$4 Tuesday: Blue Ruin

I’d forgive you if you were crazy, but you’re not, you’re weak.

Last night I rallied my friends and we saw Blue Ruin, directed by Jeremy Saulnier. This film has won a bunch of awards and while I enjoyed the film making overall, the movie really dragged. I appreciate when a film builds up the tension and then is able to release it in a huge climax however I never felt like that tension was properly released with this one.

We meet Dwight (played by a transformative Macon Blair) in the middle of a complex story. The beginning of the film held that same slow pace but with acute attention to detail. Detail was paid to the routine and style with which the main character lived. a homeless man living in a busted up car in a beach town, the filmmaking leaves the impression that Dwight is patiently waiting for something, which allows him to organize his day-to-day life and cope with the present reality. That reality (and the wait) comes crashing down when a double murderer is released from prison and Dwight goes to meet him. Dwight is not a trained killer by any means and struggles to keep a clear head as he deals with the stress of seeking revenge, executing that revenge, messily executing the individual who was newly released from prison, and dealing with the repercussions. 

The film traverses the line between psychological thriller and gory violence and as we dive further into the psychology of the main character, we wonder ourselves how far we would go for vindication. But Dwight is poorly prepared, and is barely able to keep ahead of his antagonists, who are trained in weapons and killing. a strategically violent family, the antagonists of Blue Ruin are well prepared for confrontation, as the final scene indicates (whoops, spoiler!). Dwight is not without skill, though. He thinks ahead, he is quick and nimble, escaping from situations in the nick of time and problem-solving on the spot in times of tension. This allows him to confront the armed and criminal family who has so thoroughly damaged his life. 

a beautifully filmed thriller, Blue Ruin maintains it’s focus on the present events as they unfold. although it offers an explanation for the violence and revenge, the film doesn’t linger on the details. We’re left to imagine the grotesque murder of two lovers (the parents of Dwight) after a love affair goes array that has haunted the two families for decades. However, without offering more details, the film becomes difficult to follow since it fails to provide more concrete and timely explanations of who knows who, who is related to who, and who the families are. Part of this is by design, obviously, in order to provide a psychologically twisting narrative that keeps you engaged. However, the script, with all it’s “our parents, your parents, our aunt, your brother, this grandson, the guy in prison, this woman is your sister but the movie script makes you think they’re married” just ends up getting convoluted to the point that it becomes tedious to follow the plot line.

If the film passes the Bechdel Test, it barely passes. There are multiple female characters but they exchange only a few words between them, which may or may not be words that are about the men in the movie. 

Despite the dragging narrative at times and the complicated interpersonal relationships, the film is fascinating to watch and cinematically beautiful. I’ll be looking forward to watching this film again at home and further evaluating it in the future. The title, Blue Ruin, apparently alludes to a catastrophe but may also reference the bullet-holed up blue car that Dwight drives everywhere.

I recommend seeing it and making yourself watch the gory parts. Don’t shut your eyes or you’ll miss some great moments and dark humor!

– Hans 

 

$4 Tuesday: Finding Vivian Maier

She had a dark side.

Finding Vivian Maier documents the work and art of a New York nanny born in 1929. By diving into her life through the thousands of photographs and films she kept hidden in her lifetime, this documentary tries to uncover the elusive creature that is Vivian Maier. 

She probably didn’t want all this fame. ‘Oh No’ she’d say, ‘Oh No, now why did he do that?’ 

Vivian Maier became a nanny for the freedom it allowed her after working in an oppressive sewing sweatshop for little pay. In between nanny-ing, She traveled the world extensively, intruding into private and emotional moments of humanity in dozens of countries with her Rollieflex camera. She captured sadness, joy and the weathered effects of poverty in New York City with her camera positioned at her stomach. as the film explains, her photos often have a towering perspective, giving authority to her subjects. although a street photography genuis, Vivian had a dark side.

In interviews with former charges, it  quickly comes to light that Vivian’s  obsession with disturbing newspaper  headlines, her eye for the grotesque and  off-kilter, point to deeper mental issues.  Not only was Vivian terrified and angry at  men around her, but her grown charges  recount physical abuse, perpetuating a  cycle she no doubt suffered within  herself. One woman recounts how Vivian  force fed and choked her as a child, noting  that Vivian had likely been through  something terrible herself. Vivian  was also a hoarder, keeping piles of newspapers reaching to the ceiling in her small quarters with each family she lived with.

Vivian’s mental health and accusations against her of child abuse beg the relevant debate: Can we or should we respect the artistic work of a person who knowingly used their power to sexual or physically abuse others? Does great art require a deranged mind? am I even asking the right questions?

In the case of Woody Allen, Hollywood refuses to acknowledge the victim’s perspective, a 7 year old Dylan Farrow who has had to live with the trauma of her molestation and also the problematic reaction of Hollywood- one which denied Dylan’s voice while lauding Woody for his work, as though his artistic work that can determine his entire character.

What if (dare I ask it) great art and being propelled towards abusively dominant and completely inappropriate behavior just go together. What if one enables the other and vice versa? What if this is the price we pay for great art?

These are not easy questions and I am without answers. The feminist side of me (and the side that has to live in a world all too accepting of perpetrators of violence) says, “No, we must not accept or condone sexual, physical or mental abuse of anyone, going so far as to deny the perpetrator an artistic voice in the world because they do not deserve artistic recognition unless they can make a valuable artistic contribution to society without perpetuating cycles of violence.” 

But then again, what if great art can and does emerge from the grotesque depths of our beings? The world must not shy away from these difficult dialogues and shun artists, but instead must engage with the art while not forgetting the darker sides of humanity and the real human lives that were negatively affected by abuse.

Surprisingly amusing at times and disturbingly dark, Finding Vivian Maier wove a complex portrait of an elusive photographer and disturbed person who is quickly becoming one of the most respected photographers of our century postmortem.

---

 

Bechtel Test Score: Passes on all accounts. There are multiple women who talk to each other about Vivian and a variety of related topics.

 

–  Hans

Summer in Athens, Ohio

A place where the students retreat for months, the Union is full of good people, the coffee shop is relaxing, Strouds Run becomes a daily outing, there’s never a wait at Casa and the sun is hot hot hot on these Appalachian hills, this is Athens, Ohio.

And! I am back on the movie review train for my last summer here. $4 Tuesdays and her sister day, Free Pop Corn Wednesdays at The Athena Cinema on Court Street will once again be my movie viewing days, followed by my review.

I believe that we should experience a reflection of aspects of our own unique lives in movies. I watch movies by searching for the commentary on my own journey, because a great movie will reveal lessons to me. If I can’t learn a thoughtful idea on humanity than an important element is likely missing. Above all, this is the key element in a movie for me.

I also evaluate my films from the Betchel Test perspective. As cinema should reflect realities from our lives, the Betchel Test determines this accuracy from the feminist perspective. This test was designed to score the representation of reality for the female gender. Unfortunately many movies miss this mark, which is a pity because passing The betchel Test would enhance a lot of movies’ plot, acting, directing, and script writing.

The Test is as follows:

1) Are there more than 2 females in the movie? (Yes = potentially feminist, continue to question 2)

2) Do the 3 + female characters talk to each other? (Yes = THANK GOD. How many movies have you seen in which the female characters only talk to men? Consider. It’s a surprisingly high number, isn’t it?)

3) Do these 3 + female characters who talk to each other talk about anything (literally ANYTHING) other than men?

Answer yes to all these questions and congratulations, your movie may be feminist and conscious of the real lives of women the world over. Women who interact with each other.

Now let’s dig deeper. Why would women be portrayed in movies only in terms of men? Well because patriarchy. Fuck the patriarchy!

No, but really. Men run the film industry and therefore don’t often consider the female perspective. My own theory is that when we portray women in movies as having independent lives from men it threatens the sexist power dynamic.

Women who interact with each other, talk. Women who talk to each other inevitably start revolutions and stir shit up. Feminists of the 60s and 70s knew this when they began conciousness raising groups. Any female rock band knows this is true. Women are killing it in politics today.

So why are a large number of films failing to show women as they are- thinking, communicating, thought provoking and plot driving beings? Mysteries of the universe.

This speaks to my privilege but I’ve heard of a race version of the Betchel Test, which I’m assuming are very similar questions but with race instead of gender. I will look those up and use that analysis in my movie review.

Ah so summer, we meet again. I’ve waited all year for $4 Tuesdays to happen again. Sometimes we have to go through a year long depression before being able to pick a hobby like this back up. Or is that just me?

Another story for another time,
Hans SG

The Athena Grande: American Hustle

Hehehehe. I liked this movie. I like how much I hated Bradley Cooper’s character & how much I reveled in him getting what he deserves. I like how loathsomely unattractive Christian Bale got for this role. I love Jennifer Lawrence’s ability to embrace the selfish crazy of a bored, incapable housewife. I love Amy Adam’s not-crying acting chops & her character’s snappy business & interpersonal smarts throughout the film. Love it when she controls everyone around her while still showing vulnerability.

Go see it. Sneak in whiskey, appreciate the various hairstyles, the 70’s wardrobe, & settle in for a 3 hour adventure & leave day dreaming about becoming a top-tier con artist.

People believe what they want to believe because the guy who made this was so good that it’s real to everybody. Now who’s the master, the painter or the forger?

The Secret Life of Walter Mitty

A film that embraces the cliched cheesiness and absurdity of it’s own message to deliver a wildly entertaining & uplifting film, The Secret Life of Walter Mitty follows the hard working story of a man (Ben Stiller, who also directed it!) who is pushed around by obnoxious superiors and gets lost in his daydreams of becoming the hero, the lover, and living an adventurous life. Mitty does not take chances, lives his life by organization, geometric shapes & predictable patterns. However, he himself is not boring at all. He has a successful career processing negative photography for the wise, globe-trotting Sean O’Conner (played by the ruggedly handsome Sean Penn). Mitty’s life work has been to bring O’Conner’s photography to life (literally- LIFE is the name of the magazine Mitty works for!)

Mr. Mitty also has a remarkable imagination & is prone to “zoning out,” during which the movie takes on hilarious action sequences or absurd love stories involving his crush, Cheryl Melhoff, shiningly played by the hilarious Kristen Wiig. Mitty’s vivid daydreams are in stark contrast to real-life; usually he’s too afraid to directly talk to Cheryl or stand up for himself against his new bully of a boss. People think Mitty is dumb for zoning out (I used to zone out all.the.time. when I was younger… until I got made fun of for it so I stopped X| ).

His trouble really starts when misplaced negative #25 incites a gripping and uncharacteristic adventure at the urging of his friend Cheryl. The story is as unlikely and fun as it is believable, weirdly enough. Who doesn’t like the idea of getting out of their comfort zone and having some crazy adventures?! Mitty’s adventures will delight you and inspire you.

The film has some clever product placement, making brands like eharmony.com and Papa John’s integral to the plot line. This aspect didn’t really bother me because these brands were so easily integrated (like, you would eat Cinnabon in an airport with a friend after getting back from a foreign country) that it just reflected how our lives are so deeply embedded with these brands. Plus, I appreciate clever advertising!

A large portion of the movie’s message is that our lives are so incorporated with the internet and social media, that we forget how to live offline. We forget how to live life moment to moment and savior those moments for ourselves and use those real moments to connect with others. Instead we spend out days telling others not face to face about the things we do. We’ve lost the focus on living, absorbing moments and not tryiing to profit off of them (either through money or attention). Thus we fail to fully realize our lives.

As life magazine adjusts to an online presence, the slogan “LIFE Online” might have been an exciting concept 10-15 years ago. but now it’s tired and our generation pushes back against the notion of social media & the digital age (an ironic message in a movie sponsored by eharmony.com). Of course the internet is a place to enhance areas of life by expanding knowledge and communities but it is also an entrapment, where one can get caught up while seeking for attention. It may be time to take a step back.

Last year, when my hooping video went viral, I became (even more) obsessed with the # of views and attention I received. I watched my online presence expand, I reveled in the praise and defended myself in my own head against the criticisms. It’s funny how the attention of thousands of strangers changes you. Thing is, when I made that video, it wasn’t with the intention of “going viral,” (although, ultimately, I’m very glad and thankful that it did. Doors have opened for me and I’ve learned a lot about myself because of this). I made the video because I connected passionately to the energy and message of a song (Oh Lord by Foxy Shazam) and wanted to create an expressive performance out of it. The energy is what people must’ve noticed.

However, despite the positives about this. The hula hoop community online is all about self-promotion. It’s an exhausting atmosphere to exist in. Everyone wants their art to be recognized and understandably so, but I feel myself losing my focus on being a better hoop artist when I try to self-promote.

My take-away from Walter Mitty is something I’ve known for a long time- I need to take a step back from my online presence, mainly on Facebook and regain my focus on my art.

After all, there are too many adventures waiting for me in the wider world.

Things that are truly beautiful don’t ask for attention.

– Sean O’Conner

The Bling Ring

The movie was so focused on portraying how fake and superficial the individuals who live in this upper-class, American West Coast culture are, that it failed to show their humanity entirely.

The mother’s character was the most poorly portrayed by Sophia Coppola. She failed to capture the intensity of the mother and the mother’s strange relationship with her daughters. The daughters really have a close connection with their mother, however weird, and actually believe in the “And So It Is” thing they say. Alex Nyers wasn’t lying when she said those quotes repeated by Emma Watson in the Vogue Interview; this girl truly believes what she’s saying. I think Emma Watson did an OK job acting considering the horrendous script she had to work with but unfortunately, I can’t get on her side. I don’t believe in the sisterhood between the two older girls in the movie… These girls are best friends and also fiercely competitive but none of that came through.

Perhaps I shouldn’t have expected the movie to focus so much on the 2 sisters but I’m disappointed that this story wasn’t told.

In order for me to feel and understand the pull of having nice things, wealth and fame, I needed to be seduced by the ringmaster of the group. I wasn’t, unfortunately. She was vapid and boring and I believe there’s more to the real person than that.

It’s easy to write these girls off as rich, entitled, materialistic little bitches but what about exploring the pull of celebrity culture? Fame and wealth and beauty entices everyone to an extent. When it’s so close that all you have to do is take a deep breath and push open a door to get it, what can ever limit you? I wanted to see these boundaries explored and real emotions about right, wrong and the ability to disregard common sense in search of adrenaline and wealth.

Instead the movie offers us all the material things but none of the acting to make it real.

I understand the challenge- how do you tell a story that everyone knows the ending to? Well, it’s not about the ending in that case, it’s about the relationships, the betrayal, the friendship and the reputation these individuals got in their circle of friends for stealing from celebrities. Alas, the trailer shows all the best parts of the movie. There’s also a car accident and little exploration of it’s consequences except for a laughed off “I was off the charts, they didn’t even know how I was driving.” Consequences may be a foreign thing to these kids, but I need the movie to explore why and how that is.

Skip this movie and watch “Pretty Wild” on Netflix. It’s the real thing and it’s better than the movie.

$4 Tuesday: Trance

*Spoiler Alert*

Last night I saw Trance with James McAvoy, Vincent Cassle and Rosario Dawson, three actors who I adore. I’ve been in love with James McAvoy since Atonement, at which point I learned he was Mr. Tumnus in The Lion, The Witch and The Wardrobe and then promptly devoted the rest of my life to closely following his career. Also, Scottish accent. Can a person be more perfect?

I only know Vincent Cassel from Black Swan, and he’s certainly a good actor in that movie and weirdly attractive in general. Rosario Dawson is fantastic always. The problem here isn’t really with the actors. I thought they were pretty good. But the script, the plot, the whole movie, oh God what the hell did I spend a little under two hours watching this while I ate Sour Patch Kids until my tongue bled?

Let me recap: James McAvoy plays this fine art auctioneer Simon, who steals a $27 million dollar Goya painting at an auction in order to repay his gambling debts. So it’s an inside job which is kinda cool.

He was working with the guy who he owed the money too but then decided to try and steal the    painting for himself (and then what, spend the rest of his life running from these guys?) Most of this we learn as the plot unfolds and all we know in the beginning is that this is a highly orchestrated painting theft. But Cassel’s character, Franck, intercepts Simon’s plan and a fight ensures and McAvoy is knocked on the head pretty hard and loses his memory. So he has no idea where he hid the painting. After this point the plot loses me.

After an unnecessarily grotesque torture scene (I am of the opinion that torture/physical pain scenes in general are usually more effective in inspiring that spine-tingly feeling when the film cuts away from the act of torture a hair before it starts to happen. Nope, not here. We get to watch all the grossness of Simon’s fingers being shredded. This doesn’t work because Simon can’t remember where the hell the painting is. Franck takes Simon to Elizabeth, the hypnotherapist (Dawson), in order to uncover this lost memory. He uncovers keys instead and everyone is pissed. Little does everyone know those keys go to the car where the painting (!) and a dead body (!!!!) are hidden. Together with the maggots, like the painting would’ve survived an environment like that what-the-hell-ever.

So a whole bunch of plot twists happen. Elizabeth is apparently the ex-girlfriend of Simon who he nearly killed because he was an abusive asshole. So she used her powers of hypnotherapy to make him forget her. Then she’s the very hypnotherapist Franck and Simon unknowingly seek out. In ways I could not follow she then manipulates everyone by creating false memories and sexing it up with both Simon and Franck (Dawson has the most perfect breasts on this planet. That is a fact. But she really should’ve picked a better movie to be nude in. It was literally pointless in Trance… she could’ve just kissed Simon and instead of running away and coming back 20 seconds later without clothes) until at the end it is revealed that Dawson was playing everyone all along and now she has the painting and hahahaha joke is on you, fuckers.

Except, wait, what? There’s two girls. One is dead and in the trunk being nibbled on by maggots. Elizabeth is that girl, she isn’t that girl. She’s implanted herself into Simon’s memories, but they really did date… but Elizabeth is alive, so who did he kill? And are Simon and Elizabeth working together or are Elizabeth and Franck working together? All the while Elizabeth is working for herself but then Franck tries to warn Simon but Simon doesn’t believe him and then Elizabeth is raped and Simon rescuers her and they run off together and I think Simon drowns at one point and Franck should’ve blown up in a fire-y car explosion then drowned but somehow survives that and we never know if Elizabeth actually has feelings for either of these guys or if she’s just a really fabulous actress herself.

It totally lost me. I can imagine all the script writers sitting around a table with all the possible ending twists and being like “But this ending is good! And this ending is so good! And no one will see this one coming!” before deciding to literally just put in every single plot twist ever thought of in the history of man and cramming it into a movie that started off SO interesting and then quickly fell apart. I don’t want complicated plot lines, I want a good story. The movie was so focused on being action-y and intense that it lost any real cinema feel to it. McAvoy’s Wanted left the same dry taste in my mouth. Too many plot twists, not enough story.

See, she’s all broken up in the mirror, asking, who is she, really? What’s her angle on this crime? She can’t be trusted.

As I was watching the first 15 minutes of the movie I kept thinking about all the fantastic different directions this film could go, none of which happened in the movie (which isn’t necessarily a bad thing, but the final twist at the end didn’t make me feel like the movie challenged any of my plot twist ideas. The movie’s version failed to take hold of my imagination.)

Plus the whole film is about a Goya painting, which really becomes a side accessory in the movie. In my opinion, if you’re going to have a prominent piece of art as central to the plot, the art itself needs to become it’s own character and exert it’s own force on the characters. The painting could have been a giant diamond or something else entirely and it would’ve made no difference to the plot, filming, or characters. Good cinema examines the pull these objects have on us, deeper than greed or money. I will commend the film for the one point of depth that helped elevate the film: Elizabeth wanted the painting in order to get revenge on Simon (and maybe also Franck?) for the hurt he caused her. But it could have been presented in a different way, perhaps one that actually made sense to the viewer. I still don’t understand how this dead body came into play.

And apparently, it’s representation of hypnotherapy is pretty off the mark.

Skip this movie. It’s a headache to watch.

hsg

$4 Tuesday- Spring Breakers

James Franco as rapper/gangster Alien is equal parts hilarious, convincing, disturbing and sexy (which is weird to say because I really didn’t think I would be able to get past the grill and corn rows white boy vibe). It’s pretty raunchy too, which I guess shouldn’t surprise considering what apparently goes on during spring break among college kids (alas, I only know the rumors). It starts with a montage of boobs and beer and continues with the whole boobs theme throughout the movie. I desperately want the four main girls, Brit, Candy, Cotty, and Faith, to be my absolute best friends… this movie certainly put into perspective how boring my own life is.

Faith/Selena Gomez has the brown hair and is a Christian fish out of water, simultaneously wanting to have fun but not wanting to push the boundaries, although she unintentionally gives the speech that motivates her friends to rob a chicken restaurant. Faith is uncomfortable with how her friends got the money after she learns the details. Before too long and after they spend a night in jail, she bails and that’s the last we see of her. The other three hang around Alien until a drive by shooting sends Cotty/Rachel Korine packing. Several robberies and a threesome later, the action really picks up.

The question throughout the whole movie is, how far are they going to go? The movie takes a turn after the first two leave, focusing on the power dynamics between Brit/Ashley Benson and Candy/Vanessa Hudgens and Alien. To provide some insight, the girls force Alien to his knees by sticking loaded guns in his mouth and demanding he suck. It’s a little rape-y, and if the roles were reversed it would be genuinely disturbing. Except, it’s disturbing anyway because these girls love the money, drugs, power, automatic weapons, and adrenaline of Alien’s business. It’s also what makes it interesting.

This film makes you laugh and feel totally disturbed at the same time, a delicate balance to pull but done quite well.

Favorite Quotes

I’ve found who I am here. – all the girls

You two girls are my motherfuckin soulmates. – Alien

This is the fuckin’ American dream. This is my fuckin’ dream, y’all! All this sheeyit! Look at my sheeyit! I got… I got SHORTS! Every fuckin’ color. I got designer T-shirts! I got gold bullets. Motherfuckin’ VAM-pires. I got Scarface. On repeat. SCARFACE ON REPEAT. Constant, y’all! I got Escape! Calvin Klein Escape! Mix it up with Calvin Klein Be. Smell nice? I SMELL NICE!

– Alien

I think that’s the secret to life- being a good person. – Brit

Aside from being a great genre departure for the previous Disney stars Vanessa Hudgens and Selena Gomez from virgins to raunchy young adults (can’t there be a balance!? Gotta market yourself somehow post Disney I guess…) this film is worth seeing.

See it, enjoy it, and wish your spring breaks were half as fun as this movie.

hsg

$4 Tuesdays/ RIP Roger Ebert

Tuesday is movie day for me. To be honest, it’s a new tradition and I’m kicking myself for having only started it this semester, making the constant excuse that I don’t have time to see a movie at the vintage 3 theater cinema a half minute walk from my apartment. So it’s movie day and I’m making up for lost time.

I’m in a dilemma today though. Last week I saw Stoker, which is a fantastic mind fuck of a movie in all the best ways. I want to see it again just so I can process the story line and appreciate more of the camera work and editing. I also want to see Spring Breakers. I will probably go see both because #YOLO.

I grew up doing a lot of theater- mainly acting, some crew work. In college I’ve done a few film roles on the acting side but lately I have really become obsessed with the process of post-production. Most of the time I watch a movie I pick apart each scene in my head, consider why it was filmed or edited a particular way, and praise or critique it or both. I’m obsessed.

Stoker

India Stoker what the hell. The movie starts with India running around her parent’s house and doing very mildly destructive things. She pops a blister on her foot and doesn’t flinch, she dumps over a box of tennis balls on the court, she deliberately cracks a hard boiled egg. India herself has a high attention to detail, noticing things normal people don’t, like a spider crawling on her ankle over her tights. The cinematography reflects this, obviously, with a vivid attention to detail and color. The 3 main actors all wore special contacts to give their eyes a menacing glint to great effect. This movie deserves another viewing.

After India’s father dies her previously unheard of uncle, Charlie, appears and, as Robert Ebert noted in his review (linked above), begins to seduce both mother and daughter in different ways and for different motives.

This movie questions and exposes our very dark sides. Sociopaths may be born but aren’t we all capable of suspending our human compassion and empathy to promote and enjoy the suffering of others? Bringing in some feminist analysis, people/mostly males rape because of the surge of power dominating another person can give. It’s not about sex, it’s about power. Since we live in a rape culture that condones and even encourages rape, men and women are socialized to accept it, perpetrate it, and enjoy it. Our reality is not so far fetched from the underlying themes in Stoker.

Anyway, another theme is about fulfilling our destinies, if we have them. India fights against her uncle’s friendship and herself until a sexual awakening draws her in. The shower scene would be a really positive portrayal in a Hollywood movie of female sexuality if you just took out the scenes she’s actually masturbating to. Alas, India is not normal and she grows up and accepts her destiny, her mother becomes more and more child-like.

The end has a great twist too but I don’t want to spoil it.

Favorite quotes: The obvious Nicole Kidman monologue shown in the trailer is excellent.

You know I’ve often wondered why it is we have children. And the conclusion I’ve come to is … we want someone to get it right this time. But not me. Personally speaking I can’t wait to watch life tear you apart.

Obviously a good one. My other favorite is a scene in which India and a school acquaintance are in a park. India is standing on one of those spinning toys going around and around as she says (I’m paraphrasing):

Have you ever seen a picture of yourself taken by another person from an angle you’ve never seen before and suddenly you see yourself in a whole new way. Do you know what I’m talking about?

As she says this she is spinning around and we see every angle of her as the camera remains stagnant. Masterful.

So that’s $4 Tuesdays for ya. Review of Spring Breakers and maybe an update on Stoker after seeing it a second time to come.

hsg