Monthly Archives: April 2005

Movie Reviews

You Spun Me Right Round, Baby Right Round

1 Comment

John Leguiazmo in Spun
I’ve been Spun. Jonas Ã…kerlund‘s “ode to crystal meth” (I’m not sure if “ode” is the proper word…), Spun, is the junkiest of all druggie movies I’ve seen (and I consider myself a fan of drug movies…). Not only did the movie totally make me feel like I was on crystal, but it also made me want to be on crystal, which I’m not sure is quite the goal of the movie. (Which is why I initially called the movie an “ode” to the drug.)

Prior to seeing Spun, I only knew of Ã…kerlund due to his music video projects, most notably “Try, Try, Try” by the Smashing Pumpkins (he also did “Beautiful” by Christina Aguilera and “American Life” by Madonna [among others] — so it’s safe to say that he’s into controversial videos). On the Smashing Pumpkins’ Greatest Hits Video Collection there is quite a bit about the video. It basically follows two heroin junkies in Amsterdam (or somewhere in Europe). The DVD contains the “music video” version of the song as well as an extended “director’s cut” (or short film version) that goes more in-depth with the couples lives. The video is extremely graphic and realistic — and, as I recall, there were, of coures, issues with it being played on MTV and other music video channels.

While most art relating to drug-use comes off moralistic and very anti-drug, I would have to say that Ã…kerlund’s stuff is rather sympathetic — and I’m not sure if that is a good thing or a bad thing. The “Try, Try, Try” video really captures the genuine love the two addicts have for each other and how scoring becomes about trying to make the other happy and whatnot. One of the scenes from Spun that I found really interesting was toward the end when Ross and Nikki were in the car on some all-night drive and having a meth-induced conversation — they were really connecting at this strange, primal level that I think only comes via drug use. I’ve never really seen anything like that captured on film before because it seems to be one of the most “positive” (eh, again, I hesitate on the word usage, here…) aspects of using drugs.

Another thing I found really interesting about Spun was the white trash aspect. I’ve realized that my perception of crystal meth is rather skewed because I consider it to be a party drug, when it originated as a “blue collar”/”working class” drug, so I wasn’t expecting the movie to be about a bunch of really ugly, nasty looking people using the drug. In most drug movies I’ve seen, the users start off looking really attractive and eventually end up looking gross by the end — but from the very begining, the characters in Spun were nasty.

I also have to comment on the cast of the movie: it was bizzare. First, we have Jason Schwartzman playing Ross. Now I’ve only seen Schwartzman in Rushmore and I Heart Huckabees, where he plays basically the same type of character (nerdy, off-kilter, etc.). Well, he plays the same type of character in Spun, except this time he’s a meth addict… oh, and he likes to have freaky sex with strippers. Seriously: bizzare. Then we have Brittany Murphy playing Nikki. I guess her playing this role isn’t so bizzare because, to me, she looks like some drug addict (all thin, sunken face, etc.): so nevermind the fact she’s in it. But then John Leguizamo player “Spider” Mike. Now the first time I saw him in a movie was Summer of Sam, in which he plays an angry, fucked-up guy. So I’ve always thought he was twisted. But then I saw him in Moulin Rouge and Spawn and realized he was in Super Mario Brothers: The Movie and is basically considered a comedian. Well, to those who consider this guy to be a comic actor: see Spun and Summer of Sam where he plays fucked up funny guys. Anyway, Mena Suvari was also in the cast, and she looked like shit, which I wouldn’t have expected from her. But the real treat was Mickey Rourke who plays The Cook (the guy who makes all the meth). Now I know lots of critics say that ever since Nine 1/2 Weeks he’s gone downhill, but I’m not sure. This dude is deranged and it shows in movies like Spun and Sin City and even, to some extent, Once Upon a Time in Mexico. I really think Rourke has fun acting and likes to take strange roles just for the hell of it. Maybe I’m trying to give him more credit, I dunno. I just know he’s fun to watch.

So those are the “main characters” of the movie. But like any artsy/entertaining movie, this one has some interesting cameos. First we have Debbie Harry of the group Blondie playing the lesbian neighbor of Ross. I’ve only seen Debbie Harry in two roles, and they were both cameos. She also played a minor part in the movie The Fluffer, one of the worst movies I’ve ever seen. (When Jolie and I saw the movie, I think she was the only non-gay boy in the theatre). In addition to Debbie Harry, Ron Jeremy of pornography (and Surreal Life Season Two) fame plays the bartender at a strip club. Ohh but it gets stranger because Billy Corgan (from the Smashing Pumpkins) plays a doctor. Oh, and Billy also does the music for the film, including a few songs with vocals. I never associate Billy’s soft, feminine voice with crystal meth use, but whatever.

So overall, I think the movie was decent, but I’m not sure about its message — if it even had one. Rather than being grossed out or greatly disturbed, the movie entertained me and sort of made me laugh. The whole cameo-filled thing made the movie a lot less serious than it could have been. The acting was good, but I maybe have issues with fairly well-known actors parodying/playing/pretending to be white trash crystal meth users, but whatever — that’s film for you.

Dallas, Humor

Go J.R. Ewing!

1 Comment

J.R. Ewing
While trying to find an article that fleshes out the similarities between the evil J.R. Ewing from the television series Dallas, I found this article: “Larry Hagman slams US president over Iraq.” Dude, Larry Hagman (who played J.R. on Dallas) is fucking hard-core!

Look at this quote:

JR Ewing in the Dallas series, said Bush was a “sad figure: not too well educated, who doesn’t get out of America much. He’s leading the country towards facism.” … When asked whether Bush would appreciate his accusation, Hagman replied: “It’s all the same to me, he wouldn’t understand the word facism anyway.”

So yeah, Larry Hagman basically called the president a facist. Daaaamn!

Movie Reviews, Wong Kar-Wai

2046

Leave a comment

Chow and Bai Ling in 2046
I hate to start ever review of a Wong Kar-Wai movie with something like, “Oh my god, this movie is amazing…” but it’s hard not to.

I watched his most recent (not counting the short “The Hand” from Eros) film, 2046 (Japanese promotional site, American promotional site), which could be described as a “loose” sequel to both In the Mood for Love and Days of Being Wild. I would probably say that it’s 90% sequel to In the Mood and 10% sequel to Days — Lulu/Mimi from Days of Being Wild shows up, and her lover York is refered to as the Chinese Filipino she was in love with, but that’s all. As for 2046‘s connection to In the Mood, Tony Leung reprises his role as Chow and his love interest from In the Mood, Su Lizhen, returns via flashbacks (I think directly from In the Mood, actually) as well as through a new character sharing her name.

I won’t really try to explain the plot, for two reasons: one, it would be a disservice to anyone who wants to go ahead and watch the movie since I want to give away a least as possible; and two, because the movie (like most WKW movies, for me, at least) is rather confusing. I will say that this one is even more confusing because some of the actors play different characters at different types of the film and there is a whole sci-fi and metastory thing going on.

So in lieu of giving away the story, I’ll comment on three aspects of the film that made me love it so much:

One: The sci-fi aspect of the story reminded me of another one of my favorite movies, Vanilla Sky. I love it when movies appear to be rather normal and straightforward for most of the film, and then at some point turn out to be totally different — and it’s even better when they turn out to be totally different in some strange dream/alternate universe/time travel/etc. method. The movie A.I. could be like that too… What I guess I like is when a movie contains an absurd element (cryogenic freezing in Vanilla Sky or an immortal android in A.I.), but at the same time tells an overly touching and emotional story about love or sadness or something. I think 2046 definitely has this aspect.

Two: Like the othe WKW movies, the cinematography is amazing. This one isn’t as shakey and “MTV-like” as Happy Together, but follows a style similar to In the Mood for Love. The camera work is often very slow and calculated. Rather than watching a movie, I often feel like I’m looking at beautifully composed still photographs. WKW also uses a lot of slow motion in his movies, but not in the cheesy violence-capturing or sappyness-extending methods that most Hollywood directors do. In addition to the way he works the camera, the colors are stunning. Most of the movie is very dark and shadowy (lots of dark greens, dark blues, dark reds), but a few times in the film (including the scenes that take place in “2046”), the style changes and really sets a different mood. (In addition to the scenes in “2046,” there is also a scene that shows some shots of a blue sky that is breathtaking — especially the way WKW captures the clouds: it looks like an ocean or something… truly amazing.) And finally, in what I could call another signature element of WKW movies, there is the mysterious and lovely touches of Latin/Spanish music. I’m still not sure what the signifigance of the musical choices indicate, but it works perfectly.

Three: In 2046 WKW really fleshes out the idea of chance encounters and falling in love with the right person at the wrong time, or the wrong person at the right time, or whatever. I won’t go into too many details about that now, but this quote summarizes it perfectly:

Love is all a matter of timing. It is no good meeting the right person… too soon or too late.

All things considered, 2046 may be the first Netflix movie that I watch more than once — that is, if I cannot find somewhere to order it from tonight (it still hasn’t been released to theatres, so any copy I can get probably isn’t the best quality). The movie was remarkable. I’m still not sure whether it beats Happy Together (which I love because of the gay themes and the fact I feel I can relate to the deteriorating and fucked up relationship somewhat), but it easily takes my number two spot.

Music, Music Reviews

Addicted to Buying CDs

2 Comments

The problem with obsessively “collecting” (i.e. “buying”) things (like CDs, DVDs, books, clothes, etc.) is that after a while, those things that you “collect” become less and less exciting. For at least two reasons, the more you buy, the less fun the buying is.

First, the items lose their novelty. Buying that thing is no longer a treat — it’s just something you do. Instead of buying a new movie on some lonely weekend, you are buying movies every weekend — it becomes a ritual.

Second, the ratio of good items to bad items starts to weigh more on the bad side. For example, if you buy one CD a year, it’s pretty damn certain that it will be a nice CD since it’s the only new one you’re going to get. On the other hand, if you buy a new shirt every day, it’d be difficult to buy amazing shirts all the time, so whereas you used to buy good shirts 100 percent of the time, it starts going down to 90 percent or 80 percent or even 70 percent.

I have a long, expensive history of buying CDs. Ever since high school when I had a steady job, I’ve always bought tons and tons of CDs. The habit broke, a little, during college when I had less time and money, but during the summers when I worked and had money again, I always found myself returning to the same old patterns.

After college when I had very little money, I did stop buying CDs. And I can remember every one of the few CDs I bought that summer (which, for most people, may amount to the same number of CDs they buy all year, but for me it wasn’t many). I bought: Radiohead’s Hail to the Thief, Felix da Housecat’s Kittenz & Thee Glitz, Blur’s Think Tank, and Primal Scream’s Evil Heat. Every one of those CDs was awesome and I remember always being super excited buying each and every one of them.

Lately, though, I feel like I’ve been buying some not-so-good CDs. Not that they are bad — not even that they are not good — they are just mediocore. Or they don’t have magic. Or something?

Not to say that I’ve had all misses — sometime around my birthday I bought Grandaddy’s Sophtware Slump and the Flaming Lips’ Yoshimi Battles the Pink Robots and each of those was fantastic. But both of those albums were a few years old — nothing new was exciting me.

That was until last week when one of my coworkers got me a copy of the somewhat-infamous unreleased Fiona Apple album Extraordinary Machine (Sony refuses to release it saying that it isn’t commercial enough, then some tracks got leaked to the Internet, critical-acclaim followed, etc. etc.). I totally love her music — and I think only 40 percent of the reason is the scandalous nature of the album.

Then last night I got New Order’s Waiting for the Siren Call. Although it came out in Europe a month ago, I decided to wait for the stateside release — just in case it sucked and because I knew the U.S. version would have a bonus track. New Order’s previous album, Get Ready, came out when I was in college and was, I must say, one of my favorite new release albums ever. After listening to Siren’s Call for a little under a day, I’ve gotta say that I love it, too. Maybe not as much as Get Ready, but it’s good enough to reinstate my faith in current music.

Just for kicks, here are my most recently purchased CDs. Maybe we can all learn something? Oh, and my diatribe above about getting CDs that aren’t good should be taken with a grain of salt: I don’t mean I’ve been buying shitty CDs, I just mean that they aren’t as exciting or refreshing as I hoped.

  • Waiting for the Siren’s Call by New Order
    I can tell already that the song “Guilt is a Useless Emotion” would be a great club hit. There is this one part in the song where I can totally see people at a dance club start going wild: “(I need your love) I just wanna buy it /(I need your love) Will you help me find it/(I need your love) How Can you deny it…” I also love the introduction part to “Dracula’s Castle.”
  • Sumday by Grandaddy
    Honestly, I need to listen to this some more — though I’m pretty sure I’ll love it as much as Sophtware Slump.
  • When the Pawn… by Fiona Apple
    I was so excited about Extraordinary Machine that I had to get more Fiona. Again, I need more time with this one.
  • Unrest by Erlend Øye
    Øye did the vocals for two my favorite Royksopp songs: “Poor Leno” and “Remind Me.” For that reason alone I love this guy — plus the songs on this album are very similar: emo/downtempo. Yum!
  • Extraordinary Machine by Fiona Apple
    I love “Get Him Back.” And really, I don’t get Sony’s argument that this album isn’t commercial enough. The only downside is that a lot of the songs are very similar.
  • LCD Soundsystem by LCD Soundsystem
    Pitchfork, among others, seem to think that this album is the best thing to reach the earth in ages. I can’t say I agree. The album seems rather boring. Yes, “Losing My Edge” is really funny and ironic, but that’s really the only gem.
  • Human After All by Daft Punk
    Considering that Homework and Discovery were totally awesome and dancey and sorta revolutionary, everyone had high hopes Daft Punk’s latest. I think it’s safe to say that we were disappointed. The songs “Human After All” and “The Prime Time of Your Life” are good, but there aren’t any “Da Funk”s or “Around the World”s or “One More Time”s or “Harder, Better, Faster, Stronger”s. So sad…
  • Something About Airplanes by Death Cab for Cutie
    It’s hard to really comment on a Death Cab album since, no offense, the songs are sorta similar and flow together. That said, this album is what I expected: boring and relaxing — and that’s a good thing.
  • The Soft Bulletin by the Flaming Lips
    I loved Yoshimi so much that I probably had way too high of expectations for this album. That said, “Buggin'” and “The Gash” are great songs.
  • Music Has a Right to Children by Boards of Canada
    I love Geogaddi so much (“1969”! “Julie and Candy”!) that this one would be hard to meet my expectations. So far the only song I love is “Happy Cycling.” But like the Death Cab album, I didn’t get this CD expecting to like individual songs — it’s the overall feel of the album that I like.
  • Sophtware Slump by Grandaddy
    This album is amazing. My friend Katrina had always mentioned Grandaddy was a great band and that she really thought I would like them. Then my friend Justin said the same thing. For some reason I resisted, until I saw a used copy of Sophtware Slump — then I figured it was a sign.
  • Reverence by Faithless
    I’ve been trying to find a good mp3 of Faithless’ song “Insomnia” for a long time. It was about damn-time that I just went ahead and bought the album… especially considering that I love every other Faithless album I have (i.e. all of them except for Reverence).
  • Yoshimi Battles the Pink Robots by the Flaming Lips
    This is one of those rare albums that reassures me that good music does exist and that good musicians still exist and that there is a future of good music in the world. My favorite song is, hands down, “All We Have is Now,” one of the few songs that I’ve ever heard about time travel.
  • Palookaville by Fatboy Slim
    No comment. I don’t know why I even did this. He’s so cheesy and generic nowadays.
  • Push the Button by the Chemical Brothers
    This album started my downfall of buying unexciting CDs. I was very aprehensive about buying this album. As far as I’m concerned, the Chems’ best work was Surrender (featuring my favorite song: “Out of Control”). While Come With Us as good (I love the songs “My Elastic Eye” and “Denmark”), overall it was disappointing compared to Surrender… that said, Surrender was still one of the bet albums I bought during college. I wish I could say something as positive about Push the Button. The only song I really love on the CD is “Close Your Eyes” (though “Believe” is decent, too)… That said, I don’t hate the album — the worst from the Chems is better than the best of many groups — it just didn’t feel new or exciting or anything like that.

What is the overall lesson from all of this? Maybe I should be more careful about what CDs I buy? I don’t know. I don’t think I can kick this habit. Maybe I’ll try to get less excited about certain CDs and have too high of expectations? Only time will tell…

Pervert in the Pulpit

It Is Not My Custom to Go Where I Am Not Wanted

Leave a comment

Pervert in the Pulpit: Morality in the Works of David Lynch
While I failed my attempt to blog my reading of The Use of Pleasure, I vow to do a better job with the book I am currently reading: Pervert in the Pulpit: Morality in the Works of David Lynch.

So far I am only about 30 pages into the book, but I can say already that it is absolutely fascinating. The premise of the book is that far from being a counterculture artist who challenges American values of nostalgia and innocence with irony, David Lynch (who is my all-time favorite director), yearns for a world of normalcy where people who do bad things (drugs, sex, pornography, etc.) are punished and lead fucked up and suffering lives.

It is also interesting to read this book because I would say that I have very very little experience in moral philosophy. Most everything I read is more metaphysical, so looking at something from that angle is new to me. The only other critical work I’ve read about David Lynch, The Art of the Ridiculous Sublime: On David Lynch’s Lost Highway by Slavoj Zizek is very psychoanalytic (mostly Lacan), and the author of Pervert in the Pulpit totally rejects such readings as Lynch because, he claims, they completely ignore or gloss-over any moral issues in Lynch’s movies and go directly toward readings that are metaphysical.

So because this book is so goddamn interesting, I promise that I will post my notes — so look forward to them. I can’t say whether I’m buying his argument (yet — as I said, I’m only 30 pages into the book), but it is compelling and I’m curious about what other people think.

Movie Reviews, The Use of Pleasure

Troy-Lust

Leave a comment

As I’m reading Foucault’s The Use of Pleasure, which is ultimately his analysis of Greek sexuality, I must admit that I’m finding it difficult to really try to visualize (er, not like that, but I mean really try to picture the culture and practices in my head) the society that Foucault presents. The Greeks he is writing about lived and wrote nearly 1,500 years ago — that is a long time. Our current ideas of individuality and politics and whatnot are pretty radically different.

Take the idea of sexual relationships with boys. The way Foucault writes (and I don’t think Foucault is alone in presenting this idea), sex between older men and younger boys was quite normal. Foucault goes a long way to explain how these relationships caused great anxiety for the Greeks and that they weren’t “homosexual” as we understand the concept — it was a matter of desiring a thing of beauty (and young boys were considered beautiful) and a way of combining pleasure and knowledge so that the boys could grow up to be better leaders.

In addition to the sex with boys thing, Foucault also describes marriage relationships. According to Foucault (and, again, many other writers and historians), during the Greek times men in their 30s would marry wives in their late-teens and early-20s. The marriages had more to do with politics and the creation of a household unit than love or anything terribly romantic. The wives had to remain faithful to their husbands while the husbands could find pleasure elsewhere (though it was considered best if the men remained faithful as well — though, as Foucault mentions, it wasn’t even a question about whether women could stray or not — it was assumed and ingrained that they would only have sex with one man). Further, the wives had no autonomy in their life and were mainly around to clean the house and produce children.

So like I said, I was having a difficult time imagining how a society would look with those particular sexual and politics structures. Not that I haven’t seen old movies where women are the property of their husband and whatnot — that I could imagine. I do have a difficult time picturing a society where women had no subjectivity at all.

Orlando Bloom as Paris of Troy
Well, looking to the contemporary film Troy was no help, whatsoever.

I can understand that when someone makes a historical film, they want to make it a bit more contemporary so that the audience doesn’t feel so far removed that they are trying to understand the culture instead of the characters or storyline… but still, I find it a little distressing that the filmmakers failed to even try to problematize some of the more interesting relationships, such as whether Helen choose to was forced to return to Troy with Paris (in the film, it’s obvious that she choose to and that her and Paris have such a passionate relationship in which they are equals and he values her as a person and all that) or even the strange relationship between Hector and Paris.

I should add that I’m not terribly familiar with the story, but I remember that when we read it in high school it wasn’t as idealized as the film version.

And to be honest, I don’t know why I expected more from such a big budget film, but oh well. We all make mistakes. Does anyone have any recommendations of films that actually try to reflect classical times in a more realistic way?

Politics

Debating the Abortion Debate?

Leave a comment

Bush and a bunch of men signing an anti-abortion law
My friend Alicia sent me this article by David Brooks (a conservative columnist for the New York Times): “Roe’s Birth, and Death.” Since the article was published on April 21, 2005, it won’t be free to read online for much longer, so allow me to summarize: Brooks argues that because the Roe v. Wade decision was made via the courts (and not legislated into laws), the upcoming attempt by Senate Republicans to “go nuclear” and end the ability to filibuster judicial nominations (and, Brooks suggests, filibusters in general next) is devastating for American politics. The Democrats have been using the filibuster to block judicial nominees by Bush because he is trying to appoint conservative, religious, anti-choice judges and the Democrats are trying to ensure that only judges who follow Constitutional law and not relgiious law are appointed. Anyway, Alicia asked for my thoughts on the article. I emailed them to her and figured they would make good blog content, as well:

yeah, well, i’m not happy with this article.

as for an analysis… hmm…

the thing that bothers me most — and maybe this is more evident of my “brainwashing” or whatever of pro-choice rhetroic — is that i don’t understand what blackmun and the court could have done differently. abortion isn’t about passing compromising laws and whatnot, it _IS_ about rights and the fact that the government or the church or whoever should not have such sexist control over a woman’s body.

i will say, though, that brooks is right-on about how the whole abortion debate really does dominate american politics. it gave the religious right the fervor and passion to go ahead and move much more aggressively with their agenda than they had in the past. and by taking over the framing of the debate, they have made democrats appear insane and eager to kill babies… despite the fact that late-term abortions account for such a small percentage of the abortions which take place, the conservatives have latched on to that image and seared it into the minds of americans. it’s stupid.

sorta like the whole teri shiavo fiasco, majority of americans _are_ on the side of democrats/liberals… it’s just a small group of extremely vocal and unhappy and power-hungry conservatives who say that teri should live forever and that all abortions are wrong and that men should decide what is best for a woman’s body.

my favorite photograph ever was that one where there was president bush and a group of five or six men or something signing an anti-abortion law (partial birth abortion) into place and how they were all proud of themselves for it… the whole situation of that photo was disgusting. here were men sitting there restricting women’s rights and there was not a single woman in the picture signing the bill — even though this bill was supposed to be for women’s good and protect them and stuff. so patronizing and sexist.

Buffy and Angel

Tru/Faith

Leave a comment

Eliza Dushku as Tru Davies
As a Buffy the Vampire Slayer fan, I must admit that the fact that Eliza Dushku decided to go off and do her own television show (Tru Calling) and not reprise her role as Faith on Buffy for a spin-off series made me quite sad. Faith is, by far, my favorite character in the Buffyverse and I would’ve loved to see her with her own show.

Nonetheless, I must say that Tru Calling isn’t so bad. Granted, it’s no Joss Wheadon masterpiece, but it isn’t as bad as I thought it would be. I wouldn’t say that I’m a huge fan or that I like it more than Angel or even Buffy, but it is better than most television shows I’ve watched.

The first few episodes were pretty lame. They all had basically the same plot formula: Within the first twelve minutes shows someone dies an untimely death. Then Tru (who works at a morgue) encounters their body and the dead person asks for her help. There is a neato little special effect that sort of flashes the entire previous day backward, and Tru wakes up in bed (usually someone calls her on the phone to wake her up, it seems) and gets a chance to do the day over again, this time trying to save the dead person who she doesn’t know.

Yes, it does sound a little boring… and it sort of is… but I can’t help feeling as if there is something big coming later in the season (so far I’m only eight episodes [two dvds] into it). I know that Jason Priestley shows up around episode 18 and things get more bizzare and complicated, so for the time being I’m just going to hold tight. The characters totally have me hooked and, like I said, I’m expecting some big conspiracy or something that makes the show a little less stand-alone-episode and more arch-driven (like X-Files and Angel seasons three and four).

So far my favorite episodes have been “Brother’s Keeper” (about her brother’s new girlfriend and her shady history), “Star Crossed” (about a scandalous realtionship at a prep school) and “Morning After” (about Tru’s attempt at throwing a housewarming party at her apartment and her troubles with an ex-boyfriend). I’m also intrugued by the strange mention of her father in “Closure” and hope something becomes of that.

I’m adding the rest of the season onto my Netflix, so hopefully soon I’ll have more to talk about. Oh, according to Tru Calling-Fans.com the show has been canceled, so don’t expect to watch it on television…

Movie Reviews, Wong Kar-Wai

Not as Wild

3 Comments

In my continuing love of Hong Kong director Wong Kar-Wai, I watched his 1991 breakthrough Days of Being Wild last night.

First, I will say that Wong Kar-Wai has risen to the status of “one of my favorite directors” faster than anyone else. I saw Happy Together and knew that he was awesome and that I needed to see and learn about as many as his films as possible. Following Happy Together I watched In the Mood for Love and his segment of the recent film Eros. So what I’m trying to preface this with is: 1. I love his films and think he’s an awesome director; 2. I only recently came into love with his films and haven’t seen all that many.

Also, I should add, that it’s been a pain-and-a-half getting this movie. When I first added it to my my Netflix queue, it came pretty quick (unlike Happy Together which had a “Very long wait” and 2046 which has had a “Very long wait” for over a month now). When I got the disc, however, it was cracked. Per the Netflix instructions, I filled out a form on the website and sent it back. I requested that they send a replacement copy. Lucky for me, that replacement came within three days… oh, but it was cracked, also. Oh, and I didn’t realize this until after I invited my friend Troy over to watch it with me. I felt stupid. Anyway, I returned the second broken disc and attached a Post-it that said “This one is broken.” The third time I got the DVD, it was in one piece. Yay.

York and Mimi/Lulu

On to the movie:

Like other Wong Kar-Wai movies, this movie, to some extent, revolves around the ideas of love and chance encounters. The main character, York, seduces and dumps two women: one is the quiet Su Lizhen and the other is the more spunky Lulu (a.k.a. Mimi). Eventually, York’s friend falls for Lulu and a random police office has a chance encounter with Su Lizhen. Neither of the women seem to be enough over York to acknowledge the men who may actually love them… and in the end, of course, it all goes to hell.

Similar to the way relationships develop in Happy Together, we don’t really see how “good” things are during these relationships — there is none of that cheesy spending-every-moment-together and having-super-happy-fun-carefree-times-together stuff that makes me ill in so many American romantic movies (e.g. The Notebook) — instead, we see things when they are bad. We see York reject Su Lizhen’s suggestion that they get married and live together kick Lulu/Mimi out of the apartment they share after she suggests that he might be “her boy.”

Despite these troubled relationships, however, Kar-Wai manages to capture love at it’s purest. I know I’m pretty cynical and jaded when it comes to love, but Kar-Wai seems to agree, somewhat, with my world view. Love is painful and hurtful and insane… it happens when you don’t anticipate it with people from which you don’t expect it.

Like I said, Days of Being Wild definitely touches on themes that I think become much more prominent in Kar-Wai’s later work (well, based on the recent stuff I’ve seen). The ideas of being trapped and isolated (by cramped, hot, sweaty apartments with fans) in life and relationships becomes a major theme in Happy Together, while the strange excitement of relationships that come from nowhere becomes the one of the underlying issues of In the Mood for Love.

Days of Being Wild also contains what I would call (and remember, this is only after seeing four of his movies) “trademarks” of Kar-Wai films: cramped apartment hallways, pouring rain, Latin/Spanish music, missed encounters, chance encounters, and shaky camera work.

So why do I hesitate to rave about this film as much as Happy Together or In the Mood for Love? The primary reason would be super high expectations. Had I seen this film before either of those, I would probably think more highly of it. Nonetheless, it’s exciting to see how far Kar-Wai has come and I genuinely do like it when directors find similar themes that they explore to death. Yeah, it may be a little repetitive and playing it safe, but it also gives one a chance to really explore something interesting and worthwhile. And I think Kar-Wai’s take on the themes of love and chance and fate make for fascinating film.