It is almost beyond comprehension to me that the first time I saw either of the Paddington films was not in a theater. It is however sadly true so this is the first time I get an opportunity to properly write about one of them on this project. For those of you unaware, "Paddington" is the name of a bear who has migrated from Peru to London, and is taken in by a kindly and quirky family, the Browns. The stories are full of fish out of water moments as Paddington moves from being a stranger in a strange land to a loved member of the family and community.
Everywhere you look in the movie, there are charming images and clever little visual prompts. Paddington hops on a bicycle, driven by a local, makes a quick connection to a trash collector's truck that he hitches a ride on, and then meets a bus where he can end up at his destination. There is always a slapstick moment or two for the kids, but adults will smile at the good natured way that Paddington gives everyone he meets the benefit of his trust. Of course we know that doing so is a dangerous thing and the poor bear ends up in trouble as a consequence.
There were frequent moments in the film, where I was reminded of a Wes Anderson movie. The sets, the camera angles and the movements of the actors in the scenes mimic some of the tropes of an Anderson film. The color palate of the prison where Paddington ends up, with the accidentally pink inmates garb is especially reminiscent of some of those Anderson films. Here however, we have an exceedingly polite bear as our central figure, rather than one of the grotesque figures from "The Hotel Budapest".
Enhancing this second Paddington movie is the presence of Hugh Grant, playing the heavy part, but doing so with an incredibly light touch. In many places in the film, you can spot him mocking his own career and joking about his thespian skills. The first film had Nicole Kidman as the villain, and her plot line and tone were quite a bit darker than might be fitting for a kid's picture. Grant however is a perfect, goofball style foil for our intrepid bear with the positive attitude.
This film was at the State Theater, next door to the Paramount. Several of the Family film series pictures will be screening here rather than in the grand movie palace next door. I was happy to see the theater full of families who had small children, most of whom were very cooperative with the idea of staying seated and quite during the film. The delightful howls of laughter when Paddington cuts hair in a barbershop or cleans windows at a high rise, were an extra bonus for a Sunday afternoon. I know some people don't like kids, but those people are deranged. A kid having a good time at a movie is one of the joyous things we should share in our culture.
I subscribe to a Pop Series at the Austin Symphony Orchestra and the final show in that series this season was a concert featuring music from my favorite film composer, Jerry Goldsmith. I looked forward to this evening all year long and it did not disappoint.
The opening of the concert was a fanfare, like you might get from one of the Major Studios at the start of their films. I'm not sure, but I think it might have been the fanfare written by Goldsmith for the Oscars. It was not credited in the show notes, but I do have a link for you if you want to hear it.
The Opening piece was from the Science Fiction film "Total Recall". It uses some non-traditional instruments, which was typical for Goldsmith. It sounds a little like a Basil Poledouris piece.
It is a powerful and driving theme that fits with an Arnold Schwarzenegger film. Loud and Bombastic with some banging percussion that gets you in the mood for spy games on Mars.
Long before I knew his name, Jerry Goldsmith had scored films that in my youth I saw on television. "The Blue Max" with George Peppard is a WWI flying movie about a German Pilot. seeking to become an Ace while also having a love affair with his commanding officer's wife. The flying sequences are quite good.
As the program went through each selection, Robert Faries, a writer, actor and dirctor from the Austin Arts community, introduced each piece with a little history and background on the film and how Goldsmith's work was used. His information was enlightening and enhanced the music selections greatly.
There was a medley of motion picture themes that were strung together in an effortless manner that made the styles that Goldsmith worked in seem incredibly vast. This included pieces from "The Sand Pebbles", "Chinatown", "Air Force One", "A Patch of Blue", "Poltergeist", "Papillion", "Basic Instinct" and my favorite Goldsmith work, "The Wind and the Lion".
The first half of the evenings program finished with a suite of music from "Gremlins". I mentioned it in a couple of posts in the past, "Gremlins" was the inspiration for me to write the only fan letter I ever composed. I sent it to him at Warner Brothers. I have no idea if it ever reached it's target but I am pleased to remember that I did reach out to this music giant when his work moved me.
After the intermission, we quickly dove back into some great science fiction music from "Capricorn One".
Goldsmith always tried to find the contrasting themes to the characters and scenes that the movies he wrote for presented. "First Blood" certainly needed action music, but there is a contemplative theme that permeates the movie. The show notes say "Rambo: First Blood II" but the tune is from the first film, this is an instrumental version of the theme song sung by Dan Hill.
Goldsmith and "Alien" director Ridley Scott did not agree on the tome for the theme of the film. Goldsmith reworked it to the satisfaction of Scott, but as Robert Faires explained, there were also old themes from previous Goldsmith compositions that got used as temp tracks and then stayed in the picture. Regardless of the controversy, the end title music is used in several spots in the film, it is a Goldsmith classic.
Many people will know Jerry Goldsmith because of his connection to "Star Trek". He composed the music for "Star Trek The Motion Picture" and the theme became the theme for the television series "Star Trek The Next Generation". He subsequently scored a few more of the Star Trek Films and TV Shows.
The encore consisted of two themes from movies about American Heroes of WWII. I have never seen MacArthur, but "Patton" is the film that made me fall in love with Goldsmith's music. A Fitting end to the show.
The Paramount continues to try topping itself with great programming on Friday evenings. This week we get a double feature featuring the great actress Pam Grier. The two films that are presented are at the far ends of her career. "Jackie Brown" was a prestige project from Quentin Tarantino that earned Pam Grier a Golden Globe nomination and should have earned her an Academy Award nomination for best actress. This movie was paired with a film from 1974, at the peak of her career in exploitation films, it is actually a pretty decent forerunner for "Jackie Brown", This one is called "Foxy Brown".
Let's start with "Jackie Brown". This is a Tarantino film based not on an original idea of his, or a hybrid of exploitation films that he saw as a child, but rather on the novel Rum Punch by Elmore Leonard. Tarantino adapted the book into a screenplay and made the central character a black woman so that Pam Grier could play the part. I haven't read the original text, I only know the screenplay from having seen the movie several times, but I can't imagine that the book is superior to the very clever screenplay that we get with this movie.
To Briefly summarize, Jackie Brown is an airline hostess for a low budget Mexican holiday flight operation, and she also makes extra cash by smuggling money for a gun Runner into and out of Cabo San Lucas. When things go wrong for Ordell, the gunrunner played by Samuel Jackson, Jackie looks like she is in the crosshairs of both the ATF and the violent Ordell. But you would never say that Jackie Brown was in over her head. This woman is whip smart, and fearless. And she devises a plan to get herself out of trouble with both of those sides.
The film is loaded with those Tarantino touches, such as mundane conversations turned into philosophical questions, expletive filled declarations of both love and hate, and a variety of characters that you don't really like but find very interesting. So it is clearly under Tarantino's thumb, and he makes the most of adapting somebody else's work to his kind of film. In addition to Jackie, there is one other character that is smart and sympathetic and that we will find interesting and ready to root for. Max Cherry is a bail bondsman who is being used by Ordell to make his targets available after they have been arrested. Robert Forrester, plays Max as a sympathetic and wise older man, who does play by the rules but finds himself attracted to the charm of Jackie Brown. Forester has to sell the idea that he is falling in love with the least amount of dialogue possible, in often very brief scenes. That he does so successfully accounts for his nomination as best supporting actor that year, the only Academy Award nomination that the film received.
As usual, Samuel L Jackson is full of expletives and attitude, and his character Ordell is one of the most loathsome psychopaths that we have seen in a mainstream story. This is a movie that plays it straight, and although Ordell looks like a comic book villain at times, he really does seem to feel like a real person, just not one that's very nice. Also along for the ride are Robert De Niro, as Ordell's dimwitted partner in training, and Bridget Fonda as the beach bum girl that Ordell likes to have around as eye candy, primarily because she is white. The dialogue between Fonda and Jackson is frequently brittle and very funny. Fonda's character is an attractive woman who is slightly over her youthful beauty and is now hardening into a harridan rather than a beach girl.
The cast is filled with very confident supporting actors including Michael Bowen, Chris Tucker, Tiny Lister, and most important of all Michael Keaton as the ATF guy that is interested in Jackie both professionally and romantically. Keaton and Bowen are the cops who are trying to manipulate Jackie into betraying Ordell, and Jackie has to outwit them as well as the dangerous gun dealer.
The film turns into a caper/con game movie in the last act, as Jackie and Max try to work out an exchange of money that implicates Ordell, frees Jackie from being under the thumb of the ATF, and also manages to separate the bad guy from his treasure. They do a dry run of the exchange so that the audience gets a sense of what's going to be happening, but of course Tarantino twists it around when they get to the big exchange, and he gives us the process from three or four different perspectives, starting at different times, but ultimately overlapping. It's a complicated sequence, but a good director has managed to make it completely understandable while still keeping us in suspense about what exactly is happening.
All of this only works because Pam Grier is a solid actress, who is finally getting a chance to play a smart character who doesn't rely on belligerence to get her way but rather on cleverness. She is terrific in the scenes where she has to face down Ordell, or when she is flirting with Max. She does get to do the belligerent bit a couple of times in the film, but interestingly she is playing a part with that belligerence, sort of a meta reference to earlier characters that she's played.
I was a guest on the Walt sent me podcast several years ago, where Todd Kristen and I talked about this film. The fact that Disney had bought Miramax, brought this movie into the house of Mouse, and the idea that Tarantino is responsible for a Disney movie just tickled us. I could not locate the episode, but believe me, we talked thoroughly about the film.
The second film in the program was from 1973, Foxy Brown. It's not as intricately clever as Jackie Brown is, but it does give Pam Grier a chance to show the badass that we will be seeing 25 years later in the other movie. I'm going to do a separate post covering Foxy Brown on my site "Grindhouse Alley". When that goes up I will link it here so you can see my thoughts on the second film in more detail.
I'm happy to say that even though it became a late night because of the double feature, most of the audience stayed for both movies. And everybody was very appreciative with Applause at the end of both films. I'll say once more, the Paramount Summer Classic Film Series has hit the mark.
We had a special trip to the Paramount this evening, see Superman 2, but that was not the thing that made the trip so special. We were invited to a tour of the theaters projection booth before the movie. This tour was supposed to be for several guests over the course of the evening, but we were the only ones who showed up and as a result we got a special personal tour, including a half hour conversation with tonight's on duty projectionist Chad. More about the tour in a minute, first a few words about the movie.
Superman 2 is one of the first movies that I heard people say as a sequel, it was superior to its original film. For a number of years I've believed that it was certainly a good film and maybe it rivaled the original film. This evening though, looking at it through fresh eyes, I have to say it's not nearly as good as I remembered it being. There are still some great sequences, and Christopher Reeve continues to be the definitive Superman, but so much of the movie is spoiled by clunky exposition, cartoonish bits that have been soldered onto the good action sequences, and a severe shortage of Gene Hackman as Lex Luthor.
Mr. Hackman's hammy performance as Luther was one of the joys of the original Superman. His scenery chewing and one-liners were enough to make the film feel fun, even well a truly dastardly plot was being carried out. Hackman gets to flex his muscles a little bit in the early part of the film, and then disappears for the entire second act of the movie. He does get a few zingers in during the last section of the film, but he should be getting more screen time. Maybe if there were fewer jokes about ice cream cones flying into faces, or roller skaters being forced backwards by the breath of the villains, or worst of all a guy continuing a phone conversation as the phone booth is knocked over and blown Away and he keeps talking while lying on the ground. These were dumb bits that could have been disposed of, and then Gene Hackman could have a little bit more screen time.
Unfortunately that kind of humor permeates several sections of the film. The opening sequence of the three escaped villains from The Phantom Zone actually plays pretty well even when there are some jokes. They never seem hokey. Once we get to Earth however, the hicks that the villains encounter in a town called East Houston, seem like stereotyped caricatures from the very beginning. We are supposed to be laughing at them even before they do anything funny. I never felt like laughing during this sequence. I did like the scene where General Zod and his two accomplices come to the White House to confront the president. When the president finally steps forward and takes a knee in the hopes of protecting human life, he utters the phrase "Oh God", and the general corrects him by simply saying his own name... Zod, now that was funny.
After establishing Lois Lane is a fearless reporter in the first act during the terrorist take over of the Eiffel Tower, she and Clark gets sent to Niagara Falls to cover a story for the magazine section of the Daily Planet. This is really just a justification for building the romance between Lois and Superman and setting up the dilemma that Kal-El faces when he has to choose between being Earth's protector or Lois's lover. Some of it works, some of it is a little too clunky. You do feel Clark's frustration and desperation when he has given up his powers and discovers that the three villains from Krypton are now on Earth. The trek he makes back to his Fortress of Solitude, is a little on the nose and of course unrealistic for a mere mortal. Those are questions however that don't really matter, because there's a bigger story coming.
A fight in New York City/ Metropolis is actually pretty nicely staged given the effects that were possible at the time. The problem is that the director, Richard Lester, keeps inserting moments of humor which take away from the drama of the sequence because they don't reflect something witty, but instead something that is too on the nose and preposterous. In the final act, Superman manages to accomplish several things with powers that we never knew he had before and that just feels a little too easy as a way of resolving the conflict. Oh, by the way, we are left wondering what happened to Gene Hackman's character after the villains are dispatched. We really don't know. But everyone was happy to cheer Superman returning the flag to the roof of the White House.
Back to the tour for a minute, we arrived promptly at 6:00 p.m. believing that that's when we were expected, but it turns out that it was open for an hour and that any group could arrive during that time for the tour. We waited a few minutes for somebody else to arrive and while we waited we chatted with several of the employees of the Paramount Theater. Krystal was one of the guides/ hosts for the tour and she was happy to listen to my stories about old movie theaters and the kinds of movies that Amanda and I like to go to. Danielle, who's in charge of the fan services for the Paramount was also quite happy to talk to us as she turned us over to one of the other employees to take us upstairs to the projection booth. Wendy was responsible for giving us the tour of the projection booth, and she introduced us to Chad who is the digital projectionist, and is working on becoming more proficient with the film projectors. They have some 35mm projectors and are also going to be doing five 70 mm presentations during the summer.
Chad was very good about telling us the history of the projectionists at the theater and he balanced the history with some nice technological information about the spotlights, the projectors, and the other equipment that we were getting a chance to see. When we got back downstairs we got a chance to chat with Monica who was the bartender in the Houdini Lounge area where the guests were supposed to congregate. It was a smaller crowd than I was expecting in the theater, and it was an even smaller crowd upstairs in the lounge, since it was just Amanda and me.
The employees were all interested in listening to us as we talked about theaters and movies and streaming and assorted other cinematic issues. I was very grateful that they took the time to pay attention to us. We felt special just getting a chance to do the tour, and when it winded up that it was just the two of us, we felt even more special. We got to hear a couple of ghost stories, see the scary bathroom for the projectionists, and got treated to some new friends at our favorite place in Austin Texas, the Paramount Theater.
When I wrote about this movie 10 years ago, I suggested in my post that the songs from this movie should have filled all the categories for best song at the Academy Awards. I stand by that statement because these songs do what a music piece in a film is supposed to do, advance the story, illustrate a problem faced by the characters, or tell us more about the characters themselves. All of the songs played by the band Spinal Tap in this movie do those things. I was reminded of this as I watched the film last night, and found myself tapping my toes and mouthing the words while simultaneously laughing.
This Is Spinal Tap is a documentary/ Mockumentary that tells the tale of a band that went from 60s pop to 80s heavy metal and suffered ups and downs like all musical groups do as the fads that they ride go in and out of fashion. Rob Reiner, Christopher Guest, Michael McKean, and Harry Shearer accomplish the task of making characters that we can laugh at and simultaneously identify with, at least to a point. Everyone has felt stupid doing something that others applaud, at the same time we love doing stupid things because we get to get away with it. Rockstars is a notorious for doing exactly this.
When this film came out we were at the height of hair metal popularity, and aging bands playing the nostalgia circuit. Spinal Tap may not have been a real band before this, but after this movie came out the actors who are also the songwriters discovered that their characters had an exterior life, and they have done subsequent tours and special events, and there's even a sequel in the works. Frankly this movie produces more laughs per minute than most other films are able to accomplish in 90 minutes. The only other movies that I've ever felt comparable to the laugh ratio are Mel Brooks films, Monty Python films, and a few early seventies gems. I sure hope that Tap can sustain the laughter in a new entry.
Once again I was at the beautiful Paramount Theater in downtown Austin enjoying a classic movie on a summer evening with several hundred like-minded folks. The audience at last night's screening laughed continuously and they all seem to get the joke. I could tell that several people in the audience were seeing this for the first time because their laughter was simply too spontaneous to reflect any memory. The movie is a brisk 90 minutes, with several performance set pieces that will leave you chuckling. If the shenanigans that take place during the Stonehenge number don't make you laugh, you probably have no sense of humor.
Let's be happy that metal music still exists, that rock bands from the 70s still make the rounds, and that fans of that genre can laugh at themselves when watching a film Like This Is Spinal Tap. Let's face it, if you can't enjoy someone else's amusement at your own foibles, then you were too stuck up to really be a rock fan. Let's tap into the next great song.
If you look elsewhere on the site you will find a list of my 10 favorite films. I cheated on one of the entries by listing both The Godfather and The Godfather Part 2 as a single unit. That's because I always think of them as one big movie that just got separated by 2 years. The stories integrate so incredibly well, and the casting of the younger versions of characters that we come to know in the first Godfather is so spot on, that it feels like it was planned from the very beginning.
I'm so happy that the Paramount scheduled Godfather Part 2 on its 50th anniversary, because this is a movie that should be celebrated regularly. I don't usually wait for a round number to rewatch the film, I think I saw it just a couple of years ago when I was doing my binge on "The Offer", the streaming series based on the creation of the original Godfather. I like to catch up with this movie as often as possible although it is 3 hours and 20 minutes, which means that I'm not sitting down for a casual watch. Fortunately this is an opportunity to see the film on the big screen and once again it is as impressive as I remember.
Actor John Cazale famously made only five movies, all of which were nominated for Best Picture, and three of them won the award. It's amazing to me that Cazale himself was never nominated. The only reason I can think that his performance in this film was overlooked is because there were three other supporting performances that were also pretty spectacular. It would have seemed odd at the Academy Awards if four out of the five slots had been taken up by actors in this film. Regardless Cazale's performance as Fredo, is both heartbreaking and frustrating. If you've never seen the movie I certainly am not going to spoil it for you, but let's just say that Michael never lets an offense to the family go unpunished.
The parallel structure of the two stories in this film starts with the rise of Vito Corleone as he and his family build a foundation in the early part of the 20th century in New York City , it is phenomenal. Robert De Niro, who did win this supporting actor award for his role in this film, actually looks like Marlon Brando might have looked in his leanest and hungriest years. He starts off as a naive waif, uncertain of where he fits in among the immigrants that he lives with and works around. When he encounters a young Clemenza, played with great personality by the late Bruno Kirby, Vito finds his way to his true destiny. Young Don Corleone was building his family up, but Michael Corleone in his desire to control his family completely, basically dismantles its core. In Godfather Part 3 we will get to see how it all plays out, but even without that pictures existence, we have a pretty clear idea of the wasteland that Corleone's life had become.
It's hard to imagine that Francis Ford Coppola was reluctant to do a sequel to the movie. He had so much success and a natural affinity for the material that it seemed inevitable that he would take on the task. The fact that he was able to use the studios desire for him to continue the story as a way of financing the film that he made between the two Godfathers, "The Conversation", is just an extra bonus. When you watch the scenes of young Vito Corleone stalking Fanucci across the rooftops of the Italian neighborhood that this supposed member of the black hand was in control of, it's like watching a tiger follow its prey. Inevitably there is violence, but Don Corleone does his best to keep the violence away from his family all of whom are all incredibly young at this point.
Michael's story is of course a huge contrast, he starts off with all kinds of Power, but can't keep the violence from intruding on the most personal parts of his life. The machine gun attack that takes place near the beginning of the film, highlights for his wife Kay, that the family is not really capable of going legitimate. Michael's inability to confront problems with his son, or understand his wife's pleas, makes him seem cold-hearted, when what he really is is a rock hard leader of a criminal organization. He lacks the warmth that his father had with his associates. There's a great scene where he seems to be calling his adopted brother Tom Hagan on the carpet for fielding a job offer from another Institution. He comes across as bitter, and unsympathetic. Contrast this to the scene in the first Godfather when Vito actually comforts Tom when Sonny is killed. The difference between Father and Son is subtly displayed in these two scenes. Vito always played the humble part very well. Michael on the other hand is arrogant and self-assured, and never once allows anybody to see him sweat. Hell even in Cuba Michael has a hard time relaxing a little with his brother or the business associates that he is working with.
Coppola gives us fantastic set pieces, featuring hundreds of extras in elaborate costumes with distinctive music that clearly sets the time and place of the scenes that are playing out. The street festival where young Vito is stalking Fanucci, the confirmation party in Lake Tahoe, and the New Year's Eve Revolution in Havana, are all spectacularly staged and probably a big part of why Coppola received the directors award that he was denied two years earlier. This was a big picture put together beautifully, with a huge degree of thought and care as to how the story was going to integrate the two lives.
I've told the story before of taking my girlfriend to see The Godfather and The Godfather Part 2 playing together back in the late 1970s. When the first film ended as we got up for an intermission to use the bathroom and maybe get something to drink, but the lights went down again and the second movie started immediately. We both sat down, skipped getting a drink, skipped going to the bathroom, and watch the second movie. We were hypnotized by the artistry of these two films. The fact that this woman sat with me for six and a half hours without a break only cemented my certainty that she was the woman I should spend my life with. So there's that story again, hope you enjoyed it.
50 years ago was the start of a wonderful relationship for me. This was the year that I discovered Mel Brooks. Both "Blazing Saddles" and "Young Frankenstein" came out this year, and I saw them with my high school friends who all laughed as loud as I did. We knew we were in the presence of somebody who knew how to be funny, especially to high school boys. "Blazing Saddles" was the first of these two films to be released in 74, and it's raucous, irreverent, and some times down right offensive. It was also a western, which I have a deep abiding Love for.
In spite of my admiration for "Blazing Saddles", I've always felt that it was the second best Mel Brooks film of 1974. "Young Frankenstein" goes beyond silly parody, to be a genuine tribute to and echo of the classic Universal horror movies. Of course it is hysterical, there was little doubt that with the input of Brooks and co-screenwriter Gene Wilder, that this is going to be incredibly funny. It turns out that it is also incredibly sweet, with a soft spot for all of the characters in the film, even some of those loathsome villagers who think it's time for a riot. There is something to laugh at and embrace in just about every scene.
To start off with, they made the film in black and white. In 1974 that was not very typical. Sure there were a few other films at the time that used black and white to suggest the past. Films like "The Last Picture Show", "Paper Moon", "Lenny" and a few more, They all use black and white to draw attention to themselves in a way that made them stand out in the crowded '70s field. But in the field of comedy, you don't get a lot of black and white films that are contemporary, until Woody Allen gets going a few years later. The truth is, this movie wouldn't have worked in color, because our collective memory of the Universal films is black and white. Boris Karloff may have had green face makeup when the original Frankenstein was created, but we only saw the black and white and that's what we remember. It would have been disturbing to have Peter Boyle on screen as the monster with a green face. Besides, all those great sets that were being used to make the movie wouldn't look nearly as Gothic and creepy if they were in color. The villagers walking through the forest with fog rising from the ground in black and white just makes sense.
It would be pretty hard to go wrong with a cast that includes Gene Wilder, Marty Feldman, Madeline Kahn, Teri Garr, and Kenneth Mars, but when you add a surprise guest performance by my favorite actor in a completely unexpected role, I'm just going to have to say this film approaches perfection. Let's face it Gene Hackman, as an avuncular blind man stumbling his way through making a new friend, may be the funniest 5 minutes in the whole movie, and that saying something.
The John Morris score is also something pretty special. It recalls Frankenstein with its limited score, Dracula with its borrowed themes, and classical source music. The little horn section gets its own joke when Marty Feldman as Igor, plays his little horn to accompany Inga on the violin. It's guaranteed to get a chuckle for you. Next to the sequence with Gene Hackman, the dance routine with Gene Wilder and Peter Boyle to "Puttin' on the Ritz" maybe one of the most bizarre, ridiculous, and ultimately perfect realizations of the absurdity of this story. Super duper.
As family-friendly as Young Frankenstein is, there are a couple of raunchy jokes built into the movie, especially at the end. Most of these will sail over the heads of kids, but teens and adults will smile at the sexual innuendo that is never explicitly stated. The film is certainly not as ribald as Blazing Saddles, but it's not G-rated for a reason. We are reminded once again how sadly we miss Gene Wilder on screen, his performance is one for the ages. The moment of his frustration when he can't get his two assistants to understand what he's asking for as he's being strangled by the monster, is both pantomime perfect, and then when he gets his voice back vocally hysterical. I have no patience for anybody who doesn't think this film is funny. It's so funny that I was amused by the slot machine that was based on it and was ubiquitous in Vegas two decades ago. Too bad you can't find those slots now, I'm really in the mood for dropping some coin and hoping to get a bonus.
