This is hands down the most enjoyable movie I’ve seen this year, laughing from one end to the other; loving the visual style, the terrible puns and the complete lack of self conciousness about it, the sly homages, the visual jokes, the nudge-nudge-wink-wink humour that is a touch old-fashioned while being too racy for the kidlets (it’s ok – they’ve cleverly buried it all in a cloud of innuendo and sight gags). The animation is great and as always, so very impressive considering the work that must go on to produce a mere 3 seconds of film, the artwork is beautiful and nostalgic, and the bunnies! Oh the bunnies! I may have made so many girly squeaks at the sheer cuteness of some scenes.
As the movie begins, Wallace and Gromit are found to be operating a successful pest control business (Anti-Pesto, heh), protecting the village’s prized vegetables from the voracious rabbits in the neighbourhood in the most humane and ingenious ways. However, Wallace’s inventing gets the best of him, and an experiment with a mind-control device, a vegetable-crazy rabbit, and moonlight soon leads to a humungous dangerous beast on the loose. Wallace and Gromit are called to unwittingly track down the monster of their own making in order to allow the biggest social event of the year – the giant vegetable contest – to go ahead at the Tottington estate. Lady Tottington herself is a great believer of Anti-Pesto’s humane rabbit solution, as well as a growing fan of Wallace himself, much to the disgust of her gung-ho fiancé, Victor, a throwback to the mustache twirling villains of old who would rather shoot all the fluffy things instead. All these elements collide in a frantic, clever, funny chase against time and Victor and his desire to hunt, and the were-rabbit’s need to feed.
Sunday, October 16, 2005
Sunday, August 28, 2005
Harry Potter and the Half Blood Prince by J.K. Rowling
Collected thoughts, thematically arranged. Note: Book1= PS, book2=CoS, book3=PoA, book4=GoF, book5=OotP, book6= HBP
Dumbledore
I chose to be spoiled for the end, so I knew his death was coming, but it didn’t dampen my wont to know *how* and the circumstances leading up to it. However, knowing probably did play a part in dampening my emotional reaction to it – I didn’t cry or feel particularly sad – but it’s also because everything from that point on happens so fast, event upon event piling up on each other until you run smack bang into the end: the death, then the frantic chase and fight between Harry and Snape, curses being thrown around everywhere, and everyone else still battling on; then there’s a quick reprieve in the hospital wing knowing that people are mostly ok, apart from Bill; and then it’s the funeral, the break-up between Harry and Ginny, the trio’s resolve to go find the horcruxes, and then “Oh yeah, before you go and save the world there’s a wedding to attend THE END”.
I think, as OotP is one of my favourites and possibly one of the most telling books of the series in terms of the deeper thoughts and motives of the characters and the plot, I was influenced by Harry’s own frustration with Dumbledore in the 5th book, and I carried that into this one. All-knowing as he is presented to be, and as kind and obviously good he’s been written as from the very beginning of the series, I think Rowling’s shown that he can make mistakes (the way he withheld information from Harry in a way that led to his rash and angry actions in OotP), that he’s a master manipulator (all books) and that he plays all his cards too close to his chest – no one knows much more than the other, so that everyone under Dumbledore is forced to rely on him alone in the end – made me doubt him as all-wise and powerful in the end. And so, maybe his death is a key part of his plan, but it could also be a consequence of having made a wrong move in his complex plans and having no one to rely on in the end.
Snape
I’d like to believe he isn’t completely evil; that his actions in this book are a part of the plan Dumbledore worked out with him, a way of convincing Voldemort’s supporters that he is still loyal to the Dark Side while working on the side of good. But I know it’s quite hard to prove conclusively. Certainly chapter 2 of HBP threw me for a loop. I’d always just trusted Dumbledore’s trust in Snape, and having him seemingly and comfortably colluding with Voldemort’s supporters was jarring. I do think the Unbreakable Vow had to be made to keep Bella, who we know to be volatile and dangerous and completely loyal to the Dark side, from stirring things up even more against Snape, when he’s already in a precarious position (if he really is a spy for Dumbledore).
I think by the end of the book that Snape is cracking under the burden of what he has done and still has left to do – keep Draco safe as per the vow (first by killing Dumbledore, then afterwards protecting him from Harry as well as the wrath of Voldemort and his crazy supporters), and carry out whatever plan Dumbledore had in place, and hopefully not get killed by wizards on either side. All the while knowing that killing Dumbledore, the only person who would vouch for him, is killing any hope he has left. In the chase, Harry angrily calls him a coward, which drives Snape crazy – the strain of having sacrificed so much with nothing to show but hatred and a future of hiding, while others are lauded for being obvious ‘heroes’ (such as James, and now Harry).
One of the things I love is that Rowling spent 5 books developing Snape as one of the most complex characters in her canon – looking typically like a villain, acting selfish and jealous and unjust, and yet forcing Harry (and her audience, by extension) to accept that he is good by Dumbledore’s sacred word – and then pulling it all out from under Harry’s (and our) feet by this one action, turning all her good work to dust. It has to be for a reason, and it’s really craftily done.
Harry
Considering that there are ‘his’ books, I have surprisingly little to say about Harry. I was much less affected by him than in OotP, where he was an annoying ball of hurt and teenage angst, but so much more *real* for it. Here, he’s becoming more typically hero-like – developing a sort of patience with his elders, less mopey overall, more confident in his skills – and in that growth he’s become more distant as a character. One of the best scenes in the book though is where he has to force the potion in the cave down Dumbledore’s throat and lie to him at the same time, the whole way. It is so painful and right and terrible and oddly satisfying all at the same time. It’s like Harry finally gets his revenge on Dumbledore for his frustration in OotP and yet it’s an unwanted reverse/revenge scenario because he understands why he must do it despite his reluctance and love for the old man, and I think it shows real bravery and mettle, it makes me really believe that he could WIN in the end, more than his ability to throw Unforgiveable Curses and defeat people in battle could ever.
Voldemort
I like his backstory. I like that his family was so screwed up already – the rotted mad ‘nobility’ of his wizard heritage (abuse, incest) and his careless goodlooking Muggle father tricked by a love potion into producing him – it only seemed right that Rowling go over the top with a gothic explanation of his obsession with purebreds. And I’m glad that we got to see why there was always tension between Dumbledore and Tom, hinted at in CoS, that explains why Dumbledore seems to care, personally, so much about the war against Voldemort. Rowling has said before that she excised a great deal from CoS which was used in HBP, and I think the story of Tom Riddle is what she’s talking about.
There’s also the repeated theme of Harry being so much like Tom, as already started in CoS; at one point in HBP Dumbledore even mentions that Harry may feel pity for Tom, a sense of their kindred backgrounds. I think this is to push that the use of their power for good or evil is a choice – while Harry is bullied at the Dursleys his magic manifests to help him out of bad situations and never for malicious use; Tom uses his to gain power over others and to cause harm – so despite their many similarities, their unhappy childhoods, you can see that Harry constantly chooses to do what is good (though not always what is *right*, which makes a difference, and makes him a lot like James, who we see to be a good person, but we also see in flashbacks that he could be cruel). I think Dumbledore also pushes that this is because of love – James and Lily’s relationship, Lily’s love for Harry as a baby, the love from his friends, etc – while we see that nowhere in Tom’s life does anyone demonstrate, nor offer him, love – definitely not his crazy mum, his horrified father, his disgusting relatives, the people at the orphanage, not even Dumbledore, who offers a kindness and guidance but not love.
Draco
I admit that Draco is one of my favourite characters, underdeveloped as he has been in the past 5 books. I always had a feeling he had a part to play and I’ve been vindicated, yes! He’s a redemptionist’s dream – this idea of half-baked evil in a confused boy that’s just waiting for someone to show him what’s really right and turn him for good. Whether or not this is what Rowling has in store for him, well. Knowing her predilection for twists, he’ll probably have to die for one side or the other to settle whether he is finally shown to be good or bad. (But I hope not.)
What I thought interesting was how, in another flip, Rowling turns Draco’s previous obsession with Harry into Harry’s obsession with Draco. In PoS, they first meet in the robe shop, where neither knows who the other is, and Draco is shown to be a spoilt empty brat BUT he shows no real enmity for Harry, and even seeks solidarity in some way. And when he does know who Harry is, he makes an effort for a alliance with the handshake before the sorting. I think this showed an innocence on Draco’s part – despite being the child of a Death Eater who supported Voldemort, no matter how half-heartedly, he didn’t see a real problem in being on Harry’s side, Harry who partly destroyed Voldemort. Hm. But because of Harry’s public rejection of his friendship, Draco seeks revenge in sport, schoolwork, against Harry’s friends. It’s petty, childish, useless. This is probably why, despite his constant efforts, in books 1-4, it’s often RON who gets most annoyed at what Draco does, not Harry, because Harry tends to have bigger things on his mind and a greater confidence that he is, in fact, better than Draco in everyway.
However, in HBP, Draco’s energies have now been focussed elsewhere. They meet again in the robes shop, Draco is still a brat, but right before that is the chapter two where we have an inkling that, with Narcissa’s worry, Draco is involved in something that’s really quite dangerous, and straight after that we see the scene in Knockturn Alley that eventually culminates in Draco successfully smuggling Death Eaters into Hogwarts, a challenging feat. And on the train, he allows himself a vicious petty moments – smashing Harry’s face in – but that’s it. No more annoying pranks and catcalls, nothing. He spends the whole year on a bigger task, obviously having found out between OotP and HBP that things are more serious than a schoolyard fight but a battle between two sides that involves his parents (who are important in his mind). And so we see that all through HBP, it is HARRY who does the chasing, who tries to find out what Draco is up to, who stalks Draco’s footsteps and constantly dobs him in to no avail.
So on one level he's still a vicious braggart so you can totally see why Harry would suspect him, and on the other hand there's the feeling that he's part of something bigger that he probably can't handle (and, in the end, really can't and needs saving.) I loved the bathroom scene - not for the crying so much as Harry's absolute shock at the severe damage the Sectum sempra spell and his reaction of inaction; it was just so intense and critical.
Relationships
Ah, the book of hormonal explosion. It’s the alleviating humour the book needs against the rising fear and suspicion in the pre-war politics.
I was very ‘eh’ about Harry/Ginny, having never been a fan of the idea, and also because HBP is sorely lacking any scenes to truly explain the attraction. Sure, Harry is still the boy-most-likely, and Ginny has become the single ‘feisty’ girl power character in the series, but the fact that the book never develops their actual period of dating beyond the fact that Harry spends a happy month being part of a couple, never shows true comfortable relationship-y moments with the two of them, shortchanges the dynamics of their pairing.
Ron and Lavendar were very funny in a rom-com way. The use of “Won-Won” and the Christmas gift of relationship bling made me laugh, and it was a good way to delay the seemingly inevitable relationship between Ron and Hermione. Which, of course, made me very happy as a Ron/Hermione fan, but also because they were cute without being gag-worthy, with their ability to still really piss each other off, and Hermione still having a backbone through the whole thing (heheh, “I like really good Quidditch players”) and not becoming soppy and unnaturally girly about it all.
Oh, which brings me to Tonks, a complete waste of a character considering how she seemed pretty cool and not at all interested in Remus in OotP. Ugh. I’m not against the idea of the relationship, just the way it was played out, with a sudden turn-around after the ONE open argument in the hospital, and suddenly they’re holding hands at the funeral, whatever.
On the other hand, Fleur redeemed her seemingly nonsensical and out-of-nowhere relationship with Bill, because she is so funny, and in the end heart-warmingly devoted. “I will be good looking enough for ze two of us!”
Miscellaneous stuff I really liked
- details like the Amortentia spell, with the three smells that you associate with the one you love; it’s cute, evocative, and exactly what I love about Rowling. She’s built this incredibly fun and interesting world that’s separate from the dramatic action plot, and she’s not afraid to flesh it out while keeping the story going.
- Crabbe and Goyle using the Polyjuice to become unobtrusive 1st year GIRLS was so inspired. It never would have occurred to me that they’d a) actually turn themselves into girls for Draco’s sake, and b) be *tiny* little girls.
- The Dobby and Kreacher show is just bluddy good CRACK. I love that Kreacher is unrepentantly evil but he’s caught by the House Elf Code which frustrates him even more, while Dobby is FREE from the code yet follows good (another idea about the freedom of choice?), and the fight they have was so unexpected yet completely satisfying.
- U-No-Poo makes me laugh, every. single. time. Thinking about the jingle is enough to make me crack up. On another note, while I loved the idea of Fred and George becoming great moneymakers, it troubles me to have read theories saying that Fred and George and basically evil by association, as their products can be used for bad – and is used for bad in the end – but they seem indiscriminate in who they sell to for the sake of money; which is an interesting and unsettling argument
- "Mollywobbles!" L.O.V.E. I just adore the Weasleys, and I have a soft spot for Molly in particular.
HBP is one of the better written books in the series, but it still isn’t a favourite because I think I had less of an emotional response to it, unlike OotP and GoF. However, Rowling included a lot more plot and story, kept it going with intrigue and suspense and humour, manage to still flesh out more of her created world, and kept me hanging on for the next book with the new twists and directions, which means it’s still pretty damn good!
Dumbledore
I chose to be spoiled for the end, so I knew his death was coming, but it didn’t dampen my wont to know *how* and the circumstances leading up to it. However, knowing probably did play a part in dampening my emotional reaction to it – I didn’t cry or feel particularly sad – but it’s also because everything from that point on happens so fast, event upon event piling up on each other until you run smack bang into the end: the death, then the frantic chase and fight between Harry and Snape, curses being thrown around everywhere, and everyone else still battling on; then there’s a quick reprieve in the hospital wing knowing that people are mostly ok, apart from Bill; and then it’s the funeral, the break-up between Harry and Ginny, the trio’s resolve to go find the horcruxes, and then “Oh yeah, before you go and save the world there’s a wedding to attend THE END”.
I think, as OotP is one of my favourites and possibly one of the most telling books of the series in terms of the deeper thoughts and motives of the characters and the plot, I was influenced by Harry’s own frustration with Dumbledore in the 5th book, and I carried that into this one. All-knowing as he is presented to be, and as kind and obviously good he’s been written as from the very beginning of the series, I think Rowling’s shown that he can make mistakes (the way he withheld information from Harry in a way that led to his rash and angry actions in OotP), that he’s a master manipulator (all books) and that he plays all his cards too close to his chest – no one knows much more than the other, so that everyone under Dumbledore is forced to rely on him alone in the end – made me doubt him as all-wise and powerful in the end. And so, maybe his death is a key part of his plan, but it could also be a consequence of having made a wrong move in his complex plans and having no one to rely on in the end.
Snape
I’d like to believe he isn’t completely evil; that his actions in this book are a part of the plan Dumbledore worked out with him, a way of convincing Voldemort’s supporters that he is still loyal to the Dark Side while working on the side of good. But I know it’s quite hard to prove conclusively. Certainly chapter 2 of HBP threw me for a loop. I’d always just trusted Dumbledore’s trust in Snape, and having him seemingly and comfortably colluding with Voldemort’s supporters was jarring. I do think the Unbreakable Vow had to be made to keep Bella, who we know to be volatile and dangerous and completely loyal to the Dark side, from stirring things up even more against Snape, when he’s already in a precarious position (if he really is a spy for Dumbledore).
I think by the end of the book that Snape is cracking under the burden of what he has done and still has left to do – keep Draco safe as per the vow (first by killing Dumbledore, then afterwards protecting him from Harry as well as the wrath of Voldemort and his crazy supporters), and carry out whatever plan Dumbledore had in place, and hopefully not get killed by wizards on either side. All the while knowing that killing Dumbledore, the only person who would vouch for him, is killing any hope he has left. In the chase, Harry angrily calls him a coward, which drives Snape crazy – the strain of having sacrificed so much with nothing to show but hatred and a future of hiding, while others are lauded for being obvious ‘heroes’ (such as James, and now Harry).
One of the things I love is that Rowling spent 5 books developing Snape as one of the most complex characters in her canon – looking typically like a villain, acting selfish and jealous and unjust, and yet forcing Harry (and her audience, by extension) to accept that he is good by Dumbledore’s sacred word – and then pulling it all out from under Harry’s (and our) feet by this one action, turning all her good work to dust. It has to be for a reason, and it’s really craftily done.
Harry
Considering that there are ‘his’ books, I have surprisingly little to say about Harry. I was much less affected by him than in OotP, where he was an annoying ball of hurt and teenage angst, but so much more *real* for it. Here, he’s becoming more typically hero-like – developing a sort of patience with his elders, less mopey overall, more confident in his skills – and in that growth he’s become more distant as a character. One of the best scenes in the book though is where he has to force the potion in the cave down Dumbledore’s throat and lie to him at the same time, the whole way. It is so painful and right and terrible and oddly satisfying all at the same time. It’s like Harry finally gets his revenge on Dumbledore for his frustration in OotP and yet it’s an unwanted reverse/revenge scenario because he understands why he must do it despite his reluctance and love for the old man, and I think it shows real bravery and mettle, it makes me really believe that he could WIN in the end, more than his ability to throw Unforgiveable Curses and defeat people in battle could ever.
Voldemort
I like his backstory. I like that his family was so screwed up already – the rotted mad ‘nobility’ of his wizard heritage (abuse, incest) and his careless goodlooking Muggle father tricked by a love potion into producing him – it only seemed right that Rowling go over the top with a gothic explanation of his obsession with purebreds. And I’m glad that we got to see why there was always tension between Dumbledore and Tom, hinted at in CoS, that explains why Dumbledore seems to care, personally, so much about the war against Voldemort. Rowling has said before that she excised a great deal from CoS which was used in HBP, and I think the story of Tom Riddle is what she’s talking about.
There’s also the repeated theme of Harry being so much like Tom, as already started in CoS; at one point in HBP Dumbledore even mentions that Harry may feel pity for Tom, a sense of their kindred backgrounds. I think this is to push that the use of their power for good or evil is a choice – while Harry is bullied at the Dursleys his magic manifests to help him out of bad situations and never for malicious use; Tom uses his to gain power over others and to cause harm – so despite their many similarities, their unhappy childhoods, you can see that Harry constantly chooses to do what is good (though not always what is *right*, which makes a difference, and makes him a lot like James, who we see to be a good person, but we also see in flashbacks that he could be cruel). I think Dumbledore also pushes that this is because of love – James and Lily’s relationship, Lily’s love for Harry as a baby, the love from his friends, etc – while we see that nowhere in Tom’s life does anyone demonstrate, nor offer him, love – definitely not his crazy mum, his horrified father, his disgusting relatives, the people at the orphanage, not even Dumbledore, who offers a kindness and guidance but not love.
Draco
I admit that Draco is one of my favourite characters, underdeveloped as he has been in the past 5 books. I always had a feeling he had a part to play and I’ve been vindicated, yes! He’s a redemptionist’s dream – this idea of half-baked evil in a confused boy that’s just waiting for someone to show him what’s really right and turn him for good. Whether or not this is what Rowling has in store for him, well. Knowing her predilection for twists, he’ll probably have to die for one side or the other to settle whether he is finally shown to be good or bad. (But I hope not.)
What I thought interesting was how, in another flip, Rowling turns Draco’s previous obsession with Harry into Harry’s obsession with Draco. In PoS, they first meet in the robe shop, where neither knows who the other is, and Draco is shown to be a spoilt empty brat BUT he shows no real enmity for Harry, and even seeks solidarity in some way. And when he does know who Harry is, he makes an effort for a alliance with the handshake before the sorting. I think this showed an innocence on Draco’s part – despite being the child of a Death Eater who supported Voldemort, no matter how half-heartedly, he didn’t see a real problem in being on Harry’s side, Harry who partly destroyed Voldemort. Hm. But because of Harry’s public rejection of his friendship, Draco seeks revenge in sport, schoolwork, against Harry’s friends. It’s petty, childish, useless. This is probably why, despite his constant efforts, in books 1-4, it’s often RON who gets most annoyed at what Draco does, not Harry, because Harry tends to have bigger things on his mind and a greater confidence that he is, in fact, better than Draco in everyway.
However, in HBP, Draco’s energies have now been focussed elsewhere. They meet again in the robes shop, Draco is still a brat, but right before that is the chapter two where we have an inkling that, with Narcissa’s worry, Draco is involved in something that’s really quite dangerous, and straight after that we see the scene in Knockturn Alley that eventually culminates in Draco successfully smuggling Death Eaters into Hogwarts, a challenging feat. And on the train, he allows himself a vicious petty moments – smashing Harry’s face in – but that’s it. No more annoying pranks and catcalls, nothing. He spends the whole year on a bigger task, obviously having found out between OotP and HBP that things are more serious than a schoolyard fight but a battle between two sides that involves his parents (who are important in his mind). And so we see that all through HBP, it is HARRY who does the chasing, who tries to find out what Draco is up to, who stalks Draco’s footsteps and constantly dobs him in to no avail.
So on one level he's still a vicious braggart so you can totally see why Harry would suspect him, and on the other hand there's the feeling that he's part of something bigger that he probably can't handle (and, in the end, really can't and needs saving.) I loved the bathroom scene - not for the crying so much as Harry's absolute shock at the severe damage the Sectum sempra spell and his reaction of inaction; it was just so intense and critical.
Relationships
Ah, the book of hormonal explosion. It’s the alleviating humour the book needs against the rising fear and suspicion in the pre-war politics.
I was very ‘eh’ about Harry/Ginny, having never been a fan of the idea, and also because HBP is sorely lacking any scenes to truly explain the attraction. Sure, Harry is still the boy-most-likely, and Ginny has become the single ‘feisty’ girl power character in the series, but the fact that the book never develops their actual period of dating beyond the fact that Harry spends a happy month being part of a couple, never shows true comfortable relationship-y moments with the two of them, shortchanges the dynamics of their pairing.
Ron and Lavendar were very funny in a rom-com way. The use of “Won-Won” and the Christmas gift of relationship bling made me laugh, and it was a good way to delay the seemingly inevitable relationship between Ron and Hermione. Which, of course, made me very happy as a Ron/Hermione fan, but also because they were cute without being gag-worthy, with their ability to still really piss each other off, and Hermione still having a backbone through the whole thing (heheh, “I like really good Quidditch players”) and not becoming soppy and unnaturally girly about it all.
Oh, which brings me to Tonks, a complete waste of a character considering how she seemed pretty cool and not at all interested in Remus in OotP. Ugh. I’m not against the idea of the relationship, just the way it was played out, with a sudden turn-around after the ONE open argument in the hospital, and suddenly they’re holding hands at the funeral, whatever.
On the other hand, Fleur redeemed her seemingly nonsensical and out-of-nowhere relationship with Bill, because she is so funny, and in the end heart-warmingly devoted. “I will be good looking enough for ze two of us!”
Miscellaneous stuff I really liked
- details like the Amortentia spell, with the three smells that you associate with the one you love; it’s cute, evocative, and exactly what I love about Rowling. She’s built this incredibly fun and interesting world that’s separate from the dramatic action plot, and she’s not afraid to flesh it out while keeping the story going.
- Crabbe and Goyle using the Polyjuice to become unobtrusive 1st year GIRLS was so inspired. It never would have occurred to me that they’d a) actually turn themselves into girls for Draco’s sake, and b) be *tiny* little girls.
- The Dobby and Kreacher show is just bluddy good CRACK. I love that Kreacher is unrepentantly evil but he’s caught by the House Elf Code which frustrates him even more, while Dobby is FREE from the code yet follows good (another idea about the freedom of choice?), and the fight they have was so unexpected yet completely satisfying.
- U-No-Poo makes me laugh, every. single. time. Thinking about the jingle is enough to make me crack up. On another note, while I loved the idea of Fred and George becoming great moneymakers, it troubles me to have read theories saying that Fred and George and basically evil by association, as their products can be used for bad – and is used for bad in the end – but they seem indiscriminate in who they sell to for the sake of money; which is an interesting and unsettling argument
- "Mollywobbles!" L.O.V.E. I just adore the Weasleys, and I have a soft spot for Molly in particular.
HBP is one of the better written books in the series, but it still isn’t a favourite because I think I had less of an emotional response to it, unlike OotP and GoF. However, Rowling included a lot more plot and story, kept it going with intrigue and suspense and humour, manage to still flesh out more of her created world, and kept me hanging on for the next book with the new twists and directions, which means it’s still pretty damn good!
Saturday, June 18, 2005
Mysterious Skin (2005; d. Gregg Araki)
When the movie was over, there was silence all around me, a hush unlike the end of a multiplex popcorn film; whether it was from shock, or deep thought, or sadness - or even, as I felt, a mixture of all three - it was an eerie feeling. The end of the movie is as powerful and haunting as the end of the book, something that doesn't leave you instantly as the lights go up but raises emotions and questioning thoughts that last.
The story starts, in the movie as in the book, with Brian Lackey (played as a teen by Brady Corbet) coming to one night, nose bleeding, huddled in the crawlspace beneath the family house, the previous five hours lost in his mind. He is eight years old. Over the same summer, Neil McCormick (played as a teen by Joseph Gordon-Levitt) is seduced by his Little League baseball coach, left in his care by his too young and carefree mother. He is also eight.
The movie then follows the two boys, in fits and starts, over the following ten years in their neighbouring quiet Kansas towns. Neil grows up glib and cruel in his good looks, yearning for the 'love' the coach felt for him but only succeeding in having squalid sex with strange older men, believing only in the control it seems to give him. Brian grows up awkward, asexual, believing that an encounter with aliens explains those missing hours, his nightmares. The momentum of the movie is strange but compelling - even as the story diverges into the different lives the two boys are living, there's the feeling that they are only heading towards each other, as Brian begins to remember Neil as part of those missing hours, the keeper to his missing memories, and searches him out.
It is a very hard movie to watch at times. The actual abuse is not shown, and yet the scenes leading up to Neil's loss of innocence is terrible in its foreboding, as we see the tricks his coach uses to hide his real purpose in befriending the child. Neil in adulthood stumbles his way as a hustler from one trick to another, meeting johns both pitiful and pitiless, and one rape scene is so brutal that, off-screen as it is for most part, I had to close my eyes for its duration.
And yet, it's a darkly funny movie too. Odd as it felt, at times I couldn't stop from seeing the humour and reacting out loud, as choppy waves of laughter crossed the audience. Brian at first searches out another 'alien encounter believer' through a TV show, and their relationship is so gauche that the ridiculous becomes funny, while in turn pathetic and insightful. There are moments too in Neil's life that are crazy enough to be shocking as it is guiltily amusing, such as his Halloween torture of another child.
In the end, it may seem obvious what really happened to Brian in those missing hours, but the truth is more terrible than either boy should have to bear. The power of the reveal is all these things - awful and shocking, as Neil retells in graphic detail what happened that night, that the coach not only abuses boy boys, but makes Neil an unwitting accomplice in Brian's suffering; but also redeeming, as Brian finally erases the fantastical for reality, harsh as it is, as Neil starts to erase the fantasy of the coach as someone who loved him. But it's hard to sit there and take it in, no images but two boys on the cusp of adulthood in age coming to terms with the whole truth, that one person took away their childhood a long time ago.
The ending of the book is one of the most beautifully written passages, and the movie comes close to matching the loveliness in the pathos. It ends, with hope and terrible sadness; Brian cradled by Neil and crying, in the living room where the abuse happened, the strains of Silent Night floating over them as Neil finally comes to understand a kind of tenderness, but also knowing that what binds them is that they will never be able to leave the terrible knowledge of abuse behind.
To think on it, it is an uncomfortable film to enjoy - the way the consequences of the abuse are conveyed are challenging and interesting, the film itself is beautiful and elegant, the acting is really good in many cases (particularly the two male leads), but the brutal intensity of the material scares me too. I want to see it again, and I don't want to see it again either, if that makes sense.
The story starts, in the movie as in the book, with Brian Lackey (played as a teen by Brady Corbet) coming to one night, nose bleeding, huddled in the crawlspace beneath the family house, the previous five hours lost in his mind. He is eight years old. Over the same summer, Neil McCormick (played as a teen by Joseph Gordon-Levitt) is seduced by his Little League baseball coach, left in his care by his too young and carefree mother. He is also eight.
The movie then follows the two boys, in fits and starts, over the following ten years in their neighbouring quiet Kansas towns. Neil grows up glib and cruel in his good looks, yearning for the 'love' the coach felt for him but only succeeding in having squalid sex with strange older men, believing only in the control it seems to give him. Brian grows up awkward, asexual, believing that an encounter with aliens explains those missing hours, his nightmares. The momentum of the movie is strange but compelling - even as the story diverges into the different lives the two boys are living, there's the feeling that they are only heading towards each other, as Brian begins to remember Neil as part of those missing hours, the keeper to his missing memories, and searches him out.
It is a very hard movie to watch at times. The actual abuse is not shown, and yet the scenes leading up to Neil's loss of innocence is terrible in its foreboding, as we see the tricks his coach uses to hide his real purpose in befriending the child. Neil in adulthood stumbles his way as a hustler from one trick to another, meeting johns both pitiful and pitiless, and one rape scene is so brutal that, off-screen as it is for most part, I had to close my eyes for its duration.
And yet, it's a darkly funny movie too. Odd as it felt, at times I couldn't stop from seeing the humour and reacting out loud, as choppy waves of laughter crossed the audience. Brian at first searches out another 'alien encounter believer' through a TV show, and their relationship is so gauche that the ridiculous becomes funny, while in turn pathetic and insightful. There are moments too in Neil's life that are crazy enough to be shocking as it is guiltily amusing, such as his Halloween torture of another child.
In the end, it may seem obvious what really happened to Brian in those missing hours, but the truth is more terrible than either boy should have to bear. The power of the reveal is all these things - awful and shocking, as Neil retells in graphic detail what happened that night, that the coach not only abuses boy boys, but makes Neil an unwitting accomplice in Brian's suffering; but also redeeming, as Brian finally erases the fantastical for reality, harsh as it is, as Neil starts to erase the fantasy of the coach as someone who loved him. But it's hard to sit there and take it in, no images but two boys on the cusp of adulthood in age coming to terms with the whole truth, that one person took away their childhood a long time ago.
The ending of the book is one of the most beautifully written passages, and the movie comes close to matching the loveliness in the pathos. It ends, with hope and terrible sadness; Brian cradled by Neil and crying, in the living room where the abuse happened, the strains of Silent Night floating over them as Neil finally comes to understand a kind of tenderness, but also knowing that what binds them is that they will never be able to leave the terrible knowledge of abuse behind.
To think on it, it is an uncomfortable film to enjoy - the way the consequences of the abuse are conveyed are challenging and interesting, the film itself is beautiful and elegant, the acting is really good in many cases (particularly the two male leads), but the brutal intensity of the material scares me too. I want to see it again, and I don't want to see it again either, if that makes sense.
Wednesday, April 13, 2005
Avril Lavigne - 12 Apr 2005 - Sydney Entertainment Centre
Things you may already know about Avril Lavigne: she is small and often appears rather unhappy or sour in the press; she favours a casual look of t-shirts and cargo pants, coining a new uniform for girls of a certain age; she became famous on the back of some classic pop singles about teen-girl-angst most probably written by the Matrix group and not her; she's the antithesis, or the smart-yet-shallow evolution, of your mid to late 90s female pop star, your Britneys and Jessicas and Mandys.
None of these are necessarily false.
Things I notice about Avril Lavigne within the first five minutes of watching her on stage: her small slender frame; her very blonde and straight hair; the swagger and confidence as she performs her songs, at odds with her quick spoken segues between songs; the pretty smile on her face as she performs; her great voice - husky due to a recent bout of the flu, but strong and in-tune and very clearly live.
We approached this concert with trepidation leading up to tonight, hearing about unsold seats, the hastily discounted tickets, the lack of excitement - and teenagers - around the Ent Cent as we enter the building. There's barely a respectable line for the merchandise, and, worse still, no line for the female toilets, usually a sure sign of a packed house. Poor Avril. It seems that this time around, supporting a strong, more mature second album, she's lost a fair few of the throng that filled the venue for her first tour.
Support band Town Hall Steps ("We were in Melbourne, but we come from this ****ing city!" the lead singer blurts out excitedly after a song) are a solid if not particularly interesting confusion of rock and punk. As my friend put it after the set, "The lead singer thinks he's in Incubus, the guitarist thinks he's in AC/DC, and the keyboard guy thinks he's in Muse".
After a short half-hour break, the house lights dim, and a gothic-classical theme starts up, strobe lights flashing, building an atmosphere for Avril (in a green t-shirt, a red belt, and camoflage 3/4 pants) to stride out on stage to start singing the first track of her first album. She is greeted by cheers - well, cheers from those in the seats, anyway. Those of us on the floor stare in confusion, as we see her lips moving and hear the band, but hear nothing of Avril's voice. For a moment, we think we're going to be at the worst. concert. EVER.
But after a verse and a chorus, the sound kicks in, and the crowd on the floor finally gets to legitimately cheer. The set is only an hour or so long all up, but due to the lack of stage banter, forced or otherwise, the songs move from one to the next rapidly, a great big string of hits along with a cover of American Idiot by Green Day ("My favourite band!" Avril acknowledges) right after current single He Wasn't - a brave move, considering the latter is noticeably a Green Day-lite kind of song - and some lesser known rockier songs from both albums. Avril plays guitar on several songs, accompanies herself on piano for some of the slower songs (complete with a rather anaemic chandelier above the baby grand), and in a fantastic encore, plays the drums while her band sings the Blur hit Song 2.
Losing Grip
Unwanted
My Happy Ending
Mobile
I Always Get What I Want
I'm With You
Things I'll Never Say
Who Knows
Don't Tell Me
Fall to Pieces
He Wasn't
American Idiot
Take Me Away
Forgotten
Together
Tomorrow
Nobody's Home
Sk8er Boi
Song 2
Complicated
With every song, the atmosphere went from lukewarm to happily enthusiastic. She has some of the best sing-a-long songs out there at the moment, and the concert was one nice bask in simple enjoyment in listening to a good singer happily performing without much fuss, letting the music move the crowd.
None of these are necessarily false.
Things I notice about Avril Lavigne within the first five minutes of watching her on stage: her small slender frame; her very blonde and straight hair; the swagger and confidence as she performs her songs, at odds with her quick spoken segues between songs; the pretty smile on her face as she performs; her great voice - husky due to a recent bout of the flu, but strong and in-tune and very clearly live.
We approached this concert with trepidation leading up to tonight, hearing about unsold seats, the hastily discounted tickets, the lack of excitement - and teenagers - around the Ent Cent as we enter the building. There's barely a respectable line for the merchandise, and, worse still, no line for the female toilets, usually a sure sign of a packed house. Poor Avril. It seems that this time around, supporting a strong, more mature second album, she's lost a fair few of the throng that filled the venue for her first tour.
Support band Town Hall Steps ("We were in Melbourne, but we come from this ****ing city!" the lead singer blurts out excitedly after a song) are a solid if not particularly interesting confusion of rock and punk. As my friend put it after the set, "The lead singer thinks he's in Incubus, the guitarist thinks he's in AC/DC, and the keyboard guy thinks he's in Muse".
After a short half-hour break, the house lights dim, and a gothic-classical theme starts up, strobe lights flashing, building an atmosphere for Avril (in a green t-shirt, a red belt, and camoflage 3/4 pants) to stride out on stage to start singing the first track of her first album. She is greeted by cheers - well, cheers from those in the seats, anyway. Those of us on the floor stare in confusion, as we see her lips moving and hear the band, but hear nothing of Avril's voice. For a moment, we think we're going to be at the worst. concert. EVER.
But after a verse and a chorus, the sound kicks in, and the crowd on the floor finally gets to legitimately cheer. The set is only an hour or so long all up, but due to the lack of stage banter, forced or otherwise, the songs move from one to the next rapidly, a great big string of hits along with a cover of American Idiot by Green Day ("My favourite band!" Avril acknowledges) right after current single He Wasn't - a brave move, considering the latter is noticeably a Green Day-lite kind of song - and some lesser known rockier songs from both albums. Avril plays guitar on several songs, accompanies herself on piano for some of the slower songs (complete with a rather anaemic chandelier above the baby grand), and in a fantastic encore, plays the drums while her band sings the Blur hit Song 2.
Losing Grip
Unwanted
My Happy Ending
Mobile
I Always Get What I Want
I'm With You
Things I'll Never Say
Who Knows
Don't Tell Me
Fall to Pieces
He Wasn't
American Idiot
Take Me Away
Forgotten
Together
Tomorrow
Nobody's Home
Sk8er Boi
Song 2
Complicated
With every song, the atmosphere went from lukewarm to happily enthusiastic. She has some of the best sing-a-long songs out there at the moment, and the concert was one nice bask in simple enjoyment in listening to a good singer happily performing without much fuss, letting the music move the crowd.
Sunday, January 9, 2005
The Phantom of the Opera (2004; d. Joel Schumacher)
I was forewarned to go in with low expectation, and I was ready to mock, at least in the privacy of my mind. The movie was enjoyable overall, but it really was very cheesy at some points. The opening scenes - in the now, and in the past - are good, a spectacle of colour and bustle of the stage and off. But in the middle stretch, there's a great deal of exposition by song which really drags, since anyone going to see the movie would most likely be familiar with the musical.
And what of the songs of the musical? There are very few songs anyway, and some hooks do triple-quadruple-quintuple duty as they accomodate different lyrics for many scenes. While I understand the idea of thematic music, it can grate after a while, and eventually I just get the feeling that the composer has just been plain lazy. Some of it works, however - I particularly liked the use of the last line of All I Ask of You as part of the romantic triangle of Christine, Raoul and the Phantom. Singing-wise, the cast is good, no complaints there. Where the music is let down is by the disturbing retention of the 80s-like synthesizer and electric guitar accompaniment in the actual Phantom of the Opera theme. It sounds ridiculous and out of place, especially as the orchestra for most of the other songs sound fine and provides as much oomph and grandeur as needed.
It is quite hard to tell if Emmy Rossum is a very wooden actor with one expression, or does a good job of portraying Christine as a rather simple girl. She never closes her mouth properly either, and doesn't look like she's singing in earlier scenes, but she improves by the end. Raoul's accent swings from the British-norm of musicals to his natural American at odd moments, but it's not too jarring. Gerard Butler is decent as the Phantom, but I think he does end up acting better than he sings. The final scenes of confrontation between the three of them in the basement was quite gripping for me - the force of the emotions between them made me care, even though it was rather cheesy at the same time. The rest of the cast is pretty good - Miranda Richardson is caring and strict and frightened in turn as Madame Giry, Minnie Driver does an over-the-top (and thus, in character) portrayal of Carlotta, and the managers are funny enough (particuarly Simon Callow), if not great singers.
The costumes and set design are amazing. Sure, some of Christine's clothes are suspect (her white lacy nightie/dress that she first meets the Phantom in has dips and splits in very specifically designed places), every girl has bosoms out to *here* because of corsets, and I'm amazed no one died of consumption or pneumonia considering their propensity for going out in the snow in nothing but an open shirt or a shift. But in detail and beauty, it's an intricately designed and coloured movie, splashy and eye-catching.
I enjoyed it, though it is not something you need to see a second time. The second half is better than the first, with more action and and sustained interest, mostly by taking away some of the mystery of the Phantom through the revelation of his backstory, adapted from the book rather than the stage production.
And what of the songs of the musical? There are very few songs anyway, and some hooks do triple-quadruple-quintuple duty as they accomodate different lyrics for many scenes. While I understand the idea of thematic music, it can grate after a while, and eventually I just get the feeling that the composer has just been plain lazy. Some of it works, however - I particularly liked the use of the last line of All I Ask of You as part of the romantic triangle of Christine, Raoul and the Phantom. Singing-wise, the cast is good, no complaints there. Where the music is let down is by the disturbing retention of the 80s-like synthesizer and electric guitar accompaniment in the actual Phantom of the Opera theme. It sounds ridiculous and out of place, especially as the orchestra for most of the other songs sound fine and provides as much oomph and grandeur as needed.
It is quite hard to tell if Emmy Rossum is a very wooden actor with one expression, or does a good job of portraying Christine as a rather simple girl. She never closes her mouth properly either, and doesn't look like she's singing in earlier scenes, but she improves by the end. Raoul's accent swings from the British-norm of musicals to his natural American at odd moments, but it's not too jarring. Gerard Butler is decent as the Phantom, but I think he does end up acting better than he sings. The final scenes of confrontation between the three of them in the basement was quite gripping for me - the force of the emotions between them made me care, even though it was rather cheesy at the same time. The rest of the cast is pretty good - Miranda Richardson is caring and strict and frightened in turn as Madame Giry, Minnie Driver does an over-the-top (and thus, in character) portrayal of Carlotta, and the managers are funny enough (particuarly Simon Callow), if not great singers.
The costumes and set design are amazing. Sure, some of Christine's clothes are suspect (her white lacy nightie/dress that she first meets the Phantom in has dips and splits in very specifically designed places), every girl has bosoms out to *here* because of corsets, and I'm amazed no one died of consumption or pneumonia considering their propensity for going out in the snow in nothing but an open shirt or a shift. But in detail and beauty, it's an intricately designed and coloured movie, splashy and eye-catching.
I enjoyed it, though it is not something you need to see a second time. The second half is better than the first, with more action and and sustained interest, mostly by taking away some of the mystery of the Phantom through the revelation of his backstory, adapted from the book rather than the stage production.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)