Tess of the d'Urbervilles

This is a mini-series of a book written by Tomas Hardy.

It was on PBS tonight as a Masterpiece Classic.

I, however, evidently don't read enough classics.


I have always trusted PBS. I have rarely been disappointed.


But...I shall never watch a series based on a classic book without reading the book summary again.


The author's name should have been a red flag for me. Thomas Hardy is only followed by Dickens when it comes to tragic stories.

I've only read one of Hardy's stories and it still haunts me to this day.

Hardy breaks your heart.

I think I'll skip part two (and part three if there is one.)

If you like dramas where things go from bad to worse, if you love watching injustices, this is the movie for you. The movie, like all Masterpiece series, is very good. Scenery and costuming and the way the cloud shadows move across the landscape.

Acting is good. I enjoyed watching the actress, what's-her-name, because she looks like a younger version of the girl that plays Lisbon the boss of the Mentalist.Don't watch it if you're alone and depressed and have no gun. On the other hand maybe it's good for manic depressives to see someone worse off than they are. I don't know.





I, for one, like sad stories if they end up happy not the other way around. I'm funny that way.

I'm glad I read the synopsis and also sad because I'll never forget the ending anyway.

Thanks Wikipedia, for nothing.

WHERE HAVE I BEEN?

Okay. I'm trying this new formatting for blogspot. I like change but I'm treading water here keeping up with technological advances.

Where have I been?

I truly have been watching movies. Netflix DVD's and streamed movies to my computer.

Right now I've rented enough Poirot movies and am now hooked on Midsomer Murders. It's a British detective series. I like British mysteries. There is less violence...the coppers don't hit, yell or shoot people. They don't show the gory details of the murders. And they actually have numerous suspects with motives, give clues, toss in red-herrings, and have sympathetic characters. Midsomer Murders with Chief Inspector Barnaby don't tell stories of evil, they're just detective stories.

I was going to watch the PD James series but some of the movies are out of sync on streaming and that is so frustrating to see lips move and not hear what they said for several seconds later. It's amazing how dependent my hearing is on vision...lip reading.

I have nothing else to add. I hope all of you are missing me. 

I actually went to a movie theater. Had to see the last Harry Potter movie. And get the taste of movie theater popcorn.

Reminder: I'm still waiting for a new Matthew Goode movie. (SIGH) 

Hey! I totally love this new formatting. Pick your font, color, and size. Can I pick young, thin and taller, too?

Gattaca

I really appreciate my local library for stocking old movies. I still have a VHS player which increases my viewing variety. They'll soon be obsolete and, sadly, filling landfills.)

I watched a really really old movie (well, old as Hollywood goes) Gattaca from 1997, staring Ethan Hawke and Uma Thurman.

The movie was eerie. That seems to have made it unique...I think.

I enjoyed the cinematography. It was a bit monotonous but I think that was one of the points.

I wanted to see more of Jude Law. He did well but not enough of him.

It was amazing that the casting crew found children and teens that resembled Vincent and Anton so well. (I often suspect them of casting the stars' children as their younger versions. But seldom since most natural children don't resemble their parents at all.)

Anyway, the movie was a milder form of science fiction--what Asimov liked to call sci-fi, what I call fake science fiction. (I suspect he was referring to a a science fiction story written by a non-science fiction writer. I could be wrong about Gattaca though.)

The plot was secondary to the visual scenes. A good deal of it was left open to interpretation...like what planet were they on? Was that really the sun or a simulation of a sunrise? And how come nobody recognized that Hawke's Jerome was wearing contact lenses? Did they just help him see clearly or did they alter his eye color?

Anyway, if you like mystifying sci-fi and moderately old movies from 1990's you might like it.

It's not bad (regardless of the negative viewer comments I read on the Internet. I don't know what the critics said, but who cares?

Revenge?

I'm very disturbed that movies and even TV shows are doing themes and plots showing revenge as a good idea.

That's scary. Encouraging people to take the law into their own hands is seriously wrong. Killing someone who killed a friend or family member of yours makes you exactly like the person who did the killing in the first place. Worse, since revenge includes hate.

A hero of a movie going after the cops and judge that put him in prison for something he didn't do, it just proves prison is where he belongs. DUH

Why would revenge be worth going to prison and then being killed yourself in revenge be a good idea?

The ignorance of some of the human race never fails to amaze me (or sadden and disgust me.) I'm trying hard not to judge people, but hell...when did naive come to mean stupid?


Aren't gangs bad enough with their revenge killings? Young people recruited into gangs, younger children of rival gang members plus innocent by-standers are getting killed for no reason other than a false idea that violence is a fun game.

Let's not add the general population to revenge killings.

The revenge I do approve of is honest law enforcement clapping handcuffs on a bad guy and tossing him into jail for trial. I do believe in the legal system including it's flaws. Some bad guys do get away without punishment and some innocent people get locked up, but by-passing the whole system is not the way to fight injustice.

Justice can sometimes be unjust. But we need to get rid of the idea that revenge is a good idea. One person or a gang of people do not have the right to decide how justice should be carried out.

I never used to believe in "evil", thinking it was just an "absence of good". Now I'm pretty sure evil exists and it's not just wrong, illegal, or bad choices. It's...well...it's evil.

To stop evil, stop thinking violent revenge is a fine idea.

And stop watching those damn movies and television shows based on revenge.

Thank you.

New Matthew Goode Movies?

IMDb listed four future movies for Matthew Goode in starring or co-starring roles. I'm anxiously awaiting their airing on the big screen. Or on Netflix (DVD.)

Hopefully they will actually make these movies not just plan to make them.

The reason I'm questioning it is because some of the future movies that IMDb listed for Gerard Butler never materialized. Though it's hardly IMDb's fault. I waited for those movies since I was totally in love with Gerry before I abandoned him for Matthew Goode.

Movie stars really do need to make movies now and then or people will forget them.

By the way, there really is a difference between actors and movie stars.

I just love that funny story George Hamilton told about himself. He was walking some place--maybe the beach?--and a little girl said, "Hey. You're that actor." George laughed and said, "I'm not an actor, I'm a movie star!"

Matthew is has evolved into an amazing actor. He doesn't merely play a role, he becomes a character. Watch The Lookout or Watchmen. As I've said before about Leap Year, I still can't believe Declan is really Matthew Goode. He's that good.

I sure wish they'd hurry up and release Burning Man. I've heard from other fans through this blog that it was filmed in Australia. I assume it's a British movie. It's not about THE burning man (like the big straw thing they lit on fire in ancient times -- the wicker man and/or Zozobra) but about a guy that owns a diner. I hope he doesn't really burn the hamburgers despite them name (where did they get that name anyway?) This guy has a daughter which is good since Matthew now has a real daughter and knows how a father ought to behave (One would hope.) (Wait, I just found out it's a son in the movie. Same difference. I also think he plays a broken-hearted man which is usually the usual for Goode movies.

Matthew played a pub & restaurant owner. He was a minor cheft chef in Leap Year. Maybe that's why they hired him for Burning Man. He looks good with a knife. He also had a knife in The Lookout, I believe. For different reasons.

Burning Man may just jump to DVD in the United States and never open in theaters here--the way some of Gerry Butler's movies did. (Dear Frankie, Shattered/Butterfly on a Wheel.)

DVD's are okay with me. I can watch a DVD over and over as many times as I want. I must have seen Leap Year 100 or 150 times.

I often exaggerate to make a point, a funny point.

I think actors like Matthew and movie stars like Gerry ought to stick to the British movie industry. American movies, especially romantic comedies, are so immature and well... I hate to say it, bad. (Though Lear Year was NOT bad. It was a movie you either loved or hated. Not many people ever said "Oh, it was ok.")

A stupid romantic comedy can ruin someones career. Look what happened to Gerry. That was quite a step down from 300 to dumb comedies. I won't mention those, you know which ones.

I'm glad Chasing Liberty didn't nip Matthew's career in the bud. It was a practice movie. A long screen test. Those don't count as real movies. I can forgive him for that one since he made up for it in Imagine Me and You where he played a real person. Well done.

Here's the movies IMDb lists on their Matthew Goode page:

2011 Burning Man (post-production)

2012 Overdrive (pre-production)

2012 Stoker (pre-production)

2013 Crooked House (pre-production)

Yipee and hurry, hurry.

Dark Matter

I checked Dark Matter out of my local library and slipped it in the DVD player. I had an idea (from the cover) that it was a mystery or a crime solving story.

When I realized it wasn't and being puzzled, I paused it and looked it up on IMDb.

Dark Matter staring Liu Ye, Aidan Quinn & Meryl Streep, was loosely based on the graduate student that flipped out a number of years ago and opened fire on several of his classmates and professors.

I researched the true story behind it...and then how the movie differed as to character and motive development and decided I didn't like the true story or where the movie headed with it.

I stopped the DVD player, put the DVD back in the case and returned it to the library without taking another look. (It's nice we don't have to rewind DVDs.)

I can't handle difficult plots (based on true incidents or otherwise) that bring out the unfairness and/or tragedy of human life in a too realistic way.

I don't necessarily want everything to be funny, happy, light and sugary. But this just wasn't my "cup of tea" even though it's about some subjects I do like: academia and astronomy.

[Aside: Don't ask me about that stuff. I was under the mistaken impression that A Beautiful Mind was science fiction. Imagine my shock when it really wasn't spies chasing John Nash around campus.]

Even if stories about pain and/or tragedy are not for me, you can still watch DM and decide for yourself. This might be one of the good movies. It's good acting, good script, fascinating and classy. Great music, too.

Perhaps you might decide it's NOT about pain or tragedy.

We don't all have to like the same cup of tea (or movies). Earl Grey?

The Young Visiters

Click on title above for particulars about this movie.

This felt like a strange movie to me. It wasn't bad, but I'm stumped what to say good about it. But being a highly wordy person, I will try.

To start, it's not like any other movie I've seen (I skipped the Johnny Depp version of Alice in Wonderland as too bizarre for me. And too animated.) Visiters was remotely similar, I suppose, but not intended as bizarre. More in the cute category.

Jim Broadbent pays the main character and since he is in every other British movie he's evidently a big star. It also stars Hugh Laurie (of House fame), Lyndsey Marshal who's fabulous, and Bill Nighy who is also magnificent as a character actor--I hardly recognized him, though I did in the Pirates movies (joking,of course.)

It's refreshing to see films starring normal-looking people instead of beautiful-eyed, glistening-toothed, muscular hero-actors young enough to be my grandsons. (Except Miss Marshal who's pretty and by no means too old to be my granddaughter. And her costumes and acting weren't bad either.)

I saw Broadbent recently as title character in Longford. Everyone was good and he was exceptionally good. He probably won some sort of award for it.

Visiters was based on a book written by 9-year old Daisy Ashford. It has all the qualities of romance and royalty (characters, settings and costumes) as understood by a nine-year old.

This circumstance creates a strange humor--maybe not laugh-out-loud funny, but witty humor with a large dose of silliness we have come to know and love (?) in British movies (think of Hyacinth Bucket for example.)

If you want a break from inane American TV sitcoms, computer-graphics or severely obscure feature length films, rent Visiters. It's not exactly The Tudors, but very British and refreshingly different than the usual fare dished up to American viewers--meaning viewers who still possess a sense of humor not the comatose ones who can stick to their reruns of WWF SmackDown and My Name is Earl.

PS: I didn't misspell Visiters. It was Daisy's way. In addition, it's not a kid-movie. It's a look at the world through the eyes of a child and would be baffling to a child that already sees the world like that.

SHADOW OF THE VAMPIRE

Click title above for a list of awards and wins for this movie and cast.

Beaucoup beaucoup awards. That's French for "mucho" or "a lot" in English.

I don't know how I missed seeing this movie up until now. It hit the theaters January 1, 2001.

It's a good movie. Everyone was great. John Malkovich has a little trouble with accents but it was easy to overlook them.

Willem Dafoe was unbelievably good considering most people haven't got a clue who he is. His costume and make-up were so well done no one would recognize him anyway.

I don't know why Dafoe was nominated and won Academy award for that. He clearly stole the show. (Maybe Malkovich's agent was better at contracts.)

The movie was clearly a fantasy and in no way "horror" genre. It wasn't exactly a drama either.

In fact, it probably doesn't fit any category other than weird. It stands alone. This is true, take my word for it.

There are some funny elements undoubtedly designed to make fun of the original movie: A German silent film in 1922 called Nosferatu-Eine Symphonie des Grauens (Nosferatu-a Symphony of Horror). It was the movie that this movie was about filming it. Or however you say that. (English teacher please forgive me. I really WAS listening.)

See it for yourself. I can't figure out what else to say about it other than I liked it.

La Vie en Rose

I haven't been writing about movies lately. Frankly I finally feel recovered from my recent illness, spine and heart surgeries and bad bouts of depression (not to mention dealing with grief over the death of my husband of 20+ years.) All occurring all in the space of the last 3 years. Whew.

Since I am recovered (except for occasional pain in my hip and walking with a cane) I feel restored to nearly full mobility (and learning to carry things with one hand--quite a challenge).

Being well again means I've been busy!

Since I'm busier and more active I just haven't taken the time to write/blog. When I'm not spending time with friends (usually eating out), I study, knit, cook, spend time with my dog (who seems just as peppy in the morning as I do and just as creaky and stiff in the evening), I also squeeze in time to read mysteries and watch movies.

I've been watching my way through Masterpiece PBS series--Marple, Poirot, Inspector Lynley. (Anxious for second season of Sherlock.)
______________________________________________

Last night I watched the DVD of La Vie en Rose. I started it rather late and it wasn't over until midnight, but I didn't miss one second of it. (And of course I read it since it was in French with English subtitles.)

The fact that it was in French with subtitles faded from my awareness as I fell deeper and deeper into the story and the movie. It was one of those movies where I suspend reality and am unaware of my surroundings and myself.

What can I say about this movie that has not already been said? It won numerous awards the world over especially for the lead Marion Cotillard. *See below. (She has most recently appeared in Inception with Leonardo DiCaprio.)

It was ... I don't know. It's beyond description. A ton of praise cannot be adequate.

It was BEAUTIFUL. At the end I felt awe and thankfulness that I was able to experience it.

Edith Piaf's life was full of difficulties and heart breaking events but done in such a way as to inspire endearment and gratitude for ones own life. You'll want to turn your life into a song.

I recommend this movie to everyone over the age of 12 and under the age of 110.

Even if you know the life story of Edith Piaf and the entire plot of the movie in advance, it is still a GOOD GOOD movie.

The songs were fabulous. I can see why Piaf's singing was so beloved. She must have held audiences enthralled. The singing, though not in Piaf's voice, was wonderfully done.

The acting was beyond good especially for the lead Marion Cotillard. I could not tear my eyes away from her while she was "singing." It was exceptionally amazing.

This movie will never fade away. It'll be a classic.

Please do watch it. Watch it. Watch it. Watch it.

P.S. I'm not sure if I saw whatever they call "Extended Version" or not. But it's good no matter what, if nothing more than the songs and performance of Cotillard.

*Marion Cotillard won seven Best Actress Awards for her portrayal of Édith Piaf in La Vie en Rose:
The Academy Award for Best Actress in a Leading Role
The Golden Globe for Best Actress in a Leading Role, Motion Picture (musical or comedy)
The Prix Lumière for Best Actress
The Golden Space Needle Award for Best Actress in a Leading Role at the 2007 Seattle International Film Festival
The BAFTA Award for Best Actress in a Leading Role
The César Award for Best Actress in a Leading Role
The Czech Lion Award for Best Actress in a Leading Role
info from Wikipedia

La Vie en Rose (2007)
The life story of singer Édith Piaf.
Director: Olivier Dahan, Writers: Olivier Dahan, Isabelle Sobelman
Stars: Marion Cotillard, Sylvie Testud and Pascal Greggory

Lots of Movie, Lots of Opinions

I have been watching old movies. (So I can advise people what movies to stream or order from Netflix, or buy if they're rich enough and love movies as much as I do and love tossing away money for pleasure rather than saving for they're old age.

I will mention the movies/my opinions when I have time (in between watching movies and thinking.)

Laterz

THE SOCIAL NETWORK

Click on title of the movie to link to IMDb (Internet Movie Database)



My latest rental from Netflix: The Social Network about the guy(s) that invented Facebook. True story or as true as you can get from Hollywood.

It was done in flashbacks (I think) during the court cases where a bunch of guys were suing the dude that made millions of dollars on the idea. (He's now the youngest billionaire in the country. Or maybe the world.)

The movie was mostly talking. A lot of it was in computer programming jargon. But that wasn't really important to the plot so you can tune out the details of that unless you actually understand it. (It might be humorous for all I know.)

The movie was basically a bunch of computer nerds and a couple of jocks, all talking way too fast and getting drunk.

I did get the feel of what it's like on a modern college campus. Harvard wasn't exactly like the college in Animal House but close. (Wasn't Animal House a true story too? I seem to remember I was at that college?)

I got the feel of what a young people's party constitutes now-a-days. It's probably similar to when I went to college. But I was drunk and don't actually remember.

I found this movie to be a study of a guy who didn't have a clue about life and finally realized he was a minor jerk who traded in friends for making money.

It wasn't a comedy but wasn't really a drama either. I suppose it could be called a docu-drama, whatever that is.)

My favorite line: the college guys who thought Mark Whatever stole their idea were discussing whether to sue the guy or beat him up. One of the jocks in the debate said they didn't need to get the Sopranos to beat him up. "We can do that ourselves. I'm 6 foot 5, two-hundred and twenty, and there's TWO of me." He was a twin. (Heck, I spoiled the only funny thing in the movie. Sorry.)

The Social Network was okay, but not great, maybe one notch above The King's Speech but way below Avatar. It was aimed at a specific audience (and much younger than me.)

If you find stories about computer programming exciting, go for it.

Movies and Books

I'm doing something, rather two somethings, that I just LOVE to do (especially since I'm old & widowed. Think about it.) I'm reading books and watching movies.

I just finished a wonderfully long biography of Julia Child Appetite for Life and the "last" Matthew Goode movie my list.

It was actually Matthew's first movie--South from Granada, a 1920's memoir by author Gerald Brenan. It's a Spanish movie but worth the trouble of reading the subtitles while keeping an eye on the actors and action. There was a delicious scene of a younger Matthew, with golden reddish hair, dancing with his young senorita completely nude. They were both well-endowed. Gotta love those foreign movies.

Now I'm watching my way though Murdoch Mysteries from my local library. They're hour-long Canadian TV series episodes. Good, funny and free. And all the actors and actresses are good-looking with their Victorian clothes and "new-fangled" inventions like portraits/profiles, fingermarks/fingerprints, prototype X-rays and lie-detectors. The episode with the hooded figure that shoots arrows into people, is my favorite so far. I guessed the culprit right away, but it was fun watching Detective Murdoch guess it the same time he took an arrow in his upper arm. (Oops. Is that a spoiler? Sorry.)


Another thing, Canadian shows evidently allow all the actors to speak with their own accents--so you have Canadian, British, Irish, American and some undecipherable accents all in the same show. Unless, of course, they're doing it on purpose and it's not really real.

So. Recently I streamed a movie from Netflix about the romance of George Sand and Franz Liszt. George Sand (her pen name) was evidently a liberated woman who wore pants and smoked cigarettes years before the rest of us, and Liszt was a bit effeminate. They made a perfect match.

"The world will know and understand me someday. But if that day does not arrive, it does not greatly matter. I shall have opened the way for other women." George Sand

George Sand, so they say, was a magnificent writer in her day. So I downloaded her novel Mauprat on my Kindle. Her writing IS good, at least in translation, but it's damn slow and I can only take it in small doses.

Amazing fact: I used to read a book first and then catch the movie. Loved the books but often found the movies lacking. Now, I do the opposite, love a movie and then love the book.

I loved Julie and Julia based on the book by Julie Powell who cooked her way through Julia Child's Mastering the Art of French Cooking and blogged about it. She's now an author. Darn, I wish I'd thought of that first.

I read some reviews on Amazon from people who didn't like this book. I, on the other hand, loved the movie so much that after watching it nearly as many times I did Leap Year, I had to take a look at the book. I downloaded a "sample" on my Kindle. I found her style of writing so funny I just had to get it. So I did. Yay, Kindle, instant gratification.

I guess a lot of people don't get her witty sense of humor. I have that problem too--people don't seem to get my sense of humor. They think I'm serious. And stupid. Or at least weird, which is okay with me. But until they catch up, I'm still going to keep it up. As George said, "The world will know and understand me someday. But if that day does not arrive, it does not greatly matter..."

Julie Powell mentioned her mother's horrified at her choices of where to live. Julie said she once lived in "an adobe in Middle-of-Nowhere, New Mexico."

Now, since I DO live in Middle-of-Nowhere, New Mexico, I got a good laugh-out-loud.

Julie uses a lot of cliches but in new and unexpected ways. Genius.

So, here I am in the middle of nowhere, reading two books, watching movies and old TV series on DVDs in my pajamas. You gotta love being a writer.

Since the weather's warm and sunny now I get outside often to play with the dogs and my grandkids (not necessarily in that order.)

And of course, I blog.

I tried to write for profit once but it cost me money to try to sell the damn books. So now I give them for presents and toss my writing out here in cyberland for free.

Enjoy. There's more where this came from. Toodle-Ooo

SUNSHINE CLEANING

I've been watching movies and not writing about them. So here goes.

I saw Sunshine Cleaning on Netflix streaming a few days ago. It was a 2009 movie opening first at the Sundance Film Festival in 2008.

The movie had closed-captioning but was wide-screen format (with a wide screen computer the characters looked short and wide. Fortunately my eyes can adjust that, making it appear in proportion.)

Main Cast: Amy Adams as Rose Lorkowski, Emily Blunt as Norah Lorkowski, Alan Arkin as Joe Lorkowski, and Mary Lynn Rajskub as Lynn (who also appeared in Julie and Julia with Amy Adams.) Written by Megan Holley. Directed by Christine Jeffs.

I expected a comedy. It was a semi-serious movie with a few laughs. It was a professionally done movie, acting flawless, but the plot was not exciting.

The best part of the movie (for me) was the fact it was filmed in Albuquerque, NM, where I live. I recognized many of the buildings and roads.

However, Jonathan Miller, criminal lawyer and author of Rattlesnake Lawyer mystery series who spoke at SouthWest Writers organization in March, said that NM is so unique and different, a writer has to make NM one of the characters. This was missing in Sunshine Cleaning.

For instancee it had only one Hispanic character who didn't even use the NM accent. I don't know why I included this. No one really cares. I find accents fascinating. As it was a "blue collar" story, maybe I missed something.

It was a "slice of life story" more than plot or even character driven.

It was some what dull but not boring. Watching it is up to you.

Impromptu

I watched this movie via Netflix streaming. I had to watch it on my computer's smaller screen with no closed-captioning. The upside is that close up I can hear and understand everything.

It hardly seems appropriate to watch and talk about movies when there are thousands of people suffering in Japan from the earthquakes, tsunami nuclear power plant explosions, not to mention their lack of homes, water, food and gasoline.

I think an escape from reality isn't all a bad thing. If you can avoid feeling guilty for being so well-off and wasting electricity, it's not "bad" to sit down with a movie for a couple hours instead of constantly being worried about the world situation.

Impromptu is a 1991 movie about the woman writer who used the pen name George Sand and the start of her relationship with the composer Chopin. As with all stories based on real people, we have no idea if it was even remotely historical. It was entertaining.

The acting was good. It starred Judy Davis and Hugh Grant with a good supporting cast which included Mandy Patinkin.

The costumes and accents were also good. I think it's beneficial to the audience when the producers keep the accents from all characters the same. It was a modified English probably spoken by early Americans as influenced by British. The accent used by Chopin was not overly done. None of them tried to do French and Polish. (It was set in France and Sand was French. Chopin was Polish.)

Anyway, I finally understood why the movies use costumes and accents. It's not to portray people accurately (though that helps) but it's so that the actors can get into and remain in character. That's wonderful.

So, if you want to find a movie to stream from Netflix, it's one of the movies available. (Many of the movies from Netflix are only on DVD and that's takes time to mail, receive, mail, receive...

PS: I was just wondering the other day why I have never seen Hugh Grant in anything other than a comedy. He was young in this. It was a serious role. He was believable and did well.

Bridget Jones's Diary

Click title above for IMDb info about this movie

Bridget Jones' Diary is shown on television every now and again. I certainly hope they continue to show it. There are always new "fans" and repeat "fans" to make it worthwhile.

As romantic comedies go it's one of the classier ones. It's cute and well done. I think people of all ages are able to appreciate it, watch it over and over with as much enjoyment as the first time they saw it. The story line is good, though I think we all know true love doesn't really happen that fast with as little basis the movies show us.

It starred Renée Zellweger, Hugh Grant and Colin Firth. The movie came out in 2001 when Hugh and Colin were both 40 years old. Everyone spoke with British accents including Rene who is, as far as I know, not British, so I assume it was a British movie. (And I have no idea how old she was or is.)

I was musing the other day that even Colin Firth himself has been cursed with the responsibility of all motion picture stars, that of having to do at least one romantic comedy in their lives if they want to further their careers.

I suspect part of the reason is that audiences LOVE romantic comedies, even the sappy ones, regardless what the critics think of them. A good or even so-so romantic comedy can put you on the map and grant you hundreds of die-hard fans forever.

Colin Firth is rather the stiff-upper-lift type of Englishman. He is able to convey a well-rounded character while showing little emotion, just a well placed, intelligent comment. One would hope he gets a role in which he can smile for a change.

Hugh Grant is a bit more silly in his roles even when he is revealed to have a serious or mature side. He plays the attractive, smooth-talking bad-boy
in Diary. Actually he is the type of man I like both in movie roles and unfortunately in real life. He's good in this role without stealing the show away from everyone else.

In short, Renée is adorable, Colin is desirable, and Hugh is lovable. And the script, direction and editing were good.

I would like to see the sequel to Diary again mostly because I have only seen it once. In that one, if I recall correctly, Bridget makes the mistake of falling for the bad-boy's lies AGAIN (haven't we all done that?)but ends up with the sweetie after all.

Man, he's a forgiving guy. Are all British men like that? One would hope that all men were...but, you know, romance is fantasy after all.

Thanks to everyone for bringing this movie to the big screen and now a lot small ones. It's enjoyable.

Another thing, I have a feeling Matthew Goode probably hoped Leap Year would be a popular mainstream movie like Bridget Jones's Diary instead of just a regular romantic comedy. Maybe the critics didn't like Leap Year, and Matthew didn't either, but millions or at least thousands of people loved it. And Matthew, like I said before in this blog, all movies aren't Shakespeare or, in this case, Bridget Jones's Diary.

TV MOVIES: Lying to Be Perfect

Click on title to see IMDb entry on this movie

Photo of Poppy Mongomery

Some of the good movies don't get their start at the theater box office. They're the made-for-a-particular-channel movies. And I don't particularly mean HBO or other premium channels or even PBS mini-series.

I'm speaking of the movies made for Hallmark and Lifetime and other channels. Many of them feature one or two known television stars (mostly from a popular series or a previous series) and a lot of supporting actors no one ever heard of unless they've seem them in another TV series or movie.

Several other merits of TV movies is that they have breaks for commercials built in and don't just cut for a break in the middle of a sentence. They don't have to cut out pieces of them to fit in commercials. And they don't have much cussing that needs to be bleeped out. (And heck, I remember the days when a movie that was in color instead of black and white was considered a good movie.)

I just watched one today. I use that term loosely 'watched.' Often I have the television on for company or just plain noise when I'm doing something else. Today I was knitting and straightening my room. (That usually mean I move things around from from pile to pile or stick them in another room.)

It was Lying to Be Perfect. I think that was a take off on Dying to Be Perfect. I suspected it would have something to do with dieting and was curious if they were going to spread a bunch of crap about dieting can save you, etc.

It starred Poppy Montgomery who played an FBI agent on Without a Trace. She's British but does a good American accent. I assume it's because she lived here now.

In this movie she played a "fat" girl with two "fat" friends. She worked as an editor at a publishing firm. She was an aspiring writer and when her proposal was turned down by her firm she invented a young beautiful British girl who won fame and a book contract with her firm.

In the meantime, she and her two women friends made a pact to start living healthy, exercising and eating right, and raising their self-esteem so they could start living the lives they wanted.

Of course the main girl had to confess to lying about her secret (which I would just claimed was my pen name, of course.) She had to reveal her identity eventually and by then, of course, she was a knockout.

But all the girls realized that it was their sense of self-worth and their attitudes towards themselves that needed healing not just their overweight.

I think they did a tolerable job of showing women losing weight without giving women the world over the idea that just looking good is the solution to all their problems. I think a couple of the lessons they "taught" was about finding courage to be yourself, learn to accept and love yourself, and if you're good at something you just have to express yourself with your talent as yourself and the truth will prove it to you. And the truth never hurts.

To be absolutely clear, some of the movies on LMN, Lifetime and Hallmark and other fancy channels can be quite awful. But some of them are quite good. Written by real writers and played by good actors even if they aren't famous or looking perfect.

If you happen to tune in to one you don't like, turn it off. Remember my rule "Life is too short to read crappy books and watch crappy movies." (So stop doing that unless you're attempting to write a movie blog.)

CEMETERY JUNCTION

Writers & Directors: Ricky Gervais, Stephen Merchant
Staring: Christian Cooke, Felicity Jones, Tom Hughes, Jack Doolan
With: Ricky Gervais, Ralph Fiennes, and Matthew Goode


I watched two movies yesterday. Black Swan at 4 Hills Theater, Albuquerque, NM, and the Netflix rental I saw at home afterwards was Cemetery Junction. I rented it to see Matthew Goode in yet another role. He had a smaller part but was, as always, good. I enjoyed seeing yet another hair style, and hear him use a different British accent than his own.

It's a UK movie from 2010, set in 1973, in a neighborhood where Ricky Gervais grew up. Cemetery Junction is an actual road junction in Reading, Britain. According to this story, it's a town in which people get stuck and live the same lives as their parents, never quite getting away to the outside world. I don't know if that's true, I've never been there (and never plan to visit.)

I am beginning to notice the subtle differences between English accents in Great Britain. They have a distinctive accent in Reading. I enjoyed hearing it in Cemetery Junction.

The movie is a comedy. Three boys--changing into men--discover themselves while in repetitious pastimes that they realize they must soon give up. They find themselves changed by these circumstances and by their own choices.

The town in the movie did look pretty dull. (And some of the residents were quite weird.) No wonder the kids had to create their own excitement. A couple times it landed them in jail. Luckily they had an older lovable cop friend who gave them some guidance.

It's not a laugh-out-loud comedy. It's not silly. It's touching and funny and thought-provoking. Oddly enough, Ricky Gervais who co-wrote and co-directed this story, played a non-funny part as one of the boy's father.

It has a happy ending and nothing awful happens in the movie. My favorite kind of movie.

I liked it better than Black Swan which I also saw yesterday.) I would watch Cemetery Junction again. (I might even rent Black Swan after it's on DVD awhile. I will have forgotten most of it by then.)

Enjoy Cemetery Junction if you like British comedy. (I wish more young adults would watch movies like this one, they might learn something. Though didn't we all have to learn to grow up the hard way?)

Black Swan

Click Title above for link to IMDb.

I saw two movies Saturday. I find that when I have some free time I have to stop in for popcorn. When I got home my Netflix DVD was in the mailbox, so I popped it into the DVD player. I wanted to see it right away mostly because there was nothing worth while on satellite TV. I will NOT watch Wheel of Fortune. It's the longest half hour on television. The slowest and most boring show in American. Maybe the world.

Anyway. The two movies I watched Saturday can't be compared to each other. They were completely different genres. Not even similar. Yet they were opposites. One was American and one was British. One was good. The other one was bad. Guess which one?

All I can say is that I am not watching my way through all the Academy Award Nominees for Best Picture this year. In fact, I may never trust the Academy Awards again.

I already saw The King's Speech several weeks ago before it won Best Picture in the BAFTA & the Academy Awards.

I was expecting more from Black Swan. I thought Black Swan was so-so. It was not one of those movies you say "wow" when you come out of the theater. Not like, for instance, Inception.

I think some movies are done as "art." I usually appreciate them. Then there are the movies that are "art for the sake of art." Maybe that's what the Academy is looking for. I'm just looking for good movies.

The movie I didn't like was Black Swan. I must admit I went to see it out of curiosity so I passed on the 3-D version. Even so, the movie was mediocre. I suspect the 3-D version was also mediocre because there was nothing in the movie impressive enough to warrant 3-D except the performance of the black swan.

Natalie Portman won the awards for best actress both in America and Brittan. I never really cared for, or noticed, Natalie Portman (her acting, I mean. She's probably a great person in person.) I never thought she was a major star in major movies. So I'm baffled that she won the Academy Award. I had the sense that she was holding back in this movie. Strange that the movie was about a ballerina holding back in her performance.

Unusually when I come out of a movie about an insane person I feel a little insane. I'm impressed with movies that can draw me in like that. That's the test of a true psychogical drama. Black Swan didn't do that for me. (It was either the lack of intensity within the movie or my meds are working really well now.)

I think all Black Swan does is convince it's true what they say in psychology: a psychotic person doesn't know they are. If someone thinks they might be insane, they aren't.

The costumes were monotonous except in some of the fantasies. The whole movie was done in monotones. Albeit intentionally. I liked the dashes of pink. And the stuffed animals; they were good.

I'm still curious just what character Mila Kunis was playing. But she was super. I wonder why she didn't get the nomination for best supporting actress?

I realize other people have other tastes and, of course, we all appreciate and rave about different movies. Others love the movies that I think stink. That's why there is a wide range of diversity in entertainment. I think that's wonderful.

I thought Black Swan was an OK movie. It's worth watching but I recommend waiting til it comes out on DVD and pop your corn at home.

A Single Man

Directed by Tom Ford, novel by Christopher Isherwood, written for screen by Tom Ford and David Scearce. Produced by Artina Films, Depth of Field, Fade to Black Productions. Rated R for adult content (and brief nudity--barely.) (This movie was distributed in too many countries to list. It received numerous nominations and awards. See below.

I saw (Netflix rental) A Single Man Feb. 25, 2011. I now see this title can be taken two ways. A Single Man as in not married. And A Single Man as in one man in a population of millions--does that make him insignificant or more important to the overall culture?

I seem to be a couple years behind the rest of the world in viewing relevant movies. I have been on a trek to experience all of Matthew Goode's roles. I still marvel at his ability to be a different person in each movie. He's amazing. Minus Chasing Liberty. Oh well, "you can't win 'em all," so they say.

And I can't seem to find the perfect word to describe this quality in a movie...it's beyond good. (There are the B movies, I am sure you know what they are (lowbrow?) I suppose the really quality movies are A movies. Well, this one was definitely an A+ movie.

I was hesitant (heck, struck with anxiety) to turn on my DVD player. I read Wikipedia entry which said it was a movie about a depressed man who was still grieving the loss of his long-time partner. Since I have been battling severe depression as well as grief over losing my husband, I wondered if I should consider this movie.

This movie was not frightening to me after all. It was not depressing. (Maybe that's my Zoloft talking.) It seemed to be more of a British movie than an American one (i.e. not sappy.)

If you don't want to know the plot in advance, I suggest you not read the Wikipedia or IMDb entries. The important thing is, even read them I was more interested in watching it. (That and wanting to see Matthew Goode my favorite actor in all his roles.) The movie and the enjoyment of seeing it was not based on the plot. The movie is not "ruined" by knowing the story. It's not what it's about, it's how it's done.

A Single Man is not entertainment per se, it's art and a study in complex human nature. I'm happy to say, there were no stereotypes in this movie. It was a fresh take on these subjects even set 50 years ago in 1962.

The laid back performances were understated yet sincerely emotional. The cinematography was excellent. (Example: the way the colors were drab until George really looked at them with appreciation when they suddenly became bright and vibrant.) You're taken into the story with such skill you are no longer aware you're watching a movie. I think this movie was a joyous study of life and death. Also, I found a good deal of ironic humor in the movie.

Matthew as supporting actor was just as perfect as Colin Firth as were Julianne Moore and Nicholas Hoult. A mass of talent was obviously assembled.

Matthew used the generic American accent similar to the way he spoke in The Lookout though not as gruff, of course. It was impeccable from what I heard. (Is there such a thing as an American accent without dialect? It's as varied as UK accents. Though I do think Matthew sounds better with British and Irish accent, but maybe that's just me. I heard he's finished a movie about an Australian. I'm curious to hear how he does that.)

Good-bye for now. Sit down and WATCH it.

From Wikipedia: The film was nominated for the Golden Lion at the 66th Venice International Film Festival and won the festival's third annual Queer Lion.[19] Colin Firth was awarded the Coppa Volpi for Best Actor at the film festival for his performance in the film.[20] He received a BAFTA for best actor.[21] Firth received a Golden Globe Award for Best Actor in a Motion Picture Drama nomination, a Screen Actors Guild Award for Outstanding Performance by a Male Actor in a Leading Role nomination, and an Academy Award for Best Actor nomination. For her performance, Julianne Moore was nominated for a Golden Globe Award for Best Supporting Actress in Motion Picture. Abel Korzeniowski was nominated for a Golden Globe Award for Best Original Score. On January 14, 2010, the film was nominated for, and later won, Outstanding Film - Wide Release at the 21st GLAAD Media Awards.

Buried

Click on word Buried above to see IMDb website

I can see now I have to add why I like a movie and and give illustrations (not pictures but examples.)

I didn't watch Buried. I rented it from NexFlix at the request of my daughter-in-law Rachel. She likes Ryan Reynolds.

Here's the IMDb blurb for this 2010 movie which was billed as "brilliantly twisted suspense."

Paul is a U.S. contractor working in Iraq. After an attack by a group of Iraqis he wakes to find he is buried alive inside a coffin. With only a lighter and a cell phone it's a race against time to escape this claustrophobic death trap.

Billed as Director: Rodrigo Cortés, Writer: Chris Sparling
Stars: Ryan Reynolds, José Luis García Pérez and Robert Paterson

Why I didn't watch it: I feel the same way about watching movies under ground as I feel about movies under water. Suffocated. I hold my breath. (Makes it hard to eat popcorn.)

Also, I can't stand those "race against time" movies.

I can't give you any tips on the acting. But if the subject matter of the movie is horrible, who cares how good or bad the acting is? Do you ever see a horror movie, for instance, for the acting? Right. You just want to be scared out of your head. No thanks, not me.

Buried might rival the movie I accidentally watched about the couple floating around in the ocean. It was just the two of them (deserted on a pleasure boat tour.) They talked and then disappeared one at a time. Besides being painfully suspenseful, it was boring.

If you want to watch Buried, fine, but be prepared.

Hollywood Teeth

I am so pissed off (I mean angry) that everyone in movies and on television has to have perfect, bright white teeth now.

What the hell? One's teeth are supposed to be as different from other's teeth the way fingerprints are different.

And let's face it. Bright white is NOT the color real teeth are "supposed to" be. White teeth aren't natural. They look rather like neon signs.

I've have heard of the new "dentures" that slip on OVER one's own teeth. I wish these contraptions could be removed along with costumes and make-up so the movie stars can go home to their real lives wearing their real teeth. Or they could go back to their "old" teeth in movies if their fans wanted them to.

I hate to see everyone on the screen getting their teeth straightened, capped, bleached and other miserable procedures so they can all have "perfect" teeth so they can all look alike. But at least the days are over when movie stars had all their teeth pulled and wore those sets of dentures that come out and soak in a glass all night. I'm not disparaging anyone who actually needs dentures, but movie stars who didn't need them got them. It was probably required in their contracts.

The fans don't really want their favorite celebrities to LOOK perfect. We want them to look unique and charming. We want to recognize them underneath the role they're playing.

Take Matthew Goode for instance (I know, I know, you're getting sick of me writing about him all the time.) I now know why he looks so different in Leap Year than in his other movies. It's his teeth. His teeth were different as well as his accent, hair and beard.

In his previous movies he had a charming way of talking. His front teeth were slightly misaligned with each other, and there was a small gap in his teeth on the left side. Evidently adapting over the years gave him a distinctive way of speaking. He no doubt felt he had to "protect" his irregularities from the camera, but his talking and smiling with the right side of his mouth was charming. I loved it. It was part of his delightful performance in Imagine Me and You.

I often notice the way an actor speaks and smiles. Maybe other people don't.

I can see why a person might feel conspicuous over less-than-perfect teeth. Crooked teeth, missing teeth, they may think, makes them look "bad." They want to get their teeth fixed, especially if they are very crooked or if they've had an injury to the face or mouth that altered their teeth. It's not just an ego thing because they're wanting to correct something unfortunate that they feel "ruined" their appearance. Even if it were the result of falling out of a tree when they were children or getting clonked in face with a football as a teenager.

So I don't blame Matthew Goode for having his teeth fixed. After all, he and other celebrities can afford the dental work when they become successful.

But I'm rather disappointed because I LIKED the ways Matthew talked and smiled in his various movies. He was adorable. (Additional COmments: I watched Matthew closely in Leap Year again and I think his smile is still his old one. Tho I saw him on YouTube in an interview and it did look like his teeth were different. It remains to be seen. His last movie was Jan. 2010. It's been a year. It's time we saw his new movies. Rah-rah.

Photo of Matthew Goode with cute smile

So if anyone can tell me more Matthew Goode and his teeth and/give me your own opinion, leave me some comments. Thanks.

Movies only

I've have eliminated discussing books on this blog.

I will only blog about movies here.

Movies old and new. Movies in theaters, on DVDs, Cable/Satellite and TV.

I will occasionally blog about books on my other blog ADVISING MYSELF

www.sandyschairer@blogspot.com

Thanks for reading me.

LONG LIVE THE MOVIES

The King's Speech

Clik on title above for BAFTA 2011 Awards


I saw The King's Speech yesterday. The theater is littered with retirees who don't have anything better to do in the afternoon. Including me.

Mostly I go to the theater for the popcorn. (I hope someone does a study to see how much each kernel costs in bag that's more than the cost of the movie tickets.) I don't go very often. I notice the theaters aren't popping as much popcorn anymore. You'd think if they lowered the price they could make it up in volume.)

I prefer to watch movies at home so I can rewind and listen again to the words I didn't catch. (I think with all the big movie complexes they ought to set up one with subtitles for the hard of hearing people and those who can't listen fast enough for the way people talk today. Especially the young people.) I love British movies but, you've heard me write before that I find that accent the hardest to understand. Though in King's Speech I believe they tried to tone it down for non-British listening audiences.

OK. So. King's Speech. It was a well-done movie. Nothing to rave about after you see it. Not being blown away with excitement by the story nor the acting. I would say it was good entertainment for an afternoon. But that's it. No feeling of amazement coming out of the theater. Though, not "What the hell was that about?" like after seeing Inception.

King's Speech is a bit understated. Perhaps that's how British like their movies? It's a bit tame for American viewers, though it's a movie that reaches a more cerebral viewer in the US.

I didn't know a thing about King George VI prior to seeing this movie. I certainly hope scriptwriters adhere to more of "the truth" than they did in older biographical movies.

The sets and costumes were impressive.

The King's Speech was nominated and won a series of awards from BAFTA (British film awards.) Best picture, best British film, best actor, best supporting actress, best supporting actor, and several other categories such as best original screenplay.

It's also nominated for numerous Academy Awards which air Feb. 27, 2011. It's probably going to be the same as watching the British Academy Awards this year.

The awards are seldom given to the movies I feel are the highest and best. Then sometimes I'm pleasantly surprised like when American Beauty won best picture number of years ago. And Little Miss Sunshine got an award for something. I did think that Phantom of the Opera should have won more than best song. It wasn't even the best song in that movie.)

I would like to see my favorite actors and actresses win sometimes too. I don't necessarily choose them for just that one role. I think you have to watch a number of movies of that actor/actress to appreciate just how good they are based on versatility and ability to act well from one movie to the next. I often choose them just because I like that person and their qualities in real life.

So, go see The King's Speech if for no other reason than to support the movie making industry and keep theaters from being overtaken by DVDs and Blue-ray. You can skip the popcorn.

The Lookout

Click on title to see IMDb info on The Lookout a 2007 crime/thriller drama

Written & Directed by Scott Frank
Starring Joseph Gordon-Levitt, Jeff Daniels, Matthew Goode, and Isla Fisher
Distributed by Miramax Films (USA) & Buena Vista International (Non-USA)

What can I say about this movie? (You know me, I can always say a lot.) It was reviewed (according to IMDb) 368 official times, not to mention all the clips and interviews and trailers all over the Internet, plus the amateurs like me who throw in their 2-cents worth.

I don't do reviews, I give my opinions. I try not to post spoilers. However, I'm sure everyone in the known Universe knows the story by now.

The plot is not the biggie here, though the script is excellent. It's what "they" say is a character-driven-story. I believe it was more thought-provoking than entertainment. I experienced this movie rather than just watching it.

Part of the problem in being a writer is that I can't just watch a movie without analyzing it. This movie created a feeling of impending doom, especially when I knew what was inevitably coming. The suspense became heightened with the premonitions woven into the story.

I watch a movie a second time (or more) just to enjoy it, rather than sitting there biting my nails dreading possible surprises. I can appreciate the details in subsequent viewings. I admit I am a coward when it comes to suspense especially if it hints at emotional pain and violence.

Joseph Gordon-Levitt was, without saying, wonderful. He carried the movie. I believe he was in every scene. He portrayed a complex character using a good deal of subtlety and power. It was his story, told from his point of view. The other characters/actors fully supported Gordon-Levitt. Not one of them tried to overshadow him or steal the attention for themselves.

Jeff Daniels, who received second billing (over Matthew Goode who got third billing) was the best I've ever seen him. He's gone from a weak but charming actor (mostly as Mr. Nice Guy in those made-for-Hallmark type movies) to a good actor who created here a multifaceted character integral to the story/movie.

I got the impression his was the type of character like Andy Taylor on Mayberry who could go from "Well, howdy there, y'all. Welcome to our quaint little village," to a guy who can say "Okay, asshole, cut the bullshit." Jeff Daniels showed this quality without an in-your-face attitude as an important character as Gordon-Levitt's closest friend.

Matthew Goode was good in his role as the leader of the bad guys. He did a fair American accent. His deep voice and the accent he affected reminded me of another actor's that I couldn't' quite place. He looked completely different in this movie (a given for him.) In the Special Features (which was excellent in itself) he surprised them by wanting to audition for the part appearing so inappropriate for the tough guy role based on his role in Match Point. Everyone was amazed that he literally transformed himself when he read for the part. The director said he felt that Matthew could do anything. I was pleased to hear that someone else noticed Matthew literally becomes a character. (The only other actor I have heard this about was Meryl Streep.)

I was relieved that the violence was underplayed as an inevitable part of the story. It wasn't one of those typical shoot-em-up, violence for violence's sake, or added for shock value. The one thing I felt bad about was the tragedy of one character who died who shouldn't have.

The movie was well-done and worth seeing, even the Special Feature section. It was enjoyable seeing the cast and crew talk about the movie and its production.

I hope you enjoy it. If you don't, push the eject button, send it back and miss a quality film.

Movie and Book Opinions Today

I haven't watched any new or used movies lately. So no reviews. Reading the same book--not finished yet. So no book reviews either. Sorry.

When I order a DVD to watch from NetFlix (mostly all of Matthew Goode's movies) I love them (except Chasing Liberty [yuck].) After I mail them back I miss them (him.) I want to watch it again. And again. It's a dilemma because I also want to mail them back as fast as I can so I can receive the next rental.

I like Matthew Goode because he's a real actor not just a movie star. He's so different in each role, it's mystifying. He tosses himself out and becomes the character. (You have to see it to believe it.) (In fact, he's such a good actor that if I were in a relationship with him, I'd NEVER believe a word he said.)

My first experience of him was in the romantic comedy Leap Year. After seeing that I assumed he was a bearded Irishman with curly black hair off screen too. But when I saw his internet interviews I was flabbergasted. He's nothing like his character in Leap Year. In fact, I still can't believe it's the same guy.

To make a long story short (no wait, I can't make a story short to save my life) I have a habit of buying a movie after I rent it, see it on TV or in the theater. (Fortunately my kids buy every new movie ever made so I can watch movies all day and night if I want to.)

I have graduated from watching Leap Year (about 50 to 100 times.) Then I saw Imagine Me and You. Then I bought it. I don't think I'll watch it 50 to 100 times, but, heck, why not? (I watch it for Matthew, not for the girls, by the way, in case you wondered. LOL)

Another movie I just love = Julie and Julia. I watched that a few times, and a few more times. Now I put it on to help me fall asleep at night. If I fall asleep during a movie that I've seen a zillion times, I don't worry about missing anything. I know what's going to happen and I can drift off. I guess I turn off the DVD player and the TV in my sleep, because it's off when I get up in the morning.

I do prefer falling asleep with movies that have no suspense, violence or gore. Maybe not even sexuality since it makes me too aware that I'm sleeping in a single bed alone now. (My husband died in 2009. He was a sexy little devil.)

I used to read myself to sleep. I read to escape into an alternate reality and therefore avoid this one--20th and now 21st century Earth. But that doesn't seem to work anymore. I find myself reading and reading and not sleeping. I get more into the book and unable to stop.

It's either absorption to the point of insomnia, or finding that the words just go in one eye and out the other with no comprehension whatsoever. (Is that adult on-set ADD?) Reading that way doesn't help me at all to stop thinking too much. I think about bad stuff like old age, the economy, the weather, sugary food...

So, if anyone can recommend any other movies to rent, let me know, so I can do more reviews in between Matthew Goode's movies. (I don't want to bore those of you who have no idea who he is.)

I am reading my way through my Agatha Christie library, if you recall.

In addition, I donated about 500 books out of my huge collection. (Still have too many.) So no book recommendations, please. I am a recovering bookaholic. I can't slip and go into the book store for anything more than coffee and a Danish.

Toddle-ooo for now. And thanks for reading me.

Oh, if you see Matthew Goode, please kiss him for me.

A Suitable Vengeance, Inspector Lynley Mysteries

Click title of movie above to see IMDb info

Director: Edward Bennett,
Writers: Elizabeth George (novel), Valerie Windsor (screenplay)
Staring Nathaniel Parker & Sharon Small and a cast of dozens
March 2003, BBC & PBS Masterpiece Theater

Jolly good mystery. Not your average detective story the way most Inspector Lynley cases are. This was one of those old-fashioned mysteries where the family and guests are all assembled in a gigantic old estate. When a crime or two happens, Inspector Lynley is drawn into helping local law-enforcement solve the case even if he suspects the perpetrator might be one of his own family.

The story begins with preparations for the dinner party for the Inspector, who happens to be known as Tommy, and his fiance Helen. The type of dinner party and mystery that happens around a 10-foot long table complete with candelabras, three forks and tuxedos, reminiscent of parties in the 1930's.

As the characters are introduced, we begin to see the relationships between them and more and more of their personal lives. Gradually we begin to see all -- the secrets, problems, resentments and unhappiness.

There are so many characters and story lines that one must pay close attention to follow the story and pick up on all the clues. And use closed captions or rewind button if you have trouble deciphering the Queen's English.

Now. You must remember the "rules" for screenplays. One, if it's a good script, there is nothing in the movie that does not relate to the plot and advance the story. In a true mystery there are clues as well as "false" clues (red-herrings.) But as a matter of fact, there are not many red-herrings in this movie. Everything has importance. Even though I doubt you'll figure out this mystery easily.

Two, in a good screenplay all the characters are shown or at least mentioned at the beginning of the movie (this also applies to well written novels.) This way no characters are brought in at the end to explain the solution. It's very frustrating when an author does that. It cheats the reader/viewer.

Three, cutting to another scene can indicate more happening than we are privilege to.

I particularly like the fact that British movies don't spoon feed us the way American movies do. By not handing us clues and explanations, they expect the viewers to understand the story for themselves. The cinematography is excellent, too, providing a good deal of the clues. Expressions and tones of voice are well done. Plus it was not overwhelmed with music in an attempt to manipulate our feelings.

Matthew Goode, again, was good, as was everyone else. As Inspector Lynley's younger brother, he plays a perfect combination of resentment and innocence. (Not to mention being the most handsome man in the movie with that black hair, big blue eyes and full lips. I could see his character Declan in Leap Year, more in this movie than in his other movies, especially the frowns and his delightful deep voice.)

It's an hour and a half long, but remember it's a made-for-TV movie. British television drama is often better than the average American drama on big or little screen.

This movie is excellent. You can rent or buy it along with other Inspector Lynley movies. This one was from Season 2. I hope you will enjoy it as much as I did.

My NetFlix DVD Rentals

My most recent DVD rental has been snowed-in in my post office box (the one on the end of Juan Tomas Rd. not INSIDE the post office. Duh.)

I am going to watch it now. I might write about it here, or not.

It's an Inspector Lynley Mystery (a PBS movie) only one and a half hours long.

It's one in which---guess---wait for it--Matthew Goode plays the Inspector's brother. I hope he's on more than two or three scenes. Heck, I suspect he might be the suspect.)

As you all know, or maybe didn't know me then, I was madly in love with Gerry Butler a few years ago. I realize he was just a movie star. I think I was hypnotized by all that singing in Phantom of the Opera. It was a few of the scenes where they were singing, "The Phantom of the Opera is now within your mind." Uh, ye-ah.

Quite a few middle aged (and heck, old) women fell for Gerry at that time. We used to discuss him on a fan yahoo group. It couldn't have been his handsome good looks, because he isn't really all that good-looking unless the role calls for him to be--wonders with make-up and costumes--but it was his sex appeal.

The one scene I loved in Phantom was him walking slowly down the stairs at the masquerade in that red suit and black mask. And oh, those tight black leather gloves.

So, my point is(I got side-tracked talking about Gerry for a minute) I fell out of love with Gerry and was thrashing around for someone else to love, especially in movieland, and came up with Declan in Leap Year played by Matthew Goode, the young British actor.

The big thing I noticed right off, is that Matthew Goode is an ACTOR not a movie star.

So wish me luck with Inspector Lynley tonight and seeing my sweetie Matthew Goode. (I can call him that because I'm old enough to be his mother. (Matthew's mother not Inspector Lynley's -- but maybe his too.

Good night. (PS--I also loved the scene in Dracula 2000 when Gerry Bulter is walking through the music store with his curly long hair and his long coat and that alpha male strut. Ummm.)

Turner Classic Movies

Turner Classic Movie channel is having 31 Days of Oscar Winning movies, which started Feb. 1 through March 3. Uncut and commercial free.

Click on Turner Classic Movies above to see their website and schedule.

I like the movies from the 1930's and 1940's the best.

I was just wondering why the actors all spoke like Franklin Roosevelt. Was that supposed to be THE American accent denoting educated, upper class people? It sounds strange now.

The FX of the days weren't half bad either. I saw part of Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hyde with Fredric March (1931.) The transformation of the doctor into his "evil twin" was well done. And it was all done without animation. Cool. The make-up was very well done even though Mr. Hyde looked a bit like a glorified ape.

The old movies give us a very good idea of what the fashions, hair designs, and style of make-up were popular in those days, as well as what the various buildings, furnishings and establishments looked like in those days. This was way way before the computer graphics used today.

Some of these old movies can be quite funny especially when they are serious. The seriousness may seem overly dramatic today.

The lines, too, are just so strange to us now. Take the line from Dr. Jekyll speaking to his fiance. "Marry me, darling, marry me. Marry me. I can't WAIT any longer." Now-a-days, we don't wait...if you catch my drift.

Enjoy an old movie on a TV near you today!!!

THE CHAMBER

Click on title above for website of movie

Director: James Foley
Written by: John Grisham (novel),William Goldman & Chris Reese(screenplay)
Stars:Chris O'Donnell, Gene Hackman,Faye Dunaway & Lela Rochon

I broke one of my own rules and watched a painful drama. It was accidental. I noticed the name of the movie on HBO. I had the book by John Grisham but never read it. Probably donated it to VA hospital, whatever.

Since I have enjoyed his other novels and the movies based on them, I let it play while I was playing on the computer. After the start of the movie, it got my undivided attention. Compelling. Even when I knew what was coming & the suspense built up, I couldn't stop watching.

This was a damn good movie. It pulled no punches. Brought up some serious issues. Very thought provoking. Be warned it uses some of the words that have become politically incorrect in order to stay true-to-life.

It was about a young lawyer (Chris O'Donnell) who seeks out his family whom he has not been close to and decides to take on the death penalty (in the South) and petition for an appeal for his grandfather (Gene Hackman) who was raised in the KKK and sentenced to death for murder. The movie takes us through a great deal of emotional scenes. There is some violence but the real drama is mostly psychological and emotional. The flashbacks are intense but bearable.

Chris O'Donnell and the supporting cast were good and held their own with the big star Gene Hackman. The days are over, I suspect, when Hackman is in every other movie made. So he puts a big performance into the roles he has. You can tell he's still got it.

So does Faye Dunaway. Excellent. Best I've seen her. Great role.

I recommend it so try to catch it on HBO or rental.

CHASING LIBERTY--YUCK

I got the next Matthew Goode movie from Netflix yesterday.

Director: Andy Cadiff; Writers: Derek Guiley, David Schneiderman

Stars:Mandy Moore, Matthew Goode and Mark Harmon .

I got the feeling the cast were "phoning in" their parts.

This was one of Matthew Goode's earlier films (2004.)

Chasing Liberty was a terrible movie. The actors were totally unconvincing. They looked as bored as I was. The girl was still a teenager, the guy was a bit older and should have been ashamed of himself. The general premise was stupid. It was just not believable. No heart. No intelligence. Dumb, dumb, dumb. I got the feeling they were rushing through the movie. I am also sure that the only people who would like this movie are 12 year old girls. Maybe not.

Wait, the scenery was good. But probably faked. The best parts of the movie were done by stunt people. So much for that. The bungee jumping was cool. And the crowd scene was awesome. That was it for me.

I can understand what Matthew Goode meant when he said in an interview that Leap Year was just Chasing Liberty all over again. (I see that but disagree.)Many of scenes in Leap Year were repeats of scenes in Chasing Liberty . The big difference is, in Chasing Liberty , these scenes were awful. In fact the whole movie Chasing Liberty was awful.

In Leap Year the the script was well written, the acting was more than good especially Matthew Goode and Amy Adams. That movie showed a great deal more heart & sensitivity. The young people were older and took life a bit more seriously. It was a comedy but touching. Believable. (The only bad thing about Leap Year was the editing and cutting. Too bad.)

So if it snows here for four days like the weather channel predicts, I will be snowed in with Chasing Liberty instead of the next Matthew Goode movie on my Netflix queue. WAAAAAAAAAA

Agatha Christie

Click on title "Agatha Christie" to see internet bio and book list

I've been a long time fan of Agatha Christie. I have a library of all her books. I've read all of them and some of them more than once. She wrote a number of mystery novels and short stories (in collections) and a few other stories under a pen name.

I have decided to read my way through her books starting with the mysteries. (Since I have forgotten most of them or gotten them confused in my head. I'm reading the whole library straight through IN THE ORDER they were written (published.)

I finished THE MYSTERIOUS AFFAIR AT STYLES (1920) her first book which introduced Hercule Poirot, her famous private detective.

What I like about Agatha Christie's books is the lack of description; it's kept to a minimum. I just can't stand too much description. I am not a visual person. I am an auditory person and I prefer to read dialog. I actually hear the dialog in my head as if it were really being spoken.

I also like the fact that Poirot and her other crime solving characters think a lot. (I once submitted a story in a contest and received the comment from the critiquer/judge that my characters spent too much time thinking. I disagree. I like characters who think a lot. I once read a novel that was ALL thinking. So there!)

In Christie's novels, besides talking and thinking, there is very little cliff-hanging adventure/action. I don't like those fast paced thrillers (well, maybe Davinci Code.) Not much suspense. I get too nervous if there is too much suspense.

I perfectly enjoy joining Christie's characters in there English country estates and reading about all their family and friends as they help Poirot solve the mystery.

Agatha Christie's mysteries are amazing in that she gives tons of clues to help the reader guess the culprit, as well as lots of red-herrings (false clues to mislead readers.) In some of the books she actually tells who committed the crime, but most of us read right over those and are surprised at the end that she really DID tell us who did it.

And I have never guessed any of them (except the one that had a list of characters in the front which gave descriptions of all of them. So don't read those lists, they tend to give away too much information.)

I love mysteries. My favorite genre. I read every word and never peak at the end. That would be ruining everything for myself.

They are fun books with nothing scary or gross. So join me in reading your way through Agatha's books.