it's not life that matters but the journey...

yay - I have only one more day of work this week. though I do wish I could just work and work and work and make tons of money. I need it.
but then I'd be even more tired than I am now. and I am very tired. *sigh*

likely because of the weekend and the holiday I just got my first movie from netflix in over a week! I thought I'd get both my movies today too, but the post didn't come through. you know, I've been blaming Netflix, but really it's not their fault. it's the Chicago post office. they really truly are slow. anyone who lives here knows what I mean.

well, I've been very slow in doing this, but before I start watching any more films, I thought I had better post some of the reviews that have been in my head (and now on paper as of last night) for awhile. So here goes:



Fear and Loathing in Las Vegas : First I should say, I wonder if it's really fair for me to "review" a movie of which I only watched about 30 minutes. But really, that fact alone is the reason I want to talk about this movie. I found it to be utterly unwatchable, and entirely too frenetic and annoying. If there's a point to this movie, someone please tell me. Interestingly, I didn't even know that this movie was directed by Terry Gilliam until I had shut the movie off and looked it up on IMBD - and to be honest, I was shocked that such a mess of a film was directed by such a genius filmmaker. I've always loved Gilliam's movies: Brazil, Time Bandits, the Fisher King, etc. His movies have always been quirky, but never really so annoying that it just gets under your skin, like fingernails on a chalkboard. When this movie came out years ago, I wasn't interested in watching it. Other than the fact that it has Johnny Depp, there's no appeal for me. Here's the two main reasons why I couldn't sit through this film:
1) Though Johnny Depp is more than likely brilliant as Hunter S. Thompson (from the little that I watched, and from the very little I know of Thompson), and he really seemed to "become" the character as he always does, it wasn't enough. I don't particularly enjoy watching Johnny when he plays really weird characters. Of course I loved him as Jack Sparrow, but I hated him as Willy Wonka. He was just too weird. I prefer the charming, maybe even a bit quirky, and sexy roles like Chocolat, Don Juan, Sleepy Hollow, Gilbert Grape, etc.
2) I'm not a drug addict and have never even been one. "Druggie" movies like this, Spun, Highway, Requiem for a Dream - they don't do one thing for me. they just make me annoyed and pissed off. I can't stand the frenetic, disjointed, non sensical, jumbled images that don't connect or make any sense. Nor can I empathize or care about characters who are just ruining their lives and being stupid and silly. Enough said!




Kiss Kiss, Bang Bang : I wanted to see this film for the actors: Robert Downey Jr. and Val Kilmer, both of whom I really like. Plus, the title sounded cool. I found the movie to be entertaining and sometimes even laugh out loud funny. And I did like the style and the "film noir" aspect, and the way it was directed in a way that it resembled an old '60s detective film, similar to "A shot in the Dark" (though without the genius of Peter Sellers). And I did like the narration by Downey; I thought it added an interesting element to the film and made it more personal. But besides that, I have to admit I was a bit lost and confused by the plot; I think that I sort of "got it" at the end, but not enough to really explain it to someone who asked me: "so what's it about." I'm not sure about that. the acting was pretty good, but of course neither actor quite doing his best or up to par. That could have been due to the script or the direction. Downey was pretty fun, but Kilmer (who looks very fat and tired), was just not into the role at all, and didn't seem to be having any fun. Overall, I give this a 2 1/2 out of 4 - it was a bit disconnected and confusing, and not very memorable.




Mean Creek This movie was a bit of a spontaneous pick from Netflix. I had seen it listed on a couple of the film sites to which I belong on LJ, and it seemed interesting. The story itself isn't anything new: some kids decide to get revenge on the school bully, and though what they originally planm isn't very serious (just something to "get even" and prove a point, really), things don't work out as they planned, and some of them get cold feet. From that point, things really spiral out of control, and the movie deals with the reactions of the kids to the situation, which really turns out to be quite sad. The scenery is beautiful (set in Oregon and not sure if it's also filmed there), and the actors, who are all young and unknown (except for one of the younger Culkin kids - I think Rory), are very good and convincing. The older of the actors really resembled a young Brad Pitt in his gestures and mannerisms mostly. It was a tragic and realistic film, and though not incredibly memorable, it was well done and entertaining.




American Psycho I saved my favorite of these four for last. I really liked this movie and found it very intriguing and very memorable. I remember when this film came out years ago and there was a lot of talk and controversy, so naturally I was always a bit curious to see it. finally I watched it while I was alone one night last week, and I have to admit I didn't really know what to expect. I knew that it was supposed to be somewhat of a "satire", and that it is based on a novel (and as far as I know is quite different, and less graphic than the novel). Otherwise, it was all a surprise to me. I have to admit that I both liked and disliked the movie; and it's for the reasons that I disliked it that I really ended up enjoying it, especially after the fact when I could take some time to digest what I had seen and analyze what the director was trying to do. Roger Ebert noted in his review that if this movie had been directed by a man, the main character, Patrick Bateman, would have been seen more as a serial killer. But instead, since it was directed by a woman, the character was more of typical (or perhaps atypical) misogynistic executive who tends to act out his dark fantasies rather than hiding them or burying them as most people do. He's, as Ebert says "prone to all of the usual male drives and compulsions" but he just acts out a little more. And that is an understatement. Our "hero" seems to have a love/hate relationship with himself, and he basically hates everyone that he comes into contact with. He's this larger-than-life misogynist - a guy who you might meet anywhere, but who is really a monster wrapped in a beautiful package. And boy is Christian Bale beautiful in this movie. He has an ungodly perfect body, face, hair, personality. People like him, but they don't really know him or remember him. Bale does an incredible job in this role. He is so loathsome that you end up loving him for how terrible he is and almost emphathizing with him. It's really twisted. I loved the little musical "history" interludes that he does prior to each of his really violent acts (Huey Lewis was my personal favorite of his little introductions). They were so absurd that they almost made the gruesome scenes that followed almost comical. I highly enjoyed this film and thought that the director did a great job of illustrating the sickeningly competetitive and shallow nature of American corporate male culture.