the tree of life.

i waited a year for this movie.  there were that many requests for this film that i did not get it for an entire year.  sadly i must say that the wait was not worth it.

i planned on seeing "the tree of life" in theaters.  brad pitt and sean penn!  this movie had to be amazing. my cousin erin and i even went to the theater to see it.  however, we were late and missed the first 10 minutes and decided to see "midnight in paris" instead.  the employee at the movie theater, a girl i know, even warned us that people had asked for their money back and it was actually a good thing we didn't see "tree of life."

i should have listened to that warning.  but i must add that when i heard jimmy kimmel (i think) make a joke about dinosaurs being responsible for the brother's death.  i had to see it.

this movie was bad.  not that it was bad but it was too artistic-y.  i mean i didn't need to see the beginning of time.  and the whole close ups and shots from different angles to make it feel like you were in the movie, just made me nauseated.  if i saw it in theaters i probably would have been sick.  that jerky first hand perspective was spooky in "the blair witch project" not so much here.  and that whole time sequence from the beginning of time was  bit pretensions.  it was beautiful but came across as some sad christian bragging, like look at all that my god has made.  i don't know it was weird.

the movie in itself was horrible.  it was a son justifying his hatred of his father, but i couldn't sympathize with the son.  so your father didn't like the way you picked weeds and mowed the lawn, seriously get over it.  i mean brad pitt seemed like the product of the era, that is how men were.   i mean its horrible to feel unloved by a parent but move on instead of telling on it.  i had an absent father but i didn't go around moping about, nor did i allow it to effect my self-confidence and self-worth.  it was difficult to sympathize with the son because he was for lack of a better world, a crybaby.  life is tough some time deal with it.  yes that flare up from brad pitt was bad but once again wasn't it all because of lawn work?  really???

also i couldn't handle all of the christian propaganda at the end.  seriously i hope that heaven isn't a beach because if i die and god allows me into heaven and it turns out to be the heaven from "tree of life", i will ask to be sent to hell.   and seagulls in heaven???? i hope not.  that would definitely be hell.

"the tree of life" was beautiful but lacked any real substance.  i would have appreciated it more if it was an art installation, dialogue less and project on different walls of a room.  but as a movie, it was horrible.

beloved. toni morrison. (111)

i read toni morrison's "beloved" because it is on flavorpill's 30 before 30 list.  i have to admit, at first i was weary because of the ghost and supernatural occurances in 124.  i am not one for ghost stories but it turned out to be a tragic yet beautiful story of endurance. 

"beloved" is the tale of a family and community coping with a tragedy and the appearance of a mystery woman.  the tragic event was when slaveowners found escaped slave sethe (the protagonist) to return her to the farm and in an attempt to keep her children safe, she kills her infant daughter.  sethe is jailed and the slaveowner frightened by the sight leaves her alone.  this infant daughter haunts her house and the community and then comes back in the form of an actual person, beloved.  

infanticide is a horrible crime yet is justifiable considering the horrors of slavery.  i might sound like a horrible person but i understand why sethe killed her baby.  better for that baby to die at the hands of her mother than later in life by her slaveowner or the clan.  also better to avoid a life of abuse and treatment like an animal.  actually as demonstrated in paul d's (an old friend of sethe who becomes her lover) story about how he was jealous of a rooster when he realized it was more free than him.  its horrible to imagine any situation in which a human is treated less than an animal but sadly this was how the american institution of slavery was.

in my post for art spiegelman's "maus", i discussed how "maus" allows readers to truly understand a part of history that one would only know due to history books but not as a human experience.  the same can be said for "beloved".  in school, we learn about slavery yet we have have no idea what it was really like.  in history books there are excerpts from slave narratives but unless you read one it's can not grasp the full experience of a slave.  furthermore, i would assume american textbooks present slaveflaw oils not be complete honesty about slavery and present it in a sympathetic light because american society would not want its student to see its country negatively.  to get a honest perspective one has to look elsewhere. "beloved" allows the reader to do just that, it puts things into perspective.  

for example, i knew that slaves were separated from their family members; families torn apart because they were viewed as property but it was different when i read about it in "beloved".  reading about baby suggs, sethe's mother-in-law, trying to find out which farms her children were taken to or how paul d was  amazed and envious when he met generations of black families that were able to stay together, framed it in a ways i could relate.  but the best example was paul d thought that sethe love for her daughter denver was "risky":

for a used-to-be-slave woman to love anything that much is dangerous . . . the best thing, he knew, was to love just a little bit; everything, just a bit, so when they broke it back, or shoved it in a croaker sack, well, maybe you'd have a little love left over for the next one.

it sad to imagine a world in which affection and love for your child was

dangerous because at any moment they could be taken away from you.  and yes all parents fear losing a child but for slaves it was a fact of life. furthermore, imagine your family bonds not being respected because you were not viewed as a person.  family relations were ignored because slaves were not viewed as having them because they were property.

another aspect of "beloved" that left an impression on me was the hopelessness of slavery and how individuals coped with it.  all the characters had to deal with it but i believe baby suggs was the best example because she was free and yet did not find happiness.  her son, sethe's husband, had bought her freedom but even than it did not result in peace for her. baby suggs was a spiritual leader but after the tragedy with sethe, her spirit was broken.  like she told her friend stamp when he asked why she didn't preach anymore and accused her of punishing god, she replied "not like He punish me".  it's hard to believe in a god that does not stop the suffering in one's life.  i have always said that i could never be job so i undertstand baby sugg's frustration with god.  as a result of her hopelessness, baby suggs went to bed and stayed there, her "wish was to consider what in the world was harmless" and she did that by thinking about colors because they never harmed anyone.  it was sad but beautiful how she found comfort in colors, she still had hope even if she didn't have faith in god.

another example of this hopelessness was the chain gang that paul d worked on.  it was explained that the gang would sing as they worked:

singing love songs to Mr. Death, they smashed his head.  more than the rest, they killed the flirt whom folks called Life for leading them on.  making them think the next sunrise would be worth it . . .

morrison's analogy of life as a flirt is quite clever though sad.  it's one thing to not have faith in god but quite another to not have faith in life.  

though "beloved" demonstrated the horrors of slavery, the lesson to be learn is to not hold on to the past.  (this is also the same lesson of "the great gatsby" which is also on the 30 before 30 list. hmmmm).  as explained before, sethe's dead daughter comes back to life as beloved and at first sethe is happy because it gives her the opportunity to right her wrong.  however, even though sethe wa regretful and tried to give beloved the love she needed, in the end, beloved destroyed her.  and that is how it is in life, if you cling to the past it will ruin you (like seen in "gatsby").  instead one must accept their past, mistakes and all, and continue to life on.  one can not let tragedy stop them.  an individual must learn to endure the pain that life can be at times.

i wonder if this is the one of the overall lesson of the flavorpill list?  so far two books about not holding onto the past.  but regardless, "beloved" was a wonderful novel and should be read regardless of your age.

2001: space odyssey

what does it all mean?!?!? this was my initial thought i had at the end of stanley kubrick's "2001:  a space odyssey".  my second thought was what was with the weird baby in the sphere?  that was creepy.  i of course googled and it turns out (according to my favorite, wikipedia) kubrick didn't want there to be a meaning.  he wanted it to be open to interpretation.  so here is mine:

god is not like the judeo christain god.  also heaven is not some spirit realm but simply jupiter.  on jupiter, time faster than on earth, an earth year the same as like a 15 jupiter minutes.  this is why bowman ages so quickly after he lands on jupiter.  the home that looks like a persian home (if you have persian friends you know what i mean) that bowman enters is god's home.  god collects souls from earth and puts them on jupiter and then sends them back to earth as spirits as creepy babies. a little part hinduism and a whole lot of sci-fi.  also those black monoliths.  god throws them down whenever he needs life to accelerate aka creatures are lagging, so life can advance within a time frame he deems appropriate.   

so that is my explanation of "2001 space odyssey", please share yours in the comments!

continuing with my interpretation, the first monolith appeared because the prehistoric primates were not working at the pace god need them to.  at the rate they were going, we would have never became humans.  but what i really enjoyed that portion because it demonstrated what was needed in order for man to progress.  and that is meat. i read at the natural history museum of los angeles that the introduction of meat into prehistoric man's diet caused for their brains to grow.  and of course brain growth is important in the development of any species.  so meat actually is very important.  all vegans and vegetarians you should reconsider your current diets.  and of course this was seen in the film, first they discovered tools to help with hunting.  then with meat being their primary source of food, they became stronger and then ruled that little area!

ps one of my teachers had us watch the above clip.  it may have been mr. myovich.  i remember being like what, are we watching?  but now it makes sense.

and yes that cut from the bone floating in the air to the spaceship floating in space was spectacular.

sadly, kubrick's vision of 2001 was a lot better than actual 2001 did not include commercial space trips to the moon, or even spaceships that looked cool like his sets.  but there were some things that we now have in 2013, so we aren't that pathetic in terms of our technology.  though we didn't have any of this stuff in 2001.  first of all, skype/facetime!  seeing people facetime today is amazing, i can only imagine how amazed audiences were back in '68 when dr. floyd had a video phone chat with his daughter.  another thing is navigation, though not in spaceships but in cars.  i mean honestly imagine having to get directions from a map?  how tedious and confusing, navigation has seriously changed the world and how we drive.  last but not least on board the spaceship, i noticed that astronauts watched the news on tablets.  and i mean we kinda beat 2001 in terms of this, their astronauts had them but today our average joe has one, well if he can afford it.  the last thing i noticed, though it wasn't too technological was the food service for the flight to the moon.  it was juice. and oddly, enough juice is quite a trendy thing right now. with the diet crowd, juicing is the way of the future.  i think of all of the juiceries in la right now.  it might only be a fad but when you are drinking it, ti's kinda like the future.

this film was great because its a psychological thriller.  i mean HAL is scarier than that any villain, monster or killer.  it's a machine and when it kills, it has absolutely no remorse, cos it's a machine.  the scene where it kills the astronauts that were hibernating was simple yet brilliant.  all we watched were their vital signs diminishing but it scared me.  imagine being murdered while hibernating, you have no knowledge of your death.  you have no idea you are dying, how scary is that.  it's a lot when you think about it.  or when it killed the other astronaut that went to fix that battery thingy.  i mean i think that is the scariest death, floating out in space for all eternity.  can you imagine that?  it's endless, you just have to float.  i would hate to end up like that.  again too much to think about.  this is what i enjoyed most about HAL and his evil, was that on the surface it was weird but when you think about it, it's seriously frightening.

i am often told that this movie is boring but i thought it was brilliant.  and that is just the content.  visually and musically, this movie was amazing.  all of the scenes in space soundtracked by waltz are perfection.  i mean even with it being referenced so many time in pop culture, i still got chills when i listened to the music and watched the spaceships float through space.  it was just beautiful.

all in all, an extremely enjoyable film. and i look forward to seeing the "2001: space odyssey" portion of the lacma exhibit.

quinceañera: a latina's journey to womanhood. mary d. lankford. (86)

while looking for books about hannukah, i came across this gem. it's been sitting on my shelf for about a month now (i renewed it, so it's not overdue) but finally got around to reading it and actually learned a lot about quinceañeras.

sadly and regrettably i did not have a quince. however, i was in my friend sofia samano's court, so i have experienced a quince first hand. i went to mass and of course danced the waltz, but i never got to be the belle of the ball. or should i say la reina de la fiesta. oh well. maybe in another life or my thirty birthday. cos seriously i need a cake like this in my life:

so thanks to the book i learned some new things about quinceañeras and was also reminded of some great traditions. first, i learned that i would have never survived life as an aztec.  this is assuming that i still have my atheist/agnostic tendencies and independent spirit in precolonial mexico.  but as the book explained, "in mexico's native american aztec civilizations, girls of twelve or thirteen attended two types of school, the Calmacac or the Telpucucali.  those who entered the calmacac school prepare for a lifetime of religious service.  girls who enrolled in the telpucucali school prepared for marriage."  seriously god or marriage, the only options in life, isn't great to be a woman?  if this was all i was offered in life, i would have had a serious disney princess moment about keeping with traditions.

anyway, to continue our history lesson, after the spanish conquered the aztecs in 1521, this tradition of aztec rites become catholic-ified because the spanish are catholic.   fifteen became the age for young women to choose between marriage or god.  looks like spanish colonial me would have hated life as well.  and as the book explains "these rites received the name quinceañera from the spanish word for fifteen, quince, and birthday, anos." does this whole choose between god and marriage still exist?  should i be a nun or a wife?  though i guess in both ways you are a wife, of god or some machismo senor with a tendency to get drunk and cry to sad songs.

and maybe it's just the feminist in me or the old maid in me but this whole marriage talk at 15 kinda scares me.  i mean you haven't even lived life yet and your folks are sending you to mass to learn about marriage?  (btw i don't know if this is true so please clarify if i am wrong).  i mean even the book referred to the fact that the girl having the quince looked like a young bride in her dress!  ekkkk!

but there really is nothing to worry about because today's quinces are just an excuse to party. and who doesn't love a party?  one of the traditions that the book mentioned and which i absolutely love was the presenting of heels.  (that is not it's offical name but what i'm going to call it).  so the dad of the girl presents her with her first pair of grown up shoes aka heels and she has her first dance as a "woman".  awwwwww.  how cute, right?

the book was actually a good book for kids to read about quinceañeras.  also for adults that didn't have any latin american friends growing up.  though they should make an updated version cos there were some crazy 80's dresses in in that i loved but might not be everyone's cup of tea.

rabbit hole.

yes that's the dvd cover.  i don't get it either.  when i picked it up, i thought to myself, isn't this supoose to be about a couple coping with the death of their young son?  so what's with the pornographic photo?  and with hole in the title, it sounds like some sick twisted sequel to "eyes wide shut'.  but it's not. 

but let's get serious cos this is a serious film.  the other day while googling to see when "midnight in paris" came out in theaters. i found a list of movies released in may 2011 and came across "rabbit hole".  i wanted to see it in theaters but for one reason or another never saw it.  i loved "hedwig and the angry inch" and wanted to see a john cameron mitchell film with a more serious screenplay.  (not that "hedwig" wasn't but you know, mitchell minus the camp.  also i haven't seen "shortbus".)  "hedwig" is one of my faovrites, so i was game to see another one of his films.

mitchell did not disappoint.  though i am not a parent and though i have never lost someone unexpectantly in my life, this film had me in tears.  like barely five minutes into the film kinda tears.  the screenplay is very well written.  it is by David Lindsay-Albarie who also wrote the award winning play 'rabbit hole" on which the movie was based. again though i have never experienced it, i feel this film is a an honest portrayal of life after losing a young son or daughter.  it shows that there really isn't one way to cope or even a right way to cope.  also one should expect to experience a full spectrum of emotions. 

without giving too much away, i will say that i appreciated how nicole kidman's character was anti-religion when it came to coping.  i have never found and probably will never find comfort in god when tragedy strikes.  i have explained to friends that i hope there isn't a god because human suffering shouldn't be justify by the idea that "this is what god wanted."  really god wanted horrible events to happen?  also how can one have faith in a god who lets horrible things happen to innocent people.  i can't believe in a god that places souls into families where sexual abuse happens or to parents with drug habits.  how do you justify that?  i always say i can't be job; i will question god about my suffering.  and for me i don't want to justify the horrible things that happen to me as something that god orchestrated.  who can have faith in someone who creates horrible situations for the people he love and created.  i think kidman's character summed it up best by calling god a "a sadistic prick."  a god that causes suffering would be one.  

the film touches on other topics but this is one i was left with after watching.  i was also left with puffy eyes from tears.  i think if i watch it after i have childern, i might have a different impression.  i could sympathize with the characters but i couldn't empathize with them.  this movie was good and i recommend it.  but make sure to have some discuss handy cos it is very emotional.