![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
Beer:30 + Casanova
Jan. 7th, 2006 09:45 amI survived yesterday's beer:30. It has taken a different tone now that I work in the hosting office. Yesterday the endless battle of the sexes constantly hashed out by women in unhappy marriages, was pre-empted for a discussion about banana reproduction.
Last night Marla and I went to see Casanova at my suggestion. The movie looked terrible and got bad reviews (with an exception of A.O. Scott at the NYTimes whose review mirrors my own opinion,) but I wanted something frivolous as everything out right now is so SERIOUS because it's Oscar season. (And I have to admit that Heath Ledger has nice bones. No, I haven't seen the gay cowboy movie, yet.)
The movie was total dross. All the absurdity of a historically inaccurate costume drama, mixed with some warped version of the battle of the sexes, with some truly ridiculous slapstick comedy, and a groanworthy script. I'm embarrassed to say I truly enjoyed it. Jeremy Irons as the bumbling tool of the Inquisition was hilarious. And there were all these jokes about the Pope and pork products, not to mention the inevitable jokes about erectile dysfunction required in a film about one of the world's most notorious lovers. I think it could become a cult classic.
Something about the film made me think that it was originally intended to be serious, but somewhere in the middle all the actors (Lena Olin, Oliver Platte, a cameo by one of my favorites Helen McCroary,) realized it was crap and someone tripped in the middle of a take and they decided to go with rude comedy. My only criticism is that it could be ruder. And I would have been much happier to see the twitty love interest (Who the hell is Sienna Miller? I know she's this big trendsetter, but why? She's not particularly interesting looking, and will have to develop of coke habit to keep her figure.) be seduced by Casanova and then have him go his merry way to other conquests.
I mean, come on, it's Casanova, it isn't about spiritual love, it's about the pleasures of the flesh. I like trickery and lying, and tight scrapes, and humiliation, and ultimate triumph; but we all know happily-ever-after is a joke for men like that, and particularly for any woman who takes his fleeting interest seriously. Any seducer worth his weight in pork products uses a woman's interests and opinions to the end of seduction, respects her resistance and her mind, certainly, but not her infantile romantic ideals.
Oh well, that's the movies for you. If I'd wanted a fitting ending, I could go watch Colin Firth in Valmont again. That being said, the 18C was a truly absurd time to live. Beyond the sex and ever present fart jokes, I just don't get it.
Last night Marla and I went to see Casanova at my suggestion. The movie looked terrible and got bad reviews (with an exception of A.O. Scott at the NYTimes whose review mirrors my own opinion,) but I wanted something frivolous as everything out right now is so SERIOUS because it's Oscar season. (And I have to admit that Heath Ledger has nice bones. No, I haven't seen the gay cowboy movie, yet.)
The movie was total dross. All the absurdity of a historically inaccurate costume drama, mixed with some warped version of the battle of the sexes, with some truly ridiculous slapstick comedy, and a groanworthy script. I'm embarrassed to say I truly enjoyed it. Jeremy Irons as the bumbling tool of the Inquisition was hilarious. And there were all these jokes about the Pope and pork products, not to mention the inevitable jokes about erectile dysfunction required in a film about one of the world's most notorious lovers. I think it could become a cult classic.
Something about the film made me think that it was originally intended to be serious, but somewhere in the middle all the actors (Lena Olin, Oliver Platte, a cameo by one of my favorites Helen McCroary,) realized it was crap and someone tripped in the middle of a take and they decided to go with rude comedy. My only criticism is that it could be ruder. And I would have been much happier to see the twitty love interest (Who the hell is Sienna Miller? I know she's this big trendsetter, but why? She's not particularly interesting looking, and will have to develop of coke habit to keep her figure.) be seduced by Casanova and then have him go his merry way to other conquests.
I mean, come on, it's Casanova, it isn't about spiritual love, it's about the pleasures of the flesh. I like trickery and lying, and tight scrapes, and humiliation, and ultimate triumph; but we all know happily-ever-after is a joke for men like that, and particularly for any woman who takes his fleeting interest seriously. Any seducer worth his weight in pork products uses a woman's interests and opinions to the end of seduction, respects her resistance and her mind, certainly, but not her infantile romantic ideals.
Oh well, that's the movies for you. If I'd wanted a fitting ending, I could go watch Colin Firth in Valmont again. That being said, the 18C was a truly absurd time to live. Beyond the sex and ever present fart jokes, I just don't get it.
