Rose

Jul. 10th, 2006 06:32 pm
green_amber: (Default)
(Yes, more thoughts - I've come home early for a plumber who wasn't there!)

That dr who ending, passim )
green_amber: (avatar me)
M. Outlook just talked to me. I swear.

It said "Please type your message in the text box."

My god, it's like living in Twin Peaks. When did this happen?

POTC 2 no spoilers. Meh. Too long. Needs lots of editing. Dominion gave us an Intermission which was quaint, but didn't help. Last half hour or so is dead good though, and can't wait for part 3. And yes, there is something at the end of the (endless) credits (Adele insisted there would be): but it ain't worth waiting for (especially if you need the loo). Great tentacles, as advertised.

God I'm tired!

EDIT: still awake at 3.49 and it is either getting light or has never been dark. Sometimes you remembner how far north Scotland is.
green_amber: (dr who)
Before I fly off to Cambridge for 4 days..

quick comments on Dr Who, Fear Me )

And finally, The Lake House is much better than (most of) its reviews too. It's kind of a filmed romcom version of The Time Travellers Wife, only without the dodgy pedophile overtones of that novel. The alleged romantic chemistry between Sandra Bullock and Keanu Reeves which got the film made (remember them smooching in Speed? well, I only remember The Bus) is non-existent again (actually, both seem keener on the dog) but it honestly doesn't matter very much; this is a genuinely intelligent, European style (well, adapted from a Korean movie by a Spanish director) movie, which takes a rather different look at time travel paradoxes than most movies which invoke the trope - here the key issue is not whether the past can be changed, but how much, how, and, especially, when. My own rather elitist feeling is that the reviewers who said the plot is full of holes, just weren't genre savvy enough to understand it - there *are* holes, but one is minor (the book business) and one is major, but kind of playing an allowable joker card (is the time gap between the parties always exactly two years?). I liked it, a lot, and vaguely expect it, if geeks can get over the few uber-schmaltz moments (the dog playing chess - ick!)to become a minor sleeper genre cult film.
green_amber: (Default)
.. from email conversation..

Reasons why people didn't like Love and Monsters

- it's not Who
- the Doctor (and Rose) wasn't the main character
- it "confounds expectations" (as if that was a bad thing!)
- it's like a soap opera, and that's NOT WHO

I think at root what we're seeing here is the naked faaaan mentality - we want it to look like the Who
we remember, monsters, aliens, no characterisation and no emotional development - that's for GIRLS. There's also a lot of gender and class issues floating around in there - Dr Who is above soap opera, and , god help us all, popular culture references - it's POSH and for BOYS. (oddly enough, exactly the kind of boys who will get the ELO references - which makes the hostility all the oddder.)

I do think anyone who could say it wasn't funny has had a complete sense of humour failure- but this seems to include people like Swisstone, so I'm utterly bemused..

It's CHANGE. Like I always say, nobody likes that :-)
green_amber: (angry hopey)
Well - as comicbook action movies go, it was Ok. really OK. OK plus even. But..

spoilers - only for people who've been reading the X Men since 1981 or earlier.. )
green_amber: (sinatra)
Brick is, indeed, really really wonderful. Go. The sheer effrontery of writing a classic-styled film noir gumshoe detective movie, only set in LA-outer-suburbia - where the sun always shines and the sky is always blue - and where Sam Spade is a teenager in high school, as are the familiar figures of the blonde ice-maiden, the femme fatale, the doublecrossing whore, the local muscle and the local drug kingpin (oh hang on, he's in his late 20s!) And it works. It really works - I'd say it was a cross between Bugsy Malone and Pulp Fiction but that would just so much give you the wrong idea. It's more like a classic episode of Buffy mixed up with all those Bogart movies where the black head of police tells the 'tec that he can't protect him from the Feds much longer and he'd better get off the case(fan-taaastic scene with the black headmaster of the school..). And yet it's NOT just a pastiche - it's got a rawness and a realness of the emotions that I haven't found in an "adult" movie in an awfully long time. Maybe, as in Baz Luhmann's Romeo + Juliet, we've got to get ourselves back to the teenage stage to really feel love and regret and loss. To get over the cynicism, the knowingness, of our grownupness. I wish I could have the exposition of the last fifteen minutes over again abouit five times, though, maybe with a transcript to go.

This boy (the writer/director, not the star, though he's pretty cool too) will, methinks, go far.
green_amber: (sinatra)
Marvellous review of the Dull Vacant Code

"The story of “The Da Vinci Code” goes like this. A dead Frenchman is found laid out on the floor of the Louvre. His final act was to carve a number of bloody markings into his own flesh, indicating, to the expert eye, that he was preparing to roll in fresh herbs and sear himself in olive oil for three minutes on each side..."
green_amber: (me new hair)
Enormous excitement: after about a year, two false deliveries and lots of angst , I have ordered (yet another) new cooker !!!! which might fit the kitchen this time!!!

In still more scintillation, I am now contemplating going to Chavland Matalan and buying a small filing cabinet. Or going for a swim. Or getting a new boiler. Or, inspired by [livejournal.com profile] flickgc and [livejournal.com profile] drplokta, going down the canal to check out my own cygnets. Or even, conceivably, making strawbery mascarpone lo fat philly cheese tart a la Nigel Slater.

To compensate for all this appalling domesticity . I went to see The Da Vinci Code last night too with Best Pal, her husband, and everyone else in Edinburgh it appeared (what else do you do in what appears to be October) - it is AAAAWFUUUUL - as bad as the reviews suggested and not even as funny as I thought it might be. Tom Hanks appears to be maturing into a sort of human-pig hybrid and Amelie whassername is far too thin and has one facial expression of blanket "I ought to be astonished but I can't act"-ness. The "action" goes: suspense-free murder/ inanely easy puzzle that 5 year old could solve/ historical flashback of utter banality/ giant expositional dump /token furrowing of brow by Tom Hanks as music swells for 10 minutes (can you imagine how dull it must have been ACTING it without the music?)/repeat ad sickbagum. It's nice to see Roslyn & the Louvre though :-)The end is bathos of the most extreme form and I cannot CANNOT believe this is the phenomenon everyone and their nasturtiums has been reading on trains: surely EVERYONE's heard of the whole Jesus-had-a-wife-and-child shtick by now? There's one point in the film where Hanks says to Amelie "In the end it's all about what you believe" and I wanted to tear his throat out and say "NO! NO! It isn't! It's about empirical proof or THERE'S NO POINT TO THIS CRAPPY MOVIE AT ALL!!"

And how the fuck do you persuade a murderous bound and gagged assassin to helpfully leap from a moving aeroplane into the trunk of a car anyway?

No, no, I will not get into the plot dysfunctions which came at the rate of about one per five minutes. I also refuse to put in spoiler space: if you need it for this movie you're too sick for my LJ, kid.

I came home and dialled up Elastica's first album on Napster as a kind of antidote or purity of intent. Ah, My Justine!! (What is she doing now?)
green_amber: (Default)
Actually I wasn't bothered enough this week to write one, but then I wondered if everyone had found this ? Good fun in places, (do Cybermen really run on Linux?) and it also gives you a useful password :-)

spoilers I guess, since I'm here )
green_amber: (Default)
So OK, I've re watched Dr Who properly (in case you think I lead a very sad life, well, you're right, but I've also made another fabulous Nigel Slater curry with the left over curry leaves and coconut milk, tidied up, bought a new smartphone *finally*, dragged Andy round clothes shops til his head exploded, and caught up on Green Wing, and so ...)

Well I liked it a lot better when I watched it properly - so much vital plot hole filla that goes whoosh! past you if you don't watch out but it's still a game of two halves.. so in the style of [livejournal.com profile] ninebelow:

spoilers )
green_amber: (Default)
Now I think about, d'you think Moffatt has recently read The Time Traveller's Wife?
green_amber: (the world)
Ok, since this is my curent obsession..

I thought of trying to turn this into a poll/sweepstake but it's just not nuanced enough a format - basically I'm wondering if it's possible at this stage to predict what's going to happen relationship-wise by the end of this series of Dr Who. My personal theory is that at the end of (or possibly 3/4 way through) the series, Mickey will get killed, because of the Doctor making some kind of heroic but recklessly wrong choice, which in true Whedonesque style, will (a) leave Rose properly and conveniently single, opening up future story possibilities, but (b) simultaneously make Rose hate the Doctor, thereby stopping us all saying "get a room, already". Not based on any spoilers, all my own work.. This ties up both with the "Doctor and Rose are way too cocky" theme introduced rather obvious in the first two episodes & highlighted in various spoilers all over the Net, and with the engaging "Doctor always fucks up his travelling companions" theme introduced last week. This also conveniently gives us a sensible reason why Rose would leave the Doctor, if, as I think originaly mooted, Billie Piper is still scheduled to leave the Tardis at end series 2. Alternatively if she stays on, we can have a series of them glowering at each other in mixed hatred and passion. Ooh, yummy.

Aternately, we may be seeing Mickey groomed as the next companion to take over when BP does leave, if she does. I just don't see this one; he isn't popular enough with the audience and it'd take a lot to make him so ; and Rose and the Dctor having a "will they, won't they" thing is kinda fun, but the Doctor and a male youth, m'lud?? Even though there isn't such an age gap with DT playing the part, enough people remember him as Hartnell/Pertwee/whoever (hah) that it's verging on the uncomfortably pedophilic.. plus, finally, I just don't think RTD is that interested (strangely) in writing intense male/male relationships - since his first major work with QAF it's all been M/F - Bob and Rose, the new Jesus and Jude (can't remember the original name of the Eccleston character), Casanova and various femmes, the Doctor and Rose.. (Does this make RTD the gay inverse of a slash writer??)

Alternately alternately we could see a flying intervention by Cpt Jack to make a bid for both the Doctor, Rose and conceivably Mickey in some kind of giant jammy three/foursome. What time did they say Torchwood was going out at night?-)
green_amber: (wolves)
Yeh, I liked this one. Not loved it, but definitely the best yet.

spoilers )
green_amber: (flims pc mac)
Transamerica is a sweet little film, and Felicity Huffman is ded gud (as Flick would say). Acting as a woman, to look like a woman who used to be a man, is a damn good trick to pull off, and she does. Very good make up too , one imagines.

The guy playing her son is also teh hotness (as I don't say); rather reminiscent of Little Leo de Caprio before he grew up and went off -I wonder if this one will last the pace?

Does anyone know if the writer/director is transgendered, or was he just interested in the subject?

The trans coming out party in Dallas - all big hair and guacamole dips - is an absolute hoot. Ignore the comparison on the film posters to Sideways - this is much more funny, with far more engaging characters - more like an Americana version of Priscilla, Queen of the Desert. (But, OK, without the Abba.) I am just a bit tired of fair minded, non-sexist gallant Native American characters (very Kingsolver-esque), but hey, I guess we have a few decades of equally unrepresentative caricatured villainy to get over there first..

Great Line : "Your parents' house was much nicer." "Yes. But it came with my parents."


In other news, I still have a sort of sore weird lump behind my right eye that's been there a few days - it feels like it's right in the eye socket. My optician said she couldn't see anything (this is partly why I finally went) and it might be a bunged up tear duct, 'cept it's the wrong place. Any ideas? It's giving me a bugger of a headache. (I am resisting the urge to claim it's a brain tumour, cos I am Not a Hypochondriac.)
green_amber: (Default)
Eastercon was, by general consensus, rather serious, with Lots of Programme, but it seemed to work pretty well - all the panels I went to were busy, and some, mostly in the Board Room, even steam-room like. There was, no doubt, lots of non-serious stuff out there, but it seemed to be mostly to do with corsets, Cyberdrome or Ian Sorensen, so I didn't make too much effort to find it. (I did see about 20 minutes of Ian's Greatest Hits on the Sunday - which was odd, as they only last five :-) I also missed a lot of Saturday night while being force-fed at my Mum's for Pasech (Jewish chicken dinner with the works - chopped liver, chicken soup, matzoh balls, and salmon patties, raspbery pavlova, mmmm - worth missing communal viewing of Dr Who and most of a fan fund party for, honest, even one where Flick was wearing, or nearly wearing, her new corset .. :-)

Sunday night I'd organised a sentimental pilgrimage back to the Ashoka, the canonical Glasgow Indian restaurant of my youth, with a charming entourage of Geoff Ryman (BSFA Award Winner for Air, huzzah!), Anne Wilson, [livejournal.com profile] andrewducker, [livejournal.com profile] hfnuala and [livejournal.com profile] thishardenedarm, who wasn't at the con but whom I just felt really ought to meet Geoff sometime (and vice versa.) Miraculously, although everyone but me didn't know at least some of the others, a fab time was had (including haggis pakora). Then we swanned back to the Year of the Teledu party, where we drank raspberry vodka and took pictures of ourselves in the dark adorned with glow tubes which make us all look like animated Simon Templars, admired the living dead zombies, and I discovered I'd not lost my mobile after all but only left it at the Ashoka - phew.

So to today, which I spent, it felt like, mostly either moderating or being on panels (what did I do to someone to be on nothing till the Monday of a four day con, and then on two and a half hours of them at a go!!?) leaving me rather knackered. Still, it's wondrous to go to a con that's only an hour's drive from your own home, even if that hour comeing back did include a tortuous encounter with the Glasgow one-way system and a perilous moment on Bath Street when I suddenly realised this road wasn't one-way after all, and yes, cars were coming AT ME.. oops. Maybe I was very knackered, indeed.

Meanwhile, someone offered to write me Tenth Doctor/Spike slash at the con - who was it?!

Quotes worth recalling:

1) Me, on seeing a bevy of beauties bedecked in corsets emerging from a lift : "Where did they come from?"

[livejournal.com profile] swisstone (entranced): "Heaven!"

2) Me describing how my brother is marrying this American women he met on the Internet, and how she recently actually arrived in the UK.

[livejournal.com profile] andrewducker (reading the Independent): "There's an article here on how IKEA originally started as a mail order business."

Me : "Well, at least when she arrived, he didn't have to assemble her."

3) At the Philosophy in SF panel (which was very good indeed, and managed to get in everything from Kant's theory of Pure Reason to superstring theory, and made me determined to buy something (readable, not wearable) by both Justina Robson and Liz Williams) someone opined that it was difficult for us ordinary mortals to imagine things like 4-dimensional objects in 18-dimensional space, and this might similarly make it difficult for us to apprehend the presence of aliens even if we had the technology to detect them. To which, A N Other told the engineer and mathematician joke. (Stop if you've heard this one.)

The engineer complains that he can't visualise the shape of an object in 11-dimensional space.

The mathematician says "Oh that's easy. I just imagine what it would be like in n-dimensional space and then let n=11".

I liked it. I guess this proves, if e're there waa doubt that I really am a geek..



The V for Vendetta panel I moderated seemed to to go well, and I learned an awful lot, mostly from Mike Abbott and various parts of the audience. We expected to diversify fairly quickly into talking about other graphic novels which had dealt with politics, but in fact there was plenty in the text, and particularly the divergence in endings between the graphic novel and the film, to keep a complete panel going. Mike's theory that Evie's torture is not in fact a brainwashing scene (dodgy) but a magical initiation rite (based on Moore's later obsession with magicks) had me really thinking - I hope he does, as suggested, write it up for a fanzine.

Sleeeeepy - will I have a bath next, or just watch Dr Who on vid? I guess I better go ask the cats..
green_amber: (flims pc mac)
V for Vendetta - bloody good I thought, contrary to all previous anti-PR. Then re-read graphic novel (not read since early 80s) and thought changes to plot etc made perfect sense - especially removal of 50s style 1984-style Multivac Big Brother computer-love in favour of distributed Internet style omnisurveillance. Keep meaning to write more on it. Also approve of change of Evie from 16 year old vaguely pedophilic victim to more appositely 20something political appeaser, subsequently transmuted to politicised proto suicide bomber. The ethics (and practical results) of torture remain the weak point - as discussed on many LJs. Also, Stephen Fry is great, but would a gay man with a Koran in his store room really have been so blithe? The LOOK - is absolutely stunning , as you'd expect from the Matrix twins perhaps, but more reminiscent of 70s Brit cop grittiness than twirly kung fu (and thank god for that). No wonder David Lloyd pleased, even if Le Moore isn't. I want to see it again..

Maid in Manhattan - enjoyable chickflick about Republican senator falling for Jennifer Lopez's bodelicious latina maid and being reminded of the rough side of life (him, not her) as a result. Complete rubbish politically, but fun.

Syriana - like someone else just said, pretty much Traffik, only in the Gulf and about oil. Except that Traffik had characters I cared about - even at this distance of time I remeber Michael Douglas's daugher, and the good though corrupt Mexican cop - while Syriana is an OU documentary with better cinematography. I'm glad I saw it but it ain't a Saturday night "movie". Whereas, oddly le George's other recentGood Work, Good Night and Good Luck, *is*. Always the lawyer, I tore my brain apart with trying to keep up with the plot: where IS this country? why didn't the Emir make the good prince his heir? what's Kazakhstan got to do with it? when everyone else I saw it with seemed quite happy to go, Americans bad bad BAD kittens. Details are the hobgoblin of the reviewer's brain.

The Constant Gardener - V and me got this out, bizarrely , on DVD, when it's still playing here in some of the local cinemas. No 3 in my recent canon of Worthy Films (2 X La Gorgeo Georgio, and this). Strange in a way that it's Rachel Weisz who got all the awards - yes, she lights up the screen while she's on it, but really, it's Fiennes who does all the actual acting. Poor old Ralph - ther's no Oscars in being under-stated. Not sure about this one really - I loved the opening, the camerawork, the colours of Africa, the daring of their sudden love affair - but after a while , it's Bad Pharmaceutical Company Plot 1A, hello Erin Brockovich, and NO TWISTS and TOO LONG and TOO SLOW. In the end I had to leave just before the end ,and to be absolutely honest, I didn't care - tho I must ask V if anything unexpected happened..). Along with no more books about Irish childhoods and no more TV dramas about abuse as a child,I really don't want to see any more films about Bad Pharma Companies making Money The Bad Way out of Poor Black People - unless they CAN fill in more plot twists I don't expect..
green_amber: (flims pc mac)
Tescos Online have delivered 10 mins into allotted 2 hr slot, no fuss. I heart them (even if bizarrely, there were no tinned tomatoes due to Delays Caused By Snow. Now is the end of civilisation nigh.).

Today's (other!) Happy Thing was Ladies Who Lunch with [livejournal.com profile] yonmei, [livejournal.com profile] hfnuala and (not actually lunching!) [livejournal.com profile] chillies, which was very pleasant, with lovely food at Urban Angel (oops! whisper salmon risotto, rocket salad and strawberry bakewell tart with home made amaretto ice cream - extremely yummy). We all made plans to Go Back Soon.

And tonight i'm actually going to, unheard-of-ly, Stay In on a Saturday night,cook that leg of lamb, play with the cats and watch the ice dancing final. That sounds absolutely wonderful..

Oh and .. film challenge number no-fucking-idea, Good Night and Good Luck was much much better than I expected, indeed v g indeed. Very much a poster child for the usual liberal causes, freedon of speech and the American way, etc, but not nearly as been-done for all that as I anticipated. David Strathairn takes a tremendous part as McMurrow and the b & w cinematography catches the 50s look quite staggeringly well. I hadn't realised till I got in that the characters were all real, and that the film was integrating real footage of the McCarthy hearings - but the direction and camerawork is such that the join is seamless. There are moments that, deliberately, do jolt you out your seat with their modernity - the much quoted line about how you can't spread freedom abroad if you don't have it at home is one - and I'm impressed to see Clooney sharing writing as well as directing and acting credits. Doen't he know he's just a pretty face?
green_amber: (Default)
Ok I have a theory about this one.

I think he's (Michael Winterbotton, the director) trying to demonstrate that naturalism/narrativism vs postmodernism isn't an on-off, digital, 1 or 0 , choice. That postmodernism, and uber-reality film, are both about recognising that there are shades of reality, multiple texts that are more or less aligned with "reality", shades of us all in "real life" playing mediated roles, not just on/off, reality vs self referentiality/walking through the fourth wall. We've seem that; we've seen Woody Allen walking up to himself and Diane Keaton in the cinema queue in Annie Hall , seen, more recently, Robt Downey Jr talking to the audience in Kiss Kiss Bang Bang, seen it back in the 70s in Howard the Duck. This is something cleverer - I think.

The first 20-30 mins of the film are spent actually filming the novel, sort of. We get graphic depictions, very funny, very baroque, very pseudo-Draughtsman Contract/arch but still essentially naturalistic of the parts of the novel that are leading up to Tristram Shandy's birth.

The rest of the film ptretty much shows us the cast FILMING these parts. (We get a bit more of the novel, but hardly so's you'd notice.) And in these parts, everyone is off camera, free of being actors, but still acting out varying roles. We see Steve Coogan as Coogan-the-star, as loving father and partner, as philanderer, as pleasant star pressing the flesh, as inadequate star being a bastard-cum-schmuck, as deceitful star giving an interview to a journalist he hates. And interestingly, we see Rob Bryden, who at first seems like an unmediatedly, naturalistically, pleasant person (is that really him? how do we know he's any nicer than Steve Coogan, in real life, really?) but who also, throughout the film, imitates Steve-Coogan-as-Alan_Partridge (better than Steve Coogan himself can do it). Significantly, the fade out is Rob and Steve bickering over who can do the better Robert de Niro impression. (Rob, or so it seems..)

Winterbotton is clearly obsessed with filming what seems to be real. His last effort Nine Songs involved filming "real" penetrative sex ("played" by 2 unknown actors) intermixed with "real" rock gigs. The effect of pure realism failed to convince : the film was flat and pointless and no one liked it. The film before that, 24 Hour Party People was also self referential/postmodern and also about real people - the founders of Factory Records, New Order et al - and also starred Steve Coogan, but was much funnier than A Cock and Bull Story - which latter film significantly at one point suggests that it's enough reason to make a film , if it's really really funny, and nothing more.

This film to me teases the audience with not knowing what is real and what is mediated/fiction. Is Coogan really a philandering bastard? Did he really have kinky sex with a girl when he shouldn't have? (Yes, says treacherous memory.)Is he really a reformed father and husband in REAL LIFE? Is Bryden really nicer than him or just a better actor or just the actor who got the part of the nice person? Is this a film of Tristram Shandy at all (because who has read the book and actually knows)? Even the music, stolen from The Draughtsman's Contract, recalls Peter Greenaway's fake 18th century world of uber-ridiculous wigs and cleavages.

Or alternately - maybe it's all just a cock and bull story? A shaggy bull story?

Hmm!
green_amber: (flims pc mac)
Another Neil Jordan encounter with transvestites/transsexuals, the Irish troubles and as an aside, a beautiful black woman. What are you trying to tell us, Neil?? Hmm. Very very good indeed (and, incidentally, a good antidote to Brokeback Mountain for those who maintain that "gay" or at least non-het films made for a mass film audience can only end in tragedy). Yes I did cry (yet again) but as V maintained when talking me into going, this is on the whole a remarkably light and sweet film for such potentially heavy material. I now really would like to know a bit more about the biographicalness or otherwise of the subject hero ([livejournal.com profile] rozk touched on this in her review) and may even have to read the book - zut alors! Oh and the soundtrack, of the forgotten side of 70s trash pop and love anthems, not the well known Abba anthems but Chirpy Chirpy Cheep Cheep and Morris Albert's original Feelings, brought out the longing to be young in this 40something's breast. All this and Wombles - you should go.

EDIT: And why is everything I see at the moment about the 70s huh? All in one week or so, BB Mountain, this, and Life on Mars, which I am, unexpectedly, rather enjoying. I told V, my theory is the people of our age are now in charge of the domainant cultural meme, and we're reliving out teenage years. Strange after all that stuff about the 70s being the decade taste forgot..
green_amber: (sad-cool)
.. is indeed to "the gay cowboys" film - Brokeback Mountain. Which did indeed, make me cry, lots.

It's a very very good film, but not, as we were discussing coming up the road, because it's a "gay" film. It's because it's a relationship film that gives itself room to breathe. It isn't about two people who fall in love while trying to save the world because we need a a romance sub plot, or even a slightly better explored romance evolved over a few rounds of intellectual suppers and bon mots among the literati. That's the kind of falling in love we're used to seeing in Anglo films. It's more like what I remember of the French Eric Rohmer type films films I went to when I was a student. Slow burning love, quiet love, long lasting sad love, inarticulate love, we don't see much of this on film. It works, it convinces, and it's very sad. Show not tell, they said in my scriptwriting class. The script is very good at doing this. The actors are superb and Heath Ledger is wonderful especially.

I kept getting weird flashback echoes of, "can this really be the 60s, not the 1880s? Yes that IS the Vietnam war they're, once or twice, referring to. Yes look she is wearing hot pants. Yes premarital het sex is ok, it seems, so no, we're not in the 50s, really. Yes that is a Lady Di hairdo, it must be the 80s." Yet in the countryside of rural Texas and Wyoming, the lynch mob mentality remains. Was this true? Is anyone out there from Texas who knows? I told V and Va how in 1988 - not so far from the 83 of the film's "climax" - I had indeed stayed in just that kind of trailer housing outside Dallas - it was hot hot hot, no air conditioning, and listless prostitutes surrounding the housing enclave. It was a very strange few days - [livejournal.com profile] catabolism was there - and I honestly couldn't say what the sexual mores were, but the environment rings true.

I didn't even remember it was Ang Lee directing till the credits rolled either. How does a Chinese director get this authentic feel for the 70s in the USA? Here and in The Ice Storm he really nails that all encompassing muddy brownness in house decor and lifestyle. Yet Brokeback Mountain itself, now I think of it, has almost the look of the Chinese fantasy/samurai films we see here, that beauty of crystalline nature. What was this man doing making The Hulk?

I still need a film icon :(

Profile

green_amber: (Default)
green_amber

May 2009

S M T W T F S
     12
3 456789
10111213141516
17181920212223
24252627282930
31      

Syndicate

RSS Atom

Most Popular Tags

Style Credit

Expand Cut Tags

No cut tags
Page generated Jul. 21st, 2017 02:44 pm
Powered by Dreamwidth Studios