Film Review: Nymph()manic I & II

I'm not exactly sure what I have to say about this movie, actually. In fact, I really wish that I could watch it again because I feel like I just didn't get a good grasp of it; although I just doubt that viewing this film twice is good for my psyche. If you have not heard, Nymphomanic, directed by the great Lars Von Trier, comes in two "volumes" and comes in edited and unedited versions. When I discovered that it was available on demand before it hit theaters, I figured I wouldn't go to the cinema to see them by myself so there was no point in waiting. After some discussions with my friends, I came to the conclusion that it's most likely available on demand pre-theaters in order to get more hits and make more money; for may very well do poorly in theaters because of its controversially graphic content. 

Nymphomaniac has stayed with me since I watched it, which is not something I'm really happy about. There were some beautiful aspects of the film, such as the juxtaposition of the darkness of Joe's story (the main character Joe, who is a self-proclaimed sex-addict/"nymphomaniac") against the educational recounts of the academic, asexual supporting male-role. The traumatic and negative aspects to the film far outweighed the beautiful, in my point of view. I'm a huge Lars Von Trier fan as you know from my review of Melancholia, but in my opinion this film was unnecessarily vulgar. Antichrist was the first installation in Von Trier's depression trilogy, and shares many similarities with Nymphomaniac. In fact, I think that they were so many similarities in their messages that it felt almost like a copy-cat. Antichrist had already touched on many of the things that I think nymphomaniac was going for, and there was even a couple scenes in Nymphomaniac that I thought were actually clips from Antichrist. 

Nymphomaniac did not need to come in two volumes either. Of course I love the idea of having there be a four-hour long Lars Von Trier movie, but I feel as if it's almost a waste because I'll never be able to see it again. (I wish he had done Melancholia if a two-volume installation instead!) Shia Lebouf is laughable in my opinion. I can't take him seriously, and it's only his own fault. As for Charlotte Gainsbourg, I adore her. I always have. She's a genius and Lars Von Trier and herself work incredibly together. Volume I sets the tone well for the entire film as a young Joe, played by newcomer Stacy Martin, is exploring her sexuality as an adolescent and young adult. She remembers splashing through the wet bathroom floor and recounts the physical sensations that she felt from sliding her groin back and forth on the ground. I mean, it's pretty interesting, because I've heard many girlfriends tell the story of "when I was seven and my sister was six, we did x and we thought it was so cool because it felt amazing!" (You may be thinking about now "who the hell does this girl hang out with?!" But trust me, this is very common in children to touch themselves and not understand exactly what's going on. The difference is that Joe DOES understand to some capacity what she is doing.) But as the film moves forward, her sexcapades become more and more self-destructive and more dangerous. At the end of the first volume she screams while Shia Lebouf's character, Jerome, is inside of her and says, "I can't feel anything anymore!" And that's that! Cut! Screen! And you're left feeling "holy shit, now she's lost all feeling in her vagina! This girl is NUTS!" And then you watch Volume II because you can't NOT KNOW what happens, of course, where it explores the violence that comes about because of the loss of her orgasm that she can no longer obtain during intercourse…. 

It just gets more and more depressing to the point where the redeeming qualities of the film are lost by the end. By the fourth hour I felt like my brain was rotting into a sex-mush (what?). So just don't see it. There's a lesson here, and that lesson is that some movies are just meant to not be seen and unfortunately this is one of them. 

Film Review: There Will Be Blood

So I jumped onto this cult-followed film a decent too-far-long after it originally hit the theaters in 2007. When "There Will Be Blood" came out, I was still anti-anything-that-wasn’t-horror-or-romance. As I have gotten older, my taste in films has radically changed from shitty chick-flicks and horror films to now dark or deeply rooted-independents (I'm sorry, so hipster of me) or anything directed by someone like Lars Von Trier or Darren Arranofsky… and (a little less) horror films. (That also changed with the influence of an ex of mine who is still a good friend and has great taste in filmography, and also because of the death of a best friend. I see life a lot differently that I did before because of that.) ANYHOO, I first saw Daniel Day-Lewis in The Crucible when I was a kid. (My ma has a serious obsession with old British and American literature specifically about witchcraft and the Salem witch-trials back in the day.) I’ve now seen several of Daniel Day-Lewis’ films, such as his most recent one, Lincoln. (Badass flick, dudes.) Basically, in my opinion, Day-Lewis is a genius, and he’s even more of a genius when he has a mustache. I’m getting a little off-topic here, but stick with me. "There Will Be Blood," directed by Paul Thomas Anderson, was nominated for eight academy awards and received two of them for best actor and best cinematography when is came out in 2007. It is loosely based on "Oil!," a novel by Upton Sinclair. (Anderson has said that it’s more the inspiration of the film than anything else.)

As many of you know, Day-Lewis is a “method actor.” This means that he basically LIVES the part he’s playing (or preparing for) all throughout the pre-production process and obviously during the filming. He does not leave that character even when off-set. According to many sources, “During filming {of My Left Foot], he refused to break character. Playing a severely paralyzed character on screen, off screen Day-Lewis had to be moved around the set in his wheelchair, and crew members would curse at having to lift him over camera and lighting wires, all so that he might gain insight into all aspects of Brown's life, including the embarrassments.” (Totally understandable on the crew's part, but this is a piece of art we're talking about, here!) So basically, he’s a badass, and I think that’s pretty much why "There Will Be Blood" has gotten a ridiculous cult-following. Something that Day-Lewis does so well is that when he plays a part you really can’t see him as anything else. He IS that person. Day-Lewis is so extraordinarily convincing that it’s almost creepy and it’s also almost creepy because you know that while filming, he was going to bed at night next to his wife talking in that deep, dark man-voice about oil tactics and dispensaries. (God, I wish Day-Lewis would get in bed next to me at night and talk about… anything.)  And Paul Dano… I cannot forget Paul Dano. He plays a set of twin brothers, one of them the audience only sees once. Eli (Dano’s main character) is this gross, power-driven, evangelical preacher who seeks control over his community and of course, can’t stand Plainview’s even less moral power-seeking antics. Day-Lewis and Dano have this ridiculous chemistry together as actors. Their relationship is comical at times with the way that Day-Lewis' character is always sarcastically verbally abusing Dano's character. And Dano's plays this preacher so slyly and innocently devilish, it's perfection! 

And the soundtrack. OH, the soundtrack is seriously heaven on a stick. (Sorry, if that doesn’t make sense to you.) But seriously, Jonny Greenwood, keyboardist & guitarist of Radiohead, is my most favoritest modern-composer of our time. My younger brother told me that the soundtrack couldn’t be nominated because they used sections of Arvo Part’s cello concerto; which to me is silliness. The soundtrack is so eerie that you feel like you’re watching a horror film the entire time, but you’re not!!; which I LOVE. Another soundtrack he composed was the one used in We Need to Talk About Kevin. 

So there you have it! See this if you haven't! And I'll leave you with a little story: I'll never forget one of my first introductions to this film was Dennis and his roommates quoting different tidbits from "There Will Be Blood." I would hear "Splash around, Eli" or "I DRINK your milk…" all said in different imitations of Daniel Plainview's (Day Lewis) deep, ridiculous voice. I knew I had to see it and give it a chance after that…  

Film Review: Carrie (2013)

I don't know if it's just me or if anyone else felt slightly inclined to see this, but I'm a bit sorry I did. (I was with fabulous company though, so that helped!) The new one starred the young (and very pretty) Chloe Grace Moretz as Carrie and Julianne Moore as Carrie's mother. I pumped myself up the couple days before I knew I was going to see it. It was all in the excitement of the idea I suppose, because Julianne Moore is awesome. BUT… I just wasn't impressed. I mean, yeah, she was good, she looked the part, but I needed more! I wanted more from you, Moore! (The cutting was a nice modern touch, though! Bravo on that!) And I mean, guys, Chloe whatsherface is way too pretty for this part. I mean, she's too "pretty." Sissy Spacek was beautiful, but in her own way. She's so different looking, ya know? To some I'm sure she's unattractive? But just splatter some blood on her and crazy eyes just makes a sister look freakin' bat-shit cray! 

Ugh… I just used the word "cray"………..

ANYWHO, something I did like is how the screenwriters integrated modern technology into the whole plot. I liked the pig's blood and how it was dark and strategically placed in a really cool way. I thought Chloe played Carrie well, but I really thought she only played Carrie well in the gymnasium scene. Carrie's character was really sweet, but I don't know… the way Chloe played "sweet" was so not Carrie to me. She wasn't almost "creepy" even though she was sweet. I thought the end was interesting, I guess… Now, the kid who played Tommy was really stupid. I'm sorry, but he just looked like Taylor whatshisname from Twilight and talked funny. The chick who played Chris looked like an ugly version of Emma Stone, and nobody wants that?!… Okay, I'm bashing now, I'll stop! I don't know these people personally, I'm sure they're all great people! I thought they did't take into consideration that in today's society a teacher wouldn't slap a student in the face or they would've gotten fired most likely. And (spoiler alert?) the script was almost verbatim for the entire way except for the beginning and the end. 

I just don't know why they had to ruin such a great flick. The 1974 version was just kick-ass, with a kick-ass soundtrack and a kick-ass cast. It's like making a remake of "The Shining." Just unnecessary and completely avoidable. 

Don't waste your money, but see it on DVD if you want, because I know you horror-film lovers secretly want to. 

Film Review: We Need to Talk About Kevin

Happy Thursday everyone! Thank GOD it's Thursday. Oye! Sorry about being m.i.a. these past few weeks. My blog writer, Marsedit, decided to become an app that's is $39.99 rather than being free, so I'm trying to decide what to do with that! 

But onto the film review!... 

source

I watched "We Need to Talk About Kevin" for the first time about a year ago now, and was completely blown away. I watched it a second time the day after and picked up on more subliminal messages and symbolism than I hadn't the first time. Now beware folks, this one if pretty intense. It's not a chronological film, because it bounces from different time-periods of Kevin's mother's life, so you definitely need to be prepared to pay close attention to the details; otherwise it then just becomes a random blur of violence and depressive/psycho people. 

"We Need to Talk About Kevin," directed by Lynne Ramsay, includes a star cast of Tilda Swinton (who.is.bad.ass.always) and the sweet and gentle John C. Reilly. And this film was also the big debut of Ezra Miller, who plays the part of Kevin, a deranged young adult with hatred and anger running through his veins, who has an extremely abusive and odd relationship with his mother. All of course, ending in him being a serial killer. Eva, his mother, is played by Swinton. She is a lover of traveling and seeing the world, and is independent, emotionally-closed off to everyone including her husband, and has no maternal instincts or desire for motherhood. Throughout the story, you learn about the sick and twisted relationship that Eva and Kevin cultivate through the years leading up to him using his talent with a bow and arrow to kill dozens of his high-school peers. From out of the womb, Kevin favors his father over his mother to manipulate and create as much damage as possible. It's almost like he is demon-possessed as soon as she gives birth, because he only cries frantically while he is alone with his mother. ANYWAYS, I won't give you the whole synopsis, but there are definitely some major points made in this film that I figured I could share her.

+ Eva was never interested in being a mother. Because her son was such a difficult child and she unfortunately did not have the tools to mold him into a somewhat loving one, she hates him just as much as he hates her... But then there's this odd attachment that they have with one another. There are two times in the film that Kevin shows his mother love, and she caves, as any normal human-being would of course. 

+ Sometimes it's best to go with your gut. Communication in life is HUGE, especially in a marriage. And even MORE especially in a marriage including a child with serious needs and questionable behavior. Unfortunately, John C. Reilly's character as Kevin's father, was unwilling to listen to his wife when she would slightly allude to the fact that there was something wrong with their son. Communication, folks.

+ Probably the most interesting point made in this movie is that it was all from the mother's point of view, and not just any mother, but the mother to a serial killer. Although there are ways that she may deserve some criticism, no one ever imagines their child as being something so evil. She deals with all the hate and all the anger from her community, takes it, and buries herself in it all. She almost becomes Kevin and throughout the film it is often difficult to decipher the two.  

This film is seriously awesome. It really opens up the question of "are there signs from an early age that your child may be violent?" It's sad and depressing, yes, but those are the kinds of films I like to watch, ya know? I used to be the type of girl to watch only chick flicks when I'm feeling down, but sometimes, a movie based on our world's reality does a lot more help than something that is meaningless. And sometimes, a film that is "more real" will bring you back to Earth and you can say, "well, I guess life isn't so bad afterall!" 

Film Review: Anna Karenina

So the parental unit and I watched Anna Karenina this past weekend, and let me tell you, it was pretty awesome. Earlier last year, it was on my list of films to see at the local independent-films theater but never got to it. Now I'm a little bummed that I didn't get to see it on the big screen, because the cinematography and artistic point of view were impeccable. Unfortunately, I have not read the book by Tolstoy. I could barely get through War and Peace my freshman year of college. (It was probably one of the most brutal reading-experiences of my life. No joke, kids.) But I feel like I should at least give this book a try, because the story is beautiful. I mean, don't get me wrong, it's super depressing, but that's beside the point! 

I was extremely happy when the costume designer for Anna Karenina got an Oscar the other night, because she totally deserved it. She had been previously nominated for her work in Pride & Prejudice. The work this woman does is mind-blowing. And the way the director interpreted the story was completely different than anything I have seen before. Rather than it being a very straight forward point of view, it was more choreographed in series of movement through the body throughout the entire 2 hour-long film. It literally took place on a stage as if we were a part of the cast on a Broadway show. It was crazy! 

Kiera Knightly, she's just not my favorite. She makes the same couple of faces, she has the worst under bight, she barely opens her mouth when she talks, and she weighs the same amount as one of my boobs. 

...

And that's all I have to say about her! 

BUT! NONEtheless, she kind of does a good job. And Matthew Macfadyen, who also plays Mr. Darcy in Pride & Prejudice, was absolutely hilarious; which was insanely surprising to me. 

Please do yourself a favor and see this movie! 

Style Icon: Carey Mulligan

So my life has been a little crazy lately, guys. I've been on cloud nine since Sunday night and now it's time to get back to reality! Oye, this is not going to be easy. I will share with you more information, but for now here's a little somthin'. 

Mumford & Sons. Know those guys? Yeah, so they're awesome in case you didn't know. And Marcus Mumford is married to the lovely Carey Mulligan. (She happens to be one of my favorite actresses.) Honestly, when they got together, I said to myself "self, that's about near damn perfect of a match if you ask me." 

And the lady knows how to dress. And just be awesome.

This is one of my all-time favorite fashion spreads that she was part of two years ago for Vogue

Style Icon: Penelope

One of my guilty pleasures is the movie Penelope. I've been a huge James McAvoy fan since he was in freakin' Chronicles of Narnia as Mr. Tumnus. (Sexiest Mr. Tumnus ever.) But anyways, Penelope was a really cute kids' flick about a young woman who was cursed with a pig nose and ears and the spell could only be broken by true love's kiss. 

The time-period is current-day, but more of a current-day fantasy world in the city of London. Christina Ricci plays Penelope, and her costumes are absolutely to-die for. I wish I could dress like her everyday. 

She kind of makes a pig-nose on a human cute in a way, no?

Style Icon: Emma Stone

I've been a fan of Emma Stone since her debut in Super Bad, but after I saw her in Crazy, Stupid, Love I kind of became a huge fan. 

And then The Amazing Spiderman came out, and I fell in love with her. And her boyfriend… But that's besides the point! She's absolutely gorgeous, but she also seems to be like one of the coolest chicks ever. I wish I was best friends with her… Okay, anyways, so the thing I really love about her style is she takes risks. She's always looking a little edgy to me, whether it is a small accessory or her eye makeup or her constantly changing hair color. I just love it. 

And she and her equally stylish manfriend, a.k.a. the sexiest man alive/Andrew Garfield… I die a little inside when I look at them, because they are probably the cutest couple I've ever seen in my life. If I get married and my future husband and I are half as cute as they are, we'll be lucky. 

Have a good weekend, guys! I'll be sparse around these parts next week, but I'll do my best to put an outfit post here and there. 

Style Icon: Andie Walsh

I often see these posts and think to myself, "self, you need to do that." And that's because I have a good amount of style icons that I get my inspiration from on a regular basis. I especially get my inspiration from characters from films that I adore, actresses (old and new), or an artist of some sort. 

My first installation to this series is Andie Walsh. In case you need a refresher, Andie Walsh is Molly Ringwald's character from the 80's film, Pretty in Pink. When I was younger and feeling uninspired with my wardrobe, I would turn on "Pretty in Pink" and soak in all her incredible ensembles. Seriously, every one of them was a masterpiece. I remember the opening scene is of Andie picking out her outfit for the day and meticulously choosing each piece. She talked about getting things second-hand and sewing a lot of her clothes herself, and I always admired that... 

Okay, maybe the hat is a bit too 80's for me, but I'm totally diggin' it. 

And this look is totally back...

And Duckie's style... Yes. 

Film Review: The Hunger Games

I haven't done one of these in A WHILE, which is unfortunate, since I love writing them. I haven't seen a lot of movies recently. In fact, I rarely go to the theater as it is. For several years I would go at LEAST once a week. No I'm lucky if I go once every two months.

So I didn't read any of "The Hunger Game" books. "*Gasp!* Oh em gee, how are you LIVING right now?!" Well guys, let me tell you this, I was living a lot better BEFORE I saw that damn movie. But boy, am I a little afraid to share my opinion on this with my fellow bloggers. I feel like the majority of you enjoyed this novel-series and movie.

I, on the other hand, did not.

First of all, I was really confused by the late 1990's special affects. Did anyone other than Dennis, Rachel, and I noticed that when they were on the horse-drawn carriage/gladiator thing that the special affects were just downright horrendous? It was WEIRD! I thought this was some big flick with a big budget kind of blockbuster. I also thought the entire plot was probably the most cliche one ever created in history. I mean, surprise surprise, they end up together in the end. Just like Twilight and all the other damn teen flicks these days... And what's with teens killing each other? Isn't there enough violence as it is?! I mean, kids already partaking in activities that they shouldn't be. Now we're letting them watch tween movies about teens killing each other? Is it just me or is there something seriously wrong with that? Dennis keeps telling me it's supposed to be about bullying, but why are we trying to teach kids about bullying with more violence? Am I missing the point? Because I totally could be, guys. I will be the first to admit when I'm wrong, but I don't know about this one... This movie just freaked me the eff out!

I give this movie a D - . The end.

Film Review: Midnight in Paris & Givewaway Winner

Good Morning Everyone! I have another film review to add to my little collection.

The other day this little film called Midnight in Paris came in the mail from Netflix. I'm not gonna lie, I was pretty pumped about it. In fact, as soon as I saw my boyfriend, I said "guess what I got in the mail todayyy??!" And he was pumped in response to my pumpedness.

Anyways, we had been looking forward to seeing this since we had gone away to Portsmouth last month. We had been clicking through the on-demand flicks in our hotel room, and decided to watch something else instead; so I made a mental note to put it on my Netflix queue.

After seeing it, I am a little confused as to why it received Oscar nominations. Seriously confused. I've never really been a fan of Woody Allen, especially his films within the past fifteen years or so. They are always extremely disappointing to me. But because it received so much hype, Dennis and I thought it was going to be this great romantic comedy that we would both actually enjoy.

Wrongo!

It was bad. Like pretty freakin' bad. Owen Wilson and Rachel McAdams were an engaged couple visiting her parents in Pairs. Her character was pushy, self-centered, and obviously in love with a different man. Owen Wilson played the lost film screenwriter attempting to write his first novel. One night he drunkenly stumbles into an old car from the 1920's, what he believed to be "the golden age." He bumped into Hemingway, and F. Scott Fitzgerald, and partied with them. Night after night, when the clock struck midnight, he would jump into the car and it would bring him to a the flapper-era; where he would drink and dine with the most famous writers and artists of that time.

Although it was a sweet concept, it was poorly portrayed. The script was not that great, and Owen Wilson was the same as always. The only part I enjoyed was Adrian Brody's little camio in the middle of the movie, because he was hilarious and I have a not-so secret crush on him. (I know, I'm weird. Don't judge.)

Don't waste your time. Woody Allen needs to stop filming, because he's just wasting money.

The End.

AND...

Today I am going to announce the winner of the Mystic Moons Giveaway!

Using the True Random Number Generator on random.org, the winner of the giveaway is...

Duh duh duh duhhhhh!!!

Violet from Blythe Ponytail Parades

Congratulations lovely lady!

 

My Favorites from the Oscars

So last night’s Academy Awards was probably the first time I had ever watched the entire thing. I’m extremely proud of myself and I didn’t even get bored. Rob mentioned that watching the Academy Awards is like watching the Superbowl for him. It’s just a different genre that he doesn’t really care about. I disagree with him completely on this, because watching the Superbowl from me, is like watching paint dry on a wall. At least I get to look at beautiful men looking dashingly handsome in their tuxes, and not chubby massive guys smashing into each other with helmets on when watching the Oscars…

I think my boyfriend might have an aneurism after he reads that. Sorry, babe!

Anyways, I was a pretty happy camper last night. One of my favorite films (probably of all time), The Artist, won Best Picture AND Jean Dujardin won Best Actor.

As for the fashion, there were a couple ladies that in my opinion, looked absolutely 100% flawless.

Berenice Bejo from “The Artist.” She looked incredible. Her hair color looked beautiful with the light-mint dress. And I love long sleeve dresses. And she’s married to the director of “The Artist.” He’s pretty sexy himself.

Cameron Diaz in my opinion has had way too much face-work done. She looks like a plastic man. But I loved the way she did her hair, and her dress looked like a mermaid. I liked it. A lot. And was surprised by that.

Jessica Chastain. She’s beautiful. I’m pretty sure she won best-dressed in like every magazine. This was incredible.

Livia Firth looked stunning. This dress was my favorite out of all of them. Seriously funky. Makes me happy that Colin Firth is married to such a rad lady.

And Rooney Mara. Her dress wasn’t my favorite, but her overall look was absolutely incredible. She is so beautiful, and the harsh bangs look so good on her. I was a little bummed she didn’t get Best Actress, but Meryl Streep was my runner up. She always does an amazing job.

Who was your favorite?

Film Review: The Artist

 

This past Valentine's Day week, le boyfriend and I decided it was about damn time to go see "The Artist," written and directed by Michel Hazanavicius. (We had been putting it off for far too long.) I was a little apprehensive, and I couldn't tell you why. It may have been related to the whole silent-film deal, but I grew up with the classics, thanks to my father, so I'm not sure why that was intimidating me. Anyways, we were running a little late, thus didn't see the opening credits, but as soon as I turned my eyes to the screen while walking into the theater, I was captivated. 

The story begins with a young actress, trying to find her way through "Hollywoodland," which refers to the old "Hollywood" sign in L.A., along with a narcissist, adored by the public, silent-film actor in his prime. According to the film, 1930 is the year that the first sound and voice film came out, putting many of the silent-film actors and actresses immediately out of work. They were either not cut for the job, lacking the talent and voice, or were too prideful to join the crowds. As the young actress' career is taking leaps and bounds, the main character, George, is not having the same luck. In fact, he falls into a deep depression and has no will to live or work. 

At certain points of the film, my eyes scattered to the audience. There wasn't one minute that every viewers' eyes weren't glued to the screen. Glued. With no dialogue whatsoever, the incredible soundtrack was well used to suck everyone in. Needing and wanting to know what would happen next. The actors were perfectly picked, in my opinion. They had these incredibly beautiful smiles that made everyone in the audience want to smile with them, and could clearly use their body language just in itself, to engage the viewers. The first half was very logistically based on the traditional silent-film, with dancing, overly-compensated gestures and facial expressions, and the old, corny, comedic relief. As the film progressed, it dug deeper into the main character's psyche where darker tones and more modern techniques were used and beautifully incorporated into a silent film. 

Please see it. You may not regret not seeing it if you don't know much about it, but you will seriously be missing out if you don't. 

Let me know what you think!