Posted by Erin
Fri, 08 Sep 2006 16:12:16 GMT
The kids and I watched this together. I know I'm not supposed to, but I think I actually liked this better than the first one. The first Cheaper by the Dozen (with Steve Martin and Bonnie Hunt; not the old one) seemed to have even more ridiculously chaotic moments than the second. Though I admit that Steve Martin was physically sillier in this one. Okay, maybe I can't defend my preference for the second one very well. It's true that these funny depictions of large families do no service to large families. But this one had two large families, one with twelve kids, one with eight, and one of the points of the movie is the nearly opposite parenting styles, and how both families turn out good kids (although kids from both families get into trouble).
Also, I liked that the trophy wife of the "competing" family turns out to be pretty cool. And that the kids are all nice and like each other. And that it's just the dads who are lame and overly competitive. Okay, I do find the dad-is-stupider-than-mom characterization annoying and harmful (Everybody Loves Raymond and just about every other sitcom around, for example), but it could so easily have leaked over into the kids in this movie, and it didn't.
I always criticize birth scenes in movies, and this one's no exception. But the criticisms are minor: I don't think the family has to wear scrubs in the delivery room nowadays (though I suppose it's possible in a small resort town hospital), and the labor went pretty fast for a first-time mom. But who cares about that? I'm writing it, but I don't think I care that much anymore.
Posted in Films | 4 comments
Posted by Erin
Fri, 08 Sep 2006 15:54:38 GMT
Kirsten Dunst and Orlando Bloom in a fairly decent romantic comedy (or if you want to be cool, you could call it a "rom-com," a term that disturbs me; I used it jokingly for a while, but it kept disturbing me, so I quit). The back of the DVD case claimed that the soundtrack was "great" or something, which made me suspicious that the rest of the movie might suck. But it was a pretty good soundtrack, until they started playing too much Elton John. Or maybe it was just a couple of Elton John songs played too close together or someone who sounded like Elton John. Anyway, still a good soundtrack.
It was nice to see a movie not set in New York. In fact, this one took place in Oregon (briefly) and in Louisville, Kentucky. The end features many and sundry places of interest between Louisville and somewhere west of there (maybe in Kansas?), I can't remember where. And I liked that part. I'd really like to visit the World's 2nd Largest Farmer's Market now, but I don't think it exists. I couldn't find it online, anyway. So maybe the other places are fabricated, too? I don't know.
I just realized that of the three movies I've watched in the last two days (Jon's out of town, and that's what I do when he's out of town), none of them was set in New York! I think that's a movie-viewing miracle, considering that I wasn't intentionally selecting them based on setting and they were all pretty mainstream stuff.
Anyway, if a movie like this is not completely stupid and the characters seem realistic and varied, I usually find it to be enjoyable. (An example of a romantic comedy that I did not enjoy is The Wedding Planner. Ew.) This was enjoyable.
Posted in Films | 2 comments
Posted by Erin
Sat, 02 Sep 2006 00:29:00 GMT
The back of this movie's DVD case claims that you'll want to watch it again and again to see what you missed the first time. Because it's so convoluted and full of twists and turns, you see. But it's not really. (If you want something to watch repeatedly, try The Spanish Prisoner, and then talk to Jon about it.)
It was entertaining, however. And that's what I wanted last night--something fun to watch, that wouldn't make me think too much, or at least not beyond trying to figure out who's really the bad guy. That's what I got.
As an aside, I'm going to start linking movies to imdb.com, unless I think they're really worth buying.
Posted in Films | no comments
Posted by Erin
Mon, 21 Aug 2006 05:01:00 GMT
Finally got around to watching this, which I taped off TV back in ... well, a while ago. Back when we had cable and I was a Human Tivo (Extreme Time-Shifting, Jon says). (Jon and I have avoided watching rated-R movies for years, but I've taped many of them when they were on channels that aired edited-for-TV stuff.) It was the Kate Bush song "Joanni" from Aerial that inspired me to watch it already.
I wasn't sure about it in the beginning, and whenever I watch something "historical," I spend a lot of time wondering just how much of it is really historical and how much is thrown in to sate the hunger of the masses for soap opera story lines. Of course, if I just knew more stuff, I would know, right? But anyway, at first, the movie seemed like it might be sort of weird--her visions featured a lot of fast-moving clouds and choppily edited scenes of things. And there was too much music.
But I am always interested in people who see visions. I believe in visions, but I don’t believe everyone who’s claimed to have them. I wonder how many of them question their own sanity. And I wonder about their sanity. There are a lot of people throughout history who’ve claimed to have visions, and someday I’d like to know who really did have them, who was insane, and who fabricated them in order to get power over others. I guess there might be some other categories in which to put vision-having people. Like Tevye in Fiddler on the Roof. But those were dreams, I guess.
The Messenger doesn’t answer this question about Joan of Arc, but it explores the idea, mostly through Dustin Hoffman’s character (listed as “The Conscience” on IMDb.com). Joan doesn’t seem to question her sanity so much as her own motivations. This part—after she’s arrested until the end—was my favorite part. Interesting stuff to think about.
It’s pretty violent, of course, but fortunately there’s plenty of comic relief. It’s not inappropriate, though; it’s mostly from the military leaders and soldiers who were following Joan. They’re coarse, career army guys who adore her and are exasperated by her.
And it turns out that the movie is fairly accurate historically, though the murder and rape of her sister at the beginning is apparently made up (her village may have been burned, though). However, considering the times, I think it’s likely she saw things like it, even if it wasn’t her sister. Apparently, Joan of Arc is one of the best-documented people of the Middle Ages, and much of what happens in the movie probably did happen.
So it was worth watching. The acting was good, especially Milla Jovovich and Dustin Hoffman, and John Malkovich and Faye Dunaway were great as the Dauphin and his mother-in-law, using Joan as long as they needed her and then dismissing her with the wave of a hand. In the end, I was glad her visions weren't more developed in the movie (and the real Joan heard voices, I think). Since Joan never described her voices or visions, it's good they were left ambiguous.
Posted in Films | no comments
Posted by Erin
Fri, 11 Aug 2006 05:14:00 GMT
Entertaining. Meryl Streep is great as Miranda Priestley, the feared editor-in-chief of a fashion magazine. We've all seen this type of boss portrayed in movies and on TV, everyone scurrying to meet impossible demands, but this one does it without the screaming temper tantrums. In fact, her voice stays low and reasonable-sounding throughout, and it's fun.
Anne Hathaway, as the new number two assistant to Miranda, Andrea somebody, sometimes looks great and sometimes looks like a Disney Princess (maybe Snow White), which doesn't mean she looks bad, necessarily, just a little like a cartoon. You know, skin like snow, eyes like coal, lips like blood, or whatever it is. And I was sometimes confused about who (old boyfriend or new famous writer boyfriend?) or what (stay in fashion job and dress amazingly or return to old dream of writing for The New Yorker?) I was supposed to be rooting for. I don't know if this was a weakness of the movie or a strength--maybe it's good not to show choices as Good or Bad, since they often aren't Good or Bad. I suspect that it was actually a weakness, though, perhaps caused by too little time given to Andrea's old friends, boyfriend, ambitions. Or maybe they were given enough time, but they just seemed boring compared to the cut-throat world of fashion where size 6 is the new 14.
Some secondary characters were very good: Miranda's number one assistant, a bratty English girl who reluctantly helps Andrea along, and Miranda's right-hand man who is kind to Andrea but doesn't pander to her whininess.
Also, I liked the music a lot.
Posted in Films | 4 comments
Posted by Erin
Sat, 05 Aug 2006 00:48:00 GMT
Filmed in Afghanistan after the fall of the Taliban, written and directed by an Afghan filmmaker, this is a film about a young girl who dresses up like a boy in order to get work and support her mother and grandmother. I've read a few books about Afghanistan in the last year or so--they've been enlightening, but I still don't really understand the culture there or in surrounding Islamic countries. This movie gave me more to look at than the books (and the cinematography is really beautiful), but while I can explain that women there are oppressed and treated as second-class citizens, I have the feeling I'll never know what that's really like.
What strikes me about the Muslims portrayed in this movie and in the books I've read is that they are extremely religious--praying five times a day and constantly referring to God and His will--and at the same time some of the meanest people I've had to think about. Especially interesting to me is how the women, very often treated badly by their husbands and other men, try their hardest to oppress and belittle each other.
Now I know my exposure has been limited to a movie and a few books. Here are the books I've read that deal with Afghanistan:
- The Kite Runner by Khaled Hosseini (a disturbing novel that I didn't really like but made me read more about Afghanistan and other Muslim countries)
- An Unexpected Light: Travels in Afghanistan by Jason Elliot (nonfiction about a guy's travels to Afghanistan. The first visit he snuck in and lived with the mujahedin during the Russian occupation--when he was 19! because that's what everyone wants to do on Spring Break!--and the second time he traveled around the country ten years later, when the Taliban was beginning to take control. Beautifully written and fascinating.)
- The Bookseller of Kabul by Asne Seierstad (another fascinating nonfiction book by a female Norwegian journalist who lived with an Afghani family for three months. Really interesting, though also disturbing.)
Others that are related:
- House of Sand and Fog by Andre Dubus III (interesting because one of main characters is Iranian; it's well-written and seems to characterize the Iranian family really well. Otherwise, I hated this book, because how could the characters do so many stupid things?)
- Reading Lolita in Tehran by Azar Nafisi (I haven't finished this book yet, but it's good. Much more literary criticism than I expected, it's a memoir by an Iranian literature professor who holds a sort of underground book club for women after she resigns from her University of Tehran position because of political oppression.)
Anyway, I've barely begun to learn about Islamic culture and countries. There are certain topics that scare me because I know so little and there's so much to know, so I avoid them as much as possible until something makes me finally start to learn. And even though I didn't like the book, The Kite Runner inspired me to jump in, and that's something. (You'd think 9/11 might have gotten me started, but no.)
Posted in Films, Books | no comments
Posted by Erin
Mon, 31 Jul 2006 11:54:00 GMT
Having participated in three Pinewood Derbies, the last one with two sons racing cars, and with many to come in the future, it was fun to watch this movie. It's nice to watch a comedy that isn't determined to be crude and inappropriate, too. I enjoyed it.
Posted in Films | 2 comments
Posted by Erin
Tue, 25 Jul 2006 05:02:00 GMT
Watched this last night on DVD, causing Jon to stay up later than he wanted to. Probably one of the scariest airplane crash scenes I've ever seen. I really liked the part on the island, which had no music and very little talking (until the Tom Hanks character starts talking to a volleyball he calls Wilson). The end was less satisfying than I was expecting; I wanted people to show some interest in how he managed to survive for four years alone on a island. I'd want to know all the details!
What are we supposed to learn from a Robinson Crusoe-like story, though? To appreciate what we have, I guess. And maybe to marvel at the survival instincts of humans? I'd like to learn to tie more knots.
Posted in Films | 3 comments
Posted by Erin
Sun, 23 Jul 2006 03:41:00 GMT
Or as our drive-in has it, Nacho LEBRA. I don't know if they ran out of letters or if they're creative or what.
We laughed. Jack Black using a Mexican accent is funny, it turns out. Professional wrestling is always weird, even when it's funny. I liked it.
Posted in Films | no comments
Posted by Erin
Tue, 18 Jul 2006 19:56:00 GMT
After bad-mouthing this movie (or at least implying that it wasn't good), I thought I should watch it. It was pretty dumb. I guess that's what happens when you write a script based on a song like "Love Potion No. 9."
Posted in Films | no comments
