The Movie Club

(anti) abortion movies

jimi99@msn.com — Wed, 21 Jan 2009 19:50:41 GMT

All the Hollywood pussyfooting around the subject was repudiated brilliantly last year by "4 Months, 3 Weeks, 2 Days", which was somehow suppressed for American audiences until just recently. You'd probably have to go back to "End of the Road" to find a depiction as devastating as that Romanian film.

but what about

remothevillain — Tue, 20 Jan 2009 07:46:42 GMT

I feel one of the most cleverly created and even more so, cleverly promoted movies of the year was left off the list. "JCVD" was brilliant in the way that the trailer depicted the outcome of the story, and then conversely even more brilliant in the way the film actually turned out. Sure the cinematic ambiance found in the glowing reticence of each shot got a bit annoying and trite, but the Muscles himself replaced those creative misstep with truly an unforeseen accomplishment. The climax of his performance was found in that masterful soliloquy where Jean Claude's tender vulnerability was impossible to be discerned as that of a character or as that of his own human self. So come on, where is the props for the best film of the year, "JCVD."

The Movie Club or Coffee Clatch?

RDouglas — Wed, 14 Jan 2009 09:44:51 GMT

So, I have been trying to wade through the posts here in the hopes that the personal reflections would be about movies and not a Slate version of the Vagina Monologues, but I come away disappointed.

Sorry, ladies, but there's too much kvetching about plastic surgery and abortion and the decisions forced on poor Kate Winslet's character in "Revolutionary Road," and not enough about movies. Come on! Get with the program! Whose sorry-ass excuse for a conversation about movies was this anyway?

Next year, how about an all-gay panel? Or one-armed trolls? Or New York subway-token sellers?

I wanted to hear more about "Wall-E" and "The Bank Job" and "Milk" and "Appaloosa" and the sudden fascination with the post-modern western and why animated movies almost always suck and what a letdown the latest James Bond picture turned out to be and how Paul Newman brought dignity to an undignified process and what a small gem "The Promotion" was and how George Lucas sold out "Star Wars" fans with "Clone Wars" and how wretched "Mamma Mia!" was and why Emma Thompson should be working more and not less.

You can take a quantum of solace in one thing: you're just as lazy and narrowly-focused as your male counterparts. Kudos.

Rick Douglas

The Last Taboo, explained

Newcastle — Tue, 13 Jan 2009 20:33:59 GMT

Thank you Lisa for the rant that masquerades as a review. I refuse to waste too much time here, so you'll read just three protests, each of which will reveal your arrested development as a writer.

1.) A fundamental rule says you do not use a lightening bug when you wish to convey lightening. Therefore, don't bother to explain the term "actor" to include actresses. The readers are fairly bright; they understand it.

2.) The late George Carlin was a competent social critic, despite his well - known flaws. Among his noted annoyances with phony people, was the interjection of French phrases into english language speech and writing. ( Who? Moi? was one he despised). So, your "final pensee" falls neatly into the fraud of psuedo - writing, and tells us where you are.

3.) I actually enjoy writers who ask questions about another's work, but your question why no moviemakers will confront the reality of legal abortion leaves one to wonder about your level of cultural/political vision. The U.S. Supreme Court may have declared this medical procedure legal in 1973, but a huge portion of the population believes it to be legal murder. Those believers continue to vote, and they continue to buy tickets at movie boxoffices. Filling the seats in movie theaters is still the bottom line. In an industry fraught with potential flops, why would you deliberately threaten the bottom line?

Do Youselves a Favor

mandy cat — Fri, 09 Jan 2009 15:36:21 GMT

You could all save yourself a lot of grief, not to mention wasted hours and dollars, if you'd simply pledge never to watch any movie filmed after 1959, the year "Some Like it Hot" was made. "Groundhog Day" probably warrants a grandfather clause exception.

That still leaves thousands and thousands of wonderful films you can buy online or rent, which you can then watch over and over in the comfort of your own home while drinking beer. Your home-popped corn will cost you about 16 cents a serving. If someone is sitting next to you barking into a cell-phone, you can deal with it without a public scene. Hopefully your family room isn't as dingy, smelly and acoustically ill-planned as the average metroplex.

Best of all, you avoid even the smallest possibility of finding yourself viewing a Tom Cruise performance.

Of course, it means the current movie industry will cease to exist. Bonus!

Beautiful actresses - gritty situations

mymolmol — Tue, 13 Jan 2009 08:51:06 GMT

Since moving to Britain, I've noticed that television producers here tend to employ talented actors and actresses who are normally attractive. On any given show on any given evening you can enjoy a drama portrayed by women with hair like mine (gasp!), snaggle teeth, and slightly less-than-perfect bodies. To American eyes, accustomed to an endless parade of TV Barbie Dolls, it can be somewhat distracting at first, but there is a real pleasure to be had in watching a bit of suburban life and issues acted out by people who look like they recognize the territory.

And the best film is...

doughdee222 — Tue, 13 Jan 2009 07:19:24 GMT

So let me get this straight, by general consensus and praise in this discussion the best film of the year is "The House Bunny"? Seriously?

"Slumdog Millionaire" is mentioned once. "The Wrestler" maybe once (or was it not at all?) Frost/Nixon? No debate over "Doubt"?

I can understand that they wouldn't want to mention the likes of "The Bank Job", "Hellboy II", "Religulous" or "Valkyrie". These films were good but not great.

But please, "The House Bunny"? The panelists wanted to discuss 2007's films more than 2008's. Maybe I missed the point of the debate.

-Doughdee222

"Fire me, boy!"

Here's another movie taboo...

Don Schenk — Fri, 09 Jan 2009 16:10:53 GMT

Why aren't there any movies about the loving relationships that sometimes develop between male masters and their loving female S&M slaves?

What's that you say? Movies like that don't attract enough viewers to make all the abuse the movie makers would receive from critics worthwhile?

Now what's the difference between that situation and what happens to movies promoting abortion? Oh yeah, "critical acclaim"--but still not that many ticket sales.

You laugh

dsf3g — Mon, 12 Jan 2009 10:01:44 GMT

You laugh, but as soon as Hollywood catches wind that there's a potential blockbuster Mexican Mennonite movie coming out, two more studios will start developing Mexican Mennonite movies of their own. And this will be followed by a Mexican Mennonite TV family saga called "Casita en la pradera," or maybe a reality show called "Who wants to marry a Mexican Mennonite?" I guarantee you there's some studio honcho out there in his office as we speak worrying that this Mexican Mennonite movie could be the next "Macarena" and pledging that he'll be damed if anyone thinks he's going to miss out on a piece of this action.

Abortion in Film

Steve Budakon — Fri, 09 Jan 2009 01:23:08 GMT

This is in reference to Lisa Schwarzbaum's last post, asking why Hollywood films like Knocked Up and Juno constantly fail to deal with abortion even when their plot is based around an unwanted pregnancy. I have seen this brought up by critics before and there is an extremely simple response. They can't. If they have their characters seriously consider an abortion then that's what the movies becomes about and whatever else they do in the film, that's what everyone will be talking about. Instead of making a comedy with broad appeal they have an anti-abortion message film on their hands. They need to acknowledge that their characters won't be having an abortion and move quickly past it to what their films are about, dealing with that pregnancy.

Ick!

A Dude — Fri, 09 Jan 2009 14:43:44 GMT

Climb into Kate Winslett's uterus? Make room in her womb??? Yuck! Save the sloppy female bonding talk for the locker room section of your local liberal arts college ladies, not for a public website.

Jeannette Catsoulis

drewstewart — Sun, 11 Jan 2009 07:05:04 GMT

Just how old is this Jeannette Catsoulis? Her statements on age and experience contained within her reviews reveals a woman who has yet to experience Life anywhere near a full context. Please grow up young woman before you again espouse false knowledge about what Life is all about.

Nobody knows all the answers. Don't dare to claim that you do.

PS Clearisil will probably remedy your 'outward' insecurities.

Shallow Review of Benjamin Button

TheRanger — Sat, 10 Jan 2009 23:45:59 GMT

Talk about a Pavlovian response to Brad Pitt. He appears on screen and Jeannette Catsoulis drools. The fact that Pitt was not a major actor in Button does not phase her. The relationship of Button with Daisy in her older years must give hope to Jeannette Catsoulis that she may still have a chance with Brad. IMHO Pitt's performance was mediocre compared to Badalamenti's performance of the old Button. By the time Pitt arrives his part is predictable and merely the consequence of what has been already set; like watching Titantic, you know the boat is going to sink.

Double standard reverse twist version

timezoned — Sat, 10 Jan 2009 16:10:43 GMT

Speaking of age: Can we please stop pairing actresses romantically with their could-be-fathers? Latest case in point, the imminent Last Chance Harvey, in which (spoiler!) Emma Thompson, 49, skips off into the sunset with Dustin Hoffman, 71. Defibrillators are standing by.

This after waxing rhapsodic just one paragraph before about older woman-younger man romances, and how you can't get enough of them.

I realize that in traditional Hollywood the older man - younger woman meme was so widespread as to be virtually all there was, and yes it bugged me too. However we've now moved to the point at which it's not only acceptable if the older partner is a woman, it's desirable. And bashed (one paragraph later) if it's the other way around.

Fast Food Fetus

Morty_Causa — Sat, 10 Jan 2009 16:07:16 GMT

It's all starting to come feverishly together: Preston Sturges and George A. Romero find a common esthetic while Jimmy Dean (of sausage fame) duets with Dolly Parton on 9 to 5 over the titles. But, no problemo: as Milo Minderbinder liked to say, everyone has a share. And every Person gets her picture on the cover of Rolling Stone. Ah, man, byooteeful. Mmmm, Soylent Green.

"We'll never know those faces..."

newbalance87 — Wed, 07 Jan 2009 23:05:40 GMT

Never thought I'd be further commenting on the plastic surgery discussion, but I thought this little blurb from Stephanie's most recent post was interesting:

"What's really bothering me about the whole issue is that as more and more actors (note the non-gender-specific term) "do things" to themselves as they age, we're being cheated of the faces they might have grown into. We'll never know those faces because their owners are chipping away at them bit by bit in a desperate effort to make them "better." And what is "better"? In 2005, Manohla Dargis wrote, wonderfully, about the creeping prevalence of plastic surgery among movie stars. But even that was four years ago; as critics, we don't write about the problem a lot, and it is a problem for anyone who cares about movies, and about actors."

I guess I haven't lived long enough or watched enough movies to follow the ageing of some of my favorite movie stars, nor do I understand the importance of being able to do so, but Stephanie's disappointment with some of cinema's biggest names going under the knife seems to border on the obsessive. She seems to regard these human beings as if they only existed as characters in the movies. She wants them to retain their faces for her enjoyment? Really?! Actors have lives beyond the movies. If they want to undergo plastic surgery, they should be able to; they do not have any obligation to stay as they are for the sanctity of the movies.

Movies, in a way, already distort how these actors appear on screen. Lighting, make-up, and increasingly, post-production technology change the way these actors look. Maybe I'm wrong on this, but aren't the complaints about the affect of actors getting plastic surgery the same as those that would otherwise be directed at the affects of the regular movie-making process, just to a different degree?

And for whatever it's worth, I thought Nicole Kidman, she with the worked-on forehead, was lovely in Australia, the highlight, in fact, of an otherwise so-so film. She was funny and charming in the first half, and believably emotional in the second. Apparently some critics had a problem with the forehead--they found it distracting and a hindrance to her acting--but I didn't notice it and didn't think it affected her performance at all. She was great!

No Slumdog Millionaire?

gurujeet — Fri, 09 Jan 2009 00:51:14 GMT

Did I miss where this was discussed? What gives - it was way better than the okay but forgettable Happy-Go-Lucky which got its share of ink

The Best Abortion Comedy

Pearson's Pants — Sat, 10 Jan 2009 01:24:36 GMT

Citizen Ruth was hands down the best abortion comedy ever, if you're into abortion comedy that is. It's 12 years old now, I guess abortion just isn't as funny as it used to be.

http://www.deep-focus.com/flicker/citizenr.html

Bravo Jeannette

Tommy G — Sat, 10 Jan 2009 01:21:36 GMT

Your commentary on Revolutionary Road was spell-binding. Thank you for sharing your insights on live. You go girl!!!!!

The Dark Knight and pansy-ass liberals

GreenwichJ — Thu, 08 Jan 2009 09:37:01 GMT

It was only a matter of time before the bunch of liberal pansies who claim to be film reviewers decided that, actually, they didn't like The Dark Knight.

After all, this film said it was OK to bug people to stop terrorism. It said it was OK to mistreat suspects to get information (remember when Batman dropped the mafia don off the roof?). It said there was little point in trying to cut deals with terrorists, as their motives are quixotic. And it noted how terrorists try to turn Americans against each other. Even the character of Bruce Wayne - who pretends to be a vapid playboy, but is actually "a silent guardian, a watchful protector" - was a cheerful nod to the current president.

At first, all this rather skimmed over the heads of liberal film reviewers. They had spotted the right-wing politics of 300 early enough to give it pretty terrible reviews. Conversely, dreadful films like Lions for Lambs, Redacted, Rendition, etc etc - some of the worst movies ever made by Hollywood - were given a critical pass because they clove to the left-liberal line on Bush, terrorism, Iraq etc.

Now, however, the critics are trying to re-write history. All I can say is that I paid good money to see Lions for Lambs, and I'm no longer willing to accept the cinematic judgement of a bunch of epicene ideologues who wouldn't know a good movie if it bit them on the ass.

High Fidelity

celluloid_scratch — Fri, 09 Jan 2009 22:53:46 GMT

I'm also surprised nobody has pointed out the film "High Fidelity" as a good example of an American film presenting a mature, responsible woman having an abortion and just moving on with her life.

When Laura (Iben Hjejle) has lunch with her friend Liz, she recounts the awful things John Cusack's character Rob did during their relationship. One of those was cheat on her while she was pregnant, which led to her deciding to have an abortion.

The way it's presented in this film, simply in conversation as a stinging but small event in her life, is so subtle and perfect and real. She had an abortion. Got over it. It's not the end of the world. People do it. Next.

Milk versus Slumdog Millionaire

Escalation — Thu, 08 Jan 2009 00:51:36 GMT

After seeing “Milk,” I am convinced that Penn is more than a leftwing radical; He is someone who is actually sexually attracted to men, not that there is anything wrong with liking kielbasas more than tacos, but I could never become such a great method actor.

Milk was okay, like a biographical documentary memorializing the right to undermine society with IN-YOUR-FACE cross-dressing Gay Pride parades and proving his cross-cultural credentials by obtaining union votes! Moreover, “Milk” could have used a gay Bollywood style lip-synched dance scene so we normal humans could enjoy Milk’s overcoming oppression and being shot by “W’ for not keeping promises movie too. Because of the leftwing vibe on this thread, a feel-good heterosexual and truly great love story like “Slumdog Millionaire” is overlooked. Progressives have a psychotic need to always sanction the Marxist victim. And Milk was a gay victim, who got union votes.

As always, leftwing ideology triumphs over art because to the Left “Milk” has great “social meaning.” Next leftwing ideologues will give Penn an Oscar and a Nobel Peace Prize for this movie, which could have used a Dixie Chick soundtrack to make the period movie more “politically correctly” authentic. Wasn’t it terribly how “W’ oppressed the gays in SF, shot Milk and then went on to attack the Chicks? I now hate orange juice vendors

ps---The Dark Knight

jkny — Tue, 06 Jan 2009 15:16:33 GMT

I agree with Stephanie Zacharek and loved her review, especially the part about "There's no dramatic arc in "The Dark Knight" -- only a series of speed bumps" The movie was so choppy and incoherent and hard to follow. And I liked the first movie! It had a story!

I disagree about Heath Ledger's performance. I loved Ledger in almost everything, but to me this was the worst kind of indulgent, tic-cy, showboaty acting, the I'm anguished, I'm going out on a limb, I'm doing all kinds of weird stuff, I'm schmacting! He is always a magnetic presence and there was clearly a lot of anguish going on with him, either personally or in accessing this character, but there was in BROKEBACK MOUNTAIN as well and that was a clean, simple, beautiful performance.

America: Fuck Yeah!

Wasteland — Fri, 09 Jan 2009 20:38:02 GMT

"My dour Scottish genes have remained unaroused since Stuck on You and Team America: World Police (and yes, Lisa, I can sing every song)."

I'm guessing that Jeanetter prefers the sad and somber version of 'America: Fuck Yeah'. It cracks me up every time!

Perfect "Abortion" movie: Palindromes

celluloid_scratch — Fri, 09 Jan 2009 20:27:34 GMT

I'm surprised there's been no mention of Todd Solondz' brilliant and skin-crawling "Palindromes" as an American film that dares to tackle abortion from all sides of the issue. Ironically, the film culminates with a wonderful performance by Jennifer Jason Leigh as a thinly veiled antithesis to her sharp, responsible character in "Fast Times."

So many people hated Palindromes because every time they started to feel like movie was on "their side", it did a u-turn and spit in the face of their argument. Yes, it depicted abortion as a traumatic experience for the mother, but it also did something very few American films dare to do:

It depicted a woman as wholly unfit to be a mother.

Aviva is so single-minded in her goal of having a baby to love her unconditionally that everything else becomes either an obstacle or an accomplice to that goal. The problem is she's also incredibly naive, not very bright, and extremely self-absorbed. Will those aspects of herself change once she has a baby? Probably not, since the film argues that "people don't change. They think they do, but they don't."

This film is daring because it unapologetically says that some people should just not have kids, and, even more disturbing, should just not be born, period. It's dour, cynical, and a bit crass, yes, but a welcome antidote to every other Hollywood film that treats newborn children as an inarguable blessing of joy.