Play Misty for Me: Hope You Like the Sound of Mouth Breathing

I'M ALIVE! And I'm still watching things, I swear. I'm just not having my usual energy levels because I got a new job (cue the "Hallelujiah Chorus").

Anyway, since I'm trying to get back on my Netflix DVD game and I've been catching up on some old flicks that I had heard about a trillion times, I decided to watch Play Misty for Me, one of Clint Eastwood's first movies (bless).

Aw, lil guy.

The plot follows suave radio DJ (like there is such a thing) David, a guy who lives near Carmel in what I can only assume is California. After meeting a nice woman named Evelyn at a bar, he takes her back to her place, they have a talk about having "no strings attached," have a one night stand, and call it a day -- OR DO THEY? So Evelyn keeps on popping up all over the place, namely David's house, and cooking him food, buying him stuff, etc. And David's starting to get a little creeped out at this point, so he tells her to back off. But she doesn't. As the plot continues, Evelyn becomes less and less passive and more and more obsessed with getting to David, who she thinks is her one true love.

Don't they just scream true love?

The whole "stage 5 clinger" storyline is far from new. Leave Her to Heaven, Fatal Attraction, Misery, Single White Female, and a whole bunch of other ones. What is it that we find so fascinating about people that don't take "I don't love you" as an answer?

Whatever the answer is, Play Misty for Me is indulgent, dated drama. It's not bad, but it was hard not to laugh at it for being so over-the-top at points.

On that note, Play Misty for Me is pretty dated, coming from a modern perspective. Why is David so into jazz? Were radio DJs really that cool back then? Did everyone have a blind hair stylist for this film?

Seriously, what's happening here...

One thing that really stood out (and drove me BONKERS) was the sound editing in this. While you could make the argument that the sound of heavy breathing over action shots is interesting editing, I'm gonna call it like I see it -- no one likes mouth breathing. And Evelyn's craaazy shrieks against the quick zoom-ins to Clint Eastwood's eyes are just so cliche for this time period. It's hard not to giggle.

Also what the heck is up with the soundtrack here? Why is Evelyn, a girl who seems pretty fashionable for all her crazy, so into terrible jazz? Why is David so into terrible jazz? Was terrible jazz a thing that was cool in the past? Were these the original hipsters? What is happening??

Play Misty for Me. Or, y'know...dont'...whichever...

5 outa 10.

"You're not dumping me, Buster Blue-Eyes!" I just...can't. Also, what is this music??

Frank: Papier Mache, Fassbender, and the Meaning of Art

Michael Fassbender wearing a giant papier mache head? Weird band making music out of weird stuff? Domhnall Gleeson? Streaming on Netflix?

How can you say no?

Jon Burrows (Domhnall Gleeson) is not a good song writer. Despite trying his hardest, he seems to be continually grasping at straws to write even the simplest melodies. But then he happens upon an eccentric band in need of a keyboard player and finds himself swept up in their weird ensemble. Fronted by a guy named Frank, who wears the aforementioned papier mache head, the group is...hm...weird as hell. As Jon is thrust into the mentality of a group that unquestioningly does whatever Frank tells them, he sees golden opportunity for growing as a musician. Trying to grow their fan base (as is the modern way), Jon creates a social media profile of the band unbeknownst to them, and ends up compromising their structure and, worst of all, their sound.

This movie was pretty cringe-worthy at times. Jon's sheer obliviousness at his own lack of talent is exacerbated by the fact that all of the band members (except Frank) totally hate him. While his acceptance into the band is a revelation on his side, especially after spending the opening scene of the movie trying to compose (hilariously) horrible songs, the rest of the members look at him like an itch they can't scratch. And ultimately, everything that he does to try and make the band more mainstream only serves to alienate him further from the others.

It opens up really interesting questions, though, about what people consider "good music." The band's members are, for the most part, mentally unstable. But that only serves to make their music more interesting, and to give them all a different perspective on their form of expression. Ultimately, it's because they're all a little loony that they can make the music that they do. And the driving force behind why it's so good.

Jon, by contrast, is trying to make the band into a mainstream success and that is just not who they are. By trying to make their sound all bubblegummy and catchy, he only succeeds in destroying what makes them them. His best efforts end up sounding pedestrian, basic, and (honestly) terrible. Tt becomes more and more obvious, he's not an artist, and that his music is not expressive of anything that he actually feels.

Favorite parts: Jon's hilariously awful songs in the first scene ("LADY IN THE RED COAT, WHAT YA DOIN' WITH THAT BAG??" I died.), Maggie Gyllenhaal's performace in general, the "I Love You All" song.

Very thought-provoking despite being the most offensive waste of Fassbender's beautiful, beautiful face in recorded history.

7.5 outa 10.

Mr. Turner: The Most Boring, Confusing Period Drama I've Ever Seen

Can we all agree that period dramas are usually pretty damn good? Like, look at all of the various Pride and Prejudices and Jane Eyres; or classics like Sense and Sensibility; A Room With a View; Shakespeare in Love; Elizabeth; Dangerous Liaisons; Emma; The King's Speech; Mansfield Park; Young Victoria; and a bunch of others.

Granted, these all have their pros and cons, but generally when you see a trailer where the cinematography is on par with the rest of these sorts of films you have no reason to suspect that they're, um, not going to be very good.

Mr. Turner, which I had been dying to see since the moment I saw the trailer, was a total let-down.

The plot (if you could call it that...) follows J. M. W. Turner in his later years, diving right into his life as a prolific, and somewhat controversial, painter.

Um...and that's the plot.

His life featured a jolly father who died when he was middle-aged, a failed first marriage and unacknowledged children, a common-law (presumably) marriage to a Mrs. Booth who is the only redeeming character in the film, and a weird, creepy housekeeper who shuffles around the entire film without saying more than, like, a sentence.

Ugh, this dumb biddy...

Now, keep in mind, I didn't really do research on this guy's life before going in to see the film, so I was just seeing what was put in front of me.

The nice thing about this is that I could, objectively, see what they were going for in terms of Turner's character. A gruff man who growls more than speaks (a little too much, if you ask me), there are a handful of moments throughout the film where we get an idea of his profound sensitivity in a way that's extremely intimate.

The cinematography and mise-en-scene are absolutely grogeous, and we get to see the original subjects of some of his most famous works, providing context for some of his more abstract paintings.

Like dis one.

Outside of these little gems though, the movie is just bewildering. And honestly, that's not something that you want for a biopic. Especially in trying to reflect the life of a well-known artist.

While we get little vignettes and insights as to the quality of his life, the majority of the film just feels like filler, and I found myself asking "What is the point of this scene?" more often than not. While there are a few shots that Mike Leigh makes thought-provoking and beautiful in a minute-to-minute frame, the overall message of the film is blurred as you realize that none of the scenes really connect to mark a larger message. You leave the theater thinking "Mr. Turner really liked to paint and had a lot of feelings! He was a pretty okay guy, I guess!" without really learning anything much about his art, or even really about his family life.

Seriously, who are you?

Fundamentally, too, I had a major problem with how inarticulate Timothy Spall is. Like, okay, the man grumbled like a bear. A lot. Okay. We get it. Please make the grumbling stop. Oh god now he's choking. Oh GOD, now he's gurgling?? Now he's gurgling and grumbling and choking??? Make it stooooppppp.

Woof.

Anyway, I guess my point is this: If you're going to go see Mr. Turner because you want to see a pretty movie, by all means go ahead. But if you go in expecting to leave with a better knowledge of what Mr. Turner's art was all about? Uh...you're probably going to be a little disappointed.

5 outa 10. Extra point deducted for disappointment. Just sayin.

Selma: The March for Voter Rights

In light of Martin Luther King, Jr. Day yesterday, it seems appropriate to write about a movie that I saw on Saturday: Selma. Much in the way as watching movies like 12 Years a Slave feels necessary, Selma brings to life the events that happened at that time and place during the Civil Rights Movement with shocking visuals and a moral outrage that (thank God) pays off at its conclusion.

Selma follows the actions of Martin Luther King, Jr. and his followers after four black little girls are killed in a church bombing in Selma, Alabama. In the time that follows, Martin Luther King, Jr. appeals with President Johnson to push through a federal voter rights bill that will secure the vote for African Americans and cancel out Jim Crow laws like poll taxes and other restrictions that hold them back. When Johnson refuses, deciding to focus instead on the war on poverty, King heads down to Alabama to organize peaceful protests. Despite the efforts of the black people in the area to remain peaceful, the local government continually and brutally obstructs their efforts, beating people in the streets, and killing more than a few in their frenzy to remain segregated. The struggle of these people to defend what rights they technically already have, but are being barred from, is nothing short of awe-inspiring bravery.

The first advice I have for anyone going to see this is: bring tissues. While these are things that you hear about and can see reruns of on the news, the disturbingly cavalier way in which these white officers beat down the elderly, attack the peaceful, and kill the innocent made my blood boil. Not to sell short the recent events in Ferguson, or discount racism that still exists today, but it's horrifying to see blatant beatings carried out by not just police officers, but endorsed by state elected officials as they seek to preserve a way of life as outdated as picking cotton.

While the film brings MLK to life, and it's nice to see the largely solemn leader on screen joking around with friends, what it portrays best is the reality of the danger at that time.  While it's never been a secret that these were dangerous times for Civil Rights fighters, it's incredibly inspiring to see those that were moved to this cause despite the insane violence that met them at every turn.

In an incredible stroke of luck, I was asked to this screening by a family friend and invited to a talk after the film given by a man who actually marched during the infamous March to Montgomery that the film portrays. While he mentioned that the march provided safety in numbers, he rode back to the airport in a car with another white man, and two African-American preachers. While riding he was enlightened by their sharp eyes for what was and wasn't an acceptable filling station for black people, and stated that he never before had been so aware of traffic laws and the importance of following them.

While Selma is admittedly a dramatization of the events that happened in the town of the same name, there's something to be said for the explanations it makes along the way. For example, you learn in school that they wanted voter rights, but never really why. In one scene, King explains the gravity of things being allowed to perpetuate in the South (and elsewhere) because when black people aren't allowed to vote, they are almost constantly outnumbered by white juries who then can vote against convicting whites accused of violence.

The only things that bothered me were the fact that King's speeches in the film were not taken verbatim (due to some copywriting issues with the King legacy) and also the portrayal of Lindon B. Johnson. It's historical inaccuracies like these that usually make me steer clear of biopics, but by and large, this movie is worth the watch.

7.5 outa 10.

The Babadook: Nightmare Fuel.

As most horror movie fans would probably agree, finding a well-made scary movie can be a little harder than you might think. Churning out blood and guts (sometimes quite literally) can be done by any idiot with a camera and some corn syrup. But instilling actual fear? That's something that requires a bit of finesse.

The Babadook, an Australian film garnering more and more attention, is one of these films.

Full disclosure: I don't think he's funny.

The plot follows a mother, Amelia, and her son, Samuel. Samuel is having some behavioral problems that are interfering with his classmates, his cousin, and (most markedly) his mom. He has a pathological fear of monsters, which prompts him to make numerous homemade weapons, frighten those around him, and makes it nearly impossible for him to sleep. Despite Amelia's attempted patience, there's a tangible exhaustion that totally envelopes her character. She's dealing with the grief of having lost her husband in a car accident seven years before (incidentally, on their way to the hospital to have Samuel) and her son's antics are driving her up the wall.

It only gets worse with the arrival of a mysterious pop-up book in her son's book case. A book that tells of a man called Mr. Babadook, and shows images of him watching you, waiting to be let inside, and finally, forebodingly, ends that once you've seen him you'll "wish you were dead." At first denying the existence of this creature, the mother begins to hear and see strange things at night. As things gets more eery, the Babadook starts to affect their lives and their relationship. But is the Babadook real? Or is it a manifestation of the mother slowly losing her sanity?

Is he in that closet tho..?

The Babadook is really interesting in that it blends psychological and supernatural horror in a way that hasn't been done this gracefully, to my memory, since The Shining. While you want to believe that there are supernatural powers at work, there is also a tangible slip in Amelia's psyche as she becomes more and more blunt and antisocial. Honestly, for the first half of this movie, all I could think was "This poor woman." Her son's unacceptance of the idea that there is no monster almost makes you feel hopeless. But then when he ends up being right (or does he?) you're immediately conflicted with whose side to root for. Is Amelia just at her breaking point? Is the Babadook a supernatural manifestation of her emotions? Or is he simply a monster like the child's been saying all along?

In terms of technical specs, the cinematography is on point. This is where, I might add, a lot of B-horror movies screw things up. Too many long shots, bad dialogue, sloppy editing, and dozens of other things can turn a horror movie into a nightmare (heh, see what I did there?). Director Jennifer Kent goes out of her way to give you some great jumps and fantastic creeps without sacrificing artistry. And, like all worthwhile scary movies, it has a way of manipulating sound that totally will creep you out. In their too-quiet house, Sam's outbursts are more irritating, his mother's silence more resounding, and the sounds of their intruder incredibly scary.

In a lot of ways, The Babadook reminds me of a few Asian horror movies that I've seen. A lot is left unexplained, and a lot relies on mystical realism, but that is part of what makes it so good. It's not an episode of Scooby-Doo, where the monster is revealed and you can go home with a sense of closure. It ends leaving you on your toes. After all, you can't get rid of the Babadook.

Great, great, great. 8 outa 10.

Arranged: Finding Common Ground

Following the recent devastating events in Paris, it seemed fitting to watch a movie about religious differences and how they affect (and don't affect) us in our day-to-day. The movie Arranged had been on my Netflix queue for a while, but (in pure Annie form) I was like "Ehhh...I'll get to that one later." Yesterday seemed the perfect time to check it out.

Nasira and Rochel (the "ch" pronounced with that back-of-the-throat sound so common in Hebrew and French languages) are both teachers at a Brooklyn school. Though they start off as quiet strangers, they are quickly thrown into an unlikely friendship. Despite the fact that Rochel is an Orthodox Jew and Nasira is a Muslim, they bond over their shared fates being in an arranged marriage.

What's great about this film is that it celebrates diversity without being blatantly secular. Instead of saying "oh religion is stupid!" each main character comes to the conclusion that they love their traditions and religions, despite being shoved into secular attitudes by their (somewhat overbearing) principal. And they give a nod to the secular experience as well. Rochel, after having a particularly hard time going on dates with weirdos, takes a minute to visit a cousin who isn't Orthodox Jewish anymore. And, without being hard on people that choose this kind of a lifestyle, decides that it isn't for her.

But honestly, the nicest thing about this movie is that is shows that interfaith friendships aren't impossible. Despite their parents' blatant disapproval, Rochel and Nasira end up being extremely close, to the point where Nasira goes out of her way to help Rochel find a proper suitor! There are shots, also, of each of them striving to understand each other's religion. From Rochel letting Nazira henna her hand to Nazira going with Rochel to pray at her grandmother's grave, there are small moments where they learn to accept each other. And, especially in the spirit of this week, that kind of tolerance between two very strict religions is invaluable.

A lovely movie. Believable yet powerful. 8.5 outa 10.

Whiplash: You'll Never Think of Jazz the Same Way Again

I remember when I was in high school, there was a teacher that made everyone incredibly nervous. The kind of teacher that would tell you to read the footnotes on the pages of the text book and then quiz you on them the next day. The kind of teacher that would stop and stare at you if you didn't have the right answer, and tell you to look it up on the spot, instead of moving on to another person that had their hand raised. He scared the absolute crap out of me.

Fletcher, of Whiplash, makes my high school teacher look like Santa Claus.

The film starts off with a young drummer named Andrew. A shy 19-year-old, Andrew is a student at Shaffer University (a fake school made to mirror the likes of top arts universities like Juliard). Second chair drummer in a class band, he catches the eye of Fletcher, the razor-sharp conductor of the school's studio band. Testing his strengths and weaknesses, Andrew endures psychological and physical abuse at the hands of his teacher to remain in his position as the drummer of the band. The film begs the questions: What is the true way to realize an person's talent? What is the cost of success? And how far are you willing to go to get it?

Could you handle this every day? 'Cause I could not.

I had heard that this movie was impeccable, and I really have to agree. I can't remember being as tense watching a movie since Gravity, and the fact that the film largely relies on psychological games to achieve this effect is nothing short of impressive.

Teller is absolutely brilliant as the understated Andrew. Having loved him in The Spectacular Now, he really gets to show his acting chops playing a more dynamic character. His transformation into the cocky, outspoken musician (that quite creepily ends up mirroring that of J.K. Simmons's character Fletcher) is totally believeable. What keeps the movie so captivating is Andrew's self-discipline, and his sheer will power at being able to bend and not break. And you expect him to break. Things come to a head several times within the story, and just when you think he'll up and quit -- he just keeps practicing harder.

Agggghhhhh.

That being said, and on the flipped side of things, the acting done by J. K. Simmons is nothing short of masterful. His most memorable role in my mind before stepping into the theater is when he played the father of a pregnant teenager in Juno. (And of course his role as the spokesperson for Farmers Insurance.) But honestly, the reign of terror that he unleashes on his entire band, and on Andrew specifically, has wiped the image of those good-natured characters from my mind. He is mind-bogglingly ruthless. Putting both the bands he conducts as a whole and the students within them on the line -- just to make a point -- you've got no choice but to believe the worst of this man.

And yet, one thing that the movie also does incredibly well is whisper the question: "...Is it worth it?"

Fletcher reflects at one point that there are no two words more damaging than "Good job." Students that get mollified are only then encouraged to accomplish the status quo. Students that are challenged by looking stupid react instinctively by practicing harder so that it never happens again. Andrew, instead of breaking under the massive weight of all of the psychological torment, only bounces back by practicing harder and getting better. So, the question remains...is it worth it?

Absolutely mesmerizing. I can only imagine the physical toll that this took on Teller, as he looks about ready to pass out or break something a few times. And wonderful score. Hope this ups everyone's jazz intake.

9.5 outa 10. Honestly. Very good.