“How I Met Your Mother” Series FInale

No.

Just no.

Roughly four years ago I started watching “How I Met Your Mother” reruns on FX, and got so hooked on the show I caught myself up completely to start watching it with each new season. I loved the characters, and even though things got rather repetitive I kept tuning in because it was so much fun. That is, until midway through last season. The writing became so cliché and constantly doubled back on already used story-lines that I couldn’t do it anymore. Nonetheless, I came back for the end of the season and carried on in through the final run this year.

With the series finale finished less then thirty minutes ago I can honestly say I have never been more let down by a finale, be it season or series. After nine seasons of heartbreak and laughter, the writers made the decision to pull the biggest cop out possible. Without spoiling anything just in case, I just have to say it felt like a complete disrespect to all the characters. After so much growth and change over so many years, the show made the decision to disregard all of this.

Now don’t get me wrong, there were moments that I loved. The one with Barney and Ellie melted my heart, and the reemergence of the blue french horn was perfect, but as a whole what they all represented was, in my eyes, an utter failure. 

I wanted to love it, I really did. Ted, Barney, Marshall, Lily, and Robin have been like friends. They became personalities I looked forward to interacting with. I wish they’d been sent out with a bigger and better bang.

It’s a damn shame.

The Lambs are Screaming

Today has been dedicated to writing my third quarter film study paper on the horror and thriller films I have been watching. After a quarter of all of that suspense and fear I do believe shadows, bumps, and creepy stares will never be as frivolous to be as they once were. Here is the first draft attempt of my analysis of Silence of the Lambs. I would have to say that film was my favorite from the block I watched this quarter, and I have tried to do it justice in the following bit. The relationship between Clarice Starling and Hannibal Lecter is as fascinating as it is unsettling, and it is that relationship that makes the movie what it is:

 

 

Cannibalism is a dietary outlook which has been a part of human life for centuries. Dr. Deborah Schurman-Kauflin notes that “Throughout history, human beings have dined on human flesh. Whether it was part of war to gain the enemy’s strength, or as a means to terrify opponents, cannibalism goes back a long way. There have been those lone individuals who find eating people absolutely satisfying” (SEE). Human beings experience equal parts disgust and fascination with this idea of eating one another. To many is a ludicrous notion to think of eating another person, yet there is no doubt that taboo idea draws attention, a fact fully apparent in The Silence of The Lambs. 

Anthony Hopkins portrays Dr. Hannibal Lecter, a serial killer convicted of cannibalism who is one of Dr. Schurman-Kauflin’s “lone individuals.” He was a clinical psychologist who indulged his need for ingestion of human flesh and was incarcerated for doing so. The character is disturbing in the cool, calculating, and animalistic ways he interacts with the world around him: he is a first class predator with his hackles raised indefinitely, waiting for the kill. In contrast to this character, the movie introduces us to Clarice Starling, a young FBI recruit who is portrayed by Jodie Foster. Clarice is a woman attempting to break into the chiefly man’s world that is psychological profiling within the FBI. Her first assignment is to go down to the asylum that houses Dr. Lecter, and attempt to glean any possible information from him concerning a new serial killer at large named Buffalo Bill. It is this assignment which makes possible the relationship between Starling and Lecter.

From the first time they set eyes on one another there is a power struggle established between Starling and Lecter. She is a woman desperately trying to prove herself, and the means by which she can do so is to extract information from the seemingly locked source that is Lecter. They become locked in a struggle where, in a twist on the usual, the one in the cage has the upper hand. In a pivotal moment Lecter informs Starling that he knows what it is she needs, what it is she wants, and that is “Advancement, of course,” and he knows he can help her get it. This moment inserts the idea in the plot that what exists between the two of them is not just an example of doctor and patient, but rather a twisted occurrence of mentorship where Lecter has decided to foster Starling with the goal of mutual advancement: Starling in her field, and he from his imprisonment. In his paper “Murder and Mentorship: Advancement in Silence of the Lambs” Bruce Robbins explores their relationship, and delves in to how sexuality enters the mix. Throughout the entire film Ms. Starling has to fend off advances from doctors, police officers, and superiors alike. Lecter is the only one that gets anywhere near her psyche, but this is not to say that their relationship has an sexuality in it all, but rather eroticism based on competition. 

It is disturbing to imagine being the object of an erotic encounter with a serial killer. Director Jonathan Demme plays off of this in instances with Lecter and Starling. Robbins notes that “Lecter has no more reason to require a story of sexuality from Starling than he has to want from her…a professional motive…The close-up of Lecter’s face when he elicits the primal scene of Starling and the lambs could…be explained in terms of satisfied curiosity” (83). The interactions between these two people carry an erotic tone because they are so tense and intimate. With the close-ups Demme chooses to use the faces of Starling and Lecter become the sole visuals in many conversations, creating an image of the aforementioned intimacy: they are alone with each other. 

The Silence of the Lambs commands the audiences attention and emotions by fully exposing the savagery of Lecter and contrasting it with the easily relatable drive and relative innocence of Starling. Numerous brutalities are shown on screen from flaying to autopsy, yet the most disturbing scenes are those of conversation. Hopkins and Foster both won Academy Awards for their appearances in this film, and it is the audacity and complete immersion in their characters that supplies the heart of the film. When Lecter calls Starling in the final scene of the film and asserts to her that “I have no plans to call on you Clarice, the world’s more interesting with you in it” we are left knowing both parties have found the advancement they needed, and that the world will be a most interesting place with both of them still in it

As I was beginning to read “A Tale of Two Cities” I couldn’t shake off all the discussions of metafiction and intertextuality that had gone on in class. There is a constant eb and flow of reference and tipping of the hat within television, literature, and movies. I personally think its a result of the thousands of wonderful characters and inventive universes that have been presented to the public. There is a such rich history of storytelling that it’s only natural for artists to build from one another.
During the second season of “House of Cards” the character of Doug Stamper had his charge, Rachel Bilson, read him “A Tale of Two Cities” something that his mother had done before. Having not read the book I made no connections between the two, but now that I am through Book 1 I have begun to see the fledgling pieces of connection.
In both HOC and TOTC, identity is of little consequence. The most important aspect of any human being is what they stand for. Francis Underwood is seen as a powerful, but generally dependable man in the public eye, while behind closed doors he is a conniving and cold-hearted sociopath. So far in the novel, there are hints of organized revolution brewing in the streets and with the repetition of being “recalled to life” there is little necessity for names as much as image. The young woman has no need to call her newfound father by his name or title because all she needs is this figure of a father.
I hope as I go forth in this book a deeper connection will be forged, because the writers at HOC always seem to have something up their sleeves. I am left only imagining what Claire and Francis could have done if they had been around to catalyze the Third Estate.

Happy Moments

        There are moments that make you stop and feel lucky. They do not have to be grand gestures, but could simply be a few words, or a minor epiphany that bring this on. Today, I had one of those moments. I was sitting in the back of the music room at SMS, taking a moment for myself in between mentoring classes, when I saw I had a few e-mails. As I was looking through them I opened one up from Ms. Russo, and was humbled by what it contained. She was writing to let me know that I had been chosen as class speaker at graduation. As I’m writing this I am still quite honored, humbled, proud, happy, and nostalgic as I was in the moment I opened it.

        The past four years have been ones of tense trials as well as soaring jubilations that have come together to make quite the memorable highlight reel. I can’t say that they were the best four years of my life because, frankly, there a lot of years left to go, but I think I can honestly say that no four year chunk of time will easily surpass these in their power on making me who I am. I see now that it is quite fitting that I found this out while at SMS, for that place was in many ways the prologue for the story that is high school. I know not how the epilogue of this epic will read, but I am beyond expression in how honored I am that my classmates have put the trust in me to help cap the day we’ve all been waiting for.

James Brown was a musical force that has yet to equaled. There has been buzz of a movie for years now, but no success until now. I watched this trailer and immediately became ridiculously excited for it to come out. Chadwick Boseman is a phenomenal up and coming actor, and from the clips they show he makes quite a James Brown. I’m not sure if that’s him singing or if they’re dubbing in Brown’s vocals, but either way, I feel good about this one 🙂

The State of the “American Dream”

Last night, I watched “Mr Smith Goes to Washington,” a classic film that details the rise to prominence of honest and good-hearted Jeff Smith (Jimmy Stewart) into the twisted and dishonest world of United States politics. The night before that, I watched “American Psycho,” a very different film that reveals the blood-soaked, false-faced, and self-obsessive world of Patrick Bateman (Christian Bale), and how his life as a successful Wall Street mogul hides a darker reality. Both films are depictions of the American Dream, and how the pursuit of success equates to very different things for different people. I thoroughly enjoyed both films, and while they were glaringly different in many ways, one theme was present in both: the systems which have been built to benefit the American people are broken.  In on scene in “Mr. Smith,” Clarissa (Jean Arthur) states ” Look, when I came [to Washington] my eyes were big blue question marks. Now they’re big green dollar signs,” and I believe this is a powerful representation of where the dream has gone.

“Mr. Smith” came out in 1939, and “American Psycho” came in decades later in 2000. The time periods and schools of thought in which they were released are drastically different, but they both match up chillingly with the issues that are detailed in the articles we were given. In “Debt for Life”, Peter Coy quotes Michael DiPietro, who when asked about his college education, responded with “I’ve come to the conclusion that it’s an obsolete idea that a college education is like your golden ticket. It’s an idea that an older generation holds on to.” College has become less of a long-shot, and more of an expected debt for many students. Even so, as DiPietro points out, there are opportunities without one, and in the case of making the decision about it, one must weigh the cons of debt over the pros of a furthered mind. This discrepancy is on full display in “American Psycho”, where all of the characters talk about their Ivy League educations at Yale and Harvard, but not once in the entire film is a single economically educated endeavor undertaken. They fight over business card designs, the best reservations, and yet half of the time they can’t even remember each others names. This idea that money has replaced identity is what DiPietro is getting at. It is no longer about what you can prove you know, it’s about what you can prove you’re worth.

In “The Way We Were,” an article by David Kamp, and ironically a movie detailing a quest for fame and fortune as well, this new face of the American Dream is explored. Kamp begins by focusing on Moss Hart, a playwright who propelled himself out of New York City’s outer boroughs into the limelight of Broadway. He did this with hard, but not ridiculous amounts, of work and real skill.  This is the epitome of the dream: an average young man finding a way to make it big. The sad thing is that in today’s day and age those with talent are not always the ones propelled into the spotlight. When you look around at the various pop phenoms of the day, many of them are young, wild, kids who possess a small measure of talent and much larger measure of attractiveness. Marketability has always been a large part of success, but in today’s world of media frenzy it has become more vital in the eyes of advertisers to own the most attractive product than ever before. With stunts at award shows, and condemnable behavior on all fronts, the true talent looses the headlines to those that take part in the socially acceptable forms of destructive behavior, all in the name of finding fame and fortune with the American Dream.

In short, the dream is dead because it didn’t get enough funding to survive.

So with my perspective on the whole shabang laid out, let’s move on to that of my mother’s for some comparison:

Q: In your eyes, what is the American Dream?

A: The American Dream is that you know you can work hard, get rewards, live a life that you want, and fulfill dreams.

Q: Do you feel this is exclusive to the United States?

A: No, because I think that it was the original hope of immigrants coming to America, and I think that other people who come from other countries with the hope of the American Dream, but I don’t think that the political and socio-economic status of America provides for the dream the way it used to. I think it’s harder in third-world countries with things being underdeveloped, but I think people go to the European countries and can create lives that they want as well. Coming to America is not always better for people who think it will be. For people escaping genocide as political refugees it is a better life, but many people live here and are so disadvantaged that they won’t ever achieve anything they really want. Kids having to grow up surrounded by gangs may not ever have the chance to be safe and healthy if they can’t go to school or have a safe place to sleep every night.

Q: So, would you say that the American Dream is dead for the common person?

A: I think right now it is. Because of the way our world is and the whole world at large. there’s such a discrepancy between the very rich and the very poor. There’s really a vanishing middle class. The middle class isn’t what it used to be. Many circumstances look like the American Dream on paper, but in reality with medical costs and the cost of living the way it, it isn’t what it used to be.

Q: Do you see the Dream making a comeback any time soon?

A: Nope. Unfortunately.

Oscar Predictions 2014

Here we are on the day of the 86th annual Academy Awards and I didn’t get to all the nominees, damn. Even with that considered I have seen enough of all of them to have some strong opinions on who deserves the golden statuette. Below I will list my predictions in the form of “Will Win/Should Win”( if only one answer it’s the same), and we’ll see how I do tonight!

Best Picture:

12 Years a Slave

Best Actor in a Leading Role:

Matthew McConaughey (Dallas Buyers Club) / Leonardo DiCaprio (The Wolf of Wall Street)

Best Actress in a Leading Role:

Cate Blanchett (Blue Jasmine)

Best Actor in a Supporting Role:

Jared Leto (Dallas Buyers Club)

Best Actress in a Supporting Role:

Lupita Nyong’o (12 Years a Slave) / (only if Ms. Nyongo’o is robbed) June Squibb (Nebraska)

Best Animated Feature:

Frozen / The Wind Rises

Best Cinematography:

Emmanual Lubezki (Gravity) / Bruno Delbonnel (Inside Llewyn Davis)

Best Costume Design:

Michael Wilkinson (American Hustle)

Best Directing:

Alfonso Curaon (Gravity) / Steve McQueen (12 Years a Slave)

Best Documentary Feature:

? / The Square

Best Documentary Short:

No idea

Best Film Editing:

Gravity

Best Foreign Language Film:

The Great Beauty (Italy) / The Hunt (Denmark)

Best Makeup and Hairstyling:

Dallas Buyers Club / Jackass Presents: Bad Grandpa

Best Original Score:

John Williams (The Book Thief) / Thomas Newman (Saving Mr. Banks)

Best Original Song:

The Moon Song (Her)

Best Production Design:

Gravity / The Great Gatsby

Best Animated Short Film:

No idea

Best Live Action Short Film:

No idea

Best Sound Editing:

Gravity / Lone Survivor

Best Sound Mixing:

Gravity / Inside Llewyn Davis

Best Visual Effects:

Gravity (shoe-in, no questions asked)

Best Adapted Screenplay:

12 Years a Slave

Best Original Screenplay:

Her

Atonement Question 22: “Emily Tallis”

      Up until the beginning of chapter 12, Mrs. Tallis can easily be viewed by the reader as an absentee mother who seems to have little interest in her children’s lives. We re informed by Cecilia that her mother has rampant headaches, but there is an air of dismissal when this is told implying that the young woman does not take this reason as a valid one for her mother’s constant removal from daily life. There is little information other than comments here and there from the two daughters to supply us with any positive image of Emily until chapter 12 until she begins to fill in her own gaps. 

        We enter Emily’s mind as she is laying down in her bedroom fending off what could easily become a debilitating headache. While she is laying there her thoughts stay constantly on her children as she soaks in the goings-on around the house. She hears and observes all that happens around her room from her place on the bed, and for the first time we see that although she may not be physically present, she misses very little that goes on in her home. Emily is humanized, and to interject a neologism, and  maternalized by her internal monologue on her children. Her thoughts show a true love of her daughters, and an immense guilt for not being more present in their daily lives. This view allows readers to see her as mother struggling to overcome limitations and be the figure she knows her family deserves. The chapter creates enormous empathy and sympathy for Emily by adding her take on the household we have come to be a part of. She is no longer just a name, she is a mind. 

          Emily’s views also expand the readers views of those around her. Cecilia, in particular, is given much more depth. Emily worries for her eldest daughter, seeing that the academic world has changed her. This despairing mother sees little meaning in her daughter’s studies which encompass reading and debate Emily believes could easily be accomplished within the family library. This reveals fully the view of the female identity in the Tallis world. Cecilia represents the new generation of women who want to go forth and add their minds and ideas to the male-dominated world of academia, while Emily is of the old generation that believes a woman achieving  a place as a professor, only to be forgotten soon after their departure, is no more rewarding than being an able housewife. Emily’s mind reveals a deep-seeded conflict between generations that is amplified by education, marriage choices, and an inability to easily find compromise. 

Atonement Question 7: “Characterize Paul Marshall”

       Paul Marshall is originally presented to the reader as quite the perfect human being. He is successful, smart, respected in the professional community, and his business is set to make a killing by selling his chocolates to the soldiers at war. There is nothing glaringly off-center about him at first sight. However, this changes rather quickly. The scene that begins to alter the view the reader has on Paul is one where he comes in to sit and talk with Jackson, Pierrot, Lola, and Briony. Paul is Leon’s age, so mid 20’s, but he almost immediately begins to flirt with Lola. Lola is so wrapped up in trying to be more mature, a common affliction for girls and boys at her age, and so she does her best to flirt back. There is a particularly uncomfortable passage when Lola is eating one of the candies that Paul’s company designed. The sexual tension between this man and this girl is unsettling at best. With the prior characterization paired with this latter half, a picture begins to form of Marshal that is far from positive. He can be seen as a self-absorbed and predatory person who does a near-flawless job of hiding these less than satisfactory traits from those around him. Personally, if I were to make a prediction, I believe it will be revealed that Paul is the man who assaulted Lola, and in allowing the blame to  fall on Robbie the assumptions of his character, or lack there of, are more than accurate.

Snubbed

With the Oscars fast approaching, the talk of the town religiously turns to reflect on past shows and who deservedly or undeservedly won. Whenever this begins, my mind turns to the Best Picture race of 1995. Admittedly, I was not even born when this awards show aired, but with my ever-growing array of passionate stances on films, I feel validated. This particular year was one that saw two modern masterpieces, a remarkable film directed by Academy darling Robert Redford, another that remains a boatload of fun, and finally a huge box-office success with big names and the love of America’s collective heart. So, who would you expect to win? It has been shown time and again that the Academy can be swayed from recognizing the best film to instead recognize the one that had the best marketing. Even with this considered, the living members still have much to answer to.

The first of the two masterpieces nominated was “The Shawshank Redemption.” This film is one that sits atop the IMDb list of its top 250 films as voted on by users and critics. It possesses a staggering 9.3 out of 10 star rating, and it deserves most of this praise. Morgan Freeman and Tim Robbins turn in career best performances as prison inmates, under the direction of Frank Darabont working from his screenplay adapted from a Stephen King story, and all shot under the watchful eye of Roger Deakins, arguably the greatest living cinematographer. The viewer is taken on a 142 minute epic that follows the path of the self-proclaimed innocent Andy Dufrense (Robbins) as he assimilates into the world of a rough and tumble Maine prison. “Shawshank” is a true triumph in filmmaking, allowing a story that is equal parts inspiring and harrowing to slowly enfold without being forced or embellished for effect. It did not perform well at the box office because let’s face it, a prison drama does not always appeal to the common audience. Regardless, it was recognized with 7 oscar nominations including Best Actor, Best Cinematography, Best Music – Original Score, and as mentioned earlier, Best Picture. But let’s not get ahead of ourselves.

The other widely regarded masterpiece that was in the running was “Pulp Fiction.” It was a follow up by new writer/actor/director Quention Tarantino who had established himself in 1992 with the breakout hit “Reservoir Dogs.” “Pulp Fiction” is revolutionary in the way it brought non-linear storytelling to mainstream audiences. This is not to say the style had not been used before because it had, but more to say that “Pul Fiction” made it cool. John Travolta, Bruce Willis, Uma Thurman, Samuel L. Jackson, and a whole crew of other phenomenal performers populate a story that jumps all over the place to show the audience a world of hit-men, mob bosses, violence, and humour, all communicated through a witty and biting script that never misses a beat. This film established Tarantino has more than a one trick pony, and was hailed by critics and audiences alike as an instant masterpiece. There is so little to fault within its scenes that it has remained a favorite. Like “Shawshank,” “Pulp Fiction” was nominated for 7 Oscars including Best Actor in a Leading Role, Best Actor in a Supporting Role, and again, Best Picture.

Now, of  the three remaining nominees one was “Four Weddings and a Funeral” and a second was “Game Show.” Both very well made films that deserved the recognition but were widely regarded as just lucky to be in the pack. This leaves us with our final nominee: “Forrest Gump.” “Forrest Gump” is a film starring Tom Hanks, Robin Wright, and Gary Sinise under the direction of Robert Zemeckis, that details the life of the title character portrayed by Hanks. It is a trip through American history during the 20th century and takes a look at life through the lens of a simple man just trying to do his best, and gives us a narrative that is equal parts heartwarming and pensive. Needless to say, it was a smash. Audiences and critics alike loved it, which was reflected in its box office score as well as its continuing place in the hearts of the nation. It is a well-made film, but does not hold up to the quality that is presented in both “Pulp Fiction” and “Shawshank Redemption”: it is fun and heartwarming, but it sacrifices at times to run straight for the audiences heartstrings.

So Oscar night rolled around , and the awards were revealed. As the night went on announcement came and went, seeing Tarantino score one for best writing, but “Shawshank” and the rest of the players in “Pulp Fiction” were passed up. “Forrest Gump” on the other hand raked in the awards, winning 5 before the nights big reveal. Finally the Best Picture was to be announced, and when the words were said it was not “Shawshank Redemption” or “Pulp Fiction” that went home with the prize, but rather “Forrest Gump.” In my opinion, this is one of the biggest slip ups by the Academy in their history, one that includes many missteps. In making this decision they let schmaltz and dollar signs lead their votes to a very well-made picture that was seated many rungs in quality below two of their other choices. With this in mind, I can only hope they don’t make a similar choice at this years awards.