Ha, you know I used that word to bait you, Hec.

I spent quite a while trying to decide what grade to give it because, yes, it was actively pleasurable (though it took a while to really get going), which usually gets a movie a B+ in my book (pretty much everything starts there and goes up or down), but it wasn't really as good as most movies I've given a B+ to, nor as clearly niggling at me like most movies I've given a B/B+ to. I went in knowing that it wasn't going to be amazing, so I felt an obligation to be hard on it in acknowledgment. It was definitely flawed, but it was entertaining and coherent and there were some cool special effects and a Hero's Journey and a hot Blake Lively (who, thankfully, actually did something useful at one point).

Ha, you know I used that word to bait you, Hec.

I'm nothing if not constant.

Or, you know, boringly pedantic predictable.

And that's a fair defense of a "serviceable comic book movie."

It's funny I was watching the retro channel tonight and saw two episodes of Alfred Hitchcock Presents and one of Route 66, and they were all so much better crafted in the script than you generally see anymore. They weren't genre-savvy and meta and self-referential. They were dramas with odd and distinctive narrative beats and payoffs.

In lots of ways Television writing is close to its zenith now. The medium itself is being explored in richer ways - taking advantage of the long narrative form. But there was something to be said for that era when scripts were "teleplays" and written very tight. Like short stories instead of chapters in a novel. Like little plays.

I saw Tin Tin with Matilda today and it was a serviceable entertainment. Extremely well made and the tribute to the source material was sincere and well-rendered. And yet, I felt much the same way that I did after watching Hugo Cabaret. This is an elegant machine, but it's a kind of pastiche. It doesn't have the verve or rawness or strangeness or originality or odd dramatic beats or curious narrative choices that will stick with me. It was well made. Serviceable.

They were dramas with odd and distinctive narrative beats and payoffs.

ZOMG. Have you seen Run For Your Life? It's crazy! And there's one episode with Don Rickles where you wind up thinking "So the protagonist misread this situation completely, and also he's just an asshole... and wow, that's the ending?!" It's not a good show! But it's fascinating with the BANANAS.

Anyway. I would disagree that "long-form" TV is necessarily richer -- it *can* be, and it was interesting to see the season-arc format develop as a thing... but then it immediately devolved into "let's stretch an idea that wouldn't hold up for one episode into a subplot for 13/22 episodes." At this point I want serials to come back -- the "season-long arc" style has been abused so terribly that I would rather writers shake free of it for a while.

None of which has anything to do with movies, sorry. But there was a period when I was watching Retro TV Network every Saturday and the weirdness was fascinating. Much of it was ungood, but at least it was surprising. I miss that.

and the weirdness was fascinating. Much of it was ungood, but at least it was surprising. I miss that.

It was like eating salad after a week of popcorn and candy. My brain was craving something that wasn't so streamlined by genre conventions.

I feel that way about old science fiction stories too where they didn't feel like they were all greased up and on rails, but were twisty little strange things that could start anywhere and just drop you head first into bizarre scenarios.

In lots of ways Television writing is close to its zenith now. The medium itself is being explored in richer ways - taking advantage of the long narrative form. But there was something to be said for that era when scripts were "teleplays" and written very tight. Like short stories instead of chapters in a novel. Like little plays.

I got that feeling about comics when I read the Frank Miller Daredevil run. Each issue felt like a full, complete story, with action taking place over days, sometimes. Nowadays, you can get an entire issue that only covers, like, five minutes.

I wish Jane Espenson would pop in and talk about this subject. Scrappy! Go wake her up.

So, holy crap, Tinker Tailor Soldier Spy is incredible.

This is the first time in ages I've been tempted to ahem a movie just to get me through to the Blu-Ray release. The acting is astonishing. It's such an amazingly quiet film, and so much of what is said is said with body language rather than words.

Oh, and the Fright Night remake is awfully fun.

I want to see TTSS so baaaaad.

Just open in NC already!

I am SO irritated that it has such a limited number of US screens. Otherwise, it would be WAY easier for me to find a way to see it again and again and again. There's just too much acting for one viewing! I feel like I have to see it one time per actor so I can focus on them for the whole 2:07.

I think Mark Strong gave the best performance of his career. This morning, that's really sticking to me. Firth as well.

I am SO irritated that it has such a limited number of US screens.

Apparently it's not opening in Canada (or at least in the theatre chain in my area) until January 20th. Waaah!