Monthly Archives: October 2013

Kumar Pallana: A Life In Quotes

Leave a reply

Yesterday, Kumar Pallana, perhaps my favorite accidental actor in Hollywood died at the age of 94.

Pallana was discovered by Wes Anderson and the Wilson brothers at the coffee shop in Dallas which he owned. They then gave him a small role in “Bottle Rocket.” Then he just kept popping up again and again until he became just as memorable a part of Anderson’s world as colorful wallpaper and Kinks songs.

I don’t know why Pallana was always so funny to me. Maybe because he would just pop up, say one barely audible line, and then disappear. Or maybe its because in “Rushmore” you can spot him in the background of one shot playing with a giant necklace, and he never says a word at all.

I remember him best as Pagoda in “The Royal Tenenbaums,” who was apparently an assassin in Calcutta at one point in time. In honor of Kumar Pallana, I have decided to compile all of my favorite lines of his from “The Royal Tenenbaums”:

“The black man ask her to be his wife.”

“There he is.”

“There he goes.”

“You son of a bitch!”

“Oh shit man!”

Here’s the obituary from his hometown paper.

Ten Years and Counting: How Kill Bill Changed My Life

Leave a reply

It all started with a shelf at Barnes & Noble. I had just turned twelve and had gift card money to spend. And when I had a Barnes & Noble gift card, I was a man on a mission.

I was browsing around the DVD section. I wasn’t normally one to take risks in life and buy something before I had seen it, but something told me I needed something new. Also, “Return of the King” wasn’t out yet. I stumbled upon a copy of “Kill Bill: Volume 1.” I heard it was good, the commercials were really cool, and Uma Thurman looked irresistibly sexy in her yellow jumpsuit. So I decided why not. That night, I popped it into the DVD player (remember those things?), and was never the same again.


“Kill Bill” was the start of my insatiable film journey. Every film lover has that one film that just clicks with them. Even after I found out that “Kill Bill” was paying homage (a.k.a. stealing) from so many other movies, it didn’t destroy my love for it. All it did was lead me down a path to find as many of the movies as possible connected to the Quentin Tarantino universe. From there, I found Scorsese, Kubrick, Leone, Ford, Kurosawa, “Kung Fu,” and of course “Shogun Assassin.”

I wanna know about those other four death lists.

This week marks the ten year anniversary of the release of “Kill: Volume 1.” This is the only anniversary I’m allowed to acknowledge of course, because it has a zero at the end of it. As these years have passed, I have had many more chances to view both parts, whether it be on DVD, HBO, or TNT*, and I’ve come to see that I love “Kill Bill” not just for what it inspired me to do, but for the film itself.

“Kill Bill” was meant to be one film, but it was split in half for running time and probably profitability, too.** However, I acknowledge both of them as two very separate films. I’ll mostly talk about Volume 1 here, as that’s the one celebrating the anniversary, but some discussion of Volume 2 will be absolutely necessary.

When I first watched “Kill Bill,” I had simply never seen anything like it. Forget about the fact that I was only 12 and “Kill Bill” earned its hard R. “Kill Bill” gave me a lot of mixed emotions. Before this, I figured that violence was something needed to be handled delicately. That was before I watched O-Ren Ishii chop off a man’s head followed by a gigantic geiser of blood. It was shocking, but I couldn’t stop laughing. At first, I thought there was something wrong with me. Then, I found out that sometimes its okay to make violence funny. After all, it wasn’t like Tarantino was advocating mass beheading of any sort. No, this was just a different universe where dismemberment leads to insane amounts of blood. This was also the first time I realized that a film can be a fantasy even if it didn’t involve dragons.

“Kill Bill” was also the first revenge fantasy I ever watched, and for some reason the morality of revenge tales really stuck with me. It even lead to the script of my first student film which I am absolutely ashamed of and you can absolutely find it on my Facebook, watch it, and then point and laugh at me.

More importantly, “Kill Bill” skewed my idea of what a hero was. Before I ever laid eyes on Volume 1, I was obsessed with “The Lord of the Rings” trilogy. Not the books, of course, because that’s what ADD does to you. I was used to the “Once upon a time/and they lived happily ever after” form of storytelling. Then came along “Kill Bill,” where the villains were humanely despicable*** and the closest thing to a hero was a woman who could pluck somebody’s eye out. As wildly unrealistic as “Kill Bill” is, this feel’s a little bit closer to real life: sometimes, good people do bad things and bad people have motivations behind their actions. Have you looked at TV lately and maybe heard of a show called “Breaking Bad”?

Tarantino doesn’t make personal or biographical films, but everything he makes feels directly like a portal into his brain. “Kill Bill” was also one of the first times I ever realized the beauty of great dialogue, and that it could be used for other purposes besides exposition. Throughout both volumes, there are a tremendous amount of classic monologues and bits of dialogue that are among the best that Quentin has ever written. The best monologue of the two volumes is Bill’s speech about Superman. It is so deep and thoughtful and informs the film while incorporating popular culture so well, that it makes me think that Tarantino also would have been a very successful film critic. Additionally, Tarantino’s heroes might all be evil, but they are also all obsessed with movies and TV. Finally, the film fanatic gets a chance to be the hero.

Sure, there were other films before this that had all of the qualities that made “Kill Bill” so great. But this was my introduction to all of it, so it will always remain the best to me. I am not quite sure what I’d be doing today if not for “Kill Bill.” I’d be a completely different person. And cinema would be different, too. How often do we get characters as memorable as the Bud, Bill, Elle Driver, or The Bride anymore?  Not to mention, Volume 1 still has my favorite cliffhanger twist ending of all time. Take that, Shymalan.

Additional Notes

  • I will never forget how confused I was the first time we found out Beatrix Kiddo’s name and cut to that flashback where she’s in school but still a grown up. Quentin is weird, man.
  • Favorite line of dialogue: Bitch, you can stop right there. Just because I have no wish to murder you in front of your daughter doesn’t mean that parading her around in front of me will inspire sympathy. You and I have unfinished business. And not a goddamned thing you’ve done in the subsequent four years including getting knocked up is going to change that.
  • Which one of Tarantino’s muses is better: Uma Thurman or Christoph Waltz?
  • “Silly rabbit” “Trix are…” “For kids”
  • Greatest little touch: the little wooden water fountain bobbing up and down as O-Ren and Beatrix fight in the snow.
  • I’m pretty sure the House of Blue Leaves scene switched to black and white so it wouldn’t get an NC-17 rating. However, it also worked as an amazing artistic decision. Sometimes, censorship can do great things for art.
  • The fact that neither “Kill Bill” got nominated in major categories makes sense I guess (old farts), but how could they pass up Uma Thurman and David Carradine? 
  • Other acting MVPs: Everyone in the cast. Everyone. 
  • Need to make a serious note on Michael Parks. In an interview, Tarantino once said he thought that Parks was as good as Dustin Hoffman. I don’t think he’s being hyperbolic. It is too bad that Parks never rose above B-movie star. He plays two different characters here, the first is Sheriff Earl McGraw (“son number one…this tall drink of cocksucker ain’t dead”). Then in part two, he plays Esteban Vihaio in a performance that’s strange, funny, and ultimately too brief. 
  • Another note on Parks: Tarantino is known for giving a lot of former stars their big comeback roles. I would gladly trade every role that Travolta has had after “Pulp Fiction” for more movies starring Michael Parks. 

*TNT is the king of showing the most rewatchable movies of all time. They’re also the king of inexplicably awful censorship decisions.
**Don’t feel so groundbreaking now do you, “Twilight”?
***Yes, Bill’s a psycho. But he also had his heart broken. Even a man who loves to “travel around the world and kill people for vast sums of money” can fall in love.
****Footnote

Spoiler Review: Gravity

Leave a reply

Spoiler Review is a new series where I will review movies that require many spoilers in order to review them properly. This is my review of “Gravity.” This goes without saying: SPOILER ALERT.

Every time a movie comes out that uses 3D really well, like really really well, I never hesitate to call it the second coming of cinema. “Avatar.” “Hugo.” “Life of Pi.” Yes, I do strongly regret giving “Avatar” that much credit.

I don’t want to say “Gravity” has changed the game. It’s just responded to the tools of our time so well and it has done what many others only wished they could accomplish. More importantly, if you ever doubted that the wonder of the movies has been stolen by TV, then look at “Gravity,” and you’ll understand that it never went anywhere.

This spoiler review needed to exist. It is impossible to fully expound on “Gravity” without revealing many important twists and turns. Also, it is the kind of film enhanced by going in completely surprised. Once things start to explode, the story seems very straightforward. Yet, it also has such an uneasy and unpredictable edge to it. Maybe that’s because Cuaron decided to kill off one of Hollywood’s biggest stars halfway through and then let one person run the rest of the show. Cuaron pulled a similar move in “Children of Men.” I like when movies do this. Wait, that sounded bad. I’m not sadistic, but taking an event that would normally end a film and putting it so early on is always daring. Not only that, but it will always carry the film into another direction.

Clooney’s death also leads to one of the greatest fake outs in recent memory. Kowalski’s return elicited groans from the entire audience. However, it just didn’t sit well with me from the beginning. For one thing, he kicks out a window in outer space while she sits there with no helmet on. She covers her mouth and somehow is fine. This isn’t the season of “24″ with the nerve gas where everyone just covers their faces with a tissue and is somehow fine. “Gravity” can’t get every scientific detail right, but this one was too obvious.

I’m sure Cuaron knew what kind of reaction he’d get with that scene. Good job, it worked. And it just gave even more of a sense of how alone Stone was in space. “Gravity” is less about the fear of life on another planet and more about the fear that we are but a tiny speck in a vast, empty universe. As Frankenstein’s Monster once said: “alone…bad.”

After Kowalski dies, Stone is left to fend for herself. And oh what a beautiful performance Bullock gives. She takes what could have been a repetitive 91 minutes of screaming and floating and turns it into a one woman show. It’s a lot like James Franco’s performance in “127 Hours” as she displays so many altering personalities in such a short amount of time. The most beautiful moment in the entire film is not a shot of space, but rather the scene where Stone communicates with an unknown Chinese man. She hears his dogs bark and asks them to keep barking. Then she barks along with them. These two have so little common and don’t even speak the same language. She’s trying literally anything to keep herself motivated to survive.

Eventually, there is going to be a “Gravity” backlash, because that’s what happens with any movie this big. In fact, its already begun. People are going to compare it to other movies and identify a lack of originality. However, what I hope everyone will remember is that this is the anti-space space movie. “Gravity” is not against space, but rather it challenges our notions of what lies above. At the beginning, Kowalski plays an old western tune as he floats around. Space has always been labeled the final frontier, but what is rarely acknowledged is that it is so hard to conquer a frontier that we know so little about. Unlike many of its contemporaries, “Gravity” acknowledges the many dangers of space. Its opening title card makes note of how much the temperature fluctuates. A little bit later, Kessler Syndrome causes a chain of destruction that I am still trying to wrap my head around.

And then there is Bullock, who is constantly fighting the voices in her own head as she doesn’t have anyone else to talk to for a majority of the film. She constantly has to fight between holding on to any object that will keep her alive, and letting go of all of her earthly problems, which are inconsequential when the remains of a Russian satellite are hurtling right towards you. “Gravity” shows so much, but leaves much more to the imagination. The image of her driving through Illinois with the radio playing and no direction at all is a sad yet lovely one, enhanced by the fact that we never actually get to see it. With this, the film also plays against the idea of sci-fi films in which one tries to escape their earth forms in search of a better self. Ryan Stone was hired for the job because she’s a damn good technician, but I’m sure she also really needed an escape from her lonely life. Yet, orbiting above earth, all she finds is chaos.

Cuaron has proved himself a master of visual metaphors. That’s why I’ll let it slide every time Clooney says “I have a bad feeling about this,” because that is the worst foreshadowing possible. Instead, just marvel at the moment Ryan boards the ship and sheds her suit, her body curled up and looking very much like a baby in the womb. Most filmmakers would settle for a trite Jesus on the Cross reference, but Cuaron loves his baby imagery.

That was the first rebirth of Ryan Stone. The second comes at the end, as her module crashes on earth and against all odds, she survives. Watching her swim out of the ocean and then crawl onto land before slowly getting up was like watching an ancient creature evolve right before our eyes. It’s like the Star Baby from the end of “2001″ [Editor's Note: I STILL DON'T KNOW WHAT THAT STAR BABY IS] landed on earth. Ryan Stone might be born a new, but she is no blank slate. She has a hell of a story to tell. I picture the rest of her life will include telling people this amazing story of hers at fancy dinner parties, and then chiding them because they never got to experience it in IMAX 3D.

This is not a love story.

Movie Review: Gravity

1 Reply

“In space, no one can hear you scream.”

This is now the famous tagline from “Alien,” and the basis for “Gravity.” “Gravity” hasn’t been advertised as a horror film, but it captures the fear of being alone in space better than most others that have tried way too hard to do so.

“Gravity” marks the long awaited return of Alfonso Cuaron who last directed “Children of Men,” which is still one of my favorite films of all time. Like “Children of Men,” there is no indication of when the camera starts and stops rolling. Cuaron is one for relentless action. Immersive might not even be a strong enough word to describe “Gravity.” I get the feeling that Cuaron just wanted us to float in space with him forever. There were multiple times where I felt short of breath. Apparently, you don’t need any dimensions beyond 3D to get all your senses this invested in a movie.


Plot details shouldn’t matter here much, and I want to keep it as surprising here for everyone who is reading this. The most important thing to know is that Sandra Bullock and George Clooney play two very attractive people in space. They’re assigned to fix a space ship. Things go haywire, communications breakdown, and suddenly they’re both free falling through space. If anybody remembers the scene in “Thank You For Smoking” where Rob Lowe breaks down of a movie set in space starring two attractive movie stars (one of them being Clooney), just know that “Gravity” is the exact opposite of that.

Before relying heavily on action scenes, “Gravity” is a space porn spectacle on level with “2001: A Space Odyssey.” The advent of 3D works so well here because it gives such an honest depiction of the vast scope of the universe. The long shots that Cuaron made so famous in “Children of Men” are a little stiller here, but there’s still the sense that he just wants to let the camera roll, and see what magic unfolds.

Unlike most film sets in space, “Gravity” is not about what life exists beyond our earth, but rather the lack thereof. When Matt Kowalski (Clooney) asks Ryan Stone (Bullock) what her favorite part about space is, without hesitation she replies “the silence.” Space is such a serene place, and that is why disaster makes it all the more frightening, because there’s nowhere to turn to when it hits the fan. It is also a fitting place for Ryan, who wants to be as far as she can from some of the tragic events of her own life.

Many have said that the script of “Gravity” is nothing special. While it is mostly very straightforward, it takes a lot more risks than people have been giving it credit for. One major event not even midway through completely alters the events of the film. In addition, its near lack of dialogue is a bold move which draws attention to how much of a visual driven media film is. The lack of dialogue prevents it from ever being bogged down by too many rules and too much exposition. Its never a terrible thing to make the viewers figure out some details on their own.

There are moments where it seems like “Gravity” is about to slip off into implausibility or worse yet, become “Vertical Limit” in space. However, it finds ways to stay out of that territory. “Gravity” is basically a two man show, with the two performers living up to the challenge. Bullock hands down steals the show, and proves that she can take nearly any kind of role. There’s a scene later in the film that involves her making a bunch of noises, including barking sounds, that’s she makes sad yet uplifting. I hate to make the “Alien” comparison again, but don’t be surprised if you see shades of Ripley in her performance.

When “Gravity” ended, I had that feeling I only get from truly great films. I felt a mix between exhilaration and profound shock that brought tears to my eyes. I could have sat there and watched it again. I don’t know how “Gravity” will hold up without the big screen and extra dimension, but I don’t want to worry about that just yet. While film itself is permanent, they are only in theaters for so long, and the experience is a fleeting one. “Gravity” is the reason why we go see movies in theaters.

Analog This: A Helpful Guide of Whether or Not You Should Keep Watching Homeland

Leave a reply
I swear…no more Skyping with terrorists.

Spoilers for the season three premiere of “Homeland” to come. Assume there will be spoilers for old episodes of “Homeland,” too.

A funny thing happened as “Homeland” was on its way to becoming TV’s best drama: it decided to go completely downhill. But “Homeland” wants you to know that they’re trying really hard to make a comeback. They let us know by devoting the entire “Previously on…” segment of the season three opener to what was essentially a highlight reel of the entire series.

I get it, “Homeland.” There was like two or three really awesome parts of last season. But Dana and her stupid boyfriend still murdered someone (before he got blown up) and Nicholas Brody Skyped with a terrorist on a Blackberry while standing next to the vice president. So I guess you could say things weren’t going too well for them.

So, should you keep watching, or not? The season three premiere showed some promise, but also some drawbacks. Here, I will present some highlights from the premiere, and its up to you to decide whether or not you should keep up with “Homeland.”

Chris Brody: He’s really tall now. And still has nothing valuable to add. I just want someone to give him a show where he reviews HD TVs.

Dana Brody: In retrospect, making Dana a murderer last season was pretty dumb. During the long gap in “Homeland” time, Dana attempted suicide. This is a more grounded, dark, and interesting territory for the character, and a good chance for actress Morgan Sayler to show off more of her acting potential. I just hope they don’t make much out of her sending the nude selfie. Like, that her potential new boyfriend is a Senator’s son and it causes another political scandal. It just seems too obvious.

Jess Brody: Sorry fans, but there was no Jess Brody nudity this time around. Just some deep and dark insight into her past and her family’s history with suicide and depression. Oh great, more interesting character insight. I blame the Puritans.

Jess’ Mom: Here’s a new character. Already not a big fan of her. She just seems to be there to tell Jess that she’s parenting all wrong. She reminds me of Claudette from “The Room.” That’s not a good thing.

Carrie’s Mental State: Carrie is still torn up about last year’s events at Langley. She blames herself, and I’m not sure if she really does or if that’s a way to make her cover story more convincing. Either way, she’s trying alternative medicines, but it doesn’t seem to be helping so far. She’s on trial for treason. I need to start the Carrie cry count, because this episode was a doozy.

Where in the World is Nicholas Brody?: Not sure. Surprisingly, he wasn’t in this episode at all. Maybe he’s with Saul Goodman in Nebraska. Or somebody sent him to Belize. Guys, I miss “Breaking Bad.”

Better Call Saul (Berenson): It’s really hard to complain about Mandy Patinkin. He’s like Jewish Santa Claus. He’s facing a lot more pressures now. As de facto head of Homeland Security, he has to deal with the possibility of a revoked charter, more terrorists, and the Nicholas Brody/Carrie bomb. Plus, Saul has personal issues to deal with. He’s the most sane character on the show, so I really hope he doesn’t fall into the vortex of insanity.

New Problems, New Possibilities: Maybe I’m alone here, but the most interesting conflicts on this show are the internal issues being dealt with at Langley. It feels more relevant given how, you know, we don’t have a functioning government right now. “Homeland” has some great characters, and I think it would be even better if we got to see them evolve this year. Instead of just chasing terrorists, which we’ve seen before, I’d love to see some personal struggles. How does someone keep an entire government agency, and themselves, together? But it’s a fine line to walk because…

…I don’t want a courtroom drama: “Homeland” runs into the possibility of slipping into implausibility and simply being a show about chasing terrorists. This was a problem it faced last year, which is why it nearly slipped into complete “24″ territory. However, I also don’t want to see it become just a courtroom drama. Too much of old white people (because, American politics) arguing over abstract political issues could get dull. So if “Homeland” is to get back on its feet, it needs to balance internal and external threats. Oh, and bring Nicholas Brody back.