I've been out for a while, things got very stressing last year. The three last months were full of things to do. When I was about to watch the movie, something would happen and spoil everything. I got sick, started working in one more place as a volunteer, had to take care of business regarding a third job, well, I had to stop doing things for fun, specially writing. It's unfair after all, but we have to make choices, and even if we're not happy with the scenario we're living, we have to take a deep breath and be patient. Let's talk about movies now.
I haven't been watching many movies since my last post, but in fact some of those I have were indeed, very good. Recently I've started watching drama movies again, and I'm not feeling that sad anymore. I watched Cloud Atlas (2012) on Wednesday afternoon with a couple of friends. I'm finishing watching Cronenberg's movies and start watching Darren Aronofsky's. I liked Cloud Atlas very much. I've watched Lars and the Real Girl (2007), The Snake Pit (1948), Requiem for a Dream (2000), House of Sand and Fog (2003), Them (2006) - which is one of the worst movies I've ever seen, in January. December last year I've watched Phantasm II (1988), A Dangerous Method (2011), The Host (2006), Magnolia (1999), The Loved Ones (2009) - very bad movie, Spring, Summer, Fall, Winter... and Spring (2003), La frusta e il corpo (1963), Martyrs (2008) - should not have been made, The Man Who Laughs (1928), Films to Keep You Awake: The Baby's Room (TV 2006), Dementia 13 (1963), Sleepless (2001), Phantasm (1979), The Devil-Doll (1936), A Bay of Blood (1971), Eastern Promises (2007), Island of Terror (1970), well and... I think it was this because I can't find the other names anymore.
I just realize that I could have watched this movie before, the problem is that I wrote two articles in October and November.
Take the Money and Run is a very funny movie. If you watch it, I'm sure you'll laugh, unless, of course, you don't find it funny. And I have not much to talk about it because it's a funny movie, the jokes are very silly and the script is very nonsense. Woody Allen plays Virgil Starkwell, a kind of idiot (like one of the interviewed characters says) that calls the attention of we don't know who, but has his life turned into a... a documentary, I'd say, and that's what you watch. At the beginning, you have the narrator, who "organizes" Virgil's life story in episodes, using photos and footage. You see this plain guy, very silly, who tries to "be someone", "part of something" or "a man", by robbing, or taking care of his life.
The nice part is that, as far as I see, this movie does not depict the criminal as a bad person, or someone who is very strategic and intelligent. Many of the criminals could be like that. The picture is not a romantic one, he is not a hero, you can't even sympathize with him, but he's there. He was born somewhere, he has parents that lament or think he's worthy of note.
The funny moments also are created with misplaced information: you never have what you're expecting. Take a look at this dialogue:
"With parole as inducement, Virgil submits to the vaccine. It is a success, with one small side effect. For several hours, he is turned into a rabbi."
You never expect you're going to "turn into a rabbi" as the result of a side effect of a vaccine. And all the jokes and scenes are like that, you're expecting something and bang, Woody gives you another one completely out of place, nonsensical. I miss this kind of thing, it's not like Pink Panther, it's more soft and intelligent. At the same time, it's very simple and naive.
This confusion caused by misplaced information is the key element to bring laughter to the spectator. I could say it's because of the way we read or understand things. These days I've read Critical Practice by Catherine Belsey, and among many of the things that she said, she discussed the way we use language to express ourselves, how we place ourselves in this symbolic order which is the language, that's being used before we start using it, and how we have to get used to use it. Because we live in a ideology, where things have their sense constructed by culture and used by society, it's interesting to notice how we have fun when confronted with misplaced information, or nonsense talk. The movie is shown as a documentary, so the "discourse" is very serious and practical, we watch compelled to think it's about serious matter. Whenever the narrator or someone says, seriously, something that's not to be said, that you're not expecting, you can't understand immediately, and then, like being confronted by the Uncanny there in Freud, you're confronted with something that shouldn't be there, you laugh. The confusion, because the information is logically incongruent, causes you to stop for just a frame of seconds and think: this is so dumb, this shouldn't be there. This perception makes the discourse fun, because it can be taken seriously, it cannot be understood.
Well, that's all for today, this is not my area of study - humour or deconstructivism - but I've found this discussion very interesting. See you.
