The Social Network (2010)

The poster-child of one-dimensional characters.

     Call me behind the times. I realize that The Social Network came out forever ago. Frankly, I wasn't interested enough in Facebook to see it. So I got it on RedBox today (ALL HAIL THE SCARLET MACHINE OF VALUE!!!). My reaction was just as I had predicted: underwhelmed.
     Don't get me wrong. The script was incredible. The cinematography and direction were fabulous. The performances were good. So why do I have a bone to pick with The Social Network?

1. Misogyny. I don't think there was a strong female character in the whole thing. Yes, I realize that they wanted to make the film authentic. However, there's a fine line between realistic and exhausting. For example, The Office seems pretty realistic, no? But try watching one season in a day. After a while, you get tired of people pausing in between jokes to look at the camera awkwardly. Likewise, in The Social Network, these young ladies are probably similar to the women that Mr. Zuckerberg encountered throughout his life. But I get really exhausted watching woman after woman in this movie don the generic "floozy" stereotype.  I think if you took out every scene where a woman does or says something stupid while the men did something important, the movie would be cut down to about 30 minutes.  Don't want strong female characters? Fine. Then cut out the five hours worth of stupid chicks. It's tiresome and unoriginal. Also, the setting is an Ivy League school for crying out loud. Are there no intelligent women there?
2. Character development. After watching this movie, I have decided that Mark Zuckerberg possesses no discernible human qualities. To rephrase the immortal words of Ms. Dorothy Parker, "The dude from Zombieland ran the gamut of emotions from A to B." One of the components of good drama is that the character has a wide range. Or some sort of range. But no. Zuckerberg was just a pompous prick the whole time, screwing his friends out of cash (namely Facebook co-founder, Eduardo Saverin, the only person who was half-way decent in this whole movie) and trying as hard as he possibly can to be the smartest guy in the room.  I mean, Jesse Eisenberg didn't do a bad job. I'm sure Zuckerberg is that much of a jerk in real life too. However, this is a movie. Can they at least make up an incident where he saves a cat from being hit by an eighteen-wheeler? Just to make him seem the least bit human? The script, while having witty dialogue, ignored character development almost entirely in the "protagonist." When I could find no likeable qualities in Zuckerberg's character, I said to myself, "Okay. He's one of two things: an antihero or someone putting on airs to protect himself. If it's the former, I will be entertained by the complexity of his malice. If it's the latter, then he'll do a 180 once he sees all the damage he's done and I'll be pleased with his redemption." But no. He consistently is a jerk throughout the film. Fine. There are plenty people like that in real life. But we don't make movies about them. There's nothing interesting about someone who is consistently anything. It's as boring as spaghetti boiled in a gym sock. You can make it just for the sake of being different, but that doesn't mean people will want to see it (or eat it). And if you're thinking, "Well, the chick writing this review is just a shallow moron who wants a nice character and a happy ending," you're wrong. I wouldn't want to watch consistently kind Zuckerberg either. Again, that kind of story is boring. It's lazy writing. I should hope that the real-life Mark Zuckerberg has some sense of humanity and has more than one emotion (snarky).
3. Why are there so many parties going on? This isn't Animal House. I mean, it's shallow, sexist tripe, but I didn't think it was that low. And yet, there was a party scene every five seconds. Where did this guy have time to make a website? He was quite possibly the most popular socially inept geek I've EVER seen.
4. What kind of ending is that anyway? SPOILER ALERT! Computer geek bad boy, Sean Parker (Justin Timberlake), gets caught with cocaine at  a (surprise) party with some interns. Zuckerberg expresses concern, but then looks at his business card. It then goes to a scene where he's on a laptop in the conference room where he's been questioned by lawyers throughout the movie. The lady from Parks and Recreation assures him that he's not really a jerk and walks out. Zuckerberg then sends a friend request to the only intelligent female in this movie (his ex-girlfriend that he humiliated). Then they try to give the audience closure by pulling one of those cheap, "So-and-so went on to do such-and-such" things before the credits. More lazy writing. Stupid ending.

       Those are basically my issues with The Social Network. If those sorts of things don't bother you, then by all means, rent it. I just don't see how this got 97% on Rotten Tomatoes while Pulp Fiction has only 94%. I mean, there's no way that The Social Network is as awesome as Pulp Fiction, one of the most iconic films of the 90s. But I digress.

       What I learned from The Social Network: The ingredients for success are a consistent arrogant attitude, nonstop parties, and surrounding oneself with very stupid women.

Dr. Dubstep (or How I Learned to Stop Worrying and Hate Hipsters)

mu·sic - (noun) an artistic form of auditory communication incorporating instrumental or vocal tones in a structured and continuous manner. (Definition from

http://wordnetweb.princeton.edu/perl/webwn?s=music)

     Some people get mad about injustice. Others, inconvenience. My father gets mad about the British. Is it because he thinks we live in 13th century Ireland? Maybe. However, it wasn't until recently that I was able to share in his views. Why is this, you might ask? Well, after a little research on some obnoxious claptrap "music" my friends listen to called "dubstep," it appears that the British are to blame for this terrible sin against eardrums worldwide.

     If you're one of those lucky souls out there who lives in the Underground City of the Wormpeople, I'll bring you up to speed on what dubstep is. READ THIS AT YOUR OWN RISK.

     According to Wikipedia, the foremost authority on damn-near everything, "Dubstep is a genre of electronic dance music the originated from South East London." I will allow the reader a few moments to acquire a puke bucket and/or one of those cool memory eraser pens from Men in Black.

Did you ever flashy-thing me?

    You good? Super.

    Call me old-fashioned, but I like music that has...oh what are those things called...INSTRUMENTS. And occasionally, I'm in the mood for LYRICS. What does dubstep have to offer me in these departments? Typical instruments range from the synthesizer to a personal computer! Sometimes there's even something called a "drum machine," which is like a drum because it makes drum noises, but with buttons so you don't actually have to work. What a novel invention, my dear Watson! Why, do they sing words to this incredible music? No? Maybe just a sentence over and over again? Thank the stars above. For a second there, I thought it might be something meaningful.

     So far, there's not much going for dubstep. It appears to be an instrumentless, lyricless horror. So why in the world do hipsters like it? You know, hipsters? Those quirky, judgmental little frown-puppets who buy clothes from thrift stores and then get $1000 headphones? The infamous spawn of Wes Anderson normally like out-of-tune Kleenex box guitar set to lyrics about spirographs. This dubstep business is wordless and fine-tuned.

    Alas, fair reader, the hipsters are a fickle race. However, remember the most important rule in all of hipsterdom:

1. If it's stupid, hipsters love it. And will go to the ends of the earth to defend it. Until it becomes popular.

    Dubstep is insufferable. It's like listening to an obese man sit on hummingbirds while he's getting a back rub from Gilbert Gottfried. Entertaining enough, but after a while, you get so darn sick of it, you have to place your ear just centimeters from the garbage disposal in order to keep from having nightmares. Don't believe me? See for yourself: It sounds like someone's stomach. There's a reason this stuff is "underground." I think it's safe to assume that it's stupid, and therefore, hipsters like it.

    Why am I so irked by hipsters? That is a fair question. It is because I am surrounded by them. They are some of my dearest friends. These are good people; intelligent, some may say. However, they have been misguided by the false notion that everything mainstream is terrible. And they have a right to feel that way. I hate The Partridge Family just as much as the next guy. But, my friends, if you are reading this, please understand how stupid it is to arbitrarily like something just because it's obscure, okay? And if you're going to like something dumb just because it's obscure, don't you dare call it ingenious and then berate me on how narrow-minded I am when I don't like it. I'm not narrow-minded. I just don't want to waste 5-minutes of my hard-earned time listening to some straight-up clown growl into a microphone and play "music" into his MacBook Air. That's precisely why I hide in the bathroom at fine arts assemblies. To avoid the overpraised and undertalented.

     So, go ahead, hipsters. Jump up and down to your synth music in your parent's basement, chugging down PBR and puffing away at your American Spirits. The rest of us will be gentlemen and scholars, opening our ears only to those talented enough to play an instrument.

Mystery Science Theatre 3000: My New Obsession

[Insert hilarious quip here]

Hey peoples! Sorry that all I have is a short post today. If you can, check out Mystery Science Theatre 3000! If you're a snarky movie lover like myself, this is sure to keep you laughing. It's basically a guy and his two robot buddies riffing on lousy movies, but it's really witty! I wish there was more stuff like this on TV today. I watched the Hobgoblins episode. I haven't laughed that hard in a long time.

So yeah, check it out!

The King's Speech (2010)

Please win Best Picture.

           It's not too often in Tennessee that you get to see a film of "limited release," let alone one that's devoid of any Fundamentalist Christian propaganda. That's why I nearly did a backflip upon the realization that The King's Speech was playing at one of the local cinemas. I mean, I'm not normally into the artsy, Oscar-pandling movies, but it was between that, Gulliver's Travels, and Little Fockers. The choice was clear.
           I walked into the theatre to find that it was packed with old people. My dad had to sit in one of the few available up-close-and-personal seats. I was probably the only person there under 40. But worry not, my friends--I didn't let the old people depress me. I simply did what the rest of society does best: ignore the elderly.
           Now that the stage has been set, let the review begin. The King's Speech is a period piece about King George VI of England (played by Colin Firth), who struggled with a severe stammer all his life. To make matters worse, his reign takes place during the onset of World War II, the days of Churchill (played by Timothy Spall), Hitler, and classy people who wore hats indoors. His wife, Elizabeth (played by Helena Bonham Carter), seeks the help of an eccentric speech therapist, Lionel Logue (played by Geoffrey Rush), a failed actor from Australia, with whom King George forms a deep friendship.
          This was, quite possibly, one of my favorite films of 2010. It's near-perfection. Don't believe me? How dare you! Take this enumerated list, stick it in your pipe, smoke it, and then put it into consideration.

1. THE ACTING is freakin' fantastic. Colin Firth excellently plays King George (nicknamed "Bertie" by Lionel Logue) as a shy, frustrated man. And it's brilliant. You would expect to be annoyed by a character who constantly stammers, but the character is so well played that you begin to forget that he has any kind of impediment. You also wouldn't expect Timothy Spall (aka Wormtail from the Harry Potter series) to play a convincing Churchill, but you'll be surprised. (Honestly? The only work that guy can find is Wormtail?) Helena Bonham Carter does an excellent job as Elizabeth. The first time I saw her on screen I thought "Okay. She's just going to be a cheerleader who stops in about every 5 minutes. I don't need to worry about her." But she really brings a lot to a role that any other actress would've just made a minor, forgettable supporting role. Last, but certainly not least, Geoffrey Rush as Lionel Logue is absolutely great. He's eccentric, but not cartoonish, as most actors would easily mistake. He brings a great deal of energy to this role that makes him one of the best characters in the entire movie.
2. THE STORY is, as most would complain, predictable. They'd be right. It's predictable as hell. You know from the second you see Colin Firth give his first speech that he's going to overcome his impediment. I normally agree with the predictability complaint when it comes to original screenplays, but this is a historical piece, so I can't really understand where that's a valid complaint. Sorry if real life is a little predictable, people. M. Night Shyamalan doesn't write the history books. Although, that would explain a little about how Bruce Willis was dead the whole time during the War of Jenkins' Ear. Predictability is unavoidable in some cases, and in this one, it works. You end up cheering for King George like a Loyalist in 1776. (Yes, I know this movie wasn't set in 1776.) The story is a damn good one about a man who has power and responsibility thrust upon him after his father's death and brother's refusal to accept the kingship and during a time of great difficulty for his nation. I normally mark ailments/defects/impediments as faulty devices from which to create a sympathetic character (see my rant about Theatre Kids), but moviegoers really feel for Bertie because his stammer didn't just come out of nowhere. He's a blacksheep. He was neglected and laughed at all his life. This isn't like those pricks from Rent complaining about how they're poor and have AIDS. (If this sounds insensitive, watch Rent and you'll see what I mean. Those are quite possibly the most annoying protagonists on this planet.) And you're happy that he's found someone like Logue, who just accepts him for who he is. To conclude, you gotta love rooting for the little guy.
3. THE CINEMATOGRAPHY is pretty good. There are a few shots that I don't see too often in movies like this. For instance, when Bertie is sitting on the couch in Logue's office, it captures him from about the waist up in the lower left corner of the screen, and the rest is Logue's trippy wall. I know I'm talking gibberish, but I found it kind of interesting. The rest of it is pretty well done. I constantly thank the Flying Spaghetti Monster that they didn't over-do on the close-ups, like they keep doing with all these new dramas. I was very pleased with a lot of the lighting as well. It wasn't all the doom and gloom that, again, we see with a lot of dramas. It was handled well.

          If you can, please go see The King's Speech.


          Sorry if this post is a little dull, but it is a really good picture.
          Adieu.

Why I Hate Theatre Kids

I don't even know what show this is. I think if I find out, it will only make me angrier.

      Hola, my friendos! It's been a while. I'm at the old homestead, resting up after a bout of illness. I don't know what it is, but my throat randomly got sore, I started vomiting every time I felt like falling asleep, and my neck hurts now. According to the interwebs, it could be anything from a flu bug to the Bubonic plague. As much as I love the interwebs and regard them as the source of all knowledge, I can't trust it to give a reliable diagnosis. Oh well. Life goes on (hopefully).

      So all this laying around the house gave me some time to become reacquainted with my old buddy: daytime television. After a while, though, I remembered how depressing it is to watch Suzanne Somers try to sell me a girdle for what seems like eternity and to hear "A NEW CARRRRR!" echo like a battle cry in the CBS studio set of The Price is Right. At wits end, I switched it to CNN.

      Apparently, there has not been not one, not two, but four injuries on the Broadway set of Spider-Man:Turn Off the Dark. This got me thinking until I had an epiphany...

Theater sickens me.

       Yes, much to the despair of the two people who read this blog (undoubtedly theater geeks) I find that theater is quite possibly the most annoying thing ever invented. And yes, that includes Furby. As much as I hate those nasty little chirp monsters, I'll deal with it any day before I pay $60 too many to sit next to some turgid, pretentious jerk who uses words like "harlequin" to describe "dude in tights." And then you get scooted off the premises after the 1st act of Jersey Boys for sneaking in a Slurpee and then spilling it all over the people in the "Grand Circle". Well, pardon me. There's no freakin' cup holders. And for that ticket price, you know you can damn well afford to Scotch Guard that carpet.

       There's a good reason that I prefer film over theatre: subtlety. Theatre is, by it's very nature, obnoxious. I mean, look at the titles of musicals. Almost all of them have exclamation points at the end of their titles (Oklahoma!, Repo!, Oliver!, Snoopy!!!, Swing!, Carnival!, etc!!!!!) And it's not about acting or half-way decent writing with these people. It's about screaming the moral of the story at the top of their nicotine-laden lungs.

       I hate Rent. I honestly do. I think that thing was written by a straight guy who wanted to impress all his gay friends so that other straight people will impress their gay friends. I don't know a single gay person who likes that musical. Either way, Rent is about as pleasant as watching a badger drown in nacho cheese. And it's not just because all the characters have AIDS. Honestly, after having to deal with how obnoxious they are, I wasn't the least bit sad about that. That's a pretty amateur way to garner sympathy from your audience. Your audience should want to feel sympathy for your characters, not have it shoved down their throats. A way better play about AIDS is Angels in America. The dialogue is brilliant and the storytelling is 3000000 times better than that of Rent. Only 2 characters had AIDS in that play. I was able to genuinely love all nine of the main characters. Maybe it's because they were *gasp* realistic characters who had a little something called depth. As far as depth goes, the Rent characters are about as interesting as that guy you inevitably work with who weeps tears of joy at the utterance of the phrase "team-building exercise." The characters of Rent spend half their time going like, "Woe is me! I'm so poor and hungry!" when most of the junk gathering dust in their NYC apartments would be considered pretty bankable on eBay. I don't feel the least bit sorry for them. So what if you're a "tortured artist"? If you're intelligent enough to alphabetize the Blockbuster inventory, then there's no reason for anyone to feel sorry for you. God forbid that you actually work for a living, stupid hipsters.

       But the most upsetting part about the theater (or "theatre") is not the art itself, but the people so unapologetically obsessed with it. These people range from my dearest friends to my arch enemies. These people insist on sitting down with me to have a "sing-a-long" and berate me when I don't know the lyrics to  "La Vie Bohème." "And you call yourself a theatre geek?!" they say. I never said that. I just work on the tech crew because it's the only extracurricular activity where I can sleep without getting kicked out. Beat that, track team!

       I'll admit, there are isolated incidents in which theatre is tolerable. The Crucible is incredible. Take note, playwrights, that was actually well written, as a result of Mr. Miller actually putting thought into his play. Spamalot is legit, but anything Monty Python touches automatically turns to gold. Monty Python convinced my dad that not everyone from Great Britain was out to get him. (What they want from him, I'm not entirely sure.)

      What I hate most about theatre people is that they give eccentric people a bad name. You aren't eccentric because you make a scene in a restaurant or wear a hat that makes you look like a squid. That just makes you an imbecile. Eccentric people are a lot more interesting than you, theatre monkeys. Get over it.

       I guess that's why I hate theatre people. Until next time, my dear brethren, I shall leave you with the words of a man greater than myself. That'll do, pig. That'll do.