Do We All Secretly Want Two Lovers?

This is the original version of an article I wrote for The Cord Newspaper. Below is a link to the shorter and edited printed version. http://www.thecord.ca/?p=8957

First there was team Edward or Jacob, now Peeta or Gale? Before that, Ross on Friends had to choose between Rachel and Julie; and Dawson by his creek was in agony between Joey and Jennifer. We also cannot forget Archie and his beloved Betty and Veronica. These are just a few examples of what has become prevalent in today’s films, TV and literature. The dreaded love triangle.

Why do we see so many love triangles in today’s pop culture and what is it about them that has a hold on audiences and make them popular? Is it that common to be madly and hopelessly in love with two people at the same time? Are they successful because we imagine ourselves in their shoes and project our own fantasies onto the story and characters?  We spend time and debate between friends the choices, such as the sweet bread-maker who helped save your life or the best friend, and who would be best and why, or root for the underdog, and finally, why not have both?

It is obviously effective since some of the most recent successful films and books involve a love triangle. Some friends and some members of my bookclub have mentioned, willing or not, these stories grab our attention and hold our interest. Yes, many fans are not just teens or pre-teens, but those who no longer have a “teen” in their age.  They are successful among many age brackets and cultures.   Who will she/he choose in the end and the journey to get to that decision. It’s pure entertainment and escapism, and that is what majority of audiences want when they are willing to shell out the money for a movie or book.

The film industry is a business in the end and they will continue to do what they feel is successful and guarantees profits. Keep in mind the majority of today’s love triangles are also a series, in both film and books. Breaking Dawn, the final novel in the Twilight series got split into two movies. It is a large book and a lot happens, but with creative writing and editing it could have been one film. After all, larger novels have been adapted and edited down to one film.  The focus is now that Bella has made her choice; let the fans see what happens after that choice is made. No worries, the fans will pay. There is also talk that Mockingjay, the final novel in The Hunger Games trilogy will also be split into two films. No doubt Katniss’s choice will be stretched and agonized over until the end. It is also important to note that Summit Entertainment and Lionsgate, the two film studios behind the massive franchises have recently merged.

Just like with any trend in Hollywood and popular culture, it will be done ad nauseam until audiences are fed up and it is no longer lucrative. This doesn’t seem to be happening anytime soon. Universal Studios have recently announced a sequel to Snow White and Huntsman that no doubt will have a continued focus on who wins the fair maiden’s heart, the Huntsman or childhood friend William. In early 2013, another film adaptation of a popular YA novel, The Host will be released and features a love triangle as well and other similar storylines coming our way.

But it is more than just dystopian worlds, a small rainy town, or the dark forest from a fairy tale that we can see the triangle. In Oliver Stone’s upcoming film Savages, two drug dealers, Chon and Ben go after their shared girlfriend O, who has been kidnapped by a drug cartel, and a war ensues to get her back. Although it is not a romance, there is still a triangle involved and one male will have a stronger appeal than the other to viewers. Recently, Something Borrowed (also based on a successful book) involved a love triangle between friends Rachel and Darcy over Dax. One of the most financially successful romantic comedies My Best Friend’s Wedding focused on a triangle. Do a quick Google search and numerous sites with lists of the best triangles can be found.

Was it always like this? Imagine if Juliet was honestly in love with both Romeo and Paris, (blasphemous right?) Or that Jane Eyre was whole heartedly debating between a life with Mr. Rochester and one with Mr. St. John Rivers (the horror!)  How different things would have been. Is the love triangle more of a sign of modern times? Are audiences today jaded that a love story between just two people doesn’t grab and hold our attention anymore and that we need more conflict, more choices, more entertainment or escapism.

What, if any, real type of message does this send to children, pre-teens and teens about love and what it is like to be loved or love. That unless you have more than one person declare their love for you and fight for you at the same time that you’re not worth loving?   Or that yes, it is possible to romantically love two people at once. Nothing wrong with that, you just have to choose because you can’t have both. Both? Now there’s a story for you! Once a choice has been made, does it validate that love even more, that there is no one else besides that person.

The rise of love triangles may die down and find a place in film and literature, but for now it is here along with 3D technology (love it or hate it). Call me sentimental, old fashioned and a romantic, but I’ll always have a place in my heart for Rick and Ilsa, Buttercup and her “farm boy,” Jack and Rose, and finally Rhett and Scarlett.  

The Power of Film

I read “Glorious Nostalgia: 10 Movies That Made Us Yearn  For Another Time” the other day, and it pretty much  sums up one of the elements of film (theatre and books as well) that I love; the power to transform you to a different time and place in history, at least for a couple hours at a time.

Here is a link to the article. I'm also proud that there are only two on the list I have not yet seen. 

http://www.cinemablend.com/new/Glorious-Nostalgia-10-Movies-Made-Us-Yearn-Another-Time-31503.html

Despite my interest in history, I’m too much of a modern girl and I love my indoor plumbing and electricity (I’m a slave to my flat iron) to spend more than a day in Victorian England or the wild Western Frontier, even the height of Tsar ruled Russia and King Louis reign (doesn’t matter which one,) so films help me live vicariously.

Actually, a day might be pushing it.

Yes, I’m fully aware that more often than not, historical accuracy is an issue when it comes to how history and other cultures are depicted in film, etc. But that is not the point I’m trying to make.

The power of film is to transport us to some representation of another time and place, to be engaged and hopefully care in the characters and the story being told about them. To learn something about the world we live in, humanity, and maybe even our own individual selves and our place in the world.

One of my earliest memories of when it comes to movies (if not the earliest) and  that power to take hold and transport a person through film, is Death Becomes Her, (Robert Zemeckis, 1992) it was not just watching Meryl Streep and Goldie Hawn fight over Bruce Willis. It was the funny dialogue and the lush mansions in California, the glitzy clothes, and of course the performances. I was seven years old and in grade two. 

It was the first of many times I was transported to another life and place by cinema.

So here is a list (I'm sure there are some missing) of some of my own favourite films to add to Cinemablend.com’s list, that help me transport to a different time and place.

What are some of yours?

 A Bo De Souffle (Breathless)

Last of the Mohicans

Legends of the Fall

Elizabeth

Dr. Zhivago

Rob Roy

In the Name of the Father

81/2

Memoirs of a Geisha

Breakfast at Tiffany’s

Trainspotting

Y Tu Mama Tambien (And Your Mother Too)

Curse of the Golden Flower

Moulin Rouge

Vicky Christina Barcelona

Jane Eyre

So go transport yourself! 

Review: Snow White and the Huntsman

Director: Rupert Saunders. Stars: Kristen Stewart, Charlize Theron, Chris Hemsworth, Sam Claflin. 

Released: June 1, 2012

It is no secret that majority of fairy tales, in their original telling are dark, scary and can even be disturbing. In the original Sleeping Beauty, better known as Sun, Moon, and Talia (written by Giambattista Basile in 1634) there is necrophilia and rape. In the original The Little Mermaid (by Hans Christian Anderson in 1836) the “little mermaid” feels as if a sharp sword is stabbing her feet as she walks on her human legs, even as she dances for the prince who she loves. “The Prince” marries another (who he believes saved him, not the mermaid) and the little mermaid throws herself into the sea and becomes a spirit for 300 years and then sea foam; all this after refusing to kill him in order to become a mermaid again.  Snow White and the Huntsman is not out of the ordinary from the darker original, Snow White and Seven Dwarfs written by The Brothers Grimm in 1812. In which the huntsman is hired by the evil queen to kill Snow White in the dark forest and return with her liver and lungs. He is unable to since he has fallen in love with Snow White. There is still a poisoned apple and magic mirror in there as well. But in this darker adaptation of the classic fairy tale,lead by director Rupert Saunders with writers Evan Daugherty and John Lee Hancock falls short.

A big disappoint for a film that had a lot of potential was the writing. The dialogue was a little too simple, and for a lack of a better description, cheesy at times for an attempt to be darker, edgier and more realistic.  

The biggest disappointment was the characters and their development. We get some background of Queen Raveena’s (Theron) story (and was that to make us care and feel for the villain?) and learn why she is the way she is and her motivation, but I needed more than just the fact that she has been wronged by men, told since childhood they are bad and only to rely on her beauty to gain power. It makes her a simple and crazy man hater, who dwells on her beauty and eats the hearts and souls of the youth. If it were not for the talented Charlize Theron playing the part and giving some depth, Queen Raveena would be in B films or comic books tying damsels in distress to railroad tracks.

The Prince, aka William (Claflin), yes his name is William and he is a prince,  is Snow White’s childhood friend and the one she is meant to be with....right? That is essentially as far as his character goes. We don’t know much else about him. From start to finish he is the same. After Snow White’s father has been killed, they are separated. Years later, William finds out she is alive and does what all good Princes do. He sets off into the dark forest to find and rescue her, but she’s doing okay.

Enter the Huntsman (Hemsworth) who is still hired by Queen Raveena to find Snow White in the dark forest. After his wife’s death (we don`t know how, why or when) he drowns his sorrows with drink and gamble. Before then he was one of the few who have made it alive out of the dark forest. The queen offers to bring his wife back from death if he finds Snow White.  He is the typical, heartbroken male whose former glory days are gone and his spirit is gone. He would fit right in a western. He finds Snow White, before he realizes who she really is, the previous King Magnus’s daughter thought for dead.  Once the Huntsman finds out the queen can’t actually bring back people from the dead, he’s pissed and joins forces with Snow White. That’s not all why he does it...he is falling in love with her. It is his kiss, and not the Prince’s that brings her back to life. We are not even sure of she is aware of this or how she really feels for the both of them. So the love triangle has been set for the sequel.

The focus of that triangle and film of course, is the famous Snow White. With bright red lips, raven black hair and whose heart is so pure that if the queen eats it, she will stay young, beautiful and powerful forever. Just like her Disney counterpart, she can connect with animals and make the meanest of trolls and dwarfs like her. It is not a terrible performance by Stewart, but the way she is written and at times acted makes we wonder if it is really worth all the trouble to save her, raise an army and defeat Queen Raveena. That the Hunstman (who claims she reminds him of his wife) and Prince can do better.  Snow White seems more like the girl next door, than the most beautiful and pure woman on earth who is destined to be queen. Her speech near the end to rally the troops is not the most inspiring one and once the war actually starts, she does little fighting. For an attempt to make Snow White more modern, independent and "bad ass," despite having moments of great courage, she falls and gets scared a lot, and is saved numerous times from the men around her. 

The big climax of the film, the showdown between Snow White, all dressed in armor, and Queen Raveena is a big letdown. It’s short and for the most part Snow White’s butt is being kicked. As the queen does what all villains do when they feel they are about to win, they go into a monologue about how great they are and then...a simple stab to the heart is all it takes...The end.

What saves and makes this film enjoyable to watch are the visuals. The landscape and settings, such as the English countryside, the dark forest, etc are beautiful, and matched with lovely cinematography. At times it does feel a little Lord of the Rings like in its images, but beautiful to watch nonetheless. Of course I have to mention the costumes (in particular the queens) and the score adds to the epic feel of the film. The special effects, including the make up to make characters look older is great. Another great element to the film is the seven dwarfs that include Ian McShane, Toby Jones and Nick Frost. They are not your typical dwarfs and add some good comic relief. The special effects to make the non dwarf actors look like dwarfs are on par, possibly better than the dwarfs for Lord of the Rings.

A sequel has been announced, no actual date yet, and I’m not sure what the plot will exactly entail. Let’s hope the writing and character development match the beautiful visuals.  

Famous Fathers In Cinema

 I did write a blog  for Mother’s day, so it’s only fair I do a write up for some of my favourite father’s in cinema.  Feel free to add any of yours.

Mufasa  (voiced by James Earl Jones)  in The Lion King

This has to be the equivalent of Bambi’s mother’s death. The injustice and sadness still gets to me when I watch this scene, and especially Simba’s reaction and belief that he is responsible for his father’s death. I can't even post that scene. Some heavy stuff for a children’s film. Damn you Scar!

Darth Vader ( voiced by James Earl Jones, played by David Prowse) in Star Wars

Parents may not always like the choices their children make, but the same goes for children not always liking the choices their parents make. One of the biggest lessons a child learns is that their father (or mother) is not perfect or even a hero. Luke Skywalker and Princess Leia learned this the hard way.

Daniel Hillard/Mrs Doubtfire (Robin Williams) in Mrs. Doubtfire

Divorces are known to be difficult for everyone involved, and we all cope differently. Parents do what they can to make sure they see their children as much as possible.  I wonder how these children would look back on this particular attempt.


P.S. Mrs. Doubtfire was the first VHS movie my sisters and I owned with our new VHS player. As a gift from my father. 

Atticus Finch (Gregory Peck) in To Kill a Mockingbird

One of the greatest lessons a parent can teach their children is to be courageous and fight with conviction for what is right, with dignity and strength.  Atticus Finch did this all while being a gentleman and gaining the respect of the community in a powerful and poignant way. I challenge anyone not to like Atticus Finch. 

George Banks (Steve Martin) in Father of the Bride

“You don’t worry about your daughter meeting the wrong guy; you worry about her meeting the right guy.” These are the words said by George Banks about being a father, in particular the father of a daughter. The film explores the ups and downs of giving your daughter away on the special day through the father's eyes. 

Jack Torrance (Jack Nicholson) in The Shining

Fathers are hard working. They work hard and do what they need to do in order to take care of their family. Sometimes this makes them go a little crazy...HEERREE'SSS DADDY! 

Don Vito Corleone (Marlon Brando) in The Godfather

Fathers are protective, intense and at times can be downright intimidating. As The Godfather harshly says "Because a man who doesn't spend time with his family can never be a real man." Don’t mess with this big papa. 

Happy Father's Day!! 

A Shout Out For The Borgias

I originally wanted to write about Haywire, but after watching the film, it wasn’t worth writing about. It did actually give me an idea for a possible future blog post.Anyway, I was disappointed about that, but last night after work, I was watching one of the few TV shows I actively watch and realized that the show needed its due.  

If you haven’t watched, or even heard of Showtime’s The Borgias, please start watching. If you liked The Tudors (not as much as a soap opera in comparison) or Rome, this is right up your alley.

 Neil Jordan (also known for directing Interview with Vampire, writing and directing The Crying Game and other gems) is the head creator behind the show and along with this team of writers has crafted a smart and entertaining look at the medieval world of Pope Alexander and his family (The Borgias.) How they ruthlessly held on to power, dealt with the dangers around them and those who tried to stop them, but most important and entertaining is the drama between family members, in particular brothers Cesare and Juan Borgia.

It is also said that the Borgias was the inspiration for Mario Puzzo’s The Godfather and Cesare Borgia was the inspiration for Niccolo Machiavelli’s famous book, The Prince.

Before I go any further, here are the opening credits  (one of the best opening credits for a show) for season 2. 

The Main Characters

Pop Alexander VI/Rodrigo Borgia

 Academy Award winner Jeremy Irons plays the head of church and the head of his family. He is ruthless in his ambition and devotion to his family. Power hungry and manages to stay a step ahead of his enemies. He is also a man of flesh and bone and likes to give in to his pleasures. A great multi layered character.

Cesare Borgia

Played by Canadian actor, Francois Arnaud, he is a personal and fan favourite character. He is smart, charming, cunning, and ruthless while at the same time he shows great heart and soul towards (most) of his family, and in particular his sister that at times borders incest. There were rumours that they where um...extremely close, and the show plays on that.  He has a secret anger about him, being forced by his father to enter the priesthood and become a Cardinal. His real passion is to lead the Papal Army and has a flair for war. His take charge attitude, willingness to kill and do what he has to do (willingly and unwillingly) have saved his family more than once from enemies. Cesare is as close to an anti-hero that you will get on this show.

Lucrezia Borgia

Played by Holliday Grainger, she is considered pure and innocent by the family. As the show progresses Lucrezia becomes more and more wise and learns more about how her family works, she shows her own ability to fit right in.  She was forced into a marriage and had an affair and got pregnant. Since she is daddy’s little girl, she convinced him to annul the marriage and no one seems to mind her single mother status, but I’m sure she will be forced to marry again.

Juan Borgia

Played by David Oakes, he is what you would call the black sheep of the family. Head of Papal Army, despite not having a flair for war. He is cocky, ruse and selfish. Anyone who isn’t a Borgia or a noble is not worth his time. Okay, he’s a jerk. Without saying too much, karma gets him.  

Giulia Farnese

Played by Lotte Verbeek, the Pop’s mistress, but she isn’t your typical mistress. Many Kings in Europe and other men in power would not.  hide their mistress, and would be considered a great honour to be the “official mistress.” Henry VIII for example, wanted Anne Boelyn to be his, but she refused. In other words, she wanted him to put a ring on it. With Giulia Farnese, she is comfortable in her position, is almost like a second mother, and even has been able to start her own charities and look into the accounting books of the church and recommend and be in control of changes. She is not weak, and knows how to play the game of being a woman in a male dominated world.

Vanozza Gattaneo

Joanne Whalley is the Pop Alexander’s wife, who also worked her way up into power. On the outside she is a figurehead, but within the family dynamics on the inside, her cunning and sweet demeanor gives her the ability to get to the point, help out her children. The Pop cannot get a divorce, and so her place is secure and is able to reach others the way no one else can.

There are other characters important as well, but these are the main players.

As mentioned the writing is superb with great dialogue and twists and turns that sometimes you see coming, and sometimes you do not, and it is this balance that makes you continue to watch.

The music by Trevor Morris does what a good musical score should do, enhance the moment and at times convey what can’t be said by the characters themselves.

The costumes, designed by Gabriella Pescucci are elaborate, elegant, and probably very uncomfortable and would   be considered haute couture for the time.

As a history lover I must also caution to not let this be your mini Medieval Rome/Borgia history lesson.  documentary by A&E on The Borgias that I cannot seem to find a link to share. :(

As series creator Michael Hirst for the Tudors said early on about complaints for historical inaccuracies (paraphrasing here) “This isn’t a history lesson, it’s a TV drama.”

I know have not done justice to just how great the show truly is. It is something to watch and enjoy. I hope that I have at least intrigued you. 

One more episode left in season two, already looking forward to season three next spring. Good thing I have Boardwalk Empire until then. 

Review: The Deep Blue Sea

Director: Terrence Davies. Stars: Rachel Wiesz, Tom Hiddleston, Simon Russell Beale.

Adapted from the play The Deep Blue Sea by Terence Rattigan

This film is about Hester (Weisz) who is married to a respected judge (Russell) and has an affair with Royal Air Force Pilot Freddie Page (Hiddleston.)

It is difficult to write how I feel about The Deep Blue Sea. I didn’t hate it, but I’m not too fond of it either. I got more into it and more frustrated at the same time as the film progressed.  I remember a while ago when I saw the trailer that it looked promising and I was very eager for a good love story and to some degree, I got that.  (P.S. I’m picky with my love stories. I often find them contrived and unrealistic to what I think about love. The characters unbelievable or I can’t relate to them, as well as a lack of chemistry between the actors when others see it.)  After thinking about it for over a week, I accepted that this was a story about an unhealthy and destructive love. Not a healthy and prosperous love that betters you.  

The performances to me are what stood out the most about this film and saved it. Rachel Wiesz as Hester Collyer plays the bored but dutiful wife in post WWII London. You feel her frustration and pain with her life, even to the point of being suicidal. After she falls in love with Freddie Page, her whole world becomes about him. At one point she admits that she loves him more than he loves her and she knew the risk.  When asked “How can you love a man who gives you nothing?”  Hester answers “But he does give me something [...] himself” She is so hopelessly in love with Freddie that she leaves her husband, but it soon crumbles and she does not know what to do with herself and how to keep Freddie. The tittle thus fits perfectly, as Hester drowns more and more in her love for Freddie and becomes increasingly self destructive and desperate. 

Freddie then leaves after accepting a job in South America, and since Hester cannot go with him (her husband refuses a divorce and she doesn’t seem to fight too hard for one,)  he no longer wants her, she accepts that the relationship is over. Hester is now completely alone and not better for it, her mental health and future uncertain.

By the end of the film I was very frustrated with Hester, with her passiveness and drama queen antics. I didn’t know if I wanted to hug her or slap her.  As I thought more about her and Wiesz’s great performance, it came to me that this may be a more realistic characterization of a woman in an all consuming love affair.  Despite Wiesz’s gutsy performance of an unlikeable person, I felt that I’ve seen the character of the bored aristocratic wife who finds passion and temporary happiness with another man before. This didn’t feel like anything new to me.

Freddie, played by Tom HIddleston, who is more known for portraying Loki in Thor and The Avengers, is good and shows his talent as a classically trained actor. Freddie starts off as sweet, fun and charming, but we soon see a man who is also lost and attempting to find himself after the war. More and more is revealed about his true nature, and it is not all that pleasant. I ended up wondering why Hester was so in love with him, especially after his coldness and cruelty to her grows. Then again, the old saying of love is blind comes to mind.  By the end of the film, Iboth Hester and Freddie frustrated me and I ending up disliking both of them. 

Although the story ended up not doing much for me, technically, the film is beautiful. The 1950’s setting of London, the fashion and music all work together, in particular in a touching scene with Hester and Freddie dancing in a pub. As well as some of the most beautiful transitions between scenes I’ve seen recently.

In the end, the focus seemed more on creating an atmosphere of coldness and boredom that may not appeal to many people, and the story fell flat with the strongest element being the performances that make the film worthwhile.