October means....

I'll be seeing nothing but film noirs for the next couple of days, so that is what I'll be covering for the next week or so. Enjoy!

Summer blockbusters

Summer is drawing to a close meaning the end of another summer blockbuster movie season.  And one of the biggest movies of the summer was Jurassic World, a sequel to Jurassic Park.  Jurassic World was not directed by Steven Spielberg, but it was produced by him.  Thanks to my beloved AFI, I saw 3 Spielberg adjacent movies: Jaws, Jurassic Park, and Jurassic World; and these 3 movies are roughly 20 years apart in release.  While I watched these movies this summer, I could definitely see the evolution of the summer blockbuster.  Jaws was one of the earliest movies that is considered a summer blockbuster.  Due to technology based issues, that movie is heavily character and plot driven with slow building tension.  There are still some typical action heavy scenes but it is definitely more about the substance over style and flash.  Jurassic Park was a very technology heavy summer film with an interesting of computer generated effects and practical effects, specifically all those motorized dinos.  While Jurassic Park is effects heavy, there is still a lot plot and character building involved in the movie (I was legitimately sad when Muldoon died) .  I feel like Jurassic Park is when it starts to turn a relay more on the effects and less so on the story.  Because that was extremely true when thinking about Jurassic World.  I enjoyed my time at the movie because some of the action set-pieces were quite good, there was not enough character development to make me care about anyone in the movie (I had a like bit of interest in a couple of characters but that was more due to the actors not anything about the character).  The effects in Jurassic World are all computer generated and the thrust of the movies is all about spectacle.  Which is totally fine for a summer movie but it doesn't really stick with you or really make repeated viewing interesting.

Also a side note, it was kind of a bummer that female protagonist in Jurassic World was such a bummer.  I found that Ellie in Jurassic Park was really interesting and she had a lot of agency in the film because she was smart, humorous, and brave.  The woman in Jurassic World (it is telling that I can't even remember her name) was kind of uptight and boring for a majority of the movie (until the end when she runs in high heels)

Book vs. Movie: Jurassic Park Edition

When I saw Jurassic World a couple weeks again, I liked it but it made me just really want to re-watch Jurassic Park.  And, yet again, the AFI Silver has not let me down by having a 90s film festival which included Jurassic Park so I got to see it again on the big screen.  But seeing on big screen reminded me how much I enjoyed reading to book in high school so I thought that I would read/listen to the audiobook which I've been doing to the last week or so.  In general, I find that I prefer the book over the movie, but my opinion is the complete opposite in this case.  The movie is about 300 times better for quite a few reasons:

• Several dinosaur encounters are removed.  After awhile, the interactions are not tense, just boring.  And there are so many other run ins with the T-Rex that again are not super tense.
• The velociraptors are in the mix much earlier.  You don't really see them until about the last 1/3 of the book.  
• Lex is the younger child in the book but the older child in the movie.  And making her is older sister is much better because she becomes a more interesting (and less annoying character).  Also, it is nice to see a girl not being completely helpless (she is very proactive in the kitchen scene and in the control room).
• Ellie is not Alan's student in the movie, she is his contemporary which the makes them more like equals.  And she is much more prominent in the movie than the book.  She is was more badass (and interesting) in the movie.  

I seriously may never feel the need to read the book again, the movie is way better!

The Power of Belief

I was able to catch one my most favorite on the big screen this past weekend at the AFI Silver: Gaslight (the excellent 1944 version).  It stars Charles Boyer, Ingrid Bergman, and my beloved Joseph Cotten.  And gave rise to the term "gaslighting" which means a person is made to this he or she is going crazy through the machinations of someone else.  It comes from the fact that when Charles Boyer turns on the gaslight in the unused attic, it cause the gaslight in Ingrid Bergman's bedroom (or whatever room she is in) to flicker and reduce in intensity.  And, Ingrid Bergman is the only to see it.  So this, in addition to Charles Boyer making her think that she is constantly losing or misplacing things (including pictures) and the belief that her mother was insane as well, makes Ingrid think she is crazy.  But (one) thing that saves her is the Joseph Cotten believes her.  He believes that she isn't losing or misplacing things, she isn't imagining the flicker of the gaslight.  And most importantly, he believes her before he witnesses the gaslight flicker personally.  This movie can really cement the idea that having someone else believe in is extremely powerful.

Agent Carter!

After not writing posts for a few months, I've gone a little crazy in making up for it today.  I meant to write about how much I was enjoying Agent Carter when it was on in February, but I was filling all my free time with movies from TCM.  But Agent Carter is on my mind now because it got renewed for a second season last week!  And I am so happy because I adored this show.  It was a great little 6 episode story that was fun, fast, and fabulous.  It was really good to see a female action protagonist and Haley Atwell is just so fun to watch.  A lot of the fight scenes reminded me of Alias and there is nothing wrong with that!.  Haley Atwell had great chemistry with all the other actors and she always looked like she was enjoying herself in the role.  She was my favorite part in the first Captain America movie so it was nice to see some of the gaps in her story-lined filled.  Although, I loved the show, I hope they stick to the 6 episode order.  That seemed like a good amount of time to tell an interesting story without padding it out to filled 13 or 22 episodes (writing a show that is not really a procedure and relies quite a bit of show mythology can be difficult and not everyone can pull it off easily or consistently).  I would rather have 2 or 3 short but consistently good seasons with these characters that 4 or 5 longer and uneven seasons.  But I'm hopeful and glad that ABC renewed Agent Carter!

Go Flash Go!

One new TV show this year that I have be super loving has been The Flash on the CW.  For me, comic book adaptations are sort of a mixed bag.  I don't really enjoy the super dark ones (i.e. Batman Begins) but I really like the ones with the lighter touch (like last year's Guardians of the Galaxy which was one of my favorite movies).  I have tried watching the show that The Flash was spun-off from, Arrow with mixed success.  I got about half-way through the first season and then I stopped watching it, I may have another run at it this summer.  So I wasn't sure I was going to like The Flash.  However, I wanted to try it out mostly because my beloved Jesse L. Martin is in it (and I've liked some of the stuff from the executive producer Greg Berlanti).  I was pleasantly surprised with the pilot which seemed to have a light touch but was still able to have some really emotional (and earned moments).  It is one of the few shows that I watched in real-time (meaning day of airing, not on Hulu) because the first season throughout has been really solid. The writers did a great job of pushing the various story lines forward without letting any story spin its wheels for too long or not getting attention (left dangling).  The casting is really solid, no one it really out of their element talent-wise (the lead, Grant Gustin is really great, and his dad is played by the actor what was The Flash in the earlier TV adaptation in the 90s, so that is fun)  And the first season finale was really good (again there were some great emotional moments that felt earned and realistic).  I am still loving Jesse L. Martin in it and they upped the ante in back half of the show by adding Victor Garber (never a bad idea to add Jack Bristow!).  The other thing the show has done in their favor (in my opinion), is really good use of CGI effects.  In general, it never seems like they are trying to do too much with the CGI that makes it crazy unbelieveable/fakey looking.  So good on you The Flash, can't wait to see you next season (maybe I'll catch some summer reruns).

The perfect show that I didn't know would be perfect

I've been really busy at work and therefore really tired and stressed.  And somehow, Netflix is magic (or at least we have fantastic synergy) and the disc I got on Friday was the Best of Match Game.  Which was a perfect way to unwind.  Whoever picked the episodes for Best of Match Game clearly watched the show consistently and all the ones (so far) feature my two favorite panelist Brett Somers and Charles Nelson Reilly. The lightness of the episodes was a perfect way to unwind after a long week and I loved it. And it is no surprise that I am going to get another disc this weekend.

Oscar time on TCM

It is the 31 days of Oscar on TCM which is always my favorite month(ish) on TCM.  I think they also do a good job of showing the big Oscar movies (your Citizen Kanes, your Bridges of the River Kwai) and the smaller lesser known Oscar movies (like The More the Merrier).  And almost every year I get to see little gems that I wouldn't really see otherwise (like one year when I got to watch Bullit and The French Connection back-to-back, which were shown in like that because both movies shared the same stunt driver).  So far this year, my favorite discovered movie is The Yearling.  Which I, surprisingly, have never seen (given that it stars Gregory Peck and Jane Wyman).  I really enjoyed it (which my mother recommended that I watch).  The cinematography was top notch and there was some wonderfully composed shots. And of course Gregory Peck was so good as was Jane Wyman.  And I cried of course, but not really at the parts about the deer, more due to scenes between Jody and Ory (Jane Wyman).  I highly recommend it!

Boo, Academy, Boo!

The Oscar nominations were announced today and I am kind of in shock how much Oscar love "The Imitation Game" received.  I saw it this weekend and while I didn't hate it, I was severely underwhelmed. I felt like it was a competent movie,  but not a great movie.  I thought it looked great so I have no issue with any of the technical nominations.  But I do not understand the nominations for Best Director, Best Actor, or Best Supporting Actress.  The plot was kind a mishmash mess, there was a subplot that was never really resolved and what I think was supposed to be the climax came at a really weird time in the movie that somehow seemed both too early and too late so the denouement was very unsatisfying .  I really hated the endless flashbacks/flashfowards, look movie I can pay attention to complex plots but if you do nothing to make Alan Turning look different, I can't really tell if the scene takes place in 1939 or 1942.  Plus, I felt like you don't really learn about Alan Turing and the end was such a cop-out (and just kind of ended).  I learned more about Alan Turning from an 45 minute episode of RadioLab than in a two hour movie.  And to me, all these problems are due to the director so I really feel like the nomination for the director was undeserved.  Plus, Academy, you nominated the movie Selma for Best Picture but you couldn't nominate the female African-American director (especially, since, you know all the other acting nominations and most of the directing nominations went to white people and this was a chance to be inclusive).  I like Benedict Cumberbatch, but his Alan Turning is very Sherlock-y to me (with some stuttering) and I think that there were more interesting performances than this.  And I know that I have issue with Keira Knightly (I've never really liked her), but again I felt like her performance (and that role) was so like middle of the road and uninteresting.  I guess my biggest issue with the movie is that Alan Turning had a interesting and tragic life so an interesting movie could be made about his life, but The Imitation Game is not it.

As a side note, I know that the Academy has a history of not recognizing great talent (like the fact Joseph Cotten never won) but it is kind of aggravating that the Academy is honoring such a bland-y blanderson movie.

I judge because I love

I am working my way through the later seasons of Law and Order.  My favorite detective pair was Briscoe and Green because I love both of those characters and actors.  Once Jerry Orbach left the show, Green (played by Jesse L. Martin) cycled through a couple different partners with my favorite being Lupo and the absolute worst being Nina Cassidy.  Any time I see an episode with Cassidy, I get mad all over again.  Because she is terrible.  The actress was not great and the writing for her was never particularly strong.  She is supposed to be a tough cop, but they never were able to make her more that one-dimensional character and therefore settle into using cliches (I don't know if the writers/producers told the actress to walk that way, but she walks in a way a woman thinks a man walks).  Which makes me even angrier.  In theory having a female detective would be great, seeing a woman in a male-dominated profession.  But even from the beginning, the writers shoe-horn her into the squad.  Cassidy doesn't earn her way onto the homicide squad (in a great scene with Van Buren, she (Van Buren) describes the years she working on Narcotics and undercover before transferring to homicide), she seems to be moved over to the homicide squad as a PR move.  It seems like the writers want you to root for Cassidy and believe that she is a natural at being a detective.  But it is not believable and you (me) just hate her.  There is a reason she only lasted a season, which was a season too long.  I think a better actress would have helped (Milena Govich can't pull it off) but even then, it might not be believable (although if Rosa from Brooklyn-Nine-Nine, played the character, I would have enjoyed the character much more).

I know it is ridiculous to complain about a (cancelled) show that aired almost a decade ago.  But as I mentioned, I've just started Season 17, the season of Cassidy (the season I will totally watch because my love of Green (and McCoy) >  my hatred of Det. Cassidy.

Cat People, or Be careful of shadows

The first horror film I am going to talk about is Jacques Tourneur's Cat People (1942) that was produced by Val Lewton (who produced many horror films and wrote the story on which Cat People is based). The movie focuses on Irena, a fashion designer, who falls in love with a man named Oliver.  Irena is of Serbian descent and there is a legend in her hometown that the women become panthers when sexually aroused (known as Cat People).  Irena is convinced that she is one of the Cat People but she is persuaded to marrying Oliver (the marriage is never consumated due to Irena's fear of killing Oliver in her panther state). Oliver convinces Irena to see a psychiatrist who tells her that her beliefs are due to a childhood trauma (her father dying under mysterious circumstances).  Meanwhile, Oliver has been confiding in his assistant Alice about his martial problems.  After Alice confesses her love to Oliver, Irena follows Alice and these lead to two of the most tense scenes in cinema:


and



I don't want to spoil the ending for anyone, because I highly recommend that you see it (and the sequel!).  A film technique called the Lewton Bus originated in this film (which is any time tension is dissipated with moment of surprise).  What I really admire about this movie is it's use of a type psychological tension.  I feel like to use of shadows and just noise can make the person wonder if everything that is happening is imagined.  Everything is just the idea of Irena becoming a panther, it is never confirmed visually.  And of course, your imagination is the best assest for building tension.  This is where the 80s remake failed my opinion.  Everything is shown and to the extreme.  I think this story is better represented in a quieter and more reserved way.

The perfect Venn Diagram

I enjoy tense/scary movies but I cannot handle the gore in most horror films.  Which is why old school/pre-Texas Chainsaw Massacre horror films are perfect for me.  Those movies can really ratchet up the tension with nary a dismemberment in sight.  I even enjoy the low-tech special effects that some films pull off.  And I know some of those movies are terrible.  I've seen a bunch of them on Mystery Science Theater 3000 (like Killer Shrews, The Horrors of Spider Island, Manos: The Hands of Fate, and Tormented).  But it is a genre that has its high points as well like Cat People, The Univnvited, or the Bride of Frankenstein.  So for the month of October, I am going to highlight some of my favorite scary movies (and most of them will feature very little gore).  And maybe this year will be the year I finally see Gregory Peck in The Omen (very unlikely though).

Let off some steam Bennet

I watch Commando a few weeks ago.  If there is one movie that can sum up the tendencies of most action films from the 80s, I feel that Commando could be that movie.  Excessive violence? Check.  Nudity (breasts) for no reason? Check. Synth heavy score?  Check.  Really terrible one-liners? Check.  Moments out of left field? Check.  The levels of ridiculousness in Commando is kind of beyond belief (in the opening credit Schwarzenegger and Alyssa Milino pet a wild fawn).  But honestly, I'm glad I saw it.  Because the score, by Oscar winner James Horner (he did Glory, Titanic, Apollo 13, and Braveheart), was so amazing.  Commando might be the only action film with a score that feature both steel drums and pan flute.  This movie was bananas but of a kind of good in a so bad it is good kind of way.  The script is terrible with so many bad one-liners delivered by that great thespian Arnold Schwarzenegger.  And the poor main bad guy has a physique like a regular 40-year old man (kind of chunky with a beer gut), and they dress him in leather pants, a chain mail sleeveless shirt, with a leather choker and then make the actor and Schwarzenegger contemporaries/members of the same special forces team (implying that one guy kept up his training and the other let himself go).  Oh and Dan Hedya (who is of Syrian descent) is cast as a wannabe Central American dictator.  Oh the 80s, you were adorable.

And here is part of the score for your listening pleasure:

A more modern musical

I saw Quartet last week and to say that I enjoyed it would be an understatement.  I loved it.  The plot of the film is a number of retired musicians are planning a show to keep their retirement home open.  Three members of a quartet of famous opera singers (that sang a renowned/quintessential version of Rigaletto) and the fourth member comes to the house and is coaxed into performing with them again for the event (I don't think this is giving anything away). It was the directorial debut of Dustin Hoffman and I thought he did a great job.  The movie is mostly made up of these small and subtle moments which I think falls in line with that generation of British persons. The film is very quiet but that just makes some of the moments shine.  And the music is fabulous, many beautiful classic and operatic pieces.  All of the members of the retirement home are actual opera singers or musicians so it feels so believable and appropriate when  a cast member starts singing or playing an instrument (for example, I loved the pianist who had some of the best facial reactions throughout the movie).  I would have still enjoyed the movie if Maggie Smith wasn't a member of the quartet, and she gives such a realized and solid performance. I do think of this movie as a musical and unlike most classic musicals, the songs that are sung are not reflecting the emotions of a singer or advancing the plot.  Rather, the songs are more of a necessity of the singer/musician.  You can see that the character has been in a musical state of mind for so long, that it feels completely natural for them to start singing or playing.  I highly recommend it!

You Could, but should you?

I just finished watching Three Days of the Condor and I really enjoyed it.  I love the paranoia tinged movies from the 70s like All the President's Men, The Parallax View, Klute, The Conversation, and The China Syndrome.  And Three Days of the Condor firmly falls into that category as movies that have a heavy influence of paranoia that is an aftershock of the Watergate scandal.  With that in mind as I was watching it, I fell like the current atmosphere of distrust towards the government (warranted or not) right now means it is the perfect time to remake this film.  So I started casting the (non-existent) remake:

Joe Turner (Robert Redford): Kyle Chandler.  I thought about maybe Idris Elba (I love him), but I thought a more low-key actor would be better.  And I think Kyle Chandler is believable as a very cerebral person but with enough of a physical presence that he could be threatening.

Kathy Hale (Faye Dunaway): Connie Britton.  I can pass up a chance to reunite a TV couple! But seriously, I do think she would be great in the role.  I think she could balance the strength and vulnerability in the role.   Joe does pose a little bit a physical threat but quickly they learn to trust each other.  I thought about maybe Haley Atwell, who I like a great deal, but I wanted someone closer in age to Kyle Chandler.  

Joubert (Max van Sydow): Jean Dujardin.  Cards on the table, I adore Jean Dujardin.  The character of Joubert is Alsatian, so I think it is important to maintain that characteristic.  Plus, you get the feeling that Joubert can and will do just about anything for a price, but he still respect Joe Turner.  And I think that Jean Dujardin would really have fun with this no-holds barred role.

Higgins (Cliff Robertson): Idris Elba.  The potential for duplicity is key for this role and Idris Elba could clearly pull it off (and the American accent).  If he isn't available, substitute either Mark Ruffalo or Clive Owen.

Wabash (John Houseman): Gene Hackman.  His last movie should not be Welcome to Mooseport.  Bring him out of retirement and put him in the small just scene-stealing role.

Director (Sydney Pollack): Either David Fincher or Tomas Alfredson.  Both of them have worked on films that feature of heavy dose of obsession (Fincher in Zodiac) or paranoia (Alfredson in Tinker, Tailor, Soldier, Spy) so they could competently make this movie.  And I think they would maintain more of the thriller part of the movie without adding additional physical action scenes.

Thoughts?

Guys and Dolls

And now, the only reason to watch Guys and Dolls (starting at 1:10):

The view of World War I from World War II

In honor of the centennial of World War I, TCM is showing many (many, many) movies set during World War I.  And it is so interesting to see movies about World War I, made during World War II (especially British films).  I watched a movie tonight called British Intelligence (starring Margaret Lindsey and Boris Karlof [with a limp, a facial scar, and a French accent]). There were so many veiled references to Hitler, it was practically a propaganda movie.  There were several mentions of a man thinking he was better than others, and put himself above everyone (as well as lines similar to "it has happened in the past, it is happening now, and it will happen in the future").  Those British Intelligence officers were practically clairvoyant.

As a side note, the other World War I movies I've been watching/planning to watch include Ever in my Heart  (which was unexpectedly depressing) and The Dark Journey (also known as Those Anxious Years).  And all those movies feature women either as spies or dealing with the consequences of being married to a spy.  I really think that women had much more interesting roles back then.  And really, I think the term "a woman's picture" shouldn't be quite so derogatory. Sure, while a lot of those pictures quickly veered in to over-drawn/over-wrought melodrama, some of them were very subtle and often featured women doing what every was necessary to survive (especially during wartime), like Since You Went Away and Mrs. Minever.

Summer Stock

I'm finally getting around to writing about a musical.  And the first I am going to talk about is the MGM film starring Gene Kelly and Judy Garland, in their final movie together, Summer Stock.  And the movie opens with this:

The plot is not very heavy/difficult, a shade above the classic "let's put on a show" variety.  Judy Garland (Jane) and (my beloved) Marjorie Main (Esme) are attempting to keep a farm afloat.  After the two farm workers quit, Jane procurs financing to get a tractor (which is predicated on her marriage to the son of the bank owner).  Which leads to this sequence:

Jane's younger sister Abigail then arrives with Gene Kelly (and Phil Silvers) and an acting company in tow.  There is several dance numbers and disagreements between Judy and Gene and in exchange for helping around the farm, Jane allows the acting troupe to practice in her barn. Judy and Gene fall in love and really all you need to know about the end of the movie is this:


This film is a little overshadowed by Judy Garland's personal problems.  The movie took six months to shot and during that time, she was being treated for drug dependency and saw a hypnotist and lost about 20lbs before the movie was finished (she is much thinner in the final number).  However, despite that, I think the movie is very enjoyable.  The songs are well-written and well-performed and the choreography is interesting (Gene Kelly choreographed most of his numbers but not Get Happy).  And that last song is so well done.  I always get a little sad watching Judy Garland movies, knowing what happens to her (A Child is Waiting is devastating to watch not only because of the content of the movie, but is it her second to last film role).

Summer Plan

On the heels of seeing Seven Brides for Seven Brothers on the big screen, I have decided that for the summer, I would write blog entries about musicals.  I want to cover both the tentpole musicals and the less-known ones.  And I want to think a little bit how the movie musical has changed over the years.  So here's to a song and dance filled summer!

What I learned...

I saw one of my favorite movies on the big screen (at the AFI Silver naturally): Seven Brides for Seven Brothers.  And so naturally, here is a bulleted list of what I learned watching it on the big screen:

• Really, no man should have a beard.  If you must have a beard, you must have a beard, you better maintain that beard and not let it become straggly looking (this was also influenced by seeing a Nationals player with a beard that looked like he did not have a razor, a mirror, or reflective surface). 
• Millie somehow managed to do the work of about 12 women.  She washed the dirty clothing of 6 men in the space probably 2 hours.  And she made them breakfast. 
• The gender politics in this movie are kind of terrible.  The "brides" are kidnapped and treated like objects for a large chunk of the movie.  However, Millie takes no shit from anyone.  
• The shirts Millie makes the brothers are basically amazing.  
• I had a lot of questions of about the supplies availble to Millie when she was up in the mountains.  She must have gone through so much flour and yeast, or if not yeast than baking powder.  She makes a lot of biscuits.  
• The amount of effort that Jeff Richards (Benjamin) put into his dancing, it is like a minus effort because he slide-lined Julie Newmar, who was trained as a ballerina.  
• Finally, after the number of times that I have seen this movie (at least 50), I can confidently tell you the couples.  
• In this scene below, the sound that is made when Epharim, Daniel, Frank, and Caleb slide under the two boards is glorious in surround sound: 
• I super love this movie.  I was smiling for about 80% of the entire movie.