Capote

So I showed Capote at the Evans tonight. I knew essen­tial­ly noth­ing about the man before I watched the movie. Nor­mal­ly I have a hard time watch­ing a show where the main char­ac­ter is unsym­pa­thet­ic, but some­how this show was quite com­pelling. Philip Sey­mour Hoff­man did a fan­tas­tic job in his role as Tru­man Capote.
The film’s Capote was a self-serv­ing, loathe­some, manip­u­la­tive lit­tle bas­tard; I can’t speak to the real, flesh-and-blood ver­sion, because like I said, I knew basi­cal­ly squat about him going into the film. I sure hope that being a lit­tle turd isn’t a require­ment to be an author. I don’t think I could live with myself.

Also fas­ci­nat­ing is the fact that part of it was shot on loca­tion here in Man­i­to­ba. I was sur­prised to dis­cov­er that lit­tle fac­toid, but in hind­sight, I should­n’t have been. After all, what’s flat­ter than Kansas (where about two-thirds of the movie took place)? That’s right: Manitoba.

On the whole, it did­n’t suck. But I don’t know if I could watch it again. It’s not the grat­ing voice; I got used to that fair­ly ear­ly on. It’s the way Capote uses every­one and every­thing around him, and then denies doing it, even to him­self. There’s a scene, late in the film, where he breaks down and cries, but after every­thing that led up to that point, I had to won­der if they were real tears or if he was try­ing to get some­thing from some­one with them.

Brief movie reviews

In the last week and a half I’ve seen two movies, Thumb­suck­er and The Chron­i­cles of Nar­nia: The Lion, the Witch and the Wardrobe. What did I think of them? Well, Thumb­suck­er was an ado­les­cent-angst movie that proved to me that while Keanu Reeves may not be a bril­liant thes­pi­an, at least he can act like some­one oth­er than Ted Theodore Logan. Also, just because you fill a movie with Big Names does­n’t mean it’s going to be great. The film was solid­ly OK in my book, though a cou­ple of the char­ac­ters were full-out unsym­pa­thet­ic and the teenage hero gets toyed with by more than a cou­ple of peo­ple. It was a decent film, but I don’t know if I’d watch it again.Narnia was well-done, with some stun­ning visu­als and great act­ing, espe­cial­ly from the kids that went through the look­ing-glass wardrobe into the Oth­er World. The ani­mals were all bril­liant­ly done, and ran the gamut from cute and cud­dly to regal to down­right spooky. The White Witch (played by Til­da Swin­ton, who was also the moth­er in Thumb­suck­er) was cold and cru­el. There were moments when I could tell that it was based on a chil­drens’ book, moments where things went a lit­tle too eas­i­ly or took a lit­tle too much on faith for my taste, but it was still a good, sol­id movie. I’d prob­a­bly watch it again.My friend Kevin has a sim­ple bina­ry scale for movies: It sucked or It did­n’t suck. Nei­ther of these two movies sucked, though Thumb­suck­er had me con­cerned for a while there.

Look­ing for­ward now to the new Under­world film. I just hope I’m not expect­ing too much from it…

Why can’t they make good SF movies?

So last night I got an email from a friend of mine (let’s call him Kevin, since that’s his name):

Sub­ject: Aeon Flux

I knew some peo­ple might not like it. But this review is ridiculous:

It was so uncom­fort­able to watch this film, I felt like I was des­per­ate­ly hold­ing back a bout of extreme diar­rhea while hav­ing din­ner with my girlfriend’s folks for the first time. While the feel­ing kept ebbing and flow­ing, the pain nev­er quite left. It was just bet­ter to grit my teeth and clench down, pray­ing for an end to the night.

-rot­ten tomatoes

Soo Care for the mati­nee tomorrow?

And so we went, because, hey, it’s got to be bet­ter than diar­rhea. No, wait, extreme diarrhea.

It was bet­ter. It was cer­tain­ly not great, but it was short of stom­ach-churn­ing­ly bad, too.

The good: The spe­cial effects. Some of the music. Some of the per­for­mances (with a caveat of “they did what they could with what they were giv­en”). The one girl with four hands (though it’s not the first time I’ve heard of it, it’s the first time I’ve seen it con­vinc­ing­ly done in a film (see “spe­cial effects”)).

The bad: Well, the script. The art­sy-fart­sy shots at times. The lame attempts at humour (there was only one line that made me laugh). The math (two exam­ples: we’re told right at the out­set that 99% of Earth­’s pop­u­la­tion were killed by a virus, and the “remain­ing 5 mil­lion peo­ple” formed a city. Um, 1% of 6+billion is more like 60 mil­lion than 5 mil­lion; and there is a point where we’re told that 400 years is equal to 7 gen­er­a­tions. I thought a human gen­er­a­tion was about 20–25 years, so 7 gen­er­a­tions is less than 200 years, tops).

Watch­ing the cred­its, I was struck by the thought that Pete Postlet­whaite and Frances McDor­mand prob­a­bly won’t be putting this one on their resumés.

I’m such a curmudgeon.