[Miscellany]

I was supposed to be doing some work on the weekend but somehow ended up at the movies instead.  Movies are the vice I always give in to, even if there is a lot of other stuff that needs to be done.  The movie we saw was The Way Way Back - a vacation story about a blended family who takes a trip to the beach for the summer.  But really, this Duncan's story, an awkward 14 year old who is dealing with being bullied by his Mum's smarmy new boyfriend and trying to find connection in a world where he feels so isolated.  I suppose this is a typical teenage story.  Didn't we all feel like that at some stage?

To say this movie struck a chord with me would be underplaying it a bit.  I didn't particularly identify with Duncan but I understood him and he gave me something that I just love getting when I go to the movies; a realisation.

The first scene of the movie is the car trip.  A conversation between Duncan and his Mother's boyfriend Trent breaks the silence leading Trent to question Duncan about what score he would give himself out of 10.  When Duncan reluctantly gives himself a 6, Trent gleefully tells him he's a 3.   This is not a good beginning for Duncan.  He's 14.  His mother is going out with an arsehole. He has absolutely no power, no friends, no life and nothing to look forward to. He feels unwanted, alone, awkward and lonely but something incredible happened to Duncan on his summer vacation: He bloomed.

I like to think that everyone has a blooming moment.  Perhaps yours happened at 14 and aren't you lucky that it happened so early if it did?  Maybe your bloom happened as a senior in High School or after you left and got a job.  Perhaps it was meeting the love of your life that did it.  Maybe it was getting your license or going overseas or doing Tough Mudder.  I don't know - I guess there are no rules to this kind of stuff.   A time to every purpose...

Duncan's "time" happened on summer vacation while holidaying with a family whom he felt didn't want him.  One day, while at a cafe Duncan randomly connects with the eccentric and immature water park owner Owen, who offers Duncan a job for the summer.  Duncan is excited by the prospect of spending time away from his family and accepts immediately.  At the water park Duncan finds himself.  The mavericks who work there - whom you can also imagine may have at one time felt as Duncan does - accept him totally as one of them and Duncan responds in the only way that someone completely accepted can and that is, he becomes his true self.

Maslow had a theory of self-actualisation that somehow fits into this story.  Although the threory was widely contested in the psychological community I still love to this day.  There is something so Earthy and real about it.  It feels real and that's enough for me.  Basically, in order to be self-actualised there is a hierarchy of needs that must be met.  The needs are graduated like a pyramid each step moving away from the physical and basic and into the spiritual and emotional (from food, shelter to love, confidence and belonging).  It isn't until all your needs are met that you can be self-actualised.  I think sometimes people confuse self-actualisation with success.  You can be a 'success' and 'functional' and 'loving' and still not be self-actualised and I suppose if that's how you see self-actualisation the hierarchy of needs really doesn't make sense.  IMO Self-actualisation is a state of mind, a meaningfulness one finds in life that goes beyond the material and into the soul.  Successful and loving people don't necessarily have those qualities (though, they might) and maybe self-actualised people don't necessarily meed success as a material form either.   Do I think you can skip steps and still reach the top though?  Perhaps..

I was reminded of Maslow's hierarchy of needs while watching The Way Way Back.  Duncan had the basic needs but not the emotional ones.  At the water park he found a sense of belonging and connection among people who accepted and embraced him.  He let go.  He bloomed.  He stepped up.  He defied Trent's assertion that he was a "3".

I realised that apart from our basic needs there are a couple of things that might help us to become the best person we can be:

1) A place (no matter how insignificant) where we can be completely ourselves and accepted for who we are by other people.
2) A champion who will stand up for us when we can't stand up for ourselves.

Duncan's family saw him as a 3.  In their stifling presence he was awkward, shy, weird and moody but that's not who he really was.  At the water park, with Owen championing him, he became a 10.  He found his champion and his special place and he left that sleepy summer town behind not a better person (as that would suggest he needed 'bettering') but a person who was allowed to bloom, finally.  It was his time.

I guess I've been struggling with being seen as a 3, seeing myself this way too.  I hold out hope for a champion and a place to bloom and moving up that pyramid - don't we all?


Although it's not quite Monday anymore, this one organically came up out of this post and so it must be its time.  I love this brand of 60s folk rock and whenever I play this song it seems to always be the right song to play.  I guess that Old Testament is not all fury and hell after all.

Turn, Turn, Turn - The Byrds

Labels: 60s, cinema, film, friends, life, life and art, movies, music, musical monday, musings, self help, theory, thoughts, time, wonderings

posted by M at 1:32 am 6 comments

I am the proud owner of a "Hoyts Reward Card",  that feckless piece of plastic that you hand over so that 19 year old popcorn machine operators can monitor the movies you watch.  Every so often you accumulate enough points to warrant a free popcorn from the Candy Bar or (joy!) a $10 movie.  Since going to the movies costs about $19 these days this is a quite welcome present.

The other day I decided to log on  to my account for the first time since I got the card. My first thought was "wow, I go to the movies a lot".  My second thought was "wow, I pay to see a lot of shitty movies".  Since I have a rather self-inflated perspective on what you think about the pop culture I consume I thought I might share them in a completely inept move review format for you.





Okay, okay so it's not as funny, genuine or even as interesting as Bridesmaids.  Sorry folk, but that comedy ship has sailed.  Now that we've seen a bride defecating in the middle of a busy road the land of girl comedy has changed forever.  I like a buddy flick.  I like a female buddy flick and this one pushed a lot of boundaries and I like that about it.  It fell short on a lot of different levels and perhaps Bullock isn't quite up to the task of handling this kind of comedy and that unfortunately made the acting feel a little forced.  This wasn't the best thing I've ever seen but I laughed... like... a lot.

3.5 stars.






If the merit of cinema was based on rape jokes, pissing and vomit then this movie would win all the Academy Awards and the Grand Jury Prize at Sundance.  In the real world however the CGI Angels of Death in this POS film do a more believable job of conveying a semblance of real emotion than the actors do.

1 star.







How can two guys who've had more barely legal pussy than Ron Jeremy and Bieber combined be so far removed from what the young hipsters are into?  Apparently they are hazy on what www.google.com actually does. Well boys, in case you didn't know Google is the search engine you use to find that mountain of midget porn you've been watching.  Uh huh.  That hole in the storyline aside it wasn't that bad.  It wasn't that good, but... it wasn't that bad.

2.5 stars.








Henry Cavill is hot.  The movie is shite but he is hot.  That's all you need to know.

2 stars.







I'd actually forgotten I'd gone to see this THAT'S how forgettable this movie was.

2 stars.







It's visual eye candy.  Pity about the lack of an interesting and cohesive storyline though.  It had some funny/exciting moments but ultimately this movie falls down as the typical 3rd movie in an overcooked series that should have begun and ended at the supremely awesome #1.

3 stars.







I liked it.  Somehow that little kid from About a Boy (Nicholas Hoult) makes zombies seem sweet and lovely.  After all, they're really just misunderstood, socially awkward people stuck in the bodies of decaying brain eaters.  You just want him to stop being so Autistic and just get the girl (just like in any other Rom Com).  Cute movie, lots of funny bits - it doesn't take itself too seriously and neither should you.  Don't be dick and start comparing it to Shaun of the Dead and realising it comes up short - duhhhh - no, it's not even in the same league, get over it.  Just enjoy.

3.5 stars.




Brilliant!  Bravo!  Edge of your seat kind of storyline.  A movie that is not quite as it seems.  Very clever and will charm the pants off you.

4 stars.






I'd love to say it was so bad that it was good (that was my aim in seeing it) but I'd be lying.  It was so bad that I actually took out my phone and started playing Candy Crush Saga about a quarter way through it.  The whole movie was a WTF moment.  The "climax" takes place in Cernobyl.  Yes, THE Chernobyl.  Explosions happen a the power plant.  Seriously?  Yes, seriously.

I doubt they let any human anywhere near that place even 27 years on.  Meanwhile all the characters are parading about in t-shirts and swimming in the radio-active water.  At the same time (nuclear? Does it matter?) bombs are being detonated left, right and centre.  Surely someone should have let the costume department know about including 'protective suits' in the wardrobe.

They really should have all gotten the "Yippie Kay Oh" out of there, as I wish I had about 20 minutes in.

1 star.





Meh

2 Stars.




And now for some non Hoyts movies...



Dark as hell but also incredibly touching (How?  Who the fuck knows, just go with it).  Loved it! What's his face can actually act... okay, the jury is still out on that but he did a fine job.    Fine job indeed.

4.5 stars.






Like watching the dream sequence from Twin Peaks without any of the other storyline.  David Lynch WISHES he could dream up something this fucked up.  Visually stunning and stylistically wonderful.  As always, the mood is in the silences and lack of dialogue, but WTF man?  I seriously felt like I was on shrooms watching it.  In fact I wish I'd had some shrooms.

2.5 stars.







I loved this book.  I've loved the movies that came before.  I liked this movie.  All performances were excellent.  The direction was okay.  DiCraprio was really good as Gatsby.  I think it tried too hard to be "roaring twenties".  We get it.  The Great War was over and everyone was set to party.  No need to shove it in our faces Baz, I'm sure we can figure it out on our own, we're not retarded.

2.5 stars.







Really good.  Really, really, REALLY good.  The only thing I need to fault is Cianfrance slipping too much in with too much detail into a movie that already felt a little long.  Usually when people say that movies feel a little long they mean that it was boring but I don't mean that.  It wasn't boring AT ALL, it was brilliant, beautiful, shocking etc. but there were three generational stories here that all felt a little short changed in the transition of story lines - even though I can't think of how else you'd do it and give them all justice.  But now I'm nitpicking.  You'll love it.

4 stars.



So what have you seen lately?

Labels: cinema, film, movies, opinions, pop culture, review, scopophilia

posted by M at 12:59 pm 14 comments

If that old adage "you are what you eat" holds any truth at all, then it must also be true that you are what you watch and listen to as well.   If I could go back to 2006 and redo that old blog post in the link there I'd add the movie Pump Up the Volume to the "Recipe of Me" list.  I'm not quite sure why I didn't include it in there in the first place.  I remember much of my teenage years was spent watching this movie while sighing every time Christian Slater spoke (as you do when you're about 15) and I did so, over and over, week after week until the tape literally broke.

I haven't got the movie on DVD (and clearly not on VHS either) but the other night I happened to find it randomly online and re-watched it for the first time in about 15 or so years and was delighted from opening scene to end credits.  I could still recite about 80% of it verbatim and it still rang true.  I'm many years out of my teens now and I'm amazed that I could still relate so willingly to these feelings of hurt, betrayal and injustice that are so fundamentally teenage.  It's a credit to the writing and direction but also perhaps speaks a lot of me and where I'm at during this time in my life.

I'm not sure whether this is true and FFS I can't be fucked researching it but PUTV feels like the first movie of its time to truly be a voice of the emergent Generation X especially in the face of teen cinema that had, (until that time) been thoughtful but also too "pretty" to really explore issues of how difficult it is to be young.  Pump Up the Volume isn't a pretty teen movie. Sure, Samantha Mathis is gorgeous and Christian Slater isn't exactly hard on the eye but when you compare it to the John Hughes movies that typified teen angst in the 80s it's like looking at two opposites.  PUTV is basically a big "fuck you" to the 80s and the Baby Boomers for that matter. It's Generation Xs first real voice, that is when they were still deciding whether they had a voice angry enough to be heard in the first place.

Were Generation X ever really heard I wonder?

Sure they were written about, notably by the brilliant Douglas Coupland and in numerous essays of the time.  Many songs and books and theories were pontificated (probably on the end of a joint) about Gen-X.  Certainly the Baby Boomers and (consequently) Yuppies complained about their lack of willpower, their disaffected attitude, their slacker tendencies, their over-educated cynicism and their moodiness but were they ever really heard?

A lot of what writer/director Allan Moyle examines in his movie Pump Up the Volume I think explains the fears and worries that affected Generation X before we moved the spotlight onto Gen Y and forgot there ever really was a problem.  Namely, control by large corporations over the way we live our lives, how money influences greed and corruption, that adults in positions of power are mostly untrustworthy, an inexplicable need to fuck shit up, a fear that society does not support humanity in humans, fear that our mental and physical well-being is being subverted by a machine running on corruption and greed, a feeling that perhaps anarchy is better than capitalism and of course a deep mistrust in government and all authority associated with it etc.

Let's fact it folk, aren't these the things we are still worried about?  Weren't the hippies worried about that before they turned into yuppies?  And if we aren't, why the hell not?  This is why the movie is still so relevant and why it still works.  These issues never went away in fact if anything they are more hopeless than ever, and Generation X, no matter now ineffective in changing the world they were had a bloody good point.  They may not have invented the plight or were the first to voice their concerns but they did take on these issues personally.  If we didn't listen then, why aren't we listening now?

What I love about Pump Up the Volume is the idea that idea that the voice is so powerful that it creates its own persona.  As a lowly teenager, main protagonist Mark is vulnerable; he is young and as we all know being young is hard and being young also means being powerless.  Young people who speak up or who are different are often beaten down by authority figures and of course since we are so afraid of 'otherness' by their peers too, but a voice can go anywhere and transcends cliques, class and race.  It can penetrate deep and reach out to a humanity that exists in commonality within us all.

I like the idea that a voice can just go somewhere uninvited and just kind of hang out like a dirty thought in a nice, clean mind. To me a thought is like a virus you know, it can just kill all the healthy thoughts and just take over. ~ DJ. Happy Harry Hard-On

So in the movie the voice does go uninvited into the psyche of this small town and creates a virus that causes an epidemic of thought and eventually anarchy and change in this small community and this makes me wonder, what it will take for us humans to do the same on a grander scale? While most of us humans step in time almost mindlessly to the job and the mortgage and hot sex (or endless supply of chocolate) there is a group of us who has been infected by the virus and is currently sitting very uneasily with it pulsating deep knowing that change must happen but not knowing how.

If Generation X were unheard or... ignored when they took it on then what will happen this time around?

I would be remiss to mention the fact that the soundtrack for Pump Up the Volume is just brilliant.  The released soundtrack is good but the actual soundtrack from the movie is some of the best music of its time.  Leonard Cohen, Sonic Youth, Concrete Blonde, Pixies, MC5, Beastie Boys, etc.

Here's one little gem by Richard Hell and the Voidoids.  Love Comes in Spurts.

Labels: cinema, film theory, generation x, movies, musical monday, political musings, pop culture, punk, voice, yes I am taking politics, youth

posted by M at 11:59 pm 7 comments

I went to see that movie The Social Network the other day. I saw it with my friends, which is hilarious considering the basic premise of the movie is about a guy who invents the largest site about social connectedness but has no friends of his own.

The thing I find so interesting about internet start-ups is that they are founded by very talented, young, computer hackers who prior to starting their billion dollar companies engaged in muckraking and rogue behaviour while fucking with people on the internet. Hacking itself, being a big fuck you to 'the man' of course.

Now, as CEOs and Founders themselves, these once upon a time rebels have become that 'man' they so hated as youths and spend their time not only ensuring that the kind of hacking they used to do doesn't happen to them but also collecting all kinds of information that can be used to to our (yes our) disadvantage should someone decide to be devious one day.

The Social Network was a very interesting movie to watch. I keep hearing that it's a fictionalised version of how Facebook started, and certainly Mark Zuckerberg himself has expressed frustration that books like The Accidental Billionaires by Ben Mezrich weren't 'better journalism' and that the "true story" is just too boring for Hollywood. I'm sure it was; after all everyone's life is too boring for Hollywood but when I hear phrases like I guess my real life is just too boring for Hollywood so they made stuff up to sell the movie I immediately think that all the worst bits are true. I've heard Mark Zuckerberg being interviewed and at best he is socially awkward, abrupt and evasive. It doesn't take much of a stretch to connect the dots on that famous tag line:

"You don't get to 500 million friends without making a few enemies."
Duh.

It doesn't make it true, but it makes a lot of sense. Especially considering that what we do know to be fact (the court cases the involvement of Sean Parker, facemash... blogging while drunk etc) is enough to convince anyone that clearly these are arseholes we're dealing with here. Perhaps that's a judgement call, but I'm willing to make it. So there. Who knew geekland could be so cutthroat?

The movie itself was pretty fantastic. Flawless music by Trent Reznor (as always) really created the right (rather creepy) mood and great performances by a surprising cast (including JT, finally that devastating curl came in handy for something other than being in a boy band) and furthermore it was fun to watch a movie that wasn't afraid to be topical.

Are you worried about the privacy issues inherent in using a site like Facebook?

This is just perfect: Creep - Scala and Kolacny Brothers

Labels: computer stuff, geeks, movies, the term social networking makes me think of everyone handing out business cards and calling each other Bob

posted by M at 2:15 pm 4 comments

Dear Americans,

Why remake Death at a Funeral? Seriously, why?

We know you have an aversion to subtitles and foreign films and need to remake them immediately before they sully your shores with their "foreignness", but Death at a Funeral isn't subtitled. In fact, they speak English... REAL English! Proper English!

I don't get it. I didn't think the American version was funnier than the British version. I didn't think it was better. I didn't think anything worthwhile was added to the movie in order to justify a remake.

Love Movie Buff.


Dear Young Men playing Football in the Park,

Why must you kick so dangerously close to people who just want to have a picnic and a chat?

This wide brown land has enough room for all of us, even the ones kicking footballs. Where should you go? Okay, you see that spot over there? ... nope, keep going... keep going... keep going... keeeeeeeeeep going... right over THERE. Waaaaaaaaaaay over there. Yes, THERE. That's where you need to go.

Cheers,
Chatter.


Dear Drunktard on NYE in the City,

Your drunken bogan shout: 2011 show me what you've got has become my unlikely slogan for the year.

Who knew wisdom came from a bottle? Okay, yes I did know this..

Thanks
Lover of the Bogan Slogan.



Dear Other Drunktards Laughing Outside my Window as I Type this at 12.30am,

I'm pretty sure you're smoking something illegal.

Carry on.

Cheers,
Amused but Won't be for Much Longer.



Dear Makers of the show Bret Michaels: Life as I Know It,

80s Has Been Rocker who can't come to grips with the aging process - CHECK
Long Blonde Wig and a Bandanna to cover up the receding hairline - CHECK
More Fake Tan than all the members of Jersey Shore combined - CHECK
Kids who are smarter than their Mother and Father - CHECK
Slutty ex-"dancer" - CHECK
Bullshit detector going off every 2 minutes - CHEEEEEEEEEECK!

All the elements are there. Congratulations on another piece of shit Television Show.
I couldn't be more thrilled.

Love, Addicted.


Dear Colin Firth,

You are full of awesome.
Seriously, you are - and this time you weren't even wearing a wet shirt and climbing out of a lake at Pemberley.

For the record, The King's Speech got a round of applause at the cinema - which almost never happens in Melbs.

You were magnificent!
Love, A Looooooooooooooooooooooooong time Fan.



Dear 2011,

Please...
Be Kind.
Please.

Love, Me.


Dear Nick Cave,

I love that you make music to be listened to with Headphones firmly plugged in and a glass of something that burns your throat on the way down.

"O Children" turned that scene in the new Harry Potter movie into art.
This is what you do...
Sublime.




Musical Monday

Love, Music Lover.

Labels: cinema, letters, movies, mr darcy, musical monday, US

posted by M at 12:05 am 5 comments

A couple of months ago when I wrote a post about the (lack of) visibility of the penis in contemporary mainstream cinema I never thought that it would be so soon between drinks (so to speak) and I could again be subjected to the same enjoyable spectacle. Yes folks, penis spotting is alive an well in the Sex and the City movie currently doing the rounds at the cinemas.

Funnily enough it wasn't really the penis itself that interested me this time, more that the so called traditional male gaze of the camera had been flipped and twisted for a second into an almost unheard of female gaze. It was a bit of a shock to me that I became so aware of the switch in the first place. I had just assumed that a movie about women and basically made for women would be filmed primarily with a female gaze - god knows the subject matter would probably bore any heterosexual man to a slow and painful death -but I assumed wrong. It seems that the female gaze remains as highly elusive in popular mainstream cinema as it ever was and I don't think this phenomenon is due to any kind of big conspiracy either - it just is that way, god knows why but it just is. The fact is that a female perspective in cinema may exist in so far as subject matter and characterisation is concerned but not in terms of cinematography. Does it even matter? I don't know - does it? Women look at women's bodies all the time - the difference is that while we will, can and do appreciate the female form this is not necessarily a sexually laden gaze - does the male gaze of the camera lens take this concept fully into consideration or is it just all knowing and omnipresent like God? It is all gazes, it is the only gaze, it is supreme and all accommodating? And if this is the case why did I get the shock of my life when I finally recognised the female camera gaze? Hm, why indeed?

The scene in question was the a shower scene where man-crazy Samantha pervs on her neighbour as he takes a naked outdoor shower (as you do in California apparently). The camera moves slowly and lovingly over the man's body, focusing on his heavily defined and muscular back and perfect bum and right down to his strong, tanned and not too hairy legs before it travels back up again to it's final destination - the money shot. If I ever needed a moment to tell me what women see when they are having a good perv that was it. I had become so accustomed to viewing cinema through the filter of the male gaze (camera) that I had to think twice in order to recognise my own. It felt foreign to see something filmed so entirely from the point of view of a woman that I completely disengaged from watching the movie. I remember thinking "oh, now that's interesting" - but it wasn't his body, it was the camera that I found interesting. Also the sudden representation of a female filter by which to watch a movie, one I had naively assumed I had always viewed movies with, was just so strange. The fact that I had just realised then just how strange it was unnerved me - the movie while being female-centric was filmed primarily in classic male gaze form. The point being of course not that this was done in order to exclude women, just the opposite the point is that we, women, are most comfortable in viewing cinema (all art?) in this way. The question of course then is why?

When I have theorised the male gaze of the camera in the past it is always with reference to old movies of the Hitchcockian era (and of course Laura Mulvey) where scopophilia really was a male dominated art form. I'd assumed due to various changes in movie subject matter, the rise of female directors and indeed the societal changes due to the women's movement that cinema had changed too. Ahem - perhaps not.

It's funny that it took *this* particular movie based on a series so obsessed with highlighting the *look we've come so far because now we can have sex like men* cliche, to drum the point home. We women are comfortable seeing ourselves through the point of view of how men see us - and perhaps this is highlighted in many of the female-centric things we partake in
(beauty myth etc) and I don't know that we'd even want to change that if we had the chance anyway. The question for me still is, why? I still can't answer it - it's ingrained there somewhere between why we will willingly pay for the pleasure of ripping the hair out of our most sensitive places and why GW Bush was ever re-elected. Questions I guess that answering will open a can of worms so big it can never be contained. Maybe we need that, I don't know but I do think it's highly fucked up that the so called female camera gaze existed for a grand total of 10 seconds in a movie based on women and made for women. Food for thought.

On another note, almost every (straight) guy I know loathes these women, the series, the whole premise of the show etc. Is it hated because it's subversive or because it's bullshit? I've said it before but when something is hated then it's always because a few buttons are in the process of being well and truly pushed.

What say you? Are there any movies you can recommend that show the female gaze in action? Remember female subject matter/characterisation do not necessarily mean a female gaze..

Sex and the City - do you hate it/them? Why?


And now my musical choice today comes of my female gaze quite happily looking through the filter of the male gaze. Go figure! Here we have the Duck Man performing probably my favourite of all songs I've ever discovered through watching a movie - Otis Redding's Try a Little Tenderness. A scene I love so much I shared it with my university film class as "a favourite" and a song I love so much I rang Gold FM to request it and was sternly told that "we don't play *that*". Hmph! Here are my two favourite things, movies and music combined. Okay, three favourites: Duckie.
...Apparently he has strong lips. Bless!

Try A Little Tenderness - Otis Redding.

Labels: bodies, cinema, dirty femmo, film theory, gaze, men, movies, musical monday, objectification, scopophilia, sex, women

posted by M at 9:36 pm 25 comments

There isn't a lot of full frontal male nudity around in mainstream movies is there?

The point was hammered home yesterday when I went to see Forgetting Sarah Marshall at the cinema. Yes, yes fine I realise it's not exactly high quality cinema but then again I don't have a stick up my arse about only watching movies that win at Sundance. Anyway, within the first 20 minutes or so there is a rather unassuming and flaccid CINEMASCOPE SIZED PENIS displayed for all to see. Hellooooooo sailor!

Perhaps the copious amounts of xxx porn I consume (What? Who said that?) has desensitized me to all penises -big and small- but I wasn't all that shocked to see it hanging there. In context, sure I realised that you don't usually pay your $15 bucks for penis and popcorn but overall it was pretty underwhelming. This view was not shared by the woman and man sitting behind me who clucked their tongues and she even said "oh my god, can you believe this?" and he replied with another disapproving click of the tongue.

Okay there are a couple of things going on here:

Firstly - Surely "from the makers of Knocked Up and 40 Year old Virgin" highlighted on the poster should have been a big giveaway that this wasn't going to be a deMille classic.

Secondly - I bet if a couple of enormous, plastic surgeried (made up word), blemish/scar free, perfectly airbrushed chesticles with nipples so erect that they could poke a man blind were presented on an actress of anorexic proportions who sported a bush that was expertly waxed to show a "landing strip" and little else then noone but the bible bashers from friggin Alabama would complain. Am I right? Ohhhh, but put a penis on screen for literally one second and everyone is clucking their tongues disapprovingly.

The hypocrisy kills me. I grew up seeing more boobs and bush on television than I saw green veggies on my dinner plate - penises simply don't get a gong on the tele. Why is it okay for the mainstream camera to linger on a naked woman's body like she's being stalked but a penis is rarely if ever shown in any context other than comedy or in a blink and you'll miss it sequence? Pretty much every building in the world is a homage to the brilliant architecture of the penis and every war that has ever been fought is a testament to the mighty power of those dick(head)s, every hotted up red sports car a metaphor for a man who wishes he had one and pretty much every man drunk off his man boobs figures he has the supreme privilege to flash it to anyone who has eyes - and yet penis on screen - oh no, we've gone too far now.

I can think of one type of cinema where lingering shots of the penis are displayed in their glory. Gay cinema. Maybe there's something in that. If gay cinema has the market on the penis then does that mean that mainstream cinema is hetero-sexist?

Is a penis really more offensive than a vulva? Or... Is it too sacred to be displayed in a manner where we can purchase it easily and without embarrassment on DVD like we can with the female body (take your pick of movie, there's millions)? Or can we boil all this down to rampant homophobia on the part of the consumers and studio system alike, thus: a fear of men watching other men's penises in a darkened cinema will turn all straight men gay?

What is it about the penis?

Labels: cinema, men, movies, objectification, penis, scopophilia, voyerism, women

posted by M at 9:18 am 15 comments

I love Easter, mostly because it's the celebration of our great lord chocolate. I also like that everyone is forced to adhere to the stringent guidelines of TWO, yes count them TWO holidays away from the shops and most people are so drugged out from consuming vast amounts of our lord God that the mood tends to be calm, rather than tcstressed and frenzied. I much prefer it to Christmas (the consumerist holiday), which let's face it is always marred by having to face numerous hours at the shopping mall trying to find the "perfect present" for other people. Chocolate in itself IS the perfect present so it's like Easter just takes all the brain work out of it. I approve. Yes I do.

This meme has been making the rounds lately. Basically you take a bunch of movie quotes and people try to guess them. I've got 20 here. Some of them come from my favourite movies, though not all my faves are represented. Some of them are just really cool quotes that I like. I think that movies are filled with pockets of wisdom. I love movie quotes. I love movie soundtracks. Being in a cinema is perhaps my most favourite place in the world to be. I can't think of one other place where I feel more at home. Some choose life. I choose film.


So here are the rules of the meme. Guess the movie. Try not to google - but hey I'm not going to hold it against you if you do. God knows I've cheated with the old song lyric and movie quote test in my time.


1
I realise the shell is empty; thre's no point to any of this. It's all a random lottery of meaningless tragedy and a series of near escapes. So I take pleasure in the details. A quarter pounder with cheese (those are good), the sky about 10 minutes before it starts to rain, the moment where your laughter becomes a cackle...
(Reality Bites - Answered by Phil)


2
It has an under-taste. A chalky under-taste.

quote 2 - Witches... All of them witches!

quote 3 - Come with us quietly, Rosemary. Don't argue or make a scene. Because if you say anything more about witches or witchcraft, we're gonna be forced to take you to a mental hospital. You don't want that, do you?
(Rosemary's Baby - Answered by Rowena)

3
What came first, the music or the misery? People worry about kids playing with guns or watching violent videos afraid that some sort of culture of violence will take them over. Nobody worries about kids listening to thousands, literally thousands, of songs about heartbreak, rejection, pain, misery, and loss. Did I listen to pop music because I was miserable? Or was I miserable because I listened to pop music?
(High Fidelity - Answered by Phil)


4
She's fair game, Joe. It's always open season on princesses.
(Roman Holiday - Answered by Marion)


5
What am I gonna say? 'I killed the president of Paraguay with a fork. How have you been?'
(Grosse Pointe Blank - Answered by Phil)


6
- You were a bluebird. You were a Brownie. You were a girl-scout cookie. I got you into a Remington party and what's my thanks!? It's on the hallway carpet! I got paid in puke!
- Lick it up baby. Lick it up!

quote 2 - Ram and I died the day we realised we could never reveal our forbidden love to an uncaring and un-understanding world. The joy we shared in each other's arms was greater than any touchdown. Yet we were forced to live the lie of sexist, beer-guzzling, jock assholes!

(Heathers - Answered by General Boy)


7
- What are you afraid of, a fate worse than death?
- No, just death. Isn't that enough?

quote 2 - Monkey's brains, though popular in Cantonese cuisine, are not often to be found in Washington D.C.

quote 3 - This is war, Peacock! Casualties are inevitable. You cannot make an omelet with out breaking eggs, every cook'll tell you that.
- But look what happened to the cook!


8
- Are you the president's dog trainer?
- I'm John Dean, Chief Whitehouse counsel.
-...ohh that's too bad.
(Dick - Answered by Phil)


9
- She's like a queen bee with her pick of the drones.
- I'd say she's doing a woman's hardest job: juggling wolves.

quote 2 - -Why does a man leave his house three times on a rainy night and come back three times?
-Maybe he likes the way his wife welcomes him home.

quote 3 - He killed a dog last night because the dog was scratching around in the garden. You know why? Because he had something buried in that garden that the dog scented.
- Like an old hambone?
- I don't know what pet names Thorwald had for his wife.
Rear Window (Answered by Egghead)


10
- Speak for yourself.
- Do you think I'd speak for you? I don't even know your language!

quote 2 - Does Barry Manilow know that you raid his wardrobe?
(The Breakfast Club - Answered by Phil)



11
I'm taking a remedial high school art class for retards and fuck-ups.

quote 2- Dear Josh, we came by to fuck you but you were not home. Therefore you are gay, signed Tiffany and Amber.

(Ghost World - Answered by Jezzy)



12
Keep icing your front bottom!

quote 2 - It says 12 original songs by Dr. Desmond Forrest Oats. I'll tell you what it doesn't say...it doesn't say additional lyrics by little ms sassy pants.

quote 3 - - You know that song Pocket Full Of Dreams?
- Yah, down here we call it Pocket Full of Ass.



13
- Can I trouble you for a glass of warm milk?
- You can trouble me for a glass of shut the fuck up.

quote 2 - My fingers hurt.
- What is that?
- My fingers hurt.
- Oh, well now your back's gonna hurt because you just pulled garden duty. Anyone else's fingers hurt?
(Happy Gilmore - Answered by Jac)


14
I'm asking you to marry me you little fool!

quote 2 - Mrs. Danvers I want you to get rid of all these things
- But these are Mrs. De-Winters things
-I am Mrs. De-Winter now

(Rebecca - Answered by Hayley)


15
- Are you ready to order?
- Yes, goddammit. I'm going to have the fucking poached salmon, with the son-of-a-bitching rice, and a dirty bastard salad with a shitload of Roquefort dressing. Thank you. And um, who knows what this asshole wants.
-Uh, I'll just take a fucking beer.

quote 2 - Oh, that's just what we call ourselves, you see. I'm a United States Marine. It's okay if we say it but if a squid says it (ya know a sailor) then it's fist city! But it's alright if, er, a woman says it, especially if she can sing as good as you can.

quote 3- My name's Buell, but people call me Oakie...You can call me Oakie... If you want to...
Dogfight (Answered by Ethelinde)



16
- You got a joint?
- No
- ...Be a lot cooler if you did!
(Dazed and Confused - Answered by Phil)


17
- Can you stop watching TV for a minute?
- No.
- Why?
- Because. I had a bad day at work. I had to subvert my principles and kow-tow to an idiot. Television makes these daily sacrifices possible. Deadens the inner core of my being.
(Trust - Answered by Phil)


18
We knew the girls were really women in disguise, that they understood love, and even death, and that our job was merely to create the noise that seemed to fascinate them.
(The Virgin Suicides - Answered by Phil)



19
You're not shy. You're a lawyer.

quote 2 - This letter has three typing errors in it, one of which is, I believe, a spelling error.
(Secretary - Answered by Amanda)


20
Everything begins and ends at exactly the right time and place
(Picnic at Hanging Rock - Answered by Phil)


Since we're talking movies I'm going to reference one of my all time favourite movie soundtracks for Musical Monday today; Dazed and Confused. I was introduced to Dazed and Confused via Bro, who bought the soundtrack and borrowed the movie from the video store before I had even heard of it. I am known as a bit of a movie freak among my friends but to be truthful I am nothing on my brother. Let's put it this way, back in the day all major video stores knew my brother by name. Not just one video store, all of them. I don't visit the video store quite so often but I am a regular at the cinema. I go often. Very often. Without hesitation most of my disposable cash goes there. If I'm down to my last $20, more often than not I'm spending it on one last film before I'm forced into baked bean territory. Is it an addiction? Yes, but happily so.

Movie soundtracks are some of my favourite albums to buy too - and Dazed and Confused is one of those soundtracks that started out as my Bro's but is now mine. I stole it. I reason that it belonged with me all along. I came across it at a time where I was really getting into 70s music and interested in the 70s in general. I still have a fascination with the era. It was an era that existed (it seemed) in retaliation to the peace/love philosophy of the hippies. By the time Watergate happened the illusion of 'we shall overcome' was well and truly over. Reality had set in and what a gritty one it was. The 70s were MESSY, politically speaking, musically speaking, culturally speaking... and I love that about it. Music during the 70s was amazing. Like with anything there is bad AND good, but there was such a strong mix of styles which all competed to come out on top. Disco, pop, rock, metal, punk, RnB - all really took hold in the 70s. Furthermore, a lot of the music I loved in the 90s was a throw-back to 70s punk and rock and so I became a little obsessed with movies in the 90s that referenced the 70s and likewise became enamored of the soundtracks too. I remember the 80s being an era of "hate the 70s" - and a direct reaction to it - much like the 70s was to the 60s. It's funny how that happens.

Anyway, Dazed and Confused has a solid soundtrack and the movie itself is front and centre on my shelf. If you haven't seen it, I strongly recommend it - not just for the music but for the 'coming of age', the social commentary, the humour and the nostalgia. It's brilliantly made.

As for the songs. I find it hard to pick a few. My first choice was Stranglehold - Ted Nugent, but I can't find it on RBClub. These will have to do.

Slow Ride - Foghat


Low Rider - War


Remember the movie meme!

Labels: 70s, cinema, meme, movies, musical monday, nostalgia

posted by M at 7:11 pm 32 comments

A few months ago I saw the Tarantino movie Death Proof and it got me thinking. For the record, I am a fan of his work - mostly for his brilliant use of quick dialogue but also for the blur that exists in his depicting a concrete era. I like the fact that Pulp Fiction is 50s influenced however also very much a contemporary look at the culture at the time. It's like all of his work, not quite retro, not quite a homage but very much flavourful of a genre or era without being overpowered by it. I also happen to think he has flawless taste in music and so, no matter the film I know that the soundtrack will be a killer.

I remember though when PF came out. Tarantino got a lot of flack for
a) language.
b) violence.
c) lack of strong female characters in his work.

Personally I think all three were bogus complaints all based in truth of course, but bogus nevertheless. I enjoyed the language and violence and if a man can't make a boy centered movie with a bit of grit then I don't want to know him. Yes, he uses excessive language and yes some of the scenes in all of his movies are disgusting. So what? Deal with it.

Tarantino was a smart cookie though, he saw how popular his character Mrs Mia Wallace (from PF) was among both ladies and gents that he addressed his lack of strong female leads quick smart and made one of the most kickarse lady movies ever - Kill Bill vol 1 and 2. Death Proof once again looks at female leads, however, he also adds in a strong male character to mix it up: Stuntman Mike.

The movie Death Proof has two parts within the movie - and this is going to be full of spoilers folks... The first part - three girls who think they are "badass" take to the road, visit a bar meet Stuntman Mike and end up dead. The second part - another group of girls, take to the road, visit a diner, meet Stuntman Mike and kick the shit out of him.

What was different? And just how did the second lot of girls outsmart and out kick Stuntman Mike? I mean, this guy had his sadist act down. He has a death proof car folks and he was not afraid to use it to kill women of his choosing.

Let's just have a little look see at wider society and women. One could argue in this era of post-feminism we have two kinds of women - women who don't take any shit and women who do. Of course, the reality is that there are many kinds of women, all individual - but this is a MOVIE guys, let's be serious - plus, we're looking at generalities here and in terms of a generality this would be right. Shit takers and shit givers. One could argue the same for men as well. People. People are shit takers or shit givers.

The shit takers in this movie would be seen in the first part of the movie. They are the hot, sexy girls who flirt with any man that moves. Why? Well just because they can folks, just because they can. For the record, no man complains about this fact. Who doesn't want a hot girl dressing sexy and flirting with them? Hell, did I mention they are hot? The guys are lining up to buy them drinks and the girls accept the drinks, give the boys a little sugar by way of kisses and flirting and then leave. Hell, that's their prerogative, girls don't have to put out if they don't want to do they? These girls in part one, in no uncertain terms know what they want. They are not stepford wives. They are not on a hunt for a husband. They are not gold diggers or any of that. They have careers and their own minds. This is very important to the plot because in no way are we to think of these girls as traditionally "weak".

Things for these girls seem pretty peachy. Everyone thinks they are a lovely, and they are. In the land of successful females they go very far. The thing is though, even though they seem so in control of their lives they are not. All men's interactions with these girls are only based on sex. The men buy drinks for them because they want sex. The girls promise lap dances for a certain password from men. In fact they are much more crude than the men in the film - they would see themselves as the type of women who are empowered by their sexuality. Watching the movie, you get that impression too. Their "careers" (or just the way they live their lives) are based around sex, or being sexy. Now, sex is a powerful tool and it has been theorised ad nauseum that sex is the most powerful tool that a woman can have in this world. I'm inclined to agree that it IS but I also happen to think that this SUCKS. It means that our options are quite limited if we want to be successful doesn't it? Here's what I think about these kinds of women: women who use sex to their advantage in dealings with men (by sex I mean flirting, being sexy to get what they want etc) are not the kind of women I like. I think they are selling all of us short and quite frankly demeaning themselves. HOWEVER, I do think that women who do use sex as power get very far. Mostly because our society rewards this kind of behaviour from women, rather than from men.

So why then do these women die if they have all the power? Well because like all people with only one source of power they are easy targets. These are the girls who are watched and while there is power in being 'beheld' there is absolutely no autonomy. All their power is based in sex and so when you take that away - ie: you're not interested in their sex then you render them completely powerless and useless. They don't matter any more. They are nothing. And Stuntman Mike, he's a sadist from way back, he doesn't care about the sex - only the cruelty that comes with exploiting that. They have no power when it comes to him and rightly so; they all die. Now you see why I think those girls who base all their power in sex sell the rest of us short. They don't really prosper in dire situations - and life itself is one dire situation after another really.

Enter part 2; 14 months after the part 1 girls have been brutally murdered by Stuntman Mike. Life has changed dramatically in this time. The opening shot, of a cheerleader makes you think that these are going to be yet another bunch of archetypal females that make male fantasies churn, and yet it is realised immediately that this is a big joke on us. These girls might be watched but they also do the looking, and the choosing. These girls are nothing like the ones that came before. It feels like one decade has gone by, socially speaking, rather than only a year. Enter our four main protagonists - again, all sexy/pretty girls who hang out in a male dominated world. They talk about their boyfriends, they talk about their jobs - but they pay their own way. These girls are lovely as well, but they just do their own thing. Their power is based somewhere outside the realm of sex, though it is apparent that they are not abstaining from sex, nor from men. They are just not concerned with flirting it up with randoms. Stuntman Mike notices them though and he's getting ready to kill again but something happens: The girls won't be bullied. He can't take away their sexual power by hating them, because their power isn't based in sex. They've got something different going on.
1) They stick together when it counts.
2) They make their own fun.
3) They are not afraid to get down and dirty.

This is extremely different from the girls in part 1. Both sets of girls have their own jobs and have lives and their own money. On the surface they are poster children for 'new woman' - but as always it's the inside that counts. The part two girls aren't basing their power in sex. They don't need their sexuality reaffirmed everywhere they go. And so, when Stuntman Mike approaches them, they aren't scared into a corner by him, nor are they titillated or charmed like the part 1 girls were. Sure the circumstances were different in part 2, but in the end the part 2 girls were not to be beaten down and killed. They got back on the horse and chased the man down and then beat him until he died. As in, with their bare hands. I have to make the distinction that they're not targeting normal everyday guys - they aren't the perpetrators of violence but they can turn it on when someone else starts it - I love that.

In the second part, the twist is that the girls win. Which comes as a surprise because actually no one expects that to happen - it's so rare in a movie of this sort (slasher/car movie - incidentally movies I grew up watching - especially car movies which I had major nightmares about). These women also stick together and this is an important point. When women base their power in sex then you can easily tear them apart - you don't even have to try. This is because when you have a group of women who all base their power in the reaffirmation of their sexuality and you add one man into the mix then that group of women will immediately begin tearing each other down in order to get to the man. I've seen it a million times before with girlfriends. In the case of the movie you have the part one girls arguing about whether to take the guys home with them, even though they all agreed not to. And you also have them exchange rivalries with each other over men. This isn't good when you're trying to make it out alive. The part two girls stick together and don't have any interest in being rivals at all. It's why they come out alive.

I guess what I'm saying is, and Tarantino touches on it to, that there are girls who look to men to reaffirm their sexuality and those girls are always going to be beaten down because not only does that not last forever but also there will always be people who will want to exploit that. Hell society exploits that all the time. It may be a HUGE power source to be perpetually sexy - but it's also one of the EASIEST to exploit and manipulate. A girl who is thought of only as a sum of body parts (only praised because she has a great arse or great legs or whatever it is that is admired at the time) is easily cut down into body parts when it comes down to it. She's never whole, she's just legs, or neck, or lips etc. That kind of blows. If a girl only has that going for her then she doesn't really have all that much at all and if that's all she's admired for then it says little about those doing the admiring. You see these kinds of girls everywhere, in life and in blog-land too funnily enough. Sometimes words are enough without pictures even. Everything comes back to sex - or rather to the odd comment or entry that screams; 'remember, I'm sexy!'. Couple that with being ultra competitive with other women and you have someone who is easily dismantled, humiliated and left alone without backup. Not a good position to be in when being hunted down (aka, life)

Girls, keep your girlfriends close and your interests varied. Girlfriends will back your shit up with the chips are down and if you're not afraid to smudge the mascara a bit then you can kick some major arse! Don't worry, you can always keep a makeup compact in your purse, for the touch up afterwards.

Should girls kick arses or are they better off just using sex to get what they want? Is not using sex too utopian for the society we live in - do women HAVE to use their sexuality to their advantage in order to get ahead, not just in work but in life, generally speaking?
How do men use their sexuality to get what THEY want - and why doesn't anyone ever call them on it?

Labels: dirty femmo, gender stuff, generalisations, hang it up daddy, men, movies, pop culture, women

posted by M at 1:22 am 24 comments

 # posted by M @ 1:22 am

Man #1: Funny thing about women. If you don't make big a pitch for them they get mad. If you do...they get mad. How can you win?

Man #2: You can't - they're not playing for the same stakes.

Where the Boys Are (1960).

I was watching this old 1960s classic about women, men sex and Fort Lauderdale during Spring Break. While the women grapple with whether they should or shouldn't..go all the way. The men are busy trying to convince them that there's only one option. After all cats it's the 1960s, what are we antiquated or something? Get with it!

The problem with all this perfectly outlined by the dialogue above is that men and women in 1960 aren't playing for the same stakes. The stakes being - virtue, love and marriage versus lust, fun and immediacy. Both wonderful in their own way - just very different. It makes for interesting viewing. The boys are trying to persuade the girls to give it up and the girls are trying to convince the boys to give up something too: their bachelorhood. It seems that they'll never quite get it together - either the boys need a little convincing or the girls do.

So a lot has changed, right?

Just a few short years later the sexual revolution was in full swing. Girls didn't have to wait for marriage in order to explore their sexuality anymore. Indeed, women were exploring a lot of things, including being the bread winner as well as cooking that bread and exploring for the first time a decision about the bun in the oven .

One didn't have to get married anymore to do anything they wanted, but that didn't mean that people didn't get married young. It still happened. In fact most women I know from that era DID get married, very very young - this is despite their "options".

Nowadays girls give it up big time and some even proclaim (and personally I hate this saying) that they can "have sex like a man". Waiting to get married until after one fulfills their personal dreams is something that happens more often. In fact every single woman I know who has gotten married in the last..oh say 20 years (since I started noticing that people actually got married) has had not only a career but earning on par or beyond their husbands. Yes things have certainly changed since 1960.

You'd think though, that things had changed so much that marriage would have been made redundant. Certainly one doesn't "need" to get married like one did in the old days. However, marriage is vibrantly alive. The truth of the matter is that people are still running down the isle, one, two even three times isn't uncommon. Just because we're breaking up more often hasn't actually affected the marriage game. Let's not forget that those who decide not to make it legal are still engaging in married like behaviour - making a home, having children, monogamy - defacto. While the cost of a ring has been spared, in the eyes of the law these people are as good as married, so the point still stands. Marriage is not dead. Far from it.

Has the concept of men being trapped by marriage (by women) changed though? Surely, since remember we don't *have* to get married anymore but you know what? No, it hasn't. If men needed to be convinced back in the 60s then they still have to be convinced now.

Has the concept of the fallen woman versus the healthy bachelor changed? Well, yes and no. Men who sleep around are still thought of as playboys which hasn't changed much since the 60s. Women who sleep around certainly aren't considered fallen anymore. However, there is a rather nasty stigma attached to women who decide to have frequent sexual liaisons with numerous men - and indeed women who specifically decide not to turn the sex into a relationship.

So things in that regard have changed in some ways but not in all ways.

The stakes you'd think would be evened out. But at the core of it all there's still that old struggle between wanting to get married versus (and we all know one) - the commitment-phobe. And there's still the struggle in cultural opinion of the slut versus the bachelor.

It's been 48 years since the 1960s dawned and in 48 years of enormous social, political and technological change. We have all the earmarks of change happening around us ... but when it comes down to the big things what has actually changed? I keep coming up with nothing significant except ...underwear. Women's underwear has definitely changed.

Labels: dirty femmo, gender stuff, men, movies, pop culture, women

posted by M at 10:12 pm 19 comments

Being a girl with very refined and classic tastes, the other day I treated myself to an interesting little documentary at the cinema called Air Guitar Nation. It followed the stories of two men hell bent on being not only the best air guitar errm..artists in the US but also THE WORLD! Yes, apparently there is a world championship for this kind of thing and yes, it's serious business indeed.

I'm an air guitarist from way back. I think that most people who learn an instrument from a young age (me: piano: 5yrs old) don't have a choice. When I hear music my fingers immediately twitch along with the notes. In fact my first instinct is actually to air piano even the guitar based songs. Indeed with that in mind, maybe the best air guitarists are those that have not been sullied by keeping time with the metronome and learning major and minor chords at the hands of Madam Piano Teacher who used to slap at my fingers if they went the wrong way. Is air guitar inbuilt in all of us or is it something that only people so into music that they can't help it partake?

Before the lights went down in the cinema I thought about the vast number of Air Guitar CLASSICS I know and came up with one main contender should I ever find myself in an Air guitar showdown with the devil. Not Stairway to Heaven (though it's a good one) or Rebel Rebel (though it's one of my favourites) and not Back in Black (though it rocks all colours of socks). These songs were all too much about the "music" and not enough about "the cock" for my liking. Let's face it folks, if I'm going to be playing a fake guitar I might as well go all out and go the full fake cock stroking bonanza! I can't think of any other time in musical history when it was more about the cock than 80s hair bands.

So since I am also a girl of impeccable taste regarding "the classics" my mind went to one place and one place only.


So clearly the choice for me had to be Play With Me by Extreme. Which happens to be featured in the scene (Bill and Ted's Excellent Adventure) where all the famous historical figures go wild (wyld!) at the mall - beating up on each other and sampling the goods (Genghis Khan seen perusing baseball bats at a sporting goods store..of course, what else?). If you haven't yet heard this song then I have to prepare you by saying that the GOLD is in the guitar solo (about 3/4 of the way through) and while I find this song infinitely amusing it also happens to be a guilty pleasure of mine. The solo is just a little bit on the awesome side, I promise.

Play With Me - Extreme



^-^

Is this what guitar solos and indeed Air Guitar is all about? Self indulgent, theatrical, masterful and technical? Or should it be something more meaningful?

As it turns out the main "guy" in the documentary C.Diddy agreed with my choice. He rocked Play with Me to the likes of which the world has never seen before and probably won't ever seen again. The other guy Bjorn Turoque however did not agree that Air Guitar should be quite so funny. His style was more punk rock, tight and with street cred.

The movie was funny, interesting and rather thought provoking. While I don't know if it legitimised Air Guitar the doco certainly made me think about how I engage with guitar rock and indeed think about why people air guitar in the first place?

So with that in mind - I have some questions for you, if you wouldn't mind.

1. I know what Bill and Ted, Beavis and Butthead and Wayne and Garth would say but what say you: What is good Air Guitar? Should it be funny, theatrical and preferably penned by bands sporting big hair and tight spandex or is air guitar something anyone can to do any song at any time depending on ones tastes?

2. Is air guitar in the soul or in the crotch?

3. You certainly can air guitar to Nirvana, The Saints or The Ramones (etc) but should you?

4. Can one air 'other musical instruments'? Is it right to air piano, air violin or air flute (Jethro Tull anyone?)

5. Can you air guitar to acoustic guitar?

6. Can girls air guitar as well as boys or should we just stick to being air groupies?

7. Can one Air Guitar to Sweet Home Alabama or is it better to make the twangy twangy sounds using your voice instead?

8. In a song like Satisfaction by The Rolling Stones do you go Air Guitar or Air Tamborine or BOTH (are particularly good at multi-tasking)?

9. Are there some songs so sacred that air guitaring (made up word) shouldn't be allowed?

10. What songs give you the urge to air guitar?

11. Why do people air guitar?

12. Is there anyone out there in blog land who does not partake in the art form of air guitar?


And now songs* (which are not necessarily the BEST air guitar choices but I like 'em):

Paradise City - Guns and Roses



White Riot - The Clash



The Stroke - Billy Squier




Rock N roll Part II - Gary Glitter




Smoke on the Water - Deep Purple




Whole Lotta Love - Led Zeppelin




I love Rock N' Roll - joan jett



20th Century Boy - T-Rex



Are you Gonna Be My Girl - Jet




Aneurysm - Nirvana




21st Century Digital Boy - Bad Religion





And Because it's got my name in it

More than a Feeling - Boston






I <3 "Brown Bear"

* All songs have been through vigorous Air Guitar testing by yours truly and are safe for the general public to air guitar their little hearts out to. Having said that I hold no responsibility for anyone who strains their groin, fingers or neck while "performing".

* I wanted to include Evie - Stevie Wright (which is a TOP guitar song) but couldn't upload it for some reason).

Labels: air guitar, movies, musical monday, musings, questions, weird things

posted by M at 4:54 pm 31 comments

* I had a strange blogger dream last night. It involved a mass blogger meet up, but felt more like High school. I liked High School in so far that I was totally happy doing my dance and drama, hanging out with my friends, singing show tunes in class and laughing a lot.. a hell of a lot (obviously I wasn't one of the popular elite). Apart from that I pretty much hated everyone else in High School and much like Erica Yurken from my one of my favourite childhood novels Hating Alison Ashley, I was always in the sick bay with a made up illness of some sort hoping to get out of 6th period Science with Mr K (he wore canary yellow).

The blogger meet up reminded me a little of my 10 year High School reunion (yes, unfortunately I did go...). I recognised some people, I think I recognised others and some I had no idea about. The whole thing was rather awkwardly surreal and I felt a little out of place. Which is incidentally how I alway feel - so at least that wasn't new. Just when things were looking very sad indeed Helena Bonham Carter turned up and sat right next to me. I'm not sure if she has a blog or not but it was marvelous of her anyway. She kelp scrunching her curls and looked a little flustered and distracted though - which funnily enough is exactly how I feel at the moment.

* The movie project is due tomorrow. Today, the new Dawson Leary was instructed to chain himself to the computer and edit the thing until it was done (day...what? 8 of editing?). Of course I was stuck in the AR with a bunch of homicidal children also known as my grade 3 art class (yes, yes okay fine I was the homicidal one) who for some reason were all concentrated on two girls in the grade squabbling with each other.

I got rather sick of the back and forth "but she said..." stuff and in a moment of utter frustration exclaimed to the whole grade in a loud and rather hysterical voice OH FOR GOODNESS SAKE (would love to swear for once), AS A MATTER Of INTEREST PUT UP YOUR HAND IF YOU ARE ANNOYED BY * and * ARGUING? Every single child in the grade put up their hand including one of the said squabblers (amusing). Then I put up my hand and so did the parent helper who had come in to do a yarn spinning demonstration (haha). The other squabbler and only person with their hand down looked mortified. I stopped the Art lesson right there and we talked about ways to avoid getting into arguments. It was the first time in a while for that grade that everyone worked cooperatively to come up with a solution (amazing how 'if you don't get along maybe don't sit together' is such a simple solution and and yet so effective). I'm not sure if highlighting that the whole class basically thought these two girls were idiots was the right way to go in teacher-land but sometimes kids need a dose of reality. They were being idiots.

Anyway, being stuck in the AR with a bunch of children meant that I could not keep an eye on Dawson Leary II and the movie editing. So when I turned up to the lab and saw him working on the DIRECTORS CUT of our 3 minute movie (including bloopers and outtakes and a credit reel, gangsta style) I went ballistic! Meanwhile the actual movie wasn't yet finished and I had big problems with a missing consent of release form (which by the way is still missing and by the way the fate of our movie depends on me finding it). So the film is still not finished and we are down a consent of release form. I have no way of actually supervising these children AND teach a grade at the same time AND actually get the tape to the co-ordinator all by tomorrow so the only thing left for me to do is have a complete nervous breakdown. Dawson Leary II, saw me hitting my head against the table today and said Oh Miss F, you and *producer* both stress too much! Doooooooooooontworryaboutit!. Serenity now! How do I get myself into these things?

* I had my review with Prin yesterday afternoon. I prepared like a champion (which means not starting the thinking process until about midnight the night before, pulling an all nighter and working through my lunch break and planning hour the next day) and we had a fine chat about next year. If she doesn't change her mind (anything goes with Prin) then I shall be back in the classroom next year with a day out of the room every week to supervise a Media Art extension group. This is very exciting and should keep me interested and challenged next year - and also answers the aforementioned question: How do I get myself into these things? Sigh. Surely Dawson Leary III will be a winner.

* It's amazing just how many people are searching for that blasted Maddison Gabriel on the net and coming up with my journal. Wouldn't it be great if they WEREN'T looking for child porn and instead were motivated by a distaste of the fashion and beauty industry and the unrealistic pressures it puts on women? Wouldn't it be fabulous if every one of them said 'hey, you know - this sucks and so I'm going to be outspoken about this too'? That would be great. God, I hope they're not looking for porn.

Labels: blogs, dirty femmo, friends, gender stuff, girls and women, media, miscellany, models, movies, school, stressed teachers, teacher dramas, Yoko woman

posted by M at 10:43 pm 16 comments