I love "Portnoy" I probably read it before I should have, though. It probably gave me wrong impressions. But I think its most lasting impact on me(besides strengthening my resolve to never, ever, eat liver) is the way that it's written, in terms of finding the freaky in ordinary stuff, and the way that you can hear the people's voices. But obviously, I'm speaking as someone outside Judaism. Philip Roth probably gave me my thing for Brainy Jewish Guys, even though I mostly use what I learned from him writing Munch fanfiction more than my own stuff(I don't know how Roth himself would feel about this, but I never accept the compliments without acknowledging him as an influence.)
'Sleeper'
Buffista Movies 7: Brides for 7 Samurai
A place to talk about movies--old and new, good and bad, high art and high cheese. It's the place to place your kittens on the award winners, gossip about upcoming fims and discuss DVD releases and extras. Spoiler policy: White font all plot-related discussion until a movie's been in wide release two weeks, and keep the major HSQ in white font until two weeks after the video/DVD release.
Zombieland was fun. I think Shaun of the Dead was funnier, but Zombieland was a more successful blend of both drama and comedy. It was unexpectedly affecting at times. And, yes, the cameo was pretty great.
Somebody took the long trailer for
2012
and cut out all the SFX, so you can concentrate on the stellar screaming acting on display:
Interview with Penny Chenery about Secretariat - the horse and the movie.
Ooooh! David Tennant and Simon Pegg are going to be in John Landis's Burke and Hare, based on a true story about two 19th century graverobbers who sell cadavers to Ediburgh medical students.
Ooooh! David Tennant and Simon Pegg are going to be in John Landis's Burke and Hare, based on a true story about two 19th century graverobbers who sell cadavers to Ediburgh medical students.
Nobody worry if you hear a giant squeal. That's just me, dying of happiness.
Michael Phillips of the Chicago Tribune has a four-star rave for Where the Wild Things Are.
The NYT has a pretty glowing review too.
Even so, it startles and charms and delights largely because Mr. Jonze’s filmmaking exceeds anything he’s done in either of his inventive previous features, “Being John Malkovich” (1999) and “Adaptation” (2002). With “Where the Wild Things Are” he has made a work of art that stands up to its source and, in some instances, surpasses it.
I haven't had time to post, but I loved it. I can't talk about it rationally, but I spent about the last third of the film in tears.