Friends With Money, Women with Roles

April 18, 2006

Last night Lisa Norton and I went out to see FRIENDS WITH MONEY, the new film by Nicole Holofcener starring Jen Aniston, Fran McDormand, Joan Cusack and are old friend Cath Keener.
Okay. It is not like this is the best film of the year or that it was groundbreaking in any way. Except that it rocked my world. And I feel that it is an important movie for me, an aging actress, and my friends who are also aging actresses to see. Now to be sure, when I say aging actresses I mean that we are from the moment we stop playing 16-22 year olds are aging actresses. I mean that it's something we face everyday and have to accept and understand and that life for the work-seeking actress is often different than the life of the work-seeking actor.
Don't know if I'm making sense here.
Frances McDormand is thrilling in this role. She is playing the very angry woman here and a lesser actress would likely have found herself in a very tricky predicament: an audience full of people who just want her to shut up. But dear Frannie makes us want to shake her, and want to understand her and she's vulnerable and blocked and in pain. It's fucking fabulous. But in addition to this complex character, who is interesting and funny and REAL...Frances McDormand was photographed much of the movie without any make up and with quite visible lines on her face. OK, so this shouldn't be shocking or novel enough to actually mention, but it is. And you know it is. Joan Cusack was also so fucking good in this movie and she (I'm sorry to say it this way) looked even worse than McDormand. But they didn't "look bad" or worse or whatever! They looked gorgeous and real and it was addictive watching them.
So yes, I found myself (and Lisa sadly agreed) staring at Joan, who is in possibly the best shape she's ever been in (that I've seen anyway), and I'm thinking WOW, she doesn't care that her face is big on the screen like this all wrinkly and kind of old looking? And then another voice comes in and says, shut your fucking whole you brain washed dim wit. And that was that. But the first voice was there. Definitely there. Because there is so much shame in growing old for sassy young actresses I think. Oh we have to be forever "desirable", forever young, flirty and yes, FUCKABLE.
But the fact remains, this movie is about women, who have stories, who have complicated realities. And it is so SO important for actresses to see this movie I think and see women of a certain age, up there telling some of their/our stories.
Jennifer Aniston, while it is impossible to believe that she is the one friend who loathes any form of exercise, I think she does a very good job here as the depressed, somewhat sociopathic, pot head, Olivia. I believed her. But it's hard to just put a brown rinse on your hair and then say look how pathetic I am. Her performance is good but I was simply blown away by the older actresses who clearly have more chops.
I don't have a grade for this movie because it was a highly personal experience. I don't even know if I am articulating myself the way I want to...I'll go to bed and see later how I did.

C.R.A.Z.Y like a Frog

April 22, 2006

Oh Goodness me. I can't believe how long it took me to see the awesome French Canuck film C.R.A.Z.Y.
When me and the Ex were in Montreal last summer we heard about this film that people were going mad for in Quebec...we said to ourselves we should totally go to a screening with no subtitles and see how much we can follow. Well, now that I have seen it I know that we would have loved it and loved watching it sans subtitres.
But alas, we didn't catch it way back then. But man, am I happy to have seen it at all. This movie is delicious. I want every Canadian to see it! My mother is French Canadian and so I identify myself as half-french (I'm not bilingual so I am lame). These characters did remind me of my French family in some ways. Basically I'm talking about the oh what would I call it....the DRAMA. There has been and is currently a lot of drama in my French families life. And truth be told there's been a lot of drama in the White Protestant side of my family too, but that drama is slow, silent and not talked about. French drama is about volume. It is brash, with family feuds and deep resentments that are brought up loudly at any right or wrong time. I kind of love it. I love that my passion and melodrama comes from that part of me. Not to mention the performer in me. The girl who, like the family in CRAZY, would take any opportunity to get up and perform for my relatives. I would never have done this in front of my Father's side of the family.
But the other side of this exhilarating melodrama is the annoying fact that no one can just relax, enjoy, take a deep breath and be. This doesn't seem possible for my French family. And sometimes it bugs the crap out of me.
But back to the film. There was nothing about this film that bugged the crap out of me! The performances by the lead young man and his parents were outstanding and worthy of all the awards that have been bestowed upon them. The cinematography is gorgeous. The art direction breathtaking. I cannot praise this movie enough. I am incredibly proud that it is from Canada and I wonder why Anglo Canadian filmmakers don't seem capable to make such accessible, beautiful, hilarious, moving films? Sorry but it's true. I mean I love Bruce Sweeney movies (Vancouver director, smart, hilarious.) but no one I know has really heard of him. His great last film, The Last Wedding, was in 2001 and no one I know has seen it! And it's very very good. I highly recommend it. Fucking funny, man. Thank goodness he's finally in pre-production for another movie.
OK, but back to my point. Why are Anglo Canadians known for slow moving art films? How many Americans know that History of Violence is a Canadian film? Is it a Canadian film? Does the Director being Canadian mean a film is automatically considered Canadian? I wonder. This would be a good topic for discussion if anyone was actually reading this.
I just went to IMDB and History of Violence is listed as an American film. Not even a Canadian co-pro. Hmmmm. It was filmed entirely in Canada but it was supposed to be America. All the main actors are American. The budget was 32 million (doesn't sound like a Canadian film at all, does it?). Atom Egoyan's last film Where The Truth Lies is listed as a Canada/UK/USA co-pro. It's budget was 25 million and it had some Canadians playing major roles. It's made about a million dollars. Oops. History has made 32 million in USA alone. CRAZY was made for 6.5 million! And it looks incredible. Now, I know you didn't have any big time American movie stars to pay and that alone will save you some serious dough. IMDB says it's only made around 6 million in Canada. But you know what folks? The majority of that box office money was made in ONE PROVINCE. That's pretty fucking amazing. And you know how much money Where The Heart Is made in Ontario? Ya, well, you get my point. Oh and here's something very eye opening: CRAZY opened in Quebec in May 2005. And it's still playing in theatres. Ya.
Even Egoyan's film didn't last more than a blip in the Toronto theatres. Why? Because people didn't like it. Small English language Canadian films that are good last one week generally in Toronto theatres. Unless NOW magazine, the Globe and The Sun do some MASSIVE glowing review that makes everyone put aside their fear and contempt of Canadian cinema to go and check out the movie...which then may lead to the theatre managers keeping it around for a little while longer. OK, let's check out what Anglo Can films are playing in Toronto right now....
Thom Fitzgerald's '3 Needles' is playing at Canada Square (but I'm gonna guess not for long): " But the funereal pace and slack writing keep letting you down. The great performers (Lucy Liu! Sandra Oh! Stockard Channing!) never get to do much and are upstaged by the scenery, but it's almost worth seeing for Channing's unsuccessful attempt at a Quebecois accent as the mother of a porn actor (X-Men's Shawn Ashmore)." (NOW Magazine). Again we have big American movie stars, bad material and a film-going public who will be disappointed yet again.
Amnon Buchbinder's WHOLE NEW THING. This movie is getting some very good press. I will be going to see it. But it suffers such a common fate of Anglo-can films. It's playing at the Carlton. It's been there for two weeks now and here's hoping it will stay even longer! I guess that means I should see it tonight or tomorrow. OK, done.
The Rocket, a french Canadian film about great NHLer Rocket Richard is playing at what looks to be all the theatres in the Toronto area! It's been playing in Quebec since November and now it's finally coming to the rest of the country. This film is also getting great press and it's glorious that it has such a wide release. Hockey movie in Canada...fabulous! Something that appeals to the masses. A great work of art that is entertaining, fun, educational, exhilarating. And made once again by the French. FUCK. Why can't we make some kick ass entertaining Anglo movies in this country and get some OOMPH behind them so they are not stuck with a sort shelf life at the fucking Carlton. or Canada Square?
Speaking of which, I just found another Anglo-can film playing in Toronto at the Carlton. It's called Pure, directed by Jim Donovan who mostly works in TV. It gets a pretty good review in the NOW but it's not glowing. And you know, I think like that old saying about women having to work twice as hard to get the same success as a man, I think these low-budget Canadian films need a minimum 4 star review to get people to the theatres. I mean, I'm speaking personally. Its sad. But you know what I hear again and again? People are sick of shitty Canadian films. Well, shitty Anglo Canadian films. And I am too. Aren't you?
So rent or go see CRAZY. It's extraordinary. It has the great good sense to be an entertaining, fun, moving, smart movie, set entirely in Canada, starring Canadians. And it has the very good fortune to be embraced, celebrated and supported by the people whose story it is telling. Fucking eh, man.
Let's get to it Anglos! Let's tell some of our stories. Yes, we do have some. Yes, we are distinct too. And let's try our best to support those little Carlton and Canada Square gems!
film nerd out.

In a Lonely Place: Deep Dark Bogey

April 27, 2006

Just renewed my ZIP.CA membership and yes, I'm in film nerd heaven. I got four envelopes today with DVDs...I opened the one that was on top and said I'm watching this one first. Such a fucking nerd. So I sat and watched IN A LONELY PLACE (1950) starring Humphrey Bogart and Gloria Graeme (I always loved her in IT'S A WONDERFUL LIFE) and directed by Nicholas Ray (most known for directing REBEL WITHOUT A CAUSE).
OK, so this movie is fabulous and if you like old noirs you should really rent this one. Humphrey Bogart's production company produced this film. Funny, in those days, actors didn't put their names in the credits even in they had a hand in producing the movie. That is much more of a current phenomenon. But anyway, he obviously wanted to play this part and for good reason.
He plays screenwriter Dixon Steele with some usual Bogey notes of dark sarcasm and sexy riffs off the dames...but Dixon is more tortured than most of Bogey's other roles. He's a man with some serious demons who's really in need of some good therapy or anger management.
The movie really lets him show some deep dark shit we haven't seen from him before. He's really fucked up at times but he's also super vulnerable and even desperate. There are some serious layers and it's great that he's not just doing melodramatic acting 101 for film noir. I loved it!



In a nutshell, Bogey plays this screenwriter who is suspected of murdering this coat check girl because he was the last to see her alive (in his Hollywood apartment no less) but just when things look pretty hopeless for this guy's alibi, in comes Gloria Graeme, the sexy neighbour, to tell the cops she saw the girl leave the apartment without him.
Soon enough, these two smart asses fall for each other. But no sooner than they're in domestic bliss, Dixon starts showing this paranoid side of himself that is prone to irrational rages (haven't we all been there, sister). And Gloria...oh her name is Laurel Gray...So Laurel starts to think maybe she's wrong about Dix...maybe he's a bit of a crazy nut and maybe he DID kill that coat check girl...
And there's twists and turns and scary shit and moody lighting...oh it really is a fun ride...and keeps you guessing til the end. Or at least it keeps you very very tense. Which is fabulous.
Next up I think I'll be watching KING OF MARVIN GARDENS...hallelujah I'm in film nerd heaven...I wonder how many I can watch in a month's time? I'll keep you posted!

The King of Marvin Gardens & Melvin and Howard

April 30, 2006

KING OF MARVIN GARDENS (1972) was directed by Bob Rafelson and stars Jack Nicholson, Bruce Dern and Ellen Burstyn. Jack and Bob did FIVE EASY PIECES together in 1970 and in fact made six movies together over the years (check then out on IMDB).
Now people have said that in this flick the two leads are swapping character types: Jack playing the quiet, loner-artist and Dern playing the loud mouthed, cocky, born to lose con man. These roles sit so well with these guys that the casting seems nothing less than perfect. Nicholson is a great actor. He's not a great loud actor or a great cocky actor...sure he plays those roles well, but here we see that Nicholson has this guy in him. Nicholson isn't all bravado and eyebrows! In actuality he's a sad boy who was abandoned by his dad at a young age and was brought up believing that his mother was actually his older sister. Nicholson has a great ability to show us his loneliness, his vulnerability. I was quite smitten with him in this movie. He's also got that great face and happens to wear glasses throughout the film and well, that always kinda gets me.


Dern is nothing short of spectacular in this film. He's larger than life but not over the top. He's a loser and like many a loser, doesn't have the slightest notion that he's a loser. He's a small time hustler, trying to make his way up the organized crime ladder. Dern and Nicholson are brothers, Jason and David respectively. David's a ho-hum radio talk guy who tells these quiet, personal stories on his radio program in Philadelphia. Jason's a low life gopher for low level mob guys in Atlantic City. In the film we see Jason trying to make this deal so he can build and run a casino in Hawaii. And we learn pretty quickly that that is never going to happen. Along for the ride is former beauty queen Sally, played in technicolor melodramatic glory by Ellen Burstyn and the new young beauty Jessie played by never to be heard from again actress Julia Anne Robinson (I coudn't quite tell if her performance bothered me because she was really NOT good, or if she was SO good...you know when it's hard to tell?)
So the movie just let's us watch the train wreck as it happens. I kept wanting David/Jack to leave these crazy fuckers and go back to his radio show and his smelly grandfather in Philly. I really cared for him. I thought he was smart and sensitive. But the thing is he really wanted his brother to make it. He believes in him up until the last possible moment that he can. When he finally sees that his brother just doesn't fucking get it and he unleashes on him, yelling at him for maybe the first time in his life...it is a long time coming and Nicholson is great. You wonder why he has so much faith in his loser brother. But then I thought back to the beginning of the film. There's this scene near the top when Jason calls David in Philadelphia. The grandfather comes into David's room and says that Jason's on the phone. Now David doesn't want to seem too anxious but we can see that he can't wait to get down to that telephone. The way he comes rushing down the stairs doing up his robe, all I could see was the kid brother so happy that his brother was calling him. And that sums it up right there. Jason surrounds himself with people who need the dream. His brother needs the dream of the big brother who's going to save him. These girls need the dream so bad that they will gladly see past his delusions of grandeur, his rough edges... with the hopes that soon they'll be living it up on the beaches of Hawaii. And that feeds Jason's vision of himself. They are like this circle of delusion, false hope and fake glamour.
This movie is definitely worth checking out. I can't say whether it is better or worse than FIVE EASY PIECES because it's been so long since I've seen it. But it has some terrific acting in it, a great comment on the American dream and some say it's one of the most under-appreciated films of the 70s.
Oddly enough, MELVIN AND HOWARD (1980) is another one of those films that has gone largely unnoticed. Many say it is the best film of 1980 and while it received Oscar nominations and wins, it hasn't enjoyed much of the same Classic-status of other films of that year like RAGING BULL or ORDINARY PEOPLE.
MELVIN AND HOWARD is an early Jonathan Demme film starring Paul Le Mat, Mary Steenburgen and Jason Robards as Howard Hughes. Le Mat plays Melvin Dummar, another American loser, just trying to get ahead and every time he makes it a bit of the way he winds up back on the skids. One night Melvin's driving through the desert and he picks up an old long haired freaky man who tells him he is Howard Hughes. They share an interesting ride where Melvin makes Howard sing, Melvin drops him off with some spare change and off he goes back to his life living in a trailer. We then hear nothing of this mystery man for quite some time. We just follow Melvin's life, we watch him lose his wife (the fabulous, glowing Mary Steenburgen), get her back, lose her again (UGH). We watch him toil as a milk man, a gas man, a lover, a dad, all with delicate, nuanced hum our and sweet under played innocence. Paul Le Mat deserved an Oscar nomination, if not the award itself, for this perfectly balanced performance. He is so subtle. Watch this movie close. This guy isn't acting. It's magical. Steenburgen did walk away with best supporting actress that year, which is great. As did screenwriter Bo Goldman (who also penned the script for One Flew Over the Cuckoo's Nest).



In the end, Howard Hughes dies and Melvin is mentioned as one of 16 beneficiaries in Hughes' will (to be awarded 156 Million dollars). But no one believes him. This movie is based on a true story. And while much of the world chose not to believe the real Melvin Dummar, and he did not in the end receive any of Hughes' money...the filmmakers decided to tell one side of the story only. They chose to tell the Dummar side of the story and played it out like it all really happened. There's a lot of cool shit to this story and I can't wait to Google and read all the new facts that have come about in the last few years backing up Dummars story. It's fascinating.
This film is a gem. Like KING OF MARVIN GARDENS, we're dealing with people on the fringe, people desperate to grab at that American apple pie dream until they either get it or die. But unlike KOMG, MELVIN AND HOWARD is sweet and funny. It is much more nuanced and I cared deeply for these characters, even when they were driving me a bit nuts. KOMG is a darker film to be sure. Not a comedy by any means.
MELVIN AND HOWARD deserves to be seen and applauded. Paul Le Mat should probably have been a big star after this film. But he never was. In fact, when the movie began I couldn't help but gasp: that's the husband that beat the shit out of Farrah Fawcet before she set him on fire in the TV movie THE BURNING BED (1984)! He never stopped working, he didn't drift off never to be heard from again...but people across America don't know his name and many I'm sure haven't seen MELVIN AND HOWARD, a great great film that hopefully you will see after reading this. That's of course assuming that anyone will ever see this! Ha!
all righty...see ya

UNITED 93

May 1, 2006

I have these movie passes from a while back. When you belong to ACTRA (the Canadian performers union for film and TV) you get discounts on movie passes..they're like 6 to 9 dollars each...but now that Cineplex has bought out Famous Players, who knows what kind of deals we'll be eligible for now. Anyway, I had these passes and they expired on March 31, 2006. But when I went to the cinema I was told there was a 30 day grace period. So, here I was trying to watch a bunch of movies in the last few days.
I ended up going to the Carlton with my friend John to see a new Canadian flick, WHOLE NEW THING and I got John's ticket so that was two passes right there. WNT was pretty OK. Nothing bad about it but nothing great either. Just fine whatever bland Anglo cinema as per usual.
But then the other day I decided to go see UNITED 93 at the Varsity and what an experience that was. It was a full circle moment. I had learned about the World Trade Centre attacks the morning of September 11 and had gotten on my bike to cycle to the Varsity that morning for a Toronto film festival screening. I wasn't sad or upset or terrified. I didn't or couldn't put a human face to what was happening. All I could think about was that the American government had brought all this on themselves; that bad things happen all the time, all over the world and this bad thing was happening to them. Maybe this was as cold a response as one could imagine. But it wasn't about individuals at that particular moment. It was about the entity that was BUSH-LAND, AMERICA.
I got to the Varsity that morning and everyone was talking about it. I may have even been annoyed by this. Like a "yeah yeah yeah, America's under attack...why can't we talk about ourselves for a change!". I went into the screening (I seem to recall it being a very boring Scandinavian comedy) and a woman from the Film Festival came out to introduce the film and she started talking about how upsetting everything was and that the Film Festival was deciding what their official response was going to be and then a voice or two from the back of the theatre called out "What are you talking about?". Screenings had begun at the Varsity at 8:30 that morning. Some people in my screening hadn't heard about the attacks yet.
The film fest woman sort of paused and said finally into the microphone "Oh my goodness, you don't know" or something to that effect. It was a bit TV movie melodramatic. I don't think I am such a cynic, so cold, you know? I don't want to come off sounding like such a harsh, negative asshole. I am just saying things that maybe some people wouldn't say out loud. The woman from the festival (I hate to say it) seemed to be acting a bit. Is that how I would describe it? It was interesting to try and put myself in her shoes. Here is a devastating piece of news. She has an enormous amount of power or influence at that moment. She gets to tell some people about what has happened in the USA. How would you tell it? Would you just say it non-chalantly? Maybe she felt in order to display the gravity of the situation she had to relay the news in a somewhat quiet intense fashion. But it was put on a bit. And it bugged me. I don't know how I would have done it. Maybe exactly the same. And maybe there would be some small part of me that would enjoy being the bearer of such jarring information. Like when you're happy to get to tell a friend who is not in the know that so-and-so are breaking up. And you get to see that virgin reaction to such shocking news. There is something sick there. Something thrilling and sick. But I think it's true. The bearer of bad news is powerful if only for a moment in time.
So she delivered the news. Several people rushed out of the theatre as she spoke. It was the first moment I felt a human connection to what was happening...as I imagined one of the film-goers having a spouse or children in Manhattan, being told this horrifying news in a dark cinema in Toronto at ten in the morning. Ugh.
And so we sat, the ones who remained, and watched this lame-ass movie that was trying to be cute and just wasn't achieving it's goal. And who wants to see a cute movie anyway?
Cut to April 28, 2006. Four and a half years after that day, I am back at the Varsity to watch UNITED 93, a film by Brit Paul Greengrass that details the events of September 11, 2001 with such incredible detail but focuses it's story around the fourth hijacked plane which was the only plane to not reach it's target, believed to be The Washington Capitol.
It is a gripping film. It had me from the first frame. I am torn too you know? I have a lot of suspicion of the United States. I have a lot of suspicion about this movie. As great as it is, as thrilling and really terrifying as it is, I can't help but ask: how much of this is really just propaganda? How much of what we see in this film actually happened? Will we ever know? In a country that still doesn't really know who killed one of it's finest president's, how can we think that we will ever know what role George Bush and his henchmen had in Sept 11? How can we know if the plane was actually shot down? Did the passengers intend an uprising but never really achieve their goal? Was the plane already nosediving when they stormed the cockpit or did the storm cause the hijackers to abandon their cause? I don't know. I know that much of the American people need that heroic story. They need heroes and heroines to rise from the ashes of 9/11. But I find that I can't fully believe anything surrounding the whole series of events because how do you believe anything when it is filtered through a government who consistently lies and destroys human life?
It's tough. I loved the movie. It was moving and intense and very upsetting. And incredibly well made. I mean it is quite an achievement. But the way I am watching it and the way most Americans will watch that movie, those will be two totally different experiences. And rightfully so.
I recommend the movie, absolutely. But I also think it is vital to continue to ask questions. It is so important to not just be fed the news and the "facts" and accept everything you hear and read. It's been a rude awakening, growing older and realizing that the elders of the world (at least the ones that are running everything) don't actually have our best interest in mind. They don't know better. They are not teachers. That's been a hard pill to swallow.

Michael Winterbottom

Michael Winterbottom is one of my favourite filmmakers. His latest flick is TRISTRAM SHANDY: A COCK AND BULL STORY...really funny, smart and starring my new boyfriend Steve Coogan (Don't tell my other boyfriends Joachin Phoenix and Phil Hoffman).
I don't think I dislike any Winterbottom movie. His films are wildly different from one another which I love. I think I first realized I loved his films when I saw WONDERLAND (2000). I was just so affected by this movie! I sat in the theatre and cried and cried as the credits rolled and well after. I really really love that movie and think you should go and rent it right now. Who's in it? What's it about? Well, it's about three sisters and what they're going through at this particular moment. The sisters are played by Shirley Henderson (LOVE her), Gina McKee and lovely Canadian Molly Parker. See it and don't ask why!
Another of his greatest films is the incredible IN THIS WORLD (2003). This is docu drama at it's very best. A moving, meditative yet intense journey of two young Afghan refugees as they attempt to make it to the UK for a better life, IN THIS WORLD is a movie that is based on the actual experiences of the two boys in the film. Winterbottom traveled with this boys, following the trail that their traffickers organized for them...guerrilla film making, few permissions to film, all the while managing to communicate a deeply emotional story often without dialogue of any kind. I just adore this movie and think everyone should see it. I watched the movie, wanting these two Afghan boys to make it to the UK, wanting them to have the best life they could have, of course, but every step of the way was so dangerous and so harrowing...but they hardly flinched at what I found terrifying. I was so moved and upset that these young men had experienced so much at such a young age that these conditions seemed so normal to them. Gosh, it's a good film!

I thought to write this entry today because I finally got to see the early Winterbottom film, JUDE (1996) starring the stunning Christopher Eccleston and the phenomenal 20 year old Kate Winslet! (There is just no argument that that woman is an ACTOR...one cannot help but lament the fact that she dropped out of Woody Allen's MATCH POINT, leaving the role to non-actor Scarlett Johannsen)
JUDE is fabulous, lush and yes: moving. It is based on the Thomas Hardy novel, Jude The Obscure. Kate and Chris play cousins, married to others, but passionately in love with one another. Separated from their spouses, they begin a life together, have children together but remain unmarried. Did I mention this is 1890s England? Oh my goodness, it is such a good story and these two actors are really something to watch together. It is hard to believe that Kate Winslet is all of 20 years old, her acting is so effortless, so raw and full of joy and edge. She is truly an artist and she deserves to be the youngest actor to have four Oscar nominations under her belt! I love that Chris Eccleston was 30 and Kate was 20 when they made this...she matched him toe to toe! No other actress I can think of would have pulled off this performance at 20 years of age. Totally worth a rent!

Another fabulous and addictive Winterbottom movie is 24 HOUR PARTY PEOPLE. I am not a follower or fan of the Manchester music scene of the late 70s to early 90s...but that just doesn't matter when you've got a brilliant filmmaker and leading man (Steve Coogan) pulling the strings. This was one of Winterbottom's most popular films I think considering when I mention his name to friends and people in kitchens at parties, it is this movie that they recognize. Great cast, great story, great energy and Steve Coogan really makes the whole thing really enjoyable and intoxicating.
So for the record, Michael Winterbottom is a great talent and you should go and rent all the movies I've mentioned.