200 Movies, 1 Woman, 1 Blog

The Tree of Life, 2011, USA

I have  a great deal of respect for this film, but I did not enjoy it. Perhaps I’m wrong in this belief, but I feel that an enjoyable film is one that you savour, and not one that you endure. I felt every moment of this film, and I went away from it without feeling any emotional connection to it. I felt very disconnected from it.

Peter Travers claims that the film was “shot with a poet’s eye”. This is probably the most accurate description of the film I’ve read. The cinematography is truly beautiful. But, may I suggest that the film is like imagism poetry? This poetry makes heavy use of image and metaphor to tell its story. Unfortunately, imagism is far from my favourite genre of poetry. It’s a genre I appreciate, but not one that I actively seek out.

The Tree of Life consists of a series of images and moments, and the audience must put them together to determine the meaning of the film. Much of the story takes place in the 1950s. Mr. O’Brien (Brad Pitt) and Mrs. O’Brien (Jessica Chastain) are raising three young boys. Mr. O’Brien is strict and bitter, while Mrs. O’Brien is light and carefree. They’re representations of nature and grace, respectively, and the conflict between the two. In the present, Jack (Sean Penn) has been heavily affected by the way both his parents raised him, and by a significant incident that occurred as he was growing up. I got the sense that the entire film was from Jack’s perspective, and that the scenes in the 1950s were his memories.

There was a beautiful sequence about a half an hour into the film depicting the birth of the universe. This was one of my favourite sequences in the entire film. It was beautifully shot. My only thoughts were that it was awkwardly integrated into the film. As in…it wasn’t really integrated at all. But that was consistent throughout the entire film. It was very scattered, which is consistent with my idea that the film was from Jack’s perspective. Memories are not linear; instead, they are scattered. They’re not reliable indications of how events really occurred, because they are coloured through time and reflection.

Chastain received a nomination for her work in The Help, but I’d argue she was more worthy of a nomination for her work in The Tree of Life. She gave an excellent performance.  Pitt played a character very different from any I’ve seen him play before, and I appreciated his performance, as well.

I believe The Tree of Life is worth seeing, and that it is an important film. That being said, I do not ever want to see it again. I’m sure I would have found more enjoyment in the film if I had an emotional connection to it. I felt nothing as I watched it, but this seems like the type of film you either connect with or you don’t.

The Last Days, 1998, USA

I signed up for Netflix solely to watch this film, which is pretty significant. I’ve long wanted to watch this documentary about the Holocaust, because Steven Spielberg produced it.

The documentary looks at the experiences of several Hungarian Holocaust survivors. Hungarian Jews weren’t taken to the concentration camps until the last year of the war when it became clear that the Nazis were going to lose the war. Instead of focusing their resources on fighting the war, the Nazis attacked the Hungarian Jews and murdered them or sent them to the concentration camps.

The interviews with the survivors were so interesting. They spoke candidly about their lives before the Holocaust, and about how they survived in the concentration camps. Many of the subjects journeyed back to Europe in order to find some sort of closure. One visited the town she grew up in and discovered her childhood home. These journeys added another layer to the film. The horrific atrocities of the Holocaust are fairly well known, but we often forget about what the survivors experienced after they were liberated. Many never returned home, and many lost their entire families.

It was not an easy documentary to watch. There are photos and video from the concentration camps, and it was just awful to watch. But this footage was necessary, because it shows what the Holocaust was. Humanity needs to see this footage. As I was watching it, I thought about the fact that these people were someone’s son or daughter. These people were loved, and they were treated as if they were vermin. It was very difficult to think about. We must never forget that this happened, and we can never let this happen again.

I did have one minor beef: the film was in a letterbox format. I’m assuming it was in letterbox format because it’s an older film and it isn’t one that necessarily needs to be converted back to a widescreen format. Or, it’s possible that it was filmed in that format. It was just a bit odd to watch a letterbox film on my widescreen TV.

Watch this documentary. Hearing the stories of these survivors was such a privilege. It saddens me to think that, in a few years, there won’t be any more Holocaust survivors left. It’s important to hear these stories; to get them on film or paper, before it’s too late.

I’ve been reading Maus: A Survivor’s Tale by Art Spiegelman over the last week and a half. I’m midway through the second book, which featured a scene where the author is struggling with the popularity of his graphic novel. He adamantly does not want his book adapted into a film.

It really made me think. The entire series is enormously thought provoking, rich and beautiful, but it made me think about something different. The two graphic novels would not work as a film. For those who are unfamiliar with the series, Maus is a memoir about Spiegelman’s father, Vladek. Vladek survived the Holocaust, and was deeply affected by what he went through. The memoir takes place in the “present” (late 1970s/1980s) and during World War II. Instead of drawing the characters as humans, Spiegelman draws them as animals. Each character is assigned an animal based on their ethnicity, and every animal is drawn exactly the same. This is to portray the ethnic stereotypes that exist and just how ridiculous they are.

The only way the story could work without losing its message is to retain the animal characters. But, if it were to be made into a film, I imagine people would be annoyed that many of the characters looked the same; with only their clothes to differentiate them. Plus, many would misinterpret what Spiegelman was trying to say by making the characters animals in the first place. It was an attack on stereotypes, but many wouldn’t see it that way.

Adapting graphic novels into animated films can be problematic. Persepolis was adapted into a relatively good French film. I read the graphic novel prior to seeing the film and really loved it. But the film itself was essentially the graphic novel on film, with voice acting and movement. It was quite faithful to the novel, but it didn’t ultimately add to the story. If I want to experience the story again, I’d be better off picking up the book.

I believe Maus would run into the same issue. That’s why I’m glad the author has refused to allow it to be adapted into a film. It has no place on film. I’m looking forward to finishing the last half of the second book, and I highly recommend reading the series. Telling a story about the Holocaust as a graphic novel is unbelievably creative and genius. Seeing drawings of the terrible events that occurred emphasizes further the horrors Vladek and his wife lived through. Spiegelman won the Pulitzer Prize for the series – and he did for good reason. Maus was a huge creative risk, and his story telling is unbelievable.

Rise of the Planet of the Apes, 2011, USA

I skipped this movie in theatres because I’d written it off as a result of the terrible Planet of the Apes remake. This was a mistake. The movie was a fantastic “reboot” of the series.

Will (James Franco) is a researcher who has created a drug to help alzheimer’s patients. He is especially passionate about the research because his father (John Lithgow) has dementia. After his test goes disastrously wrong on a female chimp, the trial is shut down. Will finds out that the female chimp had been pregnant, and he takes in the infant chimp. The chimp, named Caesar (Andy Serkis) inherited the effects of the drug and displays extraordinary intelligence. Will, his father, and his primatologist girlfriend (Freida Pinto) raise Caesar, until he’s taken away and placed in a primate facility. There, Caesar’s growing intelligence allows him to take over as leader of the facility chimps.

The highlight of the film is Serkis. His acting was fantastic. Caesar had a fascinating mixture of human and chimp attributes. Serkis is very good at acting physically and he got the chimp movements down perfectly.

Almost all of the chimps were created using motion capture, as opposed to the make-up effects used in the previous Planet of the Apes movies. We’re not yet at a point where motion capture or any CGI can look completely realistic, but the visual effects in the movie were generally pretty good. I noticed that the scenes where the apes were indoors looked a bit better than the scenes where the apes were outdoors. I imagine that was because the indoor scenes were probably shot on a sound stage, where conditions were quite a bit more controlled. I’m also assuming the indoor shots could use a green screen, whereas outdoor shots wouldn’t have a green screen. There were a couple of outdoor shots that looked ridiculous, but it was pretty good, overall. I’m pretty amazed at how far we’ve come in terms of special effects on film.

What impressed me most about the story is that it’s not really an “apes versus humans” story. There are sympathetic characters who are apes and sympathetic characters who are humans. It would have been too easy to make one species the hero and one species the villain. I’m interested in seeing how the sequel examines the dynamics between the two species.

I saw the movie in HD, and I’d recommend you do the same if you can. I really wish I’d gone to see the movie in theatres! I’ll definitely be seeing the sequel in theatres.

I read The Walking Dead comic series over the past few weeks. There are currently seven published books and I flew right through them at a shockingly quick rate. It’s been years since I’ve read a book or series as quickly as I read those books. It really speaks to Robert Kirkman’s abilities as a storyteller.

My decision to read the comics came because I love the TV show, and I was curious to see how the two compared. I’d heard that the comics were far better, and they truly are. But I understand why the television show feels like a “watered down” version of the comics. A world where zombies have taken over is a dark one, and Kirkman is very “realistic”. There were many scenes that I had difficulty reading because they were so horrifying. It was unbearable to imagine what was going on in my head. These are not scenes that can be shown on television – even on a cable network.

His world is hell. There are numerous moral conundrums presented throughout the course of the series that forced me to pause and think about how I would react in the same situation. I was shocked to find myself empathizing with some of the terrible actions characters made over the course of the story. Does killing make you a bad person – even if it is done for a “good” reason? How do you make peace with an action that’s necessary, but truly revolting? And what length will you go to in order to stay alive?

It’s easy to empathize with the actions of a character – even if the actions are morally repugnant, when one knows that they will never be in the same situation. I’m pretty sure there won’t be a zombie apocalypse in my future (but if there is, I have a pathetically detailed plan in place).

The magic of The Walking Dead is that you’re made to feel like you’re in this world. Characters are brutally killed off without reluctance. In many cases, they were characters that the audience had become emotionally invested in. But we still become attached to them, despite the fact that we know that nobody is safe. One book in particular made me cry during the entire first half. I felt ridiculous as I stopped to blow my nose and wipe my eyes, because I was crying over a comic about the zombie apocalypse. But when I really thought about it, I realize that, while it takes place during the zombie apocalypse, it’s more a story about humanity. What do we do to survive? What lines will we cross? How do we deal with the realities of crossing lines that we never thought we’d cross?

I felt like the characters in the comic were far more powerful than they are in the TV series. They’re darker, and better fleshed out. The TV series is still relatively young, so there is still time to develop the characters. Right now they’re relatively simplistic, whereas the characters in the comics were rich, complex and dark.
I was totally blown away by all seven books. I wish I hadn’t gone through them so quickly, because now I’ll have to wait until October or so for book eight. Each book took about two days to read – and I was pacing myself at that rate. I feel like I’m in withdrawal, and that feeling probably won’t go away until the TV show begins again in February.

I highly recommend the series if you’re interested in comic books or stories about the crumbling of human society.

Last Train Home, 2009, Canada/China/UK

This was a beautifully made, thought-provoking documentary.  It looks at the migrant workers in China.  There are over 135 migrant workers in China, and these workers only return home to see their families once a year: During Chinese New Year.

The film is not narrated and follows the lives of a single family.  The parents are both migrant workers, and they have two children who have been raised by their grandparents.  Their daughter, Qin, resents her parents for being so absent in her life.  The parents work very hard and do not like being away from their children, but they must work in a factory in order to support their family.

As I watched these two people sew day in and day out at a factory, I thought about my own shopping habits.  The clothes that I buy have most likely been sewed by migrant workers.  The other day, my mom repaired a knit sweater of mine that had a hole in it.  It was a new sweater, and I was really annoyed that it had developed a hole so quickly.  Mom noticed that the sleeve that developed the hole was poorly knitted compared to the other sleeve.  I didn’t think much of it at the time.

But, now, I can’t stop thinking about it.  Why was that sleeve poorly knitted?  Was the person who knitted it a new worker?  Or had they received some bad news that distracted them?  It made me feel very lucky.  I can afford to buy a new sweater if I need to, but the person who made it probably wouldn’t be able to replace a sweater as quickly as I can.

I’ve known about the factories in China for years, but this documentary really made me face the realities of my lifestyle.  I try really hard to buy cosmetics and skin care products that are cruelty free (especially since I spend a lot of money on bath and skin products!), but many of my other purchases are made in Chinese factories.  Is it possible to avoid it nowadays?  The sad thing is that I doubt it is possible to only buy locally produced products because most, if not all electronics are built in Asia.  The best we can do is research the conditions in factories that produce our favourite products to ensure that their workers are treated with respect.

The other day I blogged about how I make most of my entertainment purchases off of Amazon because of the price of local retailers.  If I can buy the exact same product for considerably cheaper, I will.  Would I be willing to pay more for goods manufactured in factories where workers received fair pay, benefits and time off?  I make most of my skin care purchases at LUSH or The Body Shop, and those products are manufactured in North America or the UK.  They’re slightly more expensive, but they’re also better products.  But, most importantly: I believe it’s important to support ethical companies.  I’d like to think I’d be more willing to give my money to an electronics or clothing company that gave their workers a fair wage.  I know many people would not do the same.  As a society, we’re accustomed to the prices we’re currently paying, and we expect products to be instantly available.  Overseas factory labour is not going to go away anytime soon.  China has developed itself as an industrial power because of these factories.  People are willing to work in these factories, and Western companies need to take initiative and insist that the people who make their products receive a living wage.

This documentary was amazing.  It is available on Apple TV, so please rent it.  It will make you think about the social impact North America’s purchasing habits have on individuals in China.

I’m the sort of person who generally likes to support local stores…to a point, anyway. I’m certainly fine with paying a bit more to support a local business, but when is the mark-up too much?

I discovered what my limit was last month. I’ve been reading through The Walking Dead comic series by purchasing the books. There are currently seven books in total, and since there were so many, I decided I wanted to get the best price. McNally Robinson had them for $34.99, which is pretty pricy in my mind.

Amazon has each edition for roughly $23.50; a difference of close to $12. So, naturally, I’ve purchased most of them through Amazon. I did actually purchase one of them from McNally Robinson using $12 I had left on my gift card. With tax, it still came out to be about $25, so I didn’t really save any money by buying it using my gift card. The $12 difference is consistent between McNally Robinson and Amazon, because I did purchase another book using my giftcard that was $12 more than it was on Amazon.

It’s really a shame. As a teenager, I loved going through bookstores and finding interesting books. I’d rarely go in with the intention of buying any particular title – instead I’d browse and see what I could find. Those days have all but ended, and, sadly, Amazon holds much of the blame. Because Amazon does not have a storefront to maintain, and has the ability to hold a massive amount of stock, they can sell products for a lower price. The fact that they’re so popular also helps keep the prices low. Why charge a whole lot for a DVD when you know thousands of copies will be sold a day?

My entertainment habits have changed. Instead of going to the local bookstore to browse, I buy books from Amazon based on word of mouth. It’s rare for me to buy a DVD in store, because it’s so much more convenient to buy them online.

I’ve never had a negative experience from Amazon itself. I have had problems with some Amazon third party sellers who have failed to deliver textbooks on time or cancelled my order without giving me a reason why. For this reason, I’m not sure if I’ll ever buy from a third party seller again. But I’ve never had a late order from Amazon itself. I always pick their free shipping, and while they claim it can take three to five business days to process the order and an additional two to six to deliver it, I usually receive my order in about three business days. My order is almost always shipped the next day, as well.

McNally Robinson is a company that is struggling, and I don’t want to see it disappear. They do wonderful things for authors: Many authors launch their books there and do book signings. Without McNally Robinson, local authors would have a more difficult time selling their books. Amazon will never be able to support Manitoba authors in that way. I would like to shop more at McNally Robinson, which is why I am asking them to find a way to lower their prices…just a little bit. I would have paid $27 or $28 for The Walking Dead books at McNally Robinson. But I will not pay 33 per cent more for any product.

A theatre is being renovated here in Winnipeg, and once the renovations are complete, patrons will be able to buy alcohol. Not every screen will be licensed, and presumably the licensed theatres will only be available to those who are 18 or older.

I’m generally in favour of this, but there are a few concerns. There is a certain demographic that tends to become very rowdy when they’re inebriated, and it’s hard enough to keep theatre patrons quiet as it is. I wouldn’t want to be watching a movie with a rowdy, obnoxious drunk in front of me. But I don’t think it will be much of an issue. In nearly all cases, I would think that people would sooner choose to drink to excess at a bar or sporting event. Being drunk in an environment where you’re expected to be silent can’t be fun. I imagine the primary demographic will be mature, professional individuals who simply want to enjoy a drink or two while they watch a movie. I’d certainly purchase a drink to enjoy while I see a movie.

In order to limit the risk of “buffoonery”, I can’t help but wonder if the theatre will close down the bar once a screening starts. I think it’d be wise to do that, personally. That way, you wouldn’t be getting drunk people leaving the theatre (and disrupting others) in order to get another drink. If there are only two or three licensed screens, it would be fairly easy to time the screenings so they’re close together; allowing people to buy drinks before their movie starts.

Price

I can’t imagine how much a drink would cost at a theatre. As it is, prices are badly inflated. I pay over $10 for a small popcorn and a regular Coke at the theatre. If an alcoholic drink is double the cost of a regular Coke, then you’d be paying about $8 for a drink. That’s pretty ridiculous! It would be very expensive to drink to excess at a theatre, which is another reason why I think it is more likely the demographic will be skewed towards more casual drinkers.

Dinner and a movie

I’d be more interested to see a theatre here in Winnipeg offer quality meals that can be enjoyed during a movie. Such a theatre could also be licensed, and it could cater to an adult demographic. As much as I love popcorn when I go to the movies, it’s not really a suitable dinner! I’d love to be able to enjoy a delicious meal in front of the big screen.

How do licensed theatres work near you, if there is one?

Fright Night, 2011, USA/India

I have to admit that I’ve never seen the original Fright Night, so I can’t compare the two movies.  But on its own merit, Fright Night is a good movie.  It’s very funny, lots of fun, and only a little scary.

Charley (Anton Yelchin) is a high school student who is desperately trying to fit in now that he’s dating the attractive and popular Amy (Imogen Poots).  Because of this, he’s abandoned his childhood best friend, Ed (Christopher Mintz-Plasse), who has been spying on Charley’s neighbor, Jerry (Colin Farrell).  When Ed reveals that Jerry is a vampire, Charley seeks the help of Peter Vincent (David Tennant) a well-known vampire expert and Las Vegas performer.

Tenant and Farrell were awesome.  Farrell was charming and strangely unsettling as Jerry.  Tenant really stole the show, though.  His part wasn’t particularly big, but he was excellent in every scene he was in.  He was delightfully over-the-top.  It’s a shame his part wasn’t larger.  Yelchin did a good job, as well, but his character wasn’t particularly likable.  I got the sense that having a slightly unlikable protagonist was intentional.  I can appreciate a character that is flawed in some ways and Charley was a bit of a jerk – especially at the beginning of the film.

I’m surprised this movie didn’t do better at the box office.  Vampires seem to be a pop culture phenomenon right now (along with zombies), and I thought movie goers would be more into it.  Did people reject it because it was a remake?  Or is this a sign that people are getting sick of vampires?  I thought it was a fun movie – and well worth the rental.  I regret missing it in theatres because I imagine it would have been a lot of fun to see it in the theatre.

Vampires have been quite popular for a few years now.  But I can’t help but wonder if the tide has shifted a bit.  Have franchises like Twilight ruined vampires for society?  Do we see brooding teenage vampires where we once saw monsters?  Farrell’s Jerry was most certainly a monster, but I thought he did a good job portraying a more “traditional” vampire.  Vampires are inherently sexual creatures due to the “drinking blood” aspect of their being.  They’re monsters, but they can also be seen as sympathetic tortured creatures.  The Twilight franchise mangled vampires and I can’t help but wonder if that’s part of the reason for the failure of this movie.

The Visual Effects

I really liked the make-up effects throughout the film.  They were well done, but they weren’t too gory.  There were parts of the film that were done with CGI and I didn’t care much for those effects.  I thought they looked a little bit fake and awkward.  I would have preferred if the filmmakers had stuck with the make up effects.  They looked far more realistic.

War Horse, 2011, USA

This was one of the 2011 films I was most excited to see and it didn’t disappoint one bit. Steven Spielberg has crafted a gorgeous film – probably his best since A.I. (in my opinion!).

Albert (Jeremy Irvine) becomes the owner of a young colt after his drunken father (Peter Mullan) purchases him at an auction. Albert trains the horse, named Joey, and teaches him how to plow, even though he is a thoroughbred and not a farm horse. When World War I starts, Albert’s father sells Joey in order to make some extra money, which breaks Albert’s heart. Albert swears that he will find Joey again, and heads to the front line in order to do so. As a cavalry mount, Joey has a rough time of it and changes hands numerous times through the war.

The film was beautifully shot. Janusz Kaminski is an amazing cinematographer. He framed gorgeous shots of the European countryside and shots that reminded the audience of the sheer devastation of war. The music was beautiful, as well. John Williams’ score is likely my favourite of the year, and I’m sure he has a good shot at getting an Oscar for it. I’ll be upset if he doesn’t win the Oscar, in fact. The main theme (heard from 3:31 onwards) used throughout the film was so powerful that it drove me to tears every single time. Beautiful music adds power to a movie, and Williams’ score was perfect. The music, the cinematography and the sweeping, touching story created an immensely powerful and memorable film. It had an amazing, timeless feel to it. Spielberg created a movie that feels like it could have been made 50 years ago.

Both fronts are shown throughout the film, and I really appreciated how the characters were written. There was only one “villain” in the movie, and he wasn’t involved in the war. Every character was human, and, as one poignant scene showed us, they could be friends…if their countries weren’t at war with one another. They were simply human beings fighting for their country.

After seeing it, my mom and I were talking about how most of the actors weren’t very well known. I recognized several of them, but after looking at the cast list, I realized that I am familiar with a good number of them; I just didn’t recognize them. Tom Hiddleston has a small but powerful role in the film, as does David Kross.

The film was based on a play that is currently on Broadway and the play itself was based on a book. I’m very eager to see the play. According to Wikipedia, it is starting in Toronto this year! I may have to plan a weekend trip to see the play, which is said to be extraordinarily good. I’m curious to see the puppet used onstage and its effect on the story.