BEFORE: Adam LeFevre had a small role in yesterday's film as a restaurant maitre d', and he carries over to today's film, let's hope he's got a bigger part to play here. Quite an appropriate link, since he shares his first name with the title of the film. He's the connection that gets me to a couple more films with Rose Byrne, and those connect to three films with Goldie Hawn, and that's going to get me one film away from Valentine's Day. I'd point out that I had a "perfect" January and I'm on track to make it through February without missing a connection or breaking the chain, but that would only jinx it. So let's not do that.
Another weekend is almost here, so if you're looking for some classic Oscar-nominated films to watch, here's the line-up for TCM's "31 Days of Oscar" (8 down, 23 to go) for tomorrow, February 9. The main theme is "Biopics", followed by "Best Race Relations" and "Runner Up: 1980 Best Song":
5:00 am "The Great Ziegfeld (1936)
8:00 am "The Story of Louis Pasteur (1936)
9:30 am "Young Mr. Lincoln" (1939)
11:15 am "The Stratton Story" (1949)
1:15 pm "Yankee Doodle Dandy" (1942)
3:30 pm "Calamity Jane" (1953)
5:30 pm "The Agony and the Ecstasy" (1965)
8:00 pm "In the Heat of the Night" (1967)
10:00 pm "The Defiant Ones" (1958)
12:00 am "Nine to Five" (1980)
2:00 am "Honeysuckle Rose" (1980)
Damn, I can really only claim to have seen four of these for sure. I thought maybe I watched "Young Mr. Lincoln", but no, I watched "Abe Lincoln in Illinois". And I probably watched "Yankee Doodle Dandy" as a kid, but I can't really prove it. So I'm only comfortable with saying that I've seen "The Agony and the Ecstasy", "In the Heat of the Night", "The Defiant Ones" and "Nine to Five". So another 4 out of 11 brings my total to 46 out of 103, or 44.6%. My score probably won't improve much until they hit the musicals.
AFTER: Autism is a tricky, complex subject to tackle in a movie, especially in a romance-based one. The more I learn about the disorder, the more questions I seem to have, but I think some of the most common questions asked include "What causes autism?", "How can it be treated?" and "How can I work this disorder into my screenplay? This is the thing that won "Rain Man" the Oscar, right?" Some people can be so self-serving.
So it's very movie-convenient to use autism, not only because most people don't really understand the condition (myself included), but there's such a wide range of symptoms that an affected character can basically be whatever the screenwriter wants, like here he's a genius with regards to space travel and cosmology, only not great at social interactions or reading cues from other humans when he's droned on for too long about space stuff. In "Rain Man" there was that whole card-counting thing, because where screenplays are concerned, an autistic person just isn't very interesting, unless he also happens to be a savant. Who wants to tune in to a movie and watch a character just sit in a corner and rock back and forth for 90 minutes?
To be fair, this film does depict Adam, the autistic character, with other aspects of the condition, like ritualistic behavior, always dressing the same or sticking to a very limited menu (All-Bran cereal for breakfast every day? I think I'd shoot myself in the head...), a general resistance to change, compulsive behaviors, abnormal fixations on a particular TV show or game, and the possibility of self-injury. Jesus, except for the self-injury thing, I've displayed many of these compulsive behaviors from time to time - I tend to eat the same breakfasts (though I have a weekly schedule, not a daily one) but that's really for convenience's sake, so I don't have to think about it every day. I definitely have the OCD, with the time-consuming need to organize all of my movies and comic books, I'm very resistant to change, and when have I NOT been obsessed with particular movie franchises and TV shows? If you get me talking about "Star Wars" or comic books, good luck getting me to stop. (NOTE: I don't really think I'm autistic, but this is something I should perhaps keep an eye on...)
The thing about Adam is, he doesn't know when to stop, when the person he's talking with has had enough of a particular topic. And he doesn't know how to read another person's emotions, or discern when it's a good idea to NOT ask a particular question. This becomes a problem when his new girlfriend's father is accused of financial misconduct and faces a trial, and he can't help but ask the wrong questions at the wrong time. Hollywood lately seems to love making movies about people who don't have appropriate boundaries, and here I'm thinking about films like "Welcome to Marwen" from last month and "Wilson" from last year.
But, generally speaking of course, it's not a great idea to get involved with your neighbor in a Manhattan apartment building. Because if things don't work out, that means one of you is probably going to have to walk by the other one's apartment every day, and you're always going to be bumping into your ex while checking your mail or using the laundry room. And if things do work out, then which apartment are the two of you going to spend time in? Sure, you can each keep your own apartment and maybe switch off back-and-forth, but then you're paying double rent and maintaining two kitchens, which seems like a waste. Though if you've got one of these giant, unrealistic movie-magic Manhattan apartments, I guess it doesn't matter.
NITPICK POINT: While my understanding of the Big Bang theory is limited (the scientific principle, not the TV show, although that's limited too) the way Adam explains it, the universe was compressed into a singularity point that exploded, and within under a second, the universe expanded to the size it is now. I don't think that's correct, because that would mean that in that instance, the matter that would go on to form the universe had to be moving faster than light, and science has also told us that's impossible, matter can't move faster than light. Isn't it more likely that during the Big Bang, all that matter exploded to a large size, though not anything close to the size the universe is now? After all, we believe that the universe is still growing, so why isn't it likely that the universe has been constantly growing (at a speed less than light-speed) since that moment 13.8 billion years ago? Why is a faster-than-light model the best one that Adam can describe? I mean, there are still plenty of things wrong with the Big Bang model, like, what was there before the explosion, what space did the universe expand INTO? But why make it worse by bringing time density fluctuations into the mix?
Also starring Hugh Dancy (last seen in "Ella Enchanted"), Rose Byrne (last seen in "Adult Beginners"), Peter Gallagher (last seen in "Bob Roberts"), Amy Irving (last seen in "Yentl"), Frankie Faison (last seen in "Red Dragon"), Mark Linn-Baker (last seen in "Noises Off..."), Karina Arroyave (last seen in "Dangerous Minds"), Maddie Corman (last seen in "What Happens in Vegas"), Steffany Huckaby, Haviland Morris, Mike Hodge, John Rothman (last seen in "I Heart Huckabees"), with a cameo from James Lipton.
RATING: 5 out of 10 images from Saturn
No comments:
Post a Comment