Ocean's 8: The Problem with All-Female Casts

HA! Roped you in, didn't I? I bet you were all like "OMG SHE HATES FEMALE CASTS! FAKE NEWS! CLICK BAIT!" Well, I suppose you were sort of right about that last one...but I digress (as usual).

Let me be first to say I am 100% in favor of women-centered movies and casts. Look at masterpieces like Clueless, Bridesmaids, and Girl's Trip. Women's movies don't have to be all kumbaya to be relatable. They can be hilarious, they can be cool, they can be dramatic -- they can be all the things that every other kind of movie can be. But you know what they can't be? Inauthentic.

If you had to give me one word to describe a lot of the recent attempts at all-female cast movies it would be that word: inauthentic.

Honestly, I haven't seen a movie as bad as Ocean's 8 in a really long time. And I'm the girl who sat through Oliver Stone's 1981 horror The Hand (yes, that was terrible too, but far more entertaining).

Michael Caine plays a cartoonist haunted by his amputated, murderous hand.

Yes, this is the same director that did Wall Street.

To be fair, female relationships are really hard to capture on film in general. Women are weird. We're raised in a society that praises us for being pretty, teaches us to be suspicious of other women, and has a history of pitting us against each other. Manipulation has a tendency to run rampant in inauthentic female friendships. If you don't trust a girl, you can be nice to her face but you won't be her friend -- and most girls can almost always tell the different between being nice and being friends. Maybe that's why girl friendships are so damn special -- and why movies that are supposed to be about us always end up being so fucking shitty.

Ocean's 8 makes a lot of mistakes with its...well, existence, if I'm being frank.

First of all, there's no reason to add to the Ocean saga, so like let's not.

ALSO HOW COULD YOU KILL DANNY??

(I bet he died in a really cool way though...

like Thelma and Louise style with Brad Pitt...)

Second of all, it seems blatantly obvious that they made Ocean's 11, took out like 95% of the emotion driving the heist, made the guys into girls, and tried to swap "cool" for "glam." Or something.

Whatever kind of cool they try to make these women, though...it does not play. Guys may earn the respect of other guys by being cool, but I can't think of many girls I know who respond to "cool." Girls respond to respect. Think about what works so well in Bridesmaids: they attack the pettiness factor dead-on, they're honest about it, and in the end everyone ends up being friends because they respect each other.

Ocean's 8, Ghostbusters, and many other attempts at these female-driven, nonsensical reincarnations completely disregard depth for the chance to "change it up." The plot becomes irrelevant because the fans of the prior version are going to drive to the theater anyway. And the egregious error in disregarding characters and storyline in these movies is that they become painfully boring. I really don't give a shit whose jewels they are -- none of these characters have me believing that they're real because they put out zero emotion for the entire duration of the film. Oh they stole them? Oh cool, I have more emotional involvement in the fact that I ran out of popcorn.

Ya, it's prob made out of fucking rock candy, who cares.

While Bullock emulates Clooney as best as she can, the context doesn't work. Being betrayed by a former lover that she doesn't even really seem to have liked that much anyway doesn't give us a lot of emotional investment. Worse, it turns her heist into a classic "woman scorned" trope that seriously does no one any favors. And we don't even really get the impression that she's smart -- she had been pulling off a handful of deals at a community bingo over in Jersey, we learn at one point. Seriously? What is this, amateur hour? She goes from knocking over bingo to stealing jewelry at the MET GALA? I don't buy it.

Actually, I kind of had a hard time believing that any of these women were smart. Instead of getting insights into their backgrounds and them being people that the two mains know already, each basically gets accepted into the fold regardless. We don't learn hardly anything about them.

This lack of any investment in the outcome completely disintegrates what makes heist movies so fun. In Ocean's 11, the ending is a "WOAH" moment. In Ocean's 8, the ending is an "Oh." moment.

3 outa 10. Seriously, so disappointed by this film, even though I didn't really have high hopes. But not even entertaining in a stupid kind of way. Just mundane. Hollywood needs to do better for these ladies.

Carol: Not Bad, Even Though It Didn't Win Any Oscars

In a classic Annie J. move of seeing an Oscar film when it's no longer speculative who's going to win which awards (by the way, Mad Max was an amazing film and deserved those 6 Oscars, just sayin), I went and saw Carol this past Sunday.

To be perfectly honest, I would've much rather have seen Room or Spotlight but as I have no access to OnDemand stuff and I hate watching things on my laptop (stared at Room on iTunes for a good 2 minutes before exiting the program) Carol was what I was working with. Also I love Cate Blanchett and the sets and costumes in this looked incredible.

Just look how pretty. LOOK.

Here's our plot:

Therese (Rooney Mara) is just a regular city girl: she works in a department store, she has a boyfriend, and she isn't really anything special. But all of that changes when Carol Aird walks into the toy department where she's working. After asking for Therese's advice on a Christmas gift for her daughter, Carol leaves her gloves on the counter. Womp womp. But Therese tracks down her address and sends them back to her. To say thank you, Carol invites her out to lunch. (This isn't central to the plot but I must make a note of this: they eat poached eggs with creamed spinach -- is that not the most 1950s meal you could ever imagine? Anyway..) Things start to get a little out of the ordinary, though, when Carol keeps on pressing Therese to meet with her -- though Therese is more than happy to oblige. Going to her house, asking if she can go to hers, etc. And they start to get to know each other. The whole time this is happening, Carol is going through a messy divorce with her husband, Harge (Kyle Chandler), who's aware that she's dated women in the past and isn't thrilled about her fling with Therese. The rest of the movie follows the two women as they begin to understand each other and as their romances comes up against the expectations of a 1950s society.

Spoiler alert: 1950s society isn't thrilled.

First of all: this movie is gorgeous. The colors are rich, the setting is spot-on, and the costumes are beautiful. And the whole feel of the movie comes to life under the cinematography of Edward Lachman, who also did The Virgin Suicides and, most noteworthy as of late, HBO's mini-series Mildred Pierce. Under his eye, there's a beautiful mixing of the real-life, wintry and cold-bright New York City and the muted tones of the softly lit interiors where Carol and Therese get to speak to one another one-on-one. Interesting perspectives make this too, as we look out of a foggy window in a cab, hover outside an apartment building as youth party inside, and hear a lot of off-screen dialogue while the camera meanders to show us where it's coming from.

So. Yes. Beautiful.

Where I ran into trouble with this film was in the acting. While Carol seems to be attempting to live her life the way that she wants, and that's reflected very well in Cate Blanchett's portrayal of the character I think, there's a wooden quality to Therese that I had a hard time sympathizing with for most of the movie. While Carol is treading carefully, there's a certainty to her actions that makes them unmistakeable. Therese, however, is more watery, happy to float along in Carol's wake while somewhat lacking in her own personality. As a result, I found their chemistry a little hard to believe. Therese seems entranced by Carol and befuddled by her own actions, like a minnow bewitched by the light of an anglerfish.

Anglerfish. For reference.

I will say, though, that what plays out well is the movie's tone. There is an air of caution to everything that they do, which I think reflects the attitudes of the era pretty well. It isn't an exploitation film that centers on how repressed desire plays out in the bedroom (please see: Blue is the Warmest Color). Rather, it contemplates how cautious 1950s queer women had to have been to make advances towards other women, even when you knew they were interested too. The muted tone here is very well done. I just wish there'd been a little less caution and a little more chemistry. Especially when they're alone. Natural chemistry is finding easy conversation and laughter, and I found that to be absent here.

7.5 outa 10. Long story short: Beautiful movie, but a little self-contained, even for the era that it's presenting to the audience.

Let's see if this trailer is vague enough for you...

Blue Jasmine (Seriously Blue. And Also Crazy.)

Had a "me party" yesterday and went into Philly to see such sites as the Philadelphia Art Museum, Ultimo Coffee's new coffee shop on Catharine St, The Continental, and (of course) The Ritz 5 movie theater, where I saw Woody Allen's latest Blue Jasmine.*

May I firstly say that I love Woody Allen as a director? The jazz music, the black and white 20's style intertitles and alphabetical credits, the funny/tragic realistic characters--you had me at Small Time Crooks. He is truly a craftsman and I tend to love everything that he puts out. Even To Rome With Love, haters. (Although, as a side note, I frequently ignore all of his 80s-90s films that include Mia Farrow as a headliner. Except for Hannah and Her Sisters.) I kind of pre-loved Blue Jasmine right after I saw the trailer. So let's get to it.

Jasmine (née Jeanette) has just moved in with her sister. She has just suffered a nervous breakdown following her husband (Alec Baldwin) being charged with fraud and subsequent prison suicide. After a life of luxury (Actual luxury. Like five houses and a personal jet.) she is staying at her sister's lower-middle class apartment and trying to figure out her life. But Jasmine has never had to do this before. She states more than once throughout the movie that Hal, her husband, swept her off her feet before she could graduate from college.  Resultantly she doesn't have any life skills. And has never had to be a real adult.

Pre-real life. Like an episode of Downton Abbey.

After a friend of Ginger's finds her a job as a receptionist at a dental office, Jasmine begins taking computer classes with the dream of eventually getting a degree in interior decorating online. But when one thing after another happens at the dentist's office, she quits and approaches a WASPy friend with the question "Do you know any men?" The rest of the movie is spent with her quitting everything to become a rich man's girlfriend, lying to him about her past and masquerading as a qualified interior decorator, which (predictably) doesn't end well. Her story is also cut up with vignettes from her past life, hosting parties, telling friends how she and her husband met, talking to their adopted son, listening in on deals that her husband was making, etc.

This movie was fascinating for a number of reasons. In some ways it reminded me of The Queen of Versailles, the real life tale of the Segiel family and their fall after the recession. But Jasmine, in a lot of ways, is so much more pathetic. Here we have a look at the inability of the rich to function in lower-middle class life. Relying on the increasingly imaginary "American Dream," Jasmine originally plans to pull herself up by her bootstraps and go back to school. However, faced with the harsh reality that school costs money, she then realizes that she has to fund it by getting a job appropriate to her resume (which is presumably blank).

Don't we look ravishing today.

After becoming uncomfortable with things at her menial job, she moves onto the only thing that she knows how to do: relying on a man. And this method of survival, which is pretty archaic in this day and age, does not end up panning out. We see her struggle through her life in denial of her surroundings and acting a bit like lost child looking for her mom. Or, rather, a lost wife looking for her husband.

By contrast, her sister Ginger is totally happy being a member of the lower-middle class. She bags groceries, she has two nice kids, and a boyfriend who is a mechanic. When Jasmine comes in like a tornado of judgement, though, Ginger starts to falter and question her romantic and lifestyle choices. It's a hard road back to reality for Ginger, but she gets her happy ending. Jasmine not so much.

It's ok though. She's got her vodka.

This movie seems to be making an interesting commentary about women's options today. Whereas in the 80s women may have been excellent trophy wives, it seems to be less and less acceptable for a woman to function today without an actual function. Even stay-at-home moms do more than Jasmine does. And while she's not a bad person, she doesn't seem to have the first idea as to how to pick of the pieces of her life. It also tells the eternal moral: money isn't everything.

Excellent excellent acting by Cate Blanchett. I totally believed that she was going off the deep end. If for nothing else, I would recommend the movie for her excellent acting.

8 outa 10. 

I literally had to go through this entire post and delete all of the times I'd written Blue Ivy. Thanks Jay-Z and Beyonce. Rude.