Why White Christmas Is Awesome

– Bing’s dulcet tones

– Bing’s army issue camouflage ascot and front line loafers

 – The background dancers in the Mandy and Love You Didn’t Do Right By Me  numbers; pure comedy

– Vera-Ellen’s inhuman waistline.  It’s about as big around as a cereal bowl!

– Why doesn’t anyone call out Emma the housekeeper for her meddling that almost cost them the show, not to mention three relationships (Bob & Betty, Phil & Judy, Betty & Judy)?

– The fact that General Waverly asks not to be called General and everyone continuing to call him that for the rest of the movie. 

– Of course he might have made it more difficult on himself by insisting on talking in military parlance all the time:

 To Betty at the train station, “I can’t help but think this is a tactical error.”

To everyone immediately after telling them to keep the general part quiet, “Excuse me everyone, I’m on KP.”

To Emma after she sent both his suits to the dry cleaners, “I’ll have you court marshaled!”

 – The Bing-isms: 

“Whoa, whoa, time, time, cut!”

“It’s a little dangerous putting those knights up on those bleached chargers.”

“I’m starting to play a little trombone here m’self.”

“Grab the cow.”

– Irving Berlin’s tremendous songs.

– Wallace and Davis assisting the Haynes sisters skip town on a warrant for their arrest.  Apparently none of them plan on returning to Florida anytime soon.

– “Mutual I’m sure!”

– Danny Kaye’s “small internal muscular hemorrhage” or “small compound fracture.”

– The foreshadowing of Rosemary Clooney’s future weight gain in the “Back in the Army” number.

– I could go on and on.  Best Christmas movie ever!

Wednesday Review: Star Trek, Taking Chance, Valkyrie

This past three-day weekend I watched three pretty good movies.  They don’t really have anything in common, except the obvious.  One starred Tom Cruise and one starred Kevin Bacon, who once starred together in A Few Good Men, and Tom Cruise also stars in the Mission:  Impossible movies, which are based on the late 60′s early 70′s TV series which starred Leonard Nimoy (1969-1971) who also starred in the original Star Trek television series and the new Star Trek movie which was directed by J.J. Abrams, who also directed Tom Cruise in the third Mission:  Impossible movie, which also starred Lawerence Fishburne, who was in Mystic River with Kevin Bacon.  But that’s so obvious its barely even worth mentioning.

On Sunday afternoon Jen and I went to your our local movie house to see Star Trek.  Gotta say, not a Trekkie.  In fact of all the 57 Star Trek related movies that have been made, I’d have to say my favorite is Trekkies, which more or less makes fun of Trekkies, in a friendly my-big-brother-is-teasing-me sort of way.  I wasn’t too hip to see this new treatment at first, but heard some good things via word of mouth and Jen wanted to see it, mostly due to hunky Chris Pine as James T. Kirk I suspect, so I went for it.  Besides, I’m a fan of J.J. Abrams work.  I dug Cloverfield, was a late but now devoted Lost convert, and I even liked Alias.  And the aforementioned MI: 3, which felt a lot like a souped up episode of Alias except with Tom Cruise in the role of Sydney Bristow instead of Jennifer Garner, which seemed oddly appropriate.  I gotta say, I was impressed with this latest foray into the final frontier.  The action was great, the story was pretty good, and the characters and the actors who played them I thought were a good mix homage and originality.  I was just familiar enough with the Star Trek culture to catch most of the inside and self-referential gags.  It didn’t take itself too seriously, which in my estimation has always been a negative hallmark of the Star Trek world, but seriously enough not to be a parody.  All in all, well worth the time and money spent at the theater.  So if you’re a non-Trekkie (or Trekker, as I understand they prefer to be called) go without fear.  You will probably enjoy it.  If you are a Trekker, check out this review from Kludge for that perspective.

Monday morning, Memorial Day, I watched a timely and appropriate film called Taking Chance.  Made for HBO and based on a true story, Taking Chance stars Kevin Bacon as Marine lieutenant colonel Mike Strobl, who co-wrote the movie, who escorts the body of a Marine killed in Iraq back to his hometown.  That’s really it.  Its a simple and moving tale, not dressed up with phony emotion or preachiness, about a man stung by guilt for what he feels is his not doing enough.  His task is both simple and difficult, in a way merely tagging along with the remains as they pass from plane to plane to hearse, but burdensome in dealing with the emotions of what he is doing, both his own and those of the people he meets along the way, including the family of the deceased.  A perfect movie for Memorial Day, to remember those who have fallen and appreciate those who honor them by watching over them as they make the final trip home.

The movie weekend wrapped up Monday night with Valkyrie, the story of the attempt on Adolph Hitler’s life during WWII that nearly worked.  Being a WWII aficionado, I was aware of the story and thought it was definitely fodder for a thrilling motion picture.  And it still will.  Not to be too hard on it, I did enjoy it, but it wasn’t as thrilling as I had hoped.  Much has been said about Tom Cruise in the roll as Lt. Col. Karl Stauffenberg and his being the only character without an accent of some kind, but it wasn’t quite as distracting as I thought it’d be.  The movie is pretty accurate historically, as historical dramas go, which is a plus, and it is a fascinating story, but I don’t think it reached its full potential.  Worth watching, especially if you’re a WWII buff, but a better renter than go-to-theaterer.  Which is good, because it hasn’t been in the theater in months.

So there’s my first Wednesday review in quite a while.  What?  It’s Friday?  Fine, disregard everything I just wrote.

YouTube Friday: Inspiration Point

Need a little extra motivation to finish out these last few work days before Christmas?  If this video doesn’t inspire you nothing will.  Hat tip to Jeremy for the find.

Wednesday Review: Wall-E

I’m home from work today taking care of dual ear infectioned Lily and I passed the morning watching Wall-E.  I’d just talked to a few friend who had seen it recently and they were all mostly underwhelmed.  Then just last night I read that it had been nominated for best picture, not best animated picture, by the LA Film Critics.  Just before writing this post I did a quick scan of some movie blogs I frequent and found that apparently Walll-E has generated quite a bit of controversy.  Especially for a movie ostensibly made for children.  I could drone on about these–whether its a liberal polemic on environmentalisma and anti-capitalism or a conservative appeal to self-reliance and think-for-yourselfedness– but I don’t have the energy and besides, most of them are overreactions based on assumptions made on the filmmakers.  I’m not saying they, the filmmakers, didn’t have something to say about unbridled consummerism or environmental stewardship (or lack there of), but to boil Wall-E down to that is to miss out on what I thought was  a really sweet love story and a flat out great movie.

That’s what Wall-E is, a love story told within a cauntionary tale.  When the B n’ L (Buy n’ Large) Corporation-run earth is trashed to the point of uninhabitibility, an army of  trash compacting robots is left to clean it up while the humans left on a five year space cruise…700 years ago.  For one reason or another Wall-E appears to be the only one of these robots to have survived.  With his cockroach companion by his side, he goes about doing what he was programmed to do but also collects all sorts of interesting knick knacks the humans left behind; Rubix cubes, bobble head dolls, and light bulbs.  One day he discovers something he’s never seen before on planet earth, a plant, sprouting inside an old refrigerator.  Little does he know, this discovery will change the very course of not only his existence but mankinds as well.  Soon after the discover a probe called the Extra-terrestrial Vegetation Evaluator, or EVE, arrives on earth and the two lonely robotic souls form an unlikely bond.  That is until it is interupted when EVE discovers the plant and her prime directive programming takes over.  The rest is a perilous and visually stunning adventure for Wall-E and EVE to reconnect and complete EVE’s mission, goals that were destined to become intertwined.

Film is a visual medium and a truly great film can be recognized by its ability to tell its story using only images.  While Wall-E doesn’t use only images–the sound design is incredible and a character all its own–there is very little proper dialogue in the movie as a whole and none to speak of through the films first act.  Yet the story is clear, and we’re compelled to feel for these two little robots trapped in their distopian world.  That’s where the movie really succeeds.  That’s not to say it doesn’t have its share of brevity, hyjinx, and adventure, because it does in scads, and as I mentioned earlier it is visually stunning.  There is the underlying warning message of the dangers of rampant consummerism, a message that is clear but also appropriate and not at all preachy.  Its really just the backdrop for the real story of Wall-E and EVE.  (In the interest of full disclosure I should tell you that I watched it on my brand new HDTV.  And it looked AWESOME.)

Maybe the fact that its a bit of a departure, philosophically anyway, for a Pixar cartoon threw some folks, but in my humble opinion its at least in the top three Pixar movies (maybe the best) and is definitely one of the best movies of 2008 I have seen so far.  Here’s a trailer.

Seriously? Abba?

With the election just a little over a week away, its time to get down to brass tacks and really examine the important issues that seperate the two presidential candidates, John McCain and Barack Obama:  what’s on their iPod and what are their favorite movies.

A month or so ago the Film Chat blog linked to and commented on an article written by Roger Ebert which sought to find out what sort of films the White House hopefulls enjoy.  Peter Chattaway, Film Chat‘s proprietor, made an interesting point about how McCain’s choices seemed eccentric and more personal, while Obama chose well known and well respected films tha almost make his picks seem “poll-tested.”

Just yesterday Right Wing Film Geek posted about the candidates’ music choices and got the same vibe:  McCain’s choices appear to be more honest, while Obama’s seem to be a convenient list spanning genre classics to the latest hip tunes.  A little too hip perhaps.

What does it all mean?  Well, nothing really.  But I do find it a little interesting that Obama’s selections seem to go hand and hand with his slick, manufactured image and McCain’s seem to reflect his penchant for (to beat a dead horse, if I may) maverickness.  I mean, no one would admit to loving Abba unless they really actually liked Abba.

At any rate, check out both posts if for no other reason than a little election tid-bit on the lighter side for a change.