Is there life behind stand-up comedy? (Funny People)

Laughter is a reflex. And it’s contagious. And universal.

All around the planet people enjoy a good joke. Most of the time seeing someone slip on a banana peel it’s enough to provoke a burst of laughter. But “Funny People” it’s not about that kind of laughter.

George Simmons (Adam Sandler) is a successful stand-up comedian who made lots of money starring in silly box-office movies. One day he find out that he has a rare disease and it’s time for him to reconsider his life. What follows is a sweet and tender  look at the internal laboratory of stand-up comedians.

George is very rich but lonely.  Ira (Seth Rogen) has friends, but is struggling to survive working in a deli shop and sleeping on the couch of his friend Mark (Jason Schwartzman) who has a steady and well paid job on a crappy sit-com. And there’s Leo (Jonah Hill) who’s somehow a better comic than Ira and is a regular at the local comedy club.

The world of professional comedians is a tough one and very competitive. At times you wonder if there’s a place for real friendship among this people who make a living by telling jokes. Could it be that by exposing the nakedness of the emperor, by breaking  rules and taboos, by revealing what is usually kept behind closed doors the stand-up comedian doesn’t leave room around him for genuine feelings?

The director Jude Apatow (Knocked-up, The 40-year old virgin) did a nice move by casting his wife (“How can you cheat on me?  I was so hot?”) and kids on this movie. No complains here: Leslie Man is very hot indeed and the little girls are filling naturally the screen. Adam Sandler proves again that his great performance in “Punch Drunk Love” was not a one-time hit. Plus, we have the chance to see an incredible funny Eric Bana.A virtuoso display of the universal appeal of sexual humor didn’t hurt much this tender sneak inside the internal working of some special kind of people. Funny people.

Larry David (“Whatever Works”)

“If the shoe fits, wear it”  (cliche)

A few days ago, Larry David stirred some controversy with an episode of “Curb Your Enthusiasm”. The accusation being made that he pissed on a Christ’s picture. If this would have been proven to be true, I would have disapprove it despite my lack of interest in religious wars. I’ve watched the incriminating episode and of course it wasn’t any pissing on a picture of Jesus. What happened was  that,  due to some medication, Larry David’s character(played by Larry David), had a very strong stream while pissing, and on one occasion, a drop of urine splashed on a picture of Jesus. The picture was hanged on a wall in a bathroom just above the toilet bowl(which, I hope you’ll agree, is not a great spot to put an icon). The ladies of the house interpreted this episode as a miracle(Jesus crying! blah blah) and from a joke in an TV series  the mass media made a whole shebang and blah blah

Well, Woody Allen chose Larry David to be Boris Yellnikoff in his latest production “Whatever Works”. This movie happened to be misunderstood in such a degree that it got a ‘rotten tomato’ score on a well know site of film reviews (48% on Rotten Tomatoes).

I didn’t  make a secret that, when it comes to cinema, Woody Allen is one of my weaknesses. And, the truth being told, I found some entertaining values even in his worst productions(and I won’t name any names; any Woody’s fan will know what I mean, and if you don’t like Woody Allen’s films you should stop reading this, good bye!).

Let me tell you that Evan Rachel Wood(as Melodie) is a delight in this movie. And anyone who followed W.A.’s carrier can’t accuse him of picking the wrong actors for the part. Rachel Wood stepped in a great style in the shoes of Mia Farrow, Diane Keaton, Dianne Wiest,Radha Mitchell, Christina Ricci etc

And don’t forget about Patricia Clarkson and Ed Begley Jr. They play Melodie St.Ann Celestine’s parents. Especially Patricia is a treat for any movie-goer (she probably deserve her own movie, book, statue, street, cocktail, perfume, award, cover, song, lyrics, photographs, wine, dress,  etc  )

I honestly don’t get all the bad press this movie got. Seriously. Larry David is pitch perfect in the role, Evan Rachel Wood is a nice breath of fresh air, Patricia(I already told you about Patricia, so shut up) is very good, so blame it on Woody Allen. But, don’t you dare! It’s not his greatest movie(I’ll be the first to admit it), but certainly is not his flop.

If  “I’m the only one to sees the whole picture”  I think it is high time for you to go back to watching only soap-opera for the rest of your life.

And, by the way, is your mother a woman?

Audrey (“Roman Holiday”)

Photo by Cecil Beaton

It  just happens that I think  Audrey Hepburn is the most gracious actress to have ever walked  this planet.

Her first starring role, in “Roman Holiday” (1953), brought her an Oscar, a Golden Globe and the cover of TIME, she became a muse for fashion designers and an object of admiration for cinema lovers ever since.

Audrey Hepburn (Princess Ann) brings to the screen a  unique combination of childlike innocence and royal wisdom, an overwhelming charm and a devastating sadness.

“Roman Holiday”, directed by William Wyler ,  doesn’t have a happy-ending as one would expect from a big Hollywood movie made in that era- thank God-, but that doesn’t make it less memorable. And it’s shot entirely in Rome.

***************

Thanks to Paramount and CBS DVD some of Audrey Hepburn’s movies had undergone an extensive and expensive process of restoration.  I couldn’t resist  buying the box set “Audrey – Couture Muse Collection”, which includes 6 films, mastered in high definition. “Roman Holiday”, “Sabrina”, “Funny Face”, “Breakfast at Tiffany’s”, “Paris When it Sizzles” and “My Fair Lady”

How on Earth Is “Paranormal Activity” the Scariest Movie Ever Made?

Let’s see what Rotten tomatoes has to say about “Paranormal Activity”: 90 minutes of relentless suspense.

On imdb the same movie gets 7.6 out of 10 points.

Roger Ebert, a very important film critic, credited it with 3  1/2 stars  out of 4 .

I probably woke up on the wrong side of the bed, but I coudn’t count more than 6(six) minutes and 37 (thirtyseven) seconds of really scary scenes.

If you want suspense, watch any movie made by Hitchcock(try “The Birds” or “Psycho”) or, if you don’t like “old movies” and want a scary movie,  just rent any “Asia Extreme” release from Tartan Video.

This movie barely managed to get an Honorable Mention two years ago at Screamfest . It cost eleven thousand dollars to make and it seems that , according to imdb, Spielberg changed the original ending and after that Paramount sized the opportunity of easy money and  spent 10 million on advertising and here we are.

By now  chances are that everyone knows what this movies is all about and the title is self-explanatory. What we see on the screen is the relating of a series of events involving a young couple as told by an objective witness. The camera bought by Micah to film his lovely Katie. We don’t learn much about them and we don’t know how the menacing entity looks like, but the male character is reading a book about demons(see below).  And the fact that we don’t see the “bad guy” is really the only merit of this movie.

What could have been a really good short film turned into a dull and boring 80 minutes with an added 10 minutes of really scary stuff toward the end of the movie.

To me, the trend started by “The Blair Witch Project” is a dangerous one. What at first sight seems a very good idea(give every kid access to a camera and let them develop their potential) now it’s becaming a nuisance for the seventh art.  I would compare this  ”democratization of technology” with the blow given to cinema by the television.

I’m not saying that director Oren Peli doesn’t deserve some credit. After all, he had one week, a bunch of amateurs, two  cameras and very little money to make this movie.  But I’m afraid that the marketing guys from Paramount deserve even more credit.

In primary school they teach you that a good story needs a strong introduction, a consistent content and a powerful ending in order to work. In this movie, the introduction and the middle are, at best, passable and the last part is pretty good. Is this enough to make a great movie? If you ask me, my answer is a resound no.

***

Note: While I was writing this post, an imp (which from time to time resides on my left shoulder) was whispering in my ear that because of the “democratization of technologies” an amateur like me can write an opinion and let it run wild on the internet…

Go Gently into that Good Night (“Cries and Whispers”)

We are born alone and we die alone.

We live behind closed doors.

We are trapped inside our brains and our bodies. We live in a blood-red enclosure.

Somewhere in a small village in Sweden Karin (Ingrid Thulin) and Maria (Liv Ullman) come to see their sister Agnes.

Agnes (Harriet Andersson) is suffering. Her pain is excruciating. There’s no cure. She’s dying. Only the warmth of a body can bring her some relief. There’s solace in a touch. A human touch. What Karin and Maria seem to be unable to offer. Ana, the housekeeper, is there with her whole body and soul to comfort the mistress of the house.

It’s almost a mother daughter relationship.  In dying Agnes become a child again. And the helpless girl needs the love of her mother. And of her sisters.

After a last howl at life,

she goes gently into that good night.

With Ingmar Bergman’s “Cries and Whispers” we are in the presence of a masterpiece.

*   *   *   *   *

The most haunting cinematography of Sven Nykvist will stay with you long after the movie is over.

Harriet Andersson’s performance as Agnes will stir your guts.

Ingrid Thulin, Liv Ullman and Kari Sylwan (as Ana) complete an impeccable cast.

I’ve tried hard to avoid taking a screenshot with the omnipresent red interiors. My intention was  to let you to (re)discover the visceral atmosphere of this great movie.

The Unbearable Lightness of Being – Portraits (II)

The Unbearable Lightness of Being – Portraits (I)

Naomi Watts

If somebody woke me up in the middle of the night and asked me what is the best acting scene in modern cinema I would say without  hesitation: Naomi Watts, Betty’s audition, Mulholland Drive. This is what I would call a lesson in acting.

Here’s another screen-shot from the same movie:

If you don’t love her already, can I just mention that according to imdb her favorite actresses are Meryl Streep, Jodie Foster and Julianne Moore and that her best friend is Nicole Kidman and she likes Radiohead and Pink Floyd?

I couldn’t ask for more.

Today Naomi Watts turned 41.

Wunderbar – Inglourious Basterds revisited

Note: All photos from www.ign.com

Following a discussion with als (in the comments of my previous post) I decided to see again “Inglourious Basterds” .

And I’m glad that I have.  als turned out to be right and I realized that I was wrong. But for different reasons that you might think. I was wrong in calling Tarantino a boy. While he kept his playfulness(so still a boy at heart) his latest film proved to be the work of a mature filmmaker.

I was troubled by the issue of “technique over substance” in QT’s films. About this, als is right. There’s more technique in “Death Proof” than in “Inglourious Basterds”, but by gaining substance in the detriment of technique the latter is not losing its appeal(au contraire) and the former is exposed as a good exercise in style.

And my answer to the question whether one should treat “I.B.” differently because is “about history”  is no. Not because it is about history. I chose to treat it differently because of how QT rewrote history. The best car crash ever is still a car crash, not a statement. But by choosing to use the nitrate film itself(in a cinema, nonetheless) as your weapon in fighting(and killing) the enemy is more than an artifice. It’s a statement. About the power of Dream Factory.

Shoshanna chose not to kill colonel Landa as the one responsible for the death of her family, she chose to kill the authors of the ideologies that made possible the creation of men as colonel Landa. It wasn’t an eye for an eye revenge, she went for the source of the evil.

If at the first screening I was mesmerized by Christoph Waltz, this time I was able to pay more attention to Melanie Laurent, Diane Kruger, Brad Pitt and the rest of the cast. And boy, what a treat the whole experience was. I would go as far as saying that Tarantino should get his accolades if only for the performances he pulled out of his actors. But of course that there’s more than that.

The dialogs, the soundtrack, the cast, cinematography: the storyteller Tarantino at his best since “Pulp Fiction”.

As I keep stressing, Tarantino is doing his best in entertaining us.

About a boy named Tarantino

Note: A Romanian adaptation of this post has been published on a very good blog about movies cinesseur

Let me start with a confession. When it comes to cinema I have two weaknesses. One is Woody Allen and the other is Tarantino. So don’t expect objectivity in the following text.

Give Tarantino the world of cinema and he is going to make it his playground.

He’s the kind of guy who eats movies on bread at breakfast, lunch and diner.

He acts as a giant sponge that absorbs the fictional worlds of films and later projects on us a filtered vision  of his movie-reality.

He makes movies because he loves the cinema so much. Every one of his movies is a homage to the creators of fictional imagery on celluloid. He never seems to forget that the cinema was invented to entertain people. And that’s what he does best: entertaining  cinema lovers.

He was accused of using too much violence  on screen. His excuse is that violence is part of the cinema’s aesthetic and of the human nature, for that matter. He is said to have a foot fetish. I would be a hypocrite to hide that I loved Uma Thurman’s feet caressing the floor in “Pulp Fiction”.

His latest creation, “Inglourious Basterds” , could very well be a masterpiece declaration of his love for Cinema.

In the course of re-writing history Tarantino managed to bring to the screen the excellence in a bad guy character, Jews scalping Nazis, Romeo and Juliette in a burning cinema, Brad Pitt mastering Italian, a brilliant opening scene and …a close up on Diane Kruger’s lovely feet.

For me, that’s entertainment!