|
|
|
|
 |
|
Movies
Cinefile detritus and movie reviews |
|
|
 |
August 29, 2003 |
On Crooked Timber, Brian is teaching a course in time travel and has some fascinating thoughts on time travel movies:
In Back to the Future in 1985 the first time around George works for Biff, and the second time around, after Marty has changed the past, Biff works for George. So this is a violation of the one-dimensionality principle. I had always assumed that the movie could be made sense of on a ‘branching time’ model. Indeed in the second movie that’s exactly the kind of model they say they are using.
He talks extensively about the Back to the Future (and don't miss the excellent comments as well). Where was this course when I was in university?
9:43:33 AM
Movies
|
|
August 26, 2003 |
I've got infonesia regarding where I found this, but this is a fascinating article about the way Maori deal with young offenders:
This is restorative justice, a system that has transformed the way juvenile offenders are treated in New Zealand and now embraced wholeheartedly by the British Government. It brings criminals and their victims face to face, and assigns responsibility for retribution to families and the community.
I saw Whalerider on the weekend, which was a somewhat flawed but entertaining tale of a Maori tribe's struggle for meaning in the modern world. It kind of traded on its ethnicity, was overly serious, and clumsily directed, but was still a pretty fascinating and rare look at the New Zealand indigenous peoples.
9:49:00 PM
Movies Politics
|
Angels in America is my favourite play. It's extraordinarily well-written, wonderfully creative and a clinic in magic realism. It also happens to be about 6 hours long, all told.
So, it was with mixed feelings that I learned that Mike Nichols was directing a mini-series adaptation for HBO. My concerns were eased, though, when I read about the casting, which includes Meryl Streep, Al Pacino (in a role he was born to play), James Cromwell, Emma Thompson and (the luminous) Mary-Louise Parker (who, frankly, deserves an honourable mention for my freebie list).
Apparently it's supposed to air this Christmas, which is a little odd, as it's a pretty serious play about, among other things, AIDS. And I don't think there's much Yuletide content. But, what the heck, I look forward to it.
10:37:44 AM
Movies The Arts
|
|
August 19, 2003 |
This article describes how it's increasingly difficult for studios to 'buy their gross'--that is, to throw big advertising dollars at a film to ensure a big opening weekend. Opening weekend numbers, incidentally, are critically important to perceptions of a film's success. What's changed? Technology. E-mail, the cell phone, IM--they all make it easier for consumers to virally distribute a good or (more often) bad review of a film that has just opened. This was the most interesting fact in the article:
Widely released movies this summer dropped off an average of 51% between their first weekend and their second, according to Nielsen EDI Inc., a box office tracking firm. Five years ago, the drop-off averaged 40.1%.
Of course, that may reflect the increasing crappiness of summer blockbusters, but that's neither here nor there. Here's an interesting chart of the biggest second weekend drops in modern cinema history. I was surprised to see Mallrats, Star Trek: Nemesis and Hulk on that list.
10:27:31 AM
Movies Technology
|
|
August 13, 2003 |
Though I've never acted, I've got a background in theatre and film. So, I've known plenty of actors, held lots of auditions and seen lots of plays and movies. Freakgirlspew, who's doing some freelance work for a casting agency, reminded me of a few thoughts I had on acting the other day.
There's a tremendous gender imbalance among actors. In my experience, there's probably 1 man for every 8 women who are interested in acting. Furthermore, as we all know, there generally tend to be more roles for men than women. What does that mean? Most of the male actors I've known who have even a modicum of work have, by the age of 30, established themselves. That is, they're getting regular paying work. They're not Brad Pitt, but they've made a profession out of acting.
For the women, this is, unfortunately, a rare thing. Which is tragic, in a way, because generally the women are better, more committed and more thoughtful actors than the men.
9:35:56 AM
Movies The Arts
|
|
August 8, 2003 |
Harpoon asked me to explain what hacking your DVD is about. First, a little background. First of all, ostensibly to prevent piracy (and no doubt to sell more DVDs), the DVD conglomerate (whatever they're called) divded the world up into six geographical regions. Players configured for, say, region 1, can not play region 2 DVDs. Generally, for people who relocate to a new region, you can switch the region on your player a limited number of times (like 5 or so).
This is a problem for Europeans who purchase/order a lot of their movies from North America. This is also a problem for ex-pats living anywhere, who may want to see their native cinema, but may also want to watch locally-produced DVDs. They obviously can't be switching regions every day or their player would be useless in a week. What's the solution? The multi-region hack.
Basically, using a store-bought universal remote or a PalmPilot running remote control emulation software (that is, not physically opening up your DVD player), you can reconfigure your player to play DVDs from any region. This is handy for those cases I described above. For more information on this process, check out DVD Reviewer.
11:44:49 AM
Movies Technology
|
I'm afraid the review isn't online, but I was displeased with the review of the Dave Matthews concert. I didn't go to the concert, and the review, I guess, is generally positive. However, the quality of the criticism is shameful. It's hardly criticism at all. I sent off this quick letter to the editor:
A note to Mr. Mercier on his Dave Matthews review: traditionally a concert review involves actually commenting on the music. Mr. Mercier expends three-quarters of his review on merchandising, the band's dress and the audience's antics. While I didn't attend the concert, I'm curious about how it actually sounded. The best he can offer her is a comment on Matthews 'obviously ailing voice' (which was obvious, as the singer admitted this himself on-stage) and 'some spaced-out base work'. He even gives the wrong title to that famous Bob Dylan song, All Along the Watchtower. Your writer seems to have abandoned music criticism, and written an article about being at the Dave Matthews concert. I can only conclude that Mr. Mercier's expertise lies in another genre of music, or another journalistic beat altogether.
If anybody finds that review in the strangeness that is the Vancouver Sun online, let me know.
As a bonus, here's a piece on why there will always be a critic who will stick his thumb up. It's pretty lightweight, but still an interesting read. It reminded me of the excellent Hollywood Bitchslap.
UPDATE: I had a couple of requests for the review, so I got off my lazy ass and slapped it on the scanner. Here it is. There's a nearly-as-naff review from the Vancouver Province here.
9:29:15 AM
Movies Music
|
|
August 6, 2003 |
I haven't actually seen this movie. Though I'm a movie slut, and will see nearly anything, this movie is below even my tolerance level. I'm not going to add to the tidal wave of vitriol that Gigli is(apparently deservedly) receiving, but I've just got a couple of minor notes. First, though, I can't go any further without quoting from a couple of reviews:
"A recent episode of South Park suggested that a fourth-grader's hand puppet could turn in a better performance than Ms. Lopez, and in the case of Gigli, it's hard to argue."-- Luke Y. Thompson
"It's worth knowing how to pronounce Gigli because it will enter the vocabulary as a word meaning 'massive box-office flop; an embarrassment caused by Hollywood's inability to say no to powerful creative types. See also: Ishtar.'"-- Jeffrey Westhoff
Now that's cinematic criticism. I see that it's also beaten out From Justin to Kelly for worst movie ever on IMDB.
But to the point. Most of you probably already know this, but Ms. Lopez plays a lesbian in this film. That's right, her character's gay. So there's no nooky, and presumably very little romantic or sexual tension. But does the studio want you to know that? Nope. Hence the carefully-edited trailer which hints at it, but never actually says it. And why the movie poster is all touchy-feely, but in a vague sort of way.
But I must credit Mr. Affleck (there's sentence you won't read again in this blog anytime soon). He's admitted that it's a bad movie. Albeit, with a bizarre metaphor, but whatever:
“The movie didn’t work,” Affleck tells Daily Variety. “We tried to fix it but it was like putting a fish’s tail on a donkey’s head.”
Encouraginly, in Kevin Smith's new film Jersey Girl, which also stars Mr. Affleck and Ms. Lopez, the latter dies early in the picture and is replaced as love interest by Liv Tyler. Nice.
8:50:07 AM
Movies
|
|
August 3, 2003 |
While attending the mindless but enjoyable American Wedding, I was forced to sit through the latest round of anti-piracy propaganda from the MPAA. It's an ad featuring a bushy-bearded veteran set designer explaining how his career gets hurt by movie piracy. You can watch the load of bollocks here (I know, the interface confused me too).
This was just offensive on all sorts of levels. I almost got up, threw my Junior Mints at the screen and walked out of the theatre right there. It's one thing to have to watch all that advertising before a film, but another to be lectured to by some unionized set jockey. What the hell does he care about piracy? He's been working on feature films since The Big Chill--I'd say his position is pretty secure. And it's not like his wage is going to change because the Studios make a little less (or more) money. He's in a frickin' union! Has the MPAA been living in a cave for the past five years? Have they not watched the RIAA screw up this issue? Apparently all the MPAA has learned is to antagonize its customers. Tomorrow I'm writing to Canada's film distributors and the manager at the Granville cinema to explain the load of crap they're foisting on their customers.
It's notable that the MPAA has not used movie stars to caution viewers, the way the RIAA did. In truth, it's the stars who have more to lose. After all, if the studios have less money, then they're only going to pay Harrison Ford 15 million instead of 20 for his next movie. That's a serious pay cut.
By the way, on the MPAA's fear-mongering respectcopyrights.org, they offer their explanation of copyright. It's striking that (despite the fact they quote the relavent part of the constitution), they don't mention that copyright is only to be applied for 'limited times.'
Slashdot discusses this subject...that's what reminded me of the fiasco.
11:39:18 PM
Movies The Commons
|
|
|
|
|
