...it's not dark yet, but it's gettin' there...
I've seen almost every movie Kirsten Dunst has made. I think she's wonderful, and not just because she's half Scandinavian and half German, like me. In Marie Antoinette, just out on DVD, she gives a beautiful and sympathetic performance as someone I thought I was supposed to hate.
Only Sofia Coppola could have made this movie. It's very sensual, like all of her pictures. Lots of food, lots of pastels, lots of shoes (designed by Manolo), lots of flowers, lots of hair, and of course cake. It was filmed at Versailles — the Versailles — which is reason enough to see it.
Marie Antoinette's story is essentially a girl's story, and the movie never loses that perspective. It's told from her point of view alone, and thus the French Revolution never intrudes until the very end. That was the problem, you see. Court life was completely insulated from the real world, and Marie Antoinette really had no clue what was going on outside the palace borders.
She was an Austrian princess, who was sent to France to seal an alliance with the Holy Roman Empire by wedding the somewhat shy, but basically decent grandson of the Sun King. Louis XVI is played by Jason Schwartzman, who is Sofia Coppola's cousin.
After the wedding, Marie Antoinette's biggest problem is getting the dauphin to consummate the marriage. He's sort of an Eighteenth Century nerd, more interested in the inner workings of locks, than in producing an heir. Eventually, after a man-to-man talk from the Holy Roman Emperor himself, Louis is persuaded to do the deed.
Later, Marie Antoinette enters into a secret affair with Count Axel von Fersen of Sweden (A close confidant of Gustav III, the Swedish king assasinated during a masquerade ball, and whose blood stained costume I viewed last summer at the Livrustkammaren in Stockholm, a must-see museum, but I digress.) who's a real hottie. Louis never finds out in the movie, although historically there is some debate about whether the real Louis suspected that Fersen was the biological father of the dauphin.
Anyways, the movie is as slow and dreamy as one should expect from a Sofia Coppola flick. The photography is great, as is the set and costume design. Interestingly, the costumers made a conscious choice not to include any browns in the color palette, because they didn't want to suggest sepia tones, lest the viewer get the feeling it was a historical pic. Along the same lines, there's plenty of cool Eighties new wave in the soundtrack, to add a contemporary feel a la A Knight's Tale.
I gave Marie Antoinette four stars ("really liked it") on the Neflix scale of one to five. When I got back from Sweden, I rented Queen Christina with Garbo, and last month I saw and enjoyed Cleopatra. Now I'm inspired to rent Elizabeth with Cate Blanchett, to complete my quartet of movies about iconic queens.
Update: Casca asks an interesting question: "Do they show her head getting cut off?" Actually I debated last night whether to reveal the ending, but decided not to. This morning I changed my mind, so *SPOILER ALERT* she dies at the end.
Seriously though, there is one problem with the movie, and that is that they do not show Marie Antoinette getting beheaded. That didn't spoil the movie for me, and I totally understand Coppola's decision not to show it, but I think a lot of people (i.e. guys) will end up scratching their heads at the ending.
My boyfriend hated the movie. I think that's because it's a chick flick, and if you're doing a biography of Marie Antoinette, there's sort of an implicit promise that you're going to show her head getting chopped off. That's pretty much all most people know about the subject anyway. She says "let them eat cake," (which they show, but which she never said) and she gets her head cut off. So when the movie ends with Kirsten Dunst still having a head, there's a lack of resolution, and guys are all about resolution after the build-up.
For me, the movie was not about a chick who got beheaded. It was about the contrast between court life and the life of the common folk, whom we never get to see. To fully appreciate this subtlety, you have to go into it knowing the story of the French Revolution. You also have to have a well developed sense of irony, because the movie is infused with irony. Otherwise, when an aide tells Marie Antoinette that the people have no bread, and she responds by saying, quite seriously, "well the kids will just have to go without diamonds," you won't get it.
The queen was serious, but we the viewer know that her insulation from the populace has left her hopelessly naive — as if going without diamonds could stave off the reign of terror we know will come. So even though the Revolution is not shown, the knowledge that it is brewing animates the first two acts, but only if one knows the history. Otherwise its probably just a boring costume pageant.
Or maybe Chris thought Antonella Barba was going to be in it. Just kidding honey.
A happy belated birthday to Elizabeth Taylor, who was born February 27, 1932, in Hampstead, London, England.
Today's movie needs no introduction.
Cleopatra, 1963
This is the big one. Cleopatra is the most expensive American film ever made. Adjusted for inflation, it cost more to make than either Waterworld or Titanic. Only the Russian made War And Peace from 1968 cost more. The 44 million Cleopatra's producers spent by 1963 translates to over 285 million dollars today.
Cleopatra almost destroyed 20th Century Fox. For a time, it was the only movie in production from the studio. It's an example of how not to make a movie, if you want to save money. First, they completely rolled over for Elizabeth Taylor. Not only did they pay her million dollar asking price, with no counter-offer, they agreed to all her other demands including that it be made outside the U.S. When all was said and done (including a lawsuit filed by 20th Century Fox against Taylor and Burton) she ended up taking home 7 million.
Twentieth Century Fox originally started filming at Pinewood Studios in London, constructing a huge outdoor set of Alexandria. Taylor got sick (she almost died from pneumonia) and the production sat idle while she recuperated. They couldn't film because she was in mostly every scene. England's weather wouldn't cooperate either. It seems Rome and Alexandria in the fog just wasn't convincing enough for a big budget epic, so they finally destroyed the set and moved the production to Italy. By the time they were finished with it, cameras had rolled in England, Italy, Egypt and Spain.
Because of the delays, they also had to replace the original director and their two male leads, who got sick of waiting around doing nothing. Meanwhile, the script was written as the filming was going on, which required the production schedule to follow the script. That's not the most efficient use of sets and personnel because it requires that everybody stick around collecting paychecks, whether or not they're going to be used that day.
And the sets were extravagant. If you look at the details in the background, you can see they spared no expense. The gold leaf was real gold. Even the props were beautifully hand crafted. One minor actor had a sceptre made for him, which cost a shitload of money. After one rehearsal he said to director Joseph Mankiewicz "Joe, do I need this stick?" Mankiewicz said, "No, get rid of it." The actor later grumbled, "That's the trouble with this picture. It's full of such sticks." Another example — one of Elizabeth Taylor's 65 costumes was made out of spun gold.
Producer Walter Wanger (who did four months in jail for shooting a guy in the dick) seemed like the perfect guy to handle an iconic female biopic, since he made Queen Christina with Greta Garbo back in 1933. He wasn't up to the task. After Cleopatra, he never made another movie. Studio head Spyros Skouras was accused of cooking the books to hide the runaway spending from Fox's shareholders. When one accountant refused to cooperate, Skouras fired him and got one who would.
The scene in the YouTube video below is one of my favorites from the movie. Here Queen Cleopatra makes her triumphant entry into Rome with Caesarion at her side. It's a pretty good example of how the filmmakers spared absolutely no expense on this picture. There's no CG animation of course. So when you see Queen Cleopatra riding on a 50 foot sphinx being pulled by a hundred men through the Arch of Titus, she's really riding on a 50 foot sphinx being pulled by a hundred men through the Arch of Titus.* When they originally started filming this scene the shadows were unacceptable to DP Leon Shamroy, so they had to wait another six months before trying again.
Cleopatra is an incredible motion picture, as befitting an incredible woman, Cleopatra VII, the last Pharoah of Egypt. It's over four hours long (cut down from the original six hours) and even I couldn't watch it in one sitting. Its strengths include the spectacular pageantry, costumes and majestic score, which you can see and hear in the above YouTube clip. The battle scenes are great, and some of the matte paintings are indistinguishable from reality. The movie's weaknesses include the plodding script, which never seems to get into the character of its main subject. We learn a lot about what Cleopatra did, but we never really seem to get to know her.
By contrast, we learn that Marc Antony was kind of a loser, while Gaius Julius Caesar was a real winner. Rex Harrison (pre-Henry Higgins) was surprisingly convincing as the Dictator of Rome. Richard Burton, on the other hand, played Marc Antony as if he had just graduated from the William Shatner school of acting. For some reason, Burton's Roman skirt is about six inches too short throughout the movie. It looks silly, and his legs weren't that great.
In this next scene you can see the assassination of Julius Caesar through Cleopatra's eyes. Yes, that's Carol O'Connor sticking the first dagger in. (How fitting that Casca would be played by Archie Bunker.)
There are some great scenes that unfortunately I couldn't find on YouTube, including the one where Cleopatra has a public spat with Marc Antony, who comes to her seeking grain and an alliance.
Cleopatra: Without a treaty of alliance with Egypt, you could not hold the territories under your command. True?Oh, he kneels.Antony: Possibly.
Cleopatra: Then Lord Antony, you come before me as a suppliant.
Antony: If you choose to regard me as such.
Cleopatra: I do. You will therefore assume the position of a suppliant before this throne. You will kneel.
Antony: (incredulous) I will what?
Cleopatra: On... your... knees.
Antony: You dare ask the proconsul of the Roman Empire...
Cleopatra: (pissed) I asked it of Julius Caesar. I demand it of you.
Elizabeth Taylor's performance did not earn her an Oscar nomination, as Rex Harrison's did. She was inconsistent and seemed lost with such a big script. Some of this might not be her fault, of course. After she saw the film, Taylor complained that her best work had been edited out when Daryl Zanuck insisted that it be cut down to a manageable four hours.
When the real Cleopatra first met Caesar, after sneaking into his room in a rolled up carpet, she was only nineteen years old. She died at age 39, legend says from a self inflicted asp bite. Yet, Elizabeth Taylor never seems to grow in the film. Her nineteen year old Queen acts the same as her 39 year old Queen. Only the costumes are different.
The most fantastic scene for me was the depiction of the Battle of Actium. Roman history buffs know this was the naval battle off the coast of Greece between the forces of Octavian and the forces of Marc Antony, which ended the Roman Civil War and signaled the end of the Roman Republic. Watching the movie, I knew the ships were all models, but it's such an unfamiliar scene I found it believable.
I gave Cleopatra four Netflix stars (really liked it). I did really like it, even while I wished it could have been better. It's just so big, it's an accomplishment getting through the whole thing. And I feel like all the effort they put into such an epic does count for something, although it is ultimately unsatisfying. I suspect that if they ever find and restore all that lost footage, the original six hour version will probably be a lot better.
_______________
* Never mind that the Arch of Titus was built a hundred years after Cleopatra's death.
Today we take a look at the slutty movies: BUtterfield 8 and The Sandpiper.
The Sandpiper, 1965
This movie is set in the beautiful Central Coast of California, from San Simeon to Big Sur. The restaurant Nepenthe even makes an appearance. You may remember I wrote a poem about Nepenthe. In case you don't remember, this is a good excuse for me to re-post it.
At NepentheThe Nepenthe of 1965 looks pretty much the same as it did the last time I was there, about ten years ago. I see from their website that they've bumped the price of their hamburger up to $13 since then! In The Sandpiper, it was a hippie hangout too, and the scene of some minor fisticuffs between Charles Bronson and Richard Burton.At the edge of a deep
Verdant crevasse
The hissing ocean so far below
Barely seen this morning
Through the fogCool gentle breeze, and
Green strands among blue waves
Of the pacific, sea of forgetfulness
Calming spirit and mind
As you sit waitingPale rays of gold
The sun from your left
Warms your arm and lights
This contented respite
On your journey southSailing through the mist
Wings teetering, acute dihedrals
Vultures float like seraphim
Two hundred feet beneath
Your outdoor table, whereYou eat your nine dollar hamburger
And quaff o’ quaff this diet coke
Elizabeth Taylor plays Laura Reynolds, a free spirited artist/feminist/atheist who's moved to a cozy shack on the beach in order to raise her son far away from the evil influence of traditional values. She doesn't have a high opinion of men, most especially Richard Burton's character Dr. Hewitt, an Episcopal priest.
Taylor's son gets in trouble with the law for shooting a deer, and the judge orders Taylor to send him to the private religious boarding school run by Burton. Single mom and school principal soon clash over child rearing philosophies, as in this scene.
Dr. Hewitt: It may be hard for you to believe Miss Reynolds, but boys like children of their own age. They also like some order in their lives. Given just a little time, Danny will adjust beautifully.Despite the parent/teacher friction, Burton quickly becomes smitten by the new MILF, even though he's a priest, and he's already married to another hottie, Eva Marie Saint. It doesn't take long before Burton abandons his scruples and they fuck while a little broken-winged sandpiper looks on.Laura: Adjust to what?
Dr. Hewitt: To himself, to other people, to society.
Laura: That's just it, I don't want him to adjust to society!
Dr. Hewitt: Well if you want Danny to be a non-conformist, San Simeon is the best place that could happen to him, we'd give him a set of values there that he can rebel against later. Otherwise, he may rebel against yours.
Laura: Oh I see. You mean you teach children evil, so they can rebel against it when they grow and become good.
I expected better from director Vincente Minnelli (An American In Paris, Gigi) and writer Dalton Trumbo (Roman Holiday, Spartacus). I gave it three stars on the Netflix scale, "liked it," but just barely.
BUtterfield 8, 1960
I'll tell you right up front, BUtterfield 8 is one of my favorite Elizabeth Taylor movies. Beautifully shot, amazing performances, great characters, and no Richard Burton! Instead we get Laurence Harvey in the best performance of his career. He plays the same self-important prig that you saw in The Manchurian Candidate and The Alamo, only this time with a lot more depth. He's a playboy who married well, but messes around on his wife out of self-loathing and boredom. He treats his women like whores, until meeting Elizabeth Taylor's character, a nympho by the name of Gloria Wandrous. As in The Sandpipers, Elizabeth Taylor gets cast as the "other woman."
Interestingly, Elizabeth Taylor is at the apex of two love triangles in this one. It's more of a love bowtie, I guess. A subplot involves Taylor's best friend, a writer played by Eddie Fisher, her real life husband at the time. Fisher's girlfriend wants to get married, but he's having trouble getting past his barely concealed crush on Elizabeth Taylor, who toys with his affections mercilessly. Again, she's the "other woman," this time preventing a marriage.
But it's the fiery relationship between Taylor and Harvey that provides all the action in this movie. It opens with Elizabeth Taylor waking up alone in Harvey's bed the morning after their first tryst. She wanders around the mansion, and after brushing her teeth with whiskey, finds a thank you note from Harvey with a wad of cash for her trouble. In retaliation, she scrawls her response in the mirror and steals one of his wife's furs.
The second time they meet is at a bar. I love the dialogue in this scene because they spar like two champions in a draw match. You wonder, has the playboy finally met his match? Has the man-eater finally met hers? At the climax of the scene, Harvey grabs her wrist in a vice-grip, while she crushes his instep with her heel.
Ouch. They both retire to neutral corners after that, but by the end it's Harvey's character who throws in the towel. Can you blame him? It's Elizabeth Taylor! He's so in love he vows to change his life around for her, leave his wife, and get a real job. Taylor cleans up her act too, and it looks like she's become a one man woman at last. But, and there's always a but, in the end their high hopes all come crashing down. Quite literally.
Elizabeth Taylor won the Best Actress Oscar for this role, and she totally deserved it. (She was up against Shirley Maclaine for The Apartment that year. Wow, I'm glad I wasn't voting.) Remember this was 1960 and frank treatment of sexuality was still pretty daring. There's a scene at the end when Taylor breaks down in front of Eddie Fisher, telling him a dark secret. Even by today's standards, that scene still blows me away. That's all I'll say about it.
Hollywood still makes movies about slutty women, but nowadays it's all about shock value and appealing to the sickest impulses of the criminal mind. It's enough to make me turn into a feminist. "Hey let's chain a naked chick to a radiator for the whole movie?" How disgusting. I'll take the classics and Elizabeth Taylor over Christina Ricci and fetish porn anyday.
I gave BUtterfield 8 four stars on the Netflix scale, "really liked it."
As promised, we begin our tour of Elizabeth Taylor in the 60s. I might just as easily have called it Elizabeth Taylor, the Richard Burton years. She and Richard were the Brangelina of their day, and they made nine movies together during that decade.
Taylor and Burton began their affair during the filming of Cleopatra, while they were both married to someone else. Today we'll take a look at their second movie together, released the same year as Cleopatra.
The V.I.P.s, 1963
A movie poster for The V.I.P.s promises:
ELIZABETH TAYLOR... and RICHARD BURTON... in a story about... that exciting chemistry: man and woman! The emotions... are measured... in megatons!The copy is deceptive, because V.I.Ps is really an ensemble film. If you count up all the Academy Awards owned by members of the cast, the total comes to six. Taylor won two, Maggie Smith won two, Margaret Rutherford won one (for The V.I.P.s) and Orson Welles won an honorary Oscar. That's not to mention Richard Burton's seven Oscar nominations (he never won).
Despite its dream-team cast, the movie is not another Ishtar. There are some really good performances, most notably Louis Jourdan's as Elizabeth Taylor's paramour.
Taylor does what she can with a script that assigned her the least interesting character. Her performance is subtle, and as usual she conveys as much with her eyes and a tilt of the head as she does with her lines. But Jourdan's character is the one we get to know best. It's a love triangle story. Jourdan is the playboy gambler who has stolen Elizabeth Taylor away from her rich husband, Richard Burton. Interestingly, at that time, Burton was in the process of stealing Taylor away from Eddie Fisher.
The other plot lines involve Rod Taylor as a charming but unlucky Australian businessman and Maggie Smith plays his girl Friday, who's secretly in love with him. Orson Welles plays a characature of a film director, who tries various schemes in order to dodge the onerous British tax system. Welles's storyline is intended to be comic relief, but ends up being totally forgettable. Welles was in the middle of his second European exile, and perhaps he needed the money.
Since the movie centers loosely around a transatlantic airline flight, it's fun to see a romanticized version of passenger air service, Fifties style. In the movie, BOAC assigns a special guy just to take care of the first class passengers. When the flight is delayed, they all get luxury suites in the BOAC hotel, and a car to pick them up in the morning. Nice.
But even back then, there were nasty flight attendants. Here's how Margaret Rutherford as a disheveled, pill popping duchess dealt with one impudent stewardess:
Duchess: Conductress... Conductress!Rutherford's character has some really funny lines, but giving her an Academy Award for that tiny part reminds me of Jack Palance's Oscar.Stewardess: (coolly) Did someone call something?
Duchess: Yes dear, I did. Will you please put this thing in the hold.
Stewardess: In the hold?
Duchess: Well, wherever you do put luggage that isn't wanted on the voyage.
Stewardess: If you had wanted this with your other luggage, you should've thought of that earlier, shouldn't you've?
Duchess: (regally) If that is a question to me personally, yes. If it is a general comment on human behaviour, it is an extremely unoriginal one, and hardly worth making. Kindly dispose of this hatbox.
Stewardess: But I have no room.
Duchess: Well then, you must make room, mustn't you dear.
Maggie Smith, whom I love, and whom you probably know best as Professor McGonagall of Gryffindor House, is wasted in The V.I.P.s. If you want to see how wonderful an actress she is, do rent The Prime of Miss Jean Brodie right away.
I gave The V.I.P.s a 3 out of 5 on the Neflix scale: "liked it." Put it on your movie watching queue only if you're a serious ET/RB fan, which I hope you will be by the end of this film festival. But before I leave you, I want you to look at the chair in this next screencap closely.
Strawman is probably the only one who may recognize it as a Poul Kjćrholm design (at least a knockoff). When I was in Denmark last summer, I had the pleasure of seeing a Kjćrholm exhibit at the Louisiana museum on the east coast of Sjćlland. I totally want that chair.
It doesn't seem like a year since I completed the First Annual Annika's Journal Film Festival, but it has been. If you recall, last year the honoree was Oscar winner Goldie Hawn, who has yet to send me a thank you note. I had a lot of fun watching and writing about those movies, even if I only got three comments the whole month.
I racked my brain to figure out whom to honor during this year's festival. It's quite an investment of my time: ordering the movies on Netflix, setting up my archaic screen capture procedure (don't ask, it involves lots of cable, 3½ inch floppies, my early '90's crappy laptop, and lots of running back and forth), finding and editing the pictures and then figuring out what to say about each movie.
Under consideration were fellow blonde favorites Steve McQueen and Ryan O'Neal. However, since the Oscars inspired this whole boondoggle in the first place, I decided that I should limit my choices to Oscar winners. I also wanted to pick someone whom I'm not that familiar with, because I really had a lot of fun discovering new movies during last year's Goldie Hawn event.
I reviewed eight movies last year, and so I've picked eight again for this year. That's two a week, if I want to get it done before the Oscars on February 25th; a tall order so if any of you want to help me out, let me know.
And this year's Second Annual Annika's Journal Film Festival honoree is: Elizabeth Taylor, the Sixties movies.
Here's a quick movie recommendation: Little Miss Sunshine. I gave it four stars. The cast is fantastic (it's exhibit A for why the Academy should have a special Oscar for casting), especially Greg Kinnear, Steve Carell, Alan Arkin. The girl who plays Olive is wonderful. And Chloe from 24 has a small part in it.
It's black comedy with a nice message at the end. Go rent it.
This man was a huge part of my formative years. Aaron Spelling, the man who taught everyone the zip code for Beverly Hills has passed away.
Spelling, a onetime movie bit player who created a massive number of hit series, from the vintage "Charlie's Angels" and "Dynasty" to "Beverly Hills 90210" and "Melrose Place," died Friday, his publicist said. He was 83.Rest in peace, and thank you friend.Spelling died at his home in Los Angeles after suffering a stroke on June 18, according to publicist Kevin Sasaki.
Spelling's other hit series included "Love Boat," "Fantasy Island," "Burke's Law," "The Mod Squad," "Starsky and Hutch," "T.J. Hooker," "Matt Houston," "Hart to Hart" and "Hotel." He kept his hand in 21st-century TV with series including "7th Heaven" and "Summerland."
. . .
During the 1970s and 1980s, Spelling provided series and movies exclusively for ABC and is credited for the network's rise to major status. Jokesters referred to it as "The Aaron Broadcasting Company."
Success was not without its thorns. TV critics denounced Spelling for fostering fluff and nighttime soap operas. He called his shows "mind candy"; critics referred to them as "mindless candy."
"The knocks by the critics bother you," he admitted in a 1986 interview with The Associated Press.
"But you have a choice of proving yourself to 300 critics or 30 million fans. You have to make a choice. I think you're also categorized by the critics. If you do something good they almost don't want to like it."
. . .
Spelling had arrived in Hollywood virtually penniless in the early 1950s. By the 1980s, Forbes magazine estimated his wealth at $300 million. He enjoyed his status, working in a Hollywood office larger than those of golden-era moguls ("I'm slightly claustrophpobic," he explained.) He gifted his second wife, Candy, with a 40-carat diamond ring.
. . .
Spelling grew up in a small frame house on Browder Street in Dallas "on the wrong side of the tracks," he wrote in his 1996 autobiography. He was the fourth son of immigrant Jews, his father from Poland, mother from Russia. The father's name, Spurling, was simplified to Spelling by an Ellis Island official.
Spelling enlisted in the Army Air Corps after graduating from high school in 1942.
"I grew up thinking 'Jew boy' was one word," the producer wrote in his memoir, "Aaron Spelling: A Prime-Time Life." He was considered strange by his Dallas schoolmates because his parents spoke Yiddish. He was subjected to anti-Semitic taunts and beatings on his way home from school.
At 8, the boy suffered what he termed a nervous breakdown, and he spent a year in bed. He later considered that period the birth of his creative urge. He fell in love with great storytellers, especially O. Henry. Of his early TV series he said, "They are all O. Henry short stories."
In the closest voting ever, La Femme Nikita has beaten Beatrix Kiddo to advance to the final round.
Her opponent: Jason Bourne. Let the final round begin.
I'm excited that they've decided to make a feature length 24 movie! Interestingly, they've decided not to do the "real-time" thing for the film. Of course, with two hours available to the writers, they might have had just enough time for Jack to drive from Santa Monica to Van Nuys during rush hour before the closing credits start to roll.
The moviemakers don't need my advice, but in case any are reading here it is: Jack meets Jason!
Think about it.
In June, last year, I started this whole running sidebar poll about movie assassins and who would kill whom if they had to. I'm calling the latest poll, which was the closest competition so far. You decided that Jason Bourne is more kick-ass than Leon from The Professional by a vote of 53% to 47%. It was neck and neck for quite a while.
Who knew there were so many Leon fans out there? And I thought The Professional was a heartwarming tale about some French dude and his kid. Maybe I should see it again.
Anyways, Jason Bourne advances and the bracket looks like this:
The next matchup is between Nikita of La Femme Nikita and Beatrix Kiddo of Kill Bill Parts 1 and 2. The question, as always, is this: "If Nikita and Beatrix Kiddo were each given orders to kill each other, who would win?"
So what are you waiting for? Scroll down and vote!
Previous updates in this, the blogging equivalent of a massive public works project,* can be found here, and here.
_______________
* Nobody's sure if it's worth the effort, but we've gone too far to call off the damn thing now.
I was going to review Seems Like Old Times next, but I have to skip back to the beginning after finally seeing Goldie's first movie ever.
The One And Only, Genuine, Original Family Band, 1968
This was a pleasant surprise. I really liked this movie, though I didn't think I would. The concept couldn't sound more boring, even to a history buff like myself. It's set during the contentious presidential election of 1888, between Democratic incumbent Grover Cleveland and Republican challenger Benjamin Harrison. Not exactly a formula for box office bonanzae, even back in 1968. I'd hate to have been the one pitching this one to Disney:
Mr. Disney: Hmm. I don't know. Who did you have in mind to play the lead?Originally intended as a two part tv movie, TOAOGOFB was based on the exploits of some real life historical figures, the Bower family of South Dakota.Pitcher: Well, John Davidson's available, and Walt Brennan's signed on.
Mr. Disney: Uhhh. Who else?
Pitcher: And Buddy Ebsen.
Mr. Disney: Errr. The Beverly Hillbillies guy? Is that all? I don't know.
Pitcher: Oh... and uh, I think we can get Kurt Russell.
Mr. Disney: Russell? Why the hell didn't you say so?! That kid's gold! When can you start production?
The Bowers became quite popular in the area because they had they own family band. . . . At the time, there was only one brass band west of the Missouri River, the military band attached to the Seventh Regiment, then stationed in Fort Meade. The military band was scheduled to perform at [a] celebration. Calvin [Bower] went to extreme measures and was successful to persuade the committee to also book his Family Band to play for the occasion.In the movie, the fictional Bowers are divided along party lines with Grandpa (Walt Brennan, who else?) a cantankerous Democrat, and his son (Buddy Ebsen) a quiet Republican. Brennan's granddaughter gets involved with a dashing Republican newspaperman (John Davidson). He convinces the whole family to move to the Dakota territory, hoping they'll add to the solid Republican majority.. . . When the chairman called for music, the leader of the Fort Meade Band responded. After the speaker spoke, the chairman hardly rose when the Bower Band began to play without permission. The Bowers took the crowd by surprise and there was much clapping and shouting. It took the breath right out of the Fort Meade band and they folded up their music racks and left the platform. This was the introduction of the Family Band to the Black Hills.
Davidson and the local Republicans are working to get Dakota admitted to the Union as two separate states, in order to shift the balance of power in congress with the addition of four Republican senators.* Davidson gets a shock when he finds Walt Brennan in the schoolhouse, doing a sort of 19th Century Jay Bennish act for the kids.
The eerie topicality of TOAOGOFB is one of the delights of this movie. The musical numbers are horribly bad** (with the notable exception of the finale, which is Goldie's only scene), but I laughed out loud at the unexpected parallels between 1888 politics and today.
Besides the issue of overtly political schoolteachers, the movie touches on political demagoguery, freedom of speech and dissent, and even stolen elections. As you all should know (I'm not ruining anything for you) Benjamin Harrison won the 1888 election despite losing the popular vote by over 90,000. During the movie's election night party scene, the Democrats' elation turns to violence when they find out that their man lost after the electoral votes were tallied. A riot starts and the meeting hall gets trashed. It only stops when the One and Only, Genuine, Original Family Band plays "My Country 'Tis Of Thee" to calm the crowd down.
After the brawl, Buddy Ebsen gets up to address the partisans with words that are appropriate whether the date be 1888, 1968 or even 2006:
All of us here together can build the greatest united country in the whole bloomin' world if we'll just remember one thing. There's a time to stand up and fight for what you believe in, and there is a time to join hands and work together, or all the fighting doesn't mean a thing.The teenaged Kurt Russell made the most of his small part. Despite the fact that he hated dancing, Kurt acquited himself well during the musical numbers. Goldie's one-line part featured some pretty good dancing, as well as her trademark smile. The big scene involves a sort of dance-duel between Lesley Ann Warren and John Davidson as they try to make each other jealous by do-si-do-ing with other partners. Goldie is Davidson's "other partner."
There are no scenes between Goldie and Kurt; and their off screen romance developed many years later. Goldie's memoir, A Lotus Grows In The Mud, includes the story of how she met Kurt the second time, during the casting of 1984's Swing Shift. Goldie apparently didn't even recognize Kurt, and although he remembered Goldie, Kurt had a big crush on Lesley Ann Warren at the time. Funny how the two of them were in the same movie without realizing that they were soulmates until sixteen years later!
I totally recommend TOAOGOFB, but only if you are prepared for the odd combination of Gilded Age politics and good old fashioned Disney schmaltz. I give it 3½ stars.
_______________
* As you all know, in 1888, Senators were elected by the state legislatures.
** I can't emphasize enough how bad the songs are. The libretto includes a rousing tribute to Grover Cleveland, "Let's Put It Over With Grover," (don't rock the boat/ give him your vote...) and a similarly pukeworthy paean to Benjamin Harrison, titled simply "Oh Benjamin Harrison," (he's far beyond comparison...). However, the final dance number, "West O' The Wide Missouri," is well choreographed and the song is pretty catchy. Also, 60 year old Buddy Ebsen showed he could still do a nice soft shoe routine.
Today let's take a look at two of Goldie's action comedies from the mid to late seventies: The Duchess And The Dirtwater Fox and Foul Play.
The Duchess and the Dirtwater Fox, 1976
Starring Goldie Hawn and George Segal (whom I loved in one of the meanest movies ever, the classic Who's Afraid Of Virginia Woolf?).
The interesting thing about Duchess is how different Goldie's character is from her more timid roles of the early seventies. It seems that her roles had gradually become more assertive with each film, and this one went way off the scale.
The movie opens with Goldie and another chick rolling on the floor in a full-on bitch fight. She talks like a sailor, punches people out, handles a Winchester like a pro, and even flips the middle finger in one scene. A recurrent motif in the film are a couple of embroidered pasties that keep falling out of Goldie's purse at inopportune moments.
Goldie plays a hooker/cabaret dancer in 19th century San Francisco, who's always on the make. Segal plays a small time crook/gambler who's also always on the make. A bag of stolen money brings them together, and as I like to say, hijinx ensue.
At first Goldie doesn't like Segal, who's all hands when they first meet. But then she finds out about the money and plays along until she can steal it from him. He chases her, and a gang of outlaws chases him. Somehow or another Goldie gets mixed up with a band of Mormons on their way to Salt Lake City, including the great Conrad Janis. (I think there's the obligatory shot of a stagecoach going over a cliff, which must be stock footage because I've seen it in so many westerns it's not even funny.)
The comedy is pretty hit or miss, but the funniest scene takes place inside the stagecoach between Goldie and Segal. They're trying to concoct a scheme without Conrad Janis, who's sitting between them, figuring out what they're saying. So they speak in a comical pidgin German that's really well done.
The rest of the movie is kind of juvenile and the situations seem contrived. Goldie realizes she loves the gambler in the middle of a chase scene, while they're pretending to be guests at a jewish wedding. Later, they have sex in a rowboat, before going through the rapids. The bad guys eventually catch up with our heroes and tie them to stakes in the desert.
Finally, everything works out for the best, but I forgot if they get to keep the money or not. Costume-wise, the movie is heavy on red and black. The costume designer must have been a big Stendhal fan, I guess. One highlight of the movie is when Goldie sings a bawdy song called "Please Don't Touch Me Plums" with a bunch of kids, Julie Andrews style. Fans of Bobby Vinton should also like the sappy theme song, "Lemon Drops, Lollipops And Sunbeams."
Consider me not one of Bobby Vinton's fans. Nor am I a big fan of The Duchess and the Dirtwater Fox, which I gave two stars on the Neflix scale. Goldie's performance was a standout (she was nominated for a Golden Globe). But the chuckles in this screwball comedy were too few and far between, and couldn't overcome the generally mediocre script.
Foul Play, 1978
This is the first of Goldie's two romantic comedies with co-star Chevy Chase. It's also an homage to the Hitchcock thriller The Man Who Knew Too Much, which is one of my favorites.
Despite his work in the classics Caddyshack, Vacation and Fletch, I've never really warmed up to Chevy Chase. I'm not quite sure why. In Foul Play, he's a San Francisco detective who protects Goldie Hawn from a gang of assassins out to kill the pope. I suppose people thought Chevy was sexy in those days, but he does nothing for me. Still, the romantic scenes between him and Goldie happen to be the most convincing of any movie she'd done so far.
Goldie's part was a complete 180° from her character in Duchess. In Foul Play, Goldie is a 30-something divorcee who's cute but dissillusioned by the dating scene and looking down the barrel of spinsterhood. She actually reminds me a lot of Meg Ryan's character in When Harry Met Sally, even down to the oversized 80's glasses.
There's not much to Goldie's character; she's kind of an everywoman who's only purpose is to hold the silly plot together. I can't help but like this movie though, despite it's myriad flaws. It's the supporting cast that makes Foul Play as enjoyable as it is. Look who else is in it: Brian Dennehy, Burgess Meredith, Billy Barty and Dudley Moore. (All are dead now, by the way. And don't tell me Brian Dennehy is still alive. You and I both know that Brian Dennehy and Brian Keith are/were the same person.)
Two scenes are absolutely worth the price of the rental. The first is the legendary American debut of Dudley Moore, which is the one scene everybody probably remembers most. While Goldie is trying to hide from a villain known only as "the albino," she asks Dudley Moore to take her back to his place. He misunderstands, thinking he's going to get lucky. It's rotfl funny, with Dudley's valentines day boxers, and the disco ball, and the helium filled blow-up dolls, and the murphy bed with its little trumpet fanfare. That one scene propelled Dudley Moore to stardom, and the next year he did 10 with Bo Derek.
Here's an interesting bit of Dudley Moore/George Segal trivia, which I got from IMDb.
[Dudley Moore was] the first choice to play Henry Fine in "The Mirror Has Two Faces," only to be replaced by George Segal (who was, ironically, replaced by Moore in the role of George Webber in "10"). In an interview following his announcement that he had supranuclear palsy, he revealed that he was dismissed from the role because he had trouble remembering his lines.The second most memorable scene in Foul Play is when Burgess Meredith kicks the villainess's ass in a kung-fu fight. That's pretty much all I need to say about that crazy scene.
I did run into a little suspension of disbelief issue when Chevy and Goldie were racing through San Francisco trying to get to the Opera House in time to foil the assassination plot. They seemed to be driving through all the wrong neighborhoods. Maybe I know the City too well, but I was like: "Dude, it ain't that hard. Just take Gough, you'll get there in five minutes."
The costumes weren't all that hot. Goldie wears a lot of nondescript solid color sweaters. She ends the movie in a disco era powder blue décolleté that I don't like at all. The music however, was a strong point for me. Barry Manilow sings the Oscar nominated theme song and, as you know, I love Barry. Plus, Gilbert and Sullivan's The Mikado is featured throughout.
I'm giving Foul Play three Netflix stars. It made me laugh a lot more than it had a right to. But the characters are lovable, and it definitely succeeds as fun and light entertainment.
Previous installments in the 1st Annual Annika's Journal Film Festival can be found here. I have three more to go. Next up, Seems Like Old Times.
Update: Congratulations to Goldie Hawn, who recieved the American Film Institute's Star Award in Aspen last Saturday. She's still hot.
Shampoo, 1975
Yes, the biggie, the classic. There's a lot to say about Shampoo, and a lot of good stuff has been written already.
In my view, this was a transitional movie in Goldie Hawn's career. She was thirty when the film came out. As Warren Beatty's girlfriend Jill, you still see the cute vulnerable waif from her previous comedies, but you also see flashes of the more assertive Goldie Hawn characters of the eighties and nineties. There's even a hint of that whininess she later honed to perfection in Bird On A Wire, Overboard and Private Benjamin.
Make no mistake, Shampoo is a Warren Beatty - Julie Christie vehicle, and Goldie is a supporting player.* But she had definitely arrived by 1975, and being cast in this film was merely proof of the fact.
Shampoo is another bedroom farce, but a vastly different one from Cactus Flower. Although set in 1968 (election day to be exact), Shampoo is a movie of the Seventies, or more accurately, that part of the Seventies which inspired the phrase "The Me Decade." Instead of slamming doors, each peccadillo is punctuated by a shot of Beatty tearing across Beverly Hills on his little Triumph 500.
Shampoo is about fucking. As much as each character can get away with. It's a very pre-aids movie. For a script that took eight years to write ― and the writing process was contentious at times ― there's not much of a plot. In a sense it's very much like a Dazed And Confused for the over 30 set. All the action takes place within about a 48 hour period. Beatty plays a vacant hairdresser juggling at least three women at the same time. Goldie is his easily manipulated girlfriend. Julie Christie plays an old flame who's also Goldie's best friend. And Lee Grant plays a client who's giving him a little something something on the side. Grant won an Academy Award for the role.
I must confess I didn't like Shampoo at first, mainly because I'm not a big fan of Warren Beatty. I hated Bullworth and Dick Tracy. And I was ambivalent about Bugsy, although I thought Splendor In The Grass and Reds were fantastic. But Shampoo has grown on me with each viewing. What it lacks in plot, it makes up in great lines. Like these:
GEORGE: Ever listen to women talk? I do till it's running out my ears. They only talk about one thing, How some guy fucked them over. That's all that's on their minds.Lol. I hate to say it, but that's true in many cases. Not mine of course.
Here's some more classic dialogue. Lorna is the teenage daughter of one of the women Beatty's character is banging. She's played by Carrie Fisher in her first feature film role. I love this banter.
LORNA: Are you gay?... baked apple?... they're cold but they're good.They end up screwing, of course.GEORGE: No thanks.
LORNA: Did you hear me?
GEORGE: Yeah.
LORNA: Well, are you? Are you queer?
GEORGE: yeah.
LORNA: (laughing) C'mon, are you or aren't you?
GEORGE: Gee, this is great.
He slices a piece of cheesecake. Lorna sits down, in the
chair nearest him now.LORNA: C'mon, tell me. Don't be afraid.
GEORGE: Why do you wanna know so bad?
LORNA: See if you've been making it with my mother.
GEORGE: What would my being a faggot have to do with that?
LORNA: (shrugs) Nothing, I guess... have you ever made it with a guy?
GEORGE: Have you ever made it with a girl?
LORNA: I asked you first.
GEORGE: Yeah... I've made it with a girl...
Lorna smiles. A pause.
LORNA: Well, are you?
GEORGE: Am I what?
LORNA: Making it with my mother?
There's two or three scenes with Goldie that blew me away. The first that comes to mind is a short scene when Goldie is walking home from an audition, and stops at a fruit stand. It shows the actress's maturation from a comedienne who delivers lines with great timing, to an actress who can show her inner dialogue without speaking a line.
You know she's obsessing over her fight with George, and whether or not to take that acting job, and you can see it all in her face, along with her character's indecisiveness and insecurity. Then she picks up an apple, and for just a moment, you watch her agonize over whether to buy the apple or not until she finally tosses it back in the bin. It's really hilarious.
The shot below is from another scene I love. It shows Goldie just after she got out of a porsche at the election night party, and her boyfriend Beatty is there escorting her best friend into the restaurant. Goldie shoots him a look that is pure daggers. And Beatty has this look like, "oh shit, this is going to be a long night." And it was.
By the way, the silver dress she wore for that election night party was simply adorable, and about as short as legally possible.
There's another great scene at a psychedelic party on a large Beverly Hills estate. Jack Warden's character and Goldie's happen to bust in on Warren Beatty and Julie Christie while they're fucking in the poolhouse. Julie Christie plays Warden's mistress, and Goldie's best friend, so you can imagine both of them are horrified at this discovery. But their reactions are the exact opposite of what you'd expect. It's a terrific scene.
My rating was three stars (liked it), definitely worth a rental. Next up on the AJFF: The Duchess and the Dirtwater Fox.
_______________
* Goldie also starred opposite Warren Beatty in 1971's Dollars. Unfortunately, that film is not yet on DVD, and therefore Netflix doesn't carry it.
The next two films in our retrospective contain very strong performances by Ms. Studlendgehawn. I hadn't seen either until they came in the mail this week. I love Netflix.
Butterflies Are Free, 1972
In Butterflies, Goldie plays yet another young waif with more modern sexual mores. Like her first two films, this one is also based on a stage play. The screenplay was written by the original playwright, which is probably the reason why it's so chatty and the action takes place almost completely inside an apartment. Writing for the screen and writing for the stage are two different animals, a fact that is often lost on theater people.
Butterflies is about a blind guy who is trying to gain some independence from his overprotective mother and make it on his own. It's the kind of simple PC message movie that Hollywood made a lot more of in those days: "Blind people are people too." Goldie plays the free-spirited next door neighbor who is afraid of commitment. The conflict arises when Goldie meets the mother (played by veteran TV actress Eileen Heckart, who won a Best Supporting Actress Oscar for this role).
Goldie again demonstrates a surprising dramatic ability in addition to her already established comic talent. As usual, she lights up the screen. Blocking was important in this movie because of the limitations of the apartment set. But Goldie seems to glide effortlessly from couch to floor to kitchen to table to bed. She handles the emotional transitions with the same ease. The drama seems to slow down in the middle of the movie, but things pick up at the end with the addition of Paul Michael Glaser (pre-Starsky, of course) in a bit role as a sleazy director of experimental (i.e. nude) plays.
The blind dude is played by Edward Albert, the son of Green Acres' Eddie Albert. He's an interesting guy. Half Colombian, educated at Oxford, he has an IQ of 157 according to IMDb, and he speaks Spanish, French, Portugese and Mandarin. Unfortunately, I found his constant wisecracking throughout Butterflies to be a distraction. He delivers his sarcastic lines with a deadpan affect that is too annoying for my taste. The mom character is just as sarcastic, but much more appealing.
As is my wont, I paid special attention to the costuming. Goldie had three outfits in this film. In the first act, she wore a cute peasant blouse and flirty ankle length skirt, which was her best look. She spends the middle third of the movie in a bra and panties only. I thought Goldie looked a little thick in There's A Girl In My Soup, but I must say, she was in awesome shape for Butterflies. Finally, during the third act she wore a dreary green floral dress, which was nothing to write home about.
As for ratings, I gave Butterflies three stars (liked it). The final act, with it's romantic suspense, saved the movie for me. Yes, I had a few tears. But I cry at the drop of a hat with these kinds of movies. In the end, all three main characters learn something from each other. Personal growth is always a good thing in a romantic comedy, if not in life.
The Sugarland Express, 1974
If Butterflies Are Free sounds like too much of a chick-flick for you, definitely check out The Sugarland Express. Not only was it Goldie Hawn's best role to date, it was Steven Spielberg's debut as a feature film director. And what a debut!
Long time visitors may have guessed that I'm a scholar of the 70's action movie. I mean I'm really a scholar; I wrote a paper on them in undergrad, when I toyed with the idea of being a film studies major. However, I can't claim to have been much of a scholar if I hadn't seen Sugarland Express up 'til now. I was truly missing out.
Sugarland was Universal's attempt to cash in on the anti-hero chase movie craze of the early 70's. Like another favorite of mine, Dirty Mary Crazy Larry, the main character is a skinny blonde who's as dumb as she is cute. But in Sugarland, the anti-heroes are more loveable than usual. You don't have to sympathize with them in spite of their badness, because they aren't really all that bad.
Goldie plays the wife of a small time crook who has just four months left on his sentence for petty crimes. Their kid just got taken away from her and given to a foster home. Goldie breaks her man out of jail and they take off on a comic journey across southeastern Texas to get thier little boy back. Along for the ride is a kidnapped Texas highway patrolman with a slight case of Stockholm syndrome.
The name Sugarland Express is meant to be ironic, because the pursuit is anything but an express. It's more like a 1970s version of OJ's "slow speed chase," complete with cheering throngs of roadside fans. Goldie's character insists on stopping to pee, or to get some fried chicken, or to pick up some trading stamps.
From the first reel on, you can tell that this is not your ordinary Goldie Hawn vehicle. She puts on a pretty convincing Texas drawl (to my Californian ears at least). And her character is grittier than the previous three hippie-chick roles she played. Consequently, It just might be her best performance. She still shows off her comic skills, but thanks to Spielberg's direction and the Barwood/Robbins script (Corvette Summer, Close Encounters) we get to see much more of her considerable dramatic range. With Sugarland, Goldie Hawn gave notice that she was indeed a star.
Goldie's husband is played by William Atherton, better known to me as the slimy reporter from Die Hard, and the meddling EPA dude from Ghostbusters. He does a nice job in Sugarland and it's a shame he became so typecast in his later work.
Although Spielberg had already made Duel as a made-for-TV film in 1971, he really showed the maturity of his talent in Sugarland. It's no wonder that Universal let him do Jaws the very next year. Their faith in the 29 year old director paid off. Say what you want about Munich ― I'm disappointed in that choice too ― but the guy has always known how to put together a great movie. To say that Sugarland Express is underrated is to underrate the word underrated. I gave it five stars (loved it), and I think you'd enjoy it too.
Tonight we'll take a look at the second major role in Goldie Hawn's thirty-eight year film career.
There's A Girl In My Soup, 1970
Girl starred the late, great comic genius Peter Sellers, and Goldie's name appeared above the title for the first time. This import was directed by Roy Boulting, a veteran of largely forgettable British movies. Coincidentally, he and Goldie had the same birthday.
On the surface, There's A Girl In My Soup shares essentially the same plot as Cactus Flower. Both are May-December romance / love-triangle comedies based on stage plays. Interestingly, Roy Boulting was involved in a real life May-December romance for eleven years with former child star Haley Mills (The Parent Trap, That Darn Cat!). She was 33 years younger than him.
In Girl, Goldie plays a 19 year old American hippie chick, living in London with a skeevy drummer. She gets tired of being passed around among the drummer's friends like a tray of tea cakes, so she decides to move out after a chance meeting with a 41 year old tv personality, played by Sellers. The tv personality is a self-absorbed and aging Alfie-like swinger, coming to grips with the handfuls of hair he's beginning to find in his brush every morning.
While the movie starts out prominsingly, Goldie's performance was ultimately inconsistent, a sign of weak directing. There is no chemistry between her and Sellers, who mails in the most colorless performance I've seen from him. None of the comic improvisation he was known for is on display here. I think the character was too constricting for him. Here's what Goldie told Larry King about working with Sellers:
HAWN: Peter Sellers was great to work with. A lovely man. A little bit crazy . . . It was sort of balancing a very delicate spirit on a needle. You know, because you never know where he was going.Costume-wise, Girl is nothing special either. The only stand-out is an avocado colored, wide-wale corduroy bikini that Goldie wears while lying on an inflatable raft. One wonders how they got her on that thing without wetting the fabric. Peter Sellers spent a fair amount of time shirtless, which was a major error by the filmmakers. His back was hideously hairy.But I gave him a birthday party once, and he said to me, you know, Goldie, I'll never have a home like this. I'll never have a house like this, and I would like a piece of me in your home. And he sent me a French armoire, and I still have it. That was after he ate his birthday candle, which is a whole other problem.
KING: Was he a genius?
HAWN: Yes, he was. He definitely was. He was completely in his moment, in his truth, at all times there was never a break. He was able to witness how funny he was, and yet not have any control over his ability to -- inability to stop laughing at himself.
We would have to break for lunch sometimes, because we couldn't bring him back. But, you know, you couldn't get a knife in between who he was playing and his comedy and his truth. It was all there together, which is what made him a genius.
Predictably, after a whirlwind tour of the continent, the mis-matched lovers return to London, and reality. The movie ends the same way as Cactus Flower, but in a wholly unsatisfying way. For that reason, I give it two Netflix stars ("didn't like it").
It's Oscar season, and it's time for the First Annual Annika's Journal Film Festival. This year, we will be taking a look at the career of Goldie Hawn, specifically Goldie Hawn's cute years,* from the late sixties to 1980.
Why Goldie Hawn? Because she's awesome. How many of you realize that Goldie Hawn won an Academy Award for her very first picture? That's a fact. Also, people always tell me I remind them of a young Goldie, which was probably more true when I was 20, but is still a nice compliment.
When you think that Goldie stumbled into acting (she started out wanting to be a dancer), her comic genius is even more impressive. I rank her talent as a comedienne on the same level as Marilyn's. In fact, I think Goldie took the next step in the evolution of the female comedienne. She played the ditzy character as well as Marylin, but embodied a new beauty ideal that was born in the sixties: the waif look.
But where Marylin played the dumb blonde so straight that people still think she was dumb in real life, Goldie always played it with a subtle wink. You get that same wink today from comediennes like Heather Graham and Cameron Diaz. They're too hip to be dumb. Thank Goldie for that.
Cactus Flower, 1969
I just got done seeing this one again. I love this movie. The opening credits promise a lot: directed by Gene Saks (The Odd Couple, Barefoot In The Park), starring Walter Matthau and Ingrid Bergman, screenplay by I.A.L. Diamond (Some Like It Hot, The Apartment), music by Quincy Jones, and Sarah Vaughan singing the theme song. Wow.
The plot reminds me of a Three's Company episode. It's a bedroom farce, and like all great bedroom farce, begins with a lie. Walter Matthau plays a dentist enjoying the bachelor life. In order to "keep things honest" he lies to his girlfriend, played by Goldie. He tells her he is married so he won't have to commit. But then, in a moment of weakness Matthau promises Goldie he'll divorce his wife and marry her. Hijinx ensue when big-hearted Goldie insists on meeting his wife to make sure she won't be hurt by the divorce. Now Matthau needs a pretend wife, and he picks his dental assistant, played by Ingrid Bergman in the title role. Bergman is a frumpy old maid who, like a cactus, occasionally produces a pretty blossom.
Goldie Hawn's performance is a revelation, as they say. This is the one that got her the Best Actress in a Supporting Role Oscar. When she's onscreen, I'm afraid to look at anything else in case I miss one of her facial expressions or funny vocal inflections. There's a scene in which she teaches Ingrid Bergman's character to dance, which is hilarious and embarrassing at the same time.
Walter Matthau is an unlikely romantic lead, but if you remember The Odd Couple and even Charley Varrick, he always seems able to pull the chicks. And there is a sweet onscreen chemistry between him and Goldie. You just have to suspend your disbelief a little bit.
I love Goldie's outfits too. The burgundy velvet suit is very mod. She also wore a nice rust suede miniskirt and boots combo with a yellow turtleneck. And my favorite is pictured above: blue mock turtle, extra love beads, batik inspired capris, and mary janes. Extremely cute.
My rating (using the netflix 5-star system) is five stars. A very witty, sweet and enjoyable romantic comedy with that innocent sixties hipness that you can't find in Hollywood anymore.
_______________
* When I say her "cute years" I don't mean to imply that Goldie ever stopped being hot. Did you see her on Larry King recently? I hope I look that good at 60. She looks 40.
Back in 2004, I paid tribute to the great Don Knotts on the occasion of his birthday. Here's what I wrote:
While a lot of people swear that The Incredible Mr. Limpet is the best Don Knotts movie, i think people who think that are all wet. Knotts excelled at the physical comedy of facial expressions. Limpet was a cartoon, so it by definition cannot be the best DK movie.There's a pretty good bio at ABC News.com. Did you know Don Knotts majored in speech in college?The Ghost and Mr. Chicken is a strong contender. Knotts' character is named Luther Heggs, a perfect name for a DK character. i loved the whole scene where he spends the night in the haunted house. Remember the crazy organ music? Knotts was at his shaky best.
i liked The Reluctant Astronaut just a little bit better, partly because i like space movies. This one came out in 1967, at the height of the space race. The premise is typically DK: he gets a job at NASA, tells his family and his girlfriend that he is in astronaut training, when in fact he's just a janitor, hijinks ensue, his family finds out about the charade, they're terribly disappointed, then even though he's Acrophobic, he blunders onto a spaceflight, actually becoming a reluctant astronaut , more hijinks ensue. It's predictable, but still a must see.
i also liked The Apple Dumpling Gang, where DK teams up with Tim Conway as a pair of stereotypically incompetent but loveable bank robbers.
But the funniest Don Knotts movie, in my opinion, is the often overlooked How to Frame a Figg, from 1971. Here's a couple of comments from the IMDB page:
'How to Frame a Figg is a vintage Don Knotts - frenetic, farcical comedy, and features him at the top of his form as the hysterical, cat-on-hot-tin-roof nervous, persecuted civil servant Hollis Figg.'The opening scene with the ambulance is pathetically absurd, but i won't ruin it for you, it's one of my favorite comic scenes ever.'If folks were really this stupid I could be the SRW - Supreme Ruler of the World. In this one Knotts plays a dimwitted bean counter for some little jerk water town run by a group of crooked simpletons only slightly brighter than he is. When things appear a bit shaky for the crooks they go for a frame-up of the patsy Figg. Plenty of laughs as Knotts does his usual bumbling, stumbling act. I especially appreciated the extension cord scene; asininity at it's highest level.'
Best Don Knotts movie: How to Frame a Figg. Go rent it tonight and let me know if you agree or disagree.
Update: Don Knotts' career as metaphor for the decline of American culture?
There'll be no suspense at the Oscars this year.
I got to see Woody Allen's Match Point today during its limited release. The movie is showing on only a couple of screens in the whole country. (I love L.A.) I saw it at the new Century City AMC 15 theater, right by where I used to work.
On a side note, the City of L.A. has finally decided to get rid of "little" Santa Monica Boulevard. For those of you unfamiliar with this idiosyncratic roadway, "little" Santa Monica ran alongside "real" Santa Monica from West L.A. to Beverly Hills. It's a very busy east-west route, and there was no logical reason for the redundancy. It looks like when they're done it will be twice as wide and much less confusing for the non-native driver. Good job.
So anyways, the one o'clock bargain matinee was still eight-fucking-fifty dollars at the Century City Theater, which makes me wonder what full price is. It was a full house. I'm pretty sure I was the only shikse in there too. And the youngest. It was a Woody Allen picture, after all.
I can't ruin the movie for you, because I want you to see it. The ending is really cool. I give it four stars: "liked it a lot." Woody can still make movies. I will say this: it's not about tennis. It's mainly a love triangle thing.
If you liked Closer, you'll like Match Point. The two movies are similar in many ways. Both have main characters who are feckless Brits, while Match Point has the added advantage of not having Natalie Portman in it.
Scarlett Johansson was awesome as expected. Her character is an unlikeable but sexy bitch. It's a nuanced performance. There are a lot of close-up shots, and you can't fake that kind of acting. The girl's got amazing talent.
The central theme of Match Point is the role of chance in life. Like how one little chance occurrence that you have no control over, and maybe don't even know about, can make a huge difference in your life. It made me think about how I might be married right now if a certain guy had been in the office instead of out when I called him three years ago. I'm glad he was out.
Another thing the movie reminded me about is how much I hate secret relationships. I've been in a few and they never ended well. Any time you have to keep a relationship secret, it's a sign that you probably shouldn't be in it. This includes work relationships, "his-mom-hates-you" relationships and of course cheating.
So there you go. I've started off the year with two pieces of good advice for you. Go see Match Point, and don't get into any secret relationships.
Dear Peter Jackson.
i love what you guys are doing with claymation these days, but three hours of watching a monkey grimace is a bit much, don't you think?
your fan,
annika
p.s. i mean, there's only so many ways an ape can make a sad face, you know what i mean? Geez, Roddy McDowell figured that out back in the seventies.
thanks again,
annie
p.p.s. The dino stampede was nice, but Spielberg already did one. Remember? Plus, i don't think a .45 caliber tommy gun is going to do much against a velociraptor, let alone a brontosaurus an apatosaurus, except make it madder.
luv ya,
a
p.p.p.s. Me again. Sorry, i just don't get the whole "girl loves monkey" thing. You know, Adrian Brody may not be the handsomest dude out there, but he does have a certain charm. At the very least, a cute blonde with a nice figure like Naomi Watts, shouldn't have to settle for a simian.
nika
p.p.p.p.s. i thought about my last p.s. and i should have added that i did find myself having feelings for the big furry primate by the end of the deal. Why'd you have to kill him?
byee
p.p.p.p.p.s. Who knew Jack Black could carry a whole picture? Oh, and if you wanted to cast Nicole Kidman, but she was unavailable, you couldn't have found a better facsimile than Naomi Watts. There were moments when i thought i was looking at Nicole for a second. Interesting that the two of them grew up in Australia and are actually close friends.
yours truly,
nika
p.p.p.p.p.p.s. The biplanes looked totally fake. It kind of ruined it for me. Biplanes move a lot slower in real life than you showed them. Maybe most people wouldn't notice that, but i'm kind of a biplane nut.
ceeya,
babs
p.p.p.p.p.p.p.s. i swear this is the last one. i thought the original KK was overrated. i've actually heard it referred to as the "greatest American film" ever, which is ridiculous. Like nobody's made a better movie since 1933? Come on. Your remake certainly was better. And you outdid the De Laurentiis version too. (But then De Laurentiis's sucked.) In all honesty Peter, i think you are a modern day DeMille. Keep making epics, you're good at them. i'll keep seeing them.
This King Kong was like three movies in one. The first hour was a trip through depression era New York. Nicely done. i love imagining what different periods of history looked like, and you really brought it alive for me.
The second hour was an action thriller, with monsters and lots of creepy-crawlies. It was fun, although it almost succumbed to the "Temple Of Doom" syndrome (too much action) in places. Not to worry though, i figured i could afford to miss at least one perilous escape to go relieve my bladder, and i was right.
The third act was the tragedy. No surprises there, and it may have been the weakest part of the movie. Like i said, the whole gorilla - blonde love association thing is just not believable. They must have known they couldn't have a future together. i mean, how would they do it? It's a stretch.
But overall, i'd give your KK a 3 stars on the Netflix scale ("liked it"). Definitely worth seeing, although it's an hour too long.
luvs,
annie bananie
Not many people know that, for Catholics, some sort of penance is advised during the Advent season as well as during Lent. So this year i have decided that my Advent sacrifice should be to see ten movies in the next fourteen days.
i call it a sacrifice because the quality of Hollywood movies in recent years has not given me much hope that this will be an enjoyable experience. Plus, i intend to blog about each one, and lately, wringing a decent blog post out of my head has been a difficult task.
i am in Los Angeles until after the new year, so i will have the advantage of being able to see a lot of the limited release films that are already creating a buzz, such as Spielberg's Munich and Woody Allen's Match Point (a must see for me, since i love tennis.)
The boyfriend will be joining me next week, and he has indicated that he will help me cross the finish line on this goal, as long as "that cowboy movie" isn't one of the ten films.
i hope my Advent sacrifice, and the blog posts it generates, will be of some interest to you all. Besides, it's Christmas break, and what else have i got to do with my time? Otherwise i might spend it playing videogames with my bro, or eating and drinking way too much.
i took a mid-week study break this afternoon and saw Aeon Flux. This is an interesting movie to review because audience expectations can be all over the map. The original MTV cartoon has a cult following, so i imagine those viewers would be the most discerning. i liked the original cartoon, without being obsessed by it. i wanted to see it because i like sci-fi post-apocalyptic shit, especially with a kick-ass heroine. My boyfriend, of course, went along with the hope of seeing some t&a.
i would give Aeon Flux a solid three stars (liked it) on the Netflix five star scale. i wasn't expecting greatness, only coolness, which it delivered.
My first introduction to Charlize Theron was The Legend Of Bagger Vance, which i saw in a hotel room on free HBO. i still felt ripped off. She was horrible in that lemon of a movie. The second time i saw her she was partying with an apple, and the third time i saw her she was partying in orange.
But Charlize is a big star now, because she's won an Oscar. She deserves another nomination for having never blinked once during all 93 minutes of Aeon Flux. Nobody blinks in this movie, check it out, it's freaky.
The plot is this: Aeon Flux is a 25th century assassin, and part of a high-tech underground rebellion against a mildly oppressive government a la Logan's Run without the chanting crowds. She's sent on a mission to kill the head honcho, but once she gets there, she finds out that things are more complicated than they at first seemed. They never are in these types of movies. But thankfully the plot wasn't too convoluted for my finals-fatigued brain to follow.
There are at least two requisite bitch brawls, which aren't too bad, action wise. There's minimal reliance on sci-fi gadgetry, which i count as a good thing. The atmospherics can't quite match up to the original, but then the original is a cartoon. You have to inject some humanity into a live-action remake or it would be unwatchable. Still, i think this version captures enough of the original's dreamlike weirdness to satisfy most non-purists.
i wonder where the exteriors were shot. There's a nice balance between futuristic cold concrete and manicured gardens, so the background never looks too sterile. The climactic scene features gently falling cherry blossoms, which was a nice touch.
But my favorite part was the costumes. Chris didn't think there was enough skin, but i have only two words to say about the fashions: wedge heels. i think you know how i feel about this year's must-have boot. They're on my Xmas list. Charlize shows that you can run in them, snap a dude's neck like a twig in them, and still look good in a crouch. And she does do a lot of crouching, but why not, her ass was made to be in spandex.
Charlize spends most of the time in Aeon's signature black bodysuit, but her grand entrance is in a 25th century hooded leather suit that's too hot to describe, and the stills do not do it justice. She also wears a very svelte white number in one scene, that i like a lot. But above all else, it's the boots that make this movie, baby.
So, to sum up: i liked it. It's a little too short for me to recommend paying full price though. See it on matinee like i did, or wait for the DVD.
One of the cool things about Netflix is a feature that lets you rate movies on a scale of one to five stars. Their computer makes recommendations for future rentals a member might like, based on the member’s ratings. i don’t find the recommendations very helpful, but i do like rating things.
Five stars means “I loved it.” i reserve five stars for movies i love that are generally considered classics, or which deserve to be classics; also for movies that i don’t mind seeing again and again or from which i have memorized much of the dialogue.
A fine example of my thinking on five star movies is my list of such movies from A to C in alphabetical order. i just copied and pasted the list from my Netflix page, so you will notice that there are some TV shows in there, which are not technically movies, but otherwise fit my criteria.
12 Angry Men (1957)
24: Season 1 (2001)
Ace Ventura: Pet Detective (1994)
Airplane! (1980)
All About Eve (1950)
Annie Hall (1977)
The Apartment (1960)
Apollo 13 (1995)
Arthur (1981)
Austin Powers 1 (1997)
Austin Powers 2 (1999)
Back to the Future (1985)
Band of Brothers (2001)
Beverly Hills Cop (1984)
Black Hawk Down (2001)
Breakfast at Tiffany's (1961)
Bullitt (1968)
Butch Cassidy and the Sundance Kid (1969)
Caddyshack (1980)
Captain Blood (1935)
Casablanca (1942)
Charley Varrick (1973)
A Clockwork Orange (1971)
Cold Mountain (2003)
Cool Hand Luke (1967)
The Netflix rating thing is an ongoing project, so don’t be surprised if there are some omissions from my list. It might mean that the movie didn’t come up as i was going through the recommendations (which i often did when i was bored at work) and clicking on the star ratings.
Update: There's an interesting discussion going on in the comments about whether my 5 star list contains more guy movies or chick movies. First of all, let me admit that my tastes have always included guy things, from sports movies to war movies to historical movies and sci-fi. But i think it's a mistake to say that movies which are obviously marketed towards the male audience do not appeal to women just as much.
If i had to guess, i would say i know more chicks than guys who watch 24 religiously. And comedies like Airplane, and the Ace Ventura and Austin Powers movies can't be categorized. i think both sexes enjoy them equally.
Additionally, i would look askance at any guy who could not appreciate The Apartment or Breakfast At Tiffany's. And All About Eve is just so darn good that every male should be forced to watch it for his own cultural enrichment.
i didn't want to add to any of the Dukes Of Hazzard hype that's been going on, but i have to link to the San Francisco Chronicle's review. It may be the funniest review ever, certainly the most scathing movie review i've ever seen.
There are routine movies and others that blaze a trail. There are routine bad movies and others so horrendous that they redefine bad, that make us look up synonyms for agonizing and abysmal and then gnash our teeth because the language has not kept pace with the decline of film. There are even movies that are so blazingly rotten that they can redefine past experiences and make us look back on recent weak efforts like 'Stealth' or 'Fantastic Four' and think, 'Ooh, that was fascinating.'lol. It gets better.'The Dukes of Hazzard' is hardly some routine bad movie. Rather, it's one of the elite, right up there with 'I Am Curious ... Yellow' (1967) and Bo Derek's 'Ghosts Can't Do It' (1990), in stiff competition for the lamest thing ever put on celluloid. Of course, that makes it, by default, the worst film so far of the 21st century, but to say that does little to acknowledge the ambition behind this project. Make no mistake, director Jay Chandrasekhar was swinging for the fences with this one. He was shooting for the millennium.
The movie establishes, with startling economy, that it's about two imbeciles. In a sleepy rural county, a red car comes blazing down a country road, careening and swerving, while the two morons in the front seats yell 'Woo-ooo!' and 'Yee-haaa!' These are Bo (Seann William Scott) and Luke Duke (Johnny Knoxville), the loudest, laughingest, hell-raisingest pair of single- celled organisms ever to get a Georgia driver's license.
American Beauty and The Ice Storm are essentially the same movie. Through the magic of the Netflix queue, i saw them both on subsequent nights.
Both are about dysfunctional families, mid-life crisis, sexual restlessness, infidelity, teen experimentation, and the secret underbelly of suburban life.
The difference is that one sucked and one was a pretty decent movie. Unfortunately, the Academy bestowed its Best Picture award on the one that sucked. Shows you that the Academy Awards are a joke.
A big reason for the difference was that one movie was about its subject matter, while the other was a thinly veiled political statement in which the subject matter was only a setup for the filmmaker's liberal punch-line.
Ang Lee treated his characters with gentle compassion. The other director had a huge chip on his shoulder against every character except one. American Beauty was the product of a bitter, angry, small mind. If you want my advice, pass it up and rent The Ice Storm.
Update: Perhaps i should be more specific about my objections, since it never occurred to me that anyone would disagree with my opinions on any subject [insert winking smilie here], especially someone whose opinions i respect as much as Professor Schwyzer.
It seems to me that the central villain of American Beauty is the one dimensional homophobe character, and i was a little taken aback by the over-the-top stereotype, which the writer employed to get his point across. The character of Colonel Frank Fitts, United States Marine Corps seems intended as an insult directed solely at conservatives. Here's a caricature with a crew-cut, who speaks with a southern accent, is obviously a Republican, a retired marine, an abusive husband, probably a batterer who beats up his drug dealer son and requires a monthly piss test from him. He's also a closet Nazi. But the big punch-line i alluded to — the "Crying Game moment" if you will — is when the villain, in a fit of emotion, kisses the Kevin Spacey character. The filmmaker's message to the audience is clear: all conservatives are homophobes and all homophobes are repressed homosexuals.
While i admit that some homophobes probably are repressed homosexuals (J. Edgar Hoover, and at least one of Matthew Shepard's killers for example), i have a hard time with a movie whose intent is so obviously to smear the military and conservatives the way American Beauty did. i'm very sensitive to political statements which are designed to insult not persuade, and which are disguised as art. Some have called me too sensitive, but it's no secret that liberal Hollywood filmmakers are often motivated by their hatred of Republicans. Witness this quote from an interview with Jay Chandrasekhar, who directed this year's remake movie, The Dukes of Hazzard:
You know, I’m a very liberal-minded person and I like to tweak Republicans whenever possible.Great. Just great. Love that honesty. When Hollywood realizes that it's continually pissing off one half of it's potential audience for no good reason, that's the day they'll stop whining about declining box office receipts.
With 99 votes in, i'm calling round two of the Kick-Ass Movie Assassins Runoff for Beatrix Kiddo. As you recall, i asked you to vote on the following question:
If Lara Croft and Beatrix Kiddo were each given orders to kill each other, who would win?For those not dialed in to the popular culture, Lara Croft is the kick-ass girl archaeologist/secret agent played by Angelina Jolie in the Tomb Raider movies based on the popular videogame. Beatrix Kiddo is the master assassin from Kill Bill volumes 1 and 2, also known as the Bride, or Black Mamba.
The early voting was very close with Lara Croft and Beatrix running neck and neck until about fifty votes were in. Then Beatrix pulled away and kept a substantial lead until the end. As of this writing Lara Croft had 37% to Beatrix Kiddo's 63%.
For me, the choice was easy, and not just because Kill Bill vol. 2 is perhaps the best movie i've seen since L.A. Confidential. Beatrix Kiddo was totally fearless. She survived getting shot in the head and being buried alive. Only a couple months after waking up from a four year coma, she defeated the entire Crazy 88's bodyguard with just a samurai sword, then dispatched a well rested O-Ren Ishii. She may be the only person in the world who knows the secret five-point exploding heart technique.
By contrast, the only thing Lara Croft could make explode was a pair of nipples through a quarter inch of neoprene. There's a scene in The Cradle Of Life where she's pointing a big gun at the bad guy and her hand was shaking! Some bad-ass. Black Mamba wouldn't give her a second thought.
Next up, for Round Three i've chosen an obvious match-up: Maggie from Point Of No Return vs. Nikita from La Femme Nikita (The Luc Besson film, not the tv show). This should be a good fight. So scroll down and vote!
And while you're at it, do check out my friend Matt's Baddest-Ass Post-Apocalyptic Movie Hero Tournament. Round One is Max from the Mad Max series vs. Reese from The Terminator.
P.S. Click here to see my Round One results: Jason Bourne vs. Jack Bauer.
A week or so ago, i asked this provocative question in my rotating poll: "If Jason Bourne and Jack Bauer were each given orders to kill each other, who would win?"
The results are in. You decided, with 76% of the vote, that Jason Bourne would kill Jack Bauer.
Much as i love Jack Bauer, i'd have to add my vote to the 76%. Jason Bourne kicks ass!
One thing about Jason Bourne, and i haven't read the Ludlum books so i'm only relying on the Matt Damon portrayal here, but he is freakin' deadly all by himself. Without the aid of a memory, or any organizational backup at all, he was able to alternately hide from, or escape from the clutches of, any government's intelligence or police apparatus, including about a half dozen of the world's best assassins sent to get him. Plus he's a hell of a nice guy.
The trouble with Jack Bauer is that he is nothing without CTU. And CTU is unreliable at best. Look what happened last year. In twenty-four hours CTU managed to allow someone to take over all the U.S. nuclear power plants by remote control, resulting in a nuclear meltdown and thousands of deaths, someone then stole an F-117 stealth fighter and shot down Air Force One, probably killing the president.*
Poor Jack Bauer. Without his little palm pilot he's pretty much useless. Unfortunately, that palm pilot links him to CTU, which as Dawn Summers once pointed out, "has more leaks than the Nixon White House."
Jack has his strengths, to be sure. He doesn't quit, and he doesn't shy away from doing what has to be done. Like, for instance, shooting his boss in the leg or in the head, or killing his girlfriend's husband for "national security" reasons, wink-wink. Too bad Audrey Heller couldn't see that he is actually a pretty nice guy, too. Whatta picky bitch.
But the key reason i think Jason Bourne would win this round is that he's so damn fast. And when he fights, he attacks. It's like three punches and three guys go down in one second. i've never seen Jack fight like that, although maybe he hasn't had the opportunity. Next season, when Jack's flying solo, we might get to see what he can do without CTU, so i'm looking forward to that.
Next up: Beatrix Kiddo vs. Lara Croft (not technically an assassin but what the heck.) So go vote.
_______________
* i'm still not clear on that. Did the president die or not?
Sheila posted about The Big Sleep last month, and raved about it. i was always put off by the movie, although i love Humphrey Bogart, Lauren Bacall and Raymond Chandler. It was the fact that i couldn't follow the plot that bugged me. But even the writers, including William Faulkner and Chandler himself, couldn't figure out what was going on.
So when it came on TCM yesterday afternoon, i gave myself permission to watch it without trying to understand the story and just enjoy the great film noir dialogue. Like this:
MARS
(threateningly)
Just a minute. The girl can go. I'd like to talk to you...
MARLOWE (Bogart)
Suppose I don't wanna talk to you.
MARS
I've got two boys outside in the car.
MARLOWE
Oh. It's like that, eh. Mm-hum. Run along, angel.
MARS
Your story didn't sound quite right.
MARLOWE
Oh, that's too bad. You've got a better one?
MARS
Maybe I can find one.
(looks under the rug.)
Blood. Quite a lot of blood.
MARLOWE
Is that so?
MARS
(pulls out a gun.)
You mind?
MARLOWE
No. I'm used to it.
. . .
MARS
Convenient. The door being open when you didn't have a key.
MARLOWE
Yeah. Wasn't it? By the way, how did you happen to have one?
MARS
Is that any of your business?
MARLOWE
I could make it my business.
MARS
And I could make your business mine.
MARLOWE
You wouldn't like it. The pay's too small.
MARS
I think you'd better get out here.
MARLOWE
Oh, by the way, how's Mrs. Mars these days?
MARS
You take chances, Marlowe.
MARLOWE
I get paid to.
MARLOWE
You alone, Joe?
BRODY
(pulls out a gun.)
Yeah. Except for this.
MARLOWE
My, my, my. Such a lot of guns around town, and so few brains. You know, you're the second guy I've met today who seems to think a gat in the hand means the world by the tail. Put it down, Joe.
When Bogey and Bacall were on screen together, in The Big Sleep, Key Largo, To Have and Have Not and Dark Passage they were doubly riveting. Everybody knows the "you know how to whistle" scene from To Have and Have Not (one of the greatest scenes in movie history), but this dialogue from The Big Sleep is just as electric:
VIVIAN (Bacall)
I'm very grateful to you, Mr. Marlowe. I'm very glad it's all over. Tell me, uh, what do you usually do when you're not working?
MARLOWE
Mm. Play the horses, fool around.
VIVIAN
No women?
MARLOWE
Well, I'm generally working on something most of the time.
VIVIAN
Would that be stressed to include me?
MARLOWE
I like you. I told you that before.
VIVIAN
I liked hearing you say it.
MARLOWE
Mm.
VIVIAN
But you didn't do much about it.
MARLOWE
Neither did you.
VIVIAN
Well, speaking of horses, I like to play them myself. But I'd like to see them work out a little first to see if they are front runners or come from behind, find out what the whole card is, what makes them run.
MARLOWE
Find out mine?
VIVIAN
I think so.
MARLOWE
Go ahead.
VIVIAN
I'd say you don't like to be rated. You'd like to get out in front, open up a lead, take a little breather in the backstretch and, and come home free.
MARLOWE
You don't like to be rated yourself.
VIVIAN
I haven't met anyone yet who could do it. Any suggestions?
MARLOWE
Well, I can't tell 'til I've seen you over distance of ground. You got a touch of class but... I don't know, how far you can go?
VIVIAN
That depends on who's on the saddle, Marlowe. I like the way you work. In case you don't know, you're doing all right.
MARLOWE
There's one thing I can't figure out.
VIVIAN
What makes me run?
MARLOWE
Uh huh.
VIVIAN
I'll give you a little hint. Sugar won't work. It's been tried.
A pithy and/or lame movie review.
Okay, somebody wanna explain that shit to me?
So he went back in time? i don't get it. How did he go back in time?
This movie is a bizarre cross between The Shining, Ordinary People and Harvey. Plus, it's a comedy.
Set in the eighties, it features a really cool soundtrack. Tears for Fears, INXS, Duran Duran, Joy Division and Echo and the Bunnymen, who are especially appropriate, since the key figure in this movie is a guy in a grotesque bunny suit.
i think i have identified a new movie genre, the "nostalgic suburban period movie." Add this film to the list that includes The Virgin Suicides and Dazed and Confused.
i can't watch the mom without thinking "kickinggggg bird."
Set design was very good. All the details were there. My family had the same antique Sony Trinitron.
If you were to take a poll of bloggers, i imagine this movie would be most popular with self absorbed LiveJournal types. You know, the type of kids who dress in black and think they're artistic and unique because they write free verse poems about death that sound exactly the same as all the other free verse poems about death written by all the other kids who dress in black and think they're artistic and unique.
In other words, i would have loved this movie when i was in high school.
Stylish enough to earn three Netflix stars from me, but ultimately frustrating. i know i might understand it better if i watched it again, but i just didn't like it enough to go through the extra effort.
A pithy and/or lame movie review.
Sucked.
Shockingly bad, on so many levels.
Earns the rarely given Netflix one star rating ("hated it.")
Self-satisfied, pretentious new age bull-shit.
Less fun than repeatedly hitting yourself in the nose with a large rubber ball.
A comedy that thinks it's about philosophy, or a philosophical movie that thinks it's a comedy. Whatever, it fails either way.
Not a single likeable character.
For a movie that's supposed to appeal to the narrow demographic of touchy-feely new-agey politically-correct elitist guru-gropin' dolly-llama-lovin' tree-huggin' liberal fuckturds, the main characters sure are an unpleasant passive-agressive lot with major anger management issues.
Far and away the worst entry in last year's Jude Law trifecta.
This shit-fest places its liberal point of view front-and-center. Yet the only persons of color are a tall skinny African, who has about five lines, and two black security guards. Can we say stereotype? How about racist?
Jason Schwartzman, already hideously ugly, refuses to wash his hair even once.
The obligatory anti-Christian jab, which has become de rigeur for American filmmakers these days, is extended to a full scene.
Features an ass-fucking in the mud scene.
'nuff said.
Full disclosure: i once went out with one of those new-age freakos, and i still have unresolved issues about that whole thing.
Fifty-six votes on my semi-scientific Jim Carrey poll and i'm ready to call it. the question was this: "The best Jim Carrey film was..." And the results, in order of the vote totals was:
The Truman Show 25%
Eternal Sunshine of the Spotless Mind 18%
Dumb & Dumber 14%
Bruce Almighty 11%
The Mask 7%
Me, Myself & Irene 7%
Ace Ventura: Pet Detective 5%
Liar Liar 5%
The Cable Guy 4%
The Dead Pool 4%
First of all, it was kind of a trick question. Or at least a question subject to dual interpretations. What was the best "Jim Carrey movie" or what was the best "movie in which Jim Carrey appeared." If you ask me, each interpretation of the question should get a different answer.
If you're talking about "best movie in which Jim Carrey appeared," in my opinion that's clearly Eternal Sunshine of the Spotless Mind, which is one of the best movies to come out in recent years. But it's not a typical Jim Carrey movie. Sure, his performance was great, and there were flashes of the madcap, but Carrey wasn't the star. The script was the star and i was more blown away by Kate Winslet's complex performance.
The fact that 25% voted for The Truman Show is interesting. That's the movie that broke the Carrey typecast mold. Not a great film. Interesting enough to chat about for fifteen or twenty minutes during the obligatory post-movie Panda Express run, but no more than that. Still, without The Truman Show, we would have seen Nick Cage in the lead role of Eternal Sunshine. And what a mistake that would have been. i like Nick, but he couldn't have pulled off the baby under the table scene.
Funniest "Jim Carrey" Jim Carrey movie? i'm appalled that the comedy classic Ace Ventura: Pet Detective was so low on the list. Too many lines from that movie are worth memorizing and sprinkling into everyday conversation. It's also the only comedy movie i can think of with an offbeat hero, where the hero is not a bumbler of some kind. Think of the Pink Panther movies (also classics), when you have a wacky lead, he usually succeeds despite himself. In Ace Ventura, the lead is not a stereotypical lovable loser, instead he's the only one smart enough to crack the case.
Dumb and Dumber is hilarious, but except for the scene where the two of them are squirting ketchup and mustard into their mouths, i don't laugh as hard throughout as i did when i first saw it.
The Mask was just bad, never funny, and too reliant on special effects. Bruce Almighty is a one punch line movie, and i think it came in fourth on the strength of Jennifer Aniston's titties. Finally, by all rights The Dead Pool should have scored higher than The Cable Guy. Jim Carrey was great in that final installment to the Dirty Harry franchise. He played a strung out Axl Rose type rock star named Johnny Squares. This was a couple of years before In Living Color.
i was interested in that poll question not because i'm a huge Jim Carrey fan, because i'm not. i like him well enough, but what fascinates me is how a guy who everyone was so hot on in the nineties suddenly lost favor when everybody realized that he only had one act, and it got old rather quickly. He career kind of mirrored the dot-com boom/bust cycle of the nineties. Suddenly Hollywood realized he was obscenely overvalued and his career went through a "market correction." Carrey has dramatic talent and it's been interesting watching him try to re-invent himself for his last few movies.
This weekend, i re-rented The Hitchhiker's Guide To The Galaxy, the cheesy 1981 BBC version that i used to rave about. i won't be doing that anymore. It does not hold up to a second viewing.
The fact is, i only saw it once before, many years ago, when a friend let me borrow the videotape. i was really blazed at the time. i seemed to remember thinking the low budget special effects (none) were much funnier than they actually are.
The BBC version, in fact, is pretty sucky. Arthur Dent and Ford Prefect seem gay. The chick who plays Trillian is simply annoying and unpleasant to watch, as is Zaphod Beeblebrox, who can't decide what accent to use. i wanted to strangle Marvin the depressed robot by the end of the three hours.
Zaphod Beeblebrox's extra head is comical. It moves on its own, but it looks worse than a papier mache replica. It's really bad.
i did like the little interludes when the narrator read from the Guide. These are illustrated with typical 80's videogame style graphics that seem to still work for me. The narrator delivers the funny lines with perfect deadpan timing. All the scenes on the Vogon spaceship were well done and funny too. The Vogon captain's poetry was classic.
i also detected a slight British high-brow anti-Americanism, which i hadn't noticed the first time i saw it. i'm more sensisitive to these things now. For instance, a couple of the characters spoke in caricatures of American dialects. Some guards talked like they were from Brooklyn, and Trillian sounded like a gum chewing waitress. And when Ford and Zaphod sing a death song in one of the later episodes, the melody is the Star Spangled Banner. Why is it that the Brits all know our national anthem?
That's something that has always bothered me about the British intelligentsia. They love us, yet they hate us. They act superior, yet we give them an inferiority complex. They're obsessed with us. It's kind of pathetic.
Anyways, i don't recommend the old BBC version, except to Dr. Who fans, who are all desensitized to bad sci-fi effects already.
i'm a big fan of the book, and i do plan on seeing the newest feature version. i think Douglas Adams is a modern day Swift.
1. Men bad. Women good.
2. Marriage bad. Career good.
3. The fifties bad. Today good.
4. Rules and standards bad. Bad bad bad.
5. Promiscuity is a virtue.
6. Marriage equals failure. Women should avoid it at all costs.
7. Unless you are chubby, then let nothing stand in the way of getting a husband.
8. If you absolutely must get married, remember that having a career at the same time is easy.
9. Have pity on those poor girls who grew up in the fifties. Chicks have it so much easier today.
10. Wellesley girls are snobby.*
_______________
* Okay, that last one wasn’t sarcastic.
From Coming Soon.net:
George Lucas . . . says the third and final prequel [in the Star Wars series] will not likely receive the PG rating the previous five films have received.Fans of the original trilogy, like myself, might disagree.'I don't think I would take a five- or a six-year-old to this,' says Lucas, 'It's way too strong.'
Lucas is referring to violent scenes in the film and also to Anakin Skywalker's journey to the dark side in the climax of the 30-year-old series. 'We're going to watch him make a pact with the devil,' Lucas tells the program.
He says Skywalker will be descending into Lucas' frightening vision of Hell, a mythical planet composed entirely of erupting volcanos. 'Yes...the lava at the end...it ends in hell.'
The series went to hell when Lucas released that train wreck called Episode One.
Here's some movie swear word trivia.
i think i'll watch a classic movie later tonight. High Noon, starring Gary Cooper and Grace Kelly.
: )
The IMDb plot summary says: "A sheriff, personally compelled to face a returning deadly enemy, finds that his own town refuses to help him." Sounds like a metaphor for George W. Bush and the Democrats.
Sorry, i couldn't resist the political jab.
This weekend, i finally saw two movies i've been anxious to see for a while. One was awesome, and the other was interesting, but flawed.
The Bourne Identity was the awesome one. i had to pick up the DVD at Best Buy, so that i will be ready to see The Bourne Supremacy next. i'm detemined not to make the same mistake i made with the Lethal Weapon series, when i failed to see number 2 before seeing number three. Seriously, you can't see those movies out of sequence because the existence of Joe Pesci and Chris Rock are not explained and do not make sense in the third one. i was totally confused throughout.
Anyways, i liked The Bourne Supremacy very much. Lots of action, well edited and shot, and Matt Damon is such a cutie. He's so much better than Ben Afflack as an actor. i don't know how they're going to sustain the first movie's interest in the sequel, because a lot of what made Identity good is that the audience knew more than the hero. We knew Bourne's identity, and it was fun to watch him trying to figure it out. Now that he knows it too, i wonder whether Supremacy will be as interesting.
i've heard that the sequel will be about Bourne's getting even. Another revenge movie, like that hasn't been done to death. Now the second movie i saw this weekend, in an actual theater no less, was The Village, by M. Night Shyamalan (or as i like to say: M. Knight Shamalamadingdong). i'd been avoiding all conversation about this movie for some time because i didn't want anyone to spoil it for me. If you haven't seen it, don't read any further because i intend to talk about the secret.
As i watched the Village, i kept wondering what the allegory was. i was totally taken in by the fairy tale quality of the story. Then they had to go and ruin it by injecting reality at the end. They turned a quite charming story into a one punch-line joke. To no good effect, i thought.
In Shyamalan's earlier movie, which i liked a lot better, the one about the kid that sees dead people, he also strung the audience along for the whole movie only to spring the joke on them at the very end. However, in that case, the joke was totally unexpected and caused me to re-think the whole plot for hours after it was over. After seeing The Village, all i did was criticize how it didn't make sense. Plus, i kind of guessed that the village was some sort of "Colonial House," so i wasn't really surprised by the twist.
Don Knotts had a birthday recently (July 21st), which i failed to properly commemorate on this here blog. i referenced him briefly in a short post below, and now i'm going to tell you what his greatest role was.
While a lot of people swear that The Incredible Mr. Limpet is the best Don Knotts movie, i think people who think that are all wet. Knotts excelled at the physical comedy of facial expressions. Limpet was a cartoon, so it by definition cannot be the best DK movie.
The Ghost and Mr. Chicken is a strong contender. Knotts' character is named Luther Heggs, a perfect name for a DK character. i loved the whole scene where he spends the night in the haunted house. Remember the crazy organ music? Knotts was at his shaky best.
i liked The Reluctant Astronaut just a little bit better, partly because i like space movies. This one came out in 1967, at the height of the space race. The premise is typically DK: he gets a job at NASA, tells his family and his girlfriend that he is in astronaut training, when in fact he's just a janitor, hijinks ensue, his family finds out about the charade, they're terribly disappointed, then even though he's Acrophobic, he blunders onto a spaceflight, actually becoming a reluctant astronaut , more hijinks ensue. It's predictable, but still a must see.
i also liked The Apple Dumpling Gang, where DK teams up with Tim Conway as a pair of stereotypically incompetent but loveable bank robbers.
But the funniest Don Knotts movie, in my opinion, is the often overlooked How to Frame a Figg, from 1971. Here's a couple of comments from the IMDB page:
'How to Frame a Figg is a vintage Don Knotts - frenetic, farcical comedy, and features him at the top of his form as the hysterical, cat-on-hot-tin-roof nervous, persecuted civil servant Hollis Figg.'The opening scene with the ambulance is pathetically absurd, but i won't ruin it for you, it's one of my favorite comic scenes ever.'If folks were really this stupid I could be the SRW - Supreme Ruler of the World. In this one Knotts plays a dimwitted bean counter for some little jerk water town run by a group of crooked simpletons only slightly brighter than he is. When things appear a bit shaky for the crooks they go for a frame-up of the patsy Figg. Plenty of laughs as Knotts does his usual bumbling, stumbling act. I especially appreciated the extension cord scene; asininity at it's highest level.'
Best Don Knotts movie: How to Frame a Figg. Go rent it tonight and let me know if you agree or disagree.
. . . The fight scene in Rocky II is perhaps the greatest fight scene in the history of movies - but only if you accept the dubious possibility that two professional heavyweights would, or could, go 15 rounds without ever once protecting themselves, and that any referee would ever allow such a thing. . . .
. . . There's a really good reason why Ralph Macchio's career never caught fire after doing the Karate Kid movies: he is without a doubt the most annoying actor in the history of film. . . .
. . . What is it with you guys and The Blues Brothers movie? It must be some defect in the y chromosome that makes you love it so much because - face it - that movie really sucks. . . .
. . . Amityville II, The Possession shares a distinct honor with Superman III in my book. They are both completely and utterly unwatchable. . . .
Have a great Fourth of July weekend everybody! i'm outta here.
It doesn't seem to be widely reported yet, but Drudge links to a story that Marlon Brando has died.
Calling him the greatest actor of all time is a bit of a stretch. Still, Brando did some good work in his day. My favorites are On the Waterfront, Streetcar Named Desire of course, and the Godfather. His part in Apocalypse Now, although brief, was memorable. On the other side of the ledger, i thought he was horribly mis-cast in that musical Guys and Dolls.
And what was up with that strange Oscar non-acceptance episode?
To sum up my opinion: weird guy, decent actor.
i went with Betty and her sister to see The Passion of the Christ Friday night, but it was sold out. In fact, all the evening shows were sold out the whole weekend. So, the three of us ended up seeing the 10:00 matinee in Glendale on Saturday. Now that i’ve had some time to reflect, here’s what i think.
After an advance screening of The Passion, the Pope is said to have remarked: “It is as it was.” A few days ago, i wrote about my preliminary expectations. If you plan to see the movie but haven’t, i may ruin some of the experience, so you may want to stop reading now. Even though everybody knows how it ends, i think it’s best to view any movie without foreknowledge of how the filmmakers plan to tell the story.
It’s definitely an important movie. Is it a masterpiece, as some have called it? i really don’t think so. If you’re a Christian, it's not a movie that you can walk away from without being affected in some way. But it's missing something. It was well made. i’m glad i saw it. i’ll probably see it again, even though it is very difficult to watch. i didn’t hate it, but at this point, i’m not sure i can say i liked it. Maybe i wasn’t supposed to.
While the movie has its flaws, The Passion is realistic enough to make me almost believe i was there, at the crucifixion, something i have been hearing about and reading about all my life. That’s a powerful thing. There are moments of great emotional intensity. Betty cried throughout the movie, and she was shaking afterwards. As i walked out of the theater, i felt as if things were different, somehow. None of us wanted to talk for a while, but those feelings have worn off by now.
What i Liked
There are a few scenes that i liked very much. One scene in particular was a flashback scene with Jesus after he has built a table. Also, the stoning of Mary Magdelene was very nicely done. There’s no dialogue in that scene and it’s completely in slow motion. i couldn’t tell what was going on until the final shot when Mary’s face came onscreen, then it all made sense. Very powerful.
Gibson’s treatment of Simon the Cyrenian was unusual too. i always pictured him as volunteering to help carry the cross, but i think his initial reluctance makes more sense.
The actors who played Simon Peter and Mary, Jesus’ mother, both gave very fine performances. The lack of makeup on the women in the film also added to the realism.
Satan was played by a woman, but made up to look androgynous. She was scary. The scene with Judas under a bridge made me jump in my seat. i also thought using kids to taunt Judas just before he hangs himself made it more diabolical.
Technically, the movie is very well made. The music, visual effects, and photography are all great. The director of photography, Caleb Deschanel, also did The Right Stuff, The Natural and The Patriot.
Is It As It Was? - Historical Accuracy
Mel Gibson obviously wanted to show us the most historically accurate Jesus film to date. Unfortunately, and as i feared, his commitment to accuracy was not as consistent as i would have liked.
My biggest problem is one that has been talked about a lot in the professional reviews. There is too much blood, too early, in my opinion. i thought about this for a long time. Perhaps if the amount of torture had been realistic, i wouldn’t have been as bothered by it. But, at least during the scourging, i think Gibson overdid it. i don’t think it was realistic.
The scourging scene goes on for an unnecessarily long time. Historically, people died from scourging. It didn’t take a lot of strokes to kill someone, and Jesus was whipped savagely in the movie. Though i’m not an expert on this, i really do think any person would have died from that amount of flogging. There was so much blood on the floor after the scourging scene, it is impossible to believe that Jesus wouldn't have at least passed out, let alone believe that he could carry a heavy cross afterwards. We know that Jesus did not die until he was on the cross for three hours, so i think Gibson overdid the scourging scene.
People died on the cross because it was so hard to breathe while hanging up there. if i’m not mistaken, i believe the Nazis did some awful experiments to confirm this. i remember reading about it a long time ago in a book about the shroud. To breathe while on the cross, a person had to pull themself up by the arms to take each breath. Eventually they got too tired from the pain and torture of each breath and they suffocated.
That’s why the soldiers broke the legs of the thieves. When people took too long to die, they would break their legs to hurry the process, because then the victims wouldn’t be able to use their legs to help push themselves up for each breath. Gibson showed the leg breaking, but chose not to show the crucified men struggling to breathe up to that point.
It’s possible Gibson felt that Jesus had to be practically dead when he was on the cross, since he died without needing his legs broken. But i still feel that, given the severity of that scourging, Jesus would never have made it to Golgotha. We know that He did, and not only that, He was able to survive three hours on the cross.
The alternative to breaking the legs was to lance the victim through the heart, which they did to Jesus. That was one of the scenes when i became emotional during the movie, when the water starts coming out from the side. i always knew that story, but i’d never seen it done on film that way. It was hearbreaking.
Betty had a theory that since Jesus was God, he therefore could take more punishment, but i disagree. The whole point of Jesus’ torture and death was for Him to submit to it as a man. Using His power as God to withstand any torture would have been accepting the Devil’s temptation.
If one accepts that Jesus could have survived that horrible scourging, the amount of blood and the wounds do seem realistic, and i wouldn’t have a problem with Gibson’s choice to show that accurately. i just don’t think the scourging could have been that severe.
Thematically, it’s clear Gibson wanted to shock the audience with the amount of torture in the scourging. His torture represents the sins of mankind. It looks horrible because Gibson wants to impress us with the magnitude of God’s gift to us. That was the director's choice. If Gibson had toned it down to a less shocking level, maybe we wouldn’t get the message.
With that goal in mind, i still wish we could have seen Jesus’ face a little more clearly. It’s so dark with blood, it’s really grotesque and hard to look at by the end of the movie. Maybe i’m just squeamish and maybe that’s what Gibson wanted.
i had a problem with the cross too. Like i said, Jesus should have been carrying the patibulum, not the whole cross. i don’t understand why Gibson would choose to have each thief carry a patibulum and then have Jesus carry the unwieldy cross. That doesn’t make sense to me. Why would the Romans have treated Jesus differently from the two other condemned men?
Still, it didn’t bother me as much as Franco Zefferelli’s cross in Jesus of Nazareth, which was more like a scaffolding than anything else.
Another thing, Gibson put the nails in the palms. In that book on the shroud, i read that the flesh of the hand was not strong enough to hold the weight of a human for longer than a few minutes. In the movie, there’s some rope around the wrists, but i don’t buy that either. The Shroud of Turin shows the nail wounds in the wrists. Even if the Shroud is not authentic, you have to admit that the maker of the Shroud knew a lot about how people were crucified.
Does the brutality of the movie take away from its message? Some critics say it does. But i think many critics are confused about the message. And what is the message of The Passion of the Christ? Read the opening lines to J.S. Bach’s choral masterpiece, the St. Matthew’s Passion.
Come you daughters, help me lament.If you ask me, that’s the message of Gibson’s Passion, too. It invites us to look, to see Him, not to turn away, but to see clearly what He did for us.
See Him!
Whom?
The bridegroom. See him.
How?
See Him like a lamb.
O guiltless Lamb of God
Slaughtered on the stem of the cross.
See Him!
What?
Behold His patience
Always He was patient,
Although He was despised.
See Him!
Where?
Behold our guilt.
All sin hast Thou borne
Else we must needs despair.
See Him, out of love and graciousness,
Himself carrying the wood for the Cross.
Have mercy upon us o Jesus.
Nowadays, people seem to think that Jesus came simply to tell us to be nice to each other. It’s a pleasant message, and it fits into our overly secular world without ruffling too many feathers. But, it’s not why Jesus came here. Remember, we didn’t need Jesus to tell us to "love our neighbor." That commandment was already in Leviticus. But in our secular world, people have forgotten the real reason Jesus came to earth, which was to suffer, to die, and to rise again.
People complain that there’s not enough teaching in the movie. That might be a bit unfair. To make a movie that emphasized Jesus’ teachings would be to make a different movie. But i will say that it would have been a more pleasant viewing experience if Gibson had balanced the horror with more uplifting scenes.
Is The Passion Anti-Semitic?
Some people, including some professional film critics, have said that The Passion is “clearly" anti-semitic. If that is true, then the Gospels are even more anti-semitic. Gibson’s Passion is less anti-semitic than the Gospels, and remember, the Gospels were all written by practicing Jews.
i don’t think the movie is anti-semitic, though. The bad guy is Caiaphas, for sure. But even other members of the religious hierarchy are shown openly disagreeing with Caiaphas. i don’t remember that being in the New Testament. Anyone who sees this movie, and then extrapolates Caiaphas into a representative of all jews, including today’s . . . perhaps that person should look inside their own heart first.
Would i recommend this movie? Yes and no. i'm not one of those who says "everyone should see this movie." It's not for everyone. i don't see any reason for a non-Christian to see it, other than curiosity. But then a non-Christian might not have the theological background to know why we believe what is onscreen represents a good thing.
Anyone who is dead set against this film or Mel Gibson, probably shouldn't see it. It won't change their mind. But i would recommend it for practicing Christians. At least one viewing, as long as you keep in mind this caveat: it's just a movie, it's one man's interpretation, it's not a substitute for the Gospel.
i plan to see the movie. To prepare, i have avoided reading in depth reviews or listening to any of the talk shows that have devoted hours to uninformed opinions about the movie by people who have not yet seen it. Like anything having to do with religion, everybody has an agenda. It's real tough to find an objective opinion, so i try to stay away from all opinions until i can make up my own mind.
As an amateur historian, one thing i am interested in is whether Mel Gibson will depict the historical crucifiction accurately. i've heard so much about how bloody and violent the movie is. i'll reserve judgment on that until i see it. i think some anti-religious critics might be tempted to over-play the violent imagery in order to scare away viewers.
Most of the pre-release controversy is about the allegation that the movie and/or its director are anti-semitic. Two prominent jews whom i respect, and who have seen the movie, Michael Medved and Dennis Prager, insist that it is not anti-semitic. But again, they may have their own agendas. So i'll reserve judgment on that issue too.
i'll say two other things in advance of my seeing it. First, i don't have a high opinion of Mel Gibson as a director, based on his past work. He is not known for being particularly good at historical accuracy. i did not like Braveheart, which was riddled with innacuracy. Same with Patriot, although i did like that movie better after a second viewing. If there's an excessive amount of blood, it makes me wonder if the moviemaker knew that death from crucifixion usually came about by asphyxiation.
Secondly, i happened to see only one still photo from the movie. It showed a cross that is a bit different from the actual device i believe the historical Jesus carried on the way to Calvary. From what i remember (and sorry i don't have any cite for this, i'm going off memory.) Jesus only carried the crosspiece, called a patibulum. The vertical part of the cross was permanently set up on the hill. In the movie, as in most art, we see Jesus carrying a T shaped cross, but i don't think that's what the historical Jesus carried. i'd also be interested in seeing whether they put the nails in the wrists rather than the palms.
i'm not too concerned when i hear that the movie doesn't focus much on Jesus' teachings. There are plenty of very good movies that cover that already. The Greatest Story Ever Told and Jesus of Nazareth are two that i've seen many times. Lest we forget, for us Christians, Jesus was more than just a nice guy who said a lot of nice stuff. The whole point of his life was that he died, why he died and what his death and resurrection gave to us all.
i'm planning to see the movie this weekend with Betty and her sister, after which i'll let you know how it fared against my expectations.
