(shrug)

My curiosity got the best of me this evening, so I took in a showing of Atlas Shrugged. Actually, the more complete (and threatening) title is Atlas Shrugged: Part I.

For the sake of, um, brevity, I am going to write this assuming at least a passing familiarity with the essential elements of the novel. If you haven't read it, I'm not going to attempt to summarize it here. (And if you have, then you know why I won't.)

First of all, what works. The characters of Dagney and Hank are actually pretty well-cast. I don't know either of the actors, but they pulled it off. Taylor Schilling in particular looks the part (her eyes are quite reminiscent of Rand's, which is always how I and I imagine most people envisioned the character of Dagney: a young and slightly glamorous version of the author.)





The rest of the cast are pretty weak, though I think a lot of this can be chalked up to the source material: Rand's characters are either superhuman capitalist/engineers or "the looters". Director Paul Johansson--perhaps to his credit--does not water down Rand's black and white moral universe. The result is something that is true to the source material but occasionally a bit silly on screen.

Unfortunately, the most extreme example of this is the character of John Galt, who is played by Johansson himself. Though he only appears on screen in shadow in Part I, and only utters a few lines, he manages to be bad. Really, really bad. Sofia Coppola in Godfather Part III bad. Since Galt will be the main character in the (as yet hypothetical) sequel(s), this does not bode well. Someone should really convince him to step aside and recast for the greater good of the project (something I note with no small sense of irony.)

In short, the movie is a bit better than I expected, but not great. Rand fanboys will probably like it fine. Rand haters will find plenty to hate. And I think it is no more likely to make someone want to become an Objectivist than The Passion of the Christ made me want to become Catholic.

test of time (new reviews of old movies, 1 of ?)

The combination of Netflx's ever-expanding on demand catalog and my inherent laziness have conspired to have me watching no small number of older (read: 1980's) movies in the last week or so, most for the first time in a really long time. And I'm pretty impressed how well some of them stand up.



Risky Business launched the career of noted character actor Tom Cruise (Magnolia, Tropic Thunder) and also features a bit part by an unrecognizable Megan Mullally (seriously, look it up.) Also, Rebecca De Mornay who slipped into another dimension c. 1993, reality superstar Bronson Pinchot, and Joe Pantoliano (who, like every other Italian-American actor of a certain age, got killed on The Sopranos.)

But what I really want to know is what the hell happened to Paul Brickman, the director? He made one other movie (you haven't heard of it and I can't be bothered to look it up again) and then did some TV stuff. And that's...pretty much it. I ask this, because even viewed 27 (!) years later, Risky Business is really, really good.

You probably know the plot: uptight high school student has the house to himself for a week. Dances in his underwear. Hires a prostitute. Doesn't have the money to pay her, so she takes a valuable objet d'art that belongs to his mother to settle the debt. Hilarity ensues, and our hero learns the value of taking risks.

Before John Hughes was writing angsty teen comedies set in the affluent suburbs of Chicago, before Michael Mann was shooting weirdly impersonal yet oddly compelling sex scenes with bad lighting and synth-heavy music, and before Cruise was gaying it up in Top Gun, Brickman did all of these things in Risky Business, and did them well. Seriously, Risky Business is to the "80's movie" what The French Connection is to the action-packed crime drama: you see the outlines of all the subsequent imitators throughout, and it's kind of a revelation in retrospect.

times' top films of the decade

I like this list because I've seen enough of it (well over half) to think that I mostly share their sensibilities, and that means I can take the rest of the list fairly seriously as suggestions for the Netflix queue.

Also, the decade is nearly over, and they've finally given it a name that I hope sticks: The Noughties.

watchmen

It's been reviewed to death, already, so I'll keep this brief: much like Sin City, the film adaptation of Watchmen exhibits a respect for the source material and the fans thereof that borders on reverence. Many scenes are storyboarded straight out of the book, and much of the dialog is verbatim, including, fortunately, many of the best moments from the book ("I'm not locked in here with you, you're locked in with me!")

The book is incredibly dense, making a complete translation to screen an impossibility (even with the entire comic-within-a-comic subplot axed, the film clocks in at just under three hours.) Still, Snyder is to be applauded for getting as much in as he could. And for many well-crafted (if easy to miss) references--mostly visual--to the parts he had to leave out. The opening titles in particular tell a ton of the back stories that were woven into the original.

Casting was superb (though no amount of old lady makeup can make Carla Gugino not hot...I would have cast her as the younger Silk Spectre, and someone actually old as her mother.) Jackie Earle Haley's Rorschach in particular was stellar.

As much as I enjoyed it, I have no idea how it will stand up to a naive viewing. Actually, if you never read the book and have seen the movie, I'd be interested to know what you thought.

Anyway, all of the above is really just an excuse to post this, about the horror that could have been:

next week in d-town

I am definitely going to see this:



Repo! The Genetic Opera. Mon-Thurs only, at the Carolina.

UPDATE--Saw it last night (Tuesday). It's pretty good--I would say if it appeals to you in the abstract you will probably enjoy it, and if it doesn't then probably not. The "musical" bits got a little long winded in parts, but were overall entertaining. Not nearly as gory as I expected. Visually, it's really quite spectacular.

Also, Paul Sorvino can sing. Who knew?

stuff i've been enjoying lately

--Absurdistan by Gary Shteyngart. At any given time I usually have a smallish paperback book that I carry around to read while waiting (doctors offices, oil changes, etc.) in addition to whatever is perched on my nightstand. This has been that book for me lately and now people all over the waiting rooms of Durham think I'm The Crazy Guy Who Giggles While He Reads. The chapter in which the protagonist writes a grant proposal for a Holocaust museum is beyond hilarious. And if you can make that funny, you're a freakin' genius. My habit of reading authors' second books first continues to pay off.

--In the mood for old (read: mid-1980's) horror movies, I rented Reanimator and John Carpenter's The Thing this past weekend. For fairly obvious reasons, I appreciate the satirical take on the culture of academic research in Reanimator much, much more now than when I was 12 (or however old I was when I last saw it). And I realize I'd really like a Mistkatonic Medical School T-shirt (though one of these might be OK) just to see who gets it.

The Thing scared the hell out of me when I was little. It's still pretty scary. The scene where the guy being treated with a defibrillator (he's really The Thing! Watch out!) is on the table and his chest opens up into a gaping maw of teeth and bites off the doctor's hands is a classic that will make you appreciate how much CGI sucks. (I watched that part a few times.)

--I re-read The Watchmen last week for probably the first time in over 15 years, in advance of the movie coming out in March. (The trailers make my head tingle.) There is no way the movie can be as good. And I will still go see it the night it opens.

polish film posters

I don't know if there is a legal/copyright history behind this, or just different cultural/aesthetic sensibilities at work, but communist-era Polish posters for American films are absolutely amazing.

this week in media consumption

--Watched Brick on Netflix. It was one of those that got put in the queue probably ages ago (we're not even sure by whom) and it finally came up. A truly excellent outing by a rookie director (Rian Johnson) and a very young cast (with special appearance by the Shaftastic Richard Roundtree), Brick is a classic film noir, but set in a modern-day California high school. It could have been a lot of things: goofy, pretentious, too clever for its own good. But it isn't. And it left me looking forward to Johnson's next movie, The Brothers Bloom, out this fall.

--Go see Tropic Thunder. Not only to support satire, but also because it's really, really funny. I have to say that I really respect Ben Stiller; I don't always like his movies--point of fact, I detest a few of them--but the guy is fearless when it comes to comedy. He's not afraid of sucking. Which of course means that sometimes, he sucks. But when he pulls it off, it's really good. This is probably the funniest thing he's ever done. Downey is excellent, as always. Jack Black is nearly dead weight in this one, but he is mercifully not on screen much. But--and I hate myself for having to say this--Tom Cruise steals the show. Really.

--Last weekend we caught Pineapple Express, which I also enjoyed immensely. More good stuff from the alumni of Freaks and Geeks; also, between this and TT, I think I'm going to declare this the "Summer of Danny McBride".

the dark knight

...is good. Really, really good.

If they give posthumous Oscars, Heath Ledger should certainly be considered. If you have a copy of The Killing Joke, read it before you go see the movie, and I think you'll see what I mean. That's the Joker Ledger plays:, nihilistic, terrifying, and brilliant. It's a damn shame we won't see that again.

But seriously...get a sitter for the young ones.

things ain't the way they used to be (but that's why we have reruns)

I caught The Great Escape at the Carolina tonight. Watching war movies on Memorial Day is a pretty weak way to celebrate (I suppose "observe" is a more appropriate verb here) but it beats the hell out of crowding in at the beach or buying furniture.

I find that I am liking old movies more and more the older I get. Not just in proportion with my own increasing age...I'm starting to really like movies that predate me. Some of this is probably that I'm just now getting around to watching so many of them. But even still, I sometimes catch myself getting nostalgic for an era I didn't even live in. (RW...are you reading this...is it contagious?)

Anyway...the print looked amazing (certainly not 45 years old) and I can honestly say that I didn't look at my watch once during the three-hour epic. Also, it's great to see something like this and notice all the things that have been referring to it in more recent pop culture. (The firing squad scene on New Caprica in the thrid season of BSG, for example, is lifted right out of The Great Escape. As soon as the prisoners were invited to "stretch their legs" I knew what was coming. Never trust Cylons or Nazis to be concerned for your comfort.)

Tomorrow night: The Pink Panther. I'll be there.

And I defy you to name one actor currently making movies that is half as funny as Peter Sellers.

it's friday, so...

Bring on the hyperviolent bionic Japanese schoolgirl revenge movies!

(Strictly speaking, the following is probably not safe for work.)



Also, it's Retrofantasma night at the Carolina...next week is Blade Runner: The Most Recent Cut.

durham's night out

[m] made it back to town safely yesterday, and despite teetering on the brink of exhaustion, managed to rally in time for us to attend the 9:45 showing of Durham: a Self Portrait.

We arrived at the Carolina at about 9:20...downtown was as busy as I've ever seen it (Durham Rising excepted), a real treat to see on a such a brisk autumn night. We parked on Foster across from the Y, and only so close because someone (presumably from the sold-out first showing) was leaving just as we pulled up. The sidewalks were crowded with small groups discussing the film. The Hollywood-premier-style spotlights were running in front of the Carolina's restored facade, which was pretty cool.

A healthy crowd was already assembled in the lobby. We saw several neighbors, recognized bartenders from some favorite haunts, and I ran into one of the guys I know from the Choral Society. As we were seated, I was telling [m] the story of how my friend Dave and I went to the Duke/Tech game last weekend, he ran into someone he knew from Tech at the game, and then when we went to dinner later that night sat at a table next to the very same guy (this was not planned). As we reflected on the smallness of Durham, I struck up a conversation with the guy seated on the other side of me, only to find out that he was Sean Wilson of Pop the Cap North Carolina fame, with whom I had corresponded several times over email but never met in person.

(PTCNC, by the way, is throwing a very cool event next Friday that I fully intend to take advantage of.)

The film itself was a treat...I guess I have read, heard, and absorbed various bits of Durham's history over the last year, but having them presented in such a coherent narrative really does drive home what a unique and wonderful place this is. (I had never heard about the secret game of 1944, for example.) If you didn't make it out last night, you should definitely try catch the screening on Sunday.

Afterwards, we strolled over to Bull McCabe's for a pint and a snack. I was greeted by name and a "Guinness, right?" which was just music to my ears.

It's been a year of adjustments, but I've got to say this place has really grown on me. It feels like home now.

Of course, having my wife home helps, too.

a recomendation

If you are fortunate enough to be living in one of the cities where it is/will be playing, you should go see War Dance. M and I caught it at Full Frame earlier this year, and it is really, really good. I imagine it will be available on DVD in a few months, but if you can see it on the big screen, it will be worth the effort.

this is why i didn't bother voting

Democratic leaders are stripping from a military spending bill for the war in Iraq a requirement that President Bush gain approval from Congress before moving against Iran.

House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif., and other leaders agreed to remove the requirement concerning Iran after conservative Democrats as well as other lawmakers worried about its possible impact on Israel, officials said Monday.

...

The measure provides nearly $100 billion to pay for two wars and includes more money than Bush had requested [emphasis added] for operations in Afghanistan and what Democrats called training and equipment shortages.

(link)

The whole "end the war by defunding it" thing is dead in the water--and always was--because the Republicans can't bring themselves to spend less on the military, and the Democrats can't bring themselves to spend less on anything.

(I know--that's funding for Afghanistan, but the same thing will happen in Iraq. In six months, we will be spending more, not less. If anyone wants to place a wager on that let me know...I need to cover my inevitable losses in the NCAA tournament.)

One more war-related point, that I heard over the weekend. You know we've stepped into it foreign policy-wise when the most sensible criticism comes freaking Iran:

"We are in fact facing a vicious cycle in Iraq. The presence of foreign forces justifies violence ... and violence is used to justify the presence of foreign forces."