Hit the gym for the first time since breaking my ankle back in December. I haven't just been sitting around since then--there was a good month of PT to get the muscles back into shape. Today was the first time I got on the elliptical and the weight machines.
The good news is that I didn't have to start all the way back at the very very beginning--I managed to retain some of my fitness during that time. I did a complete circuit, re-establishing my weight settings, and managed better cardio than I thought I would.
Now to keep it up!
Wednesday, March 13, 2013
Tuesday, March 12, 2013
Oz The Great and Powerful, a Review
I saw this, in IMAX and 3D, for the biggest, most spectacular Spectacular method possible. And there is no denying that this is amazing to look at. The technology is hyper-realistic, color saturated, and overall a good match of subject and technology. There a are lot of special effects that are Very Special, and Mila Kunis, Rachel Weisz and Michelle Williams are gorgeous to look at, and hold their own against the wonders of Oz. James Franco is perfectly fine, grinning and hamming it up like he's doing a satire of George Clooney's persona. If you are going to go see it, go ahead and see it in IMAX and 3D, because that's the reason to see it--to be blown away by the visual design.
Because, let's be frank, the story just doesn't measure up.
Look, I understand the appeal of looking at a classic work from a new perspective. There is a lot of built in excitement--how did things end up the way we "know" them? Why are there two witches who are sisters, but they live on opposite sides of the world? What made them Wicked? (Incidentally, Wicked, the book, does this in spades and from a very sophisticated perspective. The musical, not so much.) Why is the Lion so cowardly? Who made the Scarecrow? How did the Wizard get from being a carny from Omaha to the Ruler of the Emerald City anyway?
This movie sets itself the task of answering the first question, but fundamentally fails at it. Now, unlike Dana Stevens from Slate (who I like and respect a great deal, but disagree with on this movie), I don't think it's a fool's task to take on retelling this story. The Warner Brothers' movie is a "universally beloved classic," but it is also nearly seventy-five years old! So much has changed in terms of what can be done, and how we watch movies. I mean, just try watching an old kids movie, like Doctor Doolittle with Rex Harrison. Oh. My. God. The pacing! It is soooo slow--it's like an endurance test. Granted, Wizard of Oz holds up much better, but there's no reason to think that there is nothing new to say or see. And to be honest, the visuals are pretty amazing. Sam Raimi takes his movie into different places in Oz from the 1939 movie, so we get to see new things too!
But--and this is a big "but"--Oz the Great and Powerful fails to provide a story worth telling. I mean, we all know that the carny becomes the wizard, so showing us that he does just isn't enough. I wanted to see the How and the Why of it. What combination of circumstances and character created a man who was able to remain the ruler of a magical land for decades, with no magic of his own? And why does he stay? What is the fundamental truth about this character that makes this all work?
The answer is--nothing, really. He's a guy, he wants something, there are only women standing between him and what he wants, so of course he gets it. Of course he gets to be the Ruler of Everything, because he's A Man! And in case you doubt that as justification enough, there is A Prophecy! So really, that should answer all your objections about realpolitik and social contract and consent of the governed.
Plot summary in a thimble: turn of the century carny gets caught in a tornado while flying his hot air balloon, lands in Oz, has a few adventures, becomes the ruler of the Emerald City. Anything you didn't know already? No.
There are some conscious nods to the original, most overtly in the structure of the whole movie. The first part takes place in black-and-white in Kansas, where Oscar [many many middle names] Diggs is a carnival magician that everybody calls "Oz." While in Kansas, he has an assistant, a would-be girlfriend, and a devoted fan who believes in his magic, all three of whom show up again in the Land of Oz.
There is a contretemps with an adversary, this time the carnival strongman (who does NOT show up later) instead of Miss Gulch, a flight through a destructive tornado, and a crash landing in the technicolor landscape. There he meets a good witch who sets him on the path to the Emerald City, and he gathers companions on the way. Once there, he is given the task of killing a wicked witch, this time by destroying her wand rather than bringing back her broom, after which he is promised great rewards. The biggest difference is that instead of going back home at the end, he stays.
This might actually be the platonic ideal of a sequel format--all the fundamentals are in place, so then we can enjoy the new parts. Sadly, the new parts are uniformly clunkers, story wise. Let's get into the spoilers.
The first twenty minutes of the movie show us Oz in his native habitat. Cleverly shown in a nearly square aspect ratio and filmed in black and white, the movie establishes itself as set in The Past. As the circus magician, Oz has a sort of oily charm, because he is James Franco, and we are placed firmly in his POV, aware that his job is to amaze and fool the rubes. However, the Oz is not so much a magician as he is a horn dog and he is also obsessed with getting laid. He pulls an obviously well worn routine on his newest "assistant," presenting her with a music box that "belonged to my grandmother" in exchange for a kiss and likely more later.
This is insulting, really. The "simple country girl" is being used and the moves are obvious to the audience, but somehow she doesn't catch on, being too dazzled by the glamor of her new role I guess? It's a profoundly offensive view of a woman, and doesn't make me like James Franco/Oz at all. Then he is abusive to his technical assistant (played by Zach Braff), and once on-stage, bedazzles a young girl in a wheelchair who asks him to make her walk again. Instead of turning the moment into a human one--"I wish I could, but my magic doesn't work like that" or something, he blusters his way into an early dropped curtain in front of an audience he has alienated. Once safely off stage, he again berates Zach Braff for not dropping the curtain fast enough to save him from the encounter with the crippled girl. Not at all a nice person, nor someone I have any reason to root for at all.
But it swiftly gets worse. Back in his caravan, a woman knocks on the door, and Zach Braff offers to "wind up another of the music boxes." In case you didn't see it as a practiced scam the first time he used it on a gullible young woman, you see. But this is Annie, who he has some history with. Annie is Michelle Williams, so she is very blonde and beautiful and gentle and pure and everything Oz is not. So what does she see in him?
(That's the problem with this film, and one I am tempted to explain as a Male Problem. I assume that the intent was that we would see things from Oz's point of view, would immediately identify with him and his desires, and take his part as the story unfolds. But since I am not a Male, I didn't default into a pro-Oz camp. Thus, as the life of the carnival frustrates him, I saw him not as a beleaguered hero, but as a squirrelly creep who had not earned my favor. When Michelle Williams turns up as his Dream Girl, I'm rooting for her to run far away from him, because he is neither kind, nor trustworthy, nor anybody she should waste her time with. Perhaps, if I had been more inclined to ally myself with Oz's worldview, I would have liked this movie better. As it is, I think Oz the man was unfairly rewarded for being a creep and I can't condone it.)
Anyway, Michelle Williams has come to visit, like she always does when he's in the county, and John Gale has asked her to marry him. So she is Dorothy Gale's mother? Which makes her doomed, right, because she's dead by the events of Wizard of Oz which is why Dorothy lives with her Auntie Em. Still, though, it's probably a better life than one spent with James Franco, the serial seducer of the circus.
Oz has a speech about the difference between being a "good" man and a "great" one. John Gale is a good man, Annie should marry him, while Oz still wants to do great things. This is news to us, the audience, because so far we've just seen him doing the barest minimum to meet his basest needs. He manipulates and disrespects the woman he's seduced, he's antagonized his audience and cut the show short, he's shortchanging his assistant in splitting the box office take, and now he says he wants to be "great?" Doing what? He's venal, greedy, lecherous, disrespectful, a phony through and through.
Then it turns out he's pulled the "music box seduction" on the strong man's girlfriend, and the strong man is determined to wreak some physical damage in retaliation. Don't even get me started on what's wrong with this one. Oops--too late. Men fighting over a woman like this entirely overlooks that a woman has her own agency and has to be allowed to make her own choices about who she loves. Nope--she is Strong Man's Woman, and Oz has poached her, so he must be punished. This is Men Folks' Business, honey, so you just stand out of the way. Because it's not like maybe she didn't want to stay with a man with such a violent temper or anything--she doesn't get a say.
So Oz hops into a balloon that isn't entirely his property. (Unidentified carny: Hey! That balloon's half mine! Oz: And the other half is mine! So now we can add property theft to his list of charming attributes.) He narrowly escapes the strong man, and gets tossed into a twister. There the items swirling in the cyclone are more threatening than Dorothy encountered, and Oz is nearly impaled by several piece of white picket fence.
(This is used for 3D effect, as the pickets come flying out toward the audience. It's also probably a commentary on his fear of commitment with Annie--nearly being crucified by the symbols of agricultural domesticity in Hardly Subtle.)
At any rate, Oz is reduced to a gibbering heap, frantically pleading with god to "Let me live! I promise I will do great things!" Despite being Theologically Suspect (God does NOT bargain with terrorists!), Oz gets to pratfall into Oz and land at the feet of Mila Kunis. Who for some reason (*cough*fanservice*cough*) is wearing tight black leather pants and boots, which provoke exactly NO reaction from Oz the Great Horn Dog, despite being as UNlike anything he's seen on a woman's body in turn of the century Kansas.
Why does she wear black leather pants anyway? Nobody else in Oz dresses like that--the other witches wander around in ball gowns, and the female citizens of Oz wear outfits that would meld seamlessly into a Dr. Seuss book. But Mila Kunis skips along in her dominatrix gear, topped with a crimson jacket and enormous hat. She's Mila Kunis, so of course Oz hits on her, but he's actually less interested in her than in The Prophecy and the promise of wealth. Because, of course, about the first thing she says to him is "The Prophecy was true! You are here to become our King and return Oz to its former greatness!"
Does anybody else immediately flash back to Ghostbusters?
Exactly like this--more than once.
The only--and I mean THE ONLY--evidence of a problem is the appearance of the flying baboons, who are pretty destructive, but they are deployed because The Wizard has arrived. There's no evidence of oppressive tactics, or general unhappiness, or even irritable civil servants. Everybody is well fed, well dressed, racially integrated, and capable of breaking into elaborate choreography at the drop of a hat. Sure, there's some talk about "The Wicked Witch" and "The Curse," but what's the problem? Honestly?
(There is the matter of China Town, which was reportedly destroyed by the flying baboons on the orders of the Wicked Witch--and this is where James Franco meets the same little girl who can't walk that he met in Kansas. The China Girl says "we were all celebrating the arrival of the Wizard when they came." Again--not clear that there was anything wrong with Oz before James Franco showed up.)
Once in the Emerald City, he meets Rachel Weisz as Evanora, who is apparently the Cardinal Mazarin of the place, keeping the place running for the indeterminate amount of time between the death of the former king and the arrival of James Franco. We know she is evil because she's not willing to turn over supreme executive power just because he fell out of a hot air balloon. She wants some proof that he's a legitimate candidate before she turns over all governmental authority and an enormous amount of specie to some moistened wanker who is capable of forming the words "I am the Wizard."
I know! How unreasonable!
She also has the temerity to tell her sister, the dangerously naive and gullible Theodora (Mila Kunis) that maybe, just maybe, she shouldn't be ordering her coronation wardrobe just yet, because James Franco doesn't seem to be the commitment type. He just might not have actually promised that Theodora will rule as queen--which is pretty darn savvy of Evanora, because hello! That's exactly who he is.
Well, Mila Kunis overreacts, because the twenty minutes she spent with James Franco has rendered life unliveable without him--I'm skeptical. I mean, she is a witch, presumably she has a day job of witchery, right? She does something other than waiting around for eligible bachelors to fall out of the sky so she can maneuver them into marriage and rule the kingdom, doesn't she? Anyway, she sees him walking next to Michelle Williams (now as Glinda), and she goes full-on psychopath. Anything is better than watching him on the crystal ball cam, busily not killing the blonde witch. Because there are no other men in Oz, apparently. Or maybe there's an obscure marriage law that requires men and women captured on the Oz equivalent of a security camera to be irrevocably affianced. It's also a personal rejection, a message sent intentionally by James Franco, to signal his lack of interest in Mila Kunis. She's not "Theodora the Good," she's "Theodora the Whack Job." I mean, Bro! Beeyotches be cray-cray, amirite?
(Not of fan of this characterization--can you tell?)
The movie pretends to have a twist--which witch is the wicked one? Of course, if you've been paying any attention, there are plenty enough clues. For one, Theodora and Evanora are sisters, which means they are the witches of the East and West. Also, they are brunettes, and Michelle Williams is blonde, so that's proof beyond a reasonable doubt.
Anyway! Theodora and Evanora tell James Franco that Michelle Williams is the Wicked Witch and must be killed. And he believes them, because. . .because Rachel Weisz tells him he can't have the gold until he kills the witch, which he has to do because Prophesy! (Do we ever actually hear this prophecy? No, we don't. Just pieces. As convenient to get the plot to the next beat. Personally, I think everybody is just making all this up as they go along.)
What is the one thing we know about the "wicked witch" who is so oppressing Oz? She has flying baboons. Where do the flying baboons come from? Well, the many times they get sent out, they come flying out in an enormous black cloud--from the Emerald City.
Is Michelle Williams in the Emerald City? No, she's been banished to the Dark Forest, allegedly for killing her father, the king, so she could rule. So she's been exiled, she's far away, and nobody wonders who's running the flying baboon circus since she's been gone? PEOPLE!! USE YOUR BRAINS!! THAT'S WHY YOU HAVE THEM!!
So, in case you are surprised, Rachel Weisz has been running Oz and doesn't want to give it up to somebody who's major qualification seems to be the ability to bounce when dropped from the sky. James Franco fails to kill Michelle Williams, because he notices that she's blonde, and he realizes that she can't be evil. So he cooks up a plan to use his stage magic to scare the witchy sisters out of the Emerald City so he can get the gold.
There is a half-hearted attempt to make him into Han Solo from the first Star Wars movie, setting him up as a guy who is going to take the gold and run away--honestly, do we think we don't remember there is a Wizard in the Wizard of Oz movie? There is running around, there are steampunk goggles and a face projected onto smoke, and the true proof of evil--Rachel Weisz is actually old and ugly! It was just a spell that kept her looking like that! See! Old people don't deserve to rule!
Honestly, it's just such a mess. It's in no way clear that James Franco has any reason to rule in Oz--there is almost nothing about him that is anything other than self-interested. There is an odd sort of pacing too, as though large swaths of the movie were just left out--the journey with Theodora and Oz to the Emerald City starts with them walking, then suddenly there is a carriage with a military escort. How? Why? How much time has passed anyway?
Nor are the themes well parsed. The little girl in Kansas who wanted to walk again was disappointed, but James Franco manages to repair the broken china legs of the China Girl. But that was just a matter of having glue--there wasn't any change of heart, or particular sacrifice involved. It wasn't even magic--it was just glue.
Nor does he change his relationship with Zach Braff, who is a flying monkey in a bellhop uniform in Oz. He starts out the movie manipulating the monkey for his own convenience, forcing him to carry a heavy bag that keeps him from being able to fly. Then--they just stop interacting? The bag goes away somehow? There's literally no resolution to that subplot.
In summary--apparently, Oz needs a ruler with a Y chromosome, because women in charge just ruin things, even though there's not really any evidence of things being ruined. (There is the matter of murdering the king, which apparently happened, and Evanora did, but not clear how, or why, or what the rules for succession were, or ANYTHING.) Just take it on faith--women can't run a country, and nobody inside Oz has any claim, and they are all perfectly happy to let a foreigner come in and take all their gold! Because he's a man?
And there is a completely spark free kiss between James Franco and Michelle Williams--so Oz and Glinda were a thing? Really? And how did that work out? Not well, judging by the lack of passion between them.
And it could have been good! Really!
But it is gorgeous to look at. Just don't think about it too much.
Because, let's be frank, the story just doesn't measure up.
Look, I understand the appeal of looking at a classic work from a new perspective. There is a lot of built in excitement--how did things end up the way we "know" them? Why are there two witches who are sisters, but they live on opposite sides of the world? What made them Wicked? (Incidentally, Wicked, the book, does this in spades and from a very sophisticated perspective. The musical, not so much.) Why is the Lion so cowardly? Who made the Scarecrow? How did the Wizard get from being a carny from Omaha to the Ruler of the Emerald City anyway?
This movie sets itself the task of answering the first question, but fundamentally fails at it. Now, unlike Dana Stevens from Slate (who I like and respect a great deal, but disagree with on this movie), I don't think it's a fool's task to take on retelling this story. The Warner Brothers' movie is a "universally beloved classic," but it is also nearly seventy-five years old! So much has changed in terms of what can be done, and how we watch movies. I mean, just try watching an old kids movie, like Doctor Doolittle with Rex Harrison. Oh. My. God. The pacing! It is soooo slow--it's like an endurance test. Granted, Wizard of Oz holds up much better, but there's no reason to think that there is nothing new to say or see. And to be honest, the visuals are pretty amazing. Sam Raimi takes his movie into different places in Oz from the 1939 movie, so we get to see new things too!
But--and this is a big "but"--Oz the Great and Powerful fails to provide a story worth telling. I mean, we all know that the carny becomes the wizard, so showing us that he does just isn't enough. I wanted to see the How and the Why of it. What combination of circumstances and character created a man who was able to remain the ruler of a magical land for decades, with no magic of his own? And why does he stay? What is the fundamental truth about this character that makes this all work?
The answer is--nothing, really. He's a guy, he wants something, there are only women standing between him and what he wants, so of course he gets it. Of course he gets to be the Ruler of Everything, because he's A Man! And in case you doubt that as justification enough, there is A Prophecy! So really, that should answer all your objections about realpolitik and social contract and consent of the governed.
Plot summary in a thimble: turn of the century carny gets caught in a tornado while flying his hot air balloon, lands in Oz, has a few adventures, becomes the ruler of the Emerald City. Anything you didn't know already? No.
There are some conscious nods to the original, most overtly in the structure of the whole movie. The first part takes place in black-and-white in Kansas, where Oscar [many many middle names] Diggs is a carnival magician that everybody calls "Oz." While in Kansas, he has an assistant, a would-be girlfriend, and a devoted fan who believes in his magic, all three of whom show up again in the Land of Oz.
There is a contretemps with an adversary, this time the carnival strongman (who does NOT show up later) instead of Miss Gulch, a flight through a destructive tornado, and a crash landing in the technicolor landscape. There he meets a good witch who sets him on the path to the Emerald City, and he gathers companions on the way. Once there, he is given the task of killing a wicked witch, this time by destroying her wand rather than bringing back her broom, after which he is promised great rewards. The biggest difference is that instead of going back home at the end, he stays.
This might actually be the platonic ideal of a sequel format--all the fundamentals are in place, so then we can enjoy the new parts. Sadly, the new parts are uniformly clunkers, story wise. Let's get into the spoilers.
The first twenty minutes of the movie show us Oz in his native habitat. Cleverly shown in a nearly square aspect ratio and filmed in black and white, the movie establishes itself as set in The Past. As the circus magician, Oz has a sort of oily charm, because he is James Franco, and we are placed firmly in his POV, aware that his job is to amaze and fool the rubes. However, the Oz is not so much a magician as he is a horn dog and he is also obsessed with getting laid. He pulls an obviously well worn routine on his newest "assistant," presenting her with a music box that "belonged to my grandmother" in exchange for a kiss and likely more later.
This is insulting, really. The "simple country girl" is being used and the moves are obvious to the audience, but somehow she doesn't catch on, being too dazzled by the glamor of her new role I guess? It's a profoundly offensive view of a woman, and doesn't make me like James Franco/Oz at all. Then he is abusive to his technical assistant (played by Zach Braff), and once on-stage, bedazzles a young girl in a wheelchair who asks him to make her walk again. Instead of turning the moment into a human one--"I wish I could, but my magic doesn't work like that" or something, he blusters his way into an early dropped curtain in front of an audience he has alienated. Once safely off stage, he again berates Zach Braff for not dropping the curtain fast enough to save him from the encounter with the crippled girl. Not at all a nice person, nor someone I have any reason to root for at all.
But it swiftly gets worse. Back in his caravan, a woman knocks on the door, and Zach Braff offers to "wind up another of the music boxes." In case you didn't see it as a practiced scam the first time he used it on a gullible young woman, you see. But this is Annie, who he has some history with. Annie is Michelle Williams, so she is very blonde and beautiful and gentle and pure and everything Oz is not. So what does she see in him?
(That's the problem with this film, and one I am tempted to explain as a Male Problem. I assume that the intent was that we would see things from Oz's point of view, would immediately identify with him and his desires, and take his part as the story unfolds. But since I am not a Male, I didn't default into a pro-Oz camp. Thus, as the life of the carnival frustrates him, I saw him not as a beleaguered hero, but as a squirrelly creep who had not earned my favor. When Michelle Williams turns up as his Dream Girl, I'm rooting for her to run far away from him, because he is neither kind, nor trustworthy, nor anybody she should waste her time with. Perhaps, if I had been more inclined to ally myself with Oz's worldview, I would have liked this movie better. As it is, I think Oz the man was unfairly rewarded for being a creep and I can't condone it.)
Anyway, Michelle Williams has come to visit, like she always does when he's in the county, and John Gale has asked her to marry him. So she is Dorothy Gale's mother? Which makes her doomed, right, because she's dead by the events of Wizard of Oz which is why Dorothy lives with her Auntie Em. Still, though, it's probably a better life than one spent with James Franco, the serial seducer of the circus.
Oz has a speech about the difference between being a "good" man and a "great" one. John Gale is a good man, Annie should marry him, while Oz still wants to do great things. This is news to us, the audience, because so far we've just seen him doing the barest minimum to meet his basest needs. He manipulates and disrespects the woman he's seduced, he's antagonized his audience and cut the show short, he's shortchanging his assistant in splitting the box office take, and now he says he wants to be "great?" Doing what? He's venal, greedy, lecherous, disrespectful, a phony through and through.
Then it turns out he's pulled the "music box seduction" on the strong man's girlfriend, and the strong man is determined to wreak some physical damage in retaliation. Don't even get me started on what's wrong with this one. Oops--too late. Men fighting over a woman like this entirely overlooks that a woman has her own agency and has to be allowed to make her own choices about who she loves. Nope--she is Strong Man's Woman, and Oz has poached her, so he must be punished. This is Men Folks' Business, honey, so you just stand out of the way. Because it's not like maybe she didn't want to stay with a man with such a violent temper or anything--she doesn't get a say.
So Oz hops into a balloon that isn't entirely his property. (Unidentified carny: Hey! That balloon's half mine! Oz: And the other half is mine! So now we can add property theft to his list of charming attributes.) He narrowly escapes the strong man, and gets tossed into a twister. There the items swirling in the cyclone are more threatening than Dorothy encountered, and Oz is nearly impaled by several piece of white picket fence.
(This is used for 3D effect, as the pickets come flying out toward the audience. It's also probably a commentary on his fear of commitment with Annie--nearly being crucified by the symbols of agricultural domesticity in Hardly Subtle.)
At any rate, Oz is reduced to a gibbering heap, frantically pleading with god to "Let me live! I promise I will do great things!" Despite being Theologically Suspect (God does NOT bargain with terrorists!), Oz gets to pratfall into Oz and land at the feet of Mila Kunis. Who for some reason (*cough*fanservice*cough*) is wearing tight black leather pants and boots, which provoke exactly NO reaction from Oz the Great Horn Dog, despite being as UNlike anything he's seen on a woman's body in turn of the century Kansas.
Why does she wear black leather pants anyway? Nobody else in Oz dresses like that--the other witches wander around in ball gowns, and the female citizens of Oz wear outfits that would meld seamlessly into a Dr. Seuss book. But Mila Kunis skips along in her dominatrix gear, topped with a crimson jacket and enormous hat. She's Mila Kunis, so of course Oz hits on her, but he's actually less interested in her than in The Prophecy and the promise of wealth. Because, of course, about the first thing she says to him is "The Prophecy was true! You are here to become our King and return Oz to its former greatness!"
Does anybody else immediately flash back to Ghostbusters?
Gozer: ARE YOU A GOD?
Dan Akroyd: No?
Gozer: THEN DIE!!
Ernie Hudson: When somebody asks if you are a god, you say YES!
Exactly like this--more than once.
Everybody in this movie:"Are you The Wizard?"So, as he wanders around Oz, there is talk about a "terrible curse" and how the Wizard is supposed to "save the people" and "return us to our former glory." But frankly, it's hard to see anything wrong in Oz. Colors are hyper-saturated, fields are stuffed with corn, horses are many different colors, and there's a Smaug-sized gold hoard in the Emerald City vault. Oz totally does a Scrooge McDuck and rolls around in it even.
James Franco: "Maybe? But probably not."
Everybody in this movie: "But if you are then you get gold/a throne/the girl/popular adulation!"
James Franco: "Yes! Yes I AM THE WIZARD!"
The only--and I mean THE ONLY--evidence of a problem is the appearance of the flying baboons, who are pretty destructive, but they are deployed because The Wizard has arrived. There's no evidence of oppressive tactics, or general unhappiness, or even irritable civil servants. Everybody is well fed, well dressed, racially integrated, and capable of breaking into elaborate choreography at the drop of a hat. Sure, there's some talk about "The Wicked Witch" and "The Curse," but what's the problem? Honestly?
(There is the matter of China Town, which was reportedly destroyed by the flying baboons on the orders of the Wicked Witch--and this is where James Franco meets the same little girl who can't walk that he met in Kansas. The China Girl says "we were all celebrating the arrival of the Wizard when they came." Again--not clear that there was anything wrong with Oz before James Franco showed up.)
Once in the Emerald City, he meets Rachel Weisz as Evanora, who is apparently the Cardinal Mazarin of the place, keeping the place running for the indeterminate amount of time between the death of the former king and the arrival of James Franco. We know she is evil because she's not willing to turn over supreme executive power just because he fell out of a hot air balloon. She wants some proof that he's a legitimate candidate before she turns over all governmental authority and an enormous amount of specie to some moistened wanker who is capable of forming the words "I am the Wizard."
I know! How unreasonable!
She also has the temerity to tell her sister, the dangerously naive and gullible Theodora (Mila Kunis) that maybe, just maybe, she shouldn't be ordering her coronation wardrobe just yet, because James Franco doesn't seem to be the commitment type. He just might not have actually promised that Theodora will rule as queen--which is pretty darn savvy of Evanora, because hello! That's exactly who he is.
Well, Mila Kunis overreacts, because the twenty minutes she spent with James Franco has rendered life unliveable without him--I'm skeptical. I mean, she is a witch, presumably she has a day job of witchery, right? She does something other than waiting around for eligible bachelors to fall out of the sky so she can maneuver them into marriage and rule the kingdom, doesn't she? Anyway, she sees him walking next to Michelle Williams (now as Glinda), and she goes full-on psychopath. Anything is better than watching him on the crystal ball cam, busily not killing the blonde witch. Because there are no other men in Oz, apparently. Or maybe there's an obscure marriage law that requires men and women captured on the Oz equivalent of a security camera to be irrevocably affianced. It's also a personal rejection, a message sent intentionally by James Franco, to signal his lack of interest in Mila Kunis. She's not "Theodora the Good," she's "Theodora the Whack Job." I mean, Bro! Beeyotches be cray-cray, amirite?
(Not of fan of this characterization--can you tell?)
The movie pretends to have a twist--which witch is the wicked one? Of course, if you've been paying any attention, there are plenty enough clues. For one, Theodora and Evanora are sisters, which means they are the witches of the East and West. Also, they are brunettes, and Michelle Williams is blonde, so that's proof beyond a reasonable doubt.
Anyway! Theodora and Evanora tell James Franco that Michelle Williams is the Wicked Witch and must be killed. And he believes them, because. . .because Rachel Weisz tells him he can't have the gold until he kills the witch, which he has to do because Prophesy! (Do we ever actually hear this prophecy? No, we don't. Just pieces. As convenient to get the plot to the next beat. Personally, I think everybody is just making all this up as they go along.)
What is the one thing we know about the "wicked witch" who is so oppressing Oz? She has flying baboons. Where do the flying baboons come from? Well, the many times they get sent out, they come flying out in an enormous black cloud--from the Emerald City.
Is Michelle Williams in the Emerald City? No, she's been banished to the Dark Forest, allegedly for killing her father, the king, so she could rule. So she's been exiled, she's far away, and nobody wonders who's running the flying baboon circus since she's been gone? PEOPLE!! USE YOUR BRAINS!! THAT'S WHY YOU HAVE THEM!!
So, in case you are surprised, Rachel Weisz has been running Oz and doesn't want to give it up to somebody who's major qualification seems to be the ability to bounce when dropped from the sky. James Franco fails to kill Michelle Williams, because he notices that she's blonde, and he realizes that she can't be evil. So he cooks up a plan to use his stage magic to scare the witchy sisters out of the Emerald City so he can get the gold.
There is a half-hearted attempt to make him into Han Solo from the first Star Wars movie, setting him up as a guy who is going to take the gold and run away--honestly, do we think we don't remember there is a Wizard in the Wizard of Oz movie? There is running around, there are steampunk goggles and a face projected onto smoke, and the true proof of evil--Rachel Weisz is actually old and ugly! It was just a spell that kept her looking like that! See! Old people don't deserve to rule!
Honestly, it's just such a mess. It's in no way clear that James Franco has any reason to rule in Oz--there is almost nothing about him that is anything other than self-interested. There is an odd sort of pacing too, as though large swaths of the movie were just left out--the journey with Theodora and Oz to the Emerald City starts with them walking, then suddenly there is a carriage with a military escort. How? Why? How much time has passed anyway?
Nor are the themes well parsed. The little girl in Kansas who wanted to walk again was disappointed, but James Franco manages to repair the broken china legs of the China Girl. But that was just a matter of having glue--there wasn't any change of heart, or particular sacrifice involved. It wasn't even magic--it was just glue.
Nor does he change his relationship with Zach Braff, who is a flying monkey in a bellhop uniform in Oz. He starts out the movie manipulating the monkey for his own convenience, forcing him to carry a heavy bag that keeps him from being able to fly. Then--they just stop interacting? The bag goes away somehow? There's literally no resolution to that subplot.
In summary--apparently, Oz needs a ruler with a Y chromosome, because women in charge just ruin things, even though there's not really any evidence of things being ruined. (There is the matter of murdering the king, which apparently happened, and Evanora did, but not clear how, or why, or what the rules for succession were, or ANYTHING.) Just take it on faith--women can't run a country, and nobody inside Oz has any claim, and they are all perfectly happy to let a foreigner come in and take all their gold! Because he's a man?
And there is a completely spark free kiss between James Franco and Michelle Williams--so Oz and Glinda were a thing? Really? And how did that work out? Not well, judging by the lack of passion between them.
And it could have been good! Really!
But it is gorgeous to look at. Just don't think about it too much.
Sunday, February 24, 2013
OSCARS!! Big Awards Edition
And here we are at Director, going to Ang Lee for Life of Pi. I didn't even call this category. Have to say Jane Fonda looks amazing in bright yellow. Did they seriously just give this award and then go to ads?
How much time would we have saved by cutting Seth McFarlane out entirely?
Oh, and the ad for Baileys reminded me that I should be drinking! Fortunately, I have some Baileys in the house!
Best Actress, introduced by the still charming Jean Dujardin--wait, wasn't he a character in Les Miz? Jennifer Lawrence won! Wow. And she tripped on the stairs. I bed she mentions it in her speech. And she gets a standing O--yes! She mentioned it! She was charming and flustered and DeNiro looked like it was past his naptime.
Nice move, McFarlane. You were right--Meryl Streep needed no introduction. This is DDL again, although the clip of Hugh Jackman makes him unrecognizable. That's the kind of role that wins often, but not against DDL. Also, Denzel should win for his role as a drunk, but the DDL thing is hard to beat, especially him playing an American icon like that. Yup. Who knew? First actor to win 3 in the Lead Actor category? Wow.
How much time would we have saved by cutting Seth McFarlane out entirely?
Oh, and the ad for Baileys reminded me that I should be drinking! Fortunately, I have some Baileys in the house!
Best Actress, introduced by the still charming Jean Dujardin--wait, wasn't he a character in Les Miz? Jennifer Lawrence won! Wow. And she tripped on the stairs. I bed she mentions it in her speech. And she gets a standing O--yes! She mentioned it! She was charming and flustered and DeNiro looked like it was past his naptime.
Nice move, McFarlane. You were right--Meryl Streep needed no introduction. This is DDL again, although the clip of Hugh Jackman makes him unrecognizable. That's the kind of role that wins often, but not against DDL. Also, Denzel should win for his role as a drunk, but the DDL thing is hard to beat, especially him playing an American icon like that. Yup. Who knew? First actor to win 3 in the Lead Actor category? Wow.
DDL is so gracious, but he couldn't sell that joke. I guess we won't ask him to host the show next year.
I do not love Jack Nicholson. Seriously, why is he still being trotted out all the time? I never got him. I saw Five Easy Pieces and could not get the love.
WTF? Michele Obama? That WAS a surprise! And a great dress too! Go M.O.! And the winner is going to be Lincoln, isn't it? Michele Obama gets to open the envelope? ARGO? ARGO?!?!
Wow. That was not what I expected. But it's got two really good looking producers to bring to the stage. And the funny looking one takes the mic. Turns out he's funny too.
Now we get a closing musical number and it's almost 11--will they cut it? Will they play these guys off? No, it's a direct steal from Neil Patrick Harris's closing number at the Tonys. Having Kristin Chenoweth helps sell something that is pretty weak.
Let's not have him back next year, but ask Adele to host! Or Shatner. Or Tina and Amy. Somebody who is actually funny. Or nobody at all, and just have excellent traffic control to send people onto the stage without the person "hosting." A word which here means "tells stale jokes that are both boring and cringeworthy."
Congratulations to the winners. See you next year!
OSCARS!! In Memorium Edition
Babs was a nice choice, making this the Oscars all about women bringing the voices--Seth who? Maybe we don't need a "host," maybe we just need great voices and a traffic director backstage to get people to their marks?
Have to say Greg Louganis still looks awfully good in a Speedo--but no way am I watching "Splash."
Oh good, a gay joke from McFarlane! Offensive and not funny--that's what we want in our telecast!
Ten years since Chicago won it's Best Picture oscar. Zellweger looks especially scrunchy faces--like she can't even see out of her tiny eyes any more. The years have not been kind to her, but Queen Latifa looks WONDERFUL! And they are introducing Film Score--again, not one I feel qualified to predict. And the Oscar goes to Life of Pi.
Wow, it's after 10 p.m. here, and there are still a whole lot of awards to be given out. Are we going to be here until the wee hours!
Original song--who knew Scarlet Johanson performed one of them? Chasing Ice? I didn't even know it was a movie, much less a song. And what's the deal--two of the five nominees are in a film clip mash-up while Skyfall and the one from Les Miz are performed live? Do. Not. Get. We have time for Chicago and Dreamgirls but not the actual nominees? And Seth McFarlane's song from Ted gets Norah Jones onstage? Guess we know who are the favorites?
Actually, everybody knows Skyfall is going to win this. No question. But would Joshua Bell and Scarlett Johanson have come if they were asked?
Zellweger is all but unrecognizable--I feel like a bitch for saying it, but girlfriedn does not look like herself. She's totally rocking that gold dress, though.
And an Adele acceptance speech--too emotional, and very sweet and plenty of time for her co-winner. Lovely.
Oh no--Jimmy Kimmel is having an Oscar show afterwards. No, I am not going to watch that too. Although I am kind of surprised that I'm not also checking out what E! is doing now. Weren't they going to be counter-programming with more fashion analysis? Oh, I just checked, it's a Kardashian show, so I'm not missing anything.
Argo won adapted screenplay! I was wrong, I thought sure it would be Silver Linings Playbook--I overestimated the Harvey Weinstein factor, which I didn't think was possible to do!
Amazing how Quentin Tarantino can say words that might read as humble, but he still makes it all about himself. I had picked Moonrise Kingdom for screenplay, but this is the year of "Everybody Gets Some Love!" The Best Picture nominees are going home with a couple each it seems.
Have to say Greg Louganis still looks awfully good in a Speedo--but no way am I watching "Splash."
Oh good, a gay joke from McFarlane! Offensive and not funny--that's what we want in our telecast!
Ten years since Chicago won it's Best Picture oscar. Zellweger looks especially scrunchy faces--like she can't even see out of her tiny eyes any more. The years have not been kind to her, but Queen Latifa looks WONDERFUL! And they are introducing Film Score--again, not one I feel qualified to predict. And the Oscar goes to Life of Pi.
Wow, it's after 10 p.m. here, and there are still a whole lot of awards to be given out. Are we going to be here until the wee hours!
Original song--who knew Scarlet Johanson performed one of them? Chasing Ice? I didn't even know it was a movie, much less a song. And what's the deal--two of the five nominees are in a film clip mash-up while Skyfall and the one from Les Miz are performed live? Do. Not. Get. We have time for Chicago and Dreamgirls but not the actual nominees? And Seth McFarlane's song from Ted gets Norah Jones onstage? Guess we know who are the favorites?
Actually, everybody knows Skyfall is going to win this. No question. But would Joshua Bell and Scarlett Johanson have come if they were asked?
Zellweger is all but unrecognizable--I feel like a bitch for saying it, but girlfriedn does not look like herself. She's totally rocking that gold dress, though.
And an Adele acceptance speech--too emotional, and very sweet and plenty of time for her co-winner. Lovely.
Oh no--Jimmy Kimmel is having an Oscar show afterwards. No, I am not going to watch that too. Although I am kind of surprised that I'm not also checking out what E! is doing now. Weren't they going to be counter-programming with more fashion analysis? Oh, I just checked, it's a Kardashian show, so I'm not missing anything.
Argo won adapted screenplay! I was wrong, I thought sure it would be Silver Linings Playbook--I overestimated the Harvey Weinstein factor, which I didn't think was possible to do!
Amazing how Quentin Tarantino can say words that might read as humble, but he still makes it all about himself. I had picked Moonrise Kingdom for screenplay, but this is the year of "Everybody Gets Some Love!" The Best Picture nominees are going home with a couple each it seems.
OSCARS!! The Nine O'Clock Hour
Scientific and Technical Awards awarded by Star Trek actors? Well chosen dudes.
Ted is presenting--I don't like it. Not funny, not cute. Technically impressive, but a crudeness too far. Sound mixing--goes to a musical do you think? As someone who doesn't understand technical awards, that's what I would vote for. Apparently so does the rest of the Academy.
A TIE for sound editing! So nice they both get to win. I was afraid we were going to have to do something unsavory with the damn animated teddy bear to break it.
Now a Von Trapp Family Singers joke. Which works almost, until McFarlane laughs at his own set up. And then we introduce Christopher Plummer. And now here we are with Supporting Actress. And I was right about Hathaway. I like her, but I'm preparing for a lot of backlash in the recaps. I even like her pink Prada dress. Hey, I didn't know that she was married to a Baby Goose Celebrity Impersonator!
And what are the popcorn usherettes doing? Is that usual? To keep people from passing out before dinner?
ADELE is awesome. She changed her hair from the red carpet, and it's gorgeous. I kind of wish her dress were floor length, but then we wouldn't be able to see her sparkly shoes. She totally killed that song. (I checked, her shoes were not the ruby slippers Kristin Chenoweth was teasing during the red carpet--but if she clicks them together three times, will they take her home? Or to a world of bimetalist fiscal policy?)
And now Nicole Kidman, looking human and not at all plastic. The best picture nominees: Silver Linings Playbook, Django Unchained, and Amour. What ties these together--medical care/dentistry?
Dan Radcliffe and Kristin Stewart--I heard she was on crutches? Is that actually true? I wasn't paying attention. Production design goes to Lincoln--kind of predictable because so many of these go to period pieces. Not surprised to see Anna Karenina nominated, for example.
Snotty intro to Selma Hayek--she looks gorgeous, and she's using her second language. Let's see you be an artist in your non-native language, McFarlane. Thanks for being a jerk and a racist as well. These were pretty big awards given to big Hollywood players. Way to minimize them.
Ted is presenting--I don't like it. Not funny, not cute. Technically impressive, but a crudeness too far. Sound mixing--goes to a musical do you think? As someone who doesn't understand technical awards, that's what I would vote for. Apparently so does the rest of the Academy.
A TIE for sound editing! So nice they both get to win. I was afraid we were going to have to do something unsavory with the damn animated teddy bear to break it.
Now a Von Trapp Family Singers joke. Which works almost, until McFarlane laughs at his own set up. And then we introduce Christopher Plummer. And now here we are with Supporting Actress. And I was right about Hathaway. I like her, but I'm preparing for a lot of backlash in the recaps. I even like her pink Prada dress. Hey, I didn't know that she was married to a Baby Goose Celebrity Impersonator!
And what are the popcorn usherettes doing? Is that usual? To keep people from passing out before dinner?
ADELE is awesome. She changed her hair from the red carpet, and it's gorgeous. I kind of wish her dress were floor length, but then we wouldn't be able to see her sparkly shoes. She totally killed that song. (I checked, her shoes were not the ruby slippers Kristin Chenoweth was teasing during the red carpet--but if she clicks them together three times, will they take her home? Or to a world of bimetalist fiscal policy?)
And now Nicole Kidman, looking human and not at all plastic. The best picture nominees: Silver Linings Playbook, Django Unchained, and Amour. What ties these together--medical care/dentistry?
Dan Radcliffe and Kristin Stewart--I heard she was on crutches? Is that actually true? I wasn't paying attention. Production design goes to Lincoln--kind of predictable because so many of these go to period pieces. Not surprised to see Anna Karenina nominated, for example.
Snotty intro to Selma Hayek--she looks gorgeous, and she's using her second language. Let's see you be an artist in your non-native language, McFarlane. Thanks for being a jerk and a racist as well. These were pretty big awards given to big Hollywood players. Way to minimize them.
OSCAR!!What Happened to my Posts Edition?
And now, A TRIBUTE TO BROADWAY! Seriously, why doe movies on television need live stage performances? But I still love Chicago, thought Dreamgirls was adequate--with a special nomination for Beyonce's unplucked eyebrows. I have zero interest in Les Miz. It's Hugh Jackman singing--just like on Broadway!
I'm not buying this as necessary. A medley of tunes that all sound exactly the same as each other. That's an easy clip job. Love Samantha Banks though. Do we bring the whole cast on because we know the movie isn't going to sin anything? And where was Helena Bonham Carter during the red carpet shows? She's looking cracked out as usual, but that's apparently in character for the movie. I do like Hathaway's dress too. But I want to see more of Banks!
Oh guess, a standing ovation for this? I guess is twas guilt to create one. Either that, or there were actual electrodes implanted in the seats so everybody HAD to stand up
I think I had some posts that got lost, but they were mostly about how little there was to comment on, so no great loss, and maybe they will show up. We're back to ads, and I'm going to post this.
I'm not buying this as necessary. A medley of tunes that all sound exactly the same as each other. That's an easy clip job. Love Samantha Banks though. Do we bring the whole cast on because we know the movie isn't going to sin anything? And where was Helena Bonham Carter during the red carpet shows? She's looking cracked out as usual, but that's apparently in character for the movie. I do like Hathaway's dress too. But I want to see more of Banks!
Oh guess, a standing ovation for this? I guess is twas guilt to create one. Either that, or there were actual electrodes implanted in the seats so everybody HAD to stand up
I think I had some posts that got lost, but they were mostly about how little there was to comment on, so no great loss, and maybe they will show up. We're back to ads, and I'm going to post this.
OSCARS!! The Part Nobody Cares About Edition
What is there to say about these awards? Life of Pi sure was pretty--so visual effects awards make sense, bunch of movies I have never heard about. Seth McFarlane is mercifully absent mostly. A good speech from a guy who I don't know what the movie was. Short documentary--I don't know anything about these. Jamie Fox and Kerry Washington are doing a good job and not embarrassing themselves.
This is probably as good a time as any to go check some other live bloggers. I personally want Linda Holmes and Stephen Thompson to be sitting on my sofa and talking me through these awards, but their life feed is full of commentary and so it's terribly diffuse and hard to follow.
I love the Fug Girls, but their comments on fashions will keep.
Any others recommended?
Liam Neeson! Still attractive, but I don't like his devolution into an action hero. Argo, Lincoln and Zero Dark Thirty--these are the political movie nominees. I see why they are together. Too bad the hair and beards of the 70s weren't nearly as attractive as Ben Affleck's are. Victorian facial hair is also pretty weird, and who know that they had Grecian Formula for Men in 1863? (Yes, I'm looking at Tommy Lee Jones's hairpiece.)
Searching for Sugarman wins documentary. Shot on a iPhone, I hear. So now there is really no excuse for the rest of us not to be making movies too.
Hey--Marchesa is coming to JCPenney's? Harvey Weinstein is EVERYWHERE! Quick! Revise your Oscar picks--SLP for EVERYTHING!!
This is probably as good a time as any to go check some other live bloggers. I personally want Linda Holmes and Stephen Thompson to be sitting on my sofa and talking me through these awards, but their life feed is full of commentary and so it's terribly diffuse and hard to follow.
I love the Fug Girls, but their comments on fashions will keep.
Any others recommended?
Liam Neeson! Still attractive, but I don't like his devolution into an action hero. Argo, Lincoln and Zero Dark Thirty--these are the political movie nominees. I see why they are together. Too bad the hair and beards of the 70s weren't nearly as attractive as Ben Affleck's are. Victorian facial hair is also pretty weird, and who know that they had Grecian Formula for Men in 1863? (Yes, I'm looking at Tommy Lee Jones's hairpiece.)
Searching for Sugarman wins documentary. Shot on a iPhone, I hear. So now there is really no excuse for the rest of us not to be making movies too.
Hey--Marchesa is coming to JCPenney's? Harvey Weinstein is EVERYWHERE! Quick! Revise your Oscar picks--SLP for EVERYTHING!!
OSCARS!! Animated Films Edition
Paul Rudd and Melissa McCarthy in a classically bad bit of banter about actor's voices as tools of the craft. They tried, but the material was weak. Oh, and what a surprise! Pixar won for "Paperman."
Animated Feature Film--is--Brave! The non-brave choice--it goes to Pixar. But I do like the kilt on the producer/director.
Reese Witherspoon has to introduce three best picture nominees. This is kind of awkward, but probably necessary. Les Miz, LIfe of Pi and Beasts of the Southern Wild--quick! Why group these ones together? I guess they all have boats?
Avengers cast taking digs? Not really funny, but not UN-funny. Cinematography going to Life of Pi makes sense because it's a gorgeous looking movie--but is he high? Way to just say thanks and get the heck off the stage.
Visual Effects? Any of these is decent--special effects have gotten so good that there's really no difference in craft--it's sort of a matter of artistic effect now. And Life of Pi used the special effects in service of a story, rather than in service of the special effects. A logical win.
Using the music from Jaws to play off the speaker--rude, but kind of awesome. Shouldn't there be a hook or something coming to pull them offstage if they overrun the allotted time? When you are playing "Jaws" the menace is palpable.
Animated Feature Film--is--Brave! The non-brave choice--it goes to Pixar. But I do like the kilt on the producer/director.
Reese Witherspoon has to introduce three best picture nominees. This is kind of awkward, but probably necessary. Les Miz, LIfe of Pi and Beasts of the Southern Wild--quick! Why group these ones together? I guess they all have boats?
Avengers cast taking digs? Not really funny, but not UN-funny. Cinematography going to Life of Pi makes sense because it's a gorgeous looking movie--but is he high? Way to just say thanks and get the heck off the stage.
Visual Effects? Any of these is decent--special effects have gotten so good that there's really no difference in craft--it's sort of a matter of artistic effect now. And Life of Pi used the special effects in service of a story, rather than in service of the special effects. A logical win.
Using the music from Jaws to play off the speaker--rude, but kind of awesome. Shouldn't there be a hook or something coming to pull them offstage if they overrun the allotted time? When you are playing "Jaws" the menace is palpable.
OSCAR Ceremony!!
We are inside the theater, seeing Renee Zellweger in gold Carolina Herrara, looking good but also kind of old. Time is not kind to women.
Queen Latifah looking BOSS!! Badgely Mischka FTW!
Credits are running and now it's the last sponsors before the higher ad fees kick in maybe? Let's check and see if Levi's/J.C. Penny's has any ads during the actual ceremony. . .
And we're starting! Lots of LED lights! Seth McFarlane and his punchable face.
Let's make Tommy Lee ones laugh. It worked.
The monologue jokes are old--really a joke about accounting for no profits?
But the Captain Kirk thing is working! "We Saw Your Boobs" as a kind of parody of bad Oscar musical performances actually works. Charlize Theron and Channing Tatum doing a sort of Astaire/Rogers dance to "Just The Way You Look Tonight" is actually charming. How did that happen? The changing newspaper headlines, the sock puppet re-enactment of Flight. . . .not terrible. Especially the dryer tumbling the socks. JGL and DRadcliff dancing to "High Hopes?" He's all the way up to "mediocre." He's willing to take "mediocre."
The Green Room Sally Field and Seth in the Flying Nun sequence is a bit off, but using the "alternate history" approach allows him to have his cake and eat it too. And really, he's got to be nervous--this is a lot of singing and dancing for a guy who isn't usually in front of the camera. And I haven't wanted to punch him even once. So I'm calling this a success.
Octavia Spencer for Best Supporting Actor. She's charming and lovely and amazing. And the winner is--Christoph Walz! I didn't pick a winner here, but what a great clip they showed. Bounty hunting--"much like slavery, it's a flesh for cash business." And Walz is a classy speech-maker. A well crafted speech and they didn't even have to play him off!
Hey--Seth McFarlane does the voice over outro to the ads. He's a bargain! And we're into commercials.
Queen Latifah looking BOSS!! Badgely Mischka FTW!
Credits are running and now it's the last sponsors before the higher ad fees kick in maybe? Let's check and see if Levi's/J.C. Penny's has any ads during the actual ceremony. . .
And we're starting! Lots of LED lights! Seth McFarlane and his punchable face.
Let's make Tommy Lee ones laugh. It worked.
The monologue jokes are old--really a joke about accounting for no profits?
But the Captain Kirk thing is working! "We Saw Your Boobs" as a kind of parody of bad Oscar musical performances actually works. Charlize Theron and Channing Tatum doing a sort of Astaire/Rogers dance to "Just The Way You Look Tonight" is actually charming. How did that happen? The changing newspaper headlines, the sock puppet re-enactment of Flight. . . .not terrible. Especially the dryer tumbling the socks. JGL and DRadcliff dancing to "High Hopes?" He's all the way up to "mediocre." He's willing to take "mediocre."
The Green Room Sally Field and Seth in the Flying Nun sequence is a bit off, but using the "alternate history" approach allows him to have his cake and eat it too. And really, he's got to be nervous--this is a lot of singing and dancing for a guy who isn't usually in front of the camera. And I haven't wanted to punch him even once. So I'm calling this a success.
Octavia Spencer for Best Supporting Actor. She's charming and lovely and amazing. And the winner is--Christoph Walz! I didn't pick a winner here, but what a great clip they showed. Bounty hunting--"much like slavery, it's a flesh for cash business." And Walz is a classy speech-maker. A well crafted speech and they didn't even have to play him off!
Hey--Seth McFarlane does the voice over outro to the ads. He's a bargain! And we're into commercials.
OSCARS!! E! News Working their Blackout
I just checked out what was happening on E! while ABC was on ad break--they are pimping the heck out of E! shows that will happen later. Because guys! They totally aren't just watching TV and commenting just like you are at home! No way!
We have Giuliana Rancic and Kimora Lee and Ryan Seacrest and Kelly Osborne (and someone from Marie Claire) and they are wearing expensive dresses and they are totally not just watching TV! They are "Live from the Red Carpet!!"
Back at ABC and KChen and her Oscar Mystery--Anne Hathaway just guessed Dorothy's Slippers, and that's what it was! We have a winner!
Jamie Foxx is here with his 19 year old daughter. They talked about college in the limo on the way over--that's great. Makes me like Foxx better.
Daniel Day Lewis and his wife, Rebecca Miller--she looks like a smart person--mostly because I want that to be true. I want them to be a marriage of interesting minds. (I think he's a lock, by the way.)
So, less than 12 minutes to broadcast. Shall I make some picks?
Best Picture:I'm going with Lincoln.
Best Actor: DDL--Daniel Day Lewis
Best Actress: Jennifer Lawrence--as the "token" SLP winner
Best Supporting Actor: No Clue--everybody has won before, so it doesn't matter.
Best Supporting Actress: Hathaway is also a lock
SLP for Adapted Screenplay
Moonrise Kingdom for Original Screenplay
Best Animated Feature Film: Brave is the logical one, but I'm going to pick Wreck It Ralph, because that one had the whimsy and cleverness that we expect from Pixar and didn't get in Brave.
Those are the only ones I feel are worth predicting. I'm going to go out on a limb and suggest that Seth McFarlane isn't going to be asked back after tonight. I have no inside info--this is just my gut.
Enjoy the show!
We have Giuliana Rancic and Kimora Lee and Ryan Seacrest and Kelly Osborne (and someone from Marie Claire) and they are wearing expensive dresses and they are totally not just watching TV! They are "Live from the Red Carpet!!"
Back at ABC and KChen and her Oscar Mystery--Anne Hathaway just guessed Dorothy's Slippers, and that's what it was! We have a winner!
Jamie Foxx is here with his 19 year old daughter. They talked about college in the limo on the way over--that's great. Makes me like Foxx better.
Daniel Day Lewis and his wife, Rebecca Miller--she looks like a smart person--mostly because I want that to be true. I want them to be a marriage of interesting minds. (I think he's a lock, by the way.)
So, less than 12 minutes to broadcast. Shall I make some picks?
Best Picture:I'm going with Lincoln.
Best Actor: DDL--Daniel Day Lewis
Best Actress: Jennifer Lawrence--as the "token" SLP winner
Best Supporting Actor: No Clue--everybody has won before, so it doesn't matter.
Best Supporting Actress: Hathaway is also a lock
SLP for Adapted Screenplay
Moonrise Kingdom for Original Screenplay
Best Animated Feature Film: Brave is the logical one, but I'm going to pick Wreck It Ralph, because that one had the whimsy and cleverness that we expect from Pixar and didn't get in Brave.
Those are the only ones I feel are worth predicting. I'm going to go out on a limb and suggest that Seth McFarlane isn't going to be asked back after tonight. I have no inside info--this is just my gut.
Enjoy the show!
OSCARSII Is it a Head?
Hugh Jackman guesses the Oscar Mystery is a head--just like Amanda Seyfried. The clue has changed--the first clue was "over 2000 components." The new clue is "It was given as a gift." Can't say to whom.
Chris Evans also brought his mom as his date.
DeNiro and his wife--she's younger but not exactly young, and African American, which I didn't know. Robyn Robinson is asking DeNiro about Cooper, which is nice.
Dan Radcliff is cute, and HP is clearly over, since there aren't hordes of screaming fangirls dogging his progress. It must be a relief!
So many many ads! We're already at another commercial break, which is kind of nuts. I didn't realize just how little content there is between the ads.
Jennifer Aniston in red--not black? Is the world ending? She's got her hair down and minimal make up and no visible jewels--oh, there's a bracelet and ring and a clutch. Now we can see the earrings inside her hair, which is kind of a loss for Fred Leighton. The dress is Valentino, of course.
Jennifer Garner in purple looks awesome, with a ruffled train down the back, and what looks like a vintage elaborate necklace
Halle Berry and Robyn Robinson. Berry has a lovely black and beaded thing in stripes that looks great. She's a Bond Girl too! And this is the 50th anniversary so there's going to be a tribute. The dress is Versace, it looks great.
Chenoweth and Adele. Adele is about a foot taller than Chen, and they are talking about how heavy Adele's dress for performance is. "How tall are you?" Adele is 6'1" in her heels. They are darling together.
George Clooney--he and Walt Disney have the most different category nominations. Stacy Keibler looks very vintage. Cloons has a nice beard--he looks charming, and Keibler has lasted HOW MANY award seasons?
Sandra Bullock in Elie Saab look tall and lovely. THere's a problem with the sound--they start out booming over speakers, and then Chenoweth is heard gabbling about something. Accountants are in the house!
Are we going to get the answer to the "Oscar Mystery?"
Chris Evans also brought his mom as his date.
DeNiro and his wife--she's younger but not exactly young, and African American, which I didn't know. Robyn Robinson is asking DeNiro about Cooper, which is nice.
Dan Radcliff is cute, and HP is clearly over, since there aren't hordes of screaming fangirls dogging his progress. It must be a relief!
So many many ads! We're already at another commercial break, which is kind of nuts. I didn't realize just how little content there is between the ads.
Jennifer Aniston in red--not black? Is the world ending? She's got her hair down and minimal make up and no visible jewels--oh, there's a bracelet and ring and a clutch. Now we can see the earrings inside her hair, which is kind of a loss for Fred Leighton. The dress is Valentino, of course.
Jennifer Garner in purple looks awesome, with a ruffled train down the back, and what looks like a vintage elaborate necklace
Halle Berry and Robyn Robinson. Berry has a lovely black and beaded thing in stripes that looks great. She's a Bond Girl too! And this is the 50th anniversary so there's going to be a tribute. The dress is Versace, it looks great.
Chenoweth and Adele. Adele is about a foot taller than Chen, and they are talking about how heavy Adele's dress for performance is. "How tall are you?" Adele is 6'1" in her heels. They are darling together.
George Clooney--he and Walt Disney have the most different category nominations. Stacy Keibler looks very vintage. Cloons has a nice beard--he looks charming, and Keibler has lasted HOW MANY award seasons?
Sandra Bullock in Elie Saab look tall and lovely. THere's a problem with the sound--they start out booming over speakers, and then Chenoweth is heard gabbling about something. Accountants are in the house!
Are we going to get the answer to the "Oscar Mystery?"
OSCARS!! The Who Is Taller Edition
K Chenoweth is comparing height with Mama Cooper, and takes off her heels to see she's shorter--then Bradley Cooper gets down on one knee to help her get it back on. Very lovely, and a complete rehab from his smirky, fratty character from The Hangover.
Kidman and Urban! She looks actually human. She's got a black and gold sequined sheath and it's lovely. L'Wren Scott--it's classy and fabulous.
Charlize Theron again. The costumes from Snow White and the Huntsman is the topic of the interview. She's refusing to take any credit for her look, giving props to her styling team. I like it, but there's a train that comes out from her butt crack, which I don't like.
Oh, Robin Robinson--it's so good to have you back! (Okay, I had to say that.) Cobalt blue looks really good on her.
I'm not fond of the "Oscar Mystery" nonsense, but I'm guessing it's the Ruby Slippers from Wizard of Oz. Amanda Seyfried has guessed "A Head" and Bradley Cooper said "A Parrot?"
Over on E!, the aggressive Size 0s saying ANYTHING about Adele is just obnoxious and hypocritical. Adele does look great and happy, but also exactly like she always looks. Big black dress, big hair. Salon nails and make up. She's awesome, but shut up Giuliana. You look like you have a padlock on the fridge and you lost the combination on purpose.
Okay, I'm posting this one and switching back to ABC.
Kidman and Urban! She looks actually human. She's got a black and gold sequined sheath and it's lovely. L'Wren Scott--it's classy and fabulous.
Charlize Theron again. The costumes from Snow White and the Huntsman is the topic of the interview. She's refusing to take any credit for her look, giving props to her styling team. I like it, but there's a train that comes out from her butt crack, which I don't like.
Oh, Robin Robinson--it's so good to have you back! (Okay, I had to say that.) Cobalt blue looks really good on her.
I'm not fond of the "Oscar Mystery" nonsense, but I'm guessing it's the Ruby Slippers from Wizard of Oz. Amanda Seyfried has guessed "A Head" and Bradley Cooper said "A Parrot?"
Over on E!, the aggressive Size 0s saying ANYTHING about Adele is just obnoxious and hypocritical. Adele does look great and happy, but also exactly like she always looks. Big black dress, big hair. Salon nails and make up. She's awesome, but shut up Giuliana. You look like you have a padlock on the fridge and you lost the combination on purpose.
Okay, I'm posting this one and switching back to ABC.
OSCARS!! Again!
Why am I doing these serial posts? Because I have lost too many posts to inadvertent deletions. So I'm posting as soon as I have a break so I don't lose it all.
ABC is doing something foolish--an Oscar road trip? No thanks. Back to E!
But, E! is doing something on the Governor's Ball. It happens on the top floor of the theater, which you can check out if you tour the theater--like we did a hear and a half ago.
Giuliana Rancic is dark haired?!?! And understated in something black and strapless.
Bradley Cooper and his mom! Mom is about Chenoweth height! They are representing Philadelphia! Mom looks great, sporting a cape of feathers, and Brad is cute and awkward as he stands on somebody's gown.
Anne Hathaway was supposed to wear Valentino? She's in a pale pink Prada, and I like it. I like the simplicity, but I don't loke the double waistline--Empire and one at the waist too.
Back to ABC, which apparently has dibs on red carpet for the last hour before the actual ceremony. Reese Witherspoon rocking the Veronica Lake glamorous hair. JGL showing off his funky fly socks. ABC is showing clips of Movies of 2012--while E is recapping fashion. So that's where I am.
Jessica Chastain--her dress is kind of the same color as her hair. It's tailered and subtly beaded, but it just doesn't show on the red carpet. It's too understated, really.
Hey! The crawl says that the Governor's Ball crew will be eating chicken pot pie too! Just like me! Although theirs will be prepared by Wolfgang Puck and includes shaved black truffles. Mine is not going to be so glam, but then I get to have mine earlier than they get theirs! Win!
ABC is doing something foolish--an Oscar road trip? No thanks. Back to E!
But, E! is doing something on the Governor's Ball. It happens on the top floor of the theater, which you can check out if you tour the theater--like we did a hear and a half ago.
Giuliana Rancic is dark haired?!?! And understated in something black and strapless.
Bradley Cooper and his mom! Mom is about Chenoweth height! They are representing Philadelphia! Mom looks great, sporting a cape of feathers, and Brad is cute and awkward as he stands on somebody's gown.
Anne Hathaway was supposed to wear Valentino? She's in a pale pink Prada, and I like it. I like the simplicity, but I don't loke the double waistline--Empire and one at the waist too.
Back to ABC, which apparently has dibs on red carpet for the last hour before the actual ceremony. Reese Witherspoon rocking the Veronica Lake glamorous hair. JGL showing off his funky fly socks. ABC is showing clips of Movies of 2012--while E is recapping fashion. So that's where I am.
Jessica Chastain--her dress is kind of the same color as her hair. It's tailered and subtly beaded, but it just doesn't show on the red carpet. It's too understated, really.
Hey! The crawl says that the Governor's Ball crew will be eating chicken pot pie too! Just like me! Although theirs will be prepared by Wolfgang Puck and includes shaved black truffles. Mine is not going to be so glam, but then I get to have mine earlier than they get theirs! Win!
OSCARS--The Switch to ABC
There's an alternative to Ryan Seacrest! And it's on ABC--and Kristin Chenowith is interviewing Amanda Seyfried and doing a MUCH better job getting Amanda Seyfried to say anything. There is also a gimmick, an "Oscar Mystery" with clues and making people guess.
Quvanzhane Wallis getting her first red carpet interview, and is at least as good as Seyfried is. And Wallis is only 9 and ridiculously poised. She's wearing an age appropriate cobalt blue dress.
A salute to movie fashions! Since we keep asking the stars who they are wearing, this makes sense. In fact, it's kins of neat as they talk about what the fashions SAY about the characters.
JLaw and KChen. The second question is "How tall are you?" KChen is 4'11", JLaw says she's 5'8", but wearing "9 inch heels." And they are bonding over watching "Dance Moms." This is cute.
Zoe Saldana--we aren't asking who she is wearing? I lover the hem, love the belt, love the earrings. No so fond of the appliqué and the bow as well. There is just a little too much going on in the top half of that dress.
ABC commercial break! So we switch channels again!
Over on E!, Anne Hathaway showing some side boob, and her hair is growing out beautifully. She's reaqlly working it. It's a nice pink Prada with a very interesting back.
Naomi Watts in a sparkly Armani Prive that is rather sci-fi--cutout neckline unlike anything ever seen on the Oscars red carpet. She's lovely, I loved her so much in Mullholland Drive, but Liev Schriber on her arm is the BEST accessory.
Charlize Theron--in white Dior Courture, buzzed for "Fury Road" and she's following Anne Hathaway in the "how to rock the new cut" reality show. I'm reminded of a dress Kate Hudson wore last year, I think--white sculptural fabrick like ice cream.
Quvanzhane Wallis getting her first red carpet interview, and is at least as good as Seyfried is. And Wallis is only 9 and ridiculously poised. She's wearing an age appropriate cobalt blue dress.
A salute to movie fashions! Since we keep asking the stars who they are wearing, this makes sense. In fact, it's kins of neat as they talk about what the fashions SAY about the characters.
JLaw and KChen. The second question is "How tall are you?" KChen is 4'11", JLaw says she's 5'8", but wearing "9 inch heels." And they are bonding over watching "Dance Moms." This is cute.
Zoe Saldana--we aren't asking who she is wearing? I lover the hem, love the belt, love the earrings. No so fond of the appliqué and the bow as well. There is just a little too much going on in the top half of that dress.
ABC commercial break! So we switch channels again!
Over on E!, Anne Hathaway showing some side boob, and her hair is growing out beautifully. She's reaqlly working it. It's a nice pink Prada with a very interesting back.
Naomi Watts in a sparkly Armani Prive that is rather sci-fi--cutout neckline unlike anything ever seen on the Oscars red carpet. She's lovely, I loved her so much in Mullholland Drive, but Liev Schriber on her arm is the BEST accessory.
Charlize Theron--in white Dior Courture, buzzed for "Fury Road" and she's following Anne Hathaway in the "how to rock the new cut" reality show. I'm reminded of a dress Kate Hudson wore last year, I think--white sculptural fabrick like ice cream.
OSCARS!!--Red Carpet part Deux
During this commercial break, I am making a confession. The plan was for pizza and wine and serious couch surfing. HOWEVER--I am out of wine, so I decided to substitute rum-and-diet-pepsi. Then I punted on the pizza, because the one I like best requires actually leaving the apartment and driving to pick it up. Yes, outside the delivery area sucks.
So to make a silk purse out of the sow's ear of my own laziness, I'm having "Life of (chicken pot) Pi(e)" and the Pepsi version of "Zero Dark Thirsty" (which should be Coke Zero, which I don't have, and dark rum, which I do.)
Back to the red carpet!
GJL and Sally Field nattering about JGL's inability to tie a bow tie, while CZJ and Michael Douglas are in the background--girlfriend is looking FIERCE and FABULOUS. She was pregnant when she was here for Chicago. Is this her first time back since then?
Dustin Hoffman and Sally Field hug delightfully, and JGL is totally star struck. Dustin is spared the ManiCam. Why?
Charlize Theron is rocking a seriously short haircut. Melissa McCarthy looks lovely and nice nice hair, but almost no visible jewels--not snark, given she's got the #1 movie of the week.
Jennifer Hudson looks great, but I don't like the bangs--it makes her look ridiculously generic.
Back to the B team (Ross and Kelly in the sky box) reprising Seyfried in Alexander McQueen--it's lovely, but it's getting overpowered by the carpet.
Sneak peak of Jessica Chastain, who is so talented an actress, and such a disappointment on the red carpet. Last years black and gold gown was fabulous, this year looks washed out and small.
So to make a silk purse out of the sow's ear of my own laziness, I'm having "Life of (chicken pot) Pi(e)" and the Pepsi version of "Zero Dark Thirsty" (which should be Coke Zero, which I don't have, and dark rum, which I do.)
Back to the red carpet!
GJL and Sally Field nattering about JGL's inability to tie a bow tie, while CZJ and Michael Douglas are in the background--girlfriend is looking FIERCE and FABULOUS. She was pregnant when she was here for Chicago. Is this her first time back since then?
Dustin Hoffman and Sally Field hug delightfully, and JGL is totally star struck. Dustin is spared the ManiCam. Why?
Charlize Theron is rocking a seriously short haircut. Melissa McCarthy looks lovely and nice nice hair, but almost no visible jewels--not snark, given she's got the #1 movie of the week.
Jennifer Hudson looks great, but I don't like the bangs--it makes her look ridiculously generic.
Back to the B team (Ross and Kelly in the sky box) reprising Seyfried in Alexander McQueen--it's lovely, but it's getting overpowered by the carpet.
Sneak peak of Jessica Chastain, who is so talented an actress, and such a disappointment on the red carpet. Last years black and gold gown was fabulous, this year looks washed out and small.
OSCARS!!
I'm late to the red carpet, but I managed to catch Jacki Weaver standing over Daniel Radcliffe's shoulder, rubbing her teach to make sure there's no lipstick for her interview with Ryan "The Tool" Seacrest.
I predict this is the high point of the night.
Although Zoe Saldana's dress is architectural and fabulously understated.
Amy Adams and Amanda Seyfried look like the same person.
Octavia Spenser, looking awesome and amazing in an asymmetrical beaded and tulle-topped gown.
Is that a drawing of Bette Davis in an Edith Head dress in the background?
Kelly Osbourne--lose the purple hair. It's really not doing anything for you.
Amanda Seyfried's dress is the EXACT SAME color as Kelly's hair. Also, her eye shadow is the same color.
Split screen Amanda Seyfried and Jennifer Lawrence--again, two women, one look. Seyfried is also refusing to participate in the Seacrest Show--it's kind of obnoxious. Is there a "Big Showstopper Surprise" musical number that nobody knows about? Then answer the damn questions.
Sally Field in Red--Nice.
JLaw--now with Seacrest, and she totally towers over him. SHe's being charming, voluble, and looking creat in a white Dior, with an interesting find chain necklas that runs down her back. Love her classy hair, and the GIANT diamonds in the earrings.
Mani-Cam failure? That's a feature, not a bug!
I predict this is the high point of the night.
Although Zoe Saldana's dress is architectural and fabulously understated.
Amy Adams and Amanda Seyfried look like the same person.
Octavia Spenser, looking awesome and amazing in an asymmetrical beaded and tulle-topped gown.
Is that a drawing of Bette Davis in an Edith Head dress in the background?
Kelly Osbourne--lose the purple hair. It's really not doing anything for you.
Amanda Seyfried's dress is the EXACT SAME color as Kelly's hair. Also, her eye shadow is the same color.
Split screen Amanda Seyfried and Jennifer Lawrence--again, two women, one look. Seyfried is also refusing to participate in the Seacrest Show--it's kind of obnoxious. Is there a "Big Showstopper Surprise" musical number that nobody knows about? Then answer the damn questions.
Sally Field in Red--Nice.
JLaw--now with Seacrest, and she totally towers over him. SHe's being charming, voluble, and looking creat in a white Dior, with an interesting find chain necklas that runs down her back. Love her classy hair, and the GIANT diamonds in the earrings.
Mani-Cam failure? That's a feature, not a bug!
Tuesday, February 19, 2013
Downton Abbey Season 3
Well, that was weird. Not quite as weird as season 2--no creepy Canadian "heirs" for example, but still really weirdly paced. It's the way that the major plot developments get introduced and resolved in minutes, while the small things get drawn out to such a degree that the whole season feels out of balance.
For example--
And for gods' sakes, there will be spoilers, so only read this if you are prepared to discuss endings!
For example--
We spent two years worth of episodes on the Matthew and Mary story line. TWO YEARS. And they get married in the first hour, and the honeymoon takes place in the gap between episodes. Meanwhile, Anna and Bates (who are really hopelessly boring) take a picnic and walk the garden paths and look at each other with an appalling amount of schmoopiness. I'm glad they are together, I'm glad they are happy, but who cares if Anna knows how to reel? Who really wants to watch her take lessons from Rose? It's not dramatic, the payoff is non-existent, and it's hopelessly dull.
Or the restructuring of Downton Abbey and the elevation of Branson the Estate Agent. We had to sit through Lord Grantham being a big whiny baby about making any changes to the farms and the estate, we had to listen to him flirt with Ponzi schemes as a better solution than adopting efficient farming practices, we had to put up with his whinging about "but is it fair to the tenant farmers" far too many times...
...and suddenly it's all be done already, the entire business plan for Downton has apparently be created, adopted, and successful, to the point where Shrimpy simply says "If only we had restructured like Downton, then I could have saved Duneagle. . . ." What? In a single year? A farm-based economy has, within a single calendar year, been entirely restructured and the economic benefits became sufficiently apparent by mid summer? How is that even possible?
It's not. It's like Fellowes has an attention problem--he seems to believe that he needs to have major plot developments, but he's really not interested in them. What he is interested in are the details of how a life like the Downton's is actually lived. That's why the question of Thomas and his sexuality plays out across several/many/most episodes, ending in the weirdly anti-climactic scene where Jimmy confronts him and in two sentences they agree they can be friends, no problem.
Similarly, the Big Plot Twist at the end of the season. It's only a Big Plot Twist if you hadn't seen the many many articles about Dan Stevens' decision not to sign on for another season. Or if you didn't know he's been starring on Broadway with Jessica Chastain for the last several months. Of course Matthew had to be killed off. But killed off in the Fellowes Fashion (TM), where there is really no emotional arc or resolution. Nope--he gets run off the road, and the season ends with nobody learning about it. What do you bet that next season is at least another year later, and everybody is over him too?
BUT! He couldn't die without leaving behind a male heir, because as much as Fellowes hates change, he hates chaos more. That's why Thomas had to not be dismissed, despite everything--because he's part of the furnishing of the plot by now. He had to come back as a servant, even after his war service, and his attempt at entrepreneur status, because Downton without Thomas is apparently unthinkable. It's why Branson is staying with his aristocratic in-laws instead of setting up his own life, but he remains an employee so they don't have to call him "Tom."
I really wish Fellows would recognize that he really doesn't do melodrama very well, and just drop it. It's the small details--what does a Gillies Ball look like? How do Scottish people wake up in the morning? (To a piper treading across the bridge over the dry moat, apparently.) What is it about Rose's dress that is so scandalous, and what did the Dowager wear to her first ball?
At least Lord Grantham apologized for his opposition to Matthew, so perhaps he can stop being such a whiner and idiot. Plus, he did it just in time so Matthew can die without anybody thinking he was anything less than perfect. And Lady Mary is now free to "inherit" as regent to her son. Too bad she's such a nasty woman too. Matthew at least got to die without getting tired of her snobby, bitchy comments about Edith and Michael. So I guess it was a win-win?
There have been internet commenters who feel that Dan Stevens should have remained with Downton, either because Matthew was their favorite character, or because they feel he is not "good enough" for a different career path. Frankly, as boring as Matthew's character arc has been this season, and as uneven a writer as Fellowes has shown himself to be, I have a lot of sympathy for someone who wants to do something different for a change. I wish him luck.
For example--
And for gods' sakes, there will be spoilers, so only read this if you are prepared to discuss endings!
For example--
We spent two years worth of episodes on the Matthew and Mary story line. TWO YEARS. And they get married in the first hour, and the honeymoon takes place in the gap between episodes. Meanwhile, Anna and Bates (who are really hopelessly boring) take a picnic and walk the garden paths and look at each other with an appalling amount of schmoopiness. I'm glad they are together, I'm glad they are happy, but who cares if Anna knows how to reel? Who really wants to watch her take lessons from Rose? It's not dramatic, the payoff is non-existent, and it's hopelessly dull.
Or the restructuring of Downton Abbey and the elevation of Branson the Estate Agent. We had to sit through Lord Grantham being a big whiny baby about making any changes to the farms and the estate, we had to listen to him flirt with Ponzi schemes as a better solution than adopting efficient farming practices, we had to put up with his whinging about "but is it fair to the tenant farmers" far too many times...
...and suddenly it's all be done already, the entire business plan for Downton has apparently be created, adopted, and successful, to the point where Shrimpy simply says "If only we had restructured like Downton, then I could have saved Duneagle. . . ." What? In a single year? A farm-based economy has, within a single calendar year, been entirely restructured and the economic benefits became sufficiently apparent by mid summer? How is that even possible?
It's not. It's like Fellowes has an attention problem--he seems to believe that he needs to have major plot developments, but he's really not interested in them. What he is interested in are the details of how a life like the Downton's is actually lived. That's why the question of Thomas and his sexuality plays out across several/many/most episodes, ending in the weirdly anti-climactic scene where Jimmy confronts him and in two sentences they agree they can be friends, no problem.
Similarly, the Big Plot Twist at the end of the season. It's only a Big Plot Twist if you hadn't seen the many many articles about Dan Stevens' decision not to sign on for another season. Or if you didn't know he's been starring on Broadway with Jessica Chastain for the last several months. Of course Matthew had to be killed off. But killed off in the Fellowes Fashion (TM), where there is really no emotional arc or resolution. Nope--he gets run off the road, and the season ends with nobody learning about it. What do you bet that next season is at least another year later, and everybody is over him too?
BUT! He couldn't die without leaving behind a male heir, because as much as Fellowes hates change, he hates chaos more. That's why Thomas had to not be dismissed, despite everything--because he's part of the furnishing of the plot by now. He had to come back as a servant, even after his war service, and his attempt at entrepreneur status, because Downton without Thomas is apparently unthinkable. It's why Branson is staying with his aristocratic in-laws instead of setting up his own life, but he remains an employee so they don't have to call him "Tom."
I really wish Fellows would recognize that he really doesn't do melodrama very well, and just drop it. It's the small details--what does a Gillies Ball look like? How do Scottish people wake up in the morning? (To a piper treading across the bridge over the dry moat, apparently.) What is it about Rose's dress that is so scandalous, and what did the Dowager wear to her first ball?
At least Lord Grantham apologized for his opposition to Matthew, so perhaps he can stop being such a whiner and idiot. Plus, he did it just in time so Matthew can die without anybody thinking he was anything less than perfect. And Lady Mary is now free to "inherit" as regent to her son. Too bad she's such a nasty woman too. Matthew at least got to die without getting tired of her snobby, bitchy comments about Edith and Michael. So I guess it was a win-win?
There have been internet commenters who feel that Dan Stevens should have remained with Downton, either because Matthew was their favorite character, or because they feel he is not "good enough" for a different career path. Frankly, as boring as Matthew's character arc has been this season, and as uneven a writer as Fellowes has shown himself to be, I have a lot of sympathy for someone who wants to do something different for a change. I wish him luck.
Sunday, January 13, 2013
Shackleton's Journal--Day 27
Honestly, things are so hard while one-legged and on crutches that it feels like a frigging expedition around here. "Today, the team rested, for tomorrow we attempt the Changing of the Sheets on the Bed."
I mean, when you have only one leg and both your hands are needed for the crutches, how do you get the sheets off a bed, ferry them to the washing machine without tripping on them, and then get them back onto the bed? Much hopping, and I wound those sheets around me like a Bedouin in a sandstorm. Literally, I had them around my neck and looping over my shoulders and I even carried the pillowcases in the hollows made by the swathing.
"Day 25--despite the cold temperatures and my continued disability, it was clear we had to attempt to change the sheets, as the sled dogs were beginning to complain of the odor. After we assembled the materials, we made a cautious foray to the laundering area. No casualties were sustained. Once the sheets were returned to the camp, we had a secondary expedition to the showers, so as to retain the fresh laundry smell."
A shower is kind of tricky too, what with getting over the lip of the tub without standing on the injured leg. Once in, there is no rail, and balancing on one foot while washing is harder than yoga. Then the whole tub is slippery, so getting out again involves a hand towel to sit on while drying off and strapping the boot back on.
It's hard, but a cast would only be worse, because you can take the boot off.
"Our next expedition will be tomorrow--a long crutch hike to the mail box! We may need to bring suppllies."
I mean, when you have only one leg and both your hands are needed for the crutches, how do you get the sheets off a bed, ferry them to the washing machine without tripping on them, and then get them back onto the bed? Much hopping, and I wound those sheets around me like a Bedouin in a sandstorm. Literally, I had them around my neck and looping over my shoulders and I even carried the pillowcases in the hollows made by the swathing.
"Day 25--despite the cold temperatures and my continued disability, it was clear we had to attempt to change the sheets, as the sled dogs were beginning to complain of the odor. After we assembled the materials, we made a cautious foray to the laundering area. No casualties were sustained. Once the sheets were returned to the camp, we had a secondary expedition to the showers, so as to retain the fresh laundry smell."
A shower is kind of tricky too, what with getting over the lip of the tub without standing on the injured leg. Once in, there is no rail, and balancing on one foot while washing is harder than yoga. Then the whole tub is slippery, so getting out again involves a hand towel to sit on while drying off and strapping the boot back on.
It's hard, but a cast would only be worse, because you can take the boot off.
"Our next expedition will be tomorrow--a long crutch hike to the mail box! We may need to bring suppllies."
The Saga of the Broken Ankle
It is very important to me that this is a story of me being a Good Person and Helpful Motorist, because then I don't feel like such a dork for breaking my ankle.
Back around December 13th, we had quite a snowfall, and the sheer amount of the damn stuff coupled with some crappy weather meant that streets were not cleared in anything like the manner in which we have become accustomed. So that four days later (FOUR DAYS!) traffic was still hopelessly slow due to icy conditions. At about 5:30, I was stuck at an intersection behind two cars that couldn't make it through due to the ice. The traffic lights kept cycling, and they weren't moving because whatever motion they had got stopped by the lights turning red.
The guy in the stuck car next to mine hopped out to push the car in front of me, and he couldn't do it alone. So, subject as I am to peer pressure, I got out of my car and went to help. We got that car moved safely through the intersection, and I walked back to my car.
Whereupon I stepped on an icy patch, my ankle gave way and I ended up on my butt in the dark and the cold, surrounded by skidding traffic. I hopped up with immediate big pain in my right ankle and right wrist, but dammit, I had to get my kid to a doctor's appointment, so I carefully avoided getting my car stuck at the spot I just pushed somebody out of, and I drove myself to that appointment, and then drove myself home.
I didn't take off my boots until I made it all the way to my own couch, because it HURT! I iced it and elevated it and had to miss my last class of the semester. And much of it got better, but part of it didn't. Turns out that, yes, it was broken, which I found out a full 7 days after the accident.
(I am prepared to deliver a rant about the bad medical care I got when I went to the doctor, but I'll save that for later.)
I finally saw an orthopedist who put me in a boot, stuck me on crutches, and said "that's a weight bearing bone you broke. Stay off it and come back in two weeks."
Which in some ways is a relief, because before I got the crutches, I was crawling around on my hands and knees--at least this way I was upright and could even go out in public! Sort of--crutches are not something one can be agile and graceful with right away. Furthermore, you don't really think about how much you rely on having both your feet and your hands available to do stuff. Because make no mistake--when you are on crutches, you don't have hands. And so you can't carry stuff around--like laundry. You can't push a grocery cart--but that doesn't matter because with a broken right ankle, you aren't driving anyway.
So that's the background for why I am housebound mostly, and why things are so hard to actually accomplish. The good news is that my ankle seems to be healing, there's only a slight misalignment in the healing, which couldn't be improved by surgery so I've dodged that. I go back in 10 days, and gods willing I'll be allowed to put some weight on in, and maybe even drive.
Back around December 13th, we had quite a snowfall, and the sheer amount of the damn stuff coupled with some crappy weather meant that streets were not cleared in anything like the manner in which we have become accustomed. So that four days later (FOUR DAYS!) traffic was still hopelessly slow due to icy conditions. At about 5:30, I was stuck at an intersection behind two cars that couldn't make it through due to the ice. The traffic lights kept cycling, and they weren't moving because whatever motion they had got stopped by the lights turning red.
The guy in the stuck car next to mine hopped out to push the car in front of me, and he couldn't do it alone. So, subject as I am to peer pressure, I got out of my car and went to help. We got that car moved safely through the intersection, and I walked back to my car.
Whereupon I stepped on an icy patch, my ankle gave way and I ended up on my butt in the dark and the cold, surrounded by skidding traffic. I hopped up with immediate big pain in my right ankle and right wrist, but dammit, I had to get my kid to a doctor's appointment, so I carefully avoided getting my car stuck at the spot I just pushed somebody out of, and I drove myself to that appointment, and then drove myself home.
I didn't take off my boots until I made it all the way to my own couch, because it HURT! I iced it and elevated it and had to miss my last class of the semester. And much of it got better, but part of it didn't. Turns out that, yes, it was broken, which I found out a full 7 days after the accident.
(I am prepared to deliver a rant about the bad medical care I got when I went to the doctor, but I'll save that for later.)
I finally saw an orthopedist who put me in a boot, stuck me on crutches, and said "that's a weight bearing bone you broke. Stay off it and come back in two weeks."
Which in some ways is a relief, because before I got the crutches, I was crawling around on my hands and knees--at least this way I was upright and could even go out in public! Sort of--crutches are not something one can be agile and graceful with right away. Furthermore, you don't really think about how much you rely on having both your feet and your hands available to do stuff. Because make no mistake--when you are on crutches, you don't have hands. And so you can't carry stuff around--like laundry. You can't push a grocery cart--but that doesn't matter because with a broken right ankle, you aren't driving anyway.
So that's the background for why I am housebound mostly, and why things are so hard to actually accomplish. The good news is that my ankle seems to be healing, there's only a slight misalignment in the healing, which couldn't be improved by surgery so I've dodged that. I go back in 10 days, and gods willing I'll be allowed to put some weight on in, and maybe even drive.
The Big Lebowski, A Review
Honestly, this?
This is the huge pop cultural touchstone of the last decade and a half?
Seriously?
I mean, it's a clever inversion of Raymond Chandler's The Big Sleep, and I totally made that call on my own recognizance. Chaos explodes all around The Dude, and he just keeps chugging along. He does get entirely freaked out, he gets panicky, he gets overwhelmed, but he keeps going. Even with a marmot in his bathtub.
Sure, it's clever, it's got some odd dream sequences and stuff, and Julianne Moore is a sport, but why this one? I can't tell you.
The plot is straight out of a number of Hitchcock films and parodies. The Dude, Jeff Lebowski, gets attacked in his home by a couple of thugs who are looking for some money and pee on his rug as a message. The Dude is bummed, because "that rug really tied the room together." He decides to call on the other Jeff Lebowski--the Big Lebowski--a crippled millionaire with a trophy wife and an unctious personal assistant played by Philip Seymour Hoffman (who is brilliant). Since the thugs were looking for payment owed by this Lebowski's trophy wife, the Dude figures he should replace the rug.
I get it--it's a karmic debt that balances the universe.
But there are wheels within wheels, and soon the Big Lebowski's trophy wife has been kidnapped, and he decides to hire the Dude to carry the ransom, in case he can identify the criminals as the ones who attacked him earlier. But Dude's bowling pal Walter (John Goodman) wants to keep the ransom themselves and prepares a dummy package full of his own (dirty) underwear.
People start coming after the Dude, looking for the money. He gets beaten up, drugged, seduced, beaten up again, and a marmot gets dropped into his bath. He drinks a lot of White Russians--which he calls "Caucasians" and he wanders around in pajama pants and jelly sandals. In the end, there was never any money because even the Big Lebowski was working a con. Dude ends up back at the bowling alley, and Sam Elliot delivers a folksy closing monolog which is the biggest tonal misstep of the whole movie. Should have been cut.
But--it was fine. The Cohens made an odd little movie with a lot of name stars and a generally obnoxious attitude toward women. The plot is convoluted and there's a lot of damage inflicted on a couple of cars. Overall, I didn't hate it, but it's no Raising Arizona. Not even an Oh Brother Where Art Thou which I liked much better.
This is the huge pop cultural touchstone of the last decade and a half?
Seriously?
I mean, it's a clever inversion of Raymond Chandler's The Big Sleep, and I totally made that call on my own recognizance. Chaos explodes all around The Dude, and he just keeps chugging along. He does get entirely freaked out, he gets panicky, he gets overwhelmed, but he keeps going. Even with a marmot in his bathtub.
Sure, it's clever, it's got some odd dream sequences and stuff, and Julianne Moore is a sport, but why this one? I can't tell you.
The plot is straight out of a number of Hitchcock films and parodies. The Dude, Jeff Lebowski, gets attacked in his home by a couple of thugs who are looking for some money and pee on his rug as a message. The Dude is bummed, because "that rug really tied the room together." He decides to call on the other Jeff Lebowski--the Big Lebowski--a crippled millionaire with a trophy wife and an unctious personal assistant played by Philip Seymour Hoffman (who is brilliant). Since the thugs were looking for payment owed by this Lebowski's trophy wife, the Dude figures he should replace the rug.
I get it--it's a karmic debt that balances the universe.
But there are wheels within wheels, and soon the Big Lebowski's trophy wife has been kidnapped, and he decides to hire the Dude to carry the ransom, in case he can identify the criminals as the ones who attacked him earlier. But Dude's bowling pal Walter (John Goodman) wants to keep the ransom themselves and prepares a dummy package full of his own (dirty) underwear.
People start coming after the Dude, looking for the money. He gets beaten up, drugged, seduced, beaten up again, and a marmot gets dropped into his bath. He drinks a lot of White Russians--which he calls "Caucasians" and he wanders around in pajama pants and jelly sandals. In the end, there was never any money because even the Big Lebowski was working a con. Dude ends up back at the bowling alley, and Sam Elliot delivers a folksy closing monolog which is the biggest tonal misstep of the whole movie. Should have been cut.
But--it was fine. The Cohens made an odd little movie with a lot of name stars and a generally obnoxious attitude toward women. The plot is convoluted and there's a lot of damage inflicted on a couple of cars. Overall, I didn't hate it, but it's no Raising Arizona. Not even an Oh Brother Where Art Thou which I liked much better.
Saturday, January 12, 2013
Back to Blogging
Back in school, yadda yadda, no time to blog, too busy writing papers.
TL;DR--we're back!
Taa daa!
TL;DR--we're back!
Taa daa!
Thursday, October 25, 2012
Silver Linings Playbook, A Review
Just saw this movie as a "special screening" with the writer of the novel in attendance for a post-flick Q&A. Really a very good film, and worth seeing.
Bradley Cooper plays Pat Solitano, a Philly man who is just being released from a mental hospital as the movie opens. He's been in for 8 months as a plea bargain for "an incident"--he came home early from work one day to find his wife in the shower with another man, and nearly beat the man to death. He's signed out by his mother AMA--against medical advice, and brought back to his parent's house.
Pat's dad is Robert DeNiro, a man who has his own issues with OCD and anger management. Dad has lost his job and is making money by running bets on Eagles football games. The family dynamic among the three of them is toxic and extremely believable--they are all trying to be heard over each other, all desperate to be understood, to connect, and they set each other off in the worst ways.
Pat's wife has distanced herself over the 8 months of the hospital stay, sold the house, and gotten a restraining order against her husband. Pat is convinced that he can pull himself back together, get healthy, get his job back, and reconcile with his wife. Then he meets Tiffany, the sister-in-law of his best friend.
Tiffany has her own issues--she's a very young widow of a cop, who acted out her grief by inappropriate sexual activity. She's living in a renovated garage behind her own parents' house, and she and Pat have a prickly relationship based on their inappropriate responses to their own wounds.
They are attracted, but damaged, and married to other people--more or less. In the end, Tiffany agrees to pass a letter to Pat's wife (which would violate the restraining order) but Pat has to agree to be her partner in a dance competition. Meanwhile, Pat's dad is trying to make enough money from bookmaking to open a restaurant, and he's convinced that if Pat will watch the games with him, the Eagles will win.
The final showdown happens after Dad makes an incredibly ill-considered bet and then blames Pat and his dancing with Tiffany as the cause of the Eagle's loss. (Like I said, Dad has mental problems too.) There is a "double or nothing parlay"--if the Eagles win against the Cowboys on December 28 and Pat and Tiffany score a 5/10 points in their dance competition, the restaurant dream will be saved.
Things get worse--Pat figures out that Tiffany wrote the letter supposedly from his wife, the wife shows up at the dance competition so Tiffany gets drunk, the competition is professional and the grading is really really hard--how is this going to work out?
There is a bit of Too Much Coincidence--the Eagles win their football game exactly as Tiffany and Pat are called to dance, the final score is exactly a 5, Pat's wife actually shows up and they manage to talk without any hostility at all, the bet itself is nonsensical--but it doesn't really matter. I was caught up and deeply engaged. Things end up happily, and the movie ends with all the characters at Mom and Dad's house to watch the Eagles in the playoffs.
I have never been a Bradley Cooper fan--he just is too fratty for my taste. I've never thought he was quite as handsome as he seemed to think he was, he was just a bit too smirky for my taste. Here, he is manic, he is uncontrolled, he is abashed, he is ineffectual, he is inappropriate, but he is sincere. There is nary a smirk in the entire movie.
As Tiffany, Jennifer Lawrence is brittle and damaged and fiesty and challenging and amazing. She is also so beautifully shot--all creamy skin and tilted cheekbones and juicy curves--she might as well be sculpted from ice cream.
Matthew Quick wrote the novel that David O. Russell adapted for the screenplay, and his story was quite inspirational in a wonderfully way. A high school teacher for 7 years, he was miserable. So with his wife he quit his job, sold the house, and moved to Massachusetts to live with his in-laws and spend the next three years in the basement trying to be a writer. "And I never in a million years imagined that the Weinstein Company would fly me around the country to talk to audiences about a movie." He talked about the way that writing a book is such a solitary endeavor and felt self-indulgent to do.
But then the actor who plays Bradley Cooper's therapist wrote him a letter. "And this guy has starred in like 400 Bollywood films, but he told me 'My dream has always been to work with Robert DeNiro.'" THAT is something Quick never imagined while writing in his in-laws' basement--that he would make somebody else's dream come true.
Definitely worth seeing.
Bradley Cooper plays Pat Solitano, a Philly man who is just being released from a mental hospital as the movie opens. He's been in for 8 months as a plea bargain for "an incident"--he came home early from work one day to find his wife in the shower with another man, and nearly beat the man to death. He's signed out by his mother AMA--against medical advice, and brought back to his parent's house.
Pat's dad is Robert DeNiro, a man who has his own issues with OCD and anger management. Dad has lost his job and is making money by running bets on Eagles football games. The family dynamic among the three of them is toxic and extremely believable--they are all trying to be heard over each other, all desperate to be understood, to connect, and they set each other off in the worst ways.
Pat's wife has distanced herself over the 8 months of the hospital stay, sold the house, and gotten a restraining order against her husband. Pat is convinced that he can pull himself back together, get healthy, get his job back, and reconcile with his wife. Then he meets Tiffany, the sister-in-law of his best friend.
Tiffany has her own issues--she's a very young widow of a cop, who acted out her grief by inappropriate sexual activity. She's living in a renovated garage behind her own parents' house, and she and Pat have a prickly relationship based on their inappropriate responses to their own wounds.
They are attracted, but damaged, and married to other people--more or less. In the end, Tiffany agrees to pass a letter to Pat's wife (which would violate the restraining order) but Pat has to agree to be her partner in a dance competition. Meanwhile, Pat's dad is trying to make enough money from bookmaking to open a restaurant, and he's convinced that if Pat will watch the games with him, the Eagles will win.
The final showdown happens after Dad makes an incredibly ill-considered bet and then blames Pat and his dancing with Tiffany as the cause of the Eagle's loss. (Like I said, Dad has mental problems too.) There is a "double or nothing parlay"--if the Eagles win against the Cowboys on December 28 and Pat and Tiffany score a 5/10 points in their dance competition, the restaurant dream will be saved.
Things get worse--Pat figures out that Tiffany wrote the letter supposedly from his wife, the wife shows up at the dance competition so Tiffany gets drunk, the competition is professional and the grading is really really hard--how is this going to work out?
There is a bit of Too Much Coincidence--the Eagles win their football game exactly as Tiffany and Pat are called to dance, the final score is exactly a 5, Pat's wife actually shows up and they manage to talk without any hostility at all, the bet itself is nonsensical--but it doesn't really matter. I was caught up and deeply engaged. Things end up happily, and the movie ends with all the characters at Mom and Dad's house to watch the Eagles in the playoffs.
I have never been a Bradley Cooper fan--he just is too fratty for my taste. I've never thought he was quite as handsome as he seemed to think he was, he was just a bit too smirky for my taste. Here, he is manic, he is uncontrolled, he is abashed, he is ineffectual, he is inappropriate, but he is sincere. There is nary a smirk in the entire movie.
As Tiffany, Jennifer Lawrence is brittle and damaged and fiesty and challenging and amazing. She is also so beautifully shot--all creamy skin and tilted cheekbones and juicy curves--she might as well be sculpted from ice cream.
Matthew Quick wrote the novel that David O. Russell adapted for the screenplay, and his story was quite inspirational in a wonderfully way. A high school teacher for 7 years, he was miserable. So with his wife he quit his job, sold the house, and moved to Massachusetts to live with his in-laws and spend the next three years in the basement trying to be a writer. "And I never in a million years imagined that the Weinstein Company would fly me around the country to talk to audiences about a movie." He talked about the way that writing a book is such a solitary endeavor and felt self-indulgent to do.
But then the actor who plays Bradley Cooper's therapist wrote him a letter. "And this guy has starred in like 400 Bollywood films, but he told me 'My dream has always been to work with Robert DeNiro.'" THAT is something Quick never imagined while writing in his in-laws' basement--that he would make somebody else's dream come true.
Definitely worth seeing.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
