Archive for the ‘Culture’ Category

The Visitors are coming (back)…

Thursday, October 29th, 2009

vOh my gosh. I was a huge fan of the original TV miniseries “V”, which I was shocked to realize I must have seen at the age of 6-7, since it came out in 1983-4. It has stuck with me all these years. I must not be the only one, because you’ll notice it’s available on DVD. Go put it in your queue. I’ll wait. Don’t forget the “final battle” discs.

I have to tell you, I’m stoked about ABC reinventing the series for TV — premiere on Tuesday, November 3. My expectations are thru da rufe, so I hope I’m not disappointed in this promising new series.

But how could I not be excited? Here’s what they have going for them:

1. Major alien girl power

Here’s the original series’ “Diana”:

diana in v

and now we’re updated with the absolute perfect casting choice of Morena Baccarin (Inara from Firefly) as “Anna”:

morena in v

I also see that Elizabeth Mitchell from “Lost” is in it, but since I’m like the only non-Lost fan alive, I’ll mention her as a footnote.

2. Character focus

That’s what made the original V great — it was all about the characters, and how they responded differently to the new alien “friends”. On the ABC.com – V site, there’s an obvious character bend to the new series, with character bio links in center stage.

3. Sci-fi writers/producers

Well, this could be a plus or a minus. We’ll have to see. Looks like the writer/producer team is from the original series, as well as a similar series that I never got into called “Alien Nation” and a later one I never saw (but am going to check out) called “The 4400″ about alien abductees coming back to earth.

The good thing is that these guys are obviously committed to sci-fi, but it may mean that they will be a bit formulaic on character development. That worries me. “Lois & Clark” was great because it was created not by marvel comics enthusiasts but by Deborah Joy LeVine who thought she could make it into a romantic comedy. And the new Star Trek movie was so great as it was put in the action-storyteller hands of J.J. Abrams, who is a self-described non-Trekkie.

Sometimes the best things come when you mix genres. So we’ll see. Can they take a great sci-fi premise and create a gripping character drama? I’m crossing my fingers. Especially since it looks like Alan Tudyk is cast as well. All we need is Mal and Zoe and I’ll start shedding tears!

Now, there are rumors that the studio hasn’t liked the new “V” scripts, and other quibbles, so I hope the right persons get their way. Of course, the “right persons” are never the execs, but always the writers. :)

TiVo it for Tuesday! As a non-TVer, I’ll be checking it out online.

The Family Man

Friday, October 16th, 2009

familymanWhile I’m on the pro-family kick, I think I’ll review The Family Man (from 2000, Nicolas Cage and Tea Leoni), which is another pro-family movie.

(Though, like Spanglish, it is not an all-ages movie — it’s also PG-13.)

The Family Man is about a wall street executive who gets a chance to see the life’s road he didn’t take — the one of marriage and family vs. high-powered career. A “what might have been” story.

Now, the last movie Nicolas Cage was in that I really liked was Raising Arizona, so I remember that I didn’t have high hopes when I first saw this. But his pairing with Tea Leoni (also from Spanglish) was so charming I was taken in.

For instance, when he wakes on the second morning of his “glimpse” he hears the baby cry and goes to the bathroom door where his wife is showering to tell her about it. She can’t hear him because she’s singing in the shower (Rolling Stones, no less) so he must open the door to get her attention. The look on his face when he must deal with her nudity (not shown on camera, but firmly implied through the obscure glass) as a non-sexual event is PRICELESS, as is her annoyed “what’s the problem” attitude of a woman who has been married for thirteen years and is interrupted in the midst of an otherwise perfect shower experience.

Okay, found the vid — right at the beginning of this clip on YouTube. I warned you of the semi-nudity right? But finish my review first because once you start the clip, you won’t want to stop as he tries to change the baby’s diaper and deal with the daughter’s awareness that he is not actually her dad.

There are some great lines in this movie, like when Cage tries to have it all by moving his family into the city so he can work for his pre-glimpse firm, and he tells the upset Leoni that he wants to give her a life that people will envy.

“They already do envy us,” she says. And she’s so right — yes, some people envy those with worldly success. But another class of people value personal, family success even more. It’s the kind of movie that makes you question which class of person you are.

And of course, the movie’s mantra: “I choose us.” It’s Jerry Maguire-worthy!

This one gets four out of five nods.

nod1nod1nod1nod1

Spanglish

Tuesday, October 13th, 2009

spanglishI watched Spanglish last night, and it was nothing like what I thought it’d be. I hoped it wouldn’t be like The Waterboy or Big Daddy or several other Adam Sandler films, but I didn’t expect it to be more serious and real than 50 First Dates. It is his most mature film to date, hands down.

Hopefully, people didn’t go into this movie looking for a love story like Dates (or a crude farce like Waterboy) because this movie actually had something to say — something Hollywood almost never says.

So what did this movie (which was, incidentally, funny and charming as well) say?

It showed parents sacrificing their own happiness for their kids’ well-being. It showed them choosing family obligation over momentary pleasure. It showed them, in short, being responsible grown ups.

Shocking, I know!

Well, not Tea Leoni’s character, but she was the catalyst for the story, and she played her part so that you both laughed at her and felt sorry for her. It was a razor-fine line. She must be a pretty great actress.

But Adam Sandler and Paz Vega played their concerned parent roles well, and it became obvious that Sandler believes in this story. He didn’t set himself up as a perfect man, but as a real one, trying desperately to hold his family together.

The show-stealers were the two daughters, though. Shelbie Bruce as Vega’s Mexican-born, Americanized daughter and Sarah Steele as Sandler’s kind, grounded, charming daughter. It was those two parent-daughter relationships that made the film, and these two actresses did wonderful jobs.

Two things were wrong with this film:

1. The Title — come on, who thought this was a good idea? Yes, a language barrier is a part of the movie, and you could even argue that the two people communicating the worst were Sandler and his wife! But the word Spanglish is just plain ugly. Words have shape and sound, and much like Susan Sarandon’s movie Stepmom, this title kept me away from the film. It doesn’t say heartwarming movie to me.

2. The Teasers — this movie is grossly mis-billed as a “zany” comedy, which, aside from Leoni’s incredibly strange sex scene, is way off. Here’s what Netflix’s blurb says about Spanglish:

Cultures clash with a mighty clang in this comedy of manners and mayhem directed by James Brooks. When a beautiful Mexican housekeeper, Flor (Paz Vega), is hired by a rich Los Angeles family, everyone’s life is upended in hilariously zany ways, especially when the parents (Tea Leoni and Adam Sandler) make it their mission to be so welcoming that they become overwhelming — especially the dad, who’s quickly smitten by Flor’s beauty.

This makes it sound like Sandler plays a guy who would start an affair with his housekeeper right under his wife’s nose, which is really the opposite of the events of the movie. And using words like “hilarious” and “mayhem” makes it sound like fluff when it is substance (with flair). And it led me to worry all through the final moments of the film that the whole movie setup was just to get the two leads into bed. Thankfully, it wasn’t, and if you haven’t seen this movie, be forewarned. It is a movie about parents and children more than about men and sex. Hurrah for that!

Think I’ll start rating the things I review… how about nods? I give this four out of five nods. If you’ve been avoiding Spanglish for fear it is like Big Daddy, don’t worry. It has its priorities straight. See it.

nod1nod1nod1nod1 = 4 nods

Hollywood Pride

Tuesday, September 29th, 2009

pride_prejudice

So, the other night I was sorely lacking in Netflix movies, so I thumbed through my well-worn personal collection, and trumped out the Hollywood version of Jane Austin’s Pride and Prejudice.

I own this movie, yes. I also hate it.

Or, I did hate it when I first saw it. But since I love the story (like every other English-speaking pansy) I thought I’d better let it rest and try it again later. And yes, on subsequent viewings, I’ve hated it LESS, but I still hate the poor movie as though it has personally injured me.

Why, I asked myself upon this latest viewing. I shouldbe able to rationally dissect it after a handful of viewings, shouldn’t I? Why do I have such a visceral reaction to it?

Here are some thoughts:

  1. Elizabeth — is poorly cast. Now, I’ve liked Keira Knightly in other roles — she makes a great Elizabeth Swan, so she’s not inappropriate for period dramas (did I just call Pirates of the Carribean a period drama? Ho ho ho!) But why on earth did the poor woman think that spunk meant baring one’s teeth and looking as cat-like as possible. Her performance lacked elegance. Elizabeth Bennet was not brash, just spirited. This distinction is important to the story because she contrasts her ridiculous family (as well as her elegant but demure elder sister — a delicate balance).
  2. Darcy — is poorly cast. Okay, I had to look up Matthew Macfadyen to see what else he’s done, so obviously I’m not an MI-5 fan. Maybe his fans were pleased. And I’m not saying it’s easy to reprise the role that made Colin Firth an immortal sex symbol. But all his mannerisms seemed off to me. He helps her into the carriage, then, upon walking away, splays out his fingers like he’s trying to shake off something disgusting. Maybe he’d gently stroke the tips of his fingers with his thumb, re-enacting the touch of her hand? Maybe he’d clasp his hands together in front of his face, bringing her touch to his own lips. Splayed fingers, not working for me. The pasty mask that was supposed to be shy indifference didn’t work for me, either.
  3. Other castings — oh dear. Mr. Bingley is not a buffoon! Mr. Collins is not a serial killer! But I best move on…
  4. Dialogue — Why is everyone in such a hurry to say their lines? Are they trying to fit a three hour movie into two hours? Apparently. Yikes. Slow down, people.
  5. Beauty — the film lost something of the art of Jane’s book. Something the 1995 BBC version captured. I get it — they were trying to differentiate the public assembly dance from the Netherfield ball, but the assembly came off dirty and chaotic. Dude, I would thumb my nose if I were Darcy! Yet in this scene we are supposed to side with Elizabeth.

But here’s the real problem with this version: The Screenplay!The credited writer is Deborah Moggach who has no other notable credits, but as is often the case with Hollywood, the compromised story and affected dialogue may not be her fault… it may have been a case of too many cooks in the kitchen.

The thing is, you can’t rush a character story. You can’t fit all the scenes from the book into two hours and make any of them feel genuine and nuanced, subtle and understated. Pride and Prejudice is over 120,000 words long. Harry Potter six had to hack it to the bone to display 170,000 words onscreen… but then I think they’ll bleed over some key points into HP7. But I digress.

Lesson to be learned: Writing is important! A good screenplay is like the first domino. When it falls, everything down the line suffers. And it’s really hard to adapt a well-woven character story into a two-hour narrative. When adapting a classic you have this ugly desire to be “faithful” to the book. I’d rather see them be true to the spirit of the book than to the actual scenes. They tried, with P&P, but ultimately I think they failed. You don’t love Elizabeth’s spunk, you don’t admire Darcy’s reserve, you don’t laugh at Mr. Collins or understand Charlotte’s choice. Wickham and Georgiana become cardboard and don’t feel important to the plot, and poor Bingley is truly cringe-worthy. Jane and her parents survive rather well, as does Lydia. Lady Catherine is given too much screen time, presumably to play her role in the reversal of fortune at the end, but frankly the stronger motivator of reconciliation is what Darcy does for Lydia. Not that I would change the book one iota. But a film is not a book.little women

I give the Hollywood version of Pride and Prejudice a paltry two nods:

nod1nod1

Last night, feeling the void where a great period adaptation should be, I put on Little Women. Ahhhh. Need satisfied*.

* To be fair, Pride and Prejudice is a longer novel than Little Women by 30,000 words.

Now, to end on a sweet note:

–Pride and Prejudice, 1995, BBC adaptation

Ponyo

Wednesday, September 16th, 2009

PonyoWell, I was going to let it go at a twitter, but I’m still thinking about it, so now it’s a post.

The kids and I drove for an hour to see the new Miyazaki film, Ponyo. (It didn’t come to my local theater in backwoods, usa.) We are huge fans of Miyazaki films, each with our own fav:

4yo loves Totoro for its lovable furry title characters, the soot spirits and the Nekobasu (the cat-bus.)

7yo loves Princess Mononoke, arguably the most gruesome of Miyazaki’s films, but perhaps the most realistic.

9yo loves Spirited Away, loves No Face and even Yubaba, but especially spider-legged Kumaji and her other allies.

My husband likes Nausicaa best. Not sure why — the insect thing?

And, of course, I love Howl’s Moving Castle. I love Diana Wynne Jones’ book (and its sequels) so that’s part of it, but Miyazaki put his own stamp on an already lovely story. It’s a love story with spark (did they use that as the tag line? They should have!!). Oh, don’t you love Calcifer? In fact, I would say the Door-Mat in MindsBase was somewhat inspired by Calcifer.

Now, I feel rather amiss not even mentioning Castle in the Sky, or even The Cat Returns or Kiki’s Delivery Service, all of which we also own and love.

So, back to Ponyo. I knew, going in, that this would be a younger story, more on the order of Totoro than Mononoke. But I really got my hopes up when the hip 20-something boy at the ticket counter offered “It’s really great!” when I bought the tix.

Here’s what was great about it:

  • Watercolor artistry, oy yes.
  • Spectacular visuals, especially the oceanic events. Depicting the waves as giant fish — brilliant!
  • The magically-enlarged toy boat powered by a candle-fired boiler. My kids want to try to build one of those now.
  • The old ladies. One thing I love about Miyazaki films (and Japanese culture in general) is the integration of older people as valued members of society.
  • The smaller story of Ponyo and Sosuke is backdropped by the larger world of the mother, the father and the town dealing with the storms — LOVE IT!
  • The wonderful details such as the ham radio, the generator and the Morse Code spotlight. My kids eat up this kind of stuff.
  • The Sea King Fujimoto. Does he remind you a little of Howl? Great voice choice in Liam Neeson.

Here’s where it fell down for me. I never felt enough attachment to Ponyo or Sosuke. I never felt that Sosuke loved Ponyo the way a boy eventually needs to love a girl. He seemed to love her as a pet, but she didn’t end up as a pet, she ended up as a human girl. I needed to see them have some version of love as boy and girl — a girl who acted a little more like a girl than an alien experiencing the earth for the first time. :)

I felt like that was the promise, and not just because it’s the route Disney took on the Hans Christian Anderson classic. The opening scenes with Sosuke (at least the English version) spoke much of love — the love Sosuke immediately had for Ponyo and the love (shown by hurt when he didn’t return) Sosuke’s mother had for his father (and vice versa).

As the movie progressed and became more about Ponyo’s transformation (literally and emotionally) what I saw was Ponyo experiencing LIFE. I didn’t see her experiencing LOVE. So, in the end, I was left a little empty with where Ponyo’s story would go from there. Would Sosuke grow tired of Ponyo over the years, or see her as a sister (since all signs pointed to her being raised in his household). Would Ponyo really like being a human better if she wasn’t loved by Sosuke? Would she miss her many sisters and long to return to the sea?

Fortunately, my kids weren’t troubled by these same lingering questions. But they also haven’t begged for us to buy it when it comes out on DVD, which is often the first question after a great in-theater experience.

SO… compared to other Miyazaki films, it was okay. Compared to films like Open Season, it was “really great” — just as the ticket-boy promised.

nod1nod1nod1 = 3 nods

Now, go put all the Miyazaki films in your netflix queue!! Most are FIVE NODS!

(P.S. Is queue not the weirdest-spelled word?)