It's the Most/Least Wonderful Time of the Year, May Sweeps (NBC STYLE)

Thursday night was the season finales of both Office and my new favorite Parks and Rec. 

Office was unsurprisingly underwhelming although some of the guest stars amused me, namely James Spader (and I guess Will Arnett, just because I love him unconditonally). James Spader was actually quite fantastic as the unnerving, disturbingly persuasive managerial candidate. I don't know if his character would work full-time but, darnit, would I love to see them try.

Another point of interest or two or four in an other lackluster and annoying inconclusive finale: Ryan was really on fire. His delivery of "Oh, no, Stanley, you'll live forever" killed me, as did the whole gently deriding Jim thing. ("James.") What was the point of Jim Carrey showing up? It was nice to see Gabe finally leave but it was a bit rushed...I actually missed it while I was doing something else. And Toby is looking seriously gaunt. I'm worried about him.

The Office's inconclusive (we still don't know who's boss!) season finale gets 3 obnoxiously hilarious Jim parodies (as performed by Angela) out of 5.

Parks and Recreation has been on fire all season long, even as a midseason replacement. Thankfully it won't be getting that shaft again next season. While I found this week's episodes, sold as a bit of a two-part finale, to be less solid than last week's, I still thoroughly enjoyed them, especially the near-epic "Li'l Sebastian," which was probably as perfect to an ending as anything I've seen from any show this season. It reminded me of the good old days of The Office where there were things at stake, where the end of the season was supposed to bring up new questions as well as answers. Parks and Recreation is relatively low-key and yet its character development is so strong that they drive the plots, they are the ones causing the conflicts instead of some meaningless and manipulative plot. Tom's conflict was especially poignant and at the same time subtle enough, not made to be some big plot point to be sold on. What I love about the show is that it's not something that, like Office, needs to be promoted the heck out of to get our excitement. We come back for the characters.

And just like Ron I will miss Li'l Sebastian. I have however cried several more times than Ron has.

I'm also interested in what the proposition given to Leslie will mean for the show. Perhaps Leslie in the government, maybe as mayor, was the end game all along. It will be interesting to watch. Also excited for: more Ben x Leslie moments, Andy and April as they exit their honeymoon period, and finally meeting the original Tammy! Also I hope they play "5,000 Candles in the Wind" again because that was awesome.

I give the Parks and Rec finale episode(s) 4 and a half torches exploding in Ron's face out of 5.

The Office: End of Days

As far as I'm concerned The Office aired its final episode this past Thursday with Steve Carell's finale, "Goodbye, Michael."

While this is not the case, as the show has been renewed and there are a few more episodes left in the season (including guest stars Will Arnett and Ricky Gervais!), this episode felt like what was the end of the series. Michael Scott was the office's (both the place and the show) central figure, and without him it just doesn't make much sense at all.

This episode was by no means perfect; I found all the subplots superfluous and annoying, and I just can't wait for Deangelo to leave. I even took issue with the way Michael handled his departure mostly, but at the end I realized that he did it in exactly the right way -- his own way. And the final scenes with Jim, Dwight, and Pam were so heart-wrenching, emotional without feeling insincere or forced. They were subtle, and they were beautiful, and they were the best things the series has done since season 3, emotionally.

These last few episodes have felt like a fitting tribute, mostly, to the end of an era. I don't expect the show to go on much longer without Michael Scott's powerful and perfect presence; while it's a great ensemble, it was always Michael that held things together, Michael that made the show feel that much more cohesive instead of just a bunch of characters playing off each other. Michael was both hilarious and tragic, something that none of the other characters grasped quite as well as he did. He will be sorely missed.

I give "Goodbye, Michael" 4 removed microphones out of 5.

Watch "Goodbye, Michael." [video TBA]

Thursday Night's All Right

Thursday's comedy block was extremely awesome. I'm a cynic and a hater and I actually really enjoyed every show of the night -- well, except the Paul Reiser Show, but I don't watch that, so.

Community was hilarious, although I kind of resent that all of those awesome little plot lines will never be expanded upon. The Office was sweet, even though it was trying really hard to make me feel that way. It was nostalgic, and I'm a sucker for that kind of stuff. Season 2 will forever have a place in my heart, so I really appreciated this episode. And it made me even more sad to see Michael go.

Parks and Recreation...I can't even describe my feelings for that show in words. I spent the last two days watching all of the episodes of Season 2 that I hadn't seen. It's just a perfect television show; it's reminiscent of season 2/3 The Office, and it's so wonderful. I love EVERY. SINGLE. CHARACTER. Even Tom, even Jerry. (HAHA, Tom and Jerry.) The show works in relationships so subtly; last week April and Andy got married with little fanfare. This week Leslie acknowledges her feelings for Ben and it's not a big deal. The little quiet moments make this show feel realistic, moreso than the Office, and I just enjoy every minute of it.

The hour-long 30 Rock had its great moments, too, with some hilarious one-liners (ALSO THE RETURN OF DANNY, JUST PUTTING THAT OUT THERE CUZ I LOVE HIM), but overall I think the show should stick to its 30 minute roots. Also the shoehorned clips felt really, really weird. This season has already had two season finale-type episodes and it's not even over yet! The Office also played with nostalgia this week but in a less overt way, and while it was still kind of obnoxious I appreciated it a bit more than 30 Rock's lazy bag of season 1/2/3 clips.

I did, however, love the callback to Jack's classic line: "It's after 6. What am I, a farmer?" Good stuff.

So, yes. I highly recommend you start watching Parks and Recreation if you haven't, and I would suggest you watch all four shows' latest episodes. They were all worth it. Best Thursday in awhile.

Is it better to be on or be good? ("No Color" by the Dodos Album Review)

Thankfully, on the Dodos' No Color, they manage to do both.

That line is from album standout "Good," a 6-minute song that recalls the unpredictability of 2008 Visiter's "Joe's Waltz," a song with two distinct halves. While "Good" is a bit more polished, I think that its similarity to that song speaks for the entire album's style: it is a return to the form of Visiter but with more sheen and editing.

While the Dodos uncut are probably the best kind of Dodos, this actually works in the album's favor. The songs overall are much more concise than those on the band's three previous albums, but they also manage not to lose steam and are just great all the way through. "Sleep" is under 4 minutes long, nearly unheard of from the Dodos, but with its catchy chorus and featured spot from Neko Case, who also sings on "Good" and, amongst others, "Don't Try and Hide It," another highlight, the song quickly becomes one of the most memorable album.

"I cannot sleep/I cannot think/I cannot dream," sings Meric Long on "Sleep;" those lines speak well for the album, which is at first hyperactive and then, almost abruptly, sleepy and more introspective. Opener "Black Night" is raucous; 5 tracks later we have the decidedly hush "When Will You Go," which features Long's falsetto and has been bandied by critics as a highlight. The song reminds one more of Time to Die with its obvious production sheen but imbues it with the same spirit that embodies "Black Night."

The more mellow latter half of the album is not as immediately enticing, but the songs alternate between beautiful and interesting. While you'll love "Sleep" from the first play, a song like "When Will You Go" will command more listening time if only so you can discover its intricacies and attractive spots that are less readily enticing.

A song that is a personal favorite and reminds one of debut Beware of the Maniacs is "Hunting Season," which sounds bound for commercial or indie movie inclusion. Little oddities like this really show the band's ability to combine their intense percussion of old with their electric guitars and normalcy of late. It has its feet planted firmly in both camps, and the combination is interesting if subtle. It probably won't stand out for other people as much as it does for this reviewer, but the Maniacs vibe is much appreciated in a world that seems to think the band started with Visiter.

"Companions" is a real grower but ends up being a stand-out track. The classical-sounding guitar in the beginning really makes the song, which sounds laden with reverb and other production effects that you wouldn't really hear on their first two albums. It's the most interesting track on the album, stylistically; it sounds quite unlike anything else the band has done before. It's an experimental sort of song that really pays off and shows off the band's talent and versatility.

Overall, No Color combines the best of the band's previous albums to make a holistic, interesting, and engaging package that you will want to listen to again and again. Unlike Time to Die, it's not at all a disappoint. The Dodos still have plenty of color, and they are both "on" and "good.

No Color gets 4 and a half Neko Case guest vocals out of 5.

Download: "Good" (It's an .m4a so be prepared for that)
Also check out: "Sleep," "Black Night," "Companions"
Buy No Color here.

P.S. Sorry this review was suckish but I'm tired. The Dodos deserve better than this. Please check them out.
P.P.S. also lawl I really love "Good." The past two post titles have come from it. It's awesome.

US Skins Review

First things first: I have another stinkin' snow day, which really screws me up, ugh. However, intelligently I am using this day to watch an episode of Community on-Demand. It's "Mixology Certification," and the episode is taking place on MY BIRTHDAY, December 3rd, and Troy's birthday is the day after mine! Yay!

This has thrown me off, plus I'm irritated, so this review will probably suck.

Anyway. Skins on MTV.

L to R: Chris, Daisy (Jal), Abbud (Anwar), Tea (Maxxie), Tony, Michelle, Stanley (Sid), Cadie (Cassie), Eura (Effy)

As I mentioned yesterday, I am a fan of the original British series; thus, it was hard not to let bias seep through as I watched last night's "Tony," which was essentially a remake of the very first episode of the original show. I didn't enjoy this pilot: let's get that out of the way. However, I didn't enjoy the original very much, either. The emphasis in both versions of "Tony" is on the intense partying and drug use that the characters participate in. This is undeniable; however, what I like about Skins is that the rest of the episodes focuses instead on character development, studying each character intimately. (Not in that sense.)

Those character study moments were absent from this episode. Characters were either broadly painted (Abbud, the new Anwar; Tony; Stanley aka Sid; even Effy who looked like a 28-year-old drug addict) or flat beyond belief. While this was obviously the pilot, from the previews they showed afterwards it didn't seem that the show was going to get much deeper.

Let's talk about some of the major differences to the characters, because even though this is a transplant largely word-for-word, there are some changes. The obvious one is that Maxxie is now a lesbian, Tea (I keep pronouncing that like the drink instead of Tay-uh, haha). While Tea is accepted into the group, like Maxxie was, it seems like she may not be out of the closet. This changes the character a bit, as Maxxie was out and proud, but because there was less drama there he faded into the background much of the time. Tea also reminds me more of a female Tony than a female Maxxie; Maxxie was sweet and sincere, not one to take authority. Tea seemed confident and strong; this should prove to be a big difference.

Michelle and Tea were similar, I think; Michelle in the British series seemed to live just for Tony's love, and wasn't a very strong-willed girl. The American Michelle was someone who, while watching, kept striking me as very "cool." Her being with Tony in a reciprocated relationship made more sense here, because Michelle was easily the coolest, strongest girl out of anyone we watched. You could see why Stanley liked her so much. (Also she's perfectly cast in that she kind of looks like the original Michelle, weirdly orange hair aside.) Speaking of Stanley, while Sid was a lovable loser who just wanted a girlfriend really, really badly, Stanley was a bland pothead. He was extremely boring, and you could tell that the director really wanted us to root for him. However, his actor was not able to sell me on the character; he failed to make an impression on me, much unlike Sid did.

The acting by everyone was terrible. Evey single one of them. I had read that Tony and Tea's actors were surprising standouts, but when I watched I found them to be just as terrible as everyone else. I'm not sure if it was the direction, the fact that they have to live up to the amazingly strong original cast, or if these kids are just that bad at acting, but at times it seemed like they had learned the dialogue phonetically. This could make sense; it's impossible to completely match the cadence of the original script, with its heavy usage of British slang (that weirdly enough they kept in; the scene when Chris acts for "skins" felt really, really false to me, more than everything else), so for some of them it was a struggle to keep up while the rest didn't even try.

Eventually the episode deviated from the original enough that I no longer had a point of comparison and was forced to watch the show for what it was. This is where I meet some kind of conundrum: at the end of the episode I decided that, had I not known what the rest of the (original) series was capable of in terms of plot and character, I would give up on this show and never watch it again. I really hated this episode; it was boring, I didn't like any of the characters, the acting was terrible, but what if I hadn't known some of the more interesting things that happened later on in the original show? What if I had given up on that after the pilot, too? Because the British pilot was similarly bad, although it was better in that the characters made immediate impressions on me, especially Tony whose cell phone scene in the original was one of my favorite moments in the entire show, just for how well he sold it. So should I keep giving this show a chance?

I might, but it doesn't look good. When your central character is so weak and uninteresting, what is there to stay for? Next week should be Cadie (the new Cassie)'s episode, and while the Cassie episode in the original was one of that series' best, that was partially because Cassie was a phenomenally-played character. Cadie? She just seems to be your typical angsty teen, only she's a little "weirder" and has also tried to kill herself multiple times. Cadie was one of the least intriguing characters in this episode. There was no air of mystery surrounding her (ETA: this is also true of the new Effy, Eura, who made me angry beyond belief despite her being in two scenes), and her budding relationship with Stan was abrupt and unbelievable. The scene with the two of them in the kitchen was one of the episode's worst.  Cassie was the most original character on the show; I'm struggling with how I could describe here. Cadie was one of the least compelling here. Differences like these water the US Skins down until it gets to the point where even taken as its own show it's not interesting.

I can see how American teens who haven't seen the original show can get into this; the cast is "pretty," the partying is kind of funny (although they totally ruined "Tabitha's," aka Abigail's, party which was another moment that made the show stand out to me in that first episode, as she had everyone take off their shoes as to not ruin her parents' new rug) and I guess maybe more realistic than parties shown in other shows, there's the promise of tons of relationship drama. But as an American teen who has seen the first two series of Skins, I can't say that there's any reason for me to continue to watch this.

I really did want to give this show the benefit of the doubt. I admit that I thought it looked terrible by virtue of MTV's involvement from the getgo, but I didn't want to hate it as much as I ended up doing. It really just was not my cup of tea, even if there's that small promise of it linearly following the plot of the original show (which I can assure you/me will not happen).

Skins gets one and a half Tony's singing wildly inappropriate songs to repressed schoolgirls out of 5.

Not for the Faint of Heart: Quickies, Liars, and the Hilariously Cruel

You may have noticed that a lot of my mini movie reviews are called "quickies." Unfortunately as a teenager who spends most of her time reading Internet forums, I am exposed to terminologies such as that.

Don't know what a "quickie" is? Let Urban Dictionary define it for you, here.

I forgot about that, so naming my mini reviews that was unintentional. I think it was an unconscious thing. Like the girl in the video I'll be getting to in a second, I internalized that term sometime ago and it all just came out one day. Curse you, Toy Story 3 and my subsequent non-review! (jay kay love you baby)

And now the video I am getting to in a second. I love reading about random things. I think I just wrote an essay about that recently for some college. It was a terrible essay. But that aside, reading about random things = check plus.

I have different obsessions that I go through. A couple of years ago I was obsessed with author scandals, like the whole James Frey-exaggeration-Oprah deal, as well as the outcry against Jonathan Franzen after spurning Oprah's approval of (his absolutely amazing) The Corrections. The one that I always thought was most pathetic was the story of How Opal Mehta Got Kissed, Got Wild, and Got a Life by 19-year-old (at the time) Kaavya Viswanathan (spelled that right on my second try, whoo!).

Kaavya V. was the victim of a high pressure Indian household who was convinced that she must attend Harvard for her life to have any meaning. So she did the requisite extracurricular activities and extreme studying; eventually, she got in. Thankfully, unlike many children born from these kinds of stifling environments, she liked to read and was a decent-enough writer. (Apparently she wrote an extremely long novel about Irish history in high school? I mean, wow.)

So Kaavya got a book deal and got to Harvard. She released the young adult sounding Opal Mehta, which personally sounds extremely generic and frivolous to me (it's practically an autobiography, except starring Opal and not Kaavya, and Opal did NOT get into Harvard because she was too boring), and it sold well. That is, until she was hit with accusations of plagiarism.

Here is the by now-infamous video, where Katie Couric grills Kaavya on this in a totally-not-biased-at-all way (oh, Katie, how we all wish you were still on the Today show):

Visit msnbc.com for breaking news, world news, and news about the economy

In the end, Kaavya (who I did feel sort of bad for by the end of that clip) got her book pulled of the shelves and never wrote another word. Okay, that's an exaggeration, but her dreams of being a famous author were dashed. That's what you get for plagiarizing other generic teen girl novels, sister! And she plagiarized a lot of them, too: the Princess Diaries, some books by some Megan McCafferty woman, another book about an Indian-American girl...it's sad.

She got to stay in Harvard, though. I find that to be an ethical issue. I'm sure they have an upstanding rule about plagiarism (didn't The Social Network talk about this? Oh wait, no, that was different because their conflict was internal within Harvard. This was the case of a Harvard woman stealing from non-Harvard women, so I guess Harvard didn't care as much? Although even in the movie they didn't care!) so wouldn't it make sense for her to be reprimanded by them in some way? I guess her public humiliation was punishment enough.

Read more about the scandal here.

And now for our hilariously cruel portion: this is utterly unrelated to neither quickies nor plagiarism but it's a Roger Ebert review and he demands our constant attention!

Surely you've seen those terrible commercials for the fittingly awful-looking The Nutcracker 3D? Yeah, well, guess what? It's AWESOME! No, wait, sorry. It's not. At all. In fact, it currently has the dreaded 0% on RottenTomatoes, a badge of horribleness that not even The Room can boast to have. (The Room is probably way better though, and it's one of the worst movies I've ever seen. And I've seen Manos: The Hands of Fire! Which was worse yet. But still, okay?)

While most reviews of Nutcracker are side-splitting, Ebert's is my favorite. I read it to my sister and we both laughed mightily. (Random: anyone remember that movie Mighty Joe Young? Ugh. Awful.) Here it is, with the best parts in bold!

From what dark night of the soul emerged the wretched idea for “The Nutcracker in 3D”? Who considered it even remotely a plausible idea for a movie? It begins with an awkward approximation of the story behind the Tchaikovsky ballet, and then turns it into a war by the Nutcracker Prince against the Holocaust.
Am I exaggerating? At one point, the evil Rat King (John Turturro) has his troopers snatch toys from the hands of children so they can be tossed into furnaces, and the smoke will emerge from high chimneys to blot out the sun.

Yes. And the rats are dressed in fascistic uniforms. Against them stand our heroine Mary (Elle Fanning) and her Christmas present, a nutcracker (voice of Shirley Henderson) that has imprisoned a handsome prince (Charlie Rowe). And two-legged helicopters swoop low over screaming children, and the city is laid waste, and the rats dream of world domination.

You may be in disbelief. I was. “The Nutcracker in 3D” is one of those rare holiday movies that may send children screaming under their seats. Their parents, naively hoping to see a sweet version of “The Nutcracker,” will be appalled or angry, take your choice.

Yes, the film uses melodies that began with Tchaikovsky at one point, but now they have — are you sitting down? — lyrics by Tim Rice (“Jesus Christ Superstar,” “Evita” and “The Lion King”).
“The Nutcracker in 3D” easily qualifies as one of the most preposterous ideas in the history of the movies. It isn't a story, it's a gag line for one of David Letterman's “Top 10 Lists” (No. 9, “It's a Horrible Life”; No. 8, “A Christmas Carol in Hell”).

Andrei Konchalovsky, who wrote and directed this live-action CGI movie, says this “Nutcracker” has been a dream project for 20 years. That is tragic. Konchalovsky made the great films “Shy People” (1987) and “Runaway Train” (1985), and perhaps he became obsessed with this folly.

But what did others think? What about Nathan Lane, who plays a character not previously associated with the Nutcracker tale, Albert Einstein? Yes, Lane gets to sing a song about the Theory of Relativity, but not since he played Jacqueline Susann's adoring husband in “Isn't She Great” (2000) has a role been more thankless.

Only one thing could have made this film worse, and they haven't neglected it. That would be to present it in 3-D. They have. The movie was filmed in Hungary in 2007, and perhaps those studio execs screening it sensed a certain lack of enthusiasm. Maybe they thought that by retroactively “adapting” it to 3-D, it would play better. No luck. I've seen bad retro 3-D, but I've never seen 3-D as bad as this. The film is so dim and dingy, you almost wonder if the smoke from those burning toys is drifting between you and the screen. 

 Funny stuff. Gotta love that guy.

This post was exquisitely long. No more posts until next week, I think. My birthday's on Friday so I'm going to be busy! Wish me happy birthday in the comments?

A Quickie: Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows, Part 1

I went to see it tonight, and it was so good! Here's my five-star review:

I think I may be closer to a 4.5 on this one, but I really did love it, and would rank it up there with 1 and 3. It did feel like there was more "exposition" (even though these movies abandoned trying to re-familiarize audiences with the overarching plot about 3/4 movies ago, which is both good and bad) than actual action but I enjoyed it as a more character-driven story than other movies were. I really love the interaction between our main gang, especially Harry and Hermione and Ron and Hermione (I just love Hermione), and it was nice seeing pretty much all of our favorite characters again, even briefly (LUPIN HI LUPIN...WAIT WHERE ARE YOU GOING COME BACK AND BE IN THE WHOLE MOVIE PLEASE he looked really good in this movie, I feel like he's decreasing in age or something). This movie was SO BEAUTIFUL, I really felt like saying "wow" the whole time. The colors and the locations were great. Those HP kids better be grateful that they got to see all of these amazing places. The ending felt a bit odd; "No, Harry, I can't help Dobby, we haven't reached our death quota yet! And also it would be a perfectly sad way to end this movie! So let's end it now! Predictably! But let's also remind people that this is TBC by showing Voldemort! Yay!" Also I haven't read the book since it came out so the movie was a bit hard to follow at times, but even so this felt like one of the most succinct (despite its running time) films in the series, as well as the most engaging, and I'm SO READY for Part 2!

A Quickie: Catfish

Tonight I attended a special screening of Catfish. Here's my Flixster "review" (I gave the movie 4 stars):

I got a very cool opportunity to watch this movie at a screening that had a Q&A afterwards with the directors + Nev. VERY cool. And since I'm a kid and there were other kids there and kids are just awesome, Nev and Rel stuck around for an hour (maybe even more; they were still talking to other people 20 minutes after I left!) and took more questions and talked to us. Very cool. All of the other girls were fawning over Nev but my friends and I talked to Rel, who was similarly very nice (but not as...not charming, but obsessed with the ladies). So, very cool. Although Henry disappeared. I wanted to talk to him, too. Oh well. It was cool talking to/shaking the hand of a filmmaker.

Okay, it's not really a review, but if you haven't noticed it's almost midnight. So shut up. Blaaargh. (The movie was really good though, by the way. Funny and uncomfortable and sad and uncomfortable and uncomfortable and...)

It's Only 3 O'Clock And I'm Already Calling It A Day

Today I headed over to the IFC Center with mi madre and mi hermana to see Summer Wars, Mamoru Hosoda's follow-up to the OHMYGODAMAZING The Girl Who Leapt Through Time. It was excellent. You can't see it now because today was its last showing, but I recommend you check it out when it comes on DVD/Blu-Ray. I'll keep you posted.

After the movie, we were driving through the East Village, when suddenly I cried, "OH MY GOD!" Turning to my sister, I yelped, bemused, "That was the girl from My Life as Liz!" As in, Liz from My Life as Liz. Yeah, I'm a bit odd. So, yes, I saw Liz Lee being an annoying faux-"nerd" hanging out with her "friends" and a police officer on the sidewalk. If you care, her head is large and her hair is as red as the fire I set to it in my mind. If you don't care, well, then, don't. (Note: I think the police officer was there because they were doing filming or something? I'm not sure. She wasn't TALKING to him or anything. Also, I must say she had a snazzy outfit on. Gotta hand it to the kid.)

Since tonight is the Emmys and I'm preparing by watching 30 Rock on Free-on-Demand, I'm going to just let you read this awesome (IMO) review of My Life as Liz I wrote awhile ago. ENJOY. And come back tomorrow for my post-Emmys recap. Please? PLEASE?

What is it really like to be an “outsider?” The new MTV “reality” series, My Life as Liz, tries hard to answer this question, but ultimately fails.
Liz tells the tale of painfully cool teen Liz Lee from Burleson, Texas, where all hip kids go to die. Liz and her band of fellow “outcasts” stick out like sore thumbs amongst the other kids, whom she describes as being all preppy and stupid, and thus beneath her on the Periodic Table of Awesome. The show documents Liz’s heavily-scripted travails against the pack of blondes who used to be her friends until she awakened her inner dork and now want to make her life miserable.

Liz tries to be the My So-Called Life to the Beverly Hills 90210 that makes up the rest of the MTV line-up. (Liz even has the same dyed red hair that Claire Danes had on Life.) Whereas Life reflects sincere feelings of awkwardness, Liz portrays the sarcastic cynicism of today.

While in similarly cynical works such as Juno and MTV’s own Daria the protagonists were likeable behind their snark, Liz is completely snobby and unlikable, fitting more into the pretentious hipster scene than the nerdy one she so confidently declares herself part of.

Liz is an ironic T-shirt-abusing, chronic hair-dying, thrift store-shopping “weirdo;” however, it’s exactly these kinds of people who’ve become popular and mainstream in their own right. She’s not as different as she claims to be. In fact, according to a multitude of online comments made by her classmates, Liz is indeed quite popular at her school, contrary to what’s shown.

MTV seems obsessed with painting Liz as some sort of nerdy messiah to the masses of socially inept minors it hopes to attract. Liz preaches that she knows what it’s like to be “the school mascot” or “the club president,” and with her show she hopes to give them a voice. What she’s really doing is reducing them to outdated and inaccurate stereotypes. Liz is a 21^st Century girl, but her mindset seems to be stuck in the halls of Saved by the Bell.

In the end, Liz proves herself to be just as condescending as the people she decorates her hate wall with; the blondes she battles may be elitist, but if they are, then she is, too. What she’s not is nerdy, not in any sense.

If you want to find a true look into socially awkward life, Liz isn’t the one to go to; instead, look at the misfit boys surrounding her: if anyone at their school’s a nerd, it’s them. You don’t have to think for long to get why Liz was picked as the show’s anchor as opposed to any one of her male entourage. Even on a show about outcasts, the outcasts lose.

In two words: epic fail.

Hasta manana, babies.

Scott Pilgrim Vs. the World Mini-Review

 

After months and months and months and months and MONTHS of hype, I finally saw Scott Pilgrim Vs. the World yesterday. HOORAY! It's very likely that if you're reading this right now, you know exactly what Scott Pilgrim's about, so I will refrain from saying anything more than 1. the graphic novels set expectations at exceedingly high levels and 2. this movie definitely appeals to a certain "type."

But was this the type of movie for me? The answer is YES YES YES.

Here we go with bullet points:

• The casting was nearly perfect. Knives, STEPHEN STILLS (!!!), YOUNG NEIL (!!!), Stacey, and even Wallace, who I was worried the most about, were all perfect. Guess who else was awesome? Michael Cera as Scott. Haters gonna hate, but I thought he was...I'm trying not to say great because that rhymes excellent. He did not play "himself" (although if you've ever watched this kid in an interview you would know that he's not quite as awkward as you think), he played SCOTT. 
• More on that: Scott was a bit "toned down" from the comics. However, he was still the most enjoyable character to watch for me; maybe this was because he was the one who received the most characterization.
• More on THAT: Okay, so obviously this movie tried to adapt six volumes into one two-hour movie, which is a hard thing to do perfectly. And while I think a lot of the plot changes that were made helped to make it more cohesive and fit better into the allotted time, certain choices were made at the expense of character development. Biggest offenders: Kim, Ramona, Envy. Envy isn't as important, so it's okay, but up until the fight against Todd we keep hearing about how Scott dated Envy and she broke his heart and blah blah blah. But we never delve into their back story, which is the most interesting part, and when Envy shows up you think, "What? How the heck did Scott ever date this girl?" Also, she's just bland as heck and she and Scott don't have any closure or anything. She's just never mentioned again. We got an idea of who Ramona was: mysterious and distant. But that was it. You never really understand why Scott is in love with her and fighting for her. It's like he's just going with the motions. They don't have too much nice alone time, which was too bad, because the scenes where they did were amongst my favorite (their second (?) date, the Seinfeld-esque scene although Ramona technically isn't in that one). Basically, Ramona is flat. 
• The most egregious offense OR more on that AGAIN: KIM. I HATED KIM IN THIS MOVIE. Kim is one of everyone's favorite characters. She's a cynical, misanthropic jerk, but she really does care about Scott and everyone else. In the comics, she has depth. However, in this movie, Kim hates everything and everyone, especially Scott. She is never happy and she is never not being sarcastic. When she sees Scott her eye starts throbbing and that scary, dramatic music even plays. (Those screechy violins, you know.) She HATES him because he dumped her in high school, but the real Kim didn't care about that THAT much. Also, the real Kim was interesting, and that was what made me the most upset. This Kim was boring and I can't remember almost anything she said.
• I missed Joseph. He's one of my favorite characters. Thankfully, they had the guy that Wallace stole from Stacey in a number of scenes, kind of as a replacement. Although he was nowhere as awesome as Joseph.
• Let's talk about stuff I liked again, though. I LOVED the music. Sex Bob-omb were, for being self-loathing and "terrible," really good. I really liked their "Garbage Truck" song. Stephen Stills was a good singer, and Scott was a surprisingly competent bassist. I liked his "Ramona" song, too, although Ramona kind of blew it off. THAT GURL, WAI SHE GOTTA BE LIKE THAT
• The opening credits. The opening credits made my heart race. (I'm a little over-dramatic like that.) The visuals were just very, very cool. I loved the opening scene, too. I don't know, I just found it perfect. 
• The fight scenes were pretty awesome, although I think some of them went on for too long. (Most notably the first one, against Matthew Patel.) I did love that Ramona talked about her relationships with most of them via black-and-white cutscenes. I think my favorite fights were Scott vs. Lucas and maybe Scott vs. Todd. That one was hilarious, mainly because of how it ended. (I loved the Vegan police high-fiving in slow motion.) 
• More hilarity: The Ninja Revolution game, that aforementioned Seinfeld scene, Young Neil's idiocy, Knives' stalkerish tendencies, Scott and Ramona's date, etc. etc. There's a lot. (Oh, also, but this comes towards the end: "Do you know how long it took me to collect all of the Evil Exes' contact information? TWO HOURS!"
• I'm just going to mention it again: Wallace ruled.

ENDING SPOILERS HERE:

• The ending was weird and not wholly satisfying. That last fight went on forever, and what are they trying to say -- they're basically suggesting that Self-Respect > Love, which is kind of stupid and kind of a bad message. I guess they were trying to set up an ending where Scott and Ramona DON'T end up together. Instead, Scott would end up with Knives (word is that that's an alternate ending). I actually kind of like the idea of that, because I really liked Knives, as creepy as she was at times. She was a sweet girl and Scott actually had a rapport with her. However, Knives basically says, "Dude, we just spent nearly 2 hours murdering people so you could make out with this chick for a little bit. Seriously? LYK GO GET HER LOL" so then Scott has to go get her. It was pretty stupid that Ramona STILL hadn't "found what she was looking for" or whatever, instead keen on leaving behind yet another ex. Sister sure is flighty. Which ending do you like better, Scott and Ramona or Scott and Knives? (Look at me, trying in vain to initiate conversation between commentators and myself.)
• Either way, I like the ending that Bryan Lee O'Malley chose for volume 6 instead. That was more meaningful.

ENDING SPOILERS, OVER

The movie's not perfect, but it's about as good as a live action Scott Pilgrim could ever be. I really liked it. Really liked it. I think your mileage may vary, and I don't see many "older people" enjoying this as much although you never know, but it's a sort of ADD-addled film that could possibly define my generation. Although I really hope not. I hate my generation. We don't deserve a movie this fun.

I give Scott Pilgrim Vs. the World 4 Slutty Wallace's Sleeping Next to Various Guys and Scott's out of 5.

P.S. Even though I gave Inception a better score, I think I enjoyed this more than that. It's being a comedy certainly helps. But they're both great so see them!

For the other movies I saw this summer, you can read my Inception Mini-Review here and my quick post about Toy Story 3 here.

Work Of Art Finale Review

WORK OF ART #1.10 "The Big Show"

After a very long 10 weeks, Work of Art is finally over. I, and I'm sure the majority of the Internet/America/Universe, was expecting Miles to win all along and so when I sat down I wasn't expecting anything surprising. I assumed the finale would be your typical show where the guy you knew was going to win wins and you're either really happy or breaking your neighbor's car windows. What? Am I the only one who reacts like that?

So here is a recap of what happened last night in my living room during the last 5 minutes of the last episode of season 1 of Work of Art: The Next Great Artist:

China: Miles, sorry, but even though your art is better than everyone single other person's on this show, and even though I shouldn't have the authority to say this to anyone - I mean, c'mon, look at me, I can't even properly dress myself! - YOU DIDN'T WIN. HAHA. NOW GTFO.
Miles: .__.
Me and My Sister: NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO MILES GODDARNIT WHY NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO EVERYTHING WE KNOW IS WRONG


Miles, I personally believe, was technically the most skilled. He was also the most fun to watch, the most polarizing, the one who EVERYONE had an opinion about, positive or negative. When we reminisce about this show in a few years or whatever, we will all talk about Miles. So for him not to win was a complete shock. Especially since they sent him out first!

Thankfully, our most knowledgeable or at least most critical judge Jerry Saltz has an explanation for us:

“When did Miles lose?” ...His show was all-but perfectly realized, and looked like something I might review in a respectable Lower East Side gallery. Here came the rub. Miles’ work was so up-to-date that it looked dated. This way his art lost its edge, turned in on itself; it went from being over-hung to just being overkill. As highly accomplished as his work was, it was a bit too much in a highly conceptualized, self-reflexive, intensely theorized, and familiar quasi-visual idiom. Miles had lost by winning. He got so close to a good idea of art, that the art he got close to wasn’t entirely his own. I began to understand that this had been happening all along. Indeed, it had been there in his first digital black-and-white portrait of Nao. I think Miles should move to New York and be poor and stay up late with thousands of other young artists. Then, in five years, he could be an artist to reckon with. That he lost this reality TV show will one day actually help him.

Let us hope that is true. Miles might have been a bit pretentious, a bit of a hipster, but he was overall a very good artist (if not great), and that's the most important thing. His art is very conceptual and not very emotional; that portrait of Nao, the one he did of the "homeless shelter," those were the only ones I can remember making anyone really feel anything. But he's good, darnit. I think he'll be okay.

Before we move on to who won, let me just talk about the home visits. They helped to make this episode a lot more memorable, very human, sweet; this episode could very well be my favorite. We got to see Peregrine, Abdi, and Miles in their home environments; we got to see where "the magic happens," who they are when they're in a more comfortable, less stressful and manufactured space. While I have personally been hating on Peregrine ever since that first team challenge, it was hard not to like her as she introduced our Favorite Eternally Gleeful Swiss Man Simon de Pury to her husband (a "Jazz musician and horn sculptor"). When he was playing that horn that was wrapped around her, it was not only awkward but also...okay, mostly it was awkward. But at least I didn't hate her anymore?

Peregrine's favorite part of her show was a big portrait of these two taxidermied unborn twin deer. They were precious. However, they seemed like an out-of-place "sideshow" when it came to the rest of her Carnival theme. She had cotton candy, tons of pink and orange casts of little boys' heads, ponies, etc. It was a bit too much, in my opinion. It really was all over the place. While there were some really good pieces in it (the deer and the guest judge David LaChapelle really liked her cast of a boy's head under glass), I agree with Bill: it would be better had it been edited down. It was too unruly.

Miles' house was very nice. I liked it. You know what's good about the Midwest, other than their funny accents? You can get nice homes on the cheap-ish. Miles' had a nice home that I assume was on the cheap-ish. (I feel like now is an appropriate time for me to, as always, plug the AV Club's review, which has tons of funny quips about Miles' and Abdi's home visits.) We got to see the place in which Miles' works, AKA the ga-raage. They kept pronouncing it weirdly. I liked Miles' concept a lot, but when I first saw it I was a bit skeptical about how it was turning out. His abstractions were INCREDIBLY abstract that, when I saw them in the garage, it was hard to see them the way he wanted me to.

However, his story of trying to make sense of the footage that he took of a homeless man who died a few days after the photos were taken was definitely interesting and better represented by his gallery show. The actual surveillance photos were included, which was a nice touch of realism amongst tons of Photoshopped images that had no recognizable human features in them. You could see Miles was really proud of what he did, and he should be. Even though I understand why he lost...I still can't BELIEVE it. While everyone on the Internet seems to think that Peregrine's show was the best, I really disagree. Miles' was the most coherent, even if it was the least visually compelling.

Oh, and Miles' parents had a nice house too. [/random]

Finally, we went to Abdi's house, where Abdi introduced Simon to his very nice mom that we all heard a lot about on the show. While Simon and Mrs. Abdi's Mom talked, Abdi made lots of his classic facial expressions. Someone needs to make me some .gifs of Abdi's face, because that boy has one BIG mouth that needs to be documented for all eternity. After Simon and Abdi's Mama were done blathering, Abdi brought Simon into his "cruddy" basement. I tell you, these editors became a lot better at making drama as time went on. The way this part was edited made it seem like Abdi was doing this completely horrible job - his ideas were good but his execution was awful and it was unlikely that these pieces would get better. Simon looked bewildered, confused, and I was sort of confused, too. I didn't think Abdi's pieces looked bad, but they tend not to look as good as they do in person on camera.

It was nice to see how friendly these guys were with each other. Usually in these kinds of shows, one of the final three is a "villain," or at least not liked by the other two. So it's good that Abdi, Miles, and Pere were such good friends. It was one of the things that contributed to making this episode so nice and calm. Really, it was not as climactic and intense as you'd think, except for the parts where Abdi rushes to put together his unfinished sculptures of the basketball players (that's what they were, right?). The two sculptures, when done, were laid on the floor and resembled "The Creation of Adam." That was a nice surprise, to see them turn out looking so well.

So Miles didn't win. I've established this. SO WHO DID? Those final minutes continue:

Jerry: Peregrine, gurl, you rocked it. You was fierce.
Me and My Sister: NO NOT PEREGRINE NO NO
Bill: Abdi, you da man.
Me and My Sister: ... :)
China: ABDI YOU WON YAY
Me and My Sister: NOT EXPECTING THAT BUT YESYESYESYESYESYES! ABDI WHOOOOOOOOOOOOO

Abdi is probably the single nicest person on television today. He was one of my favorites from the beginning, he and Miles. I thought for the longest time that his place in the Final Three would be inevitable, but as he started to falter I started to worry. So the fact that he came to win the whole thing was grand. A lot of people seem confused, but I see it this way: Abdi GREW the most. When he was good, he was REALLY good. When he was bad, he learned from those mistakes to turn it around. He was very inconsistent, but we must remember that he is also the youngest. I highly doubt there are real, successful artists out there who hit a home run every single time. Abdi was the most REAL out of the final three for this reason. He didn't play the game, creating a character (Miles) and he wasn't fake and irritating and obsessed with his quirkiness (Peregrine). In a medium that encourages you to be someone you're not, Abdi was wholly himself. And c'mon, he's just SUCH A NICE GUY. He deserved to win on that alone.

Even my mom, who had never seen an episode of the show before, was happy that Abdi won. Goes to show.

So congratulations Abdi, and I'll make sure to go see your show at the Brooklyn Museum whenever it is.

Yay, Abdi! :D

Read my reviews for Episode 4 and Episode 8.

Work Of Art #1.8 Review

Oddly enough, my first (and, up until now, only) Work of Art review is the most-viewed post on this blog, counting for more than a quarter of the total page views. How strange is that, especially considering that there are absolutely no comments on it and it's mostly a rambling mess? Well, maybe that's not true. I enjoy reading and re-reading it (don't think I count for most of the views, though!) and I do have a lot to say about the show. Since last night's episode was similarly "thought-provoking," if we can really call it that, I think today's a good time to write another review.

WORK OF ART #1.8 "Opposites Attract"

At the conclusion of last week's episode, Mark is the only one of the "Miles Haters" group left. I'm sure I'm not the only one surprised at the fact that I can even say that. Mark's work, save for that one challenge a long, long time ago when he was in the Top 2, has been wholly uninspiring; it's been safe, boring, dull, and at worst, it's been awful. While his pals Erik and Ryan were either outstandingly bad (Erik) or narcissistic and disappointing (Ryan), Mark's work really just evaded discussion most of the time. He's been hanging around solely because there was also someone at least slightly worse than him. As we come to find out, however, now that the playing field has been chopped down to 6, Mark doesn't have a hiding place anymore.

So this challenge was, like the one from two weeks ago, one that required people to work together. I don't understand why team and partner challenges are necessary on a show like this. An artist is a solitary person, generally. On a show like Top Chef I can understand why they have team challenges - and they have them often, too. A chef works in a restaurant with other people. An artist? Heck to the no. Art is something you do by yourself, and while it's good to know how to work with people just as a people skill, it's not really necessary to show that you can work with a partner on a show about being the "Next Great Artist." But working with people on this show is always hilarious and a grand old time, so I enjoyed this challenge anyway!

It was nice to see some Miles and Nicole stuff again. Miles with his little baby crush on Nicole. HOW SWEET. It's always weird to think that Nicole is older than Miles (heck, everyone is except for Abdi) because Miles is just so in control of everything that's going on around him. How fitting that this is what he explored in his piece with Jaclyn exclamation points! It was kind of lame, though, that Miles, making "the challenge work for your art, not your art working for the challenge" as always, basically went from doing the theme of "Male/Female" to doing "Control/Loss of Control." That was essentially what Abdi and Nicole (who were, by the way, exceedingly dull in this episode; that's what you get when you let your heart win oh oh oh oh put the two nicest, least aggressive people together) had, so it was repetitive. However, Miles and Jackie did a much better job with their self-appointed theme and they actually did make it work for the assigned theme.

On Jackie's piece: in all of the reviews I've read, it has been discussed how Miles made it seem like the idea for her painting was his. OH MILES. SO EVIL. He knows how to play the game, guys. Don't hate because you artists don't want to be like every other reality show contestant in history; that is, you guys don't want to have specific, interesting, and hilarious personalities. You guys just want to be robots who are loved for their art! and nothing else. Jackie doesn't think of herself as the Hottest Thing in the Studio, even though the editors try to make it seem like she does; she just thinks of herself as an artist, and don't you forget it! Or else! This is why, if you read her blog, you will hear her talk about her piece and virtually nothing else. She defends her character on the show, but I think she really just wants to establish that, "Really, guys, I don't have a character! Honest! I'm just an artist! LOVE ME!" You can read her latest blog post here.

"Me? Hot? Gurl, please, I am not at all attractive! I so shy, gurl! Now, sorry, but I have to go take my clothing off now. It's morally ambiguous. You know."

I actually really like Jaclyn, though. Her blog helps. 4 episodes ago I complained about how she was "whiny" and "unlikeable" but she's actually very intelligent and one of the least obnoxious people on the show. I like her just as much as I like everyone else on the show left - Miles, Abdi, Nicole...and I thought I liked Peregrine, but this episode established that if Miles is The Evil Genius (c) then Peregrine is The Horrible Cold-Blooded Faker Who Gets People Sent Home For Things That Are Her Fault (c). That is exactly what she did this episode; she got Mark sent home. I'd like to send her a personalized greeting card thanking her for this, but I would, but I can't. I don't know her address. Also, she doesn't deserve one. Mark's original idea was really boring, lightness and darkness representing their theme, Heaven and Hell, but Peregrine's wasn't better. She essentially said, "Well, y'know, let's do this, because even though it's basically your idea, it's better because I'm much more conceptual and intelligent and a much better artist than you! Tee-hee! Do you like my new hat, by the way? And would you like to come with me and leave a melodramatic, America's Next Top Model-esque message on my husband's cell phone after this? Awkward face!" It's GRATING. Peregrine created a new character for herself: quirky buttface. SHE IS A QUIRKY BUTTFACE AND SHE IS GOOD AT THAT. Especially the latter!

That said, I liked Peregrine's piece. That's high praise, because the work in this episode sucked major. Miles and Jackie's pieces were quite good, although here's something about M&M (that's my nickname for Miles, because I do things like that): every time I see him working in the studio, I worry that he's not doing the challenge. I understand that it's because he, usually, isn't. But because he's made himself so endearing and he's essentially performed inception on the minds of the judges (he's so good at it that Leo/Dom Cobb should have hired him to help out!) everything he touches turns to gold, even if it doesn't make explicit sense. I think after he explained it to the judges, it made more sense to me, and I liked that piece of his, the holes in the wall. It is stereotypically masculine; I read a comment somewhere saying, "Don't girls punch holes in walls?" It's not that we don't, but I don't think that's how most girls choose to take out their anger, generally. Not that any guy I know has every punched a wall that hard, either, but still. So anyway, while Miles' work is questionable in the studio, it works in the gallery, and he's lucky for that.

Nicole's piece sounded like it was going to be really cool, but it was poorly executed. The crank didn't work right, but she was safe because we all know she's talented, even though she hasn't really shown it yet. Also, she's just a likable girl! She's like a little kid, and she's fun to have around. I forgot about her a lot in the beginning, which says something because that first challenge had Peregrine painting Nicole naked (although she didn't actually get naked) and you'd think we'd remember that, but no. But I like Nicole. She looks like a horse. A horse that I want to pet and name Buttercup.

Abdi's piece was kind of cool to look at, but I actually agree with China when I say that it was bad and made no sense. Although China said something about the Hulk, which is stupid because the Hulk symbolizes the loss of control AKA chaos AKA what Abdi was supposed to be doing, so scratch that, I'm back on the the China Hate Train (c). Yes, I have copyrighted all of these terms, thank you for asking. So, yes, Abdi actually had the worst piece. It sucked because I love Abdi. He's one of my favorites. There were so many great Abdi moments in yesterday's episode: there was this one part where Nicole was talking to him and he just had his mouth WIDE OPEN, smiling at her, and it was hilarious. There was also the part where Miles carried him into the apartment. The odd couple. Miles and Abdi should get more showtime together like they did in this episode, because Miles is at his most tolerable/nicest when he's with him. Because Abdi brings that out in people.

Two quick random things: Simon in this episode was unmemorable. It sucks. Next week he gets mad at Jackie, so I'm excited to see what she said to him to make this Happy Swiss Man Made of Candy and Sunshine (c) get upset. Also, the scene in-between commercials where Mark is talking about how pretentious everyone sounds was gold. Really, I love these people, but it's true. They're intelligent, hence using these very specific terms that they use to describe things, but I can't help but think that they are so self-obsessed when they're using them. It was Mark's one good moment last night. (Also: see Nicole's rambling explanation of "chaos" to Abdi for more self-obsession and overuse of intelligent words like way too many sprinkles on a hot fudge sundae.)

Jeanne was gone again, and Jerry Saltz keeps saying in his recaps that she always has smart things to say. I never saw this. I don't miss her, although I do miss having a woman on the panel.  China doesn't count; she's a robot and thus has no gender. I think the guest judge, Ryan McGuinness/McGinley/McHeineken was obnoxious and irritating. His voice was tiny and he reminded me of a kid even more than that guy from last week. I liked the guy from last week even though I can't remember his name. I did not like Ryan McG. I guess Bill stepped up his game tonight, although I can't remember a word he said. Jerry Saltz assures me that he did, though.

In the end, the judges made the obvious choice to send Mark home. Mark is literal, boring, and maybe even untalented. At the end when they showed him taking his self-portrait off the wall (I like that touch, by the way; it's nice) I thought, "What? They let him in with that crud of a self-portrait?" I liked that it wasn't a heavily Photoshopped mess of a photo, but it was boring. It was a boring picture that I could have taken if I had a nice camera. How they even let Mark in in the first place, I don't know. I guess they wanted to diversify the cast. Which reminds me, the only minority left is Abdi now. That saddens me, but at least it's Abdi and not Mark.

The group challenge from two weeks ago was far more enjoyable then this one; maybe because it had way more drama. But this episode was good, too, even if it was weird (see: China crying as she told Mark to leave; what the heck was that about? And Peregrine crying the moment the judges opened their mouth, I mean, what?). Next week is our last pre-finale challenge, strangely enough, and it looks to be quite exciting. I'm looking forward to seeing Miles safely glide into the finale spot while everyone else vomits due to nervousness and tension. Maybe you guys should take a page out of The Book of Miles and take naps on your sculptures. The possibilities!

I give this episode 4 Abdi's Being Carried Over the Threshold out of 5.

The Things We Do When There's Nothing Else To Do

Today I watched two movies. Would you like to know what they are? Check either an emphatic "Yes!" or a slightly bored, "Sure, okay." Would you like to know what I thought about them? Your options are, once again, of enthusiastic or apathetic affirmation.

Basically, you're going to hear about them either way.

Copy-pasted from my Flixster page:

The Science of Sleep

My "review" (I gave it 3 stars out of 5):

I love Gael Garcia Bernal in this movie, and Charlotte Gainsbourg was surprisingly not at all annoying. But this movie just had no real plot to speak of. It plodded on, boringly, and nothing really HAPPENED. The imagery was sometimes cool, sometimes garish and painful to look at. The movie seems to ride too much on the visuals and too little on the story. There was some good dialogue, though, dialogue that I'm sure the 20-somethings will quote in all seriousness, saying, "YES I AM LIKE THESE CHARACTERS" when really, they are not. But while dialogue like that bothers me in most other movies, I find myself wanting to quote these things, too, because they are meaningful, even while they are trying to be.

Additional thoughts: About the dialogue thing. It's the same with another, much better, and more popular Michel Gondry movie, Eternal Sunshine of the Spotless Mind. The plot of that movie is inherently easy to relate to for a young person, and there are so many conversations that the characters have that you can, and do, see said young people quote and apply to their own lives. However, these snippets aren't TRYING to sound clever or witty. They're not trying to sell posters. Gondry (well, Charlie Kaufman wrote that movie, but still) has a knack for selling the sometimes preposterous dialogue as realistic. These movies are not annoying.

Well, okay, actually, Science of Sleep is annoying at times. But it's good to know that it's not because of the dialogue. It's annoying because, as I said before, nothing really happens at all. People sing the praises of experimental films, saying a plot isn't necessary, and there doesn't have to be a character you like. The latter, I can concede, is true for the most part. But it's my personal opinion that a film is trying to tell you a story. There are a lot of films that convey emotion, but, to me, the best movie is the one that conveys emotion within in a story. This movie is just preoccupied with feelings, although I'm not so clear as to what those even are here! One quote I really like is from a review of the first Back to the Future by the BBC: "Every scene, every line works but then later you see how you were set up: nobody says anything that doesn't become important to the plot later. That should be terrible, but it's done so very well that it's a treat. It's undeniably formulaic but so outstandingly executed that it vindicates the formula." There shouldn't be completely pointless scenes, especially if said scenes are extremely boring like the ones in this movie. Every scene should have a purpose, even if that purpose isn't to drive the plot along.

Here's one crazy scene from the movie. I think it's emblematic of what it basically is:

The Girl With the Dragon Tattoo

 This review that I posted on my Flixster basically covers all of my opinions about this movie (I gave it 4 stars out of 5):

It cut out a lot of the stuff that I hated from the book, making the plot a lot tighter and easier to follow (for the most part). However, it also cut out a lot of Mikael's characterization and a lot of the stuff that I really liked from the book - namely, the stuff involving his magazine. My favorite characters in the book are Berger and the graphic designer whose name I can't remember, and Berger's subplot was completely ignored. It's really important, too, so what the heck? And the graphic designer wasn't even in the movie!

Since Mikael's backstory was ignored in favor of having more scenes with Lisbeth in them, it was really hard to pay attention to him. Luckily, Lisbeth carries the film. While I didn't personally imagine her to be as...intense as she was in this movie (in terms of how she looks, really), I do agree that the casting is pretty perfect. Also, Lisbeth is much less awkward and irritating. She's more talkative without losing the anti-social behavior that makes her who she is. I'd say that if they added at least SOME of the Millennium stuff, then I would have liked this movie WAY more than I liked the book. But as it stands, I'd say that I liked it a little more than the book. I definitely appreciated the fact that I didn't have to read this movie and face the horrible writing and drawn out descriptions. That helped.

Additional thoughts: More on the book, really. I make it sound like I absolutely HATED it. This isn't true. I actually really liked it! The writing wasn't that good, but I guess at the time I was just too used to reading all those fancy novels we read in school and such. This is more "popular" fiction, you know, like Dan Brown, Stephen King, Tom Clancy, etc. Also, I hadn't read a mystery novel in a long time, so I didn't remember what they "felt" like. But this movie reminded me of how interesting the plot was. Once again, that is most important to me: a good story. The book, and the movie, had a very good story. While the book decided to convey the story sometimes with "drawn out descriptions" (seriously: there was a WHOLE CHAPTER just dedicated to Mikael Blomkvist's day at the cafe! Ugh) it really did get the job done. The book did a way better job of letting you get to know the characters, as well.

So, that was my day. Notice that I am considering my day to be over when it's not even 2:30 yet! Such is the nature of the summer. *dramatic pose, then even more dramatic fall to the floor!* Excuse me...I feel so faint...I haven't yet had a cookie today...I should correct that situation at once!

Inception Mini-Review

Whoa. Just saw Inception. You know it, obviously - it's been hyped by pretty much everyone you know for the last YEAR, since that very first teaser trailer came out. But now that it's out, we all have to wonder - does it live up to the hype?

Well, yes, I'd say so. For the most part.

This is a mini-review. I don't think we (okay, I) here at FWSF have ever done one of those. EXPLANATION TIME WHOO: Basically I'm going to sum up everything in bullet points. It's easier and you're more likely to read it without getting bored! (Hopefully.) Think of it as my notes. WARNING FOR POSSIBLE SPOILERS. I'll try to be a little vague.

• The acting was awesome - for me the standouts were Leo, JGL, Ellen Page, and I guess Tom Hardy. Leo played the tortured married man/dream thief - his usual trope, obviously. But darnit if he's not one of the best guys acting today at playing a tortured soul. 
• I'm conflicted as to whether I'd consider Cillian Murphy's acting to be good; his character, although written multi-dimensionally, it seemed, did not seem to feel. He cried at one point, but I didn't get a good sense for who he was because the acting was cold. It was hard to connect with him.
• On that note - this movie is really one without a clear villain. It may seem like it from the beginning, but eventually the villains become friends. For a movie like this, a thriller, a heist, it seems like there -must- be a villain, but somehow it works without one. Perhaps because there are always people shooting at each other.
• The awesome scenes with JGL being thrown around in the hallway, floating around (they're seen in the trailers, you know what I'm talking about) - so cool. I love trying to figure out how that stuff works. It really amazes me. I know that it was done with sets - but how the heck could they have them floating in the air? That's something I'll be thinking about until I buy the Blu-ray and watch the special features that will hopefully cover the Making Of.   
• Ellen Page was a college student in FRANCE. Why did she have a Nova Scotian accent? Was she French-Canadian? It's a nitpick but IT BUGS ME. P.S. Michael Caine rules, bye

OKAY THESE ARE ALL SPOILERS NOW:

• The last third of the movie was the weakest. Once they got into that third dream, on that snowy mountain, it started to get complicated. The premise of this movie alone seems complicated, but it's well-explained. However, the third dream was not. It was unclear to me what the real goal was, and since everyone and everything was covered in white, it was hard to see who was who. When Tom Hardy was attacking someone, it was hard to be sure that it was not actually the other way around. 
• Limbo - the concept should make sense but Chris Nolan complicated it. At least, for me. Also in that limbo part it was incredibly infuriating that there was SO MUCH TALKING. The snappy dialogue is what sets the movie apart from your typical summer action film, but in this scene I just kept wishing that Leo would punch Marion Cotillard in the face.
• On that note - MARION COTILLARD. Her character was so stinking irritating. Maybe that was the point? She was a psychotic witch who was torturing Leo. If that was the goal then she succeeded. But I really dreaded seeing her on screen once it was revealed she was dead. She was cool when she was trying to kill everyone. 
• Her childhood home - it seemed like they were going to explain her childhood, why it was so important. They were setting things up for a BIG SCENE OF EXPLANATION AND LOTS OF FLASHBACKS but nothing ever came. It was a red herring and annoying at that. 
• JGL and Ellen Page - well, actually, Ariadne and Arthur. (Aren't those names adorable by the way?) I'm sure there's going to be tons of fanfiction about them now. I went into this movie thinking that they were going to avoid romance, but obviously they didn't. Although it was brief, anyway. But I think that scene made everyone love Arthur a little more.
• The ending. If you've seen the movie, let's discuss it in the comments. Mark for spoilers. My personal opinion is that the totem falls down, and that it's NOT a dream. But maybe I'm optimistic. God, I hope not. It better all be real! But the callback to the beginning (I actually love frame narratives even though they're done WAY too frequently) was confusing. Obviously Ken Watanabe had been there for a long time, since he was an old guy with lots and lots of makeup. But Leo? What about him? Do we all have our own limbos? But Leo told Ariadne that he had to go find Ken. How did he know that he was even dead? It couldn't have taken THAT long to find him, because he woke up before the flight was over. But Ken Watanabe had grown so old. That's the problem. That's the case against my opinion. That's why most people will say that the ending was a dream. WHY DID YOU HAVE TO DO THIS CHRIS NOLAN WHY

SPOILERS ARE OVER PEOPLE STOP FREAKING OUT NOW

So, while the movie has some missteps, it's something that I think most people will not forget anytime soon. It leaves a lot of unanswered questions that I know I'll be thinking about for a long, long time. Maybe it didn't live up to all of that insurmountable hype, but nothing does. (Except, maybe, The Dark Knight.) It'll probably make you angry - but in a good way. The movie that makes you feel something is the movie that succeeds.

Also, Leo has a really big, squishy head in it. And everyone wears snazzy suits. So you kind of have to see it for that. (Yes, I'm aware that Leo's head is ALWAYS squishy. But it's especially squishy when he's wearing a suit.)

Inception gets 4 and a half Joseph Gordon-Levitt's being mocked by Tom Hardy's out of 5.

Books Are Relevant, Too.

Today I finished a book. I love finishing books. I treat finishing a book the way other people treat getting a Trophy in a PS3 game, earning an Achievement on the 360. I love the feeling and it makes me want more.

So, here's my Goodreads-HTML-provided, very short review of the book I read today. I suggest you check the book out. It's excellent.

A Gate at the Stairs by Lorrie Moore

My rating: 5 of 5 stars


The negative reviews this book seems to be getting on this site both shock and sadden me. I loved this book from beginning to end. Maybe I'm more welcoming of "Lifetime movie adoption plots" and perhaps I'm too young to completely understand the toll that 9/11 did on the lives of -real- college students during that time period. But I loved this book, a lot.

View all my reviews >>

Buy A Gate to the Stairs here.

"Throw one at me if you want, hash head. I've got all five senses and I slept last night, that puts me six up on the lot of you."

I just watched Brick with Joseph Gordon-Levitt. Well, I mean, not with him, although that would be cool. He stars in it, I mean.

It's this neo-noir film; that's what I'd call it. Anyone who's seen a film noir should know what I mean when I say that it was so unrealistic that it didn't even matter anymore, because the dialogue was so snappy. Snappy!

Brick is about teenage detective Brendan, although he's not the kind of teenage detective you would think. He's no Shinichi Kudo. Although that would be awesome. Anyway, Brendan, being the hyper-intelligent teen he so happens to be, takes it upon himself to solve the mystery of who killed his ex-girlfriend.

While I'd seen the last half an hour or so before, I thought it was necessary to see the movie from the beginning. And it was. Everything made sense. Everything paid off nicely. Certain parts that may have seemed unnecessary came back to prove their importance. Lines that made little sense to my actually teen-aged ears ended up making a lot more sense later on. I liked that a lot.

I found myself liking the movie more and more as it went on. At the beginning, I actively disliked it; it was completely unbelievable, Emily (the dead ex) was INCREDIBLY irritating (hate on me for saying this but thank goodness she died at the beginning, even though the circumstances and reasoning were horrible), and the acting of some of the characters (Laura at first and OH MY GOD DODE UGH) was awful and hard to bear. But JGL really sold it. He inhabited that character and he made the movie that much more enjoyable. Once we had a likable, believable main character (although his characterization was slightly confusing; was he cold? Did he love too much? Was he a smart aleck? It was hard to tell) everything fell into place.

The movie, despite its extreme violence (the body count was quite possibly in the double digits; remember, these are high school kids), had some hilarious moments. Kara and the Pin were particularly hilarious. The Pin was our main antagonist, but when you saw him eating a cookie at the breakfast table with Brendan and kissing his mom, sitting on the beach talking about his love for The Hobbit, he was hard not to love. Kara's character was largely pointless but she was so full of herself and fake, dishing out freshmen at every moment who were at her beck and call for everything, I had to laugh. Especially with her Kabuki makeup on.

Brendan's best friend, the Brain, didn't get to do too much on camera, but with his little jacket and his thick glasses, he ended up being one of my favorite characters. He was the loyal best friend we all want to have.

This movie is both extremely violent and very sad, with some funnier moments. JGL pulls in his best performance in any movie not called 500 Days of Summer (even if you didn't like that movie, which thanks to its obnoxious teenage fanbase you very well might not, you have to agree he was good). Well, actually, I haven't seen Mysterious Skin yet. That's supposed to be good. But Manic wasn't worth it (he wasn't, but it's hard to call his performance great when that movie was just so not good), so the award goes to this. The story is fun to follow and while it's not something you can watch mindlessly it won't hit you over the head too much so it's pretty easy to get. Crazy film noir dialogue aside, of course.

Brick gets 4 JGLs running away at insane speeds from "The Lug" out of 5.

Work Of Art #1.4 Review

I've been trying to write a review for this for awhile, but I just...couldn't. But today I'm going to try. This post will probably be really stupid, full of "It was stinking hilarious", and poorly written. Just giving you some warning.

Oh, and before I get into things, please follow my tumblr if you have one. If you don't have one, then just disregard this part. It was supposed to supplement this blog, somehow, but I'm not really sure how so it kind of isn't.

WORK OF ART #1.4 "A Shock to the System"

While last week's challenge was incredibly commercial and "safe," yesterday's episode was all about shocking the viewer. That being said, while this challenge was probably more interesting and was better for showcasing the artists' talents than last week's, trying to shock is overrated and pretty hard to do well, which led to this episode, much like last week's, featuring the artists flailing their arms and freaking out a lot. (Look at all of those F's!)

However, one person who kept his cool amidst the rest of the gang's misguided attempts to shock was my favorite brohan, Miles. Miles is, without exaggeration, one of the greatest reality show "characters" I've ever seen. Every week Miles speaks in the same deadpan/mildly sarcastic tone in his talking heads and says something completely awesome. This week, he talked about how the first time he got turned on, which was while watching Ursula The Little Mermaid. Yes, this was actually completely relevant to the rest of the episode. Basically, this was Miles: "maaaan dat fish was dayum fine." Um, except more deadpan, obviously. And then he asked his mom what was "happening to his body." Oh, Miles.

Miles constantly mugs for the camera in his big glasses and rolled up jeans and it's just great. Did I mention that he relies on the old standby "I have OCD" as an excuse for everything and has an affinity for sleeping at the oddest of times and in the oddest of places? It's pretty obvious that Miles is going to come out on, or near, the top because he's the strongest personality; not only that, but he also has the best portfolio. I really liked his genital-laden, male bodily fluid-stained Mickey Mouse (now THAT'S something you don't hear someone say every day); while it wasn't that shocking, well, none of the pieces were, honestly, so grading on artistic merit his really was the best. But, of course, I'm kind of biased.

Miles: "Excuse me while I jack off on my painting and then take a nap on it, kthx"

Some of the other "characters" got some fun showtime today. Whenever I see Ryan, I wonder why we don't see more of him. He seems like a cool guy, if a little full of himself (there have been SO MANY pieces that have Ryan in them so far). This time we got to see some Ryan action as we watched him make an idiot out of himself in an attempt to be shocking. It' so weird, because Ryan, like Erik who is probably one of his best buddies, has this sorta dynamic personality (I mean, relatively speaking I guess) and I don't constantly forget about him, like Mark and Peregrine, but at the same time I don't really see him going far. He is talented; his picture was good, albeit not very shocking and boringly self-centered yet again. It's just that he seems more like the male model who is there for the artists to use as opposed to being an artist himself. [/Ryan rant]

Someone who actually got a lot of screen time (as opposed to Ryan, whose "some Ryan action" really amounted to about 5 minutes of screen time) was Jaclyn. Jackie is the obligatory "Little Miss Hottie" who's there for the audience to ogle and for the judges to make awkward comments about. I enjoyed watching them look at her piece, which looked like pictures someone would take with their cell phone to send to their boyfriend Jaden or whatever who would later show those pictures that were supposed to be "so special" to all of his friends, including that sleezy dude that everyone calls Boner who would then email the pictures to every single person in school. The judges seemed to derive a bit too much pleasure from the piece. You knew this was true when they put her in the Top 2 with Abdi, another favorite to win. While Jackie didn't end up winning, she does get to stay to prance around nude for at least one more episode.

I have a love-hate relationship with Erik. On the one hand, he's "really stinking hilarious." On the other hand, he's also kind of a jerk and the art he's done so far really sucks. They always show "ERIK JOHNSON'S PREVIOUS WORK LOOK AT IT PEOPLE HERE IT IS WE'RE ONLY SHOWING IT FOR A  FEW SECONDS BECAUSE WE WANT YOU TO GO TO OUR WEBSITE OKAY IT'S GONE NOW BRAVOTV.COM THANKS" and it always looks really good, but then the crud he produces on the show is just, well, crud. I wonder if it's because he doesn't work well under pressure? I don't know. His "shocking" picture was of Ryan (of course) and Jackie's feet, symbolizing, um, priests molesting little boys. Uh. Uh? Let's stop talking about it, because it's just...erm. Since Jackie is very whiny, she started screaming at people to give her ideas, and Erik did, saying she should have people write all over her pictures. She used this idea and the judges loved it. Erik did not love it when she passed this idea off as her own. That makes sense, of course he'd be mad, but it really made him unlikable in that moment. Jackie, too, but she's always unlikable. I really just wanted Erik to go home. 

(Did I mention that the guest judge this week was famous shock artist Andreas Serrano? I know, you don't care.)

Can I just say that Peregrine cracked me up so many times in this episode? First you see her just standing around nonchalantly in her metallic bunny hood, and then, while wearing that same insane outfit, she has the gall to call Nao "really crazy" (I mean, which she is, but c'mon). Her painting was of fashion models with STDs, and one of them was basically just China Chow. It was called "Syphilis for Prada and Herpes for Chanel." That was basically my favorite non-Miles moment of the episode because during the gallery show China, when looking at the painting, was like, "There's my Chanel collar! And there's my dress! I don't have STDs this is so not cool gaiz D':" China's been completely useless as a host so far. She's no Heidi Klum or Padma Lakshmi (who is actually a really excellent host; thank you, Bravo, for putting Top Chef on right before Work of Art), but I felt like she actually had a personality in this episode, at least. That was nice to see.

The other judges range from annoying to hilariously dumb. Jerry Saltz is the prime suspect in irritating-ness; I'm sure he's the most qualified member of the panel but he really bugs me. I love New York mag but I guess I always skipped the Art section for a reason. Read his recap of the episode to get a sense of how obnoxious he is. The hilariously dumb judge is Jeanne Greenberg Rohatyn, who is barely qualified to even brush her own hair, let alone be in charge of the fate of the people on this show. Jeanne just never has anything of use to say. While Andreas Serrano was standing up for one of the artists that she was dissing, she just gave him this look like, "Uh, are you kidding me right now? How can you NOT agree with me?!" It was incredibly obnoxious and idiotic.

The Tim Gunn character is Simon de Pury, who seems like one of the nicest, friendliest people who has ever existed. While in earlier episodes he seemed more like an observer than a mentor, this time he dispensed important advice and also regaled the artists with his lovely sense of humor. (One of my favorite parts of the show so far has to be, from last week's episode, when Simon tells a joke about a Dr. Zhivago-reading dog. Simon, be my grandfather or something, please!) I think Simon should be a judge, because he seems more cultured, intelligent, and interesting than any of the people who are actually getting paid to give their weak criticisms.

In a horrible segue, not only were the artists trying to be shocking, but the producers were, too, apparently. To be subversive or something, they went with an American Idol-style approach and said that they were going to eliminate TWO people this week. Yeah, I just put "American Idol" in the same sentence as "subversive." That should tell you what I thought of this choice.

The bottom four were Erik, Nao (the "internationally renowned performance artist," she was shaping up to be "The Villain" in the beginning but just faded away), Jamie Lynn (the "Nice Christian Girl"), and John, who was one of my absolute favorites. He won last week's Book Cover challenge and was just generally sweet and huggable. Oh, and, yeah, he was a good artist, too. This week he made a picture of a dude performing "auto-fellatio." I don't want to explain what that means to you, but I also don't want you to see the picture. Hopefully you know enough to know what that means on your own, because it's really disgusting. Unfortunately, the judges found John's picture safe and uninteresting. They told John that they would have preferred a photo of him actually doing the act, which is completely disgusting and weird to say to someone with a straight face. John looked insanely uncomfortable, and I don't blame him.

Nao was put down for doing thoughtless performance art, which was true, but I found it pretty unsettling. So did Andreas Serrano, who, while not shocked, claimed to be disturbed. This view was undermined by the other judges. Idiots. Jamie Lynn drew a parody of the Last Supper that was not shocking at all. The premise was that "We're making Jesus look bad! I'm going to draw a picture that shows you guys that you're making Jesus look bad with all your debauchery! JESUS CHRIST IS SO WONDERFUL!" Oh-kay, Crazy Lynn. The judges called it "Apostles Gone Wild," and aptly-so, but this "Gone Wild" stuff has become so ingrained in our culture that it's pretty much commonplace. As said in this fine review of the episode, "Presented to a panel that includes a man who dumps crucifixes into vats of urine, this 'outrage' directed at religion was benign if not wholly pleasant." It truly was awful.

In the end, the judges kicked off John and Nao, which was completely idiotic. While Jerry Saltz seems to indicate otherwise in his review, I think that the producers wanted to go for shocking in as many aspects as possible. John said that he was "went from winning a challenge one week to being sent home the next [which] is extremely baffling," and I agree. It was stupid. And Nao's might have been meaningless, but I'd be pretty shocked if I saw someone covered in feces that they rubbing on their crotch, and I doubt that'd have a point, either. Erik has been either awful or mediocre for the last four challenges, and Jamie Lynn's was outstandingly bad. Sending home Nao and my beloved JOHN was stupid beyond belief.

It may seem like I have a lot of criticisms, but I'm a hater. That's what we do. I actually really liked this episode, but I don't think I liked it as much as last week's. Next week there's supposed to be some Miles x Nicole (who I haven't mentioned even once, have I?) stuff, which means that there will be lots and lots of Miles, which makes me an excited little girl.

I'll give this episode 3 and a half Little-Mermaid-lovin' Miles out of 5.

Check out the "works of art" here.