Oblivion

It was tough this last week, avoiding several of the posts that sites I visit had on this film. I always want my first experiences with a movie to be as fresh as possible, and if I get a spoiler, or an opinion in my head too earlier, I'm afraid I will respond to the movie with someone else bias instead of my own. I could not stay entirely uninformed and still be on line, so I was aware that most of the other bloggers I follow felt it was a solid film, but all of them seemed to think it was derivative. Having seen the movie for myself, I can say that there are touches of other films, but I don't think they have much to do with the story. This felt pretty fresh to me and original enough to have me anticipating revelations without being exactly sure which way they were going to go.

Folks like me enjoy dropping names and gaining some cache from our familiarity with other films. You get to show off a little when you can say, "That's stolen from [fill in obscure film title here]. " In reality, the films being cited don't always have to be obscure to give the impression that we know what we are talking about. If the referent is well known, just make sure that the analogy is a fresh one and it will still register with others.  I can be as cynical as the next person but usually I prefer the role of sentimentalist. If a story moves me, or my eyes are filled with wonder, that is usually good enough for me. This movie succeeded at doing both of these things and that is why I can give it my recommendation. The plot twist does not have to be a blind side "Twilight Zone" original, it simply needs to make the story work and the characters matter more to me. The three main characters in this film, play out a series of what may seem inevitable outcomes, but there were some earned emotions along the way.

Victoria, played by Andrea Risebourgh, is a character that in the end is much more complicated than we are originally lead to believe. The set up of the story seems to imply a lack of depth on her part and the willingness to accept orders suggests she is merely a convenience for the plot. I thought there was a solid emotional journey and that the feeling of betrayal that sends this story in it's final direction was completely understandable from the perspective of the Victoria we meet. Her tears are not the manufactured emotions of programmed character, but rather a wounded soul who is in over her head. Tom Cruise manages to make his switch in loyalties reflect a dilemma rather than a mere awakening from a delusion. When he has to confront the same emotion after a stunning plot point, he sells it as a truly painful moment  despite his deepest emotions being awakened. In the end, Victoria does not turn out to be the love interest, but she is not a disposable character at all, and if we had to put our imaginations to it, we would see that she is more deeply effected than Jack is. This is the second feature in a row that Cruise plays a character named Jack, and it seems to suit him. He is subdued in the part but effective as a protagonist. There are two or three moments when his acting has to sell what might be an otherwise ridiculous story line. He once again is very reliable, and the star casting is undoubtedly one of the reasons for the movies success.

This is a science fiction film, so there are always going to be elements of the story that seem unrealistic. If there are plot holes, they don't intrude enough on my first viewing to take away form the suspense of the story. I like the twist and it seems completely real given the context we have been placed in. There may be some big picture questions, but when you are following the characters, those questions fade to the background. It helps that we are distracted by some spectacular design work for the world of the future. The devastated planet and the high tech living quarters and tools are wonderfully realized. Jacks vehicles and weapons are detailed just enough to make them practical while still having the cool sci fi look that I always enjoyed as a kid. The living platform that Jack and Victoria occupy, would make anyone on the West Side, jealous of their design and location. The concept for the swimming pool will almost certainly be on some billionaires feature list in their next house.

We are looking at a war film that begins by telling us that the war is over. Nothing is that straightforward however in a  science fiction film. Complications arise and the personalities of the characters drive the ability of the plot to develop. We learn that Jack is better at his job than he needs to be, and that his job is not enough for him. The crack in the facade escalates on two paths; his life with Victoria and the bigger issue of the film, the future of humanity. There are some nice revelations that tell us the real story. Some of them are contained in flashbacks, some are revealed in action and then, when we need it the most, some are shared through the sonorous tones of the great Morgan Freeman. He has a relatively small part but it adds to the credibility of the story to have his character exist at all. This was a very entertaining film, that told a story that worked for me and fit the forms of a good science fiction adventure. What elevated it for me a little was the level of conflicted emotions I felt for the characters of Jack and Victoria. The story finishes with a satisfying plot turn which resolves on aspect of the tale, and leaves the personal aspects settled on the surface but maybe frustratingly so.

The Dude Abides in Vegas

OK, it's not strictly speaking a movie post. I did not get out this weekend to a film (yet). We headed to the desert to the City of Sin, to attend a concert featuring a terrific actor (Academy Award winning by the way). Since the name of the band that Jeff Bridges plays with is inspired by a movie beloved by all film geeks, I did not think anyone would mind a little change up in the material today. We saw "Jeff Bridges and the Abiders" at the Santa Fe Station Casino and Resort. It was way on the north end of town, about fifteen miles off the main strip but well within our stamping grounds when we go to Vegas, since we try to visit the outlining resorts even more than the mega resorts on the strip. This was a venue we had not been to before but the casino was nice and the showroom was a perfect size for a show like this. There were maybe between 500 and 600 people in the audience. Every seat was withing hailing distance of the stage (which a few of The Dude's followers took advantage of, apparently under the influence.)

It's not just the fact that Bridges is an actor that let's me feel good about posting here, it's also that his set includes numbers from a several of his films. In at least two of those, he performed the songs on screen so there is an additional connection. Bridges band consists of his friends and fellow musicians from the Santa Barbara area. He has been a musician himself most of his life. He told the story of how his Dad pushed him toward acting. Jeff claims he told his Dad "I really think I like this music thing," to which he claims his Dad responded, "Be an actor and you can play a musician at some point". It was a charming story and indicative of the warm way in which Bridges embraces the audience with some familiarity and modesty at the same time.  He has of course played a musician, most notably in his Academy Award winning role as Bad Blake. The show featured at least three tunes from that film, including as part of the encore the amazing "The Weary Kind".

I do have to say that I was a little surprised at the number of canes and walkers that were being used by the audience members. The sixties generation is clearly not all as fit as the Stones are and many are moving into that stage of life where they are a bit frail. All of the audience however was enthusiastic and appreciative of the musicianship, with particular kudos and ovations for the lead guitarist and for the accordionist/steel guitar/percussion/jack of all trades man in the hat. Bridges introduced both of them but I'm afraid I don't recall their names and as I looked around on his website I could not find them. It is almost certainly there and I just missed it, sorry.

 

The above shot is from a show in Seattle last year, but I think the band is the same. I looked around to find some links that might make the show more real for any of you who are interested. There were at least two songs from "The Big Lebowski", the Bob Dylan song "The Man in Me" was nicely covered in Jeff's gravely but warm tones. Here is something approximating the way it sounded on Friday, this is also from a show last year.

The band also played a rocking rendition of the great Creedence song (and my personal favorite CCR) "Lookin Out My Backdoor."

He reminisced about several movie experiences between the songs. I would love to have been sitting around listening to the musicians jam on the set of "Heaven's Gate" or just strumming along on the guitar the last time he claims to have been in Vegas doing "Starman". He mentioned that one of his favorite lines from any film he has done was the line near the end when the visitor explains what he finds most beautiful about humans, "You are at your very best when things are worst." It was a touching thought given the events of the last week and reflective of his humanitarian attitude, and it came without preaching, which made it all the more inspiring.

Another song featured was one that he played the keyboard on, it was  from the film "American Heart" and it was written by Tom Waits, "I'll Never Let Go Of Your Hand." It was one of the slower songs of the evening but it was also very heartfelt and beautiful. I look forward to hearing it again. He made a point of sharing the names of almost all the songwriters who's work he was covering, especially his friend John Goodwin. There were three or four songs from this talented writer who appears to go way back with Jeff. There was a terrific, hard song that he apparently actually sings on screen in the film "Tidelands" from Terry Gilliam. I've never seen the film although I did hear some pretty scathing reviews when it came out. The song is an odd piece of business and I found a You Tube link for it as well so here it is:



I was most familiar with the songs from "Crazy Heart", one of my favorite films from 2009, a film like "Star Trek" that was neglected in the Best Picture category but made it's mark in two other categories. I have listened to the album occasionally over the last three years and the music is on my ipod, although lately I have depended on my Kindle Fire to hear music. The songs are mostly country based and that fits well with the bands work. They are focusing mostly on Rock/Country based sounds and the show was heavily influenced by Nashville sensibilities.

I'll finish this post with a clip put together by a fan, featuring Bridges singing the Academy Award Winning song and some photos taken at another event. If you are going to miss a weekend in the movie theater, at least let it be for an event like this. Back soon with more film centered posts.

Fogs Post on JAWS

On his regular feature "Movies That Everyone Must See", my pal Dan over at Fogsmoviereviews has a terrific article on the greatest film of the last half century. Enjoy.

42

With a hundred things to do this weekend, I thought at one point of skipping the movies and waiting until next week to see this film. Every time I saw a billboard, or poster or TV ad, I just could not wait. This is a film that calls for attention, it is about an important subject, and it is not afraid to wear it's heart on it's sleeve. Those are characteristics that compel me into a theater even when I don't have as much time as I'd like, and my instincts lead me in the right direction this weekend. "42" is the kind of movie that cineastes often dislike but the public at large consumes in mass quantities. The story has few surprises, the film making is sometimes obvious or even down right schmaltzy, but it works on such an emotional level that minor quibbles about hamfisted story telling are swept aside by emotional performances and the personal baggage that the viewer brings to the experience.

The story of Jackie Robinson, breaking into the major leagues, is a turning point in our cultural history. Years before anyone had heard of Rosa Parks, Martin Luther King Jr., or Brown vs. Board of Education, baseball became a pivotal moment in the Civil Rights movement. Robinson was on his own, standing up to the world as it was and simply asking to be allowed to play ball like any other person might expect to do. The movie focuses on the three years from when he was first considered as a candidate for the big leagues, to the end of his ultimately triumphant rookie season. This is a dramatic view of post war America, warts and all, struggling with itself as a moral leader in the world. I'd like to think that this film accurately reflects that struggle and allows us to take pride in the determination of a few men, black and white, who thought it was time for the world to change.

The movie starts by visualizing the  decision of Dodger President Branch Rickey, to seek out a black player for his team. It appears to be a calculated move, designed to build brand loyalty among the black fans of baseball, and the forward thinking Rickey seemed to know that it was destiny that the league would be integrated. As portrayed by Harrison Ford, Rickey is a combination of shewed business man and visionary civil rights advocate. He never comes out and acknowledges a motive other than building the best ball team he could, until an emotional scene when he confesses to having done less than he might have for another black player at another time. It's not a moment lingered over, but it does give us a little more motivation for all the trouble the decision ended up causing. Ford has always been an actor of great physicality.  I think ninety percent of his one performance nominated for an Academy Award, is based on how he squares his shoulders, raises his arms, and smiles or grimaces for the screen. In this role he may have more lines than any part he has ever played, even when he has been the lead. It is still his physical behavior that imbues the part with it's life. Here his back is bent, and shoulders slumped. He chews his cigar with the same fervor that he is chewing the scenery. He gets the most possible out of his gravelly old man voice and lets the special make up effects that are his eyebrows in this movie sell the rest. He is not the lead, but he steals every scene he is in and the performance is grand.

Chadwick Boseman is a bright young actor with a great future in front of him. He plays Robinson as a tightly wound spring, a man that has a strong desire to stand up and fight back, but due to circumstances he must bite his lip and keep his anger holstered. The story and it's emotional impact helps carry him through some rough patches. There are a few flat spots and a few over the top moments, but the actor manages to keep our focus on the story. The script sometimes requires a bit of the ridiculous, but that's the story of the country at the time. a giant in the world having to acknowledge the ridiculous racism that mars it's moment in the sun. Everyone else in the movie works very hard to show the kinds of people that were faced with these great changes. Some of them were brave, like "Pee Wee" Reese, who learns that his burden is nothing compared to Robinsons, others are cowards, backed reluctantly into playing with Robinson because their jobs were threatened. The most small minded of all are synthesized into two dramatic scenes. Alan Tudyk, portraying Phillies manager Ben Chapman personifies the deliberate hatred of the new, with a string of invective launched at Robinson during an early season game. Later, we see the contamination of an enthusiastic kid by the seeds of hatred planted by his father in the casual cat calling that went on during the season.

I am a sentimentalist, and the tears come easily when Robinson is embraced by his team mate in a show not just of unity but of self definition. The baseball heroics are fine, sports films need those kind of moments, but it is the small, sometimes obvious moments that really get to me. Robinson was not always perfect, Rickey was not altruistic, and the whole country was not racist. Separating the good from the evil is not a pretty enterprise at times, but it is comforting to think that when push came to shove, most of the country was anxious to push forward. It will probably feel like hokum to some viewers, and the movie will be accused of the usual faults of a story like this is. If people can get over their racist past, you would think movie snobs could temper their bias and just enjoy a great, uplifting story without having to deconstruct it through a narrow sociological prism. I was deeply moved by the story and the production values make me long for the days when the world was coated in hope, and promise. Maybe the vision of the film is an illusion, but it is one that we should be entertained and inspired by. I always hope every movie is better than the last one, but I don't know if any poster this year will be better than the one for this movie shown here. Let's play ball.

Jurassic Park Imax 3D

So why would anyone spend almost $40 to take three people to see a movie that is twenty years old and that all three had seen dozens (if not a hundred times)? That's easy, it's "Jurassic Park ", back on the big screen. I'd have paid that to see it on a regular screen without the 3D. The fact that we saw it in the third dimension and on a giant IMAX screen is just a bonus, although one of my companions did say that all viewing of "Jurassic Park" should be on IMAX, so everyone has to get a 70 foot screen for their home. That's not really practical but I know exactly what she means, this movie rocks on the giant screen. There were details that you could maybe see on a big TV, if you paused and looked closely. Here they are right in your face.

A few weeks back I posted on another bloggers post on this film, a brief story about seeing this twenty years ago, here I want to share the longer version of the story. We saw this movie with my friends Tim and Jamie Martin. My kids were little and we had my Mom baby sit for the night. We went opening night so it was packed because this was one of the biggest movies to open not just that year but ever. We only saw Tim and Jamie a couple of times a year, we went out to dinner, and then to the movie, it was a big deal. Sitting in front of us in a packed theater, were three or four twelve to fourteen year old boys. As kids at that age do, they started acting up a little, mostly just showing off for each other. I was very patient waiting through all the trailers for them to calm down (one of the trailers was for "The Flintstones" which was just a teaser and was not coming out for a year). Anyway, there was not another spot to move to, so I waited. When the screen goes dark and the "Universal" logo scrolls on the screen, John Williams ominous music cue starts and it sounds like a dinosaur, stomping through the dark. One of the kids sitting in front of us says out loud so the whole audience can hear his jaded attempt at humorous bravado "Oow,  scary!" It is at this point that I leaned forward and said to all of them, "You haven't seen scary until you've pissed me off. I don't want to hear from any of you for the next two hours!" In 1993, I wore my hair long and my beard big, and in the dark I probably looked like Charlie Manson staring at them. They shut up and when the movie ended skedaddled out of the theater shooting me nervous looks. i know that a lot of people these days avoid going to films in theaters because of boorish behavior, but unfortunately that behavior is not new, it is just intensified with the advent of the cell phone.

Now little kids for some reason have always loved dinosaurs, and mine were no exception. They begged me to take them to see the movie. They were five and seven. They were in fact small children but they were also very precocious.  I put them off for a long time but finally Jurassic Park was playing out at a discount theater for a final week, nearly six months later. We picked them up from school, and went on a late October afternoon when it would still be light out when the movie was over. I will never be a candidate for Father of the Year, and I am probably lucky I was not prosecuted for child abuse, because this is the second Spielberg film I exposed my kids to at way to young an age (take a wild guess what the first one was). Anyway they of course loved it and I thought they managed to get through without being too traumatized. It was only a few weeks ago that my oldest daughter, now 26, told me that for years she was worried about velociraptors  in her closet at night. And of course it drove my youngest to want to work in the entertainment business, the trailer at the beginning of this post is exclusive to the company she now works for.

Today, twenty years later, the movie is still terrifying and exciting and fun. The attack of the T-Rex is one of the best fright scenes in movies, and it goes on for nearly ten minutes. There is plenty to be impressed by, but when it is on the really big screen, and in 3D, it is extra impressive. Jurassic Park does not need to be in 3D to be effective, it's just a little something extra to sweeten the experience and make us want to go through it all again. Spielberg's trademark extended tension scenes are still there, his empathy for kids going through a divorce, and his ability to empathize with characters who are way over matched is what makes his movies more than just action films. Spielberg creates drama to go with the action. When I read the book back in 1991, everyone was casting in their heads for the main leads. I had always envisioned Harrison Ford as Dr. Grant and William Hurt as Ian Malcom. Sam Neil and Jeff Goldblum are now so much a part of the way I see this movie that I don't know what I was thinking. Goldblum of course has all the great lines and his delivery could not be matched by anyone. The extra reach of the T-Rex as it is chasing the jeep makes his line "Must go faster" even more appropriately understated.

I don't know if you will be able to see, but the theater we went to featured a real IMAX screen, not one of those Fauxmax screens that AMC tries to pawn off on the public. The screen drops about ten feet below the first row and towers over all the remaining rows except for the very back where the screen is only ten feet higher than the highest row. We sat three rows from the front, right in the center and it is easy to justify the extra travel time and expense to see the movie in this format.

Lovers of movies probably know the story of how Spielberg changed the way the movie was going to be shot after seeing a test real of digitally generated dinosaurs. The huge animatronic puppets that had been created for the movie by the Stan Winston Studios, did not go to waste. They are integrated into the movie very effectively and they look terrific. The eye work on some of those puppets is creepy and especially good at selling the illusion that these creatures are real. Phil Tippets stop motion animation doesn't end up in the film as far as I can tell, but you can visualize several scenes where it was probably going to be the tool they used until the digital dinos came along. Here is an L.A. Times ad that was run before the movies nearly twenty years ago that illustrates the relationship between these two techniques.



There have been two sequels to Jurassic Park and from my point of view they are both highly entertaining.  I fervently hope that the Fourth film, scheduled for next year in the summer, is also fun. I doubt that it will match anything in it's twenty year old ancestor, despite the improving technology. Spielberg is a producer on it, so there will be some standards applied, but the creativity that went into the original Jurassic Park is never going to me matched, it can only be imitated.

Evil Dead 2012

Preliminary comment...All kinds of Awesome. More tomorrow.

OK, I'm awake now and ready to let you in on my deep and analytical consideration of this complex and emotionally challenging gem of human drama.  Not really.

This is a straight out gore soaked, high intensity, disturbing shockfest. It is exactly what I wanted the movie to be. I came to the "Evil Dead" series a little late and I sort of hate myself for it. I remember seeing the poster at the "Alhambra/Gold Cinema" movie duplex back in 1981 and thinking that it looked messed up, but for some reason I did not make it out to the show. I saw a little activity from the film community when "Evil Dead II" was in theaters, but again I did not get off the couch and head to a cinema. Sometime in 1990, my friends the Yennys and the Rollinos, ended up watching "Evil Dead II" on video, I think at a Halloween party, and as John Yenny passionately defended his choice of film to others, I became convinced there was something there. At a comic book store near where I taught, they had "Evil Dead" on continuous loop and it was wild. I rented the two films and quickly became a champion myself. These movies were no holds barred fright films with a generous amount of gore to keep one disturbed for days. They also had a sly sense of humor, even the most serious of horror hounds was likely to appreciate.

Most of us who love movies rail against remakes, suggesting they reflect the bankrupt creativity of film studios who must pillage the past to find material to generate revenues. Over the past dozen years there have been dozens of horror films remade, utilizing the new technology available to achieve effects and then watering down the product enough to get a PG 13 rating to have a bigger audience. I don't automatically recoil at a remake, and there are a few instances where bringing the story to a new audience has resulted in superior entertainment. Those cases are usually the exception. This version of "Evil Dead" is one of those exceptions and a big reason that it is an exception is that the film makers abandon most of the tools of contemporary technology and go old school with their effects. There is no CGI blood in this movie, it is all on the set and the props and the actors. The blood soaked story uses galleons of crimson liquid to bring this tale to life (I love the irony of that sentence). One of my favorite things about horror films is the use of make up. In most modern films the make up effects are computer enhanced and I often feel like I am looking at a cartoon. You won't have that feeling here because the gruesome make up consists of brilliant use of appliance and prosthetic. When faces are mangled or limbs severed, it is all done in camera and it looks great. Rick Baker can be proud of the descendants he has spawned in this field. Tom Savini can sleep soundly knowing that his skills have inspired others.

"Evil Dead" practically invented the Cabin in the Woods premise of horror films. Typically a group of young people, isolated from the civilized world, are forced to cope with evil on their own with little chance of respite. A creative and successful innovation for this telling of the tale is to make this visit to the woods a serious intervention for a drug addict rather than just a picnic for horny teens. It makes it all the more believable that the cast would be slow to respond to some of the events taking place. In the world of the Evil Dead, spirits are possessed, the living are abused, and the only hope of overcoming any of it usually depends on taking the most extreme measures possible. All of that happens in this movie. I don't think it counts as a spoiler to say that most of the cast does not make it out of the story alive. In fact, most of the cast does not make it out of the story in one piece much less alive. The deaths and attacks are not morbidly lingered over like some torture based film. These events happen quickly, in a shocking manner and while they are sometimes disgusting, they manage to be scary more frequently than merely gross. Somewhere in my role as parent, I brought my children with me to the dark side. My youngest daughter (she is now 24), loves tea parties, Winnie the Pooh, Alice in Wonderland, and gore flicks. She and I have seen countless horror films in the last few years and have rarely been satisfied. Last night, she saw only half the movie, the half you can see from behind your hands or the jacket pulled up around your face. She pretty much had the same reaction I did,muttering as we walked out of the theater,"Oh God, Jesus, and What the f***." The movie was scary good and has everything you could want as a fan of horror films.

There are several tips of the hat to the original film. A close to the ground tracking shot at speed represents the evil in the woods. There is a vivid aural environment, ripe with tension and often mimicking  pieces of business from the earlier films. The trademark automobile of a Sam Rami film makes a guest appearance here. Over the credits at the end we are treated to the voice recording used in the earlier version of the film
to provide the exposition back in 1981(Bob Dorian, the host of AMC channel movies for many years and perhaps the inspiration for having Robert Osbourne host on TMC, provided the voice on the recorder). And if you are a real fan of the series, you will want to sit through the credits to get the one wink and nod that most "Deadites" crave the most.

A movie like this is not really subject to some of the same standards one might apply to other stories. When people are slow to react, it's not because they are stupid, it is just part of the order of things. There is not always a clear explanation or a sense of logic to the events. One character put it this way, when asked if he was sure if the action being planned would work, he said "I'm not sure of anything". That is pretty much the way I think most of you will feel, uncertain as to what is going to happen next. Eric, the same character also responds when David tries to reassure one of the others that everything is going to be fine says "Everything's gonna be fine? I don't know if you noticed this, but everything's been getting worse... every second". That's what we want from a movie like this, we want it to keep ratcheting up the tension, squeezing out the scares, and making us laugh at our own fears while cringing behind our hands.

Roger Ebert dies at 70 after battle with cancer - Chicago Sun-Times

Roger Ebert dies at 70 after battle with cancer - Chicago Sun-Times

While his political commentary in the last few years has frayed the edges of my respect for him, the legacy he leaves is enormous.  A pivotal figure in the world of entertainment for a position that is truly unique.

A Few Things I Miss At the Modern Movie Theater.

I just finished watching "The Cowboys", the great John Wayne film from 1972. I saw it on a very nice Blu Ray disc with an excellent picture. The movie was just as good as I remembered, but there were a few things that I had not remembered. To begin with, there is an Overture. For those of you too young to know what that is, or if you are not a classical music aficionado, an overture is defined as " An instrumental composition intended especially as an introduction to an extended work, such as an opera or oratorio.". Movies in roadshow presentations frequently had overtures. The curtains opened, the previews played and when the trailers finished, the the curtains closed again and then announced on a title slide "Overture". We are then treated to three or four minutes of musical themes from the score as people settle into their seats and anticipate the movie.

This was the second day in a row that I watched a film that includes the "Overture: as part of the video presentation. Yesterday I got to enjoy  Miklos Rozsa's fantastic theme music while the title card stayed on the screen the whole time.



In this case the overture was more than six minutes in length. The John Williams overture from "The Cowboys" is equally lengthy. The mood is set very effectively by sitting in a darkened theater with no other distractions and letting the emotion of the music sweep over you. It always seemed portentous to me, but I suspect it seemed pretentious to others. The practice made the audience focus on the movie and the presentation. When films played in roadshow presentations there were often substantially higher ticket prices and unique features to make that price acceptable. Nowadays a theater needs to take advantage of the time between the screenings to advertise to the audience. Some theaters still have slide shows that list local businesses, others have elaborately packaged show reels for movies, tv shows and other products. All theaters usually sell upcoming films through the use of trailers.

I have nothing against trailers, in fact they are one of my favorite parts of the film going experience. The trouble is that trailers are now treated as part of the advertising process rather than the movie watching process. Some theaters do not separate the trailers from the ads, some do not lower the lights all the way during the trailers. Revenue sources have to be exploited, the theater owner margins are so thin that they squeeze every nickel they can for popcorn and soda. So of course the extra time for an overture is going to be money out of their pockets.

At drive in theaters and double features which were ubiquitous in my youth, the break between movies was thought of as the intermission. The screen would sometimes countdown  the minutes until the show started up again. Often there would be ads for the snack bar similar to this:



I have seen some nice computer graphic promotions for the snack bar before the movies, immediately after the trailers. I don't know how effective they are since they are usually the last thing we see before the film starts. It would make more sense to show them five minutes before the trailers.

The two films I just mentioned also had an intermission. There is a dramatic sequence that ends with a strong music cue and then a title card identifying the break as an intermission would come on the screen. An intermission could last anywhere from five to twenty minutes depending on the film. "Gods and Generals" and "Gettysburg" are two films that had intermissions because the run time of each was near four hours. "The Cowboys" is only two hours and fifteen minutes but it still had an intermission. Anyone who has sat through one of Peter Jackson's Tolkien films would almost certainly have appreciated an intermission. The big roadshow films had an entr'acte music cue. A briefer recap of the overture to announce the start of the last section of the film. Again both of the films I saw yesterday and today had that feature. One last musical feature was exit music, that played after the credits but allowed people time to enjoy sitting in the theater as the crowd thinned and then knowing that they had really overstayed their welcome when the music stopped.

While there may be intermissions in some parts of the world during film screenings, the last major motion picture (the two Civil War Dramas mentioned earlier being relatively cheap TV productions shown in theaters) to contained a planned intermission appears to have been "Gandhi" from 1982.

While it has been thirty years since these kinds of presentations have been typical, it is only in the last dozen years or so that the process of opening and closing the curtain as part of the presentation has disappeared. With the advent of the multiplex, it seems that this pleasing feature of the experience was determined to be unnecessary. As far as I can remember, AMC theaters never had curtains on their screens. When the Edwards Chain was consumed by Regal Entertainment Group, all of the old theaters that they kept were remodeled with stadium style seating. It was at this time that the ritual of raising the curtain for the trailers, lowering it again and then raising it for the feature came to an end. It's too bad because again it really enhanced the magical experience of the movies.



If the above does not convince you, I don't know what would. I love seeing films at the El Capitan or the Chinese Theater because they continue to keep this tradition alive.

G.I. Joe Retaliation

I saw the first G.I Joe Movie a couple of years ago. I guess it was before I started the blog because I don't have a review posted. I do remember telling several people that it was "craptacular". It was loud, stupid, confusing and entertaining enough to fill a Saturday matinee and allow me to kill a bucket of butter popcorn. The sequel is just about the same. It is not a good movie but it is a good time. If you see it in 3D, it doesn't make it 3 times as good but it does make it more interesting and gives you some extra value for the effort that you made. Several scenes seem to have been planned with the express purpose of making cheesy use of stuff flying off the screen. Let's face it, this is a movie, based on a cartoon that was based on a toy line that was promoted on television. It has a lot pushing against it to begin with, if it manages to be enjoyable at all, that is something of an accomplishment.

My memory of G.I. Joe is completely different from all of the stuff that makes up this storyline. Check out this commercial from the toy line when I was growing up:



Somewhere in the early 1980s, the action figures got smaller, and the toy line got bigger. I remembered hearing speeches about how inappropriate it was that toy lines were creating cartoons that would serve as long form commercials for their products. "Transformers", "My Little Pony", "He-Man" and "G.I.Joe" were all cited as examples of this phenomena. It appears to have taken root in the consciousness of kids from that decade because they are now nostalgically returning to their youth and sharing it with their own kids. So now the commercials are not half hour television cartoons badly animated, but two hour motion pictures, almost animated and badly written. The cartoon like villains  in this movie put it in the same category as the "Transformers" films, they are action-fantasy films, and you can buy the toy. I still don't know why there are ninjas in the commando units but who am I to question the successful marketing of this product line?

The ninjas actually provide the best reason for the use of 3 D in the movie. There is a long sequence where two American Ninjas must fight against a whole squad of evil "Cobra" ninjas, and capture a duplicitous ninja who is somehow connected to the good guy ninjas. Read that sentence back, believe it or not that is an accurate description. Anyway, even though it makes very little sense, the ninjas repel down mountain sides, use zip lines and pitons to escape and fight on the side of the mountain.  This is all done in a way to allow the ninjas to fly off the screen, swoosh past our faces and then toss another bad guy off the mountain into the audience dimension. All that effort and the bad guy ninja, the cooperates with the good guys for no particular reason except some distant grudge that apparently is awakened by being kidnapped. At least we got to keep the cool customized 3D glasses.More collectible toys to keep the marketing gurus happy.

I did have a vague recollection from the first film that the President had been replaced with a "Cobra" agent. The best part of this continuity is that Jonathon Pryce returns to the film and lends it his dignity. How an English guy got elected President in the first place is a mystery, but I guess if we can have a President from Kenya, we can have one from England. (For those of you with no sense of humor, that is a joke, Do not take it as a belief in birtherism or Manchurian conspiracy theory). Channing Tatum was also in the first film, but it appears that the producer's did not realize how his career was going to take off. I heard that one of the reasons for the year long delay in releasing this was to put more of Mr. Tatum in the movie.  Joseph Gordon Levitt played the bad guy in the first film but I guess he didn't want to be back or was not going to get paid his current rate. He is replaced by a costume, and it is no great loss, he was almost not in the other movie either. Two stunt guy actors get pretty good parts, Rays Stevenson and Park. There is also a juicy part for Walton Goggins, Amanda's current crush. And the kid from Jurassic Park dies early.

The two biggest assets G.I.Joe Retaliation has going for it are Dwayne Johnson and Bruce Willis. These two guys are in nearly every movie coming out in the first eight months of 2013. Whatever they are not in stars Mark Wahlberg.  I have always enjoyed "The Rock" in movies, and I was never a wrestling fan. He has a good star presence, lifting even terrible material to at least mediocre. Bruce Willis is one of our favorites, but after the awful "Die Hard" sequel earlier this year, I was a little concerned. He seems to have awakened from that slumber (or given that the film was delayed, fallen into a slumber). Here his natural charisma adds to the film and he gets to punch in some energy without having to carry the film on his own.

If I had played with the later toys, I probably would not need a score card to keep track of all the players. No one is invested with much of a character except Johnson and Tatum, and their character comes delivered via video game, so you can tell how thin it is going to be. Stuff blows up, guns go off, swords get crossed and characters live on to fight in another sequel. I don't really care about any of it, but it was fine while I was there. I'm sure I won't remember much about it in a couple of weeks. I am afraid I do want to see General Patton's Ivory Handled .45s being used on the bad guys, that might be enough to get me into the theater three years from now, but nothing in the story is going to last long enough to anticipate it.

Olympus Has Fallen

Gerard Butler has been in some terrible movies in the last few years. His roles in "Phantom of the Opera" and "300" are almost a decade old now. So how does a guy, stuck in crappy romantic comedy hell redeem himself and return to box office success? The answer appears to be produce your own film, choose something that emphasizes the things that made you a star in the first place, and surround yourself with talented people who know how to make a movie work. The result is "Olympus has Fallen" an entertaining as all get out throwback to the action films of twenty years ago. This is the movie that "A Good Day to Die Hard" should have been.

Every few years we get studios battling it out with dueling films on similar themes. Back in the 1980s, two studios combined to merge Diane Fossey movies into "Gorillas in the Mist". Four years later there were two Robin Hood projects, one studio blinked and sold their product to television. Then there were matching Volcano movies and battling Meteor destroying the Earth films. This year we have two action films about an attack on the White House. "Olympus has Fallen" hits theaters first and sets a pretty high standard for action movie mayhem. The set up is pretty straightforward although preposterous. North Korean terrorists seize the President in order to gain political and military advantages. I get the impression from the trailer for "White House Down" that we will be getting domestic terrorists seeking a similar objective. I don't know how that will play, but it appears that Kim Jung Un wants us to believe this is possible. The North Koreans are acting in a belligerent and bellicose manner at this very moment, and the film exploits that behavior pretty well to make the premise somewhat acceptable.

The degree of firepower used in the take over of the White House in this film is alarming. The violence is brutal and there is a good reason that this film is rated R. The Secret Service and the D.C. based military units committed to defending the President's house are out gunned and the level of brutality was somewhat reminiscent of the last "Rambo" movie. Killing is indiscriminate and there are no rules of war being observed. If you are not up for a violent film then you better skip this, but if this is the kind of action that you crave, this movie will fill your plate. While much of the battle is CGI enhanced, there are dozens of extras and actors who take the stunts to the limit, flying through the air or having squibs explode their bodies. A lot of modern technology has been focused on this film. I have mentioned in some past reviews that it appears that Eastern Europe is rapidly replacing Korea and Taiwan as the leader in animated and computer rendered effects. There were several sections in the credits where every name ended with a v, usually an ov. Those that did not end with a v ended with an a. Bulgaria must be swarming with computer animators looking for work.

Butler plays a Secret Service agent with a bit of a history. We are shown his heroic nature and the nature of his failure early in the movie. The purpose of this is to add to the drama with the President's family and to raise questions in the minds of those dependent on him later in the movie. His character however, never has any doubts about his own ability. He never hesitates to act when needed and he behaves in a very consistent and aggressive manner in the film. This is how people want to see Butler, kicking ass and taking names, not trading banter with a series of actresses who can't carry a picture on their own. There are some good "Die Hard" type exchanges with the bad guy, and he gets to argue with generals and the acting President. None of the dialogue reaches the comic heights that Bruce Willis manages in the first four Die Hard" films, but there are a couple of nasty comebacks that give us some satisfaction.

The movie that this should most be compared with is "Air Force One".  The plot is simple, there are insiders who betray the President, it is one against many and the outside leadership group often feels powerless to act. There are plot holes that you can ignore because what is happening in front of you is more fun than noticing that there are other choices and options that the protagonist and the temporary command structure are missing. The cast is loaded with good actors who make their scenes work more effectively. Angela Bassett, Robert Forester, and Melissa Leo bring some gravitas to the silly goings on. Any time you get Morgan Freeman playing the President (Acting or Elected), you get some sense that people want this to be seen as something more than a cartoon. Dylan McDermott gets to return to work for the secret service, a job he had twenty years ago in "In the Line of Fire". Rick Yune plays the lead terrorist, mimicking his role in the last Pierce Brosnon 007 film. The poor guy seems to be getting a little type cast, but his acting range appears to fit the type so it's probably just as well that he gets to work at all.  Gerard Butler has some early scenes where he gets a chance to emote a bit, but once the action starts, he basically turns into the action figure that a movie like this requires. He brings enough personality to the performance to raise it above the level of a straight to video programmer. Aaron Eckhart plays the President and he is believable but underwritten. There are some nice sequences with his son that set up some more emotional points but it is standard stuff.

The action is staged energetically. Big fights and battles are mixed in with one on one combat. There are also several high tech operations and weapons that add to the suspense in the film. There are some good ploys by the bad guys to disguise some of their actions, but there are also several things that are left unexplained. It would be easy to knit pick the films plot and twists but why would you? If you paid your money to be entertained, you will be. If you wanted something that was logically sound, you will be disappointed, and you should have your head examined for wanting that from the film in the first place.  I also enjoyed the patriotic flourishes spread out through the movie. The Secretary of Defense defiantly shouts the pledge of allegiance, the American Flag is mistreated but ultimately restored, portraits of the Presidents are often shown in background shots and Abraham Lincoln makes a guest appearance and this time it's not vampires he is hunting.  This movie feels like it was made in the 1990s. The plot, action and tone recall the days of  the great action films of those times. This will be one of those movies in the future that are sometimes called "Black Hole" films. Their gravitational pull is so great that the viewer can't resist. (Thanks Dan for that term). If I don't see it again in theaters, I know I will experience it a hundred times on cable, and each time i will enjoy.

R.I.P. Uncle Vernon

Richard Griffiths, best known for the Harry Potter Films has passed at the age of 65. He doesn't look anything like Matt LeBlanc (Episodes Reference). I remember him doing an odd little dance in "Guarding Tess", it was a nice moment. Deadline Hollywood Obit.


And here he is in one of the Naked Gun films.

Wheelchair Mayhem



The Naked Gun 2½: The Smell of Fear
— MOVIECLIPS.com

W.W. and the Dixie Dance Kings.

This is a flashback to the original purpose of the blog. If you were unaware, I started this blog as a tribute to movies I saw in the summers of the 1970s, when I was in high school and college. This film was on my original list of movies that I could have posted on but it was not available anywhere. I looked on You Tube and found music clips but I could not find a trailer for the film. It's not some obscure film, it stars the biggest movie star of the 1970's, Burt Reynolds and it was directed by John Avildsen, whose next film won him the Academy Award, Rocky.

I saw this movie at the Century Theater in San Gabriel in the summer of 1975.

This is what it looked like in the late 1980s before it was torn down. As you can see after it closed as an Edwards Theater, it was re-purposed as a Chinese language theater. Most of the stand alone theaters in the area ended up in the same situation. The Monterey, and the Garfield, were both on the street that I lived on and they both showed Chinese language films until they were torn down or remodeled for something else. I know I saw this with my friend Don Hayes and his high school sweetheart and future ex-wife Cheryl Bolton. The movie featured car crashes and a special edition Oldsmobile 55, so that is probably why Don went, he liked cars. I know it must have been an evening show because matinees only ran on weekends and I distinctly remember going during the week since I did not have a job I had to show up to the next morning.

The movie is typical 1970s low budget fodder. Burt plays a good ole boy driving a fancy car, who takes a liking to a girl in a country western singing group. The movie is set in 1957, and there are some brief references to the rock and roll revolution that is taking place. The setting is the South, most of the time Nashville, because the goal of the group is to make it to the Grand Ole Opry. W.W. is a fast talking, small time crook who has managed to rob a series of gas stations without leaving much of a trace to follow. He accomplishes this by just being good natured and giving the employees a little kickback. Ultimately, it is his mode of operating that gets him and the band in trouble and high jinks occur. There are some car chases and crack ups, and a few songs by Jerry Reed and Don Williams.

Art Carney is featured as a Bible Thumping lawman, asked to hunt down the robbers by the head of the Company that owns the chain of gas stations Burt victimizes. This was his first role after winning the Academy Award for Best Actor the year before. So there is another reason that is a little odd that the movie is not really available. There is a pretty good payoff set up early on in the movie that let's the confrontation between he an W.W. get somewhat resolved at the end of the movie. The film also features Ned Beatty as a country star that writes hit songs and the band wants his help. There is a scene where they meet him and his down home charm is turned sour in a pretty effective way. In the end he redeems himself and it probably is as his character says, just one of the hazards of success. Beatty worked with Reynolds pretty frequently over the years and is featured in "Gator" and "White Lightning" two other films from the original project.

I happened to catch this just after it started on the Fox Movie Channel this morning and it was quite entertaining. There were two or three good little touches in the movie, like the two toned car, the approach that Reynold's character uses in robbing the gas stations and the Art Carney role. It's not essential viewing but it is worth a couple hours of your time if you happen to see it playing somewhere. I just am trying to plug some holes from the original project and this was a nice one to get to fill.

Happy Birthday Strother Martin

The legendary character actor Strother Martin would have turned 94 today. He is one of the most recognizable faces and voices from movies in the middle part of the twentieth century. In 1969, he was in all three of the great westerns that year; Butch Cassidy and the Sundance Kid, True Grit, and The Wild Bunch. Appearing in one of those films would be something to be proud of, being in all of them in the same year is amazing.

He worked as part of Paul Newman's troop of supporting actors repeatedly. You will see him in most of Newman's films of the 1960s and 1970s. He also worked in John Wayne films more than a half dozen times  in the same time frame. He frequently provided the comic relief in a western, or played an ineffectual businessman or crook. The parts he was known for on television and in the westerns was that of "Prairie Scum". If there was a call for a disgusting vermin from the plains or dirty desert or crawling out of the mountains, he probably played it or was looked at for it.

He was one of many Western Actors who would define the image of the old west on TV shows, but also bring home the unpleasantness of real prairie scum with a vengeance.  He starred with Raquel Welch, Ernest Borgnine, and Jack Elam in Hannie Caulder. The three villains were not just bank robbers who pulled their neckerchiefs over their faces, they were heartless, self centered cruel men who deserved the comeuppance that the will receive by the end of the movie.




His best known role was probably that of the Captain of the Chain Gang that Paul Newman serves on in "Cool Hand Luke". It is his voice that echoes the famous line that often defined the 1960's:



In my opinion, it was a great performance that should have been recognized with dozens of awards. It is however number 11 on the American Film Institutes list of greatest movie quotes.

Old-Time Hockey
Slap Shot at MOVIECLIPS.com

As you can see he was often the frustrated loser whol steals a scene and then moves on.

Below is an obituary from the Los Angeles Herald Examiner. Strother died the day before my wedding. He was my Mother's cousin and we expected him at the service. She knew why he did not come, and she did not tell me because she did not want it to overshadow the day. 1980 was not like today with a twenty four hour news cycle. I did not find out until Sunday Morning in the papers when we were on our honeymoon. This article was one of the ones my mother saved.

I can't say I knew him well. We visited he and his wife Helen several times out at their place out in the Agoura area of Southern California. I missed the funeral because I was on my honeymoon but we did go to see Helen a few days later and the house was filled with condolences from colleagues in the movie and TV business. I remember reading a very nice note from Lee Marvin that spoke fondly of the times they had worked together. My Grandmother's family had always called him Jay, I don't know if that was a nickname from childhood or if it was a shortened version of Junior. He was only 60 when he passed, and he was still an in demand actor with a pretty good cult following. One of the last things I saw him in while he was alive was the Cheech and Chong movie "Up in Smoke". He was only in it in the first five minutes but it was exactly the kind of film all my friends at the time would be going to.



A pretty good illustration of his cult status is the presence of a mural featuring his image in the Rampart section of Los Angeles. by world renown artist Kent Twitchell.

Last year I noticed it was his birthday by accident, this year I knew it was coming so I prepared this little salute for him. Actors are an interesting breed, we often feel like we know them when the only contact we have had with them is through the screen. Some actors manage to get under your skin and make an impression on you even if they are not the lead in the story. We know so many of them as "Oh yeah, that guy", it seems a shame that we don't get to know them better. Here's hoping that all the great character actors working today will be remembered fondly as well. I think Jay would have liked that.

Jay, my little brother Kirk, and me. Out in Agoura around 1966.

ALIENS

 

If you click the poster it will take you to the Vlog Page I have set up to put Video Posts on.

The Croods

The Croods is pretty much what you would want from an animated family film. There is a breathtaking visual palate, a family safe adventure, and humor geared to the little ones and the adults in your group. While it does not reach the heights of a Pixar film or  the the warmth of traditional Disney fare, it is serviceable and entertaining if not always memorable. This is exactly the kind of movie that parents want to be able to take their children to during spring break and the timing of it's release should insure that the movie is pretty successful.

From a story perspective, "The Croods" is pretty standard stuff. It is a coming of age story that focuses on a family of cavemen. Just as the oldest daughter is entering a rebellious stage, the territory of the planet is changing and newer smarter hominids appear and offer a threat of change but also survival. Of course the newest species is represented by a hunk of a cave boy who is threatening to the Dad/Leader of the family troop in a couple of obvious ways. This gives us a teen age romance and a middle age crisis all in one fell swoop. There are some contrived personal relationship moments but they fit with the theme of the film and while they may be cliche, there is a reason that cliches exist in the first place. Basically families are problematic but ultimately they are held together by the love that each member feels for the others.

We skipped seeing this in 3D but it looks like it might have been fun. It does seem to me however that in order to take advantage of the 3D  process, every animated movie is using some kind of sweeping swooshing flume ride style action sequence. Once again, as was true in a number of previous animated 3D films, characters slide down slopes, get swallowed by tube like caves and roll away on waterways to give us a thrill in visual dimensions. There is also a wide variety of flora and fauna as well as creatively designed creatures to keep us jumping and oohing and aahing.  James Cameron's Pandora has nothing on these imaginative animated images.

The character voice work is efficient. Nichols Cage is somewhat subdued since his performance here is animated and the over the top delivery he is often guilty of in live action films is moderated by this format. Everyone else was fine but not very distinctive. Cloris Leachman does the patented old lady routine that was the realm of Phyllis Diller and Betty White before her. Emma Stone does fine by "Eep", the teen age cave girl with more curiosity than her father is ever going to be happy with. Ryan Reynold voices the appropriately named "Guy", plenty resonate and future hunk-like. So many people contribute to animated films that it is difficult to pinpoint credit or blame for some elements. There are only seven human characters, most of the other voice/sound work involves animals and eruptions. I appreciated that "The Croods" did not attempt to live up to their names. There were no fart or poop jokes, and that is pretty rare for a kids movie now a days.

There is an early sequence that apes American Football and it seemed obvious to me that the Trojan Marching Band/Fleetwood Mac hit "Tusk" was being used very freely. It turns out that it was adapted by the film score composer and there was credit given, alleviating the need for a lawsuit except by Bruin fans who are unknowingly going to be subjected to chants of "U-C-L-A sucks" during this scene. Maybe that's why i ended up liking the movie as well as I did. The reality is that there were plenty of parents with their kids at the a.m. screening we went to, and all the little girls seemed happy to be there and all the little boys identified with the adventure elements. If it is a success, someone will plan a sequel, but I think in the long run it would be better for the reputation of the film if it stays a one off. The story does not demand any follow up and the creativity would probably diminish. Very much like it's stable mate "Madagascar ", "The Croods" is a well executed piece of entertainment that could overstay it's welcome. Let's just enjoy it for what it is and move on to something else next time.

Three Perfect Movies

 My memory of the 1990s is that it was not a great time for movies. That doesn't mean that there weren't great movies but rather the degree of consistency and the memorability of films left something to be desired. I'm sure this must be a false impression because there were so many films that I recall fondly from the times. It's just that the gritty seventies films were more meaningful and the bombastic eighties films were memorable. Truth be told, I can think of dozens of movies that came from the 1990s that I still love, OK cancel the first sentence of this post and let's start over.

There are so many great movies from the 1990s that people remember and that defined the times. "Titanic", "Unforgiven", "saving Private Ryan", it may be tough for you to remember some of the second tier films that really made the decade sparkle. I have been meaning to share my thoughts on some films that I have thought of as "perfect" since the day I saw them. "Perfect" does not mean they are the best films ever made or that they are of such superior production that all other films should get out of their way. For my purpose here, "Perfect" means that there is not a note in the film I would change. There is an absolute satisfaction that comes, for me at least, from indulging in any one of these movies. The casting, script, line delivery, scenario, music or set design could not be improved upon by any additional time, money, or technology.

The three films I am going to share with you here give me a warm glow in my belly, they put a smile on my face, and they make me long for the days when mid-level budgets and creativity were valued in the film community.

Number One on my list is my guiltiest pleasure. We have a western, starring Sharon Stone.

The Quick and the Dead

It is hard for me to explain to people that I love a Sharon Stone movie, much less a western that features her as a revenge driven gunfighter. Stone's career spent five years in the spotlight and she has been sliding down ever since. While never a critic's darling, she did have some worthy performances, but she became such a cliche of the sexuality of the times that she now mostly is a punchline. I still don't care, she was a hot woman with a gun strapped on her hip and she was trading western quips with some pretty great actors.

The movie is basically a spaghetti western without the need for dialogue looping. The premise is a direct homage to Sergio Leone's "Once Upon a Time in the West", with several other nods to the Clint Eastwood films of Leone as well. Listen to the music and you can hear both the beautiful melodic theme of the film but also the comic bombastic dramatic flourish that accompanies many of the scenes.



Listen to the last minute of the theme above and imagine the gunfighters stepping out onto the streets. It is perfect. I refuse to watch this film on any panned and scanned format because you will miss the reactions of the participants in the gunfights as they go on simultaneously. Director Sam Rami has a fetish with the camera and zoom dolly shots that just work perfectly in this movie.

The Quick and the Dead Features a cast that is just incredible. You start with Sharon Stone, then add the great Gene Hackman in a villainous role that drips of snake oil. An exuberant young Leonardo DeCaprio appears and he looks about twelve years old but plays it just right as a wanna-be in a town full of scum. Also appearing, five years before he became an international box office star in "Gladiator", Russell Crowe plays a reformed gunfighter dragged back into this quick draw contest. Watch for five minutes and you will know that he was going to be a sensation, it was just a matter of time. Oh, and Gary Sinese shows up in flashback scenes and classes up the film even more.

The story is repetitive because it basically features a series of showdowns in a sixteen person bracket gun-fighting contest.  The film succeeds because it makes each of the gunfights worthy and interesting. There is a twist, a line of dialogue or a memorable screen shot that will stick in your head and leave you able to distinguish each of the fast draw contests from one another. Be careful if you watch below, there is a mild spoiler but a great Gene Hackman scene and a good illustration of the gunfights that went on in the movie.

 

To this day, if this movie is on when I flip through the channels, I stop and I am mesmerized.  Gene Hackman is so perfect and this was the third or fourth western he did in the early 1990s.  "Unforgiven", "Geronimo" and "Wyatt Earp" all came just before this. Maybe the reason he stopped working is that there were no more westerns to make. I can't not look. This movie is a perfect homage to the western, a perfect performance from Gene Hackman, a perfect cast, and perfectly entertaining. If you disagree you are perfectly welcome to say so, as you stuff it.

Galaxy Quest

Every movie I go to see I want to be great. Most are not, a few end up amazing me, but I am not sure if I have ever been more entertained by and surprised by a movie than I was with "Galaxy Quest". It is a Science Fiction Comedy parody of "Star Trek" but at it's center is a heart as big as the galaxy. It starts out a little mean spirited and sour, but that is just so we can grow to appreciate how wonderful it is to be a fan and to be able to say that you touched other people with your work.

Tim Allen plays a Shatner like character who is full of himself but dismissive of the work that got him to that point. In the cast is Sigourney Weaver in a comedy performance that shows what kind of acting chops she really has (that and a blonde wig and a push up bra turn her character into something to wonder at). Alan Rickman is one of the most under rated actors of the last twenty five years. His character in this is hysterical and grounded so much in the real world despite wearing the most inane make-up appliances ever created for a weekly TV series. Rickman has never been nominated for an Academy Award, even for his brilliant ten year sojourn into the world of Harry Potter. He could easily have been nominated for this role if comedies were not so easliy dismissed by the serious world of film acting.

In the background of the story you have two of the greatest scene stealing supporting players of the last thirty years. Tony Shaloub can do comedy and drama with one hand tied behind his back. Here he plays it like he is a pot addled TV star with simply perfect timing. He is zoned out blissful in a way that never seems right except that it always works and gets the laughs that the story is going for. Earlier this week, I posted on a site that mentioned Sam Rockwell as one of the actors that you would see in anything. I'll agree and say that if you love Rockwell but have not seen this film, you may have missed his greatest role ever. He plays the third tier guest star that is clinging to what fame he once had but ends up living out the dream and nightmare of his one episode character. On "Star Trek" he would be a "red shirt", one of the many doomed actors who's character is not going to be coming back next season.

Watch this clip if you have already seen the movie, if not, save it for actually watching the movie. Some one on line strung together his best scenes, it is a few minutes of perfection.



What is so special about the movie at the end is that it take all the geeks to heart and treats the actors with the respect that they frequently miss but definitely deserve.  I laugh at everything in this film every time I see it, and I have seen it a lot of times. It is not gross out humor or cheap one liners, it is humor based on the characters and the story and it is so worth your time. Warning: Consuming this film may result in a life long addiction that will drain time away from your busy life every time the damn thing shows up on the satellite. 

That Thing You Do

I don't always know why a movie connects with me so much. I just know that I love it and I wish everyone would share my love for it as well. "That Thing You Do", is just Pop perfection. The characters, the music, and the love story leave me feeling as if these people really were a part of my life. I can tell you this movie is perfect as it is because I have an extended cut of the movie that makes the film almost half an hour longer but very much weaker. Tom Hanks wrote and directed this gem, and the editor he worked with prunes this film to a brisk focused piece of entertainment. I enjoyed seeing the extra footage one time, but I have never gone and watched it again because the theatrical cut is so satisfying.

Set in the summer of 1963, the story tells of the rise and fall of a band with a big hit. The world is full of one hit wonders, and this film shows why so many talented acts may have only one song to contribute to musical history. It also shows why we should appreciate the magic that brings together all of the elements that make a song work. It may be the hook, or a lyric, or the tempo, or it may simply be the times. Eveyone will probably be sick of "Call Me, Maybe". This film shows how you can exploit a song and still not ever tire of it. The main song is worked out and played a half dozen times in the story but each time it feels fresh and we get to be inspired a bit more by the creative and romantic hearts behind it.



I never played with a rock band, but I did do the fair circuit with my Dad's magic act, and he appeared on the Hollywood Palace, which is the show that the fictional Hollywood Showcase in this movie is based on. All of the show business stuff feels very real. Sitting down with the family to watch your family member appear on national television is exactly what we did in 1966. The TV trays and dinners were authentic as was the excitement. My older brother played the guitar and had the amps and speakers that these guys used in their early shows. The college talent show, the rock and roll all star theater shows and the fair circuit may be relics of the past, but they make us long for a less cynical time when playing for a crowd was the payoff, not the means to getting somewhere else.

Tom Everett Scott is clearly standing in for a younger Tom Hanks. Hanks still gets to be in the movie as the ominous but supporting Mr. White, the record company A & R man. Liv Tyler is beautiful and sweet and when she delivers her denouncement of Jimmy, it is heartbreakingly real. Just as Sam Rockwell practically steals "galaxy Quest", Steve Zahn nearly makes off with this movie. His goofy guitarist has the personality that the band needs. When Mr. White refers to him as the clown, I don't think it is dismissive. He knows that a band need personality. My guess is that Ringo Starr may have been the least talented of the Beatles, but he was the one with the most personality, that freed up everyone else. Zahn's  Lenny pushes the band to do new things, smash their way forward and do it all with an optimistic smile and a great laugh. 

There are another half dozen perfect characters in the story, the world weary cocktail waitress, the social climbing girlfriend, the obnoxious D.J., that all make the movie keep sailing. I especially like Guy's eternally frustrated father. Every line of dialogue uttered by the Dad is comic gold, laced with a little bit of resentment but a great amount of understanding. I don't know if Hank's own father was like this but there are millions of us out there that recognized that guy as our own fathers.  

If you can't find a couple hours of your life to watch this joyous miracle of a movie, I feel sad for you. Your life must be one of harsh hard work without the relief that comes from a few moments of relaxation. If on the other hand you do not work 16 hours a day or live in a shelter depending on the kindness of strangers to feed you, get up right now and find this movie. Put something in your life that is as perfect as your love for your favorite dog or cat, and see  "That Thing You Do". The only thing you have to lose is sadness.

Fog's Movie Reviews Need Your Support.

The nominations for the 2013 are about to open. My request for your consideration.

My favorite place to go to talk about movies with snipping limited to having a good time. Please support Dan's site and vote on the Lambs.

Stoker

When I first saw the trailer for this film it seemed like a horror film with suspense elements and an upscale cast.  Many who see it might describe it that way but after viewing it my impression is quite a bit different. There are very few horror elements, I don't think it is very suspenseful, and some of the cast is underutilized. Stoker turns out to be a film that holds us at a distance, sometimes wanting us to empathize with the lead character, and other times striving to have us repulsed by her. We never get a very clear handle on how she feels about the events that are over taking her life, and even at the end of the film, the story is ambigious concerning motivations and actions.

Many times during my screening I considered how much like an episode of the Twilight Zone or Alfred Hitchcock presents this reminded me of. We have a young girl, still in high school, who suffers the loss of her father but seems to be handling it by detaching herself from everyone else she is connected with. Because we come into the story at this point, it is difficult to understand if her reaction is shock or if she is one of those people that we all are learning to watch out for. You know the ones with no friends or social skills who plan elaborate killing sprees for no discernible reason? "India" is the name of the character, and there is not really any reason for her name to be exotic, except that it creates an aura without having to generate any story to go with it. There is another character named "Whip" and it seems that everyone is fine with the names but the personalities are not reflected by those names. It is simply an affectation and it was a little irritating when the two main male characters names are "Richard" and "Charlie". The story is hyper stylized in the way it is shot, and that is another thing that draws attention to the film instead of the characters. The story has a flashback structure and begins with a ponderous and thick headed piece of narration that almost sounds like poetry. It is "Art" not a story that is going to make this work if anything can.

There are a lot of beautiful shots in the film. Nicole Kidman's character appears in some scenes only in the mirror that our lead is looking into. There is another shot where "India" and her Uncle Charlie (Matthew Goode) are conversing, but he only exists as a shadow on the wall while she is speaking. A phone booth is fogged up for no barometric reason at all, it just makes the scene a little more unique to look at. The dead father was an architect and I guess that explains the easy availability of  five foot wide stone spheres that are perfectly round on the property. It's one of those movies where you feel like you are in someones dreams the whole time that you are watching events unfold. The two leads speak in a style that is hyper mundane, which sounds like an oxymoron but accurately describe the lack of passion that either of them exhibits until the last quarter of the movie. When emotions do begin to surface, they appear only on one characters face, the other remains bored and indifferent, as if continuing to live out a dream they have had before.

In a couple of instances, there are some flashes of emotion but since they occur in flashback scenes that give us different interpretations of what took place and seem to be entirely in the mind of only one character, those moments seem untrustworthy. Is "India" washing herself to get rid of blood, semen or is she simply masturbating for the first time? Each variation of the scene drives us further from anything that makes much sense. When the story plays out the revelations that are supposed to clarify what is going on, we can't really trust it, despite the fact that it appears we are supposed to know that this section is "true". Nicole Kidman's character is either a grief motivated zombie, a slut or an indifferent and distant parent. She sometimes accepts the things that are being said and at other times ignores them. When she gets her final scenes with Goode, I wondered how she could be so smart and so gullible at the same time. The end of the movie comes with a totally unnecessary act by "India" after a totally necessary action. Like I said earlier, the tone of the movie is a bit bi-polar when it comes to her character.

There are some disturbing moments in the background story, and some pretty gruesome moments of violence during the rest of the tale. The Hitchcock reference to "Shadow of a Doubt " is clear enough but the story stays so ambiguous and mystical at times that I mostly did not care. Mia Wasikowska was solid in "Lawless" last year, but is playing it so low key in this film that I could not tell if it was a performance or narcolepsy. She is supposed to be smart but there are no signs of that, she is supposed to be a proficient hunter, but that is told to us rather than shown to us. That she has some special way of seeing the world that she shares with her Uncle Charlie is put into background narration but not really demonstrated. The fact that a spider crawls between her legs into her crotch is creepy, but not because of anything happening during the story, just because it is creepy. I just failed to connect with this movie on so many points and I am disappointed as a result. I can't recommend it, but I would not pull you away from it if it interests you. In the end it did not move me as much as it irritated me.