A few things: Lately, I've realized that this blog, which I have proclaimed and even named "unsystematic" is becoming more and more "systematic." Since I've been watching a lot of movies the last few weeks, (some good, some bad) my writing has slowly shifted towards reviews and critiques. Well no more, I say. From here on out, there will be unsystematic-ness in this blog! Or at least I'll try. I may throw in a movie review or rehashing every once in a while, but mark my words, I am going to try to get this blog back on track.
Also, I am taking it upon myself to start doing the things that I keep telling myself to do; namely writing and running. In about six weeks, I'm scheduled to run a race in Oregon called the Hood to Coast. It's a 197 mile relay that is run by 12 man teams. That makes the distance I have to run somewhere around 17.5 miles. For a solid 3 months, I have told myself that it's time to start training. I even took a few short runs to start the process. But somehow or another, I keep finding excuses to get out of it. So in the morning, I'm going to start my training. For real.
In fact, today I am going to embark on a mission. I am going to run at least 4 times a week and I am going to try to blog every day until the race. I'm going to apologize ahead of time because I feel like as I near the end, I am bound to start cranking out some truly terrible entries. Maybe they'll involve my cat's bowel movements; maybe they'll involve my secret love for late night MTV. I don't know. But should something like that pop up, I'm sorry. There, I said it. Now let's get this going.
Let this be the beginning of a less systematic blog and a more systematic life.
Tuesday, July 14, 2009
Tuesday, July 7, 2009
Curse you, Michael Bay!
You know those bands who are insanely talented, but once they get popular, they feed off the popularity so much that you can tell they feel like putting their name on a song is good enough? The best example I can think of is the recent Green Day song: "Know Your Enemy." The song has a whopping two chords throughout and the lyrical diversity is as sparse as the chords. All I could think of when I heard it was: "Green Day's not even trying anymore." This past weekend, I watched Transformers: Revenge of the Fallen, and, summed up, it is "Know Your Enemy" but in film form and stretched into a painful two and a half hours. However, to me, this film is far more sinister than anything Green Day could conjure. Not only did it feel like Michael Bay wasn't even trying to make a good film, I felt like he was taunting me for its entirety.
If you are planning on seeing the movie, let me give you some things to look out for:
One: The movie is a shameless two and a half hour commercial. There are numerous products advertised, ranging from General Motors to LG phones to Dyson Vacuums. However, if you saw the first movie, this is nothing new to you. Remember when the Mountain Dew machine turned into a Decepticon? You remember...
Two: The producers are really hoping you think that Megan Fox is hot, because she's sure not there for her acting.
Three: Neither are the rest of the actors.
Four: Here is what aspiring filmmakers should take away from this movie- Never let something as petty as a storyline get in the way of some good action.
Five: Noise, noise, noise, and more NOISE!!!!!!
The UK version of FHM had one of the best reviews of the movie I've seen:
"It's like watching a blender for two hours while someone shouts at you. And then the last half an hour is the same, except it’s more like having your head strapped to a washing machine while you watch a blender and someone shouts at you."
To me, the film is a bit of an enigma. Somehow, it manages to be a vast exhibition of excess and a pitiful display of minimalism all in one. Granted, the special effects in the movie are amazing. However, with all of those people working hard to make those work, you would think someone would have put in some effort to make the script work.
Here's my theory about the film: Not only was Michael Bay not even trying to make a good film, he was banking on people (like me) seeing the film even after nearly every review told them not to. He knew the reviews were going to be brutal. How could he not? But Bay banked on two things going into this movie. One was the carrying over of the fan base from the first movie. The second was that he seems to think that the American public is mindless enough to be entertained by senseless action and dialogue that could have been penned by fourth graders. The thing that scares me isn't so much that he thinks that way; it's that he might be right.
So maybe it's fitting that when the film finally ends, the Green Day song "21 Guns" comes on for the (not kidding) 4th time. It's the final "F-You" from Michael Bay as you exit the theater in disbelief. Well you won't fool me again, Michael Bay. I'm sick of being conned. Now excuse me while I go buy a Dyson.
If you are planning on seeing the movie, let me give you some things to look out for:
One: The movie is a shameless two and a half hour commercial. There are numerous products advertised, ranging from General Motors to LG phones to Dyson Vacuums. However, if you saw the first movie, this is nothing new to you. Remember when the Mountain Dew machine turned into a Decepticon? You remember...
Two: The producers are really hoping you think that Megan Fox is hot, because she's sure not there for her acting.
Three: Neither are the rest of the actors.
Four: Here is what aspiring filmmakers should take away from this movie- Never let something as petty as a storyline get in the way of some good action.
Five: Noise, noise, noise, and more NOISE!!!!!!
The UK version of FHM had one of the best reviews of the movie I've seen:
"It's like watching a blender for two hours while someone shouts at you. And then the last half an hour is the same, except it’s more like having your head strapped to a washing machine while you watch a blender and someone shouts at you."
To me, the film is a bit of an enigma. Somehow, it manages to be a vast exhibition of excess and a pitiful display of minimalism all in one. Granted, the special effects in the movie are amazing. However, with all of those people working hard to make those work, you would think someone would have put in some effort to make the script work.
Here's my theory about the film: Not only was Michael Bay not even trying to make a good film, he was banking on people (like me) seeing the film even after nearly every review told them not to. He knew the reviews were going to be brutal. How could he not? But Bay banked on two things going into this movie. One was the carrying over of the fan base from the first movie. The second was that he seems to think that the American public is mindless enough to be entertained by senseless action and dialogue that could have been penned by fourth graders. The thing that scares me isn't so much that he thinks that way; it's that he might be right.
So maybe it's fitting that when the film finally ends, the Green Day song "21 Guns" comes on for the (not kidding) 4th time. It's the final "F-You" from Michael Bay as you exit the theater in disbelief. Well you won't fool me again, Michael Bay. I'm sick of being conned. Now excuse me while I go buy a Dyson.
Labels:
General Motors,
Green Day,
Megan Fox,
Michael Bay,
Mountain Dew,
Transformers
Thursday, July 2, 2009
Let the Right One In
For as long as I can remember, I have loved movies. I think it's safe to say that many of us feel the same way. Movies transport us to wherever it may be that we want to go (or don't want to go). They're our passport to adventure and the only one that guarantees a safe trip back. They are our fantasies, our fears and our gateways to the unimaginable. And lately, they've become so cliched and predictable that the fun seems to be lacking. At least that was what I thought before I saw the film, "Let the Right One In."
Let me give you the premise: boy is getting picked on at school, boy meets new girl, boy notices new girl never comes out during the daytime, people start disappearing in town, boy and girl fall in love, more people disappear from town... A vampire movie? you say, I've seen those before. Not like this you haven't.
Rather than dwell on gore like most American vampire films would do, (Let the Right One In is Swedish, by the way) the film chooses to focus on the strange love story that develops between the two main characters, Oskar and Eli. The film sticks mainly to the vampire rules we all know-vampires must drink blood to live; vampires must stay out of the sun; vampires cannot enter a room to kill someone unless they are invited in. Where the film strays from the norm is in it's form. At first, I thought there was a problem with my speakers, but then I realized that a large part of the dialogue is muted. What this does is to focus your attention on other things. The smallest sounds that the director chooses to give the audience are amplified. It creates a movie watching experience unlike anything I've ever seen. The end result is a vampire film that is less reminiscent of more recent films like "30 Days of Night" and more reminiscent of the early silent vampire films like the original "Nosferatu." The film exudes a creepiness throughout that far surpasses the cheap scares that have become expected from most newer horror films. So give "Let the Right One In" a chance. It's a film that is both haunting and beautiful, and one that will stick with you far longer than most films you will ever see.
Let me give you the premise: boy is getting picked on at school, boy meets new girl, boy notices new girl never comes out during the daytime, people start disappearing in town, boy and girl fall in love, more people disappear from town... A vampire movie? you say, I've seen those before. Not like this you haven't.
Rather than dwell on gore like most American vampire films would do, (Let the Right One In is Swedish, by the way) the film chooses to focus on the strange love story that develops between the two main characters, Oskar and Eli. The film sticks mainly to the vampire rules we all know-vampires must drink blood to live; vampires must stay out of the sun; vampires cannot enter a room to kill someone unless they are invited in. Where the film strays from the norm is in it's form. At first, I thought there was a problem with my speakers, but then I realized that a large part of the dialogue is muted. What this does is to focus your attention on other things. The smallest sounds that the director chooses to give the audience are amplified. It creates a movie watching experience unlike anything I've ever seen. The end result is a vampire film that is less reminiscent of more recent films like "30 Days of Night" and more reminiscent of the early silent vampire films like the original "Nosferatu." The film exudes a creepiness throughout that far surpasses the cheap scares that have become expected from most newer horror films. So give "Let the Right One In" a chance. It's a film that is both haunting and beautiful, and one that will stick with you far longer than most films you will ever see.
Labels:
horror,
Let the Right One In,
Sweden,
vampires
Friday, June 19, 2009
Sweet Caroline
I just got back from a trip to Boston a few days ago, and I have to say, it's an amazing city. I loved the feel of it. Like my girlfriend's roommate said, Boston is like a big town that wants to be a city. If it wasn't so cold all the time, I might even think of moving there.
While I was in the city, I got to go to a Red Sox/Yankees game. It was without a doubt one of the best sports related experiences I've ever had. Being in Fenway felt so different than any other ballpark I've ever been to. I will always be a Dodger fan, but being at Fenway made me see how so many people get lured into the Red Sox nation. The major difference: the fans.
First of all, how many fans to do YOU know that would still be pumped if the song played between the top and bottom of the first inning at their stadium was Augustana's "Boston"? I get the relevance, but Augustana? It's just not the song I would choose. If anything, I would probably go with Boston's "More Than a Feeling." It's upbeat, still uses the word "Boston" in some way, and has some great guitar riffs to get the crowd pumped.
Second, I experienced three of the "bests" I have ever experienced at a baseball game.
Number One: Best Wave. The wave that went around Fenway sometime around the sixth or seventh inning was epic. Everyone in the crowd was doing it. The wave rounded the stadium a good six times before it settled down. Amazing.
Number Two: Best Jeering. Every time the three most hated Yankee players came up to bat (Johnny Damon, Derek Jeter, and Alex Rodriguez), the entire stadium was engulfed in boos. The last time that Alex Rodriguez came up, first the crowd started yelling "A-Roid!" Then, nearly the entire stadium started chanting: "You do steroids!" I loved it.
Number Three: Best Sing Along. During the middle of the eighth inning, "Sweet Caroline" came on. Everyone in the crowd started singing. This alone made the game worth going to. I've never been a part of anything quite like this sing along before. When the song stopped midway so that the eighth inning could start, everyone kept on singing for another full chorus. Fantastic.
So the next time you go to Boston, do yourself a favor and go to a Red Sox game. I promise, you will not regret it.
While I was in the city, I got to go to a Red Sox/Yankees game. It was without a doubt one of the best sports related experiences I've ever had. Being in Fenway felt so different than any other ballpark I've ever been to. I will always be a Dodger fan, but being at Fenway made me see how so many people get lured into the Red Sox nation. The major difference: the fans.
First of all, how many fans to do YOU know that would still be pumped if the song played between the top and bottom of the first inning at their stadium was Augustana's "Boston"? I get the relevance, but Augustana? It's just not the song I would choose. If anything, I would probably go with Boston's "More Than a Feeling." It's upbeat, still uses the word "Boston" in some way, and has some great guitar riffs to get the crowd pumped.
Second, I experienced three of the "bests" I have ever experienced at a baseball game.
Number One: Best Wave. The wave that went around Fenway sometime around the sixth or seventh inning was epic. Everyone in the crowd was doing it. The wave rounded the stadium a good six times before it settled down. Amazing.
Number Two: Best Jeering. Every time the three most hated Yankee players came up to bat (Johnny Damon, Derek Jeter, and Alex Rodriguez), the entire stadium was engulfed in boos. The last time that Alex Rodriguez came up, first the crowd started yelling "A-Roid!" Then, nearly the entire stadium started chanting: "You do steroids!" I loved it.
Number Three: Best Sing Along. During the middle of the eighth inning, "Sweet Caroline" came on. Everyone in the crowd started singing. This alone made the game worth going to. I've never been a part of anything quite like this sing along before. When the song stopped midway so that the eighth inning could start, everyone kept on singing for another full chorus. Fantastic.
So the next time you go to Boston, do yourself a favor and go to a Red Sox game. I promise, you will not regret it.
Labels:
Baseball,
Fenway Park,
Red Sox,
Sweet Caroline,
Yankees
Tuesday, June 16, 2009
Turn the Other Way
On March 14th of this year, a 59 year old man in Miami, Mario Reyes, was struck and killed by a car. The driver had just left a bar and his blood alcohol level was nearly twice the legal limit. Today the driver was sentenced and received...30 days in prison. 30 days??? This makes absolutely no sense. Well, that is until you look at who the driver was: Cleveland Browns wide receiver Donte Stallworth.
Hearing about this case outraged me. How many times are we going to let celebrities off the hook for major infractions just because they're celebrities? I should note, to Stallworth's credit, that he did the right thing after the accident. He stopped and took responsibility for his actions, and since the accident, he has seemed to be extremely remorseful. However that doesn't change the fact that Mario Reyes is still dead. The maximum penalty for the crimes Stallworth was convicted of was 15 years, and he got 30 days. Maybe Stallworth really didn't deserve the maximum sentence. He's done everything right since the accident. But this man does not deserve to set foot on the football field again. We've seen this time and time again with football players (Ray Lewis, Plaxico Burress, Pacman Jones, etc.). So many players seem to think that they are above the law; that they can do whatever they want and count on their celebrity status to merit them a get out of jail free card if they get caught. And what has society done to prove them wrong? Absolutely nothing. These players ARE above the law and the case of Donte Stallworth shows this for the umpteeth time.
Hearing about this case outraged me. How many times are we going to let celebrities off the hook for major infractions just because they're celebrities? I should note, to Stallworth's credit, that he did the right thing after the accident. He stopped and took responsibility for his actions, and since the accident, he has seemed to be extremely remorseful. However that doesn't change the fact that Mario Reyes is still dead. The maximum penalty for the crimes Stallworth was convicted of was 15 years, and he got 30 days. Maybe Stallworth really didn't deserve the maximum sentence. He's done everything right since the accident. But this man does not deserve to set foot on the football field again. We've seen this time and time again with football players (Ray Lewis, Plaxico Burress, Pacman Jones, etc.). So many players seem to think that they are above the law; that they can do whatever they want and count on their celebrity status to merit them a get out of jail free card if they get caught. And what has society done to prove them wrong? Absolutely nothing. These players ARE above the law and the case of Donte Stallworth shows this for the umpteeth time.
Wednesday, June 3, 2009
Urgent
I absolutely love the Los Angeles Lakers. Some of the best memories I have growing up are of watching them. Watching Kobe and Shaq play together was something I will always remember. I guess I didn't realize what I had until Shaq was gone, and all of a sudden, so were the championships. I was thinking a lot about what's been wrong since then. What has stopped the Lakers from winning another title? I mean, they were close last year, but ultimately flopped in the finals. My feeling is that it comes back to urgency.
Watching those Lakers, there was something about them that these Lakers have lacked for the most part. The Kobe/Shaq Lakers played every game like it meant something. Watching every game of the playoffs was like watching a game 7 of the finals. Kobe was hungry, Shaq was hungry, and it showed. Remember the Kobe/Shaq alley oop that took down Portland? The Lakers were hungry then because they knew that they were talented, but that other teams actually had a chance against them. Because other teams could realistically hope to beat them, the Lakers played hard, they played with heart, and they played with urgency.These Lakers have more talent than any other team in the league. Hands down. Who else has a player like Lamar Odom coming off the bench? Most teams don't have starters with as much talent as Odom. However, Odom has the unfortunate habit of not really showing up to games that really matter. He's shown flashes these playoffs and I'm hoping that it carries into the finals. If last year's finals was any indication though, things aren't looking good.
So what do the Lakers need? They need to find that urgency again. When they've played with it during the playoffs, no other team has had a chance. The Lakers have won every single game that they "had to" (see games 5 and 7 of the Houston series and game 5 of the Denver series). But in games where they don't face elimination or good odds of elimination, they decide not to care and lose. What gave me the most hope is when the Lakers won game 6 of the Denver series. I didn't think there was any way they were taking that one, based on how they have played in every other game they didn't have to win. But they did, and now my hopes are high for the finals. Looking at the matchups, the Lakers should take it easily. But wasn't the same the case against the Celtics? Sorry Boston, but the Lakers had the better team last year. The problem is they didn't play like it. If the Lakers can play the way they're capable of, I will be celebrating another championship shortly after game 4. If they don't, it will be another long summer of hoping they wake up and find the urgency again.
Watching those Lakers, there was something about them that these Lakers have lacked for the most part. The Kobe/Shaq Lakers played every game like it meant something. Watching every game of the playoffs was like watching a game 7 of the finals. Kobe was hungry, Shaq was hungry, and it showed. Remember the Kobe/Shaq alley oop that took down Portland? The Lakers were hungry then because they knew that they were talented, but that other teams actually had a chance against them. Because other teams could realistically hope to beat them, the Lakers played hard, they played with heart, and they played with urgency.These Lakers have more talent than any other team in the league. Hands down. Who else has a player like Lamar Odom coming off the bench? Most teams don't have starters with as much talent as Odom. However, Odom has the unfortunate habit of not really showing up to games that really matter. He's shown flashes these playoffs and I'm hoping that it carries into the finals. If last year's finals was any indication though, things aren't looking good.
So what do the Lakers need? They need to find that urgency again. When they've played with it during the playoffs, no other team has had a chance. The Lakers have won every single game that they "had to" (see games 5 and 7 of the Houston series and game 5 of the Denver series). But in games where they don't face elimination or good odds of elimination, they decide not to care and lose. What gave me the most hope is when the Lakers won game 6 of the Denver series. I didn't think there was any way they were taking that one, based on how they have played in every other game they didn't have to win. But they did, and now my hopes are high for the finals. Looking at the matchups, the Lakers should take it easily. But wasn't the same the case against the Celtics? Sorry Boston, but the Lakers had the better team last year. The problem is they didn't play like it. If the Lakers can play the way they're capable of, I will be celebrating another championship shortly after game 4. If they don't, it will be another long summer of hoping they wake up and find the urgency again.
Monday, June 1, 2009
The Cat Thief
My two favorite writers are Jose Saramago and Haruki Murakami. Since I'm an aspiring writer myself, I've been thinking for a long time about what it is that makes these two so much more enjoyable to read than anything else (for me). What sets Saramago and Murakami apart from the Nicholas Sparks' and Maeve Binchy's? (Note: no offense if you like Nicholas Sparks and Maeve Binchy. Surely, there is a time and place for almost any author out there. Nicholas Sparks and Maeve Binchy are just popular authors whose works I happen to not be crazy about and who were the first to come to mind.) I'm still kind of working out the answer, but I think what I love most about both Saramago and Murakami is that they are amazing salesmen. They can each take a bizarre character or subject and make it work. In Saramago's "Blindness," (probably still my favorite book ever) an entire city goes blind. This is not an easy thing to sell at all, but he does it. He puts everything he has as a writer behind it and completely convinces the reader that it's plausible. In Murakami's "Kafka on the Shore," there is a character who goes by the name "Johnny Walker" who kidnaps cats, cuts off their heads and freezes them, and sucks their souls out of their body. I really feel that with anyone else writing that book, the character falls flat and doesn't work. With Murakami's conviction behind it, "Johnny Walker" becomes one of the best characters I have ever come across in literature. In my opinion, the reason so many movie adaptations of books fall flat is that they can never convey the force behind characters that an author can convey in a book. That is why everyone says that the movies never add up to books. Good authors know how to convince a reader and a good director knows how to convince an audience. Each are masters of their own medium. But if a good director tries to imitate a good author's work, it's just not going to happen. It would be like Van Gogh trying to imitate Picasso or vice versa. Van Gogh has some beautiful work, but only Picasso can paint a Picasso. I think that's what director's don't get. The movie adaptations that work the best are the ones that are not afraid to stray from the plot and take liberties that allow the work to cross over from effective words to effective images. A movie that remains hell bent on sticking to the book it is trying to replicate is almost always doomed to fail.
Labels:
Johnny Walker,
Kafka on the Shore,
Murakami,
Nicholas Sparks,
Saramago
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)