I’m all for mumblecore…okay, maybe I’m only 62.3% for mumblecore. But could the mumblers at least open their eyes—if not their mouths—and create some visual interest in the frame?
How many more conversations in cars, shot from the backseat, must we endure? Give me a two-shot from the front, light emanating, Kiss Me Deadly-style, from a mysterious source located along the length of the dashboard, rear-projection in the back window ripping the landscape away from the car as it speeds through the night.
BEESWAX (2009), aside from its aesthetic lack, does casually depict the daily life of a paraplegic, something we don’t often see in film.
Well, that’s not exactly true. I know full well what this ADAM (2009) looks like:
Hugh Dancy! For the benefit of me and the three other solitary ladies in the theater, I had to ask the projectionist to adjust the focus. But otherwise quite a charming little film, with a good performance from Dancy and a suitably subdued mise en scène.
plattered,
and projected.
And ended up seeing bits of four different movies today.
As they say on the interwebs: “meh.” UP (2009) in 3D whelmed me. I only went so I could get a taste of this new digital 3D business—quite a clever tribute that Pixar started off the film in the age of the dirigible and the newsreel, watched by a transfixed little spectator who wears his own special (not 3D) goggles in tribute to his favorite explorer.
The 21st-century goggles of RealD, with their circular polarizing lenses, aren’t meant for people like me who already need specs. Though they have a nice Poindexter quality, wearing them over frames puts too much pressure on the bridge of my nose, lower down. Uncomfortable. They shoulda told us to bring our contact lenses.
The RealD people say “While ‘your grandfather’s 3D’ was known for mediocre visuals viewed through flimsy colored paper glasses, RealD’s digital technology not only looks a quantum leap better than old fashioned 3D, it creates an exceptional visual with no flicker, no need to hold your head upright and no silly paper glasses, replacing them with lightweight, recyclable plastic shades.” And if the above screen capture reminds us of anything, it’s that an audience will mutely bear any indignity to drink in the magnificent images on a big screen, even “flimsy colored paper glasses,” or dressing as a geek (though I guess that’s chic now) in recyclable plastic shades, or sitting through interminable previews (now) and newsreels (then), or a $3 3D surcharge and the mall-bound, ghost-towned, Century Theater in San Francisco.
So, I was going to go to a screening of EMPTY NEST at the Sundance Kabuki in Japantown. I hadn’t been there since it freed itself from AMC and got a makeover, so I was interested in checking it out. Chose my seat on a touchscreen layout, an unnecessary luxury on a Tuesday afternoon—whee!—but which involved my having to get advice from the disinterested teen cashier about the seat’s proximity to the screen. What popped up on the monitor next really disturbed me: $8.75 + $1.50 “amenity fee” = $10.25 ticket. I asked the guy, “What’s this amenity fee?” He answered with a potted reply citing the theater’s “independence” from sponsorship by Fandango and the like. Needless to say, this skinflint turned and ran. But I’m thinking of adding an “amenity fee” to this blog. What do you think?
Now, onto the show:
A sweet and sloppy doc about North Philly high schoolers competing for culinary arts scholarships, PRESSURE COOKER (2009) drew only two lonely souls to its 4:40 screening in SF. How many theaters are screening it, total? Probably fewer than 10 around the country. So the horrible scratches the Lumiere has inflicted on this print so early on in its run do not bode well (there’s one of the scratches, between the 2nd and 3rd lockers in this shot). And it is the Lumiere’s projector (theater one) that did it—the Stella Artois cycling ad had the exact same ones. Having said all this, please note the pleasing title design; in three paragraphs or less, compare and contrast to POST GRAD’s. End of lesson.
Alexis Bledel, I think you’re the cutest and possibly the nicest young actress out there, and I will forever be devoted to you for your work on Gilmore Girls. BUT your new film, POST GRAD (2009), stoops, makes others (like me) stoop, and could be termed “stoopid,” just so I can continue on this stooping theme. Please, young television stars, when making your bumpy transition into “adult” roles in “film,” please try to insert these clauses into your contracts:
1. The title design guy must not be a hack. Varsity letter font? Pls.
[Insert awesome image here of computer desktop with MySpace, video blog, and chat windows all opening and moving around, main character socially networking with all her apps, expositioning her little heart out—a screen shot of which I would've gotten had I set my camera to the "camera" mode when turning it on.]
2. Do not allow the director to insert a pre-opening credits sequence featuring technology that will make the film appear dated in a matter of months. Actually, this sequence ALREADY feels dated, given that it was edited together a couple months ago. Also, if you are interested in depicting technology of today, please do not allow director to depict main character job-searching using the classified section of the local newspaper and a red sharpie.
3. Dad character running over the neighbor’s cat and squishing it is NOT comedy. Neither is Michael Keaton burying said dead cat in a pizza box in a too-small hole in the neighbor’s yard. Also, the dad hated the cat in the first place because he stepped in its shit in the middle of the driveway. Did no one on set understand cats? The cat-lady in me does not hesitate to inform those who only know dogs that CATS DO NOT POOP ON DRIVEWAYS. That is, unless the driveway is composed of loose sand. You out there, with your dunebuggies parked in the garage, you have been warned.
Yeah, yeah, I know it’s YOUNG AMERICA (1932), not “Young Americans,” but that doesn’t stop my brain from singing this. Plus there’re a lot of young americans in this sweet, funny, stupid little film:
…a young Ralph Bellamy, and…
…a baby-faced Spencer Tracy. Oh, and a bunch of really cute juvenile delinquent kids. The print looked so rich and with just the right amount of shimmery contrast; the preservation team under Bob Gitt at UCLA filled in all the jumpy bits around the head and tail leaders with full audio and brief seconds of still image where the missing frames were. A brilliantly done—and not overdone—preservation.
This screenshot foreshadows Wikus’s transformation in DISTRICT 9 (2009), methinks. Completely unexpected sci-fi goodness. THE summertime movie to see. I had been a tiny bit intrigued by the viral marketing campaign, but hadn’t gone further to investigate what it was all about. I’m glad I didn’t know much going in. As for the UA Theater in Berkeley: slippery floors (carpet cleaning residue tracked about), dingy smell, and the “usher” with the light saber patrolling the aisle three times during the screening. Urk.
Steve Coogan and Gina McKee…<sigh>. IN THE LOOP (2009). Theater was cold. Humor was sharp. Acting spot-on. Fatigue beginning to set in on this “diet” of one movie theater movie a day—and only day 10…
Trains and movies go together. (Glad the DP didn’t insist on having this window scrubbed before shooting it.)
Wasn’t quick enough to screen-grab the Persona tribute, but here’s a little Seventh Seal allusion to keep you cinephiles feeling smart and happy.
(500) DAYS OF SUMMER: glad I finally saw it, a little underwhelming, but I like Zooey Deschanel’s brand of manic pixie dream girl.
