Kubrick Day at KAMAD

The Los Angeles County Museum of Art has had a featured exhibition of Stanley Kubrick material and unfortunately it ends this coming week. I've been meaning to get to it for several months and of course I waited until the last week of the exhibit, but I did manage to get over there and had an amazing time looking at artifacts from all of the Kubrick films and some other projects as well.

The entry had a series of film sections from his major motion pictures, with some words from artists, critics and Kubrick himself. We scrolled through the dozen or so bits in about twenty minutes and then made our way into the entry hall which features a number of cameras and movie posters. I of course would be happy to have this wall to display in my home.

There was a room dedicated to his work as a very young photographer, primarily for Look Magazine. Several shots were on display that featured Hollywood connections and there were scrap books of magazine articles featuring photos he had taken. The first photo that he received a professional credit and payment for was a shot of a sad faced news vendor, as he looks over the headlines on the papers announcing the death of FDR. There was also an elaborate set of materials that he had put together for an abandinde project on the Ghettos of Poland from the time of Nazi occupation. The amount of work he put in to simply move on was incredible.

The gallery did not seem to be organized in any chronological fashion, it did seem to flow very smoothy through all of the film projects although some clearly received more attention than others. The section on his last film, "Eyes Wide Shut" felt to be the slimmest, although reading his words and looking at the background material, I think i might appreciate the film more the next time I see it.

High on the wall was the helmet worn by Private Joker in "Full Metal Jacket". There was also a model helicopter that had been used in the production. Each section had elaborate versions of the script with Kubrick's very detailed notes on everything in the scene. His planning was clearly meticulous. The history of each production was described, especially interesting was the display of some of the original source material. In the case of this film, there was a paperback version of the novel that started Kubrick on the movie. 

The exhibit was not thin but it was less in the works from the 1950s. His two collaborations with Kirk Douglas had large photos and detailed shooting material. "Paths of Glory" is probably the first of his masterpieces and the themes were nicely described by the curators of the exhibit. "Spartacus" was not his project, in fact he came on after shooting had started and the first director had been dismissed. Kubrick added some much needed battle scenes and the sequence where the Romans watch Douglas and Woody Strode fight for their pleasure and they can hardly be bothered to pay attention, was clearly a Kubrick shot. We see the battle from over the shoulders of the viewers as they chat and gossip. It looks like a view from a window with people sitting on a couch in front of the frame. It was the only film he made where he did not have total control over the picture and he viewed it as something of a disappointment.

Lovers of Horror would have enjoyed the way the axes were displayed from "The Shining". They were basically buried into the wall as if Jack Torrance had just tried to take us out. The dresses from the two little girls were hung up next to each other, just as if we were Danny and came up on them on our tricycle. There were some interesting letters from Saul Bass, who was pitching advertising ideas and poster artwork. While Bass was enthusiastic, we can see Kubrick's notes on each sketch and he did not like any of them. There was also a model of the maze from the end of the film and a description of how it was shot. The highlight of that room however had to be the typewriter that was actually used in the film and contained the page with the script that clearly gives away the insanity that has taken over Jack Torrance.

There were two long rooms displaying material from Barry Lyndon, including costumes and the evolution of the script. The other element of the second room was the amazing collection of material that Kubrick had put together to create a film about Napoleon. It may well be the greatest movie never made. I know that the work was immense, he had his own card catalog drawers for the reference works he had accumulated.

There was a small alcove room that was playing a series of film clips and highlighting the music that was used in the films. It was a little claustrophobic, and while it was interesting, I did not stay through the whole loop . To gain entry to that room, one had to move through the section that featured material from "A Clockwork Orange". There was a series of newspaper articles about a British man who had modeled his behavior on the droogs from this film. Kubrick had defended the movie vigorously from criticism over the violence, but after the events that occurred in the real world he held the movie out of circulation in Great Britain for many years after. In another display, one shelf over were all the mock up newspapers from the film, covering "Alex" and his trials and subsequent rehabilitation. It was an interesting contrast to see the two sets of news right next to each other.

The details of the shoot were highlighted by a series of pictures from the set from the attack on the couple by Ale and his gang. The music sequence from this film that I did watch in the side room featured the treatment which of course involved the score by Beethoven.

I can't quite remember which section featured the discussion of "red" in Kubrick films. The color has a distinctive role to play in the films, and the significance was indicated by a series of shots from the various films that showed how the color was being used. The clothes that are cut off of the victim in Clockwork and the blood on the wall behind Private Pyle are two of the examples.









There was a passageway from the Clockwork Orange displays to the Barry Lyndon rooms that featured the film A.I., which Kubrick had long planned and then passed off to his friend Steven Spielberg. The drawings that went into the visualization of the movie clearly illustrate why he took so long to get the film started. He was waiting for technology to catch up with his vision. Most of the drawings were from the 1980s and the film did not get made until after Kubrick's death in 1999. It was released in 2001.

To the right here is a close up of a miniature set reproduction of the War Room from Dr. Strangelove. It looks amazing and you should know that the chairs around the table are about the size of a paperclip. The screens in the display were actual scenes on display from the screens in the movie. The technical material here was the most involved in the exhibit. Cameras and lenses and small script elements made up most of the display. It was on one end of the entry gallery and right next to it was the material on Lolita. There were a number of photos frames of Sue Lyon in costume and on the set. They were all in color and a magnifying glass on a fixed rail allowed the viewer to scroll down the line examining them in much the way a director or photographer like Kubrick might have in making tiny decisions about costumes, make-up, props and lighting.

Friday night, I re-watched 2001:A Space Odyssey in anticipation of the trip to the LACMA. I was sure glad I did because the highlight of the exhibit for me was the material presented on what I think is his greatest film and certainly my favorite Kubrick film. There were two sections of space devoted to the 1968 epic, it included a replica model of Discovery hanging from the ceiling as well as costumes and masks worn by the performers in the "Dawn of Man" sequence. In the center of the first room were pieces of furniture found on the orbiting space station visited by Heywood Floyd on his way up to the Moon.

There was an interesting discussion of how futurists and designers from a number of big companies contributed suggestions to make the vision more real. I find it interesting that at least two of those companies, Bell Telephone and Pan Am, no longer exist and did not make it to 2001. Frank and Dave do seem to be absorbed in their i-pads while on Discovery, so it is not clear to me why IBM did not hit that technology before Apple did. There was a film clip that I saw on some other material explaining the process by which the circular section of Discovery was rotated to produce the effect of the astronauts walking in a vertical circle at times. The actual helmet used by Dave Bowman was on display and it had an interesting front projection display to put the actor in the helmet along with some of the visual effects from the film.

The most startlingly beautiful thing I saw in the whole exhibit was a miniature reproduction of "God's" white room from the end of the film. This model was suspended above the crowds heads, thus requiring us to look up to see it and leaving many patrons in slack jawed awe as they stared into space.  The Monolith is clearly visible in the center of the room It was a very dramatic piece of design for the curators of this project, and I was lucky that it was among the final things I came across.




I don't know if this exhibit is touring, if you see it in your local museum be4 sure to take the time to visit. Anyone who admires the work of one of the greatest film directors of all time will feel privileged to have spend even a small amount of time in the shadows of his genius. I know that is how I feel.

KAMAD VLOG on Sean Connery Double Feature

This is the End

I must begin with a confession. I have never been a pot smoker, I am not a drinker, I feel self conscious about the use of foul language and mocking religion seems to be a bad thing from my point of view. Having said that, this movie plays on all of those concepts and it is pretty damn funny, even to someone like me who generally does not "party" like all the actors being portrayed here. I know enough about Hollywood and how it works and while I don't follow any scandal sites, I do have a average persons knowledge of some of the characters here. If seeing Michael Cera mock the degree to which he is despised, or Seth Rogan re-evaluate some of the choices he made sounds funny to you, this is the flavor you are looking for.


There is a simple concept behind the movie, what would the end of the world be like for a bunch of pot addled Hollywood types? If the Apocalypse is anything like the Bible forecasts, it is not going to go well for most of them. This is a combination of religious philosophy and bomb shelter mentality. Ideas that were explored on the Twilight Zone fifty years ago are revisited here with the added twist that most of the characters don't have much moral fortitude to begin with. Some thoughtful moments of human wisdom are combined with desperation to survive and the result is hilarious. As the characters begin to subvert their friendships, exploit each others weaknesses and look for redemption at the same time, they explore what is truly funny about being molested by demons or consumed by the fires of hell. Let me assure you it is damn profane.

All of these actors come from a school of humor that basically puts no limits on the kinds of things a person can say about another person, even if the end of times is not present. They s@*t talk each other and say the most vile things when they are simply high, it is not that much worse when all hell breaks loose, except that now we can add on violence and screaming and the kinds of slapstick that might seem pointlessly childish without the story set up.I don't get the feeling that many of them are acting, they seem to be themselves. That does not mean that they are the way they are portrayed in the story, but that they speak in their normal rhythms and pitches, they have the same vocal qualities that go along with being a member of the group. James Franco is an enthusiastic head case, Seth Rogan is a cool dude who is a little too needy, Jay Barucel is an awkward outsider who fits in the group but is not sure why, Jonah Hill is the nice guy who could just be faking it, Craig Robinson is funny but a little insecure and Danny McBride is the cocky self centered egoist without a real sense of worth. I said all of that in the politest way possible, they will say the same things in the most horrifyingly honest way you can imagine and you will probably be like Seth when the tigers showed up in "Gladiator".

There are dozens of cameo appearances by stars great and small. TV personalities seem doomed to die early and movie co-stars get slightly bigger exits. I'd have to see it again to see what happened with a couple of the personalities that are at the party at Franco's house when things start going wrong. There are also some late surprises that are worth a giggle and a guffaw or two. I would consider seeing a couple of the film projects that get some time in the movie. There is a sequence where Franco and Rogan talk about a sequel to "Pineapple Express". Neither of them has any idea of what the story should be but they are high and in love with the idea. This movie was probably written the same way. No one knows what it is all supposed to be about, but there has to be some funny material here and they will just run with it.

"This is the End" is another in a long line of films made by these actors over the last ten years or so. Clearly they feel some degree of friendship for each other, these movies are not star turns, they are joke fests. It seems no one wants to be left out even if they end up looking like a douche. It is an acquired taste and I cannot recommend it to everyone, but if you have a high tolerance for dope humor, gross out comedy, silly situations and have enjoyed any of these performers in the last few years, you'll probably like this movie. My biggest laugh was based on the amount of blood that gets sloshed out of a severed head. If that does not sound funny to you, stay away. If you are under thirty, a pot smoker or just have a twisted sense of humor, go for it. The worst that can happen is that you are damned to hell.

Man of Steel

The much anticipated Superman reboot is here, and as well as being much anticipated, I suspect it will be much debated. This version of the strange visitor from another world is likely to provoke enthusiasm from many but disappointment from others. It looks to be a huge winner in the summer box office race, but whether it will command the respect that the Christopher Nolan Batman reboot managed to get is questionable. I come from a perspective far outside of the comics. My world of Superman experience is limited to the 40s era cartoons, the 50's era television show, the 70s era movies, and the early nineties TV adaption. I have no axes to grind based on Smallville or from the many variations of Superman that have apparently populated the comic book universe. I will freely state that my bias is strongly toward the version embodied by the late Christopher Reeve, and therefore my assessment of this film is likely to involve measurement by that standard.

Let me start with those things that I liked about this movie: Russel Crowe, Kevin Costner, and Diane Lane. Just about every scene they were in was worth the price of admission. Crowe is the hopeful scientist father that plans to save his son and the legacy of Krypton by sending his child to Earth. He is poet, warrior and visionary to the family he is trying to save. The opening section on Krypton features the kinds of fantasy elements that ought to make anyone with imagination drool. There is technology that morphs substances into objects to interact through, there is a complex genetic system that both strengthens and weakens the Kryptonians at the same time. A military coup is frustrated while the planet comes crashing down. Crowe is a super hero himself in the opening scenes of the movie. He steals vital information, he daringly stands up to his oppressors, and he has a solid throwdown with the General who is trying to save Krypton by means of conquest rather than peace and science. We don't get the discovery of young Kal-el by Johnathan and Martha Kent, but we do get to see the legacy that they try to create for their adopted son. Ma Kent played by Diane Lane seems to have the greatest influence on Clark at a young age, but Costner's Johnathan Kent is the moral center of the film. He trains Clark to control his impulses, choose his battles and learn to understand good from evil. Costner is terrific as the kind of thoughtful and decent man that was exactly right for Kal-el to model himself after here on Earth. It may be the basic nature of the character, but Glen Ford was one of my favorite things about the 1978 Superman, and Costner lives up to that memory very well. His greatest moment involves saving the dog and his adopted son at the same moment. It is a moment undermined by the story structure.

The story of Clark's development is actually told through a series of flashbacks rather than in a linear narrative. This allows that part of the story to intrude at key moments in the film. We can understand a choice that gets made by a reference to an earlier experience. I understand that it is a creative story telling technique, but I think it undermines the emotional arc of the character.This is the beginning of the problems I had with the movie. The character of Clark Kent is introduced in intermittent sequences and just when we begin to relate to him, boom we're in another part of the story. Jor-el returns in electronic visual form at several points in the story and is almost as impressive as a hologram as he was as a real person. The reveal when Clark discovers his genetic father is undermined by the laying on of the Louis Lane story at that point. This movie is trying to cover a lot of territory so that by the end we will be caught up and ready for the confrontation with the forces from Krypton that threaten the planet. The presence of the flashbacks make the movie feel almost like a time travel story,because characters don't stay down and events change instantaneously. I got used to the experience but I still feel as if emotions are undermined by the way things get played out in the non-linear format.

General Zod was another thing about the movie that I liked. The character is played true to his genetic programming, and as a result, despite the heinous nature of his acts and plans, there is a logic to it that is understandable. Michael Shannon is not in over the top villain mode, his goal is actually a noble one despite the immorality of his means. The absence of the megalomania that drove Zod in the previous films will probably feel like a cheat and a let down to those wanting the face off between the two refugees to be more satisfying. It is a touch of consistency that when the confrontation is resolved, there is more mourning than there is satisfaction. This brings us to the major complaint I have about the film. It is serious. It is so serious that it drives most of the joy out of the movie. There is not really any humor, the love story is almost non-existent and there are no pieces of business that are designed for the audience to be entertained by a movie, everything is in aid of the story that has been created. When super beings engage in fisticuffs it is natural that there be damage. The damage of a single blow by one of the combatants however, is the equivalent of a 9/11 event. Buildings crash and collapse. Explosions rise hundreds of feet into the air. Thousands of people will be displaced and thousands more will die, even though we will not see them do so and the only sense of threat to humans that we get at this point is limited to five or six characters. I know it was cartoonish to have the bad guys flung into a Coke Ad in 1980, but the laughter was real and our sense of adventure was spirited fun. This movie makes the Herculean task feel exhausting. As a comparison, last year in "The Avengers" the attack that takes place in New York City is also massive in scale, but there are moments of humor, threat, relief and joy built into those sequences. Here Kal-el and Zod are brutally trying to off one another and the rest of the world be damned. Only in a final moment is there a hint of the humanity that is needed to make this confrontation work. It is a grim, realistic vision of a battle between super beings, but it is not much fun despite all of the spectacle.

There is are two references to Kal-el being Superman. One of them is partially muted, the other is the closest that they come to having a joke in the movie. Neither is satisfying. I think Henry Cavill is effective in the role, he looks the part and except for one moment of youth based ingratitude, that he quickly regrets, he is a noble character. In this film he has become the image of Superman that most people who like other comic book characters always fault him for. He is boring and mostly without fault. I know some criticized the 2006 reboot attempt for making Superman a bit of a loser. Yet, even a loser has some personality, our Superman here is nearly a cypher. We will be able to project what we want on him, but the story tellers are not giving us much to go on. This is a solid film with many qualities to admire. It is simply not the entertainment that I was hoping for. I liked it a lot, but any love I have is tentative at the moment. I may feel more passionately about it when I see it again. I don't use a rating scale for movies because I want people to understand why I feel a certain way about a movie, not just that it scores a certain number. When I post on The Lamb, a scale is required. If you want to see it, head over there and you can evaluate for yourself. If you are already buzzed to see the movie, then anything I have to say should not dissuade you. If you have no intention of seeing it, maybe I can get you to reconsider. The end of the movie promises more interesting things and a little more fun. I wish all of the movie had that going for it, but It has a lot of other things to recommend it for regardless.

Bond Posters Addendum

Another blogging pal has posted his own list of Bond Posters, and generously included my comments on some overlapping choices. If you get a chance, go by and visit, here is the link:

http://le0pard13.com/2013/06/12/ebm-oo7-posters-a-top-13-list/

Saul Bass Google/Doodle

Just in case you missed it last month.

The Internship

When I saw the first trailer for this movie, I was a little concerned. It looked like Vince Vaughn and Owen Wilson were trying to survive on the vapors of past success. Time marches on for all of us and the idea of these two making a raunchy comedy seemed a little distasteful. As it turns out there is almost nothing raunchy about this. It enhances the story that these two are a little long in the tooth and it plays like a more straightforward comedy from the 1990s, with a newer subject but the same mixture of humor and heart that was so typical of that era. This is much closer to "Dodgeball: A True Underdog Story" than to "Wedding Crashers". As a result it is a fairly easy film to recommend to a wide audience. Last summer I could smell the stink on "The Watch", and I avoided it, this year, I was suspicious but I am really glad I did not turn my nose up at it.

The setup is something anybody of a generation from before 1990 will be able to relate to. The world has changed, and while you might have a good skill set, it may not be the one that anyone is looking for anymore.   Nick and Bill are sales guys who have a great personal touch but are antiques in the modern age of communication. It seems strange to think that guys like this are old school, but since that was the name of one of the early hits for Vaughn, maybe it is correct. This is basically a fish out of water story, and as such it comes down to how willing you are to believe that the fish can master a new environment. There are a couple of cheats just for laughs. I think guys in their forties are going to know who the X-Men are and would not fall for the joke that is teased in the trailer. One of them even makes a more current pop culture referent to "The Hunger Games". So they are not totally out of touch.  Someone savvy enough to do a Google Hangout for a job interview is likely to know of "Instagram". Other than a couple of short cuts like that the film manages to be pretty realistic in setting up the characters at the internship they manage to get with Google. Programming and engineering are not their strong suit and so the movie plays best when showing them struggling with the technical side of the job.

Everyone on their intern team becomes a dutch uncle, pointing out their weaknesses. There is a snotty rival team member who discourages one character so much that the obligatory plot complication in the last act seems pretty reasonable. Outsiders are vulnerable to self doubt, although the Vince Vaughn character of Bill, seems like the least likely of the two to give into it. Some good seeds were planted early on so it is not a complete contrivance. We get some nice background bits without having too much of the characters played by Rob Riggle and Will Farrell. Riggle gets enough screen time to be mildly disturbing but not so much that you wish the part was gone from the film. Farrell on the other hand, brings the movie to a complete stop in his brief time on screen. The scene is needed for us to believe that Wilson's character would go along with Vaughn, but Farrell does his usual scream acting. He seems to believe that louder is funnier. In fact it is just irritating. He has become a parody of himself instead of an interesting personality. Vaughn and Wilson are doing some of the same stuff they have done for years but they freshen it up, and actually try to make it work for the story. It is an interesting contrast in the development of their careers.

I'll tell you who this film will not work for: hipsters. It is too conventional and the characters are too grounded to satisfy the desire for the new and innovative. I on the other hand appreciate a story that is well crafted, even if it is derivative. The construction of a good meal starts with solid ingredients, and a good recipe. Sometimes people don't want the ravioli with chipolte tomato bisque and goat cheese. They want a simple ravioli with a good meat sauce. It may not be as inventive but it will go down well and it is usually a lot more satisfying. If you hate movies that you can see the story arc from a mile away on, than you should skip this. If you like a movie that tells a fun story and is well performed and very entertaining, than this is right up your alley. Wilson is his usual surfer burnout persona, but it was used very nicely here. Vaughn is the emotionally driven cheerleader type, but it was limited to reasonable doses along the way. The "Flashdance" inspiration story is not nearly as irritating in the film as it was in the trailer, so don't be scared away. The Google connection is the biggest product placement component I have seen since FedEx in "Cast Away". You can't get around it, and while it looks like it might be interesting, it also makes me a little squeamish. The work environment feels just a couple of steps away from "Stepford", where everything is perfect.

This film was so much better than I thought it was going to be. It is a conventional comedy, and that was the biggest surprise. The script and story are largely a result of Vince Vaughn's work, and he is not swinging for the fences. He is trying to keep the game going by getting a hit and he manages a solid double. I can't say that everyone will like it, it may be a little staid for younger audiences, expecting filthy language, outrageous behavior and cutting edge humor. If you are looking for a pleasant evening at the movies, with a date or a friend, than "The Internship" will be rewarding enough for you. You will be glad that you applied and the experience will be worthwhile.

Furious 6 or Fast and Furious Six, or

I saw the original Fast and Furious in 2001. That was twelve years and five whole movies ago. It was a guilty Summer pleasure that did not stick with me for more than a minute or two. I do remember that it was the last time I went to Universal Studios, right after the 9/11 attacks, because the cars from the movie were on display. Nothing fancy, they were just sitting there. OK, that was kinda cool for two minutes and then I moved on. It appears a lot has happened in the last ten years, the movies are now heist films, the good guy from the first movie is now a member of the criminal gang, and Dwayne Johnson has had some dealings with them in the past as some kind of U.S. Federal agent. That last part works out well for me because I like the former "Rock". He is an action star with some charisma.

It does not work out as well for Vin Diesel. I have no problems with him except that he is incredibly unexpressive in this whole movie. His tone of voice never varies, I don't remember any facial expression that could be described as more than a slight smirk, and he has a whole bunch of ponderous lines he has to read. Johnson by comparison is full of attitude, the voice changes from scene to scene,  and he only does two or three incredibly silly, gravity defying action moves. Don't get me wrong, the flying headbutt that Diesel performs is fun, but it is also over the top ridiculous. This is Johnsons third big film of the Spring and he has not outworn his welcome yet. Diesel on the other hand needs a cup of Joe and some Benzedrine. I saw the trailer for the Riddick movie coming out later this year, he looks sleepy in that also.

"Furious 6" features a returning cast member who was apparently presumed dead. She now has to be recovered and a strategic genius rogue British Special Forces guy has to be defeated. We open the film with a car race. There is a car race in the middle of the film pitting Diesel against his old amnesiac girlfriend. The film ends with a car race in Tokyo. In between the car races are car chases. The primary difference between the two types of car activities seems to be that the crashes are deliberate in the chases.  If you are not into car chase shots and racing motifs, you should skip this movie (and hell why would you even have thought of seeing it in the first place?). Although it is set up as something of a heist film, there is only one element that fits that bill and it is mostly buried in the big car chase that involves a tank. I like cars well enough, but I'm not by any stretch of the imagination a gearhead. They don't really talk much about the cars or show why one might be better than another, and it seems that they will have an endless supply to crash as the movie goes on.

There are a half dozen or more "good guy" characters to keep track of, and an equal number of villains. I suppose we have met some of Diesel's crew in the earlier films, I'll just accept them as they are and treat them like the established characters in any continuing series. I did not feel any particular affection for any of them, and there was only one scene where Johnson and one of the crew take a little revenge on a snooty car broker, that had much comedic value. This movie could use a stronger plot for the villain, and better dialogue for the secondary characters. It could also be tightened up by about twenty minutes. Some of the chases go on way to long. Instead of a breezy 90 minutes it is a ponderous two hours plus. Nonsense works best when it is brief and to the point. This movie is of course complete nonsense. That does not mean it isn't fun. I had a pretty good time, even though I was frequently lost in all the car chases trying to figure out which set of cars was chasing what other set of cars. No one seems capable of dying in a car crash, and they all appear to be the worst marksmen in the world. That's OK because then they can race again a little while later.

I did like the character of Gina Carano, as Johnsons sidekick. She is a tough looking but attractive woman who looks great fighting.  I saw her in "Haywire" last year and she should definitely be doing these action kinds of films. Her character is wasted in a plot line that was not necessary and is a contrived cliché. It does appear however that in the next movie, we will get a different kind of kick ass character. I don't know if there is some story line I missed in the previous movies, but it looks like "Handsome Rob" is going to be an antagonist in the next film and that short burst of charisma he injects in the film at the end makes the villain in this movie look tepid.

007 Posters / A Top Ten List

This is in my entry way at home. 007 greets you at the front door.

Last year in all the hubbub around the release of Skyfall, I put up several lists of Bond related rankings. The blog-a-thon I participated in includes dozens of other posts that I shared. Many of those ranked the Villains, Title Songs or Bond girls. I don't know why it never occurred to me that a poster ranking would be a ripe subject for me. My Blogging friend from Long Island, Eric, suggested this to me the other day, and I smacked myself on the forehead wondering why it had never occurred to me. I have two or three books that cover all the Bond posters, and publicity material and I am an avid collector of posters myself. As soon as Eric suggested it, I immediately went to a file on my computer where I have most of the images stored, I've used that file for a screensaver a couple of times since I've had this current computer. I first chose a poster from each 007 film. Most of them have a teaser poster, which appears in theater lobbies several months before the film arrives. That is usually followed by an advance sheet, sometimes referred to as the "A" sheet, which usually has the main artwork and tag lines for the movie. When a film actually shows up in theaters, there is a "B" sheet that is a slight variation of the "A" but includes contractual credits and refinements of the artwork. Once reviews appear, then the posters get modified with blurbs from critics. Finally, there are character posters that have become a trend in the last twenty years or so, each poster featuring leading characters from the story.


That is a lot of posters to choose from, and I wanted to pick only posters that I liked. So all 24 Bond films will not be represented here. Instead, I will share the cream of the crop. I did choose to limit a film to one appearance on the list, but the poster could come from any of the different lines of posters.I did not include the limited edition print versions of the Bond posters that adorn my family room wall, but I may give you a peek at the end of this post.

10. Die Another Day Teaser

This is the Advance U.S. One Sheet, sometimes known as a teaser. It does not include the star of the film or any images from the movie, given the film itself that was a wise idea. It does let us know the title and that it is a James Bond Film. I like the effect of the gun, hot from recent use, melting into the block of ice. It suggests action without showing any. The ice theme is a big part of the film, both in reference to one of the locations but also to the use of diamonds as a Maguffin.

9. Diamonds are Forever

This is the U.S. one sheet that is the version used when the film makes it's appearance in theaters. This art work was done by Robert McGinnis, who painted a number of the iconic Bond works of the sixties and seventies. I particularly like the pose of James Bond on the top of the arm of the moon buggy, and the girls holding the diamonds at crotch level, drawing focus to that part of the image. The explosions on the oil rig and the diamond encrusted satellite make the story intriguing. The one thing missing from the poster is any reference to Las Vegas, where the majority of the film takes place. When I saw this poster in the foyer of the Garfield Theater in 1971, I knew I wanted to see Sean Connery as James Bond, back again.

8. Casino Royale Teaser

 
Daniel Craig is introduced as James Bond in this advance teaser for the film. The lighting of the shot sets an ominous tone for the film. The poker chips combined with the title remind us that it is a gambling theme that will be the focus of our hero's conflict. The gun laid out on the gaming table tells us that the stakes are more than money. I love the strategic line up of the words in the title to allow the O's in each word to form the iconic 007 gun logo. I also think it was very effective not to have Bond looking directly at us. The photography was by Greg Williams.

   7. The Spy Who Loved Me

007 and Triple X are featured back to back in evening wear, as they stand above stolen nuclear submarines, and in front of the Egyptian Pyramids that are the location of a major section of the film. In a nod to the era of films before it, the corners feature action beats and settings. All of this using a color palate that screams the seventies. The art is the product of Bob Peak. It's BOND and BEYOND, a little word play with the name of our hero.

6. Octopussy

This is the second of two teaser posters(a B Style). The first featured a half seen Octopussy from the rear, facing eight mirrored Roger Moore Bonds. The A sheet features this image but adds some additional artistic splashes of action in the foreground and corners. I prefer this version because it emphasizes Bond but keeps the Octo reference on the right character. Like an eight armed Shiva, Octopussy is embracing and threatening to Bond at the same time. The Shiva like reference and the costume hint at the locations for the film, without coming right out and saying India. The artwork is by Dan Goozee.

5. The Man With the Golden Gun (Christmas Teaser)

As you can probably tell at this point, I like teaser posters. They hold the allure of the movie out, without revealing too much. They do exactly what they are supposed to do, peak our interest and make us anticipate. The gadgets have always been a draw for Bond films, and here is one featured in the poster. No artist or Art director was listed in my sources, these images appear to be art renderings of photographs. The way the gun comes together is shown in that last image before the title border. The film opened at Christmas time so the idea that the villain has a present for James Bond is used in the tag line. You can buy a replica of the Golden Gun, the last time I looked it was about $450.

4. Goldfinger

The most arresting image on this poster is the nude woman painted gold. That was an iconic image from the 1960s and it is the central focus of this poster. While not as visually striking as some of the other posters on my list, the black background and the gold highlights look great together. This promotion has a terrific play on the idea of the Midas Touch, instead of gold, everything he touches turns to excitement. The layout is attributed to David Chasman and Robert Brownjohn. The "Golden Girl" image was used on most of the promotional material for this film.

3. Thunderball

James Bond in a Jet Pack! 007 in an underwater battle! Our hero surrounded by women in swimsuits! My dreams have come true. The art work from this poster made me want the steel lunchbox that I never got. I love the tag lines building and the use of the logo in the word LOOK, this was very clever branding. Frank McCarthy and Robert McGinnis did the artwork. Special kudos to McCarthy on the Jet Pack painting, it is spectacular work.

2. The World is Not Enough Teaser

Forget "The Hunger Games", here is the real "Girl on Fire". The reverse silhouette of the girl in the flames, surrounded by a back background is amazing enough, but then you notice the figure of James Bond, posing in the traditional gun in hand position and it becomes something even more. Bond's outline and the girls, merge to form one of the few photoshop style designs that have ever been used on a poster that I liked. Again, the golden 007 logo announces the release date for the film and tells us nothing about the story. It uses iconographic symbols to pull us in with desire.  It is like a single frame from a Maurice Binder title sequence. The credit goes to Creative Director Randi Braun, Art Director Diane Reynolds, and choreographer Vincent Patterson.

1. Live and Let Die

 

Robert McGinnis returns one more time to my list for the fantastic art work he did for this poster. Before I comment on it let's look at a couple of other elements. This was Roger Moore's first Bond film, and the graphic designer took advantage of his first and last names, to again utilize the 007 icon. They also used a dagger in the tittle to suggest the danger in the film. This movie may have some dated elements to it, but the whole voodoo tarot card motif was visually exciting and it is integrated into the poster very effectively. The woman representing Solitaire, does not look like or dress like Jane Seymour in the film, but she sits astride the big gun between Bond's legs and fans the deck of tarot cards toward us alluringly. The larger deck of cards seems to offer 007 up as the main character card, flanked by Baron Samedi and a bevy of beautiful women, representing the Devil, Lovers and Fortune.  In the foreground are explosions, car crashes and a giant alligator vomiting out a speed boat. Bond gazes out calmly in his raised gun pose and takes it all in. The image is colorful, evocative and memorable. Those are all things a movie poster should be, on top of that the artwork is just gorgeous.

I'm sorry to say I have only two of these posters in my own collection. Some day when those lotto numbers come in, I'll indulge myself and travel around the world in pursuit of a complete collection, like bubble gum cards. Until then, I can admire them from afar, I hope you will as well. 

And her's a little something for Eric.

Swashbuckling Films

Click above for the KAMAD VLOG POST on Swashbuckling films.

The Hangover Part III

Let me give appropriate context before you judge me too harshly. If I had seen any of the "Fast and Furious" movies other than the first one, I would have gone to that movie today instead of this. Something about "Epic" just did not look appealing to me, and I love animated features. I probably would have enjoyed seeing "Star Trek Into Darkness" again, but I have been twice. My weak reaction to "Iron Man 3" kept me out of that theater. Friday night we re-watched the original "Hangover" and laughed almost as much as we did four years ago. So you now know why, even after the extreme disappointment of the the second "Hangover" film, and the terrible word of mouth on this one, we went anyway. The trailer with the giraffe was encouraging, we had no new films in the local theaters and I needed to be out. So there, shoot me.

Here is my faint praise for this film, "it's not as bad as I thought it was going to be." The three most entertaining parts were two scenes at the beginning and the final credit stinger. I guess I'm a bad person, the giraffe bit worked for me. In part because it is played as a cartoon and the CGI is so obvious that it can't really be too disturbing. It is the biggest laugh in the movie, it is mostly in the trailer, and you can see the joke coming from a mile away. If you are sick enough to still watch, then you will be amused. It will take almost two more hours before you are similarly entertained by a fresh idea in the movie. This is clearly a money grab and while a bit cynical, it only hurts the willing victims. I thought my chances of being slightly entertained by this were greater than my chance of winning the "Powerball" lottery last week. So I saved seven bucks from buying quick pick numbers and spent it on a matinee. It was a better buy in the long run but not very rewarding none the less.

Ken Jeong as Mr. Chow is amusing in small doses, here the dosage seemed to be horse pill sized. Zack Galifinakis went from being an weirdly charming oddball character in the original film, to a loathsome excuse for a human being whom we are supposed to laugh at. Supporting/ensemble characters should remain that way. "Cars 2" is a mess because the focus is on Mater, and "The Hangover III" suffers because the two oddest characters are put front and center of the story. Instead of ordinary guys coping with extraordinary events that they can't remember, we get a caper film that depends on us laughing at a murdering criminal and a psychotic mess who is off his medications. There are some gags along the way that might have worked in another movie with a different set of characters and a different premise, but they mostly fall flat during this two hours of time spent looking at things on the screen. The things on the screen are not as boring as some movies I've witnessed, but they sure are not as amusingly entertaining as the makers of this movie want them to be.

I have already spent more time writing about this than I wanted. I almost posted a single word review: "Don't". I did want to defend myself a little (yeah I know I encourage the studios to keep doing this stuff by buying a ticket, but I also give food to stray animals and indulge crazy people in conversation, it's a personal failing). The world will be a little better knowing that we are done with these films, and you will only be a little bit worse if you go and see this. I suggest you find something else, but I won't judge you if you feel you must add this to your viewing history. I just want you to return the favor.

Random Thougts, I Think Not: The Silence of the Dead Zone

Maybe some one else noticed this before me, I would not be at all surprised. I watched "The Dead Zone" this morning, a movie that I saw in theaters and have seen at least a dozen times since. As I was listening to it, the music was haunting and also strangely familiar. It dawned on me that it was strikingly similar to the music from "The Silence of the Lambs". I remembered immediately that "Silence of the Lambs" was scored by Howard Shore but I could not remember (if I ever knew) who had scored "The Dead Zone". I looked it up on IMDB and the late Michael Kamen turns out to have written this music eight years prior to "The Silence of the Lambs". I naturally assumed that Shore must have been influenced by Kamen's work since it preceded his.



As I read about Kamen, who scored a dozen movies that I adore including "Die Hard" and "Lethal Weapon", I also discovered an interesting piece of information about "The Dead Zone".  According to IMDB "His score for The Dead Zone (1983) is an adaptation of, and variation on, a theme from the second movement of the Symphony Nr. 2 in D of Finnish composer Jean Sibelius (1865-1957)." So the tone of the music is derived from an earlier source.



I immediately went to look at Howard Shore's information and found something pretty amazing. The IMDB page writes that "Since 1979, he has scored all but one of director David Cronenberg's theatrical films. Cronenberg is also from Toronto, Ontario, Canada."  So it turns out that the one score that was done for a Cronenberg film, was written by a composer who later is echoed himself by Cronenberg's main composer Howard Shore.

The connection of the soundtracks was emphasized a little bit more when on the same page, this tidbit of information turned up: It seems that Shore "Was inspired by Richard Wagner; in particular his Ring of the Nibelung cycle of operas; in composing his scores for the Lord of the Rings films. One exception to this was the Shelob's Lair scene, in which Peter Jackson told him to "go off and pretend you're making another movie for David Cronenberg.

It is likely that Kamen, was inspired by Sibelius and guided by Cronenberg, who usually worked with Shore, and then Shore was inspired by Kamen's work, created the "Silence Theme", and is later referred back to his Cronenberg work by another director. I love the way the creative process works here and I salute all of these artists on achievements that move us emotionally and intellectually.

The Adventures of Robin Hood: A Love Letter to a Movie Classic

I have written on a number of films over the last couple of years that I really will never see again. There are the new blockbuster releases that are good for the weekend but don't leave a mark. There are the usual horror films that don't scare and leave you wanting more. And finally there are the films I looked forward to that disappoint and which will stay at best a vague memory as time goes by. When I first started blogging, the films that I wrote about were from the 1970s and many of them are old friends that I visit with and treasure on a regular basis. The closest of those old friends has been the Spielberg Classic "Jaws". I have a half dozen posts on it at this point so it is pretty clear how much I love that movie. Yet in spite of my admiration for that groundbreaking mid 70s classic, it is only my second favorite film of all time. You see I am in love with someone older. In fact, this month my object of adoration turns 75. My favorite movie ever, came out twenty years before I was born, but it looks as good now as it did in 1938. It is far more entertaining than most of the films being made today, and it has a cast that puts most of today's stars and supporting players to shame.

 

I first encountered this film on television back in the 1960s and I'm pretty sure I watched it in black and white because that was the TV my brothers and I had upstairs. My Mother insisted that she saw the film in theaters in Black and White, it may have been the 1948 re-release, I read somewhere that it went out in black and white prints but I cannot locate that proof at the moment. IMDB claims that an elaborate eight minute trailer existed at one point but that it is not in the Warner archives now. The one trailer that is available from early releases is the 1948 re-release trailer found here:

It was not until I was in my teen years that I remember seeing the film on television and in color. That is when my love affair really began. Some time in the mid 1970s, I went to a screening at the Rialto Theater in South Pasadena. This theater was a neighborhood movie palace from the old days, with ornate wall carvings and a balcony. A few years earlier it was converted into a revival house and old films as well as unusual fare were programmed into the theater. I think my Dad and I went and saw "The Sea Hawk" which was in black and white and "The Adventures of Robin Hood" in color, on the same night. 

Here is a video tracing the history of the Rialto Theater. 

If you look at it, you will see how easy it would be for someone to envision themselves seeing Robin Hood for the first time in 1938, even if it was 1976.

If you don't have time for the video, look at this image and try to imagine seeing The Adventures of Robin Hood in these surroundings.

I am a romantic at heart and the combination of the film with the setting almost certainly imprinted on me in a way that contributed to it becoming my favorite film. Swashbucklers are films focused on swaggering adventurers and clearly Errol Flynn was made for this role. He had already done "Captain Blood" and his star was on the rise. James Cagney was originally scheduled to play the part but a dispute with Warner Brothers put him out of the film and moved Flynn in.  Thank goodness, because as much as I admire Jimmy Cagney, I can't see him as Robin. Everyone who fell in love with Han Solo in Star Wars, should look at this movie and see where most of the character was cribbed from. Harrison Ford made his career playing parts that thirty or forty years earlier would have belonged to Flynn. The thrill I felt at seeing Luke and Leia swing across the chasm while pursed by stormtroopers in the first trailer for Star Wars, was exactly how I felt when Robin climbs the gate rope escaping the hangman, or swoops into the frame to greet the prisoners in the attack in Sherwood Forest.

The movie succeeds on so many levels that it is astonishing. Let me see if I can organize my enthusiasm a little for this discussion. I want to focus first on the characters as performed by the stars, and then discuss the story. When I finish with the main course, then we can take in the dessert that is the score and photography of the movie.

The Characters:

The Hero

Robin Hood, as portrayed by Flynn, is the very definition of a swashbuckling character. He is indifferent to  risks and seeks adventure by challenging the injustices inflicted on England by an illegitimate ruler.  Flynn gets three or four great entrance moments in the film. When we first see him, his horse bounds over a hedge and pulls up in time to rescue the desperate Much, the Millers son. His confronting of the diabolical Guy of Gisbourne, sets the tone for serious drama leavened with a scoundrel's humor. He is clearly established as a good hearted man who is offended by the casual injustices he sees popping up around him. He could stay detached and as Marion says at one point "live in comfort" but that is not his way. Backing off from conflict is not his way either. He invites it by taking the poached deer that was to doom Much, and delivers it in grand style to Gisbourne and Prince John. He swaggers into a feast filled with enemies making plans to put John on the throne, and pushes their soldiers out of the way with the antlers of the deer slung over his shoulders. He presents it as a gift from the King he remains loyal to, in a direct slap in the face to the barons gathered to depose him.

This second introduction sets up his willingness to defy the odds and his impudent character. He trades jibes with  Prince John and Sir Guy, he mocks the Barons with his tone of voice and manner, and he begins the serious flirtation that will be the center love story that pulls us all more deeply into the adventure. As he makes an escape later in the scene, we see his skill as a archer and his ability to improvise in a clever way by turning the gatekeepers into his allies. This is clearly a man who is able to stay above water using his wits and skills. It will take a cunning enemy to bring him down, and it is never clear that anyone on the other side will be able to match his wits in these confrontations. We know the depths of greed and ambition running in the Norman plot, it is their determination and ruthlessness that are Robin's biggest enemies, not their cleverness.

Robin's third great entrance is his appearance in Sherwood to end the attack on the caravan carrying the "ransom" money collected by Gisbourne's troops. Swinging out of the trees as if from nowhere he magically lands on a prominent rock and announces his welcome to the defeated enemy, who were accompanied by  Maid Marion. Each time Flynn steps up in front of his enemies, he does so in a manner designed to tweak them and flaunt his indifference to their animus. This is the key ingredient to a true swashbuckler, that and swordfighting. (More on this later).

The Villains

It is often said that a great action film is only as good as the villain that stands in the way of our hero and ultimate success. "The Adventures of Robin Hood " has a plethora of villains, and the tandem of Guy of Gisbourne and Prince John is impossible to match. Gisbourne is the blunt instrument of John's plans, and an ardent foe of Robin since he covets Marion for himself. 

Sir Guy is played by the amazing Basil Rathbone, the elegant and lean faced intellectual best known for embodying Sherlock Holmes in a series of films in the 1930s and 40s. Rathbone was a Shakespearean actor who was not new to swashbuckling adventures. He had already battled and lost to Flynn in Captain Blood, in a memorable sword fight on a beach. It has been said that Rathbone was the best fencer of all the Hollywood community. Given the number of times that swords were involved in his films it is not really hard to believe. Rathbone was also an accomplished film actor with two Academy award nominations to his name. His intense eyes and hawk like visage would be sure to frighten small children and make him an intimidating foe for our hero. The character of Sir Guy is a metamorphosis from the legends where he was a bounty hunter working for the sheriff. In this film he is a nobleman, conspiring with the Prince to seize the throne. Rathbone trades barbs with Flynn's Robin throughout the film, right up to the climactic sword duel that rightly remains legendary today.                        

A single foe would not be enough to challenge Robin however, even one as evil and dangerous as Guy of Gisbourne.  In the larger battle for England, outside of Sherwood Forest and his love of Marion, Robin must also stand off against the heir to the kingdom and a man trying to depose his brother, Prince John.  The man who would be king is played by Claude Rains, another fantastic actor who worked in the golden age of Hollywood as a star, as a character actor and as just about the best thing in nearly every movie he appeared in (and some that he disappeared in-"Invisible Man" joke). Rains was not a tall man but he exudes confidence and power in the role of Prince John. The stature may also have communicated his neediness to supplant his brother, like an early Napoleon complex. John is arrogant and self assured, at least until Richard returns. Even as Robin is reeking havoc in the countryside, John never seems over his head, rather his intensity simply grows. This shot, showing him picking out the juicy seeds of a pomegranate, is a sly reference to his plans to pick the country dry of taxes. All in the name of his brother but actually to buy his way to the throne. The effete and diminishing tone of voice that Rains uses to convey the character is a perfect counterpoint to the ebullient open naivete of Robin of Locksley. As they engage in the witty exposition at the feast Robin barges into, John openly admits that he likes Robin. He admires his audacity, a characteristic he and Robin share.    
This exchange is one of the earliest examples of the action hero and the evil villain, exchanging barbs and sharing exposition. Characters in movies today, still try to emulate the feeling of these scenes. John Maclane and Hans Gruber are descendants of this very byplay.

In most Robin Hood legends, the Sheriff of Nottingham is the main antagonist. Robert Shaw faced off against Sean Connery a second time in "Robin and Marion", and his Sheriff fits more closely the character from legend than the ineffectual but sly Melville Cooper. Cooper is largely played for laughs and portrays the Sheriff as a near cowardly shadow of the larger Gisbourne. He is awkward but also clever. It is he who contrives the archery tournament used to snag Robin. Most of the time he stays in the background, waiting to say just the wrong thing to irritate Sir Guy or Prince John. His plea for mercy and understanding at the end of the film on behalf of John is a great summary of his role, he is an echo existing for comic effect. 

The Band of Allies AKA The Merry Men of Sherwood

The legends of Robin Hood are filled with other characters that add color and drama to the tales. The men of Sherwood Forest comprise a guerrilla army, living off the land of the forest and taking plunder not for themselves but to right the injustices of the world. Robin begins the film in the company of Will Scarlet, but despite being the oldest of his friends, Will's character seems to diminish with the passage of the story. Once other members of his band begin to form, Will is only heard from occasionally. The personalities of the other actors may dwarf poor Patrick Knowles who played him. Early on they save Much the Miller's son from Sir Guy and he becomes the most loyal member of Robin's merry men. Much works as both fierce attack dog for the group but also for comic relief. He dispatches the assassin sent to kill the king, and he woos Bess, the chaperone to Maid Marion.In the final battle, he gets the laughs.Herbert Mundin is a familiar presence from many English based films of the 1930s. He also worked with Una O'Conner in a couple of other films where they portrayed a couple.

The most prominent member of Robin's merry men is Little John. So named because he is no such thing. The story of Robin meeting John and being bested by him with a quarterstaff stems from the early legends, so it is natural that it appears in just about every version of Robin Hood you can name. Little John is the muscle of the band, he is large and large hearted and here he is portrayed by Alan Hale (The Skipper's Dad). He worked alongside Flynn in more than a half dozen other films and the two seem to have a natural chemistry. Where Flynn is sophisticated, Hale is boisterous. Little John is Robin's sounding board and at times his Jimminy Cricket. Of course Robin disregards his inner voice on a regular basis because that's what swashbucklers do. Hale strikes me as a cowboy type and so it makes sense that he appears in the westerns that Flynn did as well.

The biggest if not the tallest of the merry men is Friar Tuck. Eugene Pallette was a very recognizable Hollywood fixture. He is in dozens of classic films from the 30s and 40s. As far as I could tell, this is the one time that he worked with Flynn. Friar Tuck is a swordsman partial to ale and good food. The scene where he carries Robin across the stream and tosses him in comes from some of the more recent legends. Pallete's froggy voice and girth were used primarily as comic foil to Little John in the picture. He does present a formidable opponent in the last sequence as well. He also represents a rarely listened to voice of reason in the outlaw group.
 

There were only two prominent roles for women in "The Adventures of Robin Hood". Bess is the chaperone/female companion and servant to the Lady Marion. She is a wise older woman with a big romantic streak. She serves as comic foil and confidant at various points in the film. The dalliance she undertakes with Much after the banquet in the forest allows her to serve as a conduit between Marion in the castle and the band of outlaws. She is played by Una O'Conner, who pops up in Universal Horror movies and Warner Brother Costume dramas on a regular basis.
Her bug eyes and memorable squeal make her a welcome comic addition to the story. Her accent and face made her feel very authentic in the Castle of Nottingham and in Sherwod Forest.

Lady Marion Fitzwalter is the ward of King Richard. A Norman noblewoman who creates a Romeo and Juliet type love story by falling for the disgraced Saxon Knight Robin of Locksley. She is played by the luminescent Olivia De Havilland. It is hard to imagine but at one point, the screen writers were planning on this story without the character. The movie is a romantic look at the Robin Hood legends, but how romantic could it be if there was no romance. As of this writing, she is still alive and just three years away from reaching the age of 100. De Havilland is of course the one surviving member of the cast from this film and from Gone with the Wind. In her career she was nominated multiple times for the Academy Award and she won twice. She made eight films with Errol Flynn and you can see why when you watch this movie. Lots of stars have chemistry together, Tracy and Hepburn, Garbo and Gilbert, Redford and Newman. This was a pairing that puts all of them in the back seat. They look great together, she seems to look at him with the worshipful eyes that Ashley Wilkes was supposed to get. The great balcony scene that is clearly stolen from Shakespeare, gives her a chance to pour on the googly eyes and honey voice and Flynn responds like a snake charmed by the movement and sound of a flute. In her defiant speech to the court of execution, she gives dignity to other nobles who are not part of the Prince's plot and she stands for equality between the Saxons and the Normans.  I don't think there has been a more attractive pairing of stars since, including Brad Pitt and Angelina Jolie.

The Story

Robin Hood is a character out of English folklore, although there are similar tales told in other cultures. There are many versions of the character and they do not seem to be based on a single person. In college I took a history class entitled "Outlaws and Outcasts of the European Past". I signed up in large part because Robin Hood was mentioned in the course description. Of course the historical information is a lot less romantic and the bits of history are inconsistent. That the story here works as well as it does is a reflection not only of character but of structure. The conflict between the Normans and the Saxons is not originally part of the legends, that is a contribution of the 19th century author Sir Walter Scott. It is used effectively here to create a sense of injustice not just from a heavy tax burden but from a sense of discrimination. That Marion is a Norman and Robin is a Saxon adds to the Romeo Juliet flavor of the story.

Setting the story in the time of Richard The Lionheart has become a fixture of the Robin Hood films. This appears to be a sixteenth century addition to the legend but it works really well at allowing political intrigue to mix with the exploits of Robin. This film was released just ten years after talking pictures became the norm. The device of using title cards was not to far from the past. The movie opens with a card that announces the set up for the story.

 The story of swashbuckling adventure in outer space that opened in 1977 heavily borrowed from the past and a simple comparison of the story cards reveals how similar they are. The film quickly establishes the characters of Robin and Sir Guy as adversaries. The plot to place John on the throne is hinted at in a banquet where the Norman barons are gathered. It is Robin himself that reveals the details. This shows that he is a sharp and observant thinker and his crashing of the feast sets the tone of jocular wordplay interspersed with daring escapes and fight scenes. This pattern is repeated several times in the story. Another pattern that comes up is the introduction of new characters through their interaction with Robin. Although the sequencing is quick, the structure might be a little repetitive, but the events are so well played and delightful that a couple of repetitions seems like a small price to pay.  Ultimately, the plot comes to a boil and the outlaws manage to infiltrate the castle at Nottingham with the returned but disguised Richard, just in time to break up a coronation ceremony. Robin and Sir Guy engage in an epic duel that sets the standard for screen swordplay.

The duel is imaginatively shot and paced very effectively. Each man gets the upper hand at different points and the locations of the combat change throughout. Of course the war of words continues as well. Robin consistently gets the better of Sir Guy with the one upsmanship dialogue.There is a terrific bit of business where the two combatants vanish from the frame but the duel continues in front of our eyes, magnified against a pillar wall in shadow. It is quite imaginative and effective as a moment of pure movie joy in this dramatic climax that we are witnessing.

Michael Curtiz is listed as Co-Director, but most of the movie was shot by him. Apparently William Keighley, the other director, was not getting the action scenes done the way the producers had envisioned. Although they had had a successful outing in an earlier film, Keighley was replaced by Curtiz . Curtiz also had a successful history with Flynn, having directed him to stardom in "Captain Blood" and "The Charge of the Light Brigade". Unfortunately his dictatorial style ruffled Flynn's feathers and he was despised by his star.

It appears that the feeling was mutual and Curtiz did not have much love for Flynn either. Even so, after the success of "The Adventures of Robin Hood", they worked together on four more Warner's pictures over the next three years. The very direct physical style that Curtiz used suited Flynn well and the action star was born on the big screen, breaking out of B movie melodramas and becoming a mainstream tradition. While the Saturday Serials may have influenced "Indiana Jones" style film making, it was the success of big budget movies like this which paved the way for careers of today's action stars .

The Music

Erich Wolfgang Korngold is the composer of the music to "the Adventures of Robin Hood". He had come from Vienna to help his friend adapt Mendelson music to a film. For four years he made a variety of contributions to the invention of film scores. He had returned to Austria to conduct an opera when the offer came to score Robin Hood. He accepted and came back to Hollywood. Right after he left the areas of Austria he lived in were annexed by Nazi Germany. He later said that the film saved his life. As a Jew he would have been targeted for the usual treatment in Nazi occupied lands. His style is clasically romantic as you can hear if you play the video clip above. After the war he returned to classical composition, but many film scholars describe his score for "The Adventures of Robin Hood" as one of the greatest film compositions ever. The strutting melody that is played when Robin crashes the barons banquet is a great example of adapting themes to scenes. The lush romantic themes for Marion and Robin's love scenes evoke a tenderness during turbulent times that promises a better day.

The Look

The Adventures of Robin Hood was one of the earliest films shot in Techicolor. In fact, they used all eleven  existing Technicolor cameras for the shoot. The cameras were returned to Technicolor at the end of shooting each day. The film looks amazing, the greens are incredibly deep and the reds pop off the screen. The studio made full use of the technology and spent a huge amount of money to make the movie. It won the Academy Award for Art Direction and when you look at the sets you can easily understand why.

I have a long history with the home versions of The Adventures of Robin Hood. A couple of years ago I donated all my VHS tapes to the Goodwill, so I do not have my purchased VHS version any more. I do have the copy I taped off of television in the early 1980s out in a box in the garage. I should dig it out, I'm sure it is an interesting artifact if it was done the way I think I remember doing it. There was a local station (KTLA) that ran movies in the evenings with only a couple of commercial interruptions. I usually let the commercials run out of gratitude for the limited breaks, so it will have some interesting TV history on it. I purchased my first Laser Disc player in 1990 and shortly after, invested in the Criterion Edition of the Laser Disc you see above. It has the original commentary track from film scholar Rudy Behmer that has been included on the DVD and Blu ray releases subsequently.

Of course the movie plays regularly on TCM and every time I come across it, there goes another two hours of my life. Last week my daughter and I went to a screening at the Egyptian Theater in Hollywood, hosted by the American Cinematheque. There were a couple hundred people there to share the experience. Several families came and they all seemed to be having as much fun as I was. We had a little trouble with the Fandango ticketing process but the screening was beautiful and the theater is in great shape. I should seriously consider joining the organization, I support what they do and the opportunities to see screenings like this would be greater. My only hesitation is that like a heroin addict, I'm afraid the entry level commitment is just the start. I can see myself easily moving into a theater seat there and not leaving.

From a Screening of Mildred Pierce in the Week before our Robin Hood Adventure.

The ceiling decor at the Egyptian from our seats.

The Adventures of Robin Hood with Errol Flynn has been my favorite movie for forty years now. There are other movies that have been special and mean a lot to me but none has ever challenged the place in my heart that I hold for this treasure from the Glory Days of Hollywood.