In this delightful little memento of Pauline Kael, who is often addressed as the most influential film critic of our time, her acerbic, yet honest insights on a variety of topics come through in this informal interview clearly and entertainingly as they did in her published reviews. Kael is infamous for writing with brutal honesty on movies, directors and actors. Although, it was not her intention, she did not care who she offended or upset, but called them as she saw them.
As the author, Francis Davis confesses how he once used Kael’s review to convince a friend to watch a movie with him, Kael’s enthusiasm for films is highly contagious for she praised or slammed the movie with frivolous vitality.
The honesty and sincerity under all her flare allows her readers to relate better with her reviews. Being introduced to this legendary critic for the first time, I almost fell in love with her when Kael said, "It's not fun writing about bad movies. I used to think it was bad for my skin." She also wanted to write about movies the way people really talked as they were leaving the theatre. She believed that – and I strongly agree to this point – writing in academic English in an attempt to elevate movies actually lowers them. She quotes, “It denied them what makes them distinctive.”
A fan of classic dancer-comedians like the Ritz Brothers, Pauline Kael, bluntly complains how we all have become a heavy-handed society that wants movies to be about the misery and alienation of our generation. I often wonder, especially in a class like Arts Journalism, if watching – and enjoying – light movies makes me appear less intelligent. People, especially in academic settings like Kalamazoo College, seem to expect a movie to be heavy, turgid and moral, as Pauline puts it.
The slim 126-page book devoted to a real conversation between two friends is more a highlight of her legacy than anything. Definitely interesting and enjoyable, yet, Afterglow has the feel of a finale of a reality TV show.
Tuesday, January 29, 2008
Monday, January 28, 2008
Once Review
Falling Slowly, Once Again
There is a guy who is living a life of a pathetic Dublin busker – or a self-claimed ‘broken hearted hoover fixer sucker guy’ - after a breakup, and a girl who is living a life of an immigrant mother with a young daughter she had as a result of her ‘hanky panky.’ As the piano accompanies the guitar solo, she starts to sing in harmony to the song he used to sing alone, and slowly the song that began as a pleading monologue turns into a rich conversation. The Irish musical film, Once, written and directed by John Carney, shows how beautiful our routined life can be without adding too many accidentals to the piece.
The movie poster asks, ‘how often do you find the right person?’ It is hard to say, but Glen Hansard. 37, and Marketa Irglova, 19, a real life couple, definitely had found each other. Both professional musicians with limited acting experiences, Hansard and Irglova appear awkward and flat in the film, however, Carney allows them to adapt this major flaw into their personalities on screen, and also as the authenticity of the film. Casting ‘good singers who could half act,’ as Carney said in a Chicago interview, was an essential choice. The music really is the centerpiece of the film, and the way the emotion of the character blends with the songs to create a unified story is genuine and sincere.
The two main characters remain nameless throughout the movie. Credited as Guy and Girl, they understand each other through music, thus asking questions or giving answers seems unnecessary. Likewise, the audiences are able to empathize with the characters without knowing their names nor being assured that their relationship inclines love. When Guy finally decides to ask Girl if she still loves her husband, she answers him back in Czech, coyly refusing to tell Guy what it means – you may choose to find out what it means online, but some things are better left unknown!
This $160,000 low-budget movie filmed with a long lens camera even had an apologetic warning sign in Korean theatres before the showing, regarding its poor screen condition. However, the unsteady, home video like camera angle is what makes the movie seem much more real. In the beginning scene, the camera bobs along as it draws closer to the singing Guy. For a moment there, it is as if we are seeing Grafton, Dublin’s famous shopping district, through Girl’s eyes, not through a camera lens. This honest quality brings the viewers right to the heart of Dublin.
The movie that starts out with a lonely street performer makes a smooth transition to the scene where Guy, Girl, their band, friends and families are all gathered together around the dinner table, showing the creation of relationships in parallel to that of music.
Carney does a great job quilting the little pieces of the ordinary lives with mesmerizing melodies, capturing the moment of two talented musicians with burdened shoulders ‘falling slowly’ for each other.
There is a guy who is living a life of a pathetic Dublin busker – or a self-claimed ‘broken hearted hoover fixer sucker guy’ - after a breakup, and a girl who is living a life of an immigrant mother with a young daughter she had as a result of her ‘hanky panky.’ As the piano accompanies the guitar solo, she starts to sing in harmony to the song he used to sing alone, and slowly the song that began as a pleading monologue turns into a rich conversation. The Irish musical film, Once, written and directed by John Carney, shows how beautiful our routined life can be without adding too many accidentals to the piece.
The movie poster asks, ‘how often do you find the right person?’ It is hard to say, but Glen Hansard. 37, and Marketa Irglova, 19, a real life couple, definitely had found each other. Both professional musicians with limited acting experiences, Hansard and Irglova appear awkward and flat in the film, however, Carney allows them to adapt this major flaw into their personalities on screen, and also as the authenticity of the film. Casting ‘good singers who could half act,’ as Carney said in a Chicago interview, was an essential choice. The music really is the centerpiece of the film, and the way the emotion of the character blends with the songs to create a unified story is genuine and sincere.
The two main characters remain nameless throughout the movie. Credited as Guy and Girl, they understand each other through music, thus asking questions or giving answers seems unnecessary. Likewise, the audiences are able to empathize with the characters without knowing their names nor being assured that their relationship inclines love. When Guy finally decides to ask Girl if she still loves her husband, she answers him back in Czech, coyly refusing to tell Guy what it means – you may choose to find out what it means online, but some things are better left unknown!
This $160,000 low-budget movie filmed with a long lens camera even had an apologetic warning sign in Korean theatres before the showing, regarding its poor screen condition. However, the unsteady, home video like camera angle is what makes the movie seem much more real. In the beginning scene, the camera bobs along as it draws closer to the singing Guy. For a moment there, it is as if we are seeing Grafton, Dublin’s famous shopping district, through Girl’s eyes, not through a camera lens. This honest quality brings the viewers right to the heart of Dublin.
The movie that starts out with a lonely street performer makes a smooth transition to the scene where Guy, Girl, their band, friends and families are all gathered together around the dinner table, showing the creation of relationships in parallel to that of music.
Carney does a great job quilting the little pieces of the ordinary lives with mesmerizing melodies, capturing the moment of two talented musicians with burdened shoulders ‘falling slowly’ for each other.
Wednesday, January 23, 2008
Writers Strike Response – Drum Roll Please, and the 2008 Oscar goes to…
So, the Writers Strike has resulted in an 1.5 billion dollar loss in Los Angeles area alone, and even more money is at stake with no clear answer to whether the show, specifically the Oscar, will still go on.
At the heart of this long lasted feud are three major issues: DVD residuals; union jurisdiction over animation and reality program writers; and compensation for "new media"—content written for the Internet. In more simple terms, ‘who gets the money?’ issue. With the nation’s most prominent writers like John Wells at the front of the picket line, I personally cannot be any less sympathetic for two reasons; they must have millions and millions of dollars already, do they really need more dough? Plus, I don’t even watch TV anymore!
Surprisingly, I am not alone. According to the SurveyUSA poll result, the 75% of respondents were found to have little to no concern over the strike, and the USA TODAY poll shows that 49% of the viewers said they were more likely to watch reruns, 40% said they planned to watch reality series and other programming not disrupted by the strike, and 26% were more likely to buy or rent DVDs of television series from past seasons. These not-so-empathetic poll results almost makes me wonder, ‘is the era when the Sunday paper’s TV guide was the new American Bible finally coming to an end?
Of course, the writers must fight for their rights, and of course, they should be compensated fairly for all their hard work which requires a lot of hair-pulling, energy drinks, and no sleep. But, is this really working? Will the 11 weeks of struggle be in vain? It is definitely a close competition between the Writers and the Producers, and the winner is soon to be announced. Now drum roll, please, and the 2008 Oscar goes to…
Related Links:
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/01/23/business/media/23strike.html?_r=1&scp=1&sq=writers++guild&st=nyt&oref=slogin
http://www.usatoday.com/life/television/news/2007-12-18-strike-poll_N.htm
http://www.surveyusa.com/client/PollReportEmail.aspx?g=bbb91c3a-2bf2-4ef4-a009-e588fef04ed2
At the heart of this long lasted feud are three major issues: DVD residuals; union jurisdiction over animation and reality program writers; and compensation for "new media"—content written for the Internet. In more simple terms, ‘who gets the money?’ issue. With the nation’s most prominent writers like John Wells at the front of the picket line, I personally cannot be any less sympathetic for two reasons; they must have millions and millions of dollars already, do they really need more dough? Plus, I don’t even watch TV anymore!
Surprisingly, I am not alone. According to the SurveyUSA poll result, the 75% of respondents were found to have little to no concern over the strike, and the USA TODAY poll shows that 49% of the viewers said they were more likely to watch reruns, 40% said they planned to watch reality series and other programming not disrupted by the strike, and 26% were more likely to buy or rent DVDs of television series from past seasons. These not-so-empathetic poll results almost makes me wonder, ‘is the era when the Sunday paper’s TV guide was the new American Bible finally coming to an end?
Of course, the writers must fight for their rights, and of course, they should be compensated fairly for all their hard work which requires a lot of hair-pulling, energy drinks, and no sleep. But, is this really working? Will the 11 weeks of struggle be in vain? It is definitely a close competition between the Writers and the Producers, and the winner is soon to be announced. Now drum roll, please, and the 2008 Oscar goes to…
Related Links:
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/01/23/business/media/23strike.html?_r=1&scp=1&sq=writers++guild&st=nyt&oref=slogin
http://www.usatoday.com/life/television/news/2007-12-18-strike-poll_N.htm
http://www.surveyusa.com/client/PollReportEmail.aspx?g=bbb91c3a-2bf2-4ef4-a009-e588fef04ed2
Tuesday, January 22, 2008
NYT Critical Defense
Article: “Feisty Gods, Bored with Ambrosia, Still Get a Kick Out of the Cancan,” Written by. Vivien Schweitzer
January 22th, Monday
The New York Times
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/01/22/arts/music/22kaye.html?_r=1&scp=1&sq=feisty+gods%2C+bored+with+ambrosia&st=nyt&oref=slogin
Vivien Schweitzer’s flashy headline about the feisty Greek Gods getting ‘a kick out of the Cancan’ is just enough to provoke the curiosity in any reader. Her flamboyant and almost over-the-top voice, along with the picture of the enthusiastic soprano Nicole Lee Aiossa promises a fun night out at the ‘irresistibly comical’ hit operetta “Orpheus in the Underworld.”
Although impressed by the success of the show in many European cities, as well as by the sets including the cute detail about the wheat field and the orchestra, Schweitzer is quite critical of the actors’ singing skills. She does make an attempt to be polite by saying that ‘the acting was generally significantly better than the singing,’ however, she simply cannot resist some harsh words slipping out of her mouth: ‘[singing] was often ragged.’
In focusing on the performance of the crew, Schweitzer seems to have forgotten to explain the plot of the operetta to the readers, or perhaps she just assumed that everyone is familiar with the Greek myth about the Orpheus.
In the kicker, Schweitzer does not forget to tell the readers that the colorful ending by a troupe of lively cancan dancers makes the show all worthwhile despite the sluggishness of the show at parts, once again reassuring them of her promise for a fun evening. Vivien invites her readers to lean back, relax and enjoy the show. After all, mocking the gods is never a serious business.
January 22th, Monday
The New York Times
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/01/22/arts/music/22kaye.html?_r=1&scp=1&sq=feisty+gods%2C+bored+with+ambrosia&st=nyt&oref=slogin
Vivien Schweitzer’s flashy headline about the feisty Greek Gods getting ‘a kick out of the Cancan’ is just enough to provoke the curiosity in any reader. Her flamboyant and almost over-the-top voice, along with the picture of the enthusiastic soprano Nicole Lee Aiossa promises a fun night out at the ‘irresistibly comical’ hit operetta “Orpheus in the Underworld.”
Although impressed by the success of the show in many European cities, as well as by the sets including the cute detail about the wheat field and the orchestra, Schweitzer is quite critical of the actors’ singing skills. She does make an attempt to be polite by saying that ‘the acting was generally significantly better than the singing,’ however, she simply cannot resist some harsh words slipping out of her mouth: ‘[singing] was often ragged.’
In focusing on the performance of the crew, Schweitzer seems to have forgotten to explain the plot of the operetta to the readers, or perhaps she just assumed that everyone is familiar with the Greek myth about the Orpheus.
In the kicker, Schweitzer does not forget to tell the readers that the colorful ending by a troupe of lively cancan dancers makes the show all worthwhile despite the sluggishness of the show at parts, once again reassuring them of her promise for a fun evening. Vivien invites her readers to lean back, relax and enjoy the show. After all, mocking the gods is never a serious business.
Response to the Gloria Steinem article
Gloria Steinem begins her New York Times Op-Ed article, ‘Women Are Never Front-Runners,’ by drawing an image of a woman in question. This character is a multiracial lawyer and a state legislator. The readers soon catch on and start to think, ‘wait, that just sounds like Barack Obama!’ The answer is yes, but with a little twist. Steinem follows by imposing her big question to her intrigued readers: “After less than one term there[in the Senate], do you believe she could be a viable candidate to head the most powerful nation on earth?” What she really means is, ‘now that the sex factor has been eliminated, do you really think Barack makes a better candidate than Hilary?’ In her clear and commanding voice, Steinem guides the readers in comparing the two candidates in more political terms – for example, the experiences they had in the Senate as well as in the White House - not so much in the typical ‘the first female vs. African American candidates’ way. After all, it is all about who can do a better job in the office, not so much about who would look better in the President’s suit.
In the long list of things that worries her, Gloria Steinem cleverly convinces the readers that Clinton is clearly the superior candidate, but at the same time she assures the readers of her support toward the Democratic Party by telling them how she would ‘volunteer if he[Obama]’s the nominee.’
In the long list of things that worries her, Gloria Steinem cleverly convinces the readers that Clinton is clearly the superior candidate, but at the same time she assures the readers of her support toward the Democratic Party by telling them how she would ‘volunteer if he[Obama]’s the nominee.’
Sunday, January 13, 2008
Sweeney Todd Review
Sweeney Todd: A Story of the ‘Bloody’ Good Revenge
By Heain Lee
The musical scores of Stephen Sondheim’s Sweeney Todd sound very dissonant at first, however, as it continues, those dissonant cords start play in a perfect, yet eerie harmony. Tim Burton, teamed up with Johnny Depp, the unofficial ‘persona’ for Burton from their previous works such as Edward Scissorhands and Sleepy Hollow, and Helena Bonham Carter of the Corpse Bride and Big Fish, once again created an eerie masterpiece dripping in blood; the adaptation of Sondheim’s musical Sweeney Todd - the Demon Barber of the Fleet Street. From the opening scene, the screen version of Sweeney Todd is full of Burton’s brilliance. As Sweeny Todd (played by Depp) walks to Mrs. Lovett’s Shop on the Fleet Street upon his arrival in London, the camera travels – more like floats – along the narrow streets of London, and the dark city we see looks very much like a cartoon.
Pale, dry and detached from everything with a dark sense of humor, Johnny Depp transforms himself into the perfect Mr. Todd from the musical. In the scene where Todd reunites with his blades, which he calls ‘his friends’, Depp sings with the glare as if he is looking at a real lover or a friend and Mrs. Lovett savors the lyrics imagining Todd confessing his undying love for her. Throughout the movie, Todd and Lovett often sing the same song yet it means two totally different things. Burton does a splendid job capturing this ‘conflict’ on screen.
Helena Bonham Carter, on the other hand, created a whole new Mrs. Lovett through her superb acting on screen. The new Mrs. Lovett is a dreamer and a lover. The scene where she daydreams and sings about her their happy future together next to Todd who has a blank look on his face is like seeing the couple from the Corpse Bride in real life. In the score ‘Not While I’m Around,’ Mrs. Lovett and Toby shares a long embrace that makes them appear like a mother and a son, but at the same time like lovers. This ambiguous embrace and the pretty singing voice of little Toby is enough to give anyone a chill up and down one’s spine.
The reason why Sweeney Todd is so eerie is not so much because of all the blood we see - as the matter of fact, the obviously fake blood squirting everywhere is so unreal that it looks animated – but because of the motive behind all the killing and the emotional detachment. The use of fake flood allows Burton to capture the murder to the very last moment, which elevates its brutality - not necessarily to the eyes of the audience but the effect of it. Tim Burton not only did a good job adopting a famous musical into a film, but took one step further and created his own Burton’s Sweeney Todd. A perfect harmony created by contrasting concepts like horror/murder story and humor/comedy dazzles the audience for two hours, just like Sondheim’s dissonant musical scores. Seeing familiar actors like Johnny Depp and Alan Rickman singing is a pleasant surprise – they all did a good job - and the great costumes are not to be missed!
By Heain Lee
The musical scores of Stephen Sondheim’s Sweeney Todd sound very dissonant at first, however, as it continues, those dissonant cords start play in a perfect, yet eerie harmony. Tim Burton, teamed up with Johnny Depp, the unofficial ‘persona’ for Burton from their previous works such as Edward Scissorhands and Sleepy Hollow, and Helena Bonham Carter of the Corpse Bride and Big Fish, once again created an eerie masterpiece dripping in blood; the adaptation of Sondheim’s musical Sweeney Todd - the Demon Barber of the Fleet Street. From the opening scene, the screen version of Sweeney Todd is full of Burton’s brilliance. As Sweeny Todd (played by Depp) walks to Mrs. Lovett’s Shop on the Fleet Street upon his arrival in London, the camera travels – more like floats – along the narrow streets of London, and the dark city we see looks very much like a cartoon.
Pale, dry and detached from everything with a dark sense of humor, Johnny Depp transforms himself into the perfect Mr. Todd from the musical. In the scene where Todd reunites with his blades, which he calls ‘his friends’, Depp sings with the glare as if he is looking at a real lover or a friend and Mrs. Lovett savors the lyrics imagining Todd confessing his undying love for her. Throughout the movie, Todd and Lovett often sing the same song yet it means two totally different things. Burton does a splendid job capturing this ‘conflict’ on screen.
Helena Bonham Carter, on the other hand, created a whole new Mrs. Lovett through her superb acting on screen. The new Mrs. Lovett is a dreamer and a lover. The scene where she daydreams and sings about her their happy future together next to Todd who has a blank look on his face is like seeing the couple from the Corpse Bride in real life. In the score ‘Not While I’m Around,’ Mrs. Lovett and Toby shares a long embrace that makes them appear like a mother and a son, but at the same time like lovers. This ambiguous embrace and the pretty singing voice of little Toby is enough to give anyone a chill up and down one’s spine.
The reason why Sweeney Todd is so eerie is not so much because of all the blood we see - as the matter of fact, the obviously fake blood squirting everywhere is so unreal that it looks animated – but because of the motive behind all the killing and the emotional detachment. The use of fake flood allows Burton to capture the murder to the very last moment, which elevates its brutality - not necessarily to the eyes of the audience but the effect of it. Tim Burton not only did a good job adopting a famous musical into a film, but took one step further and created his own Burton’s Sweeney Todd. A perfect harmony created by contrasting concepts like horror/murder story and humor/comedy dazzles the audience for two hours, just like Sondheim’s dissonant musical scores. Seeing familiar actors like Johnny Depp and Alan Rickman singing is a pleasant surprise – they all did a good job - and the great costumes are not to be missed!
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
