Movie Stats:
Released 2013 (USA)
American, in English
Director - Spike Jonze
Stars - Joaquin Phoenix, Scarlett Johansson, Amy Adams
Plot Summary:
Theodore Twombly (Phoenix), a man in the throes of loneliness and depression, falls in love with his computer's artificially intelligent operating system, Samantha (Johansson). Adams co-stars as Theodore’s close friend, Amy.
Warnings:
Lots of blue language; sexy times; brief female nudity (breasts only).
Bad Stuff:
For a film set in the (nearish) future, it sure had some old-fashioned ideas about gender. People repeatedly make a big deal out of the fact that Theodore is sensitive (he’s even called a sissy for admitting that he cries). Amy is a programmer but the game she’s programming is about competing to be a good mom. I found it really off-putting/jarring. I hope we’ll be beyond most of that 50 years from now.
Good Stuff:
I’m always pleasantly surprised when movies depict a male/female friendship without a hint of romance to it. Well done, film.
The acting is phenomenal. Phoenix was particularly impressive. When I think about the fact that he spent most of filming likely talking to himself, and how he was able to effectively emote while doing that, I’m completely blown away.
It’s visually quite beautiful.
The Verdict:
I wasn’t looking forward to this at all. I don’t have anything against Joaquin Phoenix, but I wasn’t convinced that he could carry a film the way he needed to for this. Also, I was skeptical of the concept. Something about the previews I saw made it seem creepy or icky. But I went into it with an open mind, and I found myself quickly charmed. There’s nothing creepy or icky about the central romance. In fact, I thought it was really touching. Both Phoenix and Adams do an amazing job of showing what it’s like to be in a bad place in your life, and also what it’s like to come out of that bad place. I was completely wrong about Phoenix’s ability to carry the film. It’s lovely on so many levels, in a way that moved me to tears more than once. Nearly everything about it is well done: the acting, the cinematography, the special effects, the soundtrack, and the writing. My quibbles with it - including that it’s rather light on the sci fi front - are minor.
I give it 4.25 stars.
Monday, February 27, 2017
Friday, February 24, 2017
Sci Fi Top 100, #47: "Contact" (1997)
Movie Stats:
Released 1997 (USA)
American, in English (multiple non-translated other languages unimportant to the plot)
Director - Robert Zemeckis
Stars - Jodie Foster, Tom Skerritt, Matthew McConaughey, and many, many others
Plot Summary:
Dr. Eleanor Arroway (Foster), having spent most of her life searching for intelligent life in the universe, receives a message from deep space. Skerritt co-stars as David Drumlin, Arroway’s nemesis, and McConaughey as Palmer Joss, a spiritual guru who is also Arroway’s love interest.
Warnings:
Very minor violence; minor blue language; implied sexy times.
Bad Stuff:
S.R. Hadden (John Hurt) was a little too convenient as a character. He was mostly a plot device, there to rescue Arroway every time she got stuck so the story could move forward to the desired conclusion.
I kind of hate how a lot of science fiction feels the need to address questions about religion. It comes across as defensive. IMO, not everything we don’t understand has to be mystical.
There were too many secondary characters. Although most of them get relatively little screen time, the sheer number of them was distracting.
Good Stuff:
Oh hey, a female as the lead character. And she’s smart, strong, and interesting. In short, she’s well-written. I hardly know what to say.
Actual science! That was neat.
The acting is really good. Foster does most of the heavy lifting, but I quite enjoyed Skerritt as well. I hated his character so much (same goes for James Woods as NSA guy Michael Kitz). Gotta love an actor who can make you loathe their character.
The Verdict:
About a year or two ago, my husband watched this movie while I was in the same room. I didn’t pay much attention to it. Every now and then, I looked up from what I was doing to ask, “Is that movie still on?” It seemed really, really long to me. So I have to admit that I wasn’t looking forward to my own viewing. I expected to be bored.
Much to my surprise, it was a lot more interesting than expected. I never felt bored. I think that this is due to good pacing. The story flows easily. There weren’t any parts that dragged. I cared about the characters. I cared about the mystery. I wanted to see how it all played out. Also, I enjoyed the cinematography and most of the special effects have held up well. It’s a very solid film elevated by great acting.
I give it 4 stars.
Released 1997 (USA)
American, in English (multiple non-translated other languages unimportant to the plot)
Director - Robert Zemeckis
Stars - Jodie Foster, Tom Skerritt, Matthew McConaughey, and many, many others
Plot Summary:
Dr. Eleanor Arroway (Foster), having spent most of her life searching for intelligent life in the universe, receives a message from deep space. Skerritt co-stars as David Drumlin, Arroway’s nemesis, and McConaughey as Palmer Joss, a spiritual guru who is also Arroway’s love interest.
Warnings:
Very minor violence; minor blue language; implied sexy times.
Bad Stuff:
S.R. Hadden (John Hurt) was a little too convenient as a character. He was mostly a plot device, there to rescue Arroway every time she got stuck so the story could move forward to the desired conclusion.
I kind of hate how a lot of science fiction feels the need to address questions about religion. It comes across as defensive. IMO, not everything we don’t understand has to be mystical.
There were too many secondary characters. Although most of them get relatively little screen time, the sheer number of them was distracting.
Good Stuff:
Oh hey, a female as the lead character. And she’s smart, strong, and interesting. In short, she’s well-written. I hardly know what to say.
Actual science! That was neat.
The acting is really good. Foster does most of the heavy lifting, but I quite enjoyed Skerritt as well. I hated his character so much (same goes for James Woods as NSA guy Michael Kitz). Gotta love an actor who can make you loathe their character.
The Verdict:
About a year or two ago, my husband watched this movie while I was in the same room. I didn’t pay much attention to it. Every now and then, I looked up from what I was doing to ask, “Is that movie still on?” It seemed really, really long to me. So I have to admit that I wasn’t looking forward to my own viewing. I expected to be bored.
Much to my surprise, it was a lot more interesting than expected. I never felt bored. I think that this is due to good pacing. The story flows easily. There weren’t any parts that dragged. I cared about the characters. I cared about the mystery. I wanted to see how it all played out. Also, I enjoyed the cinematography and most of the special effects have held up well. It’s a very solid film elevated by great acting.
I give it 4 stars.
Wednesday, February 22, 2017
Out and About: USS Midway Museum
During a recent visit from my brother, we decided to check out the USS Midway, a retired aircraft carrier that has been turned into a museum. It's permanently docked in San Diego Bay. I have to admit, it wouldn't have been my first museum of choice, but my brother is really into military history, and I wanted to be a good host. The museum's website indicated that most guests spend about 3-4 hours there. "Pfft," I thought. "There's no way I'll be there that long."
Wrong.
All told, we spent about three and a half hours at the museum. There's absolutely no way to explain to you how large aircraft carriers are. There was A LOT to see. Even after spending all that time there, without any breaks for food, we still didn't see everything.
Tickets to the museum cost $20, with lower prices for people such as seniors, children, and retired military. Parking costs $10. My brother and I took the train from Oceanside to downtown San Diego and walked to the museum from there; that walk was less than half a mile. Included in the ticket price are free self-guided tour devices, a free movie about the Battle of Midway (the aircraft carrier, built in 1945, was named after this battle), and a free docent-guided tour of the "tower," where the bridge and officers' quarters are located.
I didn't take a ton of pictures, but here are some of the better ones that I did.
I really liked this stained glass "window" in the chapel. The chapel itself was surprisingly small for a ship that carried 4500 people. I would say it fit approximately 20.
View out a porthole.
In the end, I enjoyed my visit to the Midway. I found it really interesting. I'm glad that my brother wanted to go because I never would have gone on my own. The next time you're in San Diego, I highly recommend a visit!
Wrong.
All told, we spent about three and a half hours at the museum. There's absolutely no way to explain to you how large aircraft carriers are. There was A LOT to see. Even after spending all that time there, without any breaks for food, we still didn't see everything.
Tickets to the museum cost $20, with lower prices for people such as seniors, children, and retired military. Parking costs $10. My brother and I took the train from Oceanside to downtown San Diego and walked to the museum from there; that walk was less than half a mile. Included in the ticket price are free self-guided tour devices, a free movie about the Battle of Midway (the aircraft carrier, built in 1945, was named after this battle), and a free docent-guided tour of the "tower," where the bridge and officers' quarters are located.
I didn't take a ton of pictures, but here are some of the better ones that I did.
I really liked this stained glass "window" in the chapel. The chapel itself was surprisingly small for a ship that carried 4500 people. I would say it fit approximately 20.
The Midway has a lot of "Asian" influenced decor. My self-guided tour device said this was because the ship spent so much of its time docked in Asia. I loved this screen in the enlisted officers' mess hall (I may have the terminology wrong; this was the mess for the people who weren't grunts but also weren't at the top.)
The "tower." The person-cutouts against the wall at the bottom of the tower explain how all the people who work out on the flight deck are color-coded. The people in purple, for example, are the ones who refuel the plane (that was my grandfather's job when he served during WWII).
View of downtown San Diego from the tower.
View of San Diego Bay from the tower.
View of the flight deck from the tower. The air craft carrier docked in the distance is an active duty carrier.
You may have heard about the storm that recently slammed California. Our trip to the Midway happened on the day it rolled into town. The wind out on the flight deck was insane. I nearly got blown off my feet more than once.
Another view out a porthole reminds you to be aware of your surroundings while you're on the flight deck.
Coronado Bridge in the distance with pretty clouds.
Back end of some of the aircraft out on the flight deck, on the way down to the flight crews' ready rooms.
I liked the aerial view of these trees' roots.
Given my undying love for the Portland Timbers, I decided that this flight crew's patch was my favorite.
Radar screen. My husband is a former (submarine) Navy guy. I've heard many a story about how boring it was to sit and stare at a screen like this for hours on end.
Until very, very recently (mere days before I saw it in person), I had no idea that there was a giant statue of "Unconditional Surrender" on the San Diego Bay waterfront. That's the Midway in the background.
Downtown San Diego.
In the end, I enjoyed my visit to the Midway. I found it really interesting. I'm glad that my brother wanted to go because I never would have gone on my own. The next time you're in San Diego, I highly recommend a visit!
Monday, February 13, 2017
Sci Fi Top 100, #48: "Ghostbusters" (1984)
Movie Stats:
Released 1984 (USA)
American, in English
Director - Ivan Reitman
Stars - Bill Murray, Dan Aykroyd, Sigourney Weaver, Harold Ramis, Ernie Hudson, and many others
Plot Summary:
Three paranormal investigators start a ghost busting business and take on a major infestation that threatens New York City. Murray, Aykroyd, Ramis, and Hudson star as the ghost busters: Dr. Peter Venkman, Dr. Raymond Stantz, Dr. Egon Spengler, and Winston Zeddmore. Weaver co-stars as client Dana Barrett, who is also Venkman’s love interest.
Warnings:
Violence; blue language; heavily implied sexy times.
Bad Stuff:
As I recall, some of the special effects (like the claymation “dogs”) didn’t look so great at the time. They certainly don’t look great now.
Some of the scenes are painfully stupid and embarrassing. For example, the [SPOILER] ghost blow job. I mean, come on. How was that ever considered a good idea, especially for a movie rated PG? [SPOILER]
Good Stuff:
It’s fun and funny. The dialogue is great, very quotable, and told with excellent comedic timing. There were so many small moments that made me laugh.
The characters are all very well-written, even the minor ones. My particular favorites of the minors are Annie Potts (as secretary Janine Melnitz) and Rick Moranis (as Dana’s neighbor, Louis Tully).
I loved the soundtrack (except for maybe that “Savin’ the Day” song).
The Verdict:
How could you not love this movie? It’s sweet, light-hearted, creative, and hilarious. In short, it’s thoroughly enjoyable.
I give it 4 stars.
Released 1984 (USA)
American, in English
Director - Ivan Reitman
Stars - Bill Murray, Dan Aykroyd, Sigourney Weaver, Harold Ramis, Ernie Hudson, and many others
Plot Summary:
Three paranormal investigators start a ghost busting business and take on a major infestation that threatens New York City. Murray, Aykroyd, Ramis, and Hudson star as the ghost busters: Dr. Peter Venkman, Dr. Raymond Stantz, Dr. Egon Spengler, and Winston Zeddmore. Weaver co-stars as client Dana Barrett, who is also Venkman’s love interest.
Warnings:
Violence; blue language; heavily implied sexy times.
Bad Stuff:
As I recall, some of the special effects (like the claymation “dogs”) didn’t look so great at the time. They certainly don’t look great now.
Some of the scenes are painfully stupid and embarrassing. For example, the [SPOILER] ghost blow job. I mean, come on. How was that ever considered a good idea, especially for a movie rated PG? [SPOILER]
Good Stuff:
It’s fun and funny. The dialogue is great, very quotable, and told with excellent comedic timing. There were so many small moments that made me laugh.
The characters are all very well-written, even the minor ones. My particular favorites of the minors are Annie Potts (as secretary Janine Melnitz) and Rick Moranis (as Dana’s neighbor, Louis Tully).
I loved the soundtrack (except for maybe that “Savin’ the Day” song).
The Verdict:
How could you not love this movie? It’s sweet, light-hearted, creative, and hilarious. In short, it’s thoroughly enjoyable.
I give it 4 stars.
Friday, February 10, 2017
Sci Fi Top 100, #49: "Starship Troopers" (1997)
Movie Stats:
Released 1997 (USA)
American, in English
Director - Paul Verhoeven
Stars - Casper Van Dien, Dina Meyer, Denise Richards, Jake Busey, and many others
Plot Summary:
In the 22nd century, the survival of the human race is threatened by attack from an alien race of bug-like creatures; three friends join the federation military after graduating high school to fight for the cause. Van Dien stars as Johnny Rico; Meyer as Dizzy Flores; Richards as Carmen Ibanez; and Busey as Ace Levy.
Warnings:
Extreme violence; extreme gore; minor blue language; female nudity (breasts and butt); male nudity (butt only); heavily implied sexy times.
Bad Stuff:
Most of the acting is subpar. Richards is the worst of the lot.
I prefer my action movies to be succinct, so I think it’s too long. They could have cut out at least one “everybody gets killed by insect-like aliens” scene.
[BIG SPOILER]
Dizzy is a pretty cool, badass female character. Having “I got to have sex with Johnny” be her life’s grandest achievement really grated on my nerves. (Also, she was repeatedly passed over for promotions in favor of her less talented male counterparts, something NO ONE EVER TALKS ABOUT.) By the way, her character is a man in the source material. I don’t know if he had a death scene, but if he did, I doubt he died happy because he got to bang Johnny.**
[SPOILER]
Good Stuff:
The way it handles exposition is very clever.
It has a great, subversive, dark sense of humor.
The special effects have held up remarkably well.
The Verdict:
I never liked this film before, so I have to admit that I was dreading having to watch it again. I’m not sure why I always disliked it so much. It’s one of those movies that everyone I know loves and I’m sitting here going, “I don’t get it.” I won’t claim to completely get it now, but I get it more than I used to. In a dark way, this flick is pretty funny, and its subtle jabs at a certain kind of political system (sadly not unlike the one the people currently in power in the U.S. would love to have) are well done. It’s a pretty solid, if extremely violent, action film. I still have problems with it, but I no longer hate it.
I give it 3.5 stars.
**I just discovered that Dizzy isn't the only character that received a "facelift" from book to movie. In the book, Johnny's real first name is Juan and he's of Filipino decent, definitely not a blond-haired, blue-eyed all-American type.
Released 1997 (USA)
American, in English
Director - Paul Verhoeven
Stars - Casper Van Dien, Dina Meyer, Denise Richards, Jake Busey, and many others
Plot Summary:
In the 22nd century, the survival of the human race is threatened by attack from an alien race of bug-like creatures; three friends join the federation military after graduating high school to fight for the cause. Van Dien stars as Johnny Rico; Meyer as Dizzy Flores; Richards as Carmen Ibanez; and Busey as Ace Levy.
Warnings:
Extreme violence; extreme gore; minor blue language; female nudity (breasts and butt); male nudity (butt only); heavily implied sexy times.
Bad Stuff:
Most of the acting is subpar. Richards is the worst of the lot.
I prefer my action movies to be succinct, so I think it’s too long. They could have cut out at least one “everybody gets killed by insect-like aliens” scene.
[BIG SPOILER]
Dizzy is a pretty cool, badass female character. Having “I got to have sex with Johnny” be her life’s grandest achievement really grated on my nerves. (Also, she was repeatedly passed over for promotions in favor of her less talented male counterparts, something NO ONE EVER TALKS ABOUT.) By the way, her character is a man in the source material. I don’t know if he had a death scene, but if he did, I doubt he died happy because he got to bang Johnny.**
[SPOILER]
Good Stuff:
The way it handles exposition is very clever.
It has a great, subversive, dark sense of humor.
The special effects have held up remarkably well.
The Verdict:
I never liked this film before, so I have to admit that I was dreading having to watch it again. I’m not sure why I always disliked it so much. It’s one of those movies that everyone I know loves and I’m sitting here going, “I don’t get it.” I won’t claim to completely get it now, but I get it more than I used to. In a dark way, this flick is pretty funny, and its subtle jabs at a certain kind of political system (sadly not unlike the one the people currently in power in the U.S. would love to have) are well done. It’s a pretty solid, if extremely violent, action film. I still have problems with it, but I no longer hate it.
I give it 3.5 stars.
**I just discovered that Dizzy isn't the only character that received a "facelift" from book to movie. In the book, Johnny's real first name is Juan and he's of Filipino decent, definitely not a blond-haired, blue-eyed all-American type.
Wednesday, February 8, 2017
Up with Geography: Croatia
Country Name:
Croatia
Capital:
Zagreb
Continent:
Europe
Maps:
Neighbors:
Slovenia, Hungary, Serbia, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Montenegro
Water Borders:
Adriatic Sea
Total Area:
21,851 square miles
Five Largest Cities:
Zagreb, Split, Rijeka, Osijek, Zadar
Famous Geographical Point:
Plitvice Lakes National Park
Famous Person:
Leopold Ruzicka, 1939 recipient of the Nobel Prize for Chemistry*
Book Set In/About:
Cafe Europa: Life After Communism by Slavenka Drakulic
In this series of short essays by journalist and noted author Drakulic, she explores life in Eastern Europe after the fall of Communism.
Movie Set In/About:
"Tito i ja (Tito and Me)" (1992), directed by Goran Markovic
Set in Yugoslavia during the 1950s (Croatia was a part of Yugoslavia at that time), a young boy innocently admires the president, Josip Broz Tito (who had an oppressive regime), bringing him into conflict with the adults around him.
Headline of the Day:
"Finally! A Helicopter Service for Croatia Based on Brac for 2017" in Total Croatia News.
*For the Balkans, where ethnicity is complex and important, choosing a famous Croat was a thornier issue than I anticipated. For example, Nikola Tesla was born and raised in what is now Croatia, but, so far as I can tell, isn't considered Croat because his family was Serbian. Similarly, the composer Joseph Haydn is (controversially apparently) considered Croat even though he was born and raised in Austria. Typically, I like to choose someone who was born and raised to adulthood in that country. Mr. Ruzicka was ethnically Croat AND born there, but may have left before the age of 18 (Wikipedia was unclear on that matter). I decided to go with him anyway.
Croatia
Capital:
Zagreb
Continent:
Europe
Maps:
 |
| European continent. Croatia outlined in dark ink & shaded. |
 |
| A close-up of Croatia & its neighbors. I included the island of Brac so you'll have an idea what the headline is talking about. |
Neighbors:
Slovenia, Hungary, Serbia, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Montenegro
Water Borders:
Adriatic Sea
Total Area:
21,851 square miles
Five Largest Cities:
Zagreb, Split, Rijeka, Osijek, Zadar
Famous Geographical Point:
Plitvice Lakes National Park
Famous Person:
Leopold Ruzicka, 1939 recipient of the Nobel Prize for Chemistry*
Book Set In/About:
Cafe Europa: Life After Communism by Slavenka Drakulic
In this series of short essays by journalist and noted author Drakulic, she explores life in Eastern Europe after the fall of Communism.
Movie Set In/About:
"Tito i ja (Tito and Me)" (1992), directed by Goran Markovic
Set in Yugoslavia during the 1950s (Croatia was a part of Yugoslavia at that time), a young boy innocently admires the president, Josip Broz Tito (who had an oppressive regime), bringing him into conflict with the adults around him.
Headline of the Day:
"Finally! A Helicopter Service for Croatia Based on Brac for 2017" in Total Croatia News.
*For the Balkans, where ethnicity is complex and important, choosing a famous Croat was a thornier issue than I anticipated. For example, Nikola Tesla was born and raised in what is now Croatia, but, so far as I can tell, isn't considered Croat because his family was Serbian. Similarly, the composer Joseph Haydn is (controversially apparently) considered Croat even though he was born and raised in Austria. Typically, I like to choose someone who was born and raised to adulthood in that country. Mr. Ruzicka was ethnically Croat AND born there, but may have left before the age of 18 (Wikipedia was unclear on that matter). I decided to go with him anyway.
Monday, February 6, 2017
Sci Fi Top 100, #50: "Under the Skin" (2013)
Movie Stats:
Released 2013 (USA)
British, American & Swiss, in English
Director - Jonathan Glazer
Stars - Scarlett Johansson
Plot Summary:
An unnamed woman (Johansson) prowls the streets of Scotland looking for male victims to pick up. Vague, I know, but more explanation than that would spoil it.
Warnings:
Full male & female nudity; violence; gore; sexy times; attempted rape; minor blue language.
Bad Stuff:
It’s very dull. In theory, watching Scarlett Johansson wander around for nearly two hours sounds awesome. In practice, it’s not.
Nothing, and I mean nothing, is ever explained.
[BIG SPOILER]
Although it could be argued that she "deserved it," given what she did to all of her poor, lonely victims, I hated that the woman was victimized by a man in the end. To me, it was a huge detraction from what made this film remotely interesting.
[SPOILER]
Good Stuff:
The visuals are stunning. I’m not referring to all the naked people (although some of them were stunning too).
It’s got great atmosphere. The music sets most of the tone, but the camera work and the acting play into it as well. It’s supposed to be uncomfortable to watch and it is.
I enjoyed the sparse use of dialogue. It was different.
The Verdict:
It was interesting to see men being portrayed as vulnerable, helpless victims, something that is rarely found in media. Did it make me uncomfortable? Was I distressed? Certainly. There’s something about this film that is fundamentally, deeply disturbing. I think that’s a good thing. Movies that make us feel something are few and far between. Also, it has a really old school vibe. It’s that atmosphere - it reminded me of a 1950s sci fi-horror movie, albeit without the camp. However, this film is very, very boring. Like, I’m-surprised-I-wasn’t-lulled-into-a-coma boring. It’s too bad. I really struggled with how to rate it but ultimately decided not to leave it languishing in the doldrums of the 2s.
I give it 3 stars.
Released 2013 (USA)
British, American & Swiss, in English
Director - Jonathan Glazer
Stars - Scarlett Johansson
Plot Summary:
An unnamed woman (Johansson) prowls the streets of Scotland looking for male victims to pick up. Vague, I know, but more explanation than that would spoil it.
Warnings:
Full male & female nudity; violence; gore; sexy times; attempted rape; minor blue language.
Bad Stuff:
It’s very dull. In theory, watching Scarlett Johansson wander around for nearly two hours sounds awesome. In practice, it’s not.
Nothing, and I mean nothing, is ever explained.
[BIG SPOILER]
Although it could be argued that she "deserved it," given what she did to all of her poor, lonely victims, I hated that the woman was victimized by a man in the end. To me, it was a huge detraction from what made this film remotely interesting.
[SPOILER]
Good Stuff:
The visuals are stunning. I’m not referring to all the naked people (although some of them were stunning too).
It’s got great atmosphere. The music sets most of the tone, but the camera work and the acting play into it as well. It’s supposed to be uncomfortable to watch and it is.
I enjoyed the sparse use of dialogue. It was different.
The Verdict:
It was interesting to see men being portrayed as vulnerable, helpless victims, something that is rarely found in media. Did it make me uncomfortable? Was I distressed? Certainly. There’s something about this film that is fundamentally, deeply disturbing. I think that’s a good thing. Movies that make us feel something are few and far between. Also, it has a really old school vibe. It’s that atmosphere - it reminded me of a 1950s sci fi-horror movie, albeit without the camp. However, this film is very, very boring. Like, I’m-surprised-I-wasn’t-lulled-into-a-coma boring. It’s too bad. I really struggled with how to rate it but ultimately decided not to leave it languishing in the doldrums of the 2s.
I give it 3 stars.
Friday, February 3, 2017
Sci Fi Top 100, #51: "Fantastic Planet" (1973)
Movie Stats:
Released 1973 (France)
French & Czechoslovakian, in French (I watched with English subtitles)
Director - Rene Laloux
Stars - Eric Baugin, Jean Valmont
Plot Summary:
On a distant planet, the giant Traag people keep a humanoid race called the Om as pets. Young orphan Terr is taken in by a Traag family and eventually uses the knowledge he gleans from them to start a rebellion. Baugin voices young Terr; Valmont voices him as an adult/acts as narrator.
Warnings:
Violence; gore; full female & male nudity; heavily implied sexy times.
Bad Stuff:
It’s so boring! Never has an hour and eleven minutes of my life felt longer.
The big reveal about why the Traag spend so much time meditating made me roll my eyes. [SPOILER] They’re actually having sex during meditation. Which, come to think of it, makes that scene where the Traag children went off to meditate for the first time a little bit creepy. [SPOILER]
The soundtrack is painful.
Good Stuff:
It has a good message. It certainly should make you think twice about how we as humans treat animals.
I like the animation style. I’m not sure I’ve seen much like it before.
It’s very creative.
The Verdict:
I want to like this film because I know it’s innovative, it’s creative, and it has a strong viewpoint (although the execution of that point is a bit heavy-handed). But I didn’t like it. I was bored to tears. I seriously felt like I spent the whole afternoon watching it, while in reality it’s the shortest film on this list so far. Just not my cup of tea, I guess. If you want to watch something obscure and/or different, I wouldn’t discourage you from giving it a shot. But I also wouldn’t put it on my own sci fi recommendation list.
I give it 2 stars.
Released 1973 (France)
French & Czechoslovakian, in French (I watched with English subtitles)
Director - Rene Laloux
Stars - Eric Baugin, Jean Valmont
Plot Summary:
On a distant planet, the giant Traag people keep a humanoid race called the Om as pets. Young orphan Terr is taken in by a Traag family and eventually uses the knowledge he gleans from them to start a rebellion. Baugin voices young Terr; Valmont voices him as an adult/acts as narrator.
Warnings:
Violence; gore; full female & male nudity; heavily implied sexy times.
Bad Stuff:
It’s so boring! Never has an hour and eleven minutes of my life felt longer.
The big reveal about why the Traag spend so much time meditating made me roll my eyes. [SPOILER] They’re actually having sex during meditation. Which, come to think of it, makes that scene where the Traag children went off to meditate for the first time a little bit creepy. [SPOILER]
The soundtrack is painful.
Good Stuff:
It has a good message. It certainly should make you think twice about how we as humans treat animals.
I like the animation style. I’m not sure I’ve seen much like it before.
It’s very creative.
The Verdict:
I want to like this film because I know it’s innovative, it’s creative, and it has a strong viewpoint (although the execution of that point is a bit heavy-handed). But I didn’t like it. I was bored to tears. I seriously felt like I spent the whole afternoon watching it, while in reality it’s the shortest film on this list so far. Just not my cup of tea, I guess. If you want to watch something obscure and/or different, I wouldn’t discourage you from giving it a shot. But I also wouldn’t put it on my own sci fi recommendation list.
I give it 2 stars.
Wednesday, February 1, 2017
Up with U.S. Geography: Tennessee
State Name:
Tennessee
Capital:
Nashville
Date of Entry:
June 1, 1796
Maps:
Neighbors:
Kentucky, Virginia, North Carolina, Georgia, Alabama, Mississippi, Arkansas, Missouri
Water Borders:
Mississippi River
Total Area:
42,143 square miles
Five Largest Cities:
Nashville, Memphis, Knoxville, Chattanooga, Clarksville
Famous Geographical Point:
Great Smoky Mountains
State Nickname:
The Volunteer State. They earned this nickname during the War of 1812, when thousands of men from Tennessee volunteered to be soldiers. They kept it by continuing this tradition of volunteering during ensuing wars.
Famous Person:
Bessie Smith, the Empress of Blues (my favorite blues singer!)
Book Set In/About:
A Death in the Family by James Agee
Set in Knoxville, the unexpected death of a young family man has a ripple effect. Reviews indicate that this depiction of loss and grief is extremely authentic. It's an autobiographical novel; Agee's father died unexpectedly when Agee was a young child.
Movie Set In/About:
"Hustle & Flow" (2005), directed by Craig Brewer
A Memphis pimp struggles to get his rap career off the ground.
Headline of the Day:
"After Graphic 'Mistake,' Tennessee Doesn't Hire Aaron Sterling" in the Knoxville News Sentinel.
This article is way less juicy than the headline seems to indicate. During a live broadcast by the University of Tennessee, they posted a picture of football player Aaron Sterling as though he'd been recruited for the team. He went to another team.
Tennessee
Capital:
Nashville
Date of Entry:
June 1, 1796
Maps:
 |
| Map of USA. Tennessee outlined in dark ink, shaded & with name written on it. |
 |
| A close-up of Tennessee & its neighbors. |
Neighbors:
Kentucky, Virginia, North Carolina, Georgia, Alabama, Mississippi, Arkansas, Missouri
Water Borders:
Mississippi River
Total Area:
42,143 square miles
Five Largest Cities:
Nashville, Memphis, Knoxville, Chattanooga, Clarksville
Famous Geographical Point:
Great Smoky Mountains
State Nickname:
The Volunteer State. They earned this nickname during the War of 1812, when thousands of men from Tennessee volunteered to be soldiers. They kept it by continuing this tradition of volunteering during ensuing wars.
Famous Person:
Bessie Smith, the Empress of Blues (my favorite blues singer!)
Book Set In/About:
A Death in the Family by James Agee
Set in Knoxville, the unexpected death of a young family man has a ripple effect. Reviews indicate that this depiction of loss and grief is extremely authentic. It's an autobiographical novel; Agee's father died unexpectedly when Agee was a young child.
Movie Set In/About:
"Hustle & Flow" (2005), directed by Craig Brewer
A Memphis pimp struggles to get his rap career off the ground.
Headline of the Day:
"After Graphic 'Mistake,' Tennessee Doesn't Hire Aaron Sterling" in the Knoxville News Sentinel.
This article is way less juicy than the headline seems to indicate. During a live broadcast by the University of Tennessee, they posted a picture of football player Aaron Sterling as though he'd been recruited for the team. He went to another team.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)