Thursday, August 18, 2022

Romantic comedies

Indie Wire has a good story about romantic comedy films:


Julia Roberts was not an anomaly. In the ’90s, rom-coms enjoyed a boom time, but even the best of the bunch didn’t stand a chance of working without some of the best actresses to ever tackle material this romantic and this funny. Who couldn’t help falling in love with them — and the genre itself?

Romantic comedies have always been a staple of Hollywood movie-making (and storytelling itself), and the industry has long cycled through different iterations, subgenres, and tropes that fall within the general idea of “these two people are going to fall in love, and it will be funny.” While rom-coms are typically viewed as lighter fare — i.e. not awards material — in the earlier days of Hollywood, that wasn’t the case at all (see: “It Happened One Night,” one of only three films to ever win the big five Oscars).

Though the genre has fallen out of studio favor in recent years, becoming more popular in the streaming world (Netflix, in particular, has enjoyed great success with the formula, though the streamer tends to focus on stories that skew younger), in the ’90s, it enjoyed a major resurgence. And none of it was possible without its leading ladies.

Among them, Roberts reigned supreme. Her work bookended the ’90s, as she also ended the decade with “Runaway Bride” in the late summer of 1999 (which, adorably enough, re-teamed her with both Marshall and her “Pretty Woman” co-star Richard Gere). In between, Roberts also starred in P.J. Hogan’s “My Best Friend’s Wedding” and Roger Michell’s “Notting Hill,” both prickly rom-coms that saw Roberts playing complex heroines.

Roberts is associated with her trademark giant smile and open-mouthed laugh — best exemplified by a charming scene in “Pretty Woman” that was actually the result of Gere playing a good-natured trick on her — but that buoyancy obscures deep reserves of human drama. “Pretty Woman” was first imagined as a dark drama, which is obvious in the quieter moments of Roberts’ performance, but painful edges are peeking out of her other ’90s hits as well.


[. . .]

Meg Ryan pulled off a similar trick with her wide variety of iconic rom-com roles, with a twist: If the bubbly role was played by anyone else, the whole enterprise might crumble into an annoying mess. And yet Ryan so fully imbues her wackiest characters with humanity that we can’t help but root for them. Imagine anyone else playing the Annie Reed role in Nora Ephron’s seminal “Sleepless in Seattle” — a woman who obsesses over a man she’s never met, stalks him and his kid, travels across the country for just a glimpse of them, and throws over no less than Bill Pullman while doing it — and try to imagine still rooting for her. You can’t.

Like Roberts, some of Ryan’s best work happened when she was teamed with a familiar leading man. Roberts had Gere, and Ryan had Tom Hanks. But while Hanks’ performances in their trio of ’90s-era rom-coms often feel familiar — save for his “You’ve Got Mail” turn, in which he struggles to come across as a temporary cad — each Ryan performance is distinct from the rest. She even plays three different women in “Joe Versus the Volcano,” each its own iteration of a dream girl with her own worldview.

In “You’ve Got Mail,” the inevitable Ryan/Hanks romance might conclude the story, but within the rest of Ephron’s 1998 delight, Ryan also finds fresh facets for her Kathleen Kelly. The film is as much a story about a daughter, a friend, and a business owner as it is a woman who falls for an unexpected man over the connective magic of early AOL. Ryan is all of these woman in one, the rare on-screen leading lady who refuses to be defined by just one part (or one relationship) in her life.

Her non-Hanks work includes both unheralded winners (“French Kiss,” in which she’s matched with a hilariously fake French Kevin Kline) and massive busts (“Prelude to a Kiss,” icky even with Ryan giving it her all). She was even willing to get wacky — really wacky — alongside Matthew Broderick in Griffin Dunne’s “Addicted to Love,” the only film based on a Robert Palmer song that’s actually fun to watch. It’s Ryan’s special charisma, here lightly hidden under an uncharacteristically tough exterior, that makes the film such a romp. That’s her special sauce.




I loved romantic comedies.  Of the 90s, the best actress was Meg Ryan, sorry.  And Prelude To A Kiss is a great movie.  She is in love with Alec Baldwin.  On her wedding day, an old man kisses her.  On the honeymoon and after, she's very different.  Turns out the kiss swapped the bodies.  Alec has to think about what happens if they aren't able to switch back and he decides he loves Meg -- who she is -- not the outside container.  It's a sweet film and a funny one.  

My favorite Meg film?  Sleepless in Seattle.  I love Annie (Meg's character) and I love Rosie O'Donnell as Meg's best friends who is so funny.  "It's like a little clue!"  I could laugh at that over and over.  Or when she says, "It just feels true" -- about the Newsweek lie that it was easier for women of a certain age are more likely to be killed by a terrorist than get married.  I also love When Harry Met Sally . . . and You've Got Mail.  I love everything about Addicted To Love except Matthew Broadrick.  That was what killed the romantic comedy genre: The men.

Hugh Grant was perfect, Richard Gere was perfect.

Matthew? No.  John Cusak?  Never.  You'd have these incredible women and these overgrown boys.  

Michelle Pfeiffer is a good example of that.  One Fine Day works because you want her to be with George Clooney.  The Story of Us fails because you're wondering what she sees in Bruce Willis.

Meg's films in the 90s should have teamed her with Andy Garcia, for example.  Yes, they did pair up -- but in a drama.  Michelle should have been opposite Mel Gibson in a romantic comedy, not Bruce Willis.  

When you're making a romantic comedy, you need to remember that people want certain things.  Mindy's character on The Mindy Project was right about what you want in a movie if it's a romantic comedy.

When people like Ben Stiller started being cast, it was the end.  Yes, There's Something About Mary was huge.  Not for Ben.  For Cameron Diaz who had come into her own and it had Matt Dillion and that funny dog and we could overlook Ben Stiller.  Then he started making flop films with Drew Barrymore and Jennifer Aniston and they ruined it.  In fact, Jennifer Aniston is another example.  She's not beautfiul, she's not even pretty-pretty.  And she's too harsh and too thick for a romantic film.  They brought all these people who were wrong for the genre and they sunk it.

Owen Wilson should pay America for his attempts at being a lead in a romantic comedy.  That weird face and lantern jaw.  He looks like a yokel.  

The men were the worst.  Bill Pullman, for example. But, now that I think about it, some of the women were wrong for the genre too.  Not just Jennifer but also Reese Furry Arms Witherspoon.  I'm sorry, when you're in a romantic comedy, the audience shouldn't have to worry if your character should shave your arms or wax them.  She was like a money.  (I first noticed that in the non-romantic comedy Cruel Intentions.)

Sarah Jessica Parker is another example.  She kept failing in one after another and they kept casting her in them.

She's ugly and that face never looked right on the big screen.  Even after she finally got her chin wart removed -- everyone was laughing at it when I saw Miami Rhapsody in the theater -- she was still too ugly.

You'd think an actor would have to be honest about their looks because the cameras are on them so much.  But a lot of them must lie to themselves.  Owen, no one wants to have a romance with you. SJP, there are hairless cats who are better looking than you.  

The real stars of the genre drew you to them.  They had a quality that reeled you in.  Meg, Hugh, Julia, Richard, Sandra Bullock, Drew, etc.  Luke Wilson wasn't a star and that was a mistake that studios made.  He was great with every actress he was paired with and a real rom-com with him would have worked.  My Super Ex Girlfriend is not a rom-com -- it's bad superhero comedy.  He and Cameron Diaz were great as Pete and Natalie in the two Charlie's Angels films.  Instead of forcing Owen off on us, they should have pushed Luke.

And when you brought two disasters together in a romantic comedy, it crashed and burned.  And, in one case, destroyed a director's career.  2010's How Do You Know really destroyed James L. Brooks' career. That's what happens when you team Owen Wilson and Reese Witherspoon in a romantic comedy.  


This is C.I.'s "Iraq snapshot:"

Thursday, August 18, 2022.  Joe Biden continues persecuting Julian Assange (someone tell Roger Waters), the political stalemate continues while Moqtada sits out a meet-up and much more.

US President Joe Biden continues to persecute Julian Assange.  It's all about War Crimes -- as a US senator, Joe helped cover them up and, as a journalist, Julian Assange told the people about the War Crimes the US government carried out in Iraq and Afghanistan.  The world watches and sees how hollow the US support of journalism and a free press actually is.  

Pink Floyd's Roger Waters spoke out yesterday.



Good for speaking out.  Bad for speaking out poorly.

See if you can spot the problem:

“I’m flabbergasted that this extraordinary travesty is taking place under our noses, but Julian is still in Belmarsh Prison and he’s still en route to being extradited to the United States so that the government of the United States can kill him in private,” the 78-year-old music icon said outside the Department of Justice.

He appealed to the US attorney general by name to drop the charges against the publisher.

“Merrick Garland, do the right thing. Free Julian Assange at lunchtime today, please,” Waters said, praising the people who turned out for the demonstration.

The musician raised concerns about the health of Assange, 51, who suffered a mini-stroke last October.

“All you can do is keep doing what you’re doing. Never ever shut up, never be quiet. Raise your voices, join the choir: Free Assange, Free Assange,” Waters said.


At a protest in front of the Justice Department in Washington, on Wednesday, Pink Floyd co-founder Roger Waters urged the US government to free Julian Assange and warned that it could kill him.    

In June, the UK approved the extradition of Assange to the United States. The US claims it wants him to stand trial for breaching the US Espionage Act by disclosing military and diplomatic information in 2010. He may face up to 175 years in prison if proven guilty, though the exact term of the sentence is difficult to predict.

"Julian is still in [London's] Belmarsh prison, he is still on the way to be extradited to the United States where the government of the United States can kill him in private," Waters said. "Merrick Garland, do the right thing. Free Julian Assange at lunchtime today, please."    


You had cameras, you had press attention and you wasted it.

Merrick Garland?  Who do you think is in charge?  That's like whining to the kid taking your Taco Bell order. 

A raid took place on Joe Biden's potential 2024 challenger and where's the sunlight on that?  Not only are we not getting honest answers, he's not appointing a special counsel.  Time again, he fails to be a proponent of open government.  He should have appointed a special counsel for Hunter Biden long ago.  He doesn't do anything he's supposed to.  And we don't have a sense that the Attorney General is defending the American people, just the Democratic Party.  

He's a coward or he's a hack.  

He also doesn't control the reigns.  Joe Biden is president.  Joe Biden is the one who can call off the persecution of Julian Assange.

If you're too cowardly to call out Joe Biden, Roger Waters, stop wasting everyone's time.  I was readly to applaud you until you I streamed the video and saw you were playing coward.

That's what it is -- that's what it always is -- when you can't call out the leader in the White House.  We have held Bully Boy Bush accountable, we held President Barack Obama accountable, we held President Donald Trump accountable and we are holding President Joe Biden accountable.  

The buck stops where?

With Roger Waters, sadly, it stops with a member of the Cabinet, not with the president.

Let's jump over to a report by Dave DeCamp at ANTIWAR.COM:

A group of family members of 9/11 victims has sent a letter to President Biden urging him to return the $7 billion in frozen Afghan reserves held by the US Federal Reserve to the Afghan people.

Earlier this year, President Biden signed an executive order that would make $3.5 billion of the Afghan funds available to 9/11 families. But in the letter that was sent Tuesday, 77 family members of 9/11 victims said receiving that money would be “morally wrong.”

The letter reads: “Any use of the $7 billion to pay off 9/11 family member judgments is legally suspect and morally wrong. We call on you to modify your Executive Order and affirm that the Afghanistan central bank funds belong to the Afghan people and the Afghan people alone.”

US officials said this week that the Biden administration has decided not to return any of the $7 billion to Afghanistan and suspended talks with the Taliban on the issue. One year since the Taliban’s takeover of the country, Afghanistan is facing a dire humanitarian crisis, with millions of Afghans facing starvation.


Are the families asking a flunky to do something?  No.  No, they didn't go to the night manager at Kinko's with the request.  They're going to Joe.  And that's where the focus needs to be.  Not spread out and dispersed on flunkies.

Joe can stop the persecution at any time.  If he doesn't, he needs to understand that this is on him and will be tied to his name in the history books.  But when a Roger Waters gives him an out by defocusing, it doesn't bring pressure on Joe.

New topic, Isaiah's THE WORLD TODAY JUST NUTS "Good Riddance To Bad Rubbish" went up last night.




Like her father, Liz Cheney is trash.  James Zogby is correct:

I might be a Dem outlier, but I can’t be rooting for #LizCheney. I dealt w/ her hard-boiled neocon nonsense during the post-9/11 & Iraq war period that brought disaster to many. & I debated her slanderous attacks after Obama’s Cairo speech. Her Trump vendetta doesn’t sway me
1:22 PM · Aug 16, 2022



Bring Our Troops Home posted the following video ahead of Tuesday's election.


At ANTIWAR.COM, Bring Our Troops Home updated their message to reflect that Liz did lose her effort to be re-elected:

Yesterday was a very important day.

It’s the day the America First movement exiled the most despicable, most debased Swamp Monster on Capitol Hill.

Yesterday Liz Cheney lost renomination for Congress after three terms of using and abusing the people of Wyoming.

The reason is simple: voters are tired of fighting endless wars.

They’re tired of spending trillions of dollars in the Middle East and Central Asia while they struggle to fill their own gas tank or complete a grocery shopping list.

They’re tired of seeing their sons and daughters in uniform come home physically, mentally, and spiritually broken by war.

Or often, not come home at all.

Liz Cheney has been a face of the War Party for years.

In 2003 the Bush-Cheney administration fabricated intelligence to lie our country into a disastrous war where over a million people were killed.

Liz Cheney says “Good.”

The Bush-Cheney administration set up an international collection of secret prison camps where thousands were tortured, some to death.

Liz Cheney says, “Good.”

Barack Obama gave billions of dollars in cash and weapons to Jihadists in Syria, the same terrorists who would later start ISIS.

Liz Cheney says, “Good.”

Joe Biden is inching us dangerously close to World War III with Russia to protect his family corruption in Ukraine.

Liz Cheney says, “Good.”

And yesterday the conservative voters of Wyoming kicked Liz Cheney out of office right back to her military-industrial complex mansion in Northern Virginia.

And I say, “Good.”

Smedley Butler said “War is a racket.” And I say that Liz Cheney is a war profiteer. And someday we may rid our nation and ourselves of the former, but yesterday we rid ourselves of the latter.

Good riddance to the Beltway Butcher.


In Iraq, US troops remain.  In Iraq, the political stalemate continues.  MEMO notes:

After meeting with political leaders, the leaders of three political institutions in Iraq yesterday called on followers of Shia cleric Moqtada Al-Sadr to engage in national dialogue to resolve the political deadlock, news agencies reported.

Iraqi President Barham Salih, Parliament Speaker Mohammed Al-Halbousi, caretaker Prime Minister Mustafa Al-Kadhimi, Special Representative of the UN Secretary-General for Iraq Jeanine Hennis-Plasschaert and leaders of Iraqi factions met and discussed political deadlock in the country.

Al-Sadr and his followers, who have been involved in protests calling for the dissolution of the newly-elected parliament, did not attend the meeting.

TRACK also notes the meeting:

The Special Representative of the UN Secretary-General for Iraq, Jeanine Hennis-Plasschaert, and leaders of national political forces met in a meeting where Iraqi President Barham Salih, Parliament Speaker Mohammed al-Halbousi, the Special Representative of the UN Secretary-General for Iraq, Barham Salih, and the participants "expressed their commitment to finding a solution to all crises through dialogue to preserve the unity of Iraq, the security, and stability of its people," the report reads.


Ten months ago, on October 10th, Iraq held elections.  The president and prime minister?  Those are from before the elections.  Mustafa is at least called a ''caretaker prime minister" but it's the same with Barham Salih.  There has been a ten month and still going political stalemate.  Only the Speaker of Parliament has been voted on since the October 10th elections (and he was Speaker before the elections took place).  



Sadr's Minster rejects yesterday's dialogue outcomes and adds: if you want a representative of Sadr to attend we ask for a live meeting so the Iraqi people can see the back sense of conspiracies. #Iraq
Image
4:01 AM · Aug 18, 2022

The current conflict in Iraq isn't driven by the lack of a 'national or intern-communal' dialogue, but by a rivalry within the Shia over power and dominance. What is practical and needed isn't a meeting for all parties, but a Sadr-Framework dialogue.
Quote Tweet
Farhad Alaaldin
@farhad965
·
اهم نتائج اجتماع الرئاسات والقوى السياسية: -الانتخابات المبكرة مشروطة بالسياقات الدستورية -الدعوة الى استمرار الحوار -دعوة الى ايقاف التصعيد المشاركة الفعالة لحلفاء الصدر في الاجتماع وموافقتهم على النقاط اعلاه يغير المشهد السياسي ويعزل التيار الصدري ويضعهم في موقف حرج #العراق
Show this thread
Image
3:10 PM · Aug 17, 2022





Iraq's former finance minister, who resigned during a cabinet meeting on Tuesday, outlined the reasons behind his decision in a resignation letter made public by Iraqi social media users and outlets. 

In a 10-page-long resignation letter, Allawi blames the current political stalemate, rampant corruption by the political parties and ruling elites, and the interferences by foreign countries into Iraq's internal affairs as the main reasons behind his resignation. 

Allawi, who was also the deputy prime minister in Mustafa al-Kadhimi's cabinet, took office in May 2020. His resignation was instantly accepted and Iraqi oil m0inister Ihsan Abdul-Jabbar has been appointed as acting finance minister.

"In the few weeks after I took office in the ministry for the second time, I knew the terrifying fact on what extent the government functionality has deteriorated in the past 15 years, in a way that the political parties, as well as the self-interest groups, have practically confiscated broad joints of the state," reads part of Allawi's letter published by Al-Sumaria News Iraqi outlet. 


On the stalemate, THE WASHINGTON POST's Louisa Loveluck notes an analysis from The Crisis Group:

"The demonstrations are thus less a people’s revolution than an intra-elite fight, mainly pitting Sadr and his political backers against Maliki & his." crisisgroup.org/middle-east-no

MIDDLE EAST EYE also offers an analysis of the stalemate:

 

Iraq has hosted just two senior US government visits in the months since the country's October election. Meanwhile, the sprawling US embassy has been operating with a skeleton crew since 2019, when the US ordered all "non-emergency" staff to leave Iraq amid security threats.

"US engagement in Iraq's political process has been almost completely absent," Jonathan Lord, a former Iraq country director at the Department of Defense, now head of the Middle East security programme at CNAS, a Washington think tank, told MEE.

Some consider the past ten months a missed opportunity for the US. Washington apprehensively welcomed what was generally seen as a peaceful election, albeit one plagued by record low turnout, where big political parties backed by armed militias demonstrated their staying power. 


The following sites updated:








on

No comments:

Post a Comment

Subscribe to: Post Comments (Atom)