Trial 1

rymay27: I came across the trailer for this film right here on...

Wed, 19 Aug 2009 16:18:52 -0400

I came across the trailer for this film right here on tumblr and was instantly excited to see it. It is a documentary and it does have a strong message trying to save the dolphins but the story behind the actual cove plays out like a Hollywood action thriller. The group of activists are more like special ops agents on this top secret mission to expose the Japanese whaling industry. They succeed too. The Cove opens your eyes to some pretty messed up stuff the Japanese government is allowing to happen. It’s only in select cities so, if you can, go see this movie. Ric O’Barry will be your new hero.

inkyeagle: The Cove trailer - documentary on the annual killing...

Wed, 19 Aug 2009 16:18:02 -0400

inkyeagle:

The Cove trailer - documentary on the annual killing of 2500 dolphin’s at Taiji, Wakayama in Japan

The film “The Cove” is by far the best documentary I...

Tue, 18 Aug 2009 21:32:13 -0400

The film “The Cove” is by far the best documentary I ahve seen in awhile. I reccomend it to everyone.

thecovemovie.com

In A Dream is a fabulous film that I love dearly! Such beautiful...

Fri, 29 May 2009 12:57:45 -0400

In A Dream is a fabulous film that I love dearly! Such beautiful art with such a tragic story.

Everyone has to see it!!!!!

'Paper Man' To Open LAFF

Fri, 29 May 2009 12:34:28 -0400

‘Paper Man’ To Open LAFF

“Paper Man” To Open LAFF

by Peter Knegt (Updated 21 hours, 5 minutes ago)

A scene from Michele and Kieran Mulroney’s “Paper Man.” Image courtesy of the Los Angeles Film Festival.

Film Independent has announced that “Paper Man” will have its world premiere as the Opening Night Gala of the 2009 Los Angeles Film Festival. Written and directed by first-time filmakers Michele and Kieran Mulroney, the film is described by the festival as “the coming-of-middle-age story of Richard Dunn (Jeff Daniels), a writer caught between the pressures of deadlines, the expectations of his wife (Lisa Kudrow), and the constant presence of the superhero (Ryan Reynolds) who’s lived inside his head since 2nd Grade. And then he meets a girl – a Long Island teenager (Emma Stone) whose friendship shows him that no matter how much it hurts, it’s never too late to grow up.”

“We wanted to find an independent gem to launch the Los Angeles Film Festival, and we got our wish with the world premiere of this tender, funny, original film from two vibrant new directing talents, Michele and Kieran Mulroney,” said Festival Director Rebecca Yeldham in a statement.

“We love the spirit of the Los Angeles Film Festival and are just thrilled to get the chance to premiere our film in front of our hometown audience. It’s really an honor,” said the Mulroneys in a statement.

The film is produced by two-time Academy Award nominee Richard Gladstein through his FilmColony, Guymon Casady through his Film 360, and Art Spigel and Ara Katz through their Artfire Films, who also fully financed the production. Executive Producers include Dan Fireman from Artfire and Fireman Capital Partners, and Darin Friedman from Film 360.

Worldwide distribution rights remain available for the film, which will premiere on Thursday, June 18 at 7:30 p.m. at the Mann Village Theater. The Los Angeles Film Festival will run from Thursday, June 18 to Sunday, June 28. Check out he festival’s full lineup here.

posted on May 28, 2009

(via addthis)

12 Must See Films from Cannes '09 (plus one)

Thu, 28 May 2009 14:19:49 -0400

12 Must See Films from Cannes ‘09 (plus one)

(via addthis)

What the Wind Blew In

Thu, 21 May 2009 14:48:36 -0400

New York Times

March 1, 2009

By ARMOND WHITE

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/03/01/books/review/White-t.html?_r=1

FRANKLY, MY DEAR

“Gone With the Wind” Revisited

By Molly Haskell

Illustrated. 244 pp. Yale University Press. $24

“Gone With the Wind,” the quintessential Hollywood movie, has long deserved to be rescued from critical disdain and given its correct place among American pop masterpieces, like “The Godfather” and “On the Waterfront” and “E.T.,” that enlighten as much as they entertain. Molly Haskell provides that defense in “Frankly, My Dear: ‘Gone With the Wind’ Revisited,” an earnest work of moviegoer remembrance that’s also affectionate scholarship. Haskell’s argument is mounted on feminist principles that at first glance seem antithetical to a film widely regarded as prefeminist fluff. She contends that “themes centering on women” are “always an inferior subject matter to socially conscious critics of literature and film.” After 70 years of “GWTW” bashing, a creditable critic finally says, “Not so fast!”

Since Haskell introduced one of the earliest versions of feminist-conscious film criticism in “From Reverence to Rape: The Treatment of Women in the Movies” (1974), feminist criticism hasn’t been very evident in the mainstream media. Haskell gave up regular reviewing in the early ’90s, leaving criticism that seriously examined the big-screen image of women and the popular representation of female social roles to go underground — into academic studies where abstruse, tenure-seeking jargon is used to rebuff popular taste. That makes “Frankly, My Dear” all the more remarkable. It’s Haskell’s feminist perspective that provides insight into a movie most academics won’t touch and current critics dismiss. She disentangles the film’s qualities from the confounding issues of misogyny, racism and intellectual snobbery.

Confronting the legendary headstrong heroine Scarlett O’Hara, Haskell explores the power she exerts on the romantic and political imagination — first as a creation in Margaret Mitchell’s best-selling 1936 novel, then as a screen personification by the British actress Vivien Leigh in a Hollywood adaptation produced by the independent mogul David O. Selznick. From these multiple sources Haskell anatomizes the iconographic Scarlett as a product of proto-feminist literature, a performer’s neuroses and the outsize ambitions of Hollywood’s first golden age.

Almost like an apology beforehand, Haskell’s biographical sketches and psychological speculations set up an unlikely framework for critical interpretation. Admitting obstacles to her appreciation, she goes back to the battle lines that the initial wave of feminist pop criticism drew between political correctness and Hollywood art: “The feminist angle, and the movie’s profoundly mixed message, came home to me in 1972, when I took part in a panel — one of the first — on the roles of women in film. Gloria Steinem, editor of the newly launched Ms. magazine, brought up ‘Gone With the Wind,’ deploring the spectacle of Scarlett being squeezed into her corset to a 17-inch waist, that perfect illustration of female bondage, Southern style. I sprang to defend her as a fierce, courageous heroine, going her own way, a survivor and so on.” Giving candid testimony to the friction between doctrinaire feminism and emotionally complex movie watching defines Haskell’s critical perception. Several lapses — facile connections to Madonna, Barack Obama, Sarah Palin, even Judd Apatow — are just mild hazards of criticism as engaged, topical journalism. Mostly, her confessions and investigations revive the new journalism’s practice of personal revelation and private response.

Rejecting accusations of frivolous escapism, Haskell sees the intricate ways that “Gone With the Wind” (the book-and-film phenomenon) derived from the legacy of Southern aristocracy and changed it through the post-suffrage image of female independence. She says her own enthrallment began with teenage reading in Richmond, Va.: “Scarlett embodies the secret masculinization of the outwardly feminine, the uninhibited will to act of every tomboy adolescent, here justified by the rule-bending crisis of war.” Haskell intertwines her own history with Mitchell’s Georgia background, Leigh’s British origins and Selznick’s Jewish American determination. This personalized approach moves from superficial appreciation of the book and movie’s romanticism to a richer scrutiny of the film as “the example par excellence of this studio-confected world … the portrait of a never-never land whose harmony and grace depended on the smoothing out of much that was ugly and uncomfortable.”

Haskell consults the standard reactions to the manner in which the film ignores the turpitude of slavery while sustaining the honor of the Confederacy. Briefly citing Leslie Fiedler — who, in “The Inadvertent Epic,” made a pioneering connection among “Gone With the Wind” and “The Birth of a Nation” and “Roots” — isn’t enough, and her empathic analysis of Hattie McDaniel’s self-conscious role-playing as Mammy could be argued in more detail. But Haskell, a Southerner come north, is well suited to explain the South’s complex racial ambivalence, at one point mentioning how Mitchell “studiously tried to capture black patterns of speech.” It doesn’t excuse the flaws of “Gone With the Wind,” but before Haskell came along, lofty distaste and anger sufficed instead of clarity.

She is most comfortable examining the male-female sexual dynamics. Leigh’s Scarlett and Clark Gable’s Rhett Butler (who provides a climax to their tumultuous saga by uttering the memorable exit line “Frankly, my dear, I don’t give a damn”) have become archetypes of American heterosexual romance — its allure and its collapse. Haskell dissects their images, provocatively hinting at the film’s true basis in screwball comedy. She also contemplates hidden notions of gender identity, Southern mores, Civil War history and early-20th-century sexual fantasy.

“Frankly, My Dear” praises “Gone With the Wind” for illuminating still-conflicting romantic ideas. This comes at a time when film culture has fragmented into fan-boy/chick-flick dichotomies and populist-versus-elitist criticism. Haskell’s endeavor, different from high-art appreciation yet not far from it, brings together audience taste and intellectual specification. Since adolescence, her admiration for the film has developed into “a more grown-up affection informed by a film lover’s appreciation of the small miracle by which a mere ‘woman’s film’ with a heroine who never quite outgrows adolescence was transfigured into something much larger, something profoundly American, a canvas that contains, if not Walt Whitman’s multitudes, at least multiple perspectives.”

Haskell’s sense of the “small miracle” is important. It comes from her career-long commitment to movies as a popular art form. Strangely enough, that’s still a crucial fight. She notes that “Scarlett and Rhett may not be on the same level as such towering archetypes of American literature as Captain Ahab, Daisy Miller, Isabel Archer, Huck Finn and Hester Prynne or even such cinematic monuments as Charles Foster Kane and John Wayne’s Ethan Edwards in ‘The Searchers,’ but they occupy a more personal, familial place in the fantasies of their admirers.” Arguing for the status withheld by the critical establishment, she endorses “Gone With the Wind” as “a historical romance that transcended the genre with the immediacy of its mix of sex and feminism.” Yet that quotation refers to the book rather than the movie. Haskell’s literary defense sometimes neglects the film’s pop-art immediacy.

Observing that “emotional appeal and secret fantasy run roughshod over ideology,” Haskell offers her most effective vindication of the film when she describes how Leigh “invested Scarlett with something beyond beauty, something altogether uncanny — a demonic energy, a feverishness that would later tip over into illness and pathology.” But more important than this cynical hindsight is Haskell’s recognition of Leigh’s Scarlett as an exemplary, indefatigable American movie heroine. While placing the film among the biggest blockbusters of all time, along with “Star Wars,” “The Sound of Music,” “E.T.” and “Titanic,” Haskell curiously misses its link to the box-office champ “The Godfather,” which Paul Zimmerman of Newsweek shrewdly praised in 1972 as “the ‘Gone With the Wind’ of gangster movies.” Haskell could clinch her argument with a comparison between the two films’ protagonists.

Clearly Scarlett’s determination shares psychological roots with the Corleone demonstration of American ruthlessness. Haskell’s description of “a strange double standard whereby the ‘likable family’ — the Sopranos or the Corleones — is forgiven the most appalling behavior” begs that appropriate feminist sympathy be applied to Scarlett, who wheels and deals to defend her family and save Tara. Haskell writes that Scarlett “stands apart from herself, a masquerade of the feminine, as the mirror returns a gaze that is both her own and implicitly that of the man for whom the presentation is intended.” This assessment of the female identity that once was Hollywood’s specialty pinpoints the greatness of “Gone With the Wind” as convincingly as Ellen Willis’s memorable 1973 feminist defense of the film, “ ‘War!’ Said Scarlett. ‘Don’t You Men Think About Anything Important?’ ”

Haskell credits the film’s uniqueness not just to the phalanx of directors who worked on it but to Selznick’s supervision as the producer: “If not on the level of the great women’s directors and producers like Josef von Sternberg, Max Ophüls and Ingmar Bergman, he shared with them a richly ambidextrous mix of desire and identification.” And she admirably combines her own romanticism and critical principles in her appraisal of the controversial moment when Rhett forces himself on Scarlett: “Contexts change, perceptions shift, it’s one of the things that makes movies such a dynamic medium… . Women’s so-called rape fantasy, as I wrote in an article for Ms., did not have to be the expression of a masochistic desire for violence, some fearful encounter with an anonymous assailant in a back alley, but rather could be a carefully orchestrated drama of losing control under specific conditions and in well-chosen hands. In other words, it’s when Robert Redford (or Clark Gable) won’t take ‘no’ for an answer.” Feminist criticism has never been more daring.

In Haskell’s thoughtful revisionism, Scarlett comes to embody personal and national contradictions. The chapter “E Pluribus Unum” shows how the “dualisms” of her creators were gathered into a credibly whole personality. Focusing on Scarlett’s turbulent, childlike ways, Haskell illustrates the traits of beauty, self-regard and “the uninhibited will to act” that have made “Gone With the Wind” one of the least dated classic Hollywood movies. These attributes will always be disputed, but Haskell’s critical sensitivity rescues Scarlett’s Americanism and femininity, indicating how her image redounds upon our eternal political struggles and deepest fantasies. Haskell clarifies the long shadow that Scarlett O’Hara casts over the American movie imagination.

Armond White is the chief film critic for New York Press and chairman of the New York Film Critics Circle. His book “What We Don’t Talk About When We Talk About Movies” will be published this spring.

“Visioneers” starring Zach Galifianakis

Thu, 21 May 2009 12:56:00 -0400

“Visioneers” starring Zach Galifianakis

(via frostnixon)

Tue, 19 May 2009 20:59:33 -0400

(via frostnixon)

For Paris! Enjoy!!

Sat, 16 May 2009 18:58:00 -0400

For Paris! Enjoy!!

(via risingtensions)

Tue, 12 May 2009 15:03:12 -0400

(via risingtensions)

SLANT MAGAZINE DVD Review of Frost/Nixon: The Complete Interviews

Tue, 12 May 2009 14:36:37 -0400

frostnixon:

SLANT MAGAZIN

Frost/Nixon: The Complete Interviews by Len Sousa
Posted: April 28, 2009

imed to coincide with the DVD release of Ron Howard’s Frost/Nixon, this two-disc set is the first time the complete six-hour Frost/Nixon interviews have been made available on DVD. Compiled from a 1987 PBS rebroadcast of the original series, each episode features a brief introduction by David Frost: The 1977 series originally aired in four 90-minute parts titled “Watergate,” “Nixon and the World,” “War at Home and Abroad,” and “The Final Days”; for the rebroadcast, a fifth episode was created called “The Last Roundup,” which features unrelated sections culled from over 28 hours of interview footage taped with Richard Nixon over the 12-day shooting period.

With so much available material, there are some fascinating moments captured throughout these interviews, including Nixon defending the communist domino effect to an incredulous Frost, effectively blaming his wife’s stroke on reading Woodward and Bernstein’s book The Final Days, and describing a president’s ability to break the law in the interests of national security. It is in part three where Nixon famously remarks: “Well, when the president does it, that means it’s not illegal.”

Howard’s film version of this televised event, based on a play by Peter Morgan, does a tremendous disservice to Frost and these original interviews. As evidenced here, the real Frost was remarkably well prepared to take Nixon on and delve deeply into the issues of his presidency, routinely pushing him to provide answers to specific questions. Nixon certainly squirms several times during these sessions, repeatedly trying to dodge questions and change subjects often with a playful smirk on his face, but he’s never brought to the breaking point.

Make no mistake that the Frost/Nixon interviews do not offer any in-depth analysis into the late president’s emotional state or even an inkling into his true personality; Nixon was a consummate politician and he never lifts the veil during these sessions. Even during what is arguably the most emotionally revealing moment of the interview, when Nixon explains that no one can know what it’s like to resign the presidency, he still holds back a great deal and his appeals feel disingenuous. This is, from start to finish, a series of sober interviews and not the kind of probing psychoanalysis the fictional retelling portrays. However, it can’t be denied there’s a certain degree of insight revealed about Nixon’s state of mind and the hubris behind his decision-making that is invaluable to anyone with an interest in history or politics.

Image quality is quite good for a 30-year-old videotaped broadcast. No tracking problems or tape damage, but the screen occasionally flashes completely black for a split second. Seems like the kind of error caused by a loose wire during either filming or the DVD transfer. Video quality does sometimes change from section to section as the interviews were held over several days and the lighting or audio isn’t captured exactly the same each time. But these variations are minimal. The packaging indicates 5.1 audio is included, but only the original mono track is provided. Audio is clear with some tape hiss. Thankfully, there’s no evidence of noise reduction.

Although the press release for this DVD set stated there would be new footage of Sir David Frost reflecting on the original interviews and Peter Morgan’s Frost/Nixon play, no such feature is included. (It is, however, included on the single-disc release Frost/Nixon: The Original Watergate Interviews.) Strangely, though hours of unused footage was recorded, this set includes no additional material. The portion labeled “The Last Roundup” could be considered bonus material since it was not part of the original 1977 broadcast, but it was compiled for the PBS rebroadcast in 1987 and was not assembled specifically for this DVD release.

An overdue historical document that offers a much more fascinating glimpse into Richard M. Nixon than the generic Hollywood adaptation.

Director(s): Jorn Winther. Cast: David Frost and Richard Nixon. Distributor: Liberation Entertainment. Street Date: 4/28/2009. Runtime: 400 min. Rating: NR. Year: 1977.

DISC FEATURES:

Specifications:

DVD-Video

Two-Disc Set

Dual Layer Discs

Region 1

Aspect Ratio:

1.33:1 Full Frame

Dolby Digital Formats:

English 2.0 Mono

DTS Digital Formats:

None

Subtitles/Captions:

None

Features:

None

DISC RATINGS:

Image:

Sound:

Extras:

Overall:

http://www.slantmagazine.com/dvd/dvd_review.asp?ID=1517

OMG FUGLY!

Thu, 30 Apr 2009 18:49:59 -0400

OMG FUGLY!

Tokyo!

Thu, 05 Mar 2009 18:16:36 -0500

7 days Video footage

Thu, 19 Feb 2009 20:23:01 -0500

7 days Video footage:

Here’s a link to a friends blog. They just posted some videos from Tallahassee’s 7 Days of Opening Nights Festival. They are really cool I think you should check them out.

This is my attempt at making ratatouille just like Remi did in...

Thu, 19 Feb 2009 20:20:38 -0500

This is my attempt at making ratatouille just like Remi did in the Disney movie Ratatouille.

It took forever to cut up all the vegtables. I cut my finger a couple of times but don’t worry no blood made it into to the food.

I know ratatouille it traditionally a vegitarian peasent dish but I like meat so I added turkey Kilbasa into the mix.

The recipe is very vage so I did a little research and low and behold I wasn’t the only one who wanted to make the Disney dish. A few other people had already attempted it and so I followed in their lead coping a few things and changing some (like the kilbasa).

Anyway this is a piture of what it looked like before I sent it into the oven. Yummy!!!!!

This was a couple of nights ago. The sky was so awesome I had to...

Thu, 19 Feb 2009 15:52:00 -0500

This was a couple of nights ago. The sky was so awesome I had to take a picture. I just wish I didn’t live where the power lines always get in the way. I mean I can’t even fly a kite, not that I fly kites everyday but you never know.

There’s a saying that my Mom taught me when I was young that I’m sure almost everyone knows but I can’t help but repeat it now.

“Red skies at night, sailors delight. Red skies in morning, sailors take warning.”

I guess those sailors had a good night.