Armchair Film School Review - 2/26/12

Hey, my 2 lonely followers, I know it’s been a loooong time. I’ve been away getting an “edumacation”. I don’t know what it is, but I like collecting things, and I guess degrees are as good a hobby as any. But more on that later (another blog). I’ve been to the movies and Netflixing, and have a few films, documentaries and TV shows I want to review. So here it goes…..

Red Tails
Rating: PG-13
Genre: Action/Adventure/Drama
Dir: Anthony Hemingway
Length: 125 min
Year: 2012
Summary: The story of the Tuskegee Airmen who flew during World War II.

My 2¢: The critics tore this apart. I was concerned going in, but my fears were quickly put at ease once I settled in to watch this campy, feel-good, little film.

Armchair Film School #4

A word before I post my latest Armchair Film Review. My reviews do NOT follow the typical structure of many film reviews, where the critic provides detailed scene examples. I’ve strayed away from providing too many scene details, as I believe that it has the potential to ruin a thoroughly enjoyable viewing. There have been several occasions where I have read a review and then watched the film, only to have the impact of certain scenes dulled because I knew exactly what to expect or, even worse, was influenced by the critic who may have loved or loathed that particular scene.
I offer these reviews as a way of introducing films that people may want to add to their future viewing queue. My two cents belong in only my pocket, and won’t buy you very much. One man’s treasure trove is another’s waste deposit. Please feel free to offer your own thoughts on the films I’ve reviewed. The biggest goal for me is to learn from these movies, and feedback is a valuable learning tool.
Anyway...
The Lover
Rating: R
Genre: Foreign Drama
Dir: Jean-Jacques Anode
Length: 103 min
Year: 1992
Summary: This Oscar-nominated film explores the coming-of-age of a fifteen-year-old French girl sent off to boarding school in 1929 Saigon.

It Hurts Sooooo Good

I saw The Hurt Locker when it first came out - better yet, when a theater near me was willing to take a chance on not filling every single seat with some bang-bang-blow-it-all-to-pieces-with-as-much-visual-effects-that-money-can-buy- Megabuster. I must admit, the main reason I was so eager to see this film was because of its director, Kathryn Bigelow. A war film directed by a female was too good to pass up. However, my enthusiasm was kept a bit at bay by a creeping fear that the film would mimic many war films with the in-your-face, “shock-and-awe” approach to filmmaking. Needless to say, I purchased my movie ticket with crossed fingers, making my way to an echo-filled, empty theater (no surprises there).

Armchair Film School #3

Just smidgen of what I’ve been watching since my last visit to these here parts (it’s been a long time):

The 400 Blows
Genre: Classic/Foreign/Drama
Dir: Francois Truffaut
Length: 99 minutes

Summary: A misunderstood young adolescent turns to petty crime. (There is so much more to this, but you have to see it for yourself).

My 2¢: I really loved this film. Story is king here, and there is never a wasted moment. The story unfolds seamlessly. I was surprised at how timeless this film was and how the characters could very well be telling the story of a pre-teen struggling against all odds in today’s society.

Nashville
Genre: Classic/Drama
Dir: Robert Altman
Length: 160 min

Summary: Intersecting story lines revolving around the music industry and a political event.

Armchair Film School Reviews #2

I’ve been busy going back to film school via my DVD collection and Netflix subscription. Whenever I start work on a script, I turn to movies to put me in the right frame of mind. I try to immerse myself in old, new, good and even some I can barely get through.

I tend to start with ones I’ve seen already. Here are a few:

Citizen Kane
Genre: Classic
Dir: Orson Welles
Length: 119 min

Summary: A news reporter tracks down the meaning behind the last words uttered by an eccentric publishing tycoon.

Armchair Film School

So, I’ve been catching up on my movie viewing. I’ve watched a number of documentaries, a few classics, and a summer blockbuster.

The Business of Being Born
Genre: Documentary
Dir: Abby Epstein
Length: 84 minutes

Summary: A close look at the maternity-care system and its alternative, home birthing.

My 2¢: Truly engaging and informative. I was concerned that it would be biased and one-sided. However, an unexpected turn of events while filming forced the filmmakers to challenge their own theory/thesis.

St. Anna Review Part 1

So, last night I finally made it to the movies. My favorite little theatre was not playing Miracle at St. Anna, so I had to settle for the huge multiplex a few towns away.

First off, wtf? $21 to see a freaking movie? No wonder the box office is a roller-coaster ride. It does not take a genius to figure out that people are going to carefully pick and choose the films they want to see, and of course, the summer is a huge box office success with teenagers being out of school and young adults home from college, allowing them to take in discounted matinee showings.

Did I also mention that a freaking bottle of water cost $4? Four freaking dollars.

Poseidon Rant

So, I caught Poseidon from the beginning. It had really great potential.

But why, oh, why, remake a movie and not realize that it’s a classic and it’s going to take some really, really, really hard work? Huh?

I just purchased - on Amazon - the novel by Paul Gallico and look forward to reading it. But until then, my 2 cents.

Okay, so we are going to remake a classic. A classic that stands the test of time. Where do we start?

Oh me, oh me. Pick me, I know this one.

We must ask how close to the original do we want to stay, or will we be just keeping the name and overall theme?

Okay, so what did they do? A mish-mash of both. Is that a word - mish-mash?

Let me just say this. I watch the original over and over because I LOVE Rev. Frank Scott. He says and does everything I wish I had the guts to do and say, but I’m too damn scared that I’ll get struck by lightning, or have all of my really religious friends and family disown me. He’s a reverend, for Christ-sake. Am I going to hell for that?

Okay, so now in the new movie, we have Kurt Russell. Or is is Josh Lucas? Shit! I’m so damn confused. Okay, so it has to be the one who dies, right? No, or maybe that was the new twist - our hero lives this time? Shit, shit, shit! Work it out before you put it up on the screen, people!!!!

Okay, I’ll just “doggy, doggy, step right out” this one. I pick Josh Lucas. He’s younger and hotter and a bit more bankable. O0ps, my wanna-be executive hat is rearing its ugly head.

Okay, Josh Lucas is to Gene Hackman as... Night is to Day? What were they going for here? Huh? Huh? Huh?

Rev. Scott was a...well, reverend. Dylan... a gambler (and maybe an ex-Navy something or other - not sure, but I might have heard him mumble something like this). Anyway, okay, people I get it. He’s a gambler, he takes chances, calls people’s bluff, likes the odds and bets the house. But... why the hell should this make me care wether he lives or freaking dies? Arrrggghhhhh!!!!!!!

Oh, pick me again. Please pick me.

He likes children. Remember when he first meets the snot-nosed little kid (actually, he was cute and adorable - want to turn things on its head? - make it a kid we secretly wish swallows a bit too much salt water - oh, no, that’s cruel - just plain cruel - but fucking interesting). I digress. Sorry.

So, Dylan likes kids. And... there is this instant chemistry with the kid’s single mother (NOT!), and we can’t wait to see if the two will hook up. So... that’s why we care whether he lives or dies. Give me a big fucking break.

Anyway. Oh, we also get a nice few lines of exposition. I’m the kind that likes to go it alone - blah...blah... blah. I wish he would have. Might have made it a bit more interesting. An amazing race to see who could get to the bottom of the ship and out first. And my money would not be on the kid - but I’m cruel.

Where was I? ADD is setting in pretty fast and I’m only at the beginning.

Do I hate this movie? No. Interesting enough, I’ll probably watch it again. I pay enough for cable and... I have no life.

It’s like being a deer and headlights. I know it’s going to be ugly, but I just gotta stand there and go...WTF?

Okay, focus, focus.

So, now we have Kurt Russell’s character - Robert Ramsey. The last name - is it supposed to mean something? Anyway. So, Ramsey is an ex-firefighter and get this, the fucking ex-mayor of New York fucking City. I’m sorry about the profanity... but JEEZ!!!!

Okay, so now we all can relate to a NYC mayor? We’ll find out next year if they were on to something.

Not just any NYC Mayor, but one who seemed to have quit early (some reference to this mumbled again during a sidebar moment). His wife also dumped him and he and his daughter have these little fitty moments (why? who the hell knows, though I’m suspecting it has something to do with adding conflict). So, this ex-mayor, firefighter, husband happens to be on a cruise with his daughter (couldn’t tell is she was a late teen or way past teen - but not important - I guess) and her boyfriend. No, make that her fiancee - who she has not yet told her father of this late breaking news.

Who gives a shit!!!!

Okay, okay, he’s the ex-mayor of NYC. That makes him a very powerful man - instantly. Also, we all know New Yorker’s have attitude. This gives us an instant character that we have to do very little developing for. BULLSHIT. I’m a New Yorker and do I have an attitude? No fucking way.

So, we finally have some conflict here, right? Father - daughter thing, add the possible, would-be, might-be, gotta-break-the-news boyfriend not quite fiancee thingy and we have bonafide conflict that is sure to keep an audience at the edge of their seats.

It could happen.

Okay, so Dylan and Mr. Ex Mayor are total opposites brought together during a time of crisis and must find a way to work together in order to save lives. No, no. They are the same people, with the same need to be in control and they must get past their selfish wants and desires and help to save the lives of a small group of helpless and lost souls. That would indeed be the first movie, the two characters being Rev. Scott and Det. Rogo.

Now, to be fair, I do sincerely believe that the remake was going for this. I do believe that they thought a selfish gambler and an ex-NYC Mayor would fit this criteria. But here is where I think things run amuck (did I tell you I love that word amuck?). Rev. Scott and Det. Rogo don’t work because of their job titles alone. No, it’s just the beginning. We have to give them their own personal conflicts to deal with. Remember English class? Inner conflicts? Man Vs Self? The story already has the Man Vs Nature built in. It does its own job, it brings people into the theatre.

So, what’s left? Man Vs. Society. Man Vs. Man. Man Vs. Self.

But, I digress. I’ll come back to this later. Or maybe not. ADD is a horrible thing.

What were each of these characters struggling with? Why is this important? Well, damn, you took a small group of people away from a large group of people and decided to give the small group a fighting chance. Right there, they must be special. Now your job is to prove it. Tell me why I feel they shouldn’t have died with the rest of the lot.

I can go on and on and on and on, but I’m tired and I want to go to sleep. The bottom line, why the hell should I care? You already killed off thousands of people on that ship, why should a handful be spared? What makes them any more worthy?

If you are going to remake something, study, I mean really study, the original piece. Understand why it’s worthy. But if you are not going to study it, then make it completely over. Sit down for hours and days and months and years if you have to - figure out how to make it your own. Figure out that twist.

Could I have done a better job? NO, that’s why I ain’t sittin’ down to write a remake of The Poseidon Adventure. Jeez!

But if I was able to sit in the room, maybe as just a fly or annoying gnat, I would have thrown out a few brainstorming thingys.

Okay, so we don’t want to go with a man of the cloth. First, why the hell not!!!!!!!! So, what’s completely opposite of the man of the cloth? A gambler? Should have made him a drunk. Oh, you did - that was Kevin Dillion’s character. Why?

Okay, so you wanna stick with a gambler. Why should I care about a gambler? And whatever you do, please don’t show me a scene where he is actually sitting at the table gambling in a real, honest poker game. How about a card shark? What about an honest-to-God hustler? A low life who sneaks aboard ships to dupe really old ladies and naive nouveau riche people out of their money?

Hey, I didn’t say my idea was the best, or even good. But at least we are starting with a character that’s interesting. I wanna see him trick and hustle his way out of this disaster. I don’t know, but by making him a hustler, at least I can see him in action instead of being told that he’s a man who likes to take chances. Making him a gambler is telling, not showing - sorta like cheating. But we all cheat, right?

Richard Dreyfuss - his character is gay. Can we create some conflict with that? Is there a character who is so homophobic that he has to come to grips with this in order to live? Maybe an ex-NYC Mayor or gambler? Okay, so it’s riddled with cliches, but that hasn’t stopped you so far.

And what about my idea to make the kid a freaking brat? Why do we always have such lovable kids? In the first movie, the kid was a little fucking annoying, but that came in handy. Turn it up a notch. Give us a kid that challenges us. We all know that we should save the helpless, but what if this kid brings out the worst in everyone? Now, that’s what I call conflict.

So, we lost the Shelley Winters character. I suspect it’s because we can’t bring up the fat thing. Okay, so what do we replace it with? You see, her being overweight (you don’t have to use the fat word) was an inner conflict, as well as an outer one. It put her in direct conflict with the other characters. So, we’d have to put our heads together and try to find a replacement character whose physical attributes cause a problem. Yeah, I know, blind would be too cliche, but you gotta give me something that brings out the side in people that shows their prejudices. You see, cause that’s what I think the original was all about. Thou shall not judge and pick who should live or die, only God shall (but give us a fighting chance - I’m paraphrasing here).

Please don’t give me a stock character who we know must die. Why? Because he is a drunk and a male chauvinist pig? If you do give me this character, then keep with the theme and let him redeem himself. Again, give him a fighting chance.

Oh, and don’t give me a group of people who like each other. Yes, the best in us comes out in times of crisis, but what about the will to live? What would we be willing to do in order to live? Oh, and don’t just show me one character kicking a complete stranger off of his leg in order that he may save his own life. Or give me a parent who we are most likely to believe will do anything to protect their child. Turn it all on its head, people. Give me something old, but new. Work it out.

Okay, I need to go to bed. I must say, though, I am really learning a lot by analyzing this movie. I will most definitely watch it again, as well as watch the original and read the book. School is in.

Oh, and just to note - I KNOW NOTHING. But I aim to learn as much as I can.

Busy Little Bee

So, I’ve finished a draft of my script. Also came up with a new title, as I’ve brought in about 60% new material, completely did away with a major character, and brought another minor character to the foreground.

I’ve printed the script out and now comes the fun part - yet another revision. I won’t rush this part - for me, this is where the soul really takes effect. Punching up dialogue, cutting scenes that don’t advance or entertain, and basically making this piece my very own - giving it MY VOICE.

But, I’ve also made time to finish two books: Little Children and Step On A Crack. I really enjoyed Little Children, but was a little disappointed with the ending. I’m looking forward to seeing the movie - though I’m sure they had to change the ending.

Step On A Crack - well, this is a new crime series that I’m sure will find its way to the big screen. I can’t lie, I really saw this as a movie and would jump at the opportunity to write it. Does this mean it’s great literature? - hell no! But it’s so damn entertaining. A few things would have to change in order to bring this to the screen, and some more character development is needed. But, all-in-all, I see this as a movie. He’s already had Kiss The Girls and Along Came A Spider made into a film.

The series I can’t wait to come to the big screen is the Jack Reacher Series by Lee Child. I’m told there’s one on the way.

I also made time for a few flicks the past couple of weeks (Greenfingers, A Guide to Recognizing Your Saints, Running With Scissors, Open Range, Quinceanera, The Devil Wears Prada). A lot of documentaries (The Human Behavior Experiment, This Film Is Not Yet Rated, The Heart of the Game, An Inconvenient Truth, Home, Jesus Camp).

I finally caught Poseidon. First off, WTF!!!!!!

Why the hell make a movie over and throw the baby out with the bath water? I didn’t get to see the entire movie from the beginning. I came in towards the middle when I realized the hubby was actually sitting through it. Now, I don’t know who was the first person to say, “We just gotta make this thing over”, because, I personally don’t think the person saw the first movie, and if they did, they sure as hell didn’t get it. JEEZ!!!!!!!

It was a drama (but it was called an adventure - yeah, yeah, yeah - get them in the seats and then spring it on them - drama, baby - major drama). Yes, there was a boat, and yes, there were some very good action sequences in there. But the meat and potatoes of the original movies were the characters and their interactions. I love a good popcorn movie every now and then, but FREAKING leave what you damn well don’t understand ALONE. I think I’ll leave this for another blog entry. Now that I’ve seen how they royally screwed up the middle and end, I want to catch this “sinking ship” from the beginning.

I made a trip to Hollywood Video tonight and purchased a few goodies:

Happy Feet - I LOVED this movie. My children didn’t quite feel the same way. I have the soundtrack for this, as well.

The Pursuit of Happyness - The Hubby and my son really enjoyed this movie. This was the first movie where I saw men in the theatre really become emotional and not afraid to show it. We need a few more like this.

Children of Men - Saw this one in the movies, but I was a little disappointed. I felt like the movie wasn’t sure what it wanted to be - action or drama. I also thought Clive Owens’s character could use a bit more developing. But what the hell do I know.

Casino Royale - Haven’t seen this one - looking forward to it.

Curse of the Golden Flowers - Haven’t seen it. I have a major crush on Chow Yun Fat.

All The King’s Men - Saw the original, want to compare.

Superman Returns - I’m really not wanting to see this; however, I felt the same way about Batman Begins and, let me tell you, I’ve seen that movie about 10 times, from beginning to end.

Flag of Our Father’s - I’ve never been really big on war movies.

Stargate - Loved this one. My husband insisted on getting it for our ever-growing collection.

Catch A Fire - Saw this one in the movies; a major disappointment. I think it needed a bit more time in the oven. I was a bit detached from the main character. I’m going to watch it again a few times - hope to learn about character development. I’m a strong believer that you can learn just as much from movies that you don’t like, if you can learn to clearly understand why you don’t like it. Maybe just the school teacher in me.

Trading Places - A classic. Huge Eddie Murphy fan.

The BodyGuard - Poor Whitney Houston. JUST SAY NO!

Butch Cassidy and the Sundance Kid - I’ve seen this when I was younger. I don’t remember much, but I think it’s about time I revisited this again.

I’ll try to get in a few of these movies in between script work.

The Screening Room

I just finished watching the documentary The Devil and Daniel Johnston.

Riveting...

and completely insane.

I’ve never been so confused in my life.

Growing up in East New York, Brooklyn, and pretty much listening to what my much older brothers listened to - and you bet your ass it wasn’t folk music - I had never, ever, ever heard of Daniel Johnston.

The very moment he opened his mouth I was like, “what the...?” Is this for real?

Beauty, indeed, is in the eye of the beholder. And so is genius, for that matter.

If thousands of people truly believe this guy is a genius... I want a hit of whatever they are smoking.

There’s a huge fan base, and I mean huge. You know what, more power to them. It’s an amazing thing to believe in someone that strongly and feel that what they’ve created speaks to you on a level that nothing else has.

But, again, can I get some of what these fans are on.

It’s a great documentary; if you haven’t seen it, you will be blown away, or, at the very least, confused out of your freaking mind.

By the way, if there is anyone out there in blog world actually reading my ramblings, I’d love to hear about any other “must-see” documentaries. As I stated in a previous post, I’ll be trying my hand at one soon.

Where I Departed with The Departed

It looks like Scorsese will be racking up this awards season. DGA gave him the nod. Critics continue to pile on the props.

The Departed is a great piece of work.

So, why on earth would I even offer up my own thoughts? Stupidity? Arrogance? Or maybe I’m entitled to my own opinion, right? I know, I know, opinions are highly overrated. But, in keeping with a long standing American tradition, I will offer mine.

I couldn’t wait to see The Departed. Granted, I had not seen the original film on which this was based, but the premise sounded amazing - and still does. Let me start by saying I was completely entertained. After all, isn’t that the numero uno function of a movie? ENTERTAINMENT.

But..., every now and then, a film goes beyond that. They give us more than we anticipated. More depth, more reach... simply, they give us more. I’ve been known to have high expectations, maybe a bit too high. I’m working on that... not really.

Let me also state - out of 5 stars, I would give it 4 1/2. Maybe even 4.75. So why not five? Because I’m arrogant and stupid. And... there was one moment that was completely dropped. One key, defining moment. Now, granted, I might have missed the moment. I only saw the film once in the theatre. I’m anxiously awaiting the DVD so I can watch it over a few times and prove myself WRONG. Maybe even the one reader of this blog can prove me wrong. I so want to believe I missed the moment.

If these two characters - Billy and Conlin - are on opposite sides of each other, and then they cross over to the other’s side, at which point do they connect/intersect? Yeah, it sounds like a math problem.

I thought DiCaprio did an amazing job - AMAZING. Every line was delivered like he owned it. I was blown away by his performance.

However, I missed the moment - the exact moment, where Billy becomes lost in his fake persona - where it was no longer an act. Where he was trapped and, if he took one more step, he would be lost to the other side completely - because of his desire to be part of that world. That that world offered him something his previous one could never. I know, I know, some might argue that we constantly saw him trapped, that he feared he was going to be stuck there and eventually found out and killed. But I never, for one moment, felt that he wanted to be there. That something inside of HIM was pulling him towards the life of crime. That he had a “flicker” of enjoyment of being in that kind of world and situation. It didn’t have to be long - just a millisecond. A scary, ah-ha moment where Conlin’s world might not be such a bad place - and that he, Billy, for one second becomes Conlin. That Billy, at one point, had control of a choice he must act on, and not that he was a pawn completely being pushed and placed.

The same thing goes for Conlin, and I feel more so. At no point did I ever feel that Conlin might want out of his past. He had a job to do, and he did it, but he never seemed to stray from it emotionally. No moment when he could see a life without crime, a dream he might have had at one point - even if that point lasted all of 1 second.

The moment lost to me was the moment when these two characters became ONE, the point of intersection in their criss-crossing. The film seemed to set up this possibility in its premise and structure. But for me, it never delivered that one moment. The moment that these two characters saw each other - not literally, of course, but that they felt the desire to stay trapped in their alter ego - the desire for the other one’s life/world. At what point did either feel seduced by that other world? Again, some might argue Madolyn represented this. That’s too long of an argument for me to enter in, but let me just say, at no point did I ever truly believe that either Billy or Conlin loved this woman. She represented a time-out when they needed a breather - like with any other sports game. At times, she was even the penalty box. But enough sports metaphors.

Does this movie work without giving me that moment? HELL, YEAH. That’s the reason for the 4.5 stars. But... you knew it was coming... that’s the point of beyond I’m talking about. Some critics have labeled The Departed an “instant classic”; his greatest work; a masterpiece. I don’t know, maybe my expectation of greatness might be a little too much.