|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
friday, july 30, 2004
ok, since i was amazed to see hamlet slash was common place i continued on my google quest started below. look what i found: more communities and if you read down there? dickens slash?i don't know why this entertains me. i don't read fan fiction at all nor will i read these, but i love seeing what people come up with, i can't even cope. tinman and scarecrow? pooh and piglet? goofus and gallant? jeeves and wooster? one flew over the cuckoo's nest? oh! my heart, for a moment i thought that said oliver twist.
alack! hermia and helena? nc-17?
god only knows what my search string referrers will be after this post.
my god, bible slash?
i need to get out.
in the mean time, look at these humorous links.
why didn't i think of this?
rmatey has domain. what about gfunk?
since we like to talk about adaptations, this looks interesting.
p.s. g does! hey, proof. i read that script at miramax. it's being made into a movie.
WAIT. stop the presses. i found the pip and herbert fic. i knew they couldn't be ignored! estella drove me to him... oh my brain...
suddenly i was @ 03:24 pm
i am in a little bit in a nasty mood today. last night i was beginning to feel fickle about things and now it has settled into a nice sedimentary pile of general disgust.
the mobster freelance man in los angeles wrote back today. he "decided to stick with the people i already have."
this annoys me for two reasons.
a. had i not written him yesterday to see if he had received the drawing test i sent him, i highly doubt i would have ever heard from him again. i can take rejection fine, but i detest having to ask for it. usually, when you have been given the next step as to have work elicited from your person it is nice to have a confirmation email which states, "yes. got the work" especially when dealing with a ONE MAN company.
b. this letter makes it sound as though i was harassing him for employment. i DID answer an add HE HAD placed, i wasn't arbitrarily nudging him for gainful means.
i also have an enormous secret ego. i berate myself to no end, but secretly, well i mean here i am: dude, mine was better than the examples you sent.
whatever. why i will be ever unemployed.
i am not about to launch in to one of my angst fests. i am actually writing a movie review today because these things entertain me to no end. this round, a midsummer night's dream from 1999.
a week or so ago i had a day long fest of watching "midsummer night's dream" renditions. i watched both the 1936 and 1999 versions. the first i will discuss here is the modern version with kevin kline, calista flockhart, théoden, newsie jack kelly and a dozen other stars.
from the opening of the film i quivered with branagh hamlet anxiety. the scene opens with a title card, which supposedly sets the plot of the movie firmly in our minds, but also lackadaisically makes certain the audience grasps the mood of irreverence by pointing out some details about "that newfangled contraption, the bicycle."
what two-wheeled dreams may come? asks the audience.
if you are going to have fun with an old fairy tale, embrace it, don't mock it.
i am all about modernizing and/or playing with the settings of traditional shakespearean pieces; such is what keeps them interesting for an audience who has "been there and seen that." i, however, hold such demands to the filmmakers as to ask that the updates must make sense. i want modernity to play into the richness of the text and be so incongruous after an initial shock, the changes go by unnoticed by the audience.
consider ethan hawke's hamlet. hamlet gives the "to be or not to be" speech in the action aisle of a blockbuster. not only is this decision hilarious, it plays into the meaning of the story on the whole. it is not arbitrary.
even the "swords" in baz luhrman's "romeo and juliet" work. it's clever.
when updating, you must blend. settings ought not detract the audience from what is at hand.
ie ethan hawke becoming a gentleman in modern day new york ("great expectations").
i found the modern adaptations in this version of midsummer night's dream distracting. constant allusions are made to its being set in athens and its characters wearing athenian garb and yet-
dude: hey yo man, i'm gonna be at diana's altar, 'kay dude? uh, fie.
they are roaming around in victorian/jazz era clothing...
oberon: you will known him by his athenian garb.
me: and his fedora.
... on bicycles. i have no idea what point was being made with the bicycles, but they were ubiquitous and i can find not reason, real or metaphorical for their placement.
if anyone would like to take a stab at was their intended purport, please, humor me.
i was not impressed with the initial actors seen. theseus and hippolyta were exceptionally cold in delivery. bottom, ah bottom. i love him dearly, really. bottom would be my amnd's equivalent and you know it. bottom is played by kevin kline, who, i am sorry to say, gives way immediately to the branagh school of overacting.
this film oddly enough chose bottom as some sort of audience focal point. at the beginning he appears to be hiding from some woman, during the players first practice some boys pour wine all over his head causing a crowd to laugh at him whilst he wanders away looking hurt.
and again, i ask why?
the point of his character is he is nearly flat. he is loud, silly but confident in himself and his abilities. it is what makes him charming. it is only at the end of the play why he admits he cannot give words to the midsummer night's dream he has had, people in the audience can see, though he is, verily, an ass. somewhere deep within, he is at least truthful to himself and won't (as the lovers do) try to explain what has happened to him.
this film tries to give his character dimension. it is an assault upon the character. one loses perspective and his last speech isn't as "moving," because it is no longer the first time he is at a loss for words.
the end of the film is interesting. it follows bottom home after the play of pyramus and thisbe. he comes to an empty home and looks (forlornly) out the window only to witness a flourish of fairy lights rise into the night sky. one light, supposed to be titania, lingers before bottom.
i guess this scene was interesting; though i think the venturing into the world of bottom is as aggressive a motion as exploring the world of jack black's character in "orange county" or making a whole movie about tigger, at least with this scene i began to realize the writers were trying to make bottom (opposed to puck) the middle ground between the fairies and mortals/players and audience. i still think it is faulted decision and was done ungracefully, but it was at least some what of an attractive fancy.
in the end, you know the added bottom scenes were some sort of stipulation by kline.
kline: yeah, sure i'll play the part, but i need more screen time.
writers: sure. shakespeare didn't know what he was doing anyhow.
one more point on bottom, who i will let be after this, the ass head.
i wanted my ass head!
somewhat "creatively" he wasn't given the classic head of a donkey, but was rather made up in the fashion of a. l. webber's "cats" performers.
problem: he looked like the march hare from alice in wonderland. if i didn't know i was watching "a midsummer night's dream" i never would have guessed he was supposed to be a donkey.
it was such a disappointment.
all the budget was spent on bicycles, a proper makeup artist couldn't be hired.
the faeries. i have come to terms with the fact the faeries i envision will never make it to screen. this said, this fairy opening was very matrix.
announcer: faerie chicks gone wild!
puck: elderberry wine for everyone!
gump: hey, that's my line, normally i would be mad, but with my insta mood changes, i can't be! i'm so happy!
insert gyrating faerie folk here.
this was puck's introduction scene. i swear to god it was added.
let us consult the text, shall we?
ah! no it's there, i just imagined it differently and as such was surprised by its presence in the film (there was a tiny puck in one person's glass of milk, need i say more).
puck is played by stanley tucci, an impish looking fellow who i am not all together convinced makes a good puck.
reader interaction: how do you imagine puck?
i always imagine the "dead poet's society" version of puck. when the suicidal artist who is gravely misunderstood plays him?
actually on second thought, now having found (see: crown1.jpg) an image, perhaps not, but i like his crown (see: crown3.jpg).
tucci to me was too old. puck is sprightly, mischievous. tucci was also the most subtle of the actors, which is a little inverted since he is the most outlandish of characters.
wait. brain flash. was ethan hawke in dead poets too? my god. he is. i can't escape the man!
the faeries were eerie and creepy. they play records, because, yes they exist in ancient athens, they also apparently control the weather and abuse glitter almost as much as tom cruise in "legend."
jack o' the green: hey!
jack kelly: what?
titania's fling with bottom was by far the most horrifying scene. i was frightened when she sat on top of him. i didn't think i could be more traumatized than when i was forced to endure hamlet getting it on with ophelia, but i was wrong. titania and bottom. it was half on its way to yerf sex.
writer a: i don't get it; she likes him, but she doesn't go down? he has an ass head! what was shakespeare thinking?
writer b: wait, this scene could be really hot.
months later.
titania: touch my tit.
audience: WHAT!?
in my house.
me: my eyes, my eyes, oh, my eyes!
mother: i think this is actually illegal in several states.
this film obviously felt this dusty old tale needed some spicing up. everyone was constantly groping each other. now shakespeare has sex in his plays. i am a grown up and i can accept this without going mad with blushing and fainting away (i save those activities for social niceties such as talking to misanthropes), but when shakespeare included sex it was interesting (the sexual energy found in "othello" or hamlet's bizarre oedipal issues) or "realistic" in terms with the whole story (consider "romeo and juliet"). this film seemed to throw it in because it feared a modern day audience couldn't understand plot which didn't include (at very least) implied sex scenes.
lysander and hermia, much like the rest of the characters, are rather flat. they are pure lovers. when they run away together and in turn end up sleeping in the woods, rather than sleep together (in the most literal sense, side by side) hermia instructs they should be chaste and lysander is made to sleep apart from her.
this happens in the film, but not before nude lysander wanders over and molests hermia's near unclothed (at this point in the film she has been reduced to her underwear) bosom.
writer a: this is so lame. they're in the middle of woods and nothing happens but talking. we need to spice this up, i don't know what shakespeare was thinking.
writer b: let's have him grab her breast.
writer a: oooh.
months later.
lysander: i grabth at thy breast.
hermia: like, fie and tee hee!
lysander then spends the duration of the film in a diaper, the girls quarrel in a mud pit (writer b: chicks in mud, that'll make this better. writer a: can they be naked? naked means sexy) and the lovers are found, all together, nude, bestrewn with rose and poppy petals in a field. the latter is an awkward scene, because no one makes mention of their nakedness or seemingly lewd conduct (foursome?) because, yo, guess what? it wasn't written in the dialogue.
papa egeus: well anyhow, now that we've found you.
hermia in head: i am totally naked. i hope daddy doesn't notice.
the pyramus and thisbe skit yielded the most amusing interpretation of a line:
bottom: where he my lover deflowered-
quince: DEVOURED!
god, i love bottom. i smell another pointless literary fanlisting.
though it too offered more "let's dynamize these characters" weirdness by making flute perform his role of thisbe quite well, thus moving hippolyta and thus, again, missing the point of the skit entirely.
and then movie ended. capped off with bottom's moving audience bonding shot, one last implication of some fairy lovin' and puck's famed farewell, given this time in the garb of a stage sweep.
to sum, i quote my notes: ACK fairy love // speechless // audience.
i am convinced they only make these shakespearean films to prove modern day actors can talk with english accents and use big words in a convincing manner, which, mind, they very rarely can. they always bellow the roles as though the lofty archaic language calls for embellished delivery, when, in actuality, if spoken on normal terms, comes across do natural, the heightened diction is barely noticed.
it's as though the actors yell the parts because they don't know what they're saying and it drives me to distraction.
i don't mean to come off as a purist. i really am not. i am just a person of discerning taste.
oh, excuse, i just want to turn up sir mixalot's "baby got back" here.
really though, i just want something good when i watch a film. if it is an adaptation i want some which is true to the book, but stands on its own terms as well. is that so much to ask?
this film is entirely a two star event, neither memorable or really, too enjoyable. i think you should watch it so we can discuss, otherwise, go watch something like "sunset boulevard" and better your knowledge of fine moments in cinematic history.
and to answer puck, "if we shadows have offended-" actually, never mind. no comment puck.
i was going to ask how the branagh hamlet could have a fanlisting, but i found something indefinitely more interesting, what is this? the hamlet horatio fanlisting?
says the person with the rosencrantz and guildenstern one.
this is so awesome. i love bizarre slashish sites. ha.
excuse me while i google this, is it a common thing?
ACK. it is! there are hamlet horatio communities.
oh my pure mind: "Hamlet clings to Horatio. Their lips melt together. They tear at each other's clothes and kiss and kiss and kiss."
i'm like hamlet with gertrude, i just can't bear the thought of him as a sexual entity, it makes me ill.
yet this makes me laugh.
stay tuned for the 1936 "midsummer night's dream" commentary!
p.s. why don't james cagey or ethan hawke have a fanlisting?
p.p.s. did i tell you guys i got my film print back? it's so sweet in its little mini canister.
suddenly i was @ 02:12 pm
monday, july 26, 2004
I finished my second script! it only took all day and i now have MASS proof reading and fixing and editing and tweaking to do for the next month, but WOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO!
ask me how it went, i dare you.
suddenly i was @ 08:38 pm
saturday, july 24, 2004
my cat mabel is sitting on the back of my chair, purring in my ear. she is being a little monkey. now she has climbed to the arm rest, now to my lap, to the mouse and keyboard. off the keys mabel! now she is sitting on my papers looking at me.
oh i hardly have the mind to focus on journals these days. or anything for that matter. i think the final shock of being out of school will hit me come this august and i am gearing up for it. for then, not only will i find myself jobless and lifeless, but friendless as well as all 2 of my friends who exist at home return to their respected school lives.
august, my personal armageddon: when life becomes FECKLESS.
i really don't know how i will cope. it is all well and fine for people to tell me things will be fine, but in the meantime, they are not the ones sitting full heartedly disliking myself for not being anywhere yet. i try to flush all thoughts of this quality out of my mind, as no one else i know has found their golden opportunity, but they are out there, living, whilst i am here longing deep in my heart for anything else in life.
i know only i can make a difference in my life, so i have been trying my utmost best to be proactive.
the other day i was looking at grad schools and came to the stunning conclusion i cannot even afford the application fees. since when is it humane to charge one hundred dollars for an application?
i also cannot help but think i would like to attend graduate school for all the wrong reasons (ie: "AAH! RETURN ME TO SCHOOL!") and that i have made a most grievous error in not going right away after receiving my undergraduate degree. i mean, even if i went next year, i will still be younger than most, as i am quite young for my grade in school, but still, what will i do in the meantime?
i worry about graduate school.
i have never been a fan of it. i have always preferred getting out into the real world and getting experience to coddling one's sensibilities, prolonging the harsh, cruel actuality of life. in fact, up until the moment i graduated i never really considered it an option.
most graduate programs i have read about are about focus in a given area, which i just find so incredibly wrong. if one only concentrates on one aspect of creativity, chances for enrichment and learning are lost. i really believe someone should be able to explore as many facets of inspiration and creative outputs as is possible to strengthen their artistic clout and define their artistic person. i am afraid to focus so entirely on one type of creativity, lest i lose touch with other partitions of myself. graduate school, for me, seems about self indulgence. it is all about YOU. and, as self indulgent as i enjoy being every second of my life, i think would rather share with the world.
my undergraduate school, so far, has the most appealing graduate program. as it should. it's considered the top graduate school in the nation. unfortunately, i happened to attend it as an undergrad and i think i should go to another school to experience another city and environment.
also, once one has attended SAIC for an undergraduate degree, i hear it is nigh on impossible to be accepted into the graduate program.
i just don't know what to do. i just know i have to begin something. only i can make a difference. even if it means working at pet co. for the next three months.
GOD. what will happen? please, please, i need an out, i need to get out!
if i want to go somewhere, only i can make the move.
thus being so; i have been trying my best to be productive.
this morning i woke up early and wrote an astonishing 11 pages of script. i am nearing the very end finally. i might actually make my august deadline. in sept, or perhaps early oct i will begin my new script. if i wrote it and every two weeks or so posted portions here, would you guys honestly crit me?
last night i also began colouring my drawing test for this freelance job in l.a. i drew a mobster who looks like the love child of tony soprano and the godfather (it's not pretty.) please, call him god tony.
what else have i done creatively? i began laying out the cover art for my friend's novel. i have to paint it today.
i have also nearly finished "puck doll" and must begin scanning and printing stills from "casey dances."
socially, i have been adamant about keeping in touch with people from school. yesterday i was invited to a barbecue a time zone away. not bad.
i got together with casey and hillary again for funtime 2004 part II. hillary and i introduced casey to the joys of both "amadeus" and "some like it hot" two of the finest films ever made. if thou hast not yet witnessed their glory, please to watch them, for my sake.
we also watched legend, the euro version and the iron giant (another wonderful film).
during funtime 2004 part II, i got to meet casey's modified ken remus doll and hillary's adorable plushie remus.
i am going to be very sad when these lovely ladies return to school.
oh, and in another bit of bright news, the print of my film is finished in new york and is coming to me any day now.
we're working on things. working.
"you're going to make it after all!"
says my itunes.
thanks itunes.
i am trying, because GOD KNOWS i am rotting away.
the other day i went to the grocery store because the house was out of juice. i walked into the store took up a small basket and oh, i cannot tell the flood of feelings which overflowed my person. the immense sense of liberation and nostalgia! i remember going to the store by myself, only months ago, plucking through the bargains, being on the strictest budget, joyous to be putzing through the aisles and sales getting my best thinking done.
me waltzing up the bread aisle: i'm FREEEEEEEEEEEEE.
ah, the simple pleasures of a solitary life.
i think this scene is indicative of just how much i do INDEED need to get out.
i opened this entry with the intent of posting some movie thoughts, but i am too tired now. later i suppose.
suddenly i was @ 01:38 pm
monday, july 19, 2004
NO. will ferrell has NOT been cast to play ignatius in "confederacy of the dunces." drew barrymore? good lord. thank god production has been stalled; i would NOT be able to cope with this otherwise.
p.s. ignatius the poodle gets his name from "confederacy of the dunces," a fine, fine book you ALL must read.
suddenly i was @ 03:51 pm
yeah. still, neat! god, how i wish i could have been there. i wonder if one person i know went.
p.s. grammar quiz, i KNEW "sneaked" was the most proper term, not "snuck."
suddenly i was @ 01:10 pm
sunday, july 18, 2004
hey guess what everyone, i just landed a drawing test for myself for a probable month long freelance job in LA.IN-TER-ES-TING.
i have to draw a mobster in super photo realistic style.
i don't know if i want this job quite yet.
maybe i'll fail the test. eh...
suddenly i was @ 08:56 pm
we can't always be reading goethe and dickens.
and i just have to say michael ian black and mo rocca are my heroes. hands down. the former especially after reading his imdb page.
harvard degree in english literature and he was once a writer for "wishbone?" this man just became exponentially more hot in my own very sleep deprived opinion. we're veering near on "hot as a fox" here. i'm serious. get the hose. i mean, dude.
god, i knew i liked wishbone for a reason, now i know.
thank you imdb. this, is me to you.
i also adore loni love. she's so great. not much on her imdb file though. sadness. but those three, HOO.
ok, i'm going to bed, this is shameful.
suddenly i was @ 05:03 am
saturday, july 17, 2004
p.s. those "damn fish" are juju fish.
suddenly i was @ 01:10 pm
thursday, july 15, 2004
yes, yes, we haven't spoken in a while.
i hardly have had the energy to lift my pathetic non-active self up from the depths of nothing to sit at the computer and do something as constructive as writing a lj entry.
actually, this is somewhat needlessly harsh. i have spent the past few days scouring for jobs and editing my second script.
i do feel have i have a duty to younger mankind, all those in the process of earning their bfas and all those who are considering getting a bfa: get out now.
i know it's the most awesome degree and nothing can beat the arts, but damn. go become a doctor. i knew it was going to be hard getting a job, but never before have i faced more abysmal prospects. how does anyone get employed? i now see why, a. people return to grad school and b. why so many people who graduate in the arts don't get art related jobs.
my duty here being fulfilled, i must ask a couple questions. first, for the older-than-me contingency who reads this garble, do you have any recommendations on places to obtain fundage for graduate school?
second, does anyone know anyone who knows anyone who might know someone who might get me a job?
it's also interesting to think, "wow. i think i have made a most grievous mistake with my life." it's not a thought which usually crosses my mind, but as i was considering last night, had i stayed in my nigh-on-becoming beloved city of education and found a little place, i could have accepted the comic book store job offer, then i could have had my menial job, been near friends and support, been able to go to my screenings and see to certain unfinished businesses.
but no.
i didn't.
it is ridiculous to look back at the past and wonder, "what if, what if" but still i cannot help but think, "how could i have been so stupid?" i know what my logic was; i was trying to spare my parents any more support costs, but now what? what happens when it becomes august? it's all fine now, i have my two friends i am able to see, but what happens when they go back to school? as of right now i can't differentiate holiday from day, everything bleeds together into one long stretch of bland nothingness constantly reminding me of my uselessness. i need a schedule, i need something, asap. i am rotting.
oh god, the carpenters' "rainy days and mondays" WOULD start playing on my itunes right now.
and on that pleasant note, i finished reading, "the many sorrows of werther." for those of you who took me up on my plea to read along, perhaps it will be no surprise to you when i say i loved the book. poor werther. nothing like insipid love angst and dramatic, romantic bewailing of one's compleat (if not imagined) inadequacies. my new goal is to chest slam 24 year old goethe and have him over to tea with keats.
is werther in love? does werther love too much? does werther only love the idea of being in love? i'm not certain. all i can say on some very lesser level i feel i can relate to him.
i think werther's story would be a very interesting one to adapt to film. it would be very difficult; the novella is written in letter format, but the visuals werther describes are such and so very strong, oh, it would be quite lovely.
ie these scenes: werther is talking to a stream when his love appears above the bank. later there is a torrent flood and werther reaches out, overwhelmed, wanting to drown. werther discussing suicide with albert which ends when werther, in morbid jest, puts a pistol to his head.
oh, it is all very good. please read the book. it is one which apparently is not read as commonly in these more modern days.
when i haven't been bemoaning my existence ala werther, i have spent my time with the two sole redeeming graces of my lost summer, casey and hillary. it's always nice to have kindred spirits. a few days ago we had a 48 hour plus fest of togetherness which involved many adventures searching for ken dolls (details later), pizza and a long session of movies. we watched: dark crystal, naked, carebears the movie II, immortal beloved and rosencrantz and guildenstern are dead.
i REALLY love the latter film.
immortal beloved is a movie i have been meaning to watch for the past few ages. it's was all right. certainly no amadeus, but then can anything come close to touching the brilliance that which is amadeus? such a wonderful film. i was told to watch immortal for the scene wherein beethoven is inspired to compose "the ode to joy."
the shot is an intercut series between crotchety old man (ha!) beethoven and young boy beethoven. we are only concerned with the young beethoven half as is a very special shot. the young lu. van runs away from his abusive father and takes to sprinting through the woods. the boy comes to a lake, he strips and lies in the water. the ode to joy's most famous choral refrain begins and the camera zooms out from the boy's body. the boy floats in the water which is so still it reflects all the stars, but as the zoom continues the young beethoven looks less like he is floating in a starry lake and more like he is at the very center of a twinkling universe; an apt visual metaphor for the genius locked in his own private mind by deafness.
it was really nice. i want it on my computer. the scene was good as is but then with some of the world's most amazing music ever composed played on top of it, truly, it was very, very, nice. you could almost be led to believe it was the one image the writer had in his mind when he set out to write the story.
of ken dolls: casey and hillary decided they needed to remodel ken dolls into sirius black and remus lupin. need i say more? besides this: ken dolls are VERY difficult to find.
i, myself, am making a mini puck doll.
after our grand ventures in kendolldom, i met up with my friend alice. being it both of us share a fetish for bad disney sequels, we went out and rented "lion king 1/2." i was actually surprisingly entertained with the movie. as far as disney sequels go i think i can safely say this was a interesting take on a plot. maybe it was coming off of "r&g are dead," but i appreciated the efforts to impose an irreverent comedy over a more "serious" story. some of the sequences were amusing, most notably: parenthood, listening to mum's advice and new neighbors.
i think when timon and pumbaa start raising simba it is disney's first testimonial for gay fathers bringing up children. i was amused by the flip flop scenes of simba not sleeping to "the lion sleeps tonight" (timon to simba: you'll get old crossing this thing [log]) and simba being a rapscallion to "jungle boogie." "i'm counting to three..."
though i think the characters of uncle max and mom were somewhat forced especially at the end, i enjoyed the voice talents of julie kavner and jerry stiller. i also thought mom as the one chubby meerkat was very cute (see here). the scene where timon runs off and his mom yells advice back at him made me chuckle, i liked when he got so far away he couldn't hear her.
i can't believe i'm talking about this movie.
last fun scene: i thought most of the lion king de la original inclusions were decently placed, but my favourite was timon and pumbaa living in their new bachelor pad waking up to the loud new neighbors, aka young simba and nala singing "just can't wait to be king."
all in all, it was something which fell off fanfiction.net and was strange, but entertaining for a sequel type o' movie and i am convinced if the writing had been tighter and the comedy more striking, this film would have actually made it to the "very decent" level.
p.s. WHAT was with that legend thing on the bonus disc?
i wonder if there is such a thing as timon and pumbaa slash? because they were so obviously together in this film.
JESUS! there is! gross! they're different species people.
and again, i ask you to refer to my self pitying first paragraph and then look to this last thought, is it not proof of the fact i need to get out?
i have been traumatized by that last thought, what else was i going to say?
hmmm.
i guess i have naught much else to say. i have jobs to send out my resume out to, about 18 of them to be exact.
me: sure i'll be a proofreader.
my screening is in two days. this one isn't in a gallery like the last one, but rather is at a club. here's its site. i really wanted to be there, but oh well. i hear many people are out of town anyhow. i hope someone will call me whilst it's on and playing. anyone in the neighborhood, feel free to attend.
and remember, i ain't gonna stop the rain by complaining.
suddenly i was @ 02:04 pm
monday, july 12, 2004
my friends sent me money so i might get a plane ticket and go back to them.
i'm so happy.
suddenly i was @ 01:28 pm
saturday, july 10, 2004
how can one just feel so much angst all the time? DOES IT EVER LET UP?
in other news: i know of one person who went to the 2x4 screening. rock on.
suddenly i was @ 12:42 pm
friday, july 9, 2004
two very important things.
1. werther online. now you must all read with me! i am still off to find this book for i glanced through the text and can say i am going to like this.
p.s. now that i have seen the text, there is NO COINCIDENCE about my theory. not in the slightest.
2. look what my screenwriting teacher wrote to me in an email:
"P.S. I will miss your glowing presence in my class this fall."
isn't that nice? i like knowing i made an impression on someone.
i have an epically long script. i am wondering if i should mail off copies for other humans to read and crit. i am ashamed of it, especially since everyone knows how much i like to complain about modern day films when i easily fall victim to the same vices i condemn, but would anyone be curious to take on the read? i figure other humans have to read it some day as it's the only way i can learn and improve upon myself.
suddenly i was @ 02:51 pm
in other news: katy, the cousbian, is back.
sing with joy and gladness now with a love that's everlasting.
suddenly i was @ 04:41 am
thursday, july 8, 2004
a. looking for a job is VERY boring. where the hell is the media section in the la times' classifieds?b. how do i get to chicago by july 17th? anyone, bright ideas?
c. who can read my future?
suddenly i was @ 02:40 am
wednesday, july 7, 2004
wow, this is so me right now.go percy! go romanticism!
why am i not in bed? nicholas nickleby needs reading if i am ever to get to this werther book. who is reading with me?
suddenly i was @ 03:51 am
i love spiderman. during my tender early years of teendom, i had quite a thing for him. it is somewhat tragic, however as i explained to casey, today, in my old age i can remember very little about spiderman's comic book legacy and story.
i remember venom, i remember mary jane having a baby but it dies, i remember the spider dna taking over peter parker... and that's about it.
this said, i enjoyed the movie.
i have come to discover i am a snob with films. i should be forbidden from giving my opinion on a movie with only a single viewing as i tend to leapt forth and be incredibly critical. i should be given at least two before i let her rip.
i remember in my very first screenwriting class my teacher told us, "this is it. after this class you will never be able to watch another movie the same as you did before." and it's true. all through movies i spend my time thinking. always thinking, "see a character who doesn't say anything can work," "i wonder if they wrote in the script to have peter do that or if that was tobey maguire's interpretation?" "jesus, what is this flashback doing here?"
again as i said to casey, these thoughts are also why i giggle to myself for the duration of any one given film.
BUT I DIGRESS.
spiderman. it was ok. i liked it. as far a super hero movies go? par excellent; as a movie, movie, good, not overwhelmingly, but ripe enough to be entertaining for an afternoon.
i was reading something about super hero movies a while back; in today's hollywood, when ever a film is actually the start of a three-part-plus series, you cannot judge the quality of a hero film franchise by its first installment. the first movie exists as an introduction; you meet the characters, learn who they are and where their powers came from, they face an obstacles and by the end have developed into the super hero the audience go-ers recognize from comic book lore. think spiderman 1, think xmen. it is the second movie, however, which tells you what the series will be. the second movie makes or breaks the quality barrier. the second installment, the hero is already established, the players in place, you have only to build on the themes established in the first film, embellish, deepen, improve upon or lose it all. the exposition is finished, the second movie gets to get to the good stuff.
spiderman 2 definitely is going in the right direction on all accounts and is fine and fun film, better than the first.
i thought the first half of spiderman 2 superb and superior to the second, which became a little heavy handed in its sentimentality.
the dialogue was good. at times i felt it was a little direct getting a point across ("hi, i'm aunt may and i'm going to tell you the moral of this film.") but not too much as the point was well written, on the other hand there were little gem moments ie, at the very end of the film when peter holds the falling wall from crushing mary jane and she discovers the truth about his connections with spiderman. no long speeches, no gushing, two simple "hi's" and an awkward "this is really heavy." a irrelevant comment, compleatly true to peter parker's character. it was very nice.
i also liked how obscenely extraneous dialogue was absent and (ie) peter's character was allowed to just sit there and be quiet, letting maguire's facial expressions tell us what he was thinking. this is such a rarity in films today. usually the filmmaking gods feel audience members cannot figure anything on their own and therefore must be told at every opportunity what is going on, what is going to happen and what has just happened, repeatedly.
person: peter parker likes mary jane.
person 2: you mean to tell me peter parker likes mary jane?
person: i'm tellin' ya for the last time, peter parker likes mary jane!
there were a few moments when peter began to talk to himself and i had to cringe thinking, "please, shut up! we know! let us think for you, do not tell us!" but they were a finite amount of times and forgivable. some of the self inflicting dialogues, courtesy of peter parker, were rather enjoyable. i liked his fake phone call to no one telling mary jane he was spiderman. it was very sweet and again struck a chord with me personally as it reminded me of something i might do.
the comedy on whole of this film was all very spot on; whereas it lacked the incessant spidey banter of the first film which i enjoyed so much as it was straight from the comics, scenes like: peter doing laundry, peter in the elevator and most notably, peter breaking his back on a car (or two) only to, oh so delicately, set off a neighboring car alarm whilst walking away; more than made up for it, in spades.
my favorite scene of the whole film was the "raindrops" song sequence. i laughed entirely too hard. it reminds very much of a scene from another movie, which i did not so enjoy, "big fish" wherein the protagonist, ewan mcgregor, bearing a bouquet of daffodils walks along off to declare his love to the tune of "everyday" by buddy holly. both scenes, though neither from movies i want to get down on my knees and worship, fill me with such inexplicable feelings of "squee," i know they must be good.
and the freeze frame? odd, but incredibly funny.
i love the character of peter parker in these films. maybe i say this because i feel i can relate to him, but such is the sign of a good character: he's relatable to at least one person in the audience. this is really especially true for me right now, when peter is sitting there beyond penniless, jobless and pretty much friendless, suffering angst, i couldn't help but wonder gleefully to myself, "so, when did peter graduate from art school?"
i think why spiderman is such a successful movie series is banked on his character. his story is one which is involving. the core of the spiderman saga is peter's very mundane, very human life story. in fact, in the second film, the whole super hero aspect is almost inconsequential, playing second fiddle to the love story between peter parker and mary jane.
the love story is one i enjoy. i like love angst, especially when it is of the long unrequited, pining, lovers e'er apart sort. being the huge maudlin, romantic person i am, it is surprising how much i dislike when a couple is brought together. chemistry is so interesting to watch. i will be curious to see what they do for the obvious-in-coming threequel. it's a huge pay off to make, getting pete and mj together, because come s.man 3, that very tangible suspense and electricity of them wanting each other but being apart, will be gone. there will be different venues to explore, surely, but it will never the same. the tingling sense of anticipation is gone and it could go either way, for good or ill. i mean, let me put it this way, was the xfiles ever as interesting as mulder and scully got together? i think not.
as much as i would have enjoyed prolonging the love angst for a third film, however, i must embrace the fact it would have been a bit unbelievable. the two lovers had to come together in this film.
this film was very peter centric, which was understandable. aunt may was fine, mary jane, though on camera less, was believable. i enjoyed her angst towards peter. i did not, by any stretch of imagination approve of the jesus flashback with uncle ben; a scene i could have done without ten-fold over.
i believe doc oc. was severely underused. i was excited when his character was introduced and such importance was given to the love he shared with his wife. i thought his dedication to love would have made a nice embellishment to peter's own love issues. it was a fact which could have been exploited to the max, but was rather thrown to the wayside. love could have been a much stronger theme in this film.
because GOD KNOWS all you need is love.
but really, i wanted layered love tales. octavius and mrs octavius, peter and random way thin neighbor girl, mary jane and peter, mary jane and john jameson... layers people, think onions.
but returning to character chat and octavius being underused:
at the end of the movie when the good doctor claims, "i won't die a monster" the audience could really care less because he wasn't around enough for people to get to know his nonmonstrous side really. there seemed to be no struggle within him at all. he was there at first a little snobby talking about love and then he was there and evil. he was just a little background detail happening for the sake of making this a super hero movie whilst peter was upfront debating his life and loves.
had we cut jesus uncle ben flashbacks and ANGST my name is harry scenes, doctor octo could have been allotted a much more sound amount of screen time.
harry's character was the least believable for me. his anger and seething lust for vengeance, though i know it was supposed to be an obsession, didn't quite work.
if this second film was supposed to be taking place 2 weeks after the first film, fine, but 2 years later? it was odd. his whole character was uneven. he would be very buddy-buddy ("sure, let me show you to my good friend octavius!") but then five seconds later would be on peter's case about "the bug." maybe it was an internal thing, only coming out when harry's discretion was compromised, ie when harry was inebriated, but still.
also, didn't buy the random vision of daddy osbourne just as i did not appreciate the dream of uncle ben.
those guys died, let dead dudes lie still.
another interesting character point: i would like to know what people think of jameson. i once was a part of a conversation saying his character didn't belong in the spiderman films.
the spiderman movie works so hard at creating these realistic characters then they throw him in and he is this bombastic insane cartoon character.
the argument of course is: that is just how he is in the comic.
the question is: in the movie does he work?
the only character i can say i felt didn't work at all was harry. they want him so badly to be in the next film as hobgoblin, even if he didn't naturally fit into the puzzle of this film's narrative frame work, they were going to take his piece and to sledge hammer it until it did.
i wish they would do the venom story.
as far as timing goes, again, i loved the first half and the comedic elements, but i think this movie had far too many things going on to wrap up in a decent amount of time at the end so when the movie began to wind down, things became scanted.
i'm not a monster!
peter you're spiderman?
peter i love you!
wedding, angst, threequel- ARGH!
it was too much. my eyes almost fell from their sockets when mj took off from the church in her wedding dress. i actually did cry out, "oh my god!" in the theatre.
all in all though, a fine fun film. the humor is great, the dialogue neat and despite the blaring soundtrack DEAFENING the audience to remind them what emotion they need to feel, good healthy fun as well!
i want to read this. who knows about it and who wants to read it with me?
in other news, my film is in another show in chicago. wee.
suddenly i was @ 12:58 am
monday, july 5, 2004
i have successfully not checked my email in TWO whole days. i know, i know. mind shattering, heart blowing, abso-friggin-lutely.
EVIL CACKLE.
suddenly i was @ 01:38 pm
saturday, july 3, 2004
hooray for the grand old flag, for a duck may be somebody's mother.
well what can i say? i am so ashamed i hurt. i knew i didn't want to go because it would just reiterate everything i already felt and believed and would only make me more depressed disillusioned and guess what?
i was right!
to celebrate my patriotic-ness and to usher in the fourth o' july with a bang this year, i went, reluctantly, to see fahrenheit 9/11.
you've probably all seen it by this point, so what can i say?
it was very upsetting for me. not so much the "conspiracies" surrounding bush, but more so seeing all the people who are dying because of this "war." iraqi people, american soldiers...
i mean, the soldiers don't know any better. in fact, they don't know anything. they do as they've been told. some are so young, younger than i am and they're out there killing.
those poor mothers and families and children.
i am so ashamed of everything and... and feel so... i can't even begin to put words to the ache which rests on my heart. it hurts so incredibly much. i couldn't even look at the screen. i can't believe i live in this world. it makes me ashamed to be human. when i have to see images of war and anyone dying and killing each other, it becomes so hard to remember anything beautiful in the world. when i watch it i can't remember art and love seems far away.
i am so ashamed. i wish i wasn't here or that the world of man could just cease to exist so the evil we seem to harbor could just fade out.
i rather be dead than support hatred and murder and war.
i feel bad for living my life and being so greedy as to sit here and think about stories and finding love and my single-minded quest of finding success when there is such pain out there.
and i know i am a coward because i don't watch it. i just cover my eyes and ears because it hurts me so much. i sit and think about what i can do and i can't think of anything.
the world is a awful, awful place. there is goodness. i believe there is, i know there is, but it is so squelched and so easily misled. my heart hurts, i hurt so much.
and now that i have bled my heart all over and i am crying again, let me give a short crit from someone who is usually, so prolific in rambling.
as a film it was, ok. it is biased of course, but i'm going to pretend not to care as i am on the side towards which the film is biased.
the first half was a g. w. rant fest. it makes me glad to know i never believed what the news programs told the public. i'm glad i protested.
but what else can i say? i laughed at the mockumentary style and the cheesy music. i don't agree with how this information was portrayed, but in hindsight when i think now, i suppose kitsch and bad video editing of heads on bodies is the way to make a connection with an general audience.
the first half was a rant fest, well founded... and there it is.
the portions i found most intriguing and poignant about the documentary however, were all the people's interviews, sans moore's narration. that mother, she broke my heart. the iraqi women pleading.
it was too horrifying for words. i admittedly wept through the entirety of the film. i left and had to hide in the restroom to cry some more. then sat outside, trying to collect myself only so i could be heckled and cat called by nader enlisters for my choice of shirt.
p.s. morons, nader is an idiot. he makes promises which can't be fulfilled and merely dilutes the voting force which should be put towards GETTING BUSH OUT OF OFFICE.
if legitimate voting even functions in this country anymore.
i feel bad for everyone in this war; it is the blind slaughtering innocent. no one has a clue and it is sad and pathetic.
those bits of humanity caught on film were moving and made this film as far as my opinion goes.
i was surprised moore included so much on the soldiers going to war. it was interesting and i liked it. it showed another side to the story.
note: i will never encourage the military with my future children.
moore drives me nuts. he reminds me of this angry kid in my first art and tech class, always complaining about something but kudos to him if fahrenheit made one person reconsider the corruption that which is the american government. i have never before disliked someone so much as i dislike bush and it makes me angry to feel such animosity.
as for me i feel sick now. i wished someone to fare a good fourth of july weekend and i wish i could recant it, i feel absolutely no pride in this country and am sorry i am to be a part of it and apologize to everyone else out there for my country's actions, if the pathetic apology of an old art student who didn't even vote last election even matters. i am so sorry.
hooray for the grand old flag, which once stood for something good, but now is a shroud and a blindfold for the miseries of humanity.
fireworks.
look out, she's all wound up about something again.
suddenly i was @ 08:48 pm
i got up and am writing some of my script.
i got up! i'm going to write! the only other things awake are my fuchsia plant and mabel the cat.
p.s. also, yes, i just totally had a dream i was a my little pony.
message from the future: oh joy have written my quota for the day and am feeling is a good time to instigate THE email part II.
suddenly i was @ 08:23 am