catching up: films

[psocoptera]

Junie enjoyed Monsters University, as did I, well enough, although I'd rank it pretty low in my ranking of Pixar films. I was sort of hoping it would go further in questioning its own assumptions - sure, we know Mike and Sully go on to work in scaring, but maybe the other OK monsters really aren't that scary, maybe scaring isn't the best use of their particular talents, maybe they would actually be happier and live more fulfilling lives if they rejected the societal priorities that privilege scaring over other pursuits! But no, look, everyone has a scare card at the end, they're all conventionally successful after all, yay for them, boo for anyone who thought otherwise. Not that I was taking this personally or anything. Ahem.

I enjoyed The Great Gatsby although I wish we'd gone to the trouble of seeing it in 3D given the running imagery with cloud-of-drifting-thing effects, etc. Also it needed way more gay. (It's not that Tobey Maguire *can't* gay, I've seen Wonder Boys, Luhrmann clearly just didn't direct him to play it that way. Why not, one must ask.)

Comments

[ccommack]

Luhrmann clearly just didn't direct him to play it that way. Why not, one must ask

OK, last vestige of desire to see this Gatsby adaptation just evaporated. Even Midwestern-repressed me picked up on Nick-is-totally-crushing-on-Gatsby when I read it in high school; unfortunately, nobody else in my class did (or, rather, would admit to it), so the discussion went nowhere. Bah. If you're going to film something unfilmable like Gatsby, you have to be willing to spend a lot of film time on what is written as subtext. In the RDJ!Sherlock Holmes movies, it's the physicality of the character. Here, it should've been the epic amount of gay being brought to the table by one Nick Carraway.

tl;dr: *facepalm*