Entertain me!

I've been a miserable, mucus-y mass of contagion since last Thursday. I will warn you straight away, I haven't been able to sleep because of the microcosm of plague, and I've been watching a lot of movies (thank The Maker for Netflix streaming video and AppleTV). Here's a run-down of what I've been watching, complete with my own two cents worth of commentary:

Valhalla Rising (Mads Mikkelsen) – A bleak, brutal and very weird story about a one-eyed Viking who goes on walkabout with a slave boy and a handful of would-be Crusaders. They set out for the Holy Land and end up… somewhere else entirely. It was a little too 'stream of consciousness' for my taste, but the cinematography was absolutely gorgeous; the film felt so cold and barren that I swear I needed an extra blanket just to get through it.

Brothers (Tobey Maguire, Natalie Portman, Jake Gyllenhaal) – Let me get this out of the way right off the bat: I love the spelling of Jake Gyllenhaal's last name. Any name that manages to cram in a 'y', back- to -back l's and a double vowel and still be less than 18 letters is very impressive. Ridiculous, I know, but I already warned you that I'm sleep deprived. Anyhoo… The movie was well acted, but still disappointing, and I blame the trailers for that. They led me to believe that this was going to be some big psychological drama, pitting brother against brother in a tense and heartbreaking struggle. Not so much. It's a remake of a recent Danish flick (note: is Denmark considered a Scandinavian country? Is it cold there? Spending long spans of time cooped up would explain their cinematic style… I must do more research on this) but it definitely felt like the filmmakers put a heavy American spin on it. In the end I found myself not really caring what happened to this family, something that could have been remedied, I think, simply by giving the relationship between Gyllenhaal and Portman's characters a little extra time to develop. As it stands, it's barely more than a footnote, but watching it, I wanted it to be so much more.

A Clockwork Orange (Malcolm McDowell) – I will freely admit, I have never met a Kubrick film that I've liked. He definitely has his own style, and I am not a fan. But I figure when a movie makes as big a stir as this one does, even 40 years later, it deserves a look-see. Now, I've read the book a couple of times, and I did enjoy it, but sweet Jesus tap dancing Christ did I hate this movie. It manages to be heavy handed and nebulous (Kubrick!) at the same time, and misses several of the more subtle points that the book makes. It's a dystopian story, I get that, I really do, but by the end of the movie I had absolutely no sympathy for the main character what so ever. Even when I should have been appalled at the inhumane things being done to him, I just couldn't bring myself to care. At. All. Several times I caught myself thinking "Well, Alex, you're an asshole and you totally deserve it." The way the book was written, there was at least a little empathy for Alex as he went through his torture, and subsequent loss of his "lovely, lovely Ludwig Van". USELESS (but cool) TRIVIA WARNING: I read somewhere that Heath Ledger used Malcolm McDowell's performance in A Clockwork Orange as a jumping-off point for his performance as The Joker, and you can totally see it.

Jeffrey (Steven Weber, Sir Patrick Stewart) – Yes, THAT Steven Weber (the guy from 'Wings'). And yes, THAT Sir Patrick Stewart (the one and only Jean-Luc Picard). I love Sir Patrick Stewart (and I love saying SIR Patrick Stewart, so much so that I will correct people, all obnoxious like, when I hear his name mentioned), I saw him a long time ago in The Tempest at an outdoor summer Shakespeare festival, and ever since I will watch him in anything. But I digress. 'Jeffrey' is about a gay man (Jeffrey, go figure) who meets the man of his dreams almost immediately after declaring himself celibate over his fear of AIDS. Don't worry, Sir Patrick Stewart does not play the "man of his dreams" roll in the movie; that part fell to Michael T. Weiss, who some of you may remember from TV's The Pretender. Anyone? Anyone? No? I didn't watch it either. Oh Well. The movie was done on a small budget, and at times, you can tell. But there are giggle-inducing scenes, like the 'Gay Waiter Hoe-Down' fantasy that make it easy to overlook the occasionally shoddy camera work. I also think it's funny that Netflix recommended this movie to me based on my interest in Eddie Izzard and the must-see Tom Hanks classic Philadelphia. I'm glad they did, as I thoroughly enjoyed it.

National Geographic: The Lord of the Rings – This is part of their 'Beyond the Movie' series, and I have to say, I really enjoyed it. They take a look at the historic and cultural influences that Tolkien could have called upon when writing 'Rings'. They mention parallels between Aragorn and William Wallace, Gandalf and a litany of trusted royal advisors (I really liked the 'Worm Tongue vs. Rasputin' segment). The literature geek in me would have liked this to be twice as long as it was (it clocks in at barely over 51 minutes), but the whole 'Leave 'em wanting more' thing is applicable here. If you've got any interest at all in LOTR, rent this; it'll shed new and really cool light on the movies the next time you watch them (and as frequently as TNT airs them, that could be fairly soon).

Crazy Heart (Jeff Bridges, Collin Farrell) – No bones about it, I liked this movie a lot. Not a lot of action, but the characters are great, and the music was a big surprise bonus for me. I'm not much of a fan of country music, but immediately after watching the movie I hit up iTunes for a couple of the songs from the soundtrack. Story-wise, there were no forced happy endings here. The characters ended up maybe not where they wanted to be, but where they needed to be, which rang much more true than any Disneyfied ending. This may also be the first movie I've ever seen Maggie Gyllenhaal in where she didn't look like a tired 50 year old.

Robin Hood – The 2006 BBC series. I've seen this series mentioned in several of my online communities, and it's been recommended for me numerous times by both Netflix and Amazon. I've always loved all things Robin Hood (I even get the urge to watch Kevin 'Now I'm Using An Accent, Now I'm Not' Costner's Robin Hood every once in a while), so I finally gave in and decided to give this 2006 series a shot. Now, I feel the need to mention the BBC series Robin of Sherwood that aired here in the States on PBS in the mid-80's. It starred first Michael Praed, then Jason Connery (as in, son of Sean '007' Connery) as Robin and it was magical. It used a whole gamut of Celtic mythology to bolster the story lines, and it had a gritty authenticity to it that I don't think has been matched to this day. As I started to watch the newer one, I thought to myself "I'm not going to like this as much as RoS." I was pleasantly surprised, though, at how much I do like it. This is a scrappier take on the Robin Hood mythos – younger, more hip - that still delivers on the romance and humor. There are plot holes, to be sure (I don't think Robin and his cronies could actually waltz in and out of Nottingham Castle as frequently and as easily as they do here) but the writers have allowed for a few characters usually relegated to supporting roles to really develop here and I found myself actually more attached to them than the main characters. It's a fun bit of Saturday matinee-type adventure, and the dialogue is well written and well delivered. Fun movie tie-in: Richard Armitage, the actor who plays Sir Guy, has been cast as Head Dwarf In Charge Thorin Oakenshield in the upcoming 'Hobbit' movies (and given that Mr. Armitage is both very tall and very easy on the eyes, I'd say Peter Jackson's makeup department has their work cut out for them).