I arrive to little fanfare I imagine but none the less must get these thoughts off my chest. I am home for holidays!™ .... And dying of boredom! After binge eating on rice crispy squares and candied pecans I plopped in front of my parents new Hi Def TV where I watched Ghost Rider for all of 3 minutes before returning to the kitchen for round 4. I've been revisiting old relics of my talentless youth such as yearbooks, photos, toys, and reports. Jesus its all so banal. If I was unextraordinary or bordering on idiocy its because I was allowed to do so. After reading the inscriptions by my fellow classmates in my yearbooks I can assure you that the public education system was in trouble long, long ago.
The house I grew up in feels more and more alien and not necessarily in a bad way. My father, having retired keeps the place in top shape and my parents' taste in interior decor and design has aged well over the years. The unofficial desire is to look like a spread from Martha Stuart Living and I think very soon they will have achieved have achieved that goal. Congrats.
I'm currently sitting on a oversized couch that is more comfortable than the single bed mattress and box spring I own. I'm heading to Long Island this Christmas and have been practicing my eyes of blocked emotion and condescending smiles. I found this video that is shockingly accurate in what it will be like when I arrive.
Saturday, December 22, 2007
Thursday, November 15, 2007
Tuesday, November 13, 2007
Stttttttrrrrrrrriiiiiiikkkkkkkeeeeee
Its the second week of the heavily covered writers strike. From what I gather, and this is an overly simplistic bumpter sticker slogan explanation, the writers recognize that the business models of entertainment are changing rapidly and they demand new modes of compensation. The biggest source of contention seems to be in residuals on many new media formats like online downloading and things like TV shows on DVD, a recent phenom. There is an interesting article from the International Herald Tribune.
It basically comes to the conclusion that movies are no longer profitable. The culprit? Superstar celebrities, both of the acting and directing/producing/writing kind. They often are given "participation" points which means they get their salary [say 10 to 20 million] plus a percentage of the net gross of a film and NOT the net profit. They point out that 3 billion dollars were doled out in residuals and participation points last year. How much of that three billion went to the Writers Guild of America West which represent most Hollywood writers and have around 10,000 members? 121 million, a puny puny amount. A big name star, say Drew Barrymoore with the Charlie's Angels series or Keanu Reeves with the Matrix trilogy can easily make 70 million off one picture in participation points. Now you can see how the figure reached 3 billion and it wasn't due to the writers. They point out that the novelty of DVD's has worn off, people just aren't buying them as much and that is where movie studios were making all their money as they are incredibly cheap to make and have a high profit margin. This means the producers are digging their heels in, as one of their main duties is to make a profitable venture.
These photos were taken on my cellphone outside of where I work in Downtown where writers were protesting the filming of I believe CSI: New York
It basically comes to the conclusion that movies are no longer profitable. The culprit? Superstar celebrities, both of the acting and directing/producing/writing kind. They often are given "participation" points which means they get their salary [say 10 to 20 million] plus a percentage of the net gross of a film and NOT the net profit. They point out that 3 billion dollars were doled out in residuals and participation points last year. How much of that three billion went to the Writers Guild of America West which represent most Hollywood writers and have around 10,000 members? 121 million, a puny puny amount. A big name star, say Drew Barrymoore with the Charlie's Angels series or Keanu Reeves with the Matrix trilogy can easily make 70 million off one picture in participation points. Now you can see how the figure reached 3 billion and it wasn't due to the writers. They point out that the novelty of DVD's has worn off, people just aren't buying them as much and that is where movie studios were making all their money as they are incredibly cheap to make and have a high profit margin. This means the producers are digging their heels in, as one of their main duties is to make a profitable venture.
These photos were taken on my cellphone outside of where I work in Downtown where writers were protesting the filming of I believe CSI: New York
Thursday, November 8, 2007
Goodmorning Midnight!
These are not ghostly apparitions or visits from Extraterrestrial beings. These are the lighting crews from a movie shoot on Thursday night that lasted from 9pm to 6am. The lovely views are from the window and entryway of my apartment. I wrote about this situation earlier but I do have some good news to report. Apparently the studio responsible is going to donate around 10,000 dollars to the Echo Park Chamber of Commerce who will then disperse the money as they see fit. I'm crossing my finger for paddle-boat renovations at the lake!
Tuesday, November 6, 2007
Queen of All Media
Oprah now has an official channel on youtube. It was only a matter of time. She has disabled the embedding feature [typical control freak that she is] and so if want to watch it you have to go over to youtube and cue the appropriate search. Her username is OPRAH. Yes, in dramatic authoritative caps. Now I always approach Oprah with deep fascination, awe, anger, and respect. The most complex of media figures with all kinds of coding, branding, and messages. Not content with just a magazine, radio channel, and TV show, she is reaching out to the next frontier, cyberspace. The head spins at the possibilities. She joined on November 1rst and her channel is already is the #6 most viewed today, #4 for the week , and #29 for the month.
Right now all the clips on her channel kind of play as a "director's cut" version of her show. Its mostly behind the scenes footage, extended interviews etc. This allows a new Oprah persona to be born. The shaky, amateurish feel of the youtube clips have a nicer, more humble, and laid back Oprah. An "oh gosh I'm on the youtube I hope you'll watch" vibe. Obviously to launch the channel she had a TV epsiode serve as a giant informerical where she interviewed many "stars of youtube" which included a skateboarding dog whom Oprah confessed was her favorite interviewee. She also harassed/interviewed the founders and CEO's, one of whom, Chad Hurly is semi cute for a crazy computer nerd/geek. He could totally pass as the drummer in some bland but smart indie rock band, a la The Decemberists.
My only question now is what will Oprah decide is important to post on youtube? Perhaps her show will become more expansive. Each episode will only be the first step in a multimedia expereince. At the end of the show she'll tell you to log on for a more informative and fully emmerisve expereince on the subject of any given epsiode. Maybe there can be weekly clips from her schools in Africa where girls shower praise and thanks on O. We all know they need some SERIOUS PR spinning going on given the recent headlines involving the school. There could be a weekly Remembering Your Sprit short where Toni Morrisson talks to us directy and intimately about our inner beauty and possibility. But my greatest wish and fantasy would be for VINTAGE Oprah clips/shows. You know, circa 1986 when she was still singing the glories of McDonald's hashbrowns and wasn't above doing a White Supremacy show. I got great pleasure in watching old Oprah clips on youtube and one day they mysteriously disappeared. Please Oprah open up your vast catalog of insipid celebrity interviews if soley for the purpose of delighting in early 90's hair and makeup.
Right now all the clips on her channel kind of play as a "director's cut" version of her show. Its mostly behind the scenes footage, extended interviews etc. This allows a new Oprah persona to be born. The shaky, amateurish feel of the youtube clips have a nicer, more humble, and laid back Oprah. An "oh gosh I'm on the youtube I hope you'll watch" vibe. Obviously to launch the channel she had a TV epsiode serve as a giant informerical where she interviewed many "stars of youtube" which included a skateboarding dog whom Oprah confessed was her favorite interviewee. She also harassed/interviewed the founders and CEO's, one of whom, Chad Hurly is semi cute for a crazy computer nerd/geek. He could totally pass as the drummer in some bland but smart indie rock band, a la The Decemberists.
My only question now is what will Oprah decide is important to post on youtube? Perhaps her show will become more expansive. Each episode will only be the first step in a multimedia expereince. At the end of the show she'll tell you to log on for a more informative and fully emmerisve expereince on the subject of any given epsiode. Maybe there can be weekly clips from her schools in Africa where girls shower praise and thanks on O. We all know they need some SERIOUS PR spinning going on given the recent headlines involving the school. There could be a weekly Remembering Your Sprit short where Toni Morrisson talks to us directy and intimately about our inner beauty and possibility. But my greatest wish and fantasy would be for VINTAGE Oprah clips/shows. You know, circa 1986 when she was still singing the glories of McDonald's hashbrowns and wasn't above doing a White Supremacy show. I got great pleasure in watching old Oprah clips on youtube and one day they mysteriously disappeared. Please Oprah open up your vast catalog of insipid celebrity interviews if soley for the purpose of delighting in early 90's hair and makeup.
Wednesday, October 31, 2007
Oh The Horror! The Horror!
Saw 4 opened to 32.1 million. I consider myself a fan of the horror genre and have no desire to see it. I have missed the boat on the series. You can label me as out of touch as all those crotchety semi senile overweight film critic has beens, as after this weekend it seems to be “the” defining horror franchise of the decade. Much in the same way that Freddie and Jason defined the 80’s, Scream the 90’s, we now have Jigsaw entering the cannon of iconic horror villains for the 00’s. The 4th entry in four years [!], the last 3 have all opened north of 30 million.
It seems the series has become relevant by accident with its theme of torture. [abu gharib, the debate over torture/interrogation techniques, etc] I’m sure years from now academics will write extensively on the link between the proliferation of onscreen violence and the war that never seems to end. Its possible that it has touched a nerve or its just appealing to bored 16 year olds who have a steady diet of CSI and Law and Order: Special Victims Unit looking for a stronger fix.
It belongs to what is known as “torture porn” or the nicer “torture horror.” The genre was supposedly on its way out given the high profile summer flops, Hostel 2 and Captivity. The cultural mood had chilled rather quickly to the genre; however, the Saw series seems to say otherwise. Perhaps because the series injects a tone of ironic morality [I can’t write that without rolling my eyes] by having the killer “Jigsaw” picking people who have committed horrible acts or are not so nice people themselves, the violence Is mitigated for the audience, making it slightly easier or justified? I end that in a question mark, as I have no idea why this series is so popular and durable. I’m grasping for straws here. MY GOD, this is the 4th in the series and the marketing and advertising promised no new twists or plot revelations, the tagline was the dumb, “If it’s Halloween, it must be Saw.” So people showed up in droves for more of the same.
Now I’ve seen my fair share of flicks from this genre. I’ve sat through Hostel, the remakes of Texas Chainsaw Massacre and Hills Have Eyes, Wolf Creek, High Tension, Passion of the Christ and House of 1000 corpses. What strikes me is the cold hard cynical eye that has developed in the filmmaking process. I know these aren’t all technically torture porn but they’re part of the new wave of horror and are often lumped into the same category when media pundits talk about the disturbing violence found in modern horror.
In regards to the remakes, the originals that they were based on were extremely low budget and independently produced and financed. This gave them a power that perhaps they didn’t deserve or intend. The tone was a sort of punk DIY aesthetic that came across destructive, tasteless, and ripping at the fabric of society in a provocative and FUN way. The updated versions lack any of this humor and given the studio backing it loses all the aforementioned qualities and feels like corporate nilhism at its tackiest. Classy production values set to gruesome dismemberment. Truly anything will be green lit in the hopes of profit.
You’ll notice I put Passion of the Christ in there and for good reason. With 370 million in grosses in the US it stands as the most profitable torture porn pic of all time. Studio chiefs took note and saw that audiences had an incredible appetite and tolerance for onscreen violence and thus torture porn pics were given the go ahead making Passion also the grandfather of the movement. It predates all the films I’ve mentioned save House of 1000 corpses, having been released in February of 04. The first Saw was released the following October and perhaps in January 06 the genre reached its Apex with the success of Hostel. So yes, you can thank Jesus, in a way, for Saw 4.
My final plea is that you can justify anything if you have enough style and talent. I am not particularly squeamish and hate the standard cliché that so many people say, “I always think it’s scarier when they don’t show any violence.” Okay first of all those people are lying. They are the ones who rent Premonition and The Grudge 2 and drive 5 miles under the speed limit. I think you can argue that a key element to a horror film is a visceral reaction. You must be physically horrified or repulsed. Part of the appeal of the genre is shocking you out of your banal sedentary existence.
What would it take to shock an audience now? I think we’d have to go in the opposite direction to truly unsettle and upset. Perhaps characters getting naked and having sex on screen? A female character who after deliberation decides to have an abortion and continues on with her existence and she’s not a monster or destroyed from the experience? Characters flushing money down a toilet? Oh who am I kidding, we would NEVER see that.
It seems the series has become relevant by accident with its theme of torture. [abu gharib, the debate over torture/interrogation techniques, etc] I’m sure years from now academics will write extensively on the link between the proliferation of onscreen violence and the war that never seems to end. Its possible that it has touched a nerve or its just appealing to bored 16 year olds who have a steady diet of CSI and Law and Order: Special Victims Unit looking for a stronger fix.
It belongs to what is known as “torture porn” or the nicer “torture horror.” The genre was supposedly on its way out given the high profile summer flops, Hostel 2 and Captivity. The cultural mood had chilled rather quickly to the genre; however, the Saw series seems to say otherwise. Perhaps because the series injects a tone of ironic morality [I can’t write that without rolling my eyes] by having the killer “Jigsaw” picking people who have committed horrible acts or are not so nice people themselves, the violence Is mitigated for the audience, making it slightly easier or justified? I end that in a question mark, as I have no idea why this series is so popular and durable. I’m grasping for straws here. MY GOD, this is the 4th in the series and the marketing and advertising promised no new twists or plot revelations, the tagline was the dumb, “If it’s Halloween, it must be Saw.” So people showed up in droves for more of the same.
Now I’ve seen my fair share of flicks from this genre. I’ve sat through Hostel, the remakes of Texas Chainsaw Massacre and Hills Have Eyes, Wolf Creek, High Tension, Passion of the Christ and House of 1000 corpses. What strikes me is the cold hard cynical eye that has developed in the filmmaking process. I know these aren’t all technically torture porn but they’re part of the new wave of horror and are often lumped into the same category when media pundits talk about the disturbing violence found in modern horror.
In regards to the remakes, the originals that they were based on were extremely low budget and independently produced and financed. This gave them a power that perhaps they didn’t deserve or intend. The tone was a sort of punk DIY aesthetic that came across destructive, tasteless, and ripping at the fabric of society in a provocative and FUN way. The updated versions lack any of this humor and given the studio backing it loses all the aforementioned qualities and feels like corporate nilhism at its tackiest. Classy production values set to gruesome dismemberment. Truly anything will be green lit in the hopes of profit.
You’ll notice I put Passion of the Christ in there and for good reason. With 370 million in grosses in the US it stands as the most profitable torture porn pic of all time. Studio chiefs took note and saw that audiences had an incredible appetite and tolerance for onscreen violence and thus torture porn pics were given the go ahead making Passion also the grandfather of the movement. It predates all the films I’ve mentioned save House of 1000 corpses, having been released in February of 04. The first Saw was released the following October and perhaps in January 06 the genre reached its Apex with the success of Hostel. So yes, you can thank Jesus, in a way, for Saw 4.
My final plea is that you can justify anything if you have enough style and talent. I am not particularly squeamish and hate the standard cliché that so many people say, “I always think it’s scarier when they don’t show any violence.” Okay first of all those people are lying. They are the ones who rent Premonition and The Grudge 2 and drive 5 miles under the speed limit. I think you can argue that a key element to a horror film is a visceral reaction. You must be physically horrified or repulsed. Part of the appeal of the genre is shocking you out of your banal sedentary existence.
What would it take to shock an audience now? I think we’d have to go in the opposite direction to truly unsettle and upset. Perhaps characters getting naked and having sex on screen? A female character who after deliberation decides to have an abortion and continues on with her existence and she’s not a monster or destroyed from the experience? Characters flushing money down a toilet? Oh who am I kidding, we would NEVER see that.
Monday, October 29, 2007
36 years young today
Happy Birthday Winona! I was going to post on specific childhood memories associated with the various movies and roles she's done but I'm at work and lazy. I was trolling through imdb and there's a rather sweet/psychoic thread titled HAPPY BIRTHDAY darling from your TRUE FANS, that sends her birthday wishes from all her cute/crazy fans. Here's a sample poem
We ADORE you. And remember...
When you walk through a storm
Hold your head up high
And don't be afraid of the dark.
At the end of a storm
Is a golden sky
And the sweet, silver song of a lark.
Walk on, through the wind,
Walk on, through the rain,
Though your dreams be tossed and blown.
Walk on, walk on with hope in your heart,
And you'll never walk alone,
You'll never walk alone!
Winona!
Friday, October 26, 2007
Its Almost Halloween!
This video is pretty funny because there is more than just a kernel of truth. Displaying just how limited the option of women's costumes can be
Monday, October 22, 2007
NO MAN
So a few days ago I came home to this flyer on my door . Yes, Universal pictures is basically shutting down Echo Park for three days and requiring that we cannot park on our streets and our compensation is..... FREE TACOS! Never mind that the film will probably cost about 80 million and be a major tent pole pic starring Jim Carey. Never mind that this smacks mildly of racism [just give the Mexicans some tacos and they'll comply!] given the neighborhood. We have received what? A two week notice? Why wasn't this translated into Spanish? If it were shooting in Compton would the catering services provide colored greens and fried chicken? Egg rolls in Chinatown? Boy did they mess with the wrong building. We are now thanks to gentrification a group of white, liberal, over educated under employed mid twenties kids with something to prove. We won't stand for it!
Friday, October 19, 2007
Movie Theatres like Premium Cable?
Eight films on 500 plus screens are being released this weekend. It is a record that no theatre owner will be busting out the champagne for. What's that sound? Is it the painful cries of the slowly dying movie theatre experience? What huge summer blockbuster smash that lowered the bar for what passes as mainstream entertainment was released this past Tuesday? If you guessed Transformers you are correct. But wait, wasn't that released in July? Wasn't that.... 3 MONTHS AGO? I thought only major box office flops were rushed to DVD right? Wrong. And with 8 films coming out this weekend it seems studios are expressing their disinterest in whether their film performs well or not. They certainly aren't taking the audience into consideration because I can bet that half these titles will be out of your local AMC before the middle of November hits. Is the theatrical release becoming as irrelevant as the Grammys? Is it now just pure decorum? The hours'dourves to the main course of revenue from DVD sales/rentals, cable rights, and merchandise? I can sadly count MANY foreign and independent releases that DID NOT MAKE IT to LA or were screened for a week at best and then left that were available simultaneously on IN DEMAND. This means my parents who live in a small backwoods suburban town could watch Dans Paris and Private Property before I could as they live in a giant air conditioned house with 300 cable channels. Its these LITTLE things, these small priviledges of city life that you cling onto and fool yourself into thinking make you superior and validate your insanly high apartment living, traffic, and pollution. This is a reason I have also held out on Netflix for so long. I still rent from my local video store, which has an amazing selection I might add, solely to preserve a sense of community, geography and space. But this is disheartening. I might as well live in the middle of FUCKING Utah. I'm sure there'll be a Starbucks there.
Monday, October 15, 2007
Box Office Roundup
Tyler Perry's Why Did I Get Married? opened strongly at number one with 21.3 million. I have never seen any of Mr. Perry's films but perhaps I should. I am always interested in modern day "word of mouth" audience driven films. He also wears all hats, usually producing, directing, and acting. Not to mention that his first two films, the Medea vehicles, have as their main star a black christian drag queen. From what I gather these films tend to have an urban grit in dialogue and style with extremely blatant Christian, conservative moralizing. The kind of melodramas that if the cast were white would be so stale and tired that they wouldn't get the greenlight on the PAX network as a TV movie of the week. But since it is filtered through the black experience it is fresh and new.
Michael Clayton opened at number four, a disappointment. I had a chance to see it this weekend and it is a smart, well acted, and the key word ADULT thriller/drama so of course it's only natural that it underperformed. Interesting to note though that George Clooney is seen as an A list star whereas Tyler Perry is not. However, check the box office records and Tyler Perry is a much safer bet. Martin Lawrence and Eddie Murphy are also extremely bankable stars who still in consistently profitable low budget comedies. And I think a case could be made that WIll Smith is the most sure thing to ensue a box office hit. However from a media representation standpoint they are nowhere near the same level as say Brad Pitt [ who has a very spotty box office track record]. What exactly constitutes a mega watt, A list star? Being white certainly seems to help.
But don't feel too sorry for Mr. Perry. There is an informative NYT profile on him which contains these ... interesting tidbits,
"In my mind,” he said, “going to a clothing rack in the pursuit of happiness is a total distraction. For me, it’s disheartening. Black people, especially, have gotten so lost in it.”
It is surprising, then, to hear Mr. Perry boast about his Rolls-Royce and his five houses, including one in the Hollywood Hills and three in Atlanta, as well as an apartment in Midtown Manhattan. (“Can you imagine being in my position and not having real estate in New York?” Mr. Perry said. “That would be an idiot move.”) He is also building his dream house, a 30,000-square-foot French Provincial, in a prosperous Atlanta neighborhood.
Inspired by evangelists like T. D. Jakes, who preach that the devout shall prosper, Mr. Perry sees no conflict in advocating austerity but coveting fine things.
“There is a movement within the black church that teaches it’s not a sin to have money,” Dr. Neal said. “The thinking is that money is part of the blessings you receive because you have been a good Christian.”
And Mr. Perry continues to accumulate material blessings: he has already outgrown the 75,000-square-foot studio he bought less than two years ago, and intends early next year to expand into the former world headquarters of Delta Air Lines in Atlanta, in a 30-acre campus. There he plans to continue filming new projects including “Meet the Browns,” starring Angela Bassett as a woman who leaves the Chicago projects to move in with her family in the South.
And Mr. Perry dreams of creating a TV network with cartoons, news broadcasts, comedy shows and dramatic series that “will reinforce positive good messages.”
And beyond all that? “Someday I’d like to own my own island,” Mr. Perry said."
Good luck with that Tyler! I can't get too mad at him though after watching him stick up for Janet in a recent CW31 interview. Nasty hosts of some dumb innocuous Sacramento morning program decide to start berating Janet about her career ending superbowl incident. It comes about two minutes in and this is after the smug condescending hosts accuse Mr. Perry of ripping off The Big Chill. It is out of left field and unfair to Janet considering it is not at all relevant to why they are on the morning show and happened THREE YEARS AGO. She has had to discuss and apologize for that "wardrobe malfunction" more times than she would probably care to and Tyler Perry actually steps in and doesn't let them bully her. And speaking of stepping in for defense, if memory serves me correctly, Justin Timberlake was the man who ripped it off. Now call me crazy but if he is the sexy, womanizing lothario that he claims to be. why didn't he step up, be a man and say, "yeah I ripped it off and its a damn shame you all only got to see one boob. Leave her alone, I was involved too" Instead he ran away with his tail tucked between his legs, notoriously silent as she was crucified by the media and the FCC.
UPDATE: from imdb.com
"Tyler's message of family values and personal redemption speaks very strongly to people who are not frequent moviegoers." (Perry's films appeal mostly to older black churchgoers; almost 90 percent of Married's ticket buyers were black.) Lionsgate distribution chief Tom Ortenberg.
90%! that's crazy!
Michael Clayton opened at number four, a disappointment. I had a chance to see it this weekend and it is a smart, well acted, and the key word ADULT thriller/drama so of course it's only natural that it underperformed. Interesting to note though that George Clooney is seen as an A list star whereas Tyler Perry is not. However, check the box office records and Tyler Perry is a much safer bet. Martin Lawrence and Eddie Murphy are also extremely bankable stars who still in consistently profitable low budget comedies. And I think a case could be made that WIll Smith is the most sure thing to ensue a box office hit. However from a media representation standpoint they are nowhere near the same level as say Brad Pitt [ who has a very spotty box office track record]. What exactly constitutes a mega watt, A list star? Being white certainly seems to help.
But don't feel too sorry for Mr. Perry. There is an informative NYT profile on him which contains these ... interesting tidbits,
"In my mind,” he said, “going to a clothing rack in the pursuit of happiness is a total distraction. For me, it’s disheartening. Black people, especially, have gotten so lost in it.”
It is surprising, then, to hear Mr. Perry boast about his Rolls-Royce and his five houses, including one in the Hollywood Hills and three in Atlanta, as well as an apartment in Midtown Manhattan. (“Can you imagine being in my position and not having real estate in New York?” Mr. Perry said. “That would be an idiot move.”) He is also building his dream house, a 30,000-square-foot French Provincial, in a prosperous Atlanta neighborhood.
Inspired by evangelists like T. D. Jakes, who preach that the devout shall prosper, Mr. Perry sees no conflict in advocating austerity but coveting fine things.
“There is a movement within the black church that teaches it’s not a sin to have money,” Dr. Neal said. “The thinking is that money is part of the blessings you receive because you have been a good Christian.”
And Mr. Perry continues to accumulate material blessings: he has already outgrown the 75,000-square-foot studio he bought less than two years ago, and intends early next year to expand into the former world headquarters of Delta Air Lines in Atlanta, in a 30-acre campus. There he plans to continue filming new projects including “Meet the Browns,” starring Angela Bassett as a woman who leaves the Chicago projects to move in with her family in the South.
And Mr. Perry dreams of creating a TV network with cartoons, news broadcasts, comedy shows and dramatic series that “will reinforce positive good messages.”
And beyond all that? “Someday I’d like to own my own island,” Mr. Perry said."
Good luck with that Tyler! I can't get too mad at him though after watching him stick up for Janet in a recent CW31 interview. Nasty hosts of some dumb innocuous Sacramento morning program decide to start berating Janet about her career ending superbowl incident. It comes about two minutes in and this is after the smug condescending hosts accuse Mr. Perry of ripping off The Big Chill. It is out of left field and unfair to Janet considering it is not at all relevant to why they are on the morning show and happened THREE YEARS AGO. She has had to discuss and apologize for that "wardrobe malfunction" more times than she would probably care to and Tyler Perry actually steps in and doesn't let them bully her. And speaking of stepping in for defense, if memory serves me correctly, Justin Timberlake was the man who ripped it off. Now call me crazy but if he is the sexy, womanizing lothario that he claims to be. why didn't he step up, be a man and say, "yeah I ripped it off and its a damn shame you all only got to see one boob. Leave her alone, I was involved too" Instead he ran away with his tail tucked between his legs, notoriously silent as she was crucified by the media and the FCC.
UPDATE: from imdb.com
"Tyler's message of family values and personal redemption speaks very strongly to people who are not frequent moviegoers." (Perry's films appeal mostly to older black churchgoers; almost 90 percent of Married's ticket buyers were black.) Lionsgate distribution chief Tom Ortenberg.
90%! that's crazy!
Thursday, October 11, 2007
The Greatest Music Video in the History of All Time
"Lets All Chant" is one of my all time favorite disco jams that is criminally ignored and underrated. It was put to useful effect in, "The Eyes of Laura Mars" and Whit Stillman had the good sense to include it in the soundtrack to his film, "Last Days of Disco" but otherwise its basically a forgotten classic. When I youtubed the video I went in with low expectations. Rarely does a music video so perfectly represent or capture the spirit of songs you hold dear. To me this song is thick with gothic atmosphere and irresistable dance beats. The kind of thing that makes you go ape shit on the dance floor. I took a deep sigh and clicked play. Even with the poor video and audio quality the brilliance of the video shone through. I want to live, dance, thrive, and die in this neon stark world of beautiful woman dressed in tailor made mens suits. Now the oboe solo does drag a little bit but it serves a purpose. You think the song is slowly winding down but then BAM! you're sucker-punched with a triumphant final dance break accompanied by a visual image of a windex blue 70's bikini goddess spread eagle.
UPDATE: I cannot stop watching this video. Every time I watch I feel as if I am seizuring with divine pop rapture. Its so good that I am no longer able to be productive [I'm at work]
UPDATE: I cannot stop watching this video. Every time I watch I feel as if I am seizuring with divine pop rapture. Its so good that I am no longer able to be productive [I'm at work]
Wednesday, October 10, 2007
Goodbye Desert Rose
My Wednesday morning has totally been ruined. I've been crying into my chamomile tea all morning [and last night when Billy Joel's Piano Man came on the radio in my car.... I might have problems] But anyway, Flower Whiskers, the regal matriarch of Meerkat Mannor passed last week and I just found out today. Apparently it was a Cobra, it gets worse. From the NYT, "Though the death had been foretold in advertisements, which announced an impending tragedy that would change things forever, few seemed prepared for the bloody eventuality of Flower’s end, her tiny head swollen from infection, the melancholy music that accompanied her never-to-be-resumed breaths. Flower had fallen protecting her cubs." Following is a fan tribute
Tuesday, October 9, 2007
Saturday, October 6, 2007
Vive la France!
I think there is a general consensus that we are in the midst of a male acting crisis. No one from "our" generation [those born say post 75] has truly broken out and is revolutionizing the silver screen. You could argue there has always been a male acting crisis. In general men are often less interesting to watch on screen than women thanks to societal norms that dictate men can't really appear too vulnerable or weak onscreen. We get freaked out and uncomfortable. Passivity is just so euro faggy and betrays the American male spirit. So we often get performances that are stoic, constipated, and restrained. THINK Kevin Costner who in almost any of his films whether he is a serial killer, betrayed husband or terminally ill always gives this perplexed, confused look as if he can't find his car keys. Things I fear are about to get worse. With the baby boomer generation, who are the largest portion of the population and possibly the greediest and most self involved, we might never get a chance to fill the screen. The actors from this era seem to be digging their heels in refusing to evacuate the leading man position. We are still being asked to take Bruce Willis and Harrison Ford as legitimate action heros. Sylvester Stalone is in talks to revive the Rambo franchise and we all remember the atrocity that was Up Close and Personal which had a 107 year old Robert Redford romancing Michelle Phieffer. This all leads me to dystopian nightmares of erotic thrillers played out in convalescent homes.
DAMNIT, I want to see myself up on the silver screen, okay? We are in trouble. We are awash in a sea of Orlando Blooms [this generation's Mark Hamil] and Jake Gyllenhaals. Nice guys, cute, with noble intent but zero charisma and mediocre acting chops. Okay, okay there's always an exception to the rule, Ryan Gosling shows incredible promise and at this point seems incapable of giving an uninteresting performance. So what is my solution you ask? How do I turn this article from just being a complaint ridden rant into something positive, active, and hopeful? The answer is simple. We must look to where America has looked in the past when she was in trouble. France. Yes, France. There is a whole gaggle of young male actors bursting with energy, passion, and talent. It also helps that many of them are MEGA cute! My friend Arnold and I want to start a Tigerbeat Magazine but only feature art house European actors amidst panda stickers and neon pink hearts. Many of these boys need to come to the US pronto, brush up on their English skills and grace our screens. We need to mix it up, where's globalism when you need it?
I want to start with my personal favorite. Melvil Poupaud. Sigh, oh Melvil. He is currently in the NYT YSL Spread palling around with Stefano Pilati who says this of him, ‘‘There is something real and imperfect about him — he was able to wear the collection effortlessly. In his films, Melvil plays complicated characters — beautiful, conflicted and ultimately tragic. There is a richness and depth to his evocation on screen that resonates with the ideas behind the collection and my work in general at Yves Saint Laurent." Tasty! See LeTemps qui rest, Broken English, Un homme perdu
Next is Roman Duras who is perhaps my favorite young screen male presence. I recommend The Beat That My Heart Skipped, Russian Dolls, and Dans Paris. A leading man if I ever saw one.
Big up to Louis Garrel for doing a lot of interesting, varied, challenging work. He also likes to get fully naked a lot, just putting that out there. See Ma Mere, Regular Lover, Love Songs
So French!
Perhaps the most "Hollywood" of the lot is Gaspard Ulliel who brings a unique intensity and physicality to his roles. Sadly people across the pond took note and cast him in Hannibal Rising. Oops! However see Strayed, The Last Day, and A Very Long Engagement for less embarrassing fare
Jeremie Renier perhaps has the most impressive list of films under his belt having worked with a lot of big names. He often gives understated, ego-less performances. See The Promise, Criminal Lovers, The Pornographer, The Child, Private Property
DAMNIT, I want to see myself up on the silver screen, okay? We are in trouble. We are awash in a sea of Orlando Blooms [this generation's Mark Hamil] and Jake Gyllenhaals. Nice guys, cute, with noble intent but zero charisma and mediocre acting chops. Okay, okay there's always an exception to the rule, Ryan Gosling shows incredible promise and at this point seems incapable of giving an uninteresting performance. So what is my solution you ask? How do I turn this article from just being a complaint ridden rant into something positive, active, and hopeful? The answer is simple. We must look to where America has looked in the past when she was in trouble. France. Yes, France. There is a whole gaggle of young male actors bursting with energy, passion, and talent. It also helps that many of them are MEGA cute! My friend Arnold and I want to start a Tigerbeat Magazine but only feature art house European actors amidst panda stickers and neon pink hearts. Many of these boys need to come to the US pronto, brush up on their English skills and grace our screens. We need to mix it up, where's globalism when you need it?
I want to start with my personal favorite. Melvil Poupaud. Sigh, oh Melvil. He is currently in the NYT YSL Spread palling around with Stefano Pilati who says this of him, ‘‘There is something real and imperfect about him — he was able to wear the collection effortlessly. In his films, Melvil plays complicated characters — beautiful, conflicted and ultimately tragic. There is a richness and depth to his evocation on screen that resonates with the ideas behind the collection and my work in general at Yves Saint Laurent." Tasty! See LeTemps qui rest, Broken English, Un homme perdu
Next is Roman Duras who is perhaps my favorite young screen male presence. I recommend The Beat That My Heart Skipped, Russian Dolls, and Dans Paris. A leading man if I ever saw one.
Big up to Louis Garrel for doing a lot of interesting, varied, challenging work. He also likes to get fully naked a lot, just putting that out there. See Ma Mere, Regular Lover, Love Songs
So French!
Perhaps the most "Hollywood" of the lot is Gaspard Ulliel who brings a unique intensity and physicality to his roles. Sadly people across the pond took note and cast him in Hannibal Rising. Oops! However see Strayed, The Last Day, and A Very Long Engagement for less embarrassing fare
Jeremie Renier perhaps has the most impressive list of films under his belt having worked with a lot of big names. He often gives understated, ego-less performances. See The Promise, Criminal Lovers, The Pornographer, The Child, Private Property
Monday, October 1, 2007
Thursday, September 27, 2007
Sleepaway Camp
Okay so apparently there is a Sleepaway Camp reunion movie in the works with the writer/director Robert Hiltzik of the original classic. I know we're all excited, what is Sleepaway Camp you ask? FOR SHAME! One of the all time B movie greats of the 1980's. With a disturbingly young cast and bizarre queer subtexts that become VERY explicit in the shocking twist ending which I am providing for your viewing pleasure, it is a must for anyone into camp/cult films. The plot really is secondary, a tragic boating accident leaves a newly orphaned Angela, who looks a lot like Sarah Silverman, with her aunt Martha and cousin Ricky, and off to camp the kids go, where bad things start to happen. Judy as the main bad girl truly makes this film for me,and her demise is tragic, a fate so terrible that the filmmakers don't have the guts to show the aftermath. Yes, a curling iron to the crotch is never a pleasant experience R.I.P Judy, R.I.P. This is from a time when horror was an odd creature, the film is clearly made for 12 year olds, much in the way that Deadly Friend was too, but contains fairly graphic, albeit silly, death scenes and strings of profanity designed to make the young ones giggle. If this were made today, no doubt it would be neutered, given a PG-13 rating, with bland yet classy production values, and a cast from One Tree Hill.
Following the events of Return to Sleepaway Camp, "Reunion" focuses on the long-awaited return of Aunt Martha as well as Ricky and Angela Baker. I can't wait!
Following the events of Return to Sleepaway Camp, "Reunion" focuses on the long-awaited return of Aunt Martha as well as Ricky and Angela Baker. I can't wait!
Monday, September 10, 2007
Friday, September 7, 2007
Is There Life After Birth?
"More generally, my obsessiveness about books, songs, and films was a beard about growing up, which I didn't want to catch myself doing. I wanted it behind me while it was ahead of me. This exertion of will was also an act of sensory deprivation, of self abnegation. The two- will and deprivation- were weirdly compatible. I tried to obliterate my teenage years in movie theaters because my teenage years embarrassed and saddened me. Between double features of French films, between putting one book down and picking up the next , I'd glance at my wristwatch to see if I was in my twenties yet."
-Jonathan Lethem
The Disappointment Artist
-Jonathan Lethem
The Disappointment Artist
Thursday, September 6, 2007
Apple and Starbucks like PB and J
From IMDB
In what Starbucks founder and Chairman Howard Schultz described as a "transformation" of the marketplace for digital entertainment, thousands of recordings of music and movies will soon be able to be purchased and downloaded at nearly 6,000 Starbucks coffee shops via Apple's iTunes Music Store and eventually in all 14,000 Starbucks shops worldwide. Some analysts predicted that the deal between Apple and Starbucks could mark the end of brick-and-mortar music/video stores if not the CD and DVD themselves. During an Apple presentation in San Francisco to announce the release of new video-capable iPods, Schultz said, "It's rare a physical retailer can transform the marketplace. ... This is going to be a transformation." Analysts predicted that Starbucks will likely install small terabyte-size wireless servers in its shops, enabling customers to download a movie during the time they wait for their coffee instead of the several hours it often takes to do so over the Internet.
In what Starbucks founder and Chairman Howard Schultz described as a "transformation" of the marketplace for digital entertainment, thousands of recordings of music and movies will soon be able to be purchased and downloaded at nearly 6,000 Starbucks coffee shops via Apple's iTunes Music Store and eventually in all 14,000 Starbucks shops worldwide. Some analysts predicted that the deal between Apple and Starbucks could mark the end of brick-and-mortar music/video stores if not the CD and DVD themselves. During an Apple presentation in San Francisco to announce the release of new video-capable iPods, Schultz said, "It's rare a physical retailer can transform the marketplace. ... This is going to be a transformation." Analysts predicted that Starbucks will likely install small terabyte-size wireless servers in its shops, enabling customers to download a movie during the time they wait for their coffee instead of the several hours it often takes to do so over the Internet.
Film Future
Various media outlets are reporting on the record breaking summer of 2007 at the Box Office. The magical 4 billion dollar mark was crossed for the first time ever during the summer window period. Most of these stories often point out that the top grossing pics were largely threequels which could spell trouble for the future of Hollywood given the fact that if there are no originals today there can't be a threequel a few years from now. What interests and disturbs me more is the business model of a typical hollywood blockbuster.
Let's look at the number one film of the summer Spider Man 3 with roughly 336.5 million dollars. This does not surprise or upset me. The first two films were enormously popular and more importantly well liked. It was the first film of the summer, opening on May 4th so there were a lot of people eager to catch the first blockbuster that came their way. Even if it is the weakest of the series, it makes sense. Spider man 3 carried a production budget of 260 million dollars. Let me repeat that, 260 million dollars. This is NOT the most expensive film of the summer [Pirates 3 carries that honor] and does NOT include the costs of a print and advertising campaign. For high profile pics of this nature an advertising/marketing campaign usually adds between 30 to 60 million dollars, sometimes more, sometimes less. So basically Spidey movie cost about 300 million [at the very least] to make and market. I'm sorry, perhaps shove down our throats is a better word than market. And why shouldn't they, given the cost of the film. It opened to a record breaking 151 million in its first weekend. Lets pause and think about that. In three days it made basically half of its entire revenue. More and more blockbusters are frontloaded. Opening on the largest number of screens possible often with around the clock showtimes in hopes of breaking some sort of record which would create positive media buzz. This often means a movie is instantly deemed a hit or failure based off its first weekend. It also means that whether or not the film is any good is irrelevant because they are making all of their money during the first week. Word of mouth seems to be a thing of the past.
So for all these media pundits proclaiming that this summer's breakthrough box office is a triumph of quality storytelling, it might be more correct to say a triumph of advertising. If they didn't get you to sit in the theatre during the first three days, they probably didn't catch you.
So back to the Spider Man 3 budget. According to Box Office Mojo, a studio keeps roughly 55% of a movie's gross, the other 45 goes to the theatre owners. So you basically have to double the film's production costs in order to see what figure would make a movie break even. Spider Man 3 would need to gross 600 million in theaters to "break even". Given the worldwide box office take of 890 million, it achieved this. In fact, this film will be an enormous cash cow for Sony as ancillary markets such as DVD, toys, TV rights, rentals, fast food promotions, etc are not taken into account. But what exactly goes into making sure films with dangerously high budgets are monster hits?
One could argue that with such high budgets, the soul of a film must be compromised. Studio execs have to be risk averse and above all protect and represent the interests of their shareholders, not an audience member. This means the higher the budget goes the less a director will be trusted or allowed to take chances. If a film costs 200 million dollars then it better appeal to the largest number of people possible. This is where cynical studio bosses often decide to appeal to the worst and most base instincts of an audience member. They view us as stupid and always go for the cheapest and easiest route. A film will often be screened at 1000 malls, test audienced to death so that when it is released it is a desperate collage of all highs and peaks, no lows. Is it me or do many of these large blockbuster films feel less like a movie and more like brand extension. Often choppy, incoherent, and with flat storytelling and blatant product placement it is less like a movie and more like an informercial, selling nothing except the experience of the movie itself.
Aside from the mind blowing amounts of money that are spent and made on studio tent pole pictures, and the implications in an American blockbuster that costs over 300 million or future releases that will need to generate a billion dollars in revenues to be determined successful, what disturbs me is the trickle down effect that has taken place in the film industry. This sink or swim opening weekend mentality has weaved its way down to the independent, adult oriented, and foreign film markets. If a film doesn't do gangbusters business that first weekend [think Miranda July] then its on DVD within two months. Call me old fashioned or a film purist, but my preferred mode of seeing a film I am interested in, is on the big screen. Granted, I'm sure Shrek 3 will play beautifully in the backseat of a Honda Odyssey. If your film is complex, difficult, or odd; that equals hard to market which spells box office poison. Quality and entertainment seem to be less of a factor of ensuing a box office hit.
Now I'm not trying to say that high profile blockbusters were any better or worse ten years ago. Looking back ten years ago is quite telling and puts things in swift perspective. Men In Black, Air Force One and Liar Liar are no more intelligent or better than their respective counterpart positions in the top ten this year. However, even bad movies at least felt like movies and not a barrage of images pasted together by a committee of disinterested business men. Interestingly enough, 1997 was the year of Titanic. Titanic as we all know is the highest grossing film of all time, both domestically and internationally. At the time of its release, it was also the most expensive film ever made, carrying a reported budget of 200 million. But perhaps this is where my lament becomes more clear. Titanic was number one for 15 consecutive weeks and opened to a strong but not stellar 28 million back in December of 1997. It was allowed time to breathe and grow which films simply cannot do today. The longest any film was able to stay number one over this summer was two weeks.
So this whole article has been a giant smokescreen. It really boils down to the fact that the window between theatrical and home viewing release is ever shrinking and it will only be a matter of time when all films are released simultaneously or in my darkest Orwellian nightmares, only very expensive studio produced fare will make to big screens with everything else only available on your ipod or VOD.
all facts and figures from Box Office Mojo
Let's look at the number one film of the summer Spider Man 3 with roughly 336.5 million dollars. This does not surprise or upset me. The first two films were enormously popular and more importantly well liked. It was the first film of the summer, opening on May 4th so there were a lot of people eager to catch the first blockbuster that came their way. Even if it is the weakest of the series, it makes sense. Spider man 3 carried a production budget of 260 million dollars. Let me repeat that, 260 million dollars. This is NOT the most expensive film of the summer [Pirates 3 carries that honor] and does NOT include the costs of a print and advertising campaign. For high profile pics of this nature an advertising/marketing campaign usually adds between 30 to 60 million dollars, sometimes more, sometimes less. So basically Spidey movie cost about 300 million [at the very least] to make and market. I'm sorry, perhaps shove down our throats is a better word than market. And why shouldn't they, given the cost of the film. It opened to a record breaking 151 million in its first weekend. Lets pause and think about that. In three days it made basically half of its entire revenue. More and more blockbusters are frontloaded. Opening on the largest number of screens possible often with around the clock showtimes in hopes of breaking some sort of record which would create positive media buzz. This often means a movie is instantly deemed a hit or failure based off its first weekend. It also means that whether or not the film is any good is irrelevant because they are making all of their money during the first week. Word of mouth seems to be a thing of the past.
So for all these media pundits proclaiming that this summer's breakthrough box office is a triumph of quality storytelling, it might be more correct to say a triumph of advertising. If they didn't get you to sit in the theatre during the first three days, they probably didn't catch you.
So back to the Spider Man 3 budget. According to Box Office Mojo, a studio keeps roughly 55% of a movie's gross, the other 45 goes to the theatre owners. So you basically have to double the film's production costs in order to see what figure would make a movie break even. Spider Man 3 would need to gross 600 million in theaters to "break even". Given the worldwide box office take of 890 million, it achieved this. In fact, this film will be an enormous cash cow for Sony as ancillary markets such as DVD, toys, TV rights, rentals, fast food promotions, etc are not taken into account. But what exactly goes into making sure films with dangerously high budgets are monster hits?
One could argue that with such high budgets, the soul of a film must be compromised. Studio execs have to be risk averse and above all protect and represent the interests of their shareholders, not an audience member. This means the higher the budget goes the less a director will be trusted or allowed to take chances. If a film costs 200 million dollars then it better appeal to the largest number of people possible. This is where cynical studio bosses often decide to appeal to the worst and most base instincts of an audience member. They view us as stupid and always go for the cheapest and easiest route. A film will often be screened at 1000 malls, test audienced to death so that when it is released it is a desperate collage of all highs and peaks, no lows. Is it me or do many of these large blockbuster films feel less like a movie and more like brand extension. Often choppy, incoherent, and with flat storytelling and blatant product placement it is less like a movie and more like an informercial, selling nothing except the experience of the movie itself.
Aside from the mind blowing amounts of money that are spent and made on studio tent pole pictures, and the implications in an American blockbuster that costs over 300 million or future releases that will need to generate a billion dollars in revenues to be determined successful, what disturbs me is the trickle down effect that has taken place in the film industry. This sink or swim opening weekend mentality has weaved its way down to the independent, adult oriented, and foreign film markets. If a film doesn't do gangbusters business that first weekend [think Miranda July] then its on DVD within two months. Call me old fashioned or a film purist, but my preferred mode of seeing a film I am interested in, is on the big screen. Granted, I'm sure Shrek 3 will play beautifully in the backseat of a Honda Odyssey. If your film is complex, difficult, or odd; that equals hard to market which spells box office poison. Quality and entertainment seem to be less of a factor of ensuing a box office hit.
Now I'm not trying to say that high profile blockbusters were any better or worse ten years ago. Looking back ten years ago is quite telling and puts things in swift perspective. Men In Black, Air Force One and Liar Liar are no more intelligent or better than their respective counterpart positions in the top ten this year. However, even bad movies at least felt like movies and not a barrage of images pasted together by a committee of disinterested business men. Interestingly enough, 1997 was the year of Titanic. Titanic as we all know is the highest grossing film of all time, both domestically and internationally. At the time of its release, it was also the most expensive film ever made, carrying a reported budget of 200 million. But perhaps this is where my lament becomes more clear. Titanic was number one for 15 consecutive weeks and opened to a strong but not stellar 28 million back in December of 1997. It was allowed time to breathe and grow which films simply cannot do today. The longest any film was able to stay number one over this summer was two weeks.
So this whole article has been a giant smokescreen. It really boils down to the fact that the window between theatrical and home viewing release is ever shrinking and it will only be a matter of time when all films are released simultaneously or in my darkest Orwellian nightmares, only very expensive studio produced fare will make to big screens with everything else only available on your ipod or VOD.
all facts and figures from Box Office Mojo
Friday, August 31, 2007
Actors Who Will Star in Anything
So Balls of Fury comes out this weekend which stars Christopher Walken as some sort of evil Asian MC for a ping pong tournament. Its a bit of stunt casting that feels REALLY stale. The general assumption is that there is something inherently funny in casting Christopher Walken in a comedy. However, he's done this SO many times that there is no tension or dichotomy in his role choice/star persona anymore. What baffles and fascinates me though is the incredible amount of good will he seems to generate from the general movie going population. He can star in basically anything and come out of the picture unscathed. Some of the normally career ending films he has stared in the past decade include; Joe Dirt, The Country Bears, Kangaroo Jack, Gigli, Envy, and The Stepford Wives.
However, do a youtube search of Christopher Walken and you'll get thousands of amateur impersonations which are basically loving, gentle, adulatory spoofs. In viewing his IMDB credits, he always has seemed to alternate somewhat between serious and light fare until around 1999 when he made a surprise cameo as The Headless Horseman in Sleepy Hollow. From there onward his film choices seem to take a serious nosedive. Paycheck seemed to become paramount over script, film premise, or personal integrity.
There are quite a few actors from his generation who seem to have followed a similar career path including his very famous co star from the very serious and intense The Deer Hunter, Mr. Robert Deniro. Perhaps he is an even more painful example. While Christopher Walken always seems to be in on the joke, Mr. Deniro does not. I don't think he realized the full camp potential or horribleness of Hide and Seek, where he went toe to toe with a then 10 year old Dakota Fanning. Some other recent career lowlights of Mr. Deniro include, Godsend, Showtime, The Adventures of Rocky and Bullwinkle, and Stardust in which I've read he plays a cross dressing outer space pirate. Interestingly enough, 1999 seems to be the turning point for Deniro as well. He starred in Analyze This, where he spoofed his own tough guy mafia persona and the film was both a critical and commercial success. He did in this post 99 period star in the very lucrative Meet The Parents and Meet The Fockers films but at what expense?
So basically these are two men who in the third act of their careers had a mini renaissance by making fun of themselves. What started as a surprising and clever play on audience expectations has devolved into sad clownish pantomime that feels desperate and cynical, with the only motivation/explanation being a paycheck.
Questions to ponder. At what point does an actor become an icon and immune to box office success or failure? Who are other examples? [Mr. Pacino I'm looking in your direction]
However, do a youtube search of Christopher Walken and you'll get thousands of amateur impersonations which are basically loving, gentle, adulatory spoofs. In viewing his IMDB credits, he always has seemed to alternate somewhat between serious and light fare until around 1999 when he made a surprise cameo as The Headless Horseman in Sleepy Hollow. From there onward his film choices seem to take a serious nosedive. Paycheck seemed to become paramount over script, film premise, or personal integrity.
There are quite a few actors from his generation who seem to have followed a similar career path including his very famous co star from the very serious and intense The Deer Hunter, Mr. Robert Deniro. Perhaps he is an even more painful example. While Christopher Walken always seems to be in on the joke, Mr. Deniro does not. I don't think he realized the full camp potential or horribleness of Hide and Seek, where he went toe to toe with a then 10 year old Dakota Fanning. Some other recent career lowlights of Mr. Deniro include, Godsend, Showtime, The Adventures of Rocky and Bullwinkle, and Stardust in which I've read he plays a cross dressing outer space pirate. Interestingly enough, 1999 seems to be the turning point for Deniro as well. He starred in Analyze This, where he spoofed his own tough guy mafia persona and the film was both a critical and commercial success. He did in this post 99 period star in the very lucrative Meet The Parents and Meet The Fockers films but at what expense?
So basically these are two men who in the third act of their careers had a mini renaissance by making fun of themselves. What started as a surprising and clever play on audience expectations has devolved into sad clownish pantomime that feels desperate and cynical, with the only motivation/explanation being a paycheck.
Questions to ponder. At what point does an actor become an icon and immune to box office success or failure? Who are other examples? [Mr. Pacino I'm looking in your direction]
Thursday, August 30, 2007
Wednesday, August 29, 2007
Clever
Clever- superficially skillful, witty, or original in character or construction; facile: It was an amusing, clever play, but of no lasting value.
Tuesday, August 28, 2007
Song of Summer
From Jay Z's opening declaration, "Rhianna, good girl gone bad!" (is there anywhere else they can go?) to the closing refrain "Come into me" which the video illustrates, this has been the song of summer. I myself am a fan. The lyrics are so simple and vacuous they seem to hint at greater depths. Sadness also seems to creep into the vocal delivery of the song regardless if it is intentional or not, its there, at least for me anyway. Everyone goes on and on about the sad state of the music industry. Many claim its a fractured niche market driven mess on its last legs. So maybe I find monster size inescapable hits as comforting and reassuring in these uncertain times. You have a problem with that?
Friday, August 24, 2007
Vague Malaise
Some sociology theorists such as Jerry Mander see television programming as being deliberately designed to induce self-hatred, negative body image, and depression, with the advertising then being used to suggest the cure
They crack themselves up!
They crack themselves up!
Thursday, August 23, 2007
Dictionary.com
con·form·ist
1. a person who conforms, esp. unquestioningly, to the usual practices or standards of a group, society, etc.
2. (often initial capital letter) a person who conforms to the usages of an established church, esp. the Church of England.
–adjective
3. of or characterized by conforming, esp. in action or appearance
mo·ral·i·ty
1. conformity to the rules of right conduct; moral or virtuous conduct.
2. moral quality or character.
3. virtue in sexual matters; chastity.
4. a doctrine or system of morals.
5. moral instruction; a moral lesson, precept, discourse, or utteranc
eth·ics
1. (used with a singular or plural verb) a system of moral principles: the ethics of a culture.
2. the rules of conduct recognized in respect to a particular class of human actions or a particular group, culture, etc.: medical ethics; Christian ethics.
3. moral principles, as of an individual: His ethics forbade betrayal of a confidence.
4. (usually used with a singular verb) that branch of philosophy dealing with values relating to human conduct, with respect to the rightness and wrongness of certain actions and to the goodness and badness of the motives and ends of such actions.
passivity
noun
1. the trait of remaining inactive; a lack of initiative
2. submission to others or to outside influences
1. a person who conforms, esp. unquestioningly, to the usual practices or standards of a group, society, etc.
2. (often initial capital letter) a person who conforms to the usages of an established church, esp. the Church of England.
–adjective
3. of or characterized by conforming, esp. in action or appearance
mo·ral·i·ty
1. conformity to the rules of right conduct; moral or virtuous conduct.
2. moral quality or character.
3. virtue in sexual matters; chastity.
4. a doctrine or system of morals.
5. moral instruction; a moral lesson, precept, discourse, or utteranc
eth·ics
1. (used with a singular or plural verb) a system of moral principles: the ethics of a culture.
2. the rules of conduct recognized in respect to a particular class of human actions or a particular group, culture, etc.: medical ethics; Christian ethics.
3. moral principles, as of an individual: His ethics forbade betrayal of a confidence.
4. (usually used with a singular verb) that branch of philosophy dealing with values relating to human conduct, with respect to the rightness and wrongness of certain actions and to the goodness and badness of the motives and ends of such actions.
passivity
noun
1. the trait of remaining inactive; a lack of initiative
2. submission to others or to outside influences
Tuesday, August 21, 2007
American pill-popping has doubled
Sales of US painkillers, such as Vicodin and OxyContin, have exploded — up 90% between 1997 and 2005. Analysts say an aging population, aggressive pharmaceutical marketing, and less-tolerant attitudes toward pain explain the boom (CN)
I Drank This
Fruitopia is a fruit flavoured, non-carbonated drink introduced by The Coca-Cola Company in 1994 and targeted at teens and young adults.
According to New York Times business reports, it was invented as part of a push by Coca-Cola to capitalize on the success of Snapple and other flavored tea drinks. The most common flavor of this drink was "Strawberry Passion Awareness". This flavor was available at most drink fountains as well as McDonald's as Coca-Cola pushed this drink to market in many places. Fruitopia vending machines were also popular in schools and college campuses, in addition to, or as a replacement to soda. After Fruitopia was introduced in the United States, TIME magazine named it one of the Top 10 New Products of 1994. Much of the success of the drink is credited to famed beverage brew master, Steven A. Ricci, who was able to not only brew the recipe for the fruit drink, but create so many great tasting culminations. Steven A. Ricci left the Coca-Cola Co. in late 2000-early 2001, thus forcing Coca-Cola to discontinue the product without their heralded brew master.
Other flavors included The Grape Beyond, Tangerine Wavelength, Citrus Excursion, Fruit Integration, Pink Lemonade Euphoria, Lemonade Love & Hope, Raspberry Psychic Lemonade, and Beachside Blast. These flavors were available in the United States. A much wider array of flavors was available in the UK. In a drive to remake the brand and remarket it as more relevant to Generation X, Coca-Cola dropped several flavors in 1996 and added and renamed others.
Fruitopia's unusual commercials were quite interesting despite the simplicity of the product behind them. The commercials were animations, using images of fruit arrayed in brilliantly colored spinning kaleidoscope patterns, accompanied by idealistic aphorisms reminiscent of hippie poetry of the 1960s, such as might be found in advertisements which ran in underground press newspapers of the period. Background music on several of the ads was provided by The Muffs, Kate Bush, and the Cocteau Twins also contributed.
There is a beautiful person
living inside you!
Please share a Raspberry Psychic Lemonade
with him or her.
THANKS WIKIPEDIA!
According to New York Times business reports, it was invented as part of a push by Coca-Cola to capitalize on the success of Snapple and other flavored tea drinks. The most common flavor of this drink was "Strawberry Passion Awareness". This flavor was available at most drink fountains as well as McDonald's as Coca-Cola pushed this drink to market in many places. Fruitopia vending machines were also popular in schools and college campuses, in addition to, or as a replacement to soda. After Fruitopia was introduced in the United States, TIME magazine named it one of the Top 10 New Products of 1994. Much of the success of the drink is credited to famed beverage brew master, Steven A. Ricci, who was able to not only brew the recipe for the fruit drink, but create so many great tasting culminations. Steven A. Ricci left the Coca-Cola Co. in late 2000-early 2001, thus forcing Coca-Cola to discontinue the product without their heralded brew master.
Other flavors included The Grape Beyond, Tangerine Wavelength, Citrus Excursion, Fruit Integration, Pink Lemonade Euphoria, Lemonade Love & Hope, Raspberry Psychic Lemonade, and Beachside Blast. These flavors were available in the United States. A much wider array of flavors was available in the UK. In a drive to remake the brand and remarket it as more relevant to Generation X, Coca-Cola dropped several flavors in 1996 and added and renamed others.
Fruitopia's unusual commercials were quite interesting despite the simplicity of the product behind them. The commercials were animations, using images of fruit arrayed in brilliantly colored spinning kaleidoscope patterns, accompanied by idealistic aphorisms reminiscent of hippie poetry of the 1960s, such as might be found in advertisements which ran in underground press newspapers of the period. Background music on several of the ads was provided by The Muffs, Kate Bush, and the Cocteau Twins also contributed.
There is a beautiful person
living inside you!
Please share a Raspberry Psychic Lemonade
with him or her.
THANKS WIKIPEDIA!
Sunday, August 19, 2007
Its Official
I started a blog. I've decided to jump on the already painfully crowded bandwagon. What I lack in talent, wit, or style I make up for with ambition [look where it got Madonna!]. There will be no consistent theme or subject matter to this blog. It will be characterized by abnormal frequency and fluidity of verbal evacuations. So I've decided that if I could choose my god parents they would be Kim Gordon and Michael Stipe.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
