Yesterday

[beowabbit]

Yesterday was spent entirely at home — we did not brave the cold. (K—— slept too late for us to get back to the Flea, and really, why would we leave the house? :-)

We did watch two more movies: American Beauty and Unbreakable. We both enjoyed all three movies; we both agreed Magnolia was our favourite of the three.

Today we’re about to go to the Museum of Science to see the Human Body Omni film showing there. Must run and get ready...

Comments

odd

[cthulhia]

I found magnolia to be sort of a longer, second-rate version of American Beauty. (the flower names, maybe?) At least, obviously some guy trying to make a story out of an Aimee Mann record.

I love the music, but the movie itself was just sorta too pointless. especially the frogs.

Re: odd

[luckytroll.livejournal.com]

I loved the frogs. Cognitive dissonance rules.

Re: odd

[cthulhia]

there's cognitive dissonance, and then there's 'we're trying to be deep artists but we have nothing left to say because we're trying to make a coherent story out of a record and our musician girlfriend is seething with jealousy because it's not her record. so let's have it rain frogs. ha ha."

because of the quality of the songs, there are vignettes in the film that worked out well, that could've been interwoven effectively without having to resort to something so structurally weak.

it's hard to use cognitive dissonance without reflecting poorly on the storytelling aspect of a piece.

Re: odd

[beowabbit]

I loved the frogs, too. The whole thing had a little bit of magical realism to it, and that just cemented it for me. Part of why I liked Magnolia better is probably because it was longer. I love Kubrick and Bergman and Kurosawa; most movies feel a little too cramped and rushed for me.