Possession: The Movie

 Disclaimer: I fully understand that movies aren't books and movies have to make money and I will try to limit any 'but the book was better' stuff.

While I did enjoy watching the movie as its own thing, I stand by my opinion that Gwynneth and Eckhart were badly cast, him more so than her. Part of why I think she was badly cast is probably my personal dislike for her, and that's not entirely fair, but I do think it would be better to have cast someone actually English. Even though Lena Headey was a great Blanche I think she could have also been a spot on Maude. I'm really glad that with the casting on Eckhart they made the character American although I think my ideal casting would have been Ben Chaplin. He's who I pictured when I was reading the book.

The Victorian half of the plot was done really well. Like I said I thought Blanche was well-cast and I think this was my introduction to Jennifer Ehle, who was fantastic as Christabel. I really need to get on top of watching the BBC Pride and Prejudice. Also I could basically just stare at Jeremy Northam in period costumes all day and be perfectly happy. He was perhaps a little better looking and warmer than I had pictured Ash being but I think that's an ok concession for the movie version to make; worth noting but not worth complaining about.

read on

Heavy Handed But Enjoyable

I finally got around to watching Vicky Cristina Barcelona last night*. I was kind of disappointed with it even though I did enjoy watching it.

I mostly didn't like the heavy handed exposition in both the narration and the dialogue and the false dichotomy that was set up between 'artistic people' and 'sensible people'. I don't mind narration in general, and at times I even like it (Pushing Daisies was one such instance), but just about everything the narrator said was repeated by the characters at least twice in dialogue. We did not need to hear that Juan Antonio just went through a tumultuous divorce three times, once is more than enough.

Also, I felt like the differences in character between Vicky and Cristina and Juan Antonio and Vicky's husband were, in addition to being overly explained, oversimplified. I much preferred how Woody Allen showed in Melinda and Melinda the differences of character of one person in two different situations. In that film it seemed like it would be much easier to make a black and white contrast between the comedy Melinda and the tragedy Melinda but it was much subtler than the passionate artist/pragmatic student setup in Vicky Cristina Barcelona. It also kind of annoyed me that the guy who played Vicky's husband (aka Claire's hot republican boyfriend from Six Feet Under) is continually being typecast as a wet blanket, square (see also Julie and Julia).

Additionally, it was distracting that Catalan culture played a major part in the film but it seemed like everyone was speaking Castilian.

Overall though, despite its flaws, the performances are what really saved the film; specifically Javier and Penelope's**.

Also, I still really want to go to Spain.

*I did not watch this last night but I had watched it the night before I wrote this. According to the time stamp I watched it on July 14th which is still long after the movie actually came out anyway. Better late then never.

**When I watched the film I hadn't seen Rebecca Hall in anything before. Although I don't think her performance in this film stood up to Javier and Penelope's respective performances I did see her in Wide Sargasso Sea and she was absolutely incredible in that.

read on

NY Times Clutches Pearls Over Body Hair

I've read about the fact that Mo'Nique's doesn't shave her legs on a lot of blogs. The first time I read about it was a while ago. It was definitely pre-Precious because when her leg hair was being talked about in an awards show context I was already aware of the fact. The New York Times, perennially behind the times, just decided to tackle the issue of body hair on the red carpet yesterday. It's a silly piece with a gossip blog tone.

The part that bothered me most:

...Mo’Nique...lifted her floor-length dress to reveal her unshaved calves, abundant in their hairiness. This did not go over well. The New York Daily News crowned her “the least superficial actress ever.” On Web sites like TMZ.com, people posted comments like “I have to HURL now ... Disgusting is an understatement.” It would seem that a collective ewww rang out nationwide, one designed to make every ’tween girl snap to attention and realize that leg hair is not allowed.

I don't understand how being called 'the least superficial actress ever' consisitutes not going over well. Does the NYT value superficiality so much that pointing out ones lack of superficiality is an insult? Also why are comments from TMZ being used as a source? What's next, quoting bigots on YouTube in an article about race relations?

If this is an attempt from the NYT to be snarky and relevant it's worrying.

Via Roger Ebert's twitter.

read on

Doppelgängland

Brad Pitt And Julian Barratt



Both are dashing actors in their 40's who have fathered twins and have temporarily shared similar facial hair (something I obviously think is of great importance). They don't really seem to have much else in common.

I think, if given the opportunity, Julian could do a really good job in more serious, mainstream roles if that's what he wanted. If he'd been in Benjamin Button I might have actually had some desire to see it. Alternatively I can't quite see Brad hanging out in the Zooniverse with Vince Noir. He may like jazz though...

read on

Early Morning* Outrage

Ugh!! So I was reading some other blogs and had the TV on in the background. The Rachael Ray Show was on and this plastic surgeon was talking about nose jobs and brought up Adrien Brody. I've loved him since he was the (kind of faux) punk in Summer of Sam. His face is perfect and his nose suits him (and I've always had a thing for big noses). This effing plastic surgeon puts up a side by side pic of Adrien and what he'd look like with a nose-job. He said even though he's very handsome, that the smaller nose fit his face better.

TOTAL LIE!! In the after picture his nose did not balance out his chin, and the proportionality was gone from his face. I'm actually surprised the Dr. didn't suggest shaving down his chin bone as well. Jesus...I'm so sick of people getting cookie cutter noses. So many awesome looking people don't have cookie cutter noses. Besides Adrien, Noel Fielding and Erin O'Connor spring immediately to mind.

After the Adrien face massacre he brought up a similar side by side showing a woman in the audience what her nose could look like post-rhinoplasty. She basically said she wanted to get the surgery but couldn't afford to so the doc was basically showing her what she can't have. Nice...

For the rest of the segment, Rachael, who doesn't really seem all that vain, had to ooh and aah over things from breast implants to eyebrow growth serum. It came off as totally fake and pandering, the same way she seems to be pandering when she does segments for people with children (ok, I have watched her show before). I tend to think it's because producers are likely pressuring her to try too hard to appeal to her perceived audience. I wonder if this will change now that the demographics of people at home at 10am, due to unemployment, become very different.

*I'm fully aware that 10am isn't really considered early morning but I freelance and I stay up really late so to me it's pretty much early morning.

read on