The Michigan Daily - michigandaily.com

Tuesday, November 24, 2009 - 5

FILM REVIEW

Get the picture!

CPR + wolf fangs = exacerbating the problem.

'Moon' doesn't shine

The second, more action-
packed'Twilight' installment
is still just for the fans.
By JACK PORTER
Daily Arts Writer
The inescapable cultural phenomenon sur-
rounding "The Twilight Saga" gets its second
film installment in "New
Moon," carrying on the story
of Bella and Edward's tortured
teen romance. But there's The TWlight
more to these films than sim-
ply retelling the stories of Saga: New
the books. It creates some- Mon
thing new: a crop of talented
teen idols who could become At Quality 16
part of the next generation of and Showcase
A-List Hollywood actors. Summit
Thanks to the juggernaut
commercial success of the
"Twilight" brand, these fresh-faced actors are
breaking out is a big way; Robert Pattinson is
already being compared to James Dean and
Marlon Brando for his cult-like popularity.
The first "Twilight" movie propelled both

Kristen Stewart and Robert Pattinson to super-
stardom, and "New Moon" looks to do the same
with Taylor Lautner, who often appears sans
shirt. Even more than the original "Twilight,"
"New Moon" fetishizes its gorgeous protago-
nists. Human Bella's (Stewart, "Twilight")
obsessive romance with vampire Edward (Pat-
tinson, "Twilight") is based mainly on physical
attraction, and the films reflect that - the stars
are the focal point. Their faces and bodies con-
stantly fill the framte, from Stewart's quizzical
eyebrows to Pattinson's pouty lips and Laut-
ner's washboard abs.
"New Moon" picks up where the first "Twi-
light" left off, with Bella and Edward united
as a blissful couple. But soon, Edward and his
vampire family leave Forks, Wash. for good.
Edward abandons Bella, explaining that rival
vampire clans endanger not only his family's
life, but hers as well. Love-sick Bella becomes
deeply depressed without him, but her friend
Jacob (Lautner, "Twilight") manages to save
her from her own self-destructive urges. Their
friendship gets complicated and Bella becomes
the target of vampire assassins in this more
action-oriented sequel.
Compared to the first filsm, "New Moon" is
more exciting and fast-paced. Action scenes
involving werewolves are the most spectacu-

lar, with CGI work generating convincingly
ferocious jaws and flowing fur. The love tri-
angle makes for some tense moments between
Stewart, Pattinson and Lautner, which suc-
ceed because of appropriately angsty perfor-
mances and natural chemistry. But outside of
the romantically charged moments, the actors
falter. in more banal conversations (most of
the film), they deliver their lines in a halting
manner with overly long pauses. Part of the
blame should go to the script's clunky dialogue
("I belong with you." "No, you don't."). The
narrative are is equally frustrating, as Bella's
behavior is always tear-suicidal, and there's no
forward momentum to the story.
"New Moose" is best when presenting beau-
tiful images other than the actors, like pan-'
orascmic views of mossy temperate rain forests
and dramatic seaside cliffs. It's less adept at
telling a compelling story. The most involving
moments are the brief fireworks of the romance
and action scenes, which use CGI and glossy
close-ups as weapons of choice.
Despite the poor dialogue, the actors occa-
sionally shine. And for fans of the series, "New
Moon" manages a successful adaptation of the
book, capturing its. moods of heartbreak and
anguish. But for those not under author Stepha-
nie Meyer's spell, it could be quite a bore.

live in cynical times.
Our generation was
brought up to question
authority, challenge the status quo
and distrust
other people,
and that's just
the way we are.
And that's cool.
I'm definitely
a sarcastic,
doubtful per-
son myself. But ANDREW
there's some- LAPIN
thing I've been
wondering about us. With the rise
of the Internet as a tool to remove
ourselves from the world through
ironic detachment, is it possible
for any work of culture - like, say,
a movie - to reach us emotionally
anymore?
I gotto thinking about this after
seeingthe new release "Precious,"
which is about an impoverished,
abused, pregnantblack teenager
in Harlem. That's a lot of misery to
squeeze into one film, and maybe
a fault of the movie is that it's too
much to contain. But I'm won-
dering if it nevertheless has the
power to touch us cynical college
students. It's unfortunate, but from
what I've witnessed the past couple
years, I'm inclined to say "no."
My reasoning has to do with
how we approach difficult subject
matter. We laugh atlit. Our tenden-
cy is to turn everything into ajoke,
and that includes ironic, over-he-
top, look-how-offensive-we-are
kinds ofjokes. Maybe humor is
our defense mechanism; maybe
we just don't care about the things
aboutwhich we should care.
In a key scene in "Precious,"
the mother (playedby MoNique)
drops a newborn baby on the floor
of her apartment. Over the top?
Maybe a little, but it's filmed with-
out gratuity; it's an event that hap-
pens during her fit of rage, and it's
meant for give audiences a con-
crete realization of the disturbing
downward spiral of her character.
But who among us hasn't heard at
least one "dead baby" joke before?
You know what I'm talking about.
They're funny because of how
absurd and outrageous it is to joke
about infant mortality. And maybe
I've told a few myself. Butyou
take someone who routinely spills
"dead baby" jokes, sit them down
in front of a movie theater and
play them that scene from "Pre-
cious," and their first instinct is to
laugh. It's funny, right?
OK, so maybe it's not just our
generation that's doingthis. But
we're the ones who are trying to
look at the supposed prudishness
of our prior generations from
the outside. Remember all those
YouTube parodies of "Brokeback
Mountain" from a few years back?
Nobody meant any harm by them
at least, I hope they didn't. It
was just funny to portray C-3P0
and R2-D2 as gay. But it also might
be a sign that the movie didn't
emotionally resonate with us the
way the filmmakers intended.
This is unquestionably the era
of post-modern filmmaking: We're

past the point where we casually
assume all movies are really "hap-
pening," and we're more aware
than ever of the manipulative
devices that actors and directors
employ to win our hearts. The
motives of filmmakers are much
more transparent to us now than
they've ever been with past audi-
ences, whether that's because of
our heightened obsession with
the industry or the increased
self-involvement of the directors
in question. Quentin Tarantino's
"Inglourious Basterds" was essen-
tially an expos6 of techniques
used by wartime propaganda
films, and documentarians like
Michael Moore and Werner Her-
zog love describingtheir film's
emotional hooks to the audience
during their narrations.
So with all this new trans-
parency, we're left with less of
an incentive to get emotionally
wrapped up in a film's story. It's
hard to clap for a magician when
you already know his tricks, it's
true. And this plays a big part
in our newfound celluloid cyni-
cism. But if we're not careful, this
immediate impulse to pick apart
and mock every movie could per-
manently transform the ways we
watch and respond to films.
Now, obviously the filmmak-
ers themselves should be charged
with making us care. If their
old techniques of emotional
manipulation are becoming too
see-through, they need to think
of some new ones. "Brokeback"
was so easy to parody because all
Ending celluloid
cynicism.
the hallmarks of a grand romantic
epic - the picturesque landscapes,
the swelling music, the tearful
confessions - were already there.
And ina few months, it's not hard
to imagine Mo'Nique's baby-drop-
ping in "Precious" making the
YouTube rounds as well.
But a lot of this lies on us too.
We can't keep arrogantly distanc-
ing ourselves from every work
of art that comes along. If that is
where we're heading, I want to
discover one simple thingbefore
the how-we-view-movies mind-
shift is complete: What was the
last movie you saw that reached
you in a really meaningful way?
Which of film's most recent
endeavors penetrated your own
defenses, so that you weren't
focused on any unintentional
comedy or on the director's short-
comings, but only focused on the
characters and situations that
were being depicted in front of you
with utmost sincerity? It's an hon-
est question. I want to know if I'm
exaggeratingclaims of our genera-
tion's cynicism. Prove me wrong.
Lapin has tons of "dead baby"
jokes he wants to tell you. E-mail him
at alapin@umichedu to hear them.

John M er typical 'Battle'

By LEAH BURGIN
Daily Arts Writer
Despite John Mayer's claims
that his new-
est album would
deviate from his ***
older work and
exhibit some John Mayer
experimentation, Battle Studies
Battle Studies .m
does not live up Calambia
to this prelude
- it's about 45 minutes of Mayer's
usual defining vocals and tradi-
tional blues-rock-pop sound. In
fact, one of the only bold moves
Mayer made for Battle Studies was
donning a new, gravity-defying
hairstyle for the album cover.
But as single "Who Says"
demonstrates, the conventional
approach works for Mayer. Blas,
honest and simple, "Who Says"
dares the world to try and control
Mayer if he wants to "plan a trip to
Japan alone" or just "get stoned."
His sultry vocals and bouncy, teas-
ing guitar twangs play off each
other in a classic Mayer fashion.
His comfort with this style is evi-
dent - the combination works, he
knows it and it comes through in
the genuine nature of the tune.
Jaunty "Half of My Heart" fur-
ther exhibits Mayer in his element.
Featuring delicate embellish-
ments on electric guitar and in the
backup vocals of Taylor Swift (her

voice echoing Mayer's repetitive
declarations that he "can't stop
loving you"), "Half of My Heart"
stays true to Mayer's style, and its
unvarying acoustic guitar melody
never gets boring.
"Perfectly Lonely" and "Friends,
Lovers or Nothing" similarly pres-
ent Mayer at his best, adding more
electric guitar and keyboards to
the usual acoustic guitar and drum
formula. The dense instrumenta-
tion on the track contrasts with
Mayer's straightforward vocal
tone and message ("Friends, lov-
ers, or nothing / We'll never be
the in between / so give it up") in a
powerful way.
Some tracks, like "Edge of
Desire" and "Do You Know Me,"
demonstrate what happens to a
song when the balance between.

Mayer's
tion go
Mo
higi
an ince
from M
You Kn
from an
bal - th
and hu
overpos

s vocals and instrumenta-
es askew. In the former,
notonous, but
hly listenable.
ssant hi-hat heat detracts
layer's lilting vocals. "Do
ow Me" similarly suffers
n overuse of crash cym-
he intricate guitar medley
sky, low-range vocals are
wered by the obnoxiously

"Why has my Edward Cullen still not come for me?"
constant brushed-cynbal sound. be reined back in - it consumes
In both songs, the omission or Mayer, who does not alter his
reduction of the percussion ele- singing style to compete with the
ments could have allowed these monster he created.
tracks to breathe. What is particularly unsatis-
But no song destroys the Mayer fying about Battle Studies is its
sound as completely as "Assas- clunky pacing -Mayer clumps the
sins." Beginning with a repeti- good tracks.in the middle of the
tive and stagnant plinking sound album and encircles them with sig-
of a thumb piano, "Assassins" nificantly weaker material. In this
progresses into an unsettling sense, the standout songs become
rhythm that, when combined unjustly strangled by the less-
with heavy and distorted guitar worthy numbers. A simple rear-
melodies, Mayer cannot ground rangement of the album could have
with his mellow vocals. The ren- made Battle Studies more pleasant
egade instrumentation takes con- to listen to - after all, a bold new
trol, runs rampant and cannot hairstyle can't carry everything.

University of Michigan's
Largest
Selection of REALTY
Units Availableformmmediate Oc...pany
Off Campnus Now Leasing for 2010-2011
HUouses up to 14 bedrooms
gousin Church St.17341 995-5200
Ho uw rchrealtyco cor

ARTS IN BRIEF

TV REVIW
Doing your own stunts
isn't always enough
"Super Dave's Spike-tacular"
Tuesdays at 9 p.m.
Spike
"Super Dave's Spike-tacular" promises "the
best half hour of television ever" within the
first minute of its premiere. Well, bad things
happen to shows that lie, but karma concerns
must've been ignored by the macho man's
channel that is Spike. Because it's aware of its
flippant tone, this "Spike-tacular" stunt show
is a truthful tribute that's only for the old guys.
- the nostalgia seekers of the world.

The headline "Spike-tacular" guarantees
American-dream stunt mayhem: red-wite-
and-blue scantily clad women and plenty
of testosterone. Bob Einstein ('Curb Your
Enthusiasm") plays Super Dave Osbourn, the
confident, cool yet clumsy stuntman. Though
Super Dave often gets injured when his stunts
go awry, "Spike-tacular" fails to deliver the
raw action that compels fist pumps and high
fives from dudes everywhere. In each of the
stunt's opening sequences, Super Dave is
either squashed by a horribly computer-gener-
ated demolition ball or blown up in a race car
before it can happen. But there's not even any
blood or guts, man!
The tacky stunts in "Super Dave" are as
stock as the stupid drunk exploits found on
YouTube, lN fact, it's hard to remember this
is an actual show and not some dude taping
a slow-speed chase through empty streets.

"Spike-tacular" is really a mock reality show
in this sense, and it doesn't take itself serious-
ly. in order to extract any enjoyment, its audi-
ence must do the same.
Look, Super Dave was born in 1942 and he
doesn't have to obey the rules. He's an old-
fashioned stuntman, and when that's taken
into consideration, the lame jokes and awk-
ward humor transform into sympathetically
cute grasedpa-esque TV.
There are only four episodes of the "Spike-
tacular," and it's worth it to watch one of
them, laugh at the stupidity and compare how
its special effects rival those done on iMovie.
Super Dave knows this isn't the best half hour
on television, but grandpas also know their
grandkids aren't the cutest kids ever. Some-
times a lie can be soup for the soul, and Super
Dave does his best to keep it well fed.
CRISTINA ANGER

A I