Categories
Film Features Film/TV

Foreign Affairs

Late winter/early spring is traditionally the worst time of the year for movies. With most late-year Oscar hopefuls and staggered-release foreigns and indies finally having hit town, we’re left with the studio system’s lesser lights as the big companies clear out the detritus to make room for the summer blockbusters. In this context, Miramax’s Birthday Girl would seem to be a promising alternative. A low-budget British flick that admirably mixes genres (comedy, thriller, romance), cultures, and languages (English and Russian) and stars Nicole Kidman, Birthday Girl has been building its minor buzz through recent festival appearances in London and Toronto and at Sundance.

Promising though it may seem, Birthday Girl ultimately doesn’t offer much more than the typical born losers Hollywood dumps during this off-season. In fact, I can’t imagine the film getting much attention at all were it not for the presence of Kidman, a talented and adventurous actress who has become a major star in the past year.

Written and directed by the brother filmmaking team of Tom and Jez Butterworth, Birthday Girl opens with lonely Englishman John (Ben Chaplin, looking every bit the stereotypical “mild-mannered bank clerk”) offering a voice-over account of his romantic troubles. “When you think about it, England is just a small island,” John says. “I know that gives you about 20 million girls to choose from — but if you live in a small town and work long hours, you’re just not going to get a chance to meet them all.” This is a means of justifying the “bravery” of John’s decision to order a bride from a dubious Web site called “From Russia With Love.”

John’s new companion arrives soon after in the form of Nadia (Kidman), a tall, sexy, chain-smoking Russkie who speaks no English. After a few moderately interesting scenes of John and Nadia learning to co-exist — the understandable tension mitigated by a growing (mostly sexual) chemistry — the film takes a turn into thriller territory.

Birthday Girl consistently misses opportunities with this potentially compelling premise. For starters, the film establishes John’s “purchase” of Nadia in quick, credit-sequence narrative strokes rather than exploring in more detail what might lead a man to make such a provocative decision. The film does present a possible romantic partner at John’s workplace but doesn’t give enough information about the character’s interactions with other people to explain, outside of the opening narration, why he would resort to a mail-order bride. The film also does little, aside from the language barrier, with the obvious cultural issues that would arise when an Englishman and Russian woman, strangers to one another, attempt to force a romantic union. Instead, Birthday Girl bypasses these potentially fruitful subjects in favor of a “madcap” con-game-meets-screwball-romance whose plotting is ragtag and whose surprise “twists” are entirely familiar. Certainly there isn’t enough going on here in terms of story and dialogue to make up for the film’s entirely mundane visual style.

The attraction here is Kidman, who acquits herself perfectly well. But, ultimately, this feels like a stunt movie for Kidman, a breather between bigger projects that allows her the novelty and challenge of doing an accent when she’s not speaking her lines in Russian.

A respectable if middling genre pic whose quirkiness feels forced (and not all that quirky), Birthday Girl isn’t really a bad film, it’s just not a very interesting one. — Chris Herrington

In what can only be described as an abashedly good time, The Count of Monte Cristo delivers ripe, swashbuckling fun. The classic Dumas revenge tale comes to life with Guy Pearce (Memento) and Jim Caviezel (The Thin Red Line, Frequency) playing opposite one another as friends cum enemies in 19th-century France. Pearce plays the Machiavellian Mondego with fiery panache and Caviezel is surprisingly enjoyable as Edmund Dantes (aka the Count), capturing the character’s unusual transformation from kindly simpleton into vengeful playboy. Aside from the winning performances, The Count delights in having fun with its enjoyable subject matter. Considering the glut of wretched films that have recently been born out of Dumas’ work (The Man in the Iron Mask and The Musketeer), this is no small feat.

The story itself is rather simple, though the details are complicated slightly in the film. Dantes and Mondego are two best friends who’ve grown up together in Marseilles and now work as sailors on a local boat. Dantes is a kind but uneducated son of a local craftsman. Mondego, on the other hand, is the heir to a great family fortune — the son of privilege. Constantly jealous of his friend’s happiness, Mondego is particularly covetous of Dantes’ beautiful fiancÇe, Mercedes (Dagmara Dominczyk). When Dantes unknowingly involves himself in government affairs (he innocently agrees to deliver a letter from the quarantined general Napoleon), Mondego seizes the opportunity to frame him for treason. With the help of a crooked local politician, Villefort (James Frain), Mondego has Dantes sent off to prison.

Family and friends are told that Dantes is dead, and Mercedes weds Mondego. Meanwhile Dantes is in prison, clinging no longer to feelings of love and spirituality but solely to visions of vengeance. When a neighboring inmate accidentally tunnels into Dantes’ cell, a friendship is formed as the educated, elderly priest (Richard Harris) teaches the young man all he has to offer. The priest schools Dantes in literature, math, science, and, of course, swordsmanship. The priest also tells his pupil of a lost treasure which he is going to rescue once he tunnels out of the prison. In a daring escape (minus the priest), Dantes frees himself from the big house, finds the treasure, and crowns himself the Count of Monte Cristo, arriving in Paris as a mysterious young aristocrat, all the while plotting to exact his revenge on those who wronged him.

Although The Count of Monte Cristo is laughable at turns (Luis Guzman is ridiculous as the Count’s indebted manservant, failing to alter his accent from the same street-smart one he used for roles in Boogie Nights and Out of Sight), it’s also fast-paced, exciting, and hard not to enjoy. — Rachel Deahl

Categories
News News Feature

OTHER PEOPLE’S PROBLEMS

Listen:

I was wondering if you could help me with something. Since you’re a woman, maybe you could give me a woman’s point of view. I really can’t talk about this with my friends so maybe you could help. Basically this is it:

After the death of her parents last year, my long-term girlfriend got, well, a little chubby. Since then, she has been working hard to get her figure back to where it used to be and is starting to look really fucking fabulous. Here’s the deal: Before she lost her figure, she liked to wear miniskirts but stopped when she gained weight. Now she’s wearing them again, but the only difference is she doesn’t wear panties anymore.

She says it makes her feel sexy not to wear them. That’s fine with me, but when we go out she lets men look under her dress. She tries to do it discreetly, but it is pretty obvious to me that she is letting them get a good look. We love each other, and if doing that makes her feel more sexy then it is okay as long as she still comes home with me, but do you think it’s something I should be worried about?

Signed,

A Bit Muffed

Okay:

There is something to be said for the thrill of lingerie, whether it’s because it’s lacy or sexy or just not there at all. And there is something to be said about a woman who has, from the sound of it, rediscovered her own sex appeal. Wanting to flaunt it is nothing out of the ordinary. Nothing to be worried about.

My question is: Does she know that you know she’s sharing her goodies with the entire neighborhood? Or does she think you think you’re the only one with the recipe? I only ask because, yes, sometimes women are conniving (not because they’re women, just because they’re people) and they want their boyfriends to see other guys checking them out, if only to reaffirm how attractive they are. This could be the case here. She knew she got a little, well, thicker, and now she’s trying to prove to you that she’s attractive. The solution could be as simple as taking her in your arms and telling her how great she looks.

But … there’s always a but, you know … once I happened to be in California during a rather blustery spring. And, as it happened, one of those blusters blew a woman’s skirt up and exposed, well, everything. Because this young lady wasn’t wearing underpants either. I’m not sure if she was feeling sexy or not, and, granted, I was young and the city streets were rough, but my first and still-lingering thought was “That woman is a prostitute.” Now, I’m not saying your girlfriend is a prostitute or even wants to be with someone else. However, clothes send signals; you better believe that the lack thereof sends a pretty loud signal itself, one that doesn’t always say NOT AVAILABLE.

Here’s the other thing: I’m not a man; I’m not really sure I understand how this whole scenario works (in terms of the when, where, and how mechanics) but I’m not sure everyone wants a snatch of snatch. And I’m pretty sure there are laws against this sort of thing. Let’s say, just for the sake of argument, that your girlfriend was male and was going around in public wearing a big trenchcoat before exposing herself — however discreetly — to others. Would you have even needed to write me? Probably not. The community outcry would have taken care of the problem.

So a woman’s point of view? It doesn’t matter how sexy she feels; she needs to keep it in her pants.

Listen:

I’m writing in hopes that you can help me with a particular relationship dilemma that I’m having. I’ve been involved in a long-distance, somewhat romantic relationship with a girl. This girl happens to be involved with another individual in her hometown. We agreed that if we met someone we found interesting and attractive in our respective hometowns we would allow ourselves to pursue a relationship with them. Obviously, she has taken this option.

I had resigned not to consider the possibility of pursuing another relationship, convinced that there would not be another in the world that I found stimulating, interesting, attractive, etc. I recently met a girl who I immediately found interesting, stimulating, etc. and felt very comfortable around. I assured myself and the out-of-town girl that although I spent quite a bit of time with the in-town girl and had a great time when I was with her, I was only looking for a friend.

Yet the more time that I’ve spent with the in-town girl, the more attracted to her I’ve become. I get excited when I see her name on the Caller ID and disappointed when it’s not her number. I wanted to tell her how beautiful she was the other night but was afraid of the potential consequences … because what really complicates this situation is that these two girls are friends.

I feel like the in-town girl might have feelings for me, but it’s difficult to tell. I’m quite monogamous, so I’m not looking to have a romantic relationship with both girls or anything freaky like that. I just didn’t expect that I would be so attracted to the in-town girl. I usually immediately develop a romantic relationship with a girl and then become friends with her, not the other way around, so this is a new one on me. I want to tell the in-town girl how I feel about her, and I want to tell the out-of-town girl that I want to pursue a relationship with the in-town girl. Should I reveal my feelings for the in-town girl and risk losing two friends? Or should I play it safe and keep two good friends?

Signed,

Off Track

Okay:

This seems to me to be another classic example of the love triangle Archie, Betty, and Veronica-style. Except that Veronica doesn’t live in Riverdale but somewhere else … far, far away? Or close, close by?

Let’s pretend, just for the sake of argument, that Veronica lives in rival Sunnydale, a mere jaunt away from you, Archie. In that case I would say tread carefully; I don’t know that many women, or men for that matter, who feel completely comfortable going out with their friends’ exes. Especially so soon after a break-up. The safest option for everybody would be to hold off and wait until things become less … well, recent. Give yourself time to lick your wounds, deepen your friendship with Betty so she doesn’t become Rebound-Girl, and then make your move when you can’t even remember what’s-her-name’s name. If what you’re feeling is real, it won’t go away while you wait.

However, it sounds as if Veronica lives a little farther away than Sunnydale. Which alleviates some discomfort, because you and Betty can go to school or parties or whatever and not have to worry about running into her.

What concerns me, because something always does, is why you would have to assure Veronica that you and Betty are just friends if she (Veronica) is off running around with Reggie. Before you do anything, you need to make sure that you’re ready for a relationship with someone other than Veronica … that you’re not biding your time until she comes back to you or showing her that someone else — a friend, even — wants to be with you.

Having said that, let’s assume you’re seriously into Betty. Veronica is a thing of the past and you want to declare your feelings without hurting anyone or being hurt yourself. This is what I call a death-defying circus act, so I wish you good luck.

You say you think in-town girl (or Betty, as I like to call her) is interested in you, too, but you can’t tell. My guess is: She’s confused. If she does like you, she probably doesn’t want to say anything because of the exact same reasons you don’t want to say anything. But it’s almost worse for her. If she’s friends with Veronica, and the two of them talk, which friends happen to do, and you keep assuring Veronica the two of you are just friends … well, I think you see where I’m going. Even if poor Betty likes you, she’s not going to voice it because she knows — via Veronica — that her feelings won’t be returned. So the onus here rests upon you.

But that doesn’t have to be a bad thing. Whenever I ask myself the question: Do I want to be friends or more with this person, I almost always pick the friendlier of the two options. Because there’s kissing involved and I like kissing. So I say go for it.

Honestly, I wouldn’t worry about losing two good friends. Unlike our friends Archie, Betty, and Veronica, I’m banking on the fact that you are all adults and will be able to handle yourselves. Just be straightforward with both of your Riverdale friends and everything should work out fine. And, by the way, being friends first can be very good, so it might just be worth it.

(Gotta problem? Wanna make it my business? Write cashiola@memphisflyer.com.)

Categories
Sports Sports Feature

MEMPHIS SPORTS SCENE

Blast coach Rickey Jemison says that this league is about one thing: helping football players go pro. “The players play to get an opportunity to get looked at,” Jemison says. That’s right. No salaries, no TV cameras, just some guys playing football in a serious way.

Jemison knows something about serious football. He’s the second all-time leading rusher for Arkansas State University, and later played for the NFL’s Redskins. Jemison also coached in various positions for the AFL2’s Arkansas Twisters and Pensacola Barracudas.

The squad, according to Jemison will hold try-outs around Valentine’s weekend.

Also, according to the NAFL website (www.nafl.net), the Memphis Blast will hold tryouts at the Wilson World End (near the Mall of Memphis) from 6:30-10:30 p.m. on Saturday, February 2.

Both teams are part of the South East Region Central Division, along with the Central Arkansas Rhinos, as well as other teams to be determined soon.

Also, starting its second season in Memphis are the Memphis Xplorers in the Arena2 football league. The Xplorers will hold tryouts as well this Saturday. Here’s what the ever eloquent Xplorers PR people have to say:

“Memphis Xplorers head coach Danton Barto won’t spend the morning on Groundhog’s Day looking for some silly rodents’ shadow. He’ll be looking for some hardcore serious football players.

“The Xplorers will hold their final open tryout for the 2002 season on Saturday February 2, at Southaven High School. Registration will begin at 9 a.m. (long after the Groundhog has made its appearance), with the on field workout scheduled to begin at 10 a.m.

“Prospects should wear appropriate workout attire and cleats. Cost of the camp is $45 which covers the mandatory arenafootball2 insurance. Payment can be by cash, or money order. No personal checks will be accepted.”

No rodents, huh? Good to see that Coach Barto has his priorities straight. And good to see that Memphis semi-professional football, a brand of loveable vermin in its own right, refuses to die.

ODDS & ENDS

  • Let’s all raise a glass to Grizzlies Center Bryant Reeves in his retirement. Far too many sportswriters speak badly of the big guy (I’m guilty as well), but he was just someone asked to do too much, given his relative capabilities. Also, while his salary will still burden the team through next year, at least he had the good sense to walk away and let the team get on with their collective lives.

  • Here’s a list of rookies playing in the All-Star rookie game: Shane Battier, Memphis; Pau Gasol, Memphis; Brendan Haywood, Washington; Joe Johnson, Boston; Andrei Kirilenko, Utah; Tony Parker, San Antonio; Zeljko Rebraca, Detroit; Jason Richardson, Golden State; and Jamaal Tinsley, Indiana. For those on the Rookie of the Year watch, seeing Battier, Gasol, and Tinsley mix it up should be fun. You can get a preview during tonight’s game as the Grizzlies travel to Indianapolis.

  • The two top Grizzlies vote-getters for the 2002 All-Star game are guard Jason Williams (170,807 votes), and center Lorenzen Wright (65,263 votes). Both players are in the top ten for their respective positions in the Western Conference.

  • Rookie forward Pau Gasol has scored in double figures in 11 straight games and has scored 25 points or more six times during that span. He is shooting 60 percent (98-of-164) in his last 11 games. Gasol has not shot under 50 percent in a game since making 2-of-5 shots in a loss to Atlanta on January 4.

  • Tiger senior forward Kelly Wise currently leads the C-USA in rebounding with 11.6 rpg. Freshman guard DaJuan Wagner currently ranks second in scoring with 21.2 ppg.

QUOTABLE:

  • “That’s what the game comes down to, a silly play. It doesn’t make any sense, this game, sometimes.” A very un-Zen Lakers coach Phil Jackson, on the officiating in the Lakers 93-87 loss on January 27.

Categories
Sports Sports Feature

GRIZZLIES CAN’T RUN LATE WITH LAKERS

Chalk another loss up for the Grizzlies (13-33). The Grizzlies dropped to the L.A. Lakers (32-12) 100-85 Friday night in front of a sold-out Pyramid crowd.

The Grizzlies controlled most of the game, with a lead as big as nine in the third quarter. The Memphis squad used the talents of point guard Brevin Knight, starting for the injured Jason Williams, who is still suffering soreness from ingrown toe-nails on either foot. Knight paced the team with 13 points to lead all Grizzlies, and also a game-high ten assists. Like Knight, forward Pau Gasol scored 13 points, and tossed out six assists of his own. Forward Grant Long and guard Rodney Buford scored ten points apiece to round out the Grizzlies scoring effort.

That was enough through three quarters, but then Knight needed to sit due to fatigue. Without Knight, the squad’s offense and defense stalled. “Our offense bogged down,” Grizzlies coach Sidney Lowe said after the game. “We couldn’t get it done on the inside, we couldn’t get it done on the outside.”

Battier agreed. “We gave them a big momentum boost in the fourth,” Battier said. “We didn’t make plays down the stretch. We were stuck at 75 for a long time.”

In terms of the defensive breakdown, Battier said communication was at a premium. “We didn’t talk enough on the floor, and that hurt us,” Battier said. “You just have to do the best you can.”

Part of the defensive breakdown happened late in the third, when Lakers guard Derek Fisher hit consecutive threes to cut the Grizzlies lead to one. “The word was don’t leave Fisher,” Lowe said. “Just don’t leave him.” Fisher was undefended with both shots, and finished the game with 21 points.

Along with Fisher, Lakers center scored 26 points and pulled down 10 rebounds for L.A. Guard Kobe Bryant — who scored 56 points in the two teams’ previous meeting — was limited to only 13 points. Forward Rick Fox, held scoreless though the first three quarters, scored 10 points in the fourth, as the Lakers outscored the Grizzlies 32-16 in the fourth.

The Grizzlies return to the Pyramid on Sunday, February 3, at 2 p.m. when they face the Charlotte Hornets.