Greetings,
So, is it possible for a movie that had high acclaim at one time to also be very underrated? Well, it might be rare, but I say the answer is yes. Especially when certain movies win certain awards and some people think that other certain movies should have won instead. And they still think that over thirty-five years later. Seriously, let it go. But today I will be talking about the first of those two certain movies, an extraordinary film called Ordinary People. See what I did there?
Ordinary People is a 1980 film that was named the Best Picture of said year, and as I mentioned, some people, to this day, feel as though it did not deserve to win. It kind of makes me question if they even saw it, because it is one of my favorite movies. Mostly it is that because it makes me feel...a lot! But more on that later. It stars my beloved Timothy Hutton as Conrad Jarrett, a teenager dealing with PTSD after being involved in a boating accident that killed his older brother, Buck. After a suicide attempt and a stint in a psych hospital, he begins to see Dr. Berger played by Judd Hirsch. His parents, Calvin and Beth, played by Donald Sutherland and Mary Tyler Moore respectively, are dealing with all of this, or not dealing with it, in their own ways. Calvin is doing his best to try and understand the feelings of his surviving family members, whilst Beth seems to be in complete denial about everything that has happened, attempting to do the impossible - live in a past that no longer exists. Oh, and by the way, I must give a bit of a warning. You know how there some people who no one can ever hate, like Betty White or Mr. Rodgers or Grimace? And also Mary Tyler Moore. Everyone loves her. Well, prepare yourself. It may seem impossible, but for much of the duration of this film, you will probably not like her very much. You might even hate her. I know I did. Granted, I understand why she is behaving as she is, but still. Again, more on that later.
Basically, the plot is just watching this family trying to figure out what to do in a situation that no one is equipped to handle. I know that may not seem like much, just watching people live through a tragedy, or to be more accurately, its aftermath, but trust me, this is one of those films that carries out a somewhat simple story in a brilliant way. And the brilliance comes mostly from the actors. In addition to those I already mentioned, keep an eye out for some other familiar faces in smaller roles, like Dinah Manoff, Elizabeth McGovern, M. Emmet Walsh and Adam Baldwin. Everyone is fantastic in this. Of course, when it comes to those four main actors I spoke of earlier, they all bring something extraordinary. There's that word. again. I can commend Judd Hirsch, playing a doctor who has seen people's hardships from the outside and tries desperately to help, or Donald Sutherland, portraying a father who is trying to hold together what he has left, or Mary Tyler Moore, as a woman fighting to oppress reality so she does not have to deal with life's most excruciating pain. But if I'm being honest, the sun of this film rises and sets on the performance of Timothy Hutton. Hard to believe he did this when he hadn't even reached the age of twenty. No doubt about it, he is absolutely exquisite, and he breaks my heart every time I watch this. And that really is the sign of serious mastery in film making. When you can watch something or someone over and over again, and the effect never diminishes. And speaking of mastery in film making, I would be remiss if I didn't mention the director here, Robert Redford. Yeah, that's right. He has directed TWO of my all time favorite films. This one included, obviously.
So, are there any other reasons why I love Ordinary People so much? Why, yes, and it kind of lies right there in the title. I've always loved movies and stories that are very character driven. I love seeing how people are and how they live and how they deal with everyday life, even when everyday life changes for them. Look, I'm fine with films that take people away to a fantasy world, but to me, there's nothing more moving than being confronted with a reality that is not your own but that very well could be. What happened to the family in this film could happen to any of us. That's what makes it so compelling, fearful even. And honestly, we need to be reminded of what could be for us, so that we can more appreciate the blessings we have and not get complacent about them. If I may make an analysis on the mother character here, I always felt as though she had such a good life, perhaps one that was near perfect, that her gratitude for it turned into a kind of entitlement. She may have begun to feel that this perfect life was a guarantee, so when it was taken from her, the only reaction could be one of anger, of "How dare anything or anyone ruin what the life that is owed to me!" Trouble is, she had no idea how to deal with that anger or grief, so instead of pulling close what family she had left, she dug a canyon between herself and them. All the while, we sit and watch, wondering if they'll build a bridge to one another so they can heal or all fall over the edge. It's a grim set of thoughts, but I think they are things we all need to think about sometimes. So, yes, I am grateful for films like this that help us do that.
I suppose I should wrap this up. I am absolutely recommending that everyone take a look at Ordinary People. No, it's not always easy to watch. In fact, it's not mostly easy to watch, but as I said, it will make you feel something. It will make you think. And hopefully, it will make you appreciate what and who you have.
Love and full moons,
Becky the Writer
Sunday, March 13, 2016
Sunday, February 28, 2016
Drew: The Man Behind the Poster - Documentary Review
Greetings,
A while back, the wonderful Cecil Trachenberg of GoodBadFlicks did a video on "What Happened to Movie Posters?" He pointed out a lot of the unoriginality, repetitiveness and general lack of artistic merit that they hold. And even though I was aware of that, it's not until someone shows you example after example, right in a row, that you realize how big the problem is. So, today, I am happy to be talking about something that celebrates a man who was the antithesis of that problem, a documentary called Drew: The Man Behind the Poster.
The titular Drew is Drew Struzan, a person who any cinephile knows. He was the creator of countless, legendary movie posters from Star Wars to Back to the Future to Hook and so many in between and beyond. He is basically the master of this particular art, and this 2013 documentary hones in on how he came to be that. Sadly, it also chronicles how the lack of appreciation for that art has grown in the film industry over the decades. But we'll discuss that travesty later.
This documentary has that quality I tend to look for which is that it feels very sincere and very personal. It's not one of those unauthorized things you see sometimes, nor does it feel like one. Much of this film is taken up by interviews with Drew Struzan himself, as well as his lovely wife, Dylan, and their son, Christian. The family tells the stories of all the struggles they had to endure whilst Drew was waiting for his big break, something he achieved through great dedication, persistence and, of course, an amazing gift. There is so much that I learned about him through this. Though I've always been a fan of his movie posters, I was unaware of how many album covers he did. Oh, sorry. Youngsters, "albums" are things that we used to buy that had music on them, and they came with little books filled with the words of the songs and usually a wonderful picture on the front. I'm actually a bit floored that I didn't know about this. I mean, I am someone who tends to devour liner notes, and since Mr. Struzan did the art work for one of my favorite Bee Gees' albums, Main Course. I can't believe I didn't notice. Better late than never?
Besides the inside stories from the family, we also get a lot of interviews with people who have been connected to Struzan's artwork by way of the films. We hear from people like Michael J. Fox, George Lucas, Stephen Spielberg, Harrison Ford and Guillermo del Toro. They have nothing but praise for the man as well as what he has created. As well they should. However, one can easily recall what those first four men I named would be taking about, movie wise, including posters for the films I mentioned earlier, but it's a bit different for Mr. del Toro. In fact, what he has to say has much to do with less of the past of Struzan's work, but more the recent past, present and possible future. Oh, spoilers coming up...I guess.
While del Toro does speak highly of those works of art that he grew up with, those that contributed to his love of cinema, he also represents, by proxy, what has happened to the attitude toward this creativity. On more than one occasion, del Toro asked Struzan to make posters for his films, and they are absolutely stunning. No surprise. Sadly, though, they were rejected by the studio, who did not want to pay for it. Del Toro ended up paying for the art himself, as well as giving some as limited edition collector's items for his fans. I guess it's no shock that one of the only directors these days that I can truly call an artist has a great respect for the art of someone else. What should not be a shock to anyone is that precise reaction to the most recent work of Drew Struzan.
I know I'm not the only one who has come to notice the lack of artistic integrity in the film industry. Not to say there is absolutely none, but it has become difficult to find. So, of course, if the industry has little need for artistic merit in the very medium it creates and distributes, why should it want for that when it comes to another? Maybe if they decided to take one more closer look at the current work of Drew Struzan, they might want to recapture some of that magic for themselves.
Look, I don't want to end on a sour note, so I have some good news. First, this is a great documentary, and if you're an art lover, definitely check it out. Second, it's clear that, though certain people are ignoring the work of a great artist, many people have not forgotten. This film shows that their are still so many admirers of Drew Struzan and what he has created and continues to create. You can see that he is so grateful for that. He makes art because it is in him to do so, and he'll never stop, I believe. It's not about collecting a check or approval from a studio. It's for himself, first and foremost, and for everyone who still is in awe of what he does.
Love and full moons,
Becky the Writer
A while back, the wonderful Cecil Trachenberg of GoodBadFlicks did a video on "What Happened to Movie Posters?" He pointed out a lot of the unoriginality, repetitiveness and general lack of artistic merit that they hold. And even though I was aware of that, it's not until someone shows you example after example, right in a row, that you realize how big the problem is. So, today, I am happy to be talking about something that celebrates a man who was the antithesis of that problem, a documentary called Drew: The Man Behind the Poster.
The titular Drew is Drew Struzan, a person who any cinephile knows. He was the creator of countless, legendary movie posters from Star Wars to Back to the Future to Hook and so many in between and beyond. He is basically the master of this particular art, and this 2013 documentary hones in on how he came to be that. Sadly, it also chronicles how the lack of appreciation for that art has grown in the film industry over the decades. But we'll discuss that travesty later.
This documentary has that quality I tend to look for which is that it feels very sincere and very personal. It's not one of those unauthorized things you see sometimes, nor does it feel like one. Much of this film is taken up by interviews with Drew Struzan himself, as well as his lovely wife, Dylan, and their son, Christian. The family tells the stories of all the struggles they had to endure whilst Drew was waiting for his big break, something he achieved through great dedication, persistence and, of course, an amazing gift. There is so much that I learned about him through this. Though I've always been a fan of his movie posters, I was unaware of how many album covers he did. Oh, sorry. Youngsters, "albums" are things that we used to buy that had music on them, and they came with little books filled with the words of the songs and usually a wonderful picture on the front. I'm actually a bit floored that I didn't know about this. I mean, I am someone who tends to devour liner notes, and since Mr. Struzan did the art work for one of my favorite Bee Gees' albums, Main Course. I can't believe I didn't notice. Better late than never?
Besides the inside stories from the family, we also get a lot of interviews with people who have been connected to Struzan's artwork by way of the films. We hear from people like Michael J. Fox, George Lucas, Stephen Spielberg, Harrison Ford and Guillermo del Toro. They have nothing but praise for the man as well as what he has created. As well they should. However, one can easily recall what those first four men I named would be taking about, movie wise, including posters for the films I mentioned earlier, but it's a bit different for Mr. del Toro. In fact, what he has to say has much to do with less of the past of Struzan's work, but more the recent past, present and possible future. Oh, spoilers coming up...I guess.
While del Toro does speak highly of those works of art that he grew up with, those that contributed to his love of cinema, he also represents, by proxy, what has happened to the attitude toward this creativity. On more than one occasion, del Toro asked Struzan to make posters for his films, and they are absolutely stunning. No surprise. Sadly, though, they were rejected by the studio, who did not want to pay for it. Del Toro ended up paying for the art himself, as well as giving some as limited edition collector's items for his fans. I guess it's no shock that one of the only directors these days that I can truly call an artist has a great respect for the art of someone else. What should not be a shock to anyone is that precise reaction to the most recent work of Drew Struzan.
I know I'm not the only one who has come to notice the lack of artistic integrity in the film industry. Not to say there is absolutely none, but it has become difficult to find. So, of course, if the industry has little need for artistic merit in the very medium it creates and distributes, why should it want for that when it comes to another? Maybe if they decided to take one more closer look at the current work of Drew Struzan, they might want to recapture some of that magic for themselves.
Look, I don't want to end on a sour note, so I have some good news. First, this is a great documentary, and if you're an art lover, definitely check it out. Second, it's clear that, though certain people are ignoring the work of a great artist, many people have not forgotten. This film shows that their are still so many admirers of Drew Struzan and what he has created and continues to create. You can see that he is so grateful for that. He makes art because it is in him to do so, and he'll never stop, I believe. It's not about collecting a check or approval from a studio. It's for himself, first and foremost, and for everyone who still is in awe of what he does.
Love and full moons,
Becky the Writer
Friday, February 19, 2016
Remembering Harper Lee and Why What We Write Needs to Matter
Greetings,
There are some people who, even though you or I may not know them or if they are public figures who choose to be not so public, make us glad that they are, at the very least, still out there in the world with us. Sadly, we lost one of those people, and it was Harper Lee.
If you don't know who that is, and I'm sad for you if you don't, Harper Lee was the author of To Kill a Mockingbird, arguably one of the greatest books ever written. She just passed away at the age of 89, a mere seven months after her second book, Go Set a Watchman, was released. That one, the world had waited on for over fifty years. Yes, someone considered one of the best writers of our time only released two books in her long life. I haven't had a chance to read that second one, and I've heard that it was actually a first draft of Mockingbird, to which Harper made drastic changes, obviously. I don't know, but even if it was, it's probably better written than anything on the shelves these days. Still, if To Kill a Mockingbird had remained the only book that Harper Lee released or wrote, it would not have mattered. That one book was enough, because it mattered.
Now when I say it mattered, I mean that it did so in the most important way. She wrote a book that pretty much changed the world, and it certainly changes most of the people who read it. If not everyone who reads it. Interestingly enough, I don't think she set out to do that. I think she had something to say and set out to write a book that was good. However, like anyone who creates a masterpiece, she did not plan to create one. And yet, she did.
You see, a masterpiece is not something for which one can plan. It's something that happens because the person who is behind anything that exceptional somehow manages to do everything just right. Everything falls into place and some people are blessed enough to be the vessels for what is the result. Harper Lee was one of those people. She had a story to tell, and she demanded greatness of herself, which led us to this wonderful book. Considering how she seemed to shy away from as much "celebrity" as she could throughout most of her life, I imagine that she never could have predicted what an impact her writing would have on the world. Maybe that's why so many of us see her as brilliant. It's because she wasn't trying to be. She just was.
If there's one thing I really notice about Mockingbird when I read it, it is that I can so clearly see the care that Harper took as she was writing this story. She worked hard to make it the best that it could be, for herself and for anyone else who was going to read it. She perfectly took us to another world, let us see through the eyes of another person. As I said before, she wanted it to matter. So, as a writer myself, I try to make what I do matter, and Harper Lee is a shining example of that. She should be that example for all writers.
Look, I'm not saying that every book has to be To Kill a Mockingbird or any other legendary novel. In fact, some writing is meant to be fun and light, and they serve a purpose by letting our minds relax. We need those books in the world. But that is, again, their purpose, and those authors are aware of it. Speaking for myself as a reader as well, I can always tell when an author cares, and I can certainly tell when they don't. It does not take much to understand and feel what drives certain people to write certain books. Anyone can sense when someone is doing it for fame or money or to jump on a popular bandwagon, and whilst those people might have managed to achieve those things, think about what they haven't achieved. Things like respect. I know that in the past decade or so, many of us have joked and laughed about how many poorly written books have become popular and made boat loads of cash, and if that's what those authors were after, good for them, I guess. But if I was making money from a book that was terribly written and pointless and gave little to anyone who read it, I would not be happy. Because to a true artist, fame and money might be good things to attain, but without being respected as a writer, without being that artist, it's all worthless. In fact, when I finish laughing at all those aforementioned jokes, I actually feel kind of sad. I feel sad for the state we seem to be in when it come to the written word and art in general.
I have walked through many bookstores and libraries in recent years, and I do so with one question: "What is the point?" This is only my opinion, of course, but I just feel like there are so many people who want to be writers for the wrong reasons, and they build a body of work that is unbelievably futile. None of us should have to wonder what a writer has to say if we've read their book, and sadly, I've read quite a few books where I'm left empty, because, though they've put words on paper, the author has said nothing. As someone who loves words and stories and who loves to create them, I can't think of anything more devastating, in that context, than for people to read what I've written and feel nothing. I honestly want all writers to be passionate. I know some are, and I am grateful for them, but many are not. I want everyone who dares to call themselves a writer to not only want to put words on paper and collect a check, but I want them to have a desire to create entire worlds, to make a difference in the lives of their readers, even if it's a small difference. I want them to want to make their readers feel something, whether it's joy or pain or anything in between. Let it be something. We need to make them feel alive. That's what we're supposed to do. That is our contribution to the world. And it is exactly what Harper Lee did.
So, as we say goodbye to this amazing artist, I hope that all of us, especially the writers, choose to carry on a legacy that people like her began. A legacy of creating things that will reach people, that will change them for the better and that will last forever.
Love and full moons,
Becky the Writer
There are some people who, even though you or I may not know them or if they are public figures who choose to be not so public, make us glad that they are, at the very least, still out there in the world with us. Sadly, we lost one of those people, and it was Harper Lee.
If you don't know who that is, and I'm sad for you if you don't, Harper Lee was the author of To Kill a Mockingbird, arguably one of the greatest books ever written. She just passed away at the age of 89, a mere seven months after her second book, Go Set a Watchman, was released. That one, the world had waited on for over fifty years. Yes, someone considered one of the best writers of our time only released two books in her long life. I haven't had a chance to read that second one, and I've heard that it was actually a first draft of Mockingbird, to which Harper made drastic changes, obviously. I don't know, but even if it was, it's probably better written than anything on the shelves these days. Still, if To Kill a Mockingbird had remained the only book that Harper Lee released or wrote, it would not have mattered. That one book was enough, because it mattered.
Now when I say it mattered, I mean that it did so in the most important way. She wrote a book that pretty much changed the world, and it certainly changes most of the people who read it. If not everyone who reads it. Interestingly enough, I don't think she set out to do that. I think she had something to say and set out to write a book that was good. However, like anyone who creates a masterpiece, she did not plan to create one. And yet, she did.
You see, a masterpiece is not something for which one can plan. It's something that happens because the person who is behind anything that exceptional somehow manages to do everything just right. Everything falls into place and some people are blessed enough to be the vessels for what is the result. Harper Lee was one of those people. She had a story to tell, and she demanded greatness of herself, which led us to this wonderful book. Considering how she seemed to shy away from as much "celebrity" as she could throughout most of her life, I imagine that she never could have predicted what an impact her writing would have on the world. Maybe that's why so many of us see her as brilliant. It's because she wasn't trying to be. She just was.
If there's one thing I really notice about Mockingbird when I read it, it is that I can so clearly see the care that Harper took as she was writing this story. She worked hard to make it the best that it could be, for herself and for anyone else who was going to read it. She perfectly took us to another world, let us see through the eyes of another person. As I said before, she wanted it to matter. So, as a writer myself, I try to make what I do matter, and Harper Lee is a shining example of that. She should be that example for all writers.
Look, I'm not saying that every book has to be To Kill a Mockingbird or any other legendary novel. In fact, some writing is meant to be fun and light, and they serve a purpose by letting our minds relax. We need those books in the world. But that is, again, their purpose, and those authors are aware of it. Speaking for myself as a reader as well, I can always tell when an author cares, and I can certainly tell when they don't. It does not take much to understand and feel what drives certain people to write certain books. Anyone can sense when someone is doing it for fame or money or to jump on a popular bandwagon, and whilst those people might have managed to achieve those things, think about what they haven't achieved. Things like respect. I know that in the past decade or so, many of us have joked and laughed about how many poorly written books have become popular and made boat loads of cash, and if that's what those authors were after, good for them, I guess. But if I was making money from a book that was terribly written and pointless and gave little to anyone who read it, I would not be happy. Because to a true artist, fame and money might be good things to attain, but without being respected as a writer, without being that artist, it's all worthless. In fact, when I finish laughing at all those aforementioned jokes, I actually feel kind of sad. I feel sad for the state we seem to be in when it come to the written word and art in general.
I have walked through many bookstores and libraries in recent years, and I do so with one question: "What is the point?" This is only my opinion, of course, but I just feel like there are so many people who want to be writers for the wrong reasons, and they build a body of work that is unbelievably futile. None of us should have to wonder what a writer has to say if we've read their book, and sadly, I've read quite a few books where I'm left empty, because, though they've put words on paper, the author has said nothing. As someone who loves words and stories and who loves to create them, I can't think of anything more devastating, in that context, than for people to read what I've written and feel nothing. I honestly want all writers to be passionate. I know some are, and I am grateful for them, but many are not. I want everyone who dares to call themselves a writer to not only want to put words on paper and collect a check, but I want them to have a desire to create entire worlds, to make a difference in the lives of their readers, even if it's a small difference. I want them to want to make their readers feel something, whether it's joy or pain or anything in between. Let it be something. We need to make them feel alive. That's what we're supposed to do. That is our contribution to the world. And it is exactly what Harper Lee did.
So, as we say goodbye to this amazing artist, I hope that all of us, especially the writers, choose to carry on a legacy that people like her began. A legacy of creating things that will reach people, that will change them for the better and that will last forever.
Love and full moons,
Becky the Writer
Saturday, January 30, 2016
Paper Man - Movie Review
Greetings,
And so, I continue my crusade to try and get everyone to write letters and notes, less through email or text, but on real and actual paper, I will again be discussing a film with "paper" in the title. Actually, I just re-watched this movie and wanted to talk about it, despite my list of blog posts titles becoming repetitive because of it. But that was a good opener, though. Anyway, Paper Man, ladies and gentleman.
Paper Man is a 2009 movie wherein Jeff Daniels plays a writer. So, it's a Jeff Daniels movie. Yeah, he plays writers quite a bit. Not complaining. Anyway, he plays a guy named Richard Dunn, a not terribly successful novelist who goes off to Montauk in order to get some work done on his new book, something suggested by his wife, Claire, played by Lisa Kudrow (Yay!). As he has been dealing with writer's block, she thinks it will be helpful for him to have some time alone. But, alas, he is not alone. Richard has a friend with him. An imaginary friend named, Captain Excellent, played by Ryan Reynolds. And before you ask, yes, they do take complete advantage of the fact that he is a superhero, and it is rather glorious. On a slightly more serious note, he has always had this imaginary friend as a lifelong support through difficult times, and it shows how someone like this can be seen as having a disorder of some kind. More on that later.
So, along with the Captain, Richard manages to strike up a friendship with a teenage girl named Abby, played by Emma Stone. Abby seems to be a girl who is quite lost, letting herself be involved in an abusive relationship with a guy named Bryce, played by Hunter Parrish, and trying to figure out how to deal with her past. She is looking for stability in her life, I think, and though she does get some from her best friend, Christopher, played by Keiran Culkin, who loves her and wants to protect her from pretty much everyone who isn't him, it feels like he's becoming not enough for her. Almost as though he's holding her back.
The story basically follows both Richard and Abby as they simply try to figure out the direction in which their lives should be heading, though they are living ones that are mostly completely different. But it's the things they have in common that lead them to having a wonderful friendship. As to be expected, when some people look at the relationship they have, it comes across as ever so slightly creepy and inappropriate, even though, when one bothers to look closer, they would see that there is a purity and a sincerity to the friendship. It's uncommon on the outside, but it also consists of some of the essential things that lead people to become friends in the first place.
Eventually, we get to learn more about these two, while they do the same for themselves and each other. They are able to open up to each other emotionally, which helps them both deal with their issues, and it turns out they have more in common than they know or will ever reveal. And I get that is sounds as though I'm spoiling things there, but this is one of those films where, even if I laid out the entire plot, I would still say go watch it. Because it's the performances that really make this movie as good as it is.
I mean, we all know that Jeff Daniels is amazing, and he has some heart-wrenching scenes here, as does Emma. In fact, I could easily say that this might be her best performance in a film, or at the very least, it was the first to truly show how much potential she has for the future. And while I speak of the heavy emotion aspects of the movie, there is also a lot of humor in it, something that both the writers and the actors, especially these two, managed to balance brilliantly. And that is not something that is done easily.
The bottom line is this. Even though Paper Man may not have been a huge success with critics or otherwise, it might be just another one of those films that I gravitate to because I am a writer. I get the issues we have when we're not coming up with the amazing words we wish we could, and I certainly understand the feelings of needing someone to talk to, but, because everyone around us either doesn't understand or doesn't want to understand, we have to make up people to talk to. Or just settle for ourselves. I almost think that this movie turns the audience into the outsiders who see us as insane, and it lets them decide whether or not they will continue to see us like that or just accept what we are and how we think. Hopefully, the latter happens more often than not.
So, in case you didn't figure it out, I am recommending Paper Man, if for nothing else than the fantastic performances. But who knows? Maybe it will help people see us writers, not as odd, but just as us.
Love and full moons,
Becky the Writer
And so, I continue my crusade to try and get everyone to write letters and notes, less through email or text, but on real and actual paper, I will again be discussing a film with "paper" in the title. Actually, I just re-watched this movie and wanted to talk about it, despite my list of blog posts titles becoming repetitive because of it. But that was a good opener, though. Anyway, Paper Man, ladies and gentleman.
Paper Man is a 2009 movie wherein Jeff Daniels plays a writer. So, it's a Jeff Daniels movie. Yeah, he plays writers quite a bit. Not complaining. Anyway, he plays a guy named Richard Dunn, a not terribly successful novelist who goes off to Montauk in order to get some work done on his new book, something suggested by his wife, Claire, played by Lisa Kudrow (Yay!). As he has been dealing with writer's block, she thinks it will be helpful for him to have some time alone. But, alas, he is not alone. Richard has a friend with him. An imaginary friend named, Captain Excellent, played by Ryan Reynolds. And before you ask, yes, they do take complete advantage of the fact that he is a superhero, and it is rather glorious. On a slightly more serious note, he has always had this imaginary friend as a lifelong support through difficult times, and it shows how someone like this can be seen as having a disorder of some kind. More on that later.
So, along with the Captain, Richard manages to strike up a friendship with a teenage girl named Abby, played by Emma Stone. Abby seems to be a girl who is quite lost, letting herself be involved in an abusive relationship with a guy named Bryce, played by Hunter Parrish, and trying to figure out how to deal with her past. She is looking for stability in her life, I think, and though she does get some from her best friend, Christopher, played by Keiran Culkin, who loves her and wants to protect her from pretty much everyone who isn't him, it feels like he's becoming not enough for her. Almost as though he's holding her back.
The story basically follows both Richard and Abby as they simply try to figure out the direction in which their lives should be heading, though they are living ones that are mostly completely different. But it's the things they have in common that lead them to having a wonderful friendship. As to be expected, when some people look at the relationship they have, it comes across as ever so slightly creepy and inappropriate, even though, when one bothers to look closer, they would see that there is a purity and a sincerity to the friendship. It's uncommon on the outside, but it also consists of some of the essential things that lead people to become friends in the first place.
Eventually, we get to learn more about these two, while they do the same for themselves and each other. They are able to open up to each other emotionally, which helps them both deal with their issues, and it turns out they have more in common than they know or will ever reveal. And I get that is sounds as though I'm spoiling things there, but this is one of those films where, even if I laid out the entire plot, I would still say go watch it. Because it's the performances that really make this movie as good as it is.
I mean, we all know that Jeff Daniels is amazing, and he has some heart-wrenching scenes here, as does Emma. In fact, I could easily say that this might be her best performance in a film, or at the very least, it was the first to truly show how much potential she has for the future. And while I speak of the heavy emotion aspects of the movie, there is also a lot of humor in it, something that both the writers and the actors, especially these two, managed to balance brilliantly. And that is not something that is done easily.
The bottom line is this. Even though Paper Man may not have been a huge success with critics or otherwise, it might be just another one of those films that I gravitate to because I am a writer. I get the issues we have when we're not coming up with the amazing words we wish we could, and I certainly understand the feelings of needing someone to talk to, but, because everyone around us either doesn't understand or doesn't want to understand, we have to make up people to talk to. Or just settle for ourselves. I almost think that this movie turns the audience into the outsiders who see us as insane, and it lets them decide whether or not they will continue to see us like that or just accept what we are and how we think. Hopefully, the latter happens more often than not.
So, in case you didn't figure it out, I am recommending Paper Man, if for nothing else than the fantastic performances. But who knows? Maybe it will help people see us writers, not as odd, but just as us.
Love and full moons,
Becky the Writer
Wednesday, January 27, 2016
Paper Towns - Movie Review
Greetings,
Is it just me or are those "coming of age" movies part of the most hit or miss genre of all time? And I'm not just talking about some films being good and some being bad. I mean that within the movie there are parts the either really work or really do not. I've always felt this way, and - Holy Smokes! - was that feeling confirmed when I saw the film I am going to talk about today, Paper Towns.
Paper Towns is a 2015 movie based on the 2008 novel of the same name by John Green. More on him later. Anyway, the story follows Quentin, played by Nat Wolff, a young man in his final year of high school. He is nice and smart, has great friends, a supportive family and what I would call a very unhealthy obsession with the girl next door. Oh, yeah. We're going there. For the past eleven years, he has lived across the street from Margo Roth Spiegelman, played by Cara Delevigne, a little girl with whom he develops a close friendship, wherein they are defined as "partners in crime". As a child, Margo just seems very adventurous with ambitions of being mysterious. As a teenager, she becomes one of the most despicable cinematic characters in my recent memory. Or maybe she's not. I don't know because this model they hired for unknown reasons, other than "because she's a model", is not such a great actress (See Cindy Crawford in the 1995 movie Fair Game for more analysis on that). Point is, she is purporting herself, as is everyone else, as being far more interesting than she actually is. Look, there's nothing fascinating about using capital letters in the middle of a sentence because the lower case ones feel left out. I mean, it was cute when Vanessa Hudgeons did the number thing in Bandslam, but her character was enjoyable enough to back it up. Oh, and Margo pretty much uses Quentin to do her bidding and ultimately treats him like crap. In my opinion. And yet, I think they want us to like her, not to mention the way they expect me to believe that this quirky, indie, living outside the box girl is tight with the popular jocks and cheerleader types. My response to all of that is this: DENIED. For real, entertainment industry, stop trying to make me like awful people. We already had that girl on Glee. We don't need any more of that. Sorry for the rant. Back to the plot.
After some narration from Quentin, talking about how he and Margo have grown apart over the years, and a night where she drags him around breaking the law, she up and disappears. Hosanna! Unfortunately, he decides to go on a road trip to find her. Of course, when I say "unfortunately", I say it in regards to this poor boy who just doesn't get it. For the movie, it is quite fortunate. Not only do we get rid of that obnoxious character, we get to the real meat of the story and the best thing about it. As I said, Quentin wants to go off and find Margo, but he can't go alone, so he takes with him his two best friends, Ben and Radar, played by Austin Abrams and Justice Smith, as well as Radar's girlfriend, Angela, played by Jaz Sinclair, and Lacey, played by Halston Sage, who is one of Margo's friends. Now I do like the girls both actress and character wise, but I super like Ben and Radar. They're sweet and funny and - Oh, look at that - LOYAL! Yes, these friends are everything that Margo Roth Spiegelman is not. So, I spent the whole time hoping that Quentin would get it. Get who his real friends are and get who he should really be concerned about and giving his time to. Does he? Well, that would constitute me giving away the ending and I don't want to do that.
So, like I said before, I'm on the fence about this one when I break it down. When it comes to the story, I'd have to go to my feelings about John Green. And my feelings on him are...meh. Yeah, I don't really care for him as a writer. I know it's sacrilege to say that these days, but too bad. I have my opinion. I'm not saying he's a terrible writer. He's not. He's just not someone who I find particularly exceptional. I would call him a trendy writer. It seems that people starting reading his books because other people told them to do so, whether they actually wanted to or not. Not to say that trendy things can't have staying power. I just don't know if we'll be studying him in the class room in fifty years. As always, though, if you think his books are good and you get joy out of reading them, I am sincerely happy for you, and I won't try to stop you. This is just my taste. And my taste dictates that some of this story is good and some of it is not.
I will make a point of saying this, though. I know I said that I like the Quentin character, but even better, I am really starting to like Nat Wolff as an actor. I was never too crazy about him, mostly because he played some characters that I found annoying, usually an annoying little brother. But, wow, he is really growing up and turning into a fine, young actor, so I'd say that is my favorite aspect of the film. And I hope he continues on this path, because I am looking forward to more of it.
Okay, let's finish up. Would I recommend Paper Towns? Sure, why not? It's worth a watch, again, if you like those coming of age movies... especially from the 80's. Seriously, had this have been made in that decade, the words "Starring John Cusack" would have been involved. Yeah, good times, indeed. So, if you can get yourself through the Margo scenes, you will be rewarded with some better stuff. This means thumbs up, but a thumb held up at about a 71 degree angle.
Love and full moons,
Becky the Writer
Is it just me or are those "coming of age" movies part of the most hit or miss genre of all time? And I'm not just talking about some films being good and some being bad. I mean that within the movie there are parts the either really work or really do not. I've always felt this way, and - Holy Smokes! - was that feeling confirmed when I saw the film I am going to talk about today, Paper Towns.
Paper Towns is a 2015 movie based on the 2008 novel of the same name by John Green. More on him later. Anyway, the story follows Quentin, played by Nat Wolff, a young man in his final year of high school. He is nice and smart, has great friends, a supportive family and what I would call a very unhealthy obsession with the girl next door. Oh, yeah. We're going there. For the past eleven years, he has lived across the street from Margo Roth Spiegelman, played by Cara Delevigne, a little girl with whom he develops a close friendship, wherein they are defined as "partners in crime". As a child, Margo just seems very adventurous with ambitions of being mysterious. As a teenager, she becomes one of the most despicable cinematic characters in my recent memory. Or maybe she's not. I don't know because this model they hired for unknown reasons, other than "because she's a model", is not such a great actress (See Cindy Crawford in the 1995 movie Fair Game for more analysis on that). Point is, she is purporting herself, as is everyone else, as being far more interesting than she actually is. Look, there's nothing fascinating about using capital letters in the middle of a sentence because the lower case ones feel left out. I mean, it was cute when Vanessa Hudgeons did the number thing in Bandslam, but her character was enjoyable enough to back it up. Oh, and Margo pretty much uses Quentin to do her bidding and ultimately treats him like crap. In my opinion. And yet, I think they want us to like her, not to mention the way they expect me to believe that this quirky, indie, living outside the box girl is tight with the popular jocks and cheerleader types. My response to all of that is this: DENIED. For real, entertainment industry, stop trying to make me like awful people. We already had that girl on Glee. We don't need any more of that. Sorry for the rant. Back to the plot.
After some narration from Quentin, talking about how he and Margo have grown apart over the years, and a night where she drags him around breaking the law, she up and disappears. Hosanna! Unfortunately, he decides to go on a road trip to find her. Of course, when I say "unfortunately", I say it in regards to this poor boy who just doesn't get it. For the movie, it is quite fortunate. Not only do we get rid of that obnoxious character, we get to the real meat of the story and the best thing about it. As I said, Quentin wants to go off and find Margo, but he can't go alone, so he takes with him his two best friends, Ben and Radar, played by Austin Abrams and Justice Smith, as well as Radar's girlfriend, Angela, played by Jaz Sinclair, and Lacey, played by Halston Sage, who is one of Margo's friends. Now I do like the girls both actress and character wise, but I super like Ben and Radar. They're sweet and funny and - Oh, look at that - LOYAL! Yes, these friends are everything that Margo Roth Spiegelman is not. So, I spent the whole time hoping that Quentin would get it. Get who his real friends are and get who he should really be concerned about and giving his time to. Does he? Well, that would constitute me giving away the ending and I don't want to do that.
So, like I said before, I'm on the fence about this one when I break it down. When it comes to the story, I'd have to go to my feelings about John Green. And my feelings on him are...meh. Yeah, I don't really care for him as a writer. I know it's sacrilege to say that these days, but too bad. I have my opinion. I'm not saying he's a terrible writer. He's not. He's just not someone who I find particularly exceptional. I would call him a trendy writer. It seems that people starting reading his books because other people told them to do so, whether they actually wanted to or not. Not to say that trendy things can't have staying power. I just don't know if we'll be studying him in the class room in fifty years. As always, though, if you think his books are good and you get joy out of reading them, I am sincerely happy for you, and I won't try to stop you. This is just my taste. And my taste dictates that some of this story is good and some of it is not.
I will make a point of saying this, though. I know I said that I like the Quentin character, but even better, I am really starting to like Nat Wolff as an actor. I was never too crazy about him, mostly because he played some characters that I found annoying, usually an annoying little brother. But, wow, he is really growing up and turning into a fine, young actor, so I'd say that is my favorite aspect of the film. And I hope he continues on this path, because I am looking forward to more of it.
Okay, let's finish up. Would I recommend Paper Towns? Sure, why not? It's worth a watch, again, if you like those coming of age movies... especially from the 80's. Seriously, had this have been made in that decade, the words "Starring John Cusack" would have been involved. Yeah, good times, indeed. So, if you can get yourself through the Margo scenes, you will be rewarded with some better stuff. This means thumbs up, but a thumb held up at about a 71 degree angle.
Love and full moons,
Becky the Writer
Saturday, January 16, 2016
Amy - Documentary Review
Greetings,
Well, I hate to talk once again about a great artist who left us much too soon, but I like to contribute to the "gone but not forgotten" mindset as much as I possibly can. So, today, I will be discussing a documentary that I recently saw about Amy Winehouse, aptly titled, Amy.
To be honest, I didn't even know that this film was being made, until I came across a trailer for it. Usually, I know about these things far in advance, docs about people in music, I mean. And said trailer I will discuss later. But I was really looking forward to seeing an official, for better or worse, account of the life of Amy Winehouse. I will say it's tough to go into something knowing that it will not have a happy ending, but I think what leads up to that ending and how it is portrayed is an important part of doing any movie like this.
Amy was directed by Asif Kapadia, well-known for his film about Ayrton Senna, aptly titled, once again, Senna. Now I admit, I have not seen any of his films before this, but I am considering it now. I really like his style in putting this together. It was, in some parts, a typical documentary with everything you expect being there, but there was enough uniqueness in the structure so that it could stand out. I was impressed by how well-balanced it was concerning the ups and downs of Amy's life and career, which were plentiful, and it pulls very few punches. That's good, in my opinion, because one must see the downs to appreciate the ups, and see the ups to get the emotional impact of the downs. To put it bluntly, a lot of this was difficult to watch. Not surprising.
One of the things I noticed most was the way Amy talked about fame and how she saw it and approached it. I speak both of her own and that of others. One of my favorite scenes was the recording session she had with Tony Bennett. At that point, she was a huge star, but, standing next to one of her greatest musical inspirations, she was like a nervous little girl. Her insecurities came out, and Mr. Bennett sweetly encouraged her. Maybe it's just the way I saw it, but I think she was shown as quite a humble person when it came to her talent. It seemed she didn't necessarily want to be a star; she just wanted to sing.
Sadly, though, that was a big part of the story as well, the perception of artists and what they are supposed to strive for. It seems that, when the world thinks of artists, they think of two kinds and two kinds only - ones that are poor and unknown, or ones that are rich and famous. And you have to pick one to be. But, though these kinds may be the most recognized, people tend to forget about those in the small but happy medium. The artists that manage to be successful, but not famous, financially stable (At least, somewhat), but not rich. Honestly, I think that is where many artists hope to be. And, whilst I may be wrong, I think Amy Winehouse may have been one of them.
That brings me to what may be the most polarizing thing about her. There are masses of people who were devastated by her death, but there are also a lot of people who would be quick to say that she brought it on herself. I personally tend to fall somewhere in the middle. I was saddened by her death, mostly because she was a great talent, and I thought she had potential to be one of those singers who did it until they were old, never stopping. But I also believe that she made a lot of poor choices in her life, which ultimately led to her death. Some may think that to say that is to speak ill of the dead, but I dare any of them to deny it. You can say that it wasn't her fault because of the way fame affected her, but while that may be a reason, I've never seen it as an excuse. And trust, there had to have been more things attributed to those choices than just her stardom. Which brings me to that trailer.
Honestly, I liked the first trailer for the movie. It was very well put together and had a great tone to it. And then, the second one came out. So, there's this thing that's done with trailers, and that is to show some quotes from reviewers and whatnot. Well, one of those quotes said that this film was "a celebration of Amy and a condemnation of us". Okay? First, it did celebrate her life. As I mentioned, it spotlighted her amazing talent and the potential she had to have a long career, but if this is implying that it celebrated her life as a whole, then we have a problem. Many parts of her life should not be celebrated but seen as a cautionary tale. And second, that thing about condemning US? Are you including me in that "us", because I never did a thing to hurt that woman. I just liked her music and her and occasionally said a prayer when I saw she was in trouble. I never stuck a needle in her arm. I never gave her drugs. Look, as I was saying before, many things can contribute to why we make the decisions that we do, but they are, in the end, OUR decisions. I am in no way condemning Amy for her mistakes, because we all make mistakes, some of them tragic, even life threatening, but please do not condemn me or anyone else for them.
Look, I don't want to sound harsh or judgmental towards this woman who I had great artistic admiration for. I suppose at the heart of this sad story is just a girl who couldn't see herself in the way that those who loved her did. And when I say those who loved her, I don't necessarily mean her fans. Of course, I know they loved her very much, and I would never, ever take away from the loss they feel, but they also didn't know her. I speak of the people who knew her personally, her true and genuine friends, the ones who really cared about her and wanted her to be okay. There were actually a couple of interviews with some girls who she had been friends with for quite a while. You could see the pain they experienced, not because of what superstar Amy Winehouse was going through, but because of what their friend Amy was going through. I wish she could have seen herself more the way they did. It was clear that she was greatly loved, authentically loved.
Okay, I may have gotten off track here, as I've been talking more about the person than the documentary. Then again, that's what this film was. It was her story, the good, the bad, the best and the worst. So, I say that this is a very well done movie. Yes, it is heartbreaking, from the sad parts, but even more so, from the not so sad parts, I have to say. It's when you see her as the happy, real person that she was, the moments where she smiled and laughed and was so full of joy and so grateful for being able to do what she loved, it's then that your heart truly aches for what the world lost. Not just an amazing artist, but a woman who, when she was at her best, was extraordinary. I'm glad that this film showed her, not just as a famous person, but as a person. Again, I hope I wasn't too harsh about this. The truth is difficult, but it has to told. Otherwise, we can never become wise. We can never protect ourselves. I certainly hope that people continue to be inspired by Amy Winehouse's music, but more so, I hope that people learn from her story.
This was a tough one.
Love and full moons,
Becky the Writer
Well, I hate to talk once again about a great artist who left us much too soon, but I like to contribute to the "gone but not forgotten" mindset as much as I possibly can. So, today, I will be discussing a documentary that I recently saw about Amy Winehouse, aptly titled, Amy.
To be honest, I didn't even know that this film was being made, until I came across a trailer for it. Usually, I know about these things far in advance, docs about people in music, I mean. And said trailer I will discuss later. But I was really looking forward to seeing an official, for better or worse, account of the life of Amy Winehouse. I will say it's tough to go into something knowing that it will not have a happy ending, but I think what leads up to that ending and how it is portrayed is an important part of doing any movie like this.
Amy was directed by Asif Kapadia, well-known for his film about Ayrton Senna, aptly titled, once again, Senna. Now I admit, I have not seen any of his films before this, but I am considering it now. I really like his style in putting this together. It was, in some parts, a typical documentary with everything you expect being there, but there was enough uniqueness in the structure so that it could stand out. I was impressed by how well-balanced it was concerning the ups and downs of Amy's life and career, which were plentiful, and it pulls very few punches. That's good, in my opinion, because one must see the downs to appreciate the ups, and see the ups to get the emotional impact of the downs. To put it bluntly, a lot of this was difficult to watch. Not surprising.
One of the things I noticed most was the way Amy talked about fame and how she saw it and approached it. I speak both of her own and that of others. One of my favorite scenes was the recording session she had with Tony Bennett. At that point, she was a huge star, but, standing next to one of her greatest musical inspirations, she was like a nervous little girl. Her insecurities came out, and Mr. Bennett sweetly encouraged her. Maybe it's just the way I saw it, but I think she was shown as quite a humble person when it came to her talent. It seemed she didn't necessarily want to be a star; she just wanted to sing.
Sadly, though, that was a big part of the story as well, the perception of artists and what they are supposed to strive for. It seems that, when the world thinks of artists, they think of two kinds and two kinds only - ones that are poor and unknown, or ones that are rich and famous. And you have to pick one to be. But, though these kinds may be the most recognized, people tend to forget about those in the small but happy medium. The artists that manage to be successful, but not famous, financially stable (At least, somewhat), but not rich. Honestly, I think that is where many artists hope to be. And, whilst I may be wrong, I think Amy Winehouse may have been one of them.
That brings me to what may be the most polarizing thing about her. There are masses of people who were devastated by her death, but there are also a lot of people who would be quick to say that she brought it on herself. I personally tend to fall somewhere in the middle. I was saddened by her death, mostly because she was a great talent, and I thought she had potential to be one of those singers who did it until they were old, never stopping. But I also believe that she made a lot of poor choices in her life, which ultimately led to her death. Some may think that to say that is to speak ill of the dead, but I dare any of them to deny it. You can say that it wasn't her fault because of the way fame affected her, but while that may be a reason, I've never seen it as an excuse. And trust, there had to have been more things attributed to those choices than just her stardom. Which brings me to that trailer.
Honestly, I liked the first trailer for the movie. It was very well put together and had a great tone to it. And then, the second one came out. So, there's this thing that's done with trailers, and that is to show some quotes from reviewers and whatnot. Well, one of those quotes said that this film was "a celebration of Amy and a condemnation of us". Okay? First, it did celebrate her life. As I mentioned, it spotlighted her amazing talent and the potential she had to have a long career, but if this is implying that it celebrated her life as a whole, then we have a problem. Many parts of her life should not be celebrated but seen as a cautionary tale. And second, that thing about condemning US? Are you including me in that "us", because I never did a thing to hurt that woman. I just liked her music and her and occasionally said a prayer when I saw she was in trouble. I never stuck a needle in her arm. I never gave her drugs. Look, as I was saying before, many things can contribute to why we make the decisions that we do, but they are, in the end, OUR decisions. I am in no way condemning Amy for her mistakes, because we all make mistakes, some of them tragic, even life threatening, but please do not condemn me or anyone else for them.
Look, I don't want to sound harsh or judgmental towards this woman who I had great artistic admiration for. I suppose at the heart of this sad story is just a girl who couldn't see herself in the way that those who loved her did. And when I say those who loved her, I don't necessarily mean her fans. Of course, I know they loved her very much, and I would never, ever take away from the loss they feel, but they also didn't know her. I speak of the people who knew her personally, her true and genuine friends, the ones who really cared about her and wanted her to be okay. There were actually a couple of interviews with some girls who she had been friends with for quite a while. You could see the pain they experienced, not because of what superstar Amy Winehouse was going through, but because of what their friend Amy was going through. I wish she could have seen herself more the way they did. It was clear that she was greatly loved, authentically loved.
Okay, I may have gotten off track here, as I've been talking more about the person than the documentary. Then again, that's what this film was. It was her story, the good, the bad, the best and the worst. So, I say that this is a very well done movie. Yes, it is heartbreaking, from the sad parts, but even more so, from the not so sad parts, I have to say. It's when you see her as the happy, real person that she was, the moments where she smiled and laughed and was so full of joy and so grateful for being able to do what she loved, it's then that your heart truly aches for what the world lost. Not just an amazing artist, but a woman who, when she was at her best, was extraordinary. I'm glad that this film showed her, not just as a famous person, but as a person. Again, I hope I wasn't too harsh about this. The truth is difficult, but it has to told. Otherwise, we can never become wise. We can never protect ourselves. I certainly hope that people continue to be inspired by Amy Winehouse's music, but more so, I hope that people learn from her story.
This was a tough one.
Love and full moons,
Becky the Writer
Tuesday, January 12, 2016
Top Ten David Bowie Songs
Greetings,
Okay, so 2016 has been kind of a sad year thus far. We're not even two weeks in and we've lost quite a few great people, Frank Armitage, Pat Harrington Jr., Robert Stigwood and now the person about whom I will be speaking today, David Bowie. That one came out of nowhere for me, because I didn't even know he was sick. Maybe others did, but I never kept up on news about him. To be honest, I was never much of a hardcore fan of his. Sure, I liked a lot of his songs, as evident by what I'm posting today, and I did love to hear him talk in interviews, as he had a talking voice that was even more enjoyable to me than his singing voice. But I know that there are fans out there that are hurting a lot more than I am, because they were, are and always will be those hardcore fans. Still, it is sad that such a great talent is lost to us, so I thought I'd pay a little tribute and share with you what were my favorite songs of his. I hope my attempt at levity here is seen not as disrespect while people are mourning, but as a way to hopefully bring a little smile to their faces and hearts in a time when they need it. Here we go.
Honorable Mention "Under Pressure" - This would have made the list, but I think, technically, it's a song from a Queen album. Still, it's a great song and Bowie is as much of a presence on it as anyone, so it's worth some acknowledgement. And Vanilla Ice TOTALLY stole that bass line!
#10. "Fashion" - Yeah, this reminds me of the getting ready for school scene in Clueless. What about it? Actually, that might be the first time I heard this song. Okay, you true fans can get upset about that. I don't mind. But, you know, better late than never.
#9. "Ashes to Ashes" - You know what is usually awful and unnecessary? Movie sequels. But song sequels? Oh, yeah, I could stand for a few more of those, so long as they're written as well as this, which references a character brought to us by way of an earlier song by David Bowie. One that I may be talking about later. Maybe, maybe not. Yeah, I'll totally be talking about it later.
#8. "Fame" - John Lennon helped to write this one. That's reason enough to include it.
#7. "Heroes" - I've heard that the production of this song has been compared to a "Wall of Sound" production. That seems accurate when you think of the, let's say, grandness of it. It has so many layers and is very rich, and it really feels like those involved cared about making it great. Apparently, that's a thing that used to happen a lot in the music industry.
#6. "Golden Years" - Yeah, this reminds me of the party scene in A Knight's Tale. What about it? Look, it's not my fault that he let a lot of his songs be in movies. But, let's be honest, I'm glad he did.
#5. "Changes" - I use this song to test people who would like to be my friend. I say "What do you think when I say 'Ch-ch-ch'?" If they respond with "Ch-Ch-Ch-Ch-Changes!", then they are granted the honor of my friendship. If they respond with "Ch-Ch-Ch-Chia (Pet)!"? Fail, fail, fail, fail, fail! Thanks again, Mr. Bowie.
#4. "Ziggy Stardust" - I don't know for sure just who this Ziggy Stardust guy is, but I know that he took it all too far, he could play guitar and I'm pretty sure there's at least one person in the world who was named after him. Also, if I ever got to be in a band with him, I'd be happy.
#3. "Space Oddity" - I mean, you gotta love a song that was not allowed to be played on the BBC until the astronauts from Apollo 11 got back home. No, seriously, that happened. I suppose I can understand that. Though, to this day, I'm not sure if it encouraged more people to join the space program or discouraged them. As long as it encouraged people to write better music (which it did, I believe), I guess it doesn't matter either way.
#2. "Young Americans" - I love when a song plays and you can totally hear what influenced the writer. Here, it is obvious that Bowie was influenced by some serious soul music. I just love the sound of this song and how different I find it from a lot of his other work. But I guess that's what he was all about. He wrote and created whatever he felt in the moment. Also, Luther Vandross sang back up. I mean, come on!
#1. "The Man Who Sold the World" - There's something special about any combination of music and lyrics that becomes haunting. And that is how I would describe this song. It is hauntingly beautiful. I've heard so many explanations for what this song may be about or what it was inspired by, from Heinlein to Cthulhu, but I really don't care. All I know is that it's amazing. That's plenty enough for me.
And so those are my favorites from the late, great David Bowie. Of course, my prayers go out to his family and all the heartbroken fans, and as always, I hope he had everything set right in the end. He was a wonderful artist and this world will miss him.
Love and full moons,
Becky the Writer
Okay, so 2016 has been kind of a sad year thus far. We're not even two weeks in and we've lost quite a few great people, Frank Armitage, Pat Harrington Jr., Robert Stigwood and now the person about whom I will be speaking today, David Bowie. That one came out of nowhere for me, because I didn't even know he was sick. Maybe others did, but I never kept up on news about him. To be honest, I was never much of a hardcore fan of his. Sure, I liked a lot of his songs, as evident by what I'm posting today, and I did love to hear him talk in interviews, as he had a talking voice that was even more enjoyable to me than his singing voice. But I know that there are fans out there that are hurting a lot more than I am, because they were, are and always will be those hardcore fans. Still, it is sad that such a great talent is lost to us, so I thought I'd pay a little tribute and share with you what were my favorite songs of his. I hope my attempt at levity here is seen not as disrespect while people are mourning, but as a way to hopefully bring a little smile to their faces and hearts in a time when they need it. Here we go.
Honorable Mention "Under Pressure" - This would have made the list, but I think, technically, it's a song from a Queen album. Still, it's a great song and Bowie is as much of a presence on it as anyone, so it's worth some acknowledgement. And Vanilla Ice TOTALLY stole that bass line!
#10. "Fashion" - Yeah, this reminds me of the getting ready for school scene in Clueless. What about it? Actually, that might be the first time I heard this song. Okay, you true fans can get upset about that. I don't mind. But, you know, better late than never.
#9. "Ashes to Ashes" - You know what is usually awful and unnecessary? Movie sequels. But song sequels? Oh, yeah, I could stand for a few more of those, so long as they're written as well as this, which references a character brought to us by way of an earlier song by David Bowie. One that I may be talking about later. Maybe, maybe not. Yeah, I'll totally be talking about it later.
#8. "Fame" - John Lennon helped to write this one. That's reason enough to include it.
#7. "Heroes" - I've heard that the production of this song has been compared to a "Wall of Sound" production. That seems accurate when you think of the, let's say, grandness of it. It has so many layers and is very rich, and it really feels like those involved cared about making it great. Apparently, that's a thing that used to happen a lot in the music industry.
#6. "Golden Years" - Yeah, this reminds me of the party scene in A Knight's Tale. What about it? Look, it's not my fault that he let a lot of his songs be in movies. But, let's be honest, I'm glad he did.
#5. "Changes" - I use this song to test people who would like to be my friend. I say "What do you think when I say 'Ch-ch-ch'?" If they respond with "Ch-Ch-Ch-Ch-Changes!", then they are granted the honor of my friendship. If they respond with "Ch-Ch-Ch-Chia (Pet)!"? Fail, fail, fail, fail, fail! Thanks again, Mr. Bowie.
#4. "Ziggy Stardust" - I don't know for sure just who this Ziggy Stardust guy is, but I know that he took it all too far, he could play guitar and I'm pretty sure there's at least one person in the world who was named after him. Also, if I ever got to be in a band with him, I'd be happy.
#3. "Space Oddity" - I mean, you gotta love a song that was not allowed to be played on the BBC until the astronauts from Apollo 11 got back home. No, seriously, that happened. I suppose I can understand that. Though, to this day, I'm not sure if it encouraged more people to join the space program or discouraged them. As long as it encouraged people to write better music (which it did, I believe), I guess it doesn't matter either way.
#2. "Young Americans" - I love when a song plays and you can totally hear what influenced the writer. Here, it is obvious that Bowie was influenced by some serious soul music. I just love the sound of this song and how different I find it from a lot of his other work. But I guess that's what he was all about. He wrote and created whatever he felt in the moment. Also, Luther Vandross sang back up. I mean, come on!
#1. "The Man Who Sold the World" - There's something special about any combination of music and lyrics that becomes haunting. And that is how I would describe this song. It is hauntingly beautiful. I've heard so many explanations for what this song may be about or what it was inspired by, from Heinlein to Cthulhu, but I really don't care. All I know is that it's amazing. That's plenty enough for me.
And so those are my favorites from the late, great David Bowie. Of course, my prayers go out to his family and all the heartbroken fans, and as always, I hope he had everything set right in the end. He was a wonderful artist and this world will miss him.
Love and full moons,
Becky the Writer
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)