Top ten SYTYCD review still to come, but it's 102 degrees and our entire family has melted. Off to wipe down kitty with wet towel and infuse cold drinks into self. Blogging to resume when heat wave ends.
This movie came out the same time as Beastly, which I talked about last week, and my brain has always kept them linked. Both visually stunning, both fairy tale retellings with definite individual flavors, and both didn't quite do it for me.
Red Riding Hood is a difficult one to describe. Though there are differences, if you're familiar with the Brothers Grimm version and can reframe it as a werewolf story, that's pretty much the essentials. I can't fault the cast, though I can't remember most of the actors' names one week after viewing, and hadn't been sure until the closing credits if the heroine, Valerie, were played by Amanda Seyfried (which was correct) or Heather Graham (or was it somebody else I was suspecting?) and character names, apart from Valerie, her love interest, Peter (get it?) and antagonist Father Solomon. Which is about what I need, as it's pretty straightforward.
There's a werewolf attacking people in the town where our story takes place, a medievallish European burg. Usually, the animal sacrifices pacify the wolf, but apparently not this time. Something to do with the moon. Valerie has loved Peter from childhood but is promised to marry Some Other Dude, who was apparently her dead sister's beloved and sister may have done herself in over this prospect. At any rate, there is angst. Secrets involving paternity of someone no longer with us and the wolf is a constant threat when it's dark, which it usually appears to be.
The visuals and atmosphere are the real stars of this movie, the dark overall tone reinforcing the threat of the wolf attacks and the mounting paranoia amongst the villagers, and the stark black, white and gray tones are definitely inspiring for the artistically inclined, including my art crush, Michelle Ward. Which may make it fitting that my memories of this movie tend toward the sketchy. The visuals were gorgeous, and though there is violence, the gore is left to the imagination, which can be far more horrifying as it lets us imagine what isn't shown.
I find myself remembering more what I wish the movie had been. I did like Valerie and Peter's relationship but wanted more of it and the nice surprise that Valerie's fiance is a decent guy, willing to step aside when he accepts that Valerie truly loves Peter. Beyond that, he's the one who suggests he and Peter work together to rescue an imperiled Valerie. I would have liked to have seen that unlikely friendship develop and how the three of them would relate to each other as young adults. Also more of the issues with Valerie's family as well.
Unfortunately, other issues kept me from having the sort of experience I'd hoped with Red Riding Hood. The character of Father Solomon, the werewolf-catcher, came across as one dimensional. Priest in a horror movie? I called it right off that he'd turn out to be stupid or evil, and no surprises there, alas. By the time he departs the story, we've already heard him confess to killing a woman, seen him kill one of his African associates, and torture a mentally challenged person because obviously that person's condition meant they needed killing. Sorry, Father Solomon, I have no sympathy for you.
A festival scene could have been plucked right out of generic medieval burb and plopped into a modern night club, complete with girl on girl dirty dancing to attract the eye of a desired male, and did take me out of the story for its duration.
The identity of the werewolf could have been handled better, and more backstory on how that person became afflicted could have made for a richer experience, though I can't fault the acting in the scene where the wolf's motivations are disclosed. Valerie, as well, proved to be a strong heroine in the end, insisting on doing what was right no matter the cost, but again, I wanted more. I don't normally grade movies, but the best way I can describe my experience with this movie is to give the visuals an A+ and the content a C.
DH had control of the remote last week, so I didn' t get to see the top 14 perform until much later in the week, and Happy Dance Monday didn't have the same ring to it. Since my brain whimpers at the thought of trying to recap two weeks at once (bad idea, will not attempt that again) we will go with general impressions....and many, many links. You may want to grab a beverage and sit down for this one.
First, the guest judges. I like seeing different people on the panel and getting different input, but I also prefer when the guest judges have more dance cred. Carmen Electra may have had some valid comments to make, but I didn't hear them; I was thinking "Carmen Electra is a dancer? Really? How? When? I remember Baywatch." :headscritch: Don't watch Modern Family, so Jesse Tyler Ferguson is new to me (and congrats to him on his Emmy nomination, though I will use this space to protest the fact that Neil Patrick Harris was robbed. Basketball hoop scene, people. Gaaaaah. I can quote dialogue from that scene and it knots my gut. :flail: Reining this back onto topic, NPH is apparently slated as a guest judge at some point in the near future? Awesome.) I know Lady Gaga will be guest judge at some point as well, and I'd say she'd be appropriate, as her music has been used on the show, and she employs a fair number of dancers with whom she works, so she does know something. But stars with hidden dance backgrounds we may not have heard of at all? Ehhhh, not so much. If I'm asking myself why Judge X is a judge, that detracts from any merit their comments may have (and please, please, please, Guest Judges, do not let your comments contain the phrase "I don't know," especially when the next judge is Travis Wall, who breaks down the performance by specific moves and technical terms and offers constructive criticism as well as praise.)
Next, Emmy nominations. I did actually squee when I read that Cat Deely was nominated for best host in a reality show or competition. Since she is up against Jeff Probst from Survivor, among others, this will have me biting some nails. Congratulations also to Travis Wall, Mia Michaels, Mandy Moore (the choreographer, not the singer) Stacey Tookey, and the husband/wife team of Napoleon and Tabitha D'Uomo. Tight, tight competition there, and good review of everyone here. I find it interesting that the nominations this year are for the body of work instead of the individual routines, and any other year, I would have said Mia Michaels should win, no contest. This year, I'm putting my money on Travis Wall because he is freaking incredible and there are times when the student surpasses the teacher, blabbity blabbity blabbity. This may inspire me to do a favorite routines cage match after the finale is over.
On a semirelated note, Denise Wall needs to be named official dance mom of the century, because one of her other sons, Danny Tidwell, like his brother, a runner up for SYTYCD champion, is now a soloist with the Norwegian National Opera and Ballet. If that's not enough, another son, Scott Ross, seems to be a pretty decent musician. I want to drop by on family entertaiment night because it would be the best night ever. (Yeah, HIMYM link, but I had to, and seriously, no Emmy nomination for Jason Segel either? Bah. :stomps off in a pique:)
But back on topic. They announced the all-stars, whom we will see next week. I am very sorry to hear Alex Wong sustained another injury, but fingers crossed he will take good care of himself and be able to serve as an all star another year. We get more Pasha, Stephen "tWitch" Boss, and get to see some other favorites return to partner with the current crop, so this is going to be a season to remember. Already scouting out venues for the upcoming tour, because I do not want to miss this one.
Since I probably should include something about the recent episodes, I am now declaring favorites.
Jess is the guy I'm watching (and very sorry to bid adieu to Alexander) most closely:
For the gals, it's a dead heat between Melanie:
and Sasha:
I know this is only scratching the surface, but what a surface it is. Phew!
No book vs movie on this one, so I'm sure I'm missing elements that are in the original novel by Alex Flinn that may have worked better for me, but I didn't find enough new in this retelling of Beauty and the Beast to make me seek out the book.
Though I've always liked fairytale retellings, it was the visuals that drew me to Beastly. One of my favorite horror comics from years ago was a haunted house story set in the penthouse of an abandoned NYC skyscraper (I really want to say it was a DC comic, and published before 1976) so when I saw the main character, Kyle, living on his own in an empty but well appointed apartment after his transformation, I was sold. Add in the rooftop greenhouse filled with roses and I am there. Extra points for the makeup artists who worked on this movie, but....
If the entire point of the story is for Kyle to be transformed from a traditionally handsome blond teen to something, well, beastly, what we see above does not qualify that. Kyle's search to find a young woman who found him appealing might have been easily solved by visiting an alternative club. A few piercings and tattoos do not a beast make, but it certainly is an intriguing image. Maybe it's my own taste or maybe Alex Pettyfer's bone structure, but I couldn't find Kyle's appearance beastly, which did affect my enjoyment of the story. Similarly, Mary-Kate Olsen's makeup as Kendra struck me as having more gothic flair than anything that would attract ridicule. Vanessa Hudgens' presentation as heroine, Lindy, doesn't strike me as a girl who would go unnoticed by someone who values physical beauty, but again, maybe this is my personal taste, and I'm certainly not a teenage boy, wealthy or otherwise.
The story is pretty straightforward to those familiar with Beauty and the Beast, and translates well to the modern setting, especially with the hero starting out as a prince of his world - the handsome, popular big man on his high school campus. Hubris is his downfall, and Kendra uses his beastly transformation to teach him a lesson about inner beauty, which he does learn, hitting expected story points along the way.
Neil Patrick Harris ran away with this movie with his portrayal of Will, the blind tutor hired to oversee Kyle's schooling. Paying a character with a physical challenge can be, well, challenging for an actor, but as always with Mr. Harris, well played. I would have happily watched another two hours of his character's story, which brings me to the ending.
While we have a classic story here, with certain elements the viewer is going to expect; Kyle's redemption, hero winning love of heroine, etc, and those all delivered, plus a chilling something extra of Kendra ending up as Kyle's snotty father's new assistant (we all know what's ahead for dad, in that case) other elements fell flat. The resolution between Kyle and Lindy felt rushed, and I wasn't sure what the future would hold for a couple this young. Are they each other's one true love or is this something that will play out and they go their separate ways when college begins? Will's regaining his sight, as well as the out of nowhere immigration status change for the housekeeper's entire family seemed tacked on and wouldn't have changed the rest of the story if those elements were removed.
All in all, I'm glad I watched Beastly, and I would consider watching it again, but most likely stick to the scenes that affected me most: Kyle's "embrace the suck" speech; the empty apartment montage and the visuals of the greenhouse. Okay, and scenes with Neil Patrick Harris or Mary-Kate Olsen. 80s child stars for the win. I would be interested in seeing Alex Pettyfer in something else, as I'd love to see what he does with different material. Recommendations welcome.
I hadn't planned to watch Interview With the Vampire at all, but there it was on BBC America while I was catsitting, so I hit record and let it sit for a while. Neither Brad Pitt nor Tom Cruise are actors whose work I seek out, and I will admit that it's difficult for me to watch either gentleman's performances without their tabloid exploits edging into the frame. So that may have colored my experience to some degree, and then there's the author's impressions of this casting choice. I'll give my standard response to the question of who I would have cast - have a cattle call audition and whoever gives the best reading gets the part. Character descriptions to be taken from the original manuscript, and please prepare a monologue from same. Best readings of each role go on to read a scene so we can get the right chemistry. At least that's how we do things at Hypothetical Studios.
Kirsten Dunst, though, kicked child actor tushie as Claudia, and I understand why Movie!Claudia was about double the age of Book!Claudia. The role looks to me like it would be too much for a younger actor, both in amount of work and content of the material. We at Hypothetical Studios do not intentionally traumatize our actors of any age. Though I read the book after watching the movie, I found it very easy to create my own images of Louis and Lestat as I read, and neither bore any resemblance to the film's actors.
For the actual book vs movie comparison, I 'll go straight to the heart of the matter: book. By about a mile. I do appreciate that Anne Rice adapted her own work from novel to screenplay, and if a novel is to be adapted, that's the way I prefer it to go. Let the one who told the story tell the story, but at the same time, transferring from one medium to another is going to require some changes.
I do think it says something, though, about the adaptation if a viewer who has not read the book can tell what was changed or left out of the movie version. While I do understand why Anne Rice made some of the changes she did - changing Louis' brother to wife and infant, for example, omitting Lestat's father entirely, or assigning one of Gabrielle's discoveries from The Vampire Lestat to Claudia in this film) for me, the original format gave me a deeper experience, which is what I'd hoped to find.
The film was gorgeous, and the use of light and dark fit the story beautifully. The fact that I had to sit down and write out several pages of notes afterwards does say something about the effectiveness of the movie version, but the clincher was that I had to find the book so that I could get the real story. For me, in both, Louis is the central figure, his humanity even in the face of his undeath making him a memorable and unique character.
For me, the book gave me a more intimate view into Louis' essence, and that's what tipped the scales. His conflicted nature, self doubt, and different attempts to come to terms with the changes in his life (and death) left an impression on me and I can see where this would be a role many actors would find challenging.
My favorite part of the movie were the opening and closing bits, with Louis and Daniel (again, the book wins here; I prefer Daniel being referred to as only "the boy.") I found Brad Pitt's performance very effective in those scenes, as though Louis were still weighing how much to share, and then ultimately his frustration that Daniel Did Not Get The Point.
While I've appreciated Sting's music for quite a while, I didn't connect "Moon Over Bourbon Street" to Interview With The Vampire until I'd discovered the story for myself, and have to add myself to the fans who think it should have been included in the movie. Still good, though, and I can play it before rereading the book, so all's well there.
I hadn't planned to watch Interview With the Vampire at all, but there it was on BBC America while I was catsitting, so I hit record and let it sit for a while. Neither Brad Pitt nor Tom Cruise are actors whose work I seek out, and I will admit that it's difficult for me to watch either gentleman's performances without their tabloid exploits edging into the frame. So that may have colored my experience to some degree, and then there's the author's impressions of this casting choice. I'll give my standard response to the question of who I would have cast - have a cattle call audition and whoever gives the best reading gets the part. Character descriptions to be taken from the original manuscript, and please prepare a monologue from same. Best readings of each role go on to read a scene so we can get the right chemistry. At least that's how we do things at Hypothetical Studios. 
