hold on tight!

Just a quick one to say that with finals, graduation, and the first WHIRLWIND two weeks of my summer job, time to blog is not available. I plan to write about the season finales happening 'round about now, and will be seeing a few movies in theaters soon, so stay tuned. Also, any interest in a review of last night's Lily Allen concert? I think I might work on that, too.

Ciao!

trailer mondays?

Let's see if they stick! I know I should have gone with my lit major roots and used alliteration, but I was too bored to wait until Trailer Tuesdays... Also, I want to give props to Stagafling and thank him for the shout-out. I knew something good would come of watching too much TV!

Waitress (April 27)
I have been waiting for this movie for quite some time now, and I think it's going to be delicious (I can't stop with the crappy puns...sorry). It's a real shame how the tragedy of filmmaker Adrienne Shelly may skew the reception of the film, but it seems to be a perfectly stylized vehicle from which I expect the best of Keri Russell and Cheryl Hines. Nathan Fillion, of course, is never a bad thing!


Duck (May 11)
I couldn't tell you what this is about or if it looks like it'll be any good. But the website certainly has enough leafy crescents to imply that there's great critical value to this film that nobody else has ever heard of. One thing's for sure, Philip Baker Hall has given such amazing performances in Paul Thomas Anderson's movies that I must expect greatness from him in a starring role.


Fay Grim (May 18)
Parker Posey and Jeff Goldblum together seems like it would promise some off-beat chemistry, but I cannot say I have high hopes for this picture. First of all, the entire movie seems to be filmed in dutch angles, where the camera has been tilted to lend a sense of unease or quirkiness to everything, which gives me pause in a movie about terrorism? kidnapping or murder? government plots? Can't quite tell. The most unfortunate thing about the trailer is the final title card, which reads, "Watch the way you want. Opens May 18th in theatres and on HDNet Movies. Available May 22nd on DVD." Yeah, the studio really thinks this one is going to make money...see for yourself:


Evan Almighty (June 22)
Bruce Almighty was surprisingly better than I could have expected, but I found the main characters too unlikable and unrelatable for the humor to really come across and hit the mark every time. I have a lot of faith (hee) in Steve Carell's ability to pull this antediluvian character off, and I must say that the story looks quite a bit sweeter and easier to stomach than having to watch Jim Carrey conjure a monkey out of a cholo's ass. Though I must wonder how the film is going to get around the implications for the audience of creating a diegesis where the moviegoers are part of a world of abhorrent sinners that need to be wiped out by a new deluge. Also, notice The Office's Ed Helms in a small role!


Stardust (August 10)
Oooh, this looks like so much fun! Couldn't really tell you what's going on, but I know I want to see this one on the big screen. Hopefully Michelle Pfeiffer, Robert DeNiro, Ricky Gervais, and Sienna Miller won't fall into the same stylistic ruts they've individually occupied for the past few years. And man, do I loves me some Claire Danes!


Superbad (August 17)
Yes! This looks like much of the funny could not be included in the trailer. Reminiscent of Knocked Up, perhaps? Why yes! Produced by Judd Apatow and starring Seth Rogen, it looks like a broader take on "Freaks and Geeks," which can only be a good thing (as long as it isn't too broad, I suppose). And let us not forget - Michael Cera is a bonafide God-among-men. Stay tuned after the trailer below for some bonus Michael Cera action...



Martian Child (October 26)
I wasn't sure how I felt about this at first (K-Pax meets Millions? Starring The John Cusack?), but now I am starting to think that this may be just the kind of movie I'd like to see him in at his age. Identity was good, but having seen Must Love Dogs and (oh hell no) America's Sweethearts, I feel like studios haven't known what to do with such a good actor when he's too old to play Lloyd Dobler anymore. Certainly, he's mastered some more "adult" roles, but I think he will settle into the fatherhood role with the grace of a Shopgirl Steve Martin instead of a Cheaper by the Dozen one. Also, John Cusack --> High Fidelity --> Nick Horby --> About a Boy --> the right kind of role for John Cusack right now.

we will rock you... booyakasha!

In some of the best movie news I've heard recently, Sacha Baron Cohen is signed on to play Freddie Mercury in an upcoming biopic! He is replacing previous frontrunner Johnny Depp, possibly because studio executives realized they had been considering Johnny Depp to play Freddie Mercury.

In some of the worst movie news I've heard recently, rumors that Sacha Baron Cohen is signed on to play Freddie Mercury in an upcoming biopic are absolutely untrue. The actor's publicist has come out and said that the reports are "pure hokum."

Who says "hokum" anymore? Anyway, the conclusion I've come to is that internet entertainment news is a cruel temptress, trying always to get my hopes up about something before dashing them away again. I had been very upset to hear about Depp's possible casting as legendary Queen singer Mercury (the dear Farrokh Bulsara, fyi), and am at least hoping that the confusion regarding the actor in the role means that Depp is out. I grant that he is a talented actor, and he used to be hot back when he was on 21 Jump Street, but I do not think people would be able to take him seriously in the role.

I understand this statement is confusing in light of my support for the casting of Cohen as Mercury, but I think that SBC has proven himself capable of committing to so many different types of roles - so far as to sacrifice himself to the character he is playing - more convincingly even than Depp. I think when the average person watches Ali G, they are entirely focused on and drawn into the noted Staines-ian, and don't think about Borat or Bruno until after they have absorbed who Ali G is. With Depp, however, it has become difficult for audiences to suspend their caricature of Depp caricaturing Keith Richards as Captain Jack Sparrow. The character and the man are almost inseparable, even for long-time fans.

Certainly, Cohen looks a hell of a lot more like Freddie Mercury than Depp does, but more importantly, I think he is woefully underappreciated in Hollywood. Though I did not see all of the contenders for the most recent Academy Awards, I maintain that Cohen should have at the very least been nominated. I don't think any other actor in Hollywood, Daniel Day Lewis be damned, could have commited to the role of Borat with such devotion, and pulled it off. I didn't like the movie or the character as much as I like some of Cohen's other work, but the fact is that he takes himself just seriously enough for everyone else to buy into his shtick.

So here's my vote for Sacha Baron Cohen as Freddie Mercury. May the best man win, and go on to lipsynch to classic sports anthems forever...

P.S. I should point out that I am quite devoted to Queen, and it is very important to me that the makers of a Freddie Mercury biopic give the man and the band the credit they deserve. I have seen the London stage musical "We Will Rock You" three times, and highly recommend it to anyone lucky enough to get a chance to watch it. I have so so so many memories of listening to Queen on my headphones and really absorbing the magic of the vocals, the instrumentals, the lyrics. Beautiful music deserves to be held on a pedestal, and I hope that the biopic, especially when dealing with a subject such as a famous death to AIDS in 1993, will be dignified. To me, even spandex suits and cocaine don't diminish the aplomb of this band...

mea culpa

I can hardly believe that I haven't posted since Monday! Unfortunately this week before finals has been terribly busy and hectic, but I apologize for my lapse in writing. On the plus side of schoolwork, I did get to screen my final video project on Thursday night! Though I am well aware of the faults in my piece, it was very exciting to see my very first short film on a big screen in front of an audience after at least 48 solid hours of shooting, re-shooting, recording sound, re-recording sound, and oh! the editing. Before this semester I had never held a camera or looked at Final Cut Pro, so it feels very nice to know that I actually made something! Also, I've come to the conclusion that I ought to take an intermediate level video production class next semester, despite the fact that it meets on a Friday afternoon (!). I'm hoping to change my schedule to drop L.A. Stories, add Media Sketchbook (the intermediate video class), drop Women and Comedy (wish it didn't conflict with this next class!), and add James Joyce. We'll see how much the registrar wants to help me out or not...

Yesterday morning I watched this week's two-hour episode of "Grey's Anatomy" online, and got my first glimpse of what may well become the Addison spinoff, "Private Practice." First things first - I really would have hoped that the team behind the catchy name of the original TV show, making a new show about an OBGYN named Dr. Montgomery, would have had the chutzpah to name it "Montgomery's Ward." But oh well...

Thursday's Seattle-based segments of "Grey's" packed quite a few standout moments. The slow decline of Cristina into an obsequious wife is dreadful to watch, because - ever since the end of season 2 - I've been waiting for her to sacrifice her whole self for Burke, only for him to decide that he doesn't want her anyway. Even more dreadful was the elevator kiss between George and Izzie. The adultery subplot would be painful enough to watch if it weren't for the complete lack of foreshadowing to there ever being an attraction between these two. But the scene in which Meredith gives the bad news to her father...I can't have been the only one who burst out in tears. That was one of the most powerful moments of the entire series, and I thought it was spectacularly framed and even better acted. I'm sad to see Mare Winningham off the show, but it was certainly a shot in the arm (hurr hurr) for the Seattle drama while the Santa Monica doctors were getting introduced.

In regards to the "possible" back-door pilot, I think it is understandable why many or most Grey's devotees would be unlikely to give it as much attention or praise as the original. Of course the cast is older, and their problems are finely tuned to an older audience, as well. Divorces are one thing in the background of Seattle Grace, but fertility issues, single parenting, and middle age will be differently ensconced in the L.A. atmosphere. That said, the mood of the new show is certainly more lighthearted, which I think will appeal to the Sex and the City demographic. It will be interesting to see, if Grey's fans and focus groups shy away from the spinoff, how the show's creators will react.

I read an interview in Entertainment Weekly a few weeks ago with an ABC executive who explained that a new pilot has a much harder time gaining viewers than a spinoff does. If this is the case, then I would imagine ABC will want the spinoff to go ahead no matter what Grey's fans say. Grey's viewers aren't going to abandon the established show if PP is a bomb, and it has a better chance of getting new viewers than a show with less buzz surrounding it.

For my part, I am a big fan of Kate Walsh, and if she gets her own show, I will certainly tune in for the first few weeks to see if I like it. But this latest episode did not have the pacing and character depth that sucked me right in for Grey's Anatomy. Also, was it just me, or did they portray Los Angeles in a very early-'90s sort of way? Hot blondes in sundresses, shaggy-haired surfer dudes, rollerbladers? I mean, I suppose it was meant to contrast with Seattle as much as possible, but I had a hard time watching such an unrealistic environment. I mean, trust me - I looooove L.A., but there was so much emphasis on the outside surroundings and I couldn't really figure out why.

Anyway, I'll be posting more, I promise!

i am three thousand percent sure!

I suppose I can understand people being baffled by my love for America's Next Top Model, Dirty Dancing, or even Philip Seymour Hoffman. Even some of my closest friends still raise an eyebrow when I wax nostalgic about the sense of security that comes from being engaged in conversation with Professor M. But nothing gets criticized more than my awed respect for The Maury Povich Show. Almost every weekday, if I'm free at noon or 2pm, I turn on Maury.

Types of Maury episodes typically break down into the following categories: paternity testing, unruly teen girls, lie-detector tests, abusive husbands, makeovers, obese toddlers, and sensational events caught on tape. The first three categories form a sort of Venn diagram, and air more frequently than the others. Rarely, there will be an exceptional episode about people with debilitating deformities or strange phobias, but these are few and far between.

A lot of people think of Maury as base entertainment cashing in on the problems of society's trodden-upon -- perhaps going to so far as to liken it to a modern day race-unspecific minstrel show. I can't entirely disprove this, but I'd like to argue that most forms of mainstream entertainment which are popular with the same demographics as Maury's audience are the same way. A lot can be asked about the ethics of a show which parades the sorrows and tribulations of its guests for profit, but the women who bring their fatherless children and cheating husbands onto the show are deeply yearning for answers.

On a basic level, Maury is providing services to people which are too expensive for almost everyone in the population. A trip to NYC to answer the questions that have been plaguing them is very desirable to a lot of people (as evidenced by the show's continued success), at the cost of being exposed on television in moments of vulnerability.

I watch the Maury show for a couple of reasons: it entertains me, and it makes me feel better by giving me the perspective to understand that other people have worse problems than I do. I also tend to think that Maury highlights how chronic some of society's problems are, like infidelity, unprotected sex and the resulting unplanned pregnancies, deadbeat dads, abusive husbands, rebellious teens, obesity, &c.

As a result of the reach Maury has over so many Americans, however, I believe that he has a social responsibility. On a small scale, he helps the individuals on his show, but does nothing to address the problems his show gives light to. This is my one concern, and I am baffled as to why Maury doesn't stress the use of condoms or other forms of birth control on his show. I have never once heard him mention that people wouldn't be going through such trauma if they just took better care of themselves. And I don't know how much a trip to prison and a tongue-lashing by D West is going to help a teenage prostitute in the long run. So though I enjoy The Maury Povich show, I do think it is past time for his audience to recognize the trends they watch on TV every day.

trailer rundown

So, I decided it's time to get back into one of my favorite high school pastimes. Spending hours looking at movie trailers online. Here's a few that look worth mentioning:

The TV Set (Now Playing)
Well, I'm interested in the theme of this film - I like the self-reflexive look at the film and TV industry, but I'm not sure if the mood is going to strike the right balance between Punch-Drunk Love and I Heart Huckabees. Anyway, I expect good things from Justine Bateman, David Duchovny, Sigourney Weaver, and Judy Greer, so I may actually see this in theaters instead of netflixing it...


The Ex (May 11)
Since the disastrous experiment in feeling bad, The Last Kiss, hopefully Zach Braff has realized how important it is that he keep himself involved in projects that are in some way comedic. This movie doesn't look like it will be a comedy to remember for years or anything, but I think the three leads have proven themselves before, and I am always jonesing for more Jason Bateman.


Severance (May 18)
So the first half of the trailer looked like the film would be too slow and low-budget to pull off "dark" without being interesting enough. Once I realized that it's a dark comedy and a slasher movie, I got more excited. I've never really been into the slasher genre, but this seems like it won't be taking that aspect of the film as seriously as it will treat the characters and the social commentary. Plus, Laura Harris from "Dead Like Me"!


Paprika (June 1)
Yoooooooowza... I am woefully unfamiliar with Japanese filmmaking, but this looks like it might be the thing that gets me to sit and watch anime with an eagerness I've never felt before. I mean, I know nothing about the story from the trailer, but visually, it looks like it could be one of the best movies I've ever seen.


Across the Universe (September 28)
MFers took the idea for a Beatles movie musical that I had when I was in the shower in high school and did it so much better than I ever could. Dammit. Seriously though, this looks stunning. Hopefully I can get the image of Evan Rachel Wood and Marilyn Manson doin' it out of my head enough to enjoy this...


The Savages (TBD)
Yesssss! More Philip Seymour Hoffman to turn me on... this movie looks great. What Little Miss Sunshine would be if there were no minors or opportunities to laugh out loud. I'm being serious, I really think this will be moving and funny, and I am really looking forward to the interaction between PSH and Laura Linney. With both of them signed on, I don't really know if I have to say anything else.


This was fun...I'll have to look through more trailers later!

in a family way

For many years, I have prided myself on my ability to look down on people who favor gross-out or other types of base, broad comedy. That's not to say that if getting a screenwriting career meant selling out and writing Date Movie 12: Now That's What I Call Date Movie: Furious Havana Drift, I wouldn't do it, but I could never bring myself to watch more than a few minutes of the American Pie / Van Wilder sort of movies that gross so many millions. One exception to this rule is Grandma's Boy, which I saw as a free screener called "Nana's Boy" a few months before its release. Though I don't smoke pot, play video games, or have a particular obsession with huge fake boobs, there was good acting and plenty of witticism to string those themes together and create a laugh riot.

When The 40 Year Old Virgin came out, I didn't expect much. I knew Steve Carell to be funny from The Daily Show, but what sold me was that if Catherine Keener had been willing to sign on to what looked like a boring 'not-quite-teen sex romp,' there had to be something more substantial to it. What a pleasant surprise it was to see a smart collection of funny characters, perfectly crafted for their situations, with a revamped Hollywood storyline that ended up being just the right amount of endearing. I wouldn't say that everything in the movie was perfect, but I must applaud writer-director-producer Judd Apatow for appealing to popular kids, nerds, adults, men, women, comedy fans, and romance fans with this film. In hindsight, I'm sure I shouldn't have expected anything less from someone involved with both "Freaks and Geeks" and "Undeclared."

Apatow's next project as a director (he's still writing and producing, but has kept his directorial talents from other projects such as - wait for the shock of a lifetime - Fun With Dick and Jane) is Knocked Up, which will bring along Virgin's Seth Rogen and pair him against the glorious Katherine Heigl. [Sidebar: Kirsten Dunst needs to realize that just because she has kittenteeth like Katherine Heigl doesn't mean they make her beautiful. Heigl also has the benefit of not looking like a hobo's mummified corpse.] The similarity in marketing between the two films is an interesting tie-in, hopefully getting Virgin's audience to come back. Look at how the first movie's poster is stylistically similar to the second, and how they convey that the characters are different, but both of them will surprise us with how unlike their appearances they are. Now, look at me, judging books by their covers and coming to the conclusion that these characters wouldn't want us to!

I'm interested in the parallels that the filmmakers and the stuido are trying to draw between the two films, because I would very much like for Knocked Up to have the same charm and charisma that the first did. I have faith in the main actors and in Apatow, but I wonder if the appeal of the subject matter will fail to attract the right type of audience. It doesn't seem that most teenage boys are going to want to spend their tips earned from hard nights delivering pizza and drinking Steel Reserve to want to see what happens when you get drunk and careless with a foxy lady. Certainly, there will be a larger female audience - perhaps because of Izzie Stevens, and perhaps because the thought of pregnancy/childbirth humor wouldn't disgust them. It follows, then, that enough boyfriends can be convinced to buy a ticket due to the Virgin-related advertising, so hopefully things will work out for this movie.

I like to see a quasi-realistic situation (whoops I'm a young professional who got drunk, got pregnant, and is trying to work it out) presented in a way that's not depressing like a Lifetime Original Movie, but not maudlin and predictable, either. So, I'm looking forward to Knocked Up, but I don't want to get my hopes up too high. The best case scenario seems to be that it is funny and sweet, and also presents a more positive take on real life to young audiences, where people do get pregnant, and people do turn unexpected pregnancies into positive situations. The worst case scenario is that is is funny but completely ridicules the situation that Heigl's character gets into. Apatow did produce Anchorman, one of my least favorite movies, but as he was not a part of the creative team, I'm not worried that this new film will leave the same sour taste in my mouth. Unless the studio wants it to so that more young men will see it.



*************************************************

Secondary blog: So, ever since I woke up yesterday morning, I've lost my voice. I was feeling unwell a few days ago, but right now I feel totally healthy. Except for the fact that I just can't make sound come out of my mouth! I've allowed myself to have some fun with it, assuming it goes away soon, and have been acting as though life is one big game of charades. My friends have been pretty good about interpreting my miming, and putting up with my furious scribbles on a notepad. I don't know, it's just an interesting experience. For some reason, I'm integrating what little ASL I know into my communication, even though none of my friends can interpret it. The last time I lost my voice was junior year of high school, when I was singing all the time, out of my range, for my school's production of The Wiz, and it just gives such an unusual filter to the minutiae of daily life. For one thing, I'm trying to listen more actively to what people say because I'm not thinking about what anecdote I want to tell everyone at the dinner table. My thoughts have become more introspective and reactionary, because if I really want to say something, I have to think about it more during the process of writing it down or conveying it some other way than if I were to just blurt it out. Perhaps because I have to pick and choose what to tell people, I am being more insightful? I don't know, I just wonder what things would be like if nobody used small talk. Also, one of my friends noticed that there is a little bit more of a patronizing tone that can occur when someone is responding to my hand motions and silent mouthing of words. I don't think this is a bad thing or unusual, it's just how people normally talk to children or other nonverbal beings. Anyway, just a random musing. If my voice isn't back by tomorrow morning, I am going to go to the doctor, because I think after two days of curious silence, it'll just get frustrating.