Released 2013.
Direcected by Sofia Coppola.
Written by ofia Coppola and Jo Sales (from Vanity Fair "The Suspect Wore Louboutins".
With
Katie Chang,
Israel Broussard,
Emma Watson, Claire Julien, Taissa Farmiga,
Georgia Rock
I saw this film to take my daughters to see it. I wanted them to see the wickedness of their ways.When my daughter asked why are you taking us - she didn't want to go - I told her she had to see it because it is the film of her generation. My daughter is obsessed with celebrities, and texting and photographing herself constantly. I guess I wanted her to know what she looks like from the outside. Of course there is more to her than this obsession and she is a kind gentle spirit, but it does worry me that she gets so wrapped up in this celebrity culture. I think she was a little peeved.
That said, it was better than I thought it would be, though I went in with low expectations. It was kind of funny.
It's based on a true story of a bunch of some L.A. kids who decided to steal from some of the celebrities they obsess over. The director does sort of metaphorically wag her finger at these kids, while at the same time admiring these kids. In one very minor scene, the girls are in the car singing along to a rap song, swear words and all. They are really trying hard to be cool. And what's not to like about these kids? They are young, beautiful, fashionable and full of vibrant energy. In some ways, this film is a celebration of youth, as well as a cautionary tale.
Some critics say the film makers were not critical enough. I think the results of their deeds is lesson enough... in part. It chastises the kids for the the felonies they committed but erhaps there should have been more criticism of the shallow, values that these kids extolled.
Wednesday, July 24, 2013
Tuesday, July 23, 2013
neighboring Sounds 2.5/4
Seen on DVD. Released 2012.
Directed and written by Kleber Mendonça Filho,
With Irma Brown, Sebastião Formiga, Gustavo Jahn, Maeve Jinkings, Dida Maia, Irandhir Santos, W.J. Solha
Okay , so I was excited when I saw that this was available on Netflix. It was on the top of many critics' best of 2012 lists. From the title and the use of the word "sounds' I thought it might be edgy and slightly experimental. In fact, I was worried that it would be too experimental. (I'm not a big fan of straight out experimental films - I like to have some sort of narrative and character development). Well it wasn't TOO experimental. In fact, with the exceptions of a few interesting sonic offerings, it was kind of a normal film.
Briefly, the film takes place in a rich part of Brazil where most people have servants.Most of the neighborhood is own by "The Grandfather" and a couple of his grand children are living in the neighborhood. One has a new girlfriend and the other is always in trouble with law even though he is from a rich family. This latter character, does bring some edginess to the film. The town decides to hire a security firm because they are worried about the outside (poor, thieving folk from the favelas) getting into their nice neighborhood. There is also a woman who is obsessed with the dog barking next door who tries to think of ways to silence the dog. The movie starts with this character, so maybe that is where the title comes from, because otherwise, I don't see where the word "Sounds" comes from thematically in the film.
For those who like sequential narratives, it might be a difficult film, but basically the narrative is episodic and it is an ensemble piece. I enjoyed it - yes. There were some interesting characters and I got to see a side of Brazil that I haven't seen before (I'm accustomed to seeing the favelas when I ever I watch a Brazilian film).
It might sound like I hate it, but I didn't. I like it a lot. I just don't think it was one of the best 3 films of 2012. It just isn't special enough.
Directed and written by Kleber Mendonça Filho,
With Irma Brown, Sebastião Formiga, Gustavo Jahn, Maeve Jinkings, Dida Maia, Irandhir Santos, W.J. Solha
Okay , so I was excited when I saw that this was available on Netflix. It was on the top of many critics' best of 2012 lists. From the title and the use of the word "sounds' I thought it might be edgy and slightly experimental. In fact, I was worried that it would be too experimental. (I'm not a big fan of straight out experimental films - I like to have some sort of narrative and character development). Well it wasn't TOO experimental. In fact, with the exceptions of a few interesting sonic offerings, it was kind of a normal film.
Briefly, the film takes place in a rich part of Brazil where most people have servants.Most of the neighborhood is own by "The Grandfather" and a couple of his grand children are living in the neighborhood. One has a new girlfriend and the other is always in trouble with law even though he is from a rich family. This latter character, does bring some edginess to the film. The town decides to hire a security firm because they are worried about the outside (poor, thieving folk from the favelas) getting into their nice neighborhood. There is also a woman who is obsessed with the dog barking next door who tries to think of ways to silence the dog. The movie starts with this character, so maybe that is where the title comes from, because otherwise, I don't see where the word "Sounds" comes from thematically in the film.
For those who like sequential narratives, it might be a difficult film, but basically the narrative is episodic and it is an ensemble piece. I enjoyed it - yes. There were some interesting characters and I got to see a side of Brazil that I haven't seen before (I'm accustomed to seeing the favelas when I ever I watch a Brazilian film).
It might sound like I hate it, but I didn't. I like it a lot. I just don't think it was one of the best 3 films of 2012. It just isn't special enough.
Sunday, July 21, 2013
A Highjacking 3/4
Seen in Theater. Released in 2013
Written and directed by Tobias Lindholm.
With Pilou Asbæk, Søren Malling, Dar Salim, Roland Møller, Gary Skjoldmose Porter,
Abdihakin Asgar, Amalie Ihle Alstrup
A Danish ship is hijacked by Somali pirates. This is mostly the story of how the crew deals with being hostages and the negotiations that happen between the pirates and the company that owns the ship. The film has two basic settings; that of the claustrophobic and increasingly shabby ship and the clean, sparse cool office of the Danish company. It is a nice contrast in relation to the fact that the people are negotiating over the lives of real people. And that is the crux of the film.
Recommended if you can find it.
Written and directed by Tobias Lindholm.
With Pilou Asbæk, Søren Malling, Dar Salim, Roland Møller, Gary Skjoldmose Porter,
Abdihakin Asgar, Amalie Ihle Alstrup
A Danish ship is hijacked by Somali pirates. This is mostly the story of how the crew deals with being hostages and the negotiations that happen between the pirates and the company that owns the ship. The film has two basic settings; that of the claustrophobic and increasingly shabby ship and the clean, sparse cool office of the Danish company. It is a nice contrast in relation to the fact that the people are negotiating over the lives of real people. And that is the crux of the film.
Recommended if you can find it.
Monday, July 15, 2013
The Wall 3/4 stars
Seen in theater, released 2013.
Directed by Julian Pölsler
Written by:Marlen Haushofer (novel), Julian Pölsler (adaptation)With Wolfgang M. Bauer, Ulrike Beimpold, Martina Gedeck
This is a very beautiful film with lots of ideas floating around. In it, a woman (basically a one woman show) on holiday in the Austrian Alps finds her self walled in by an invisible barrier. So this is the story of how she and her animals survive (or not). The invisible barrier is not explained. It just is. But she is trapped for the few humans in her area are frozen (dead) standing in their places so the audience knows that she is alone.
The visual beauty comes from her surroundings as she is caged in a valley of the Alps. Of course, one could argue that there is beauty in the prose her character and some of the ideas that she expounds upon.
Some of the themes that are discussed are that of survival, responsibility to nature, loneliness, and the transcendence of natural beauty.
I would CAUTIOUSLY recommend this film. It is very beautiful and poetic. It is also a bit slow going. I seem to say this often, but I would recommend this film only to people who are capable of being patient and can appreciate the films relaxed, lingering pace.
Sunday, July 14, 2013
The Way, Way Back **1/2 out of 4
Seen in Theaters.
Released 2013.
With Steve Carell, Toni Collette, Allison Janney,
The Trailer;
Released 2013.
With Steve Carell, Toni Collette, Allison Janney,
| AnnaSophia Robb, Sam Rockwell, Maya Rudolph, Liam James, Rob Corddry, Amanda Peet | |||||||||||||||||||||
| I would recommended this movie. But "wait!" You might say. "You only gave it 2 and 1/2 stars. Why would you recommend this film?" First , 2 and a half stars means its a very good movie (# is great and 2 is good). So basically, that means I am stingy with stars. Second, While as entertaining and fun as the film is, it is not exactly earth shattering. And you wouldn't expect "earth shattering" from the4 makers of The Descendants. two and a half stars is about where I start recommending films. | |||||||||||||||||||||
| |||||||||||||||||||||
| And here's the part about the believability of the film. Can a kid really be that geeky? Can a cute young hottie really go for such a geek. Can a kid so geeky, really change his personality around so much, (or learn to live with it so easily). Would an adult really take the time to take this kid under his wings. (even if he is practically an adolescent himself). Probably not, but suspend belief and you will be okay. If you can suspend disbelief for a zombie movie, you can do it for this one too. So go! Enjoy yourself.. There's even some food for thought, though its pretty subtle and not even worth going into here. You'll be glad that you went. |
Wednesday, July 10, 2013
World War Z ** out of 4
Seen in theater. Released June 2013.
To be sure this is a fun and fairly harrowing film. But in my opinion, it was nothing special. All the action scenes were of zombie attacks on the populace. They all started to look the same after a while. There was this constant low level soundtrack of groaning and growling off stage and I got tired of the stuttery herky, jerky movements and the expressive/non expressive facial expressions. Seen it all before, too many times.
One thing I liked about the zombies was the dedication in which they pursued their victims. They used their bodies as battering rams to smash though barriers and windshields in an all out effort to get their victims. I thought that it was kind of intense.
At the end, I was left wanting more, but not in a good way. Not in a way that made me think that was the most awesome film I have ever seen. It was more like "That's it?" More of a disappointment that there wasn't more. The film just seemed to speed through events, except for the (after a while) the mind numbing zombie attacks.
I understand that this film had issues in its production, and I wonder if a lot of detail was left on the cutting room floor. For example, this being a World War, there were scenes in 3 different parts of the world; South Korea, Jerusalem and some Southeastern European country whose name was mentioned quickly and that I was unable to catch. (Belarus? )
In South Korea, the film must have spent less than 10 minutes there (estimation) and it was taking place at the army base. Hardly any glimpse of the country itself. They got off the plane (attacked by zombies), talked, got back on the plane (again attacked by zombies).
In that southeastern European country, they spent the whole time (almost) in a health facility, It was a decent set piece but we saw very little of Belarus.
Only in Jerusalem was the any indication that they were actually in a foreign country. And it was probably the best set piece of the bunch. But even in that case, they spent about 5 minutes talking and the rest of the time they were being attacked by zombies through the street of Jerusalem. At least during that attack, you got a feeling of place.
I'm trying to keep these reviews shorter, but there was an interesting scene in Jerusalem where people were passing though the gates to get protection, behind walls. The zombies were on the outside trying to get in. Any messages or symbolism there? Me thinks perhaps.
I wouldn't recommend this film at a first run theater, but it would certainly be worth watching at the cheap theater or at home on your home theater system. On the other hand, why bother when there are so many great films available. Do we have enough time in our lives to watch the " just decent" films?
I have the feeling that there is a better possible film here, it is a shame that they couldn't make it. I does make me want to read the book, so I can at least imagine that better movie.
Here's a trailer.
Directed byMarc Forster.
Written by :
Matthew Michael Carnahan (screenplay),
Drew Goddard (screenplay),
Starring
Brad Pitt,
Mireille Enos,
Daniella KerteszTo be sure this is a fun and fairly harrowing film. But in my opinion, it was nothing special. All the action scenes were of zombie attacks on the populace. They all started to look the same after a while. There was this constant low level soundtrack of groaning and growling off stage and I got tired of the stuttery herky, jerky movements and the expressive/non expressive facial expressions. Seen it all before, too many times.
One thing I liked about the zombies was the dedication in which they pursued their victims. They used their bodies as battering rams to smash though barriers and windshields in an all out effort to get their victims. I thought that it was kind of intense.
At the end, I was left wanting more, but not in a good way. Not in a way that made me think that was the most awesome film I have ever seen. It was more like "That's it?" More of a disappointment that there wasn't more. The film just seemed to speed through events, except for the (after a while) the mind numbing zombie attacks.
I understand that this film had issues in its production, and I wonder if a lot of detail was left on the cutting room floor. For example, this being a World War, there were scenes in 3 different parts of the world; South Korea, Jerusalem and some Southeastern European country whose name was mentioned quickly and that I was unable to catch. (Belarus? )
In South Korea, the film must have spent less than 10 minutes there (estimation) and it was taking place at the army base. Hardly any glimpse of the country itself. They got off the plane (attacked by zombies), talked, got back on the plane (again attacked by zombies).
In that southeastern European country, they spent the whole time (almost) in a health facility, It was a decent set piece but we saw very little of Belarus.
Only in Jerusalem was the any indication that they were actually in a foreign country. And it was probably the best set piece of the bunch. But even in that case, they spent about 5 minutes talking and the rest of the time they were being attacked by zombies through the street of Jerusalem. At least during that attack, you got a feeling of place.
I'm trying to keep these reviews shorter, but there was an interesting scene in Jerusalem where people were passing though the gates to get protection, behind walls. The zombies were on the outside trying to get in. Any messages or symbolism there? Me thinks perhaps.
I wouldn't recommend this film at a first run theater, but it would certainly be worth watching at the cheap theater or at home on your home theater system. On the other hand, why bother when there are so many great films available. Do we have enough time in our lives to watch the " just decent" films?
I have the feeling that there is a better possible film here, it is a shame that they couldn't make it. I does make me want to read the book, so I can at least imagine that better movie.
Here's a trailer.
Saturday, July 6, 2013
The Life of Oharu ***1/2 out of 4
Seen in Theater.
Released 1952.
What is it about historical Japanese films (or society) that people, especially women, have to walk so slow? Is it the outfits that they are wearing - the Samurai culture? Everyone just shuffles around. This is the second Japanese film that I have seen where the movement of the actor is excruciating slow.
At first the film started slowly and then stuff started to happen. There's definitely some interesting themes to think about..
It is the mid 17th century in Japan, about an older (50 years old) reflects on her life and how she got to where she is now (in one long flashback). With out telling about every episode that happens, she starts as a lady in waiting at the royal court, but then fails in love with a man below her station. Their love affair is found out and she and her family are exiled from Kyoto. What follows is a series of events in which her problems get solved only to end in worse circumstances that she already was. . In one of the first episodes, she become concubine to an emperor and births the heir to the throne, but she is summarily dismissed after the baby is born and she sent back to live with her parents.
She seems to drift with the winds of fate. It appears she has no free will and that her fate is decided by men (or jealous wives). This is certainly a commentary on the freedom of women even in modern times. The fact that this film is set in the Samurai times makes me think that it is a metaphor for the freedom., or lack there of, of women in society. This film was made in 1952, a time when women had much less rights than they do now and also made in Japan, a country which has been more male dominated then most countries.
The film really grew on me as it continued on from the opening scene.
There's lots more that would be interesting to talk about, but I am trying to keep these short, otherwise I'll never be able to keep up.
Released 1952.
Directed by Kenji Mizoguchi
With:
Kinuyo Tanaka,
Tsukie Matsuura,
Ichirô SugaiWhat is it about historical Japanese films (or society) that people, especially women, have to walk so slow? Is it the outfits that they are wearing - the Samurai culture? Everyone just shuffles around. This is the second Japanese film that I have seen where the movement of the actor is excruciating slow.
At first the film started slowly and then stuff started to happen. There's definitely some interesting themes to think about..
It is the mid 17th century in Japan, about an older (50 years old) reflects on her life and how she got to where she is now (in one long flashback). With out telling about every episode that happens, she starts as a lady in waiting at the royal court, but then fails in love with a man below her station. Their love affair is found out and she and her family are exiled from Kyoto. What follows is a series of events in which her problems get solved only to end in worse circumstances that she already was. . In one of the first episodes, she become concubine to an emperor and births the heir to the throne, but she is summarily dismissed after the baby is born and she sent back to live with her parents.
She seems to drift with the winds of fate. It appears she has no free will and that her fate is decided by men (or jealous wives). This is certainly a commentary on the freedom of women even in modern times. The fact that this film is set in the Samurai times makes me think that it is a metaphor for the freedom., or lack there of, of women in society. This film was made in 1952, a time when women had much less rights than they do now and also made in Japan, a country which has been more male dominated then most countries.
The film really grew on me as it continued on from the opening scene.
There's lots more that would be interesting to talk about, but I am trying to keep these short, otherwise I'll never be able to keep up.
Friday, April 19, 2013
Reality **1/2 Seen in the theater
2012.
Directed by Matteo Garrone.
Written by Matteo Garrone, Massimo Gaudioso and others.
With Aniello Arena, Loredana Simioli, Nando Paone.
At first I thought this was kind of cute but silly little movie. Almost too much so. But then it started to grow on me.
The main character of the film, Luciano, is a well loved fish salesman who occasionally entertains friends at parties and weddings with a drag routine. , His friends and family adore him. I found his loonyness a bit overbearing and annoying, but I suppose it is the character trait that is necessary for the role he plays. He tries out for a Big Brother type reality TV show an comes away from the try out thinking the producers liked him and that he's going to get selected. The call he is awaiting is late in arriving and meanwhile he is starting to lose his sense of reality. He sees spies in every corner and he banks his whole life on the success he thinks will come from his televisions appearance.
At this point, the film takes a dark turn, and I really liked it.
here's the trailer.
Directed by Matteo Garrone.
Written by Matteo Garrone, Massimo Gaudioso and others.
With Aniello Arena, Loredana Simioli, Nando Paone.
At first I thought this was kind of cute but silly little movie. Almost too much so. But then it started to grow on me.
The main character of the film, Luciano, is a well loved fish salesman who occasionally entertains friends at parties and weddings with a drag routine. , His friends and family adore him. I found his loonyness a bit overbearing and annoying, but I suppose it is the character trait that is necessary for the role he plays. He tries out for a Big Brother type reality TV show an comes away from the try out thinking the producers liked him and that he's going to get selected. The call he is awaiting is late in arriving and meanwhile he is starting to lose his sense of reality. He sees spies in every corner and he banks his whole life on the success he thinks will come from his televisions appearance.
At this point, the film takes a dark turn, and I really liked it.
here's the trailer.
Saturday, March 30, 2013
The Ballad of Narayama ** (1957) seen on DVD
Directed by Keisuke Kinoshita.
Written by Shichirô Fukazawa (stories), Keisuke Kinoshita.
With Kinuyo Tanaka, Teiji Takahashi, Yûko Mochizuki.
There's plenty to complain about here as can be inferred by the 2 star rating I gave it. Though I would still recommend it under certain circumstances. 1) See the film in the theater. I watched on DVD on my flat screen TV and the dark portions were difficult were to differentiate. And a large percentage of the film happens in the dark. It's also worth seeing n the theater because it is beautiful. It is made on a sound stage, but I don't think that it was done to save money. The sound stage was meticulously designed. It was purposely unreal, and that non-reality gave the film eerie and beautiful tone. It almost looked like pages out of a children's picture book. The sky at night fall had an eerie purple/violet color. During the autumn scenes, the screen is filled with the gold of harvested rice and the pink of blooming flowers. At times, one part of the screen was yellowish, while a different part of the screen was greenish blue. I feel seeing this film on the big screen would add at least another half star to the rating. 2) Be prepared for little character development. This film is based on a novel which is based on a folk tale. Folktales have hierarchical characters. There is the kind grandmother, the insolent grandson and the bimbo grand-daughter in-law. The kind-hearted son and the gracious new recently widowed wife. In fact I really liked that wife. At first I though she would come into the family and try to tear it apart, as daughter-in-laws are wont to do, but no, she appreciated that the family took her in and is loyal and kind to her husband and mother-in-law. Another reason for the lack of character development is simply cultural. Japanese are not know (generalization here) for being individuals but to follow orders and customs. That is the case in this film. The characters do things that are inexplicable, but they do so because of tradition and custom. But I think at the end, the director tries to question unwavering loyalty to culture. A synopsis: In a small Japanese village, it is custom for the elderly , when they turn 70, to go to Mount Narayama to "visit the gods" - die. The grandma has no problem with this and eagerly awaits her 70th birthday. The son has other thoughts which is why I say perhaps the director is questioning this ritual. In fact that there is another elderly man in the village who isn't taking this ritual so well as counterpoint to the grandmother. 3) expect a slow narrative. It is pastoral setting and it has old people in it. One needs some patience for this film. Couldn't find English subtitles, but this will give you an idea of how it looks.
There's plenty to complain about here as can be inferred by the 2 star rating I gave it. Though I would still recommend it under certain circumstances. 1) See the film in the theater. I watched on DVD on my flat screen TV and the dark portions were difficult were to differentiate. And a large percentage of the film happens in the dark. It's also worth seeing n the theater because it is beautiful. It is made on a sound stage, but I don't think that it was done to save money. The sound stage was meticulously designed. It was purposely unreal, and that non-reality gave the film eerie and beautiful tone. It almost looked like pages out of a children's picture book. The sky at night fall had an eerie purple/violet color. During the autumn scenes, the screen is filled with the gold of harvested rice and the pink of blooming flowers. At times, one part of the screen was yellowish, while a different part of the screen was greenish blue. I feel seeing this film on the big screen would add at least another half star to the rating. 2) Be prepared for little character development. This film is based on a novel which is based on a folk tale. Folktales have hierarchical characters. There is the kind grandmother, the insolent grandson and the bimbo grand-daughter in-law. The kind-hearted son and the gracious new recently widowed wife. In fact I really liked that wife. At first I though she would come into the family and try to tear it apart, as daughter-in-laws are wont to do, but no, she appreciated that the family took her in and is loyal and kind to her husband and mother-in-law. Another reason for the lack of character development is simply cultural. Japanese are not know (generalization here) for being individuals but to follow orders and customs. That is the case in this film. The characters do things that are inexplicable, but they do so because of tradition and custom. But I think at the end, the director tries to question unwavering loyalty to culture. A synopsis: In a small Japanese village, it is custom for the elderly , when they turn 70, to go to Mount Narayama to "visit the gods" - die. The grandma has no problem with this and eagerly awaits her 70th birthday. The son has other thoughts which is why I say perhaps the director is questioning this ritual. In fact that there is another elderly man in the village who isn't taking this ritual so well as counterpoint to the grandmother. 3) expect a slow narrative. It is pastoral setting and it has old people in it. One needs some patience for this film. Couldn't find English subtitles, but this will give you an idea of how it looks.
Tuesday, March 26, 2013
Argo *** (out 0f 4) seen in theater
2012
Directed by Ben Affleck.
Written by Chris Terrio (screenplay), Tony Mendez (book).
With Ben Affleck, Bryan Cranston, John Goodman.
I saw the trailer for this way back when and thought "how silly". My favorite film reviewer (the staff of the Chicago Rreader) did not reccomend the film. So I waited. Meanwhile everyone else was loving it so I finally got around to seing it.
It is a good film! Though my assumption was correct that the part of the undercover Hollywood scouting team was pretty silly - though true. it's hard to believe the Iranians fell for it. Perhaps less emphasis on that aspect would have been better. The film seems pretty full of its self about how silly this is that it kind of annoys me.
And my daughters thought the soundtrack was pretty cheesy at the end when it is happily ever after. They might have been right, though I fell for the cheesiness. perhaps I understood more about what was at stake for these people.
here's the trailer, though I am sure most people saw it.
Directed by Ben Affleck.
Written by Chris Terrio (screenplay), Tony Mendez (book).
With Ben Affleck, Bryan Cranston, John Goodman.
I saw the trailer for this way back when and thought "how silly". My favorite film reviewer (the staff of the Chicago Rreader) did not reccomend the film. So I waited. Meanwhile everyone else was loving it so I finally got around to seing it.
It is a good film! Though my assumption was correct that the part of the undercover Hollywood scouting team was pretty silly - though true. it's hard to believe the Iranians fell for it. Perhaps less emphasis on that aspect would have been better. The film seems pretty full of its self about how silly this is that it kind of annoys me.
And my daughters thought the soundtrack was pretty cheesy at the end when it is happily ever after. They might have been right, though I fell for the cheesiness. perhaps I understood more about what was at stake for these people.
here's the trailer, though I am sure most people saw it.
2046 **1/2 (out 0f 4) seen in Theater
2004
Directed and written by Kar Wai Wong.
With Tony Leung Chiu Wai, Ziyi Zhang, Faye Wong
2046 is the year that Hong Kong loses its economic and political independence. It is also the name of a science fiction novel that the main character Tony Leung is writing as well as the room number of many of the beautiful girls with whom he has liaisons with. Strangely enough, the majority of the story takes place in the 60's in the swinging city with it's night clubs and brothels. People go through sexual partners like we today go through coke cans. It's seedy and erotic. But one of the women from 2046, played by the beautiful Ziyi Zang, is able to maintain a relationship with Tony a bit longer, but of course the relationship is fatal and doomed in the end. At the end there is all remorse and regret. Perhaps a message about that kind off lifestyle?
There is a beautiful series of shots that really hit home with me because they reminded me of my own home movies that my parents and other parents across America took in those days. In these scenes, one of the girls from room 2046 will sit or stand near the hotel sign (60's style) in there 60's outfit staring off into the sky looking very melancholy. All this is shot in handheld, 8 mm film and has that shaky, grainy homemade look.
Oh, yeah and then there's that sci-fi theme which comes and goes and the sequence of the story is so convoluted that it is really difficult to make any kind of sense of it. The sci-fi portion I suppose is some sort of metaphor about memories. I really had trouble with that idea.
Recommended for those whose taste is patient and leans toward the avant-garde.
Directed and written by Kar Wai Wong.
With Tony Leung Chiu Wai, Ziyi Zhang, Faye Wong
2046 is the year that Hong Kong loses its economic and political independence. It is also the name of a science fiction novel that the main character Tony Leung is writing as well as the room number of many of the beautiful girls with whom he has liaisons with. Strangely enough, the majority of the story takes place in the 60's in the swinging city with it's night clubs and brothels. People go through sexual partners like we today go through coke cans. It's seedy and erotic. But one of the women from 2046, played by the beautiful Ziyi Zang, is able to maintain a relationship with Tony a bit longer, but of course the relationship is fatal and doomed in the end. At the end there is all remorse and regret. Perhaps a message about that kind off lifestyle?
There is a beautiful series of shots that really hit home with me because they reminded me of my own home movies that my parents and other parents across America took in those days. In these scenes, one of the girls from room 2046 will sit or stand near the hotel sign (60's style) in there 60's outfit staring off into the sky looking very melancholy. All this is shot in handheld, 8 mm film and has that shaky, grainy homemade look.
Oh, yeah and then there's that sci-fi theme which comes and goes and the sequence of the story is so convoluted that it is really difficult to make any kind of sense of it. The sci-fi portion I suppose is some sort of metaphor about memories. I really had trouble with that idea.
Recommended for those whose taste is patient and leans toward the avant-garde.
Tuesday, March 12, 2013
All that Heaven Allows *** (of 4) (1955)
Seen in Theater.
Directed by Douglas Sirk.
With Jane Wyman, Rock Hudson, and Agnes Moorehead.
This is a story of a widower accustomed to country club life who fall s in love with the younger and hunky Rock Hudson. Of course all her peers are scandalized and the couple have to try to survive the outcry and scorn heaped upon them.
And this film has a lesson about the morality of individualism. Cary's (Wyman) crowd is quite different from Ron's (Hudson) crowd who happen to be naturists. The debutante crowd scoffs at this other crowd and it is more a story about accepting people's different outlook on life than finding love in a a May?September romance. The naturists are considered outsiders. This being 1955, that was probably the trendy thing for the hip kids, but the message still rings true today. There is much pressure on society for people to fit in, whether they are naturists, beatniks, hippies, punk rockers or communistic. The film criticizes those people (the elite) who look down on people different them. This is still a current theme today.
Here's the trailer;
A particularly good scene, though it might be hard to understand out of context.
Directed by Douglas Sirk.
With Jane Wyman, Rock Hudson, and Agnes Moorehead.
This is a story of a widower accustomed to country club life who fall s in love with the younger and hunky Rock Hudson. Of course all her peers are scandalized and the couple have to try to survive the outcry and scorn heaped upon them.
And this film has a lesson about the morality of individualism. Cary's (Wyman) crowd is quite different from Ron's (Hudson) crowd who happen to be naturists. The debutante crowd scoffs at this other crowd and it is more a story about accepting people's different outlook on life than finding love in a a May?September romance. The naturists are considered outsiders. This being 1955, that was probably the trendy thing for the hip kids, but the message still rings true today. There is much pressure on society for people to fit in, whether they are naturists, beatniks, hippies, punk rockers or communistic. The film criticizes those people (the elite) who look down on people different them. This is still a current theme today.
Here's the trailer;
A particularly good scene, though it might be hard to understand out of context.
Lore ***1/2 (out of 4) (2012) in Theater
Theatrical opening Feb. 2013
Directed by Cate Shortland. Written by Robin Mukhererjee.
With Saskia Rosendahl, Ursina Lardi, Nele Trebs, Kai Malina, Hans-Jochen Wagner, Mika Siedel.
I think the thing that stands out for me is the subtlety of the film. Like most films about WWII and the Holocaust, it has an anti - hate message as all are and all should righteously continue to be. But in this film, the audience is not hit over the head with the idea that this event was a bad thing. The story of the horror of WWII has been told from many viewpoints - the Jewish, the sympathetic German national, Nazi's who resisted etc. This one is told for a slightly different point of view than normal.
it is the story of a group of children who are forced out of their home because of the Nazi/SS past of their parents, who have disappeared, presumably captured or killed by the Ally troops. They must find their way to their grandmothers house on the other side of the nation with an infant in tow and no adult. Many lessons are learned, including the lessons of why their previous way of life (Nazism, etc) was wrong.
lessons are learned when in their travels they meet a Jewish traveler/refugee. The lead child, Rosendahl, has been trained/taught to hate Jews, yet he helps her and the kids out. Their relationship evolves and changes. Also they learn a lot about the real life just by wandering through the country side and seeing hoew the German people are and how tough life is. After all, being the children of Nazi officers, they were protected from the cruelties of life and war.
Directed by Cate Shortland. Written by Robin Mukhererjee.
With Saskia Rosendahl, Ursina Lardi, Nele Trebs, Kai Malina, Hans-Jochen Wagner, Mika Siedel.
I think the thing that stands out for me is the subtlety of the film. Like most films about WWII and the Holocaust, it has an anti - hate message as all are and all should righteously continue to be. But in this film, the audience is not hit over the head with the idea that this event was a bad thing. The story of the horror of WWII has been told from many viewpoints - the Jewish, the sympathetic German national, Nazi's who resisted etc. This one is told for a slightly different point of view than normal.
it is the story of a group of children who are forced out of their home because of the Nazi/SS past of their parents, who have disappeared, presumably captured or killed by the Ally troops. They must find their way to their grandmothers house on the other side of the nation with an infant in tow and no adult. Many lessons are learned, including the lessons of why their previous way of life (Nazism, etc) was wrong.
lessons are learned when in their travels they meet a Jewish traveler/refugee. The lead child, Rosendahl, has been trained/taught to hate Jews, yet he helps her and the kids out. Their relationship evolves and changes. Also they learn a lot about the real life just by wandering through the country side and seeing hoew the German people are and how tough life is. After all, being the children of Nazi officers, they were protected from the cruelties of life and war.
A new beginning and some films I have seen
A brand new start. I had given up for a while. Just not enough time. But I decided to revisit the blog for one reason only, and that's to make postings about films I have seen. Hopefully i can go back to doing full blown reviews of books and films, but right now I am looking for something that keeps track of my movie going and that I can share with the public.
So for now, this blog will mostly cover films. I had written about films here in the past, but I found that I was unable to keep up with it since one can consume a film in 2 hours more or less and it takes an hour (more or less)to write a review. So I decided to just focus on books since those take longer to consume and therefore I wouldn't have to write much, but even at that slower pace, I was not able to keep up. A difficult Fall and Spring are partially responsible.
So I found some satisfaction with my desire to share on Facebook where there is an AP that allows me to post books I have read. I don't write very much - just blurbs really, but at least I can keep track of what I read and share it, though I am not always convinced the AP is posting.
But there was no similar AP to post and share films I have seen, and I noticed people on Facebook like doing that. I started to post about films, but there was no real record being kept of what I have seen, so here I am back at the blog. The blog will keep track of all the movies I have seen and I can still share. For now I'll be keeping the he posts blurb-like, but I hope to one day being able to get more elaborate with my entries once again.
Wednesday, January 4, 2012
Winter's Bone ***1/2
By Daniel Woodrell.
Published by Bay Back Books - Little, Brown and Company.
Copyright 2006, 2007.
193 pages.
Lets start off by saying that I am a big fan of Woodrell. I was introduced to him by the movie of the same name as this book. I loved the movie. It had all the elements that I like - It is gritty, violent, profound and beautiful. (Don't worry, I'll get back to that - I won't take the lazy way out by simply listing a bunch of superlatives). I went out and looked for his books and read a bunch of them that can be found on this very blog and I can say that all his work, to a greater or lesser degree, has the above mentioned characteristics. I stayed away from this one even though I had just seen the movie because I was too familiar with the story and I wanted some time to pass and because it was simply unavailable at the library. The movie had made this book a popular requested selection.
All of Woodrell's books take place in the Ozarks where the people are poor and desperate. It's not the sweet, apple pie American country we are talking about. It is the dark underbelly of a depraved and desperate society. A theme that is gritty and appeals to me immensely.
A young girl of 16, Ree Dolly, is forced to take care of her two younger brothers and her mentally handicapped mother because the father is out running about and simply not around. She's on her own and struggling to put food on the table. The law visits her one day and informs her that her father, a crack cocaine cooker by occupation, has not shown up for court and that the house she lives in and as well as many generations of Dolly's before her, will be confiscated since he signed the house over for his bail and has not shown up for court. Ree has to find her father. It's a dangerous task since the father was most certainly caught up with drugs and violence and she will need to enter that world to find him. And the rest of the book is about her search for him.
The most important part of that search thematically is the idea of the community and family that is so important to the people of the Ozarks. That closed-knit community that always claims to take care of their own and keep the law out is also a very dangerous community to be in the midst of. In other words, the family that watches out for her also watches her to be sure that she doesn't meddle in their affairs.
One interesting passage that was not in the movie was that there is a discussion of an ancient religion. This ancient religion is based on the bloodlines of the families of the Ozarks. I don't really know if it exists or if it was something that the ancestors of these people brought with them from Europe or if it was simply made up for the sake of advancing the following the author's ideas. but there seems to be some some spiritual belief or customs that link this community. For example, all of the boys seem to have a regular name but also an ancient family name that Ree thinks is the reason the boys are doomed to their fate. Woodrell tries to put forth the thesis that the people are doomed to behave in the depraved and savage ways because it is their inheritance culturally as well as spiritually. The book is already profound in its portrayal of poverty and depravity, but I believe this excerpt adds even more levity to the themes of the book.
This book has almost no flagging portions and is a very fast and easy read. I think that the reason I hesitate to give it the full 4 stars is because of some previous biases I have. I so fell in love with the movie that the book didn't really surpass the film for me. Usually the book is always better then the film. In this case both are brilliant, but I am not sure that the book is that much better than the movie. That does say something for the film makers and their adaptation. It is a very faithful and well done adaptation of masterpiece book.
It looks like I never reviewed the film so I won't be duplicating this trailer. And Dickon Hinchcliffe of Tindersticks fame does the sound track - Amazing!
Published by Bay Back Books - Little, Brown and Company.
Copyright 2006, 2007.
193 pages.
Lets start off by saying that I am a big fan of Woodrell. I was introduced to him by the movie of the same name as this book. I loved the movie. It had all the elements that I like - It is gritty, violent, profound and beautiful. (Don't worry, I'll get back to that - I won't take the lazy way out by simply listing a bunch of superlatives). I went out and looked for his books and read a bunch of them that can be found on this very blog and I can say that all his work, to a greater or lesser degree, has the above mentioned characteristics. I stayed away from this one even though I had just seen the movie because I was too familiar with the story and I wanted some time to pass and because it was simply unavailable at the library. The movie had made this book a popular requested selection.
All of Woodrell's books take place in the Ozarks where the people are poor and desperate. It's not the sweet, apple pie American country we are talking about. It is the dark underbelly of a depraved and desperate society. A theme that is gritty and appeals to me immensely.
A young girl of 16, Ree Dolly, is forced to take care of her two younger brothers and her mentally handicapped mother because the father is out running about and simply not around. She's on her own and struggling to put food on the table. The law visits her one day and informs her that her father, a crack cocaine cooker by occupation, has not shown up for court and that the house she lives in and as well as many generations of Dolly's before her, will be confiscated since he signed the house over for his bail and has not shown up for court. Ree has to find her father. It's a dangerous task since the father was most certainly caught up with drugs and violence and she will need to enter that world to find him. And the rest of the book is about her search for him.
The most important part of that search thematically is the idea of the community and family that is so important to the people of the Ozarks. That closed-knit community that always claims to take care of their own and keep the law out is also a very dangerous community to be in the midst of. In other words, the family that watches out for her also watches her to be sure that she doesn't meddle in their affairs.
One interesting passage that was not in the movie was that there is a discussion of an ancient religion. This ancient religion is based on the bloodlines of the families of the Ozarks. I don't really know if it exists or if it was something that the ancestors of these people brought with them from Europe or if it was simply made up for the sake of advancing the following the author's ideas. but there seems to be some some spiritual belief or customs that link this community. For example, all of the boys seem to have a regular name but also an ancient family name that Ree thinks is the reason the boys are doomed to their fate. Woodrell tries to put forth the thesis that the people are doomed to behave in the depraved and savage ways because it is their inheritance culturally as well as spiritually. The book is already profound in its portrayal of poverty and depravity, but I believe this excerpt adds even more levity to the themes of the book.
This book has almost no flagging portions and is a very fast and easy read. I think that the reason I hesitate to give it the full 4 stars is because of some previous biases I have. I so fell in love with the movie that the book didn't really surpass the film for me. Usually the book is always better then the film. In this case both are brilliant, but I am not sure that the book is that much better than the movie. That does say something for the film makers and their adaptation. It is a very faithful and well done adaptation of masterpiece book.
It looks like I never reviewed the film so I won't be duplicating this trailer. And Dickon Hinchcliffe of Tindersticks fame does the sound track - Amazing!
Tuesday, December 20, 2011
South of Broad **
By Pat Conroy.
Published 2009 by Nan A. Nalese a division of Random House.
512 pages.
This books has one of those covers I try to avoid. You've seen them. Their the ones you see on best selling hard cover books; shiny cover, realistic non-ironic illustration, author's name in large type almost as big as the title (I guess the name of the author sells in these types of books). They have a certain look to them that says "commercial" that I generally pass over when I'm browsing books. One of the author's previous works is The Prince of Tides, from which I believe a movie was made. So I believe that the publishers are marketing it as a commercial, mainstream book. A definite red flag. But the book does have it's charms.
The story starts out with a description of the main character - Charleston, South Carolina. The other main character, Leo, has to work out all the issues he has that stems from his dysfunctional family traumatized by a horrific event he witnessed when he was a child. He's supposedly a loner and unattractive (though he's a little too charming to be believable as this type of character). He befriends an assortment of oddball characters (two orphans from the mountains, an African American with a chip on his shoulder, a beauty queen and her twin gay brother whose father is an abusive homicidal maniac, and two socialites that were busted for drug use). Through the sheer will of this "awkward" young man, these disparate characters put their prejudices behind them and become the greatest group of friends who have ever lived.
In the next section, the group has grown into adulthood and they embark on a variety of adventures. Meanwhile the book toggles back and forth between the present (of that section) and the past which was skipped over. At this point the quality of the book rises and falls.
At times the story is silly and overblown. And at times it is tender and sweet. The opening section of the book where Leo has his coming of age moments is one of those sweet, tender parts. The beautiful Sheeba takes the virginity of the lonely and hideous Leo - every lonely boy's fantasy is fulfilled here - but it is well done. There's a particularly nice scene when there is an opening of the hearts of the characters while they are floating down a river. You feel as though the characters have grown.
This first section takes a dip at the end when Leo has his party and is able to smooth the unruffled feathers of the prejudice the characters show one another when encountered with various exotic backgrounds. The rich kids don't like the orphans or the African American kids. Leo, the lonely, unattractive and awkward boy, supposedly has the persuasive powers to knock away centuries of racial and class hatred and make every one friends. I didn't buy it. Perhaps kids from the south are so charming that even the pariahs of their society are charming and witty.
And then the book fast forwards to a later version of these friends and here is where the bulk of the story takes place. I also think it is the least interesting part except for when the story flashbacks to show what happens in the intervening years. The gay brother is missing in San Francisco during the height of the AIDS epidemic. The beauty, Sheeba, who is now an Oscar winning actor, gets the group together to help find him. The group flies off San Francisco and embarks on an adventure. I think the silliest part of this section is how they resolve the problem. The actual problem its self is silly too. Trevor, the gay man, is being held hostage by some thug collects checks that come from the family of the suffering AIDS victims. Instead of calling the police, the group decides on rescuing Trevor and breaking him out. Exciting perhaps, but not very realistic and really pointless and devoid of meaning. What could the author possibly be trying to say with this excerpt except to say perhaops, "you see what good friensd they are and what lengths they will go to help each other?"
The story does toggle back to the group's last year in high school. And I am supposed to believe that the awkward and homely Leo is one of the stars of the team that goes all the way to the championship. If that were the case, he should have not been lonely anymore. Leo's way too charming and talented to be the "Toad" that every one says he is.
I suppose it is naivete, but one of the messages of this book that I liked perhaps is that Leo was so (relatively) successful in his life because he was such a nice guy. He might have been awkward (I don't believe it for a second - he was practically the leader of the group - leaders are not awkward) but he was soooooo nice. I have to admit, I bought into it a little. After reading this book, my personal philosophy has changed or at least been reinforced. I believe people should be nice - That simple!
Why can't we all be a little nicer? This is a world where everyone has to be the best, or hyper manly or super cool (gosh, life feels like high school) Why can't we just be nice? There is so much meanness and pettiness these days. You can watch two grown men on TV beat the crap out of each other on Ultimate Fighting matches. Role models for toughness and manliness but where are the role models of civility? These people should be put in jail for assault, not revered as gods. Thugs and brutality are celebrated today. Maybe simply being nice is a way to avoid conflict and create some happiness in the world. I think the world needs to know that and Leo might be able to teach us that.
The book ends nicely in a tender and charming way, though all the pieces do fall together a little too neatly. The sacrifices he makes and his good will earns him his just rewards. Predictable but nice.
Here are some comments by the writer himself.
Published 2009 by Nan A. Nalese a division of Random House.
512 pages.
This books has one of those covers I try to avoid. You've seen them. Their the ones you see on best selling hard cover books; shiny cover, realistic non-ironic illustration, author's name in large type almost as big as the title (I guess the name of the author sells in these types of books). They have a certain look to them that says "commercial" that I generally pass over when I'm browsing books. One of the author's previous works is The Prince of Tides, from which I believe a movie was made. So I believe that the publishers are marketing it as a commercial, mainstream book. A definite red flag. But the book does have it's charms.
The story starts out with a description of the main character - Charleston, South Carolina. The other main character, Leo, has to work out all the issues he has that stems from his dysfunctional family traumatized by a horrific event he witnessed when he was a child. He's supposedly a loner and unattractive (though he's a little too charming to be believable as this type of character). He befriends an assortment of oddball characters (two orphans from the mountains, an African American with a chip on his shoulder, a beauty queen and her twin gay brother whose father is an abusive homicidal maniac, and two socialites that were busted for drug use). Through the sheer will of this "awkward" young man, these disparate characters put their prejudices behind them and become the greatest group of friends who have ever lived.
In the next section, the group has grown into adulthood and they embark on a variety of adventures. Meanwhile the book toggles back and forth between the present (of that section) and the past which was skipped over. At this point the quality of the book rises and falls.
At times the story is silly and overblown. And at times it is tender and sweet. The opening section of the book where Leo has his coming of age moments is one of those sweet, tender parts. The beautiful Sheeba takes the virginity of the lonely and hideous Leo - every lonely boy's fantasy is fulfilled here - but it is well done. There's a particularly nice scene when there is an opening of the hearts of the characters while they are floating down a river. You feel as though the characters have grown.
This first section takes a dip at the end when Leo has his party and is able to smooth the unruffled feathers of the prejudice the characters show one another when encountered with various exotic backgrounds. The rich kids don't like the orphans or the African American kids. Leo, the lonely, unattractive and awkward boy, supposedly has the persuasive powers to knock away centuries of racial and class hatred and make every one friends. I didn't buy it. Perhaps kids from the south are so charming that even the pariahs of their society are charming and witty.
And then the book fast forwards to a later version of these friends and here is where the bulk of the story takes place. I also think it is the least interesting part except for when the story flashbacks to show what happens in the intervening years. The gay brother is missing in San Francisco during the height of the AIDS epidemic. The beauty, Sheeba, who is now an Oscar winning actor, gets the group together to help find him. The group flies off San Francisco and embarks on an adventure. I think the silliest part of this section is how they resolve the problem. The actual problem its self is silly too. Trevor, the gay man, is being held hostage by some thug collects checks that come from the family of the suffering AIDS victims. Instead of calling the police, the group decides on rescuing Trevor and breaking him out. Exciting perhaps, but not very realistic and really pointless and devoid of meaning. What could the author possibly be trying to say with this excerpt except to say perhaops, "you see what good friensd they are and what lengths they will go to help each other?"
The story does toggle back to the group's last year in high school. And I am supposed to believe that the awkward and homely Leo is one of the stars of the team that goes all the way to the championship. If that were the case, he should have not been lonely anymore. Leo's way too charming and talented to be the "Toad" that every one says he is.
I suppose it is naivete, but one of the messages of this book that I liked perhaps is that Leo was so (relatively) successful in his life because he was such a nice guy. He might have been awkward (I don't believe it for a second - he was practically the leader of the group - leaders are not awkward) but he was soooooo nice. I have to admit, I bought into it a little. After reading this book, my personal philosophy has changed or at least been reinforced. I believe people should be nice - That simple!
Why can't we all be a little nicer? This is a world where everyone has to be the best, or hyper manly or super cool (gosh, life feels like high school) Why can't we just be nice? There is so much meanness and pettiness these days. You can watch two grown men on TV beat the crap out of each other on Ultimate Fighting matches. Role models for toughness and manliness but where are the role models of civility? These people should be put in jail for assault, not revered as gods. Thugs and brutality are celebrated today. Maybe simply being nice is a way to avoid conflict and create some happiness in the world. I think the world needs to know that and Leo might be able to teach us that.
The book ends nicely in a tender and charming way, though all the pieces do fall together a little too neatly. The sacrifices he makes and his good will earns him his just rewards. Predictable but nice.
Here are some comments by the writer himself.
Sunday, July 24, 2011
The Liberation of Gabriel King **
By K.L. Going.
Copyright 2005 by K.L. Going.
Published by Scholastic Inc. New York.
1st Edition by Scholastic 2008.
Young people books are rarely on the same level of sophistication of an adult book, so it's rare the juvenile book that can compete with the adult book for quality and transcend it's kin. So don't let the 2 star rating steer you away from the book. It's really quite good. Remember that 2 stars (if you look at my opening posting for this blog, it has the definitions of the ratings there) means pretty good on an adult standard.
It brings up a couple of interesting topics such as bullying, racism, friendship and loyalty. These topics are presented in a pretty obvious manner but the presentation is good enough.
The story is about two friends who live in the deep south (Georgia?) in the summer of 1976. So it's (recent) historical fiction. The two friends are Frita Wilson, the daughter of an African American preacher and Gabriel King, the son of a working poor white family. Frita is brave and athletic. Gabriel is small and afraid of everything. He gets bullied a lot. Frita tries to protect him.
It's summer before they enter fifth grade and Gabe does not want to advance because he is afraid of the two main bullies, Duke Evans and Frankie Carmen. After one especially cruel incidence of bullying, Frita goes to Duke Evans and punches him in the nose and a fight ensues. After breaking it up, the father of Duke scolds his son... for getting beat by a N..... girl.
Gabriel was still afraid of near everything. I found this part a little hard too believe - he was afraid of EVERYTHING! Frita came up with a plan. Gabe would make a list of everything he was afraid of and through out the summer, and before they entered the fifth grade, they would scratch off as many items on the list by trying to do each thing on the list so they would not be afraid anymore.
There was one humorous scene in which Frita asked if he was done with his list, but Gabe wasn't because he kept adding things to his list. There was another scene that struck me as very true. One of the fears that Gabe had was swinging off the rope in the local swimming hole. Frita made him do it. After that, he loved swinging off that rope. It reminded me of my daughters when they are afraid of something, One time on a water slide, Georgia my younger daughter, was afraid. But after she went once, I couldn't stop her from going for the rest of the day.
Eventually Frita came up with her own list, which was much shorter than Gabe's. One of her fears was of the bully Duke's father. In an effort to face her fear, she approached him to apologize for the fight. The author doesn't tell the reader what the father says, but she leaves the group of men very rattled.
There are some nice things in this book. Not too many books are set in the 70's very often, especially kids books. The 70's was an interesting era and I think that the author shows the feeling of the decade by describing the thoughts of one of the characters ( i forget which) when that character says or thinks about the racist remark that "this type of thing is very surprising to occur in this day and age." But is it really? I mean we are talking about less than a decade from the major period of civil rights. I would guess that it occurred all the time. Heck, racism even occurs today more than 30 years later, albeit less frequently and in much subtler ways..
Copyright 2005 by K.L. Going.
Published by Scholastic Inc. New York.
1st Edition by Scholastic 2008.
Young people books are rarely on the same level of sophistication of an adult book, so it's rare the juvenile book that can compete with the adult book for quality and transcend it's kin. So don't let the 2 star rating steer you away from the book. It's really quite good. Remember that 2 stars (if you look at my opening posting for this blog, it has the definitions of the ratings there) means pretty good on an adult standard.
It brings up a couple of interesting topics such as bullying, racism, friendship and loyalty. These topics are presented in a pretty obvious manner but the presentation is good enough.
The story is about two friends who live in the deep south (Georgia?) in the summer of 1976. So it's (recent) historical fiction. The two friends are Frita Wilson, the daughter of an African American preacher and Gabriel King, the son of a working poor white family. Frita is brave and athletic. Gabriel is small and afraid of everything. He gets bullied a lot. Frita tries to protect him.
It's summer before they enter fifth grade and Gabe does not want to advance because he is afraid of the two main bullies, Duke Evans and Frankie Carmen. After one especially cruel incidence of bullying, Frita goes to Duke Evans and punches him in the nose and a fight ensues. After breaking it up, the father of Duke scolds his son... for getting beat by a N..... girl.
Gabriel was still afraid of near everything. I found this part a little hard too believe - he was afraid of EVERYTHING! Frita came up with a plan. Gabe would make a list of everything he was afraid of and through out the summer, and before they entered the fifth grade, they would scratch off as many items on the list by trying to do each thing on the list so they would not be afraid anymore.
There was one humorous scene in which Frita asked if he was done with his list, but Gabe wasn't because he kept adding things to his list. There was another scene that struck me as very true. One of the fears that Gabe had was swinging off the rope in the local swimming hole. Frita made him do it. After that, he loved swinging off that rope. It reminded me of my daughters when they are afraid of something, One time on a water slide, Georgia my younger daughter, was afraid. But after she went once, I couldn't stop her from going for the rest of the day.
Eventually Frita came up with her own list, which was much shorter than Gabe's. One of her fears was of the bully Duke's father. In an effort to face her fear, she approached him to apologize for the fight. The author doesn't tell the reader what the father says, but she leaves the group of men very rattled.
There are some nice things in this book. Not too many books are set in the 70's very often, especially kids books. The 70's was an interesting era and I think that the author shows the feeling of the decade by describing the thoughts of one of the characters ( i forget which) when that character says or thinks about the racist remark that "this type of thing is very surprising to occur in this day and age." But is it really? I mean we are talking about less than a decade from the major period of civil rights. I would guess that it occurred all the time. Heck, racism even occurs today more than 30 years later, albeit less frequently and in much subtler ways..
Wednesday, July 20, 2011
The Remains of the Day ***1/2
By Kazuo Ishiguro.
Copyright 1988 by Kazuo Ishiguro.
Published by Vintage International Books, a division of Random House, 1993.
Originally published Faber and Faber Ltd., London and Alfred A Knopf in U.S. 1989.
245 pages.
This book won the Man Booker award, I assume in 1988 or 1989. I'm a fan of the Man Booker award because I think their choices are a little more edgier than the book awards given in the U.S., so I am always excited to be reading one. I had heard of this book for a while and finally got around to it.
Ishiguro came from Japan to England when he was 6 years old. I believe most of his books are about life in England, as opposed to life in Japan where he is originally from. This book certainly does NOT have an Asian "feel" to it, or does it?
The main character is a traditional English Butler to one of the great households of English history. The book starts off with his new American employer sending him off on a short vacation, since there is a lull in the work to be done at the house, and encourages him to make a short country drive in the rural parts of England in the owner's own car. The butler, Stevens, is hesitant but decides to go ahead because they are a little short staffed at the house and decides to go to speak to a former employee, Ms Kenton, who happens to live out in the country to see if she wants to come back. This is the basic plot line. There are several themes that weave in and out of the narrative as the book continues.
A large part of the time, Stevens is contemplating, and musing on past events that he has lived through as a butler. This activity probably takes up about 70% - 80 % of the book. He starts off by musing about the "great Butlers" of the day. It should be said that this story takes place in post WWII times so his ruminations tend to be nostalgic and take place in pre WWII times. This train of thought leads him to believe that a great butler must have dignity and must belong to house of great gentleman. In other words that he must have a great master. A master who is noble and cares about the affairs of the day. He believes his previous employer, Sir Darlington, was one of those people. He believes that his master was engaging himself in events of world importance. It was after all., before WW II and there was much international intrigue to get involved with. He spends much time retelling the events that transpired at the behest of his master's concern and influence. Great people of important stature visited the house to discuss important things. Remember, this is England with a a strong tradition of nobility. The nobility believed that they were to be the helmsmen of world affairs because of their great knowledge and education. For the most part they were not believers in the ideals of democracy since they felt the masses to be simple and uneducated, so the responsibility fell to them. That's why Stevens believed that the greatest butlers were attached to the greatest houses. And when I say greatest houses, I mean the greatest masters or noblemen. And Steven believes that his master Darlington was one of the great nobles of the day.
Meanwhile, Stevens is traveling through the country side and meeting a great many of these simpler people, and why he likes them, there is a distance that he puts between them and him. In fact, because of his behavior and the car he drives (the owner's) people frequently mistake him for a nobleman and not a butler. There are also some fine descriptions of the country side as travels through it.
Finally he arrives at the town where Ms. Kenton lives. Stevens had assumed that Ms. Kenton might want to return since her letters to him tended to wax nostalgic and that she often complained about her marriage. But she never really said that she wanted to come back. Much of the contemplation he was doing was looking back at his working relationship between him and her. She was in charge of all the maids and female servants while he was in charge of the whole household. They were often at odds with each other. She was prone to having a temper and speaking her mind, which really annoyed him since he was always striving for that "dignity" mentioned above. He always had a professional attitude towards her. He came off as rather cold, though we, the readers, had privy to his inner thoughts, and his background, and could understand why he was the way he was.
So at the end we get Ms. Kenton's story. She had left Darlington Hall to get married, but the marriage was more about the doubt in her mind about whether she wanted to continue in the profession than about really being in love, hence the marriage problems she was having. After all the years in passing, she had learned to love her husband. She would not be going back with Stevens. This was a bigger disappointment to Stevens than he thought it would be. He knew she never had said that she wanted to come back, but still I think he was hoping. Perhaps there was love, perhaps he longed for the olden days. But he was disappointed. He was certainly saddened by the seemingly unhappy life Ms. Kenton had acquired.
Darlington's life had become riddled with controversy and scandal. He may or may not have been involved with the enemies of England, though Stevens insisted that Darlington didn't realize what he was doing and acted out of sincerity and that he was an innocent. So perhaps that's the saddest part of the book. Everything Stevens had believed about being a butler and his employer, his identification, was thrown into doubt. Sad but not traumatic like the blurb suggests.
The themes and the material might seem kind of dry, and maybe because I'm a better reader or maybe because of the way the book was written, I had no difficulty reading the book. I was able to understand the ideas and description and concepts very easily. I read the book in less than 3 days. Usually with material like this, I struggle and it takes longer to read. I did not find this the case, and though I am not very good at speaking about the writing and language an author uses, this ease I had with the material speaks to the quality of his writing.
A trailer of the movie.
Copyright 1988 by Kazuo Ishiguro.
Published by Vintage International Books, a division of Random House, 1993.
Originally published Faber and Faber Ltd., London and Alfred A Knopf in U.S. 1989.
245 pages.
This book won the Man Booker award, I assume in 1988 or 1989. I'm a fan of the Man Booker award because I think their choices are a little more edgier than the book awards given in the U.S., so I am always excited to be reading one. I had heard of this book for a while and finally got around to it.
Ishiguro came from Japan to England when he was 6 years old. I believe most of his books are about life in England, as opposed to life in Japan where he is originally from. This book certainly does NOT have an Asian "feel" to it, or does it?
The main character is a traditional English Butler to one of the great households of English history. The book starts off with his new American employer sending him off on a short vacation, since there is a lull in the work to be done at the house, and encourages him to make a short country drive in the rural parts of England in the owner's own car. The butler, Stevens, is hesitant but decides to go ahead because they are a little short staffed at the house and decides to go to speak to a former employee, Ms Kenton, who happens to live out in the country to see if she wants to come back. This is the basic plot line. There are several themes that weave in and out of the narrative as the book continues.
A large part of the time, Stevens is contemplating, and musing on past events that he has lived through as a butler. This activity probably takes up about 70% - 80 % of the book. He starts off by musing about the "great Butlers" of the day. It should be said that this story takes place in post WWII times so his ruminations tend to be nostalgic and take place in pre WWII times. This train of thought leads him to believe that a great butler must have dignity and must belong to house of great gentleman. In other words that he must have a great master. A master who is noble and cares about the affairs of the day. He believes his previous employer, Sir Darlington, was one of those people. He believes that his master was engaging himself in events of world importance. It was after all., before WW II and there was much international intrigue to get involved with. He spends much time retelling the events that transpired at the behest of his master's concern and influence. Great people of important stature visited the house to discuss important things. Remember, this is England with a a strong tradition of nobility. The nobility believed that they were to be the helmsmen of world affairs because of their great knowledge and education. For the most part they were not believers in the ideals of democracy since they felt the masses to be simple and uneducated, so the responsibility fell to them. That's why Stevens believed that the greatest butlers were attached to the greatest houses. And when I say greatest houses, I mean the greatest masters or noblemen. And Steven believes that his master Darlington was one of the great nobles of the day.
Meanwhile, Stevens is traveling through the country side and meeting a great many of these simpler people, and why he likes them, there is a distance that he puts between them and him. In fact, because of his behavior and the car he drives (the owner's) people frequently mistake him for a nobleman and not a butler. There are also some fine descriptions of the country side as travels through it.
Finally he arrives at the town where Ms. Kenton lives. Stevens had assumed that Ms. Kenton might want to return since her letters to him tended to wax nostalgic and that she often complained about her marriage. But she never really said that she wanted to come back. Much of the contemplation he was doing was looking back at his working relationship between him and her. She was in charge of all the maids and female servants while he was in charge of the whole household. They were often at odds with each other. She was prone to having a temper and speaking her mind, which really annoyed him since he was always striving for that "dignity" mentioned above. He always had a professional attitude towards her. He came off as rather cold, though we, the readers, had privy to his inner thoughts, and his background, and could understand why he was the way he was.
So at the end we get Ms. Kenton's story. She had left Darlington Hall to get married, but the marriage was more about the doubt in her mind about whether she wanted to continue in the profession than about really being in love, hence the marriage problems she was having. After all the years in passing, she had learned to love her husband. She would not be going back with Stevens. This was a bigger disappointment to Stevens than he thought it would be. He knew she never had said that she wanted to come back, but still I think he was hoping. Perhaps there was love, perhaps he longed for the olden days. But he was disappointed. He was certainly saddened by the seemingly unhappy life Ms. Kenton had acquired.
Darlington's life had become riddled with controversy and scandal. He may or may not have been involved with the enemies of England, though Stevens insisted that Darlington didn't realize what he was doing and acted out of sincerity and that he was an innocent. So perhaps that's the saddest part of the book. Everything Stevens had believed about being a butler and his employer, his identification, was thrown into doubt. Sad but not traumatic like the blurb suggests.
The themes and the material might seem kind of dry, and maybe because I'm a better reader or maybe because of the way the book was written, I had no difficulty reading the book. I was able to understand the ideas and description and concepts very easily. I read the book in less than 3 days. Usually with material like this, I struggle and it takes longer to read. I did not find this the case, and though I am not very good at speaking about the writing and language an author uses, this ease I had with the material speaks to the quality of his writing.
A trailer of the movie.
Tuesday, July 19, 2011
High Fidelity **1/2
By Nick Hornby.
Copyright 1995 by Nick Hornby.
Published by the Penguin Group.
323 pages.
This is one heck of a funny book and I enjoyed it immensely. It does drag on a little in the middle though. The main character, Rob gets a little too whiny, he even admits it at one point, and tiresome.
This book is about a guy Rob, who has just broken up with this girlfriend. He's the owner of a record store and feels stuck where he is because he's 39 and he feels like he hasn't grown since his college days. He restless and cranky.
The book starts out with a list and a description of his 5 worst break - ups. His last break-up, which is the focus of this story is not included in his list. Though he claims it's not one of the top five, he seems to take it pretty hard, because all he does is wring his hands with regret and indecision. He goes to work everyday at his records store called Empire Records. There he encounters much banter and tom foolery with his two store clerks who are record snob geeks/ perpetual bachelors. Much of the humor comes from these conversations.
I could really relate to this book as I myself am somewhat of a record snob (surprising in know but it's true). One of the concepts that the book discusses is how these people tend to push their opinions on other people, especially girlfriends. Lord knows I've been there, but in defense of this practice, don't I, a confessed music geek, have to put up with what I consider a lot of garbage? I think it is only fair that I get my 2 cents and get to hear some of my preferred and obscurer music? Where ever one goes, you can hear the strains of some (sorry) really horrible music. I think if I am forced to listen to that, people should have to put up with what I like once in a while. One of my favorite quotes from the book: "I want him to show the rest of us that it is possible to maintain a relationship and have a large record collection." That really struck a chord with me. Discussions like these are the parts I really enjoyed about the book. I could really relate.
Copyright 1995 by Nick Hornby.
Published by the Penguin Group.
323 pages.
This is one heck of a funny book and I enjoyed it immensely. It does drag on a little in the middle though. The main character, Rob gets a little too whiny, he even admits it at one point, and tiresome.
This book is about a guy Rob, who has just broken up with this girlfriend. He's the owner of a record store and feels stuck where he is because he's 39 and he feels like he hasn't grown since his college days. He restless and cranky.
The book starts out with a list and a description of his 5 worst break - ups. His last break-up, which is the focus of this story is not included in his list. Though he claims it's not one of the top five, he seems to take it pretty hard, because all he does is wring his hands with regret and indecision. He goes to work everyday at his records store called Empire Records. There he encounters much banter and tom foolery with his two store clerks who are record snob geeks/ perpetual bachelors. Much of the humor comes from these conversations.
I could really relate to this book as I myself am somewhat of a record snob (surprising in know but it's true). One of the concepts that the book discusses is how these people tend to push their opinions on other people, especially girlfriends. Lord knows I've been there, but in defense of this practice, don't I, a confessed music geek, have to put up with what I consider a lot of garbage? I think it is only fair that I get my 2 cents and get to hear some of my preferred and obscurer music? Where ever one goes, you can hear the strains of some (sorry) really horrible music. I think if I am forced to listen to that, people should have to put up with what I like once in a while. One of my favorite quotes from the book: "I want him to show the rest of us that it is possible to maintain a relationship and have a large record collection." That really struck a chord with me. Discussions like these are the parts I really enjoyed about the book. I could really relate.
Friday, July 15, 2011
Founding Brothers - The Revolutionary Generation **1/2
By Joseph J. Ellis.
Copyright 2000 by Joseph J. Ellis.
Published Vintage Books a Division of Random House, 2002.
Originally published by Alfred A. Knopf, a division of Random House, 2000.
248 pages.
This is a book that won the Pulitzer prize so clearly I don't know what I'm talking about, but I'm not going to let awards and honors sway me from my opinion no matter how wrong I am. The problem with much non-fiction, especially that of History, is that it is not always reader friendly. There's tons of citations, quotations, notations and appellations in this book which always make for a difficult read.. This is especially true when the book is about the politics of the day, which this one is.
But the author tries to present the content in a different way. He tries to write stories, or essays, in a roughly chronological order (apart from the 1st one which is later/ middle in the time period covered) and this does help a little. I believe the author even uses the word "stories" in his introduction. And certainly the book does start off with a riveting story. It speaks about the infamous duel between Aaron Burr and Alexander Hamilton. And that is a pretty riveting story, even when the author describes the circumstances that led to the duel, which are mostly political in nature. They were in opposite political parties and Hamilton was pretty much libeling Burr. Still this section of the book was very interesting.
But then the "stories" seem to be pretty flimsy constructs to hang a narrative. Ellis might take one small event, a dinner party between rival politicians, to wax seemingly forever about the politics of the day. A couple of the stories are not even stories but simply concepts or themes. Here are some example titles: The Silence, The Collaborators and The Friendship. Not really stories, but themes. Which is fine, but the author had me believing this would be more narrative oriented.
Not that I didn't enjoy all the information about the politics of the day. There was much discussion about slavery, states rights vs Federal government power, and Federal banking. All of them being intricately connected. And I enjoyed those discussions, but I am probably a more patient reader than most.
The last two chapters center around Thomas Jefferson and John Adams and the book picks up here again. They were friends during the Revolution, rivals in Politics, and then friends again in the waning years of their lives. They wrote a series of letters to each other, even while Jefferson was President. They wrote with the knowledge that they would be leaving these letters behind them after death for posterity and history. Adams wrote that now that they were friends again, they should try to explain their differing opinions to each other, and consequently to History and the future.
I think the author war somewhat successful at making this book "reader friendly", but not completely. And the above organization of information was helpful. I can think of two books about History which I felt were reader friendly, so I do think it is possible to do, but admittedly rare. One was a book about modern Mexico. (The title escapes me but was one of my all time favorites) It used themes to organize the information. The book was highly readable and enjoyable. Of course it wasn't strictly about politics, but it did have a chapter or two about that. So maybe it is really hard to wrote a "reader friendly" book about political history.
Another book, which can be found on this blog was one about the Jamestown colony. That was very interesting partly because it had extensive primary sources written by Captain John Smith himself. Again this book is not strictly about the politics. In this book, the author talked about the relationship with the Indians often. Perhaps a bit more intriguing than strictly politics.
So, while this was an excellent book, I believe the readability suffered because of the focus on the politics and also some of the old fashioned language used in the quotes. Maybe it's not possible to have a purely political book that is reader friendly, though I think this was a good attempt. And of course, the content, no matter how difficult the reading, is always paramount in non-fiction and the content alone can sometimes be enough to keep a reader engaged. Which it did for me. I don't mind political history.
Here's some one else's opinion.
Copyright 2000 by Joseph J. Ellis.
Published Vintage Books a Division of Random House, 2002.
Originally published by Alfred A. Knopf, a division of Random House, 2000.
248 pages.
This is a book that won the Pulitzer prize so clearly I don't know what I'm talking about, but I'm not going to let awards and honors sway me from my opinion no matter how wrong I am. The problem with much non-fiction, especially that of History, is that it is not always reader friendly. There's tons of citations, quotations, notations and appellations in this book which always make for a difficult read.. This is especially true when the book is about the politics of the day, which this one is.
But the author tries to present the content in a different way. He tries to write stories, or essays, in a roughly chronological order (apart from the 1st one which is later/ middle in the time period covered) and this does help a little. I believe the author even uses the word "stories" in his introduction. And certainly the book does start off with a riveting story. It speaks about the infamous duel between Aaron Burr and Alexander Hamilton. And that is a pretty riveting story, even when the author describes the circumstances that led to the duel, which are mostly political in nature. They were in opposite political parties and Hamilton was pretty much libeling Burr. Still this section of the book was very interesting.
But then the "stories" seem to be pretty flimsy constructs to hang a narrative. Ellis might take one small event, a dinner party between rival politicians, to wax seemingly forever about the politics of the day. A couple of the stories are not even stories but simply concepts or themes. Here are some example titles: The Silence, The Collaborators and The Friendship. Not really stories, but themes. Which is fine, but the author had me believing this would be more narrative oriented.
Not that I didn't enjoy all the information about the politics of the day. There was much discussion about slavery, states rights vs Federal government power, and Federal banking. All of them being intricately connected. And I enjoyed those discussions, but I am probably a more patient reader than most.
The last two chapters center around Thomas Jefferson and John Adams and the book picks up here again. They were friends during the Revolution, rivals in Politics, and then friends again in the waning years of their lives. They wrote a series of letters to each other, even while Jefferson was President. They wrote with the knowledge that they would be leaving these letters behind them after death for posterity and history. Adams wrote that now that they were friends again, they should try to explain their differing opinions to each other, and consequently to History and the future.
I think the author war somewhat successful at making this book "reader friendly", but not completely. And the above organization of information was helpful. I can think of two books about History which I felt were reader friendly, so I do think it is possible to do, but admittedly rare. One was a book about modern Mexico. (The title escapes me but was one of my all time favorites) It used themes to organize the information. The book was highly readable and enjoyable. Of course it wasn't strictly about politics, but it did have a chapter or two about that. So maybe it is really hard to wrote a "reader friendly" book about political history.
Another book, which can be found on this blog was one about the Jamestown colony. That was very interesting partly because it had extensive primary sources written by Captain John Smith himself. Again this book is not strictly about the politics. In this book, the author talked about the relationship with the Indians often. Perhaps a bit more intriguing than strictly politics.
So, while this was an excellent book, I believe the readability suffered because of the focus on the politics and also some of the old fashioned language used in the quotes. Maybe it's not possible to have a purely political book that is reader friendly, though I think this was a good attempt. And of course, the content, no matter how difficult the reading, is always paramount in non-fiction and the content alone can sometimes be enough to keep a reader engaged. Which it did for me. I don't mind political history.
Here's some one else's opinion.
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)
Posts
