Drew Struzan Screening and Signing

So we headed back up to Forest Lawn Glendale today for the screening of "Drew:The Man Behind the Poster". This was my second time to see the film on a big screen and the second time we got the privilege of listening to the man himself speak about his life and art. The film was showing in the large auditorium at the Museum site at the cemetery. You enter through a beautiful sanctum that resembles a European church of massive proportions. The screening auditorium is probably meant for funerals attended by several hundred mourners, but today it was loaded with fans. At first it looked like maybe a hundred and fifty or so made it out on this glorious Southern California Saturday, but by the time the film had ended the numbers seem to have doubled. It was a very nice turnout for the screening, Q and A, and signing.

The movie was great, I actually own it on DVD, so revisiting it was not the main goal of this trip. It is nice however to listen to an appreciative audience react to the comments made by the figures being interviewed in the movie and to hear their laughter at a couple of the things Drew shares about his experiences. The gallery of art next door is open for two more weeks and feature art from movie illustrator Bob Peak as well. We missed a chance when we first saw the exhibit to meet Mr. Stuzan at the opening night reception. He was arriving just as we were setting off for some other plans. So our purpose here was to shake his hand, share our appreciation and get a couple of items signed for our own collection.

Drew was very modest and unassuming as he took several questions immediately after the film. He was also very quick witted and made several humorous comments about the questions and the subjects they focused on. The one question that seemed to be most interesting to most of the crowd, was whether he had been contacted to come out of "retirement" and do the posters for the new "Star Wars" films. He demurred and said no one had contacted him but if a loyal friend like George Lucas asked for a favor, he would always be there for him.

After the film screened there was a short break for people to have some refreshments out in the patio area between the Theater and the museum. Everyone was having a great time and we saw several people with interesting items that they had brought for Drew to sign. One guy and his wife had a large lobby banner from the last Indiana Jones film, several people had brought various posters to have them signed. I saw a couple of "Star Wars" posters and several "Back to the Future" posters as well. Amanda made a dash over to the museum store to pick up two copies of the beautiful book that he has released with fantastic photos of his work.

She was a little surprised that the book was more expensive than she thought, but when opened we discovered that she had purchased copies that had already been signed. That gave us the out we were looking for. We too had brought some items to get signed but we knew that he would only be able to sign one item per fan. This meant that instead of getting just the books signed, we would be able to have a permanent memento that was truly unique.  This made us both a little giddy and we quickly finished the soda and cookie we were enjoying and zipped back into the theater to queue up for the signing table.  There were people milling around but no line had started so I took the opportunity to speak with a couple of other attendees and share some stories about our love for the poster work of our host this day. I suddenly noticed Eric Sharkey standing a few feet away and approached him. Eric is the director and co-producer of the film. Back in November, I'd had a chance to meet him and talk about the movie at the Archlight screening. I reintroduced myself and thanked him again for being a big enough fan to follow through and put this film together. He had traveled three thousand miles across country tobe here today, and he was just as kind and generous in listening to me prattle on as he had been before. I was forward enough to ask if he minded taking a picture with me, and he honestly seemed surprised that anyone was interested in doing so, but also very pleased that I had asked.

I was delighted to have the picture and glad to share it here. As you can see behind us, there were some people mulling around but in thirty seconds a line suddenly appeared and we moved quickly to join it. The number of people who had stayed after the screening and had something they wanted to share with Drew and get signed was pretty impressive. It took a few minutes to get things started so I took advantage to document the line with a couple of shaky shots. No flash was used in the sanctuary, and my phone is so old I don't have one anyway, but I did find the night time setting and got these quick looks at the line.

We were about four or five back from the guy in the right hand side of the picture here. There were maybe thirty people in front of us but everyone was in a splendid mood and we all just talked to each other. Behind us was a much longer segment of the line that extended all the way through the long passage area nearly out the front door of the chapel. You may not be able to see it clearly but the line here goes though a doorway, a foyer for the theater, and then into the high ceiling ed cathedral area.

Once the signing began the line moved quickly for us. We were not rushed at all but the process seemed to be very efficient. As we walked out afterwards, I was glad we were in the front quarter of the line, because it was starting to be a long day and I had a friend who had flown into town and was having dinner with us in a couple of hours.


When we got up to Drew, I went first and I pulled out my "Revenge of the Jedi" poster that I had bought for a Christmas gift for my wife and I in December 1982. Just a few days after I had already put it in a frame and hung it on the wall of our apartment, George Lucas announced that the name of the film had been changed to "Return of the Jedi". The value of my fifteen dollar investment multipled by ten or twenty times and we had a unique collectors item.

Drew gave me some good advice on where we ought to place the signature. He discouraged the idea of signing on the textured section and offered to sign with a silver sharpie on the black area at the bottom. I joked that he was the expert on signing, since the only thing I ever signed was a check. He quickly joked back with me, "Well did you bring one, show me."  The guy in front of me had brought the Black Sabbath album with him to be signed and I saw a reprint of a "Revenge" poster also.  Amanda had suggested weeks ago, that we take the jacket from "John Carpenter's The Thing" to get it signed. The Laser Disc cover was an unusual item and Drew commented on it by pointing out the places that the video company had enhanced and extended his work from the poster.

It was terrific getting to speak with Mr. Struzan for even just the few moments we shared. He was enthusiastic with everyone and friendly as could be. We walked away with a very satisfied heart and a great memory. There was a raffle/drawing after the screening and several nice prizes were distributed. We did not have the winning numbers, but I did get a nice shot of the beautiful art lithography that summarized Drew's work with George Lucas, and had both Drew's signature and the incredibly rare George Lucas signature as well.

I'm shamefully envious of that lucky guy who had the right combination of numbers and got a ticket twenty people after I did.

On returning home after our dinner with my friend, I thought I'd add a couple of photo close-ups of the graphically elegant signature of Drew Stuzan on our two treasures.
First up, "The Thing":

Finally, here is my original "Revenge of the Jedi" poster signed by a true original, the talented and kind Drew Stuzan:

Outdoor Movie LA Calendar Hollywood Forever Cemetery

Outdoor Movie LA Calendar Hollywood Forever Cemetery



This list rocks and if you want to enjoy the Southern California Summer, you need to find one of these events to attend.

The Bounty amd Sixteen Candles: The 30 Years on Project

From the Thirty Years on Project. Click the poster to go to the entry.

Also from 1984, the John Hughes classic. Again, click the Poster and enjoy.

The Amazing Spider-Man 2

We have a new winner in the race to be the weakest Spider-Man movie ever. Leading the pack for seven years was the nearly universally reviled "Spider-Man 3".  While it was certainly the least favorite of mine, I have never been a hater like so many others. It was a disappointment and at times a little silly. What it never was was boring. "The Amazing Spider-Man 2" is just that. Equally bloated with plot elements and villains, but managing to be entertaining for only about a third of it's more than two hour running time. The second entry in the reboot of a series that probably did not need to restart so soon, this film will be the biggest disappointment of the year to geeks and movie executives everywhere. The comic book fans will pick it apart for it's flaws and the money men will second guess how they took a sure thing and turned it into this.

There are long stretches in the movie where we get an ill defined domestic drama featuring Peter Parker, His girlfriend Gwen and his Aunt May. This is not what people turn out for. The back and forth love affair has a couple of sweet moments, but it all feels pointless and without any real motivation. If Peter is going to make the decision to stop seeing Gwen, why does he spend all his time following her around and mooning over her? Why does Gwen take him back when she knows how he is not able to make a commitment? Why would anyone care is the two of them have created no stake for the audience to begin with? Maybe if I had re-watched the last film right before seeing this one, it might have helped, but I don't think so.

The opening chase and battle with a barely recognizable and incoherent Paul Giamatti as a Russian gangster who may figure in the plot later, was sadly divisive for me. The way it is shown, from camera positions and Peter's perspective and then at street level if gracefully imagined. It just doesn't look very good. The animated CGI images are blurry around the edges, the colors look weak and it seemed flat. It is possible that this resulted from the effort to make this a 3D spectacular, but I did not see it in 3D and it looked cheap. The spitting gibberish uttered by Giamatti in the opening is Shakespeare compared to the "Ve av vays of making u talk" accented dialogue that comes from the "scientist" who is supposed to contain the villain "Electro" later in the film.  It was literally embarrassing to listen to this cliche speak from the screen. This movie feels slapped together in a way that "Spider-Man 3" might have been, but at least there, the seams were only visible when Peter Parker goes dark. In this movie, every villain is half thought out, every Peter Parker domestic problem is written as if it were important but plays like it is not, and all of the action scenes are less than exciting.

I think Andrew Garfield is a great choice for the part. He and Emma Stone have a nice chemistry, but their story pales in comparison to the Mary Jane material that was explored in the first series of films. The reason it does not live up to it's potential is that it was underwritten. The conflict they have should play out with more emotional investment and it is instead brittle and conventional. I am a softie when it comes to emotions. I love those Spielberg moments that deliberately try to pull a tear from your eye. A good commercial or a dog story on the news or even a piece of gossip about a kid in my wife's class can make be sniffle. The resolution of this story left me unmoved. I'm told that fans of the Spider-Man comics think the Gwen Stacy story line is the apex of the emotional journey that Peter takes. I just sat there, stone faced and wondered why it wasn't working.

There are some easy bad choices to point to. Jamie Fox gets to play nerd, but he doesn't play an engineer as a geek, he plays it as an idiot. His Max Dillon practically drools when showing how awkward he is supposed to be. It is a caricature that makes a simple hero worshiping fan into a simpleton. "Electro" could use some motivation, but the psychological roots of his rage are conveniently skipped over.    Harry Osborn is a different matter. The roots of his problems are better explained, and they are set up well. It is the manner in which he steps so quickly into the role of the "Goblin" that feels rushed. Had they left the set up for a third film and waited for this character to appear, I think it could have worked much better. In this situation, it seems like they just wanted a movie of at least two hours so they grafted an additions element to flesh it out. The "Rhino" character and Giamatti's role are throw away bits which added nothing to the proceedings. If you stick around for the credits, you will get another example of the slap dash nature of the movie. In an attempt to tie in the Marvel Universe, there is an insert that has no context, no connection, and no reason for being there. It raises some interesting questions about cross promotion, but it had nothing to do with what we just spent two and a quarter hours living through. The whole enterprise is a letdown.

Gladiator (2000)

This month appears to be sword and sandal month at the AMC Classic scheduling center. Last week there was "The Ten Commandments", this week "Gladiator" and in the next couple of weeks we are going to get "Ben-Hur" and "Spartucus". Somewhere, Captain Oveur is smiling and thinking of Joey in ways that we cannot mention. This is an opportunity to write about a film I have loved since it came out, but have never posted on before. Given that it stars Russell Crowe, was directed by Ridley Scott and won the Academy Award for Best Picture, that seems a little strange to me.

"Gladiator" is only fourteen years old, yet it already feels like a classic because it launched a hundred imitators. Before 2000, it would have been a long time between historical epics featuring legions of ancient warriors conducting combat with swords and spears. After this picture succeeded, we got "Troy", "300", Kingdom of Heaven", "The Eagle", "Pompeii", remakes of Conan and cable series based on "Spartacus" plus a dozen others that don't pop into my mind at the moment. This film was hugely influential on the subject matter of films in the last decade and a half and also on their style.

Russell Crowe won the lone Oscar of his career in this centerpiece of a three picture Oscar nominated run. His turn in "A Beautiful Mind" might have been deserving, but his work in "Gladiator" is what made him the biggest star in the world for about five years. You would need to go back to 1959 to find a winning performance in an action film. This is a raw, bloodthirsty part that required physical agility, and intellectual engagement with the motivations of the character. Maybe if you count John Wayne in "True Grit", you'd get a film role that won because the character was a hero who used violence in an active way to achieve his character's purpose. Maximus starts the film as a warrior general. Not content to sit on the sidelines but charging into battle, swinging a sword and getting bloodied up close. His moment of despair at discovering the fate of his family, reaches our hearts and hardens them to the villain of the piece, who before this may have simply been a misunderstood wannabe. The challenge he issues to the crowd in the second of his five scenes in the arena, " Are you not entertained? Are you not entertained? Is this not why you are here?" is both an indictment and an incitement and Crowe has just the right take on it. Everyone who has seen the movie knows that the passage that won him the award was his self revelation to the Emperor at the conclusion of the first Coliseum fight. His controlled fury is the point at which the story has been tightened to it's greatest capacity, and we await the outcome because his voice told us it would be coming, in this world or the next.

As I listened to the music, there were several passages that sounded just like the themes from "Pirates of the Caribbean" and it is with good reason. Hans Zimmer recycled some of those heroic motifs from this film in the lighter pirate movie just a couple of years later. There are some great details in the production. The dusty red hued out post that is Proximo's home feels exotic and dangerous. The blue-grey tint to the battles in Germania were cold to contemplate and you could feel the dirt on your body. The golden shaded views of Rome and the gladiator contests themselves make the setting the center-point of all the proceedings.  Richard Harris leaves the film early but still makes an impression. Joaquin Phoenix as Commodus has a terrific scene with Harris, that makes us temporarily sympathetic. He manages to turn that into revulsion by delivering the provocative description of the fate of Maximus' family in a tone that makes the words even more horrible. His work contributed to Crowe's performance substantially in that section. Oliver Reed leaves this planet with what might have been his finest performance. This movie has dozens of great elements to it that make it so worthwhile.

It was just me and one other guy in the theater today. AMC needs to build this programming up a little more. I could not figure out why I was not seeing trailers for the other films coming up in this series, instead of the two art house releases that may never make it to these local theaters. The cashier in the Box Office, was surprised when I ordered my ticket, she did not even know the fim was playing. That is at least the third time I've had that reaction when I went up to the ticket window for these showings. AMC, you are doing a great thing with this program, but get the promotion up to speed and let's get a few more seats filled. There are others like me who would make the effort a couple extra steps were taken in letting people know what is happening.

The Other Woman

I think everybody knows the answer to this before it opened, but I'll go ahead and ask and answer the question anyway. Is there any way that this movie will be any good?     No.

I have liked Leslie Mann in other films, she is an every day kind of attractive. She is a talented comedic actress. She should have looked at this script and run the other way. Having made the movie, she should now sue the producers for turning her into a whining, needy, idiot, character who is made to look unattractive and stupid in nearly every sequence in the film. I have always had a thing for women in hats, maybe I saw Casablanca and and fell in love with Ingrid Bergman at a young age. This movie may have cured me of that fetish. Whenever the director wanted her to look awful, he put her in a hat that not even Bergman could have sold.

Cameron Diaz is still an attractive woman, but she is a little older now and sometimes looks a bit well worn at times. Her smile still twinkles, and her hair is cute in whatever form it shows up in, but either the sun or plastic surgery have given her a tougher look than she probably deserves. Now I will say there was a trailer for "The Sex Tape" playing before this movie and she looked terrific in that, so maybe the director of photography needs to share some of the blame here. She has been funny in a dozen movies. Many of which I liked but others have dismissed (eg. "Knight and Day") Here she has nothing funny to do or say. There are moments when I wondered if she knew what the tone of the film was supposed to be.

I don't really know Kate Upton. She is a beautiful woman and apparently world famous, probably for being beautiful. It turns out she has made three films now and I have seen all three of them. I have no memory of her from the other two at all. So while beauty is certainly a calling card, it is not a memory card, because unless she is on the beach in a bikini, I suspect her acting career will be limited. I hope that doesn't sound too mean, I don't want it to. I was just not convinced that she needed to even be in this movie.

This could almost be a remake of "The First Wives Club" from 1996. Except instead of three philanderers, we have one serial philanderer and the women he has cheated on. It's a woman's empowerment revenge story. Unfortunately, none of the main characters is likable enough to feel much sympathy for and at times they are downright irritating. The male character in the story is played with a tone that guns from suave James Bond sex machine to doofus Jeff Daniels in "Dumb and Dumber". Nothing in the way any of these characters act is in the realm of reality, which would be alright if it was all revenge fantasy, but it isn't. There is another romance shoehorned onto the story, a superfluous character played by Don Johnson, who looks great by the way, that is distracting and totally predictable, and some cultural references to  the French that might have worked if the story had stuck to the comedy and not veered into melodrama.

It doesn't work. I did not expect it to, and the two women who went with me agreed. It's the only new wide release this weekend, so maybe it will make some money, but you can look for a quick exit from theaters and an even quicker exit from your memory.

The Ten Commandments

Nothing celebrates Easter and Passover like "The Ten Commandments". Getting a chance to see it on the big screen is also a treat. I may have done this with my kids back in the late eighties or early nineties but I can't quite remember. I do know that if I did, it was not in the pristine digital form that the movie was delivered to us today in. Although it was a theatrical release for one day, I am pretty sure this was the home Blu-ray version, complete with Entrance and Exit Music, and an intermission. The problem was that they really did not take a break at the intermission, the music played briefly and then the entr'acte for the second half started. After the whole experience was over, as I was waiting for my family to exit the ladies room, I heard a young woman speaking to her father about how long the movie was that they had just seen. It sounded like they saw "Heaven is for Real". The dad was explaining why he thought it was just long enough and she said it could have been longer. Her phrase was something like "I've seen a movie that was two hours thirteen minutes, so this could have bee longer and it would not be a problem". Having just come out of a movie that runs three hours and forty minutes, I chuckled to myself and thought about how lucky I am that I can be enraptured for that long without starting to feel ADD.

A Screen Shot from the entry way to show that I really was in the theater watching this.

The spectacle of "The Ten Commandments" starts with a stirring speech by director Cecil B. DeMille. It extols the virtues of the story as the beginning of real freedom and he makes a very pointed comparison to some of the political issues of 1956. It turns out that he sees it as a very anti-communist film because it concerns totalitarianism by one man over the rule of law that governs all men. It was an apt message then and it is equally important today. Although the photographic effects are not as impressive as they once were because of the more sophisticated tools now available, they still pack a wallop and if you are caught up in the story, the imperfections hardly matter.  The characters are quite different but you can see the seeds of Ben Hur in Charlton Heston's Moses. It was an impressive performance in the first half, but once the make-up and hair took over in the second half, he was more a cardboard hero than he had been before.

I saw that my blogging friend Eric, learned all of his Jewish traditions from this film. I guess I'd have to say that this was pretty close to my education on the matter as well. DeMille assures us at the beginning that although there is a large period of time in which we do not know the history of Moses, that his film is based on historical works by ancient scholars and theologians. I'll take him, at his word, it seems unlikely that he committed any heresy that would get him in the same hot water with religious groups as Darren Aronofsky got into with the recent "Noah". The film has stood the test of time, so there is not a lot to add. If you don't care for biblical epics, this will be a burden to you, but if you are inspired by the events of the old or new testament, than this should be a treat that you can savor for a long time (3:40 to be exact).