Fall watching, II

THE ASSIGNMENT, 1997

Director: Christian Duguay

Writers: Dan Gordon and Sabi H. Shabtai

Actors: Aidan Quinn, Donald Sutherland, Ben Kingsley

The Assignment sounded very promising. Donald Sutherland, a fine Canadian actor, playing a CIA agent: good. Ben Kingsley: good. Aidan Quinn: OK, fine. A plot involving getting rid of Carlos the Jackal, an actual terrorist who in real life is now serving a life sentence in a Paris prison. Couldn’t be bad.

Sadly, it was. This film had a lot of potential, but it uses a plot device that asks us to suspend way too much disbelief.

It all hinges on a plan dreamed up by CIA agent Jack Shaw (Donald Sutherland). He trains US naval officer, Annibal Ramirez (Quinn), who is the double of Carlos, to impersonate Carlos. The plan is to discredit Carlos, so that the KGB, one of his patrons, will assassinate him. The training involves hardships and mind games, so that Ramirez starts to lose his nice-ordinary-guy persona and take on some of the dark-side aspects of Carlos. So far, so good: some possibilities here. But the training verges on silliness, the dialogue is portentous, and everything is treated as deadly serious. The whole thing needs more variation — more light and shade.

It all gets way out of control when Ramirez is trained to impersonate Carlos sexually by a former lover of his. Oh, come on! is the discerning viewer’s likely response at that point.

The action moves to Libya and gets into full rooftop leaping, car chasing, innocent passerby scattering, mode. No cliché of the genre is left unexplored: cars are driven down stone steps, bodies crash through windows into people’s homes or teeter on the edge and then tumble off high buildings, cars crash and explode.

Claudia Ferri, as Ramirez’ wife, is convincing as their family life disintegrates owing to his personality change. The rest of the lesser characters are one-dimensional. Aidan Quinn, playing both Ramirez and Carlos, was fine, although his accent varied at times when it wasn’t intended to. Donald Sutherland does his usual, chilling rendition of a morally bankrupt character: over the top, of course, but it’s that kind of a movie. Ben Kingsley has a nice role in the early scenes as a Mossad agent who thinks Ramirez is Carlos. But any nuances in his performance become lost as things turn farcical. This is the fate of the film as a whole.

PAINTED LADY, 1998

Director: Julian Jarrold

Writer: Allan Cubitt

Actors: Helen Mirren, Iain Glen, Franco Nero, Iain Cuthbertson

This was a two-part made-for-TV movie, but it’s not in any way inferior to a film made for the theatre. It’s a murder mystery, with lots of fine art references to appeal to art history lovers.  “Judith Beheading Holofernes” by Artemisia Gentileschi almost has a role of its own.

Helen Mirren has a great part as Maggie Sheridan, an aging musician who does her own makeover to pose as an art buyer. She plays both the if-Janis-Joplin-had-lived character and the if-I-had-been-born-a-Polish-Countess character perfectly. Not surprisingly, the part was written specifically for her.

When the film opens, Maggie is living in a guest cottage on the Irish estate of Sir Charles Stafford, where she has been enjoying an extended recovery from decades of fast living. She is drawn into the world of art dealing, both legitimate and not, as a result of the murder of Sir Charles.

Lesley Manville and Michael Maloney, as her respectable and successful art historian sister and art dealer brother-in-law, provide a great contrast to Mirren’s character. Iain Glen as her childhood friend Sebastian Stafford and Franco Nero as dealer Robert Tassi are appealing characters. But it’s definitely Mirren’s movie and very entertaining.

Art lovers will enjoy the not-so-subtle references. Mirren surprised in her bath by her brother-in-law is a great scene and we can all imagine what is going to happen to Sebastian.

Pistachio Sour Cherry Tart

This is the world’s best dessert. Made by Thomas Haas, it has a shortcrust pastry base (though “pastry” sounds far too pedestrian to describe it), a filling of sour cherries with some cognac and kirsch, and a dome of pistachio cream. The combination is indescribable. You will hear angels trumpeting when you bite into it.

Fall watching, I

I rarely get to see new movies. My viewing is usually done at home with DVDs from the video store or, more usually, the library, since our local library has a great collection and it’s FREE.

Three recently watched:


LOGAN’S RUN, 1976

Director: Michael Anderson

Writers: Based on the book by William F. Nolan and George Clayton Johnson

Actors: Michael York, Richard Nolan, Jenny Agutter, Peter Ustinov and Farrah Fawcett (when she was still Fawcett-Majors)

This was surely made to be a cult film. The story is set in the 23rd century after an unspecified disaster, when humanity lives in a sealed, domed city.  At the age of 30, people are supposedly “renewed” at a ceremonial event (in fact, they are vaporized).  Michael York and Richard Nolan play Logan 5 and Francis 7, “sandmen,” who track down and kill the smarter ones who flee the renewal (“runners”).

In a complicated and unnecessary plot twist, Logan 5 is told by the central computer to infiltrate Sanctuary, the place runners are aiming for. He and Jessica (Jenny Agutter) go together, with Jessica being the classic tag-along “girl” of seventies’ movies. (She has a thankless part, consisting of looking attractive and frightened. Farrah Fawcett has a brief and even more thankless part.)

At some point after they get outside the sealed city, they encounter the first old man they have ever seen (Peter Ustinov, for some reason reciting verses from T.S. Eliot’s “Old Possum’s Book of Practical Cats”). Logan 5 finally figures out that something is wrong with the story he was brought up to believe. He goes back to tell the truth. After many fights and encounters, he and Jenny free the population and they all stumble outside, blinking at the sun.

You may have gathered that this is not a good movie. It is, however, entertaining in a bad way. It will remind you of early Star Trek, both visually — the men in jumpsuits and the women in neo-Grecian mini-draperies, the polystyrene sets — and acting-wise.

Because I told my friend JR that I had seen it, she lent me The Island for comparison.


THE ISLAND, 2005

Director: Michael Bay

Writers: Screenplay by Caspian Tredwell-Owen and Alex Kutzman

Actors: Ewan McGregor, Scarlet Johansson, Djimon Hounsou, Sean Bean, Steve Buscemi

Ewan McGregor and Scarlet Johansson are Lincoln Six Echo and Jordan Two Delta. They are told that the outside world is contaminated and they live in a closed facility where their basic needs are cared for. They wear white jumpsuits (of course). They look forward to winning the Lottery, which will send them to the Island (which they are told is the only safe place in the outside world).

Lincoln is not quite as contentedly zombie-like as his peers. He asks questions. He hangs out with McCord (Steve Buscemi), a technician who works in a behind-the-scenes workshop at the facility. When Lincoln gets into a forbidden area and sees the most recent lottery recipient having body parts removed, he figures out a lot of what’s going on. The residents are clones, being kept in perfect physical condition because they are “products” at Merrick Biotech. When their outside sponsor needs a replacement part, the clone “wins the lottery.”

Lincoln and Jordan escape with the reluctant help of McCord. They plan to confront their sponsors and ask for their help to expose Merrick and don’t believe McCord when he tells them that the sponsors won’t necessarily be glad to see them. “Just cause people wanna eat the burger doesn’t mean they wanna meet the cow.”

McCord is the comic relief and has all the best lines:

McCord: Jeez, why do I always have to be the one to tell the kids there is no Santa Claus?

McCord: I know you’re new to this whole human thing, but … backpacks for boys, purses for girls. Ya understand?
Jordan Two-Delta: We’re not idiots.
McCord: Well, excuse me, Miss “I’m-so-smart-I-can’t-wait-to-go-to-the-Island!”

Lincoln: What’s God?
McCord: Well, you know, when you want something really bad and you close your eyes and you wish for it? God’s the guy that ignores you.

The Island is a way better film than Logan’s Run, even allowing for the twenty-five years’ gap between them. It has a good story line and better actors. It’s silly at the end, when Merrick loses it, but overall it is entertaining and worth watching without the alternative substances you would need to get the most out of Logan’s Run.


WIT, 2001

Director: Mike Nichols

Writers: Screenplay written by Mike Nichols and Emma Thompson; original play by Margaret Edson

Actors: Emma Thompson, Christopher Lloyd, Jonathan M. Woodward, Eileen Atkins, Audra McDonald

Well, there was nothing light or funny about this film. The story consists of what happens in the period between Vivian Bearing’s diagnosis of ovarian cancer and her death. There are flashbacks to her earlier life as an English professor but essentially the film looks at how cancer treatment and hospitalization come very close to robbing a woman of her dignity and her humanity.

The surprising thing is how watchable this movie is. Emma Thompson owns the whole thing: she dominates every scene. Her performance is chillingly real. As a currently healthy person, I identified with her very much in the beginning as she refuses to play the role expected of her by the medical staff. But all those little humiliations and indignities mount up and add to the toll apparently taken on her by illness. She changes; her acerbic personality, assertiveness and wit gradually fade away and are replaced by a different person as her end comes near. It’s the performance of a lifetime.

Those who have seen someone die of cancer may well find that it brings back painful memories.

The doctors are two-dimensional by comparison. They treat Vivian as a case rather than a person. The young doctor, Jason Posner (Jonathan M. Woodward) is a former student of Vivian’s and there is a nice moment just before an examination when she turns to the camera and says “I wish I’d given him an A.” There are a few moments like this, when Vivian interacts with the camera, though I think it could have been handled differently.

 

The Wit Film Project provides supporting materials for medical schools in the US and Canada who wish to use the film as a teaching aid.

The changing sky

As seen from my office window one November afternoon:

And a little later on:

Aunt Angela on written communications: 1

LESSON 1, PART 1

Use the fewest words possible to convey your message

People are busy. They want to find the underlying information quickly. If they don’t, they are likely to give  up and move on.

The sentence below was used by someone who wished to tell her clients that under certain circumstances they could get their confirmation deposits back. She wrote:

A refund of your confirmation deposit will be made to you.

Total: 11 words. The same information could be better conveyed by six words:

Your confirmation deposit will be refunded.

LESSON 1, PART 2

Use the active voice

Bureaucracies often use the passive voice. It’s unfriendly. It sounds as though something will happen without human intervention and that no individual or group is willing to take responsibility.

We can continue to improve the original sentence by changing it to:

We will refund your confirmation deposit.

Fall reading

The mood for fall reading is dark and mysterious. If there is humour, it should be black.

atkinsonCASE HISTORIES and HUMAN CROQUET Kate Atkinson

I am a great fan of Kate Atkinson. Her first novel, “Behind the Scenes at the British Museum,” made a profound impression on me. I love her wit, her way with words, her startling imagery, and her odd characters, who always, at least in part, remind me of someone I’ve observed.

I am working my way through the rest of her books: lately “Case Histories,” a mystery, and “Human Croquet,” her second novel.

Atkinson’s books absolutely require a second reading. They are so full of complex detail that I can’t imagine anyone not having to go back and reread to pick up pieces they didn’t fully “get” the first time around — and this is not just for her three mysteries, but for her novels as well. I am sure she must draw an enormous diagram, all links and arrows, on the wall when beginning a book.

In “Case Histories,” naturally enough, there are three case histories brought to Jackson Brodie’s attention. (Brodie is a former police officer turned private detective. ) Some of the links between cases are obvious to the reader: others aren’t. Even Brodie isn’t fully informed, as some of the characters have lives (and chapters) entirely their own. The majority of the puzzle gets satisfyingly filled in by the end, though some things are left ambiguous. But the joy of “Case Histories” is in the prose as much as in the plot: wildly imagined, bizarre and convoluted, effortlessly flowing:

Amelia envisaged that between York and the royal-infested Scottish Highlands there was a grimy wasteland of derelict cranes and abandoned mills and betrayed, yet still staunch, people. Oh and moorland, of course, vast tracts of brooding landscape under lowering skies, and across this heath strode brooding, lowering men intent on reaching their ancestral houses, where they were going to fling open doors and castigate orphaned, yet resolute, governesses.

Reading Atkinson, you can imagine having drinks with a funny, brilliant friend who is relating a story in her typical manic style, with many parenthetical asides, each with enough material for another story.

————————-

atkinson2

“Human Croquet” starts out weirdly and becomes weirder as the book progresses. It begins at the beginning of the world. The passing of aeons is dealt with rapidly and then, in Shakespearean times, we hear the story of a family, a house and a tree.

Next, we are in the same area in the 1960s, in the teenage life of Isobel Fairfax. Isobel’s life has been turned upside down by mysterious losses: the permanent loss of her mother and the temporary loss of her father, so her life is full of the unexplained and — perhaps as a result — she has a powerful imagination. However, things are about to get more odd still as Isobel starts to move in and out of alternate realities. Her world feels strange and dreamlike:

I pull out a deck-chair and join him in the twilight garden. The rooks are coming home late, hurtling on their rag wings toward the Lady Oak, racing the night, caw-caw-caw. Maybe they’re afraid of being transformed into something else if they don’t get back to the tree in time, before the sun dips below the horizon that saucers blackly beyond the tree. Perhaps they’re frightened of shifting into human shape.

I couldn’t put it down. There are questions left unanswered at the end: it’s up to the reader to choose which of many paths is the likeliest one to explain Isobel’s experiences.

————————-

niffeneggerTHE THREE INCESTUOUS SISTERS Audrey Niffenegger

I saw Audrey Niffenegger at this year’s Vancouver Writers’ Festival. I’d read her first novel, “The Time Traveler’s Wife,” but I wasn’t prepared for her dramatic presence and the discovery that in addition to being a writer she is an artist and a creator of handmade books. She showed some images from her visual novel The Three Incestuous Sisters and I was immediately hooked by her dark imagination.

The text is minimal and you have to see the images (all aquatints) to follow the story. Audrey Niffenegger says:

When I try to explain The Three Incestuous Sisters to someone who hasn’t seen it, I tell them to imagine a silent film made from Japanese prints, a melodrama of sibling rivalry, a silent opera that features women with very long hair and a flying green boy. I never try to explain what it means; you can find that out for yourself.

————————-

No Great MischiefNO GREAT MISCHIEFAlistair MacLeod

I had great expectations of this book. MacLeod is a highly respected, prize-winning (Impac) author who writes about history, family and community. “No Great Mischief” follows the family of the Clann Calum Ruagh through their childhood in Cape Breton and their adult lives working as miners on Ontario, with flashbacks to earlier times and some parts of the story set in the present day.

Although I was expecting to enjoy this book, somehow I just didn’t. The repetition that others have found poetic, I found just repetitive; the italicized Gaelic phrases on every page stopped the flow of my reading. I could see the beauty of the writing and the poignancy of the story, but dispassionately and at a distance. I found the history passages intrusive and the whole thing was too slow for my mood. In my Original Book Club (as opposed to my Other Book Club), we were evenly split, with half of us absolutely loving the book (“poetic,” “elegiac,” “full of contrasts”) and the rest finding it mildly to exceedingly annoying.

Maybe one day I will try it again, and this time I will know what frame of mind I should be in to get the most out of it.

Burning fashion questions

harem_pants

I am subscribed to an email newsletter from the fashion-and-beauty magazine LouLou (no idea how I got signed up; perhaps a friend thought I needed some help).

I occasionally look at the newsletters, but usually find the fashion advice incomprehensible and the “looks” recommended mystifying, so I view them as more for amusement value than useful information.

Here is an example: the answer to the question I know you are asking yourselves: How do I wear harem pants to my holiday party without emphasizing my bust?

It’s fortunate that the answer (to this and other burning questions) is there, complete with shopping details.

The answer is basically “Wear a simple top [now why didn't I think of that?] and [of course] a pair of killer heels to elongate your silhouette.”

« Older entries