To enter a war zone with inadequate training and hardly any ground support with the goal of retrieving precious works of art from Nazi thugs, risking everything to return them to their rightful owners, this is how George Clooney's The Monuments Men proceeds, decadently daring and cluelessly clever, exoterically unreeling, with far too strong a sense of invincibility.
It's a great idea but it's difficult to treat Monuments Men like a serious war film.
War films need to be serious.
World War II's more of an afterthought than an omnipresence within and although the high spirits of the tangential team are endearing, in war films the war needs to be present in each and every nanoframe, every aspect scrutinizing the terror.
True, such films often include moments where the struggling combatants think of home or let loose for a while, but their despair still ominously flows.
Monuments Men sort of reverses this standard, the film occasionally focusing on the war while it seems like the combatants never left home, and, while it's noteworthy that the film doesn't play by the book, it falls flat throughout.
I applaud what it sets out to do however.
It's simple and easy to follow, providing a clear sensible message: great works of art chronicle and catalogue a people's historical and contemporary conditions, and any attempts to pilfer this aspect of a culture is universally unacceptable, to be resolutely fought against even if the impracticality of fighting against it directly during an actual war is daunting, that fight being artistic in its pursuits nevertheless.
By stating this message in terms that can be easily understood, Monuments Men will hopefully encourage many latent art lovers to cultivate their interests more actively.
One scene is commendable too, when James Granger (Matt Damon) returns a stolen painting to the house where it once belonged, even though the homeowners may never return, this scene defining a post-war rebuilding stage's genesis, highlighting how difficult it must be to know where to begin.
It passes by far too quickly.
Loved the Granger.
Monday, March 24, 2014
Thursday, March 20, 2014
Kaze tachinu (The Wind Rises)
The dreams of a modest principled hard working youth patiently materialize in Hayao Miyazaki's Kaze tachinu (The Wind Rises), an animated account of a brilliant Japanese aeronautical engineer whose poetical mathematics helped remodel Japan's aviation industry.
The frame insulates a wise psychological stratagem for growing and changing during tumultuous times, within Jirȏ Horikoshi's (Joseph Gordon-Levitt) mind, and provides him with the strength to go-with-the-flow as hardships, sicknesses, and political aggressions challenge his strong sense of self.
He grew up in the years leading up to World War II and had to helplessly sit back while his designs were co-opted by the military.
The film doesn't shy away from exploring technological testaments to militaristic miscues.
Horikoshi has to hide for a time as jingoistic agents grow suspicious of his activities.
This aspect of the film fades without receiving enough attention.
I'm supposing the pre-war years were quite oppressive as indicated by Horikoshi's attempts to converse with less fortunate citizens who are frightened by his humble offering of sponge cake.
Research and development processes and workplace pastimes are a recurring feature as his dreams become a reality through the application of diligent trials and errors.
Love fills-out the creative cure, as a respectful romance energizes his designs.
Kaze tachinu offers innocent industrious insights into a dedicated upright life of work and study whose successes and failures are stoically articulated.
Romance, rewards and retinues refine his tragic pursuit of innovation, his revered reveries, seek, search, discover; apply; install.
The frame insulates a wise psychological stratagem for growing and changing during tumultuous times, within Jirȏ Horikoshi's (Joseph Gordon-Levitt) mind, and provides him with the strength to go-with-the-flow as hardships, sicknesses, and political aggressions challenge his strong sense of self.
He grew up in the years leading up to World War II and had to helplessly sit back while his designs were co-opted by the military.
The film doesn't shy away from exploring technological testaments to militaristic miscues.
Horikoshi has to hide for a time as jingoistic agents grow suspicious of his activities.
This aspect of the film fades without receiving enough attention.
I'm supposing the pre-war years were quite oppressive as indicated by Horikoshi's attempts to converse with less fortunate citizens who are frightened by his humble offering of sponge cake.
Research and development processes and workplace pastimes are a recurring feature as his dreams become a reality through the application of diligent trials and errors.
Love fills-out the creative cure, as a respectful romance energizes his designs.
Kaze tachinu offers innocent industrious insights into a dedicated upright life of work and study whose successes and failures are stoically articulated.
Romance, rewards and retinues refine his tragic pursuit of innovation, his revered reveries, seek, search, discover; apply; install.
Monday, March 17, 2014
Stay
The baby factor plays a crucial role in Stay's conceptual christening, the key sociological stitch practically tying the abstractions together.
Aging Dermot (Aidan Quinn) reacts none to supportively upon discovering that partner Abby (Taylor Schilling) is carrying his unborn child.
Content to live out his life quietly with minimal responsibility, the shock halts his settled steady stride.
He's a bit of an ass.
Abby leaves Ireland to visit her family in Montréal where her father (Michael Ironside as Frank) is thrilled by the news, yet troubled by her questions about her own mother, who left their family when she was 6.
Back in Ireland, Dermot strikes up acquaintances with a teenager who's skipping school to work and a single mom, their conversations causing him to reconsider his dismissive attitude regarding child rearing.
He also goes out of his way to irritate a fellow community member looking to sell a piece of property close to his own, disrupting his hopeful plans, even though he needs the money to save his struggling business.
He's a total ass.
Although his shenanigans do unearth a rare archaeological find.
The pints must flow.
Weathered and worldly, Abby and Dermot's relationship stubbornly and pensively communicates realistic fears concerning the introduction of youngsters, the upheaval of a stable set of solidifiers, the ground changing announcements of birth.
Communal and familial observations and traditions supply down-to-earth accidental supernatural provisions, fortune or fate?, interactive antecedents.
Aging Dermot (Aidan Quinn) reacts none to supportively upon discovering that partner Abby (Taylor Schilling) is carrying his unborn child.
Content to live out his life quietly with minimal responsibility, the shock halts his settled steady stride.
He's a bit of an ass.
Abby leaves Ireland to visit her family in Montréal where her father (Michael Ironside as Frank) is thrilled by the news, yet troubled by her questions about her own mother, who left their family when she was 6.
Back in Ireland, Dermot strikes up acquaintances with a teenager who's skipping school to work and a single mom, their conversations causing him to reconsider his dismissive attitude regarding child rearing.
He also goes out of his way to irritate a fellow community member looking to sell a piece of property close to his own, disrupting his hopeful plans, even though he needs the money to save his struggling business.
He's a total ass.
Although his shenanigans do unearth a rare archaeological find.
The pints must flow.
Weathered and worldly, Abby and Dermot's relationship stubbornly and pensively communicates realistic fears concerning the introduction of youngsters, the upheaval of a stable set of solidifiers, the ground changing announcements of birth.
Communal and familial observations and traditions supply down-to-earth accidental supernatural provisions, fortune or fate?, interactive antecedents.
Thursday, March 13, 2014
Miraculum
Flight plans, guilt-ridden, felicitous, miserable, and emancipating flight plans, desperately intermingle differing degrees of shock, immersed in Daniel Grou's Miraculum, as risks deteriorate familial stabilities, and the concept of vice, is multifariously de/moralized.
Synoptic suffering.
A weary outcast attempts to make amends through profits earned from drug smuggling.
An affair crushes and/or enlivens the members of two elderly couples.
Distant addictive empty partners seek to rejuvenate their marriage.
A struggling Jehovah's Witness is tempted by secular advancements (blood transfusions).
The four stories downtroddenly unfurl within and without (like Babel or Tian zhu ding), lucidly pinpointing vectorized vertices, occasionally peaking ensemble, dedicating a despondent deconstructive density to open-minded conscientious plights, which resists clear and distinct binding generalizations, to materially matriculate the mundanely divine.
Although communal belonging is fluidly challenged as unforgiving bulwarks fortify their positions.
Wherein resistance is rather futile.
Miraculum isn't like pastis, milk, and honey, more like a caressing melancholic ideological tempest, compelling in its whirlwinds, tight, multifaceted, challenging.
Editing by Valérie Héroux.
Written by Gabriel Sabourin (Valérie Beaugrand-Champagne consulting).
It breathes difficult distinct tetralectics into profound ethical quotients, corrugating crisp conceptions of the beautiful, rationally masterminded, exacting, composed.
Keeping you focused at full attention.
Built to multilaterally stimulate.
Synoptic suffering.
A weary outcast attempts to make amends through profits earned from drug smuggling.
An affair crushes and/or enlivens the members of two elderly couples.
Distant addictive empty partners seek to rejuvenate their marriage.
A struggling Jehovah's Witness is tempted by secular advancements (blood transfusions).
The four stories downtroddenly unfurl within and without (like Babel or Tian zhu ding), lucidly pinpointing vectorized vertices, occasionally peaking ensemble, dedicating a despondent deconstructive density to open-minded conscientious plights, which resists clear and distinct binding generalizations, to materially matriculate the mundanely divine.
Although communal belonging is fluidly challenged as unforgiving bulwarks fortify their positions.
Wherein resistance is rather futile.
Miraculum isn't like pastis, milk, and honey, more like a caressing melancholic ideological tempest, compelling in its whirlwinds, tight, multifaceted, challenging.
Editing by Valérie Héroux.
Written by Gabriel Sabourin (Valérie Beaugrand-Champagne consulting).
It breathes difficult distinct tetralectics into profound ethical quotients, corrugating crisp conceptions of the beautiful, rationally masterminded, exacting, composed.
Keeping you focused at full attention.
Built to multilaterally stimulate.
Wednesday, March 12, 2014
300: Rise of an Empire
I'm not sure if 300: Rise of an Empire is supposed to be taken seriously or rather should be treated as a healthy cerealized kitschtastic crack, its graphic epic historic amplitude hilted, jacked, and drawn, battle-ready and menacing in its entirety, strategically frothing, an implicated grind.
Themistocles (Sullivan Stapleton) and Artemisia's (Eva Green) nocturnal knockings knit like necromanced kerosene, enriching yet servicing quinoa, while Xerxes (Rodrigo Santoro) gracefully prances about like an impregnable prophesied faun, mystically captivating, ornate and commandeering.
There isn't really that much happening in the film besides battling and preparations for battling.
The majority of the battles taking place on water.
The Persians insist on invading Greece and go rather multitudinously about it, which necessitates constant inspirational speech making from Themistocles, a plain everyperson possessing ingenious gifts for fighting and strategizing, whose experiential wherewithal infuses his speeches with spry rallying rectitude, democracy under siege, his fellow citizens, pressurized and proverbed.
According to my tastes, many of the speeches fell flat, but since I realized that Themistocles's gifts were for warfare, not rhetoric, and his legend demanded that he set out to unite Greece, a soldier shepherding a synergy, I could forgive the fact that the words he chose didn't resonate with me, strictly focusing on their underlying message.
A relationship between father and son familializes both the preparations for and the acts of battling.
Heavy on the gore.
At several points it seems like the reasons for battling are secondary to the battling itself, blood spurting from hacked-off limbs the motif which occurs most often.
Which adds a mischievous quality to the design.
Which perhaps should be taken seriously.
Themistocles (Sullivan Stapleton) and Artemisia's (Eva Green) nocturnal knockings knit like necromanced kerosene, enriching yet servicing quinoa, while Xerxes (Rodrigo Santoro) gracefully prances about like an impregnable prophesied faun, mystically captivating, ornate and commandeering.
There isn't really that much happening in the film besides battling and preparations for battling.
The majority of the battles taking place on water.
The Persians insist on invading Greece and go rather multitudinously about it, which necessitates constant inspirational speech making from Themistocles, a plain everyperson possessing ingenious gifts for fighting and strategizing, whose experiential wherewithal infuses his speeches with spry rallying rectitude, democracy under siege, his fellow citizens, pressurized and proverbed.
According to my tastes, many of the speeches fell flat, but since I realized that Themistocles's gifts were for warfare, not rhetoric, and his legend demanded that he set out to unite Greece, a soldier shepherding a synergy, I could forgive the fact that the words he chose didn't resonate with me, strictly focusing on their underlying message.
A relationship between father and son familializes both the preparations for and the acts of battling.
Heavy on the gore.
At several points it seems like the reasons for battling are secondary to the battling itself, blood spurting from hacked-off limbs the motif which occurs most often.
Which adds a mischievous quality to the design.
Which perhaps should be taken seriously.
Thursday, March 6, 2014
Rhymes for Young Ghouls (Rimes pour revenants)
A systematically brutalized culture's subjugated displacements resiliently assert themselves in Jeff Barnaby's Rhymes for Young Ghouls (Rimes pour revenants), a hardboiled look at a Mi'kmaq reserve (Red Crow) oppressed by a cruel vindictive Indian Agent and laws requiring children to attend residential schools.
There's friendship, family, camaraderie, language, culture, belonging, humanity.
But the gang of authoritative thugs who govern the place still do everything they can to impoverish.
The film's violent.
It's fight-back or fuck-off as a might-is-right philosophy confronts resistance, ubiquitous altercations, outrageous regulations (no boats on the lake for starters).
Alia (Kawennahere Devery Jacobs) knows how to fight.
Left to be raised by her deadbeat uncle after her father was sent to prison and her mother committed suicide, she establishes a flourishing business which earns her enough cash to pay off the Indian Agent.
Thereby freeing her from the residential school.
But his abusive grip squeezes tighter and tighter, necessitating a potent counterstrike, sounding the call of the warrior.
Rhymes for Young Ghouls isn't shy.
It starkly lays out a ravaged set of institutionalized sterilizations while demonstrating how the victims remain elastically fertile.
Many of the characters are young and their tragic innocence exacerbates the tyranny.
Accentuates the acrimony.
While their communal bonds reify the transcendent life.
Love the analogous relationship between the wolf and the mushroom story and the bloodthirsty pursuit of capital.
There's friendship, family, camaraderie, language, culture, belonging, humanity.
But the gang of authoritative thugs who govern the place still do everything they can to impoverish.
The film's violent.
It's fight-back or fuck-off as a might-is-right philosophy confronts resistance, ubiquitous altercations, outrageous regulations (no boats on the lake for starters).
Alia (Kawennahere Devery Jacobs) knows how to fight.
Left to be raised by her deadbeat uncle after her father was sent to prison and her mother committed suicide, she establishes a flourishing business which earns her enough cash to pay off the Indian Agent.
Thereby freeing her from the residential school.
But his abusive grip squeezes tighter and tighter, necessitating a potent counterstrike, sounding the call of the warrior.
Rhymes for Young Ghouls isn't shy.
It starkly lays out a ravaged set of institutionalized sterilizations while demonstrating how the victims remain elastically fertile.
Many of the characters are young and their tragic innocence exacerbates the tyranny.
Accentuates the acrimony.
While their communal bonds reify the transcendent life.
Love the analogous relationship between the wolf and the mushroom story and the bloodthirsty pursuit of capital.
Tuesday, March 4, 2014
Stalingrad
Improbabilities abound in Fedor Bondarchuk's oddly sentimental Stalingrad, my first look at a Russian blockbuster, just as grandiosely sensational as their American counterparts, so it seems, dazzling and heartbreaking, modestly skewed.
The film concerns one of the Second World War's Battle of Stalingrad's myriad crazed territorial trespasses wherein the Russians possess a building the Germans covet, hoping to win it back, their opposing forces exchanging ample audacities.
A beautiful young Russian ingénue still lives in the building (Mariya Smolnikova as Katya) and 5 hardened comrades fall for her as the fighting intensifies.
The situation's dire and the soldiers are countering inestimable odds with neither supplies nor reinforcements.
Katya offers a fleeting escape from the surrounding horrors, reminding the men that they're fighting for a greater purpose, substituting radiance for perdition, dignity for misery.
Even if what I've read about Stalin's reign in the Soviet Union makes it sound like hell on Earth.
It's difficult to determine whether or not the film is simply celebrating the sacrifices of courageous persons thrust into an abyss whose maddening pressures necessitated the emergence of heroism, the overwhelmed and underfunded Russians forced to bravely ignite their internal flames (one of the best scenes depicts this), or if it's glorifying the war itself, the scene where two would-be lovers sit back and watch the artillery light up the night sky like a fascist/communist fireworks display functioning as a romantic yet too distracting display, although had I been in a similar situation I too would have likely watched in wonder.
Focusing on the inherently deadly and ruinous nature of the display rather than any secondary futuristic aesthetic qualifications no doubt.
The deadly and ruinous nature of the display isn't referred to, discipline is brutal as a Russian sailor is shot for presenting an alternative point of view, Stalin isn't mentioned with loathing, the best speech is reserved for the enemy German captain (Thomas Krechmann/Kretschmann)(it reminded me of Robert Graves's description of Julius Caesar's pre-battle motivations in I, Claudius), in short, the discourses of the Left are largely absent (one Russian soldier is reprimanded for using the word retarded and there's a conciliatory frame whose presence is dismissible), which I was hoping would not be the case in a film celebrating Commie heroes, even if I'm (now) aware that it was mass-produced in Putin's Russia.
It's not necessarily that improbabilities abound, but when I watch these films and think, "this is a life or death situation and that's what tricked you?", I tend to use words such as improbable to describe what happens.
A must if you want to see your first Russian blockbuster, even if it's one of the worst movies you'll ever see.
I was naively hoping it would be similar to Elem Klimov's Come and See (all I knew about the film going in was that it was called Stalingrad and made in Russia).
Here's hoping Putin doesn't become any more Hitleresque.
The film concerns one of the Second World War's Battle of Stalingrad's myriad crazed territorial trespasses wherein the Russians possess a building the Germans covet, hoping to win it back, their opposing forces exchanging ample audacities.
A beautiful young Russian ingénue still lives in the building (Mariya Smolnikova as Katya) and 5 hardened comrades fall for her as the fighting intensifies.
The situation's dire and the soldiers are countering inestimable odds with neither supplies nor reinforcements.
Katya offers a fleeting escape from the surrounding horrors, reminding the men that they're fighting for a greater purpose, substituting radiance for perdition, dignity for misery.
Even if what I've read about Stalin's reign in the Soviet Union makes it sound like hell on Earth.
It's difficult to determine whether or not the film is simply celebrating the sacrifices of courageous persons thrust into an abyss whose maddening pressures necessitated the emergence of heroism, the overwhelmed and underfunded Russians forced to bravely ignite their internal flames (one of the best scenes depicts this), or if it's glorifying the war itself, the scene where two would-be lovers sit back and watch the artillery light up the night sky like a fascist/communist fireworks display functioning as a romantic yet too distracting display, although had I been in a similar situation I too would have likely watched in wonder.
Focusing on the inherently deadly and ruinous nature of the display rather than any secondary futuristic aesthetic qualifications no doubt.
The deadly and ruinous nature of the display isn't referred to, discipline is brutal as a Russian sailor is shot for presenting an alternative point of view, Stalin isn't mentioned with loathing, the best speech is reserved for the enemy German captain (Thomas Krechmann/Kretschmann)(it reminded me of Robert Graves's description of Julius Caesar's pre-battle motivations in I, Claudius), in short, the discourses of the Left are largely absent (one Russian soldier is reprimanded for using the word retarded and there's a conciliatory frame whose presence is dismissible), which I was hoping would not be the case in a film celebrating Commie heroes, even if I'm (now) aware that it was mass-produced in Putin's Russia.
It's not necessarily that improbabilities abound, but when I watch these films and think, "this is a life or death situation and that's what tricked you?", I tend to use words such as improbable to describe what happens.
A must if you want to see your first Russian blockbuster, even if it's one of the worst movies you'll ever see.
I was naively hoping it would be similar to Elem Klimov's Come and See (all I knew about the film going in was that it was called Stalingrad and made in Russia).
Here's hoping Putin doesn't become any more Hitleresque.
Thursday, February 27, 2014
RoboCop
Didn't think they should remake RoboCop, the original being one of the best action films I've seen, up there with Die Hard and Aliens, but they did, it exists, I obviously couldn't resist seeing it, and tried not to spend too much time comparing it to the original while watching, even though my efforts proved futile.
The first RoboCop's much more gritty, a different degree of debauched desperation. Pre-internet, its world is much more local, focusing on criminal thugs, corporate power struggles, and terrorized police forces more than international paradigms and their relationship to the United States, a raw frantic highly organized pedigree, wherein RoboCop's (Peter Weller) identity and family aren't primary to the structure of the narrative.
The internet-era RoboCop deals with multiple big-picture issues. The ways in which multi-billion dollar companies agitate to infringe upon integral civil liberties. Maintaining a humanistic identity while constantly embracing eclectic electronic onslaughts. Media personalities and their institutionalized agendas. Scientific ethics, parenting, global politics, cyborgs.
Cyborgs don't really seem like far-fetched highly aggressive airy-fairy daydreams anymore.
There's a Fido-like script involving a cyborg possibly starring Matt Damon waiting to be written.
Co-starring Benedict Cumberbatch and Sally Hawkins.
Like Archer, I still fear cyborgs however, and as RoboCop (Joel Kinnaman) loses his identity in the new film, fears regarding consciousness altering technocrats are rebelliously voiced, their counterparts receiving plenty of airtime as well in the movie's dialectic (the sequel's set up well).
More polished than the original, lacking its wild conditioned sense of experimental zealotry, the relationship between the two films reflects the potential maturation of the original's fan base, much like the first three Terminator films, while making me think today's youth must be hyperactively aware (Michael Keaton's [Raymond Sellars] presence perfectly establishes this transition [casting by Diane Kerbel and Francine Maisler]).
Perhaps they didn't like it.
I did meet a youngster who enjoyed Star Trek Into Darkness however (co-starring Peter Weller).
The first RoboCop's much more gritty, a different degree of debauched desperation. Pre-internet, its world is much more local, focusing on criminal thugs, corporate power struggles, and terrorized police forces more than international paradigms and their relationship to the United States, a raw frantic highly organized pedigree, wherein RoboCop's (Peter Weller) identity and family aren't primary to the structure of the narrative.
The internet-era RoboCop deals with multiple big-picture issues. The ways in which multi-billion dollar companies agitate to infringe upon integral civil liberties. Maintaining a humanistic identity while constantly embracing eclectic electronic onslaughts. Media personalities and their institutionalized agendas. Scientific ethics, parenting, global politics, cyborgs.
Cyborgs don't really seem like far-fetched highly aggressive airy-fairy daydreams anymore.
There's a Fido-like script involving a cyborg possibly starring Matt Damon waiting to be written.
Co-starring Benedict Cumberbatch and Sally Hawkins.
Like Archer, I still fear cyborgs however, and as RoboCop (Joel Kinnaman) loses his identity in the new film, fears regarding consciousness altering technocrats are rebelliously voiced, their counterparts receiving plenty of airtime as well in the movie's dialectic (the sequel's set up well).
More polished than the original, lacking its wild conditioned sense of experimental zealotry, the relationship between the two films reflects the potential maturation of the original's fan base, much like the first three Terminator films, while making me think today's youth must be hyperactively aware (Michael Keaton's [Raymond Sellars] presence perfectly establishes this transition [casting by Diane Kerbel and Francine Maisler]).
Perhaps they didn't like it.
I did meet a youngster who enjoyed Star Trek Into Darkness however (co-starring Peter Weller).
Monday, February 24, 2014
Jimmy P.
Unidentified debilitating head trauma leads Blackfoot war veteran Jimmy Picard (Benicio Del Toro), his Blackfoot name meaning Everybody Talks About Him, to seek medical aid, which congenially yet professionally presents itself in the emergence of Georges Devereux (Mathieu Amalric).
Devereux's carefree ways have established himself a controversial reputation whose negative aspects are ignored by the Topeka Military Hospital's hiring committee.
His interests in Aboriginal cultures and easy going yet penetrating style endear him to Jimmy, whose living full-time at the hospital and has learned from experience to distrust people of European descent.
Jimmy's trauma runs deep, and the two establish a patient constructive healing dialogue which drives the film's therapeutic cerebral inclusivity, diagnosis didactic, arguably becoming friends.
There's still some patient/therapist distance structuring their relations, so whether or not a true friendship blossoms is up for debate.
While Devereux is devoid of prejudice, Jimmy still confronts varied systemic social dismissals.
The film convalescently analyzes and/or refers to dreams throughout, these practical surreal revelations serving to meritoriously mystify its compelling inductive rationality, extracting conversational results and applying them to the world at large, proactively deconstructing its habitually ethnocentric subconscious.
The fire in the pines.
Stigmatic catatonics.
Devereux's carefree ways have established himself a controversial reputation whose negative aspects are ignored by the Topeka Military Hospital's hiring committee.
His interests in Aboriginal cultures and easy going yet penetrating style endear him to Jimmy, whose living full-time at the hospital and has learned from experience to distrust people of European descent.
Jimmy's trauma runs deep, and the two establish a patient constructive healing dialogue which drives the film's therapeutic cerebral inclusivity, diagnosis didactic, arguably becoming friends.
There's still some patient/therapist distance structuring their relations, so whether or not a true friendship blossoms is up for debate.
While Devereux is devoid of prejudice, Jimmy still confronts varied systemic social dismissals.
The film convalescently analyzes and/or refers to dreams throughout, these practical surreal revelations serving to meritoriously mystify its compelling inductive rationality, extracting conversational results and applying them to the world at large, proactively deconstructing its habitually ethnocentric subconscious.
The fire in the pines.
Stigmatic catatonics.
Sunday, February 23, 2014
Gloria
The world of post-divorce adult dating releases a sombre upbeat frustrated flow in Sebastián Lelio's Gloria, as risks are taken in her (Paulina García as Gloria) search for a partner, unleashing fresh currents of desire, tormented by encumbering egotistical eddies.
She ebbs.
She flows.
But deception and non-committal petulancies provoke circularities of their own, pinpointed purchased prolific paddlings, pensively oriented, destination, cued.
The film champions a vital sense of heightened self-appreciation in the face of unsolicited undeserved shame, staying afloat after having been cast adrift, eventually docking on a jaunty friendly shore.
Look at how she comports herself.
Brought back to life by the power of pop music, suppressing her instincts so she can still give it a shot.
Why not eh?
Beautifully bouncing back.
From stranger tides.
She ebbs.
She flows.
But deception and non-committal petulancies provoke circularities of their own, pinpointed purchased prolific paddlings, pensively oriented, destination, cued.
The film champions a vital sense of heightened self-appreciation in the face of unsolicited undeserved shame, staying afloat after having been cast adrift, eventually docking on a jaunty friendly shore.
Look at how she comports herself.
Brought back to life by the power of pop music, suppressing her instincts so she can still give it a shot.
Why not eh?
Beautifully bouncing back.
From stranger tides.
Devil's Knot
Seemingly criminal investigative buffoonery is exactingly exposed yet authoritatively dismissed in Atom Egoyan's Devil's Knot, the lives of three teens dependent on said revelations, the law more concerned with either fabricating or submitting to superstition.
The evidence which Egoyan vets cannot lucidly resolve resulting legal tensions.
Dedicated altruistic private investigator Ron Lax (Colin Firth) resolutely prowls to defend, analyzing the facts exhaustively and judiciously, earning trust where none has ever been granted, proceeding directly, from a sense of justice.
But his team is held back by insurmountable time constraints and predetermined sentences, foregone conclusions belittlingly arresting, narcoleptic networks, propagandized anew.
The film harrowingly spawns a persisted enveloping remittance, a sublime sense of optimism institutionally dismayed, helplessness, the beautiful, the dissolute, the scapegoating of difference, a purloined procedural penitentiary.
Nothing can be proven.
Fights against overwhelming odds.
The knot represents the ways in which authorities sometimes outlaw/vilify/demonize a bohemian perspective then rely on their sanctified laurels while using the strategies of that perspective to illegitimately act.
It happens in the film anyways.
And in Foucault.
Oddly, I've been wondering recently if there's ever been a documentary film made about duty counsels and/or legal aids.
Appropriately timed thought even if Lax isn't a lawyer.
I've noticed a negative stereotype associated with the work legal aids perform which a solid documentary film and accompanying book could help destabilize.
Something like Duty Counselled.
Or something else.
The evidence which Egoyan vets cannot lucidly resolve resulting legal tensions.
Dedicated altruistic private investigator Ron Lax (Colin Firth) resolutely prowls to defend, analyzing the facts exhaustively and judiciously, earning trust where none has ever been granted, proceeding directly, from a sense of justice.
But his team is held back by insurmountable time constraints and predetermined sentences, foregone conclusions belittlingly arresting, narcoleptic networks, propagandized anew.
The film harrowingly spawns a persisted enveloping remittance, a sublime sense of optimism institutionally dismayed, helplessness, the beautiful, the dissolute, the scapegoating of difference, a purloined procedural penitentiary.
Nothing can be proven.
Fights against overwhelming odds.
The knot represents the ways in which authorities sometimes outlaw/vilify/demonize a bohemian perspective then rely on their sanctified laurels while using the strategies of that perspective to illegitimately act.
It happens in the film anyways.
And in Foucault.
Oddly, I've been wondering recently if there's ever been a documentary film made about duty counsels and/or legal aids.
Appropriately timed thought even if Lax isn't a lawyer.
I've noticed a negative stereotype associated with the work legal aids perform which a solid documentary film and accompanying book could help destabilize.
Something like Duty Counselled.
Or something else.
Monday, February 17, 2014
La Grande Bellezza
Intricate spiralling ornately orchestrated unconcerned lavish spectacular ornamentations lushly yet temperately adorn La Grande Bellezza's sensuous immersions, crystalline socially interactive penetrating steps daring the bold to convivially counter, impeccable introductory multilayered intensities, celebrating for the urge of heights, shear polished expressive intertextual presence, the slightest movement, calm overwhelming culturally accumulated propensities, days within months within years within decades within millennia, to actively exist within contemporary a/temporalities, to discuss, persuade, to pressure, the hubris, the risk, the meticulous structure, deconstructing the meticulous by agilely removing any sense of the contritely overbearing, genius and beauty united in harmony, its form/s finessing the flaneur, complete distinct exploratory vignettes lacking borders or delineations, smooth seductive sequential synergies, emotive yet provocative, the mention of Proust, if ever there was a film that made me momentarily feel the same way I do while reading Proust, it's Paolo Sorrentino's La Grande Bellezza; I thought this was an impossibility; flourishing forbearance, imparted, gentle.
Cinematography by Luca Bigazzi.
Idea, conversation, melody.
Jep Gambardella's (Toni Servillo) introduction is the best introduction of a character I've ever seen.
See this one in theatres.
Like 12 Years a Slave, it demands multiple viewings.
Par excellence.
Cinematography by Luca Bigazzi.
Idea, conversation, melody.
Jep Gambardella's (Toni Servillo) introduction is the best introduction of a character I've ever seen.
See this one in theatres.
Like 12 Years a Slave, it demands multiple viewings.
Par excellence.
Tuesday, February 11, 2014
Saving Mr. Banks
Artistic visions begrudgingly meet, in a story whose timelines derail the discreet, innocent childlike paternal love, textually flexed, romantically shoved into glittery glistening bedazzled shapes, affably born through divergent tastes, differing cultural curtailed conceptions, tenacious tempests, animate tensions, the question of ownership reputedly trusts the picture's polarity's pulsating thrush to sustains which wisely and playfully stray into micro and macro cosmetic brays, the genuine article exists in flashbacks, tragic addiction, familial shellacs, heartbreaking integrity guides P. L. Travers (Emma Thompson), a commitment unwavering forthrightly flatters, a confident stubborn unyielding resolve which Disney (Tom Hanks) respects, having been there installed, yet he's also a father taking care of the kids, a promise was made, indentured votives, but trifles and mercantile paraphernalia, can't loosen the grip of Ms. Travers's regalias, her steady inflexible inspiring song, betwixt the mercurial commercial throng.
Saving Mr. Banks presents a fun lively look at creative expression, uniting two revered works from different domains while managing to apply its own historical take on the narrative's competing geneses.
A poignant picturesque blush of the abrasive, empathetic yet covetous, principled, and cherished.
Saving Mr. Banks presents a fun lively look at creative expression, uniting two revered works from different domains while managing to apply its own historical take on the narrative's competing geneses.
A poignant picturesque blush of the abrasive, empathetic yet covetous, principled, and cherished.
Saturday, February 8, 2014
Whitewash
Bland mundane blunt verisimilitudes cordially plow absurd fail-safes in Emanuel Hoss-Desmarais's campy Whitewash.
It's not that it's bland.
The characters and situations are somewhat bland but the ways in which they mitigate predetermined discourses of the sympathetic hyperstylizes their cerebral forthcomings.
A down-to-earth puzzling routine pervasively co-opts its miscalculated immersions but Bruce's (Thomas Haden Church) struggle to legitimize his poorly executed attempts to avoid the truth apply a lively coat of untarnished wherewithal.
During his discussions with Paul (Marc Labrèche), and others, he tries not to be blunt, but lacks the finely tuned verbal veneers necessary to convivially cloak his to-the-point observations, although he doesn't have many alternatives when interacting with Paul, whose death may not even be as accidental as it appears.
He remains cordial while hiding-out in the wilderness but guilt and fear infiltrate his interactions, causing him to appear awkward and creepy, loneliness, indulgence, bad luck.
He has to pick up supplies from time to time.
He drives a snow removal machine.
The more I think about it, the film seems less and less absurd, as if it's trying to trick you into thinking it's absurd by exfoliating the unexceptional.
Which makes for some constructive camp.
The previews were pleasantly misleading.
I've wanted to see this since I heard Thomas Haden Church was being paired-up with Marc Labrèche.
Brilliant.
Casting by Margery Simkin.
If you're thinking, this winter's been long and harsh, go see this film.
Not only is it worth seeing, it's perfect for a long harsh winter's February.
On par with Premier Amour and Vic + Flo ont vu un ours.
It's not that it's bland.
The characters and situations are somewhat bland but the ways in which they mitigate predetermined discourses of the sympathetic hyperstylizes their cerebral forthcomings.
A down-to-earth puzzling routine pervasively co-opts its miscalculated immersions but Bruce's (Thomas Haden Church) struggle to legitimize his poorly executed attempts to avoid the truth apply a lively coat of untarnished wherewithal.
During his discussions with Paul (Marc Labrèche), and others, he tries not to be blunt, but lacks the finely tuned verbal veneers necessary to convivially cloak his to-the-point observations, although he doesn't have many alternatives when interacting with Paul, whose death may not even be as accidental as it appears.
He remains cordial while hiding-out in the wilderness but guilt and fear infiltrate his interactions, causing him to appear awkward and creepy, loneliness, indulgence, bad luck.
He has to pick up supplies from time to time.
He drives a snow removal machine.
The more I think about it, the film seems less and less absurd, as if it's trying to trick you into thinking it's absurd by exfoliating the unexceptional.
Which makes for some constructive camp.
The previews were pleasantly misleading.
I've wanted to see this since I heard Thomas Haden Church was being paired-up with Marc Labrèche.
Brilliant.
Casting by Margery Simkin.
If you're thinking, this winter's been long and harsh, go see this film.
Not only is it worth seeing, it's perfect for a long harsh winter's February.
On par with Premier Amour and Vic + Flo ont vu un ours.
Tuesday, February 4, 2014
The Secret Life of Walter Mitty
Monumental shifting shocks born on the strings of unexplored imaginary rifts, celestial seasoning, rhizomatic reveries, driven by the emergence of an affective resonance, accelerated paramount experiential zeitgeists, their heights represented by the pursuit of the elusive snow leopard within the Himalayas, upon which Walter Mitty (Ben Stiller) meets the legendary Sean O'Connell (Sean Penn), whose carefree incomparable precision counters Ted Hendricks's (Adam Scott) callous downsizing, impromptu communal exercise, a spirited abounding break.
This is more than just a journey of discovery.
It's a sudden apprehensive full-throttle embarkation, synthesizing the subjective, the romantic, the practical, and the abstract in a hesitantly audacious leap of faith in oneself, the amorous tenacious logic of risk, a quasi-archivist in search of a lost record, love, adventure.
The excursion assists in the development of his eHarmony profile.
Individualistic styles contrast corporate bottom-lines through the art of naturalistic photographic bewilderment, patiently awaiting the arrival of a highly sought after enigmatic boon, having meticulously yet not fastidiously set-up the shot, while remaining somewhat aloof, interruptions noted but welcome, the evidence secondary to the ensconcement, a mature modest chime hallowing the apprenticeship of bliss.
And freedom.
For a windswept mellow-set Béla Flecked rougir.
Loved the discussion of Bowie's Space Oddity.
This is more than just a journey of discovery.
It's a sudden apprehensive full-throttle embarkation, synthesizing the subjective, the romantic, the practical, and the abstract in a hesitantly audacious leap of faith in oneself, the amorous tenacious logic of risk, a quasi-archivist in search of a lost record, love, adventure.
The excursion assists in the development of his eHarmony profile.
Individualistic styles contrast corporate bottom-lines through the art of naturalistic photographic bewilderment, patiently awaiting the arrival of a highly sought after enigmatic boon, having meticulously yet not fastidiously set-up the shot, while remaining somewhat aloof, interruptions noted but welcome, the evidence secondary to the ensconcement, a mature modest chime hallowing the apprenticeship of bliss.
And freedom.
For a windswept mellow-set Béla Flecked rougir.
Loved the discussion of Bowie's Space Oddity.
Saturday, January 25, 2014
Captain Phillips
Different worlds collide in Paul Greengrass's objective Captain Phillips, one wherein multiple possibilities exist yet the competition to obtain them is intense, the other, qualified by extremely limited options, life threatening and treacherous, suffocatingly sane.
Captain Richard Phillips (Tom Hanks) rose through the ranks according to a different historical set of his world's cultural economic indicators, which he describes early on during a conversation with his wife (Catherine Keener as Andrea Phillips).
Muse (Barkhad Abdi) then appears in present-day Somalia, a person competing as Phillips had in his youth, but within a market in which standing-out requires fire power, and impacts are made through violent confrontation.
The film doesn't judge.
Both Phillips and Muse have jobs to do and they do them.
Phillips's probing hard-hitting questions boldly challenge the ways in which Muse earns his living, but Muse competently defends his volatile endeavours, redefining impoverishment in the process.
Neither of them concedes.
Neither of them backs down.
The film's a realistic open-minded level-headed examination of how individuals from different nations go about putting food on the table.
Muse does what he can to be Captain Phillips.
Captain Phillips offers constructive recourse.
Captain Richard Phillips (Tom Hanks) rose through the ranks according to a different historical set of his world's cultural economic indicators, which he describes early on during a conversation with his wife (Catherine Keener as Andrea Phillips).
Muse (Barkhad Abdi) then appears in present-day Somalia, a person competing as Phillips had in his youth, but within a market in which standing-out requires fire power, and impacts are made through violent confrontation.
The film doesn't judge.
Both Phillips and Muse have jobs to do and they do them.
Phillips's probing hard-hitting questions boldly challenge the ways in which Muse earns his living, but Muse competently defends his volatile endeavours, redefining impoverishment in the process.
Neither of them concedes.
Neither of them backs down.
The film's a realistic open-minded level-headed examination of how individuals from different nations go about putting food on the table.
Muse does what he can to be Captain Phillips.
Captain Phillips offers constructive recourse.
Thursday, January 23, 2014
Her
Permissive inquisitive supple algorithms congenially contravene age-old courting rituals to ambiguously nurture an amorous electronic aesthetic in Spike Jonze's Her, wherein the app deluge is convivially levied, romanticized as a crush, and poetically prorated.
Her offered me new insights into romantic films.
It's not just that they provide heartfelt diagnoses regarding the ways in which different people express their feelings, it's that they can also take contemporary cybernetic enclosures, themselves revealing significant structural shifts in practical cultural interpersonal relations, and affectively normalize them, an extended divergent 21st century version of Data (Brent Spiner) hooking up with Tasha Yar (Denise Crosby), without utilizing monsters or excessive stubbornness, while still examining issues of be/longing and fidelity, and conscientiously theorizing about what it means to be in love.
That's totally romantic.
Simultaneously virginal and promiscuous, Her socially demonstrates the resonant festive frequency of an open-minded ceremonial cooperative, broken up into jaunty quotidian workplace conversations, support networks, and intuitive streamlines.
It asks, is it odd that Theodore Twombly (Joaquin Phoenix) doesn't let himself go, or would his life have been more fun if he had more intently, or is he right to embrace a more traditional lifestyle, preferring the contact of person-to-person multiplicities?
Thereby challenging its viewer's conceptions of in/formality.
Subjective principalities, digitized, anew.
What are those Belle & Sebastian lines from The Model, "the vision was a masterpiece of comic timing, you wouldn't laugh at all"?
They fit quite well with Her.
Although the perfect mom video game made me laugh.
Surprised Joaquin Phoenix wasn't nominated for best actor.
Her offered me new insights into romantic films.
It's not just that they provide heartfelt diagnoses regarding the ways in which different people express their feelings, it's that they can also take contemporary cybernetic enclosures, themselves revealing significant structural shifts in practical cultural interpersonal relations, and affectively normalize them, an extended divergent 21st century version of Data (Brent Spiner) hooking up with Tasha Yar (Denise Crosby), without utilizing monsters or excessive stubbornness, while still examining issues of be/longing and fidelity, and conscientiously theorizing about what it means to be in love.
That's totally romantic.
Simultaneously virginal and promiscuous, Her socially demonstrates the resonant festive frequency of an open-minded ceremonial cooperative, broken up into jaunty quotidian workplace conversations, support networks, and intuitive streamlines.
It asks, is it odd that Theodore Twombly (Joaquin Phoenix) doesn't let himself go, or would his life have been more fun if he had more intently, or is he right to embrace a more traditional lifestyle, preferring the contact of person-to-person multiplicities?
Thereby challenging its viewer's conceptions of in/formality.
Subjective principalities, digitized, anew.
What are those Belle & Sebastian lines from The Model, "the vision was a masterpiece of comic timing, you wouldn't laugh at all"?
They fit quite well with Her.
Although the perfect mom video game made me laugh.
Surprised Joaquin Phoenix wasn't nominated for best actor.
Wednesday, January 22, 2014
August: Osage County
The loss of a family member begets inconsolable griefs and vitriolic censure as three generations representing different familial traditions gather in mourning.
Character development is dynamically and interactively adhered to as historical ideological super(e)latives contend.
Edges are sharpened.
Balance obliterates.
Pharmaceuticals fuel a tumultuous tirade whose sneering strikes and belittling gripes nurture a bellicose backlash whose ominous offensive jeopardizes a solemn ceremonial meal's digestion.
Rancour.
Heartache.
Cast iron confederacies.
August: Osage County isn't that concerned with subtlety, although the family depicted have spent their lives refraining from using direct forms of communication, and the symbolism in the background of the sequence where Charlie Aiken (Chris Cooper) greets his son (Benedict Cumberbatch) highlights this forthcoming transformation, this move from eggshells to shrapnel.
Early on there's a shot depicting Charlie and Little Charlie within their environment at large and you can see the profile of a Native American Chief in the background.
Subsequent shots zero-in-on the two but the profile of the Chief remains.
I thought the inclusion of the profile would have been stronger if it had been left out of the subsequent shots, until I noticed how it related to the film's greater purpose.
The film subtly and not so subtly examines contemporary and historical perspectives regarding relations between Native Americans and those descended from Europeans.
By first keeping the profile of the Native American Chief in the background, the tragic nature of the dismissive attitudes concerning these relations are reflected.
But keeping the profile in the following shots reflects the empathetic attitudes as well since the profile doesn't disappear, while also foreshadowing the film's overt move from reserved ornamentation to full-on acrimonious onslaught.
The film's embattled matriarch (Meryl Streep as Violet Weston) has fallen apart partially because the traditions she held dear in her troubled childhood have dramatically changed, and her children and grandchildren abide by different cultural codes.
Her last scene shows her seeking comfort from her Native American nurse Johnna Monevata (Misty Upham), whom she's bigotedly dismissed at points, who proceeds to comfort her, possibly understanding what she's going through, painstakingly living on higher ground, higher ground which has been generationally transformed and preserved by some, through an immaculate application of the golden rule.
It's a brilliant synthesis.
Written by Tracy Letts.
Character development is dynamically and interactively adhered to as historical ideological super(e)latives contend.
Edges are sharpened.
Balance obliterates.
Pharmaceuticals fuel a tumultuous tirade whose sneering strikes and belittling gripes nurture a bellicose backlash whose ominous offensive jeopardizes a solemn ceremonial meal's digestion.
Rancour.
Heartache.
Cast iron confederacies.
August: Osage County isn't that concerned with subtlety, although the family depicted have spent their lives refraining from using direct forms of communication, and the symbolism in the background of the sequence where Charlie Aiken (Chris Cooper) greets his son (Benedict Cumberbatch) highlights this forthcoming transformation, this move from eggshells to shrapnel.
Early on there's a shot depicting Charlie and Little Charlie within their environment at large and you can see the profile of a Native American Chief in the background.
Subsequent shots zero-in-on the two but the profile of the Chief remains.
I thought the inclusion of the profile would have been stronger if it had been left out of the subsequent shots, until I noticed how it related to the film's greater purpose.
The film subtly and not so subtly examines contemporary and historical perspectives regarding relations between Native Americans and those descended from Europeans.
By first keeping the profile of the Native American Chief in the background, the tragic nature of the dismissive attitudes concerning these relations are reflected.
But keeping the profile in the following shots reflects the empathetic attitudes as well since the profile doesn't disappear, while also foreshadowing the film's overt move from reserved ornamentation to full-on acrimonious onslaught.
The film's embattled matriarch (Meryl Streep as Violet Weston) has fallen apart partially because the traditions she held dear in her troubled childhood have dramatically changed, and her children and grandchildren abide by different cultural codes.
Her last scene shows her seeking comfort from her Native American nurse Johnna Monevata (Misty Upham), whom she's bigotedly dismissed at points, who proceeds to comfort her, possibly understanding what she's going through, painstakingly living on higher ground, higher ground which has been generationally transformed and preserved by some, through an immaculate application of the golden rule.
It's a brilliant synthesis.
Written by Tracy Letts.
Tuesday, January 21, 2014
The Wolf of Wall Street
What to make of this one.
Comparing Scorsese's Wolf of Wall Street to Oliver Stone's Wall Street could generate some compelling comparative data, in regards to their historical censures.
Has this particular epoch enabled Scorsese to direct without limits, to go beyond Seth MacFarlane and Adam Reed, to freely proceed with neither caution nor complaint in an excessive wanton capitalistic cynosure, to gratuitously salute the golden age of sleaze?
He tests you within.
He bombards you with luscious images of in/accessible voluptuous beauties, interspersing tips on illegally playing the stock market, and then asks you whether or not you're capable of following the lecture, playing with the process of narrativization throughout.
Tantalizing tutelage?
He takes a group of guys who grew up together, installs one as leader after he learns how to make enormous sums of money, they all then make enormous sums of money, and they basically never leave high school for the rest of their lives, and not one of them even so much as ends up in the hospital.
There are funny moments.
But why they needed 180 minutes to retool this tale is beyond me.
There's just no Gravity in this film.
That's arguably the point, and it's presented as a best case example of raunchy sophomoric absurdity.
But there's too much exploitation for me.
It is fun getting to know smart women.
There's one female stockbroker who succeeds but her role's tacked-on, she's belittled in the end, and is initially dependent on the generosity of men.
However, like American Hustle, it's filled with tips on how to avoid being scammed.
Comparing Scorsese's Wolf of Wall Street to Oliver Stone's Wall Street could generate some compelling comparative data, in regards to their historical censures.
Has this particular epoch enabled Scorsese to direct without limits, to go beyond Seth MacFarlane and Adam Reed, to freely proceed with neither caution nor complaint in an excessive wanton capitalistic cynosure, to gratuitously salute the golden age of sleaze?
He tests you within.
He bombards you with luscious images of in/accessible voluptuous beauties, interspersing tips on illegally playing the stock market, and then asks you whether or not you're capable of following the lecture, playing with the process of narrativization throughout.
Tantalizing tutelage?
He takes a group of guys who grew up together, installs one as leader after he learns how to make enormous sums of money, they all then make enormous sums of money, and they basically never leave high school for the rest of their lives, and not one of them even so much as ends up in the hospital.
There are funny moments.
But why they needed 180 minutes to retool this tale is beyond me.
There's just no Gravity in this film.
That's arguably the point, and it's presented as a best case example of raunchy sophomoric absurdity.
But there's too much exploitation for me.
It is fun getting to know smart women.
There's one female stockbroker who succeeds but her role's tacked-on, she's belittled in the end, and is initially dependent on the generosity of men.
However, like American Hustle, it's filled with tips on how to avoid being scammed.
Tian zhu ding (A Touch of Sin)
Both the wealthy and the impoverished receive their fair share of unexpected comeuppances in these loosely intertwined grotesquely plighted a/morality tales, presented en masse as Zhangke Jia's Tian zhu ding (A Touch of Sin), guilty, of having sacrificed.
After the first two vignettes, requisite apprehensions immobilize one in regards to phases 3 and 4, which have the potential to be just as satirically maniacal, just as starkly im/balanced.
Questions of right and wrong atmospherically attire the violence with cold dreaded ethical extinctions, some of the characters not necessarily lacking options, yet inimically immersed in their own substantive slather.
Despair.
Foraged feelings fostered.
Values obliging concomitant abst(r)ains.
Nebulous nuts and bolts.
Complicit chaotic cankers.
Dissonant diabolic docility.
Interactive entropy.
So many reactions.
Consequences aplenty.
My eyes.
Tian zhu ding's so very unhappy.
Nothing's easy in this one.
After the first two vignettes, requisite apprehensions immobilize one in regards to phases 3 and 4, which have the potential to be just as satirically maniacal, just as starkly im/balanced.
Questions of right and wrong atmospherically attire the violence with cold dreaded ethical extinctions, some of the characters not necessarily lacking options, yet inimically immersed in their own substantive slather.
Despair.
Foraged feelings fostered.
Values obliging concomitant abst(r)ains.
Nebulous nuts and bolts.
Complicit chaotic cankers.
Dissonant diabolic docility.
Interactive entropy.
So many reactions.
Consequences aplenty.
My eyes.
Tian zhu ding's so very unhappy.
Nothing's easy in this one.
Monday, January 13, 2014
American Hustle
Serious sustained elusively sentimental cirrhosis, soberly conceived and symptomatically executed, the established bland underground beacon coerced into serving an opportunistic senseless gold digger, retentively reliant yet arrogantly exploitative, the combination's blinds leaving him susceptible to implosive cracks, their fissures directly proportional to their aggrandizements, seismically de/centralizing, corpus allumé.
Feminine elements complicate and complement the messy procedure as pressures coruscate emotional embers, and logical jealousies prevaricate relational rationalities.
Should this film be taken seriously?
On the one hand, as Irving Rosenfeld's (Christian Bale) character, the intelligent flexible streetwise devoted husband scam artist, suggests, we definitely should be, as his livelihood and familial security depends on it, even though he's a criminal.
On the other, as Richie DeMaso's (Bradley Cooper) character, the brash insubordinate wild-eyed FBI agent, suggests, we definitely should not be, as his reckless and life threatening decisions are simply too preposterous to take, even though he's enforcing the law.
The hilarious repeated transitional scene which sees the camera shoot the ground floor of American Hustle's FBI headquarters and then rapidly shift its focus to the top, suggests that David O. Russell is seriously playfully shining (editing by Alan Baumgarten, Jay Cassidy, and Crispin Struthers).
His beams brightly illuminate upright politician Carmine Polito (Jeremy Renner), a true person of the people and loving family man, tricked into accepting bribes.
Ethically, I find it highly problematic when politicians take bribes to stimulate economies through casino construction since casinos can and have ruin/ed the lives of many a low-income worker.
Real worldly, a lot of people don't seem to care about these realities anymore and think being exploited is great.
Rosenfeld doesn't like being exploited although he earns a living exploiting people.
He feels guilty for his actions in relation to Polito's eventual arrest, because even though casino creation is exploitative, Polito is acting on the people's behalf, according to the film's cavalier combustion.
Great film on many levels.
But in terms of bribing politicians to achieve specific ends, it fails to reflectively hustle.
A suave sensational scam?
Not persuasive enough of a play.
But it does offer effective indirect advice on how to avoid being scammed and the script's excellent (written by David O. Russell and Eric Warren Singer).
Which works.
Feminine elements complicate and complement the messy procedure as pressures coruscate emotional embers, and logical jealousies prevaricate relational rationalities.
Should this film be taken seriously?
On the one hand, as Irving Rosenfeld's (Christian Bale) character, the intelligent flexible streetwise devoted husband scam artist, suggests, we definitely should be, as his livelihood and familial security depends on it, even though he's a criminal.
On the other, as Richie DeMaso's (Bradley Cooper) character, the brash insubordinate wild-eyed FBI agent, suggests, we definitely should not be, as his reckless and life threatening decisions are simply too preposterous to take, even though he's enforcing the law.
The hilarious repeated transitional scene which sees the camera shoot the ground floor of American Hustle's FBI headquarters and then rapidly shift its focus to the top, suggests that David O. Russell is seriously playfully shining (editing by Alan Baumgarten, Jay Cassidy, and Crispin Struthers).
His beams brightly illuminate upright politician Carmine Polito (Jeremy Renner), a true person of the people and loving family man, tricked into accepting bribes.
Ethically, I find it highly problematic when politicians take bribes to stimulate economies through casino construction since casinos can and have ruin/ed the lives of many a low-income worker.
Real worldly, a lot of people don't seem to care about these realities anymore and think being exploited is great.
Rosenfeld doesn't like being exploited although he earns a living exploiting people.
He feels guilty for his actions in relation to Polito's eventual arrest, because even though casino creation is exploitative, Polito is acting on the people's behalf, according to the film's cavalier combustion.
Great film on many levels.
But in terms of bribing politicians to achieve specific ends, it fails to reflectively hustle.
A suave sensational scam?
Not persuasive enough of a play.
But it does offer effective indirect advice on how to avoid being scammed and the script's excellent (written by David O. Russell and Eric Warren Singer).
Which works.
47 Ronin
Unjustly cast out and stripped of their rank, forced to quibble for crumbs, scrap for sustenance, and transcend for trifles, Carl Rinsch's 47 Ronin patiently wait to seek vengeance, the pressures of time motivationally closing in.
Their Lord was betrayed through bewitching and forced to take his own life to maintain his family's honour.
A humble troubled outcast who renounced his demonic tutelage possesses the forbidden knowledge necessary to arm their ascent.
Composed as a group, they unite forthwith, entrusting enlivened artists with their plans, prognosticating as a matter of necessity.
In absolute domains.
Liked what happens in 47 Ronin which takes place in 18th-century Japan more than the film itself, but I respect what it delivers.
It provides a traditional story steeped in loyalty, overflowing with injustices, told in a traditional way, for audiences respectful of said traditions.
It's a true exercise in modesty considering that it doesn't play-up Kai's (Keanu Reeves) demonic abilities even though such a feature may have increased its salutations.
Form working hand-in-hand with content.
Even the mythical beast isn't shown-off.
Restraint.
Their Lord was betrayed through bewitching and forced to take his own life to maintain his family's honour.
A humble troubled outcast who renounced his demonic tutelage possesses the forbidden knowledge necessary to arm their ascent.
Composed as a group, they unite forthwith, entrusting enlivened artists with their plans, prognosticating as a matter of necessity.
In absolute domains.
Liked what happens in 47 Ronin which takes place in 18th-century Japan more than the film itself, but I respect what it delivers.
It provides a traditional story steeped in loyalty, overflowing with injustices, told in a traditional way, for audiences respectful of said traditions.
It's a true exercise in modesty considering that it doesn't play-up Kai's (Keanu Reeves) demonic abilities even though such a feature may have increased its salutations.
Form working hand-in-hand with content.
Even the mythical beast isn't shown-off.
Restraint.
Tuesday, January 7, 2014
Inside Llewyn Davis
Inside Llewyn Davis you'll find a staggering conflicted troubadour torn apart by the loss of his musical partner, problematically fazed.
This guy's a bit of a jerk, depicted as an oddball within folk music culture, gifted and heartwarming while performing, troubling and disruptive while doing anything else.
It's like he's a jaded cynical holier-than-thou 90s caricature surrounded by congenial 1960s good spirits, frustrated by his lack of success, overconfident to the point of paralysis.
He always has to be in control.
It's as if the Coen Brothers are playing a joke with Llewyn Davis (Oscar Isaac), presenting a character reminiscent of Five Easy Pieces's Robert Eroica Dupea (Jack Nicholson), assuming their audience will be unconsciously sympathetic, while making him as unsympathetic as possible, hoping people will still refer to him as tragic.
He's given opportunities.
And unlike Dupea, his community has merits to which he can relate.
His loss perhaps prevents him from noticing these merits.
But his attitude suggests that he may have been directly responsible for his loss (which is likely augmenting his malaise).
Jerry Seinfeld's (Jerry Seinfeld) interactions with Kenny Bania (Steve Hytner) offer a constructive parallel, Kenny functioning as the 1960s good spirit living in the 90s, as if Inside Llewyn Davis primarily concerns itself with this comedic dialogue, with elements of The Master's Freddie Quell (Joaquin Phoenix) intermixed.
I was hoping he would take off to the Northern wilderness near the end like Dupea in Five Easy Pieces.
Perhaps he did.
John Goodman (Roland Turner) delivers another exceptional performance.
This guy's a bit of a jerk, depicted as an oddball within folk music culture, gifted and heartwarming while performing, troubling and disruptive while doing anything else.
It's like he's a jaded cynical holier-than-thou 90s caricature surrounded by congenial 1960s good spirits, frustrated by his lack of success, overconfident to the point of paralysis.
He always has to be in control.
It's as if the Coen Brothers are playing a joke with Llewyn Davis (Oscar Isaac), presenting a character reminiscent of Five Easy Pieces's Robert Eroica Dupea (Jack Nicholson), assuming their audience will be unconsciously sympathetic, while making him as unsympathetic as possible, hoping people will still refer to him as tragic.
He's given opportunities.
And unlike Dupea, his community has merits to which he can relate.
His loss perhaps prevents him from noticing these merits.
But his attitude suggests that he may have been directly responsible for his loss (which is likely augmenting his malaise).
Jerry Seinfeld's (Jerry Seinfeld) interactions with Kenny Bania (Steve Hytner) offer a constructive parallel, Kenny functioning as the 1960s good spirit living in the 90s, as if Inside Llewyn Davis primarily concerns itself with this comedic dialogue, with elements of The Master's Freddie Quell (Joaquin Phoenix) intermixed.
I was hoping he would take off to the Northern wilderness near the end like Dupea in Five Easy Pieces.
Perhaps he did.
John Goodman (Roland Turner) delivers another exceptional performance.
Saturday, January 4, 2014
Mandela: Long Walk to Freedom
Justin Chadwick offers a selective charismatic altruistic account of Nelson Mandela's (Idris Elba) life in Mandela: Long Walk to Freedom.
Significant events from Mandela's heroic trials are qualitatively condensed then narratively harvested.
It unreels at a fast pace but Elba's calm committed confrontational resolve surreally subdues the passage of time, tantalizingly transforming 30 seconds into two-minutes-forty, proactively producing captivating capsules.
A good companion piece for 12 Years a Slave in terms of the differing approaches adopted to biographically elucidate, McQueen cultivating a shifting pyrodactic panorama, Chadwick proceeding more traditionally.
Chadwick doesn't shy away from presenting the difficulties associated with actively pursuing disenfranchised political agendas, and the toll Mandela's sublime idealism takes on his wives and children are dis/comfortingly displayed.
His first wife leaves him but his second never yields in her championing of his cause while he's imprisoned, suffering jail-time and countless indignities consequently.
Their breakup after he's released is perhaps the most unfortunate disengaging of amorous affections I've ever come across.
Winnie Madikizela-Mandela (Naomie Harris) kept the fire burning brightly throughout his 27 years in prison and seeing them part is tragic if not earth shattering.
But Mandela believed in a non-violent working solution and when provided with the opportunity to politically enact one, engaged.
Taking the resultant monumental fallout in stride.
Not a saint, perhaps, but definitely, a person of steel.
Significant events from Mandela's heroic trials are qualitatively condensed then narratively harvested.
It unreels at a fast pace but Elba's calm committed confrontational resolve surreally subdues the passage of time, tantalizingly transforming 30 seconds into two-minutes-forty, proactively producing captivating capsules.
A good companion piece for 12 Years a Slave in terms of the differing approaches adopted to biographically elucidate, McQueen cultivating a shifting pyrodactic panorama, Chadwick proceeding more traditionally.
Chadwick doesn't shy away from presenting the difficulties associated with actively pursuing disenfranchised political agendas, and the toll Mandela's sublime idealism takes on his wives and children are dis/comfortingly displayed.
His first wife leaves him but his second never yields in her championing of his cause while he's imprisoned, suffering jail-time and countless indignities consequently.
Their breakup after he's released is perhaps the most unfortunate disengaging of amorous affections I've ever come across.
Winnie Madikizela-Mandela (Naomie Harris) kept the fire burning brightly throughout his 27 years in prison and seeing them part is tragic if not earth shattering.
But Mandela believed in a non-violent working solution and when provided with the opportunity to politically enact one, engaged.
Taking the resultant monumental fallout in stride.
Not a saint, perhaps, but definitely, a person of steel.
Monday, December 30, 2013
Oldboy
Much lighter than Chan-wook Park's demented bitter construct, Spike Lee's Oldboy is still illicit enough to provoke degenerative thoughts of decay, bathed in a regenerative yet psychotic ludic lotion, like a transgressive pantomime, cauterizing ruin.
Suppose this particular narrative inevitably comes across as dark.
Even if you throw in Ron Burgundy and his chipper news team.
The vindictive carousing of an insatiable werehyena.
A leather apron.
And a codified shield.
The game plan's the same.
Asshole. Locked in a room for more than a decade for no apparent reason. Suddenly released. Abounding tension. A set of clues. The diagnostic hammer.
Seismic atrophy.
The tension abounds but it lacks the all-encompassing sense of discombobulated dread cultivated by Park.
But I did prefer the new ending.
So dismal it brought a tear to me eye.
Why do people excel at imploding such vivid monstrous moral vivisections?
Vision. Goal. Cyanide.
The discipline of the Real.
Suppose this particular narrative inevitably comes across as dark.
Even if you throw in Ron Burgundy and his chipper news team.
The vindictive carousing of an insatiable werehyena.
A leather apron.
And a codified shield.
The game plan's the same.
Asshole. Locked in a room for more than a decade for no apparent reason. Suddenly released. Abounding tension. A set of clues. The diagnostic hammer.
Seismic atrophy.
The tension abounds but it lacks the all-encompassing sense of discombobulated dread cultivated by Park.
But I did prefer the new ending.
So dismal it brought a tear to me eye.
Why do people excel at imploding such vivid monstrous moral vivisections?
Vision. Goal. Cyanide.
The discipline of the Real.
Saturday, December 28, 2013
Anchorman 2: The Legend Continues
Ron Burgundy lead an extraordinary extracurricular promotional campaign leading up to the release of Anchorman 2: The Legend Continues, thereby suggesting that it must be an exceptional film, surpassing its comedic predecessor in varying degrees of hilarity, while stretching the boundaries of both ridiculousness and applicability, a voluminous viscosity, asinine yet chaste.
I'm used to seeing American comedies that are around 90 minutes in length but Anchorman 2 comes in at 119 according to its IMDB surrogate.
An out of the ordinary promotional campaign.
An extra 29 minutes.
Released a week before Christmas.
And Anchorman 2 delivers.
Ron Burgundy proves himself to be a sturdy bumbling honest easily upset independent intellectually discordant emotionally secure visceral champion for the everyperson, continuously and undauntedly moving forward, apart from when he decides to hang himself after a randy exhibition at Seaworld (see Blackfish).
He has his own polite style and definition of appropriateness which lead to conflicts when expressing himself within unknown vectors, yet he confidently bounces back and keeps focusing on the positive, action, reaction, proactivation, thereby inspiring his loyal news team.
Some team members function as reps for some somewhat revolting tendencies towards violence, but these tendencies are made to appear ludicrous, kind of, as Burgundy consistently outwits them.
The bats were a brilliant idea. The scorpions, the bowling balls, the bra covered in cats, the details, it's like every line and every scene were eruditely vetted by comedic veterans dedicated to making the best American comedy in years, many of the scenes appearing as if they were haphazardly thrown together, but you don't achieve this level of rowdy unconcerned reckless jocularity without patiently reviewing and editing every aspect of the production, while keeping in mind the havoc of the finished masterpiece simultaneously.
Film editing by Melissa Bretherton and Brent White.
Should I mention the battle?
The greatest most unexpected battle I've ever seen in an American film, with the Minotaur and a werehyena, that's right, a werehyena, plus a Canadian news team, introducing a fantastic sporty religious scientific historical mélange of postmodern acrobatic intensity, Alterius, Maiden of the Clouds (Kirsten Dunst) commencing the romp with her exclamatory horn, Vince Vaughn (Wes Mantooth), arriving at a pivotal, game changing moment.
Or Dolby? His song?
The figure skating?
The parenting?
Never really liked car chases but I do love animal stories.
Even better than Machete Kills.
Written by Will Ferrell and Adam McKay.
I'm used to seeing American comedies that are around 90 minutes in length but Anchorman 2 comes in at 119 according to its IMDB surrogate.
An out of the ordinary promotional campaign.
An extra 29 minutes.
Released a week before Christmas.
And Anchorman 2 delivers.
Ron Burgundy proves himself to be a sturdy bumbling honest easily upset independent intellectually discordant emotionally secure visceral champion for the everyperson, continuously and undauntedly moving forward, apart from when he decides to hang himself after a randy exhibition at Seaworld (see Blackfish).
He has his own polite style and definition of appropriateness which lead to conflicts when expressing himself within unknown vectors, yet he confidently bounces back and keeps focusing on the positive, action, reaction, proactivation, thereby inspiring his loyal news team.
Some team members function as reps for some somewhat revolting tendencies towards violence, but these tendencies are made to appear ludicrous, kind of, as Burgundy consistently outwits them.
The bats were a brilliant idea. The scorpions, the bowling balls, the bra covered in cats, the details, it's like every line and every scene were eruditely vetted by comedic veterans dedicated to making the best American comedy in years, many of the scenes appearing as if they were haphazardly thrown together, but you don't achieve this level of rowdy unconcerned reckless jocularity without patiently reviewing and editing every aspect of the production, while keeping in mind the havoc of the finished masterpiece simultaneously.
Film editing by Melissa Bretherton and Brent White.
Should I mention the battle?
The greatest most unexpected battle I've ever seen in an American film, with the Minotaur and a werehyena, that's right, a werehyena, plus a Canadian news team, introducing a fantastic sporty religious scientific historical mélange of postmodern acrobatic intensity, Alterius, Maiden of the Clouds (Kirsten Dunst) commencing the romp with her exclamatory horn, Vince Vaughn (Wes Mantooth), arriving at a pivotal, game changing moment.
Or Dolby? His song?
The figure skating?
The parenting?
Never really liked car chases but I do love animal stories.
Even better than Machete Kills.
Written by Will Ferrell and Adam McKay.
Friday, December 27, 2013
12 Years a Slave
Steve McQueen's 12 Years a Slave is an outstanding film, cautiously yet confidently condensing over a decade's worth of lesions into a cruel, wicked, sensitive, combative humanitarian analysis of slavery's perverse apocalyptic logic, without simply establishing stock polar oppositions but still proceeding unambiguously enough for good to be clearly distinguished from evil, this willowing contrast patiently woven by a perceptive painstaking piecemeal punctuality whose periods and com(m)as aren't definitely placed, but rather gradually appear and fade as the years pass, flowing into one another while delineating crescents, conscious of the a/temporal confines of progressive thoughts shortsightedly dominated by racist hierarchical sludge, wherein Christian principles lie in ruin yet are ignorantly and emphatically pontificated nonetheless, this oppressive static systematic abuse inevitably engendering madness, this sustained a/temporal madness captured again and again by the unforgiving sadistic capricious misery inflicted on the suffering, McQueen's morose humble vicious living characters defining slavery's hopeless absolute perfidy, and the monstrous affects of its cultural applications.
12 Years a Slave unreels like a biographical film, but is anything but a simple chronological serialization of events.
Each sequence rather develops an affect of its own, united by the general tragedy, but separate animate pieces still, as if McQueen took the extra time and care to consider each component's vital individuality while crafting it, in order to formally elevate freedom's fluctuating fervours, a voice of protest unconsciously applied, for characters facing the whip for minor transgressions.
Patsey (Lupita Nyong'o) has a small role but she stands out, having delivered the best supporting performance I've seen this year.
She doesn't appear often but when she does she affectively commands every desperate beaten nanosecond, as if, for a brief moment, the entire film solely concerns her, and will only make an impact if she performs second to none.
She also diversifies Solomon Northup's (Chiwetel Ejiofor) character by making a reasonable request which the memory of his former freedoms and hopes to one day regain them disables him from granting.
Thereby further intensifying the madness.
Acting as if it's nothing out of the ordinary.
12 Years a Slave unreels like a biographical film, but is anything but a simple chronological serialization of events.
Each sequence rather develops an affect of its own, united by the general tragedy, but separate animate pieces still, as if McQueen took the extra time and care to consider each component's vital individuality while crafting it, in order to formally elevate freedom's fluctuating fervours, a voice of protest unconsciously applied, for characters facing the whip for minor transgressions.
Patsey (Lupita Nyong'o) has a small role but she stands out, having delivered the best supporting performance I've seen this year.
She doesn't appear often but when she does she affectively commands every desperate beaten nanosecond, as if, for a brief moment, the entire film solely concerns her, and will only make an impact if she performs second to none.
She also diversifies Solomon Northup's (Chiwetel Ejiofor) character by making a reasonable request which the memory of his former freedoms and hopes to one day regain them disables him from granting.
Thereby further intensifying the madness.
Acting as if it's nothing out of the ordinary.
Thursday, December 19, 2013
The Hobbit: The Desolation of Smaug
The quest to reclaim the treasure stolen then hoarded by the accursed dragon Smaug (Benedict Cumberbatch) continues, one hobbit and thirteen dwarves audaciously adventuring away.
Bilbo's (Martin Freeman) steady unerring quick-witted agility saves them from many interminable ends.
Humanistic politics and economics enter the fray as they meddle in Lake-Town (Esgaroth), the pragmatic and the opportunistic squaring off in a heated debate concerning the potential fallout from pent-up dragon wrath.
Parochial wood-elve rulers are critiqued for occupying their thoughts too exclusively with the safety of their own domain, even though the forces of evil threaten neighbouring lands as well.
One of his subjects, the stunning Tauriel (Evangeline Lilly), with long flowing red hair, breaks with tradition, and seeks the affections of Jacob rather than Edward, thereby securing a sacred trust, in pristine, alluvial pastures.
A new instalment in The Hobbit/Lord of the Rings narrative could focus primarily on her relationship with Kili (Aidan Turner), as the two are shunned by their respective cultures, eventually finding refuge with the skin-changing Beorn (Mikael Persbrandt).
(He changes into a bear).
Bilbo, in possession of the ring of power, could stop by to spy on them from time to time.
The Desolation of Smaug is a fast-paced thoughtful energetic sequel.
Loved how Thorin (Richard Armitage) dematerialized the imposing gold statue in his attempt to defeat Smaug, thereby symbolizing his own surmounting of the Scrooge-like pretensions akin to the acquisition of limitless wealth.
Kind of cheesy in the final moments.
Nice cliffhangers nevertheless.
Bilbo's (Martin Freeman) steady unerring quick-witted agility saves them from many interminable ends.
Humanistic politics and economics enter the fray as they meddle in Lake-Town (Esgaroth), the pragmatic and the opportunistic squaring off in a heated debate concerning the potential fallout from pent-up dragon wrath.
Parochial wood-elve rulers are critiqued for occupying their thoughts too exclusively with the safety of their own domain, even though the forces of evil threaten neighbouring lands as well.
One of his subjects, the stunning Tauriel (Evangeline Lilly), with long flowing red hair, breaks with tradition, and seeks the affections of Jacob rather than Edward, thereby securing a sacred trust, in pristine, alluvial pastures.
A new instalment in The Hobbit/Lord of the Rings narrative could focus primarily on her relationship with Kili (Aidan Turner), as the two are shunned by their respective cultures, eventually finding refuge with the skin-changing Beorn (Mikael Persbrandt).
(He changes into a bear).
Bilbo, in possession of the ring of power, could stop by to spy on them from time to time.
The Desolation of Smaug is a fast-paced thoughtful energetic sequel.
Loved how Thorin (Richard Armitage) dematerialized the imposing gold statue in his attempt to defeat Smaug, thereby symbolizing his own surmounting of the Scrooge-like pretensions akin to the acquisition of limitless wealth.
Kind of cheesy in the final moments.
Nice cliffhangers nevertheless.
Saturday, December 14, 2013
Out of the Furnace
Direct multilayered sociocultural oppositions contend, contrast, and coalesce as unpredicted vilified variables resuscitate/implement ancient/contemporary retributive, abysmal, and vindictive plaques, steady as she goes, reap the whirlwind, orderly disciplined straight and narrow paths, wild wanton adventurous tracts, unambiguous bucolic depth, heartbreaking rules, honourable clefts, Scott Cooper's Out of the Furnace, reasonably welding an ethical framework for subverting the law, according to a specific social set of incendiary standards.
The key to my interpretation comes from the fact that Russell Baze (Christian Bale) may lose his job at the mill, the very same mill where his father worked for his entire life, due to management's decision to move operations to China.
The film's villain, Harlan DeGroat (Woody Harrelson), has lived off-the-grid selling narcotics in the hills throughout his life, as his father presumably did before him.
DeGroat's survival suggests that an income can be earned out of the furnace, characterized by an alternative set of non-traditional denominators.
Should the mill close and no alternative well-paying job not requiring an education present itself, Baze will still have to earn an income.
Taxes from such well-paying jobs can be used to create sustainable public schools, hospitals, and transit systems.
If well-paid jobs not requiring an education continue to disappear and aren't replaced, and prices don't suddenly decrease significantly, the tax base required to support public schools, hospitals, and transit systems will decrease significantly as well, thereby increasing public deficits.
Food, shelter, and automobiles will still be sought after, however, and DeGroat's character demonstrates that they can indeed be gathered.
Now, Baze outwits DeGroat in the end, and likely doesn't go to prison, thereby suggesting that if North American workers who find themselves regrettably jobless must embrace underground economics to continue to provide for their families, then they can adopt the strategies but not the methods generationally applied for centuries by DeGroat's contemporaries and descendants, potentially replacing their narcotic provisions with more wholesome contraband goods and services, divergent ecotours catered by moonshine for instance, using portions of their profits to fund schools, hospitals and transit systems, as respectable industrialists (the good bourgeoisie) find ways to once again supply strictly legal employment, at home as opposed to somewhere in Asia.
From one Christmas to the next.
Incisive film forged with coruscating interpretative flames.
Disposable incomes that won't result in jail-time build thriving communities.
It's an old idea, I know.
But it still steeps an effervescent collective brew.
The key to my interpretation comes from the fact that Russell Baze (Christian Bale) may lose his job at the mill, the very same mill where his father worked for his entire life, due to management's decision to move operations to China.
The film's villain, Harlan DeGroat (Woody Harrelson), has lived off-the-grid selling narcotics in the hills throughout his life, as his father presumably did before him.
DeGroat's survival suggests that an income can be earned out of the furnace, characterized by an alternative set of non-traditional denominators.
Should the mill close and no alternative well-paying job not requiring an education present itself, Baze will still have to earn an income.
Taxes from such well-paying jobs can be used to create sustainable public schools, hospitals, and transit systems.
If well-paid jobs not requiring an education continue to disappear and aren't replaced, and prices don't suddenly decrease significantly, the tax base required to support public schools, hospitals, and transit systems will decrease significantly as well, thereby increasing public deficits.
Food, shelter, and automobiles will still be sought after, however, and DeGroat's character demonstrates that they can indeed be gathered.
Now, Baze outwits DeGroat in the end, and likely doesn't go to prison, thereby suggesting that if North American workers who find themselves regrettably jobless must embrace underground economics to continue to provide for their families, then they can adopt the strategies but not the methods generationally applied for centuries by DeGroat's contemporaries and descendants, potentially replacing their narcotic provisions with more wholesome contraband goods and services, divergent ecotours catered by moonshine for instance, using portions of their profits to fund schools, hospitals and transit systems, as respectable industrialists (the good bourgeoisie) find ways to once again supply strictly legal employment, at home as opposed to somewhere in Asia.
From one Christmas to the next.
Incisive film forged with coruscating interpretative flames.
Disposable incomes that won't result in jail-time build thriving communities.
It's an old idea, I know.
But it still steeps an effervescent collective brew.
Tuesday, December 10, 2013
Violette
The drive for publication, honest controversial fearless prose, risks taken, contacts established, unerring syntactic strides, desires unfulfilled, sacrifices, tormenting, longitudinal allusive reins, interactive bucolic strains, prohibited friendships lamented, unsettled confrontational muse, pluralizing her stricken sentence, substantive, and disobeyed.
Didn't think Simone de Beauvoir (Sandrine Kiberlain) would like Proust.
Perhaps she did momentarily.
Making the short-film in the middle broke up the traditional chronological categorizing well, hilariously lightening while intensifying the sombre desperate elegance.
Tough life decisions.
Rewarded.
The countryside provides a nourishing wellspring of seductive solitude whose tranquil rhythms encourage profuse flourishes.
Difficulties associated with maintaining prolonged professional literary acquaintances are amorously and quasi-hierarchically socialized.
She just does what comes naturally, boldly sharing her relevant thoughts which create intellectually diverse yet accessible cultural markets for millions who were otherwise forced to unconsciously contemplate the patriarchal.
Violette Leduc (Emmanuelle Devos).
Groundbreaker.
Innovator.
Writer.
Didn't think Simone de Beauvoir (Sandrine Kiberlain) would like Proust.
Perhaps she did momentarily.
Making the short-film in the middle broke up the traditional chronological categorizing well, hilariously lightening while intensifying the sombre desperate elegance.
Tough life decisions.
Rewarded.
The countryside provides a nourishing wellspring of seductive solitude whose tranquil rhythms encourage profuse flourishes.
Difficulties associated with maintaining prolonged professional literary acquaintances are amorously and quasi-hierarchically socialized.
She just does what comes naturally, boldly sharing her relevant thoughts which create intellectually diverse yet accessible cultural markets for millions who were otherwise forced to unconsciously contemplate the patriarchal.
Violette Leduc (Emmanuelle Devos).
Groundbreaker.
Innovator.
Writer.
Thursday, December 5, 2013
Philomena
An out-of-work atheistic professional journalist teams up with a devout confident assertive mother to write his first human interest story in Stephen Frears's Philomena.
The two work well together.
I wouldn't be able not to say that (lol) because Steve Coogan and Jeff Pope's script has created two wonderful characters, one with elite qualifications, the other comfortable within the kitschy continuum, the kitschy elite and elitist kitsch notwithstanding, both successes in their respective domains insofar as they've groomed themselves well over the years, brought them together to conduct investigative research, and given them both enough humanity to be able to work as an effective team, both partners listening to one another and making related adjustments throughout which demonstrate facets of humble active listening, snide though it may occasionally be, their power relations not being strictly governed by a master/slave dichotomy, but rather a constructive allied argumentative breach, which playfully and dismissively gives and takes on both sides.
Martin Sixsmith's (Steve Coogan) intellectual capacities are higher than Philomena's (Judi Dench) and he has trouble refraining from expressing this fact, especially before 9 am (why do you have to pretend to be in a good mood before 11 am?), which is to be expected, but they're also high enough to recognize their own particular shortcomings, their exclusive ornate prejudices, which helps Martin learn to accept Philomena's difference, her loves, her passions.
Philomena doesn't shy away from defending her values and even though she's likely never studied advanced rhetoric nor frequently schmoozed in realms where it's condescendingly applied, she holds her own when Sixsmith criticizes her beliefs, breaking through his sound observations (with which I tend to agree) with cold hard forgiving faith.
How she could continue to believe after what certain religious authorities put her through is beyond me but she does and justifies her position coherently enough.
The metaphorical extract (the breach) distilled from their colourful exchanges is a fluid effervescent bourgeoisie, competent mediator of the clashes, comprehensive, cogent, chill.
First time I've briefly forgotten it was Judi Dench acting for awhile, her divergent performance creatively testifying to her dynamic multidimensional strengths.
Not that I've seen most of the films she's been in.
The two work well together.
I wouldn't be able not to say that (lol) because Steve Coogan and Jeff Pope's script has created two wonderful characters, one with elite qualifications, the other comfortable within the kitschy continuum, the kitschy elite and elitist kitsch notwithstanding, both successes in their respective domains insofar as they've groomed themselves well over the years, brought them together to conduct investigative research, and given them both enough humanity to be able to work as an effective team, both partners listening to one another and making related adjustments throughout which demonstrate facets of humble active listening, snide though it may occasionally be, their power relations not being strictly governed by a master/slave dichotomy, but rather a constructive allied argumentative breach, which playfully and dismissively gives and takes on both sides.
Martin Sixsmith's (Steve Coogan) intellectual capacities are higher than Philomena's (Judi Dench) and he has trouble refraining from expressing this fact, especially before 9 am (why do you have to pretend to be in a good mood before 11 am?), which is to be expected, but they're also high enough to recognize their own particular shortcomings, their exclusive ornate prejudices, which helps Martin learn to accept Philomena's difference, her loves, her passions.
Philomena doesn't shy away from defending her values and even though she's likely never studied advanced rhetoric nor frequently schmoozed in realms where it's condescendingly applied, she holds her own when Sixsmith criticizes her beliefs, breaking through his sound observations (with which I tend to agree) with cold hard forgiving faith.
How she could continue to believe after what certain religious authorities put her through is beyond me but she does and justifies her position coherently enough.
The metaphorical extract (the breach) distilled from their colourful exchanges is a fluid effervescent bourgeoisie, competent mediator of the clashes, comprehensive, cogent, chill.
First time I've briefly forgotten it was Judi Dench acting for awhile, her divergent performance creatively testifying to her dynamic multidimensional strengths.
Not that I've seen most of the films she's been in.
Tuesday, December 3, 2013
Nebraska
Stark patient self-sacrificing unconditional love idealizes David Grant's (Will Forte) compassion in Alexander Payne's laid-back Nebraska.
A road trip.
Family bonding.
Grievances aired.
Irrationality, coddled.
The film contrasts sympathetic understanding with grotesque blatant greed to generate a gentle hardboiled eccentric microbrew whose earthy hops boisterously blend with its down-home sense of whispered wonder.
Drenched reprieved latent reactive emotion.
It takes a good look at honesty as several close family members state that Woody Grant's (Bruce Dern) misguided claims lack sanity, yet due to their enriched aggrandizing interests they're treated as cold hard facts regardless nonetheless.
These interrelations produce a series of depressingly comic wisps.
The aesthetic modestly criticizes while humbly elevating aspects of rural life and formulates a fecund quaint sterility which gymnastically disables pretentious categorical judgments.
The film seems laid-back and calm even while characters express themselves aggressively but you don't achieve this kind of distinct reflective vacant simplicity without meticulously focusing upon its underlying romance.
Great ending.
Great film.
A road trip.
Family bonding.
Grievances aired.
Irrationality, coddled.
The film contrasts sympathetic understanding with grotesque blatant greed to generate a gentle hardboiled eccentric microbrew whose earthy hops boisterously blend with its down-home sense of whispered wonder.
Drenched reprieved latent reactive emotion.
It takes a good look at honesty as several close family members state that Woody Grant's (Bruce Dern) misguided claims lack sanity, yet due to their enriched aggrandizing interests they're treated as cold hard facts regardless nonetheless.
These interrelations produce a series of depressingly comic wisps.
The aesthetic modestly criticizes while humbly elevating aspects of rural life and formulates a fecund quaint sterility which gymnastically disables pretentious categorical judgments.
The film seems laid-back and calm even while characters express themselves aggressively but you don't achieve this kind of distinct reflective vacant simplicity without meticulously focusing upon its underlying romance.
Great ending.
Great film.
Saturday, November 30, 2013
Delivery Man
If you loved Ken Scott's Starbuck, you may not appreciate his Delivery Man as much (the contents of the films are too similar), although Vince Vaughn (David) reimagines the character well enough, in classic screwing-up while excelling Vince Vaughn fashion, putting in another great performance, confident personality generally unconcerned with consequences, überfatherhood thrust upon him, a life changing salacious shock, a languid lecherous illustrious lighthouse.
(Still prefer Patrick Huard's performance).
Not going to read what I wrote about Starbuck until finishing this review, for curiosity's sake (I did duplicate the tags however since the film's are so similar).
The narrative is a treasure for those adhering to discourses of hereditary multiplicities, even if it's fictional, since David's offspring possess sundry talents and seemingly limitless flexibilities, when considered as a whole.
I'm assuming there's a group who adheres to discourses of hereditary multiplicities.
I mean, what would happen if you had 534 children with 534 different women and then set them loose on the streets of New York or Montréal?
They aren't all going to end up in the same profession.
They aren't all going to look the same.
They will likely react to various stimuli differently.
Some of them, may even listen to, Tigermilk followed If You're Feeling Sinister followed by The Boy with the Arab Strap then Aladdin Sane after their favourite CFL team loses the Grey Cup.
534.
It could happen.
It's tough for me to write that critically about Delivery Man because, as I mentioned earlier, the film's too similar to Starbuck, which is why I didn't want to see it in theatres but I woke up too late that day to see Heli at EXCƎNTRIS.
It was a late night.
Great translation.
Just too familiar with the story so my reactions were always mitigated by encumbering memories which prevented me from being surprised by the sequences.
Surprise is important.
Good surprises.
Screw-off sadists.
Marshmallows.
(Still prefer Patrick Huard's performance).
Not going to read what I wrote about Starbuck until finishing this review, for curiosity's sake (I did duplicate the tags however since the film's are so similar).
The narrative is a treasure for those adhering to discourses of hereditary multiplicities, even if it's fictional, since David's offspring possess sundry talents and seemingly limitless flexibilities, when considered as a whole.
I'm assuming there's a group who adheres to discourses of hereditary multiplicities.
I mean, what would happen if you had 534 children with 534 different women and then set them loose on the streets of New York or Montréal?
They aren't all going to end up in the same profession.
They aren't all going to look the same.
They will likely react to various stimuli differently.
Some of them, may even listen to, Tigermilk followed If You're Feeling Sinister followed by The Boy with the Arab Strap then Aladdin Sane after their favourite CFL team loses the Grey Cup.
534.
It could happen.
It's tough for me to write that critically about Delivery Man because, as I mentioned earlier, the film's too similar to Starbuck, which is why I didn't want to see it in theatres but I woke up too late that day to see Heli at EXCƎNTRIS.
It was a late night.
Great translation.
Just too familiar with the story so my reactions were always mitigated by encumbering memories which prevented me from being surprised by the sequences.
Surprise is important.
Good surprises.
Screw-off sadists.
Marshmallows.
Thursday, November 28, 2013
The Book Thief
A struggling family adopts a young girl (Sophie Nélisse as Liesel) in pre-World War II Germany as the fascists's political agenda rapidly spreads throughout the country.
Ideological indoctrination confuses intelligent youth who can't understand its narrow-minded discipline.
The focus is on the good Germans, the ones who were simply trying to make ends meet during difficult economic times and were forced to come up with survival strategies ad hoc as repugnant discourses gained social traction, followed by war.
The Book Thief unreels from a child's point of view and the film is primarily geared towards children.
I'm used to finding more depth in children's films, meaning that they're sometimes more engaging for adults, but that's not necessarily a criticism, insofar as the kids in the audience were likely fully engaged, and it was made for children.
Still, it accentuates the senses of fear and helplessness conscientious citizens feel when trying to express themselves within oppressive environments dominated by violence, but in an oddly inconspicuous way that leaves the impression that nothing could possibly go seriously wrong, even while war breaks out and the hunted desperately seek shelter.
This explains Death's (Roger Allam) avuncular yet cumbersome narration.
The importance of reading is at the forefront, an individual's desire to expand her mind contrasted with what happens when highly fanatical aggressive groups who never had any desire to expand theirs suddenly control the military.
Nazi Germany was responsible for destroying Europe in the first half of the 20th century, but, according to practically every article I read about the European Union, they're currently saving Europe from total financial disaster, playing a much stronger role than either France or Britain, no doubt due to the strength of the good Germans depicted in The Book Thief, their environmental concerns, and resolute calm.
Viewing The Book Thief in this way helps to detach unconscious direct correlations between Germany and Nazism, which, after you've seen around 100 World War II films and read many books on the subject, is an unconscious direct correlation that's tough not to make (like Mexico and drug cartels [more {some?} American films with Mexican characters who aren't labourers or members of a drug cartel would be nice]).
These correlations can then be replaced by less volatile caricatures, as Germany's contemporary status suggests it deserves.
Thus, when you think of Germany, try not to immediately think, Nazis, a period of their history that more or less ended in 1945, but think, getting rid of nuclear power, focusing on green technologies, economy remains strong even after the integration of East Germany, saving the European Union, fiscal responsibility, which are aspects of what's happening now.
Not so easy to do, I know.
But I've done it. So I know that it is possible.
Ideological indoctrination confuses intelligent youth who can't understand its narrow-minded discipline.
The focus is on the good Germans, the ones who were simply trying to make ends meet during difficult economic times and were forced to come up with survival strategies ad hoc as repugnant discourses gained social traction, followed by war.
The Book Thief unreels from a child's point of view and the film is primarily geared towards children.
I'm used to finding more depth in children's films, meaning that they're sometimes more engaging for adults, but that's not necessarily a criticism, insofar as the kids in the audience were likely fully engaged, and it was made for children.
Still, it accentuates the senses of fear and helplessness conscientious citizens feel when trying to express themselves within oppressive environments dominated by violence, but in an oddly inconspicuous way that leaves the impression that nothing could possibly go seriously wrong, even while war breaks out and the hunted desperately seek shelter.
This explains Death's (Roger Allam) avuncular yet cumbersome narration.
The importance of reading is at the forefront, an individual's desire to expand her mind contrasted with what happens when highly fanatical aggressive groups who never had any desire to expand theirs suddenly control the military.
Nazi Germany was responsible for destroying Europe in the first half of the 20th century, but, according to practically every article I read about the European Union, they're currently saving Europe from total financial disaster, playing a much stronger role than either France or Britain, no doubt due to the strength of the good Germans depicted in The Book Thief, their environmental concerns, and resolute calm.
Viewing The Book Thief in this way helps to detach unconscious direct correlations between Germany and Nazism, which, after you've seen around 100 World War II films and read many books on the subject, is an unconscious direct correlation that's tough not to make (like Mexico and drug cartels [more {some?} American films with Mexican characters who aren't labourers or members of a drug cartel would be nice]).
These correlations can then be replaced by less volatile caricatures, as Germany's contemporary status suggests it deserves.
Thus, when you think of Germany, try not to immediately think, Nazis, a period of their history that more or less ended in 1945, but think, getting rid of nuclear power, focusing on green technologies, economy remains strong even after the integration of East Germany, saving the European Union, fiscal responsibility, which are aspects of what's happening now.
Not so easy to do, I know.
But I've done it. So I know that it is possible.
Tuesday, November 26, 2013
Kill Your Darlings
John Krokidas's Kill Your Darlings enlivens the fortuitous meeting of a group of experimental writers including Allen Ginsberg (Daniel Radcliffe), Jack Kerouac (Jack Huston), and William S. Burroughs (Ben Foster) in New York City during their youth.
Not sure how much of the film is based on rhythmic verge (the facts).
That doesn't really matter.
It offers generalized insights into their introductory methods and innocently stylizes a literary ethos of sorts.
It focuses primarily on Ginsberg's infatuation with fellow student Lucien Carr (Dane DeHaan), whose being pursued by an obsessed thinker (Michael C. Hall as David Kammerer) who simply can't detach and withdraw.
Ginsberg grows and changes over time, Burroughs and Kerouac do not.
Kerouac's stasis is quite lively.
The film itself is sort of like a lively stasis, like a successful Not Fade Away.
The main problem's formal.
While wild moments and coming of age initiations are present, it's still easy enough to follow, like a crazy countercultural clutch, a warm and fuzzy bourgeois blanket.
More like the classes Ginsberg stops attending than something by Godard or Cassavetes.
Had high expectations. Loved reading most of these authors in my early twenties. Thought the filmmakers would have taken a more poetic approach.
Radcliffe excels as Ginsberg, reminding me at times of a younger Joaquin Phoenix, moving beyond the Harry Potter persona, establishing greater depth and personality.
That's good.
Not sure how much of the film is based on rhythmic verge (the facts).
That doesn't really matter.
It offers generalized insights into their introductory methods and innocently stylizes a literary ethos of sorts.
It focuses primarily on Ginsberg's infatuation with fellow student Lucien Carr (Dane DeHaan), whose being pursued by an obsessed thinker (Michael C. Hall as David Kammerer) who simply can't detach and withdraw.
Ginsberg grows and changes over time, Burroughs and Kerouac do not.
Kerouac's stasis is quite lively.
The film itself is sort of like a lively stasis, like a successful Not Fade Away.
The main problem's formal.
While wild moments and coming of age initiations are present, it's still easy enough to follow, like a crazy countercultural clutch, a warm and fuzzy bourgeois blanket.
More like the classes Ginsberg stops attending than something by Godard or Cassavetes.
Had high expectations. Loved reading most of these authors in my early twenties. Thought the filmmakers would have taken a more poetic approach.
Radcliffe excels as Ginsberg, reminding me at times of a younger Joaquin Phoenix, moving beyond the Harry Potter persona, establishing greater depth and personality.
That's good.
Saturday, November 23, 2013
The Hunger Games: Catching Fire
Having won the previous year's Hunger Games, Katniss Everdeen (Jennifer Lawrence) and Peeta Mellark (Josh Hutcherson) return to District 12 to attempt to resume their normal lives.
Trauma terrifyingly affects them both as haunting memories short-circuit various pastimes.
President Snow's (Donald Sutherland) fascist ideology continues to crush workers throughout the Districts but Katniss and Peeta have given them something to believe in.
That belief steadily intensifies throughout the progress of a mandatory nationwide tour during which they must demonstrate their loyalty.
But fascist kings stack fascist decks, not really even a deck, and an unforeseen revised savage sewer augustly swells, threatening to tether the people's momentum, to a coerced, despotic, desolate, plain.
Upon which obedience is the only option.
There's a lot happening in The Hunger Games: Catching Fire.
Katniss and Peeta's aforementioned trauma adds depth to Haymitch's (Woody Harrelson) character, justifying his excessive drinking.
Rob Ford is not Haymitch. Rob Ford is being legitimately criticized for drinking and driving and smoking crack cocaine. These are things responsible Mayors don't do. These are things responsible people don't do regardless of occupation.
You almost feel bad for Effie Trinket (Elizabeth Banks) as she makes the best of an abysmal situation by seeming to genuinely care about teamwork.
As one of the participants dies during the Hunger Games's Quarter Quell, the sun rises, thereby symbolizing that there is only freedom in death when living under extreme forms of government.
Protests at the highest level do nothing to dissuade Snow's executive, similar mechanisms existing in Canada before Baldwin and Lafontaine introduced Responsible Government.
Katniss's formidable resolve resplendently radiates as if her just constitution was forged by Barton Street Steel.
A crucial moment during which the expediencies of her predicament neurotically test her herculean will exemplifies this in/dependence (beautifully dependent on championing the rights of the helpless).
Trust becomes a critical factor.
The parts which necessitate action don't focus on the violence but rather the obstructions of the civilized combatants.
The film depicts what it could be like to live somewhere where 1% of the population hold 99% of the wealth and there isn't a democratic system in place guaranteeing fundamental freedoms.
Where one size fits all.
Should probably read the books too.
Trauma terrifyingly affects them both as haunting memories short-circuit various pastimes.
President Snow's (Donald Sutherland) fascist ideology continues to crush workers throughout the Districts but Katniss and Peeta have given them something to believe in.
That belief steadily intensifies throughout the progress of a mandatory nationwide tour during which they must demonstrate their loyalty.
But fascist kings stack fascist decks, not really even a deck, and an unforeseen revised savage sewer augustly swells, threatening to tether the people's momentum, to a coerced, despotic, desolate, plain.
Upon which obedience is the only option.
There's a lot happening in The Hunger Games: Catching Fire.
Katniss and Peeta's aforementioned trauma adds depth to Haymitch's (Woody Harrelson) character, justifying his excessive drinking.
Rob Ford is not Haymitch. Rob Ford is being legitimately criticized for drinking and driving and smoking crack cocaine. These are things responsible Mayors don't do. These are things responsible people don't do regardless of occupation.
You almost feel bad for Effie Trinket (Elizabeth Banks) as she makes the best of an abysmal situation by seeming to genuinely care about teamwork.
As one of the participants dies during the Hunger Games's Quarter Quell, the sun rises, thereby symbolizing that there is only freedom in death when living under extreme forms of government.
Protests at the highest level do nothing to dissuade Snow's executive, similar mechanisms existing in Canada before Baldwin and Lafontaine introduced Responsible Government.
Katniss's formidable resolve resplendently radiates as if her just constitution was forged by Barton Street Steel.
A crucial moment during which the expediencies of her predicament neurotically test her herculean will exemplifies this in/dependence (beautifully dependent on championing the rights of the helpless).
Trust becomes a critical factor.
The parts which necessitate action don't focus on the violence but rather the obstructions of the civilized combatants.
The film depicts what it could be like to live somewhere where 1% of the population hold 99% of the wealth and there isn't a democratic system in place guaranteeing fundamental freedoms.
Where one size fits all.
Should probably read the books too.
Tuesday, November 19, 2013
Carrie
A shy young sheltered girl is tormented and humiliated by her insensitive classmates due to her unfortunate unawareness of nature's biologics.
But these very same biologics possess specific hereditary gifts that to the uninitiated appear legitimately demonic.
Prom quickly approaches and commendable do-gooders attempt to ease the heightened tension.
Their efforts fail to pacify a spoiled jealous spiteful thug, however, whose mad cruel retributive act, ignominiously ensures that all goodness is in jeopardy.
Reason cannot be maintained.
Liked the new Carrie.
Suppose a lot of people already know what happens in Carrie.
Nevertheless, a resilient inclusive dimension can be found within, the snobs still abrasively __cking around as they so often do, the immediate transformation of pure bliss into incarnate rage blindly affecting all, the shock hemorrhaging Carrie's (Chloë Grace Moretz) ethical splice, thereby further encouraging understanding inclusivity.
It's a shame Carrie rampages, for, thanks to the resources available in her high school library, she was just beginning to learn how to develop a strong sense of self, conscious of the ways in which her own individuality fit within larger social cohesivities, book after book after book potentially strengthening both her resultant inchoate confidence and sense of belonging.
But she does rampage and if she didn't the narrative's impact would have perhaps been less catchy.
Couldn't work a debate into the end of this one I guess.
Or Professor X?
Imagine Professor X had shown up?
Unprovoked conflict abounds.
Wednesday, November 13, 2013
Thor: The Dark World
The new Thor film, Thor: The Dark World, takes too many liberties in its preparations for battle.
Its clumsy approach to the construction of its foundations begets a gurgling perfunctory stale flaccid belch.
Thor's (Chris Hemsworth) restoring order to the 9 Realms, not choosing between cotton candy and caramel corn.
But this is a film, not a skyscraper, and after the, sigh, Dark Elves, invade Asgard, it picks up steam and successfully delivers an action-packed dialectic twisting shifting scorn, eccentric citizens of Earth scientifically counterbalancing the religiosity, with glasses, humour metrically romanticizing the miscues, the hammer, pounding and pulverizing away.
Go __ck yourself Loki.
Still, the Convergence could have been more lavish.
As it stands, it's an alright Convergence, but if it only happens once every 9,000 years or so, perhaps Thor: The Dark World could have spent an extra 10 to 15 minutes exploring its quasiphantasmagorical interrelations, multiple entities from manifold worlds gravitating towards these shocks, intertwining piquant interplanetary processions, coordinated cataclysmic chaos, tantalized and transitioned through Thor.
I usually don't recommend that things be more lavish, but in Thor: The Dark World's case, they may have had some extra money to spend.
In a situation like this you don't need to set everything up beforehand.
And you can intermingle select forthcoming synergies within.
Its clumsy approach to the construction of its foundations begets a gurgling perfunctory stale flaccid belch.
Thor's (Chris Hemsworth) restoring order to the 9 Realms, not choosing between cotton candy and caramel corn.
But this is a film, not a skyscraper, and after the, sigh, Dark Elves, invade Asgard, it picks up steam and successfully delivers an action-packed dialectic twisting shifting scorn, eccentric citizens of Earth scientifically counterbalancing the religiosity, with glasses, humour metrically romanticizing the miscues, the hammer, pounding and pulverizing away.
Go __ck yourself Loki.
Still, the Convergence could have been more lavish.
As it stands, it's an alright Convergence, but if it only happens once every 9,000 years or so, perhaps Thor: The Dark World could have spent an extra 10 to 15 minutes exploring its quasiphantasmagorical interrelations, multiple entities from manifold worlds gravitating towards these shocks, intertwining piquant interplanetary processions, coordinated cataclysmic chaos, tantalized and transitioned through Thor.
I usually don't recommend that things be more lavish, but in Thor: The Dark World's case, they may have had some extra money to spend.
In a situation like this you don't need to set everything up beforehand.
And you can intermingle select forthcoming synergies within.
Monday, November 11, 2013
All the Wrong Reasons
Solid beginnings for All the Wrong Reasons.
Chummy quotidian banter, an elastic sense of low-budget self-aware elusion, characters who seem relatable but have enough cinematic distance built-in to problematize their realistic preoccupations, polish, tragedy, helplessness, grit.
Facial expressions provoke chuckles.
Background details add flavour.
Surveyed departmental legacies.
Evacuated evasive everyday elevations.
It doesn't hold together well as things become more serious however.
It's not that I didn't like the development of Kate (Karine Vanasse) and Simon's (Kevin Zegers) affections.
They're strong characters and their interactions curve and merge.
But as the intensity of the wry melodrama increases, and morality becomes a potent factor, the comedy disintegrates, and austerity commands.
I liked some of the scenes and the resolutions, but the general air of upright tension in the second half suffered from a lack of contrapuntal displacement.
Unsuccessful juxtaposition.
Solid beginnings though, solid beginnings.
Chummy quotidian banter, an elastic sense of low-budget self-aware elusion, characters who seem relatable but have enough cinematic distance built-in to problematize their realistic preoccupations, polish, tragedy, helplessness, grit.
Facial expressions provoke chuckles.
Background details add flavour.
Surveyed departmental legacies.
Evacuated evasive everyday elevations.
It doesn't hold together well as things become more serious however.
It's not that I didn't like the development of Kate (Karine Vanasse) and Simon's (Kevin Zegers) affections.
They're strong characters and their interactions curve and merge.
But as the intensity of the wry melodrama increases, and morality becomes a potent factor, the comedy disintegrates, and austerity commands.
I liked some of the scenes and the resolutions, but the general air of upright tension in the second half suffered from a lack of contrapuntal displacement.
Unsuccessful juxtaposition.
Solid beginnings though, solid beginnings.
Thursday, November 7, 2013
Dallas Buyers Club
When confronted with the gripping prospect of death, Dallas Buyers Club's Ron Woodroof (Matthew McConaughey) cursively refuses to back down.
Economically finding a way to prolong his counterintuitive friction, he proactively rides the bull, adjusting prejudicial preferences in the meantime, gesticulating, matriculating, stanced.
This ___ker knows how to rock a library.
He does his research, finds alternatives, makes hard decisions, goes into business, and proceeds to assist those who had been condescendingly written off.
The butterfly scene boils it down.
The film's straightforward yet punctual and provocative, brazenly tackling hard-hitting browbeaten issues of gender and sex, not to mention the pretensions of the American medical establishment, friendships and partnerships metamorphically blossoming, underground economies, financing the bloom.
Once again we find economic justifications for a more inclusive sociocultural dynamic, more customers, more profits, sustainable social programs, this time in the heart of Texas.
One of the most unlikeliest humanitarian activists I've seen.
His interests are initially individualistic, but he reaches higher ground throughout his transformation.
Possible oscar nomination for McConaughey?
Economically finding a way to prolong his counterintuitive friction, he proactively rides the bull, adjusting prejudicial preferences in the meantime, gesticulating, matriculating, stanced.
This ___ker knows how to rock a library.
He does his research, finds alternatives, makes hard decisions, goes into business, and proceeds to assist those who had been condescendingly written off.
The butterfly scene boils it down.
The film's straightforward yet punctual and provocative, brazenly tackling hard-hitting browbeaten issues of gender and sex, not to mention the pretensions of the American medical establishment, friendships and partnerships metamorphically blossoming, underground economies, financing the bloom.
Once again we find economic justifications for a more inclusive sociocultural dynamic, more customers, more profits, sustainable social programs, this time in the heart of Texas.
One of the most unlikeliest humanitarian activists I've seen.
His interests are initially individualistic, but he reaches higher ground throughout his transformation.
Possible oscar nomination for McConaughey?
Saturday, November 2, 2013
El Cuerpo
Stubborn protrusive reason flaunts a cryptic allegiance with supernatural impulses as Oriol Paulo's La Cuerpo seeks to retrieve an embattled corpse, evidently contravening its diagnosed paramortal slumber.
A corpse has disappeared.
It is sought after.
The search excavates murder.
A question of feeling, evoking, fury.
At the risk of sounding disingenuous, a clue is provided where it is least expected.
The flashback motif, used extensively, at one point proves exhausting, but it is within this kitschy exhaust that an emaciated ember balefully stows, teasing, fleecing, tormenting, breaking down dismissive pretensions in full-fledged fleeting embalmed mockery.
Endearing ending.
Slowly evolving to become something greater than the sum of its parts, La Cuerpo revels in its formal debauchery, to triumphantly emerge a ravenous satiation.
Burned.
Totally burned.
The reason.
A corpse has disappeared.
It is sought after.
The search excavates murder.
A question of feeling, evoking, fury.
At the risk of sounding disingenuous, a clue is provided where it is least expected.
The flashback motif, used extensively, at one point proves exhausting, but it is within this kitschy exhaust that an emaciated ember balefully stows, teasing, fleecing, tormenting, breaking down dismissive pretensions in full-fledged fleeting embalmed mockery.
Endearing ending.
Slowly evolving to become something greater than the sum of its parts, La Cuerpo revels in its formal debauchery, to triumphantly emerge a ravenous satiation.
Burned.
Totally burned.
The reason.
Thursday, October 31, 2013
The Fifth Estate
The Fifth Estate's cold calculated construct of Julian Assange (Benedict Cumberbatch) maintains that he's a driven well-meaning intense prick whose inability to bend resolutely cost him dearly.
Guilty of high-tech intractability.
The portrait's possibly unfair.
It was a simple matter of redacting articles posted on WikiLeaks so that the names of covert individuals mentioned within them would not appear and the individuals themselves would likely not be violently punished (murdered) afterwards.
Not such a simple matter for Assange, according to The Fifth Estate, however.
He was determined to publish leaked articles in full on principle to demonstrate that he wasn't doing anything to hedge the truth.
I respect this on principle, but when people's lives are at stake I do have to agree with The Fifth Estate's condemnation of the practise, Assange being unable to recast his image as his freedom fighting persona gained international traction.
The problem in the film is this.
Assange rightfully despises tyranny.
It's what he fights against.
Tyrants tend to kill people.
In The Fifth Estate, as WikiLeaks's reach exponentially extends, it becomes clear that Assange is a general of sorts, more of a supreme commander, and that by releasing unredacted documents, he has the power to sacrifice troops for what he considers to be the greater good, but he still sacrifices troops nonetheless, somewhat carelessly, I might add.
So on principle, he makes decisions that could have cost people their lives, people who may have been fighting for the same things using different methods, when he really didn't have to, he could have redacted the documents without ruining them, which causes him to become tyrannical himself, an unfortunate development for such an heroic person.
What I loved about The Fifth Estate was its examination of history, contemporary history, how many of its characters are aware of the monumental changes the internet has brought about, like Gutenberg's printing press on hyperactive culturally enlivening intergalactic booster juice, The Guardian's Nick Davies (David Thewlis) offering some notable insights, moving the film away from the severely intensifying interactions between Assange and Daniel Berg (Daniel Brühl).
Looking forward to reading/viewing what other biographers have to say about Assange over the upcoming decades.
Compelling person.
Brilliant colossus.
Guilty of high-tech intractability.
The portrait's possibly unfair.
It was a simple matter of redacting articles posted on WikiLeaks so that the names of covert individuals mentioned within them would not appear and the individuals themselves would likely not be violently punished (murdered) afterwards.
Not such a simple matter for Assange, according to The Fifth Estate, however.
He was determined to publish leaked articles in full on principle to demonstrate that he wasn't doing anything to hedge the truth.
I respect this on principle, but when people's lives are at stake I do have to agree with The Fifth Estate's condemnation of the practise, Assange being unable to recast his image as his freedom fighting persona gained international traction.
The problem in the film is this.
Assange rightfully despises tyranny.
It's what he fights against.
Tyrants tend to kill people.
In The Fifth Estate, as WikiLeaks's reach exponentially extends, it becomes clear that Assange is a general of sorts, more of a supreme commander, and that by releasing unredacted documents, he has the power to sacrifice troops for what he considers to be the greater good, but he still sacrifices troops nonetheless, somewhat carelessly, I might add.
So on principle, he makes decisions that could have cost people their lives, people who may have been fighting for the same things using different methods, when he really didn't have to, he could have redacted the documents without ruining them, which causes him to become tyrannical himself, an unfortunate development for such an heroic person.
What I loved about The Fifth Estate was its examination of history, contemporary history, how many of its characters are aware of the monumental changes the internet has brought about, like Gutenberg's printing press on hyperactive culturally enlivening intergalactic booster juice, The Guardian's Nick Davies (David Thewlis) offering some notable insights, moving the film away from the severely intensifying interactions between Assange and Daniel Berg (Daniel Brühl).
Looking forward to reading/viewing what other biographers have to say about Assange over the upcoming decades.
Compelling person.
Brilliant colossus.
Sunday, October 27, 2013
L'autre maison
Serene lakeside pastoral tranquility's cumulative regenerative assertive grace tantalizingly taunts a troubled convalescing alcoholic in Mathieu Roy's L'autre maison, a man struggling to overcome his sundry jealousies and youthful longings, his inability to refrain from hostilely instigating comparative packs compounding his skittish alarm, a lost unattainable sense of consistent security haunting his unconscious, alcohol no longer an option, but peace, present, partout.
Flying off the handle quickly, abrasively, and confidently, Eric's (Émile Proulx-Cloutier) destructive instincts reflect the stormy endearing tract of the frightened everyperson, his counterproductive soul-searching trail blazed by Proulx-Cloutier's strong performance.
The film periodically focuses on his distracted bemusements, intermixing and contrasting his viewpoints with more successful and less coherent supportive family members.
Its calm enduring inquisitive patience forges a tight urban/rural familial dialectic whose curative emphasis boundlessly allures.
The late night swim is an important moment.
Ah, dinner is served.
Love permeates.
With raccoons.
Flying off the handle quickly, abrasively, and confidently, Eric's (Émile Proulx-Cloutier) destructive instincts reflect the stormy endearing tract of the frightened everyperson, his counterproductive soul-searching trail blazed by Proulx-Cloutier's strong performance.
The film periodically focuses on his distracted bemusements, intermixing and contrasting his viewpoints with more successful and less coherent supportive family members.
Its calm enduring inquisitive patience forges a tight urban/rural familial dialectic whose curative emphasis boundlessly allures.
The late night swim is an important moment.
Ah, dinner is served.
Love permeates.
With raccoons.
Tuesday, October 22, 2013
Amsterdam
Three close friends, living in a small town, married and settled, habitual and unsuspecting, routine linear sturdy timber, off for an expected excursion, wives, nothing to be worried about.
But a salacious drug and alcohol fuelled binge replaces their traditional fishing trip, in none other than fabled Amsterdam, during which an adulterous peculiarity comes to light, ushering in a new set of incongruous relational vertices, discordant complexities, whose devastated heartbroken pinpricked clutches, deceptively destabilize a longstanding foundation of trust.
It's a morality tale.
A classic case of conjugal infidelity crushing one's sense of purpose and well-being.
The crush is perhaps too limiting as its despondent affects prevent Sam (Robin Aubert) from taking part in most of the film, exploratory analysis sacrificed for betrayed obsession, Amsterdam examining the detonation of reason, as thoughts of forgiveness abandon.
His friends are left trying to explain his absence after he chooses to remain in Europe, their cover-up exacerbating the situation, lies, trauma, incompatibility.
They didn't hire Columbo to investigate this one.
Old school yet relevant, Amsterdam substantializes conceptions of loyalty and friendship, refusing to disqualify their guilt, hardboiled chaotic remorse.
But it really boils down to childishness.
Whose the more childish, Sam or Jeff (Gabriel Sabourin)?
From right to left?
But a salacious drug and alcohol fuelled binge replaces their traditional fishing trip, in none other than fabled Amsterdam, during which an adulterous peculiarity comes to light, ushering in a new set of incongruous relational vertices, discordant complexities, whose devastated heartbroken pinpricked clutches, deceptively destabilize a longstanding foundation of trust.
It's a morality tale.
A classic case of conjugal infidelity crushing one's sense of purpose and well-being.
The crush is perhaps too limiting as its despondent affects prevent Sam (Robin Aubert) from taking part in most of the film, exploratory analysis sacrificed for betrayed obsession, Amsterdam examining the detonation of reason, as thoughts of forgiveness abandon.
His friends are left trying to explain his absence after he chooses to remain in Europe, their cover-up exacerbating the situation, lies, trauma, incompatibility.
They didn't hire Columbo to investigate this one.
Old school yet relevant, Amsterdam substantializes conceptions of loyalty and friendship, refusing to disqualify their guilt, hardboiled chaotic remorse.
But it really boils down to childishness.
Whose the more childish, Sam or Jeff (Gabriel Sabourin)?
From right to left?
Saturday, October 19, 2013
Machete Kills
Impressed by Machete Kills.
So many great lines in this film.
It's like Kyle Ward and Robert and Marcel Rodriguez really took the extra time and care a quality ridiculously sensational over-the-top film needs to be convincingly down-to-earth yet mesmerizing and decaptivating.
It sets a high standard for other filmmakers working along similar lines, and, much like Planet Terror, gives them something to aspire to.
Luz (Michelle Rodriguez) has her other eye shot out and then gets up to fight blind?
Fully loaded machine gun breasts?
The heart that refuses to cease beating?
It's the President on the phone?
El Cameleón?
No need for rhetorical explanations.
It's rare that a film so confidently and quickly moves from the improbable to the ludicrous to the exceptional, so sure of itself, so Machete (Danny Trejo).
Oddly, whereas I thought Sherlock Holmes: Game of Shadows faltered by situating Holmes (Robert Downey Jr.) in an international scenario, Machete Kills excels precisely for this reason.
The Last Stand had a similar cast but lacked Machete Kills's sharp-edged artistry.
Pacific Rim had many great lines but I'm afraid it's no Machete Kills.
Let's just throw in Star Wars.
The next one takes place in space.
In space!
Like Star Trek II in terms of outshining its predecessor.
Not that I'm comparing Star Trek: The Motion Picture to Machete.
I'm wondering if Machete can somehow be worked into an Avengers film, either through reference or by making a direct appearance.
The Avengers could use some Machete.
A rugged old-school indestructible hero.
Going to see this film, again.
So many great lines in this film.
It's like Kyle Ward and Robert and Marcel Rodriguez really took the extra time and care a quality ridiculously sensational over-the-top film needs to be convincingly down-to-earth yet mesmerizing and decaptivating.
It sets a high standard for other filmmakers working along similar lines, and, much like Planet Terror, gives them something to aspire to.
Luz (Michelle Rodriguez) has her other eye shot out and then gets up to fight blind?
Fully loaded machine gun breasts?
The heart that refuses to cease beating?
It's the President on the phone?
El Cameleón?
No need for rhetorical explanations.
It's rare that a film so confidently and quickly moves from the improbable to the ludicrous to the exceptional, so sure of itself, so Machete (Danny Trejo).
Oddly, whereas I thought Sherlock Holmes: Game of Shadows faltered by situating Holmes (Robert Downey Jr.) in an international scenario, Machete Kills excels precisely for this reason.
The Last Stand had a similar cast but lacked Machete Kills's sharp-edged artistry.
Pacific Rim had many great lines but I'm afraid it's no Machete Kills.
Let's just throw in Star Wars.
The next one takes place in space.
In space!
Like Star Trek II in terms of outshining its predecessor.
Not that I'm comparing Star Trek: The Motion Picture to Machete.
I'm wondering if Machete can somehow be worked into an Avengers film, either through reference or by making a direct appearance.
The Avengers could use some Machete.
A rugged old-school indestructible hero.
Going to see this film, again.
Tuesday, October 15, 2013
Gravity
Trauma's debilitating cloaked severity haunts Gravity's heroine as destructive debris and interstellar circumstances threaten her very survival, necessitating the delivery of split-second correct decision making where the slightest miscue will accelerate her demise.
Her oxygen supply is running low.
George Clooney (Matt Kowalski) doesn't make it.
Perdition rests in the flames.
Of cherished, bygone, days.
The immediacy of her isolated predicament and its associated inanimate malevolence prevents her conscious reflexivity from being able to divert periodic onslaughts of asphyxiating plush, the situation requiring simultaneous internal and external synthesized orchestrations for her reliable future to independently portend.
The film's action reliably and boisterously builds as the bright and beautiful Ryan Stone (Sandra Bullock) approaches its climax.
Couldn't help but think of the ending of the first Alien film, and that Gravity is somewhat of a gem amongst science-fiction considering that it poignantly and thought provokingly stuns throughout, providing a brilliant exemplar of feminine strength, without introducing a bloodthirsty monster.
Science-fiction more concerned with the beauty of life than gruesome death?
That stands out.
Her oxygen supply is running low.
George Clooney (Matt Kowalski) doesn't make it.
Perdition rests in the flames.
Of cherished, bygone, days.
The immediacy of her isolated predicament and its associated inanimate malevolence prevents her conscious reflexivity from being able to divert periodic onslaughts of asphyxiating plush, the situation requiring simultaneous internal and external synthesized orchestrations for her reliable future to independently portend.
The film's action reliably and boisterously builds as the bright and beautiful Ryan Stone (Sandra Bullock) approaches its climax.
Couldn't help but think of the ending of the first Alien film, and that Gravity is somewhat of a gem amongst science-fiction considering that it poignantly and thought provokingly stuns throughout, providing a brilliant exemplar of feminine strength, without introducing a bloodthirsty monster.
Science-fiction more concerned with the beauty of life than gruesome death?
That stands out.
Runner Runner
Liked what happens in Runner Runner more than the film itself.
It's too generic for my tastes, not the kind of generic film that recognizes its shortcomings and works an awkward self-critical yet confident and bedazzling dimension into its reels, haughty and sporty, arrogant yet maudlin, but the kind that directly deals with a popular contemporary pastime (online gambling) by utilizing a straightforward style with all the associated bells and whistles, to maximize its take home without taking any serious risks.
Throughout the film serious risks are taken, the plot necessitates serious risk taking, it's just that it takes these serious risks leisurely and comfortably, straightforwardly, if that makes sense.
This aspect is best represented by the crocodile scene.
It still employs clever underground reversals however that made me glad I stuck it out till the end.
To avoid giving away what happens, imagine a situation where a brilliant statistical analyst has the worst possible luck and his financial situation dictates that alternative methods must be embraced if he's to succeed, like Inception's Cobb, the socioeconomic dice stacked against him in each and every sophisticated spin of the wheel, in/formal inter/national legalities stacking the deck, but tries to maximize his profits anyways, even though it could result in the loss of everything.
He makes his bet.
Doubles down.
Throws in the chips.
Undergrounds within undergrounds.
Proceeding delicately.
It's too generic for my tastes, not the kind of generic film that recognizes its shortcomings and works an awkward self-critical yet confident and bedazzling dimension into its reels, haughty and sporty, arrogant yet maudlin, but the kind that directly deals with a popular contemporary pastime (online gambling) by utilizing a straightforward style with all the associated bells and whistles, to maximize its take home without taking any serious risks.
Throughout the film serious risks are taken, the plot necessitates serious risk taking, it's just that it takes these serious risks leisurely and comfortably, straightforwardly, if that makes sense.
This aspect is best represented by the crocodile scene.
It still employs clever underground reversals however that made me glad I stuck it out till the end.
To avoid giving away what happens, imagine a situation where a brilliant statistical analyst has the worst possible luck and his financial situation dictates that alternative methods must be embraced if he's to succeed, like Inception's Cobb, the socioeconomic dice stacked against him in each and every sophisticated spin of the wheel, in/formal inter/national legalities stacking the deck, but tries to maximize his profits anyways, even though it could result in the loss of everything.
He makes his bet.
Doubles down.
Throws in the chips.
Undergrounds within undergrounds.
Proceeding delicately.
Wednesday, October 9, 2013
The Butler
Periodically piecing together various volatile historical tracts, intergenerationally sketching a people's hard beaten path, sustained successful service slowly evidencing sophistication and ingenuity, facets which for some archaic reason required proof, proof that wasn't that easy to come by due to multileveled systemic oppressions, which persist, and committed confrontational activism, manifesting different variations on a theme, familially questioning particular forms of engagement, Lee Daniels's The Butler functioning as a practical ideological switchboard, easy to follow yet deep and hard hitting, well suited to wide audiences, proper.
Considering the potent surge of what's being described as the new racism, this is an important film.
The Butler's a good starting point for young secondary students interested in learning more about 20th century American history as well, since it broadly condenses many important developments and personalities, thereby making them accessible, while setting them up with oppositions to avoid having things appear too simplistic, these elements serving to encourage further study.
It also demonstrates that your occupation or income doesn't necessarily limit your ability to play a role in the world at large.
Imagine what could have been done with web 2.0 back then.
Out of sight.
Considering the potent surge of what's being described as the new racism, this is an important film.
The Butler's a good starting point for young secondary students interested in learning more about 20th century American history as well, since it broadly condenses many important developments and personalities, thereby making them accessible, while setting them up with oppositions to avoid having things appear too simplistic, these elements serving to encourage further study.
It also demonstrates that your occupation or income doesn't necessarily limit your ability to play a role in the world at large.
Imagine what could have been done with web 2.0 back then.
Out of sight.
Saturday, October 5, 2013
Don Jon
A sexually active male whose interests and activities generally correspond to a popular idealization of traditional masculinity finds himself attempting to conform to what at first seems a model relationship, in Joseph Gordon-Levitt's feature length directorial debut Don Jon, seduced by a perfect 10, then willing to abide by related sociocultural courting mechanisms.
There's just one problem.
Well, a couple of problems (she's very bossy).
But the main problem is pornography.
Porno, porno, porno.
This guy's addiction to porn knows no limits and he even prefers it to sex, completely and utterly obsessed, strategies, a psychological playbook, on his phone while waiting for class, always on his mind, no holds barred, wild uncontrollable excessive lust, instantly activated at each and every opportunity.
His new partner is unimpressed and it causes friction in their relationship.
The film intelligently and comically exaggerates a controversial phenomenon to its extreme, lusciously and ironically opposing it to an obstinate depiction of perfection, interspersing familial dynamics at well chosen intervals (best Tony Danza performance ever!), while patiently revealing a workable solution.
It's fun, the script (written by Gordon-Levitt) providing every character with solid lines and developmental motions, firmly rooted in what's often considered to have been normal in the 1950s (with more swearing), subtly launching a raunchy prorated convalescent case-study, whose sustainable solution vivaciously stylizes.
Jon's (Joseph Gordon-Levitt) internal turmoil is expressed through road rage.
The pulsating gender based intertextual clashes work well.
Surprisingly tame considering.
Swear those were CFL clips.
There's just one problem.
Well, a couple of problems (she's very bossy).
But the main problem is pornography.
Porno, porno, porno.
This guy's addiction to porn knows no limits and he even prefers it to sex, completely and utterly obsessed, strategies, a psychological playbook, on his phone while waiting for class, always on his mind, no holds barred, wild uncontrollable excessive lust, instantly activated at each and every opportunity.
His new partner is unimpressed and it causes friction in their relationship.
The film intelligently and comically exaggerates a controversial phenomenon to its extreme, lusciously and ironically opposing it to an obstinate depiction of perfection, interspersing familial dynamics at well chosen intervals (best Tony Danza performance ever!), while patiently revealing a workable solution.
It's fun, the script (written by Gordon-Levitt) providing every character with solid lines and developmental motions, firmly rooted in what's often considered to have been normal in the 1950s (with more swearing), subtly launching a raunchy prorated convalescent case-study, whose sustainable solution vivaciously stylizes.
Jon's (Joseph Gordon-Levitt) internal turmoil is expressed through road rage.
The pulsating gender based intertextual clashes work well.
Surprisingly tame considering.
Swear those were CFL clips.
Tuesday, October 1, 2013
The Ghosts in Our Machine
Liz Marshall's new documentary The Ghosts in Our Machine follows the beneficial risks taken by photographer and animal rights activist Jo-Anne McArthur as she snaps heartbreaking shots of the animals enslaved in various industries.
Grim statistics numerically accompany her outputs, providing troubling realities with cold hard facts.
The fur industry's profits are increasing, for instance.
Scientific laboratories have actually bred a beagle to maximize its docility.
Dairy cows generally give milk for three to four years before they're butchered, even though they could have lived a much longer life, their utters no longer being profitable.
Facilities like those chronicled in Gabriela Cowperthwaite's Blackfish are sprouting up all over the world.
And the practices adopted by many organic farmers aren't that different from their large-scale competitors.
Animal rights are the focus and discourses which justify animal abuses are contradicted through a wide range of compelling photographic and cinematic images.
The film is informative without being preachy, evocative but not sickly sentimental.
It's not sensational, relying more on the integrity of its illustrations than the volatility of its message.
When they visit the Farm Sanctuary in upstate New York and show close-ups of their resident cows, pigs, sheep, etc., intricately capturing their emotions and personalities, it's truly moving.
The film should be airing on the CBC's documentary channel on Sunday, November 24th.
Finding funding to support your work, an artist's dedication, and historical revelations are featured as well.
Here's an article about animal rights in Switzerland.
This is what I think Ms. McArthur is referring to when she mentions bears.
Farm Sanctuary's catalogue and its value added information are remarkable.
Living an ethical life.
During question period after the film, an audience member asked how Ms. Marshall and Ms. McArthur manage to continue pursuing their goals in the face of so much suffering (paraphrasing), and Jo-Anne recommended Aftershock: Confronting Trauma in a Violent World as an aid.
Sounds like a good read.
Grim statistics numerically accompany her outputs, providing troubling realities with cold hard facts.
The fur industry's profits are increasing, for instance.
Scientific laboratories have actually bred a beagle to maximize its docility.
Dairy cows generally give milk for three to four years before they're butchered, even though they could have lived a much longer life, their utters no longer being profitable.
Facilities like those chronicled in Gabriela Cowperthwaite's Blackfish are sprouting up all over the world.
And the practices adopted by many organic farmers aren't that different from their large-scale competitors.
Animal rights are the focus and discourses which justify animal abuses are contradicted through a wide range of compelling photographic and cinematic images.
The film is informative without being preachy, evocative but not sickly sentimental.
It's not sensational, relying more on the integrity of its illustrations than the volatility of its message.
When they visit the Farm Sanctuary in upstate New York and show close-ups of their resident cows, pigs, sheep, etc., intricately capturing their emotions and personalities, it's truly moving.
The film should be airing on the CBC's documentary channel on Sunday, November 24th.
Finding funding to support your work, an artist's dedication, and historical revelations are featured as well.
Here's an article about animal rights in Switzerland.
This is what I think Ms. McArthur is referring to when she mentions bears.
Farm Sanctuary's catalogue and its value added information are remarkable.
Living an ethical life.
During question period after the film, an audience member asked how Ms. Marshall and Ms. McArthur manage to continue pursuing their goals in the face of so much suffering (paraphrasing), and Jo-Anne recommended Aftershock: Confronting Trauma in a Violent World as an aid.
Sounds like a good read.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)