a story lately told: coming of age in ireland, london, and new york. anjelica huston (211)

last weekend, after a trip to la, i decided to stay with my auntie trace and uncle karl.  while awaiting for them to pick me up from the amtrak, i decided to check out the used book section at the beale library.  i didn't find anything to buy but did come across anjelica huston's memoir, a story lately told:  coming of age in ireland, london, and new york.  i love her because of her work with wes anderson, and of course the witches, so decided to check it out.

i wasn't sure what to expect, i mean, she is etheline tenebaum!  the lost mother of darjeeling limited and morticia adams!! this memoir had to be extraordinary!! but sadly it wasn't.

this memoir lacked heart. it is almost as though huston wrote it simply to make money versus sharing her life.  could she be doing that bad? i mean i did just look up her imdb, she has been voicing tinkerbell movies, maybe she is hurting?  it also seemed like she didn't want to be outdone by her sister, allegra, who she thanked in the acknowledgements for inspiring her.  if it was personal growth, she needs to try digging deeper.

the one thing that i took from this memoir  is that huston likes to namedrop.  if feel bad (due mostly to this memoir) but didnt realize that huston's father was a famous director, like the african queen famous.  and due to this huston's childhood was very glamorous filled with hollywood's elite always randomly dropping by their home.  i would say 50% of the time discussed about ireland was just names of celebrities.  so many people were named, all minor characters, that i lost track and could not keep everyone straight. (though i must admit that i was impressed by the namedropping of john steinbeck.) the remaining 50% of the ireland era was spent discussing the description of their mansion and their horses.  it lacked funny little anecdotes one has as a child.  the only one i can remember is huston being embarassed while performing macbeth but that turned out to be peter o'toole's memory and not her own.

the london era was filled with the same namedropping.  marianne faithfull was mentioned.  also the fact that the director of romeo and juliet was interested in casting huston as juliet but her father wanted her in his film. i hate to be mean but can not imagine her as juliet that film as it was made is perfection.  also i felt like huston's #teenageproblems about doing the film were an excuse for her poor performance.

the london era was also when huston lost her mother in a car accident.  it was a tragedy that huston discussed without any feeling.  maybe it was too difficult for her to discuss honestly, but if she wanted to pay tribute to her mother, she missed her chance. it was a very distant discussion of a very tragic event in her life.

the new york era covered her absuive relationship with bob richardson, who is terry richardson's dad!  while googling for photos of a young anjelica huston (she was gorgeous), saw one of terry and huston which seemed odd but now after reading this it's even odder.  richardson, a successful photographer and like twentysomething years her senior was crazy and controlling for lack of a better description.  she was young and sadly put up with it until she realized how horrible her life was on trip to mexico and finally left him.  again, the lack of emotion of heart was even seen in the discussion of this relationship.  

i must admit i did find myself romantizing the gritty new york scene huston was apart of, ie living at the chelsea hotel (yes even with its creepy stories).  also all of her modeling in europe sounded so glamourous as well, though she seemed a little thin-skinned initially, crying at a nyc go-see.

as i mentioned before this memoir was not that interested and read more like a who's who of hollywood.  i was looking forward to reading funny little anecdotes about her growing up and coming of age, but every story just seemed like the means for her to brag about something.  

though i should add, by reading between the lines, one can find the inspiration for her amazing performances in wes anderson films.  for as glamourous her parents were they were absent from most of her life.  they were also more concerned with their own love affairs then the raising of her children.  perhaps it is this lack of parenting growing up that huston drew as inspiration for the messed up mothers she played in anderson films.  to take it one step further, she is also channeling her mother with her depictions of ex-wives of insensitive yet creative men in anderson's films.  though this epiphany is not enough to justify reading the memoir, just watch a wes anderson film instead to see huston at her finest.

oh and i will add, i also learned through photos that huston dated jack nicholson (hich i didn't know), now that is memoir i want to read!

& sons. david gilbert. (167)

*

i checked out david gilbert's & sons, after reading about it on flavorwire's list of 15 best novels of 2013:  

of course, my love for salinger being the reason for my reading.  and i have to say its quite ambition to channel salinger for a character but gilbert's novel was well written and one that i assume salinger would not have hated.  but i can not sing its complete praises, wonderful prose, yes, but the storyline made a disappointing turn at the end.  (yes, there will be spoilers in this post.)

but lets start with some praising.  as i mentioned before expectations are set high when salinger is alluded to for a novel and gilbert did not disappoint.  he was witty and filled with wonderful allusions and imagery.  for example:

just a week earlier, the temperature sulked in the teens, the windchill dragging the brat into newborn territory.

(how clever!)

 

a.n. dyer's eulogy for his dear friend charlie toppings:

what are we in this world without our friends if family is the foundation then friends are its crossbeams it's drywall it's plumbing friends keep us warm and warmhearted friends furnish and with a friend like charlie topping i was never without a home. . . whenever i was need of succor--succor. . . i could count on charlie.  he was an unlocked door with something smelling good in the oven.  he was the fire in the fireplace, the blanket draped over the couch, the dog at my feet.  he was the shelter she. i was the storm.

(so sweet!)

and:

the bubbles in the champagne shimmied up the flutes, a hundred phony smilies breaking the surface, like some esther williams routine . . .

(i always adore an esther williams reference!)

and last but not least

every act of memory is an act of imagination.

(which is true, our minds fill in the gaps and so our memories are more imagination than actual recollection.)

the story is narratored by philip toppings, and his likability was on par with the awkward affection one feels for holden caulfield.  both are at low points in their life they differ in that i was hopeful that holden turns around, whereas with phillip i was just creeped out by him.  he went from pathetic yet insight godson of a.n. dyer to single white female.  i didn't care for his character and though i guess he was important because he revealed that & (a.n. dyer's novel in the book) was about dyer's dominance and abuse in their friendship and also for the letters that started different sections.  but other than that his creepy stalker behavior took away from the story of dyer and his son.  though i guess in the movie adaption of the book, he would make for a good point of view.

random digression, i could see this as a wes anderson movie, quirky family, absent father (weird cloning story), and creep neighbor.  bill murray as a.n. dyer, adrien brody and jason swartzman as richard and jaime, and owen wilson as phillip toppings.  not sure who would play andrew, guess he would have to look like a young bill murray.  (hollywood should make this happen!)

and now that i mentioned it the whole cloning storyline was not my cup of tea if it was true.  it is my cup of tea, if was some crazy story a.n. dyer made up to justify how he had ruined his life.  though towards the end of the novel it felt like it was to be true.  

and in the end, i didn't like andrew dying.  it just seemed so random and out of place.  its intent seemed more like a convienent way to finish up the story.  it was really great up until that point and then it fell apart for me and i started to lose interest. 

but i mean still check it out.  it is a good story and well-written and maybe you will enjoy the ending more than me.

and before i close i have to add.  this novel made me long for new york.  so many locations were mentioned that i could plan a whole tour of the city based on it.  my next trip out i will definitely hit up the frick!  and do central park proper, i mean i haven't even seen the alice in wonderland statues.  oh and i love love loved when andrew went to the met looking for jennie.  what an adorable game!!! i am going to do that someday.  call someone i am dating and tell them what museum, i am at and then say that i am staying in front of my favorite work of art and see of they can find me!  but seriously the whole time i read, i wished that i was in new york!

*forgot to take a picture before i returned the book.

the fantastic mr. fox. roald dahl (141)

last week in honor of roald dahl's birthday, i finally watched wes anderson's "fantastic mr. fox".  of course, anderson walks on water in my eyes so i loved it.  it was sweet and clever and filled me with whimsy, just like all of his other films.  and though the film and the book are nothing alike other than the premise, there was a scene from the movie that sparked my desire to read the book.  it involved bunce and his goose liver doughnuts!  foie gras doughnuts!!! though a villan, bunce sounded like my kind of man!  and so i wondered did this really happen in the book?  did dahl or anderson create this dessert??

and of course . . . it was dahl!

bunce is alittle on the short side but, if he made me foie gras donuts everyday, i could look pass it.

the rest of the story was of course a delight.  mr. fox is fantastic and clever, stealing food from the three farmers.  though i guess it is quite horrible that he does steal from them.  but i will justify his thievery by claiming that the farmers left mr. fox with no alternative by farming mr. fox's hunting grounds and a fox has got to eat.  mr. fox did have a family to feed.  also they destroyed his home!  they turned a hill to a crater, so here is another justification for his stealing.  also  he ashared his stolen goods with the other animals which makes the stealing okay.  he wasn't a greedy thief, more like robin hood!  

also the farmers did shoot off mr. fox's tail (poor guy) so stealing their goods was sweet revenge in my book.  and really did  bean need that much cider???

all in all, this book was a delight and if you have never read it, pick it up.  let me know if boggis, bunce, and bean are still waiting by the fox hole.

bottle rocket.

i adore wes anderson but i have never seen his early movies and by early i mean "bottle rocket" and "rushmore" (yeah i know it's horrible that i haven't seen the later, especially if i claim i love anderson but i haven't and i do.)

and to be honest, good thing this is the first time i saw it because if "bottle rocket" was the first anderson film i ever saw i would have never watched the others. i mean the only thing that reminded me of the rest of the anderson movies was the music. the music was quirky but perfect for every scene like all of his movies. and also pagoda is in it! i googled and his name is kumar pallana but he'll alway be pagoda to me.

this movie was missing whimsy. there is this feeling of warm fuzzies one gets watching anderson films and i didn't get them watching this. normally i get lost in his films, i become a member of that dysfunctional family and love them quirks and all. and there are also cute moments sprinkled through out his films, like the plays of margot tenebaum, the random sea creatures of "the life aquatic", the letter writing between sam and susie but none of that in "bottle rocket." there were no memorable scenes either.

visually it was nothing close to an anderson film. there were no cute sets. nor did he do his single shot scan through multiple rooms thing. wes probably hadn't seen "the graduate" yet so "bottle rocket" didn't have any mike nichols-esque shots. it lacked heart, it was as if wes was trying to be late 90's cool when he just needed to be his oddball self.

james caan couldn't even save it. i was so excited to see him in it. sonny back and alive but his character fell short for me.

i mean not everyone can be amazing from the beginning. a lot of people have strong debuts and than suck so i'm glad he made this. but let's be honest, i feel no need to buy the criterion version of this film.