Saturday, January 23, 2010

Star-struck a Second Time: Denys Arcand's STARDOM


I just watched the film Stardom for the second time last night and man, what an honest work of art. Director Denys Arcand shows us that he is a true master of visual storytelling. If you haven't seen it, I highly recommend it.

In brief, Stardom tells the rags-to-riches story of a young girl who skyrockets to the top tier of the modeling industry with the aid of prominent individuals (mostly men with whom she intimately involves herself) throughout her climb. For me, the most interesting aspect of the film has to be the way the story is told through various camera lenses, from TV sitcoms and talk shows, which range from a Canadian Jerry Springer to a more traditional Late Late Show host, to the black and white voyeuristic docudrama of Bruce Taylor (wonderfully portrayed by Robert LePage, who also directed an excellent film called Far Side of the Moon back in 2003.) The diversity of color footage, which illustrates Tina Menzhal's (Jessica Paré) life as a model as glamorous, idyllic and lush with color sharply contrasts with the darker, almost hidden truth that her life is only filled in by dominant blacks, shades of gray and the slightest hope of white. That is absolutely brilliant filmmaking.

And if you enjoy Stardom, be sure to check out Arcand's other films of note, namely The Decline of the American Empire (1986) and its sequel The Barbarian Invasions (2003). Oldies but goodies, guaranteed!

Friday, January 22, 2010

What Being a Writer Really Means

It's the same every semester. I teach college writing across NJ, and every semester without fail, a student will come up to me after I've just finished a discussion on rhetorical principles like narration or description and ask something like "How can I get a book published?" or the even more nebulous "How do I become a Writer."

So I give the student the Spark Notes version of my spiel, about how the Writer's life is a lonely, oftentimes empty one; how a Writer must be dedicated and faithful to the written words he or she presses down on the page, clicks onto the computer screen; how in times of even the thickest "Writer's Block" the Writer will hammer the heaviest of leaden words into the wall until it cracks enough so this Writer-Warrior can crash through it with the power of a freight train hauling "boxcars, boxcars, boxcars" of new and fresh messages that must reach the destination of a published book, newspaper headline, or movie theater's marquis.

For any student who hasn't thrown on his or her coat by now and left tracks leading to the classroom door, I belt out a harangue about how arduous a task it is to find a publisher who'll look at his or her foot any differently than the 12 other pairs of feet keeping the door ajar with late night manuscripts; how a Writer's shoes can't be fitted like Bobo's or Bill Gates', but must glow like an alien from the 11th dimension, its foot colored by shoes that show off all the individuality in each of its seventeen toes, plus the rhyme and reason behind each and every toenail; how there's the possibility of self-publication through myriad websites like CreateSpace, and how that's all fine and good, but how that option also comes with it own set of perils. "Nice book, John," critics and colleagues will snicker and sip their cocktails, "but it's not a real book!"

Being a Writer is hard. Writers know this. People who want to be Writers don't. The problem is that the students who want to be writers are the same students whose pages I slash up with scratches of blue ink because despite the quality of the content, they are a toxic ocean of textspeak, a wasteland of grammatical errors and sentence fragments where modifiers dangle around like half-chopped heads in a Rob Zombie picture. Don't even get me started on the amount of comma traffic. And apostrophes? They seem to being going the way of dodo.

These are the ones who want to publish a book. Who want to be Writers. But in all sincerity, they probably won't. Why? It's pretty simple: They don't enjoy writing enough to learn the craft of writing. Most of these students may dabble in poetry or have written a short story once; some even maintain blogs which many times have as many grammatical problems as they do subscribers. A Writer is a different species altogether. Whether it's a single poem or a ten page essay on global warming from a Neo-Marxist standpoint, a Writer must immerse him- or herself in the work; he or she must enjoy jotting down those first words that will be replaced later by two even more accurate words that say the same thing more effectively or poetically, and perhaps in fewer words. This is the Writer's life.

Case in point: My creative writing courses teem with some similar students, those who want to be Writers. But then there are those in class who actually are Writers. Here's the difference: The Writers realize that to be Writers, they have to constantly practice. They have to write. They accept the fact that they have to make writing a habit and nurture it. They see truth in my analogy "Writing is to the Writer as junk is to William S. Burroughs" (who, coincidentally, was also addicted to writing.) Writing is a drug, so that when Writers don't do it, they can't function properly, go through withdrawals, even start doubting themselves. Without pen pressed to page, the Writer falls to pieces bit by bit. None of these students ever ask me "How do I publish a book" or "How do I become a Writer?" They're already on the path. They walk into the classroom and I teach them about craft, and they use that honed skill to mold their content more effectively and make it sing. They already carry journals where ever they go, unafraid to fire off a few rounds of verbal ammunition into it or explode a few thought-bombs here and there; they know it's target practice. They know the more they get, the better their aim will become so that when they're face to face with a publisher, their manuscript will shine. They are the ones who will be published, guaranteed.

And when the publishers ask the Writer to rewrite or polish up the draft he or she had submitted, or suggests they add this or take out that, the Writer will smirk, go home, and continue where they left off, already halfway through the rewrite. The Writer never stops writing.

So if you want to publish a book or be a Writer, my advice to you is simple and straightforward: Just Write.

Saturday, January 9, 2010

Dark Fantasies Brought to Light

ONE HOUR FANTASY GIRL journeys into a different corner of the dark basement world of prostitution, the sexless realm of fantasy fulfillment. It is stunningly shot with a beautiful mélange of color that externalize the inner conflicts Brandi/Becky battles with throughout the film. It’s a raw and oftentimes sweetly disturbing picture; at one moment we witness Brandi fulfilling the overtly Freudian desires of Roger; at other times we fall at ease when she spends time with Bobby, her seeming savior. The twist in the film is unpredictable, and was probably what I enjoyed most about the film.


Although ONE HOUR FANTASY GIRL was superbly shot by cinematographer Rush Hamden, the film fell somewhat flat for me where the overlapping storylines are concerned. Some elements just didn't add up, specifically the very loose subplot which takes place in a diner. I get what those scenes are trying to accomplish, but I don't see how it fits seamlessly with the context of the story’s main plot. The ending, I thought, could have come much sooner than it did, and I feel that more could have been done to expound on Becky’s desire to work a job in real estate so that the ending wouldn’t have appeared so arbitrary.


I saw many similarities between ONE HOUR FANTASY GIRL and THE GIRLFRIEND EXPERIENCE (and while I appreciate the premise in the former much more than in Soderbergh’s film, I did feel more empathy for Sasha Grey’s Chelsea than I did for Kelly-Ann Tursi’s Brandi), but writer/director Edgar Michael Bravo offers up an intriguing alternate take on the “dark damsel in distress” motif and gives the audience a worthwhile ride.