LEE PACE!

So Lee Pace has a new movie, The Fall, which is reportedly produced by David Fincher and Spike Jonze, two of the most creative minds in directing that I can think of. The film looks like nothing else I’ve seen. It’s like a cross between The Mummy, Awakenings and The Neverending Story or something. It looks really interesting. The colors are striking, the soundtrack is looking to deliver, and hey, it’s a Fincher and Jonze collaboration. What could go wrong?

http://movies.yahoo.com/movie/1809761972/info

Here are some production photos from Yahoo!

The truth in Real Time

I love Bill Maher. He’s probably the only political commentator who tells it like it is, with expletives and whatnot. His show is very well-written, honest and unafraid to dish on the news. I like the segment called “New Rules”, and I also like the way his panel is constructed, bringing in different people from different backgrounds, who can offer different perspectives on one issue, and yet who are able to reach a consensus on a certain point. I dislike it when people bring in two blatantly opposing sides and just make them argue on live TV. I mean, it’s 2008. We’re so past that now.

On last week’s segment, Maher talked about how the media blew up the issue of Barack Obama’s “bitter” comments about Pennsylvanians, and how Hillary Clinton, seeing a possible opening, jumped on the bandwagon and called him “elitist”. I agree with most of what Maher said and I think it’s just incredibly stupid how people choose to misconstrue someone’s perfectly well-intended statements. If you’re running as a presidential candidate, would you really intend to demean the people who you want to vote for you in less than a week? I mean, seriously? Is HRC really that stupid that she honestly thought voters would see her maneuver as something that was “in defense of the working class”? HRC who would be the last person you would think to be able to “relate” with working class people? She of the Clinton dynasty, a product of Yale who probably never faced economic hardships before in her life? I find it incredibly annoying how the media chose to blow this out of proportion, when the issues at hand are the soaring gas prices and the rioting in Tibet and China’s refusal to solve the problem.

I like that Maher was able to put the people in perspective. He asked, “What does it take to be an elitist these days?” I think the difference between Maher and the rest of the comedic political commentators such as Colbert and Stewart is that he doesn’t rely on caricaturing and physical comedy. Maher isn’t about to go perform a skit to emphasize a point. He’s a comedian who knows that all he needs is his material, which stands even better on its own compared to the writing for Stewart or Colbert. Also, both Stewart and Colbert are on Comedy Central, public television that your kid can access. How much are they really allowed to say? When you’re on HBO, you at least have more leg room for saying what is really on your mind.

Although I love Maher, I don’t agree with him on everything. I disagree with his points on religion; he maintains his dislike for organized religion, while I consider religion as completely relative and flexible depending on who you’re dealing with. For instance, he expressed his disdain with the Catholic church, and how the Pope should have been held accountable for all the child molesting going on in the Catholic churches. I see that as faulty reasoning, because as the Pope, how the heck are you supposed to stop something like this? George W. Bush can’t even control his own country, how much more a guy in a funny robe trying to moderate the pedophiles in church? It’s unreasonable, and I don’t think it makes much sense to blame him for the horniness of the priests. They should be held accountable individually, and the Catholic church is not to blame for individual choices and behavior. When he mentions the whole “good at covering up things” by the church, and how it seems like the Pope is more interested in sheltering the institution rather than the people, I disagree as well, because it’s not like this is exclusive to the Catholic church alone. The Protestant religion is pretty self-righteous itself and if you look at American history, you can see how much Protestants have done their share of “defending the institution” rather than “defending the flock”. Islam is the same–people go to war in the name of religion and if that’s not trying to “uphold the institution”, I don’t know what is. I just think religion is a tricky subject, but a subject that cannot be viewed in black and white.

But other than that, I like Bill Maher. He’s a funny guy. And thank God someone can actually stand up to Bill O’Reilly. Bill Maher, you’re my hero.

Sibling rivalry 101

Director Noah Baumbach doing his thing.

Noah Baumbach has perfected the dysfunctional family film. Squid and the Whale is one of my favorite movies, and he wrote and directed that film brilliantly. What I love about Baumbach is that his films are a plausible kind of dysfunctional–real people with real quirks in really fucked up situations. I think what sets him apart from other dysfunctionalites [writer-directors who tend to churn out un-family friendly films--the likes of Sofia Coppola, Alexander Payne and Wes Anderson] is that his characters are not larger than life. They’re real people with real problems–most of which don’t ever get resolved. His scripts are sharp, funny and succinct–nothing too over the top and pretentious. He and Dan Harris [Imaginary Heroes] kind of have the same style of storytelling, which I really like.

So when I decided to rent Margot at the Wedding, I thought, “Hey, it’s a Baumbach film. Should be good.” I knew going into it that Jack Black was in the movie; and Jack Black is not my cup of tea. Surprisingly, Black was tame and toned down in this film. His character, Malcolm, still provided comic relief for the film, but the power plays were commanded by Jennifer Jason Leigh and Nicole Kidman, both award-nominated and award-winning heavyweights. Kidman was surprisingly good in this film. Her performance was like the one she gave in The Hours, except Sybil-fied. Basically, the premise of Margot at the Wedding, is Nicole Kidman’s character Margot attending her estranged sister’s wedding invitation, and ending up completely mucking up the situation. What’s interesting isn’t the premise of a wedding crasher type thing, but rather, the brazenly self-aware and truthful repartee between type A, perfectionist Margot and her free-spirited sister Pauline [Jennifer Jason Leigh], whose relationship is so strange and skewed that one can only imagine what it would be like to be in that family.

Laughing it up: Nicole Kidman and Jennifer Jason Leigh play two sisters who have a love-hate relationship with each other.

I like the muted tones of the film, how it’s simple and restrained. It can be compared to the Augusten Burroughs memoir-based movie Running with Scissors, except less indulgent. I feel like Noah Baumbach is like a Wes Anderson, only less indulgent and more tell-it-like-it-is. I also like the soundtrack for the movie. Overall, I enjoyed the film. It was purposefully fragmented, which I thought was an interesting aesthetic choice. Good, strong performances, even from Jack Black (who attempted to cry, but failed, in my eyes). If you’re a fan of the dysfunctional movies like Winter Passing and Imaginary Heroes, you will like this movie.

Laughter for all the wrong reasons

Daniel Tosh is one of my favorite comedians, simply because he tells it like it is, and then some. Oh, and he doesn’t take sides. On his show, no one is safe. He makes fun of everyone. And by everyone, I mean that he goes through the whole politically incorrect checklist and goes after people you would have never thought would be subjects of a stand-up show. From his grandmother to David Beckham, George W. Bush (who doesn’t make fun of him these days?) to dead people, this guy can make anything sound funny. Even the serious issues like abortion, gay marriage, safe sex, Hurricane Katrina and the war.

What I like about him is that he is extremely intelligent, and you can tell just by listening to his routine. His delivery is always on-point, he’s self-deprecating and doesn’t really give two shits what anyone thinks, it seems. He’s very well-read, and he likes to insert current events and pop culture references into his skits that you can relate easily to what he says. His routine is very well-rounded. He talks sports, sex, relationships, religion, politics, science…he covers everything. And as I said before, no one is safe from this guy. Not even Heath Ledger, R.I.P. And he’s not afraid to say what he thinks. Like when he says that he’s glad that guy got mauled by the tiger at the San Francisco zoo. It’s what everybody else thinks. He’s like the Simon Cowell of comedy, only cuter, less upright and with a penchant for run-ons.

There was this one part of his routine where he started talking about taking the troops to Nebraska to fight the war there. After which he non-segueways into a whole talk about how his car doesn’t run on ethanol and how ethanol is a silly dream that will never happen, especially in Brazil. A bunch of people at the audience react with “Ohhhhs” and he then goes into a whole tirade about ethanol and how it’s expensive, impractical, etc. And he finishes with, “So I get it, you don’t want to learn.” And the audience just erupts in laughter. I like that he does that–makes fun of his audience. I mean, it’s good to be able to laugh at yourself once in a while.

I also like his rapid-fire style of comedy. He goes on and on with one joke and he ends it with something completely left-field from where he started. Like, he starts off with an Adam and Eve story and pretty soon you get an ending involving Mariah Carey’s too-far-apart boobs. I like that he references things that most of the audience doesn’t get. Like when he mentions a bad Sandra Bullock movie, I was thinking, “Is he talking about Speed or The Net? Probably The Net, because Speed was a pretty good movie.” And then he brings up The Lake House, which I have seen (and as it looked like, I was probably the only one in that audience who saw that movie. Keanu fans are uber-loyal, as you know).

Anyway, I had a blast and I think so much more of him now that I have seen what he is like live.

Hell hath no fury

Uh…So my biggest wonder is how the contestants of Hell’s Kitchen ever made it to this show, and if they even know how to cook. I don’t know if it’s just the setting and the conditions of the show, where Chef Ramsay is screaming expletives at them left and right, but their food sure looks like shit. Compared to Top Chef, Hell’s Kitchen seems like it’s only exciting because of the shouting matches that Ramsay does every episode.

I’m confused, because the prize of this show seems far bigger than the Top Chef prize. I mean, the winner of Hell’s Kitchen gets to be executive chef of a Gordon Ramsay restaurant. Come on. I mean, that’s better than going to Aspen to watch people cook, right? The thing I don’t like about Hell’s Kitchen is that it looks like the place they are cooking at is completely unsanitary. The chefs look really bad, sloppy, and they just seem like people who got picked off the streets to cook. I mean, at one point a stay-at-home dad was in the competition! Really? You would give the helm of your new restaurant to a stay-at-home dad with no culinary experience?

Anyway, on the upside I watched Tuesday’s episode of HK at Hulu.com, my new favorite website. It’s like the YouTube of TV shows. It’s free! Still growing, but it’s free!

The Bachelor: In Defense of Polygamy

I’ve been watching The Bachelor for a while now, and as the seasons progress I’ve noticed that it gets more and more apparent how much polygyny is being touted in the show. I mean, obviously, it’s going to be polygyny, but I just find it very interesting how this show has managed to go on and on for many seasons without someone saying that this is just an excuse for a guy to date several girls at once without being a dick.

First and foremost, the reason why this is so apparently pro “player” is that of all the Bachelor seasons, only one has had a role reversal–The Bachelorette–with Trista, who came off of the previous Bachelor. That was actually one of the most intense seasons of the series so far. I mean, when it came down to the final two, Trista had two really good guys who I felt either would have been great. But only one out of the many seasons has this role reversal occurred. Why is this? Women are naturally monogamists. They are more serious about relationships than men are, and so the idea of dating several men at once and being vulnerable to more than one man kind of takes away that special connection that an exclusive relationship offers. The reason there have been so many Bachelor seasons as opposed to Bachelorette ones is simply because guys are more comfortable with the idea of having many women at the same time. I mean, it’s like striking gold, right? There seems to be nothing wrong with the concept of a man dating several girls and several girls falling for one man. After all, the mentality is that girls focus on one man, whereas if the guy has to submit himself to being “chosen” by a girl, he’s just going to be like, “Screw this, I can go find some random girl from a bar to get with.”

I think it’s interesting how the first episode works. In a group of 25, the guy has to choose the girls that stand out the most–usually they are the ones that are the prettiest or the most well-proportioned. It’s just a fact of life–guys are more into physical attraction, while girls go for personality. Take Trista’s season, for example. She went with Bob, who had a huge personality and a great sense of humor, but who wasn’t as attractive as the other guys who got cut. Whereas the bachelors usually go for the prettiest of the bunch, until they discover what psycho bitches they actually turn out to be.

Another thing I want to mention is how incredibly bizarre the situation is. I don’t know why any self-respecting girl would go on a dating show in search for the man of her dreams, but that’s just me. I don’t mean to sound condescending to the girls who are on the show, but to me, it’s just like you’re making it more difficult for yourself, having to compete with 25 other girls? Seriously? I feel like it’s unfair, because given time and some effort, I’m sure each of those girls (save for the really crazy ones that always seem to make it on every season despite the host Chris’ contention that the best ladies in the United States have been selected to go on the show) have something good to offer. And I just think it’s disgusting how some of the girls resort to cattiness and groveling just so they can secure a rose. I mean, why would you disrespect someone else for liking someone you like? You have something in common, you like the same guy, so what’s the problem? I just think with these girls being cooped up in a mansion and having to subject themselves to PDAs from the object of their affection and another girl in the house is just a recipe for disaster. And the producers sure know that. That’s “reality” TV for you.

I absolutely detest the rose ceremonies, because so far I have not seen anyone decline a rose. I’m sure there have been instances, and I vaguely remember seeing an episode when someone did decline a rose, but I feel like it’s not done enough. I mean, when you meet a guy for the first time, is he automatically your type? And on top of that, you’re competing for time alone with him with other women. This means that not only don’t you know the guy, you’re being pressured to put yourself out there and make yourself stand out than you would normally. I just find it incredibly surreal that all the girls have liked the Bachelors right away at the get-go of the first episode. Sure, most of them happen to be incredibly cute, and most have a crapload of money, so most women would probably have no problem going into it, but a connection is something you can’t pre-establish. Like, it’s got to be there the moment you set eyes on someone. Are you telling me, ABC, that all 25 women felt the connection with this guy on day one?

I’m trying to imagine myself in this situation, where I am competing with 25 other women for a man. First of all, I probably would not last 5 minutes on the show anyway, as I am a boring reality show star and would not generate much interest from viewers, simply because I don’t do drama. I’m really laid-back, so it takes a lot to get me worked up about something. Secondly, I would greatly dislike the whole throwing-yourself-at-the-Bachelor, because frankly, relationships don’t work that way. It’s a two-way situation, he has to throw himself at you, too. Thirdly, when the guy is kissing one girl every 5 seconds, you kind of have to wonder why you’re even in this thing to begin with. It’s just not natural.

So in conclusion, I contend that ABC’s The Bachelor is simply a show that perpetuates the double standard for entertainment value. Most of the couples that emerge from the show rarely last, so it just goes to show that the setting is superficial, and that once out of that reality show bubble, you are beamed back to reality, where people aren’t always as nice because they’re not fighting for your affections with 25 other women anymore and don’t have to eagerly await a rose for their efforts. It’s silly this thing they call “love” on The Bachelor.

The big tease (part II)

Not that anybody cares, since no one reads this crap anyway, but I haven’t been blogging lately since I just got smacked with a crapload of schoolwork, topped with relentless work scheduling, relatives coming over to visit, parents getting completely out of control…you know, the stuff of life! Anyhoo, I am back, but as of late I haven’t really seen too many films. I wanted to do a post on Firefly, since I am rewatching the series and realized that I actually don’t have a post solely on it. I had a Serenity post a while back, but I think the series deserves some of its own post space. Also, I am planning on doing a quotes category as soon as I get some time freed up for it. And I am loving this new layout from WordPress! It looks so much neater!

Anyway, I found some cool trailers on the web. I mentioned one of my highly-anticipated films coming out late this year, Blindness, based on the excellent book by Jose Saramago, and they now released a trailer for it. It looks awesome. Mark Ruffalo, Julianne Moore, Danny Glover, and Gael Garcia Bernal star in this film directed by Fernando Meireilles [The Constant Gardener, City of God]. I think this is going to be one of the year’s best movies. “The only thing more terrifying than blindness is being the only one who can see.” (Doesn’t that just give you the willies?)

http://video.msn.com/video.aspx?mkt=en-US&brand=&vid=b10fe33d-d3a1-40b8-9bde-b6beb383360f

Another movie I want to see is the new Steve Carell spy film Get Smart. With Anne Hathaway, Alan Arkin, Masi Oka and The Rock, this film looks like a fun watch. And of course, points for using a Hives song in the trailer.

http://video.msn.com/video.aspx?mkt=en-US&brand=&vid=1f9578e7-6a11-40b2-b360-459b197c7ac1

Also, to all you Batman fans, there’s a new Dark Knight DVD and it looks freakin’ awesome. Gotham Knight will be released in July, and I just know Comic-Con is going to have something neat in store for us. This is actually related to the movie, they wanted to tie this is with the darker material that is being explored in this summer’s The Dark Knight.

http://movies.yahoo.com/movie/1809701419/video/7331181

As for the new M. Night Shyamalan movie, The Happening, well. First of all, let me just say that I am so not a fan of silly movie titles like The Door in the Floor, The Thing and this one, The Happening. I mean, really? Could you not come up with a better movie title? I know the writer’s strike was a pretty big blow to the creative process, but come on. The Happening? It’s as vague as a Shyamalan film can get. It looks like an attempt to pull off a Cloverfield, but that’s just me. See for yourself.

http://movies.yahoo.com/movie/1809921595/trailer

The big tease

Pictures from upcoming films out soon.

WANTED [James McAvoy, Angelina Jolie, Morgan Freeman]

THE INCREDIBLE HULK [Edward Norton, Liv Tyler, Tim Roth]

 

HELLBOY II: THE GOLDEN ARMY

 

SPEED RACER

THEY EXIST!

You make me want to be a groupie

My most recent playlist. Not all new stuff, but still great stuff:

1. Peter Bjorn and John - Does It Matter Now!

2. Arctic Monkeys - Scummy

3.  Snow Patrol - Same

4. John Mayer - Split-Screen Sadness

5. Matt Costa - Mr. Pitiful

6. Wilco - Impossible Germany

7. Keane - We Might as Well Be Strangers

8. Matt Pond PA - New Hampshire

9. Rilo Kiley - Plane Crash in C

10. This is Me Smiling - Matter to Matter

11. Ray LaMontagne - Shelter