Another Manic Monday

Originally posted on December 13, 2023.  Those of you who are paying attention will notice that I already passed this date in my regular review of old posts and making them public again.  It seems I missed a few private posts and will try to clear them up over the next few days – Mat

I just posted my 2010 review. Got partially through a mini-review of Touch of Evil and the Corrections before some weird glitch happened and it was deleted. We’ll see if I write it again…Today I plan to watch The Abyss so keep an eye out for that review in a couple of days.

We spent the weekend bumming around. Amy went to the girls to make Christmas decorations and so I watched 2010 a little earlier than planned. We “rented” Bridget Jones’s Diary as well and watched it last night. Not sure yet if I’ll actually review it.

It snowed a little here. Nothing to write home about. The cars have a thin layer and you can see it in grassy areas of the cities. I swear to you every single car that has a layer of snow on it also has writing in that snow. It’s like there is this whole pack of snow graffiti artists who lie in wait for the first snow and then attack with smiley faces, Santa Clauses, and a wide variety of perversion. Very odd it is.

Just found out Amy only has one class today so I might not get to watch The Abyss as planned. We’ll see how it goes.

2010: The Year We Make Contact (1984)

2010 the year we make contact poster

Editor’s Note:  Early in this blog I decided it would be fun to go through my DVD collection and watch and review every movie I owned. This idea didn’t last long, but you’ll find me talking about it in this (and other) reviews.

Like several movies in my DVD collection, I did not purchase 2010: The Year We Make Contact. It was a movie my folks owned and decided to get rid of. Never being one to turn down a movie, I took it.

I watched 2001 for the first time in college. I had no intention of seeing the sequel because I knew it was not made by Kubrick and felt it would probably be very inferior. Even though my parents gave it to me a couple of years ago, I have had no desire to actually watch it. But since I have vowed to review all the movies in my collection I did my duty this evening. I was mildly surprised, but not at all impressed.

In watching this movie I did my best to remove the idea that this is a sequel out of my head and just tried to enjoy it as a science fiction film. This was increasingly difficult since a great deal of time in this film is spent going back and explaining all of the events in 2001. This is probably my greatest complaint about the film. Where 2001 works not by not giving any answer, 2010 works too hard to give meaning not only to itself but also 2001. Where 2001 is silent, allowing images to tell the story, 2010 fills nearly every moment with noise.

The visuals of 2010 were very well done. I felt the images of the spaceships, planets, and space travel were quite nice. The special effects, in general, were also very nice. The film does get severely dated with its cold war subplot. Americans and Russians working together in space while their political counterparts wage war on the Earth below may have been effective at the time, but today it only seems cheesy.

I have not read the books to 2001 or 2010 so I do not know if their explanation of HAL’s “malfunction” are the same as the movies. I can’t help but feel disappointed with the explanation either way. I have always felt that part of the power of 2001 was how it didn’t answer many of the questions it asked. How there was no explanation of where the monoliths came from, no explanation of what went wrong with HAL, no explanation of what the long sequence at the end meant. It’s as if by not giving us explanations, the viewer has to fill in the gaps. In 2010 we get more answers than we need. Any real explanation of why HAL went bad, no matter how logical, seems to dull the experience of watching 2001. Now again, I haven’t read the books, where I believe those very things are explained. So those who have read the books may not feel the same way, but this is my experience.

In the end, that is the better way, to sum up my feelings about this movie. If you have never read the books, but find 2001 to be an immensely satisfying film experience then 2010 is most likely to be disappointing. However, if you have read the books and have already had much of the meaning behind 2001 explained to you, then you may find more enjoyment in the sequel. Likewise, if you have never seen the art that is 2001, or found it too heady to understand, then 2010 may be an enjoyable piece of science fiction.

Walking

Walk down that lonesome road all by yourself
Don’t turn your head back over your shoulder
And only stop to rest yourself when the silver moon
Is shining high above the trees

–James Taylor

This morning I had a French lesson at Mcdonald’s at 11 am. Or I was supposed to have one. I left my place at about 10:30 which is a bit more than you need to take the tram, but I was hoping to walk most of it, hopping the tram if I saw I was running late. Mcdonald’s is right off the tram track so I normally walk along the tramway to get there. This time I decided to take a shortcut.

From my flat, the tram actually makes a little curve on its way to Mcdonald’s. By my way of thinking I was going to make a straight shot of it, going from one point of the curve to the next without actually taking the longer curve of it. Does that make sense? Think of a circle and realize that the shortest distance from one point to the next on the circle is a straight line, not a curve.

Apparently, the actual curve is a lot less than I imagined it to be and so I wound up walking more parallel with the tram than actually running into it. This comes from hindsight and was unknown to me at the time. I walked, and walked, and walked always believing I could spot the tram tracks just ahead of me. Eventually, I noticed a little garden section of the city that is on the road to Germany. Knowing that McDonalds was not on the way to Germany I decided to turn.

I walked, and walked, and walked and the road ran out. Before me was a section of a field followed by a lot of trees. Mcdonald’s was definitely not in a forest! I managed to find a map at a bus stop, but I could not find any of the streets around me on the map. Again I walked. Did I mention that the temperature was right around 0 degrees Celsius? Freezing is the word.

Back in the city, and not the forest, all the streets look the same. They are all lines with the same type of tree, they all have the same sort of stores and the apartments look identical when you’re lost. I began to just backtrack hoping to get back to something familiar. Finally, after an hour and a half, I saw the tram pass in the distance! I didn’t know what tram it was or where it was located, but I nearly lept knowing it would take me somewhere in my knowledge of Strasbourg. I kept staring at that spot waiting for another tram to pass, hoping I hadn’t hallucinated it the first time. Nope, a second one passed in minutes.

At about 12:20 I made it back to Mcdonald’s where, of course, my tutor was no longer waiting on me. Another 15 minutes and I was back home. After a few e-mails (EVERY call in France costs money, so it’s easier to e-mail) and lots of apologies Ann, my tutor, forgave me. It turns out the student before me had also not shown up. So poor Ann had waited in Mcdonald’s for three hours!

The rest of the day was uneventful. We went to Daniel and Tammy’s and had a good visit. Then we went grocery shopping. Constantly grocery shopping. When you only have a small cart to carry them in, and a small refrigerator to put them in, you are always grocery shopping.

A Little of This, a Little of That

I am already re-editing my 2001 review. That’s quite a movie to get just right.

Not a lot going on today to talk about. In doing a little laundry I discovered I am missing two pair of blue jeans! Because laundry is so expensive, and our inability to do laundry and Daniel and Tammy’s, we have been rather behind on our laundry for many weeks. Our tendency has been to do the necessary items when needed and to throw an odd pair of pants/shirt in with those. We haven’t actually laundered all of our clothes in well over a month!

This being true, I have no idea when my jeans went missing. I could have left them at Daniels or the boys, but my suspicion is somebody swiped them when we did laundry at one laundromat. There is one mat we went to a few times that has a person on duty who supposedly watches the clothes so that you don’t have to stay there.

This person also moves the clothes from the washer to the dryer and folds them when everything is done. All of that and it is actually a little cheaper than most of the do-it-yourself laundromats. However, the last time we went I noticed that the person on duty doesn’t really watch the clothes all that well. In fact, several times that we have come in, there was no one out front at all. So in one of those absences, I suspect someone may have seen my pants and ran with them. Who knows, maybe I’ll find them under the couch!

We are going to see Touch of Evil tonight. It is playing in VO which means it retains the original English soundtrack with French subtitles. I have only seen this film off of cable so I am quite excited to watch it again on the big screen. I’m not sure if it is the original version or the recent “director’s cut.”

Apparently, the studio made a number of changes to Orson Welles’ version of the release. Welles wrote a 58-page memo detailing the changes he wanted to make to the version actually released. The studio paid him no mind. However, in 1998 some folks took the memo and tried to re-edit the film according to that memo. That version is quite a movie. Next week we get to see Casablanca at the same theatre! Cool beans! They actually show quite a few older movies and have some pretty neat “festivals” showing the films of a particular actor or director or theme. Needless to say, I am excited.

2001: A Space Odyssey (1968)

2001 a space odyssey poster

Editors Note:  I have watched this film many times since I wrote this review in December of 2004 and I no longer find it boring at all.  It is one of my all-time favorite films.  I might have to watch it again this weekend 😉

I will not attempt to discuss the meaning of this film or to answer most of the questions it poses. There are plenty of places on the internet that try to do that.

2001 is one of the few films I find absolutely amazing, and that I dread to watch. Like Citizen Kane I find this movie to be technically brilliant, but mostly boring. It was the first or second DVD that I purchased when I bought my player back in 1999. Yet in the interim 5 odd years, I have watched 2001 in its entirety only once or twice. Several times I have started to sit and watch it, but I just can’t get through it all at once. Even for this review, I watched it in sections.

It doesn’t help that the section I enjoy the most (the section involving the mission to Jupiter with HAL) is a good hour into the movie. It’s not that the other sections do not have meaning to me, it’s just that I find them very difficult to get through. The opening sequence “The Dawn of Man” is very well filmed, is vital to understanding the whole movie, and begins to ask some very good questions (does the advent of technology bring us closer to destruction as it also furthers our race?) Yet, I find this section mind-numbingly dull. Upon first viewing it was interesting, but now I know that the monolith is coming, I know that the ape-men discover the use of the bones as tools and this leads to their use as weapons. My knowledge of the action now bores me. I am the type of person who enjoys watching a movie repeatedly. I have a pretty large collection of DVDs and watch many of them often. So knowing the outcome of a scene does not always necessitate my boredom. It is just so with this particular film.

Likewise the next section of the film leading to the discovery of the monolith on the moon I find to be quite boring. It is only when we get to the middle chapter of the movie dealing with the journey to Jupiter and the madness of HAL that I remain interested as a film watcher. This section also happens to be the one I find most technically interesting. I must also admit this is the section with the most dialogue and most action. But I am not ready to say that this is the cause of my enjoyment. Because by most standards there is still not a lot of action or dialogue going on in the film. What I do enjoy is the use of sets to create the space station atmosphere. For example, I love trying to determine how they created the scenes where the astronauts appear to walk upside down or ‘turn’ with the ship? The atmosphere created by the use of the silence of space, the loneliness of the ship, and the remoteness of the all-seeing HAL eye is pitch-perfect. Kubrick builds the tension between the two conscience astronauts and HAL brilliantly. The scene in which HAL reads the astronaut’s lips is still one of my favorites in any film, ever. HAL, though a computer, has been rated as one of the greatest screen villains of all time, and rightly so. He is as calculating as he is cold.

Once this section ends, though we slip back into the brilliant but boring mode of the film. When Dave slips into the wormhole (did anyone call it a wormhole back then?) we are treated to a psychedelic ride of crazy colors and trippy music. But it goes on so long that I wish I did acid or smoked pot to keep me interested. It’s like the whale chapters of Moby Dick, where I have to agree that they are important for the sake of the novel, but I’d rather just skip past them and get on with the story. I believe the parts I find boring in the movie are essential to the film, and in many ways they make it the masterpiece of cinema that it is. This being so doesn’t make me watch it more than once every few years.

The Books Are Coming

I was going to write a long treatise on what I have learned while being in France and the differences in races in culture, but something happened and that’s out the door.

We got our books! We got our books! Amy was very excited about it until we actually got the books home and she opened them. Then she realized this means she has no reason not to study for her Ph.D exams! Yuck. But me, I’m thrilled. Now I have lots of good books to keep me busy when I am not reading something from the library 😉

There were three boxes packed inside a giant shipping bag. Initially, we began dragging the bag down the street, but after a few minutes, Amy decided to run and get the cart we used to buy groceries and whatnot. She removed the bag and it made a makeshift hand cart. Instead of just waiting with this giant bag full of boxes on the side of the road, I decided to keep dragging it.

So here I am this very bundled-up American boy dragging a very large bag full of boxes down the streets of Strasbourg. Let’s just say I got more than a few odd looks. As I dragged the bag it began to rip open so I kept turning it over to a nonripped side. The cardboard corners of the boxes made this terribly loud noise as I walked which drew me even more absurd looks from fellow streetwalkers.

Finally, Amy came with the cart and we got it into the building. The elevator, for some reason, didn’t stop at our floor, number 2, but kept going to floor number 4. Oblivious to this fact we went to where our apartment should have been if we were on the right floor and wondered why the keys weren’t working! Red-faced we realized our error and took the elevator back to the second floor and made it home!

As I look at my books I remember my process of selection back in America. I decided that since I would have plenty of time to read I would send myself many of the big fat books I never get around to reading. So I now have Les Miserables, Of Human Bondage, The Fountainhead, and several other mountainous tomes. To offset these behemoths I then filled the rest of the box with sillier novels like Forrest Gump and Bridget Jones’s Diary.

I haven’t finished watching 2001. I just can’t watch that film in one setting. So my review may be a few days later than initially stated. I’m also realizing there isn’t a chance of me giving an in-depth review of what it all means or of all the techniques used to make the film. There are plenty of other places to get that information anyway. I will probably make more personal observations about the movie and what it means to me. Not that anyone really cares anymore.

Whole Lot of Shaking Going On

Apparently, we had an earthquake Saturday night. It wasn’t bad enough to do any real damage but gave enough shaking to wake most of my friends out of bed and give them a good scare. Amy and I slept right through it. I have to say I was a little disappointed with that.

We now have Christmas plans. Our friend from Penn State has a boyfriend, Paco, who lives in Paris. They are both going to visit Paco’s family in Spain for Christmas and have generously offered to lend us his flat in Paris! Christmas in Paris sounds marvelous to me. It couldn’t have come at a better time either. Amy had just spent Sunday morning a little upset about not having Christmas plans and then like an Angel came Elizabeth with her gift.

I’ll be watching 2001 this afternoon so expect a review in a day or so…

Reviews

Before I do any actual reviewing I wanted to give a little background into why I am reviewing and my general philosophy of reviews. Some of this will repeat what I have posted previously, but hopefully, there is enough new material to not bore anyone.

Now that I have declared that I will be reviewing movies, music, and books I begin to wonder why want to do it. Generally, reviews are written when an art form has recently been released for general consumption. They are, in fact, designed to inform potential consumers of whether or not that particular art form is good enough to be consumed. Unfortunately, I am in France and rather poor, and thus cannot review newly released material. I do not have the cash to buy new CDs, American movies are generally released weeks to months after their American release dates, and I never did buy newly released books. This means the material I will be reviewing will be outdated. This begs the question of why am I bothering to review these materials and why should you, as a reader, care?

To answer the first question I respond that the answers are largely personal. With plenty of time off, I need something productive to occupy my time. By actively watching, reading, and listening to various art forms I am giving myself something to that seemingly does not waste my time. To ingest these mediums in a way that I must review them to an audience means I cannot merely allow them to play in the background while I lounge in my pithiness. Likewise, I have always had a minor dream of writing in some professional capacity. Writing reviews will help me sharpen my craft and allow me to see if I have any ability that could credibly be moved into the realm of professional writing. Likewise, if I ever do decide to try to be a professional reviewer I will have a portfolio of sorts to stand on.

Why should you, as a reader, care? Frankly, you don’t have to. Personally, I find that I often seek out reviews of movies, books, and music that I have recently consumed. I enjoy reading the opinions of other people and comparing them to my own personal views. Sometimes it is interesting to see if another soul found the same meaning in the same moments, or if they saw something that I may have missed. In time I will hopefully have a large body of work into which readers may delve to see how I viewed certain material. Albeit if I actually do create a large body of work I will have to find a better way to organize it than this blogger does.

In general, reviewers have had to have journalistic integrity. That is to say, they were held responsible for reviewing the reviewed material in an objective way. A journalist is bound to report the facts, to reveal the actions and events as they occurred without subjective data, and without relaying personal feelings and ideas into the report (I will not comment on whether or not this actually happens, but that is the journalistic ideal). Art forms are in large part a subjective medium. There are no yardsticks to measure, quantitatively, an actor’s performance. There are no measuring cups to qualify the use of lighting in a film. Yet a reviewer was devised to do his/her best to objectively review the material.

The new internet reviewers scoff at objectivity and revel in their subjective reviewing methods. They believe that since it is impossible to be wholly objective while reviewing an art form it is best to allow the reader to understand their subjective stances. They, therefore, allow the reader to know of any preconceived notions they had before they consumed the art. For example, for over a decade, fans hoped, dreamed, and prayed for the Star Wars prequels to be released. When The Phantom Menace finally was released there was no way it could have not been disappointing (that in fact, it was not very good, only added to the disappointment). These fans had preconceived fantasies in their minds of what the film should have been, and thus when the reality was not the fantasy, these fans were then disappointed.

The new version of reviewers informs the reader of these notions. Also, they believe that external and internal forces affect the way they consume the media. If the reviewer is having a bad day because their dog just died, or their dinner was cold these things can affect their perception of the art form. Just as the mood of the day can. If a reviewer is not in the mood for a comedy this will affect their opinion of the slapstick they have to review that day. Unfortunately, these fans often slide into long segues of personality and do little actual reviewing of the material.

My philosophy of reviewing lies somewhere between these two versions. I believe there are some things you can objectively quantify. If a director uses a camera technique that has never been used before you can say this. If a singer’s lyrics are cliched and trite this also can be noted. However, I also believe in the impossibility of being completely objective and that some points of personality must come across. When someone tells me they really liked a movie, but I do not know any other movies that they enjoyed I pay them no mind. However, if they also enjoyed many of the movies that I enjoyed, then I will listen to them explicitly. This is why I hope to create a large selection of reviews so that the reader may have an understanding of the variety of material I enjoy and don’t enjoy.

Well, that was long. If you’ve made it this far, thanks for listening.

Close Encounters of the Third Kind (1977)

close encounters of the third kind poster

Editor’s Note:  This is one of the earliest reviews I ever wrote. It is interesting (at least to me) to see how I’m trying to find my voice, trying to figure out exactly how to review a film.

This movie is pure joy to me. This makes it rather difficult for me to actually review the movie and not just give it praise. Since I have seen it numerous times, and there are then no surprises for me, so I must warn the reader that there will probably be **spoilers** in this review. So if you have not seen it and do not want any details of the film, stop reading now.

There were a few differences with this viewing than in previous viewings. First I have actually been to the Devil’s Tower in Wyoming. Having actually seen this natural monument takes a little mystery out of it in the film. For years it seemed more like something out of the filmmaker’s imagination, something of the dreams of Hollywood, than something real. Something made of rocks and dirt. The mysterious glow that surrounded the rock in the film, and especially the first actual appearance in the film on television, has been dimmed a little. Likewise, as Richard Dreyfuss sculpts the mount in the beginning I wanted to shout at him to flatten the top.

Secondly, I am now quite familiar with a number of Francois Truffaut’s films. He plays the mysterious French scientist in the film, but is in reality, a gifted director and pioneer in the French New Wave. Being familiar with who the actor is, gave the character more depth and mystery. I wonder how Spielberg talked him into becoming an actor in his film. If he had any influence on the direction of the film.

Having learned a little French myself, and having a very good translator beside me also shed some light on what was actually being said in the French conversations. There are several moments in the film when Truffaut speaks in French and Spielberg uses no subtitles. I always felt this was intentional to give the film a little more mystery, to add the international, interwordly feel to the film. So it was interesting now to actually understand what was being said.

I have also, for the past few years, lived in Indiana. Much of the movie takes place in Muncie, Indiana and I found the same joy that I always find when a movie, book, or song takes place somewhere I know or have been to. As if it becomes more real simply because I know the places it occurs.

To me, the film is less about aliens and more about a sense of wonderment. In a famous scene, a small boy stands in front of an open door that is ablaze in a fiery glow. You cannot see what is outside, but you have spent the previous minutes watching the boy’s mother become very frightened as the aliens attempt to enter the house. Yet the boy standing close to these unseen and unknown creatures stands unafraid, even curious. There are many beautiful shots of a night sky with billions of brilliant stars sparkling. Throughout the film, Spielberg seems to be using space and aliens as a means to express wonder and amazement at the unknown.

Richard Dreyfuss’ character loses interest in his family and outside life except for the mystery of the things he saw in the night sky and the recurrent thought of the mysterious mountain. Several times as he builds the mountain out of clay, dirt, and mashed potatoes he proclaims that it must mean something, but isn’t sure of what. Even in the last scene when he boards the alien craft there is no final meaning given. It’s as if Speilberg is saying that it is the search for meaning in the universe, it is in looking with wonder at the great mysteries of the world that we in fact find some purpose, some meaning.

I was reading a review of Steven Spielberg as a director and one of the things it discussed was the director’s tendency of not moving his camera. That he tends to allow action to come to the camera’s view instead of following the action with the camera. So as I watched this film I kept a keen eye out for camera movement. I did find this to be true. That’s not to say the camera was only in one place. In fact, it often was placed in different parts of a room for a scene, but in any given shot, there was little movement. No sweeping shots, no long-tracking scenes. The biggest movement I saw was when Richard Dreyfuss and Melinda Dillon arrive at the Devil’s Tower. The camera then sweeps over the car and follows the characters up a hill to reveal, finally, the giant rock in a real shot. I’m not sure what to make of this but found it interesting.

As in many Spielberg’s films there is marital strife in this movie. Richard Dreyfuss and Terri Garr’s marriage literally falls apart as Dreyfuss becomes more and more obsessed with his visions. There is one scene in particular where Dreyfuss is locked in a shower crying and Terri Garr begins to scream at him and scream at the children to go to their rooms. Speilberg uses several close-up shots of the children to show how this fighting disturbs them. Spielberg has been on record saying that his own parent’s divorce disturbed him deeply. Many of his films either show the distress of an unhealthy marriage or the products of divorce.

In this film, the problems of the marriage are Richard Dreyfuss’ character’s obsession.  He is also the hero of the film and is whisked away in the wonderful alien ship. I view this not as a detraction from the film but as an artistic endeavor. Spielberg takes time out of his alien picture to show the hurt and pain Dreyfuss causes. Dreyfuss’s character also shows remorse over his actions yet cannot turn away from his obsession. As he begins to tear down his scrapbooks of alien abductions he tears the pointy top of his clay Devil’s Tower and becomes obsessed all over again. Though in reality, I would see such a person’s actions in disgust and contempt in the context of the film I see it as a broader artistic action toward the overall goal of seeking deeper meaning and wonderment. Just as I can cheer for the violent destruction of the bad guy in an action movie when the reality which is abhorrent and gruesome.

And that’s my review. I am reluctant to give any kind of official 5-star rating or whatever because that seems so arbitrary. And as happens when I begin rating anything I find trouble in giving Evil Dead II the same rating as To Kill a Mockingbird because one is a much better piece of cinema but the other is also a wonderful flick.

Top 5 Opening Tracks

Editor’s Note: For a brief period back in 2004 I had a little Facebook group where we would ask each other for our Top Five…whatevers.  I got the idea from the film High Fidelity, and we had a lot of fun with it.  I regularly posted my answers to the question on my blog. 

1. “Box of Rain” by the Grateful Dead from the album American Beauty.

Phil Lesh wrote all of the music, and even scatted the vocal lines before giving it to Robert Hunter to write the lyrics. He wanted a song to sing to his dying father. Hunter is quoted as saying the lyrics nearly wrote themselve coming as fast as the pen could hit the page. It is a beautiful song and opens waht is arguably the best Grateful Dead album ever made.

2. “Where the Streets Have No Name” by U2 from the album The Joshua Tree

The opening track to my all time favorite U2 album. The slow, ethereal feel of the organs drifting is like sitting in a cathedral. Then the quick rhthym of the Edge’s guitar fades followed the thump thump of Adam Clayton’s bass. My head begings to nod, my feet begin to tap and then ‘BAM’ Bono’s vocal “I wanna run. I want to hide” it’s like the lift off of a rocket. Pure joy is followed for the next 4 minutes.

3. “So What” by Miles Davis from the album Kind of Blue

The jazz album for people who don’t own any jazz. This is a Miles Davis album in name only, with a line up like John Coltrane, Julian “Cannonball” Adderley on saxophones, Bill Evans on piano, Paul Chambers on bass and Jimmy Cobb on drums this is an allstar jazz group. And it is this opening tonal song that brings the world to a new kind of jazz. Even the opening notes are some of the finest music to be played on any album.

4. “A Hard Days Night” by the Beatles from the album Hard Days Night.

From the opening chord of George’s guitar you know this is gonna be something exciting. From that startling moment John launches into one of the all time great rock and roll dities. Just one of many lennon/mccartney tunes that sound like they’re having so much fun and you just can’t help but sing a long at the top of your lungs.

5. “Radio Free Europe” by REM from the album Murmur.

A muddy, murky tune that you can’t understand a word to ushers to the world the sound that would be REM (at least for the next decade or so). Alternative college rock had been brewing behind the scenes for awhile and this, to me at least, is one of the defining songs of the whole scene. To this day I have no idea what Michael Stipe is singing about, and I just don’t care.