[center][img]http://img166.imageshack.us/img166/7753/20060911shortbusnd2.jpg[/img]
[/center]
[font=Arial][color=DarkRed]
Shortbus ? How do we define pornography? John Cameron Mitchell (creator of Hedwig and the Angry Inch) wrote and directed an examination on human… More
[center][img]http://img166.imageshack.us/img166/7753/20060911shortbusnd2.jpg[/img]
[/center]
[font=Arial][color=DarkRed]
Shortbus ? How do we define pornography? John Cameron Mitchell (creator of Hedwig and the Angry Inch) wrote and directed an examination on human relationships that also employs hardcore sex. Yes, the actors are really having sex and we really see, among other things, a man fellate himself to climax. There?s hetero sex, homo sex, masturbation, and, in small flashes, a whole sweaty orgy of people of all shapes, sizes, colors, and tastes. This movie celebrates the sheer possibilities and enjoyment of sex. Mitchell isn?t the first serious filmmaker to show people really doing it, and the movie shows sex in a realistic fashion that is rarely seen, with all the humor, playfulness, and stumbles that can arise. It?s refreshing and a great window into the depths of human interaction. That?s the deal: everyone in this film is reaching out to feel something. The script mostly follows the pursuit of a sex therapist who has never had an orgasm. The sex will get the headlines, but it?s the quiet reflections on human connection that really sneaks up on you and can hit hard. The movie doesn?t cover every facet with ease, like a stalker-esque character, and some of the acting is a bit amateurish; however, it?s a daring film that has a disarming sweetness to it and an open hearted message that's rather romantic after all. And no, it?s not porn.
Nate?s Grade: B
Little Children ? Director Todd Field ([i]In the Bedroom[/i]) and author Tom Perotta ([i]Election[/i]) have created the most incisive, mordant, and entertaining peek into suburban life since 1999?s [i]American Beauty[/i]. You really feel the carnal yearning that Kate Winslet and Patrick Wilson have as they inch their way to an affair. I?ve never felt the raw appeal of an affair perhaps like this before. Even more amazing, the film explores an entire neighborhood of characters and breathes life into them. [i]Little Children[/i] feels like a great novel, with a scalpel-sharp narrator offering glimpses into the inner workings of these people. You get a great sense of worth in the film and it?s easy to fall under its spell. [i]Little Children[/i] is a wonderful movie that looks at the complexities of people without judgment but with plenty of sly humor. It?s a fine work of satire and sensuality, and Winslet is becoming so good at delivering powerful performances that she?s being taken for granted as perhaps the best actress of her generation.
Nate?s Grade: A
This Film Is Not Yet Rated ? Filmmaker Kirby Dick is a ballsy man. First, he crafts a rousing journalistic expose on the unimpartial and arcane practices of the Motion Picture Association of America ratings board. Then, and this is genius, he submits his own muckraking documentary to that same board for a rating. Dick?s potent film is ambitious and tries to do too much, touching every topic related to the MPAA it can think of; it practically steamrolls over the ideas of piracy and the fact that a national ratings board eliminates the all-too-likelihood of arbitrary local ratings systems. But Dick squares the MPAA in his sights and his aim is deadly. This is an organization that says it is voluntary and has no editorial control over how movies are made. But how voluntary is it when the NC-17 rating is treated as a commercial kiss of death, where newspapers won?t run ads, video stores won?t carry the film, and advertising is strictly limited?
Dick makes brilliant note of the different hypocrisies of the ratings systems. Sex is graded far more harshly than wanton violence, and what?s even worse is homosexual sex. Dick juxtaposes film clips side-by-side, one with heterosexual sex where the film received an R-rating, and the other with homosexual sex where the film received an NC-17 rating. The scenes are nearly identical except for the gender of the people involved. Also, sexual thrusting also seems to get the MPAA?s goat. An animated sequence detailing what is and isn?t allowed in a film per rating is hilarious (you did know you got one ?fuck? for a PG-13 as long as it is not in reference to sex, right?). There?s a lot of filmmakers in here to share their MPAA horror stories of what was and wasn?t accountable for taste, and some of it is baffling; Hilary Swank wiping her mouth after going down, off camera, on a girl is the difference between R and NC-17. The MPAA also has a disturbing habbit of grading harshly when it comes to films that show women receiving pleasure through sex.
The MPAA is also the only ratings board where its members are kept in secret in an effort, they say, to thwart coercion. Dick hires a private eye, who happens to be a lesbian no less, and together they hunt down the raters and reveal to the public for the first time who these arbitrators of taste really are. MPAA mastermind Jack Valenti said the raters would be comprised of normal parents; well Dick?s film exposes that many on the board have adult children, and some don?t have any kids at all. Plus there are two members of the clergy on this board in an ?advisory? function. The film isn?t mean-spirited but is very angry, but it?s an anger that Dick makes sure you understand and relate to. The most astonishing aspect of this documentary is that the MPAA actually listened and is loosening certain rules, allowing filmmakers to cite precedence when arguing for or against their ruling (?Hey, you can stab a guy in an ear with a penis in [i]Scary Movie[/i] but we can?t have two women kiss??). This is a must-see for film fanatics and those curious how the industry ceded power to a small group of middle-aged homeowners.
Nate?s Grade: B+[/color][/font]