NEW MOVIE REVIEW: Tinker, Tailor, Soldier, Spy

Gary Oldman is the BOMB (remember that one---from the nineties!) in this movie. He portrays George Smiley, a shrewd retired agent of the British version of the CIA---an organization fondly referred to as "the Circus". The thing about Oldman here is that he takes stoic to a-whole-notha level. Consequently, the few (like maybe three) times he does show some emotion, it really packs a wallop.

Examples:

1. When he observes his wife making-out with another man---for 2 seconds he really looks like he's going to have a stroke.
2. When he is "pressing" a wayward colleague for information, he doesn't actually press or act threatening at all. But at one point, he simply leans into the guy's ear and says, "Tell me the address" in a quietly persuasive tone. He has just the smallest smirk about him and it is chilling---like bbbbrrrrrrrr.
3. When he returns to his home after the whole mess is over, his whole body just kind of drops when he sees his wife in the kitchen. We only see her forearm.

The setting is the 1970's. And these ain't your James Bond or Jason Bourne kind of secret agents. Nobody is super-strong or has snazzy equipment. There are no car chases, no roof-jumpings, no explosions. These are more the real deal guys who steal government secrets and occasionally kill people.

The pace is very slow, but engrossing, as Smiley attempts to ferret out who among the top members of the Circus is actually a double-agent working for the Russians. It's a lonely life working in the spy business. You can't trust anyone, it would seem. I liked that this movie was very realistic in that way. The life of a secret agent appears to be kind of a sad one. This job not only didn't seem glamorous, it seemed like knowing you could get killed at anytime was the only real "excitement". People who like that brand of excitement are kinda nutz. Hence, by Jules logic, people who work for the CIA and the like are kinda nutz.

Still, a cool film. 4 stars. Go see it. George Smiley is a strange bird, but you really appreciate him.

NEW BOOK REVIEW: Affinity

Several posts ago, I reviewed The Little Stranger by Sarah Waters. In that review I really struggled---and failed--- to articulate a solid reason why I found that book so compelling.  Now, after reading Affinity, I have a better handle on what makes her books successful sellers. 

First off, as with The Little Stranger, Affinity moves along very slowly toward its climax. After an initial event involving a ghost and a death, nothing terribly exciting happens for quite some time. Still, you are pulled into the day-to day workings of a very specific and detailed place in time. The images and voices of the period are so well drawn that you become immersed. It's truly an unfamiliar world for most of us, and Ms. Water's has a way of letting you hear, see, feel and even smell that world miraculously without becoming bogged down in descriptors. She gives just the right amount of information. It's the next best thing to being there.

She also uses first person narration to great advantage in both books. While the gentleman narrator in The Little Stranger seemed a very "normal" sort of person, the two narrators in Affinity are both very troubled women. One is a curiosity, for sure. The other, though, is someone we can easily relate to, understand, and sympathize with. In each case, your interest is piqued and held even as you seem to travel with them through their daily routine comings and goings.

Both books are psychological ghost stories. Is this real? Is it imagined? Is it mental illness or a cruel hoax? They are not, then, overtly scary, but more worrisome, sorrowful and melancholy.

A bit about the subject matter in Affinity. I'm just gonna be blunt here. Most of us are not lesbians--estimates go as high as 8% or so, I think. I'm in California, so I feel like there are more, but the fact is that probably 90% of  women are straight.  So, even the subtlest of Victorian lesbianism is interesting, I think. It's something we don't know much about. Besides not having the life experience, we haven't read a lot on the subject either. I can safely say this is my first Victorian lesbian romance, and I suspect that is the case for most of the readers. But, hey, it won't necessarily be my last. It is not the same thing as hetero romance. There are commonalities, of course, but it's different and, hence, more interesting on some levels. 

I hope that doesn't scare anyone off. It is the subtlest of subtle, truly. Give it a whirl!

On A Personal Note

RIP Morris ~ You were very loved and will be sorely missed ♥

The One You've Been Waiting For: The Girl with the Dragon Tattoo

Why an American film version?

Boy, talk about your hotly debated remakes. Firstly, the Swedish film version of 2009 was quite popular in the U.S., so I don't hold with all the talk about Americans being too lazy or stupid to deal with subtitles. If some people find that having to read subtitles detracts from the full film experience, that makes them neither lazy, nor stupid. It's simply an experiential debate, in my opinion. Anyway, plenty of us lazy, stupid Americans managed to read the subtitles for this film. I don't think the remake was in any way meant to pander to Americans who dislike subtitles. Actually, I think the popularity of the Swedish film, combined with the popularity of the Steig Larssons's book, is largely what drove the remaking of this movie. It's an opportunity to make money. It's also an opportunity for filmakers to have their way in interpreting the source material. Have at it, fellas. Why not an American version?

The Inevitable Comparison

I feel as though I won't be able to fairly compare the two films without watching both this version and the Swedish version one more time. However, I am not going to do that right now, so this unfair comparison will have to suffice. I'll start with the pet peeve.

When I first heard that Daniel Craig was cast as Mikael Blomkvist, I was concerned that he would be too athletic, too macho, and too damned good-looking to portray the middle-aged journalist. Lisbeth Salander is the action hero of this story, not Mikael Blomkvist. I must say, though, that Craig did a fine job with the role. He gave a controlled, believable performance. However, they did him no favors by dressing him so well.  He can't help that he has a very taut body (or actually, maybe he should've tried to gain a few donut pounds), but the wardrobe director did not have to make it so obvious. Did you get a load of how his clothes fit? Puleeeez. I guess Swedes get even their down jackets tailored.

For the general public, Rooney Mara as Lisbeth seemed to strike the bigger casting controversy, but I have to say, I think she was fine. I think the Swedish film did more to enable the audience to understand Lisbeth's character, but I thought Mara did well with the road traveled in this version. I think she could actually be great in the 2nd and 3rd films, which I presume (and fervently hope) will be made. Not taking anything away from Noomi Rapace, though, who was fantastic in her own right.

Apparently, some folks took issue with the length of the almost 2 3/4 hour American film. I actually loved the pacing and loved the detail. I'm probably in a minority, but even 3 hours would have been fine with me. Some thought the piece at the end (after the mystery is resolved) was unnecessary, but I found it useful. All except the bit at the the very end. I don't think Lisbeth had any romantic expectations of Mikael, and I don't think she would have been the least surprised, much less bothered, by his spending time with Erika, his longtime lover. More true to Lisbeth's character: Walk right up and hand him a gift in front of Erika.

As with all great stories, understanding the motivation of key characters is critical. I feel the Swedish version did a better job with this. Prime example is the plotline involving Lisbeth and her public guardian.

Why would Lisbeth, a hard-as-nails survivor, allow any man to force or manipulate her into doing anything she did not want to do? You would expect her to say 'f*ck-off' and thrust her knee into his crotch. What on earth could he do or say to force a different reaction? The Swedish film made it very clear, both in set-up and in action, that he had her truly cornered. He had something she could not do without. We understood that, and also understood that Lisbeth was somehow accustomed to getting nasty jobs done in order to get what she needed.

Another example is the relationship between Harriet and Henrick. There was a lot of love and support in that relationship; that was clear. Why would an adult Harriet not inform her uncle--and the police, for that matter-- about the events of her youth? The Swedish film did a much better job of detailing the grisly nature of events, the abject terror that ruled Harriet's young life, and the guttural pain and lasting fear that would lead a person to completely put away that part of their life forever---even at the cost of the lives of others.

Other little things in the film were also missing, for me. I think it makes for a more effective mystery if you cast suspicious light on a number of characters. This version, I felt, did less of that. We needed more contact with Harald and the other Vangers. They were all apparently horrid people, so the guilty party could have been any one of them, or any two or three of them. Let us have a chance to look at them with suspicion.

All in all, though, this was a good film. Very engrossing and a perfectly legitimate take on the story. The greater thing that will come of this, I hope, is that the 2nd and 3rd films will be made. The Swedish made-for-tv versions were okay at best---not even close to the quality of the first film. The lazy, stupid Americans have a great opportunity here to do justice to those stories. I can hardly wait!

The Golden Globes and Other Notes....

The Golden Globes Nominees are out. Sadly, I have seen only one of the films nominated for Best Picture/Drama. I did really enjoy the one that I saw. It would be very hard not to enjoy The Help. Despite some faults, it was, in the end, a beautifully shot, well-acted, touching film. 

I did see three of the five films nominated for Best Picture/Musical or Comedy.  I didn't love Bridesmaids as much as some folks, but there were a couple of hilarious moments. Melissa McCarthy definitely gave the breakout performance of that film.  I am surprised she was not nominated.  I also saw 50/50, and enjoyed that quite a bit. Joseph Gordon-Levitt is hard not to love. But the winner for me? Midnight in Paris. I enjoyed that so much that I'd hop in an imaginary car at midnight and go see it again. As far as the best actor award in the same category (musical or comedy), I'd give it to Ryan Gosling for Crazy, Stupid, Love. He was quite awesome playing a truly yuck-o, lounge lizard for the new millennium. 

And the big nominee for me? Best Television Drama: American Horror Story. Now I am not saying that it should win (because I can't entirely argue with some critics who have called it a big ole mess), but I completely understand those who love it. This is the most entertaining, "ohshi*didthatreallyjusthappen" show on television.

Very soon I shall be seeing The Girl With The Dragon Tattoo. And, yes, despite my concerns about Daniel Craig being too good-looking and too testosterone-y to play Mikael Blomkvist, I am very, very excited.

HOLY SMOKES!! My Latest TV Discovery

Look, here's the thing: I don't have cable, or a dish, or anything else which would allow me access to a lot of tv channels. It's sometimes sad when I don't know what's going on in the world of the Kardashians---just kidding---but the lack of tv channels is probably a very good thing for me. I can become a little engrossed, if you know what I mean. (Yes, I do have a problem dragging myself away from the Law and Order marathons.)

So, today I was perusing the internet when I came across the name of a newish tv show that piqued my interest: American Horror Story. Does any one remember the tv show American Gothic? Fun stuff. So, in the interest of discovering new diversions (i.e. work-avoidance), I decided to watch the pilot. Which resulted in my watching all the other episodes available. HOLY SMOKES.

There is a truckload of stuff going down in this series, and I don't want to give too much away, but let's just say there's Jessica Lange at her crazy-Southern best, Dylan McDermott sans pants, the lady who played the mom in Six Feet Under, Vera Farmiga's little sister (Taissa)---who has some serious acting skills, teen romance, a lovely creepy house, spooky old photographs, dead babies, deformed children, body parts in jars, and a considerable amount of sex.

Yeah, and that's only the tip of the turret.

I really don't know if they can keep this up and still keep it compelling. Sometimes when there is too much going on, there isn't enough character development and you get into a situation where you don't give a crap about these people because you don't know them well enough to care. So far though, that is not a problem. There are quite a few interesting plot turns and you definitely want to find out more of the backstory of these characters. 

I was glued to my computer, so much so, I had a hard time removing myself to watch Once Upon a Time on television. American Horror Story kinda knocked my socks off. It's got a very strong cast to boot. If you aren't faint of heart (or faint of stomach), I'd say give this a shot. It's a wild ride; so far so good.

NEW MOVIE REVIEW: Tower Heist

"If it had provided me with nothing else, "Tower Heist" would have afforded me the sight of a solid gold automobile being lowered from the penthouse of the Trump Tower with Matthew Broderick dangling from it. Sometimes you appreciate such simple human spectacles. To be sure, Trump Tower has been renamed "The Tower," and the man dangling from the car isn't the Donald, but this is an imperfect world."  ~ Roger Ebert

Look, the plot is ridiculous, but who cares? If the plot had been more clever, would this have been a better film? Sure. But this isn't that kind of movie, and nonetheless, it was still entertaining and funny.


First off, the whole penthouse lifestyle (as in rich---not as in naked) is fun to imagine for those of us who have never had, and will probably never have, the opportunity to go inside one of those high rise apartment buildings occupied by the NYC elite.  It sure would be fun to spend a weekend there. 


Next, the cast was enjoyable: Ben Stiller, Eddie Murphy, Casey Affleck, Matthew Broderick, Alan Alda, Judd Hirsch, Michael Pena. I didn't care too much for Gabourey Sidibe and her Jamaican accent, but everyone else was pretty funny. For some reason Matthew Broderick as a middle-aged sad-sack particularly struck my funny bone. He just looked funny. Tea Leoni, was also likable, even though I'm usually not crazy about her. 


The movie moves along at a quick pace. There were couple of slow spots for me (oddly enough, during the actual heist), but overall it kept me engaged.


I hate it when critics write a review and most of it is actually a synopsis. LAME. So, you won't get that from me. You can look up the synopsis at IMDB or Wikipedia or something. Consequently, this review is short, but you get the point. Tower Heist is a glossy production---nonsensical, but amusing. And that's fine as long as you weren't expecting something more.

Random Snippets (TV and Whatnot)

SNIPPETS

TV:
I missed the last episode of Grimm. I heard it lacked a fairytale thread. Is that correct?

Once upon a Time 
I am really enjoying this show. But I didn't enjoy the actress they chose for Cinderella. The non-love also probably had to do with the way the role was written and directed. Here's my idea of  Cinderella:

That's Dianna Agron from Glee.  Of course, she already has quite a good job, but they should hunt around for someone like her.  You should like Cinderella, not be irritated by her. And frankly, she should be really pretty. Speaking of  which, I love Ginnifer Goodwin as Snow White. Perfect casting. Also she's damned adorable in her pixie haircut. She looks like she's gonna sprout gossamer wings and pointed ears.

And of course, there's Robert Carlyle as Rumplestiltskin/Mr. Gold. Creepy in the most delicious and charming fashion.

Dancing with the Stars
Felt really bad for JR. He looked bummed-out. I still think he'll beat Ricki Lake. He's just more fun to watch. Also, Rob Kardashian has done a bang-up job on the show. He was great last night. He manages to look natural and authentic in his expression, plus he's quite light on his feet for a big guy.

Random Notes
They have an option on this blog site to have a warning for adult content. They're talking about naked pictures, right?  I mean, I don't think my occasional spicy language counts---that's just my literary style ;)

About the movie Tower Heist : I heard from one of my sources that it was very fast-paced, funny and entertaining. Even though director Brett Ratner is apparently a d*ck. Oops--there goes that spicy language thing again. But, but, but he said some really nasty things in a recent interview. Only a total tool would say that stuff.   http://www.hollywoodreporter.com/news/brett-ratner-fired-oscars-olivia-munn-258883

Crisis Alert: The company that owns Chevy's (my heroin (aka chip) supplier) has filed for bankruptcy.  They need to get their financial act together. People's lives are at stake. 

NEW MOVIE REVIEW: Margin Call

This is a compelling movie: 4/5 stars. The 'whys' are coming, but first I need to confess something. 

I am a colossal ignoramus when it comes to finance and economics. It's not that I am dumb; it's more that my brain steadfastly resists information which it does not find immediately beneficial. This boils down to me being able to absorb movies and not news. 

Movies=entertainment/stress relief. 

News=doubt/worry/frustration/confusion.

Movies are immediately beneficial.

Anyway, there is a point in the movie where the CEO of an investment banking firm asks a young analyst to explain their dire financial situation to him as though he were "a five year old or a golden retriever". Don't get your hopes up too much here. My golden retriever brain still did not get half of what he was saying. BUT, that did not make the movie any less compelling.

It's a taut story. The financial world is about to be turned on its over-inflated head. Fortunes will be lost, careers will be torched, lives will be ruined. And how long after the fuse is lit will the bomb explode? A matter of hours. Tick-tick-tick. As long as the director handles this right, it's gonna keep you tuned-in. He does and it does. Plus, it's a good-looking film: the sharp and shiny reflection of affluence. 

It's got a big cast, lots of people you know. The opening scenes with Stanley Tucci (a favorite of mine) tell you right off the bat that this is gonna be a good flick. He's perfect, as you would expect, and the scenes are oddly relate-able (anyone else recently experience the sudden disappearance of your co-workers?). It's just even more sordid here---I guess you have to consider the source.  

Jeremy Irons, Simon Baker, Paul Bettany, Penn Badgley all give solid performances. Demi Moore is okay, like always. (Hey, I like her, but in my experience, her acting, while not bad, hasn't shown a whole lot of depth or nuance). Kevin Spacey is great, as always. Remember Verbal Kint/Keyser Soze? One of the all-time favorite performances, that one was. But I digress.

The surprise performance, for me, was by Zachary Qunito. Since I didn't see the new Star Trek films, I only know him from the tv series Heroes. This role is a big departure from that. He is very convincing, very believable---great expressiveness in his face, great line delivery. 

Apparently there really are people whose lives are driven only by the need and desire for wealth. So, if you had a few minutes with these guys what would would you want to know? 

How about:   How does it feel to be a soulless bastard? 

How's About a Grimm Cinderella Episode? Here's My Version

Seen the new tv show Grimm? Here's a taste of my idea for an upcoming episode.

Script By Jules 

Scene One - At the police department

Hank (Nick's partner): Nick, check out there girl over there. What's your take on her? 

(Note: Nick is known for his ability to pinpoint a lot about a person within the first minute of seeing them).

Nick: Judging from her clothes, and the fact that she looks like she hasn't had access to a shower recently, I'd say she's living on the street. Not picked up for prostitution though, looks too innocent--doesn't have that hard look in her eye. She's a beautiful kid, huh? Even under all that grime.

Hank: Ha! Got ya on this one. She's living with her family. And according to Captain, the mom and the sister came in all decked out. Rolled-in in a silver Jaguar. He said those shoes the mom was wearing go for about eight-hundred bucks. Kid's got the supermodel looks and dresses like a dumpster, and the rest of the family dress like tv stars.

Nick: Why'd they bring her in here? Shouldn't she have been taken in to Juvy?

Hank: Nope--Genessa is eighteen. Get this: they brought her in because sister number one claims that this one cut off a good-sized piece of sistah's big toe. 

Nick: What?

Hank: Oh, yeah. They brought in a prom shoe full of blood for evidence. Oh, and that's not all. Here's where we come in. Sister number two?? Missing since last night. Prom night. 

Nick: And Genessa is our perp?

Hank: Apparently, so. Accordingly to her family, that is. Seems there was some big fight between the three sisters over the Prom King. Got pretty ugly, I'd say.

Nick: Can't wait to meet her family. Have we brought in the Prom King yet?

Hank: Nope. I figured we'd get to him after we checked out Supermom and her dysfunctional cheerleaders.

Nick: What else do we know about our perp?

Hank: Straight-A student; quiet, not much of a socializer. Held back in school a year---can't figure that one out. She's apparently very bright. 

Nick: And the Prom King?

Hank: Andrew Rocklin

Nick: Rocklin. Rocklin? Like Rocklin Estates, Rocklin?  

Hank: That would be correct.

Nick: Nice. Ultrarich boy dates dumpster-diver. Okay, well, let's go meet Miss Genessa.

______________________________________________

I know you're just dying to hear the rest of the story. That's one cool thing about Grimm's plotlines. They have threads of the original fairytale, but you know the episode always has a different twist.