Review: Atonement

Originally posted at Epinions

Two figures stand by a fountain. A little girl watches from a window. What the girl thinks she sees only marginally corresponds with what actually occurs between the man and woman below. A little girl’s perception, a little girl’s imagination, a confusion, occasionally deliberate, of truth. This is what lies at the heart of Joe Wright’s Atonement.

Atonement is the second feature by director Joe Wright, his 2005 adaptation of Pride and Prejudice being his first. An adaptation of Ian McEwan’s novel, Atonement tells the story of writer Bryony Tallis, her sister Cecilia, and their gardener Robbie Turner. It’s a story of love, hurt, passion, and forgiveness: what the characters involved want, need, and ultimately fail to find.

The story begins in England on the cusp of World War I. Over the course of an evening lives are torn apart by a crime of lust and young Bryony’s purposely false accusation of guilt. As a result Robbie Turner is torn from his lover Cecilia. The story continues through the war four years later, telling the story of Cecilia and Robbie’s attempt to reclaim the life that was stolen from them and of Bryony’s attempt to make things right.

The narrative meanders throughout the course of the film, the story being told out of sequence and from different points of view. We see glimpses of the private lives of Robbie, Cecilia, and Bryony. But what is true and what is imagined? What version of events can we trust? How much is Bryony’s invention?

As a result of how the story is told you do have to pay attention. There are enough cues that I never found it so disorienting as to take me out of the film. In the end everything makes sense and any questions I was left with seem to be left unanswered for a reason. The idea is that if it’s not our story we can only know as much as we are told. If our narrator is unreliable then we can trust what they give us only so far. The idea of trust and ambiguity in a narrative is one that I find fascinating and films that explore that generally appeal to me. I enjoy being allowed to think and question, I like being challenged. Atonement succeeds in this sense.

Of course, while there are questions raised, enough is given that if you are more inclined to see a movie that is straightforward Atonement can still be perfectly enjoyable. While not completely linear, its narrative is not confusing. The visuals are lush and the acting is strong. Keira Knightly continues to impress and James McAvoy makes Robbie Turner such an incredibly sympathetic character that it is near impossible to not ache for him.

Saoirse Ronan is Bryony at 13 while Romola Garai comes in for the older 18-year-old Bryony. I personally prefer Garai’s older Bryony but Ronan is still solid. I think for me it may be more that Bryony is more complex character at 18 and therefore more sympathetic. Vanessa Redgrave also has a few minutes as Bryony at the end of her life and, interestingly, I found this elderly Bryony to be the least sympathetic of all. Where the child acts out of hurt and the young woman seeks to repair, the old woman has fallen back on the sins she committed at 13 and seems to have failed to grasp the lessons she should have learned.

Balancing the different view points expressed in Atonement is tricky at times and as a result the pacing is a bit off. It slows down in the middle which is unfortunate considering the slowest portion had the potential to be the most affecting. Where it could have added substantially to the emotional impact of the film, the problems with pacing instead detract from it. So while I felt sad as I watched the credits roll, my eyes remained dry.

I love Wright’s use of long, moving shots, how he deals with the passage of time, as well as his use of sound (most notably the use of the sound of a type writer in Atonement). I’m incredibly interested to see what Wright does with his next film, The Soloist.

Atonement is a good, almost excellent film. There are flaws for sure but it’s strengths make up for them. A beauty to watch, characters to care for, Atonement is a film definitely worth seeing.

Thoughts: In The Name of The King: A Dungeon Siege Tale

I was hanging out at a friend's last night when the trailer for In The Name of The King came on TV.

"What the hell is that?"

"Oh, it's some video game based thing by that awful director guy with the weird name. Bowel or something."

"Uwe Boll??? Oh NO."

Why does this man get to continue to make movies? And how on earth does he get any recognizable talent in his movies? It depresses me. And that trailer just looks hideous. And the posters suck. Whenever I see crap like this being produced I'm just baffled. I really don't understand how In The Name of The King gets made and yet so many better scripts never see the light of day. Why would you want to pour money and time and energy into something that has no redeeming value whatsoever?

It makes me a little bitter.

If you haven't seen it, you may not want to. But the trailer if you're curious:



Also. This other poster is so much better than the one in American Cineplexes:



Not that a cooler poster will make it any better. Uwe Boll is beyond help.

Review: Bridges of Madison County

Originally posted atEpinions

By what definition does a romance become great? Is it the doomed fate of Romeo and Juliet or is it the triumphant happily ever after of Cinderella? We all go through life searching for that elusive great love. How often do any of us get to find it?

Bridges of Madison County is the story of a great, brief, love affair. Francesca Johnson and Robert Kincaid meet over a weekend in rural Madison County in 1965. Francesca lives a quiet farm life. Her husband has taken the children to the state fair for the weekend when Kincaid shows up. He is a photographer on assignment for National Geographic magazine and is there to photograph the famous bridges of Madison County. Francesca offers to help him find his way and as they spend more time together, the attraction between them grows.

The movie is filled with tender moments of hinted at desire, expressions of frustration, and acknowledgements that a relationship between them can never be. With all of that, I was honestly expecting something more. More tension, more sympathy, something more personal. As it is, the movie is good, really good; it’s just not great.

The talent behind the film is excellent though. Meryl Streep and Clint Eastwood are Francesca and Kincaid. Streep got quite a bit of attention for her performance (an Oscar nomination for Best Actress among other things) and rightly so. Her expression of emotions is powerful. Eastwood has a strong presence as always and the chemistry between them is certainly believable.

Eastwood directs and as much as I love Clint Eastwood I think that may be part of the problem. I love Eastwood for his westerns, for his films with a more male perspective. The viewpoint that works so well for something like Unforgiven does not give us the same insight that Bridges of Madison County would have benefited from.

I will say this though. It’s a beautiful film. Jack Green’s cinematography truly takes advantage of the rural setting. Combined with Eastwood’s direction, the warm images captured are definitely my favorite thing about the movie. It evokes a distinct feeling of nostalgia that makes me long for summer. It’s a feeling that fits the story perfectly.

While the visuals are its strength, the narrative structure is its greatest flaw. Adapted from the novel by Robert Waller, the story is told through the narrative device of a frame story. Which is just awful, especially the acting. Where Streep's performance is spot on, the acting of her grown children is forced and seems fit more for a TV movie than a Clint Eastwood epic. It was also frustrating how the frame would continually interrupt the flow of the narrative. We would be involved with Francesca and Kincaid, waiting anxiously for what was next, only to have the grown children thrust back into our focus. Their poor voice over narration would interrupt Streep and Eastwood’s dialogue and I would be taken completely out of the film.

So overall I guess what I feel towards the film can be best described as ambivalence. I enjoyed it, I’m glad I watched it, but I’m in no rush to see it again. I’m not going to force it upon my unsuspecting friends. Or at least, any more than I all ready have (my roommate watched with me). So for my recommendation I will say this: If you’re a fan of romance, Clint Eastwood, or Meryl Streep you should definitely see this film. It will be worth your time. Otherwise, I don’t think this is a must see.

The DVD is nothing to write home about. No real features or anything like that. Just the movie for your viewing pleasure.

Trailers: The Dark Knight

We've seen stills. We've seen posters. And now, finally, we get the trailer.

The Trailer.

A goodness me. Where do I even begin? Oh Heath Ledger. You're creating many an inappropriate feeling in myself and my friends. I cannot wait to see your Joker on the big screen. I may not be able to contain my excitement.

Top Ten List: A Discussion of Influence

To set the scene:

INT. BAR – NIGHT

A lone trumpet wails as crowds of the fashionably adorned clamor to have their picture snapped. Candles imbue the sprawling lounge with a warm glow, the glasses sparkle, the beer flows.

Huddled in a back corner, hiding from the giddy masses, two people lean in close, their words exchanged in a flurry of whispers. Ignoring their surroundings, they are waist deep in a conversation of immense importance. They are discussing the origin of an idea.

***

It’s a question that every writer gets. It doesn’t matter what stage of your career you are at; if you have written, somebody will be asking. And Monday night as I sat in LA’s Dresden, a lounge I occasionally frequent with friends in the vicinity of Hollywood Blvd and Vermont Ave, it was my turn to be asked. I just shot my first post-college short film and my crew and I were out celebrating our survival through the weekend of insanity. My DP, 1st AC, and I were discussing our complicated final shot, debating whether we had failed or succeeded in its execution (a question that will most likely not be answered until editing is complete, if even then).

My DP (Director of Photography) went off for another beer while the 1st AC (Assistant Camera) and I continued to talk. Until he stopped me.

“Okay, enough, this is a great chat but I want to talk about you. You’re incredibly interesting and I want inside your head.”

My first reaction is Oh great, is this a line? But it wasn’t and what followed was a detailed discussion of my influences and where exactly all of the ideas for my short came from. It’s not an easy straightforward list. My influences range from visual to narrative, they include film, music, even poetry. The evolution of an idea is not simple and its genesis is still a mystery. But that discussion made me think about it in a more thorough way than I had previously. And that thought led me to create this list I am about to present to you.

It’s a list of my influences. Not every single influence, but the top ten films that in some way led me to make the choices I made for this specific project. Some of these films have influenced me in a very general way and could be listed as an influence for anything I create. Or in one case, it was a single shot in a single scene that led my to a stylistic decision for half of my film. Either way. It’s a brief glimpse into my head that I’m writing as much for your entertainment as I am for my own desire to express myself.

With that I shall begin. Here now: My top ten most personally influential films of the moment. Presented in a rough order of what exactly their influence has been.

In The Mood For Love (2000) dir. Wong Kar Wai , cinematography Chris Doyle.
Set in Hong Kong, In The Mood For Love tells the story of a man and woman who engage in a hopeless love affair. Brought together by the affair that their spouses are having, trapped by the constraints of propriety, their great passion can never be consummated. Instead, they share save their secret to never be forgotten even as it can never be known by anyone other than themselves. For me this film is influential across the board, stylistically and narratively. The flowing cinematography, the color palette, the use of slow motion, the obscuring foreground, the use of soft focus, the framing of characters. More importantly it’s how all of these elements compliment the narrative, rather than just being used for the sake of looking pretty. From the narrative end, it’s how the story evolves, how the characters are developed, and most importantly how the love story is told.

2046 (2004) dir. Wong Kar Wai, cinematography Chris Doyle.
A rough sequel to 2000’s In The Mood For Love, 2046 continues the story of Chow Mo Wan and how he has dealt with his failed love. It follows his affairs with several female characters and explores a story he himself is writing. It has many of the same themes and stylistic choices as In The Mood For Love. For me specifically, the end of my film is a nod to a moment in this. It was also an influence in my choices for set design and helped form the color palette I ultimately chose with the help of my Production Designer.

The Bridges of Madison County (1995) dir. Clint Eastwood, cinematography Jack Green.
It’s a film I would only rate 3, maybe 3 1/2 stars on its own and as such I think it’s a great example of how even the smallest thing can be hugely important. It’s the love story between a normal farm wife and a wandering photographer. The frame story is problematic but Meryl Streep and Clint Eastwood are great as always. The moment for me in this film is brief. As they dance in her kitchen, as they act on their desire, there is one shot in this one scene that caught my eye. The framing, and most importantly how the characters are lit, were the jumping off point for the lighting scheme my DP and I designed for our entire love scene.

Osaka Elegy (1936) dir. Kenji Mizoguchi, cinematography Minoru Miki.
When A Woman Ascends the Stairs (1960) dir. Mikio Naruse, cinematography Masao Tamai.
I’m listing these both together because they are both influential in the same narrative way. The films both tell stories of women struggling with life in a world controlled by men. While melodramas, I find them more subdued than their American counterparts. They explore “women’s issues” and explore themes similar to the ones I included in my own story. Love vs. duty, freedom, independence, hope, despair, and the choices that these women must ultimately make.

Children of Men (2006) dir. Alfonso Cuaron, cinematography Emmanuel Lubezki.
This could possibly be the most influential film for film students for the next few years. For me it actually wasn’t a huge, huge influence. My DP and I discussed it while we were talking about how we wanted to go about shooting the film in general. What it led us to was a couple of long takes and a slightly wandering camera. Both things that complimented my original ideas very nicely.

The Gleaners and I (2000) dir. Agnes Varda.
Along with Gimme Shelter, The Gleaners and I is one of my favorite documentaries. In both films the camera not only records the story being told, it gets inside of it, becomes a part of it. The Gleaners and I is a stylistic influence for me, the use of close-ups of different objects, and the personal exploration the Varda engages in. It’s as much about her own personal journey as it is about her subject. It’s a great general influence and has greatly informed my use of the close-up shot.

Umberto D. (1954) dir. Vittorio De Sica, cinematography G.R. Aldo.
One of the best (and my favorite) examples of Italian Neo-Realism, Umberto D. tells the story of an aging government worker and his small dog Flick. It’s a painful exploration of a man falling through the cracks of society. It’s sad and beautiful and moving. It influenced the writing of my dialogue, or rather, the not writing of my dialogue and leaving a good bit of room for improv with my actors. I allowed them to take their characters and make them a part of themselves. While my film is certainly not a neo-realist work, I did aim to create something rooted in something real.

Unforgiven (1992) dir. Clint Eastwood, cinematography Jack Green.
There isn’t really a specific moment of influence in this film. Rather, it’s the general look and atmosphere, the moments of quiet, how the characters develop. While Osaka Elegy and When a Women are both very definitely “women’s films”, Unforgiven is very definitely a “man’s film”. I guess having more of a male centered perspective prevented me from making my film entirely melodramatic. Mostly this influence is vague at best, a feeling rather than a specific example.

These last two films are general influences rather than specific. For me, they would go on any list anywhere about where I draw my inspiration from. In fact, when asked what my favorite film is, the last entry to this list is my answer.

L’Avventura (1960) dir. Michelangelo Antonio, cinematography Aldo Scavarda.
While it’s exact merits are often debated and questioned, some people love it while others hate it, I have been hugely affected by this film ever since my first viewing as a freshman in college. In general, it’s the way that Antonio uses his visuals to tell more of the story than any narrative device. Film is a powerful medium and I think the importance of the image is sometimes forgotten. Speaking more specifically, what it’s really about for me in this case is how the story is told. It’s all of the missing bits. Sometimes the things that are most important exist between the lines; it’s the silences that are more telling the verbal exchanges. It’s as much what is unsaid as it is what is said. I hate over telling a story and I like to have a little faith that the audience is intelligent enough to read into the parts in between.

Jaws (1975) dir. Steven Spielberg, cinematography Bill Butler.
And this is it. My answer to that questions every filmmaker gets, the question that has no easy answer. Of course I always qualify by first explaining that there are so many films, so many things I love, that it’s impossible to name just one. But if I had to pick, this movie is it. It’s narrative perfection, every element comes together to tell the story. Every moment is used, not a second is wasted. It’s the movie that made me love movies. And when I was first exploring filmmaking, first trying my hand at it, Jaws was what was there with me, encouraging me, pushing me to go just a little bit further. So while you may not be able to pick out a specific moment in my work that shows its influence, the fact that my work exists at all is evidence enough.

***

And there it is. A look inside my head. I hope you liked it! I think my 1st AC did.

Production: Introducing Tomorrow's Party

Considering the fact that this is a blog about film and filmmaking, you would think that I would talk about my projects. I'm not really sure why haven't. But yes, I have my own project. And I'm going to talk about it.

Currently I am working on putting together a five minute short film called "Tomorrow's Party". My roommate and drunken cohort Katie is helping me produce it. If I haven't driven her crazy yet... I have a feeling she may hate me by the end of it. Haha... I'm kidding... I think...

About Tomorrow's Party.

It's a screenplay that I wrote, will be directing, and am producing. When you're working on something this small you end up doing a lot of it yourself. The rest of it... I'm calling in a lot of favors. A friend from college is coming in from New York to be my DP. Various other friends are filling other crew positions. As I've mentioned all ready, my roommate is my producer. So far the only people enlisted who I didn't know previously are my actors.

It's a lot of work. It fills most of my free time. There are locations to be scouted, actors to talk to, insurance to arrange. And that was just the last three days. There's a laundry list of things to accomplish before Thanksgiving. This week.

When I stop thinking about how much I have to do, I start thinking about how I'm going to be able to afford this. By the skin of my teeth. It's incredibly stressful but I try and not let that freak me out. Because I know people who have done more than I'm doing with relatively less resources. I may be putting everything I have into this film, but I think I have enough. I think. I hope.

But that's an inescapable part of indie filmmaking. We do what we can with what we have. We may have to make sacrifices but in the end it's worth it. We've made a film. It's ours.

I'm not working in independent film at the moment but that is the world that I come from. The experiences have been frustrating, they've been painful, they've been frustratingly painful. And yet, this is the world that I come back to for my own work. Because real independent filmmaking, at it's best, is soulful. The people love what they're doing, we're passionate, and in the end our projects mean something.

Again. This is at it's best. At it's worst it can be soul sucking working. People will take advantage of you. Projects can be worthless crap. You may get nothing out of it.

Tomorrow's Party will be indie at it's best. I can say that with confidence. Because it is my project, I believe in it, and I truly appreciate everything that everyone is doing for me. I may not be able to afford to pay my cast and crew, but I do respect them. I will take care of them as best I can. I want to make this film worth it for everyone.

It's my first post-college project. My first real film. Yes, it's super short. But it's a learning experience. It's also a story I care about. Sometimes five minutes is all you need.

Tomorrow's Party is where my energy will be spent for the next three weeks (Wait, I really only have three weeks left? Now THAT is a terrifying thought). And my time. And all of my money that's not all ready going to rent or bills. But that's okay. Because we're getting this done. We're making a movie.

I'll try and keep posting updates. I can't promise anything but I'm sure there will be lots to talk about. Right now most of what I've got is stress and exhaustion. Oh yeah, and a conversation with a 75-year-old ex-rock band manager Holocaust survivor from Germany. I guess there is always that.

Production: Effect Inaction

A picture a friend of mine took last week in front of Disney Studios in Burbank, CA.

The show I am currently working on is looking for a PA. My APOC sent an email out to the coordinators' email list asking for resumes. This was yesterday. Ever since that email went out, she's been inundated with resumes from PAs. There have been phone calls. And in every conversation, in every message, there is a note of desperation.

Please, help me, I'm out of work.



Fox announced yesterday that it was going to go ahead and air new Family Guy episodes even though show creator Seth MacFarlane is on strike. Which is an interesting choice considering the fact the MacFarlane not only is involved in the writing of the show, he does several of the voices as well.

Last Sunday Fox aired the last completed pre-strike episode. Starting this Sunday, every new Family Guy airing is being produced without MacFarlane. While Fox does technically have the right to go ahead without MacFarlane's involvement, I agree with his assessment that it's "a dick move."

To quote him directly:

"It would just be a colossal dick move if they did that,"

So what's the big deal really? Family Guy is Seth MacFarlane's show. It's been a huge success for Fox and you know it's made a ton of money. Especially on DVD sales. Family Guy is famous for being resurrected after it's tremendous performance in the DVD market.

DVDs. One of the issues of this strike. Residuals that writers receive from DVD sales. Is this starting to come together for you yet?

Fox made a huge amount of money off of Family Guy when it was released on DVD. Fox continues to make a huge amount of money off of the show with new episodes, continued DVD sales, etc. And not only do they refuse to even consider sharing the profit with the creative talent behind the show, rather than respect the creator of this show that has turned them a substantial profit, the network and studio execs choose instead to go on without him.




So now I sit here in my office, look out over LA, and listen to the desperate phone calls.

"I heard you need a PA? Did you get my resume? Where can I send it?"

For one of these people there may be a job. For the rest? There will be uncertainty and frustration as they watch their job prospects fade away. The longer this strike lasts, more productions will shut down, and more PAs will being making these desperate phone calls to the few shows still running.

I am incredibly glad that I made the choice I did when I was offered this job I now I have. It wasn't my only option but it is the only one that currently still exists. If I had chosen differently I would be the one making the desperate phone calls rather than listening to my APOC answer them.

It all goes beyond money. It's about respect. It's about dignity. Right now, there's not much of any of that going around.

Article about Fox Airing Family Guy without MacFarlane

Thoughts: Mad Men

Now I know I don't normally talk about television shows but I feel like I need to mention how fantastic Mad Men is. It really is great. AMC did well with season 1 and I'm very excited to see what comes next in season 2. Which is scheduled for next year. Assuming things... whatever.

In the mean time AMC is running season 1 (which ended mid-October) so there's plenty of time to catch up with missed episodes.

It's just absolutely fascinating to watch. The characters are great. Even the characters who are bastards have their sympathetic moments. Oh man, and that season finale? I'm desperate for more.

I just want to spread the good television love. There's so little of it. And soon to be even less of it.

Production: WGA Strike & Functioning Chaos

Hollywoodland is all abuzz with news of the WGA strike that began this morning at 12:01. After months of getting nowhere, it's not a huge surprise that the WGA decided to strike. The big issues involve residuals with DVD sales, internet distribution, and other new media. Basically, the writers are getting the shaft and the producers don't want to fix the situation.

All that background, you can look up online.

What I'm really interested in talking about is what this strike means for those of us not directly involved but still very much so effected by this strike.

I'm obviously not in the WGA (...yet?) and I don't really know any writers. So I can't say what this is like for them. I don't know how this is going to effect them. Depending on how long this strike lasts (the 1988 one lasted 5 months), what will happen to them? They'll be out of work, sitting around, and waiting.

As lame as that is for them, I totally get it. I'm very much so on the side of the writers in this. I mean, you know people are making money off of the free downloads of television shows available on most networks's websites. So why should the writers not get residuals? People should receive fair compensation for the work that they do. Currently that's not happening. If a strike is what's needed to fix it then by all means strike.

But how will this strike effect the rest of us in production?

For me personally, probably not all that much until maybe January when the job I am currently working ends. I'm in the very comfortable position of being employed by a reality show that currently has no writers. No writers, no strike, production continues unfazed. An excellent situation for paying my rent.

In January, if the strike is continuing, my plans for future employment will probably change. I was hoping to possibly jump onto a different show where several people I know work. That probably won't happen with a strike because that show will probably not go into production. I was also hoping to possibly jump onto a feature. That may or may not happen. If I can get onto a certain one that is already in production, it'll happen. Otherwise, there probably won't be any features for me to jump on to.

What else will I do? Well, I'll have a month or two long vacation before production on my current show begins again. I'll stay in reality. Which isn't terrible. I just need to make sure I save enough over the next two months to be able to pay rent and live off of should that happen. I need to make sure I can afford to take a two month vacation. Considering I won't have any other options.

So that's what this strik means for me.

What does it mean for my roommate, who is currently working on a scripted sitcom?

The show that she is currently working on prepared somewhat for this strike. They have a small backlog of episodes ready to go. Three actually. So they're guarenteed another four or five weeks of production to shoot those three episodes. If the strike is still going at that point?

My roommate is then out of a job. And uncertain about what job she may find next. She may be able to find a feature already in production. She's interviewed with on already. But there won't be much.

We'll be out of work at the same time but at least I know I'll definitely have work to go back to.

It may turn out to not be a big deal though. At this point, who can say? Certainly not us here at the bottom. I don't even think those at the top, in the middle of the negotiations, have any idea either.

It may not be a cheerful Christmas in Lala land this year. And we haven't even gotten to the DGA or SAG negotiations coming up next year.

It's an interesting time to be in Hollywood. That is for sure.

Thoughts: 30 Days of Night

So after a long and stressful week I wanted something fun but quiet to occupy my Friday night. I figured, I'm feeling a little icky, what better to make me feel better than Josh Hartnett and vampires? Right?

Wrong. Now yeah, that was what one might call a MISTAKE.

It sucks when a movie looks so fun and turns out to be so terrible. The trailers for 30 Days still look good to me, even after I've watched it. It's the same as it was with Spiderman 3. The trailers look great, the movie falls way short. At least with 30 Days the craptacularness that was the movie didn't ruin a trilogy. I'm still disappointed by how bad Spiderman 3 turned out to be...

Even cool posters couldn't save Spiderman 3

Anyway. 30 Days of Night. Terrible. But worse. Boring. I mean, really? How do manage to make a movie about vampires unleashing a bloodbath upon an unsuspecting town boring? That's not an easy task. But 30 Days succeeds. I really almost walked out. Several times. And even though i stayed, I kept checking my watch. It just dragged on and on and on.

It's just really bad. The acting is hideous. The characters are dumb. The gore is really, really disappointing. I may not go to a movie like this for the acting or the plot or the writing. But I do go for the gore. And when the gore and even the action fail to live up to potential. Well. You've just got nothing.

Even my love for Josh Hartnett couldn't save this movie for me. He may be pretty to look at but pretty isn't always enough.

Ben Foster is adorable. Although the black teeth are a little gross.

Of course. I must say, Ben Foster is quickly becoming one of my new favorites. For the small role he played, he is entertaining.

I definitely do not recommend 30 Days of Night. What a waste.

The movie may not have been scary but this dude was definitely creepy.