skip to main |
skip to sidebar
I think I was in my early teens when I saw this film for the first time. It played on television a lot in my teens, so I'd see a bit here and there, and after a while I made a point of watching the whole thing. Plus, I was oddly very keen on the Terminator films, which will come up later.
This is not a film to start watching after 10 o'clock at night, particularly if you plan to watch the special edition (which has an extra half hour of footage and makes more sense). I started watching this two nights ago, but realised there was no way I was going to stay awake for it, so I gave up and started again tonight. It is a very long film, the kind that James Cameron is partial to making. But it holds your attention. I'd forgotten how arresting some moments were.
I'd also forgotten that one of the characters has a pet rat, who happens to have a pivotal role. (This is interesting to me as a rat owner myself these days. You rarely see them featured as pets in movies).
I really quite enjoy James Cameron's movies, especially those from the 80s and 90s. I think I like his style - I find that he blends action, suspense and humour in the right proportions for my tastes. Little touches, like having one of those stuffed Garfield toys with the suckers on its paws stuck on a window in the rig (remember those?!), or having a fake pot plant on the rig because of course a real one wouldn't survive underwater... Those little touches show a thoughtfulness in the filmmaking that I appreciate.
This film does have an inaccuracy in it that I see in a lot of films and it really bugs me. Whenever someone is giving CPR in movies or on TV, they never tip the victim's head back properly so that they can receive air effectively. Why do they always get this wrong?? Is it on purpose? I've read somewhere that they always do CPR with bent elbows, instead of straight as you're meant to, on film because there would be too much risk of cracking an actor's rib if they got too enthusiastic about it. Is there some similar convention for the breathing side? I can't explain how much this irritates me. Well, I could, but it would be lengthy.
Final Thought: No one says "son of a bitch" like Ed Harris. He really makes the most of the "bitch".
Up Next: The Adjustment Bureau (2011)
I made The Bassist come with me to see this film at the cinema. He didn't like it. At all. I've watched a couple of times since, and each time I end up wondering whether I like it as well.
I think my main issue is that I can't get past the fact that I find the character of Summer incredibly unlikeable. I know that you're not supposed to warm to her a great deal, as she does our hero wrong, but I get stuck wondering why he's so infatuated with her in the first place. This film is tagged as a romantic comedy but I don't think that's accurate. You're watching someone allow himself to be toyed with and I get so frustrated that he just takes it.
But then I think, that happens. People have toxic relationships where they are used, all the while thinking that everything will work out if they are patient. Often friends are stuck in a position just like those in this film - waiting for someone they care about to finally understand that they need to get out of an unfair situation. So I guess this film is realistic in that way. The trouble is that it was advertised as a romantic comedy, when it really isn't in the traditional sense.
While watching it, I wondered why I'd bought it, to be honest. My discomfort with the film is pretty solidly focused on the fact that I can't stand Summer, and I reckon the creator intended me to feel that way to a degree.
Apart from that character, I find the film interesting. I like the way it is put together and I like the little touches like the dance number and the French film dream sequence and Expectations vs Reality. So, if you can put aside any frustrations with Summer, which I really, really try to do...
Final Thought: The saving grace for this film for me is Tom's sister. She's blunt and honest and more mature than anyone else in the film. Is that possibly a deliberate comment on the rest of the characters?
Up Next: The Abyss (1989) (Special Edition)
I love a well made, animated movie. There will be a lot of Disney and Pixar, a smattering of Studio Ghibli and Dreamworks, and some more random cartoons amongst these films I'll be watching.
About four years ago, I began a crusade to gather as many of the classic Disney films as I could, as well as the decent modern ones. Back when I was a kid, Disney would only release their films on VHS for a limited time, one at a time, every seven years (I learned this when I was working at a video store). Then after that limited time had expired they'd all be pulled from the shelves. So you'd have to snap them up when you saw them. When DVDs started to take hold they seemed to be doing the same thing for a while there, so when I began collecting them on DVD, I'd pounce on any I saw. These days they seem to be staying on the shelves for much longer, so the urgency has diminished somewhat.
Anyhow, it turns out that there's quite a few Disney movies that I just assumed I had seen as a child, but upon watching them as an adult, it turned out that I'd never seen them before. I think I may have been confused by the fact that I also had picture books of their films, and tapes of song collections so I knew many of the songs, or maybe I just couldn't remember much of it. But I was quite moved watching these films for what felt like the first time at the age of 24, and there were several occasions where I rang my partner (let's call him The Bassist) in a bit of a state over it. He'd hear my crying on the phone and be very concerned for my wellbeing, until I explained that the reason I was emotional was due to the exploits of an animated dog and then... Well, then he was just baffled. But to me that's the beauty of a classic film, regardless of whether it's animated or whatever. If it's done well, it moves you.
I also really love the old
Disney voice actors. There's a lot of animated films lately that seem
to count on using a big name movie star as a voice in order to get
attention. I suspect it may have started with the success of Robin
Williams in Aladdin, but I could be wrong. I feel like voice acting is a
separate art though, and while some of your big name actors seem to
understand that (Jeremy Irons, Ellen Degeneres, Rowan Atkinson...), most
of the time they don't. If you can't separate the character from the
awareness of who is voicing it, then I don't think it is entirely
successful. And I love that Pixar for the most part seems to be aware
of this, however Disney lost sight of it for a while there.
Back to this film.
So many people are so aware of the Disney movie that the fact it is based on a book gets lost. Dodie Smith wrote The Hundred And One Dalmatians, and its even lesser acknowledged sequel The Starlight Barking, and as a dog-obsessed child I adored them both. I read them over and over. That is possibly why I assumed I had seen the Disney film, because if I was that in love with the books, I must have sought out the film as well. But it seems that I didn't get around to it until four years ago.
101 Dalmatians is a beautiful movie. It strays from the book, as so many films do, but I forgive it because they've created their own lovely story. The music is great, the animation elegant, the baddies classic, and it leaves you feeling content. I'm so sentimental for great animated films, which is bound to come up every time I watch one on this project. Watching 101 Dalmatians makes me want to watch every other classic Disney movie in my catalogue immediately, but I must abide by my rules.
Final Thought: How great were old credit sequences at the start of films?
Up Next: 500 Days Of Summer (2009)
In conversation with The Bassist this morning, he commented that I don't seem to be talking as much about the films in my posts as he expected. My intention is not to review them, there's enough people out there who do that, successfully or otherwise. I'm giving my opinions, yes, but the idea of this writing project was different to that.
I was looking for some simple idea to prompt me to write regularly. I have so many movies that watching them and writing responses appeared to be a good place to start. Depending on how strongly I feel about my opinions on a film, some posts may tend toward being a review, but for me it's not about that. I'm just writing responses about whatever occurs to me. Recounting the first time I saw the film, or why I felt the need to buy it, or the sentiments it stirs up, or an opinion I have about a general subject regarding films. I'm just intending to write, not review. It's about how I relate to my movie collection personally. I can understand why The Bassist was confused, and most likely others will be too, if they read what I'm posting.
I'm not trying to review these movies, I'm just writing about them and whatever else I may be reminded of as a result of watching them.
It was a lazy, rainy day when I saw this film for the first time, and I went with very low expectations. A friend and I wanted to see anything at the cinema, and 17 Again seemed the most bearable option, but not terribly promising. I think I had some faith in Matthew Perry to be funny, but that was about it. I hadn't seen any of the High School Musical franchise, on purpose, so as far as I was concerned Zac Efron was just another piece of candy being marketing to young girls and I didn't expect him to carry a film.
I was so surprised by how much I enjoyed this movie.
Efron's comic timing is impressive and the boy can dance, which is somewhat randomly included in the film for no particular reason (but that's fine, I love a dance number). My friend and I were in almost hysterics at times, I think partly due to shock at the script actually being decently amusing.
To me, this film is far more enjoyable than you, the person over 16 years old, would think. It's harmless fun and bubble gum and it ends with a valuable lesson like the films you grew up with and there's nothing wrong with that. I think, for me, the reason those kind of films don't work sometimes is if you don't genuinely like the characters that you're supposed to care about. And in this film, you do like them. The hero is has made a mistake he needs to learn from, but you don't think he's stupid. The nerdy friend is nerdy but lovable and not unbearable, though you never quite understand why the hero chose him as a friend in the first place, except perhaps for thinking he was adorable? The stuffy principal is trying to be professional. Et cetera, et cetera, you get the idea.
So, I stand by this film. I don't care that it's fluffy and stars Zac Efron. It's fun, it means well, and it has some wonderfully timed lines that I wonder whether they were scripted or improvised.
Final Thought: The kid who plays Alex is a quiet talent and I'll be keeping an eye out for him in movies in the future.
Up Next: 101 Dalmatians (1961) - I've realised that, with all the remakes going on these days, for many films I'll need to list the date it was made in order to specify which version I'm talking about.
I had never seen this film before.
I ended up with this DVD due to a friend. We were browsing a secondhand DVD/music store and I think I picked up 12 Angry Men and commented that I hadn't seen it but had heard that the play was amazing. She insisted that it was brilliant and demanded that I purchase it. I protested that I don't generally buy films that I haven't seen, but she wouldn't take no for an answer. Being that the DVD was only $5, I figured "Why not?"
Thanks, friend.
It's a beautiful and classy film.
There's something different about actors pre-1960. There's a particular accent and melody to the voice, a certain deliberate-ness to the acting that manages to not seem overdone (when done well) and a sense that these films were made because someone was trying to create a work of art. Of course, there are those in the modern day film industry who are still trying to make works of art, but they are all too often drowned out by those who seem to think that movies are disposable and you just keep making them at random until you get lucky.
It sounds a bit snobbish, I know, and "they don't make 'em like they used to" and all that... But to a degree it's true. When you watch older movies, you can tell that things were done with care, at least in the ones I've ever been exposed to.
How likely is it that you would see a film like this now? Ninety-five percent of it consists of twelve men in a room, talking. What studio would take a gamble on that being successful? How would they believe that could hold an audience's attention? Craig Monahan did something similar with his The Interview, which itself is a very gripping piece of cinema that I highly recommend but unfortunately don't own.
For me, the joy of this film is watching things play out. Seeing the characters argue and use logic. Even the moments where a conclusion dawns on you just before it comes to the characters are wonderful. You know that the writer intended to give that lightbulb moment to the audience first, allowing us to realise "Of course!" and then watch hungrily for the characters to catch on.
Since I bought this film, I've had a number of people assure me that it's great. It's taken me three years to get around to watching it, but I have now and I agree.
Final Thought: I really enjoyed the revelation of why the final juror held out for so long, and love even more that it didn't occur to me earlier.
Up Next: 17 Again
So we begin with 10 Things I Hate About You. (In my organising, this is at the start as it is a number, so there you go).
Man, the 90s did teen movies well. I have no idea how many times I've seen this film. My gang at school loved it, so it came out at every sleepover. I did once insist that my high school boyfriend watch it, and he didn't enjoy it quite as much as I do. But what does he know, eh? It's entertaining, and it pretty much borders on being a parody some of the time (case in point, the introduction of the different cliques in the school. Cowboys??)
We all know it's a reimagining of The Taming Of The Shrew, as it's from that time in the 90s when Hollywood was looking to Shakespeare for its inspiration. For me, I much prefer them pinching ideas from Shakespeare over the current trend of "And another sequel! And a remake! And a prequel!" If you can't be original, at least be inspired by material that is rich, moving, timeless and complex. Don't make movies based on board games. Just because someone happened to get lucky with a movie based on an amusement park ride (which will also be coming up later), doesn't mean that such an inane concept will ever work again.
The serenade in 10 Things I Hate About You is still one of my favourite moments in a teen movie. Heath Ledger gained a lot of attention for Brokeback Mountain and The Dark Knight (which will be coming up later), but I think that even in this movie he showed flashes of subtlety that hinted at how great an actor he could be. Then there's Julia Stiles, Joseph Gordon-Levitt... And Andrew Keegan. Where did he go? This was the only movie I ever saw him in I think, but he was all over the teen magazines when I was a kid and I never really knew why. Was he famous in America?
Final thought: The Stratfords have an amazing house. I want that porch.
Up Next: 12 Angry Men
It has been such a long time since I've posted and life has changed dramatically.
But, I've missed writing. At the moment, in order to have the motivation to write, I need a reason. Something to write about. I've been waiting for a project idea to come to me, and, as I passed my shelves this evening, it finally did.
I'm going to watch all the movies I own. In alphabetical order.
It's not a groundbreaking project, I know.
But it's an easy place to start, and it should give me a fair bit of fodder for writing.
It's easy to feel connected to movies. It could be that you watched it after a bad breakup, or that you watched it every weekend as a child, or that it was introduced to you by someone who had an impact in your life.
I guess, in this project, I'm looking to entice these memories back to me, and use them as material to get myself writing again.
I have a policy that I don't tend buy DVDs that I don't feel I'd want to watch over and over again. That means that I only buy movies that have grabbed my attention in one way or another. Although, I must admit, there's some gambles in there as well. Some left me pleasantly surprised, and some left me not entirely convinced.
So that's my simple idea. I plan to write a post for each film I watch. I have a lot of DVDs... I don't even know how long this will take, what with having a full time job. Let's see how it goes.
