Random Factoid #236

21 03 2010

Once again, I come before you to alert you to an error that I have made in a previous factoid.  It brings me no pleasure to announce that I have made a mistake, but it somehow makes me feel better knowing that I have acknowledged it.

The culprit: Random Factoid #216.

In 2007, I bought a book in New York City called “Oscar Season” by Mary McNamara.  It was at a random little shop in the city, and I was struck by seeing the golden statue concealing a gun.

Ever since that fateful day, I have told myself that I will read the book during awards season one year.

2007 came and went, “The Departed” won Best Picture, and I hadn’t read it.

2008 flew by, “No Country for Old Men” won Best Picture, and I still hadn’t read it.

2009 was fine, “Slumdog Millionaire” won Best Picture, and it continues to garner dust on my bookshelf.

Now, in 2010, barring some freak occurrence, yet another year will pass where “Oscar Season” has gone unread.  There’s always next year…

The other day, I decided to look at the copyright page of “Oscar Season.”  I discovered that it had not been published in 2007 like I had thought, but rather in 2008.  So that makes the factoid factually incorrect.  I doubt anyone caught it, but it doesn’t weigh on my conscience anymore.





Random Factoid #235

20 03 2010

This factoid isn’t so much about the I, it’s about the you.  There is something that I would like you to do.

The movie blogging conglomerate that I belong to, the Large Association of Movie Blogs (or LAMB for short), has kindly featured me in their “Brutally Blunt Blog Blustering” post of the week.  They invite anyone to leave an anonymous comment with honest suggestions for how I can improve the site.

So, what I would like you to do is venture on over to the site and leave your two cents.  Do you hate that my factoids are so utterly random?  Do you have an issue with my layout?  Is my writing style for reviews absolutely unbearable?  Do I need to use a more lively font?  Anything and everything is welcome, I only ask that you be completely honest. This is your big chance to make a big difference on the way this site is run (and avoid any direct reaction from the author), so make the most of it.

CLICK on the picture below to see the “Brutally Blunt Blog Blustering.”





F.I.L.M. of the Week (March 19, 2010)

19 03 2010

It’s been a long time since I have been so enthusiastic about presenting a movie as the “F.I.L.M. of the Week.”

I acknowledge my tendency to sensationalize and exaggerate as a blogger and critic.  In a way, it’s what I have to do to get my feelings across and make it read.  So I throw around a word like triumphant quite a bit.

I’m not sure that I have ever seen a movie that fits the word triumphant better than Julian Schnabel’s “The Diving Bell and the Butterfly.”  Simply put, the film tells the story of one of the greatest triumphs of the human will over obstacles that has even been told – no exaggerating.  And it only makes it more extraordinary to think that the movie is based on a true story.

Yes, it is entirely true that Jean-Dominique Bauby, the editor of Elle in France, suffered a massive stroke that left him comatose for three weeks.  When he woke up, he found himself a victim of “locked-in” syndrome.  All mental and cognitive functions worked, but nearly all physical functions were shut down because of the lack of activity in the brain stem.

But notice that I didn’t say all physical functions were shut down.  Bauby had one functional body part: his left eye.  Thanks to the help of two patient and ingenious hospital therapists, he eventually learned to talk and communicate not with his mouth, but with this eye.  And as Bauby’s confidence in the system grew, he began fulfilling his previous book contract, albeit in a manner and about a subject that no one could have expected.  His strength and determination shocked everyone, but more importantly, it inspired them.

Director Julian Schnabel, deservedly cited by the Academy for his work, does an excellent job bringing this story to the screen.  He begins the movie by showing us life from Bauby’s new perspective; that is, from a fixed position down below.  We feel the frustration as he tries to speak but slowly realizes that no one can her him.  We sense the disorientation as his right eye fails to catch up to his left.  Slowly, as Bauby comes to terms with his condition, our view expands.  We see Bauby as the world sees him.  We see Bauby as he sees himself.  We see Bauby’s dreams.  By the end of the movie, Schnabel ensures that we have fully explored the man, and he uses plenty of technical weapons in his arsenal to achieve it.  The cinematography and editing, both nominated for Oscars, are absolutely phenomenal.

I feel like triumphant is almost an understatement for “The Diving Bell and the Butterfly.”  It’s the kind of movie that makes you wonder why more foreign films aren’t nominated for Best Picture – this easily makes my top five of 2007.  But I digress; I don’t want this to become a discussion of the politics of movie awards.  This is a movie that shows the power of the human will to overcome the most grueling of physical obstacles in a way that stirs the soul, and it needs to be seen.





Random Factoid #234

19 03 2010

I came to a realization the other day that I found rather shocking.  To my knowledge (and my memory could potentially fail me here), I have never seen a foreign language film in theaters.  I see plenty on video, but I don’t think I’ve ever slapped down the cash at the box office.

Perhaps I’ll break the streak with “A Prophet” – I intended to break it with “The White Ribbon,” but they yanked it too soon!





Random Factoid #233

18 03 2010

For the first time in a few months, I checked my Rotten Tomatoes profile.  The last review I entered was “Nine” – and that was back in the last decade.

I decided that I wasn’t satisfied with the shady sillhouette they had so courteously provided as my profile picture, so I decided to change it.  And no, I didn’t actually use a picture of myself.

If you were to find me on Rotten Tomatoes now, my profile icon would look like this:

Why?  Because Pixar is the best, and I just want to go give this cloud a hug.





REVIEW: The Girlfriend Experience

18 03 2010

I have a great deal of respect for Steven Soderbergh because in all of his directorial projects, he has never played it safe.  Even in his more conservative films, he is never afraid to take risks – for example, he gives “The Informant!” the double punch of a smart satire and a deliberate character study.

But whenever Soderbergh isn’t doing well-received studio movies, he makes a fair amount of experimental cinema.  And the thing about these movies is that they are incredibly polarizing – you either think it works or it fails; there’s not much of a middle ground.

With his latest experiment, “The Girlfriend Experience,” it doesn’t.

I’ve been taught the scientific method throughout my entire schooling career, so I can systematically dissect where the movie fell apart.  I admire Soderbergh’s hypothesis, or the general idea he had for the film.  He wanted to make a movie about how the failing economy affects everyone, even those who you wouldn’t expect.  You know, like call girls and personal trainers.  It’s a movie with ambition, and I would much rather spend my time watching a bad movie with ambition than a mediocre movie without it.

The error is in the execution.  Technically speaking, there’s nothing really wrong about the acting, even from Sasha Grey, whose only previous experience came from the adult genre.  But every performance lacks in urgency, and I felt no reason to care about the fate of any character in the slightest.

The writing also lacks, mainly because it fails to match the movie’s daring premise.  It’s too caught up in clichés and predictability, often the deciding factor of mediocrity nowadays.  We are still in the middle of this financial crisis, and maybe taking such a bold look at it is best served to wait until after it all subsides.  C- /





Random Factoid #232

17 03 2010

In first grade, I was required to write in my journal for school purposes.  Usually, we could write about things that we wanted, such as our weekend.

I wrote in this journal a great many times, but the only entry that I distinctly remember is an entire section devoted to my adoration of a cup for “The Road to El Dorado” that I got at the movies.

I meant to say that it was a really cool cup, but I accidentally forgot to write the word cool.  It came back with the comment: “That sounds great, but what is a really cup?”





Random Factoid #231

16 03 2010

The first time I had ever seen the Best Picture-winning movie on the day of the ceremony was in 2004. I had seen “Million Dollar Baby” a week or so before the show. A trend didn’t catch on until 2007; since that year, I have seen the winning movie by the Oscars ceremony.





REVIEW: The Last Station

16 03 2010

The Last Station” is a movie that would have played well in ‘20s and ‘50s.

It’s a classic battle of communism vs. capitalism as Countess Sofya (Helen Mirren) fights for the right to the profits from the writings of her husband, famed writer Leo Tolstoy (Christopher Plummer).  Her fiercest opponents are the forces that hope to turn her husband into a saint and his work into a movement, led by the ruthless Chertkov (Paul Giamatti).

Caught awkwardly in the midst of all of this is Valentin (James McAvoy), a secretary for the family hired by Chertkov to document all the proceedings in the Tolstoy’s dwelling.  A devoted “Tolstoyan,” Valentin believes in abstinence and rejects private property.  Yet as he becomes intertwined in the affairs of the house, he finds himself smitten by one of the commune workers and sympathizing with Sofya’s plight.

In “The Last Station,” I saw in Helen Mirren what I feel like everyone else in the world saw in “The Queen.”  As supposed to her passive and gentle Oscar-winning work in the latter, I saw truly powerhouse acting that absolutely commands the screen.  It wasn’t just her reputation that earned her these many nominations; this performance is completely deserving.  I’ve never advocated that screaming plus shouting with some crying equals an Oscar nomination, but plenty of people claimed that the trailer just screamed awards attention for Helen Mirren.  She does plenty of it, but it is executed with the utmost perfection that it never feels like she begs for attention.

Christopher Plummer is charming and delightful as Leo Tolstoy.  This isn’t the best of 2009 or of his career, but it’s another great reminder of what a treasure he has been all the way back to Captain Von Trapp in 1965.  The fact that this was his first Academy Award nomination is truly criminal.

“The Last Station” is a movie that succeeds because of its phenomenal acting, mainly from Mirren and Plummer.  But it’s also one of those movies that can win you over with the stunning beauty of its setting.  In fact, it almost becomes difficult to keep your attention on the actors during the scenes in the forest and not let your eyes drift to the gorgeous foliage.  The movie often tries to focus on love and romance, but the theme isn’t played out with great success.  Thankfully, it plays a smaller part to the conflicting ideologies, and it is here where the film is at its strongest.  B+ /





Random Factoid #230

15 03 2010

I have a Post It note on the dashboard of my laptop reserved just for factoid ideas. This comes in handy on the days when my brain is running pretty low on juice.

Obviously, since the Post It note itself has become a factoid, you can tell that I could use a few more brainstorming sessions. Thankfully, it’s spring break, so I have time for that.





Random Factoid #229

14 03 2010

Back in the ’90s (strange to think that it was TWO decades ago), the Disney Store would give posters away if you brought a ticket stub for a Disney movie into the store. Naturally, I took advantage of this offer many times – although the only poster I distinctly remember receiving is one for “Toy Story 2.”





Random Factoid #228

13 03 2010

Live update from the road! I’m somewhere in Mississippi, hoping that this momentary 3G service will stay with me long enough to post this factoid!

I’m taking a Spring Break college trip, and in my family’s typical fashion, we are driving the whole thing.

Rather, my parents are driving. I, on the other hand, am curled in the backseat of the Suburban with my Snuggie and my laptop. This is hour 8 and I’m already on my fourth movie – “Inglourious Basterds.” I won’t reveal the others because one will most likely be next week’s “F.I.L.M.”





F.I.L.M. of the Week (March 12, 2010)

12 03 2010

The “F.I.L.M. of the Week” is Kathryn Bigelow’s “Near Dark.”  Rather than present a conventional review, I simply want to leave you with a “top 10 list” as to why you should watch this movie.

  1. For any of you who cheered on Kathryn Bigelow to Oscar gold a few days ago but had no idea what she had directed other than “The Hurt Locker,” you need to see “Near Dark.”  This is one of her earliest movies, and it’s a totally different experience than her most recent directorial effort.  Nevertheless, it showcases her excellent directorial prowess.
  2. Tired of the “Twilight” vampires and Stephenie Meyer’s romanticization of the blood-sucking creatures who haunt the night, also known as vampires?  “Near Dark” is the antidote to your woes.  It bears a few plot similarities (and I can unfortunately say this from experience because I read the book – DO NOT JUDGE ME), but you won’t see any tender moments in the fields here.  Bigelow makes the vampires fearsome creatures who burn in the sunlight and look disheveled and dirty.  Forget Team Edward, I’m on Team Bigelow.
  3. But for those of you that like “Twilight,” you should know that a remake of this movie was planned yet cancelled in the wake of the release of the vampire juggernaut.
  4. Bigelow superimposes the vampire story over the backdrop of a western town, and she mingles the two genres in ingenious ways.
  5. Need someone with better acting chops than Robert Pattinson playing your vampire?  Does Bill Paxton suffice?  He is the most recognizable actor that “Near Dark” has to offer, but each of the other vampires are equally as terrifying.
  6. If you want something that will capture your attention, just wait until the vampires go hunting for some food in a biker bar.  Bigelow builds the tension beautifully just like she did in “The Hurt Locker.”
  7. It was made in 1987, so it’s got some awesome 80isms about it.  Just  that generally awesome vibe that an 80s movie has is the best thing “Near Dark” has going for it.
  8. Almost the whole movie features the score of a German synth pop band.  It’s a serious movie, so try not to let it distract you too much.  But enjoy it, even laugh at it if you feel so compelled.
  9. And while we are on the subject of the ’80s, enjoy some of the special effects towards the end.  They match the quality of “Avatar” at their most brilliant moments (did you pick up on my sarcasm?)
  10. If you are just looking for an enjoyable moviegoing experience that offers you thrills, chills, drama, and maybe some comedy at the expense of the movie itself, then “Near Dark” is a pick that will suit you.  It veers toward the predictable at times, but who really cares?  It’s from the 80’s!!




Random Factoid #227

12 03 2010

Because I run this blog and I get to define what on earth a “random factoid” actually is, I’ve decided to do something a little different today. It’s my artistic license, and I’m exercising it.

I am not without fault. While dunking Oreos before studying for my AP US History test yesterday, I caught a few brief moments of the 2002 movie “Mr. Deeds” on TBS (taking a study break is NOT the fault to which I referred). Suddenly, I remembered whenever I saw it in theaters.

Then I remembered one of my very first factoids: Random Factoid #5, in fact. Pay attention to the bolded section below.

My parents were very protective of the movies I saw, and I will always remember the first PG-13 and R movies that I ever saw.

The first PG-13 movie I saw was “Ever After: A Cinderella Story.” It was shown to me by a babysitter who now runs her own stationery line.

The first PG-13 movie I saw in theaters was “Legally Blonde 2: Red, White, and Blonde.” I got to see it as a reward for my days spent fighting off a viral pneumonia in the Monterrey County Hospital (that’s right, I got pneumonia while vacationing in Pebble Beach).

The first R movie I saw was “Crimson Tide.” My dad started watching it on Encore when I was in the room, and he let me watch it with him.

The first R movie I saw in theaters was “Flags of our Fathers.” The only reason that I was allowed to see it was because I had read the book for a school assignment.

I misspoke. “Legally Blonde 2” was released in 2003, a full year after I saw “Mr. Deeds.”

I admitted my faults. My confessional is complete.





Random Factoid #226

11 03 2010

I have a special compartment of my wallet reserved for free movie tickets, and thus concludes my first one-sentence factoid ever.