List vs. list vs. list

The AFI has come out with an updated list of the best American movies of all time. The best thing about their list is the list of what they left out.

Tim Gordon of FilmGordon writes that while he is a fan of the films on the list, it leaves off too many outstanding films featuring black performers and made by black film-makers. He suggests:

The Defiant Ones
A Raisin in the Sun
Nothing But A Man
In the Heat of the Night
Sounder
Lady Sings the Blues
Claudine
The Color Purple
Glory
Malcolm X
Boyz 'N the Hood
What's Love Got To Do With It
The Hurricane
Ray
Ali

And the Alliance of Women Film Journalists has announced its own top 100 list with emphasis on females in front of and behind the camera.

I'm in favor of everyone seeing all of the movies on all of these lists. And I am delighted that my friend Tim and my Film Institute colleague Jennifer Merin are there to remind us of films every bit as worthy as the more conventional and traditional choices made by AFI.

AFI list (2007 edition)

1. Citizen Kane, 1941.

2. The Godfather, 1972.

3. Casablanca, 1942.

4. Raging Bull, 1980.

5. Singin' in the Rain, 1952.

6. Gone With the Wind, 1939.

7. Lawrence of Arabia, 1962.

8. Schindler's List, 1993.

9. Vertigo, 1958.

10. The Wizard of Oz, 1939.

11. City Lights, 1931.

12. The Searchers, 1956.

13. Star Wars, 1977.

14. Psycho, 1960.

15. 2001: A Space Odyssey, 1968.

16. Sunset Blvd., 1950.

17. The Graduate, 1967.

18. The General, 1927.

19. On the Waterfront, 1954.

20. It's a Wonderful Life, 1946.

21. Chinatown, 1974.

22. Some Like It Hot, 1959.

23. The Grapes of Wrath, 1940.

24. E.T. the Extra-Terrestrial, 1982.

25. To Kill a Mockingbird, 1962.

26. Mr. Smith Goes to Washington, 1939.

27. High Noon, 1952.

28. All About Eve, 1950.

29. Double Indemnity, 1944.

30. Apocalypse Now, 1979.

31. The Maltese Falcon, 1941.

32. The Godfather Part II, 1974.

33. One Flew Over the Cuckoo's Nest, 1975.

34. Snow White and the Seven Dwarfs, 1937.

35. Annie Hall, 1977.

36. The Bridge on the River Kwai, 1957.

37. The Best Years of Our Lives, 1946.

38. The Treasure of the Sierra Madre, 1948.

39. Dr. Strangelove, 1964.

40. The Sound of Music, 1965.

41. King Kong, 1933.

42. Bonnie and Clyde, 1967.

43. Midnight Cowboy, 1969.

44. The Philadelphia Story, 1940.

45. Shane, 1953.

46. It Happened One Night, 1934.

47. A Streetcar Named Desire, 1951.

48. Rear Window, 1954.

49. Intolerance, 1916.

50. The Lord of the Rings: The Fellowship of the Ring, 2001.

51. West Side Story, 1961.

52. Taxi Driver, 1976.

53. The Deer Hunter, 1978.

54. M-A-S-H, 1970.

55. North by Northwest, 1959.

56. Jaws, 1975.

57. Rocky, 1976.

58. The Gold Rush, 1925.

59. Nashville, 1975.

60. Duck Soup, 1933.

61. Sullivan's Travels, 1941.

62. American Graffiti, 1973.

63. Cabaret, 1972.

64. Network, 1976.

65. The African Queen, 1951.

66. Raiders of the Lost Ark, 1981.

67. Who's Afraid of Virginia Woolf?, 1966.

68. Unforgiven, 1992.

69. Tootsie, 1982.

70. A Clockwork Orange, 1971.

71. Saving Private Ryan, 1998.

72. The Shawshank Redemption, 1994.

73. Butch Cassidy and the Sundance Kid, 1969.

74. The Silence of the Lambs, 1991.

75. In the Heat of the Night, 1967.

76. Forrest Gump, 1994.

77. All the President's Men, 1976.

78. Modern Times, 1936.

79. The Wild Bunch, 1969.

80. The Apartment, 1960.

81. Spartacus, 1960.

82. Sunrise, 1927.

83. Titanic, 1997.

84. Easy Rider, 1969.

85. A Night at the Opera, 1935.

86. Platoon, 1986.

87. 12 Angry Men, 1957.

88. Bringing Up Baby, 1938.

89. The Sixth Sense, 1999.

90. Swing Time, 1936.

91. Sophie's Choice, 1982.

92. Goodfellas, 1990.

93. The French Connection, 1971.

94. Pulp Fiction, 1994.

95. The Last Picture Show, 1971.

96. Do the Right Thing, 1989.

97. Blade Runner, 1982.

98. Yankee Doodle Dandy, 1942.

99. Toy Story, 1995.

100. Ben-Hur, 1959.

Slate: Evan is no Noah

David Plotz, who recently blogged the Bible for Slate, writes about Evan Almighty's appalling effort to pander to religious moviegoers. What makes it appalling, according to Plotz, is the way it tries to have it all ways -- to sell it to religious audiences as a parable and to secular services as entertainment. I don't have a problem with the movie's not replicating the devastation of the Noah story (God did promise never to do it again). But I entirely agree that removing any sense of Evan's righteousness or responsibility and any real threat or implication undermines both the meaning and the narrative of the story.

Racially blind or blindly racist

Teresa Wiltz has a very thoughtful piece in today's Washington Post about the controversy of the casting of

Angelina Jolie, American, pale of skin and plump of lip, playing the part of the real-life Mariane Pearl, a French-born, brown-skinned, kinky-curly-haired woman of Afro-Cuban and Dutch heritage. Ponder the societal implications of Jolie sporting a spray tan and a corkscrew wig. Discuss: Is this the latest entry in the American canon of blackface --21st-century style?

Wiltz gives space to both sides, those who are offended by casting a white actress (Wlitz notes that Jolie's mother was "reportedly part Iroquois") and those who consider it a step toward race-blind casting, like Halle Berry's forthcoming appearance as a real-life politician who is white. And then she puts the discussion in the context of Hollywood history, casting white performers as non-white characters -- Mickey Rooney, John Wayne, and Katherine Hepburn as Asians, Ava Gardner and Jeanne Crain as black characters, turning real-life minority characters into more box-office-friendly Caucasians -- as recently as in Oliver Stone's "World Trade Center."

I have paid special attention over the years to some of the absurdities and atrocities in racial issues in casting. One of the most absurd is Ricardo Montalban's being cast as a Japanese man -- in a movie about racism ("Sayonara"). Apparently the idea is that all minorities are the same. I did not have a problem in casting Chinese actresses in "Memoirs of a Geisha," though I think the protests hurt the movie's ticket sales. I don't think you have to be Jewish to play a Jew (though at least one critic noted that when Jews play Jews they overact and I would add so do non-Jews -- I wouldn't wish Laurence Olivier's performance as an Orthodox Jew in "The Jazz Singer" on anyone), gay to play a homosexual, Southern to play a Southerner (Brit Vivien Leigh got two Oscars for playing Scarlett O'Hara and Blanche Dubois, and "Cold Mountain" had English Jude Law playing a Confederate soldier and Aussie Nicole Kidman playing his true love). That's why they call it acting.

Wiltz perfectly captured the confusion of this moment in a way that was both sensitive and balanced and her article had a reassuring sense that we are moving toward something better. In the original Broadway production of "Once Upon a Mattress," a black actress (and the daughter of the head of the NAACP) was required to put on whiteface every night to play the queen. I thought of that when I read about the casting of Audra Macdonald in Broadway's "110 in the Shade" without any silliness about racially matching her with the people who play her family. (This is something my high school did back in 1970.) And Kerry Washington in "Fantastic Four" plays a character who is white in the comic. I don't think we'll see Queen Latifah appearing as Princess Di. But she did play a role originated by an English white male -- Alec Guiness -- in "Last Holiday."



Also on the front page of the Post is William Booth's piece about the documentary "Reel Bad Arabs," based on the book by Jack Shaheen. The portrayal of Arabs in Hollywood has been limited to "the three Bs" -- belly dancers, billionaire sheiks and bombers."

And thus we have the Timeline of International Villainy. To create drama, especially in action and war movies, Hollywood needs bad guys, and in their time, the Japanese and Germans, and later the Koreans and Vietnamese, served that role. For a long while, commies were useful foils (with their taste for world domination, nukes and vodka), but with the end of the Cold War, the Soviets became the Russians, and the Russians only worked if they were gangsters, and Hollywood already had the Italians to do that job. Colombian drug traffickers were employed as handy replacements, but then coke just felt . . . dated. Transnational corporate evildoers are okay, if not that sexy. But there just has been something about those Arabs. They've got legs.

The Silverdocs winner: "Please Vote for Me"

And the winners are:

PLEASE VOTE FOR ME by Weijun Chen Wins Sterling Award Best Feature

Special Jury mention to ENEMIES OF HAPPINESS by Eva Mulvad

LOT 63, GRAVE C by Sam Green Wins Sterling Award Best Short

Honorable Mention went to I WANT TO BE A PILOT by Diego Quemada-Díez

Music Documentary Award Goes to NOMADAK TX by Raúl De la Fuente

KURT COBAIN ABOUT A SON by AJ Schnack Wins The Cinematic Vision Feature Award

MY EYES by Erlend Mo Wins The Cinematic Vision Short Award

The WITNESS Award Goes to THE DEVIL CAME ON HORSEBACK
by Ricki Stern and Annie Sundberg

Witness Award Honorable Mention went to THE PRICE OF SUGAR by Bill Haney

BIG RIG by Doug Pray Wins the SILVERDOCS/American Film Market Award

Feature Audience Award to SOUVENIRS by Shahar Cohen and Halil Efrat

A SON'S SACRIFICE by Yoni Brook Wins Short Audience Award

ACE Grant winner is THE CONCRETE JUNGLE by Rachel Buchanan and Don Bernier

KC Star and Nancy Drew

Many thanks to the Kansas City Star for publishing my review of Nancy Drew.

Silverdocs Festival at AFI

I was out of town this week, so only made it to the last day of the Silverdocs film festival. Next year, I'll do my best to see it all. In just five years, it has become the top documentary festival in the US, possibly the world. The two films I saw today happened to have similar themes -- they were both about children and competition. Both were excellent.

"Doubletime" is like a cross between "Spellbound" and "Rize," the story of two Carolina teams that go to New York to compete at the Apollo Theater in the National Double Dutch competition. Jump-roping has been divided for decades between single (skipping) -- mostly white -- and double (double dutch) -- mostly black. Everything comes together in Harlem as American kids of both races take on some tough new competitors -- from Japan.

In "Please Vote for Me," third graders compete in a hotly contested election to be elected class monitor. In China. Previously, class monitors had always been selected by the teachers. But one classroom was persuaded to try "democracy." Three students are nominated and the next thing you know they are surrounded by their own Karl Roves and James Carvilles -- parents who help them try to buy votes and write their speeches and classmates who heckle their friends' opponents. It is hilarious when the eight year olds replicate the emotions and tactics of adult campaigns -- but with less ability to hide their ploys and emotions. And it is touching when we see how much it matters to them -- everyone breaks down in tears at some point. As much determined by the one-child culture as by the communism, it is an enticing glimpse of a world both familiar and exotic.

Jaguar Stalks

Check out my friend Lauren Verlaque's Zazzle store,
jaguarstalks's Gallery.

SPOILER ALERT -- "Nancy Drew" and "Ratatouille"

Two movies for kids coming out this month devote a significant amount of story-telling time to plot twists involving secret out-of-wedlock children whose fathers were never told that they existed. One is the PG "Nancy Drew" and the other is the G-rated "Ratatouille." Is there anyone who thinks that this is an appropriate storyline for movies marketed for children? Is there anyone out there who looks forward to questions from a six-year-old about what a DNA test is for or how a father could be surprised to find out that he has a grown-up child or why a mother would want to keep such a secret?

It is not as though either of these is a sensitive treatment of a subject that may be of interest or concern to children living in a world of blended families and reproductive technology. In both cases, they are tossed into the plot more for convenience than for the expression of art or creativity. If the film-makers could not show some effort in designing a plot with more imagination, they could have taken the time to think about finding a plot with more resonance for children.

Could Paris be doing a Cagney?

When I saw the reports (who could avoid them) about Paris Hilton shrieking and crying as she was taken back to jail, I thought of that famous scene at the end of Angels With Dirty Faces when priest Pat O'Brien asks his childhood friend, a hoodlum played by James Cagney, for one last favor. Cagney's character is in prison, sentenced to death. His cocky bravado has made him a glamorous figure to the local teenagers, who all want to be like him. O'Brien asks him to help him show the kids that he is not a hero. And so, on the way to the chair, Cagney pretends to be a coward, and the kids lose all respect for him.

So, could it be that somewhere, somehow, someone got to Paris and said, "It's time for you to make a contribution to society. This whole Britney/Lindsay/Paris bad girl thing has gone too far. So, could you help us out, honey, by behaving like a total looney-tune spoiled girl princess sissy instead of the cool and haughty heiress that launched a million paparazzi?"

Well, it's a better theory than the alternatives. I'd hate to think she really is a total looney-tune spoiled girl princess sissy.

The KC Star runs my review

Many thanks to the Kansas City Star for asking me to review Surf's Up.

Great black movie musicals (yes, another list)

My friend Tim Gordon has a great list of his favorite black movie musicals, in honor of Black Music Month. I was especially glad to see the underrated "Sparkle" included, as I am a huge Lonette McKee fan. I was also very happy to see him list classics like "Cabin in the Sky" and "Carmen Jones," and one of my favorite films in any category, "School Daze."

Long shots (literally)

Thanks to my DH for showing me another great list, this one from Daily Film Dose, of the greatest long tracking shots in the history of film, with clips.

AOL Music's 77 Most Unforgettable Movie Songs

Another indefensible but irresistable list, this one from AOL, The 77 Most Unforgettable Movie Songs. What makes this list fun is that it includes the movie clips, everything from "Top Gun" ("Take My Breath Away") to "Napoleon Dynamite" (Jamiroquai) to "Beverly Hills Cop" (Alex F). Of course many of the choices are quibble-worthy, but unlike EW, I think #1 is an excellent choice. And the sidebar lists (best Bond themes, movie musical groups we wish were real) are a treat.

Which critic shares your taste?

Wisegeek has some up with a test to help you determine which movie critic is closest to your taste in movies. Not much range in movies or critics, but fun to try.

If Rives controlled the internet

I am a huge fan of poetry slam star Rives and of the fabulously provocative and entertaining TED Talks series. Put them together and you get this clip:

SPOILER Alert! Jeff Bridges coaches.....

Last night I was thinking about next week's animated release, "Surf's Up" -- cute and unprenentious -- and realized that it reminded me of one of my favorite guilty pleasures of the last few years, Jessica Bendinger's deliciously kinetic Stick It. Both are films about young athletes getting ready for the big, defining competition. Both learn that winning isn't everything -- in fact, both learn that winning can be the opposite of coming in first. What's important is loyalty, self-respect, expressing yourself, and having fun. And both young athletes are coached by ex-athletes played by Jeff Bridges. Hmmm...

Quotes of the Week -- "Knocked Up" and Mars/Venus

Can it be that there is a gender difference among the critics who reviewed "Knocked Up?" Not a split exactly, but a slant. Male critics were more likely to be unabashedly positive about the film, finding it not just funny but smart, even profound.

At the New York Post, Kyle Smith gave the film a "Standing Ovulation" (that was the headline), calling it

an era-defining comedy classic to rank with "Little Miss Sunshine." It's this generation's "When Harry Met Sally," and it's even better than "The 40-Year-Old Virgin," because the freakish situation it uses as a setup is life....
Like Rogen's character, "Knocked Up" is a lot more mature than it looks. It's a brilliant comedy disguised as a dumb one.

Adam Graham of the Detroit News says it

is full of huge laughs and witty pop culture banter but also offers insightful and honest explorations of marriage, relationships, friendship and parenthood.

Bob Longino of the Atlanta Journal-Constitution calls it

more than just laugh-out-loud funny. It's the relationship comedy of the summer and likely the best boy-meets-girl movie of the year.

At the New York Times, A.O. Scott says it is

an instant classic, a comedy that captures the sexual confusion and moral ambivalence of our moment without straining, pandering or preaching.

We're talking about a movie that draws much of its humor from arrested development, pot jokes, very crude and raunchy references, and a childbirth scene that gives new meaning to the term "up close and personal."

Female critics seemed more ambivalent. Slate's Dana Stevens calls it a "raunchy, guy-centric summer comedy...[that] is a crossover movie both in gender and in age." But she says that as she thought about the film, she realized

[Writer-director Judd] Apatow writes men with far more insight and acuity than he writes women. As a result, his portrait of contemporary gender relations is unbalanced: Crude and hilarious in Guyville, he seizes up when he gets to Ladyland and allows himself to take refuge in comfortable clichés. It's not that Knocked Up is misogynistic—if anything, Apatow is uxorious to a fault, scrupulously respectful of chicks and the chick stuff they do. He just doesn't seem to get exactly what that stuff is....

Paradoxically, the tenderest, most emotionally intimate scenes in "Knocked Up" aren't the romantic ones between Alison and Ben, but those involving Ben and his profane posse and his growing relationship with the developmentally stunted Pete....in his next film, maybe he could honor women by striving to create female characters with the depth of humor and humanity he gives to men.

In The Reeler, Michele Orange says the movie makes her want to be a dude. In Apatow's world, the dudes get to live in slacker heaven -- they get to be funny. But it is the treatment of

the sympathetic, if undeveloped Alison (what does Ben, who lives for one-liners, see in his bland goddess?) that confirms the essential zoological status of the female of the species in Apatow-land. They can’t make you laugh but they can certainly make you cringe.

Another critic weighs in on why critics (should) matter

Richard Schickel defends professional critics in the LA Times:

Criticism — and its humble cousin, reviewing — is not a democratic activity. It is, or should be, an elite enterprise, ideally undertaken by individuals who bring something to the party beyond their hasty, instinctive opinions of a book (or any other cultural object). It is work that requires disciplined taste, historical and theoretical knowledge and a fairly deep sense of the author's (or filmmaker's or painter's) entire body of work, among other qualities.

Opinion — thumbs up, thumbs down — is the least important aspect of reviewing. Very often, in the best reviews, opinion is conveyed without a judgmental word being spoken, because the review's highest business is to initiate intelligent dialogue about the work in question, beginning a discussion that, in some cases, will persist down the years, even down the centuries... I don't think it's impossible for bloggers to write intelligent reviews. I do think, however, that a simple "love" of reading (or movie-going or whatever) is an insufficient qualification for the job. That way often leads to cultishness (see the currently inflated reputations of Philip K. Dick or Cornell Woolrich, both easy reads for lazy, word-addicted minds).

And we have to find in the work of reviewers something more than idle opinion-mongering. We need to see something other than flash, egotism and self-importance. We need to see their credentials. And they need to prove, not merely assert, their right to an opinion.

I don't think anyone has to do anything to prove the right to an opinion and I certainly don't believe credentials are anything but incidental to a critc's value or qualifications. I believe that we prove (or don't prove) ourselves with every word we write. I loved seeing Dana Stevens move from a blog to writing for Slate and the New York Times. But she did that exclusively on the basis of her writing, not her credentials (which happen to include a PhD, but not in film). One of the greatest columnists of the 20th century was Mike Royko, who used to drive a cab until one of his passengers happened to be a newspaper editor and offered him a job at the paper. I do agree that the recommendation is not the most important part of the review and that a good review requires more than a love for movies (or books or whatever) and the impulse to express one's feelings is not enough. What matters is strong, involving writing grounded in full engagement with the subject of the review and enough understanding to appreciate its context.

My War, My Story

Every American owes it to our troops to watch the new documentary from Wolf Gang Pictures called My War, My Story. Eighteen veterans of the war in Iraq tell their own stories, simply and directly. We hear from one through the letters he sent home and the family he left behind.

It is impossible not to be moved and inspired by the dedication and integrity and sacrifice of these young people. They have earned our respect and gratitude with their service and they have earned our attention as well. The film is well-organized but must important it gets out of the way and lets its subjects speak for themselves. Many of them now oppose the war, but not all of them. They have their problems with politicians, the war in Iraq, and with their own re-entry but they speak of their colleagues and superiors in the service with the deepest respect and admiration. One says that he still likes to think as he looks at each person he walks by that he was willing to sacrifice his life for each one of them. The honor and dignity they demonstrate is deeply moving and inspiring. They deserve our attention as well as our infinite respect and gratitude.

Those who think of Memorial Day as a time for picnics and sales should take an hour and a half out of their three-day weekend to hear what the people who have been there fighting for us half a world away have to say. And to think very carefully about what "Support the Troops" really means.

Quote of the Week -- Pirates 3

From my friend and colleague Ally Burguieres:

I didn’t include a plot summary because the Internet didn’t have enough space.

Stephen Hunter has "A Bad Case of Summer Movies"

The Washington Post's Stephen Hunter loves to be the enfant terrible, and here is his rant on summer movies. My favorite line:

Irony should be licensed and should require a seven-day waiting period to see if the proposed user is mature enough to deal in it.

Shrek Shills

The Department of Health and Human Services is using big green ogre Shrek to teach children to be healthy. But the junk food companies of America are using Shrek to urge kids to eat fat and sugar. The Campaign for a Commercial-Free Childhood has called on HHS to "stop partnering with the poster ogre for junk food marketing - and start getting serious about combating childhood obesity by advocating for policies that protect children from commercial exploitation."

They have also published a list of food promotions affiliated with Shrek and other characters from the movie. The list as more than seventy products, including "McDonald's Happy Meals, Kellogg's Marshmallow Froot Loops cereal; Keebler E.L. FudgeDouble Stuffed cookies, "ogre-sized" Peanut Butter M&M's, Cheetos, and Kellogg's Frosted S'Mores Pop Tarts." Shrek Cheetos turn your tongue green! Shrek M&Ms come with a toy Shrek car! Shrek Donkey chatterbox offer on a box of Kellogg's Eggo Chocolate Chip waffles!

If HHS wants to urge kids to lead a healthy lifestyle, they can begin by prohibiting the use of cartoon characters to push unhealthy food.

100, 99, 98, 97.....

Thanks so much to Entertainment Weekly's Popwatch for pointing out this fabulous selection of movie clips counting down all the numbers from 100-1. It's astonishing how immediately identifiable so many of the clips are.

Quotes of the Week: Underwhelmed by Shrek the Third

Most critics found the latest installment of Shrek to be not quite up to the happily ever afters of the first two, except for The New York Times, where A.O. Scott said:

[T]he movie’s liveliest humor and sharpest drama take root in decidedly grown-up situations. Shrek’s anxious, less-than-overjoyed reaction to the prospect of becoming a parent is not something most youngsters will relate to. (In one brilliantly executed sequence he has a nightmare of being besieged by hundreds of gurgling, saucer-eyed ogre babies.) And the depiction of Cinderella (Amy Sedaris), Rapunzel (Maya Rudolph) and Snow White (Amy Poehler) as bored, catty moms is likely to tickle fans of “Little Children,” a group that I hope doesn’t include any actual little children.

Whether these bits would seem as fresh or incisive if they were not embedded in a noisy cartoon remotely based on a beloved picture book is an open question. The strategy of the “Shrek” movies has always been to appeal to the easy, smirky cynicism of the parents while whetting their children’s appetite for crude humor and plush merchandise. “Shrek 2” pulled off the trick in a way that struck me as coarse and overdone, turning travestied fairy tales into the stuff of hackneyed Hollywood satire. But “Shrek the Third” seems at once more energetic and more relaxed, less desperate to prove its cleverness and therefore to some extent smarter.

Cinemablend's Joshua Tyler got nicely meta:

The problem is, Shrek the Third doesn’t take its own advice. It isn’t itself. The first two movies were family films with an adult edge. This third one is a watered down kids’ movie through and through, and the script plays out like something written for one of those assembly line produced direct-to-DVD sequels Disney is fond of releasing to fill up Wal-Mart bargain bins. Except this isn’t Disney, this is the franchise that makes fun of Disney for doing things exactly like that. Instead of sticking to what made it great, Shrek has become a part of the homogenized mediocrity it was railing against in the first place.

Perhaps Nick Rodgers of Springfield, Illinois' State Journal-Register summed it up best:

The series has jumped the Shrek.

Tucson Weekly : The Definitive Summer Movie Preview

Thanks to Jim Judy of Screenit.com for recommending this hilarious Summer Movie Preview.

Women Aloud on Greenstone Media

One of my radio stations, Greenstone Media, has expanded its website. Check out Mo and Shana by listening into some of their shows online.

Quotes of the Week

On Georgia Rule:

Many critics did not like the weird mood swings and uneven tone (though some liked it for just that reason). Suzanne Condie Lambert described the problem well:

Director Garry Marshall's comedy-drama suffers from an unfortunate role reversal. The comedy is stunningly unfunny, while the drama is sometimes disturbingly funny.
The Arizona Republic

I liked the economy of Ella Taylor's description:

An incoherent dramedy of rampant parental insufficiency.
The Village Voice

And Michael Wilmington gets this week's wisecrack-incorporating-current-events award:

Maybe "Georgia Rule" should be required viewing for Paris Hilton during her term in the slammer. But not for us.
Chicago Tribune

Hollywood set to filter on-screen smoking - Los Angeles Times

I'm quoted in this LA Times story about the MPAA's new policy on smoking in the movies. I'm very glad the MPAA is amending its ratings and especially glad at the process behind this decision. In the past, the MPAA's criteria and procedures were haphazard and opaque. This time, they asked Harvard to do a study on smoking in the movies and adapted their ratings policy in response. I hope this is the beginning of another look at the way they evaluate other kinds of material, including "action" violence and "comic" sexuality.

SPOILER Alert!

Warning! This blog post reveals the endings or "surprise" twists in several films, so stop reading now if you do not want to know the endings to "Georgia Rule," "23," "Perfect Stranger," "Gothika," or "The Ex."

It seems to me that there have been an awful lot of dumb fake-outs in movies lately. This week's "Georgia Rule" has at least four different zig-zags on the allegations of sexual abuse made by Lindsay Lohan's character. She says he did it. She says she lied. She says he did it. She says she lied. Then she says he did it. In "Next," the whole damn movie turns out to be a big fake-out, almost like Bobby Ewing's return in "Dallas," or the last episode of "St. Elsewhere." And what is the deal about having the main character spend the whole movie trying to solve a murder only to reveal that the perp is none other than that same character? That's Jim Carrey in "23" and Halle Berry in "Perfect Stranger." She already pulled that once in "Gothika." In "The Ex," the whole premise of the movie is the inability of Tom (Zach Braff) to fight man-to-man with Chip (Jason Bateman), the guy who is after his wife, because he's in a wheelchair. Big fake-out number one when our hero discovers a photo of the guy proving that he can walk, only to learn -- after an intended-to-be hilarious scene where he throws Chip down the stairs -- that it is a picture of Chip's identical twin brother. Followed shortly by another intended-to-be-hilarious scene where it turns out that Chip has indeed been faking for more than a decade and is not paralyzed at all. At which point he gets into an accident and breaks both legs, landing him, yes, in a wheelchair.

There's a difference between a cheesy fake-out and a story. Even the audience for a silly comedy or a cheesy thriller is entitled to have it make sense at some level.

Esther Iverem's Gotta Have It

One of the speakers at the MMI Film Critic Institute was Esther Iverem, whose thoughtful and incisive new book is We Gotta Have It: Twenty Years of Seeing Black at the Movies, 1986-2006.

Ms. Iverem answered some questions about the book in an email interview:



The title of your book refers to a movie that you call a major turning point in the portrayals of black characters in film, Spike Lee's She's Gotta Have It. When you were growing up, were there any moments in film or television that felt memorably valid for you?

My favorite childhood film and TV moments probably come from the TV show Julia and the movie Claudine. I remember thinking that they actually showed something vaguely resembling Black life as I knew it—families, people with jobs, children with a life of imagination or mischief.

I also grew up during the so-called Blaxploitation era in film and, even though I shouldn’t have seen those films at that age, I did see a lot of them. I don’t even know if the current ratings standards existed then. Like, I wonder now, how exactly did I get in to see a “Dolemite” movie? I don’t know if, at the time, I thought of any of these movies as valid beyond the fact that it was exciting to actually see Black people on the big screen. There weren’t a lot of Black movies before this time and I thought that most of the media, including television and the newspapers in my native Philadelphia , depicted Black people in a very negative light. Even though the drug dealers, pimps and assorted criminal characters of the Blaxploitation era were not “positive,” I was so starved and fascinated to see Blacks on the screen that these characters, sadly, became Black screen “heroes” because they were usually depicted with some backbone and moxey.

"She's Gotta Have It" was a breakthrough not just in its portrayal of black characters but in its portrayal of a central female character who was strong, independent, and unabashedly sexual. Yet your book suggests that even the limited and conflicted successes in the broader and more authentic portrayal of black characters has too often overlooked the reality of women's stories. Why do you think that is?

That reality is overlooked because most of the filmmakers are men, most of the main characters are men and most of the stories revolve around male themes and a male point of view. I absolutely love the work of Ousmane Sembene for subverting this “dominant paradigm” and appreciate Tyler Perry for the same reason. To a lesser extent, the same problem exists outside the “Black” community of films but I think that a hyper machismo exists in Black film because of the influence of hip hop, a seemingly insatiable need to counter the historic image of the servile darkie and because I think hyper machismo or clowning is all the studios want to see from Black men. Also, Black films are still considered “Black” films as opposed to just films, and I think Black men are still considered the proper representatives of the race, as opposed to Black women.

Why is it so important to "return the gaze?" What does that mean?

The “gaze” is an idea I picked up while studying critical theory on an arts journalism fellowship in the 90’s. Part of our post-colonial existence means that the former colonizers (Whites) give themselves the power to gaze at, depict and frame the former colonized, in this case, people of African descent. By returning that gaze, we empower ourselves to recognize that gaze, as well as name and critique how we are depicted and framed. I feel I take on this task with most films from Hollywood , even those that might star a Black actor, or include a Black producer, etc.

You cover a stunning array of films in the book. Are there two or three neglected gems that you wish everyone could see?

The epilogue of the book includes a sampling of films that you describe: Sidewalk Stories, Rosewood, One Week, The Visit, Simeon, Unprecedented, Meteor Man, Paid in Full, La Tropical and Beah: A Black Woman Speaks.

How do you feel about Ice Cube, who began as an insistent voice of protest and now makes films like Friday After Next and Are We Done Yet?

Wow, that’s a complex question that I’ll try to simplify. First of all, I disagree that Ice Cube began as an insistent voice of protest. I think he began as a voice of anger and, with the important exception of hating the police, seldom was that anger directed at the larger economic, government and social structures that create inequality, racism and ghetto conditions. His album, Death Certificate, was a departure from West Coast thuggery. Rappers of his era that did raise that protest voice, such as Chuck D and Arrested Development, were actually squashed in favor the West Coast “gangsta rap” rap style, personified by Cube, which, by the way, first heavily pushed calling Black women bitches and hos.

I think his image, his mad face, was commoditized and conveniently used by Hollywood, in the beginning, to insert the energy of a nouveau angry Black man and, now, is used now to show that the young, angry Black man can be tamed and made fuzzy for seemingly family-friendly comedies (that depict Black children acting like no Black children I know. )

Of all Cube’s movies, I liked All About the Benjamins best. And even though it was dissed by most White critics, I liked XXX: State of the Union for its willingness to be skeptical and critical of the U.S. government. But I think Cube is mainly about getting paid, first with rap and now with movies. I haven’t seen anything from him that makes me want to take him seriously as an artist, visionary or thinker.

Who in Hollywood is doing the most interesting work now?

I don’t watch the entire industry closely enough to offer an overview. Of the films I have watched and reviewed, I am still most interested in what is coming from the independent film community, though some studio productions have been impressive. I am drawn to movies that have something important to say about the world and that, in this time of illusion and doublespeak, tell is like it is. These were my favorite films from 2006, which are also listed in the book’s epilogue: When the Levees Broke: A Requiem in Four Acts, Catch a Fire, The Pursuit of Happyness, Apocalypto, Bobby, CSA: The Confederate States of America, Glory Road, Akeelah and the Bee, Yesterday, Waist Deep and An Inconvenient Truth. In addition to being in We Gotta Have It, these reviews are also posted at www.SeeingBlack.com.



She will be appearing this Saturday at a book signing.
Host: SeeingBlack.com and Busboys and Poets
Location: Busboys and Poets, The Langston Room
2021 14th St, NW, at V Street, Washington, DC
When: Saturday, May 12, 4:00pm
Phone: 202-285-1841 info. 202-387-7638 Busboys

Do Critics Matter (more)

The New York Times solicited reader comments about whether critics matter to people who are deciding what movie to see. They had 140 responses at the time of this writing, and most surprisingly encouraging.

Animator vs. Animation II

Thanks to the Daily Reel's Anthony Kauffman for recommending this hilariously clever short film by Alan Becker. He thinks it should taken the top prize at the Webbys, and I agree. It did win the popular vote, and you can see why.



Chapter One is almost as good:

Quote of the Week -- describing Spidey 3's black squiggly thingy

Critics tried hard to find a good way to describe that black squiggly stuff that falls out of the sky and latches on to Peter Parker and Venom-izes Topher Grace.

As always, Dana Stevens of Slate nails it: "Evil space licorice...space fungus, which looks like a living bundle of black licorice whips." And I love her use of the term "air guns" to describe Peter's space-licorice-enhanced gesture as he struts down the sidewalk.

The Washington Post's Ann Hornaday calls it "a dollop of black alien glue" that propells "Peter to assume the haircut and eyeliner of an old Joy Division cover band and sashay down Manhattan streets with an awkward cock-of-the-walk strut."

The paper of record does its research and gives us the source material's description along with the critic's own characterization and an accurate description of its consequences. In the New York Times, Manohla Dargis calls it "an inky extraterrestrial glob (a symbiote in Marvel-speak) [that] spreads its gooey tentacles over his body, turning his suit and soul black."

And over at Entertainment Weekly, Owen Gleiberman calls it "a sticky, shiny black tangle — beware! It's the crawling audiotape! — that, for no discernible reason, heads straight for Peter, infesting his cruddy apartment like fleas waiting for a dog." I also like his second reference: "alien stickum."

Quotes of the Week -- Texas Hold 'Em edition

Lucky in cards, unlucky in reviews. "Lucky You" drew some poker metaphors in its mostly negative reactions from critics.

The love story is a bluff...A decent movie just wasn't in the cards.
Lisa Schwarzbaum Entertainment Weekly (D-)

After several delayed release dates, Warner Bros. finally lays down its cards with Lucky You, and it's a weak hand.
Brian Lowrey Variety

By the fifth All In, I wanted All Out.
Willie Waffle Wafflemovies.com

And on (or should I say in) the other hand:

Robert Duvall, Eric Bana and Drew Barrymore all give persuasive performances that add up to a royal flush.
Cole Smithey Colesmithey.com

One sings, the other...unfortunately sings, too

Two movies opening this weekend, and two adorable actresses sing -- badly -- in each of them. Drew Barrymore was supposed to sing badly in "Music and Lyrics," so that was all right. But in "Lucky You" she is supposed to be a would-be singer with her first professional gig. In Las Vegas. Yeah, not much competition there. She was much better off as the only performer whose singing was dubbed in "Everyone Says I Love You." She should have learned her lesson from Julia Roberts in that film and have left the singing to someone who can hit the notes.

Kirsten Dunst plays aspiring actress MJ in the "Spider-Man" movies. In the third installment, she has her Broadway debut. She gets fired for her bad performance (presumably her thin voice) and yet manages to get a job as a singing waitress. She takes on Marilyn Monroe in Some Like It Hot by singing "I'm Through With Love" -- off-key. It would be better if she and Barrymore would be through with singing.

It's the best blurb ever!

Two recent notes in the NY Times about the problem of blurb abuse -- taking selected quotes from a review to use in promotional materials that make it appear the review was much more positive than it was.

In today's paper, the EC takes on the issue as a problem of false advertising:

New Law to Protect Critics From Being Misquoted

The European Commission has passed legislation that would keep bad reviews from looking good, the London newspaper The Independent reported. The measure, to take effect in December, will make it illegal for advertisers to misquote reviewers by taking a positive word or phrase from a theater review if it gives a misleading sense of the whole review. The Unfair Commercial Practices Directive bars advertising that includes “false information” or any claim that “deceives or is likely to deceive the consumer” and thus “causes or is likely to cause him to take a transactional decision that he would not have taken otherwise.” Helen Kearns, the commission’s spokeswoman on consumer affairs, said the measure would be “policed on a case-by-case basis” by the Office of Fair Trading. “It should apply to misleading advertising right across the board,” she added, “from airline tickets to theater tickets.”

And, just a couple of days earlier, an article described how pervasive mis-blurbing blurb abuse has become in book promotion.

Of course in movie world there are so many "critics" who are happy to call the "Are We Done Yets" of the world Oscar-worthy, "wonderful family fun!" or "one of the best of the year!!" if they can get invited to junkets and see their names in the ads. I'd love to see that considered false advertising.

Conflict of interest at DC Filmfest?

The Washington Post's Desson Thomson has written an important and meticulously researched story about the Washington DC Film Festival that is respectful and understated, but raises disturbing questions about conflicts of interest and poor leadership of the annual event. Other regional festivals, including the DC area's own SilverDocs and Maryland Film Festival have surpassed it in measures like national (even international) reputation and budget, the DC Filmfest seems stagnant after more than two decades.

The Maryland Film Festival has tripled its operating budget in nine years, and is planning for a dramatic increase -- from about $350,000 to more than $1 million -- in the next two years. In its five years, the Silverdocs documentary film festival, sponsored by the American Film Institute and Discovery Communications, has evolved into a buzzed-about event that attracts filmmakers and media coverage from around the globe.

Yet Filmfest DC, a festival granddaddy after more than two decades, has seemingly refused to grow. Under the stewardship of its part-time director -- Tony Gittens -- its mission (bringing international films to Washington audiences), budget (about $410,000) and number of films (84 shorts and features this year) have changed only incrementally over two decades....

Does Gittens's status [as both festival director and executive director of the D.C. Commission on the Arts and Humanities] present a conflict of interest? Is it self-dealing? At the very least, it presents an appearance of conflict, as the arts commission also provides grants each year to about half a dozen other film festivals, including the Environmental Film Festival and gay and lesbian Reel Affirmations.

Thomson concludes that the conflict of interest may be more one of appearances than reality, but that the real problem may be the limited time that Gittens has to devote to it because of his obligations at the Commission. Gittens receives no additional monetary benefit from running the festival, which has a more-than-healthy surplus in its bank account, though, predictably, other arts organizations in the city believe they are unfairly disadvantaged when they ask for money from the Commission. But as long as he has both jobs, it is difficult to ensure adequate oversight. He probably does not have the time to do the job right. He clearly does not have the vision, seeing no reason to expand the festival's reach and showing himself stunningly unaware of the needs and resources of the city he serves:

Washington, according to Gittens, is a city with unique challenges. "There's no private money here," he says, apparently discounting major corporations in the region such as Lockheed Martin, AOL, Sprint-Nextel, General Dynamics, Capital One and Marriott International. "There's not even any big foundations. . . . In Seattle you got the dot-com foundations. You go to San Francisco and you got [financier] George Gund and other sources to drive events."

Gittens says his mission is clear.

"A festival like ours serves a different purpose -- bringing great films to a great city. . . . We bring them in the spirit of celebration, to show films from around the world, stories of other cultures that never get seen in this country unless regional fests like us get them here. . . . It's a service we provide. People come back year after year. And we feel that we are doing some good."

And in terms of aspiring to the ranks of the higher-profile regional festivals, he says: "I don't have those thoughts."

Turn off your cell phone (Vader remix)

Entertainment Weekly's popwatch blog has a funny YouTube clip about a guy who makes the mistake of answering his cell phone in a very important meeting. Let's just say the Empire strikes back.

More on Whether Critics Matter -- From Time Magazine

Time's current issue focuses on "fanboy" culture, the defining role of

the typically geeky 16-to-34-year-old male (though there are some fangirls) whose slavish devotion to a pop-culture subject, like a comic-book character or a video game, drives him to blog, podcast, chat, share YouTube videos, go to comic-book conventions and, once in a while, see a movie on the subject of his obsession.

They're the new tastemakers," says Avi Arad, a producer behind this summer's Spider-Man 3 and Fantastic Four: Rise of the Silver Surfer. "Hard-core fans represent a small piece of the viewing public, but they influence geek culture, journalists, Wall Street. You don't want them to trash your project." If these fans embrace a project, as they did 300 and Heroes, they can kick-start a hit.

Time movie critic Richard Corliss responds with a essay headlined "Don't Read this Column." It may be, as Variety editor Peter Bart notes, that critics have little impact on ticket-buyers for movies like "Norbit" and "Wild Hogs." Bart suggests that critics "take 'a sabbatical until September,' when Hollywood starts releasing artsy films in the pre-Oscar blitz." (Irony alert: Bart as editor presumably approves of his publication's critic Justin Chang, who recently called "The Reaping" "almost riveting in its silliness" and said of box office smash "Night at the Museum," "Rarely has so much production value yielded so little in terms of audience engagement.") Corliss says:

Implicit in Bart's argument is that a popular film is a good film, and vice versa. If critics can't validate that tautology, we're useless. That's why studios screen fewer and fewer of their films early, and if they do, they invite everyone but critics. Until the fall, that is, when they want their prestige releases on 10 Best lists. Those citations sell tickets and tip off the awards folks. In that sense, Hollywood uses us as heralds to our own constituency. We're the fanboy brigade for Oscar films.

...

Hollywood's marketers have become tremendously efficient at getting their core audience to see their big movies. They don't need critics for that. But critics have a larger utility: to put films in context, to offer an informed perspective, to educate, outrage, entertain. We're just trying to do what every other writer is doing: making sense of one part of your world.

So, dear reader: If our opinions on a movie don't coincide, I don't care, and neither should you. I'm not telling you what to think. I'm just asking that you do think.

Museum of the Moving Image's Film Critic Institute

I'm back from the Film Critic Institute sponsored by the New York Times Foundation and the Museum of the Moving Image. It was five days packed with panels, screenings, discussions, and homework. Every single bit of it was enthralling, thrilling, dazzling, and inspiring. I feel like I've been plugged into plugged into a super-duper recharger and at the same time being given a powerful new pair of glasses while someone has floored my gas pedal. Everyone -- presenters, organizers, and participants were all so smart and honorable and knowledgeable and dedicated. I felt like Kevin Costner in "Bull Durham" talking about his time in "the Show" where all the practice balls are white and all the women have long legs and money.

Just to give you an idea, our last day included a presentation by Mark Urman of ThinkFilm (very funny, very smart, very honest) and two hours with Martin Scorsese, prompting one of the participants to say, "If movies are our religion, we just met the pope."

It wasn't because he was a celebrity or even because he is a great director. It was because we had just spent two hours with perhaps the greatest and most knowledgeable lover of movies who has ever lived. I am quite certain he would happily still be talking to us if we had not somehow found the fortitude to let him go. He talked to us with great passion about movies he loves, from the very first films he saw ("Forbidden Planet" got only two stars!) to his grail-like search for the definitive prints of "Tales of Hoffman" and "Once Upon a Time in the West." And the experience of showing "Charlotte's Web" at his seven-year old's birthday party. (She has recently moved beyond her affection for "High School Musical," he was relieved to report.) His office is filled with Italian movie posters (the Italian posters for American movies are stunning) and he has beautiful, leather-bound volumes with the names of his movies, I imagine his annotated scripts. The two posters behind his desk are from movies about Hollywood -- "The Bad and the Beautiful" and "Sunset Boulevard." He has a photo of the big four -- himself with Lucas, Spielberg, and Coppola -- the night he won the Oscar. He talked about some of his movies and how he approached them and some of what went into making them. One of the problems created by computer editing is that the old-fashioned way, with physical cutting and pasting -- gave him time to walk around and think between edits. He almost made a movie based on the real-life story behind "Moby Dick," but then he said, "Me, on a boat? I can't do that!" Now he is working on documentaries about British film and about the Rolling Stones. And he said that when he is in the office he has Turner Classic Movies on all the time and will constantly interrupt whatever he's doing to have everyone watch, "This movie isn't very good, but this one shot is incredible. You have to come see it!"

Just outside his office is where his long-time editor and close collaborator, three-time Oscar-winner Thelma Schoonmaker, has all of her equipment. We sat in her office and she showed us some of the scenes she worked on (the famous no-edits entrance into the Copa in "Goodfellas," the plane crash in "The Aviator," several of the boxing matches in "Raging Bull") and talked us through the choices. There are elephant sounds in those boxing scenes! One of the other Institute participants told her how he had seen her late husband, the great British director Michael Powell, at one of his last appearances, at a screening of "Peeping Tom," and she told us she was there and how much it meant to him to see how enthusiastically the film was received by the audience.

We were all a little gobsmacked. So I don't think we were able to get the most out of our last stop, an art gallery with an exhibit drawing a connection between early cubism and early movies, though we did love the installation, which included a small screening space designed to look like a tiny Parisian theater from around 1906. Then some of us went to a rehearsal of "Passio," a beautiful choral piece by Arvo Part accompanying a film assemblage, clips from very old medical footage (some quite disturbing) and other oddities.

MMI film institute homework -- a review of "The Pervert's Guide to Cinema"

One of my homework assignments was this review of The Pervert's Guide to the Movies:

It doesn’t get any more meta than this.

“The Pervert’s Guide to the Cinema” is a movie about movies. No, it’s a movie about movies about movies — or about dreams, fantasies, and stories of all kinds, and the movies that represent, exemplify, explore, and illuminate them. It is a critique of a critique of movies and of their critique of, well, pretty much everything, you name it, the human condition, the collective unconscious, essential dualities, the man behind the curtain, the fundamental conservatism of pornography, Pluto’s nightmare (being tried by a jury of cats) from Disney, the obscene, unkillable father, and of course the backed-up toilet.

Documentarian Sophie Fiennes (sister of Ralph and Joseph) has made a three-hour film of Slovenian philosopher and psychoanalyst Slavoj Zizek talking about films and what they mean. His passion for his theories and for the films he describes are so intense that he literally enters into them through meticulously re-created sets that place him in Norman Bates’ cellar, Neo’s chair opposite Morpheus, and the hotel bathroom from Francis Ford Coppola’s “The Conversation.”

Zizek sees film not just as art but as the expression of our collective unconscious. We may think of the term “dream factory” as referring to Hollywood’s aspirational gloss, the way we might dream of dancing like Astaire or punching like John Wayne. But Zizek sees films as our way of processing our deepest primordial conflicts, as we do in our literal dreams – and our nightmares. The film is essentially an illustrated lecture, kaleidoscopic in format, with a torrential barbaric yawp of ideas and images, some provocative, some insightful, some revelatory, some outlandish. Like Freud, however, he does not know much about what women want.

The film begins with an enchanting scene from 1931’s “Possessed” with Joan Crawford. As she walks toward the railroad tracks, a train rolls by, so close and so slowly that she can see through the windows of each passing train car a different scene of glamour, sophistication, and intrigue. An elegant couple in evening clothes is dancing. Another is sharing a romantic supper. Each tableau is more enticing than the last for the small-town girl, and they pass as though she is changing the channels on a television set. And then, at the end of the train, a man is drinking a cocktail. Unlike the others, he is not separated from her by glass, and he leans over to put a drink in her hand, inviting her into this dream, making her fantasy real. Zizek is doing the same for us. As our proxy, he enters into the movies, and we follow him the way Alice followed the White Rabbit. In some cases, he stands before a white screen, the personification of a Rorschach blot. In some, it is enough to recreate the set but in others he visits the actual real-life locations, as though the physical reality underlying the fantasy story will help him unlock its secrets and make it somehow more real, dissolving the separation between him and the movie, between us and the screen.

At times it feels like free-association , part ramble, part rant, as though Zizek is diagnosing and treating the collective neuroses of humanity as audience at the same time we are treating his, the silent psychoanalyst for his stream of consciousness.

Zizek dwells on dualities. In the literal (if internal) struggle with good/bad controlled/uncontrolled battling dualities, ”the obstacle is externalized,” as we see in films like “Fight Club,” “The Red Shoes,” “The Wizard of Oz,” and “Dr. Strangelove.” “The “uncastrated double” is the other, a projection of ourselves through the leading character who represents us and who must attempt to triumph over that nasty, headstrong id. We see literal (external) dualities in films like “Blue Velvet,” with a (blond) good girl and a (dark) bad girl, an impotent and ailing good father and a powerful and seemingly unkillable bad one. The ultimate psychological crime, Zizek tells us, is the father who will not die. We see the self splintered into three with the Marx brothers, Chico the crafty, calculating ego, Groucho the hyper-cerebral superego, and Harpo the ravenous id, at once childlike and innocent and primordially aggressive. “The combination of utter corruption and innocence is what the id is about,” Zizek tells us. We might come to the conclusion that Groucho and Chico also embody corruption and innocence and that, for example, more traditional straight man/comic duos like Abbott and Costello and Martin and Lewis might better exemplify the tension between superego and id, but the avalanche of images and words does not give us enough time to breathe, much less think.

All of this is in the context of the ultimate duality of fantasy and reality. The irony is that it is through fantasy that we work through this conundrum. “The Matrix” is a double-fantasy as its fictional world is outside the norms of time, place, and physics. In that film, Morpheus gives Neo the choice between the blue pill, which would allow him to continue to believe what he has always thought to be reality, and the red pill, which shows the truth. Will the movies be our red or blue pills?

Zizek sits in Neo’s chair as though Morpheus is making him the offer, and says, “I want a third pill.” He shows us how movies can be this third pill. Inherently fantastic, they can explore the reality of fantasy. In “Blue,” Julie loses her reality when her husband and child are killed. She loses her fantasy of what her husband was when she discovers that he lied to her. Her final achievement, her happy ending, is to acquire appropriate distance from reality –”life in its brutal meaninglessness” – to be able to appreciate fantasy (in a theater), but recognize it as such. In “Eyes Wide Shut,” real-life enactment of a woman’s fantasy is perversely un-erotic, destroying any imagined thrill. (Zizek might have also included films like Orson Welles’ “F for Fake” and “The Immortal Story.”)

And then there is the fantasy of our love object. Zizek’s superbly chosen example is Charlie Chaplin’s “City Lights.” The blind girl believes that the little tramp is a millionaire. He steals the money for her operation and when he gets out of prison she has no idea that the funny little man in rags is the one who made it possible for her to see, until she touches his hand as she gives him a flower. The movie wisely does not try for the fantasy Hollywood ending. We don’t know what the characters will do with this realization; as it ends, they do not, either. It is that very ambiguity on screen that brings us closer to resolving our own conflicts. “It is only in cinema where we get the critical dimension we are afraid to confront in reality.”

Zizek looks at film the way that Freud, Jung, and Joseph Campbell looked at myths. Film is modern myth, a dress rehearsal for our emotions and a way of using symbols and structure to make sense of that which is beyond the capacity of any boundary of meaning to enclose. Why a “pervert’s guide?” Because Zizek says that “Cinema is the ultimate pervert art. It doesn’t give you what you desire, it tells you how to desire.” This may be his greatest failure of insight. Desire is innate and one of the deepest desires is to make some sense of ourselves and our lives. Films thrill us when they satisfy, even for a moment, that desire, to give us, as Zizek says, that voice that we would otherwise be unable to access. In helping us recognize this — and in reminding us of films we should see or see again and questions to ask ourselves as we watch, he and Feinnes have made a film that is both entertaining and wise.

The Force is Still With Us Three Decades Later

As the 30th anniversary of the original "Star Wars" release approaches, the official history is back under discussion. More material for film historians and "Star Wars" fanboys and all those in between.

Live music for silent movies

The MMI Institute participants just attended a screening of William S. Hart's 1916 silent film, "Hell's Hinges," introduced by Diane Kaiser Koszarski, the author of Complete Films of William S. Hart. The highlight was the haunting live musical accompaniment, part original, part adapted from traditional music of the era, performed by Donald Sosin, dressed in a cowboy shirt and jeans for the occasion.

Do we need critics?

EW's Whitney Pastorek asks a good question to think about as I go to NY for the film critics institute: "What's the critic's role in a comment-board world?"

Am I a Frank Rich or a Pauline Kael? HELL to the no. But I consider myself a proud part of that tradition. I've spent the better part of my adult life educating myself, cultivating opinions, learning about the journey of art through the ages. I take in almost-inconceivable amounts of music, movies, books, television, and media so that I can report on pop culture with an eye on its place in history. I also take time to craft that reporting, to shape my opinions. I take time to present them in a compelling way. I worry over commas, I fret over em-dashes. I use spell-check. I'm inspired by all those amazing voices that came before me, and, as with any craft, I aspire to be excellent at mine. And I believe that, if used properly and responsibly, it is a craft that has great value. I do not know that our society would be a better place if everyone was allowed to perform surgery or build skyscrapers or drive big-rig trucks just because technology came along that made those activities available to the masses at the click of a button. I don't see what makes cultural criticism any different.

This next sentence says it all, and should be recited by everyone with a keyboard and a blogger account.

Just because you can type into the little box and press "post" doesn't mean you should.

The MMI Institute

I am thrilled to have been accepted to the Institute in Film Criticism and Feature Writing, sponsored by the Museum of the Moving Image and the New York Times Foundation. There will be fifteen journalists from a wide variety of backgrounds who write for a wide variety of outlets. And the schedule they have for us is dazzling, with speakers and screenings. Monday we get to attend an editorial meeting at the New York Times. And Tuesday we hear from Martin Scorsese and his long-time editor, Thelma Schoonmaker.

We'll be very busy -- the institute has warned us there will be homework. But I will try to post some updates on this blog while I am there.

Miss Pettigrew

Doesn't this sound wonderful?

NEW YORK, April 16, 2007 – Production begins this week on location in the U.K. on Focus Features’ comedy "Miss Pettigrew Lives for a Day," starring Academy Award winner Frances McDormand in the title role. Focus CEO James Schamus made the announcement today...Ms. McDormand is executive-producing Miss Pettigrew Lives for a Day with Frank Frattaroli and Paul Webster...Joining Ms. McDormand in the cast are Amy Adams (most recently seen in Talladega Nights, and an Academy Award nominee last year for Junebug), Ciaran Hinds (who recently wrapped There Will Be Blood), Shirley Henderson (of the Harry Potter movies), Lee Pace (a Golden Globe Award nominee for Soldier’s Girl), Mark Strong (currently in Sunshine), and screen newcomer Tom Payne.

In the 1939-set romantic tale, Miss Guinevere Pettigrew (Ms. McDormand), a middle-aged London governess, finds herself unfairly dismissed from her job. An attempt to gain new employment catapults her into the glamorous world and dizzying social whirl of an American actress and singer, Delysia Lafosse (Ms. Adams). Within minutes, Miss Pettigrew finds herself swept into a heady high-society milieu – and, within hours, living it up.

Many thanks to Gwendolynne Larson and the Emporia Gazette

Gwendolynne Larson's latest column for the Emporia Gazette has a nice compliment for my reviews. She says just what I hope for -- that I give her the information she needs to decide what is right for her son. Sorry he didn't get to see "Disturbia" with his friends this week, but I'm glad Ms. Larson feels she can rely on my reviews.

The Movie Mom's Dad -- Speeches that Changed the World

Vital Speeches magazine has produced a DVD of 25 speeches that changed the world, and I am very proud to say that my dad's "vast wasteland" speech is on the list, right there between Richard Nixon's resignation and Leonid Brezhnev's "Peaceful Co-existence."

Update: Today's Chicago Tribune has my dad's op-ed on the Imus mess.

Hairspray

Quite a treat for a cold and rainy April this week when DC film critics got to see a sneak peek at footage from next summer's "Hairspray." It boggles the mind to think that John Waters' film has become a hugely successful Broadway musical and is now back on film with John Travolta in the role immortalized by the divine Divine (yes, that's him in the picture). It looks like it is avoiding the pitfalls of "The Producers" and while it has lost some of its edge, it has tons of energy and spirit. Can't wait.

Mine Your Own Business

"This is not about global warming," we were crisply informed by Freyda Levy before the movie began. "It's about economic development." Levy is the president of the Moving Picture Institute, which supports film-makers and films "who are committed to protecting and sustaining a free society."

Not the usual movie screening. Instead of a movie theater or screening room, this one was held in the Dirksen Senate Office Building on Capitol Hill. Instead of a dozen scruffy movie critics, the audience was about 70 Hill staffers wearing IDs with blurred photos on chains around their necks.

The movie was Mine Your Own Business, funded by industry, but made by journalists Phelim McAleer and Ann McElhinney, who retained editorial control. The premise of the film is that a responsible mining company has been thwarted from developing mines in some of the poorest communities by well-meaning but carpet-bagging environmentalists who have a romantic notion of "peasant" culture and are thus condemning these people to lives without opportunity for jobs, health care, and education.

The mining companies, of course, are carpet-baggers too, with their own ideas of what is best for these communities, not coincidentally what is best for the mining companies as well. But they make some good points and have some devastating footage. As a movie, it is ragged and amateurish. As advocacy it is further evidence that in the era of Michael Moore, "An Inconvenient Truth," and You Tube, a movie is worth a million words. And $10 million in lobbying.

Writer's Alamanac

When my children were younger and we had to get them to the schoolbus, I used to set my alarm to wake up to Garrison Keillor's Writer's Alamanac every morning on NPR. It was a wonderful way to start the day. I loved hearing each day's poetry selection in Keillor's hypnotically sonorous tones. I enjoyed hearing which writers were celebrating birthdays. And I always found his sign-off touching: "Be well, do good work, and keep in touch."

Now I get to sleep a little later, but I still get Keillor's daily poetry selection via email. Today is Billy Collins' poem about going to the movies.

The Movies

I would like to watch a movie tonight
in which a stranger rides into town
or where someone embarks on a long journey,

a movie with the promise of danger,
danger visited upon the citizens of the town
by the stranger who rides in,

or the danger that will befall the person
on his or her long hazardous journey—
it hardly matters to me

so long as I am not in danger,
and not much danger lies in watching
a movie, you might as well agree.

I would prefer to watch this movie at home
than walk out in the cold to a theater
and stand on line for a ticket.

I want to watch it lying down
with the bed hitched up to the television
the way they'd hitch up a stagecoach

to a team of horses
so the movie could pull me along
the crooked, dusty road of its adventures.

I would stay out of harm's way
by identifying with the characters
like the bartender in the movie about the stranger

who rides into town,
the fellow who knows enough to duck
when a chair shatters the mirror over the bar.

Or the stationmaster
in the movie about the perilous journey,
the fellow who fishes a gold watch from his pocket,

helps a lady onto the train,
and hands up a heavy satchel
to the man with the mustache

and the dangerous eyes,
waving the all-clear to the engineer.
Then the train would pull out of the station

and the movie would continue without me.
And at the end of the day
I would hang up my oval hat on a hook

and take the shortcut home to my two dogs,
my faithful, amorous wife, and my children—
Molly, Lucinda, and Harold, Jr.

Be well, do good work, and keep in touch.®

Tagged by Reel Fanatic

I'm honored that Keith Demko of Reel Fanatic, a blog I admire very much and read several times a week, selected my blog as one of the sites that makes him think. Right back at you, Keith!

Quote of the Week -- Dana Stevens on "Grindhouse"

Of all the reviews I read, Slate's Dana Stevens best conveyed and illuminated the transgressive pleasures of "Grindhouse."

We've all experienced some degree of Tarantino fatigue since ["Pulp Fiction"], whether with the director himself (who sometimes seems to be using the screen as a place to play out his own airless adolescent fantasies) or with the endless imitations spawned by his particular brand of fast-talking, genre-savvy splatter (this year's dreadful "Smokin' Aces" is one latter-day example).

But Death Proof is a reminder of what there was to like about Tarantino in the first place: his uncanny ear for dialogue that's at once naturalistic and deliriously wordy, his kinetic action sequences, and his voracious love for cinema in all its incarnations, especially the sleazy ones. With its lean 90-minute running time and a near-complete absence of CGI, "Death Proof" feels like an experiment in austerity after more than a decade in which Tarantino had free run of the special-effects candy store. And it works fabulously, much to the surprise of this generally Tarantino-weary writer.

Peep-a-rama

The Washington Post's first-ever Peeps diorama contest was a huge hit, with more than 350 entries. The winner and many of those selected for the website were inspired by movies. First prize went to this fabulous salute to Marilyn Monroe's "Diamonds are a Girl's Best Friend" number in Gentlemen Prefer Blondes. Runners-up included tributes to Soylent Green ("Soylent green is PEEPS!!!") and Mommie Dearest. There's an hilarious slideshow here.

Faux double features

The release of "Grindhouse" this week reminded me of another fake double feature that was a tribute to the movie-going pleasures of an earlier era, Stanley Donen's Movie Movie. Like "Grindhouse," it had two films and a coming attraction, but this one was set in the 1930's. There was a black and white drama about a boxer (Harry Hamlin) and a color musical. And, as in "Grindhouse," some players appeared in both. A terrific cast included George C. Scott, Ann Reinking (as "Troubles Moran" who almost makes the pure-hearted hero forget what's important), and a script co-written by "M*A*S*H"'s Larry Gelbart, it well deserves a release on DVD.

Guilty Pleasures

The Washington Post has a great salute to guilty pleasure movies. I try not to feel guilty about my pleasures...but I'll admit to loving "The V.I.Ps," Doris Day comedies like "The Thrill of it All," "Move Over Darling," "Please Don't Eat the Daisies," and "Lover Come Back," Douglas Sirk suffering-women-in-couture-clothes movies like "All That Heaven Allows" and "Magnificent Obsession," and unpretentious teen movies like "High School Musical" and "Stick It."

The Wilhelm Scream

Another reason to love the internet -- someone has taken the time to research and meticulously document the history of the Wilhelm scream, a popular sound effect that has now become something of an in-joke for sound engineers and movie fans. Reportedly, it was originally recorded by Sheb Wooley, best known as one of the bad guys in "High Noon" and as the writer-performer of the 50's novelty hit "Purple People-Eater." He also wrote the theme song for "Hee Haw." The distinctive scream has been used in many movies and You Tube has a clever compilation: