film analysis

this is what i have been up to over the last twenty four hours....watching and disliking films that have nothing to do with the papers that i have to write and that are due in less than a week's time...
Did not like "Be Cool" at all, even though John Travolta was way too cool getting a deserving yet under-exposed singing sensation her true rights...he was all over the place, dancing with uma thurman and playing clever tricks with the pawn cards..but this ffilm is almost impossible to understand if you have not watched "get shorty:, and since i hadn't, i suppose i should better reserve my comments. the rock was way too cool for words though.
"History of violence" is definitely not a film worth viewing. and i am absolutely serious. not because i can not watch violence on screen, but because this film should have ended half and hour or more before it actually did. according to the dvd cover, this film is about one guy who shoots some bad guys trying to protect his family and job etc, and then is mistaken as someone else by some gangsters. one can only dream of what the film could have become if Viggo Mortensen (looking gross, a huge let down after Lord of the rings) was actually not the guy thses people were claiming he is. but he had to be, because the direcor was hoping for some subtle psychological drama that definitely eluded the likes of me who are as of now fully steeped in film theory. but the sex scenes were great.
"Taking Lives" was definitely the best of the lot, though medusa is proud to say that she is now a competent reader of the filmic narrative. there were some unncessary twists and turns, ones that were not important, and did not serve any purpose. but what the hell. Angelina Jolie was looking good, and that is an understatement.
so now i shall go back to not studying.