Significant Hollywood Moments in Despot Disrespect

By now everyone knows the situation. Entertainment mega-company, Sony Pictures Entertainment, whose servers were hacked in a cyber-attack reportedly linked to North Korea, were the victims of terroristic threats. Threats that were promised to come to fruition if they released the upcoming film, The Interview, starring Seth Rogen and James Franco as would-be assassins of North Korean dictator Kim Jong-un. As of yet, Sony has indefinitely shelved the film and has no plans to release it theatrically, or on DVD or VOD. This decision by Sony, though entirely understandable, is a major strike against American free expression. It is also a slap in the face to an film industry that has, for many decades, satirized world dictators freely! Yes, some might have forgotten but Hollywood has been "sending up" dictators for years!

Here is a look back at the top five films that had the "chutzpah" to go into wide release with their impertinence!

#5 The Big Lebowski (1998)

That's right! The Dude (Jeff Bridges) did not abide Middle Eastern tyrant, Saddam Hussein! In a dream sequence, we see Saddam in charge of issuing bowling shoes. Not too disrespectful you say? Okay, Saddam might have been a bowling fan, but we're only at #5...

#4 The Naked Gun: From the Files of Police Squad! (1988)

If it's a Zucker-Abrahams film, everyone is fair game! The police parody found Lt. Frank Drebin (Leslie Nielsen) taking it to all of our nation's arch-rivals of the era: Gorbachev, Castro, Khomeni, Gaddafi and Arafat! Heck, "Mr. October"-himself, Reggie Jackson was supposed to assassinate Queen Elizabeth II! It was satire, no one got upset!

#3 South Park: Bigger Longer and Uncut (1999)

When it comes to satirizing current events, Trey Parker and Matt Stone are the unholy heirs to the style that made the Zucker-Abrahams movies so great! These two hold nothing holy and will make fun of anything, or anyone, that they feel needs to be brought down a peg. Some see it as a rite of passage or an indication that they have "made it" to be parodied on the duo's television show, "South Park." Their feature film took it a step further and lampooned a world leader, and not a Canadian one, no, it was the despotic Iraqi leader, Saddam Hussein. Depicted as Satan's gay lover, Saddam's caricature was insanely funny! Reportedly, U.S. Marine guards for Saddam Hussein, after his overthrow and capture, showed the film to him repeatedly. What was his attitude toward his depiction? Probably wasn't good! However, those same marines were able to get Saddam to autograph a photo to be brought back and presented to Parker and Stone. I wonder what the inscription was? "I can change! I can change!"

#2 Team America: World Police (2004)

Before Kim Jong-un, there was Kim Jong-il. He was the autocratic tryant ruler of North Korea, and he was huge film fan! I wonder if he ever saw this cinematic gem by Trey Parker and Matt Stone. Before Hollywood screenwriters were trying to assassinate the son, Parker and Stone made a movie about a paramilitary puppet force tasked with assassinated the father! This film seemed destined to restore American faith in free speech after The Interview was pulled from release, however, due to the unwanted publicity, Paramount Pictures cancelled all requests to screen the film theatrically for the moment. But for those who saw it back then, it's classic! Maybe we should put Parker and Stone in charge of our nation's retaliatory jab against North Korea. I definitely see a great "South Park" episode coming out of this.... However, as classic as this film is, it is not the #1 Hollywood dig at dictators...

#1 The Great Dictator (1940)

This classic Charlie Chaplin satire takes on the then-powerful leader of the Third Reich of Nazi Germany, Adolf Hitler. You have to remember, when this film was released, Hitler was at the height of his power; Europe had been crushed under his heel, Great Britain was on the brink of defeat, and the Soviet Union was trying its best to avoid being invaded. Chaplin's, and Hollywood's, courage in releasing this film was a big risk. Chaplin's biting indictment of Hitler and his anti-Semitic views is a true classic, and a testament to free speech. Actor Steve Carell cited this film when he called the moment Sony cancelled the release of The Interview, a "sad day for creative expression."


This is just my take on the films. My opinions. Feel free to voice yours. Can you think of any others that should be on this list? Let me know!

Check out my latest article over at Influx Magazine!

http://influxmagazine.com/the-blob-1958/

Review of Christopher Nolan's latest, Interstellar!

Without giving too much away, Christopher Nolan's latest film, Interstellar, follows engineer/pilot-turned-farmer, Cooper (Matthew McConaughey) as he embarks on a do-or-die attempt to save mankind.  It appears Earth is dying, due to some type of ecological cataclysm, and humanity only has one generation left before the planet becomes uninhabitable.   In a twist of fate, Cooper stumbles upon N.A.S.A.'s top secret base of operations and is drafted to pilot a secret mission through a wormhole in hopes that the human civilization can be relocated to a planet in this new galaxy.   Cooper has to make a choice, accept the mission which means leaving his own family behind, perhaps never to return to them, or stay and possibly die with them.

The visuals are stunning!  I don't know what a wormhole or black hole looks like up close, but Nolan came up with some incredible versions!  There are some intricate story details being thrown around, mostly science-related, that might be perplexing for many viewers (Hey, this is a Nolan film, after all).   Quantum theory and astrophysics aside, this film is all about journeying into the great beyond.  At first glance, this seems like a rehash of 1997's Contact, directed by Robert Zemeckis, as both are about traveling to another galaxy on faith, with characters having daddy-issues, but to be so dismissive would do Nolan's film an injustice.   Even I came into this viewing with reservations, having fallen into the oldest of reviewer traps.... reading someone else's review first! I watched and looked for items to nitpick, but honestly, I came away with a totally different feeling; one of hope.   One of the characters in the film, Professor Brand (Michael Caine) regularly quotes poet Dylan Thomas, "Do not go gentle into that good night, old age should burn and rage at close of day. Rage, rage against the dying of the light."   And, understanding that passage is the key to understanding this film, that mankind is at our best when out of options, when we let go to passion and dive into the unknown, as Cooper does in this film. He dives in, his own future unknown, yet he dives in out of love and for a need greater than himself.

Have you seen Keanu Reeves' new film, John Wick?  Check out my review in Influx Magazine!

http://influxmagazine.com/john-wick-review/

Top Ten Worst Film Remakes of All Time!

Well, some time ago, I gave you my the list of the top film remakes of all time. An old friend of mine asked me when I was going to do this for the worst film remakes. Well, I secluded myself, meditated, sequestered myself to ponder the myriad possibilities and the mysteries of the universe. Then I emerged, had a shave, a steak, an ice cold Coke, and started to type. Now, here it is. Because you asked for it, you got it!


#10 Godzilla (1998)

I like Roland Emmerich. I think he's a talented filmmaker and I honestly liked this movie when it came out. I think it's a horrible remake, a disgrace to the original, but a fun film nonetheless. With a $379 million worldwide haul it was definitely not a bomb. The critics overwhelmingly panned it but it has still managed to gain a cult following. Fans of the original 1954 classic, of which I consider myself one, have generally panned the film. Toho, creators of the original, have embraced this mockery and made the creature part of canon, albeit as a small sideline and unrelated to the real Godzilla. In having this new incarnation attack New York City, the film did throw a kink in the theory that the first thing these giant creatures do when they wake up is head straight for Tokyo. Also, we could have done without all the Godzilla "mini-me's".

#9 Planet of the Apes (2001)

'Nuff said, right! No, I'll go ahead and give you my two cents worth anyway. Mark Wahlberg as an astronaut! Not enough, still want more? This film is not a worthy successor to Charlton Heston's original, it just isn't! The film isn't convincing and all the special effects and makeup in the world aren't going to get the audience to invest emotionally and buy into the film. The original 1968 film might have been a product of that generation but it is still sacred, and still watchable. If you're going to attempt a remake, or a reboot as it were, try a different angle with better writing, better acting, such as in 2011's Rise of the Planet of the Apes, and the subsequent 2014 sequel. They got it right.

#8 The Day The Earth Stood Still (2008)

Opening to mixed reviews, this movie ended up with $233 million worldwide. That doesn't make it a good movie. I never invested in the whole Jennifer Connelly/Jaden Smith family dynamic and I believe that this movie furthers the stereotype that Jaden Smith is a good actor! A fan of Keanu Reeves I may be, but he is not a worthy successor to Michael Rennie of the original 1951 classic.

#7 The Wolfman (2010)

I tried to like this film. I honestly did! However, as fan of the original 1941classic, this incarnation just didn't stand up. The classic films were passionate and full of excitement, but this version had only marginally attention-grabbing moments and very little in the way of suspense. This film opened to just plain poor reviews and ended up grossing $139 million worldwide (on a $150 million budget, can you say flop!). It is hard to capture the thrill of the original Universal horror classics that many people grew up with, so why bother.

#6 A Nightmare On Elm Street (2010)

Okay, let's get one thing straight: Robert Englund is Freddy Krueger. That 's just the way it is. I recently watched a 4-hour documentary on the story of the entire Nightmare franchise. In it they discussed the idea of recasting the character for one of the sequels. The actor they hired tried, bless his heart, but just couldn't capture the energy or attitude that Englund brought to the character. It was a reality check and the studio met Englund's price and rehired him. I love Jackie Earle Haley but there was no way he was going to win this battle. Also, the original 1984film, and subsequent sequels, had a bit of humor and had more fun in the overall tone of the films. This one was just plain sad!

#5 When A Stranger Calls (2006)

"Have you checked the children?" Wow! In 1979, Columbia pictures took the urban legend and brought it to the big screen. It was scary to say the least, absolutely creepy! Not a classic film in terms of plot, but the beginning and ending were where it was at! This remake valiantly tried to modernize the story and tighten the plot of the original, but the gag is already known. There is no shock to be had. "We traced the call! It's coming from inside the house!" it's just not the same when you know it's coming...

#4 Arthur (2011)

Dudley Moore was a genius! Liza Minnelli was perfect in her role! Sir John Gielgud, for crying out loud! The original 1981 film was perfect! The character chemistry was perfect! We didn't need a remake! Why would anyone try to do this? I hope the studio executive who greenlit this travesty is wasting away in a dark dungeon somewhere. Helen Mirren must've thought she was signing on to some other film because I can't fathom how she was cajoled into wasting her talents in this drivel! If you are given a choice of whether to watch the original or watch this new version, do yourself a favor and watch Dudley Moore. With a $45 million worldwide gross, many film goers must've chose to do just that!


#3 The Bad News Bears (2005)

Do you remember this film? Probably not and for good reason! The original 1976 version had Walter Matthau's sad sacked coach up against the tough Tatum O'Neal. What did this one have? Billy Bob Thornton? Yeah, in the right circumstances his Bad Santa act could've worked but it just didn't come across. Bottom line, the new team lacked the appeal of the original. The film opened to mixed reviews and quickly sunk, grossing only $34 million worldwide!

#2 Psycho (1998)

What can I say about this film? Gus Van Sant... you disappoint me. Basically a shot-for-shot remake of the original 1960 Hitchcock classic. I studied the original intensely in one of my film classes. That film had layers to it! The scenery, the mood, every prop had a story, the mise-en-scene was brilliant! Van Sant just couldn't provide those layers in just duplicating what was already done once before; it just wasn't there for me.

#1 Rollerball (2002)

Oh, just a horrible movie all the way around! The original 1975 James Caan action-sci-fi film seemed so real, so visceral. In fact, there is an urban legend that that stunt men took the action so seriously that many actually died in the filming (they didn't, by the way, die; not take it serious, that they did). James Caan has gravitas, he's tough, believable. Chris Klein, ...ehhhh, not so much. Now if this film was about a Calvin Klein model forced into a runway model-off to the death, maybe he could pull it off. With a worldwide gross of only $26 million, this movie genuinely suuuuuucked!

Honorable Mentions! I got 'em:

Friday The 13th (2009)
Prom Night (2008)
Guess Who (2005)
Get Carter (2000)
Halloween (2007)
The Karate Kid (2010)
Charlie and the Chocolate Factory (2005) 

A Review of The Pick-Axe Murders Part III: The Final Chapter

This past Saturday evening, I had the distinct pleasure to coordinate the Houston premiere and Q&A of this film, The Pick-Axe Murders Part III: The Final Chapter.  First, to understand the impetus behind this film, you have to understand the director, Jeremy Sumrall.  He is a lifelong fan of the genre, especially the neo-classic 80's slasher era and all the sequels they generated.  Jeremy understood the pitfalls of delving into this type of filmmaking.  Jeremy himself put it best at the Q&A when he mentioned that the first film in any horror series is the undoubtedly the best.  They tended to get campier and campier as more sequels were released.  Owing to the fact that Jeremy was still new to feature-length film directing, he says he chose to dive into the deep end and make the usually schlocky sequel first!  So that means, there is no Part I or Part II, not yet at least.

Jeremy gets around this by having old-school title inserts explaining the back story of the characters, or what you might have missed in the first two non-existent films. It was the Summer of 1982, ten teens were horribly murdered in the rural area of Woodland Hills.  The murders were committed by the reputed son of Satan himself, Alex Black, an indestructible killing machine.  Black was imprevious, I mean, impervious to injury (inside joke for those who have seen the film) due to his link to an mystical amulet he wears.  Eventually, he is hunted down and killed by the locals.  The only survivors were a teenage camper named Adrienne and young sheriff's deputy Matthews.  Black's evil amulet is reportedly lost somewhere in the woods.

Approximately one year later, now a sanitarium patient, Adrienne, is again tormented by the monstrous Alex Black as he returns and begins his killing spree anew.  Once again, Adrienne is one of the only survivors to escape.  Is Alex Black gone for good this time?  No chance.

Part III picks up about 5 years later, young Matthews is now Sheriff Matthews (he won the election, that no one seems to remember) and Adrienne is a disturbed alcoholic, haunted by the memories of what she has endured.  A pair of teen campers have unwittingly resurrected Alex Black after they stumble across the amulet, albeit after having genre-mandated sex in the woods.  Black is now back and free to spread death and mayhem across Woodland Hills.  Are Sheriff Matthews and Adrienne up to the task of stopping this seemingly unstoppable killing machine once and for all?  You have to see the film to find out!

This film is Jeremy's love letter to the slasher films of the 1980s.  It is chock full of easter-egg callbacks to those classic horror films we all loved so much.  There is no new ground to be broken here, the formula for classic slasher is definitely evident.  However, it's a formula that horror fans carry a fondness for and can appreciate.  Jeremy aims to give his audience a roller-coaster ride of slasher excitement and he delivers.  There is ample blood, gore and nudity to go around (as one of his producers so succinctly put it, Jeremy exceeded his "budget for boobs").  This film will hopefully get a wide release.  Right now it is making the film festival rounds.  If you get a chance to see, definitely check it out.  This is only the beginning for Jeremy Sumrall.  He will undoubtedly make many other films, but hopefully, someday, he will make a return to Woodland Hills.  The Pick-Axe Murders Part III: The Final Chapter is 50% blood, 50% boobs, 100% fun!

Tusk Q&A with Kevin Smith and Justin Long

Well, I watched the new film by Kevin Smith, Tusk, starring Michael Parks and Justin Long.  It was interesting to say the least!  Inspired by one of Kevin Smith's weed-infused podcasts, Tusk has to be seen to be believed!  Without giving away any spoilers, the film begins with a great premise, a podcaster (Justin Long) in search of his next big story.  He takes a trip to the Great White North, Canada, to meet up with a local internet sensation. His plans go awry when he finds that his intended interviewee is, shall we say, unavailable.  On the verge of a wasted trip, he comes across an odd, old seafarer (Michael Parks) who wishes to exchange his adventurous stories for some company, but in truth has more devious intentions.  We learned all this from the trailers.

The film's first half plays like a good horror flick, the mood is set, the suspense building, the special effects/makeup have to be seen to be understood.  The last half of the film doesn't take itself too seriously.  Don't get me wrong, this is no Jay & Silent Bob flick, think more Cabin in the Woods.  The ending was a little disappointing to me.  However, after you see it you'll realize the film could have only ended one of two ways and neither would have been very happy.

Justin Long's character doesn't draw much sympathy from the viewer; he's funny but just not a likable guy.  The incomparable Michael Park's character is deranged and psychotic!

Ultimately, Tusk was a fun ride.  It was satirical, fun, sad, and at points just gross!  But gross that makes you smile!  And that's all that Kevin Smith wants, for you to have a good time.

Afterward, I stuck around for the Q&A.  It was live-streamed from Austin at Fantastic Fest, where the audience there had just finished watching a simultaneous screening of the film as well.  It was moderated by Alamo Drafthouse founder, Tim League. It was usual Kevin Smith shenanigans!  If it wasn't for the time constraints of the film festival, he could've talked for hours!

The questions were good allowed Smith to elaborate on such things as producing the film, motivating young aspiring filmmakers, and what it felt like to work with his daughter, Harley, in her first film role, alongside her schoolmate, Lily-Rose.  He also discussed very briefly the chemistry between the two young girls and how he's finishing up filming Yoga Hosers, which is centered around the characters portrayed by Harley and Lily-Rose.  He even talked the possibility of Jay & Silent Bob possibly making a cameo appearance, possibly.

Being that his daughter and Lily-Rose Depp go to school together, Smith was on friendly terms with Lily-Rose's father, Johnny Depp.  He briefly spoke about being "that guy" who asks Depp if he wants to be in his new film.  Surprisingly, Depp was enthusiastic about doing a role, a somewhat uncredited role.  If you see the film, Depp is unmissable and unforgettable.  I won't go into details (spoilers) but if you see it, you'll know what I mean!

I ran into a lot of friends at the event and a great time was had by all!  Until next time, see you at the movies! (oh wait, I keep forgetting someone already uses that line.  Oh, I got one... Snoochie Boochies!)

Advanced Screening of Kevin Smith's TUSK! Thursday, September 18!

I was able to get my hands on a pair of tickets to the advanced screening of Kevin Smith's new film Tusk, the first of his new True North Trilogy!  The screening is being presented by Fantastic Fest and features a Q&A with Smith and star, Justin Long, immediately after the film.  The Q&A will be streamed directly from Fantastic Fest in Austin where Smith and his cast are debuting the film.

Will it live up to expectations?  I'm hoping so.  I really like Kevin Smith.  I've met him and some of his friends a few times and he's always been a fun guy to talk with.  I enjoy his films and I'm looking forward to this, his latest venture!

I believe tickets are still available.  The screening and Q&A will be at Alamo Drafthouse - Mason Park, on Thursday, Sept. 18, 5:30 P.M.  See you there!

Five Film Remakes (plus one) That Are Better Than The Originals

I was sitting around talking with friends the other day.  We got to discussing the best film remakes ever made.  Remakes that were actually better than the originals.  Now, we dismissed all the recent reboots and remakes that is all the rage right now in Hollywood.  Debating whether 2012's Amazing Spider-Man is better than 2002's Spider-Man isn't really want we wanted to cover.  Besides, isn't that a question best left for the ages, for film scholars to discuss and debate way in the future.  No, we wanted to get down to the nitty-gritty.  We wanted a list of the top five, with one more as an honorable mention (I won't say which of this list got that distinction).  But here goes the list, not in any particular order:

Heat (1995)

If you're like me, you probably didn't even know this was remake.  What's more is that it is a remake by the same director, Michael Mann!  Heat (1995) is a retelling of Mann's 1989 television movie, "L.A. Takedown".  The main plot remains the same, the colliding of wills that occurs when Vincent, the cop (Al Pacino) is set against master criminal, Neil (Robert DeNiro).  The original starred Scott Plank as Vincent, and Alex McArthur as the master criminal, this time named Patrick.  "L.A. Takedown" was shot in about two weeks and aired on NBC as a pilot for a planned series.

Mann's theatrical take is an immeasurable improvement over his former version.  He was able to refine his script, lose sequences that detracted from the narrative flow, and just happened to be able to get two of the most intense actors of the era (before DeNiro got into parody-mode, a story for another time).  If you ever have the chance to see the original, or come across the DVD, watch it and you'll see...Mann's revised version is the better of the two.

Ocean’s Eleven (2001)

First, let me state that I am a fan of The Rat Pack's classic 1960 original.  The chemistry that existed between Frank Sinatra, Sammy Davis, Jr., Peter Lawford, Dean Martin, and Joey Bishop was phenomenal.  But, honestly, this film was no more than an excuse for them all to get together and party in Las Vegas under the guise of filming a movie.  The film itself is a bit of a let-down with an unsatisfying ending.

Steven Soderbergh’s version updated the heist, added an unbelievable ensemble of today's most charismatic actors. and managed to kick off a rather successful trilogy.  The updated story, with George Clooney taking over for Sinatra, is a great mix of personalities, laughs, twists, and overall fun!  The 2001 version is everything the original wishes it could have been!

The Maltese Falcon (1941)

Definitely at the top of the list when it comes to Film Noir, the film features outstanding performances by Humphrey Bogart, Mary Astor, Peter Lorre, and Sidney Greenstreet.  Based on the novel by Dashiell Hammett, director John Huston's 1941 adaptation was actually the third time the story was brought to the silver screen. Director Roy Del Ruth brought his version to the screen in 1931, starring Ricardo Cortez and Bebe Daniels.  Del Ruth's version was pre-code and therefore more provocative and featured a possibly grittier Sam Spade.  Many say Del Ruth's version stayed truest to Hammett's version of Sam Spade.   That film was followed by the 1936 comedy version, Satan Met A Lady, directed by William Dieterle and starring Bette Davis and Warren William.  Unfortunately the script was mediocre at best and star power just couldn't save the film from falling into obscurity.  Huston's adaptation towers over the others, however, by force of the sheer talent he gathered for his cast.  The film was nominated for three Academy Awards, but alas failed capture any of them.

Little Shop of Horrors (1986)

Director Frank Oz’s dark comedy, horror musical was well received but has really found its stride in home video and late night theater special presentations!  The original film was a low-budget effort by the legendary Roger Corman in 1960.  Corman's version is a classic, don't get me a wrong, a true cult classic.  It even features a young Jack Nicholson!  Then, in 1982, an off-Broadway (then Broadway) musical adaptation, by Alan Menken and Howard Ashman, became a huge hit.  It only made sense to update the story for film once more and build upon the comedy of the original while maintaining the great musical numbers of the theater-version.  The result is the more popular Frank Oz film.

The Thing (1982)

In 1951, director Howard Hawks introduced filmgoers to The Thing from Another World.  James Arness (yes, Marshal Dillon from "Gunsmoke") plays a vegetable-based alien life frozen in the Arctic wasteland only to be discovered and accidentally thawed out.  He goes on a murderous rampage throughout an isolated Arctic research station before being electrocuted by our heroic cast, lead by Kenneth Tobey.  It's a classic.  I love it.  It's classic 1950s science fiction.  But that's just the point, 1950s science fiction.  The film just doesn't hold up as well today.

However....John Carpenter's version successfully melds science fiction with his own horror styling and gives us a thriller we can never forget!  Carpenter's 1982 version, has the isolated research station again finding something frozen in ice.  It turns out to be a parasitic alien that can take the shape of any living being it happens to catch alone.  Both film versions are based on a novel by  John W. Campbell Jr., entitled "Who Goes There?"

Though it was never a big hit at the box office, Carpenter's film is one of the staples of the science fiction horror genre.  The special effects, the mood, the mystery, not knowing who is human and who is the alien, all come together to bring us one of the scariest films of my generation.  There are still debates to this day as to how the film really ends, who remained human and was the alien killed?  If Carpenter knows, he isn't saying, and that only adds to the popularity and mystique of the film.  Don't get me wrong, I still highly recommend anyone see the original if you ever get the chance, but Carpenter's version will stay with you long after you have left the theater!

The Fly (1986)

When it comes to science fiction horror, the original The Fly (1958), directed by Kurt Neumann,  falls prey to the same problems as The Thing from Another World.  The original was great for its time, with a great cast, David Hedison, Patricia Owens, and the incomparable Vincent Price.  However, the film just doesn't hold up as well today.

David Cronenberg’s 1986 film was a total immersive experience in body horror, eliciting a haptic response that is off the charts!  The film became known for the grossest special effects and award-winning make-up.  Starring Geena Davis and Jeff Goldblum, as the brilliant scientist who begins to transform into a human/fly hybrid after an experiment goes horribly wrong.  Aargh!  I get chills just thinking about Goldblum's transformation.  Which, I guess is exactly the response Cronenberg would want.  There is a reason he is the king of body horror.

Matt Damon returning to Jason Bourne!?!?

The Hollywood Reporter is, well, reporting that Matt Damon and Paul Greengrass are in talks with Universal to bring back Jason Bourne!

This has been rumored for a while but everyone involved has always denied and deflected any discussion of a return to what the original trilogy so great.  What makes me excited about this possibility is that Greengrass will be involved in writing the script as well as directing.  Greengrass had no part in writing the original trilogy, but was given the reins in directing The Bourne Supremacy and The Bourne Ultimatum (that is parts #2 and #3, for the Bourne-challenged readers).  The talented Tony Gilroy wrote the screenplays for the all of the Bourne films so far, as well as directing the last one, The Bourne Legacy.

So far, Damon and Greengrass as just in talks, so it looks like we are still a bit away from a full green light on the project.  I'm not big on reboots, non-essential sequels, and uninspired formula films, but if this goes through, and I see no reason why it wouldn't, the billion dollar franchise that is Jason Bourne could be well on its way to reigniting my love for the action film!

Our fingers are crossed!

The Slang of Film... (Part 1)

You ever dreamed of visiting a movie set?  Many do.  However, if you did, there is large chance you wouldn't understand much of what was being said by many of the cast and crew as they went about the process of making the film.  Sure, chances are they are not speaking a foreign language, unless it's a foreign film, then you knew what you were getting into.  They do tend to use their own slang for common terms around a film set.  Some of these terms have been around since the birth of the cinema and others came about through the years.  

Here I will illuminate a handful of these special terms for you.  So kick back and enjoy some of the wondrous slang terms being hurled around a film set near you:

1)  Walla (wah-lah) - also known as Rhubarb, is a sound effect used in films to imitate background conversations in a crowd.  Normally extras would murmur the word, "walla", or "rhubarb", when the script called for indistinct background conversation.

2) Canted Angle (kænt-ed æŋgᵊl) - adjective meaning tilted or slanted.  Sometimes commonly referred t as a Dutch Angle.  It refers to a shot in a film that is lopsided, tilted or slanted.  Used by filmmakers to represent madness, disorientation or tension.

In the example above, from Spike Lee's Do The Right Thing (1989), you see an example of a canted angle.  This reflects the tension preceding a pivotal confrontation in the film.

3) Cowboy Shot - A derivation of the common medium shot where the actor is visible from his mid-thigh up to his head.  Sometimes referred to as an American Shot, it was named for its use in early Westerns when this type of framing was used in order to see not only the actor's face, but his gun and holster as well.

Seen above is a good example from the 2012 Quentin Tarantino film, Django Unchained. Another version of this type of shot  is when you have two characters face off against one another, one in the foreground and the background.  One character is in the foreground, his back to the camera, framing the background character through his legs.  See the excellent example below (from an unknown film)

4) Squib (skwɪb) - A small explosive devise usually set upon a piece of the set or on a character that simulates a bullet hit or a very small explosion.

5) Chewing the Scenery - Acting with an extreme, over-the-top performance; overacting.  Sometimes this can be done at the insistence of the director, other times the actor just goes overboard with emotion.  A great example of this is the actor David Caruso in the TV show, "CSI: MIami".  Caruso has made a science out of removing his sunglasses while delivering one-liners.  One can honestly say every time he does so, he's chewing the scenery to the point that he's leaving bite marks all over the set!

Another great example is Jeff Bridges, as pictured above, in Jon Favreau's Iron Man (2008). Bridges made legions of fans under-acting as the iconic Dude, but his turn as the baddie in Favreau's film had him overacting in some scenes to the point where he was figuratively chomping scenery left and right!  But we can't fault him for it; Bridges always brings what he believes the character needs, plus...he's The Dude!

6) The Martini Shot - Slang term for the last filmed shot of the day (because the next one most probably will have alcohol in it!).  Sometimes referred to as the Abby Singer, named after the late director and production manager, Abner "Abby" Singer (pictured below with actor, Tim Conway).  Singer frequently notified his cast that this was the "last shot of the day", or that he'd shoot "this one, and just one more."  Sometimes, the Abby Singer refers to the second to last shot of the day, with The Martini Shot being the absolute last shot.

7) Walking the Banana - Refers to the actor having to cross in front of the camera in an arc which will then appear on screen as if he walked a straight line.

8) MacGuffin (məˈgəfən) - Coined by acclaimed director Alfred Hitchcock to refer to a plot device in the form of some item or event that the film characters consider important, but which the audience either doesn't know of or is not invested into in any way.  Ultimately, the exact nature of the item is not pivotal to the plot, and sometimes remains unknown.  A few famous uses of a MacGuffin in film include the meaning of rosebud in Orson Welles' Citizen Kane (1941), or the necklace in James Cameron's Titanic (1997)

9) Red Herring (red ˈherɪŋ) - Term used to describe an item or point used to distract or mislead the audience from the real important issue in many mystery and thriller narrative films.  A great example of this term is the character, Bishop Manuel Aringarosa, in Ron Howard's 2006 film, The Da Vinci Code (based on the book by Dan Brown).  The narrative presents Aringarosa (seen below as portrayed by Alfred Molina) in such a way as the audience believes him to be the mastermind behind the events unfolding in the film, calling attention away from whom might really be pulling the strings!  Later, it is revealed that he is indeed innocent.  The Italian surname, Aringarosa, translates into English as Red Herring!

10) Chekhov's Gun (ˈtʃeˌkɔfs ˈgən) - Quite the opposite of a Red Herring.  Based on a quote by Russian writer, Anton Chekhov, "Remove everything that has no relevance to the story. If you say in the first chapter that there is a rifle hanging on the wall, in the second or third chapter it absolutely must go off. If it's not going to be fired, it shouldn't be hanging there."  His meaning is that every element of the narrative be necessary, otherwise it should be removed.

That's the list for now.  There are many more I could list but I think these ten are a good start.  Let these sink in for a bit and I'll compile another list of intriguing terms for later.  Until then, I'll See You At The Movie!  Wait! I think someone already uses that line.  Okay, I got one:  You Stay Classy San Diego!

Cinematic Term: Rule of Thirds (Star Wars: Ep. 4 A New Hope example)

A film term that some new film students find hard to grasp is the Rule of Thirds.  If you've never heard of this before, don't be surprised.  It's more of a guideline than a rule, and actually more of a best practice than a guideline!  So when a young film student asks me just what is this Rule of Thirds and how does it affect the composition of a film shot, this is what I say (or post, as the case may be).

What is the Rule of Thirds?  This is a good question.  When trying to transfer their vision to the screen, filmmakers have to decide what is the best way to film their movie.  They have to be sure to pay great attention to the look of the film.  Sets and scenery notwithstanding, the composition and framing of shots are very important.  When discussing framing, inevitably the Rule of Thirds comes up.  This is not an actual filmmaker's rule, but more of a universally accepted guideline to ensure balance is established within the frame.  To accomplish this, cinematographers try to imagine two equally-spaced vertical lines and two equally-spaced horizontal lines that in effect divide the image frame into nine equal parts.  Now, important film elements should be placed either along these lines or at their intersection points.

    

A good example of a use of this rule is from my favorite film, Stars Wars (dir. George Lucas, 1977).  At one particular point in the film, Luke Skywalker (Mark Hamill) is seen in a long shot.  He stands on a small sand dune staring out at Tatooine's two suns as they begin to set.  If you take the shot and apply the gridlines you will find that the right vertical line positions itself just along Luke’s side.  The horizontal lines capture Luke's image in between them.  One of the setting suns is captured straddling the top horizontal line with the other just below.  This was not done by coincidence.  This shot was meticulously framed so that the image of Luke at dusk was balanced for greater effect.  The viewer is unconsciously drawn to the grid intersections.  In framing the image in this way, the long shot calls to mind a feeling of yearning and remoteness, a feeling Luke has that there is something greater out there for him.  As his Aunt Beru (Shelagh Fraser) remarked, "he can't stay here forever, most of his friends have gone","Luke's just not a farmer, Owen.  He has too much of his father in him."

New Blog!

I know what you're thinking!  Another blog out there, same old business.  Well, not true!  I'm not just here to give a movie review that you probably don't care about anyway!  I'll also impart a bit of movie wisdom, a little insight, if you will.  I've studied film for years, formally and informally.  My father has been a movie memorabilia dealer for well over thirty years.  Through him, I learned first about film promotions; what a one-sheet was, a three-sheet, an insert, window card and just what was a playbill.  Then I began to understand the films, Universal horror, German Expressionism, Film Noir.  In the past few years I've studied extensively the language of film and film production, mise-en-scene, shots, angles, cuts, sound, and lighting.  My goal is to share what I've learned with the readers.

I hope to use this blog as an avenue to share some film production knowledge, movie reviews and news, as well to share some great stories about the wonderful film professionals I've had the pleasure to meet in my travels around this great country of ours.

Soon, I'll be adding a regular podcast feature as well.  I also host film screenings here in Houston (or rather the metropolitan Houston area - actually I host in Tomball and Katy, which are Houston suburbs), and I'm actively involved in the film studies program at the University of Houston Downtown (if you see me, say hi!).  I'll be posting updates on all of the above features as they come about.

So save me to your favorites, check in every once in a while and enjoy!