Sunday, November 13, 2005
Ôdishon / Audition - 1999
Viewing Ambience: Dark if you really want to scare yourself
Intoxicants: Big Green (you're going to be confused and freaked out anyway - so why not?)
Food: Popcorn (which you won't be able to eat at certain parts)
Other: Subtitled
Discussion:
I ordered this movie from NetFlix after seeing it mentioned on the "100 scariest film moments of all time" show on the Sci-Fi channel. Although I'm not a huge fan of subtitles and was hesistant to rent a foreign horror film, I was already broken in by a dubbed version of Ju-On (one of the scariest movies I've ever seen) and the original Japanese Ringu.
These horror directors in Japan have got it down. What can I say. They have what is lacking in many of our horror movies now - not a sneering comedy, but an honest to god scare.
This movie starts off as a dramady - the main character (Shigeharu Aoyama - he goes by Aoyama for most of the film) loses his wife and he raises their little boy alone. 7 years later the father and teenage sone sit at the dinner table. Son tells father he should get married since he's not getting any younger.
The father (Aoyama) thinks on it for a while. He discusses it with his colleague (Yoshikawa) who comes up with the slapstick idea of having an audition. He offers to let Aoyama audition his new wife under the pretense of casting a film.
Thus ensues the humorous audition scene where several young women parade in and out of a room and are asked silly questions such as "how do you feel about men?" "Would you be willing to do a sex scene?" Several of the women are shown to be a bit unhinged - which works as both comedy and foreshadowing.
Near the end of the list comes Asami. Aoyama already fell for her while reading the bio attached to her photo.
Asami appears to be the perfect embodiment of all that is right about a woman. She is beautiful, sweet voiced, demurely dressed, a trained classical ballerina and seemingly grateful for the attention of Aoyama. It is then that the off key music ensues (figuratively). None of her background, although casually checked, can be verified.
Against the advice of Yoshikawa, Aoyama calls her for dinner. She seems sweet, but eventually tells a tale of a sad and abused childhood. It is then the surreality kicks in. A series of dreamlike sequences follow - this is the buildup.
The movie culminates in 30 minutes of the most horrifying and difficult to watch horror scenes. Think Misery with Katie Holmes. It was great.
We watched the end sequence with the director's commentary translated into english. That was good - still scary. Gory, without being overly bloody. This director (like Takashi Shimizu) knows that what is left out is often worse than what is shown.
I highly reccomend it.
Intoxicants: Big Green (you're going to be confused and freaked out anyway - so why not?)
Food: Popcorn (which you won't be able to eat at certain parts)
Other: Subtitled
Discussion:
I ordered this movie from NetFlix after seeing it mentioned on the "100 scariest film moments of all time" show on the Sci-Fi channel. Although I'm not a huge fan of subtitles and was hesistant to rent a foreign horror film, I was already broken in by a dubbed version of Ju-On (one of the scariest movies I've ever seen) and the original Japanese Ringu.
These horror directors in Japan have got it down. What can I say. They have what is lacking in many of our horror movies now - not a sneering comedy, but an honest to god scare.
This movie starts off as a dramady - the main character (Shigeharu Aoyama - he goes by Aoyama for most of the film) loses his wife and he raises their little boy alone. 7 years later the father and teenage sone sit at the dinner table. Son tells father he should get married since he's not getting any younger.
The father (Aoyama) thinks on it for a while. He discusses it with his colleague (Yoshikawa) who comes up with the slapstick idea of having an audition. He offers to let Aoyama audition his new wife under the pretense of casting a film.
Thus ensues the humorous audition scene where several young women parade in and out of a room and are asked silly questions such as "how do you feel about men?" "Would you be willing to do a sex scene?" Several of the women are shown to be a bit unhinged - which works as both comedy and foreshadowing.
Near the end of the list comes Asami. Aoyama already fell for her while reading the bio attached to her photo.
Asami appears to be the perfect embodiment of all that is right about a woman. She is beautiful, sweet voiced, demurely dressed, a trained classical ballerina and seemingly grateful for the attention of Aoyama. It is then that the off key music ensues (figuratively). None of her background, although casually checked, can be verified.
Against the advice of Yoshikawa, Aoyama calls her for dinner. She seems sweet, but eventually tells a tale of a sad and abused childhood. It is then the surreality kicks in. A series of dreamlike sequences follow - this is the buildup.
The movie culminates in 30 minutes of the most horrifying and difficult to watch horror scenes. Think Misery with Katie Holmes. It was great.
We watched the end sequence with the director's commentary translated into english. That was good - still scary. Gory, without being overly bloody. This director (like Takashi Shimizu) knows that what is left out is often worse than what is shown.
I highly reccomend it.
Saturday, November 12, 2005
Tod Browning's Freaks - 1932
Viewing Ambiance: Mid t0 half dark - there's some stuff you might want to see really well and film quality is not all that great.
Intoxicants: Stick with wine or light beer for this one.
Food: Fried Chicken
Discussion:
Freaks was supposed to be a horror film. I can imagine, for a audience un-used to slasher flicks, Freddie Krueger, Texas Chainsaw Massacre and Saw, that it would be fairly horrific and frightening. We have become desensitized - but then, the people who lived while this film was made also were used to seeing physical abnormalities that have all but been eliminated for most of us in the US.
Freaks is based on a short story called "Spurs" by Tod Robbins about a circus midget who falls for a conniving trapeze artist who is determined to marry him and take his money. Her treachery is avenged by the other circus freaks. In the film, the midget is played by Harry Earles (later of the Lollipop Guild in The Wizard of Oz) and the conniving trapeze artist is played by Olga Baclanova - a stage actress who transitioned into film as a "B" actress.
The bulk of the film is populated by non-normal people - there are a few micro-encephaletics (then called pin-heads), a man born without arms or legs (called a human torso or human caterpillar) - Prince Randian does this really cool trick where he lights a cigarette that he rolled using only his tongue, 2 armless woman, a bearded lady, a human skeleton, a "turtle girl," a man born without legs (Johnny Eck), a Bird Girl, and another midget called Angeleno - during the wedding feast, Angeleno does a very good "C-Walk" dance which is amazing considering that there were not exactly a lot of Crips walking around in 1932, also there were a pair of Siamese Twins - the Hilton Sisters - Violet and Daisy.
Viewing this film takes a lot of use of the word "Considering."
As in, considering the fact that it was made in the 1930's it is surprisingly well constructed. Some of it is hokey, no doubt, but there are a few really good parts and some actual shocking scenes that aren't too melodramatic.
And, considering the fact that the director and many of the actors either came directly from silent films or had no acting experience outside of the sideshow, it's not badly acted (Daisy Earles eases into her part, but for the most part she sounds as if she is reading her lines).
Olga is appropriately evil and conniving - she is a good actress. Harry Earles is a good actor (Daisy is his sister, not his wife). Johnny Eck (the half boy) is charming, as is another midget, Angeleno Rossitto (the C-Walker).
The Wedding Feast scene freaked me out the most. It seemed like a surreal nightmare - since I typically have nightmares two days after seeing a scary movie it remains to be seen if this one will seep into my subconscious. The pin-heads freaked me out the most - they looked exactly like R. Crumb's depictions - and their names were Zip and Pip.
Some of the accents were so thick as to be nearly incomprehensible at times - even those of the lead, Henry Earles. But, after a while you get used to not understanding what the "Freaks" say, even with the captions on.
The film really shows the family behind the circus. They are very in-tune with one another. In fact, as the barker says at the beginning of the show "you offend one, you offend them all."
Overall this movie was well worth a watch - and short enough to keep your attention. As far as the bonus features go - the commentary was good, but the documentary was more rewarding as they talk about each individual freak and what they brought to the table.
For example - the human worm - his personal assistant on the film was his son. So apparently, he led a fairly full life. Also, we learn that the Hilton Sisters freaked out F. Scott Fitzgerald in the studio commissary one day.
Netflix has it. Get it, I say.
Intoxicants: Stick with wine or light beer for this one.
Food: Fried Chicken
Discussion:
Freaks was supposed to be a horror film. I can imagine, for a audience un-used to slasher flicks, Freddie Krueger, Texas Chainsaw Massacre and Saw, that it would be fairly horrific and frightening. We have become desensitized - but then, the people who lived while this film was made also were used to seeing physical abnormalities that have all but been eliminated for most of us in the US.
Freaks is based on a short story called "Spurs" by Tod Robbins about a circus midget who falls for a conniving trapeze artist who is determined to marry him and take his money. Her treachery is avenged by the other circus freaks. In the film, the midget is played by Harry Earles (later of the Lollipop Guild in The Wizard of Oz) and the conniving trapeze artist is played by Olga Baclanova - a stage actress who transitioned into film as a "B" actress.
The bulk of the film is populated by non-normal people - there are a few micro-encephaletics (then called pin-heads), a man born without arms or legs (called a human torso or human caterpillar) - Prince Randian does this really cool trick where he lights a cigarette that he rolled using only his tongue, 2 armless woman, a bearded lady, a human skeleton, a "turtle girl," a man born without legs (Johnny Eck), a Bird Girl, and another midget called Angeleno - during the wedding feast, Angeleno does a very good "C-Walk" dance which is amazing considering that there were not exactly a lot of Crips walking around in 1932, also there were a pair of Siamese Twins - the Hilton Sisters - Violet and Daisy.
Viewing this film takes a lot of use of the word "Considering."
As in, considering the fact that it was made in the 1930's it is surprisingly well constructed. Some of it is hokey, no doubt, but there are a few really good parts and some actual shocking scenes that aren't too melodramatic.
And, considering the fact that the director and many of the actors either came directly from silent films or had no acting experience outside of the sideshow, it's not badly acted (Daisy Earles eases into her part, but for the most part she sounds as if she is reading her lines).
Olga is appropriately evil and conniving - she is a good actress. Harry Earles is a good actor (Daisy is his sister, not his wife). Johnny Eck (the half boy) is charming, as is another midget, Angeleno Rossitto (the C-Walker).
The Wedding Feast scene freaked me out the most. It seemed like a surreal nightmare - since I typically have nightmares two days after seeing a scary movie it remains to be seen if this one will seep into my subconscious. The pin-heads freaked me out the most - they looked exactly like R. Crumb's depictions - and their names were Zip and Pip.
Some of the accents were so thick as to be nearly incomprehensible at times - even those of the lead, Henry Earles. But, after a while you get used to not understanding what the "Freaks" say, even with the captions on.
The film really shows the family behind the circus. They are very in-tune with one another. In fact, as the barker says at the beginning of the show "you offend one, you offend them all."
Overall this movie was well worth a watch - and short enough to keep your attention. As far as the bonus features go - the commentary was good, but the documentary was more rewarding as they talk about each individual freak and what they brought to the table.
For example - the human worm - his personal assistant on the film was his son. So apparently, he led a fairly full life. Also, we learn that the Hilton Sisters freaked out F. Scott Fitzgerald in the studio commissary one day.
Netflix has it. Get it, I say.
My Sister's Keeper - Jodi Picoult
Title: My Sister's Keeper
Author: Jodi Picoult
Publisher: Atria Books
Date: 2004
Discussion:
I got this book on Tuesday and I finished it in the middle of the night on Thursday. It was difficult for me to put down.
The Setup:16 year old Kate has APL, a form of leukemia that is chemo-resistant. This means that whatever puts it into remission once can't be used again as the smarty-pants leukemia has already figured out how to beat it. She's had it since she was 2.
Her 13 year old sister, Anna, was born specifically to be a cord blood donor for her sister's first stem cell transplant. When I say specifically, I don't mean that her parents got pregnant on purpose, I mean that they selected an embryo determined to be the most suitable match for their ill daughter.
19 year old brother, Jesse is a troublemaker - he has to be to get attention from a family that centers around Kate and her relapses.
Mom and dad are Sara and Brian. Dad is a fire fighter and mom is single-minded when it comes to her oldest daughter - anything that is possible must be tried - even if it means pushing her younger daughter to the limits of her endurance.
There are lots of things in this book that rang true - the unexpected nature of such an illness (lymphoma, like leukemia, is a blood cancer that is random in nature - there's no genetic links even suspected), the little crises that can turn into big ones (a trip to the hospital to get chemo can turn into a months long stay if something goes wrong), the complete and utter unfairness of cancer, and of life, and how everything revolves around the person who is sick - even if they are not conscious.
The story begins as Anna decides to file for medical emancipation to avoid giving her sister her kidney. The story gently leads you into believing her reasons for doing so are complex - partially a desire to simply be asked rather than ordered to donate, partially a cry for attention from a distracted family engrossed in saving her older sister and partially fear for her own health and a desire to exert control over her own body. There is always a bit of ambiguity though, which leads us to a revelation at the end of the novel.
The text in iteself is interesting as each chapter has the title of the person who is narrating, and each of these people are assigned their own font. There were a couple of points where I felt the author was purposely delaying the story to build anticipation - I hate it when authors leave off at a crucial point to switch point of view and you have to muck through another few pages to continue the part you were really engrossed in. It's a sign of not being confident in your craft. Plus, it's really annoying.
There is also a sub-plot of an attorney and his lost high school love that is interjected. I feel like this was completely superfluous. The attorney has a "service dog" whose service remains a mystery until close to the end. This is an annoying trick. I felt like saying "look lady, your story is good enough, you don't need to be putting all this garland on it" but maybe she felt like she did. Or maybe her editor did - at any rate, it kept me curious about the damn dog.
Not surprisingly, the mom gets really upset about the turn of events. Other reviews I read mentioned her single-mindedness was "incomprehensible" or other such phrase. I say - don't judge until you have walked a mile in their shoes. If you don't know what it's like to have a child/sibling/close family member be sent into the abyss only to be snatched back by some "miracle" you can't understand that toll that takes on you. The hoping, the praying - miracles happen - but you never know when.
I was considering being a kidney donor for my sis. Considering is probably an understatement. It was assumed that I would and I did want to - but the truth is, it scared the shit out of me. There are things that I want to do and like to do that would be more dangerous without my spare kidney? It's all very nice to say you only actually need the one until someone starts talking about cutting you open to take the spare.
I can't imagine declining to do so, not to my sister and certainly not to our parents. I had to let myself believe that I had that choice - but really I had no choice. And what if that was all she needed and I refused and then she died. It would be all my fault. My selfishness. I think, when it would have come down to it I would have done it. How could I not? I'd gotten a taste of life without her and I didn't like it. And I'm way over 13. And I wasn't born especially to give her anything, except company and the occasional hard time.
****SPOILER ALERT****ENDING OF BOOK REVEALED****
If you don't want to know how this book ends, stop reading here.
I can empathize with Anna when she is conflicted about the donation thing. And the mom is a bit nuts, but they are so singluarly focused on Kate's crises that Anna is invisible. I can relate to that as well. Calling the hospital. Monitoring the nurses. Trying to ensure that your favorite nurse is on that shift. Reporting the ones you don't like. Spending the night in the room when you are allowed. Shitty cafeteria meals.
My parents went from calling me once a week to calling me twice a day. It was difficult. The conversations started "tell us the news." "Have you heard anything?" "Did you talk to the nurses?"
You start to feel a bit like chopped liver. I love my sister - I wanted her to get well also. I spent a lot of time in that fucking hospital. But I'm not just the familial extension that feeds information the nurses are unable to give over the phone - just like Anna is not the familial extension created to be Kate's spare parts.
Anyway, turns out that Kate asked Anna to not give her the kidney. This information comes out in a dramatic court scene where the attorney has a seizure (this, we find out is the reason for the service dog and the abruptly ended love-affair). Kate wanted to die - she was sick of fighting.
The judge rules that Anna can be medically emacipated and tragically, on the way to the hospital, she and her attorney get into a car accident. Anna's father, who is a fire-fighter, responds to the scene. Anna is brain dead and donates her kidney to her sister and then dies.
The sister is miraculously recovered and writes the epilogue in 2010. The trouble maker brother is now a cop. The dad had a drinking problem and then recovered. The mom seems to have mellowed out (she should, since her favorite daughter lived anyway).
I have more than a few problems with this. I think it would have been better if Anna had gotten the emancipation and given the kidney willingly. Since Kate was the one who initiated the refusal, there would have been some way to work around that. The ending selected by the author was just tooo hokey.
Also, what was up with the APL, which is the most aggressive and least survivable form of leukemia, just dippearing? It was pretty unbelievable. I was kind of disappointed - it seemed like an easy out.
There were parts of this book that rang true, but when the ending is so pat (like the fire fighter dad) I feel kind gyped.
Author: Jodi Picoult
Publisher: Atria Books
Date: 2004
Discussion:
I got this book on Tuesday and I finished it in the middle of the night on Thursday. It was difficult for me to put down.
The Setup:16 year old Kate has APL, a form of leukemia that is chemo-resistant. This means that whatever puts it into remission once can't be used again as the smarty-pants leukemia has already figured out how to beat it. She's had it since she was 2.
Her 13 year old sister, Anna, was born specifically to be a cord blood donor for her sister's first stem cell transplant. When I say specifically, I don't mean that her parents got pregnant on purpose, I mean that they selected an embryo determined to be the most suitable match for their ill daughter.
19 year old brother, Jesse is a troublemaker - he has to be to get attention from a family that centers around Kate and her relapses.
Mom and dad are Sara and Brian. Dad is a fire fighter and mom is single-minded when it comes to her oldest daughter - anything that is possible must be tried - even if it means pushing her younger daughter to the limits of her endurance.
There are lots of things in this book that rang true - the unexpected nature of such an illness (lymphoma, like leukemia, is a blood cancer that is random in nature - there's no genetic links even suspected), the little crises that can turn into big ones (a trip to the hospital to get chemo can turn into a months long stay if something goes wrong), the complete and utter unfairness of cancer, and of life, and how everything revolves around the person who is sick - even if they are not conscious.
The story begins as Anna decides to file for medical emancipation to avoid giving her sister her kidney. The story gently leads you into believing her reasons for doing so are complex - partially a desire to simply be asked rather than ordered to donate, partially a cry for attention from a distracted family engrossed in saving her older sister and partially fear for her own health and a desire to exert control over her own body. There is always a bit of ambiguity though, which leads us to a revelation at the end of the novel.
The text in iteself is interesting as each chapter has the title of the person who is narrating, and each of these people are assigned their own font. There were a couple of points where I felt the author was purposely delaying the story to build anticipation - I hate it when authors leave off at a crucial point to switch point of view and you have to muck through another few pages to continue the part you were really engrossed in. It's a sign of not being confident in your craft. Plus, it's really annoying.
There is also a sub-plot of an attorney and his lost high school love that is interjected. I feel like this was completely superfluous. The attorney has a "service dog" whose service remains a mystery until close to the end. This is an annoying trick. I felt like saying "look lady, your story is good enough, you don't need to be putting all this garland on it" but maybe she felt like she did. Or maybe her editor did - at any rate, it kept me curious about the damn dog.
Not surprisingly, the mom gets really upset about the turn of events. Other reviews I read mentioned her single-mindedness was "incomprehensible" or other such phrase. I say - don't judge until you have walked a mile in their shoes. If you don't know what it's like to have a child/sibling/close family member be sent into the abyss only to be snatched back by some "miracle" you can't understand that toll that takes on you. The hoping, the praying - miracles happen - but you never know when.
I was considering being a kidney donor for my sis. Considering is probably an understatement. It was assumed that I would and I did want to - but the truth is, it scared the shit out of me. There are things that I want to do and like to do that would be more dangerous without my spare kidney? It's all very nice to say you only actually need the one until someone starts talking about cutting you open to take the spare.
I can't imagine declining to do so, not to my sister and certainly not to our parents. I had to let myself believe that I had that choice - but really I had no choice. And what if that was all she needed and I refused and then she died. It would be all my fault. My selfishness. I think, when it would have come down to it I would have done it. How could I not? I'd gotten a taste of life without her and I didn't like it. And I'm way over 13. And I wasn't born especially to give her anything, except company and the occasional hard time.
****SPOILER ALERT****ENDING OF BOOK REVEALED****
If you don't want to know how this book ends, stop reading here.
I can empathize with Anna when she is conflicted about the donation thing. And the mom is a bit nuts, but they are so singluarly focused on Kate's crises that Anna is invisible. I can relate to that as well. Calling the hospital. Monitoring the nurses. Trying to ensure that your favorite nurse is on that shift. Reporting the ones you don't like. Spending the night in the room when you are allowed. Shitty cafeteria meals.
My parents went from calling me once a week to calling me twice a day. It was difficult. The conversations started "tell us the news." "Have you heard anything?" "Did you talk to the nurses?"
You start to feel a bit like chopped liver. I love my sister - I wanted her to get well also. I spent a lot of time in that fucking hospital. But I'm not just the familial extension that feeds information the nurses are unable to give over the phone - just like Anna is not the familial extension created to be Kate's spare parts.
Anyway, turns out that Kate asked Anna to not give her the kidney. This information comes out in a dramatic court scene where the attorney has a seizure (this, we find out is the reason for the service dog and the abruptly ended love-affair). Kate wanted to die - she was sick of fighting.
The judge rules that Anna can be medically emacipated and tragically, on the way to the hospital, she and her attorney get into a car accident. Anna's father, who is a fire-fighter, responds to the scene. Anna is brain dead and donates her kidney to her sister and then dies.
The sister is miraculously recovered and writes the epilogue in 2010. The trouble maker brother is now a cop. The dad had a drinking problem and then recovered. The mom seems to have mellowed out (she should, since her favorite daughter lived anyway).
I have more than a few problems with this. I think it would have been better if Anna had gotten the emancipation and given the kidney willingly. Since Kate was the one who initiated the refusal, there would have been some way to work around that. The ending selected by the author was just tooo hokey.
Also, what was up with the APL, which is the most aggressive and least survivable form of leukemia, just dippearing? It was pretty unbelievable. I was kind of disappointed - it seemed like an easy out.
There were parts of this book that rang true, but when the ending is so pat (like the fire fighter dad) I feel kind gyped.
