(no subject)
++ In the continuing saga of ayrdaomei and Her EverShrinking F-List, I've done another cut. (But hey, some credit! It's been...like two months since the last one.) As ever, no offense intended. I've just been finding myself with less and less to say about more and more journal entries on my friends view.
++ You know, my not posting much about myself? It's really not for lack of trying. Yesterday, I got about half a sentence into a heavily, heavily filtered post. Spent about 10 minutes trying to reword just that half sentence. Decided posting about myself and things unrelated to fandom is for the birds.
++ Okay, I will say this: HA! Pert stuff aside, sounds familiar.
++ Been to the movies a bit in the past week:
Blood Diamond: good, after a fashion? I don't think it struck the proper balance of message and compelling storytelling. I was thinking about other message movies I've loved - Tears of the Sun, The Constant Gardener, Hotel Rwanda. I think what all those movies had in common was they were very good about letting the message come to you, while the movie itself just focused on telling a story about a person, or small group of people. Take both Tears and Rwanda which had messages about the criminality of international nonintervention in cases of genocide. Instead of lecturing us about how awful it was, the movie told a story about a group of people and asked "Is this tolerable?" There was a trust in the audience, I think, to...recognize certain truths and come to their own conclusions. Whereas Blood Diamond is too much lecture and not enough letting me close to the characters. If that makes sense. I am also tempted to say Blood Diamond spread its focus too much. I think the film could have worked with the storytelling focused on Soloman and Archer. But they tried to shoehorn Maddy into it, plot device that she was for lecturing the audience and getting the boys through Africa, and it skewed things the wrong way. Somehow, in a story about conflict diamonds and what an African fisherman goes through to reunite his family, the African fisherman became a tertiary character. Like,the film wanted to lecture me about blood diamonds and the wrong and right, while at the same time asking me to care about the ongoing flirtation between Archer and Maddy and it's just like "hmmm....no." This movie needed way more focus on Soloman. I think we got a really good idea of Danny, as the film wore on, what made him tick. But not so much Soloman, and I really wanted to know. I think it's fair to say that not every father who loves their child would have gone through the lengths Soloman did to find his son. So what made Soloman different? I have no idea. Was he not torn by fears of what would happen to his wife and daughters if he wasn't successful? I have no idea. And I wanted to! I could used a little less time on Maddy and her eyes and more time on the guy whose existence essentially drives the plot of this film, thanks.
On the plus: I have to say I thought Leo was really good, again. And I joked on his accent when I first saw the trailer for the film, but in the context of the other voices in the film, his accent seems spot on. I really hope he nabs the Golden Globe for The Departed, but having seen him in this, I'm afraid now he'll split the vote against himself. Hope not. **crosses fingers**
I don't even really need a cut for Charlotte's Web: lame! It was just very dry and straight-forward. Dakota Fanning continues to be too good and cute for words, and Julia Roberts has a very soothing voice, but beyond that, this movie did absolutely nothing for me. And I know, I know, I'm not the target audience. But I see kids movies ALL THE TIME, and good, compelling storytelling should click on some level for anyone, regardless of the target demographic. I mean, I still get choked up reading The Runaway Bunny and Harold and the Purple Crayon. But I didn't really care for this movie and I mostly didn't care whether Wilbur made it or not, but that it mattered to Charlotte.
Wow, where to start with Casino Royale. I saw it Friday afternoon and was compleeeeeeeeeeeeetely underwhelmed. Not that I thought it was a bad movie, but as johnnybvo put it, guess I'm more of a fan of the over-the-top aspect of the Bond films than I thought. This seemed like a decent spy movie, but not what I expect from my Bond. I know you have to allow a little leeway for the fact that they're setting up Bond's early days and all that, but still. I mean, really, how fucking lame was the villian? He was so not badass. I'm sorry, you don't establish badassity by just tossing out that he knew 9/11 was going to happen and did nothing but position himself to make money off it. And no, you don't establish badassity by having him weep blood and stare at James from across a table for 30 minutes. The Bond women were lacking and while Eva can be attractive, I really hated her in that garish red lipstick she wore for many of her early scenes. She is so much prettier when she's not made up. Like in the bathroom scene where James brings her the dress and later on at the hospital, when she tells him he makes her feel reborn. There were a few moments sprinkled throughout, but for the most part I was sorely disappointed. Like I could have just rewatched the Bourne movies. I missed the things that make Bond Bond, you know? I missed Moneypenny. I missed the gadgets. I missed the insane villain and his crazy plot to do something completely horrible. Yes, funding terrorism is bad, mmmkay. But it's like, not Bond villain bad, I'm sorry. And what the hell is with James not being the one to kill said baddie? So lame.
I ended up seeing the film again on Saturday evening, because my dad wanted to see it. I liked it slightly better the second time around. It was neat to rewatch and notice how many of Vesper's reactions to developments at the casino could now be read a different way. The highlights of the film remained the free-running sequence, and the way Bond wore the hell out of those corduroys in that walk-and-talk with M. I give my heartfelt thanks to the director of the film for that shot from behind of them in the gazebo. Hellllllooooo, male nurse. As Dot used to say. I like Craig as Bond, I do. I mean, he works for me; it was the story I found lacking. He had superb chemistry with M in their too short scenes together. I love his more athletic Bond, especially the way he runs (though I'm so not buying that he wasn't even breathing hard by the time he got to the embassy). I like his delivery of funner dialogue - that his smartass comes with a touch of playful. I kinda liked how Bond's relationship with Vesper echoed his relationship with Elektra in The World Is Not Enough. But otherwise? Meh to the movie as a whole.
++ In books: Robert B. Parker has a new Spenser novel out! The Spenser stories have been on the decline for a long while now - you read them in like a half a day, and Spenser's funny, and beats some sense into some people, but nothing more gripping than that. Still, I always get excited when I hear Parker's written another, always eager to get my hands on it. There's always such potential for goodness before you've opened a book, you know? And rather surprisingly, since it's been out less than a month, I found one of the copies still on the shelf at the local library. Good times. Course, my dad always calls first dibs on any Spenser book I bring home, so I also picked up the next in Dean Koontz's Odd Thomas collection. Oh, and johnnybvo got me Pride of Baghdad, which I heard made Playboy's list of the seven best fiction books in '06. And if that's not a compelling endorsement, I don't know what is ^_~ Leisure reading, yay.
++ Has anyone seen Mandy Patinkin in concert? He's coming to the Lyric Opera House next month and I'm seriously thinking of going. Balcony seats are just under $30, which is a bit much, but I think it might be worth $30 to hear Mandy perform some of my Sondheim favorites live for once in my life. Jim Gaffigan is doing a comedy show the night before and as much as I love Jim, he's come a ways from his Improv days it seems. Tickets for his show are rather pricey considering I'm fairly sure he's still not a real mainstream name in stand-up. Or maybe he is, I dunno. At any rate, I won't be seeing him again.
++ Doesn't look like we'll be getting any snow this coming week :/ I know, I shouldn't talk when people are buried under it in some places. But. I just find rain especially draining this time of year. If it's going to be wet, I wish we'd get some snow.
++ You know, my not posting much about myself? It's really not for lack of trying. Yesterday, I got about half a sentence into a heavily, heavily filtered post. Spent about 10 minutes trying to reword just that half sentence. Decided posting about myself and things unrelated to fandom is for the birds.
++ Okay, I will say this: HA! Pert stuff aside, sounds familiar.
++ Been to the movies a bit in the past week:
Blood Diamond: good, after a fashion? I don't think it struck the proper balance of message and compelling storytelling. I was thinking about other message movies I've loved - Tears of the Sun, The Constant Gardener, Hotel Rwanda. I think what all those movies had in common was they were very good about letting the message come to you, while the movie itself just focused on telling a story about a person, or small group of people. Take both Tears and Rwanda which had messages about the criminality of international nonintervention in cases of genocide. Instead of lecturing us about how awful it was, the movie told a story about a group of people and asked "Is this tolerable?" There was a trust in the audience, I think, to...recognize certain truths and come to their own conclusions. Whereas Blood Diamond is too much lecture and not enough letting me close to the characters. If that makes sense. I am also tempted to say Blood Diamond spread its focus too much. I think the film could have worked with the storytelling focused on Soloman and Archer. But they tried to shoehorn Maddy into it, plot device that she was for lecturing the audience and getting the boys through Africa, and it skewed things the wrong way. Somehow, in a story about conflict diamonds and what an African fisherman goes through to reunite his family, the African fisherman became a tertiary character. Like,the film wanted to lecture me about blood diamonds and the wrong and right, while at the same time asking me to care about the ongoing flirtation between Archer and Maddy and it's just like "hmmm....no." This movie needed way more focus on Soloman. I think we got a really good idea of Danny, as the film wore on, what made him tick. But not so much Soloman, and I really wanted to know. I think it's fair to say that not every father who loves their child would have gone through the lengths Soloman did to find his son. So what made Soloman different? I have no idea. Was he not torn by fears of what would happen to his wife and daughters if he wasn't successful? I have no idea. And I wanted to! I could used a little less time on Maddy and her eyes and more time on the guy whose existence essentially drives the plot of this film, thanks.
On the plus: I have to say I thought Leo was really good, again. And I joked on his accent when I first saw the trailer for the film, but in the context of the other voices in the film, his accent seems spot on. I really hope he nabs the Golden Globe for The Departed, but having seen him in this, I'm afraid now he'll split the vote against himself. Hope not. **crosses fingers**
I don't even really need a cut for Charlotte's Web: lame! It was just very dry and straight-forward. Dakota Fanning continues to be too good and cute for words, and Julia Roberts has a very soothing voice, but beyond that, this movie did absolutely nothing for me. And I know, I know, I'm not the target audience. But I see kids movies ALL THE TIME, and good, compelling storytelling should click on some level for anyone, regardless of the target demographic. I mean, I still get choked up reading The Runaway Bunny and Harold and the Purple Crayon. But I didn't really care for this movie and I mostly didn't care whether Wilbur made it or not, but that it mattered to Charlotte.
Wow, where to start with Casino Royale. I saw it Friday afternoon and was compleeeeeeeeeeeeetely underwhelmed. Not that I thought it was a bad movie, but as johnnybvo put it, guess I'm more of a fan of the over-the-top aspect of the Bond films than I thought. This seemed like a decent spy movie, but not what I expect from my Bond. I know you have to allow a little leeway for the fact that they're setting up Bond's early days and all that, but still. I mean, really, how fucking lame was the villian? He was so not badass. I'm sorry, you don't establish badassity by just tossing out that he knew 9/11 was going to happen and did nothing but position himself to make money off it. And no, you don't establish badassity by having him weep blood and stare at James from across a table for 30 minutes. The Bond women were lacking and while Eva can be attractive, I really hated her in that garish red lipstick she wore for many of her early scenes. She is so much prettier when she's not made up. Like in the bathroom scene where James brings her the dress and later on at the hospital, when she tells him he makes her feel reborn. There were a few moments sprinkled throughout, but for the most part I was sorely disappointed. Like I could have just rewatched the Bourne movies. I missed the things that make Bond Bond, you know? I missed Moneypenny. I missed the gadgets. I missed the insane villain and his crazy plot to do something completely horrible. Yes, funding terrorism is bad, mmmkay. But it's like, not Bond villain bad, I'm sorry. And what the hell is with James not being the one to kill said baddie? So lame.
I ended up seeing the film again on Saturday evening, because my dad wanted to see it. I liked it slightly better the second time around. It was neat to rewatch and notice how many of Vesper's reactions to developments at the casino could now be read a different way. The highlights of the film remained the free-running sequence, and the way Bond wore the hell out of those corduroys in that walk-and-talk with M. I give my heartfelt thanks to the director of the film for that shot from behind of them in the gazebo. Hellllllooooo, male nurse. As Dot used to say. I like Craig as Bond, I do. I mean, he works for me; it was the story I found lacking. He had superb chemistry with M in their too short scenes together. I love his more athletic Bond, especially the way he runs (though I'm so not buying that he wasn't even breathing hard by the time he got to the embassy). I like his delivery of funner dialogue - that his smartass comes with a touch of playful. I kinda liked how Bond's relationship with Vesper echoed his relationship with Elektra in The World Is Not Enough. But otherwise? Meh to the movie as a whole.
++ In books: Robert B. Parker has a new Spenser novel out! The Spenser stories have been on the decline for a long while now - you read them in like a half a day, and Spenser's funny, and beats some sense into some people, but nothing more gripping than that. Still, I always get excited when I hear Parker's written another, always eager to get my hands on it. There's always such potential for goodness before you've opened a book, you know? And rather surprisingly, since it's been out less than a month, I found one of the copies still on the shelf at the local library. Good times. Course, my dad always calls first dibs on any Spenser book I bring home, so I also picked up the next in Dean Koontz's Odd Thomas collection. Oh, and johnnybvo got me Pride of Baghdad, which I heard made Playboy's list of the seven best fiction books in '06. And if that's not a compelling endorsement, I don't know what is ^_~ Leisure reading, yay.
++ Has anyone seen Mandy Patinkin in concert? He's coming to the Lyric Opera House next month and I'm seriously thinking of going. Balcony seats are just under $30, which is a bit much, but I think it might be worth $30 to hear Mandy perform some of my Sondheim favorites live for once in my life. Jim Gaffigan is doing a comedy show the night before and as much as I love Jim, he's come a ways from his Improv days it seems. Tickets for his show are rather pricey considering I'm fairly sure he's still not a real mainstream name in stand-up. Or maybe he is, I dunno. At any rate, I won't be seeing him again.
++ Doesn't look like we'll be getting any snow this coming week :/ I know, I shouldn't talk when people are buried under it in some places. But. I just find rain especially draining this time of year. If it's going to be wet, I wish we'd get some snow.