essentially a "feel bad" movie throughout. The part that gets me the most is the last twenty minutes, when David is with the robots of the distant future. They take a lock of Monica's hair that Teddy had been keeping, and restore her for a single day. In that day, David colours with her, and falls asleep in her arms. But to me, it's merely an illusion created by these advanced robots, and it's a sort of...false happiness. It just served to remind me of the happiness David was deprived of earlier in his "lifetime".
3. Edward Scissorhands
Trailer.
My favourite movie. This one takes me back to my years as a high school student. Back then (and now, to an extent), I related to Edward. I didn't have scissors for hands, but I might as well have. It's a look at suburban existence, conformity, and rejecting those that are "different".
Johnny Depp is perfect in this film. Edward IS the movie, and it scares me that Tom Cruise was originally considered, but wanted it to have a "happy ending". Thank God he didn't get it, because the message would be ruined if an unnatural happy ending was tacked on. I've seen the movie countless times, and once I counted how many lines Depp uttered...it was something like 30. Therefore, this is a role that required a lot of physical acting, and emotion. He does it magnificently, he becomes Edward, and makes the movie what it is.
2. Atonement
Trailer.
I always tell people that if they want to really cry, they should watch Atonement. It's part love story, part war movie, and part coming of age story. It's a lot of different things, but to me, it works. Primarily, it is the love story between Cecilia (Keira Knightley) and Robbie (James McAvoy), and the fallout caused by an accusation made by Cecilia's sister, Briony (Saoirse Ronan).
It also contains an excellent five minute tracking shot that rivals the one in Children of Men.
1. Grave of the Fireflies
Trailer.
I don't watch a lot of anime, but a few years ago, I was told by numerous people that this was the saddest movie they'd ever seen. I took that as a challenge, and bought it. It's the story of two siblings, Seita (Tsutomu Tatsumi) and Setsuko (Ayano Shiraishi) in Japan during World War II.
It was just as sad as everyone told me. I watched it two and a half years ago with my boyfriend at the time, and I was inconsolable by the end of it. I still have it, but have been unable to watch it since, not for lack of wanting to, but because it was just so painful. I have been really wanting to see it again lately, so it's just a matter of bracing myself for it, and maybe having an understanding friend watch it with me so I can cry on their shoulder.
***
Writing has always been a very cathartic thing for me. It "centers" me, and being able to keep busy and concentrate on something else, especially something I enjoy so much, is very useful. I also want to take this opportunity to give my heartfelt thanks to everyone who has been there for me, by listening, offering their love and support, giving me hugs, texting me to check up on me, and getting me out of the house. It really means the world to me to know that so many people care about me. Thank you.
What's the saddest movie you've ever seen?
But since it is on my mind, here are 5 really sad movies that will either bring you right down...or remind you that your life really is not that bad. I always find it cathartic to watch sad movies when I'm down, because for a time I'm crying about something else, instead of whatever is bothering me. Though sometimes, what I really need is a good laugh--but that's for another list.
I will note where there are spoilers.
5. Osama
Trailer.
I saw this years ago, and it has stuck with me ever since. It is the story of a young girl who must disguise herself as a boy in order to work to feed her family in Afghanistan while it was under Taliban rule. It made me think, how many young girls had to do what she did in order to feed their families? The entire situation presented in the film, and the tragic ending make it a downer, but it really puts your life into perspective. We live in a free and democratic country, and hopefully we'll never have to live under oppression. But at the same time, it's depressing that people in this world have to live like that...I just can't imagine it. I suppose that's a very good thing.
4. A.I. Artificial Intelligence (will contain spoilers)
Trailer.
I first saw this in Florida when I was 11 years old. My parents took us to it because they thought it was a light hearted movie about robots. Boy, were they wrong. I was traumatized by the "flesh fair" scene, and found it overly long, and boring. Thankfully, several years later I watched it again and loved it.
I do feel that the movie goes on a bit too long, and should end with David repeating his wish to the Blue Fairy until the end of eternity. But the "real" ending has grown on me somewhat.
This movie is full of tragedy. From Monica abandoning David, to the aforementioned "flesh fair", to the ending, it's essentially a "feel bad" movie throughout. The part that gets me the most is the last twenty minutes, when David is with the robots of the distant future. They take a lock of Monica's hair that Teddy had been keeping, and restore her for a single day. In that day, David colours with her, and falls asleep in her arms. But to me, it's merely an illusion created by these advanced robots, and it's a sort of...false happiness. It just served to remind me of the happiness David was deprived of earlier in his "lifetime".
3. Edward Scissorhands
Trailer.
My favourite movie. This one takes me back to my years as a high school student. Back then (and now, to an extent), I related to Edward. I didn't have scissors for hands, but I might as well have. It's a look at suburban existence, conformity, and rejecting those that are "different".
Johnny Depp is perfect in this film. Edward IS the movie, and it scares me that Tom Cruise was originally considered, but wanted it to have a "happy ending". Thank God he didn't get it, because the message would be ruined if an unnatural happy ending was tacked on. I've seen the movie countless times, and once I counted how many lines Depp uttered...it was something like 30. Therefore, this is a role that required a lot of physical acting, and emotion. He does it magnificently, he becomes Edward, and makes the movie what it is.
2. Atonement
Trailer.
I always tell people that if they want to really cry, they should watch Atonement. It's part love story, part war movie, and part coming of age story. It's a lot of different things, but to me, it works. Primarily, it is the love story between Cecilia (Keira Knightley) and Robbie (James McAvoy), and the fallout caused by an accusation made by Cecilia's sister, Briony (Saoirse Ronan).
It also contains an excellent five minute tracking shot that rivals the one in Children of Men.
1. Grave of the Fireflies
Trailer.
I don't watch a lot of anime, but a few years ago, I was told by numerous people that this was the saddest movie they'd ever seen. I took that as a challenge, and bought it. It's the story of two siblings, Seita (Tsutomu Tatsumi) and Setsuko (Ayano Shiraishi) in Japan during World War II.
It was just as sad as everyone told me. I watched it two and a half years ago with my boyfriend at the time, and I was inconsolable by the end of it. I still have it, but have been unable to watch it since, not for lack of wanting to, but because it was just so painful. I have been really wanting to see it again lately, so it's just a matter of bracing myself for it, and maybe having an understanding friend watch it with me so I can cry on their shoulder.
***
Writing has always been a very cathartic thing for me. It "centers" me, and being able to keep busy and concentrate on something else, especially something I enjoy so much, is very useful. I also want to take this opportunity to give my heartfelt thanks to everyone who has been there for me, by listening, offering their love and support, giving me hugs, texting me to check up on me, and getting me out of the house. It really means the world to me to know that so many people care about me. Thank you.
What's the saddest movie you've ever seen?
Friday, January 15, 2010
In the Chamber 2010
Today I attended "In the Chamber", where two plays were shown, "Last Man in Krakendorf", and "Last Man in Puntarenas". It was certainly an interesting experience.
I liked "Last Man in Krakendorf" by Gordon Tanner better. It was a very dark monologue performed by a character who is feeling anger about factory farming, and the hog barn fire in a Manitoba community. He spent twenty years of his life working in the farm industry, and was appalled at the way the hogs were treated, and the horrible deaths all 15,000 pigs suffered. It was dark, but often times very funny. That being said, the humour pushes boundaries at time and could potentially be offensive to some.
Tanner, who also performed in the play is filming a sort of plea to an unseen character, and uses a power point presentation during the play. On at least one occasion, he stood very close to the wall it was being projected on, and his face was drowned out. I would have liked to have been able to see his face at that moment, as he was reacting in a fairly emotional way. The power point presentation was a good addition to the play, but the logistics needed to be worked out better so Tanner's face is not washed out at any point.
I liked this play, but it was overly long. A good twenty minutes could have been cut without losing anything. In fact, it would have added impact to the story, since by the end, I felt a bit tired of it, and was ready for it to end.
***
I really disliked Steven Ratzlaff's "Last Man in Puntarenas", however. It was about a man giving a speech at a dinner in his honour. He's celebrating quitting his job in the medical field, and is telling the story of how he got involved in the bureaucratic position he held. Throughout the play, the (unseen) members of his audience leave one by one, because they are alienated by this man's rant. Quite frankly, I felt the same way the invisible audience did. Maybe I just could not relate to him. But mostly, the story felt grating, and by the halfway point, I was checking my watch every five minutes (never a good sign).
I interpreted Ratzlaff's story as being one of refusing to let go. His marriage to his wife ended after the death of their son, who died at 16 months of age. It could have been a really touching story, but I think, again, because of the length of the monologue, it went on much too long, and it became boring. There were some attempts at humour within this play, and the odd time I did chuckle, but it seemed to fall flat most of the time.
***
Monologues can be a great way of performing theatre, but it has to be able to hold the attention of the audience. These two (mostly) one person plays did not have enough material to warrant the 50 minutes each were given, so eventually both become dull and tired. Both would have worked much better as half hour plays.
I liked "Last Man in Krakendorf" by Gordon Tanner better. It was a very dark monologue performed by a character who is feeling anger about factory farming, and the hog barn fire in a Manitoba community. He spent twenty years of his life working in the farm industry, and was appalled at the way the hogs were treated, and the horrible deaths all 15,000 pigs suffered. It was dark, but often times very funny. That being said, the humour pushes boundaries at time and could potentially be offensive to some.
Tanner, who also performed in the play is filming a sort of plea to an unseen character, and uses a power point presentation during the play. On at least one occasion, he stood very close to the wall it was being projected on, and his face was drowned out. I would have liked to have been able to see his face at that moment, as he was reacting in a fairly emotional way. The power point presentation was a good addition to the play, but the logistics needed to be worked out better so Tanner's face is not washed out at any point.
I liked this play, but it was overly long. A good twenty minutes could have been cut without losing anything. In fact, it would have added impact to the story, since by the end, I felt a bit tired of it, and was ready for it to end.
***
I really disliked Steven Ratzlaff's "Last Man in Puntarenas", however. It was about a man giving a speech at a dinner in his honour. He's celebrating quitting his job in the medical field, and is telling the story of how he got involved in the bureaucratic position he held. Throughout the play, the (unseen) members of his audience leave one by one, because they are alienated by this man's rant. Quite frankly, I felt the same way the invisible audience did. Maybe I just could not relate to him. But mostly, the story felt grating, and by the halfway point, I was checking my watch every five minutes (never a good sign).
I interpreted Ratzlaff's story as being one of refusing to let go. His marriage to his wife ended after the death of their son, who died at 16 months of age. It could have been a really touching story, but I think, again, because of the length of the monologue, it went on much too long, and it became boring. There were some attempts at humour within this play, and the odd time I did chuckle, but it seemed to fall flat most of the time.
***
Monologues can be a great way of performing theatre, but it has to be able to hold the attention of the audience. These two (mostly) one person plays did not have enough material to warrant the 50 minutes each were given, so eventually both become dull and tired. Both would have worked much better as half hour plays.
Thursday, January 14, 2010
Welcome to the Dollhouse
I watched Welcome to the Dollhouse tonight on Kenton's recommendation. It was really great--and very different in the sense that it deals with a pre-teen girls social "difficulties". Most films that tackle the story of the social outcast obviously use high school students. The comedy was very dark (just as I like it), and I laughed, and laughed.
I thought about why that is the case, and have come up with a few thoughts. The first thing that came to my mind is that if a film takes place in a high school, they can cast actors that are either already adults, or near adulthood. Heather Matarazzo, who played the protagonist, Dawn Wiener, would have been about 13 years old at the time of filming. That's really young to be tackling such a complex role, and many young actors would not be able to do such a part justice. Matarazzo was fantastic though, as was the entire young cast. If you're able to cast slightly older actors, and place them in a high school environment (where people are still known to be cruel).
Another thought that came to mind is the thought that most people are not comfortable with the idea of pre-teens rebelling, or experimenting in any sort of way. "Pre-teenhood" is tough in the sense that you're generally seen as a slightly older child (at least, that's how I was seen), and rebellion is not supposed to start occurring until high school. I remember when I was in 8th grade, a couple of my peers were caught smoking a cigarette on school property, though outside of school hours. The principal banned them from all the school dances (oh no!) as a result. Of course I'm not saying that kind of thing should be happening, but it does anyway. People just tend to like to plug their ears and ignore this fact. And since many stories like this one do involve some level of rebellion, filmmakers tend to keep it high school aged.
But I, for one, really appreciated the fact that Todd Solondz set it in a junior high school. Because as I said, it's not a perspective you often see. And it reminded me SO, so much of my middle school experience as the "unpopular girl" (a label that, unfortunately, stuck through high school, as I mentioned in my last post). Even Brandon (Brendan Sexton III) reminded me a little of several of the boys I went to school with way back then. Brandon's sympathetic portrayal made me really think about life back then. You can never really walk in another person's shoes, so you can't always know what causes someone to treat you the way they do. Maybe these boys had a difficult home life? I'll never know, and I don't need to know, but I hope that wherever they are, they're living in a way that allows them to sleep at night.
The dynamic of junior high, and high school is also completely different. I thought the character Mark Wiener (Matthew Faber) said it best: "High school's better than junior high. They'll call you names, but not as much to your face." I really couldn't have said it better myself.
I thought about why that is the case, and have come up with a few thoughts. The first thing that came to my mind is that if a film takes place in a high school, they can cast actors that are either already adults, or near adulthood. Heather Matarazzo, who played the protagonist, Dawn Wiener, would have been about 13 years old at the time of filming. That's really young to be tackling such a complex role, and many young actors would not be able to do such a part justice. Matarazzo was fantastic though, as was the entire young cast. If you're able to cast slightly older actors, and place them in a high school environment (where people are still known to be cruel).
Another thought that came to mind is the thought that most people are not comfortable with the idea of pre-teens rebelling, or experimenting in any sort of way. "Pre-teenhood" is tough in the sense that you're generally seen as a slightly older child (at least, that's how I was seen), and rebellion is not supposed to start occurring until high school. I remember when I was in 8th grade, a couple of my peers were caught smoking a cigarette on school property, though outside of school hours. The principal banned them from all the school dances (oh no!) as a result. Of course I'm not saying that kind of thing should be happening, but it does anyway. People just tend to like to plug their ears and ignore this fact. And since many stories like this one do involve some level of rebellion, filmmakers tend to keep it high school aged.
But I, for one, really appreciated the fact that Todd Solondz set it in a junior high school. Because as I said, it's not a perspective you often see. And it reminded me SO, so much of my middle school experience as the "unpopular girl" (a label that, unfortunately, stuck through high school, as I mentioned in my last post). Even Brandon (Brendan Sexton III) reminded me a little of several of the boys I went to school with way back then. Brandon's sympathetic portrayal made me really think about life back then. You can never really walk in another person's shoes, so you can't always know what causes someone to treat you the way they do. Maybe these boys had a difficult home life? I'll never know, and I don't need to know, but I hope that wherever they are, they're living in a way that allows them to sleep at night.
The dynamic of junior high, and high school is also completely different. I thought the character Mark Wiener (Matthew Faber) said it best: "High school's better than junior high. They'll call you names, but not as much to your face." I really couldn't have said it better myself.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
