Log in

No account? Create an account

keeping up with the livejournaling

I'm not sure if I've mentioned it, but I am a fan of the Daylight Savings Time. You see, I'd been waking up whenever it gets light outside and am philosophicaly opposed to being awake before 8 am unless absolutely necessary; so this was causing a bit of an existential crisis. The business of trying to fall asleep out of spite was getting tiresome.

And writing about the time is almost as fascinating as talking about the weather which is almost as interesting as posting about television. I could've just written about tonight's episode of the o.c. and the moral issues raised by competing plots to get Trey out of the Cohen house. In particular, the question of why Trey's theft of an item from a charity auction is so much worse than Marissa's plan to sell an essentially stolen item to its rightful owner in a charity auction.

Right. I've been spending a lot of time working.

Last night I went to see Los Angeles Plays Itself (not gay-themed adult entertainment, L.A. Plays Itself [imdb]), Thom Anderson's film essay about the way that the city of Los Angeles has been represented in movies. The thesis is not particularly deep -- films shot in Los Angeles don't accurately reflect the "real" city, it's architecture, or its citizens but sometimes unintentionally document these things -- yet the investigation holds up for much of the three hour running time. There are parts that drag sligthly or get over-opinionated, but the whole thing is pretty fascinating. I suppose that a similar argument could be made about any town, but the sheer amount of footage shot in Los Angeles makes it a good place to start.

Although clips from nearly 200 movies (relying heavily on Blade Runner, L.A. Confidential, and Chinatown) are included, I couldn't help but wonder about some that were left out. Highlighting my own lack of depth on the topic, I missed seeing recent movies like Mulholland Drive, the Anniversary Party, Spanglish, Collateral, and Less Than Zero. I did enjoy seeing all of the old movies with crappy astonishingly different styles acting and pacing. My inability to pay attention to most old films is kind of embarrassing.


Were there any TV clips? I think 24, Beverly Hills 90210 (and derivatives like Melrose Pl), Baywatch, et al., play a really big role in framing LA.

the hills of beverly were not included

The only television clips (that I remember) were from Dragnet, which was also a film. That is, I think he tried to stick to movies (that supported his arguments) and may have used a Dragnet loophole. Unless he only showed clips from the film and not the television series -- I'm not sure if I could tell the difference.

I am amazed that the temptation to use those shows (and also L.A. Law) didn't get the better of him.

Re: the hills of beverly were not included

Maybe he'll do a sequel with TV shows.
i don't really see any reason to be up before 8 am as well.
I think the same can be said of New York. Well, maybe. At least about what it's like to live in New York? Over spring break Kailin and I watched Addicted to Love (which is actually a very bizarre and disturbing, and odd and maybe brilliant) movie. It is the first movie I've seen that depicts what it's really like to live in New York. Sure, you've got an amazing city in front of you, but more likely you find the street performers somewhat annoying, you go to Washington Square Park to spy on someone, you work at an elementary school, and maybe you're crazy. In all seriousness, it was the first movie that didn't depict living in NY like being on Sex and the City, or something else that is totally unrealistic.
The main points that Thom Anderson made about the depiction of New York in film is that NYC is more immediately recognizable and is usually shot in clearer focus, while Los Angeles is often to represent some other place and is shot through fog.

It's interesting that Addicted to Love turned out to be a realistic movie about New York. I remembered it as having some absurd plot elements.
the plot is certainly absurd, but the fact that the main characters don't do anything "new york" (i.e., do not go to touristy spots, meet donald trump, have fabulous jobs, live in really large apartments without explanation, or go on shopping sprees), but rather are just ordinary people who happen to live in new york is what i found so realistic.
i guess i mean that addicted to love is, refreshingly, a movie that takes place in new york, rather than a movie that includes new york as a character. Cf. Hitch.