I'd listen to her if I were you.

-----------------------

Previously:

2010: Costume Design

2011: Special Effects

So last year I employed my City Mouse character in a new strip for The LAMB's Oscar preview series, and I thought it was fun enough to bring him back for a second go-round this year. A lot of things went wrong in putting this together - I won't bore you with details - but suffice it to say I managed to get it in before the big show this Sunday. This year, my category is Visual Effects, and I think you'll like seeing CM and Collie in a variety of guises from these movies. Have a look.

------------------

Previously:

LAMB Acting School 101 is a regular event in which LAMB bloggers discuss the work and career of a given actor. This month's subject is Meryl Streep. The complete list of posts for this month will go up July 31 at the LAMB site.

 It's become a running gag by now: every time Meryl Streep makes a movie, she gets nominated for an Oscar. She has two of them already, and critics and fans alike recognize her as the finest actress of the modern era and among the pantheon of all-time greats. But there's a slight problem: if she's so great that the Academy continues to shower her with Oscar nominations year after year, why hasn't she won in the past 28 years? It's generally agreed amongst Oscar pundits that she will, eventually, get that third Oscar... but they've been saying that for awhile now and it still hasn't happened. (Let's agree at the outset that the Oscars in general, while of tremendous cultural significance, are rarely a true indicator of quality, and that they get as many choices wrong as they do right, if not more.)

Let's take a look at the record: a staggering sixteen Oscar nominations for acting, more than anyone, over a 31-year (and counting) span; thirteen for lead, three for supporting. Two wins: Kramer vs. Kramer (supporting) and Sophie's Choice (lead). An almost-guaranteed seventeenth nomination would appear to be in the cards for her upcoming role as Margaret Thatcher in The Iron Lady. She's been nominated for dramas and comedies, period pieces and modern-day stories, in films by acclaimed directors (Eastwood, Redford, Nichols) and lesser-known ones (Carl Franklin, David Frankel, Hector Babenco - not exactly household names), and of course, in a wide variety of accents. (Another great stat: she's been in three Best Picture winners in only seven years: The Deer Hunter, Kramer vs. Kramer and Out of Africa.)


There's no easy explanation for Streep's Oscar drought, because there have been so many circumstances beyond her control that have kept her from that elusive third Oscar. She has lost to legendary actresses that had never been feted with an Oscar before (Shirley MacLaine, Geraldine Page), to actresses caught up in a Best Picture domination (Gwyneth Paltrow, Catherine Zeta-Jones), to actresses that gave overpowering performances that would not be denied (Susan Sarandon, Helen Mirren), and to actresses that were controversial choices at best (Kate Winslet, Sandra Bullock).

Is it possible for an actor to be too good - to be taken for granted after so many memorable performances? Many of today's most popular actors have yet to win one Oscar, much less two: Leonardo DiCaprio, Tom Cruise, Julianne Moore, Johnny Depp, Brad Pitt, Samuel L. Jackson, Annette Bening, to name a few. We're so used to seeing them at the top of their game time after time, making a great performance look effortless, that we draw the conclusion that if they don't have an Oscar now, they will one day.


But let's not forget that Streep does own two Oscars already. Some pundits make it seem as if she's unsuccessful in some manner because she hasn't won in so long. If anything, the fact that she gets nominated as often as she does by her peers is an indication of how highly regarded she has become through the years.

I, too, believe Streep will win a third Oscar at some point in the future. As remarkable a streak as hers is, it also defies probability. This year, she'll likely contend against another overdue actress: Glenn Close, in the gender-bending drama Albert Nobbs. For Streep, I think a great deal will depend on the success of The Iron Lady in general. Assuming a Lead Actress nomination for her, will the film receive multiple nominations - maybe even Best Picture - or will her nod be the film's only Oscar representation? Many Oscar experts believe The Blind Side's Best Picture nod made the difference for Bullock winning over Streep, whose film, Julie & Julia, did not make the Best Picture cut. Regarding a possible Streep-versus-Close contest, British dramas and biographies are considered "Oscar bait" for the Academy, but then, so are roles where women play men. Close is very well respected, but Streep is Hollywood royalty. To say this is the year the streak ends is far too premature at this stage.

Thoughts?

-------------------------
Previously in LAMB Acting School:
Natalie Portman
Gary Oldman
Willem Dafoe

last seen online via YouTube

6.7.11

LAMB Acting School 101 is a regular event in which LAMB bloggers discuss the work and career of a given actor. This month's subject is Willem Dafoe. The complete list of posts for this month will go up June 25 at the LAMB site.

I am profoundly old-fashioned when it comes to video games. I don't need much at all to entertain me: a simple shoot-em-up, a sports or word game, or a puzzle of some kind, has always been enough for me - not that I haven't experimented. I've played some 21st-century games in recent years: Guitar Hero, several other games with more complex controls than a joystick. I've even tried out the Wii. While I do find the new levels of game technology impressive, to say the least, I also have to admit to a certain level of trepidation as well.

I'm convinced that video games are an art form on the basis of the visuals alone. While it's not quite the same as looking at CGI spaceships on a movie screen, the look of current games combined with the remarkable array of interactivity approaches the level of art as far as I'm concerned. Like painting or sculpture, it's a learned trait combined with a certain amount of innate, intuitive skill. Human minds have to imagine the way Lara Croft moves, interacts with her environment, responds to input from the user. That takes imagination.

At the same time, though, the speed in which game technology is increasing is breathtaking. Can it be possible that games are now comparable with movies in their complexity? I find it impossible to believe - yet is that a result of games getting better or movies getting worse? The implications of that are a little disturbing, at least from the perspective of movies - especially when one considers that Hollywood seems disinclined to make more challenging movies these days.

David Cronenberg's eXistenZ is often compared to The Matrix, which came out the same year and has a few surface similarities, but I think it has more in common with something like David Fincher's The Game, particularly the shifting environments and the is-it-a-game-or-isn't-it head trip. (A number of YouTube commenters also drew comparisons to Inception, which, of course, came afterwards.) The plot suggests that games like eXistenZ - where you plug an organic-looking console into a hole at the base of your spine - are all the rage, but I can't imagine how. The eXistenZ world is not all that exciting, and it seems to substitute atmosphere for depth. Then again, from what I understand of current role-playing games, there are often long stretches of inactivity before something happens - not unlike reality, I suppose.

I can understand wanting to devote long hours at playing these new kinds of games in order to beat it if you're younger and presumably have more time to devote to that sort of thing. I spent many long hours in arcades as a kid, trying to beat my favorite games. Even if you're young, however, I feel like it's too much time to spend on something so frivolous as a game. Call me an old fuddy-duddy, but that's how I feel. I'd rather devote all that time to writing or drawing or biking. I guess that's why I prefer my games to be simpler. I no longer feel the need to spend so much time playing a game, no matter how complex.

Okay, so now I gotta say something about Willem Dafoe. Unfortunately, he isn't in eXistenZ much: he appears in one scene as a gas station attendant whom Jennifer Jason Leigh and Jude Law turn to for help, and he briefly appears again at the end. Dafoe is his usual creepy self. His character is not quite what he seems, but then, no one in this movie is. Something about his face - maybe it's his chin, his eyes, that grin of his - that is particularly unsettling, yet there's no doubt that he's a fine actor. Usually he's a supporting guy, but when he takes center stage, he can really shine.

Besides eXistenZ, I've seen Dafoe in Platoon, The Last Temptation of Christ, Mississippi Burning, Born on the Fourth of July, Cry-Baby, Wild at Heart, Clear and Present Danger, Basquiat, The English Patient, Affliction, American Psycho, Shadow of the Vampire, Spider-Man 1-3, The Aviator, Inside Man and Antichrist. I'd have to say Shadow of the Vampire is my favorite role of his.

-------------------------
Previously in LAMB Acting School:
Natalie Portman
Gary Oldman

last seen online via Youtube
4.26.11

LAMBs in the Director's Chair is an ongoing event in which LAMB bloggers discuss the work and career of a given director. The current subject is Frank Oz. The complete list of posts for this event will go up May 2-3 at the LAMB site.

I almost wish I hadn't re-watched The Dark Crystal. It had been years since I had seen this movie, and initially I was excited about seeing it again because I fondly remember how much I loved it as a kid. What kid wouldn't love it? A magical alien world, an epic quest, a wide variety of beings, both good and evil, and all created through the muppet magic of Jim Henson and Frank Oz? You can't ask for much more than that. I was already a huge muppet fan; every weeknight I'd faithfully watch The Muppet Show on television, and in my mind, they were (and still are) as real as my closest friends. So a movie like this was tailor-made for me.

Now that I'm grown-up, though, I can't look at Crystal the same way anymore. Watching it last night, I found I couldn't ignore the nagging, unanswered questions: what was the Crystal's original purpose? How did the shard get lost in the first place (and how did it end up in Aughra's possession)? Who wrote the prophecy of a gelfling being the one to restore the Crystal? And why a gelfling anyway? Why didn't the Mystics do anything to stop the Skeksis wiping out all the gelflings? And on and on.

I know, I know, I'm not supposed to wonder about stuff like that, but I can't help it. It's easy to think that anything is possible in a fantasy setting, and I suppose that's true, but in movies like this, sometimes it feels like the plot dictates what the characters can and can't do. The audience needs an exposition dump? Have Jen and Kira read each other's minds when they first touch! Jen and Kira are trapped on a ledge with nowhere to go? It's okay - Kira can grow wings! I don't wanna sound like I'm dumping on this movie, though. It's visually spectacular and genuinely fun to watch once you get caught up in it all.

When it comes to muppets, I've always been a little leery of wanting to know too much about their creation, because like I said, characters like Kermit and Fozzie and Miss Piggy are real to me and always have been. Still, I've always recognized the work Henson, Oz, and others have put into them. As I watched Crystal, I thought of Avatar for a moment and wondered whether a CGI fantasy land is that much superior to one created out of latex and plastic. It seems to me that the latter can compete very well with the former. Perhaps modern audiences have perhaps lost their taste for it? That would be unfortunate if it were true.

So I have to say something about Oz as a director, but I can't think of too much to say. Besides Crystal (which he co-directed with Henson), I've seen The Muppets Take Manhattan, Little Shop of Horrors (1986), What About Bob?, In and Out, and Bowfinger, and while he's obviously great at mixing real actors with muppetry, his non-muppet movies are kinda meh. They're okay (Bowfinger in particular was better than I expected), but none of them are the kind of movies I'd want to own so I could watch them again and again. Still, it's good that Oz was able to spin out a directing career of his own.

----------------------

Previously in LAMBS in the Director's Chair:

Francis Ford Coppola

Terry Gilliam

Spike Lee

from Jenny's video collection
circa 1997

LAMB Acting School 101 is a regular event in which LAMB bloggers discuss the work and career of a given actor. This month's subject is Gary Oldman. The complete list of posts for this month will go up March 24 at the LAMB site.

Punk rock! The first time I was exposed to punk was in high school. It was the Ramones. It took me a little longer to really appreciate punk though, since this was also the period where I discovered classic rock for the first time - although now I suppose the Ramones are considered classic rock by some.

Jenny has been a punk rock diva for as long as I've known her. She's been the lead singer and co-lyricist of at least two different punk bands that have played around the city (one of them an all-girl band), and I've seen both of them play live on multiple occasions. To be honest, Jenny will never be mistaken for Pat Benatar or Ann Wilson in terms of singing ability, but with her it's almost besides the point. She's all about putting on a stage performance. She's been known to wear a "devil" costume, complete with a plastic pitchfork, and prance around the stage, gyrating sexily while screaming her songs. Not exactly Lady Gaga, but for what it is, it's pretty funny and entertaining. And she loves it, she absolutely loves the thrill of making a spectacle of herself in the name of rock and roll.

So it was with more than a little measure of excitement that I first saw Sid and Nancy with her, at her old Alphabet City apartment. Jenny's lived all over the city; this was one of many apartments she lived in and perhaps the one I associate most with her. The Sex Pistols definitely embody the things she strives for as a rock star, at least on-stage. I've always been of two minds about them: I dig their music but Johnny Rotten's voice can grate after a certain point. There's a story about them that pretty much sums up not only themselves, but perhaps punk in general: the original bassist was a big Paul McCartney fan, but made the mistake of letting that fact slip in front of the others. When they found out, they kicked him out of the band! His replacement: Sid Vicious, who was no Paul McCartney, to put it mildly.

Gary Oldman plays Sid, and he captures the manic, frenzied energy of the man perfectly. Oldman has always been an outstanding actor, mostly playing either bad guys or crazy guys - or both. Sid and Nancy, though, is one of the few films where he's been center stage. He's an acting chameleon, disappearing within his roles completely, and maybe that's one reason why he's not a bigger name. Many superstar actors, it seems, develop an on-screen persona that shows through from one role to the next, and I think audiences find comfort in that. When you see, say, Adam Sandler in a movie, chances are you know more or less what to expect from him. That's not always true with someone like Oldman, but that's okay because he's so good.

Besides Sid and Nancy, I've seen him in the following: Rosencrantz & Guildenstern Are Dead, State of Grace, JFK, Bram Stoker's Dracula, True Romance, The Professional, Immortal Beloved, Murder in the First, Basquiat, The Fifth Element, Air Force One, Lost in Space '98, The Contender, Batman Begins and The Dark Knight. I think my favorite performance of his is Immortal Beloved, where he plays Beethoven.

-------------------------

first seen in Queens, NY
1981

LAMBs in the Director's Chair is an ongoing event in which LAMB bloggers discuss the work and career of a given director. The current subject is Terry Gilliam. The complete list of posts for this event will go up February 18-20 at the LAMB site.

Terry Gilliam is a good director who has run into more than his share of bad luck, it seems, over his career. His clash with Universal over Brazil is common knowledge; the studio wanted one ending, he wanted another, they fought. Gilliam's Don Quixote movie took so long and had so many problems that a documentary about the making of the film was released before the film itself, which may never see the light of day now. Before Zack Snyder, Gilliam tried to make Watchmen twice and failed. And of course, Heath Ledger died during the filming of The Imaginarium of Doctor Parnassus.

It's enough to make one believe in a curse of sorts, except that Gilliam has made some wonderfully imaginative and funny films. In addition to Time Bandits, I've seen Monty Python and the Holy Grail, Brazil, The Adventures of Baron Munchausen, The Fisher King, 12 Monkeys, Fear and Loathing in Las Vegas and The Brothers Grimm. No one does fantasy like him; from art direction and costuming to cinematography and editing, it's pretty easy to spot a Gilliam film.

My pals Bibi and Eric are huge Monty Python fans, and while I may not be as knowledgeable about the British comedy troupe as they are, I've seen enough Python sketches and movies to appreciate Gilliam's contributions, in particular those slightly-creepy-yet-amusing animated bits. (At least, I always thought there was something unsettling about them - but in a good way.) I have Holy Grail on DVD; one of these days I'll write about it so I can talk more about Bibi and Eric, because Python actually helped bring them together.

The first time I saw Time Bandits was when it initially came out, in 1981. It was at a neighborhood theater in Queens which, like many of my old neighborhood theaters, is no longer around. Unfortunately, I don't recall the name of it. It was on Northern Boulevard in Jackson Heights. When my father took me there, I happened to run into some school friends and we all watched the movie together.

On a whim, I went back to the site of the old theater yesterday for the first time in I don't know how long. It's now a restaurant. It's still recognizable as a former movie theater; the marquee is still there, covered up by signs for the restaurant. It's smaller than I remembered, but then I was a kid when I used to go there.

Jackson Heights is a mostly Latino neighborhood. Walking east down Northern Boulevard (this little section of it, anyway; Northern is huge), one can find a ton of Spanish restaurants and bodegas. One of my old grade schools, PS 148, is in the area. I only spent first and second grade there, so I don't have too many memories of it other than it was the only school I attended in a school bus. That, and this one girl who used to tease me all the time. (She may have liked me. I dunno.) Further east down Northern is my old junior high school, but I didn't walk that far yesterday.

I don't remember going to the Northern Boulevard theater often. I went to the Jackson and the Colony (I think that was the name) over on 82nd Street much more, even though they were a little further away by bus. Still, the memory of seeing Time Bandits there is vivid in my memory. Perhaps it was because I saw it with friends. I loved the movie, I know that. Still do.

---------------------

Previously in LAMBS in the Director's Chair:

Francis Ford Coppola