3 (Million...) Thoughts on The Oscars

1. The Show - God, where do I even begin? I guess I'll just start with the obvious, so that I never, ever have to think about it again. The Will Smith/Chris Rock fiasco. There are obviously more important things going on in the world, but I think this moment really accentuated a very real issue of how to deal with situations that are nuanced and complicated, and boy, have we taken a turn for the worse. At this point, the situation, in my eyes, is done - both have apologized, both admitted to being in the wrong, both have committed to doing better going forward. My issue, now, is the mishandling of the situation by the Academy, and the very vocal group of people who think it's okay to assault someone over an insensitive joke. Here's what should have happened - instead of Rock continuing to announce the category of Best Documentary Feature, they should have just cut to a commercial and asked Smith to leave. I don't care what Rock said, how bad it was, etc., you can't just assault someone at, essentially, a work event, or anywhere. And, maybe after reviewing the situation for a few minutes, ask Rock to leave too (it was not a rehearsed and approved joke, and I'm pretty sure they have standards for the jokes allowed to tell on stage i.e - not making fun of someone's health condition, which is why they don't hire comedians like Rock and Gervais to host anymore). My point is that they absolutely should NOT have continued the show as if nothing happened. I don't think it was necessary to get the cops involved, and was relieved that Rock had no interest in pressing charges over being bitch-slapped. But to just let Smith continue sitting there, laughing and hugging his colleagues, and then allowed his Oscar moment, was sort of shocking. I also don't think his Oscar should be taken away??? I'm reading now that there is an "investigation" into the incident, but that's so unnecessary - we all saw what happened, LIVE, and they missed their opportunity to handle it appropriately. They've awarded Oscars to far worse people and have never revoked an Oscar before (that I know of, at least). So, here's my other issue - a joke is a joke, even if it offends you, it's still a joke. The joke in question, a joke that Will, himself, laughed at until he saw that it upset his wife, should have just been booed by the audience (it wasn't even a good joke - a G.I Jane joke in the year 2022? and also G.I Jane was fucking hot! How was that even an insult?), and everyone could have moved on (and also Smith could have absolutely humiliated Rock in his speech - by almost keeping the exact same speech he gave about protecting his family. He could have stood up for his wife in that moment and would have probably been given a standing ovation. I mean, he got standing ovations anyway, for some reason, but still he would have been seen as heroic). But guess what? People are saying that Smith was *right* for assaulting him because it wasn't a joke, instead it was verbal assault. Yup. You read that right. Verbal assault. Words have no meaning anymore, apparently. I know lines get crossed in comedy - but to define an insulting joke as "assault" is wildly inappropriate and incorrect. Verbal assault implies a threat of direct violence or abuse, and is also said with malicious intent, often uses foul or inappropriate language, is spoken with a loud or threatening tone, etc. I'm not even looking up the exact definition, this is just...common knowledge. It's really, really disturbing that this is how people are perceiving jokes nowadays. Okay, I'm done with that. It's a huge shame that it overshadowed the rest of the show, I honestly barely remember anything that happened after that. But overall, I think the whole vibe of the show was really disrespectful to film. I think the Academy need to realize that they are never going to have the ratings they used to have. Obviously, they should try to appeal to younger audiences, but to just ignore concerns from leading directors, actors, fans, about why it's so necessary to air all of the categories live is just really, really disrespectful. And a lot of the things they did to appeal to a younger audience backfired - why exactly was Megan Thee Stallion there to rap during a kid's song that wasn't even nominated? And why not hire hosts that appeal to younger people?? Personally, I love Wanda Sykes (but she did a horrible job), but she's not exactly popular among 20 year olds? And Amy Schumer is actually, actively disliked by a younger audience - I think she actually did a much better job than I was expecting. I think *the only* time I laughed were from her jokes ("they hired three women because it would be cheaper than one man", calling Jake and Maggie Gyllenhaal a couple, her burn of Being the Ricardos, and the "did I miss anything?" quip. I also laughed when they told Dame Judi Dench that she has to take advice from Kim Kardashian and "work harder", but I think that might have been Regina?). The flow of the show was all over the place - why did they open with a musical number from a nominated song instead of a montage celebrating film? why didn't they have Billie Eilish perform her Bond song in connection with their "60 years of Bond" montage? And why didn't they have someone connected with Bond introduce it??? Dench is in the audience! Why did they insult animation as something that adults have to endure while kids watch it on repeat during the category for animation (in which the second best film in the category, Flee, is not even for children)? I, unlike seemingly everyone else, actually liked that the In Memoriam montage was more upbeat and personal (although at that point I don't know a single person that was actually watching it), it seemed more like a celebration of life instead of the downer that it usually is. Let's see...what else? Oh yeah, the whole goal of making the show shorter, again, backfired spectacularly. It's so easy to see what could have been cut - to make room for all of the categories, and keep the show running on time.  And...can't they get in some kind of trouble for touting the awards as "live" when a large portion of it wasn't??? How are they getting away with that? I actually have so many other notes to comment on (like the dumb as fuck twitter Oscar polls that were featured), but I'm mentally exhausted, so...moving on. 

2. The Winners - The other disappointing thing about this show, is that it featured absolutely NO surprise wins. Usually there is one or two (I feel like the Supporting Actor/Actress category always features a surprise, but sometimes others too). As someone who doesn't really like how awards season has been playing out, I was desperate for a shocking win. Denzel or Andrew in Actor, Kristen or Jessie in Supporting Actress etc. Also, Dune winning Best Picture? I'm not a huge fan of it, but it doesn't make a bit of sense that it won almost all technical categories, yet wasn't nominated for Director, and wasn't a frontrunner for Best Picture. Instead a movie that I could have made won. CODA is a fine movie. I actually liked it, but as a Best Picture contender?? I can't think of one exceptional thing about it. The only wins I was actually rooting for were Jessica Chastain (although I would have been happy with any of those actresses minus Kidman) and Cruella for Costume. I also love Questlove (I have not watched Summer of Soul yet, but Questlove deserves all of the awards all the time - I just read his book Music is History, and I loved it - he's just so passionate in everything he does). Another passionate winner...Riz Ahmed! Is an Oscar winner!! YES. Next up, an acting award. He's incredible. 

3. The Fashion - I have two very surprising favorite looks of the night. I guess the first one isn't all that surprising, because I adore her so much, but I thought Lily James looked absolutely stunning. But the reason I'm surprised is because I don't even actually like the dress. The color, the floral applique, the high slit, with that necklace - it shouldn't work, in theory, but I don't know...she just looked gorgeous. The second one is Kristen Stewart. I mean, has anyone ever shown up to the Oscars in short shorts before??? The rebelliousness of it is hilarious, but also...she looked great! Legs for days, still somehow glamorous while staying true to who she is and how she can be as comfortable as possible at an extremely uncomfortable event. Other looks I loved: Olivia Colman - the dress, makeup and hair, all just perfect and effortless looking. Simu Liu in the red suit - love it. Zendaya - seemed to play it a little safe, but she still looked gorgeous and chic. But, of course, there are some looks that failed, for me. The mermaid dress worn by Jessica Chastain is, honestly, hideous. I love her to death, but it's just so ugly. A usual fashionable icon, Tracee Ellis Ross, wore a spectacularly ill-fitted dress. Billie Eilish with the garbage bag dress (personally, I prefer over-sized dresses over skin-tight, but this look was a mess). And it's odd that Kristen Stewart can pull off not only short shorts, but a blazer with no shirt, while Timothee showed up with no shirt and I cringed with disgust. 

Thoughts on 5 Films

1. F9 - I honestly forgot that they released another Fast & Furious movie last year until it appeared under the *new* to free streaming movies list. I generally like them all (they all range between 2.5 to 3 stars), but I do admit that they all sort of blend together too. And I do feel like we are at the point in which they should just leave well enough alone. So there's not really much to say about this entry into the franchise, except LOL they go to space!!! But here are some random thoughts anyway: (1) John Cena is a perfect addition to the F&F cast. (2) I didn't think Charlize's hair could get worse than the previous movie, but that bowl cut is a choice. (3) I adore the hot guy from Mayans M.C., I wish he were in this more. (4) There are very few tiny female actresses who can believable beat the shit out of men twice their size, and Michelle Rodriguez is definitely one of them. She's always so much fun to watch. (5) There is something so fucking sexy about a black matte colored car. Okay, that's it. I'm done. 

2. No Exit - This is a very nice contained and concise little thriller. The catalyst for the story is that this young woman is trapped at a Visitor Center with a group of strangers during a snow storm, which is interesting enough, but then this woman discovers that there is a young girl tied up in the back of a van in the parking lot - with nowhere to go and having no idea which one of them owns the van, she has to do some quick thinking to save this girl (and herself). There are a few twists; the first is completely expected but I think the second is done really well to reveal a truly surprising twist of events. Usually with these things, it's the least likely person, but in this case the least likely person is Dennis Haysbert just because he's Dennis Haysbert (one of the most trustworthy actors of our time!), so it's definitely not him, so my guess was the woman (I won't tell you if I was right or wrong, though). I love how tense and unsettling it starts off, though, with a game of Bullshit (the card game) between our 5 stranded strangers. It sets the tone for the rest of the film, and it moves very quickly without wasting a single second. And I love how the game is referenced again when things start to hit the fan ("I'm going to call bullshit on that!"). There's also a nice story of redemption with our main lead (played by Havana Rose Liu - I don't think I've ever seen her in anything previously, but she is excellent!). There are also some pretty dumb moments, and obviously the plot is a bit ridiculous. And *slight spoiler* there is a huge plot hole with the kidnapped girl having a chronic illness (nobody would traffic a young girl with a chronic illness that they knew about beforehand). Otherwise, a solid movie. 

3. Turning Red - The controversy around this movie is quite something, isn't it? First, I think the most glaring problem is that film criticism has changed drastically. It's turned into something that is extremely personalized ("how do I feel about this movie", how do I relate to this story"). I don't think that's a bad thing - and it is exactly how I write about movies. But I also don't think it's...professional. If I were getting paid to review movies as a professional film critic, I would write very differently. So the film critic who declared that this movie was "not made for him" (if you don't know what I'm talking about, first, good for you! and second, just google it), and then reviewed the film through that lens was clearly deserving of the backlash, just not for his opinions, but instead, for the fact that he's terrible at his job. Second, it's a known distinction between men and women, that men tend to relate better to male characters, while women can relate to both male and female (and any other gender). It's a generalized theory, of course, but I think it's true - and it explains why more stories focus on male characters (there are obviously other factors too). The times they-are-a-changin', though, and it's fascinating to watch a certain group of people (mostly white men) have complete meltdowns about art being made that isn't geared towards them (and for the record this only the fourth Pixar movie out of like 30(?) that has a female lead. FOUR. Calm your nuts, guys.). Third, it's also extremely fascinating that this movie is being picked apart for being not appropriate for young children. And not just because of the period talk (I'll get to that part in a second), but because this young girl...defies her parents (which is a running theme in soooooo many Disney movies that I grew up with - The Little Mermaid, The Lion King, etc. but definitely a big part of seemingly every Pixar movie too, Finding Nemo, Luca, Coco, etc.). Why is this one being singled out for it? I definitely think it has something to do with the story revolving around a hormonal teenage girl and for some reason that is a terrifying topic. And, speaking of hormonal, I get that period talk is uncomfortable for some people, and I get that parents have to navigate that discussion with their children, but isn't it helpful to have it discussed more in popular culture? I just don't understand how that makes anything harder for anyone? And this isn't an adult issue, it's a KID issue - the average age girls get their period is 12 (aka a kid), but some get it as early as 8. If we want to get rid of the stigma or "taboo" of a very normal bodily function, this is where it starts. And, I know that parents don't want to think about it, but teenage girls are super horny. I don't really remember a lot from those days, but I recently went through a bin of my childhood stuff and found a bunch of notes from my friends that we used to exchange during class, and let me tell you, I was SHOCKED at how x-rated our discussions were. Just absolute filth. So, in short, this film is very relatable for teenage girls, especially ones who may have had a strained relationship with their mom. Also, as a teenager just a few years before this movie takes place, I could relate to all of the early 2000 aesthetic (the girl with the butterfly clips in her hair hit me hard!) and pop culture references (and I was a HUGE *NSYNC fan. But I will say that the movie's biggest plot hole is that these girls are able to buy tickets for a huge boyband at the box office the day of the concert. UM WHAT? That did not happen. I literally had to sleep outside the box office, months in advance, along with a bunch of other teenage girls - but I did get SECOND ROW tickets BABY!!). There's also a lot of commentary on generational trauma that I think a lot of non-white people can relate to (as proven by many reviews that I read). The odd thing is that I didn't actually think this movie was all that good, I just feel like I have to stick up for it. It's not bad, either. It's a very mediocre Pixar movie (I'm not really a big fan of Pixar, though, I think the only one I really loved is Brave). I don't like the animation style at all, and there are parts of the movie that are severely obnoxious and annoying. It's overly saturated in color and very busy. And honestly, any professional film critic could have a laundry list of things this film fails at, but being unrelatable is just not it. 

4. Benedetta - OHHHHH how I love this movie! I am contemplating it as my favorite film of 2021 (it's definitely a tie right now between this and The Harder They Fall). I knew very little about it going into it, and I think that's an advantage to enjoying it, so I'm not going to say much. It's very typically a Verhoeven film - it's unapologetically very erotic and I would expect nothing less from a film about a forbidden lesbian love story involving a nun. There is absolutely nothing subtle about it and the imagery used, and I find it just hilarious (they literally carved a Virgin Mary statue into a dildo. I'm dead.). There is also a particularly disturbing torture scene that I will likely never forget (but oh how I wish I could). I'm stunned that this isn't among the International Feature Oscar nominees this year (it's far better than Drive My Car and The Hand of God, but also is far more controversial - again, a Virgin Mary dildo, probably not going to win over Oscar voters). The lead actresses are outstanding - Virginie Efira and Daphne Patakia have insane chemistry and their sex scenes are, like, actually sexy (sorry, but I'll never understand the love for the sex scene in Portrait of a Lady on Fire). Also, I, like most are focusing on the sex part, but it's actually got a lot to say about religion and the power that it holds over people. I read the movie as incredibly anti-religious, and I truly think that's the intent, which will likely alienate a large portion of its audience. My only *issue* with it is that it's a French language film that takes place in Italy (and is based on "true" events). It doesn't make a bit of sense to have them speak French (but it's a French financed film, so I understand why it's made that way, but it will never not be an issue for me). 

5. The Adam Project - This is a perfectly cute family movie. There's absolutely zero originality there, but it's...cute. It definitely copies Back to the Future the most, but also acknowledges it perfectly (the kid gives obvious Marty McFly vibes with that vest. It's blue instead of red, but we know the reference is clear). I obviously love the reunion of Jennifer Garner and Mark Ruffalo (and the idea that this is in the same universe as 13 Going on 30 is hilarious and I will allow it). I've said it before, but I've never really been a big fan of Ryan Reynolds (he's great in Deadpool and The Voices), but he's perfectly Ryan Reynolds in this (yes, I realize that I've used the word "perfectly" three times already for a movie that is farrrrrr from perfect). The best part of this movie, though, is definitely this kid. What a find! He is definitely a future movie star - so adorable, charming, endearing etc., with great comedic timing. The plot is way overdone, and definitely gets a little repetitive. Also, the de-aging of Catherine Keener is terrifying and it hurts my brain. I think it's so hard for me to accept because we know what a young Catherine Keener looked like, so seeing a different version of that is hard to process. I would just prefer for a different actress cast in the role (I'm sure there are plenty of young women who look like Keener who could have played the role sufficiently. It's not like it's a challenging role or anything). Anyway, there's not much else to say. I had a good time watching it, laughed a bit, and felt a bit of the nostalgia for classic 80s family adventure films that this film relies on, which overall, is a satisfying watch. 

Thoughts on 5 Films

1. West Side Story (2021) - Usually if a film is as well-made as this one, and isn't terribly offensive in any way, I would rate it a solid 3 stars (even if I didn't necessarily like it - The French Dispatch is a perfect recent example). But there are just too many unlikeable factors in this remake that I (hesitantly) rate it 2 1/2 (which is comparatively very low - so many 5 star reviews! It's going to cause me to have a stroke one day, I think). First and foremost, even if you completely ignore the accusations against Ansel Egort, he is so obviously miscast here. It's actually stunning just how awful he is. And I say that as someone who has been a fan of his in past projects (I thought he was adorable in The Fault in Our Stars and LOVED him in Baby Driver). But, who thought he could do this role? He can't sing! And he's not someone that I would describe as instantly likeable, which is kind of essential to this role. The controversy happened as filming was wrapping up, so I understand that there was just no way to recast him, but at some point in the beginning did nobody else notice that it wasn't working? There is just absolutely zero chemistry between him and Rachel Zegler - in fact, she seems pretty much repulsed by him. It's the least invested I've ever been in a love story in my entire life. And speaking of Zegler, I remember when she was cast in this - and it was a big deal around here, because a normal 17 year old girl from Hackensack, NJ was cast in a Steven Spielberg production of West Side Story! That's so cool! I was rooting for her, and she's not...terrible, exactly, but she certainly lacks the charisma needed for such a big project like this. She felt lost by her surroundings for almost the entire movie. As for the much lauded performances by Ariana DeBose and Mike Faist, they are...fine? DeBose is probably the only one in the entire cast who can sing. But an OSCAR? She'll likely win it, considering she's won all of the precursory awards, but I'm at a loss for words. Faist has some presence (comparatively), but his voice is way too high-pitched for me (and the horrendous accent is hard to listen to). He's also probably the least threatening grown man I've ever seen in my whole life. I can appreciate that they at least cast a little more appropriately than the 61 version, but also still didn't cast a Puerto Rican in the role of Maria, so it's still a little problematic. Anyway, aside from the casting, it really does just seem pointless. You know how people always identify older movies and add "you can't make that movie today" because of its outdated racism/sexism/etc.? Well, this is one of them. And they do very little to update it or modernize it (bare minimum). I say that as someone who likes the original. It's a musical version of Romeo & Juliet, with stunning songs, amazing choreography - what's not to like? But instead of making it relatable to a younger generation, they slightly update it by giving more depth to "The Sharks". They also use Spanish dialogue (without subtitles), which is probably the only thing that felt authentic about the whole movie. But overall, no matter how well-made a movie is, if it's poorly acted by 1/2 of the cast, has zero chemistry in the romance that is the catalyst for the plot, and feels pointless, then I have to question what the fuck we are doing here? And I judge every single person who rated this 5 stars on letterboxd. 

2. Drive My Car - This is another example of a movie that is well-made that I didn't like (still better than West Side Story, though). Three hours is unnecessarily long for this story (especially after watching a 2.5 hour movie directly before it). Slow burn doesn't even begin to cover it. The credits don't appear until 40 minutes in, and as much as I love the rebelliousness of it, I also *knew* from that moment that this movie just wasn't going to be for me. Those 40 minutes could have easily been condensed to about 15 minutes. It's a very character driven story, which isn't a bad thing, but unfortunately, the characters aren't all that interesting. It's also a man dealing with loss (of his wife), and I guess we are supposed to see this as "complicated" because we (the audience, along with this man) know that she was cheating on him but....sorry to be a cold hearted bitch, but WHO CARES? She cheated, but he doesn't seem to be that upset by it or even surprised by it, and it doesn't mean that she's a bad person or that he wasn't in love with her (and I don't need a THREE HOUR LONG movie to tell me that). Then the story focuses on this play that he directs - a multi-language interpretation of Uncle Vanya. I've read pretty much every Chekhov play (Drama Studies major - I took an entire class just on Chekhov), but out of his major 4 works, Uncle Vanya is my least favorite one (Three Sisters = The Cherry Orchard > The Seagull >>>> Uncle Vanya). I do like the idea of doing a singular project in multiple languages, though - it feels like a celebration of diversity and language instead of forced representation. Oddly, the part of the story that I just couldn't get into is his interactions with the woman who "drives his car", which is very likely due to the length of the film. I was just so bored before any of the seemingly important stuff happens. If an hour (literally an entire hour) was cut from this movie, I would probably really like it - but as it stands, I'm just indifferent about it. 

3. Fresh - *some spoilers* I was super intrigued about this movie, more so for Daisy Edgar-Jones than...wait for it...SEBASTIAN STAN (I was forced to learn his name!!! FORCED because he is in fucking everything right now, and he certainly isn't a good enough actor to warrant all of these roles. Also, I've seen the name a ton of times, but I didn't realize that his last name was "Stan" because I thought people were just saying they were a "Sebastian stan", as in the word the internet uses when they are an obsessive fan of someone). I've only seen Daisy in Normal People, but I LOVED her performance. She kind of reminds me of Anne Hathaway (which could be a good or bad thing depending on the project). It's weird that this was the second movie in a row that the credits didn't appear until well into a large chunk of the movie (this one I think was at 33 minutes in. It worked much better for me here than it did in Drive My Car). So, first I will say that I definitely like this movie - it's well-acted (minus a bland SebStan (that's his nickname!), has some cool shots, and is just a fun, suspenseful thriller. But the thing I like most about it is that it made me reminisce about several bad dating experiences. It captures a viewpoint that is often seen as "extreme", but totally relatable. Because, guess what? When women go on dates, we have to worry about GETTING MURDERED. Isn't that fucking crazy? Totally true, though. So....prepare for my fun tangents ahead: Ooooooh let's talk about dating, shall we? First, I think it's odd that this "dating is hard" concept is sort of seen as a peril of modern dating, which I find SO MUCH better than dating when I was in my 20s. Modern dating is pretty much dating through apps. I was very hesitant about this at first, but I have to admit - it works! I guess you have to have a good sense of when to move forward and when something is a "red flag", and I usually have a good sense of that now. It's easier to weed out the weirdos if you can spend time talking to them through social media and I kind of feel like if you are still running into weirdos, that's on you? I do find that A LOT of people invite drama and disappointment into their lives, when I just shut it down very quickly. I had mostly good luck with online dating (and that's how my boyfriend and I met - and we are going to hit 6 years together this June). But I do say NOW when I talk about luck with dating, because I definitely did not have it in my 20s (and the female character is supposed to be mid 20s in this, I'm assuming). Three things (memories from my 20s) popped into my mind watching this: (1) The time I was roofied at a bar. YUP. Luckily, and I mean I thank the fucking heavens above, I happened to be on an antibiotic for my chronic bronchitis at the time and should not have been drinking anyway, and those antibiotics interacted with the drugs put in my drink INSTANTLY. I had to be rushed to the hospital but, most importantly, I was safe (there's obviously a longer story, there, but I'll move on). (2) The time I decided to do a "say yes" to everything. I was in a super depressed funk after a major breakup and didn't really know how to navigate dating. It's, once again, a long story, but to shorten it - I definitely ended up with someone who was married (or, less likely but still scary, a serial killer). I realized it once we were in his (very fancy) NYC apartment and he had to take a private call in another room. I was bored so I grabbed a magazine that was sort of hidden under a pile of papers. I noticed the name on the mailing address line was different than the name he gave me (but the address was where we were). I was instantly alert - like, FUCK he gave me a fake name (I'm old, so google existed, but it wasn't used the way its used now) - what do I do??? I got up and started looking around. For some reason I opened the fridge and there was literally nothing in it. So it was not an apartment that was "lived in". I grabbed my shit and left - and as I left I asked the concierge at the front desk of the building, "I should go, right?" and he said "yeah girl, run". Unfortunately, this was after I slept with him (TMI, don't care). (3) The numerous times that I was called a bitch because I was so over men that my "go to" response was "no thank you". I literally didn't even look up at whatever man was hitting on me - just "no thank you" and literally hit instantly with "bitch" or even better "you're not even that hot". Soooooooooo back to the topic of this movie - I find it interesting that she doesn't meet the cannibalistic serial killer through the new "modern" dating, instead he hits on her in a supermarket (which also...RED FUCKING FLAG. I hate when guys try to talk to me at the supermarket. I literally will prop up some sort of men's product on the top of my cart - like axe spray or deli meat to prevent men from talking to me. I always assume that any guy talking to me at a supermarket is a serial killer. Is this not engrained in other female brains? It should be. Maybe this movie will change things?). It's also weird that it's not seen as a red flag that he hit on her in a supermarket (talking about cotton candy grapes - as if that's not something that women already know about? That there are grapes that taste like cotton candy? Where do you people live? This is a well-known grape), but it is a red flag that he doesn't have an Instagram. Are we living in backwards land? Anyway, I'm on a roll because I'm not even half-way done with the thoughts in my head, but I will also say that I totally agree with the guy on her first (very awful) date - I mean, he was really rude, but also why the fuck did she dress like she was a teenager going to a sleepover? Why would she wear that on a date? Am I supposed to think he's an asshole because he commented on a very real observation? I wouldn't expect a man to show up in his fucking pajamas on a first date!? AND, probably an even bigger no-no for me to say, as a feminist, but...um...her getting fucking taken by a cannibal serial killer is totally her own fault (just like it was my fault when I was roofied and also my fault for sleeping with a potential serial killer but most likely just a normal married man). There is this whole scene about "it's not your fault!" when it comes to women being raped and murdered, which to an extent is true (obviously), but also women need to take responsibility for their own actions - and *understand* the world we live in. We, unfortunately, live in a world in which YOU CAN NOT just go away with a man that you DO NOT KNOW. It's THAT SIMPLE (now, again, this is a grey area - and does not take into account women, or actually any gender, who may have learning disabilities and/or autism that prevents them from understanding basic human normalcies. And this is why we have to be so vocal about what is safe and not safe for women to do. I'm sorry, I would love to say we live in a "free" world where women are safe to do the same things that men can do, but that's not reality. If we stop pretending, women will be safer. Period.). Like I said in the beginning of this post - when women date, we literally have to take into consideration the likelihood of being raped and/or murdered. It sucks, but it's undeniable (and you know what's even worse? We are actually more likely to be murdered by a partner!). This might be my longest post since Boyhood (God, I hated that movie). Let's see, what else do I have to say? Should I talk about the actual movie? Ok. I liked it, as I said. The end is a little over-the-top and a bit ridiculous, but for a first feature, I think it's really well done. As someone who can't even watch cooking shows (or touch raw meat - I literally have to leave my body when I cook. It's so fucking gross), this was a tough watch. It's a little predictable (I mean, I *knew* she was definitely going to bite his penis at some point, obviously), and I knew the waterfall picture was going to be how the friend figured out she was in trouble. But overall, I had a ton of fun with it. And "Heads Will Roll" is the perfect song for this film, and I love that this song has had a bit of a resurgence lately. 

4. After Yang - YAY! I loved it! I can't imagine this won't be on my Best of 22 list, but it's obviously super early for that. If you've read this blog for a while, then you know my love for Colin Farrell. One of the greatest actors of his generation, and someone who consistently picks challenging roles both in blockbuster films and indies (this and The Batman were released in the same week and they could not be more different). He is *terrific* in this movie, surrounded by an outstanding supporting cast - Jodie Turner-Smith is becoming a fast favorite (she was so good in one of my favorite movies of the last decade, Queen & Slim). Now, I'm not sure why the theme of this post seems to be talking about the opening credits, but this is the third movie in a row, in which it seems like an important moment. These credits are perhaps my favorite I've seen in quite sometime. It perfectly encapsulates a moment that feels futuristic but also entirely relatable, while also capturing the dynamic of this family. It's also just *super fun* to watch. While I admit that it does become a little slow and repetitive (and I dislike the doubled dialogue - very jarring and irritating), there is still just so much to unpack here and analyze well after the film ends. As most futuristic robot stories tend to respond to, the obvious "question" of the film is "what does it mean to be human?", but it also narrows this down to more specific themes of identity - and even more specific, Asian identity, and again even more specific with Asian identity as someone adopted by a non-Asian family. *some spoilers* It's also weirdly about the idea of destiny and soulmates, human concepts adapted by this robot (I got literal chills when the girl appeared in his Alpha memories). Just a really beautiful movie that will stay with me forever. 

5. The Green Knight - I think I was expecting too much with this. It's a good movie, that even has some *excellent* moments, but overall it's not something I would recommend to anyone aside from people who have an appreciation for cinematography and editing. David Lowery has a fascinating filmography, with more credits as an editor, and honestly, you can tell in his movies. He knows which shots to linger on and how to make complicated shots look easy. The opening shot in this alone is something to celebrate - it's just stunning. The music is very haunting, and also very reminiscent of Lowery's Ain't Them Bodies Saints, which is actually the only thing I remember about that movie, and probably all I remember from this one as well (time will tell). It also has a very strong ending (actually, really, really strong ending - the more I think about it the more brilliant it becomes). Dev Patel is...fine in this? I saw a lot of chatter about him being snubbed by the Oscars, but it's certainly not an award worthy performance. And speaking of Oscar, how is Alicia Vikander being so sidelined in films? I didn't even know she was in this movie! In such a small role (albeit a significant one), I just don't understand her career at all. She won an Oscar! It feels like it doesn't mean anything anymore (which I guess could be deemed a good thing if they're giving out Oscars to actors like Rami Malek, the sooner they are forgotten, the better, I guess. But I really like Alicia. She should be on the same level as Jessica Chastain and Emma Stone, and yet she's taking bit parts that are mostly forgettable). Anyway, that's really all I have to say about this. People way oversold it to me, unfortunately. 

Thoughts on 5 Films

1. Flee - I'm not the biggest fan of documentaries, but I was super intrigued by this as an animated documentary. Also, the only movie ever to get Oscar nominations in the documentary, animation, and international categories. It definitely deserves the acclaim (and is far better than its international competition of both Drive My Car and The Hand of God), although I think the animation is its worst feature. I saw someone compare it to Waltz with Bashir, and I agree to an extent, but also because of that - it kind of seems more of a copy than inspired by. But the story is incredible - and it is perfectly paced and incredibly intense. It's just such a harrowing life story of this man (and his family) that gives incredible insight into the refugee experience. I get why his story was told as animation, but I just didn't like it. There was too much going on - with the different animation styles (I actually preferred the black faceless animation - it felt more harrowing), the past and present tense, the addition of real footage, etc. It's just a lot to absorb instead of allowing the audience to focus on the story. But I still really loved it, and the ending totally got me. *spoilers* When he goes through the doors and it's a gay club, I literally burst into tears - like, full-on ugly crying for 10 minutes. A scene that I will likely never forget. 

2. Texas Chainsaw Massacre (2022) - My past experience with Texas Chainsaw movies consisted of the 2013 one with my girl, Alexandra Daddario, and I sort of liked it? So I decided to watch the original a few days before I watched this one, and it's actually not what I was expecting. Good, but not great - with a WHOLE lot of screaming. I tried to watch the second one, but I couldn't find it streaming anywhere so I decided to just skip ahead to this one since it's supposed to be a direct sequel anyway. This one, though, is awful. I'm so disappointed that this is Elsie Fisher's next feature after her incredible debut in Eighth Grade. She's not exactly the worst part of the cast, but all of them are pretty terrible. And I don't believe for one second that any of them are "influencers" (with those haircuts? Nuh-uh, sorry I don't buy it). I also thought the girl who plays her sister was about 14 but apparently she's 27. Of course, the one guy I find hot is Irish (I mean I knew he wasn't from Texas because then I wouldn't find him hot. It makes sense, I promise). And of course *spoilers ahead*, he suffered the most brutal kill. I actually flinched. Anyway, the plot is stupid (there is no way these kids could just buy a whole town? They all seem so stupid? I don't believe they are business savvy AT ALL), the dialogue is the worst, and the characters are all so annoying. The best part is obviously the scene where Leatherface steps onto the bus and they all point their phones at him, and then he just brutally massacres all of them - tossing influencer body parts left and right. Just absolutely hilarious! Also, thumbs up for the ending (I clapped). Oh and one more thing, I was confused at the casting of Sally because this woman definitely doesn't look anything like Sally from the original, and I wondered why they didn't just cast the original Sally, but apparently she died in 2014 (and she was in the 2013 one! I didn't even realize!). But they still could have cast someone who looked like a believable older version of her? 

3. The French Dispatch - I just don't think Wes Anderson and I get along anymore (I did like Isle of Dogs, but I didn't like his previous two movies before that). I still rated this movie 3 stars because it's incredibly well-made and has some stunning set design (and no Oscar nomination! Another egregious snub), but that doesn't necessarily mean that I enjoyed it. I *love* that he has a signature style - it's incredible that you can take any shot in this movie and instantly recognize it as a Wes Anderson film. He has my complete and utter respect. I just don't vibe with the stories. There are three stories within this film, and the first one is clearly the strongest, but by the third one I struggled to keep my eyes open. The expected star-studded cast consists of a lot of Anderson favorites such as Owen Wilson, Bill Murray, Jason Schwartzman, Saoirse Ronan and (new to Anderson films) Lea Seydoux. I think the highlight, acting-wise is Benicio del Toro, who is actually hilarious in this ("And that's why I signed on for clay pottery" had me laughing). And the dud is Timothee Chalamet (that mustache is embarrassing, and I've given him multiple chances, but I'm convinced that Call Me By Your Name was a fluke). I also didn't like the fake teeth on Tilda Swinton - such an unnecessary distraction. There's not much else I have to say - if you're a fan of Anderson, then I can't imagine not liking this as it's perfectly Wes Anderson. And even as a film fan, in general, you'll appreciate the static camera shots, the color palette, and the symmetry of it all. 

4. The 355 - It's always interesting to watch a film with this caliber of incredible talent and figure out how it all went so wrong. It received some pretty harsh reviews when it was released to theaters which was definitely disappointing. It seems insane that a movie starring Jessica Chastain, Lupita Nyong'o, Penelope Cruz and Diane Kruger could really be that bad (I mean, TWO of them are nominated for Oscars THIS YEAR!). Unfortunately, the reviews are pretty fair. It's not exactly bad, but it's entirely mediocre. The plot is unnecessarily complicated and twisty - instead of building in intensity, it just gets frustrating (I literally yelled out - "JUST FUCKING KILL HIM ALREADY"....Twice!). The "big" twist is very obvious (again, if you don't see someone die then they are not dead...this is action thriller 101). It's far too long and it drags. I'm not sure what kind of hold Carter Baizon/Bucky/himbo has on Hollywood because he's in way too many projects right now and he's not a strong enough actor to warrant any of these roles. The biggest problem with the movie, though, is that these women all do some really stupid shit - they are never one step ahead, instead they are constantly being outsmarted. Plus the action and chase sequences are filmed so clumsily. Every movement feels painfully staged. It's like they spent way too much money on the actresses and they had nothing left over for the actual production. Also, I *love* the idea of having an international cast, but if you are going to make their nationality important to the plot and part of the identity of the characters, then you need to cast it correctly. Nyong'o is not British (and her accent is horrendous) and Cruz is not Colombian - so all of them lined up in the poster with their nation's flag behind them feels...wrong. 

5. Copshop - Solidly entertaining Gerard Butler/Frank Grillo action thriller. But surprisingly, they are both overshadowed by Alexis Louder - she really holds the plot together and out-acts everyone around her. Both Butler and Grillo play to their strengths though and "stay in their lane" so to speak. It's a little disappointing that I don't find either of them hot in this - Butler with the American accent (what's the point in that???) and Grillo with the horrifying man bun (although it's even worse when he takes it down). It's a little bit of a cat and mouse plot, except the role of cat and mouse keep switching - you don't really know which one is the bad guy or if they are both the bad guy, but one might be (relatively) better than the other. I tend to like Joe Carnahan movies (The Grey, Smokin' Aces, The A-Team), but it feels like a long time since he's made a good movie? Boss Level was ok, but hardly memorable. I think I'll probably say the same thing about this movie a year from now. It's basically Assault on Precinct 13. 

Thoughts on 5 New TV Shows

1. The Afterparty - I wanted to like this show more than I did. I certainly saw a ton of rave reviews of it on Twitter, plus it's from Christopher Miller and stars, my love, Dave Franco. Overall, though, I found it really mediocre and often times very annoying. The cast, aside from Franco, are just full of people who are not my cup of tea. Sam Richardson is fine, and Ben Schwartz has been funny in some projects (although I can only think of Parks & Rec). But Tiffany Haddish is awful - and I've seen enough of her projects now to make a clear declaration that she is not funny. Ditto for Llana Glazer (I don't think I'll ever forgive her after False Positive - one of the worst movies I've ever seen in my life). Double ditto for Ike Barinholtz (who is also about a decade older than everyone else so it makes no sense why he is at the same reunion as the rest of the cast. I don't actually know if that's true because I'm too lazy to look it up, but he sure looks a decade older than everyone there). I will say that there are two episodes that stand-out - the musical episode and the animated one. The musical one veers way too dangerously into Hamilton style rapping for my taste, but I do appreciate the genre mixing. It's a really interesting way to show different perspectives of the same event. And I definitely didn't guess who the killer is - I had a theory, but I also thought my theory was way too obvious. They did a good job of keeping it a mystery, but also explaining it all in the final episode where it completely makes sense (as in, if I watched it again - it's probably all really obvious). I also like the little Fred Savage cameo! 

2. Dopesick - I'm 3 episodes in and it's good. I'm not fully invested in it because I already know the story and it's moving very slowly (I've seen a lot of shock as if the show is uncovering information that wasn't already readily available). I also think (so far) it's trying to take the blame of the opioid crisis off of doctors, and I just don't buy it. As someone who experiences chronic pain (I was hit by a car as a child and fell off of a ladder when I was 20) - I've seen DOZENS of doctors over the last 20 years who have consistently tried to prescribe me Oxy and when I ask for other options, I am met with complete abandonment, as in "you must not be in that much pain then" and/or "well, I tried to help but clearly you don't want to be helped". And that, my friends, is why I don't trust doctors nor do I trust Big Pharma. And I'm going to say something really controversial, but I *completely* understand why people don't trust the Covid vaccine. It's all the same people in charge - that not only caused the opioid crisis, but were also in charge during the AIDS crisis (while Fauci did some good during the AIDS epidemic, he certainly did not do enough, CLEARLY. It's crazy to me that he's seen as some sort of hero now. Does google not exist anymore or are people too lazy to use it?). Also, to be clear, I got the stupid vaccine because it was the right thing to do; I'm just saying that I understand why others are skeptical (not the ones who think it's 5G related or that it's like a mark of the devil or whatever the conspiracy nuts are spouting out nowadays). But when it takes almost a full year for them to admit that the vaccine causes changes in menstrual cycles - that's a problem. Anyway, I'm clearly on a tangent, and not one I talk about often - I try to stay out of it all because I've found that not many people know how to manage life in the grey. Either something is "bad" or "good", "wrong" or "right" with no nuance in-between. And I also would hate for someone to base their own decisions on something I've said that they may have misinterpreted (as an example, I hate Hillary Clinton - that's a whole other topic, but I was pretty outspoken about it during the primaries before the 2016 elections - so much so that both my bf and mother voted for a 3rd party candidate in THE 2016 election. When I found out after the fact, I was like "WHAT? How could you not vote for Hillary, when there's SO MUCH at stake?", "you said all those awful things about her!", "BUT I STILL FUCKING VOTED FOR HER! ARE YOU FUCKING INSANE?" It just absolutely blew my mind, but I've learned to keep my mouth shut now. Hillary is great. I love her. Never done anything bad in her life, ever). OH MY GOD, I'm on another tangent. My apologies. The series is strong even if it's a little slow - great performances from Michael Keaton, Will Poulter and Kaitlyn Dever. It really reinforces how small-towns (specifically mining towns) were specifically targeted, and how addiction effects everyone (more crimes etc). I'm interested to see how dark the story is going to get. 

3. Inventing Anna - I read and heard about the accent that Julia Garner does in this, and yet, I still was not prepared. It's so bad that I wasn't sure if I was going to be able to watch the whole thing (I did, though). Admittedly, I have never heard of Anna Delvey before this (I don't really follow socialite news? Who does? Why does everyone seem to know about this woman?), but out of curiosity, I listened to a few snippets of her interviews to hear her actual accent, and Garner does, indeed, fail spectacularly. I get that Garner is trying to show how her accent was as fake as her persona, but the "real" Delvey still sounds believable. If Garner spoke to me in real life in that accent, I would not believe it was real (does that make sense?). She basically sounds like a Russian valley girl. Aside from Garner's accent, her acting isn't terrible - she's far more tolerable here than she is on Ozark (sorry, but I have no idea why so many people love Ruth? I've been rooting for her death since day one). But the best part of the cast is recognizing all of the Scandal and Grey's Anatomy alums. Plus the addition of Anna Chlumsky and Laverne Cox! Just a terrific cast, overall. The story to this is absolutely insane, but also it's kind of believable because a lot of society people are so fucking delusional and lack the "street smarts" needed to decipher when someone is cheating them. I don't really feel bad for any of the people that she screws over (especially the woman who didn't notice 400k in credit card charges). I'm not sure why there is such an interest in terrible white women being terrible, when there are so many other actually interesting people to make stories about, but then again, I'm watching it? So I guess they win. I did find some of it really interesting, though - just how easy it was for her to scam everyone. And it's hilarious that she knew the Fyre festival organizer. Also, I LOLed at the Culkin reference (Clumsky's face was priceless. My Girl, forever). 

4. Bel-Air - I had to watch this out of pure curiosity. Of course, I was a huge fan of The Fresh Prince of Bel-Air (and of Will Smith, in general). I know it shocked a lot of people when it was first announced that they were switching genres with the reboot, but honestly, it makes sense. I think we are at a point of exhaustion with sequels, reboots, etc., but this is the way to keep it fresh - either modernize it or change the genre. Do something different, basically. The only problem with this, though, is that making it a soapy drama - it basically turns into The O.C. (complete with a punch to the face at the end of the pilot episode. Totally expecting someone to say "welcome to Bel-Air, bitch"), which is kind of hilarious. I never connected how similar the plots were until now. I've watched the first two episodes, so far, and as of right now, I'm not really feeling it. It's been mostly exposition and character introductions - like, LITERAL introductions (this is Uncle Phil! And this is Carlton! Hello Ashley!). Hilary was always my favorite character, but the whole influencer thing is grating (but makes sense for an updated version of the character). The dialogue is also a little forced and the use of the word "jawn" is excruciatingly overused (I also didn't realize that is a localized Philly word, but it makes sense because the only person I see use the slang that much is Questlove). Anyway, it has potential and I like all of the actors so far, so I guess we'll see!

5. In From the Cold - Kudos to Netflix for sending an email recommending this show to me because otherwise I would have never heard of it. I feel like streaming services, in general, are doing a terrible job at promoting their shows. It's like they focus on one or two things even though they just released 10. Usually things reach me because of word of mouth (my co-workers) or Twitter (although both recommended Bridgerton to me and I'm still bitter. One of the worst series I've ever seen in my life - and not even in the "so bad it's good" category like You). But, oddly, I think Netflix probably knows my taster better than anyone (I've had the service for about 20 years). This show is pretty much a combination of Alias, Fringe, and The Americans (three of my all-time favorite shows!) and it is exactly "my shit". Also, it stars Margarita Levieva, who is someone I assumed I didn't know, but she's Amanda Clarke from Revenge (the "real" Amanda Clarke) and I also remember really liking her performance in Inherit the Viper. I'm really excited about her starring role in this because she is wonderful. I kind of wish they didn't give the premise away in the series description, though, because the pilot episode is excellent, but would have been a shocking surprise had I not known what to expect. It's still a successful pilot episode, because I immediately wanted to watch the next episode (the Limp Bizkit cover of "Break Stuff" really won me over). I also really like the woman who plays the younger Anya - she reminds me of Jodie Comer, but I'm not sure if that's just because of the character or the actress. I'm not the biggest fan of her daughter (the acting, the character are both annoying); it's never a good thing when you're rooting for an innocent teenager to die, but I definitely think it would have benefitted the show a bit. There are also some really strong action & fight sequences that felt believable (the subway kill is probably my favorite - and then they watch it on the surveillance camera! So gruesome, and kind of hilarious). Anyway, it's definitely for a specific audience, but I really liked it and am hoping Netflix renews it for another season ASAP. 

Thoughts on 5 Films

1. Antlers - This is a solid little horror movie, mostly due to the fantastic cast - Keri Russell and Jesse Plemons! It definitely has potential to be better, but overall it has a strong theme of childhood trauma and PTSD. It makes the same mistake that a lot of horror movies do, and that is that it's so fucking dark (I mean aesthetically dark not psychological). How are you supposed to be scared when you can't even tell what is happening??? It never makes sense to me. Even the poster is dark - what the fuck am I even looking at??? There's also A LOT of build-up - there's a whole 45 minutes before something scary actually happens, which isn't necessarily a bad thing, but I do wish it had some tighter editing and story-telling. But as I said, stellar performances from Russell and Plemons (as expected), and the little boy is also excellent. There's some gruesome bits, but nothing really memorable about it. Although it did have a fantastic ending that I might remember for a while. Time will tell. 

2. Ghostbusters: Afterlife - This was FAR better than I was expecting! I like the original Ghostbusters just fine, but it's not one of those movies that I hold dear to my heart or care if there are multiple remakes and reboots. But when I saw the trailer for this, as many others pointed out, it looked like a Stranger Things movie not a Ghostbusters movie (and not just because of the actor being in both). It just looked a little like it was pandering to a wider audience instead of "true" fans, which is exactly what the 2016 one mistakenly did (side-note: I thought the 2016 one was fine *shrugs shoulders*, but also Chris Hemsworth's lens-less glasses still makes me laugh on a regular basis). So, I'm surprised to say that this reboot is quite enjoyable! It's cute, very funny, a little dark and spooky, has some really strong characters - overall I don't have really anything negative to say about it (ok...it definitely could have been at least 20 minutes shorter, but that's every movie nowadays. I also DO NOT like the Harold Ramis ghost. Please STOP doing this, Hollywood. It's super fucking creepy!). It's hard to even pinpoint the most successful aspects, because it all just works so well. I think a lot of credit, though, is on the shoulders of Mckenna Grace. First, I didn't even recognize her. Like, at all. I had no idea until the end when I looked it up - solely because I thought "wow that girl is awesome! Who is she???", and was stunned by the answer. She's just perfect in this (the wink, the dorky science jokes, just perfect). I also think Paul Rudd and Carrie Coon have insane chemistry. I would watch a million movies with them as a couple. 

3. Together Together - I like that this movie does a sort of gender-swapping story, but instead of actually swapping a gendered story, it tells a story that is typically a female story (a woman deciding to have a baby on her own) and realistically makes it a male one. It's super interesting and I don't think it's been done before? I know there have obviously been stories about single fathers, but I mean of a guy that sets out to have a child on his own instead of it happening to him. It feels very modern. I also think the characters feel very real, except for maybe Jules, who is a little over-the-top, but also provides some truly hilarious moments - my favorites are when he yells at the customer who is waiting for his coffee "WHAT? Here you go!" (perfect line delivery) and when he says "do NOT name your kid Jessie" with absolutely no prompt or context. I laughed for like 3 minutes straight. But the main girl, played by Patti Harrison (I think this may be the first thing I've seen her in), does a great job at portraying a very balanced and composed young woman, who happens to be in an odd situation. She reminds me of myself, a little, in that she doesn't really divulge much unless prompted and she's awkward but not in an accentuated way. I also love seeing Sue from Veep! She plays the same no-nonsense sort of character, but I am here for it! Overall, I think this is a sweet little indie movie that's charming and unexpected. I like it! 

4. Titane - *slight spoilers* I had no idea what this movie was about - I heard that it was super weird and from many implications, I went into it *pretty sure* that the main character fucks a car? But, surprisingly, we've been there before (with The Counselor, which was not as bad of a movie as everyone claims). Also, surprisingly, I've been to a car show very similar to the one featured in the beginning of this movie. I actually like car shows, in general, and I used to go to the one at the Javits Center in NYC every year (haven't been in 3 years, but definitely plan on going to the next one). The one I went to that reminded me of this one was in LA and it was a car-slash-fashion show, which was really just an excuse to have a bunch of models in bikinis walk on a runway. Anyway, the beginning of this movie is fairly successful. It's clearly meant to be an uncomfortable watch (and the car fucking isn't even the worst part - she attempts a hanger abortion and she tries to bite off someone's nipple ring - both scenes had me cringing). I wasn't super enthralled with the whole faux-feminist murderer plot that was beginning to unfold (it's ok because he was an asshole never works for me). But then, it becomes an entirely different movie, and I'm not sure if I like it or not. It's basically a copy of The Imposter (which is somehow a documentary, meaning it's REAL. Wild, but real). Overall, I think it's just a little too ridiculous for me to truly enjoy it, but there is still a lot of good stuff within it. The use of body horror is extreme - and I had my nose scrunched for the entire movie. It's just soooo gross. I like the way it uses pregnancy as trauma (how "alien" your body becomes), and I like how it relates trauma to sexuality. There's definitely a clear Under the Skin vibe (which is one of my favorite films of all-time) about identity, gender, relationships and sexuality. I don't think it's something that will stay with me, though, as Under the Skin did. 

5. Marry Me - As I've said many times, rom-coms aren't really my thing. But as with any genre, a good movie is a good movie. And there have definitely been some really good rom-coms (13 Going on 30, While You Were Sleeping, My Best Friend's Wedding are some of my favorites. Oddly, the most recent one that I really liked was that Rebel Wilson one - Isn't it Romantic, and I was definitely not expecting to like that. So, you never know!). This is a satisfying rom-com. I don't necessarily think it's a good movie, but it hits all the notes that it should, is well-acted and charming, and has a good message. It's also very innocent and inoffensive (I'm usually super offended by most rom-coms. They are super misogynistic, especially the "girl power" ones). It has a simple story of a famous pop-star falling in love with a "regular" guy, and it's definitely a relationship the audience can root for. I adore JLo, but I'm not a big fan of her acting (terrific performer, though!), nor am I fan of Owen Wilson (I don't hate him, I just find him a little annoying). They both don't really have any range, so it just feels like they are playing a heightened version of themselves, but it works (I AM, however, a big fan of Michelle Buteau, but she is sadly under-utilized in this). I read an interesting article about how JLo consistently only has white guys as her love interests in films, which is not something I ever thought about, but obviously a bit problematic? Considering how influential she is and how she embodies this very proud Latina/New Yorker identity, I wonder if it's merely coincidental or if she designed her film career to cater to a "wider" (aka "whiter") audience? Sorry, I don't have the article link, but I'm sure you can find it if you're interested. Anyway, there's obviously some cheesy moments, and very unrealistic moments (how did a middle-school guidance counselor afford 3 tickets that close to the stage of a concert that clearly would be thousands of dollars per ticket?). There are also moments in which the audience is supposed to sympathize with this woman, because her life is just so hard (late night hosts are making fun of her!), but I rarely feel bad for celebrities (is that mean? I know they are human and have feelings too blah, blah, blah, but unless they have a family member dying or something to that extent, I just don't feel bad. Money doesn't buy happiness, but it sure makes everything easier). I also don't believe celebrity couples are real - 90% of them are for publicity. But there are also some really cute moments in this - like when she shows up at his school and the kids in the math club dance with her. The funniest part of the whole movie is when they describe JLo as "north of 35" (she's 52). Also, the line "award shows are bullshit and you don't need them to tell you how good you are", which is clearly @ The Academy for "snubbing" Lopez for her performance in Hustlers (which was good, but not award-worthy in my opinion). Overall, I had a good time with this. I'm not sure why they had to end it on such a weird note (during the credits there is a joke about a girl going on a camping trip on a first date and her boyfriend goes "she's still alive!" - ha, ha, ha he didn't murder her! SO FUNNY!).