Discuss Tagged Articles at Cinematical
Discuss: Performer of the Decade?
Like many critics I'm working on my list of the best films of the decade. I have been doing lots of shuffling around, swapping some of the films in the top 20 with films in the top ten, just to see how they look. But something occurred to me. A lot of the films had one thing in common: Scarlett Johansson. What does that mean? Does it mean that she's the greatest actor of the decade? Or is she just lucky? I'm not sure what to make of it. I have never interviewed her (I was once all set for a phone interview for Girl with a Pearl Earring that was canceled) so I can't claim to know what she's like in real life. Frankly, she's not the greatest actor in the world; in bad movies she can seem awkward, fumbling with troublesome dialogue. But there's definitely something about her, and it goes beyond her blonde-haired, full-lipped, smoky-voiced, voluptuous beauty. I might make an argument for her as "performer" of the decade.
Let's look at her first great film of the decade, Terry Zwigoff's Ghost World (2001). She plays Rebecca, the best friend of Enid (Thora Birch). They have just graduated high school, and face a long, boring summer. They have long-standing plans to get jobs and rent an apartment together. Rebecca holds to her end of the bargain, but Enid becomes sidetracked with a summer class and a friendship with a nerdy record collector (Steve Buscemi). When they are together, Rebecca and Enid have a funny, dark, cynical rapport. Rebecca is good at keeping up with her friend, but there's the tiniest hint that she's getting tired of it, that she wants to move on. Johansson was only 16 here, and two years younger than Birch, but she seems much older and perhaps wearier.
What Makes a Real Vampire?
Filed under: Fandom »
The Twilight Saga has whipped up a frantic fervor in fangirls, opening doors to female fandom while sticking incessant and neverending thorns in the folks who want Bella and Edward to go far, far away. But it's also brought up a pretty interesting argument: What makes a vampire? I teased about the notion yesterday when I wrote about the Daybreakers PSA; however, can we really define what makes a vampire beyond sharp teeth and a thirst for blood? And if we can, what is necessary and what can be finagled?
Vampires have been around forever in some shape or form, flying through the worlds of folklore and darkness before shuffling into their modern guise of pale, 19th century blood drinkers. In 1819, John William Polidori presented The Vampyre ushering in this idea of the mysterious man entering high society, seducing young women with vampiric charm. "In spite of the deadly hue of his face, which never gained a wanner tint, either from the blush of modesty, or from the strong emotion of passion, though its form and outline were beautiful, many of the female hunters after notoriety attempted to win his attentions, and gain, at least, some marks of what they might term affection." From then on, no lady was ever safe.
Discuss: Are You Tired of the Happy Comedic Ending?
Filed under: Comedy », Fandom », Fan Rant »
Comedies are, by definition, doomed to a certain, set existence. Quoting Oxford's Concise Dictionary of Literary Terms: "Its ending will usually be happy for the leading characters. In another sense, the term was applied in the Middle Ages to narrative poems that end happily." This was compounded by the advent of New Comedy, which "abandoned topical satire in favour of fictional plots based on contemporary life: these portrayed the tribulations of young lovers caught up among stock characters such as the miserly father and the boastful soldier." So here we sit, doomed to repeat ourselves over and over because some dudes from way back when made laughs of a certain path. There will be an outbreak of shenanigans, some goofy stock characters along the way, and then the almost inevitable happy ending with cheek-pinching smiles, swelling music, and feel-good moments. A lot of the time, it works. We giggle, the credits roll, and we leave the theater feeling happy and refreshed.
But just as often, I find myself dreading the second half and that inevitable tonal shift. The film will begin to swell into a picture-perfect happy ending, characters softening and getting just what they need for the desired conclusion, whether that be saccharine sweetness, uncharacteristic responsibility, or Meet the Parents type chaos. The personalities and paths of the characters become second-fiddle to the need to wrap up the story. Rather than simply enjoying the world that's been set up, soon we must watch it wrap into a pretty bow.
Discuss: The Movies That Haunt You
Filed under: Fandom »
After heaps of buzz and praise, and our own Eric Snider saying: "it's compelling and artistic, punctuated with warm humor and masterful performances, and ultimately triumphant and hopeful," Precious: Based on the Novel Push by Sapphire is finally hitting theaters today. It's a harrowing look at one girl's traumatic young life of being pregnant with her second baby (by her father), abused by her mother, and struggling with illiteracy and obesity. In other words, a movie that demands you to think and feel -- to be touched beyond the 110 minute span of the film.
Naturally, that made me think about movies that haunt us. It can be for any number of reasons -- because of a film's thought-provoking power, how it's filmed and presented, the way it latches on to pain in our own experience, unsettles our own belief systems, angers us, or challenges us. Whether it ends sadly, or with hope. Whatever the reason, certain films seep into us and refuse to leave, whether it be for a few fleeting post-credits moments, or a week, month, year, or lifetime.
Upon leaving Requiem for a Dream the first time, my friend and I couldn't get the music out of our heads. We couldn't stop repeating the same thoughts as our brains tried to process them. Even if I don't see the film before my eyes, the music brings back every feeling, every moment of tenseness. As the credits started moving in Dogville, I couldn't shake the last powerful moments out of my head. It took a while to shake the gooseflesh from my arms, and every time I let my mind slip back, there's a brief jolt of shocked memory.
Discuss: Movies That Everyone Seems To Love But You
Filed under: Action », Drama », Fandom »
A couple of weeks ago I wrote a little post about Movies That Nobody Seems To Like But You, and it was an awful lot of fun for you (over 100 comments) and me -- so today I thought we could flip it around because I happen to know for a fact that there are movies that everyone seems to love but you ... because for me, that movie is Heat.
Released in 1995, Michael Mann's crime drama was an unofficial remake of his made-for-TV film, L.A. Takedown, and is still considered one of the greatest crime films of all time. The story centered on an LAPD homicide detective and a career criminal (played by 'Method heavies' Al Pacino and Robert De Niro) in a battle of wits with Mann's trademark themes of masculine identity and how our work can define us as people. But, no matter how many times I have tried to give this movie just one more chance, I still walk away wondering what I'm missing. In fact, it's a great example of how it doesn't matter how good a movie may be, it will always come down to your personal tastes.
After the jump: it's not a 'guy thing' and what's the big deal with that diner scene?...
Discuss: The Characters We Wish Were Serialized
Filed under: Casting », Fandom »
There are times when our fandom gets satiated. We see a world stretch out before us on the big screen, come to adore a character, and then get to follow him or her through a number of films. In some cases, they might even start to feel like an old friend, popping up over and over again. We'll become attuned to their swagger, the tone of their voice, the moments they love or loathe. Other characters, their presence in our lives is deliciously, yet painfully brief -- destined only for repeat viewings of the same scenes, the same reactions, the same outcome over and over again.The more our movie world leans towards sequels, the more part of me wishes certain characters could have continuing life on the big screen. (Played by the same actor, of course. No Vince Vaughn/Norman Bates recasts allowed.) On the mind from earlier this month, I wouldn't complain if Lena Olin's sadistic Mona popped back up again... If Myrna Loy's Nora Charles popped up in just about every film there is. If we could see Danny Huston's Arthur Burns menace the old Outback once again. If Frances McDormand got to spend more time as a sexy music gal. If a Sirius Black-centric film focused on Gary Oldman. And while Christopher Walken always gets the tough mob-ish roles, how nice it would be to have seen more deer-hunting Nick, or bomb shelter-loving Calvin.
In a perfect cinematic world, where rewrites and crappy stories aren't an issue (they're a whole different can of worms) -- which characters do you wish you could see over and over again? It might be for your own particular quirks, a spot-on performance, or even the breath of relief that an actor is getting to do something they almost never get a chance to do. Let us know in the comments ...
The Politics of Familial Moviegoing
Filed under: Fandom », Home Entertainment »
I grew up watching movies. Unfortunately for me, and my job, it wasn't a rich resume of epic adventures and award-winning fare. It was a collection of retro nostalgia, horse racing, weekly Friday night movies to see the mainstream fare, and anything by C. Thomas Howell. Yes, I think between '85-'95 I saw everything with Ponyboy. My favorite, of course, being Side Out.In reflection, I'm sure the myriad of terrible B movies and fluff fare is the reason I have such a deep appreciation for cult films. Like any parent-kid relationship, you're taught a set of values, you apply them with your own tastes, and then the parental units recoil. I'm sure they never thought that a childhood with Arsenic and Old Lace would inspire later years with David Lynch, Bruce Campbell, and The House of Yes.
But it was also a very particular affair. At first it was haphazard -- picking films at random, the adamant being the most successful. Then it became turn-based. My pick one week, dad's the next, mom's the week after, and so on and so forth. When I'd pick mine, half the time it would be followed by a heavy blanket of guilt and awkwardness -- the stupidity I felt picking Lost Highway when it was my turn, or in a visit back home a few years later, Undercover Brother. No matter what democracy was instilled in the process, it never turned out quite right. I guess that's the rub when trying to find a movie that pleases three wildly different sets of taste.
Was, or is, family moviegoing part of your routine, and if so: How did/do you handle it, and how did it inform your future movie interests?
How Surprised Should We Be By Good Acting?
Filed under: Fandom »
While watching House the other day, I was once again struck by just how great Hugh Laurie is. I'm not the only one -- he's been nominated for a bunch of Emmys and won a few Golden Globes. People rave about his talents, and the way his accent seems to disappear without a trace. We're mesmerized.But should we be? I mean, how much shock and awe should we feel towards actors who are simply doing their jobs well? The more I think about it, and about Hollywood in general, the more it seems like we've been conditioned for badness. Pull off a halfway decent accent and we'll be pleased. Cry in a realistic way and we'll buy it. Make everything look real and we'll be putty in your hands. But wait ... isn't that their job?
Of course, entertainment is an emotional business designed to push our buttons, whether those buttons be happiness, sadness, madness, fear. Something done well will appeal to us on a deeper level for this very reason. You can't not feel inspired and drawn to a perfect performance. But emotions aside, should it? The nuances of a talented actor should be praised, without a doubt. But where do you draw the line?
It's impressive when someone pulls off an accent, cries convincingly, morphs themselves in particular ways, or carries off a particular presence. But where is the line between basic job requirements and praiseworthy work? Have we, as moviegoers, come to expect too little of our actors?
Note: Hugh is merely a launchpad for this discussion. I am, in no way, implying his talents aren't notable enough for recognition.
Discuss: What Makes a Great Movie Villain?
While watching Michael Mann's Heat, I discovered the "cup of coffee test" for screen villains. I found myself thinking again of that great scene in which the cop (Al Pacino) and the villain (Robert De Niro) sat down to share a cup of coffee. It was a simple gesture, with no chasing or guns or shooting. Just talking. But it demonstrated on a thematic and visual level that this hero and this villain were actually very close to one another. They were very similar people, with similar natures.
I started applying this test to almost every movie. Not surprisingly, most of them fall apart. Most movie villains simply sneer and cackle and try to take over the world. But think of Batman and the Joker in The Dark Knight. They don't literally have coffee together, but they do sit down together for a talk; the movie presents them as equals, and separate from the rest of the world. They understand one another better than anyone else. Consider, also, Col. Landa (Christoph Waltz) in Inglourious Basterds, who sits down several times with several heroes over several different kinds of beverages (ranging from milk to wine). He's snaky, but smart and always cordial.
Sometimes the rule gets a little gray. For example, Clint Eastwood and John Malkovich don't exactly stop for coffee in In the Line of Fire, but they do have a quick, revealing phone conversation in which it is established that they are kindred spirits. And it's unlikely that Clarice Starling would sit down for coffee with Hannibal Lecter in The Silence of the Lambs -- mainly because he would probably use it to kill her -- but they do sit down and talk together.
And then, sometimes, all it takes to be a cool villain is a black mask and a respiratory problem. What do you think, dear readers? Do your favorite villains pass the "cup of coffee" test?
Discuss: What's Your Favorite Remake?
Filed under: Fandom », Remakes and Sequels »
We often bash the neverending flurry of remakes, and frankly, it's hard not to. Nestled in between the possible gems are many projects that wrench the magic out of the original they're supposed to love. But luckily (especially in this remake-laden movie world) they're not all bad. In fact, sometimes they can be downright delightful, thought-provoking, or even awe-inspiring.One of the top contenders, of course, is The Fly. The 1958 version was wildly popular and loved, yet David Cronenberg was able to sweep in and concoct a film that people rave about to this day. It remains one of the only movies able to rip through my adoration of the original and find a secure spot on the appreciation shelf. Beyond that, there are further remake chills with memorable projects like Dawn of the Dead and Cape Fear, plus a bunch of more mainstream-friendly, and beloved, remakes. Ocean's 11, anyone? Oh, and who can forget the foreign inspiration? If not for The Hidden Fortress, we'd never have Star Wars; if not for Yojimbo, we'd never get Fistful of Dollars.
Over the years, Cinematical has written about the best science fiction remakes, horror re-do's that don't suck, and even remakes that are better than the original, but I wanted to hand the reigns over to you. What remakes do you love? They could be as good as the original, better, or even be loathed by the general population. That's the thing with taste -- it's wonderfully subjective and there's always someone out there who will disagree with you. Are you a fan of Goldblum becoming a buzzing insect, or do you bravely hold onto an appreciation of the latest Planet of the Apes, Willy Wonka, or -- egads -- Gus Van Sant's Psycho?
Jeremy Renner Wants To Be An Avenger
Directors We Love: Jim Jarmusch
Indie Roundup: 'Sweetgrass,' 'Clarkworld,' 'Broken Embraces'
Shelf Life: Fight Club_thumbnail.jpg)
Watch: Famous 'Matrix' Scene Re-Created with LEGOs
_thumbnail.jpg)
