Sex & the City ad

This is hilarious. The first time I started watching, I thought it might be an ad for the next movie (already!) but turns out it's just an ad for some marathon instead. Still: brilliant.

Technically, the girls did not go to grade school together, so it wouldn't really make sense for that to be part of the next movie anyway. Though that would be amazingly entertaining, it would negate all sorts of background established over the course of the series. Oh well. But this does make me really excited to know what the plot of the next movie will be!!

Hair

True, I have seen this movie more times than I'd like to admit. But the lovely Miss Chelsea had NOT, and on a drunken Friday night, what else are you going to reach for on the DVD shelf? It was this or Mamma Mia!, and frankly, there's no comparison. (I actually really love that movie as well, but I can talk about that another time.)

If you haven't seen Hair, you have really missed a magical wonder of the 1970s. The movie is based -- I would argue loosely -- on the 1968 musical about hippie culture and Vietnam. I say "loosely" because if you're familiar with the musical on stage at all, the film will probably surprise you. On stage, the show is wall to wall music and seemingly formless. The film is far more structured, contains about a third of the music, and some of the song lyrics are even altered to make the plot more cohesive. If you have the option to see either and you're not sure you're into the whole experimental musical idea, I suggest you start with the film. It's like, stoned-lite. Contrary to some questionable college productions of the show that shall not be named, the musical is meant to be a kick-ass trip down freedom lane. So if you can't handle loose plot structure and fluid shifting form, probs not for you.


Give it a try! As Chelsea pointed out, it's like a way superior version of Across the Universe. She might have only made the connection, and I might have added the superlatives. But it's true! If you've seen the latter, you will notice a lot of pilfering, er, um.... parallels. It's ridic. Guess which one's in my collection?

Wikipedia-media

Check out this really interesting article I just finished reading for my Teaching with Technology class.  Did you ever wonder who created Wikipedia, and why it exists in the first place? If you have ever edited or posted to the site, you probably have some questions about how it is policed. At least I did...

Anyway, you may find this article of interest if:

a) you are a journalist of some kind

b) you use Wikipedia.... ever

c) you don't know what I just said in point b

d) you live in this century.

Very interesting exploration of the community-encyclopedia idea.  Interested to know your comments, if applicable -- this is a huge controversial topic in Education classes.  i.e. Should teachers accept Wikipedia as a resource?  You might want to read this article before you answer.  ahhh, intrigue....

The Five Obstructions

Something really magical happens while you're watching this film. Something unique. Yes, at the moment I'm writing this, I'm affected by the succinctly compelling language of the film itself. I am compelled wholly by this film, in so many ways. As an artist, I cherish its reverence for the creative process - the moment of imaginative conception in all its glory. As a filmmaker, in particular, I am impressed by the versatility of this man, the subject of the film, Jorgen Leth (pictured here), who is able to work so ingeniously. As a person, I am challenged by the concepts of beauty and limitation impressed through the film. Overall, I am blown away.


Alright, so it's not perfect, but only because nothing is! But it's darn close. That's right: darn. You'll notice it's missing half a shoe in my assessment. I'm modifying my format here, and not including my rubric anymore -- I felt it was oppressing the flow. However, I will say that a meager 3 points were subtracted from the overall score, which is pretty astounding. This film is really worth watching, whether or not you consider yourself "artsy." Lars von Trier, the director, has such an overwhelming love for Jorgen Leth, his subject, that he has enlisted him to recreate his own 1967 film, The Perfect Human. Von Trier creates a series of obstacles for Leth to overcome in his re-shootings. These range from "no edit can exceed 12 frames" to "shoot it in Cuba." At one point in the three year process, von Trier insists that he is providing a therapy - at another point, he chastises Leth for not producing the "crap" he's anticipated. Von Trier is visibly mystified by his subject's tenacity and brilliance through every hindrance, forcing the viewer to ask Who is the student, and Who is the teacher? By the end of the film, I wasn't sure what had happened, and who won in this ambitious challenge. The only thing I found certainly: the greatness of Jorgen Leth.

As a student of Education these days, I found myself continuously asking, "How can I use this film in my classroom?" There are some red flags in the idea of using the thing in its entirety: there's a fair smattering of nudity and sex imagery, for example. But, I'm going to find a way to incorporate the film into my teaching somehow. There's a lesson to be learned here about technique, genre play, risk taking, etc. As I said, this film exposes valuable lessons on the process of creation, whether you create "art" or anything else.

Taking the Stage

I am totally in love with this new MTV show called Taking the Stage. Yes, it's a reality show, and I don't care what that connotes, because it's awesome.

Basically, the show follows a few "main characters" who attend the Cincinnati School for Creative and Performing Arts (SCPA), so basically a reality Fame. The show's greatest strength is its portrayal of school-wide talent. One of the main characters is a music major, others study dance (ballet or hip-hop), and most are multi-talented singers/performers. It's completely addictive, and there have only been 3 episodes. T.t.S. does lack some high quality drama. I mean, come on, these are high school students. So, of course, the gossip revolves around Tyler trying to get with Jasmine while secretly flirting with Mia, which Shaakira and Malik totally saw coming. But seriously, what else constitutes drama in reality tv?

MTV admits that some of the scenes are re-shot reality. As in, they sometimes have to "re-enact" important moments or stage conversations in more concise snippets for sake of pacing. I don't really mind that in principle, but these kids are not actors. Usually you can tell what is being re-shot vs. what is actually happening real time. This does give the show sort of a fakey veneer, at times. But honestly, the showcase of talent and creative challenges far outweigh the poor "un"-script. Check it out -- you'll be glad you did.

I just don't know.

Apologies. Not so much to you, because you probably don't give a damn. Apologies to myself. For not keeping up with this damned blog. Like most journals and diaries of my past, I have slacked and neglected.

Here's the problem:

Every time I think of something I want to write about, I end up asking myself, "Is this truly blog worthy?" But why? I invented this thing, and it can live or die by my hand. Maybe I don't want to limit this blog to movies. For example, I enjoyed writing that last post, which was only peripherally related to a movie-review. Maybe I should just make this blog a review of... whatever? It might be more interesting. And I might have more interest in keeping it maintained. Sure, I will still have insecurities. Am I interesting? Am I saying anything original? Who cares? What's the point? When am I going to do laundry?

I'm all over the place on this one. Bottom line: I need some inspiration. Since my last entry earlier this month, I've watched Kinsey, Born into Brothels, Ordinary People, One Flew Over the Cuckoo's Nest, Rachel Getting Married, and Jesus Camp. You will notice that I haven't reviewed any of these films and frankly, I don't intend to review them. I am rebelling against my own system! (Foiled again!) But why!? Kinsey made me shrug. Born Into Brothels was sad but I forgot it 20 minutes later. Ordinary People is way dated in every way possible... and not in a great sense. Cuckoo's Nest had me watching the clock. Rachel impressed me, but my critique ended there. And Jesus Camp.... well let's just say I almost vomited. And that was about the strongest reaction I had to any of the above.

Yesterday my mailbox surprised me with Kramer vs. Kramer, the next film on my agenda. And, though I've had over a day to take it in, I have stalled. I think I need to give myself permission to just go wherever this thing takes me. It's like wandering around in a city I hardly know... I have sort of an idea of what I'd like to see, but if I don't get there, I'll probably still enjoy myself. I hope....

In closing, a picture of the #1 Victorian Novel you should avoid this year. Or ever...

Ralph Fiennes vs. Liam Neeson

Ok, this is not a review of anything. I just have to put this out there.

I have this problem. I thought by acknowledging it and talking about it with other people, maybe it would resolve itself. I thought I could laugh it off. I thought this would heal itself. But no. As time goes on, it just worse and worse. And I don't know what to do.

I cannot tell the difference between Ralph Fiennes and Liam Neeson. Seriously. It's like, I know they're two separate people, and I can recognize that, side by side, they look different. But when I'm looking at just one of them, I literally cannot imagine the other one. When I saw The Reader a few weeks ago, I spent the whole movie thinking how impressed I was with Liam Neeson's performance, only to realize DURING THE CREDITS that the whole time, it was definitely Ralph Fiennes. Please consider this comparison: black and white photographs including nondescript hand gestures.
















Am I right or am I right? I mean, seriously.

So, after The Reader incident, I really focused on learning the difference between these people. Then I ended up 'flixing Kinsey (which I am yet to write a review of, basically because I feel uninspired). On the box, of course it has Liam Neeson's name printed in big letters. And during the opening credits, once again, "Liam Neeson." Alas, without fail, 45 minutes into the movie my mind wanders a little and I realize that I've been thinking, "Wow, this role is so different than The Reader. That's pretty impressive, Ralph Fiennes." Umm.... what is wrong with me? Example #2 for comparison: color photo with similar dramatic intensity.
















To make matters worse, I sometimes also mix Colin Firth into this equation. This rarer problem, objectively, makes less sense - I recognize this. But for whatever reason I just can't figure it out. Then complicate the whole thing with crazy make-up and special effects... I am just a lost cause.


Yeah... no chance. I have no idea who any of these people are.