Gabriel García Márquez is a bit of an enigma to me. He's one of my favorite writers, but I end up loving his stories without really knowing why. There's an easy comparison between this book and Nabokov's Lolita: both of them are about an older man who obsesses over and falls in love with an adolescent girl. But, of course, this book's Argentinian setting makes it quite different in important ways; there's an entirely different sensibility to the characters. And while the relationship between the narrator and his Delgadina is certainly central to the plot, I'm not sure the story is really about that. It's much more about love than obsession or perversion, which also separates it from Nabokov's story. And when you get down to it, I think the story is much more about old age and nostalgia than it is about sex. Or maybe I'm just talking out of my ass. Whatever the book is truly commenting on, if anything, the prose is so wonderful that I almost don't care if I don't understand it.

Started: 2006-01-10 | Finished: 2006-01-11

Purchase from Amazon

My first experience with The Producers was on Saturday, May 31, 2003, when Juliette and I saw Jason Alexander and Martin Short in the Los Angeles production at the Pantages Theatre. I think I can honestly say I've never laughed harder at any other play. It's too bad that I saw it before I saw the 1968 film; the original suffered in comparison—to me, at least. We were excited to see the new film version of the musical, but I'm not sure why—after loving the stage version so much, how could a movie hope to live up to it? And, really, it didn't. There wasn't the same energy to the movie as on stage and, in fact, a fair amount of the production was too theatrical and didn't come off well on screen. To top it off, Uma Thurman just wasn't right for the part. She looked good enough, sure, but she didn't have the voice or dancing talent to carry the role. I think the film's producers wanted to bring some extra star power to the movie, but they ended up kind of killing some of my favorite scenes from the stage musical. Still, the rest of the cast was pretty good. I think I preferred Martin Short to Matthew Broderick, but Nathan Lane was excellent. And I particularly liked Roger Bart as Carmen Ghia. Surprisingly, I even liked Will Ferrell—for once, his overwrought screeching was right for the part. If you have the chance to see The Producers on stage you should definitely take it. If not, I'd say that, even though this version had its faults, the source material is good enough to make the movie worthwhile.

Viewed: 2006-01-06 | Released: 2005-12-15 | Score: B

IMDb Page

I wasn't really all that interested in seeing this one, but Juliette and I felt like seeing a movie with her sibs and this was the least uninteresting of the lot. It did get a few laughs out of me, but mostly it was pretty dumb. On the positive side, the acting talent that Jim Carrey discovered during The Eternal Sunshine of the Spotless Mind still seems to be present—he hammed it up in his usual style for most of the movie, but during the climactic scene he pulled out a pretty decent monologue.

Viewed: 2006-01-03 | Released: 2005-12-20 | Score: D

IMDb Page

I first saw Army of Darkness in the 11th grade and I've been a fan of Bruce Campbell ever since. There's just something about his cocky, campy sense of humor that I really enjoy watching. And, as it turns out, I enjoy reading it, too. His writing style has this unusual combination of swagger and self-deprecation that made for a really fun read. I will say, though, that if you're not a fan, I don't think this book has much to offer you.

Started: 2005-12-01 | Finished: 2005-12-25

Purchase from Amazon

Beat to Quarters is the sixth Hornblower book according to the chronology of the series, but it was the first one written. Surprisingly, I think it may be my favorite one so far. You'd expect that in a first book there'd be a lot of exposition, but Forester handles it very well, and by the end of this book I felt that I knew Horatio Hornblower much better than I had before. It was also interesting to see how Forester's style changed over time. For example, Beat to Quarters made a lot of references to the fact that certain actual historical events hadn't taken place yet—a device that I think was included to give a better sense of the period. Of course, by the later books, less time was spent on that sort of contextual help because people already knew what to expect. I think the action in this one was also more intense and interesting than in the previous books. By the end of the novel, I found myself really looking forward to the next one.

Started: 2005-12-27 | Finished: 2005-12-27

Purchase from Amazon

This one actually had me questioning whether I'm a snob about comedy or if I just have a bad sense of humor. The rest of the audience—including all three of the people who I saw it with—laughed at just about every joke in the movie. I laughed at one. I think part of this is just my sensitivity to humiliation; like most films of this genre, there were many moments that fall into the category I call "the part of the movie I can't watch." I do have to give this film credit for being well-written, though. There's a lot more to it than just your typical meet-the-family comedy. In fact, there's enough meat to the script that it gives the cast a chance to really act, which they mostly do quite well. I even thought Rachel McAdams did a respectable job. The only one I wasn't sure about was Ty Giordano. He does OK, but I don't know if he really has much range as an actor—he seemed more or less exactly the same as he did in A Lot Like Love. If you're looking for a good holiday date movie, this one will probably do the trick.

Viewed: 2005-12-18 | Released: 2005-12-15 | Score: C

IMDb Page

I would have given this a fourth star if not for the fact that it was just. so. long. It was well-paced, had a lot of good action, and it was cool, but at three hours plus there's just nothing that can be done to avoid it feeling really, really long. But on to the good stuff. To begin with, I think that Peter Jackson did an amazing job with updating this film. The effects were stunning, and the action really sucked me in—and I'm not one to be won over easily by effects and action sequences. The acting was mostly good, although I'm not sure Jack Black was really the right person to cast as the director—he came off as just a little too hammy, in my opinion. What surprised me, though, was that the best acting in the movie came from Kong, himself. I would never have suspected that a computer-generated gorilla would be capable of such a nuanced, intriguing, moving performance, but that is exactly how I would describe it. I would definitely recommend this one, with the small caveat that it's probably not right for anyone with a short attention span.

Viewed: 2005-12-19 | Released: 2005-12-04 | Score: B

IMDb Page

It's hardly surprising that Brokeback Mountain is one of the most talked-about films of the year—you couldn't really expect otherwise with a "gay cowboy movie." I'm not quite sure it completely lives up to the hype, but it is a very good film. To begin with, it's visually stunning. You expect that from a Western—landscapes are an integral part of the genre—but what impressed me was how well Ang Lee, who was born and raised in Taiwan, was able to capture such an American feeling in his movie. The combination of lean, spare dialogue with the vast scope of the visuals lends this sort of stripped-down, rugged feeling, at once haunting and empty, but also raw and passionate. That more or less also describes Heath Ledger's performance, which would have been perfect if not for the fact that he had so much trouble with the accent. As for Jake Gyllenhaal, well, I'm starting to be a little unsure if he's quite as good as I've given him credit for being. I think it's just that he's a little too young and doesn't have the range to play a fully mature character. That's fine for movies like Donnie Darko and Jarhead, but by the end of Brokeback Mountain he's supposed to be approaching middle age, with a teenaged son and a wife of nearly twenty years, and I just didn't buy it. The supporting cast was good, and I especially thought the three main women (Michelle Williams, Anne Hathaway, and Linda Cardellini) did well, but really it was all about Ledger and Gyllenhaal. I don't know if I think this one really deserves a Best Picture or Best Actor win, but I think the nominations it's gotten so far are quite appropriate. And it's been kind of a lean year for movies—in my book, at least—so maybe some wins wouldn't be so bad after all.

Viewed: 2005-12-17 | Released: 2005-12-08 | Score: A

IMDb Page

I had a really hard time finding free moments in which to read this book, which was a real shame because it grabbed me from the start. When I finally got a chance to really sit and read it, I ended up staying awake until three in the morning to finish it. This was my first time reading Ishiguro and, despite what I had heard, I found his writing to be very accessible. More to the point, I found it to be beautiful, the sort of haunting beauty that is all the more powerful for its seeming simplicity. My one regret about the book is that the review that led me to read it gave too much away. I think the book would have been even more effective if I hadn't known the twist ahead of time. That's why I'm not going to tell you much about the story itself. (And, by the way, if you happen to follow the Barnes & Noble link above, don't read the School Library Journal review.) What I will say is that the blurb on the jacket cover is a bit deceptive—the book goes in a very different direction from the normal lit-fic stuff you'd expect. In fact, if it weren't for the fact that it's by such a recognized literary author, I imagine a lot of those snooty lit-fic readers out there would turn up their noses at it. Trust me, though, it's good.

Started: 2005-11-10 | Finished: 2005-11-27

Purchase from Amazon

Rent has always been one of those shows I've felt like I ought to have seen but haven't had the opportunity, so I was very interested to see the film adaptation. Having seen it, I can see why it was such a big deal, even though a lot of what made it provocative in 1996 has lost some of its edge. When a revolutionary show loses its shock value and people lose interest in the issues it presents the show often suffers—Hair is an example of that, in my opinion. Rent, though, manages to survive this transition largely due to the character drama and the great music. Six of the eight members of the original Broadway cast reprised their roles in this film adaptation, and I think that their familiarity with the characters really showed in the performances. The two newcomers, Rosario Dawson and Tracie Thoms, also integrated very well with their veteran counterparts. The only catch in my mind was that, as good as this movie was, it seemed like the stage musical would have been better. Throughout the film I kept finding myself wondering how scenes had been staged in the Broadway production. It seemed to me that the only thing really gained by turning it into a movie was that people got a chance to see it who otherwise might not have had the chance—like me, for example.

Viewed: 2005-11-25 | Released: 2005-11-22 | Score: A

IMDb Page