113. Zelfs Je Naam Is Mooi &...

Lyrics

Als jij je kleren aantrekt zonder haast

(When you unhurriedly put on your clothes)
En haast zonder erbij na te denken

(Seemingly without putting much thought in it)
Kijk ik naar een omgekeerde strip-tease

(I am watching a reversed striptease)
Van een volmaakte schoonheid

(Of a perfect beauty)
Elke handbeweging een gedicht

(Each hand movement, a poem)
Elke buiging als een roos die sluit

(Each bow, like a closing rose)
O schat van mij, o hemels hoge ster

(O my love, o heavenly star)
Zelfs jouw schaduw kan mij verblinden

(Even your shadow can blind me)

Dus ga niet weg

(So don't leave)
Ga nooit bij me weg

(Don't ever leave me)
Maar als je ooit verdwijnt

(But if you ever disappear)
Laat mij je dan weer vinden

(Let me find you again)

Zolang ik jou echt bij me heb

(As long as you are truly mine)
Heb ik de volmaakte liefde hier

(I am having the perfect love)
Drink ik uit een pure waterbron

(I am drinking of a pure water source)
En slaap onder een deken van geluk

(And I am sleeping under a blanket of happinness)
Jij bent het goudste zonlicht

(You are the most golden sunlight)
Een volmaakt helder kristal

(A perfectly bright crystal)
Zo schitterend dat het licht ervan

(So brilliant that its light)
Me soms dreigt te verblinden
(Sometimes threatens to blind me)

Maar ga niet weg

(But don't leave)
Ga nooit bij me weg

(Don't ever leave me)
En als je ooit verdwijnt

(And if you ever disappear)
Laat mij je dan weer vinden

(Let me find you again)

Zelfs je naam is mooi

(Even your name is beautiful)
Mooier dan die van iedereen

(More beautiful than the namy of any other)
Die dezelfde naam heeft

(Who has the same name)
Zelfs je naam is mooi

(Even your name is beautiful)
Mooier dan die van iedereen

(More beautiful than that of any other)

Dus ga niet weg

(So don't leave)
Ga nooit bij me weg

(Don't ever leave me)
Maar als je ooit verdwijnt

(But if you ever disappear)
Laat mij je dan weer vinden

(Let me find you again)

Julia

(Julia)

The first two verses of this song are genuinely odd. Who thinks much anyway when dressing up. Also weird: how this song ended up this high. It's not bad either textually, or musically, but there are thousands more like it. I also have never actually heard it outside of the context of the Top 2000, despite the fact that it's relatively recent (it was released in 1998). I am also yet to encounter anyone who has some sort of opinion on it. Besides that, singer Henk Westbroek is not some especially beloved cultural figure in the Netherlands. It is a song though that speaks of love with an old-fashioned exuberant earnestness, making use of very traditional metaphors. Besides it is about a Julia. So it's time for a classical retelling of a classical story.

The Movie: Romeo and Juliet (Franco Zeffirelli, 1968)

I haven't seen Baz Luhrmann Romeo + Juliet (1996) in quite a long time, but I believe I prefer it over this version of the story. Having said that, it's quite refreshing to see Zeffirelli's film. Many Shakespeare adaptations try to put the story in a modern context. They turn it into a musical, or a coming of age film, or they use it to comment on modern society. Furthermore, its actors are often too aware that they are doing Shakespeare and that this is really serious art. They can't really be blamed. These are some of the most retold stories in western history, and it's quite hard to approach them unconsciously.  Zeffirelli's film doesn't have that problem. It is made as if this is the first adaptation of Romeo and Juliet ever.

Perhaps even more importantly, it's made as if its completely unaware that it is 1968. One can imagine that if they had film equipment in Shakespeare's time, the 1611 Romeo and Juliet film would look similar to this. Zeffirelli emphasizes the show. Sure, people went to see Romeo and Juliet because they wanted to be moved by the story, Shakespeare was entertainment too. They also went to see a show, to see/hear the actors saying Shakespeare's words and simply to see the actors act. That's above all what makes this film so interesting. This movie doesn't want to offer an immersive experience, to make the audience forget that they are watching a movie. Rather, the theatricality of it all is overstated. The actors don't blend into their role, but constantly make you aware that they are performing. They all savor the chance to chew on Shakespeare's words, and to play with/enjoy the rhythmic structure of the sentences. They want to awe the audience. As such, their movements are overstated too. They hurl themselves in every fight, kiss or quarrel. The audience doesn't simply go to see actors act, but also to see them performing physical feats. Consequently everybody 'overacts', but that's the point 

John McEnery, playing Mercutio does this best. And it's his fight with Tybalt (Michael York) that exemplifies best the performative aspect of it all the best. They are rivals, but their fight starts friendly. They don't intend to hurt each other. They literally go through the motions, while sword fighting. They mime all the movements, without actually trying to hurt each other. It's a show they stage for the audience on the main square of Verona. The show doesn't even end when Tybalt accidentally stabs Mercutio. Mercutio is really hurt and about to die, but pretends to be healthy in order to stage a death scene for himself.. He pretends in other words as if he is hurt and about to die, and everyone around him cheers at his great acting. Only when he really dies, everyone realizes the true gravity of the situation, and consequently Romeo kills Tybalt, and, well shit hits the fan.

This approach suits me well. I am not an English native speaker, so I often find it quite hard to follow Shakespearean speech. I tend to miss many of the nuances, jokes, and insights of his dialogue. I watched Romeo and Juliet without Dutch subtitles, but they wouldn't have added much anyway. I do not think there is much of a point to read/see Romeo and Juliet, or (some) other Shakespeare plays in any other language than English. I know the content of the story, it's not the content that matters, it's the form, the way Shakespeare tells it. I have never seen a Shakespeare adaptation that gets this more than Zeffirelli's Romeo and Juliet.   

  

112. Heroes &...

Lyrics

I, I will be king
And you, you will be queen
Though nothing will drive them away
We can beat them, just for one day
We can be Heroes, just for one day

And you, you can be mean
And I, I'll drink all the time
'Cause we're lovers, and that is a fact
Yes we're lovers, and that is that

Though nothing, will keep us together
We could steal time,
just for one day
We can be Heroes, for ever and ever
What d'you say?

I, I wish you could swim
Like the dolphins, like dolphins can swim
Though nothing,
nothing will keep us together
We can beat them, for ever and ever
Oh we can be Heroes,
just for one day

I, I will be king
And you, you will be queen
Though nothing will drive them away
We can be Heroes, just for one day
We can be us, just for one day

I, I can remember (I remember)
Standing, by the wall (by the wall)
And the guns shot above our heads
(over our heads)
And we kissed,
as though nothing could fall
(nothing could fall)
And the shame was on the other side
Oh we can beat them, for ever and ever

Then we could be Heroes,
just for one day

We can be Heroes
We can be Heroes
We can be Heroes
Just for one day
We can be Heroes

We're nothing, and nothing will help us
Maybe we're lying,
then you better not stay
But we could be safer,
just for one day

Oh-oh-oh-ohh, oh-oh-oh-ohh,
just for one day

"There is no accounting for taste" can only get you so far. If you compile a list of the best pop/rock music, you really need to have a David Bowie song among the first 50, or at least the first 100. Personally I find it even stranger that Radio 2's listeners somehow didn't choose Space Oddity as Bowie's highest placed song.  

I am not a particularly great fan of Bowie, but he is without a doubt one of the most influential and important musicians of the 20th century. He was certainly one of the most progressive, I am not greatly familiar with issues of gender and sexuality, but now that queer identities become more visible in mainstream culture and society, it is pretty clear to me that David Bowie was far ahead of his time when exploring his (sexual) identity. And perhaps the same thing can be said about Freddie Mercury. These artists forced the audience to accept them on their own terms. And their identity was an inherent part of their art, which you could not escape if you wanted to enjoy/interact with it. The 'dominant' culture/society had to adapt to them. 

Anyway, I'll write more about this once I discuss one of Bowie's songs dealing directly with these issues. The movie I chose has nothing do with that. I just chose it because Heroes plays an important role in it. 

The Movie: The Perks of Being A Wallflower (Stephen Chbosky, 2012)

The Perks of Being A Wallflower is closer to Ordinary People, than to Juno. This is not a coming-of-age film, but a drama about Charlie (Logan Lerman) a deeply troubled teen, The film takes his problems seriously, and is often surprisingly dark as it dives inside Charlie's mind and tells it from his point of view. Chbosky, who adapts his own book, is not an especially great or imaginative director. Especially the flashback scenes are rather clumsily handled. Chbosky has filmed them as if he wants to hold crucial information back, waiting to reveal it at the end of the film. The reveal doesn't come as a surprise though, besides there is not much dramatic reason for Chbosky's approach. Having said that, it is quite clear that Chbosky is a really intelligent writer, who truly understands his lead character and his problems. 

Chbosky does above all make great use of voice-over, especially when Charlie tells us about his newfound friends Patrick (Ezra Miller) and Sam (Emma Watson). Charlie is a rather unreliable narrator, in what he tells us really does happen, only he interprets it quite clearly in a wrong way. When Patrick makes fun of a professor, Charlie tells us, that he did it, not because he is a 'bad guy', but to entertain the freshmen. Patrick is indeed not a bad person,  but his act was purely for himself, to forget his own troubles. He is a closeted homosexual who has problems of his own. Charlie may see that and realize it, but he needs to tell/delude himself that his friend is a perfectly normal person. Similarly Charlie tells us that Sam, on whom he has a crush, used to be drunk constantly and sleep with a lot of different men, but that he won't judge her for that. That narration makes, first of all clear that Charlie certainly does judge her for it, but is afraid someone might find out, which might ruin his friendship. Secondly, Sam's behavior may not have been quite exemplary, but it was certainly not awful. There is not that much to be judgmental about. But by making it sound more awful than it is, Charlie braces himself for a possible end of their friendship. If it does happen, he can comfort himself in the belief that he didn't lose that great a person. 

The potential loss of contact/friendship is what drives Charlie's behavior, and the movie itself. That fear informs basically every action he takes, never allowing him to truly relax, not even when he is genuinely happy and comfortable among his friends. In fact, especially not then. What if he says/does something stupid. During a game of Truth or Dare, he does and his greatest fears seem to come true. His decision is not smart. but it is one of the only times in the movie, he expresses his true feelings. If he did that earlier, he would not have to make a bad decision. Charlie's fear/insecurity is also the reason why he keeps talking about how wonderful 'the night at the tunnel was', when they elatedly listen to Bowie's Heroes, through a gloriously lit tunnel. It's the one night of which Charlie is absolutely certain that his friends loved it, so he cannot go wrong talking about it. The movie understands that this certainty is why Charlie loves that night so much, even more so than the greatness of the night itself. 

The tunnel sequence is probably the most famous one in the film, partly because it's at the beginning and Emma Watson is introduced for the first time in all her glory. She benefits from the fact that she is seen from the point of view of Charlie, so she is shot in a very flattering way, emphasizing her beauty. Perhaps over-emphasizing, as Chbosky does want to make clear that Charlie's image of Sam is a bit too much of a fantasy. But camera tricks can only do so much. It's a star-making moment, and performance. It immediately squashes any doubts about Watson career after Harry Potter. As for myself, I saw the movie once before seeing it for this post. I hadn't, and still haven't, seen any Potter-film before the third. The first three didn't catch the tone/spirit of the books, leaving me uninterested in the rest. In any case I was absolutely gobsmacked, and paid more attention to her (role) than the movie's themes. I was convinced that she was going to be a star, and she is one now. That's deserved, she is obviously intelligent, and a very good actress. She is not as great as I expected though. She needs the right role. She deserved an Oscar nomination for The Bling Ring, but she was quite frankly awful in Noah. The other main actors here are quite good too by the way. Ezra Miller's bad luck is that Adam Driver exists.

The Perks of Being A Wallflower does have some significant flaws. Charlie is a self-centered character, for obvious reasons, who does not pay much attention to his friends problems. Considering much of the film is told from his point of view, it is logical that the film is to some extent guilty of the same, but Chbosky could have cared a bit more about them. Or he should have completely disregarded their feelings and focus entirely on Charlie. Now Chbosky, is also at times unfair towards his characters, especially towards Mary Elizabeth (Mae Whitman). Once she starts dating Charlie, the movie suddenly seems to turn her into an insufferable character, just because she is not Emma Watson. Now the fact that she is not Emma Watson, is in this context a pretty understandable reason to not want to date her, but the movie would have been better if it just admitted it. Lastly, this is a weirdly self-congratulatory film. Charlie wants to be a writer, and the film constantly reminds us that he can write really well and that he one day surely will become one. At times the movie plays as if Chbosky is telling his own origin story, 'How I Became A Superhero Writer'. In this regard there is one especially cringe worthy scene between Charlie and his English teacher Mr. Anderson. That the scene is cringe worthy is especially an achievement, considering Mr. Anderson is played by Paul Rudd. Still on the whole, this is a very good film. What it does well, it does extremely well.   

     

111. Kayleigh &...

Lyrics

Do you remember chalk hearts melting on a playground wall
Do you remember dawn escapes from moonwashed college halls
Do you remember the cherry blossom in the market square
Do you remember I thought it was confetti in our hair
By the way didn´t I break your heart
Please excuse me I never meant to break your heart
So sorry I never meant to break your heart
But you broke mine

Kayleigh is it too late to say I'm sorry?
And Kayleigh could we get it together again
I just can't go on pretending that it came to a natural end
Kayleigh oh I never thought I'd miss you
And Kayleigh I thought that we'd always be friends
We said our love would last forever
So how did it come to this bitter end

Do you remember barefoot on the lawn with shooting stars
Do you remember the loving on the floor in Belsize Park
Do you remember dancing in stilettoes in the snow
Do you remember you never understood I had to go
By the way didn´t I break your heart
Please excuse me I never meant to break your heart
So sorry I never meant to break your heart
But you broke mine

Kayleigh, I just want to say I'm sorry
But Kayleigh I'm too scared to pick up the phone
To hear you've found another lover to patch up our broken home
Kayleigh I'm still trying to write that love song
Kayleigh it's more important to me, now you're gone
Maybe it will prove that we were right
Or it'll prove that I was wrong

Do you remember chalk hearts melting on a playground wall
Do you remember dawn escapes from moonwashed college halls
Do you remember the cherry blossom in the market square
Do you remember I thought it was confetti in our hair
By the way didn´t I break your heart
Please excuse me I never meant to break your heart
So sorry I never meant to break your heart
But you broke mine

Kayleigh is it too late to say I'm sorry?
And Kayleigh could we get it together again
I just can't go on pretending that it came to a natural end
Kayleigh oh I never thought I'd miss you
And Kayleigh I thought that we'd always be friends
We said our love would last forever
So how did it come to this bitter end

Do you remember barefoot on the lawn with shooting stars
Do you remember the loving on the floor in Belsize Park
Do you remember dancing in stilettoes in the snow
Do you remember you never understood I had to go
By the way didn´t I break your heart
Please excuse me I never meant to break your heart
So sorry I never meant to break your heart
But you broke mine

Kayleigh, I just want to say I'm sorry
But Kayleigh I'm too scared to pick up the phone
To hear you've found another lover to patch up our broken home
Kayleigh I'm still trying to write that love song
Kayleigh it's more important to me, now you're gone
Maybe it will prove that we were right
Or it'll prove that I was wrong

I am not a fan of modern so-called indie music. I mostly dislike the very sober, nearly timid arrangements/style. It's not surprising than that I like Kayleigh, and similar 80's songs quite a lot. You could call these songs overproduced maybe, but that's my favorite thing about them. As for linking it to a movie, I am glad it namechecks Belsize Park, which is apparently in Camden Town, London. There appears to be a romantic comedy about several people in Camden Town hooking up and breaking up.

The Movie: This Year's Love (David Kane, 1999)

IMDB describes This Year's Love as follows: "A group of thirtysomethings flirt around Camden Town, swapping partners in search of love, lust and life". This makes it seem like a typical British romantic comedy of the 90's, but This Year's Love is different, if not necessarily better, than the average Four Weddings and A Funeral. It takes its working class surroundings seriously, at least in the context of a romantic comedy. Its characters are genuinely flawed people who remain flawed at the end. It's also much less interested in dreamy notions of romanticism. Not everything needs to be nice, cute or beautiful. The movie makes this clear right from the opening credits which are set against a heavily tattooed body, while on the soundtrack we hear hard rock. I am not sure about this, but I do believe that tattoos weren't very mainstream in the UK/western culture in general in 1999, and I can imagine that quite a lot of people considered these opening credits to be relatively transgressive. 

After the opening credits we cut to two people, Hannah (Catherine McCormack) and Danny (Douglas Henshall) oversleeping for what turns out to be their wedding reception. The movie doesn't show them excitedly preparing for it, nor does it present that day as the most important one of their life. The reception nearly immediately turns sour anyway, when Danny finds out his bride slept with his best friend a couple of days before the wedding. The enraged Danny leaves the wedding, ends up at an airport and meets Mary (Kathy Burke), cleaning lady by day, club singer by night. Hannah on the other hand ends up in bed with local Casanova Cameron (Dougray Scott). Cameron is the roommate of the pathetically insecure Liam (Ian Hart), who somehow earns the attention of Sophie (Jennifer Ehle), who may be a single mom, but is also the coolest, sexiest girl on the block. During the course of the movie, all these couples will change, but at the end to nobody's surprise Danny and Hannah will end up together.        

The main problem with the movie, apart from the contrived coincidences through which all these people meet each other, is that Hannah and Danny are the dullest characters in the movie. Nothing even remotely surprising happens to/between these characters. On top of that Henshall is not a very charismatic or interesting actor, at least not here. I recently saw him in The Salvation in which he was quite good in a small role. The movie's MVP is Dougray Scott, playing Cameron. I have probably seen Scott in some movies, but never noticed him. Here he gives a wonderful comic performance. Cameron is an 'artist' who paints whatever he finds in a catalog,  than sells the paintings at auctions, and the money he earns, he spends betting at horse races. He explains in a hilariously pretentious way that he doesn't care about a career, just about the process. What is wonderful about this is that he truly does live like a liberated, 'enlightened' bohemian, only he is too dumb to realize it. He believes that he is a bum, who successfully conceals his true nature. He conceals nothing though, least of all his true problems, namely that he is really dumb and shallow. The scenes in which Cameron tries to be honest about himself are probably the film's highlight. It's helped by Scott's great performance. At first I thought he was horribly overacting, without paying any attention to his co-actors. It takes a while before you realize Scott is acting precisely in the same way as if Cameron would act if he were to portray himself on film. 

As for the other characters. Kathy Burke gives a very sympathetic performance as the slightly plump and unattractive Mary, though the movie comments way too much on how it should not be a big deal that she is plump and unattractive, thereby making it a big deal. But it's quite rare for a romantic comedy to treat someone like Mary as an ordinary woman who enjoys sex. It's even rarer for it to present her as an ordinary woman who is not pathetic or sad, because she doesn't get to have sex or find love. The film does not pity Mary and presens her as a confident, intelligent woman, who can deal on her own with aggressive men such as Liam. Liam only becomes aggressive by the third act of the movie. Before that he is a rather timid nerd, who does not really know how to behave around women. Director Kane deserves credit for showing his aggressiveness as simply the other side of the same coin. Both his timidness and his aggressiveness are born out of his extreme fear of women and sex. It's a rather dark plot point all the more so, because it is not presented as all that surprising. Liam's aggressiveness is just as natural as his timidity.