What We Blog About When We Blog About Love

Entries categorized as ‘movies’

Let The Wild Rumpus Begin.

October 17, 2009 · Leave a Comment

x

x

You get so used to Hollywood screwing up (by dumbing down) adaptations of kids books that it’s difficult to know what to say when you watch a movie like Where the Wild Things Are. The worst thing that can be said about it is that it’s not really a movie for eight-year-olds. Seeing as we’re not eight-year-olds, we’re fine with this. The best thing that can be said is that it gets childhood almost exactly right. Credit for this goes not just to director Spike Jonze and co-writer Dave Eggers, but most of all to young Max Records, who as Max captures all the wonderment, loneliness, imagination and terror of growing up. There’s a scene when he and Carol (voiced perfectly by James Gandolfini) race up to a cliff overlooking the sea. Another Wild Thing runs up behind them and bumps into Max, nearly knocking him over the ledge. There’s a split second when it appears Max might fall, and you feel the danger of this strange world of imagination, no matter how imaginary it may be. That’s the tightrope walk of growing up that the movie captures beautifully. Aside from the second half dragging a bit, the movie was a pleasure to watch. Our favorite characters may have been KW’s friends Bob and Terry. We won’t give anything away, but let’s just say they tell pretty good jokes.

Categories: movies
Tagged: ,

On Disagreeing With Your Favorite Movie Critic

July 22, 2009 · 10 Comments

Anthony Lane of The New Yorker is my (Ben) favorite film critic (though Jerry Grit finds him too fizzy and prefers the magazine’s other reviewer, the workmanlike David Denby, while Mark Hoobler would contend A.O. Scott is a better judge of cinema than both). I have read hundreds of Lane’s reviews, the bulk of them from his superb collection, Nobody’s Perfect. While all movie tastes differ, I can count on one hand the number of times I’ve taken serious issue with Lane’s consideration and judgment. (Foreshadowing: This will happen in the fourth graf of this post.) Like fellow New Yorker writer Hendrik Hertzberg is on politics and James Fallows on media, or how Randall Jarrell was on poetry, Lane has the persuasive ability to convince you of the rightness of his judgment. He has an abundance of a great critic’s indispensable virtue: fairness. (Not coincidentally, my least favorite critics — Walter Kirn, Dale Peck, Christopher Hitchens, to say nothing of political commentators – strike me as the most unfair.)

Lane’s recent review of Brüno might seem an exception. Erin and I had both been weighing whether or not to see it. We are “Da Ali G Show” fans and thoroughly enjoyed Borat (me probably a bit more than Erin), and we’ve already incorporated a new voreslang from the Brüno trailer ( “Zat’s such a Samantha thing to zay”). Lane eviscerates the film, saying

I’m afraid that “Brüno” feels hopelessly complicit in the prejudices that it presumes to deride. You can’t honestly defend your principled lampooning of homophobia when nine out of every ten images that you project onscreen comply with the most threadbare cartoons of gay behavior. A schoolboy who watches a pirated DVD of this film will look at the prancing Austrian and find more, not fewer, reasons to beat up the kid on the playground who doesn’t like girls. There is, on the evidence of this movie, no such thing as gay love; there is only gay sex, a superheated substitute for love, with its own code of vulcanized calisthenics whose aim is not so much to sate the participants as to embarrass onlookers from the straight—and therefore straitlaced—society beyond.

We both read the review independently of one another and both arrived at the same conclusion: We will never see Brüno. It’s not that we wouldn’t be amused at parts (as reliable critics Erik Brueggemann and my brother Dan attest we would) or that we consider ourselves squeamish (although we don’t jump at the opportunity to watch a talking penis). It’s that, with Lane’s review irreversibly embedded in our heads, we could not be convinced that any other verdict would be more appropriate than his own. A brutal review, yes, but to our minds not an unfair one.

Is this closed-mindedness? Shouldn’t we at least arrive at our own conclusion? There are arguments for that. But given the price of a movie ticket today, it’s an argument we’re not going to have.

This brings us to Lane’s take on The Half-Blood Prince, reviewed here yesterday. Simply put, it was unfair. Lane woke up on the wrong side of the bed or was bullied by director David Yates in junior high or something. He reads the film’s style as “dour and heavy,” which I could chalk up to an honest disagreement in mood. But when he writes that the

bruised, lead-and-sepia tone that [Yates] uses to tint the entire landscape of the movie [is] not only … lowering to behold; it also scrubs away any remembrance that this saga of gifted kids was once a bit of a jape. Why is it that, from Gotham City to Hogwarts, the official word has gone out that anything dark and edgy is a de-facto guarantee of weight and impact? Just what is so serious about horny adolescents cooking potions?

For one, the film is funny. We’ve expressed our fondness for Jim Broadbent’s performance, and Michael Gambon wrings some dry humor from Dumbledore (as does the marvelous Evanna Lynch as Luna Lovegood). Secondly, the series becomes increasingly dark and serious as it progresses, though it never choked off the pleasure of Rowling’s magical universe. The films, especially the last two, have done the same. If anything, they still play it too safe: in the book when Harry forces Dumbledore to drink from the cup, Dumbledore screams, “I want to die! I want to die!” and later, “KILL ME!” That would have been a truly unnerving scene to recreate on film, which settles for a reluctant Dumbledore drinking the cup and then appearing to be in need of a very long nap.

Lane’s final jibe is to imply that Half-Blood Prince devolves into sub-Tolkien borrowing. He’s right to see parallels (the dead Aragog, the Gollum-like Inferi) but wrong to conclude Potter’s universe is inferior by comparison. It is different, and the Lord of the Rings trilogy, as films, were superior in skill and cohesion. There were also only three of them, helmed by one (superlative) director, Peter Jackson. Both series should be viewed on their own terms.

What Lord of the Rings and the last four Harry Potter films share is that we’ll happily cozy up to them on some future rainy afternoon when we need comfort food from the DVD library. As for my tiff with Mr. Lane, I suspect we’ll soon put it behind us. I once again yield the floor to his superior judgment.

Categories: movies
Tagged: , , , ,

Harry Potter and the Half-Blood Prince

July 21, 2009 · 2 Comments

 HP_SS_synopsis_1

They’ve come a long way, baby.

 

The last director before David Yates to get back-to-back films in the Harry Potter franchise was the franchise’s first — and worst — director, Chris Columbus. Columbus was responsible for the drearily unimaginative Sorcerer’s Stone and Chamber of Secrets, both of which reduced J.K. Rowling’s world to what an adult imagined a pre-teen audience would want. The real magic of Rowling’s books is that her charms transcend age and demographics. Why a studio thought the director of Home Alone 2 and Stepmom could pull off a similar magic trick is beyond us. (We extend our apologies to those of you who are Percy Jackson fans.)

It took Alfonso Cuarón in Prisoner of Azkaban to liberate the films from their slavish devotion to the books. His Hogwarts was dark and moody. The characters became more shaded and emotionally complex. The special effects weren’t deployed simply to draw attention to themselves. Mike Newell then took the baton and did an admirable job with Goblet of Fire despite the fact it ended tragically with the death of R-Patz (Cedric Diggory).

Yates took over with Order of the Phoenix, and you could argue that he has benefited from a trio of young actors who have matured quite impressively over the course of six films. That would be true. It would also be true that the series itself made a jump between books two and three, from wonderfully captivating children’s literature to literature, period, and that it would only be natural for the films to follow suit. Point taken. (You may stop reading now, Mrs. Columbus.)

But no matter. With his two entries in the series, Yates has given Harry Potter a jolt of menace and darkness equal to the text. He’s also given a little zing to the numerous romantic subplots, capturing teenage lust as chastely envisioned by Rowling herself. ( “Snogging” just doesn’t have a dirty ring to it.) Ron’s efforts to prevent Harry and Ginny from falling for each other were among the film’s more amusing touches, as was Ron under the influence of a love potion.

The most amusement in the film comes from Jim Broadbent, whose portrayal of Horace Slughorn may be even better than what Rowling drew up. Broadbent’s eyes enlarge and shrink in direct proportion to one another, never on the same page. In honor of his performance we’d like the Academy to create an Oscar for Facial Gestures. (He’s especially funny to watch when he’s on the periphery of a scene.) We couldn’t decide which description fit him best: a British version of an older, more rumpled Bill Murray, or National Lampoon’s Cousin Eddie once he gets really senile.

The cave scene where Harry and Dumbledore find the horcrux was perfectly imagined. If you read the book — and even if you didn’t — you knew exactly what was coming when Harry reached down to cup the water from the lake, and still we jumped. Both of us also caught in Draco Malfoy the disturbing hint of a lonely outcast about to retaliate in violence against his school. He’s on the verge of becoming the Eric Harris/Dylan Klebold of Hogwarts.

Neither of us have read the book in a couple years, so we weren’t distracted by deviations or omissions from the text with one exception: We could’ve done without the final scene in the tower where Harry, Ron and Hermione provide exposition and gaze hopefully toward film seven (or, more appropriately, films seven and eight). Where — and here’s your spoiler alert notice if you’re not one of the dozen people left on the planet who doesn’t know how it all ends — was Dumbledore’s funeral? Where was Harry telling Ginny they could not be together because of the task ahead of him? That scene in the book was enough to plant real doubt in our minds about whether Harry or Ginny might die in the final chapter. We were invested in Harry’s heart; in the film, he not only doesn’t have this conversation with Ginny, he has it with Hermione, who we presume must be center stage (with Ron sitting quietly in the background) because our three stars need face time as a phoenix soars past and into the sunset on a false note of hollow uplift. The emotional weight of Harry learning that Snape is the half-blood prince also felt like a missed opportunity. Harry’s flirtation with and interest in the dark arts provided the dramatic tension of the book. In the film, it’s an afterthought.

These are mere quibbles. The film may be 150 minutes, but it flies by, and it’s a blast. Thank you, David Yates.

Categories: movies
Tagged: ,

Taken

July 14, 2009 · 9 Comments

taken-liam-neeson-32

Do not date this man’s daughter.

x

Based on our admittedly unscientific accounting, Liam Neeson kills roughly 139 people to rescue his daughter from an Albanian gang of human traffickers. If we ever have a girl one day, Ben will aspire to exactly this level of maniacally vengeful fatherhood.

Categories: movies

LocaVoreblog Roasts a Chicken!

July 1, 2009 · 2 Comments

PART II:  MAIN COURSE

Last week, I (Erin) detailed my trip to Green Acres Farm where I picked up my very own locally-bred, hormone-free, humanely-raised chicken (named “Darryl”). After thawing Darryl in our fridge, I prepared to cook what, by Vore standards, qualified as a feast. Usually our “dinner” is a bowl of pasta, a salad, or a slice of stromboli. An accompanying side dish is practically a buffet, so Friday’s meal constituted a miracle. Somewhere, my mother cries silently to herself that she failed to make me a proper woman.

Adios Self-Esteem: Even illustrations have perkier breasts and better domestic skills!

Adios Self-Esteem: Even illustrations have perkier breasts and superior domestic skills!

Before we could please our palate with the succulent breast, thigh and wing of poultry, I had to do the inevitable: Face the chicken. I did not want to face the chicken because raw chicken, especially a whole chicken, is slimy and gross. And decapitated.

On the bottom shelf of the fridge, Darryl was still next to that Yuengling but thankfully the Mexican leftovers had been tossed out. As I placed him in the roasting pan, delicately spreading his legs and wings, I was acutely aware that Darryl was an animal. Since reading Omnivore’s Dilemma, I’ve more or less reconciled my guilt over eating animals, but even still, the nausea set in and I couldn’t help but feel sad when looking at the stump that used to hold a head. Pollan writes that as he got closer to his food (both on an emotional and geographical level), he felt overwhelmingly thankful for it. There was a story behind his meal. It wasn’t faceless or pre-packaged. It was Darryl, who had been sacrificed for our appetite.

Into the oven went Darryl, along with some butter, rosemary and sea salt.  An hour and fifteen minutes later, out came a fragrant, oven-browned bird that looked camera-ready.

Who wants my butter pecan thighs?

Who wants my butter pecan thighs?

I fixed steamed vegetables from my parent’s garden and cheesy-tomato rice (a Vore staple) to go along with the chicken. I felt proud of my meal, which then made me feel embarrassed that normal people have real meals every night of the week. Oh well, guess we’re a different type of normal.

Suck it, Betty Crocker!

Suck it, Betty Crocker!

The meal did not come without a cost, as in the amount of money we paid for it. Darryl was no cheap chicken. (He was about $3.50 a pound.) But what did we get for that price? Chicken that tasted as fresh as any we’ve ever had the pleasure of eating. Could we afford to eat Darryl on a nightly basis? No. Are we willing to pay more every so often for a gustatory experience of this kind? Based on LocaVoreblog experiment #1, the answer is “absolutely.”

POSTSCRIPT FROM BEN: Darryl was delicious. Erin said I should write that I ate two pounds of him, but I’m certain it was not two pounds. But it was a lot. A delicious lot. This locavore thing is deliciously good!

POSTSCRIPT FROM ERIN: For an absurd and hilarious encounter with Danish film, allow me to recommend The Green Butchers, starring one of my favorites, Mads Mikkelsen, better known as Le Chiffre from Casino Royal. It’s about two Danes who are in the very bad habit of killing people and then selling those people disguised as chicken. Also, Mikkelsen sports a mean male-pattern baldness look.

Ben og Erin Vore sige: Watch De Grønne Slagtere for dit helbred!

Ben og Erin Vore sige: Watch De Grønne Slagtere for dit helbred!

Categories: LocaVoreblog · movies
Tagged: ,

The Hangover & Drag Me To Hell

June 8, 2009 · 9 Comments

Ben, who snuck in a double feature this weekend, is going to steal a page from Matthew Leathers’ book and write two two-sentence reviews

 

the-hangover-01

THE HANGOVER: As he did in Old School, Todd Phillips brings a subtle aesthetic sensibility to every frame. Broadly defined that sensibility is, “Why shoot this scene with pants when we could shoot it without pants?”

 

drag_me_to_hell_0520

DRAG ME TO HELL: Cat-lovers should avoid this movie at all costs. As should anyone who gets queasy at the thought of a dead gypsy woman vomiting beetles onto Alison Lohman’s face.

 

Anyone who saw these films with me (or just saw them, period) is welcome — nay, encouraged — to submit his/her own two-sentence review.

Categories: movies
Tagged:

Drag Me To Hell + Up = Voreblog’s Saturday Night

June 1, 2009 · 17 Comments

up-pixar-render-(2)

 

If you should ever find yourself about twenty minutes into a movie that you realize was a mistake (say, Drag Me To Hell), and then find yourself presented with the incredibly fortunate diversion of a pulled fire alarm, we recommend you do what we did on Saturday night: Use all the commotion and hubbub to steal across the lobby and over to the other hall so you can slip unnoticed into the 10:10 showing of Up. (If you time it well, you will enter the theater right as the previews start.) 

Up is the latest offering from Pixar, which can seemingly do no wrong. We ruffled some feathers when we said that we found WALL-E to be a bit underwhelming. (We don’t remember the exact wording of his epithet, but Matthew Leathers essentially questioned if we had a soul.) The wordless first half hour of that film, with its beautiful panoramic shots and precision of small, emotional detail, was a wonder. After that it got fairly conventional.

Up is 96 minutes of imaginative and inspired moviemaking. It begins with a young boy, Carl, captivated by a movie theater newsreel of an explorer named Charles Muntz (voiced, menacingly, by Christopher Plummer). Carl’s appetite for adventure and exploration is duly whetted, and on his way home from the theater he meets someone else who shares that passion, a tomboy named Ellie. The movie immediately jumps into a montage of their life together, beginning with their wedding and moving successively through stages of joy, surprise, grief, routine, loss, companionship and death. Those two minutes are a small marvel, and a movie unto itself. (David Denby calls it “one of the most moving animated episodes ever made.”) We’re not ashamed to say we were both teary at the end of it.*

The movie, like the widowed Carl’s spirits, lifts off after he ties thousands of helium balloons to his house. He sets off for Paradise Falls in South America, where he and Ellie always dreamed of exploring. Only after he’s airborne does Carl discover he has a co-pilot: a young, earnest, eager-to-please Wilderness Explorer named Russell. It’s a testament to the writers that you can appreciate how annoying and tiresome Russell can be without actually finding him annoying or tiresome. His enthusiastic idealism is a fine corrective for the grumpy, cantankerous Carl, who gradually warms up to Russell as they try to land, and then drag, his house to the precipice of Paradise Falls.

Before they get there, they are intercepted by a strange, flightless bird (Russell dubs it “Kevin” even though it turns out to be a she) and four dogs in hot pursuit. The dogs, it turns out, can speak, thanks to collars which transmit their thoughts into words. One dog, the vicious ringleader, has the misfortune of his collar settings being switched to a chipmunk voice. He barks orders but the other dogs can only laugh at him. Another dog, Dug, becomes a helpful if dense sidekick, constantly sidetracked by squirrels. 

There are so many winning sequences that it’s hard to keep track. One of the strangest (and funniest) comes at the end when Russell slides and squeaks across an airship window. The gag starts funny and only gets funnier, as the filmmakers stretch it out for what seems like forever. (Denby got a kick out of this moment too.) 

Finally, we should qualify our reaction to Drag Me To Hell. It may, in fact, be an equally brilliant movie, albeit of a very different ilk.* One of us would have been thoroughly enjoying it except that he knew the other was not, and that the evening ahead — indeed, the next several weeks — might be spent locking and re-locking doors, investigating unusual noises and assuring his lovely wife that no demonic gypsy woman is really intent on dragging her to hell. Perhaps we simply weren’t in the Sam Raimi, horror-spoof frame of mind. (Perhaps one of us never will be.) The other, however, will gladly see this movie with anyone who wishes to behold the sight of a toothless, deathless, forehead-stapled Lorna Raver menacingly sucking on Alison Lohman’s chin just seconds before Lohman shoves a ruler down her throat. It’s not exactly uplifting, but it sure is funny.

 

* = As Kenneth Turan said (somewhat feistily) in his review on NPR, “If parts of Up don’t bring a tear to your eye, I just don’t want to hear about it.”

** = Ben’s brother Dan sure thought it was brilliant when he texted this: “You got to see drag me to hell! you will poop yourself!”

Categories: movies
Tagged: ,

This Day in Vore History: May 28, 2003

May 28, 2009 · 7 Comments

Part three of a four-part series recounting the romantic origins of Voreblog. Part one and Part two.

 

On June 2, 2003 — the day after Erin Beers flew back to Nashville after a five-day trip to Pittsburgh to visit Ben (and attend Mike and Beth Werkheiser’s wedding) — Ben cracked open his journal and wrote, “I think Erin Beers made a mistake.” He considered this for a while, reading and re-reading those seven words, before adding, “It’s not an irrevocable mistake. I am still confident of that.”

——————

Six days earlier, on Tuesday, May 27, 2003, Ben awoke with a ruthless headache. He was home in State College, PA, to celebrate Memorial Day with the family. It wasn’t much of a celebration though, as he spent most of the day in bed with a fierce migraine. He went to sleep Monday night thinking it couldn’t get worse. He woke up Tuesday and it was.

Ben’s parents refused to let him drive back to Pittsburgh that day, not that Ben would’ve attempted it. But Ben had to find a way to be at the Pittsburgh International Airport by 12:57 p.m. on Wednesday, the 28th, the time at which Erin Beers would be landing for a five-day visit. The ostensible reason for the visit was a wedding. Mike and Beth Werkheiser, camp friends, were to be wed in Beaver, PA, that Saturday. Erin returned her invite with the “and guest” box checked, then booked her trip. She’d spend four days in Pittsburgh prior to the wedding, then fly back to Nashville the following day. All Ben had to do was be there.

——————–

Ben woke up on Wednesday and felt like a human being again. He drove back to Pittsburgh that morning, and three hours in the car allowed him ample time to plan out the crucial details of Erin’s reception. Ben plotted what album would be playing when Erin got in the car (Gemma Hayes, Night on the Side). (Ben had visually associated Gemma and Erin since he thought they looked alike. Plus he had a crush on Gemma. Plus Ben hoped Erin would pay special attention to the lyrics of song three on the album, “Let A Good Thing Go,” a lament for, as the title suggests, letting a good thing go.) He visualized which details of the youth room at Shadyside Presbyterian he would point out to her, details which — if carefully selected — would evoke shared memories of the prior summer at Summer’s Best Two Weeks when Erin and Ben met as co-counselors of the kitchen crew, comprised of twenty-some high schoolers who occasionally did bone-headed yet endearing things like try to mail camp forks to friends (this is you, Chris Tolles) or parade around camp during optional playing the bagpipes (in kilts, no less). Ben was concerned about the state of his apartment, which he had not had time to prep given his delayed return from State College. Had he accidentally left his frog-print boxers in the common room? Carefully arranged his Paste magazines on the coffee table as potential conversation-starters? And the right books beside them? And the right CDs? He’d have to wing it when they walked through the door, assessing the situation like a field commander and moving like a hawk to correct any incriminating details that might suggest he was not boyfriend-worthy.

By day’s end, an event Ben had anticipated for so long (Erin! in Pittsburgh!) came and passed … normally. When Ben spotted Erin at the airport, all the little details of her face, hair, build, gait came back instantly. When they toured Shadyside, Ben feared that the youth room — rather than inducing camp nostalgia — may have alternately raised Erin’s potential doubts of Ben as the stereotypical churchy youth pastor. When they reached the apartment, Erin — tired from her trip — dozed on Ben’s bed and drooled on his pillow. That night, after Ben dropped Erin off at a friend’s house in Squirrel Hill where she would be staying for her visit, he drove back down Negley Hill and saw — as he always did from that hill, when he was paying attention — a panoramic view of Pittsburgh at night, stretching far and wide in all directions. One other detail Ben had incorporated into the day was the glorious view of Pittsburgh that greeted drivers emerging from the Fort Pitt Tunnel, a view most spectacular at night but even at midday still a pretty good way to introduce the Steel City to a visitor. (Pittsburgh is “the only city with an entrance,” sayeth the New York Times.) When they had emerged from the tunnel that afternoon, Ben rolled down his window, stuck his head out and yelled, “She’s expecting big things, city!” He repeated that line, alone in his car, with slightly less gusto, as he descended Negley Hill that night.

——————-

The template for the next two days started with leisurely mornings spent sipping coffee at Jitters on Walnut Street (Ben, in his pre-coffee days, getting a chai instead), enjoying a light breakfast, then going for a long walk or run. This was still three months before Erin, running for the first time with Ben in Nashville, nearly blacked out from a combination of fatigue and nerves, the latter being the result of her fear that she couldn’t keep up with a boy. While Erin sat down on the 21st Avenue sidewalk to regroup, Ben — slightly panicked and doused in sweat — ran into the nearest convenience store. “My girlfriend almost passed out and I need to get something for her,” he told the clerk. “Are you going to pay for it?” the clerk asked. “I don’t have money,” Ben said as he grabbed the closest granola bar and apple juice. “I’ll come back and pay you, honest.” The clerk shook his head. “You can’t take both,” he said. Ben put the granola bar on the counter. “Ok,” the clerk said — resigned, probably, to taking $1.09 out of his paycheck as the price to pay for enabling a possibly life-saving intervention, if not an unusual new shoplifting technique.

But, again, this act of small heroism would not transpire for another three months.

On Thursday, Ben and Erin drove south and east to visit Fallingwater, then to Ohiopyle, another site intended to evoke fond shared memories. (Camp rafting trips down the Youghiogheny River launched from Ohiopyle.) They parked at Cucumber Falls and hiked downstream to Cucumber Rapids where they found a big, flat rock to stretch out on and just rest, eyes closed, below the sun. On Friday they explored the Warhol Museum with its balloon-filled rooms and Campbells soup can trinkets in the gift shop, then sauntered around the North Shore and its wading pools. They talked of the upcoming summer at camp, when Erin would return for two terms (a month) and Ben would overlap for two of those weeks, his first — and only — post-youth ministry plans once he wrapped up four years at Shadyside. Where he would move that August — be it Nashville or Chicago or, less likely though still a possibility, out West to regions unknown — was still up in the air. Ben hoped to have a better idea after Erin’s visit if there was a green light on Nashville. But for the first three days of Erin’s stay, no talk ventured too far down that uncertain path. 

——————-

Neither Ben nor Erin remember much about the wedding, except that they were slightly late arriving because — depending on who you asked — the driver either missed a turn or the navigator misread the map. This would prove to be a harbinger of things to come.

What both remember happened after the wedding, in Ben’s car, parked on Elmer Street just outside his apartment, with the engine off but the power still on so Erin could enjoy the smell of a Honda Civic’s A/C, its own little aromatic madeleine. It started raining, first a drizzle and soon a downpour. Inside, Ben and Erin were still all decked out (though Erin had removed her shoes and put her aching feet on the dash), both reclined with their seats back, watching the rain patterns on the windshield and talking, finally, about where they stood. (The kids today refer to this as the DTR conversation.)

Erin said she didn’t see a green light when she thought about a relationship with Ben. It’s not that there’s another guy in the picture, she said. It may be about the timing, she said. Everything lines up, she added, ticking off items: musical and artistic interests; athletic interests; shared religious beliefs. That’s what I’m looking for in a guy, she said, almost apologetically. But no green light.

I’ve never met this Green Light guy, Ben thought, but God help him if he ever crosses my path…

Ben had a hard time believing Erin. He considered the evidence from the past three days and saw only good things. He couldn’t bring himself to believe Erin wasn’t feeling something good too, although there was always that nagging doubt — cultivated from numerous misreadings of relationships past — that Ben simply didn’t get it the way other people got it on matters of the heart.

That’s when Erin said, There’s something else. She told Ben he had always been a good thing in her life, and it occurred to her that this may be something to consider.

“I don’t think it was just my optimism that wanted to hear ‘yes’ when Erin said ‘no’,” Ben journaled after the fact. “I think it’s because her ‘no’ was a ‘yes’ in the making.”

Later, both of them would recount the other doubts that went unspoken that night in the car. Erin’s visit had reminded Ben, who had been single for quite some time, what the harder parts of a relationship might be: the listening, the yielding, the silences. Erin, for her part, had some misgivings both large — about what Ben would be now that he was done being a youth pastor — and small — about some of Ben’s fashion tastes, particularly his choice of black suede dress shoes for the wedding. (This would fester in silence until, a month after they were married, Ben saw those shoes and certain other items from his closet in a Goodwill pile Erin had started. “I could let it slide until we were married,” Erin said. “Now I’ve got to put my foot down.”) 

Because they could not talk about “us” before an “us” existed, Ben and Erin had the more immediate conversation about where Ben would move in three months. Nashville? And if so, to do what? And for what reasons? Neither one suspected that the fragile possibility of a relationship could survive the expectations that would come with Ben moving to Nashville for no other reason than that Erin was there. Ben found himself wondering, Where would I be and what would I do if Erin Beers wasn’t in the picture? Would I be doing us harm by moving to Nashville? Is it really just a matter of timing, and we just hit it wrong?

——————-

The first letter Erin wrote to Ben after returning to Nashville included a folded copy of the cover of New York magazine’s June 9, 2003 issue. The headline reads “What Are You On?” above a counter of pills, ranging from Paxil and Zoloft to Ritalin, Viagra and Vicodin. Such was one outcome of their visit: Mental health issues were not just out in the open now, but fodder for comic relief. “Yeah! Drugs!” Erin scribbled on the cover. This was the kind of thing they couldn’t have joked about nine months ago.

“It’s fun to spy on your life and to put together a few more pieces to the puzzle of knowing you and not knowing you at all,” Erin wrote in her letter. That’s before the missive went completely bipolar. Erin first wrote, “I stand behind everything I said to you last week … I cannot say things to you that I don’t fully mean & have you move here & then be disappointed,” then — half a page later — “When I think about you possibly moving here and having things go well and I imagine us together or whatever, it makes me think that it would be final. You would be it. If we dated then we’d probably get married, pros & cons. And that FREAKS ME OUT. I wouldn’t want you to be someone on a list of failures.” Later in the letter she wrote, “When I think about the future, I know I’d be happy with you. There isn’t one good reason why I wouldn’t be.” 

——————–

Ben would not receive that letter until after he saw All The Real Girls at The Harris Theater downtown. He saw it alone, as he usually preferred. The film is a beautiful, note perfect account of all-consuming young love in a small North Carolina mill town. It is brutal, and it is honest. “I just want to make sure that a million years from now I can still see you up close and we’ll still have amazing things to say,” Paul (Paul Schneider) tells Noel (Zooey Deschanel) in one scene. It is a line that only the very young could say and mean. 

Leaving the theater, all Ben could think about was Erin. He was sad and forlorn and elated and confused all at the same time. He was in love and didn’t know if he was loved back. Standing on top of the Smithfield Street parking garage, Ben called Erin to tell her he’d just seen the film and how much he’d enjoyed seeing her and how he couldn’t wait for camp in less than two months. That was it. It was a good conversation. And the next day Erin mailed the letter.

Categories: This Day in Vore History · movies · music · things that make you sad
Tagged: , ,

Friday Recommends: Inappropriate Crushes

May 8, 2009 · 3 Comments

zac_efron_seventeen_again

Zac Efron. I want to go to there.

 

Last night, instead of having our regularly scheduled meeting, I (Erin) went to see 17 Again with my Bible study. It was awesome (in the biblical sense) and I daresay that it made me feel seventeen — nay, sixteen – again. We were the only ones in the theater. Between the six of us, we smuggled in four Diet Cokes, Skittles, Milk Duds, Riesens, Swedish Fish, Junior Mints and plenty Good ‘N’ Plenty. Also, six inappropriate crushes. 

Here’s what you need to know before going — and you should go.  

1.  This will be a familiar story. Take one part It’s a Wonderful Life, two parts Big and 13 Going on 30, a splash of Freaky Friday, and mix vigorously. Add a dash of Cat Power and Spoon. Fold in Massage Zac Efron and the other actors.

2.  Thomas Lennon is a funny man. Best known for playing the plum-smuggling cop on Reno 911, Lennon plays a rich, unfortunate geek obsessed with fantasy and sci-fi. Also, he has bad hair.

3.  It will make you uncomfortable. There’s no two ways about it: Making out with your father/mother/daughter/son is gross.  But also kind of exciting?!!?

4.  The word “twinkledouche” will quickly become part of your vocabulary. I challenge you to work this into casual conversation over the next week or so.

5.   Zac Efron is 21 and therefore, not completely inappropriate.

 

In conclusion, ZAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAACCC! 

Categories: Friday Recommends · movies
Tagged: ,

Adventureland

April 7, 2009 · 4 Comments

adventureland-kennywood_45901857

The Vores give Adventureland two thumbs up!

 

BEN: There were about five things going for this movie right out of the gate. One: It’s set in western Pennsylvania. Two: It was filmed at Kennywood, Pittsburgh’s premiere amusement park attraction. Three: It stars Jesse Eisenberg, whose character James is a close relative of the character Eisenberg played in the exceptional The Squid & The Whale. Four: Yo La Tengo did the score. Five: The vintage 80s soundtrack includes The Velvet Underground, The Cure, The Rolling Stones, Big Star, Hüsker Dü and David Bowie.

ERIN: I would add one more item to that list: The comedic duo of Bill Heder and Kristen Wiig, the husband-and-wife team running Adventureland. My favorite scene involved the two of them making prize bananas with googly eyes and an eye patch.

BEN: When I saw them in the trailer I’ll admit that I expected the movie to be more slapstick, especially since it was directed by Greg Mottola, whose last film was Superbad.

ERIN: It certainly wasn’t raunchy like Superbad.

BEN: It wasn’t. What it was is exactly the kind of dry, bittersweet, coming-of-age summer love story that I’m a sucker for.

ERIN: You are a sucker for those. 

BEN: Being somewhat a child of the late 80s, do you think perhaps I am the target audience and that my estimation of the film could be inflated?

ERIN: You’re really more a child of the early 90s, but I do not think Adventureland’s charms are exclusive to your particular demographic. 

BEN: Speaking of Superbad, do you think Eisenberg’s character James was separated at birth from Michael Cera?

ERIN: Yes, but he was more like the “Arrested Development”/George Michael Michael Cera than the Superbad/Evan Michael Cera.

BEN: He also had a slightly more intellectual bent. I mean, he did have a bachelor’s degree in comparative lit with a Renaissance-studies minor.

ERIN: His character kind of reminded me of you.

BEN: Wait, is that a good thing?

ERIN: Yeah. You should take it as a compliment.

BEN: Seeing him made me keep comparing this film to The Squid & The Whale.

ERIN: Which one comes out on top?

BEN: Well, they’re very different films. Adventureland was more light-hearted. It had a gentler ending.

ERIN: The ending was perfect.

BEN: Let’s not reveal it here so as not to spoil it.

ERIN: Fair.

BEN: The Squid & The Whale was darker and far less of a crowd-pleaser, although I think it had a perfect ending too.

ERIN: It was more provocative. But Adventureland was perfect for a vacation movie. I loved it.

BEN: I expect we’ll be seeing it in the Vore DVD library sometime before the end of the year.

ERIN: I expect we will. Speaking of vacations, isn’t Katie Stratman the perfect host?

BEN: She is a host par excellence. Although I have eaten about thirty-two of her famous cookies since we arrived.

ERIN: That’s like a cookie an hour.

BEN: She also paid for our movie tickets!

ERIN: That she did.

BEN: Can you think of any reason not to want to come to Denver and stay with Katie Stratman?

ERIN: I have thought long and hard on this, and the conclusion I have reached is “No.”

BEN: Fair.

ERIN: Highs and lows of the trip so far?

BEN: Two words: Tattered. Cover.

ERIN: I’ve gotta go with brunch at Lucile’s Creole Cafe.

BEN: I never thought I would say this, but I would kill somebody in cold blood to get more of those biscuits.

ERIN: Lows?

BEN: Aside from that two-year-old on the plane?

ERIN: Oh yeah. Say no more.

Categories: movies
Tagged: , , , ,