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.