Below are the 20 most recent journal entries recorded in Mary Arline's LiveJournal:

[ << Previous 20 ]

Monday, October 12th, 2009
6:00 pm	A short litany of thanks I didn't know what I wanted to say today. Everything I would like to say has already been said, and much better than I could say it. So I would just like to say thanks. Thank you, Matthew. Thank you, Judy and Dennis. Thank you, Father Roger Schmit. Thank you, Moises Kaufman.
Friday, September 11th, 2009
4:53 pm	Four questions: What does it profit us to save our lives if we have to sell our souls in the process? If we aren't willing to live according to our principles of freedom and justice and equality, what's the point of fighting and dying for them? What would the world be like if people actually lived the way they try to teach their children to live? If people actually shared, actually treated others as they would want to be treated, if people actually behaved as though they thought their character counted, if people listened to children's stories and actually heeded the morals... What exactly is patriotism? *** By the way, Darryl Worley, I have indeed forgotten the lyrics to your wretched song, and I plan to keep it that way.
Wednesday, July 8th, 2009
9:54 pm	12:34:56 07/08/09 It was one brief shining moment today, and it wasn't as cool as it could have been because the computers at work don't list the date in mm/dd/yy format, but I still enjoyed it. Current Mood: geeky (1 Comment |Comment on this)
Tuesday, June 23rd, 2009
7:55 pm	Movie trailers and such I saw what I assume to be the latest trailer for Harry Potter and the Half-Blood Prince on IMDb, and I have to admit that it looks pretty damn impressive. Since Kloves is back as screenwriter, I don't hold out a lot of hope for it for it being coherent or comprehensible, but it should be visually pleasing at least. The effect of the cursed necklace on Katie Bell is exactly as I imagined it. Here's what I don't understand, though: how the hell did they manage to make a movie version of Half-Blood Prince and only have it be rated PG, rather than PG-13 ? I don't mean that a higher rating automatically makes for a better film (I've seen plenty of R-rated movies that were utter crap), but I personally found the book so much more disturbing than the earlier installments that I don't see how the movie could be anything less than equally as violent, disturbing, etc. as the most recent movies. But then again, it's not that it's necessarily less violent, disturbing, etc. as the previous movies, it's that the MPAA hasn't deemed it so, for its own inscrutable reasons. And then, against my better judgment, I watched the trailer for New Moon, the latest installment in the "Twilight Saga", as it's now being called. I have no interest in seeing the film, but I was a little concerned about the character of Jacob because in the first movie he had long hair and now he has short hair, and in several American Indian cultures that's a sign of mourning. Well, "concerned" isn't really the right word; I just wondered if that was important to the story or purely an aesthetic choice. But they didn't address it in the trailer, nor on the IMDb trivia pages, and I don't care enough to research it any further. I have to admit, though, the werewolf transformation in the trailer is pretty damn cool, and even though it's clearly a digi-wolf, at least it resembles an actual wolf rather than some enormous, hairless, carnivorous rodent (*ahem* Prisoner of Azkaban). I bought the Rifftrax for Twilight as soon as it came out, because Twilight as a cultural phenomenon deserves to be mercilessly mocked. I haven't been able to listen to it with the actual movie yet; all the copies in the library are out, and when I requested my reserve copy I was number 94 in the queue. But I've listened to it by itself, and even without the movie it's quite funny. Fortunately, (or unfortunately, as the case may be), I remembered the movie well enough to match up the commentary with approximately what was going on in the story. Of course, it helps that Twilight doesn't have a plot as such until the latter third of the movie. Current Mood: sore (1 Comment |Comment on this)
Monday, April 6th, 2009
5:25 pm	Jai ho! I went to see Slumdog Millionaire today. It was very good, although it was a little bit hard to follow sometimes, probably because of a combination of accents and cultural references (coming into 5 minutes late probably didn't help either). But I pretty much knew how it was going to end what with the publicity and the Oscars and all, and yet I was still antsy with suspense towards then end. And once again, it was one of those movies in which the journey is more important than the destination, though, having taken the journey, the destination makes for a nice payoff. I loved how the police inspector started to get caught up in the story, so that it was less an interrogation and more of a Scheherezade, Thousand and One Nights situation. I've said before and I'll say again that Dev Patel is adorable, and he was soooo good in this movie, although I felt that his dialect work was a little splotchy, but he brings such tenderness and pathos to the role that it hardly matters. His few scenes with Freida Pinto were so beautiful and sweet. It kind of reminded me of Man of LaMancha, the idea that idealized love doesn't have to be disappointed, that love has the power to make the ideal real; as the song lyrics go: "to each his Dulcinea that he alone can name." It's interesting that of all its many awards and nominations, very few are for acting: few acting nominations and fewer wins. It's also interesting that for the SAG Awards Dev Patel was nominated as an Outstanding Actor in a Supporting Role rather than a leading role; I don't know if that's because they considered it to be such an ensemble piece, or they had so many strong contenders in the Leading category, or what. It's unfortunate for Dev Patel that he had to go up against my boy Heath Ledger but, God willing, Dev Patel will have a long and fruitful career ahead of him and get plenty more chances to win. I truly hope so, because from what I saw in this film he truly is a prodigious talent (Slumdog did win the Outstanding Cast award from SAG, so at least he didn't go home completely empty-handed). Well, I've now seen two Academy Award nominees for Best Picture, this and The Curious Case of Benjamin Button (unfortunately I missed both Frost/Nixon and Milk in the discount theater, so will have to wait for the DVDs, and don't know if or when The Reader has played near me, or will). Between the two of them, I honestly couldn't say which is better; I can't think of any valid grounds for comparison. I guess if I absolutely had to pick one over the other, I'd pick Benjamin Button, for the sole reason that I could easily follow the story and (mostly) understand what the characters were saying. Also, it had less of the cringe-worthy violence, which I appreciate. That's not to say that the violence and disturbing imagery in Slumdog was gratuitous, because it wasn't; I'd just prefer not to see it, although ultimately it was worth it. Oh, by the way, the soundtrack kicks ass! Current Mood: entertained (Comment on this)
Saturday, April 4th, 2009
10:40 pm	Passion I don't know about April being the cruelest month (I'd be more inclined to pick October or November) but April 4th is certainly a momentous date: it's the date Dr. King was killed and the date Heath Ledger was born (though not the same year, obviously). It's technically not Palm Sunday this year, but it's Palm Sunday for me because my choir sang at the Saturday evening Mass this weekend. I recently read a non-fiction book called The Irrational Season by Madeleine L'Engle, who has been one of my favorite novelists for years, but I'd never read any of her non-fiction until now. I'm not sure exactly why, but I'm glad of it because I don't think I would have gotten as much out of it in high school as I have now. Anyway, in the book she describes participating in reading the Passion as part of the crowding chanting, "Crucify him!" and describes how it disturbs her because she doesn't know whether or not she would have actually been part of that screaming mob had she been there at the time. I can relate to this. During most of my childhood summers I participated in the Black Hills Passion Play (which, alas, is now defunct), but it wasn't until I was 12 years old (old enough and tall enough) that I participated in the mob scenes. And the first time I did so it was extremely difficult, because on one hand I was acting in a way that was completely counter to my nature, and yet at the same time I felt within myself the capacity for that depth of violent rage and blind hatred, and I felt that, under certain circumstances, I too could possibly be carried away by those emotions. After all, had I not been carried away to a lesser degree by violent emotions all my life? Did I not consider myself somehow akin to the Incredible Hulk? Eventually I got myself under control, and realized that if you're going to do a Passion Play, you need an angry mob or it's not going to work. Tonight when we read the Passion, what struck me was the way Jesus' friends all abandoned him when the high priests came to arrest him. This is something else Ms. L'Engle addresses in The Irrational Season, pointing out that it was the women who stuck by him, despite--or perhaps because of--the fact that they were virtually powerless, second-class citizens. That was something that I'd never really thought about before, and that's probably the reason why it struck me tonight more than ever. In fairness to the disciples, while it would have been very noble of them all to go along and die with Jesus, it would have meant there would be no one left to tell the story (except the women, and in that societal situation who would have listened to them?), so it was probably a good thing in the long run that they did run away, but tonight I was disgusted with them for their cowardice. And yet, even while I was disgusted with them, I had to ask myself if I wouldn't have done the same thing in their shoes. Would I have had the courage to stand by Jesus and be persecuted and possibly killed with him? To answer this question I attempt to broaden it by imagining in Jesus' place a friend or family member, and it becomes easier to imagine standing my ground, but I still don't know that that's the choice I would make if I were actually faced with the decision. ( Read more... )
Monday, March 2nd, 2009
5:19 pm	To Bobby Jindal, Re: Volcanos Context: Last week President Obama (ooh, it still makes me feel all tingly when I say that) gave a speech to Congress regarding the state of the Union, but it wasn't officially a State of the Union speech because apparently you have to have been president for at least a year to give one of those. Regardless of the semantic distinctions, they had a prominent member of the opposing party give a response, as is customary. They picked Bobby Jindal, the governor of Louisiana where, as you might recall, they had a big ol' hurricane a few years ago, a harrowing experience that taught Bobby Jindal that spending money on natural disaster preparedness was a bad idea. This, for some reason, caused Jon Stewart to take a sausage link wrapped in a pancake and dip it into bacon-flavored mayonnaise and attempt to eat it. None of this made any sense. The Daily Show With Jon StewartM - Th 11p / 10c Bobby Jindal's Republican Response Daily Show Full Episodes Important Things With Demetri Martin Political Humor Joke of the Day Governor Jindal, allow me to explain to you why we need to monitor volcanoes: Perhaps you've heard of Yellowstone National Park, in the northwest corner of Wyoming. What you might not be aware of is that Yellowstone Park--nearly all 2.2 million acres of it--is a gigantic volcano caldera. A caldera, in case you are not aware, is the hole in a volcano where the lava comes out. Let me reiterate, because this is very important: the caldera is not IN Yellowstone Park; Yellowstone Park IS the caldera--that's how big it is. To put it another way, Yellowstone Park is a volcano, but not just any volcano; they call it a supervolcano. And it's still active. In point of fact, it's the largest active volcano in the world. They figure that it erupts every 600,000 years or so, and the last time it erupted was 630,000 years ago. So basically, our great nation is sitting atop a huge ticking time bomb, which could theoretically go off at any time. If, God forbid, it does so during our lifetimes it won't just be a national emergency, it will be a worldwide emergency. As bad as Hurricane Katrina was--and I in no way mean to minimize the devastation and suffering that it caused--if, God forbid, Yellowstone were to blow during our lifetimes it would make Hurricane Katrina look like a refreshing April shower. Now, to be fair, I can kind of see an argument against monitoring it; if, God forbid, it were to blow, it would be a catastrophe unlike anything the homo sapient race has ever experienced, and how do you possibly prepare for something like that? And if we can't prepare for it, maybe we're better off not knowing. On the other hand, if there IS something that we can do to prepare for it, we're probably better off doing it. And part of preparing, if any preparation is possible, is monitoring the situation so we have an idea of when our preparations will have to be put into action, just as meteorologists monitor hurricanes to try to predict where and when and with how much force they are going to hit. Of course, that doesn't always mean that they predict correctly, and it doesn't always mean that people are prepared for every contingency, but the knowledge that comes of monitoring the situation is a vital part of the preparation process. Bottom line, Governor Jindal; if, God forbid, Yellowstone blows within our lifetimes, it probably won't make much difference to me, nor to most of us who live in the western and midwestern states, whether or not the government spent money on trying to prepare because, if we're lucky, we'll be killed instantly. Make no mistake about it; those killed instantly would be the lucky ones. But those of you in the southern and eastern states might be unfortunate enough to survive long enough to see the aftermath, and if you do survive, you just might be grateful that the federal government took the time and spent the money to monitor the situation and prepare for it. Or, if you and your Republican cohorts succeed in bankrupting the effort to monitor the Yellowstone situation, you might just live to regret it. And a happy Mardi Gras to you, sir. Incidentally, the source I have cited in this little essay is A Short History of Nearly Everything by Bill Bryson, published by Broadway Books, copyright 2003. It's a very well-researched and accessibly written book, an excellent read if you want to have the ever-loving crap scared out of you. (2 Comments |Comment on this)
Tuesday, February 24th, 2009
1:26 pm	The Curious Case of Benjamin Button Yesterday I did indeed go see The Curious Case of Benjamin Button and I enjoyed all 166 minutes of it. It was a beautiful story about unconditional love and devotion, and about things happening in their own season. It's one of those movies that sort of defies genre categorization, and I like movies like that because they present an intellectual challenge and invite interpretation. It won 3 Oscars on Sunday, for Art Direction, Visual Effects, and Make-up, the latter two unquestionably well-deserved, although I am bemused by the extent by which they have become almost the same thing in recent years. Not that that's a bad thing; if that's what it takes to keep the stories coming, then I'm all for it, and this is definitely a story that probably could have been presented without extensive CGI, but it probably wouldn't have been as effective. I felt that all the aging (or un-aging, as the case may be) effects in the movie were very skillfully and gracefully done. I respect Brad Pitt as an actor because he seems to be one who tries to maintain artistic integrity and doesn't allow himself to be typecast or pigeonholed, but as a result he's played a lot of roles in which his character is, for lack of a better word, creepy. Creepy at best. So it was nice to see him play a not-creepy character for once. Well, he was still kind of creepy what with the whole digi-man-boy aspect of it, but the creepiness came more from the situation and not from the content of the character's soul. ( Philosophical musings with vague spoilers ) Current Mood: moved (Comment on this)
Monday, February 23rd, 2009
2:06 pm	If there were ever a year to watch the Oscars... ...not having seen any of the films, this was it. Not having seen any (well, most) of the movies, I don't have a lot of comments, but I have a few thoughts: ( Read more... ) To sum up, I enjoyed the Oscars, as I usually do, and of course the old debate rages on about whether the Academy is out of touch or hypocritical, about whether movies that make a lot of money are good and vice versa. So I'll just reiterate that I think that the Academy can stand to be a little more populist, and the populace can stand to be a little less hedonic; maybe we could all meet in the middle and be epicurean. Current Mood: entertained (Comment on this)
Sunday, February 22nd, 2009
12:45 pm	Ten years of La Vita Bella It's now ten years since Roberto Benigni won the Best Foreign Language Oscar and Best Actor Oscar for Life Is Beautiful, one of my favorite movies ever. It still maintains an IMDb rating of 8.4, and is ranked number 85 of its Top 250. And yet, I'm constantly dismayed by the resentment that people, particularly film critics, harbor toward that movie and toward Benigni, particularly for the best actor Oscar. Now, to be fair, I've never seen any of the other performances that were nominated for best actor that year (nor, unsurprisingly, the other foreign language film nominees) so I'm not prepared to make a value judgment, but people seem to regard that win particularly as a joke at best and an outrage at worst. So I would just like to take a moment to get down on my knees and profess my undying love for Roberto Benigni and Life Is Beautiful. ( Read more... ) Current Mood: enthused (Comment on this)
Thursday, February 5th, 2009
8:55 pm	The Tales of Beedle the Bard Hmm, I'm doing kind of a lot of posts in a row, but since I've got some time I might as well. And since I'm done with school now I have more time to read for pleasure and to write middlingly scholarly critiques of said pleasure reads. I recently purchased the Tales of Beedle the Bard with a Christmas gift card. I had seen the Tales themselves before; when Amazon purchased the special edition at auction they transcribed all the tales and published them on the website. However, the commentary by Dumbledore was new, and mostly delightful, although I have to admit that I had mixed feelings about it. On the one hand, I loves me a Dumbledore, but on the other hand, it brought up bad feelings about when she published Quidditch Through the Ages and Fantastic Beasts and Where to Find Them in 2001, and they had introductions by Dumbledore, and since the events of the books concluded in 1997 or '98, I took this to mean that Dumbledore was one of the characters who was going to survive, which was one of the reasons why his death came as such a great shock. Of course, there was never any indication WHEN exactly Dumbledore presumably wrote those introductions; I leapt to a conclusion and was well punished for it. That said, I am glad that Ms. Rowling did in fact provide an explanation for this book, and after all, I certainly wouldn't have wanted her to have included author's notes in the other volumes giving away that Dumbledore was doomed. I understand why Ms. Rowling doesn't necessarily want to stay in the Harry Potter universe for the rest of her writing career, but if she did wish to do so I think there's almost infinite scope for her to continue to develop it. For example, twice she's mentioned Hairy Snout, Human Heart, "a heartrending account of one man's struggle with lycanthropy"...and if she wanted to write it, there would probably be a market for it. I'd buy it. Also, I'd be immensely interested in reading more about the Wizarding Academy for the Dramatic Arts, although I suppose such a novel might be prone to becoming melodramatic (almost certainly, now that I really think about it). ( As to the Tales themselves (with spoilers) ) Speaking for myself, as long as Ms. Rowling wishes to stay in the Harry Potter universe, I'll be willing to follow her, but I'll also follow her anywhere else. Current Mood: geeky (1 Comment |Comment on this)
8:42 pm	Hey, I just thought of another showtune into which I can work Obama's name! "Maria" from West Side Story: "Obama, my president's name is Obama. And suddenly that [...] will never be the same to me..." Now, you could just use "name" in that space that I left as it is in the original song, but I'm trying to think of a one-syllable word that can refer to the office of the presidency, and I'm drawing a blank. Any ideas? Current Mood: inspired Current Music: My song will be for Obama for the next 8 years (1 Comment |Comment on this)
Sunday, January 25th, 2009
1:49 am	Virtuosity I hope you'll indulge me as I continue to work through my grief. My counselor told me last fall that grief never really goes away, although it (usually) gets easier to bear after a while. Now that I think about it, you wouldn't really want it to go away entirely, because that would mean forgetting about the people you lost. So as you can probably imagine, Heath Ledger is much on my mind lately, what with the anniversary and the movie awards season and the year-end retrospectives on people who have died in 2008. ( Read more... ) Current Mood: momentarily overwhelmed
Tuesday, January 20th, 2009
8:13 pm	Free at last, free at last! Thank God Almighty, we are free at last! Free of President George W. Bush, that is. From now on, and forever, he is Ex-President George W. Bush. That is how I prefer to think of him, although it's probably more respectful to say "Former President Bush", but the "ex" makes such a stronger statement (also it would be a handy way to differentiate him from his father). Oh, what a joyous day this is! Although I knew intellectually this day would come eventually, part of me was afraid that it would never come. This would, of course, have been a joyous day no matter who was Ex-President Bush's successor, but the fact that it is Barack Obama, a man whom I truly respect and admire, makes this a day of unparalleled delight. Except that "delight" is a bit too capricious an adjective, because there is a tremendous solemnity to this joyous and wondrous occasion. I recorded the proceedings from NBC, for no particular reason other than that's the channel I happened to be tuned to; all the networks carried it, so it didn't really matter. But because I picked NBC I was able to hear my fellow South Dakotan Tom Brokaw's commentary on the occasion (Tom Brokaw being another man I truly respect and admire). He and his fellow commentators were talking about the civil rights leaders that paved the way for Barack Obama to be the president, and Tom Brokaw said, "I don't think we can pay enough tribute to Dr. King," and I completely agree. Sometimes as I face the various personal struggles of my own life, in my moments of weakness I wonder if it's possible for Good to overcome Evil without compromising itself, and therefore if it's possible for Good to triumph at all, because if Good triumphs by compromising itself, then it's no longer Good. And in these moments of weakness I remember Martin Luther King Jr., and Mohandas Ghandi and all those who stood by them and worked with them and I remember that it's possible to fight without resorting to violence and that Good can overcome Evil without compromising its integrity. At this moment, friends and strangers, anything seems possible; sometimes that is a terrifying thought, but at this moment it is exhilarating. Current Mood: hopeful (Comment on this)
Monday, January 19th, 2009
8:02 pm	From Dark Ages to Brighter Tomorrows My, what a grandiose post title! I'd like to say something really profound to match it, on this the eve of Barack Obama's inauguration, on this the last night of George W. Bush's presidency EVER! All I can think to say, however, is that I think it's tremendously fitting that Barack Obama's inauguration is coming on the heels of Martin Luther King, Jr. Day. You know, I'm sure I knew at some point that Dr. King was only 39 years old when he was killed, but it's only at this moment that I fully realize how young he was, how much he accomplished in such a short span of time, and how much more he could have accomplished had he lived. Perhaps he could have been president himself, although that seems unlikely because, even putting aside the whole race issue, he was an Idealist and according to David Keirsey, who wrote a book analyzing the temperaments of all the presidents, there has never been an Idealist president, and he briefly explains why he thinks there probably will never be one in this excerpt. He and his other temperament analysts conclude that Barack Obama is a Rational, and I'm sure that they're right because as far as I can tell he does seem to have the strategic intellect, but he also talks a lot about idealism and he seems to share some values with us Idealists, like altruism and authenticity. In fact, the more I think about it, the more perfect he seems for the presidency in the current times: visionary enough to see the potential for a better future and pragmatic enough to conceive and actually implement plans to achieve it. Over the course of the last election I've had difficulty articulating why Barack Obama appeals to me so, because so much of it are things that I've picked up intuitively, which are very hard to put into words, especially if you're trying to make an argument to persuade those who are skeptical, if not outright hostile, to your viewpoint. But I think now I can at least express my intuitive knowledge, even though it will still necessarily be in very abstract terms. First of all, putting aside for the moment all question of politics and ideology and believe, I get a sense from Barack Obama that I haven't gotten from the last two presidents and indeed get from very few politicians in general, which is that Obama is motivated by a genuine desire to help people and improve the country, whereas with most politicians in general and particularly with counting-down-the-hours-still-President Bush and Bill Clinton, the sense that I got was that their first priority was to do whatever they thought was going to benefit them, and only after that concern themselves with whether or not it was the best thing to do for the country. I get that sense from both Bill and Hillary Clinton, by the way, and I believe that that's the main reason that their marriage survives; whether their attachment is purely pragmatic at this point or whether there's some emotional attachment I couldn't say, and it's really none of my business, but regardless of what they feel, they need each other in order to survive politically. Anyway, the point I was trying to make it that, even if I don't agree with Barack Obama on some things, I trust him to do whatever he sincerely believes is best for the country. Which brings me to my second and slightly less abstract point: even when I disagree with Barack Obama about certain issues or what have you, I can understand why he takes the position that he does. There's an internal logic to his value system; therefore I am able to respectfully disagree. Whereas with counting-down-the-hours-still-President Bush it's exactly the opposite: even when I agree with him, his reasoning makes no sense; even when it seems to make sense, it makes no sense within the larger context of his ideology. Anyway, I would really love to watch the inauguration tomorrow, but unfortunately I have to work, so I'll only be able to watch a little bit of it over my lunch break (and that only if they have the TV tuned to the right channel, but most of the networks will be covering it so chances are pretty good that it will be on). ( In which I am a forgetful neo-Luddite and digress about figure skating ) (Comment on this)
Sunday, January 11th, 2009
10:31 pm	Golden Globes You know, last year I didn't put the results behind a cut, and maybe I should have. But then, maybe anyone who actually cares was either also watching or looked up the results already. I don't have a lot to say, not having seen many movies or watched much TV this past year. One thing that I learned from watching this particular broadcast is that a five-second delay is not enough time to blur out obscene gestures, which is interesting to know. I wonder how much time they would need for that; perhaps we'll find out. I kind of hope not. But anyway, there are three results that I want to comment briefly about: ( I will cut it just in case anyone hasn't seen the results yet and wants to be surprised ) (Comment on this)
Wednesday, December 3rd, 2008
9:35 pm	Archangel Quiz So there's a meme going around about the Belief-O-Matic Quiz, which I don't want to do because the questions are so very vague. But then they had another quiz which was the Which Archangel Are You? Quiz. This was intriguing to me because I've been taking a seminar on John Milton, and most of it has been studying Paradise Lost, in which two of the four archangels are major characters. Well, my result on the quiz was Raphael, which made me happy, because he's pretty much my favorite character in Paradise Lost, and because one of my dearest friends is named Raphael, so I feel connected to the name, at any rate. Current Mood: angelic? (5 Comments |Comment on this)
Friday, November 28th, 2008
9:36 pm	Star Trek Voyager parody Someone finally had the sense to free it from its original MST3k context and post it on YouTube as a stand-alone. Huzzah! It features Mike Nelson in drag as Captain Janeway...and he's pretty convincing, actually. Watch. Enjoy. That's an order! I'm kidding, but seriously, it's really funny and I think most of you will enjoy it. Current Mood: enthralled (Comment on this)
Monday, November 24th, 2008
9:00 pm	Well, so I did go see Twilight after all... You see, I was feeling hormonally unbalanced and overly emotional, so I thought getting out of the house and seeing a teen-angst movie would help. And it did. I did enjoy the movie, though not necessarily in the way the filmmakers intended. And yet, as it was ending and I was leaving the theater, I felt kind of ashamed for having spent money on it (although it was a matinee, so I didn't pay full price for it), and kind of nervous that I might run into someone I know and feel the need to explain myself, but that didn't happen so it's fine. Anyway, as to the film itself...as I expected, it is prime Rifftrax fodder. Example: BELLA--Let's assume for the sake of argument that I'm not smart. ME--Wow, that's a stretch. There were quite a few places in the movie where I enjoyed a hearty guffaw where no one else seemed to. That said, however, I think the medium of film served the material well as far as making it seem less ridiculous, as did having actual, three-dimensional human beings portraying the various roles. I think that casting Robert Pattinson in the role of Edward was wise, because I found myself liking the character as portrayed by him, whereas I didn't expect to like him at all (due to transference, if nothing else). But he brought something indefinably endearing to the role. I guess somehow through his acting ethos he brought some credibility to the role and to the project--no mean feat, so let's give him credit where credit is due. He's also quite pretty, and I'm not sure why; I wouldn't categorize any of the individual features of his face particularly attractive, and yet put them all together and somehow it works. So yeah, he's definitely the glue that holds this thing together; I was impressed with him, and I will be watching his career with interest. I don't know what else to say, really. It wasn't as unintentionally hilarious as I thought it might be, but certainly presented a lot of raw material for parody. What I needed from it was escapism, and it provided in spades, so I guess from that viewpoint I can recommend it--provisionally. Oh, and because I know it will be of interest to some people, the girl who played Fritzie in Camp was in it, which of course opens up a whole new avenue of parody possibilities. Current Mood: sore (Comment on this)
Thursday, November 20th, 2008
7:32 pm	Maybe I should go see a movie to take my mind off my troubles Apparently Twilight, starring Cedric Diggory and Diet Natalie Portman, is opening tonight at midnight, which sounds really silly when you just say it like that. I'm so depressed I almost want to see it in hopes that it will be so unintentionally hilarious that it will take my mind off my troubles. But on the other hand, it might just be completely stupid and make me more depressed, not to mention 8 to 10 dollars poorer and nervous because I would be surrounded by a crowd of hormone-crazed, angst-ridden teen girls. Mega-Teen-Girl-Squad! I do want to see the movie eventually; I just don't want to pay to see it, because I'm expecting to pay money for the Rifftrax, whenever there is one. I know there will be eventually, and if there isn't I'll make my own version, because without having seen it, I know intuitively that Twilight is the kind of movie just made for Rifftrax. In the interest of full disclosure, I should mention that I haven't read the books either, nor do I intend to. So I suppose I don't really have the right to judge, so I'll try to say this as ingenuously as possible: from what I understand, this girl falls in love with this guy, but he like completely ignores and avoids her and treats her inconsiderately, and she's all hurt, but then it turns out that the reason that he completely ignores her is because he actually loves her too, but he's a vampire and so he stays away from her to protect her from himself. Without making any unfair criticisms, I'm just thankful that the book series didn't exist when I myself was a hormone-crazed, angst-ridden teen girl, because I myself was also in love with someone who completely ignored and avoided me and treated me inconsiderately, but it turns out that he just didn't like me. Had the books existed and had I read them (which is kind of unlikely in the first place because I'm not really into vampires), I probably would have become even more deluded; I probably wouldn't have concluded that he was a vampire (although it would have been good if I did because that would have been a major turn-off), but I probably would have taken it as reason to hope that he really did like me and there was some sort of noble reason why he always ignored and avoided me and treated me badly. Because I did read a book once which was actually quite cute and clever and not remotely similar to Twilight (as near as I can tell) except for the motif of a guy treating a girl really badly because he was secretly in love with her, and maybe if I hadn't read it I would have wised up more quickly. *sigh* That kind of plot just really, really annoys me, because I know the damage it can do. Not to say that people aren't responsible for their own thoughts and feelings and actions, because they are...and yet, books can have a powerful influence, especially if they seem to give us license to believe what we want to believe. Current Mood: it's Coily's army of darkness! (1 Comment |Comment on this)