Dollhouse

I watched Dollhouse. I was able to see the conversation Joss had when creating it.

ELIZA DUSHKU: I need wear hot outfits. But how will I do it?

JOSS WEADON: Let’s make a witty show full of great dialog.

ELIZA: But will that show me off in hot outfits enough? Will the Dialog distract?

JOSS: You may be right. What about a straight-up action show?

ELIZA: I will wear hot outfits, right?

JOSS: Sure. But it will be on FOX.

ELIZA: How will that affect the hot outfits?

JOSS: Have you seen what they’d done to Summer Glau on Terminator?

ELIZA: … Let’s do it.

I’ll keep watching it, because I have know that dude can write. I just wish he had done this with Quantum Leap.

W. (2008)

Oliver Stone's habit of mining the recent and familiar for his fictionalized histories requires a leap from his audience. I think that the strengths of W. become clearer if it's viewed as an alternate history, if we pretend for a couple of hours that we're from a calmer, saner universe where George W. Bush was only ever the son of a President, a semi-public figure of fun, instead of a world-historical fuckup. Imagine, we say, just imagine what would have happened if Dan Quayle had become President! Or Jesse Ventura! Or worst of all George W. Bush! Someone that feckless and callow and lazy—what dystopia would reign!

Stone presents Bush (Josh Brolin) in scenes from throughout his adult life, moving back and forth through time as we see how his formative experiences and demons and flaws shape his actions. These scenes, mostly, are intensely personal: and, while they present Bush, especially younger Bush, as a grotesque, they are careful not to damn him for that; Brolin plays him with such confidence that he becomes a preternatural charmer even through the slouching and loudness and mouthfuls of food. Two scenes at the beginning neatly lay out the Bush dynamic: one, a golden moment on a baseball diamond where Bush receives full and absolute adoration from the crowd before he throws out the first pitch as President; the second a fraternity hazing where Bush is seen to be a peculiar interpersonal genius. Bush craves love but will accept deference; and if he cannot compete in the world of ideas and reason he will resituate all his problems from there to the realm of personal connection where he is nigh unrivaled. Bush's struggle for the respect of his father (James Cromwell in a nice performance of some heavy-handed scenes) is the key to this dynamic: GHWB seems to be the only person who both refuses W. affection and does not fall for his charms; in Stone's telling, it is approval from this distant father that motivates the striving of an unfit man for office but is not enough to overcome shallowness and incompetence.

Of course W. would not be an Oliver Stone film without a little wackadoodle read on l'affaire Bush, one he here situates within the national security apparatus of the administration. These scenes are where the feel of alternate history comes in; the odd impressions and recontextualized quotes identify this as parodic; the murderous absurdities calmly dropping from the mouths of Cheney and Rumsfeld and Wolfowitz reminded me of nothing as much as Dr. Strangelove. Most of these criminals don't come off well, of course: Colin Powell (Jeffrey Wright) gets the best treatment, with his Iraq war arc being presented as tragedy-lite; Condi Rice is shown as less conspirator than enabler, though Thandie Newton's distracting impression makes her thoroughly a figure of ridicule. Karl Rove, wow: Rove is not only a villain, he is a malevolent corrupt elf; casting Toby Jones here is one of Stone's most interesting choices in the whole film.

Throughout the film, we come, as we expect, to feel sympathy for W. He's a man wholly out of his depth, whose personal psychodrama became treasonous only because of the family into which he was born. His interpersonal instincts are so right that he cannot realize that his intellectual instincts are so wrong; in manipulating those around him to give him love (or deference, that Splenda to his soul), he opens himself up to their manipulation to war. But those very scenes with his advisers and cabinet pull us back out of any sympathy. The jarring satire reignites our anger at regular intervals. Nixon was part tragedy, part Grand Guignol, but the character was given an amoral macabre dignity. Bush's dignity, hinted at in the sympathy Stone give to his rise through life, is utterly undercut by the clowns by which he is undone; and we in our alternate universe laugh at the criminals and cringe at Bush, thinking What a bullet we dodged, then, didn't we?

The Best and Worst Lesbian Movies

I found a blog post of the “Best. Lesbian. Movies. Ever.” So, I have taken that list and separated it into MY list of best and worst lesbian movies. It seems I disagree with a lot of the movies on this list. It’s also important to note that the definition of lesbian movie is basically “any movie with girl on girl action no matter how insignificant or traumatizing”. Still, I left “Boys Don’t Cry” and “Monster” off the list.

BEST LESBO MOVIES


But I’m a Cheerleader: This movie is just flat out funny, no matter who you. Plus, the ladies love Clea Duvall.

If These Walls Could Talk 2: Cuz deep down inside, I think Chloe Sevigny is SO hot as a butch dyke.

Imagine Me and You: This is just a sweet movie. And Anthony Stewart Head is really cute and funny in it.

Gia: This is the first time I saw (and subsequently developed a crush on) Angelina Jolie. It’s also a solid movie.

Tipping the Velvet: The movie is better than the book, in my opinion. And I just love Nan King. She’s kind of my cross-dressing idol.

Saving Face: This is such a good movie and it’s so much more about familial relationships than lesbians. And I like that.

D.E.B.S.: Super campy and fun. Plus Holland Taylor is in it. What’s not to like?

Lesbo Movies I didn’t Hate:


Bound: I really like this movie a lot. However, Gina Gershon’s character is named Corky. Instead of being sexy, it makes me laugh every time. Just imagine Jennifer Tilly saying “Oh Corky” in that breathy voice. It’s hysterical.

Better Than Chocolate: It’s pretty cute but the acting and the story leave a something to be desired. Same as…

The Incredibly True Adventure of 2 Girls in Love: this movie has a young Laurel Holloman playing a character named Randy Dean. It’s good and terrible all at the same time.

Loving Annabelle: This is a story about a student and a teacher developing a romantic relationship. I’m not sure why the lesbians like this movie so much. Sure, there’s some girl on girl action but I’m not actually supposed to think this is okay, am I? The movie is not so bad though.

Desert Hearts: I think this movie is probably really good if you have better taste in movies than I do.

All Over Me: This movie wasn’t good enough to capture my full attention but it’s worth it to see a young Leisha Hailey rocking out.

WORST LESBO MOVIES:


Kissing Jessica Stein: I liked this movie when it came out. Hell, I even own this movie. However, the more I watched it the more I hated it. Maybe I would like it better if Jessica hadn’t ended up with a dude in the end. Or at least not that dude. I don’t know.

High Art: Did you like this movie? I couldn’t even make it through the whole thing. Another movie that ladies love that I just don’t understand.

Lost and Delirious: OMG. Worst. Lesbian. Movie. Ever. Mischa Barton is even in it which totally proves my point.

Gray Matters: I take it back. This is actually the Worst. Lesbian. Movie. Ever. Here’s the plot: A brother and sister are best friends. They are so close, people actually think they’re dating. The sister is a total lez but doesn’t realize it. They fall for the same girl (who subsequently falls for the brother) and the sister spends the rest of the movie trying to sabotage them. SO bad.

Itty Bitty Titty Committee: I’m really supposed to like this movie. It was even written and directed by the same woman who did “But I’m a Cheerleader” which is one of my favorite lezzie films ever. Alas, I’m not riot grrrl enough to like this movie. I actually thought it was totally boring.

Chasing Amy: This movie wasn't listed on the blog post I found. Still, I wanted to get it on here because I really think this movie is awful. When I was 17 and had never seen girls kissing in a movie before, I loved this flick. Then I got older and was slightly embarrassed for liking it so much. It's just so unrealistic that any lady-loving lady would fall for Ben Affleck. It wasn't believable in Gigli either. But that movie was just one of the worst movies ever made. Period.

Lesbo Movies that I have Yet to See:
I have no opinion on these movies but I plan to see them one day.

Rescuing Desire

Laurel Canyon

Fingersmith

Foxfire

Puccini for Beginners

As it turns out...

the Japanese are still doing blackface. Of our president.



thank you to Chris for making my evening...really uncomfortable.

Elements of a midlife crisis

35 movies reviewed
# of movies with protagonists under 40 - 13
# of movies starring John Cusack - 5
# of movies starring Jack Nicholson - 5

Dear Movie Stars, Please Make More Funny Movies

I'm just gonna go right ahead and say it. I hated Lost In Translation. For one thing, I'm sick of movies about how hard it is to be a really successful middle aged dude with several hot women in love with you. It's probably a good movie. Whatever. It's boring.

It's not as if I don't like Bill Murray, or even didn't like him in this role, he was fine. I just wish he was making more funny movies, because I think really good comedic acting is rarer than really good dramatic acting. I miss Dr. Venkman.

I think of this as a common and sad phenomenon. People make funny movies, then they go on to prove themselves in some serious role, and then they do only serious and/or Important movies. But then I started making this list, and it seems like I might be wrong. Steve Martin may take himself too seriously as a writer, but he still mostly acts in (ostensibly) funny movies. Adam Sandler and Jim Carrey (neither of whom would be on any top twenty list of my favorite funny people in the first place anyway) have both done some serious stuff, but they've kept on making "funny" movies too.

So here's my whole argument:


This is awesome.



This is lame.

a little whining about Tropic Thunder

I'm trying not to be Oscar obsessed but the more I think about it the more I'm baffled/angry about Robert Downey Jr's nomination for his performance in Tropic Thunder, a role that comprises exactly one (admittedly well-played) half-clever joke, mostly at the expense of the Academy. It's distressing to think of the level of not-addressing-the-problem indicated by giving a goddamn statue to a goddamn white dude. I thought RDjr was very funny/satirical/clever/interesting/etc in that movie, don't get me wrong. I just think it's lame to honor gimmicky crap, but it's beyond bizarre to do so when the gimmick in question is blackface. BLACKFACE. Somebody explain to me again how this is about racism and therefore not...racism.

Sextette

[photo: you do the math] Fans of Mae West tend to be fans of her work in the 30s--work done at the height of her career as a vaudevillian. She was a bold female figure, funny, commanding, and fully in possession of a palpable personality and sexuality. I've never quite known if I feel West is talented, but I always *feel* West, for watching her is somehow consuming. Sextette comes not from the stage-lit glamor of West's early career, but from the fog that is the very end of her career--an age of color, when the feather boas must compete for screen time with the emerging mullet, and when the nation was already struggling to digest Alice Cooper. Sextette doesn't attempt to hide from a subset of film culture that was, if not advancing, at least rapidly changing. Sextette is a bizarre hodge podge. It integrates many of the tropes of 30s musical (mixed identities in romantic farce, the delayed consummation of a favored marriage, the starlet--playing a character that is overtly a swift adaptation of her public persona to the screen) with the culture of the late seventies. The contrast can be jarring. West plays herself, the vaudevillian charmer, but about forty years too late. What was sex appeal at 35 is, around 85, how I imagine W.C. Fields would look hefting around in a wedding dress, commenting coyly on his eagerness to reach the honeymoon suite. To those who believe I'm overstating the matter, I submit this clip of West in her eighties singing "Babyface" to a table of foreign dignitaries, all of whom are younger than her by at least one decade, but more often by three.

Don't misunderstand -- it is really fun, and not solely in that fascinating train wreck kind of way. I loved Sextette as only Sextette can be loved. It's funny, West is hysterical (usually deliberately), it's full of great people, it's a watchable ego piece (the script was adapted from a play West wrote for herself to star in), and in the end it confirms everything I believe about what happens when people try to act really sexy. At any age.

Pride and Prejudice (2003)

I noticed right away that there was something off about this modern retelling of Pride and Prejudice, but I should have known what it was, and I didn't. For one thing, if I had noticed the subtitle: Pride and Prejudice: A Latter-Day Comedy, that might have clued me in. Also, I could have read the synopsis which describes this Lizzie as a student at Brigham Young University. I did not notice that. I just noticed as I watched the first few scenes that the film seemed oddly clean, everyone soap-opera shiny and talking in this sort of wooden way, as if they were reading off cue cards.

When Lydia (not me, the character, in the movie, the slutty one) said "You're not going to be ready for the party" and Lizzie said "What party?" and Lydia said "You should pay attention in church" - that was my first clue. I thought, "Oh! It's Christian." Then someone mentioned that they were in Utah, and I finally understood. It's not just Christian, it's Mormon. I guess if you're making a new version of a novel which is very familiar, and which has been adapted a ton of times, the best way to go about it is to do something new and unexpected. And I really wasn't expecting LDS, despite all the clues. So I guess that's something.

Film versions of Austen's novels are thick on the ground, and I'm always a little wary of a new adaptation - what are you going to add? Clueless stands out, because it is based on Emma, but not awkwardly so - Clueless does not constantly remind you that it is Austen. It is very possible to watch Clueless and never know that it is based on Emma. This Pride and Prejudice on the other hand constantly refers to its Austeniness, with odd intertitles from the novel (e.g. "A fortnight passed..."-Pride and Prejudice), as well as lifted character names and occasional bits of dialogue. As a movie, Pride and Prejudice is pretty lame. But I'm interested in the fact there is a production company making movies "by Mormons, about Mormons, and for Mormons." I like the idea of little movie companies that make little movies for specific audiences. It should encourage diversity and innovation, in general. So I guess I approve.