I feel sick to my stomach every time I see a someone playing with another person’s emotions. It’s so fucking sickening. My brother used to be like that, and I’m sure he still is at times. I know, and sadly have unknowing gotten involved with, several guys like that. It’s sick! Sex with different people that means nothing. If you’re both into one night stands, whatever, just be safe and don’t make a slutty habit out of it. Especially if you’re supposedly looking for that special someone, because then, it just makes you look like a bullshitting prick.

I hate when guys can’t count their sex partners. It rubs me the wrong way. And they’ve expierimented with heavy drugs. And you know they still do it a little bit, because they hangout with skeezy little stoners and people who snort and shoot, etc. And the drinking, they don’t know when to quit. Drinking and driving isn’t an issue because they don’t care. As long as they get what they want. Their idiots! And don’t even get me started on cheating. Only slutty skanks cheat. Especially if you’re not telling your partner about it. Do it once and you may have a shot. Do it twice, and give your partner proof…. Bye, bye! Believe me when I tell you they will find out.

Anyways, I’m so glad I decided not to watch The Notebook tonight. Then I would’ve been crying even harder. I already watched Brokeback Mountain tonight. Jeez! Anyways, have a good night!

For Monday, we’ll be reading Annie Proulx’s short story, “Brokeback Mountain.”  It’s the final piece in a collection of short stories about Wyoming, entitled Close Range:  Wyoming Stories.

You can download a copy of “Brokeback Mountain” here.

Brokeback Mountain graced our collective cultural conscience in 2005 with the release of Ang Lee’s film.  And with our reading of Annie Proulx’s short story, on which the film is based, our course comes full circle.

What might the literary pastoral have to tell us about “Brokeback Mountain?”  Construct a pastoral reading of Proulx’s short story that deals with its pastoral motifs, tensions, themes, and messages.

The Controversial Night and the political inside

Banyak yang mengatakan kalau pihak AMPAS sudah mulai terbuka dalam dekade ini. Terlihat dari beragamnya film yang menang dan diakui melalui nominasi. Diantaranya adalah adanya sebutan The Black Oscar tahun 2001 yang lalu dengan dikawinkannya Halle Berry dan Danzel Washington sebagai pemenang kategori utama yang berhembus menjadi propaganda Oscar dalam isu rasisme. Kemudian disebutnya tahun 2005 sebagai The Gay Oscar karena diakuinya Brokeback Mountain sebagai nominasi Best Picture dan menjadi kontroversi hangat di media, ditambah lagi dengan nominasi di kategori Actors-nya yang didominasi karakter gay. Sebut saja Philip Seymour Hoffman (Capote), Felicity Hoffman (Transamerica), Heath Ledger (Brokeback Mountain), dan Jake Gyllenhall (Brokeback Mountain). Meski hanya Hoffman yang akhirnya menang. Tahun 2005 juga menjadi puncak malam Oscar yang paling kontroversial karena ketika para precursor serempak menasbihkan Brokeback Mountain sebagai film terbaik, AMPAS memilih Crash sang kuda hitam sebagai pemenang.

Masih ingat bagaimana tanpa ekspresinya Jack Nicholson sewaktu membacakan Crash yang menjadi pemenang? Nampak sekali dia pun sebagai pihak yang ikut memilih terkejut luar biasa dengan hasil yang ada. Semakin lengkap akhirnya ketika pihak-pihak yang dianggap sebagai anggota juri “konservatif” yang biasanya “berumur” mengakui bahwa mereka bahkan tidak sudi menonton film Brokeback Mountain karena temanya yang sulit diterima itu. Padahal pihak Academy sudah mewanti-wanti bahwa juri oscar harus menonton setiap film yang menjadi entry. Inilah titik dimana Oscar akhirnya dikritisi habis-habisan, karena tidak bisanya menghimpun semua pemilihnya untuk menonton semua film yang masuk kualifikasi. Tidak hanya sebatas itu, kemenangan Crash yang mendapat hujatan, juga menarik berbagai pers untuk saling menuding mau ke arah mana Oscar berperan. Tahun 2005 merupakan tahun paling politis dari Oscar karena ada dua isu sentral yang digusung, isu gay dan rasisme. Keputusan AMPAS untuk memilih Crash juga dianggap sebagai proyek “aman” mereka karena memenangkan film seperti Brokeback Mountain akan mengundang berbagai pandangan berbeda termasuk bagaimana nantinya penerimaan kaum “gay” seutuhnya. Crash lebih dipilih juga mengingat isu rasisme tidak kalah gesitnya menjamur di Amerika. Mereka harus memilih antara isu gay atau rasisme, dua isu yang mengkutub dan memiliki debat yang begitu panjang. Maka terpilihlah rasime yang bisa menjadi isu paling aman ketimbang memilih isu yang diangkat dalam film Ang Lee. Ini pun tidak semata-mata tanpa sejarah yang panjang. Ini dimulai dengan bagaimana tidak beraninya Oscar mengakui “Do The Right Thing” dua dekade silam, bahkan masuk nominasi sekalipuin tidak, yang akhirnya membuat Kim Basinger geram sampai-sampai menyinggunggya terang-terangan di depan para audiens di malam Oscar dengan mengatakan bahwa AMPAS belum bisa menerima film yang menampilkan “kebenaran” dalam isu rasisme yang dipamerkan film penting “Do The Right Thing”. Crash adalah pilihan yang tepat pada waktu yang tepat juga. Isu gay belum bisa diterima seutuhnya, bahkan ketika film sebesar Brokeback Mountain sekalipun, pihak AMPAS sulit mengetuk palunya. Masih butuh mungkin satu dekade lagi ketika isu sensitif seperti gay bisa diterima.

Tinggalkan tahun 2006, mari menyimak yang terjadi di tahun kemarin, ketika Slumdog Millionaire menang. Ini juga menjadi bukti bagaimana sudah terbukanya AMPAS, sebuah film yang tidak dibuat oleh sutradara Amerika, dengan pemain yang tidak satupun berkulit putih, dan setting film yang sama sekali tidak menceritakan budaya Amerika akhirnya ditasbihkan sebagai Best Picture. Apakah ini ada unsur politisnya di luar kualitas filmnya yang memang bagus? Entahlah. Hanya saja jika melihat bagaimana precursor mengakui film ini serempak sebagai film terbaik, contohnya BAFTA dan Golden Globes dan festival film-film lainnya, akankah timbul kontroversi jika Oscar memilih Frost/Nixon sebagai pemenang? Pasti. Akan banyak yang mencibir bagaimana ketidakterbukaannya pihak Oscar jika saja Slumdog Millionaire tidak menang dan akan timbul anggapan bagaimana apatisnya Amerika terhadap isu kemiskinan di Asia.

The “Blah blah blah”

Pada akhirnya Academy Awards bukanlah hanya sesederhana konsep “film bagus adalah film bagus adalah film bagus adalah film bagus”. Tetapi lebih kompleks dari itu. Ada politik yang sampai kapanpun tidak bisa dipangkas dari situ. Itulah mengapa terkadang film yang biasa saja bisa diterima, namun sebaliknya film yang luar biasa luput dari nominasi. Academy Awards tak ubahnya pemerintahan yang membutuhkan antek-anteknya sebagai pelengkap. Selayaknya pemerintahan, dibutuhkan kekuasaan, nama besar, kampanye, lobi-lobi, dan entah apalagi. Karena itulah maka dikenal berbagai pakem umum ketika Oscar season dimulai. “Hey, itu filmnya Clint Eastwood pasti masuk Oscar” “Hey, itu filmnya Steven Spielberg pasti dilirik Oscar” Atau contoh lainnya yang disebut kampanye. Ketika Oprah mengampanyekan Crash, berbuah manis. Bagaimana dengan Precious yang juga akan mendapat sorotan karena Oprah ada dibelakanggnya juga? Bisa ditebak.

Selain itu dikenallah Harvey Weinstein dengan strategi kampanyenya yang jitu, bahkan banyak menganggapnya licik. Dialah yang berhasil mebuat Shakepeare in Love mengalahkan Saving Private Ryan. Dialah yang berhasil mengantarkan Chocolat meraih nominasi Best Picture padahal review filmnya buruk. Dan yang paling gres, dialah yang berhasil mengantarkan The Reader merangsek sebagai nominasi Best Picture dan membuat orang-orang menghujat si Harvey Weinsten ini. Namanya kampanye sah-sah saja. Toh pada akhirnya setiap orang punya caranya sendiri-sendiri. Yang banyak usaha yang akan membuahkan hasil. Pihak yang tidak berhasil, perlu banyak berkaca pada Harvey Weinstein. Maka untuk tahun ini berhati-hatilah wahai engkau para film-film lainnya. Karena The Weinstein Company akan mengampanyekan filmnya habis-habisan. Siap-siaplah untuk gempuran Nine, Inglourious Basterds, A Single Man, dan The Road yang semuanya akan ditangani Harvey Weinstein. Heads up, guys!

Scrivo mentre sono in viaggio da PINKville verso Roma. 10 giorni per rilassarsi dopo il periodo tormentato e pieno della sessione d’esame e della festa del cinema. 10 giorni per mangiare prima dell’inizio di un work out che dovrà farmi perdere 13-15 chili. 10 giorni prima dell’ultimo sforzo che mi porterà alla laurea ed a lasciare per un po’ l’Italia. 10 giorni per capire la vita di paese che un tempo conducevo.

Ritornare, in inverno, nel proprio paese natio, di 2000 abitanti scarsi, è un’esperienza ai limiti delle novelle di Stephen King. Tipo che, con la temperatura mai sopra i 6°, pare di essere nel Maine e sempre in procinto di scoprire qualche nuovo omicidio ad opera di un mostro psicotico e misterioso.

Ed io, in questo ambiente da bestseller, mi ci ritrovo benissimo. Metto su panza a sberle di dolci e cannelloni, tracanno birra in quantità industriali, rutto come un camionista, scoreggio talvolta in compagnia di amici e sono sempre favolosamente gay.

Si, perché, se c’è qualcosa che di Pinkville mi piace, sono i miei amici che bramano racconti e sfrociate cittadine per passare la serata. Ed io, reggendo la mi terza bottiglia di birra, sono sempre pronto ad aggiornarli sui nuovi stili e sui diversi rimorchi, trasformandomi in uno di quei cowboy di Annie Proulx.

Però, questa volta, una parte della cricca, mi ha interpellato per fare un particolare censimento. Tutti seduti al divano di un noto bar locale, il  cui nome è sempre seguito da un “Ohooooo” collettivo, io, Suor Teresa (che è un ragazzo) e Martini (che è una ragazza), sorseggiando, appunto, Martini, abbiamo stilato la lista di tutti i gay del paese. Siam rimasti impressionati dalla grande quantità di manzi omosessuati, come direbbe un vecchio pazzo del  luogo, che offre la comunità.

Insomma, se nelle grandi città a nessuno frega nulla di chi va con chi, nei piccoli paesi è un argomento molto in voga. Non per additare e deridere, ma solo per rendere ancora più tristi le ragazze del luogo che devono cercare la mezza mela tra una rosa molto ristretta di ragazzi che si dividono tra mostri, cozzari, mafiosi, decenti e quindi gay.

Ed  io che di gay a Pinkville ne so qualcosa, ho reso quella lista lunga e succulenta. A volte pensiamo tutti che nei piccoli paesi sia difficile potersi esprimere liberamente, ma quello che io ho capito da questi dieci giorni è che, sommariamente, a pochi interessa se sei gay o etero. L’importante è che si abbiano belle storie da condividere con i propri amici, che poi sia il racconto di “Pink ed il poliziotto” o quella di “Pink ed il suo lavoro”, poco importa. La normalità la si trova nei posti più impensati, come proprio in quella pizzeria piena di uomini rudi e timorati di Dio.

Gay marriage was defeated by popular vote in Maine this week, delivering the cause a stunning roundhouse punch right in the Guccis.   I, for one, have spent this week marinating in a dark concoction of vinegary frustration and venomous fury to the point that if I were to be tossed onto a grill and parcelled out on paper plates, I have enough taint to inflict at least 20 serious tummy aches at a church picnic.  What happened in Maine pisses me off  for 2 reasons: 1. matters concerning social justice and the individual rights of members of a minority group should never be subject to the mercy of  majority rule, because:  2. majority rule has no mercy.   Going with the conventional wisdom that gay people comprise 10% of the population, it’s obvious that as long as our rights are up to everyone else, we’re pretty much guaranteed jack shit nothing. * I know; I did the math, and yes, the calculator really did swear at me.  

So obviously, the Gay Marriage Movement is failing to convince the remaining 90% of the population that inequality and injustice is anyone’s problem but our own.  If Maine and California are the pace cars of this race to kill gay marriage, then it looks like our rights will be in the hands of people who  have strong objections against us at worst, and, at best, have no personal investment in the matter.  After all, if you’re not planning on getting a gay marriage yourself, what would motivate you to support it?  Clearly, the approach of  trying to appeal our fellow Americans’ sense of compassion and fairness isn’t working.  Being an upstanding citizen who contributes to society by working hard, paying taxes, and not dressing my daughter like a lumberjack counts for–wait, let me check my calculator–that’s right: jack shit nothing.   So the Gay Marriage Movement needs to impel the support of the American voting population by stimulating something more compelling than a sense of good will towards people who happen to be different from themselves;  it needs to play to that all-powerful motivating force called self-interest.  In short: we need to make our problem, everyone’s problem.  How do we do this?  We need to ditch the Mr. Nice Gay stuff and go back to what we’re really good at: ruining Thanksgiving.

Thanksgiving is such a delicate creature.   It’s the pedigreed poodle of American holidays: each year a new Thanksgiving is born, the immaculately coiffed and stunted offspring bred of untold generations of family tradition and undiluted dysfunction.  And then it is sent hobbling into traffic (i.e. when the guests arrive).  So it really isn’t hard for a gay person to ruin Thanksgiving.   After all, it’s the celebration of the “normal” traditional family.  All a gay person has to do to rattle this pretense and remind everyone that “normal” is just a boring little town in Illinois is, well, show up.  Only the drunks surpass our power to ruin the holiday.  But thanks to internalized homophobia, many of us are drunks, too!

Ruining Thanksgiving is practically a gay tradition.  I remember coming back from college for Thanksgiving break back in 1987, sporting my Dagwood Bumstead-meets-Thompson-Twins haircut, the intensely taciturn way my dad carved the turkey, the worried look on my mom’s face, and the lonesome feeling of being a misunderstood minority within my own family.  Such wonderful memories!  So it’s in the spirit of ‘87 that I propose that unless and until gay marriage is a nationwide reality, we make Thanksgiving as uncomfortable as possible.  It may be the only way we can personalize the pain of injustice for those who make the mistake of thinking gay marriage is someone else’s concern.

We’ve been singled out as “others”– outcasts of the mainstream.  This is why we’ve been denied the right to marry, so while we’re being marginalized, let’s give ‘em what they want until they beg us to stop.

 Some handy tips for the ladies:

For supportive straight people who want to be part of the fun:

For everyone::

If I can’t inspire you to ruin Thanksgiving in the name of social justice, then let Jeannette Saucier, 71, of Topsham, Maine, inspire you as she did me.  When I first read her statement “It’s not that I feel bigoted to gay people. We have gay people in my own family, but I don’t see them having to be married to prove a point,” I knew something had to be done to prove my “point” that Gay Americans are Americans and human beings deserving of their rights as citizens and members of the human race.  Until this is recognized, we cannot let go or give up. 

Taking Woodstock (2009)
★★★ / ★★★★

Directed by Ang Lee (“The Ice Storm,” “Crouching Tiger, Hidden Dragon,” “Brokeback Mountain”), “Taking Woodstock” was about the summer of 1969 and the flourishing counterculture that culminated in the Woodstock Music and Arts Festival. Caught among the powerful movement was a family and their debt concerning a motel that no one ever visits. Demetri Martin tried to help out his mother (Imelda Staunton) and father (Henry Goodman) with money and moral support as best he could to the point where he had to sacrifice his career as an interior designer. Stuck in the ennui of rural town, the arrival of his childhood friend (Jonathan Groff) and concert organizers gave Martin and his family a chance to finally get out of debt. The only catch was that they had to somehow take in hundreds and thousands of people (which eventually grew to about a million or so) and deal with the frustrations of the citizens of their own town, the neighboring cities and the media coverage. They also had to find a land owner (Eugene Levy) who was willing to take in all sorts of people and be able to deal with the mess afterwards.

I’ll admit right away that “Taking Woodstock” could have been so much bigger and more interesting. However, I do admire Lee’s choice of telling a story from a struggling family’s perspective, especially from a son who was more than ready to leave the nest but was chained at home because of his own guilt of abandoning his parents when they needed him most. Making that decision gave the film a much-needed heart. I was amused when I saw the family dynamics because Staunton was so intense, Goodman was so passive and Martin was inbetween. But then there were truly touching moments, especially a scene toward the end between Martin and his father when the son finally summoned the courage to do whatever it was that he wanted to do in the first place.

The storytelling was light (even for a comedy-drama) and all over the place which worked at some parts because it reflected that era. With a little bit more focus on the event at hand, stronger script and storytelling, this could have been an Oscar contender. I also would have liked to see more of Jonathan Groff. He had a certain spark about him that intrigued me. It might have been his extremely laidback nature or the way he looked into the main character’s eyes, I’m not exactly sure, but what I’m sure of is that the film would have benefited if it had fully explored characters. On the other hand, as much as I love Emile Hirsch, I felt like his character was simpy a distraction. His scenes could have been cut off from the picture and the final product would pretty much have been the same. But then Liev Schreiber as a cross-dresser and having great comedic timing really had me engaged. With this picture, one thing that didn’t work was almost always coupled with two or three things that worked.

I cannot say that “Taking Woodstock” was a disappointment because it managed to entertain and it had a fresh perspective on the monumental event. But it definitely would have won extra brownie points if it had actual footages of several artists’ performance such as Janis Joplin or Jimi Hendrix, or at least a restaging of some sort.

¿Qué habría ocurrido si Marty McFly y Doc Brown, además de viajar en el tiempo, hubiesen vivido una historia de amor similar a la de los vaqueros de Brokeback Mountain? Pues que, muy probablemente, la saga de Regreso al Futuro, se habría convertido en la de Brokeback to the Future. Aunque el tráiler está en inglés, creo que se entiende perfectamente, gracias a que el lenguaje del amor es universal.

Vía: Ración individual de personalidad.

by dkpatriarch

© 2009 David Hilton

Movies made from video games suck right?  Even worse than games based on movies.

I'm the Prince of Posers!

That’s the general consensus among both film critics and gamers, though I myself have enjoyed a few of the films like Resident Evil, Tomb Raider, Hitman and even Max Payne.

No, they weren’t paragons of classy cinema worthy of deep discussion or jaw-dropping amazement, but they were entertaining enough with at least some vague tributes to the source material they were using.

Soon we have Disney’s Prince of Persia: Sands of Time, based on the last-gen game of the same name, to be released May 2010.

Will this movie amaze us, mildly entertain us, or will it simply be another crappy attempt to cash in on a game’s popularity (though luckily Uwe Boll isn’t involved in this one at least)?

I’d say the fact that it is being made by Disney was already cause for concern, except that Disney and Jerry Bruckheimer also created a number of Pirates of the Caribbean adventure movies based only on a ride at Disneyland.

• Prince Of Persia: Sands Of Time Movie

And the first film at least was good fun.  Of course the films have since been made into video games that were a bit less fun, but that’s another story.

Because video games don’t tend to have the narrative depth or characterisations that a good movie needs, the films based on games tend to either deviate dramatically from the source material or suffer terribly from poor storytelling and overly basic plots.

I'm the Princess to tame you young Prince

However, they are best when they replicate the sense of action and atmosphere that the games encapsulate.  This is where the Prince of Persia movie could work.

Already from the trailer we can see that filming in Morocco gives the movie the right atmosphere and there certainly seems like there will be plenty of that Prince of Persia jumping about and even a bit of the humour thrown in.  But there still needs to be plot, deeper characterisation and realistic sets and special effects.

Pirates of the Caribbean and other adventure movies like The Mummy worked because they didn’t take themselves too seriously and aspired only to be good old fashioned escapist action.  They had good dialogue and, especially in Johnny Depp, great characterisation.

That’s what the Prince of Persia movie should be aiming for.

• Prince Of Persia Sands Of Time Dev Discussion

This is what director Mike Newell (Four Weddings and a Funeral, Harry Potter and the Goblet of Fire) could very well bring; that is if his cast that includes Jake Gyllenhaal (Brokeback Mountain) as Prince Dastan, Gemma Arterton (Bond: Quantum of Solace) as Tamina, and Ben Kingsley (‘insert tons of well known fims here’) as Nizam, can bring some refreshing dialogue and depth to their roles.

All too often movies based on games feel stilted or cheap in presentation and have very little sense of drama.

Mind you, the future may see movies based on games able to go beyond the ‘action adventure’ goal. 

WETA's Distric 9 defies critics

District 9, from Peter Jackson and directed by Neill Blomkamp, gave gamers a wishful thought about what a Halo movie could have been like under those two if it had gone ahead.  Could a game inspire such depth and attention to detail in the future?

Also there are the short web-films that Ubisoft are putting together for the Assassin’s Creed 2 game (see my review of the first film here).  The first one is stylistic, authentic-looking, and focuses on both plot and characterisation, even in the few minutes it lasts.  Could it have made a quality full film?  From what I saw it sure looked like it at least was heading in the right direction.

The Prince of Persia movie is focusing on the mystical dagger and time-rewind theme of the game but we will have to see if it has the style, characters and story to match.

I want to hail the movie as a prince among paupers in the game to film genre, but am worried I will instead be mocked with another Prince of Putrid.

What do you think?  Will this movie stink or smell of roses?  Comment below.

List of games made into movies:

• Super Mario Bros.: Peach-Hime Kyushutsu Dai Sakusen! (July 20, 1986)
• Super Mario Bros. (May 28, 1993)
• Fatal Fury: The Motion Picture (July 16, 1994)
• Street Fighter II: The Animated Movie (August 6, 1994)
• Double Dragon (November 4, 1994)
• Street Fighter (December 23, 1994)
• Mortal Kombat (August 18, 1995)
• Mortal Kombat: Annihilation (November 21, 1997)
• Pokémon: The First Movie – Mewtwo Strikes Back (July 18, 1998)
• Wing Commander (March 12, 1999)
• Pokémon: The Movie 2000 – The Power of One (July 17, 1999)
• Pokémon 3: The Movie – Spell of the Unown (July 8, 2000)
• Shenmue: The Movie (January 20, 2001)
• Lara Croft: Tomb Raider (June 15, 2001)
• Pokémon 4Ever – Celebi, Voice of the Forest (July 7, 2001)
• Final Fantasy: The Spirits Within (July 21, 2001)
• Resident Evil (March 15, 2002)
• Pokémon Heroes (July 13, 2002)
• Pokémon: Jirachi Wishmaker (July 19, 2003)
• Lara Croft Tomb Raider: The Cradle of Life (July 25, 2003)
• House of the Dead (October 10, 2003)
• Pokémon: Destiny Deoxys (July 22, 2004)
• Resident Evil: Apocalypse (September 10, 2004)
• Alone in the Dark (January 28, 2005)
• Air (February 5, 2005)
• Pokémon: Lucario and the Mystery of Mew (July 16, 2005)
• Final Fantasy VII Advent Children (September 14, 2005)
• Doom (October 21, 2005)
• BloodRayne (January 6, 2006)
• Forbidden Siren (February 9, 2006)
• Silent Hill (April 21, 2006)
• Pokémon Ranger and the Temple of the Sea (July 15, 2006)
• Dead or Alive (September 15, 2006)
• Dōbutsu no Mori (Animal Crossing) (December 16, 2006)
• Pokémon: The Rise of Darkrai (July 14, 2007)
• Clannad (September 15, 2007)
• BloodRayne II: Deliverance (September 18, 2007)
• Resident Evil: Extinction (September 21, 2007)
• Hitman (November 21, 2007)
• In the Name of the King: A Dungeon Siege Tale (January 11, 2008)
• OneChanbara (April 26, 2008)
• Postal (May 23, 2008)
• Like a Dragon (June 23, 2008) aka Ryū ga Gotoku Based on the first Yakuza Video Game
• Pokémon: Giratina and the Sky Warrior (July 19, 2008)
• Far Cry (October 2, 2008)
• Max Payne (October 16, 2008)
• Resident Evil: Degeneration (December 17, 2008)
• Street Fighter: The Legend of Chun-Li (February 27, 2009)
• Pokémon Diamond & Pearl Platinum the Movie: To the Conquering of Space-Time (July 18, 2009)

Upcoming releases

• Tekken (2009)
• The Legend of Spyro 3D (2009)
• Professor Layton and the Eternal Diva (2009)
• Prince of Persia: The Sands of Time (May 28, 2010)
• The King of Fighters (2010)
• BloodRayne III: Warhammer (2010)
• Clock Tower (2010)
• Mortal Kombat: Devastation (2010)
• Resident Evil: Afterlife (2010)
• Dead Space (2011)
• Gears of War (2011)
• Army Of Two (2011)
• Uncharted (series) (2011)

© 2009 David Hilton

BrokeBack Mountain es una buena película. Es bonita y eso… Pero es curioso el nombre.

Broke es en inglés algo así como “roto”, del verbo To broke, romper, creo. Vale. Back: retroceder, atrás, también se acepta como espalda o “culo”. Esto ya empieza a ser raro. ¿no?

Mountain. Si `Montambai´ es bicicleta de montaña, mountain es, o bicicleta o montaña. Más bien parece montaña.

Siendo esto más o menos así, BrokeBack Mountain significa o Bicicleta Rompeculos o La Montaña Culoroto… Y yo veo al director intentando venderle la película a un productor, con los siguientes argumentos:

“Illoquepasa, mira, un momentillo…  tengo aquí una película muy bonita, muy buena fotografía ¿sabes? y unos paisajes chulísimos, de rios, montañas, pesca, pacomérselos… todo muy romanticón y tratando un tema social muy tabú hasta ahora, innovador que te rilas, ompare… ¿sabes? Pues eso, que es una película sentida, muy sentimental y como rompedora ¿me entiendes? Tío, que va a dar mucho que hablar, ya verás. Los actores, cumplidores, vaya papelones, ¿qué no? Habla de la sexualidad en plan vaqueros de la América profunda, muy progre, contada muy despacio ¿sabes? Creo que la película es interesante. Gustará. Mírate a ver si me la compras y eso, ¿sabes? tu la ves, y ya me dices”… Y el productor le pregunta… “¿Y como se llama la película?” Y el otro: “¿La película? ¿Qué como se llama? Mira, pues, ¿sabes? es un título… vamos… eh… Se llama La Montaña Culoroto…”

Y digo yo. Ya que vamos a poner un título de cachondeo a una peli así, porqué no llamarla directamente: COMBOYS MARICONES, y punto.

Gracias.

Jake Gyllenhaal, Tobey Maguire and Nathalie Portman in a drama about war and those it leaves behind.

When decorated Marine Sam Cahill (Tobey Maguire) heads off to his fourth deployment in Afghanistan, his wife Grace (Nathalie Portman) and their two daughters go through the motions of readjusting to life without a husband and father. But when Sam disappears after a helicopter crash while on a mission above the Afghan desert, his estranged ex-con brother Tommy (Jake Gyllenhaal) assumes the role of caretaker for the family, even romancing the lonely Grace as the two share their grief. In time, all three Cahill girls come to accept, even embrace Tommy as a surrogate for the presumed-dead Sam. The four move on with their lives until Sam returns home, scarred and shaken after his time spent as a POW.

Brothers remakes the 2004 Sundance favorite Brodre, reinterpreting writer-director Susanne Bier’s script to an American perspective and setting. Director Jim Sheridan’s brooding and forceful earlier dramas, including In The Name of the Father, The Boxer, and The Field, dealt as this film does with sweeping political themes on the level at which they affect individual lives, and the aftermath of events which were bigger than the people involved in them. Bier’s original script is adapted by David Benioff, who previously adapted The Kite Runner and his own novel The 25th Hour.  

The film’s biggest obstacle, we imagine, is the wall of indifference American audiences have consistently demonstrated for films regarding America’s presence in either Afghanistan or Iraq. The larger Hollywood studios and smaller independents alike have tried for years to bring any number of true- and fictionalized stories related to either Gulf War to the screen, but all have met with little to no success. In fact, Gyllenhaal himself has starred in two: Sam Mendes’ little-seen adaptation of Anthony Swofford’s memoir Jarhead and Gavin Hood’s 2007 drama Rendition, though neither could be considered a box office hit. Most other war-focused efforts have found a mixed critical reception, with only Kathryn Bigelow’s The Hurt Locker getting almost unanimous praise as its release crept across the country last summer.

For its part, the cast is qualified and competent, even if all three principals have seemed on the edge of their emergence as adult stars for years now. Maguire, once so promising in The Cider House Rules and The Ice Storm, has spent most of the last decade devoted to the Spider-Man franchise. Likewise Portman, another rising star of the 90s who (as we’ve said before) in recent years seems to only make films that are based on books with their own cardboard display at Barnes & Noble. Gyllenhaal earned his acting credentials with memorable turns in Brokeback Mountain and Zodiac, though controversy overwhelmed the one film as much as public confusion undermined the other, blunting his arrival in either case.

All of this is only important in that, for the film to work for most audiences, all three will have to grow into their roles onscreen, asserting a maturity that audiences would take for granted in older actors. Judging from the trailer below, it’s apparent they’ve managed with Sheridan’s help to do exactly that. Also appearing are the great Sam Shepard as the Cahill boys’ career Marine father and Mare Winningham as their mother.

Brothers opens nationwide December 4.

- Michael Kabel

:: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: ::

Höstterminens Tjänstemannafest för nationens duktiga jobbare hölls i går lördag och traditionsenligt i Gillis. Temat var Western och detta betydde många bredbrättade hattar, fjädrar på huvudet, skott i luften och sköna västliga referenser.

Kvällen inleddes med lekar, tjo och tjim i många av Husets skrymslen och vrår. Äpplen i vatten + mjöl, ballongförflyttning, pilbåge, lassokast, introtävling, frågequiz och sångkomposition var några av övningarna och detta var visserligen överraskande kul men det mest häpnadsväckande är att tidsschemat verkade hållas! Äntligen har receptet för en tidsoptimerad lekrunda hittats?

Välkomnandet in i den fantastiskt utsmyckade Gillis var överväldigande. En dammig sydstatskänsla hämtad från en spagettivästern spred sig. Det har skrivits en hel del skön country och här fick vi både detta samt mer västligt humoristiska referenser. Eric Weissbergs “Duelling Banjos” var nog den mest överraskande partyhöjaren under själva middagen. Klassisk cowboyförrätt väntade på alla indianer och kofösare, kaktusar och homoerotiker och till huvudrätt serverades kycklingtortillas. Vinnaren av tävlingen före middagen blev Speedwaylaget Indianerna – kanske tack vare deras snajsiga låt. Priset blev VIP-behandling/myshög i Övre Gillis, mycket uppskattat.

Det som hände härnäst var minst lika skoj som det redan nämnda om än lite mer höljt i dimma och därmed slutar rapporten från en tjänstemannafest med kanonbra tema, ett Gillis som kändes mer som Dallas och en partystämning av det allra finaste slaget – kort sagt, TJM på Krischan. Tack seniors.

So, yeah.

Dave, I appreciate your insights into suffering for incentives that we don’t even hold in high regard.  While I have a vague understanding of the all-consuming nature of your craft, mine doesn’t even really feel like work.  This, here, feels like work to me — which perhaps explains the tremendous difficulty I am currently encountering in reading faces.  There is a bizarre disconnect between phases of interpretation and production that results in large swathes of my time being all at once pleasurable and yet unsatisfying.

Naturally, then, my inclination is always toward throwing career aside for something comfortable and something fulfilling.  Especially, given my repugnance to working alone and the natural disposition of an attention whore, taking orders at some fancy restaurant is my idea of a good time.  But then, after a while, your hands start to peel away from your obsession with standards of cleanliness, and you begin bossing people around for forgetting the pepper grinder, not running food, or filling in their tips during a busy shift.  It starts out as a joke — wouldn’t it be fun if I took this really seriously?  But then you realize that you cannot separate these nagging perfectionist impulses from anything you do… And, then, at the end of the day, it is hard to enjoy yourself, because you’ve become just as rabid and fanatical and detail-obsessed, as you would be if you were doing the thing that comes most naturally, that will never leave you alone…

I don’t know if this can be called ambition, per se.  I think two things, rather, are at play here.  On the one hand, having autonomy is really the only way for us to pursue making those fine, dazzling sweaters, or pushing the envelope of physiognomy at the level at which it would be satisfying for us. Yet, increased autonomy is necessarily wrapped up with an influx of carrots.  On the other hand, intrinsic motivation only gets one so far if one tends toward having ridiculously high expectations of oneself and others.  At least where I’m concerned, then, rolling in approval, attention and, yes, carrots, is really the only way to temper my own expectations and moderate the critical narrative that otherwise motivates me. In that sense, prestige is not a bad thing at all.  Laughable, sure.  But also reassuring.

So, yes.  To answer your question, ambition is for suckers.  But the unhappiness of being obsessed — even in spite of oneself — with something without having the free rein to pursue it is much more pernicious.  And I think it is that point at which stress and prestige both cede their terrain to the joys not so much of living in human society but of the harmony between craft and mind. Which is kind of how I feel about this blog…

And, btw, I totally do not go in for either growing vegetables or long bike rides!

New in at Cinema Books: Annie Proulx’s Brokeback Mountain and Postcards A Reader’s Guide  by Mark Asquith, $12.95 paper.  This is a new Continuum Contemporaries series where writers on both sides of Atlantic provide accesssible introductions to modern, influential novels.  The author also discusses the film adaptation of Brokeback Mountain. Discussion questions included at the end of the book  to inspire further comment..

Le conseil de la semaine : ruez-vous dans la salle la plus proche pour voir Funny People (si ce n’est pas déjà fait). Parce que nous, on n’a qu’une envie : y retourner ! C’est un fait : Judd Apatow, élu un peu vite nouveau roi de la comédie américaine, se bonifie à chaque réalisation.

Si Funny People a tendance a noircir un peu le tableau (ça reste du Judd Apatow, tout de même) avec son personnage principal (Adam Sandler, bluffant) totalement incapable d’être heureux, il faut se tourner du côté des influences du cinéaste, récoltées au détour de ses films et de quelques interviews, pour comprendre cette nouvelle direction. Les choix d’Apatow en matière de films sont révélateurs puisqu’ils lorgnent franchement vers la comédie, d’une part, mais sont aussi d’une grande puissance émotionnelle, d’autre part. Une combinaison qu’on retrouve notamment dans son petit préféré : Bienvenue Mister Chance avec Peter Sellers…

1. Bienvenue Mister Chance (1979) d’Hal Hashby

“C’est le genre de film que j’espère être capable de faire un jour” déclare Judd Apatow à propos du film d’ Hashby. Surtout connu pour le changement de registre de Peter Sellers dans son dernier grand rôle, Being There (son titre original) suit l’ascension d’un simple jardinier dans les hautes sphères publiques, la faute à un fort pouvoir de persuasion de la télévision.

2. La dernière corvée (1973) d’Hal Hashby

Vous l’aurez compris, Apatow est fan d’Hashby. Le poster de The Last Detail (titre original) trône même dans l’appartement d’Ira (Funny People). Jack Nicholson y joue un marin, chargé d’escorter un jeune prisonnier en compagnie d’un collègue. Les trois lascars décideront plutôt de prendre du bon temps à la place. “C’est à la fois bouleversant et hilarant, mon cocktail préféré.” Apatow dit aussi apprécier le ton cru du film, plutôt révolutionnaire à cette époque. Shocking !

3. Fast Times at Ridgemont High (1982) d’Amy Heckerling

“Un de mes films préférés de tous les temps.” Pas étonnant. Ambiance teenager assurée sur fond de discours sur l’avortement. On aperçoit également le poster du film chez la bande de jeunes comiques de Funny People. Si vous considerez que Sean Penn est le meilleur acteur du monde, vous ne devriez peut être pas regarder ce qui suit…

4. Tendres Passions (1983) de James L. Brooks

5 Oscars, rien que ça, pour le drame de Brooks, Terms of Endearment (titre original). On y retrouve aussi Nicholson, chouchou d’Apatow, en astronaute. “Une grosse partie du film traite du cancer. C’est fait avec réalisme et il contient de grands moments de comédies. Ce n’est pas du tout un film larmoyant.” Ça ne vous rappelle rien ?

5. Seize bougies pour Sam (1984) de John Hughes

Souvent comparé à John Hughes, Apatow avoue une sincère admiration pour le réalisateur regretté, que ce soit pour Sixteen Candles (titre original) ou Un ticket pour deux (Planes, Trains & Automobiles) dans lequel joue un autre de ses héros, Steve Martin. Apatow a d’ailleurs produit le sous-estimé Drillbit Taylor en se basant sur une ébauche de scénario signée Hughes. Dans Sixteen Candles, John Hughes filmait  les péripéties sentimentales d’une ado dont tout le monde a oublié l’anniversaire…

6. Broadcast News (1987) de James L. Brooks

Encore Brooks, encore les coulisses de la télévision et toujours Nicholson, dans un rôle anecdotique de présentateur télé. Difficile de ne pas penser à Présentateur vedette : La légende de Ron Burgundy, farce géniale écrite par Judd Apatow des années plus tard.

7. Harold et Maude (1971) d’Hal Hashby

Troisième nomination pour Hashby dans cette liste. Ce classique de l’humour noir s’attaque à la différence d’âge dans la relation amoureuse. Harold a 19 ans mais aime Maude qui en a 79. L’ainée des filles Apatow récoltera d’ailleurs le prénom de cette vieille bique pas du tout acariâtre.

8. Bienvenue dans l’âge ingrat (1995) de Todd Solondz

Teen movie trash, Welcome to the dollhouse (titre original) inspirera Apatow sur sa série télé Freaks and Geeks. “Heather Matarazzo, dans le rôle de Dawn Wiener, est l’un des plus grands nerds jamais vus au cinéma ou à la télévision.” Wiener, c’est aussi le véritable nom de famille du personnage de Seth Rogen dans Funny People. A propos du cinéma de Solondz, il avoue : “Je ne pense pas qu’on ait la moitié des couilles de cet homme ! “

9. Tootsie (1982) de Sidney Pollack

Celui-là, on le connaît tous (merci TF1 pour ces multi-rediffusions). Dustin Hoffman se travestit pour trouver un rôle, ett une nouvelle fois, on entre dans les coulisses d’Hollywood. “Tootsie est un film parfait. Je le revois dès que je peux.”

10. Frankenstein Junior (1974) de Mel Brooks

Un autre Brooks cette fois puisqu’il s’agit de Mel et de son délirant Young Frankenstein (titre original), qui parodie les classiques de l’horreur. Il s’agirait d’un des préférés d’Apatow qui en a profité pour afficher de vieux posters horrifiques dans l’appartement de Steve Carrell (40 ans toujours puceau).

On aurait pu également citer des films plus récents comme l’excellent Punch Drunk Love, premier réel contre-emploi pour son buddy Adam Sandler ou, plus étonnant, Brokeback Mountain, qu’on aperçoit en arrière plan dans En cloque, mode d’emploi.

Judd Apatow, de passage à Paris pour une drôle de masterclass, évoquait également linfluence des Marx Brothers (“Je regardais les Marx dès l’âge de 10 ans.”) mais aussi celle de Woody Allen :  “Woody Allen est un roi, nous sommes tous d’accord. Je n’arrive même pas à admettre que nous faisons le même métier.”

Sources : Rotten Tomatoes, IMDb, Technikart n° 136.

h/t Jimmah at LGF

i love this part of the day!! MAN CANDY!! lmao.

Jake Gyllenhaal….…..

he is soooooo dreamy and most def deserves to get the title today!!! xoxoxoxo.

p.s. i wish i could have been his co-star in brokeback mountain.