Reel Girly

With all the hullabaloo of SFIFF50 just behind me, I’m hoping to be a bit more dutiful to my blog and really, what better way for me to dive in than to dance about in the well worn path of Raimi’s newest Spidey saga?

I’m really surprised to find that my views are largely my own - I mean, no one else seemed to think Spiderman 3 was political. Arguably, I’m hinging my entire thesis on one shot: the shot in which a finally redeemed Spiderman comes to save MJ in front of a mob of media and lands dead center in front of an iconic, waving flag. However, it seems to me that a film in a previously very intelligent franchise, helmed by a very intelligent (genius at times) filmmaker, is not ridiculously simple for no good reason. Even amidst the static created by heaps of needless villains, the plotline remained quite incomplex. I read all about Raimi’s casting requirements and I get he was up against a few walls, but people love to forget that in the interest of communicating ideological content, competent filmmakers have historically chosen to wrap their ideologies in simple films. They do so to give the viewer the time and mental bandwidth to consider the story’s implications and to find the moral. I’m of the mind that Spiderman’s third grade reading level plotline dug at a brand of redemption that seems a tad…shall I say prescriptive.

Spiderman encounters Venom, chooses to be poisoned, believes his choices (at first) to be partially charitable and then his downward spiral goes far deeper than any of other brands of damnation present in the first two films. His decisions, if you will, extend beyond self-preservation and go into offensive positioning. Also, call me goofy, but his eventual ally in Harry was a little Tony Blair for me. I’m just saying.

As far as the overall thrill-factor of the film goes, I’m with the chorus. 3 doesn’t match the candor of it’s predecessors, and it smacks of compromise all over the place, but if I’m right, and Raimi’s goal was to make a political parable, or even a letter to the president (dare I say it) 3 achieved that goal. Well, presuming that the president will take this third grade level “letter” as a message from the Raimis. Really, that’s funny all on it’s own. No punch line (or pimp suit) required.

p.s. i have some great press stills but i’m still experience some glitches with uploading. They’re massive files and the way I’m making them smaller isn’t working out. Will edit the post as soon as I can figure out how to deal with the images. Best! -S

Orange Revolution is a relatively traditional documentary about the Ukranian popular uprising in 2004, that tracks the ascension of Victor Yushchenko and his/the people’s battle against the corrupt regime that suppressed his election.

As with any movement that is popularly successful, the specifics of the politics really bog down the popular sentiment – as a result, we don’t hear much about the beliefs of the presidential elect, outside of his position of opposition to the regime. Journalists helpfully explain that bribes were the currency of the regime: you could bribe your way out of jail, bribe your way into college, bribe your way out of prior convictions. The regime’s supported candidate proved this last note as he had two convictions on his record but still considered himself “cleansed in the eyes of the law.”

This doc proves that popular political sentiments, no matter how powerful can’t be more widespread than they are broad. At the same time it’s made by an American and one can’t help feel the pangs of familiarity in the circumstances of the 2004 Ukrane election and the US 2004 election…A regime supporter even raised the question “And then did Bush get elected fairly?!” as if to suggest that one election (or fraud) somehow legitimizes the other. It’s worth mentioning that there was a good laugh at that line since the supporter was slurring and drunk. Regardless of our nation’s apparent similarities or differences, stories of such powerfully unifying belief are always inspiring and that alone justifies the efforts put forth in this film. To an extent Orange Revolution, which does make mention of the censorship and restraining of information of the press during the elections, seems to be acting as sort of proxy to the news. Not a bad proxy – there is a basic neutrality to the information though it all comes from one side of the battlefield, but the representations are largely quite neutral. Even at the end when a note alerts us that, now that the news agencies are independent, they blast all the candidates equally. À nous la liberté.

A continuation of his 1997 opus Henry Fool, Fay Grim is a similarly off-center ode to love and human potential by indie-auteur Hal Hartley. Now following the story of abandoned wife Fay (brilliantly played by Parker Posey) the film begins in Queens and establishes the barely contained chaos that Henry (Thomas Jay Ryan) left when he abandoned Fay and their son Ned (Liam Aiken) seven years ago.

- Originally I put up my whole interview then I got my head about me and realized this film is hold review. I’ll put up the whole review closer to the release date. Sorry for the messiness!

I interviewed Hartley and Posey on Bealtaine and I’ll be selling those interviews (and blogging about it) shortly. Hartley said Ned’s the next up for a title film and that the Grim/Fool family will be like Hartley’s “Skywalker” family.

Also, please check out the photos my genius husband has put up on his flickr site. Of course his images will accompany my interviews no matter where they may end up;-)