Halloween 2013!

For as much as I love Halloween, half-assing costumes really gets my goat. You know what else is annoying on Halloween?

• Overly trendy costumes. People think they are being original, maybe funny? when they dress up in super timely, probably pop-culture related costume. Example: the Miley Cyrus VMA performace costume this year. Not funny. Too many people did it. Even worse, too many uncool people did it- Paris Hilton, Kelly Ripa. Just seems really, really lame.
• Costumes that are confusing. I saw a camouflage bodysuit. Is that a soldier? I don't understand.
• Boring skanky costumes. Why do so many people want to be slutty kitty? Especially when they can be something funny and less obvious, say... slutty Frodo. Be slutty, but don't be boring slutty.
• Unspecific Costumes. Come up with a backstory if your costume doesn't have one, its so much more fun! Take Heidi Klum's "elderly woman". Why wasn't she a character or a classic Hollywood person? Halloween is about being someone else for the night, in a fun way. How can she just be an elderly woman? What is that expressing? Its not as bad the above faux-pas, but still.

Lots of boring this year. Lots of unspecific. Lots of stupid trendy. But there were still some fun costumes by celebrities too! I don't even feel the need to bother with a worst of list right now, maybe I'll add that later. If you want to look at some boring Halloween outfits, any gossip site will do.

Here is some of the awesome:

Yes this is a pop culture costume (Lil' Kim from some award show several years back), but it is original and not timely! It is recognizable enough to recall the reference, but not too recognizable that everyone would get it. It's also fun and colorful! I'm a fan. Of the costume-not naked Miley. Gross.

I like the old school costume thing when people commit! I especially like that Dracula. You go NPH and family!

LOVE both of these!!!! Original, committed, specific. It doesn't get much better! Elizabeth wins this year. Unfortunately, I don't recognize these people...

So there you have it. 2013 Halloween. Mostly disappointing, but it was a Thursday! Why can't we have it on every last Friday of October? There can be one united weekend of everyone dressing up, rather than two weeks of noncommittal costumes leading up to it. Let's just make that official now.

Netflix's Arrested Development- "I've Made a Huge Mistake" or... Not?

Netflix gave Arrested Development “ANUSTART”, and after marathoning it on the day it was released- I am conflicted.

Getting reacquainted with the familiar theme song and seeing it coupled with updated cast photos certainly brought a smile to my face. It had been so long! I managed to maintain the hope that the new season would feel like a natural continuation of the series, but alas, it did not.

I realized this as soon as I saw Lindsay’s new face.  My first reaction to seeing her was a scream followed by the reasonable question asked in an unreasonable volume: “WHY DID YOU DO THAT PORTIA?”. She is also wearing a really bad wig (to mimic her hair from 5 years ago), and that probably makes it worse. Things have obviously changed. So pretty much right away, my expectations for the series were put in check. This experience would be at best kind of funny, and at worst horribly depressing.

Aside from the cosmetic issues of Lindsay’s face and George Michael's loss of adorableness, there is also the matter of the format. It is awesome that Netflix made 15 new episodes for a show I love, but the very nonlinear storyline becomes such a chore. I was on board for the say, 6 episodes, but 15?! There is just way too much repetition. Perhaps this would have been more tolerable had I not finished my marathon in one day, but I was not warned against this. I had a goal to celebrate the show’s return in one day, and I achieved this goal- to the detriment of my enjoyment of course.

I was really relieved when I got to the end of the new season, but wait- a cliffhanger? What? No Season 5 has been greenlit that I know of, why would they torture us with a maddening nonlinear storyline AND a lack of resolution? I guess Netflix is trying to force me to hope for a Season 5, and it’s somehow working. I am a simple creature after all.

Still, the show provided some laugh-out-loud moments for me, and I am not often a LOL’er. Plus it was really amazing how many of the cast they managed to bring back. So yes, I guess this new Arrested Development was overall worth it. I laughed, I cried (mainly on the inside when I saw Lindsay’s face), but I did watch. I saw the whole new season in one day as I had planned for months, so... go Netflix?

It is just unfortunate that I felt the need to end that statement with that question mark.

Season 2 Finale of Girls: Here’s to Looking Forward to Better Writing in Season 3?

So I just finished watching the season finale of Girls, and I’m left with a disappointed feeling. I’m not disappointed in the characters’ decisions ( their horrible, awkward mistakes are kind of what the show is all about), it’s more of a general confused feeling.

Charlie is rich and successful now? We didn’t even know he had a career! Random and annoying. A little context and a little setup can go a long way in believability, but we are not given either for this plot point.

Marnie wants to be a singer? I get what we are supposed to see here- Marnie is “flailing” and has no direction in life, but that is just too random for me. No setup, whatsoever.

And they are back together. That I’m okay with, though it is heartbreaking as I have a soft-spot for Charlie. Marnie has hit a low point, so she is trying to take comfort in the familiarity and ego-boosting Charlie provides. Charlie is a sweet love-puppy for Marnie, and though it would be better for him to be rid of someone that isn’t truly in love with him, he’ll take what he can get from her. Them getting back together at this point totally makes sense. Thank you.

Shoshanna and Ray- Shoshanna makes out (at the very least) with that doorman, and she acts accordingly weird with Ray. Then they break up because Shoshanna says she is tired of his “black soul” a.k.a. negativity. So was it the chicken or the egg? Did she cheat on Ray because she wanted to break up with him, or did she break up with him because she cheated? Personally, I think it was her guilt that made her break up with him, I hope so at least. Otherwise, we didn’t get enough context to really make that plotline work either...

Hannah is becoming just plain cringe-worthy. Her obsessive-compulsiveness (also, where the did that come from?) is really uncomfortable to watch. I do wish they spent less time torturing us with it, and more time progressing the story. Not much has happened with her character past say, episode 3 or 4.

My favorite storyline of the last two episodes was Adam’s. I have such a better understanding of his character seeing him in a new, normal relationship. He can’t handle it! The poor guy is so screwed up that he needs Hannah (he must be REALLY screwed up). He needs someone that is damaged like he is. A normal girl like the new girlfriend is not a good fit at this point in his life, and woe to the girlfriend who takes him on. He is creepy and traumatizing to a normal girl. What Hannah thinks is weird and kind of amusing, the new girl thinks is degrading. When Adam runs to Hannah’s rescue, it is sad and sweet, but best of all, understandable.

Jessa is still M.I.A. and I am fine with that.

SIDEBAR

Season 2 was just not as good as the first season, but still a great and innovative show. I really appreciate the dialogues we are having because of it- Namely the fallout following the episode with Patrick Wilson, where Hannah has a brief affair with a “super-hot” successful man. I read a few articles reacting to that episode, and they were... enlightening. What type of man is an “appropriate” partner for Hannah/Lena Dunham? Well, according to many, many bloggers, Patrick is way too attractive and wonderful for either Lena or the character she plays because, obviously, she is not beautiful. It was so unrealistic! Hopefully the viewers that took that message away from the episode, will someday realize that the joke in Girls is on them.

Another highlight of the season for me was the Cocaine episode. I LOL’d more than once, and that is not a common occurrence. Girls can be many things done very well, but I do especially enjoy when it chooses to be hilarious.

Anyway, it is at least an interesting show even when it is not entertaining. So what if this season was only entertaining half of the time? That’s okay. Though I prefer last season, I do still admire Girls. I hope it continues to at least be interesting.

Zero Dark Thirty- Not Just An Action Movie You Already Know The End To

Yeah... don't worry about it being too factual.

Zero Dark Thirty- Not Just An Action Movie You Already Know The End To

Just finished watching Zero Dark Thirty and I was somewhat impressed at how entertaining it was. Towards the end, it gets intense! I’m not sure why the last half hour or so was such a suspenseful experience for me (maybe it was anticipation?) but it was just that.

Kind of interesting to make a Hollywood film about a real-life event that took place less than two years ago, but I think this risk works out. Oftentimes people shy away from recent real-life subject matter because it is assumed the public wants escapism. I guess this film proves that the average moviegoer is open to a film about real-life events- as long as they have a happy (I guess?) ending.

It is a story that builds, so don’t expect your heart to race for about 2 hours of the 2:37 runtime. There were a few torture scenes that made me feel very desensitized when I found myself thinking: why am I kind of bored right now? Yes, it does drag a little at some points, but it's going somewhere good, don’t worry.

Zero Dark Thirty is up for five Academy Awards this year: Best Picture, Best Actress (Jessica Chastain), Best Original Screenplay, Best Sound Editing, and Best Film Editing. So in honor of the antiquated, superbly uncool television event that is the Academy Awards, let’s evaluate the film by its award categories.

*I still haven’t watched all of the nominees, so be forewarned- speculation ahead.

Best Picture- I hope I like one of the other nominees better. It’s an entertaining film to be sure, but I don’t feel affected by it too much. It’s not too groundbreaking, other than being a success story for films with recent subject matter. I really hope I like something better, but I’m not upset that it’s nominated, so that’s cool.

Best Actress- I like Jessica Chastain for some reason. I’ve only seen her in movies that I didn’t  like too much (Take Shelter, Tree of Life), so she must have been really good enough in them. I think she’s rather talented and I think she’s going to make me really happy one day. Her screen presence is apparent in this movie as well, but I don’t think the character she plays is deserving. Her character seems very manufactured. Hollywood does have a hard time making complex female characters, so naturally we are given the stereotypical tough chick in place of a real person. The role should not interesting enough to be the role that Chastain wins for. Maybe someday she’ll win her Oscar though.

Best Original Screenplay- This one did upset me a little. Why do the highest officials in the CIA swear so much? That is a very unprofessional environment, and I sincerely hope they are able to conduct themselves in a more mature way. I’m pretty sure Chastain’s character harrasses her way to the top, and I’m also pretty sure that technique doesn’t work in reality. It is an interesting story, but not because of the writing. The writing was definitely a weak point, maybe THE weak point of the film. It succeeds in spite of ridiculous characters and ridiculous dialogue. Not a fan.

Film and Sound Editing- I’m not as invested in these areas, but I think it could win in both of those categories. Like I said, it was downright suspenseful leading up to the climax, and that is probably due to the editing (both film and sound) getting in my head. Kudos, hope you win there Zero!

Sidenote-Prepare yourself to be distracted by the side actors as well. I spotted Lord Blackwell from Sherlock Holmes (real name Mark Strong apparently), Pete from The League (Mark Duplass), Andy from Parks and Recreation (Chris Pratt), and James Gandolfini. None of these actors did a bad job really, but I found their presence somewhat distracting. For instance, Andy is a badass Navy Seal instead of the loveable dope he plays on Parks and Rec. Very confusing.

ZDT Casting agent : "He does feel comfortable in water... Navy Seal!"

I liked it.
+ Entertaining, has some great scenes, tells a great story.
- Has some annoying flaws and can be a tad boring.
3.5 out of 5 stars sounds about right.

Tarantino's Unabashed Indulgence in Django Unchained

Oh Jamie Foxx, you're sooo cool... (sarcasm)

Django Unchained  WAS my most anticipated movie of 2012. Quentin Tarantino has directed some of my favorite movies (Kill Bill Vol.1 and 2, Pulp Fiction, Jackie Brown) and written some of my favorite screenplays (see above), and yes, all of his work is indulgent. He is a lover of homage, and part of the fun of his films is being able to feel how much fun he had making them. A Tarantino film is always a unique experience.

Django Unchained is definitely unique- no other filmmaker would be able to get away with making and distributing this film in wide release.

Django is a western that takes place in the South, and the hero is a slave named Django. He is not a terribly believable or likeable character. He comes off as modern-day cocky Jamie Foxx, trying his best to look cool and be tough. Jamie Foxx plays Jamie Foxx thinking he’s the hero in an “important” action film. This made me really not like Jamie Foxx, if you can tell.

Django is rescued and subsequently freed by a German bounty hunter named Schultz, played by Christoph Waltz (in a distant second for his best Tarantino role). Django has a wife that coincidentally speaks German, and is conveniently named Broomhilda Von Shaft. After a successful partnership and growing mutual respect, Schultz agrees to help Django find her. During the winter months, the duo meet or murder many'a white folk with bounties on their heads, and they set out to find Broomhilda at the spring thaw.

Here is where the movie takes a turn for the worse. Django and Schultz hatch an elaborate to buy Broomhilda from her current owner Calvin Candie (as played by Leonardo DiCaprio). For some reason, they think they should to pretend to be willing to pay “a ridiculous sum” for an expensive mandingo fighter. When they are at "Candyland" looking at the fighters, they can negotiate to purchase Broomhilda for a fair price in a seemingly casual side deal. Then presumably, they will cancel their bid for the mandingo fighter, and leave with a fairly priced Broomhilda. Why not just save time and energy and just purchase Broomhilda at a ridiculous sum relative to her? I have no idea. Maybe they really are just that cheap. Anyway, this deception does get them in trouble, and action scenes ensue.

Django runs 2 hours and 45 minutes long, but the time flies by. For better or worse, it is action-packed and full of wacky racist characters. It has its moments of levity to be sure, and between these moments of levity are gruesome scenes of horrifying racism. It’s an odd mix. Tarantino has always had very dark humor in his films, but Django takes this to a new level. For me, I found it hard to chuckle at Schultz’s wit when a slave was torn apart by dogs minutes earlier. Slightly distracting, and more on this later.

Haha they can't see through their masks!/ OH MY GOD

Tarantino’s most recent films: Kill Bill, Death Proof, Inglourious Basterds, and Django Unchained have been revenge fantasies. I’m not sure what’s going on there, but I’m guessing it is just because revenge can be really satisfying to watch sometimes. So what makes Django not nearly as much fun and far less satisfying than the others?

1. Characters. Well first of all, as I mentioned before, Django/ Jamie Foxx isn’t really likeable. We see that he loves his wife as well as Schultz, but we don’t really see any positive qualities beyond this. He takes naturally to murder, even quipping at one point “Kill white folks and get paid for it? What’s not to like?” I understand where he is coming from, as he has been abused by white people all his life, but it’s not really an endearing attitude toward humanity. Maybe a different actor could have made it endearing, but Jamie Foxx does not.

Furthermore, when he plays a black slaver to earn Candie’s trust, it is his most convincing performance in the film. He watches atrocity after atrocity be inflicted on black slaves and he doesn’t bat an eye. He throws a man and his horse to the ground when they say something racist to him- granted I like horses, so I’m a little sensitive to horse violence- but this was too far! He just doesn’t seem to be a good guy.

His wife is the typical damsel in distress, and an annoyingly weak character. She doesn’t have many lines, but in her little bit of screen time she does manage to ruin Schultz and Django’s plan. We root for Django and Broomhilda because the people they are revenging against are so evil, not because we really care about their characters.

Kind of all she does in 2 in a half hours. Go feminism.

We do kind of care about Schultz, but his character goes down the tubes too. His plan to rescue Broomhilda seems completely idiotic and unnecessary. When the plan goes wrong, he reacts in a completely idiotic and unnecessary way, (**SPOILER AHEAD**) which causes himself to be killed, Django captured and Broomhilda not to be freed. So he also becomes a really annoyingly brash and stupid character.

I do want to give some props to Leonardo DiCaprio (Calvin Candie) and Don Johnson (Big Daddy) and the great Samuel L. Jackson (Stephen) for the amazing acting that led to some awesomely hateable villains. Best part of the film to be sure. See the film for villains, if nothing else.

Is it the the goatee, the cigarette or the hammer that gives the evil away?

2. The Music. THE MUSIC IS SOOOO ANNOYING. There is so much music, and so many different genres. It becomes horribly distracting by the end. We have to watch Django/Jamie Foxx shooting people to his own rap song.

Sidebar: I think this movie really suffered from the Jamie Foxx-Quentin Tarantino friendship. Jamie Foxx got to look as cool and invulnerable as he wanted, and Quentin went unchecked with horrible distracting music and meaningless references. Good collaborations have checks and balances you guys!

3. It gets to the point of too disturbing and too light to be that disturbing. We see a man ripped apart by dogs. We see two slaves forced to fight to the death. Now, all of Tarantino’s films have disturbing elements to them, but these scenes trump watching a car accident or a shooting. They are gruesome scenes, and maybe there are just some things that I’m not desensitized to seeing on screen yet, but it was too gruesome to be fully enjoyable. Well then again, I have enjoyed some really gruesome movies.. so hmm, let me rephrase: the gap between the high points of pure comedy and the low points of pure horror was immense, and this made the tone too inconsistent and confusing.

Not surprisingly, Django has created quite a bit controversy. Personally, I’m not sure whether to applaud it or shake my head. We hear the N-word countless times in the film, and I suppose that I appreciate the fact that Tarantino tried to stay authentic. He doesn’t shy away from the horrors of slavery, but he does seem to use it for shock value, and that is probably worse. I’ve heard the film regarded as being a product of white man’s guilt. I’ve heard it criticized for making the white man out to be the devil. It’s been called racist for the brutality against black people. It’s been called racist for the brutality against countless white racist hillbillies.

(Actually, I kind of understand that criticism, because if the shoe was on the other foot, and someone had the idea for a film about a white man seeking revenge on racist black people, that film REALLY would have never gotten made... in 2012. We do have Birth of a Nation, but I hope we as a nation can surpass that insanity)

America: We don't know what is racist unless it is Birth of a Nation obvious.

The ethics of this film could be and probably will be, argued about for years to come. Django earns some extra points from me there. Discussion is the best!

So I will give it this, Django Unchained is an interesting movie, or at least it brings up interesting issues. I’m happy I saw it, though I was ultimately very disappointed. It is by far my least favorite Tarantino flick, but that’s not saying much in itself because I fully loved all of his other films (besides Death Proof that took some time, and I could only bring myself to like it).

Worth seeing, kind of interesting, kind of annoying. I’d give it 2.5/5 stars.

If you want a second opinion, here is an interesting article that completely disagrees with me:

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/bob-cesca/django-unchained-movie-of-year_b_2458521.html

The Very Belated 2012 Celebrity Halloween Costume Post

2012 was a very disappointing year in celebrity Halloween costumes. Where was the creativity? I'll take funny too. Any awesome detail even? Nope.

Anyway, here's the best of the worst year in Halloween costumes:

1. Hilary Duff in Dia de los Muertos garb- Kind of a unique idea, and she commits! I like the hair, the makeup...yeah. I don't have too much to say here, just one of my favorites from a lame year.

2. Deryk Wibley and gf ( I guess?)- Dressing up as your ex, then making your current gf dress up as the ex's current fiance... That would normally be kind of a dick move, but when your ex is the ridiculous Avril Lavigne and her current fiance is Chad Kroeger of Nickelback, this is acceptable. And hilarious.

3. Emanuelle Chiquri's Random (?) Friend- Unicorns are adorable. I might be one next Halloween if I give up on being an X-men woman, possibly Storm. I like wigs.

4. Lauren Conrad as Mary Poppins- wholesome, adorable and surprisingly uncommon. She even managed to skank it up a very tiny bit. I approve.












Basically everyone else you have of in Hollywood was something boring, half-assed or unpleasantly confusing. There were a few exceptionally bad costumes. For example, Chris Brown and his posse were members of Taliban  Funny, funny joke. You so clever and edgy? I CAN'T with that. Alessandra Ambrosio dressed up as a sexy soldier too closely resembling a Nazi  I do not feel the need to post pictures of these instances. But even the queen of Halloween herself, Heidi Klum, had a not-awesome costume. She is usually so all-out at her Halloween parties that even when the costume idea isn't that cool, the costume itself is INCREDIBLY cool. Here is this year's misstep:

Why do you do this to me Heidi Klum? It looks... cheap. Egyptian goddess is such a great starting point! WTF is up with those wings? Did her children help her cut them? Either way, I am offended. She even had an extra few months after she cancelled her Halloween party to class it up, nope. No changes. She better make up for this with the best costume ever Halloween 2013! I want to forgive. Example of a model dressing up as Cleopatra done right:

Kinda cool right? Tsk tsk Heidi.

Lincoln Is... Better Than The Average Award Show Fodder

Being an American history drama about American hero Abraham Lincoln, directed by Steven Spielberg and starring Daniel Day Lewis, it is no surprise that Lincoln has 12 nominations in the 2012 Academy Awards. The film was tailor-made to be an award show behemoth! However, the Academy is comprised of mostly elderly white males, therefore, the Academy is comprised of Lincoln’s  prime demographic. The award shows of today are hardly indicators of true film excellence, instead they indicators of a film’s appeal to elderly white males. That being said, if the Academy chooses to bestow Lincoln some prestigious accolades, I won’t be entirely disappointed. There is some greatness in this film.

The film takes places over two months, focusing on Lincoln’s efforts to pass the 13th Amendment which would abolish slavery. He is facing a bitterly divided Congress and passage of any bill would be difficult, but this issue divides even his own party. He is forced to walk a political tightrope, and this makes for an interesting tale of political drama.

The acting is superb. Daniel Day Lewis is surprisingly convincing as one of the most famous figures in American history. I know it’s DDL, so perhaps I should not have been so surprised, but Abraham Lincoln would naturally be a daunting task. He’s not even American, but he does a great Lincoln. The other standout for me performance-wise was Lee Pace as the outspoken Democrat and Confederate sympathizer Congressman Wood. It is not a likable character, and he doesn’t have that much screen-time, but he commits so hard. His time on the Congress floor is visually compelling and very charismatic- it is really fun to watch him play the villain.

The visuals are also pretty impressive. I’m no history major, so just based on looks and not necessarily historical accuracy, the sets and costumes are incredible.

The acting and the story are the strength of this film, and for me, this was enough to overcome the many annoying weaknesses. Spielberg has a history of making his characters superhuman forces of benevolence, and Lincoln is no exception. In this film, the Civil War was simply good versus evil. Of course slavery was evil, but the Civil War wasn’t just about slavery. It was about a fundamental change in the economy of the South. Southerners weren’t simply a group of racists looking for an outlet to exact their hatred, they were afraid of the change that an end to slavery would mean. There is no complexity to the issue in Lincoln, half of the country was made up of evil racists. Abraham Lincoln was an angel, most characters even seem to treat him as such. Everything he says is “wise”. He isn’t a human character, and he fighting for good in a good versus evil story. It is not deep. There are no issues to work through. For me, the best of films do stay in your thoughts and challenge you after you leave the theater. Lincoln is not one of these films.

Yes, Lincoln is the stereotypical modern award-winning film, but it has value. It is deserving of awards in some areas, and I didn’t hate it. It is well-made, entertaining to watch and definitely easier to watch than most of the universally acclaimed historical dramas. As always, keep expectations low and you might just enjoy it. I’d give it... 3 out of 5 stars. Not bad!