I had the pleasure of seeing some pretty inspiring movies in the last few days: Following Sean, Billy the Kid, and Local Color.
FOLLOWING SEAN is one of those documentaries that felt like a Jóhann Jóhannson composition, slowly building and becoming louder and more complex, until it suddenly ends and you're kind of overwhelmed by this hugeness in front of you. Maybe not all his works, but the best. I didn't know what I was watching at first or where I was going. There are tons of momentum shifts, time shifts, but everything feels right. It's linear a way, but you don't really know how it us or why it is until the end. It's really a film that creeps up from under you. I found it to be ultimately... filmed by someone with a beating heart, for one. A friend who was describing a poet recently said, "It doesn't feel like a human's behind the words; it feels like ghosts." So many poems feel like that, and some on purpose I suppose, but this was the complete opposite. It reminded me a bit of STONE READER in the sense of the quest, and of CAPTURING THE FRIEDMANS for its use of older footage, not originally sought out for use in the film. I felt I was a better person after seeing it. It sounds saccharine but it's true. It's a film that feels silly to even begin to describe, and if you don't get it you may turn it off. But it clicked for me. There's so much I could say about it, but I won't try. See it. Not only that, but I didn't know who Lori McKenna was, and her amazingly beautiful song, "Never Die Young," runs with the credits. Her voice reminds me a bit of Sally Ellyson from Hem, who also has one of the most amazing voices I've ever heard.
BILLY THE KID was a movie I'd seen a trailer for, and it didn't disappoint. It's basically about a kid who's a sophomore in high school and gets followed around by a camera. Again, the reviews were mixed, and I can see why, but ultimately I found it to be completely interesting. You can tell he's borderline genius with the things he says, and there were moments I wanted to be that age again. I think it's essentially a movie about young love, but through some alternate sense of anything most of us have ever known. He's not your average high school sophomore, and you can tell he's something special. It's another oddly inspiring movie by the end. I'm having a lot of trouble making any semblance of a connection with my own words, which is another reason it just needs to be viewed.
LOCAL COLOR, like SNOW ANGELS, is a script that could've been made into a shitty Lifetime movie in the wrong hands, and you may say it is, in fact, pretty much a Lifetime movie. I think despite the possibly maudlin and predictable nature, I found it all to be enjoyable because I seem naturally to compare all art to poetry: painting, music, fiction, everything. I think most poets are biased toward the notion that poetry can be found in everything, but no other art can singularly claim that as far as I'm concerned. I find myself relating to Trevor Morgan's character (who I saw something in in OFF THE BLACK, even though the movie was a watered-down -- with more narrative -- David Gordon Green flick, complete with stolen cinematographer Tim Orr): wanting to learn and knowing it may take a while to realize why I'm doing what I do. The script is predictable, but there's something I like about it so much, for all the reasons I won't be able to explain.
I don't know if this post makes any sense.
But I still feel like I not only have so much to learn, but there's so much I want to learn, before I get older and jaded and bad shit happens to the point where I don't want to think about art in the least. I hope that never happens, but unfortunately it does for some.
I've probably written about it before, but when Phil Levine was here my first semester at VCU a few years ago, he said, about Larry Levis, and I'm paraphrasing: "Even when he was going through awful things in life, he never stopped writing." I remember so much about that moment, even where people were sitting, people who I haven't seen since that hour in that room with no windows open.
I can't say anything else right now without sounding like someone who can't even tell you what time it is.
Showing posts with label david gordon green. Show all posts
Showing posts with label david gordon green. Show all posts
Wednesday, November 19, 2008
Tuesday, September 23, 2008
Ballast
When I saw a still from Ballast as one of the Sundance movies a year or two ago, I thought it was striking. When I found out more about it, I was even more excited.
The trailer was finally put up a few days ago, and immediately after seeing it, just the trailer, my thought was, "I really can't see how this won't be making an appearance on my favorite 100 movies list once the next one is constructed."
Immediately many directors came to mind: The Dardenne Brothers, David Gordon Green, Terrence Malick, Charles Burnett, Ed Radtke, and Lynne Ramsay. If that's not worthy of jaw-dropping awe, then I don't know what is.
The movie opens in New York October 1st, so if you live there, see it. And if you see it, you should let me know about it.
Can't wait until I do.
*
In a post titled "The Good, the bad, the numbers," Leslie Harrison talks about some interesting manuscript-related things, most which seem important, at least to me.
Here's one of the excerpts:
Number of contests this manuscript got sent to: 6.
Number of years I worked on this ms before sending it anywhere: 8.
Number of poems from this ms published in journals prior to its winning: Umm, maybe 8.
The second and third lines of that are very good to know, mainly the fact that she worked on it for eight years before it was sent out. I thought about my own, and I realized that technically it's been worked on for about two years, mainly because even the published poems -- almost every single one I think -- I wrote my first two years of my MFA either weren't good enough, or they didn't fit, or were never a part of the manuscript from the beginning.
That said, and as I've said before, I think it's ready to go now. Every unsigned "Dear Poet, this manuscript blows. Enclosed are the ashes left from the fire in the bucket we used to burn it." I'm kidding of course, and the great thing about rejections are they push you to make a better manuscript, or better poems. That's what every one did for mine. Without them, and without having sent it out to all those contests, I wouldn't have been as furious when it came to changing things.
I also feel like I could spend another X amount of years on it, and it wouldn't change much at all. Another good sign I hope that it's legitimately ready. It's a book now. It wasn't when it was getting the few placing nods it got about a year ago, and still, the fact that it was placing also made me work harder. And even though I'm sending it out, it may take another five years. I really hope it doesn't, but be that as it may, I'm still trying to work on new stuff and get away from a lot of the types of poems that comprise GHOST LIGHTS.
But I think it's important for folks like myself to look at the time Leslie spent on her manuscript. In the world of tons of new journals and MFA programs now, don't tell me that there aren't those racing to get a career and put a book out. Then again, it's probably been like that for a while. Yet there are also folks that are making sure there book is as solid as it can be before they send it out. Giving. It. Time. I did things differently, and we all do, but I always like hearing things like that -- and find them kind of fascinating, because I'm more of a nerd probably than I'd like to admit -- in blog posts from poets.
*
Since there's going to be a July wedding in 2009 for Jess and myself, we're trying to get as much clutter out of already fairly clutter-free apartment, even though Jess would probably complain that it's all my stuff comprising the clutter. Moving's going to be a bitch anyway, but trying to do some things now will save a lot of hassle.
One of the most contributing factors is the amount of paper journals and magazines I have.
When I first got to Richmond I decided that if I was going to try to publish poems, I should buy some subscriptions to journals. This was a great idea, and a very helpful and instructional one. However, after a few years, they added up, since most of them are thicker and wider than actual books. Not to mention the small stack I have going of issues I'm appearing in. I'm not Bob Hicok, so I don't have many to speak of, but hopefully the list keeps growing as the years go on.
My question is: What's the proper way to get rid of them? I don't want to throw them out, but there are too many to keep and have around, especially since I won't be returning to almost all of them. I think they could help folks who are curious about publishing, since the reason I did get all the subscriptions was to not only read them, but to see what they looked like, how they felt in my hand, what kind of covers they had, and of course what they were publishing to see if I had a chance to get in there with my own work.
Like I said: I don't want to throw them away, but I want to make sure they're going to go somewhere people will have access to them, either by reading them or taking them for free. I'm done with them, and even though they're a few years old, they're still good for reference at the very least I'd imagine, and in many cases the journals have the same editors and aesthetic.
Let me know if you know what would be a good idea, or if you have experience with this. I don't need money for them and don't expect it, but "donating" doesn't always translate into something that makes people happy. Meaning: I want them to be used, for whatever reason, by people. Not get taken as a donation and thrown in the back alley for the garbage truck to collect, when I could've done that myself.
*
It was Finland's second school massacre in less than a year and the two attacks had eerie similarities. Both gunmen posted violent clips on YouTube prior to the massacres, both were fascinated by the 1999 Columbine school shootings in Colorado, both attacked their own schools and both died after shooting themselves in the head.
I still can't believe things happen like this. I almost can't comprehend it. Like everything occurred in a language I will never understand.
The trailer was finally put up a few days ago, and immediately after seeing it, just the trailer, my thought was, "I really can't see how this won't be making an appearance on my favorite 100 movies list once the next one is constructed."
Immediately many directors came to mind: The Dardenne Brothers, David Gordon Green, Terrence Malick, Charles Burnett, Ed Radtke, and Lynne Ramsay. If that's not worthy of jaw-dropping awe, then I don't know what is.
The movie opens in New York October 1st, so if you live there, see it. And if you see it, you should let me know about it.
Can't wait until I do.
*
In a post titled "The Good, the bad, the numbers," Leslie Harrison talks about some interesting manuscript-related things, most which seem important, at least to me.
Here's one of the excerpts:
Number of contests this manuscript got sent to: 6.
Number of years I worked on this ms before sending it anywhere: 8.
Number of poems from this ms published in journals prior to its winning: Umm, maybe 8.
The second and third lines of that are very good to know, mainly the fact that she worked on it for eight years before it was sent out. I thought about my own, and I realized that technically it's been worked on for about two years, mainly because even the published poems -- almost every single one I think -- I wrote my first two years of my MFA either weren't good enough, or they didn't fit, or were never a part of the manuscript from the beginning.
That said, and as I've said before, I think it's ready to go now. Every unsigned "Dear Poet, this manuscript blows. Enclosed are the ashes left from the fire in the bucket we used to burn it." I'm kidding of course, and the great thing about rejections are they push you to make a better manuscript, or better poems. That's what every one did for mine. Without them, and without having sent it out to all those contests, I wouldn't have been as furious when it came to changing things.
I also feel like I could spend another X amount of years on it, and it wouldn't change much at all. Another good sign I hope that it's legitimately ready. It's a book now. It wasn't when it was getting the few placing nods it got about a year ago, and still, the fact that it was placing also made me work harder. And even though I'm sending it out, it may take another five years. I really hope it doesn't, but be that as it may, I'm still trying to work on new stuff and get away from a lot of the types of poems that comprise GHOST LIGHTS.
But I think it's important for folks like myself to look at the time Leslie spent on her manuscript. In the world of tons of new journals and MFA programs now, don't tell me that there aren't those racing to get a career and put a book out. Then again, it's probably been like that for a while. Yet there are also folks that are making sure there book is as solid as it can be before they send it out. Giving. It. Time. I did things differently, and we all do, but I always like hearing things like that -- and find them kind of fascinating, because I'm more of a nerd probably than I'd like to admit -- in blog posts from poets.
*
Since there's going to be a July wedding in 2009 for Jess and myself, we're trying to get as much clutter out of already fairly clutter-free apartment, even though Jess would probably complain that it's all my stuff comprising the clutter. Moving's going to be a bitch anyway, but trying to do some things now will save a lot of hassle.
One of the most contributing factors is the amount of paper journals and magazines I have.
When I first got to Richmond I decided that if I was going to try to publish poems, I should buy some subscriptions to journals. This was a great idea, and a very helpful and instructional one. However, after a few years, they added up, since most of them are thicker and wider than actual books. Not to mention the small stack I have going of issues I'm appearing in. I'm not Bob Hicok, so I don't have many to speak of, but hopefully the list keeps growing as the years go on.
My question is: What's the proper way to get rid of them? I don't want to throw them out, but there are too many to keep and have around, especially since I won't be returning to almost all of them. I think they could help folks who are curious about publishing, since the reason I did get all the subscriptions was to not only read them, but to see what they looked like, how they felt in my hand, what kind of covers they had, and of course what they were publishing to see if I had a chance to get in there with my own work.
Like I said: I don't want to throw them away, but I want to make sure they're going to go somewhere people will have access to them, either by reading them or taking them for free. I'm done with them, and even though they're a few years old, they're still good for reference at the very least I'd imagine, and in many cases the journals have the same editors and aesthetic.
Let me know if you know what would be a good idea, or if you have experience with this. I don't need money for them and don't expect it, but "donating" doesn't always translate into something that makes people happy. Meaning: I want them to be used, for whatever reason, by people. Not get taken as a donation and thrown in the back alley for the garbage truck to collect, when I could've done that myself.
*
It was Finland's second school massacre in less than a year and the two attacks had eerie similarities. Both gunmen posted violent clips on YouTube prior to the massacres, both were fascinated by the 1999 Columbine school shootings in Colorado, both attacked their own schools and both died after shooting themselves in the head.
I still can't believe things happen like this. I almost can't comprehend it. Like everything occurred in a language I will never understand.
Wednesday, September 10, 2008
Open Windows
It's been hot in Richmond lately, hot enough where the air conditioning has to be on, at least for me. And I can sometimes sweat in the air conditioning. That said, this is the first day in a while that I've had the windows open, and it's amazing how quickly you can feel something ineffable by breathing in fresh air versus conditioned recycled air, especially everything from the trees, the restaurants, even the heady smells of garbage waft in sometimes, becoming oddly comforting. Fall is my favorite time of the year. It's the best beer season, where summer seasonals and Maibocks turn into Russian Imperial Stouts and Barley Wines, where the windows can be open all the time, and if you're cold you can throw the covers on top of you and hear the drunken meanderings of people at 3 in the morning down the sidestreets, the interminable wails of fire trucks and police cars. I'm more calm and more inspired. Usually. I hardly wrote this summer, and if the bug doesn't get me, it doesn't get me, especially with the busy year ahead. And fall technically hasn't even begun yet.
*
Snow Angels is officially released Tuesday on DVD. Finally. Like many others, however, I already downloaded it and watched it. Then soon after I watched it again. I slept for the first time yesterday in 48 hours last night, something I'd never done. While it was downloading, I told myself I'd fall asleep and watch it in the morning. Knowing it would probably be done in a few hours, however, that made me even more awake. I'll always be a kid on Christmas for those kinds of things. And when I woke up around 4:15 to see that it had finished, I immediately watched it, and finished it when Jess was just getting up to go to work.
When I met David Gordon Green in April of 2006, when he and Brad Land were in Durham talking about the then-imminent Goat, (which has now been taken over by Jeff Nichols, director of the amazing Shotgun Stories) I was more interested in Snow Angels. The novel is set in and around Butler, Pennsylvania, which is within an hour of my hometown in western Pennsylvania. I think everyone in the audience could've given a shit when I asked why he didn't film it there, making it more authentic, but the first thing I'll say for the movie is that I believed it was western Pennsylvania. The snow. The farmland. The dull-ish looking houses. The neighborhoods. The high school. Maybe that was the point: it could be anywhere with snow. But it was filmed in Halifax and Noca Scotia, and maybe you, esteemed film watcher, could guess easily it's Canada and doubt the rest of the movie because of that. But it felt like Pennsylvania to me, had all the grittiness of the cold, starting your car in the morning, bundling up (even though I never bundled up, which is another reason I almost died after chugging vodka in the woods by the high school bleachers during a football game when I was 14, which oddly enough seems like yesterday with how clear some of the flashes are from that night), everything about the cold. I was fooled. I felt I was in Butler. Or near Slippery Rock. Or driving to Meadville through Conneaut Lake to get to Allegheny. The location, like all of David's movies (even the L.A. in Pineapple Express to a certain degree) becomes another main character.
But even beyond that, so much was real to me. Many viewers hate his scripts, or somehow think they aren't believable, that the little tics and beats and pauses of the characters are forced, when truly they're anything but. Finally he's made indie movies (and there are others, just not many) that can be something that's not forced, but something utterly believable and in its own little world. The characters are amazing, the situations are amazing, the acting is amazing. There are scenes of bizarre weirdness and "huh?" moments, but then you realize you've been in situations like that -- you just didn't deem them important in any way, or take any stock in the things that people have sometimes said in the past, because then they didn't matter or seem of any validity or importance.
There isn't one moment where something's not engaging. And I'm not sure I've ever seen young love portrayed so emotionally and beautifully before. One of the reasons why the movie didn't do all that well (at least in theaters; I hope the DVD audiences are much more aware) is because too many people don't like reality or haven't experienced it, have lived cookie cutter lives or relationshops, have never been honest. We've all been guilty of semblances of such lives at the very least, but there's really nowhere to hide from it in this film.
Plus, near the end there's an original Explosions in the Sky song, "What Happens After," that's over one of the most beautiful and heartbreaking scenes ever put to celluloid. And the soundtrack throughout by David Wingo and Jeff McIlwain is pitch perfect, going under the radar when there's prominent dialogue, swelling in warranted moments of crisis.
I feel like this is a movie where they can be no opinion, no Randy Jackson-like, "It was just aight fo' me tonight, dawg. It was just aight fo' me..." You're either going to get it or you're not, whether you're 18 or 88. If you don't get it, I won't hold it against you, and if you want to call me a conceited asshole because I say such a thing, I could really care less. I've experienced one of the most beautiful and true pieces of art I've ever seen in my life, and it will be timeless, something that will be as ripe in 2040 as it is in 2008, and beyond.
See this movie. Watch it with the lights off. Watch it with no distractions. Watch it again.
*
Snow Angels is officially released Tuesday on DVD. Finally. Like many others, however, I already downloaded it and watched it. Then soon after I watched it again. I slept for the first time yesterday in 48 hours last night, something I'd never done. While it was downloading, I told myself I'd fall asleep and watch it in the morning. Knowing it would probably be done in a few hours, however, that made me even more awake. I'll always be a kid on Christmas for those kinds of things. And when I woke up around 4:15 to see that it had finished, I immediately watched it, and finished it when Jess was just getting up to go to work.
When I met David Gordon Green in April of 2006, when he and Brad Land were in Durham talking about the then-imminent Goat, (which has now been taken over by Jeff Nichols, director of the amazing Shotgun Stories) I was more interested in Snow Angels. The novel is set in and around Butler, Pennsylvania, which is within an hour of my hometown in western Pennsylvania. I think everyone in the audience could've given a shit when I asked why he didn't film it there, making it more authentic, but the first thing I'll say for the movie is that I believed it was western Pennsylvania. The snow. The farmland. The dull-ish looking houses. The neighborhoods. The high school. Maybe that was the point: it could be anywhere with snow. But it was filmed in Halifax and Noca Scotia, and maybe you, esteemed film watcher, could guess easily it's Canada and doubt the rest of the movie because of that. But it felt like Pennsylvania to me, had all the grittiness of the cold, starting your car in the morning, bundling up (even though I never bundled up, which is another reason I almost died after chugging vodka in the woods by the high school bleachers during a football game when I was 14, which oddly enough seems like yesterday with how clear some of the flashes are from that night), everything about the cold. I was fooled. I felt I was in Butler. Or near Slippery Rock. Or driving to Meadville through Conneaut Lake to get to Allegheny. The location, like all of David's movies (even the L.A. in Pineapple Express to a certain degree) becomes another main character.
But even beyond that, so much was real to me. Many viewers hate his scripts, or somehow think they aren't believable, that the little tics and beats and pauses of the characters are forced, when truly they're anything but. Finally he's made indie movies (and there are others, just not many) that can be something that's not forced, but something utterly believable and in its own little world. The characters are amazing, the situations are amazing, the acting is amazing. There are scenes of bizarre weirdness and "huh?" moments, but then you realize you've been in situations like that -- you just didn't deem them important in any way, or take any stock in the things that people have sometimes said in the past, because then they didn't matter or seem of any validity or importance.
There isn't one moment where something's not engaging. And I'm not sure I've ever seen young love portrayed so emotionally and beautifully before. One of the reasons why the movie didn't do all that well (at least in theaters; I hope the DVD audiences are much more aware) is because too many people don't like reality or haven't experienced it, have lived cookie cutter lives or relationshops, have never been honest. We've all been guilty of semblances of such lives at the very least, but there's really nowhere to hide from it in this film.
Plus, near the end there's an original Explosions in the Sky song, "What Happens After," that's over one of the most beautiful and heartbreaking scenes ever put to celluloid. And the soundtrack throughout by David Wingo and Jeff McIlwain is pitch perfect, going under the radar when there's prominent dialogue, swelling in warranted moments of crisis.
I feel like this is a movie where they can be no opinion, no Randy Jackson-like, "It was just aight fo' me tonight, dawg. It was just aight fo' me..." You're either going to get it or you're not, whether you're 18 or 88. If you don't get it, I won't hold it against you, and if you want to call me a conceited asshole because I say such a thing, I could really care less. I've experienced one of the most beautiful and true pieces of art I've ever seen in my life, and it will be timeless, something that will be as ripe in 2040 as it is in 2008, and beyond.
See this movie. Watch it with the lights off. Watch it with no distractions. Watch it again.
Sunday, August 3, 2008
Sunday
The Pineapple Express was great. Sean informed me after we got out of the theater that, "They give more tickets away than they have seats for," since he's been to advance screenings before. I'm glad that happened after we saw the movie, even though there were still a decent amount of seats left. And funnily enough we couldn't take our cell phones in. Mine's so old I can't even take video. Is it really going to help the movie to not leak? And a clip that's a minute and a half on YouTube? People will still see it.
There were nods to Knocked Up, Ding-A-Ling-Less (and a quick Robert Longstreet cameo at the beginning), George Washington ("You gotta be the dumbest motherfucker in captivity," though in the aforementioned it's sans curse), and probably a few others. Admittedly, it was much weirder than I thought it was going to be. Yes, much of it seemed improvised. It's Seth Rogan, so he kind of plays the same deadbeat type of character too. James Franco's pretty hilarious, and Craig Robinson has a pretty hilarious supporting role. Danny McBride, a la the All the Real Girls deleted scenes, really gets to have his moments, and I imagine people may get a bit tired of it, but so much was ridiculous and hilarious. But you have to live in the world. The story pretty much couldn't happen in real life, so you're either along for the ride or you're not. I found myself laughing out loud at some stuff and being pretty much the only person in the theater laughing, which I oddly find welcoming when such a thing happens.
I'll see it again probably when my brothers are down here next weekend, depending on how we feel I suppose, but I'm sure it'll happen at some point.
Speaking of David Gordon Green, Snow Angels finally has a DVD release date of September 16th. The bad news is it seems ludicrously bare-bones. Three commentaries for his previous films, and now they have nothing? No featurette? Not even one deleted scene? I don't care too much since it'll be my first time actually seeing the movie. But I expected more. It's still pre-order city for me though.
*
Over 20 poets with first books (and some with more) have volunteered to participate in the continuation of the first book interviews. Many have been nice enough to send their books also, for those poets whose books I don't already own. Unfortunately I don't have the extra few hundred bones to purchase as many first books as I'd like to compensate for all the poets deciding to do this. And I don't think everyone wants to see the exact same questions answered, though many will be repeated in each interview of course.
Hopefully the first one will be posted by the end of August, but I might wait until September. It works both ways, meaning I can send all I want, but if folks are busy and need some time to get the interviews back, I want to already have a good amount before I post so I can post them semi-regularly and have some kind of schedule. I'll keep interested parties updated.
*
I didn't start this blog to bitch or enter into arguments or anything, but there are a few things that have not been leaving my head lately, and I want to enter into this conversation. A few weeks ago Eduardo posted about having some pet peeves about poet bios: one being Pushcart nominations, and the other with "prize-winning poet" attached. Then Steve Schroeder chimed in with poets talking about where their books have placed as either a finalist or semi-finalist in contests.
I agree with the fact that "prize-winning poet" is a bit lame, since the prize could be something you won only within your MFA program, with you and four others. However, I'm fine with the other two points of interest in a bio. Here's why.
As far as the Pushcart nominations go, for a beginning poet like myself (I've been writing seriously for only about two years, if that), I think it's something that can make editors take a second look at your work. Am I asking that they spend hours upon hours pouring over my work? No. But as long as you're semi-humbling on your cover letter, that could something that they may be interested to know. Again, you're probably not shouting it from the rooftops, but on a blog or cover letter? Sure, why not?
And yes, with so many online journals, it's easiER to get nominated, but it still isn't necessarily easy (unless you have an "in" with the editor that actually helps get you nominated). You have to get published for one. Secondly they're probably going to pick some fiction in there too, out of, I think six total? But to be among the crop of work they liked the most and, ideally, have the most faith in it as far as it being picked in a pool of thousands of pieces of writing (meaning the actual Pushcart judging), I think that's a nice thing to be a part of. Both of my nominations were from online journals. I knew I didn't have a chance in hell, and they probably thought I didn't either, but for someone who had really just started taking writing and publishing seriously, and to have them be some of the first poems I published, again, I was pretty honored to be among their choices.
I've since taken the nominations off my bio and cover letter, but I don't see the problem with it on there if you choose to go that route. Some writers have been nominated over twenty times, some probably over fifty. And some will die with multiple books out without a Pushcart. I've never read or have even seen a physical Pushcart anthology anyway. So why gripe about such a harmless inclusion on someone's bio in the first place?
As far as the book length manuscript contest placings go, I also think that's good information to know, whether you're an editor or a general reader. That may be something editors want to know. If they don't: fine. If they want to shred my submission on general principle because they think I'm trying to sound like a badass (which, laughably, I'm not, and I don't think anyone else is assuming such by placing that within their bio or cover letter either): fine. If they could give two shits but still end up liking the work: fine. But for me, if I like the said poet's work and read where they've placed in a manuscript contest in their contributor notes, and / or if I think I have something in common with them as far as their writing goes, I'd be more apt to send to that contest if I had a first book I'm sending out, and I currently do. The same screeners may like my work also. Plus, there are some contests I've initially found out about through seeing those bios.
Now Steve's been an editor at a few places, and he's seeing many submissions I imagine, so I'm sure he's not the only one with those gripes. Also, I imagine there are some folks with needlessly and hysterically ostentatious 25-line bios, and that may be where all the pet peeves stem from.
But again, I just don't get all the hostility, and I see this bitching from people on different blogs, at different times, continually -- enough to have me sit down and write about it, as long as I've taken to do it -- whether it's all in good fun or not.
I guess I could go into a rant on how annoying it is to see how many residencies people have gotten. Why do I care about that? Many people get them, tons of those fellows and scholars still never publish books, and tons of people who don't deserve to go end up going. It's all about the folks reading the applications. And for the record, I've never applied for one and don't plan on applying soon. But if I had a recent residency at Yaddo would I mention it on my bio? Sure. Do we need to know, however, that after fifteen residences you still don't have a book out? Nope.
Again, I'm not trying to start some big altercation, or any semblance of an altercation, and I don't think anyone reads this in the first place, but I wanted to say my peace since it's been in my head for a long time. I think if more people concentrated on the work, though, both with reading others' and writing their own, there would be less attention toward bios in the first place, since we all know they are -- or should be -- of little importance on a cover letter or blog or website.
I'm not an "editor," (though that's becoming more of a stock footage term these days anyway) and I've never been, but I always hope if I get something published -- whether it's from an online journal hosted by Geocities or the New Yorker -- that it's from the opinion of that editor that they like it and want to publish it. And if somehow a Pushcart nomination comes from it, then thank you very much.
There were nods to Knocked Up, Ding-A-Ling-Less (and a quick Robert Longstreet cameo at the beginning), George Washington ("You gotta be the dumbest motherfucker in captivity," though in the aforementioned it's sans curse), and probably a few others. Admittedly, it was much weirder than I thought it was going to be. Yes, much of it seemed improvised. It's Seth Rogan, so he kind of plays the same deadbeat type of character too. James Franco's pretty hilarious, and Craig Robinson has a pretty hilarious supporting role. Danny McBride, a la the All the Real Girls deleted scenes, really gets to have his moments, and I imagine people may get a bit tired of it, but so much was ridiculous and hilarious. But you have to live in the world. The story pretty much couldn't happen in real life, so you're either along for the ride or you're not. I found myself laughing out loud at some stuff and being pretty much the only person in the theater laughing, which I oddly find welcoming when such a thing happens.
I'll see it again probably when my brothers are down here next weekend, depending on how we feel I suppose, but I'm sure it'll happen at some point.
Speaking of David Gordon Green, Snow Angels finally has a DVD release date of September 16th. The bad news is it seems ludicrously bare-bones. Three commentaries for his previous films, and now they have nothing? No featurette? Not even one deleted scene? I don't care too much since it'll be my first time actually seeing the movie. But I expected more. It's still pre-order city for me though.
*
Over 20 poets with first books (and some with more) have volunteered to participate in the continuation of the first book interviews. Many have been nice enough to send their books also, for those poets whose books I don't already own. Unfortunately I don't have the extra few hundred bones to purchase as many first books as I'd like to compensate for all the poets deciding to do this. And I don't think everyone wants to see the exact same questions answered, though many will be repeated in each interview of course.
Hopefully the first one will be posted by the end of August, but I might wait until September. It works both ways, meaning I can send all I want, but if folks are busy and need some time to get the interviews back, I want to already have a good amount before I post so I can post them semi-regularly and have some kind of schedule. I'll keep interested parties updated.
*
I didn't start this blog to bitch or enter into arguments or anything, but there are a few things that have not been leaving my head lately, and I want to enter into this conversation. A few weeks ago Eduardo posted about having some pet peeves about poet bios: one being Pushcart nominations, and the other with "prize-winning poet" attached. Then Steve Schroeder chimed in with poets talking about where their books have placed as either a finalist or semi-finalist in contests.
I agree with the fact that "prize-winning poet" is a bit lame, since the prize could be something you won only within your MFA program, with you and four others. However, I'm fine with the other two points of interest in a bio. Here's why.
As far as the Pushcart nominations go, for a beginning poet like myself (I've been writing seriously for only about two years, if that), I think it's something that can make editors take a second look at your work. Am I asking that they spend hours upon hours pouring over my work? No. But as long as you're semi-humbling on your cover letter, that could something that they may be interested to know. Again, you're probably not shouting it from the rooftops, but on a blog or cover letter? Sure, why not?
And yes, with so many online journals, it's easiER to get nominated, but it still isn't necessarily easy (unless you have an "in" with the editor that actually helps get you nominated). You have to get published for one. Secondly they're probably going to pick some fiction in there too, out of, I think six total? But to be among the crop of work they liked the most and, ideally, have the most faith in it as far as it being picked in a pool of thousands of pieces of writing (meaning the actual Pushcart judging), I think that's a nice thing to be a part of. Both of my nominations were from online journals. I knew I didn't have a chance in hell, and they probably thought I didn't either, but for someone who had really just started taking writing and publishing seriously, and to have them be some of the first poems I published, again, I was pretty honored to be among their choices.
I've since taken the nominations off my bio and cover letter, but I don't see the problem with it on there if you choose to go that route. Some writers have been nominated over twenty times, some probably over fifty. And some will die with multiple books out without a Pushcart. I've never read or have even seen a physical Pushcart anthology anyway. So why gripe about such a harmless inclusion on someone's bio in the first place?
As far as the book length manuscript contest placings go, I also think that's good information to know, whether you're an editor or a general reader. That may be something editors want to know. If they don't: fine. If they want to shred my submission on general principle because they think I'm trying to sound like a badass (which, laughably, I'm not, and I don't think anyone else is assuming such by placing that within their bio or cover letter either): fine. If they could give two shits but still end up liking the work: fine. But for me, if I like the said poet's work and read where they've placed in a manuscript contest in their contributor notes, and / or if I think I have something in common with them as far as their writing goes, I'd be more apt to send to that contest if I had a first book I'm sending out, and I currently do. The same screeners may like my work also. Plus, there are some contests I've initially found out about through seeing those bios.
Now Steve's been an editor at a few places, and he's seeing many submissions I imagine, so I'm sure he's not the only one with those gripes. Also, I imagine there are some folks with needlessly and hysterically ostentatious 25-line bios, and that may be where all the pet peeves stem from.
But again, I just don't get all the hostility, and I see this bitching from people on different blogs, at different times, continually -- enough to have me sit down and write about it, as long as I've taken to do it -- whether it's all in good fun or not.
I guess I could go into a rant on how annoying it is to see how many residencies people have gotten. Why do I care about that? Many people get them, tons of those fellows and scholars still never publish books, and tons of people who don't deserve to go end up going. It's all about the folks reading the applications. And for the record, I've never applied for one and don't plan on applying soon. But if I had a recent residency at Yaddo would I mention it on my bio? Sure. Do we need to know, however, that after fifteen residences you still don't have a book out? Nope.
Again, I'm not trying to start some big altercation, or any semblance of an altercation, and I don't think anyone reads this in the first place, but I wanted to say my peace since it's been in my head for a long time. I think if more people concentrated on the work, though, both with reading others' and writing their own, there would be less attention toward bios in the first place, since we all know they are -- or should be -- of little importance on a cover letter or blog or website.
I'm not an "editor," (though that's becoming more of a stock footage term these days anyway) and I've never been, but I always hope if I get something published -- whether it's from an online journal hosted by Geocities or the New Yorker -- that it's from the opinion of that editor that they like it and want to publish it. And if somehow a Pushcart nomination comes from it, then thank you very much.
Tuesday, July 1, 2008
the usual i suppose
so amidst all the movie watching i had to talk about these, first of all. i saw shotgun stories finally after a long wait and no way to get a dvd rip off the internet. it was pretty amazing and lived up to the hype (and look at how gorgeous and 70s the poster is). especially since jeff nichols was around 28 when he completed it. there's tons of am
azing arkansas scenery (shot by adam stone, who's done a.d. work with david gordon green), a great score by lucero (with some help from pyramid), and a pretty compelling story. i come from a family of 3 brothers, so i think those of us who do maybe feel more of a bond as such, but even if you're not a part of such a family, you can see the potential for a long career for jeff nichols by watching this film. if you don't know what it's about you can find out for yourself, but it was worth the wait for me. plus there's a music-only track, which i think shows how compelling the scenery is. it takes a good cinematographer, yes, but so many great landscapes could be captures by monkeys behind the lens and come out beautiful. movies with an additional main character as the landscape have always intrigued me, and this adds to the list. jeff nichols is also taking over for david gordon green as the director for goat, the memoir written by brad land. i hope they film it in south carolina. it should be in production now, at least that's what imdb says.
in bruges was a weird little flick too. saw the trailer on apple's site a while back, and it looked intriguing. it ends up being written like tarantino, the coen brothers, and bruce robinson (more withnail and i than how to get ahead in advertising) collaborated (and carter burwell also did the music), while filming the whole thing in a little town in belgium. throughout the whole movie they're also drinking great beer out of glass chalices and oversided wine glasses. tripels and belgian strong pale ales it looked like to me mostly. as the movie gets a bit over-the-top with its comedic racism and prejudice, collin ferrell's character keeps calling them "gay beers," which someone else can read into. there's a ton of twists, a ton of swearing, and a lot of accents thrown at you. it was a pretty wild ride, and i liked it a lot, mainly because i was torn between so many things to think about. am i laughing at this? am i offended? am i supposed to be offended? is this supposed to be funny? though it meshed well instead of being completely off-putting.
back to the documentary side of things. jandek on corwood was fairly mind-blowing, in that i never got into jandek's music. when i was music director at warc at allegheny, though, i'm pretty sure we had a ton of original jandek pressings in our packed little alcove behind the equipment. i could've mad
e a ton of money had i spent more time reading about record collecting. we had so much out of print stuff, not old jazz records as much as radio issued singles, limited pressings, etc. all of it spanning back into the 80s. i can see why people like the music, but i never got into it. i just didn't know about the insane mysteries surrounding this guy, and the whole thing is utterly fascinating and engrossing. salinger-esque was his life (before, apparently, he started playing scant live sets in, i think, 2004 until the present and beyond), though many think the talent factor is a little skewed. anyone into music probably already knows a bit about jandek, but if you are and you don't, this thing's worth seeing. i spent a ton of time looking at the supplements, sans commentary, and did more research on the web after it's over. a whole psychology class could be taught on this guy, his methods, his music, his reclusive nature.
and finally, slasher blew me away. a movie about a guy who's hired to slash prices for car dealerships and get them sold and taken off the lot. thankfully, i had no idea what i was in for by just the quick description that i'd seen from the av club. but it was hilarious and humanistic in an american movie kind of way, and i feel like michael bennett's a composite character of a ton of different characters everyone's met, from movies, other documentaries, real life. it was one of those movies t
hat almost shouldn't have been inspiring, but was by the end. plus it's filmed in memphis, and one of the best lensed movies of all time i think is jim jarmusch's mystery train. it seems like a lot hasn't changed visually since 1989. tons of southern wreckage. abandoned houses. dingy avenues. tons of train tracks. beautiful decay all over the place. people wonder why the south is such an amazing place visually. yeah, it's not greece or italy, i know that, but i have some pride in what nature does to our creation in the u.s. within the last 100 years or so. i always find that stuff fascinating. i'm off track here, but the movie blew me away. so many movies lately i want to buy. there are a ton. and this is one of them. see it if you haven't.
*
sometimes i think i should've gone into film. with the time i spend watching movies -- and spent watching these movies -- i could've been writing new poems, or at least attempting to write non-horrendous drafts. but then i started thinking that if i could later teach classes in film and poetry, wherever i end up (yeah, pretty easy, i'm sure), that i'd be pretty happy. i wasn't cut out to be a filmmaker, though its fingerprints on my work are more like godzilla's.
but i've used film in my poems in other ways and continue to do so. maybe they're inseparable for me. i think that's the case.
charles bernstein, i think, was the one who said poetry needs to be at least as interesting as television, or something as such. well, i guess for me it has to be as interesting as a great movie or documentary. then again, so many movies are pure poetry too.
endeth here before i go too far into realms of non-understanding to my own understanding.
*
c. dale young has a post from a few days ago that i really like, where he talks about "god" appearing in his manuscript more than he'd thought, and wondering if it's too much. though now he's come to terms with it, knowing it isn't.
though this is his third book and he's had a lot of experience, it's good, i think, for folks who've spent a lot of time with their manuscripts -- as i have in the past year, more time than i'd like to admit -- to question and requestion that. whether it's thematic, like my elegies that seemingly run wild, or just single words. obsessions need to remain our obsessions. but where is the line drawn?
i think all of this is pretty dangerous when starting to just put together a manuscript, and i'm glad i didn't think it about it much then, as it could easily go toward paralysis and make you want to burn it. but having invested a lot of time in a manuscript, it's always good to question, and to hopefully be able to come to terms with kinds of repitition in a beneficial and positive way without convincing yourself falsely.
*
for a mere $.75 (that's cents) plus shipping, i got another copy, though this time a hardcover, from half.com, of lynda hull's the only world. it's an ex-library book (screw you phil levine -- this refers to an older post), but it's in fantastic condition. that original book's amazing, as are all the rest of hers. david wojahn and mark doty did a great job with the new-ish collected, but man, having the original is choice, tops, pinnacle -- not to mention how inspiring her work continues to be for myself and many other poets. i mean, 75 cents, people. can you even get taco bell for that much now?
*
and now it's official congratulations (the link is to a .pdf file) to mathias svalina and allison titus, two former vcu mfa-ers (though allison switched and got her mfa in fiction from vcu, she started in poetry) in poetry whose books will be published by cleveland state university press next year. with so many recognizable names as finalists and semi-finalists, i can see why my manuscript, though it was a much older version (yes, i'm making excuses), wasn't among such esteemed folks.
i think the next few years or so are going to have some presses, contests, and judges scratching their heads about which to choose while getting so many great manuscripts, as more and more contests are filled with finalist and semi-finalists whose work i've seen in journals and have really liked. though that's my taste, i think it's pretty good.
*
i just heard outside our office / guest room windows, which looks down upon a street intersecting a few bars (even though we don't get the insane noise of living close by vcu), a woman kind of yelling, on a tuesday of all days, "i should be allowed to go! fuck!" now who knows what she was talking about, but you have to love the incessantly nightly, most-likely post-drunken and possibly pre-coital drama meandering down the streets and careening off the buildings. i don't know if it's our brick walls below or what, but we get this insane echo that bounces of every wall. it sounds freakishly like the conversations / altercations are happening right behind us, in the room. then assholes start blasting their bass as loud as it can go and honking. one of these days i'll post joe bolton's "the party," which totally reminds me of being in the fan district in richmond. it's a love / hate relationship, but more often than not, love wins.
azing arkansas scenery (shot by adam stone, who's done a.d. work with david gordon green), a great score by lucero (with some help from pyramid), and a pretty compelling story. i come from a family of 3 brothers, so i think those of us who do maybe feel more of a bond as such, but even if you're not a part of such a family, you can see the potential for a long career for jeff nichols by watching this film. if you don't know what it's about you can find out for yourself, but it was worth the wait for me. plus there's a music-only track, which i think shows how compelling the scenery is. it takes a good cinematographer, yes, but so many great landscapes could be captures by monkeys behind the lens and come out beautiful. movies with an additional main character as the landscape have always intrigued me, and this adds to the list. jeff nichols is also taking over for david gordon green as the director for goat, the memoir written by brad land. i hope they film it in south carolina. it should be in production now, at least that's what imdb says.in bruges was a weird little flick too. saw the trailer on apple's site a while back, and it looked intriguing. it ends up being written like tarantino, the coen brothers, and bruce robinson (more withnail and i than how to get ahead in advertising) collaborated (and carter burwell also did the music), while filming the whole thing in a little town in belgium. throughout the whole movie they're also drinking great beer out of glass chalices and oversided wine glasses. tripels and belgian strong pale ales it looked like to me mostly. as the movie gets a bit over-the-top with its comedic racism and prejudice, collin ferrell's character keeps calling them "gay beers," which someone else can read into. there's a ton of twists, a ton of swearing, and a lot of accents thrown at you. it was a pretty wild ride, and i liked it a lot, mainly because i was torn between so many things to think about. am i laughing at this? am i offended? am i supposed to be offended? is this supposed to be funny? though it meshed well instead of being completely off-putting.
back to the documentary side of things. jandek on corwood was fairly mind-blowing, in that i never got into jandek's music. when i was music director at warc at allegheny, though, i'm pretty sure we had a ton of original jandek pressings in our packed little alcove behind the equipment. i could've mad
e a ton of money had i spent more time reading about record collecting. we had so much out of print stuff, not old jazz records as much as radio issued singles, limited pressings, etc. all of it spanning back into the 80s. i can see why people like the music, but i never got into it. i just didn't know about the insane mysteries surrounding this guy, and the whole thing is utterly fascinating and engrossing. salinger-esque was his life (before, apparently, he started playing scant live sets in, i think, 2004 until the present and beyond), though many think the talent factor is a little skewed. anyone into music probably already knows a bit about jandek, but if you are and you don't, this thing's worth seeing. i spent a ton of time looking at the supplements, sans commentary, and did more research on the web after it's over. a whole psychology class could be taught on this guy, his methods, his music, his reclusive nature.and finally, slasher blew me away. a movie about a guy who's hired to slash prices for car dealerships and get them sold and taken off the lot. thankfully, i had no idea what i was in for by just the quick description that i'd seen from the av club. but it was hilarious and humanistic in an american movie kind of way, and i feel like michael bennett's a composite character of a ton of different characters everyone's met, from movies, other documentaries, real life. it was one of those movies t
hat almost shouldn't have been inspiring, but was by the end. plus it's filmed in memphis, and one of the best lensed movies of all time i think is jim jarmusch's mystery train. it seems like a lot hasn't changed visually since 1989. tons of southern wreckage. abandoned houses. dingy avenues. tons of train tracks. beautiful decay all over the place. people wonder why the south is such an amazing place visually. yeah, it's not greece or italy, i know that, but i have some pride in what nature does to our creation in the u.s. within the last 100 years or so. i always find that stuff fascinating. i'm off track here, but the movie blew me away. so many movies lately i want to buy. there are a ton. and this is one of them. see it if you haven't.*
sometimes i think i should've gone into film. with the time i spend watching movies -- and spent watching these movies -- i could've been writing new poems, or at least attempting to write non-horrendous drafts. but then i started thinking that if i could later teach classes in film and poetry, wherever i end up (yeah, pretty easy, i'm sure), that i'd be pretty happy. i wasn't cut out to be a filmmaker, though its fingerprints on my work are more like godzilla's.
but i've used film in my poems in other ways and continue to do so. maybe they're inseparable for me. i think that's the case.
charles bernstein, i think, was the one who said poetry needs to be at least as interesting as television, or something as such. well, i guess for me it has to be as interesting as a great movie or documentary. then again, so many movies are pure poetry too.
endeth here before i go too far into realms of non-understanding to my own understanding.
*
c. dale young has a post from a few days ago that i really like, where he talks about "god" appearing in his manuscript more than he'd thought, and wondering if it's too much. though now he's come to terms with it, knowing it isn't.
though this is his third book and he's had a lot of experience, it's good, i think, for folks who've spent a lot of time with their manuscripts -- as i have in the past year, more time than i'd like to admit -- to question and requestion that. whether it's thematic, like my elegies that seemingly run wild, or just single words. obsessions need to remain our obsessions. but where is the line drawn?
i think all of this is pretty dangerous when starting to just put together a manuscript, and i'm glad i didn't think it about it much then, as it could easily go toward paralysis and make you want to burn it. but having invested a lot of time in a manuscript, it's always good to question, and to hopefully be able to come to terms with kinds of repitition in a beneficial and positive way without convincing yourself falsely.
*
for a mere $.75 (that's cents) plus shipping, i got another copy, though this time a hardcover, from half.com, of lynda hull's the only world. it's an ex-library book (screw you phil levine -- this refers to an older post), but it's in fantastic condition. that original book's amazing, as are all the rest of hers. david wojahn and mark doty did a great job with the new-ish collected, but man, having the original is choice, tops, pinnacle -- not to mention how inspiring her work continues to be for myself and many other poets. i mean, 75 cents, people. can you even get taco bell for that much now?
*
and now it's official congratulations (the link is to a .pdf file) to mathias svalina and allison titus, two former vcu mfa-ers (though allison switched and got her mfa in fiction from vcu, she started in poetry) in poetry whose books will be published by cleveland state university press next year. with so many recognizable names as finalists and semi-finalists, i can see why my manuscript, though it was a much older version (yes, i'm making excuses), wasn't among such esteemed folks.
i think the next few years or so are going to have some presses, contests, and judges scratching their heads about which to choose while getting so many great manuscripts, as more and more contests are filled with finalist and semi-finalists whose work i've seen in journals and have really liked. though that's my taste, i think it's pretty good.
*
i just heard outside our office / guest room windows, which looks down upon a street intersecting a few bars (even though we don't get the insane noise of living close by vcu), a woman kind of yelling, on a tuesday of all days, "i should be allowed to go! fuck!" now who knows what she was talking about, but you have to love the incessantly nightly, most-likely post-drunken and possibly pre-coital drama meandering down the streets and careening off the buildings. i don't know if it's our brick walls below or what, but we get this insane echo that bounces of every wall. it sounds freakishly like the conversations / altercations are happening right behind us, in the room. then assholes start blasting their bass as loud as it can go and honking. one of these days i'll post joe bolton's "the party," which totally reminds me of being in the fan district in richmond. it's a love / hate relationship, but more often than not, love wins.
Tuesday, June 3, 2008
David Gordon Green
I've been wanting to post about David Gordon Green for a while now, but I never had a blog, so I couldn't in that sense. A few days ago Danny McBride came out with Will Ferrell on the MTV Movie Awards. A few awards later it was Seth Rogan and James Franco. Everything's involved with David Gordon Green. Like six degrees.
This will be messy, but alas. First off, after meeting DGG April 2006 and talking to him about all kinds of shit, I was pretty thrilled to hear about some of the movies he was discussing, to be mentioned later.
Let's first talk about Paul Schneider. I think he's turned into a pretty good actor, having pretty huge parts lately in THE ASSASSINATION OF JESSE JAMES... and LARS AND THE REAL GIRL. And he wrapped PRETTY BIRD recently, which he wrote and directed. His role in ALL THE REAL GIRLS (which I don't like as much anymore, but did see 8 times in two different theaters when I was in college) shot him up to that kind of mild stardom from the folks figuring he would obviously be good in other movies, and I think he's someone to watch. And his first role that anyone saw was as Rico Rice in GEORGE WASHINGTON, which, even though it owes debts to many amazing movies, is still one of my favorites and will continue to be.
Next is Tim Orr, his cinematographer. I make a point to see every Tim Orr movie. When my friends used to shoot around the rusted bridges and general physical malaise and nastiness in our hometown, a lot of was dedicated to the lens of Tim Orr. Along with DGG, we loved nature busting through the man made cracks and buildings, burned out houses, interminable train tracks. All of that. But Tim Orr continues to do some great projects, and because he's one of the best cinematographers working, I always watch a lensed film when it's released. One of the best has to be COME EARLY MORNING, which was on Lifetime recently, which kind of pisses me off. Like SLINGBLADE, the Arkansas landscape in all its rusted and heated glory comes through well, and the story's great. I've even seen LITTLE MANHATTAN. I'll see them all.
Those are the obvious heavy hitters, and I was hoping, at least for Tim Orr, that it would play out that way.
Now onto Danny McBride, or "Bust ass" in ALL THE REAL GIRLS. Friends with David Gordon Green, has some funny moments in ATRG (especially the hilarious shit in the deleted scenes), and has somehow blown up in the world of semi-not-so-decent comedies as of late. He has a role in THE HEARTBREAK KID, the new remake, which is a horrendous movie. Though he wears ridiculous shorts and says some funny shit. I couldn't get through HOT ROD because, again, it was horrendous, but he has a role in that. Jess and I saw DRILLBIT TAYLOR recently, which I thought was actually pretty hilarious. He has another smaller role in that, and though not a horrendous movie, he gets some good lines. At any rate, somehow he's becoming this comedic juggernaut in the vein of Will Ferrell and that comedic troupe, the Funny or Die kind of mode. That brings me to...
THE FOOT FIST WAY: Somehow Will Ferrell and Adam McKay got a hold of it, loved it, got to release it, and now it's in theaters via Paramount Vantage. I haven't seen it yet of course, and will have to wait for the DVD I imagine, but there were some NCSA students hanging out with us in April 2006, and at that point they had just screened the film, and I guess even 2 years ago there were rumors about Warner Brothers, or some other big studio buying it. Maybe that fell through, but now it's probably going to be some kind of cult hit. It looks pretty hilarious, so I hope it delivers. But now Danny McBride, who used to be a guy who worked on student films with DGG and then scored the "Bust ass" role because, I think, someone dropped out, is working his way to the top, and I applaud him. Coming out with Will Ferrell and getting grandfathered in that kind of role can't be a bad thing.
That brings me to Ben Best, who was one of the writers working with Jody Hill on THE FOOT FIST WAY. He worked with DGG during UNDERTOW, and on the documentary on the disc you can see a few scenes with him and Barlow Jacobs.
Barlow Jacobs to LOW AND BEHOLD: a movie I'm pretty thrilled to see (also starring Eddie Rouse, a DGG alum, and one of the stars of GEORGE WASHINGTON). Co-written by Barlow Jacobs, and he's also one of the stars. Read more about it on IMDB, and check out the trailer.
Then to SHOTGUN STORIES (which I hope is still going to be released on DVD in July). Jeff Nichols directed. He had a small acting part in COME EARLY MORNING. He also is taking over the directorial duties of GOAT from DGG. Barlow Jacobs, again, is one of the actors in SHOTGUN STORIES. The movie's done well with the critics. It's again filmed in Arkansas. And again, it looks like it's going to be great. David Gordon Green is also a producer.
Now let's move onto GREAT WORLD OF SOUND, a movie written and directed by Craig Zobel, who worked on UNDERTOW, ALL THE REAL GIRLS, and GEORGE WASHINGTON (and also has a small part as the groom in UNDERTOW during the weird marriage scene that Chris and Tim witness). I was hoping for more from the movie (of which DGG is also a producer), but it was solid and different, and I love Pat Healy [An interesting side note: DGG didn't believe me that Pat Healy was on the former gameshow Russian Roulette, hosted by Mark L. Walberg, current host of the egregious The Moment of Truth, so he called him and left a message and asked him. Pat won the $10,000 prize; he wasn't only a contestant. Of course Pat called about an hour later when we were at The Federal in Durham and confirmed, and I think DGG was wondering why I knew all that insane shit, but then during the course of the day I think he realized I was kind of insane]. It's worth checking out. Plus Robert Longstreet's in it, and if you haven't seen DING-A-LING-LESS, which will be saved probably for another post, you should. GWOS brings up a lot of interesting points about the record industry, with a lot of funny moments, and this shitty sentence doesn't do it justice, so just see.
I forgot to mention that David Wingo does the music for GREAT WORLD OF SOUND. He collaborated with Michael Linnen on the scores for ALL THE REAL GIRLS and GEORGE WASHINGTON, along with Jeff from Lusine for SNOW ANGELS. David Wingo will make an appearance later.
That brings me to THE GUATEMALAN HANDSHAKE, another DGG-produced movie that I had been looking forward to for a while, especially since he said that and GWOS were some of the best movies he's seen in a while. I guess to produce them you'd have to think that, which is admirable. But the movie falls flat, unfortunately. I really really wanted to like it, but it seemed like a forced amalgam of GEORGE WASHINGTON and NAPOLEON DYNAMITE. It seemed like every other shot was an homage, a recognizable homage, from the "nerdy white dude wanting to date the black girl" (ala NAPOLEON DYNAMITE and GEORGE WASHINGTON) to the guy who disappears (or Buddy dying in GEORGE WASHINGTON), to the weird dialogue, to the rusted bridges and farmland and long stretches of road. Actually, one of the best things about it was the cinematography. But it was trying too hard to be like other films. Ending with fireworks and a derby. But David Wingo also did the music for this, and the music was good. Will Oldham also stars, though he doesn't have a lot of speaking parts since he disappears early and is later shown in flashbacks.
I suppose I should also mention SECURITY, COLORADO, a movie penned and directed by Andrew Gillis, who I also got to meet back in April of 2006. Some of the favorite tunes from the GEORGE WASHINGTON score are by Andrew Gillis. Lots of melodic piano and acoustic guitar. There's an early scene with George walking his dog down the street, and there's this beautiful shot of an armchair just sitting in an alley, and that's an Andy Gillis tune. And probably the most beautiful is the slow-motion cigarette smoke of George's father father when he visits him in prison, and Andy's music is playing. I wish he made more, because it's amazing stuff. SECURITY, COLORADO, however, which also stars Paul Schneider, had a lot to live up to for me, especially with all the talent behind it. It's also a Dogme 95 film, which I thought was bizarre. But the lead chick gets naked about halfway through, which is more than worth a viewing if you see it on Sundance.
I guess all of this is inspiring because I don't think David Gordon Green ever thought he would lead all these folks (and of course not all of them owe such a huge debt to him as this post potentially presupposes) to their careers, and some of them I hope will be long and ballsy and weird and fruitful and ultimately prosperous.
He's also been a huge inspiration to me. Usually when I write I'm always imagining being behind a camera. Though I may get out of the narrative mode eventually, and am trying to, I'll always be seeing everything clearly, even though the reader may never. And it started with his enthusiasm, of which I wish I had more. I wanted to go to film school before I got into literature, first wanting to write fiction, and then flipping out over "Out of the Cradle Endlessly Rocking." It's not a singular opinion to say Whitman brought you to poetry, but he did.
THE PINEAPPLE EXPRESS, directed by David Gordon Green (no, people, the guy(s) who directed KNOCKED UP and SUPERBAD did not direct THE PINEAPPLE EXPRESS) opens in a few months in August, and I have no doubts, along with everyone else, that it will be a hit. I hope he'll turn into the new Soderbergh, in some respects, by doing huge movies and making enough cash to make all the passion projects. And yes, Danny McBride's in it, and Tim Orr did the cinematography.
What happened to NERD CAMP? Is the SUSPIRIA remake happening? The sci-fi movie starring Paul Rudd? The derby movie? The Jon Heder-affiliated "Amblin Entertainment 80s movies-esque" film about the robots? Tons of good things are hopefully on the horizon. I can't wait to see what happens.
I wish I could've done some family tree for this, but this is what I got people.
This will be messy, but alas. First off, after meeting DGG April 2006 and talking to him about all kinds of shit, I was pretty thrilled to hear about some of the movies he was discussing, to be mentioned later.
Let's first talk about Paul Schneider. I think he's turned into a pretty good actor, having pretty huge parts lately in THE ASSASSINATION OF JESSE JAMES... and LARS AND THE REAL GIRL. And he wrapped PRETTY BIRD recently, which he wrote and directed. His role in ALL THE REAL GIRLS (which I don't like as much anymore, but did see 8 times in two different theaters when I was in college) shot him up to that kind of mild stardom from the folks figuring he would obviously be good in other movies, and I think he's someone to watch. And his first role that anyone saw was as Rico Rice in GEORGE WASHINGTON, which, even though it owes debts to many amazing movies, is still one of my favorites and will continue to be.
Next is Tim Orr, his cinematographer. I make a point to see every Tim Orr movie. When my friends used to shoot around the rusted bridges and general physical malaise and nastiness in our hometown, a lot of was dedicated to the lens of Tim Orr. Along with DGG, we loved nature busting through the man made cracks and buildings, burned out houses, interminable train tracks. All of that. But Tim Orr continues to do some great projects, and because he's one of the best cinematographers working, I always watch a lensed film when it's released. One of the best has to be COME EARLY MORNING, which was on Lifetime recently, which kind of pisses me off. Like SLINGBLADE, the Arkansas landscape in all its rusted and heated glory comes through well, and the story's great. I've even seen LITTLE MANHATTAN. I'll see them all.
Those are the obvious heavy hitters, and I was hoping, at least for Tim Orr, that it would play out that way.
Now onto Danny McBride, or "Bust ass" in ALL THE REAL GIRLS. Friends with David Gordon Green, has some funny moments in ATRG (especially the hilarious shit in the deleted scenes), and has somehow blown up in the world of semi-not-so-decent comedies as of late. He has a role in THE HEARTBREAK KID, the new remake, which is a horrendous movie. Though he wears ridiculous shorts and says some funny shit. I couldn't get through HOT ROD because, again, it was horrendous, but he has a role in that. Jess and I saw DRILLBIT TAYLOR recently, which I thought was actually pretty hilarious. He has another smaller role in that, and though not a horrendous movie, he gets some good lines. At any rate, somehow he's becoming this comedic juggernaut in the vein of Will Ferrell and that comedic troupe, the Funny or Die kind of mode. That brings me to...
THE FOOT FIST WAY: Somehow Will Ferrell and Adam McKay got a hold of it, loved it, got to release it, and now it's in theaters via Paramount Vantage. I haven't seen it yet of course, and will have to wait for the DVD I imagine, but there were some NCSA students hanging out with us in April 2006, and at that point they had just screened the film, and I guess even 2 years ago there were rumors about Warner Brothers, or some other big studio buying it. Maybe that fell through, but now it's probably going to be some kind of cult hit. It looks pretty hilarious, so I hope it delivers. But now Danny McBride, who used to be a guy who worked on student films with DGG and then scored the "Bust ass" role because, I think, someone dropped out, is working his way to the top, and I applaud him. Coming out with Will Ferrell and getting grandfathered in that kind of role can't be a bad thing.
That brings me to Ben Best, who was one of the writers working with Jody Hill on THE FOOT FIST WAY. He worked with DGG during UNDERTOW, and on the documentary on the disc you can see a few scenes with him and Barlow Jacobs.
Barlow Jacobs to LOW AND BEHOLD: a movie I'm pretty thrilled to see (also starring Eddie Rouse, a DGG alum, and one of the stars of GEORGE WASHINGTON). Co-written by Barlow Jacobs, and he's also one of the stars. Read more about it on IMDB, and check out the trailer.
Then to SHOTGUN STORIES (which I hope is still going to be released on DVD in July). Jeff Nichols directed. He had a small acting part in COME EARLY MORNING. He also is taking over the directorial duties of GOAT from DGG. Barlow Jacobs, again, is one of the actors in SHOTGUN STORIES. The movie's done well with the critics. It's again filmed in Arkansas. And again, it looks like it's going to be great. David Gordon Green is also a producer.
Now let's move onto GREAT WORLD OF SOUND, a movie written and directed by Craig Zobel, who worked on UNDERTOW, ALL THE REAL GIRLS, and GEORGE WASHINGTON (and also has a small part as the groom in UNDERTOW during the weird marriage scene that Chris and Tim witness). I was hoping for more from the movie (of which DGG is also a producer), but it was solid and different, and I love Pat Healy [An interesting side note: DGG didn't believe me that Pat Healy was on the former gameshow Russian Roulette, hosted by Mark L. Walberg, current host of the egregious The Moment of Truth, so he called him and left a message and asked him. Pat won the $10,000 prize; he wasn't only a contestant. Of course Pat called about an hour later when we were at The Federal in Durham and confirmed, and I think DGG was wondering why I knew all that insane shit, but then during the course of the day I think he realized I was kind of insane]. It's worth checking out. Plus Robert Longstreet's in it, and if you haven't seen DING-A-LING-LESS, which will be saved probably for another post, you should. GWOS brings up a lot of interesting points about the record industry, with a lot of funny moments, and this shitty sentence doesn't do it justice, so just see.
I forgot to mention that David Wingo does the music for GREAT WORLD OF SOUND. He collaborated with Michael Linnen on the scores for ALL THE REAL GIRLS and GEORGE WASHINGTON, along with Jeff from Lusine for SNOW ANGELS. David Wingo will make an appearance later.
That brings me to THE GUATEMALAN HANDSHAKE, another DGG-produced movie that I had been looking forward to for a while, especially since he said that and GWOS were some of the best movies he's seen in a while. I guess to produce them you'd have to think that, which is admirable. But the movie falls flat, unfortunately. I really really wanted to like it, but it seemed like a forced amalgam of GEORGE WASHINGTON and NAPOLEON DYNAMITE. It seemed like every other shot was an homage, a recognizable homage, from the "nerdy white dude wanting to date the black girl" (ala NAPOLEON DYNAMITE and GEORGE WASHINGTON) to the guy who disappears (or Buddy dying in GEORGE WASHINGTON), to the weird dialogue, to the rusted bridges and farmland and long stretches of road. Actually, one of the best things about it was the cinematography. But it was trying too hard to be like other films. Ending with fireworks and a derby. But David Wingo also did the music for this, and the music was good. Will Oldham also stars, though he doesn't have a lot of speaking parts since he disappears early and is later shown in flashbacks.
I suppose I should also mention SECURITY, COLORADO, a movie penned and directed by Andrew Gillis, who I also got to meet back in April of 2006. Some of the favorite tunes from the GEORGE WASHINGTON score are by Andrew Gillis. Lots of melodic piano and acoustic guitar. There's an early scene with George walking his dog down the street, and there's this beautiful shot of an armchair just sitting in an alley, and that's an Andy Gillis tune. And probably the most beautiful is the slow-motion cigarette smoke of George's father father when he visits him in prison, and Andy's music is playing. I wish he made more, because it's amazing stuff. SECURITY, COLORADO, however, which also stars Paul Schneider, had a lot to live up to for me, especially with all the talent behind it. It's also a Dogme 95 film, which I thought was bizarre. But the lead chick gets naked about halfway through, which is more than worth a viewing if you see it on Sundance.
I guess all of this is inspiring because I don't think David Gordon Green ever thought he would lead all these folks (and of course not all of them owe such a huge debt to him as this post potentially presupposes) to their careers, and some of them I hope will be long and ballsy and weird and fruitful and ultimately prosperous.
He's also been a huge inspiration to me. Usually when I write I'm always imagining being behind a camera. Though I may get out of the narrative mode eventually, and am trying to, I'll always be seeing everything clearly, even though the reader may never. And it started with his enthusiasm, of which I wish I had more. I wanted to go to film school before I got into literature, first wanting to write fiction, and then flipping out over "Out of the Cradle Endlessly Rocking." It's not a singular opinion to say Whitman brought you to poetry, but he did.
THE PINEAPPLE EXPRESS, directed by David Gordon Green (no, people, the guy(s) who directed KNOCKED UP and SUPERBAD did not direct THE PINEAPPLE EXPRESS) opens in a few months in August, and I have no doubts, along with everyone else, that it will be a hit. I hope he'll turn into the new Soderbergh, in some respects, by doing huge movies and making enough cash to make all the passion projects. And yes, Danny McBride's in it, and Tim Orr did the cinematography.
What happened to NERD CAMP? Is the SUSPIRIA remake happening? The sci-fi movie starring Paul Rudd? The derby movie? The Jon Heder-affiliated "Amblin Entertainment 80s movies-esque" film about the robots? Tons of good things are hopefully on the horizon. I can't wait to see what happens.
I wish I could've done some family tree for this, but this is what I got people.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
