Cast: Clive Owen, Jude Law, Julia Roberts, Natalie Portman

Directed By: Mike Nichols
Written By: Patrick Marber
Cinematography By: Stephen Goldblatt
Editor: John Bloom & Antonia Van Drimmelen 

The beautiful thing about this movie is the words the language used which is both smart and cruel it’s amazing how sentences can hurt and destroy so much

This is not a film to watch if you are looking for action it’s more about Character , Drama and situations then anything else. This is just a adult relationship drama and everything here is beautiful.

This is a drama but feels more like a horror movie there are so many scenes of emotional violence that this is like watching a massacre. Since there are only four characters it’s easy to get to know the characters even though they don’t talk about there pasts much you get to know them so much that you feel the pain and despair that they do.

The Switching allegiances, mind games and harsh words make this like a british David Mamet film though you can tell the film is based on a play for it’s limited locations and exclusive intimate closed spaces that the action takes place in. Mike Nichols wisely knows how to open the film up to make it looks sumptuous.

Even though the cast is all good the person who walks away with the film is Natalie Portman this is what award winning acting is all about een thought she didn’t even get nominated it was a chance for her to escape her shackles of her teen and lightweight roles to show that she is not only grown but a fully sexual being. From her scene in the strip club where even though she is taking orders she is in total control while also letting herself be completely vulnerable by actually telling the truth for one of the first times in the film. To when she is being vulnerable when she is supposed to be running away with the love of her life. Mike Nichols also knows how to make this beautiful lady into a goddess with color, dress and showing just enough skin.

Cate Blanchett was originally cast in the Julia Roberts role she played the role in the play that Julia Roberts plays but she got pregnant and could not do the role so she was replaced by Julia Roberts who does pretty good in this role since this is really one of the few times where she plays a three dimensional character that is kind of like her usual self of being likeable but also capable of being hateful. There is no cutesy sweet girl we are used to here. Jude Law and Clive Owen were both also in the play but here they switched the roles they originally played. Both are too perfection.

The film also has a beautiful opening scene with the song the blower’s daughter by Damien rice that this movie seem to put on the charts for people to discover which in itself is a haunting song that hovers over the rest of the film     

A definite must see

Pare AGORA de ler a Você S/A e preste a atenção no que a Tess tem a dizer,

porque este é o verdadeiro case de sucesso profissional e amoroso.

E, como toda grande história, embalada por uma boa música.

These famous legs don't actually belong to Anne Bancroft, but to actress Linda Gray. Uploaded by projectorhead.wordpress.com.

Beyond a memorable script, a terrific cast, a visionary director, and perfect music, some movies just happen to fully embody the Zeitgeist of its era. So it was with The Graduate, a masterful movie that perfectly captured the freedom and angst of the late 60s.

The script came courtesy of Calder Willingham and Buck Henry. Dustin Hoffman made his major movie debut, and was perfect as Benjamin Braddock, while Anne Bancroft portrayed Mrs. Robinson with the perfect blend of sultriness and ennui. It was director Mike Nichols’ second film, following the startling Who’s Afraid of Virginia Woolf. That’s a pretty auspicious beginning. And the music of Simon and Garfunkel was expertly woven through the film, a soundtrack not just for the movie, but for the times.

Uploaded by dateacougartips.com.

I love behind-the-scenes movie trivia, so here are a couple of things about The Graduate I found interesting. Dustin Hoffman was 30 and Anne Bancroft was 36 when the movie was made, but Hoffman looked so young and Bancroft so mature that they carried off cross-generational lovers. And the legs in the famous movie poster, beyond which we see Hoffman, didn’t belong to Bancroft, but to a young model – Linda Gray, who went on to play Sue Ellen Ewing in Dallas.

The Graduate was selected as the number seven movie in the American Film Institute’s “100 Years…100 Movies” program. Two lines from the movie also are among the most famous in film history: “Mrs. Robinson, you’re trying to seduce me, aren’t you?” was selected as number 63 by the AFI and number 17 by Premiere magazine. And “Plastics” was the AFI’s number 42 quote.

Always a Buzz in Buffalo When Keanu Reeves Visits

Your Fab Four Fact Fix…
~1967, working at Abbey Road studio in London, The Beatles mixed four songs, ‘Hello Goodbye’, ‘Your Mother Should Know’, ‘Magical Mystery Tour’ and ‘I Am the Walrus’. Due to the radio feed used in ‘I Am the Walrus’ being recorded in mono, the song changes from stereo to mono at the line “Sitting in an English garden”. 

Deeep Thoughts…
~A critic is a gong at a railroad crossing clanging loudly and vainly as the train goes by.”-Christopher Morley
~”A doctor can bury his mistakes but an architect can only advise his client to plant vines.”-Frank Lloyd Wright
~”A man is incomplete until he is married. After that, he is finished.”-Zsa Zsa Gabor

Late Night Humor…
(Dave)
~Bad year for Democrats. This is all they have left: the presidency, both houses of Congress . . . and all of Hollywood. That’s all.
(Fallon)
~In election news, President Obama called and congratulated Republican Bob McDonnell after he won the governorship in Virginia. Obama then moved Virginia to the bottom of the swine flu vaccine waiting-list.
~Michelle Obama took daughters Sasha and Malia to a Miley Cyrus concert. After the show, they got a poster, a T-shirt, and her autograph. And that was just the stuff for Joe Biden.
~Happy 40th birthday to “Sesame Street.” It’s getting so old, it’s now being brought to you by the letters A, A, R, and P.

Big Birthdays…
~1931 Mike Nichols born in Berlin, Germany “Nichols is one of only ten people to have won all the major American entertainment awards: an Oscar, Grammy, Emmy and Tony Award”

~1946 Sally Field born in Pasadena, CA

~1948 Glenn Frey of the Eagles is born in Detroit. He has two solo hits that reach No. 2 on Billboard’s Hot 100: “The Heat Is On” and “You Belong to the City.”
Big Music Notes…
~1948 No. 1 Billboard Pop Hit: “Buttons and Bows,” Dinah Shore.
~1961 Jimmy Dean began a 5-wk run at No. 1 with “Big Bad John”.
~1968, The Monkees’ three quarter of a million dollar feature film, Head opened in New York City. Instead of being aimed at their target audience of teeny boppers, the film contained a dark theme about the manipulation of the group with walk-on appearances by inappropriate guests and scenes of Vietnam War atrocities. Reviews were harsh and the picture was a box office disaster.  (Did not know about this, you? This from thisdayinmusic.com)
~1971 Cher had her first #1 hit with “Gypsys, Tramps, and Thieves”.
(Can I just say–Whiskey-Tango-Foxtrot?!?!  What the hell were we thinking?!)
~1975 The Sex Pistols make their performance debut at St. Martin’s School of Art in London. Ten minutes into the gig, the school’s social programmer pulls the plug on the band’s amplifiers.
~1976 The Steve Miller Band was #1 with “Rock ‘N’ Me Baby”.
~1982, Soft Cell’s ‘Tainted Love’ achieved the longest unbroken run on the UK charts when it logged its 43rd week in the Top 100.
~1993, Pearl Jam went to No.1 on the US album chart with ‘Vs’, selling 950,378 copies making it the highest sales in US album history in one week.
~2005, Madonna scored her 36th Top Ten single with ‘Hung Up’, equaling the record with Elvis Presley for the most Top Ten singles. ‘Hung Up’ was also Madonna’s 47th Top Forty single, the most for any female artist. The track sampled the instrumental riff from Abba’s ‘Gimme, Gimme, Gimme’.

That’s about it from here…

Ta…

Mired in production difficulties and problems from day one, 1970’s Catch-22 manages to be an entertaining, black comedy about war and the absurdity involved with it. Mike Nichols took on the task of bringing Joseph Heller’s brilliant novel to the screen, but Buck Henry tinkered with the book so much that much of it was almost unrecognizable on screen. Nevertheless, Heller approved of the finished product.

That’s not to say many others did, however, as the picture didn’t do well at all with critics or at the box office. It is now seen as somewhat of a cult film. There is some good stuff in Catch-22, even if there isn’t really a discernable cohesive narrative or thread to follow. The characters are entertaining, the script is witty and entertaining, and the tone of the movie is deeply sardonic and rich with dark humour.

Alan Arkin stars as Captain Yossarian, a U.S. Army bombardier stationed in Pianosa during World War II. He is continually dispatched on dangerous missions and watches his friends die. The whole thing is driving him a little bit crazy, so he tries to escape combat duties. The problem is the “catch-22” employed by the army: a pilot is crazy to fly more missions but sane if he doesn’t want to and the only way to be grounded is to be determined crazy. In other words, flying the missions would prove the man to be crazy, but asking not to fly them would only prove sanity and, thus, would mean more missions.

Nichols’ film becomes concerned with how various people cope with such convoluted logic. We explore various characters along with Yossarian, including Lt. Milo Minderbinder (Jon Voight) and his bizarre black market scheme, Major Major (Bob Newhart) and his inability to do his newly-assigned job, and Captain “Aarfy Aardvark” (Charles Grodin) and his commission of murder.

Catch-22 had some difficulty going up against MASH in 1970 and was Paramount’s big gamble against the powerhouse picture from Robert Altman. Catch-22 tried largely to bank on star power, using the likes of Anthony Perkins, Art Garfunkel, Orson Welles, and Martin Sheen in the picture. In the end, it was the lack of cohesive narrative that probably cost it the most, as it can be a little hard to follow with its reliance on flashbacks and bizarre sequences.

In that respect, though, Nichols does capture the absurdity of the war. His use of strangely convoluted logical corners and David Watkin’s cinematography make for interesting aspects, helping drive the movie into some truly odd places. Newhart’s performance, for instance, is devilishly comic and reinforces the sense of incompetence flowing through this particular military base. Keep an eye out for the changing pictures on the wall in Major Major’s new office, too.

Of course, doing justice to Heller’s peculiar tour de force is going to be an uphill climb and Nichols’ picture doesn’t quite do it. While Heller’s novel was so batshit crazy that it made sense, Nichols’ movie adaptation doesn’t quite work with the ultimate irrationality of the concept of the catch-22. Instead, it takes bits and pieces from the book and attempts to find its own ground. It makes nothing out of Yossarian’s insane insanity, choosing instead to play it extraordinarily straight in a sea of absurd supporting characters.

That said, there are still plenty of reasons to check out Catch-22. The performances are solid from top to bottom, even if they do employ many of the anti-war movie stereotypes from time to time, and the cinematography and meshing of the violent with the comically absurd is worth a look as well. Nichols certainly doesn’t knock this one out of the park, but there’s enough goofy, bizarre fun within Catch-22 to make it worthy of a recommendation.

6.9/10

Crítica de Cinema – Texto publicado originalmente em A ARCA, em 16/01/2005.

Eu sei. Sou mesmo um completo de um imbecil apaixonado. Sou daquele tipo de cara que se entrega em qualquer porcaria de relacionamento, e no fim das contas é passado pra trás e acaba se afundando na lama quando lê um livro qualquer do Manuel Bandeira, ouve uma música do Djavan ou assiste a um filme da Meg Ryan. Peraí, com relação a esta parte da Meg Ryan, não vamos exagerar! Bem, quem me conhece sabe que sou realmente um retardado quando o assunto é “relações pessoais”. Não rejeitando minha “nerdice”, mas os nerds também amam! E quem conferiu nosso artigo dos melhores longas de 2004, sabe que sou assim mesmo (se você não viu, dê uma olhada lá na “minha” relação dos melhores).

Assim como aconteceu com o seu El Cid em Menina dos Olhos, será muito difícil pra mim ser imparcial ao falar do excepcional Closer – Perto Demais (Closer, 2004). Tudo isto porque o novo trabalho do veterano cineasta Mike Nichols me pegou de jeito. Aliás, eu confesso sem medo de questionar minha sexualidade (heheh…) que chorei mesmo durante o filme inteiro – não só eu como metade da sala de exibição também! Aliás, não só chorei como, ao final do filme, tive vontade de me jogar na frente do primeiro caminhão que estivesse passando ocasionalmente na rua.

E por que tudo isso? Simples. Porque assim como a grande maioria dos mortais, já passei pela terrível experiência de levar um belo dum chute na bunda. E Closer é um filme sobre pessoas que sofreram, sofrem ou ainda sofrerão esta mesma situação traumática. E se você também já foi rejeitado em algum momento da vida, a identificação é incrivelmente forte. Quando você se vê retratado de uma maneira tão sincera como neste trabalho, aí já era: você termina realmente deixando o controle escapar pelas mãos e a emoção toma conta do seu corpo. Se você entende o que eu digo, prepare-se para ficar tão atônito quanto eu fiquei.

E uma observação pessoal: o filme tem que ser muito bom mesmo para que eu consiga assistir numa boa sem me incomodar com a Julia Roberts (Doze Homens e outro Segredo) no elenco. Afinal, todos sabem que consigo gostar menos dela do que do Tom Hanks, outro que não sou chegado. Ah, ela não é tão grande atriz assim… e ainda roubou o Oscar da Ellen Burstyn, pô! (O quê? Você ainda não assistiu Réquiem para um Sonho? Sacrilégio!).

Mas um alerta importante: para gostar MESMO de Closer, é necessário ter um mínimo de afinidade com o gênero romance, ou pelo menos um mínimo de sensibilidade. Nada contra, mas se você é um sem coração que só se importa mesmo com sabres de luz ou coisas similares, acredita que filmes românticos são “para meninas” e não se sentiu tocado com Encontros e Desencontros e nem com Brilho Eterno de uma Mente Sem Lembranças, é melhor passar bem longe do cinema. Porque corre o risco de achar esta fita extremamente cansativa e verborrágica, justamente por se tratar de um longa cujo roteiro dá total atenção às palavras: não há cenas cheias de adrenalina, nem situações picantes. Só o bom e velho diálogo – e aqui, mais poderoso do que nunca.

A história é mais ou menos assim: em Londres, um incidente une Alice (Natalie Portman) e Dan (Jude Law). Ela é uma ex-stripper americana recém-chegada à Inglaterra. Ele é um jornalista que trabalha redigindo obituários e está tentando escrever seu primeiro romance. Algum tempo depois, Dan divide o mesmo teto com Alice, finalmente consegue concluir sua obra e está participando de uma sessão de fotos de divulgação para seu livro. As fotos são comandadas pela fotógrafa divorciada e obcecada por aquários Anna (Julia Roberts). Ele se sente atraído por ela (mesmo tendo certeza de seu amor por Alice), e ambos trocam um “selinho”, que é interrompido por Anna ao descobrir que Dan já é enrolado com alguém.

Para se vingar de Anna, Dan resolve se passar por ela em um chat de sexo, teclando com o primeiro que aparecer e marcando um encontro para sexo real. No caso, o primeiro que aparece é o médico Larry (Clive Owen). O problema é que Larry e Anna realmente se encontram pessoalmente, e não apenas sacam no ato que tudo foi uma armação como ainda se apaixonam e começam a sair…

Algum tempo depois (mais uma vez), o médico e a fotógrafa estão casados, o jornalista e a americana ainda moram juntos e mantém um relacionamento ativo, e os quatro personagens se cruzam numa galeria de arte, onde Anna expõe suas fotografias. Enquanto Larry e Alice conversam, descobrem afinidades e confidenciam suas desconfianças com relação aos respectivos parceiros, Dan e Anna finalmente explodem num tórrido caso de amor e sexo – e, por conseqüência, detonam diversos acontecimentos que unem e desunem os dois casais das mais variadas formas. No meio do fogo cruzado, discute-se abertamente amor, sexo, desejos, futuro, traição, redenção.

Só pra relacionar rapidamente as principais qualidades de Closer: o roteiro de Patrick Marber é excelente e não precisa mostrar “órgãos sexuais expostos” e nem vulgarizar os diálogos para ser extremamente amoral, dúbio e sexualmente forte – mesmo jogando o eufemismo na lata do lixo e usando frases diretas e “sem papas na língua”. A direção de Mike Nichols e a estrutura narrativa do roteiro é a mais tradicional possível, não se importando com pirotecnias ou extravagâncias visuais. A montagem avança e retrocede no tempo sem aviso prévio, mas não fica confuso em momento algum. E a trilha sonora é muito boa, com destaque para a ótima e sensível The Blower’s Daughter, de Damien Rice, canção que abre e fecha o longa e, falando de amor, contrasta bem com o clima puramente sexual do enredo.

Quanto ao elenco: Jude Law (Capitão Sky e o Mundo de Amanhã) é competente e segura seu personagem num boa. E Julia Roberts, independente de gostar dela ou não, não está ruim mas também não está excelente. Aliás, é bem curioso ver a “linda mulher” num papel bem diferente do habitual, afinal, aqui ela está mais “várzea” do que nunca, fornecendo mais do que xuxu na serra. Mas ainda assim poderia ser muito melhor, num personagem que se daria bem nas mãos de Laura Linney ou Carrie-Anne Moss, por exemplo.

Mas os donos absolutos de Closer atendem pelos nomes de Natalie Portman (a Rainha Amidala de Star Wars) e, principalmente, Clive Owen (Rei Arthur). Owen dá um banho em todo o elenco com sua caracterização imponente e moderadamente sacana do médico taradão, enquanto Portman, além de se entregar com firmeza em seu papel, nunca esteve tão linda e sensual como aqui. Desafio qualquer marmanjão a não se apaixonar por ela em sua última cena – aliás, em qualquer cena. Só a seqüência do sofrido e tenso diálogo entre Larry e Alice na sala privada da boate já é o suficiente pra justificar qualquer prêmio concedido aos dois atores.

E agora você se pergunta: como confiar numa crítica escrita por alguém que declaradamente deixou o profissionalismo de lado e embarcou de coração aberto na trama? Eu respondo: não tem como confiar. Tire a prova. Abra uma concessão. Esqueça por alguns momentos dos morcegões atormentados, das guerras intergalácticas e dos quartetos de heróis que dominarão as telonas neste ano. Enfrente uma sessãozinha mais calma e deixe-se emocionar com as dúvidas e os desencontros destes quatro personagens. Afinal, eles só querem amar e ser amados. Quer adrenalina maior do que esta? E se você não se sentir tocado em momento algum… você é um coração de pedra!

CURIOSIDADES:

• O diretor Mike Nichols é responsável por importantes obras como Quem Tem Medo de Virginia Woolf? (1966), o oscarizado A Primeira Noite de um Homem (1967) e a recente minissérie Angels In America (2003).

• A peça teatral Closer, escrita por Patrick Marber e que serviu de base para este filme, estreou em Londres em 1997 e, desde então, foi traduzida para mais de 30 idiomas e apresentada em mais de 100 cidades em todo o mundo.

• O papel de Anna foi oferecido inicialmente a Cate Blanchett, que não pôde aceitar por estar grávida na ocasião das filmagens.

• Formado no conceituado Royal Academy of Dramatic Art, da Inglaterra, o excelente Clive Owen começou a ser notado no ótimo e subestimado suspense Crupiê, de Mike Hodges (disponível em DVD no Brasil). Para quem não se lembra, Owen também foi o astro daquela série de mini-filmes da BMW veiculados na Internet, sendo dirigido por nomes como Ang Lee (Hulk), David Fincher (O Quarto do Pânico), John Frankenheimer (Ronin), Wong Kar-Wai (Amor à Flor da Pele) e Guy Ritchie (Snatch).

• Clive Owen e Natalie Portman receberam, respectivamente, os prêmios de Melhor Ator Coadjuvante e Melhor Atriz Coadjuvante na última edição do Globo de Ouro por este filme. Owen ainda saiu vitorioso pela Associação de Críticos de Toronto, Associação de Críticos de Nova York e pela Sociedade de Críticos de Las Vegas, além de conquistar o segundo lugar na preferência dos Críticos de Boston (atrás de Thomas Haden Church, por Sideways). Natalie Portman foi eleita Melhor Atriz Coadjuvante também pela Sociedade de Críticos de San Diego.

CLOSER • EUA • 2004
Direção de Mike Nichols • Roteiro de Patrick Marber, baseado em sua peça teatral
Elenco: Natalie Portman, Jude Law, Julia Roberts, Clive Owen.
98 min. • Distribuição: Columbia Pictures.

The Graduate often appears near the top of many ‘all-time’ lists, especially among US cinephiles. On the other hand, it also attracts the odd backlash from those who claim it’s tonally incoherent and over-rated as a portrait of disillusioned rebellious American Youth.

What I Reckon is that while I can easily understand it not flawless, I think its a brilliant film that has relevance today for anyone who has done what they’re told, but somehow just wants to get off that merry-go-round…

Please note this review contains spoilers throughout…

This Mike Nichols film from 1967 is usually billed as a comedy, but from the opening shots we’re immediately aware this is not a run-of-the-mill example of the genre. Benjamin Braddock (Dustin Hoffman) travels silently, stony-faced, through an airport, accompanied by Art Garfunkel’s angelic, haunting voice singing “Hello darkness my old friend…” For much of the title sequence, Benjamin is cropped out of the frame. He returns home with barely a word spoken. Slapstick this is not.

The first half of the film is all about alienation and a complete breakdown of communication within the apparent American Dream. Ben is frequently sullen and silent, either hiding from or cut off from the world: in a diving suit, underwater in the gorgeously blue swimming pool, behind dark glasses, even when he and Elaine retreat beneath the roof of his car, withdrawing from the noise of the outside world. Indeed, even when Benjamin pursues Elaine to Berkeley, we see him sat still while everyone else rushes around him, or later being shut out of her classroom in the silent, empty hallway.

Conversations are often clipped to point of monosyllables. A friend of Ben’s parents accosts him almost conspiratorially with “I’m going to say one word to you, just one word… Plastics.” Nothing the elder generation says to him even begins to connect. But similarly he cannot seem to engage Mrs Robinson, despite his embarrassinbgly awkward best efforts: “We’re going to do this. We’re going to have a conversation.” On perhaps the worst first date ever, Elaine has to shout above the roar of Ben’s car engine, and we can barely hear his one-word replies.

In addition to the fractured dialogue, the way frames are constructed heightens the feelings of dislocation – both of the characters from each other, and indeed from the audience. During their ill-feted affair, Ben and Mrs Robinson are rarely seen clearly together. One or both of them is cut off the edge of the shot, in silhouette, or sat with their back to the camera. Even when we can see them both, there’s not a great deal of eye contact. The bedrooms are white and clean to the point of being cold, clinical and distant, not at all intimate or personal. Within all of this, the humour of the alleged comedy is often painful, and almost always arises through miscommunication or misunderstanding. This is a dark, disjointed view of the world.

Anne Bancroft is tremendous as Mrs Robinson. If Jesus does love her more than she can know, He truly is a saviour of souls. Mrs Robinson is a desperate predator, clinging onto her historic pre-eminence in a changing world. We often see her in animal print coats, robes or slips, a hint at the exotic or dangerous in Benjamin’s preppy world. She lures him into her lair, and never lets him escape. Fearing the worst when Elaine returns, she forbids him from seeing her, because she know her daughter’s youth and innocent beauty will steal Benjamin (her new plaything) away. Her eyes are dark, clouded and empty. In one agonising moment she removes her stocking, coldly vacant. It’s devastating.

In the truly wonderful scene when Ben finally confesses his affair to Elaine, we see Mrs Robinson between them, outside the door, mascara streaked across her face, dejected, resigned, beaten. She silently leaves the frame but the camera stays focused on her, on her absence, for an achingly long couple of seconds before returning to Elaine. That’s the moment the film shifts from the split between the generations to a struggle within the younger characters to discover their own purpose and place in the world.

From the very first to the very last frame, music plays an important part. Like the weather & landscape in Thomas Hardy novels, Simon & Garfunkel’s songs are a character in themselves, the lyrics often expressing the unspoken feelings of Benjamin’s personality. “The Sound of Silence” perfectly reflects and builds on the theme of alienation and isolation all through the first half. Benjamin is reacting against the world of his parents, but he has little or no direction: he certainly doesn’t know what he actually wants; just that he wants things to be “different”. When the focus switches from his home to Berkeley, “Scarborough Fayre” becomes a lilting love song: Ben has found his purpose, a quest to recapture and regain Elaine’s affection.

But Benjamin Braddock, for all his gawky angst, can be a pretty unlikeable character. If he weren’t so incompetent, he could almost be described as a sociopath. He’s nihilistic, he rejects his parents, he’s very creepy towards Elaine in Berkeley when he practically stalks her for weeks, and he does take her on that terrible first date: although he does crack at the last minute, so perhaps he’s not a monster! We can only assume that Elaine sees something of herself in Ben, or simply recognises his struggle to express himself. But for the most part she seems pretty well-adjusted and more at ease with herself.

And then there’s the famous final sequence which has even been copied by The Simpsons, where Ben actually achieves something. Seemingly victorious in his quest for Elaine, the younger generation escape from the clutches of the old. Mrs Robinson (in a leopard-print suit) hisses at Elaine “It’s too late” before her daughter snaps back “Not for me”, fleeing from the Church and her preppy catalogue fiancé Carl. Yet as our hero and heroine leap onto a bus, directionless and alone, “The Sound of Silence” returns. Staring straight ahead, not even touching, they may be in it together, but this must be one of the least triumphant happy endings ever.

Para el 12 del próximo febrero está anunciado el estreno en España de “The Wolfman”, “El hombre lobo”, su título en nuestro idioma.

La película la dirige Joe Johnston, director, guionista y productor; más dedicado a las segundas labores, que a la de dirección.

Aunque su primer film, “Cariño, he encogido a los niños”, está fechado en 1989 (han trascurrido 20 años), tan sólo ha dirigido diez películas en este tiempo (incluyendo alguna cosilla para televisión), entre ellas, “Jumanji”, en 1995, y “Jurassic Park III”, la última entrega de la saga, en 2001. La número once será “The First Avenger: Captain America”, si como está previsto, comienza su rodaje durante el año próximo.

De esas películas dirigidas por Johnston, he visto las tres que he mencionado, y “Cielo de octubre” (1999).

De la primera,”Cariño, he…” no tengo mucho que decir. Tuvo fama en su día, se sigue recordando, pero no pasa de ser una comedia familiar, con la que los niños disfrutaron, y puede que aún disfruten si sus nostálgicos padres se la compran en DvD. A “Jumanji” le tengo una cierta simpatía. Puede que por la historia que contaba, por sus aún en mantillas, pero impactantes efectos digitales (aunque los leones, si os acordáis de ellos, eran para echarse a llorar), y porque me pareció “bien hecha” para pertenecer al género de entretenimiento. “Cielo de octubre”, no tenía nada que ver con el género de las otras películas, y sin embargo, el planteamiento y desarrollo de una historia de superación, estaba muy bien resuelto y creaba interés. En “Jurassic Park III”, le agradecí a su director su corta duración, no porque me aburriera, o la considerase totalmente nefasta, si no, porque supo contar todo en esa hora y media tan usual hasta hace unos años, y tan olvidada ahora.

Con esto, he querido decir, que sin ser un director que mencione por norma en mis conversaciones cinéfilas, no es tampoco de los que si llego a nombrar, sea para tirarlo por los suelos. Hasta ahora, sus trabajos me han parecido correctos, y posiblemente, esta nueva película, también me lo parezca. O talvez me sorprenda, y de la corrección pase a otra categoría. Pero esta por ver…

La leyenda del hombre lobo (al que ya hace referencia la mitología griega, y al que citaron posteriormente Plinio el Viejo, y Virgilio en algunos de sus escritos, y que pone en boca de uno de sus narradores en “Satyricon”, Gayo Petronio), y el mito del vampiro, han dado mucho juego tanto en la literatura como en el cine, y más de una vez, los dos han compartido páginas o secuencias.

Con mayor o menor fortuna, desde la primera incursión en la pantalla del licántropo, allá por el año 1935, en la película “Werewolf of London” (hay otra con el mismo título del año 1981, dirigida por John Landis), en cada década hemos podido verle en el cine, protagonizando un film, o como personaje secundario.

En 1941, en “The Wolf Man”, Lon Chaney Jr. hizo una creación del hombre lobo que marcó un hito, y que se recordó durante años. Repitió esa creación en títulos como, “Frankenstein y el Hombre Lobo”, “La zíngara y los monstruos”, “La mansión de Drácula” y “Contra los fantasmas”. En España, Jacinto Molina, más conocido como Paul Naschy, tiene el record de ser el actor que más veces ha interpretado al licántropo. Desde que en 1968 rodó “La marca del hombre lobo”, la primera película en la que le daba vida, lo ha hecho en multitud de ocasiones.

También pudimos ver a José Luis López Vázquez en el año 1971, interpretando el papel protagonista de “El Bosque del lobo”, de Pedro Olea, basada en el personaje real de Manuel Blanco Romasanta, una extensión diferente y más realista del hombre que se convierte en lobo, y que posteriormente hemos visto en una nueva versión del año 2004, “Romasanta, la caza de la bestia”, dirigida esta vez por Paco Plaza, y protagonizada por Julian Sands y Elsa Pataky.

En 1984, un casi desconocido Neil Jordan, dirigió “En compañía de lobos”. El cuento de “Caperucita Roja”, pero en donde el lobo es un hombre que se convierte en animal.

Hollywood no ha dejado de tirar de la figura del licántropo, y en 1994 nos ofreció la excelente “Lobo”, dirigida por Mike Nichols y protagonizada por Jack Nicholson y Michelle Pfeiffer. “Underworld”, que ya va por su tercera entrega, presenta una eterna batalla entre hombres lobo y vampiros. En “Van Helsing” (2004), de Stephen Sommers, Hugh Jackman, se convierte en hombre lobo para acabar con Drácula. También en la saga de “Harry Potter” aparece el mito, así como en la de “Crepúsculo”.

En la película de Johnston, se retoma la imagen del licántropo de 1941 interpretado por Chaney. Le da vida ahora, Benicio del Toro, y lo acompañan en el film, Anthony Hopkins, Emily Blunt, Hugo Weaving y Geraldine Chaplin, entre otros.

Y esto es lo que nos contará:

Lawrence Talbot (Benicio del Toro) es un noble torturado que vuelve a las tierras de la familia después de la desaparición de su hermano. Hace las paces con su padre (Anthony Hopkins) y sale en busca de su hermano… para acabar descubriendo que también a él le espera un horrible destino.

La infancia de Lawrence Talbot se acabó bruscamente la noche que murió su madre. Se fue del adormilado pueblecito de Blackmoor y tardó décadas en recuperarse e intentar olvidar. Cuando Gwen Conliffe (Emily Blunt), la prometida de su hermano, le encuentra y le ruega que la ayude a buscar a su amor, Lawrence Talbot regresa a casa. Entonces se entera de que algo brutal, salvaje, con una sed insaciable de sangre ha matado a muchos campesinos, por lo que un suspicaz inspector de Scotland Yard (Hugo Weaving) ha venido a investigar.

Empieza a encajar las piezas del sangriento rompecabezas y se entera de que existe una antigua maldición que convierte a las víctimas en hombres lobo las noches de luna llena. Para acabar con la carnicería y proteger a la mujer de la que se ha enamorado, Lawrence Talbot debe destruir a la temible criatura que se esconde en los bosques cercanos a Blackmoor. Este hombre sencillo con un pasado doloroso sale en busca de la bestia y descubre que él también tiene un lado primitivo.

Os dejo el enlace al trailer en español, aunque puede que ya hayáis visto el que colgó mi compañero Snake en agosto, en su versión original.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HP0HxVRugMU

De momento es lo único que hay, en espera de febrero.

-

Swanson  

Where is this love? I can’t see it, I can’t touch it. I can’t feel it. I can hear it. I can hear some words, but I can’t do anything with your easy words.

– Alice

Patrick Marber adapted his play into the Mike Nichols’ directed feature, Closer. It takes an unflinching look at love, desire, deception, infidelity and happiness in relationships. It has been years since I have seen this movie. It still holds up. It’s a powerful narrative with some outstanding performances from Natalie Portman and Clive Owen who were nominated for Oscars for their portrayals.

The movie starts with the chance meeting on a London street when a New York transplant and former stripper, Alice (Portman) catches the eyes with an obituary writer, Dan (Jude Law), then she is struck by cab. While in the waiting room, the two begin to have a sweet flirtation that turns into something more.

A couple of months pass, Dan is the studio apartment of Anna’s (Julia Roberts) getting his picture done for the jacket of his book that is loosely based on Alice’s life. During their session, Dan flirts with the recently divorced woman and convinces himself that he loves her. He wants to see her, but he is in a relationship with Alice. Anna rebuffs Dan’s advances.

One night in retaliation, Dan corresponds on sex chat room with a dermatologist, Larry (Owen) pretending to be Anna. During the course of the session, Dan asks Larry to meet Anna at the local aquarium that he knows that she frequents for a quick shag at a nearby hotel.

Larry meets the real Anna at the aquarium where the miscommunication of the previous night leads to an unexpected romance between the two. The four players finally meet each other on the night of Anna’s photo exhibit, “Strangers.” They size each other up.

This movie deals with beginnings and ends. There is no boring middle. None of these four people wanted to be close to one another. They want to keep a safe distance from each other to string each other along to torture the other.

This movie is brutally honest to a fault. These damaged people are nasty to each other. It pommels you as a viewer that you have to look away from the screen to save yourself. The performances from Law and Roberts ring false. You don’t believe that these people were in aguish.

Judgment: A relationship movie that you shouldn’t see with the person that you are going to break up with.

Rating: ****

BROADWAY BABIES: 30 Rock scene-stealer Jane Krakowski, who made her name in the Broadway musical Grand Hotel and won a Tony for dazzling

KRAKOWSKI: song & dance

Antonio Banderas in Nine, is finally getting back to full-time singing and dancing, if only temporarily. Due to her shooting schedule her cheeky tongue-in cheek cabaret act at Feinstein’s, Jane Krakowski Has Sold Out…Tickets Available, must close tomorrow night at Loew’s Regency … Laurie Metcalf, who picked up three Emmys playing Roseanne’s sister on Roseanne, is back on Broadway starring as the mother in the first full-scale revival of Neil Simon’s Brighton Beach Memoirs. She’ll continue to reprise her role in Broadway Bound, the second play in Simon’s autobiographical comedy, when both shows play in rep at the Nederlander. Brighton Beach Memoirs opens Oct. 25; Broadway Bound begins previews Nov. 18 and opens Dec. 10 … and Academy

METCALF: Broadway bound

and Tony Award winner Mike Nichols will be honored with the American Film Institute’s 38th annual Lifetime Achievement Award in 2010. “I’m surprised and pleased,” dead-panned the impish director of such films as Who’s Afraid Of Virginia Woolf and Angels In America. “I was watching The Graduate on my Blackberry last week and it really holds up!”

NO PEOPLE LIKE SHOW PEOPLE: Why do we watch movies on planes that we wouldn’t watch anywhere else? Margaret Atwood tweets that she disgraced herself by watching Year One, the sophomoric comedy spoof with Jack Black and Michael Cera, on her way to the Frankfurt Book Fair. Guess she consoled herself with news that her Year Of The Flood was

McGOWAN: Julie's ex on The Border

#8 on the New York Times bestseller list by the time she landed in Germany … Doug Coupland thinks Ed O’Neill’s new show Modern Family “is just pure genius. It’s sooooo well written.” A technology geek, Coupland finds delightful and absurdly obscure video clips and posts them on Twitter – for example, this gem with Mr. T, Loni Anderson, George Hamilton and Olympic gymnast Mary Lou Retton in the same Lipton commercial. Coupland, whose new book Generation A is due in book stores, reports he lost his cell phone a few weeks ago, but instead of hyperventilating he’s discovered that he simply doesn’t think about it any more. “Didn’t expect that to happen!” Me neither … and Darryl’s Hard Liquor and Porn Film Festival returns to Toronto tomorrow night for one night only at

O'NEILL: new series

the Bloor Cinema with its 10th annual show featuring funny short films about sex from Canada and around the globe.

EXES & OOOHS: Yesterday I told you that Julie Stewart, currently on stage at the Factory Theatre in Brad Fraser’srave-winning new comedy True Love Lies, also plays Graham Abbey’s ex onThe Border.

Wrong! Julie plays James McGowan’s ex on The Border. And yes, I really can tell those two guys apart. (sigh)

Oh well. Happens in the best of families.

KUTCHER: start 'er up

YA GOTTA HAVE A GIMMICK: Thanks to Ashton Kutcher for sending me (and maybe a million others) news of that new iPhone app that lets you start your car from your phone. I would start saving up for it but I’m saving up for a new TV set instead. No, not HD – 3D. Yup, Panasonic unveiled its prototype 50-inch Viera plasma 3-D set in Tokyo this week. Apparently it’s a wow. The technology works by rapidly alternating between left and right frames of the video. Viewers wear glasses that sync with the television over an infrared signal. The right frame is seen only with the right eye and the left frame with the left eye, creating the illusion of depth.

So all they have to do now is persuade producers to make reality TV shows in 3-D, and we’ll have even more reasons to go back to the movies.

Have a great weekend!

-/-

Mike Nichols’ career as a film director began with 1966’s Who’s Afraid of Virginia Woolf?, a dazzling character-driven piece based on the play of the same name by Edward Albee. Its depiction of domestic chaos in the 1950s is shocking and biting, even with today’s standards, and its story of cruelty remains agonizing to watch at times despite the brilliant performances and awe-inspiring screenplay.

Ernest Lehman was in charge of the adaptation of Albee’s play and he does an excellent job bringing this complex work to the screen. With Nichols simple black-and-white direction and Haskell Wexler’s cinematography, the film has a close feel that really draws the intimacy of the situations and conversations to the fore. It’s a tough film to watch because it feels deeply personal and deeply painful. There is a sense that we, as an audience, are observing something we shouldn’t be.

Who’s Afraid of Virginia Woolf? is set on the campus of a New England college. We are introduced to a couple, George (Richard Burton) and Martha (Elizabeth Taylor). George is an associate history professor and Martha is the daughter of the college president. It’s the middle of the night, around 2 am, and George and Martha are essentially drunk and fighting each other like they usually do. Martha announces that they are expecting company, so George tells his wife to ensure she controls herself.

The company is a young couple: Nick (George Segal) and Honey (Sandy Dennis). Nick is an up-and-coming instructor and Honey is not particularly bright. They are an odd but strangely suitable couple. The games begin when Nick and Honey presume they are probably intruding on something volatile between Martha and George. Martha and George insist on the young couple sticking around, however, and this leads to a night of terrifying conversation, innuendo, gamesmanship, lies, and verbal warfare. Nothing is sacred.

Nichols’ picture is absolutely thrilling in the way it utilizes language to get things done. We marvel at how George and Martha carry on with each other; it is shocking to hear the insults and deceptions hurled at one another. We are bearing witness to a marriage in shambles, essentially. There was happiness between George and Martha at some point and time, but they have turned into brutal adversaries.

Who’s Afraid of Virginia Woolf? is a volleyball match of humiliation and dangerous games. In leaving Albee’s dialogue virtually intact, Nichols’ picture was the first American film to use the words “goddamn” and “bugger” on screen. It was a shocking movie for audiences at the time and, thanks to the powerful performances of Burton and Taylor, it retains all of its emotional impact to this day.

In using the real life husband and wife team of Burton and Taylor, Nichols was taking a gamble that few others would have taken. Oh sure, Taylor and Burton tag-teamed on the megaflop that was Cleopatra, but something like this was a different beast. This movie required the couple to be absolutely cruel and vile to one another, script or not, and the process must have been draining on the actors.

Grasping the context of Who’s Afraid of Virginia Woolf? is somewhat tricky but not altogether impossible. America was coming out of the conservative throes of the 50s and, in the post-Ike era, the gloss of American life was beginning to fade to reveal that people had real problems. In many respects, this Mike Nichols film showcases some of those real problems behind closed doors, introducing many Americans to a world onscreen that they imagined only existed in real life. It helped shatter the mould of fantasy Hollywood, proving that films could tackle real stories and real people skilfully and artfully.

Who’s Afraid of Virginia Woolf? is an essential motion picture. The performances are tremendous, the script is phenomenal and Nichols directs it all with simplicity and courage. It is a bold movie, even now, and many will be shocked by the lengths George and Martha go to in order to torture one another.

9.2/10

Trailer:

El American Film Institute ha anunciado la concesión de su premio anual a toda una carrera al realizador y productor Mike Nichols, responsable de cintas tan conocidas como “El graduado”, “Closer”, “Working”, “Silkwood” y “Who’s Afraid of Virginia Woolf?”.

Nacido en Alemania hace 78 años, emigró junto a su familia a Estados Unidos al inicio de la II Guerra Mundial, cuando apenas contaba 7 años.

A finales de los 50 comenzó su carrera como actor en teatro y televisión.Ha sido candidato a cuatro premios Oscar y ganado una por “El graduado”.

La película más reciente de Nichols fue el thriller político “Charlie Wilson’s War” con Tom Hanks y Julia Roberts, sobre la ayuda de Estados Unidos para combatir la ocupación soviética en Afganistán en la década de 1980.

Mike Nichols se encuentra trabajando en dos proyectos para cine, uno de ellos es Deep Water.

CHARLIE WILSON’S WAR av Mike Nichols (2007)
Med Tom Hanks, Julia Roberts, Philip Seymour Hoffman, Jud Tylor, Hilary Angelo

SPOILERVARNING

Om en film handlar om krig och den ena sidans stridande soldater kommer från USA och filmen är gjord i Hollywood, så är formeln given: man kritiserar företeelsen krig och framställer den som hemsk, men ser samvetsgrant till att med stor omsorg framhålla (inte så sällan med hjälp av en berättarröst till slutscenen och eftertexterna, som i Platoon av Oliver Stone och Flags of Our Fathers av Clint Eastwood) att de amerikanska soldaterna är hyvens och reko pojkar med äppelpaj i blick och amerikanska flaggans mönster på kalsongerna. Ja, något i den stilen, i alla fall. Kriget är ont, men amerikanerna är goda.

Det här ska nu för all del inte förvåna någon, för det är i själva verket en rätt trogen bild av Hollywoods åsikter. Filmbranschen i USA är av tradition politiskt liberal och nu när både John Wayne och Charlton Heston är döda går det endast med stor svårighet att spåra upp någon i Hollywood som är republikan. Att filmbranschen röstar på demokraterna är närmast ett axiom.

Liksom det närmast är ett axiom att filmbranschens utövande konstnärer, från manusförfattarna till regissörerna till skådespelarna, ofta har helt andra åsikter än eventuell sittande, republikansk president om när det är befogat att börja kriga någonstans i världen. Men här finns en hake, för när den republikanske presidenten väl har börjat kriga får “våra män och kvinnor i uniform” Hollywoods fulla stöd. Ibland får de till och med via satellit dela ut något av priserna under Oscarsgalan. För när pojkarna och flickorna är på plats med sina vapen och riskerar livet, ställer sig även Hollywood som sanna patrioter bakom dem.

Och därav filmerna som dels kritiserar krig, dels hyllar de amerikanska soldaterna.

Fast i Charlie Wilson’s War sker inte hyllningen som en avslutande men ohyggligt effektiv fotnot i form av berättarröst i slutet, den pågår filmen igenom. Även om det inte är just soldater den hyllar, utan en amerikansk krigsinsats. För Charlie Wilson’s War handlar alltså om kongressledamoten Charlie Wilson, som för att ta död på så många ryssar som möjligt lyckades få de amerikanska anslagen till vapen åt afghanerna då Sovjet invaderat att höjas från fem miljoner dollar till en miljard dollar. Varpå afghanerna dödade hemskt många ryssar och vann kriget. Under filmen får man sig som tittare till och med regelbundet till livs ett slags serietabell, där antalet nedskjutna, sovjetiska helikoptrar och sprängda stridsvagnar anges år för år. Meningen är nog att man ska hurra. Det gör de i alla fall i filmen.

Men nu är ju det här en film av Mike Nichols. Mannen bakom bland andra The Graduate och Carnal Knowledge.

Så inte helt överraskande överraskar den.

För den avslutas med en käftsmäll mot USA:s krigsmakt som är så talande och så skrämmande att man faktiskt kan tro på att filmen, som det påstås i förtexterna, bygger på en sann historia. Jag har spoilervarnat ovan, så jag dristar mig att tala om att en miljard dollar till vapen inte är för mycket, men att en miljon dollar till en skola i Afghanistan inte kan komma på tal. Vilket är talande.

Fast å andra sidan är det också talande att de stridande förbanden kommer från dels Sovjetunionens Ryssland, dels Afghanistan. Det finns alltså inga amerikanska soldater att hylla. Vilket förstås är bekvämt om man nu vill överraska med kritik mot själva beslutet att kriga.

Annars lider Charlie Wilson’s War av samma verklighetssträvan som Flags of Our Fathers, men ur en annan, intressant vinkel. Medan strävan efter autenticitet fick teamet bakom Flags of Our Fathers att bränna av så många granater och skottsalvor under handlingsbärande dialog att det är omöjligt att uppfatta vad någon säger, låter teamet bakom Charlie Wilson’s War i stället alla prata i munnen på varandra när de promenerande längs kongressens korridorer bedriver politisk kohandel. Så är det säkert i verkligheten, men för filmen blir det katastrofalt – den handlingsbärande dialogen drunknar i… den handlingsbärande dialogen.

Så jag gick till dvd-menyn och knäppte på engelskspråkiga textremsor. Och det visade sig att man varit fantastiskt noggrann och med angivelse av vem som säger vad i kakofonin har skrivit ut vad precis alla säger, vilket lett till fem- eller sexradiga textremsor skrivna med mycket liten stil som täcker nästan hela bildrutan. Och tar så lång tid att läsa att man omöjligt hinner göra det när de sekundsnabbt blixtrar förbi i det kulsprutesmattrande tjattret och därför blir tvungen att gång på gång frysa bilden för att förstå vad som händer, och varför.

Kör hårt,
Bellis

1967 του Mike Nichols

“Mrs.Robinson, I think you’re trying to seduce me..-aren’t you?”

Θέλω να ξεκινήσω στέλνοντας συγχαρητήρια σ’ αυτόν που το μετέφρασε έστι. Ο πρωτάρης. Από την αρχή στο λαιμό μου κάθησε, λες και είναι καμιά χαζοαμερικανιά σαν αυτές που συνηθίζουν να γυρίζουν σήμερα.

Και συνεχίζω με τα βασικά της πλοκής. Πρωταγωνιστής της ιστορίας είναι ο Benjamin Braddock. O Benjamin μόλις έχει αποφοιτήσει με τιμές από το πανεπιστήμιο, αλλά δεν είναι σίγουρος για το τί θέλει να κάνει στη ζωή του. Αυτό για το οποίο είναι σίγουρος και μας γίνεται από την αρχή σαφές είναι ότι δε θέλει να γίνει σαν τους πλούσιους και ολίγον τι γελοίους γονείς του και τους παρόμοιους φίλους τους, που έχουν κατακλύσει το σπίτι για να γιορτάσουν την επιστροφή του, παρ’ ότι ο ίδιος θα προτιμούσε να μείνει μόνος του και να σκεφτεί για το μέλλον του. Σε καποια στιγμή, η κυρία Robinson, μια σαραντάρα φίλη των γονιών του, του ζητάει να την οδηγήσει μέχρι το σπίτι της, το οποίο κάνει απρόθυμα. Στη συνέχεια, με διάφορα τεχνάσματα καταλήγει να στέκεται γυμνή μπροστά του, κάνοντας εμφανής τις προθέσεις της. Εκείνος φεύγει τρομοκρατημένος, αλλά μετά από δύο μέρες της τηλεφωνεί και η (σεξουαλική βασικά) σχέση τους ξεκινά. Και μετά γνωρίζει την Elaine, την όμορφη κόρη της κ. Robinson. Τότε τα πράγματα περιπλέκονται…

Ο “Πρωτάρης” δεν είναι μια τυπική ρομαντική κομεντί. Είναι κωμωδία, με το χιούμορ να βγαίνει αβίαστα, έχει και λίγο δράμα μέσα, είναι ένα ωραίο love story, αλλά είναι και κοινωνική σάτιρα. Συνολικά, είναι μια ιδιαίτερα όμορφη και απολαυστική ταινία. Η εξαιρετική σκηνοθεσία του Nichols (οσκαρ σκηνοθεσίας) την κάνει τέτοια. Έχει κοντινά πλάνα στα πρόσωπα των ηρωών, σκηνές όπου ο πρωταγωνιστής ρεμβάζει ή ο σκηνοθέτης αφήνει τις εικόνες και τη μουσική να αποδώσουν τη σκηνή και ευρηματικά πλάνα, όπως οι ταχύτατη εναλλαγή σκηνών ανάμεσα στο γυμνό σώμα της κ. Robinson και το έκπληκτο πρόσωπο του Benjamin ή ντροπιαστική σκηνή στην πισίνα, “κυριολεκτικά” από τα μάτια του Benjamin.

Αυτός ήταν ο πρώτος μεγάλος ρόλος του Dustin Hoffman, που τον έκανε διάσημο. Παίζει φανταστικά το χαρακτήρα του, ένα νεαρό λίγο μαμούχαλο, λίγο παθητικό, αρκετά μπερδεμένο, χωρίς κάποιο συγκεκριμένο στόχο στη ζωή του, μέχρι που γνωρίζει την Elaine. Η Αnne Bancroft φτιάχνει μια εκρηκτική κ. Robinson. Τί ελπίδες θα μπορούσε να ‘χει κάποιος σαν τον Benjamin ότι μπορεί να της αντιστάθει; Είναι όμως και μυστηριώδης: δε μαθαίνουμε πολλά γι αυτή, πέρα από το ότι αναγκάστηκε να παρατήσει τις σπουδές της και να παντρευτεί όταν έμεινε έγκυος. Ούτε είμαστε σίγουροι για το αν νιώθει για τον Benjamin κάτι παραπάνω από ερωτική έλξη. Ίσως ναι. Επίσης πολύ καλή είναι και η παρουσία της Katherine Ross στο ρόλο της γλυκιάς και έξυπνης Elaine.

Πρέπει ακόμα να προσθέσω ότι υπάρχει σοβαρός κίνδυνος να λατρέψετε τα τραγούδια των Simon & Garfunkel αφ’ ότου δείτε την ταινία. Εκτός από το πλέον γνωστό Mrs.Robinson, χρησιμοποιήθκαν και τα Sound Of Silence, Scarborough Fair και April Come She Will.

Όλα τα παραπάνω συνθέτουν την (πιθανώς) διασημότερη αποπλάνηση όλων των εποχών…

FOOTLIGHTS: Dynamic screen duo Meryl Streep and Kevin Kline, who made history 25 years ago in Sophie’s Choice, will perform an evening of Shakespeare as a benefit for The Acting Company, the Juilliard offshoot that

KLINE: Meryl's choice

gave Kline his start. Conceived and directed by Kline, The Lover and the Poet: An Evening of Shakespeare will be held at the 400-seat Florence Gould Hall on November 2. Before that, however, they’ll team up with Daniel Craig, Maggie Gyllenhaal,Mike Nichols and Austin Pendleton in a one-night benefit performance of Courage in Concert at the Public Theatre on October 19. In the meantime some chosen few lucky ticket-buyers will get to see Ms Streep in person tonight at the Royal Ontario Museum in Toronto, where she’ll participate in a Q&A with Globe & Mail film analyst Johanna Schneller.

ALWAYS A BRIDESMAID, YES, BUT SUCH A PRETTY ONE: As a presenter she’s handed out hardware to her Star Wars mentor George Lucas and co-star Harrison Ford, but Carrie Fisher says she gave up on hoping for Acting awards a long time ago.

FISHER: wishful winning

She admits she still hoped that she might win “just a little one” for her writing – plaudits for Postcards From The Edge? prizes for The Best Awful or Surrender The Pink? — but alas, no awards have materialized so far.

“I now get awards all the time for being mentally ill,” the bi-polar Fisher notes. “I am apparently very good at it, and I get honoured for it regularly.”

She’s awfully good at writing, too. Which is one of the reasons writers ranging from playwright Terence McNally to novelist Salman Rushdie joined movie stars ranging from Jane Fonda to Harvey Keitel for the opening of Carrie’s one-woman tour-de-force Wishful Drinking last Sunday on Broadway. Fisher made her Broadway debut in 1973 (yessssss, 1973) as part of the chorus backing up her mother Debbie Reynolds in the revival of Irene, but had toured with her even earlier than that, in her mom’s glitzy road show. Those of you with

DEBBIE: still in harness

reeeeally long memories may recall Carrie, still a teenager, standing on stage at the O’Keefe Centre in Toronto in 1970, singing her mom’s hit ballad Tammy while Debbie was backstage making a quick costume change. By the time she played in Irene, Carrie was a seasoned ‘road warrior’ who had seen her MGM-bred mother dump legendary British director Sir John Gielgud (who was still struggling with the musical when it played the Royal Alex for four weeks on its way to New York) for her old studio pal Gower Champion. Champion, a choreographer who lived up to his name, who had already staged a hit musical called Hello, Dolly and pulled Irene into such dazzling shape that it ran for more than 600 performances. (When Debbie grew weary of it, her MGM gal pal Jane Powell took over the rest of the run for her.) Ah yes, them were the days.

STREEP: in Toronto tonight

Debbie, of course, is still alive and high-kicking at 77. This month she and her personal musicians will take her show, An Evening With Debbie Reynolds, to the Julie Rogers Theatre in Beaumont, Texas for a breast cancer fund-raiser. 
Meanwhile, there’s good news for those of us who hunger for more of Carrie’s wickedly witty prose. She’s working on a new book – a collection of stories from movie sets of “films I pretended to act in.” Hope she includes Shampoo.

And speaking of those writing honours that keep eluding her – considering those rave reviews, wouldn’t it be funny if she gets Tony-nominated as both the author of Wishful Drinking and as lead actress in a play?

Stranger things have happened.

-/-

*Disclaimer* My apologies for the swearing and cussing to come in the below post. My brain is just a lil’ sore from not understanding certain ways of thinking. Imagine how that violation might feel before you excuse it, ya know?

I wasn’t going to say anything about this Roman Polanski “youthful error” (my ass!) nonsense because I’ve already exhausted my vocal cords in anger. my knuckles may never return to normal color again after gripping my desk so God damn hard. this pathetic petition of entertainment’s greats are supporting a child rapist to either protect their own, watch their careers for future projects, and/or excuse his mess because he’s a “genius” behind the lense is absurd beyond belief. those are the excuses I’ve come up with and they’re just not good enough. I’ve admired these people – who I thought were somewhat intelligent people – and their work from afar since I understood what being an artist really meant. but then I saw this name:

Diane Von Furstenberg.

WTF, DVF?!?! SERIOUSLY? one of my all-time female icons who I’ve admired since college has become an utter disappointment. Guess all that charity work smacks of lies, deception, keeping up with appearances, and such, huh? I’m stunned by seeing her name. totally fucking stunned.

Natalie Portman.

Hello, hypocrite. did you not just film a rape scene for The Other Boleyn Girl marking it as one of the hardest moments in your career? WOW.

and it gets worse. pop your Pepto now.

Martin Scorsese, Woody Allen, Harrison Ford, Steven Soderbergh, Salman Rushie, Mike Nichols, Sam Mendes, Penelope Fucking Cruz and TILDA FUCKING SWINTON ?!!!?!?

countless movies defining my personal pop culture experience and child-adulthood nostalgia (which means a lot to me) will officially never be thought of in the same way again.

maybe I’m wrong in believing that justice needs to be served to the now adult woman who was raped at 13-years-old after being fed into a champagne and drug induced stupor so Polanski could have his disgusting way with her. I thought that as a society we decided rape was a bad thing? what is this “age of consent” bullshit I keep hearing about? there is no age requirement for not allowing someone’s nonconsensual entrance in to your body!

FemBot has a quote from Robert Goolrick of The Beast, who was raped by his father, that is oddly reassuring.

…it is the absolute, final, and total end of childhood, of any sense of innocence and wonder. Perhaps the girl in California had already lost hers. Perhaps her mother manipulated the situation. I, frankly, don’t give a good goddamn… . So, the Artist as rapist. Do we trade a child’s life for Knife In The Water? And, if so, do we trade a child’s life for Caddyshack? I say no.

and just when we thought we had accomplished so much we realize we’ve accomplished so little.

Image thanks to sodahead.com

October 5, 2009

I swam today a half mile with my friend Rachel at the Swim Club in Calabasas and ran 5 miles. The West Hollywood Book Fair was today, and I saw my friend Lisa who made amazing carrot cake, so all in all it was a perfect day. Tonight we saw Regarding Henry.

Regarding Henry

Mike Nichols directed this movie and somehow I missed it, but we decided to catch in on Netflix. Annette Bening is great and looks so young and tender. It’s a film about brain damage, a theme that we, in our household are fascinated with. Mark’s written a novel where the main character has brain damage. Serious brain damage. So we spent a couple years mashing the subject. Harrison Ford seems obsessed with the word “Ritz” although we don’t understand why for part of the movie. When we do, it’s so sad and so pathetic and heart breaking. At the point he’s being brought back home, it seems ridiculous like he’ll never survive. But at the point he is being pushed back into going to work, it’s absolutely ridiculous. He clearly can’t function at all. Such a strange movie. About how life has its strange turns and twists.

Money

White people and money.

We don’t talk about money. We don’t like to talk about it when we have it. Or when we don’t have it. It’s all wrong. We don’t talk about sex or money. We have a compulsion to buy more house, clothing, boats, RV’s, TV’s, jet skis etc than we can possible afford, to impress the other White people. Make no mistake, I see plenty of African American people at the university where I teach buying Escalades. They tell me they have $800 payments; sometimes my students tell me they’re living in their Auntie’s garage and making payments to their Baby Momma. That can’t be all good. But White Americans are all secretive about their money, and I’m not sure I completely understand why. Are we ashamed of the money we have and then ashamed when we do not have it? We are Puritans beneath the skin, strangely restless.

Houses: We buy more houses than we can afford so that we can impress whom? Who is impressed with the house? I am never sure. Sometimes I go to someone’s house and everything is so perfect but there is no place I want to sit. I have one friend whose house I visited today where everything is so comfortable, I feel like I could kick back in any room and relax or take a nap. Losing houses: In Asian families, I understand that the whole tribe helps out if one family member is going to lose a house, but in White families this is not the case. In White families I’ve known, when one person loses a house, their siblings call each other on the phone like this, “Hey Susie, you know Sam is definitely losing the house.” “No kidding. How’d that happen?” “Too much spending. You know, the trip to Hawaii, the furniture for the kids’ rooms, you know. So what’s up with you?” “Well, the dog’s been sick, that’s been costing me thousands.” “Right, so see you at Red Lobster.” That’s White people. Standing by while family members go down. I think that’s the biggest difference I’ve figured out so far between African Americans and Whites. The differences between a tribe that looks after that tribe and the White family that tries to look after itself.

Credit Card Spending: How much credit card debt is appropriate to have? Americans are getting further and further in debt. This may be something African Americans and White Americans share. What may be different is what we spend money on. Whites spend money on clothes, and water toys and big electronic stuff that sits in one’s living room in an entertainment center. Everybody has a bigger television than you do. Everybody has bigger speakers. Better furniture. That’s what you spend with the credit cards. So you can watch football. Or basketball.

I don’t understand any of this. I didn’t grow up normally in America, so I don’t understand the need to impress anyone. Not at all. Not sure who would care if I had a TV. Or an RV. I have a dog named JJ. My daughter’s python ate six mice yesterday. I don’t think anybody’s impressed with my kid’s python. I think people start off wanting to impress their own parents and then try to impress others. I had no parents to impress, no nuclear family to impress, so that made that easier. White people are screwed up about money. That’s a fact. It’s supposed to just be a thing to get you around. Life is the main thing as my friend Annie La Ganga says, Life is the real reason. Mucking around in a life you like with people you like is all good.

Mike Nichols dirigió en 1967 “El Graduado”, que contenía una historia de un cierto morbo para la época, al girar una parte de su trama, sobre la seducción de un jovencito que acaba de graduarse en la universidad, por una mujer madura.

Dustin Hoffman (no tan jovencito, porque ya contaba 30 años cuando interpretó el papel, aunque resultaba totalmente convincente), Anne Bancroft (no tan madura, pues en la vida real tan sólo tenía 6 años más que su seducido) y Katharine Ross (que tenía 27 años cuando dio vida en la película a la novia de el graduado, siendo al mismo tiempo hija de la seductora), fueron los protagonistas de un film que obtuvo un gran éxito (y mítico al día de hoy), al que ayudó también su atractiva banda sonora.

Paul Simon y Art Garfunkel (Simon & Garfunkel), un dúo de de reconocida calidad, y en la cumbre de la fama en aquel año 67, fue fichado para poner música a la película.

Exceptuando el tema central, Mrs. Robinson, que compuso Paul Simon especialmente para el film, el resto de los que componen la banda sonora, habían sido publicados con anterioridad, y ya eran conocidos por la mayoría de los espectadores que vieron “El Graduado”.

Junto a Mrs. Robinson, The Sound of Silence y Scarborough Fair, fueron los temas estrella que podían escucharse en diversas secuencias del film.

La banda sonora de “El graduado”, se mantuvo durante nueve semanas en primera posición en los listados de grandes éxitos, consiguiendo ser Disco de Oro. En la entrega de los Grammy de 1969, Mrs. Robinson fue reconocida como la mejor grabación del año, y Paul Simon fue galardonado con el premio a la mejor banda sonora original para una película.

Merece la pena que dediquéis unos minutos a escuchar estas canciones que algunos ya conoceréis, y que por su calidad resultan atemporales.

Os recomiendo también ver la película si aún no la habéis visto. Estuvo nominada en siete categorías de los premios Oscar (una de las nominaciones, la de Hoffman al Mejor Actor), consiguiendo Mike Nichols el de Mejor Director.

Mrs. Robinson

The Sound of Silence

Scarborough Fair

Trailer

-

Swanson 

Tradução: Hello, stranger!

Sometimes we choose the films we watch, but the most important ones seem to choose us. And so it was with “The Graduate,” one of those timeless classics I kept meaning to see but never did. This always seemed a grave error in judgment, waiting so long to meet Benjamin Braddock. Then ”The Graduate” finally cycled up from its lowly queue ranking, I watched it, at age 28, and I knew. I saw this movie at precisely the right time.

Oops. Was that too crunchy, maybe too reflective? Absolutely. Benjamin Braddock (Dustin Hoffman) would hate it. He’s not that reflective, lives mostly inside his mind. So why should I wax all philosophical? Refer back to ”precisely the right time.” Bittersweet and poignant, “The Graduate” is a film best enjoyed after the angst of the early 20s — OK, the whole of one’s 20s — has passed. In those youthful moments where The Future and all its infinite possibilities are terrifying, perspective doesn’t exist. All that does is fear, the kind that doesn’t go away until you stop feeding it and it wanders away.  

In Mike Nichols’ “The Graduate,” we don’t get to see that transition for Benjamin. Right on. Benjamin, in Hoffman’s estimation, is the listless owner of some unnamed of bachelor’s degree and one of those real-world useless fellowship accolades with a name no one can keep straight. Back in his parents’ California home, he’s forced into one party after another in his honor, and each one makes him more and more uncomfortable. Everyone has big opinions about what Benjamin should do with his life (one word: “Plastics”), but he hasn’t the slightest clue. All his frustrations — “I’m worried about my future” he says pointedly — are ignored, and this only magnifies his anxiety. 

Then comes the summer-long Affair Heard ‘Round the World (it lives on in infamy through Simon and Garfunkel’s “Mrs. Robinson”) with Mrs. Robinson (Anne Bancroft), a confident, attractive, overtly sexual friend of Benjamin’s parents. In a dumber film, Mrs. Robinson would play teacher and impart scads of life lessons to the shy, inexperienced Benjamin, who’d gobble them up and grow into a mature, successful businessman. But who wants to see that movie? Certainly not Nichols; thus, the affair serves mostly to exacerbate Benjamin’s confusion, mixes up the concepts of dreams and sexual desires in his brain. Not good for a regular 20something guy, let alone one who’s as rudderless as Benjamin. Then things get worse: He falls for Mrs. Robinson’s young daughter Elaine (Katharine Ross). This is an odd plot point, one that could be a little soap opera-esque without Nichols’ knack for finding the right pitch (helped along by Simon and Garfunkel’s deceptively peppy score).

So the web of Benjamin’s world is, ahem, decidedly tangled. Sex tends to do that, particularly if it happens with the best looking of all your parents’ friends. (Eek.) Yet these entanglements don’t matter nearly as much as the way they affect Benjamin. “The Graduate” is first and foremost a coming-of-age film, for though Benjamin’s technically an adult his emotional development hasn’t come close to catching up with his age. And the strange escapades in his life don’t produce the effects we might predict. To a degree, his affair with Mrs. Robinson does enlighten him — he taps into his sexuality in a way he hasn’t yet. But Benjamin thinks his affair with Mrs. Robinson will mean something. She’s bored and wants sex. (Bancroft does a wonderful job of not backing away from Mrs. Robinson’s palpable sexuality.) Then he believes his love — however misplaced and desperate — for Elaine will give him purpose. We get the idea that Benjamin’s seeking the right things; he’s just looking in the wrong places.

This much becomes clear in the ending (one of the best in cinematic history), and in Hoffman’s distracted performance. Hoffman closes down his face and shrinks his shoulders to play Benjamin, who’s separated himself from reality. He’s spinning around with no sense of direction until the end. Even then, when he’s learned something, he doesn’t seem to know what. Neither do we … and that’s just as it should be.

Grade: A