The Longwinded (Lincoln) Loser (Lawyer)

In under 30 words: An unintelligent, painfully long movie featuring nauseating camera movements and bad Ryan Phillippe acting (or as Adam Sass brilliantly put it, simply Ryan Phillippe acting).

Warning: I don't know how to successfully bash this movie, AND leave out key facts. There will be SPOILERS.

Denny uses Groupon and came across a deal! Only 6 dollars for tickets to Lincoln Lawyer? Boy Howdy! So we ante up our six bucks a pop and roll into an empty evening showing of the latest Matthew McConaughey legal thriller. While its an unusual departure from the smug romantic comedy he's used to, McConaughey is no stranger to the thriller. It would be nice, I assumed, to see him return.

After sitting through-what seemed like- hours of trailers and commercials (not ONE for something I'd see, I might add) the movie finally started. To it's credit, it had some of the coolest opening credits I'd seen in a while. Shots of LA, Matthew, and his Lincoln town car flew in and out in various squares and rectangles, rocking out to a killer soundtrack. If only I could have watched the credits on loop for two hours...

But no, unfortunately for Denny and I, the movie had to start eventually....

The Lincoln Lawyer tells the story of Mick, a criminal defendant who works from the back of his Lincoln town car. With his faithful driver, Earl, he takes to the streets. When a gang of bikers approaches her car, we get to see how bad ass McConaughey can be. Despite looking uncomfortable in a suit, Matthew is at his best when he is smarmy and confident. He gets plenty of opportunities to be charming, and those are his best. He's not terrible with the more emotional stuff, although he has trouble accessing the emotion. Thankfully, there are contacts to make him look like he's crying and a make-up artist to put bags under his eyes.

McConaughey has a new client. Someone that requested him specifically, Louis (Ryan Phillippe). He's a young playboy accused of beating and threatening to rape and kill a prostitute. He says he didn't do it and that she is setting him up. Mick and his investigator (William H. Macy, searching for another paycheck in "Shameless" downtime) set out to find the truth.

Ryan Phillippe, in addition to being a horrible, lip quivering actor, is not as innocent as he proclaims to be. There is a reason he picked Mick as his attorney, you see. Mick defended a client, for a very similar crime and lost. Lo and behold, its because Phillippe's Louis is the one that committed the crime! As Mick begins to put together the pieces, he realizes that due to attorney client privilege and all that, that there is nothing he can do. Louis torments Mick, in what could be the most interesting plot line of the movie. How can Mick defend this guilty man, AND get him convicted to save his previous client from jail time?

And this is the opportunity for the movie to be really intelligent. But it isn't. Lincoln Lawyer never reaches levels of intelligence that a legal thriller of this caliber should have. There are no a ha! moments, aside from Matthew FOLDING A PHOTOGRAPH IN HALF. Yes, ladies and gentleman, THAT is Matthew's shining moment of intelligence. I suppose, if the character was smart, no one would buy Matthew playing him. So they make other characters figure things out for Matthew. Despite the terrible acting, Phillippe was the smartest character. WHY AM I ROOTING FOR RYAN PHILLIPPE IN A MOVIE?!

To ensure Matthew plays to his game, Phillippe goes after the ones Matthew loves. William H. Macy, whose character is made sympathetic because his gay partner died of AIDS (thanks red ribbon glued to a photograph. Way to show-not-tell. Director Brad Furman went to film school [ but more on that later]), is the first to feel Phillippe's threat. And then Mick's ex-wife and mother of his child (an underused Marisa Tomei) who also happens to be a prosecutor. How convenient.

I'll save you how it ends, but thankfully, it does (about 30 minutes too late). It drags on and showcases a lot of Ryan Phillippe attempting to act, and lot of "fancy" camera work. The entire thing was shot like a student film with quick cuts and exaggerated camera movements. If you need to raise tensions by spinning a camera in a circle in the middle of the courtroom, there is something wrong with your courtroom scene. Same applies for the entire movie.

About halfway through the movie, when I started zoning off in anger, I imagined some potential sequels: The Prius Preacher, The Toyota Teacher, The Jaguar Janitor, and so on and so forth. All wildly more entertaining in my head than what was playing out on the screen in front of me...

Do yourself a favor, even if Groupon offers you $1 tickets to this, save your two hours. Rarely do I see a movie that makes me feel like I wasted my money. This was one of those times. And it wasn't even MY money. It was Denny's. And it wasn't even full price. It was $6. It was, however, 2 hours of my life that I will never have back.

Trailer Analysis: Beastly vs. Red Riding Hood

This March we get not one, but TWO classic fairy tale reboots. CBS Films' Beastly and Warner Brothers' Red Riding Hood open a week apart and will do their best to tap into the Twilight fangirl base. I'll tell you this much now, one of them I'm stoked on and the other... well the other you'd have to tie me to a chair and duct tape my eyes open to watch (and I guarantee you the entire time I was sitting there I'd be gnawing away at my arms in an attempt to free myself. The pain of my teeth grinding through my skin would be less than that of watching this attempt at romance). I think you know where this is going...

vs.

Beastly is a modern take on the Beauty and the Beast tale. A pretty, popular, and terribly vain young man is made to look ghastly by a sorceress and only true love (by a brunette) can break the spell.

This is what love looks like, right guys?

The trailer opens with the words "Beautiful people get it better." Then why are you playing this part Alex Pettyfer? If someone loves this movie does that break your spell of only doing shitty movies (I Am Number 4, anyone?)?

Look! It's Will Ferrell in Zoolander!

Beautiful, blond Pettyfer is made to look like an awesome punk rocker by one of the Olsen sisters (I still can't tell them apart, although I always suspected they dabbled in witchcraft [How else did New York Minute get made?].) and so he becomes a recluse to be tutored by a blind Neil Patrick Harris.

But how the fuck can he play darts??!

Don't get me wrong, I love NPH, but apparently blind to him also means deaf given the slow cadence of his dialogue. But it's okay, because NPH can see how awesome Pettyfer is (funny, I didn't get that out of the trailer. Since his personality sucked, too). I contemplated awarding NPH the "What-The-Fuck-Is-He-Doing-In-This-Movie" award, but then I remembered that twin babies are expensive. He's not the only one who can see Pettyfer's inner beauty... It's that bitch from High School Musical! With nothing better to do and the desire for ANOTHER green room, Hudgens is here...trying to be a star... again. Move the bangs aside, sweetie, and embrace your lack of star quality. Just. Stop. You can see how beautiful Pettyfer is, but you can't see how dismal your career is?

It's supposed to be a sweeping Twilight romance, but really its a jumbled modernistic montage of "ugly" Alex Pettyfer looking past Vanessa Hudgen's bangs into her big, vacant eyes. I get no sense of her character what-so-ever. And as I Am Number Four and Twilight taught us, the movie needs to be from the normal girl's point of view, not the supernatural freak. If you haven't guessed it, this is the movie I'm looking forward to THE LEAST. I frankly can't even believe I sat through the trailer three times to write this.

Stay home and watch the good version

My what an exciting trailer you have.... Red Riding Hood.

And my what big eyes you have... OMG guys, she's the wolf.

Less that 15 seconds in and I'm already way more excited about this movie. The vacant glances of Beastly are replaced with a, quite literal, carnivorous love affair. Seyfried's Little Red is big eyed and all grown up. She's fooling around with the woodsman, when her hand in marriage is promised to another. Love triangles did director Catherine Hardwicke well before, (cough, Twilight, cough) and if you're going to try and tap into that fan base, you might as well go back to the source.

They've got more chemistry in this photograph than

Hudgens and Pettyfer have in their entire movie.

While Seyfried is running around with good old fashioned lust (which I know she can play given her stellar performance as the over-sexualized title character in Chloe.) there is another in the village with blood lust! A werewolf, it turns out. And now we're officially in a whole different world than the original little red riding hood. I imagine Grandma will play into this somehow, but the real mystery is not how little red escapes the wolf, but rather- who the wolf is.

Gary Oldman in a dapper purple outfit is hell bent on finding out, and he knows Seyfried knows. It's probably someone she's fucking... but which one?

Red Riding Hood does several things right, where Beastly goes wrong. First, they cast talented actors. Its amazing what Gary Oldman can do for a movie, and I've never seen Amanda Seyfried in something where she was bad. Second, it's got a style. It's beautiful and bright and they stick to that bright but Gothic style through and through. Seyfried is sure to be the only one with red, but the purple, the blue, the yellow all pop just as much. I've always said that Amanda Seyfried has a face for a Tim Burton movie, and this looks like its about as close as she'll get for now. Third, its from HER point of view. This is where Twilight succeeded and I Am Number 4 failed. If you're going to cater to the teen girl, by all means, make your character a teen girl.

A great soundtrack, fast cuts, and a story that I am familiar with (but did not grow up on in a superior animated form) all help to make Red Riding Hood my choice for fangirl storybook romance.

Marcus Picks the Oscars - Part II

Part two is underway of my Oscar picks and predix. Full disclosure: I only watched 25 minutes of the The Fighter. I honestly have no desire to ever see the rest/end of that movie. But regardless, here we go:

BEST SUPPORTING ACTOR

Who Will Win: Christian Bale. Well Bale has done it again. He's completely altered his physical appearance for a role as a washed up boxer, turned druggie training his brother who happens to be Mark Wahlberg. He apparently isn't even himself anymore, but frankly I thought he was borderline caricature in the beginning of the film. Oh yeah- and there's this: CLICK ME. Forgot about that, didn't you Hollywood? Call me old fashioned but part of being a great actor is not treating your crew like shit....

vs.

Who Should Win: Geoffrey Rush. Because he's never gone into a fit of rage that wasn't scripted AND because after The King's Speech all I wanted was for him to be my best friend. I'm fairly certain I brought up faking a speech impediment to Denny after we saw this, simply to go visit Rush. In all seriousness though, he was the perfect foil to Firth and I found myself rooting for Firth not simply because he was great, but also because a success for Firth's Bertie was a success for Rush's Lionel.

BEST SUPPORTING ACTRESS

Who Will Win: Hailee Steinfeld. Don't ask me why. I hated the film, but the Academy didn't. There is going to be an upset in one of the major acting categories (as Leo is the front runner) and this will be the category it happens in. What is usually my favorite category is so blah this year. True Grit was a box office success and they'll want to find a place to reward it. This is it. Plus Steinfeld is gaining a ton of momentum and has more screen time than any of the other actresses. The Academy is about to turn its precedent of "reward the child actor with the nomination itself" on its side and give Steinfeld the trophy- but that doesn't mean they'll put her in the lead category.

vs.

Who Should Win: Helena Bonham Carter. She completely transformed herself out of the eccentric, mismatched-shoe-wearing, neo-witch she has become. On top of that, she gave a subtly moving performance that was the epitome of a great supporting actress. Her turn, however, is being overshadowed by phenomenal performances by Firth and Rush, and a slew of mediocre performances crowding the supporting actress race. I am also still pissed that my Black Swan supporting ladies didn't work their way in here.

BEST ORIGINAL SCREENPLAY

What Will Win: Inception. The Academy owes Nolan big time. They screwed him over with The Dark Knight and completely blanked on even nominating him for director for the visually explosive mind fuck that was Inception. The best director nods are the scene of the crime... They'll make it up to him here.

vs.

What Should Win: The Kids Are All Right. I laughed. I cried. And I was just reading the script. The script has so much heart, that it's no wonder the movie felt love. The characters are just as defined on the page as they are on the screen and this is the type of genre that the original screenplay usually loves. It's right up there with Little Miss Sunshine in the "quirky family dramedy" genre.

BEST ADAPTED SCREENPLAY

What Will and Should Win: The Social Network. Do I even need to go further on this one? If they could have nominated Sorkin five times they would have. His dialogue is brilliant. It's the perfect combination of material and writer and will undoubtedly be recognized.

BEST ANIMATED FEATURE

What Will Win: Toy Story 3. Pixar is incredible, I will not deny that. This movie did everything that was promised to me. The characters were just as lovable and the story line just as heart wrenching and loving. But the fact that I am using the phrase "just as" should clue you in to something - it is simply a play into a fan base that is already there. Yes, its great. But is it original?

vs.

What Should Win: How To Train Your Dragon. This movie utilized animation in a way that animation was intended to be used. The flying sequences were so much fun, and save for Wall-E, I have never associated so strongly with an animated character. Hiccup was the perfect everyman. His connection with Toothless and his desire to please his father were amazing emotional through-lines to a thoroughly entertaining and beautiful movie.

Marcus Picks the Oscars - Part I

That time is rapidly approaching once again- The Academy Awards. I, like all of you, have thoughts on what will and what should go down. I (also like most of you) also happen to blog which subjects you to my thoughts on the matter. It isn't going to be pretty-

BEST PICTURE

What Will Win: The Social Network. Don't give in to the hype about The King Speech's resurgence. The Academy is shying away from the traditional in an effort to prove they're as hip as you. It will go to The Social Network, especially since nothing negative has come out of the Social Network's reign.

vs.

What Should Win: Black Swan. What other movie made you feel the things that movie made you feel? It was entertaining AND it was an emotional experience. Which is exactly what a movie should be. It was cathartic. It was chaotic. It was beautiful. It has incredible performances, supporting actresses (yes, that's a dig at the Social Network), an amazing score and cinematography, and costumes to die for (Halloween is already being planned). Above all, it captivated me. It moved me and I am dying to watch it again- unlike any of the other Best Picture Nominees (Kids Are All Right excluded- more on that later). The Best Picture award is collected by the producer, making it the "Best Produced Movie" award. The pieces all came together on this movie like on no other.

BEST DIRECTOR

Who Will Win: David Fincher. Riding the success of his movie, Fincher will walk away with the gold. He delivered a tense, captivating movie about computers. He did not, however, deliver any performances that will walk away with a prize. I think the Academy also feels like they owe him (for Benjamin Button, although god knows why. I feel like Fincher owes ME for that movie).

vs.

Who Should Win: Darren Aronofsky. Black Swan was his vision executed to perfection. I will be the first to admit that the script to Black Swan is not very good. (But what? Didn't I just say it should win Best Picture? Yes. Yes I did. It's my blog. Let me be.) Aronofsky mines gold out of it. Without him, this movie would be nothing. His directorial efforts stretched beyond camera angle and performance. He put faith in his actors, which helped pull out the performances he got. From the visuals to the score, everything was so fittingly "Aronofsky"that this movie couldn't be anything other than a directorial masterpiece. I mean shit... look at how he made you FEEL.

BEST ACTOR

Who Will and Should Win: Colin Firth. Way to go Firth. You made me feel for someone who sounds like a bumbling idiot. The frustration was all too real (and this was that you controlled the stutter!) To have such a mastery over your own voice to do that is enough to take the prize, but why would Firth stop there? His relationships with Rush and Carter are passionate and understandable. He stepped into Bertie and never looked back. Plus he's "owed" for A Single Man.

BEST ACTRESS

Who Will Win: Natalie Portman. Before I go on- this is THE best category this year. Now back to Portman- she did an amazing job and I will be completely happy when she takes the stage of the Kodak. She became a ballerina and her control of her emotions (both while dancing and while speaking) is incredible. She may never top this performance. It wasn't until she took on the black swan that I realize dhow phenomenally she acted the white swan. Amazing.

vs.

Who Should Win: Michelle Williams. What? You expected me to say Annette Bening? Hell, I expected me to say Bening - but at the end of the day we need to be honest and she was not the best actress this year. She was good, but not great. And as much as I love her and that movie, she's going to have to wait because Michelle Williams in Blue Valentine DESTROYED me. Two words for you - SPOILER: Abortion (1). Scene (2). She was hardly acting; she was being.

Willy Wonka and the Hollywood Forever Cemetery

"It's the most fun I've had in L.A."

That's what I'd heard. Of course I'm going to go in slightly skeptical and full of the highest hopes. I'd been pumped up to believe that evening movie screenings in the Hollywood Forever Cemetery were not only great, but a quintessential part of the Los Angeles experience.

I can now stand behind everything I'd heard and assure you that it is absolutely, 100%, positively true. If you get one Saturday in LA during the summer, and only one, this better be what's on your list to do.

Screenings in the cemetery are a fantastic way to spend a summer evening. Sure it sounds creepy (and it a little bit is) but as Megan put it as we were gallivanting through the gravestones - "It's kind of cool to be here and be really a live. You know? We're living in the moment with friends. we're not here for death. We're here for life." I might have paraphrased a bit - but that's the gist of what she was drunkenly rambling on about after the movie.

Yes, I said drunkenly. You see, it's not "public" in there so drinking.... TOTALLY ALLOWED.

Several bottle of wine, a shit-ton of snack, two bags of candy and a sushi platter later - we have a successful, drunk picnic in the cemetery for last night's movie: Willy Wonka and the Chocolate Factory. (No not the shitty one - the good one.)

Gates open at 7, so Nora, Kate, Mikey, Megan and I got there at about 5:30 to get in line. Kevin and Alex and Ashley soon joined us. Followed by Janove and Julie and Jordan. What a crowd! Apples to Apples passed the time (Kate and I are kindred Apples to Apples spirits)...and so did the wine. I was hammered before I even got through the gates into the cemetery.

500+ people crowded onto the lawn for one of the greatest cult movies ever. There was yelling. There was singing. There were snarky remarks. There was quotes. There was so much candy.

It was a ton of fun- but admittedly would have been less so had it not been for the amazing weather, great friends, and campy, fun movie.

Goodbye Century City, Hello Santa Monica

The company move is finally upon us - after a good (ish) year in Century City the company is off the a more creative space in Santa Monica. Reasons for the move include, but are not limited to: bad ghosts in the office, the awful corporate atmosphere, new executives and lack of funds. Thats right, Santa Monica will be cheaper than Century City. Naturally, there are pros and cons to both locations. I for one will be glad to get out of this office though - hopefully some big changes will happen in the new building.... However, there are-

Things I'll miss about Century City:

-The proximity to my house. Don't get me wrong, it still takes me 30 minutes to get there during morning rush hour - but hell, it's closer than Santa Monica.

-The Starbucks in the ground level of my building. I don't even need to go anywhere to get my morning coffee! Amazing. They know my order. More amazing (or embarrassing)!

-The way the elevator says "going down" when I return to the lobby. I can't help but laugh... EVERY time.

-The awful fashion sense of people who work in a corporate setting. I'm especially fond of the ones that dress nice, but where tennis shoes.

-The view. I'm on the 21st story and can see out to the ocean. Even in Santa Monica, I'll rarely see the ocean.

-The Century City mall. It's so close! It has awesome food! It's an escape during lunch time, and it has a movie theatre we sometimes go to instead of doing work.

Things I'm looking forward to in Santa Monica:

-Being ocean side. I won't be able to see it, but it'll be there. Maybe somedays, I'll even go down there, just because I'm so close.

- The new building. It's an old abandoned warehouse that we're converting. It's going to be cool (and hopefully) creative. And hopefully I'll finally have a new assistant to help me out!

-The Daily Grill. I've missed it and there is one around the corner from my office. This will end poorly for my wallet, but so well for my stomach.

-TruYogaLA. I'm going to start doing yoga. Mark my words. There is a studio around the corner from the office, and while they don't have early morning classes as I'd hoped- they do have one I can do after work, or at lunch. We'll see how that goes!

-The bus. I'm going to take it. So long to my driving commute, and hello to the bus. Sure it might be sketch (because come on, who rides the bus in LA?) but its going to be an hour where I'm not wanting to kill myself in my car. Its an hour where I can do something else. Its an hour that my car isn't polluting the planet. I'll take the risk.

There is some bad too though, like how I have to contact every single person in contacts to tell them that we've moved. Or have to pack the entire office in boxes. Or how I need to order new stationary, business cards, letterheads, etc. because no one in the office had the foresight to plan ahead. How about how I still don't know the new phone number so I CAN'T do any of those things? Augh! The first few weeks in Santa Monica will be a mess, but then it will hopefully calm down. I'm going to really need that yoga.

Trailer Analysis: The Social Network

If there is one thing I know about, it is social networking. I love my blog, my facebook, my twitter. Hell, I still I love my myspace (in a nostalgic type of way). I've been social networking since xanga (but you don't get the link to that, nice try). But enough about me-

David Fincher's trailer (the real one, not the teaser) for The Social Network has hit the Internet today. Let's take a look shall we?

Find the trailer here: The Social Network.

The trailer is presented as a series of status updates accompanied by the voices of actors reading them. Not very cinematic, but the movie can hardly be expected to be visually stunning. Its the type of story that might make for a better play.

This clearly means theres nothing interesting to show in the movie.

There is a definite feeling of drama amidst the founders (or those who can be presumed to be founders based on the trailer) of facebook. Who said what, who stole what from whom. It's the story of invention and court. A relationship drama. Sounds a lot like Flash of Genius. Look at how that did (you don't have to, I'll tell you: TERRIBLY).

Film is a visual medium and while it might have story, The Social Network, does not have visuals. Maybe stunt casting people like Justin Timberlake will put young people in seats, you see- aside from it's lack of visual appeal (that isn't the actors, I'll admit they're er... visually pretty. No, not you Jesse Eisenberg) there is another fundamental problem with a drama about facebook-

People my own age (aka The Facebook Generation) do not care about dramas. Very few people, in fact, care about dramas. So why would a movie, whose primary audience should be facebook users, gear itself for those looking for more distinguished dramatic fare (often, but not limited too, older people who know nothing about facebook). Maybe I'm being harsh on the elderly, maybe I'm being harsh on people my own age- but look at the movies in the marketplace- how many are dramas skewed for younger crowds?

Interestingly, the movie is placed in the "history" genre on IMDB. While facebook will be history, this movie will hardly make a historical dent.

Trailer Analysis: Tangled

I make no attempt to hide my love of animated films. The first movie I remember seeing in theaters is Disney's Beauty and the Beast. They've always held a spot in my favorite movies. And with the likes of Wall-E, Up (okay...Pixar movies), The Princess and the Frog and How to Train Your Dragon - I thought we were bouncing around in a golden age of animation. So how fitting that the tale of the girl with the long golden hair should work it's way into my golden age.

I always thought the story of Rapunzel was pretty simple, so naturally, I was interested in seeing how they'd do it. Then they released these stills and I was through the moon excited.



The first tip off should have been that Mandy Moore was cast as the voice of Rapunzel. But, I kept my chin up....



And then they released the trailer. Never in the history of movies has my expectations of a film shattered so quickly. Catch the trailer here, and find my commentary after the last beautiful still.



What you just watched was indeed for a Disney movie, as a follow up to the Oscar nominated Princess and the Frog. No, that wasn't a Shrek movie, although had they titled it Shrek and Rapunzel down a 5th of Vodka (see what I did there? Cleverly incorporating the sequel number into the title) I wouldn't have batted an eye. I'll need a fifth to get through this.

Here's what went wrong:

The princess: Let me break this down for you: Rapunzel is a damsel in distress. She is locked in a tower, and thus has not gotten a haircut, resulting in some long ass hair. This is not that Rapunzel. This is the female empowerment Rapunzel. A slightly superhero-esque version of the princess. Her hair has fucking powers! With powers like that, why does she need some strapping prince to rescue her? And without that need, pray tell, what is the point of the movie?

The prince: Who is this guy? Cocky, self-centered, seems to me like he's the perfect foil for our heroine. But Disney has forgotten, in their desire to make the female strong-willed, that boys watch Disney movies too. This is not the type of guy they should grow to be. I know they've got other movies too, but come on. This guy is a joke. And the main character (as is appears in the trailer). Give me someone real.

The style: After all the hubbub about returning to their roots with hand drawn animation they give us this? You're joking me. This is a classic story and deserves to be presented as such.

The music: Reminiscent of the Smash Mouth cover of I'm a Believer in Shrek, the use of a pop rock soundtrack is wildly out of place in the medieval setting. Stick with catering the soundtrack to the era, Disney, a la the Jazzy New Orleans sound of The Princess and the Frog.

The title: Why not just call it Rapunzel? There is no brand recognition with Tangled. If it's an attempt to make the story relevant and hip, it's painfully amiss.

Mind you I had to watch this trailer several times to dissect it. Punishment I wouldn't even put my worst of enemies through.

Sometimes...

Sometimes I have to sit back and remind myself that I'm getting paid to make movies. How cool is that?

Please Give this movie a chance

Summer thus far has been less than exciting for movies. Maybe it's changing tastes, but there is something wrong when I'm more excited for the Joan Rivers documentary, A PIECE OF WORK, than I am for TOY STORY 3, or any of the other "summer blockbusters." That being said, when staring at the movie marquee today I opted out of PRINCE OF PERSIA or SEX AND THE CITY 2 and voted to see the Manhattan based dramedy, PLEASE GIVE - starring Catherine Keener, Oliver Platt, Rebecca Hall and Amanda Peet.

Nicole Holofcener, channeling her best Woody Allen delivers a compelling character study of a woman grappling with guilt. Catherine Keener plays Kate, a wealthy New York furniture dealer and mother. She, along with her husband Alex (Oliver Platt) buy the furniture from the children of their deceased neighbors and resell it in an upscale 5th Avenue furniture store. As their business expands, they make plans to expand their apartment: by buying the apartment of their elderly neighbor, Andra (Ann Morgan Guilbert) and waiting for her to die.

Guilbert is old, senile and cranky, and doesn't look like she's going anywhere anytime soon. She is cared for by her grand-daughter Rebecca (Rebecca Hall, donning a frumpy wardrobe, bad teeth and greasy hair). Amanda Peet plays her other grand-daughter, Mary, who could care less about her ailing grandmother.

Peet's relationship with Guilbert is the most authentic in the piece, and struck close to home, as all I could see in their correspondence was my relationship with my great-grandmother. Both speak their mind, no matter how rude, causing a huge clash and strain on Hall who attempts to make peace. I was Peet (which makes it even more awkward when Peet and Platt find themselves in some sexually uncomfortable positions).

Catherine Keener, fabulous as always, feels tremendous guilt for her success and doesn't seem to understand why her husband doesn't feel it as well. She carries her guilt on her sleeve and makes up for it by volunteering and handing out money to homeless on the street (much to the chagrin of her daughter, played by Sarah Steele). She can't handle it though, and while she feels like she should give back, she has a hard time actually doing so. Holofcener has written a beautiful disaster for Keener and it's entertaining to watch her unravel from the safety of the audience.

The characters have little to no arcs, but this film isn't about change. It is instead about being a fly on the wall and watching the intersecting lives of a handful in New York. The characters are compelling, and while of course we want them to change, it is not so unsatisfying to see them end precisely where they started.

Overall, I recommend seeing it if you're feeling something a bit off beat that will make you think. The performances and production value are strong and at 95 minutes, it's a quick glimpse into a life that isn't your own.

Please give this movie a chance, it might be a better option than the traditional summer fare.

Playing Dress Up: A Blog About Costumes

My current Hollywood excursion has involved a lot less alcohol and a lot more money. What could I possibly be spending money on that isn't booze and rent? Costumes.

Have no fear, it's not MY money, but rather that of the production JEB & JEREMIAH: ALIVE IN 2010.

I wouldn't exactly call myself new to the costume scene, but this is only my second costuming excursion in LA (the others, all being for short films in Orange County). Don't get me wrong, there was certainly a high frequency of trips to LA when we needed things we couldn't find in the thrift stores/costume stores/fabric stores in Orange County - but now... now it's all LA, baby.

Costumes are important to any production because they do a fascinating trick. Acting aside, they take a person you could see on the street and make them someone else. It does this not only for the audience, but also for the actor. Costumes are important to actors to find the character inside themselves. Inside the clothes.

Prepare yourself, this is going to be a long one (you wish that what she said. or he. I don't judge). Items of discussion in the most important costuming blog: Design, Film, Theater, Colors, Stores & Jeb and Jeremiah

Lets get into this then, shall we?

DESIGN

I'll admit to you now, I don't sew. It makes being a costume designer difficult. It's on my list of things to learn. So for now, I design and then find the pieces to match my vision. It's difficult, but it works for now. If I had an arsenal of seamstresses my life would be much easier. Design is important though. You've got to know what you want. Walking into the stores I shop at can be an overwhelming experience and if you don't know what you're looking for- you'll quickly get lost in blazers and trench coats and sweaters. that being said, sometimes you stumble upon a piece that throws your design out the window. Be prepared to let it go. The piece you find is better than the one in your head.

FILM

You can get away with a lot less in film, because sometimes the camera is closer to the outfit than you'd ever want. It's for THIS reason that I find pre-made pieces, as opposed to try and make them myself. For S.S. HUMANITY we needed white jumpsuits that we then ended dying light blue for camera. How I wish we could have simply found light blue tops to begin with. The end result was fine, but I was terrified that my uneven bucket dye job would show on camera.

THEATER

Much more freedom, and much more room for fun. It might just be a misguided notion in my head, but I feel like you can get away with so much more on stage because it doesn't need to look as real. You can be extravagant. You can play with color. You can be surreal. I know you can do this in film, but in my opinion you can get away with stylization so much more in theater. Unless you work for Tim Burton. The thing about theater costumes, more than film, is that they need to look like they belong together. Lots of characters on stage need to look like they're from the same world. That's why, when it came to costuming DOG SEES GOD, Anna and I used American Apparel for all our base colors.

Well that... and the fact that we fucking love American Apparel.

COLORS

I love playing with color more than anything else. Sure, you can learn things from fabric and cut, but COLOR, my goodness. I really love colors. All of them. It's my high school background in art, I think, that makes color so important to me. Never just put someone in a color. Every color means something. Every color means multiple things. And what about color combinations? And what about when there's a change in color for an actress? What internal change does it represent? There is a simpler character in JEB AND JEREMIAH who I am costuming in primary colors to illustrate her simple nature. Things like that... things that NO ONE will EVER notice- those are the types of things I love in costuming. In THE SPRINKLER we transitioned the old man from Velcro shoes to lace up to illustrate his gained mobility. Do I think anyone caught it? No. But they registered it subconsciously. (That last bit.... not about color. Sorry!)

Jumping back to the primary colors real quick - if you ever work with me you will quickly learn that primary colors are my signature. It's how I leave my mark on things. I try and incorporate them somewhere in everything artistic I do.

STORES

Squaresville- I first came across Squaresville when costuming A VISIT OF CHARITY. It's a vintage store tucked away on Vermont Avenue. It's phenomenal and I make trips out there often (especially since Ozzie Dots it right over there). Most of the stores I hit up are vintage stores, since most of the things I end up costuming are vintagey feeling, if not set in the past completely.

Ozzie Dots- Part costume store, part vintage store. What more could you ask for? Props? Okay, it's got them too. It's amazing and I could spend HOURS in there. Lesley and I have. Mikey and I have. Alison and I have. It's terrific.

American Vintage- It's on Melrose. It's great and the cheapest of all the vintage stores mentioned here.

Jet Rag- It's huge. The biggest of all of these by far. Two stories of excellence. Sundays they have a 1$ sidewalk sale. Check it out. Also vintage.

American Apparel- I swear I'm not endorsed by them. The plain colors and standard pieces are great building blocks to costumes.

JEB AND JEREMIAH

One of my most daunting challenges yet. A play that starts in the 1920's and then time travels to the present. I needed to be able to create not just one world with costumes - but two.

Here's a look at the two most opposite costumes in the show: Jeb and Jeremiah's and the sexy dancers. If that doesn't make you want to see the show, I don't know what will. Check it out. I had a lot of fun with this one. Hitting all the aforementioned stores. It's gonna be a good one.

The reason I end on Jeb and Jeremiah is so that I can urge you all to see it, as its coming soon. There will be more on Jeb and Jeremiah in the weeks to come. Stay tuned.