Much Ado About Whedon

Movies: Much Ado About Nothing

Joss Whedon's adaptation of Shakespeare's classic comedy is the stuff of minor Hollywood legend. Shot in 12 days at Whedon's own home in Santa Monica, and starring a bunch of Whedon regulars, the film is absolute candy for Whedonites and Shakespeare lovers alike.

Set in modern day, filmed in clean, beautiful black and white, Much Ado About Nothing is the perfect opposite of Baz Luhrmann's frenetic take on Romeo and Juliet. Although the two films are modern adaptation of Shakespeare, Much Ado is dreamy and smooth where R&J is grungy and aggressive.

Both films are great for someone like me--a person who never studied Shakespeare beyond the few plays I was required to read in high school, yet feels an intellectual obligation to be at least somewhat familiar with his oeuvre. It is difficult for me to follow along with any Shakespeare play, especially if I haven't read it or seen an adaptation before. I find these modern film adaptations easier to understand than theatrical productions, if only because I'm able to see the actors' body language and facial expressions up close. So I might miss the meaning of some witty banter--but I still know when to laugh.

Briefly, the plot centers on two couples: the older Beatrice and Benedick, who boldly proclaim their disdain for love and marriage while engaging in a constant (outrageously flirtatious) "merry war" of banter and dismissive insults with one another. The other couple are the young Claudio and Hero, who fall so madly in love with each other they plan to marry immediately. There are multiple conspiracies to bring the couples together and to tear them apart. Leonato, Beatrice's uncle, conspires to bring Benedick and and Beatrice into a "mountain of affection" through some well-placed false gossip. Despite the trickery, it's clear that B & B's love for each other was always there inside them, it just needed a little push to come to surface.

Claudio and Hero, on the other hand, are the victims of the villainous Don John, who puts into place a scenario that fools Claudio into thinking Hero is unfaithful and thus rejecting and humiliating her at the altar. I have to admit that I was severely creeped out by people dressed in modern clothing basically telling Hero she was better off dead than alive and without her virginity. Her own father included! But I liked how things played out in the end, with Hero pretending to die and then "coming back to life" and, like a merciful goddess, giving that dumb fuck Claudio another chance.

By far the best performance in a film filled with excellent acting was Amy Acker's turn as the sharp, irreverent Beatrice. She appears like a fully modern woman, disdainful of love, yet brimming with affection for her cousin Hero and uncle Leonato. Although Benedick accuses her of being a "harpy", she seems anything but: a sly, sarcastic intelligent woman whose only major flaw is her own pride.

Despite the Shakespearean slut-shaming (my friend chided "It was written 600 years ago. I think it he gets a pass"), I found Much Ado About Nothing a charming delight with a few sincerely deep pangs of emotion ("A miracle! Here's our own hands against our hearts." ...le sigh) within a frothy and gorgerously filmed comedy.

4.5 out of 5 stars

Playing with Dolls

Movies: Marwencol

Marwencol might be the most unique documentary I've ever seen. It follows Mark Hogancamp, a middle-aged man who is recovering from an extremely violent attack that took place about five years before this documentary was made. The night of the attack, Hogancamp left a bar and five teenagers who were harassing him followed him, jumped him, and beat him so severely he was in a coma for nine days. Hogancamp lost many of his motor skills and had to relearn how to walk, eat, etc. He also lost many of his memories--including the fact that he used to be a severe alcoholic (after the attack, Mark had no interest in booze).

In the aftermath of the attack, Mark found that since he had limited health coverage and couldn't attend therapy indefinitely, he had to create his own therapies. Before the beating, he was a very skilled artist, but afterward his hands shook too much to draw. Still drawn to art in general, Mark began to collect GI Joes, Barbies, and other dolls and create an alternate world--a Belgian town called "Marwencol"--in his own backyard. He came up with story lines, created very realistic scenes, and photographed them. Marwencol allowed Mark to process the anger and fear the attack left him with. In one story line, Mark's alter-ego, an America GI, is captured by Germans and tortured for information before the female dolls of the town rescue him. He points out that this story line allows him to relive the beating and even "get revenge" in a safe way.

One day, as Mark is taking one of his little jeeps for a walk (to create realistic wear and tear on the tires), he is discovered by a man who offers to do a show of his work in Greenwich Village. Mark, who never thought of himself as an artist, has to decide if he's ready to enter back into the wider community in order to attend the show.

What's fascinating about Marwencol is that it illustrates how our assumptions about people can be upended when we get to know them. To outsiders, Mark Hogancamp might come off as creepy: he flirts with a married neighbor, sleeps with Barbie dolls beside him, takes the dolls for "walks", etc. But when you hear his story, you realize that Mark is remarkably articulate and in-tune with who he is and what he needs in order to recover from his brutal attack. Mark is both a pitiful and an inspiring man. He complains about being lonely and not having a girlfriend for nine years--which is very sad because you completely understand his loneliness. Yet, he also points out that being able to do this kind of art is wonderful since it proves that his attackers didn't take away his imagination. Mark Hogancamp's story reminded me a lot of Harvey Pekar's story in American Splendor. Pekar, another strange, lonely man, also lived an inspiring life through his comic art. Pekar suffered through cancer and used comics as a way to transcend a very painful, scary experience. In the film, he (well, Paul Giamatti, playing him) says "Ordinary life is pretty complex stuff". Indeed, Mark Hogancamp lives a simultaneously ordinary and extraordinary life just as Pekar did.

I love that we get to see all sides of Mark Hogancamp in this film: his anger at the men who attacked him, his vulnerability and anxiety, his creativity, and his happiness in his work and art. I also liked that the film was inspiring, but not sappy or melodramatic. Mark Hogancamp shows how even someone with limited means can use art to find meaning in the absurd and often painful realities of life.

4 out of 5 stars






Mark's alter-ego 

Growing Girl

Movies: Frances Ha

Director Noah Baumbach is the king of movies about adults who can't or won't grow up. From the over-educated, under-motivated group of college friends in Kicking and Screaming to Jeff Daniels' pompous ass of a professor in The Squid and the Whale to Ben Stiller's caustic turn as an immature misanthrope in Greenberg, Baumbach has sharp ear and eye for man-children who think they're better than everyone else even though they can barely feed themselves or make polite conversation.

In his latest project, Frances Ha, Baumbach turns his attention to a women-child this time. However, he seems to have more sympathy for a female Peter Pan than the male ones who typically inhabit his movies. Greta Gerwig's turn as the titular Frances is all at once irritating, embarrassingly awkward, sympathetic, and charming. Frances is 27 (my age!) and is trying to break into a dance company in New York City even though she's not very good at her craft. But she loves life and she loves her best friend, Sophie (Mickey Sumner, daughter of Sting), whom she lives with, spends entire days with, and even sleeps in the same bed with. Sophie and Frances have a true romance between them that one would think nothing could tear asunder.

That is, until Sophie moves out and starts dating "Patch". Frances is understandably chagrined. Sophie is paving her way towards adulthood while Frances is homeless, boyfriendless, and on the verge of being jobless. Worst of all, she's in denial about her situation and seems unable to make any changes. So she passive-aggressively lashes out at Sophie, mocking Patch and criticizing Sophie's choices. The world is about to get a whole lot darker for Frances before she sees a light at the end of the tunnel.

But despite Frances' awkward ways (a scene of her dominating the conversation with petty anecdotes and unfunny jokes at a dinner party with older, chicer friends is absolutely excruciating), we can't help but feel affection for Frances, who often acts like a character on the TV show Girls, but a few years older. Her love for Sophie is so pure and so relatable, that it's very understandable that she feels the world spinning out of control as Sophie and Patch get more serious about each other. And to be fair, Sophie does start ignoring Frances in favor of newer, shinier friends.

But what really redeems Frances in comparison to Baumbach's previous parade of man-children is that she really doesn't think she's better than anyone else. She isn't self-loathing either. She's just un-self-aware, which can be both cute and annoying. But she's not a mean person and she's not arrogant or entitled. Frances is happy with the simple things in life: dancing, cookies, and friendship.

Frances' predicament gets almost hilariously bleak near the end of the movie, but she also gets a couple well-deserved breaks. As in Baumbach's other films, Frances Ha ends on a note of redemption and hope. Perhaps more hope than his previous films. It's a *little* too tied up in a nice bow for my tastes, but it also feels real and sweet. Frances doesn't get everything she wants, but you know that she is slowly making her way to adulthood...if a bit more slowly than her friends.

Frances Ha is a movie that reminds us of that old adage: growing older is required, growing up is optional. And as Frances runs through the streets to David Bowie's "Modern Love", it reminds us that sometimes it's ok to be a little young at heart.

4 out of 5 stars

Movie Round Up

Movies: Rubber, Mud, Kill List


Rubber

You may have heard of Rubber. It's that movie where a tire comes to life and begins killing animals and people telepathically. Oh, and the tire's name is Robert.

You might ask: why a tire? Luckily, the movie answers this question in an opening monologue by one of its characters. Stephen Spinella, playing Lieutenant Chad, addresses the audience and asks why E.T. in the movie E.T. is brown. Why the characters in Love Story fall in love. Why, in The Pianist, the talented main character has to hide from the Nazis when he's clearly such a talented man. The answer to all three questions: No reason.

"No reason" is the thesis of Rubber. It's a movie where absurdity is valued over reason. There is a meta-story to the story. As the Robert-the-psychopathic-tire plot unfolds, a group of people in the desert sit there and watch it, as if they were watching a movie. At one point the film begs the question--if no one is watching, what happens to the characters in the film? Do they just go home? It's kind of like that old brainteaser: if a tree falls in the woods and no one is around to hear it, does it make a sound?

So it's best to see Rubber with an open mind. It's not a horror movie and it's not a comedy, although it has elements of both genres. It's also not a heavily symbolic story with an actual deeper meaning that can be unlocked by going over the clues, like, say, Mulholland Drive. In order to have clues and a deeper meaning, Rubber would have to have reason, and as stated early on in the film, there is no reason. The only message I can extract from this movie is that the audience makes the film and without an audience, a film is nothing. So maybe that's the answer to all the above questions: why is E.T. brown? Why do the characters fall in love? Why does Robert the tire attain sentience and blow up people's heads? For the audience. Whether they understand it or not.

3.5 out of 5 stars


Mud

Mud should be a better movie than it is. Starring Matthew McConaughey as the titular character, Mud had the potential to be a creepy and taut Southern-fried thriller. But it had far too little momentum for that and instead is a slow semi-retelling of The Adventures of Tom Sawyer. In Mud, two young teen boys, Ellis and Neckbone, live on a river somewhere in the South. They regularly explore a nearby island, and one day they discover a motorboat high in the branches of a tree. It turns out that there is a man, who goes by the name of Mud, hiding out there. Mud is on the run from the law, and in exchange for food, he promises to let the boys have the boat when he's done with it. Mud is waiting on Juniper (Reese Witherspoon in a trashy and thankless role), his "true love", to arrive so they can run away together. Mud is basically a poor, Southern Jay Gatsby--waiting on a women he can never really be with. The boys--romantic Ellis in particular--are intrigued by his story and try to help reunite him with Juniper. However, seeing as Mud is a wanted man, helping him escape is not so easy.


I saw this movie at the Alamo Drafthouse, and I have to say that the best part of the experience was the beer that was served to me in my seat. Although Mud is in not really a "bad" film, it's very slow and underwhelming, with surprisingly little at stake. A better movie would have made the character Mud more menacing (or, alternatively, more charming), and make the audience feel wary of him. Instead, we know from the get-go that Mud is a good guy and he's not going to harm these boys. There's no sense of danger or suspicion. For a film about a fugitive trying to get back together with his sexy-trashy girlfriend, Mud sure doesn't have that many thrills. It's not very sexy, it's not very violent, and it's not very profound.

I would recommend skipping Mud and seeing director Jeff Nichols' 2011 film Take Shelter--a truly frightening and thrilling film--instead.

3 out of 5 stars


Kill List

Unlike Mud, Kill List drips with malice and unbearable tension. From the quick cuts in the middle of scenes to the ominous soundtrack that will raise the hair on the back of your neck, you know right away that something is terribly wrong in Kill List.

Jay, a former hitman, has been out of work for 8 months. His wife is growing increasingly angry with him, leading to screaming fights between the two of them and putting the emotional welfare of their son at stake. When Jay's army buddy, Gal, encourages him to take a job putting his killing skills to work for a vast sum of money, Jay reluctantly agrees. As the two men make their way down the hit list, it becomes apparent that Jay is in no way prepared for this job. Suffering some kind of PTSD, Jay's method of killing becomes more and more deranged. There are some truly disgusting scenes of violence in this movie that even got the best of me, and I can generally handle movie violence. It's one of those movies where the violence occurs a little ways off screen and you are praying that the camera won't pan down...and then it pans down. Kill List is not for the faint of heart or stomach.


So, it would seem that this movie is all about a deranged contract killer's descent into madness...except that is isn't. There is something far, far more sinister going on around the periphery and the final 30 minutes is a combination of insanity and fear. And the worst part is there's really no explanation for the events that occur. But it is truly effective as a horror film. It didn't exactly keep me up all night, but I was definitely disturbed by it.

I'm being coy on purpose. If you like horror films--especially ones that use atmosphere, rather than jump scares, to create a sense of dread--see Kill List with as little knowledge about it as possible.

4 out of 5 stars

The "Meh" Gatsby

Movies: The Great Gatsby

What makes a novel "unfilmable"? For me, it's when a novel deals more in ideas than plot, when symbolism figures heavily into the novel, and when the prose is so beautiful, it simply can't be replicated in any meaningful way on the silver screen.

In many ways, Baz Luhrmann is the ideal director for the latest screen adaptation of F. Scott Fitzgerald's The Great Gatsby. Who better to direct a story about the consequences of opulence and extreme fixation than one of the most stylistically opulent directors whose stories invariably focus on intense and fixated love? Yet, ironically, the failures of the film are predictable when one reviews Luhrmann's previous works.

Luhrmann, a director I do like, succeeded in his adaptation of Romeo and Juliet because his style was new and fresh at the time: anachronistic, hyperactive, colorful and fast-paced. And even though the film romanticized what is a very misunderstood plot (two teens commit suicide--it's a tragedy, not a love story for the ages), the youthful intensity of pre-Titanic Leo and post-My So-Called Life Claire made the short-lived romance between the characters burn. Come on. That scene where they kiss in the elevator? My 12 year old self knew is was fucking hot, and my 27 year old self still knows it's hot. Chemistry, man.

Likewise, Luhrmann's Moulin Rouge! also worked. First of all, Luhrmann could go as crazy as he wanted because there was no story that the film was based on. And the setting--turn of the century Paris--was begging for Luhrmann's frenetic style. And once again, the leads had enormous chemistry. Ewan McGregor's optimistic bohemian who is destroyed by the loss of his love and Nicole Kidman's jaded courtesan are as believable as they could be in a film as theatrical and costumey as Mouiln Rouge!

Unfortunately, Luhrmann's style doesn't work with The Great Gatsby. The novel, which can truly be called the (or, at least, "a") Great American Novel, for its heartbreaking take on "The American Dream", is too sincere and too dignified for a sexual, colorful, Jay-Z-filled movie. It's not Luhrmann's fault: the material is so rich that any interpretation is bound to cheapen it.


The actors come off as far too sincere. Leo could play a punk rock/beach bum Romeo, but he can't play Gatsby. If Robert Redford couldn't pull it off, who can? Leo is an intense actor, and roles like Billy in The Departed and Cobb in Inception suit him. But he walks a fine line between searing the screen with his squint and sneer, and falling into a parody of himself, which he does in this film.

I initially liked the idea of casting Tobey Maguire as Nick Carraway--the wide-eyed, somewhat effeminate narrator and observer--but Tobey is just too Tobey to be believed. And Luhrmann gives him a frame story that isn't in the book and comes off as super-cheesy and pointless.

Carey Mulligan pulls off Daisy Buchanan well enough. She captures Daisy's airiness and vulnerability and, perhaps accidentally, avoids too much depth. Which is good, since Daisy is a profoundly shallow character.

The only actor who seemed to be able to accurately and fully realize his character was Joel Edgerton as Tom Buchanan. Edgerton plays Buchanan as a arrogant prick with a secret insecure and frightened side. Buchanan is all swagger when he feels that what's his (i.e. his wife and mistress) is secure. But when something (or someone) threatens to diminish him--either by threatening his privileged place in society, or by stealing his wife--he crumbles into a mess of unfocused anger, and even sentimentality. I thought Edgerton's performance was the deepest one. He managed to make it clear that Buchanan is not remotely a good person, but not exactly a "villain" either.

Other than the acting, the movie was certainly pretty and the soundtrack was bangin'. But all attempts to show what the book is actually about come off as cheesy and shallow. Let's be clear: The Great Gatsby is not a love story. It's about a man who doesn't like himself and his roots, so he creates a story about himself and then lives it, even if he must lie, cheat, or steal to make this dream of himself a reality (he's basically a less asshole, far less talented version of Don Draper in the 20's). And all of this subterfuge is for a woman who doesn't really deserve him anyway: a woman who couldn't love a penniless man if she wanted to. Daisy is a figment of Gatsby's imagination as much as "Jay Gatsby" is.

Additionally, The Great Gatsby is an uncomfortable and even cruel take on "the American Dream"--Gatsby does everything a white, middle-American man is supposed to do: he pulls himself up by his own bootstraps (through bootlegging, ironically!). Yet he can never truly be considered a success because 1) he's new money, and success is measured in this world by how old your money is and how little you had to do (be born) to come into it, and 2) because he achieved his wealth through criminal activity. The Great Gatsby reveals how the game of success in America is rigged. If you are born poor and lowly, you will always be poor and lowly. And if you try to weasel your way in with the truly privileged classes, you're bound to be punished.

The film, of course, doesn't really touch on these themes, instead preferring to present Gatsby and Daisy's romance as TRUE LOVE. It's not--she doesn't even come to Gatsby's funeral. The movie really pounds home the green light at the end of Daisy's dock--the symbol of all Gatsby's hopes and desires, so close yet forever out of reach. Seriously, Luhrmann shows us the green light like, 7 times. We get it. HOPE UNFULFILLED. Attempts to take the material seriously result in over-acting, corniness, and general insincerity.

I can't really say I'm surprised, and, hey, I ain't even mad! It was a decent attempt, but sometimes art can't be re-imagined in another medium. Like Lolita, The Watchmen, and The Scarlet Letter, attempts to bring The Great Gatsby to the big screen are doomed to wither in comparison to the source material.

3 out of 5 stars

Authoritative Voice

Movies: Compliance

The film Compliance is deeply, deeply disturbing--all the more so because it is based on actual events. Now, sometimes when a film claims to be based on true events, the "truth" is often twisted to the benefit of the story. The events that occur in Compliance are practically a play-by-play of what actually happened in reality. And in order to explain the movie to you, I pretty much have to give the entire plot away. If you don't want to be spoiled, I urge you to stop reading and watch Compliance when you're in the mood for a film that will destroy your faith in humanity. Maybe this weekend? :) :)


So, in real life, in April of 2004, a man called a McDonald's in Kentucky pretending to be a police officer. He told the manager on duty that an employee--a young female--had been accused of stealing money from a customer earlier that day. The manager, Donna Summers, took the employee, Louise Ogborn, to the back of the store, and under the direction of "Officer Scott", searched her belongs, strip-searched her, and kept her clothes from her. Ogborn was forced to wear apron while they all waited for the police to arrive. Since Summers had to get back to work, she called her fiance, Walter Nix, to come in and watch Ogborn. For the next two hours, Nix forced Ogborn to perform jumping jacks in the nude, he inserted his fingers into her vagina, he spanked her, and he forced her to perform oral sex on him. Yes, he was told to do all this by the supposed Officer.

When the police got involved in the case, they discovered that similar prank phone calls had occurred dozens of times in 30 states. The investigation lead to the arrest of David Stewart. Stewart was eventually acquitted of all charges due to lack of evidence. (Thanks, Wikipedia!)

In Compliance, director Craig Zobel changes the names, the restaurant (it's called "ChickWich" in the film), and some of the details, but the rest of the story remains the same. As Zobel imagines it, these events occurred within a perfect storm: ChickWich's manager, Sandra, is having a terrible day because an employee didn't close the freezer door the night before, resulting in $1500 of spoiled food. Young employee, Becky (Dreama Walker, of Don't Trust the B--- in Apartment 23 fame), gets on Sandra's nerves as she texts instead of working and acts like a typical sassy teenager. When the call from "Officer Daniels" comes in, the man on the other end sounds authoritative and alternatively professional and a little intimidating. He easily convinces Sandra to search Becky's belongs and, eventually, strip search her. Occasionally, Becky talks to the officer, who seems to know all about her drug addict brother, and uses that information to frighten her even more.

It seems bizarre that no one stops and says "Hey, I think this situation is actually illegal!", but with the stress of the situation and the amazing power an authoritative, white man's voice has over...well, all of us, you can kind of understand how Sandra and everyone involved would allow things to escalate.

The shit really hits the fan when Sandra calls in Van, her fiance, to "guard" Becky while Sandra works out front. Van is portrayed as not a very intelligent man, and although he initially resists the "Officer's" directions to strip Becky, make her bend over, expose herself, etc, he is eventually convinced. These events do not occur when Sandra is in the room and, in fact, when she comes in to check on Becky and Van, the two immediately cover Becky back up and separate. Both of them know that what is occurring is fucked up, but Becky is too frightened and vulnerable to fight back and Van is...I suppose mesmerized at the power he is given over a naked young woman--power authorized by another man's voice and nothing more.

Again, the events are unbelievable to me and yet...they happened. Dozens of times. As did the Milgram Obedience to Authority experiments and the Stanford Prison experiment. The combination of respect for authority figures that is instilled in us from childhood, combined with stress and fear, can make people do horrible things that look insane from the outside, but seem to make complete sense to the person who is doing them. One of the best scenes in Compliance is that last one, in which Sandra is interviewed by a news anchor who asks what she thought when she came in to the storeroom and Becky was still naked. Sandra claims "She was never naked. She was always wearing an apron." When they roll the security tape to show Becky, obviously naked and clearly begging Sandra for help, the camera stays on Sandra's face as shock, horror, and ultimately denial cross over it. In the last lines of the film, she makes awkward small talk with the anchor--choosing not to fully accept her part in the horror.

Some reviewers initially argued that Compliance was exploitative and aimed more to titillate the audience than make them feel empathy for Becky. In my opinion, the film desexualizes the events as much as it can. The stark lighting, the ominous music, and the acting--oh, the glorious acting!--make it clear that THIS IS NOT OK when Van spanks Becky and makes her do other things. While there are definitely elements of the pornographic, this film clearly does not condone the violence that occurs.

As I mentioned before, the acting really makes the film. Ann Dowd gives a wonderful and (mostly) sympathetic performance as Sandra--the middle-aged, schoolmarmish manager. She's a woman who genuinely thinks she is just doing the right thing, although it gets ugly when she claims to be a victim just as Becky was at the end. Dreama Walker is perfect and fearless as Becky. She's plays a perfect 19 year old: one moment she's sassy and owning her youth and attractiveness, the next she's angry and frightened at being accused of stealing. Finally, she is--as the title suggests--completely compliant out of fear and exhaustion. Her eyes just go dead. It's horrifying. Even Bill Camp, who plays the dimwitted, predatory Van, gives a great "ugly" performance. In real life, Walter Nix, who raped Louise Ogborn during the McDonald's prank call, was remorseful and served 5 years in prison. It's amazing to me that this man did these things that were so clearly abusive and awful...and then immediately called his friend and said "I did a bad thing". I mean, I guess it shouldn't be amazing...but to me the whole thing is mind blowing.

Compliance is a rare movie that kept me glued to my seat. Despite the fact that I read a lot about the movie before I saw it, I couldn't tear my eyes away. If the film seems exploitative, it's probably because it's about someone who was exploited. And it's an excellent example of how easily we trust (and/or fear) those who claim to have authority over us--even if they're just a voice on the phone.

4.5 out of 5 stars

All the Movies That's Fit to Print!

Movies: Side Effects, Weekend, Evil Dead


Yo! I've been ignoring this blog for a while and it's time to catch up.


Side Effects

Forgive me if I can't recall all the details of this film since it's been about two months since I've seen it. Supposedly, this is Steven Soderbergh's final film (other than his Liberace biopic for HBO). It's not a bad movie, but it's not really that amazing either. While ostensibly about the negative side effects of anti-depressants, including sleep-walking, Side Effects has more twists than a Chubby Checker single. Some of these twists are creepy and ingenious, and others are, eh, a bit overkill.

It all starts when Emily Taylor (Rooney Mara, of Dragon Tattoo fame), goes to the minimum security prison to pick up her white collar criminal husband, Martin (Channing Tatum), who has just finished serving four years for insider trading. Emily, who has a history of depression, begins to sink back into a funk as she helps her husband adjust to life outside the pen.

When Zoloft doesn't work for Emily, her psychiatrist (Jude Law, in a very strong performance) recommends a new drug, Ablixa (cleverly mimicking the ads for the real life drug Abilify), and that's when the shit hits the fan.

Side Effects clever because you're primed to think that it's a film that exploits the love/hate relationship our society has with medication: we're Americans, so we're loathe to admit we need help, especially mental help. But everyone and their brother seems to be on something--and some people don't think twice about offering a Valium or Adderall to a friend in need. However, Side Effects veers off the path of hand-wringing "social message" movie and into bat-shit crazy town pretty quickly.

3.5 out of 5 stars


Weekend

We were going to watch this film in my queer cinema class, but it got bumped out due to lack of space in the schedule. I went ahead and watched it on my own and I'm glad I did. It made me cry.

Weekend is like a more elegant, gay mumblecore movie. Nothing much happens, but it captures some of the intricacies of life and emotion really well. Two British men, Russell and Glen, meet at a gay bar. Russell takes Glen back to his place and they spend the night. What should have been a one-night stand turns into a deeper connection when the two men decide to hang out again that evening. And then Glen reveals that he's moving to America (Portland, actually!)...for two years.

Weekend is both sad and comforting. It's a familiar situation: you meet someone and connect really well, but they're on vacation, or they're moving soon, or they want to date someone else, or they just fade away. I tend to get very interested in people I meet and I feel sad if I don't get to fully know them well. But as someone who has moved a number of times throughout my life, I am aware than many relationships are temporary and few last for a lifetime. It's not about maintaining every friendship or romance you've ever experienced--it's about learning from the people you've met throughout your life. It's about the journey, you guys!! *sniff*

When Russell meets up with Glen at the train station (which will presumably take him to the airport, since you can't take a train from England to America...), it doesn't feel cliche at all. It feels heartbreaking and hopeful. Glen gives Russell a gift and when he opens it, man, my heart exploded.

Weekend isn't really a queer film--not to me anyway--although Glen and Russell discuss coming out and being gay. It's just a movie about two people who form a brief, yet intense connection...and then move on.

4.5 out of 5 stars


Evil Dead

This "remake" of the original Sam Raimi film is a pretty cut and dried horror movie. 5 friends meet in a dilapidated cabin in the woods at the request of Mia, a recovering heroin addict who wants to use the weekend to kick the habit. She's joined by her brother, her brother's girlfriend, and two college friends. When the friends discover rotting cat corpses and a book bound in human skin in the basement, they decide that the best course of action is to STAY IN THE CABIN, thus securing their fate for being stupid.

The blatant stupidity continues as the bookish friend begins to read from the human-skin book and inadvertently summons a demon who possesses Mia and makes her do a bunch of violent, crazy shit that her friends write off as an attempt to escape the cabin and avoid getting clean.

The violence is pleasantly outrageous--my favorite scene involves a chainsaw--and although some critics have claimed that Evil Dead is a comedy, the only funny parts are when Mia's brother keeps telling everyone "It's ok! It's ok!" even after fountains of blood have spurted and it's very clearly not ok.

Evil Dead is an entertaining movie, but it doesn't really have a gimmick to make it original. After seeing Tucker and Dale Versus Evil and The Cabin in the Woods, I think I'm spoiled for these types of horror movies since they seem very paint by numbers.

3 out of 5 stars