High Fidelity

I recently watched an adorable movie directed by Stephen Frears called High Fidelity.  What makes it so adorable you ask?  Isn't every John Cusack movie adorable, or does it seem adorable because he himself is the epitome of TATH (too adorable to handle).  Now John Cusack was in many adorable movies in the 80s so I was under the impression that this movie was one of his classic 80s movie which didn't bother me at all because I love the 80s (the music, the movies, the fashion) everything about it makes me wish I lived longer to remember it.  Anyway, it had a very 80s style to it, then I saw that it was made in 2000, and I was surprised.  It has the potential to be a John Hughes movie or even a Cameron Crowe.  Then I saw it was directed by Stephen Frears who also directed The Queen and Dirty Pretty Things.  Both these movies are in a completely different genre than High Fidelity which is a cute romantic comedy.  Well its not really that comedic, but Jack Black is there for his annoying comedic relief.  Frears also directed Dangerous Liasions which I've never seen so I don't know what genre it would fall under.

I liked this movie quite a bit because I could relate to it for two reasons.  Reason number one being that Cusack's character Rob constantly looks at the camera and talks to the audience more than other characters.  I think Frear did this as a reason so we can relate to Rob and sympathize with him.  Of course, its John Cusack, who doesn't feel bad for him when something bad happens?  He's just too adorable!  Also, the talking to the audience seemed more to me like he was talking to himself, which I do quite frequently.  The movie starts out with him being dumped by longtime girlfriend, and through out the movie he gets a little crazy about it and dwells on it.  Sounds like me.  Which brings me to reason number 2, the Top 5 Break Ups he discusses at the beginning of the movie.  I think we all have somewhere in the back of our mind a top 5 list for breakups, I know I do.  Top 5 seems to be a consistent theme throughout the film as he has a top 5 list for pretty much everything.  What I enjoyed, is that Rob decided to figure out his breakup by communicating with his top 4 as to why they broke up with him in the first place.  Most of them he finds results, some he didn't really care anymore.  So everyone likes a character they can relate to, and that's why I like Rob.  I think asking my exes questions is a great idea.  Of course there needs to be enough time in between the break up that its not just me trying to get him back.  Rob also made a comment about music telling how you feel.  I agree with him 100%.  He makes tapes for different situations to help say how he feels about that particular situation.  I myself have done that too.  He even informed me how to properly make a break up tape, what should be expressed in the music.

 This movie was good, but I didn't like the ending.  Maybe its over my head, but to me it just didn't add up.  Most of it ties in together, him DJing again, the success of the hoodlums and Jack Black's band, but I didn't understand why he got back together with Laura.  I thought he made great progress in realizing what was wrong with their relationship and getting over her, but then she takes him back because it just seemed like the right thing to do.  And he's okay with that?  After flirting with a writer from The Reader he then has a heartfelt conversation of wanting to marry Laura and never growing tired of her.  I know this is suppose to be like a Coming of Age genre, but what does he realize?  In a way he's back where he started.  I guess the time apart made him realize he's ready to be 100% committed to her because he admitted to not being fully committed to her the first time they were together.  Maybe I just answered my own question, but if anyone can help me out with my confusion it would be greatly appreciated.

Okay, I'm almost done with this review, but first I must list things I liked and didn't like about this film.  Like:  The different alternative reactions of Rob when Tim Robbins' character Ian comes into the store.  I myself try to think of the best way to react to a sucky situation and these alternatives showed me different outcomes.  Dislike:  Jack Black, does anyone not see how annoying he is?  Does he ever play different characters? Maybe that's why lovable Seth Rogen and geeky Jonah Hill are now the token fat funny guy in every comedy.  I did however like his character in Shallow Hal.  I'm starting to think Frears wrote him in the movie so he could make more money.  "Hey Jack Black, he's a funny, fat guy, lets put him in our movie and make millions on the idiots that love every movie he's in"  Like: Drake Bell playing a young John Cusack.  Clearly Frears wants us to know Cusack has been adorable at least since 7th grade.  I felt angry that John Cusack was dumped but then I felt angrier that Drake Bell was dumped.  That was good casting, you're almost forgiven for the Jack Black casting debacle.  Dislike:  The beginning of the last club scene.  While Rob was playing music the background noise of people talking was just too unrealistic.  Anyone can tell the talking was recorded separately from the club scene.

Finally, little fact I learned about John Cusack.  He's from Evanston, IL, the next town over!  He's like my neighbor.  I know this wasn't the review to The Fourth Kind, like I stated previously, but are you really that disappointed?  The movies probably not that good. 

Update 5/16/2011:

I've decided that since I live in Chicago, I will visit locations in every film I review that took place in Chicago.  This is the location of the record store from High Fidelity.

Awaiting the 83rd Academy Awards/Children of the Corn

The 83rd Annual Academy Awards will be presented on Sunday, February 27, 2011.  Televised on ABC, the award ceremony will be held at the Kodak Theatre.  I am patiently waiting for the nominees to be announced, which won't be until Tuesday, January 25, 2011 at 5:30AM at the Samuel Goldwyn Theater.  From January 25th until February 27th, I will be watching and reviewing ever nominated film in my blog.  Of course I will let you know the nominees once I find out and will be giving you my opinion on who should win and who probably will win.  Leave comments and let me know your opinion too.

 I've recently watched both versions of Stephen King's Children of the Corn.  I usually don't care for remakes, but I've learned its easier to get permission to rewrite someone's idea than it is to think you've written an original piece only to be sued by someone who insisted they wrote it first.  I always expect remakes, however, to be completely different from the original.  Children of the Corn was no exception.  Neither was very good.  The original Children of the Corn was made in 1984 and starred Linda Hamilton, most famous for her role in the Terminator movies.  The remake was a made for TV movie.  Released in 2009, it apparently follows the short story by Stephen King better than its predecessor does.  I haven't read the book yet so I can't comment further on that.  One thing I know for   sure though, the remake was far more disturbing.  The movie starts with a cute little boy preaching to children about having to kill their parents, not as creepy as the beginning of the original where the children just randomly show up to a diner and start slaughtering all the adults.  They were led by a creepier looking child who was actually 25 when the movie was made and went on to other creepy roles as Cousin It in the Addam's Family and the voice of Chucky from the Child's Play movies.  That was pretty much the only scary part of the movie.  And of course the main adults survived.  John Franklin's Growth Hormone Deficiency actually helps him to play a more believable Isaac than 99s remake Preston Bailey.  He's just too adorable to be an evil preacher boy.  Maybe they should have brought Franklin back for this role.  Side note: The original Malachi (Courtney Gains) played the sheriff in Sweet Home Alabama.  Anyway, one major difference was the bickering married couple.  The couple in the original weren't married and Hamilton's character Vicki kind of hinted towards a proposal in the beginning.  What was interesting was that the couple in the remake was biracial, even though it was the 70s and biracial couples weren't very common.  They were also very annoying, constantly bickering at each other causing viewers to wonder why they were even together or how they got together in the first place.  In my experience with horror movies I've noticed the director usually makes the viewer relate with the main character or feel bad for them so that you don't want them to die, but I found myself so annoyed by this couple (mostly the woman) that I was routing for the kids.  I was happy in the end when they both were sacrificed for He Who Walks Behind the Rows, apparently that's how the King's story ends too.

I'm going to talk mostly about the remake now because it was so disturbing, and I have no idea what people were smoking when they not only let this movie air on television, but funded it to be made at all.  Something that bothered me were the young girls that walked around pregnant.  I guess this is pretty common in today's society with teenage pregnancy on the rise, but maybe Ruth should have been played by someone that didn't use to be on Nickelodeon's show Zoey 101.  I don't care that she's 18 and considered an adult, she'll still be Zoey's sweet and innocent 13 year old friend to me.  Of course none of this is as disturbing as the child sex scene.  It made me want to vomit.  It starts out with Isaac saying "Now is the time for harvest".  Well little did I know that harvesting equals child pornography.  All of a sudden these two children get on the altar and start having sex.  Full on nudity.  There were boobs and moaning involved.  To make matters worst, younger children got in a circle to watch and cheer.  It's disturbing to even talk about it.  I'm still doing research to figure out exactly how young these two actors engaging in sex are.  I read on another blog that the girl is still not 18, so she was definitely too young to do that scene.  As for the male procreater, well I found his facebook, but none of his websites state his age, but I'm attracted to him so he's probably young.  So that part pretty much turned me off the movie.  Call me a party pooper, but I'm not a huge fan of child pornography even if it was adults playing children.  Stephen King is a very talented author, I don't know why he let them associate that scene with his name.

In conclusion, if you want to watch Children of the Corn, I recommend only the first one from 1984.  Unless you're a wierdo that likes disturbing things then feel free to watch the remake because it is totally different from the original and based more on the short story, but the acting is terrible.  No surprise there.  If you like disturbing movies like Clockwork Orange, then you might like Children of the Corn.  Don't let me stop you, but you have been warned.  Ironically enough I'm now going to watch Children of the Corn 3: Urban Harvest made in 1995.  I couldn't find Children of the Corn 2:  The Final Sacrifice anywhere.  I don't think it made it onto DVD.  I figured I'd give all the corn children a chance because so many movies were made, and I can't just watch one movie in a series.

Continuing with the suspense theme, my next review will be 2009s The Fourth Kind.  I've heard its really scary so I can't wait to watch it.

Thanks for reading!