Recently, I saw two movies about love. Since both of these movies took place in the present day (mostly), I decided to assume that both of them were trying to be realistic in their portrayal of young people falling in love. Both showed two attractive young people meeting and then what happened to them years later. Only one of them featured a virtually unrecognizable Dread Pirate Roberts, but we can't have everything. These two movies were Blue Valentine and No Strings Attached. One is a critically acclaimed drama about two people at the beginning and end of their relationship. The other is a saucy romantic comedy about friends with benefits who just might be developing feelings for each other. What do they have to say about love in these modern times? Can we reach a consensus?
How does time flow? In one of those linear fashions or some kinda crazy hopscotching business?
BV: Hopscotching business. The movie jumps back and forth between the two leads falling in love and falling apart years later.
NSA: Linear, but beginning when the leads are teenagers before jumping forward a few times, for no particular dramatic purpose.
Do the young people have family issues?
BV: Yes. Ryan Gosling has an absentee mother, Michelle Williams has a father who screams at her mother. Also, her mother suffers a terrible case of evaporating in the block of time between the early scenes and the later ones.
NSA: Yes. Natalie Portman's father dies early on. Ashton Kutcher's father is a lecherous faded TV actor dating his son's ex.
Is there a doctor in the house?
BV: Michelle Williams wants to be a doctor, but becomes a nurse after having a child ruins her life.
NSA: Natalie Portman is apparently in the Grey's Anatomy stage of becoming a doctor.
Sorry, I meant, is there a handsome doctor in the house?
BV: Ben Shenkman is on hand to tempt away the little lady.
NSA: This guy. Also, Cary Elwes, no matter how old or bearded he gets. Natalie Portman knows what I'm talking about.
Does anyone throw a punch?
BV: Ryan Gosling, at Ben Shenkman.
NSA: Ashton Kutcher, at his own father. This was nearly as disturbing.
Do they get by with a little help from their friends?
BV: No. These two have zero friends. Maybe everyone else finds them as unpleasant as they find each other.
NSA: Yes. Natalie has two ladyfriends, played by the notably more interesting Greta Gerwig and Mindy Kaling, as well as a gay friend. Ashton has two gentlemen friends, horny sarcastic dude and horny emotional dude.
How's the Oscar pedigree look?
BV: Both stars have been nominated, though Ryan was nominated for Half Nelson, not this one. Sorry, Ryan.
NSA: Natalie Portman and Kevin Kline both know their way around an Oscars ceremony.
General economic outlook?
BV: Lower-middle class. Living in a trailer.
NSA: Upper-middle class, but everybody has roommates.
Get to the good part. How's the sex?
BV: Bad.
NSA: Good.
What's the tagline?
BV: "A love story" (I think this is one of those ironic things)
NSA: "Friendship has its benefits", which is an important message for the lonely malcontents in Blue Valentine
I know these two movies don't really jump to mind as comparable ones, but I do think it was interesting to note what they did have in common, whether that was highly-respected actors or the fact that taglines are always a little painful. What does it say that two movies with vastly different aims both feature women as high-achieving professionals and men as charming underachievers? They also both had something to say about the choices and consequences young people face about sex and how worthwhile it is to stick with someone or make a go of it on your own. One of them might be saying it slightly more painfully than the other, but it is an aspect of romance on which both focus. Also, there seems to be something irresistible about what happens when people first meet.
I don't really want to recommend one over the other, since there's probably a time and a place for each. But I did gather some romantic advice after seeing both: Be rich, have friends, make a good first impression, and don't get married if you don't know each other that well.
Wednesday, February 23, 2011
Thursday, February 10, 2011
TV Review: Being Human
There's this weird thing that happens in the entertainment industry. One country makes a thing, the thing is super popular, and then a different country makes their own version that is simply horrendous. For instance, the movie Mostly Martha is this sweet, slightly cheesy German movie about an uptight chef. A few years later, Catherine Zeta-Jones ruined it in English with No Reservations. Please, don't rent No Reservations. You're only feeding the beast.
Sometimes these adaptations work. Unfortunately, for every Office, there's a Coupling or Viva Laughlin. The latest entry into this pantheon of hits and embarrassing misses is Being Human, currently running on the Syfy channel. I would call this one more miss than hit, at the moment. It is a show about a vampire, a werewolf, and a ghost who are roommates. To me, this sounds like the set up to a joke, but most of the characters are incapable of pushing their faces into smile shapes, so it's more of a drama.
Aside from their general humorlessness, they're also whiny and not terribly interesting. Aidan, the requisite hot brooding vampire guy, is two hundred years old. He used to be really violent and murderous, but now he's not, except for when he relapses once an episode. He has this one vampire friend who is kind of threatening. Then there's Josh, the whiny werewolf. I keep thinking Josh will be the funny one, but he isn't. He mostly sulks, because he's not old enough to brood. Finally, we have Sally the ghost. Hey, what's that over there? Oh, it's another feminist rant.
OK, you have three main characters, so two of the three have to be men instead of the other way around (of course), but the one female character is also a ghost? The only one with no power to do anything at all? The one who can't interact with any characters except the two main dudes because they're the only ones who can see her? The one whose ultimate fate rests on her ability to find emotional closure about her life? At least make some effort here. I know the cast is based on the British version, but that doesn't mean it was OK when they did it.
Moving on to other issues, the show is supposed to be set in Boston, but the producers apparently didn't even spring for a few skyline shots to toss between scenes. The only indication that they're in Boston is that one, someone casually referred to them being in Boston, and two, Josh was supposed to be attending MIT Med School before he got bitten by a werewolf and dropped out. I can't even tell where in Boston they're supposed to be living. I'm guessing they're in South Boston, but I'm not sure. Didn't Good Will Hunting teach us all the phrase "Southie"? Also, Josh goes off into "the woods" once a month to turn into a werewolf. Where is he going? What woods? Why isn't anyone taking the T anywhere?
I'm not expecting ol' Josh to be all, "Head down Boylston, take a right on Arlington, a left on Newbury, and it's by the Urban Outfitters across from Hynes." But if you're going to go to the trouble of setting your show in a specific town and more than that, a large famous town, let the city give your show a little added flavor. This show needs it. So far, plot lines focus on how miserable everyone is. There needs to be something else going on or else they need to make me care about these people more. I mean, a show about poor whiny 20-somethings in Boston with a supernatural element is totally my cup of tea. I probably won't give up on it yet, partially because it's already set up as a series recording on my DVR. I suggest a second emotion for each character, as well as one of those famed "ongoing plot lines" to tie the episodes together.
Final verdict? Skip it, unless you refuse to let anything vampire-related pass you by or you can think of some other reason to watch it.
Sometimes these adaptations work. Unfortunately, for every Office, there's a Coupling or Viva Laughlin. The latest entry into this pantheon of hits and embarrassing misses is Being Human, currently running on the Syfy channel. I would call this one more miss than hit, at the moment. It is a show about a vampire, a werewolf, and a ghost who are roommates. To me, this sounds like the set up to a joke, but most of the characters are incapable of pushing their faces into smile shapes, so it's more of a drama.
Aside from their general humorlessness, they're also whiny and not terribly interesting. Aidan, the requisite hot brooding vampire guy, is two hundred years old. He used to be really violent and murderous, but now he's not, except for when he relapses once an episode. He has this one vampire friend who is kind of threatening. Then there's Josh, the whiny werewolf. I keep thinking Josh will be the funny one, but he isn't. He mostly sulks, because he's not old enough to brood. Finally, we have Sally the ghost. Hey, what's that over there? Oh, it's another feminist rant.
OK, you have three main characters, so two of the three have to be men instead of the other way around (of course), but the one female character is also a ghost? The only one with no power to do anything at all? The one who can't interact with any characters except the two main dudes because they're the only ones who can see her? The one whose ultimate fate rests on her ability to find emotional closure about her life? At least make some effort here. I know the cast is based on the British version, but that doesn't mean it was OK when they did it.
Moving on to other issues, the show is supposed to be set in Boston, but the producers apparently didn't even spring for a few skyline shots to toss between scenes. The only indication that they're in Boston is that one, someone casually referred to them being in Boston, and two, Josh was supposed to be attending MIT Med School before he got bitten by a werewolf and dropped out. I can't even tell where in Boston they're supposed to be living. I'm guessing they're in South Boston, but I'm not sure. Didn't Good Will Hunting teach us all the phrase "Southie"? Also, Josh goes off into "the woods" once a month to turn into a werewolf. Where is he going? What woods? Why isn't anyone taking the T anywhere?
I'm not expecting ol' Josh to be all, "Head down Boylston, take a right on Arlington, a left on Newbury, and it's by the Urban Outfitters across from Hynes." But if you're going to go to the trouble of setting your show in a specific town and more than that, a large famous town, let the city give your show a little added flavor. This show needs it. So far, plot lines focus on how miserable everyone is. There needs to be something else going on or else they need to make me care about these people more. I mean, a show about poor whiny 20-somethings in Boston with a supernatural element is totally my cup of tea. I probably won't give up on it yet, partially because it's already set up as a series recording on my DVR. I suggest a second emotion for each character, as well as one of those famed "ongoing plot lines" to tie the episodes together.
Final verdict? Skip it, unless you refuse to let anything vampire-related pass you by or you can think of some other reason to watch it.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)