The Poseidon Adventure (1972)

I thought this was a pretty weak film. I didn't enjoy it because the cinematography had no imagination, and the characters screamed and fought so much that I almost didn't want to finish watching it.
This style of film is one of my LEAST favourites. Similar films include It's a Mad Mad Mad Mad World, and Flight of the Phoenix. Ironic fact, these 3 films have been each remade within the past few years, all remakes complete trash. The original films are no masterpieces either, why the hell do they remake the crappy films.
Ernest Borgnine is also so friggin annoying in this film, his voice and face respectively.
I don't recommend this film unless you want to watch something that will help you appreciate good films.

West Side Story (1961)

I really like this movie. For months now I've been trying to see this movie for free (the library had a ridiculous queue), so I ask a friend who owned it, and I must say it's one of the best musicals ever. This was my 2nd time watching it, but it was even better watching it again. The dancing is superb, and I do love great choreography. Story is fine, it doesn't stand out, just a modern take at romeo and juliet, but the dancing and singing, sigh so good.
The setting and costume is also worth paying attention to. There is some great use of bright colours in the women's dresses, against the drab colours the men wear.
Some of my favourite song (and I love them all) "Play is cool, boy", "America", "When you're a jet", "Mambo" (which has no singing, just awesome dancing), and "Tonight" to some extent.

Help! (1965)

This movie is alright. The pacing is slow though. Unfortunately I've been making constant comparisons with A Hard Day's Night, an earlier Beatles film. In my opinion, A Hard Day's Night is a classic slapstick comedy, I own it too. While Help doesn't fit into the same mold as A Hard Day's Night, it still has some amazing elements, that is making me finish watching the film, rather than just turn it off. Both films are directed by Richard Lester, so they have many common cinematic devices, but Help! feels very subtle and quiet in comparison to AHDN. What I like about Help! is that The Fab Four still deliver their random ironic situational comments. John seems ot be getting more air time than the others, but he's been the funniest so far. The plot revolves around a conundrum that Ringo has found himself in, but Ringo's aloof performance is more annoying than silly. Paul and George seem bored with what they're doing, but maybe that's because they don't have as much screen time.
Special attention to the sections devoted to The Beatles doing their music video schitck. "She's got a ticket to ride" where they're on a ski hill is pretty funny. Director Lestor has some awesome off-center cinematography, that still feels original to watch today. The Monkees tv series came out a year after this film was released (1966-1968) and hugely steels comedic devices from Help!, which I'm sad to say devalues this film. While I realize Help! precedes The Monkees' series, the commonality makes it hard for it to stand out.
By the end of the film, I feel like it was able to redeem itself. Funny scene, the four of them are wearing funny beards; the irony is Ringo and John wear beards that they actually have for real later in life, haha.
I think overall this film is worth seeing if you want to see something funny/silly.

Midnight in the Garden of Good and Evil (1997)

I enjoyed this movie for a number of reasons. For one, the pacing is really good. I think Eastwood really knows his timing with his films because even though this film is two and a half hours long, it goes by so smoothly so it doesn't feel long at all. I constantly feel engaged in the action of the scene. One reason why I think the scenes are so engaging is because Eastwood balances the tone of each scene so that they work together. There are a number of comic relief scenes that I think really lighten the film up, so that the whol film does not revolve around the murder case. I think it is important to have a subplot because it lets the audience relax for a few minutes, instead of constantly getting more info about the main plot.
John Cusack was also good in this film. Even though he plays his character the same as any other one of his characters, I think it works in the context of the film. The same with Kevin Spacy. I think Spacy's character is a lot like the one he played in The Usual Suspects, but of course in another setting, but there are many character commonalities, like lying to the other characters, that he performs.

The Holiday (2006)

I thought this was a cute film. The premise was good, the cast was good, and the setting was awesome. However, I thought the story line wasn't balanced enough. For anyone familiar with the story line you know that two women switch houses for their vacation, and they end up falling in love with a guy at the vacation spot. It's unbalanced because more time is spent on the romanace with Cameron Diaz than with Kate Winslet. I guess it makes sense in the story line because it was more about the physical attraction between Cameron Diaz and Judd Law, than with Kate Winslet and Jack Black.
I found myself paying a lot of attention to the jewelery that both Cameron and Kate were wearing. There was simple, yet elegant pieces. Since I recently got my ears pierced I pay more attention to earings that other ladies wear. Also the necklaces were really cool that they wore in the film. They were mostly long necklaces and also simple and elegant so they matched the earings they wore. Both actresses wore the jewelery effortlessly and it really added to the tone of the film, I feel.
Judd Law and Jack Black were also cute in this film. I thought it was good that their romance stories were also brought to light, but it was a good decision to never make the film too sad or depressing when the characters were discussing how their last relationship ended.
This film reminds me of Love Actually which is also British (The Holiday I guess is half British), except The Holiday is only with two overlapping romances while Love Actually has many relationships going on. I guess The Holiday can be seen as an echo film to try and capture the same audience that was won over by Love Actually.

Marie Antoinette (2006)

I was really disappointed by this film for a number of reasons.
I don't like it when films bastardizes culture from centuries ago with terms, phrases ways of life from the 20th century. I know it's meant to be a twist on a period piece, but it really takes away from the authenticity of the film and I lose respect when many ideals are not present.
I know Sophia Coppola was trying to be all punk rock with this film, and at times it's really cool hearing bands like The Strokes in the soundtrack of a period piece, but really that takes away any seriousness the film could inhibit.
The party scenes were very well edited in my opinion, but what they were doing at the parties were pretty lame. Playing put-a-famous-name-on-your-forehead-and-guess-who-you-are probably wasn't around in the 18th century, or pot for that matter. I really just think the film is Sophia trying to make Marie Antoinette like any other young girl in the 20th century, but that an unfair representation of their way of life.
Too much of the film was focused of whether or not she was having sex with her husband. I think other elements should have gotten more attention.
The French didn't like this film in Cannes, and I gotta agree with them on this one.

Y tu mama tambien (2001)

This was an impressive film. It was the second time I've seen it and boy it seemed to make a lot more sense this time around.
The cinematography in this film in incredible; I couldn't look away because the composition had me at the edge of my seat. The colours are so bold, and vivid, it felt like I was there.
The characters are also really strong. Their stories are realistic; they have their own goals and vices, I feel like I learned more about human natures from watching it.
The pacing of the film is also really good. I had forgotten that one of the story techniques of the film is that all the natural sound is cut off, and a ominous voice-over shares further information about one of the characters, it was really well done.

The Stepford Wives (1975)

This was a pleasantly eerie film. I say it's pleasant because it was well done and it was subtle rather than over the top. So that no one gets confused this is the original film, the remake from a few years ago pales in comparison.
What I liked about this film is that the politics of 2nd wave women's liberation are fresh in the text of the film. It's very obvious the dominant theme in this film.
What didn't take me as a surprised, and I thought was a good choice was that the film had a bleak ending. This isn't a typical Hollywood film for that reason. It came out in 1975 making it part of the tail end of the New Hollywood Cinema years.
Katharine Ross was alright in this film. It's hard for me to take her very seriously after knowing her as the mousy cute girl in The Graduate, c'est la vie.

Arsenic and Old Lace (1944)

I thought this was a decent film. It wasn't what I was expecting because I didn't think the film was based on a theater production. I find film adaptations from theatrical plays interesting because they do not require a lot of set design, most of the time the film can take place in just a few areas, sometimes only one room is necessary. I want to examine how there is a huge difference between these 2 room films and epics that use many continents to tell their story.
Arsenic and Old Lace is a typical theatrical production. Most of the film takes place in the living room of the two old ladies that are killing old lonely men as charity.
I initially watched the film because Cary Grant was in it. While he was enjoyable to watch, I have to admit that the magic that I once saw in his films are gone (reading a person's biography, and watching almost 2 dozen of their films can make a person feel bored with an actor).

L'homme qui aimait les femmes (1977)

This was a really good film. I really enjoy Truffaut films more now. When I was watching this film I found many elements that make this film the predecessor of the highly recognized film “Adaptation” which is also a great film.
While the immediate subject matter is not identical, there are many thematic devices that make a parallel reading very easy to do.
For one they are both about men who are writing about love and relationships. While Adaptation is about how flowers are symbols of love, L’homme takes a literal stand on the subject.
There is a scene that reflects this. In L’homme, The writer is describing what he likes about each woman specifically. He describes them as having something unique about themselves that he is drawn to. In Adaptation, the writer uses different flowers as metaphors for each woman that he could be attracted to.
Both writers are also obsessed with how they are writing their books. They admit that they are putting their personal sentiments into their writing because each writer has a personal approach to whatever subject they are dealing with. Both writers want to try to overcome being too narrow viewed, and they regard it as a vice, but they don’t realize that it is not a flaw, but rather a strength to have a unique position.
In both films there is a scene toward the end when they are confronted by a former lover. The lover tells them that they have to learn how to like themselves because their problem is they push people away because they have low self-esteem. They don’t allow themselves to love one single woman because they have trouble metaphorically looking at themselves in the mirror.
There is also a scene in the film where there is a conversation over the phone where the woman just wants to hear the man breath, she doesn’t want him to say anything she just wants to have a sign that he is present and giving her his full attention.
Also a minor detail, Meryl Streep, one of the main women in Adaptation looks uncannily like one of the women in L’homme; I don’t think it’s a coincidence.
Once I realized that these films have so much in common in made L’homme even the more interesting to watch. I found myself looking for more similarities, but I think the other observations I made don’t have much foundation.
The films ended very differently. Adaptation ended with the protagonist feeling free and open to new opportunities about his life. He feels he can move on from his former lover, and the death of his brother. While L’homme ended with the protagonist dying from his weakness; he was reaching for the nurses legs and fell off his hospital bed and died.
Both films are very good stories.

The New Pornographers – Ottawa Bluesfest – Sunday July 16, 2006

I thought this was a good show. I was unfortunately somewhat disappointed, but it was merely because of aesthetic reasons ie. the band does not look like rock stars, what the giff! The sound was tight (even though the mix was poorly done).
To get back to this aesthetic thing, the members of the band looked ordinary and geeky. I think bands should dress up, or at least try and present some kind of performative image, it makes the whole seeing them live more worth it, instead of the look like you’re watching them jam in some garage. One of the main things that through me off was the bassist was a total doppelganger for my old film professor M. Raymond, so it was funny and kind of weird watching him rocking out wearing a ‘Where’s Waldo” shirt, and I don’t think he was being ironic.
I was feeling kind of gross as well because I had been outside for most of the afternoon and it was so friggin hot out, it was not enjoyable to stand around for a few hours on top of that.
Overall, they played the songs I wanted to hear, so they weren’t a disappointment in terms of that, it was just the presentation that I think needs work. The band members didn’t move around the stage at all making it look like they were part of an awkward junior high band performing in a talent show, hehe.
Controller.Controller played before them and I really enjoyed their set, they rocked hard, it was fun.

The Pink Panther (2006)

Wow! I really think this movie is underrated, I thought it was hilarious. I’ve seen the first two original Pink Panther movies from the 60s and hated them, in comparison this version is so much better.
The funniest part of the film is that it’s Steve Martin, an American actor with a corny French accent. The accent is so bad he was definitely trying to make it the worse French accent ever, it was hilarious. One of my favourite parts was when Kevin Kline says a word in French to Steve Martin, and Steve has a “what the fuck does that mean” look oh his face, haha the French character doesn’t know French, just a bad accent. It was even funnier when Steve Martin, with a French accent was trying to learn how to speak with an American accent, haha. The whole scene is a lady trying to teach him how to say “I would like to buy a hamburger” to say the least it was not successful. The next scene has Steve Martin in NYC having his first hamburger, he acts like hamburgers are disgusting, but he bites into is and is in friggin’ love
I have so many lines I loved in this movie that Steve delivered. His facial expressions were so funny also. Also surprising there was some impressive cinematography also, I wasn’t expecting any stylization, kudos!
I wasn’t anything out of this film initially because I had hated the original Pink Panther movies (I respect Peter Sellers, I just don’t think there’s anything special about his version of the character, it was lame).
Here is the trainer who trains! hehehe

Short Cuts (1993)

I thought this was an enjoyable film. For those who are not familiar with this film, think the movie that inspired Magnolia?
I like Short Cuts more than Magnolia because it doesn’t have that syrupy orchestral music playing in the background the whole time; it’s more gritty and believable. Julianne Moore is in both films also, I think she’s alright in Short Cuts.
This film is three hours long, but I found the pacing so well done that I didn’t even notice the time going by, I think it was because Robert Altman made sure that each segment of each story was not very long making the viewer eager to see where and how the story will continue to develop in it’s next segment. I found I was eager also to see how each character would bump into one another. Most of the characters are related to one another or are neighbour or have some affiliation with each other, and I found it interesting to see how each would meet.
All of the cast members I enjoyed, This film is definitely worth checking out.

The English Patient (1996)

I really didn’t like this film, I thought it was crap. It in no way appeals to me, and I will now say why.
For one there is not much dialogue in this film. You may thing, but the visuals speak where words would be, but no. All the visuals are the same, there is no vary whatsoever in the visuals. The characters mostly rely on facial expressions to say their emotions, but there is only one expression in this whole entire friggin film. The oh I miss my lover, my life is soo deprived, I was happy at one time, I wish I could love someone passionately, I’m lonely and I need a huggy-wuggy, bleh! I’d rather listen to someone say this than have to look at their facial expressions.
The other thing is that the cinematography has nothing to it, I never say this, but I could have done better cinematography myself. Gah! I can understand why this film won 9 academy awards, I don’t agree with the academies decisions as it is, so The English Patient film can take their crappy awards, and shove it.
I guess I’m a little irritated that I sat through this film. I just don’t understand this type of film, why do people find it appealing, it’s so boring and predictable, in the bad way.

A Fistful of Dollars (1964)

I thought this was a really good movie. I didn’t think I was a fan of Westerns, but the style that the spaghetti western is done in is really good. What I like about this kind of western is that there is a dimension of parody in the film. When I watched “The Good, The Bad, and the Ugly” a few months ago with my dad, I had no clue why he was laughing all the time, I just thought the film was being corny and not knowing it. Now I realize that the director was aware and consciously put the parody elements in the film. One of the strongest ways this dimension is portrayed, I believe, is in the soundtrack. It’s an awesome soundtrack with a funny flute loop and chain clang against something. The cinematography is also amazing, I put it up there with my favourite films in terms of visuals, it’s orgasmic! I really want to see ‘For a Few Dollars More’, but it seems to be a hot ticket item at the library for a few weeks, argh nugget!
Note to fans of the Back to the Future trilogy: Fistful of Dollars has the scene that Marty used to get the idea of the ‘bullet-proof vest’; it was cool seeing that scene.
This is definitely a film to watch to get a well rounded film history.

Nine to Five (1980)

This was a cute and enjoyable film. Lily Tomlin, Jane Fonda and Dolly Parton have good chemistry together, and even though it could be slightly irritating to watch their hijinks, I couldn’t help chuckling to myself.
Nine to Five is a kind of self-mockery of the women’s liberation movement during the 70s. I thought they played it well; I especially found it interesting to see how different the times were over 25 years ago. Just a few weeks ago I had heard about this film because they were releasing a 25th anniversary DVD.
I also found this film interesting because of all the old technology that the have in the office. All their office equipment are antiques when compared to what is around today, it was pretty funny watching the characters function with the gi-normous photocopier, it’s loco.
I recommend this movie as an easy watch. Thinking about it now, it reminds me of Weekend at Bernie’s, but with the subject matter dealing with woman’s lib instead.

Holiday (1938)

This is another great Cary Grant picture. It’s the third film he starred in with Katherine Hepburn, and I have to say this film is my favourite with Hepburn because she was not annoying at all, I found her very charming and victimized actually (which sucked, but I guess helped me sympathize with her character).
I was deceived at the beginning of this film. The love interest in the film initially is named Julia, and I got so excited because I thought hey it’s going to be another Cary Grant love Julia film. It was like this for most of the film, but half way through it turns out that the character known as Julia was shallow and uninteresting, which blew for me personally in a way, but since I found Hepburn’s character so endearing I just told myself I wasn’t like that crazy Julia character and enjoyed the film.
Cary did some cool nonchalant acrobatics. I’m reading a biography of his and seeing him do the acrobatics (because he’s where he originated in show biz) really shown that the man has class and talent.
In terms of story this was a good film. It was explained very well why Hepburn was the black sheep of the family, besides a few renegade ideas she talked about, she didn’t seem that far from the pack (I guess they wanted me to use my imagination).
I say check out this film if you want to see classic Cary and a non-irriating Hepburn.

Snow Falling on Cedars (1999)

I have to say that this film did nothing for me, and I know why. This film, along with many films of the same style, is extremely lyrical. That means that there are no jokes. The film revolves around illustrating the passion and the yearning the characters have for each other. There is always the direction of withdrawl that one character experiences for the other and the audience experiences this by being shown flashback over flashback of the characters happy encounters overlapped with the sad character's desire for the other, who is trying to move on with their life. I find it hard to sit through these types of films because, in two words, they’re dramatized drama. This style of filmmaking is bland to me. Now you may think I’m a hypocrite, but I love lyrical foreign films, and most lyrical Canadian films; it’s just the American lyrical film that makes me want to fall asleep or fast forward through the film.
The topic of the film was pretty interesting, and I would label this an enjoyable film, but it’s honestly the director’s fault that I don’t like this film. I don’t blame the director for ruining it for me because it’s his style; I just think it’s important to give credit where credit is due. Scott Hicks also directed Shine which I enjoy, but that’s because there was some comic relief present. I think for myself, an American film with no comic relief whatsoever is sacrilegious; it’s their strongest device in their films.
Snow Falling on Cedars did have some great performances and they deserve attention. Ethan Hawke was very cute and lonely.

The Break Up (2006)

I really liked this movie. Yes, it was really depressing to watch a loving relationship end, but at the same time I thought this film had excellent flow and great character development (the film student in me, what do you expect). Both characters had their flaws in terms of communication and it was interesting to watch how the other received and responded to that communication and more so lack of communication.
It would have been nice to see the couple for a bit at least during their happy period (but I guess that’s not what the film is about). Instead the two years the relationship occurred is represented through the opening credits of snapshots (candid and organized). I thought that was an effective device, but it would have been nice to see a scene or two of them actually being in the relationship (instead of starting the film after the credits with them fighting).
There was some humour also in the film to lighten the incredible dark and depressing fall of the relationship. Aniston’s effeminate brother, during a dinner scene, is trying to get Vince to sing a drum beat in harmony to other people at the table. He kept repeating “come, come on the bass drum” to try and encourage Vince, it was hilarious! Jon Favreau also stole some scenes as Vince’s best buddy who tries to console him during this period of break up (I felt sad that Jon has gained so much weight since “Swingers”, he was hot in that film, what happened Jon? I thought you lost all your baby fat from “Rudy” years ago, you can’t claim its baby fat anymore).
I definitely recommend checking this film out. I saw it with my roommates and the consensus was it was a bad film because it made them feel awkward to watch it. I guess the voyeur in me holds nothing against that!

The Thin Man (1934)

I thought this was a great film. It’s definitely one that is entertaining, let has enough substance that one does not feel like are killing brain cells.
William Powell stars as a former detective who marries woman with a large dowry who is living a life of luxury. One day there is a murder and he gets roped in (partially unwittingly) into cracking the case of who the murderer is. This film is definitely a classic caper (probably one of the best of it’s kind). William Powell is dashing and debonair; his character is constantly drinking, it’s hilarious. The chemistry between he and his wife is reason enough to watch this film. It’s a fast talking, almost screwball comedy (but he already has the girl, so the film is picking up after a few years of marriage). They joke around, very dryly, about not caring about one another, it’s so funny. This movie must have made dinner parties the hippest thing on this side of the coast.