Childhood is an important formative time in a person’s life. When that time is spent in a spiritual laden schooling system where you’re sexually abused by the principal of the institution and at the same time refused the ability to have a relationship with your one true love due to this same principal, it’s understandable that you’d be a bit messed up about it.

This however, is the backstory. Bad Education is actually the story of how Angel (Gael Garcia Bernal) meets up with a former friend, now director, proposing to make his screenplay into a film. His screenplay, entitled The Visit, is about this childhood of abuse and about how in his adult life he ended up confronting his abuser. With little to lose Angel claims he’ll do anything to play the leading role in the film of Zahara, the transvestite singer.

The film structurally broke itself in half; just as it does out main character of Ignacio (Nacho Perez). It’s split between the story of the Ignacio as a child being abused and Angel making this movie/Ignacio’s adulthood taking his revenge. This allows for the film to be taken in two separate levels, and at the same time for it to be segmented completely. While one half of the story definitely informs the other it’s also easy to see that these parts can make their own whole, which is how I decided to interpret the film. I saw the story of Angel separate for the story of Ignacio; the story of an actor trying to get this great part and become a sensation is different from the tragic story of a child unable to love.

When the film ended I couldn’t help uttering a word I find myself using to describe certain films more and more; Pulp. While the first time I heard this word used in relation to storytelling was in Pulp Fiction – which opens with a definition — I honestly never quite considered it as a genre, as opposed to just one instance of a person bending a story to be this distinctly peculiar thing. Years later I can see it’s influence (and where it takes it’s own from) and somehow I want to say that this film, more than autobiography or anything else, felt pulp to me. This could possibly be me focusing more closely on the tale of Zahara and Manuel Berenguer (Lluis Homar) than anything else when all was said and done. This may be because, like even the characters in the film, I don’t want to think too much about the childhood in this film.

 What do you think of Bad Education?

Can we call this the honeymoon episode? After doing 150 it seems that only right that something went wrong, so we had a week away from the usual format but here we return with this 2006 film After the Wedding to discuss. So check out the notes below:

(03:36) Review: After the Wedding
(31:21) Questions
(42:10) Top 5: Weddings in Film

Thanks for listening and feel free to let us know what you think either through the comments below or email us here.  You can subscribe to the podcast via our RSS or iTunes and now Stitcher.  It would be awesome if you would rate/review us on iTunes (we’ll read your reviews on the show)

Four years ago the world was witness to something it had never imagined possible; Star Trek was popular. J.J. Abrams took the job as director of what would be the revitalized world of a heavy geek-loved property that had very little out of market attraction and made it palatable to all. I would ask if this is a changing of the times? If audiences warmed to the idea of space? Or did J.J. Abrams put so many lens flares that it warped the minds of all into figuring out that it was plain and simple a great movie.

Today, with higher expectations and the addition of (more geek-beloved) Benedict Cumberbatch in the role of John Harrison, Abrams must scale another mountain and a half to blow fans out of the water — and us search for where R2D2 is in this one. Let’s take a moment before we answer if he made the mark; can we?

So what makes these batch of films (that I’m calling reboots, even though technically they aren’t) so good is that they hold spectacle over the niche elements without caring. Now, let me be clear before I go any further: I am not a Star Trek fan, I grew up with The Next Generation playing on my TV and actively disliking/ignoring it, so I may be speaking out of turn, but this is how the world of the internet makes it seem, so that’s how I decide to view it. Whenever I hear Star Trek fans describe the brand they always seem to reach a point of description that makes it seem more interested in creating paradoxical science claiming to be true (within that universe) using logic to reach it’s ends rather than making it – you know – FUN. Abrams with the swoop of a pen (and a few lens flares – seriously guys I’m going to keep making lens flare gags here) wrote that right out of the film. He asked us to jump onto a roller coaster and takes us point to point without asking any questions and I’m happy for every minute of it.

Now, before I make this movie seem completely mindless let me stop you from asking. It isn’t. The film does apply a lot of logic to it, and it’s not because Spock (Zachary Quinto) arguing with Uhura (Zoe Saldana) or Kirk (Chris Pine) telling us that it’s logical reminds us of it, but rather it’s own inherent nature does that. Even though early on in the film we’re queued into one of the biggest elements of the character of Kirk and his method not to be logic but dumb luck — via a wonderful monologue from Admiral Pike (Bruce Greenwood) — and it taints that idea of logic, it feels like a misdirect. Yes, there’s a lot of ‘gut’ reaction that comes from Kirk but it always begins in a point of logic and just dovetailing into improvisation from that point on when things go wrong. You can even see it when logic fails Spock towards the end of the film how he end up abandoning it for an improvised ending.

Just like with many second chapters these days the highlight is the villain and Cumberbatch doesn’t disappoint. Every moment he lingers on a screen is a moment we all wish was at least 50% longer when it’s over and for a myriad of reasons. Part of me even wishes he was just playing his version of Sherlock and I’d be happy enough, but this is probably better. His terrorizing nature added to his physical dominance (as shown in a brilliant action scene where he has two big ass guns) just keeps the film on its toes in ways that the lacking menace from Eric Bana in part one just couldn’t manage.

What did you think of Star Trek Into Darkness?

I was trying to write a review for today… but instead this is all I can muster

I know I’m posting this late, and all I can say is… KAHHHNNN!!!!!

UPSTREAM COLOR (2013)

“To use the word hypnotic as it relates to the first third of this film would be more than on the nose. Where we see the Sampler giving instructions to Kris in a tone that is as important as asking someone to pick up the newspaper and seeing her unable to be tired or hungry due to it is astounding and grabs the viewer by the balls immediately.” - Read the full SPOILER review here

ALL ABOUT MY MOTHER (1999)

“As the film progresses from it’s opening scenes and takes Manuela to Barcelona we find her embroiled in a fight in a prostituted area, meeting with a nun, becoming assistant to a famous actress (and eventually perform an stage next to her), and play a surrogate mother to many other wayward souls in this world. Remembering the mystic glances that we see Esteban look at his mother with it makes sense that he would write a story where she’s basically the hero to everyone we meet.” – Read my full review here

BARBARA (2012)

I had heard fantastic things, but somehow all I can say about this movie is it was okay. I loved how it didn’t blatantly say when it was (or maybe I missed that bit) and how the filmmaker made it slowly unravel with bit elements. Regardless, it’s a small story that didn’t have a massive impact on me.

REWATCHED

Last weekend I treated myself to a break from the serious with some fun through The Dark Knight Rises and Fargo. Both films are far apart from one another but both amazingly crowd pleasing films in how it handles its own content.

Keeping the fun going I saw Death Proof (I still defend this movie to my death) and Kiss Kiss Bang Bang (fan favourite for all the Iron Man 3 fans out there). The films are pulpy messes that keep giving to an audience that wants it (that’s me).

Lastly; a film that I probably can call a new watch (as I barely remember seeing bits and pieces on TV as a child) I saw Field of Dreams. It’s a film that pumps sentimentality into every frame and for the better.

My count for the year of 2013 is updated to 88 First time watches (21 from 2013); 70 Rewatches; 158 Total Films

I love The Incredibles. I actually used to own in it on DVD, until my cousin (then three-years-old) raided my movie collection for any and all Disney things and I happily contributed it to her cinematic upbringing. I had — and still have — every intention of reacquiring it, on blu ray of course, but somehow haven’t quite found the day of the week where my mouse clicked ‘add to cart’ on Amazon just yet. However, this post is not about me crying that I don’t have it anymore or that I really like the movie; this post is about the idea of sequelling and this constant need for more and more canon to exist of these things we love.

With it now being two weeks into summer and the world and a half having seen Iron Man 3 for the fifth time each (it seems like it based on the numbers). I wonder why it is that audiences are always so fascinated with the idea of more of these set of characters that (hopefully) they just finished watching complete a full arc not a couple years ago. Now they have to check back in to find out that they’re still messed up with more issues to get over.

I guess more than the idea of serialization of cinema it’s the trapping of filmmakers that’s on my mind. Today when people utter the name Batman they immediately think of Christopher Nolan. With the final of his trilogy of Batman films, The Dark Knight Rises, having been released last year you can only imagine that within the next two or so years Warner Bros is going to look to somehow continue the legacy of that series and audiences are going to be walking in with a loaded gun called “not as good as Nolan” before a frame is even shown. Which leans us towards the discussion of people starting to BEG for Nolan to come back just so we can recapture that moment where we all smiled because it was good. This notion of trapping a storyteller into a box of a franchise bothers me.

Which is why the notion of Brad Bird talking about The Incredibles 2 bothers me. Not that he should never be allowed to reach into that bag ever again, but maybe it’s that I always find NEW so much more interesting than continuations. If he’s just continuing something previous then all my brain can imagine seeing is that very thing, a continuation as opposed to a reinvention that’ll make me feel just as gleeful as when I first saw The Incredibles and didn’t know what to expect. I had only an idea of what it could be and when I was shown what it was it wowed me so much that I couldn’t believe it. Doing a part two allows for less of my imagination in attempting to create the idea of what it could be so much less as I already know the template now.

This is quite possibly me rambling on for no reason whatsover, because more than likely this is just an off comment Bird is making in the five millionth interview he’s done where some journalist is pretty much forced by his/her editor to ask about the film. But it’s a thought none-the-less.

What’re your thoughts on this?

I honestly didn’t know I could plan this better. With the weekend past being mother’s day and this month’s upcoming Blindspot (still preparing to watch) being All About Eve this film was somewhat perfectly placed to buffer between all these things.

Manuela (Cecilia Roth) is the single mother of a film/art obsessed teenager, Esteban (Eloy Azorin), who on his 17th birthday when attempting to get a famous actress’ autograph after seeing her in a play is run over by a car and dies. This event prompts Manuela to leave Madrid and return to Barcelona to see her now deceased son’s father and confront the life she left behind eighteen years prior.

During that first chapter where we’re introduced to Manuela and her son it kind of sets up the film perfectly. More than believing this is a story of Manuela dealing with the grief of losing her son I see it as a fantasy concocted by her son as he claims he wants to write a story about her. Esteban looking longingly at his mother who he loves deeply and continually scribbles notes into his book, watching All About Eve and A Streetcar Named Desire, as well as seeing her ‘perform’ in a simulated conversation at her work — as a nurse at a transplant hospital — with a pair of doctors practicing asking the bereaving to give consent to allowing their loved ones who’ve just past to donate their organs for transplants.

As the film progresses from it’s opening scenes and takes Manuela to Barcelona we find her embroiled in a fight in a prostituted area, meeting with a nun, becoming assistant to a famous actress (and eventually perform an stage next to her), and play a surrogate mother to many other wayward souls in this world. Remembering the mystic glances that we see Esteban look at his mother with it makes sense that he would write a story where she’s basically the hero to everyone we meet.

This film is the realistic kind of fantastical that with each element being grounded in reality the fact that all these things happen to one person over such a short period of time it compounds itself in unbelievable nature and coincidence that it’s hard to not allow the possibility of fantasy to enter the discussion.

With the direct references to Bette Davis in All About Eve (and with the film titled All About My Mother; obvious connections) and A Streetcar Named Desire we see multiple instances of femininity rising above all outside forces. Even with the connection with Gena Rowlands in Opening Night, with the scene of Esteban trying to get Huma’s (Marisa Paredes) autograph outside the theatre the film wants to highlight the notion of these strong female archetypes. We have the prostitute who’s not afraid to admit her nature, the woman who’s become pregnant and wants to see it through regardless of the social boundaries she expects to meet, the actress who’s having career trouble and her friend being the drug addict, added to that the woman who’s lost her child; these are all stories told through the film and through the varying characters presented, the great part about this is that none of them every feel overbearing. Almodovar isn’t afraid to take that mixture of insane and let them stew for a while in small scenes where they can admit to one another that things aren’t great but still enjoy the moment (i.e. the drinking/ice-cream moment).

What do you think of All About My Mother?

Every once in a while you’ll sit down a do a podcast and have to go to Plan B; but then you realize that even that isn’t going to happen. What’s left. Well that’s when Plan C comes to play and you hope that it’s fail proof. This is what this episode is. We sat down to do one thing, and ended up doing something completely different and for your benefit you get to listen to me and my cohosts having a very lack of direction conversation. So enjoy, and send all the hate mail somewhere else (or leave it in the comments below).

Thanks for listening and feel free to let us know what you think either through the comments below or email us here.  You can subscribe to the podcast via our RSS or iTunes and now Stitcher.  It would be awesome if you would rate/review us on iTunes (we’ll read your reviews on the show)