i don't think you can help it, either, but i won't sweat it. besides, i totally expected this. i've never been able to express anything disdainful for Woody Allen's films without someone either telling me how wrong i am for it, or how one-dimensional my thinking is.

:shrug:

having characters that are idle rich don't bother me, i don't think i said that. did it sound like that's what bothered me? because that isn't what made them unrealistic to me. i probably wasn't very good at explaining it, but it isn't the lifestyle really, it's the dialogue and their actions and reactions to things.

yeah, like i said - whatever. whether it's all in his mind or it really happened doesn't make a difference to me because there's no explanation for this and that's not the focus.

anyway, i guess i am prejudice against Woody Allen, but writing off what i say and why i dislike it with a wave of your hand and a, "oh, you just hate the guy" is unfair. i tried to look at it as objectively as possible. i guess you can choose to believe that isn't true if you want to, but there's not much i can say to that.

Thanks for that great review, now I want to see this one!

hm? which one?

No long review for this because it can be easily summed up in a short little sentence or two: basically, this is the perfect film to watch today of all days, from the 4 star performances, to the two-sides-of-the-world thing, to Jude Law finally gets it right, to the ending scene including all four actors dancing around a fire place on New Year's eve shouting HAPPY NEW YEAR!!! while a bunch of corny, peppy music plays. it's perfect.

HAPPY NEW YEAR, MOFOS!

a much longer, better review featuring something of higher quality coming verrasoon.

- ashley

Oh man, this documentary is made of so much win, I feared my heart would swell to the point of bursting.

I went into this film thinking I was going to see a study on how a chimp can be taken out of its own environment, brought into ours and proven to understand and accomplish real communication with a human being... and I did. Sort of. However, the overall consensus seems to say a lot more about people than it does about animals. For those of you who have ever watched James Marsh's previous documentary (Man on Wire), then you're probably already familiar with the style in which he craftily tells a story. Project Nim is wonderful for its heart and soul, but also brutal in the way it really exposes human nature.

Specifically, Nim was a chimpanzee who was the subject of scientific studies to do with animal language due to their DNA being identical to a humans to a crazy degree (98% or thereabouts). Herbert Terrace, the head of the study, wanted to challenge Chomsky's thesis that "only humans have language" by raising Nim in a human family treated like a child. Two weeks after he was born, he was separated from his mother, Carolyn, and put into the hands of a young couple with several young children of their own. The year was 1973. Funnily enough, the family who initially adopted Nim didn't really seem to take the study too seriously. The LaFarge's were sort of your typical liberal, hippy family of the mid-1970's, and Stephanie (Nim's "mom") wasn't very keen on keeping charts or notes or journals on Nim's progress. Therefore, there's lots of uber cute footage of little Nim running wild through the house, being curious and insanely lovable to the LeFarge's, but not a lot of "depth" beyond that. She didn't want to treat him like an experiment; it was pretty much like having another baby for her. She was excited to show Nim the world, but not to restrain him in any way. In fact, she wasn't even keen on teaching him language because she thought it would make him less unique.

Eventually, Nim was taken away from the LaFarge's to be put into a more controlled environment. This is when he started to learn sign language. He was still in a really nice environment, though, and it looked like good times. He was surrounded by young, bright teachers who would take care of him and teach him and basically treat him like one of them. Nim got to go on hikes and talk to them about what they could hear and see; he was able to ask for food when he saw it; they even let him take a few puffs of their joints. :D And Nim did learn over 125 signs - various food signs, basic verbs like "want" and "get", and others like "hug" and "kisses."

Unfortunately, though, as Nim grew and became less cuddly and more like an animal, they had to put him in an even more controlled environment. He was aggressive, often biting and scratching (and we all know the affects of that by now) to the point that Herb had to face facts and treat Nim like what he was - an animal. It's really heartbreaking watching little, trusting Nim being drugged up and led by the hand through the gates of some pretty horrific places, even at one point being brought to an animal testing centre. It was around this time that Herb began to run out of funding for his project, and coincidentally enough it was also around this time that Herbert Terrace admits to the world that his experiment had failed - not because he ran out of funding or because of any action on his part, but simply because he decided that all the signs Nim learned didn't really prove that Nim was communicating at all, but merely mimicking his teachers, and the only communication Nim would really take part in were instinctive ones to get him what he wanted (apple me eat, drink me Nim, for example).

I'd say the end result is probably up for interpretation, but it sure did seem like in the end, no matter how pampered and attended to Nim was in his life, it was always for the benefit of the doers and the thinkers, not Nim himself, and therefore, it really does say just as much about humans as it does about chimps.

Re: Let me entertain you: reviews by ash
 

I don't know if I'll like it. Looks too "sweet" for me. Heh.

Re: Let me entertain you: reviews by ash
 

:mad:

This movie kinda reminded me of Synecdoche, New York in that there were several instances where I was laughing heartily but I wasn't sure if i was "supposed" to actually find it all that funny; though I suppose that's a ridiculous thing to say. The way one feels about a film is always open to swing a great deal of ways. Either way, I enjoyed it much more this way.

The Future is about a couple in their mid-thirties, Sophie and Jason, who have a mid-life crisis of sorts upon discovering that the cat they are soon to adopt will be ready to take home in 30 days. Their reasoning is since in 5 years they'll both be 40 (I guess the cut-off age representing all things liberal) this window of time up until the cat is theirs is really the last chance either of them will ever have to be "free". In other words, the movie takes place over the span of about 30 days, which this odd twosome decides are their last days to accomplish something great. The idea that the age of 40 is the last year in one's life to do something great is beyond strange, but nevertheless, this is the mind-set of both of them.

Anyway, they both end up quitting their jobs (him an IT Tech from the house, her a dance instructor for children) and focus all of their attentions on things they have deemed "worthwhile causes" - Sophie has a goal to "create a dance a day" in hopes of creating a solo dance masterpiece, while Jason begins soliciting door-to-door on behalf of an environmental group, asking people if they would like to buy a tree to help reduce global warming. MEANWHILE, there is also a running commentary sandwiched in between by the cat that is waiting to be adopted. The cat, Paw Paw, speaks to the audience in an extremely delicate, fragile voice about how it's patiently waiting for its owners to come for it, how it knows that once it is theirs, it knows it will be loved and secured for life, and "will never spend a night outside again". This is probably by far the strangest part of the film but it kind of grows on you as the film progresses.

There are lots of good, surreal bits to enjoy here: a crawling security blanket (t-shirt) that stalks its owner, a narrating cat, an old man philosopher and his dirty-talk greeting cards, a discussion with the moon, a young girl who buries herself in the backyard with the approval of her dad, and a couple who believe they each have special powers: Sophie can move things with her mind (!!!!) and Jason can stop time (???), and has to help the moon bring the tide back in so that time will be righted again.

Hanyway, overall this was an enjoyable experience of a movie. It's probably something I'll have to watch at least twice more to get the full experience, but it's a definitely good enough for that. Miranda July, who directed and starred in it, was absolutely brills to watch. Definitely gonna watch Me, You, and Everyone We Know now.

rating: (undecided)

Re: Let me entertain you: reviews by ash
 

Sounds like all that randomness in the movie is trying to speak of some larger message, probably to do with how to face your future. The cat sounds like it's representing time itself. The young girl burying herself in the backyard sounds like a death reference -- facing death in the future. I dunno - I haven't seen it. Sounds a little too wacky in a cutesy way, but interesting. Wondering what dirty-talk greeting cards are - I'm imagining those cards that play songs when you open them, but these say things like, "I'm so horrrrrrny."

Re: Let me entertain you: reviews by ash
 

it's pretty wacky, but also just really funny. the acting also seems almost slowed down in a forced, deliberate way. i'm unsure if it'd be your cup of tea. you seem unpredictable when it comes to these things.

Re: Let me entertain you: reviews by ash
 

It's not 'wacky', per se. It's odd-ball, but I never found it too wacky or quirky the way I have some other films in this vein. All the odd stuff seemed totally normal in this, in a way. Sort of like Synecdoche, New York: the burning house scenes in that were really strange, but it felt kind of like it was just another part of the film.

I DONT KNOW.

Project Ni was excellent too. No quite Man On Wire, but up there.

Project Ni? is that Monty Python speak?

Re: Let me entertain you: reviews by ash
 

**** you

After the death of their mother, two sisters go back to their childhood home to tie up lose ends and make peace with their past and end up discovering some unsettling and disturbing secrets about the mother and the house they grew up with.

Been awhile since I did this! So, I watched this last night at 1AM. I was in a really bad mood, and thought maybe a movie that would scare me sh**less would be a good distraction. Further to that, I watched it under my covers with my ear buds in, which made it even creepier because I could hear every little sound.

So I know the ghost story sub-genre is probably the most cliche of the horror genre, but it's always been my favorite because when done right, it forces the audience to use its imagination to fill in the blanks, which is way scarier than anything they could do visually. Ghost stories seem to be the best at showing barely anything at all and yet still managing to be scary, which I love.

This film sticks close to the rules, but manages to lift itself above mediocrity with a surprising narrative and some genuinely creepy imagery, all soaked in a creepy atmosphere that just doesn't seem to want to leave. And that's the thing, when I'm grabbed by a ghost story's atmosphere without constantly getting my face rubbed in it, it tends to get under my skin. This film did just that and allowed me to relish in that wonderful 'I'm scared but enjoying it' state. I was also pleasantly surprised by the climax and the reveal of what was exactly going on.

From the opening scene, it immediately disarms its viewer within the first 3 minutes, and you spend the rest of the movie feeling uneasy and tense. There's hardly any blood or guts, or soundtrack to speak of, and whole bits where there's barely any dialogue, but it manages to build just the right atmosphere and keep you on your toes.

The mystery is compelling and holds the story together in an efficient way before the very tense last twenty minutes, even though there is no 'pact' to be seen in it. The only part I didn't really care for at all was the ending, which was kind of silly and I wish the movie had ended just a couple minutes sooner, instead. It does leave things just vague enough to keep it open-ended, though, and while there are a few scenes that were unnecessary, overall, it's a fun, creepy ghost story worth a watch.

Re: Let me entertain you: reviews by ash
 

No reviews in three years, I thought I was neglectful. ;) Glad to read a review from you and hope your back on the wagon Ash.

Re: Let me entertain you: reviews by ash
 

lol, thanks. i took a really long hiatus from this place. i plan to add a few more soon.

You take a simple hiatus and come back only to find an ass like me has taken up residence. Must be disconcerting. :)

Re: Let me entertain you: reviews by ash
 

ha, not at all actually, i've enjoyed the discourse we've had so far

Wow look at this. Didn't see this coming. Been a long ass time Ash. Welcome back to the reviewing game.