Thought Chasm

Archive for November, 2006

Chumscrubber

Monday, November 27th, 2006

this is a movie that you likely haven’t heard of. it’s another film about the escape from suburbia. This one has many things going for it, including a quality cast << glenn close, ralph fiennes, jamie bell, and a culkin >> and some hilarious commentary on the bubble that is suburban life. The movie boils down to a bunch of pill-popping kids whose parents are too involved in their own business to notice, but it has a strong undercurrent that creates a higher quality story than I expected.

The film’s commentary is intriguing and smart. The depiction of the characters and the isolation they feel, while surrounded by people, is intricate, but done well. Close does a great job of translating her characters’ desperation. Belle is beautiful and carries her weight on screen even if her role is a shallow one. I have yet to see billy elliot, but I think Bell did a great job here. His character has many levels and he portrays his social distance genuinely.

As far as the film itself I think it was pretty dece. There wasn’t much in innovation on the directing side, but there are parts << like the overlaying of dean trying to sleep with carrie doing yardwork >> that help drive the story. The tie-in to the video game could have been better, but was symbolically a great move.

This is a better style of film for depicting the suburban disillusion than say, orange county, because it lets the characters depression seep to the surface. It’s weighty enough to portray a reality that is becoming more and more popular while still being witty and dark. It describes the severe isolation and misunderstandings between people in an age where contact is as simple and easy as ever.

It won’t change your life, but anyone who has ever set foot in a suburban housing development and is disenchanted with the white picket fence, 2.5 child, american dream will get a kick out this one.

***

Tags: rent
Posted in chasm reviews | Comments Off

WTF?!? 11.17.06

Friday, November 17th, 2006

I realize this video is a few days old, but this is ridiculous. This man has the ignorance of a fifteen-year-old and the common sense of someone half that age. These comments are incredibly inappropriate, “politically incorrect” or not. While he spends half of the time backtracking to cover his ass, he uses the other half perpetuating the myth that Islam is an evil religion and the followers are all working against the Christian/American yah… cause they’re basically the same, if not legally (yet) good.

Glenn spouts off about having the common sense of the nation, but he speaks from a place only Bill O’Reilly can claim as common. Though he has made a couple interesting points in the past, he continues to ignore public opinion and go the route of the far-right. You would think an election that clearly though not as strongly as I would have hoped showed the nation’s views as more moderate, or even liberal, would hamper this backward, socially-handicapped, post-9/11, fearmongering. You would think someone with a national voice would try to help in the progress of that nation. You would think he would want America to look like a forward-thinking nation, ready for the global issues to come.

Instead he displays our country’s lack of respect for other cultures. He shows that sixty years after we thought all Japanese were working together against us and stuffed them into concentration camps, we still think a religion or ethnic background should be held accountable for a small percentage of their peoples’ actions. I guess that means I’m somehow responsible for Americans being greedy, fat, and ignorant. Because we are the global equivalent to the first shithead on the playground to hit a growth spurt and use his size to pick on the weaker kids, I must be liable. Or maybe because I’m Catholic I should admit my role in the pedophilic practices of their priests.

Fuck off. If our nation is ever going to show respect for others and regain our role as a nation of example we might as well start with our public figures. Someone whose opinions are heard by millions should have the forethought not to come off as a racist fuckstick. Thanks Glenn, for being the public voice Borat tries so hard to coax out of people without any coaxing.

Posted in media | Comments Off

Lady in the water

Thursday, November 16th, 2006

Warning: spoilers lie within…

i think m. night shyamalan should go into comedies. not because i find him particularly funny, but more because this film was hilarious. unfortunately, something in the writing makes it obvious the comedy aspect was unintended. and by something i mean there were no jokes or even humorous asides.

the premise is weak and full of holes. it’s supposed to be a bedtime story, but even kids would probably laugh out loud at some parts. it’s hard to explain so i’m going to do something that i’ve never done and hope never to do again. i’m going to mention certain parts of the movie as examples. if you haven’t seen it i’ll try to keep them less plot-important. if you have seen it i’m sorry. and for the select few who have seen it and enjoyed it i don’t know how you found this blog because i haven’t recommended it to you.

first there’s the stutter. there was not only no reason for the stutter, but it was horribly overacted and inappropriate. i know it was there in order to show a parallel between heep and story, but it had so little bearing on the plot it was irritating.

second was young-soon choi << even the character name is epically dumb >>. her character was so stereotypically Asian it was almost painful and she continued to tell heep parts of the bedtime story at odd and prophetic times for no particular reason. her relationship with her mother is inane and trite. the worst of it is how she recognizes the story as a bedtime story her grandmother told her even when “narf” would never occur in any Korean in any form at any time ever.

speaking of her mother: third is how her mother would only tell the story to heep if he acted as incompetent as possible. what the hell is that about? that just ended up translating as ridiculous and pathetic.

fourth was the excessive use of exaggerated characters. a man who only works out one half of his body. a crossword champion. a movie critic who sees no originality in film. five Hispanic daughters. a gaggle of stoners. a superintendent who’s methodically melancholy. i mean i understand using exaggerated characters to make a point, but not to make a cast.

fifth is how shyamalan cast himself << a pretty shitty actor >> in a prominent role. how conceited do you have to be to pull that off? arrogance anyone?

sixth is heep swimming with his shoes on for roughly ten minutes without any more air than through a straw in a dinner glass. there was no reason for the haste of not taking off at least his shoes. or at least there wasn’t in the film. maybe shyamalan had that in his head.

and finally seventh is the predictability if his trademark << and cliche >> twist ending. once the necessary players are explained it’s hard to see why heep chooses the people he does.

the directing is generic and the writing dull. i understand the story is probably supposed to generate a sense of hope about the humans fate, but there’s not enough attention paid to any part of this movie to convey this intention. i would guess anyone over the age of thirteen who enjoyed this film would try to paint a grandiose picture and philosophy that shyamalan himself didn’t know how to paint. the only way to find merit in this film would be to see it as a movie for children, but the promoters unfortunately didn’t bill it as this.

the suspense is generated << and not well >>. so it was hard to get immersed in this one. maybe this was shyamalan trying to get away from his twist-ending persona, but there is such a build-up i find it hard to believe he didn’t at least have one in mind. the build-up itself is so rudimentary it forces me to be embarrassed for him.

but, on the other hand, if this is shyamalan’s first venture into the comedy genre i give him credit. because i was laughing out loud through many a sequence.

Tags: terrible movie
Posted in chasm reviews | Comments Off

imperial

Wednesday, November 15th, 2006

Friday night i went somewhere i wouldn’t normally go with the friends up from home, the imperial room off first ave on the corner of fourth street, and found myself fascinated. you can learn a lot about yourself while surrounded by the slight and vain. not that I’m typically introspective while out on the town. at the time i was more concerned with the low caliber of the disc jockey and the overall decibel level. in addition to the DJ who made the unfortunate mistake of cutting the music mid-word often and deliberately and his curious selection of tunes, the sound system was roughly comparable to factory-sent Dell speakers.

I guess i should expect no less of a soundtrack to the congregation. i use that word purposefully because i have no other way of describing the crowd than that of one in misguided worship. i have certain expectations of a bar on first avenue. i also make assumptions of the people that go there upon these expectations. i judge a book by its cover because some nights i don’t really give a shit about reading. if that makes me a bad person i hope someones sizing me up for the hand basket.

it’s the worst form of mating ritual i can imagine. how can you spark interest in another while worshiping yourself? it was like they were trying to make something so easy as hard as possible. even the ones who already showed signs of commitment were being distant and uninterested. i fail to understand why they would go somewhere just to show everyone in attendance how bored they were with being there.

I’ll start with the fairer sex because my sexual preference forced more study of them. there were girls whom appeared to have spent at least four hours on their look and yet failed to refine beyond trailer park chic. there were girls whom took just as much time to look as if they made a quick outfit change after work. there were girls whom continually checked themselves from eye to toe to make sure everything was looking spectacular. there were girls whose eyes never left the table they were seated at or the group they were standing in. there were girls whose eyes darted around desperately searching for approval in a return glance. there were girls whom were stone cold sober and girls whom were two drinks from ruining a long-term platonic friendship. but there was one universal among all of them: they were trying to show as little interest in the men as they possibly could.

As for the douchebags it was a mixed turnout. there were guys dressed expensively casual. there were guys dressed economically casual. there were guys whom were one collar pop away from high society and others whom were a change of shoes away from dropping a frontside boardslide. there were guys whose hair would withstand tornado-force winds. there were guys desperate for attention while trying their hardest to remain stoic. there were guys paying more attention to themselves than any woman ever could. there was one universal among all of them: they were trying to show as little interest in the women as they possibly could.

I realized while i was watching this that i have very little chance of fitting in. I could entertain myself there, but i could never make it a fixture in my schedule. I lack the callowness to get along with the people there. I see no need to spend six dollars for a drink to exude disinterest. i can be disinterested on my couch with a primo for a fractional cost. the girls there beyond their expensively well-maintained bodies have little to offer. the guys there are not the type i would typically acquaint with.

I’m not saying I’m better than them because I’m not better than a strong majority. I’m also speaking in generalities so a person there could be the next love of my life or life-long friend. I just don’t have it in me to put on such an act just for some ass. Maybe with age because you’re almost dead at thirty my desperation will grow and I’ll find value in such an establishment. Until then at least it’s a fun place for an internal laugh.

It comes down to this: I can be shallow and arrogant and conceited and judgemental and desperate and sleazy, but at least I’m not the worst out there.

Posted in reflection | 1 Comment »

amores perros

Tuesday, November 14th, 2006

let me begin with a preface. there are a couple filmmakers who have a definitive style and stick to it strongly. it’s not that they can’t go beyond their mold, but they choose to define themselves by certain choices. Alejandro gonzalez inarritu and m. night shyamalan are the two i think of. shyamalan creates a story methodically and effortlessly that draws the viewer in and then shocks them with a strong, unexpected turn that leaves them reeling. inarritu builds three distinct stories, connects them with a tragic act (always involving a vehicle), and then deepens the characters while thriving on that connection.

both use details specifically and repeatedly to emphasize their meaning, but inarritu manipulates time to develop the connections. both directors create visually beautiful works of cinematic art and i enjoy both (even if i joke about shyamalan).

the difference in the two emerges as they continue their careers. inarritu now has three notable films, all of which are reviewed here, and shyamalan has five. shyamalan seems to have become a slave to his distinctive twist endings. they are becoming less and less interesting. in fact, in the case of signs, it was so preposterous it made me laugh out loud. with respect i have yet to see lady in the water and he writes his own films.

inarritu on the other hand has never been better (see babel). his films are intense, thought-provoking, and absolutely genius. even if you factor out his apparent distaste for motor vehicles his directing is the stuff of legend.

Now let’s get on with it. this film was amazing. visually it was stunning and the story is incredibly intense. inarritu weaves a tale of three people completely different and yet connected by a tragic accident. one, a punk kid in love with his abusive brother’s wife, finds himself in the seedy business of dog fighting. another, a supermodel in love with a married man, is hit by the first while driving with her beloved dog. and the third, a dirty street walker surrounded by canines, finds a Rottweiler who has been shot and nurses him back to health.

the stories are developed beautifully. each character has many levels that are described to the smallest detail with the skill very few directors have ever been able to manage. the storylines themselves are intertwined masterfully as the film proceeds. inarritu uses time shifts to draw the viewer in and without the cliche title screens displaying how much earlier or later the following sequences are. as in his other films, the complete chronology of the film is only discovered very near the end. the three stories are so detailed and intense they are only a few steps beyond films of their own.

the repetition of visual elements (a phone or a poster) is incredible. some of the shots were so eye-catching they stick with me a day later. one such example is the supermodel leaving the hallway, we see her leaving to the left of the screen and to the right in the mirror simultaneously, creating a gorgeous symmetry on screen.

much like 21 grams and babel after it, this film exposes the delicacy and faults of humanity with stunning brilliance. the acting is universally great and perpetuates the intensity developed by the story and directing.

*****

Tags: see
Posted in chasm reviews | Comments Off

stay alive

Tuesday, November 14th, 2006

simplistic plot plus attractive female(s) plus gore minus plausibility multiplied by number of teen interests mentioned plus product placements divided by number of WB-esque actors equals PG13 horror film. it’s a great formula if you’re bored numb and need something to entertain a third of your brain for awhile.

this movie had it all. it was predictable, simplistic, irrational, full of holes, and littered with attractive just-barely-out-of-teens actors. you’ll recognize the two lead females from the mind-numbing ‘OC’ << armstrong >> and intellect vacuum ‘One Tree Hill’ << bush >>. foster is actually accomplished, but most won’t know him because his other flicks included door in the floor and live as a house. not that he was good in either, but at least he has some cred for doing them.

the story follows six gamers as they try a game their recently-murdered friend was testing. they end up dying just as they die in the game. they decide to be heroes and kill off the witch. good times all around.

character development in this one is pathetic. actually everything about this is pathetic except the money Dell and Ford put into their product placements. it even had the ridiculous gall to end with a cabin fever-esque ending. i’m glad i didn’t go through the trouble of renting this one. at least bush and armstrong looked good upside down.