Dear Charlize Theron,
Stop. Your acting has too much acting in it.
You and Spruell should share the wealth with Kristen. She needs it.
Best,
J. D. Hansel
P.S. And tell Kristen she is not a codfish. Thanks.
by JD Hansel
Dear Charlize Theron,
Stop. Your acting has too much acting in it.
You and Spruell should share the wealth with Kristen. She needs it.
Best,
J. D. Hansel
P.S. And tell Kristen she is not a codfish. Thanks.
by JD Hansel
Hi. I’m J. D. Hansel.
Not the usual J. D. Hansel though – that is to say, not the J. D. who’s already seen the movie that he’s trying to review, and has had time to form an opinion about it. I’m J. D. in the middle of watching the movie. I am one hour, six minutes, and 39 seconds into The Perks of Being a Wallflower, and at this time I cannot say with certainty that I’ll be able to finish the film, because the protagonist has just been dared to do the unthinkable. While I do not wish to give it away, I need to make one thing clear – this is my worst nightmare. This movie is terribly horrific because it’s filled with my biggest social fears. I don’t feel safe while watching this film.
I haven’t been this uncomfortable in ages. What started as a seemingly innocent comedy has had me sweating in a cold room, and biting my fist to keep from yelling. I had to stop the movie because I just couldn’t take it anymore. I’ve gone to do some chores, and I’ve gone for a walk, but PowerDVD is still sitting in my taskbar, eager to move on, and I still can’t muster up the courage to see what’s going to happen next. I even had to get the DVD case out of my sight, because just thinking about the film makes me shaky, queasy, and rather dehydrated. I’m trying to stall by getting other things done, so I’m in the middle of typing up an email to a Muppeteer I admire at the moment, because even that doesn’t make me quite as anxious as what I think I’m about to see if I play the movie for just ten more seconds. I might try to go play a video game to take my mind off of it, or perhaps I’ll do some packing to move back into my college dorm after spring break, but I still don’t know if I’ll be able to finish this nightmare.
It’s me again – the “normal” J. D. Hansel, under the influence of hindsight bias and time to overthink things, as usual. I’m glad that I’m back, because looking back on this film (which I watched almost a month ago), I can appreciate it more now than I could at the time when I was watching it. My problem, naturally, is that I cannot decide which opinion is more “true” or “pure” – the opinion formed while experiencing the film, or the opinion formed a little bit afterward while looking back at the whole. For this particular movie, I think that the answer is the former. Why? Because, I just now took a look at this movie’s trailer (as I often do to refresh my memory), and immediately my senses have returned to the state depicted in this video:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1MnX1wT7BRU
So, in order to recover a little bit, pardon me for a moment while I bang my fists on the keyboard and scream at the ceiling. SZAD.s.kaskssklksalaSZKLJsklkuhdkwkwqp’;wsikjnd9jhergpeehuefwmgwr,’l;wersdffeuhgdefrnklj4wert3pmoljmqhudf7yhegkmrergmk;vbdfidvbfzusdwf’l,ERT./dvslop;sdf.,lerg ,gert
In summery, this is one of the most important, absurd, genuine, horrible, amazing, beautiful, creative, bizarre, genius, unethical, idiotic, awesome, frustrating, glorious, deceitful, outstanding, terrifying, enlightening, enraging, cliche, original, heartfelt, heartbreaking, game-changing, life-changing, and stupefying works of art in the entire timeline of the galaxy. My inability to process such a thing fills me with unspeakable frustration. This is one of those rare films that will haunt me until I die. I know this is rather late in the article to present a thesis statement, but I suspect this aggravation is mostly due to the fact that it should just be a stupid, meaningless, unoriginal teen dramedy, but instead, it uses the deepest fears that were meant to be left unspoken to an extent that Stephen King, Alfred Hitchcock, Rod Serling, and the original Snuffleupagus puppet combined could never parallel.
Since it seems impossible for me to figure out how many stars I ought to give this film, I’ll have to try to focus on some aspects other than the horror. The author of the book, Stephen Lucifer Chbosky, directed this film, and this has both good and bad effects on the movie. The good effect, of course, is that he knows how to tell the story, since it’s his story, and I firmly believe that the writing and directing of a film are generally best done by the same person. This film serves as evidence for this theory of mine, because much of the story is expressed excellently in ways that any other director would probably not try. Not to mention, one scene uses music even more powerfully than the average musical film in the scene featuring “Come on Eileen” – and this kind of perfection is what cinema was meant to be. However, since his background is in writing more than directing, and since he had not yet directed a film on this scale, some of his work is technically lacking. I’m specifically thinking of the scene towards the beginning in the bleachers (when Sam is introduced), because the editing is so unprofessional and awkward that I laughed so hard that I fell on the ground.
Still, it is the characters and conflicts that make a movie more interesting than the technical side of things, so these are what I’ll prioritize. The characters are largely likable when they’re supposed to be, and Charlie is as relatable as the author intended. Each of the actors performed completely believably, although frequently I found I couldn’t quite believe Watson’s American accent – not that I could have done a better English accent, so perhaps I shouldn’t complain. The characters and conflict had all been done in such a way that I couldn’t help but get really invested in the story, but I think this leads to my problem with the film.
One of the greatest sensations I have experienced is when I watch a movie or television program that uses the social anxiety of the audience to make a scene that is both terrifying and hilarious at the same time. The awkwardness of the situations towards the end of Woody Allen’s Play It Again, Sam and the Next Gen. episode “Hollow Pursuits” can generate two very different emotional responses at the same time, one of which has me peeking through my fingers, and the other has me rolling with laughter. What must be kept in mind is that this only works if the balance is kept just right, with the laughter serving as a spoon full of sugar. In this film, it’s clear that the balance is off – I couldn’t laugh when I wanted to laugh because I felt far too uncomfortable; frankly, I felt violated.
I felt as though the movie had struck me right in the heart, and used my fears to destroy me. Even now, over a month after I watched the movie, the anxiety it induced is still too strong to be considered wholly ethical. Oddly, however, my problem with the film is not so much its attack on the audience, but the way it tries to make everything better with the ending. The ending is when the movie tries to seem caring for its audience by putting a little Hello Kitty Band-Aid on the bloody slash it slit. The happy ending is highly inappropriate, and is even deceitful, since the only friends he made in school (aside from the teacher) are only seen on occasion when they come to visit, meaning our protagonist logically should feel lonely and miserable during 90% of the school year. The worst part is that it’s in the guise of a very cliche young adult novel dramedy, making it the kind of movie that’s not supposed to be a masterpiece, which just adds to the disrespect I feel the film is showing me. If the movie is going to injure me this badly, it needs to finish me off, to put me out of my misery by making a depressing ending that will make the horrors I experienced worth something. I’ve often considered how fun it would be for me to make the most depressing film of all time, so it could be used as a tool to show what it’s like to have depression, but to do that I would have the decency to go all the way and end the film with a thought that will make the viewers wish they were dead – with none of Chbosky’s false hope for consolation.
While I am exceedingly tempted to give this movie four and a half stars (part of me even demands five) for being so powerful, impacting, and unbelievably moving, I’m afraid that I must give this a low, low, low rating for its cruel abuse of the medium of cinema. However, I must recommend it to everyone, and even tout it as a great achievement of cinema, because it’s a more elegant and beautiful abuse than I could have ever imagined.
by JD Hansel
This is the first of a few films I’m going to review this month that are at the very least passable on the grounds that, in spite of their clichés and shortcomings, they unfailingly hold a grip on my enjoyment simply by being so strangely interesting. Hotel Transylvania is, by all means, a stereotypical CG animated film, with shameless repetition of embarrassing tropes, as I can easily explain by summing up the film. An overprotective widowed father (see Finding Nemo) whose “innocently villainous” demeanor makes him a bizarre parental figure (see Despicable Me) lives in a world populated with monsters (see Monsters Inc.) and runs a hotel to provide solitude the legendary figures (the film’s primary, if not only, defining feature) in order to protect his daughter from the dangers of the outside world (see Tangled). The stupid teenage protagonist gets a crush on the girl who’s voiced by a pop star (see The Lorax) and finds that she wants her freedom (see Brave), and now the protagonist has to avoid being caught for deceiving everyone (see A Bug’s Life) while the couple hopes they can fulfill her dreams of going to paradise (see Up). This isn’t even mentioning the fact that it ends in a random musical number set to a pop song, making it even more reminiscent of Despicable Me, or the running gag concerning an awkward old lady doing something inappropriate while uttering a catchphrase with an odd accent, which in this case is the monster who eats things and says, “I dint do that,” but it’s basically “bad kitty” from Madagascar.
While the whole film feels too familiar, these are merely the ugly little details that fill the gaps between the beautiful experiences of seeing such great, strong characters trying to figure out how to handle the protagonist’s incredibly difficult situation whilst navigating through this frighteningly inventive world. The way that the characters – and other magical/mythical elements – are consistently used in ways I never would have considered. The movie is silly, smart, and surprising, which makes it a good family movie to share with anyone. I can almost forgive the horrendous cliché of the part when the loud party music comes to a halt just as someone is yelling something personal to someone else, creating a very “CG family film” scene that’s both awkward and sad. That being said, the only reason why that scene alone hasn’t earned this film a terrible rating from me is this: I already miss the film’s delightful characters, and I’m eager to join them again when the sequel arrives.
by JD Hansel
How does this film get away with so many problems? The main character makes stupid decisions and obsesses over a game in which I have no interest. One of the main turning points is meant to be a surprise, even though it is rather predictable. The movie suddenly shifts point of view in the third act, making the ending confusing. While on the subject of the ending, it’s very cliché, with the male lead running down the streets to make up for the sadness he brought her, and then read her a letter confessing his love for her. Oh, and writers are advised not to overuse profanity as it is generally used for shock value to cover up a lack of genuinely interesting content. So why do I adore this movie?
It all boils down to a great high concept that was executed with strong characters and very effective storytelling.
The “high concept,” also known as the strange attractor, is the basic concept of the film summed up in a sentence or two, which has a unique, compelling intrigue. This film had me with the description on Netflix, which does not always do a good job when it comes to describing the film, since it rarely gives viewers the high concept or log line as it probably should. However, read this one: “After a stint in a mental hospital, Pat moves in with his parents and tries to win back his wife, until he meets a woman who’s as unstable as he is.” So, so, so compelling and intriguing.
However, it only works if the characters are interesting, and I think I was interested in the main character, Pat, right away. I understand exactly what it’s like to obsess over people and things that I should just forget about, and I was totally with him when he woke up his parents to rant about the book he just read. (For me, it’s a bad film, or a mostly great film with a bad ending, that makes me just about scream and punch the wall sometimes.) Somewhere in the middle of the movie, I get kind of tired of him making stupid decisions like going to the Eagles game, and I start to get annoyed with the character from whose perspective I am supposed to be seeing the story, which is a big problem. But, by that point, Tiffany is a big presence in the film, and between the writing and the performance, I found her to be the more interesting character anyway. At the end of the day, she is the character with whom I empathize, and she is the one I want to see happy more than anyone else. This, I think, is why I did not mind it too much when the movie shifted to her perspective – I was more interested in her perspective before the shift occurred.
Now that we are on the subject of story structure, I think that the story is well-built. There were a couple of times when I actually had a hard time figuring out how to interpret what I was seeing or hearing, but I figured it out eventually. Really, it just required thinking a little bit, but I imagine I would not have had this problem had I not watched it in pieces over many nights. One could question whether or not the love story really works well since we do not necessarily see the development of the relationship of the two leads to quite the degree one would expect if we are to believe that they gradually fall in love throughout the movie. Also, if by the end of the film we see everything from Tiffany’s perspective, then I think the dance competition should be of more value to her than it is to Pat’s family, but with the way the story is written, that is not the case. Instead, we know that Tiffany has had an interested in the dance competition, but we do not know just how much it means to her, making the ending of the film a victory for the side characters rather than the girl who has suddenly become the lead. (This would not be an issue had the point of view not changed, which would not have been necessary if the protagonist had been more likable, so I still claim that Pat’s lack of likability mid-way through is the movie’s greatest fault, and even then, it is not a huge one.)
Overall, the story is decent, and the characters are impressive, but what could give the film a special edge? A great soundtrack. The soundtrack to this movie is just awesome. It features some of the most emotional songs ever recorded. The use of “Maria” from West Side Story is oddly perfect, and while they did not go with the Royal Philharmonic Orchestra’s jazz recording of the song, which is my favorite version, I love the fact that they used Dave Brubeck’s cover. I love Dave Brubeck, and his music appears multiple times in the film. Additionally, “Misty” by Johnny Mathis is so gorgeous, and it was also used in the film at just the perfect time. Now let’s talk about the song that the movie features the most, “My Cherie Amour.” This is one of the greatest songs ever recorded, and it has the magical ability to grab listeners and suck them into its sweet sadness, and then drown them in the intense emotion. Such an amazing song, and once again, the movie used it to the perfect effect. Well done, movie.
I must confess that, like the professor who never gives anyone an A, I almost never give movies more than four and a half stars, even if I really like them a lot. This is because I have reserved five stars for my favorite movie of all time, and four and a half for movies that come close. While this movie has some serious flaws, it has the miraculous ability to make me love it anyway. This movie created incredibly close aesthetic distance by the end in a way that reminds me of Play It Again Sam. It moved me emotionally to the point that I was on the edge of my seat at the very end of the film, hoping and praying that everything would work out between the leads, with the horrible fear that the movie made take a turn for the artistic and end on a downer. Then, when they kissed, I finally sat back and let out a sigh of relief. I was so impacted, that I had to go for a walk to ponder it (around midnight) so I had a chance of getting to sleep.
So, while I may really, really regret this, movie, I think I’ll be nice and give you the bonus half a star. Well done.