Sofia's Epic Fail

4 out of these 7 women have speaking roles. 

Was that harsh? Well, watching her new film The Beguiled felt like a one and a half torture ride to nowhere's-ville. I want my time back, and my money. And I want her to make better films, but that's not going to happen is it? 

The film was marketed as a radical feminist revenge story, perfect for the chauvinist rhetoric of the Trump era, but Valerie Solanas it is not. It's not even a 'hell hath no fury…' kind of thing. As I said, it's about an hour and a half of nothing. Which is a fair assessment of basically all of her films, yeah I said it. It had such great potential. It's a Misery meets Gone with the Wind story based on a Clint Eastwood movie from the 70's (arguably the best era of America filmmaking). With a stellar cast like Kirsten Dunst, Colin Farrell, and the up-and-coming Elle Fanning, you were thinking how could this go wrong? In all respects apparently.

Admit it, this part from the trailer is why we all wanted to see it. 'Get me the anatomy book'.

I have to give it up to the marketing department. They did a great job with the theater art, the promo art, the trailers, etc. Basically building up this turd in a dress so that people would shelve out 11 dollars to see it. I saw it with a friend earlier today and we witnessed quite a few walk outs. At first we thought it was because we were basically screaming at the screen, but we couldn't help ourselves. Eventually, we realized that the walk outs had the right idea. 

So stop fucking with us, Coppola. Just because you're Hollywood royalty doesn't mean you can do no wrong. In fact you can do so much wrong to some seriously ripe and brilliant material that it kind of taints your family's legacy.

The film is photographed beautifully; with low-lit interiors, candlelight and sunshine, and dressing that looks like it's actually a house that has been lived in and not a matte painting that was put up the day before. Costumes are en pointe and that's about the only positive things I have to say about the film. I know it was just released, so unlike most of my reviews I'm not giving away the plot. Here's what we know. Colin Farrell is a Union deserter; a Irish mercenary who has been badly injured and is found on the outskirts of a large Southern plantation in Virginia. He is taken in by the children and their headmistress who have had to lay low three years into the Civil War. It's pretty obvious that 6 girls in their sexual prime or in puberty and a woman a bit past her prime but still hot AF (Nicole Kidman) would create sexual tension with the one man they're keeping in the house so palpable you could cut it with a bread knife.

I will give her the director of photography a lot of credit. He managed to make a dull film very pretty. So you have that to look forward to. 

Firstly, this house she runs with 6 pupils seems to have an endless supply of food and wine. What the actual fuck? Every movie about the Civil War, or any war for that matter is about people having no food or rations. Also, three of the girls don't even have speaking parts. That's a waste of space, they literally do nothing. You could just cut them out of the film and save the budget. For an hour and a half run time, I would say there's about 20 minutes of dialogue which is par for the course for a Sofia Copolla film. Every single time there is a moment for potential pathos, drama, and hubris, she builds that moment and then kills it. It's like getting really close to orgasm, and then the person falls asleep on you.

Although it appears deliciously sexually devious, the actually sexuality of this film has about as much erotica as a 13 year old's vampire fan fiction.  

It's almost as if Sofia is afraid of the sexuality of this film, which is basically the driving force of the plot. Even scenes that should be highly erotic are creepy and weird. Scarlet O'Hara crying on Ashley's chest was more erotic than anything in this movie. For a mostly silent film with no plot and no nuance of the main characters it seems to kind of move into the category of Avant-Garde, which I believe is actually Sofia's calling. But go Avant-Garde all the way. Film on 16mm silent Bolex cameras, with a 10 minute run time, and save us the grief. She so desperately wants to be considered a serious artist, but she comes off as uber-pretentious. She breaks so many film rules that it's just not right. 

I know breaking film rules can be fine, but what we think of as breaking is actually bending. Tarantino does it, Scorsese does it. But rules are there for a reason. Example: Your main characters have to be nuanced. They have to be three dimensional. They have to have motive good or bad. There has to be a plot that moves forward and doesn't just meander around waiting for shit to happen. I don't care how pretty it looks. 

People think that she's so unique because she plays up the subtlety which is actually giving her audience a giant middle finger. There's being subtle, which is fine, and then there's saying nothing at all, and that's what this film does. I don't need resolution, I can leave a film without closure as long as the film presents interesting questions to consider later. This film does not. You leave the theater thinking…'well, that happened'. Sofia is should really stop writing her own films because she writes about 30 pages and stretches it to an hour and a half run time (I keep mentioning that because it felt way longer). It's kind of sad that coming from such a talented family, we'll think of The Bling Ring as 'the good one'. Hard pass.

Trailer below...I mean...whatever.

Women's Fashion Through the Years and Through the Movies

Marlene Dietrich in her iconic tux.

Once we lost the bone corset and the hoop skirt made out of wire (basically sounds like articles that belong in a torture chamber rather than on a woman's body) fashion changed quite drastically. After the suffrage movement, there was a big need for women to behave, look, and mimic men. The 20's era of women's fashion wasn't the most feminine, but it was quite unique. It was a time where a dress that goes above the ankle was still scandalous. The dresses were ones that hung like oversized burlap sacks over the feminine physique because they also lost the need to wear girdles or bras. They decorated them with fringe, rhinestones, and feathers, cut their hair short like men so it would be less to handle. It was a way of becoming more masculine while still showing off the beauty of womanhood. The make up of the times also changed drastically, considering at the turn of the century, there was barely any make up being worn by women, except for in high society circles. To touch on the opposite side of the spectrum, dark lipstick and eye-liner took over, where women started to look like burlesque performers and/or clowns. One woman in particular took that sentiment to a very literal level; Marlene Dietrich wore a tuxedo in Morocco and subsequently many times in real life. She later said that she never dressed for a man's attention, but for 'the look'.

Joan Crawford in a gown by Adrian who was the foremost designer for celebrity dresses in the 1930's, making all of his women more feminine, beautiful, and chic.

By the thirties, things had settled, the right to vote was ours and we as a species had calmed down. The dresses became flowy and long with empty backs and were made out of silk and satin. They were curve hugging and striking, very much accentuating the female anatomy. Now that most women had started to work; mostly as shop girls and stenographers, while in the office they would don pencil skirts and fitted suits adorned with fur. Katherine Hepburn was one of the few brave souls of that era to always wear pants. It was a risky move that eventually became her trademark. Later in life, she was asked if she even owned a skirt by Barbara Walters and she quipped 'I have one, I'll wear it to your funeral'. 

Grace Kelly encapsulated demure but still eye-catching fashion of the 1950's, of course barely anyone looked like her or had a body that carried clothes better.

Let's skip on over to the 50's and early 60's. Tiny wastes were in, as were shoulder pads, and demure button-downed dresses. The woman had moved back to the kitchen, was prescribed dexedrine and spent her day doing laundry and vacuuming. Just think of Betty Draper in the first two seasons of Mad Men. This is why vamps like Marilyn Monroe with her low cut dresses that she was basically sewn into was such a scandal. With a body built for sin, she had no reservations about hiding it, especially because in the start, it was her bread and butter. 

Marilyn Monroe in her infamous 'Happy Birthday Mr. President' dress made of nude-colored fabric and beads that barely hid anything and definitely made a statement. It was the pinnacle of her penchant for shocking fashion statements.

By the late 60's, with the second wave of feminism being a prominent force in American dissent, pants were now just as common on women as they were on men. It was a questionable time for fashion. Low-riders (I don't care how flat your stomach is) are not flattering, neither are elephant flares and knits. But by the Summer of Love, we were lucky people were wearing ANYTHING. The hair got long and unkempt, and basically it was a free-for-all, I suppose the biggest fashion icons of that time were Ali McGraw and Barbara Streisand, who each in their own way, made the questionable fashion choices of that era chic. 

Dustin Hoffman pulled off the horrible fashion statements of the 80's much better than any woman on celluloid that I can remember. 

The 80's...why don't we skip that. We can sum it up in very few words; shoulder pads, flacid bows, and Laura Ashley. It was perhaps the most unflattering time for women's fashion. Someone once said that the shoulder pad problem was so bad that women clearly wanted to look like a bunch of line backers. Perhaps the female fashion icon of the 80's is Dustin Hoffman in Tootsie. 

Believe it or not, my mother dressed me like this for the majority of my adolescence still when I started dressing myself in Birkenstocks, electric blue eye-shadow, and micro-mini's, I have to say she had the right idea. 

Now, on to the era that I really love...and also hate to a degree, the icons of which were Courtney Love in her baby doll dress and lace up pleather boots, Kate Moss and her androgynous skinny jeans and oversized t-shirts, and of course Jennifer Aniston as Rachel Green with that hair cut we all remember, and down-to-earth casual 90's style. It was a time to get back to basics. But for some reason I was always dressed in embellished Blossom-esque hats, velvet overalls, and fake suspenders (I'm serious). The 90's were definitely two eras of fashion. The early ones were all about women dressing very earthy like they are standing in line for Lilith Fair tickets, and the second part was filled with body glitter, cargo pants, and plum lipstick. Thanks for that Gwen Stefani. 

Walking art. Nicole Kidman was the only one in my opinion that could pull off a designer gown better than the model on the runway.

And what are we up to now? Thank god the first decade of the 00's is over and we no longer wear Juicy Couture, trucker hats, and midriff tops (it was such a dark time). One fashion icon that has held her own for close to two decades now and still doesn't miss a beat and always ends up on everyone's Best Dressed list is Nicole Kidman. With the body of a porcelain doll that eats a rice cake a year, she can wear sweat pants from Walgreens or Valentino couture and make it look gorgeous. Not that she'd ever be caught dead in sweat pants. Taylor Swift also has her whole renewed image going. Starting from a country bumpkin look with her long blonde curly hair, and cowboy boots to a closet full of Louboutins and sailor shorts (also, since when did the cat become an accessory, much better than Paris Hilton's ferret, am I right?). My current favorite has to be a cross between Emma Watson and Tilda Swinton who both got back on the androgyny train and still manage to make it look sexy, feminine and incredibly chic. Whether on the red carpet wearing Balenciaga couture or grocery shopping, they are on fleek (can't believe I just said that). It's important to mix the feminine sensuality with sophistication and they've both done so brilliantly while being about 20 years apart in age. Oh and by the way, wearing a lot of designer high-end clothing does NOT make you chic. Every red carpet Kristen Stewart attends she's draped in Zuhair Murad (one of the most innovative designers right now) and she can't even stand up straight? It's a crime to fashion...and to women. Now if we could just lose the skinny jeans, the ironic vintage T's, and the raccoon eye-make up we'd actually have a good era going on right now. Let's get at it. 

Below, clips to illustrate my point. 

Is Emma Watson's Character in The Bling Ring the New Suzanne Stone?

Emma Stone (left) portrays ring leader Alexis Neiers (right) in Sofia Coppola's The Bling Ring (2013)

So much has gone down in the past few days people. Wendy Davis stood in hot pink sneakers in a sea of Republican Texans without pee-breaks or trips to the vending machine for 13 hours to run out the clock so that most abortion clinics in the greater Texas area wouldn't be shut down. The supreme court overturned Prop 8 in California as well as ruled DOMA unconstitutional (while also overturning the Voting Acts Right) that last part being something people have totally seemed to ignore, but still huge strides made for freedom of sexuality and freedom of individual liberty. Meanwhile, Paula Deen is still a huge racist, and Kim Kardashian had Kanye's baby way too early, but not like dangerously early, and gave it literally the dumbest celebrity name, which is totally expected. So my brain is going through a lot of duress right now.

So let's talk about other stuff...all this news is overwhelming and I need a break. I've been watching previews for The Bling Ring (2013) and pre-ordered it on iTunes. It will be the first Sofia Coppola experience I had since I nearly shot myself after watching Marie Antoinette (2005) so obviously I'm hesitant. I've made sure I have a watching partner and the house is cleared of all poisonous and sharp objects. So I should be fine, but let's draw some kind of comparison, just for the fuck of it.

In the trailer there's a very interesting moment that I kept thinking of. Emma Watson plays the Alexis Neiers-based character we all know as the ring leader behind the infamous Hollywood Hills burglaries which shocked...absolutely no one and why the fuck did anyone care that Paris Hilton was now missing three pairs of Chanel sunglasses? I do believe there are still children starving in Sudan but whatever you want to make a film about Sofia is fine by me. Then it hit me, Sofia has always been somewhat of a failed satirist, and perhaps this will be her redemption.

both women love to watch themselves.

I couldn't stop thinking about another pitch perfect satire about a woman who strives to be famous by being infamous, clawing her way up a ladder and leaving others hurt and disturbed along the way; Suzanne Stone the ruthless murderess of Gus Van Sant's brilliant black comedy To Die For (1995). The character is played perfectly by a pre-botoxed Nicole Kidman, and there's a great scene when she's about to basically get away with concpiracy to commit murder and says to hoareds of press who surround her (just what she wants) that 'life, liberty....and all the rest of it still stand for something'. For some reason this immediately popped into my head when in the trailer we see Emma Watson as Nicki swarmed by a similar hoard of photographers desperately speaking into every microphone hiding her actual pleasure with the whole situation by huge Nicole Ritchie-type sunglasses that she's 'a huge believer in karma, and this is a learning experience for her' after which she takes a pause to think of something at least remotely sincere and ends it with 'I want to lead a country one day...for all I know'. The statement seems as misguided as Stone's but harkens that though acquitted in the actual courts, in the court of public opinion, these two broads are screwed because they wanted superficial things (namely fame of any sort, no matter how long the 15 minutes would last) and did really despicable and cruel things to achieve it, not understanding in the end that in their moment of redemption at least to the people that they had fought so hard to get on their side, they totally screwed it up because all in all, they are pretty soulless individuals. 

Both are extremely aware of their own sexual power.

Now, I am not comparing Gus Ban Sant to Sofia Coppola, I mean I haven't seen any pigs fly through my window, nor any of the horesmen of the apocalypse so that will not happen not now and not ever. But in terms of satire, I think if Sofia was directing Watson towards any extension of Alexis Neiers it was probably to play her as one of the greatest bitches in film history, or at least of the 90's and that of satire itself, and that is Suzanne Stone (Nicole Kidman). That is, if she's any kind of smart, and that's a reach. But let's hope that we see some more of Van Sant's themes in Coppola's teenage epic. It could work to her benefit, or land her right on her ass. Just like the rest of her films.

Trailers for both films below. 

My Favorite Oscar Dresses

Amy Adams in my favorite designer (well of the moment) L'Wren Scott in 2011.

This is probably my favorite Oscar Dress ever and something that looks like it belongs on Tilda Swinton, this Avent-Garde Givenchy was the best look of 2012.

Cate Blanchette makes the list again when she wore this groundbreaking John Galliano in 1999.

Who can forget Charlize Theron in her I-know-I'm-going-to-win-so-I'm-really-going-all-out Gucci sparkly number that echoed Marilyn's infamous skin-and-beads dress. She looked flawless in 2003.

Freida Pinto paying tribute to her Indian heritage in this stunning blue John Galliano gown in 2008.

Grace Kelly in who else? Edith Head. There was never a better star-designer match since Joan Crawford and Adrian. This is 1954 for The Country Girl.

Although usually making serious fashion faux pas, Gwyneth Paltrow in this Tom Ford dress was freakin' flawless in 2012.

Hilary Swank channeled the 30's with this stunning backless Guy Laroche gown the year she won for Million Dollar Baby in 2005.

This is kind of a given, if you ask anyone which is their favorite Oscar dress, they will probably say 'that Julia Roberts one' in 2001 when she won for the titular role in Erin Brockovich. Nothing beats vintage Valentino.

This is another personal favorite of mine, unfortunately apparently the only good fashion choice Marion Cotillard has made as we've seen of late. This Jean-Paul Gaultier mermaid gown stunned in 2008 when she won for La Vie en Rose.

Before she started looking like some scared socially awkward 6th grader, Michelle Williams was flawless at the 2005 Oscars in this luscious yellow Vera Wang and bright red lipstick. The most like Marilyn she's ever looked ironically.

If I have three personal favorites on this list, this would definitely be the third one. Natalie Portman always looks stunning (except her pregnancy dress in 2011, yuckville) but this Lanvin grey Ancient Greece inspired number was just flawless in its simplicity.

Pre-botoxed Nicole Kidman in 1997 rarely looked awful in anything, but this lime-green silk Dior creation was practically built for her, in fact it was. John Galliano's handy work yet again.

Emma Stone tried to recreate this dress down to the letter and miserably failed last year because honey, nobody looks more statuesque in a red Valentino than Nicole Kidman, pre-botox or post-botox. This is her in 2007, and out of all the bright red dresses to clash with the red carpet of the Oscars, this is by far the best one, and there have been a lot of them.

And true to her bo-ho chic style, Sienna Miller looked fabulous in this Matthew Williamson dress in 2004. 

Well that's it folks, be sure to check my best and worst list after this year, you know how much of a mean bitch I can be!