Friday, January 31, 2014

His Royal Douchness

The Man in the Iron Mask
Director: Randall Wallace
Cast: Leonardo DiCaprio, Jeremy Irons, John Malkovich, Gerald Depardieu, Gabriel Byrne
Released: March 13, 1998


Like The Count of Monte Cristo, this movie is also an adaptation of an Alexander Dumas novel. Even though there are some similarities, I liked Monte Cristo a lot better. In The Man in the Iron Mask, King Louis XIV (Leonardo DiCaprio) rules France as a total jerk. He is pompous, sleeps with many women, and only cares what he looks like as he's always pawing at his locks and wearing fancy silk frocks. (Ha, that rhymes!) Basically he rules the country like if any of the Jersey Shores idiots were the POTUS. (Ugh). He does not care about anybody but himself.

Jeremy Irons, John Malkovich, and Gerald Depardieu play the Three Musketeers (another Dumas-penned story) - Aramis, Athos, and Porthos, respectively. Athos has a son who is engaged to be married to a woman that Louis decides he wants for his own and has him sent to battle where he is killed. Louis then takes Christie into his home...and his bed! Seriously, he sleeps with her, like, the next day!

The King does some more appalling things and the Musketeers decides it's time to overthrow the little a-hole. Aramis has the perfect plan. He knows that Louis has a twin brother, Phillippe, who has been imprisoned for six years. Louis didn't want the country knowing that he had a brother so he ordered for an iron mask to be made for Phillippe to wear so nobody would ever know his identity. Since it covers his entire head, it's more of a helmet, but The Man in the Iron Helmet just doesn't have the same ring to it. Put anyone in an iron helmet and they're going to look ridiculous. And it does look ridiculous. Just look at him in that picture and tell me it doesn't make you laugh just a little! The Musketeers teach him what he needs to know to be King, including family history and what to do in social situations and their plan is to lure Louis out of a party, kidnap him, and replace him with Phillippe. There's a few snafus, but by the end of the movie, Phillippe becomes the true King of France without anyone realizing that one brother has been swapped for another.

You would think with such an interesting premise, this movie should work, but it just doesn't. For one thing, even though I thought the mask, er, helmet was ridiculous, you really don't get the sense that Phillippe was wearing it for six years and he seems to accept becoming a King just like that. I don't buy it. They also try to make this movie into too many things: a romance! A comedy! An action picture! If you watch the trailer, they advertise it as all three back to back. It starts out decent enough, telling the general plot of the movie, then it goes into Louis courting his women, then we get a bunch of jokes, then some action shots. It is so bad! The "comedy" portions of this movie is the worst - I did not laugh once. Now I don't think The Count of Monte Cristo is the best movie ever, but compared to this movie, it's a masterpiece.

However, if Leonardo DiCaprio had never been in Paris filming this movie, then I never would have had this "amazing" story to tell. Click the video to hear my "amazing" Leo story!



Thursday, January 30, 2014

Late reaction to Oscar nominations

If you're curious about the reaction of this year's Oscar nominees from someone who has only seen two of the movies  nominated in the main categories, then you came to the right place!

Best Picture:
American Hustle
Nebraska
Gravity
12 Years a Slave
Captain Phillips
Philomena
The Wolf of Wall Street
Her
Dallas Buyers Club

I have only seen Gravity and Captain Phillips. So far the former is my favorite movie of the year and the latter will most likely be on my top ten list. I would love it for Gravity to win (hey, it happened last year when my favorite movie of 2012, Argo, won), but most likely it will be 12 Years a Slave. I will most likely rent that when it comes out on DVD, but it's hard to drag myself out to a theater to watch such a brutal and horrific movie.  I will also eventually see American Hustle but I am worried it will be more like The Fighter (which I didn't like so much) than Silver Linings Playbook (which I liked). I had never even heard of Philomena until it was nominated and still don't know what it's about. I will eventually see all (or most) of these, but I doubt any of them will top Gravity for my favorite movie. 

Best Actor: 
American Hustle: Christian Bale
Nebraska: Bruce Dern
The Wolf of Wall Street: Leonardo DiCaprio
12 Years a Slave: Chiwetel Ejiofor
Dallas Buyers Club: Matthew McConaughey

First of all, where the hell is Tom Hanks for Captain Phillips? I thought for sure he was a shoo-in for a nomination! Everyone loves Tom Hanks and he hasn't been nominated in a long time and this was the perfect opportunity to do so! I'm sure he could have easily edged out Christian Bale. Now I haven't see any of these so I don't know who is the best, but I imagine it's a dead heat between Matthew McConaughey who's been winning all the big surprises or Chiwetel Ejiofor who everyone is buzzing about. It's hard for me to live in a world where McConaughey has an Oscar (it would be just so weird, but the again, Nicolas Cage has one!) I feel like they're going to give it to Ejiofor at the last minute. Just a hunch I have. 

Best Actress:
American Hustle: Amy Adams
Blue Jasmine: Cate Blanchett
Gravity: Sandra Bullock
Philomena: Judi Dench
August: Osage County: Meryl Streep

I would love for Sandra Bullock to win, not because she's the only performance from this list that I saw (well, that might be part of the reason!), but she was great and held her own. After about 30 minutes she was the only one in the movie. It's kind of a shame that she won five years ago for a decent performance in a not that great of a movie. Would she have won this year if she hadn't won for The Blind Side? I don't know, it's possible. But I think since she won so recently that may have hurt her...of course it didn't hurt Hilary Swank or Christoph Waltz! Most likely it will be Cate Blanchett. She won Best Supporting Actress in 2005 for The Aviator, but that felt more like a make-up oscar than anything else, so I feel like this will be her "real" Oscar if you know what I mean. Remember when she was first nominated in 1999 for Elizabeth and Gwyneth Paltrow won and everyone said Cate should have won? Well, not only will Cate (most likely) have two Oscars, but she's also been nominated five more times since her first time. How many times has Gwynnie the Pooh been nominated since she won? A big fat whooping ZERO! I've even read articles about Oscar votes who voted for Gwyneth who said they probably would have voted for Cate if they could redo their votes that year! I really dislike the GooP in case you haven't noticed. So while I would love Sandra to win, I would be very satisfied with a Cate win! Also, since Meryl Streep won for The Iron Lady a couple years ago, I thought they would cut back on her nominations. Wasn't the reason she was getting nominated for everything prior to 2012 was because they desperately wanted to give her that 3rd Oscar? I really haven't heard anyone rave about her performance. I have heard everyone raving about Emma Thompson in Saving Mr. Banks (another movie I haven't seen yet but want to) so I was surprised she wasn't nominated.

Best Supporting Actor:
Captain Phillips: Barkhad Abdi
American Hustle: Bradley Cooper
12 Years a Slave: Michael Fassbender
The Wolf of Wall Street: Jonah Hill
Dallas Buyers Club: Jared Leto


I've only seen Abdi's performance and while he did a great job for his first film I can't say he was the best until I see the others. Leto seems to be the front runner for now. I've never watched My So-Called Life, but that's what I always associate him with. Unlike the other acting categories, this is the only one that doesn't have a previous winner. 


Best Supporting Actress:
Blue Jasmine: Sally Hawkins
American Hustle: Jennifer Lawrence
12 Years a Slave: Lupita Nyong'o
August: Osage County: Julia Roberts
Nebraska: June Squibb

There's no way they're giving this to anyone other than Lupito, right?


Best Director:
American Hustle: David O. Russell
Gravity: Alfonso Cuarón
Nebraska: Alexander Payne
12 Years a Slave: Steve McQueen
The Wolf of Wall Street: Martin Scorsese

I would love for Cuarón to win this because he is an amazing director and I could see him winning. He did win the Golden Globe so that could be in his favor. Or it could go to Steve McQueen since his movie is most likely to win the Oscar. I really have no idea. But I'm giving the edge to Cuarón. I mean, have you seen his movies? They're so good!

Monday, January 27, 2014

'90210' Tribute

I only have three episodes to go before I finish the entire series (10 seasons!) of Beverly Hills, 90210 and as a little tribute I made this video. Enjoy! 








Sunday, January 26, 2014

Bad Simbas!

The Ghost and The Darkness
Director: Stephen Hopkins
Cast: Val Kilmer, Michael Douglas, John Kani, Bernard Hill, Emily Mortimer, Tom Wilkinson
Released: October 11, 1996

Oscar nominations:
Best Sound Effects Editing - won


I recently listened to a podcast of Stuff You Missed in History Class and they did an episode on the man-eating lions of Tsavo, Kenya who were feasting on the railroad workers back in 1898. Because the lions were like apparitions, they were known as The Ghost and The Darkness. The hosts mentioned that many film adaptations have been made about this story, but this movie is the only one I am familiar with. I had never heard of this story until I saw this movie for the first time back when it was released on video. I hadn't seen it since and after listening to that particular podcast, decided to revisit it.

John Patterson (Kilmer) is a British engineer who is sent to Tsavo to be in charge of working on a railroad that is behind schedule. There have been reports of lion attacks so Patterson stays awake in a tree all night and kills a lion that approaches the camp. Everyone is happy and celebrates and they get back to work. The only problem is, the lion Patterson killed wasn't one of the two man-eating lions known as The Ghost and The Darkness that wreck havoc on the camp, killing several people in a short amount of time. Being a true story, Patterson was a real person and claimed that 135 people were killed by the lions, but it seems the number might have been more accurate to 35....perhaps that "1" was an ink blot in his journal?

These lions prove to be quite difficult to kill as they are very sneaky and crafty and work together. After one of the lions has mauled a worker in the middle of the day, Patterson and a few other men follow it where it has dragged the body to start feasting on it. Patterson has his gun aimed at it, but the lion seems unfazed. This was before anyone realized there were two lions so they were not expecting the second lion that has snuck up on them on a roof of a shelter they're nearby and leap onto one of the men and kill him, causing distraction and for the two lions to trot away.

Charles Remington (Douglas), the expert hunter who comes to help hunt the lions is totally fictional. In real life, Patterson was the one who killed both lions. Remington kills the first lion. He does it by using a poor baboon chained to a wooden post as bait. He appears securely safe in a tree, but Patterson, on the other hand, is sitting atop a wooden structure that isn't the most secure and everytime he turns around (which was whenever he heard a sound, which was quite often), it wobbles. Not long after the first lion is killed, the other lion, apparently out for revenge, kills Remington. So one lion and one man are left and now it's Patterson's turn for revenge and with the help of native Samuel (Kani) who has been a trusted ally since Patterson arrived in Tsavo, manages to kill the lion and end the killing and chaos.

When I first saw this movie back in 1997, Val Kilmer and Michael Douglas were the only actors I was familiar with, but watching it again, I couldn't help but think how familiar the local doctor looked and I knew I had seen him in something and was thinking, "That's not the guy from Lord of the Rings, it it?" (Yes, I realize that doesn't really narrow it down). But after confirming with IMDB, yes, it was "that guy" from LotR, Theoden, played by Bernard Hill, who I also know quite well as the captain in Titanic. I also found out Tom Wilkerson plays Patterson's a-hole boss who tells Patterson that he doesn't care about those who have died and wants his bridge to be built in a timely manner. I didn't really become familiar with Wilkerson until 2000/01 when he was in The Patriot and In the Bedroom. And Emily Mortimer, only in a couple scenes, plays Mrs. Patterson. She's since gone on to be someone I recognize in stuff from a guest spot in 30 Rock to Hugo.

The real Ghost and Darkness.
The most fascinating things about The Ghost and The Darkness (which are on display at the Field Museum in Chicago - I really want to go there one day!) was that they were maneless lions. Seeing as these particular kinds of lions are rare (and probably not the most trainable), the movie used lions with manes. (And really bad fake lions for whenever one leaps onto a person to attack).

The cinematography of the African landscape is breathtaking and makes you want to go on a safari when you see all the different animals, that is, until the lions start attacking and eating people!

Tuesday, January 21, 2014

Sweet Revenge

The Count of Monte Cristo
Director: Kevin Reynolds
Cast: Jim Caviezel, Guy Pearce, Richard Harris, Luiz Guzman
Released: January 25, 2002
Viewed in theaters: February 8, 2002


According to Wikipedia, this is the tenth adaptation of Alexander Dumas's novel, but I think it is the only one I've seen. Edmond Dantes (Caviezel) and Fernand Mondego (Pearce) are best friends, or at least Edmond thinks so. Fernand is jealous of him because he is marrying the beautiful Mercedes (Dagmara Dominczyk) and has been promoted to captain, both are things that Fernand wants even though he is wealthy (Edmond is poor) and educated (Edmond can't read).

Edmond is betrayed by his so-called best friend when he is arrested for treason. He was set up to deliver a compromising letter and when he runs away to seek help from Fernand, that's when he realizes that Fernand was behind the plan to help get him sent away to prison. He is sent to a prison on an island called Chateau d'If. There he is thrown into a stone room and only gets fed once a day and his toilet pail is emptied once a day. His only human contact occurs once a year on his anniversary of being in prison when he is chained to a wall and whipped. After being there for one year, he attempts to hang himself, but the message he chiseled into the stone wall, God will give me justice, stops him. Four years pass and that's when he discovers he had a neighbor prisoner below him all this time when a priest (Harris) comes tunneling out of the floor, thinking he was headed for the outside. He asks to stand on Edmond's shoulders so he can see a sliver of sky and thanks him, saying he hasn't seen the sky in eleven years which is the saddest thing ever.

Since neither have anything better to do, the priests teaches Edmond reading, writing, math, philosophy, and how to fight with a sword among many other things. Since they are only interrupted twice a day by the prison guards, they have the rest of the entire day to work on Edmond's education. That's not the only thing they're working on as they are also creating a tunnel to escape.
 
Unfortunately, with just months left before they make it to the outside, the ground above collapses on the priest. Edmond drags him back to the cell. In his dying breath, the priests confesses to Edmond where a fortune of a deceased Count is located. He was imprisoned for not revealing it. He said he didn't know where it was, but tells Edmond that he lied. This information comes in very handy for Edmond later on.

For an actor of his age, Richard Harris sure does a lot of physical stuff - he's dragged by his arms, he climbs up and down holes, he runs around the cell as he teaches his prodigy how to sword fight. He was sure a spry old man!

It had been a very long time since I last saw this movie (12 years) so I felt pretty smug when I knew how Edmond was going to escape. When I saw the large bag the prison guards put the priest's body in, I blurted out, "He's going to use that bag to escape!" Yes, I know, it was so obvious, but I was pretty proud of myself. When a guard goes to feed Edmond and his bowl is not produced in front of the door, that is when the guard becomes suspicious and sees the priest's dead body and goes out to warn the others that they are taking out a live person. Why he just didn't have his bowl already ready to go, I don't know. Maybe he wanted them to know he had escaped? What I had totally forgotten was that they threw the bag over the cliff which the prison sits upon! And I'm like, "Oh sh--", even though I know he survives, duh. But that was a long fall with lots of rocks waiting to meet him at the bottom. How he managed to miss those rocks is only a miracle. Luckily he was able to grab the keys from the head guard before he was thrown so he could unlock his shackles.

Altogether, he was in that prison for 13 years of his life and enjoys his freedom quite immensely when he escapes. He washes up on another deserted island where he meets a band of pirates who want him to come work for them. They are to kill one of their traitors, Jacapo (Guzman), but Edmond convinces them to spare his life and Jacapo tells Edmond he will be forever indebted to him for the rest of his life.

Edmond's first stop is to get the treasure the priest told him about and after he and Jacapo haul out eight huge trunks from an underwater cove, Jacapo declares him the richest man he's ever known. Edmond decides his new alias will be the Count of Monte Cristo. He invites everyone to a lavish party on the ground of his new mansion where he makes his grand entrance on a hot air balloon with acrobats and fireworks. All I could think of was if I read about some rich person doing this it at a party, I would roll my eyes so far back into my head. Cinematically, it made a pretty cool scene. But he did make an entrance, which is what he wanted. Unfortunately the two people he most wanted to be there to see his entrance weren't there.

He vows revenge on those who were the reason he was sent to prison, especially his ex-BFF, Fernand who, he learns, has married Mercedes. He's not too happy with Mercedes either when he learns of this, especially since she promised him 13 years ago that she would never take off the ring of twine that symbolized her eternal love and faithfulness for Edmond. Well maybe not eternal faithfulness anymore seeing as she and Fernand have a sixteen-year-old son named Albert (played by Henry Cavill who played (plays? - I suppose it's an ongoing franchise) Superman in the latest movie that I never saw and don't intend on ever seeing). Edmond gets through to Fernand and Mercedes by fake-saving their son after he has him set up to be "kidnapped" by his old pirate friends. He is invited to their (ridiculously opulent) home to be thanked for saving their son. Mercedes immediately has suspicion of him, telling him he reminds her of someone she knew quite well a long time ago. It isn't until she sees him playing with his hair -just like Edmond used to do!- that she knows it really is him and demand to know where he's been all this time but he pretends to not know what she's talking about, declaring, "Edmond Dantes is dead!" Of course she calls him out on knowing that name if he claims to not know who she is talking about. Duh! He finally admits it is really him and is angry at her for marrying Fernand so soon after he was sent to prison. Remember when I said that Albert was Fernand's son? Well, he was actually Edmond's son and that's why Mercedes had to marry Fernand so quickly. It's just like a soap opera!

In the end, Albert gets his revenge and lives happily ever after with his family. By far the most interesting part of the movie is when he's in the prison with Richard Harris.

Monday, December 30, 2013

Coming of Age

Big
Director: Penny Marshall
Cast: Tom Hanks, Robert Loggia, Elizabeth Perkins, Mercedes Ruehl, John Heard
Released: June 3, 1988

Oscar nominations:
Best Actor - Tom Hanks (lost to Dustin Hoffman for Rain Man)
Best Original Screenplay - Gary Ross and Anne Spielberg (lost to Ronald Bass and Gary Morrow for Rain Man)



13 Going on 30
Director: Gary Winick
Cast: Jennifer Garner, Mark Ruffalo, Judy Greer, Andy Serkis
Released: April 23, 2004
Viewed in theaters: April 30, 2004




Big is about a thirteen-year-old named Josh Baskin (David Moscow) who wishes he were older and wakes up as a thirty-year old (Tom Hanks). 13 Going on 30 is about a thirteen-year-old named Jenna Rink (Christa B. Allen) who wishes she were older and wakes up as a thirty-year-old (Jennifer Garner). Despite having the same premise and similar themes, these movies are quite different (which was a smart move for 13 so it wouldn't look like a total copy cat!) 

Young Charlotte Grayson
The set up for both movies kinda follows the same pattern. Both of them take place in the '80s (I'll get back to that) and neither Josh or Jenna are very popular, although they wished they were, especially Jenna who longs to be part of a group of popular girls called the Six Chicks, even though they only take advantage of her by making her do their homework, led by a girl named Tom-Tom (and after seeing this movie 3 or 4 times, I still have no idea why she was called that because we later learn her real name is Lucy). Fun trivia fact: one of the Six Chicks was played by Ashley Benson aka Hannah Marin from Pretty Little Liars. Jenna's best friend and next-door-neighbor, Matty, smartly points out to her that she can't be a Six Chick because they already have their allotted number of girls in their clique. Another fun fact: young Jenna is played by Christa B. Allen who plays Charlotte on Revenge, a show I stopped watching in the middle of its second season because it just got so ridiculous and I just didn't care anymore. I recognized her name in the credits and kept looking for her, thinking she was one of the Six Chicks; it never occurred to me that she was playing the younger version of the main character! Obviously I didn't recognize her at all! I probably didn't because she was eight years younger and had this horrible '80s hair style and has a completely different wardrobe from Charlotte's. For her 13th birthday, Jenna invites Matty and all the popular kids from her school only to find herself being ditched by them and she blames Matty for this.

In Big, Josh has a crush on an older girl (I'm assuming she was older...she was at least a foot taller than he was!) and his best friend and next-door-neighbor (hmm, sound familiar?), Billy, confirms with him that she broke up with her boyfriend and is therefore available. While at a carnival with his parents, Josh sees his crush with a guy (obviously on a date) and tries to impress her by saying he's ridden the roller coaster they're in line for many times, only to find out that he is too short to go on it. Ouch. 
Freaky

Now we're to the part where Josh and Jenna make their wishes. I think it was more effective in Big, but was more accurate in 13. Let me explain: In Big, while at the carnival, Josh sees a fortune teller machine, similar to an arcade machine, and it has the creepiest head in it. The fortune teller's name is Zoltar and when you put a quarter in it, it tells you to make a wish, then spits out a card saying, "Your wish has been granted." With the grotesque puppet head and ominous mood made already by a thunderstorm, the scene is made even more creepy when Josh looks down and sees that the machine has been unplugged all along! When Josh makes his wish, he says, "I wish I were big." Now, if I were Zoltar, I would assume he meant that he wished he had more physical mass, not older, but I guess the movie wouldn't sound as good if it were called "Older", but that's just a little nit-pick. In 13, Matty has made Jenna her own "dream house" (he totally loves her) and has included a packet of fairy wishing dust which seemed very contrived, but at least when she made her wish, she was very precise, saying, "I wish I were 30, flirty, and thriving." 

We next have our scene where the characters wake up the next day and discover what has happened to them. This scene is done much better in Big. In 13, it felt like they were trying not to totally copy Big for this scene, but they still kinda do. It's funnier in Big as he's trying to put on his own clothes only to find he can't fit in them and when his mom (Mercedes Ruehl) asks him a question from downstairs he replies with a deeper voice. They try to make it funny in 13, but it goes on a little too long as she sees a guy only wearing a towel coming out of her bathroom and freaks out when she hears a cell phone. 

The biggest difference in these movies is the time setting. For Josh, it's still the same year as it was when he was a kid, 1988, and everyone around him is still the same age. He has literally skipped from being 13 to 30. For Jenna, it is 2004 and everyone else has grown up around her and she already has an established job at Poise magazine and has an apartment in New York. She already has lived her life (and discovers that she was popular in high school and became friends with the Six Chicks and now works with Lucy (the girl called Tom-Tom (Judy Greer)). She just doesn't remember any of it and soon finds out she's not a very nice person, having done terrible things, including pushing Matty out of her life because she got too cool for him. This scenario is a little less freaky in 13 as nobody is surprised that Jenna is older, but they do wonder why she's acting all weird. Plus, she already has a job and apartment she doesn't have to worry about. It's a little more scary for Josh in Big. When he tries to tell his mom what happened, she gets freaked out that a strange man is in her home and is talking about her son and thinks Josh has been kidnapped. The only person who knows the truth about Josh's identity is Billy who is skeptical only until Josh starts singing a song they always sing together. He helps Josh by acquiring his dad's clothes for him, breaking into his family's emergency cash stack for Josh to stay at a crappy hotel in New York. Josh doesn't have the luxury of having a doorman or a walk-in closet full of designer dresses, shoes, and purses like Jenna has. Instead he has screaming neighbors, gunshots outside his window, and a crappy room. Big definitely explores a darker side. There's a bit of a dark side in 13 when Jenna realizes she was a major bitch in her blocked-out years and someone who turned on her friends and family and sold out her own place of employment by helping out the competition, Sparkle magazine. That said, Jenna never has to fear for her life or safety like Josh, plus her parents aren't out there worrying about their daughter and what's happened to her. I never understood why the Baskins just didn't call the police and say that their son was missing. Unless they did and I just totally missed that. Josh tries to ease their minds by calling them and saying their son was okay and writing them letters saying he was being treated well and it was just like summer camp. Even though they put a missing child photo of him on the side of a milk carton (oh, how '80s!), it still didn't feel like they were doing enough to find him. And he was gone for at least a month...that's a long time for your kid to go missing! In this regard, I think 13 had more free reign to not have to worry about stuff like that and maybe their method made more sense, but it was much more interesting in Big. It's one thing to want to be a certain age, but skip ahead (or back) to the year when you will be (or were) that age, but it's another to be a totally different age in the present year. Or at least, I can only imagine! 

I mentioned earlier that I would discuss the setting of the '80s. Obviously Big is set there throughout the whole movie as well as was filmed in the '80s, however, 13 Going on 30 seems to have a lot more fun with the decade...even when it is set in 2004. They go through all the great '80s songs: "Thriller", "Jessie's Girl", "Burning Down the House", Madonna's "Crazy For You", "Love is a Battlefield", "Everybody Have Fun Tonight", and "I Wanna Dance With Somebody." That annoying Liz Phair song, that played everywhere in '04 was the only current song they had. There's not that many big '80s hits in Big and one of the songs sounded a lot like the song Will Smith wrote for Men in Black...and then I learned that he sampled from a song called "Forget Me Nots" and that's the song that plays when Tom Hanks and Elizabeth Perkins are jumping on the trampoline. Seeing that as I recognized it as the Will Smith song and not the '80s song should probably provide a clue that it wasn't a huge '80s hit...not in the way the songs in 13 are. That movie also has fun with the fashion: they dress young Jenna and the Six Chicks in some of the most ridiculous, but most amazing '80s fashions. Josh's crush wears a very '80s outfit and is decked out in denim, crimped hair, and big plastic earrings. And they weren't even trying to be cute and clever like they were in 13; it's so awesome. Seeing as Big was filmed in the '80s, it was just the current decade for them and they didn't have the fun with it as they did with 13 Going on 30. They had yet to realize what an awesome decade for fashion and music they were dealing with!

Josh gets a job at a toy company and when the president (Robert Loggia) sees how knowledgeable he his about toys, he is quickly promoted to Vice President, much to the chagrin of the other employees. His salary raises significantly and he is able to afford his own loft complete with a bunch of toys. Both movies have a musical number they're both known for: the playing of "Heart and Soul" on a floor piano in FAO Schwarz in Big and the "Thriller" dance scene in 13 when Jenna is trying to revive a dying party to impress her boss (Andy Serkis) which turns into a flash mob. Both scenes are the highlights of their movies.


Movies like these would not be complete with a romance. In Big, fellow co-worker, Susan (Elizabeth Perkins), takes a liking to Josh even though she finds him a bit odd when he shows up to a party wearing a ridiculous white suit and eats the baby corn like regular corn. Even when he takes her back to his apartment filled with toys, she is only a little taken aback, but still, ironically, finds him more of an adult than her ex (John Heard). In her new world, Jenna already has a boyfriend, a good-looking hockey player who's also really dumb. She meets back up with Matty (Mark Ruffalo) who tells her they haven't spoken since high school and she finds out about her past from him. They rekindle their friendship and Jenna is crushed to learn that he is getting engaged to another woman and is moving to Chicago.

A big difference between these two movies (there are more than one!) is how they deal with sex. Jenna never has sex when she is in her adult body, but Josh does (and is quite chipper the next day). This is a little bit disturbing because while Jenna still thinks of herself as a 13-year-old, she has already lived her entire life up to 30 (even though she doesn't remember it) and has already had experience with guys and sex seeing as she has a boyfriend and found out she had an affair with a married man (even though she doesn't remember any of it). Josh is just a 13-year-old in an adult body and has had no experience so it's a little creepy to think Susan had sex with a 13-year-old, even though he looked like an adult.

Both movies remind us that these adults are really still kids. Josh still hangs with Billy and they get pizza, ice cream sundaes, spray each other with Silly String, and snicker when people think Billy is Josh's son. And let's not forget all the toys he gets to play with! There's a hilarious scene in 13 Going on 30 when Lucy tells Jenna that a hot guy in a restaurant is checking her out and she decides to talk to him. She goes past the attractive guy Lucy was talking about only to stop in front of a 13 year old boy and starts talking to him and asks for his number. She also makes friends with a 13-year-old girl who lives in her apartment and invites her and her friends over for a sleepover and proclaims the reason she looks good in her new dress is because of her "amazing boobs!"

In Big, at the beginning of his transformation, Josh wants nothing more than to go back to his old self, but finds out that it will take a month before he gets back any information on where the carnival with the fortune teller is. (It left town the next day). But he likes his life as an adult and isn't sure he wants to go back to a kid until Billy puts some perspective into him. In 30, Jenna is resigned that this is where she now is in her life and will have to deal with the repercussions of being who she was and losing Matty. Of course both movies both end up with them going back to their 13-year-old selves.

I highly recommend both movies; Big is more of a classic, but I think 13 Going on 30 is very cute and Jennifer Garner is very charming as Jenna. It's a very un-Sydney Bristow-like role, but some of the outfits reminded of clothes Sydney would wear for her undercover jobs! Especially when she had her hair up in pigtails with these long chopsticks...those would make great weapons for Syd!  Oh, and if you love the '80s, you should definitely check out both movies! 

Tuesday, December 24, 2013

Christmas Classic

Miracle on 34th Street
Director: George Seaton
Cast: Maureen O'Hara, Natalie Wood, Edmund Gwenn, John Payne
Released: May 2, 1947

Oscar nominations:
Best Picture (lost to Gentleman's Agreement)
Best Supporting Actor - Edmund Gwenn (won)
Best Original Story - Valentine Davies (won)
Best Screenplay - George Seaton (won - okay, isn't that the same as "original story"?)


For my traditional Christmas movie review, I was going to do a double review of this movie and the 1994 remake, but I could not get my hands on the '94 one. (You'd think this one would be the harder one to find!) The only time I saw it at my local video store was when I rented this one, but I didn't want to get that one too because I would look stupid renting two of the same movie. (They're not the same, but you know what I mean!) And even though it was my #1 on my Netflix queue, they kept sending me the discs for season 4 of Modern Family which were listed after that one. So no double feature this year. It would have been interesting to compare the two movies. Maybe I will do the '94 remake next year as a holiday bonus movie. If I can find it, that is!

This is the first time I've seen the original. I had seen the remake when it came out and then again on home video, but it's been awhile since I've seen that, though I certainly remembered elements from that one while watching this one. I'm pretty sure the remake is an exact replica of the original although I'm sure they changed a few things. I just can't tell you what those might be! Apparently there's also been two made-for-TV remakes that came out in 1959 and 1973 which I didn't even know had existed! It's been almost twenty years since the theatrical remake...I think it's about time for another rendition of this Christmas classic!

When I first saw the '94 version, my first introduction to this movie, I was old enough to know (spoiler alert!) Santa isn't real. (Please, I had figured that out when I saw a price tag from Toys R Us on one of my toys!) But I could totally suspend my imagination and believe that Santa could be real in movies like he is in Elf, Ernest Saves Christmas, and many others. So when I watched Miracle on 34th Street ('94), I just believed that he was the real Santa and didn't even think about it. But watching Miracle on 34th Street ('47), I wasn't so sure. Is he really Santa or is he just a kind-hearted man, but a bit loony and really believes he is a fictional character? I can't remember if they gave him any sort of magical powers in the '94 version that would make it no doubt he really was Santa or if it's just because I'm a little older and a little wiser and psycho-analyze things too much. This is why it would have been nice to re-watch the remake! In Elf, Santa lives in the North Pole with his toy-making elves (and Buddy!) and flies a sleigh pulled by his eight reindeer. Neither Santa does that in the Miracle movies, but there are other signs that he could be Santa Claus, although everything can be explained. You certainly can't explain how you can ride in a sleigh by flying reindeer!

The film starts out in New York at the Macy's Thanksgiving Parade where Kris Kringle (Edmund Gwenn), as he calls himself, fills in for the drunk man who was supposed to play Santa. He seems to know what he's doing with the reins, but he could just be an excellent horseback rider. Before that, he tells a shop owner that his miniature reindeer are in the wrong spot. (How can you even tell Prancer from Cupid, Comet, etc.?) He could have just been pulling that out of his butt and telling the show owner some gibberish to make it sound like he knew what he was talking about. When he gets a job as a department store Santa at Macy's, instead of trying to sell the extra stock they have at the store like he was told, he tells the parents where they can find a toy if Macy's doesn't carry it. He could have just done his homework. Although this was before the Internet existed, so it probably took more time, but he could have visited every store and took inventory of their stock. By the way, I didn't know Gimbles was a real store. My first instruction to it was in Elf and I just thought it was a made up department store for that movie. Too bad Buddy the Elf wasn't around back then to decorate their department store for them.

When Doris Walker (Maureen O'Hara), who hired Kringle at Macy's, asks to see his contact information, she is given a card with an address from the North Pole. It could be that he is homeless and just wrote the first thing he thought of! And since he really does believe he is Santa Claus (perhaps it's the beard?), he is taken to court to question his sanity. There is that scene where his lawyer (and Mrs. Walker's love interest), Fred Gailey (John Payne), shows evidence that he is the real Santa because all these bags of letters addressed to "Santa" have been delivered to the courthouse. Since all those letters were delivered to this man who says he is Santa at this address where he's being held, that must mean he really is Santa! Well, not exactly. There's a scene at the post office where they are trying to get rid of all the letters addressed to Santa they've accumulated throughout the years (what do they do with those anyway?), so they decide to send them to the courthouse because they've read about Kris Kringle in the paper and they just want to get rid of all those letters! I don't think that scene really proved he is Santa. And then you have the last scene (which I remember in the remake too) where it's Christmas day and Doris's daughter, Susan (Natalie Wood) is upset because she didn't get what she asked Santa for....which was a house, duh, of course it's not going to fit under your tree! She goes for a drive with her mom and Fred and makes them stop the car when she sees the house she showed a picture of to Kris with a "for sale" sign the yard. She yelps and jumps around the house, happy and pleased that Santa remembered her gift. I rolled my eyes when Fred says, "Well, now we have to buy it for her." Nice gift, "Santa", you're making the adults pay for it!

I'm not trying to be a total Scrooge, but I'm just pointing out that this so-called Santa could just be a demented, albeit, kind, old man who does think he is really Santa. They never give you any concrete evidence that he is a character who travels around the world in one night to deliver toys to all the children. I think they want you to believe he is Santa, but leave it up to interpretation. Or maybe I'm just a total downer!

Let's talk about Susan. Let's just forget the fact that it was totally ridiculous that her mom and Mr. Gailey decide just to buy a new house because she asked Santa for one. That whole thing aside, I'm sorry, but this little girl has a stick up her butt. She is just so...unfun and acts more like an adult than a kid. I can't remember if Mara Wilson's Susan was like this too. Susan is probably no more than eight and doesn't believe in Santa. (I blame that on her mom who also seems to be really uptight.) There's a scene where she's telling Kris that her schoolmates were pretending to be animals and they wanted her to be a bear and she indignantly tells him, "I'm not a bear! I'm a girl!" Oh my God, it's called having an imagination! Kids like that are the worst! She does learn to be more like a kid, so she gets a little better but she totally looses me again at the end with her ridiculous present from "Santa".

This movie came out in May, which today is unheard of for a Christmas movie not to come out in November or December. (The '94 one came out in November.) The reason it came out nearly six months before Christmas was because more people back then went to movies during the summer rather than the winter and they wanted to be sure they made money. They didn't market the movie as a Christmas movie and instead of showing scenes from the movie when they were promoting it, they did an advertisement where they said this movie was "romantic", "thrilling", "funny", and any other adjective you could think of to make people see it. It seemed to work because it became a big hit for its time and was nominated for a few Oscars (and won most of them).  It's a nice movie, but to me, it really doesn't feel like a Christmas movie. It just seems to be lacking that extra spark.

Friday, December 20, 2013

Christmas Collage

Here is a Christmas video I made and I hope you check it out and enjoy it. I mostly used stock photos of Christmas images, but to tie it in to movies, there are some stills from Christmas movies and I did use music that is used in Christmas movies as well. 





In keeping with my holiday tradition, I will do a Christmas movie review this year. I have plans for a double feature, but I am having problems with getting my hands on one of the movies. It's always gone at my local video store and even though I have it as #1 on my Netflix queue, they keep sending me my second choice even though it doesn't say it's a long wait. So if I can't get this movie, I will just have to do another one. It's not like my choices are limited for Christmas movies!

Thursday, December 12, 2013

White House Has Fallen

 White House Down
Director: Roland Emmerich
Cast: Channing Tatum, Jamie Foxx, Maggie Gyllenhaal, Richard Jenkins, Jason Clarke, Joey King, James Wood
Released: June 28, 2013


Olympus Has Fallen
Director: Antoine Fuqua
Cast: Gerald Butler, Aaron Eckhart, Morgan Freeman, Angela Bassett,  Melissa Leo, Rick Yune, Dylan McDermott, Finley Jacobsen
Released: March 22, 2013


Remember in 1998 when both Armageddon and Deep Impact, both about asteroids destroying the earth, were released within months of each other? And wasn't there two movies about volcanoes erupting within the same year too? White House Down and Olympus Has Fallen are both about the White House being taken over by terrorists and one man (Channing Tatum for WHD and Gerald Butler for OHF) must stop them. Both movies came out earlier this year only separated by a few months. There are only two main differences that I can find in both movies. One is that OHF takes itself much more seriously than WHD. It has a very somber mood while WHD goes for the more blockbuster summer popcorn thrill ride. It even makes a meta joke when a guide is giving a tour of the White House and tells the group where they are standing is where the aliens blew up the White House in Independence Day. Apparently that line was not in the script, so good for Roland Emmerich for having a sense of humor to keep it in. (Just in case my mom is reading this, he directed Independence Day!) Also, the marketing! I saw trailers, commercials, and posters for WHD everywhere while I had no idea that OHF even existed until I saw it on DVD and heard somebody talk about it on a podcast when they were reviewing these two movies. I thought it was one of the straight to DVD releases!

Why don't we compare how similar they are? In the first time in Cinematic Sara history, I created this nifty table from my iMac's Pages:


White House Down

Olympus Has Fallen
POTUS: James Sawyer (Jamie Foxx) Even though Foxx isn’t as young as I thought he was, I could never believe him as the President of the United States. He was just never authoritative to me in a way, say, someone like Denzel Washington would be able to pull off. The First Lady is in Paris when the chaos happens.

POTUS: Ben Asher (Aaron Eckhart) Asher is a widower with a young son. His wife died in a car accident a year prior when their car slid into an icy bridge and she plummeted to her death. There was only time to save Asher. 
The hero: John Cale (Channing Tatum) First of all, I could watch Channing Tatum in anything. He is very nice to look at! Cale is a bodyguard assigned to the Speaker of the House of Representatives. He gets involved with helping Sawyer when he is in the White House on a tour with his daughter when the mayhem begins. 

The hero: Mike Banning (Gerald Bulter) Banning used to be head of the security team for the POTUS, but he was pulled from the team because he was the one who saved the POTUS and couldn’t save the FLOTUS so it brings back bad memories for the President. When Banning sees something is wrong at the White House, he goes into Jack Bauer mode. 



The (main) bad guy: Emil (Jason Clark, the guy from Zero Dark Thirty). With the help from the inside, he leads his men inside and they start taking hostages. The bad guys sneak into the WH acting like janitors. 

The (main) bad guy: North Korean terrorist, Kang (Rick Yune) who is posing as the South Korean’s Prime Minister’s assistant. That way he is invited into the White House when Asher has a meeting with the PM. After the WH is surrounded by Kang’s men and the security guys have all been taken out, Kang takes the POTUS and others (including the Secretary of Defense (Melissa Leo)). Kang wants Asher to pull troops from his country where there’s a civil war going on and he wants the codes for the missiles he plans to launch and the only people who know them are the POUTS and two other officials in the room.
Inside Man: Martin Walker, retired head of the Presidential Detail (James Wood) He is the one who is behind the overthrow of the White House because his son was killed in war and he wants revenge. He also wants codes that will launch a missile.  

Inside Man: ex-Secret Service agent-turned-traitor Dave Forbes (Dylan McDermott). I don’t remember why he was working with the North Koreans, but Banning doesn’t know his old pal is one of the bad guys until Forbes says Kang’sname and Banning asks him how he knew his name. He tells Forbes to be on the good side for once and radios Kang to tell him he has Banning captured and after he does that, Banning kills him. Dude, pick a side and stay with it! 
The veteran: Speaker of the House, Eli Ralpheson (Richard Jenkins). He is the one Cale works for and he is also behind the whole plot as well. He is promised if he goes along with it, he will be the next POTUS because they launch a missile at Air Force One which has the VP in it. (What’s this an epihour of 24?) But what he and Walker failed to realize is that they didn’t succeed at killing the President and their plans are thwarted.  

The veteran: Speaker of the House, Allan Trumball (Morgan Freeman). See, even the veteran actors are playing the same roles! Unlike Ralpheson, Trumball is a good guy and has to take over as POTUS for five minutes when it is feared that Asher is dead. 
The kid: Emily (Joey King) Cale’s daughter who has an unusual fascination with politics for a girl her age. Her flag waving skills helps save her dad and POTUS at the end of the day (don’t ask). She has a YouTube channel and takes videos of the terrorists as she’s hiding. She is captured and brought into a room with the other hostages, but not before she uploads the videos to her channel and they go viral and soon it’s all over the news. The journalists say her name and post her picture. Now I  shouldn’t compare this ridiculous event to a real, horrifying one, but I remember when Columbine happened live (as this was happening live too), students would call news channels from inside the school to tell them what’s going on, but the journalists would be very careful to say DO NOT TELL ME WHERE YOU ARE so they wouldn’t be found and shot in case there were any TVs on. Why are these journalists saying her name and posting picture of her when her hostages could be watching it on TV? That was just stupid and that would never happen. 

The kid: Connor (Finley Jacobsen) He has nothing to do except be saved. After he is safe, Banning continues on with getting the POTUS and defeating Kang. This category is the only one where there’s a major difference between the two movies. It’s the only one where the characters are played by opposite genders. And while Connor is barely in the movie, Emily plays a very big role in hers.
The (main) female: Carol Finnerty (Maggie Gyllenhall). She works as an assistant for the POTUS and is not in the White House when it’s taken over. She’s working on the outside to help Cale and Sawyer escape.

The (main) female: Director of the Secret Service, Lynne Jacobs (Angela Basset). She fully and completely trusts Banning with her life and with the life of the President. She knows if anybody is going to save Asher, it’s going to be Banning! She’s also on the outside helping Banning.