Sunday, December 11, 2005

In Her Shoes

cast: cameron diaz, toni collette, shirley maclaine

“in her shoes” is a film that can only be properly reviewed by a girl. there are certain miniscule nuances that only a girl can perceive due to her natural ability to be instinctively intuitive. girls are so perceptively sensitive they make boys look numb.

so instead of coming up with an intensive but uninformed and non-emphatic review, i will just concentrate on 1 infinitesimal part.

this scene has cameron diaz working as some sort of caregiver at an old folks’ home, and she was trying her best to read a poem to an old and blind retired teacher. the old man was encouraging cameron as she was not a good reader. and i felt this handicap made the chosen poem more apt.
One Art
by Elizabeth Bishop
The art of losing isn't hard to master;
so many things seem filled with the intent
to be lost that their loss is no disaster.
Lose something everyday. Accept the fluster
of lost door keys, the hour badly spent.
The art of losing isn't hard to master.
Then practice losing farther, losing faster:
places, and names, and where it was you meant
to travel. None of these things will bring disaster.
I lost my mother's watch. And look! my last, or
next-to-last, of three loved houses went.
The art of losing isn't hard to master.
I lost two cities, lovely ones. And, vaster,
some realms I owned, two rivers, a continent.
I miss them, but it wasn't a disaster.
- Even losing you (the joking voice, a gesture
I love) I shan't have lied. It's evident
the art of losing's not too hard to master
though it may look like (Write it!) like disaster.


the teacher in the old man began asking cameron some reading comprehension questions to better her appreciation of poetry. they both agreed that the author of the poem was trying to downplay losing. the poem talked about losing keys. then, losing places and names. after that, the losing of the poet’s mother’s watch and houses to boot. it starts getting more and more exaggerated as she began losing realms, rivers and even an entire continent. the poem climaxes with the biggest loss of all: a special friend or maybe a lover. (i can’t tell for sure as she hides this mysterious person behind the pronoun “you”)

but cameron impresses her patient-cum-professor by pointing out that even though the author kept on repeating and insisting that losing was no big deal, that losing was not hard to master, that losing was not a disaster, she was in reality sour-graping and most likely just setting up a false front of toughness for she truly was affected by the pain of losing the aforementioned mystery friend. (this friend must be really, really special to be considered the inspiration of a great poem which would then decades later be quoted in a great movie.)

cameron’s analysis of the poem – which according to the retired teacher was the correct analysis – struck me as quite ironic. cause even if the author was just sour-graping and downplaying her losses in some form of unconscious defense mechanism, she was actually being accurate!

losing is no big deal! losing isn’t a disaster! losing isn’t hard to master! i personally know this as my entire life is a study (or a clinic even) in losses, frustrations, rejections, disappointments, breakdowns, tragedies (and feel free to add more of the same concepts). jason biggs in the movie “loser” is actually me – except i didn’t get mena suvari in the end.

these supposed “losing moments” are very superficial. probably the only real losses in life are encountered when you give up (a billy daland philosophy), or when you don’t rise after a fall, or when you live in fear of losing, or worse, when your spirit is broken. an amputated spirit, after all, is THE ultimate loss for “there is no prosthetic for that”.

rating: 5 of 5 stars * * * * *
a very mushy and tear-jerking chick-flick, and i loved every second of it.

1 comment:

rob said...

Sounds interesting. I hope this movie is 'As Good As It Gets'-like. At least it sounds unique.