Posts by Cecelia
Last ←Newer Page 1 2 3 4 5 Older→ First
-
Hmm, not sure I can let that go ;-)
Sigh. I'll have to try again.
-
Thou liest, thou shag-hair'd villain!
What, you egg!Thousands of fifth formers doing Macbeth?
And recordari - chacun a son gout??? Can't read Fforde. Tried and failed.
But I'm so wired - I'm nearly all the way through Season 5 of The Wire and I've got no one to discuss it with because everyone else has seen it and moved on.
Hmmm It's so brilliant. Talk about characterisation of fatherless young boys ... Might have made me more critical of Boy than it deserved.
In fact, Shakespeare would have been proud of it.
-
You saw them as stereotypes, I saw them as manifestations of people I knew growing up.
I suppose I'm forgetting the 80's setting when y'all grew up. I grew up in the 50s so I've got a different perspective.
Eleven year old boys are not quite so cute and innocent now?????? I think Alamein Jnr's sweetness is a stereotype with little bits of brotown and of Waititi's former film Two Cars. You can make one sweet little film about such a boy but if you repeat it in a less subtle way you are possibly feeding into some sort of legend rather than reality.
I'm confusing myself now.
-
I don't think it's a coincidence that Science's cradle was in such an environment. It's the rebellious child of religion, and it surpasses the parent, but it's still from the same bloodline.
Sounds interesting. Do you mean that Western (?) religion has been too either/or?
I have just read The God Delusion and really enjoyed it. Loved the idea of 'memes' and found his concluding arguments about how we atheists can find consolation and inspiration very worthy.
But I felt he left something out. I think back to the novel Gilead which I read recently. Some believers use Christianity as a sort of conduit for a deep understanding of existence.
-
We've had some great short films. And they sort of get lost in the system. I loved Possum by Brad McCann but there I go again, I love the angst ... the unease.
Honestly I do like comedy too but to focus a comedy around a plotline which is about coming to terms with the death of a mother seems like a bad recipe to me.
There was a full house at 2 pm when we went to see it and lots of teenagers who laughed and went ahhhh. So that was great - if it's the beginning of cinema of ease, bring it on.
I'd just like a grown up NZ feature about a Maori community without the stereotypes of Boy or the violence of OWW. That's not up to Taika but there must be so many stories out there.
-
Don't agree at all. Yes the final dance number was great (a la Slumdog Millionaire) but I still think Waititi has sold out. His short films showed originality and even brilliance and huge potential. I loved the start of Boy in the school with the cynical teacher and after that there were some super moments.
But I don't think the film knew where it was going. The humour from the father and gang was quirky to the point of the sentimentality and I think we can overdo the cute Maori "Not even ao!" type of fond humour. There was real pathos at times. Towards the end I thought it would develop some sort of mana - but no - not really.
So there was an uneasy mix of humour and pathos.
And he plundered his own successful film Two Cars One Night. Shot for shot he reprised it in parts. And the kiwi iconography if that's a word was not an unselfconscious mix: Billy T James and the Goodnight Kiwi etc. And then the borrowing from Holes if I might assume that.
Cinematogrpahy and acting of the main characters was great - Rocky in particular was sooo good but there was some clumsy acting too and I think the narrative dragged a bit.
Waititit must have more stories in his head than this.
Sorry to be a sourpuss. I just had such high expectations and one shouldn't.
-
Remember the recent Close Up where Sainsbury (or was it Hosking) interviewed both Gareth Morgan and Ian Wishart. At the end the online poll declared that the majority went along with Wishart (who had started to spout about one world govt) and agreed that climate change was not man made and wasn't happening anyway. That was never given any context. It was just there.
-
Going back a bit - The Listener. Sorry to start another bash-the-Listener angle BUT I'm fuming. Has anyone else seen the letter page in the current issue? There is an insert about a complaint to the Press Council made by Charlotte Paul re the Listener's treatment of the Cartwright Inquiry. The complaint was not upheld. A magazine is entitled to "adopt a forthright stance" the Press Council said.
Stirling said, "Plainly by describing Bryder's conclusion as 'the truth', the Listener has accepted that we prefer her analysis ... to that of the Cartwright Inquiry. That is our call and we are entitled to make it."
So Pamela Stirling is qualified to judge one book as 'the truth' while the Inquiry 'got it wrong'. Publishing a few letters is all the balance needed ...
So I don't think it is just the cover imagery that is wrong, all wrong. This time the cover hyperbole is matched by the "considered" opinion of the editor.
-
Just to say ... have just watched Media 7 - Marilyn Waring et al and ... it was too short. Me want more.
-
A veritable goldmine of intelligent commentary from Emma and Gio - one funny, one serious, both precious.