film review

The Film is Harold and Maude and everything about it is wonderful. Despite the fact that upon release in 1971 it bombed at the box office, it is now regarded to as a coveted cult classic. With Ruth Gordon and Bud Court as the leads, and a fitting musical score supplied by the one and only Cat Stevens the movie was destined for greatness.

Harold is a young man (boy really) who has an infatuation with death. Maude is an old woman with a young soul and true zeal for life. The seemingly opposite characters meet at a funeral and soon become each others counterparts. Taking place all around San Francisco with Maude pulling such stunts as stealing cars, posing for a nude sculpture, and smoking from a hookah; the film is far from realistic, but that’s not what it’s all about. It is often forgotten that film is an art form and art is what it is. Harold and Maude doesn’t follow your typical dark romantic comedy route or even drama, it is in a league of all its own. It’s about love, life, and how amazing the relation between two people can be.

When we first meet Harold he in a large room ornately decorated with classical era tapestries and furniture. As “Don’t be Shy” by Cat Stevens plays the viewer is caught off guard when Harold proceeds to hang himself. Contrary to common thought he is not dead, and the opening scene is the introduction to Harold’s pseudo-immolate behavior.

Harold and Maude is tricky because it’s more of a “read between the lines” type of film and can be interpreted in infinite ways fitted to each individual viewer. To the indifferent somewhat callous viewer Harold and Maude is nothing more than a disturbing love story between a seventy-nine year old woman and nineteen year old boy. Others may disagree and believe it is about finding love in life regardless of the trivial details of age, society, and time.

The photography (directed by John Alonzo) is a perfect fit to the quirky characters. Most shots were long and used a lot of panning to follow the characters and show the detail of what was going on. Sound too (directed by William Randall) was key to the poetic beauty of Harold and Maude. Cat Stevens music played nondigetically throughout the majority of the film until the final scene where Randall showed his true genius and mixed up the digetic and nondigetic sound. The sound drove home what was appearing on the screen in such a way that brilliance doesn't even begin to describe.

Hal Ashby's direction of Colin Higgins work was spottless. The roles of Harold and Maude fit Court and Gordon like a glove and the unexpected chemistry between the two was undeniable. A film whose profits were dismal at the box office and yet lasted thirty something years without loosing it's poetic beauty has got to be a film worth seeing at least once wouldn't you think?

critique the critic

It seems everyone except for me has seen "Juno", and raved about it. After checking out a review by Ty Burr I want to see the movie even more so than before but also feel like I’ve already seen it.

Burr credits the actors for putting on a spotless performance and director Jason Reitman for excellent screenplay. He is a big fan of Ellen Page's attitude and amazing character portrayal as Juno. He even went as far as saying,

"Page lets the character keep tripping until she has to look down; in a way it's as insightful a portrait of a kid stumbling toward adulthood as Dustin Hoffman's in "The Graduate"

With words like that this movie is either fantastic, or this reviewer doesn’t know his left from his right (I’m betting on the first one). The man's details are endless. He goes on and on about all the little details in the film and how each and every part pulls itself together to create this seemingly perfect dry comedy.

I think Ty Burr did a good job in describing the film in an exciting way to make one want to go see it, but in the process he gave away too much about the characters through over description of their attitudes. In a single paragraph the man tells you all about the would-be adopting family and it’s too much.

“Juno decides to have the baby and give it to the nice childless couple whose advertisement she finds in the Pennysaver, next to the exotic bird ads. They are Mark and Vanessa Loring (Bateman and Garner), living in yuppie splendor in a nearby McMansion sub-development, and just when both the girl and we have pegged the wife as an overwound power-tripper and the husband as a totally cool dude, the ground shifts.”

The point of going to a movie is to review it for yourself with fresh eyes and ears. I wouldn’t pay eight dollars to see a movie when it seems I’ve already read the script. Big pockets of information regarding the plot were given away too easily and now when I finally get around to seeing "Juno" I'll be waiting for these certain events to occur rather than enjoy the film.

After reading this review I have more of a desire to see the film but feel there will be less shock value. I still am going to go see it, but it kind of sucks that a reviewer would give away too much information. All in all I found this review enriched with unnecessary big eloquent descriptive words that basically gave away the entire plot. Ty Burr should probably stick to reviewing crappy films because it’s not like anyone would be willing to pay eight dollars to go see “Good Luck Chuck” after getting the low-down from one of his reviews.

film blog deal

Movies are good like many other things in this world. Trees are probably better but this isn't Art of Tree. Harold and Maude is a pretty bomb ass movie, so is Alice's Restaurant. But that's mainly because I'm partial to the likes of Arlo Guthrie and Cat Stevens. There are a shitton of factors that make a movie 'good'. Not only do the screenplay and actors have to be good but so does the crowd you're viewing the film with. Take Mr. and Mrs. Smith; the first time I saw it was on a laptop with my moms friends kid of whom I'm not too fond of and I remember the movie sucking, but the second time I saw it was with a bunch of bomb-ass kids up at Menogyn on a projector sprawled across the floor and the movie was ten times better. Everybody is entitled to their own ideas on what makes a movie good and that's just fine by me. Being out in the wilderness is still better though. ten fold. absolutely no comparison.

Assg. 13

1. I'm not sure if it would be classified as a principal but I'm always super cautious to be on my best behavior the week before I'm supposed to go up to camp. Any little thing I do wrong there will be an immediate threat to take it away. I'm a big fan of karma too. The universe for sure has a way of keeping things in balance. Now I'm not saying be a great person all the time, just know that when you're being a douche it's going to come back to get you. I don't know man. Be a dece person and live your life.

2. The California forest fires is an event in the news that has had an impact on me. Don't get me wrong it absolutely sucks that peoples homes and lives are indangered but it's just how the earth works. Natural fires are good for the land it's how the earth reviatlizes itself. I'd probably fight to save my house too but i can see the otherside of the story.

3. I would like to go on a 30 day canoe trip this year. I'm going to accomplish it by going up to camp with a bunch of kids and doing it. We've barely begun the plans but it's looking like we're doing the Albany river in Canada. This goal is important to me because many of my friends have done trips like theese and had a bomb ass time. I would also like to make money to pay for this trip. I will do so by working at Caribou. I work a lot and it's not all that much fun but i need the cash so i do it. Basically being outside is my goal.

too long to type (Assg. 12)

1. Writing a play was neither fun nor easy. The process of formatting was both challenging and frustrating. It was tough coming up with a good plot, characters with personality, and flat out writing it in general. I don't think I'll ever be too interested in writing plays unless I'd be getting payed a shit-ton of money... money I can use so I can retire early and go paddling for the rest of my life. The form confused me and seems ridiculous.

2. I'm still nor sure exactally what a personal essay is because I didn't listen much. Whatever the case I'm going to write about paddling or backpacking because it's what I like to do. It's nice because i can relate the wilderness to absolutely anything and gives me a broad topic. I'm sure in my personal essay I will take the story strraight out of real life and make it work. Any story from trail would work. Stories from paddling through the BWCA would work. Stories from the Quetico would work. Stories from Jellystone would work. Stories from virtually any trip ever would work just fine.

3. If i had to give advice to any kid growing up today I'd tell them to do what they do. Kids need to learn how to grow up in their own way. Advice can really screw them over because who am I to teach them how to be? They're not me. I wouldn't want to mess with what they have going for themselves whether it be science camp or play-doh. Growing up today is no different than growing up 100 years ago. There are different challenges and things to deal with, but challenges none the less. Kids will be kids and I'm not one to intervene with that.

4. I didn't find anything of what they had to say interesting. the sound on my machine didn't work. TADA!

way too long (Assg. 11)

1. Theme is not very important in anything I write because I don't care all that much. A great piece of literature doesn't have to have theme to be great. Take biographies, there is no definite theme in plenty and yet I'm sure you could find someone who finds it important anyway. I'm sure you could find plenty of other people who see a theme in everything. Sometimes you're better off without a theme because I have read plenty of books with themes that sucked that would have been better off without any. Honestly I don't really care, if it's good it's good and if it's bad it's bad.

2. I think knowing the right people keeps literature around for long periods of time... and having natural skill. I couldn't see myself writing something that would last that long or at all because I don't spend much time writing. Writing is not a passion of mine and if it came down to writing or paddling I'd pick paddling every time. I like reading books, just not writing and I'm okay with that. Authors and pieces of literature come and go and that's just part of life. There isn't enough space in the brain to retain everyone who ever wrote a good work.

3. If i could have a lasting impact on the world with literature I'd hope it'd be a haiku because those are pretty sweet. As a writer I could make that kind of impact by writing a sweet ass haiku awesome enough to withstand time. It's really not all that important to me. It'd be sweet, but I'm not going to spend my time at home watching Disney movies and secluding myself from the real world to come up with it. If it happens it happens and if it doesn't I'm okay with that. I'm gonna go paddling and backpacking and live my life.

"I am a thinker and I think this" (Assg.10)

1. I see a lot of trash in our world that could be recycled and this concerns me. It's ridiculous how much stuff we put in landfills that could be composted or recycled. I feel concerned because I'd like to have an ozone layer and be able to breathe?
2. All of my buddies have pretty dynamic personalities and I'm not about to write about one of them on the Internet... that's creepy and unsafe.
3. Wagon Wheel written by Bob Dylan (and then added to by Ketch Secor of Old Crow Medicine Show) is a piece of writing I like a lot. It's inspired me to go paddling more.