A Statement of New Year, New Blog

OK, so not really.

Here's the deal, darlings: KateJones, aka The Movie Girl, wants to start writing more critical analysis, because she thinks she wants to be a critic when she grows up.  Thusly, this blog will henceforth be a forum of practice and, well, practice.

So, I am going to start writing critical article-thingies for new films, old films, and television shows.  I might even write more than one criticism of the same film (the more I watch The Dark Knight, the more I want to talk about it.)

All I ask for from you, dearlings, is that you comment comment comment, tell me WHEN I'm wrong, WHY I'm wrong, and maybe if I don't make any sense sometimes.

Also, keep in mind that I will NEVER be wrong, but you are allowed to incorrectly disagree.

Merry New Year!

A Statement of Setting a Good Example (And About The Dark Knight)

Having just told Lady Liberty to write in her blog, it seemed to prudent to follow my own advice.

Earlier this week, one of the best films of the year, The Dark Knight, was released on DVD, BluRay, etc, etc, etc.  I have watched it twice.  Because that's what I do.

Having seen the film in the theater later in its run (I was in London when it opened in the US, and came home the day it opened in the UK, natch), I was able to sneak into an uncrowded screening, have a row to myself, and settle into one of the most creepy and delectable performances in recent memory; the overshadowing and brilliant job done by Heath Ledger is a true tribute to a man who will never again grace the big screen.  The decayed makeup, the incessant tongue-action, that walk, are all marks of an amazing performance, one of a thoughtful and talented actor.  Let it not go unsaid that this was the loss of a man who could have been his generation's greatest performer.

At the time I found the film excellent, but long and slightly overwrought by the end (we love you, Harvey Dent... they couldn't give you your own movie?  Seriously?), and as was expected of everyone, I focused mainly on Ledger's performance in the initial viewing.

So... these second and third viewings.

Make things much more digestible.  On the small screen the Joker and the stunts and the intensity are of course lessened, but not to the extent that they become ineffective.  It also gives the viewer a chance to concentrate more on the story, which is less overwhelming when you can focus on it.  Batman has limits.  The Joker doesn't.  This is the message buried deep beneath the mob hits, the explosions, and the breathless trips to Hong Kong.

Batman might be a vigilante, but he is a good vigilante.  And just when he realizes what he "would have to become" in order to beat men like the Joker, we begin to fear that that's what will happen; he will break his own rules out of heartbreak, anger, and sheer irritation at this guy who just won't quit.

In the end, though, he reassures us that this will never happen; he takes the blame for the kidnapping of Commissioner Gordon's family, and the death of Dent.  He puts himself in harm's way and goes on the lam to prove to himself, and to us, that he is the Dark Knight.  Gallant and true, and willing to do what it takes.

So watch it again, ok?

(This can also be done late in January, when it is re-released in the theaters as a run-up to the Oscars.  Another chance for big-screen excitement!  Hooray!)

A Statement About Grey's and the Ginormous Shark

Grey's Anatomy, where have you gone?

I remember a time, not-so-long-ago, when I knew and loved (or loved to hate) every character on Grey's Anatomy.  I didn't know everything there was to know about all of them, or any of them, but I rooted for them, hoped for them, and tough-loved them through any number of traumas, family dramas, and patients.

So what the hell is going on?

Season 3 was dark and unrelenting; George's dad died, Meredith's mom died (and Meredith almost joined her), Izzy and George slept together, Alex fell in love with a mentally unstable patient, Bailey's marriage started to fall apart, the Chief and his wife ran hot and cold, Burke left Cristina at the altar, and Meredith and Derek "broke up."

We came back hopeful in Season 4, but it took a while to clean up the mess from the previous year, and then the disaster that was the Writer's Strike occurred.  Finally, finally, things got back in the swing when they returned.  Creator Shonda Rimes announced that she had watched all of the show's DVDs during the strike, and she was going to recapture the tone.  In the season finale, Meredith standing in the field surrounded by candles, making the big romantic gesture for Derek was exactly what we wanted; a sign that the old Grey's was back.

Oh, how very wrong we were.  The Izzy/Denny "thing"... there aren't really words.  It was good to hear late last week that there is a plan, that in theory there will be an explanation that will make sense to everyone.  But reflected in this is a larger problem.  A story that potentially bizarre and polarizing should not take eight episodes to wrap up.  And if it's going to take that long, the audience should not be kept in the dark to the point that they feel compelled to give up before the payoff.  Viewers have to have faith in the writers of any show, and when the writers go so completely off the deep end without even a hint of explanation, that trust is shaken.  Seriously.

Factor into this more new characters than anyone could possibly care about (that said, Kevin McKidd's Owen Hunt is yummy, and does indeed make a perfect addition to the cast... too bad he has to share his time with Melissa George's ridiculous Sadie...), and it seems that the old Grey's is irrevocably lost.  We still love our core characters, but they are not given enough attention for us to put up with their antics any longer.  And since it is virtually impossible to back-track once these characters have been added and these mistakes have been made, it brings us to a defining moment, and a sad conclusion: Grey's Anatomy has jumped the shark.

A Statement About Holiday Movies

Tis the season to watch all of those movies that your mother will only let you watch after Thanksgiving.  I have compiled a list of my faves, fully recognizing that it's a guilty pleasure kind of list, and not one necessarily reflecting film quality.  So here are my favorites.

Holiday Inn/Meet Me in St. Louis- These two have to be listed together, because they are not strictly Holiday Movies.  Or rather, they are ALL Holiday Movies.  Each one covers about a year in the life of their characters, but each gave life to a classic Christmas song; Holiday Inn is the first film featuring the song White Christmas, while Judy Garland sings Have Yourself a Merry Little Christmas for the first time in St. Louis.  Classic.

National Lampoon's Christmas Vacation- Are you serious, Clark?

The Santa Clause- Ok, ok.  I know it's nouveau and a bit cheesy, but all of the Santa Clause films are charming and funny, with fun holiday pop visuals.  Just go with it.

The Muppet Family Christmas- Not the Muppet Christmas Carol.  The Family Christmas.  You know, the one where they invade poor Fozzie's mother's house, Miss Piggy gets caught in a snow storm, and all of our Sesame Street friends show up to help with the Christmas Pageant.  Also, an errant Turkey tries to convince Swedish Chef that Big Bird is actually the Christmas meal.  Amazing.

Love Actually- Charm in abundance, every notable British actor from the past ten years (except the grandes dames, who really get enough movies together), and a warm and cheerful message that doesn't over-do the goo.  Not every character gets a happy ending, but every viewer finishes the film in full Christmas spirit.

When Harry Met Sally- Actually, this is the last film to watch before the holiday movies go away until next year.   Culminating on New Year's Eve, this rom-com mainstay is the perfect way to wrap things up.

So... yeah.  What are your "must-see" films for this time of year?

A Statement of Neglect

Hiya, Everyone-

It's been a crazy couple of weeks, but the novel is done!  Hooray!

So now that that's "over," and other things should start calming down, more posts for everyone!  Hooray!

Feel the excitement in the air...

A Statement About the Actual Twilight Movie

Not too much to say, except that it was more or less as expected (see previous post).

That said, we need to take a moment to discuss Edward, aka Robert Pattinson.  After reading a few interviews he seemed a bit pretentious and overrated, but I have to confess, he was the most pleasent surprise in the film.

I don't know about his future acting prospects, but he embodied our anti-hero quite perfectly; gorgeous, dark, and intense.  Some have called his acting wooden, but I have a feeling that was done on purpose...

It's a good thing he was there, quite frankly.  Because as in the books, the centerpiece of the film was the relationship between Bella and Edward, and as in the books, Edward was the centerpiece of the relationship.

Now I promise, no more Twilight.  On to something with substance.

A Statement About How I Met Your Mother

As is becoming my common practice, I have been reading a lot about shows (mostly courtesy of Mr. Ausiello), and then downloading a couple of eps from iTunes to check them out.  I have had some disappointments (hello, Chuck!), but most recently have had great success with a little show called How I Met Your Mother.

At first glance, this show has all of the elements that would make it distinctly uninteresting: set cameras, Friends knock-off setting (five friends live and love and laugh in New York City; they congregate in the bar downstairs from the apartment where three of them live), and a pretty standard premise (boy meets girl, boy pursues girl, etc.)

Imagine my shock, then, when this show turned out to be actually one of the funniest shows I have seen in quite a while.  A great deal of the credit goes to Neil Patrick Harris' Barney, an obnoxious ass who uses words like "legendary" and "awesome" and believes that no week is complete without strippers.  He adds an element of sheer absurdity to HIMYM, and "NPH" as he is called, keeps his character fresh and funny without ever straying into the realm of "too much."

While the basic setup is fairly familiar, HIMYM changes the gameplan enough to make a tired subgenre seem new again.  We flash forward to Ted Mosby ("the dad") telling his kids the seasons-long tale of, indeed, how he met their mother.  And the episodes act as parts of the story he tells them-- comprehensive and well-ordered, but not always in the right order, leaving for plently of surprises and twists.  In this way, HIMYM has learned from the "new" comedies (Arrested Development, 30 Rock) and built stories that we aren't even aware of yet.  An example of this was seen at the end of season 2, when it comes to light that Barney is the reason Lily (Ted's roommate and fiancée of his best friend Marshall) returned to New York at the beginning of the season.  At the time we had no inkling that that occurred, but when it came to light at the end of the season, it made perfect logical sense.

Another bit of refreshment from the HIMYM playbook is the gender-reversal roles.  Robin, the girl Ted falls for in the pilot (before promptly telling his kids, "And that's how I met your Aunt Robin"), doesn't want kids, and isn't even particularly sure she wants to get married in general, while Ted is all about finding the woman he wants to spend the rest of his life with.  When they breakup at the end of season 2 (no spoiler alert, kids... we know she's not the mother!), it's because they realize that he wants things that she doesn't.  

In all, How I Met Your Mother is thoroughly charming, often hilarious, and a great source of reassurance that the sitcom is not dead.  If the genre wants to continue in the old tradition and not switch to single-camera inside-joke fests, How I Met Your Mother makes a fabulous transition.

In fact, I think I'll watch an episode right now.

A Statement About The Tone

Yo-

So I was reading an article today, and one of the comment-ers said of the writer, "Everything she writes is so negative!"  And I thought, "Well, hell.  My past two entries have been pretty damn negative."

Thusly, the next post will be something positive... Maybe something about how Quantum of Solace kicks ass (I haven't seen it yet, but is there a doubt?), maybe something about the new little gem I have found, How I Met Your Mother.

Aren't you just dying from the suspense?!

A Statement About Zack, Miri, and Their Porno

So this one time, I went and saw Zack & Miri Make a Porno.  I was fully prepared for the vulgarity, the rudeness and the sheer offensiveness of the whole endeavor.  I was not at all prepared for how terribly ordinary it was.

I adore obscene humor.  Or "boy humor," although I don't think it's fair that they're the only ones who should get to laugh at movies like Old School, Super Troopers, and Harold & Kumar.  The thing about each of those movies was that they were all relatively unique.  At the very least, they took an old concept and put a spin on it so that it felt new and fun.  The humor is outrageous in each, and different.

Which is where Zack & Miri falls short.  There are shocking moments, but they are not so shocking as to make the film itself stand out.  Full frontal male and female nudity (which makes it fun for everyone, not just the boys... or maybe, especially boys depending on your preference), lots of references to anal sex, gay porn, oral sex, etc., etc., etc.

And these run-of-the-mill attempts at "offending" the general public do nothing to hide the monotony of the plot.  Zack and Miri have been friends forever and live together.  Zack and Miri go to their high school reunion to judge the people who tormented them.  Zack and Miri don't know they're in love with each other until the possibility of having sex with other people comes up.  They have sex.  They get awkward.  They fight.  They separate.  They get back together.  The End.

Seth Rogen and Elizabeth Banks both make it watchable, at least.  Rogen doesn't act in this as much as other films (see: Superbad), but rather reprises his role from Knocked Up, another superior comedy filled with "boy humor."  Banks actually adds acting credibility to the whole affair, bringing Miri to vulerable, messy life both at the reunion (her high school crush is now out and dating a gay porn star), and in the porno shoots.  Miri's reaction to Zack going alone into his bedroom with one of their costars is particularly affecting.  It should also be noted that when Zack and Miri actually do have sex, aside from being a revelation for them, is a revelation for us; we see two people realizing for the first time, on camera in front of six other people, how they really feel about each other.  It's a brief flash of everything the film should have been.

If only the film had tried harder to be good instead of shocking.

A Statement About the Twilight Movie (A Post of Skepticism and Procrastination)

Well, we have already talked about the Twilight series as books, but we haven't yet talked about the impending film, set for release on 21 November.  This week Entertainment Weekly (themoviegirl's Bible) dedicated their cover to the subject (for the second time this year), and so I feel it is time for us to discuss it here.

Before I start, I want to reiterate my enjoyment of the books, and the fact that I plan to read them again in the future.  I have nothing against the books, but I am less convinced that they are classics worthy of such attention, than they are flash-in-the-pan filler for what was a gaping hole in the market.

Back to the movie.  17 million copies of the books have sold, mostly to girls and their moms, but also to a reasonable amount of boys.  17 million over the course of four books.  This is a lot, a great deal more than I or you will ever sell, and Stephenie Meyer has done very well for herself.  Again, tapped in to the market, etc.  That said, it does not bode well for big box office.  Most of people seeing that trailer, and most of the people who spend LOTS of money at the movies, are probably unfamiliar with the story.  Not that the story is a big draw for those people to begin with, but we'll get to that later.  

To start with, the choice of actors is a problem.  I have nothing against Robert Pattinson or Kristen Stewart, and I do not doubt they are the right choices for their respective roles.   The rest of the cast I find questionable, especially since there is almost zero recognizibility.  As a further draw for a film that has a built in (and not terribly huge) cult following, known actors needed to be cast who would help draw in the crowds.  The dude from Fastlane and Jane Doe from Grey's Anatomy do not exactly carry audiences with them everywhere they go (see: Elizabeth Reaser's recently cancelled CBS show).  There is not a single marquee name to show, even in cameo, in the movie trailer.

It is the job of movie trailers to tempt viewers into the theater.  They should give a taste of the story without giving away the whole plot.  A trailer should intrigue.  The Twilight trailers were really only "good" for people familiar with the plot of the book.  They show Edward and Bella, as well as the bland introduction of James and Victoria as The Bad Guys.  There is nothing indicating a deeper mythology, or even a presentation of a coherent plot.

Which brings us back to the story issue.  Twilight is a love story.  Plain and simple.  There is nothing wrong with a love story, but it is awfully hard to make a mainstream movie (or bestselling series) on that basis alone.  The "other" plot for Twilight is easy enough: rival vampires threaten Bella's life.  There is also the ongoing conflict between the vampires and the werewolves (hello, Team Jacob!), both territorially and for Bella's affections, but that doesn't take off, really, until the second book.  The "serious" threat, to everyone in the series, is also introduced in the second book, goes away almost entirely in the third, and is resolved so laughably in the fourth as to lose all credibility.  

I don't like the ongoing rivalry between Twilight and Harry, but there is honestly no comparison.

I don't wish bad things for the Twilight film, and I will certainly go see it, just as I will read the books again.  But I don't see that it will become the phenomenon it needs to become to spur further sequels.  And I don't think we'll still be talking about it a decade from now.

A Statement of Weakness

Hi Everyone-

I am officially feeling the NaNoWriMo Second Week Drag!

I've written enough that I am still more than "on course," but the past three or so days have felt completely uninspired both to write and by what I have written.

Statements of support ("You can do it!") and judgement ("If you don't do it, you will be a ginormous loser!") welcome.

Thanks!

A Statement of Relief and Happiness

Yay, Obama!!

A Statement About NaNoWriMo

Just a quick note about beaucoup excitement in the month of November...

Aside from being the month containing my favorite holiday (hello, Thanksgiving!), November is also National Novel Writing Month.  This is an annual challenge, designed to encourage participants to write a 50,000 word novel over the course of the month.

So that's what I'm going to do.

I wrote about 7,100 words over the weekend (to finish exactly on time, we are told we need to write an average of about 1,660 words per day), but I was on a roll and, as was pointed out to me by the wise Lady Liberty, better to write more when you're in the zone than to worry about those days when you're not.

So encouragement welcome.  According to most participants, the second week is the hardest, so I'll probably be asking for some help next week.

That's all!

A Statement About Liz Lemon

I didn't "get" Sex and the City.  And I gave it a damn good try.  I watched the first season, and have probably seen a season's worth of reruns on TBS (I know they're watered down, but the idea is there) and I just... don't get it.  It might be my age, it might be that I don't live in a city (although I have, several times over the past few years), it might be that I would rather buy 15 DVDs than spend $300 on a pair of shoes.  But I digress.

The biggest problem I have with Sex and the City is that none of those women represented ME.  I know there was a brainy/cynical one and a romantic one, and I probably fall somewhere between the two.  But I never looked at any of them and saw myself.  I could relate to their problems occasionally, but that was about it.

Which is why I nominate Liz Lemon as my female representative to the Pop Culture Congress.  Liz Lemon, 3o Rock's own Mary Tyler Moore (although I have to confess, I don't know what that means) is ME.  And that's all there is to it.

First of all, Liz Lemon is gloriously weak.  Weak in ways that I (and girls like me) are weak.  She eats.  Constantly.  In fact, there is a rather spectacular cutaway in the season 2 episode called "Sandwich Day" in which she flips over a table, screeching "WHERE'S MY MAC AND CHEESE??" when the male writers under her employ have presumably stolen it and eaten it for themselves. (For those curious, I have that Mac and Cheese moment about once a week).  

Liz steps in to save her staff from the Head Honcho, Jack Donaghy, on a regular basis.  But when she herself makes a rather large error in judgement, she is happy enough to let her entire staff be questioned and accused and to turn on each other before finally confessing to Jack.  Of course, he knew it was her the whole time.

Another thing that makes Liz Lemon stand apart the complete lack of romance in her life.  This is not to say that she does not have boyfriends, or that she doesn't have sex (we know it usually involves being bribed with food and Uno foreplay).  Liz does not base her life around finding a romantic love interest.  When Floyd, the season 1 boyfriend, elected to stay in Cleveland without her, Liz returned for season 2, not depressed and bedridden, but ready for action (with the exception of the whole wedding-dress-buying incident).  30 Rock is not about Liz finding a boyfriend or love or any of that.  It's about Liz, her crazy job, and trying to live her life around it.

This is further emphasized by the 4 males immediately surrounding Liz on a regular basis, all of whom have zero romantic prospects with our heroine.  Nor, it should be mentioned, do they want them.  Jack is her boss and wants to help "better" her life and self-esteem; Pete is her loser producer who moves in with her after his wife finds out he didn't have a vasectomy; Tracy is the insane (actually insane) star of her show; and Kenneth is the quasi-adolescent NBC page who follows her around like a puppy hungry not for Liz herself but for the opportunities her presence can bring.

The final reason Liz Lemon is my kind of character is that she is absolutely, without question, unhesitatingly nerdy.  This is a girl who has no time to pay attention to what she's wearing (as Jack often points out).  Star Wars references abound (especially when Jenna, the other star of Liz's show, tries to tell her that "Men don't like girls who watch Star TREK," "WARS!!" Liz corrects vehemently.)  Liz is also the fearless propagator of exclamations like "Nerds!" and "Blerg!" and "Monsters!" and, on several occasions, tells people they can "eat my poo."

In long, I adore Liz Lemon.  On the television landscape she is the character who represents me, the way I think, and the way I do things.  Enough said.

A Statement About the New Look

Cheers to Lady Liberty for our sexy makeover!

A Statement About Why I Am Not Sure About Fringe

Full disclosure:  I would follow JJ Abrams to the ends of the earth.  Felicity, Alias, and Lost are among my favorite shows (the latter two I watch on a regular basis in their entireties).  I severely dislike Tom Cruise and went opening weekend to see M:I3.  I am a Star Wars fan for life, but I will be there opening weekend for Star Trek  in May.

But I am not sure about Fringe.

It's not the plot that I am concerned about.  Something about the X-Files meets Alias theme tells me that this could go on for a while, and with a mythology that is at once intriguing and a bit more accessible than say, Lost or Alias.

I am not concerned at all about the characters, although it is strange that for once the female character is the least compelling of them all.  It is not like an Abrams heroine to play second banana to anyone, much less two men.  But there can be no question that the good doctor and his son are the bread that makes the sandwich.

It's not even the unlikely Boston locale that unsettles me.  I mean, seriously?  THAT much supernatural activity in that state?  Hell, in that part of the country?  At least Alias held to its main conceit and sent Sydney Bristow all over the world.  The least they could do is send the operatives all over the country.

No, it is not any one of these things that makes me hesitate to fully embrace and obsess over Fringe.  It is all of them put together.  There is something not quite right, something not quite gelling, that gives me serious pause.  It might be that the main actress, Anna Torv, is not grabbing me, a rare thing in an Abrams find (the man is pretty much batting 1.000 on finding gorgeous, compelling new talent with actual talent).  Because the actress is not grabbing me, the actor is, and Joshua Jackson is the best part of the show.  And the girl is not even matching him.  Which might be the point... she is the serious government type, and he is the sarcastic know-it-all with no loyalties.  Maybe.  But I don't like it.  And even Sydney Bristow with her two dead fiances and rogue mother and dead friends had a sense of humor.  There is something off about Fringe, and I cannot quite put my finger on it.

And so, I remain skeptical.

A Statement About Mad Men and How Much it Kicks Ass

Mad Men is pretty effing excellent.

Let's just put that out there for a moment.  I watched the first episode well over a year ago when the initial critical praise just ramping up.  I have to confess that at first I didn't "get" it, and so tried to ignore the growing cult buzz.  However, after the continued hype and the whole Emmy win, it became increasingly apparent that I was missing something.  

So I bought the first season on iTunes, and ohmygoodness.  Stephen King was right when he wrote in a recent Entertainment Weekly column that Mad Men is a soap opera wrapped in nostalgia and style, but it is also much, much more than that.  It is a studied look at relationships and the expectations we have for eachother.  The marriage of Don and Betty Draper is one of superficial happiness (all of Betty's friends take time to comment about the apparent perfection of her husband) and deeply wrought undercurrents (after 6+ years of marriage, Betty still does not know the specifics of Don's past, starting with the fact that his name is not Don Draper).

All of this domestic turmoil landscaped by Don's advertising firm, Sterling Cooper, the literal source of manipulative advertising and false polish for the products people are trying to sell.  

The show might border on ordinary if not for the extreme flair and style with which it is presented.  For better or worse, we are transported back to an era where smoking is cool, a scotch at 10 in the morning is perfectly acceptable, and kids are left at home asleep at night with no babysitter.  The writing is excellent, the acting is subtle and effective, and it's just a great show.  

Plus, Don Draper is hot.

A Statement About 30 Rock

I have been meaning to write this particular post for a while, but it's even more relevent today, so here we go.

30 Rock is excellent.  I don't say that with a single reservation, or with an ounce of exaggeration.  Tina Fey has created a show that is both smart and ridiculous (my favorite kind) and with a cast that is absolutely to die for.

The key to the excellence has to be a complete knowledge and respect for the people she wants watching this show.  For example, what should have been a routine product placement of Verizon products in season 2, the writers take on their selling-out dead on when Fey's Liz Lemon, after extolling the virtues of the network, looks straight into the camera and says "Can we have our money now?"

And then there is Liz Lemon herself.  Never before has there been such a female character on television, and she could not be more relatable even in her exagerrated neurosis.  Liz is socially awkward, a Star Wars dork, an emotional eater (see:  Cheese curls, a $57 steak, and a meatball sub with extra bread.)  Liz is not desperate for a man to come along and make her a complete person-- she already is.  But that doesn't keep her from wanting the companionship anyway (see: Dennis Duffy). 

Even the shortened second season (oh... the Writer's Strike seems so long ago, doesn't it?) the material is fresh and outrageous and smart as hell.  Why aren't you watching?

A Statement About Why Twilight is NOT The Next Harry Potter

OK, I know I have been saying I would do this for a long time, so here it goes.

There is currently a drive in the entertainment industry (at least the book and film bits) to convince everyone that the Twilight series will replace the Harry Potter series in terms of pop cultural and monetary importance.  There is also a movement to make people choose between Harry and Twilight, creating an artificial conflict between fans of both.  For the record, I read and enjoyed both to various degrees.  I like Twilight, and had fun reading it.

Twilight is not The Next Harry Potter.  And anyone who tells you otherwise has not been paying attention.  Twilight, enjoyable though it may be, features some of the worst writing in recent memory.  As an example, the number of times the word 'beatutiful' is used to describe the heroic Edward is almost laughable.  This is to say nothing of a serious lack of mythology and substance to anything pertaining to the back story.  In fact, it is not until the fourth book that Meyer begins presenting a universe full of vampires and lore.

Contrast this with Potterverse, where we know from the beginning that there is more to this world than just Harry, and we meet all of the various characters present in the climax of the series along the way.  The writing in Harry is also clearly superior, with the introduction of various concepts and plot hypotheticals throughout.  Rowling's use of the word 'basilisk,' for example, without any nod toward the fact that the word means giant snake, shows her respect for readers' intelligence and curiosity.

The main reason, though, that Twilight is not a worthy successor to Harry Potter, more than anything, boils down to the final books in the respective series.  The Deathly Hallows serves the rest of the series remarkably, offering closure to every major issue presented, and inviting the reader to see his favorite characters settle in to a comfortable and peaceful future.  Characters we know and love suffer and die, not to eccess, but realistically.  Breaking Dawn, on the other hand, devolves into a gory, bizarre alternate universe, different thematically, tonally, and every other way possible from the other books in the Twilight series.  A slew of new characters are introduced, expanded upon, and then dropped... clogging up the narrative and giving zero closure to fans who have followed the important people throughout.  Not a single character suffers or dies or sacrifices to produce the desired happy ending.

To even compare the Twilight to Harry Potter is completely innappropriate-- not just because of their differences in quality, but because in the narratives themselves,  they are completely different from one another.  This is probably the source of most of the heated debates between fans, as well as the source of the idea that readers must choose between the two.  This is not the case... we simply need to agree that one is vastly superior to the other.

A Statement of Apology

I know, I am officially the worst blogger EVER... I'm getting back in to it though... Don't give up on me yet!

Coming soon: A Statement About Why Twilight is NOT Harry Potter

Sorry Sorry Sorry

I'm really sorry, I know I have been super neglectful, I promise to come back soon.

A Statement About Atonement

On the spectrum of tragically epic and over-wrought love stories, there are very fine lines between those that are so trite as to be unwatchable, those that are good but ultimately forgettable, and those that will go down in the annals of cinema as the ones to beat. Somehow, quite inexplicably, Atonement falls at the center of it all, and I cannot stop thinking about it.

Let's start at the beginning: it is one of the most stunningly gorgeous films I have ever seen. Having watched it on a moderately sized home television, I cannot imagine what it must have looked like in the cinema, but it must have been breathtaking. This in itself is the films first flaw-- it is so beautiful as to be distracting as one becomes so mesmerized by the costumes and colors and opulence of it all that one forgets to pay attention to things like what is going on and what the characters are saying.

And what are the characters saying? Everyone seems to be talking in a forced Rosalind Russell-Cary Grant banter that is at once intriguing and incomprehensible. It also makes the actors almost painfully self-conscious. While she does an admirable job throughout the film, you can almost see the wheels turning in Keira Knightley's head with every look she gives, every cigarette she smokes, and every painfully fashionable outfit she puts on.

The self-consciousness is almost a theme of the direction. As lovely as everything is, you can't help but think about how the director took it upon himself to setup those impressive scenes, and think of his thought processes as he created his picturesque shots.

An audience should not be thinking about the director and his thought-processes.

But here's the thing: it should have gotten all of the nominations it did. It should not have won anything (except art direction). And more than the good but forgettable Cold Mountain, Atonement breaks ground on the tragic epic lovestory frontier. Because somehow, when Cecilia Tallis whispers 'Come back to me' to her tormented lover Robbie, you buy it hook line and sinker. And James McAvoy's Robbie is suitably traumatized without being pathetic while Cecilia is distant and cool without being heartless. The thing that makes this a different film is that it is not about the two of them, it is about the person who keeps them apart, Cecilia's sister Briony. The film does not dwell on their tragedy, but rather on its maker, and what she does to, yes, atone for her actions.

At the end of the day, Atonement does not and will not achieve the same status as Gone With The Wind or even Titanic, but it does break ground, and it is certainly worth seeing.

A Statement About Why the BAFTAs are Bad

I know I should be talking about how poorly I did on my Oscar picks, but a) I don't really want to talk about it and b) I would prefer to talk about it after I get back to the States and watch the tape that my lovely Mommy made for me.

So for right now, I am going to talk about how much the BAFTAs are terrible.

I had the (dis)pleasure of watching them for real on television, presented by the BBC live from Covent Garden on the 10th of February. And it was appalling. All of the obvious people won (including Marion Cotillard, leading certain Gingers to announce that the BAFTAs are an indicator of the Oscars... not so, but more on that later). I should have known something was awry when people started pointing out that Atonement was the only British film nominated, but I didn't. And when it won Best Picture, I had the sinking feeling that that was the point I was being led to all evening.

Let's be perfectly clear: the Brits like to pretend that the BAFTAs are the British 'response' to the Oscars. It's not quite working out that way-- even the British press covers the Oscars more than the BAFTAs. So what it becomes is a night of self-congratulation for British and European film that seems completely unnecessary. Nevermind that more non-Americans have won Oscars in acting catagories in the last 8 years (and not a single American won this year), it all seems a bit bitter to announce Atonement the best film of the year just moments after stating that it's the only British film on the ballot.

Now, as to why the BAFTAs are not a good indicator of the Oscars: because they don't want to be. Sometimes there is overlap, as there should be if a performance is particularly spectacular, but Marion Cotillard's BAFTA-followed-by-Oscar does not a predictor make. If anything, it highlights her Oscar upset even more.

That is all.

FINAL OSCAR PICKS

DISCLAIMER: I have not had much time to think about this. Put your money on Peter and the Wolf in the animated short category though.

BEST PICTURE
No Country for Old Men
BEST ACTOR
Daniel Day-Lewis, There Will Be Blood
BEST ACTRESS
Ellen Page, Juno
BEST SUPPORTING ACTOR
Javier Bardem, No Country for Old Men
BEST SUPPORTING ACTRESS
Cate Blanchett, I'm Not There
BEST DIRECTOR
Joel and Ethan Coen, No Country for Old Men
BEST ORIGINAL SCREENPLAY
Diablo Cody, Juno
BEST ADAPTED SCREENPLAY
Joel and Ethan Coen, No Country for Old Men

Stay tuned for reaction on Monday.

YAY (a statement)

OK, so the Strike is over, the Oscars are back on... and oh yeah, I am in London and can't watch them.

Anyway, Oscar picks by the end of the week, and when I get back, A Statement About Why the BAFTAs Suck, and A Statement About 30 Rock and How Cool It Is. Aren't you excited?

MY TOP 10 FAVORITE FILMS

Here it is. Before we begin, I expect to see some serious comments re: your top 10, and all of the (incorrect) reasons you think mine are wrong.

10. Juno
9. Love, Actually
8. The Princess Bride
7. Waitress
6. Pride and Prejudice
5. His Girl Friday
4. Pulp Fiction
3. The Incredibles
2. Meet Me in St. Louis
1. The Philadelphia Story

A Statement About Why It's Taking So Long

OK, full disclosure time: I am having trouble coming up with my Top 10 Favorite movies.

Not that I am unsure as to what they are, but it's the order and the dynamics of the thing that are eluding me. I mean, how many classics are too many without being pretentious? And which horrifically stupid but terrifically classic comedy deserves a spot in the top 10? The moral of the story is that I am not blowing off the list, but am instead taking my time to organize my thoughts. I apologize for the delay and hope to have something to say by the end of next week.

On a sad closing note, RIP Heath Ledger. It seems he has joined the ranks of those young, impossibly talented actors whose lives were cut short, seemingly by their talent and the excessive-ness that comes with it. Tragic.

A Statement About My Top 10 Favorite Movies

My Dearest Peeps,
First of all, Happy New Year! Hopefully 2008 will be full of happiness, health and wonderment for all... or at least we will see the end of the writers strike. Stemming from a New Year's Eve conversation, I have decided it is time to grace you all with my top 10 favorite movies of all time.

Soon-ish.

Let me clarify something first: my (or your, or anyone's) Top 10 Favorite Films has nothing to do with the Top 10 Best Films, a list that is much less subjective. Therefore, you will see no Citizen Kane, or The Graduate, or even The Wizard of Oz on my list. That list is a completely different discussion for another time.

So, this is just a note to make that statement and to say that my list is on it's way. I don't believe this is the kind of thing to be rushed or thought-up on the spot, and I expect mine to stick pretty permenantly, pending, of course, the release of other amazing films (you know, should the strike ever end.)

Thusly, dear readers, think of your own picks as well so you can post them later and we can get into a spirited debate about why I am right and you are not.

MERRY NEW YEAR!