Fast forward to the present and my blues are no longer the same. They seemed to have darkened into a blue so deep it’s almost black. Not unlike a night without stars, or a piece of paper soaked in black fountain pen ink. I rely on the old reliable coping mechanism to help me and I find that its efficacy has changed as well. Most probably because the ways with which I can keep myself busy have also changed. Since I am not living along anymore, I have neither the will nor the right to alter the appearance of the house I live in. Since I am also preparing to leave Cambodia, I only accepted an ordinary amount of work to ensure their timely delivery. My creative writing has been sort of blocked for a long time now, coming in few, infrequent bursts in the form of a poem or a blog-post (such as this). Same goes for my (attempts at) art.

This is when my friendly neighborhood (pirated) DVD shop comes to my rescue. Sokha, the shop’s owner/manager has been responsible for fulfilling my cineaste’s desires since I discovered his shop in 2005. I like buying my DVDs from him because he tells you when the disc you’re about to buy is an excellent or poor copy. Of course you can choose to ignore his suggestions but experience has taught me not to. But enough about him. I actually wanted to write about a film I saw recently, whose DVD I purchased from the aforementioned FNPDS.

When I heard that ‘A Single Man’ was going to be made into a film, directed by Tom Ford, no less, I didn’t know what to think right away. Apart from the obvious gay connection, that is. It’s gay story and Tom Ford is gay. But I knew that Tom Ford was a fashion designer, not a film director like, say, Bill Condon or Brian Singer. I think the only clear comment that came out of me was, ‘at least, the costumes would be interesting’. When it premiered at the Venice Film Festival last year, to great acclaim, I became more curious to see it. After all, it starred 2 of my favorite, albeit under-rated actors Colin Firth and Julianne Moore, based on a novel written by someone I like as well (Christopher Isherwood).

Long considered as Isherwood’s finest achievement (more than ‘The Berlin Stories’, which inspired the musical and film ‘Cabaret’), I have the misfortune of not being able to read ‘A Single Man’ the novel. But in the interim between reading about the film and actually watching it, I was able to access a lot of materials on how Tom Ford adapted the story to film. He didn’t tweak the plot, this I learned, but he added ‘back stories’ to plot devices, like George’s coat. For example, I know that the role of George was initially given to another actor because Colin Firth was not available but a change in the latter’s filming schedules gave him the window to shoot the film in 21 days. I also know that the role of Kenny was originally for Jamie Bell (Billy Elliott himself) but he was dropped because he failed to show up for the costume fitting days prior to the shoot. And the actor who replaced him was also a child actor (Nicholas Hoult from ‘About a Boy’) who have previously worked with one of the film’s producers.

All of these (and more) built up my anticipation in watching the film. And the day came when Sokha sent me an SMS saying that ‘A Single Man’ was already available in his shop, followed the evening when, purchased made, I sat in front of my computer and watched it. What do you think made me write 5 long paragraphs before getting to the part where I would talk about the film? I think this is because I wanted to share the whole experience surrounding this film. Because the film required more than watching; one had to experience it. Sure, genre and format-wise, the film is not unique. I can name a slew of films that took place within a day (all ‘Die Hard’ films, ‘Go’, the Filipino film ‘Isang Araw Walang Diyos’ (One Day Without God) and one TV season of ‘24′), or a few that are narrated by dead people (’American Beauty’, ‘The Lovely Bones’, and the entire ‘Desperate Housewives’ series), or even some period domestic dramas that scratch at the surface of shiny-happy-people-living-so-called-normal-lives (’The Ice Storm’, ‘Revolutionary Road’, and another TV series called ‘Mad Men’).

But what sets ‘A Single Man’ apart? Is it its provenance? Maybe. Is it the outstanding acting from the cast (not just Mr. Firth, who received 2 best actor awards and another 2 nominations for his efforts)? Possibly. Is it the ‘gay angle’? Probably. In my opinion, what set this film apart is, for all the gloom and sadness and the overarching theme of loss and death, it is, ultimately, life affirming.

The film opens with a dream of the vehicular accident that claimed the life of George’s partner of 16 years. An accident that George did not learn of until a day later, thanks to his late partner’s cousin who cared. A death that George wasn’t able to mourn properly as he was kept from attending the funeral services because he was neither family nor ‘friend’. Eight months have passed and George is still feeling crappy. But today is different because George has at least made a decision to deal with his predicament. So for the next hour we join George as he (secretly) says good bye to his life. There is an almost rhapsodic feel to these scenes. Because he is saying good bye, each mundane encounter is stretched to evoke feelings. This is where technique almost takes over the proceedings. Extreme close-ups of eyeballs and lips provide emphasis of things gone, or still going. Changes in color saturation signal flash backs that bring George comfort and the brutal return to reality. And through this all, everybody seems to look their best. It’s a s if every character is attending a funeral.

Well, one might say, that’s because of the director, who also cast fashion models in some minor roles. Some might feel that this too much eye-candy can be a distraction but we need to look beyond this. I mean, glossy melodramas have been around since the first films were made. Think of Douglas Sirk’s films where he cast devastatingly beautiful ingenues like Susan Hayward. Think of ‘Far From Heaven’, Todd Haynes’ 2002 film (that starred Julianne Moore) that paid homage to Mr. Sirk. Think of Viva Films’ 80s komiks-based melodramas, where all characters were dressed impeccably and photographed lushly while crying buckets of tears.

In the end, no matter how stylized or stylish a film is, its substance (or lack of) will always prevail and be made obvious. In ‘A Single Man’, this substance floated effortlessly to the surface, well above the good looks of the cast, the costumes, the production design, the cinematography, etc. George’s interactions, starting from his housekeeper, his neighbor/neighbor’s children, the receptionists, his colleague, his students, the hustler, and his best friend, all served make George question his decision early on in the film. And when he has finally decided that he will not kill himself, after having made peace with his grief, George has a heart attack (alluded to briefly) and eventually dies.

Other friends who have seen the film expressed dismay and disappointment  at this ending. I, on the contrary, find the ending appropriate and fitting. I mean, it would be nice to think of the future George has with Kenny and all other possibilities that wait for him but story-wise, what happened to him in the end brought him full-circle. And therefore, a much better place than what-might-have-been.

I remember feeling dismayed and disappointed at the ending of ‘The Dark Tower’ series by Stephen King. After 7 books (and many lifetimes’ worth of adventures and pitfalls), Roland the protagonist finds himself right back where he started, destined/doomed to do and experience everything all over again. Apparently, many other people felt the way I felt and they made their feelings known more strongly than I did. Mr. King responded by saying, “It might not be a good ending, but it was the right ending.”

So there. I watched the credits roll and thought of how I would blog about this film. Took me a few days to do so. Some of those who know me might find the way I understood this film to be strange. That’s fine by me. Anyway, I have already written that lately my perceptions have been, for the most part, askew or off-kilter. It’s probably the blues.

Or the blacks. Who knows for sure?

A Single Man; 2009; Artina Films, Depth of Field, Fade to Black Productions, Directed by Tom Ford; Rated R for some disturbing images and nudity; Watch it!

Two days later I got a call from R, asking me if I had seen this film. I told him that I’d seen it at the shop but hadn’t bought it. he then started raving about it and he told me he’d drop it at my house the next day so I can see it for myself. R is not particularly prone to gushing so I thought, there must be something there. However, I also recalled the times when our opinions of films (and music) didn’t really agree so I considered that too.

Nevertheless, I saw the film (in one of my late-night attempts to fight off insomnia) with no great expectations and an open mind. And boy, was I glad to have done so. I found myself smiling within 10 minutes of the film and laughing 20 minutes later. I was in tears in the last 15 minutes of the film and by the time the credits rolled by, my heart was just about to burst. Did I say that I was prone to gushing? My apologies then. But I was genuinely touched by this film. If I remember correctly, the last time a movie made me feel this way was when I saw ‘My Best Friend’s Wedding’. But of course, to compare 500DOS (pardon the text-speak) with the latter will do both films a grave injustice.

I understand that the film was marketed as a romantic comedy but I don’t think it is. For a romantic comedy it didn’t pack enough rollicking scenes and snappy dialogue. As a dramatic film, it didn’t have enough tension. I think it (safely) straddled the line between a romantic comedy and a light romantic drama. This is no mean feat to accomplish. I mean, look at ‘Lucky You’–that clunky Drew Barrymore-Eric Bana movie that had a serious identity crisis, genre-wise. Like the voice-over narrator said, ‘This is a story of boy meets girl. But let me tell you up front, this is not a love story’.

The narrative jumps back and forth within the 500 days that Tom (Gordon-Levitt) spent with Summer (Deschanel). I guess that explains the title. The premise, however, is simple enough. Boy meets girl. Boy falls in love. Girl doesn’t. Told mostly from the perspective of Tom, the film shows in both oblique and straightforward manners how mutable our perceptions are of other people. Through Tom’s eyes I see how the same memories can be interpreted and re-interpreted, depending on how we feel towards the object of our remembrance. In one montage of Summer, Tom’s voice-over goes, ‘I love her smile. I love her hair. I love her knees. I love how she licks her lips before she talks. I love the heart-shaped birthmark on her neck. I love it when she sleeps.’ Minutes later, the same montage is replayed, but the voice-over has turned to, ‘I hate her crooked teeth. I hate the way she smacks her lips. I hate her knobby knees. I hate that cockroach-shaped splotch on her neck.’

At its oh-so-mellow core, the film tackles the issue of soul-mates (or the belief in such). And I was grateful that it was handled in the most non-cheesy and non-mushy manner. In the scene that ties the beginning and the end of the film (day 488, if I remember correctly), Tom wondered how in the world Summer became one’s husband when ’she didn’t even wanted to be someone’s boyfriend’. Summer shrugged and said, ‘I woke up one morning and I knew’. Tom asked, ‘Knew what?’ and her stunning reply was, ‘What I was never sure of with you’. At first glance, one would think that all of Tom’s efforts had been indeed in vain. Most of Tom’s screen time was spent trying to prove to Summer that they were meant for each other, a claim that was supported by the fact that both of them shared a passion for many things, like the music of The Smiths and the art of Magritte. A claim, which was shot down in another scene by Tom’s preternaturally wise younger sister Rachel (Chloe Moretz) with one curt line: ‘Just because she likes the same bizzaro crap you do doesn’t mean she’s your soul mate’.

To know and realize that the person you love intensely doesn’t feel the same way towards you is devastating. Enough to shatter one’s belief in soul-mates–in love itself. But often times, this is the truth. When relationships end, we often get lost in the drama of things: what each party did wrong, the crying, and the drinking, the rebound sex/ relationship, the 5 stages of mourning in all its morbid glory-(and the regressions)-denial, anger, bargaining, depression, resignation, and so on and so forth. So much so that we ignore the fact that the relationship ended simply because one did not feel the same way for the other. For a social transaction to last, it requires some sort of reciprocation. If this is absent, then this relationship is doomed, no  matter how hard they try to make it last, the end of this relationship is of a mathematical certainty. In fact, the more you delay its end, the more damage it brings to both parties.

Is this cruel? Yes, I would say. But hey, life can be cruel. Relationships especially. The thing is, I believe that from the moment we decide to enter a relationship, we are already setting our selves up for some hurting along the way. No matter how loving and nurturing and caring this relationship might be, we are bound to be hurt one way or another. Ignoring this fact, this reality, is detrimental to our subsequent peace of mind. Because, frankly, the concept of ‘happily ever after’ does not exist in real life.

While it is true that realizing that the object of our intense (bordering on the obsessive) feelings doesn’t feel the same way towards us is devastating, being able to accept this (cruel) fact can also be liberating. In the film, Summer soothes this pain by telling Tom, ‘You weren’t wrong, Tom. You were just wrong about me’. If the film ended with this line, I would’ve been content. In tears (okay, almost in tears, but throat clenched), but content. But it included some sort of epilogue that provided the viewer with a more concrete sense of hope than what Summer’s statement implied. This struck me again because, yes, it is true, that in the end, when we have given all of ourselves to love and its ramifications and we think we have nothing left, or if we feel nothing but dead inside, more often than not, we find ourselves still breathing, and that all we still have is hope.

Will there be a sequel called ‘(500) Days of Autumn’? I am wary of sequels, to tell the truth. Just as I am wary of getting back together with someone you already broke up with before.

(500) Days of Autumn; 2009; Sneak Preview Entertainment; Directed by Marc Webb; 95 minutes; PG-13 in the Philippines. Watch it!

‘Terminator Salvation’ was my first choice because it’s been showing for a long time now. I next saw ‘Drag Me To Hell’ but that deserves a post of its own, seriously. I read about the bad reviews on T4 but I was ready to ignore it because I love Christian Bale (since seeing him for the first time in ‘Empire of the Sun’ and then in ‘American Psycho’). Okay, I must admit that a Terminator movie without Arnold is not quite the same. Never mind the awesome array of robots that populated this sequel and the almost gleeful way they destroy everything. The story lacked flesh, so to speak. Chunky, bloody flesh. The washed-out cinematography or the frantic musical score did not help. Neither did Helena Bonham Carter’s cameo (her bald cap & make-up wasn’t up to par, and her CGI version isn’t impressive as the Arnold CGI).

However, I was pleasantly surprised by his co-star Sam Worthington. I read somewhere that Christian Bale was offered the role of Marcus Wright. In the original script, it was the bigger role. But Christian chose to play John Connor and instigated many rewrites of the script that made the role bigger. That is just one of the woes that besot the making of this film. Well, it was Sam’s luck that this role fell on his lap. I first saw Sam in ‘Rogue’, a crocodile-in-a-rampage movie that starred Radha Mitchell (Pitch Black) and Michael Vartan (One Hour Photo). His role was small; he got eaten by the crocodile in the first 30 minutes of the movie, but even then I thought: I’d love to eat him up as well, given the chance.

I think Sam Worthington is an absolute hottie. And he can act, too. What’s with these Australian guys, anyway? Eric Bana, Heath Ledger, the late Michael Hutchinson (of INXS), and big daddy Mel Gibson. And how can I forget Terrence Stamp? Anyway, seeing Sam in the movie almost redeemed the movie for me. Incidentally, Sam is also filming ‘Avatar’–the comeback movie (sort of) of James Cameron. Talk about six degrees of separation. Also, Sam plays Perseus (originally played by Harry Hamlin) in the upcoming remake of ‘Clash of the Titans’.

When I said that Sam Worthington almost redeemed ‘Terminator Salvation’ for me, I said it because there was another reason. And his name is Anton Yelchin. When I was in Bangkok in May, I watched the new ‘Star Trek’ and I meant to write about that movie and Anton but never did. I enjoyed that movie immensely, by the way. It was refreshing to see him on ‘Terminator Salvation’, playing the role originated by Michael Biehn in the first movie. Anton Yelchin, born in Russia to famous figureskaters, started as a child star. I remember seeing him on the mini-series ‘Taken’ and on ‘Hearts in Atlantis’ with Anthony Hopkins.

Except for his age (he just turned 20), Anton is my physical type: curly hair, wide forehead and eyes, and lanky/willowy. But more than these, I love him because he is a very good actor. He was effective as the half-alien child in ‘Taken’ and as the vulnerable boy in ‘Hearts in Atlantis’. I hadn’t seen ‘Alpha Dog’ and I will as soon as I find a DVD in the shop I mentioned in the first paragraph.

Speaking of physical types, the other reason I saw the first ‘Transformers’ was because of Shia Lebouf. The primary reason was, obviously, the robots. I like Shia for his hair. And I so love his neurotic vibe in the movie. For the second movie, which I saw the next day, I was even more curious to see the new robots in the cast. However, there I was again, pleasantly surprised to discover Ramon Rodriguez. Playing the role of budding internet honcho Leo Spitz (not swallowz? hehe), he was equally neurotic (if not a bit paranoid) as Shia’s character, only more physically gorgeous.

Ramon has done his share of TV work (The Wire) and movies. In fact, he is one of the cast in the remake of ‘The Taking of Pelham 123′ with John Travolta and Denzel Washington, which was also showing in the theater, by the way. Didn’t watch it, though. I read somewhere that Ramon is an avid salsa dancer who writes scripts as well. And the loads of positive feedback he got on his role has made Michael Bay want to expand his role on the third ‘Transformers’ movie. For me, his curls and limpid eyes are enough. As for the movie, I don’t care about the lackluster reviews: I loved ‘Transformers 2′!

And I love these rising stars, too.

I read in an interview that Allan Ball (creator of Six Feet Under) first read ‘Dead Until Dark’ at the airport, liked the book so much, found out that it was the first of a series of books (what would came to be called the Sookie Stackhouse novels), and read the series before phoning author Charlaine Harris to discuss the possibility of developing a TV series based on the book(s).

And the rest they say, is TV history. Equally reviled and acclaimed by critics, the series won its lead star (the wonderful Anna Paquin) a couple of best actress awards, one from the Golden Globes.

I saw teasers about it on HBO and Cinemax and I was pleasantly surprised to see it in my friendly neighborhood (pirated) DVD shop. I immediately bought it for an impromptu DVD marathon. I would say that Six Feet Under was much better than this series. However, compared to other non-Alan Ball shows, True Blood is great. There are lots of sex and gore, which made me think it can’t be shown intact on HBO because coming from repressed Singapore, it censors its films (I later learned it will be shown on Cinemax instead, proving my point). But the story is equally horrific, funny, and allegorical–three things I like in my horror/fantasy films. The allegory might be a little obvious (God hates Fangs? C’ mon!) but the whole series was cleverly written and made many surprising turns.

I’m looking forward to seeing more of ‘True Blood’. I heard that the first season was based on the first book. There are 9 in the series, so there. I hope it lasts longer than ‘Carnivale’, another great HBO show that ended prematurely after only just 2 seasons.

Like Alan Ball, I first saw ‘Twilight’ in one of the bookshops in Suvannabhumi Airport in Bangkok. Because I had a long lay-over at the airport, I bought the book and started to read it. However, after about 150 pages, i wasn’t still engaged into the book. So I stopped reading it and got a foot massage instead. I felt the same way when I tried to read a Harry Potter book. For a vampire novel, it was anemic–like a vampire who has not feed for years. And there were 4 in this series of books!

Fast forward to early this year, and the book, like most bestsellers, has been turned into a movie. My hopes for the film rose when I learned that Kristen Stewart would be playing Bella. I loved Kristen in ‘Panic Room’ and ‘Into the Wild’. The guy who was playing the vampire was being hyped as this super-handsome guy, which I didn’t quite buy into. In my opinion, the guy who played Prince Caspian (whose names escapes mo now, sorry) was hotter.

So how was the movie? Well, in keeping with the pun I started in a previous paragraph, the movie simply sucked, and not in a good vampire way at all. For starters, the mythology for me was too convenient. And as the lead, Bella’s character is virtually a damsel in distress who can only be saved by someone who is very strong but very prone to violence. A vampire who hits his girlfriend? That would be interesting! Anything than this chaste, pseudo-brooding mess of a movie. And it was a huge hit! I’m probably not the real target of this movie, having reached a certain age and a certain level of cynicism. FYI, as I am writing this, release dates for the next 2 films have been announced already. (Gasp!)

Just so we’re clear: I abso-fu***ng-lutely love True Blood, and would rather much see Twilight disappear into the night. I especially love the main theme of the show, which I have attached in this post. Hope ya enjoy that song, y’all, as I did. I’m currently reading this book, another bestseller, whose movie version I read somewhere will be released on 2010. So far, it’s living up to the hype. I am so loving this book!