MY STUPID MOOOOVIE DIARRHEA (SIC)

To save space, I have decided to put my moooovie diarrea in one post. As you can see, I'm too fucken lazy to look up how to spell diahreah, or diarrhea, or whudever. No matter how you smell it, everybody knows what diarrrhhea is.


10,000 BC 3/9/08
Speaking of diahhreah, it's safe to wait another 10,000 years before seeing this piece of shit. What a piece of shit! One of the worst movies ever made. Not only was it AWFUL, but it was ANNOYING. It kept making loud noises and shit like that. What a piece of SHIT. A trained monkey could make a better movie than this piece of shit.

I'M NOT THERE. 12/7/07 (Pearl Harbor Day)
I saw the movie "I'm not there", about the life of Bob Dylan. I don't think that it's particularly understandable to non-Dylan fans. It might make some sense if you are intimately familiar with the various re-inventions of Bob Dylan, but I'm not.

Bob Dylan exploded on to the scene when I was in High School. We were making the huge transistion in the 60's from crew-cut, conformist, automatons to long-haired, LSD'd, neo-psychotics. And here was Bob Dylan singing songs that actually MEANT something. Songs that were actually poetry.

I liked (and still do) his early songs in the acoustic, folksy genre. Some are incredibly beautiful when you listen to them again. But then he went into his AWFUL electronic phase, and hardly made more than 2 or 3 more songs even worth listening to.

I never paid attention to Dylan after he entered the electronic phase. I also got very disgusted with him after hearing (as a teenager) that he had invested $10 million in New York City real estate. I don't know if that is true or not, but it highlighted the hypocrisy of singing about revolution and inequality, etc., and then investing the profits from the songs in real estate. I don't think that I ever took a rock group seriously after that. Which is probably wrong on my part.

What was most interesting about the movie was that Cate Blanchett played Bob Dylan in drag. She was actually very believable. In fact, she was a better Bob Dylan than Bob Dylan.

Unfortunately, she caused an outburst of homosexual anxiety on my part. That was because, before I realized that the character was actually Cate Blanchett, I got really turned on. I said "WTF!? Am I turning queer at my age? I've been watching and listening to Bob Dylan for 45 years and never got hot over him before."

Fortunately, once I recognized that "Bob Dylan" was actually Cate Blanchett, I understood that I was just turned on because I turn on significantly to Cate Blanchett. Whether she's a queen or a drag queen.

She's a very good actress. This is the second movie that I've seen her in where she did not look much like herself. I forgot the name of the first one, but it is reviewed somewhere in this Blob. I mean, Blog.

In fact, after the movie was over, I actually Googled "Cate Blanchett" and "I'm not there" to make sure that it was REALLY Cate Blanchett in drag. I still wasn't 100% sure. But it was.

After the Cate Blanchett part, there was a Richard Gere part, but I got bored and left.

Draft 1: 12/27/07.

THE GOLDEN COMPASS 12/8/07
I saw the Golden Compass last night. It may have it faults, but it is definitely an extraordinary movie. The critics just gave it a 43% , but I think that it will go on to become a classic. I liked it better than the Lord of the Rings.

I'm eager to read the trilogy, eventually. I just started Harry Potter 7, which will take me about 2 months. I don't read much fiction, so it takes me a long time to finish a novel. I also like to savor Harry Potter books. It's a fun world. But I'll definitely read that trilogy after Harry Potter.

While the theatre was mostly filled with little kids and their parents, I don't think that that will continue in the future. After the movie, while peeing, I heard a little kid (about 6 or 7) tell his father that he didn't like the movie because it was very scary.

I kind of thought that that would be the case. The movie has too much violence and noise for small children. Along with the treachery of Nicole Kidman, who I am still not sure was a good guy or a bad guy, there is ample material to give children nightmares. But the children in the theatre were quite spellbound by it. There wasn't much noise in the theatre, considering how many children there were.

Except for 2 teenage girls in the next isle who maintained an almost unbelievable stream of non-stop chatter. For the last 30 minutes of the movie, they did not stop talking for 1 second. It was something for the Guiness book of world records. I saw them after the lights turned on and they were still talking, and didn't seem to have any guilt about talking in the theatre. Perhaps they didn't know that they weren't supposed to be talking during the movie. It did rather detract from the movie. I could hardly hear Nicole Kidman.

Kidman put in a very good performance. She has shown herself to be a very good actress, starring in an unbelievable number of movies, and usually in a fairly unique and intelligent way.

But I think that this will ultimately turn into more of an adult, or at least age 16+ movie.

As far as it being anti-church, that may be the case in a spirtual sort of way. But if the church sees itself in the Magisterium, then maybe they ARE evil. The movie does seem to favor the individual and the witch against big Organized Religion, in a very strong way. The villians want to separate children from their daemons (souls)so that the Magisterium can use their daemons, and it leaves the children lifeless and powerless.

The armored bear gives a GREAT performance. I was surprised since it looked kind of stupid in the ads. But it's a great voice.

There were a lot of things that could have been better, of course. There was too much stupid violence. Most of it was unnecessary. The plot was a little too complicated and too diffuse.

In the sequel, they should put more emphasis on the daemons' behavior, and also on the meaning of the compass. They probably do in the book.