tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22333780125298192242024-03-05T00:32:36.996-05:00"He Had on a Hat"The Bowman Blog: trenchantly goofy musings from an actor, writer and all around pop culture geek.Terence Bowmanhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/04576129838447713151noreply@blogger.comBlogger107125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2233378012529819224.post-67091061524733978232013-02-13T14:24:00.001-05:002013-02-21T13:55:16.443-05:00James Bond vs Silliness<table align="center" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto; text-align: center;"><tbody>
<tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEihPQFTvChz-KCun2Naa4KfWoK2wgzJ3icaykO681Cg5mLbLSTyN-jgYGsqIB8uLB1USCGS4UBecl9cmN_wVitOqSyAzzDVF3EExv9ZmMKJQORPJl7bw_LdrRDT1Ci05uJ1p502QXSSth4/s1600/Roger-Moore-Moonraker-HD-Desktop-Wallpaper-1024x576.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" height="360" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEihPQFTvChz-KCun2Naa4KfWoK2wgzJ3icaykO681Cg5mLbLSTyN-jgYGsqIB8uLB1USCGS4UBecl9cmN_wVitOqSyAzzDVF3EExv9ZmMKJQORPJl7bw_LdrRDT1Ci05uJ1p502QXSSth4/s640/Roger-Moore-Moonraker-HD-Desktop-Wallpaper-1024x576.jpg" width="640" /></a></td></tr>
<tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;">Roger Moore as Ian Fleming's James Bond in 1979's Moonraker. Bond got pretty out there during the Moore years.</td></tr>
</tbody></table>
<br />
<br />
The James Bond movie franchise is older than I am.<br />
<br />
October 5, 2012 marked the 50th anniversary of the release of Dr. No, the first in a series of 23 Bond films. April 13 of this year will mark the 60th anniversary of the publication of the novel Casino Royale by British author Ian Fleming. The book was the first in a series of James Bond novels on which the movies were originally based.<br />
<br />
Over all those the years, 007 has faced down a wide array of innumerable different threats from an almost equally uncountable number of megalomaniac villains and their highly skilled assassins. Of all those threats, assassins and villains, few of Bond's movie enemies have been as persistent, determined and pervasive as the one nemesis that Bond, throughout his extremely successful cinematic career, has never been able to fully vanquish. What I'm referring to is the greatest nemesis borne out of 007's blockbuster movie franchise; one that has outlasted all others in a series of movies that has seen as many radical stylistic shifts as it has years. It is the one enemy that, no matter what the era, no matter who the actor portraying Bond is, relentlessly returns to challenge James Bond time and again.<br />
<br />
The enemy is silliness.<br />
<br />
In the now five and a bit decades of James Bond's celluloid career, many aspects of the super spy's adventures have been discussed, debated and analyzed. Much has been said about Bond, his gadgets, his cars, his women, his lifestyle, his missions and his villains. Yet relatively little has been said about the vary degrees of unrelenting silliness the big screen Bond has been forced to contend with over the years.<br />
<br />
Anyone who has followed the history of the Bond franchise from the early days of Sean Connery's James Bond through to the current reign of Daniel Craig's 007 knows what I'm talking about. In almost every era, there is at least one moment in at least one movie when Bond's over the top escapist action set pieces take the basic premise of the Bond's larger than life world of escapism just a notch or two too far.<br />
<br />
There have been scenes that have seen 007 engaged in a chase involving a ludicrously land adapted gondola, spectacular car stunts scored with comedy music, tanks smashing their way through city streets, speed boats crashing through wedding cakes, Bond attempting to drive a car after it has been cut in half...and...well, the list of Bond silliness is too long to fit into this post. Suffice it to say that there are an alarmingly large number of occasions when the action scenes in a Bond movie transcend the thriller genre, or even the camp thriller genre for that matter, and start to look like something you might see in a Road Runner cartoon.<br />
<br />
There are many people who see these slapstick comedy moments as an (if not the) element that defines the James Bond movies. While for others, myself included, even the faintest implication of any potential ensuing slapstick in any given Bond movie makes them cringe with dread. The two widely varying perceptions of the movies speak to the point that Mr.Bond's exploits have been so all over the map in his half a century of blockbusters that the character has been plagued by an identity crisis almost since his inception.<br />
<br />
<span style="font-size: x-large;"><u><b>Ian Fleming's James Bond 007</b></u></span><br />
<table cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="float: left; margin-right: 1em; text-align: left;"><tbody>
<tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="http://www.ianfleming.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/08/ian_fleming_page_pic_resize.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="clear: left; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" height="320" src="http://www.ianfleming.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/08/ian_fleming_page_pic_resize.jpg" width="252" /></a></td></tr>
<tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;">Bond's creator in his younger days</td></tr>
</tbody></table>
To understand Bond's ongoing shifting identity, it helps go go back to the character's roots. James Bond was first created by British intelligence officer turned journalist turned author, Ian Fleming, in the aforementioned 1953 novel, Casino Royale.<br />
<br />
During World War II, Fleming served with British naval intelligence. Some of his experiences from that time loosely inspired many of Bond's literary adventures. Fleming wrote 12 Bond novels and a number of short stories before his untimely death at the age of 56 in 1964, mere months before James Bond truly became a worldwide pop culture phenomenon.<br />
<br />
Fleming's Bond books were, for the most part, well crafted pulp thrillers. In spite of some far fetched premises, Fleming certainly knew how to engage readers. The initial sales of the books in the UK alone were a testament to the appeal of Fleming's writing.<br />
<br />
<table cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="float: right; margin-left: 1em; text-align: right;"><tbody>
<tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjE3aM-ghyphenhyphen2gykJXRhlwFR1WzYANxgC1532YJl6zn9sPVCE8-oeEvisbyGnNLoBJz0le3TISpdmXiRITxq4tyf7yvKgxJbvFLx5WDSeBpGAtdvAfchyAmPAiBDg0qpwmSYFruvMUWPjLRs/s1600/Ian_Fleming__s_James_Bond_by_heathencomics.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="clear: right; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" height="640" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjE3aM-ghyphenhyphen2gykJXRhlwFR1WzYANxgC1532YJl6zn9sPVCE8-oeEvisbyGnNLoBJz0le3TISpdmXiRITxq4tyf7yvKgxJbvFLx5WDSeBpGAtdvAfchyAmPAiBDg0qpwmSYFruvMUWPjLRs/s640/Ian_Fleming__s_James_Bond_by_heathencomics.jpg" width="485" /></a></td></tr>
<tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;">"He was good-looking in a dark rather cruel way <br />
and a scar showed whitely down his left cheek"<br />
- from <i>The Spy Who Loved Me </i>by Ian Fleming</td></tr>
</tbody></table>
The literary Bond bears only a passing resemblance to the cinematic Bond. Fleming's Bond, by comparison to his multiple motion picture incarnations, was a dark, tough and humourless character. Whenever he had to kill in the performance of his duties, he did not take it lightly. He certainly never cracked pithy one-liners about his kills or anything else in his line of work, for that matter. The literary 007 was often quick to temper and had a mean-looking scar across his right cheek. Like his celluloid doppelganger, he was still very much a suave, sophisticated and cultured man of the world. However, his suave sophistication was never pushed to the point of satirical exaggeration, as was often the case in many of the films. While fond of the finer things in life, Fleming's Bond was also a hard as nails SOB when the job called for it. His world of espionage was a colder and grimmer one than that of the movies. The Bond of the books was closer to antihero than hero. In the words of his creator, Bond was not a hero at all but rather "a blunt instrument".<br />
<br />
<div style="text-align: right;">
</div>
Fleming's Bond also did not have the seemingly endless array of skill sets that the various movie Bonds have had at their disposal. For instance, the literary Bond spoke English, French and German. The movie Bonds, on the other hand, could (as the many of the films suggest) speak every single language in the world fluently.<br />
<br />
Marksmanship was the Fleming Bond's only real specialty. The literary 007 was a really good shot and often his assignments involved assassination; hence the term"License to Kill". He was not an amazing stunt driver or acrobat or master of any and all types of fighting skills. This is a Bond who ould have never been able to just simply hop into the cockpit of any plane, helicopter or jet and suddenly somehow have not only the ability of fly the aircraft but the ability to do so with impressive skill. He also had little or no gadgets like those so closely linked with the movies.<br />
<br />
To be fair, some of the Bond films' more outlandish ideas were supplied by the books. Oddjob, Goldfinger's lethal steel-rimmed bowler hat wielding henchman, the underwater commando battles of Thunderball and the high octane ski chases first seen in On Her Majesty's Secret Service, for example, were all originally the products of Ian Fleming's fertile imagination. The original novel of Doctor No even contains a scene where Bond battles a giant squid (and, frankly, I am amazed that the movies have not yet gotten around to lifting that one). To his credit, Fleming was able to ground even such borderline fantastical elements in a very real sense of intrigue and suspense through the use of his concise, almost journalistic prose. <br />
<br />
Attempting to put such arch Bond elements on the big screen with a straight face back in the early 60's would certainly have been a challenge; one that may well have required creating a new type of stylized movie making. Such a movie would have to walk a fine line between thrills and camp humour in order to coax a contemporary mainstream movie-going audience raised on traditional Hollywood genres like westerns and musical comedies into that world. Without doing so, audiences of the day may not have been able to take, say, a villain with steel hands named Dr. No who lives in an atomic powered underground complex on his own island all that seriously.<br />
<br />
<span style="font-size: large;"><u><b><span style="font-size: large;"><span style="font-size: x-large;">From Dr. No With Love</span></span></b></u></span><br />
<table cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="float: left; margin-right: 1em; text-align: left;"><tbody>
<tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhPb2HsPVV_RBAEHB9vCX21cS3SEKpwK_HLY7rkLMwIjVOS76kJswG-bSTXB8Rmg9_Pr-4A13sj6xx3WSs0CbasWjl0ayLmXHO3US7TmKcOesTwORDOBEc6CTHWwFY0gXHnS-kNEW1KjaIq/s1600/Ian-Fleming-with-Sean-Connery-Dr-No-Set2.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="clear: left; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" height="253" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhPb2HsPVV_RBAEHB9vCX21cS3SEKpwK_HLY7rkLMwIjVOS76kJswG-bSTXB8Rmg9_Pr-4A13sj6xx3WSs0CbasWjl0ayLmXHO3US7TmKcOesTwORDOBEc6CTHWwFY0gXHnS-kNEW1KjaIq/s400/Ian-Fleming-with-Sean-Connery-Dr-No-Set2.jpg" width="400" /></a></td></tr>
<tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;">Ian Fleming and Sean Connery on the set of Dr.No</td></tr>
</tbody></table>
Nonetheless, the early Bond films still tried to stay fairly close to their source material. The Bond books were, most especially in the UK, huge bestsellers, after all. Much like the Harry Potter, Twilight and Hunger Games movies based on the best sellers of today, nobody wanted to alienate an established fanbase created by the books. However, Bond movie producers Albert R. Broccoli and Harry Saltzman along with director Terence (no relation) Young did decide on a slightly less serious take on the character for the first big screen Bond. They set that process in motion by casting the then unknown Sean Connery, an actor whose baseline charm tends to play towards a lighter tone, as James Bond.<br />
<br />
Any light tones of humour remain extremely subtle in Dr.No, the first James Bond movie, released in 1962 . The understated humour can only be seen fleetingly in Bond's cinematic introduction. There is a wry sense of almost invisible self mockery as Connery, in the now iconic tuxedo, sitting at the baccarat table of an exclusive London casino, utters the words that would become part of the pop culture lexicon for the next 50 years: "Bond. James Bond". As we cut to Bond and see the man for the first time, a subtle creeping smirk begins to cross Connery's face, as a now highly un-PC cigarette dangles casually out to the side of his mouth. Bond's signature big band jazz theme, a new and unheard of piece of music at the time, plays on quietly in the background. <br />
<br />
<br />
<iframe allowfullscreen="allowfullscreen" frameborder="0" height="480" src="http://www.youtube.com/embed/3nxG09xHhro" width="640"></iframe><br />
<br />
Yet, at the same time, Dr. No also features some scenes that are as close to Fleming as has ever been seen on the big screen.<br />
<br />
<iframe allowfullscreen="allowfullscreen" frameborder="0" height="360" src="http://www.youtube.com/embed/btjBvrly2aI" width="640"></iframe><br />
<br />
<br />
Those two scenes set the tone for Dr. No, as well as the second film of the series, From Russia With Love. Basically a heist film centered around a Russian decoding machine, From Russia With Love is one of the rare Bond films that can comfortably be referred to as a thriller. The bedroom scenes have a classic film noire look to them and then there is the Hitchcock inspired action sequence where Bond is chased across a field by helicopters. <br />
<br />
By Goldfinger, though, the earliest shift towards films that are a little less serious begins rear its silly head. Despite what the Bond DVD documentaries like to tell you, the first two 007 movies, not unlike Fleming's books, fared much better internationally than they did in the U.S. Dr. No and From Russia With Love did fairly well but were certainly not blockbuster hits in the USA. Goldfinger was the franchise's big play to make a much bigger dent in the lucrative American box office.<br />
<br />
To that end, the Bond producers and Goldfinger director Guy Hamilton were willing to push the humour envelope further than that of the first two films. The movie opens with Connery's Bond emerging from a lake with a decoy bird strapped to the top of his head. A little later on, Bond removes his still wet black commando outfit to reveal that he was wearing a perfectly dry tuxedo,complete with a white dinner jacket, underneath his stealth gear the whole time. <br />
<br />
<iframe allowfullscreen="allowfullscreen" frameborder="0" height="480" src="http://www.youtube.com/embed/IWPyI5tcpfI" width="640"></iframe><br />
<br />
That scene pretty much says it all right there. Those opening moments of Goldfinger, and the rest of the film that followed, established a new image of James Bond in the popular consciousness that would endure for decades to come. Bond had now moved yet another modicum away not only from Fleming's literary creation but also away from the earlier, more stylistically subdued worlds of Dr. No and From Russia With Love.<br />
<br />
Goldfinger saw Bond's first baby steps into the world of all out camp.<br />
<br />
<span style="font-size: x-large;"><u><b>Bondmania</b></u></span><br />
<table cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="float: left; margin-right: 1em; text-align: left;"><tbody>
<tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="http://whatculture.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/12/Corgi-Aston-610x524.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="clear: left; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" height="274" src="http://whatculture.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/12/Corgi-Aston-610x524.jpg" width="320" /></a></td></tr>
<tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;">It was clear what audiences Bond was picking up now</td></tr>
</tbody></table>
The new lighter approach to Bond paid off big time. Goldfinger launched the global phenomenon that became known as Bondmania. It went way beyond just movies.<br />
<br />
In addition to Goldfinger's huge box office numbers, 1964-5 saw an outburst of 007 toys, aftershave, clothes, games, gadgets, you name it. It was a merchandising marketing bonanza matched only by that of Beatlemania which gripped the world around the same time. Among other things, Goldfinger, for the first time, gave the franchise a major foothold with an entirely new and lucrative audience: kids.<br />
<br />
The other byproduct of Goldfiner and the subsequent Bond craze was that it cemented into the popular landscape an impression of James Bond as an inventive yet frivolous diversion that was never to be taken too seriously.<br />
<br />
The next film, Thunderball, blurred the line between thriller and camp further still. In the opening of the 4th 007 movie, Bond escapes from the bad guys by utilizing his most preposterous gadget to date, a jet pack. It's an image of Bond so strongly connected to the character that, Sean Connery, when appearing on the David Letterman show 30 odd years later, was lowered onto the stage strapped into, you guessed it, a jet pack.<br />
<br />
Thunderball was a hit that even outdid Goldfinger. By today's box office standards, we're talking about Goldfinger and Thunderball box office numbers that would be on a level with Star Wars, Titanic, Toy Story, Avatar, ET and Lord of the Rings. <br />
<br />
Returning Dr. No and From Russia With Love director Young manages, for the most part, to successfully navigate the borders of camp humour and genuine thrills. However, with its jet pack escape, evil look-a-like imposters, highjacked nukes and underwater commando battles, Thunderball does firmly broaden the extravagant nature of Bond's increasingly outlandish and gimmicky world. <br />
<br />
<table cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="float: right; margin-left: 1em; text-align: right;"><tbody>
<tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="http://www.mi6-hq.com/sections/articles/images/history_press_bond_merchandise1.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="clear: right; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" height="160" src="http://www.mi6-hq.com/sections/articles/images/history_press_bond_merchandise1.jpg" width="320" /></a></td></tr>
<tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;">I remember this one.</td></tr>
</tbody></table>
In the next film, You Only Live Twice (1967), Bond's world would, for the first time, cross the line into from camp and light humour into outright silliness.<br />
<br />
By the 5th 007 movie, Bond producers Broccoli and Saltzman were entering into an era where they felt they had to top themselves with each successive movie in order to retain their ongoing titles as reigning box office champs.<br />
<br />
You Only Live Twice sure does go there too. The movie features many of what are now seen as the quintessential Bond elements: an evil genius with a secret technological complex (inside a hollowed out inactive volcano, in this case, no less) filled with guys in jumpsuits driving golf carts around. From his secret lair, said evil genius (Ernst Stavro Blofeld, a recurring Bond nemesis) launches a master plan for world domination. The movie has even got the now classic climatic ninja commando raid set amidst a seemingly endless array of gunfire and explosions. You Only Live Twice is also the movie where Bond for the first (but not the last) time transgress its own genre.<br />
<br />
<span style="font-size: x-large;"><u><b>"A Drop in the Ocean"</b></u></span><br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="http://www.freeclassicimages.com/images/you_only_live_twice_1967.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="476" src="http://www.freeclassicimages.com/images/you_only_live_twice_1967.jpg" width="640" /></a></div>
<br />
Early on in You Only Live Twice, there is a scene where Bond and his Japanese spy companion are being chased through Toyko by a car full of bad guys. The Japanese agent radios to her superiors to "arrange usual reception". A helicopter soon appears in the sky. The helicopter hovers over the bad guys' car and lowers a giant magnet on a cable. The magnet then attaches itself to the roof of the car. The helicopter flies off carrying the magnet with the car stuck to it below. The slapstick coup-De-gras is delivered when the bad guys, in a gag worthy of The Three Stooges, futilely attempt to turn the steering wheel of their floating car as they look out the windows in panic. The car is soon carried over a river. The magnet is then released and the car plummets into the water below. The entire sequence is straight out of the Wile E. Coyote playbook.<br />
<br />
<iframe allowfullscreen="allowfullscreen" frameborder="0" height="360" src="http://www.youtube.com/embed/bLAo27BtBJ0" width="640"></iframe><br />
<br />
It is at that moment that the Bond movies made that first irreversible move towards total all out silliness. The trend would continue with exponential velocity in the movies to come. It would take the Bond franchise decades to undo the process.<br />
<br />
The preceding Bond movies kept increasingly broadening the scope of their extravagant action set pieces. However, once those movies set a tone, they tended stay true to that tone. This scene, even within the context of the over the top Bond action, sticks out like a sore thumb. It is a scene that belongs in a movie like an over the top madcap comedy romp like It's a Mad Mad Mad World and certainly not in James Bond's world. <br />
<br />
The first time I saw You Only Live Twice, I remember that scene left me asking myself, "What kind of a movie am I watching now?". It also had me wondering if the Bond producers and first time Bond director Lewis Gilbert had given any thought at all to that question. <br />
<br />
These types of shifts in Bond tone would continue in the films to come and, ultimately, the James Bond movies would would be cursed to live out a stylistically schizophrenic existence for many years.<br />
<br />
<table cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="float: right; margin-left: 1em; text-align: right;"><tbody>
<tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="http://www.scififx.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/10/George-Lazenby-kilt-1.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="clear: right; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" height="320" src="http://www.scififx.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/10/George-Lazenby-kilt-1.jpg" width="216" /></a></td></tr>
<tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;">Bond in a kilt? That's the least of it.</td></tr>
</tbody></table>
The next film, On Her Majesty's Secret Service, actually took a brief small step back away from total silliness. I guess the Bond producers and longtime Bond editor turned director Peter Hunt felt that they just couldn't top rockets, volcanoes, ninja commandos and cars plunging into water from great heights, nor should they even try. Sadly, the new approach didn't quite pan out.<br />
<br />
In addition to introducing George Lazenby, Connery's ill conceived and ill received replacement, the film strayed significantly from the Bond formula. For one thing (SPOILER ALERT) James Bond got married. For another, his wife had the distinction of being the only Bond girl to be killed off at the end of the movie. The end of On Her Majesty's Secret Service still remains the most downer ending of any Bond movie and is also, ironically, one of the most dramatic scenes in the whole franchise. It is perhaps for this reason that the film, over time, became a cult fave among fans. In 1969, though, the smaller scale and less silly approach, along with Connery's absence made the movie, by Bond box office standards, a total bomb. With the future of a stunningly lucrative franchise on the line, it was time to pull out all the stops.<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<span style="font-size: x-large;"><u><b>Moore Silly Business</b></u></span><br />
<table cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="float: left; margin-right: 1em; text-align: left;"><tbody>
<tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="http://25.media.tumblr.com/tumblr_m9bkslGHr91rv0suso1_500.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="clear: left; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" height="252" src="http://25.media.tumblr.com/tumblr_m9bkslGHr91rv0suso1_500.jpg" width="320" /></a></td></tr>
<tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;">Sean Connery in Diamond Are Forever: d'oh boy.</td></tr>
</tbody></table>
Desperate to get the franchise back on its feet again, the Bond producers backed up a truck load of money into Sean Connery's driveway. Landing a record breaking payday that he donated entirely to charity, Connery agreed to play Bond one more time. The movie was Diamonds Are Forever and it would be, hands down, the silliest Bond to date.<br />
<br />
Many people associate Roger Moore, who took over the role after Connery's delayed departure, with the ushering in of a new much lighter approach to 007. Not so. That shift firmly took root while Connery still carried the Bond mantle. With Diamonds Are Forever, the Bond producers and returning Goldfinger director Guy Hamilton took the first little steps towards outright comedy taken in You Only Live Twice to a whole new level of silliness.<br />
<br />
For lack of a better definition, it's hard to categorize Diamonds Are Forever as anything but a comedy. The movie features Bond driving a car tipped over on two wheels during a Las Vegas chase scene that also features many police cars crashing into each other like something out of an episode of The Dukes of Hazard, Bond racing a wacky "moon buggy" across the desert, a bunch of incredibly dated wink-wink "look, the these two henchmen are actually gay" jokes, Dick Tracy-like gangster caricatures and a scene in which Bond says to a sunbathing woman "There something I'd like you to get off your chest" and then proceeds to pull off her bikini top and choke her with it in order to extract information.<br />
<br />
Hold on, hold on. I need to catch my breath from all the laughter.<br />
<br />
It is the few and far between serious fight scenes and not the outright slapstick comedy, that stand out like a sore thumb in Diamond Are Forever. The 6th Bond movie bears more in common with other 60's era spy comedy movies like In Like Flint and Dean Martin's quintessentially Mad Men era Matt Helm comedies than it does with any previous Bond movies. You know you've got a problem when a series of movies starts imitating its own parodies.<br />
<br />
All that aside, Diamonds Are Forever was the highest grossing movie of 1971. You know that kind of thing is only going to encourage them. <br />
<br />
After Diamonds Are Forever, Roger Moore, former British TV star of such shows as The Saint and The Persuaders, took over the role of Bond, James Bond. The Moore era would produce what are certainly the silliest and most erratic Bond movies of the bunch.<br />
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="http://ca.movieposter.com/posters/archive/main/77/MPW-38696" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" src="http://ca.movieposter.com/posters/archive/main/77/MPW-38696" /></a></div>
<br />
Moore debuted as Bond in Live and Let Die in 1973, a movie that also went on to be the number one at the box office in its year.<br />
<br />
It's hard to know what to make of Live and Let Die. The movie is stylistically chaotic, to put it mildly. There is a speed boat chase where boats careen over land then crash into a wedding and smash right through the cake. There is another chase scene involving a Double Decker bus in which Bond runs the bus through a tunnel that the bus' height cannot clear. The bus is cut in half as Bond continues to race down the road.<br />
<br />
Yes, James Bond has now devolved into the Keystone Cops.<br />
<br />
At one point, Bond is pursued by a Louisiana Sheriff named J.W. Pepper, a clownish caricature broadly played by character actor Clifton Webb. Webb's Pepper character appears to have walked directly off the set of just about any 70's era Burt Reynolds movie.<br />
<br />
The movies are now very far away from Fleming's Bond. The darkness of the character has been long left in the dust. The movies now share only the title, a random plot element or two and some character names in common with the increasingly obscure and forgotten British pulp thrillers. Bond is now even miles removed from Goldfinger. It is quite clear, now more than ever, that a major part of Bond's target audience is kids; highly nondiscriminatory kids.<br />
<br />
The early 70's was a time when spy thriller movies were right out. In the post-Vietnam Watergate era, the only thing even close to serious Hollywood spy movies at the time were low key films like Three Days of the Condor and The Parallax View, in which espionage was depicted in a decidedly non-romanticized light.<br />
<br />
So whatever, right? Things change: most especially things like majorly lucrative blockbuster franchise movies like James Bond. Fair enough. And, well, yes, Diamonds Are Forever and Live and Let Die might be okay comedy movies, if they were actually in any way funny.<br />
<br />
I have never found any of this era of Bond remotely humourous. That just makes the whole process all the more painful. I should point out that are Bond fans out there who strongly disagree with me on this count and are quite fond of movies from the era of Moore Bond silliness. Many of them no doubt first came to these movies at young age. Nonetheless, even as a kid, I never saw the humour in many cars smashing into each other over and over again, whether it be in a Bond movie, the Blues Brothers or even in Disney's The Love Bug.<br />
<br />
<iframe allowfullscreen="allowfullscreen" frameborder="0" height="360" src="http://www.youtube.com/embed/cODPt3T0cHE" width="640"></iframe><br />
<br />
Additionally, the seemingly non-stop barrage of one-liners and quips are forced. It does not help that Moore tends to play Bond as a comedian, and not a very subtle one at that. In the rare moments that call for Moore's Bond to be tough, I simply can not believe him. It's like watching Don Knotts trying to be Chuck Norris.<br />
<br />
Live and Let Die, unlike most of Diamonds Are Forever, still attempts to take some of the Bond thrills and spills seriously. When it comes to the serious action scenes in Live and Let Die, it's hard to get engaged in any tension or excitement when you've just spent twenty minutes watching boats smashing into cars accompanied by a stereotypical redneck sheriff engaging in exclamations that even Foghorn Leghorn would consider a bit much.<br />
<br />
Don't get me wrong. I've got nothing against a campy larger than life Bond adventure when it's well done. Goldfinger, Thunderball and even You Only Live Twice (minus the car dropping scene, of course) make for thrilling and entertaining escapism. For the most part these movies respect the boundaries between camp and total silliness. Not everything has to have the darker more serious tone of Ian Fleming (though it's nice when they hit that too).<br />
<br />
There are fine lines between thrills, camp, farce, parody and slapstick. Live and Let Die runs roughshot over all of them. Not only can the Bond series often not settle on a consistent tone from movie to movie but, in the Moore era most especially, it's like they can't even decide on a consistent tone within the same movie. The sum total is a big mess that is frustrating to watch. To call Live and Let Die even self parody dignifies the movie with a sense of purpose that it just does not appear to have.<br />
<br />
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="http://d1k217qge1tz5p.cloudfront.net/img/Items/3000/2927.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="clear: left; float: left; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="400" src="http://d1k217qge1tz5p.cloudfront.net/img/Items/3000/2927.jpg" width="262" /></a></div>
In the next Moore Bond, The Man With The Golden Gun (1974), is even worse than Live and Let Die. The Bond producers and returning director Guy Hamilton now push the comedy past its breaking point. One of the great tragedies of Live and Let Die are the spectacular stunts, including a world record breaking speed boat jump, that were simply lost in the movie's stylistic shuffle.<br />
<br />
Not to be outdone, the second Moore Bond movie features one of the greatest car stunts ever presented in the silliest light possible.<br />
<br />
During a chase, Bond has to jump an AMC Hornet (the cars were all about product placement by this point) across a broken bridge. The bridge has been smashed in two is such a way that the two sides of the bridge that remain on either side of the river are slightly curved. Bond, accompanied by Sheriff Pepper from Live and Let Die (who is somehow on vacation in Thailand -let's not even get into it), makes the jump anyway. During the jump, the car spectacularly spins completely around in the air before landing on the other side of the bridge. This is before the age of CGI so that means that somebody actually did that incredible stunt for real. Bond ramps up the "comedy" as he makes a clearly post dubbed "Have you ever heard of Evel Knieval?" quip just before the jump. Then, for reasons that escape me to this day, somebody decided that very best possible way to showcase this amazing record breaking stunt was by scoring it with a slide whistle.<br />
<br />
If there was any doubt that the Moore Bonds had degenerated into live action cartoons, there could be none after viewing that scene.<br />
<br />
<iframe allowfullscreen="allowfullscreen" frameborder="0" height="480" src="http://www.youtube.com/embed/fzCIbhLUUA0" width="640"></iframe><br />
<br />
<br />
Such WTF moments are rampant throughout Moore's 007 tenure. Moonraker contains a chase where Bond pilots a motorized gondola out of the canals of Venice and, as it turns out to have wheels, races it through streets full of tourists. The scene is complete with a drunk guy watching the gondola as he does a take and then stares quizzically at the bottle of wine he's been drinking from.<br />
<br />
In Octopussy (1983), Bond is chased through the jungle and escapes by swinging from a from a vine. As he swings, somebody got the hilarious idea to dub in the Johnny Weissmuller Tarzan yell. What is this? The Carol Burnett Show?<br />
<br />
In A View to a Kill (1985), Bond snow boards away from heavily armed Russian soldiers as California Girls by The Beach Boys plays. Later, a car Bond is driving is cut in half during a chase and then Bond -get this- drives the half car anyway.<br />
<br />
Wait, wait. Once again, I need to catch my breath from all the laughter. <br />
<br />
The only two Moore era Bonds that sorta kinda break the silliness pattern are The Spy Who Loved (1977) Me and For Your Eyes Only(1981).<br />
<br />
The Man With The Golden Gun, as it turns out, was the lowest grossing Bond movie to date, including On Her Majesty's Secret Service. The Bond franchise, now run solely by producer Broccoli brought back You Only Live Twice director Lewis Gilbert. Gilbert, to his credit, attempted to steer the series back to at least the standards of his previous Bond movie. The Spy Who Loved Me is still quite over the top and much more campy than even You Only Live Twice. What it does accomplish, though, is that for the first time in almost a decade, it is a James Bond movie that at least maintains a consistent tone within itself.<br />
<br />
The opening ski chase, like the pre-title sequence from Goldfinger, sets the tone for the rest of the movie. The chase has only the smallest amounts of restrained humour that does not detract from the excitement. The final gag of the chase comes when Bond's Union Jack parachute that opens after he literally skis off the side of a mountain. Even so big a joke comes off as an understated deadpan Steven Wright one-liner when measured against the standards set by Diamonds Are Forever, Live and Let Die and The Man with the Golden Gun.<br />
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="http://i.dailymail.co.uk/i/pix/2012/07/13/article-2172597-140A34E9000005DC-576_634x335.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" src="http://i.dailymail.co.uk/i/pix/2012/07/13/article-2172597-140A34E9000005DC-576_634x335.jpg" /></a></div>
<br />
<br />
<br />
For Your Eyes Only attempted to get Bond back to basics after the literally out there space battle spectacles of 1979's Moonraker. It takes a more serious tone....more or less. It's climatic mountain climbing scene is most one of the most intensely low key action sequences ever filmed, Bond or otherwise.<br />
<br />
Moore comes the closest he ever gets to Fleming's Bond in a scene where he kills a particularly vicious henchman. As the henchman's car is is precipitously perched on the side of a cliff, Bond kicks the car off the side of the cliff and sends the man crashing to his death. It is, without a doubt, Moore's best acting as James Bond and the first time we have seen so cold and dark a Bond since the "You've had your six" scene in Dr. No. That moment, though, is almost completely undone as the writers could not resist giving Moore's Bond one of his standard quippy one liners after killing the man. In context, it makes Bond look not like a cold professional assassin, but rather, like kind of a dick, really.<br />
<br />
<br />
<iframe allowfullscreen="allowfullscreen" frameborder="0" height="480" src="http://www.youtube.com/embed/WIjQZIiORGY" width="640"></iframe><br />
<br />
The basic problem with For Your Eyes Only is that Bond producer Broccoli and stunt coordinator turned first time director John Glen, still seem to reluctant to abandon silliness completely. The movie contains sequences like the ski chase scene that sends Bond careening across the tables of the terrace of a ski hill restaurant, complete with comic takes from onlookers. <br />
<br />
The penchant for consistently going back to the silly thrives throughout the next and last two Moore Bond movies, Octopussy and A View to a Kill. Octopussy, in particular, has some scenes that are almost genuinely thrilling. Yet the movie still annoyingly keeps shifting back to gags like the previously discussed Tarzan yell.<br />
<br />
As late as A View to a Kill, Moore's last Bond outing, Broccoli and now regular Bond director Glen were still routinely pursuing the silly. Doing so at a time when more serious action movies like The Terminator, Rambo and the first two Indiana Jones movies were doing boffo box office business is a perplexing choice at best. <br />
<br />
<span style="font-size: x-large;"><u><b>"The Worst James Bond Ever"</b></u></span><br />
<table align="center" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto; text-align: center;"><tbody>
<tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="http://cinetropolis.net/wp-content/uploads/2012/04/timothy-dalton-007-james-bond.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" src="http://cinetropolis.net/wp-content/uploads/2012/04/timothy-dalton-007-james-bond.jpg" /></a></td></tr>
<tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;">Timothy Dalton as 007: the closest thing to Fleming's Bond that the big screen has ever seen</td></tr>
</tbody></table>
By the time new Bond Timothy Dalton took the reigns in 1987, the Bond production team had finally got the memo on that non-silly action movies were back in a big way. The resulting movie was The Living Daylights, the first of only two Bonds that would feature the classically trained Dalton as 007.<br />
<br />
In The Living Daylights, Dalton's portrayal of Bond comes closer than any other actor, before or since, has to faithfully portraying Fleming's Bond on screen. Like the Bond of the novels, Dalton's Bond is cold, brooding, tough and quick to temper. There is a scene in the film just after a successful enemy raid on a British intelligence base where Dalton's Bond is dressed down by M, his superior. Bond merely sits there, quietly fuming. Just looking at Dalton's intense stare during the scene, it's as if one can almost hear the Fleming style prose precisely describing Bond's contained rage. <br />
<br />
Unfortunately, it seems that Broccoli, now partnered with production assistant turned producer Michael G. Wilson, and ongoing Bond director Glen were still quite reluctant to change the character all that radically. As a result, Dalton seems to have made an amazingly strong acting choice whitin a creative vacuum. While toned down from much of the Moore silliness, the character of James Bond does not appear to have been written with a return to the character's literally roots in mind. It's kind of bizarre, really, to see a Fleming style 007 darkly underplaying an assortment of typically tongue in cheek James Bond movie one liners.<br />
<br />
Nevertheless, The Living Daylights was the most gritty and realistic looking film the series had seen to date. A Bond film had not taken itself quite so seriously since From Russia With Love. Yet, again, though, the Bond producers still could not resist the urge to work just a smidgen of ol' slapstick silliness here and there. Watching Dalton's genre-busting Bond as he escapes from the bad guys by sliding down the side of a snow covered hill riding a cello case is an almost surreal experience.<br />
<br />
<iframe allowfullscreen="allowfullscreen" frameborder="0" height="480" src="http://www.youtube.com/embed/2QZuOQZ1HC4" width="640"></iframe><br />
<br />
<br />
Such a lack of coordination between Dalton's acting choices and the writing and direction of the film did not serve the actor well. Combine that with a public impression of Bond defined by 12 years of Roger Moore cartoons and, well, Dalton's performance was misunderstood at best. Even today, Timothy Datlton's 007 is often still unfairly maligned.<br />
<br />
To quote the 12 year old sitting behind me at the movie theatre on opening weekend, many felt that Dalton was the "worst James Bond ever!".<br />
<br />
In License to Kill (1989), the actor's second and final appearance in the role, Dalton was clearly directed to lighten things up. That direction is ironic in light of the fact that License to Kill's war on drugs story line is one Bond's more "real world" adventures. Nonetheless, the new direction diluted Dalton's take on Bond and only served to confirm Dalton's poor reputation with both critics and audiences.<br />
<br />
Between 1989 and 1995, the Bond movies took their longest hiatus since the series began. Contrary to popular belief, this was not because of Dalton's alleged "killing" of the franchise at the box office. Each of Dalton's two Bond movies, in fact, out-grossed Roger Moore's final appearance as Bond in A View to a Kill. Rather, it was legal wranglings over the ownership of the rights to the character between the studio and the producers that held up the production of a new Bond installment for six long years. Dalton was reportedly offered the role again when the legal wranglings were settled and franchise was finally set to return to movie theaters. Perhaps reluctant to go another round with the critics and the public, Dalton declined.<br />
<br />
<span style="font-size: x-large;"><u><b>That Darn Tank<span style="font-size: x-large;">!</span></b></u></span><br />
<table cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="float: left; margin-right: 1em; text-align: left;"><tbody>
<tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="http://www.italiaspeed.com/2005/cars/fiat/07/james_bond/pierce_brosnan.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="clear: left; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" height="300" src="http://www.italiaspeed.com/2005/cars/fiat/07/james_bond/pierce_brosnan.jpg" width="400" /></a></td></tr>
<tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;">Brosnan looking almost Flemingeque.</td></tr>
</tbody></table>
Once the Bond movies were back on track, the coveted role of James Bond ended up going to the guy that had almost got the role instead of Timothy Dalton back in 1987.<br />
<br />
007 would now be brought back to life by the former star of TV's Remington Steele, Pierce Brosnan. 1995's Goldeneye revived Bond in a big way. It was such a big hit that it single-handedly saved MGM, the studio now responsible for Bond, from bankruptcy.<br />
<br />
Brosnan's take on Bond was equally popular. He was one of the few actors in the role able to believably balance humour along with a hint of the dark grimness of the character. The new Bond of the 90's came off as a compromise between Sean Connery and Timothy Dalton.<br />
<br />
While Goldeneye is certainly a not a perfect Bond film, it did at least take itself a more seriously than many of the earlier Bonds. Well, it almost did, anyway. About mid-way through the film, Goldeneye's promise of eschewing all of Bond's previous silliness was seriously compromised. <br />
<br />
There is a chase scene in Goldeneye where Bond commandeers a tank. Yes, darn it, a tank. Suddenly, a previously respectable Bond revival with a decent actor in the lead reverts back unrepentantly to the dreaded slapstick silliness of the past. Bond crushes and smashes cars while steering his tank through the streets and landmarks of downtown St.Petersberg. The tank chase in Goldeneye is an action set piece that's just too big and too wacky to be forgivable.<br />
<br />
Well, it was a nice new direction while it lasted.<br />
<br />
Perhaps more disconcerting is that the franchise was now working with a new production team headed by former co-producer Michael J. Wilson and Albert Broccoli's daughter Barbara (the senior Broccoli died in 1996 and was credited as a "consulting producer" on Goldeneye) and more A-list directors, like Goldeneye's Martin Campbell.<br />
<br />
<br />
<iframe allowfullscreen="allowfullscreen" frameborder="0" height="360" src="http://www.youtube.com/embed/yy-MKdRwhHs" width="640"></iframe><br />
<br />
Fortunately, the tank chase would, as it turns out, be the last gasp of Roger Moore era silliness in the franchise (fingers crossed ). The Brosnan Bonds would continue to be similarly erratic, though never quite as dumb. For every time the films did something dark and bold with Bond like the year and a half Bond spends in a North Korean prison in Die Another Die (2002), there would also be a counter balancing bit of silliness like Bond's preposterous invisible car in that same movie. Still, while pursing ever more ramped up action and spectacle, the Bond movies would mostly downplay the outright silliness that had dogged the series for so long.<br />
<br />
<span style="font-size: x-large;"><u><b>The Sky is Falling </b></u></span><br />
<span style="font-size: x-large;"><u><b><br />
</b></u></span> <br />
<table align="center" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto; text-align: center;"><tbody>
<tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="http://www.dvdsreleasedates.com/posters/800/C/Casino-Royale-movie-poster.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" height="640" src="http://www.dvdsreleasedates.com/posters/800/C/Casino-Royale-movie-poster.jpg" width="445" /></a></td></tr>
<tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;">Daniel Craig as a James Bond I never thought I'd see.</td></tr>
</tbody></table>
<br />
Things got even more promising with the 2006 Bond reboot, Casino Royale. For the first time in the series' 44 year history, Bond producers Wilson and Broccoli wiped the 007 slate clean and started anew.<br />
<br />
The hard edged Daniel Craig was cast as Bond in the first faithful adaptation of a Fleming Bond novel since On Her Majesty's Secret Service. Casino Royale, with the exception of two ramped up action set pieces early in the film, is very close to Ian Fleming's debut Bond novel. The infamous torture scene that many critics saw as an edgy new direction for Bond was, in fact, taken almost verbatim from the then 53 year old novel.<br />
<br />
<iframe allowfullscreen="allowfullscreen" frameborder="0" height="360" src="http://www.youtube.com/embed/i_y7YEIphts" width="640"></iframe><br />
<br />
I remember reading that torture scene in Casino Royale for the first time and thinking , "Well, we'll never in a million years see that in a Bond movie". Thankfully, I was wrong.<br />
<br />
The character of James Bond in Casino Royale, however, is not exclusively Fleming's. There are certainly elements of the literary Bond in Craig's intense take on the character but, on the whole, the actor, the screenwriters and returning Goldeneye director Campbell are very much doing their own thing as well.<br />
<br />
The reboot, in short, gave us a new, grittier, tougher Bond. He is driven, angry, intense and just a little bit crazy (you'd have to be, wouldn't you?). Bond is now grounded in the real world. He is not one of these speaks-every-language, knows-everything and can-do-anything type Bonds that had become de riguer in the series. James Bond now has flaws, many of them. This Bond bleeds, both literally and figuratively. Casino Royale is a tour de force blockbuster franchise reboot that takes Bond in just the right direction.<br />
<br />
The only real problem with Casino Royale's fresh new direction is that no one seemed to know where to go next. The next movie, Quantum of Solace (2008) sets a similar tone to Casino Royale but does not have as much of a coherent direction to it. Among other problems with the film, it's like the producers and director Marc Forster had no idea where to go with the character now and, ultimately, with the series as a whole. It's quite an odd development when you consider that the movie is, uniquely to the series, a direct sequel to the previous Bond movie.<br />
<br />
All other faults aside, Quantum of Solace's biggest slip happens towards the end of the movie. There is an aerial chase scene that, to be fair, is a well crafted action set piece. The real problem is that the chase begins with Bond jumping into the cockpit of an abandoned airplane and that he immediately seems to know how to fly it.<br />
<br />
My silly sense is tingling.<br />
<br />
<iframe allowfullscreen="" frameborder="0" height="480" src="http://www.youtube.com/embed/Hyw7OYU0_mE" width="640"></iframe> <br />
<br />
The plane chase sequence was, of course, not at all silly in and of itself but establishing that Craig's Bond is able to jump into a plane and suddenly be able to fly it felt like an ominous step in the wrong direction. As I mentioned earlier, Fleming's Bond, unlike the movie Bond, had limits to his extraordinary abilities. In the movies it was pretty much a given that Bond could simply do just about anything. In Tomorrow Never Dies (1997), for instance, Brosnan's Bond gets into the cockpit of a jet and flies off to partake in a spectacular dogfight. No one thinks twice about the fact that bond can just do shit like that. So, by having Bond jump into a cockpit and fly a plane without a second thought in Quantum of Solace, the series was quietly taking a small, practically imperceptible slip down a slippery slop to the potential return Bond sillines. <br />
<br />
The current Craig Bond movie Skyfall (2012), just released on Blu-ray, DVD and various streaming and video downloading services, while an overall solidly good Bond movie, also contains many of those same type of troubling elements.<br />
<br />
I will try not to give too much away here but I'm gonna call SPOILER ALERT just in case.<br />
<br />
Skyfall, directed by Oscar winning American Beauty director Sam Mendes, gives us the most in-depth look at Bond's character that we have ever seen, rivaling even that of Ian Fleming's novels.<br />
<br />
Skyfall, at the same time, though, ultimately does represent a decisive backing off from the harder edged darker Bond of the previous Craig Bond movies. It's got some pretty over the top action set pieces, most especially in the pre-title sequence. It's no boats crashing into cars a la Live and Let Die but, next to the two previous Bonds, the opening train chase borders on the preposterous. <br />
<br />
<br />
<iframe allowfullscreen="allowfullscreen" frameborder="0" height="360" src="http://www.youtube.com/embed/ZwWLOvjQfN0" width="640"></iframe><br />
<br />
Though that pre-titles sequence does end on a very dark note. And therein lies the strength of Skyfall.<br />
Unlike many other Bonds, Skyfall is able to switch those shifts in tone on and off quite easily.<br />
<br />
Even so, though, the movie has more Bond quips and one-liners than we've heard since Brosnan left the role. It is a testament to Daniel Craig's talents as an actor that he is able to make such light material work within the context of the darker more complex Bond that he developed in the previous films.<br />
<br />
In Skyfall, Q, the finicky gadget supplier, is back, as are the gadgets themselves, the flirtatious Miss Moneypenny is back and even Sean Connery's Aston Martin DB 5 from Goldfinger has somehow managed to find its way into the world of Daniel Craig's James Bond. Yes, many of the earmarks of the more traditional and lighter Bond movies are slowly finding their way back into the series.<br />
<br />
The real kicker comes during a chase scene in the London Underground when Bond runs after a train after its doors are closed. Ordered to get on the train no matter what, Bond runs after it and jumps on to the back of the train just before it exits the station. A bystander watches this stunt and turns to his wife and says, "Well, I guess he really wants to go home".<br />
<br />
Silliness red flag. Big time.<br />
<br />
The line disturbingly harks back to the Roger Moore era. It confirms that whenever it comes to a Bond completely devoid of silliness, the 007 franchise simply cannot stick to its guns.<br />
<br />
It appears that Mendes' intention in Skyfall is to deconstruct and then reconstruct the very essence of the Bond genre. The question is: what is it being reconstructed into?<br />
<br />
As part of the process, it feels like there is a surreptitious attempt in Skyfall to insert the rebooted Daniel Craig 007 back into the continuity of the Connery through Brosnan Bond movies that Casino Royale supposedly abandoned (and, yes, if you watch the 1962-2002 Bond movies, the series is quite clear, in many different instances, that we are supposed to believe that these five different actors over a 40 year period are, in fact, the same guy).<br />
<br />
With the siren's call of even greater box office dividends from a more "family friendly" Bond calling, the final moments of Skyfall seems to be quite clearly telling the audience, "Okay we're done with all the hard edged reboot stuff, from now on its Bond business as usual".<br />
<br />
In the final scene, the new M, played now by Ralph Fiennes, asks if Bond is ready to return to duty. After a dramatic pause, Bond, with a great purpose that only Daniel Craig could pull off replies, "With pleasure, sir. With pleasure."<br />
<br />
Well, such a direction may not necessarily be a problem if the series is able to strike the same delicate chord as Skyfall did in the movies to come. Given the history of the Bond movies, though, we all know that is not very likely.<br />
<br />
<table align="center" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto; text-align: center;"><tbody>
<tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="http://www.apnatimepass.com/skyfall-movie-poster-6.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" height="426" src="http://www.apnatimepass.com/skyfall-movie-poster-6.jpg" width="640" /></a></td></tr>
<tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;">Craig's Bond is grittier and then suddenly a little lighter in Skyfall</td></tr>
</tbody></table>
<br />
<br />
<span style="font-size: x-large;"><u><b>Bond's Branding Issues</b></u></span><br />
<br />
The 007 identity crisis, will, just like it says at the end of every Bond movie, return.<br />
<br />
The problem of defining who Bond is and what he means to audiences was summed up for me a couple of years ago when I was getting together with some friends to watch Goldfinger on video. <br />
<br />
"I love watching Bond movies and making fun of them", said one of my friends.<br />
<br />
"Oh, there's no need to do that. They make fun of themselves", replied another.<br />
<br />
"What are you guys talking about? They're action movies", chimed in a third.<br />
<br />
It hit me then that for such a long lasting and successful brand, James Bond sure has a lot of branding issues. <br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<iframe allowfullscreen="allowfullscreen" frameborder="0" height="360" src="http://www.youtube.com/embed/Tf8_WiSSsAU" width="640"></iframe><br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
James Bond, even over six decades, has still not yet completely vanquished his greatest and most powerful arch enemy of them all, silliness. <br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />Terence Bowmanhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/04576129838447713151noreply@blogger.com3tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2233378012529819224.post-52960377719840273402012-12-23T10:24:00.001-05:002012-12-27T18:01:49.792-05:00The 12 Screenings of GeekMas<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgOL2Qc4Bg4FaqxzX20GNFNbFZBw5Phc8pgMgUhNDt15WUNueN4nfwP6gHGPq1enB9B6A_qycO5qBdFX0sPF_UZW6VCr1AnHyHWBzp5DD7ODzm5-_PkCvuUmiCgTCcjEQ6DNIQODbxiDeg/s1600/Star_Wars_Boba_Fett_Christmas_Statue.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgOL2Qc4Bg4FaqxzX20GNFNbFZBw5Phc8pgMgUhNDt15WUNueN4nfwP6gHGPq1enB9B6A_qycO5qBdFX0sPF_UZW6VCr1AnHyHWBzp5DD7ODzm5-_PkCvuUmiCgTCcjEQ6DNIQODbxiDeg/s1600/Star_Wars_Boba_Fett_Christmas_Statue.jpg" /></a></div>
<u><br />
</u> 'Tis the season to be geeky....well, actually, all of the seasons are, really. There is something about the yuletide season, though, that can serve up a special brand of seasonal geekery. It's always fun this time of the year to take a break from the shopping madness, the snow, the family commitments and all of that traditional non-geeky Christmas stuff and take in something truly odd and/or wondrous that is both truly geeky and filled with the spirit of the season.<br />
<br />
Whether you celebrate Christmas, Hanukkah, Kwanzaa or Wookie Light Day, here are my ideal 12 Screenings of Geekmas.<br />
<u><br />
</u> <u><br />
</u> <u><br />
</u> <span style="font-size: large;"><b><u>12. Every Doctor Who Christmas Special (2005-2102)</u></b></span><br />
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhYiQZS_-0M-b-wK5lKxONgfi41-yjjSNkz8OFXedzyplxQ4F4vuoGxe9DKOt_he4xiwbvrLbJd_YhaZcZd9MONaGJKF1CFj0CBxu3OxAjgDdMJrMW0jVg0j8dFabSiDepJOv-Qp9ajbCk/s1600/Whoxmas.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="440" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhYiQZS_-0M-b-wK5lKxONgfi41-yjjSNkz8OFXedzyplxQ4F4vuoGxe9DKOt_he4xiwbvrLbJd_YhaZcZd9MONaGJKF1CFj0CBxu3OxAjgDdMJrMW0jVg0j8dFabSiDepJOv-Qp9ajbCk/s640/Whoxmas.jpg" width="640" /></a></div>
<br />
I can't think of another SF/Fantasy franchise with nearly as many, if any, Christmas specials. Thanks to the great British tradition of airing Christmas specials of the most popular shows on TV on the evening of December 25 (What? How are they supposed to sell mountains of toys that way?), the last of the Time Lords has now given or will give us, 7, count 'em 7 Christmas specials.<br />
They are:<br />
The Christmas Invasion<br />
The Runaway Bride<br />
<span class="yshortcuts cs4-visible" id="lw_1356275903_0">Voyage of the Damned</span><br />
The Next Doctor<br />
Doctor Who's A <span class="yshortcuts cs4-visible" id="lw_1356275903_1">Christmas Carol</span><br />
The Doctor, The Widow and The Wardrobe<br />
and the upcoming (which airs, you guessed it, tomorrow, December 25, 2012)<br />
The Snowmen<br />
<br />
<span style="font-size: large;"><b><u>11. The Six Million Dollar Man: "A Bionic Christmas Carol" (1976)</u></b></span><br />
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhBsjBKFVSSMEhNmHHDJiU3QRPTm1ErUToVziuCll-m8hZN7Tdniqe2ju2FCic-GKgu1g3udmPv0Ildn9pfIDOiNEN33pJkcyomOa8rw80TSX4GAZ6YNDuVB6BfCNNJ52XRcriDDACEzTKO/s1600/six-million-dollar-man-a-bionic-christmas-carol-16.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="480" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhBsjBKFVSSMEhNmHHDJiU3QRPTm1ErUToVziuCll-m8hZN7Tdniqe2ju2FCic-GKgu1g3udmPv0Ildn9pfIDOiNEN33pJkcyomOa8rw80TSX4GAZ6YNDuVB6BfCNNJ52XRcriDDACEzTKO/s640/six-million-dollar-man-a-bionic-christmas-carol-16.jpg" width="640" /></a></div>
<u><br />
</u> The hit 70's TV series about the adventures of super cyborg secret agent Steve Austin went through the paces of a rather uninspired reworking of Charles Dickens' classic seasonal tale, A Christmas Carol, back in December 1976. The episode is notable on account of a scene where Colonel Austin, sporting his one season only 70's porn star 'stash, goes into a toy store. Eagle-eyed viewers will notice in the background a shelf full of the best selling toy of that yuletide season, The Six Million Dollar Man action figure.<br />
<br />
Meta, man, just totally meta.<br />
<br />
<span style="font-size: large;"><b><u>10. On Her Majesty's Secret Service (1969) </u></b></span><br />
<br />
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgAEZxOZjj9YROjAoA5mf0iSfqDPp7dJDrlZR_DMrvC2bcp9so5RB2WlwEB0xl4BpZkXe_GuZ7Log15Znt2_gLBav9z9YlunQYUEKouGcfUKf0gy1zszTWMEZ7O5ryj5EexpGsRoRksrdE/s1600/007_Claus_James_Bond_Lazenby_Christmas.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgAEZxOZjj9YROjAoA5mf0iSfqDPp7dJDrlZR_DMrvC2bcp9so5RB2WlwEB0xl4BpZkXe_GuZ7Log15Znt2_gLBav9z9YlunQYUEKouGcfUKf0gy1zszTWMEZ7O5ryj5EexpGsRoRksrdE/s1600/007_Claus_James_Bond_Lazenby_Christmas.jpg" /></a></div>
James Bond, in the person of one time 007 George Lazenby, must stop his arch nemesis, Ernest Stavro Blofeld, from carrying a biological terrorist attack on Christmas Eve, 1969. Includes the best Yuletide downhill skiing and stock car chases ever filmed.<br />
<br />
<span style="font-size: large;"><b><u>9. Christmas with the Joker (1992)</u></b></span><br />
<br />
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="http://thebatmanuniverse.net/image/TV/History/Cartoons/010-Batman-The%20Animated%20Series/Episodes/Season%201/002%20Christmas%20with%20the%20Joker/GCPD.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" src="http://thebatmanuniverse.net/image/TV/History/Cartoons/010-Batman-The%20Animated%20Series/Episodes/Season%201/002%20Christmas%20with%20the%20Joker/GCPD.jpg" /></a></div>
<br />
The second episode ever of the landmark 90's TV show Batman: The Animated Series is, you guessed it, a Christmas one. The best line in any holiday themed TV show ever comes right after Robin suggests that he and Batman watch the seasonal classic "It's a Wonderful Life" on Christmas Eve. The Dark Knight replies to the Boy Wonder's suggestion with, "I've never seen that movie. I could never get past the title".<br />
<br />
<span style="font-size: large;"><b><u>8. Black Christmas (1974)</u></b></span><br />
<br />
<table align="center" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto; text-align: center;"><tbody>
<tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="http://www.moviefancentral.com/images/pictures/review53118/blackchristmas2.jpg?1352742212" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" height="360" src="http://www.moviefancentral.com/images/pictures/review53118/blackchristmas2.jpg?1352742212" width="640" /></a></td></tr>
<tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;">"The call is coming from inside the house!" originated in this film too.</td></tr>
</tbody></table>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
</div>
<br />
Released four years before John Carpenter's smash hit horror movie, Halloween, this low budget Canadian horror movie marked the veritable virgin birth of the the holiday-specific teen slasher movie. According director Bob Clark, who went on the direct the seasonal classic A Christmas Story (1983), the unmade sequel was,interestingly, to take place on Halloween. Hmmm....<br />
<br />
<span style="font-size: x-large;"><b><u>7. Star Trek: Generations (1994)</u></b></span><br />
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
</div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhD_FcTu3GC6b3nh47C_nmkYC6mTRklMr7g6TXizCC8DhG5Zv7ukf5lIFPjTiBpkTW74_WZ8n_IhSVLUpdodIzzUIHPhh5OYU4H2AXi6Z3E8moXm9bMmjPTkVIhTVCNogb52_D5dvi4w34/s1600/Picard+Xmas.bmp" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="426" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhD_FcTu3GC6b3nh47C_nmkYC6mTRklMr7g6TXizCC8DhG5Zv7ukf5lIFPjTiBpkTW74_WZ8n_IhSVLUpdodIzzUIHPhh5OYU4H2AXi6Z3E8moXm9bMmjPTkVIhTVCNogb52_D5dvi4w34/s640/Picard+Xmas.bmp" width="640" /></a></div>
<br />
Captain Jean-Luc Picard's Nexus induced family Christmas fantasy marks the most substantial evidence of Yuletide tradition in the entire Trek franchise. We also learn that Picard is a big time retro type 'cause his ideal seasonal celebrations sure have a major 20th century vibe to them.<br />
<br />
<span style="font-size: large;"><b><u>6. Things to Come (1936)</u></b></span><br />
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="http://k-punk.abstractdynamics.org/archives/thingstocome1024x768.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="480" src="http://k-punk.abstractdynamics.org/archives/thingstocome1024x768.jpg" width="640" /></a></div>
<br />
This prescient 1936 film, based on the book by HG Wells, predicted the outbreak of a second world war during the holiday season of 1940. The film becomes a little less prescient, though, when it shows the war lasting well into the 1970's. Plus they're pretty clear on the prediction that there will be no more Christmas celebrations by the 21st century. Looking around my house right now, I know this is not so.<br />
<br />
<span style="font-size: large;"><b><u>5.Die Hard II (1990)</u></b></span><br />
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="http://rview.reviewcentre.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/12/Die-Hard-21.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" src="http://rview.reviewcentre.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/12/Die-Hard-21.jpg" /></a></div>
<br />
The first Die Hard movie is largely considered the classic Xmas action movie of choice. However, its sequel, with its arctic gear commandos, winter wonder snowmobile chases and implausibly lethal icicles, delivers much more Christmas spirit.<br />
<br />
Bruce Willis once again shows off his super human crime fighting abilities when he rides one of the aforementioned snowmobiles at top speeds on a late December evening without even wearing a pair of gloves. <br />
<br />
<span style="font-size: large;"><b><u>4. It's a Wonderful Life (1946)</u></b></span><br />
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="http://www.grosvenorcafe.co.uk/uploads/2112.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="360" src="http://www.grosvenorcafe.co.uk/uploads/2112.jpg" width="640" /></a></div>
<br />
The single most popular Alternate History movie ever made. It's also fun to proclaim that during a screening of the seasonal classic and then take in all the strange looks.<br />
<br />
<span style="font-size: large;"><b><u>3. Santa Claus Conquers The Martians (1964) </u></b></span><br />
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="http://nomorepopcorn.files.wordpress.com/2011/12/santa_claus_conquers_the_martians_003240_2.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" src="http://nomorepopcorn.files.wordpress.com/2011/12/santa_claus_conquers_the_martians_003240_2.jpg" /></a></div>
<br />
This baby is go-to Christmas Cult Kitsch Classic. It is a perfect film when you're in the mood for spending the holidays with the Mystery Science Theater 3000 gang.<br />
<br />
<span style="font-size: large;"><b><u>2. Gremlins (1984)</u></b></span><br />
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="http://www.filmoria.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/2011/12/Gremlins.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="360" src="http://www.filmoria.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/2011/12/Gremlins.jpg" width="640" /></a></div>
<br />
Darkly comical marauding mischievous and deadly mythical creatures creatures wreak a ton of entertaining yuletide havoc in a small town.<br />
<br />
(SPOILER ALERT) Phoebe Cates's dad-dressed-as-Santa-getting-killed-while-stuck-in-the-chimney monologue is an all time classic of the genre.<br />
<br />
<span style="font-size: large;"><b><u>1. The Star Wars Holiday Special (1978)</u></b></span><br />
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgd4fOmgeEHuTvDsKli_LBjSkkxM9VPVRCfbO1Z26zB3npt36PfiHZngaXDC3hi6iLWmlPbRTxGVxB-NPaMBQ4d2-otfbO4h08yynIdi3afw-XsGZd656MKqszFkCGOz9JPOHxT7lMqbe0/s1600/star-wars-light-day.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgd4fOmgeEHuTvDsKli_LBjSkkxM9VPVRCfbO1Z26zB3npt36PfiHZngaXDC3hi6iLWmlPbRTxGVxB-NPaMBQ4d2-otfbO4h08yynIdi3afw-XsGZd656MKqszFkCGOz9JPOHxT7lMqbe0/s1600/star-wars-light-day.jpg" /></a></div>
The legendarily badness of the Star Wars Holiday Special has become a staunch pillar of seasonal geekdom nonetheless. The legend goes that Carrie Fisher is leaning against Chewbacca in this shot 'cause she was a little too full of Star Wars Holiday cheer to stand on her own.<br />
<br />
<div style="text-align: center;">
<i><span style="font-size: large;"><b><span style="font-size: large;">Merry</span> <a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4mAZM6ONuiM&list=UU_kTOFWksPIG5_5JQNDI1sA" target="_blank">Wookie Li<span style="font-size: large;">ght</span> Day</a> Everyone! </b></span></i><br />
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgExc_AZvuOAQraZ6XTbae87-zBbdBcL_5z-7qjpIgUTnNt588OLfPMMAE_F-aeclKIVNQHi4x-EhRpIwMtM9V-NNxARzQcWbzMm75bunDcD78ZNZVmlyiOaqvau6ZYKLymcmU0aXHUcmM/s1600/Alex+Ross+Mas.BMP" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="640" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgExc_AZvuOAQraZ6XTbae87-zBbdBcL_5z-7qjpIgUTnNt588OLfPMMAE_F-aeclKIVNQHi4x-EhRpIwMtM9V-NNxARzQcWbzMm75bunDcD78ZNZVmlyiOaqvau6ZYKLymcmU0aXHUcmM/s640/Alex+Ross+Mas.BMP" width="502" /></a></div>
</div>
<div style="text-align: center;">
<br /></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
</div>
<div style="text-align: center;">
</div>
<br />Terence Bowmanhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/04576129838447713151noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2233378012529819224.post-38640322995139215242012-09-21T10:00:00.000-04:002012-09-22T10:52:26.842-04:00Star Trek: Generations Cast Reunites at Montreal Comic Con 2012<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhwXcSIQ9EWyyLMnIm6wGny4MfqiJFRP3gfro9CTu8IztDvcMweyztKApyILAiJwLABYePMEA24q2evc6P2e8qyq4P_HbH7tqKiGMOm31NKmcpPnEGBj19jZFxo6nFOz3-TERiRN6jZVwM/s1600/Stewart+Shatner+McDowell.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="424" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhwXcSIQ9EWyyLMnIm6wGny4MfqiJFRP3gfro9CTu8IztDvcMweyztKApyILAiJwLABYePMEA24q2evc6P2e8qyq4P_HbH7tqKiGMOm31NKmcpPnEGBj19jZFxo6nFOz3-TERiRN6jZVwM/s640/Stewart+Shatner+McDowell.jpg" width="640" /></a></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Saturday night at the 2012 Montreal Comic Con featured an
unexpected on stage reunion of the cast of Star Trek: Generations.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br />
Well, at least part of it was unexpected, anyway. </div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br />
The 1994 Star Trek movie featured William Shatner, as the original series'
Captain Kirk, and Patrick Stewart, as Star Trek: The Next Generation's Captain
Picard, together on screen for the first time. The Saturday night Comic Con
event, entitled Reunion of the Generations, featured Shatner and
Stewart on stage together.<br />
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
The two legendary Star Trek Captains took fans' questions and riffed off of
each other for close to an hour, often whipping the capacity crowd up
into a frenzy of applause and laughter.<br />
<br />
The two cultural icons regaled the crowd with, among other things, an amusing
rant about constantly being asked "What's your favourite episode?"
and how they would both love to be in a "J.J. Abrams Star Trek
movie". Shatner also added that he, interestingly, is currently working on
a documentary film about the making of the Star Trek: The Next Generation
television series.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgem-vFPu9Srm_w3bh_PG501tUecxGSMAUdVYXHnsBff6yLCIrC_-xBBDEAfPXbBRCCyHmwhUfE5J62mnuFtOtyT-fYoghZHN63wBSVcvGCyepCGV408BoH9daZyh66c1Ko5kJ4BMgfJIo/s1600/Reunion+of+Generations.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgem-vFPu9Srm_w3bh_PG501tUecxGSMAUdVYXHnsBff6yLCIrC_-xBBDEAfPXbBRCCyHmwhUfE5J62mnuFtOtyT-fYoghZHN63wBSVcvGCyepCGV408BoH9daZyh66c1Ko5kJ4BMgfJIo/s1600/Reunion+of+Generations.jpg" /></a></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
About three quarters of the way through the show, a fan asked question
about about who Captains Kirk and Picard's greatest nemesis was. Just
then, a voice was heard quoting the line "Time is the fire in which we
burn".<br />
<br />
<br />
The line, of course, was uttered by the film's villain, Dr. Tollian Soran,
played by none other than Malcolm McDowell (who was scheduled to appear at
Comic Con the next day).<br />
<br />
While the audience was still contemplating the fact the fan appeared to have
just delivered the best McDowell impersonation they had ever heard, McDowell
then quickly emerged from backstage to thunderous applause and a standing
ovation. </div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgx4DdnIQkbclm0VJD0IUzB8w4YX1BCKYpe3XsBdaIRL6xJJ8a40h7NiE4raPaDJEhlXW8THjyrusYY8wC3-VkjpwQxN_vI1RCY1JU6iSPAvtgC3fyCXi-LLmYWi1Oei-sf94PfMZbzYFGC/s1600/star_trek_generations.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="clear: left; float: left; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="300" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgx4DdnIQkbclm0VJD0IUzB8w4YX1BCKYpe3XsBdaIRL6xJJ8a40h7NiE4raPaDJEhlXW8THjyrusYY8wC3-VkjpwQxN_vI1RCY1JU6iSPAvtgC3fyCXi-LLmYWi1Oei-sf94PfMZbzYFGC/s400/star_trek_generations.jpg" width="400" /></a></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
McDowell and Stewart have, it turns out, known each other since their
days with the Royal Shakespeare Company. Stewart pointed out that McDowell
first appeared on stage with him as a "spear carrier" in a mid 1960's
production of William Shakespeare's Henry The VIII, Part One. There was some controversy
amongst the two about the actual year they met. McDowell saying it was '65 and
Stewart '66 (though another online source puts their first meeting in 1964).</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Messrs Shatner, Stewart and McDowell then went on to lament the death of
Captain Kirk in Generations. McDowell pointed out that "[Star Trek
Generations producer and co-writer] Rick Berman could have written you a better
death". "They had you shot in the behind", Stewart quickly
aware of much of the fan dissatisfaction with the onscreen death of Captain
Kirk in Star Trek: Generations.<br />
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Throughout the onstage Generations cast reunion, there was no mention of some recent
controversial comments McDowell made about the Trek franchise. Appearing at
Hero Complex, an event hosted by the Los Angeles Times last June, McDowell said
that in Star Trek Generations, he "got to be the guy who shut Shatner
up.”, adding, in reference to the Star Trek movie franchise, that he "did
them a favor,”. In the same interview, McDowell continued his unabashed
criticism of Trek, "...you have Patrick Stewart spouting off for another
40 minutes. If you find that exciting, hey, go watch paint dry", he said.
He then went on to praise J.J. Abrams for "actually making some good [Star
Trek] movies".<br />
<br />
<br />
<iframe allowfullscreen="allowfullscreen" frameborder="0" height="360" src="http://www.youtube.com/embed/W71HrpLZ9gI" width="640"></iframe></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
However, as McDowell and Stewart hugged each other on stage Saturday night, it
seemed that, apparently, all had been forgiven, or at least, forgotten.<b><u><o:p></o:p></u></b><br />
<br />
<iframe allowfullscreen="allowfullscreen" frameborder="0" height="360" src="http://www.youtube.com/embed/FDXgeo_1w8k?rel=0" width="640"></iframe>
</div>
Terence Bowmanhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/04576129838447713151noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2233378012529819224.post-67663974388128800632012-08-16T12:22:00.002-04:002012-08-16T12:24:07.064-04:00Acting With Glasses 101This week's post is my first ever vlog. In this video post, I discuss my own unique perspective on the craft of acting while wearing glasses or sunglasses.<br />
<br />
Enjoy.<br />
<br />
<br />
<iframe allowfullscreen="allowfullscreen" frameborder="0" height="360" src="http://www.youtube.com/embed/7zoWXFFZOpk?rel=0" width="640"></iframe><br />
<br />
<br />
Hey, He Had on a Hatters, I'm off on vacation. <br />
<br />
My post will resume once again the week of September 10, 2012. Until, then have a great rest of August and a fun Labour Day weekend.<br />
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="http://www.iwatchstuff.com/2012/02/01/sam-neill-jurassic-park.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="213" src="http://www.iwatchstuff.com/2012/02/01/sam-neill-jurassic-park.jpg" width="400" /></a></div>
<br />
<br />
See you in September!
Terence Bowmanhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/04576129838447713151noreply@blogger.com9tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2233378012529819224.post-68438473813684143652012-07-25T11:27:00.001-04:002012-10-16T15:19:04.071-04:00The Kristen Stewart Conundrum<span style="font-family: inherit;"><br /></span>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="http://collider.com/wp-content/image-base/Movies/W/Welcome_to_the_Rileys/movie_images/Welcome%20to%20the%20Rileys%20movie%20image%20Kristen%20Stewart%20%281%29.jpg" imageanchor="1"><span style="font-family: inherit;"><img border="0" src="http://collider.com/wp-content/image-base/Movies/W/Welcome_to_the_Rileys/movie_images/Welcome%20to%20the%20Rileys%20movie%20image%20Kristen%20Stewart%20%281%29.jpg" /></span></a></div>
<i style="background-color: white;"><b><span style="font-family: inherit;"><br /></span></b></i>
<i style="background-color: white;"><b><span style="font-family: inherit;">"She is a real force with terrific instincts." </span></b></i><br />
<i style="background-color: white;"><b><span style="font-family: inherit;">-Sean Penn on Kristen Stewart</span></b></i><br />
<span style="font-family: inherit;"><br /></span>
<div style="text-align: right;">
<i style="background-color: white;"><b><span style="font-family: inherit;">"Kristen isn't interested in blurting out her emotions all in front of her, and that results in really intelligent and interesting performances."</span></b></i></div>
<div>
<div style="text-align: right;">
<i style="background-color: white;"><b><span style="font-family: inherit;"> -Jodie Foster on Kristen Stewart</span></b></i></div>
<i style="background-color: white;"><b><span style="font-family: inherit;"><br /></span></b></i>
<div style="text-align: left;">
<b><i><span style="font-family: inherit;">"She is unique, and I don't see-outside of maybe two or three people much older than she is- a uniqueness in actresses today. She is a one-of-a-kinder".</span></i></b></div>
<b><i><span style="font-family: inherit;">-Bruce Dern on Kristen Stewart</span></i></b><br />
<b><i><span style="font-family: inherit;"><br /></span></i></b>
<div style="text-align: right;">
<span style="font-family: inherit;"><b><i>"</i></b><b style="background-color: white;"><i>This is a gutsy woman....young, bright, wonderful, talented, observant…</i></b><b style="background-color: white;"><i>"</i></b></span></div>
<div style="text-align: right;">
<b><i><span style="font-family: inherit;">-William Hurt on Kristen Stewart</span></i></b></div>
</div>
<div>
<i><b><span style="font-family: inherit;"><br /></span></b></i>
<b><i><span style="font-family: inherit;">“Stewart is, quite simply, a wonderful actress."</span></i></b><br />
<b><i><span style="font-family: inherit;">-Roger Ebert on Kristen Stewart</span></i></b><br />
<i style="background-color: white;"><b><span style="font-family: inherit;"><br /></span></b></i>
<i style="background-color: white;"><b><span style="font-family: inherit;"><br /></span></b></i>
<span style="font-family: inherit;"><span style="background-color: white;">There are no doubt a great many people who just </span><span style="background-color: white;">had a major WTF moment while </span><span style="background-color: white;">reading the above quotes. Are these people talking about the same Kristen Stewart? The really bad actor in those awful Twilight movies? The same one that is now, quite unjustifiably, the highest paid actress ever? </span></span><br />
<span style="background-color: white; font-family: inherit;"><br /></span>
<span style="font-family: inherit;"><span style="background-color: white;">What in the hell are these otherwise respectable people on about? I mean, c'mon, t</span><span style="background-color: white;">here are <a href="http://www.facebook.com/KristenStewart5Movies1FacialExpression" target="_blank">Facebook pages</a>, <a href="http://iwastesomuchtime.com/on/?i=474" target="_blank">memes</a> and <a href="http://youtu.be/1vlQd9w0w_4" target="_blank">YouTube montages</a> that are dedicated </span></span><span style="background-color: white;">solely </span><span style="background-color: white; font-family: inherit;">to confirming that which everybody already knows: that Kristen Stewart simply can not act. </span><br />
<span style="background-color: white; font-family: inherit;"><br /></span>
<span style="background-color: white; font-family: inherit;">What if, though, just for a moment, we consider the notion that maybe Penn, Foster, Dern, Hurt and Ebert are not just talking out of their asses (though I would pay good money to see that)?</span><br />
<span style="font-family: inherit;"><br /></span>
<span style="font-family: inherit;">For instance, let's take a look at this scene:</span><br />
<span style="background-color: white; font-family: inherit;"><br /></span>
<span style="background-color: white; font-family: inherit;"><iframe allowfullscreen="" frameborder="0" height="360" src="http://www.youtube.com/embed/Iin1bfKXkrk?rel=0" width="640"></iframe></span><br />
<span style="background-color: white; font-family: inherit;"><br /></span>
<span style="background-color: white; font-family: inherit;"><br /></span>
<span style="background-color: white; font-family: inherit;">No, Kristen Stewart did not guest star on The Sopranos.</span><br />
<span style="background-color: white; font-family: inherit;"><br /></span>
<span style="font-family: inherit;"><span style="background-color: white;">That is a scene from the 2010 film, Welcome to the Rileys starring Stewart, James Gandolfini and Melissa Leo and directed by Jake Scott (son of director Ridley Scot). The movie is about a middle aged man (Gandolfini) who, </span><span style="background-color: white;">after the death of his own teenage daughter, </span><span style="background-color: white;">attempts to become a father figure to a 16 year old drug addict runaway turned sex worker (Stewart). </span></span><span style="background-color: white; font-family: inherit;">I see a many things in Stewart's performance in this clip but I do not see anything that suggests that she "can't act". </span><br />
<span style="background-color: white; font-family: inherit;"></span><br />
<span style="background-color: white;"><span style="background-color: white; font-family: inherit;"><br /></span></span>
<span style="background-color: white;"><span style="background-color: white;"><span style="font-family: inherit;">Welcome to the Rileys premiered in January 2010 at the Sundance Film Festival to an unusually </span>positive<span style="font-family: inherit;"> critical reaction to her performance:</span></span></span><br />
<span style="background-color: white;"><span style="background-color: white; font-family: inherit;"><br /></span></span>
<span style="background-color: white;"><span style="background-color: white; font-family: inherit;"></span></span><br />
<span style="background-color: white;"><span style="background-color: white; font-family: inherit;"><b><i>"The discovery once again is Kristen Stewart. </i><span style="background-color: white;"><i>Who knew she had these notes? I'm discovering an important new actress."</i></span></b></span></span><br />
<span style="background-color: white;"><span style="background-color: white;"><span style="background-color: white; font-family: inherit;"><i><b>Roger Ebert's Sundance Journal </b></i></span></span></span><br />
<span style="font-family: inherit;"><b><br /></b></span>
<div style="text-align: right;">
<span style="font-family: inherit;"><i><b>"But the film belongs to Kristen Stewart, raw, uncompromising, magnificent at every turn, delivering a ferocious and emotionally-charged performance." </b></i></span></div>
<div style="text-align: right;">
<span style="background-color: white;"><span style="background-color: white;"><span style="background-color: white; font-family: inherit;"><i><b>Moviehole.com</b></i></span></span></span></div>
<div style="text-align: right;">
<span style="font-family: inherit;"><i><b><br /></b></i></span></div>
<span style="font-family: inherit;"><i><b>"She comes off like a rabid dog, completely unpredictable...See it for Stewart’s electric performance."</b></i></span><br />
<span style="background-color: white;"><span style="background-color: white;"><span style="background-color: white; font-family: inherit;"><i><b>Laremy Legel Film.com</b></i></span></span></span><br />
<span style="background-color: white;"><i><span style="font-family: inherit;"><b><br /></b></span></i></span>
<div style="text-align: right;">
<span style="background-color: white;"><i><span style="font-family: inherit;"><b>"Stewart's strung-out, frowzy performance is a timely reminder that the girl can act."</b></span></i></span></div>
<div style="text-align: right;">
<span style="background-color: white;"><span style="background-color: white;"><span style="background-color: white; font-family: inherit;"><i><b>Robbie Collin, The Telegraph U.K.</b></i></span></span></span></div>
<br />
<div style="text-align: right;">
<br /></div>
<span style="background-color: white;"><br /><span style="background-color: white; font-family: inherit;">It turns out that Stewart has got a surprisingly long list of performances in smaller independent films </span><span style="background-color: white; font-family: inherit;">for which she has received an impressive number of glowing reviews from both critics and the public alike.</span><span style="background-color: white; font-family: inherit;"><a href="http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0378793/" target="_blank"> Speak (2004)</a>,<a href="http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0418586/" target="_blank"> The Cake Eaters (2007)</a>,<a href="http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0758758/" target="_blank"> Into The Wild (2007)</a>, <a href="http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0954990/" target="_blank">The Yellow Handkerchief (2008)</a>, </span><span style="background-color: white;"><a href="http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1017451/" style="font-family: inherit;" target="_blank">The Runaways (2010)</a><span style="font-family: inherit;"> and </span><a href="http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1183923/" style="font-family: inherit;" target="_blank">Welcome to the Rileys</a><span style="font-family: inherit;"> are amongst the films where Stewart is arguably doing her very best work. Virtually nobody has seen or even heard of these movies. On the other hand, everyone does seem to know about the Twilight movies which comprise what are arguably the weakest performances of Stewart's career (which, BTW, comprises 31 IMDB </span>credits<span style="font-family: inherit;"> since she began acting at the age of 9).</span></span><br /><span style="background-color: white; font-family: inherit;"><br /></span><br /><span style="font-family: inherit;">That is where the </span>conundrum<span style="font-family: inherit;"> comes in. </span></span><br />
<span style="background-color: white;"><span style="font-family: inherit;"><br /></span></span>
<span style="background-color: white;"><span style="font-family: inherit;">I remember seeing Welcome to the Rileys not too long ago. I was familiar with some of Stewart's other work, both Twilight and non-Twilight, and already thought she was a pretty solid actor. I was even more impressed with her performance in the film. What I took away from it, more than anything else, is that I barely recognized Kristen Stewart in Welcome to the Rilys as the same person from the Twilight movies.</span><br /><br /><span style="font-family: inherit;">It was around this time that the reviews for Stewart's latest film, Snow White and the Huntsman, began appearing. I was stunned when I read some of them:</span><br /><span style="background-color: white; font-family: inherit;"><br /></span><br /><span style="background-color: white; font-family: inherit;"><b><i>"The elephant in the room, however, is Stewart...she’s dreadful."</i></b></span></span><br />
<b style="background-color: white; font-family: inherit;"><i>-Tom Clift, Moviedex.com</i></b><br />
<span style="background-color: white; font-family: inherit;"><br /></span>
<div style="text-align: right;">
<span style="background-color: white; font-family: inherit;"><b style="background-color: white;"><i>"It doesn't help that Snow White is Kristen Stewart, an actress who seems to have just the one expression at her command..."</i></b></span></div>
<div style="text-align: right;">
<b style="font-family: inherit;"><i>-Andrea Chase, killermoviereviews.com</i></b></div>
<span style="background-color: white; font-family: inherit;"><br /></span>
<span style="background-color: white; font-family: inherit;"><i style="background-color: white;"><b>"I believe it proves my theory that Kristen Stewart is the Keanu Reeves of her generation." </b></i></span><br />
<span style="background-color: white; font-family: inherit;"><i><b>-</b></i></span><span style="background-color: white; font-family: inherit;"><b><i>Annalee Newitz, i09.com</i></b></span><br />
<span style="background-color: white; font-family: inherit;"><br /></span>
<span style="background-color: white;"><span style="background-color: white; font-family: inherit;">Woah! Quite the critical turnaround, huh? </span></span><br />
<span style="background-color: white;"><br /></span>
<span style="background-color: white;">I found that last one particularly surreal. I remember thinking, "Seriously? You're putting<i> her</i> in the same sentence with the go-to 'insert bad actor here' punchline of the last 20 years?". </span><span style="background-color: white;">Things got even more surreal when I started seeing that line turning up all over the internet and racking up the "like"'s on Facebook.</span><br />
<span style="background-color: white;"><br /></span>
<br />
<b><u><span style="font-size: large;"><br /></span></u></b>
<i><b><u><span style="font-size: large;">"Magnificent at Every Turn" </span></u></b><b style="background-color: white;"><u><span style="font-size: large;">vs</span></u></b><b style="background-color: white;"><u><span style="font-size: large;"> "She's Dreadful"</span></u></b></i><br />
<span style="background-color: white; font-family: inherit;"><br /></span>
<span style="background-color: white; font-family: inherit;">Snow White and The Huntsman and Welcome to the Rileys are very different roles in very different movies. Nonetheless, I still found it truly bizarre that</span><span style="background-color: white; font-family: inherit;"> </span><span style="background-color: white; font-family: inherit;">two vastly divergent opinions </span><span style="background-color: white; font-family: inherit;">about the same actor</span><span style="background-color: white; font-family: inherit;"> of equal yet opposite force can co-exist in the same universe. When you read some of the glowing praise back to back with some of the brutal reviews, it's hard to believe that are even talking about the same person. I found the whole thing</span><span style="background-color: white; font-family: inherit;"> perplexing enough to </span><span style="background-color: white; font-family: inherit;">motivate</span><span style="background-color: white; font-family: inherit;"> me to do some research and watch some more movies so I could finally get the bottom of what I call The Kristen Stewart Conundrum.</span><br />
<span style="font-family: inherit;"><br /></span>
<span style="background-color: white; font-family: inherit;"><span style="background-color: white;">For the record, </span><span style="background-color: white;">I don't care about how much money Stewart makes, her personal life, her relationships, how she deals with the press, her looks, </span></span><span style="background-color: white;">her weight (though, God, that whole issue in show biz could be series of posts unto themselves) or any of the other media obsessions surrounding her and celebrities in general. </span><br />
<span style="background-color: white; font-family: inherit;"><br /></span>
<span style="background-color: white; font-family: inherit;">All I care about is </span><span style="background-color: white; font-family: inherit;">her acting and what people think about it. </span><br />
<span style="background-color: white; font-family: inherit;"><br /></span>
<span style="font-family: inherit;"><span style="background-color: white;">Acting is craft that a relatively small of amount of people know the in and outs of but that everybody has an opinion about. Whether </span><span style="background-color: white;">it be critics, </span><span style="background-color: white;">the average movie goer or even actors, what constitutes a good performance is a </span><span style="background-color: white;">highly subjective matter. </span></span><br />
<br />
<span style="background-color: white; font-family: inherit;">What fascinates me about the wildly differing opinions on Stewart's work are the</span><span style="background-color: white;"> </span><span style="background-color: white;">questions it raises about what constitutes good or bad performances in the eyes of critics and the public </span><span style="background-color: white; font-family: inherit;">and how major mainstream success can influence and shape an actor's image and credibility. </span><br />
<span style="font-family: inherit;"><br /></span>
<span style="font-family: inherit; font-size: large;"><b><u><i>"The Twilight Nonsense"</i></u></b></span><br />
<span style="font-family: inherit; font-size: large;"><b><u><i><br /></i></u></b></span>
In November 2008, the first movie of the the Twilight series was released. It and the films that followed were, and still are, by far Kristen Stewart's biggest movies ever. The films were based on the best selling books written by Stephanie Meyer.<br />
<br />
Stewart played the female lead, Bella Swan, an "average" teenage girl who gets caught up in what can best be described as a Gothic tween soap opera involving a love triangle of vampires and werewolves. The role was both the best and the worst thing that ever happened to Kristen Stewart.<br />
<b><i><span style="font-family: inherit;"><br /></span></i></b>
<b><i><span style="font-family: inherit;">"Too bad Stewart's talents are being wasted on the Twilight nonsense"</span></i></b><br />
<b style="background-color: white;"><i><span style="font-family: inherit;">-Rotten Tomatoes Audience Review of Speak (2004) </span></i></b><br />
<span style="background-color: white;"><span style="font-family: inherit;"><br /></span></span>
<span style="background-color: white;"><span style="font-family: inherit;">The major difference between the Stewart fans and "haters" is that, </span>basically<span style="font-family: inherit;">, they are watching her in different movies. The fans know (but often don't like) Twilight. From what I've seen, though, the "haters" </span></span><span style="background-color: white;"><span style="font-family: inherit;">don't know and don't want to know anything about any performances in </span>obscure<span style="font-family: inherit;"> movies that might change their opinion of her. Of </span>course<span style="font-family: inherit;">, there is also a small but vocal contingent that dislike her in any role, no matter what.</span></span><br />
<span style="font-family: inherit;"><br /></span>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="http://idigitalcitizen.files.wordpress.com/2009/12/twilight-movie-poster-480x320.jpg?w=480" imageanchor="1" style="clear: left; float: left; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" src="http://idigitalcitizen.files.wordpress.com/2009/12/twilight-movie-poster-480x320.jpg?w=480" /></a></div>
<span style="background-color: white; font-family: inherit;">It reminds a bit of when Jessica Lange made her film debut in the 1976 version of King Kong. Knowing nothing about her other than that she was a model turned actress whose big screen debut was in one of the biggest blockbusters of the year, the critics were brutal. "Worst performance of the year" and "She'll never work again" were typical reviews. Six years later, Lange won the Best Actress Oscar for her performance in Francis. I knew people who were still incredulous about her win even then.</span><br />
<span style="font-family: inherit;"><br /></span>
<span style="font-family: inherit;">Reviews, good or bad, can be like political talking points. Truth, lies or distortion, it makes no difference. Once they are repeated often enough, for many people, they become true (though aside from producer Harvey Weinstein's Oscar voting campaigns, there are rarely agendas driving movie reviews). </span><span style="background-color: white;"><span style="font-family: inherit;">I have come across people who have not even seen a single movie of Stewart's yet are still are under the impression that she can't act. She's not by any means in the same league as </span><span style="font-family: inherit;">Lange but I do think that Twilight is Kristen Stewart's King Kong.</span></span><br />
<span style="font-family: inherit;"><br /></span>
<span style="background-color: white; font-family: inherit;">I first saw Kristen Stewart in Twilight. Yes, I have seen every Twilight movie to date. I'm a geek. That's my job.</span><br />
<span style="font-family: inherit;"><br /></span>
<span style="font-family: inherit;">She did not make much of an impression on me at the time, good or bad. </span><span style="background-color: white; font-family: inherit;">It was not until I started seeing Stewart in other roles like Adventureland (2009) and The Runaways that I really got a sense that there was way more to her than the role of Bella Swan might suggest. </span><span style="background-color: white; font-family: inherit;">From there on in, I watched her in the Twilight movies with different eyes. </span><br />
<span style="font-family: inherit;"><br /></span>
<span style="background-color: white; font-family: inherit;">The first thing I got a sense for with those new eyes is that Stewart seemed to be holding back. It occurred to me fairly quickly into watching the second film, Twilight: New Moon, that she seemed to be directed away from playing anything that was too strong in any direction (and I can tell you from experience that </span><span style="background-color: white; font-family: inherit;">directors can indeed make a big difference in actor's performance). </span><br />
<br />
<div style="text-align: right;">
<b style="background-color: white;"><i><span style="font-family: inherit;"><br /></span></i></b></div>
<div style="text-align: right;">
<b style="background-color: white;"><i>"...a series of movies that clearly constrain her acting ability and makes her seem as boring as her character, Bella Swan."</i></b></div>
<div style="text-align: right;">
<b style="background-color: white;"><i>David Blaustein, ABC News</i></b></div>
<br />
<div style="text-align: right;">
<b><i><br /></i></b>
<div style="text-align: left;">
<b><i>"What surprised me was how much I admired Kristen Stewart, who in Twilight was playing below her grade level."</i></b></div>
</div>
<div style="text-align: right;">
<div style="text-align: left;">
<b><i>-Roger Ebert on Adventureland</i></b></div>
</div>
<br />
<div style="text-align: left;">
<br /></div>
<span style="background-color: white; font-family: inherit;">In the Twilight movies, I got the impression that Stewart was directed to play a blank slate that the target audience of tween girls could project themselves onto. I have not read any of the Twilight books (my dedication to this blog only goes so far) but I'm told this is very much what the character of Bella Swan is like in the books as well.</span><br />
<span style="font-family: inherit;"><br /></span>
<div style="text-align: right;">
<b style="background-color: white;"><i><span style="font-family: inherit;">Bella Swan (Kristen Stewart), is indeed passive and blank, a transparent proxy for the audience.</span></i></b></div>
<div style="text-align: right;">
<b><i><span style="font-family: inherit;">-Dana Stevens, slate.com </span></i></b></div>
<span style="font-family: inherit;"><br /></span>
<span style="font-family: inherit;">In that sense, Stewart was doing her job. She was giving the franchise what it needed by not alienating as much of the target audience as possible. It's an accomplishment that did her no favours.<br /><br /><iframe allowfullscreen="" frameborder="0" height="360" src="http://www.youtube.com/embed/fQxzSTMOvxM?rel=0" width="640"></iframe>
</span><br />
<span style="font-family: inherit;"><br /></span>
<span style="font-family: inherit;"><br /></span>
<div style="text-align: right;">
<b style="background-color: white;"><i><span style="font-family: inherit;">"...her plain, expressionless face and deadpan voice was almost painful to watch."</span></i></b></div>
<div style="text-align: right;">
<b style="background-color: white;"><i><span style="font-family: inherit;">-</span></i></b><b style="background-color: white;"><i><span style="font-family: inherit;">IMDB User Review of </span></i></b><span style="background-color: white;"><b><i>Twilight</i></b></span></div>
<div style="text-align: right;">
<b><i><span style="font-family: inherit;"><br /></span></i></b></div>
<br />
<div style="text-align: left;">
<b style="background-color: white;"><i><span style="font-family: inherit;">"Miss Stewart - however cute she may be - seemed to be only given one direction, and that was to 'stare longingly into his face with your lips slightly open'."</span></i></b></div>
<b style="background-color: white; text-align: left;"><i><span style="font-family: inherit;">-IMDB user review of Twilight</span></i></b><br />
<br />
<div style="text-align: right;">
<br /></div>
<span style="background-color: white; font-family: inherit;">Watching Stewart in the </span><span style="background-color: white;">Twilight</span><span style="background-color: white;"><span style="font-family: inherit;"> movies </span>quickly<span style="font-family: inherit;"> became frustrating as hell. It felt like she was working at about 10% of her true potential. </span></span><span style="background-color: white;"><span style="font-family: inherit;">It's no coincidence that both Stewart and co-star Robert Pattinson were often </span>criticized<span style="font-family: inherit;"> for their work in Twilight but then got much better responses to their roles in </span></span><a href="http://www.telegraph.co.uk/culture/film/filmreviews/9290609/Cannes-2012-Robert-Pattinson-in-Cosmopolis-review.html" style="background-color: white; font-family: inherit;" target="_blank">other films.</a><span style="background-color: white; font-family: inherit;"> </span><br />
<br />
<span style="background-color: white; font-family: inherit;">The great irony of Stewart's now extremely successful career is that the one role for which she is best known is her most atypical and one that is not truly indicative of her talents. </span><br />
<span style="background-color: white; font-family: inherit;"><br /></span>
<span style="background-color: white; font-family: inherit;"><br /></span>
<span style="font-size: large;"><span style="background-color: white; font-family: inherit;"><b><i><u>"A Flawless Performance" vs </u></i></b></span><b style="font-family: inherit;"><i><u>"Cannot Handle the Drama"</u></i></b></span><br />
<span style="background-color: white; font-family: inherit;"><br /></span>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="http://www.moviegoods.com/Assets/product_images/1020/372379.1020.A.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="clear: left; float: left; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="251" src="http://www.moviegoods.com/Assets/product_images/1020/372379.1020.A.jpg" width="400" /></a></div>
<span style="font-family: inherit;">In 2004, Stewart starred in Speak, a low budget indie film originally made for the Showtime/Lifetime cable networks. The film is about a 14 year old rape victim and her struggle to tell someone, anyone, about her ordeal (and I gotta add here that </span><span style="font-family: inherit;">I find it very troubling that it has become necessary to make movies about such an issue for so </span><span style="font-family: inherit;">young an audience).</span><br />
<span style="font-family: inherit;"><br /></span>
<span style="font-family: inherit;">Just 13 when the movie was shot, Stewart's performance was well </span>received.<br />
<span style="font-family: inherit;"><br /></span>
<span style="font-family: inherit;"><br /></span>
<div style="text-align: right;">
<span style="font-family: inherit;"> <b><i>"Kristen Stewart doesn't just shine, she burns...a flawless performance."</i></b></span></div>
<div style="text-align: right;">
<span style="font-family: inherit;"><b><i>-Chris Parry, efilmcritic. com</i></b></span></div>
<span style="font-family: inherit;"><br /></span>
<span style="font-family: inherit;"> <b><i>"Wow! Kristen Stewart. An impressive performance."</i></b></span><br />
<span style="font-family: inherit;"><b><i>- IMDB User Review of Speak </i></b></span><br />
<span style="font-family: inherit;"><br /></span>
<div style="text-align: right;">
<span style="font-family: inherit;"><b><i>"She does things with her face that actors twice her age with twice her experience only wish they could do"</i></b></span></div>
<div style="text-align: right;">
<span style="font-family: inherit;"><b><i>-IMDB User Review of Speak</i></b></span></div>
<div style="text-align: right;">
<span style="font-family: inherit;"><br /></span></div>
<span style="font-family: inherit;"><b><i>"Kristen Stewart played the full range of emotions from debilitating despair to righteous anger and made the character completely believable."</i></b></span><br />
<span style="font-family: inherit;"><b><i>-IMDB User Review of Speak </i></b></span><br />
<span style="font-family: inherit;"><br /></span>
<div style="text-align: right;">
<span style="font-family: inherit;"> <b><i>"Kristen Stewart's performance and expressions--incredible"</i></b></span></div>
</div>
<div style="text-align: right;">
<b><i>-IMDB User Review of Speak </i></b></div>
<br />
Granted Stewart is playing a character that doesn't talk all that much but it is still fascinating that, even so early in her career, the first thing many of the reviews mention is her "expressions". In this case it is as a positive<span style="font-family: inherit;">, not the negative "inexpressive" and "one expression" type comments that will come up time and again later on. It is again something of a conundrum that throughout her </span>career<span style="font-family: inherit;"> Stewart has been alternately praised and condemned for the exact same thing: her "expressions" or alleged lack thereof.</span><br />
<span style="font-family: inherit;"><br /></span>
<span style="background-color: white; font-family: inherit;">What I see in her performance in Speak is this 13 year old </span><span style="background-color: white;"><span style="font-family: inherit;">kid reacting to events going on around her with </span>incredible<span style="font-family: inherit;"> instincts that are beyond her years as well as an </span>uncanny<span style="font-family: inherit;"> </span>ability<span style="font-family: inherit;"> to</span></span><span style="background-color: white;"> </span><span style="background-color: white;">communicate those feelings to an audience. </span><span style="background-color: white; font-family: inherit;">Stewart and the character she plays become one in the same. </span><br />
<span style="background-color: white; font-family: inherit;"><br /></span>
<span style="background-color: white;"><span style="font-family: inherit;">Meanwhile, on Rotten Tomatoes, we start to see the first evidence of the impact Twilight would have on Stewart's image and </span>credibility<span style="font-family: inherit;"> as an actor. In reviews dated </span></span><span style="background-color: white; font-family: inherit;">around late 2008 and early 2009, just after the release of the first Twilight movie, the first truly negative reviews of her work in Speak start rearing their heads on the popular movie site.</span><br />
<span style="font-family: inherit;"><br /></span>
<span style="font-family: inherit;"><br /></span>
<b style="background-color: white;"><i><span style="font-family: inherit;">"Stewart cannot handle the drama the role brings"</span></i></b><br />
<b style="background-color: white;"><i><span style="font-family: inherit;">-Rotten Tomatoes Audience Review of Speak</span></i></b><br />
<b><i><span style="font-family: inherit;"><br /></span></i></b>
<div style="text-align: right;">
<b><i><span style="font-family: inherit;">"I see nothing in her face or movements that betrays anything worth looking at. "</span></i></b></div>
<div style="text-align: right;">
<b style="background-color: white;"><i><span style="font-family: inherit;">-Rotten Tomatoes Audience Review of Speak</span></i></b>
</div>
<div style="text-align: right;">
<b style="background-color: white;"><i><span style="font-family: inherit;"><br /></span></i></b></div>
<span style="background-color: white; font-family: inherit;">"<i style="font-weight: bold;">Perfect role for Kristen Stewart's expressionless face."</i></span><br />
<b style="background-color: white;"><i><span style="font-family: inherit;">-Rotten Tomatoes Audience Review of Speak</span></i></b>
<br />
<span style="font-family: inherit;"><br /></span>
<div>
<span style="background-color: white; font-family: inherit;">Amazingly, Stewart is now suddenly getting criticized for having an "expressionless face" for the exact same role for which she was previously praised for her "incredible" expressions (t</span><span style="background-color: white; font-family: inherit;">o be fair, there were still good reviews of Speak post-Twilight). It is evident that audiences, and later critics, seeing her for the first time in Twilight were beginning to make those weaker performances their baseline opinion of Stewart's talents in general.</span><br />
<span style="background-color: white; font-family: inherit;"><br /></span>
<b style="background-color: white;"><i><span style="font-family: inherit;"><br /></span></i></b>
<b><i><u><span style="font-size: large;">"Expressionless Face" vs "Incredible Expressions"</span></u></i></b><br />
<br />
The issue of Stewart's "expressions", "face" and "look" come up negatively again and again in many reviews. To one degree or another, these types of criticisms haunt her in every role.<br />
<br />
<b style="background-color: white;"><i>"Fear, uncertainty, determination and love; they all look the same on Stewart’s inexpressive face."</i></b><br />
<b style="background-color: white; font-family: inherit;"><i>-Tom Clift, Moviedex.com review of Snow White and The Huntsman</i></b><br />
<b style="background-color: white; font-family: inherit;"><i><br /></i></b>
<br />
<div style="text-align: right;">
<b style="background-color: white; color: #333333; font-family: inherit; line-height: 17px;"><i>"This young actress can convey more with one look than most veterans can with an entire monologue."</i></b></div>
<div style="text-align: right;">
<b style="background-color: white; color: #333333; font-family: inherit; line-height: 17px;"><i>-IMDB User Review of Speak</i></b></div>
<br />
<div style="text-align: right;">
<b style="background-color: white; font-family: inherit;"><i><br /></i></b></div>
So what is it about this aspect of her performance that so polarizes critical reaction?<br />
<br />
Well, for one thing, she will often play scenes muted, at times with a seemingly neutral gaze, allowing only glimpses of emotion sparingly.<br />
<br />
In this scene from Speak, she has just snuck into a hospital room to escape the world as she reflects on what is still her completely solitary emotional trauma:<br />
<b><i><br /></i></b>
<iframe allowfullscreen="" frameborder="0" height="360" src="http://www.youtube.com/embed/SRsgceT12h0?rel=0" width="640"></iframe><br />
<span style="background-color: white;"><br /><br /><span style="font-family: inherit;">The emotions of this </span>scene<span style="font-family: inherit;"> are </span>powerful<span style="font-family: inherit;"> yet understated. In t</span></span><span style="background-color: white;"><span style="font-family: inherit;">his case, as in much of the movie, she is being helped out by her own voice over. Still, though, it showcases a common thread in her performances. The text provides the context of the story and she, with various degrees of </span>subtly<span style="font-family: inherit;">, fills in the emotions.</span></span><br />
<span style="background-color: white;"><span style="font-family: inherit;"><br /></span></span>
<span style="font-family: inherit;">In this scene from Welcome to the Rileys, Mallory's (Stewart) would be father figure Doug (Gandolfini) is paying her $100 a day in rent to live in her home. In the process, he is fixing up her run down dwelling and attempting to instill some sense of structure and discipline into her life (in what presumably is a part of long term plan to get her off drugs and away from sex work</span><span style="font-family: inherit;"> ).</span><br />
<span style="background-color: white; font-family: inherit;"><br /></span><span style="background-color: white; font-family: inherit;">Take a look:</span><br />
<div style="display: inline ! important;">
<span style="font-family: inherit;">
<br />
<iframe allowfullscreen="" frameborder="0" height="360" src="http://www.youtube.com/embed/MZd0EtmLmlU?rel=0" width="640"></iframe> </span></div>
<br />
<div style="display: inline ! important;">
<br />
The way she looks at him towards the end of the scene is great. She says almost nothing in reaction to his lecturing. She doesn't have to. The look is very<span style="background-color: white;"> much alive: she is at once angry, frightened, conflicted and vulnerable. She both needs yet rebels against his guidance, authority and caring. Once again, the script creates the context, she subtly supplies the emotions.</span></div>
<br />
But what about the multitude of people that seem to see nothing in her face, those who frequently use words like "inexpressive", "one expression" and "expressionless"? Do they just not "get it"? For some, this may be the case but I don't think it's quite that easy.<br />
<br />
Stewart's "look" or "expressions" can be very understated and subtle. So much so that people could either miss them completely or, more likely, are just plain frustrated by the lack of forthright emotion.<br />
<br />
<b><i>"Kristen Stewart is always on the verge of emoting but never quite gets there."</i></b><br />
<b><i>-Netflix User Review of Adventureland</i></b><br />
<br />
In the case of Twilight, where the text is not providing not enough context or weak context, these "looks" and "expressions" exist in a vacuum and come off as "blank" or "inexpressive".<br />
<br />
Snow White and the Huntsman is another case where Stewart's understated expressions were poorly received. Take a look at this scene:<br />
<b style="background-color: white;"><i><span style="font-family: inherit;"><br class="Apple-interchange-newline" /><iframe allowfullscreen="" frameborder="0" height="360" src="http://www.youtube.com/embed/hMx7OP7yiHA?rel=0" width="640"></iframe> </span></i></b><br />
<b><br /></b>
<br />
That incredibly subtle look is just so very Kristen Stewart. It's a boldly small way to play off of something so big. Knowing her other work, I can appreciate what she is trying to do in that scene. Without that knowledge, though, it's a moment that could easily be subject to other interpretations.<br />
<br />
<br />
<b style="background-color: white;"><i><u><span style="font-size: large;">"Touching Her Hair Non-Stop"</span></u></i></b>
<br />
<span style="font-family: inherit;"><br /></span>
<span style="font-family: inherit;">The "hair touching" criticism is right up there with "</span>inexpressive<span style="font-family: inherit;">". And it's not just that Stewart is apparently touching her hair "non-stop" in "every scene", there are also complaints about lip biting, stuttering, exhaling, </span><span style="font-family: inherit;">and just about any other twitch or tic (or whatever you want to call them) that anyone has ever seen her have.</span><br />
<span style="font-family: inherit;"><br /></span>
<span style="font-family: inherit;">One movie where that where these types of comments come up a lot is Adventureland (2009). Directed by Greg Mottola (Superbad) and co-starring Jesse Eisenberg and Ryan Reynolds, the movie is probably Stewart's most critically </span>divisive<span style="font-family: inherit;"> role. From what I've seen, it is also the one with the most complaints about her</span><span style="font-family: inherit;"> </span>contentious<span style="font-family: inherit;"> tics and twitches, for lack of a better term (calling them tics and </span>twitches<span style="font-family: inherit;"> is a bit unfair as that implies involuntary or sub-conscious physical actions and I'm quite certain that they are deliberate acting choices on Stewart's part).</span><br />
<span style="background-color: white; font-family: inherit;"><br /></span>
<span style="background-color: white; font-family: inherit;">In Adventureland, Stewart plays a teen who is emotionally damaged by her father's quick remarriage after the death of her mother. She enters into </span><span style="background-color: white;">an increasingly problematic relationship with Eiesn</span><span style="background-color: white;"><span style="font-family: inherit;">berg, who is working at the same amusement park as Stewart in his first post graduate yet </span>minimum<span style="font-family: inherit;"> wage job. </span></span><br />
<span style="background-color: white; font-family: inherit;"><br /></span>
<span style="background-color: white;">Predominately</span> aimed at a youth audience, the film very much lives under the shadow of Twilight. For Stewart, that is not a good thing.<br />
<span style="font-family: inherit;"><br /></span>
<b style="background-color: white;"><i><span style="font-family: inherit;"><br /></span></i></b>
<span style="font-family: inherit;"><br /></span></div>
<span style="font-family: inherit;"><br /></span>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<span style="clear: right; float: right; font-family: inherit; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-left: 1em;"><span style="background-color: white; font-family: inherit;"><br /></span></span><span style="clear: right; float: right; font-family: inherit; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-left: 1em;"><span style="background-color: white; font-family: inherit;"><br /></span></span><span style="clear: right; float: right; font-family: inherit; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-left: 1em;"><span style="background-color: white; font-family: inherit;"><br /></span></span><span style="font-family: inherit; margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" src="http://thisweeksflixpix.files.wordpress.com/2011/05/adventureland.jpg" /></span></div>
<span style="font-family: inherit;"><br /></span>
<div>
<span style="background-color: white; font-family: inherit;"></span><br />
<div style="display: inline ! important;">
<br /></div>
<br />
<div style="margin: 0cm 0cm 0.0001pt; text-align: right;">
<div style="text-align: left;">
<b style="background-color: white;"><i><span style="font-family: inherit;">"Oh, and Kristen Stewart is, as </span>always<span style="font-family: inherit;"> awful."</span></i></b></div>
</div>
</div>
<b style="background-color: white;"><i><span style="font-family: inherit;">Rotten Tomatoes Audience Review of Adventureland</span></i></b><br />
<br />
<br />
<div style="text-align: right;">
<b style="background-color: white;"><i><span style="font-family: inherit;">"Kristen Stewart gets too much criticism for her acting....don't judge her off of the Twilight series."</span></i></b></div>
<div style="text-align: right;">
<span style="background-color: white;"><span style="font-family: inherit;">-<i style="font-weight: bold;">Netflix User Review of Adventureland</i></span></span></div>
<br />
<span style="font-style: italic; font-weight: bold;"><br /></span>
<span style="font-style: italic; font-weight: bold;">"Kristen Stewart does her trade marked emotionally crippled teenager bit and despite myself I still cared about her."</span><br />
<b style="background-color: white;"><i><span style="font-family: inherit;">Netflix User Review of Adventureland</span></i></b><br />
<div>
</div>
<br />
<b style="background-color: white;"><i><span style="background-color: white;"><br /></span></i></b>
<div style="text-align: right;">
<b style="background-color: white;"><i><span style="background-color: white;">"</span></i></b><b style="background-color: white;"><i>Kristen Stewart harbors too much teenage angst while </i></b><b style="background-color: white;"><i><span style="background-color: white;">touching her hair in what appears to be every scene"</span></i></b></div>
<div style="text-align: right;">
<span style="background-color: white; font-family: inherit;">-</span><i style="background-color: white; font-family: inherit; font-weight: bold;">Netflix User Review of Adventureland</i></div>
<div>
<div style="text-align: right;">
<span style="background-color: white;"><span style="font-family: inherit;"><i style="font-weight: bold;"><br /></i></span></span></div>
</div>
<div style="text-align: right;">
<div style="text-align: left;">
<b style="background-color: white;"><i><span style="font-family: inherit;">"I was getting annoyed seeing Kristen Stewart touching her hair nonstop and chewing on her lip."</span></i></b></div>
</div>
<div style="text-align: right;">
<div style="text-align: left;">
<i style="font-weight: bold;">Netflix User Review of Adventureland</i>
</div>
</div>
<span style="background-color: white; font-family: inherit; font-style: italic; font-weight: bold;"><br /></span>
<br />
<span style="background-color: white;">Initially</span><span style="background-color: white; font-family: inherit;">, I was perplexed that so many people were so hung up on such small details of her performances. Isn't this just her version of Jack Nicolson's smirks, Al Pacino's yelling and Christopher Walken's quirky offbeat line readings? In terms of audience tolerance, not in the least, apparently.</span><br />
<div>
<span style="background-color: white; font-family: inherit;"><br /></span>
<span style="background-color: white; font-family: inherit;">I think understand where the annoyance is coming from. </span><br />
<span style="background-color: white; font-family: inherit;"><br /></span>
<span style="background-color: white; font-family: inherit;">In Twilight, for instance, the character of Bella is so blank that any time she does anything remotely distinctive, like the hair touching, for instance, it stands out like a sore thumb. Nobody likes sore thumbs.</span></div>
<div>
<span style="background-color: white; font-family: inherit;"><br /></span>
<span style="background-color: white;"><span style="font-family: inherit;">Once her tics and twitches are noticed, they can create a v</span>icious<span style="font-family: inherit;"> circle: the more they are talked about, the more it creates a hyper awareness of them. And, on the internet, almost everything gets talked about a lot. </span></span><br />
<span style="background-color: white;"><span style="font-family: inherit;"><br /></span></span>
<span style="background-color: white;"><span style="font-family: inherit;">When I went back and watched her performances, I even found myself constantly watching for them at the expense of everything else. It becomes like Bob Dylan's nasally high pitched singing or William Shatner's staggered delivery. Issues of artistic merit aside, those aspects of their performance </span></span><span style="background-color: white;">have been commented on and joked about so much that it reaches the point that audiences fixate on them and thus can see little else. I</span><span style="background-color: white; font-family: inherit;">t's a byproduct of overexposure.</span></div>
<div>
<span style="background-color: white; font-family: inherit;"><br /></span></div>
<div>
<span style="font-family: inherit;">Yet the problem does not begin and end with Stewart's Twilight overexposure. The powerful negative reactions to her tics and twitches are very real for a lot of people. They seem to me to have a </span>disproportionally<span style="font-family: inherit;"> </span>emotional<span style="font-family: inherit;"> element to them. It is like these tics and twitches become the focal point for other less easily articulated aspects of her acting that just plain rub some people the wrong way. </span><br />
<span style="font-family: inherit;"><br /></span>
<span style="font-family: inherit;">There's kind of an emotional rawness and realness to some of Stewart's performance that can, at times, be a bit unsettling to watch. One of the ways these elements </span>manifest<span style="font-family: inherit;"> themselves in her performances is via the tics and twitches.</span><br />
<span style="font-family: inherit;"><br /></span>
<span style="font-family: inherit;">Take a look at this scene from Adventureland in which Eisenberg has just caught Stewart cheating on him with a married man, played by Ryan Reynolds.</span></div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
<span class="second-half" style="background-color: white; display: inline; font-family: inherit;"><br /><iframe allowfullscreen="" frameborder="0" height="480" src="http://www.youtube.com/embed/Hi3sxRokaTw?rel=0" width="640"></iframe></span>
<span class="second-half" style="background-color: white; display: inline; font-family: inherit;"><br /></span>
<span class="second-half" style="background-color: white; display: inline; font-family: inherit;"> <b><i>"Stuttering + twitching = great acting"</i></b></span><br />
<span class="second-half" style="background-color: white; display: inline; font-family: inherit;"><b><i>-YouTube comment on the above clip</i></b></span><br />
<br />
<span class="second-half" style="background-color: white; display: inline;"><span style="font-family: inherit;">I would got along with the above quote if that was the </span><i style="font-family: inherit;">only</i><span style="font-family: inherit;"> thing she was doing in that scene. It's not. </span></span><br />
<span class="second-half" style="background-color: white; display: inline;"><span style="font-family: inherit;"><br /></span></span>
<span class="second-half" style="background-color: white; display: inline;"><span style="font-family: inherit;">She is living the </span>emotional<span style="font-family: inherit;"> reality of the scene. The way she is working off of Eisenberg is very real. At one point, she echoes back his "fucking idiot" line, but now directed inwards at herself with a whole new and much sharper intensity. </span></span><br />
<span class="second-half" style="background-color: white; display: inline;"><span style="font-family: inherit;"><br /></span></span>
<span class="second-half" style="background-color: white; display: inline;"><span style="font-family: inherit;">The "stuttering" and the "twitching" become the physical manifestations of her emotions. She is in pain in a way that you can just feel. That kind of emotion</span><span style="font-family: inherit;"> may put some people off, quite possibly even subconsciously.</span></span><br />
<span class="second-half" style="background-color: white; display: inline; font-family: inherit;"><br /></span>
<span class="second-half" style="background-color: white; display: inline;"></span><br />
<div style="font-family: inherit; text-align: right;">
<span class="second-half" style="background-color: white; display: inline;"><span style="background-color: white; font-family: inherit;"><b><i>"...there's a quality about her that I find affecting, a sort of contradictory flinty fragility, like she's easily broken but also quick to temper. And she's guarded, making those few moments where she relaxes and lights up something special."</i></b></span></span></div>
<div style="font-family: inherit; text-align: right;">
<span class="second-half" style="background-color: white; display: inline;"><span style="background-color: white; font-family: inherit;"><b><i>Drew McWeeny, Hitfix.com review of Adventureland</i></b></span></span></div>
<div style="text-align: right;">
<span class="second-half" style="background-color: white; display: inline;"><br /></span></div>
<br />
<span class="second-half" style="background-color: white; display: inline; font-family: inherit;"><br /></span>
<span style="background-color: white;">That sense of authenticity is the key to the reason behind the twitches and tics. </span><span style="background-color: white; font-family: inherit;">For me, in Twilight, for instance, when I see Stewart touch her hair in an emotional moment, it's the only time I feel like I'm watching a real person. </span><br />
<br />
<b style="font-family: inherit;"><i>"She’s been criticized for being very twitchy and there’s some negative things said about her in regards to her acting affectations, but they’re not affectations, they’re who she is and that’s how she is. And she’s very open and honest and authentic in herself and it really comes down to authenticity. "</i></b><br />
<span style="background-color: white; font-family: inherit;"><b><i>-Jake Scott, director of Welcome to the Rileys</i></b></span><br />
<span style="font-family: inherit;"><br /></span>
<span style="font-family: inherit;">Take, for instance, this scene from the 2008 film The Yellow Handkerchief, starring William Hurt, Eddie Redmayne and Stewart<span style="background-color: white;">. In the film, ex-con Hurt and troubled teens Redmayne and Stewart are t</span></span><span style="background-color: white;">hrown together into one car by circumstance in what is essentially your basic emotional road trip movie</span><span style="background-color: white;"> </span><span style="background-color: white; font-family: inherit;">. In this scene, the three complete strangers are forced to share a motel room</span><span style="background-color: white; font-family: inherit;"> for the night</span><span style="background-color: white; font-family: inherit;">. </span><span style="background-color: white;">Take a look at the scene from The Yellow Handkerchief by </span><a href="http://youtu.be/EXrQXbVqmZw?t=4m57s" style="background-color: white;" target="_blank">clicking here</a><span style="background-color: white;"> (it's a lengthy clip, you can stop watching around 6:20 or so)</span><br />
<br />
<div style="text-align: left;">
Again in this scene, the often dreaded hair touching is, to me, very real. It's the way Stewart is living through the scene, rather than just acting in it. It's the kind of behavior I've seen from real people in real life.<span style="background-color: white;"> I think, though, that you need to get be able to get get </span><span style="background-color: white;">past the fixation on the twitches and tics to see it. </span><br />
<span style="background-color: white;"><br /></span>
<span style="background-color: white;"></span><br />
<div style="display: inline !important; text-align: -webkit-auto;">
<div style="display: inline !important;">
<div style="text-align: left;">
<span style="background-color: white;"><b style="background-color: white;"><i><span style="font-family: inherit;">"Stewart largely disavows the tics and tells her best-known role entailed—the gnawed-on lip, the downcast eyes—in favor of a more forthright relationship with the camera." </span></i></b></span></div>
</div>
<span style="background-color: white;"><b><i>Christopher Orr, The Atlantic review of Snow White and the Hunstman</i></b></span></div>
<span style="background-color: white;"><br class="Apple-interchange-newline" /></span>
<br /></div>
</div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="http://i2.listal.com/image/1330635/600full-the-yellow-handkerchief-poster.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="400" src="http://i2.listal.com/image/1330635/600full-the-yellow-handkerchief-poster.jpg" width="280" /></a></div>
<span style="font-family: inherit;"><b><u><br /></u></b></span>
<br />
<br />
<div style="display: inline !important;">
<div style="text-align: left;">
</div>
<div style="display: inline !important; text-align: -webkit-auto;">
<div style="text-align: left;">
<br /></div>
</div>
</div>
<br />
<b style="background-color: white;"><u><span style="font-size: large;">"An Amazingly Real Sad Girl"</span></u></b><br />
<br />
<div>
<span style="font-family: inherit;"><span class="first-half" style="background-color: white;">"<i style="font-weight: bold;">I am now really convinced that Kristen Stewart does not have a happy bone in her body.</i></span><span class="second-half" style="background-color: white; display: inline;"><b><i>"</i></b></span></span><br />
<b style="background-color: white;"><i><span style="font-family: inherit;">Netflix User Review of Adventureland</span></i></b><br />
<br />
<span style="background-color: white;"><span style="font-family: inherit;">If I were playing Stewart's part in Adventureland and somebody wrote that about my performance I would consider that the highest compliment anyone could ever pay me. That is very much what her character is: she really is that fucked up.</span></span></div>
<div>
<span class="second-half" style="background-color: white; display: inline; font-family: inherit;"><br /></span>
<div style="text-align: right;">
<span class="second-half" style="background-color: white; display: inline; font-family: inherit;"><b style="line-height: 17px;"><i>"Kristen Stewart plays an amazingly real sad girl."</i></b>
</span></div>
<div style="text-align: right;">
<span class="second-half" style="background-color: white; display: inline; font-family: inherit;"><b style="line-height: 17px;"><i>-Rotten Tomatoes Audience Review of Speak</i></b></span></div>
<div style="text-align: right;">
<span class="second-half" style="background-color: white; display: inline; font-family: inherit;"><br /></span></div>
<br />
<span style="background-color: white; font-family: inherit;">That is another description that comes up a </span><span style="background-color: white;">lot</span><span style="background-color: white; font-family: inherit;"> when discussing Stewart's work, "real". </span><span style="background-color: white;">In the 2010 movie, The Runaways, she got a new and different opportunity to play more of that "realness".</span></div>
<span style="font-family: inherit;"><br /></span>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="http://i2.cdnds.net/10/28/550w_movies_the_runaways_poster.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" src="http://i2.cdnds.net/10/28/550w_movies_the_runaways_poster.jpg" /></a></div>
<span style="font-family: inherit;"><br /></span>
<span style="font-family: inherit;"><br /></span>
<span style="font-family: inherit;">Music video director Floria Sigismondi had, for some time, been planning a film about the first major all girl punk band, The Runaways. Breaking onto the scene in the mid to late 70's, The Runaways would be become an underground sensation that would ultimately launch the career of rock legend Joan Jett. </span><br />
<span style="font-family: inherit;"><br /></span>
<span style="font-family: inherit;">Kristen Stewart was cast in the role of Joan Jett. Dakota Fanning was cast as The Runaways lead singer, Cherry Currie. Fanning was also trying to break the mold of public perception by distancing herself from her career as a child actor.</span><br />
<span style="font-family: inherit;"><br /></span>
<span style="background-color: white;">Stewart</span><span style="background-color: white; font-family: inherit;"> immersed herself in the character. She changed her look, her hair and took on the attitude and mannerisms of a young Jett. She added to her musical talents (see Into The Wild) by singing and playing guitar just like Jett, coached by Joan herself.</span><br />
<span style="background-color: white; font-family: inherit;"><br /></span>
<b style="background-color: white;"><i>"Stewart's vocal impersonation of Jett is uncanny.</i></b><b style="background-color: white;"><i> She can be a compelling performer when allowed to do something other than mope around a Twilight movie. </i></b><b style="background-color: white;"><i>Stewart is something of a revelation, full of fire and attitude..."</i></b><br />
<b><i>Grek Maki- Maki at the Movies</i></b><br />
<b><i><iframe allowfullscreen="" frameborder="0" height="360" src="http://www.youtube.com/embed/pVkTA0lodq0?rel=0" width="640"></iframe></i></b><br />
<b><i><br /></i></b>
<br />
<b><i><br /></i></b>
<span style="background-color: white; font-family: inherit; font-style: italic; font-weight: bold;">"Stewart just plain nails the role -- she's tough, she's hungry and she loves playing rock star as much as she loves playing guitar. Stewart makes you want to watch the movie."</span><br />
<span style="background-color: white; font-family: inherit; font-style: italic; font-weight: bold;">Tom Long, The Detroit News</span><br />
<span style="background-color: white; font-family: inherit; font-style: italic; font-weight: bold;"><br /></span>
<div style="text-align: right;">
<b style="background-color: white;"><i>"Stewart is very spot on as Jett...The slouch, the snarl, the open-legged sitting position, and the raw, powerful voice..."</i></b></div>
<div style="text-align: right;">
<b style="background-color: white;"><i>-Netflix User Review of The Runaways</i></b></div>
<div style="text-align: right;">
<br /></div>
<b style="background-color: white;"><i>"I now recognize Kristen Stewart as a serious actress."</i></b><br />
<b style="background-color: white;"><i>-Netflix User Review of The Runaways</i></b>
<br />
<div>
<b><i><br /></i></b>
<div style="text-align: right;">
<b style="background-color: white;"><i>-"I am such an un-fan of Kristen Stewart that I was skeptical about her as Joan. I loved it though"</i></b></div>
<div>
<div style="text-align: right;">
<b style="background-color: white;"><i>Netflix User Review of The Runaways</i></b></div>
</div>
<span style="font-family: inherit;"><br /></span>
<b style="background-color: white; font-style: italic;"><i>-"She actually managed a smile and a semi angry look for this film. There may yet be hope."</i></b><br />
<b style="background-color: white;"><i>Netflix User Review of The Runaways</i></b>
</div>
<b><i><br /></i></b>
<span style="background-color: white;"><span style="background-color: white;">My respect for Stewart as an actor was upped a notch watching her in The Runaways. I also remember thinking "God, she must hate those Twilight movies more than anybody else does".</span></span><br />
<span style="background-color: white;"><span style="font-family: inherit;"><br /></span></span>
<span style="background-color: white;"><span style="font-family: inherit;">Kristen Stewart's performance as Joan Jett is the kind of role they like to hand out Oscar nominations for; the </span>chameleon<span style="font-family: inherit;"> like </span>portrayal<span style="font-family: inherit;"> of a real person or "pulling a Meryl Streep" as some call it. However, </span><span style="font-family: inherit;">Jett is just a bit too obscure a figure for the Academy and The Runaways features underage girls in a great many sex, drugs and rock and roll scenes. Not to mention that Stewart was not yet on the industry's radar in that way and that </span>practically<span style="font-family: inherit;"> nobody saw the movie in the first place. </span></span><br />
<br />
<div style="font-style: italic; font-weight: bold;">
<span style="font-family: inherit;">"Audiences tend to avoid Kristen Stewart's non-'Twilight' movies like vampires fleeing daylight. Believe me, it's their loss."</span></div>
<div style="font-style: italic; font-weight: bold;">
<b style="background-color: white;"><i><b style="background-color: white;"><i><span style="font-family: inherit;">Lou Lemick, New York Post</span></i></b></i></b></div>
<br />
<br />
Nonetheless, The Runaways does showcase one the cornerstones of Stewart's best performances: the understated realness of many of her roles.<br />
<br />
Take a look at this scene where Jett is composing while taking a bath. <br />
<br />
<br />
<iframe allowfullscreen="" frameborder="0" height="360" src="http://www.youtube.com/embed/IUBGYqcEq4Y?feature=player_embedded" width="640"></iframe>
<br />
<br />
<br />
<span style="background-color: white;">I really like this scene but it also makes me think that this kind of thing </span><span style="background-color: white;">can easily register to some audiences as "nothing"</span><span style="background-color: white;">.</span><br />
<div>
<span style="background-color: white;"><br /></span></div>
<b style="background-color: white;"><i>Jett's unique blend of allure and threat, apathy and determination, gets a mumbling hyper-naturalized take from Stewart—more Brando than Bella Swan. Her performance is largely internal."</i></b><br />
<b><i>-Karina Longworth, The Village Voice</i></b><br />
<br />
<span style="background-color: white;"><br /></span>
<span style="background-color: white;">Wow. Kristen Stewart has now been compared to both Marlon Brando <i>and</i> Keanu Reeves. That is one divisive actor!</span><br />
<span style="background-color: white;"><br /></span>
There are times when Stewart has emotional explosions and then there times that she just lets little bits of her inner turmoil out in more low key scenes. Take, for instance, this scene in Welcome to the Rileys where Mallory has just met Doug''s wife Lois (played by Melissa Leo) for the first time.<br />
<div style="display: inline ! important;">
<br />
<span style="font-family: inherit;"><iframe allowfullscreen="" frameborder="0" height="360" src="http://www.youtube.com/embed/uo87zoGhdic?rel=0" width="640"></iframe></span><br />
<br />
<span style="font-family: inherit;">
This is scene is where, as Jodie Foster points out, Stewart is not "blurting out her emotions all in front of her". There is a lot of pain beneath the surface. She plays it close to the bone, remaining guarded yet not </span>completely<span style="font-family: inherit;"> </span>invulnerable<span style="font-family: inherit;">. That, and she's holding her own in a scene with Melissa freakin' Leo.</span><br />
<span style="font-family: inherit;"><span style="background-color: white;"><br /></span></span>
<br />
<b style="background-color: white; font-family: inherit; font-style: italic;"><i><b style="background-color: white;"><i>"Some accuse her of being flat and emotionless in her films but the more I watch her work, I see that what makes her work stand out is that she is real. Never overacting or trying to play the heavily emotional scenes...it's like your viewing a real person in life"</i></b></i></b><br />
<b style="background-color: white; font-family: inherit; font-style: italic;"><i><b style="background-color: white;"><i>IMDB User Review of Welcome to the Rileys</i></b></i></b><br />
<div style="display: inline ! important;">
<span style="font-family: inherit;"><b style="background-color: white;"><i><b style="background-color: white;"><i><br /></i></b></i></b><br /><i><span style="font-size: large;">"<b><u>It Doesn't Help That Snow White is Played by Kristen Stewart"</u></b></span></i></span><br />
<span style="font-family: inherit;"><br />However, "a real person in life" does not always work for her. Take, for instance some of the reviews for Snow White and The Huntsman, ie: "dreadful", "one expression at her command" and the infamous "Keanu Reeves of her generation". Stewart</span><span style="background-color: white;"> is again having same problem that she has always had with both the influence of Twilight and, perhaps more significantly, the way that audiences sometimes react to and/or interpret Stewart's acting. </span><br />
<b style="background-color: white; font-family: inherit; text-align: left;"><i><br /></i></b>
<b style="background-color: white; font-family: inherit; text-align: left;"><i>"As Snow White, Kristen Stewart is terrific. I have not seen any of the Twilight films, but on the basis of Panic Room, Runaways, and now this, I have to say she’s among my very favourite younger actors."</i></b><br />
<b style="background-color: white; text-align: left;"><i>-CJ Johnson, FilmMafia.com</i></b><br />
<br />
<span style="background-color: white; font-family: inherit;">I have not seen Snow White and The Hunstman </span><span style="background-color: white; font-family: inherit;">but, going off of the short clips posted on YouTube, what I see</span><span style="background-color: white; font-family: inherit;"> is that Stewart is approaching the material with her usual understated, internalized and naturalistic performance. I think the reason why she keeps </span><span style="background-color: white;">getting </span><span style="background-color: white;"><span style="font-family: inherit;">negatively singled out in reviews is that she's playing a different game than the other actors.</span><span style="font-family: inherit;"> It's almost as if her co-stars, Charlize Theron and Chris Hemsworth, are playing Shakespeare and Stewart is in a documentary. It is certainly an esoteric and ballsy choice to make in a big mainstream blockbuster.</span></span><br />
<br />
<div style="text-align: right;">
<b style="background-color: white;"><i><span style="font-family: inherit;">"Stewart, with her contemporary edge, seems to be acting in the wrong era."</span></i></b></div>
<div>
<div style="text-align: right;">
<b><i>Peter Rainer, The Christian Science Monitor</i></b><br />
<div>
<b><i><br /></i></b></div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
<div style="text-align: right;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: left;">
<b style="background-color: white;"><i><span style="font-family: inherit;">"Snow White is meant to be "the fairest of them all" when Kristin Stewart is one doggy lookin bitch."</span></i></b></div>
<div style="text-align: left;">
<b style="background-color: white;"><i><span style="font-family: inherit;">-Rotten Tomatoes Audience Review </span></i></b></div>
<b><i><span style="font-family: inherit;"><br /></span></i></b>
<span style="font-family: inherit;">That last comment is a bit harsh but it is an otherwise astute, insightful and completely reasonable critique of Stewart's performance in the film.</span><br />
<span style="background-color: white; font-family: inherit;"><br /></span>
<br />
<br />
<div style="margin-bottom: .0001pt; margin: 0cm;">
<b><i><span style="background-color: white; font-size: 13.5pt;"><br /></span></i></b></div>
<div style="margin-bottom: .0001pt; margin: 0cm;">
<b><i><span style="background-color: white;"><u><span style="font-size: large;">"An Actress Who Isn't Horrible"</span></u></span></i></b></div>
<div style="margin-bottom: .0001pt; margin: 0cm;">
<br /></div>
<div style="margin-bottom: .0001pt; margin: 0cm;">
<br /></div>
<div style="margin-bottom: .0001pt; margin: 0cm;">
Once seen in the broader context of Stewart's career, the assertion that she "can't act", in my opinion, does not hold up to scrutiny. Other criticisms such as "one expression", "blank" and "touching her hair non-stop" are, at the very least, open to debate. </div>
<div style="margin-bottom: .0001pt; margin: 0cm;">
<span style="font-family: inherit;"><br /></span></div>
<div style="margin-bottom: .0001pt; margin: 0cm;">
<span style="font-family: inherit;">Having learnt more about Stewart and her work than any 48 year-old man should, I find the divergent critical opinions of her work to be much less </span><span style="font-family: inherit;">of a conundrum now.</span></div>
<div style="margin: 0cm 0cm 0.0001pt; text-align: right;">
<b style="background-color: white;"><i><span style="background-color: white;"><br /></span></i></b></div>
<div style="margin: 0cm 0cm 0.0001pt; text-align: right;">
<b style="background-color: white;"><i><span style="background-color: white;">"All in all, my all time favorite movie, starring an actress who isn't horrible, as most of the world
apparently believes"</span></i></b></div>
<div style="margin-bottom: .0001pt; margin: 0cm;">
<o:p></o:p></div>
<div style="margin: 0cm 0cm 0.0001pt; text-align: right;">
<b><i><span style="background-color: white;">-Netflix User Review of Advdentureland</span></i></b></div>
<br />
<span style="font-family: inherit;"><br /></span>
<span style="background-color: white; font-family: inherit;">While not nearly as inept and untalented as some would have you believe, Kristen Stewart does have a certain raw and unrefined quality to her </span><span style="background-color: white;">performances</span><span style="background-color: white; font-family: inherit;">. That rawness can, depending on the role, work for or against her. </span><br />
<br />
<span style="background-color: white;"><span style="font-family: inherit;">"<i style="font-weight: bold;">I can’t think about it as logic. </i></span></span><i style="background-color: white; font-family: inherit; font-weight: bold;">I can’t put too much sense on to it like that. If I ever think about something too hard I will leave the scene after we are done shooting and it’s like: ‘I didn’t go through that. That’s not real. I didn’t just go through that and I faked it.’ I used like these tools that I learned over the years that I’ve been able to fake it. And that feels horrible." </i><br />
<b><i><span style="font-family: inherit;">-Kristen Stewart on her own acting</span></i></b><br />
<span style="font-family: inherit;"><br /></span>
<span style="background-color: white;"><span style="font-family: inherit;">Clearly, Stewart can rise to great heights in smaller indie movies where the writing and directing are there to back her up. She also has a special </span>talent<span style="font-family: inherit;"> for quite effectively </span>bringing<span style="font-family: inherit;"> to life some very emotionally damaged characters. Nonetheless, I think it's fair to say that her transition to mainstream blockbusters has been, well, somewhat problematic. </span></span><br />
<span style="font-family: inherit;"><br /></span>
<br />
<div style="text-align: right;">
<span style="background-color: white; font-family: inherit;"><b><i>“She’s very vulpine—very wolfish—and wily, kind of twitchy. Directing her is kind of like wrangling a herd of cats.”</i></b></span></div>
<div style="text-align: right;">
<span style="background-color: white; font-family: inherit;"><b><i>-Jake Scott</i></b></span></div>
<br />
<br />
As I said earlier, she's not in the same league, as say Jessica Lange (there is rarely any debate surrounding actors of that caliber), but Stewart certainly has the potential to get there.<br />
<br />
Despite the major critical backlash, the box office success of the Twilight series, and now Snow White and The Hunstman as well, has put Stewart in a position where she can afford to play more interesting roles in smaller movies.<br />
<br />
<span style="background-color: white;"><span style="font-family: inherit;">The early buzz on Stewart's role as Marylou in the upcoming film adaptation of Jack Kerouac's On The Road is </span>predominantly<span style="font-family: inherit;"> good </span></span><span style="background-color: white;">(shot right here in my hometown...though I am not in it...hmmm)</span><span style="background-color: white;"> </span><span style="background-color: white; font-family: inherit;">.</span><br />
<span style="background-color: white; font-family: inherit;"><br /></span>
<b><i>"Kristen Stewart, fine and untwitchy"</i></b><br />
<b><i> Manohla Dargis, The New York Times review of On The Road</i></b><br />
<span style="background-color: white; font-family: inherit;"><br /></span>
<span style="background-color: white; font-family: inherit;">The film got a reported 11 minute standing ovation at Cannes. Like Welcome to the Rileys, there is already Oscar buzz for Kristen Stewart. </span><span style="background-color: white;">Yes, I just put the words "Kristen Stewart" and "Oscar" in the same sentence for the second time.</span><br />
<span style="font-family: inherit;"><br /></span>
<span style="font-family: inherit;">Should such a thing as an Oscar for Kristen Stewart ever come to pass, given everything I've seen about her on the internet</span><span style="font-family: inherit;">, I sure as hell want to be online when that envelope is ripped open.</span><br />
<span style="font-family: inherit;"><br /></span>
<span style="font-family: inherit;"><br /></span>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="http://thefilmstage.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/03/On-The-Road-Movie.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="424" src="http://thefilmstage.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/03/On-The-Road-Movie.jpg" width="640" /></a></div>
<span style="font-family: inherit;"><br /></span>
<br />Terence Bowmanhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/04576129838447713151noreply@blogger.com45tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2233378012529819224.post-48003961934054399132012-07-09T17:06:00.000-04:002012-07-18T17:46:07.910-04:00Ernest Borgnine's Top Nine<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="http://www.coronacomingattractions.com/sites/default/files/news/ernest_borgnine_dirty_dozen.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" src="http://www.coronacomingattractions.com/sites/default/files/news/ernest_borgnine_dirty_dozen.jpg" /></a></div>
<br />
Sorry, Ernie, I just could not resist that title.<br />
<br />
Ernest Borgnine has always been one of my favourite actors. He's one of my few faves who have stood the both the test of time of my learning something about the craft of acting.<br />
<br />
Above all, the man had presence. He also had an amazing ability to make just about any line of dialogue his own, no matter how badly written it may have been. It's no surprise that Borgnine had a 61 year career in which he racked up -get this- 203 IMDB screen credits.<br />
<br />
He didn't even appear in his first film until he was 34 years old. In fact, he didn't even take up acting until after leaving the US Navy at the end of World War II.<br />
<br />
Mr. Borgnine kept working right up till the end. <span style="background-color: white;">He was nominated for an Emmy at the age of 92 for his performance in the final episode of ER.</span><span style="background-color: white;"> He's still got one more movie, The Man Who Shook the Hand of Vicente Fernandez, coming out later this year. </span><br />
<br />
<span style="background-color: white;">On top of that, how many actors do you know of whose obituaries read <i>"Star of From Here to Eternity and SpongeBob SquarePants Dies"? </i></span><br />
<br />
These are nine of my Ernest Borgnine faves.<br />
<br />
<br />
<b><u><span style="font-size: x-large;">9. The Devil's Rain (1975)</span></u></b><br />
<br />
<br />
<table align="center" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto; text-align: center;"><tbody>
<tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="http://www.badmovies.org/movies/devilsrain/devilsrain7.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" src="http://www.badmovies.org/movies/devilsrain/devilsrain7.jpg" /></a></td></tr>
<tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;">Ernest Borgnine is The Devil.</td></tr>
</tbody></table>
<br />
<br />
Okay, I'm going to admit to a bit of bias here.Any movie that's got Borgnine <i>and</i> William Shatner in it can't be all bad, right?<br />
<br />
Um, well, not so much.<br />
<br />
This is where that part about Borgnine being able to own even badly written dialogue comes in. More than anything else, though, I just love the idea of Borgnine as The Devil.<br />
<br />
I know. I know. Typecasting, right?<br />
<br />
Well, in fact, Borgnine plays more of a centuries old warlock who leads this coven of witches. The Devil thing comes later. Oh, and along the way, he transforms Shatner into an unwilling servant of Satan.<br />
<br />
In his 2008 autobiography, Ernie, Borgnine talks about working with Shatner: "Bill Shatner is a hoot. He has a kind of florid style, as do I, and he's just so entertaining to watch on the set and on the screen."<br />
<br />
<br />
<iframe allowfullscreen="" frameborder="0" height="480" src="http://www.youtube.com/embed/3cKDpLHPp7k?rel=0" width="640"></iframe>
<br />
<br />
<br />
<span style="background-color: white; font-size: x-large;"><b><u>8. McHale's Navy (1962-66)</u></b></span><br />
<span style="background-color: white;"><br /></span><br />
<span style="background-color: white;"><br /></span><br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="http://i2.listal.com/image/2398840/600full-mchale%27s-navy-screenshot.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" src="http://i2.listal.com/image/2398840/600full-mchale%27s-navy-screenshot.jpg" /></a></div>
<span style="background-color: white;"><br /></span><br />
<span style="background-color: white;">There are not a lot of actors who could pull off the kind of career move Ernest Borgnine made with McHale's Navy. He had a successful career as an Oscar winning dramatic actor but Borgnine basically set all that aside for four years. From 1962-66, he starred in McHale's Navy, a half hour TV comedy series about a wacky US Navy PT boat during World War II.</span><br />
<span style="background-color: white;"><br /></span><br />
<span style="background-color: white;">The show contained some pretty over-the-top and dated comedy. Borgnine starred alongside future Carol Burnett Show and Dorf star, Tim Conway. </span><br />
<span style="background-color: white;"><br /></span><br />
<span style="background-color: white;">Such a move may well have killed the careers of many actors (especially back in the days when there was little or no star crossover from TV to movies), but not Borgnine. O</span><span style="background-color: white;">nce the series was cancelled, </span><span style="background-color: white;">he managed to pick up his dramatic career once again with roles in big movies like The Dirty Dozen and Ice Station Zebra. </span><br />
<span style="background-color: white;"><br /></span><br />
<span style="background-color: white;"><br /></span><br />
<span style="background-color: white;"><br /></span><br />
<span style="background-color: white; font-size: x-large;"><b><u>7.Willard (1971)</u></b></span><br />
<span style="background-color: white;"><br /></span><br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="http://wrongsideoftheart.com/wp-content/gallery/stills/willard_01.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="472" src="http://wrongsideoftheart.com/wp-content/gallery/stills/willard_01.jpg" width="640" /></a></div>
<span style="background-color: white;"><br /></span><br />
<span style="background-color: white;">Borgnine was often typecast in the likable sidekick role. Every once in a while, though, he'd get to play the heavy (no pun intended, seriously). </span><br />
<span style="background-color: white;"><br /></span><br />
<span style="background-color: white;">In Willard, Borgnine plays the boss of the titular character. It seems this boss is attempting to take control of Willard's deceased father's company and squeeze Willard out of the business completely. Complicating things is the fact that Willard is an oddball social misfit whose only friends in life are rats. </span><br />
<span style="background-color: white;"><br /></span><br />
<span style="background-color: white;">Willard trains his rats to become lean mean killing machine rodents. Borgnine is so perfectly unlikable in the role that (SPOILER ALERT) the audience is not really all that broken up to see him get eaten alive by a pack of viscous attack rats while falling out a window. </span><br />
<br />
<span style="background-color: white;">In those pre-CGI days, you just know that at some point Ernie had to deal with real rats crawling all over him during shooting.<br /><br /></span><br />
<span style="background-color: white;"><iframe allowfullscreen="" frameborder="0" height="480" src="http://www.youtube.com/embed/UptTxOJuDW0" width="640"></iframe></span><br />
<span style="background-color: white;"><br /></span><br />
<span style="background-color: white;">Remade in 2003 with Crispin Glover as Willard and R. Lee Ermey in Borgnine's role.</span><br />
<span style="background-color: white;"><br /></span><br />
<span style="background-color: white;"><br /></span><br />
<span style="background-color: white;"><br /></span><br />
<span style="background-color: white; font-size: x-large;"><b><u>6. SpongeBob SquarePants (1999-2011)</u></b></span><br />
<span style="background-color: white;"><br /></span><br />
<span style="background-color: white;"><br /></span><br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="http://p.twimg.com/AxUFso1CEAALPC5.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" src="http://p.twimg.com/AxUFso1CEAALPC5.jpg" /></a></div>
<span style="background-color: white;"><br /></span><br />
<span style="background-color: white;">Around the mid 90's, when Ernie was still a spritely young man in his late 70's, he began doing animation voice-over work. In his book, Borgnine describes voice work as "almost like stealing money, to put it bluntly." He's right. It can pay very well sometimes; better than TV or movie roles, i</span><span style="background-color: white;">n some cases</span><span style="background-color: white;">, </span><span style="background-color: white;">and under decidedly less demanding circumstances.</span><br />
<span style="background-color: white;"><br /></span><br />
<span style="background-color: white;">Aside from the allegedly easy cash, Borgnine suddenly found a whole new audience in animation. There is a whole generation who only know him as the voice of the superhero Mermaid Man from extremely popular animated series SpongeBob SquarePants. Borgnine voices the aged version of Mermaid Man, a character that is clearly a satirical take on the DC comics superhero, Aquaman (and 1960's TV series of the same name). Mermaid Man's sidekick, Barnacle Boy, is voiced by Borgnine's old co-star from McHale's Navy, Tim Conway.
</span><br />
<span style="background-color: white;"><br /></span><br />
<span style="background-color: white;"><br /></span><br />
<b><u><span style="font-size: x-large;">5. <span style="background-color: white;">The Dirty Dozen(1967)</span></span></u></b><br />
<span style="background-color: white;"><br /></span><br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgTzdOV360T-S8W-klF12ySY9JYasAIoV796X8wFwVbk5PLtSbeGa3uHTAcaeHUz2O_EmeKyQMYt8_DErBLizlATrqCumiBl7xBzEZSN_ZpkV4i41lE4ccE6_xlOAc1ij_OHAN8GUCpV38/s1600/tumblr_m6vflnce1T1qz58xbo1_500.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgTzdOV360T-S8W-klF12ySY9JYasAIoV796X8wFwVbk5PLtSbeGa3uHTAcaeHUz2O_EmeKyQMYt8_DErBLizlATrqCumiBl7xBzEZSN_ZpkV4i41lE4ccE6_xlOAc1ij_OHAN8GUCpV38/s1600/tumblr_m6vflnce1T1qz58xbo1_500.jpg" /></a></div>
<span style="background-color: white;"><br /></span><br />
The Dirty Dozen is something of a legend in the category of classic "guy" movies. It also boasts quite the impressive cast: Lee Marvin, Charles Bronson, John Cassevetes, Donald Sutherland, Telly Savalas, George Kennedy and, of course, Ernie.<br />
<br />
His role<span style="background-color: white;"> is not really that big. He plays </span><span style="background-color: white;">General Worden, </span><span style="background-color: white;">the man who concocts a plan to recruit a team of military prisoners for a suicide mission in Nazi occupied Europe during WWII. The General then hands it all over to a reluctant Lee Marvin. Borgnine doesn't get to do any running around or fighting in this one but, nonetheless, he is very effective in the part of the seemingly blundering General. And, man, he certainly holds his own in those scenes with Lee Marvin.</span><br />
<br />
A made-for-TV sequel, The Dirty Dozen: The Next Mission, was made in 1986. Borgnine reprized his role as General Worden. The events of that movie take place shortly after the end of the original Dirty Dozen. One thing that I could not get over while watching the sequel was how the poor General seemed to have aged almost 20 years in just a matter of weeks.<br />
<br />
<br />
<iframe allowfullscreen="" frameborder="0" height="480" src="http://www.youtube.com/embed/ZtDh0d-1IH4?rel=0" width="640"></iframe><br />
<span style="background-color: white;"><br /></span><br />
<span style="background-color: white;"><br /></span><br />
<span style="background-color: white;"><b><u><span style="font-size: x-large;">4.From Here to Eternity (1953)</span></u></b></span><br />
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="http://hollywood-elsewhere.com/images/column/backinla/fatso.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" src="http://hollywood-elsewhere.com/images/column/backinla/fatso.jpg" /></a></div>
<br />
<br />
By the time From Here to Eternity made it to the screen, James Jones' hard hitting novel about US military life just before the Japanese attack on Pearl Harbor in 1941 was pretty watered down. Much of the sex, violence and the existential lack of morality that made the book memorable was either toned way down or cut out altogether.<br />
<br />
<span style="background-color: white;">In the "toned way down" </span><span style="background-color: white;">department</span><span style="background-color: white;">, that included the character of the violently abusive Sgt "Fatso" Judson. N</span><span style="background-color: white;">onetheless, </span><span style="background-color: white;">Borgnine's performance as "Fatso" did put him on the map in Hollywood. From Here to Eternity was his first real outing into the "big leagues", as he called it. He co-starred with Burt Lancaster, Montgomery Clift and Frank Sinatra. Borgnine's character was, well, was not so nice to the latter. </span><br />
<span style="background-color: white;"><br /></span><br />
<span style="background-color: white;">Ernie was apparently complimented by James Jones himself during a visit to the set. Jones felt that Borgnine was, despite the script adjustments, very authentic to the spirit of the original character in his book.</span><br />
<span style="background-color: white;"><br /></span><br />
<span style="background-color: white;"><br /></span><br />
<br />
<iframe allowfullscreen="" frameborder="0" height="480" src="http://www.youtube.com/embed/M7ZIfWwZN9k?rel=0" width="640"></iframe>
<br />
<span style="background-color: white;"><br /></span><br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
</div>
<span style="background-color: white;"><br /></span><br />
<span style="background-color: white;"><br /></span><br />
<span style="background-color: white; font-size: x-large;"><b><u>3. The Wild Bunch (1969)</u></b></span><br />
<span style="background-color: white;"><br /></span><br />
<span style="background-color: white;"><br /></span><br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="http://i.ytimg.com/vi/24UiXGgMRtg/0.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" src="http://i.ytimg.com/vi/24UiXGgMRtg/0.jpg" /></a></div>
<span style="background-color: white;"><br /></span><br />
<span style="background-color: white;"><br /></span><br />
<span style="background-color: white;">The Wild Bunch is a lot of things. In its day, it was one of the most violent movies ever released. Today, it is still considered one of the greatest Westerns ever made (and, really, kinda tame in the violence department by today's standards). The Wild Bunch is also seen as part of the beginning of the end of the genre of the Western.</span><br />
<br />
<span style="background-color: white;">Even in 1969, Borgnine was considered one of the older guys in these ensemble pieces. In The Wild Bunch, he fit in a bit better age wise. He plays Dutch Engstrom, one of a group of aging outlaws that also consists of William Holden and Robert Ryan.</span><span style="background-color: white;"> </span><span style="background-color: white;">He was 51 at the time and it was his most physically demanding role to date. In Borgnine's words, "it was not much fun to make." </span><br />
<span style="background-color: white;"><br /></span><br />
<span style="background-color: white;">I bet. That final 12 minute gun battle is grueling just watching it. I can't even imagine what it woulda been like shooting that sucker.</span><br />
<span style="background-color: white;"><br /></span><br />
<span style="background-color: white;"><iframe allowfullscreen="" frameborder="0" height="480" src="http://www.youtube.com/embed/jwE3TfJUB48?rel=0" width="640"></iframe></span><br />
<span style="background-color: white;"><br /></span><br />
<span style="background-color: white;"><br /></span><br />
<span style="background-color: white;"><br /></span><br />
<b><u><span style="font-size: x-large;"><span style="background-color: white;">2. The </span><span style="background-color: white;">Poseidon</span><span style="background-color: white;"> Adventure (1972)</span></span></u></b><br />
<span style="background-color: white;"><br /></span><br />
<span style="background-color: white;"><br /></span><br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="http://static.guim.co.uk/sys-images/Film/Pix/pictures/2010/10/8/1286535798038/The-Poseidon-Adventure-006.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" src="http://static.guim.co.uk/sys-images/Film/Pix/pictures/2010/10/8/1286535798038/The-Poseidon-Adventure-006.jpg" /></a></div>
<span style="background-color: white;"><br /></span><br />
<span style="background-color: white;"><br /></span><br />
<span style="background-color: white;"><br /></span><br />
<span style="background-color: white;">Speaking of movies that "weren't much fun to make", Borgnine speaks similarly of The Poseidon Adventure. "Fourteen weeks of backbreaking work", he called it. <span style="background-color: white;">The result, though, turned out to be Borgnine's biggest box office success. Once again, he was part of an ensemble cast including Gene Hackman, Red Buttons, Shelley Winters, Roddy McDowell, and starring as Borgnine's wife, Stella Stevens. </span></span><br />
<span style="background-color: white;"><br /></span><br />
<span style="background-color: white;">The Poseidon Adventure is one my personal faves of the 70's disaster movies. It's a pretty simple plot, really. Right at midnight on New Year's Eve, a tidal wave hits a big luxury ocean liner and turns it upside down. A group of surviving passengers try and find their way to the top/bottom of the ship before it sinks. </span><br />
<span style="background-color: white;"><br /></span><br />
<span style="background-color: white;">Borgnine is great in this movie. He's saddled with some really cheesy dialogue in places but, boy, he nails that shit anyway. I just remember the way he stares down Gene Hackman (playing a Reverend who is attempting to lead the rescue effort) with the line "And who the hell are you? God?!".</span><br />
<br />
<span style="background-color: white;">Another favourite scene of mine is where Borgnine's wife has lost a good part of her evening gown so Borgnine takes off his shirt so she can cover herself. Clearly, this was a cheap exploitative ploy on the part of producer Irwin Allen to gratuitously make Ernie to spend the bulk of the film in his undershirt.</span><br />
<span style="background-color: white;"><iframe allowfullscreen="" frameborder="0" height="360" src="http://www.youtube.com/embed/CP0wV7IvSiI?rel=0" width="640"></iframe></span><br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<b><u><span style="font-size: x-large;">1. Marty (1955)</span></u></b><br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="http://s3.amazonaws.com/plexus_ent/posters/Marty-PosterArt.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="640" src="http://s3.amazonaws.com/plexus_ent/posters/Marty-PosterArt.jpg" width="426" /></a></div>
<br />
<span style="background-color: white;">Marty is a film based on the teleplay of the same name by Paddy Chayefsky and it's t</span>he movie that Ernest Borgnine won his Best Actor Oscar for.<br />
<br />
And it is quite a performance too. As the 34 year old socially awkward unmarried man still living with his mother, Ernie maintains an understated charm and grace. Back in 1955, apparently, a single man in his 30's' only option was, of course, to continue living with his mom.<br />
<br />
In addition to the Oscar for Best Actor, the movie also won Best Picture, Best Director and Best Screenplay. The Academy tends to swing three ways for Best Picture: epics, small character driven films and films that deal with social/political issues that may or may not fit into the first two categories. Marty is part of that small character driven films category. That's why Borgnine is crucial to its success.<br />
<br />
Up against James Cagney, James Dean, Spencer Tracy and Frank Sinatra, Borgnine did not expect to win the Oscar. He was so sure of it, in fact, that at the time his name was announced during the Academy Awards, he had fallen asleep in his chair.<br />
<span style="background-color: white;"><br /></span><br />
<span style="background-color: white;">Fair enough. The Oscar ceremony can get seriously dull sometimes.</span><br />
<br />
<iframe allowfullscreen="" frameborder="0" height="480" src="http://www.youtube.com/embed/-plDirobizQ?rel=0" width="640"></iframe><br />
<br />
<br />
Thanks for all the fun, Ernie!<br />
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="http://www.euronews.com/images_news/img_606X341_0907-cinema-Ernest-Borgnine.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" src="http://www.euronews.com/images_news/img_606X341_0907-cinema-Ernest-Borgnine.jpg" /></a></div>
<br />
<div style="text-align: center;">
<b>Ernest Borgnine 1917-2012</b></div>
<div style="text-align: center;">
<b>RIP</b></div>Terence Bowmanhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/04576129838447713151noreply@blogger.com4tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2233378012529819224.post-5385122466528453082012-06-26T13:57:00.000-04:002012-07-18T17:47:13.276-04:00Act of Valor, Hollywood and The Pentagon<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
</div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="http://www.hurlbutvisuals.com/blog/wp-content/uploads/2012/02/act-of-valor-navy-seals-movie-poster.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" src="http://www.hurlbutvisuals.com/blog/wp-content/uploads/2012/02/act-of-valor-navy-seals-movie-poster.jpg" /></a></div>
<br />
Watching Act of Valor, the recent film in which active duty US Navy SEALs portray themselves in a Hollywood war movie gave me some very mixed feelings.<br />
<br />
For one thing, the casting of real life warriors in a war movie further blurs the already heavily blurred line between escapism and war in Hollywood movies. Let's face it, every Hollywood war movie from Rambo to Abbott and Costello's Buck Privates has some kind of an agenda behind it. Entertainment and escapism are usually only half of the picture when it comes to Hollywood's military themed movies. <br />
<br />
Hollywood, especially in recent years, is often categorized as a left leaning, liberal industry that predominately pushes a "radical" leftist viewpoint. When it comes to Hollywood and the military, though, that assessment of the American film industry comes off as, well, ill informed at best.<br />
<span style="background-color: white;"><br /></span><br />
<span style="background-color: white;">On Wilshire Boulevard in Los Angeles, in and </span><span style="background-color: white;">amongst</span><span style="background-color: white;"> the production companies, talent agencies, </span><span style="background-color: white;">entertainment</span><span style="background-color: white;"> lawyers and other </span><span style="background-color: white;">ancillary</span><span style="background-color: white;"> show biz industries, there is a building that houses the entertainment </span><span style="background-color: white;">liaison</span><span style="background-color: white;"> branch of the </span><span style="background-color: white;"><a href="http://www.defense.gov/faq/pis/pc12film.aspx" target="_blank">Office of Public Affairs of the US Army, Air Force, Navy and Marines</a>. The function of these offices is to help provide "U.S. military assistance in producing feature motion pictures, television shows, documentaries, music videos, commercial advertisements, CD-ROM games, and other audiovisual programs...".</span><br />
<br />
<span style="background-color: white;">Act of Valor represents what some might categorize as the ultimate culmination of said "U.S. military assistance". It is also part of a long standing symbiotic relationship between Hollywood and the Pentagon, sometimes referred to as the "Military Entertainment Complex".</span><br />
<br />
The US Department of Defense has been offering help and assistance to Hollywood in the making of war and other military themed movies at least as far back as the 1915 feature film <a href="http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0004942/" target="_blank">The Battle Cry of Peace: A Call to Arms against War</a>. This very early silent film tells the story of how foreign powers manipulate the pacifist movement in the US in order to leave American unprepared for a (fictional) invasion of New York and Washington. The movie featured actual US troops along with real generals and even an appearance by the current Secretary of War (as the title was known then) at the time. It doesn't take a great deal of political analysis to understand why the military might want to support such a movie.<br />
<span style="background-color: white;"><br /></span><br />
<span style="background-color: white;">Wings, a 1927 movie about World War I fighter aces that was the first film to ever win the Best Picture Oscar, also received US military assistance. This assistance was especially useful when it came to recreating aerial battle scenes. These scenes featured real planes shot from wing mounted cameras. To this day, it is considered some the greatest biplane dogfight footage ever shot.</span><br />
<span style="background-color: white;"><br /></span><br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="http://www.motherjones.com/files/imagecache/master-image/legacy/news/qa/2004/09/robb_qa_200x214.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="clear: left; float: left; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" src="http://www.motherjones.com/files/imagecache/master-image/legacy/news/qa/2004/09/robb_qa_200x214.jpg" /></a></div>
<span style="background-color: white;">Yep, the Hollywood Pentagon relationship is a pretty simple formula, really. Want to get shots of tanks, planes and an army of thousands in your movie? Don't want to incur a massive production and/or special effects budget? </span><br />
<span style="background-color: white;"><br /></span><br />
<span style="background-color: white;">Simple. Get Pentagon cooperation. They'll let you use their </span><span style="background-color: white;">personnel</span><span style="background-color: white;"> and equipment for next to nothing.</span><br />
<span style="background-color: white;"><br /></span><br />
<span style="background-color: white;">The catch? The Pentagon gets script approval. </span><br />
<span style="background-color: white;"><br /></span><br />
<span style="background-color: white;">That's right, you want their hardware, they get to tell you what can and can not go into your movie. </span><br />
<span style="background-color: white;"><br /></span><br />
<span style="background-color: white;">As you might guess, The Pentagon usually has got a quite specific agenda of their own. And that will be most certainly represented in their script notes. The history of The Pentagon's </span><span style="background-color: white;">involvement</span><span style="background-color: white;"> with Hollywood has impacted many military themed and war movies in significant ways. </span><span style="background-color: white;">Many such films have seen changes that intrinsically alter their meaning and substance. </span><br />
<span style="background-color: white;"><br /></span><br />
<span style="background-color: white;">WWII veteran and celebrated American novelist James Jones wrote an epic length novel in 1951 titled From Here to Eternity. In the book, Jones tells the story (based largely on his own experiences) of a group of soldiers stationed in Hawaii during the time leading up to the Japanese attack on Pearl Harbor in December 1941. The book is an unflinchingly frank account of military life from Jones' personal perspective. It depicts a system where, for instance, a corrupt Captain is not punished or reprimanded by the Army for his actions. Rather, he ends up getting promoted.</span><br />
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="http://www.filmposters.com/images/posters/11061.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="clear: right; float: right; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-left: 1em;"><img border="0" height="308" src="http://www.filmposters.com/images/posters/11061.jpg" width="400" /></a></div>
The Pentagon made it clear from the outset that they would not lend their support to any movie based on Jones' book. Unfortunately, making a film adaptation of From Here to Eternity without Pentagon support was cost prohibitive due to the amount of men, equipment and locations required to do justice to Jones' novel. The studio, Columbia Pictures, and the Pentagon were gridlocked on the issue.<br />
<br />
Finally, the studio made the move of showing the Pentagon a shooting script before pursuing the issue of assistance any further. The script in question already contained changes to many of the more "undesirable" elements in Jones' novel. The corrupt Captain, for example, does not get promoted but instead is caught and dealt with appropriately. The director of the 1953 film adaption of From Here to Eternity, Fred Zinneman, once said that the scene where the Captain receives his comeuppance from his superior officers is "the worst moment in the film, resembling a recruiting short."<br />
<br />
<span style="background-color: white;">Which brings up another interesting point.</span><br />
<span style="background-color: white;"><br /></span><br />
<span style="background-color: white;">Maintaining</span> a squeaky clean positive image of the military is one part of The Pentagon's agenda in Hollywood movies. It does not stop there, though. Beyond just providing a positive public image for the military, Hollywood movies can also be great recruiting tools. This can be especially true of movies aimed younger audiences, particularly teenage boys.<br />
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="http://www.bolgernow.com/blog/wp-content/uploads/2010/11/stripes-movie-poster.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="clear: left; float: left; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="317" src="http://www.bolgernow.com/blog/wp-content/uploads/2010/11/stripes-movie-poster.jpg" width="400" /></a></div>
The 1982 Bill Murray comedy Stripes was, believe it or not, approved of and supported by the US Department of Defense. One of the first things that the Pentagon had changed was to eliminate all drugs and drinking scenes from the script (and there were plenty in the first draft, apparently). They also had a hand in the "losers become heroes" action comedy sequence that dominates the second half of the film. During that part of Stripes, the character of Sgt Hulka, the career Army Drill Sergeant played by Warren Oates, comes off as a resourceful, heroic and ultimately likable character. The portrayal of the character in the latter part of the movie is a total about face from the unlikable depiction of Sgt Hulka earlier on in which the Sergeant steadfastly plays the role of Murray's <span style="background-color: white;">uptight </span><span style="background-color: white;">authoritarian antagonist.</span><br />
<br />
The film ends with Murray, and his band of <span style="background-color: white;">supposed </span><span style="background-color: white;">military non-conformists, defeating the Russians and being celebrated as heroes, all the while surrounded by a bevy of cute young girls. </span><br />
<br />
Seriously. Watch Stripes again and look at how pro-Army that movie actually is.<br />
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
</div>
<span style="background-color: white;">An even more obvious example of the "Hollywood movie as recruiting poster" is the 1986 movie that made Tom Cruise a major star, Top Gun. The US Navy gave the filmmakers an unprecedented amount of support and access to their facilitates for the making of the movie. The result is a veritable love letter to aircraft carriers, fighter jets and the cool guys like "Maverick", "Ice Man" and "Viper" that fly them. </span><br />
<span style="background-color: white;"><br /></span><br />
<span style="background-color: white;">For those of you who may have been in coma back in 1986, Top Gun was a massive hit, grossing $176 million in the domestic market alone. The success of Top Gun also boosted recruitment in the late 80's. The year after the movie's release, the US military saw an increase in personnel of 20,000 over the previous year. It is a movie that is seen by many as part of a force that gave the image of the military in the US a 180 degree turn around from their much more negative image during the Vietnam era.</span><br />
<br />
<br />
<iframe allowfullscreen="" frameborder="0" height="480" src="http://www.youtube.com/embed/VN8ze3S0Uj8?rel=0" width="640"></iframe><br />
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
</div>
<span style="background-color: white;"><br /></span><br />
<span style="background-color: white;">The Pentagon has also refused <i>not</i> to support a number of films for very telling reasons. They turned down a 1963 film called Seven Days in May. The film starred Kirk Douglas and Burt Lancaster and was directed by John Frankenheimer (The Manchurian Candidate) from a screenplay by Rod Serling (host and creator of TV's The Twilight Zone). It was about military led coup against the US government. </span><br />
<span style="background-color: white;"><br /></span><br />
<span style="background-color: white;">The Pentagon also retroactively withdrew support from Clint Eastwood's 1985 war movie, Heartbreak Ridge. It seems that Eastwood refused to cut a scene in which his character shot an unarmed Cuban soldier during the 1983 US invasion of Grenada. Not surprisingly, The Pentagon objected to the depiction of a US Marine committing an act that would be seen as a war crime. They had supported the film during shooting but any onscreen acknowledgement of their cooperation was withdrawn from the movie. The contentious scene did stay in the picture, though.</span><br />
<br />
In the case of two classic Vietnam War movies, Francis Ford Coppola with Apocalypse Now and Oliver Stone with Platoon, both side stepped the Pentagon support issue entirely by shooting in the Philippines. They enlisted the help of that country's military to play the role of the US military whenever major amounts of men and equipment were called for. Though both of those filmmakers also ran into plenty of trouble contending with some highly unstable Filipino politics during filming.<br />
<br />
The 1996 alien invasion blockbuster Independence Day is a movie that you'd think the Pentagon would have been all over. However, they objected to the part of the movie where it is revealed that the US military has been secretly experimenting with alien spaceships on a US Air Force base in Nevada known as Area 51 since the 1950's.<br />
<br />
More recently, the Pentagon refused to provide support to this summer's Marvel studios blockbuster, The Avengers. They reportedly objected to scenes where Colonel Nick Fury, played Samuel L. Jackson, was seen taking orders from a nebulous international committee. <br />
<br />
The Avengers plowed on without the Pentagon's support. One of the advantages of a big CGI budget, I guess. Too bad, though. Imagine if they'd have been able to shoot on a real life SHIELD Hellicarrier.<br />
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="http://moviecarpet.com/iwave/images/1/o-another-battle-los-angeles-poster.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" src="http://moviecarpet.com/iwave/images/1/o-another-battle-los-angeles-poster.jpg" /></a></div>
<br />
Not all blockbusters followed the same path as Independence Day and The Avengers. Recent Pentagon supported blockbusters include Battleship, Battle Los Angeles, X Men First Class and all three of the Transformers movies. Transformers director Michael Bay describes himself as "world class ass kisser" when it comes to his attitude toward this kind of support.<br />
<span style="background-color: white;"><br /></span><br />
<span style="background-color: white;">Even more recently, Act of Valor has taken the Hollywood Pentagon partnership to a whole new level. </span><br />
<span style="background-color: white;"><br /></span><br />
<span style="background-color: white;">Back in 2007, directors Mike McCoy and Scott Waugh were making a training film for the United States Navy's Sea, Air, and Land teams, or as they are better known, SEALs. The project eventually led to the idea of making a feature film about the SEALs with members of that elite commando team serving as advisers. In addition, of course, the film makers would also have the full cooperation of the US Navy. As the planning of the film progressed, it was felt that only the SEALs could effectively duplicate their tactics on screen. The idea of casting actual active duty SEALs to play themselves was born.</span><br />
<br />
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="http://thetfs.ca/wp-content/uploads/2012/02/act-of-valor.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="clear: right; float: right; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-left: 1em;"><img border="0" height="224" src="http://thetfs.ca/wp-content/uploads/2012/02/act-of-valor.jpg" width="400" /></a></div>
While Act of Valor was not directly funded by the US Navy or the Department of Defense, the movie is still very much their baby. To cinch that point, the US Navy had final cut approval of the film.<br />
<br />
In the movie business, BTW, that's huge.<br />
<br />
Getting final cut of a movie is usually an honour reserved for the likes of studio heads and big money making Hollywood auteurs like Steven Spielberg and James Cameron.<br />
<br />
More than anything else, Act of Valor was viewed as a potentially very effective recruiting tool. It seems that nobody in the Pentagon had forgotten about Top Gun. As far as the Pentagon in Hollywood is concerned, box office numbers are not nearly as important as recruiting numbers.<br />
<br />
The resulting film is an odd mixture of a old school Hollywood war movie tropes, standard contemporary action movie explosions and chase scenes, impressive cinematography and some of the the most audacious "stunt" casting in Hollywood history.<br />
<br />
Many of the reviews I have seen of Act of Valor focus on the performances of real life SEALs (whose real names never appear on screen). Many of the critics state that the SEALs are not actors and that, unfortunately, it really shows on screen. Some critics even go so far as to say that the nonprofessional performances distract from the film's ability to entertain. Other reviews from online commentators counteract these arguments stating that the acting is not what's important about the movie or make the case that no one was expecting the SEALs to be great actors anyway or even point out that they've seen worse performances by "so-called professional actors" in other movies ( I, for one, would love to know what movies they are referring to).<br />
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
</div>
<table cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="float: left; margin-right: 1em; text-align: left;"><tbody>
<tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="http://www.elecplay.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/02/act-of-valor.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="clear: left; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" height="223" src="http://www.elecplay.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/02/act-of-valor.jpg" width="400" /></a></td></tr>
<tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;">See? It's all fake.</td></tr>
</tbody></table>
<span style="background-color: white;">The implication of both arguments is that there isn't really anything any one can do when there are nonprofessionals with no acting training or experience in the lead roles. The underlying assumption is that it is simply a given that there is no way they could have been able to pull off convincing performances. </span><br />
<br />
On that point, I totally disagree.<br />
<br />
Act of Valor is not the first movie in history of cinema to use nonprofessional or inexperienced actors. Victorio de Sica's 1948 Italian Neo-Realist classic, The Bicycle Thieves, featured some incredibly real performances by non-actors. When George A. Romero created the modern day zombie movie with The Night of the Living Dead in 1968, much of his cast was nonprofessional. If anything, that casting worked for the film and not against it. British faux documentary director Peter Watkins has gotten some stunning results from nonprofessionals in films like The Battle of Culloden (1964), The War Game (1968) and Punishment Park (1970). In the hit indie film, Once, director John Carney got memorable performances out of two professional musicians with little or no acting training or background in the lead roles . Closer to the war movie genre, World War II veteran and inexperienced actor Harold Russell won an Oscar for his portrayal of a disabled war hero in William Wyler's 1946 film, The Best Years of Our Lives. Stanley Kubrick worked wonders with former US Marine Corps Drill Sergeant R. Lee Ermey (and other less experienced actors) in his Vietnam War movie, Full Metal Jacket (1986).<br />
<br />
If the SEALs performances in Act of Valor didn't work then, really, the responsibility for that failure falls on directors McCoy and Waugh. There are many techniques you can use to get good performances out of non-actors. McCoy and Waugh, however, seemed to have instead decided to direct the SEAL's as if they were experienced actors. The SEALs seem to have been given artificial bits of physical business, fake smiles, forced scenes that supposedly depict a sense of camaraderie, and it also seems like they may have received that dreaded direction for all actors everywhere, line readings (that's when the director tells you exactly how to say any given line of dialogue). These guys are not able to pull off any of those things. The dialogue they are given even contains a few typical action movie one-liners. Dude, seasoned actors have trouble with that shit, what were you expecting?<br />
<span style="background-color: white;"><br /></span><br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
</div>
<span style="background-color: white;"><br /></span><br />
<table cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="float: right; margin-left: 1em; text-align: right;"><tbody>
<tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="http://i1.ytimg.com/vi/PtLj6IvtuF4/hqdefault.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="clear: right; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" src="http://i1.ytimg.com/vi/PtLj6IvtuF4/hqdefault.jpg" /></a></td></tr>
<tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;">Directors McCoy and Waugh</td></tr>
</tbody></table>
<span style="background-color: white;">Getting something real and natural out the SEALs should not have been that much of a stretch. They are playing themselves doing something that live every day. I mean, c'mon, it's not like they were cast as 57 year old Hindu women. </span><br />
<br />
Fortunately, The SEALs do have some very real moments, though they are few and far between. When they are in the field on a mission, relaying orders and information to each other in the midst of battle, their calm matter of fact delivery is stunningly real. Act of Valor could have benefited from more of that kind of thing.<br />
<br />
There is one scene, in which a SEAL interrogates a captured bad guy, that has incredible life to it. Much of the scene appears to be improvised. I suspect that actor Alex Veadov, (one of a few professional actors in supporting roles, in this case playing the bad guy) has some improvisational training in his background. He and the real life SEAL interrogator provide what is easily the best acted scene in the film. Let actors improvise (professional or otherwise) in a situation where they don't necessarily know what's coming next and eventually real stuff will start happening.<br />
<br />
However, directors McCoy and Waugh may well have been on a tight schedule and budget and thus were not allowed the luxury of exploring scenes through improvisation. Or, as first time feature film directors with primarily documentary films on their resumes, they may simply have been too inexperienced in the craft of directing actors. Or perhaps the Navy wanted those kinds of performances, for whatever reason that may have suited their agenda. I've certainly been in enough commercials to know that, as the Mad Men guys like to say, "The client is always right, even when they're<span style="background-color: white;"> wrong." It is probably yet another example of how the Pentagon's influence on Hollywood has once again impacted the content of one more movie.</span><br />
<br />
<span style="background-color: white;">As an action movie, Act of Valor is okay. The action and the story are well executed. The combat scenes, due perhaps to their verisimilitude, stand out from your more typical fare. However, Act of Valor is neither just an action movie nor typical fare. In fact, the movie is not nearly as escapist in nature as it attempts to appear to be. </span><br />
<span style="background-color: white;"><br /></span><br />
<span style="background-color: white;">As a recruiting film, going after the target audience of teenage boys approaching enlistment age, Act of Valor is, well, outstanding. As if to cement the goal of reaching their intended audience, some combat scenes are shot from the SEALs' POV, which unmistakably intimates the look of the Call of Duty video games and just about every other first person shooter game out there.</span><br />
<br />
The SEALs at one point launch a rescue mission to retrieve a captured CIA operative (and apparently capturing a CIA agent in the field takes little more than impersonating the guy from room service, but I digress). The agent in question is a woman. While she is depicted as tough and capable, she is still very much portrayed as the vulnerable female captured by crazed and evil men. To hammer the point home, the evil men both symbolically rape and crucify their captor. The SEALs arrive almost literally in the nick of time. It's all standard patriarchal rescue scenario stuff, to be sure. <br />
<br />
The SEALs are seen mounting military operations with some extremely heavy duty equipment in the Philippines, Somalia and Mexico. There does not appear to be even a second thought given to the fact that are launching military incursions into foreign countries without any apparent permission or even knowledge of their activities on the part of said countries.<br />
<br />
Honestly, at times, Act of Valor fells like Team America minus the puppets and the jokes. Though it is foolish to dismiss this movie so flippantly. <span style="background-color: white;">One thing I can tell you from my personal experience with the World War II veterans in my family is that I remember that they always held great disdain for Hollywood's romanticism of war. </span><span style="background-color: white;">The cast may be real warriors using real tactics and equipment but Act of Valor is not real war any more that it is merely Hollywood escapism.</span><br />
<br />
As far as I'm concerned the issue of Act of Valor is not whether or not you love it or hate it or whether or you agree or disagree with its ideology. Bigger even then how the viewer feels about it is that the viewer understands what the movie is. Just being able to ask the question of why Act of Valor was made is more important than the answer. Knowledge is power.<br />
<br />
Don't kid yourself; no matter what the motivation behind it, there is no truth to the phrase "it's <i>just</i> a movie".<br />
<br />
<br />
<iframe allowfullscreen="" frameborder="0" height="360" src="http://www.youtube.com/embed/35b_UqGYZgw?rel=0" width="640"></iframe>Terence Bowmanhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/04576129838447713151noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2233378012529819224.post-41876779696129189612012-05-28T11:11:00.000-04:002012-05-28T18:59:38.182-04:00Student Protests: Haven't I Seen This Movie Before?<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgiaKcnAoYdNHIxoR8DT1FCSFpS-Lq7ZOsJ67ebKVsl53EGC8Dq30Jr8QG_zljHnz427_v6yhcVumJD4lKWO8CSdsM9vYvtB0M1KtFYQ5P4ZywsfD_WnnGkTMbH5yh4Qo4KVcckaxzl4TY/s1600/6642460.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgiaKcnAoYdNHIxoR8DT1FCSFpS-Lq7ZOsJ67ebKVsl53EGC8Dq30Jr8QG_zljHnz427_v6yhcVumJD4lKWO8CSdsM9vYvtB0M1KtFYQ5P4ZywsfD_WnnGkTMbH5yh4Qo4KVcckaxzl4TY/s1600/6642460.jpg" /></a></div>
<br />
<br />
Living in Montreal as I do, it's become pretty difficult to ignore a few little things that keep happening in and around my city: the escalating student protests, the mob mentality violence, the police brutality, the divisive reactions to the provincial government's legislative response to the crisis, the nightly pot banging marches outside my window in my supposedly sleepy west end neighbourhood, the list goes on...<br />
<br />
It's also hard for me not to think that maybe I've seen this movie before. These kinds of protests and the subsequent public reactions to them are nothing new. It has happened in many different places and during many different times, including in our own backyard. For those of us with even dim memories of decades past, it does all seem kinda familiar. For someone my age, much of that familiarity does not come from the events first hand but, rather, from the pop culture of the day.<br />
<br />
Also familiar from both life and pop culture is the slowly increasing number number of comments turning up in the social media spheres regarding "entitled" and "spoiled" "kids" who should "get a job", "learn about responsibility", "sacrifice" and generally "wake up" and get used to life in the "real world". <br />
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
We have certainly heard that kind of thing before, like in, say, way back in 1968....<br />
<br />
<br />
<br /></div>
<iframe allowfullscreen="" frameborder="0" height="480" src="http://www.youtube.com/embed/FZo2hhvvlpw" width="640"></iframe>
<br />
<div>
<br /></div>
<br />
<br />
Jack Webb in the TV series Dragnet (who became something of a poster child for parodies of "the establishment" in the 60's, 70's) concisely encapsulates the often dismissive, judgmental and condescending attitude on the part of the established order faced by many different successful and not so successful popular movements towards social change.<br />
<br />
On the other hand, the protesters and the activists, even in their pop culture form, are also not above employing their own similarly incendiary language and rhetoric....<br />
<br />
<iframe allowfullscreen="" frameborder="0" height="480" src="http://www.youtube.com/embed/UMMN2WKtYGU?rel=0" width="640"></iframe>
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
Sure, these kinds of clips aren't exactly Montreal 2012. The issues are different. The time is different. The place is different. The culture is different. The underlying emotion, basic ideological conflicts and general atmosphere, though, are really not so different. Social change has and will continue to happen all the time. Otherwise, we'd all still be living in caves and eating Brontosaurus Burgers (again, there might be some pop culture in there).<br />
<br />
When seen through the eyes of the events of the last one hundred days here in Montreal, looking back at the pop culture zeitgeist of the so called "youth revolution" of the 60's can be quite thought provoking. If nothing else, it can give us a much broader social and historical perspective. If nothing else it makes it clear that one thing remains unchanged: the issue of student protest and social and political reactions to it is just as devise today as it was then.<br />
<br />
While these movies, TV clips and pop culture in general are not necessarily historically accurate records of the events of the day per se, they are incredible time capsules to the way these movements were seen at the time.<br />
<br />
For example...<br />
<br />
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="http://ca.movieposter.com/posters/archive/main/71/MPW-35974" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="505" src="http://ca.movieposter.com/posters/archive/main/71/MPW-35974" width="640" /></a></div>
<br />
<br />
Wild in the Streets (1968) is, at first glance, a silly film. It only takes a few minutes of viewing to see, though, that, in spite of its superficial silliness, the movie is fascinatingly telling of its time and the attitudes towards the issues that it attempts to address. <br />
<br />
Wild in the Streets tells the story about how the youth population of the late 60's (52% of the US population was under the age of 25 at that time, according to the film) manages to change the voting age in the USA to 15. As a result, they elect the first 24 year old President of the United States of America.<br />
<br />
Let's make no mistake, this movie was made, first and foremost, like almost any film anywhere, to make money. American International Studios, the people responsible for the picture, were the major producers of Drive-In type B-movies at the time. And it is easy to see the film as cynical exploitation of then very lucrative youth market. Yet Wild in the Streets does manage to address the issues of the day in a surprisingly well rounded, albeit over the top, manner. The movie both plays to and satirizes the youth movement at the same time.<br />
<br />
The youth movement, led by the young millionaire pop star, Max Frost, wants to see Frost elected as the youngest President of the United States in history. In order to do so, they concoct a plan to get the Legislative Branch of the US government to lower the voting age by putting LSD in their water supply. The scene of all these middle aged politicians tripping out on acid is shot with that classic swirling focus and tilting camera angles that was practically de riguer for movie acid trips of the day. The scene is played as a youth empowerment fantasy for laughs while simultaneously the film also manages to create an underlying sense of something sinister. It's kinda funny but, still, watching all these hippies manipulatestoned out of their mind elected officials into enacting legislation that will allow their guy to be elected President (in what amounts to a bloodless coup d'etat) is quite unsettling.<br />
<br />
<iframe allowfullscreen="" frameborder="0" height="480" src="http://www.youtube.com/embed/rRLwV2xafpk" width="640"></iframe>
<br />
<br />
The satire arches up even higher as the newly elected President Frost orders that everyone over thirty years of age be rounded up and sent to "re-education" camps where they are forced to drop acid every day. It's part youth culture empowerment fantasy, part satirical political cautionary tale.<br />
<br />
<i>View the complete film of Wild in the Streets by <a href="http://youtu.be/_S1Pa_61tXk" target="_blank">clicking here.</a></i><br />
<br />
<table align="center" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto; text-align: center;"><tbody>
<tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="http://movieposters.2038.net/p/Punishment-Park.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" src="http://movieposters.2038.net/p/Punishment-Park.jpg" /></a></td></tr>
<tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;">A clip from Punishment Park was featured earlier in this post.</td></tr>
</tbody></table>
<br />
<br />
On the the almost opposite side of the spectrum is Peter Watkins' still controversial 1971 film, Punishment Park . Peter Watkins is a British filmmaker known for his mockumentaries. Unlike much of the genre, his mockumentaries are not comedies. If fact, they are generally deadly serious affairs. <br />
<br />
Two of Watkins' better known earlier mockumentary works are Culloden and The War Game. Culloden (1964) documents the history of the Battle of Culloden, in which the English (some say brutally) put down a Scottish rebellion in 1746. The film utilizes historical reenactments shot it a TV news documentary style. The War Game is a 1967 mockumentary film that takes places in England after a hypohthetical nuclear war. It unflicnlingly depicts the potential devastation of such a conflict. It is, to the best of my knowledge, the only mockumentary to ever win an Academy Award for Best Documentary.<br />
<br />
Punishment Park, follows in the tradition of those two films by telling the story of how convicted young radical revolutionaries in the US are sent (under the pretext of an actual existing piece of US legislation enacted in the 1950's) to a desert in Southern California. Once there they are given the chance to escape their sentence if they can survive what is essentially a three day desert death hunt at the hands of the police and National Guard trainees. The central conceit of Punishment Park is that it is a documentary ostensibly shot by a European film crew.<br />
<br />
<iframe allowfullscreen="" frameborder="0" height="480" src="http://www.youtube.com/embed/suh2r2ojP3I" width="640"></iframe>
<br />
<br />
As is the case with many of Watkins' films, he uses only non professional actors. Also like much of his work, the cast improvises a great deal of the film. In this case, the convicted protesters were played by actual activists, students or other similarly inclined young people. The cops and National Guard trainees were played actual cops, ex-cops, National Guardsmen, veterans or others who also may have been similarly ideologically inclined. The result of this non professional improvisational approach creates an unexpectedly engaging discourse between the two sides. Watkins does not take the easy route of merely making the activists righteous heroes and the authorities two dimensional closed minded villains. While the film undoubtedly leans more to the left than than the right, neither side is portrayed as completely right or completely wrong.<br />
<br />
In fact, almost everybody in the movie comes off as pretty much equally unlikable. And that's kinda the point of the whole endeavor. Unmistakably, Punishment Park is agit prop, yet it is not the simple agit prop that often defines the genre. Watkins seems to be ramping up the rhetoric and the hyperbole for the exact purpose of instigating inflammatory debates (and perhaps even second thoughts) on the issues of power vs revolution, peace vs violence, social order vs individual rights, equality vs oligarchy and so on.<br />
<br />
It's almost as if Punishment Park is there to kick you in the ass and get you upset about the questions it raises, whether you like it or not.<br />
<br />
When you go back into the history of 1960's student protest films, there are many forgotten films that are actually still quite relevant, most especially in light of the recent Occupy movement and the even more recent Quebec student protests. Among others there's <a href="http://youtu.be/5Y4Mapfx56g" target="_blank">Medium Cool (1969)</a>, <a href="http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0066296/" target="_blank">The Revolutionary</a> (1970, starring the now much more right leaning Jon Voight) and this one, The Strawberry Statement (1968):<br />
<br />
<br />
<iframe allowfullscreen="" frameborder="0" height="480" src="http://www.youtube.com/embed/ZbHk7N7uRLo?rel=0" width="640"></iframe>
<br />
<br />
I'm not sure why the local Montreal TV stations have not been running these movies every night for the last 100 days...<br />
<br />Terence Bowmanhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/04576129838447713151noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2233378012529819224.post-50113666079391672442012-05-11T16:42:00.002-04:002012-05-11T16:42:54.925-04:00Five Movies With Big Time Mommy Issues<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
</div>
<table align="center" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto; text-align: center;"><tbody>
<tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="http://www.thelmagazine.com/imager/b/magnum/1794137/66b2/Psycho_625.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" src="http://www.thelmagazine.com/imager/b/magnum/1794137/66b2/Psycho_625.jpg" /></a></td></tr>
<tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;">Psycho: the classic "go to" movie for mommy issues...and, <b>no, it's<i> not </i>on this list</b>.</td></tr>
</tbody></table>
<br />
<br />
I had a film teacher once who used to say that all great directors, as some time or another, return to their childhood via their films. It is a theme that can be seen in all the great directors of cinema history: Ingmar Bergman, Francois Truffaut, Orson Welles, Pedro Almodóvar, Akira Kurosawa and, of course, the man who practically turned revisiting his childhood into a genre unto itself, Steven Spielberg.<br />
<br />
These filmmakers, and many others like them, return to their juvenile past in any number of ways: through narrative, symbolism, flashbacks, or, most importantly, through some form of cinematic recreation of their memories of their own mothers.<br />
<br />
Once you start looking at the maternal images and themes in many of these films, it's not hard to come to the conclusion that these guys must have had some pretty rough childhoods. All great directors had traumatic childhoods, it seems, for which they apparently believe their mothers were responsible.<br />
<br />
Examples are all over cinema history. As a pointed out with my post on <a href="http://terencebowmanblog.blogspot.ca/2012/04/five-great-movie-crucifixion-scenes.html" target="_blank">movie crucifixion scenes</a>, I could run a post a week on the subject and still not cover all the examples out there in cinema history. In this case, I could go on for years.<br />
<br />
Keeping that in mind, here are five films that I find to be fascinating instances of movies with Big Time Mommy Issues...<br />
<b><u><span style="font-size: x-large;"><br /></span></u></b><br />
<b><u><span style="font-size: x-large;"><br /></span></u></b><br />
<b><u><span style="font-size: x-large;">Notorious</span></u></b><br />
<i>Directed by Alfred Hitchcock</i><br />
<i>1946</i><br />
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgUH-Tlj5YUth_bqB7qddjyHhe0rM0_qqbQ8b0CMsHwyPecOtGBCgROI2x0HQTNx_z2x7-n_sFvfgdQqePaGOlwJPOS23y8hrPRifsec7mHGJH0M94uIHw6B-dnloWrv7EetwX0K16p7T8/s1600/Notorious-alfred-hitchcock-865373_1024_768.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="480" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgUH-Tlj5YUth_bqB7qddjyHhe0rM0_qqbQ8b0CMsHwyPecOtGBCgROI2x0HQTNx_z2x7-n_sFvfgdQqePaGOlwJPOS23y8hrPRifsec7mHGJH0M94uIHw6B-dnloWrv7EetwX0K16p7T8/s640/Notorious-alfred-hitchcock-865373_1024_768.jpg" width="640" /></a></div>
<br />
Legendary British born Hollywood thriller director, Alfred Hitchcock, practically owns the concept of movies with Big Time Mommy Issues. Few directors have had the word "Freudian" connected to them more often than Mr.Hitchcock. This is so largely on account of the fact that it is true. <br />
<br />
It might seem like Hitchcock's 1960 slasher horror thriller classic, Psycho, would be the obvious choice when it comes to flushing out the director's cinematic maternal issues. The key wold there is "obvious". As amazing as Psycho is, there are numerous other and more subtle examples of maternal themes that run throughout Hitch's work.<br />
<br />
For instance, there's Cary Grant simultaneously escaping his own domineering mother yet at the same time seeking maternal protection from Eva Marie Saint while on the run in North by Northwest. The theme is even present in Hitch's quasi-apocalyptic thriller, The Birds (not the least of which is central conflict with Mother Nature, herself). However, one of the most interesting displays of Hitch's mommy issues comes into play in one of Hitchcock's most purely cinematic films, the 1946 thriller, Notorious.<br />
<br />
The plot of Notorious involves US government agent Cary Grant attempting to flush out some escaped Nazis in post World War II Brazil. To carry out his mission, he turns to Ingrid Bergman, the American daughter of convicted Nazi spy. While romancing Bergman in some of the most steamy Hollywood love scenes of the era, Grant manages to recruit her. She is to go to Brazil and resume the acquaintanceship of suspected Nazi operative Claude Rains. The somehow totally not suspicious Rains fall in love with Bergman. He asks her to marry him, which, as it turns out, plays nicely into the whole infiltrate the ring of Nazi spies plan.<br />
<iframe allowfullscreen="" frameborder="0" height="480" src="http://www.youtube.com/embed/2G8HY1UDe7Q" width="640"></iframe><br />
<br />
<br />
It's the rare thriller director, then or now, who would bring a mother into this kind of a story. With Hitch, of course, such a thing is almost expected.<br />
<br />
Despite being a suave elegant middle-aged man and an accomplished Nazi operative, Rains has got this really domineering mother who continues to play a very influential role in her son's life. He reports to her at the end of her bed each day. The story goes that these scenes were lifted from Hitch's real life in which his domineering mother required him to report the activities of his day to her in a similar manner. Some biographers report that this practice continued into Hitch's adult life right up to 1940, the year he relocated to Hollywood to further his film making career.<br />
<br />
Whatever the exact particular inspiration, the scenes between Rains and his mother (played by veteran Austrian actress Leopoldine Konstantinare) are some of the most interesting dialogue scenes in Notorious. Rains is constantly facing his mother's continued disapproval, even as he attempts to break free of her influence by asserting his independence and marrying Bergman ( it's all part of the plan, as far as she and Grant are concerned, though). Rains finally figures out that he has, in fact, married an American agent. Before sharing the revelation with anyone else, he goes to his mother. Now Hitchcock's Freudian Mom is totally in her element. Not only is he is able to scold her son over his poor choice of a wife, but she is also able to regain power over his life. She concocts a clever plot to kill Bergman via slow acting poison. She oversees the plan. She is often seen sitting or lying down; the maternal monster's power is such that she can exact control even from an apparently passive position.<br />
<br />
<br />
<iframe allowfullscreen="" frameborder="0" height="480" src="http://www.youtube.com/embed/c6xD3e_mZpk" width="640"></iframe>
<br />
<br />
Domineering control and manipulation to the point of attempting to murder Hitch, don't know how to say this but you got a few issues there, buddy.
<br />
<br />
<b><u><span style="font-size: x-large;"><br /></span></u></b><br />
<b><u><span style="font-size: x-large;">Alien</span></u></b><br />
<i>Directed by Ridley Scott </i><br />
<i>1979</i><br />
<i><br /></i><br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgxmAvBVTBswtUYL1Bn0yxm2QcsVcBvEYgUVwbRQgKBp9f3lPxpBAXfsSebOGFGHGafx_rOYF0gcNcEEgH8QQHMqCYg7YIusngyPi6RR4OM4_AeZNQf5n7U_IHckKcHXW274AtizF8VHqk/s1600/alien-movie-poster41.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgxmAvBVTBswtUYL1Bn0yxm2QcsVcBvEYgUVwbRQgKBp9f3lPxpBAXfsSebOGFGHGafx_rOYF0gcNcEEgH8QQHMqCYg7YIusngyPi6RR4OM4_AeZNQf5n7U_IHckKcHXW274AtizF8VHqk/s1600/alien-movie-poster41.jpg" /></a></div>
<i><br /></i><br />
On the surface, perhaps not a movie one might immediately associate with maternal issues. But, then again, there are those alien eggs...<br />
<br />
<table cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="float: right; margin-left: 1em; text-align: right;"><tbody>
<tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEh9U07LfVzoN4Qt8KIQHGxY-HjnPKmLJy0Ezyl3cUIw1P-EkbOob618b0-O1D-eOvQTQxyx0FZl6K5SSGdWdnxi7QBpNAE7KhNGGH1FFeVZeOum9siI3g5cP4mgLHm_nxgMQdcOIJE_vInM/s640/hr_giger_facehugger_IV.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="clear: right; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" height="290" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEh9U07LfVzoN4Qt8KIQHGxY-HjnPKmLJy0Ezyl3cUIw1P-EkbOob618b0-O1D-eOvQTQxyx0FZl6K5SSGdWdnxi7QBpNAE7KhNGGH1FFeVZeOum9siI3g5cP4mgLHm_nxgMQdcOIJE_vInM/s400/hr_giger_facehugger_IV.jpg" width="400" /></a></td></tr>
<tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;">Original Alien designs by HR Giger: See what I mean?</td></tr>
</tbody></table>
Besides some more subtle, underlying maternal themes, sexual imagery abounds in Alien. The alien monster with the big shiny phallushead and <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vagina_dentata" target="_blank">vagina dentata</a> mouth, for example. Even the so-called "face hugger" aliens contain subtle phallic and vaginal imagery.<br />
<br />
How does sexual imagery fit into discussion of maternal symbolism? Duh. Aside from adoption, artificial insemination, surrogate and other clever means of sidestepping the course of nature, what's the number one major prerequisite for all moms everywhere?<br />
<br />
Along with all the sexual imagery, images and themes of fertility, impregnation and maternity permeate Alien as well. Yet the presence of these images and themes is very much a perverse one.<br />
<br />
An egg is often seen as a traditional image of fertility. This may be so but the egg is literally alien as well as enigmatic, ominous and ultimately deadly. As the humans approach the alien egg for the first time, they shine flashlights through it. Murky fetal shadows appear inside the egg. There is life inside but it is dark and unknown. The egg then suddenly opens with of its own accord with a slowness that is both purposeful and potentially sinister. As the human astronaut approaches it, an alien being springs out. It quickly wraps itself around its victim's face, inserting a tentacle down the victim's throat. More sexual imagery. This time it is of a both invasive and aggressive nature. The alien "face hugger" then both feeds off of and at the same time keeps its host alive. Later, it impregnates it's human victim turned host. Finally, after it has gestated for a sufficient amount of time inside the human, a new alien being violently and bloodily bursts out of its host's stomach, leaving the host dead. The whole sequence of events is a twisted and horrific vision of fertility, impregnation and childbirth.<br />
<br />
In Alien, even the spacecraft itself has maternal overtones. The computer that runs the ship, the Nostromo, is, without much subtlety, named Mother. Mother, the computer, runs the ship when the crew is in cryogenic sleep. Mother also knows things the crew does not. It awakens them and sends them on their mission to investigate an unknown alien transmission. In fact, Mother is operating on her own hidden agenda that remains unknown to the crew for much of the film. Mother may know best but just what the hell is she up to?<br />
<br />
<table cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="float: left; margin-right: 1em; text-align: left;"><tbody>
<tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="http://www.markta.co.uk/alien/screens8/alien_172.JPG" imageanchor="1" style="clear: left; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" height="177" src="http://www.markta.co.uk/alien/screens8/alien_172.JPG" width="400" /></a></td></tr>
<tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;"><span style="font-size: small; text-align: -webkit-auto;">Mother's </span><span style="font-size: small; text-align: -webkit-auto;">womb-like </span><span style="font-size: small; text-align: -webkit-auto;">main computer access room </span></td></tr>
</tbody></table>
The opening sequence of the film shows the ships crew being awakened from cryogenic sleep. The long sleep is a state that requires the nurturing care of Mother, the computer. The scene where they crew quietly and delicately awakes from their long slumber is another birth image. Only this one is more positive than other such visual analogies seen in the film. <br />
<br />
<br />
Even in the midst of all the death and fear that surrounds the crew, Sigourney Weaver's Ripley rarely loses her cool. She remains focused and driven by the vital task at had, get rid of the murderous alien creature. She is even cool and calm as she engages the ship to self destruct, the only truly reliable means of killing the alien creature. However, when Ripley discovers that the alien is blocking her route to the escape shuttle, she attempts to shut the self destruct sequence off. It being too late in the process, Mother will not cooperate. When this happens, Ripley has one of her most outwardly emotional displays seen in the film. In a rare moment of cathartic release, she screams and throws things at the computer, yelling out one simple word: <i>"Mother!".</i><br />
<i><br /></i><br />
<iframe allowfullscreen="" frameborder="0" height="480" src="http://www.youtube.com/embed/eX_qn3bV5n0" width="640"></iframe>
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<b><u><span style="font-size: x-large;">Nixon</span></u></b><br />
<i>Directed by Oliver Stone </i><br />
<i>1995</i><br />
<i><br /></i><br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjQOQ3wU-mwIFLN9mCveGmeELrKYgmaF8m2UpbVsgg50oFGGROYrpZuQ94Zxw1KaPrKzsobuMRW3b_4tsWMITGiJ5qwzrfQwvy0vwJ6q_geyFTXb8UPPAiO34u0FKmHECzc5MCEBbHSY_c/s1600/nixon-movie-poster-1995-1020195470.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="640" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjQOQ3wU-mwIFLN9mCveGmeELrKYgmaF8m2UpbVsgg50oFGGROYrpZuQ94Zxw1KaPrKzsobuMRW3b_4tsWMITGiJ5qwzrfQwvy0vwJ6q_geyFTXb8UPPAiO34u0FKmHECzc5MCEBbHSY_c/s640/nixon-movie-poster-1995-1020195470.jpg" width="429" /></a></div>
<i><br /></i><br />
Oliver Stone is quite the director. Often Over-the-top and highly Stylized, Stone's films are built around complex themes and characters that are, even in their complexity, boiled down to their most simplistic elements. And, oh yeah, it is often the case that, in an Oliver Stone picture, everything almost always comes back to the mother's. This is most especially true in his bio-pics.<br />
<br />
In Alexander, legendary ancient Greek warrior's thirst for conquest was drilled into him by his mother, mostly through the use of Angelina Jolie's uber-stylized accent along with the off kilter angles with which she was shot. In W., President George W. Bush's, as portrayed by Josh Brolin, political foibles and miscalculations (as Stone's film classifies them to be) were in no small part created by the judgments and disapproval of his dad, James Cromwell,in the role of Bush 41. Though, in subtle shots and cinematic allusions, Stone implies that the George Sr. did so as the screws were being put to him by matriarchal Barbara Bush, as portrayed by Ellen Burstyn.<br />
<br />
Nixon, Oliver Stone's 1995 biopic of Richard M. Nixon, the only US President to resign, throws many thematic and stylistic concepts into he mix. Not the least of those ideas are the influences that Nixon's mom, Hannah Nixon, had on the future president. In real life, Nixon did, in fact, reference his mom in his last day on the job speech as President before leaving the White House forever. So it's not surprising that Stone chose to include her in his pastiche of Nixon's personal and professional life.<br />
<br />
Nixon is portrayed by the unlikely Anthony Hopkins. His mother is portrayed, with just the appropriate amount coldness and distance, by Mary Steenburgen. Hopkins, though, never actually appears on screen with Steenbergen. In those scenes, Nixon is played by actors portraying the younger versions of Nixon. In one scene memorable scene, 12 year old Nixon (as played by Corey Carrier, the 10 year old Indy from The Young Indiana Jones Chronicles) is caught with a cigarette. Shot in that classic dark moody black and white cinematography that often constitutes a flashback in a Stone film, the scene depicts Steenburgen attempting to get a confession out the young Nixon. Hanna Nixon was a Quaker so, in the film, the maternal Nixon uses the pronoun "thee" towards her son. Just that, in of itself, suggests a constant sense of both emotional distance and judgement. Nixon finally confesses to possessing the cigarette but his mother promises not to tell his stern father about the incident. She states that it is "our little secret".<br />
<br />
Hmmm...I wonder which part of Nixon's later life Stone is implying that story from his childhood may have informed.<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<iframe allowfullscreen="" frameborder="0" height="360" src="http://www.youtube.com/embed/nZ06jnTar44" width="640"></iframe>
<br />
<br />
Historically accurate or not, the intent of the scene is pretty clear.<br />
<br />
Nixon's mom turns up in various other flashbacks throughout the film and, in all instances, displays a powerful sense of emotional distance coupled with a domineering demeanor towards her son.<br />
<br />
Joan Allen plays Pat, Nixon's wife. Stone very strong suggests, both visually and textually, that Pat is Nixon's maternal substitute. Many of Allen and Hopkins's scenes involve Nixon crying on his wife's shoulder and/or confiding in her in a way in which, the film suggests, Nixon was never able to do with his mother.<br />
<br />
The most powerful of the dark maternal images in Nixon turn up when the film supposedly recreates an interview conducted with Hannah Nixon shortly before her death in 1967. An aged version of Steenbergen appears once again in black and white, though this time it is much more grainy than in previous scenes, while sitting in a nursing home. The interviewer asks what Mrs. Nixon thinks of the fact that her son may well run for President in the next year. On the surface, her answers are all positive and supportive of her son. She even flashes the occasional smile when referring to him. However, to the great credit of her performance, Steenbergen delivers the seemingly nice answers with a subtle yet strong sense of cold emotional dissonance that lurks behind even her smiles.<br />
<br />
<iframe allowfullscreen="" frameborder="0" height="480" src="http://www.youtube.com/embed/_vHvga3PXTI" width="640"></iframe>
<br />
<br />
It's hard not to draw the conclusion that, as far as Oliver Stone is concerned, all of the Nixon's characters flaws and his ultimate political fate all go right back to his mother.<br />
<br />
Seriously? The carpet bombing of Hanoi? US backed regime change in Chile? Watergate? You wanna put all that on the guy's mother?<br />
<br />
<br />
<b><u><span style="font-size: x-large;">Braindead</span></u></b><br />
<i>Directed by Peter Jackson </i><br />
<i>1992</i><br />
<i><br /></i><br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="http://drugsbunny.files.wordpress.com/2010/06/braindead-cover1.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="640" src="http://drugsbunny.files.wordpress.com/2010/06/braindead-cover1.jpg" width="443" /></a></div>
<i><br /></i><br />
<br />
Before The Lovely Bones, King Kong, Lord of the Rings, The Frighteners and Heavenly Creatures, Peter Jackson made a some pretty fucked up movies. Very entertaining....but fucked up.<br />
<br />
Bad Taste, his first feature made back in 1987, is about aliens that come to earth in order to turn people into food. It is very much what they like to call now a "splatter" movie. In 1989, he made Meet The Feebles, a darkly twisted satirical movie about a group of Muppet-like puppets. Of this period of Jackson's work, 1992's Braindead takes the proverbial gory cake.<br />
<br />
Known as Dead Alive in its North American release, Braindead, in addition to its absurdly extreme amount of gore, contains some of the most over-the-top Mommy issues ever put on film. On account of a Sumatran Rat Monkey (pretty sure that's fictional) that ends up in a New Zealand zoo, there is an outbreak of zombieism in Wellington. Long story short, the films's protagonist, Lionel Cosgrove (played by Timothy Balme) must fight off a most of his recently zombiefied neighbourhood. To add the tension, his mom, played by Elizabeth Moody, also succumbs to the zombie epidemic. Even before she was infected, though, Lionel's mom was not exactly portrayed as a saint. Often shot from close, unflattering angles, she is yet another mom that is domineering and unlikable. She even goes so far as to make disparaging remarks regarding Lionel's Italian girlfriend.<br />
<br />
<iframe allowfullscreen="" frameborder="0" height="480" src="http://www.youtube.com/embed/BnCfUpw-i7A" width="640"></iframe>
<br />
<br />
In what is already a pretty damned ramped up film to begin with, Braindead ends with some of the biggest mother issues ever put on film...literally.<br />
<br />
Before we get to that point, though, there is a lot of incredibly gory dismembering, disturbingly relentless attacks by a zombie baby, a kung fu fighting priest, and a scene involving a lawnmower and room full of zombies that features one of the greatest slayfests this side of the Evil Dead movies.<br />
<br />
After all that, Lionel's mom re-appears. She has now become the biggest-assed zombie ever (seriously -<a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=c-DiV5Jzs7Y&feature=youtu.be" target="_blank">check out the scene</a>). Proclaiming that she will keep and protect her son forever, giant zombie mom grabs Lionel and literally sticks Lionel "back" into her gigantic womb. Our hero then must cut himself out in an absurdly over-the-top Freudian celebration of gore and rebirth.<br />
<br />
While there is very strong sense of wry humour, satire and slapstick in Braindead, I still can't help but think, <i>"What in the hell did Peter Jackson's mom do to him?".</i><br />
<br />
In case you haven't already, <a href="http://youtu.be/c-DiV5Jzs7Y" target="_blank">Take a look.</a> (<i>the clip is in German but more than likely you will get the gist of it)</i><br />
<br />
See what I mean? That scene puts the Big in Big Time Mommy Issues...<br />
<b><u><span style="font-size: x-large;"><br /></span></u></b><br />
<b><u><span style="font-size: x-large;"><br /></span></u></b><br />
<b><u><span style="font-size: x-large;">The Mummy</span></u></b><br />
<i>Directed by Karl Freund </i><br />
<i>1932</i><br />
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjznv-kg4BuGwsdDANq5GGBjgp1bZppxcNeSsPFMc0E4jYnLZyOIW7AfOjI6TfK19bZTctAp2rc2hETafvzsiOA-Ntl59uUbRvb2-xBgtke-RinyuNE4dZjQ89G8dsAZtGuxR3v3YWubSE/s1600/The_Mummy.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="640" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjznv-kg4BuGwsdDANq5GGBjgp1bZppxcNeSsPFMc0E4jYnLZyOIW7AfOjI6TfK19bZTctAp2rc2hETafvzsiOA-Ntl59uUbRvb2-xBgtke-RinyuNE4dZjQ89G8dsAZtGuxR3v3YWubSE/s640/The_Mummy.jpg" width="416" /></a></div>
<br />
<br />
HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA!<br />
<br />
<br />
<div style="text-align: center;">
<span style="color: red; font-size: large;"><b>Happy Mother's Day!</b></span></div>
<div style="text-align: center;">
<br /></div>
<br />Terence Bowmanhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/04576129838447713151noreply@blogger.com1tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2233378012529819224.post-24404821772591720022012-05-04T09:34:00.001-04:002012-05-04T09:34:06.071-04:00The Avengers and The Movie Crossovers That Never Happened<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgQy6atx7nEHsbbUIjbAs7yVaDPn-DWX4_PKmVHMiTGXzkglfoKZQ6CLlDI7pOONd416VSdHEoY5SuuvEuB0XBekQeacNE_Wl3r-7ir571b9fTZHALUqTXkL2Kk_zg-3zeYKltliLuBl4-L/s1600/avengers-wallpapers5.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="640" oda="true" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgQy6atx7nEHsbbUIjbAs7yVaDPn-DWX4_PKmVHMiTGXzkglfoKZQ6CLlDI7pOONd416VSdHEoY5SuuvEuB0XBekQeacNE_Wl3r-7ir571b9fTZHALUqTXkL2Kk_zg-3zeYKltliLuBl4-L/s640/avengers-wallpapers5.jpg" width="442" /></a></div>
<br />
The Avengers have arrived.<br />
<br />
The long awaited big screen adaptation of the legendary Marvel Comics superhero team in is finally playing in theaters. There has never been a crossover movie quite like The Avengers; characters established in their own original movies, made with the express intention of later putting those characters together in one big movie. The hype surrounding the release of Iron Man, Iron Man 2, The Incredible Hulk, Thor and Captain America was not just about the opening of a big blockbuster movie in and of itself. As much as anything else, the hype was also about how each movie brought the world one set up closer to The Avengers.<br />
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="http://talkabtmovies.files.wordpress.com/2011/03/frankenstein_meets_wolf_man_poster_01.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="clear: left; float: left; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="400" src="http://talkabtmovies.files.wordpress.com/2011/03/frankenstein_meets_wolf_man_poster_01.jpg" width="265" /></a></div>
Movie crossovers are nothing new: Frankenstein Meets The Wolf Man, King Kong vs Godzilla, Alien vs. Predator...the list goes on. Granted, putting Frankenstein and the Wolf Man in the same movie was as an after thought and not the reason why they made a Frankenstein and a Wolf Man movie in the first place but, still, you get the general idea.<br />
<br />
It's all been done.<br />
<br />
Or has it?<br />
<br />
What about those crossover movies, some potential dreams comes true, some potential nightmares come true, that never quite made it into movies theaters?<br />
<br />
In the world of Hollywood Development Hell that is the movie business, many ideas, crossover and otherwise, are talked about. Few come to fruition.<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
Some of those ideas can run anywhere from the bizarre to the unfeasible or, in some cases, both.<br />
<br />
Take, for instance, these examples...<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<strong><u><span style="font-size: x-large;">The Beatles in The Lord of the Rings as Directed by Stanley Kubrick</span></u></strong><br />
<i>Speaking as a huge fan of all three of the above, I am so glad this project never came to be.</i><br />
<i><br /></i><br />
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgwC1GQnxfJmo6zE1rTXibGap8_INb7GSsoMpbhhyphenhyphenXCAhZ50qRQuR0_T0udpJ_2h-_qu5XYQjvYtO1OJcgd82Wo3uBEdGCX9rQDLXwEbm6MBPB-sr5d7ZDl1HGiDWohsQTJye-kBrQhR2E/s1600/BeatlesLotR.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="640" oda="true" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgwC1GQnxfJmo6zE1rTXibGap8_INb7GSsoMpbhhyphenhyphenXCAhZ50qRQuR0_T0udpJ_2h-_qu5XYQjvYtO1OJcgd82Wo3uBEdGCX9rQDLXwEbm6MBPB-sr5d7ZDl1HGiDWohsQTJye-kBrQhR2E/s640/BeatlesLotR.jpg" width="403" /></a></div>
<br />
Back in the day when Beatlemania was all the rage, The Beatles original old school show biz manager, Brian Epstein, signed a three picture deal for the The Fab Four with United Artists. A Hard Day's Night and Help! were the first two films of these deals.<br />
<br />
By 1966, things had changed a bit since those two cinematic moptop romps were filmed. The Beatles had performed their last live show. They started smoking those funny cigarettes Bob Dylan gave them. They were among the first people on the UK to drop acid. And, perhaps most significantly, the lads from Liverpool were replacing lyrics like <span style="font-family: inherit;">"<span style="background-color: white; line-height: 21px; text-align: left;">She loves you, yeah, yeah, yeah. </span><span style="background-color: white; line-height: 21px; text-align: left;">She loves you, yeah, yeah, yeah</span>"</span> with lyrics like "<span style="background-color: white; line-height: 21px; text-align: left;"><span style="font-family: inherit;">No one I think is in my tree, I mean it must be high or low<span style="color: #676767;">". </span></span></span><br />
<br />
The Era of Beatlemania had officially bitten the dust.<br />
<br />
The boys themselves, now Zuckebergesque millionaires in their mid-20's, decided that they wanted to run their career a little differently from here on in. And they had the power to do pretty much whatever the hell they wanted. As anyone who has sat through the Star Wars prequels can tell you, that kind of creative control in not necessarily a good thing.<br />
<br />
The Beatles were now, in part, defined by their own reactions against the earlier part of their career. They no longer had any taste for the incredible amount of handling they had undergone during their Beatlemania phase, for instance. Huge stadium shows were out. Rather than making live TV appearances, they made short films of their songs (early rock videos, really) to show on the Ed Sullivan Show and American Bandstand. And they sure weren't into making silly off-the-wall movies designed to sell soundtrack albums. Nonetheless, there was still a small matter of the contractual obligation they had for that pesky third Beatles movie. Well, if the lads were gonna do a film, they were gonna do it their way. Their, it turns out, lead to some -shall we say?- interesting ideas.<br />
<br />
In the mid 60's, Italian film maker Sergio Leone had just created the genre that became known as the Spaghetti Western. The genre was typified by films of his like A Fistful of Dollars and The Good, The Bad and The Ugly. Yep, one of The Beatles movie ideas was that they would be the stars of a western; quite possibly a Leone-like Spaghetti Western. The movie may well have featured John, Paul, George and the aptly named Ringo sporting Clint Eastwood-like hair and beards while slinging their genre deconstructing six guns to the tune of an Ennio Morricone soundtrack perhaps peppered with a few psychedelic sounding Fab Four Country and Western songs.<br />
<br />
The movie, oddly tittled A Talent For Loving, was actually scheduled to shoot in Spain. The reason for aborting the production was ostensibly on account of weather problems in that country. Though some might say it was the Hands of the Good Movie Gods intervening. If so, The Beatles would continue to keep those Hands pretty busy for some time to come.<br />
<br />
The other idea the Beatles had was to do a film adaptation of JRR Tolkein's classic Fantasy trilogy, The Lord of the Rings. Back in the Sixties, The Lord of the Rings was seen as more of a mind blowing trippy hippie kinda book and not as much as the celebrated epitome of all geekdom that it is today. The lads were serious enough about the idea to approach the director of the SF classic 2001: A Space Odyssey, Stanley Kubrick. This made perfect sense because, aside from Kubrick being an accomplished A-list director at the time, 2001 was a movie that was very popular with the hippie crowd in 1968.<br />
<br />
The Beatles. Tolkien. Kubrick. 1968. Did I mention the part about those funny Dylan cigarettes and being some of the first people in the UK to drop acid?<br />
<br />
Stanley Kubrick's Lord of the Rings, Beatles-style, had already been cast too: George Harrison as Gandalf, Paul McCartney as Frodo Baggins, Ringo Starr as Sam Wisegamgee and John Lennon as Gollum.<br />
<br />
Hey, man, don't shoot the messenger.<br />
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="http://halmasonberg.files.wordpress.com/2011/03/936full-stanley-kubrick.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="clear: right; float: right; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-left: 1em;"><img border="0" height="273" src="http://halmasonberg.files.wordpress.com/2011/03/936full-stanley-kubrick.jpg" width="400" /></a></div>
According to most reliable Kubrick biographies, the legendary director did actually consider taking the job. Kubrick finally passed on the film, though, on the grounds that the books, even with his 2001 visual effects team on the job, were unfilmable. In the pre-Industrial Light and Magic and CGI era, Kubrick was right.<br />
<br />
While a Kubrick LOTR would have been fascinating, God knows how much of Tolkien would have actually made it to the final cut. Just ask Antony Burgess, Stephen King and Vladimir Nabokov how Kubrick film adaptations worked out for them.<br />
<br />
Not to mention that The Beatles are not actors. They would have been plugging their own personalities into pre-established Tolkien characters. So the movie would have ended up with a Maharishi-like Gandalf, a over-the-top cutesy Frodo, an angry anti-authoritarian Golum and a goofily downbeat Sam.<br />
<br />
It's also rumoured that, after Kubrick turned the project down, British film maker John Boorman was approached. Boorman too would have been an "interesting" fit, having gone on to direct films like Deliverance, Excalibur and one of the trippiest SF exercises of all time, Zardoz.<br />
<br />
According to Peter Jackson, it was Tolkien himself, by virtue of the fact that he was still alive at the time, who put the ultimate kibosh on the whole bizarre mash-up of a project.<br />
<br />
The Beatles finally ended up getting their long desired hippy dippy adventure movie and got to honour their United Artists contract at the same time. The solution to both problems was the animated film, Yellow Submarine. The animated movie was appropriately psychedelic to the era. It also demanded very little of The Beatles, outside of writing some new songs and appearing in a short live action epilogue at the end of the film.<br />
<br />
<table align="center" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto; text-align: center;"><tbody>
<tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="http://i.telegraph.co.uk/multimedia/archive/01488/das-boot_1488483i.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" height="400" src="http://i.telegraph.co.uk/multimedia/archive/01488/das-boot_1488483i.jpg" width="400" /></a></td></tr>
<tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;">Another crossover that never happened...</td></tr>
</tbody></table>
<br />
<br />
<br />
<strong><u><span style="font-size: x-large;">Zeppelins, Dinosaurs, Vikings and Nazis</span></u></strong><br />
<i>With a line up like that, how could you go wrong? </i><br />
<i>Well, let's start with never making it...</i><br />
<br />
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="http://ecx.images-amazon.com/images/I/51N8dGAdDaL._SL500_AA300_.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" oda="true" src="http://ecx.images-amazon.com/images/I/51N8dGAdDaL._SL500_AA300_.jpg" /></a></div>
<br />
<br />
<br />
While none of the above elements were established movie franchises per se, they were, and still are, elements that, even by themselves in just one film, can make for awesome movies.<br />
<br />
Hot on the heels of the success of the original 1933 King Kong, producers and directors Ernest B. Schoedsack and Merian C. Cooper were approached by MGM studios to make a fantasy adventure movie so big that it would make King Kong look like a spider monkey. The movie in question was to have been titled War Eagles.<br />
<br />
The basic elements of the movie would have gone something like this: explorers discover a lost valley. In this remote valley, descendants of Vikings lost centuries before continue to thrive. Also still existing in this valley: dinosaurs. Vikings and dinosaurs. Of course. De rigeur for any great adventure epic, really.<br />
<br />
In addition to dinosaurs, there are also giant prehistoric eagles (the fossil records for which have yet to be discovered, I guess). Naturally, the Vikings ride these giant eagles majestically through the skies. Somewhere along the way, it being the eve of World War II and all, the Nazis attempt to invade the US of A. Their attack fleet is made up, naturally, of Zeppelins. Oh, yes, indeed, my friends, the climatic battle of War Eagles would have featured Vikings riding a top giant prehistoric eagles fighting off Nazi Zeppelins over the skyscrapers of Manhattan.<br />
<br />
Total Geekasm.<br />
<br />
For the 1930's, War Eagles have been positively Michael Bay in its scope (though probably better directed). The movie would have been in Technicolor, the same process for making colour movies (a rarity back then) used in The Wizard of OZ and Gone With The Wind. Willis O'Brien, the effects legend behind King Kong, was set to do the visual effects. The screenplay was written by Cyril Hume, who wrote many of the hit MGM Tarzan movies as well as the now classic 50's SF film, Forbidden Planet.<br />
<br />
With a premise so rich and a team like that, it begs the question: how did this movie not get made? Well, the answer had something to do with the real life version of World War II.<br />
<br />
Producer Cooper was also very much the adventurer. He was a flier and subsequent POW during World War I. Not unlike the Carl Denham character in King Kong, Cooper shot wildlife documentary footage in exotic locales like Africa and South America during the 20's. On the brink of the US entry into World War II, Cooper left Hollywood to join the US Air Force, despite the fact he was already old enough to have been exempt from military service. When he left, War Eagles was put on hold. It was never picked up again. At the time of Cooper's departure, the film was pretty far into production too, <a href="http://www.amazon.com/WAR-EAGLES-Unmaking-Alternate-Monsters/dp/1593934815/ref=sr_1_2?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1335819474&sr=1-2" target="_blank">as this excellent book tells us.</a><br />
<br />
<a href="http://www.amazon.com/War-Eagles-Carl-Macek/dp/1932431748/ref=sr_1_3?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1335819474&sr=1-3" target="_blank">A novel </a>, supposedly based on the unfilmed screenplay for War Eagles, came out many years later, though, I'm told, given War Eagles' history and pedigree, it is something of a let down. IMDB lists a 2012 version of War Eagles, with a similar plot to the original, as being "in development" but it cites no stars, director, writer, producer or studio attached to it.<br />
<br />
Hey, Peter Jackson, you showed a great amount of admiration for King Kong in your 2005 remake. Maybe you could get to War Eagles after that Hobbit thing, k?<br />
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="http://roberthood.net/blog/wp-content/uploads/2008/03/war-eagles-book.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="400" src="http://roberthood.net/blog/wp-content/uploads/2008/03/war-eagles-book.jpg" width="263" /></a></div>
<br />
<br />
<strong><u><span style="font-size: large;"><br /></span></u></strong><br />
<strong><u><span style="font-size: x-large;"><br /></span></u></strong><br />
<strong><u><span style="font-size: x-large;">Star Trek Meets Eddie Murphy</span></u></strong><br />
<i>The best idea in blockbuster movie crossovers since Richard Pryor met Superman.</i><br />
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="http://pkdmedia.com/comics/2010-01-21-Almost-Trek.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="640" oda="true" src="http://pkdmedia.com/comics/2010-01-21-Almost-Trek.jpg" width="472" /></a></div>
<br />
Back in the mid 80's, riding high on the phenomenal success of the first Beverly Hills Cop movie, former Saturday Night Live star Eddie Murphy was just about the biggest comic on the planet. It seems that somebody got the idea of expanding Murphy's comedic range beyond that of just the planet.<br />
<br />
Also not doing too badly in the mid 80's was the Star Trek franchise. The feature film series based the seminal SF TV series was hot off the one two punch of the hit movies, Star Trek II and III. Leonard Nimoy, director and star of the upcoming Star Trek IV, felt that, after all the emotionally wrenching death, destruction and resurrection in II and III, it was time for the Trek franchise to lighten up a bit. After all, where was the Star Trek movies answer to the show's classic comic relief episode, The Trouble With Tribbles?<br />
<br />
Well, the answer certainly wasn't in the idea that came next.<br />
<br />
Apparently some of the suits at Paramount Pictures got wind of the lighter direction idea for Trek. I guess they looked at some Beverly Hills Cop box office receipts and suddenly came up with a brilliant idea. Why not put Eddie Murphy in the next Star Trek movie? Unfortunately, their question was a rhetorical one. <br />
<br />
Nimoy played the studio's little game and considered the idea. Murphy, reportedly a huge fan, leaped at even the very idea of appearing in a Star Trek movie. The wacky alien concept was bounced around but, in the end, it was decided that Murphy would be funniest if he were allowed to stay squarely in his mid 80's urban context. Thus the idea of a time travel story line was born.<br />
<br />
According to Nimoy's book, I Am Spock, Nimoy met with Murphy in the ascending superstar's new sparsely furnished Hollywood Hills mansion. Nimoy writes that both parties,while remaining enthusiastic, expressed reservations over such a crossover and that both were well aware of its potential for failure.<br />
<br />
The story goes that someone at the studio suddenly became aware of Superman III, which featured ground-breaking comedian turned movie star Richard Pryor in a central role. The combo of the very funny Pryor and the very established franchise of Superman was, well, poorly received by critics and fans alike. Superman III did okay at the box office yet still sent the franchise into a slump. Somebody at Paramount got appropriately scared of the idea of mixing franchises and of potentially killing both Murphy's and Trek's reputation simultaneously. Keep the two apart, though, and there was almost guaranteed success for each.<br />
<br />
That ended up being the right call. Star Trek IV went on to become one the highest grossing Star Trek movies ever. Murphy's next two movies, The Golden Child and Coming to America, are still among the star's top ten highest money makers ever.<br />
<br />
The time travel scenario did stay in the picture, though. The part Murphy was supposed to have played in Star Trek IV eventually morphed in the role of 20th century marine biologist Dr.Gillian Taylor, Kirk's love interest.<br />
<br />
Imagine if Murphy had stuck with the part that far ; now that woulda been a <i>crossover.</i><br />
<i><br /></i><br />
<table align="center" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto; text-align: center;"><tbody>
<tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="http://d2oz5j6ef5tbf6.cloudfront.net/cd/large/Superman_III_WarnerBros923879.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" src="http://d2oz5j6ef5tbf6.cloudfront.net/cd/large/Superman_III_WarnerBros923879.jpg" /></a></td></tr>
<tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;">Which brings us to....</td></tr>
</tbody></table>
<i><br /></i><br />
<br />
<br />
<strong><u><span style="font-size: x-large;">Batman vs. Superman</span></u></strong><br />
<i>Wolfgang Petersen's Super Perfect Das Bat Force One starring Jude Law and Colin Ferell. </i><br />
<i><br /></i><br />
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
</div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiBosk0EMiHqIisjpTC1zcFp6VMSPSp7hWI98CAYgKb0E2uEwi5Yd81pi5ALridil5zQBWcral8qWZuWQ-D91p0-9_1eHUsDct8nz9dCY7zKveanX8lSjnaC2kRac_qbd6Oi1M-2Gdyb3E/s1600/worlds-finest-batman-and-superman.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiBosk0EMiHqIisjpTC1zcFp6VMSPSp7hWI98CAYgKb0E2uEwi5Yd81pi5ALridil5zQBWcral8qWZuWQ-D91p0-9_1eHUsDct8nz9dCY7zKveanX8lSjnaC2kRac_qbd6Oi1M-2Gdyb3E/s1600/worlds-finest-batman-and-superman.jpg" /></a></div>
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
</div>
<br />
Cast your mind back the time just after Joel Schmuacher and George Clooney "killed" the Batman franchise; the time when it was painfully obvious that Christopher Reeve would never play Superman again. Around that time, superhero movies were seeing something of a box office renaissance with the success of X-Men and the first Spider-Man movie. Hulk, Daredevil and Fantastic Four movies were also on the way. Not surprisingly, the idea of of reviving both the Superman and Batman franchises was very much one the minds of the people at DC Comics and Warner Studios. Reportedly, the predominant feeling was that bringing life back to Warner/DC's dormant flagship characters would best done sooner than later. Many different options on how to go about reviving Supes and Bats were explored.<br />
<br />
What they settled on was Batman vs Superman.<br />
<br />
Batman vs Superman...hmmm....well, the idea of getting those two guys together in a movie is a good one and one that is long overdue at that. However, the "vs" angle can be a bit problematic. Anyone who read World's Finest Comics (which regularly featured Superman-Batman team ups) when they were a kid knows that the two superheroes' alliance was generally an amiable one. Sure, in later Justice League and other comics, there was plenty of tension between The Gothamite and the Metropolitan. However, with the exception of Frank Miller's extremely gritty The Dark Knight Returns, relations between the two rarely broke down the "vs" level.<br />
<br />
The battling superhero scenario has certainly been done in the comics. Plenty of times, in fact. It's a premise that can work, within certain limits. You can have The Thing vs The Hulk or The Hulk vs Wolverine and even the monumental Marvel-DC crossover of Superman vs Spider-Man seemed to make sense, but when comes to Superman and Batman, the whole "vs" concept just doesn't quite mesh.<br />
<br />
<table cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="float: left; margin-right: 1em; text-align: left;"><tbody>
<tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="http://image.toutlecine.com/photos/e/n/e/enemy-1985-tou-05-g.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="clear: left; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" height="263" src="http://image.toutlecine.com/photos/e/n/e/enemy-1985-tou-05-g.jpg" width="400" /></a></td></tr>
<tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;">Wolfgang doin' the directan' thang</td></tr>
</tbody></table>
Nonetheless, Batman vs Superman moved ahead. The studio got Wolfgang Petersen, director of such films as Das Boot, The Perfect Storm, Enemy Mine, The Neverending Story, Troy and Air Force One, on board to direct. Petersen stated publicly that he was very into the idea and loved the film versions of both characters that had appeared thus far. In fact, he still claims that he is interested in directing a Batman vs Superman movie some day.<br />
<br />
Possible casting choices that hit the rumour mill at the time included Jude Law or Josh Hartnett as Superman and Colin Ferrell or actual eventual Batman, Christian Bale, as The Dark Knight himself. Apparently, Bale was also at one point considered for the role of Superman.<br />
<br />
Wow. Imagine. Bale vs Bale. That, I woulda paid good money to see.<br />
<br />
Like the Eddie Murphy meets Star Trek idea, however, Warner/DC got cold feet on the idea mixing franchises. Lighter heads prevailed. They decided that it would be better to revive each character separately. If Batman vs Superman bombed, both characters were screwed at box office. If only one or the other bombed, well, they always had Batman vs Superman in their back pocket to help boost the hypothetically less successful franchise.<br />
<br />
In time, Warner/DC finally went with Christopher Nolan's Batman Begins. For the Kryptonian's resurrection, there was Bryan Singer's ostensible follow up to the Christopher Reeve Superman movies, Superman Returns. Batman Begins was a huge hit, as was its sequel, The Dark Night (and most likely that will also be the case for the upcoming The Dark Knight Rises). Superman Returns, on the other hand, did well financially but not so well with critics and fans. Whatever the case, there was never any talk of Bale's Batman duking it out with Brandon Routh's Superman.<br />
<br />
In fact, now with The Avengers finally here, the DC superhero movie crossover project may well come full circle. Marvel Comics has just made a huge, bold and more than likely very successful move with a feature film version of their superhero team. Warner/DC have apparently been thinking about a potential movie featuring that company's biggest superhero group, The Justice League (also known for years on Saturday morning TV as the Super Friends) for some time. Now, it may well happen.<br />
<br />
All Warner/DC needs to do now, is, after the 2013 Superman movie, Man of Steel, reboot Batman yet again (neither Nolan nor Bale are interested in seeing the Dark Knight join the league). Then they just need to tackle the small matter of making a Wonder Woman, Flash and Aquaman movie. And, well, popular or not, they've already established a movie Green Lantern, who could be ready to join the Justice League any time.<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="http://geektyrant.com/storage/2011-post-images/justice_league_movie_poster_by_daniel_morpheus-d4ga8dj.jpeg?__SQUARESPACE_CACHEVERSION=1322170110030" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="370" src="http://geektyrant.com/storage/2011-post-images/justice_league_movie_poster_by_daniel_morpheus-d4ga8dj.jpeg?__SQUARESPACE_CACHEVERSION=1322170110030" width="640" /></a></div>
<br />
But, you know, after looking at the Development Hell process in detail in this post, it's possible that just about every project on this list may well come into being before we will ever see anything like a Justice League or a similarly ambitious crossover movie happen.Terence Bowmanhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/04576129838447713151noreply@blogger.com2tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2233378012529819224.post-75217628820086349452012-04-27T10:00:00.000-04:002012-04-27T10:39:10.787-04:00My Adventures in YouTube Land<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="http://www.utexas.edu/cola/depts/geography/_files/images/site/youtube-logo.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="452" src="http://www.utexas.edu/cola/depts/geography/_files/images/site/youtube-logo.jpg" width="640" /></a></div>
<br />
<br />
In the roughly year and a half that I have been blogging and article writing, I have found that, as a relatively new contributor to the land of Internet discourse, the general tone of discussions and debates that I've been involved in have been surprisingly reasonable. The comments I've gotten on "He Had on a Hat" and on my articles for other online writing have, while often in disagreement with my ideas and opinions, remained relatively positive and reasonable.<br />
<br />
All that seemed to change, though, once I started posting videos on YouTube. For some reason, on YoutTube, unlike blogs and web articles, the member comments are much more raw and the opinions more unbridled. I began posting videos on YouTube innocently enough. There was some stuff I was kinda expecting certain types of reactions to. Like, for instance, the responses to this scene from the 1972 movie Catlow, in which Leonard Nimoy lets it all hang out...<br />
<br />
<iframe allowfullscreen="" frameborder="0" height="480" src="http://www.youtube.com/embed/hOGpC75s0Y8" width="640"></iframe><br />
<br />
<br />
Typical comments from other YouTubers went something like this:<br />
<br />
<span style="font-family: inherit;">"<span style="color: #333333; line-height: 16px; text-align: left;">To see Leonard fighting naked is the hottest thing ever! O.o"</span></span> <br />
<br />
And so on and so forth...but even in this case, there were a few comments that surprised me:<br />
<span style="color: #333333; font-size: 13px; line-height: 16px; text-align: left;"><span style="font-family: inherit;"><br /></span></span><br />
<span style="color: #333333; font-family: inherit; line-height: 16px; text-align: left;">"oh man, you don't really see anything important. So disappointed :( lol "</span><br />
<br />
Then there was this little edit I made featuring a montage of Chuck Heston's religious epic roles set to Johnny Cash covering a Depeche Mode song<br />
<br />
<iframe allowfullscreen="" frameborder="0" height="480" src="http://www.youtube.com/embed/5mF8gdz3u4s" width="640"></iframe><br />
<br />
There were several potential sources of outrage there from fans of either Heston, Cash, Depeche Mode, Jesus or all four but, nope, not a single comment.<br />
<br />
Interesting.<br />
<br />
Even when I called the fan classic Star Trek II: The Wrath of Khan on its lack of originality....<br />
<br />
<iframe allowfullscreen="" frameborder="0" height="480" src="http://www.youtube.com/embed/9paw_bLP5y0" width="640"></iframe><br />
<br />
Nothin'. Trekkies? Trekkers? Geeks? Nope.<br />
<br />
No contest on that one either.<br />
<br />
Then I dug up this little gem featuring a very young Christopher Walken on an episode of the original 1960's version of the TV series, Hawaii Five-0:<br />
<br />
<iframe allowfullscreen="" frameborder="0" height="480" src="http://www.youtube.com/embed/VF9y6eElFPk" width="640"></iframe><br />
<br />
<br />
While many of the comments I received either praised Walken or commented on how young the guy looked (many of them bringing, not surprisingly for YouTube comments, Walken's "ass" into the discussion), a couple of commentators took issue with the text I wrote accompanying the clip in which I referred to lead H50 actor Jack Lord as "stiff".<br />
<br />
They opened by quoting my own words: <br />
<br />
"'Lord, an actor whose performances could sometimes be as stiff as his hairpiece, is just a little better than usual working with the young Walken.' That shows how much the writer who wrote that piece knows about Jack. Copying the 'stiff' label is ignorant and shows he doesn't know the difference between serious acting and stiff acting." <br />
<br />
I quickly pointed out to this poster that implying that I knew nothing about acting or of Jack Lord's work was, to put it mildly, a majorly erroneous a assumption, most especially in my case. Anyone who knows me or reads "He Had on a Hat" regularly knows what I'm talking about.<br />
<br />
Even on that heated discussion, though, I was later able to make peace with the Lord fans who clearly misinterpreted me as being a Jack hater.<br />
<br />
The YouTube comments, though, really seriously heated up when it came to this clip of William Shatner interviewing controversial radio talk show host Rush Limbaugh on Shatner's talk show, Raw Nerve. <br />
<div>
<br /></div>
<br />
<br />
<br />
<iframe allowfullscreen="" frameborder="0" height="480" src="http://www.youtube.com/embed/Ff_Ydkrtb9c" width="640"></iframe><br />
<br />
While I quickly received a number of Rush bashing and Shatner praising comments, the Limbugh fans out there (and, yeah, there are a lot of them) soon took notice of what they perceived as a one sided discussion.<br />
<br />
Here's one of the more colourful additions to the conversation:<br />
<br />
"Rush is the best. I want to tell you little pinhead libtards who are clueless which looks like most of the people in here are. Since we are talking health care, I've had type 1 Diabetes all of my life WITHOUT INSURANCE FOR MOST OF MY LIFE. During the Clinton admin, I went to the gov health clinics that Clinton shut down after 2 years in his term. It was the worst health care I have ever seen. The medicine was low grade, doctors were clueless about the disease, and it was full of racist brainwashed blacks...you pinhead liberals complaining you don't have anything BOOO HOOOO. Get a job you stupid stinky idiots. If you don't like what you have find something else and work hard. Stop thinking the gov should do everything for you. Stupid lazy idiots. Celestial Woodway is a racist. You people don't know shit. I have the experience and I know what I'm talking about. So stick your Obama dildo up you ass."<br />
<br />
Woah, okay...I, in no uncertain terms, absolutely object to the use of the term, "stinky".<br />
<br />
Seriously, though, a great many responses to these highly objectionable words went through my head. I felt that engaging the guy (and, yeah, I'm assuming it's a guy) would just dredge out more and more of the same extreme rhetorical hyperbole. So I cut right to what I felt was the real heart of the matter by saying:<br />
<br />
"I am glad to see that the discourse remains civil and reasonable."<br />
<br />
After that, I never heard another word from that person ever again.<br />
<br />
Yep, that's how the Internet and YouTube comment section debates seems to work. You can call people "racists", "libtards" and even go so far as to label them "stupid stinky idiots". You can respond to these kinds of statements in kind and inevitably escalate the hate even further. But, if you take on a calm and moderate tone, well, that just stops everything cold. Some things are simply just not tolerated on the Internet.<br />
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="http://theintelhub.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/09/youtube-censored-2.png" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" src="http://theintelhub.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/09/youtube-censored-2.png" /></a></div>
<br />
<br />
Until next week, have fun out there in cyber debate land, all you stinkies...Terence Bowmanhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/04576129838447713151noreply@blogger.com0Montreal, QC, Canada45.5086699 -73.553992545.3306269 -73.8698495 45.6867129 -73.238135500000013tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2233378012529819224.post-84792134155250525482012-04-19T08:59:00.000-04:002012-04-19T08:59:46.746-04:00Disaster Movies of Titanic Proportions<table align="center" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto; text-align: center;"><tbody>
<tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEg_2sGx5OW23WkGyXXC3U82rO9lWxtGPVtpRszO0bgvXU3XuiWOnoSI2GyRh37aed7YUz5GftwGs3z08LkdbtAzC8VX3N73-bgp2fDopQIJszLiDrcZXr2WTI53LKwjCJTNVO1GJE_dy18/s1600/H-Titanic_400x400_2_jpg_400x400_upscale_q85.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEg_2sGx5OW23WkGyXXC3U82rO9lWxtGPVtpRszO0bgvXU3XuiWOnoSI2GyRh37aed7YUz5GftwGs3z08LkdbtAzC8VX3N73-bgp2fDopQIJszLiDrcZXr2WTI53LKwjCJTNVO1GJE_dy18/s1600/H-Titanic_400x400_2_jpg_400x400_upscale_q85.jpg" /></a></td></tr>
<tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;">From The Onion's Our Dumb Century</td></tr>
</tbody></table><br />
<br />
The sinking of the RMS Titanic was a story so big and so tragic in its day that even one hundred years plus four days later, people lime me are still blogging about it. The demise of the White Star Line's flagship on its maiden voyage in 1912 went on to become story that even influenced our very culture. I first heard about The Titanic when I was 5 or 6. The disaster was sounded so culturally archetypal (that's the exact wording I used at 6 years old) that, for the longest time, I thought it was a story from the Bible. No doubt the "God Himself couldn't sink her" line has something to do with that . After all, the good book is full of people challenging God's power and living to regret it big time, usually via some form of flood, plague or other Act of God (which, BTW, has always sounded like the kind of thing that goes down in an abusive relationship, but that's a whole other blog post).<br />
<br />
Of course, there are the movies that are based on the event itself, like A Night to Remember and that one there that's one of James Cameron's early low budget art house movies from his pre-Avatar period. More than that, though, the sinking of the Titanic has influenced movies in terms of both theme and narrative. Particularly prevalent are movies from the pinnacle of the 70's disaster movie craze that are filled with themes of decadence combined with human technological hubris. Like, you know, the hubris of, say, building ridiculously large ships that don't have even enough lifeboats on board because, after all, "God Himself couldn't sink her" and then decadently partying it up on said ship till an iceberg comes along and sets things straight.<br />
<br />
These themes are, of course, most often seen in disaster movies, most especially one made sure the height of the genre's popularity in the 1970's.<br />
<br />
Here's three for instances...<br />
<br />
<br />
<div style="text-align: center;"><b><u><span style="font-size: x-large;">The Poseidon Adventure</span></u></b><br />
<b><u><span style="font-size: large;"><br />
</span></u></b></div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgMc-oySM23xHYD2RN_8EIl822QGuipSZXNLo8GbZZhyphenhyphenNyBuEiReqoKc2rPO36VJXv13_9V9mggoGf-nyimL55X43DeEnwbozk1C3tmNe9x97l7AIwdUeXGTr0sGM-HP3UfVUy5FKASbyI/s1600/the-poseidon-adventure-poster-mort-kunstler.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgMc-oySM23xHYD2RN_8EIl822QGuipSZXNLo8GbZZhyphenhyphenNyBuEiReqoKc2rPO36VJXv13_9V9mggoGf-nyimL55X43DeEnwbozk1C3tmNe9x97l7AIwdUeXGTr0sGM-HP3UfVUy5FKASbyI/s1600/the-poseidon-adventure-poster-mort-kunstler.jpg" /></a></div><br />
Many of the 70's disaster movies are essentially the Titanic in a different context. Case in point, The Poseidon Adventure.<br />
<br />
Producer Irwin Allen's spectacular 1972 disaster movie even keeps the passenger liner setting of its inspiration. The ship in question is the mythologically monikered SS Poseidon. While on a New York to Athens cruise, The Poseidon gets hit by one of the biggest tidal waves ever recorded. Of course, the wave doesn't just chose to hit the boat at any old time. No, the great waters of the world decide to flex their aquatic muscles just moments after midnight on New Year's Eve. In a heavily ramped-up sequence of stunts and screaming, many people are brutally killed on what some might call the Worst New Year's Eve Ever. The survivors must find their way to the "bottom" of the ship, which, of course in now the "top" of the ship before the whole kit and caboodle (oh, yes, the caboodle too) sinks. And all the while, everyone is in their nice fancy-pantsed tuxedos and hoity-toity evening gowns. It all makes for a very Titanic paradigm. That, and the whole movie is a blatantly flimsy excuse to show Ernest Borgnine running around in his undershirt for two hours.<br />
<br />
Not to be confused with its two 2005 remakes.<br />
<br />
<br />
<iframe allowfullscreen="" frameborder="0" height="360" src="http://www.youtube.com/embed/dd03qev59Jo" width="640"></iframe><br />
<br />
<div style="text-align: center;"><b><u><span style="font-size: large;"><br />
</span></u></b><br />
<b><u><span style="font-size: large;"><br />
</span></u></b><br />
<b><u><span style="font-size: x-large;">The Towering Inferno</span></u></b></div><div style="text-align: center;"><b><u><span style="font-size: large;"><br />
</span></u></b></div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjG7ZJN1setxWLld1nwcNrPAmMGMZJSby9r_zD2a7s3yVumWfoankcuiB9LIeUKOhx9p_nxB21BJXH5oc3aLs2mVii0FppHJ92RNHI1sI1dQiYqIMHeYglNcPcA3KwfbJzIzIldk0L55VM/s1600/towering_inferno.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjG7ZJN1setxWLld1nwcNrPAmMGMZJSby9r_zD2a7s3yVumWfoankcuiB9LIeUKOhx9p_nxB21BJXH5oc3aLs2mVii0FppHJ92RNHI1sI1dQiYqIMHeYglNcPcA3KwfbJzIzIldk0L55VM/s1600/towering_inferno.jpg" /></a></div><br />
Irwin Allen is at it again. And this time it's 1974.<br />
<br />
This disaster of Titanic proportion gets out of the water and into the world's tallest building. Set in San Francisco, The Towering Inferno features a 138 story marvel of modern architecture that was at the time the world's tallest fictional skyscraper. A second tower, not quite as tall, stands next to it. The "twin towers" of the film are a fairly obvious allegory to then just opened World Trade Center in NYC; a veiled comment on how buildings as tall as those of the World Trade Center towers were, ultimately, doomed to disaster.<br />
<br />
No comment.<br />
<br />
Due to some shoddy wiring by a crooked contractor, a small electrical fire breaks out on the 79th floor. Only it doesn't stay small for long. This, of course, happens on the opening night (ie: maiden voyage) of the skyscraper . The top floor of the, as it is refereed to in the film, Glass Tower is filled with San Francisco's decadent social elite. Everyone is all feted up in their decadent evening gowns and tuxedos, 70's style (and, oh yeah, there's some kitschily hideous clothes on display in this movie).<br />
<br />
Of course, the building is too tall for any of the fire engine ladders to reach high enough to rescue anyone. So that leaves us with a lot of people running around on fire and some spectacular failed rescue attempts in the form of fiery helicopter crashes.<br />
<br />
The Towering Inferno features one of the most impressive casts that big Hollywood money can buy: Steve McQueen, Paul Newman, Faye Dunaway, Fred Astaire, William Holden, Robert Wagner and, filling out the historical irony department, O.J. Simpson.<br />
<br />
Speaking of the historical irony department, the 70's disaster movie genre may have, from a 21st century stand point, gotten very disturbing. The Airport series of movies, which depicted many innovative airborne disasters, were also very popular at the time (though, thematically speaking, not quite Titanic enough for this post). At one point, the series producer's idea for next film in the Airport franchise would have involved a 747 passenger jet crashing into -wait for it- the world's tallest skyscraper. The Airport producers ditched the idea when they heard that The Towering Inferno was in the works.<br />
<br />
Good thing. That movie woulda been a bit too creepily prescient all around. And just imagine what those video rental figures would have been like on September 12, 2001.<br />
<br />
<iframe allowfullscreen="" frameborder="0" height="360" src="http://www.youtube.com/embed/zsRnQQpklPM" width="480"></iframe><br />
<br />
<div style="text-align: center;"><b><u><span style="font-size: large;"><br />
</span></u></b><br />
<b><u><span style="font-size: large;"><br />
</span></u></b><br />
<b><u><span style="font-size: x-large;">Raise The Titanic</span></u></b></div><div style="text-align: center;"><b><u><span style="font-size: large;"><br />
</span></u></b></div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiPoxevopEEHVqEUd_KWHeoGlsANA3qPOEAtB-FM2CxqmIQq31KdP41sVcWXa9Nko4NC7sBWZYHzeEHEqXBz9k7_EU4qWake08LJ7ntqcD7XePdZ65S4qFA1ceTcBeI_qP-Dluk92h2hvY/s1600/rescaten_el_titanic_1980_4.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="640" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiPoxevopEEHVqEUd_KWHeoGlsANA3qPOEAtB-FM2CxqmIQq31KdP41sVcWXa9Nko4NC7sBWZYHzeEHEqXBz9k7_EU4qWake08LJ7ntqcD7XePdZ65S4qFA1ceTcBeI_qP-Dluk92h2hvY/s640/rescaten_el_titanic_1980_4.jpg" width="426" /></a></div><br />
Raise The Titanic is a disaster of a different sort; a disaster at the box office, involving both hubris and decadence.<br />
<br />
This 1980 film was based on the bestselling novel of the same name by author Clive Cussler. After Raise The Titanic, Cussler did not allow another one of his books to be adapted to the big screen ever again. The only exception being Sahara in 2005, and even then Cussler sued over it.<br />
<br />
As the title suggests, the film is about an attempt to raise the Titanic from its watery grave (nobody tell James Cameron about that idea). Through a convoluted series of plot thickening events, it is discovered that not only is there this rare fictional mineral that's really important to American national defence tech but that the only known samples of this mineral were on board the RMS Titanic when that iceberg went and sunk it. Suddenly, the Americans and Russians are in a race to find the Titanic and raise it from the bottom of the ocean. The Americans, led by badass Logan's Run Sandman Richard Jordan and a slumming Jason Robards, find the Titanic first.<br />
<br />
They finally (SPOILER ALERT) succeed in raising the ship. However, when doing so, they conveniently skip over the fact the Titanic's hull was split in two when it sunk. That plot point might be a passable bit of artistic license were it not for the fact that there is a scene where they actually show footage taken from a submarine that shows the Titanic in two pieces on the ocean floor.<br />
<br />
The critical and financial success of Raise The Titanic, or lack thereof, is where the hubris and decadence bit comes in. In 1980, the movie cost an estimated $40 million to make. To date, the film has only made back $13 million worth of that initial investment. Those numbers include the era of Beta, VHS, laser discs, DVD, Blu-ray, cable movie channels, Netflix, digital downloads and the financial bump of just about any movie with the word "Titanic" in the title that came in the wake of Cameron's 1997 blockbuster. The almost total failure of Raise The Titanic drove both Cussler and veteran British film producer Lord Grade out of the movie business entirely.<br />
<br />
Raise The Titanic is also historically significant in another way. It was nominated for Worst Picture, Worst Screenplay and Worst Supporting Actor at the 1st Annual Golden Raspberry Awards.<br />
<br />
<br />
<iframe allowfullscreen="" frameborder="0" height="480" src="http://www.youtube.com/embed/5Il7Hub5Vqs" width="640"></iframe><br />
<br />
I'd only seen bits and pieces of Raise The Titanic on TV once or twice so I decided it was only fair to seek it out and watch it. As is often the case with bad movie hype, it really wasn't THAT bad. Not the greatest movie I've ever seen but certainly no <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_movies_generating_losses" target="_blank"><i>insert your favourite go-to big budget movie that bombed here</i> </a>either.<br />
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjMNmDVozkQa_p8_utvD17KAmVOE1CmSWiq96B2-XCm9aazLK2Mw5E2q1nynVAws712SXAcERsvqRlyAj2_J9XgEaRiwCIiYzErJhJHNwIe5WQxztGHfS05Bpdr0Akx-3LcMVkVBCZkBRs/s1600/titanic-nautical-1024.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="480" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjMNmDVozkQa_p8_utvD17KAmVOE1CmSWiq96B2-XCm9aazLK2Mw5E2q1nynVAws712SXAcERsvqRlyAj2_J9XgEaRiwCIiYzErJhJHNwIe5WQxztGHfS05Bpdr0Akx-3LcMVkVBCZkBRs/s640/titanic-nautical-1024.jpg" width="640" /></a></div><br />
<br />
I'll be back with some more Disaster Movies of Titanic Proportions for the 200th Anniversary of the sinking of the Titanic...Terence Bowmanhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/04576129838447713151noreply@blogger.com3tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2233378012529819224.post-47928189340199755912012-04-05T10:51:00.000-04:002012-04-05T10:51:24.046-04:00Five Great Movie Crucifixion Scenes*<div style="text-align: center;"><i><b>*that aren't from movies about Jesus</b></i></div><br />
<table align="center" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto; text-align: center;"><tbody>
<tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhhnhos0Odg_HobZ5FFAV_gHdiOJQUvqQTZrkR07ySP-4jeyVRk1hT_FPKXjjrQgVPg7ynWTFoz2wQV1RxgGNgTau2Ir7Mb703F2d-ovuNRBDCNWlA7XiPaXPXTys5CfBRC3qstXIGQfUI/s1600/RoboCop-on-the-cross.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhhnhos0Odg_HobZ5FFAV_gHdiOJQUvqQTZrkR07ySP-4jeyVRk1hT_FPKXjjrQgVPg7ynWTFoz2wQV1RxgGNgTau2Ir7Mb703F2d-ovuNRBDCNWlA7XiPaXPXTys5CfBRC3qstXIGQfUI/s1600/RoboCop-on-the-cross.jpg" /></a></td></tr>
<tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;">The first still from Mel Gibson's upcoming Robocop reboot</td></tr>
</tbody></table><br />
After bunnies and chocolate eggs, the most prominent image of Easter is that of Jesus Christ crucified on the cross. It's an image that permeates more than just Easter. There are few other images in our Judeo Christian-based culture that are quite as resonantly iconic (well, if you leave out the Judeo part, anyway). The image of the <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stations_of_the_Cross" target="_blank">11th and 12th Stations of The Cross </a>have been revisited by artists in many different mediums over the last twenty or so centuries.<br />
<br />
Film makers are no exception. In the history of cinema, many directors have gone there and in many different ways. A good deal have gone to the literal representation of the crucifixion in biblical films like William Wyler with Ben Hur and George Stevens with The Greatest Story Ever Told while others have taken more controversial routes like Norman Jewison with Jesus Christ Superstar, Martin Scorsese with The Last Temptation of Christ and, more recently, Mel Gibson with The Passion of the Christ. Far more prevalent, though, are the allegorical Christ figures of movie history. Peruse through enough academic articles and serious-minded fan websites and you will find alleged Christ parallels in every cinematic icon from Rhett Butler to Luke Skywalker. Many times the perceived savior allusion is more than just literary in nature; they are visual and cinematic in nature and they usually key thematic and dramatic scenes in film. The image most commonly cinematically referred to is that of the crucifixion of Christ. These scenes borrow not just the thematic concepts of the crucifixion but much of the classic iconography of the crucifixion as well: <a href="http://www.topnews.in/files/crucifixion.jpg" target="_blank">outstretched arms</a>, <a href="http://edblonski.files.wordpress.com/2011/04/nail-pierced-hand.jpg" target="_blank">nails through the hands or wrists,</a> <a href="http://www.hem-of-his-garment-bible-study.org/images/Jesus-crown-of-thorns.gif" target="_blank">the crown of thorns</a> and <a href="http://schribe.files.wordpress.com/2011/04/longinus.jpg" target="_blank">the spear in the side</a>, to name a few.<br />
<br />
For some, these visual crucifixion cues are more apparent and meaningful than others. For someone raised Catholic as I was (though I'm most definitely in the "fallen" category now) and who was later taught film criticism by a <a href="http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/montreal/story/2012/03/27/montreal-film-scholar-gervais-jesuit-dies.html" target="_blank">Jesuit priest</a>, such images leap off the screen. For those with more secular upbringings who were taught film criticism (if at all) by, say, an avowed Marxist, probably not so much. However, as <a href="http://marshallmcluhan.com/" target="_blank">Marshal McLuhan</a> was fond of saying, "The medium is the message". If those images are up there on that movie screen and a viewer notices it, consciously or not, then they do have some kind of meaning.<br />
<br />
I could spend a blog post each week pointing out each and every visual Christ allegory that has ever appeared in a movie at one time or another. I've narrowed it down to five of my favourite examples. Here are five examples of films that have borrowed, used for their own purposes and some might say twisted and even ridiculed the imagery that, next to bunnies, is most strongly associated with this time of the year.<br />
<br />
<i><b>WARNING: B</b></i><i><b>ig time SPOILER ALERT, if you have not seen any of these movies.</b></i><br />
<br />
<br />
<div style="text-align: center;"><b><span style="font-size: x-large;"><u>Conan The Barbarian</u></span></b><br />
<i style="text-align: -webkit-auto;">1982</i><br />
<i style="text-align: -webkit-auto;">Directed by John Milius</i> <br />
<i style="text-align: -webkit-auto;"><br />
</i></div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="http://www.mystichammer.com/conan/images/crucified.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" src="http://www.mystichammer.com/conan/images/crucified.jpg" /></a></div><b><br />
</b><br />
<i><br />
</i><br />
<b><u>Who's Standing in for Jesus?</u></b><br />
Future Governor of California and champion body builder turned action movie star, Arnold Schwarzenegger. In this case, Mr. Schwarzenegger is playing legendary fantasy writer Robert E. Howard's most famous creation Conan The Cimmerian, an ancient and, I might add, pagan barbarian.<br />
<b><u><br />
</u></b><br />
<b><u>What's the context?</u></b><br />
While seeking revenge for the murder of his father, Conan tracks down the evil, mystical and snake-themed warlord Thursla Doom, (James Earl Jones, who was then still trying to break away from that Darth Vader typecasting thing). After tracking down Doom, Conan attempts to infiltrate Doom's temple but is captured. Doom then sentences the barbarian to death by crucifixion. While tied to a tree (not nailed to a cross), Conan endures his torment in the most pro-active way possible. At one point, a vulture attempts to peck out Conan's eyes. Before the bird can do so, Conan bites the thing right in the neck and kills it. The barbarian is later rescued by one of his comrades in arms and is brought back to health with the help of the magic of an old wizard.<br />
<br />
<b><u>What makes it a crucifixion?</u></b><br />
The religious allegories of the scene, while present as a stylistic motif, are a bit tenuous, to say the least. Conan almost, but doesn't quite, die while tied to a tree and is then brought back to "life" via supernatural means. Yeah, that's sorta kinda a crucifixion and resurrection metaphor, but, really, the only allegory that really holds up to scrutiny is Conan's incredible ability to survive hardship, torment and almost certain death.<br />
The scene is often described a quintessential moment in defining the character of Conan, both in cinema and in literature. The scene itself is taken directly from a similar yet much more powerful description of Conan's similar crucifixion in Howard's original short story, A Witch Shall Be Born.<br />
<br />
<table cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="float: left; margin-right: 1em; text-align: left;"><tbody>
<tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEi_wNUcHf0L2SGTquhJFIsen5sM6R-Wr5IyIsqet_6rxc2Iri8DjgkWBg4CdbZzT159xqqJ0Bue-Vm8-jB3-G4rQyT_Jy8EX7eeVX59XD8gm2znU-FRYHF2HN0nKoheCTC78x5jqsI9ldU/s1600/Conan-Crucifixion.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="clear: left; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" height="400" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEi_wNUcHf0L2SGTquhJFIsen5sM6R-Wr5IyIsqet_6rxc2Iri8DjgkWBg4CdbZzT159xqqJ0Bue-Vm8-jB3-G4rQyT_Jy8EX7eeVX59XD8gm2znU-FRYHF2HN0nKoheCTC78x5jqsI9ldU/s400/Conan-Crucifixion.jpg" width="321" /></a></td></tr>
<tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;">Artist Boris Valego's rendering of A Witch Shall Be Born</td></tr>
</tbody></table><br />
<i>"By the side of the caravan road a heavy cross had been planted, and on this grim tree a man hung, nailed there by iron spikes through his hands and feet. Naked but for a loin-cloth, the man was almost a giant in stature, and his muscles stood out in thick corded ridges on limbs and body, which the sun had long ago burned brown..."</i><br />
<i>-Robert E. Howard, A Witch Shall Be Born, 1934</i><br />
<br />
That section of the original Conan story is some of the best writing of Howard's career and, in my opinion, the most powerful passage ever written for his signature character. In the story, Conan ends up on the wrong side of a bloody coup d'etat in ancient city state. He is literally crucified for defying Constantius, the new conqueror. Conan is nailed, not tied, to a cross, not a tree. The vulture scene is basically the same. Conan's only rescue comes in the form of a passerby, one of Constantius' rivals, who merely cuts down the cross and lets Conan fend for himself from there. Conan, of course, manages to survive to fight another day. In an effort to retain some believability, Howard has Conan spend several months recovering. Conan finally exacts his revenge when, after conquering his army, he finally captures and then crucifies Constantius, the very man that had Conan nailed to the cross in the first place. Not only does Conan overcome suffering at the hands of his enemies but he does quite aggressively.<br />
"You are more fit to inflict torture than endure it.", says Conan to his former tormentor as he leaves the man hanging on the cross.<br />
Not exactly "turn the other cheek" stuff, is it?<br />
No, Conan is not a messianic figure of salvation and resurrection ; he survives crucifixion not because of his virtue or because of divine providence but because Conan The Barbarian (in both movies and books) is, quite simply a tough, determined and unkillable badass.<br />
<br />
<iframe allowfullscreen="" frameborder="0" height="360" src="http://www.youtube.com/embed/PAHFNiNl9JM" width="640"></iframe><br />
<br />
<br />
<b><br />
</b><br />
<br />
<div style="text-align: center;"><b><span style="font-size: x-large;"><u>The Omega Man</u></span></b></div><div style="text-align: center;"><i>1971</i><br />
<i>Directed by Boris Sagal</i></div><br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"></div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="http://www.cultreviews.com/wp-content/uploads/2009/03/the-omega-man-5.png" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="360" src="http://www.cultreviews.com/wp-content/uploads/2009/03/the-omega-man-5.png" width="640" /></a></div><br />
<b><br />
</b><br />
<b><u>Who's standing in For Jesus?: </u></b><br />
Charlton Heston, as U.S. Air Force Colonel Robert Neville, M.D..<br />
<b><br />
</b><br />
<b><u>What's the context?:</u></b><br />
The Omega Man is the second of three film adapatations of Richard Matheson's short story I Am Legend (the first is The Last Man on Earth in 1964 with Vincent Price and the third is I Am Legend with Will Smith in 2007).<br />
In 1975 (which would have been four years into the Not-Too-Distant Future when the film was made) the Cold War has become one of biological warfare. Heston, an Air Force research physician, injects himself with an experimental vaccine, but it is too late. Most, if not all, of the world population has already succumbed to the plague created by the war. Heston believes he's the last man on Earth. He goes on to spend his days roaming the deserted streets of Los Angeles and his nights fighting off a cult of plague infected nocturnal albino vampires. The cult is determined to destroy all remaining technology and Heston along with it. However, Heston and his large cachet of automatic weapons and greenades have something to say about that plan.<br />
Heston is rescued from the albino vampires one night by a group young hippie survivors. The young "kids of today" are immune to the plague because of their age. Can you tell this movie was made in the early 70's?<br />
With the help of one of the young hippies, a former medical student, Heston is able manufacture a new vaccine from his own blood as he, of course, is immune to the plague.<br />
Before he can get out of the city with the new vaccine, however, one of the albino vamps manages to impale Heston with a large spear. Heston dies slowly, posed in a Christ on the cross style crucifixion pose. The young hippies retrieve the serum he made, get out of the city and get the closing credits rolling.<br />
<br />
<b><u>What makes it a crucifixion scene?</u></b><br />
K, this allegory is pretty ham-handed but, as <a href="http://www.montrealgazette.com/entertainment/movie-guide/Marc+Gervais+Montreal+priest+with+passion+film+dies/6361119/story.html" target="_blank">the aforementioned Jesuit Priest who taught me film criticism</a> used to say, "It's all there.". First, there's the outstretched arms and the slightly bent knees: you know, you basic Christ on a the cross position. Then Heston bleeds profusely from the wound inflicted by a large spear (yes, yes, he was not stabbed exactly in the side but let's not too holier than thou about every little detail, okay?). Not to mention the fact that the man has just effectively saved all of humanity from its own, you might say "sins", with a serum that was literally made from Heston's own blood.<br />
Once it's all laid out like that, the symbolism is pretty forced and, frankly, even as these kinds of things go, kind of silly in how seriously it takes itself.<br />
On the bright side, though, perhaps the grateful survivors of this future world will someday drink wine at communion each week, as a way of symbolizing the sacrifice of the Blood of Heston...<br />
<br />
<iframe allowfullscreen="" frameborder="0" height="360" src="http://www.youtube.com/embed/qsrSXyPk7tk" width="640"></iframe><br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<div style="text-align: center;"><b><span style="font-size: x-large;"><u>Blade Runner</u></span></b></div><div style="text-align: center;"><i>1982</i></div><div style="text-align: center;"><i>Directed by Ridley Scott</i></div><div style="text-align: center;"><br />
</div><table align="center" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto; text-align: center;"><tbody>
<tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhNuWxsKPI3mo1riF6FIiVO5dnzmwPUj_Kr6o2chFTXFYpGRXbXEZyCAAS1pt5yL0gUK7DcABSY3rkMPr9JetXOQI1vlblAbp0hr24mE6E2kiX2W36Y6l0CRjVpcMB3-FnXrLUOcVjnoqc/s1600/roy-batty.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhNuWxsKPI3mo1riF6FIiVO5dnzmwPUj_Kr6o2chFTXFYpGRXbXEZyCAAS1pt5yL0gUK7DcABSY3rkMPr9JetXOQI1vlblAbp0hr24mE6E2kiX2W36Y6l0CRjVpcMB3-FnXrLUOcVjnoqc/s1600/roy-batty.jpg" /></a></td></tr>
<tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;">This image is closer to that of a Resurrection that it is to that of a Crucifixion but more on that later.</td></tr>
</tbody></table><div style="text-align: center;"><br />
</div><div style="text-align: center;"><br />
</div><div style="text-align: left;"><b><u>Who is standing in for Jesus?</u></b></div><div style="text-align: left;">Rutgar Hauer, as the powerful, menacing yet somehow spiritual and sympathetic biorobotic android, Roy Batty.</div><div style="text-align: left;"><b><u>What's the context?</u></b></div><div style="text-align: left;">Blade Runner is the bleak dystopian future to end all the bleak dystopian futures.</div><div style="text-align: left;">Futuristic cop/bounty hunter or, if you prefer, Blade Runner, Rick Deckard (Harrison Ford) is assigned to track down and "retire" (ie: kill) a group of rogue biorobotic androids known as replicants. The replicants, lead by the creepily charismatic Roy Batty (Hauer) have escaped from what basically amounts to slavery to seek out Dr. Eldon Tyrell. Tyrell is head of the eponymous Tyrell Corporation, creators and manufacturers of the Replicants. That makes Tyrell something of a God figure, at least as far as the replicants are concerned, anyway. As Deckard hunts the replicants, he seems to become increasingly cold and inhuman, even as he becomes romantically involved with a replicant. Meanwhile, the fugitive replicants appear to be gaining more humanity as they come closer and closer to the end of their genetically programmed two year life span.</div><div style="text-align: left;">In the film's climax, Deckard has a dramatic show down with the surviving replicants on a rooftop in the rain. He is tormented physically and psychologically by the increasingly powerful and menacing Batty. As Batty realizes his time is coming to and end and that he is starting to lose control of his physical body, he drives a nail through each of the palms of his hands, in attempt to stop them from shaking. Moments later, after rescuing Ford from falling off the roof and saving his life, Hauer sits down in the rain on the rooftop and declares that it's "time to die.". He droops down into a still position and releases a white dove that he had (for some reason) grabbed a hold of earlier. The dove flies directly up into the air in slow motion as the camera follows it from below.</div><div style="text-align: left;"><br />
</div><div style="text-align: left;"><b><u>What makes it a crucifixion scene?</u></b></div><div style="text-align: left;">The religious allusions in Blade Runner are a bit more subtle and nuanced than in the other films mentioned in this post. They are one element in a wonderfully multifaceted palate that deals with many themes and concepts, both visual and thematic. They are stylistic, cultural, philosophical and, yes, even theological in nature.<br />
Let's stick to the theological stuff.</div><div style="text-align: left;">Among other things, biblical allusions and references abound in Blade Runner. Ford in one scene deals with street vendors in outdoor markets that have a strong visual and aural middle eastern biblical vibe to them. He interrogates an exotic dancer who performs with a snake, a biblical symbol of Satan, that in the words of the host of her show, "once corrupted the soul of man".Tyrell is portrayed as a powerful, and, yes, an almost God-like figure who lives in a temple-like skyscraper, the top of which can only be ascended to in a glass elevator that overlooks the city, the sky and the stars.<br />
At the end of the film, Batty performs his own self-crucifixion, then saves Deckard's life and then dies. As he dies, he releases the white dove that flies upwards. A white dove often symbolizes the <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Holy_Spirit" target="_blank">Holy Spirit,</a> which, coincidentally, also left Christ as he died on the cross (the dove could also be interpreted as symbolic of Batty's soul). The Christ allusions end there ,though. There is no resurrection for Batty. Yet the end of the film suggest that there may be a resurrection, at least thematically, for Deckard.</div><div style="text-align: left;">Of course, director Ridley Scott is not drawing perfect direct lines between Batty and Jesus. Rather, he is playing with these archetypal cultural images to create an impression. By drawing these religious allusions, even they are only perceived subconsciously, Scott is playing with the issue of existentialism vs spirituality. Batty, an artificial being created by humans and the supposed evil villain of the piece becomes a figure of great humanity and redemption as he clings to his final moments of life. The white doves suggests not only possible savior overtones but, on a more basic level, it suggests that this non-human being perhaps did, in fact, have a soul. The world of Blade Runner is one in which humans can create life via their own technology, both human and animal. It's life that, as it turns out, could have more potential for humanity and spiritualism than its creators. The humans of Blade Runner live in a world dominated and even partly destroyed by that same technology that created artificial life.<br />
Is there a God in the midst of all of this bleak, technologically dominated world of the future? Or, in a world where its technology is so powerful, is humanity God?</div><div style="text-align: left;">Like many great films (and even art in general), Blade Runner raises more questions than it answers.<br />
<br />
<iframe allowfullscreen="" frameborder="0" height="360" src="http://www.youtube.com/embed/5dA3DePirsE" width="640"></iframe><br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<iframe allowfullscreen="" frameborder="0" height="360" src="http://www.youtube.com/embed/LuBToeQeeEU" width="640"></iframe><br />
<br />
</div><div style="text-align: left;"><br />
</div><div style="text-align: left;"><br />
</div><div style="text-align: center;"><span style="font-size: x-large;"><u><b>Robocop</b></u></span></div><div style="text-align: center;"><i style="text-align: -webkit-auto;">1987</i><br />
<i style="text-align: justify;">Directed</i><i style="text-align: -webkit-auto;"> by Paul Verhoven</i><br />
<i style="text-align: -webkit-auto;"><br />
</i></div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEix8ffUmqA9mF90J6Y9-KwZhkwJQJMqNDFwGF1FvLd0MCvcL_O_kTX4j9-w45eS-EN-52ZgE614nVQfzzvnKSu1khuLkB_vIW6UEyWEV2ozqeH2x-ngzAcyDXj03vAg25O9AHSebS6KYlI/s400/robocop.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEix8ffUmqA9mF90J6Y9-KwZhkwJQJMqNDFwGF1FvLd0MCvcL_O_kTX4j9-w45eS-EN-52ZgE614nVQfzzvnKSu1khuLkB_vIW6UEyWEV2ozqeH2x-ngzAcyDXj03vAg25O9AHSebS6KYlI/s1600/robocop.jpg" /></a></div><b><br />
</b><br />
<br />
<b><u>Who's Standing in For Jesus?</u></b><br />
Peter Weller as Officer Alex Murphy, soon to become a super cyborg cop, Robocop.<br />
<b><br />
</b><br />
<b><u>What is the context?</u></b><br />
Another dystopian not-too-distant future outing, only this one is just a tad more bleak than The Omega Man and at least as bleak as Blade Runner.<br />
In the crime ridden no man's land that is Detroit of the near future, the police force has -in the ultimate satire of Reagan era politics - been privatized. The Omni Consumer Products Corporation is now in charge of the cops and, boy, have they got some cool ideas for technological upgrades to the force. One of their new innovations involves building unstoppable cyborg super cops. Their first guinea pig for the new law enforcement product line is Officer Alex Murphy. Murphy is selected for the job after he is killed in the line of duty. Killed, I might add, in one of the most brutal killing scenes in cinema history.<br />
Once "legally dead", Murphy is fused with mechanical robot parts and becomes the ultimate law enforcement machine, known simply as Robocop. Or as the movie poster puts it: "Part Machine. Part Man. All cop." The film is never clear as to whether Murphy was killed and actually brought back from the dead via technology or is just almost killed and given a new lease on life via technology.<br />
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgUwf5o70j3KmGVQk_glpVwFlkrvV62sfhqd_dAE6M5-DLST9VqE01YXuy_tBdH_z0tsRBpY6e5h-3M3RhK6DbalMRcldvIjFXFSHVj6Lno5hKFz5hO8U1P6EeAjL33053UrDVcH7PBFZ0/s1600/robocop.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="clear: left; float: left; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgUwf5o70j3KmGVQk_glpVwFlkrvV62sfhqd_dAE6M5-DLST9VqE01YXuy_tBdH_z0tsRBpY6e5h-3M3RhK6DbalMRcldvIjFXFSHVj6Lno5hKFz5hO8U1P6EeAjL33053UrDVcH7PBFZ0/s1600/robocop.jpg" /></a></div><br />
Whatever the case, Murphy's death at the hands of some of the most sadomasochistically twisted villains this side of Deliverance, is akin to a crucifixion. In the hands of audacious Dutch director Paul Verhoeven, in his first mainstream Hollywood feature, Murphy's death scene is actually a tad more than just akin to Christ on the cross.<br />
<br />
All of Verhoeven's films, from his early art-house European films like The 4th Man to his big mainstream Hollywood movies like Starship Troopers, Basic Instinct and even the much maligned Showgirls, feature some from of thematic crucifixion and/or resurrection, usually centered around the film's central character.<br />
<br />
<b><u>Why makes it a crucifixion scene?</u></b><br />
The crucifixion allegories in this movie are bit more subtle than those of Conan The Barbarian or even those of The Omega Man (similar to Blade Runner, though). The imagery may not be immediately consciously obvious to the casual viewer. I've found that calling Murphy's death scene a crucifision allegory is often met with the classic "you're reading to much into it" rebuttal that film symbolism interpretations are often met with. Yet, at the same time, I often also hear people who have just seen Robocop for the first time, bring up the crucifixion angle without prompting.<br />
<br />
Take a look at the scene below and you'll see what I mean (warning for the uninitiated, it's pretty <b><i>violent and disturbing</i>)</b>.<br />
<br />
In particular, Murphy's hand being blown off with a shot gun at close range is a nail through the palm of the hand taken to the next level. He is "killed" in an outstretched arm position. That crucifixion image is a little less on the nose on account of the fact that the man is missing an arm at the time. Murphy's final bloody head wound is a more brutal version of a crown of thorns. The visual allusions are indirect and subtle, yet still there.<br />
The crucifixion imagery works on an almost subconscious level. It is an excellent example of Verhoevan's unique ability to create audaciously over-the-tip visuals yet still maintain an air of subtlety at the same time.<br />
I actually agree with the "don't read too much into it" argument but not so much in terms of the imagery but more in terms of the conclusions one might make from that imagery.<br />
Sure, Murphy/Robocop goes through his own version of crucifixion and he sees his own version of a resurrection when he is transformed into the savior hero of Robocop. However, even within the film's own terms, Robocop is not Jesus, nor is he meant to be. Verhoeven uses the Christ parallels as a means of creating a deeper and more emotional connection with a larger than life hero (literally, in this case). He does this through the use of deeply rooted, powerful, culturally based iconography. At the same time, he is also using the Jesus allegories as an ironic juxtaposition with a bleak world of violence, social disorder and immorality.<br />
Is Robocop really a savior? Or just a promulgation of more violence, death and disorder? Is a world so mired in crime and corruption even capable of redeeming itself? Is such a world's salvation even within the reach of a savior like Robocop?<br />
Discuss.<br />
<br />
<br />
<iframe allowfullscreen="" frameborder="0" height="480" src="http://www.youtube.com/embed/VclFEwUGdY0" width="640"></iframe><br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<div style="text-align: center;"><b><span style="font-size: x-large;"><u>Life of Brian</u></span></b><br />
<i style="text-align: -webkit-auto;">1979 </i><br />
<i style="text-align: -webkit-auto;">Directed by Terry Jones</i> </div><b><br />
</b><br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="http://i.telegraph.co.uk/multimedia/archive/02023/crucifixion_2023029i.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" src="http://i.telegraph.co.uk/multimedia/archive/02023/crucifixion_2023029i.jpg" /></a></div><b><br />
</b><br />
<b><br />
</b><br />
<b><u>Who's Standing in For Jesus?</u></b><br />
Graham Chapman as Brian, but he's more standing near than standing in.<br />
<br />
<b><u>What's the Context?</u></b><br />
And now for something completely different....<br />
Brian is this guy, see, who just happened to be born in Bethlehem in the stable next door to the one that Jesus Christ was born in on the same night. He spends most of the rest of his life either being mistaken for or living in the shadow of, the true Messiah.<br />
The premise of Brian gives the legendary British comedy troupe, Monty Python, an opportunity to do some of the best and most irreverent biblical comedy ever.<br />
Many have taken the film to be critical and insulting to Jesus, his teachings and to religon in general. However, really, the film is full of comedy that goes something like this:<br />
Brian (addressing a large crowd, hanging on his every word): "You are all individuals!"<br />
Crowd: (in unison) "We are all individuals."<br />
<i>Pause</i><br />
Lone voice in the crowd: "I'm not.".<br />
Or the scene in which an organization known as the Judean People's Front talk about they despise their bitter rivals, The People's Front of Judea.<br />
It's quite clear that Python's objects of satire are the institutions, culture and subsequent misinterpretations of Christianity. It's no wonder that much of the clergy spoke out so strongly against the film.<br />
Life of Brian ends with Brian, as seems to be his lot in life, following in Christ's footsteps and being, you got it, crucified (along with, I might add, all of the rest of the Python troupe in various other roles).<br />
<b><br />
</b><br />
<b><u>What makes it a crucifixion scene?</u></b><br />
Duh.<br />
This being a comedy and all, there is certainly none of the violent imagery of the crucifixion seen in other films on the subject, both allegorical and literal. No hands are nailed to crosses, there is no crown of thorns and no large spears are poked into Brian's side. Still, though, the image of the film's lead character stuck up there on a cross to (unlike the real savior) die for no good reason is just a tad of a heavy note with which to end a comedy.<br />
Python handles it brilliantly.<br />
Eric Idle, hanging there on a cross just next to Brian, breaks out into song. The song, "Always Look on the Bright Side of Life" is so inanely happy and optimistic that it puts the final musical numbers of most Disney musicals to shame. The end of Life of Brian is one of the greatest strokes of comedic genius in all of Pythondom (but let's not overstate it).<br />
On the one hand, there is the obvious comedic contrast of a happy musical comedy song (with just a touch of Python's infamous cynical irony) sung be a group of people about to die the horrific death of crucifixion. It's easy to see how some may consider the scene to be a complete mockery of the crucifixion of Christ and the value and beliefs that all of Christianity stands for, thus making it utterly blasphemous.<br />
It isn't really, though, if you think about it.<br />
Even with all of its ironic cynical satire, "Always Look on the Bright Side of Life" is an incredibly catchy song that ultimately exudes happiness and optimism in almost every note. Listen to Canadian folk singer Bruce Cockburn's live cover version of the song and notice the enthusiasm with which the audience sings along. Then try and tell yourself that is not so. Still not convinced? Try singing "Always Look on the Bright Side of Life" to yourself and see if you're not feeling better after a verse or two.<br />
Happiness, optimism and the belief that much better things are coming, even in the face of the bleak and horrific present; I'm sorry, but, isn't that what Christianity is all about?<br />
<br />
<iframe allowfullscreen="" frameborder="0" height="360" src="http://www.youtube.com/embed/L2Wx230gYJw" width="640"></iframe><br />
<br />
<br />
<div style="text-align: center;"><b><br />
</b></div><b><br />
</b><br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"></div><div style="text-align: center;"><div style="text-align: center;"><b><span style="background-color: white; color: magenta; font-size: large;">Happy Easter, </span></b></div><div style="text-align: center;"><b><span style="background-color: white; color: magenta; font-size: large;">Passover,<br />
Greek Orthodox Easter</span></b></div><div style="text-align: center;"><b><span style="background-color: white; color: magenta; font-size: large;">and </span></b></div><div style="text-align: center;"><b><span style="background-color: white; color: magenta; font-size: large;">Spring </span></b></div><div style="text-align: center;"><b><span style="background-color: white; color: magenta; font-size: large;">Everybody!</span></b><br />
<b><span style="background-color: white; color: magenta; font-size: large;"><br />
</span></b><br />
<table align="center" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto; text-align: center;"><tbody>
<tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhQA83cMVM2g0fKLx7mYXyxeAO5dtKEP4kZguMomtIAgSs9xX6nfwZYijWrV3FLJ6rm8vZ6aBj6z1XVcnlVvSELvBJ6xzWc-7AVI5wW032i0y0nJjOjPtmWfdL5W05DylE2oq8vfjKvTQw/s1600/Superman_Returns_Wallpaper.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" height="480" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhQA83cMVM2g0fKLx7mYXyxeAO5dtKEP4kZguMomtIAgSs9xX6nfwZYijWrV3FLJ6rm8vZ6aBj6z1XVcnlVvSELvBJ6xzWc-7AVI5wW032i0y0nJjOjPtmWfdL5W05DylE2oq8vfjKvTQw/s640/Superman_Returns_Wallpaper.jpg" width="640" /></a></td></tr>
<tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;">Thought I'd leave you on a pop culture Christ allegory image that really didn't go down so well,<br />
though it was not religious groups who objected, but comic book fans!</td></tr>
</tbody></table><b><span style="background-color: white; color: magenta; font-size: large;"><br />
</span></b></div></div>Terence Bowmanhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/04576129838447713151noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2233378012529819224.post-32851740491006824252012-03-26T10:00:00.002-04:002012-03-26T18:05:26.183-04:00Killer Whale-o-Saurus vs. Mega Super Sub<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"></div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhRQSkZKKytqsvKkCX-K0PJpJ9uu9AJ600XQNx2igRCA0r9-v02wgOIaL6Wg754_eTDOBBIaeCAbdUhyphenhyphenmMx9ctmElzIiw8u8qwJdID9QEEGCnMgLfs_8NJ9-SsiEml0oQ16rhg_hLX5nQ8/s1600/blurry.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhRQSkZKKytqsvKkCX-K0PJpJ9uu9AJ600XQNx2igRCA0r9-v02wgOIaL6Wg754_eTDOBBIaeCAbdUhyphenhyphenmMx9ctmElzIiw8u8qwJdID9QEEGCnMgLfs_8NJ9-SsiEml0oQ16rhg_hLX5nQ8/s1600/blurry.jpg" /></a></div><br />
<br />
Herman Melville’s Moby Dick is a literary classic. It also has all the makings of a great action adventure movie. Melville’s immortal tale of a whaling Captain obsessed with tracking down and killing the great white whale that that maimed him has seen many screen adaptations. Some go as far back as 1926 and some are as recent as the last couple of years. <br />
<br />
2010: Moby Dick, is a direct-to-DVD movie produced by The Asylum, the studio responsible sensationalistic fare like Mega Shark vs Giant Octopus. This time around, Captain Ahab trades in his whaling ship for a 21st century nuclear submarine. Moby Dick has been upgraded from sperm whale to super gigantic prehistoric white whale. <br />
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhe2Q0oAulBeJZaz2oTmseyLLm6FkoRMzNop8ucDatQy3Ct2dSSrPDA1s-2oMXCRQnarR2cLe_VebXeZ9LvnBCnTNJera33JIZgIRIUfa22UzbEV2lU7oHKotfJsdHtZVKtna-7AXd3umw/s1600/98.png" imageanchor="1" style="clear: left; float: left; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="220" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhe2Q0oAulBeJZaz2oTmseyLLm6FkoRMzNop8ucDatQy3Ct2dSSrPDA1s-2oMXCRQnarR2cLe_VebXeZ9LvnBCnTNJera33JIZgIRIUfa22UzbEV2lU7oHKotfJsdHtZVKtna-7AXd3umw/s400/98.png" width="400" /></a></div>Captain Ahab is played by Barry Bostwick. The guy from Spin City and The Rocky Horror Picture Show is, of course, a natural casting choice for one of the most iconic literary figures of all time. <br />
<br />
The Asylum’s choice of source material for another of their trademark CGI monster movie, though, is perplexing at best. Melville purists would no doubt be outraged that such cheesy schlock is even coming within harpooning range of Moby Dick. The Asylum could have made any low rent creature movie without dragging Melville into it. Surely Killer Whale-o-Saurus vs. Giant Super Sub would grab much more attention in the Netflix catalogue. <br />
<br />
Screenwriter Paul Bale’s -shall we say? -unique adaptation displays an unexpected reverence towards Melville. There are curious uses of lines or variations on lines from the novel. When the Ishmael character, Dr. Michelle Herman (played by Renee O’Connor, Xena: Warrior Princess), is introduced, the famous first line of the book, “Call me Ishmael” becomes, “Call me Michelle”. <br />
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiy6RgHo__sUx7c8MfKJP_JWriCxiblqCmK2kM6Rv4itV_ndTpRcIsxnAe-LjeMwFmLqd8Uq8iat8hAzT111ohMJmemOwZm3wv98-WUlYcFv84CQE9nUlVcA5vvSsnL0Gg3wO6dUX_j-KY/s1600/megasharkvscrocosaurus.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="640" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiy6RgHo__sUx7c8MfKJP_JWriCxiblqCmK2kM6Rv4itV_ndTpRcIsxnAe-LjeMwFmLqd8Uq8iat8hAzT111ohMJmemOwZm3wv98-WUlYcFv84CQE9nUlVcA5vvSsnL0Gg3wO6dUX_j-KY/s640/megasharkvscrocosaurus.jpg" width="426" /></a></div><br />
Bostwick’s performance is also unexpectedly compelling. Entire scenes are transformed whenever Bostwick’s Ahab enters the frame. The presence of a theatrical Shakespearean character with an over-the-top sense of gravitas suddenly juxtaposed with B-movie acting is like watching a Youtube mashup of Plan 9 From Outer Space and King Lear. <br />
<br />
The death of Ahab during the movie’s horribly contrived climax is, oddly, very close to the character’s death in the novel. However, if there are attempts to nuke the great white whale in Melville, those pages must be missing from all but a few editions.<br />
<br />
Once you get past Bostwik’s Ahab and the somewhat clever Melville references, you are pretty much just left with yet another mediocre B-grade giant sea creature attacks movie. Still 2010: Moby Dick does manage to create a bad-accident-on-the-highway-like fascination towards the whole endeavour. <br />
<br />
The movie also opens up the possibilities of more Asylum adaptations of other Herman Melville classics. How about Bartelby: The Curse of the Zombie Scrivener? Or perhaps Billy Budd vs. Predator? <br />
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjarEYJMWntjc4-vs3taHa-yyB0pMSr3IV5ou6leelUlKO8DOW23rMsKAVv8xcunzwCYn8nnKi-yB2G_zazjzZw-TUz069XxxUp-SJXyKYkTExraIqKVqdaIZUVZLgbtQ-J72O31whKW3s/s1600/billy-budd.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="clear: left; float: left; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="320" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjarEYJMWntjc4-vs3taHa-yyB0pMSr3IV5ou6leelUlKO8DOW23rMsKAVv8xcunzwCYn8nnKi-yB2G_zazjzZw-TUz069XxxUp-SJXyKYkTExraIqKVqdaIZUVZLgbtQ-J72O31whKW3s/s320/billy-budd.jpg" width="208" /></a></div><br />
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"></div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjx4fdOBxcine-uWYm9derFQ5QE3dnnXgVUhOpgF8ipVKsmyXfcuGXT7gkGAABiawv98f2_bVZfWuuThUtWl-bGfkj9_i-pnXZ_GfdrHoKAFo8pC3RJBbRHLeFWlWiVXLBEA7-FLKPvt-E/s1600/predator.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="clear: right; float: right; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-left: 1em;"><img border="0" height="288" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjx4fdOBxcine-uWYm9derFQ5QE3dnnXgVUhOpgF8ipVKsmyXfcuGXT7gkGAABiawv98f2_bVZfWuuThUtWl-bGfkj9_i-pnXZ_GfdrHoKAFo8pC3RJBbRHLeFWlWiVXLBEA7-FLKPvt-E/s320/predator.jpg" width="320" /></a></div><br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
We can only hope.<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<iframe allowfullscreen="" frameborder="0" height="315" src="http://www.youtube.com/embed/CHmFW-1Cwkw" width="560"></iframe>Terence Bowmanhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/04576129838447713151noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2233378012529819224.post-75708690087213629182012-03-19T10:00:00.004-04:002012-03-19T12:31:40.678-04:0010 Sean Connery Roles That Never Were<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"></div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"></div><table align="center" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto; text-align: center;"><tbody>
<tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjr1eXU-qNYPd7ReFdV7BePSJbln4LKNnxugoPepQYmoppSei8vqu7iCYRSdKHR_yOITmtqTcDahEYhZecekaj1QbWM_VxBjZJdkxB9OXBpgRRYJWEZBBELFcf7KWBNgQjc0lxB6L6ghYg/s1600/Sean-Connery-Close-Up.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" height="480" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjr1eXU-qNYPd7ReFdV7BePSJbln4LKNnxugoPepQYmoppSei8vqu7iCYRSdKHR_yOITmtqTcDahEYhZecekaj1QbWM_VxBjZJdkxB9OXBpgRRYJWEZBBELFcf7KWBNgQjc0lxB6L6ghYg/s640/Sean-Connery-Close-Up.jpg" width="640" /></a></td></tr>
<tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;">Sir Thomas Sean Connery looks back at that which might have been.</td></tr>
</tbody></table><br />
<br />
Anybody who has ever parused into the depths of IMDB.com or the plethora of internet trivia pages, knows there are a lot of famous roles that were not originally going to be played by the actors that made them famous. There are a lot of stars in cinema history that at one time or another have been offered famous, popular or iconic roles and, for one reason or another, turned them down.<br />
<br />
It's fun (or in some cases horrifying) to think about these movie-might-have-been's: Ronald Reagan as Rick Blaine in Casablanca, WC Fields as The Wizard in the The Wizard of Oz, Nicolas Cage as Superman, Tom Selleck as Indiana Jones, Dustin Hoffman as Rick Deckard in Blade Runner, Dom de la Luise and Harvey Korman in Airplane!, Christopher Walken as Han Solo, Marlon Brando in The Exorcist...the list goes on and on. It's not uncommon for a role and the film it belongs to to transmography radically several times over during the process known in the industry as "development hell".<br />
<br />
In many cases, the original casting choices are ones that could have significantly changed the role, the movie or both. Poke around in the depths of alternating casting lore long enough and there is one name that reappears more than any other: Sean Connery.<br />
<br />
Once you take a good look at the amount of times it has happened, it is not uncommon for big movie stars to pass on roles that become legendary in the hands of other actors. However, in Connery's case, it sometimes feels like the original James Bond Academy Award Winning Sexiest Man Alive has turned down just about every role he was ever offered.. Few movie stars can match Connery's seemingly pathological commitment to passing over famous, iconic, financially successful, career defining and just plain juicy roles. The guy a legend in that department.<br />
<br />
Here are 10 examples for Sir Thomas Sean Connery's incredible knack for the phrase: "Hmmm....no, guys, I think I'll pass this time, thanks."<br />
<br />
<br />
<div style="text-align: center;"><b><span style="font-size: x-large;"><i>Tarzan</i> </span></b></div><div style="text-align: center;"><b><span style="font-size: large;">in </span></b></div><div style="text-align: center;"><b><span style="font-size: x-large;"><u>Tarzan, The Magnificent</u></span></b></div><u><b><br />
</b></u><br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"></div><table align="center" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto; text-align: center;"><tbody>
<tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEioAFnC1Mk13v1uHcqvOX3Gfmg3ygdwlGVGWCFJsqrhEeiSPvIJcqaw9e7s45l8Afpxnlr74IHeBB3xirvuBuA7_JnCHovTVz1cKRF-BQW_hh3xI9vIujtNbXPYUotkTg1NjYM9Cr0MixY/s1600/zardoz-1973-04-g.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" height="489" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEioAFnC1Mk13v1uHcqvOX3Gfmg3ygdwlGVGWCFJsqrhEeiSPvIJcqaw9e7s45l8Afpxnlr74IHeBB3xirvuBuA7_JnCHovTVz1cKRF-BQW_hh3xI9vIujtNbXPYUotkTg1NjYM9Cr0MixY/s640/zardoz-1973-04-g.jpg" width="640" /></a></td></tr>
<tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;">Tarzan and the Plastic Jungle of the Bandanna People</td></tr>
</tbody></table><u><b><br />
</b></u><br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"></div>In 1959, the Tarzan movie franchise, which had been dumbing down Edgar Rice Burroughs' jungle pulp adventure hero since the early 30's, got something of a reboot. The same series of ape man movies had been a viable Hollywood franchise since 1932. 27 years on, a new producer, Sy Wientraub, had taken control of the series. He felt it was time to shake the Lord of the Jungle up a bit. The resulting movie, Tarzan's Greatest Adventure is one the best Tarzan movie ever made (with kudos also going to the 1999 Disney version and the 1984 film, Greystoke). For the first time in cinema history, the character's childlike "me Tarzan, you Jane" broken pidgin English was dropped in favour of making Tarzan as articulate and intelligent as he was in the pages of Burroughs' original novels.<br />
<br />
Muscle man turned B-movie actor Gordon Scott was cast as Tarzan. The evil treasure hunting bad guy was effectively played by Anthony Quayle. In the part of one of Quayle's henchman was a young up and coming Scottish actor by the name of Sean Connery. Producer Weintraub was so impressed with the young Connery that he reportedly offered him the role of Tarzan in the next movie in the the series, Tarzan The Magnificent. Connery is quoted as responding to Weintraub's offer with, "two fellows took an option on me for some spy picture and are exercising it. But I'll be in yours next.". On account of that "spy picture" thing, Connery's Tarzan was never to be. By the time Tarzan Goes to India (next film in the series after Tarzan The Magnificent) got off the ground, so had a series of movies featuring a spy named Bond, James Bond. James Bond was a massive hit and it arguably remains Connery's most famous role to this day.<br />
<br />
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgKUTlmGXPWg-KFaidP1ppZrQ_ovL4F7I_ffQ8FbawKSAVigsFX6dLgW_F_F695NwdmUEAEBgJT9FGFcLF-78QFlA-4T4hM1Y-1I7egwiB4jLy3dNaBva_wy2PIlefC9YN0j3WxpeQy_k4/s1600/l_53334_cb83d502.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgKUTlmGXPWg-KFaidP1ppZrQ_ovL4F7I_ffQ8FbawKSAVigsFX6dLgW_F_F695NwdmUEAEBgJT9FGFcLF-78QFlA-4T4hM1Y-1I7egwiB4jLy3dNaBva_wy2PIlefC9YN0j3WxpeQy_k4/s1600/l_53334_cb83d502.jpg" /></a></div><br />
Not all trivia sites are in agreement on the Tarzan role, however. Some say Connery was was offered a role in Tarzan Goes to India but not the title role. Given Connery's Mr.Universe physique, undeniable charm and sex appeal at that time, Tarzan seems a much more likely role for a hot young actor than that of just another baddie. Either way, it is a moot point. Connery was out of Weintraub's price range by that time anyway. There probably wasn't enough money in all of Hollywood to convince Connery to don that loin cloth by that stage in his career.<br />
<br />
At the height of Bondmania in the mid-60's, Tarzan's Greatest Adventure was re-released into theatres. The film's second run was an obvious attempt to cash in on Connery's presence in the movie . The movie poster for the re-release featured a new (SPOILER ALERT) slug line: "Tarzan Kills James Bond!".<br />
<br />
<table align="center" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto; text-align: center;"><tbody>
<tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEj8HckSpaP9K35kCn7gRfgJp6CYiF7Qu8JqvLX8HBwNZHQPsMkoewVsOhpLSDdfpSympjmFaVqDUu9_kz2ihkVG8aA6W_zj2rGhhXLQx3RCc3L1m8HbulHUo5Bn52Mq3psbkp1we1gq9CA/s1600/Annex+-+Connery,+Sean+(Tarzan's+Greatest+Adventure)_01.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" height="480" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEj8HckSpaP9K35kCn7gRfgJp6CYiF7Qu8JqvLX8HBwNZHQPsMkoewVsOhpLSDdfpSympjmFaVqDUu9_kz2ihkVG8aA6W_zj2rGhhXLQx3RCc3L1m8HbulHUo5Bn52Mq3psbkp1we1gq9CA/s640/Annex+-+Connery,+Sean+(Tarzan's+Greatest+Adventure)_01.jpg" width="640" /></a></td></tr>
<tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;">Connery in the Tarzan role he did actually play, along with fellow bad guy Anthony Quayle</td></tr>
</tbody></table><br />
<br />
<br />
<div style="text-align: center;"><b><i><span style="font-size: x-large;">King of the Moon </span></i></b></div><div style="text-align: center;"><b><span style="font-size: large;">in </span></b></div><div style="text-align: center;"><b><span style="font-size: x-large;"><u>The Adventures of Baron Munchhausen</u></span></b></div><u><b><br />
</b></u><br />
<u><b><br />
</b></u><br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjG_XINhCjnIFuP4Tx9SfOv5RDr5wsNn61_X5KQMJwmnaOrhPLssyiTw3LpysLSfzN-Njur2foYbY_nxqFupsle9m9ru5Z1GTSxI_PaN69VN8JmlZ1Vb-RbmvtKFYXR6Ba2EHhhOK2MZic/s1600/the-adventures-of-baron-munchausen.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="480" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjG_XINhCjnIFuP4Tx9SfOv5RDr5wsNn61_X5KQMJwmnaOrhPLssyiTw3LpysLSfzN-Njur2foYbY_nxqFupsle9m9ru5Z1GTSxI_PaN69VN8JmlZ1Vb-RbmvtKFYXR6Ba2EHhhOK2MZic/s640/the-adventures-of-baron-munchausen.jpg" width="640" /></a></div><u><b><br />
</b></u><br />
After co-directing one of the greatest comedies ever made, Monty Python and the Holy Grail (1974), ex-Pythoner and budding auteur, Terry Gilliam, went on to create a series of increasingly audacious cult movies. Time Bandits (1981) was followed by the highly praised Brazil (1985). Gilliam then followed that up with his biggest and most sprawling production to date, The Adventures of Baron Munchhausen (1988).<br />
<br />
Sean Connery had previously worked with Terry Gilliam in the aforementioned Time Bandits. In that film, a sheltered British kid and a bunch of dwarfs quirkily<br />
<br />
The Adventures of Baron Munchhausen is an epic fantasy adventure set in the 18th century...on acid...or to be more historically accurate but still as cliched...on opium. Among about a million and one other visually stunning stream of consciousness adventures, the eponymous Baron sails to the moon. Once there he encounters, naturally, the King of the Moon.<br />
<br />
Apparently stipulating that he only play Kings in any future Gilliam movie, Connery was cast as the lunar monarch. Gilliam has a reputation for retooling and rewriting his scripts that puts the like George Lucas and Orson Welles to shame. The Munchhausen script at the time that Connery signed on and the one that ended up being the shooting script were two very different animals. Somewhere in there, the King of the Moon, a substantial role in the first draft, ended up being reduced to little more than cameo role in the final draft. Connery reportedly felt that the part had become too small and so he dropped out of the project.<br />
<br />
Gilliam's path at that point was clear: recast the part with the only actor who is as close to Sean Connery as you can get: Robin Williams.<br />
<br />
<table align="center" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto; text-align: center;"><tbody>
<tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEj_YzM7eRrkHNX2_XhErl0mzdDXcc78rarQxIThNkCZOg35ALJZiRU__ztj6_Mccls3ttupU-h0vhpSmO2cKocWL1M0bzACrWoiX5yZszG1rWDEenWg2t8FP9sTqm8qREaVBg37R6CPMPs/s1600/09.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEj_YzM7eRrkHNX2_XhErl0mzdDXcc78rarQxIThNkCZOg35ALJZiRU__ztj6_Mccls3ttupU-h0vhpSmO2cKocWL1M0bzACrWoiX5yZszG1rWDEenWg2t8FP9sTqm8qREaVBg37R6CPMPs/s1600/09.jpg" /></a></td></tr>
<tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;">Robin Williams or Sean Connery? Who can tell?</td></tr>
</tbody></table><br />
<div style="text-align: center;"><b><i><span style="font-size: x-large;">The Player </span></i></b></div><div style="text-align: center;"><b><span style="font-size: large;">in </span></b></div><div style="text-align: center;"><b><span style="font-size: x-large;"><u>Rosencrantz and Guildenstern Are Dead</u></span></b></div><div style="text-align: center;"><b><span style="font-size: x-large;"><br />
</span></b></div><div style="text-align: center;"><u><b><br />
</b></u></div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEh9Mus3qhRoVSujvgkm4KVc3VB-LP75Fz1KhjUeq0t61q070FObQl5HoWP11SKvJ9vQbzNVHhPZCTmUHHvUY-MtvL5RdOoIcLoO-JqtRnAaz00NxqOI0NxruLvKU6JlTlBBjQWUkoHkZYY/s1600/Highlander-Connery-Ramirez.gif" imageanchor="1" style="clear: left; float: left; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="300" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEh9Mus3qhRoVSujvgkm4KVc3VB-LP75Fz1KhjUeq0t61q070FObQl5HoWP11SKvJ9vQbzNVHhPZCTmUHHvUY-MtvL5RdOoIcLoO-JqtRnAaz00NxqOI0NxruLvKU6JlTlBBjQWUkoHkZYY/s400/Highlander-Connery-Ramirez.gif" width="400" /></a></div>Speaking of Terry Gilliam, the screenplay for Gilliam's most famous film, Brazil ,was co-written by British playwright Tom Stoppard. Stoppard wrote (or co-wrote) a number of screenplays including Shakespeare in Love and an uncredited rewrite of all of the dialogue in Star Wars Episode III: Revenge of the Sith.<br />
<br />
As a playwright, however, Rosencrantz and Guildenstern Are Dead remains Stoppard's best known work. Rosencrantz and Guildenstern Are Dead is actually a play within a play. It follows the "off stage" story of two minor characters from William Shakespeare's Hamlet.<br />
<br />
Rosencrantz and Guidenstern Are Dead premiered on stage at the Edinburgh Fringe Festival in 1966. However, it was not until 1990 that Stoppard finally got to make the film version of one of the most wonderfully absurdist meta pieces of theatre ever. Stoppard both adapted his play to the screen and directed the film. Rosencrantz was played by Gary Oldman and Tim Roth was cast as Guildenstern. The role of the Player King is smaller than that of the two leads, yet thematically intrinsic to the play. For that part Stoppard cast, you guessed it, Sean Connery.<br />
<br />
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiuqfhWVdATH-2f1_wOAvVHfJki_Xz-qx8DRF4Dh4zXfDy-US02GgQislQqk0RJ8Dq6gCJCsxWxSta1tBCQcgYSHIKH213sQLcDO-9sVUmkpinRdGXNXkPuKWeQfFUOEXWqZ19t2mYCK78/s1600/Echo-rosencrantz-and-guildenstern-are-dead-15206242-480-357.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="clear: right; float: right; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-left: 1em;"><img border="0" height="297" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiuqfhWVdATH-2f1_wOAvVHfJki_Xz-qx8DRF4Dh4zXfDy-US02GgQislQqk0RJ8Dq6gCJCsxWxSta1tBCQcgYSHIKH213sQLcDO-9sVUmkpinRdGXNXkPuKWeQfFUOEXWqZ19t2mYCK78/s400/Echo-rosencrantz-and-guildenstern-are-dead-15206242-480-357.jpg" width="400" /></a></div>I have played the part of the Player King on stage in both Rosencrantz and Guildenstern Are Dead and Hamlet. For the life of me, I can not fathom why any actor would want to turn down so juicy a part. Nonetheless, Connery did just that.<br />
<br />
There are conflicting explanations as to why Mr.Connery did so. I remember reading the press on the movie when it came out. The story that I read then was that Connery was forced to drop out for health reasons. The actor had throat surgery in 1989, reportedly to remove benign nodules from his vocal chords. His voice, the story said, had not yet sufficiently recovered from the surgery to take on such a role.<br />
<br />
Current Internet commentators, on the other hand, seem convinced that Connery dumped the part in favour of the much better paying and higher profile gig as the Scottish-brogued Russian submarine Captain in The Hunt For Red October. Throat surgery seems a more likely explanation to me. Watch Connery's films and you'll notice that his now trademark and often imitated vocal raspyness only starts turning up in his performances from 1990 or so onward.<br />
<br />
<table align="center" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto; text-align: center;"><tbody>
<tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhLdtmO4rIuMqVvXRK4GTvZVq2_Z-p7mk78hqTKVtyuPuXoQBQS_8_l4DrKrDbEQ18WI-i0yQlirp7p4eHmVn7WPJo5uh5SEMjtVIexwah83baYCjimOffrL1J0v6VB_knvGG5CjANHlw8/s1600/MV5BMTM4NDc4NjA1OF5BMl5BanBnXkFtZTcwMzE2OTY2NA%2540%2540._V1._SX640_SY949_.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" height="400" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhLdtmO4rIuMqVvXRK4GTvZVq2_Z-p7mk78hqTKVtyuPuXoQBQS_8_l4DrKrDbEQ18WI-i0yQlirp7p4eHmVn7WPJo5uh5SEMjtVIexwah83baYCjimOffrL1J0v6VB_knvGG5CjANHlw8/s400/MV5BMTM4NDc4NjA1OF5BMl5BanBnXkFtZTcwMzE2OTY2NA%2540%2540._V1._SX640_SY949_.jpg" width="269" /></a></td></tr>
<tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;"><span style="font-size: small; text-align: -webkit-auto;">The role of the Player King</span><br />
<span style="font-size: small; text-align: -webkit-auto;">finally went to the second greatest <br />
Connery doppelganger after Robin Williams, <br />
Richard Dreyfus. </span> </td></tr>
</tbody></table><br />
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"></div><br />
<br />
<br />
<div style="text-align: center;"><b><i><span style="font-size: x-large;">Thomas Crown </span></i></b></div><div style="text-align: center;"><b><span style="font-size: large;">in </span></b></div><div style="text-align: center;"><b><span style="font-size: x-large;"><u>The Thomas Crown Affair</u></span></b></div><div style="text-align: center;"><span style="font-size: x-large;"><b><br />
</b></span></div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"></div><u><b><br />
</b></u><br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgBl9f8b-Tffv6bDxNUwNPhbIixblhaZuMm4zVR9JeBee5A2m08hpdvfWoKJo6aC6dCgh3RSPxhEy_dYmaK_6Kx3M0ecRnBlZMbrnr9W-lQgS6m3ddjoxbg8YzHNO-UbAPWinDz3HefdvI/s1600/Hatami-20-12tif.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="clear: left; float: left; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="266" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgBl9f8b-Tffv6bDxNUwNPhbIixblhaZuMm4zVR9JeBee5A2m08hpdvfWoKJo6aC6dCgh3RSPxhEy_dYmaK_6Kx3M0ecRnBlZMbrnr9W-lQgS6m3ddjoxbg8YzHNO-UbAPWinDz3HefdvI/s400/Hatami-20-12tif.jpg" width="400" /></a></div>In 1968, box office superstar Steve McQueen, was cast against type in director Norman Jewison's The Thomas Crown Affair. McQueen's character, the titular role, is a millionaire businessman (yep, just a mere millionaire, it was the 44 years ago, after all).<br />
<br />
This particular member of the 1968 1% also robbed banks, just for the fun of it. The role of the suave, sophisticated debonair playboy millionaire was a bit of departure for McQueen. His most famous roles up to that point tended to be cops, cowboys, foot soldiers, street hustlers and other more down to earth every man type characters. Nobody saw McQueen as a "suit". The star had a great deal of trouble convincing the studio to let him play one too.<br />
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"></div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhNf1OgVxEELuGkt0-IQMxl21f4xgnHh1WfHFqD7ce1iYYm-hN98F8r-ZSn6e5bDh-ywb23Uxt2tWd1vCduTrl9Um8jW5a5O43AOVxRPrIDt5mFsTlXoOVFHMXUL-xA0byRIymdthKrHf8/s1600/sean-connery.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="clear: right; float: right; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-left: 1em;"><img border="0" height="300" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhNf1OgVxEELuGkt0-IQMxl21f4xgnHh1WfHFqD7ce1iYYm-hN98F8r-ZSn6e5bDh-ywb23Uxt2tWd1vCduTrl9Um8jW5a5O43AOVxRPrIDt5mFsTlXoOVFHMXUL-xA0byRIymdthKrHf8/s400/sean-connery.jpg" width="400" /></a></div>Some of the resistance to McQueen playing the role of Thomas Crown came from screenwriter Alan Trustman.<br />
<br />
Why? Well, in a 2011 interview with the New York Daily News, Trustman explains, " I wrote it for Sean Connery.....when they cast Steve McQueen, I objected violently and claimed that he could not deliver the dialogue."<br />
<br />
Connery had already turned them down by that point so Trustman and the studio execs finally relented. The screenwriter did an extensive rewrite of the role, tailoring it to McQueen's personality.<br />
<br />
Connery has since said that he regretted not taking the part. Personally, I'm not convinced that it would have worked. Thomas Crown dresses well, has expensive tastes and seduces the woman who is investigating him. A variation on James Bond, in other words.<br />
<br />
Perhaps the best known scene in The Thomas Crown Affair is the one in which McQueen and co-star Faye Dunaway, not so subtly flirt with each other while playing chess. Let's just say that there' plenty of Bishop stroking and leave it at that. I shudder to think what kind of a grinning smirkfest a 1968 Sean Connery would have turned that scene into. Trustman also seemed to have a strong sense of what Connery's Thomas Crown might have been like. " It would have been very different and I'm not sure it would have been better.", he said.<br />
<br />
Interestingly, when Die Hard and Predator director John McTiernan remade the movie in 1999, he too cast the James Bond of the day, Pierce Brosnan, in the title role. The Thomas Crown Affair had come full circle. Said Trustman of the remake, "Brosnan played it as if he were Sean Connery.".<br />
<br />
<br />
<div style="text-align: center;"><b><span style="font-size: x-large;"><i>James Bond </i></span></b></div><div style="text-align: center;"><b><span style="font-size: large;">in </span></b></div><div style="text-align: center;"><b><span style="font-size: x-large;"><u>On Her Majesty's Secret Service, </u></span></b></div><div style="text-align: center;"><b><span style="font-size: x-large;"><u>Live and Let Die </u></span></b></div><div style="text-align: center;"><b><span style="font-size: x-large;">and </span></b></div><div style="text-align: center;"><b><span style="font-size: x-large;"><u>Moonraker</u></span></b></div><div style="text-align: center;"><u><b><br />
</b></u></div><table align="center" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto; text-align: center;"><tbody>
<tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEj6hEOrbE6BcbN5e_vSeE8rXIBePNhEv0ep0OD74xDqMtg-Ryk34WasVFzsHLz7_w5rpNcwK1-QbkYpXPH67t3CUEHvjJi9Yoc8GdPpP_MXShpDgDZBtMWr2yjnXEawyzKiAHrv1S80Bd8/s1600/draft_lens18668771module154076528photo_1318288949on-her-majestys-secret-se.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEj6hEOrbE6BcbN5e_vSeE8rXIBePNhEv0ep0OD74xDqMtg-Ryk34WasVFzsHLz7_w5rpNcwK1-QbkYpXPH67t3CUEHvjJi9Yoc8GdPpP_MXShpDgDZBtMWr2yjnXEawyzKiAHrv1S80Bd8/s1600/draft_lens18668771module154076528photo_1318288949on-her-majestys-secret-se.jpg" /></a></td></tr>
<tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;">Early marketing campaigns attempted to capitalize on the idea of a Connery-less Bond movie</td></tr>
</tbody></table><u><b><br />
</b></u><br />
<u><b><br />
</b></u><br />
Sean Connery had a complex, love-hate relationship with James Bond. Sure, it brought him international super-stardom, yet in the success of the popular role lurked that which can be both an actor's blessing and curse: typecasting. Connery would not successfully break the Bond mold until years after he left the series. Even so, it took till to the late 80's and early 90's before Mr. Connery really ditched the 007 association once and for all.<br />
<br />
It's hard to believe that, as early as 1977, Connery was considering playing Bond again. The projects in question were non-official rogue 007 films spawned by a complicated legal loophole that opened the door to the question of who really owned the rights to the story of the fifth Bond movie, Thunderball . Such legal machinations would finally result in Connery reprising the role of Bond in Never Say Never Again in 1983 (it and the 1967 spoof, Casino Royale, remain the only two "unofficial"James Bond movies).<br />
<br />
Even before that, though, Connery had his fair share of flirtations with 007 movies that would not come to pass. After Thunderball, the producers of the Bond franchise wanted to follow up that massive hit with On Her Majesty's Secret Service. Based, of course, on the Ian Fleming Bond novel of the same name, that's the movie where James Bond famously (SPOILER ALERT) gets married and his wife famously (SPOILER ALERT) gets killed. There was just one problem with the plan. The film features a hidden bad guy fortress in the Swiss alps which, of course, endows the story with both a ski and bob sled chase. In order to meet the studio's desired release date for the next Bond movie, On Her Majesty's Secret Service would have had to shoot in summer. That made shooting ski chases in the Swiss alps a little problematic. So instead the producers moved ahead with You Only Live Twice, the Fleming book in which Bond (SPOILER ALERT) supposedly famously dies. Midway through shooting You Only Twice in Japan, Connery decided that he was leaving the franchise. So On Her Majesty Secret Service, a fan favourite of the series, which contained one of the most powerful scenes in all of Bond-dom, the death of 007's wife, would, alas, be done without Connery.<br />
<br />
Even after all that, Connery was not still quite done with the role yet. After the box office disappointment of the Connery-less On Her Majesty's Secret Service and the thorough critical trouncing of new 007 George Lazenby, the producers and the studio were quite eager to see Connery back in Bond action. They finally struck a deal with Connery to return to the role just one more time. He was paid the then astronomical fee of one million dollars. Connery donated all of it to charity.<br />
<br />
In the late 60's with the Apollo 11 moon landing and the public's general fascination with space, Ian Fleming's Moonraker (the closest the literary Bond ever got to outer space) was considered as the next film. Gerry Anderson, famous for his super successful puppet action adventure shows Thunderbirds and Captain Scarlet, was hired to get to work on a space oriented Bond story. For reasons that remain uncertain, Moonraker was ditched in favour of Diamonds Are Forever in which, of course, Connery would star. A satellite in the service of the evil Blofeld and stunningly silly desert moon buggy chase are all that remained of the space angle (and of Anderson's contributions? Who knows?). The franchise would return to Moonraker in 1979, in the wake of the success of Star Wars and the new Hollywood sci-fi blockbuster craze of the time.<br />
<br />
Diamonds are Forever went on to become the number one grossing movie of 1971. That is particularly impressive box office success when you take into account that the movie was released in December. Now the studio was more eager then ever for another Connery Bond. Overtures were made. Overtures to the reported tune of 5.4 million bucks. It was an unheard of offer back in the day but the studio really really really wanted Connery in that next James Bond movie. The next film slated for the series was Live and Let Die. As pop culture history tells us , despite the incredible offer, Sean Connery did not appear in Live and Let Die. The producers and the studio, no doubt reluctantly, settled for Roger Moore, the former star of the British TV series, The Saint, as James Bond.<br />
<br />
Probably for the best. As Roger Moore took on the Bond mantle, the series would go on to defy itself in its rise to all the new levels of super silly-billy-ness.<br />
<br />
<table align="center" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto; text-align: center;"><tbody>
<tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiXp8N8z5VuTgmNrhruOBlvF_dQY0XHJmpFoIM-sUY79RiTK6rHtPDTfvNQX4YzaWOmUhJj8m9A8uvOsr9MXjBVZrBvChWr1UefS206kl9g30910r5Ek7H9fMFrLJgczcI8tc0fAZL8VvM/s1600/l_90402_0062512_b6b29ea9.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiXp8N8z5VuTgmNrhruOBlvF_dQY0XHJmpFoIM-sUY79RiTK6rHtPDTfvNQX4YzaWOmUhJj8m9A8uvOsr9MXjBVZrBvChWr1UefS206kl9g30910r5Ek7H9fMFrLJgczcI8tc0fAZL8VvM/s1600/l_90402_0062512_b6b29ea9.jpg" /></a></td></tr>
<tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;">Imagine what the German release poster for<br />
Moonraker with Connery as Bond would have looked like...</td></tr>
</tbody></table><br />
<br />
<div style="text-align: center;"><b><span style="font-size: x-large;"><i>Nigel Powers </i></span></b></div><div style="text-align: center;"><b><span style="font-size: large;">in </span></b></div><div style="text-align: center;"><b><span style="font-size: x-large;"><u>Austin Powers in Goldmember </u></span></b></div><div style="text-align: center;"><u><b><br />
</b></u></div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhTmOmadXsT5uFQ2KfzSvgSuMho0-RWR44kqa-WfnIYRG-MRKPAbA73Mmng4lEeuIqZ_aYrKtIveG5-d12gleMoPUeYDvbgX3jXnH5zg1PfeKUC7kwjjGdZBvg910jq0rr6BWhME1FYqac/s1600/austin_powers_in_goldmember_002.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="430" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhTmOmadXsT5uFQ2KfzSvgSuMho0-RWR44kqa-WfnIYRG-MRKPAbA73Mmng4lEeuIqZ_aYrKtIveG5-d12gleMoPUeYDvbgX3jXnH5zg1PfeKUC7kwjjGdZBvg910jq0rr6BWhME1FYqac/s640/austin_powers_in_goldmember_002.jpg" width="640" /></a></div><u><b><br />
</b></u><br />
In early 2001, it was being widely reported in the entertainment news media that Sean Connery and his Goldfinger co-star Honor Blackman (you know, the P-word named woman) had just signed on the play the parents of Mike Myer's mega popular super spy parody character, Austin Powers. The news didn't come as that much of a surprise. Ever since the first film in the Austin Powers series, everybody was kinda expecting something like this, sooner or later.<br />
<br />
In said first film, Austin Powers: International Man of Mystery, it was clear that Meyers was doing a James Bond parody. In fact, it was a little too clear, if you ask me. Myers' 60's Bond parody concept was very predominant in the media and popular consciousness. It's all anybody was focusing on. There was little or no mention of all the other lesser known 60's spy films and pop culture that Myers was satirizing even more than he was poking fun at Bond. Myers was, in fact, also going after many of Bond's imitators and the super spy pop culture fad of the 1960s in general. That first Powers movie had everything from character names lifted directly from Dean Martin's Matt Helm spy comedy movies to references to the Flinstones' "J.Bondrock" parody. Alas, almost all such references flew right by most critics and commentators.<br />
<br />
For better or worse, the Bond references were the most obvious ones to spot. The climatic Austin Powers scenes in the first film feature some shot for shot recreations of similar scenes the climatic battle in the James Bond movie, You Only Live Twice. Dr.Evil looks almost exactly the same as Donald Pleasance in the role Ernst Starvro Blofeld, the Bond arch villain character (though Dr.Evil was named after the arch nemesis of Captain Action, a popular action figure line at the time). Then, of courses, there's Powers' comically hairy chest that is most certainly a nod to every time Mr.Connery took off his shirt in a Bond movie.<br />
<br />
<br />
<table align="center" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto; text-align: center;"><tbody>
<tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEikAi8laEKQdfrzfA3RIloTynePa5JAbEefXHnMU7uTe78VAWLv0PY4ir5UQ8-lobfUKcqUnEQ-usF-qca-yPHWYjan0s4dAYy3WZUzj9pYXRkDuEP5coA44EPlqbx5zGpwvQJbe-O7HxE/s1600/MV5BMjI5NjY5OTI3NV5BMl5BanBnXkFtZTcwODExOTM2NA@@._V1._SX640_SY966_.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" height="640" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEikAi8laEKQdfrzfA3RIloTynePa5JAbEefXHnMU7uTe78VAWLv0PY4ir5UQ8-lobfUKcqUnEQ-usF-qca-yPHWYjan0s4dAYy3WZUzj9pYXRkDuEP5coA44EPlqbx5zGpwvQJbe-O7HxE/s640/MV5BMjI5NjY5OTI3NV5BMl5BanBnXkFtZTcwODExOTM2NA@@._V1._SX640_SY966_.jpg" width="424" /></a></td></tr>
<tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;">Never Say Never Again: about as close as we'll ever see of an aging Connery in a spy role.</td></tr>
</tbody></table><br />
When Myers decided to introduce the silly super spy Powers' dad, Connery was a natural choice. Sir Sean had even already blazed the trail for the role when he played the dad of a character he partly influenced, in Stephen Spielberg's Indiana Jones and The Last Crusade.<br />
<br />
The early 2001 news reports of Connery in the role never came to fruition. There is scarce information on why exactly Connery never joined the cast. My best guess is that by 2002, Connery was starting to take the prospect of life after retirement a lot more seriously and was getting a lot more picky (even by his standards!) about the roles he wanted to play.<br />
<br />
The role of Nigel Powers, Austin's dad, instead went to Michael Caine. At first glance, Caine may seem like a lesser second choice for the part in that there is no real thematic connection to Powers or to the spy movie genre. However, Austin Powers' iconic glasses are exactly the same type of glasses that Caine wore when he played British spy Harry Palmer in another series of 60's spy movies (produced by the same guys that produced Bond). In fact, the Palmer character was part of the inspiration for Austin Powers.<br />
<br />
See what I mean? Another reference everybody missed.<br />
<br />
<br />
<div style="text-align: center;"><b><i><span style="font-size: x-large;">Sybok </span></i></b></div><div style="text-align: center;"><b><span style="font-size: large;">in </span></b></div><div style="text-align: center;"><b><span style="font-size: x-large;"><u>Star Trek V: The Final Frontier</u></span></b></div><div style="text-align: center;"><u><b><span style="font-size: x-large;"><br />
</span></b></u></div><u><b><br />
</b></u><br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhYlSg-oU5YLvVE4jdBXVslJjSBgqlNQ-DTSwrywSJiDbxLNzgq8OIJW2Faipki26LkgpiDtPBBxUz3NLxEam3fI0u6OjmClvTTR4pTHoWfuY2MuD2I4Y-YN2B7046d2DiNLOCZNt6E3Eg/s1600/sean+connery+sybok.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhYlSg-oU5YLvVE4jdBXVslJjSBgqlNQ-DTSwrywSJiDbxLNzgq8OIJW2Faipki26LkgpiDtPBBxUz3NLxEam3fI0u6OjmClvTTR4pTHoWfuY2MuD2I4Y-YN2B7046d2DiNLOCZNt6E3Eg/s1600/sean+connery+sybok.jpg" /></a></div><u><b><br />
</b></u><br />
It's gotta be every fanboy's dream crossover: Captain Kirk vs Zed, The Exterminator (you'll get that one later, trust me)...okay...well maybe just this fanboy's.<br />
<br />
In Star Trek V: The Final Frontier, William Shatner signed on not just to once again play the Captain of the USS Enterprise but to also direct the fifth film in the then seemingly unstoppable Star Trek movie franchise. In a move that was highly contentious amongst Trek fans, Star Trek V introduced the character of a renegade Vulcan named Sybok. As the story unfolds, Sybok also turns out to be Spock's long lost, never even spoken of before brother (but let's not dwell on that which cannot be undone).<br />
<br />
Shatner's first choice for the role of Sybok was Sean Connery. Shatner (who is -believe it or not- the same age as Connery) believed that Connery could bring just the right amount of gravitas, humour and power to the role, not to mention a lot of international name brand recognition. So much so that the movie probably would have been released in some countries under the banner "Sean Connery in Star Trek V".<br />
<br />
The choice was not just Shatner's pipe dream, either. Negotiations with Connery had begun, but before the deal could be finalized, this guy named George Lucas came along and offered Connery the role of the father of some archaeologist from the 1930's. I dunno. Sounds kinda dull, Sean. You sure want to give up Star Trek for that?<br />
<br />
Connery and Shatner in the same movie. My mind boggles at the possibilities. All the film would have needed then was Charlton Heston as the powerful alien entity who pretends to be God (you know, it really is kind of a bizarre plot for a Trek movie). Then Star Trek V would have realized the dream team movie cast of my childhood.<br />
<br />
No matter, though. Sadly, even with Connery's presence, charisma and popularity, nothing could of have saved that major misfire of a Star Trek movie, either creatively or at the box office.<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<table align="center" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto; text-align: center;"><tbody>
<tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEh9nOWKdR5-f_B1Hr54tjdsd8C5lpMGWV1EYvy6GceOpW6VHopC7E5vpLjtMqLrCEyQpZmHx9HZztYuYvhgMfe0tYsEVrHgttfaTJKZTTjgJOTz5nRLcM6ymCH-BD_KYbp1fWgtEWaYeD4/s1600/james.bond.vs.captain.kirk.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEh9nOWKdR5-f_B1Hr54tjdsd8C5lpMGWV1EYvy6GceOpW6VHopC7E5vpLjtMqLrCEyQpZmHx9HZztYuYvhgMfe0tYsEVrHgttfaTJKZTTjgJOTz5nRLcM6ymCH-BD_KYbp1fWgtEWaYeD4/s1600/james.bond.vs.captain.kirk.jpg" /></a></td></tr>
<tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;">Okay, this one, more people will get.</td></tr>
</tbody></table><br />
<br />
<div style="text-align: center;"><b><span style="font-size: x-large;"><i>John Hammond</i></span></b></div><div style="text-align: center;"><b><span style="font-size: x-large;"> </span><span style="font-size: large;">in </span></b></div><div style="text-align: center;"><b><span style="font-size: x-large;"><u>Jurassic Park</u></span></b></div><div style="text-align: center;"><u><b><br />
</b></u></div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEj_BQjvh6IoImvvyxnSB0LbzLQ1IxTBAjsGpqAMXc112hz2w5i-8N-kC1aofTazFdlAyf0qclqGqsxaxnSrSYGhQlnmEqqfEDTUuZx3uFz-W1FO8S_ZR7UhPt87s-ISiwOFwythTAq1Mm8/s1600/photo-jurassic-park-1993-4.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="clear: left; float: left; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="255" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEj_BQjvh6IoImvvyxnSB0LbzLQ1IxTBAjsGpqAMXc112hz2w5i-8N-kC1aofTazFdlAyf0qclqGqsxaxnSrSYGhQlnmEqqfEDTUuZx3uFz-W1FO8S_ZR7UhPt87s-ISiwOFwythTAq1Mm8/s400/photo-jurassic-park-1993-4.jpg" width="400" /></a></div><u><b><br />
</b></u><br />
Michael<span itemprop="description"> Crichton</span> , the renowned novelist, screenwriter, director and M.D., was good friends with Sean Connery. The two first met when Crichton directed Connery in his 1979 film, The Great Train Robbery. They hit it off and remained friends for years. Connery once said of Chrichton, "He’s got a very big influence on my life.".<br />
<br />
Though, apparently almost no influence at all when it comes to roles Sean accepted. Aside from The Great Train Robbery, Connery only ever appeared in one Crichton related project, the 1993 film adaptation of Crichton's novel, Rising Sun (which was neither directed nor adapted for the screen by Crichton). <br />
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiCIGx2vVyj16SA34GHGdHVXHbu-rNOU4SU_7mGfMW0Juw2lHrs1vSS-f_HcNgNQ2fyUXn1P_n58OY5PIVIHzIPPnO7GGFjLvI5YTiqvuVUcXLOLXD11Rq_J_xkvVWF2Xm6qZZcneAKjyo/s1600/89163.png" imageanchor="1" style="clear: right; float: right; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-left: 1em;"><img border="0" height="300" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiCIGx2vVyj16SA34GHGdHVXHbu-rNOU4SU_7mGfMW0Juw2lHrs1vSS-f_HcNgNQ2fyUXn1P_n58OY5PIVIHzIPPnO7GGFjLvI5YTiqvuVUcXLOLXD11Rq_J_xkvVWF2Xm6qZZcneAKjyo/s400/89163.png" width="400" /></a></div>There could have been one other notable exception: Jurassic Park. For the role of John Hammond, the Scottish billionaire who masterminded the idea of an amusement park populated by cloned dinosaurs, Crichton suggested that director Steven Spielberg cast his old pal, Sean Connery.<br />
<br />
Like everything else listed in this post, it was not be. According to an interview with Chricton I remember seeing on Charlie Rose back in the day, their friendship did not run quite <i>that</i> deep. Connery wanted more money than the studio was willing to cough up, according to Crichton. <br />
The studio execs probably felt that the success or failure of Jurassic Park did not rely on Mr. Connery's presence in the film. They were already shelling out the big bucks for the real stars of the movie, the dinosaurs (and the ground breaking visual effects that would bring them to life on the screen).<br />
<br />
Sir Richard Attenborough got the part of Hammond. Attenborough played the part as a naive benevolent happy-go-lucky grandfatherly figure who, although well intentioned, was horribly misguided. The characterization is almost a total opposite of Chrichton's Hammond in the original novel. There, Hammond knows exactly what he's doing and is well aware of the potential dangers (and massive profits) of his undertaking. He darkly uses the term "collateral damage" when people start getting eaten by the giant reptilian Frankenstein monsters Hammond helped create.<br />
<br />
Connery tends to play most of his characters as people who, while often facing great conflicts, are essentially happy. It is doubtful that any sense of darkness to the character would have played into Connery's acting choices nor would they have been tolerated by the studio execs who seriously gunning for a big summer blockbuster.<br />
<br />
Almost cast as Dr. Grant, the role that ultimately went to Sam Neil, was Harrison Ford. Yeesh, with Connery and Ford under Spielberg's direction, the whole affair might have felt a little too Indiana Jones and the Last Jurassic Crusade.<br />
<br />
<div style="text-align: center;"><b><span style="font-size: x-large;"><i>Morpheus </i></span></b></div><div style="text-align: center;"><b><span style="font-size: large;">in </span></b></div><div style="text-align: center;"><b><span style="font-size: x-large;"><u>The Matrix</u></span></b></div><br />
<br />
<table cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="float: left; margin-right: 1em; text-align: left;"><tbody>
<tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEi-6eOq5zSl-4gw1PUEFssARb59_0LTCujB7YTLbRcDAEE0o5qqAtBUdM9ldOdqO3SyNzeLuEBDGEj-2dDjgwhkFaZf-vP_ZVr1Vp-NaOaZ9yxtYVRAee3JTqjRoVyhfThtM66RuiIOZEc/s1600/morpheus.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="clear: left; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" height="226" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEi-6eOq5zSl-4gw1PUEFssARb59_0LTCujB7YTLbRcDAEE0o5qqAtBUdM9ldOdqO3SyNzeLuEBDGEj-2dDjgwhkFaZf-vP_ZVr1Vp-NaOaZ9yxtYVRAee3JTqjRoVyhfThtM66RuiIOZEc/s400/morpheus.jpg" width="400" /></a></td></tr>
<tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;">Um...no...I'm not doing the doppelganger bit again.</td></tr>
</tbody></table><br />
As I start looking down this list of roles that Mr. Connery turned down, one overwhelming thought comes to mind: <i>"What the hell was this guy thinking?</i>". The list that contains some of the most interesting, iconic, juicy and lucrative roles of the last 50 or so years.<br />
<br />
Well, here's one more for you, Sir Sean; you could have easily doubled his 1990's asking price price of 10 million dollars a picture by starring in The Matrix.<br />
<br />
Connery has stated in a couple of different interviews that we was approached to star in The Matrix. Many believe that he was offered the role of Morpheus, the cooler-than-thou leather clad mentor in The Matrix. In addition to making an absolute ton of money, The Matrix redefined the SF action movie genre for the next 10 years and beyond. Better yet, Connery, as far as critical reaction goes, would have the added advantage of being the guy in the movie that wasn't Keanu Reeves.<br />
<br />
Yes, according to most sources, Connery was initially offered the part that went Laurence Fishbourne (and single handedly rejuvenated his career). However, here is some speculation out there in Internet land that Connery was, in fact, offered the role of the Key Keeper in the sequel, Matrix Reloaded.<br />
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEg3d8D23olkp60msmSSu3Q0aPvIhxRGKEJJ2A5oCepTCKeSGGc_j7OVmjAZHkymKSKlVHwmLv2PrezC2nXqTkF-_NILtTmTrxGdi7Ud_e77i5x1msTPFwuhGmtyHLLkPiVAvEy7jDX-72U/s1600/sean-connery+(1).jpg" imageanchor="1" style="clear: right; float: right; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-left: 1em;"><img border="0" height="225" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEg3d8D23olkp60msmSSu3Q0aPvIhxRGKEJJ2A5oCepTCKeSGGc_j7OVmjAZHkymKSKlVHwmLv2PrezC2nXqTkF-_NILtTmTrxGdi7Ud_e77i5x1msTPFwuhGmtyHLLkPiVAvEy7jDX-72U/s400/sean-connery+(1).jpg" width="400" /></a></div><br />
If that's true, it makes even less sense than turning down Morpheus. That decision is at least conceivably understandable. The first Matrix film is so intensely a visual and visceral experience that God knows how the thing ever would have come across in mere written word script form. Turning down the sequel to one of the biggest hits of the decade is much more perplexing. The movie was out there. It was successful. More than likely, they could have afforded Sir Sean. The part of the Key Keeper is relatively small in terms of a time commitment yet at the same time potentially very profitable. Given all that, I'm more inclined to believe that Connery turned down the seemingly risky Morpheus role in the original rather than the sure thing role of the Key Keeper in the sequel.<br />
<br />
Morpheus would have worked for Connery too. The action tough guy mentor role is one that he had mastered at that stage in his career, having already played the part in such films as The Untouchables and Highlander.<br />
<br />
<br />
However, turning down The Matrix is a mere drop in the bucket next to...<br />
<br />
<div style="text-align: center;"><span style="font-family: inherit; font-size: x-large;"><i><b>Gandalf </b></i></span></div><div style="text-align: center;"><b><span style="font-family: inherit; font-size: large;">in</span><span style="font-family: inherit; font-size: x-large;"> </span></b></div><div style="text-align: center;"><span style="font-family: inherit; font-size: x-large;"><b><u>The Lord of the Rings</u></b></span></div><br />
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEje2dPnt99Z34XMVTIESK8rCt059blqm93jgpgYanF2qmXxuf-8AAIesNDXyZaM9Y_7i3B9jzuqNiZVDxN2rPLMyH4bryNyJqBtLvea4JMcuQXtA-KfqE7MYzxiplqeMvO_uhsqu_0e3sQ/s1600/sean.gif" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEje2dPnt99Z34XMVTIESK8rCt059blqm93jgpgYanF2qmXxuf-8AAIesNDXyZaM9Y_7i3B9jzuqNiZVDxN2rPLMyH4bryNyJqBtLvea4JMcuQXtA-KfqE7MYzxiplqeMvO_uhsqu_0e3sQ/s1600/sean.gif" /></a></div><br />
Connery is on record as saying, "I didn't understand it" in refrence to the roles he passed on in both The Matrix and in The Lord of the Rings (just check out the extras on The League of Extraordinary Gentlemen DVD ). In another interview Connery sold the Lord of the Rings non-comprehension explanation even harder. "I had never read Tolkien, and I didn't understand the script when they sent it to me. Bobbits? Hobbits?", he said.<br />
<br />
You might have wanted to take a second look at Tolkien and those Bobbits Mr. Connery. Based on the cut of the gross deal that Sir Ian Mckellan got for playing the role of Gandalf in the Lord of the Rings trilogy, Connery would have stood to make an estimated $253 million from the role. Good thing the guy was already a multi-millionaire when he passed on that one.<br />
<br />
Not understanding the script is one reason for passing on the one of the biggest film trilogies of all time Another, and slightly more understandable, reason why Sir Sean turned down director Peter Jackson's offer was the prospect of the grueling 18 month shooting schedule that would take place on the other side of the world. Connery was in his late 60's at the time and all that wouldn't have exactly been easy for him..<br />
<br />
Now, legendary horror movie actor Christopher Lee was ten years older than Connery and yet that didn't stop him from taking the part of the evil Saruman in the same project. Let's face it, though, Saruman isn't as big a role and, with all due respect, Mr. Lee was probably a lot more in need of 253 million bucks than Connery was.<br />
<br />
J.R.R. Tolkien's creation of the wizard Gandalf is one of the most recognizable characters in all of fantasy fiction (that was true even before the movies). The Lord of the Rings: Return of the King is the only film ever in the SF/Fantasy/Horror genre to win an Oscar for Best Picture. Yep, Sean, you seriously missed the boat on this baby.<br />
<br />
Mr. Connery, however, may have been leery of "weird" SF and Fantasly scripts sent his way since, say, the mid 70's. Also on the League of Extraordinary Gentlemen DVD extras, Connery says that he did The League of Extraordinary Gentlemen because, "I'm the guy who did Zardoz, after all." That may be a very telling comment in light of his rejections of both The Matrix and Lord of the Rings.<br />
<br />
For the uninitiated, Zardoz is a 1975 science fiction film directed by John Boorman (Excalibur, Deliverance) starring Sean Connery. It is a very trippy 70's sci-fi parable that pretends to more dense and cryptic than in fact it actually is. In other words, it's pretentious.<br />
<br />
As if that weren't enough, Connery plays a guy named Zed, The Exterminator (see, I told you that reference would make sense later) who spends almost the entire film in a bright red diaper that looks like it may very well have been the inspiration for Borat's infamous one piece male swimsuit. Or, as Mike Myers referred to Sean's unique Zardoz wardrobe at Connery's induction into the American Film Institutes's Hall of Fame, a "nutsack". It's kinda like he got to play Tarzan 16 years after he was first offered the part.<br />
<br />
When you take Zardoz into account, it's no wonder that, whenever Connery saw an offbeat "cerebral" SF or Fantasy script like The Matrix and Lord of the Rings, he ran as fast as he could in the opposite direction.<br />
<br />
Don't get me wrong, Zardoz is a fascinating curiosity in both the genre and in Connery's career. Nonetheless, go watch it and see if you can't blame the guy.<br />
<br />
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"></div><table align="center" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto; text-align: center;"><tbody>
<tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhY8uDxlO-rlgWD7MimPaFOgOelb0KMNUCDKMZ60tGE6WeQ3n8t6HLKC7iwGcTPaHEC8KS4q40MH6cDheumabqxy3KvyzoekxuwbHXUvtjdxGTiRqLcG_O7gd54Gm-_FwQ5omTKj-0sZEg/s1600/connery+zardoz.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhY8uDxlO-rlgWD7MimPaFOgOelb0KMNUCDKMZ60tGE6WeQ3n8t6HLKC7iwGcTPaHEC8KS4q40MH6cDheumabqxy3KvyzoekxuwbHXUvtjdxGTiRqLcG_O7gd54Gm-_FwQ5omTKj-0sZEg/s1600/connery+zardoz.jpg" /></a></td></tr>
<tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;">The role that many feel Sean Connery <i>should</i> have turned down.</td></tr>
</tbody></table><br />
<br />
These are but a few examples of the Connery Roles That Never Were. The list goes on: Daddy Warbucks in Annie, Captain Von Trapp in The Sound of Music and, most recently, reprising the role of Dr. Henry Jones, Sr. in Indiana Jones and The Kingdom of the Crystal Skull, to name a few.<br />
<br />
Sir Thomas Sean Connery is now quite adamantly retired from movies. The likes of George Lucas and Stephen Spielberg have famously attempted to lure him out of his luxury New York City apartment and back on to the big screen, but to no avail. Except for a couple of voice gigs, no one has succeeded in that endeavor.<br />
<br />
I guess Sean Connery has decided to take his notorious reputation for turning down roles to its ultimate logical conclusion.<br />
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"></div><table align="center" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto; text-align: center;"><tbody>
<tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgOUZlbuoxhNKRGXywHE7Ed1gFE3mn9Jj7sNp3NH69GcY8jEyzRixBtd4muPAPEI7OL8snUsAykhAsC2l-Zc91W8dpRyN1QXNwWwEnGlihE-5I4VGPLnABsXw_QRIX947hctPR9POS-dys/s1600/2.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgOUZlbuoxhNKRGXywHE7Ed1gFE3mn9Jj7sNp3NH69GcY8jEyzRixBtd4muPAPEI7OL8snUsAykhAsC2l-Zc91W8dpRyN1QXNwWwEnGlihE-5I4VGPLnABsXw_QRIX947hctPR9POS-dys/s1600/2.jpg" /></a></td></tr>
<tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;">No, this one's just for fun.</td></tr>
</tbody></table><br />
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"></div><br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"></div>Terence Bowmanhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/04576129838447713151noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2233378012529819224.post-68268752277592801662012-03-12T10:00:00.002-04:002015-03-17T12:10:08.942-04:00The Greatest Green Supeheroes<div style="text-align: center;">
<span style="font-size: large;"><b><u><br />
</u></b></span></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="http://collider.com/wp-content/uploads/green_lantern_comic_book_flight_alex_ross.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" src="http://collider.com/wp-content/uploads/green_lantern_comic_book_flight_alex_ross.jpg" height="640" width="416" /></a></div>
<br />
<br />
<div style="text-align: center;">
<b><u><span style="font-size: x-large;">Green Lantern</span></u></b> </div>
<div style="text-align: center;">
<b><u><span style="font-size: large;"><br />
</span></u></b></div>
<div style="text-align: center;">
<b><u><span style="font-size: large;"><br />
</span></u></b></div>
<b><u>Created by: </u></b><br />
Bill Finger and Martin Nodell, later re-imagined by Gil Kane and John Broome<br />
<b><u>First Appeared:</u></b><br />
All American Comics #16 July 1940, re-introduced in 1959<br />
<b><u>Secret Identity:</u></b><br />
Identities, in this case: Alan Scott, Hal Jordan, Kyle Rayner, John Stewart (not the Daily Show guy), to name a few...a lot of different people have gotten their hands on that power ring.<br />
<b><u>Origin: </u></b><br />
A dying alien, just after crash landing on Earth gave test pilot Hal Jordan a ring (and an accompanying lantern in which to recharge it) that not only gave Jordan special powers but also made him part of an interplanetary police force known as The Green Lantern Corps (that's the better known version, anyway).<br />
<b><u>Powers: </u></b><br />
Um, what can't he do?<br />
The power ring has, over the years has given Green Lantern such powers as flight, teleportation, matter manipulation, time travel, telepathy, hypnosis, invisibility, force field generation and, my personal fave, the ability to create a giant green boxing glove capable of of squashing his enemies from a distance.<br />
<b><u>What's Cool About Him: </u></b><br />
See Powers and Secret Identities<br />
<b><u>What's Not Cool: </u></b><br />
See Powers and Secret Identities<br />
<b><u>Has Been Played by: </u></b><br />
Sadly, only one live action version, played by Ryan Reynolds.<br />
In animated form, The Green Lantern has appeared in many incarnations in everything from the Super Friends to the animated Justice League/Justice League Unlimited series to the recent Batman: the Brave and The Bold. Green Lantern has been voiced by a wide variety of actors including Phil Lamarr, David Boreanaz, Nathan Fillion, Michael Rye, Gerald Mohr and even director/fanboy/egotist Kevin Smith.<br />
<br />
<br />
<div style="text-align: center;">
<span style="font-size: large;"><b><u><br />
</u></b></span></div>
<div style="text-align: center;">
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
</div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgx69tGhxCAByVnZ6k-pNV6OuXW_2WxWkhPE9rzHyxY7vjwgDK6MV4EiFf5w7YW4c3sHi8Iz5Dc7SLBmOswE98u0813x-cIB6ziMNQ5Nld9HJWKSSfrBMKeDWRwEPK0BIVrXF83H78gIv0/s1600/green+hornet.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgx69tGhxCAByVnZ6k-pNV6OuXW_2WxWkhPE9rzHyxY7vjwgDK6MV4EiFf5w7YW4c3sHi8Iz5Dc7SLBmOswE98u0813x-cIB6ziMNQ5Nld9HJWKSSfrBMKeDWRwEPK0BIVrXF83H78gIv0/s1600/green+hornet.jpg" /></a></div>
<b><u><span style="font-size: large;"><br />
</span></u></b></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
</div>
<div style="text-align: center;">
<b><u><span style="font-size: large;"><br />
</span></u></b></div>
<div style="text-align: center;">
<b><u><span style="font-size: x-large;">The Green Hornet</span></u></b> <br />
<b style="text-align: left;"><u><br />
</u></b><br />
<b style="text-align: left;"><u><br />
</u></b><br />
<div style="text-align: left;">
<b><u>Created by:</u></b></div>
</div>
<div style="text-align: left;">
George W. Trendle and Fran Striker</div>
<div style="text-align: left;">
<b><u>First Appeared:</u></b></div>
<div style="text-align: left;">
January 31, 1936 on WXYZ radio, Detroit, later on NBC Radio<br />
<b><u>Secret Identity:</u></b><br />
Newspaper publisher and renowned bachelor playboy about town (sound familiar?) Britt Reid by day, Green Hornet by night (literally, he's the first guy to do the "by day, by night" shtick).</div>
<div style="text-align: left;">
<b><u>Origin:</u></b></div>
<div style="text-align: left;">
The common thread among the many different takes on the character over the years all involve the following: Reid saves the life of his future sidekick,Kato, while visiting any number of different places in Asia (Kato's nationality has been Japanese, Korean, Thai and Chinese over the years, due to the ever shifting political and military conflicts between the US and various different Asian countries), Reid returns to to the US, becomes publisher of The Daily Sentinel newspaper after the death of his father, Kato invents a bunch of cool gadgets and then the duo proceed to get inadvertently drawn into a life of masked crime fighting.</div>
<div style="text-align: left;">
<b><u>Powers:</u></b></div>
<div style="text-align: left;">
Has a sidekick who knows Martial Arts and who can build technology advanced crime fighting tools like high speed, rocket launching, bullet proof cars and special gas guns that can knock out the bad buys out for anywhere from one hour to eleven days.<br />
Other than that, depending on the version, The Green Hornet is either an extremely skilled fighter and detective in his own right or a total doofus who just rides on Kato's coattails or somewhere between the two. </div>
<div style="text-align: left;">
<b><u>What's Cool About Him:</u></b></div>
<div style="text-align: left;">
You gotta love a guy that puts on a tie before he goes out to kick some ass. The man basically dresses like just about any male cast member of Mad Men, except with a mask and an obsession with the colour green.</div>
<div style="text-align: left;">
While really a crime fighter, The Green Hornet pretends to be a criminal as a means of obtaining the bad guy's trust and learning about all of their nefarious plans.</div>
<div style="text-align: left;">
Britt Reid is the grandson or grandnephew (depending on the version) of the The Lone Ranger. The Green Horent was created by the same guys who made The Lone Ranger and broadcast on the same radio network. The original radio series was aimed a slightly older audience than that of the mysterious masked man of the old west series and touched on many social and political issues. The original radio scripts were often based on actual police file cases.</div>
<div style="text-align: left;">
The Green Hornet has appeared in an impressive number of different mediums: radio, TV, serial, comics, video games and movies.</div>
<div style="text-align: left;">
The 1960's TV series introduced Bruce Lee to the world.</div>
<div style="text-align: left;">
<b><u>What's Not Cool:</u></b></div>
<div style="text-align: left;">
An entire generation only knows The Green Hornet as a Seth Rogan character.</div>
<div style="text-align: left;">
<b><u>Has Been Played By:</u></b></div>
<div style="text-align: left;">
Al Hodge in the 1936-52 radio series.</div>
<div style="text-align: left;">
Gordon Jones in the 1940 movie serial, The Green Hornet (but voiced by Hodge every time Jones puts on the mask)</div>
<div style="text-align: left;">
Warren Hull in the 1941 sequel serial The Green Hornet Strikes Again (this time, no Hodge)</div>
<div style="text-align: left;">
Van Williams in the 1966-67 TV series</div>
<div style="text-align: left;">
Manu Lanzi in the 2006 French-made short film.</div>
<div style="text-align: left;">
Seth Rogan in the 2011 movie<br />
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: left;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: center;">
<span style="font-size: large;"><b><u><br />
</u></b></span></div>
<div style="text-align: center;">
<span style="font-size: large;"><b><u><br />
</u></b></span></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="http://theflickcast.com/wp-content/uploads//the-hulk.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" src="http://theflickcast.com/wp-content/uploads//the-hulk.jpg" /></a></div>
<div style="text-align: center;">
<span style="font-size: large;"><b><u><br />
</u></b></span></div>
<div style="text-align: center;">
<b><u><span style="font-size: x-large;">The Hulk</span></u></b> <br />
<span style="font-size: large;"><b><u><br />
</u></b></span></div>
<div style="text-align: left;">
<b><u>Created by:</u></b></div>
<div style="text-align: left;">
Stan Lee and Jack Kirby</div>
<div style="text-align: left;">
<b><u>First Appeared:</u></b></div>
<div style="text-align: left;">
The Incredible Hulk #1, May 1962<br />
<b><u>Secret Identity:</u></b><br />
Dr.Bruce Banner, though it's not exactly a secret.</div>
<div style="text-align: left;">
<b><u>Origin:</u></b></div>
<div style="text-align: left;">
<span style="background-color: white;">Doc Bruce Banner, belted by gamma rays, turned into the Hulk.</span></div>
<div style="text-align: left;">
<b><u>Powers:</u></b></div>
<div style="text-align: left;">
Hulk smash.</div>
<div style="text-align: left;">
<b><u>What's Cool About Him:</u></b></div>
<div style="text-align: left;">
Giant. Green. Can throw tanks to the other side of the desert with a single toss. Get him on your side in am bar fight and you're laughing (just don't do that in front of him).</div>
<div style="text-align: left;">
<b><u>What's Not Cool:</u></b></div>
<div style="text-align: left;">
You wouldn't like him when he's angry.</div>
<div style="text-align: left;">
<b><u>Has Been Played By:</u></b></div>
<div style="text-align: left;">
Billy Bixby as Banner, Lou Ferrigno as The Hulk in the 1977-82 TV series and 1988-90 TV movies<br />
Eric Bana as Banner along with director Ang Lee as a motion capture CGI Hulk in the 2003 movie</div>
<div style="text-align: left;">
Edward Norton as Banner along with a CGI/motion capture Hulk in the 2008 movie</div>
<div style="text-align: left;">
Mark Ruffalo as Banner along with another CGI/motion capture Hulk in the 2012 hit, Marvel's The Avengers and also in the upcoming Avengers:Age of Ultron.</div>
<div style="text-align: left;">
Lou Ferrigno voiced The Hulk in the 1996 animated series as well as (according to IMDB) in the 2003 and 2008 movies, plus the 2012 Avengers movie (he is uncredited in all three films).<br />
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: left;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: center;">
<span style="font-size: large;"><b><u><br />
</u></b></span></div>
<div style="text-align: center;">
<b><u><span style="font-size: large;"><br />
</span></u></b></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="http://blogs-images.forbes.com/carolpinchefsky/files/2012/01/GreenArrowDCComics.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" src="http://blogs-images.forbes.com/carolpinchefsky/files/2012/01/GreenArrowDCComics.jpg" height="480" width="640" /></a></div>
<div style="text-align: left;">
<div style="text-align: center;">
<b><u><span style="font-size: large;"><br />
</span></u></b></div>
<div style="text-align: center;">
<b><u><span style="font-size: large;"><br />
</span></u></b></div>
<div style="text-align: center;">
<b><u><span style="font-size: x-large;">Green Arrow</span></u></b> </div>
<div style="text-align: center;">
<b><u><span style="font-size: large;"><br />
</span></u></b></div>
</div>
<div style="text-align: left;">
<b><u><span style="font-size: large;"><br />
</span></u></b></div>
<div style="text-align: left;">
</div>
<div style="margin-bottom: .0001pt; margin: 0cm;">
<span style="font-family: inherit;"><b><u>Created by:</u></b><o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div style="margin-bottom: .0001pt; margin: 0cm;">
<span style="font-family: inherit;">Mort Weisinger and George Papp</span></div>
<div style="margin-bottom: 0.0001pt; margin-left: 0cm; margin-right: 0cm; margin-top: 0cm;">
<span style="font-family: inherit;"><b><u>First Appeared:</u></b><o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div style="margin-bottom: 0.0001pt; margin-left: 0cm; margin-right: 0cm; margin-top: 0cm;">
More Fun Comics #73, November 1941<br />
<b style="font-family: inherit;"><u>Secret Identity:</u></b><br />
<div style="margin-bottom: 0.0001pt; margin-left: 0cm; margin-right: 0cm; margin-top: 0cm;">
<span style="font-family: inherit;">Leftist billionaire Oliver Queen.</span></div>
</div>
<div style="margin-bottom: 0.0001pt; margin-left: 0cm; margin-right: 0cm; margin-top: 0cm;">
<span style="font-family: inherit;"><b><u>Origin:</u></b><o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div style="margin-bottom: 0.0001pt; margin-left: 0cm; margin-right: 0cm; margin-top: 0cm;">
When Oliver Queen is abandoned by one of his business rivals on a remote uncharted island, he quickly learns survival skills, mainly through the use of his main hobby, archery. Upon his rescue and return to civilization, he decides to the robin hood thing, only cooler.</div>
<div style="margin-bottom: 0.0001pt; margin-left: 0cm; margin-right: 0cm; margin-top: 0cm;">
<b style="font-family: inherit;"><u>Powers:</u></b></div>
<div style="margin-bottom: 0.0001pt; margin-left: 0cm; margin-right: 0cm; margin-top: 0cm;">
<span style="font-family: inherit;">As the name might suggest, he's really good with a bow and arrow. Plus Queen used his </span>unlimited<span style="font-family: inherit;"> wealth to create a wide array of unique arrows that can explode, put out fires, disperse tear gas, act as a grappling hook or even become a delivery system for thermonuclear bombs.</span></div>
<div style="margin-bottom: 0.0001pt; margin-left: 0cm; margin-right: 0cm; margin-top: 0cm;">
<span style="font-family: inherit;"><b><u>What's Cool About Him:</u></b><o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div style="margin-bottom: 0.0001pt; margin-left: 0cm; margin-right: 0cm; margin-top: 0cm;">
The costume and the blond Van Dyke, for one thing.<br />
The 1970's comic book series in which Green Arrow teamed up with The Green Lantern. Those comics addressed major social and political issues of the day. In one issue, Green Arrow and Green Lantern had to deal with the fact that Green Arrow's sidekick, Speedy, had become a junkie. From there on in the guy became one of the most outspoken voices of leftist and progressive politics in mainstream comics.</div>
<div style="margin-bottom: 0.0001pt; margin-left: 0cm; margin-right: 0cm; margin-top: 0cm;">
<span style="font-family: inherit;"><b><u>What's Not Cool:</u></b><o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div style="margin-bottom: 0.0001pt; margin-left: 0cm; margin-right: 0cm; margin-top: 0cm;">
In his first ever on-screen appearance in a 1973 episode of the now classic Saturday morning cartoon, Super Friends, Green Arrow exclaims lines like, "By Nottingham's ghost!", "Great flaming arrows!" and "By Robin Hood's bow!".<br />
<b><u><span style="font-family: inherit;">Has Been Played By:</span></u></b></div>
<div style="margin-bottom: 0.0001pt; margin-left: 0cm; margin-right: 0cm; margin-top: 0cm;">
Justin Hartley played The Green Arrow on the long running Superman prequel series, Smallville.<br />
Stephen Arnell plays The Green Arrow (or a version thereof) in the current CW network series, Arrow.</div>
<div style="margin-bottom: 0.0001pt; margin-left: 0cm; margin-right: 0cm; margin-top: 0cm;">
The Green Arrow was voiced by actor Norman Alden in the aforementioned Super Friends episode as well as by many other voice actors in such animated series as Justice League Unlimited, The Batman, Batman: The Brave and The Bold, Young Justice and a number of direct to DVD animated superhero movies.</div>
<div style="margin-bottom: 0.0001pt; margin-left: 0cm; margin-right: 0cm; margin-top: 0cm;">
<br /></div>
<div style="margin-bottom: 0.0001pt; margin-left: 0cm; margin-right: 0cm; margin-top: 0cm;">
<br /></div>
<div style="margin-bottom: 0.0001pt; margin-left: 0cm; margin-right: 0cm; margin-top: 0cm; text-align: center;">
<span style="font-size: large;"><b><u><br />
</u></b></span></div>
<div style="margin-bottom: 0.0001pt; margin-left: 0cm; margin-right: 0cm; margin-top: 0cm; text-align: center;">
<b><u><span style="font-size: large;"><br />
</span></u></b></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEib_2N_BUCorFjUkNbtgvp8f-KutRhHzaiDRQJyBQvv7arRtcjZXZsn5Vxf1aMD-yYvL-9KSn7SKbLn7iYanxRjJLOs2cgpXJjZ1Xo6x2jtgLI7xzIOLj669SaGPFymw-kQDouMasM6tl0/+patrick+Jurewicz.jpeg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEib_2N_BUCorFjUkNbtgvp8f-KutRhHzaiDRQJyBQvv7arRtcjZXZsn5Vxf1aMD-yYvL-9KSn7SKbLn7iYanxRjJLOs2cgpXJjZ1Xo6x2jtgLI7xzIOLj669SaGPFymw-kQDouMasM6tl0/+patrick+Jurewicz.jpeg" /></a></div>
<div style="margin-bottom: 0.0001pt; margin-left: 0cm; margin-right: 0cm; margin-top: 0cm; text-align: left;">
<div style="text-align: right;">
<b style="text-align: center;"><u><span style="font-size: large;"><br />
</span></u></b></div>
<div style="text-align: center;">
<b><u><span style="font-size: x-large;">St. Patrick</span></u></b></div>
</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<b><u><span style="font-family: inherit;"><br />
</span></u></b><br />
<b><u><span style="font-family: inherit;">Created by:</span></u></b></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Small shreds of historical evidence embellished by about 1600 years worth of folklore and mythology.</div>
<div style="margin-bottom: 0.0001pt; margin-left: 0cm; margin-right: 0cm; margin-top: 0cm;">
<span style="font-family: inherit;"><b><u>First Appeared:</u></b><o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div style="margin-bottom: 0.0001pt; margin-left: 0cm; margin-right: 0cm; margin-top: 0cm;">
<span style="font-family: inherit;">387 A.D. (estimated)</span><br />
<b style="font-family: inherit;"><u>Secret Identity:</u></b><br />
Known as "Patrick" to his friends and family.</div>
<div style="margin-bottom: 0.0001pt; margin-left: 0cm; margin-right: 0cm; margin-top: 0cm;">
<span style="font-family: inherit;"><b><u>Origin:</u></b><o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div style="margin-bottom: 0.0001pt; margin-left: 0cm; margin-right: 0cm; margin-top: 0cm;">
At age 16, he was brought to Ireland after being captured in Wales by Irish slave traders. He escaped then later returned to Ireland as Catholic Bishop. I know, I know...this one needs some serious retroconning.</div>
<div style="margin-bottom: 0.0001pt; margin-left: 0cm; margin-right: 0cm; margin-top: 0cm;">
<b style="font-family: inherit;"><u>Powers:</u></b></div>
<div style="margin-bottom: 0.0001pt; margin-left: 0cm; margin-right: 0cm; margin-top: 0cm;">
Superior snake banishing skills, ability to use the shamrock as a metaphor for the Holy Trinity, has a walking stick with debatable divine powers, is a Saint.</div>
<div style="margin-bottom: 0.0001pt; margin-left: 0cm; margin-right: 0cm; margin-top: 0cm;">
<span style="font-family: inherit;"><b><u>What's Cool About Him:</u></b><o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div style="margin-bottom: 0.0001pt; margin-left: 0cm; margin-right: 0cm; margin-top: 0cm;">
St.Patrick was so good at getting the snakes out of Ireland that many researchers today believe that Emerald Isle at that time never even had snakes to begin with.</div>
<div style="margin-bottom: 0.0001pt; margin-left: 0cm; margin-right: 0cm; margin-top: 0cm;">
<span style="font-family: inherit;"><b><u>What's Not Cool About Him:</u></b><o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div style="margin-bottom: 0.0001pt; margin-left: 0cm; margin-right: 0cm; margin-top: 0cm;">
Inspires an annual display of the most incredibly<span style="font-family: inherit;"> rowdy </span><span style="font-family: inherit;">drunken cosplay ever.</span><br />
<b><u><span style="font-family: inherit;">Has Been Played By:</span></u></b></div>
<div style="margin-bottom: 0.0001pt; margin-left: 0cm; margin-right: 0cm; margin-top: 0cm;">
The appropriately named Patrick Bergin in the 2000 TV movie St.Patrick: The Irish Legend. Fans everywhere are still waiting for that big, definitive St.Patrick blockbuster, though....maybe Hollywood will get to it after The Dark Knight Rises and The Avengers?<br />
<br />
<br />
<table align="center" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto; text-align: center;"><tbody>
<tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="http://www.teesd.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/03/030412-feature-1.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" src="http://www.teesd.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/03/030412-feature-1.jpg" /></a></td></tr>
<tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;"><b><i><u><span style="font-size: small;">Not an actual ad on my blog, BTW. </span></u></i></b><br />
I knew I couldn't be the first person to ever make these connections.</td></tr>
</tbody></table>
<br />
<br />
<b><i><span style="color: #6aa84f; font-size: x-large;">Happy St. Patrick's Day Everyone!</span></i></b></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
Terence Bowmanhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/04576129838447713151noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2233378012529819224.post-27234690271867605442012-03-05T10:00:00.007-05:002012-07-18T17:48:26.980-04:00John Carter and The Edgar Rice Burroughs Movie Curse<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
</div>
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="http://www.opplol.com/downloads4/john_carter_movie_poster3.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="286" lda="true" src="http://www.opplol.com/downloads4/john_carter_movie_poster3.jpg" width="640" /></a></div>
<br />
<br />
This Friday, one of science fiction and fantasy writer Edgar Rice Burroughs' most popular characters is finally making his big screen debut. And, no, of course, I'm not talking about that yelling guy in the loin cloth who hangs out with apes. I'm talking about Burroughs' <i>other</i> most popular character, John Carter of Mars <br />
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/3/3a/Princess_of_Mars_large.jpg/250px-Princess_of_Mars_large.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="clear: right; cssfloat: right; float: right; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-left: 1em;"><img border="0" height="320" lda="true" src="http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/3/3a/Princess_of_Mars_large.jpg/250px-Princess_of_Mars_large.jpg" width="211" /></a></div>
62 years after his death, Burroughs continues to be one of the genre's most venerated old school pulp adventure writers. Primarily known as the creator of Tarzan of the Apes, Burroughs wrote an estimated 70 novels featuring a wide array of different characters and their stories. The author has created, among other things, literary fantasy adventure series that take place in the jungle, on Mars, the Moon, Venus, on lost islands populated by dinosaurs and even in the center of the Earth. Most of his books are still in print today (there are 539 Burroughs titles available from the Amazon.com Kindle Store alone).<br />
<br />
Burroughs, however, has not had a great history when it comes to motion pictures. While often financially successful, big screen adaptations of his work have largely been B-movie fare, often aimed at younger and less discriminating audiences. Some of the Burroughs' movies have risen above their lower echelon cinematic status but not many. You could call it the Edgar Rice Burroughs movie curse.<br />
<br />
The upcoming movie, John Carter, is an adaptation of A Princess of Mars, the first in a series of books featuring Burroughs' second most famous character after Tarzan, the aforementioned John Carter of Mars. The new film is directed by avowed John Carter fan Andrew Stanton (Wall-E, Finding Nemo, Monsters Inc.) under the auspices of the Walt Disney Studios. The new movie may change the tides of Burroughs-based films. However, the historical odds are not in the blockbuster's favour.<br />
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="http://montanawriter.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/02/ERB.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="clear: left; cssfloat: left; float: left; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="308" lda="true" src="http://montanawriter.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/02/ERB.jpg" width="400" /></a></div>
Edgar Rice Burroughs (1875-1950) did not begin his writing career until the age of 35. Though he did enter said career with a bang. A Princess of Mars (the premiere John Carter adventure, originally appearing in a serialized pulp magazine format with the title Under The Moons of Mars) was his first<br />
published work.<br />
<br />
Just months after that, Burroughs second published piece also began appearing in serialized pulp magazine form. It was entitled Tarzan of the Apes. Later published as a complete novel, the book would not only go on to become one of Burroughs best selling works but it would also introduce what is arguably the most popular fictional character of the 20th century. 2012 marks the centenary of the debut of both Tarzan and Carter.<br />
<br />
<br />
A Princess of Mars is the first of eleven Carter novels written by Burroughs between 1912 and 1948 (though the eleventh book was published posthumously in 1964). John Carter is an American Civil War veteran who, while searching for gold in a mysterious cave in Arizona, finds himself ethereally transported to the planet Mars. It's similar to the out-of-body adventure premises used in The Matrix and Avatar (only Burroughs did it 90 or so years before both of them). Due to the super human powers Mars' gravity affords him, Carter is able to leap great distances and has great physical strength. He quickly becomes a key player in an epic fantasy adventure as different Martian races battle over the fate of the future of Mars (or Barsoom, as it is known to its inhabitants).<br />
<br />
<span style="font-family: inherit;">A classic tenant of Burroughs' work is the rugged Anglo Saxon adventurer stranded in some form or other of a lost or alien world. These heroes are well educated, cultured men with the hearts of warriors. Invariably, these men somehow rescue and ultimately transform the primitive cultures of their strange, adopted lands (and slay a few monsters along the way for good measure). In this case, the hero is John Carter and the lost world is Mars.</span><br />
<br />
According to Burroughs' IMDB page, there are 68 movies based on his work. Only 6 of those movies are non-Tarzan adaptations. There's about 10 on that list that are actually good movies and only one or two that do not fall into the category of B-movies.Burroughs himself, though, was no stranger to the movies, most especially when it came to the eponymous hero of his most famous book. Well, at least initially, anyway.<br />
<br />
As the heroic man raised by apes known as Tarzan became increasingly popular, Burroughs had a radical new idea. His plan was to have Tarzan appear in every place possible on the newly emerging pop culture landscape: books, movies, a comic strip, radio series, merchandise, you name it. Experienced business people at the time advised him that this was a bad idea. The conventional wisdom of the day was that all these products would compete against each other and thus none of them would be profitable. Burroughs went ahead with plan anyway. It worked. All things Tarzan were extremely successful.<br />
<br />
The next time you're in the drugstore looking at Dora The Explorer dental floss, you now know that you have Edgar Rice Burroughs to thank for it.<br />
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/7/7d/Tarzan_of_the_Apes_1918.JPG" imageanchor="1" style="clear: right; cssfloat: right; float: right; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-left: 1em;"><img border="0" lda="true" src="http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/7/7d/Tarzan_of_the_Apes_1918.JPG" /></a></div>
Burroughs and movies were closely linked in the early days. In 1918, Tarzan of the Apes, a silent film starring longshoreman turned actor Elmo Lincoln, opened on Broadway. It became the first movie ever to gross one million dollars. Burroughs was very much involved in bringing the 1918 Tarzan to the screen.<br />
<br />
The movie business, though, would, like it has done to so many others, betray Burroughs. In 1932, Tarzan the Ape Man, the first "talkie" take on Burroughs' creation, debuted. The film's producers cast former Olympic Swimming Gold Medalist Johnny Weissmuller as Tarzan.<br />
<br />
<br />
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="font-family: inherit;">In the pages of Burroughs' books (as opposed to many of the well known film and TV versions) Tarzan is a British nobleman lost in the jungle as baby and raised by apes; once discovered by Europeans, Tarzan returns to civilization. He becomes well educated, articulate, intelligent, and can speak several languages. Tarzan was the noble savage who became the ultimate protector of the primordial jungles of Africa. </span></div>
<br />
<br />
As he was established by Weissmuller in the long running series of movies, Tarzan spoke only in broken pidgin English. While certainly not stupid, he is depicted as a very simplistic and childlike being. Tarzan is not a British nobleman (his origins mostly remain unknown) and he never returns to civilization to be educated. A significant departure from the literary Tarzan, in other words.<br />
<br />
Burroughs became increasingly frustrated by the latest Hollywood take on the character and its growing popularity. He was bothered by the dwindling amount of creative control and input he had toward his best known brand. The author finally attempted to take Tarzan back, albeit in movie serial form.<br />
<br />
The 1933 serial, Tarzan The Fearless, featured another Olympic Swimmer, Buster Crabbe (who would go on to play Flash Gordon), as Tarzan. In this serial, the pidgin English issue was sidestepped by having Tarzan never speak more than one syllable at a time. The serial did little to sway the public away from, or change their attitudes towards, the Weissmuller Tarzan.<br />
<br />
In 1935, Burroughs tried again. He used his own production company to make another more authentic serial, The New Adventures of Tarzan. The serial featured an articulate intelligent Tarzan played by the incredibly athletic Herman Brix (he later worked under the stage name Bruce Bennett). However, MGM, the studio that was producing the Weissmuller Tarzan features, fearing too much potential confusion, campaigned against the serial. They threatened theatres that showed the serial would be denied the opportunity to play the much more lucrative MGM Tarzan films. From there on in, Burroughs' only involvement with the big screen Tarzan would be cashing royalty cheques.<br />
<br />
In the mainstream, "Me Tarzan, you Jane" would pretty much define the character. That did not change until the 1959 "reboot", Tarzan's Greatest Adventure. By that time, unfortunately, Burroughs had already been in his grave for 9 years. The Tarzan movies from then on and the 1960's TV series would continue to feature well spoken and intelligent takes on Tarzan. It did little good towards changing Tarzan's image. You need only to read Mad magazine or watch the Carol Burnett Show to realize that the Weissmuller Tarzan mold remained dominant in the pop culture consciousness well into the 70's and 80's. <br />
<br />
There are handful of good Tarzan movies. Disney's animated feature of the late 90's is probably the most faithful adaptation of Burroughs' original novel out there. It is to a point, anyway. The Tarzan books are not exactly known for their musical numbers. Even at their best, the movie Tarzans rarely bear more than a passing resemblance to the character of Burroughs' 26 Tarzan novels.<br />
<br />
The movie adaptations of Burroughs' non-Tarzan novels have fared even worse.<br />
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="http://www.westernclippings.com/images/heavies/geraldmohr-junglegirl.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="clear: left; cssfloat: left; float: left; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="343" lda="true" src="http://www.westernclippings.com/images/heavies/geraldmohr-junglegirl.jpg" width="400" /></a></div>
The 1941 serial Jungle Girl, based on a Burroughs novel of the same name, stuck to the familiar Burroughsian territory of jungle adventure. The novel was set in a lost world in the jungles of Cambodia. The serial kept only the title of Burroughs' book and focused on tried and true African based jungle adventures. It was followed by two sequels, Perils of Nyoka and Nyoka The Jungle Girl, both of which came no closer to their source material.<br />
<br />
It was not until 1975 that another non-Tarzan Burroughs' novel would make it to movie screens. The Land That Time Forgot was based on the first novel of the author's Caspek trilogy, first published in 1918. Following in the footsteps of Sir Arthur Conan Doyle's successful novel The Lost World, The Land That Time Forgot was about a lost remote island somewhere near Antarctica. The island, a closed tropical ecosystem, is inhabited by dinosaurs, other prehistoric creatures and a wide array animals, both real and fictional. Those animals include Neanderthals, hominids and homo sapiens.The island, known as Caspek to its primitive inhabitants, contains its own unique system of evolution through metamorphosis.<br />
<br />
It is discovered by a submarine with a mixed American, British and German crew . The novel takes place in 1916, the height of the First World War, so the presence of sworn enemies on the same sub is, well, kind of a long story. Better to read the book...or you can just watch the movie.<br />
<br />
The mid 70's film adaptation was produced the British company Amicus Productions. It was distributed in North America by American International, a studio known for B-movies, AI (as it was known) largely supplied the drive-in movie circuit in the 60's and 70's. The screenplay, as adapted by Burroughs aficionado and noted British SF and Fantasy author, Michael Moorcock, incorporates elements from all three of the Caspek novels. No stop motion animation (the preferred means of bringing dinosaurs and other big monsters to the screen back in the day) was used. All of the dinosaurs seen on screen are either models or puppets. The overall effect is, well, pretty dated. The acting is the stuff of classic B-grade action adventure fare all the way, most especially in the case TV Western veteran Doug McClure in in the lead role. The movie has all the earmarks of an old-fashioned Saturday matinee adventure. On that level, The Land That Time Forgot is a very entertaining movie.<br />
<br />
The film is well (if somewhat cheesily) handled by director Kevin Connor. Moorcock does a nice job of making Burroughs' fantastical and arcane concepts succinct, eloquent and easy to grasp, even for a younger audience. The movie is unmistakably aimed primarily at kids. And kids are probably the audience that made it one of the biggest sleeper hits of '75. The Land That Time Forgot still stands today as one of the better Edgar Rice Burroughs film adaptations (Tarzan movies included).<br />
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="http://randall120.files.wordpress.com/2011/03/land_that_time_forgot2.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" lda="true" src="http://randall120.files.wordpress.com/2011/03/land_that_time_forgot2.jpg" /></a></div>
<br />
<br />
The same cannot be said of it sequel, The People That Time Forgot, which came out in 1977. Loosely based on the second Caspek novel of the same name, the film only incorporates a few key elements of the book. It is an aimless sequel; convoluted and a lot less watchable than its predecessor. Watching the special effects of the movie's opening biplane meets Pterodactyl scene (inspired by a similar but more interesting scene in the book), it is almost impossible to believe that The People That Time Forgot was released in the same year as the original Star Wars.<br />
<br />
<br />
<iframe allowfullscreen="" frameborder="0" height="315" src="http://www.youtube.com/embed/N9IDA2a9e70" width="560"></iframe><br />
<br />
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="http://rimworlds.com/theclassicsciencefictionchannel/wp-content/uploads/2009/10/attheearthscore1.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="clear: left; cssfloat: left; float: left; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" lda="true" src="http://rimworlds.com/theclassicsciencefictionchannel/wp-content/uploads/2009/10/attheearthscore1.jpg" /></a></div>
In between those two movies, the same studio released another Burroughs adaptation, At The Earth's Core, in 1976. At The Earth's Core was the first book in Burroughs' Pellucidar series, chronicling the adventures of the previously referred to lost world at the center of the Earth. After Tarzan and John Carter, Pellucidar is probably Burroughs' next best known series. The movie once again features McClure in the lead. This time he is joined by co-star Peter Cushing, of Star Wars and Hammer horror movies fame. Cushing plays Professor Abner Perry, the aging inventor who builds what is essentially a giant drill-like vehicle that tunnels underground, all the way to the earth's core. The giant drill ship is now somewhat of a classic image in pop culture lore (as well as a primer in cinematic Freudian imagery). Once again, the dinosaurs and other monsters that dwell in the Earth's core are brought to life with models, puppets and even the old Godzilla standby of a guy in a rubber suit. These effects do not serve the fantastical nature of Burroughs creature creations well. Their ineffectiveness is particularly true when it comes to the Mahars, the winged reptile race that rule Pellucidar and are the major villains of the story. The impact of any threatening creature that has the look of a plastic puppet or a guy in a rubber suit is unintentionally comical.<br />
<br />
At The Earth's Core even takes a turn toward intentional (though not much funnier) comedy almost every time co-star Cushing is on screen. Playing against his usual heavy Hammer horror or Grand Moff Tarkin type, Cushing plays Professor Perry as an essentially silly and fidgety old man. Slapstick comedy even turns up in At The Earth's Core. In the final scene, the giant drill tunnels back to the Earth's surface. It ends up surfacing right in the middle of the White House front lawn. The wacky scene is of the drill suddenly popping up out of nowhere is complete with Keystone style cops running away in frantically comedic terror.<br />
<br />
<iframe allowfullscreen="" frameborder="0" height="480" src="http://www.youtube.com/embed/1yL7MTLCKgo?rel=0" width="640"></iframe><br />
<br />
<br />
Some of the other non-Tarzan Burroughs movies belong to a movie studio known as The Asylum. The Asylum is responsible for direct-to-DVD monster fare like Mega Shark vs Giant Octopus and Mega Shark vs Crocosaurus. They are essentially the Netflix era's version of B-movie makers for the drive-in circuit of days gone by. The Asylum has plenty of experience in the limited budget CGI monster department.<br />
<br />
<br />
<iframe allowfullscreen="" frameborder="0" height="360" src="http://www.youtube.com/embed/LZeWtfDsxXc?rel=0" width="640"></iframe><br />
<br />
<br />
In 2009, The Asylum made the second screen adaptation of Burroughs' The Land That Time Forgot. This time around the script is a very loose adaptation of Burroughs' book. The story is updated to the 21st century. The island is now situated in the Bermuda Triangle, on which a group of American tourists and their guide are shipwrecked.<br />
<br />
The island somehow exists in its own version of a time vortex. Along with dinosaurs, there are stranded air and sea travelers from different time periods . Most prominent among them, the crew of a German submarine from World War II. There's a little tiny bit of something sort of loosely based on Burroughs poking through there. In the true tradition of The Asylum's notoriously limited production values, our heroes are stranded on an island of what amounts to two Tyrannosaurs and a few pterodactyls, only one which is seen up close. Well, at least that's a dinosaur population that's realistic in terms of what the ecosystem of one small island could most likely support. Even by the cheesy standards set by other Asylum movies, the 2009 Land That Time Forgot is not great. It probably goes without saying that even the '75 version is a much better movie.<br />
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
</div>
The Asylum got in the Burroughs adaptation game twice in 2009. Their version of A Princess of Mars marks the only previous movie adaptation of a John Carter book. Like The Asylum's Land That Time Forgot, the story is also updated to the 21st century. Carter is re-imagined from a Civil War hero to a hero of the War in Afghanistan. However, the Burroughs novel, as it turns out, is merely used as a deception for a low budget rip-off of the James Cameron blockbuster Avatar. This is kind of ironic in light of the fact that Cameron is on record as saying that John Carter was an inspiration for Avatar.<br />
<br />
<iframe allowfullscreen="" frameborder="0" height="360" src="http://www.youtube.com/embed/EnsuVpG_OZQ?rel=0" width="640"></iframe><br />
<br />
A big budget John Carter movie had been bouncing around in Hollywood development hell since the days of the early Weissmuller Tarzan films. Names attached to the project over the years have included Looney Tunes animator Bob Clampett, stop motion animation master Ray Harryhausen, Die Hard and Predator director John McTiernan, comic book legend and director Frank Miller and most recently Iron Man director Jon Favreau. Tom Cruise was even slated to play Carter at one point. In the end, the project finally moved ahead with Disney and director Stanton.<br />
<br />
<table align="center" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto; text-align: center;"><tbody>
<tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEg6WNAbOGRK1s3z2wYnCg7kA-Q7us2_zlJrJwVua9w2WABh8_RTczhuK6HM4u7epGqcFIhICK36Ed0N-fgA74sVy5lX9So3FZh2SCeAaqwM9u0ltuJnGQH5aTR7Jeh1D9v0-KcwbZ_dDNI/s1600/John+Carter+serial.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEg6WNAbOGRK1s3z2wYnCg7kA-Q7us2_zlJrJwVua9w2WABh8_RTczhuK6HM4u7epGqcFIhICK36Ed0N-fgA74sVy5lX9So3FZh2SCeAaqwM9u0ltuJnGQH5aTR7Jeh1D9v0-KcwbZ_dDNI/s1600/John+Carter+serial.jpg" /></a></td></tr>
<tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;">An imagined 1930's John Carter movie serial poster.<br />
Thanks to the guys at the Serial Squadron for this one.</td></tr>
</tbody></table>
<br />
<br />
Now, for the first time since the 1930's, Burroughs' material is the basis of an A List big budget live action movie in the hands an A List Hollywood director and studio. However, none of that guarantees that this new John Carter can successfully break the Edgar Rice Burroughs' movie curse.<br />
<br />
Director Stanton is a top notch Disney animator behind the commercial and critically successful family hits Wall-E, Monsters Inc and, my personal fave, Finding Nemo. John Carter will mark Stanton's live action directorial debut. Undoubtedly, his animation background can come in handy for much of the CGI in the film, particularly when it comes to the 12 feet tall four armed green Martian race known as the Tharks. More importantly, though, Stanton is big, life-long fan of the original Burroughs books. He read all 11 of them as a child, referring to them as "my Harry Potters". <br />
<br />
Stanton also made the canny move of hiring novelist Michael Chabon to help adapt the screenplay for John Carter. Chabon is the author of, among other things, The Amazing Adventures of Cavalier and Clay, a critically acclaimed and best selling novel set in the early days of comic book history. Chabon is also a Carter fan, having read the entire series when he was nine. Chabon once said of Burroughs' prose that the author was "a narrative machine" who "really knew how to keep a story going". Not since Michael Moorcock penning The Land That Time Forgot screenplay as so accomplished a Burroughs fanboy had a significant hand the writing of a Burroughs movie. <br />
<br />
<br />
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom: 0.0001pt;">
<span style="font-family: inherit;">Still the issue of the Edgar Rice Burroughs movie curse endures. Did bringing talented Carter fans on board the movie adaptation actually pay off? The simple answer is yes.<o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom: 0.0001pt;">
<br /></div>
<br />
John Carter is the Citizen Kane of non-Tarzan Edgar Rice Burroughs movie adaptations.<br />
<br />
Stanton and Chabon's fandom of the books is evident throughout the film. For instance, like in the original novel, Edgar Rice Burroughs himself appears as a character in the sequences that bookend the movie. Though, in the time period that the film sets those scenes in, the real Burroughs would have been six years old and the not the the twentysomething he appears to be on screen (and, that, of course, is the only non-believable aspect of inserting Burroughs' into the John Carter storyline).<br />
<br />
The depiction of Mars in the movie reflects the vision of alien world as seen through the imagination of the late 19th and early 20th centuries. Much of the martian technology, ships, architecture and weapons have a definite steampunk vibe to them.<br />
<br />
Chabon (one of three screenwriters credited along with Stanton and Mark Andrews) and Stanton have a strong sense of what made the John Carter books work: chases, aliens, monsters, battles, intrigue and cliffhangers galore.<br />
<br />
To be fair, sometimes those elements work for the film and other times they work against it. The steampunk meets Gladiator design of the movie is a bit too over-designed and laboured at times. Some of the dialogue scenes between Carter (Friday Night Lights' Taylor Kitsch) and the Martian Princess, Deja Thoris (X Men Wolverine's Lyn Collins) are kind of clunky. There's also a few action sequences that are shown in hard to follow close constantly shaking angles cut together with some very quick editing.<br />
<br />
John Carter stays more or less faithful to Burroughs' original novel, though there are a few significant departures. For the most part, those departures are for the better. In the original Carter books, a great deal of the dialogue is communicated telepathically, with the exception of the protagonist, who is unable to do so. From a cinematic point of view (I can tell you as an experienced screenwriter) that that is an almost unworkable concept. The telepathy angle is dropped from the movie entirely. There's also some mixing and matching of characters, events and even creatures from some of the later Carter books. On the whole, such alterations serve the movie well.<br />
<br />
Those unfamiliar with the books may find the alien politics and races a bit byzantine to follow. Jeddak, Tharks, Barsoom, Zodanga, Therns, Woolas: the film throws a great deal of arcane Burroughsian jargon at the audience in a very short period of time. If you don't get any of that stuff, all you are left with is a lot of running around and fighting. But it is some mighty good running around and fighting.<br />
<br />
The stunts and visual effects (it's often hard to tell where one ends and the other begins) certainly live up to the Carter legend. Particularly masterfully handled is the sequence in which Carter is forced to battle two giant "White Ape" creatures in gladiatorial style arena combat (you know, it's on all the posters). Stanton visualizes and paces the sequence so as to squeeze every bit entertainment value the David and Goliath-like spectacle has to offer. It's a man vs monster battle that represents everything that old school fantasy pulp adventure should be.<br />
<br />
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="http://www.flicksandbits.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/02/john-carter-andrew-stanton.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="400" lda="true" src="http://www.flicksandbits.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/02/john-carter-andrew-stanton.jpg" width="640" /></a></div>
<br />
<br />
<br />
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom: 0.0001pt;">
<span style="font-family: inherit;">It’s safe to say that John Carter breaks the Edgar Rice Burroughs movie curse.<o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom: 0.0001pt;">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom: 0.0001pt;">
<span style="font-family: inherit;">For fans of the books and potential fans of new movie, perhaps the more important question is will John Carter also be able to achieve major box office success? Is it possible that, like the books, we will see many more John Carter movies? A wave of more authentic </span>adaptations<span style="font-family: inherit;"> of Burroughs' other work? An actual faithful version of Tarzan?</span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom: 0.0001pt;">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom: 0.0001pt;">
<br /></div>
<br />
<br />
<br />
<iframe allowfullscreen="" frameborder="0" height="360" src="http://www.youtube.com/embed/nlvYKl1fjBI?rel=0" width="640"></iframe><br />
<br />
<br />
The answer is...well....Barsoom only knows.<br />
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgPzqkycT5rC4GqeuHcc8ZvjvSZ2G1RAuQFefR8IpPixOwefyO99in0G50dQlb2PlLXBwfis8zZUpiVbUydGD_uuLPqpfzbw1enHrQeWtspXzZOYDlk81arE-6dc8api0soc6Nc-K7_DxM/s1600/john_carter_banner+%25281%2529.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="285" lda="true" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgPzqkycT5rC4GqeuHcc8ZvjvSZ2G1RAuQFefR8IpPixOwefyO99in0G50dQlb2PlLXBwfis8zZUpiVbUydGD_uuLPqpfzbw1enHrQeWtspXzZOYDlk81arE-6dc8api0soc6Nc-K7_DxM/s640/john_carter_banner+%25281%2529.jpg" width="640" /></a></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
</div>Terence Bowmanhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/04576129838447713151noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2233378012529819224.post-37869083007337909902012-02-27T16:24:00.197-05:002012-02-28T09:21:05.975-05:00My Oscars 2012 Timeline<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="http://surfaceearth.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/01/Oscars-2012-logo.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" src="http://surfaceearth.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/01/Oscars-2012-logo.jpg" /></a></div><br />
Sunday night, after a frightfully busy week (and an almost as busy weekend), I hunkered down on the couch in my comfy clothes, next to <a href="http://www.irenesuchocki.com/" target="_blank">IS</a>, with some Sun Chips and red wine for a ritual I have observed annually since 1976: watching the Oscars.<br />
<br />
Here is the breakdown of my timeline of randoms, thoughts observations and other silliness that occurred to me as I watched the show.<br />
<br />
Just pretend it's a Twitter time capsule...<br />
<br />
6:30 PM: It's still two hours from the 84th Annual Academy Awards. I decided in to tune into CNN's red carpet coverage. CNN's Showbiz Tonight's special Oscar Red Carpet fashion commentator, Real Housewives of Beverly Hills "star" Lisa Vanderpump, makes the observation that more stars are wearing ostentatious jewelry this year than they have in the past few years. She points out that the stars must be less self conscious of wearing expensive glitter this year, thus creating is a clear indicator that the economy is recovering and that the four year recession must be coming to an end. There she goes quoting Paul Krugman again.<br />
<br />
8:03: I have now switched over to ABC's Oscar pre-show. It's much slicker show than Showbiz Tonight's. Now just 30 minutes away, I tune in to see Bradley Cooper doing, for some reason, his Christopher Walken impression. For better or worse, Christopher Walken has now joined Ed Sullivan, Elvis Presley, Jack Nicholson, Bob Dylan and William Shatner as one of every supposed funny man's go-to impersonation. And, honestly, I've seen it done better, like by Christopher Walken, say.<br />
<br />
8:21: Just before showtime, ABC runs a trailer for Disney's new CGI action adventure blockbuster epic, John Carter. One of the quotes from a film critic that appears on-screen reads "Full of action". As far as vague generalizations go, that's a veritable rave review.<br />
<br />
8: 30: The show proper begins. Morgan Freeman introduces the evening. He is wearing a black glove on his left hand. Apparently, he's just returned from a light saber duel with Darth Vader.<br />
<br />
8: 36: Billy Crystal, not surprisingly, appears in another one of those tour-de-force short films where, through the magic of digital effects, he appears in all of the nominated movies. The one thing that really stands out the most to me is that the inserting-Billy-Crystal-into-any-given-movie technology sure has come a long way since the 90's.<br />
<br />
<table align="center" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto; text-align: center;"><tbody>
<tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="http://cdn.eurweb.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/02/billy-crystal-sammy-davis-jr1.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" src="http://cdn.eurweb.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/02/billy-crystal-sammy-davis-jr1.jpg" /></a></td></tr>
<tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;">Crystal took some heat for his black-face Sammy Davis, Jr. impersonation in the opening short film. <br />
It ain't the 80's no more, Billy.</td></tr>
</tbody></table><br />
8:43: Martin Scorsese's Hugo wins The Oscar for Best Cinematography. As cinematographer Robert Richardson walks up to the stage to accept his statue, they then proceed to a show a scene from Hugo that is made up entirely special effects and little or no actual cinematography.<br />
<br />
8:52: Is it just me or does this year's excuse for a montage of memorable movie scenes have no clips from films before 1970? I thought they decided not to care about the youth audience this year.<br />
<br />
9:06: You know you're watching an American brodcast when, as the nominees for Best Foreign Language Movie are announced, a large map behind presenter Sandra Bullock lights up to show which part of the world the nominated countries are in.<br />
<br />
9:08: A Separation, a film from Iran wins Best Foriegn Language Film. The director gives a "Why can't we all just get along?" speech. And cue Fox News going apeshit with manufactured rage, now...or, at least, Stephen Colbert.<br />
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="http://storage.people.com/people/archive/jpgs/19791008/19791008-750-0.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="640" src="http://storage.people.com/people/archive/jpgs/19791008/19791008-750-0.jpg" width="484" /></a></div>9:09: They cut away to some of the stars in the audience. Yikes. Nick Nolte sure has seen better days.<br />
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="http://abcsofstyle.files.wordpress.com/2012/02/nick-nolte.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" src="http://abcsofstyle.files.wordpress.com/2012/02/nick-nolte.jpg" /></a></div><br />
<br />
9:11: Octavia Spencer wins Best Supporting Actress for The Help. All I can think about during her emotionally moving acceptance speech is that upstaging goofy guy that helped her up the stairs.<br />
<br />
9:16 Hey, CTV, that's 9th time this hour that I've seen that lipstick commercial. Relax, I was sold on the stuff from the first time I saw it.<br />
<br />
9:22 The cast of Mighty Wind, Waiting for Guffman and Best in Show are featured in a short film depicting a focus group at a pre-screening of the Wizard of Oz in 1939. Eugene Levy is awesome. Best line: "Cut the rainbow song".<br />
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="http://www.tvworthwatching.com/blog/2012/02/27/oscars-wizard-focus-group-6.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" src="http://www.tvworthwatching.com/blog/2012/02/27/oscars-wizard-focus-group-6.jpg" /></a></div><br />
<br />
9:25. The Girl with the Dragon Tatoo wins for best Film Editing. Editor Kirk Baxter has the acceptance speech line of the night as he says at the end of some very brief comments, "Let's get out of here".<br />
<br />
9:38 That Cirque du Soleil presents a totally awesome movie themed acrobatic show. Makes me wish I'd last more than two hours in those auditions.<br />
<br />
10:01 Christopher Plummer gets a standing ovation as he wins Best Supporting Actor for his role in Beginners. If being 82 isn't a sign of Mr.Plummer's impending mortality, wining his first Oscar at 82 sure is.<br />
<br />
10:14 John Williams is nominated twice for Best Score. He still loses. Good. The guy's really kinda over accoladed.<br />
<br />
10: 18 K, so there were only two nominated songs this year. Yet for some reason, the producers of the show decided not have either of them performed during the broadcast. One of them was a song from The Muppets. Yeah, good call. The Muppets performing a song live at The Oscars really woulda brought the proceedings to a grinding halt.<br />
<br />
Brett Mackenzie, half of the New Zealand musical comedy duo, Flight of the Conchords wins for his original song composition,“Man or Muppet”.<b> </b>He thanks Disney for making "movies with songs in them".<br />
<br />
10:21. Will Ferrell and Zach Galifianakis do a bit physical comedy bit with cymbals. It's the kinda thing you could have easily seen Martin and Lewis doing at like the 1956 Oscars. It is funny, though. That kinda stuff is timeless.<br />
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="http://img.ibtimes.com/www/data/images/full/2012/02/27/239507-ferrell-and-galifianakis-prepare-to-present-the-oscar-best-original-so.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" src="http://img.ibtimes.com/www/data/images/full/2012/02/27/239507-ferrell-and-galifianakis-prepare-to-present-the-oscar-best-original-so.jpg" /></a></div><br />
10:28 The Descendants wins best screenplay. I'm surprised to hear that director Alexander Payne and his co-writers are former members of the LA-based improv troupe, The Groundings. Well, that is until they get on stage and start speaking.<br />
<br />
10:30 Woody Allen wins Best Screenplay for Midnight in Paris. I am shocked and stunned to see that Woody is not in attendance. What do they have to do get him to back? Make another Nora Ephron montage of New York movies?<br />
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="http://www.parallax-view.us/wp-content/uploads/2012/02/TrumbullBladeRunner.jpeg" imageanchor="1" style="clear: left; float: left; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="302" src="http://www.parallax-view.us/wp-content/uploads/2012/02/TrumbullBladeRunner.jpeg" width="320" /></a></div>10:37 Douglas Trumbull, the incredible visual effects pioneer who created the effects for 2001: A Space Odyssey, Close Encounters of the Third Kind, Blade Runner and The Tree of Life gets a life time achievement award. His tribute takes up almost 38 seconds of screen time.<br />
<br />
10:54. The Artist directo<span dir="ltr">r Michel Hazanavicius</span> wins the Best Director Oscar. He thanks the "crazy people" who put up the money for him to make the movie. Yep, that's film investing, alright.<br />
<br />
10:58 A tribute to legendary Hollywood make up artist Dick Smith (The Godfather, The Exorcist) takes up all of 23 seconds of screen time. Guess he's less important to the medium than Douglas Trumbull. <br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
11:07 No James Farantino in the dead person's reel. I guess not many members of the Academy are big fans of The Final Countdown.<br />
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="http://www.imfdb.org/w/images/thumb/1/12/FinalCountdownDVD.jpg/300px-FinalCountdownDVD.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" src="http://www.imfdb.org/w/images/thumb/1/12/FinalCountdownDVD.jpg/300px-FinalCountdownDVD.jpg" /></a></div><br />
<br />
11:14 Boy that thing where last year's winner for Best Actor addresses each of this year's nominees is awkward as hell. Colin Firth did do his best with it, though.<br />
<br />
11:29 I'm with Meryl Streep when she says, "Oh, come on!", to the standing ovation. She then points out that half of America is probably saying the same thing as well. True dat.<br />
<br />
11:32 Tom Cruise is presenting the Best Picture Oscar. I wonder what having such an honour bestowed on him did for his Thetan levels.<br />
<br />
11:35 The Artist wins Best Picture. Aside from it being the odds on favourite and this year's darling of the critics, the win was inevitable for another reason. The movie was distributed in the US by Harvey Weinstein. Let's face it, when it comes to Oscar voting campaigns, the guy is Karl Rove. <br />
<br />
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="http://urbancowgirlvancouver.files.wordpress.com/2012/01/the-artist-poster.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="360" src="http://urbancowgirlvancouver.files.wordpress.com/2012/01/the-artist-poster.jpg" width="640" /></a></div><br />
<br />
Until the 85th Annual Academy Awards...or next week.<br />
<br />
Whichever comes first.<br />
.Terence Bowmanhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/04576129838447713151noreply@blogger.com2tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2233378012529819224.post-46656339937428189052012-02-20T10:00:00.001-05:002012-02-20T10:00:02.380-05:00Swamp Thing vs Man-Thing<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEi-0XPgo-QP7uqDIuQb5YjzeNVBj5K7N9QZCwGwePGwxiii6CflTTdDGbl06Gv0Ctmt3CwQRNOYfnnqBxc_hTqb1KjbMvr5TpSi11KB6kQMymPxdsCrKCOUCjF6uka8xfXKMnnZ5GvQnM0/s1600/swamp+man+thing.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEi-0XPgo-QP7uqDIuQb5YjzeNVBj5K7N9QZCwGwePGwxiii6CflTTdDGbl06Gv0Ctmt3CwQRNOYfnnqBxc_hTqb1KjbMvr5TpSi11KB6kQMymPxdsCrKCOUCjF6uka8xfXKMnnZ5GvQnM0/s1600/swamp+man+thing.jpg" /></a></div><br />
Sorry, gang.<br />
<br />
That's not real. Just yet another example of someone out there who owns Photoshop and has a lot of time on their hands.<br />
<br />
Which, unfortunately, I do not this week. "He Had on a Hat" will return in its regularly scheduled time slot next Monday. Check it our for my moment by moment commentary on this year's Oscars.<br />
<br />
Until then, watch this fun thing:<br />
<br />
<iframe allowfullscreen="" frameborder="0" height="360" src="http://www.youtube.com/embed/Rd0DnIzEbu4?rel=0" width="640"></iframe>Terence Bowmanhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/04576129838447713151noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2233378012529819224.post-9249750545368869862012-02-13T10:00:00.005-05:002012-02-13T14:04:54.041-05:00Saint Valentine's Day, The Massacre and The Movie<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="http://i2.fc-img.com/fc03img/Comcast_CIM_Prod_Fancast_Image/23/239/1319461164768_rovi-St._Valentine_s_Day_Massacre_Overlay_640_320.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" src="http://i2.fc-img.com/fc03img/Comcast_CIM_Prod_Fancast_Image/23/239/1319461164768_rovi-St._Valentine_s_Day_Massacre_Overlay_640_320.jpg" /></a></div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"></div><br />
The Saint Valentine's Day Massacre. Almost everyone is familiar with the name. Yet, for the most part, they are not as familiar with the event itself.<br />
<br />
Sure. The Saint Valentine's Day Massacre is on one of those great anti-Valentine's day go-to phrases. I've often heard it jokingly used to describe any Valentine's Day activities that go horribly wrong. Or it's an anti-Valentine for those who have issues with the 14th of February: you're not celebrating a silly "Hallmark holiday" (which is a myth, BTW, check out<a href="http://terencebowmanblog.blogspot.com/2011/02/saint-valentine-is-reason-for-season.html" target="_blank"> last year's blog on the subject</a>) you're celebrating the anniversary of the Saint Valentine's Day Massacre. Or I've sometimes seen as the theme of a dance or a party held by someone with a supposedly irreverent sense of humour.<br />
<br />
Given the historical facts of the actual mob hit that went down at 10:30 AM on February 14, 1928, such references are, well, just a tad glib at best. The Saint Valentine Day Massacre was a vicious, bloody and brutal attack, even by today's organized crime violence standards. That the massacre is still referred to at all some 83 years later speaks to the brutal impression the killings made on the public consciousness.<br />
<br />
<table align="center" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto; text-align: center;"><tbody>
<tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjTB4lTh-Cw90JFujZbf9bgQENHEik3y4Ybdvfl6Htz537qUwfqVAJ7Ksc-404Gv6DQ0_RyZ5AHE3kZ9Na5TqRglO5kb59tQ5eFx3Uq5ydz2uDtDNMu1n5VIH7uRg84fASGz3JAhUIrAhgj/s1600/st-valentine-s-day-massacre-front-page-of-the-chicago-daily-news-14th-february-1929.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjTB4lTh-Cw90JFujZbf9bgQENHEik3y4Ybdvfl6Htz537qUwfqVAJ7Ksc-404Gv6DQ0_RyZ5AHE3kZ9Na5TqRglO5kb59tQ5eFx3Uq5ydz2uDtDNMu1n5VIH7uRg84fASGz3JAhUIrAhgj/s1600/st-valentine-s-day-massacre-front-page-of-the-chicago-daily-news-14th-february-1929.jpg" /></a></td></tr>
<tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;">The first newspaper headlines of The Saint Valentine's Day Massacre.</td></tr>
</tbody></table><br />
One of the strangest and most fascinating periods of American history is the Prohibition Era. It is also one of the most violent. In 1920, with the implementation of the 18th Amendment to the US Constitution, alcohol was effectively outlawed in the United States of America. It was rather a stunning move, looking back on it now. I mean, think of it in the context of the current US election cycle debates on the role of "big government" in people's lives. As Ron Paul would tell you, a move like that should be, well, majorly out bounds in terms of government power. The movement to outlaw alcohol in the US was motivated by religious morals, the desire to address a wide range of social problems and big business interests. Not so different than the motivation for legislation today, in other words.<br />
<br />
As anyone who's been following the last two seasons of HBO's Boardwalk Empire can tell you, the outlawing of alcohol in the US, lead to a massive boon in, not surprisingly, the illegal alcohol trade. When booze is illegal than only outlaws will have booze, kinda thing. The era gave rise to the largest and most powerful system of organized crime the US had ever seen up to that time. Through a combination of intimidation, brute force, political corruption and bribery, organized crime controlled almost all of the alcohol flow in the US between 1920 and 1933, a period commonly know as The Prohibition Era.<br />
<br />
<table align="center" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto; text-align: center;"><tbody>
<tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="http://blog.vermontlodgingproperties.com/files/2011/10/we-want-beer.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" height="400" src="http://blog.vermontlodgingproperties.com/files/2011/10/we-want-beer.jpg" width="640" /></a></td></tr>
<tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;">Prohibition Era protests or just your average Saturday night?</td></tr>
</tbody></table><br />
Just as an aside, prohibition in the US was also a massive boon to Canadian distilleries and breweries like Seagram's and Molson....but that's another story. <br />
<br />
The most infamous gangster of the era was a guy named Al Capone. You know, the guy who according to the British 70's flash-in-the-pan pop group, Paper Lace, "Tried to make that town his own". The town in question, of course, was Chicago. Capone was, it's safe to say, the most powerful and, yes, the most infamous gangster in that city at the time. One of the things that made Capone so infamous was The Saint Valentine's Day Massacre. <br />
<br />
<table cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="float: left; margin-right: 1em; text-align: left;"><tbody>
<tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="http://badassoftheweek.com/capone3.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="clear: left; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" height="394" src="http://badassoftheweek.com/capone3.jpg" width="400" /></a></td></tr>
<tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;">Chicago tourist stores sell Al Capone merchandise. Kinda sick, huh?</td></tr>
</tbody></table>By 1929, Al Capone, at the age of 30, had risen to the top of the organized crime heap. He was in control of much of the booze, gambling, prostitution and just about any other illegal stuff going in Chicago. Capone had only one major rival, a gangster named George "Bugs" Moran. The two gang leaders had been vying for control of Chicago and trying to kill each other off in the process for years by the late 20's. Capone, not a man generally known for his patience and understanding, is thought to have ordered the hit on Moran to eliminate the rivalry between the two gangs once and for all. <br />
<br />
Contrary to popular belief, Capone's plan was not take over Moran's gang but to weaken his organization and its potential threat to Capone's operations by eliminating Moran along with some of his higher-ups. One of Capone's up and coming lieutenants, and the object a recent hit attempt himself, Jack McGurn, came up with a unique plan to take out Moran. <br />
<br />
The idea was to lure Moran and his men into a garage on the North Side of Chicago. The garage, located at 2122 North Clark Street in the Lincoln Park neighbourhood, is where Moran allegedly did much of his business. He was to be lured there on the pretense of a supposedly big booze purchase. The booze was, of course, all part of ruse, set up by McGurn.<br />
<br />
Gunmen, disguised as cops would then raid the place, disarm everyone and line them up against the wall. The idea was to lull Moran and his men into a sense of false security, thinking that they were in the midst of a routine raid that would later easily be ironed out by greasing all the right palms. Once Moran and his gang were up against the wall, as the cliche goes, the plan was to "fill 'em full of lead". The fake cops and some extra gunmen dressed in civilian garb were all hired killers brought in from outside of Chicago (some believe NYC) so that the hit could not be directly linked to Capone, should anything go terribly wrong and there were survivors or witnesses.<br />
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"></div>At 10:30 AM on February 14, 1929, the plan was executed flawlessly (pun intended). The timing of the hit on Valentine's Day is generally believed to be pure coincidence. More than likely, it was not motivated out of any sense of irony on Capone's part (ie: brutally murdering his enemies on a day dedicated to love). <br />
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="http://listverse.files.wordpress.com/2010/02/34569574.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="clear: left; float: left; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="249" src="http://listverse.files.wordpress.com/2010/02/34569574.jpg" width="320" /></a></div>You need only to look at photos taken after the massacre to know that the incident was was indeed both brutal and bloody. Seven people were killed in that garage that day. They were Peter Gusenberg (Moran's main enforcer), Frank Gusenberg (Peter's brother, also an enforcer), Albert Kalchellek (Moran's #2 man, though he was retired at the time), Adam Heyer, (a bookkeeper), Reinhart Schwimmer (a gambler and associate of Moran's gang), Albert Weinshank (who managed the cleaning and dyeing operations for Moran) and John May (a mechanic who was not a member of the gang). All were shot upwards of fourteen times each by at least two Thompson sub machine guns or "Tommy Guns".<br />
<br />
<div style="text-align: right;"></div>The gruesome photos of the aftermath were, amazingly, run by many of the newspapers of the day totally uncensored. It was also the newspapers who immediately dubbed the incident with the moniker it is known by today, The Saint Valentine's Day Massacre. The sensationalistic coverage of the hit made Capone a national celebrity, both in the media and with federal law enforcement.<br />
<br />
The massacre was the beginning of the end of Capone's career. Previously celebrated as an amusing colourful, if somewhat unsavory character, in the media, the story turned public opinion against Capone. Consequently, the heat on Capone was turned up by both the FBI and an fresh new young US Treasury agent named Eliot Ness. <br />
<br />
On top of everything else, Capone never succeeded in killing Moran.<br />
<br />
<table align="center" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto; text-align: center;"><tbody>
<tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="http://www.mearsonlineauctions.com/LotImages/7/2153b_lg.jpeg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" height="545" src="http://www.mearsonlineauctions.com/LotImages/7/2153b_lg.jpeg" width="640" /></a></td></tr>
<tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;">See what I mean?</td></tr>
</tbody></table><br />
Moran, as it turns out, was running late on the morning of the 14th. Seeing the cop car outside the garage, he suddenly decided to literally go grab a coffee. One of Moran's men, Albert Weinshank, had a similar enough build to Moran that Capone's lookouts positively identified him as the gang leader from a distance. It just goes to show you that there are times when being a disorganized mobster really can pay off.<br />
<br />
Frank Gusenberg was the only survivor of the massacre. Well, for about three hours he was anyway. Chicago police attempted to question Gusenberg during those few scant hours that he clung to life in the hospital. However, even then, the <i>Code of the Mobster</i> was firmly in place. All Gusenberg would say to the cops was "Nobody shot me.". He had fourteen bullet holes in his body at the time.<br />
<br />
Sounds like a scene from a movie, huh?<br />
<br />
Surprisingly, though, there is only one movie about The St.Valentine's Day Massacre.<br />
<br />
Allusions and fictional versions of the massacre turn up in many different movies like the classic Billy Wilder comedy Some Like it Hot (1959) and the original 1931 version of Scarface (for the record, "Scarface" was originally Al Capone's nickname). Most famously, of course, there is an episode of The Golden Girls where the character of Sofia claims to have been present at the massacre.There are no existing historical records that can effectively refute that claim.<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="http://s4.thisnext.com/media/largest_dimension/DBA53730.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" src="http://s4.thisnext.com/media/largest_dimension/DBA53730.jpg" /></a></div><br />
The only movie that directly depicts the actual events of the mass murder itself is the 1967 film, The Saint Valentine's Day Massacre, directed by Hollywood's indie low budget B-movie master, Roger Corman. Ironically, one of the least memorable scenes in Corman's film takes place in the hospital when Gusenberg says, "Nobody shot me".<br />
<br />
The Saint Valentine's Day Massacre was based on Seven Against The Wall, a live TV play that was broadcast on CBS Playhouse 90 in December of 1958. Harold Browne, the playwright of the TV piece, also wrote the screenplay for the '67 film. The film also featured several cast members from the TV broadcast reprising their roles.<br />
<br />
Despite Corman's reputation as an outsider to the Hollywood establishment, The Saint Valentine's Day Massacre, was one of the rare instances in which he worked directly for a major studio (Fox, in this case). It is also one of his few films in which he worked as a director rather than just as a producer. Well, actually, in this case "rare" is a relative term.<br />
<br />
According to IMDB, Corman is credited with producing 399 movies but only directing 56 times. Among Corman's better known films as director and/or producer are the original non-musical version of Little Shop of Horrors, The Man with the X-Ray eyes and Death Race 2000 (both the original '75 version and the 2008 remake).<br />
<br />
The Saint Valentine's Day Massacre is a pre-Godfather depiction of the mob. There is no sympathetic portrayal of the mobsters as tragic figures to be seen here. That interpretation would become de rigueur after Francis Ford Coppola's 1970 mafia masterpiece and would continue to dominate the genre from then on right through to as recently as The Sopranos.<br />
<br />
Back in '67, though, these gangsters were portrayed as larger-than-life caricatures, almost comical in their egotistical disregard for human life. There are times in the film that the performances are so over-the-top that it almost feels like watching a 20's gangster sketch from the Carol Burnett Show or A Piece of the Action, the campy Star Trek episode where the crew of the Enterprise encounters a planet that is amazingly similar to Chicago in the 1920's (irresistible trivia note: both the episode and the film were shot on the same backlot).<br />
<br />
<iframe allowfullscreen="" frameborder="0" height="360" src="http://www.youtube.com/embed/DAiWLy6lxVU?rel=0" width="640"></iframe><br />
<br />
We are lead to laugh at these supposedly real life underworld figures from history more than we are lead to sympathize or identify with them. The only thing close to a truly sympathetic portrayal in the film is that of a very young Bruce Dern, in the role of mechanic John May. Despite the fact that May worked for Moran, he was attempting to lead an honest life. He just needed the work to support his wife and seven children. He's the guy who was tragically in the wrong place and the wrong time when the shooting started. Therefore, the audience is allowed to like him. <br />
<br />
<table cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="float: right; margin-left: 1em; text-align: right;"><tbody>
<tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="http://www.wiki-cine.com/photos/861/11061.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="clear: right; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" height="640" src="http://www.wiki-cine.com/photos/861/11061.jpg" width="427" /></a></td></tr>
<tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;">Kinda doesn't work</td></tr>
</tbody></table>Jason Robards as Capone delivers what, for my money, is the most over-the-top portrayal in the film. He manages to pull off a massively big performance without ever letting Capone seem in any way likeable. Robards is, to put it simply, totally miscast in the role. Don't get me wrong, the guy is a great actor who has delivered some incredible performances in films Like All The President's Men (1976), Magnolia (1999) and, my personal obscure fave, as US President Ulysses S. Grant in an awful reboot attempt known as The Legend of the Lone Ranger (1981). Nonetheless, Robards as Al Capone is a bizarre choice for the role at best. He is the wrong physical type (tall and thin vs short and plump) and the wrong age (Capone was about 30 during the events depicted in the film while Robards was 44 when the film was shot) for the role.<br />
<br />
Al Capone has been played by no less than 16 actors in the history of film and TV. The best on-screen Capone in recent memory has got to be Robert Deniro in Brian DePalma's 1987 film, The Untouchables. Deniro's performance as Capone in that film ushered in a new stage in the actor's career in which Deniro shifted from playing leads and meaty character roles to playing smaller yet prestigious "And Robert Deniro as..." parts in big movies. Perhaps the most interesting Capone, from an obscure trivia angle, is actor Nicholas Turtruro (brother of John and star of, among other things, NYPD Blue) who played Capone in a 1993 episode of The Young Indiana Jones Chronicles. Special note should also be made of English actor Stephen Graham who plays Capone on the current HBO historical series, Boardwalk Empire. Capone experts believe that Graham's is the most realistic on-screen Capone yet.<br />
<br />
Apparently, Corman's first choice for the role was Orson Welles. Welles was reportedly vetoed by the studio as they thought he'd be far too much of a mavericky pain in the ass. They were probably right, though it woulda been better for the movie. Corman would return to the Capone story as a producer of the 1975 film simply titled Capone. Ben Gazarra played Capone in this biographical film that only briefly touched on The Saint Valentine's Day Massacre.<br />
<br />
In The Saint Valentine's Day Massacre, there are many other fine actors cast and miscast as the major gangsters. George Segal plays Peter Gusenberg. Ralph Meeker, who played Mickey Spillane's Mike Hammer in the seminal 1955 noire film, Kiss Me Deadly, plays Moran. All of these accomplished actors have been directed to play the gangsters so big that any sense of humanity has been systemically removed from the characters. Meeker is the only actor amongst the impressive cast who is able to rise to the occasion of delivering a highly stylized performance while still keeping his role emotionally grounded.<br />
<br />
The film is made in a supposed docudrama style. It's got that voice of authority style narration that was very familiar in crime dramas and police procedurals back in the day. It was the kinda thing that turned up on TV in shows like Dragnet and The FBI. Interestingly, every character/historical figure gets their own voice over bio, including (if they were not one of the people killed in the massacre), when and how they would later die (in some cases, that's more than thirty years after the events depicted in the film).<br />
<br />
The film is more or less historically accurate. Though, artistic license is taken with some events and characters. The two out-of-town hitmen dressed as cops, for instance, are both named in the film. Though in reality, nobody to this day is sure who those guys actually were. In some cases, historical research on the massacre since 1967 has made some parts of the story and other details inaccurate. For instance, it was thought, at the time the movie was made, that Capone was born in Italy in 1899 but it has since been learned that he was, in fact, born to Italian immigrant parents in Brooklyn, NY, in 1899.<br />
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="http://ca.movieposter.com/posters/archive/main/33/b70-16705" imageanchor="1" style="clear: left; float: left; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" src="http://ca.movieposter.com/posters/archive/main/33/b70-16705" /></a></div>The larger problem with the film, though, is that it's hard to tell why Corman wanted to tell this story. His direction avoids both deifying or crucifying the mobsters at the same time. They are neither heroes, nor antiheroes or even villains. Nor are they the classic tragic figures of Hollywood's cautionary morality tales like Public Enemy (1931), Little Caesar (1931) and The Roaring Twenties (1939).<br />
<br />
The narration, by legendary voice actor Paul Frees, effectively keeps the film from displaying any kind of sentiment, even a nihilistic one. The scenes of massacre itself are strongly reminiscent of scene in Arthur Penn's Bonnie and Clyde (released in the same year so probably not an influence), in which the two eponymous antihero outlaws are gunned down by police in a brutally violent bloodbath. The massacre in Corman's film, while similarly gory, simply does not have the same emotional impact.<br />
<br />
Despite numerous ongoing investigations, no one was ever arrested or charged in connection with The Saint Valentine's Day Massacre. Capone, famously, was only ever arrested for tax evasion, never for his role in the massacre or for any of his other infamous crimes. Technically speaking, it remains an open case.<br />
<br />
So it seems somehow fitting, then, nobody's ever made a really good definitive movie of the The Saint Valentine's Day Massacre either. And, you know, the 85th anniversary is coming up. Just sayin.<br />
<br />
<table align="center" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto; text-align: center;"><tbody>
<tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4093/4957109807_d7c8fe31a2.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" src="http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4093/4957109807_d7c8fe31a2.jpg" /></a></td></tr>
<tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;">A 100% completely historically accurate reenactment of the brutal event</td></tr>
</tbody></table><br />
Happy Saint Valentine's Day Massacre Anniversary Everybody!<br />
<br />
<span style="font-size: x-small;"><i>(see what I did there with the irony there?) </i></span>Terence Bowmanhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/04576129838447713151noreply@blogger.com6tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2233378012529819224.post-81003465079829539342012-02-04T13:59:00.000-05:002012-02-04T13:59:34.448-05:00Mighty Memories of Mightor<table align="center" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto; text-align: center;"><tbody>
<tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="http://farm2.static.flickr.com/1440/1439724021_85250c95ef_o.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" height="480" src="http://farm2.static.flickr.com/1440/1439724021_85250c95ef_o.jpg" width="640" /></a></td></tr>
<tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;">Excerpt from the short lived comic book based on the 60's animated series Moby Dick and The Mighty Mightor</td></tr>
</tbody></table><br />
I've just spent the last couple of months revisiting one of my very first favourite TV shows ever. There seems to be a digital age mandate that every TV show that ever aired anywhere at anytime must be made available to everyone everywhere (whether it be via DVD, Blu-ray, streaming video or digital download). Thanks to that unofficial internet mandate, I have got see, for the first time in over 40 years, an old Saturday morning cartoon called Moby Dick and The Mighty Mightor.<br />
<br />
Regular He-Had-on-a-Hatters may recall that I previously blogged about Moby Dick and The Mighty Mightor in a post of mine from around a year ago concerning <a href="http://terencebowmanblog.blogspot.com/2011/01/weirdest-animated-shows-for-kids.html">some of the weirdest cartoons ever made for kids.</a><br />
<br />
As coincidence would have it, Moby Dick and the Mighty Mightor was released on DVD just months after I first blogged about the show. Thanks to some lucrative TV work over the summer, I was able to indulge in the so frivolous a thing as the complete series DVD set of a cartoon that I barely remembered from my early childhood.<br />
<br />
<br />
Contrary to what the order of names in the title might suggest, the feature attraction of the 1967-69 animated series was a prehistoric superhero known as The Mighty Mightor, and not a cartoon version of Herman Melville's infamous white whale The show was produced by Hanna Barbera, the animation production company famous for creations such as Tom and Jerry, The Flintsontes, The Jetsons, Yogi Bear, Johnny Quest, The Super Friends, Josie and The Pussycats and, in perhaps their greatest contribution to ironic Gen X pop culture kitsch, Scooby Doo.<br />
<br />
Until a few months ago, I had only vague memories of Moby Dick and The Mighty Mightor. That's understandable. I would have between 3 and 5 years old during its original run (possibly a bit of older if I caught it in reruns).<br />
<br />
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="http://webpages.charter.net/superheroes/mightoropening.gif" imageanchor="1" style="clear: left; float: left; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" src="http://webpages.charter.net/superheroes/mightoropening.gif" /></a></div><br />
Looking at the show "again", made me realize that I <i>really</i> didn't remember much about it at all. It was only seeing the opening titles on Youtube that even made me aware of the Mightor's prehistoric setting. I also had forgotten that Mightor's adventures were lumped in with the Moby Dick cartoons. I did remember that there was a Moby Dick cartoon but I never connected it with Mightor. I also remember somehow knowing that Moby was a pre-existing character from a book or something like that. More than likely, Classics Comics Illustrated had something to do with that knowledge. <br />
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"></div>Given how vague I was on Moby Dick and The Mighty Mightor, I sure as hell can't expect my readers to know anything about the show either.<br />
Time for some background. <br />
<br />
Moby Dick and the Mighty Mightor had the classic 60's Saturday morning cartoon structure. It was divided into three seven minute-ish cartoons: one about Mightor, followed by one about Moby Dick and then another with Mightor to close out what really was a pretty offbeat cartoon sandwich. Moby and Mightor were always shown in completely separate self-contained adventures. They never crossed-over. The belief behind this popular format at the time was that younger kids did not have the attention span for longer and more involved 25 minute stories (yep, 25 and not today's standard of 20 to 22 minutes-there were way less commercials back then).<br />
<br />
I gotta say that, even after just having seen the entire series over a four month period, I still find the show's prehistoric superhero and happy albino whale premise just a tad on the bizarre side.<br />
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="http://www.tvacres.com/images/moby1.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="clear: right; float: right; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-left: 1em;"><img border="0" src="http://www.tvacres.com/images/moby1.jpg" /></a></div>The Moby Dick segments could generously and humorously be described as a very loose adaptation of Herman Melville's classic American novel. Aside from potentially agitating Melville purists no end, the Moby Dick segments featured some of the most basic cartoon chases this side of the Road Runner. Two perpetually scuba diving kids named Tom and Tub seemed to be continually attacked and chased by any number of undersea creatures, mutants, mad scientists, aliens or all of the above. Inevitably, they were saved by a friendly yet somewhat scrappy heroic whale named Moby Dick. If one really wanted to got out on a limb, I suppose one could argue the "scrappy" part is somewhat true to Melville...but I guess one doesn't.<br />
<br />
Any other tenuous connections to Melville end there. Moby is essentially a superhero whale in these cartoons . He is able to smash and destroy many a ship, submarine, or sea monster just by head butting 'em with enough force .Moby never dispenses with Tom and Tub's nemesis without having a bratty bullying smirk cross his face. Kinda creepy, if you ask me.<br />
<br />
In one cartoon, Moby cements his cetacean superhero status when he is actually able to tie himself into a knot and then quickly snap himself undone in order to produce enough inertia to swim after the bad guys at record speed (marine biologists can confirm the complete scientific validity of this maneuver -look it up on Wikipedia).<br />
<br />
Tom, Tub and Moby are accompanied by a seal named Scooby. Apparently two kids and a happy-go-lucky heroic whale just didn't provide enough cute for one cartoon. And yes, that's right. The seal's name is Scooby. However, unlike like his canine successor, this Scooby did not speak, let alone pronouncing every word as if it begins with the letter "R". Nor did this Scoob have a pothead level obsession with munchies and snacking. <br />
<br />
One episode worth checking out features a Captain Nemo-esque submariner who escapes to a "mysterious island'. It's the closest thing you'll ever get to a Herman Melville-Jules Verne crossover.<br />
<br />
You can take a look at a more typical Moby Dick episode by<a href="http://fliiby.com/file/253247/y31micxiq7.html" target="_blank"> clicking here</a>. <br />
<br />
As for The Mighty Mightor, this intro explains the show's premise more concisely and eloquently than I ever could: <br />
<br />
<br />
<iframe allowfullscreen="" frameborder="0" height="480" src="http://www.youtube.com/embed/GwOexVTeFo0?rel=0" width="640"></iframe><br />
<br />
<br />
"And Tog is<i> transferred</i> into a fire breathing dragon"? What is he? A crosstown bus? Maybe the word you were looking for is "transformed"?<br />
<br />
Sorry. Had to get that off my chest.<br />
<br />
Superheroes and dinosaurs. It's a no brainer, really. Undoubtedly, every five year old boy in the world would be glued to the TV.<br />
<br />
I know I was.<br />
<br />
And, no, despite the prehistoric setting that features a dinosaur-human coexistence, I don't think the creators of this show were creationists. Back then seeing people and dinosaurs together was just plain everywhere in pop culture. It was in everything from The Flintstones to One Million Years BC. It represented a common misconception of the day. I doubt there was any kind of overwhelming creationist agenda in Hollywood then, except maybe for not wanting to offend some religious groups (and doing so was particularly bad for business back then, especially when it came to kids shows). Indeed, the human dinosaur co-existence convention goes back to the earliest silent films set in prehistoric times. No doubt those early movie producers felt that people fighting dinosaurs just plain made for more exciting stories, not to mention a more lucrative bottom line at the box office. <br />
<br />
It wasn't until Steven Spielberg's Jurassic Park in the early 90's, that the human dinosaur co-existence misconception (among other dinosaur misconceptions) was finally put to rest in the popular consciousness. After that, the primitive man-thunder lizard connection was strictly the domain of the creationists. <br />
<br />
A typical Mightor episode would revolve around some kind of attack or plot against mild mannered cave dweller Tor's village. Tor would then have to sneak away to transform into Mightor in order to defend the village. Usually, the chieftain's daughter, Sheera, was somehow directly or indirectly threatened as well. Sheera ,with her bold red hair and Bedrock original designer cave dress, was a cross between Wilma Flintstone and Raquel Welch in One Million Years BC. The anachronistic prehistoric babe next door, in other words.<br />
<br />
This clip kinda gives you a good idea of what usually went down in Mightor's world. <br />
<br />
<iframe allowfullscreen="" frameborder="0" height="480" src="http://www.youtube.com/embed/s7oB0JEZaj0?rel=0" width="640"></iframe><br />
<br />
<br />
Some of the comments below this clip on Youtube, for obvious reasons, degenerate into a heated creationist vs. evolution debate. Um, folks, did you notice that Mightor flies? That he has a wooden club that fires energy bolts? That he uses that same club to transform his physical being? That his sidekick is a fire breathing dragon? That his adventures often involve giants, rock monsters, insect people and vampires? That it's a <i>cartoon</i>?<br />
<br />
See, it's this thing called Fantasy, there, guys. Look into it.<br />
<br />
On less contentious note, notice how Mightor has a sorta British sounding voice. He speaks in that "standard English" accent that was often taught in theatre schools in the pre-James Dean/Marlon Brando method acting era. It was the kind of voice that was de-riguer for any Saturday morning hero in those days. <br />
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="http://www.behindthevoiceactors.com/_img/chars/char_26310.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="clear: right; float: right; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-left: 1em;"><img border="0" src="http://www.behindthevoiceactors.com/_img/chars/char_26310.jpg" /></a></div>Most annoying of all and not seen in the above clip is the character of Little Rok, Sheera's younger brother. Little Rok is a kid who has a major hero fixation on Mightor. He is always dressing up like Mightor and trying to take on the bad guys and monsters himself. Such ventures would, of course, would end up with Little Rok getting into trouble, leaving Mightor to come rescue him. Mightor truly is a superhero in that he has incredible patience towards this essentially really dumb kid. Mightor keeps rescuing Little Rok over and over again without complaint. Not only that, but doesn't even attempt to turn these incidents into some kind of teachable moment. You know, so that Little Rok could learn the valuable lesson that it's really not a good idea throw rocks at an Allosaurus. The 1970's era of preachy, hammer-over-the-head message-y Saturday morning cartoons was still, thankfully, a few years away. <br />
<br />
It's very clear that Mightor was made by the same guys that made The Flintstones. Sheera, for instance, rides around on a mini mammoth that, as any good fan can tell, is clearly the Flintstones' vacuum cleaner. That guy sure worked a lot back then. <br />
<br />
<div style="text-align: left;"></div><table cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="float: left; margin-right: 1em; text-align: left;"><tbody>
<tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="http://p2.la-img.com/930/24884/9075738_1_l.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="clear: left; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" height="343" src="http://p2.la-img.com/930/24884/9075738_1_l.jpg" width="400" /></a></td></tr>
<tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;">Alex Toth's Mightor designs</td></tr>
</tbody></table>Like many of Hanna-Barbera's 60's creations, Mightor was designed by the legendary comic book and animation illustrator, Alex Toth. Toth spent years in the comic book industry, drawing the early Green Lantern and Justice Society of America comics. By the time Mightor came around, Toth was lending talents to most of Hanna Barbera's action adventure shows like Jonny Quest, The Herculoids, Space Ghost, Birdman, and later, in a return to his roots, The Super Friends.<br />
<br />
However, the Mightor design is not totally Toth's. Some of the credit has to go to Jack Kirby. Yes, Jack Kirby, the legendary Marvel Comics artist. In 1967, Hanna Barbera had made an animated series based on Stan Lee and Jack Kirby's classic creation, The Fantastic Four. As a follow-up, Hanna-Barbera had a series in development based on another popular Marvel character, The Mighty Thor. For some unfathomable reason, Marvel decided instead to go with a deal with with the bargain basement animation of production company known as Grantray Lawrence. They were hired to make animated versions of the rest of Marvel's major characters (except Spider-Man who had his own series elsewhere at the time). Grantray-Lawrence created animation for the Marvel characters so bad that it made Rocket Robin Hood look like Fantasia.<br />
<br />
Why anyone would forfeit this... <br />
<br />
<iframe allowfullscreen="" frameborder="0" height="480" src="http://www.youtube.com/embed/HeM6TGQecNI?rel=0" width="640"></iframe><br />
<br />
...for this... <br />
<br />
<iframe allowfullscreen="" frameborder="0" height="480" src="http://www.youtube.com/embed/M9UgWyGB3vc?rel=0" width="640"></iframe><br />
<br />
...is beyond me.<br />
<br />
Not wanting to waste the time and money they'd already put into the development process, Hanna-Barbera turned The Mighty Thor into The Mighty Mightor . You can kinda see the similarities: the cape, the horned helmet and the hammer/club that helps the hero fly. Though, for my money, the Mightor's transformation seems closer to that of Billy Batson becoming Captain Marvel than it does to Dr. Donald Blake becoming Thor (keep up with me here, geeks).<br />
<br />
<table align="center" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto; text-align: center;"><tbody>
<tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiNiuxInmggNHdzyks-sFDuDOQBcvmWZoWNfU_IJSeAe3-GmnOvDxKL7cOiFG4uii7sayvsYPsiRKirtBW8jgMJy66KnbX9ssCS_n_tWI0kX5_LmEM9vVdQmuAu35KaVVzGe4m9PveRFejf/s400/Thor+vs.+Mightor.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" height="414" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiNiuxInmggNHdzyks-sFDuDOQBcvmWZoWNfU_IJSeAe3-GmnOvDxKL7cOiFG4uii7sayvsYPsiRKirtBW8jgMJy66KnbX9ssCS_n_tWI0kX5_LmEM9vVdQmuAu35KaVVzGe4m9PveRFejf/s640/Thor+vs.+Mightor.jpg" width="640" /></a></td></tr>
<tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;">Still waiting for this crossover...</td></tr>
</tbody></table><br />
Personally, I just wanna see Kenneth Branagh's film version of the Mighty Mightor. Mightor could be played by a dark haired Chris Hemsworth type but he should definitely be voiced by Branagh himself, just to keep things consistent with the original series.<br />
<br />
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="http://www.internationalhero.co.uk/m/mightor4.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="clear: left; float: left; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" src="http://www.internationalhero.co.uk/m/mightor4.jpg" /></a></div><br />
For now, though, I guess we'll just have to settle for Mightor's recurring role as Judge Hiram Mightor on the classic Adult Swim series, Harvey Birdman, Attorney at Law. <br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
Finally, I want to leave you with the opening titles of the Moby Dick and the Mighty Mightor. Mightor does something that I have never seen any superhero do; he makes his enemy hit themselves.<br />
<br />
Take a look at 0:21 to see what I mean...<br />
<br />
<iframe allowfullscreen="" frameborder="0" height="480" src="http://www.youtube.com/embed/BByhY5mY8n8?rel=0" width="640"></iframe><br />
<br />
Now I know where all those schoolyard bullies picked up that "Stop hitting yourself! Stop hitting yourself!" move.<br />
<br />
Thanks a lot, Mighty Mightor.Terence Bowmanhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/04576129838447713151noreply@blogger.com4tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2233378012529819224.post-65387844785137846942012-01-28T12:36:00.000-05:002018-06-18T14:05:46.977-04:00Captian America, The Great American Iconoclast<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjMvJ26Rx6SUz1RyzuuGicuPXe3a6H1f0U497vYHJIYr36yZEfp94mYO0xTwO2he6LyCXgIoxiG1I0rLon4Zjen_psJH-yPOVHyTMi6cnShgoM7v-3yT-xZgBLKdKiNHDaGIdSV51lqp7k/s1600/Captain+America.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjMvJ26Rx6SUz1RyzuuGicuPXe3a6H1f0U497vYHJIYr36yZEfp94mYO0xTwO2he6LyCXgIoxiG1I0rLon4Zjen_psJH-yPOVHyTMi6cnShgoM7v-3yT-xZgBLKdKiNHDaGIdSV51lqp7k/s1600/Captain+America.jpg" /></a></div>
<div style="font-family: Verdana,sans-serif;">
<br /></div>
<div>
<span style="font-size: small;"><span style="font-family: "verdana" , sans-serif; line-height: 115%;">When the blockbuster Captain America movie first hit theatres throughout the world in the summer of 2011, some countries released the movie not under its original title of Captain America: First Avenger but under the truncated title, First Avenger.</span></span></div>
<div>
<span style="font-family: "verdana" , sans-serif;"><br /></span></div>
<div>
<span style="font-family: "verdana" , sans-serif; font-size: small;"><span style="line-height: 115%;">The underlying concern was that the name “Captain America” might negatively impact international box office numbers in some countries due to Anti-Americanism and a general distrust of American foreign policy- notwithstanding the potential brand recognition attached to an over 70 year old comic book hero. </span> </span></div>
<div>
<span style="font-family: "verdana" , sans-serif;"><br /></span></div>
<span style="font-family: "verdana" , sans-serif;">Paramount Pictures reportedly gave international distributors a choice: Call it Captain America: The First Avenger or truncate it to The First Avenger - but no other variations. In the end, only Russia, Ukraine and South Korea opted to shorten the movie's title.</span><br />
<span style="font-family: "verdana" , sans-serif;"><br /></span>
<span style="font-family: "verdana" , sans-serif;">Given the true history and nature of Captain America's character, however, no country should have had to change the movie's name: Far from being an icon of American jingoism, this superhero often has been one of his nation's most trenchant critics.</span><br />
<span style="font-family: "verdana" , sans-serif;"><br /></span>
<span style="font-family: "verdana" , sans-serif;">On the surface, the reasons for concern are understandable. Outside of comic-book fandom, all that most people think of when they hear the name "Captain America" (or even just look at the guy) is an over-the-top American propaganda figure. Let's face it: Cap's costume is heavily dominated by stars and stripes. It's like Betsy Ross and Edna Mode teamed up to design the outfit. Many observers simply assume that he is a creature of the Pentagon spin machine. Indeed, an informal survey of media coverage of the upcoming Captain America movie found news outlets from CNN to Fox News to the BBC stating that the superhero with the star-spangled shield was created as a propaganda tool for the U.S. war effort during the Second World War.</span><br />
<span style="font-family: "verdana" , sans-serif;"><br /></span>
<span style="font-family: "verdana" , sans-serif;">That is a major misconception: The first issue of Captain America was published by Timely Comics (later Marvel Comics) in December 1940, a full year before America's entry into World War II.</span><br />
<span style="font-family: "verdana" , sans-serif;"><br /></span>
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhKp9ChSQzUCcV-HMJxGnjp3kSg5jFlYNofxqIrFDXcfX9bFgFqXOvf3cA0Cv_DMEjh53ZSfifWdcysfXOo28yVsfVOYZRqUQwzvepH7JxRUH5uvFVb8LGlSifkio_JB9Rf4tfFUcmLFDI/s1600/1-captain-america_super.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><span style="font-family: "verdana" , sans-serif;"><img border="0" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhKp9ChSQzUCcV-HMJxGnjp3kSg5jFlYNofxqIrFDXcfX9bFgFqXOvf3cA0Cv_DMEjh53ZSfifWdcysfXOo28yVsfVOYZRqUQwzvepH7JxRUH5uvFVb8LGlSifkio_JB9Rf4tfFUcmLFDI/s1600/1-captain-america_super.jpg" /></span></a></div>
<span style="font-family: "verdana" , sans-serif;"><br /></span>
<span style="font-family: "verdana" , sans-serif;">At that time, the American mood towards the war in Europe was largely isolationist: There were still many Americans who wanted the United States to stay out of what was then seen as a European war and none of America's business.</span><br />
<span style="font-family: "verdana" , sans-serif;"><br /></span>
<span style="font-family: "verdana" , sans-serif;">Of course, there were also a number of Americans who took the opposite view. One of them was FDR. Others were hawkish media figures who led a subtle push toward military involvement through movies, radio, newspapers and, yes, even comics.</span><br />
<span style="font-family: "verdana" , sans-serif;"><br /></span>
<span style="font-family: "verdana" , sans-serif;">In the latter case, the push was not always so subtle: The cover of the first issue of Captain America featured a splashy full-colour rendering of the red, white and blue clad superhero punching Adolf Hitler right in the face. Believe it or not, it was a controversial image back in the day.</span><br />
<span style="font-family: "verdana" , sans-serif;"><br /></span>
<span style="font-family: "verdana" , sans-serif;">For Captain America's creators, the legendary Jack Kirby and Joe Simon, both the character and the punch were no accident. Like many Jews in America at the time, Kirby and Simon were concerned with the news coming out of Nazi Germany. The political message behind an American superhero who was ready, willing and able to take on the Nazis was intentional. Simon said in an interview years later that, "the opponents to the war were all quite well organized. We wanted to have our say, too."</span><br />
<span style="font-family: "verdana" , sans-serif;"><br /></span>
<span style="font-family: "verdana" , sans-serif;">After its initial publication, the now-famous Hitler-bashing cover resulted in threats and hate mail for the authors. The underlying patriotic wartime themes of Captain America were embraced by official government propaganda only much later - after the attack on Pearl Harbor.</span><br />
<span style="font-family: "verdana" , sans-serif;"><br /></span>
<span style="font-family: "verdana" , sans-serif;">Sales of Captain America comic books trailed off significantly after the end of the Second World War, and it eventually ceased publication. But 20 years later, the character was revived by another comic-book legend, Stan Lee, who concocted a story about Cap being frozen in suspended animation since 1945, and revived by a newly formed superhero group, The Avengers, in 1964.</span><br />
<span style="font-family: "verdana" , sans-serif;"><br /></span>
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="http://filmhash.files.wordpress.com/2011/05/avengers-4-cover.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><span style="font-family: "verdana" , sans-serif;"><img border="0" height="640" src="https://filmhash.files.wordpress.com/2011/05/avengers-4-cover.jpg" width="414" /></span></a></div>
<span style="font-family: "verdana" , sans-serif;"><br /></span>
<span style="font-family: "verdana" , sans-serif;">In the February 1970 issue, Cap is seen wandering the streets of New York, contemplating the then-current social revolution. Thinks Cap in a classic Marvel comics thought bubble: "And in a world rife with injustice and endless war . Who is to say the rebels are wrong? But, I've never learned to play by today's new rules! I've spent a lifetime defending the flag, and the law! Perhaps I should have battled less, and questioned more!"</span><br />
<span style="font-family: "verdana" , sans-serif;"><br /></span>
<span style="font-family: "verdana" , sans-serif;">Later, Cap bolts out of bed and says of the establishment: "It was the same establishment that gave them a Martin Luther King, a Tolkien, a McLuhan, and a couple of brothers named Kennedy! We don't claim to be perfect . no generation is! All we can do is learn to live with each other - learn to love one another."</span><br />
<span style="font-family: "verdana" , sans-serif;">Not exactly gung-ho American conservatism, that. It was the kind of nuanced reflection that was a rarity in the anti-establishment era.</span><br />
<span style="font-family: "verdana" , sans-serif;"><br /></span>
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgMZBtQNznzrIH-rMpmrhsuCNFPUTr32GZSO9qFdglhQKA68YObFntpPZQryq5qFhCz_2MIQrTKgUF7Z5Q3tOfuakxj6r9SfMWS_Ef29Na2eQ2OB7-_F-mwHB_lRvcDgPEDD7199DvcVHo/s1600/Captain+America+122c.jpg" imageanchor="1"><span style="font-family: "verdana" , sans-serif;"><img border="0" height="640" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgMZBtQNznzrIH-rMpmrhsuCNFPUTr32GZSO9qFdglhQKA68YObFntpPZQryq5qFhCz_2MIQrTKgUF7Z5Q3tOfuakxj6r9SfMWS_Ef29Na2eQ2OB7-_F-mwHB_lRvcDgPEDD7199DvcVHo/s1600/Captain+America+122c.jpg" width="468" /></span></a></div>
<span style="font-family: "verdana" , sans-serif;"><br /></span>
<span style="font-family: "verdana" , sans-serif;">A little later in the 1970s, when Watergate rocked America, the Marvel Uni-verse produced its own fictional version of the scandal - and Captain America was front and center.</span><br />
<span style="font-family: "verdana" , sans-serif;"><br /></span>
<span style="font-family: "verdana" , sans-serif;">A subversive terrorist organization known as The Secret Empire attempted a coup d'état against the United States. The group was stopped by Captain America. Later, Cap learns that the leader of the Secret Empire was none other than the president of the United States (who, at that time, of course, was Richard Nixon). The actions of The Secret Empire and their connections with the commander-in-chief were covered up. Like Joe Simon and Jack Kirby many years before him, writer Steve Englehart openly admitted the political intentions of the story; it was definitely meant to be an allegory to Watergate.</span><br />
<span style="font-family: "verdana" , sans-serif;"><br /></span>
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEj0YqQ2LUBEoOX5jV9vmpKDwYrpn5iaZlP1WHgRM1ynYXaFRnWfHwxKHJ7tRauCG3ANbfaReO6Ppwzpe2p-b2HrR0ANu1vOZJnYPs7MH4IFw-3WOcK_pt2cgiac4_1EWdQfvofWiSjJ-e4/s1600/-2-captain-america_super.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><span style="font-family: "verdana" , sans-serif;"><img border="0" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEj0YqQ2LUBEoOX5jV9vmpKDwYrpn5iaZlP1WHgRM1ynYXaFRnWfHwxKHJ7tRauCG3ANbfaReO6Ppwzpe2p-b2HrR0ANu1vOZJnYPs7MH4IFw-3WOcK_pt2cgiac4_1EWdQfvofWiSjJ-e4/s1600/-2-captain-america_super.jpg" /></span></a></div>
<span style="font-family: "verdana" , sans-serif;"><br /></span>
<span style="font-family: "verdana" , sans-serif;">Captain America, disillusioned by the whole affair, dumps his American red, white and blue costume, and takes on the identity of Nomad (the man without a country - get it?). It was around the same time that Cap took on The Falcon, one of the very first African American superheroes in mainstream comics, as a sidekick. Captain America was no Archie Bunker in tights.</span><br />
<span style="font-family: "verdana" , sans-serif;"><br /></span>
<span style="font-family: "verdana" , sans-serif;">Fast forward to the George W, Bush era, and you find that the Marvel Universe in general, and Captain America in particular, were still commenting on the times. In a story-line that mirrored the real-life Patriot Act, the fictional U.S. Government passed the "Superhuman Registration Act," requiring all persons with super powers to register with the government as "a human weapon of mass destruction." The superhumans also were required to reveal their true identities and submit to government training. The creed of the post-9/11 era was: "You are either with us or against us." Captain America was most decidedly on the "against us" side: He opposed the Act and refused to register, arguing that such legislation was an infringement of American civil liberties.</span><br />
<span style="font-family: "verdana" , sans-serif;"><br /></span>
<span style="font-family: "verdana" , sans-serif;">Actually, he didn't just argue. He fought. Hard. And a lot. And against his former friends and allies such as Iron Man. Captain America, the onetime "sentinel of liberty," finally went into hiding as a mall cop.</span><br />
<span style="font-family: "verdana" , sans-serif;">Finally, and begrudgingly, Cap did "the right thing" and surrendered, preferring instead to fight the rest of his political battles in court. But while Cap was being brought into the court house, he was shot by a sniper. Then, Sharon Carter, a SHIELD agent and Cap's former lover, also known as Agent 13, finished the job and killed Captain America.</span><br />
<span style="font-family: "verdana" , sans-serif;"><br /></span>
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjwyD5q6N-XB5sS8LdgMWLZuVi-xoYwYOndlSGP8jZJsci2pJwikw7YHSTwnEoFMO8CUY4lURW0u4jJf2Bv5ydLss2loKuVJgCYJh4FY34T7QfKft1ICkh_vnXhUO6Dlo7THOozRKoEKLg/s1600/deathofcapomnibus.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><span style="font-family: "verdana" , sans-serif;"><img border="0" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjwyD5q6N-XB5sS8LdgMWLZuVi-xoYwYOndlSGP8jZJsci2pJwikw7YHSTwnEoFMO8CUY4lURW0u4jJf2Bv5ydLss2loKuVJgCYJh4FY34T7QfKft1ICkh_vnXhUO6Dlo7THOozRKoEKLg/s1600/deathofcapomnibus.jpg" /></span></a></div>
<span style="font-family: "verdana" , sans-serif;"><br /></span>
<span style="font-family: "verdana" , sans-serif;">She was, of course, under the influence of the bad guys at the time. Nonetheless, the circumstances are telling: Captain America was killed by a federal agent while defying the actions of his government in a time of war. The story behind the death of Captain America certainly did not reflect the mainstream jingoism of the post-9/11 Bush Era.</span><br />
<span style="font-family: "verdana" , sans-serif;"><br /></span>
<span style="font-family: "verdana" , sans-serif;">All of which to say: Anyone who understands Captain America's story should understand that the title of the movie should not have been changed - because he is the farthest thing from an icon of unthinking American sabre-rattling. Doing so serves only to fortify misconceptions surrounding a character who has wrestled, more than most real-life thinkers, with the question of what it means to be "American."</span><br />
<span style="font-family: "verdana" , sans-serif;"><br /></span>
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="http://splashpage.mtv.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/06/captain-america.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><span style="font-family: "verdana" , sans-serif;"><img border="0" src="https://splashpage.mtv.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/06/captain-america.jpg" /></span></a></div>
<span style="font-family: "verdana" , sans-serif;"><br /></span>
<br />
<div style="text-align: center;">
<i><span style="font-family: "verdana" , sans-serif;">Reprinted courtesy of the The National Post</span></i></div>
<div style="text-align: center;">
<i><span style="font-family: "verdana" , sans-serif;">www.national post.ca</span></i></div>
Terence Bowmanhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/04576129838447713151noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2233378012529819224.post-3500374788650738072012-01-21T11:56:00.000-05:002012-01-21T11:56:26.782-05:00What Are the Hidden Agendas of DVD and Blu-ray Extras?<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="http://cinefilter.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/12/ChoiceBuyPlanetOfTheApes.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="248" src="http://cinefilter.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/12/ChoiceBuyPlanetOfTheApes.jpg" width="640" /></a></div><br />
<br />
The other day I was checking out the extras on the Rise of the Planet of the Apes Blu-ray I got for Christmas this year. One of the special features focuses on the history of the Apes franchise.<br />
<br />
A history of the The Planet of the Apes franchise? Really?<br />
<br />
Given how much Fox, the owners of the rights to all things Apes, seems to want to find a new audience for the reboot and given how much the Apes franchise is either or unknown to or dismissed by just about anyone under the age of 40, I was kinda surprised they even went there.<br />
<br />
And, in fact, they kinda didn't.<br />
<br />
In one featurette, director Rupert Wyatt, screenwriters Rick Jaffa and Amanda Silver as well as actor Andy Sirkus all talk in very positive terms about the original Planet of the Apes. They all say that they are big fans of the movie. However, 99% of the focus of the featurette is on the original 1968 film. Little or no mention is made of the later films.<br />
<br />
<iframe allowfullscreen="" frameborder="0" height="360" src="http://www.youtube.com/embed/EbCoDf44oCE?rel=0" width="640"></iframe><br />
<br />
I found this particularly bizarre as Rise of the Planet of the Apes is, for all intents and purposes, a remake of the fourth film in the Apes series, Conquest of the Planet of the Apes (some say it is more a reboot of Conquest but, hey, let's split Ape hairs). The interviews imply that the writers somehow just came up with this idea of creating a back story for Planet of the Apes as a means of a rebooting the franchise. This is even more bizarre in light of the fact that Fox has had a Conquest remake/reboot in the works since almost right after the failure of the last reboot attempt, Tim Burton's 2001 "re-imagining" of the '68 film. <br />
<br />
<iframe allowfullscreen="" frameborder="0" height="480" src="http://www.youtube.com/embed/-lzvsHFzVZw?rel=0" width="640"></iframe><br />
<br />
Also weird is that at one point Jaffa says that in one of the later films "reference" is made to an ape named Caesar who first defied his human masters and said "No". He adds that he thought it would be a great to actually see that moment on screen.<br />
<br />
First of all: "reference"? Conquest of the Planet of the Apes is an entire movie devoted to Caesar's story. That's slightly more than just a "reference". Secondly, the moment Jaffa refers to has already been seen in said movie; it is not something new to the franchise as Jaffa seems to be suggesting. For the record, the only "reference" to the event in question is in the previous film in the series, Escape from the Planet of the Apes. Jaffa comments make me wonder if he has even seen these movies. Both he and all of the publicity I've seen about the movie says that Jaffa is big fan of the series. <br />
<br />
<br />
There is more to this than just Apes fanboy nitpicking. It's like the featurette is purposely drawing attention away from connection between Rise of the Planet of the Apes and Conquest of the Planet of the Apes. What's the agenda here? Is just that they think most of the public at large only know the original film and not the sequels? Or do they not want to confuse potential new fans of the reboot? Or does Fox just simply feel that getting into the whole history of the Apes franchise will "turn the kids off"? <br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjqhFv8nrzVUyerifE2yPtY0a2Scj96Rm3WBkDB0Y_HXBPWlAMIL37aiUPD7yqJJbjoZAU0smNSkuyO6gCF-Gep-bcq5nk68oY0PSm-FRLAEqC5wy-pxGji3aZUlzKc4uZF3tCHc7E0epE/s1600/Let+Me+In+%2528Blu-Ray%2529.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="640" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjqhFv8nrzVUyerifE2yPtY0a2Scj96Rm3WBkDB0Y_HXBPWlAMIL37aiUPD7yqJJbjoZAU0smNSkuyO6gCF-Gep-bcq5nk68oY0PSm-FRLAEqC5wy-pxGji3aZUlzKc4uZF3tCHc7E0epE/s640/Let+Me+In+%2528Blu-Ray%2529.jpg" width="467" /></a></div><br />
<br />
<br />
Another example of perplexing Blu-ray extras can be found on the Let Me In Blu-ray. Let Me In is the "not as bad as you might expect it to be" remake of the amazing Swedish teenage vampire movie, Let The Right One In. BTW, if you have not seen Let The Right One In, do so. It's one of the most engagingly creepy movies of all time.<br />
<br />
Imagine Twilight directed by Ingmar Bergman.<br />
<br />
<iframe allowfullscreen="" frameborder="0" height="360" src="http://www.youtube.com/embed/sZJUgsZ56vQ?rel=0" width="640"></iframe><br />
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="http://ecx.images-amazon.com/images/I/51GYpLBd1CL._SL500_AA300_.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="clear: left; float: left; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" src="http://ecx.images-amazon.com/images/I/51GYpLBd1CL._SL500_AA300_.jpg" /></a></div>As was the case with Rise of the Planet of the Apes, the Let Me In Blu-ray extras gloss over the remake angle. In one of the featurettes on the background of the film, director Matt Reeves (Cloverfield) says that he loved the 2004 novel, Let The Right One In by Swedish writer John Ajvide Lindquvist, since he first read it. He said that he always wanted to make a film of the novel.<br />
<br />
Yes, it's true: the original Swedish film is also based on the same novel. However, the implication of the subsequent interviews with Reeves and the various producers of the film is that Let The Right On In is <i>the only</i> adaptation of the book that exists. Nowhere does anyone even bring up the original film.<br />
<br />
As with Apes, this is kinda weird if you've seen both movies. <br />
<br />
Let Me In is, in some scenes, a shot for shot remake of the Swedish film. The sets, costumes and cinematography are all variations on or recreations of elements of original movie. In. To be fair, there a few Americanizations here and there. Some scenes are ramped up big time, old-school Hollywood style. Overall, though, the Let Me In is a very close in mood, tone and look to Let The Right One In.<br />
<br />
So, why then do they seem to be deliberately deceitful about the background of this film?<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<iframe allowfullscreen="" frameborder="0" height="360" src="http://www.youtube.com/embed/7oQFXaAj5xE?rel=0" width="640"></iframe><br />
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="http://ferretbrain.com/images/library/3fd800154dc9d255a9b8b4466a81e820.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="clear: right; float: right; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-left: 1em;"><img border="0" height="320" src="http://ferretbrain.com/images/library/3fd800154dc9d255a9b8b4466a81e820.jpg" width="208" /></a></div><br />
I know American audiences will not flock to European movies en mass, even when they involve trendy pop culture icons like vampires. Though, will it really turn off American viewers that much if they even know that the movie is in any was connected to a European film?<br />
<br />
Sometimes the agendas of the DVD extras go another way. Take the Batman and Robin DVD...please (sorry, could not resist).<br />
<br />
Of course, I'm talking about the 1997 movie that, in star George Clooney's words, "shut down the Batman franchise". Indeed, Batman and Robin is pretty much a universally reviled movie by both fans and non fans alike. Unlike the previous examples, the extras on this DVD are not so quite so deceptive in nature.<br />
<br />
If fact, all of the interviews and commentary tracks on the Batman and Robin DVD are quite apologetic, often explaining where and how the problems with the film developed. Chris O' Donnell (Robin) says that the media "assault" for a movie like this can hurt a film in that it builds up false expectations. Director Joe Schumacher goes even further. He actually says, "I'm sorry" outright at one point.<br />
<br />
<iframe allowfullscreen="" frameborder="0" height="480" src="http://www.youtube.com/embed/r6epsGrcuTs?rel=0" width="640"></iframe><br />
<br />
So why point out that the movie that someone just bought or rented is really bad?<br />
<br />
Well, in this case, I remember people talking about the apology on the DVD. Let's face it, it attracted a lot of attention to a DVD of a movie that has such a bad reputation that it might never have left the Zip.ca warehouse. Perhaps they were trying to draw people to the DVD that way?<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="http://shaunmusco.com/images/Printed/B/Batman_And_Robin-%5Bcdcovers_cc%5D-front.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="clear: left; float: left; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="265" src="http://shaunmusco.com/images/Printed/B/Batman_And_Robin-%5Bcdcovers_cc%5D-front.jpg" width="400" /></a></div><br />
My theory is that the DVD extras can achieve two goals.<br />
<br />
One is the DVD's are, of course, sent to critics. Often the extra content of the DVD/Blu-ray turn up in reviews. Many websites feature reviews of not just the movie but also of the special features. And, in some cases, the DVD extras have doubled as promo material appearing in electronic press kits and the like. In other words, the extras are tool in the overall publicizing of the movie in the media.<br />
<br />
The second goal DVD/Blu-ray extras can achieve is that they can (hopefully) generate good word of mouth publicity (which even now is still often the backbone of a movie's success). So if, for example, the word gets out that Let Me In is not a completely original movie then that can impact future DVD/Blu-ray sales.<br />
<br />
Negatively, apparently.<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="http://www.suga3.com/kellyw/2_bat.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" src="http://www.suga3.com/kellyw/2_bat.jpg" /></a></div><br />
<br />
These are just a few examples I noticed recently.<br />
<br />
Anybody out there ever notice the DVD/Blu-ray extras that seem to have some kind of an agenda going on?<br />
<br />
Feel free to weigh in belowTerence Bowmanhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/04576129838447713151noreply@blogger.com2tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2233378012529819224.post-21354168753139397542012-01-14T10:23:00.001-05:002012-01-15T09:48:48.711-05:00The Adventures of Tintin Bombs in The US, Gets a Sequel Anyway.<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="http://collider.com/wp-content/uploads/adventures-of-tintin-movie-poster-03.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="640" src="http://collider.com/wp-content/uploads/adventures-of-tintin-movie-poster-03.jpg" width="432" /></a></div><br />
The Adventures of Tintin, the movie based on the internationally bestselling comic by the late Belgian artist and writer Hergé, produced by Peter Jackson and directed by Steven Spielberg, despite is struggles at the US box office, is getting a sequel.<br />
<br />
The movie has grossed $63 million at the domestic box office since it opened in North America on December 21, 2011. However, that number is has been boosted considerably by box office grosses from the Canadian province of Quebec. The movie opened in Quebec December 9 and had accounted for $16 million of the $25 million in domestic grosses as of the week of December 27, 2011. Take into account the fact that Quebec comprises a small fraction of the total population of North America and then put Tintin's domestic gross up against the $269 million the movie has made internationally to date, and it's pretty safe to say that the The Adventures of Tintin has, as many predicted it would, bombed in the US.<br />
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="http://images.nichetech.in/4300079/cover_page.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="clear: left; float: left; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="400" src="http://images.nichetech.in/4300079/cover_page.jpg" width="285" /></a></div>So, of course, the news has just been announced that the sequel, The Adventures of Tintin: Prisoners of the Sun (or that's the rumored title anyway), is tentatively scheduled to hit theatres sometime in 2013. The second Tintin movie will be produced by Spielberg and directed by Jackson: a reversal of their roles on Tintin's original big screen outing.<br />
<br />
All facetiousness aside, the sequel has, of course, been ordered based on Tintin's huge international success and not the character's relatively poor showing at the US box office.<br />
<br />
No surprises there, really. <br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"></div>The Tintin comics are massively popular throughout the world. In the United States, however, Tintin is, at best, an obscure character with what could generously be described as a small cult following. <br />
<br />
Tintin is a globe-trotting Belgian boy journalist. In a typical adventure, he journeys to an exotic location and quickly becomes entangled in adventure and intrigue. Occasionally, simplistic social or political satire and commentary would figure in the stories. Americans, for instance, were sometimes portrayed as greedy and selfish people, only interested in money. Non-European races were often viewed with dated, colonial and paternalistic attitudes <br />
<br />
Tintin has been compared to a boy scout in his values and sensibilities. His dog Snowy, a white Terrier speaks directly to the reader via thought balloons, not heard by anyone else. Captain Haddock, Tintin’s best friend, is a salty sometimes heavy drinking sea captain who was known for such catch phrases as “Blistering barnacles!” and “Thundering Typhoons!” <br />
<br />
Titin was drawn in a style originated by Hergé known as “lingle clair” (or “clear line”). Linge clair is a style that gives comics a somewhat flat appearance. It is sometimes seen in other European, particularly French, comics but pretty much never appears in mainstream American comics. <br />
<br />
Since the character’s debut in 1929, it is estimated that over 200 million Tintin books have been sold. The new Tintin movie spent at least two weeks as the #1 movie in no less than 9 different countries. None of that changes the fact that The Adventures of Tintin faced an uphill battle at the US box office practically from the git go. <br />
<br />
Quite simply, Tintin is the soccer of the comic world. And, like soccer, Tintin has been unsuccessfully attempting to break into the US market for some time. <br />
<br />
During the 1950’s, Tintin comics were moving over 250,000 copies a week in Europe alone. Towards the end of that decade, the first of several attempts to introduce Tintin to America was made. Accompanied by a large publicity campaign, newly translated and adapted versions of four of Tintin’s most popular adventures hit American bookstore shelves just in time for Christmas 1959. The Tintin titles sold only 8000 copies each over the entire Christmas season. <br />
<br />
Why the failure? There are a few possible reasons. Tintin comics were sold as books in Europe, often bound in hardcover and sold at higher price that most comics. In the United States, the Tintin books were seen merely as just another “comic book” that, for some reason, was being sold at a much higher price. Another problem was that not long before Tintin’s first appearance in the US, comic books, particularly the gory and violent crime and horror comics that dominated US newsstands in the early 50’s, were extremely controversial. A 1954 US Senate Sub-Committee investigated comic books as a possible cause of juvenile delinquency. The whole genre still had something of a black mark on it. Finally, and perhaps more importantly, no one was really sure whether or not Tintin translated into the American idiom. <br />
<br />
Tintin re-emerged on the American scene in 1966. A US magazine, Children’s Digest, began publishing serialized editions of Tintin adventures. The magazine appearances proved popular enough to warrant a 1969 American re-launch of the hardcover Tintin comics. By 1971, Tintin reached what would become the pinnacle of his American popularity. The books were selling a reported 1000 copies a day. Unfortunately, in 1972, Western Publishing, one of the biggest comic publishers in the US at the time, passed on new and bigger contract to publish and distribute all of the Tintin books in the US. Their argument was that fancy-pants European hardcover comics could not compete in a marketplace where the monthly adventures of such popular characters as Superman, Spider-man and Batman were going for just 20 cents a pop. The books did continue to publish in the US, but, starting in 1974 with a much smaller publisher and distribution. <br />
<br />
In Canada, Tintin has fared somewhat better. The original French versions of Tintin have been the educational comic of choice for many a Canadian elementary school French teacher over the years. In Quebec, as recent box office number in the province confirm, Tintin has seen European levels of popularity. Montreal even had for a time its own Tintin boutique that specialized in related books, merchandise, collectibles and memorabilia. <br />
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhlTAJrVONkKdd74Jwm-9vuA0QmnKY9KfPu87zyVRlBzwxGlKncWMf6L05yyEoC6GZLQWUwTp-bEzi9rO4Lv9XmUQDHGpM4sijvshRB15e_ZGvRTou5m4900gscx6T0eMYVERR8QQwXjSU/s1600/Tintinbook.jpeg.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhlTAJrVONkKdd74Jwm-9vuA0QmnKY9KfPu87zyVRlBzwxGlKncWMf6L05yyEoC6GZLQWUwTp-bEzi9rO4Lv9XmUQDHGpM4sijvshRB15e_ZGvRTou5m4900gscx6T0eMYVERR8QQwXjSU/s1600/Tintinbook.jpeg.jpg" /></a></div><br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"></div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"></div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="http://tvclassicshows.com/wp-content/images/rintintin.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="clear: right; float: right; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-left: 1em;"><img border="0" height="200" src="http://tvclassicshows.com/wp-content/images/rintintin.jpg" width="153" /></a></div>In the US of A, the adventurous young journalist continues to struggle to find an audience to this day, the new blockbuster movie merely proving to be no exception to the rule. On the one of the internet’s biggest movie sites, <a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="http://www.imdb.com/">www.IMDB.com</a>, on the page promoting the Adventures of Tintin's US release, the first FAQ reads "Is this based on a book?” <br />
<br />
The message boards on the popular movie site <a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="http://www.aintitcool.com/">www.aintitcool.com</a> are even more alarming. Comments posted under a still from the movie depicting Tintin reading a book with his trusted Terrier, Snowy, by his side read “I thought Rin Tin Tin was a German Sheppard, not some Terrier.” and “ Rin Tin Tin isn't reading ... He's watching that little boy read. ...did you even look at the picture when you wrote your headline?”. Rin Tin Tin, being a now fairly obscure canine movie star of Hollywood movies of the 20’s and 30’s and later the star of 1950’s TV series of the same name. Obscure or not, US audiences apparently make a quicker connection to the German Sheppard screen hero than they do the Belgian boy reporter. <br />
<br />
Even some of the more informed comments are not much more encouraging, “Spielberg is trying to force Americans to love a comic they've had little exposure to.” reads one comment below the latest trailer for the film. “Sorry but why should I give a shit about this boy and his dog?” reads a slightly more extreme comment. Well, at least Spielberg and Jackson have already doubled their 130 million dollar investment in Tintin in the international markets. <br />
<br />
One comment that was little more positive refers to the movie as “...a combination of Indiana Jones and Pirates of the Caribbean”. While Tintin predates and has seen longer lasting popularity that either of those franchises and while the comment does not suggest any familiarity with the character it is, at least, positive. <br />
<br />
So is it just bad marketing that has robbed Tintin of his potential US fandom? Or is it the fact that Tintin is Belgian and not American? Is it that the rare portrayals of America in Tintin are usually not very complementary? Or is it simply that the whole “linge clair” look of the art and the characters is, for lack of better word, too <i>European</i>? <br />
<br />
It seems clear in retrospect that Tintin's best path to US box office gold would have to have been a total overhaul and reboot of the character for American audiences: change Tintin's nationality to American, set at least part of the movie in present day America, redesign the whole look of the Tintin world, have Tintin use current tech like iPads and GPS and so forth. In other words, wreck the franchise completely and kill the movie's prospects for international success (which, in fact, has become the backbone of the film distribution industry in the 21st century). It is unlikely that the Tintin sequel will follow any of these potential directions nor stray all that far from the clear formula for international success that the first film established.<br />
<br />
With a second and perhaps third Tintin movie in the works, the Belgian boy journalist could be poised to become an internationally (yet not domestically) successful big screen franchise. If that's the case then future Tintin movies may make incrementally larger and larger inroads onto the US pop culture landscape. If you look at the recent increased interest and awareness of the last World Cup tournament in the US, then perhaps Tintin will see a gradual rise in American popularity, ever growing yet still largely marginalized in the mainstream media. In that case, Tintin will continue to successfully carry the mantle of being the soccer of the comic book world for years to come.<br />
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="http://ghostradio.files.wordpress.com/2009/07/the_adventures_of_tintin_cast.png" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" src="http://ghostradio.files.wordpress.com/2009/07/the_adventures_of_tintin_cast.png" /></a></div><br />
<div style="text-align: center;"><i>Portions of this post reprinted by permission of the National Post </i></div><div style="text-align: center;"><i>(www.nationalpost.ca)</i></div>Terence Bowmanhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/04576129838447713151noreply@blogger.com9tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2233378012529819224.post-18878040640347193152012-01-06T15:03:00.000-05:002012-01-06T15:03:44.544-05:00My Top 10 Movies of 2011*<span style="font-size: x-small;"><i> *even though I didn't see everything.</i></span><br />
<br />
<table align="center" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto; text-align: center;"><tbody>
<tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="http://bestmoviesevernews.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/12/best-movies-ever-thor-bridesmaids-posters-Summer-movie-preview-2011.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" src="http://bestmoviesevernews.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/12/best-movies-ever-thor-bridesmaids-posters-Summer-movie-preview-2011.jpg" /></a></td></tr>
<tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;">Just a collage. For my actual list, see below. </td></tr>
</tbody></table><br />
Hey Everybody!<br />
<br />
Welcome to "He Had on a Hat", 2012 version. We're in for another year of interesting, arcane, goofy and possibly (though probably not) insightful blog posts by the guy that writes this thing every week.<br />
<br />
I'm starting off the New Year with two tried and true blog post conventions: the Top 10 List and The Year End Wrap Up.<br />
<br />
Originality! Yay!<br />
<br />
<span style="font-size: x-large;"><u><b>10. J.Edgar</b></u></span><br />
<u><b> </b></u><br />
<u><b> </b></u><br />
<i>D: Clint Eastwood</i><br />
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><u><b> </b></u><a href="http://jrarcieri.files.wordpress.com/2011/11/j-edgar.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" src="http://jrarcieri.files.wordpress.com/2011/11/j-edgar.jpg" /></a></div><br />
J.Edgar is shot in wonderfully muted colours that give the film that distinctively nostalgic look of faded photographs, newsreel footage and even memories.<br />
<br />
J. Edgar is a biopic of unusual depth. One of the many dimensions of legendary yet reportedly a bit looney tunes FBI director, J. Edgar Hoover's personality explored in tin the film is the man's penchant for self aggrandizement. In particular, Hoover is called to task by his superiors regarding his "appearances" in radio programs and comic books. Given the era in which the the media appearances occurred, it place them, of course, right smack dab in the middle of Clint Eastwood's childhood years. All great auteurs revisit their childhoods via their films in one way or another.<br />
<br />
And that's the interesting crux of J.Edgar. The film may have an aura of glowy retro nostalgia but its insights into the past are much more grounded in an emotional reality. The film suggests, among other things, that Hoover was something of a paranoiac. It also suggests that the man's alleged homosexuality was so heavily closeted that even he himself did not even understand his own sexual orientation. <br />
<br />
J.Edgar's mother, whom Hoover continued to live with even while running what would become the most powerful law enforcement agency in the USA, is wonderfully played by Dame Judi Dench. Despite the excellent performance, the film does her character no favours. As is often the case with these historical biopics (especially in the case of ones directed by the more maverick auteurs like Eastwood and Oliver Stone), Hoover's conflicts and demons are all about mommy issues; everything is always the mother's fault. If that is true, then I guess the same can be said of the all the great films directors like Eastwood create.<br />
<br />
<br />
<u><b><span style="font-size: x-large;">9. X Men: First Class</span></b></u><br />
<i>D: Matthew Vaughn</i><br />
<br />
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEj1zZmOmJbLbpsnU9OT6VDhPEELrg62cL_6ezAWVGbYGDfmEXug2_TYIfOYPcwnc6IV6i-v3A-4YLA1TeLGHnubUW6fbne__VQiG_R7KiOsDm5Sn6RavDX3ei1HiiseYwppwFmGFwrX22s/s1600/X-men+First+Class+New+Pics+%25282%2529.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEj1zZmOmJbLbpsnU9OT6VDhPEELrg62cL_6ezAWVGbYGDfmEXug2_TYIfOYPcwnc6IV6i-v3A-4YLA1TeLGHnubUW6fbne__VQiG_R7KiOsDm5Sn6RavDX3ei1HiiseYwppwFmGFwrX22s/s1600/X-men+First+Class+New+Pics+%25282%2529.jpg" /></a></div><br />
Who knew a Mad Men/X-Men crossover would work so well?<br />
<br />
Casting Mad Men cast member January Jones as a young Emma Frost really helped the cross over come together. Though there needed to be scenes of Xavier and Magneto knocking back scotch and making sexist comments throughout there mission to really seal the deal.<br />
<br />
I can't wait till all of the documents surrounding the 1962 Cuban Missile Crisis are declassified so that we can learn what role mutants actually did have in the events that brought the world closer than it has ever been to nuclear annihilation. <br />
<br />
<br />
<u><b><span style="font-size: x-large;">8. Rise of the Planet of the Apes</span></b><span style="font-size: x-large;"></span></u><span style="font-size: x-large;"> </span><br />
<i><span style="font-size: small;">D: Rupert Wyatt </span></i><u><i><span style="font-size: small;"> </span></i><b><span style="font-size: x-large;"><br />
</span></b></u><br />
<u><b><span style="font-size: x-large;"> </span></b></u><br />
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="http://moviesmedia.ign.com/movies/image/article/116/1161176/rise-of-the-planet-of-the-apes-20110414031205800_640w.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" src="http://moviesmedia.ign.com/movies/image/article/116/1161176/rise-of-the-planet-of-the-apes-20110414031205800_640w.jpg" /></a></div><br />
<div style="text-align: center;"> <i>"Ape Shall Not Remake Ape"</i></div><div style="text-align: center;">-The <a href="http://apes.wikia.com/wiki/The_Lawgiver">Lawgiver </a>after seeing Tim Burton's 2001 attempt at a Planet of the Apes reboot. </div><br />
I was super skeptical than anyone could ever make the The Planet of the Apes franchise come to life again. Social commentary oriented SF movies with dark, depressing endings went out the day Star Wars opened in 1977. I never thought that a franchise so downbeat would ever play in the 3D blockbuster land of today's cinema marketplace.<br />
<br />
Yet it did. Big time.<br />
<br />
Rise of the Planet of the Apes was both a commercial and critical success, plus a really good movie to boot.<br />
<br />
Andy Serkis, the great actor who plays (via CGI motion capture tech) the Ape rebel leader Caesar, has, I must say, ended up in the weirdest bit of type casting in the history of cinema. <br />
<br />
Despite the best efforts of the Blu-ray special features to tell you otherwise, Rise of the Planet of the Apes is not just a reboot of the franchise but also actually a remake of the 4th (and some would say best) movie in the Planet of the Apes series, Conquest of the Planet of the Apes. Seriously. Go rent/stream/download Conquest of the Planet of the Apes and you'll see what I mean.<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<span style="font-size: x-large;"><u><b>7. The Way Back</b></u> </span><br />
<span style="font-size: x-large;"><i><span style="font-size: small;">D: Peter Weir</span></i></span><br />
<br />
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="http://www.mynewmovies.net/images/2011/01/The-Way-Back-wallpaper.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="479" src="http://www.mynewmovies.net/images/2011/01/The-Way-Back-wallpaper.jpg" width="640" /></a></div><br />
Peter Weir is da man.<br />
<br />
This Australian director has managed, under the radar in many cases, to make some of the most consistently solid movies of the last 35 years: Picnic at Hanging Rock, Gallipoli, The Year of Living Dangerously, Witness, Dead Poets Society, The Truman Show and Master and Commander: The Far Side of the World. Even his offbeat misfires like Mosquito Coast, Green Card and Fearless are fascinating movies. <br />
<br />
In his first feature film in eight years, Weir has added to the former and not the latter category.<br />
<br />
The Way Back follows the apparently true story of three men who escaped from a Siberian gulag in the USSR in 1941. Not only did the men evade capture but they ended up traveling, on foot, all the way from Siberia to India. Needless to say, the cinematography and the scenery in The Way Back is amazing as are the performances by Jim Sturges, Ed Harris, Colin Farell and <span style="font-size: small;">Saoirse Ronan. Of course, the sum of the film's great parts are all pulled together through Weir's impeccable direction. The epic journey movie has rarely been so well realized.</span><br />
<br />
<span style="font-size: small;">Though, I do have to admit that I was disappointed that neither Sherman, Mr.Peabody nor the eponymous machine appeared in The Way Back. </span><br />
<span style="font-size: small;"><br />
</span><br />
<br />
<u><b><span style="font-size: x-large;">6. Red State</span></b></u><br />
<i>D: Kevin Smith</i><br />
<br />
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="http://www.geekyuniverse.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/12/red-state-movie-banner.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="481" src="http://www.geekyuniverse.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/12/red-state-movie-banner.jpg" width="640" /></a></div><br />
I am super up and down on the films of Kevin Smith; some are brilliant, others are, well, <i>very</i> Kevin Smith.<br />
<br />
I approached this film with a fair amount of trepidation. As it turns out, Red State is quite possibly Smith's best film. It's also his biggest departure as a director.<br />
<br />
I was not expecting a sick yet quirky action movie with socially satirical overtones. Additionally, knowing nothing about the film going in, nor did I see just about anything that happens coming. I highly recommend watching this film if you know very little about it. If you do, well, I'm sure it's still good then too.<br />
<br />
One note to Kevin Smith: stay off the Blu-ray extras, k? Your egomaniacal hard sell rants just about undid all the goodwill you built up with such an intense, compelling and satisfying movie. <br />
<br />
<br />
<span style="font-size: x-large;"><u><b>5. Hanna</b></u></span><br />
<span style="font-size: x-large;"><u><b> </b></u></span><br />
<i>D: Joe Wright</i><br />
<br />
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="http://www.onlinetvcast.com/upload/movies/movie_330_thumbForVideoPanel.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="291" src="http://www.onlinetvcast.com/upload/movies/movie_330_thumbForVideoPanel.jpg" width="640" /></a></div><br />
Oh, man if I have to see <span style="font-size: small;">17 year old Irish actress Saoirse Ronan play yet another ass-kicking action hero in another Hollywood action blockbuster....geez, guys, come up with something new already.</span><br />
<span style="font-size: small;"><br />
</span><br />
<span style="font-size: small;">Like Red State, Hanna was unexpectedly good. It has both excitement and emotional depth to spare. It's basically a majorly ramped-up dysfunctional family drama with archetypical fairly tale overtones thrown in for good measure...geez, guys, come up with something new already.</span><br />
<br />
<span style="font-size: small;">When you've got a movie featuring hero who can take on </span><span style="font-size: small;">Galadriel and The Hulk both </span><span style="font-size: small;">physically <i>and </i>emotionally, </span><span style="font-size: small;">then you know you are definitely not dealing with your standard movie fare.</span><br />
<span style="font-size: small;"><br />
</span><br />
<span style="font-size: small;"><br />
</span><br />
<span style="font-size: small;"><br />
</span><br />
<span style="font-size: x-large;"><u><b>4. Another Earth</b></u></span><br />
<i>D: Mike Cahill</i><br />
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEifXmpLjOPdURWHTGq_ciJ0tTJJ56vytu7pmM64jt0cJcuHOCkLN71_mTSH87n-Q-nGQ_kEJd24GeMVoCdaoKfVvfgq8ZDSNv3MwX78uN8tw1V_4fcqPvGa7EZ8lZnq1618tlzpZEGEskNr/s1600/_home_filmfirs_seefilmfirst_web_uploads_assets_images_quads_fba0d84c9aea5f4879c7ead2ec2ea9f16696d289.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="480" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEifXmpLjOPdURWHTGq_ciJ0tTJJ56vytu7pmM64jt0cJcuHOCkLN71_mTSH87n-Q-nGQ_kEJd24GeMVoCdaoKfVvfgq8ZDSNv3MwX78uN8tw1V_4fcqPvGa7EZ8lZnq1618tlzpZEGEskNr/s640/_home_filmfirs_seefilmfirst_web_uploads_assets_images_quads_fba0d84c9aea5f4879c7ead2ec2ea9f16696d289.jpg" width="640" /></a></div><br />
Anybody who has been casually going to movies over the last 30 years may not realize this but you can actually make good science fiction movies that don't involve laser battles and giant bugs eating people.<br />
<br />
Another Earth is a very low budget film (much of it was shot in the director's mom's house!) that really demonstrates how character and basic human emotions can drive a good SF movie. In a plot line similar to Lars von Triers' Melancholia (which I have not yet seen), Another Earth follows the story of how the appearance of, literally, another Earth in the sky impacts the lives plain old regular folks living out their daily lives on Earth. It reminded me a lot of another low budget indie SF movie, Moon. Moon also showed how a really good premise very simply executed can get you long way in science fiction cinema. It can often take you much further than laser battles and giant bugs eating people can, that's for sure.<br />
<br />
<br />
<u><b><span style="font-size: x-large;">3. Bridesmaids </span></b></u><br />
<i>D: Paul Feig</i><br />
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="http://www.glamzzle.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/08/bridesmaids-movie-banner.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" src="http://www.glamzzle.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/08/bridesmaids-movie-banner.jpg" /></a></div><br />
K. Let's get this outta the way now. I do not like gross-out bathroom humour at all. It's not that I object to it or anything like that. Quite honestly, I have just never ever gotten what's funny about bodily functions. It leaves me cold is all. So, if I had been directing Bridesmaids, the famous "poo" scene that I've heard so many people rave about, would have been left on the cutting room floor, where, IMO, it belongs.<br />
<br />
That being said, Bridesmaids is a rare new comedy film that not only did I like but that stayed with me with long after I watched it. The humour is smart and, with one or two obvious exceptions, pretty subtle.<br />
<br />
It's great to see Kristen Wiig finally break that weirdo-looking and weirdo-acting character typecasting that has dogged her for -what now?- six seasons on SNL. To be fair, one of Wiig's strengths as a performer is playing quirky. SNL, though, often ramps up the quirk to the point where it obscures her real talent. That talent being Wiig's ability to play offbeat characters that are actually real people and not merely caricatures of general weirdness. In Bridesmaids, Wiig hits just the right balance between quirk and truth and thus is able to carry the entire film nicely.<br />
<br />
A Facebook friend of mine once wrote "Why can't Judd Apatow do for average looking women what he's done for average looking men?".<br />
<br />
I think that just happened.<br />
<br />
<br />
<span style="font-size: x-large;"><u><b>2. The Artist </b></u></span><br />
<i>D: <span style="font-size: small;">Michel Hazanavicius </span></i><br />
<br />
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="http://www.filmofilia.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/12/The-Artist.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" src="http://www.filmofilia.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/12/The-Artist.jpg" /></a></div><br />
It was a refreshing change to be one of the youngest people in theatre instead of the oldest, which has become de riguer to my film going experience of late. The Artist may be a film that plays only to the older cineaste crowd. My gut instinct, though, is that the movie is a bit more universal than elitist in its appeal.<br />
<br />
There is a lot more to The Artist than just it's silent film gimmick. Director <span style="font-size: small;">Michel Hazanavicius</span> nails the now over 100 year old silent movie genre and, like many great silent films, it is compelling to watch despite (or perhaps even because of) its format. <br />
<br />
It's a super freaky experience to watch a seemingly authentic silent movie and then suddenly see the faces of current contemporary actors. John Goodman is particularly good at playing the style of the film while still creating a grounded and nuanced performance. <br />
<br />
The Artist walks a particularly fine line between imitation, parody and actually being its own film on its own terms . Jean Dujardin's dog sidekick is one of the film's biggest risks in that regard. Somehow, though, the happy little dog fits almost seamlessly into the rest of the picture.<br />
<br />
<br />
<span style="font-size: x-large;"><u><b>1. Drive</b></u></span><br />
<i>D: <span itemprop="description">Nicolas Winding Refn</span></i><br />
<br />
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="http://www.moviescut.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/08/Drive-Movie-Poster-And-Trailer-2011.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="480" src="http://www.moviescut.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/08/Drive-Movie-Poster-And-Trailer-2011.jpg" width="640" /></a></div><br />
Drive is probably the most conventional film that maverick Danish director <span itemprop="description">Nicolas Winding Refn has made to date. Actually, it ain't that conventional a movie but next to Winding Refn's previous films like the acid trip Viking epic Valhalla Rising and the smaller more intimately violent full frontal male nudity epic of Bronson...well, you get the picture.</span><br />
<span itemprop="description"><br />
</span><br />
<span itemprop="description">Sure Drive may appear to be a standard Hollywood/indie action thriller on the surface. A stunt driver for movies moonlights as wheel man for any job that pays well enough but then soon gets himself caught in a web of mafia intrigue and betrayal. </span><br />
<br />
<span itemprop="description">But, as the woman who filed a lawsuit against Drive's distributors for falsely advertising the film as a "Fast and the Furious" type action movie will tell you, appearances can be deceiving.</span><br />
<br />
<span itemprop="description">Ryan Gosling continues his rise towards becoming that "that guy who is in everything now." Gosling's characters all have that fascinating combination of being emotionally withdrawn and almost expressionless while hiding a deep and complex inner rage. </span><br />
<br />
<span itemprop="description">Plus who knew Albert Brooks could be such a bad ass?</span><br />
<span itemprop="description"><br />
</span><br />
<span itemprop="description">Drive has that rare ability to aloof and in-your-face at the same time.</span><br />
<span itemprop="description"><br />
</span><br />
<span itemprop="description">I am quite serious when I say that I simply cannot wait to see what </span><span itemprop="description">Nicolas Winding Refn and Gosling (in the lead role) will do to the upcoming remake of the 70's disco sci-fi classic <a href="http://youtu.be/4WUUnc1M0TA">Logan's Run.</a></span><br />
<br />
<span itemprop="description">Is there a way I can just buy those tickets now? </span><br />
<span itemprop="description"><br />
</span><br />
<br />
<span itemprop="description"><b>Honourable mentions:</b></span><br />
<span itemprop="description"><b> </b>Blue Sunshine, Rango, Midnight in Paris, Hugo, Cedar Rapids</span><br />
<span itemprop="description"><br />
</span><br />
<span itemprop="description"><b>Dishonouarble mentions:</b> </span><br />
<span itemprop="description">The seemingly endless 3D fad.</span><br />
<span itemprop="description"><br />
</span><br />
<span itemprop="description">See you next week, He Had on a Hat-ers!</span>Terence Bowmanhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/04576129838447713151noreply@blogger.com2