Girl Detective

#10 in my 2007 book challenge was Behind the Scenes at the Museum by Kate Atkinson. When I first read it, about ten years ago, I thought a reveal near the end undermined Atkinson’s conceit of Ruby as an unlimited-omniscient narrator. I was sure I’d never want to read it again, and gave away my copy. Happily, a new copy wasn’t hard to come by when I changed my mind. (I ask myself two questions when giving a book away: Am I likely to read it again? Will it be easy to get from a library or used book store if I change my mind?)

Three things made me reconsider Behind the Scenes. One was how much I enjoyed Atkinson’s Case Histories last year. Two was the high praise by the author of Mental Multivitamin, whose good opinion is not too freely given. And three was that a good friend of mine was reading it, so I’d have someone with whom to discuss it.

The ending didn’t bother me this time. I was also surprised to find how much I empathised with the character of Bunty, Ruby’s mother. I’m sure I didn’t do so the first time I read it, which was pre-marriage and very pre-children. Perhaps it’s my post-partum depression, but I found all the mothers and all the children very sympathetic on this read.

Bunty makes herself a cup of tea in the kitchen at the back of the Shop, relishing her few moments of morning solitude….My poor mother’s very disappointed by marriage, it’s failed to change her life in any way, except by making it worse. If I listen in on her airwaves I can hear an endless monologue on the drudgery of domestic life–Why didn’t anyone TELL me what it would be like? The cooking! The cleaning! The work!….And as for babies, well…the broken nights, the power struggles…the labour pains!

#9 in my reading challenge for the year was Siblings Without Rivalry by Adele Faber and Elaine Mazlish. For a long time, I thought Drake didn’t have sibling issues. Then Guppy started to crawl, and everything changed. This book was recommended to me by several parents, and I found it worthwhile. Like many of the people in the book, I wanted ideas to help the relationship between my kids, and the topics brought up a far wider range of relationships. I got insight into the dynamics between me and my kids, between my two kids, and between my kids and other kids. Interestingly, I also got a lot of insight into my relationships with my siblings and parents. I found it affirming to be reminded that parenting in general, and potentially loaded topics like sibling relationships especially, aren’t intuitive. The challenge, as with any self-help book, is to pick some of the advice and practice it. This book has a good number of suggestions, large and small, that are easy to understand and implement.

My husband G. Grod forwarded me Carrie Rickey’s piece on Philly’s Ritz theaters, which may be acquired by Landmark. As with most buyouts of local indies, there’s the usual sturm und drang of “Boo, our independent [insert business type here] is gone and bought out by corporate goons.” While I don’t love Landmark theaters (in fact, I had one of my worst movie experiences ever at the Lagoon), I think they do a reasonable job of keeping up local historic theaters, programming good films, and offering good, albeit over-the-top expensive, concessions. Since I recall feeling similarly about the Ritz theaters, I hope there won’t be much change for folks in Philly.

I moved to Philadelphia sight unseen for my first “real” (i.e., salaried and with benefits) post-college job. I didn’t know anyone, and the Ritz theaters were like my first friends. Though I soon met good folks like JV and Rock Hack, it took a while to get sorted with friends; my job was demanding and required me to work many nights and weekends. Movies, which I’d recently learned to love (see #2), very ably filled the few cracks in my schedule. I was young and insecure enough to feel self-conscious when I went alone to restaurants and to dinner, but I quickly learned to like my own company.

At the time, there were only two Ritz theaters–the Bourse, and the Five on Walnut. (The East opened just before I moved away.) Though the screens were smallish, so were the theaters, which felt intimate. Each weekend, I’d look for the late showing of movies that sounded interesting to me. I was young enough that I could still stay awake for the 10 p.m. show; they weren’t the expensive naps they’ve become in later life. I learned that Chinese films are often depressing, and that Gong Li is beautiful, by watching Ju Dou. My first Alan Rickman movie was one in which he didn’t play a bad guy–Truly, Madly, Deeply. I remember beautiful images and intrusive scores from Marcel Pagnol’s autobiographical films, My Father’s Glory and My Mother’s Castle. I didn’t love every movie I saw at the Ritz theaters, but all were subsumed in my burgeoning love of film, which I continue to honor both by making movies a priority, and by going to see them at local movie houses like the Ritz.

Little Darlings was another book I read surreptitiously as a teenager. It had a pink cover with a white bikini bathing suit on it, so it was not inconspicuous. “Don’t Let the Title Fool You” was the tagline. Little Darlings, was originally a 1980 movie with Tatum O’Neal as idealistic rich girl Ferris and Kristy McNichol as streetwise poor girl Angel. Each bets that she will be the first to lose her virginity.

#15 in my 2007 movie challenge was MI3. In my defense, this was my husband’s pick. I was in the mood for an entertaining action movie. This couldn’t even fit that generous bill, though Cruise is strangely more believable as Ethan Hunt than he is in real life married to Katie Holmes. Hunt must rescue two damsels in distress, a colleague and later his fiancee. Phillip Seymour Hoffman does nothing special with the role of villain. Midway through this movie I turned on my computer so I could at least get some work done. When the twist at the end came, I didn’t care, and I was very annoyed at the plot device of getting the man emotionally involved by putting “his” women in danger. Woven into the movie were homages to roles from Cruise’s career. This felt gimmicky and annoying. Overall, this movie by J.J. Abrams, the creator of shows Alias and Lost, felt like an overlong, merely OK, TV episode, not a blockbuster action film.

#14 in my 2007 movie challenge was Little Miss Sunshine, which I rationalized buying at Target because:

1. I wanted to see it before the Oscars
2. It was on sale for $16.99, which is
3. Lots cheaper than two tickets, popcorn, candy, a drink, and a babysitter

It was funny and bittersweet, and owed at least a little to National Lampoon’s Family Vacation. The performances were strong all around. It brought back memories of my youth, when my family got in a van and drove hither and yon, inspiring adolescent horror of being stuck with “these people”.

#13 in my 2007 movie challenge was Dark City, another entry prompted by this list of Fifteen Geek Movies. Literally and figuratively very dark, Dark City is a precursor of The Matrix that examines some of the same themes of individuality, society, and choice. Where The Matrix had Keanu well cast as the none-too-bright Neo, Dark City has a badly coiffed Rufus Sewell, sporting what looks like 80’s rock-star hair. I did, though, appreciate Jennifer Connelly’s strong eyebrows. I found the fight scene at the end silly and overlong, but the film itself is definitely worthwhile.

#12 in my 2007 movie challenge was Nine Queens, an Argentinian film that had been on our Tivo forever. This heist film is clever and charming. While I knew that someone was scamming someone, I thought it did a good job of spinning things out till the end.

#11 in my 2007 movie challenge was The Departed, in a theater with good popcorn. I thought this film was well worth the effort and expense to see away from home, and also that it deserved the Best Picture Oscar. All the performances were solid, particularly those in smaller roles. I was also very impressed by DiCaprio. Scorcese took a Hong Kong action film and adapted it to South Boston. Some griped that he simply remade a movie. I think it was an impressive transposition. My only quibble was the very last shot of an animal–alright, already, I got it.

I don’t like memes–way too much me, me, me. Yet the movie one making the rounds reminded me why I love the movies and still go out to them even though it’s expensive and hard to do so. Thus, my responses to the meme I saw at GirlReaction and The Sheila Variations. You can see that Duff and I have some opinions in common. I’ll try to keep things brief.

1. Name a movie that you have seen more than 10 times.

The Breakfast Club

2. Name a movie that you’ve seen multiple times in the theater.

Branagh’s Henry V, and Cinema Paradiso; both were showing at a nice theater in DC in 1990. (It was a two-plex up Wisconsin Ave., I think, and may not exist anymore). My loves of movies, seeing them in theaters, and Shakespeare all sprang from here.

3. Name an actor that would make you more inclined to see a movie.

Classic: Cary Grant. Modern: George Clooney

Added later: Don Cheadle

4. Name an actor that would make you less likely to see a movie.

Never say never–I’ve seen great movies with actors I usually don’t care for, like Out of Sight with J. Lo, and Femme Fatale with Rebecca Romijn and Antonio Banderas. But OK, maybe Tom Hanks.

5. Name a movie that you can and do quote from.

I am terrible at quoting from movies.

6. Name a movie musical that you know all of the lyrics to all of the songs

Grease

Added later: And probably Xanadu. My sisters and I saw it in the theater and bought the LP. Olivia Newton John, Gene Kelley, Greek mythology, and ELO–awesome when I was a pre-teen, I’m guessing not so much, now.

7. Name a movie that you have been known to sing along with

I’ve blocked it out, but I’m sure I sang along to Dirty Dancing in college.

8. Name a movie that you would recommend everyone see.

Henry V

9. Name a movie that you own.

Henry V

10. Name an actor that launched his/her entertainment career in another medium but who has surprised you with his/her acting chops.

J. Lo in Out of Sight

11. Have you ever seen a movie in a drive-in? If so, what?

Yes; a double feature of Ferris Bueller’s Day Off and Pretty in Pink. I drank pink wine coolers.

12. Ever made out in a movie?

Not that I remember.

13. Name a movie that you keep meaning to see but just haven’t yet gotten around to it.

La Règle du Jeu. It’s been on our Tivo forever.

14. Ever walked out of a movie?

Yes, Grandview, U.S.A.

15. Name a movie that made you cry in the theater.

Cinema Paradiso, every time

16. Popcorn?

You betcha, as long as there’s real butter for it, and Junior Mints to mix in.

17. How often do you go to the movies (as opposed to renting them or watching them at home)?

Even with two small kids, about twice a month.

18. What’s the last movie you saw in the theater?

The Departed

19. What’s your favorite/preferred genre of movie?

I’m equal opportunity, though I don’t like horror and violence.

20. What’s the first movie you remember seeing in the theater?

The AristoCats

21. What movie do you wish you had never seen?

Dead Presidents

22. What is the weirdest movie you enjoyed?

Tapeheads, which I saw for the first time last weekend

23. What is the scariest movie you’ve seen?

Poltergeist, which I saw in the theater and probably also saw more than 10 times.

24. What is the funniest movie you’ve seen?

A Fish Called Wanda

A fun find from our library, Looking for a Moose by Phyllis Root is one of our new favorite picture books. The text is repetitive and almost rhyming, similar to We’re Going on a Bear Hunt by Michael Rosen, so it’s fun to read aloud. It’s different from Bear Hunt because it’s a one way journey, and because it has a happier ending that teaches the plural of moose. Cecil’s oil paintings are clear and engaging, and several pages have hidden moose.

#8 in my 2007 book challenge was The Evolution of Desire: Strategies of Human Mating by David Buss. I found it often repetitive, and occasionally interesting. Published in 1994 and relying on research up to twenty years before that, it’s old for non-fiction, and thus dated about things like sexual behavior in the face of AIDS. The author has an interesting premise, and one I didn’t find very shocking or surprising: men and women’s mating strategies are often unpleasant adaptive mechanisms that have ensured survival and propagation. These strategies are general and animal-like, rather than individual and emotional. Buss interestingly deploys many examples from the animal world to illustrate parallel points. His anecdotes of humans, though, never felt like they illustrated his scientific data well. They seemed more like stories (and often unpleasantly sexist ones) in the vein of “love’s a bitch.” Additionally, the scientific evidence Buss relies on was sometimes sketchy. He noted that lesbians mating behavior didn’t conform to certain of his theories, but didn’t explore this at any length. In one particularly egregious instance, Buss noted how the sexual revolution proved one of his theories, since it occurred during a time of more women than men, yet he didn’t mention another key contributing cause, the birth-control pill. The chapters had some slipshod endnotes that hinted at less than rigorous scholarship. One of the members of my book group recommended Jared Diamond’s Why Is Sex Fun? instead.

#10 in my 2007 movie challenge was Talladega Nights. Thank you, Will Ferrell, for making me laugh out loud. This was a silly, relatively plot-free movie that seemed more like two hours of improv scenes strung together. But it hung together well enough for me; I liked it even better than I did Ferrell’s Anchorman. The extras were fun to watch, and the movie was full of quotable lines like, “Thank you, baby Jesus…” and “Shake…and…bake!” And my husband G. Grod’s favorite: “Hakuna Matata, beetches!” One of the reasons for my annual book and movie challenges is to stay intellectually agile. I can’t say this film contributed to that. But it did make me laugh. And a good comedy is hard to find.

#7 in my 2007 book challenge was Evelyn Waugh’s Loved One. It’s a recommendation of my husband G. Grod. It was also my attempt to sneak in a short novel before I had to read two non-fiction books for my two book groups. The Loved One is, to borrow from Hobbes, nasty, brutish and short. It’s a bleak comedy about two Hollywood funeral homes (one for pets, another for departed “Loved Ones”), a dead Hollywood failure, and a love triangle among an aspiring poet, a head embalmer, and an idealistic cosmetician. I found it perhaps more clever than enjoyable. It has the kind of biting, mean-spirited humor that I’m not always in the mood for.

#9 in my 2007 movie challenge was Repo Man, which my husband borrowed from the library after finding this list of fifteen essential geek movies. I had seen 11 out of the 15, 8 of them with my husband. Repo Man is extremely weird, more so than other movies of its time that I did see, like Valley Girl, Better Off Dead, and the John Hughes canon. Emilio Estevez is a skinny young punk drafted into service as a repo man by Harry Dean Stanton. They inhabit a dark corner of the 1980s with generic everything, where there’s a ready supply of items to be reclaimed by people whose reach extended their grasp. The plot centers on a mysterious car that inspires warring factions, and there’s a truly bizarre ending.

#8 in my 2007 movie challenge was Stranger Than Fiction, which I saw at a discount theater. Good: ticket only cost $2, and they have good popcorn with real butter. Bad: film was mis-framed to start (could see the boom mike at the top of the screen), then out of focus throughout. I enjoyed the film anyway. Ferrell was funny, vulnerable and sweet as a boring IRS agent who suddenly starts hearing someone narrate his life. Maggie Gyllenhaal was charming, Emma Thompson was believably weird as the author, Tony Hale (Buster from Arrested Development) was ideal as a geeky friend, and Dustin Hoffman was kookily engaging as a literature professor. Only Queen Latifah seemed to be superfluous to the endeavor.

With the rise of Netflix and the fast, inexpensive availability of DVDs, why do I go to the movies, especially now that I have two kids, and going with my husband involves paying a sitter?

I go because I like the experience (even when I don’t; more on that below) and because some movies are better in the theater. I saw Branagh’s Henry V at least four times in the theater (a really good one, too) and I don’t think it’s a coincidence that it became one of my favorite films.

I recall reading (but can’t find a link after much searching) that the brain processes films and DVDs differently. Films are a string of images, and even though the break between frames happens so fast it’s impossible to see, our brain still experiences it and actively provides closure between frames. DVDs, though, are a steady stream of digital images, and the brain receives these passively.

From his review of Star Wars: Episode II, Roger Ebert has this to say about the difference between film and digital images:

Digital images contain less information than 35mm film images, and the more you test their limits, the more you see that. Two weeks ago I saw “Patton” shown in 70mm Dimension 150, and it was the most astonishing projection I had ever seen–absolute detail on a giant screen, which was 6,000 times larger than a frame of the 70mm film. That’s what large-format film can do, but it’s a standard Hollywood has abandoned (except for IMAX), and we are being asked to forget how good screen images can look–to accept the compromises. I am sure I will hear from countless fans who assure me that “Episode II” looks terrific, but it does not. At least, what I saw did not. It may look great in digital projection on multiplex-size screens, and I’m sure it will look great on DVD, but on a big screen it lacks the authority it needs.

That’s why I went to see Lawrence of Arabia last year when it was showing in a nearby revival. It was not meant to be seen on my television; it was meant to be seen on a big screen. It was a spectacle, and as such, it was spectacular.

There are films that are better at home. Comedy DVDs, with their extras, are especially fun. My husband and I watched Talladega Nights last week, and got several nights of enjoyment out of a friend’s DVD. Character-driven films, and films that were shot digitally, also benefit from small-screen viewings.

It’s not only the image that draws me to theaters for films. It’s the holistic experience. I know what the arguments are against theater going; I don’t disagree with most of them: dirty theaters and restrooms, overpriced and poor quality concessions, skyrocketing ticket prices, and, oh, the humanity–cell phones, conversations, small children in adult movies. Yes, these are hazards, and not uncommon ones.

One of my most disappointing experiences in recent years was going to see the movie Adaptation at The Lagoon theater. Tickets were $8 each, even though the movie was in the early afternoon (there had been a morning show). A 16-oz. bottle of water cost $3 (I’d purchased a 6-pack of 24-oz. bottles at Target the day before for $1.99). We paid for parking, and then I didn’t like the movie and the people behind us talked the whole time. I haven’t been back to the Lagoon since. Instead, I adjusted my movie practices and have had much better experiences, with only occasional annoyances ever since. Going to the movies has become an event, and an oasis of time to myself. I make the effort to minimize these potential pitfalls.

Dirt: if I go to older theaters, I bring anti-bacterial wipes and tissues. I seek out new stadium theaters that have not yet acquired the sticky patina of pop on the floor. The newer restrooms have hallway entrances, not doors, and automated soap, water, and flushing, so there are fewer contact surfaces.

Overpriced concessions: Theaters make their money here, not on tickets. I think it’s bad manners to bring stuff from home. But there are usually some lower-priced combos. I always buy the smallest size because it’s more than enough and it is cheaper, if not by much. I also seek out theaters that have good concessions. Three Twin Cities theaters with good popcorn and real butter are The Heights, The Riverview, and the GTI Roseville 4.

High ticket prices: I try to go to the cheapest show of the day, which is often the twilight show (about 4 to 6 p.m.), NOT the matinees. Don’t buy tickets online or on a credit card if you’re carrying a balance; the additional charges add up. Also, check out discount theaters. Paying $2 a ticket is a bargain, but there are hidden costs. I’ve found the crowds at discount theaters are less polite, and the last film I saw at one was out of focus.

Rude and stupid people: There’s no way to avoid them fully. Going to nicer, newer theaters and seeing non-blockbuster movies will reduce their incidence. While some people WILL bring children to adult movies (there were a few last week when my husband and I saw The Departed. I’m all for early education, but Scorsese is a bit much for the under-six crowd), I try to stem the tide of judgment and wonder if they can’t find childcare or can’t afford it. Finally, my best advice for avoiding talkers and other pests is to take the path of MOST resistance in the theater. If the door is on the left side, I cross over and sit on the right side. I don’t sit in the middle. I sit against the wall rather than on the aisle. If the person behind me talks, I move, since shushing them often doesn’t work.

Leaving the comfort of my home means taking some chances, and possibly spending more to do so. For me, seeing a movie is such an enjoyable event I think it’s worth the risk.

Tivo is perfect for watching the Oscars. We started late, forwarded through all the commercials and boring awards and speeches, and only got to real time at the end.

Fashion, good: Kate Winslet’s dress’s old-time glamour, though the shade was a bit too pale. Cate Blanchett’s dress flattered and dazzled. Helen Mirren seems to own the definition of “age-appropriate”. The color of Jessical Biel’s dress looked good in general and on her.

Fashion, not so good: Nicole K’s red dress looked like she had a giant red mushroom on her shoulder, and only served to accentuate how ghostly pale and weirdly non-human she looks. She’s done too much to her face; it doesn’t seem to move. Her hair color is too pale, and too straight. The skirt of Reese Witherspoon’s boring-black dress was distracting, though the shape was flattering. And she’s gotten too thin for her chin; it’s going to take over the world. J. Lo’s jeweled bodice was also distracting, and the dress wasn’t flattering to boot. Plus where’s the color, people? Bleige is not flattering or interesting. Kirsten Dunst’s dress had a collar at the top, and feathers at the bottom. And what was that shove she gave Toby when they presented? Play nice, kids. Clive Owen’s weird collar and blue suit did not enchant.

Ellen did a good job as host, though her her last pair of pants were not flattering. The extra ceremony stuff was pretty good, though I found Michael Mann’s America montage a little bizarre. And oh, yeah, the movies that won awards were pretty good. I didn’t feel there were any egregious mistakes. For the record, though, I think Children of Men deserved better attention.

For more gossip, visit Perez Hilton and Go Fug Yourself.

#7 in my 2007 movie challenge was Amores Perros, directed by Alejandro González Iñárritu, an Oscar nominee tonight for Best Director. I’d heard AP was good but violent, and that held true for both people and animals. The movie told three interwoven stories that centered around love, also for both animals and people. Love for animals proved more simple, though not less wrenching.

#6 in my 2007 movie challenge was Children of Men. Using sparing detail, director Cuarón effectively evokes a near-future dystopia in which humans can no longer reproduce. Clive Owen looks handsome and haunted as the reluctant hero, drawn into danger by his ex-wife, Julianne Moore. The colors are dark and somber, and the long film shots are mesmerizing to watch. I think this competes with some of the Best Picture nominees. It is well worth seeing both for its look and the story, which is told simply and well.