Things that DON'T happen in real life.. but seem to happen all the time on TV and in the movies

Masquerade balls. 

It's such a cheap shot. Oh, hey, I have a bunch of characters. They have all types of feelings for each other. Some are unrequited, tragically. Some are seen as socially unacceptable, either by society as a whole, or by the set group of people. Brilliant! Let's put tiny masks on them, spike the punch, and watch them make bad decisions. In theory it works, but there are too many inconsistencies for me to sufficiently suspend my disbelief. 


Known, documented issues with masquerade balls: 

1. Masks that cover barely half the face don't fool anybody. Actually, masks in general don't fool anybody. I know it's creepy, but if you were shown photographs of all the people you knew and saw on a regular basis, you could figure them out by their bodies and clothes. No one wants to admit to being that aware of other people's body parts, but face it, we all are. 
2. Humans, as a species, tend to take their clothes off and/or lose things while drinking. [[[Case in point: myself. You. All your friends.]]] So, at an actual masquerade party, people would get drunk and take their masks off. Therefore making the entire charade pointless. 
3. Before you say that people wouldn't drink at a masquerade party, think about it: it's a masquerade party. 
4. Finally, in any population present at a party, there are always those people, THOSE AWFUL PEOPLE that don't wear costumes. You know them. They're the ones wearing the exact same thing they normally wear, those same horrifically uncreative ones who "go as themselves" for Halloween (NOTE: It is acceptable to do this if you show up at the party after 11 p.m., when people have already begun following rule 2, and cowboy hats and boas are draped over random people, furniture, and people passed out on furniture). Anyway, those people make everything weird because they don't show up in masks, and they ruin the whole concept. Which, as I've stated, is built on flimsy logic to begin with. 

People get injured, get back up, and are miraculously unscathed the next day. 

Several weeks ago I fell down a flight of stairs. It sucked. I had a few drinks in me, but I was sober enough to feel every iota of pain. It was awful. I had to plan my lessons with whole blocks of dialogue, in case my lip (which I bit through) was still too swollen for me to talk (and students would read it off). For two weeks, I looked like an abuse victim. Bruises, huge and yellow, covered me. I couldn't bend down or kneel for a month. Yet people in TV and movies seem to get the crap kicked out of them and bounce right back. It makes me have more respect for Buffy, because at least, on that show, they address it. They literally say, several times, that she has accelerated strength and healing powers. 

No one's roots grow out on TV. 

This does not really require much explanation, but it brings up something that's just generally unfair about life: When you don't dye your hair, it takes FOREVER to grow. When you dye it, even slightly, the roots show up almost immediately. On TV, this never happens. 

Women wear loads of makeup and somehow don't look like prostitutes. 

I was watching Pretty Little Liars the other day (because yes, I watch that show. Partially to have some common ground with my students, but also because I genuinely like it). All of the main characters are loaded with makeup. The thing that I don't get is, they look fine. You know how you can wear makeup to make yourself look like you're not wearing any? It's like that, multiplied by eleven. What kills me is that if I (or any woman) wore that kind of makeup during the day (or even at night), I'd look ridiculous. I'd look like a trying-too-hard-hooker. Yet these girls (21-year-olds playing 16-year-olds, obviously), look pretty. I'm sure it's some combination of lighting and camera work. In fact, I know it is. I remember vividly how much more makeup I had to put on when going onstage. But it's just another inconsistency that bothers me. 

I've only seen 2.5 scary movies

I just read Boston.com's list of the 50 scariest movies ever clickity here if you want to read it too and I'm shocked and dismayed to report that I've only seen 2.5 of the movies.

1. The Ring: Honestly, I didn't love it. I was freaked out by it, but it helped me articulate what I believe to be an important distinction: scary versus startling. The Ring made us jump out of our seats, but it was due mostly to the startling factor. The camera zooms into the guy dead on the chair with his face all distorted, but it happens SO FAST that you're literally startled that the lens moved that fast. Yes, the dude himself is scary, but I think the startle far outweighs the scare. However, I'll give it props for having a creepy premise. And I love the actress who plays Samara. She also plays Rhonda, the mormon fundamentalist patriarch's child bride in Big Love. She's f*cking fantastic.

2. Invasion of the Body Snatchers: Fantastic movie. I watched part of it when I was 8, and when I saw a clip of the remake many years later, even my 8 year-old memories could tell the difference. I've seen it several times since then, and I have been able to draw the following conclusions:
--It is fantastic. Watch it.
--My mother is magical, because this movie did NOT scare her away from gardening in the slightest. In fact, I think it may have inspired her to go outside that very minute and start weeding.
--Botany is a funny word.
--It is AMAZING how Jeff Goldblum has aged so well. In this movie, he is supremely awkward, all lips and squinty eyes and teeth. In Law&Order, he's actually borderline handsome. Fascinating.

2.5. The Shining. I say .5 because I couldn't get through it. It was too slow. I liked the creepiness of it, but there isn't enough Adderall in the world that could make me sit through the rest of it. Kid was fabulous though.

New Goal: Watch as many of these movies as I can. Starting with "The Innocents (1961)."

Go see MILK. Seriously.

The movie MILK needs to win every award possible. Except Best Supporting Actor. That should to to Heath Ledger for The Dark Knight. Josh Brolin honestly wasn't that great as the conservative sometimes-ally of Harvey Milk's.

Reasons why you should see MILK:

• It will change your life.
  
• Sean Penn literally disappears into the role. When I got home, I imdb-ed him, and for a few minutes, I couldn't connect the candid photograph on his profile to the person I'd just spent the last 2+ hours watching. It took a few days before I was really cognizant of the fact that he existed as a full person beyond that role. That's how complete his portrayal was. It wasn't a portrayal. It was a channel.
  
• It's not preachy. Obviously, it's about gay rights, and it chronicles a period in history, but it doesn't feel like a documentary or a public service announcement. I don't know from experience, but I have an inkling that's hard to do. It's not a movie that imposes its views, or tries consciously to send a message. It's a character-driven drama set in a turbulent, challenging, provocative, changing 1970s San Francisco. It's my belief that in order to portray a message, the art can't be just about the message. In Huck Finn, for example, the racism cuts through the narrative like a knife, but the reason readers care is because they connect with the character of Jim. It's not about racism, it's about one man who is being judged unfairly because he just so happens to have more of a certain pigment in his skin. It's not about the issues, it's about the people behind them, and that is where Milk succeeds. Yes, it led me to research even more about gay rights. Yes, I was inspired to create my own constitutional amendments. Yes, it probably made me even more passionate about these issues. But it's not because of the issues - it's because of Harvey Milk. The movie captures his journey with such humor, pain and grace.
  
• James Franco is a real actor in this movie. Don't get me wrong - he's a comedic genius. Long after Seth Rogen and Jonah Hill have faded from the limelight, James Franco will still be leading a successful career so varied in its pursuits that he will be compared to Christopher Walken. James Franco is the type of actor who will be able to record a funny sketch for funnyordie.com, meet the President, film a scene from some breakthrough Showtime drama, and read to children in a local library, all in a day. He's just that good. But in this movie, he's exact. His emotions are as clear or as cloudy as the moment desires, and you never get that feeling that he's overdoing it or underdoing it. He owns it.
  
• Emile Hirsch is also fantastic. He provides much of the comic relief, and he steals every scene he's in. It wouldn't surprise me if he didn't break character between takes, because his whole body goes into being Clive Jones, his whole being. I can't see him walking like a normal person off to his trailer. The transition had to have been hard for him.
  

I will probably add more to this later. I know it's a rant. Deal with it.

Love you all,
Lw

PS: Internal Playlist-->

Shinedown- Second Chance