what did we watch: AVATAR

So tonight I watched Avatar with my parents. From what I hear, the director James Cameron who is also the director of Titanic, The Terminator films and The Abyss, aimed to make Avatar an epic that would be of as much fame and as notorious as Titanic. I'm not sure if the film can actually accomplish such a feat, if that really was the idea, but the film is definitely a success in it's own right.

My number one reason for its success is its gorgeous aesthetics. Gorgeous doesn't even appropriately describe the beauty of this film, all 2 hrs and 42 minutes of it, or at least every shot that involves the fictional world of Pandora. The effort put into every scene reminds me of Haruki Murakami's Princess Mononoke (which I can't seem to find a good website of) and the fantastical plant life in that film as well. And it's not only the imaginary flora and magnificient forest that are works of art, the indigenous Na'vi people are equally beautiful in their own right as well as the creatures of Pandora that on the whole seem very likely to rip your throat out. I could probably expand even further on how much the beauty of Avatar is enough to make it worth watching (and worth winning a couple awards for) but I feel it's necessary to mention things like plot and characters.

("spoiler" alert)

Sam Worthington plays the male lead of Jake Sully, a paraplegic marine taking his dead brother's place in a scientific mission to understand Pandora better, and the very attractive Zoe Saldana acts as the Na'vi who takes him by the hand, Neytiri. Honestly, there isn't a great deal of character development, though I suppose in films of this sort aimed to be epics it's not necessarily the most crucial element. The one source of change in heart lies within the male lead and it's a transformation you can see coming - you expect certain roles from certain characters: hero, heroine, bad guy, secondary characters that help the good guys triumph (sigourney weaver and michelle rodriguez)...Avatar does tug at your heartstrings (or it did tug at mine) but not because of dynamic characters, for reasons of more epic proportions involving ideas that are regularly approached by films: the meeting of races, total irrational violence, rallying of people around one cause, the maturing of one person and being accepted, as well as good winning out over evil.

I think the film can easily be split into two halves, a first half giving the audience total understanding of the world of Pandora and creating an emotional connection with the people of Na'vi and then a second half where all the action happens. Action that I prefer greatly over the guns and car chase types of a great deal of films nowadays. Let's not kid ourselves, before stepping into the theater I already knew there was going to be romance and I knew very well that there was going to be a happy ending. I'm not complaining, I think both were tastefully executed and I'm the type to enjoy both of those elements in a good movie. (I don't handle the reality of misery very well when displayed in Hollywood generated films.) Both halves let you fully appreciate the stupidity of the human race and if you're the sentimental sort (like me) then you also can spend the movie considering the utopic idea of a race completely interlocked with the nature around them. (and actually in love with their world)

Though this is a lengthy post, (and really just my amateur shot at a movie review) I think it's worth mentioning again that the aesthetics of Avatar alone are amazing. That balance struck between complete fantasy and plausible reality (which I also said about Up by Pixar) is incredibly well done and is part of why I can be so in love with this movie; it's a wonderful example of imagination at its fullest and an unfathomable amount of hard work and labor (which I like to perceive as very passionate and heartfelt). My last additional comment is that the 3D element is, in my opinion, not necessary and almost an obstacle in fully appreciating Avatar - something so well done doesn't require the gimmick.

this movie is so gorgeous.

what did we watch: the september issue

just watched the september issue with six other girls from parsons and one girl from FIT. general conclusion? we love grace coddington. it's true.

but i have to admit. i also love anna. both anna wintour and grace are such strong, stubborn, genius women. the former has incredible management skills, the ability to organize, to be decisive, to be witty, is intelligent, creative, and very very capable of everything her job entails. the latter has mind blowing styling abilities, is an imaginative romantic to the fullest extent, knows how to consciously think out what works well and looks the best but also simply has instinctive intuitive taste that is 100% reliable.



i also loved seeing the forming on the september issue of amercian vogue (in brief because the almost 6 month process is condensed into a 90 minute film) from start to finish and all the photoshoots, obstacles and arrangements that took place during it's creation. it's an incredbly daunting task and unbelievably complex and practically scary and intimidating from my point of view. the idea of putting together that issue every year and putting all that passion and energy into it is difficult to comprehend.



my fascination with and desire to be in the fashion and magazine industry grows.




(good thing i got that fall nylon internship then)

what did we watch: david letterman

"lukewarm royalty with a whip from outerspace"
- anna wintour on david letterman last night on what she supposedly is according to the media

can't wait to see the september issue.

what did we watch: lovers on the road 《戀人路上》

《戀人路上》lovers on the road

this past saturday, august 1st, i watched "lovers on the road" with ben at the grand cinema in elements. (kowloon station, 1 austin road) it's part of their summer promotional program: "indie salon" which is a collection of eight independent films produced in hong kong and around this area. every week on wednesdays (7:30 and 9:30 pm) and saturdays (2:30 and 4:30 pm) two of the films are screened; tickets are $40 for student and $60 for adults. (unfortunately only hk student id's are accepted)



"lovers on the road" is directed by tsang tsui shan and it has a lot going for it in terms of substance, ideas and difficult themes. it follows the story of one very self-absorbed naive girl - who it is easy to hate and not so easy to love - and her move from hong kong to beijing with her boyfriend whom she seems to have no feelings for but a very long term commitment to. there are a number of shots and scenes that are quite aesthetically done, good composition and good color, but the editing is awful and it's cut very poorly. very very poorly. plus on a large screen the pixelization is very clear and it bothers me even though i'm aware how low budget these films are. the trailer looks good though this small...the soundtrack is a bit awkward and the dialogue is too self aware. the main actress does quite a good job as does one of the other supporting actors but on a whole there is nothing dynamic about the film and it could be improved. but it is my first local indie film and i'm still quite glad i went to see it. i still remember it and it's 73 minutes of glory on the large screen so at least it remained in my mind.

what did we watch: he's just not that into you

he's just not that into you

it's sad to say but very true, that airplane movies generally tend to...not be very good. thus on my nice 17 hours worth of flying yesterday (and 24 hours of traveling...) i watched three movies that i would never have chosen to watch in theaters for money. or even really have agreed to watch on tv - at least not alone. the second of these three i watched was he's just not that into you a romantic chick flick at best with basically no action, no humor and nothing really exciting at all. it is "real life."

based on the best seller with the same title written by the sex and the city writers Greg Behrendt and Liz Tuccillo - having never read the book i can't compare it - but i can defintely see the similarities between this mediocre movie and the SATC series. (not to say SATC is mediocre - it's definitely one of my guilty pleasures {amy, i too know to term them guilty pleasures}) the movie (and originally the book) are intended to serve as guides to women on understanding men (in breief). reading the signals, knowing what they mean and what to do next - that whole lot. i can't say there isn't some solid advice...but on the whole it isn't anything you haven't already heard, seen and been told by the media before.

the best thing going for this movie is probably it's cast. a full fledged all star cast of nine, at least recognizing the actors and actresses is semi fun and they make for good eye candy even if the acting itself isn't the most amazing. or the writing of the scenes. bradley cooper and scarlett johannsen are particularly attractive people to seen on screen...

ok there's a little bit of humor and it wasn't that painful to watch. if anything it's 129 minutes of time filling entertainment. but i wouldn't pay money for it and i'm not likely to watch it again.

official movie site

what did we watch: UP

UP

this past sunday, may 31, i and some 20 other people went to watch UP, the latest pixar/disney movie released and it was amazing. spectacular. phenomenal. etc. to begin with, the art was breath taking. so much effort, time, thought, consideration of every tiny detail and composition was put into the making of this 96 minute film. i loved the textures, the rich bright colors, the vast panoramic views used and the often fantastical imagery. pixar hit this one exactly right with the level and balance of realism and fantasy as well. your imagination is stretched, the world is not quite your world - but it's still realistic in the sense that you don't feel the movie tries to hard to make things "work" (ok some peole say the aviator dogs...but i'll overlook that in light of how well the rest is in sync). and the plot is great, even if it isn't action packed thriller or suspenseful mystery - it is partially those things and partially comedy, drama, and both a child suitable and adult film. the best thing about films are layers of interpretation and layers of depth and UP definitely fulfils both life lessons and a realistic portrayal of the course of life, human emotions and human behavior. the characters are perfectly composed, jokes are well made, and i love a movie that gets all the movie goers talking about it afterwards.

i could watch it again and again.

to be watched: burn after reading

basically about how something small snowballs into something huge and massive and uncontrollable. contains all star cast including george clooney and brad pitt with completely unique characters crafted and executed well. is hilarious, quirky, satirical and the perfect dark comedy and despite all the oscars is the more enjoyable cohen brothers film in comparison to no country for old men. odd similarity to the latter is the lack of a soundtrack and the fact that you only register that after the movie's over. extremely quotable. promotable to all except for young children.