A Man and a Woman, Indeed

Although he's been directing movies for almost fifty years, I had never heard of Claude Lelouch until the other day, when I rented a movie he made called A Man and a Woman (1966). This exquisite romance was nominated for four Oscars® during the 1966 season and declared Best Foreign Film and Best Screenplay. Not exactly a lightweight.

Much like Michaelangelo Antonioni, Lelouch was a documentary man who found success in art films, although it appears he did not find as much success as good ole Antonioni. Despite having only seen one (1) film of his, I feel comfortable saying that for two reasons:

1. I had never heard of him before the other day and I heard of Antonioni before I uttered my first word (almost).

2. Despite a prolific fifty-year career, he appears to have only made two movies of enduring quality: A Man and a Woman and the 1981 musical Les Uns et Les Autres (aka Boléro). The fact that a 23 year-old Sharon Stone has a bit role in the latter film only piques my curiosity and fear not--it is already on my Netflix queue.

Please do not think I mean to belittle Lelouch's contribution to the world of art, however. Anybody who contributes one exquisite book, painting, poem, photograph, motion picture, building, or sculpture to the global treasure trove can hold their head high in my book.

We should all be so lucky as to be responsible for the crafting of something enduringly beautiful, something strangers the world over can enjoy indefinitely, something that never would have existed without their unique efforts.

In other words, Joseph Heller can rest easy after 38 years of painful (trust me) failure post-Catch-22 and Claude Lelouch certainly has no reason to be ashamed of his cinematic hit ratio.

Just the Facts, Ma'am

Fact: The Colored Bartender in The Palm Beach Story was played by a man who called himself Snowflake.

For this and many other reasons, I find it hard to imagine what it would have been like to be alive in 1942. Others reasons include having to wear a wool suit all the time, hats, hair oil, the everpresent cloud of cigarette smoke, propriety, World War II, racism, and the absence of rock'n'roll.

Only in a truly fucked-up world would a black man rise the ranks of the entertainment industry as a performer named Snowflake, parlay that modest success into the dream role of "bug-eyed black man in a white tuxedo getting shot at by wasted wealthy white hunters on a private train car from New York City to Palm Beach" in one of the biggest comedies of the year, and then have this article written about him in the paper:

Finish Him!

It is no secret that I have been pretty down on Michael Cera post-Arrested Development, with the notable exception of Superbad and the less-notable exception of his French alter-ego in the trailer for Youth in Revolt).

The problem, of course, is that he used to be funny, but is now merely running his shtick into the ground and it depresses me. He is hardly alone here--look what happened to Will Ferrell, Jack Black, and Ben Stiller. Owen Wilson seems to only make dog movies these days. Does the same fate await Zach Galifianakis? Let's hope not.



Anyway, after watching the recently-released trailer for Scott Pilgrim vs. the World this weekend, several questions come to mind:

1. Why is Michael Cera's girlfriend so much larger than he is?
2. Why does she also seem much older than him?
3. Why does she find him remotely attractive?
4. Why is this movie a video game?
5. Was this video game directed by Diablo Cody or Jason Reitman?
6. Or has Edgar Wright managed to perfectly emulate that trying-too-hard, poor-timing, really-unfunny, cheesy, unrealistic-in-a-bad-way style those two hacks have made lucrative careers out of?
7. Will I watch this movie anyway?

_

Ridley Scott Is a Hack

Yes, I have finally said it out loud and, for clarity's sake, I must inform you my tardiness in so doing is most certainly not due to any wavering of opinion glinted by misguided fanboy nostalgia.

I had merely forgotten about him because his movies are so forgettable and he has been so delightfully irrelevant until the recent fusillade of Robin Hood advertisements plaguing my fair city and its otherwise carefree citizens.

Yes, he directed Alien. Yes, he directed Blade Runner. Yes, he directed Thelma & Louise.

I feel the need to point out, however, that he did not write those movies. He did not create those worlds, those stories, or even the characters. Which is not to say he did nothing, as I am well aware of the tasks performed by a director, but directing those movies hardly puts him on the same shelf as Francis Ford Coppola, who at least wrote Apocalypse Now, The Conversation, and Godfather II before deciding to stop making movies that anybody gave a shit about or even the same shelf as two-hit wonder Michael Cimino, who wrote the story for The Deer Hunter and the script for Heaven's Gate before taking a 22-year nap.

Not only that, but I have no special place in my heart for either of the three aforementioned 'seminal' films he directed. They are favorites among many film geeks/historians and feminist theory professors, but they do nothing for me. I have seen them all and never had a desire to see one again.


And so it is no surprise to me that Scott's laughably ill-conceived and wholly-unappealing reworking of the Robin Hood myth was eviscerated today by the fine folks at Movieline.

A selection of gems from their review:

No wonder Russell Crowe, who plays the renowned bandit hero in Scott’s big fat mess of an epic, looks so cranky and numbed-out. Robin Hood isn’t merely misguided, or overly ambitious, or excessively laden with special effects. Its problems are much bigger than that: The picture is simply oppressive in its blandness, a lumbering symbol of everything that’s wrong with big-budget moviemaking these days. Reportedly, Scott may have spent as much as $237 million on this dreary parade float of a movie, but why quibble about the actual amount? The real outrage is that the dollar signs don’t even show.

The picture’s numerous battle sequences are cluttered and imprecise, but worse than that, they’re just plain ugly.

And the story — set in the days before Robin Hood started robbing from the rich and giving to the poor — is all mechanics and no drama. Brian Helgeland’s screenplay (from a story by Helgeland, Ethan Reiff, and Cyrus Voris) is needlessly complicated. The filmmakers obviously think murkiness and unnecessary digressions are the same as depth.

No actor in Robin Hood escapes with his or her dignity intact, with the exception of Eileen Atkins as Eleanor of Aquitaine. [Cate] Blanchett, often a fine and subtle actress, is somnambulant here — she drifts through the movie like a half-awake, half-aware ghost. She also comes off as sexually indifferent to, if not outright repulsed by, Crowe’s Robin. When the two move in for a kiss, their smooching has a perfunctory, “Think of England” quality.

Crowe is playing a quality here — a kind of drab, holier-than-thou dignity — rather than a character, and Scott never calls him on it. He either hasn’t noticed or doesn’t care, but that’s all of a piece with this bungled picture. Scott isn’t a graceful director, and we shouldn’t expect lyricism from him. But any filmmaker telling the Robin Hood story should be able to achieve more than a persistent throb of dullness, which is the best Scott can manage here.

Ouch!

Historically, James Cameron generates a lot of ink for his bloated budgets (think Titanic + Avatar) and uses this free press to feed his bank account until it overdoses, but I think spending $237 million on this inglorious turd (plus over $100 million in marketing costs), will only reward Scott with innumerable mentions alongside Waterworld director Kevin Reynolds (despite the fact that it eventually turned a slim profit), as there is no way in hell Robin Hood is on anybody's wish list this weekend...or ever.

[Incidentally, you will be pleased to know that Waterworld director Kevin Reynolds also directed the previous Robin Hood turd, starring Kevin Costner (which somehow netted $390 million globally, despite sucking). So Scott and Reynolds have even more in common than at first blush! -Ed.]

I would wish you luck this weekend, Mr. Scott, if I did not crave your failure like Cathy craves chocolate.


Why so harsh on the Riddler, you ask?

For your consideration:


"Hmmm...all of my movies have sucked since 1991...what should I do now? No, wait--what would George Lucas do?"

Enter Blade Runner: Director's Cut, Blade Runner: Final Cut, and Blade Runner: This Is Totally the Next-to-Last Cut, I Swear DVD re-issues and not one but TWO Alien prequels.

What else would you expect from a 72-year-old egomaniacal hack?

Seacrest out.

_

They Can't All Be Rocky...

Ladies and gentlemen of the ether, I introduce you to the one, the only--Sage Stallone.

Yes, his father is Sylvester. Yes, his mother is Jon Lovitz. Yes, his father got him into the business.

Curious to know more?

His nickname is Stoney. His middle name is Moonblood. He is friends with Vincent Gallo and Quentin Tarantino. He was born in 1976, seven months before the premiere of Rocky turned his father into an international superstar. He was married to a woman once, until it was annulled less than a year later. He is obsessed with exploitation films.

I feel like I'm writing his match.com profile here!

Ladies? Any takers?

[Legal notice: I get ten percent of both your living allowance and divorce settlement, should you one day take that plunge--GTC]

_

The Next Three-Day Blockbuster Already in the Bag

Seeing as this movie not only stars Jennifer Aniston and Adam Sandler but has already undergone a transformation from Holiday in Hawaii to Pretend Wife to Just Go With It (Oooh, I hate it when they're right...eventually...), I don't have high hopes for this product.

By the way, we can go ahead and call this a product instead of a movie, right? I didn't think I'd hear any objections.

Let's looks at the evidence:

Production budget = $52 million
Advertising budget = $100 million (estimated)
Total budget = $152 million

"Yikes. This movie needs to make some money! Should we make it good or sugar-coat it for the masses?"

"Experience dictates a vote for the sugarcoat, sir."

"Carlson?"

"I'd have to agree. Under those terms, projections indicate $75 million for the four-day weekend, plus foreign take around...$30 million, a 70% drop in second-weekend sales, but still on enough screens to pile up some more B.O, plus a steady stream of rental income to catch the stragglers. I see a profit here, gentlemen."

"Alright--let's do this turd. Get me whoever wrote Valentine's Day on the horn right now. If we can't get him, we'll get that kid that did Lucas in Love. And the guy who directed Zohan. He's killer. Meanwhile, sign every actor and model you can think of who'll sell themselves out for some cash."

- overheard in an imaginary office somewhere

You know Jen is sweatin' this one. She's sweatin' that comparison photo, this sexier, younger version of herself. Do you see the fear in her eyes?

It's a tough life on top.

_

This Ego Best Be Gettin' Checked

And SOON:


I'm surprised she didn't give herself "Special Thanks" while she was at it. Why not, right? I hear the more credits you give yourself, the better your chance is to 'make it' in Hollywood.

"Oh, wow--it says here you were both Casting Director and Casting Coordinator on a 17-minute short film that nobody will ever see or should ever see. That's very impressive--how do you feel about writing/producing/assistant-producing/directing/assistant-directing/craft-servicing/wardrobe-assisting/PAing Spiderman 5? We're really looking for a fresh voice in the series, preferably somebody with a ton of experience doing every job on set and in post-production, since we don't have much of a budget..."

"OMG! That's so perfect! I knew I would make it in Hollywood if I never lost sight of who I am as an artist/handyman/egomaniac. I'll start crocheting a Spiderman costume tonight--I can totally see it in my head and it is going to be beautiful. "

Okay, okay, hold the phone--maybe I'm selling The Swim Team Renaissance woman Amber Crosby too short here. Let's read the synopsis--maybe the movie's awesome, right?

In her early twenties, Mona finds herself living in the tiny town of Belvedere with no direction and nothing to do. Her days consist of long, boring hours gazing out her window at the barren landscape, lying to her mother about how busy her life is, visiting the small market down the road and avoiding eye contact with the three elderly people who run it, Elizabeth, Kelda and Jack Jack, the only other people within miles.

While visiting the market one afternoon Mona overhears the three elderly shop owners arguing about how they have never learned to swim and complaining that there isn't even a suitable body of water anywhere near the town of Belvedere. Speaking to them for the first time, Mona claims that she can teach them and they don't even need a body of water. Using three large bowls, a kitchen floor and a lot of imagination the swim lessons begin. As Elizabeth, Kelda and Jack Jack eagerly follow Mona's every direction they become lithe, agile swimmers, young again in the waters of their minds.

These weekly swim lessons give Mona direction and she, too, is transformed, becoming a strong, purposeful coach. Later in life, when Mona again finds herself without direction, wandering through the empty rooms of her apartment after a painful break-up, the memory of Belvedere comes back to her. She is reminded of her time with Elizabeth, Kelda and Jack Jack and the feeling of swimming without water. Based on the short story by Miranda July, the film reminds us that sometimes it's the things we've forgotten that haven't forgotten us.

Written by George Seamer

Well, I was right--it is very far from awesome. In fact, it sounds even worse than I could have imagined. And I mean that. And I have a great imagination.

And I find it exceedingly odd that Amber Crosby didn't write her own synopsis for imdb--what, that's the only task she's too good for?

What a bitch...

_

As IF There Was a Virgin in 16th-Century Mexico...

It seems frightening, multi-millionaire screenwriter Joe Eszterhas has finally shaken his Showgirls curse and has a new project underway about the Virgin of Guadalupe.

While the story sounds boring beyond belief and the last person I would want to write any movie is a one-trick pony who found Jesus post-throat-cancer, I'll cut him a little slack in light of Flashdance and Basic Instinct.

After all, Paul Verhoeven followed up the Showgirls turd with the fabulous, widely-misunderstood satire Starship Troopers and then knocked it out of the park recently with Black Book--probably the only movie about WWII that I've ever enjoyed (well, besides his 1977 effort, Soldier of Orange).

But I suppose Verhoeven's oeuvre has always been far more diverse than Joey E. I guess we'll just have to hold our breath and see what happens. Start...now!

_

Up for a Laugh?

Who isn't, right?!!!!

Well, then check out the titles of the 164 movies Sasha Grey was in before she got Soderberghed. And don't ask me how I stumbled on this...(when did imdb start listing pornos, btw?)

My six faves:
Filth Cums First 3
Wet Food
Blow Me Sandwich
Flower's Squirt Shower 5
We Suck: POV Tag-Team Suck-Off
Slam-It! In a Young Whore

The Most Intriguing:
Seinfeld: A XXX Parody

_

Dear imdb...

After looking up Neil LaBute's The Shape of Things tonight on imdb.com, and then looking to kill a little time by reading one of the comments at the bottom of the page, I finally got a much-lusted-after window into the everyday lives of the average imdb poster.

For those of you who have not seen the movie, this is all you need to know:

Paul Rudd (34) plays a schlub in college who has trouble talking to girls and doesn't really date. Enter sexy Rachel Weisz (32), who goes after him, slowly changes him, manipulates him, and ends up fucking him over in a super embarrassing, extremely public way (it is, after all, a Neil LaBute movie).

For those of you who might think I'm being insensitive, I haven't attached his user name and I doubt he reads my blog. Although I hope he does; sadly, I need his support and, sadder, he needs my help.

Here goes:

"Okay, could anybody else really relate to the main character in certain ways?

It really touched me on a personal level because, to be brutally honest, if a girl showed enough attention in me I think I would succumb to changing myself if she wanted me to. And obviously the movie presents the idea that this really isn’t a good thing.

I have a pretty good social life and have friends I’m very close to, both male friends and female friends. But I’m now in my freshman year of college and I’ve never had a girlfriend and have only gone out on one date (where the girl said yes at first and later specified we would just go out “as friends”, although I can understand why she said that b/c we didn’t know each other that well at all).

I’m not a complete slob or copy of Adam, though.
I’m very concerned about eating healthy, I actually wear (hopefully) fashionable clothes and try to dress nicely (partially, I realize, as a crutch for my insecurity), and I think I’m at least average looking. I am pretty skinny and I’m insecure about how thin my arms are, and I’m slightly hunched over from scoliosis, but overall I’m not this “Comic Book Guy”-type loser with no style or sense of hygiene.


I’ve had my guy friends tell me I should be more confident when it comes to girls, but they’ve all had girlfriends before. And I truly don’t think they understand where I’m coming from. Even if they made the first move on their g.fs, that’s still positive feedback. I tell them,
I’ve never had a girl - express interest in me before –
– at least, not to my knowledge. Sometimes I wonder if a girl HAS had a crush on me before but hasn’t told me to my face + I’ve never known about it.
But I’ve never had a mutual friend come up to me and say “so-and-so thinks you’re cute and she wants you to ask her out”, and I’ve never been asked out by a girl directly.

I had a really big crush on a girl last year but she was shy and withdrawn and a little icy. I haven’t really developed any big crushes on any girls here at college, but I have been interested in a few whom I don’t know that well. The first two girls here turned down my advances and the last girl said yes, but like I said earlier, she wanted to go to the movies as friends. Still, the fact that I could successfully ask a girl out (and I later found out she said yes b/c she thought I was a really nice guy and fun to hang out with) was a great boost to my self-esteem. But we really didn’t have a “gf-bf” connection so I think we’ll just stay friends, which I’m totally okay + cool with.

I agree with a poster in another thread that girls can be too cruel sometimes, seem to prefer those “super-confident, outgoing” guys (who are often complete jerks/a-holes as well).

I’m sorry but some of us guys are just not outgoing extroverts. It’s just a NATURAL part of our personalities, it’s cruel to expect us to change something that’s fundamentally part of who we are (see Myers-Briggs four personality characteristics, like INFP).
Although part of me really envies cool, laidback, outgoing guys and I wish I could be more like them. And I can understand Adam’s though processes: If only I was better looking or more confident, girls would be interested in me, etc.

Girls need to take the initiative and ask guys out too, luckily society is evolving and this is becoming more commonplace.


But yeah…I’ve received compliments on my personality and my clothes from girls, and I’ve even been flirted with by random chicks a few times, but I’ve never had any direct, positive feedback. I’ve never had a girl, to my knowledge, crush on me or be really interested in me or even “like” like me…maybe they have. But I can’t tell you how crippling it is to a person’s self-esteem and ego to ALWAYS be the ones doing the initiating with very little validation.

I could see myself in Adam’s position and that’s what is kind of scary. Could anyone else relate? I’m only 18, so I truly believe I’ll find someone eventually…I mean, I’ve only asked out girls 4 times, 2 of those times it was on “group dates”. And 1 of those times was kind of a yes!
But yeah, I’m really grateful for this film and play b/c I know I’m not the only one struggling with this self-esteem/need for validation.

If you’ve received validation from other people you may not realize how important it is to those who don’t have that much of it."

Wow. You might not believe this, but I actually posted the same movie review on rottentomatoes! Something about this movie just causes guys like us to pour it out, I guess. We like to vent about how we hate that sexy girls always seem to like guys who are more attractive, more entertaining, more confident, more experienced, and more adventurous than us. It doesn't make any sense! Why do all the sexy, cool girls like all the sexy, cool guys?!?! UGH!!

Okay. Gimme a minute. Sorry--I got a little carried away. Too close to home. Breathe.

My official advice for Forlorn in Fresno:
Lower your standards. Go after the not-so-attractive, super-mousy girls that scatter when they hear a loud noise. Corner one in the library, place a copy of Jane Eyre on her head, and tell her if she can hold it there for 60 seconds you'll give her a dollar. Then kiss her while she's thinking about balancing the book. Then date her until you graduate and marry her in a small ceremony at the local Olive Garden--but make sure you get a table big enough for six! You don't want any of your friends to miss out...


I didn't realize that psychiatrists respond to postings on the imdb page of The Shape of the Things. But, evidently, they do. Here is a less-helpful response to Forlorn in Fresno, posted three days ago, before I could help:

"Wow, rarely do I meet people who are in a situation like I've been.

You're 18, so okay - you'll get things going soon enough. You're aware of your situation, and that's a huge advantage. If I should give you one piece of advice to get something going, it would be to be positive about everything in your life; think positively about yourself and everyone around you, assume that people think positively about you. This will make you more relaxed and less insecure, which is important.

My own story;
I was 22 before I even kissed a girl. And I had the huge advantage of having been a participant in the Danish version of Beauty and the Geek. 4 or 5 months after the first kiss, I lost my virginity in an act of what I would now call 'pitty sex'. Once I had tried it, it got a lot easier, and now, three years later, I'm honestly looking for something that can last my lifetime. So I think that I'm proof that good guys can remain good, even though they improve 'the shape' of themselves ;)

AND: I can really relate to what that other guy said about a 'late bloomer'. They really are the best kind of friends!"

Wow. You really figured it out, buddy. You are one of the lucky ones...

Really? Three years later you "are honestly looking for something that can last a lifetime?" Isn't that what you were looking for in the first place? You're not exactly a reformed ladies man...

It doesn't sound like your time on Denmark's Beauty and the Geek changed you for the better or worse. You lost your virginity because of it, but shit, just because you fucked a girl once--or got fucked is probably a better way of phrasing it--doesn't mean you're any good at it. Or any closer at making it happen again. Or any more confident--or does humiliation as a geek on a national television show, followed by one-off pity sex with a random chick, make you feel better about yourself and more likely to approach a girl you find attractive?

It doesn't. Try eharmony.com instead. That creepy dude invented that site just for you. Go out on as many dates as it takes for a girl to kiss you, then marry her. You'll be happy forever. You won't know the difference.

You're welcome, boys. All in a day's work for the imdb.