I’ve always found the expression ‘a creature of habit’ an odd phrase. Mostly because it conjures images of strange animals dressed like nuns wandering around performing daily routines over and over. And when people say it to me I automatically go that place and think: “No. There’s no way I look like a pig-rat with rosary beads straightening furniture.” But let’s be honest, I am a behemoth of habit. My habits are steadfast and immovable. Like a powerful, metaphorical pillar of truth and justice, my habits and routines are hard to shake loose and stand strong whatever the weather. However unlike said metaphorical pillars of truth and justice my habits are really a metaphor for cyclic patterns of laziness and stubbornness.
You may have noticed this in the form of my lack of blogular activity since I announced to the Internet that I was journeying off to create a new blog with cool short stories and I was never coming back because this was the THING I was going to do forever. Well now I’m back, sheepish and apologetic that once again I have used my break from Uni to avoid all forms of regular posting. There is a pattern emerging (couldn’t you tell from the title?). As soon as I get some breathing room from studying the posts dry up like so many good similes/analogies. And then there’s the small matter of vowing to do something with increased regularity and then that too evaporates.
But all is not lost. No, from the ruins of procrastination come a sexy, sexy phoenix of productivity and ingenuity. I have decided that the pieces that I was going to post elsewhere can instead be housed here. I still have a few unpublished scribblings in a notebook that didn’t quite get onto the blog before I got bored, missed my regular posting deadline and then for the sake of saving face couldn’t ever go back (like when you call someone the wrong name by accident and then never speak to them again to save yourself from the absolutely crippling awkwardness that you know will come the next time you speak). So essentially what that means is that there is going to be some remodelling up in this bitch. Some slight shifting of this wall and an addition of a new kitchen and laundry. Maybe even a water feature. Probably not though. It will probably just be Christmas lights wrapped around a sink.
What are these lovely new additions? Well I’m not totally sure yet, I do know that I will make some adjustments to the categorical nature of these posts to include the runoff from The Urban Sprawl (the blog I mentioned earlier that has now stalled and will relocate over to here in the form of sub-sections, but that you can still suss out over via the link above if you wish). But keep watching the skis. I mean skies.
Other than that I have been keeping busy by freaking out about my last semester of Uni starting last week, grudgingly agreeing to accompany my girlfriend to the gym (you will hear more about this in a future post, promise) and contributing to a film/tv/book/music blog run by a friend. You can check that out RIGHT HERE. Which brings me to the topic of discussion today:
When You’re Writing Something About A Film and Your Girlfriend Repeatedly Borrows Your Laptop and Adds Her Own Pieces of Reflective Commentary to the Piece.
Rolls right off the tongue.
So like I said I’m writing these film analyses for a mate for his blog (there’s another guy on literature and another on music and said mate is in charge of the televisual aspect), and like the title suggests I was getting some outside, unsolicited help from a very persistent red-head. Her interjections were not your run of the mill “I am a loser” hacks. Oh no. There was a thought process going on, an intent to almost continue on the train of thought I was halfway through writing…which is why I felt it necessary to share them with you. The piece was about Steven Soderbergh’s Side Effects (2013) and this is how it went down.
In this first one I wrote from ‘You’ to ‘facetious but’ and then Michaela’s contribution is the rest.
“You may think that the whole pill analogy was a little bit facetious but really, when you think about it, elephants are a bit facetious so I make a valid point. What’s really awkward is when people actually take them seriously. All this Elephant Conservation bullshit pisses me off. That’s not what the elephants want! They’re just being a flippant and having a good old time, and occasionally they may do something a little bit mischievous, like pretend they’re becoming extinct and the whole fucking world takes it the wrong way and decides not to poach them anymore. It’s just ridiculous. Do you think Dumbo really cared that he had big ears? Well allow me to let you in on a little secret: he didn’t. He thought it was funny and the best part was, he fooled all you fuckers into feeling sorry for over something that started as a bit of lighthearted fun. As for his bitch of a mother, I guess that was a little bit sad, but everything has to die eventually right? In conclusion if you still think my pill analogy was a little ‘tongue in cheek’, let me leave you with three words to mull over: Boat. Fucking. People.”
So she manages to turn the discussion into whether or not elephants actually need protecting or are instead just having a bit of a laugh and even gets to chuck in some topical stuff on boat people. Right. Next came this. My words end at ‘forgiven’.
“Considering the film focuses on the pharmaceutical you could easily be forgiven for seeing the parallels between it and Baz Luhrmann’s Moulin Rouge (2001). We could assume (although never explicitly shown in the film) that Satine was taking some sort of drug during her suffering TB, or for those who aren’t quite up with the medical lingo, TUBERCULOSIS. Was she addicted to these drugs? I think so. Was the addiction ever highlighted? Of course not. What kind of musical movie would it be if you found out your leading lady was addicted to a drug that made her alarmingly okay with sitting on a swing 100 metres above the ground, dressed as a flamingo and with no safety harness. The film would then become a crazy mix between a Cirque du Soleil show with voice-overs done by David Attenborough.”
A unique take on Nicole Kidman’s performance and one that was probably unnoticed by pretty much every other person who ever watched the movie. Although she does a very good job at combining two completely unrelated films. Also a lack of profanity this time. But rest assured it came back for the third and final of Michaela’s hijacker analyses. I stop writing at ‘sees’.
“Side Effects sees inside what most of us, as humans, never will. Interestingly we as people tend to believe that we are the superior race, but what most of us choose to ignore is the presence of a creature that, up until this movie, has hidden in our shadows, biding it’s time until we least expect it. It’s meant to be ‘Man’s Best Friend’ but really it’s man’s worst fucking enemy. It’s a silent killer that pledges it’s loyalty to those who are FUCKING BLIND and need help doing everyday shit and the kills them when they are trying to read Braille: The Labrador. Yes, it may look dopey but the lab is far from it. A killer in your own backyard, your aged care home…and no-one has suspected it, until Side Effects.”
This is perhaps my favourite, simply because this has to be made into a B-Grade Horror film by someone somewhere. Forget Sharknado, it’s Labrademon. Starring that adorable dog from Napoleon all grown up and vicious as all get out. Besides that though what have I learnt from this? There is a very real chance that my girlfriend is a lot funnier than I am. And now I don’t know what to do.
Anyway I hope you enjoyed today’s offering and thanks to my special ‘contributor’ Michaela Powell. Keep an eye out for more posts and changes soon.