Isn't that just like a newbie blogger: Signs up a brand new blog and, within a week, takes 9 days off with nothing to say for himself. I was on vacation the past week in both North and South Carolina enjoying cool mountains and waterfalls. Being without internet for so long a time can be disconcerting, but rest assured that I'm back.
I noticed something interesting when I came back to my blog after so long. One of the reasons I picked blogspot was, aside from being free and easy to use, was that there was only one ad and it was unobtrusively at the top. The color scheme of the ad usually blended in, so that was also good. One other thing I discovered was how the ad scans for keywords in my posts and uses them to sell certain items like "The Godfather" DVD for my post on Brando.
I know some that are disturbed by this sort of advertising, particularly on Amazon, but I can't say that I am. The whole explanation of wanting to cater to specific consumer needs seems logical to me and even helpful. Griping about it these days seems futile since even Google, that search engine bastion of non-ads, will produce sales links related to your searches. Now it's true that some searches and keywords can be misinterpreted by computer AI, leading to uncomfortable ads. So, in closing, let this be a warning to anyone looking for cocktail recipes online.
Monday, July 12, 2004
Friday, July 02, 2004
I'm not with the Government, but I am here to help.
As silly as some of the stuff on this blog is, there is something nagging at the back of my head and I feel that I must clear it up to give myself peace of mind.
I am not, nor do I mean to pass myself off as, a member of the Federal Bureau of Investigation.
Ahhhh. That's better. Now, if you really mean to assign meaning to that little acronym, here are some alternatives:
Finlandia Bicycle Institute
Fanatical Billiard Instructor
Frappuccino Buyers International
Floating Ballast Inventor
Fishing Barrels Incorporated
Fluorescent Beetle Inspector
I am not, nor do I mean to pass myself off as, a member of the Federal Bureau of Investigation.
Ahhhh. That's better. Now, if you really mean to assign meaning to that little acronym, here are some alternatives:
Finlandia Bicycle Institute
Fanatical Billiard Instructor
Frappuccino Buyers International
Floating Ballast Inventor
Fishing Barrels Incorporated
Fluorescent Beetle Inspector
Review: "Pride and Prejudice" (TV miniseries) (1995)
I think I've discovered a facet of the "chick flick" phenomenon that I hadn't before. It's not the theme of the film so much as the quality. The true definition of a "chick flick" is a film of mediocre quality (plot holes, bad dialogue, convenient meetings, etc.) that nevertheless has the redeemable qualities of romance and attractive leads. The same is true for guy flicks/action films where the hero has unlimited ammunition, the bad guy's henchmen can't hit the broadside of a barn, and big bad guy himself has no motivation other than being evil. However, if a film is very well made, then people of both genders can like and appreciate it.
I can think of no higher quality film that surpasses the concept of "chick flick" in my experience than "Pride and Prejudice". Created for the BBC, the miniseries has developed a justifiable reputation as one of the best adaptations of classic literature in recent memory. The story, set in early 19th century England, centers on the Bennett family and the constant activity of finding the right husband for the five daughters. The youngest three are really too young to be thinking of such things, so their main activity is to flirt and giggle at dances. But for the elder two, Jane (Susannah Harker) and Elizabeth (Jennifer Ehle), their clock is ticking and their mother is eager to find them a match. Suffice to say, these two daughters yearn for romance over wealth in their prospective mates, and they are often at odds with their mother and others in their intentions.
Which leads us to the actor and character that has become one of THE icons of romance in film: Colin Firth as Mr. Darcy. For much of the film, he comes off as superior, aloof and stuck-up. This is Elizabeth's first impression and rightly so. We soon learn, though, that Darcy's attitude is only partly through his wealthy upbringing. The other part is his frustration with women who's only ambition is to marry well. He finds in Elizabeth a fierce intelligence and stubborn quality with which he is quickly enamored, despite parts of him who are averse at engaging with a lower class. There are many complications during the five hour running time but, as Geoffrey Rush says in "Shakespeare in Love", it all turns out well.
The script and performances are all perfect. The story flows smoothly with subplots weaving in and out of the main storyline until they all come together perfectly at the end. The actors are very well cast, particularly Firth and Ehle who have a wonderful chemistry together. Benjamin Whitrow and Alison Steadman are almost a movie into themselves as Mr. and Mrs. Bennett. They play their parts of hysterical wife and sensible husband like they've been doing it forever. Also, for fans of BBC comedy, it's hilarious to see Julia Sawalha as the immature Lydia Bennett. After several years of playing the intelligent straight woman to the two flighty stars in "Absolutely Fabulous", she gets to do some flightiness of her own here.
Do yourself a favor and see this soon. Take a whole rainy Saturday afternoon and watch it. This is truly a romance for everyone.
Ten out of Ten
I can think of no higher quality film that surpasses the concept of "chick flick" in my experience than "Pride and Prejudice". Created for the BBC, the miniseries has developed a justifiable reputation as one of the best adaptations of classic literature in recent memory. The story, set in early 19th century England, centers on the Bennett family and the constant activity of finding the right husband for the five daughters. The youngest three are really too young to be thinking of such things, so their main activity is to flirt and giggle at dances. But for the elder two, Jane (Susannah Harker) and Elizabeth (Jennifer Ehle), their clock is ticking and their mother is eager to find them a match. Suffice to say, these two daughters yearn for romance over wealth in their prospective mates, and they are often at odds with their mother and others in their intentions.
Which leads us to the actor and character that has become one of THE icons of romance in film: Colin Firth as Mr. Darcy. For much of the film, he comes off as superior, aloof and stuck-up. This is Elizabeth's first impression and rightly so. We soon learn, though, that Darcy's attitude is only partly through his wealthy upbringing. The other part is his frustration with women who's only ambition is to marry well. He finds in Elizabeth a fierce intelligence and stubborn quality with which he is quickly enamored, despite parts of him who are averse at engaging with a lower class. There are many complications during the five hour running time but, as Geoffrey Rush says in "Shakespeare in Love", it all turns out well.
The script and performances are all perfect. The story flows smoothly with subplots weaving in and out of the main storyline until they all come together perfectly at the end. The actors are very well cast, particularly Firth and Ehle who have a wonderful chemistry together. Benjamin Whitrow and Alison Steadman are almost a movie into themselves as Mr. and Mrs. Bennett. They play their parts of hysterical wife and sensible husband like they've been doing it forever. Also, for fans of BBC comedy, it's hilarious to see Julia Sawalha as the immature Lydia Bennett. After several years of playing the intelligent straight woman to the two flighty stars in "Absolutely Fabulous", she gets to do some flightiness of her own here.
Do yourself a favor and see this soon. Take a whole rainy Saturday afternoon and watch it. This is truly a romance for everyone.
Ten out of Ten
Brando Is Dead. Long Live Brando.
When President Reagan died four weeks ago, a number of columnists wrote, referring to his alzheimer's, that we had actually lost Reagan a long time ago. The same could be said to be true with Marlon Brando, who died yesterday at the age of 80. Looking at his resume on the IMDb, one cannot help but be shocked on how fallow his career became after "Apocalypse Now" in 1979. In the 25 years since that film, Brando has appeared in eight films, and most of those in supporting roles. Aside, perhaps, from a winking take on his "Godfather" image in the comedy "The Freshman", most of these roles will be forgotten.
In terms of film, his image had already been set in stone. By 1979, he could count the names Stanley Kowalski, Terry Malloy, Vito Corleone and Colonel Kurtz among those that would survive well beyond him. Of course, that's a very selfish way for his fans to view the man. Most likely, Brando didn't give a damn about his "legacy", but rather cared more for his "art". Talking about acting in these terms strike some as pretentious, but when it comes to movies like "On the Waterfront", you can't argue with the results. His "Method", which was adopted by many young actors in Hollywood back in the fifties and sixties, was a movement that classical actors chuckled at. The famous anecdote of Laurence Olivier talking with Dustin Hoffman about all his strenuous preparation for a role and then suggests, simply, "why not try acting, dear boy" perfectly illustrates this.
But if film proves anything, it is that there are NO absolutes to follow in filmmaking. Directors can be authoritative and dictatorial (From Hitchcock to the Coen Brothers) or they can be loose and improvisational (From Scorsese to Soderbergh) or they can be somewhere in between, yet they all can achieve movie greatness despite their different styles. The same goes for all facets of the process, especially acting. When these different styles come together, it is a learning process for all involved. That's not to say that it's always a pleasurable experience, but one does grow from it.
This is a lot of hot air from me on the occasion of one actor's death, but he influenced so many in Hollywood that a simple laundry list of his films would not suffice for his obituary. He was a force of nature, and his presence will always be felt. As for both his "legacy" and his "art", the young actors in Hollywood could do far worse than spend a weekend on the couch having a Brando-athon. Not a bad idea for the rest of us, too.
In terms of film, his image had already been set in stone. By 1979, he could count the names Stanley Kowalski, Terry Malloy, Vito Corleone and Colonel Kurtz among those that would survive well beyond him. Of course, that's a very selfish way for his fans to view the man. Most likely, Brando didn't give a damn about his "legacy", but rather cared more for his "art". Talking about acting in these terms strike some as pretentious, but when it comes to movies like "On the Waterfront", you can't argue with the results. His "Method", which was adopted by many young actors in Hollywood back in the fifties and sixties, was a movement that classical actors chuckled at. The famous anecdote of Laurence Olivier talking with Dustin Hoffman about all his strenuous preparation for a role and then suggests, simply, "why not try acting, dear boy" perfectly illustrates this.
But if film proves anything, it is that there are NO absolutes to follow in filmmaking. Directors can be authoritative and dictatorial (From Hitchcock to the Coen Brothers) or they can be loose and improvisational (From Scorsese to Soderbergh) or they can be somewhere in between, yet they all can achieve movie greatness despite their different styles. The same goes for all facets of the process, especially acting. When these different styles come together, it is a learning process for all involved. That's not to say that it's always a pleasurable experience, but one does grow from it.
This is a lot of hot air from me on the occasion of one actor's death, but he influenced so many in Hollywood that a simple laundry list of his films would not suffice for his obituary. He was a force of nature, and his presence will always be felt. As for both his "legacy" and his "art", the young actors in Hollywood could do far worse than spend a weekend on the couch having a Brando-athon. Not a bad idea for the rest of us, too.
Review: "Chato's Land" (1972)
British director Michael Winner's most famous flick was the 1974 Charles Bronson revenge film "Death Wish". It started the "vigilante" genre, prompting countless carbon copies of the formula after the film hit it big. The quality of those imitations were often poor, and that's including the sequels Winner himself made: The bad "Death Wish II" and the ugly "Death Wish III".
There were two other notable films Winner made before his big success, both starring Bronson and released in 1972. The first is the entertaining action film "The Mechanic" and the second is the bleak Western "Chato's Land". I say bleak because I really mean bleak, and it is obvious halfway through the film that there will be no happy ending to this story.
It begins inside a quiet saloon where an Apache Indian (Bronson) is sitting with a drink at the bar. An angry man sitting at one of the tables taunts him and eventually pulls his gun, but the Apache is faster and shoots him dead. He quickly, but calmly, exits the saloon, mounts his horse, and rides off into the desert. A posse is quickly formed lead by Captain Quincey (Jack Palance), a confederate civil war veteran, to go after the Apache. And within the first five minutes, we have the complete bare bones plot.
Although not entirely original, the film takes the vantage of the Apache as a good guy. A more accurate description is there are plenty of bad guys in the story that rank above him. These include Jubal Hooker (Simon Oakland) and his sons Elias and Earl (Ralph Waite and Richard Jordan). All three have a viscous streak that gets the whole group in trouble from the get-go. As the posse starts decreasing one by one, it is the Hookers, and not the sensible Whitmore, that prods them to continue, sealing their fate.
Because all the fat is cut, the film quickly pulls you and never lets go. When I said the film starts in the saloon, I meant just that. No credits, no titles, just straight to the bar and the shot that starts it all. And before you know it, we're out in the unforgiving desert made tolerable by the company of this large posse, as they themselves are also heartened by the number of their group. As their number dwindles, and they go even farther into unknown territory, we know what the outcome will be, and we can't tear our eyes away.
The familiar faces, besides Bronson and Palance, are James Whitmore as Joshua, who most people know for "The Shawshank Redemption" and Miracle Grow ads. Far more disconcerting is Waite as Elias, whom nearly everybody recognizes for his role as Pa Walton on "The Waltons" TV series. To see him play such a sadistic bastard the same year he started a TV role that would become one of the most beloved father figures of all time may be disturbing for fans of the show.
As I said, this is not a happy film. What it is is a fascinating, alternative Western with good performances and a story that will engross the viewer. If you love the genre, you should give this one a shot.
Seven out of Ten
There were two other notable films Winner made before his big success, both starring Bronson and released in 1972. The first is the entertaining action film "The Mechanic" and the second is the bleak Western "Chato's Land". I say bleak because I really mean bleak, and it is obvious halfway through the film that there will be no happy ending to this story.
It begins inside a quiet saloon where an Apache Indian (Bronson) is sitting with a drink at the bar. An angry man sitting at one of the tables taunts him and eventually pulls his gun, but the Apache is faster and shoots him dead. He quickly, but calmly, exits the saloon, mounts his horse, and rides off into the desert. A posse is quickly formed lead by Captain Quincey (Jack Palance), a confederate civil war veteran, to go after the Apache. And within the first five minutes, we have the complete bare bones plot.
Although not entirely original, the film takes the vantage of the Apache as a good guy. A more accurate description is there are plenty of bad guys in the story that rank above him. These include Jubal Hooker (Simon Oakland) and his sons Elias and Earl (Ralph Waite and Richard Jordan). All three have a viscous streak that gets the whole group in trouble from the get-go. As the posse starts decreasing one by one, it is the Hookers, and not the sensible Whitmore, that prods them to continue, sealing their fate.
Because all the fat is cut, the film quickly pulls you and never lets go. When I said the film starts in the saloon, I meant just that. No credits, no titles, just straight to the bar and the shot that starts it all. And before you know it, we're out in the unforgiving desert made tolerable by the company of this large posse, as they themselves are also heartened by the number of their group. As their number dwindles, and they go even farther into unknown territory, we know what the outcome will be, and we can't tear our eyes away.
The familiar faces, besides Bronson and Palance, are James Whitmore as Joshua, who most people know for "The Shawshank Redemption" and Miracle Grow ads. Far more disconcerting is Waite as Elias, whom nearly everybody recognizes for his role as Pa Walton on "The Waltons" TV series. To see him play such a sadistic bastard the same year he started a TV role that would become one of the most beloved father figures of all time may be disturbing for fans of the show.
As I said, this is not a happy film. What it is is a fascinating, alternative Western with good performances and a story that will engross the viewer. If you love the genre, you should give this one a shot.
Seven out of Ten
Thursday, July 01, 2004
Yaphet Kotto Quote of the Month: July 2004
Yaphet Kotto is best known to Television viewers as Lt. Al 'Gee' Giardello on the great series "Homicide: Life on the Street". Here's a quote from the show:
Lt. Giardello: When in Rome, do as the Romans do. When in Baltimore, do as I tell you to.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)