i miss childhood

often are the time i yearn for a time machine.

dogtooth: bite on this

yorgos lanthimos' DOGTOOTH. it's messed up in all the right places.

here's the story: two parents keep three kids (now matured young adults) at home, teaching them to fear the world that exists beyond their yard's fence. when they happen to accidentally learn of outside words and ideas, their parents explain them away (for example, they are taught the word "pussy" to mean a large light, and a "zombie" is a yellow flower). one of the three children acts up throughout the film despite physical punishment. because she creates stress for the family, we as audience members have enough of a plot to follow.

lanthimos begs his audience to reflect on how parents raise children, specifically comparing these kids to the domestic pets many families own today. he tells his story through scenes with unnerving action, imposing frightening and bizarre images on the minds of anyone who chooses to see it. (the clip below provides a great idea of the film's tone; trust me, though, it's just the tip of the iceberg.)

this cannot be anyone's cup o' tea, nor can i give it a stellar recommendation, but by golly does it start a discussion.

the last day of our acquaintance

127 hours: tik tok

damn, it would suck to be literally stuck between a rock and a hard place, wasting away until time snatched your soul from your nubile body. that's where aron ralston (james franco) finds himself in 127 HOURS, deserted in the desert and left only to imagine escape, the past, and his own loneliness.

danny boyle mounts the director's chair to tell this true story, something that proves to be both a cinematic and riveting experience. for the most part, audience members live the character's experience (though not as suffocatingly-so as this year's BLACK SWAN), realizing his regrets, despair, much-needed humor, and most memorably, his pain. in living the accelerated 127 hours with mr. ralston, we can see boyle's argument against solitary livelihood when our time on earth can be/is so limited.

it's a fun one--heartfelt, too. kate mara forever.

original hipster: film distribution edition

the criterion collection is totally inspiratory of a contemporary subculture.

today is our life

looks like an indie darling

i'm interested to see the directoral debut of HOW I MET YOUR MOTHER's JOSH RADNOR in HAPPYTHANKYOUMOREPLEASE, although the title is an annoying mouthful. it feels very zach braff, right?



"my great shame as a writer is just that i'm this suburban kid with good parents... hardly dickensian." magical visionary... definitely not, but i'm staying tuned.

and i love and will always love kate mara.

waterbirds

such a good album, for real.

lord knows best

dream cop

i love you, jerri blank

a most fitting tribute.

baby, i could rule the world

"you think this is sexy?" "you're damned right i do."

having an inner monologue that talks back is a blessing and a curse. i'm a scorpio and having named my dueling personalities "sex" and "death" is something i was born into. i blame my parents. anger is liberating.

the super objective of the social network

here's what i admire most about the FINCHER / SORKIN SOCIAL NETWORK: i could not figure out character mark zuckerberg's super objective. i saw it again. i could not figure out character mark zuckerberg's super objective. at least not with definition...

high praise to DAVID FINCHER for crafting a visually intriguing story to the important textual melody of AARON SORKIN, who writes playful words and interesting characters into power battles that drive the electric current of what i consider the best film of 2010.

but what drives EISENBERG's zuckerberg? is it the girl (erica albright aka a perfect ROONEY MARA)? is it to make her feel mistaken for dumping him in the brilliant opening scene of the film? is it the desire to prove that his geek-dom reigns superior to privileged meathead jocks? is it to prove to everyone that despite his nerdiness and humble appearance, he can gain notoriety and be an important, sought-after figure? he's got angst, that's for sure.

i believe the answer to my above italicized question holds the key to understanding this movie, and i'm interested in seeing what other people have to say.

brian eno says

"A part of me has become immortal, out of my control."

i motion to believe this proof that brian eno is a vampire.

original hipster: sinead o'connor edition

1. swan song 4 U alternate cover album?
2. i hope natalie portman goes black swan shit crazy. v for voulez-vous chill. you'll never be sinead.
3. NOTHING COMPARES 2U

fever

in a perfect world...

b.d. wong would put out an entire album of tori amos' greatest hits. i'm thinking of sponsoring a chain letter.

blue valentine: thinkin' 'bout love in the 21st century

as opposed to my earlier post, DEREK CIANFRANCE's BLUE VALENTINE is a fine example of minimalist storytelling. we aren't presented with overwrought structure or unnecessary supporting characters, but simply the future, the past, the actors, and the camera. it leaves one trying to understand love and marriage through looking at the good, the bad, the kindling, and the ending.

in a day when the pre-marriage counseling is hardly taken seriously and love's feeling is more important than sacrifice and commitment, this is the tale of many love stories (though, yes, this is much more indie). here, love is not a spiritual thing.

CIANFRANCE seems to compare love's feeling to love's commitment and the selfless dedication that a marriage asks of both its members. he doesn't point out the important moments to us, though in the film's wake, we are left to study the characters and see what moments explain the disillusionment at hand. cindy (played by a terrific michelle williams) lives for feeling. dean (a well-studied ryan gosling) found his life's one true mate. her fairytale fades, his continues. what happens when a couple first loses that feeling of love? and what if one also loses the desire to keep the flame flickering?

the performances are top-notch, the filmmaking great. one complaint: too many close-up shots in the film's first hour make the audience feel unpoetically / inappropriately claustrophobic. not a good date movie, but a great one to see. oscar bait? i'm not sure, but this one sure lives up to its title.

melvin sokolsky's fly girls

mo' melvin, for harper's bazaar, 1963.

somewhere?

sophia's not my cup of tea, but i can't say i didn't enjoy watching it. with SOMEWHERE, her latest effort in directing, she not so much tells a story as captures a snapshot of a lifestyle and its implications.

many critics have compared this to european cinema, and this comparison makes sense. the film is quiet. the script is not full of words. the acting is generally genuine and not forced.

but if film directors are storytellers, one should expect them to tell a story. instead, miss coppola presents many prolonged snapshots from the perspective of an unassuming observer, seemingly expecting her audience to hyper-intellectualize the subject matter of her chosen moving images in order to reach a conclusion or formulate their own version of a storyline.

from my experience, good european cinema doesn't do that... so why the comparison? this is narrative minimalism to an extreme, and although it can be mildly entertaining to peek into the life of a fictional hollywood star and his lack of a family life, this seems to be less of storytelling and more of studying character in the form of a feature film.

saturday night slow jammin'

Desert Island Feeling by Mutual Benefit from Nathaniel Whitcomb on Vimeo.

holy costume party, batman!

nico and andy warhol as batman and robin for esquire, 1967.

melvin sokolsky's bubble girls

in 1963, melvin sokolsky snapped his famous "bubble" series depicting fashion models chillin' midair inside of a bubble.

the kids are all right: the film's just a'ight

there was one moment during this film when i felt like there was dramatically intriguing stuff. otherwise, THE KIDS ARE ALL RIGHT offers an interesting look at the levels of sacrifice necessary in a long-term "marriage," gay or not. the story's stituation is unique to lezzie partnerships, however, for breadwinner mom one (annette bening) and dykey mom two (julienne moore) bore children together thanks to one hippie sperm donor (mark ruffalo). the resulting children, now of age, search the hippie down, and his brief addition to the family catalyzes a long-comin', bedrock-shakin' fight between moms one and two.

for conservative theatre-goers, director LISA CHOLODENKO highlights what is probably one of biggest problems in a lesbian marriage: the need to feel sexually fulfilled by something only a man can provide. it's interesting to see that play out dramatically, though in the end i'm not sure it provides the argument it's necessarily going for in proving the absolute viability of gay marriage between women when compared to marriage between man and woman. what it does prove is that this group of people under the "momses," as one character describes, is a fully functioning, alternative family unit.

again: there's one moment that makes this movie absolutely worthwhile, but i can't in good mind spoil it. the filmmaking at that point is great. otherwise, the movie's pretty indie and the performances are generally good, though not oscar-worthy as many people are labelling it. this is simply the mainstream gay movie of the year.