Underworld (aka Transmutations) is a 1985 British horror film, written by Clive Barker and James Caplin, and starring Denholm Elliott, Miranda Richardson, Steven Berkoff, Larry Lamb, Ingrid Pitt and Art Malik, in which a mad doctor keeps mutants underground. The film was directed by George Pavlou.

Amazon Specials!

Her sene illaki bir dönem filmi çıkar ve Oscar’da kostüm tasarımı dalına aday olur biliyorsunuz.Son yıllardan örnek vermek gerekirse aklıma gelen filmler The Duchess, Elizabeth: The Golden Age ve Marie Antoinette.Üçü de kraliyet saraylarında geçen, aslında Oscar’da diğer kategorilerde pek iddiası olmayan filmler.Dediğim gibi “dönem filmi” işte.Bu sene de kraliyet ailesine ait bir film var elimizde, The Young Victoria.Aslında film bu sene gerçekleşecek 82. Akademi Ödülleri için değil 81. Akademi Ödülleri için The Duchess ile beraber anılıyordu.Ancak filmin gösterim tarihi ertelenince bu senenin yarışına dahil oldu The Young Victoria.Filmin Emily Blunt için de bir adaylık getirisi olacağını düşünenler olsa da bence abartmasınlar, böyle bir şey mümkün değil.

The Young Victoria‘nın konusu 63 yıllık bir süreyle Birleşik Krallık’ta en fazla hükümdarlık sürmüş I. Victoria’nın hayatını anlatıyor.Ama adından da anlaşılabileceği gibi genç zamanlarını.Amcası IV. William’ın ölümü üzerine tahta 18 yaşında çıkan Victoria’nın hayatından tahta çıkış ve Prens Albert’la evlilik dönemlerini izliyoruz filmde, ki bana göre tadı damağımızda kalıyor.

Özellikle 2005 yapımı C.R.A.Z.Y filmiyle tanınan Jean-Marc Vallee yönetiyor filmi.Yemek sırasında bardaklarla yaptığı kamera oyununa hasta olduğumu ekleyerek, Vallee‘nin yönetmenliğinin oldukça iyi olduğunu söylemek istiyorum.Bu tarz filmlerde kostümlerle göz boyanabileceği düşünülse de bana göre yönetmenlik de en az kostümler kadar önemli.Çok berbat bir televizyon yönetmenini koyun Marie Antoinette‘in başına da göreyim.Sofia Coppola olmadan Marie Antoinette nasıl bir hiçse bu diğerleri için de geçerli.

Senaryo ise Gosford Park ile Oscar almış Julian Fellowes‘e ait.Kendisinin yeni Alfonso Cuaron projesi The Tourist‘in senaryosunu da yazdığını ekleyeyim.Filmin oyuncuları ise Angelina Jolie ve Johnny Depp olacakmış.Konumuza tekrar dönersek, Fellowes iyi bir iş çıkarmış ama kesinlikle dört dörtlük değil.Hatta bir sürü kusur sayabilirim size.Bir kere filmin ilk yarısı inanılmaz derecede yavaş işledi ve klişelerle doluydu.Ne olacağını zaten daha önceki dönem filmlerinde görmüştük.İkinci yarısında ise senaryo delice bir hız aldı ve zevki de o zaman çıktı zaten.Eksi puanlar buradan gelsin.

Kadroda ise hakikaten harika isimler var.Victoria’yı canlandıran Emily Blunt tek kelimeyle harika.Zannediyorum The Devil Wears Prada‘da Blunt bize ne kadar yetenekli olduğunu haber vermişti.Bu sene Cheri‘de de izlediğim Rupert Friend ise Cheri‘den bambaşka bir role bürünmüş.Bir sene içerisinde iki dönem filminde oynamasına önce talihsizlik diye yaklaşmış olsam da taban tabana zıt bu iki role de apayrı renkler katmış Friend.Ben bu beye dikkat derim.Kadro bu kadarla bitmiyor.Başta kısaca izlediğimiz Jim Broadbent ve filmde iyiyle kötü olmak arasında giden anne rolündeki Miranda Richardson filmin deneyimlilerinden.Yan rollerin başarılı oyuncusu Mark Strong bir başka süpriz.Bir türlü hak ettiği değeri görmeyen Paul Bettany gözüme takılan son isim.

Bu tarz filmlerde çok önemli olduğunu düşündüğüm müzikler ise fena değildi.The Duchess‘inkilerle boy ölçüşemezdi tabi ama rahatsız da etmedi.Filmin müziklerini besteleyen isim Ilan Eshkeri bu arada.Kendisini Stardust ve Hannibal Rising’den tanıyan vardır.

Kısacası film ortalamanın üzerinde bir seyirdeydi.Yazdıklarımdan pek kusuru yokmuş gibi görünse de senaryodaki durgunluğun gitmediği sıralarda hakikaten sıkılıyorsunuz.Ama Victoria’ya ve Emily Blunt‘a karşı koyamıyorum.Bence izleyin.

B-

1837. VICTORIA (17) (Emily Blunt) is the object of a royal power struggle. Her uncle, KING WILLIAM (Jim Broadbent), is dying and Victoria is in line for the throne. Everyone is vying to win her favor. However Victoria is kept from the court by her overbearing mother, THE DUCHESS OF KENT (Miranda Richardson), and her ambitious advisor, CONROY (Mark Strong). Victoria hates them both. Her only friend is her doting governess, LEHZEN (Jeanette Hain), but she is smothering and over-protective.

Victoria’s handsome cousin, ALBERT (Rupert Friend) is invited to visit by her mother. He’s also the nephew of her Uncle, KING LEOPOLD OF BELGIUM (Thomas Kretschmann). It’s obvious that Albert has been coached to win her hand. At first she’s annoyed as she has no intention of being married. She never wants to be controlled again. However Albert is also tired of being manipulated by his relatives. Victoria and Albert talk openly and sincerely and become friends. When he returns home she grants him permission to write to her. King Leopold is delighted and pushes Albert to woo her. Albert refuses because he knows she’s not ready and he won’t return to London until she invites him. Leopold reluctantly waits.

Meanwhile King William dies and Victoria is crowned Queen of England. Victoria’s first decree is to banish her mother and Conroy to a remote palace apartment. She embraces LORD MELBOURNE (Paul Bettany), the charming Prime Minister, as her sole advisor. They become inseparable and although his motives are slightly self serving, he truly cares for her and wants her to succeed. Prince Albert returns to London to witness the coronation and the friendship between Victoria and Albert deepens. They spend happy hours together but it is obvious Victoria is under Melbourne’s spell and he eventually returns to Germany.

The public loves their new Queen. She’s cheered as she rides through the streets but this honeymoon with the public comes to a sudden end. Melbourne’s party is defeated in the elections and his rival, PEEL (Michael Maloney), demands that Victoria replace her ladies in waiting, who are all supporters of Lord Melbourne, with the wives of his own allies. Victoria refuses. Peel resigns and the backlash is furious. The newspapers declare that Victoria is opposing the public’s will. They are outraged.

It is only now that Victoria understands how much she needs Albert’s support. Against Melbourne’s wishes, she summons the young Prince back to England. This time Albert is determined not to be kept waiting in the wings any longer. Seeing his new resolution and struck by how handsome and sincere he is, Victoria invites him to marry her.

The spectacle of the royal wedding wins over the public. The handsome young Prince and Queen are cheered and all seems well in the Royal household.

However tensions between Albert and Victoria start to emerge. She wants an obedient friend and lover, not a controlling husband. But he, reasonably enough, wants to be her partner and equal, to be involved in her political decisions. Victoria is furious. She is the Queen and she will manage her own business! Albert is hurt and has little to do in his new role as Consort. Eventually, with the Dowager QUEEN ADELAIDE’S (Harriet Walter) encouragement, she allows him to re-organize the palace staff. He does a great job – the household is more efficient than it’s been in centuries.

Victoria becomes pregnant. Life should be perfect. But they argue when she sees Albert talking with politicians at a party. She’s incensed that he is taking the lead without her permission. They are later riding through the streets when a crazed man tries to shoot Victoria. Albert throws her to the carriage floor and is wounded trying to protect her. Shocked by the danger and amazed by the strength of his love, Victoria realizes what a selfish woman she’s become. She begs Albert’s forgiveness as he insists that all he’s ever wanted was what was best for her. Trusting him completely, she’s now ready to accept his help. Together they banish Lehzen who could not accept Albert’s place in the family, and her mother’s treacherous advisor, Conroy, who was still wielding influence. In a symbolic move, Victoria moves Albert’s desk next to hers and for the rest of his life they rule together

Starring: Emily Blunt, Jim Broadbent, Mark Strong, Paul Bettany, Miranda Richardson, Rupert Friend

MOVIE TRAILER :

Sleepy Hollow is a 1999 period horror film directed by Tim Burton. Based on the Washington Irving story The Legend of Sleepy Hollow, the film stars Johnny Depp, Christina Ricci, Sir Michael Gambon, Miranda Richardson, Casper Van Dien, Jeffrey Jones, Ian McDiarmid, Michael Gough, Richard Griffiths and Christopher Walken. The story centers on police constable Ichabod Crane sent from New York City to investigate a series of murders in the village Sleepy Hollow by a mysterious Headless Horseman. The style and themes of the story take inspirations from the late Hammer Film Productions.

Sleepy Hollow had been in development since 1994 and was originally intended to be directed by Kevin Yagher. The film labored into development far enough for Burton, who had unsuccessfully worked on Superman Lives, to direct. The majority of the filming took place in England where the crew built an entire soundstage. Sleepy Hollow would be released with box office success and critical acclaim, grossing roughly $206 million worldwide and scoring a 73 percent approval rating at Rotten Tomatoes.

Trivia:

• The scene where Ichabod Crane crosses the covered bridge and hears the frogs underneath croaking “Ichabod” and “Headless Horseman” is a tribute to Disney’s 1958 animated version of The Legend of Sleepy Hollow (1958) (featured in The Adventures of Ichabod and Mr. Toad (1949)), in which Ichabod Crane, crossing a bridge, hears the frogs croaking the same words. Director Tim Burton, a former Disney animator, has cited the Disney version of the tale as his main inspiration for the look and style of his film. The scene of Ichabod Crane riding the Horseman’s horse backwards is also taken from the earlier film.
• Christopher Walken, who plays the Headless Horseman, played a schoolteacher in The Dead Zone (1983), in the beginning of which he tells his class to read “The Legend of Sleepy Hollow.”

Johnny Depp

• The town Sleepy Hollow was created from the ground up in three months. At the time of filming, it was the largest set built in England and was put up in record time. The last set that held this record was built for Billy Elliot (2000).
• The Western Wood was built on a sound-stage so everything, the weather, light, could be controlled.
• The Windmill was too large to be constructed on a sound-stage because it was over five stories high. The sails alone weighed over 2 tons.
• The final chase sequence on the coach in the Western Wood took three weeks to film.
• The Horseman’s horse is named Daredevil, the same name of Brom Bones’ (Brom Van Brunt’s) horse in Irving’s original short story; the horse was purchased in Seville, Spain.
• Christopher Walken’s character has no speaking lines, aside from a couple of “HAA”s to his horse and “shhhh.”
• Director Trademark: [Tim Burton] [scarecrows]
• This was originally to be a Kevin Yagher directorial project. Tim Burton later took over the project, with Kevin Yagher remaining on with co-producing credits among others.

Christina Ricci

• The dress worn by Katrina Anne Van Tassel (Christina Ricci) in the last shot of the movie has the same pattern as Michael Keaton’s outfit in the climactic scene of Beetle Juice (1988) also directed by Tim Burton.
• Tim Burton and the crew of the movie built the small town Sleepy Hollow complete with rooms, floors, and stairs. The town was dismantled after filming was completed.
• Historically, Ichabod Crane was a very unattractive man. Johnny Depp wanted to add prosthetics to his face to make himself look ugly, but Tim Burton wanted to base the character on Crane’s more unattractive personality traits – his reported squeamishness and eccentricity.
• According to Tim Burton, the opening shots of Peter Van Garrett were shot by Conrad L. Hall, who was a friend of the film’s director of photography, Emmanuel Lubezki.
• Star Johnny Depp adopted Goldeneye, the horse that played Gunpowder, Ichabod Crane’s horse in the film, when he heard it was going to be put down.
• While Tim Burton admired Andrew Kevin Walker’s original script, he hired the famed playwright and Academy Award-winning screenwriter Tom Stoppard as script doctor. Stoppard did an uncredited re-write to tone down the violence of Walker’s script.
• Ichabod Crane faints six times in the movie.
• At the start of filming the three-way axe battle with Ray Park, Johnny Depp and Casper Van Dien, Casper Van Dien broke the index finger of his left hand. Although extremely painful, he carried on without telling anyone as he didn’t want his part cut short.
• Ichabod Crane and Katrina Van Tassel were, reportedly, real people
• Winona Ryder was offered the role of Katrina Van Tassel, but turned it down.
• A mechanical horse, an updated model of one used in earlier films, was used for studio shots. The mechanical horse was originally developed for riding scenes with Elizabeth Taylor in National Velvet (1944).
• Johnny Depp did all of his own stunts for the final scene where he is dragged by the horse – he had bullet-proof clothing underneath his wardrobe.
• This film features three sith lords from the Star Wars prequels, Ray Park (Darth Maul), Christopher Lee (Count Dooku ) and Ian McDiarmid (Darth Sidious).
• During the last scene Ichabod, during his explanation to Katrina and Young Masbeth of how easy New York is to navigate, says, “The Bronx is up and the Battery’s down.” This is a line from the song “New York, New York” which is featured in the movie On the Town (1949).
• Casper Van Dien in real life is related to the Van Tassels (Christina Ricci’s character’s family; she is his love interest in the film).
• Casper Van Dien gained 30 pounds for his role of Brom.
• The production notes on the DVD reveal that Johnny Depp based his characterization on the late Roddy McDowall (Fright Night (1985)), Angela Lansbury (The Mirror Crack’d (1980)) and Basil Rathbone (The Adventures of Sherlock Holmes (1939) and others).
• Liam Neeson, Brad Pitt and Daniel Day-Lewis were all considered for the role of Ichabod Crane.
• Marlon Brando was sought as The Hessian Horseman.
• Although the headless horsemen in the books and fairy tales is physically not allowed to cross the bridge, as it is known as a safe haven for the characters, in this version he can cross it freely.
• Michael Gough came out of retirement to play Notary Hardenbrook.
• Although Tim Burton claims the windmill scene was a reference to Frankenstein (1931), which he lovingly quoted in Frankenweenie (1984), a stronger link can be made to Will Hay’s Oh, Mr. Porter! (1937) which also featured a windmill but not a headless horseman.
• This was the very last movie produced on laserdisc anywhere in the world.
• During the promotional interviews for the film, Johnny Depp gave Sir Michael Gambon the ‘task’ of mentioning Claudia Schiffer’s knickers in every press interview. According to Gambon, when interviewed on BBC “Top Gear” (1978), he succeeded easily. Mind you, Gambon admitted that he lies in all interviews, so this may not be true after all!
• Johnny Depp reportedly has never seen the film because he didn’t like the way he acted in the film.
• The gown of patterned gray muslin worn by Jessica Oyelowo (Sarah) is the same costume worn by Billie Piper (Fanny Price) during the play rehearsal scene in Mansfield Park (2007) (TV), and by Thandie Newton (Sally Hemings) in Jefferson in Paris (1995). Sally’s gown is made from the fabric selected by Thomas Jefferson and Mrs. Cosway.
• The last live action film of Michael Gough.
• Johnny Depp initially wanted to play the character with a long prosthetic snipe nose, huge ears and elongated fingers, although his suggestions were turned down by Paramount Pictures as they felt the design to be too outrageous.
• The cast and crew often said “The feeling one had walking around Sleepy Hollow’s sets, and in particular the town at Lime Tree, was almost as if you were walking around the inside of [Tim] Burton’s head.”
• In the novel, the Headless Horseman was a man who lost his head from a cannon blast in an unknown battle of the American Revolutionary War.
• This is the first adaption of Sleepy Hallow that doesn’t involve the actor of the headless horseman having to conceal their head in the cloak. Rather, to fit with the technology, the head of the actor is replaced with a blue screen mask and a CGI collar to match the flow of the robe.

Amazon Specials!

Haz click en la imagen para verla al detalle

A pesar de que la cinta se ha presentado en ya varios festivales a lo largo del mundo, se acaba de anunciar que Young Victoria se estará estrenando dentro del circuito comercial hasta el priemr trimestre del 2010, e incluso no se sabe de una fecha definida. La cinta aborda los primeros años de reinado de Victoria de Inglaterra, centrándose particularmente en su vida romántica. El film ha recibido críticas excelente en donde se ha exhibido, y todo parece indicar que, si no ha llegado aún a las salas, se trata de problemas de distribución.

There will be time/ There will be time/ There will be time to murder and create

T.S. Eliot, The love song of Alfred J. Prufrock

La vida privada de los artistas siempre se ha caracterizado por los tonos extremos: la satanización o la glorificación, siempre en aras de la aceptación masiva del producto cinematográfico. Pocas excepciones acreditan el tributo a la alteración del rigor histórico a favor del rigor cinematográfico, tal y como sucede en La vida privada de Enrique VIII de Alexander Korda (1933) o Amadeus (1984) de Milosz Forman. Hay que lanzar una afirmación sin ambages: Las biopics (biographical pictures) suelen ser infieles a la vida del biografiado. Aquí no vamos a discutir algo elemental. Se trata de una película, no de un documental; por lo tanto, la biopic puede tomarse todas las licencias que le vengan en gana.

No sólo reyes y músicos han sido objeto de representaciones cinematográficas. Los escritores están entre los favoritos y nunca se han escapado de la lente atenta del cine. No se puede evitar el recordar a Jonathan Pryce en Carrington (1995) y a Fred Ward en Henry & June (1990). Otro caso memorable es el de ese mito viviente llamado Anthony Hopkins metiéndose en la carne de Clive Stipes Lewis en Tierra de sombras (1993), con Debra Winger interpretando a la poeta moribunda Joy Gresham. En este último filme el personaje femenino es el motor dramático, tal y como lo vamos a constatar en los aspectos íntimos del primer matrimonio de T.S. Eliot (1888-1965), en Tom & Viv (1994) de Brian Gilbert, basada en la obra de teatro homónima de Michael Hastings. Para quienes no están al tanto de la importancia de este bardo, habrá que decir que su texto La tierra baldía (1922) es a la poesía contemporánea lo que el Ulises de Joyce es a la narrativa del siglo XX.

El filme nos muestra al poeta norteamericano (interpretado por William Dafoe) asentado en Gran Bretaña donde la aristócrata Vivienne Haig-Wood (Miranda Richardson) habría de cambiar su vida e influir tremendamente en su poesía. Ella, hiperkinética, hiperactiva, alocada, anticonvencional (en una escena amenaza a Virginia Woolf con un cuchillo  para robarle un taxi); él, mesurado, apacible, introspectivo. Ella parece la gringa y él el británico.  Ella lidia con las frecuentes menstruaciones semanales y dolores de cabeza que se deben a un desorden de la pituitaria; él acaba siendo el más importante poeta de su generación.  Él es una hechura de ella. Él lee sus textos, los corrige, le ayuda a pulirlos, le consigue los contactos. A él no se le nota tanto interés en esta mujer extravagante, quien de haber vivido en esta época habría resuelto su desbalance hormonal (¿simple histeria?) con la medicación adecuada. Los únicos momentos en los que al autor de La tierra baldía se lo ve atraído hacia Vivienne es en los preliminares de un cortejo que termina con una propuesta de matrimonio por parte de ella. Es el año 1915.

Con una sencilla puesta en escena a cargo de Brian Gilbert, en donde no hay cámaras afectadas ni movimientos delirantes y extremos, el espectador es conducido por una galería de emociones que van desde el amor más intenso a la total desesperación, sobre todo cuando Vivienne tiene que ser recluida a la fuerza en un hospital siquiátrico. Viv pasaría en instituciones mentales desde 1930 hasta 1947, el año de su muerte. Más tarde, en 1957, el poeta se casaría con su secretaria Valerie Fletcher. Carole Seymour-Jones sostiene en Painted Shadow: A Life of Vivienne Eliot (2001) que la orientación sexual del autor de La canción de amor de Alfred J. Prufrock era fundamentalmente gay. El mismo libro trae el chisme de que Eliot evitaba constantemente sus obligaciones maritales, por lo que Vivienne empezó un affaire con el filósofo Bertrand Russell. Virginia Woolf, que le publicó su segundo libro de poemas, definió sardónicamente al matrimonio: «Él era uno de esos poetas que vivían rascándose constantemente y su esposa era la picazón».

Chismes aparte, regresemos al filme. Willem Dafoe ha puesto énfasis en el manejo de su voz (parece que ha trabajado con las grabaciones del poeta norteamericano) y asume con dignidad el rol de Thomas Stearns Eliot, convenciéndonos totalmente de ser una persona ajena a los problemas mundanos, soportando con estoicismo el mal de su conviviente. A ratos dota a su personaje de una frialdad y una falta de expresividad notables que nos impiden resolver la ambigüedad en la que reside el enigma del filme: ¿La ama o no la ama de verdad? ¿Le interesa Vivienne únicamente por su familia pudiente para lograr el estatus tan ansiado? Lo cierto es que el buen cine no admite preguntas, mucho menos si son cursis.

La única respuesta a cualquier pregunta se llama Miranda Richardson, nervio principal de esta historia, y cuya performance alcanza niveles poco comunes y no solamente en sus momentos de resquebrajamiento sicológico. Es el total dominio del personaje lo que llama la atención, su histrionismo para poder ser tierna en un momento y violenta en el siguiente minuto. Es una de los nombres más importantes que ha dado el Bristol Old Vic Theatre School (donde fue compañera de Daniel Day Lewis y Greta Schacchi) y aún no ha recibido todo el reconocimiento que se merece. Aquí no hablamos del Oscar o cualquier otro premio superfluo. Todavía no hay roles que estén a la altura de su inconmensurable talento. En muchas escenas la misma actriz parece estar presa de esas alteraciones conductuales que afectaron a la señora de Eliot: los ataques de ira, la violencia física, los lapsus y exabruptos… Cosa curiosa: El descontrol también es actoral. A ratos sentimos que Miranda Richardson también está poseída por demonios incontrolables. El actor debe ser un médium (no le quitemos su acepción espiritista a esta palabra) que transmite emociones que no son corroborables en el mundo empírico. Esto, que suena aparentemente a una trivialidad a lo Stalisnavsky, es algo que constantemente proyectan grandes artistas como la Richardson.

La última parte del filme maneja con sutileza una paradoja. Eliot empieza a ser famoso mientras la salud mental de su mujer va en descenso. Ella, la que le dio sus últimos años de lucidez, va sumergiéndose en la sombra; él asciende hacia la luz de la celebridad mientras ella se fastidia por la falta de reconocimiento público, después de todo ella es la primera lectora de las obras de su marido, la que organizaba lecturas familiares y la que le mecanografiaba los manuscritos. Fue gracias a la aristocracia en la que Viv lo introdujo que Tom pudo conseguir la ciudadanía británica en 1927 y  además la membresía de la Iglesia Británica (este tema del anglicanismo que tanto influyó en su poesía debería ser tema para un ensayo extenso).

Hay un punto en la hagiografía de Eliot que no deja de intrigar: Vivianne nunca le hace una revelación a su futuro esposo del problema femenino que la aqueja (las metrorragias y las jaquecas crónicas). La película parece decirnos que a él no le importaba demasiado dicho asunto, puesto que tenía la mirada fija no sólo en la carrera literaria que iba a forjar, sino en su inserción definitiva en la sociedad londinense. De hecho, Tom & Viv sugiere que ella es recluida por haber atentado contra la clase pudiente por su conducta insana, producto de su desbalance hormonal. Ella es soslayada no sólo por su esposo y su familia, sino también por el establishment de Bloomsbury.

Para muchos la película puede resultar un tanto aburrida y densa como los textos del poeta. Para los devotos puede resultar un receptáculo de buenos chismes intelectuales. El hecho de ser la adaptación de una obra de teatro lo pone inmediatamente a uno en guardia como espectador. La narrativa avanza de manera gradual como un conjunto de sketches que han sido yuxtapuestos con inteligencia.

Retumban en los oídos de este crítico la forma con la que el personaje defiende su vínculo conyugal, exigiendo el respeto del caso. “Soy la señora de T. S. Eliot”, afirma con orgullo en el momento en el que los familiares (poeta a la cabeza) deciden internarla de por vida. También es una forma de decir: “No hace falta que me aprehendan de forma violenta. La camisa de fuerza es innecesaria”. Es el mismo respeto que merece Brian Gilbert por haberse embarcado en una tarea poco grata: el de dar vida audiovisual a uno de los escritores menos carismáticos del siglo XX. Para quienes han leído a Eliot saben que no era precisamente el Neruda inglés. Gilbert filmará después Wilde (1997) donde se encargará de recrear la personalidad turbulenta y polémica de otro escritor, el británico y esta vez sí muy carismático, Oscar Wilde. Vale este intento a lo Merchant-Ivory de retratar al Thomas Stearns Eliot de los albores de su carrera. Una curiosidad para literatos.

Brothers: opening in theaters Dec. 4, 2009.
Directed by: Jim Sheridan
Starring: Natalie Portman, Jake Gyllenhaal, Carey Mulligan and Tobey Maguire

Although this film looks a little bit like a 21st century Pearl Harbor with a slight horror twist, I’m intrigued. Portman, Gyllenhaal and Maguire rarely give bad performances and so if we are basing this off of past precedent I think this film could be good. Intense, but good.

A Single Man: opening in limited release Dec. 11, 2009.
Directed by: Tom Ford
Starring: Colin Firth, Julianne Moore, Matthew Goode and Ginnifer Goodwin

This is fashion designer Tom Ford’s directorial debut. Do I really need to say more? Curiosity has consumed me. Plus, if such heavy weights as Moore and Firth are part of the cast, I’m hoping that this means Ford actually has some promise as a director. Not to mention it is nice to see Firth in a role that doesn’t require him being the cheesy rom-com lead.

The Young Victoria: opening in limited release Dec. 18, 2009.
Directed by: Jean-Marc Vallée
Starring: Emily Blunt, Rupert Friend, Paul Bettany, Miranda Richardson and Jim Broadbent

I am a sucker for period pieces and Emily Blunt is quickly becoming an actress “to watch out for.” The romantic love story of Queen Victoria and Prince Albert is not one I’m too familiar with, so I hope it’s tragic and heart-wrenching. That is they only was a love story should be.

why is this movie not about ME?

R

Ben Lee, Rose Byrne, Miranda Richardson

Placid Lake: You hate that guy, don’t you?
Joel: If I could get away with it, I’d kill him, have his windpipe bronzed and wear it on a chain around my neck.

Placid Lake (Lee) is an odd child, with two free-spirited, non-violent parents.  Placid is picked on constantly throughout school, and his only true friend is Gemma (Byrne), who he’s had a platonic relationship with since they were very little.  After he’s out of school, Placid decides to rebel against his parents, conform to society, and get a job at an insurance company.  Meanwhile, Gemma – who’s always been a much more studious type than Placid – is starting to think that she’d rather explore more of herself than the bookish scientist role that her father has channeled her into.

I think I can trace my general annoyance with this movie directly to the lead performance by Ben Lee.  Placid Lake is not very likable.  Sure he got picked on a lot, for no real reason, but that doesn’t give him license to be such a selfish jerk all the time.  The character and the performance just rubbed me the wrong way.

Thankfully, Rose Byrne is also in the movie, and her cuteness and likability balances things out.  I’d rather have seen a movie all about her.  Miranda Richardson is entertaining as Placid’s mother, and I thought Christopher Stollery was particularly good in a subtle performance as Placid’s boss at the insurance company.  He’s funny, but there’s also a certain sadness to his performance as a guy who’s been broken down by the corporate world and wants to live vicariously through whatever excitement Placid might have in his life.

The idea of someone rebelling against their wild parents by becoming a buttoned down business type is reasonably funny, but it also got old pretty fast.  Plus, the outcome of that story line, as well as the one involving Placid and Gemma, is entirely predictable.  There are some funny moments along the way, but it’s all moving towards one dull, inevitable conclusion.

Don’t jump off of buildings.  You’ll break bones.

10 – 2.1 for the annoying lead character/performances – 1.7 for being overly predictable – .4 for being a little too repetitive with its themes + .2 for Rose Byrne = 6.0

Por Roberto Camargo

A primeira tomada é feita quase toda digitalmente. Nagini, a cobra de Lord Voldemort, atravessa, soberba e pixelizada, a tela. Essa é uma pequena amostra do que Harry Potter e o Cálice de Fogo pode proporcionar ao espectador. A quarta aventura do jovem bruxo, aliás, é o livro com maior potencial como material cinematográfico – em matéria de blockbuster repleto de efeitos especiais. Dragões, sereianos, o torneio tribruxo e o retorno de Lord Voldemort a uma forma física.

Na batuta, após a boa – porém breve – passagem de Cuarón, assume Mike Newell. O currículo desse inglês é bastante vasto, principalmente pela sua história na televisão. Entretanto, é nos filmes que ganha maior destaque. Em 1977, dirigiu O Homem da Máscara de Ferro. Décadas depois, lançou sucessos como Quatro Casamentos e um Funeral, Donnie Brasco e O Sorriso de Monalisa. Em 2005, foi convidado para dirigir a quarta aventura de Potter. Entregou-nos, na época, o melhor filme do bruxo.

Para quem não conhece a história, aí vai um pequeno resumo. No seu quarto ano na Escola de Magia e Bruxaria de Hogwarts, Harry Potter (Daniel Radcliffe) tem um novo encontro com a morte. Seu colégio recepciona um lendário torneio entre as três maiores escolas bruxas do mundo. Esse torneio reserva as mais perigosas missões, como enfrentar um dragão apenas armado com sua varinha. Tradicionalmente, são três apenas os competidores e todos devem ser maiores de 17 anos. Esse ano, no entanto, um quarto integrante figurou entre os competidores. E ganha um doce quem adivinhar quem foi…

A narrativa ganha cores logo na primeira sub-história: a Copa do Mundo de Quadribol. A paisagem da cena da chave do portal está belíssima, assim como a fotografia composta contra o sol. O design do estádio de quadribol lembra muito os estádios de futebol do nosso Primeiro Mundo. Tantos aspectos positivos terminam tão logo o ministro da Magia inicia a partida. Ao invés de mostrar a partida, o diretor corta a cena e vai direto para o pós-jogo. Tenho certeza que muitos fãs esperavam pela final entre Bulgária e Irlanda, e eu me incluo nessa porcentagem.

O elenco permanece o mesmo, com adicionais interessantes. Robert Pattinson, o atual queridinho das mulheres, dá vida a Cedrico Diggory, representante de Hogwarts na disputa pela taça tribruxa; Katie Leung encarna a insossa Cho Chang, por quem Harry tem uma paixonite; Clémence Poésy, como Fleur Delacour (sinceramente esperava uma atriz mais bonita para viver a Fleur…); Stanislav Ianevski representa o astro de quadribol Vitor Krum; Brendan Gleeson introduz o auror e novo professor de Defesa contra as Artes das Trevas, Olho-Tonto Moody; e Miranda Richardson vira Rita Skeeter, a sensacionalista repórter do Profeta Diário.

Depois de listar exaustivamente quase todo o elenco, você deve estar rogando pragas contra mim, pois esqueci, talvez, da maior figura entre os estreantes. Ralph Fiennes, sim, o Paciente Inglês, ressuscita a figura humana de Lord Voldemort. E como grande ator que é, encontra o tom perfeito para o frio lorde das trevas. Talvez a face ofídica que Rowling cita em seus livros tenha ficado exagerada, uma vez que sumiram com o nariz de Fiennes e colocaram uma fenda em seu lugar. Mas, exagerado mesmo, só os cabelos longuíssimos de Potter e Rony Weasley (Rupert Grint)…

Pitacos de cri-crítica a parte, o filme é muito bom, surpreendendo até mesmo aqueles que não vão com a cara dessa fantasia inglesa. Harry Potter e o Cálice de Fogo enche os olhos com seus efeitos digitais, faz rir de vez em quando e traz a morte de maneira sutil e, porque não, emocionante.

Minha nota: 8.0

Direção: Mike Newell
Gênero: Aventura/Drama/Suspense  
Duração: 157 minutos
Elenco: Daniel Radcliffe, Emma Watson, Rupert Grint, Alan Rickman, Tom Felton, Robert Pattinson, Ralph Fiennes, Robbie Coltrane, Maggie Smith, Clémence Poésy, Stanislav Ianevski, Brendan Gleeson, Miranda Richardson, Timothy Spall e Michael Gambon.

Siga as principais novidades do Movie For Dummies também no twitter. Clique aqui!

This starts off as a decent thriller, with Stephen Rea’s IRA terrorist reluctantly holding Forest Whitaker’s likable English soldier hostage (Whitaker with an English accent…what?), but once it moves on from that and becomes something different, it also becomes a lot less interesting. Rea and Jaye Davidson have no real chemistry together, which is a huge detriment to the film, since the second half is all about their relationship and what it means for the both of them. The oft-discussed twist is pretty laughable, not to mention predictable, and the song choice at the end is utterly ridiculous. I couldn’t fucking believe my ears when it started playing. Was this supposed to be a comedy? Props for some good dialogue and a terrific performance by Miranda Richardson as one vile bitch.

C+

I was Sweeney Todd: The Demon Barber of Fleet Street the other day and that made me think. I noticed that quite a bit of the movie musicals from nowadays are usually se in the past. Take Sweeney Todd for example. It was set during the 1800s. Hairspray is the same way. It was set during the early 1960s. There’s also Chicago, Moulin Rouge!, The Phantom of the Opera, etc. I think that’s part of the reason as to why they’re appealing. I don’t know why, but that’s just what I think.

From A Little Girl Dreams Of Taking The Veil, a collage-novel by Max Ernst, from here.

Hark! whence that rushing sound?
’t is like the wondrous strain
That round a lonely ruin swells,
Which, wandering on the echoing shore,
The enthusiast hears at evening;
’t is softer than the west wind’s sigh;
’t is wilder than the unmeasured notes
Of that strange lyre whose strings
The genii of the breezes sweep;
Those lines of rainbow light
Are like the moonbeams when they fall
Through some cathedral window, but the tints
Are such as may not find
Comparison on earth.

Behold the chariot of the Fairy Queen!
Celestial coursers paw the unyielding air;
Their filmy pennons at her word they furl,
And stop obedient to the reins of light;
These the Queen of Spells drew in;
She spread a charm around the spot,
And, leaning graceful from the ethereal car,
Long did she gaze, and silently,
Upon the slumbering maid.

Miranda Richardson as Queen Mab, from that miniseries about Merlin starring Sam Neill.

Oh! not the visioned poet in his dreams,
When silvery clouds float through the wildered brain,
When every sight of lovely, wild and grand
Astonishes, enraptures, elevates,
When fancy at a glance combines
The wondrous and the beautiful,-
So bright, so fair, so wild a shape
Hath ever yet beheld,
As that which reined the coursers of the air
And poured the magic of her gaze
Upon the maiden’s sleep.

from here.

The broad and yellow moon
Shone dimly through her form –
That form of faultless symmetry;
The pearly and pellucid car
Moved not the moonlight’s line.
’t was not an earthly pageant.
Those, who had looked upon the sight
Passing all human glory,
Saw not the yellow moon,
Saw not the mortal scene,
Heard not the night-wind’s rush,
Heard not an earthly sound,
Saw but the fairy pageant,
Heard but the heavenly strains
That filled the lonely dwelling.

-from Queen Mab; A Philosophical Poem; With Notes, by Percy Bysshe Shelley, somewhat based on the character of Queen Mab from Mercutio’s speech in Romeo And Juliet by Shakespeare. You can find the full text of the poem here.

Queen Mab In The Ruins, from here.

Esta peli es dirigida por Mike Newell gran sorpresa al ver que conozco más de dos pelis en un director de la franquicia (bah! después revisé y también conozco más de dos con Cuarón y con Columbus); Newell no tiene un perfil definitivo pero me deja un leve tufillo a pelis de serie B y comedias románticas, en fin, un tipo extraño. Me gusta Donnie Brasco con Johnny Depp,  Al Pacino y Michael Madsen, me gusta Four Weddings and a Funeral con Hugh Grant, Kristin Scott Thomas y Andie MacDowell, no me molesta demasiado Mona Lisa Smile con Julia Roberts, Kirsten Dunst, Julia Stiles, Maggie Gyllenhaal y Ginnifer Goodwin y siento que tiene un gran sentido del humor recapitulando su portafolio para televisión.

La historia en este capítulo, como lo decía anteriormente, se vuelve trágica y siento que Newell la trató con un buen respeto y delicadeza. El gran problema es que los actores son muy jóvenes, neonatos y no toda la actuación puede recaer sobre los hombros de las estrellas; en este caso Timothy Spall, Jason Isaac, Robbie Coltrane, Michael Gambon, Maggie Smith, Alan Rickman, Brendan Gleeson, Miranda Richardson (quien ya había trabajado con Newell en Dance With a Stranger), Gary Oldman y Ralph Fiennes. Siento entonces que hace falta mucha fuerza a nivel de forma pero que Newell hizo un gran esfuerzo y que Daniel Radcliffe, Emma Watson, Rupert Grint y Robert Pattinson, como Cedric Diggory, pudieron esforzarse al máximo pero les hizo falta mucho tramo para llegar a una posición honrosa.

Lo divertido de la peli es la primera gran aparición de Voldemort encarnado por Ralph Fiennes. Usando un maquillaje sobrio pero definitivamente perverso; la historia gana un personaje villano de características épicas.

David Cronenberg’s 2002 thriller “Spider” is one of those rare movies which creates a solid, substantial divide between viewers, depending on what the audience wants in a movie and in how they watch it. For viewers who want a movie to spell things out for them or at least hint at the grander scheme, who want to be frequently if not constantly entertained with action, drama, or comedy, who want to see attractive actors playing endearing and likeable roles, this movie most certainly will not appeal whatsoever. Viewers who enjoy an intellectual movie with twists and turns barely noticeable until the end, who are fascinated by deep and complex performances which take time to puzzle out, who watch films closely for each hint in each frame, however, will find in “Spider” a movie to watch over and over again.

In this film, directed by horror master Cronenberg and adapted by Patrick McGrath from his own novel, a man known as Spider suffering from severe schizophrenia, portrayed by the unparalleled Ralph Fiennes, escapes from an insane asylum and takes up a room in a sordid halfway house. As the film is told mainly from this man’s perspective, the lines between present and past are blurred, as are those between reality, memory, and delusion, as Spider begins to explore what he perceives to be his childhood, his Oedipal and disturbed relationship with his mother (Miranda Richardson in a truly fantastic performance), and his own mental illness, ultimately piecing together the truth behind his delusions.

Before any critique can be made, I must first commend the film for its absolute brilliance in screenwriting, acting, cinematography, and countless other areas, for I find this to be one of the best movies I have seen in years. The script delves into psychosis far better than any other film I have seen to date, marking the strangeness and subtleties of mental processes while keeping a coherency which must be admired. As the title character, Fiennes takes on the role of a schizophrenic to a rather alarming degree, creating an altogether disturbing persona, from an unsteady walk to random, unintelligible murmurs to the frantic yet deliberate writing in Spider’s precious book of memories. Richardson as well delivers a fantastic performance as Spider’s mother, stepmother, and landlady, blurring the lines of reality by similar appearances yet retaining three individual characters only marred by the narrator’s psychosis — a pretty, soft, caring housewife; a vulgar, cruel, sexual mistress; an angry, efficient, blaming housekeeper; bleeding into each other like ink on damp paper. The cinematography also perfectly explores the schizophrenic mind, blending artistic angles with more mainstream shots which creates a balance between a dramatic movie and an experimental piece which functions perfectly within a film which pushes the boundaries on what cinema can really and effectively explore.

However, the film itself relies primarily on subtleties in order to make its point. From the movie’s first abrupt departure into memory, noted by little more than Spider’s ability to speak silmultaneously with other characters, to the replacement of actors by other actors to imitate the man’s faulty perceptions, the film unapologetically delves into the psychotic mind without explaining its differences from concepts of normalcy. Yet, without noting these small departures from reality, the audience is unable to realize how deep and complex this film has rather suddenly become. Without noticing the blurred lines between memory, reality, and delusion, the viewer cannot become part of Spider’s journey and cannot understand the importance of all of the hints which Cronenberg, the traditional master of psychological horror, places within his film, ultimately missing what makes this film so fantastic.

“Spider” has rather few faults, and this I believe to be the only major one — the failure to accomodate an audience who will watch lazily and will therefore miss the brilliance hidden in the film’s subtletles. Though I personally hate films which spell out the major themes and though I appreciate hidden meanings as much as any writer, for a movie which even remotely relies on mass appeal it becomes unfortunately necessary to make things slightly more obvious than the cinematic artist would like. As a critic and as an avid film buff, I daresay I picked up on the majority of Cronenberg’s subtletles, but without such a background and a pension for artistry, I doubt that any average viewer would be able to understand the beauty that exists in this film. I wonder, of course, if anything more obvious would ruin the unequivocal complexity which makes this film great, but I cannot help but think that something a little less subtle and artistic could have made “Spider” far more successful than it is today.

2002: Spider di David Cronenberg

“Il regista canadese, maestro dell’ambiguità, ci cattura ancora una volta” (Il Sole 24 Ore, 15 Dicembre 2002).

Meritato grande successo al Festival di Cannes del 2002, David Cronenberg “varia sul tema che predilige – l’orrore della personalità – con indubbio virtuosismo: fa convivere nella stessa inquadratura passato e presente; provoca sussulti nello spettatore suggerendogli efferatezze senza bisogno di mostrargliele; dipinge una periferia londinese gravida di squallore poetico” (la Repubblica, 22 maggio 2002).

Opportunamente tutti i critici hanno sottolineato come questo sia un film che va visto più volte (“per capirne le mille sfumature”): da sottolineare che il lavoro è stato accolto più favorevolmente in Francia che in Italia (ma Cronenberg è famoso per dividere…).

Tratto dall’omonimo romanzo del 1990 di Patrick McGrath (scrittore cresciuto in un manicomio criminale), un film non facile, tutto giocato sull’ambiguità essere-apparire, incubo-realtà, fantasia-verità e che David Cronenberg dirige con maestria e con inquadrature che richiamano continuamente Bergman e il migliore Hitchcock.
Viaggio di un uomo all’interno della sua follia, esplorazione senza speranze o soluzioni di un incubo insieme reale e mentale, Spider è stato giustamente avvicinato al mondo di Escher, Becket, Kafka e Freud.
Un vero e proprio puzzle massimamente coinvolgente, una straziante riflessione sulla propria identità, un psicodramma sull’intersecarsi di passato e presente che procura inquietudine e angoscia nello spettatore che pretende dal cinema qualcosa in più dei soliti spettacoli fracassoni a cui purtroppo siamo sempre più abituati.

Un film lento (non noioso, tutt’altro) che si avvale della sorprendente performance di Ralph Fiennes (in un ruolo difficilissimo) e Miranda Richardson (che addirittura interpreta tre parti, una diversissima dall’altra, il che tra parentesi rappresenta la chiave del mistero). Bravissimi anche Gabriel Byrne e Lynn Redgrave. Raramente è visibile un intero cast così nettamente superiore alla media.

tuttelerecensioni

Regia: David Cronenberg
Sceneggiatura: Patrick McGrath
Cast: Ralph Fiennes, Gabriel Byrne, Miranda Richardson, Lynn Redgrave, John Neville, Gary Reineke, Philip Craig, Bradley Hall
Fotografia: Peter Suschitzky
Montaggio: Ronald Sanders
Musiche: Howard Shore
Produzione: Artists Independent Network, CBL, Grosvenor Park Productions, Capitol-Davis-Metropolitan Films
Distribuzione: Fandango
Paese: Canada, Francia, Gran Bretagna 2002
Genere: Thriller, Drammatico
Durata: 98 Min
Uscita Italia: 29 Novembre 2002
Uscita Canada: 13 Dicembre 2002
Uscita Francia: 13 Novembre 2002

Sito Ufficiale

Trama:
Dennis Cleg ha circa trent’anni e da venti vive in una casa-famiglia per malati mentali a Londra. Nonostante gli sia stata diagnosticata una schizofrenia acuta, non è mai stato realmente ricoverato, ma ora comincia progressivamente a perdere il contatto con la realtà.

Note:
Su IMDB i premi e i riconoscimenti al film

Hace solo algunas semanas anunciamos que la cadena AMC había ordenado la producción de Rubicon, una nueva serie dramático, y hoy ya podemos presentar el primer adelanto de lo que seguramente será una serie muy interesante.

De la misma cadena que presenta Mad Men y Breaking Bad, llega Rubicon, un thriller político que presenta a James Badge Dale, también conocido como Chase en la tercera temporada de 24, como un analista que descubre que sus empleadores son parte de una conspiración global.

También presentando a Lili Taylor (Six Feet Under) y Miranda Richardson (The Crying Game), la serie se enfoca en Will, un talentoso pero cerrado analista que descubre algunos secretos de sus empleados amenazando su vida y la de cualquier persona cercana.

Una serie de eventos sospechosos llevan a Will a creer que una organización invisible con una agenda desconocida ha estado manejando la compañía y posiblemente el destino del mundo. Nosotros tenemos doce episodios para descubrir la realidad.

La primera temporada de Rubicon todavía no tiene una fecha de estreno.

This post is really two posts. The first section preoccupies itself with why album covers matter culturally, so as to set up a discussion of a particularly interesting album cover, in this case Kate Bush’s 1982 release, The Dreaming, which I focus on in the second section. I intend to discuss more album covers throughout the duration of this blog’s livelihood. If you would like to throw out suggestions or contribute a piece, feel free. Contact me at feministmusicgeek@gmail.com.

One thing that I fear is leaving our popular consciousness in the digital age is the album cover. I don’t consider myself a technophobe and hardly think music videos (once on TV, now on the Web) contributed to the downfall of album packaging (I actually think that’s the fault of record labels who keep raising their retail prices). Yet I do worry what we’ll lose if we stop caring about album covers. Growing up, Madonna had some of the most interesting album covers ever. So imagine how bummed I was when I saw her slapped-together, clumsily Photoshopped cover for Hard Candy. Sigh.

Cover for Hard Candy; released in 2008 on Warners Bros.

Now I know that avering my love for album covers may cast me as a bit of a commodity fetishist (which I kinda am, despite how problematic it is). And I get why album covers don’t take priority. For one, market imperative — covers cost money and the more elaborate they are, the more expensive they can become (just ask the folks at Factory Records; for every sold copy of New Order’s “Blue Monday” — lavishly designed by Peter Saville to look like a floppy disc — the label lost money, though was more concerned in releasing a well-made, lovingly-crafted piece of popular art than in turning a profit). Also, the reliance of plastic for packaging can be less than environmentally friendly (though kudos to many musical acts, artists, and record labels for realizing this and phasing it out with more paper printing).

Cover for An Invitation by Inara George; released in 2008 on Everloving with paper cover

But album covers reveal so much — who the artist is, what the music is going to sound like, what the theme or concept behind the album might be, who made the cover art, the evolution of print technology, the history of album packaging, indeed how valuable packaging may have been to the people and companies responsible for release. And obviously, in terms of representational politics, album covers can tell stories, share folklore, provide commentary, project alternate realities, or rebel. Bottom line: they’re texts and we shouldn’t overlook them or what they may reveal about the artists, the markets, and the fan bases. If interested, I highly recommend Steve Jones and Martin Sorger’s essay “Covering Music: A Brief History and Analysis of Album Cover Design.”

Treatise endeth. New treatise begineth.

One such album cover I’d like to look at is Kate Bush’s The Dreaming. Now, I’m a bit new to her, but not exactly. I have kind of a greatest hits awareness of her. As a girl, I made up dance routines in my room to “Rubberband Girl” and “Running Up That Hill” when they (rarely) got played on the radio. I know she was discovered by Pink Floyd’s David Gilmour at an early age and recorded her first album, The Kick Inside, as a teenager. I know that she produces her own material. I know that she’s a trained interpretive dancer and worked with Lindsay Kemp, David Bowie’s choreographer. I know that she directed and starred in a short film called The Line, the Cross, & the Curve co-starring Miranda Richardson based on songs from her 1993 album The Red Shoes. I know she’s done some bugged-out music videos. For example:

And then I know what other people think of her. I know a lot of negative things. Characters in books like Bret Easton Ellis’s The Rules of Attraction and Nick Hornby’s High Fidelity hate on her music. Likewise, people like to throw around rumors that, due to her perfectionism in the studio and her penchance for writing songs about female suffering and neuroses, mythological women, and the paranormal, she is crazy. It’s all crazy sexist. On that tip, I was friends with a girl who said of Bush, “Ugh, Lilith Fair.”

And then the positives. I know that a lot of people mention her when they talk about Tori Amos (and now, St. Vincent and Bat for Lashes). I’ve read some academic work (specifically Debi Withers’s piece on queer subjectivity in her second album, 1978’s Lionheart, and Holly Kruse’s “In Praise of Kate Bush,” which considers Bush’s authorial status, from the anthology On Record: Rock, Pop, and the Written Word). I know that Ann Powers, a rock journalist I idolized growing up, is writing a 33 1/3 book on The Dreaming (expect a future post upon its release next year — I’m way stoked).

And then I know male artists who have sited her as an influence. There’s L.A. outsider art rocker Ariel Pink, who borrows her treble-heavy, lo-fi, avant pop production sensibilities and clearly positions himself as a fan.

But lest we think that Bush’s weird music is only stuff white people like, OutKast’s Big Boi grew up on her music and R&B singer Maxwell covered “This Woman’s Work.”

Hmmm. Guess I knew more than I thought. Yet, I’d never actually listened to an entire Kate Bush album. So, I thought I’d start with The Dreaming, which is really great. It’s kinda crazy how influential and varied and timeless this music is — I haven’t had a listening experience with so many “aha” and “so this is where ______ came from” moments since I first heard The Velvet Underground’s debut album the summer before college. But that was all happy accident. I picked it because a) it’s widely regarded by music critics as a masterpiece, b) indeed, Powers is writing about it, c) it marks a transition for Bush as producer as well as singer and instrumentalist, and d) the cover.

Cover for The Dreaming; released on EMI in 1982

This cover (made by Kindlight) knocks me out. I’ve stared at so much in the past few weeks — after several years of looking at it in various record stores — and only recently figured out that it’s supposed to be Houdini and his wife (indeed, there is a song called “Houdini” on the album, told from his wife’s perspective). The shackles around him are to be broken using the key, which Bush (as Bess Houdini) has in her mouth. But I always thought she had a wedding ring in her mouth and was internally debating whether or not to put it on (and perhaps be shackled) or swallow it and flee.

I suppose it could work either way. It’s also possible that Bush and Bess Houdini have suddenly become self-conscious about the inherent performativeness of their careers (musicians, like magicians, trade in trickery). There’s also the possibility that the key takes on some sort of sexual, Freudian design as a symbol and that the juxtaposition of the key, the shackles, her tongue, and her lusty proximity to Houdini may be at odds with her Victorian dress, coinciding at once with Houdini’s era, Bush’s origins as a Brit, and Bush’s lyrical preoccupations. All readings are valid, as they peak curiosity and dialogue with the music. Indeed, they are part of the music. Part of this woman’s work.

Variety reports that AMC has ordered 12 episodes of new drama Rubicon, a political thriller starring James Badge Dale (24, The Departed) and Miranda Richardson (The Hours). Early reports say the show has similarities to the conspiracy elements of Alias, which just happens to be one of my most favorite shows in recent years. From what I can tell so far, this sounds like a great asset for AMC to add to their growing stable of outstanding dramatic programming. The Variety report targets a 2010 premiere of the new series, which could allow it to fit snugly between the third seasons of Mad Men and Breaking Bad.

An investigator travels to a small farming community and uncovers malign supernatural doings.