"Inland Empire" - a dissection of the film, its surrealism and its overarching themes, in 10,000 words.
Fuck, I hate shaving.
I realised something today; South Park is the true growed-up version of Rugrats. No, really. It centres around a group of young ‘uns who constantly misinterpret things. It’s just that South Park is dirty about it, and Rugrats isn’t.
So basically, I’m loving a cartoon similar to one I loved as a kid. Goddammit, I haven’t changed in the slightest.
To get a bit more high-brow for a second:
Mark this day; the day when some TV newspaper guy gave 2001 1 star. Out of five. Despite the millions of stars the movie introduced us to – well no, I’m being silly. But still, one fucking star.
This was in the TV Guide from the Melbourne’s Herald Sun, apparently. And the criticism went thus:
“Nay, lest ye be pretentious, ye shall not watch 2001. Yay, it is as true as I spake here afore you. See, it is overcomplicated, and I don’t like the music. So fuck you, Stanley.”
Well, no, it actually goes like this:
“It may be a modern classic, but director Stanley Kubrick’s space oddity takes more time than a voyage to Mars. The movie is like space itself, endless, empty and pretty pointless. 1 star out of 5.”
Of course it’s like space itself, that’s the mood it’s trying to evoke; that intense nothingness. God damn, are some critics really that stupid? I mean, really?
No, I shouldn’t judge. Maybe it’s a personal matter, and that it’s not that it just bored him. Maybe this guy has really well-thought out criticisms, it’s just that he only had a limited space (LOL! PUN!) to write in. I’m willing to give him, or in fact her because let’s not get sexist, the benefit of the d-
...no wait, they also gave Legally Blonde 3 stars. Yeah well, fuck them.