Somewhere in Time

Year 2, Day 58 - 2/27/10 - Movie #423

BEFORE: Continuing the theme of romance across the ages...

THE PLOT: A Chicago playwright uses self-hypnosis to find the actress whose vintage portrait hangs in a grand hotel.

AFTER: Hypnosis? Really? No machine, no portal, no time-traveling ring?

Chicago Playwright Richard Collier (Christopher Reeve) receives a vintage watch from an old lady after one of his plays is performed - and she cryptically says "Come back to me..." Eight years later, he finds himself drawn to a hotel, and a portrait of Elise Mackenna (Jane Seymour) a striking actress who performed in a play at the hotel in 1910. When he finds his name in an old hotel register, he's convinced that he can travel back in time to meet her. Because there's just no way that someone with the same name could have ever visited that hotel...

Collier then gets some really bad advice from his old physics professor, who suggests that he dress in period costume, surround himself with artifacts from the hotel's attic, and hypnotize himself to believing that he IS in 1910. So although it seems like he travels back in time to romance Elise, we're never really sure whether this journey is real or imagined.

You'd think, however, that the appearance of the elderly lady, who of course is an older Elise who waited 70 years in solitude to find the young Richard as a college student, would confirm his ability to time travel, right? However, one key element is missing - he never told her that he was visiting from the future. So how would she know to wait for him, and how would she know what year he would be born, and when and where he would be attending college?

Which suggests the alternate theory, that Richard's journey to 1910 was only imagined, and that his self-hypnosis was too successful, causing him to get lost within his own fantasy. His body would be comatose or unconscious while he imagined the fantasy world wherein he could romance a young, innocent actress.

Anyway, what message did she hope to deliver with the watch? Telling Richard to "come back" to her, at a time 8 years before he even left, only confused him. And if she did manage to get him to "come back", then she'd be with him and not alone, which would mean that she wouldn't have to deliver the watch, and just like that, we're in a time paradox.

Nope, it's much more reasonable to assume that the old lady delivering the watch was a random occurrence, which caused a man to descend into obsessive madness...

Also starring Christopher Plummer, with brief appearances by a young William H. Macy (his first movie!) as a theater critic, and Tim Kazurinsky as a photgrapher in 1910.

RATING: 5 out of 10 room keys

Kate & Leopold

Year 2, Day 57 - 2/26/10 - Movie #422

BEFORE: Last year, I transitioned from romance films to time-travel movies, and I think I'll do the same thing again this time around. After all, I just watched lovers from different races (Jungle Fever) and lovers from rival families (Romeo & Juliet), so now how about lovers from different eras?

THE PLOT: Leopold is an English baron living in New York in the end of the Nineteenth Century. Kate is a successful businesswoman also living in New York, but in 2001. Due to a time incident, they meet each other in the present days and they fall in love.

AFTER: Remember those old Reese's Peanut Butter Cup ads - "You got your romantic comedy in my time-travel movie!" "You got your time-conundrum in my chick flick!" But are these two great tastes that taste great together?

Apparently time is like a "pretzel", and a naturally occuring time portal is floating over the East River - it's conveniently invisible so it doesn't freak out New Yorkers...

Essentially, this is a form of chick-flick porn - a man from the 1890's (Hugh Jackman) gets transported to modern times, but he has manners, and poise, and charm and hunkiness, like a walking Harlequin romance character. Kate (Meg Ryan) isn't charmed by him at first, because she's a modern woman with a career and a bad track record, and not used to men who write letters and stand up when a woman leaves the table.

I admit I've often wondered what a person from the 1700's or 1800's would think of our modern conveniences, and they sort of touch upon that here, as Leopold tries to figure out how to work a toaster or a dishwasher. But there's an implication that he invented some sort of counterweight system, so pulling him out of time somehow made all the elevators in New York stop working right. Even if time travel were possible, this would only have happened if he never returned to the 1800's to finish his work, but he does, so it wouldn't. Plus, after seeing modern-day New York, and then returning to his time, why didn't this guy become a bigger inventor than Edison?

Then the movie really blows the time-travel mechanics at the end - the time portal returns him to the same day he left, but at an earlier time in the day. This is a cheat for storytelling purposes - and causes temporal problems. There should be two of him walking around after he goes back, and he'd have to avoid bumping into the earlier version of himself, then wait for him to travel forward, and take his place... He wouldn't just "replace" the other version of him, and relive part of that day, with the full knowledge of his trip to the future. Fail. Points off for bending the rules of quantum mechanics to make your screenplay easier.

Also starring Liev Schreiber, Bradley Whitford and Breckin Meyer, with cameos from Spalding Gray, Kristen Schaal and Natasha Lyonne.

RATING: 6 out of 10 tubs of margarine

William Shakespeare's Romeo & Juliet (1996)

Year 2, Day 56 - 2/25/10 - Movie #421

BEFORE: Continuing with the "star-crossed" lovers portion of the countdown - a total classic, as updated by Baz Luhrmann. Spoiler alert - it doesn't end well... But I can't really finish off the romance category without a nod to old Billy Shakes...

THE PLOT: Classic story of Romeo and Juliet, set in a modern-day city of Verona Beach. The Montagues and Capulets are two feuding families, whose children meet and fall in love.

AFTER: This plays like a mix between classic Shakespeare, and "Grand Theft Auto: San Andreas"...the setting is moved from Verona, Italy to Verona Beach, CA, swords become guns, and (presumably) horses become muscle cars...

But the dialogue stays more or less intact, which is disconcerting at first, hearing Olde English phrases coming from modern actors. But I did get used to it, even if I sometimes only understood the gist of a line rather than the exact meaning. And in some cases I think the modern elements put new twists on the old dialogue, since I'm pretty sure Shakespeare didn't know about Ecstasy pills, shooting pool and trailer parks. But he did know about cross-dressing, and Romeo's pal Mercutio seems really into it as they attend a costume party at the Capulet mansion...

I kind of wish Baz Lurhmann had stuck with this idea and updated some more Shakespeare classics - but I guess he just had to do "Moulin Rouge", and leave it for others to make "O" and "10 Things I Hate About You".

And you can't find any problems with the script, since it's only been workshopped for the last 500 years or so - this is one of the few times I can talk about the ending without giving anything away. If you haven't encountered this plot before, then where have you been?

The last act plays like a commercial for FedEx - if only the priest had used a reliable delivery service, instead of "Post Haste Dispatch" - Romeo would have received the news about Juliet's fake death, and tragedy would have been averted.

And I liked when Romeo snuck back into Verona Beach after he heard about Juliet's funeral - there were police cars and helicopters after him, so he must have had at least a 3-star wanted level...

No way am I ending Romance Month on such a depressing note...

Starring Leonardo DiCaprio, Claire Danes, John Leguizamo, Paul Sorvino, Brian Dennehy, Pete Postlethwaite, Harold Perrineau (of "Oz" and "Lost" fame...), Paul Rudd (last seen in "Forgetting Sarah Marshall"), cameos from Jamie Kennedy, Zak Orth, Jesse Bradford, Vondie Curtis-Hall and M. Emmet Walsh.

RATING: 5 out of 10 neon crosses

Jungle Fever

Year 2, Day 55 - 2/24/10 - Movie #420

BEFORE: Hmm...Movie #420 - too bad I don't have "Half-Baked" or "Homegrown" on my list... This is about where Spike Lee movies and I had something of a falling-out. I watched "Do the Right Thing" and while at NYU I was shown his earlier films.

THE PLOT: Friends and family of a married black architect react in different ways to his affair with an Italian secretary.

AFTER: This was a very polarizing film back in the early 90's, and now I realize why. It could be seen as a suggestion that black men can have a "free pass" and satisfy their curiosity by sleeping with a white chick, then go back to their wife and daughter. My other problems with this movie are as follows:

The issue of race dominates everything - most of the characters in this film are either black people who dislike white people, or Italians who dislike black people. It's a gross over-simplification, and a convenient one as well. If someone besides the main characters could tolerate each other's presence, there wouldn't be any tension, and therefore no movie. But while highlighting the race issue, the film manages to ignore any progress in race relations made in the 1970's or 80's, and instead shows a situation more closely resembling outdated 1950's sensibilities. And at this point in his career, Spike Lee wasn't able to depict racism in anything but a racist way - remember that when you point a finger at someone, you've got three fingers pointing back at yourself...

There are just too many characters and sub-plots that don't connect with each other in any intelligent way. Samuel L. Jackson as a crackhead, begging for money from his brother, and robbing his parents' apartment for cash - that's a movie in itself. John Turturro as an Italian trying to date a black woman and fighting with his father (Anthony Quinn) - that's a movie, too. So two subplots, in addition to the romance between Flipper (Wesley Snipes) and Angie (Annabella Sciorra)

The biggest problem, though, is the very loud "background" music that dominates nearly every scene. Often the music doesn't even fit the mood of the scene, so what's it doing there? It's extremely distracting. In some cases I almost couldn't hear people repeating the same information over and over in their lines...

Also starring Ossie Davis, Ruby Dee, Frank Vincent, Michael Imperioli (heck, 1/2 the future cast of "The Sopranos" is in this film...), Nicholas Turturro, Michael Badalucco, Debi Mazar, Tim Robbins, Brad Dourif, Halle Berry and Queen Latifah.

RATING: 3 out of 10 chocolate egg creams

Last Chance Harvey

Year 2, Day 54 - 2/23/10 - Movie #419

BEFORE: Unlikely (?) Romance week continues - they say love is where you find it, or in this case, when.

THE PLOT: In London for his daughter's wedding, a rumpled man finds his romantic spirits lifted by a new woman in his life.

AFTER: From Streisand movies to a film with Barb's husband, James Brolin, in a small role. Hey, I'll take whatever connections I can get at this point...

Harvey (Dustin Hoffman) is a music composer for commercials, who's having a rough time as he travels to London for his daughter's wedding - he's having work troubles, he has to see his ex-wife with her husband (Brolin) - plus he's jetlagged and cranky, as most people get when traveling - then he gets hit with the news that his daughter would rather have her stepfather walk her down the aisle. Ouch. This is a man disconnected from most of society, including his own family.

In the midst of all this, he (nearly) encounters Kate (Emma Thompson) a few times, and is in fact rude to her at first - she's one of those survey-takers at Heathrow airport, so who can blame him? But after a cancelled flight lands him at the airport lounge, Harvey chats up Kate and they become intrigued with each other.

Their subsequent daytime walk across London is just as improbable as the long night seen in "Nick & Nora's Infinite Playlist" - they take buses and subways, she goes to her writing class, they stop for a drink, and somehow at the end of this 17-hour encounter, they realize that Harvey's daughter's wedding reception is still going on, and they decide to attend. After an improbably quick dress-selection montage...

You know what, the timeline doesn't matter. This is a charming, simple little film. Two people meet and get along - it's the essence of every romantic story, and sometimes the simplest stories contain the most essential truths. Being with Kate gives Harvey the confidence he needs, and vice versa - since Kate is a social misfit in her own way, so used to romantic failure that she's not quite sure how to handle a success.

So let's review what we've learned this month - love comes to teens, CPA's, sporting-goods store owners, college students, music composers, cops, film editors, writers and musicians of any age. The trick is recognizing it and taking that leap when it comes along...and it's kind of refreshing to see people of a certain age making a connection, in a way that's very realistic and not madcap.

Also starring Kathy Baker and Richard Schiff -

RATING: 7 out of 10 trashy novels

The Owl and the Pussycat

Year 2, Day 53 - 2/22/10 - Movie #418

BEFORE: Another movie that I only know from reading the MAD Magazine parody when I was a kid - which doesn't count as seeing the film. The only Streisand movie I watched as a kid was "What's Up, Doc?", and when they ran that on cable a couple years ago I taped it, and put it on a DVD with this film.

THE PLOT: Owlish Felix is an unpublished writer who vents his frustration by reporting to the super that the woman in a neighboring flat takes the occasional payment for sex.

AFTER: Another snapshot of New York City romance in the 1970's. People have tiny apartments, noisy neighbors, and rude Russian supers - seems about right. And everyone's a wanna-be writer, or a wanna-be actress or model...it's a city of a million broken dreams.

Streisand is perfectly cast as a loud, ditzy broad who WILL NOT SHUT UP, even though it's three a.m. and everyone around her just wants to catch a few winks. I see girls like this almost every day on the subway, and sometimes it's so tempting to offer them $10 just to not talk for 5 minutes, because I know they won't be able to do it (but at least I'll enjoy 2-3 minutes of silence...)

But people seem to pay Streisand's Doris for other things - modeling, actressing, or being tied up while they throw food at her. Yes, all those Manhattanites with broken dreams are real sick perverts behind closed doors... This could be the first movie to deal with fetish groups, well before the internet even existed.

But once loudmouth Doris and bookish Felix (George Segal) spend a crazy night at each other's throats, bickering and yammering, life apart is never quite the same - for one thing, it's a lot quieter, but also less exciting. Can two Manhattanites share an apartment without driving each other crazy? No, apparently not.

This felt like a one-act play adapted into a movie - yep, IMDB confirms that Buck Henry adapted a play by Bill Manhoff. It's got that "Butterflies Are Free"-feel to it.

Also starring Robert Klein as Felix's friend Barney, Roz Kelly (aka Pinky Tuscadero) as Doris' friend Eleanor, and that's porn-star Marilyn Chambers (under another name) as Barney's girlfriend.

RATING: 4 out of 10 go-go dancers (split them up between Mr. Segal and Mr. Klein, as hazard pay...)

The Way We Were

Year 2, Day 52 - 2/21/10 - Movie #417

BEFORE: After some mental dispute over whether I've seen this one before - my ex made me watch a lot of Redford movies - I determined that I didn't recall anything about it, so the fastest way to settle the matter was to watch it and cross it off the list. With the Streisand movies, I'm taking a similar approach as the one I took to eat the giant sandwich: divide and conquer. If I watch them all at once, it would be too much, but I might be able to handle one or two at a time.

THE PLOT: Two desperate people have a wonderful romance, but their political views and convictions drive them apart.

AFTER: Yes, I made the right call. Nothing about this film seemed familiar in any way, so I must not have seen it - maybe I was confusing it with "Barefoot in the Park".

And Streisand plays a Communist - I knew it! I mean, I knew she was a leftist liberal, but this seems a little extreme. But the movie starts in 1937, when the Communists were sort of Allies with the U.S. against the Nazi regime, so that's a little different. Robert Redford plays a young writer/college jock who encounters her working in a diner - then they don't see each other until 8 years later at the height of WWII, when he's a naval officer (though we never see him doing anything close to military service...) and she's still a political activist (a commie who likes FDR? Does that even make sense?)

Streisand's Katie brings a very drunk Hubbell home from a bar, and seduces him in his sleep (not cool...) and from then it's an on-again, off-again relationship that lasts through the end of the war and into the 1950's. She encourages him to write another novel, and he wants to write for Hollywood films - hmm, Hollywood screenwriter in the 1950's, his wife has a communist background - nope, don't see any problems looming in the distance for this couple!

There's a pregnancy, and an affair, and eventually they realize that they're two very different people (duh!) and then it's another 20 years before they bump into each other and remember "The Way We Were". Again, it's not my kind of film but I can see where it has some kind of importance for people, unlike "Funny Girl".

I did like the visual pun where all the Hollywood types accused of being Marxist had a costume party where everyone dressed as Groucho or Harpo Marx...funny stuff.

Just a few more romance films, then I can move on to one of my favorite topics - I swear this is all leading somewhere...

RATING: 4 out of 10 protest signs

Romance With a Double Bass

Year 2, Day 51 - 2/20/10 - Movie #416

BEFORE: I'm taking a bit of a mulligan today, this film is just 40 minutes long, but I didn't know that when I bought it, I just figured it was a full-length film. The reason I'm short on time is that I spent 4 hours on Thursday night eating a giant sandwich at Sarge's Deli, in my first-ever eating challenge. I've been watching the show "Man vs. Food" and wondering if I've got what it takes to win one of these challenges. Since I'm just starting out, I found a challenge with no time limit, strictly pass/fail. It was called the Monster Sandwich, billed as "NYC's Largest Sandwich", featuring pastrami, corned beef, turkey, roast beef and salami, with lettuce, tomatoes, cole slaw and Russian dressing on some seriously large sourdough rye. Eating the meat was no problem, but that bread really slowed me down - it took me about 2 hours to eat the last quarter of the sandwich, I was able to sit in the deli long enough to become hungry again.

The downside is that after spending an evening competing in the deli, I fell behind on a number of other things - so I was lucky to find a shorter film on my list that will enable me to catch up a bit this weekend.

THE PLOT: A bassist shows up early for the betrothal ball of a beautiful princess, and whiles away the time having a dip in the river...as the princess is doing the same.

AFTER: Based on a short story by Anton Chekhov, this seems to be set in Russia, but in essence is very, very British. The film highlights the difference between the classes - a lowly musician and an upper-crust princess encounter each other in the woods. Since they both took a dip in the river, and they both had their clothes stolen, they both happen to be quite naked.

It's like something out of a lost "Fawlty Towers" episode, especially since it features two of that show's stars, Monty Python alum John Cleese, and his wife at the time, Connie Booth. The bass player has to figure out a way to help get the princess back into the castle, and appear on time to play at the ball, all while stark naked, which is no mean feat. I won't reveal his methods, but let's just say that the solution wouldn't be possible if he played the triangle.

It's a cute film with a unique set-up, and of course John Cleese is at his best when caught in social settings where disasters occur and then spiral out of control as he tries to fix them.

RATING: 5 out of 10 tuxedos