middle cyclones and other references

"He slept that night in his own country and he had a dream wherein he saw God's pilgrims laboring upon a darkened verge in the last of the twilight of that day and they seemed to be returning from some deep enterprise that was not of war nor were they yet in flight but rather seemed coming from some labor to which perhaps these and all other things stood subjugate."
The Crossing, Cormac McCarthy


Credit: sirmerlin (sidebar art) ∙ Josh Cochran (Icon)
Recent Tweets @1ncandenza
Posts I Like
Posts tagged "procrastination theatre 2012"
Procrastination Theatre: May 5, 2012 This is actually a completely new genre of movie that I like to call “emo-heist”. Whatever - it’s really poorly written, and basically the plot does stupid things with no acceptable rationale. As expected, Eddie Murphy is the only reason you should see it. Ben Stiller isn’t bad either - it’s nice to see him in a role where he is competent, not just neurotic.

Procrastination Theatre: May 5, 2012

This is actually a completely new genre of movie that I like to call “emo-heist”.

Whatever - it’s really poorly written, and basically the plot does stupid things with no acceptable rationale. As expected, Eddie Murphy is the only reason you should see it. Ben Stiller isn’t bad either - it’s nice to see him in a role where he is competent, not just neurotic.

Photo
Procrastination Theatre: May 3, 2012 You should see this movie if you like any/all of the following: Strong women with insane fighting skills Steven Soderbergh Self-aware, stylized action thrillers Bill Paxton Pam Grier movies Any of the men whom Gina Carano beats up Fight choreography that feels real and brutal and efficient Realistic accounts of how sore a person would be after that much fighting Short, terse, well-crafted little movies without any padding Feeling like the many attractive Hollywood men had a lot of fun getting beaten up by a woman in the making of this movie Gina Carano (is a babe) You should not see this movie if you like the following: Sunset walks on the beach (you will get this joke if you have seen this movie already).

Procrastination Theatre: May 3, 2012

You should see this movie if you like any/all of the following:

  • Strong women with insane fighting skills
  • Steven Soderbergh
  • Self-aware, stylized action thrillers
  • Bill Paxton
  • Pam Grier movies
  • Any of the men whom Gina Carano beats up
  • Fight choreography that feels real and brutal and efficient
  • Realistic accounts of how sore a person would be after that much fighting
  • Short, terse, well-crafted little movies without any padding
  • Feeling like the many attractive Hollywood men had a lot of fun getting beaten up by a woman in the making of this movie
  • Gina Carano (is a babe)

You should not see this movie if you like the following:

  • Sunset walks on the beach (you will get this joke if you have seen this movie already).
Photo
Procrastination Theatre: May 3, 2012 So, because we were informed that the only showing of The 5-Year Engagement that afternoon was a “Mommy & Strollers Only” showing (don’t ask), my mother and I saw this together instead. Which. Yes. I guess really the problem here is that the movie couldn’t commit to its initial premise, which was “Let’s try to make this a funny take on Snow White, wherein the Evil Queen is fun and saucy.” And I mean Julia Roberts was perfect for this, because I find it very difficult to not love Julia Roberts. Her face is so likable and interesting and she makes terrible dialogue lively. But then instead of sticking with her, and continuing to make fun of Snow White for being, well, boring and one-dimensional (sorry, Lily Collins, but it’s true), they try to make Snow White interesting and they move away from Julia Roberts, who is the only entertaining part of the movie. And then during the end credits there’s a Bollywood dance number that’s really weird and abrupt. But maybe interesting to those of you (Sarah, really) who know stuff about Bollywood movies? Also, Armie Hammer is goofy in this. And often shirtless. And the dwarves are okay but still, Julia stole the show.

Procrastination Theatre: May 3, 2012

So, because we were informed that the only showing of The 5-Year Engagement that afternoon was a “Mommy & Strollers Only” showing (don’t ask), my mother and I saw this together instead. Which. Yes.

I guess really the problem here is that the movie couldn’t commit to its initial premise, which was “Let’s try to make this a funny take on Snow White, wherein the Evil Queen is fun and saucy.” And I mean Julia Roberts was perfect for this, because I find it very difficult to not love Julia Roberts. Her face is so likable and interesting and she makes terrible dialogue lively. But then instead of sticking with her, and continuing to make fun of Snow White for being, well, boring and one-dimensional (sorry, Lily Collins, but it’s true), they try to make Snow White interesting and they move away from Julia Roberts, who is the only entertaining part of the movie.

And then during the end credits there’s a Bollywood dance number that’s really weird and abrupt. But maybe interesting to those of you (Sarah, really) who know stuff about Bollywood movies? Also, Armie Hammer is goofy in this. And often shirtless. And the dwarves are okay but still, Julia stole the show.

Photo
Procrastination Theatre: April 26, 2012 Looking back on it, I’m realizing it’s actually hard to overstate how much I disliked this movie. Or as Hemingway would say it, this was not a good or a true movie. Problem #1: the whole premise of the movie is just sort of weird and disingenuous. And creepy. Yeah, I said it. The whole idea of this memoir where this guy who lusted after her for a week pretends that he’s unlocked the secret of her character for all of us reeks of all that masculine gaze stuff that I hate talking about but that does actually happen a lot of the time.  Problem #2: No thanks, Michelle Williams. I just can’t. Not into it, sorry. Problem #3: ARE YOU KIDDING ME WITH HOW TINY THE BUTT DOUBLE THAT THEY USED FOR MARILYN’S NUDE BOTTOM IS? ARE YOU KIDDING ME? That was a Size 2 butt. That was not a Marilyn butt. Like, fuck you, movie. Yeah, let’s make a movie claiming to unlock the secrets of the most iconic sex symbol of all time, and then let’s make her famously sexy, luscious body more appropriately sized for today’s standards. I hate whoever was in charge of this movie. I hate them with all my heart. Problem #4: Sentimental, patriarchal claptrap. 

Procrastination Theatre: April 26, 2012

Looking back on it, I’m realizing it’s actually hard to overstate how much I disliked this movie. Or as Hemingway would say it, this was not a good or a true movie.

Problem #1: the whole premise of the movie is just sort of weird and disingenuous. And creepy. Yeah, I said it. The whole idea of this memoir where this guy who lusted after her for a week pretends that he’s unlocked the secret of her character for all of us reeks of all that masculine gaze stuff that I hate talking about but that does actually happen a lot of the time. 

Problem #2: No thanks, Michelle Williams. I just can’t. Not into it, sorry.

Problem #3: ARE YOU KIDDING ME WITH HOW TINY THE BUTT DOUBLE THAT THEY USED FOR MARILYN’S NUDE BOTTOM IS? ARE YOU KIDDING ME? That was a Size 2 butt. That was not a Marilyn butt. Like, fuck you, movie. Yeah, let’s make a movie claiming to unlock the secrets of the most iconic sex symbol of all time, and then let’s make her famously sexy, luscious body more appropriately sized for today’s standards. I hate whoever was in charge of this movie. I hate them with all my heart.

Problem #4: Sentimental, patriarchal claptrap. 

Photo
Procrastination Theatre: April 13, 2012 Definitely watched this on the last day of classes for my undergraduate term, ever. With my 16 year old younger brother. Definitely drank a beer and got so pleasantly buzzed that me being slightly drunk is his new favorite and he now regularly encourages me to imbibe liquor in his presence. Anyway, we wanted to watch something fun and dumb. This was it. This was awesome at being that. It was also the first and likely only time that I got excited about my knowledge of basic physics, which manifested itself in my somewhat sloppily explaining to my brother that clearly no one in this movie had even a basic understanding of momentum and collision. Because p1 = p2! And if they want to make sure that m1v1 + m2v2 = 0, then maybe they should do the frigging calculation instead of just throwing something tiny in the train’s way and pretending that that will work. And that is all. That is all the physics I have left.

Procrastination Theatre: April 13, 2012

Definitely watched this on the last day of classes for my undergraduate term, ever. With my 16 year old younger brother. Definitely drank a beer and got so pleasantly buzzed that me being slightly drunk is his new favorite and he now regularly encourages me to imbibe liquor in his presence.

Anyway, we wanted to watch something fun and dumb. This was it. This was awesome at being that. It was also the first and likely only time that I got excited about my knowledge of basic physics, which manifested itself in my somewhat sloppily explaining to my brother that clearly no one in this movie had even a basic understanding of momentum and collision. Because p1 = p2! And if they want to make sure that m1v1 + m2v2 = 0, then maybe they should do the frigging calculation instead of just throwing something tiny in the train’s way and pretending that that will work. And that is all. That is all the physics I have left.

Photo
Procrastination Theatre: April 8, 2012 Yes, we rewatched this on Easter Sunday morning while dying eggs. I am not a religious person. I am a sentimental person.

Procrastination Theatre: April 8, 2012

Yes, we rewatched this on Easter Sunday morning while dying eggs. I am not a religious person. I am a sentimental person.

Photo
Procrastination Theatre: April 9, 2012 Listen…maybe someone can explain the appeal of Kazuo Ishiguro to me. This is now my second foray into his work (see also: Never Let Me Go, which I both read and watched) and while I didn’t read The Remains of the Day, it seems to suffer - or to make me suffer, that is - from the same absolute boredom. Maybe it’s because I’m a Jane Austen and George Eliot enthusiast, maybe I’m too much of an Anglophile, but to my mind, Ishiguro doesn’t render the deep social complexities of the British class system, he just actually ends up simplifying them. Because he places the class system under the yoke of the One Big Secret (Nazis in the closet!), everything becomes this oversimplified, reductive shadow of the actual social complexity that someone like Austen or Eliot paints so well in 19th century British literature. So, like, boring, Ishiguro. Boring, Anthony Hopkins. Even you, Emma Thompson, love of my life, are kind of boring in this. Even you, Hugh Grant genuinely acting (actually, you’re not that boring). Even you, pre-injury Christopher Reeve (you’re actually still pretty commanding). But seriously - a boring story told by an author whom I’m beginning to pretty firmly categorize as boring and reductive almost to the point of allegory. Instead of giving us substance, he gives us a lot of whispers and stiffly pressed collars and an atmosphere of gravity and we’re supposed to believe that all these things amount to something complex. Seriously, just read Middlemarch. Or Mansfield Park. And yes, I mainly watched this because it is apparently a touchstone for Ben/Leslie in Parks and Recreation. I have no shame.

Procrastination Theatre: April 9, 2012

Listen…maybe someone can explain the appeal of Kazuo Ishiguro to me. This is now my second foray into his work (see also: Never Let Me Go, which I both read and watched) and while I didn’t read The Remains of the Day, it seems to suffer - or to make me suffer, that is - from the same absolute boredom. Maybe it’s because I’m a Jane Austen and George Eliot enthusiast, maybe I’m too much of an Anglophile, but to my mind, Ishiguro doesn’t render the deep social complexities of the British class system, he just actually ends up simplifying them. Because he places the class system under the yoke of the One Big Secret (Nazis in the closet!), everything becomes this oversimplified, reductive shadow of the actual social complexity that someone like Austen or Eliot paints so well in 19th century British literature. So, like, boring, Ishiguro. Boring, Anthony Hopkins. Even you, Emma Thompson, love of my life, are kind of boring in this. Even you, Hugh Grant genuinely acting (actually, you’re not that boring). Even you, pre-injury Christopher Reeve (you’re actually still pretty commanding). But seriously - a boring story told by an author whom I’m beginning to pretty firmly categorize as boring and reductive almost to the point of allegory. Instead of giving us substance, he gives us a lot of whispers and stiffly pressed collars and an atmosphere of gravity and we’re supposed to believe that all these things amount to something complex.

Seriously, just read Middlemarch. Or Mansfield Park. And yes, I mainly watched this because it is apparently a touchstone for Ben/Leslie in Parks and Recreation. I have no shame.

Photo
Procrastination Theatre: April 5, 2012 Oh my God, I’m so behind on these. Okay, so I haven’t read the books. From what I’ve heard/seen in the movie, it seems as though Suzanne Collins is dealing with some pretty complex and interesting issues when it comes to negotiating publicity and identity in a world increasingly dominated by  the weird facade of reality tv; she’s also done a pretty bang-up job of looking at how the different means of production would get parcelled out between different districts. That being said, I’m still not sure if I’m going to read them because I’m pretty sure the writing itself, if not the ideas, is young adult writing.  Anyway, the movie: was good, I thought, for someone who hadn’t read the books. Jennifer Lawrence was wonderful in it, which shouldn’t surprise anyone because Winter’s Bone is basically The Hunger Games in the real world. I could have done with a lot less shaky-cam; I went in with a headache and left with a huge migraine. I am fine with shaky-cam in action scenes, but if we’re just walking n’talking, I don’t know why I am suddenly just looking at a boot. And in what I assume is the correct reaction to the books, anytime Peeta and Katniss did anything romantic with each other, I made a face like I was seeing a close relative naked. I am apparently not at all comfortable with the idea of publicized affection. And I mean, really, Katniss is a lovely antidote to the Twilight debacle; what if there’s a girl who really isn’t interested in romance, period? I like it. My last comment is that I used to do archery and I was awesome at it and Jennifer Lawrence did a pretty good job at it but it would actually screw up your shot to pluck it back even further once you already have the string at your face so….anyway. 

Procrastination Theatre: April 5, 2012

Oh my God, I’m so behind on these.

Okay, so I haven’t read the books. From what I’ve heard/seen in the movie, it seems as though Suzanne Collins is dealing with some pretty complex and interesting issues when it comes to negotiating publicity and identity in a world increasingly dominated by  the weird facade of reality tv; she’s also done a pretty bang-up job of looking at how the different means of production would get parcelled out between different districts. That being said, I’m still not sure if I’m going to read them because I’m pretty sure the writing itself, if not the ideas, is young adult writing. 

Anyway, the movie: was good, I thought, for someone who hadn’t read the books. Jennifer Lawrence was wonderful in it, which shouldn’t surprise anyone because Winter’s Bone is basically The Hunger Games in the real world. I could have done with a lot less shaky-cam; I went in with a headache and left with a huge migraine. I am fine with shaky-cam in action scenes, but if we’re just walking n’talking, I don’t know why I am suddenly just looking at a boot. And in what I assume is the correct reaction to the books, anytime Peeta and Katniss did anything romantic with each other, I made a face like I was seeing a close relative naked. I am apparently not at all comfortable with the idea of publicized affection. And I mean, really, Katniss is a lovely antidote to the Twilight debacle; what if there’s a girl who really isn’t interested in romance, period? I like it.

My last comment is that I used to do archery and I was awesome at it and Jennifer Lawrence did a pretty good job at it but it would actually screw up your shot to pluck it back even further once you already have the string at your face so….anyway. 

Photo
Procrastination Theatre: April 5, 2012 Okay, I am woefully behind on these, but bear with me, because part of why I am behind on them is because I had exams and I just didn’t feel I had the time to really properly write about this movie. And mainly Michael Fassbender. So I resisted seeing this in theatres for almost a year because, as I annoyingly said to everyone who asked me why I wouldn’t see it, having twelve good actors/actresses does not a good movie make. And after having seen this, I can confidently say that I am right. Having twelve good actors does not make a movie good. But apparently having Michael Fassbender does make a movie good. Seriously - I am just distressed by Fassbender at this point. How does he do it? How is he so good in this otherwise uninteresting and mediocre movie? I mean, I like a lot of the other actors in this movie, but everyone pretty much delivers the Action Movie Special in this movie: the bare minimum, nothing compelling, a pretty standard dialing-it-in for a subpar script and a big budget. BUT NOT FASSBENDER. Fassbender is just, like, home run after home run in this movie. He is batting a million, and for what? For a stupid comic book prequel. Like, yes, bat a million for Steve McQueen. But you are batting a million in a movie where everyone else is sleepwalking through the dreadful dialogue. You are destroying it in a movie where January Jones plays a woman who can turn into a diamond and therefore justify her total absence of line delivery. I just…I can’t. Michael Fassbender has won. I finally found him devastatingly attractive in this movie (particularly the Argentinian Nazi bar scene), and the best way to characterize how I feel about Fassbender now is, quite simply, put upon. I feel put upon by Michael Fassbender. He is too talented and too attractive and too awesome at everything and I feel put upon because I do not have the time or energy to obsess over him as much as he clearly deserves to be obsessed over. Other things about this movie: I love James McAvoy, but he is ridiculous in this movie, and it’s clear that he’s supposed to be, because I believe that this movie is really about discovering that Professor X is the biggest upper-class privileged piece of shit in the world. Seriously, I think the title X-Men: First Class is meant to signal to us that one’s position on what the mutants should be doing about their social situation depends a lot on whether you are perhaps an upper class aristocrat with a mansion. And, contrary to what everyone else thought about the movie, I don’t see it at all as a bromance between Charles and Erik. I mean, Charles is just so clearly light years of maturity behind Erik, it just seems like a remotely pleasant acquaintance to Erik most of the time. Like the new naive kid in school who you’ll hang out with absentmindedly because you’re not a bad person. 

Procrastination Theatre: April 5, 2012

Okay, I am woefully behind on these, but bear with me, because part of why I am behind on them is because I had exams and I just didn’t feel I had the time to really properly write about this movie. And mainly Michael Fassbender.

So I resisted seeing this in theatres for almost a year because, as I annoyingly said to everyone who asked me why I wouldn’t see it, having twelve good actors/actresses does not a good movie make. And after having seen this, I can confidently say that I am right. Having twelve good actors does not make a movie good. But apparently having Michael Fassbender does make a movie good.

Seriously - I am just distressed by Fassbender at this point. How does he do it? How is he so good in this otherwise uninteresting and mediocre movie? I mean, I like a lot of the other actors in this movie, but everyone pretty much delivers the Action Movie Special in this movie: the bare minimum, nothing compelling, a pretty standard dialing-it-in for a subpar script and a big budget. BUT NOT FASSBENDER. Fassbender is just, like, home run after home run in this movie. He is batting a million, and for what? For a stupid comic book prequel. Like, yes, bat a million for Steve McQueen. But you are batting a million in a movie where everyone else is sleepwalking through the dreadful dialogue. You are destroying it in a movie where January Jones plays a woman who can turn into a diamond and therefore justify her total absence of line delivery. I just…I can’t. Michael Fassbender has won. I finally found him devastatingly attractive in this movie (particularly the Argentinian Nazi bar scene), and the best way to characterize how I feel about Fassbender now is, quite simply, put upon. I feel put upon by Michael Fassbender. He is too talented and too attractive and too awesome at everything and I feel put upon because I do not have the time or energy to obsess over him as much as he clearly deserves to be obsessed over.

Other things about this movie: I love James McAvoy, but he is ridiculous in this movie, and it’s clear that he’s supposed to be, because I believe that this movie is really about discovering that Professor X is the biggest upper-class privileged piece of shit in the world. Seriously, I think the title X-Men: First Class is meant to signal to us that one’s position on what the mutants should be doing about their social situation depends a lot on whether you are perhaps an upper class aristocrat with a mansion. And, contrary to what everyone else thought about the movie, I don’t see it at all as a bromance between Charles and Erik. I mean, Charles is just so clearly light years of maturity behind Erik, it just seems like a remotely pleasant acquaintance to Erik most of the time. Like the new naive kid in school who you’ll hang out with absentmindedly because you’re not a bad person. 

Photo
Procrastination Theatre: March 9, 2012 Um, I forgot to mention that we saw this. And by we I mean my youngest brother and I, because the Boyfriend and my younger brother had gone out to party on Friday night. So we thought, yeah, let’s watch Labyrinth. And then we proceeded to say the following things: “Boooooowiiiieeeee!”“Do you think we’re supposed to be high for this?”“I love these sketchy Muppets.”“We’re definitely supposed to be high for this.”“The baby seems to be having an okay time though?”“OH MY GOD WHAT ARE THOSE FUCKING RED THINGS WHEN DID WE SWITCH TO ANGEL DUST.”“I think our Netflix paused to give us time to go freebase something.” “What is…I feel like Bowie’s kinda creeping on young Jennifer Connelly.”“The British-accent dog musketeer riding a sheepdog Muppet over rocks that fart is maybe the best thing that’s ever happened to me.” 

Procrastination Theatre: March 9, 2012

Um, I forgot to mention that we saw this. And by we I mean my youngest brother and I, because the Boyfriend and my younger brother had gone out to party on Friday night. So we thought, yeah, let’s watch Labyrinth. And then we proceeded to say the following things:

“Boooooowiiiieeeee!”
“Do you think we’re supposed to be high for this?”
“I love these sketchy Muppets.”
“We’re definitely supposed to be high for this.”
“The baby seems to be having an okay time though?”
“OH MY GOD WHAT ARE THOSE FUCKING RED THINGS WHEN DID WE SWITCH TO ANGEL DUST.”
“I think our Netflix paused to give us time to go freebase something.” 
“What is…I feel like Bowie’s kinda creeping on young Jennifer Connelly.”
“The British-accent dog musketeer riding a sheepdog Muppet over rocks that fart is maybe the best thing that’s ever happened to me.” 

Photo
Procrastination Theatre: March 15, 2012 Full disclosure: the Boyfriend and I were pretty drunk when we watched this. Or I was, anyway. We loved it. We laughed, hard, a lot, at the sheer perfection that was Charlize Theron’s facial expressions. We also were unable to watch the more difficult scenes, because they were incredibly raw and sad. We are also pleased that Diablo Cody has grown out of her ridiculously unreal dialogue phase and now has dialogue so painfully real and authentic that it is either a) hilariously awful or b) impossible to watch without squinting from embarrassment.  We would like to know where the Oscar nominations for this movie were, as well. Patton? Charlize? Oh, never mind.  We also say “Yikes” when people talk about volunteering overseas. 

Procrastination Theatre: March 15, 2012

Full disclosure: the Boyfriend and I were pretty drunk when we watched this. Or I was, anyway.

We loved it. We laughed, hard, a lot, at the sheer perfection that was Charlize Theron’s facial expressions. We also were unable to watch the more difficult scenes, because they were incredibly raw and sad. We are also pleased that Diablo Cody has grown out of her ridiculously unreal dialogue phase and now has dialogue so painfully real and authentic that it is either a) hilariously awful or b) impossible to watch without squinting from embarrassment. 

We would like to know where the Oscar nominations for this movie were, as well. Patton? Charlize? Oh, never mind. 

We also say “Yikes” when people talk about volunteering overseas. 

Photo
Procrastination Theatre: March 4, 2012 Nope. Not good. Pretty boring. EXCEPT Giovanni Ribisi, who is amazing and puts Academy Award Nominee Jonah Hill to shame. More Ribisi! More Ribisi!

Procrastination Theatre: March 4, 2012

Nope. Not good. Pretty boring. EXCEPT Giovanni Ribisi, who is amazing and puts Academy Award Nominee Jonah Hill to shame. More Ribisi! More Ribisi!

Photo
Procrastination Theatre: March 3, 2012 I have a crush on young Jack Lemmon. 

Procrastination Theatre: March 3, 2012

I have a crush on young Jack Lemmon. 

Photo
Procrastination Theatre: February 27, 2012 In what I can best describe as a newfound commitment to Fassbender’s acting excellence, I watched this movie, knowing that things would happen in it to which I would only have square responses. Katie Jarvis is really profoundly good in this movie, and Andrea Arnold shows us her life with little to no dialogue, just brutally honest accounts of how this girl spends her day, and what exactly her family is like. (Side note: if you watched this movie drunk, the dirty-mouthed ten-year old sister would be your #1 favorite part.) Michael Fassbender is also, as always, remarkably subtle. I mean, this isn’t a predator, or even a bastard. He’s just an opportunistic man with an offhand talent for womanizing. It’s good. It’s great how he plays the line between fatherly interest and sexual interest. But now I have to have square opinions, which is that I don’t think Fassbender and Jarvis’ characters have sex: I think she gets raped (spoilers or whatever…come on, if you’re watching an indie movie about a troubled 15-year old and her mom’s new boyfriend becoming close, you know they’re going to have sex). I just don’t think that kissing someone then provides consent for him pulling your pants off and penetrating you in less than 90 seconds’ time. Which doesn’t change my opinion and the value of the movie, it’s just a personal distinction I wanted to make. Also, no condom! Nothing makes me cringe more even though I realize that is realistic! If life really was like True Blood and everyone had a supernatural power in them somewhere, I would seriously want to be the Condom Fairy, where I flit around to all these impulsive sexual situations that happen so often in movies and, like, spray a condom onto the man’s penis before penetration. That would truly be a dream come true.

Procrastination Theatre: February 27, 2012

In what I can best describe as a newfound commitment to Fassbender’s acting excellence, I watched this movie, knowing that things would happen in it to which I would only have square responses. Katie Jarvis is really profoundly good in this movie, and Andrea Arnold shows us her life with little to no dialogue, just brutally honest accounts of how this girl spends her day, and what exactly her family is like. (Side note: if you watched this movie drunk, the dirty-mouthed ten-year old sister would be your #1 favorite part.) Michael Fassbender is also, as always, remarkably subtle. I mean, this isn’t a predator, or even a bastard. He’s just an opportunistic man with an offhand talent for womanizing. It’s good. It’s great how he plays the line between fatherly interest and sexual interest.

But now I have to have square opinions, which is that I don’t think Fassbender and Jarvis’ characters have sex: I think she gets raped (spoilers or whatever…come on, if you’re watching an indie movie about a troubled 15-year old and her mom’s new boyfriend becoming close, you know they’re going to have sex). I just don’t think that kissing someone then provides consent for him pulling your pants off and penetrating you in less than 90 seconds’ time. Which doesn’t change my opinion and the value of the movie, it’s just a personal distinction I wanted to make. Also, no condom! Nothing makes me cringe more even though I realize that is realistic! If life really was like True Blood and everyone had a supernatural power in them somewhere, I would seriously want to be the Condom Fairy, where I flit around to all these impulsive sexual situations that happen so often in movies and, like, spray a condom onto the man’s penis before penetration. That would truly be a dream come true.

Photo
Procrastination Theatre: February 26, 2012 It really is ridiculous that this movie didn’t win Best Cinematography at the Oscars, because that is what it did spectacularly. I actually really enjoyed the creation of life sequence because what they did with those effects! Oh my God! I mean, you should read about it  - they used basically scientific techniques to produce these stunning,  vibrant, living visual effects. Such a huge difference when compared to CGI! I mean, the mind reels. Truly spectacular and beautiful. I was even fine with the dinosaurs.  That being said, I don’t need Jessica Chastain whispering pretentious words like “mother” and “love” and “life” to me while I am watching these beautiful special effects, Terrence Malick.  And that’s basically the whole problem with the film. For everything that The Tree of LIfe does really well, like the special effects, or actually Brad Pitt, who I think deserved the Best Actor nom for this more so than for Moneyball - he really fleshes out the patriarch into a complicated force of violence & selfish love, it reminded me of the equally intense work that he did in Jesse James - for every good thing, Malick gives you about ten minutes of stupid voiceover. It’s honestly the voice-over that killed it for me. If he had just shown the compilation of shots that he put together, I would have enjoyed that. I would have been fine with the Terrence Malick Cinematography iMovie Feature. But fucking….the most poorly written voice-over dialogue of life. We’re talking junior high poetry crap. Like, junior high nature girl poetry, I’m going to be super into Buddhism in a few years adolescent poetry. I couldn’t do it. I just seriously couldn’t do the writing.  And so, in conclusion, I defer to the inimitable and discerning Christopher Plummer: “Terrence Malick needs a writer, badly.”

Procrastination Theatre: February 26, 2012

It really is ridiculous that this movie didn’t win Best Cinematography at the Oscars, because that is what it did spectacularly. I actually really enjoyed the creation of life sequence because what they did with those effects! Oh my God! I mean, you should read about it  - they used basically scientific techniques to produce these stunning,  vibrant, living visual effects. Such a huge difference when compared to CGI! I mean, the mind reels. Truly spectacular and beautiful. I was even fine with the dinosaurs. 

That being said, I don’t need Jessica Chastain whispering pretentious words like “mother” and “love” and “life” to me while I am watching these beautiful special effects, Terrence Malick. 

And that’s basically the whole problem with the film. For everything that The Tree of LIfe does really well, like the special effects, or actually Brad Pitt, who I think deserved the Best Actor nom for this more so than for Moneyball - he really fleshes out the patriarch into a complicated force of violence & selfish love, it reminded me of the equally intense work that he did in Jesse James - for every good thing, Malick gives you about ten minutes of stupid voiceover. It’s honestly the voice-over that killed it for me. If he had just shown the compilation of shots that he put together, I would have enjoyed that. I would have been fine with the Terrence Malick Cinematography iMovie Feature. But fucking….the most poorly written voice-over dialogue of life. We’re talking junior high poetry crap. Like, junior high nature girl poetry, I’m going to be super into Buddhism in a few years adolescent poetry. I couldn’t do it. I just seriously couldn’t do the writing. 

And so, in conclusion, I defer to the inimitable and discerning Christopher Plummer: “Terrence Malick needs a writer, badly.”

Photo
Single A Theme :: Version 1.3 :: By Business Bullpen