Where the wild things are

February 18, 2010

Based on the homonym children’s picture book, written by the american writer Maurice Sendak, Where the wild things are its a kind of sociological study of the assumption of the lidership in a group.

It’s difficult to be a new one into a group, so it is harder to be The King in the group you’re adapting to. Max, the child who is been dressed up with a wolf costume, tried to adapt himself into the wild bunch. A bunch who is integrated by some kind of big jackass creatures designed by the great Jim Henson.

However, the approach is magnificent, but the resolution doesn’t fulfill us. There is a beginning with interesting brushstrokes, but it doesn`t led into a good resolution. What a pity. What a pity because the film has all the ingredients to be a good one: good music, cut, plot, script.. Above all, the idea of the social acceptation into a group is the leitmotiv of the intrigue. Max became a self-invested king and reigned correctly in an anarchy. And, at the end, the anarchy turned against him. Maybe the power insn’t a question of title. Is a question of action and results.

Whatever it worked

October 4, 2009

Bittersweet couple

Maybe I’m not the impressionable young girl that I used to be and I’m not going to have a crush on Woody Allen anymore. It was awesome whatever it worked.

Maybe he did’t realized yet that his creative skills are over now, and he’s overestimating his job, his career and, above all, his latest films. this is the case of Whatever it works. Let me explain myself about that issue.

Cliché. The favourite Allen’s word on every film.  He is always demonizing the idea of being a cliché, such a representative person of a community. But he’s always in a metalinguistic absurd idea of being a cliché, because he is always making clichés on his characters. Maybe he is living in a continous paradox.

Cliché A: The “north-american dumb blonde”. South-Northamerican, Republican, ultra-catholic, becomes infatuated easily, silly… The role is played by Evan Rachel Wood (as far as I concern, brilliantly), and she is the one that is under the influence of the “basic” needs and passions. She really does’nt think about the consecuences of her acts. She only wants to escape from her parents home and guide her own life. She has a lot of hope in love, life and human being.

Cliché B: The intellectual unbearable man. Lives in New York, Communist, Hypochondriac, Atheist, Depressive, Extremely intelligent… The role is played by Larry David (correctly). He’s the stereotype of a clever man, who is always thinking about philosophical theories and every possibility of being infected by an illness, hates living and human passions. Making love, for example, is useless for him. We remember an spanish artist, Salvador Dalí, that writes exactly the same. This is just a problem of self-confidence:

«Sufría entonces dos obsesiones que me paralizaban. Un miedo pánico a las enfermedades venéreas. Mi padre me había inculcado el horror al microbio. Esa angustia no me ha abandonado jamás, e incluso ha llegado a provocarme estados de demencia.

Pero, sobre todo, experimenté durante mucho tiempo la gran turbación de creerme impotente. Desnudo y comparándome a mis camaradas, descubrí que mi sexo era pequeño, triste y blando. Recuerdo una novela pornográfica donde el don Juan de turno ametrallaba los vientres con una alegría feroz, diciendo que le gustaba oír a las mujeres crujir como una sandía. Yo estaba convencido de que jamás podría hacer crujir así a una mujer. Y esta debilidad me roía. Disimulaba esta anomalía, pero a menudo era presa de unas crisis de risa incontenibles, hasta la histeria, que era como la prueba de las inquietudes que me agitaban profundamente»

To sum up with this two stereotypes, we can affirm that in our daily life we could fell like “A” or “B”. Depends on the day, our fellings.. Sometimes we love life, its pros and cons, we put all our hopes blindly in something or somebody. Sometimes we hate life, have self-pityness, be in constant doubt and sorrow… And even sex is a dirty and under-intellectual act, as it is for the character of Larry Allen.
But human being always want to be hopeful. Maybe we could fail. Maybe nothing is forever. Our life, for example, is not forever. The ephemeral sense of life is a shadow that emerges from our current life. But without hope, we are nothing. Its so easy to live in a bubble, where nobody could hurt you.
This is the case of Woody Allen. He is always felling sorry for himself. Poor boy. But he is not able to love anyone but himself. And, paradoxically, he want to explain that in a constant self-defence like “religion is bullshit” or “love is rubbish” Maybe he is as weak that he is always giving excuses avoiding being hurt. But life is this: if you don’t take risks, you’re not able to win. And you ‘ve got the freedom to choose your way of life: you are free to feel whatever you want. Even a “progressist” and “communist” cinema director always tells you what is the best “intellectual” bahaviour. Maybe the best one could be stop making the same movie again ang again and accept that your creativity is gone. Assume your limits by oneself is the golden rule of not being frustrated.