I don't consider myself a romantic. I rarely cry at movies, but this movie just made me ball. It's an Australian film called Innocence.
I saw the trailer for it while watching another video, and I decided to rent it. I loved the premise of the movie, which is about rekindling your first love after 40 years. I have a thing about my first love so I had to see it.
I was in tears the whole time. It made me wonder what it would be like to see my first love again after 40 years. Would the guy still even remember me? He was my first love, but who knows where I ranked in his life.
It makes me teary eyed to think about rekindling a first love. Is it possible to start again, start all over? Can you pick up where you left off 40 years ago?
I've tried to answer this question myself, and tried to write a play about running into my first love. The play was hard to write, so I didn't finish it. I wanted my characters to have a happy ending, but I couldn't do it.
It made me wonder if I believed in second chances in life. I don't think I do. Once an opportunity is gone, it's gone forever and you can never get it back, not in the same way anyway. The play started to be about how there are no second chances in life, and even if there were, my characters wouldn't choose them. What couldn't work in the past can't work in the present. The thought depressed me so I stopped working on the play.
Watching the movie made me want to work on the play again. Maybe my characters can't have the happy ending they've always wanted, but maybe they can have happy moments. And perhaps a few happy moments are better than no moments at all right? I hope so.
Tuesday, January 27, 2004
Check out this Victoria's Secret link, Victoria's Secret Sale page. You can find some really good deals on clothes for under $20 under Clearance. I love shopping for marked down clothes on the Net. It's like digging through the sales racks at stores.
I picked up two Victoria's Secret matching lounge outfits to wear at home, each for under $20. They're cute outfits, 100% cotton, the top and pants match, and they're terrific when you want to look good but still be comfortable.
I picked up two Victoria's Secret matching lounge outfits to wear at home, each for under $20. They're cute outfits, 100% cotton, the top and pants match, and they're terrific when you want to look good but still be comfortable.
It looks like John Kerry won, and Chris Matthews and the Hard Ball gang are saying Howard Dean has a stint and and a 1 in 10 chance of winning the democratic presidential nomination.
I've turned the TV on just in case Howard Dean decides to give another "I have a scream" speech. God, I love that phrase. I wonder who coined it. People are so clever aren't they?
I never liked Howard Dean. He was too much angry talk and no substance on his policy issues. I still think the 2004 presidential election race will be close, with the Smirkiemeister coming out on top.
I'm a democrat, but I'm also a pragmatist at heart. Political pundits have been reporting lately that the republican party is united behind Shrub giving 90% support. This the real story of why the Shrubmeister will win. 9 out 10 people in his own party support him.
The democrats are fighting amongst themselves, and when there is too much infighting there is no unity. Demos just don't get that, and until they do people like Smirkiemeist will be running the country.
It's that theory of if you give people enough rope, eventually most people will hang themselves. The demos are hanging themselves, voting Green in local elections and saying it doesn't matter. Of course it matters.
It's the effect of living in a very connected world. What one small part of the world does really affects another. You can't be a demo and vote green in a local election, and not expect there to be consequences on the national party and national politics.
The GOP has disciplined itself to understand this theroy. They've learned to put their differences aside and present a united front. Arnie's win in the governor of Cali's race is testament to that.
But the GOP had to suffer a long time in politics to figure that one out. And their takeover of the federal government has been in the planning stages for years, and it started out in local elections all over the country. The GOP started connecting with all kinds of people, and well look where they are now.
Demos, I'm starting to think, are so insular, thinking that everyone is crazy and stupid except for them. That's not a great strategy for getting people over to their side.
So maybe it's the demo's turn to suffer. The only problem is, how long are people willing to suffer? It looks like to me another four years.
I've turned the TV on just in case Howard Dean decides to give another "I have a scream" speech. God, I love that phrase. I wonder who coined it. People are so clever aren't they?
I never liked Howard Dean. He was too much angry talk and no substance on his policy issues. I still think the 2004 presidential election race will be close, with the Smirkiemeister coming out on top.
I'm a democrat, but I'm also a pragmatist at heart. Political pundits have been reporting lately that the republican party is united behind Shrub giving 90% support. This the real story of why the Shrubmeister will win. 9 out 10 people in his own party support him.
The democrats are fighting amongst themselves, and when there is too much infighting there is no unity. Demos just don't get that, and until they do people like Smirkiemeist will be running the country.
It's that theory of if you give people enough rope, eventually most people will hang themselves. The demos are hanging themselves, voting Green in local elections and saying it doesn't matter. Of course it matters.
It's the effect of living in a very connected world. What one small part of the world does really affects another. You can't be a demo and vote green in a local election, and not expect there to be consequences on the national party and national politics.
The GOP has disciplined itself to understand this theroy. They've learned to put their differences aside and present a united front. Arnie's win in the governor of Cali's race is testament to that.
But the GOP had to suffer a long time in politics to figure that one out. And their takeover of the federal government has been in the planning stages for years, and it started out in local elections all over the country. The GOP started connecting with all kinds of people, and well look where they are now.
Demos, I'm starting to think, are so insular, thinking that everyone is crazy and stupid except for them. That's not a great strategy for getting people over to their side.
So maybe it's the demo's turn to suffer. The only problem is, how long are people willing to suffer? It looks like to me another four years.
I'm glad I saw "Master and Commander: The Far side of the world" before it left the theatres. It got so many oscar nods. I'm bummed however, that I missed "Seabiscuit", but hopefully the studio will redistribute the movie now that it's been nominated.
Okay, I saw "Lost in Translation" and while I thought it was a good movie, was it really "Best Picture" oscar worthy? I don't think so. I think Sofia Coppola got the nod because her movie is one of the only movies that is making any money. It was made with a low budget, and it's raking in the big bucks relative to much it cost to make. It's movies like "Lost in Translation" that are financially propping up the Hollywood film industry.
I likes LinT because it's an indie movie that appeals to a commercial audience. Coppola proves you don't have to make artie fartie movies that are self indulgent and that don't make any sense to be an indie, and you can make an indie type movie that does sell commercially and is entertaining. She breaks the myth that a movie can be artie and good, only if very few people have seen it, it loses money and it's not in the least entertaining.
"Master and Commander", which is also not a great movie, got the nod for Best Picture because technically it's a difficult movie to make. Academy voters like epics, and M&C is an epic. From a technical point of view, M&C was a difficult movie since they filmed on an actual ship. For all its techincal prowess, M&C did not make money in its run at the USA box office although DVD sales and its overseas box office, may help the movie to break even.
M&C, while not a great movie, is the type of movie that Hollywood used to make in its past. It's the kind of movie that really looks great on screen, and worth seeing in the movie theatre. It's also the kind of movie that generates a ton of jobs for Hollywood people, actors and techs.
Since Academy voters are all union members, it makes sense that they would vote for a picture that insures for them a sort of job security. Vote for oscar films that employ a ton of people, so those kinds of film keep getting made.
I'll watch "LOTR: Return of the King" and "Mystic River" this weekend.
"Mystic River sounds like an actor's movie, and "LOTR" had to get nominated because it's a box office smash, the story is great, and it employed a ton of technical people.
Okay, I saw "Lost in Translation" and while I thought it was a good movie, was it really "Best Picture" oscar worthy? I don't think so. I think Sofia Coppola got the nod because her movie is one of the only movies that is making any money. It was made with a low budget, and it's raking in the big bucks relative to much it cost to make. It's movies like "Lost in Translation" that are financially propping up the Hollywood film industry.
I likes LinT because it's an indie movie that appeals to a commercial audience. Coppola proves you don't have to make artie fartie movies that are self indulgent and that don't make any sense to be an indie, and you can make an indie type movie that does sell commercially and is entertaining. She breaks the myth that a movie can be artie and good, only if very few people have seen it, it loses money and it's not in the least entertaining.
"Master and Commander", which is also not a great movie, got the nod for Best Picture because technically it's a difficult movie to make. Academy voters like epics, and M&C is an epic. From a technical point of view, M&C was a difficult movie since they filmed on an actual ship. For all its techincal prowess, M&C did not make money in its run at the USA box office although DVD sales and its overseas box office, may help the movie to break even.
M&C, while not a great movie, is the type of movie that Hollywood used to make in its past. It's the kind of movie that really looks great on screen, and worth seeing in the movie theatre. It's also the kind of movie that generates a ton of jobs for Hollywood people, actors and techs.
Since Academy voters are all union members, it makes sense that they would vote for a picture that insures for them a sort of job security. Vote for oscar films that employ a ton of people, so those kinds of film keep getting made.
I'll watch "LOTR: Return of the King" and "Mystic River" this weekend.
"Mystic River sounds like an actor's movie, and "LOTR" had to get nominated because it's a box office smash, the story is great, and it employed a ton of technical people.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)