I Pretend to Know What I'm Talking About

Ranking (from Worst to Best) Every Movie Released in 2011 That I Personally Saw, With One Comment Each

2011-12-29T11:06:00.000-08:00

*** All based on my personal preferences, but I do like to think I have a founding for most of them. Feel free to discuss your picks for best/worst in the comments or wherever!

The year of 2011 is at its close, and quite a diversity of films were bestowed upon us by the studios this year. I found that I saw quite a number of the "major" ones that were released in 2011, but not all of them of course. I also wanted to see a lot more of them but never had the chance. What with all these lists floating around the internet these days stating the "top tens" and "worst tens" of the year, I decided to rank every film I say released in 2011, from worst to best. It's all based on my personal tastes, and obviously some will feel differently.

I've also decided to make one-ish comment for each of them, just so you know where I'm coming from (though I do know that I can come off as a little pretentious sometimes). Okay, are we ready?

Let's start with the worst and work our way to the best:

38. The Green Lantern - Ryan Reynolds' abs are not enough to sustain my interest anymore.

37. Just Go With It - I'm pretty sure Nicole Kidman paid the studio not to put her in any advertising for this film, so nobody would know she was in it.

36. Priest - At least it wasn't as bad as Legion, but still pretty nonsensical.

35. Bad Teacher - Cameron Diaz sure works her body hard, but too bad her character is just so unlikable.

34. Arthur - Man-children that refuse to grow up really start to get on my nerves after a while, and I heartbreakingly can't even say that the presence of Dame Helen Mirren saved this one's skin.

33. The Change-Up - When your film starts off with jokes about babies pooping, you can't expect much.

32. Something Borrowed - These two women are absolute monsters and I can't stand their self-pitying.

31. No Strings Attached - I mean both the stars are charming enough but there is just something about each of them that still remains unlikable to me.

30. The Mechanic - I've seen worse films starring Jason Statham, but it was more or less what I expected in the end.

29. Limitless - I wanted to like this movie much more than I did; it seemed kind of silly when it all boiled down to it.

28. Rio - I don't know, it was a little campy, even for a child's movie with nothing that really stood out.

27. Fast Five - Absolutely ridiculous and with so many factual inaccuracies, but more enjoyable than some of its previous installments.

26. Waiting For Forever - I didn't really know what to expect, and while I liked the performances of Tom Sturridge and Richard Jenkins (as always) it was just a little too melodramatic.

25. Pirates of the Caribbean: On Stranger Tides - This franchise has little to offer us anymore, but at least it didn't have such a convoluted plot like the last one, and featured an actual hottie via Penelope Cruz.

24. The Green Hornet - I know, it's kind of silly, but I like that is wasn't trying to be so serious in terms of glorifying "superheroes".

23. Water for Elephants - For once Robert Pattinson wasn't looking so constipated, and Christoph Waltz is charmingly creepy once again.

22. Gnomeo and Juliet - Just adorable and how could you not like something featuring all that Elton John?

21. Thor - Weirdly outlandish and way more on the "fantasy" end than I expected, but I love my mythology, and Chris Hemsworth and Tom Hiddleston won me over.

20. Horrible Bosses - I think it was the squeaky voice of Charlie Day and my constant love of Kevin Spacey that made me think this one was so hilarious.

19. Justin Bieber: Never Say Never - I watched it for fun and kind of as a joke but ended up being surprised by how talented Justin Bieber actually is.

18. The Conspirator - Solid performances all around, and an interesting subject, but it kind of felt like a generic, old-timey procedural.

17. Paul - Nick Frost and Simon Pegg are hilarious when they are together, if maybe a little childish.

16. Crazy, Stupid, Love. - A solid cast and adorable story, just needed a couple less rom-com cliches.

15. Fright Night - Maybe it's my love of David Tennant that made me biased about this one, but I was actually really tense during the whole thing, despite it not being that scary.

14. Sherlock Holmes: A Game of Shadows - The chemistry between Sherlock and Watson is undeniable, plus Guy Ritchie seems very clever.

13. X-Men: First Class - The above mentioned chemistry is only beaten by James McAvoy and Michael Fassbender together in this movie.

12. Midnight in Paris - Some might say that Woody Allen has lost his touch, but I say this was just a light, fun trip, with the ever-natural Owen Wilson.

11. Jane Eyre - They really hit the heart of the eerie, gothic feel of Jane Eyre this time, especially with Mia Wasikowska and Michael Fassbender (again).

10. Rango - There were references to Singin' In the Rain and In the Heat of the Night in this children's movie: how could I not like it?

9. The Girl With the Dragon Tattoo - The only thing that I didn't like was a little too much fragmenting of scenes, other than that, it is really engrossing and dark.

8. Friends With Benefits - I didn't have high hopes from the premise, but Mila Kunis and Justin Timberlake knocked it out of the park with their banter.

7. Bridesmaids - Just hilarious, in the most awkward kind of way, but most importantly shows that women can in fact be funny.

6. Hanna - Great use of scenery and sound mixing, as well as the fact that Saoirse Ronan is a strong force to be reckoned with.

5. Drive - I didn't expect it to be so intense, but I must say I like being surprised.

(***The best movies of the year, in my opinion, whose rankings are essentially interchangeable with one another):

4. 50/50 - It's not insensitive about such a serious topic, but it's also not melodramatic about it, which I loved.

3. The Artist - I can't say that this movie is for everyone, but it was just such a feel-good time and extremely clever in its editing and presentation.

2. The Muppets - What kind of a sick person doesn't like the Muppets, Jason Segel, or the musical stylings of Bret McKenzie?

1. Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows - Part 2 - Maybe it's because I grew up with these characters and this was the true end of it all, but I must say that this movie was incredibly done and came such a long way since the first installment 10 years ago.

And there you have it! What about you, did you have any different favorites or least favorites? Anything you were dying to see but never had a chance to (see my list below)? What are you looking forward to in 2012?

Films I Have Yet to See from 2011 But Want To:

Attack the Block

The Guard

** Shame

*** Tinker, Tailor, Solider, Spy

We Need to Talk About Kevin

Carnage

Super

** The Skin I Live In

*** Beginners

The Help

Margin Call

Coriolanus

Like Crazy

Martha Marcy May Marlene

The Descendants

Hugo

The Iron Lady

Hesher

Pina

Being Elmo: A Puppeteer's Journey

Seeing Violence and Being Violent: Correlation ≠ Causation

2011-12-18T21:14:00.000-08:00

*** There is no science to back any of this up, it's just a thought I had.

There is often talk in the news about how violent video games and violent films can possibly make children and youth more aggressive, especially if they are subject to it at a young age. This is an especially common topic in recent years as progressively violent acts are committed by young children, as well as progressively shocking films and media are produced depicting violence.

Are these two things linked? Are children (and sometimes adults) being influenced by what they see into thinking that this kind of behavior is appropriate, and can in fact be heroic?

There is, in fact, a correlation between aggressive behavior and the viewing of violent material, however other factors are often present which also contribute to the behavior. And it must be said that some people are definitely influenced by what they watch. This does not, however, mean that every person who is subject to seeing violence becomes violent later in their life.

I am often saying that I am the exception to these rules, and in this case, I once again do not follow this pattern of violence. Although I often see R-rated films with lots of blood, gore, and death, I do not actively seek this out in my daily life. In fact, I have basically been allowed to watch whatever movies I wanted since I was about 11 years old, and my mother saw nothing to fear in this. I turned out fine, and have no been affected at all by this type of media.

In fact, I think that being alright with seeing blood and violence on screen will save my life one day. By being able to watch a person skinning and cutting up a moose in a film, I feel like I wouldn't lose my head if I ever had to resort to hunting a wild animal in real life (although I wouldn't be too happy about it, I might add). If I were ever attacked by a man on the street, I wouldn't fear punching him in the face with my keys, whereas I know some girls are often afraid of making full contact with a person they are hitting. And most importantly, if a zombie apocalypse was in fact ever to happen, I would not have as much trouble doing some damage to save my life.

In essence, while some people may be affected negatively by seeing violence in the media, becoming more aggressive themselves, I think that it will save my life one day: I will be less likely to become squeamish or back down when I do in fact need to act violently towards someone, but do not actively seek out these situations in my daily life.

How about you?

Do you think that violent movies, video games, etc have made you more aggressive in your real life?

(My daddy never taught me how to shoot tin cans in a field out back...)

Talking Sexuality, 4: Labeling – “There Be Madness Yet No Method In It”

2011-12-01T23:20:00.000-08:00

*** Everyone has the right to his or her own opinions. Mine may differ from yours and I accept that, and if you would like to discuss your own, feel free to sound off in the comments! But please, be respectful. I am not here to offend anyone or try to sway you to see things my way. I am just expressing my beliefs and am open to having a conversation regarding any others that may be presented to me.

[I know I use a lot of examples from fictional sources (film, television, etc), but that is because I do not want to use real life examples. I do not directly know a lot of people that deal with these subjects daily, and would therefore only have access to real life stories through word of mouth. I would rather not make assumptions about someone else’s life when I can't possibly know anything about it…]

When talking about a person’s sexuality, one usually has to define themselves in one of the following terms: Straight, Gay, or Bisexual. What do I call this? A label of course, much like the stereotypical labels put on children and adolescents in school, which can sometimes then come to define them. It’s a common human idea to want to classify someone, whether that be based on nationality, gender, race, or (nowadays especially), sexuality. I, however, see a few problems in this whole idea of “labeling” sexuality, the first being that these classifications are very strict and leave no room for fluidity of definition. Are we to assume that all people fit perfectly into these categories or is there more to it than being one of three (or however many)?

Just like any other means of classifying people, there will always be exceptions, and this widespread belief that there are only three means in which people can identify their sexuality makes me believe that some people will be left feeling alienated. What if these definitions of hetero-geny and homogeny are not enough? What if people don’t feel like they belong to any such grouping definitively? Also, can a person belong to one group and then change later? It almost seems as though once society has established your one label, you can never break free from that, even though it’s a know fact that people grow, change, and don’t always fit into a perfect ideological prototype.

In its past season (5), the British television series “Skins” skimmed the surface of examining an issue such as this through the character of Frankie. Frankie is a female, and yet purposefully makes herself to be androgynous, and doesn’t necessarily want to associate with either gender. When asked by her friends if is she is a lesbian, she says no. A bisexual? Same response. Frankie just says that she is “into people”, because to her, that is an acceptable explanation. Why should such a young person have to tie down to one label? She doesn’t feel as though she fits into any of these categories, and so chooses not to associate with any of them.

In modern day, however, one might say that this “into people” attitude is related to the idea of pan sexuality. Did anyone even know that that was a defined sexuality as well? Although this is yet another classification for people, it is maybe more appropriate for many, as it allows for a lot more deviance from the usual classifications of sexuality.

These deviations may also stem from a greater acceptance of “alternate” sexualities as time goes on and societies progress. Yet, there is still a large belief of many people that bisexualism and pan sexuality does not in fact exist; this idea is somewhere along the lines of “you are either gay, or straight, and bisexualism is just a way for gay men who don’t want to outright come-out to bridge themselves into their homosexual identity.”

I think that that kind of ideology is dealing with far too many assumptions about a person to be really valid. In fact, studies have been conducted to show that it is in fact possible for people –men, at least—to be sexually attracted to members of both sexes. Why then, is the idea that a person can be interested in both sexes still considered to be an unrealistic sexual orientation, as well as taboo when compared to both heterosexuality and homosexuality? Is it because that implies a higher level of promiscuity (they want to have sex with everyone!)?

[I know I shouldn’t make assumptions as I’ve already said, but do you think there is also more of an acceptance for men to think women are bisexual, but not other men? I know the homoeroticism of females is popular to men, but if these women performing homoerotic acts are also interested in men, there is a greater chance the men can still score them, right? Maybe I’m a little off base here. I’ll talk more about genders and homoeroticism another time…]

But where does this need to label people come from in the first place? I simply believe that it is a societal construction used by certain groups, or “types,” of people to make them feel more comfortable. What I mean by that is, some people want to know exactly what the orientation of a person is, so they know how to act around them, treat them, or even so they know what their chances are when it comes to a romantic relationship with them. Also, it may also be a way for those who have homophobic tendencies to categorize people, in order to know who they do and do not want to be around, out of fear or ideology.

In essence, it seems as though the purpose of labeling is not for the sake of the people being labeled, but for the outsider. Shouldn’t it be the other way around? I think people should be able to identify themselves with whatever they are comfortable with, not with what others want to see them as. For example, on the series “Glee”, the character Santana recently came out as a lesbian, however she has only really showed interest in one girl. Maybe besides her best friend Brittany, she doesn’t love girls, but also is interested in guys after being so sexually active with them in the past. One might be tempted to refer to Santana as a bisexual because of these factors, when really, she wants to be identified as a lesbian, because this is who she believes she is, and this is the title that she is comfortable in having. It should be the person in question deciding what they want to be identified with, if anything.

When it comes down to it, labeling a person based on their sexuality is not necessary in the first place. Sure it might be a comfort for some, but for others is can become a source of torment, or something that causes them more confusion than self-realization. People can change, and people can weave in between categories on any type of classification system. What you consider yourself one day may not be the same the next, yet the stigma of a certain classification may stick with you beyond your personal growth.

In the end, identity should be a personal choice, not imposed upon someone. Society in general also needs to open its eyes wider to see that there are always exceptions, because rigidity doesn’t always cut it.

P.S: I will always include the image of Jack Harkness wherever I can when talking about sexuality. He has become my symbol for pan sexuality, an idea that I think encompasses more people than we realize.

I'm Sorry, Random Stranger, but "Malkovich, Malkovich, Malkovich"

2011-11-29T21:17:00.000-08:00

*** A post about an occurrence of the day. A "Random Story" if you will.

Things were getting a little serious around here with all those posts about sexuality. Due to some positive response, however, I will be continuing with that soon, but just wanted to take a break for a quick, frivolous little post here. In fact I am working on something right now to continue the series (after a small chat I had with a friend of mine on the subject), but it's not quite ready yet.

All that being said...

I'm sure it can be seen that I am quite obsessed with cinema, and have some strong likes and dislikes in regards to it. Today, I had a moment where I almost jumped into another person's conversation to argue with them about an actor. However I restrained myself. Here is what happened:

I was waiting for my English class to start today, and had two students majoring in Drama sitting behind me. We had just studied J.M. Coetzee's beautiful novel Disgrace in class, and followed that by watching the film. They stated that they really enjoyed the film, however they "really don't like the actor who played David Lurie. 'That guy' is just not very good in anything."

Oh. Oh this statement snagged me very hard for a number of reasons:

1) "That guy" is named John Malkovich. John. Malkovich.

Saying he is not very good in "anything" makes me believe they had seen him in a number of things yet didn't know who he was still. Alright, so maybe not a lot of people know his name, but shouldn't people that are interested in acting (aka, majoring in Drama) know of more actors than the average person (which I consider myself to be). Especially one that has had a large career on both stage and screen?

2) Speaking of things Drama majors should be aware of, is none other than the fact that John Malkovich is a fantastic actor. He is elegant, dictates beautifully, and has had a successful career not because of his looks, but because of his talent. You'd think that someone who is pursuing acting as a craft would be akin to the skills of an established actor such as John Malkovich.

Yet I restrained myself! I really did, because as I always say, people are entitled to their own opinions. Even if that opinion is very wrong indeed.

Oh yes, that is very biased of me to say, but the whole thing really did take me off guard. If it had been just any other person that I knew nothing about saying these things I likely wouldn't have cared, but it was the fact that I knew that these two people were majoring in Drama-- and should therefore be a little more aware of performing nuances-- that really did not sit well with me.

Why is that? I really can't say. But alas, that is my story of the day.

Has anyone else ever had an experience like that where you wanted to jump into a conversation to defend something you were a fan of? Or for any other reason?

I'll admit, it doesn't happen to me often, which is kind of surprising...

Talking Sexuality, 3: Religion, Marriage, and Freedoms

2011-11-09T23:03:00.000-08:00

*** Everyone has the right to his or her own opinions. Mine may differ from yours and I accept that, and if you would like to discuss your own, feel free to sound off in the comments! But please, be respectful. I am not here to offend anyone or try to sway them to see things my way, I am just expressing my beliefs and am open to having a conversation regarding any others that may be presented to me.

Ah yes, here it is, the big discussion about religion and sexuality. Religion is always brought into it when discussing points of view on homosexuality and bisexuality, especially when the topic of marriage is concerned. For me, however, it’s not really that big of a discussion. I will admit, however, that I am not strongly religious (though I do have beliefs) so that may be one large factor in establishing my point of view.

As far as I see it, sexuality is a personal thing that differs from person to person, much like religion. Do you see where I’m going with this? In Canada and the United States, (as well as many other nations, but I’m just speaking of what I know) there is a constitutional right to the freedom of religion. Freedom to believe in what you want to believe in, or to not believe in something someone else does. It’s all about personal choice when it comes to religion, so why wouldn’t sexuality be the same? If someone chooses to act against that may be written in one faith by having a certain type of relationship, then they have the right and freedom to make that choice. A homosexual may not fit into what is “good” in one religion, but it is their decision to “sin” against that God by doing so, and since this is the type of action that does no harm to any other person, I see no problem with it. Especially since, as I mentioned, there is freedom of religion, so why should someone’s life be forcefully governed by a specific faith that they don’t necessarily associate with?

This is not to say that religious homosexuals and bisexuals do not exist. Of course they do, and of course I don’t know what exactly they may believe in, but since faith is so personal, these issues are between that person and their God. That is, if they believe there is any issue to begin with, as there may not even be! Some religions openly accept all sexualities, in fact, which is refreshing seeing as many (as far as I know) do not feel this way.

This, in course, leads us to the topic of Gay marriage. Now, given my above statements on religious freedoms, it stands to reason that Christian ideals regarding the definition of “marriage” being used to define that of an entire nation or state is a little …unconstitutional? I understand that back in the days of establishment in North America, nations were founded on major religious belief systems, thus forming most of the subsequent laws, but in this modern age, I don’t think using one system of beliefs as a prototype is sufficient. I do believe that certain religious establishments should reserve the right to decline performing a same-sex ceremony if this is not something they want to condone, however, making this type of marriage completely illegal based on religious affiliations is unfair and unjust. There are of course ways to be married without the support or influence of any specific faith, so why can these options not stay open to a same-sex couple, even if a certain Church does not want to allow them to be married?

[Amidst all this, however, I am proud to say that the nation wherein I live (Canada!) has same-sex marriage equality. So then why do I feel so strongly about this issue? Because these equalities do no stand up the same in the United States-- directly South from us-- which as a nation often has a large influence upon Canada.]

Finally, I will say that when I bring up religious freedoms, some people will often chime in and say that if someone believes in a religion (or has no beliefs at all) wherein it is alright to kill people, then they should be able to do this too, given my argument. I find this, however, to be like apples and oranges: other wrong acts such as rape, murder, theft, etc cause harm and suffering to other people, and therefore have a place in legal systems and moral values. Homosexuality, on the other hand, does not harm anyone, and is a product of love. How do the two women on the bus that have a relationship together affect you? Probably not in the slightest.

Some might argue that homosexuality does in fact cause some others difficulties or issues, if they believe in a certain faith. Or, for example, the common question of, “What am I supposed to tell my child about the two men living together/who are married down the street? How do I explain that?” You know what the answer is? However you want to explain it! Do you think that these men are sinners for what they are doing and want your child to feel the same way since they are being brought up in the same religion as yourself? Do you want to lie and tell the child that these two men are just roommates with one another? How does this really affect you beyond a few choice conversations with your child? It’s just another to add to the list that you will already be covering at the different stages of your child’s life anyways.

Essentially, I feel as though religion is a personal choice, and thus it is also a choice whether you abide by that in your everyday life or not. If this means that your sexuality does not fit a certain faith, then so be it. Sexuality can be a choice for some, but for others, they feel as though they are born with it. And who is any Deity to deny someone the inherent person that they are? As many would say, God makes no mistakes, and while your God may not accept different sexualities, someone else’s may differ. How can anyone know what faith is right, or tell someone else what to believe in? That is really the heart of the matter, as I see it.\

*** Of course, I can understand as well that certain nations are not based on these freedoms, in which case it is more difficult to argue against certain laws within a nation against homosexuality. Really, it’s a sad to think about, but I suppose that is just the way the world is. Hopefully the world’s views keep progressing however, and that is one thing I will always give my faith to.

Talking Sexuality, 2: It’s All Just Love and Sex, Isn’t It? (Maybe One, Maybe the Other, or Both!)

2011-10-21T22:40:00.000-07:00

***Everyone has the right to his or her own opinion. Mine may differ from yours and I accept that, and if you would like to discuss your own, feel free to sound off in the comments! But please, be respectful. I am not here to offend anyone or try to sway them to see things my way, I am just expressing my beliefs and am open to having a conversation regarding any others that may be presented to me.

[Note: I’m not even going to touch the argument of religion and sexuality in this, as I feel it is a whole other discussion in itself, which will likely be written about in a post to come.]

It’s interesting that I started talking sexuality right around Spirit Day, which was on October 20^th, in support of LGBT youth. Though really, any time is a good time to talk about sexuality, as it has become a big issue in modern society, with very split opinions on the subject. Yes, we have come a long way from past decades to being a more accepting culture, but there is still discrimination, and large movements of bullying against LGBT teens (and even adults). But why? Aspects of religion aside (as I mentioned above), what makes homosexuality or bisexuality seem offensive to some people? Because when it boils down to it, it’s really just about who you love and interact with, right?

Now I know, there is always that looming question of what exactly is love to begin with? You know that feeling you have with your best friends, like you can tell them anything, be who you really are, and there is also some strange emotional connection between you that you can’t put your finger on? Well, of course I don’t know for sure, but to me, that is love. I know that friends love each other, and I think that in essence, romantic love is just an extension of those same feelings. I’m not saying that if you “love” your best friend that you feel romantically about them, or that it is sexual in any sense, I just think that sometimes it can go beyond the “normal” realm of friendship/other relationship love and turn into romantic/sexual love, you know what I mean? How can someone say that emotions of love in a relationship are not real just because two people are of the same gender? Do you not love your friends of the same gender? Of course not in the same manner, but regardless, as I mentioned already, I feel like it’s really just a different form of those other types of “love” you may feel (but what do I know? I’m not a science or love expert by any means!)

And of course, some might argue that the nature of homosexuality and bisexuality, or any sexuality for that matter is in fact whom you want to have sex with (hence the nomenclature of the categories). It might be this thought of sexual activity that turns some off of accepting different sexualities because they see it as “unnatural”, but I don’t necessarily believe that sexuality per say boils down fundamentally to sex. Maybe it’s the romantic in me, but I think it has a lot more to do with emotionality and love than that. Or maybe I’ve watched A Single Man one too many times, because within that film, the main character recounts how he has had sex with women, but categorizes himself as gay because, as he tells his partner, "I fall in love with men. I fell in love with you". It’s all a matter of the labeling of sexualities based on sexual acts, I think, even when the fundamental basis for one may in fact be more emotional than physical.

On the other hand, yes, homosexuals and bisexuals choose to have sex with people of different genders than what one might consider normal (in terms of human biology and reproduction). Some view sex solely as a means of reproduction, but in modern times, this view is obviously not as common as it once was. That being said, if a majority of people don’t view sex as only necessary for reproductive purposes, why is it so wrong for two people of the same gender to engage in it? They obviously cannot procreate, but if that’s not what people of different genders are using it for either, why does that matter?

It also seems as though homosexuals and bisexuals have this stigma attached to them that they are more “sexually devious”, that is, will have sex with multiple partners, more frequently, and in less “conventional” ways, you might say. But what about all those heterosexuals that engage in the same sort of activities? Heterosexuals often partake in sexual acts that are similar to those which two females or two males might engage in (or so I’ve read and heard) with one another—not everyone simply has sex in one conventional way, even in heterosexual relationships. It’s unfair to stereotype certain sexualities as the deviant ones when in actuality there are those who sleep around or do partake in “kinky” activities in all sexualities. Every group has it’s exceptions, so it is unreasonable to lump all people of one particular label into a certain categorization that they may or may not fit into (you see, I’m not denying that there are both sexually mischievous homosexuals and heterosexuals, but not all of them in either category are like this, of course).

So what is it about different sexualities that make people wary to accept them? There are relationship issues in all sexualities, including both emotional and sexual aspects, making it seem like no one “type” of relationship is necessarily superior to another (besides the fact that one can procreate and the other cannot).

Do you think that there is really any difference between two people of opposing genders falling in love and two people of the same gender falling in love, aside from basic biology? What are your thoughts on the subject?

Talking Sexuality, 1: Why Talk About It and Be Out There?

2011-10-18T21:41:00.001-07:00

*** Everyone has the right to his or her own opinion. Mine may differ from yours and I accept that, and if you would like to discuss your own, feel free to sound off in the comments! But please, be respectful. I am not here to offend anyone or try and sway them to see things my way, I am just expressing my beliefs and am open to having a conversation regarding any others that may be presented to me.

[Note: At a later date, I will talk more about why I am supportive of all sexualities.]

Some believe it’s become fashionable to say that they support gay rights. (Everyone is doing it, huzzah!) However, sometimes we just think about these things when directly asked or if it is directly placed in front of us, rather than being outspoken, or taking an active interest in the subject. Anyone that knows me personally knows that I am very much interested in Gay Rights movements, as well as other aspects of sexuality and recognition. Every now and again, however, people will ask me why, being a heterosexual myself, I am so into that kind of thing, or more crudely put, “Why do you love gay people so much?” Really, I’m interested in all aspects of sexuality, not because I myself am questioning my sexuality. Also I want to gain a better understanding of this position and these issues. Through this understanding, --as well as through friendships with homosexuals--, I have come to accept who they are, and have become supportive of their lives.

That being said, it’s all well and good to be okay with homosexuality personally and in your mind, but why speak out about it? Why engage in conversation about it with others, and why show the world what you believe in by attending events and spreading information? Or should the real question be… Why not?

This is not to say that if you believe in something you should shove it down someone else’s throat; oh no. But showing you are behind something and engaging in discussion/debate around such subjects in a respectful way is always a good thing, to illustrate a perspective and be a face for what you believe in.

The “God Hates Fags” movement from The Westboro Baptist Church is certainly outspoken and in your face about what they believe in, and I think that the opposing side should also show itself in return. If you are strongly opinionated about something, you shouldn’t be ashamed of this, and not engaging in your ideas is almost a way of saying that you believe in something, but don’t want people to know it.

Take for instance, Gay Pride events. I was once told that they really just perpetuate gay stereotypes of being incredibly flaming and decked out in rainbows all the time, and I can definitely see the point in that statement; actually if someone doesn’t want to engage in such and even tI really don’t see the harm in it. However, if you do partake, it is as though you are declaring that you are not ashamed of who you are, and don’t care who knows this. If you are heterosexual, it’s a way of saying that this is what you believe in, and that you are going to stand by it as a real presence.

Finally, I will admit that a lot of this discussion was in fact spurred on by the recent outing of actor Zachary Quinto, confirming that he is in fact a gay man. He spoke out stating that he was inspired to step out in honor of teen Jamey Rodemeyer who recently committed suicide after being bullied for his sexuality. Quinto essentially says that he wanted to publically acknowledge his sexuality in order to make a difference, be a role model, show kids that they are not in fact pariahs like society may make them believe. (This was all in a blog post which can be read HERE! It’s really quite lovely). On the other side of the coin, I feel as though being supportive as a heterosexual is also important. I feel as though it is also a way of showing homosexuals/bisexuals that not only people “like them” will support them, but also others who are technically considered “normal”.

I know that in the recent years society has made great strides to bring equality to all sexualities, but --as Zachary Quinto also mentions-- we still have a long way to go. And frankly, even after all people have equal rights, there will still be a persistent stigma attached to sexualities (or so I personally believe). Why else would a book like The Help be considered so relevant today in regards to racism, despite the fact that races have been legally equal for centuries now? It’s because despite being legally considered equal, there are still stereotypes that persist, making people retain the feeling of being a pariah, when really they shouldn’t be made to feel as such.

But now I leave it to you: What do you think about homosexuality/bisexuality? Would you consider yourself an active supporter of your beliefs? Do you think that people should show their support in an open way or not?

P.S: Stay tuned for more discussion on sexuality to come. I really like talking about this subject, if you couldn't tell...

Times Hath Changed: The Stigma of Male Dancers

2011-10-15T17:02:00.000-07:00

I'm not saying that no male dancers are gay. I'm not saying that all of them are. I'm not saying one way or another, and of course the are exceptions, but to me, it seems that when you see a male dancer these days unless they perform in hip hop (or some other more "masculine" form of dance), you are likely to get someone speculating on their sexuality. Was this always the case?

I don't think so. I believe that with the rise of awareness in regards to homosexuality, as well as the changing views of masculinity over the years, male dancers are now more frequently stamped with the stigma of "possibly being gay".

Why is that? Back in the day (I'm talking early/mid 1900s) our leading men were often dancers, and some of the different era's "men's-men" were in fact very adept dancers. I'm talking the Gene Kelley's and the Fred Astaire's. I really just don't know why nowadays you see a male dancer that does something other than "rougher" hip-hop or something else of the sort, and there is often speculation around them. I am also not saying that back in the day people didn't question male dancers as well, or that everyone nowadays is questioned, but it's just a more common thing I find.

And the strangest part of all, is that I think most women would even love to just imagine being whisked around the Fred Astaire like Ginger Rogers, to be tapped along with Gregory Hines, to be lifted by the impossibly muscular body of Mikhail Baryshnikov, or even to take a swing with the rubber-faced Donald O'Connor. Do you know what made Patrick Swayze (in memoriam) even more attractive in Dirty Dancing? The sexy ballroom dancing! That is just a fact.

So I don't know what I'm getting at, all I know is that I absolutely love male dancers, and yes, some of them will be gay, but that doesn't mean all of them are. And to leave us with that, here is the fantastic piece "Moses" from Singin' in the Rain featuring both Gene Kelly and Donald O'Connor. (LINK) They are just amazing. And that, my friends, is what I call a leading man.

50/50: A Quick Review

2011-10-06T21:35:00.000-07:00

*** I do have a bit of a bias towards Joseph Gordon-Levitt as I am a fan (like many others), so sometimes it sways what I think, but I don't think it did a lot this time. And I understand if you disagree.

Just a quick couple of notes after seeing the film 50/50, Starring: Joseph Gordon-Levitt, Seth Rogen, Bryce Dallas Howard, and Anna Kendrick.

If you haven't seen a trailer for it, you can check one out: Here!

I know a lot of people are referring to this as "that cancer movie" but I think it's so much more than that. I really enjoyed it for a number of reasons, and would recommend it to most of my friends! I say "most" because, you know, there are always those with weird/terrible taste, but let's not get into that now...

Quick Notes on 50/50:

1. Clean production and editing. Nothing too weird going on.

2. Great writing and pace. It is actually very very funny, but also heartfelt.

3. All of the actors/actresses in the film shone. Their talents were not wasted, and it was nice to see Seth Rogen drop into some more dramatic moments to go with his lovely grizzly-bear laugh.

4. It didn't laugh in the face of cancer, but it also didn't go down the predictable route of making everything seem like a travesty, or preaching that there is a light at the end of the tunnel (and all that).

I thought this movie was a great blend of showing the different emotions one can go through when facing a terrible illness/disease, etc. I've had close members of my family survive surgeries to remove tumors, but have also lost one to cancer as well, so I have experienced a lot of the feelings that were shown in the film in regards to the family and friends of Adam (the protagonist).

The one sticking point that my sister found in the film was that she thought [spoiler alert!] making Adam's father also have Alzheimer's was a bit overkill, and didn't really add anything, because he barely interacted with him in the film. I thought that it kind of added a dynamic and understanding of Adam's relationship with his mother, but I don't know, that's what she thought and I can see where she was coming from.

In the end, this movie is not a "shit happens, life goes on" comedy about a terrible, common disease. It's about relationships, helping people through tough times, loss, survival, changes, adaptation, family, trust, and everything else. And most importantly, you don't get the feeling that some movie executive is rubbing his hands together gleefully at the thought of gaining accolades for shining such a "light" on this subject. Not, it genuinely feels heartfelt and sincere.

I would definitely recommend this movie.

Have you seen it already? What did you think? Were you also floored by Joseph Gordon-Levitt?

Dear "Glee": Mercedes and Rachel Can Stop That Now, Please

2011-10-04T19:30:00.001-07:00

*** Spoiler alert? I don't even know, I don't give away that much really but still...

Some ideas spurred on by Season 3, Episode 3, which was supposed to have been "The Best Episode Yet", but frankly, the producers need to go back, watch the episode Wheels and then talk to me.

Yes, I like "Glee". Don't judge me, I know that it used to be a lot more fun and now it is overly campy and sometimes a little ridiculous, but I don't care. I got sucked in early by the incredibly talented singers on the cast and how it almost felt like it was mocking other teen shows originally. Now? Well, I'm getting irritated by some things. Thus, my postage here! Where else?

Oh Lea Michele and Amber Riley. Both are amazing singers, and I just wish I was half as talented as them. Their characters, however, are getting on my nerves. How many times have they done the "sing-off" thing with one another? At least three now (by the 3rd Season, 3rd Episode). And it seems like they keep being surprised by the talent of the other person singing! "Oh no, Mercedes was better than me, didn't you hear her?" Um, didn't you hear her two seasons ago when she sang "And I Am Telling You"? Yes you did, because you thought the same thing then. Then you hugged each other for your abilities after singing "Take Me or Leave Me". Get over it, you are both amazing.

Though frankly, I think Lea Michele has more of a show-tune voice than a popular-song voice. It just sounds more suited to show tunes, and often more mature in those songs, whereas some others come across as a little screechy. Still, an incredibly powerful voice.

Also, in today's episode (I think it was called Asian F or something like that?), Mercedes kind of went off on Mr. Schuester during their "booty-camp" dance practice for essentially treating Rachel as though she is perfect and asking "Why isn't Rachel here?"

You know what I said not thirty seconds earlier? "You know who should be there? Rachel! She isn't as strong of a dancer as most of the other kids. She has that awkward kind of movement sort of like Kurt does." So really, even though Merecedes could have taken it down a notch, I agreed with her.

What is this really all about? I don't really know, I guess I am just getting annoyed by some things on "Glee". Actually a lot of the time I express discontent at things, but in the end, I know I will keep watching it. It's fun, you don't have to think about it a lot, and as I said before, some of those kids are just so incredibly talented, I can't help but watch them.

So take it with a grain of salt. Take it with a pound or two! And let's just see what else comes to us in the time to come.

And apparently "Glee" is on a break until November now? Doing that stretching out business like last season which made it seem like it went on forever, and was kind of like 2 little seasons? I guess so, but what do I know?

A Gif Adventure: That Awkward Moment When Nobody Gets Your Joke or Reference

2011-09-17T22:45:00.001-07:00

*** This is random and just for fun. A Gif story, once again.

Sometimes I make references that nobody gets. Sometimes I make really lame jokes and nobody laughs. Essentially, I am the annoying little dog in the room, constantly begging for attention. Here is a random little whatnot, showing three of these situations as of late. And why? Just for fun! And since I've discovered funny Tumblrs that make little Gif scenarios such as Lean-Back-And-Roll-On.Tumblr.Com and lmatgtfo.Tumblr.Com, I've come to like making my own as well.

(Note: All these Gifs were found on Google, so if you want some credit, just give me a shout.)

Thus, withhout further ado: "That Awkward Moment When Nobody Gets Your Joke or Reference"

These stories are pretty random...

My mother, uncle, aunt, and father are talking about hang-nails and how they get rid of them by trimming, biting, etc.

My mom: "I just tear them off. Sometimes it makes it worse though."

Me: "That's so gross!"

Mom: "I know it hurts at first, but it's really the best way!"

Me: "Whatever you say, Natalie Portman..."

And my brain

And my uncle's face

And my face

My mother brings in a huge bag of apples from the tree outside and this is what happens;

Mom: "You have to eat at least one of these a day. Because an apple a day keeps The Doctor away."

Me: "Awww, but you know how I've always wanted to travel through space and time!"

And she just goes

So I look at her like

And she finally gets it but is very unenthusiastic about it...

I randomly say to my sister, "Why is it called Miss Universe if all the contestants are always from Earth?"

And her reaction

So I tell my friends, but they just look at me like

Except of course for the one (you know who you are) that is like

And so our brains go

My friends are talking about one of their first projects in computing science which involves a "Grid" on a computer. They are saying stuff about moving up and across certain spaces, telling one another what they have to do to finish it etc etc.

Friend: "Don't worry, it's super easy to get through."

Me: "Yeah, except be careful that you don't die on the grid..."

And thus my face

And their reaction

And Me: "Like Tron... You know, Tron?"

And despite being misunderstood time and time again, in the end of it all, I feel like this...

Anything like that ever happen to you? I get it a lot... This is just a sample. It's kind of weird, I know.

And more importantly, did you get my jokes?! (Haha, that last part isn't serious. Or is it?)

Making Pie Charts is Kind of Like Studying for Stats, Right?

2011-09-11T17:17:00.001-07:00

*** This is just for fun.

Reasons I Might Not Do So Well At University This Year

Legend:

Initial Data (Frequency) and Relative Frequency:

Look at me, being all mathematical and whatnot! See? I actually have absorbed something from the past 2 classes. Not that this is really what this kind of thing is used for, but still...

Right, now I'm off to watch the TrueBlood finale! That's enough Stats for today.

Note on Brief "Hiatus" of Sorts...

2011-09-06T13:51:00.000-07:00

In the days to come, I will be going back to class, and thus will be unable to post as frequently. Not that I have a big reader-ship or anything, just be prepared for little to no posting, at least until Christmas break, and then again in the Summer.

This is just a hobby, you know? But I do thank those who stop by, and hopefully will be able to write more later, since really, that's the whole point. I love films and I love to write, no matter how nonsensical it all is.

But just for the road, here is a random photo of Ralph Fiennes, dancing with an umbrella. Do you love it? I sure do.

So Emma Thompson, Kate Winslet, and Rachel Weisz are in an "Anti-Plastic Surgery" Club Now?

2011-09-06T13:34:00.000-07:00

It's like a dream-team of sexy British women. And when I heard that these three Oscar Winners were all swearing to not go under the knife, all I could think was: "Of course they wouldn't! They are all gorgeous!"

I mean, look at them! They are all absolutely stunning, so why would they go get some plastic surgery to alter that? Natural beauty is what it's all about. But I still think it's a real great thing that they are sending this message that even though they work in an incredibly superficial industry where there is constant pressure to preserve their looks, they won't be doing that.

And I hear Dame Helen Mirren might be next to join? Yes please, that woman is a fox!

Okay, so I'm not saying that if you have a horrible accident and need plastic surgery to fix your face (ie, Rose McGowen?) that you shouldn't do it. There is just a time and a place. I mean, Nicole Kidman is absolutely beautiful, but over the years it's become a kind of waxy beauty because of some of the botox and work on her face. And who knows, if she hadn't done that she may have been just as beautiful as before, or maybe not, but we will never know. Now we just have this frozen face, which isn't bad, but it's not like it's completely natural. And she is still a very talented actress, it's not like that has changed in any respect.

I think it would be more impressive if some young Tartlettes (I mean "Starlettes" of course) jumped on this vow to not alter their face when they are young and unsure of what they will look like in years. You know what I mean? Because some people get more and more attractive with age, while others don't so it's scary, and would be brave to make that commitment at a young age! Whereas all these older gorgeous women kind of know that they don't need it because, as I said, they are all stunning as-is.

Not to take anything away from their message, though! I absolutely love it. I absolutely love all of them, and hope to keep on looking at their beautiful, natural faces for years to come, while enjoying more of their talented work as fantastic actresses.

Man Monday: Is Cillian Murphy Attractive? (And Other Whatnot on Perceptions of Beauty)

2011-09-05T18:51:00.000-07:00

***Random Post. Take from it what little you will... It's just a couple of fleeting thoughts.

The other day I referred to Irish actor, Cillian Murphy as handsome, and someone around me said that that was weird because he is creepy looking. Thus, we once again come to the roadblock that is the subjectivity of beauty.

How are we supposed to judge what makes a man or woman attractive? In the "old days" it was mostly from a biological standpoint, as the strongest man was the bread-winner, and thus the most attractive, or with the most chiseled features. Today, we still have a lot of the more burly men being deemed the most attractive, but there is also a lot of exception made for other "beta" males and skinnier, yet still strong men.

Women in the past were deemed attractive if they had curvaceous bodies that were suitable for bearing children. Today, however, we are more inclined to think a skinny woman with little hips is more attractive than a larger one. Perceptions change in time, and now our biological guidelines are blurred and allow for anyone to be attractive, depending on the person doing the looking.

Given that these exceptions allow for there to be controversy regarding pretty much every person, let's look at Cillian who seems to have a lot more people think he is "creepy" than attractive.

On a simply biological standpoint, he is a bit on the thin side, so maybe that is what turns some people off, but his features on the other hand? Absolutely gorgeous. Literally, he could have made it on any one of my feature lists up to date.

Cheekbones? Angular and sharp.

Eyes? Gorgeous, swimming-pool blue, with a strong brow.

Lips? Soft and fluffy looking.

When you separate each of these stunning features by itself, they are all incredible, yet together is makes for something that a lot of people don't like? I really don't understand. I mean, my mother says she always watches him in movies expecting him to be bad, even when his character is not, simply because of his roles in the past. Being pigeonholed as an attractive person by past roles? That seems a bit weird.

Maybe I am just ranting and maybe not as many people don't like the way he looks as I think, but when it comes down to it, I still think that this man is unique looking, and gorgeous, because of those unique features, which together make for a delightful looking gentleman.

Thus, for today's Man Monday, I salute you, Cillian Murphy! May you love the way you look, despite those who may not like it.

I think I just love a lot of people, and like to spread beautiful thoughts and beautiful pictures of beautiful people. That is, beautiful to me, as like I said, subjectivity is abound and all that nonsense.

But what do you think about the whole thing?

The Less Recommended: Not "Classics" but Still Worth Putting on Your List

2011-09-03T15:21:00.000-07:00

*** Once again, this will be biased to my personal taste, but I do like a mixed variety of things, so I'm sure something will spark your interest.

Have you ever looked at those "lists" that people make of movies that everyone should see, that are all typically filled with the same "classic" films?

You know, The Godfather, Casablanca, Citizen Kane, Singin' In the Rain (which I absolutely adore!), etc etc

Well, for the most part those kinds of lists are right because those movies are (usually) great, but if we just stick to the cliche, standard classic films, we might miss a whole lot of other hidden gems.

Thus, I have made a short list of 6 films, that I call the "Less Recommended". Maybe I'll come up with some more later, but for now, here are a few films that some people might recommend to you, (as they are pretty good) though are recommended far far less than any of the aforementioned "Classics". Actually, most of them are pretty new films, so maybe they have just gotten lost in the throng of all the other new films being pumped out these days?

I've also included what you might call the genre or niche of the film, and some other typically recommended films of the same variety.

Historical Biopic: The Last Station (2009)

Usually, when looking for a good historical biopic you will stumble upon the likes of Rasputin with Alan Rickman, or Gandhi with Ben Kingsley. For me, however, I took a look at The Last Station, chronicalling the last year of Leo Tolstoy's life, and his relationship with wife Sofya. Expertly acted in the lead roles by both Dame Helen Mirren and Christopher Plummer, the cast is also filled out with Paul Giamatti and James McAvoy, showing us his real actor-ing side which came to life in the likes of The Last Kind of Scotland, and other films. To go with these great performances is some crisp cinematography, and an interesting look at the man who wrote so passionately, and the changing beliefs of his followers. For the most part, however, this movie belongs to Dame Helen, as she is an absolute beast in her role. It honestly made me look back at the 2009 Academy Awards, and not so much as "Why?" Sandra Bullock won Best Actress (because I really do like her), but "How?". I'm pretty sure I would have voted for Helen Mirren that year.

Ensemble Action/Heist/Gangsters: RocknRolla (2008)

I find a lot of people often recommend the film Snatch to people, which is an absolutely hilarious, dark, and witty ensemble heist and British gangster film, but once you have your fill of that movie, you might want to take a gander at RocknRolla. Both films were directed by Guy Ritchie, and have a very similar feel and pace to them. This one features a nice, big cast of characters just like the other, including acting work by Tom Hardy, Thandie Newton, Mark Strong, and Gerard Butler. I always say, "You know it's going to be a mediocre to bad movie if Gerard Butler has an American accent" but thankfully for this one, he doesn't, and it works well. He's just being an actor rather than some burly... Thing. Plus there is one pretty cooky dance section with Butler and Newton that always makes me laugh, and when it comes down to it, Guy Ritchie really is a pretty great director.

High-Schoolers, Fighting to Have a Voice: The Trotsky (2009)

Usually the high school films most people see with teenagers wanting to have a voice or find themselves/a cause, etc etc are The Breakfast Club, or maybe Charlie Bartlett. I however just watched The Trotsky, and really really enjoyed it. It is obviously a bit outlandish and cheesy like most comedies set in high school, but with all those political and historical references, plus the dry humor of Jay Baruchel's character, is because really funny and quirky compared to most. Now, I'm going to be honest and say that it wasn't the best film ever, but it was a lot better than I thought it was going to be and really enjoyed it. I think a lot of people might overlook it because of the historical undersetting of the main character Leon thinking he is the reincarnation of Leon Trotsky, but it really isn't that deep and you really don't have to know much about it to enjoy it. Though liking certain little historical/political jokes is definitely a good thing.

Journalist/Police, Trying to Uncover the Gritty Truth: Red Riding: In The Year of Our Lord 1974 (2009)

One might usually think of The Silence of the Lambs or Se7en when coming up with a film about people trying to solve a series of gruesome crimes, and if this is something that you like, you may want to also check out the Red Riding Trilogy. The 1974 installment is only the first of three movies, but if it's anything to go by, the rest are probably very good and very dark as well. The movie, as I mentioned before is kind of gritty and deals with some disheartening subject matter, but is very suspenseful and well done. Oh, and did I mention that the first installment stars the beloved and talented Andrew Garfield? But in a far harder, more aggressive role than you might suspect to find him in (I mean, the boy has an Irish accent and sideburns!). Also joining Garfield in the cast is the ubiquitous baddie, Sean Bean, and proper actress Rebecca Hall, actress-ing her butt off as per usual. There is also a bizarre cameo by Irish up-and-comer Robert Sheehan, who is also a very you fellow, which makes me think we should watch for him in the future.

Political Comedy: In the Loop (2009)

I actually don't think I've ever ventured into the territory of political comedy before, so I don't really know what one might typically recommend, but in all actuality, this film is hilarious. It's faced paced, with incredible British humor, and some of the best insluts and phrases I've heard in a long time. No wonder it was nominated for Best Adapted Screenplay at the Academy Awards, though if I'm honest, those who are easily offended by crass and vulgar language might want to stay away from this one. Aside from that, however, it is very quick-witted and shows how ridiculous political systems can be sometimes. Plus, Peter Capaldi has one of the best voices for cursing I think I have ever heard, and his portrayal of Malcom Tucker in both this and "The Thick of It" (from which this movie was adapted) is just unlike anything I've ever seen before.

Sci-Fi: Moon (2009)

There have been some phenomenal Sci-Fi movies over the years including Blade Runner, Star Wars, Alien, and others, but one that most people seem to not really know about is Moon. I know I have mentioned this film before, but in all honesty, watching the movie can be totally justified, simply by the profundity of Sam Rockwell's lead performance in it. Some people consider it to be one of the biggest oversights by The Academy in recent years, as he went without recognition for his incredible, multi-faceted (photo spoiler! There's two of him...), essentially one-man performance. I honestly believe that if this had not been a Science Fiction movie, he would have gotten an Oscar nominated, by The Academy rarely honors its Sci-Fi films, unless it is for visual effects (or Sigourney Weaver in Alien). Aside from this impeccable acting job on the part of Mr. Rockwell, the film is also supported by some unusual visual effects, using miniature models of crafts mining on the Moon, rather than simply using CGI, to make it look more interesting. Furthermore, the film features the cold voice of Kevin Spacey as GERTY the computer, which is essentially a perfect vocal casting. I would really like to watch this again, as it had some interesting themes and plot confusions in it, and I would really highly recommend it for people to take a gander at one day.

With that, I come to the end of my list! Did you see any of those? What did you think of them?

Are there any other not often talked about Gems that you have seen lately?

Wonderous Woman Wednesday: Carey Mulligan

2011-08-31T17:22:00.000-07:00

*** Just for fun, let's toast one fantastic Hollywood woman this Wednesday, and we will see where we go from there.

Today, I was reading on Pajiba about how Anne Hathaway seems to keep getting all the good roles for 20/30 somethings in Hollywood these days (we're not going to go too deep into why right now). They mentioned, however, that Carey Mulligan is capable to Oscar Calibre performances, but isn't exactly a big box-office success (yet).

This makes me sad, because frankly, she is a fantastic performer, and thus, for today's Wonderous Woman Wednesday, I am going to celebrate the beauty that is Carey Mulligan!

She's adorable.

She's talented.

She has a cute sense of fashion and I modeled my hair after hers (even though she personally didn't like it that short).

Seriously, I think that this girl is going to be just amazing and ubiquitdous in the years to come, because of her incredible abilities at acting. I wouldn't call her the next Meryl Streep, because who are we kidding? No. One. Can. Be. Meryl. But she sure is great for someone in their 20s.

An Education? She was giggly and adorable, and also serious yet naive. It was a great role just made for her, and kept you entrhalled in a movie with an otherwise slow plot.

Never Let Me Go? I cried. I really did. Lucky girl with Mr. Andrew Garfield. And she kept stealing my attention, even away from him, being such a solid anchor in that movie.

Pride and Prejudice? Well, Kitty gets pretty gypped on lines, but she was still funny.

And as far as I'm concerned, in person she always seems to be really sweet and intelligent, and at events always appears to be having a good time. Even in that "Details" magazine article with Shia Labouf-- in which he came across as kind of douche-- he had nothing but nice things to say about her, unlike a lot of his other lady-loves in the past. Which is a good thing. Because if he said one word against her I would have cut him (but not actually).

I hear now Carey has been seeing Marcus Mumford of Mumford & Sons? And may or may not be engaged, based on the celeb gossip? (I mean, I don't read that stuff... *cough*)

Regardless of all that, today's Wonderous Woman of Carey Mulligan is all class for such a young lady and I look forward to seeing more of her in the future.

Still, it's a shame that (besides my friends), a lot of people still say, "Who?" when you mention her name. Tisk Tisk.

Look for Carey in the upcoming:

Drive (out this September) with Ryan Gosling.

Shame (tentative January 2012 release) with Michael Fassbender [#DatFass].

The Great Gatsby remake (tentative 2012 release) with Leonardo DiCaprio [not really what I would say is a Gatsby type, but that's besides the point].

And being all-around adorable, and busy busy, all the time.

P.S: Gratuitous GIF of Carey and Andrew giggling about him singing the "Bed Intruder" song! She cry-laughed just like me, and I wasn't even there!

[2000s Edition] Was my Old-School, Fictional Boyfriend Actually All that Great?

2011-08-28T20:55:00.000-07:00

*** This is the last installment of this "series" of posts, and is something I did simply for fun, and biased to my own personal likings, so please take it all in with a grain of salt.

To go along with my assessment of the typical film and television "heartthrobs" from cliche teen-movies in the 1980s and 1990s, I decided to now do a final examination of a few males from the early 2000s. To go with the "nostalgic" theme I'm going for, the movie had to have come out at least 10 years ago, leaving only 2 years in the 2000s available for scrutiny on the boys that we used to love.

Of course, take a gander at the 1980s (including the introduction to what this whole thing was about) and the 1990s if you feel inclined to catch a glimpse of the other two decades.

Also, as I mentioned above, this whole thing is inconsequential and just for fun, plus totally biased to my own personal feelings and likings. It also only includes characters from films I have actually seen myself, as not to have to base my opinions on those of someone else.

Without further ado, however, I give you: A Character Assessment of our Old-School Fictional Boyfriends. Were they Really as Great as We Remember? [Early 2000s Edition]

Cliff Pantone (Jesse Bradford): Bring It On (2000)

Every time I watch this movie, I just really want to be friends with a guy like Cliff. He is so funny, and smart, and in a band? Okay sure, I would totally fall for a guy like this. I think a lot of it has to do with his quirky persona, but in all actuality, he wrote the girl a song to make her feel better about her cheer issues (that sounds silly, but you know what I mean) and was really supportive of his sister, trying to get her to branch out and join the team. Although I will admit that he could have been a bit more understanding when Torrance’s boyfriend at college came back, and she broke up with him soon after. Maybe that’s just me, though. I don’t know, I still really like Cliff’s character, but then again, her relationship with him isn’t really one of the most pivotal conflicts within the film to begin with.

Character Grade: 8.5/10

Rob Gordon (John Cusack): High Fidelity (2000)

Oh hello John Cusack, nice to see you on our list again. Now, maybe not as many people would consider Rob Gordon a “teenage” heartthrob, but really, he was created to be a character for you to love, so just bear with me on this one. All in all, I love the fact that he makes lists to get over things, because really, I do too. And he really tries to figure out his life and move on once Laura dumps him. At the same time, however, trying to justify his cheating and actions while she was pregnant is a little, well, douchey. Musical snobbery is never good either, especially when it comes to your friends. Didn’t he almost not let one of his close co-workers play at an event? Don’t you trust your friends, Rob? I don’t know, this one was kind of mixed, and I think I would have to watch it again to really decide on Rob.

Character Grade: 4/10

Ryan Woodman (Shane West): Whatever It Takes (2000)

Like High Fidelity, I don’t really remember this movie a lot, just the major stuff. And as much as I love Shane West and wish his character in A Walk to Remember could have made the timeframe cut to be on here, sadly we have to go with a slightly less-likable character for him. Now, Ryan Woodman is definitely loveable, I mean he plays the accordion for goodness sake! And he also ends up with his oldest friend (as it should be) but boy does it take a long windy path to get there. And why was he so obsessed with the popular girl who was just awful when there were so many other perfectly good girls? Why wouldn’t he protect his best lady friend from the greasy James Franco if he knew what a skeeze he was? Why would he go to prom with a girl that he didn’t really like (even if she was acting like a crazy person until he was)? Was having that cool status really that important to him? Oh but in the end he was good to his best friend and they really did belong together, I just think he made a mess of things up to that point, and shouldn’t have been so oblivious to her feelings and all that. Though I know, sometimes that happens, especially with someone you know so well.

Character Grade: 5/10

Berke Landers (Ben Foster): Get Over It (2001)

It seems like until I made my friends watch this with me, pretty much nobody I knew had seen this movie. To my sister, however, it was a classic, and Martin Short is just hilarious in it! Anyways, I think I may be biased because I really like Ben Foster, but besides that, Berke wasn’t so bad. Arguably, he really could have gotten over Allison in a much less painful way, and could have been a little more mature about it, rather than trying to weasel his way back into her life when she had another boyfriend. He did, however, indirectly show her what a tool her new boyfriend was, and did realize how good his best friend’s little sister was. Now I’m torn on the whole, “But you’re Felix’s little sister” issue, I mean I can see why he wouldn’t want to hurt his best friend, but also why wouldn’t he be willing to give it a shot and talk to his friend about it? I don’t know, he still seemed like an okay guy. A little odd, but pretty good.

Character Grade: 6.5/10

Derek Reynolds (Sean Patrick Thomas): Save the Last Dance (2001)

Now, besides all that “gangster friends” business perpetuating the African American stereotype, I really think that Derek Reynolds was a great fictional boyfriend to have, even though I can’t remember ever wanting him. Why was he so great? Well, he was pretty smart for one thing, getting into a good college, and taught a stiff ballerina how to be somewhat hip-hop (though how “street” can Julia Stiles really be? Not all that impressive but that’s not what we are talking about). Also, he never let those issues others had about interracial couples get to him, even when they got to his lady-love. Plus he got out of the gang and was big support to Sara’s shaking dancing dreams. All in all, Derek was really nice guy, and had a good head on his shoulders next to some less-than amiable others.

Character Grade: 9/10

It appears that like the 1990s, the 2000s also had some ups and downs. After the whole things, however, and considering all the character flaws, despite the fact that some other guys from each decade might have a better "grade" overall, I still can't help but fall for a couple certain fellows. That being said, my one true "boyfriend" from each decade are as follows:

1980s: Jake Ryan, 1990s: Preston Myers, 2000s: Cliff Pantone

And since that is that for this adventure in examination, what do you think? Was I too hard on anyone, or too easy on someone else? Was there one specific decade of teenage hunk that you liked more than the others? How about anyone that I missed in my assessments?

[1990s Edition] Was my Old-School, Fictional Boyfriend Actually All that Great?

2011-08-27T11:42:00.000-07:00

*** This is just for a bit of fun, and biased to my own likings, so take it all with a grain of salt. Also, stay tuned for the final installment featuring boys from the Early 2000s (as long as the film was made at least 10 years ago, to go along with the "nostalgic" feel).

To go along with my assessment of some typical heartthrobs from the 1980s, here is the next installment of my nostalgic look back on the boys that we loved. So please, Take a Look at the First Introduction to the subject, to see what it's all about.

I mentioned above, this inconsequential examination is a bit biased to my own personal likings, and only includes those characters from films that I actually have seen, as I wouldn't want to have to base anything on just reading other's opinions on the subject.

Alas, without further ado: A Character Assessment of our Old-School Fictional Boyfriends. Were they Really as Great as We Remember? [1990s Edition]

Jordan Catalano (Jared Leto): "My So-Called Life" (1994)

Is it just me, or is there something inherently smarmy about Jared Leto? And this thus rubs off onto the character of Jordan Catalano. Sometimes, you can get past the actor paying the part, but for this one I just can’t. I mean, I understand that sometimes the “bad-boys” with jerky attitudes can be kind of attractive, but this guy was a serious douche. He wouldn’t even acknowledge Angela’s presence in the halls sometimes, he wrote a song about his car instead of his girlfriend, and he couldn’t read. Are we supposed to feel bad about that? Seriously, just try. I don’t want to be insensitive, but I find illiteracy a real turn-off, and just never liked the character of Jordan. I know why Angela liked him, but he never won me over. No Sir, I wasn’t buying what he was selling. Plus he would have sex with your best friend given the chance, which is totally uncouth.

Character Grade: 2/10 (Just because I can understand why someone might fall for him).

Preston Myers (Ethan Embry): Can't Hardly Wait (1998)

Oh Preston, you certainly won me over, and I would have loved to have been your big-haired Amanda Beckett. Was it those puppy-dog eyes and hilarious expressions on his face? Maybe. Or maybe it was that he held onto his feelings for years, which many can understand, but never once tried to break up the relationship she already had. In lots of those romantic movies, the “other guy” will move in and get close to the engaged girl, or girl in a relationship, and thus change her affections, but Preston kept his distance, which is the right thing to do (or so I think). He also kept a purely platonic, goofy relationship with his best lady-friend, and lots of people seemed to know who he was and like him too. More than anything, he didn’t change his future plans for a girl he had just confessed his love to, and didn’t expect her to follow him wherever he went either, but gave their relationship a shot and did the long-distance thing successfully. And that, my friends, is more realistic than most other rom-com relationships. Though Preston does get a character point deducted for making the Angel-Stripper feel bad. Other than that, Prestoooon, was a great fictional boyfriend.

Character Grade: 9/10

Sebastian Valmont (Ryan Phillippe): Cruel Intentions (1999)

No. No no no no no, more No than you can irrigate a canola field with. I just do not and will not ever accent Sebastian Valmont as a heartthrob. Wiki calls him a “Villain turned Anti-Hero” or something along those lines, which I guess I can see since later he actually falls in love and wants to stop the silly games and even reveals his journal and past doings to Annette, but still. Maybe if he didn’t constantly look like he was sizing you up for a coat made out of human skin. Maybe if he didn’t bang anything in sight, was totally manipulative, and made a bet so he could win sex with his stepsister, even though she obviously wanted him in the first place. It went on too long, and even with those slight character changes near the end, I can’t help but think that this guy was a huge, huge douche. (Plus, just like Jared Leto there is something just inherently greasy about Ryan Phillippe, or so I personally think anyways.)

Character Grade: 1/10

Zach Siler (Freddie Prinze Jr.): She's All That (1999)

Hello Zach, football star, thinks he can have whatever and whoever he wants with that big big ego of his. Oh yes, that is why you started dating cute Laney in the first place, because of a bet wasn’t it? Well now that just won’t do, especially since she wasn’t even that unattractive in the first place! You really fell for her once she got all prettied up, didn’t you, my shallow boy? Well okay, it was a little before that that you started warming up to her, during that weird performance art thing. And even if the relationship started under some less-than noble circumstances, once it really came down to it, he put in the effort to keep her and help her out, and even defended her weird little brother. I guess when it came down to it, Zach was kind of a sweet guy (I mean he did take his cute little sister to prom with him), he just needed to be pushed in that direction out of his egotistic beginnings, which left him with a little scarring in the character assessment department.

Character Grade: 7/10

Patrick Verona (Heath Ledger): 10 Things I Hate About You (1999)

It almost feels wrong, considering the character of a person played by Heath Ledger, but alas, he was quite the hunk in my time. This is kind of similar to the Zach Siler thing, as initially his intentions of just dating the girl for money was kind of on the douchey side, but then later he realized real feelings for her. That hunky brooding thing at the beginning was a bit odd, seeing as nobody wanted to talk to him, but he really was suited to Kat, and when he made her mad, he went to some pretty adorable lengths to win her back (remember the singing? Lovely). I really don’t know why she flipped when he wouldn’t kiss her after she vomited all over the place. Would you? I didn’t think so. But he did have some moments of flipping too, which were kind of out of place. We’re just going to forget that in the original Taming of the Shrew story by William Shakespeare that this character starved the Kat character until she broke… No, Heath would never do that. I think he was a pretty good guy in the end, it was just the being paid to date her situation that kind of made him seem like a bit of a skeeze at the beginning.

Character Grade: 7/10

Cameron James (Joseph Gordon-Levitt): 10 Things I Hate About You (1999)

If the burly Patrick Verona’s aren’t your type (what kind of sick person says Heath Ledger isn’t their type?) or if you are like me and have a soft spot for the beta-males, you may have found yourself fancying Cameron in this film. And why not? He was cute, and really like a girl enough to try and make her sister happy, even when he may not in fact end up with the girl. He maybe overreacted a little when Bianca went out with Joey, I mean he got Joey to pay Patrick in the first place since he knew that he wanted her and she kind of wanted him and all that nonsense. My my, Cameron, weaving a very complicated web, aren’t we? That’s always trouble, but you definitely came through throughout the entire thing. Plus, I liked the honesty with Bianca, telling her things that she really needed to hear, even if nobody else was going to say it to her. But maybe that’s just the fact that it’s Joseph Gordon-Levitt winning me over.

Character Grade: 8.5/10

Unlike the 1980s, I probably wouldn't hit all of the hunks of the 90s... There were some ups and some definite downs, in my own personal opinion. But of course a few of them I still love, despite some character flaws, as I know everybody has them in some form or another. (As for you, Sebastian and Jordan, Ew ew ew, get away, get away, Get Away!)

But what about what you think? Was I too hard on some and too lenient on some others? Were there any other people you would have considered a heartthrob in the 1990s that didn't quite make my assessment? Do you feel differently any of them now, compared to how you did back then?

Celebri-Dream, "The Doctor and Beast on a Wintry Night of Amnesia"

2011-08-26T15:41:00.000-07:00

Quite frequently, I have dreams featuring celebrities or fictional characters, which says a lot about how obsessed with cinema I am. Sometimes I like to share them, so as to have a record of my strange strange thoughts.

Often they don't make sense or connect very well when you try to remember the dream the next day, but apparently whilst actually in "Dream-Land" anything can make sense, right?

"The Doctor and Beast on a Wintry Night of Amnesia"

I recently had a-- once again-- very bizarre dream, involving not only one, but two random people from film and television this time. It all started with me at a graduation ceremony, in the middle of a field, which was centered in the middle of some random big city (I think it was Chicago? Even though I've never been there). Oh, and it was the middle of winter (like an Albertan winter) so it was incredibly snowy, yet I was still wearing my heels in the field of snow. Anyways, it was getting late, so I went to this bus station at the edge of a field, and couldn't figure out which bus to take home, but everyone was pretty much gone and the hoodlums were starting to come out, so I hopped on a bus hoping it was the right one. It wasn't, but I did see the Eleventh Doctor (as played by Matt Smith) on the bus! I recognized him and kept referring to him as "Eleventh Doctor" but he didn't seem to know who he was. I noticed he was missing his Sonic Screwdriver so asked him about it, and he said he must have lost it, which I knew was not a good thing. So by a stroke of luck, the bus brought us right to the house of my friend "Beast". Like literally, I said, "My friend Beast will probably know what to do, he's a genius" and there was his house!

When I say Beast, I mean like, Hank from X-men, but before he turns into Beast (yet I still call him that). Pretty much, it was just Nicholas Hoult, and he said he actually knew The Doctor, and took him inside, since apparently he knew how to help get his memory back. As they were doing this, I went and got changed into some of Beast's clothes (which inexplicably fit, but hey! It's dream-land!) and when I went back to the "lab" to see if Beast was able to bring back The Doctor's memory... Well... Let's just say that things were getting a little homoerotic. As in they knew each other a little better than Beast initially let on. And come on now, I mean I don't want to seem like a creep, but both of those young gents are pretty attractive, so it's not like I was complaining.

Anyways, they noticed me come in and played it off all nonchalant, but they knew that I knew, and I'm pretty sure they were madly in love. It seemed as though The Doctor had his memory back though, so I asked and he said yes, and he had actually had his Sonic Screwdriver stolen from him, and knew how to get to where it was! So we all drove in this tiny car to the middle of some ghost-town, and stopped outside of this tiny shack. The Doctor told me that his Screwdriver was in the house, in a red toolbox in the far left hallway, and both him and Beast urged me to go in, not them. Being my dream-self, of course I went in, and I'm ashamed to say that this is where the story got a little... Racist. Well okay not completely, but a bit racially stereotypical.

You see, I had just watched the episode of Weeds, Season 7 where Heylia storms out of her house with a shotgun all angry like? Well, that pretty much was exactly what happened to me, except for the African American woman wasn't necessarily Heylia. I don't really know. All I remember at this point was I managed to sneak in the house and grab the Screwdriver, but before I got out, this woman started shooting at me with a rifle or whatever you call it, I am ducked down behind a tiny separating wall as shrapnel is flying everywhere. Then the woman's 3 "Gangster" sons come along and start talking smack, and I think I almost made it out of the house when I fell down, and the dream ended. Maybe I was shot, maybe I wasn't. But where were Beast and The Doctor? Cowering in the car or somehow trying to help me out? I can't really be sure.

Once again, very very strange, I know. But for some reason I like to record them and look back on them in later. Maybe it can illuminate something in the future? Probably not, but regardless:

Has anyone else ever had a bizzare dream that they would like to share? I always like hearing them, as like I said, anything can happen in Dream-Land, so it's usually pretty random and interesting!

[1980s Edition] Was my Old-School, Fictional Boyfriend Actually All that Great?

2011-08-24T14:48:00.000-07:00

** Stay Tuned for an Examination of Other "Teenage Heartthrobs" from the 1990s and Early 2000s later on. This is just for fun, and slightly biased by myself, so heed with a grain of salt, as per usual.

We've all done it. Fall in love with a fictional character, I mean. Especially in our teen years while watching specifically "teen" movies looking at our teenage heartthrobs, specially designed to make us swoon all over the place. But looking back, I start to wonder if these guys were really all they were cracked up to be. Were we just blinded by our young love, watching them as teenagers (or sometimes, in my case, a pre-teen), to not see that some of them were actually kind of douchey, or egotistic, or not even that nice at all?

I've decided, just for fun, to do a character assessment on some of the old "classic" teen movies of the past 30 years or so. I call them "Old-School" because if they aren't more than a decade old, they didn't make the cut (sorry, A Walk To Remember).

For this one we are going to focus on some of the memorable gents from the 1980s. Keep in mind that I will only talk about guys in movies that I have actually seen, as I would like to not just be shooting in the dark or following what everyone else says about the character. That could make it slightly biased, but I think we've come to expect that from web-writing, haven't we?

Please, notice that Michael J. Fox (as pictured above) and all the characters he plays is missing from this list, even though we loved him in a lot of 80s classics. Marty McFly? Total babe. Teen Wolf? Okay, maybe not sensitive to his best lady friend "Boof", but you know what? You will not find me assessing his character ever. Ever! Why? Because you even breathe the word "douche," or "unkind," or "smarmy" in reference to the man. That man is precious, and I love him, and say one bad thing about him, and I will climb in your window. And proceed to snatch your people up.

But now, without further ado or digression: A Character Assessment of our Old-School, Fictional boyfriends. Were They Really as Great as We Remember? [1980s Edition]

Daniel Larusso (Ralph Macchio): The Karate Kid (1984)

Oh, don’t look at me like that. You loved him when you were 13 or whatever. Anyways, let’s look at his character. Alright, so it’s pretty awesome that he basically defeated the nazi-esque karate club, which included that blonde bully, using focus, rather than hurting people, and that bully did take things kind of far, but how did the whole thing start? Daniel sprayed him with water and ruined his skeleton makeup on Halloween! Not cool, dude. Plus all those snippy little rifts with Mr. Miyagi, the man that took him in and wasn’t even related? Tisk tisk. Yet, at the same time, we love this young boy, who certainly had a way with the ladies (and certainly could dance)!

Character Grade: 6/10

Jake Ryan (Michael Schoeffling): Sixteen Candles (1984)

Jaaaaaake! Seriously, what a gorgeous gorgeous hunk he was, I would certainly want him just like Molly Ringwald (who apparently everyone in the 80s wanted). And you know what? The guy was actually pretty sweet. I mean, he didn’t really pay attention to Sam until he found out that she would consider having sex with him, which is a bit skeezy, but after that, the boy really put in the effort which goes a long way! He broke up with his girlfriend right away, sort of befriended the nerd to find out about Sam, then showed up at a low moment for her at her sister’s wedding, and even celebrated her forgotten birthday! Thanks for going the extra mile, Jake. That’s really sweet of you, even if it was spurred on by thoughts of sex.

Character Grade: 8.5/10

John Bender (Judd Nelson): The Breakfast Club (1985)

I chose this photo of him lighting a match with his teeth because it might be one of the sexiest things I’ve ever seen. No seriously, it’s that attitude that made us fall in love with John Bender, and squeal with delight when he triumphantly pumped his fist in the air. But when it comes down to it, the boy has some serious issues, and crossed the line saying some things, though some of it, sure, was honest and they needed to hear it. Furthermore, it’s unclear what will happen next with Claire and John but if they did in fact try to pursue a relationship, all that “I don’t believe in one guy/one girl” thing will probably lead to John cheating eventually, and he will likely never think he lives up to Claire’s expectations and wants in a man, since he never has in his home life, and possibly continue his somewhat violent behavior. So I don’t know, I mean a lot of this we can chock up to a bad home life, which makes him a sympathetic character, but at the same time, he has his moments of being a straight up jerk. Thus, I’m a bit conflicted.

Character Grade: 5.5/10

Andrew Clark (Emilio Estevez): The Breakfast Club (1985)

Andrew is another one of the guys you may have fallen for in this movie, based on the different “types” one might be into. And well, I must admit, he was kind of funny at some points, but for the most part, epitomized the persona of a jock being pushed by his father. It was that pushing that led him to his worst act of taping another kid’s butt-cheeks together and ending up in detention, and you can tell that he is really remorseful about it, which makes it a little sad. At the same time, you have to like how he sort of kept looking at the cute basket case all day, and trying to learn about her, make her feel better about her life, but then he only really shows interest once she all of a sudden is “pretty” and basically just changes who she is outside to look more like someone he would want? Nope, not digging that. And what about their relationship too? I mean she said she would be friends with Brian Johnson as she had no friends, but he likely wouldn’t as it wouldn’t fit with his “group” or whatever, so where does that leave her in the middle? How does he introduce her to his friends anyways? These Breakfast Club boys are kind of a mess, aren’t they? We love them despite ourselves, as we are willing to overlook some of their lesser qualities, it seems.

Character Grade: 5.5/10

Lloyd Dobler (John Cusack) Say Anything (1989)

Oh Lloyd Dobler, the guy every girl wants standing outside of her window with a boom box. He made that move iconic, stricken with parody, and ruined romantic gestures for every man after him. Lloyd was a sweet guy who stuck it out with Diane while her father was going through troubles and all he wanted was to make her happy and give her support. The thing I hear the most, however, is that Diane didn’t deserve him. Well okay, but that’s who he wanted and he sure put in the effort and gestures to get her. The only thing about him is that all of his female friends really seem to mother him, which I don’t always really find that appealing, and you would almost like to think that he would have been more supportive of his friend Corey after she had such a hard time with her breakup with Joe, rather than befriending him, though as far as boyfriends go, Lloyd really was a great catch for Diane, and everyone else in the 80s.

Character Grade: 9/10

Hm, it looks like Mr. Lloyd Dobler is the winner of this round, though Jake Ryan was pretty close behind.

Oh, who am I kidding? Even with some of those character flaws, I'd still probably hit every one of these guys like a brick wall. Though the older I get, the creepier it makes it when I say that...

Do you think I was too easy on some of them? Or too hard on others? Were there any Teenage Heartthrobs that you were madly in love with back in the 80s, that didn't make it onto my list? Do you feel differently about them now, compared to how you did then?

Like I said, this is just for fun, and soon I will be examining some more from the 1990s and Early 2000s, for no reason whatsoever.

Celebri-Dream, "Andrew Garfield and the Carnies"

2011-08-19T10:24:00.000-07:00

Often they don't make sense or connect very well when you try to remember the dream the next day, but apparently whilst actually in "Dream-Land" anything can make sense, right?

"Andrew Garfield and the Carnies"

Last night, I dreamt that the circus came to town, but it was... a bizarre one. I don't really know how to explain it. Well okay, so a lot of the people running it were giant talking cats in suits.

Anyways, I was walking through all the tents and such, and stumbled upon a tent where you could interact with these performers from the night show, who all wore metallic blue, skin-tight body suits with glitter all over them. As I was walking past, I noticed that one of the men was Andrew Garfield, and just had to go talk to him (I'm not stupid, after all). So basically it was the usual, "Oh hey, great show, can I take a photo with you?" But in the photo it turned into an awkward hug kind of situation where I wouldn't let go of him. He seemed to be really creeped out so I left, but as I was leaving I found a pair of shoes and socks on the ground. A lot of tents were closing up as it was nighttime, so I decided to bring them to lost and found the next day.

The next day, I was working at a pharmacy (which I really don't work at) with my friend Brittany, and Andrew Garfield comes in. And basically, I'm super shocked, star-stuck, and oh-so enamored by him that I make this face:

He looks at me all sad looking, then goes up to my friend Brittany, gets a prescription, and whispers something to her, while I stand there unable to move.

Brittany tells me once he leaves, that he said, "You're friend is exactly like my fiance, and I'm really sorry that I can't make both of them happy."

And I was like, "Uuuh... But I just met him? Why would he care?" and then proceeded to burst into tears.

Anyways, I had to return the shoes and socks, and on them, it had a tag that said, "Return to the Blue performance tent" so I was like, "Oh great, now I have to see him again and it will be awkward". But I went anyways, and found the tent, which was apparently two stories high, and as I came to the top of the steps, I saw this girl with red hair, and immediately I knew that that was his fiance. And thus, I tripped on the top step, so everyone stared at me. I went up to her, as she was at some sort of "Front Desk" thing in the tent and gave her the shoes and socks, and the girl was like, "Oh so you're the one who is having an affair with my fiance!" And I immediately said, "No no, why would you say that?"

And she said, "Well you were talking to him the other day, and now have his shoes and socks!"

And I was like, "But I just met him and talked to him for five seconds! And found his socks on the ground, that's why I'm returning them!"

So his fiance burst into tears, and I did the same, and then said I had to go, but not before she slipped in, "How could you be so awful?"

And I was thinking, "But I didn't do anything, except maybe give him an awkward hug!" (which I would totally do if I ever actually met him, but still).

It was like a Rom-Com without the "Com" part! Maybe it was because I just watched that "Romantic" movie with little to no comedy featuring Tom Sturridge and Rachel Bilson the other day... Waiting for Forever, it was called? Anyways, that is besides the point.

And so, I left all upset, and wandered through the dark Carnie town, and before it all ended, I walked past what I thought was a guy dressed up as The Joker, who proceeded to slap my bum when I went past, and as soon as he did it, I knew he was the actual Joker (like, Heath Ledger style), and freaked out, thinking he was going to blow up the circus, then woke up with a start.

Le weird, right? I don't know why I always want to record these things, maybe it will illuminate something in the future. Have you ever had a bizarre dream you want to share? I always like to hear them, and I don't know why...

A Gratuitous (Pictorial) Display of The Prettiest Lips I Ever Dun' Seen

2011-08-11T11:17:00.000-07:00

For the most part, this is just a random list of photos, much like when I celebrated my favorite Hollywood Eyes, or Cheekbones and Jawlines.

So this time I decided to move onto another facial feature for Gratuitous Display... And that is, lovely, kissable lips!

Now, I must admit, I'm not really the kind of girl who will stare at people's mouths. I actually find it kind of weird, but every now and again, you just notice those really really nice lips on people, and sometimes wonder what they might feel like if you were to get to know this person and... Okay okay, you get the point.

I must say, however, that I love smiles, though that can get all mixed up in the whole braces/non-braces, cute snaggle-tooth, not-cute snaggle mess of subjectivity. As can all kinds of beauty (that's a post for another time, maybe...), which makes these gratuitous lists of mine completely personal in the choices of people. I mean, you may be wondering why I don't put the predictable/obvious choice of Angelina Jolie on here? Well, because although her lips are big and many women envy them, I don't find them all that attractive. But that's just me, like I said!

But now I'm getting into a big old rant about the subjectivity of beauty, which I should cut short right now...

For now, let us bask in the beauty of some nice lips, whether they be pillowy, soft, big, pouty, or anything of the sort! And thus, I hereby give you, A Gratuitous, Pictorial Display of the Prettiest Lips I Ever Did See (and/or Want to Sink My Teeth Into).

Gemma Arterton

Known to me under the name of "That pretty girl from The Prince of Persia who I sometimes mix up with that other pretty girl from Cemetery Junction", which leaves everyone wondering who in the world I am talking about! (For the record, the other pretty girl is Felicity Jones). And my my, Gemma, don't we just have the most British of names to go along with those lovely lady lips and flawless skin! I hope to see her in some more diverse roles in the future, but for now, I will just have to make do with staring in envy at those gorgeous features of hers.

Michael Buble

I'm just going to get it right out there and say that at this exact moment I am on a Michael Buble "high". Ever since I went to his concert in Edmonton 3 days ago and just fell in love. "What is it about this man that makes him so sexy?" I thought? Maybe it's the voice, the swag, the suits, the giggly personality... but feature-wise? The lips. Maybe they aren't the biggest, but they sure look soft enough to sink your teeth into, no? But don't let me talk you into it, let him do the convincing!

Penelope Cruz

I'm pretty sure I have an intense lady-crush on this woman. I mean, look at her! She is so gorgeously Spanish and talented, and unlike most other celebrities, named her child something pretty normal (Leo, or so the rumor is). Just look at those lips... If she and her stunning husband Javier Bardem ever invited me over for a party, I would say "Yes" in a heartbeat!

Andrew Garfield

Hands up, who saw this one coming? Yes, I will admit that I'm absolutely enamored by this young gentleman. Everything about him, and like some of the others, his lips may not be the biggest or smoothest or anything of the sort, but they sure do look pouty and irresistible if I say so myself. Oh, and if you haven't seen Boy A yet, Do Yourself a Favor... (and don't forget to check out those pretty soft lips of his while you're at it!)

Tom Hardy

Inspiration for this list? Maybe so. But look at how pillowy! I know, I know, many people are still unaware of who Tom Hardy is, but there was a reason they called him "Handsome Bob" in RockNRolla, you know? I think it was all the "Darling" talk in Inception though, that really won me over... But we're getting off track now. Seriously, I could take nap on those fluffy beauties. And I'm sure you all understand why I call him PillowLips Hardy now, right?

David Kross

At this moment, my family is thinking I have a serious problem when it comes to the boy from The Reader. And you know what? I do. Because it was a beautiful movie and he did a great job. And no, my dear sister and mother, it was not for the full-frontal of the young gent. Actually he looks like somewhat of a doppelganger to me... But more importantly to what we are discussing, just like Andrew Garfield he has those pouty lips. Lucky Kate Winslet, getting to see for herself how soft they are, again and again! Though on the other hand, maybe he is the lucky one in this situation, I mean hers aren't so bad either...

Chord Overstreet

I don't think any list like this nowadays would be complete without "Trouty Mouth" himself. I mean just look at them! Gorgeous and full. Though let me just mention the whole "Chord Overstreet doesn't want to come back to 'Glee'" thing. I honestly don't blame him, I mean as much as I wanted to see where the Sam/Mercedes relationship would have gone (as it was pretty cute), they really weren't utilizing him at all in the last half of the second season, were they? He was just kind of there, and every now and again they would make a joke about his big mouth. His gorgeous big mouth, they should say! I mean, if he wants to work on his musical career rather than just being known as "that kid from Glee" for forever, then good on him! He's a talented singer and musician, and I think given the right circumstances could do very well.

Luke Pasqualino

Didn't Naomi refer to Freddie by saying "You love the lips!" at one point in the third season of 'Skins'? Am I just imagining this? Well anyways, in a show with so much teenage sex and love, especially featuring someone with such big fluffy lips, one can't help but wonder what they might feel like pressed against your own, am I right? Wait, and then he was on 'The Borgias' for a while? Hm, I guess more people have experienced them than you might imagine with such an obscure name in the grandiose Hollywood spectrum.

Chris Pine

They're like, flat but... big, am I right? Okay, no seriously, am I the only one that finds Chris Pine attractive? Because I really do. And I love the voice that comes out of him too, because for some reason, it doesn't match the typical "hollywood action star" voice, yet I love it because he sounds so smart! (Wow, that was a lot of "because"). Anywho, I never really realized how nice his mouth region actually is until recently and I must say... I am intrigued. Oh, go ahead and judge, but remember that you are gandering on this site too, so I'm not entirely to blame here.

Emma Stone

Emma Stone seems to be everyone's lady-love at this moment in time. Men, women, whoever! Everyone loves this girl (seriously tell me of someone who doesn't and I'll show you a liar), but why not? She is beautiful, and sassy, and funny and all that... And although she has some thinner lips, well hey, they look smooth or whatever, don't they? And that's one of those other things about her that is so endearing: she doesn't have the typical, gorgeous features of the classic leading-lady (ie, collagen injected lips) or model bombshell, yet she is absolutely stunning all the time.

And there you have it! My list of some of the prettiest lips I have seen as of late (or the ones I'm most curious to inspect, more like), even though as I said before, I'm not really a fan of looking at people's mouths, I'm more of an eye and cheekbone lady (and smiles, of course!).

But now I leave it to you. Is there anyone else that you personally might have chosen for this gratuitous display instead?

"The Buffer" and Other Notes on Cinema Etiquette

2011-08-06T16:40:00.001-07:00

***These are not real. It's just what I myself (and my friends and family) go by.

For any social situation involving other people there are always those unspoken "rules" or personal etiquette guidelines we should follow, out of respect for everyone else around us.

This includes how we behave when we go through the community experience of seeing a film in a public theatre.

I've never really had a problem with other people while watching a movie, because I'm pretty easy-going when it comes to that stuff, but the other day, I had a... let's say "confused" moment when someone broke the one rule my sister and I always go by. And that rule is known as "The Buffer".

*Ahem*

The Buffer:

A two seat gap (one if fine, two is better) you leave empty between you/your viewing party and another person/their viewing party when there are other ample seats to be filled around you and throughout the theatre.

You know what I mean? I was going to see Friends with Benefits with my sister and her friend, and the theatre was almost empty, --just a couple of small groups-- and this one couple decided to plop down right next to me right off the bat, even though there were countless seats not even near me!

Okay okay, so it's not that big of a deal and I don't mind sitting next to other people. In fact, it happens a lot, I was just so confused as to why out of all the seats, the one directly beside me looked the most appealing? Especially since the two people seemed incredibly confused by some of my laughing moments that they "didn't get" and other reactions while watching it. To which I thought, "Hey, you chose to sit next to me, remember?"

To be honest, the breach of The Buffer isn't that bad. It's just kind of strange when a completely random person really wants to sit beside you when the rest of the theatre is empty.

The thing with The Buffer, too, is that sometimes, a theatre gets full. Well okay, so if a theatre is fuller, you can sit right next to someone. That is perfectly fine. If you leave a buffer and the theatre starts to fill up, go ahead and scooch over to make room, but just leave that buffer there initially out of courtesy. And for goodness sake, when you make a buffer, always leave at least 2 spaces. Why? Because then, if the theatre fills and couple comes looking for seats, well they will fit very nicely in between you and not have to make others scooch or split up or anything. I mean, I know sometimes people go to movies alone, but it's usually a group thing.

And that, my friends, is what the usage of The Buffer is all about.

Here are a couple of other "Notes on Cinema Etiquette" as defined by myself and my sister.

(And you better listen to us, because we are well-seasoned film viewers, at both cineplexes, and smaller theaters).

Previews:

- I firmly believe that in those silent couple of seconds after a preview ends, you are allowed to say one quick line regarding whatever you feel about that you just saw. For example, "No. No no. Hell no. Not today." Or "I think Adrian Brody is way better than this." Or "I think I've seen this movie before... Just... A different Holiday." (*Cough* New Year's Eve* Cough*)

Verbal Reactions to Film:

Seeing a movie at a theatre in public turns it into a community experience. I don't see why we can't have certain reactions to things we see on screen. I mean, we go to a scary movie to be scared with others, or see something funny to laugh along with the group when it's in theaters, right? Not to just stifle ourselves like we might at home. Anyways...

- Laughing when you aren't necessarily supposed to because you find something humorous unintentionally is totally fine. Sure, people might stare or be confused, but it makes for a great time! Just hold off if it's like a really really serious thing you are laughing at, like a kid's father dying or cancer or genocide, or anything like that. Seriously, what kind of a sick person are you?

- The occasional "What?!" or gasp, or other exclamation is fine. Actually it's kind of funny when people do that. Though I have to be honest and say it's usually me who is the culprit.

- Incessant talking is just a no-brainer. Don't do it. However, the odd, strategically placed line about the actors, plot, action is okay. See, this way it's not constant talking, though you are able to get the most important questions out there or things said before you forget about them. Just be careful dow much you do it, since I always abuse this one.

- Crying is one of those things that sometimes happens during a movie, and it can't really be helped. When a young child cries, I let it slide, because they don't know any better, but for adults, crying makes people uncomfortable. But like, I said, sometimes it can't be helped! For crying, I say it's okay to do so in a theater, but only if you are very very quit about it. Don't go sobbing away or loudly sniveling, bothering everyone else around you. Let those tears run down your face and quietly wipe them away with a kleenex, or press your thumbs to your tear ducts to hold it, or blink back the welling in your eyes, I really don't care! Just don't make any noise. That way, only the people you came with are likely to notice your tears, and they shouldn't be too weirded out by it, right?

Food:

- If you smuggle in a soda can (come on, everyone does it) or buy a soda in a bottle, open it up before the film starts or during previews. Everyone hates a random can crack in the middle.

- Skittles and other candies roll. Just be careful, and catch them in your crotch if you can.

- Garbage goes in the cup-holders or under your seat, on in front. Nobody wants to step in that.

- Don't get mad at the person that is sliding past you to work their way to the washroom. They are just as uncomfortable as you are, and really don't want to be bothering you, but they have to. As a person who holds it every time, that can get painful if you have a tiny bladder.

Phones:

- It's kind of a given to put your phone on silent,and not talk on it. Seriously, this isn't a phone booth. However, I have a little thing about texting. If you are in the back 2 rows or so, you can have a freebie of 2 texts during the film. Why only the back rows? Because little to nobody can see your phone's light back there, whereas in the front, you see something shining and your eye is directly drawn to it, like a crow and a shiny thing. Just don't, if you are closer than the back 3 rows.

I feel like there was more but that also seems like a lot for now.

With that, I give you my random notes on Cinema Etiquette! What do you think on the subject? Anything that really annoys you in a movie or you would add to the list?

P.S: Please note my choice of photos giving props to the Edmonton Princess Theatre and (sadly, just closed) Garneau Theatre. I hear it's turning into Metro city now though? I'm not sure...

Yes, Andrew Garfield is Skinny, and Yes, Maybe I DO Like It!

2011-07-28T10:13:00.000-07:00

*** This is a bit of a rant, so take it with a grain of salt.

It seems like ever since the first promotional photograph of Andrew Garfield in The Amazing Spiderman came out, there have been comments and statements surrounding how skinny Andrew Garfield is (ie, "Is this Spiderman an Ethiopian or something?" How offensive). I even just read in my local newspaper --which almost never has things related to pop-culture in it-- about how the writer thought he needed to "eat a few more sandwiches" before he could successfully pull off the character of Spiderman. I just can't help but wonder why many people are having a hard time accepting Garfield as this character?

Are all heroes supposed to be big and buff? Aren't we in a time where anyone could become or be considered a hero? Can only the biggest and burliest be our leading men in action roles these days? I would like to think not.

I mean, Tobey McGuire as Spiderman was maybe a bit more stocky than Garfield, but he didn't really fit the typical superhero build either, being quite a bit shorter than the usual leading-man. But that's the whole thing, isn't it? Different types of men are now being put into these hero-like roles. What about the smaller James McAvoy in Wanted? Or the thin Edward Norton as The Incredible Hulk? You'd think that as long as the person suits the character outside of the Superhero persona, they should be acceptable in the role, seeing as it's the powers that make them strong, not their build.

And that's the whole thing, isn't it? In The Amazing Spiderman, Peter Parker is going to be a high school student, and what boy in high school (besides the football player or other jock) do you know that is big and burly like Batman or Superman?

Peter Parker is a nerd, after all, that just falls upon his powers by chance, so wouldn't it make sense that he is a skinny, awkward little thing?

Also, if nobody has noticed, Garfield is just naturally thin, though by the looks for some of the new photos (seen in Entertainment Weekly) of the upcoming film, he is getting quite ripped! And if anybody knows me, they know that "Skinny-Ripped" is my favorite kind of gentleman's frame.

So yes, Andrew Garfield is a skinny guy, but who says that's not going to be good for Peter Parker and Spiderman? The man is a very talented actor (no seriously, he's amazing), so if anyone can pull off a character, it will be him.

Though frankly, even if some people don't think Garfield fits the role for this film, it doesn't ride entirely on his shoulders, does it? We all know an amazing actor can be brought down by the other aspects of a film, such as poor directing, cinematography, other actors interaction, costume, etc etc.

All I'm saying, is we should give Garfield a chance. He might surprise some skeptical people! though I am completely biased on the subject, as I am personally rooting for him to have a long and successful career.

What about you though? Do you think Garfield is "too skinny" for Spiderman?

"Time Travelin' Time Travelin', Yeah!" : (A Gratuitous Pictorial of Decades of Men)

2011-07-25T13:35:00.000-07:00

I'm going to be totally honest with you, sometimes I just like making incredibly random lists or posting photos (mostly of hunky men). And today, I found myself being inspired by a couple of things:

First of all, I have been watching some older movies with the typical "Leading Men" or their time, and sometimes I want to say that they don't make men like they used to. That's not to say that men today aren't handsome and charming or anything of the sort! They are just a different... "Style", you might say.

Furthermore, I was taking a gander at some "Doctor Who" featuring the Eleventh Doctor (the newest one) and I found myself enraptured by Matt Smith's face. I find him to look very young, but feel as though arguably he should be older. As in, his face would be suited to another time, or is more fitting of an older gentleman? I'm not really sure, but I guess it's good for Time Traveling, right? Because it's both modern yet old? No? That doesn't make any sense at all, does it?

Hence, I wanted to do a Time-Warp, traveling back to the different decades and looking at what men epitomized women's fancies at that time. Frankly, some of the ages had many more men that could be suiting for this list, but I tried to narrow it down to 2 for each. Some of them are my own personal fancies, and some of them are more so the popular/typical "Crushes" of that decade.

Thus, I hereby give you: Men of Every Decade (From now until the 1930s)

(I hope you like Time-Warping with me. Which decade has your favorite kind/class/style of man?)

2010s: Leonardo DiCaprio and Javier Bardem

Hello there, 2010s. It's the modern age, and we embrace gentlemen with different quirks as our leading men more openly than we may have in the past. To represent this age, I have chosen Leonardo DiCaprio --who, arguably, has been a prominent leading-male for all of the 2000s as well-- because 2010 was really a big year for him, with two major hits (Inception, duh!), and those pretty little kitty-cat eyes of his. On the other hand, is Mr. Javier Bardem, showing that we love to cross borders and embrace a little foreign flare, and as I mentioned before, a little quirk in the looks department (that nose!). It's a dead sexy time where anyone can be considered attractive in one way or another. Let's keep this up!

2000s: Matt Damon and Ewan McGregor

Crossing over into a new millennia, we take a stand against the "pretty boys" and go for the everyday man. That is not to say that these men are not attractive or pretty: oh no! They just don't have to be the Alpha-Males to get our attention, in a sea of incredibly buff bodies as the beach-bro (aka, Abercrombie Model) craze starts to really take its hold. You know, I've never really realized how similar in features these two men are... But that is besides the point. For the 2000s I give you Matt Damon and Ewan McGregor! Both action stars with a twinkle in their eye, who show that they can kick ass and get the girl, without being super tall, incredibly built, or even super tan (really, is that supposed to make you more manly? I don't know). Plus everyone loves a family man (which both of them are). Look to the future boys, we are going to love you for a long long time!

1990s: George Clooney, Tom Cruise, and Brad Pitt

I previously mentioned the dawn of the "Pretty Boys", which I would consider the 1990s. Really though, there is nothing wrong with that. This was the time when boy-bands really hit their stride, with their boyishly attractive gents, thus leading me to call this the Dawn of the Pretty Boys. Come on... You know what I'm talking about. I couldn't decided which two of these men epitomized the time better, as all of them are still around (well okay, two of them are still very very prominent), and all three of them really came to fame during this time. Oh these leading men, one made danger and crazy a sexy feature , one made southern charm and a goofy attitude the name of the game, while the other led to the rise of sexy doctors littering television (in the 2000s especially), and for that sir, I cannot forgive you... Buuuut, you are a silver fox, so I guess I will. Just this once.

1980s: Harrison Ford and Michael J. Fox

Oh the 1980s, where hair was big, pants were tight, and colours were bright. And the men? Well, they were what I call either "Lovables" or "Pirates". Because really, they (mostly) fell into these two categories. On the one hand, we have the Pirates; the Judd Nelsons, the Kevin Bacons, and the James Spaders. The bad-boys who don't give a damn, but fall in love just like anyone else. Representing this category we have Harrison Ford, with his kind eyes, but intelligent, rapscallion swagger. Well okay, so in Star Wars he wasn't exactly a "pirate", but more a Space-Cowboy, but you understand how they are kind of similar, right? On the other side, we have the Loveables; the John Cusacks, the Anthony Michael Halls, and the John Cryers. The cute little things that love music and will dance up a storm with you given the chance. Representing this category we have a fellow Time-Traveller, Michael J. Fox. Come on now, you know you love him, as he is just precious. That's the only word for it. But either way, I salute all of you retro lovers, whether you find yourself fancying more Pirates or more Loveables. They are both just too good to pass up!

1970s: Jack Nicholson and Clint Eastwood

Oh the 70s... This is when things were a little strange. I mean, layered style, one piece suits, bell-bottoms, and all that other jazz was the rage. Did I mention Glam-Rock? Well David Bowie certain brought the fire in that department (yeesh, why didn't I choose him to represent this time?!) Regardless, this was the era when people of all kinds seemed to embrace expression and liberation and all that, though at the same time, there was still a distinct way to be manly, and that was to be assertive about it. And who better to bring the quirk of the time, yet still be handsome in those layered suits than the fantastic actor in Jack Nicholson, and rugged Clint Eastwood? Seriously, when I was looking at a People magazine's "Stars, Then and Now" thing, I was astonished by how attractive Clint Eastwood was! I mean, he had the retro style, but looked darn good in it with that commanding scowl. I guess the 70s really liked their men to be men, since fashion sort of crossed over between genders and made for confusion otherwise (Hello, Leotards!). Or am I just making bold assumptions now?

1960s: Sidney Poitier and Michael Caine

What do you think of when you see these two men? Well I'll tell you what I see, and that is pure class. Class up the spout and spraying wildly in your face! The suits, the glasses, the hair: everything put together made men in the 60s seem suave and collected (as long as they weren't part of the Flower-Power and/or Hippie craze, I might add, though there is definitely nothing wrong with that!). All I know is that I look at these men and the way that they carry themselves, and you can tell that they have a lot of respect for themselves, and thereby also a lot of respect for women (it's all about sexual revolution in the 60s and what have you, amd I right?). I really do think I love this era of gentlemen, and it might be one of my favorites. They just seemed so put-together, I can't get over it... Plus, talent was a huge thing at this point, as evidenced by the incredible men pictured above.

1950s: Gene Kelly and James Dean

Oh the 1950s. This is possibly one of my other favorite ages, as the style was fun, and it encapsulated the ages of Frank Sinatra, Elvis Presley, Gene Kelly, and James Dean! It was a time when leading men were either dapper in every way (Gene!), or incredibly handsome bad-boys (James!). Though these kinds of bad-boys were the ones you could work with: not too bad, as in their hearts they were still very good. Well okay, except for if they were heavily involved with drugs, as this is never cool, but besides that. And more than anything else, this age of leading man was based on talent (much like I mentioned in the 1960s), and the men you saw could act, sing, or dance beautifully, making their marks in iconic ways.

1940s: Laurence Olivier and Humphrey Bogart

"How now, brown cow?" "The tip of the lips, the teeth, the tongue!" You got it, these men stood out from the rest by the way they spoke, and let me tell you, diction can go a long long way. How else would Laurence Olivier become one of the foremost Shakespearean actors of the century? Or how could Humphrey Bogart become the American Film Institute's "Greatest Male Star" in the history of American cinema (Laurence Olivier is #14)? Not by being unaware of how to carry himself, that is for sure. Being noble was a big part of the roles in the 1940s, and these two men carried it off perfectly. Frankly my dear... these men were some well-presented somethings. Plus, their features were characterized by strong noses and square jaws by the looks of it, nailing down what were are to love in men of that time.

1930s: Fred Astaire and Cary Grant

And now we finally come to the 1930s. Now, my knowledge of this age is a little lacking, but all I can tell is that suits were the name of the game, so they classed that place up. Plus, it brought to us the star in Fred Astaire, and Cary Grant. True leading men with (once again) a lot of skill and dapper appeal. I'm not really sure what else to say about this time, except for I hope you enjoy the eye-candy. I mean, they were attractive in a sense that probably isn't common in modern times, but regardless, they aren't so hard on the eyes, are they? There's an old-school charm about them, you might say.

Do you see how I didn't put on Andrew Garfield or Nicholas Hoult or Robert Downey Jr or Joseph Gordon-Levitt or Kevin Spacey? Yeah, I'm trying to be less redundant, though it's hard for me, as those men are just too fantastic to forget about! But I digress...

As I mentioned, I think the 1950s/1960s had some of my favorite men. How about you? Any decades stick out to you are particularly memorable or swoon-able?

Sound off with other additions to the list or anything too! I just love to post, is all.

"James Potter was a Prick," and Other Thoughts on the Harry Potter Finale

2011-07-22T20:28:00.000-07:00

*** Spoiler Alert!!!

Tread these waters carefully if you haven't read Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows, or seen Part 2 of the film. Because this whole thing is about that ,and I would hate to have anyone crying foul.

"James Potter was a Prick"

I know, I know, many of the characters in the Harry Potter series always told Harry that his dad James was "A Great Wizard", but after reading the last three novels (and seeing the final film), I can't say as I agree with that. I mean sure, he was probably a great Quidditch player and good at school, and that guy that everyone loved because he was smart and funny, but kind of douchey at the same time? We all knew guys like that in school. And frankly, I don't like them. What did James Potter ever do, being a "great wizard" and all anyways? Do we just take the word of a few others? Nobody never really explained why James was so great.

And more than anything else, after looking into Severus Snape's memories, all I can tell is that James was a huge bully. I mean, picking on Snape, and furthermore, taking the love of his life? As though Snape wasn't a tormented enough character, James just pushed it further, and why?

Because he was the best friend of the girl he liked? I don't know, I mean there must have been something that Lily saw in James to love him and make Harry and all that, but I still felt really bad for Snape. I guess I am always on the "best friends realizing they love each other" train after watching plenty of teenage rom-coms from the 80s and 90s, but still, the man protected Lily's son for years after she died, even though it wasn't his child to save, and even killed one of the men he was closest to in life, and died for him to survive. Well okay, so it also saved the Wizarding world from (essentially) a fascist dictator, but still, it was all spurred on by the death of his beloved. And that, my friends, is why I love Severus Snape, oh so much (plus, being portrayed by the sensational Alan Rickman doesn't hurt either).

It's not that I doubt that James Potter had his good points, as obviously he fathered Harry and had a wife that loved him and some great friends, but he still didn't seem as great as everyone claimed he was. Even in the finale film, when talking to ghosts of his past, Harry essentially skipped right over his father and went to talk to his mother and God-Father, rather than his real dad. Does that say something to you, seeing as Harry had seem Snape's memories prior to this? Perhaps.

The only thing that bothers me about claiming that James was a bit of a prick and a bully despite what others said, is that I would hate to think that his best friends, Remus Lupin and Sirius Black were like that as well. I seriously fell in love with Remus and Sirius, and they loved James, and kept claiming he was a great guy, so were they possibly like that too? I don't think so, I mean Remus may have really loved James because he was willing to keep his secret of being a werewolf and all, but still... It puts my mind into a conflicted place.

All in all, though, James Potter was not a favorite character of mine. No, sir.

And now...

Other Thought Spurred by Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows, Part 2:

- That whole "19 years later" thing was very unnecessary in the book, and even more so in the film. I can't believe how much like a pedophile Malfoy looked done all up! And how homely Ginny looked. For Hermione it almost seemed like the next day, just older clothes, but the rest were just so... Homely. There is no other word for it. Though I did appreciate that they insinuated that Neville and Luna might end up together like we all kind of hoped for in the novel, though didn't end up happening in the epilogue. We all know that's how it should have been though... Come on now.

- Jason Isaacs (Lucius Malfoy) has very kind eyes. I know I've already gone through the whole, "Wasn't Voldemort charismatic?" thing, so you must be wondering what is wrong with me, but seriously, once Lucius started to actually calm down with the whole "pure-blood" supremacy thing and had his whole family somewhat screwed over by The Death Eaters what what have you, I started to feel sorry for him and those sad sad eyes. Well okay, maybe Jason Isaacs is just handsome, and I can't help myself.

- I was kind of sad that they brushed really quickly over the whole Albus, Aberforth, and Arianna relationship. Although, it probably would have slowed the pace down too much for the genre of film, but in the novels it was really interesting. Also, I understand what Harry meant when he said that he didn't care about what happened between Albus and Aberforth, because that wasn't the man that he knew, so I can understand why it was left out. Though I also would have liked to see more of how Dumbledore actually got the Elder Wand, since that could have explained a lot, and it kind of illuminated the relationship they brought up in the first part about Grindelwald and Dumbledore. That all seemed like it might have been hinting towards Dumbledore's sexuality, which to me wasn't as big of a surprise as it was to other people. I don't know, maybe that was just me, and now I'm getting off point a little bit.

- I can't believe how little screen time the Weasley Twins got in Deathly Hallows: Part 2. They had quite a few lines in the first part, so I guess this was making up for it, giving them only one line each (kind of like the reverse of Neville's parts comparatively between the first and second parts). The one thing that I really didn't like was how they simply brushed over Fred's death, though he was one of my favorite characters, hence wanting a bit more from it.

- The thing about the Sword of Gryffindor: Could you technically "own" it, or does it not really belong to anyone? Because if it did, all of a sudden it could disappear as though to say, "Oh sorry, I have to go help out my peeps" and then present itself to someone else. Fickle little thing, isn't it?

- The one thing that seems to be talked about more than anything is... WHEN did Neville Longbottom (Matthew Lewis) get so attractive? I mean, at first he was a goofy, chubby little thing, then all of a sudden in The Goblet of Fire he was super skinny and awkward, and now, he is manly and badass. I mean, he was totally badass in the final book, but seeing it visualized really made it all the more apparent that they boy really grew up, more than any of the other actors it almost seemed. I think he may have started getting attractive around The Order of the Phoenix though, and standing up for himself, what with wanting to avenge his parents when Bellatrix came around and all that, you know?

Random Running-Commentary, Courtesy of Myself and My Sister:

(I know there was more, but I sadly can't think of it all now...)

- There was a goblin in Gringotts that totally looked like Conan O'Brien. Seriously, they put the camera on him a couple of times, and it was uncanny.

- I know my sister has pointed it out before that Ron has some really meaty thighs, but his bottom is also quite big! Not that I'm complaining though, the boy has nice arms, and I have always found him super attractive, even since I was 12 (haha). There is just something about a Ginger, and by golly, this movie had plenty of them!

- (As Voldemort disintegrates): "Careful! Don't breathe in the Voldemort dust! He will totally come back like right at the beginning of it all again!"

-"Wow, Sirius was looking good! You just know he was wearing that velvet, purple jacket in Harry's memory of him..."

And that is that! What did you think of the finale of Harry Potter? Did anyone else have other thoughts spurred by the film, or final book?

(I'm just throwing it all out there since it was fresh on my mind after seeing the film last week).

Dear Ralph Fiennes (A Public Letter)

2011-07-16T14:59:00.000-07:00

*** In honor of Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows Part 2 coming out, and once again being astounded by the amazing Ralph Fiennes.

(General thoughts on the finale to come, but not today...)

Dear Ralph Fiennes,

How is it that I always leave a theatre absolutely astounded by you?

More specifically, how is it that whenever you play a horrendous, loathsome character, I always feel a tinge of sympathy for them? Or at least, am totally engaged by the character?

Seriously, Sir, you have to have some major charisma to be able to pull that off.

Come on now, I laughed pretty hard when you gave Malfoy that awkward hug as Voldemort when he walked to join your ranks. And just the way you moved so slithery-like with a grin and glint in your eye?Fantastic. I mean, I know Voldemort was kind of a Fascist and wanted to exterminate muggle-borns/muggles (aka, straight-up genocide) but you still made me giggle at some points. Tisk tisk, Sir, making those serious allusions enjoyable. But I must say, I liked it.

Kind of like you made an actual Nazi seem charismatic and enthralling? In Schindler's List, obviously. How can someone be so interesting just shaving their face? I don't know, but you pulled it off. Oscars, all around! Wait, that didn't happen? Travesty. Well, then again, you were up against the incredible Leo DiCaprio in What's Eating Gilbert Grape?, and Pete Postlethwaite in In the Name of the Father, and... Okay, I'm getting a little off track.

Where was I?

Oh right, making evil characters magnetic.

That brings me to The Red Dragon, and you as "the Tooth Fairy". Seriously, I felt bad for you! Being so awkward with the precious Emily Mortimer and thinking you were hideous because of your mother. That was adorable and heartbreaking, and I sympathized with you even though you were a vicious serial-killer! Honestly, how can you do that? I feel like a piece of crap for feeling bad for you, but there you go. Plus, you thought you were so ugly because of that little lip scar, thing? Seriously man, that was nothing. If anything you are ridiculously foxy for an older man, which makes me feel a little skeevy saying sometimes, but I really don't care.

What I can't excuse, however, is you eating an original William Blake. I can't say as I am per se a fan of William Blake in any sense, but that is just not cool. You can't do that to a classic.

Though that back tattoo you have inspired by the painting is pretty rad.

Also, what is with that Jennifer Lopez stuff? Maid in Manhattan or whatever? That made both you and the fabulous Stanley Tucci forgettable and generic. Please don't do that ever again. Please. I don't think my heart can take it.

But you know, it's not that I am not a fan of you as a romantic lead or anything? With Rachel Weisz? Yes please! Or how about that incredible performance in The Reader? I totally buy that you were the extremely attractive young David Kross. I really do. Like I said, you are a foxy older man, and I'm sure were foxy back in the day as well. Foxiness doesn't die. Well okay, sometimes it does, but for you? No, Sir.

Is that wrong to say? No I don't think so. But what am I really getting at here? I think all I really wanted to say was, please keep doing what you are doing. Go ahead: make those horrendous characters enjoyable and enthralling and magnetic! I love it. I love you, and if I ever have a dream about you being my professor at university, I'm sure it will be a sexy one.

It's those eyes of yours. Deep, sparkling, beautiful.

And with that, I will leave you. Please call me up some time to hang out. I'd really like to get to know how you managed to make a Nazi so captivating.

Evil is sexy, and you certainly prove it.

Sincerely,

P.S: In Bruges made me laugh out loud, so you can be really hilarious sometimes, too. Just saying, as evidently I have a lot of love to share.

*** I have a serious problem and I am aware of it. I seek help to cure me of this infliction that causes me to love every man with a glimmer in his eye.

An Early Halloween Preparatory: Alternative Movie-Themed Costume Ideas

2011-07-09T21:58:00.000-07:00

The only reason I put the word "alternative" in there is because some of these aren't exactly what one might initially think of as a costume when wanting to base their Halloween getup on a movie character.

You know what I mean right? You always see handfuls of people dressed up as Jigsaw, or The Joker, and usually a lot of them run into one another and then it's either a party or awkward, depending on what kind of people the dresser-uppers are.

To me, however, if you are a real self-proclaimed "buff", you will think outside of the box a little bit. Sure, some of these ARE a bit cliche or you have probably seen them before, but it's not like you can buy any of them in the store or will see another 5 of the same costume walking around at the same time, you know? (Case and point, that year that I counted at least 7 Darth Mauls within one hour.)

Or of course, these ideas can be used for other themed parties such as Academy Awards night (like my friends and I did last year, all with very different get-ups) or another film-themed party. Just have fun with it! I like seeing people put together home-made things, especially if they are well-known concepts/people, but most others never even thought of dressing up like that!

Without further ado, I give you some Alternative Movie Character-Themed Costume Ideas and the "Category" of costume/idea they might fall under (a few months early of Halloween):

[In no particular order]

Cute: Carl's House - Up!

One of my friend's actually dressed up as this for our Oscar Party that I mentioned and it might have been my favorite. It may sound hard to do, but if you are even a little bit crafty it's really not as elaborate as you might think. That is unless you really want to actually construct a wearable house out of wood or something, in which case I say good on you! But either way, this one is just a really cute idea.

What You Will Need:

For a simple sort of setup for this one, you can take a big, flat piece of cardboard, and cut out the outline of the house, and draw some of the basic structure on it. You can colour it in using bright paint or pencil crayons, and possibly print off a photo or two of the characters on your computer to glue on the house. Then, use a strong or ribbon to tie the cardboard around your neck like a sandwich-board sign might be worn, and get a bunch of helium balloons to tie to the ribbon or to the top of the cardboard house (as long as it's not right in front of your face).

Lazy and Frat Boy-ish: The Dude - The Big Lebowski

You know, for the guys who don't really want to dress up or have any costume that might hinder them during the night? Well in that case, go for simple and comfy, much like the character of The Dude himself.

What You Will Need:

A long, green or brown bathrobe, as well as slippers, a plain white or grey shirt, and some kind of shorts. Big, almost wrap-around sunglasses can also add to the look and give it some extra "cool", as well as long hair and a beard if you are feeling really up to dressing up. Of course, although this is The Dude's most iconic outfit, there are others that may work with comfy patterned pants and bowling shoes with a knitted sweater, if you want to that that rout, but who doesn't like an excuse to basically wear pajamas around? Hence, this falling into the "lazy" category.

Based on a Real Figure: Frida Kahlo - Frida

If you want your costume to be an actual historical figure in real life, just look to those films which are based on true stories! Especially those with vibrant, memorable characters with a distinct look, such as the artist Frida Kalho. I actually dressed up as her for my Oscar Party, and while some people weren't really sure who she was, those who got it found it pretty hilarious. I was also in art school at the time so I thought it would relevant.

What You Will Need:

Either a silky dress with some sort of bright colouring, or a floral-patterned dress. A shawl to wrap around yourself, preferably floral as well, and lots of beaded bracelets and necklaces. Pencil eyeliner or other makeup can be used to create her distinct and recognizable uni-brow, and for your hair you could either do a braid across the top in a headband shape, or attach some big, bright flowers to a headband. Of course, if you are feeling adventurous, it may also be fun to try on a Spanish accent for the night, but that's just me.

Ironically Hipster and Arty: Ricky Fitts - American Beauty

If someone were to walk around filming dead birds and plastic bags nowadays, they would just be seen as pretentiously artsy and a big hipster that is too cool for anything "mainstream". Heck, Ricky Fitts was in fact all those things, but you know what? I absolutely love this movie, and actually really liked how sweet Ricky could be at times. Plus, this wouldn't be a hard costume to put together, and if you actually want to be hipster-y, then go ahead, Ricky Fitts it up!

What You Will Need:

A white, button-down shirt, and a black tie, which could also be interchangeable with a black sweater-vest. A black hooded sweater on top is also optional, with a black toque for your head and a small video camera strapped to your hands at all time. Also, if you want to go the extra mile, it might be funny to get a small balloon filled with helium, and put a white plastic bag around it, so the bag kind of hovers around, then tie it with fishing-line to your belt or hand so it follows and dances around your head. Huh? Neat idea? Okay maybe a little corny, but I thought it would be cute.

Meaningful (Though Could be Seen as Slight Racial Stereotyping): John Coffey - The Green Mile

I'm going to go on record and say that I adore this movie, and John Coffey was just so sweet, I couldn't help but fall in love with his character, especially since he was so willing to help people. The only thing with this one (which I mentioned in the categorizing) is that in dressing up as a black man in the 1930s and obviously a slave could be taken as being racist or stereotyping. But I assure you, if you were to come up to me dressed as John Coffey, I would think it was a great idea.

What You Will Need:

A cream coloured button-down or henley shirt which you can then tear the sleeves off. Dungarees/overalls torn or rolled up at the bottom to be too short, and if you want to go the extra, messy mile, paint yourself to be the same colouring as Michael Clarke Duncan. Also if you want to add more to this costume, you can throw on a necklace of St. Christopher, or carry a little stuffed mouse with you.

Could be Another "Normal" Costume for People Who Haven't Seen the Movie/Opportunity to Act: Marge Olmstead Gunderson - Fargo

I'm going to be totally honest with you, this one I only put in there because I think it would be really fun to have the chance to throw out a terrible "Midwest" accent all night long. "Oh yeeeah?" "You betcha!" "The heck you mean?" Oh you know what I mean. Plus, if nobody "gets" who you are or haven't seen the movie, then you are just a small-town cop! Canadian cop because of the furry hat? No no, us Canadians would know better, but that's besides the point.

What You Will Need:

Big, wintery jacket, preferably in dark green, brown, or black, with a beige or tan coloured collared shirt underneath. Leather gloves and a toy gun. A furry hat with ear flaps, which some may call "Russian" in style, and a police badge on the top of your hat, which can be a fake toy one as well, or craftily made out of brown or yellow felt. You can go the extra mile by putting a patch on your coat's shoulder as well, and of course don't forget your terrible Midwest accent and slang!

Slutty: RollerGirl - Boogie Nights

You know how there is that idea that when girls reach a certain age, they just want to dress up in skimpy outfits and go out partying on Halloween? Well, Mean Girls likes to think that it's an excuse for girls to dress up in lingerie and animal ears, but here is another one that might strike your fancy to be something different: RollerGirl! You know, from that movie where Heather Graham takes her kit off and you see more than you ever wanted to on her? Yeah, I didn't like it either. But if you can skate pretty well, this one might be fun, and still keep the scantily-clad, party-girl sentiments you may be going for.

What You Will Need:

A short 70s style dress, or short shorts and a low-necked wife-beater tank top. You can add a bomber jacket on the second option if you want, or a retro design to the tank. Other embellishments that can be added are funky sunglasses, and of course the necessity of 4-wheeled old school roller-skates!

Cliche: Alex Delarge - A Clockwork Orange

I call this cliche because I have seen plently of people dress up as this character, though never as many as the afformentioned Joker, Darth Maul, Jigsaw, etc. Actually I see a lot of people dress up as this if they want to seem original or "deep", but haven't actually seen or understood the movie. Obviously not everyone is like this! I'm just saying it's what I've observed in a number of people. But for you who actually really like this movie, and want to have an excuse to go around saying things like "Yarbles!" and "Viddy Well!" all night, then go for it!

What You Will Need:

Bowler hat and cane, white button-up shirt and long john style pants, with an over-top jock-strap like device. Black lace-up boots, and fake eyelashes for one eye. Of course, a long, evil stare will also go a long long way for this one (in addition to the hilarious slang you should be inclined to use).

Elaborate: Pan or the Man with "Hand-Eyes" - El Labyrinto Del Fauno

Are you expetionally artistic or like to create big, elaborate costumes? A crafty kind of person with a sense of whimsy? Why not try to put together a costume like Pan or the Man with the Hand-Eyes in Pan's Labyrinth? It might take a while and take some experimenting to actually get it to work, but here are some initial ideas. Honestly, I don't really know how you would go about putting these together.

Pan the Faun - What You Will Need:

Paper mache or styrofoam for horns, paper mache for face, or just blue face paint. A grey or blue bodysuit for the body, and crinkly paper embellishing or pine-cone pieces to add texture, painted on top of course with blue, grey, and green. Acrylic paint may be a good idea to also make the costume crinkly like the Faun's texture. Blue or grey gloves with similar embellishing, and a brown belt to hand items/your fairies on. Extra effort can be put into making flared legs with hooves (or use stilts?) or puppet fairies to follow you around. Really just experiment and see what you can come up with. It would probably be pretty intense to make.

Man with the Hand-Eyes - What You Will Need:

A skin-coloured bodysuit (most likely from American Apparel, like my sister used to make a Lady Gaga bubble costume last year), paint or sewing with other material to make skin flaps and markings on his skin. Plain mask that can be painted over in skin colour with markings for nose, and face paint to make blood coming from the mouth, eyes drawn on the palms of your hands for the pivotal essence of the creature. You could also attache half-spheres to your palms to make it more authentic looking. Make pointed fingers out of pointy gloves or attaching paper spikes to your fingers as well, if you want to go the extra mile. Just play around with this one (and Pan, for that matter) to see what you can come up with.

Offensive, Most Likely Trying to be Funny and Failing: Precious - Precious

Honestly, why would you want to dress up as this? I mean, I understand wanting to dress up as a racially stereotypical black woman, as my sister's friends once did that, as they had "Black Lady" alter-egos, but if you were to do this and then tell people you are specifically Precious... the reactions might be along the lines of "Oh... Ouch." Or so I think anyways. I mean, it might be a funny idea, but the whole story of Precious was just way too harsh for me, and not something that you'd necessarily want to become or make fun of at risk of seeming offensive. But maybe that's what you're going for? Regardless.

What You Will Need:

Padding for weight (pillows, extra sweaters, etc), jeans, bomber jacket, hoop earrings and cheap plastic jewelry in bright colours, hair back in a ponytail. Extra effort for painting your skin brown or dying your hair black and getting the gruff expressions just right.

Obscure: Anton - The Imaginarium of Dr. Parnassus

This is for someone who wants to have an obscure costume that not a lot of people will understand (kind of a "hipster" sentiment, huh?). Because as far as I can tell, not a lot of people have actually seen this somewhat random, but visually stunning film. And I know, Heath Ledger was incredible as always, but this was the first time I saw Andrew Garfield in anything and he stole the show. There are two ways you can go about this one, one of which is more easier to put together, the other a little more elaborate:

Simpler, Anton's regular Gypsy Attire - What You Will Need:

(Top photo) Red and green wooly sweaters, brown-ish coloured scarves, hoods, and a Norweigan-style woolen cap. Most importantly, fingerless gloves and an adorable expression.

More Elaborate, Anton's Hermes-Style Performance Outfit - What You Will Need:

(Bottom photo) Chain-maille armour, chest plate, metal helmet (or metal bowl) with Hermes wings (can construct out of cardboard and paint), silver pants with overskirt, red wrap for a belt. Most importantly, silver face paint. Extra mile for doing the painting with cheekbones and everything, as well as a chicken to do magic with.

That about does it for the ones I want to explain. Here are also some runner-up or other ideas for each "category" that you might be interested in, if none of those tickled your fancy (you will probably just have to Google these ones if you don't know who/what they are):

Cute: Olive Hoover - Little Miss Sunshine

Lazy or Frat Boy: Mark Zuckerberg - The Social Network

Based on a Real Figure: Harvey Milk - Milk

Hipster and Arty: Richie Tenenbaum - The Royal Tenenbaums, or Clementine Kruczynski - Eternal Sunshine of the Spotless Mind

Meaningful: Brandon Teena - Boys Don't Cry, or R. P McMurphy - One Flew Over the Cuckoo's Nest

Could be Another, Non-Movie Based Costume: Vampire Lestat - Interview with the Vampire

Slutty: Guinevere - King Arthur

Cliche: Hannibal Lecter - The Silence of the Lambs, or Maverick - Top Gun

Elaborate: Fluffy, the 3-Headed Dog - Harry Potter

Offensive: Hynkel, Dictator of Tomania - The Great Dictator (Don't give me that, you're basically just dressing up as Hitler).

Obscure and Simpler: Kenny - A Single Man, or Neil Bookman - Running With Scissors

Obscure but More Elaborate: Any character from Man in the Iron Mask (come on now, you have to love Period Pieces).

And now, as per usual, I leave it to you. What did you think of those? Do you have any other, better ideas? Throw em out there!

I must admit, I just love dressing up for occasions, so that may be why I compiled this in the first place.