Doghouse

*** (3 stars)

"Alright, calm down... You sound like a dolphin"

I watched "Doghouse" on the recommendation from my friend who is equally obsessed with horror. We go back and forth sending trailers and posting articles about the latest, greatest, and missed treasures of gore and fright.

Doghouse follows a group of longtime friends out to cheer up their buddy following his divorce, and they only have one thing on their minds- birds (women). Well, maybe it will be nice to get away from their own nagging spouses too. On the suggestion of Mikey (Noel Clarke, "Centurion", "Doctor Who"), they travel to Moodly where his gran lives and the population is 4:1 ladies. Win-win, right? Wrong. All of the women have been turned into zombies with a craving for male blood and guts. Can the happy bachelor gang get out alive? Will any of them "score"? Will you care?

Director Jake West specializes in what I would call "B-horror, slapstick". His movies don't seem to try to be anything that they're not- bloody, gory, and void of plot or sense. His best know work may be "Razor Blade Smile" about a vampiress out for revenge against the Illuminati, or his addition to the "Pumpkinhead" idiom; the made for TV "Pumpkinhead: Ashes to Ashes". Armed with this knowledge, I probably would have ignored my buddies advice, but the cast was too interesting to pass up. What were these guys doing in this movie?

The macho male crew is rounded out by leader and self proclaimed playboy Neil (Danny Dyer, "Human Traffic", "Malice in Wonderland"), the recent divorcé Vince (Stephen Graham, "Boardwalk Empire"-he's amazing!, "Public Enemies"), comic geek Matt (Lee Ingleby, "The Last Legion"), recent zen convert Patrick (Keith-Lee Castle, "Seed of Chucky"), the requisite homosexual Graham (Emil Marwa, "East is East"), and slacker Banksy (Neil Maskell). They're driven to the country by Christina Cole ("Hex") whom they immediately dub "Candy". Eventually, the guys run into an Army guy (Terry Stone) trying his best to kill the "zombirds" and redeem himself in the role he played in their creation.

If I were not a woman, or had the ability to completely check my brain at the door, I may have liked this movie more. Unfortunately, all I could think about was how misogynistic the men were (no wonder their women hate them), and how I wished they would die. The story lags about, not quite sure if it's a comedy or just a B-movie. Women are harlots and zombies hell bent on destroying/pacifying a man and men are the lonely victims to their plans. Please.

The opening scenes of the movie rip off British gangster movies with each character being introduced to us through the misdeeds they do to their significant others, then freeze frame and animate to reveal their names. Guy Ritchie doesn't even do that anymore people! Move on! Cole is completely underused and I kept wondering why she was even in this movie. Has life been that bad for you girl? Your IMDB page tells a different story. The idiocy surrounding them only makes it the more amazing that any may actually survive. How hard is to to lure a zombie out of a van and then get in it? Just run around in a circle people. Why run off into no man's land? Pun intended.

My feelings on the movie were actually heightened after watching the making of featurette, an in dept look at production, cast interviews, post production, and FX. "Doghouse" was shot with the Red HD Digital Camera, which fuses the best of film and digital filming into one camera without any of the negatives. The Red is able to give crisp picture and definition in low light, eliminates blur when used as a steadycam, and provides high definition playback. Digital filming allows the director and actors to go for longer takes, and is cheaper than shooting on film. Other films shot with this amazing new technology include "The Social Network", the upcoming "Pirates of the Caribbean: On Strange Tides", "District 9", "Che"; as well as numerous television series like "Southland", "Covert Affairs", "Sanctuary", and "Louis". It is truly amazing.

First time screen writer Dan Schaffer makes a valiant effort at crafting a 90-minute story line, but gets weighed down by the limitations a screenplay has over his usual comic book format. I am curious to read his comic works, especially "Dogwitch" about an outcast witch obsessed with the sick and unstable subcultural population. Could be good.

The FX are really great- heads being chopped in half, guts galore, crazy zombie make-up. It's got it all. It's no surprise when you consider that the team responsible also worked on "Hitchhikers Guide to the Galaxy", "Splintered", "Prince of Persia", and "Moon". Great make-up and FX can really help a poor movie become a good one.

All in all, I like this movie more after learning more about the behind the scenes, but I don't think I could really recommend it. Unless, that is, you've got a beef with women and enjoy watching idiots attempt to fight zombies. You would do better to rent "Shaun of the Dead" again.

Mr Potter

**** (4 stars)

The week long celebration of my birth ended Thursday, so I'm finally sober enough to sit down and write. Well, maybe not; but I'm not hung over and that will just have to do.

The traditional Graygrrrl Thanksgiving involves going to the movies, stuffing my face, and passing out. Now that I'm older, it also involves a quick stop at my friends Misfits Thanksgiving (which is not a nod to the power of Danzig, though I think I wore a Misfits tee one year...) to drink a bottle of wine before the family fun. This year we combined my birthday movie with out Thanksgiving movie (seems to be happening more and more these days) and saw "Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows: Part 1".

For those of you living in a cave or at the bottom of the sea without access to TV, book stores, libraries, movie theatres, and Netflix; this is the penultimate HP movie before it comes to a close next summer. I'm not going to recap the last 6 movies for you, I'm sure someone has already done it, but I will tell you about this one. It's been forever since I read the book (well, only a year actually) and I totally forgot everything that happened. It was nice to be surprised and upset in the movie. Usually, if I read something once it's with me forever. In the final installment, Harry and crew are on the run from the Death Eaters (Voldemort's, the ultimate baddie, minions), searching for the fragmented pieces of Big V's soul, and trying not to die while also making googly eyes at one another.

I was not excited when it was announced that this book would be split into two movies. I know it's long, but really? Greedy much? After watching the film though I can say it was probably a good idea. Did it need to be 2 1/2 hours long? No. Two hours would have covered it and we would have been fine. However, naysayers should finally shut their mouths that this could have been told in one movie. Maybe if we were back in the glory days of Hollywood when movies had intermissions, but no one does that anymore. Why don't they? I would kill to see the final installment right now. I remember what happens ultimately, but the journey to get there is lost from my mind. I want to know now!

Directed again by David Yates, the film has all the dark, mature tones the books had while maintaining some semblance of humor. I teared up twice (when did I start getting emotional at movies? I blame "Heavy") but laughed at least 20 times. Every time something was revealed I would whisper, "Oh!" or "What?" or "Oh my!". My mother and friend thought that was hilarious and kept laughing at me. Who cares? Get into the movies people!

Longtime writer Steve Kloves continues his reign as one of the best adaptation writers in the biz. Everything from the books is there with all the fluff removed. I could have done without so many long looks and it-will-be-alright stares, but I fear that was more an editing decision. Editor Mark Day has worked with Yates for years. I wish he had broken from the mold of previous films that seemed to linger on establishing shots that establish nothing. I don't care about a bird flying over Hogwarts, I know we're at Hogwarts, we've been at Hogwarts for the past 3 scenes! You're making me crazy!

The actor's keep getting better though. Each movie they mature more and more, and I'm not talking about getting older and taller. The confidence has been there since Yates took over, but I think it was really instilled by Alfonso Cuaron in "Prisoner of Azkaban" when the films took their turn to the dark side and began demanding more from it's child stars. A particular scene towards the beginning finds Harry, Hermione, and Ron on the run in the streets of London. I busted out laughing, watching Ron (Rupert Grint) starring in wonder at the "real world" around him. "Hallows" continues the tradition of "name the actor", with familiar faces in small roles. This time I wracked my brain trying to identify two men Ron and Harry impersonate in the Ministry of Magic. Thank god for IMDB! Now I know it was David O'Hara from "Wanted" and "Doomsday", and Steffan Rhodri from "Gavin & Stacey"(TV). Love those guys! Also stopping by are a who's who of British character actors: Peter Mullan ("Session 9"), George Harris ("Layer Cake"), Andy Linden ("Rocknrolla"), Sophie Thompson ("Emma"), Jamie Cambell Bower ("Sweeny Todd"), Rade Serbedzija ("Snatch"), and John Hurt is back as Ollivander the wand maker.

Alexandre Desplat is a welcome addition to the team. Nominated for several Oscars and BAFTA awards, his musical compositions make me want to buy the score on CD. His music has appeared in an amazing array of wonderful films: "Fantastic Mr. Fox", "The Queen", "The Beat That Skipped My Heart", "Lust/Caution", "The Golden Compass", and "Twilight: New Moon" (which I will forgive him for). He is brilliant!

So, should you see the movie now or wait until next summer to see them both at once? I say go now. You want to see this on the big screen (though I would advise against IMAX- too much fast motion and random Steadicam shots would make you ill). Also, if you don't see it you will be forced to join the other weirdos in the caves and underwater cities until you do. That last one sounds kind of cool though. "You haven't seen Harry Potter? To Atlantis with you!"

[side note: What's up with charging $4 more for ETX (Enhanced Theatre Experience). All you get is a slightly bigger screen and upgraded sound. I won't even mention the digital projection as the rest of the theatres I visit have that too. Really? $4? You're website says $2 and that seems pushing it. Maybe if you had those awesome motorized chairs that vibrate and pivot I would consider it. Oh! Who's tried those new chairs and why doesn't Dallas have them? If Nowheresville, TX can have them, I want them too!

Moguls & Movie Stars

Last night I caught an episode of TCM's "Moguls and Movie Stars" series, about the history of Hollywood filmmaking. The episode I watched, "Brother, can you spare a dime?" focused on Hollywood from 1929-1941, specifically the creation of the major studios, the transition from silent to "talkies", and the creation and, in some cases, destruction of the studio star. To top it off, it's narrated by Christopher Plummer whom I simply adore!

It was fascinating and I hope they release it on DVD. It would make the perfect gift or addition to your film library.

If you have cable, the series is running through December 13th. I missed the first 3 episodes, so I really hope they re-run them later. Check out their site in the link above and mark your calendar and DVR to record!

It's my birthday week (yes, I get 7 whole days to drink myself silly and have a raucous good time), so I don't have a lot of time to watch movies at the moment. I will be back later this week with my Harry Potter review, albeit a bit late, but I refuse to NOT see this movie on Thanksgiving thereby killing two birds with one stone: What to see on my birthday and what to see on Thanksgiving. Problem solved!

See you soon and Happy Thanksgiving (or Happy No Work Thursday for those of you who don't celebrate)!!

WWQTW?: Orlando

Friday night was the last meeting of WWQTW? for 2010. I am so thankful to lead this club and love all the great discussions we've had over the last few months. I am working on some really cool movies and surprises for next year, but until then you're on your own! Check out my list of movies everyone should have seen (and the basis for what we watch in the club) here, or just click on the "wwqtw" label at the bottom to fill your days during the holiday season.

Back to Friday! We had a great turn out and even better eats! I'm going to have to start taking pictures of the spread: stuffed phyllo assorted bites, stuffed brie, crab dip, pizza rolls, Olive Garden salad (love!), and French silk pie to finish. My Sausage Tempeh Puff Pastries were a big hit as well and I will post the recipe on my food blog this week. I wanted to continue along the same themes as last meeting where we spoke about gender and identity from the perspective of "Queer Cinema", but this time I wanted to focus on female/feminist film.

"Orlando" (1992) was written and directed by Sally Potter and based on the book by Virginia Woolf. The novel itself was a love letter to Woolf's mistress Vita Sackville-West, herself an accomplished poet. The film begins in 1500 with the young Orlando (Tilda Swinton) becoming the confidant (and lover?) of Queen Elizabeth I. It is Elizabeth that urges Orlando to "...not whither, do not fade". Here the theme of immortality is introduced in the film. After the deaths of the Queen and Orlando's parents, he falls a sleep for some time and awakens in 1610 ("Love") and begins an affair with Sascha, a Russian noble woman. Later, in 1650, he begins a poem ("The Oak Tree") about his love and hatred of Sascha and women in general. In 1700 ("Politics"), Orlando is made the liaison to Constantinople and remains there until war forces him to rethink his priorities. When we next meet Orlando ("Society"), he is now a she. "The same person, no difference at all, just a different sex". The Lady Orlando now makes her way in the world of upper-crust society as a woman. The limits to her freedom and privilege as a woman are all the more harsh as she still thinks of herself as a man, or if not male than as equal to men. In 1850 ("Sex") she has a brief affair with Shelmerdine (Billy Zane) that ends when she is forced from her estate for being an unmarried woman. Now in the section named "Birth", we see Orlando as a successful mother who is only now able to live the life she always dreamt and be the person she always wanted to be.

The main themes of Orlando are love, immortality, and gender roles. When Orlando is a young man, he is a hopeless romantic more interested in love that station. It is not until he is in love that he recognizes the "treachery of women" and the pain that comes with pleasure. "I can find only three words to describe the female sex. None of which is worth expressing". He is happy then to live a quiet life, alone at home, meditating in the far East, or sitting in a salon (though now as a woman his opinion is worth less). Love comes knocking again in the guess of an American adventurer whom she proposes to upon first meeting. He, however, recognizes her spark and refuses. They have a wonderful conversation about what it means to be a "real man" or a "real woman". When he leaves, she has the exact conversation with him as she did with Sascha, only now Orlando speaks the woman's part and Shelmerdine speaks Orlando's. It is useful to note that the two loves of Orlando's life are both tied to the weather- Sascha must leave when the ice cracks and her ship can sail, while Shelmerdine must leave when the wind changes direction. It is a not so subtle metaphor, yet one that works.

Immortality is another theme of the film. Orlando lives over 300 years and sees and experiences the world in a unique way. He falls in love, breaks his heart, goes abroad, changes gender, falls in love, breaks his heart, loses his home, and generally looks for the meaning in all of it. It is finally in modern times that she is "no longer trapped by destiny" and can live as a free spirit.

Gender is obviously a theme here. Orlando lives multiple lives as both a man and a woman, but it is the female gender that he eventually sticks to and seems to have been working towards his whole life. It is as a woman that he can express himself more freely and avoid the things he finds distasteful. A woman can speak of love, avoid war and conflict, be the mistress of her own home, and an independent person. It is fascinating to see the history of the world played out over one persons lifetime. The way each subtle changes hits Orlando plays across his face. He winks, knowingly toward the camera.

Potter is known for her avant-garde film making style. Her films often seem to follow no discernible plot, characters break the forth wall, and the fantasy of the mind becomes reality. She is also regarded as a feminist filmmaker, though I don't hear her male counterparts labeled as misogynist filmmakers like a badge of honor. Her first film starred Julie Christie as a movie star who tries to understand her roots. It has no real plot and the script is a bit weak. She spent 9 years working on the "Orlando" script, trying to show her detractors that she was capable of a good script. She succeeds here and makes one of my favorite, little appreciated movies here. She followed it up with "The Tango Lesson" in which she also stars. It's better than "The Gold Diggers" but her refusal to write in the Hollywood standard of 3-arch narration may turn many viewers off. Truth be told, the only other movie of hers I liked was "The Man Who Cried" starring Johnny Deep and Christina Ricci. It tells the story of a Russian Jew (Ricci) who is separated from her family as a child. As an adult, she becomes a professional singer, falls in love with a gypsy (Deep), and searches for her father as the Nazi's invade France. Her most recent film, "Rage", is the story of a murder at a fashion party told through the interviews a blogger conducts on the scene. There is no set, only a plain brightly coloured backdrop and the actors speak directly into the camera. While it is an interesting concept, it quickly becomes tiresome and boring.

Tilda Swinton is one of my favorite actresses in history, hands down. She (finally) won an Oscar in 2008 for "Michael Clayton", and has been nominated for several awards for her work in "Curious Case of Benjamin Buttons", "Burn After Reading", "Young Adam", and "The Deep End". I also love her as the angel Gabriel in "Constantine". She is a fearless actress and great talent. The whole club was in agreement that we could not think of any other actor to play the role of Orlando. Her voice subtly shifts up a register when she becomes a woman, and the knowing looks she gives the camera take on a whole new meaning. She would have to be sympathetic for the film to be successful and she is.

The film was nominated for two Academy Awards in Costume design and Art Direction. It is amazing to think this film was made for roughly the equivalent of $8 million. Costume designer Sandy Powell would go on to win 3 Oscars for her work in "Shakespeare in Love", "The Aviator", and "The Young Victoria". It truly is a beautiful film to watch, though the DVD transfer is sometimes a bit sketchy. Maybe it was just my copy. The transitions between decades/chapters was often done on screen and followed by a title card instead of the other way around. This seemed to confuse some of the club (While running through a hedge labyrinth and going from 1750 to 1850: "Where did she find a change of clothes?" -"There was a hedge of requirement?").

Further viewing: The Gold Diggers, The Man Who Cried, Mrs. Dalloway, Thelma & Louise (the male perspective to feminist film), Hedwig & The Angry Inch, Transamerica, The Fountain, Looking for Mr Goodbar, Frida, Lovely & Amazing, The Piano, The Virgin Suicides, The Namesake, Gas Food Lodging, Personal Velocity, Brief Crossing,