Brokedown Booty Palace

One film I like to go back and watch now and again is "Brokedown Palace", which is about 2 girls who go to Thailand and get mixed up with a shady character who plants heroin on them and then has them arrested. The scene in the Airport where they get busted is pretty dramatic: just as they're getting ready to board the plane, the Thai militia shows up and goes right to them, ready to shoot to kill.

The film stars Claire Danes and Kate Beckinsale as the 2 girls, and Bill Pullman as the lawyer("Yankee Hank")who tries to get them out. It was actually filmed in Manila, not Bangkok, but what the hell do us Americans know? One far-East setting is just like another.

A fairly entertaining movie. You get into the story, as the different layers unfold, and the exotic setting. But one other thing kept with me while watching the film, and observing Danes and Beckinsale.

Who has the better can?

You could definitely argue toward Danes, who makes up for what she may lack in kazooms with nice hips and a solid, substantial backside(which, by the way, you get a good look at in the movie "Shopgirl"). Good legs too. Definitely more of a 'lower-body' chick. Beckinsale is a bit taller and willowier, but her butt has surprising cleft and swell to it, which may equal or exceed Danes'.

Well, all told, an entertaining movie. An interesting story(and, yes, based on true events--that shit really happens over there!), in an 'exotic' setting. And portrayed by 2 young actresses you enjoy seeing turn around.

The Shining

Just recently I ordered what I thought was going to be the old 1977 release of The Shining, book by Stephen King, directed by Stanley Kubrick, starring Jack Nicholson/Shelley DuVall, yadda yadda.. Upon opening the package, my glee sank, my spirit falling to the floor, splattering like a lumberingly lugubrious horseturd of disappointment, in seeing that it was an entirely different edition: different EVERYTHING.

It was a feeling quite similar to getting my McDonald's bag-o-burgers-n-fries home to find out they added all that McJunk on the burgers when I'd asked for them plain. I mean, you can scrape the stuff off, but it's not what you ordered. Plus, it still has the McJunk aftertaste even after you get it removed from your food. Sorry, but I'm NOT "lovin' it"....
Unfortunately with a DVD, there's nothing you can scrape off except the plastic covering, so I decided to sit and watch it, even though it's not what I ordered. I suppose the equivalent here of scraping off excess/unwanted stuff is the fast-forward function, but I never ended up using it.Well, this newer version does have much more resemblance to the book: first, Rebecca DeMornay(who is much more "packed" than I remember her, for whatever that's worth)is much more like the Wendy in the book than was Shelley DuVall, both physically-blonde and all-and emotionally. And the story itself pretty much follows the book, right down to the ending- or at least the demise of the Overlook.
Well, I should say apparent demise here, but maybe I've said too much already. I'll leave the ending a surprise just in case you haven't seen it.
Being executive producer and all in this '90's version, I think this was how Stephen King probably would've wanted to shoot The Shining back in 1977 if he'd had carte blanche. I haven't read any press on it but I'll bet it would confirm what I'm saying here. Personally though, I don't think this newer one is as good, regardless of its fidelity to the book. I don't like the way it's cut, and from the relatively glossy quality, it was recorded on tape rather than film-which loses something, at least for Smithton Wahling-Rumply..
What I favored about the '77 version was, besides amazing performances by both Nicholson and DuVall(no one plays fright like Shelley DuVall, particularly in the near-final scene where Nicholson breaks down the door with an axe, etc..), are the various Kubrick touches.
Stanley Kubrick is a very tactile, visceral director. He makes you feel the area you're looking at as if you were touching it. Not only the physical surface(as in those scenes with Danny on his scooter heading down the various surfaces: carpeted, hardwood--and the scenes in 2001 aboard the ship, when they're jogging and you go upside down due to the lack of gravity)but the physical dimensions of the room. There's a certain harmony to every room he creates as to the various elements within that room, everything blends. It invites you in. Very true of The Shining, and evident in all other films, notably Eyes Wide Shut.
The director of this newer version does not have Kubrick's sense of feng shui- well, actually few do. So you're not necessarily drawn into the scene, though he is not without his surprises. Still, I'll take the original Shining, even though it wasn't exactly in line with the writer's original vision.

Deconstructing Woody Allen

Personally I still like Woody Allen's movies. I did think "Deconstructing Harry" had a casualness to it in places that bothered me, a drop-the-ball feeling as to the dialogue(the 'f word' for one thing, something never used before, and feels strangely inappropriate). And though I did like the movie ultimately--the point about Harry being dysfunctional in life but his art being his redeeming functionality--I didn't get into the jagged cutting of the film.

It did give a certain edge to the film though. He did that same thing in "Stardust Memories", the scenes with - oh shit whatshername, the thin, neurotic British actress-when she's in the nuthouse.

I don't understand why he's so hated by the general public for taking up with his girlfriend's adopted daughter. Personally I don't consider that a complely reprehensible act, as she was of consenting age and there were no legal barriers. Irresponsible maybe, but then what does that have to do with me? Who am I to pass judgment here? As an entertainer, does he owe me a certain code of conduct for me to view his films?


Woody Allen's only responsibility to me, Smithton Wahling-Rumply, is to make entertaining films--and even then, only if I've paid to see it.

I must admit, though, I'm not as avid a fan as I once was. But I still do enjoy the occasional Woody Allen flick. And he did make some good ones. Particularly the earlier, funnier ones.

Just kidding.