A twenty favorite actress meme, the brain-child of Nathaniel R., in the order they came to me.
Juliette Binoche
Naomi Watts
Natalie Wood
Maggie Cheung
Katherine Hepburn
Kate Winslet
Setsuko Hara
Zhang Ziyi
Faye Wong
Gong Li
Claudette Colbert
Maria de Medeiros
Rachel Weisz
Ingrid Bergman
Liv Ullmann
Michelle Pfeiffer
Faye Dunaway
Catherine Deneuve
Claudia Cardinale
Giulietta Masina
RSS 2.0
Thank you ever so, Rick.
You are the bee’s knees.
Undoubtedly…
I see there has been some name-calling. This cannot be tolerated. CAN. NOT. NO PRISONERS! NO PRISONERS! (Where is Peter O’Toole when you need him?)
Miranda – Formidable intellect? Can you come over here and tell that to my fellow condo board members. They think I’m a contemptible moron. Maybe contemptible, but never a moron.
I stand firm on Hepburn, though I will admit a small weakness for her in A Long Day’s Journey into Night. It’s funny to see someone posture so… (tweek!)
Miranda, do bees have knees? I’ve often wondered at the etiology of that phrase.
Thank you, undoubtedly . . .
Marilyn, You would have noted the insults had you bothered to drop by after insulting ME on my taste in actresses. But no, you were just a drive-by insulter.
Doody-head.
Oh by the way, I liked your response to the folks at FOTM club. I personally just haven’t had time to do anything other than this blog and work and keep up family obligations. We haven’t exactly burnt up the wires over our proposed joint project, have we?
I can’t spend all day on your site, Rick. I have other subjects who clamor for my attention.
“Have you ever been stung by a dead bee?”
Marilyn, read my edit to the last comment …
Rick, I’m sorry if those guys are offended for being called what they are, but I don’t mince words. That’s the problem with academics – they are so concerned with writing everything perfectly and not looking stupid that they don’t contribute at all. After the initial burst prompted mainly by the magnetic presence of Girish, that was it.
As for our little project, I guess it’s dead, too. I wanted to do it, but my mind is consumed with a lot of headaches. As you can see from some of the more frothy offerings on FonF, it’s hard to even get my mind around writing reviews. I’m not kidding – this condo board is a nightmare! I plan to resign as soon as I can or just serve my last year and then give it up. I have a lot of writing I want to do, and it is really getting in the way.
God I know about boards . . . I’m on one here in T-town, West Alabama Aids Outreach, that is a major headache.
While I’d like to do film ethics, I’m not so sure that the blogging world is ready. People don’t seem to want to talk about subtext in film. If you do, people think you’re reading too much into it, or looking for stuff that isn’t there . . .
I think it could find a place. You and I have training in ethics, which I think would preclude a lot of strange subtextual reading.
As they say, “next year in the holy land…”
Rick, I know very little about insects per se. It would strike me, now that I think about it, that bees likely DO NOT have knees. But you never know.
I have yet to ask.
Marilyn, if your condo board members don’t see you for the marvelous treasure that you undoubtedly are, then they should be slapped up side of the head. Every hour on the hour.
Until they change their respective viewpoints.
That’ll show em….
Miranda, I like how you think.
I think we should do a knee survey, myself, which animals have knees and which don’t?
And i want to sell tickets to when Marilyn starts slapping board members up side the head. We could make enough to retire to Mexico and sip piña coladas all day.
Bees do have knees, yes, they really do. Why that is so cool, I’m not sure, but since the saying has been around a long time, it must be wise.
Slapping isn’t probably a good thing to do to one’s neighbor. Now, a perfect stranger in a movie, that’s another story. I will, however, try the doody-head insult on them and see how it goes.
Bee’s knees are cool because that’s where they carry the pollen.
Of course! (slaps head) After just viewing The Hellstrom Chronicle, I should have known that. Foxy as ever!
I looked it up one time b/c of Morrissey when he sang ‘Two lumps, please/ You’re the bee’s knees/But so am I’, in “Reel Around The Founatin”.
So this is why Marilyn’s been ignoring my blog. She’s been here being wooed by Rick.
While I’d like to do film ethics, I’m not so sure that the blogging world is ready. People don’t seem to want to talk about subtext in film. If you do, people think you’re reading too much into it, or looking for stuff that isn’t there . . .
You know, one of the reasons I stopped doing my other movie blog last year was because of the headaches of just that thing. It was my place to talk about new movies and really get into what was going with them. I started with No Country for Old Men and people seemed to get upset if you took the movie as anything but a straightforward drama. If you read anything into it you were not only wrong, but boring. That’s a response I would get. Something along the lines of “well you could look at it that way but it’s less interesting.” Why? Why is it only interesting to take a movie at face value? People are afraid to explore art for deeper meaning.
So I dropped the blog, and pretty much dropped any write-ups of that nature on Cinema Styles. As for starting a group blog, unless you have around thirty or forty contributors they seem doomed to failure as one person feels they’re carrying everyone else. And blogging is time consuming. With new movie blogs popping up every day it’s more and more time consuming just to make the rounds. By the time you’re done reading everyone’s daily entry and commenting, the day is done – And we still have to work and make money.
Lately I’ve been enjoying Invisible Edge and my personal blog of original films and photography much more than Cinema Styles. I love it, and love writing about movies, but sometimes with everything else going on in life, it feels like a job I’m not getting paid for.
And if you ever want to discuss ethics in film, I’m game. And if prior studies are a requirement, I minored in Philosophy at Catholic University and took as many Theology and Ethics courses as I could just to argue with the professors and piss them off. Which I did, often. But I got good grades.
Of course, like so many other things, I probably wouldn’t be able to squeeze any more time into it but maybe once a month, instead of doing a separate blog, we could each take turns hosting a discussion of a chosen film or topic on our own blogs. I think that makes more sense than a group blog. We pick a movie or genre or general topic for each month and rotate which blog covers it. I’m game for that. Just give me until January to get past the holidays, which are a neverending struggle for me as it is.
Jonathan – When you write posts about cruelty to animals, don’t expect me to jump in. That’s the only thing in films I’m squeamish about. I especially loathe the Pony Express.
Your talk about a chosen film butts right up against something Rick and I were discussing earlier in this comment thread – The Film of the Month Club. We both signed on. The first entry went gangbusters, probably because Girish picked it (we all love Girish), then it faded to black very quickly. I picked a film, wrote it up, and Ed Howard did an amazing two-parter that must have taken a huge amount of time grabbing all the screencaps. Nobody cared. There was an e-mail chain a couple of days ago – initiated by Ed – to save the Film Club. Everyone had some excuse or another, mostly grad school. I said in my usual delicate manner that nobody was committed to it, so I bowed out and wouldn’t participate in future. I got chastized for cutting and running, even though none of them even showed up to run away. Also for being resentful, which is true, and I’m not apologizing for it. Then they talked about how we shouldn’t get all uppity if there aren’t any comments, because all blogs go through that. I said, yes, a regular blog. This is a club. The whole idea is to watch a movie together and discuss. Otherwise, it’s not a club. That’s when I stopped reading and responding to the e-mails.
You know, one of the reasons I stopped doing my other movie blog last year was because of the headaches of just that thing. It was my place to talk about new movies and really get into what was going with them. I started with No Country for Old Men and people seemed to get upset if you took the movie as anything but a straightforward drama. If you read anything into it you were not only wrong, but boring. That’s a response I would get. Something along the lines of “well you could look at it that way but it’s less interesting.” Why? Why is it only interesting to take a movie at face value? People are afraid to explore art for deeper meaning.
God… that’s depressing. If you are a “critic” or “cinephile” etc., how can you NOT look at movies (or any art) and search for something underneath? I can’t talk about movies without trying to dig into them. I have no interest in writing summaries of movies. Leave that to Todd McCarthy or Peter Travers.
I mean, I had a talk with a friend of mine (in person, off the blog) about The Dark Knight, and how I think it reflects our culture’s sadistic obsessions, but he didn’t wanna hear it and thought I was being a twat and told me to just have fun. I can’t do that. If I wanna have fun I look at porn or play video games.
But Jonathan, I think you should start something like that up again. If not on Cinema Styles, on another blog b/c I think you – and every one of us – are interested in that type of forum. Am I wrong?
Fox, you are the man . . . and I’m glad to see my theory about animal behavior to hold true even in the bee world: “It’s all about food and/or sex”
Of course, we humans are above all that stuff.
P.S. to Jonathan-
I remember loving your October Kill Fest post on The Exorcist b/c it started talks of different interpretations that I found fascinating. In fact, that was one of my favorite threads b/c it felt like we were really getting into the guts of a film for once.
The oozing, slimy guts. Yum!
You know, all this discussion about subtext and getting to deeper levels reminds me of the my most recent attempt to go a little deeper, the recent post on Prince Caspian. Jonathan is right: most folks just say “maybe you’re reading too much into it,” or “it’s just a movie, it’s just an adventure, it’s not sadistic twaddle like The Dark Knight”
I saw “Wanted” on DVD the other day, and I’ve never saw so much sado-masochistic crap in my life. It exists as far as I can tell for no other reason than to fan the blood-lust of adolescents. Which it did: a well-known young movie blogger, in response to someone pointing this out, that there may be more to this flick than just good fun, he said in his blog, and I’m quoting now, “Shut the fuck up! Shut the fuck up! Shut the fuck up!” Talk about a self-fulfilling prophecy.
But how do you tell when there’s no there there? I saw a Korean film Beautiful that was horribly sadistic towards women (with an edge of comedy) but that was supposed to reflect the sensibilities of the first-time director’s mentor, who is highly regarded in Korea. Is it a flaw in myself (did I actually say that?!) that I can’t see deeper it this thing? Am I really missing something crucial? Was the idea there, but not the execution?
Marilyn and I even had a blog up called “Film Ethics” here, but if you go there, you’ll see there are no posts. Neither of us has had the time. Hell, I haven’t had the time (for some reason Christmas/Advent is really busy for me …) to post to CCC since Saturday.
I’d like to do a blog that goes a little deeper than just who does what and how cool the special effects were. Maybe film ethics isn’t the right title . . . but then again, maybe we don’t have time . . .
Marilyn, to answer your last post, no I don’t think its a flaw in you. (I would never say that, ’cause you could find out where I live). sometimes there’s no there there. I think in “Wanted” what it really was for — to fan the empowerment fantasy of adolescent video-game players — was what it was really for. All the existential crap that people put on it may be there as well, but at its core it is what it is.
Btw, I heard a reviewer say once that he’s never seen a Korean film without an edge of sado-masochism, largely toward women.
But how do you tell when there’s no there there? I saw a Korean film Beautiful that was horribly sadistic towards women (with an edge of comedy) but that was supposed to reflect the sensibilities of the first-time director’s mentor, who is highly regarded in Korea. Is it a flaw in myself (did I actually say that?!) that I can’t see deeper it this thing? Am I really missing something crucial? Was the idea there, but not the execution?
That’s the thing. I mean, what Marilyn just said is why I love digging deeper. I don’t expect to be right, or agreeable all of the time, and sometimes I expect to change my mind, but that’s why I crave discussions and debates on movies. There are cultural and life experience barriers that will effect us for sure. Marilyn mentions Beautiful. I grapple with the films of another Korean director Kim Ki-Duk for many of the reasons she said above. I’ve gone days sometimes trying to figure out where I stand. But I think that’s great!!!
We bring out own experiences and biases into movies and, to me, that’s okay. I think writing about movies is kind of writing about yourself… or, trying to figure yourself out, or, think through things so you can make sense of them.
I think The Host was a feminist-friendly Korean film.
And there are definitely films that are just meant to go with popcorn, like my beloved Resident Evil films. But when you get to Romero’s Dead films, there we’re going a little deeper, tapping the collective unconscious or making a direct comment, as the later films do. Nonetheless, I laugh at how some people fall all over themselves to spin gold from straw. It’s just as silly as the, “Can’t you just relax and watch the movie” folks.
The Emperor’s Last Bang and Chiwaseon, too, but those were historic event and biopic, respectively.
Btw, I heard a reviewer say once that he’s never seen a Korean film without an edge of sado-masochism, largely toward women.\
There’s some truth to that, but not fully. Like there are some Korean films such as My Wife Is A Gangster that are kind of pro-feminist, in my opinion.
ok… I love this discussion but I gotta leave my desk for about an hour… BE BACK SOON!
Fox, Kim is the mentor I mentioned.
Ahhh…. yes, I’ve gone from defending his films (Samaritan Girl, Bad Guy) to being pretty disgusted by them (The Isle, The Coast Guard). But I will say this about him. I will gladly go back and re-watch his films in due time to see if my perspective have changes. For whatever he is, I think he really believes in what he’s doing, and I respect that.
But as Rick mentioned above, all of those movies I just mentioned could be seen as being very brutal towards women. Here’s what Wiki says about The Isle
Marilyn – All those reasons you stated are why a group blog just doesn’t work but if Fox wrote up Movie A in January, we let everyone know and we all discussed it for several days on his blog, then in February we do a movie at Ferdy on Films, then March Cinema Styles, April Coosa Creek and so on it would work because we all visit each other’s blogs and comment anyway. And there’s no added pressure about keeping a separate film club/blog going because we use our own blogs. We just all have to make sure we watch the movie in question, that’s all.
Fox – It’s surprising to me how many people get downright upset about reading context into a movie. And I have The Dark Knight finally on its way to my house. Am I a bad cinephile for wanting to dislike it before even seeing it?
I should add that I’ve wanted to dislike movies before and ending up liking them so if it’s good I’ll still like it. But something tells me I’m not going to. Every pop cultural phenom that I’m told has changed movies forever always seems to disappoint me.
Anyway, I really have so many posts to write on movies I want to dig into but never feel I have the time and it’s frustrating. Work has simply become more and more time consuming and life at home seems busier than ever too. Just this weekend my wife was lamenting that she hasn’t done a painting in a couple of weeks because there’s just no time.
Oh and Marilyn, the Pony Express post was a total joke post about a short subject. There wasn’t actually anything about the Pony Express, historically speaking, except several paragraphs of me acting seemingly in awe of the short while clearly tearing it to shreds between the lines.
Jonathan -
And you have kids!! The fact they you juggle three blogs in tandem with that alone is impressive.
But on The Dark Knight thingy. This is via Jason @ The Cooler, but he posted something from Jim Emerson’s blog about how a critic (or blogger) out there was saying “Deny The Dark Knight an Oscar nom at your own peril!” or something. Um, ok?! I mean, I get that people like that movie, and I’ve heard some eloquent reasons why. But I don’t like it, so let’s talk about it and not flip our lids. I mean, you’re right, some people just get full on ANGRY! It’s bizarre. I had a good friend of mine really get personal with his attacks on me after I shared my thoughts on The Bourne Ultimatum, There Will Be Blood, and Step Up To The Streets, and it was really awkward. It was like I had harmed him in some deep way. Anyways… Here is that Scanners link. And to be fair, I haven’t read the whole thing.
I’m sorry to be coming to this fascinating thread late in the day, but work got in the way.
Two brief things:
1)I would gladly participate in a “Film of the Month Club” so if anyone launches it, let me know.
2) Rick – thank you from the bottom of my heart for blasting “Wanted.” I had exactly the same horrified, disgusted reaction, but most people I’ve share it with just think I don’t know how to relax and have fun.
Rick-
I totally understand if you don’t want to, but I couldn’t help asking where that was when the guy/gal said “SHUT UP!” over Wanted.
Pat-
I’m with you on your agreement with Rick on Wanted. I had the same battles with people over Sin City. In fact, I just watched part of it again with my wife. She liked it, I still hated it. But the cool thing about her is that she’s just “I thought it was gross, gooey fun”. And I totally respect that b/c she doesn’t tell me to “shut up!” if I wanna like it for below the surface reasons. I guess that’s why we’re married… And BTW, I think things can be “gross gooey fun” too… like Dead Alive, but I dislike Sin City for other reasons. Kinda along the same lines as The Dark Knight and Wanted, in fact
[...] I happened to be over at the lovely and talented RICK OLSON’S site, COOSA CREEK CINEMA [...]
Rick, 100 comment posts are copyrighted to Cinema Styles, Inc., a subsidiary of Mega-Movie BlogAmerica, a sub-subsidiary of Exxon Mobile, so if you get there with this post you owe me money.
HAHA…. Jonathan, I was thinking the same thing about the 100 comments, but like a no-hitter into the 7th inning of a baseball game, I didn’t want to bring it up and jinx Rick. Go Rick, Go!
p.s.
Jonathan, the check will be in the mail . . .
Fox, It was ****** over at his blog ****** And I had the same reaction to “Sin City” I thought it was vile. Entertaining but vile.
(comment edited because it looks like maybe more people might be headed this way. If you didn’t catch it, Fox, email me)
I would be totally in favor of some sort of rotating discussion of movies on our respective blogs about a single movie once in awhile, sort of like Jonathan — or was it Fox? — suggested. Maybe if we keep it low key and our egos in check — which, of course, we do anyway! — we could maybe have some good discussions. We could rotate the blog location from month to month, as someone on this thread suggested . . .
Hi! Rick,
Omg!…I “step” away for a couple of days (What seemed like only a few hours…)( a “babe” in the woods at no#3…Wow!…now, I am no# 96….Rick!)
dcd
Wow!….Your Click to Edit feature is very nice!….ahhh!…no more..Sorry! Rick, I made a “typo” you may never hear those words from me again!…I bet you are happy!…not to hear those words again!
dcd
I’m finally home from work (my normally 40-minute commute took over 2 hours tonight, thanks to a raging snowstorm.) Just checking in to see if we can get this comments thread to 100-plus!
Pat, i wouldn’t myself want to be the 100th comment . . . that’s going to have to be someone else.
Dcd, welcome back . . . glad you like the edit function.
That someone will be ME ME ME!