Writing up a list of all the TV I was falling behind on was pretty helpful in getting me caught up, so I figured it would help if I went into the last two months of the year with a list for movies. I'm about at the same point I was at last year, having seen around forty movies from 2011. The following is about sixty more titles I'd like to see, and the list will almost certainly get longer before it gets much shorter. Foreign films, for instance, are always harder to get a good bead on.
For ease of reading, I've broken the list down into a couple of categories:
The Titles I'm Actually Pretty Excited About
Tucker & Dale vs Evil
We Have to Talk About Kevin
Take Shelter
The Sleeping Beauty (Catherine Breillat)
Martha Marcy May Marlene
The Artist
Tinker, Tailor, Soldier, Spy
A Dangerous Method
Shame
The Turin Horse
Currently in Theaters But, Will Be Available in a Redbox in Six Months
Contagion
Moneyball
50/50
Real Steel
The Ides of March
In Time
Puss in Boots
The Rum Diary
Tower Heist
I Like the Director, But I'm Not Sure About This
The Skin I Live In (Pedro Almodovar)
J. Edgar (Clint Eastwood)
The Descendants (Alexander Payne)
War Horse (Steven Spielberg)
Carnage (Roman Polanski)
Young Adult (Jason Reitman)
Hugo (Martin Scorsese)
The Girl With the Dragon Tattoo (David Fincher)
We Bought a Zoo (Cameron Crowe)
Movies Being Plugged For Their Potential Best Actress/Supporting Actress Oscar Contenders
The Help (Viola Davis and Octavia Spencer)
My Week With Marilyn (Michelle Williams)
Albert Nobbs (Glenn Close)
The Lady (Michelle Yeoh)
Oranges and Sunshine (Emily Watson)
The Iron Lady (Meryl Streep)
The Whistleblower (Rachel Weisz)
Drove By Theaters Where They Were Playing Earlier This Year, Thinking "I Should Go See That," So They're Probably Already on DVD
Jane Eyre
Win Win
Certified Copy
Submarine
Beginners
The Guard
The Devil's Double
Another Earth
The Future
Blatantly Commercial Hollywood Movies Can Be Good Too, You Know, and Why Haven't You Seen "Bridesmaids" Yet?
Bridesmaids
Pirates of the Caribbean: On Stranger Tides
Winnie the Pooh
Crazy Stupid Love
Immortals
The Muppets
The Adventures of Tintin: The Secret of the Unicorn
Mission: Impossible – Ghost Protocol
Sherlock Holmes: A Game of Shadows
I Should Watch More Documentaries, and I Only Know About Most of These Because of Filmspotting
Project Nim
Senna
Tabloid
The Interrupters
Being Elmo
These Amazing Shadows
Into the Abyss
Pina
In the Conversation, But I Honestly Don't Know Much About Them
Margaret
Coriolanus
Higher Ground
Like Crazy
Extremely Loud and Incredibly Close
Le Havre
Tyrannosaurus
Movies With No Apparent US Distribution That I'm Hoping Will Pop Up Somewhere Eventually, Pretty Please?
Perfect Sense
The Sound of Noise
Black Venus
A Boy and His Samurai
Tatsumi
---
Saturday, November 5, 2011
Friday, November 4, 2011
"The Red Chapel" Takes on North Korea
Some of the most interesting moments in film are the ones that are accidental or unplanned. So it is with the daring Danish documentary, "The Red Chapel," that is so fascinating because it's a failure in many respects. You can tell what the filmmakers intended to do, which was to enter North Korea in the guise of an unassuming comedy troupe, put on a show, and subtly send up and expose the inner workings of one of the most repressive regimes on Earth, "Borat" style. Mads Brügger, who had this bright idea, enlists the help of two young Danish-Korean performers, Simon Jul Jorgensen and Jacob Nossell. Jacob, self-described as a "spastic," suffers cerebral palsy, has a severe speech impediment, and requires the use of a wheelchair for long distances. The trio head off to North Korea for two weeks, and quickly discover that they have have bitten off more than they can chew.
The glimpses inside Pyongyang, polished and perfect for the outsiders, are illuminating. However, it's the clashes among the would-be infiltrators that provide the film with its best moments. Brügger keeps wanting to push the boundaries, more willing to ingratiate himself to their hosts, yet also quick to seek out ways to make situations more awkward and uncomfortable. The other two, especially Jacob, are far more sympathetic to the people they encounter, and are more earnest in trying to fulfill their cover story of promoting cultural exchange. The lies they have to tell to keep up appearances clearly grate on Jacob, who is quicker to try and make friends and enjoy the offered hospitality, despite the unsettling reality of being in a society where the handicapped simply do not exist. Ironically, because of Jacob's impeded speech, he's the only one who can freely voice his opinion throughout, because the North Koreans can't understand his "spastic" Danish.
Brügger's tactics increasingly come off mean-spirited, especially as it is apparent that the North Koreans are easy marks, and fairly helpless in their ability to respond to basic irony and sarcasm. His narration of the documentary provides some sobering context about the reality of North Korea behind the carefully erected facade, but it's largely unnecessary. The way that events unfold, with the North Korean organizers taking over the comedy routine, removing all the Western elements and injecting propaganda, requires no underlining. Brügger's smaller stunts, like wanting to read a nonsense poem to a statue of Kim Il-Sung, are fairly harmless, but when he starts putting Simon and Jacob in positions they're clearly not comfortable with, things start to feel exploitative. Brügger's is accused several times of being cruel, of having no humanity or scruples. However, to his credit, this attitude does lead to some great moments of drama, like a tense blow-up he and Jacob have in the middle of an elaborate anti-American rally.
The more organic developments that tend to be more rewarding. The trio's guide and chief minder during their stay is a woman named Mrs. Pak, who takes a maternal liking to Jacob, remarking a few times that she thinks of him like a son even though they've only known each other for a few days. The sentiment may seem odd, but her emotion is clearly genuine. She affords the filmmakers a close-up look at a true believer, who becomes emotionally overwhelmed by nationalist sentiment, and recites party propaganda with great sincerity. However, the paranoia of the North Koreans is also palpable in every scene, in every passive-aggressive exchange, in every hesitation to answer a difficult question or depart from the official script. The individuals we meet become sympathetic very quickly, which isn't very conducive to Brügger's attempts to paint them as objects of scorn and ridicule.
The larger, sinister mechanics of the North Korean regime, on the other hand, are so pervasive and so omnipresent, that they're impossible to penetrate in any meaningful fashion. The Danes score few victories, and contrary to what the marketing copy says, never manage to pull off anything truly outrageous or subversive while they're in North Korea. On the other hand, if they had, they probably wouldn't have gotten out of the country in one piece, and certainly not with their footage intact. But "Red Chapel" is still an immensely rewarding watch, as the camera captures the filmmakers struggling to deal with an increasingly difficult experience and gradually adjusting their priorities from trying to send-up North Korea to simply surviving it. It's not the film they set out to make, but it certainly came out a compelling, thought-provoking one.
---
The glimpses inside Pyongyang, polished and perfect for the outsiders, are illuminating. However, it's the clashes among the would-be infiltrators that provide the film with its best moments. Brügger keeps wanting to push the boundaries, more willing to ingratiate himself to their hosts, yet also quick to seek out ways to make situations more awkward and uncomfortable. The other two, especially Jacob, are far more sympathetic to the people they encounter, and are more earnest in trying to fulfill their cover story of promoting cultural exchange. The lies they have to tell to keep up appearances clearly grate on Jacob, who is quicker to try and make friends and enjoy the offered hospitality, despite the unsettling reality of being in a society where the handicapped simply do not exist. Ironically, because of Jacob's impeded speech, he's the only one who can freely voice his opinion throughout, because the North Koreans can't understand his "spastic" Danish.
Brügger's tactics increasingly come off mean-spirited, especially as it is apparent that the North Koreans are easy marks, and fairly helpless in their ability to respond to basic irony and sarcasm. His narration of the documentary provides some sobering context about the reality of North Korea behind the carefully erected facade, but it's largely unnecessary. The way that events unfold, with the North Korean organizers taking over the comedy routine, removing all the Western elements and injecting propaganda, requires no underlining. Brügger's smaller stunts, like wanting to read a nonsense poem to a statue of Kim Il-Sung, are fairly harmless, but when he starts putting Simon and Jacob in positions they're clearly not comfortable with, things start to feel exploitative. Brügger's is accused several times of being cruel, of having no humanity or scruples. However, to his credit, this attitude does lead to some great moments of drama, like a tense blow-up he and Jacob have in the middle of an elaborate anti-American rally.
The more organic developments that tend to be more rewarding. The trio's guide and chief minder during their stay is a woman named Mrs. Pak, who takes a maternal liking to Jacob, remarking a few times that she thinks of him like a son even though they've only known each other for a few days. The sentiment may seem odd, but her emotion is clearly genuine. She affords the filmmakers a close-up look at a true believer, who becomes emotionally overwhelmed by nationalist sentiment, and recites party propaganda with great sincerity. However, the paranoia of the North Koreans is also palpable in every scene, in every passive-aggressive exchange, in every hesitation to answer a difficult question or depart from the official script. The individuals we meet become sympathetic very quickly, which isn't very conducive to Brügger's attempts to paint them as objects of scorn and ridicule.
The larger, sinister mechanics of the North Korean regime, on the other hand, are so pervasive and so omnipresent, that they're impossible to penetrate in any meaningful fashion. The Danes score few victories, and contrary to what the marketing copy says, never manage to pull off anything truly outrageous or subversive while they're in North Korea. On the other hand, if they had, they probably wouldn't have gotten out of the country in one piece, and certainly not with their footage intact. But "Red Chapel" is still an immensely rewarding watch, as the camera captures the filmmakers struggling to deal with an increasingly difficult experience and gradually adjusting their priorities from trying to send-up North Korea to simply surviving it. It's not the film they set out to make, but it certainly came out a compelling, thought-provoking one.
---
Thursday, November 3, 2011
A Trio of Disney Docs
Since I enjoyed "Waking Sleeping Beauty," an insider's look at what was going on behind the scenes of the 90s Disney animation Renaissance, I thought I'd take in some of the other Disney-themed documentaries that have been made in recent years. I went through a trio of them over the weekend: "The PIXAR Story" from 2007, "Walt & El Grupo," from 2008, and "The Boys: The Sherman Brothers' Story," from 2009. A couple of points need to made right off. The films were all produced with the cooperation of the Walt Disney Company, giving the filmmakers access to clips and music and other IP, so of course the documentaries are very complimentary towards the Mouse. However, they don't indulge in much corporate cheerleading for Disney, and never play like the thinly disguised commercials that some of the their older projects were - though the PIXAR doc comes close at times. Still, one should take note that all three films were all made by people with close family ties to Disney. "The Boys" coming from the sons of Robert and Richard Sherman is no surprise, but more eyebrow-raising is Leslie Iwerks, daughter of the legendary animator Ub Iwerks, directing "The PIXAR Story," and "Walt & El Grupo," being helmed by Ted Thomas, son of another beloved animator, Frank Thomas. So clearly, there's bias at work here from the outset.
But on to the films. "The PIXAR Story" gets a lot of mileage out of having most exciting narrative. The Cinderella story of PIXAR's rise is tremendously interesting stuff, and the doc is great at putting together all the little bits and pieces of early CGI animation history that I've only seen piecemeal from other sources. The archival footage is always great to see, and with the recent passing of Steve Jobs, his appearances are especially poignant. Unfortunately, that all stops after the release of "Toy Story," when an animation nut like me starts noticing that a lot important context, like PIXAR's ongoing battle with Dreamworks' animation division, is barely alluded to. I mean, come on. The biggest challenge with "A Bug's Life" wasn't the crowd scenes or the fear of a sophomore slump, but the fact that Jeffrey Katzenberg was gunning for them with "Antz," which beat "Bug's Life" to the theaters by four weeks. The more recent material is also weaker, containing a lot of aspirational talk for the future of the Disney/PIXAR partnership, which had only just been cemented when the film was finished. There's even a substantial segment devoted to talking up the return of traditional animation, a venture which hasn't turned out so well. Still, "The PIXAR Story" is a fun watch, very accessible, and has a lot of good, geeky animation history in it.
"Walt & El Grupo" will likely only be of interest to real Disney buffs, as it chronicles the 1941 goodwill tour of South America that the US State Department sent Disney and a a group of his employees on, the "El Grupo" of the title. We also get a rather one-sided look at the notorious Disney Studio strike that was going on around the same time, but this is about as in depth as I've ever seen Disney (both man and studio) ever address the subject. Most of the film is taken up with chronicling the trip through Brazil, Chile, and Argentina. Since El Grupo and the people they met in South America are mostly deceased, we have to make do with the second-hand reminiscences of various relatives, giving the whole film the feel of an extended photo album review. With a very meandering, incidental narrative and too many people to follow, the whole middle section has a tendency to blur together. Also, though the trip was considered a success, the filmmakers don't do a particularly good job of convincing us that it had much impact on either Disney or relations with South America. It certainly didn't warrant an entire 107 minute documentary film. To hammer the point home, the animated feature that was produced as a result of the South America trip, "Saludos Amigos," was mostly well-received at the time of release, but it's largely forgotten today, a curiosity item like this documentary.
Finally, "The Boys" certainly features subject matter worthy of examination - the careers of the songwriting Sherman brothers, Robert and Richard. The pair was responsible for many Disney earworms, from the songs in "Mary Poppins" and "The Jungle Book" to "It's a Small World." However, their non-Disney work gets a bit sidelined here, which is a shame. "Chitty Chitty Bang Bang" gets a few minutes, since it was one of the most popular and enduring films they worked on, but other late career highs like "The Slipper and the Rose" are glossed over quickly. What's really intriguing is the family drama that frames the whole feature. Richard and Robert Sherman never got along all that well, and were estranged for decades in later life. "The Boys" was put together by their sons in the hopes of mending some fences, but the brothers don't open up much about the fallout or the reconciliation process. Much left unsaid does show up onscreen, however, such as the uptick in recent collaborations between the pair, including work on the new stage versions of "Chitty Chitty Bang Bang" and "Mary Poppins." Of the three docs, this is easily my favorite. The execution's a little bumpy, but it's so well intentioned, and so clearly a labor of love, it won me over. And frankly, I suspect I'd like any excuse to revisit the Shermans' catalog.
---
But on to the films. "The PIXAR Story" gets a lot of mileage out of having most exciting narrative. The Cinderella story of PIXAR's rise is tremendously interesting stuff, and the doc is great at putting together all the little bits and pieces of early CGI animation history that I've only seen piecemeal from other sources. The archival footage is always great to see, and with the recent passing of Steve Jobs, his appearances are especially poignant. Unfortunately, that all stops after the release of "Toy Story," when an animation nut like me starts noticing that a lot important context, like PIXAR's ongoing battle with Dreamworks' animation division, is barely alluded to. I mean, come on. The biggest challenge with "A Bug's Life" wasn't the crowd scenes or the fear of a sophomore slump, but the fact that Jeffrey Katzenberg was gunning for them with "Antz," which beat "Bug's Life" to the theaters by four weeks. The more recent material is also weaker, containing a lot of aspirational talk for the future of the Disney/PIXAR partnership, which had only just been cemented when the film was finished. There's even a substantial segment devoted to talking up the return of traditional animation, a venture which hasn't turned out so well. Still, "The PIXAR Story" is a fun watch, very accessible, and has a lot of good, geeky animation history in it.
"Walt & El Grupo" will likely only be of interest to real Disney buffs, as it chronicles the 1941 goodwill tour of South America that the US State Department sent Disney and a a group of his employees on, the "El Grupo" of the title. We also get a rather one-sided look at the notorious Disney Studio strike that was going on around the same time, but this is about as in depth as I've ever seen Disney (both man and studio) ever address the subject. Most of the film is taken up with chronicling the trip through Brazil, Chile, and Argentina. Since El Grupo and the people they met in South America are mostly deceased, we have to make do with the second-hand reminiscences of various relatives, giving the whole film the feel of an extended photo album review. With a very meandering, incidental narrative and too many people to follow, the whole middle section has a tendency to blur together. Also, though the trip was considered a success, the filmmakers don't do a particularly good job of convincing us that it had much impact on either Disney or relations with South America. It certainly didn't warrant an entire 107 minute documentary film. To hammer the point home, the animated feature that was produced as a result of the South America trip, "Saludos Amigos," was mostly well-received at the time of release, but it's largely forgotten today, a curiosity item like this documentary.
Finally, "The Boys" certainly features subject matter worthy of examination - the careers of the songwriting Sherman brothers, Robert and Richard. The pair was responsible for many Disney earworms, from the songs in "Mary Poppins" and "The Jungle Book" to "It's a Small World." However, their non-Disney work gets a bit sidelined here, which is a shame. "Chitty Chitty Bang Bang" gets a few minutes, since it was one of the most popular and enduring films they worked on, but other late career highs like "The Slipper and the Rose" are glossed over quickly. What's really intriguing is the family drama that frames the whole feature. Richard and Robert Sherman never got along all that well, and were estranged for decades in later life. "The Boys" was put together by their sons in the hopes of mending some fences, but the brothers don't open up much about the fallout or the reconciliation process. Much left unsaid does show up onscreen, however, such as the uptick in recent collaborations between the pair, including work on the new stage versions of "Chitty Chitty Bang Bang" and "Mary Poppins." Of the three docs, this is easily my favorite. The execution's a little bumpy, but it's so well intentioned, and so clearly a labor of love, it won me over. And frankly, I suspect I'd like any excuse to revisit the Shermans' catalog.
---
Wednesday, November 2, 2011
Kevin Smith Joins the Dark Side
"Red State" has generally been called a horror film, when it's better described as an exceptionally dark satire with some horror elements. It starts out like a typical slasher, with a trio of teenage boys, Travis (Michael Angarano), Jared (Kyle Gallner) and Billy Ray (Nicholas Braun), driving out to meet a woman they met online, who is offering sexual favors. Of course this is only a ruse, meant to lure the boys into the hands of a murderous, homophobic Christian cult, led by Pastor Abin Cooper (Michael Parks). Modeled after the Westboro Baptist Church among others, Cooper is as charismatic as he is clearly out of his mind, living with an extended family, including daughter Sarah (Melissa Leo) and granddaughter Cheyenne (Kerry Bishé), along with other worshipers on a compound called Five Points.
The situation becomes more interesting when the authorities get involved. Eventually local Sheriff Wynan (Stephen Root) calls in the Feds, namely Agent Keenan (John Goodman), who is investigating Cooper's group for possibly stockpiling firearms. Any argument about the film demonizing Christian groups should be tempered by the film's portrayal of the government operatives as bumbling, self-interested, borderline incompetents, blindly following the orders of superiors who are driven by petty grudges. The clash between the two groups, both ideologically fanatical in their own ways, is shocking not for the amount of violence, but for the lack of doubt or hesitation regarding mutual self-destruction on either side. Once the cult is branded as a domestic terrorist group, and the lawmen declared to be in league with Satan, there's no turning back.
I want to reiterate that this isn't a horror film. There's tension and unease in abundance, but no reals scares. "Red State" doesn't work as horror, being far too concerned with larger messages regarding religion, politics, and sexuality. And though it apes a few horror conceits and there are some gory moments, it also seems to delight in refusing to let the audience enjoy the carnage. Deaths, when they occur, are quick and clinical. It's the motivations behind the killers that are meant to disturb us. "Red State" is very smart in this regard, though maybe a little too on the nose with its messages. Despite being so different from anything that writer-director Kevin Smith has done before, his fingerprints are all over the script. This isn't the first time he's tackled social issues, but here his intentions are blatant, and his usual frathouse sensibilities are nowhere to be found. A few bleak laughs do get through, but they're more reminiscent of recent British satires like "In the Loop" and "Four Lions" than anything in the View Askew universe.
What really sells it is the direction, which is a considerable improvement over Smith's previous films. Here, he demonstrates he's perfectly capable of shooting action sequences, and knows how to summon tension and sustain a mood for his own purposes. Most of the film is shot on handheld camera, with a utilitarian visual style common for low-budget horror pictures, but a little easier on the eyes. I could actually follow the action and work out where everyone was spatially. That puts Smith ahead of a lot of directors that I could name. I think there are still some elements that could use work or that come off as gratuitous - Kevin Pollak's entire contribution to the film, for example - but I'd happily trust Smith with any thriller or horror project after this.
And even if you don't like what the director is doing, it's hard to deny the performances. Michael Parks gets a nice, long, bit of sermonizing to drive home just how evil an evil pastor can be. Melissa Leo gives what could have been a stereotypical, flat character, some welcome depths. And it's always good to see John Goodman, here playing the federal agent stuck between a rock and a hard place, who does a lot to sell the more unlikely bits of the story. Just about everyone in the film has a good veneer of reality - the horndog boys, the cult members, the police - even though the situations they're placed in are extreme, and play out in a fantastic way.
I really enjoyed "Red State," in spite of some reservations. It's not a great film, but it's one which has a coherent and distinctive point of view, good insights, and a lot passion behind it. So it aggravates me to no end that by all indications, Kevin Smith won't be pursuing other projects in a similar vein. The man wants to retire. Retire! He's barely in his forties! Oh well. At least the big galoot is leaving us on a high note.
---
The situation becomes more interesting when the authorities get involved. Eventually local Sheriff Wynan (Stephen Root) calls in the Feds, namely Agent Keenan (John Goodman), who is investigating Cooper's group for possibly stockpiling firearms. Any argument about the film demonizing Christian groups should be tempered by the film's portrayal of the government operatives as bumbling, self-interested, borderline incompetents, blindly following the orders of superiors who are driven by petty grudges. The clash between the two groups, both ideologically fanatical in their own ways, is shocking not for the amount of violence, but for the lack of doubt or hesitation regarding mutual self-destruction on either side. Once the cult is branded as a domestic terrorist group, and the lawmen declared to be in league with Satan, there's no turning back.
I want to reiterate that this isn't a horror film. There's tension and unease in abundance, but no reals scares. "Red State" doesn't work as horror, being far too concerned with larger messages regarding religion, politics, and sexuality. And though it apes a few horror conceits and there are some gory moments, it also seems to delight in refusing to let the audience enjoy the carnage. Deaths, when they occur, are quick and clinical. It's the motivations behind the killers that are meant to disturb us. "Red State" is very smart in this regard, though maybe a little too on the nose with its messages. Despite being so different from anything that writer-director Kevin Smith has done before, his fingerprints are all over the script. This isn't the first time he's tackled social issues, but here his intentions are blatant, and his usual frathouse sensibilities are nowhere to be found. A few bleak laughs do get through, but they're more reminiscent of recent British satires like "In the Loop" and "Four Lions" than anything in the View Askew universe.
What really sells it is the direction, which is a considerable improvement over Smith's previous films. Here, he demonstrates he's perfectly capable of shooting action sequences, and knows how to summon tension and sustain a mood for his own purposes. Most of the film is shot on handheld camera, with a utilitarian visual style common for low-budget horror pictures, but a little easier on the eyes. I could actually follow the action and work out where everyone was spatially. That puts Smith ahead of a lot of directors that I could name. I think there are still some elements that could use work or that come off as gratuitous - Kevin Pollak's entire contribution to the film, for example - but I'd happily trust Smith with any thriller or horror project after this.
And even if you don't like what the director is doing, it's hard to deny the performances. Michael Parks gets a nice, long, bit of sermonizing to drive home just how evil an evil pastor can be. Melissa Leo gives what could have been a stereotypical, flat character, some welcome depths. And it's always good to see John Goodman, here playing the federal agent stuck between a rock and a hard place, who does a lot to sell the more unlikely bits of the story. Just about everyone in the film has a good veneer of reality - the horndog boys, the cult members, the police - even though the situations they're placed in are extreme, and play out in a fantastic way.
I really enjoyed "Red State," in spite of some reservations. It's not a great film, but it's one which has a coherent and distinctive point of view, good insights, and a lot passion behind it. So it aggravates me to no end that by all indications, Kevin Smith won't be pursuing other projects in a similar vein. The man wants to retire. Retire! He's barely in his forties! Oh well. At least the big galoot is leaving us on a high note.
---
Tuesday, November 1, 2011
Not a Great Year for Animation
It stands to reason that after a particularly strong year for animated films, like 2010, you're going to have a weak one. However, 2011 has just been one disappointment after another so far. The films have all been doing well at the box office, with a couple of exceptions. We started off the year with the February release of "Gnomeo and Juliet," a very modestly budgeted first feature from a no-name studio. It cleared nearly $100 million in domestic receipts, despite mixed reviews. In March, "Rango," followed with $123 million, very good for a first feature by ILM, but not quite enough to cover its production budget. Fortunately, foreign numbers were about on par, more than enough to make up for the shortfall. In April, Blue Sky's "Rio" brought in $143 million, and if you count the partially animated "Hop," it was good for $108 million. Not great numbers in either case, but respectable.
There were only two pre-summer bombs. One was "Mars Needs Moms," the troubled mo-cap feature that only earned $21 million domestic with a reported budget of $150 million. The film's performance was bad enough that Disney parted ways with Robert Zemickis, quashing future projects in the pipeline, including a proposed "Yellow Submarine" movie. The other underperformer was "Hoodwinked Too! Hood vs. Evil," the sequel to the surprisingly well-received "Hoodwinked," that was good for $50 million back in 2005. The sequel brought in about a fifth as much in April, and there's been some ugly behind-the-scenes clashing between the production company and the distributors, the Weinstein Company. There are a few features that crash and burn every year, though, so a few flops were not unexpected.
But then we get into summer, where the more highly anticipated films started rolling out, and we started seeing some really worrying numbers. First, "Kung Fu Panda 2" landed in May, where it came in second to "The Hangover 2" in the first weekend, failed to match the opening numbers of the first "Kung Fu Panda," and only totaled $165 million domestic to the original's $215 million. What's mystifying is that there was hardly any discernible difference in the reviews or audience reaction to the two films. "Kung Fu Panda 2" was well-liked and had little competition for the youngest viewers during the early summer months. Also, the general trend for animated sequels is that the box office numbers tend to go up for at least one or two successive installments. Fortunately, "Panda 2" was a major blockbuster overseas, with nearly $500 million in foreign receipts, edging the worldwide total higher than that of the original, and putting it in fourth place for 2011 worldwide grosses so far.
In June, "Cars 2" was a different story. $191 million domestic can hardly be called a failure, especially as "Cars 2" remains the highest domestic grossing animated film of the year. However, compared to PIXAR's past box office successes, it's certainly a disappointment. "Cars 2" is the studio's first feature to fail to cross $200 million domestically since 1998's "A Bug's Life." Again, overseas numbers eased the pain, but not nearly to the extent that "Kung Fu Panda 2" enjoyed. In the worldwide numbers, "Cars 2" trails by well over $100 million. Another blow to Disney was the flop of "Winnie the Pooh," the traditionally animated feature that opened against the last "Harry Potter" movie in July, and was promptly flattened. Then "The Smurfs" opened a few weeks later, and flattened them again. So far "The Smurfs" has brought in $140 million to "Winnie the Pooh's" measly $26 million. Fortunately "Winnie" was a cheap feature and will likely recoup its budget, but this doesn't bode well for the future of traditional animation in the US.
"The Smurfs" was one of the surprise hits of the summer, and did particularly well overseas, about on par with "Cars 2." There was also the success of the 3D rerelease of "The Lion King" in September, which topped the box office two weeks in a row and was good for another $92 million. Otherwise, numbers have been down across the board, especially at the domestic box office. Only one animated film, "Cars 2," has cracked the top ten for the year. In 2010, there were five titles, which all broke $200 million domestically. But then again, 2010 was an unusually good year for animation, with the last "Toy Story" and "Shrek" movies, and strong originals like "Despicable Me," "Tangled," and "How to Train Your Dragon." Also, though the critics have generally been kind, the hard truth is that this year's films just haven't been as good. I liked "Kung Fu Panda 2" quite a bit, and "Cars 2" and "Rio" were passable, but only "Rango" was really anything special. The best reviewed animated film of the year was "Winnie the Pooh," but I admit that like so may others, I let it get lost in the summer scrum and haven't seen it yet.
We have a couple more 2011 animated films left to go. Box office analysts are currently fretting that "Puss in Boots" only took in an estimated $35 million over the weekend, in spite of good reviews. Dreamworks hasn't seen opening numbers that low in years, and my gut feeling is that it's probably a sign that people have had about enough of the "Shrek" franchise. Moving on, November brings "Happy Feet Two" and an Aardman original, "Arthur Christmas." I do not understand the "Happy Feet" love, but maybe they can make lightning strike twice. I'm afraid "Arthur" may be doomed by its Britishness and a bad ad campaign, but then you should never underestimate Christmas movies. In December, we'll see "The Adventures of Tintin," which is already being rolled out in Europe, and getting good notices so far. I don't think it'll do as well in the US, however, since "Tintin" isn't well known here, and the mo-cap animation is still awfully off-putting. Oh, and there's "Alvin and the Chipmunks: Chip Wrecked," and the less said about it, the better.
Finally in the independent and foreign realms, there's surprisingly little this year. Fernando Trueba and Javier Mariscal's "Chico and Rita" is getting an Oscar qualifying run, but Studio Ghibli's "Arrietty" has been pushed back to February, 2012. "From up on Poppy Hill," Ghibli's latest, has scarcely had any buzz at all. The new "Trigun" film was supposed to have a limited release in the US this year, but I haven't heard a word about it in ages, or anything else from Japan for that matter. France's "A Monster in Paris" hasn't been picked up for US distribution yet - maybe next year. Also MIA is "Tatsumi," a Singaporean film that got some attention when it played at Cannes.
But these things are cyclical. Next year we'll see originals from PIXAR, Dreamworks, Laika, Ghibli, Aardman, Sony, Illumination, Disney, and far fewer sequels (two next year, opposed to five this year). That's plenty to look forward to.
---
There were only two pre-summer bombs. One was "Mars Needs Moms," the troubled mo-cap feature that only earned $21 million domestic with a reported budget of $150 million. The film's performance was bad enough that Disney parted ways with Robert Zemickis, quashing future projects in the pipeline, including a proposed "Yellow Submarine" movie. The other underperformer was "Hoodwinked Too! Hood vs. Evil," the sequel to the surprisingly well-received "Hoodwinked," that was good for $50 million back in 2005. The sequel brought in about a fifth as much in April, and there's been some ugly behind-the-scenes clashing between the production company and the distributors, the Weinstein Company. There are a few features that crash and burn every year, though, so a few flops were not unexpected.
But then we get into summer, where the more highly anticipated films started rolling out, and we started seeing some really worrying numbers. First, "Kung Fu Panda 2" landed in May, where it came in second to "The Hangover 2" in the first weekend, failed to match the opening numbers of the first "Kung Fu Panda," and only totaled $165 million domestic to the original's $215 million. What's mystifying is that there was hardly any discernible difference in the reviews or audience reaction to the two films. "Kung Fu Panda 2" was well-liked and had little competition for the youngest viewers during the early summer months. Also, the general trend for animated sequels is that the box office numbers tend to go up for at least one or two successive installments. Fortunately, "Panda 2" was a major blockbuster overseas, with nearly $500 million in foreign receipts, edging the worldwide total higher than that of the original, and putting it in fourth place for 2011 worldwide grosses so far.
In June, "Cars 2" was a different story. $191 million domestic can hardly be called a failure, especially as "Cars 2" remains the highest domestic grossing animated film of the year. However, compared to PIXAR's past box office successes, it's certainly a disappointment. "Cars 2" is the studio's first feature to fail to cross $200 million domestically since 1998's "A Bug's Life." Again, overseas numbers eased the pain, but not nearly to the extent that "Kung Fu Panda 2" enjoyed. In the worldwide numbers, "Cars 2" trails by well over $100 million. Another blow to Disney was the flop of "Winnie the Pooh," the traditionally animated feature that opened against the last "Harry Potter" movie in July, and was promptly flattened. Then "The Smurfs" opened a few weeks later, and flattened them again. So far "The Smurfs" has brought in $140 million to "Winnie the Pooh's" measly $26 million. Fortunately "Winnie" was a cheap feature and will likely recoup its budget, but this doesn't bode well for the future of traditional animation in the US.
"The Smurfs" was one of the surprise hits of the summer, and did particularly well overseas, about on par with "Cars 2." There was also the success of the 3D rerelease of "The Lion King" in September, which topped the box office two weeks in a row and was good for another $92 million. Otherwise, numbers have been down across the board, especially at the domestic box office. Only one animated film, "Cars 2," has cracked the top ten for the year. In 2010, there were five titles, which all broke $200 million domestically. But then again, 2010 was an unusually good year for animation, with the last "Toy Story" and "Shrek" movies, and strong originals like "Despicable Me," "Tangled," and "How to Train Your Dragon." Also, though the critics have generally been kind, the hard truth is that this year's films just haven't been as good. I liked "Kung Fu Panda 2" quite a bit, and "Cars 2" and "Rio" were passable, but only "Rango" was really anything special. The best reviewed animated film of the year was "Winnie the Pooh," but I admit that like so may others, I let it get lost in the summer scrum and haven't seen it yet.
We have a couple more 2011 animated films left to go. Box office analysts are currently fretting that "Puss in Boots" only took in an estimated $35 million over the weekend, in spite of good reviews. Dreamworks hasn't seen opening numbers that low in years, and my gut feeling is that it's probably a sign that people have had about enough of the "Shrek" franchise. Moving on, November brings "Happy Feet Two" and an Aardman original, "Arthur Christmas." I do not understand the "Happy Feet" love, but maybe they can make lightning strike twice. I'm afraid "Arthur" may be doomed by its Britishness and a bad ad campaign, but then you should never underestimate Christmas movies. In December, we'll see "The Adventures of Tintin," which is already being rolled out in Europe, and getting good notices so far. I don't think it'll do as well in the US, however, since "Tintin" isn't well known here, and the mo-cap animation is still awfully off-putting. Oh, and there's "Alvin and the Chipmunks: Chip Wrecked," and the less said about it, the better.
Finally in the independent and foreign realms, there's surprisingly little this year. Fernando Trueba and Javier Mariscal's "Chico and Rita" is getting an Oscar qualifying run, but Studio Ghibli's "Arrietty" has been pushed back to February, 2012. "From up on Poppy Hill," Ghibli's latest, has scarcely had any buzz at all. The new "Trigun" film was supposed to have a limited release in the US this year, but I haven't heard a word about it in ages, or anything else from Japan for that matter. France's "A Monster in Paris" hasn't been picked up for US distribution yet - maybe next year. Also MIA is "Tatsumi," a Singaporean film that got some attention when it played at Cannes.
But these things are cyclical. Next year we'll see originals from PIXAR, Dreamworks, Laika, Ghibli, Aardman, Sony, Illumination, Disney, and far fewer sequels (two next year, opposed to five this year). That's plenty to look forward to.
---
Sunday, October 30, 2011
"Once Upon a Time" and "Grimm" (and "Fables," Oh My)
Since writing up this post about the potential similarities between the Bill Willingham comic "Fables," and the new fairy-tale themed shows "Once Upon a Time" and "Grimm," I've finally had the chance to sit down and watch the two pilots and do some assessment. Thought I'd share a few thoughts on them below.
Of the two, ABC's "Once Upon a Time" appears more impressive at first glance. It has a cast with bigger names, and the creators seem much more gung-ho about the whole fairy-tale idea. In the pilot, Snow White (Ginnifer Goodwin), Prince Charming (Josh Dallas), and other fairy-tale characters are transported by the Evil Queen (Lana Parrilla) to a small town in Maine called Storybrooke. They live out normal lives, with no memory of who they really are, but they can't leave and never age. The only one who can break the spell is the grown-up daughter of the prince and princess, Emma (Jennifer Morrison), spirited away to Earth as a baby before the spell could affect her. Emma is brought to Storybrooke at the urging of her own son Henry (Jared S. Gilmore), who she had to give up at birth, and reappears in her life as a precocious ten-year-old. Henry knows the truth about Storybrooke, but his adoptive mother is none other than the Evil Queen – the town's mayor.
"Once Upon A Time" is so family-friendly, brightly-colored, and utterly harmless, it almost makes my skin crawl. It does nothing remotely interesting with the fairy-tale characters, letting them all conform to the utterly sanitized, cartoonish, Disney-fied versions that the popular culture is familiar with. And no surprise, as "Once Upon a Time" airs on the Disney-owned ABC network and makes use of its library of characters. Human versions of Jiminy Cricket (Raphael Sbarge) and Grumpy the Dwarf (Lee Arenberg) appear in the pilot, and the extended cast list promises more to come. Aside from Jennifer Morrison, the performances are too broad and over-the-top. Lana Parilla's bald-faced bitchery is already making me think this could end up being "Desperate Housewives" with glass slippers. The writing is clever in some respects, but so bland and so clearly uninterested in exploring the classic stories in any real depth, I found it hard to stay engaged. Also, the production design is pretty atrocious – like Disney's "Enchanted" or their 90s "Cinderella" special on a fraction of the budget.
I'm much more partial to NBC's "Grimm," which takes a completely different approach. It's a police procedural, following police officer Nick Burkhardt (David Giuntoli), who discovers he's descended from a line of Grimms, who protect humanity from fairy-tale villains. Russell Hornsby plays Hank Griffin, Nick's partner, and Bitsie Tulloch plays his girlfriend. Two other characters more worthy of note in the first hour are Nick's tough Aunt Marie (Kate Burton), and Eddie Monroe (Silas Weir Mitchell), a twitchy, reformed "blutbad," better known as a Big Bad Wolf. The Blutbaden, who live among humans and are undetectable save by Grimms, are set up as the major villains of the series. In the first hour, a blutbad snatches girls wearing red hoods, including one who took a shortcut that she shouldn't have.
"Grimm" has a pretty shaky first outing, but I also think it has a better premise and the right attitude toward adapting fairy tales to the modern day. It emphasizes the horrific elements at the core of most of these stories instead of playing on our nostalgia for happily ever after endings. "Little Red Riding Hood," referenced heavily in the pilot, has always been a cautionary tale, based on potent, real-world fears. The concept of the blutbad is hokey, and there's not much that distinguishes them from the demons on "Supernatural" or the vampires on "Buffy" right now, but "Grimm" has plenty of room to improve. The acting is solid. The effects aren't great, but they're used well. And then there's the chilly, edge-of-the-wilderness atmosphere, helped by the fact that the production is based out of Portland, with all those Pacific-Northwestern forests in close proximity. Also, I really think the procedural formula is going to help rather than hurt "Grimm" in the long run, because it'll help some of the more outlandish elements go down easier.
I'd like to reiterate that I really see no similarity between either show and "Fables" at this point. The mythology of "Grimm" is totally different, and so is the way that it uses fairy-tale allusions. "Once Upon a Time" is a closer match, but the tone and focus of the story aren't, and the show totally rejects the subversive edge of the comics. For some that may not be such a bad thing. I suspect that I would have liked "Once Upon a Time" much better if I were younger and less familiar with the gorier, toothier, original versions of "Snow White," "Sleeping Beauty," and so on. And while I think "Grimm" is more promising, it is a little frustrating that I already suspect that if it does well, it may never break out of the procedural formula.
So will somebody please just adapt "Fables" already?
---
Of the two, ABC's "Once Upon a Time" appears more impressive at first glance. It has a cast with bigger names, and the creators seem much more gung-ho about the whole fairy-tale idea. In the pilot, Snow White (Ginnifer Goodwin), Prince Charming (Josh Dallas), and other fairy-tale characters are transported by the Evil Queen (Lana Parrilla) to a small town in Maine called Storybrooke. They live out normal lives, with no memory of who they really are, but they can't leave and never age. The only one who can break the spell is the grown-up daughter of the prince and princess, Emma (Jennifer Morrison), spirited away to Earth as a baby before the spell could affect her. Emma is brought to Storybrooke at the urging of her own son Henry (Jared S. Gilmore), who she had to give up at birth, and reappears in her life as a precocious ten-year-old. Henry knows the truth about Storybrooke, but his adoptive mother is none other than the Evil Queen – the town's mayor.
"Once Upon A Time" is so family-friendly, brightly-colored, and utterly harmless, it almost makes my skin crawl. It does nothing remotely interesting with the fairy-tale characters, letting them all conform to the utterly sanitized, cartoonish, Disney-fied versions that the popular culture is familiar with. And no surprise, as "Once Upon a Time" airs on the Disney-owned ABC network and makes use of its library of characters. Human versions of Jiminy Cricket (Raphael Sbarge) and Grumpy the Dwarf (Lee Arenberg) appear in the pilot, and the extended cast list promises more to come. Aside from Jennifer Morrison, the performances are too broad and over-the-top. Lana Parilla's bald-faced bitchery is already making me think this could end up being "Desperate Housewives" with glass slippers. The writing is clever in some respects, but so bland and so clearly uninterested in exploring the classic stories in any real depth, I found it hard to stay engaged. Also, the production design is pretty atrocious – like Disney's "Enchanted" or their 90s "Cinderella" special on a fraction of the budget.
I'm much more partial to NBC's "Grimm," which takes a completely different approach. It's a police procedural, following police officer Nick Burkhardt (David Giuntoli), who discovers he's descended from a line of Grimms, who protect humanity from fairy-tale villains. Russell Hornsby plays Hank Griffin, Nick's partner, and Bitsie Tulloch plays his girlfriend. Two other characters more worthy of note in the first hour are Nick's tough Aunt Marie (Kate Burton), and Eddie Monroe (Silas Weir Mitchell), a twitchy, reformed "blutbad," better known as a Big Bad Wolf. The Blutbaden, who live among humans and are undetectable save by Grimms, are set up as the major villains of the series. In the first hour, a blutbad snatches girls wearing red hoods, including one who took a shortcut that she shouldn't have.
"Grimm" has a pretty shaky first outing, but I also think it has a better premise and the right attitude toward adapting fairy tales to the modern day. It emphasizes the horrific elements at the core of most of these stories instead of playing on our nostalgia for happily ever after endings. "Little Red Riding Hood," referenced heavily in the pilot, has always been a cautionary tale, based on potent, real-world fears. The concept of the blutbad is hokey, and there's not much that distinguishes them from the demons on "Supernatural" or the vampires on "Buffy" right now, but "Grimm" has plenty of room to improve. The acting is solid. The effects aren't great, but they're used well. And then there's the chilly, edge-of-the-wilderness atmosphere, helped by the fact that the production is based out of Portland, with all those Pacific-Northwestern forests in close proximity. Also, I really think the procedural formula is going to help rather than hurt "Grimm" in the long run, because it'll help some of the more outlandish elements go down easier.
I'd like to reiterate that I really see no similarity between either show and "Fables" at this point. The mythology of "Grimm" is totally different, and so is the way that it uses fairy-tale allusions. "Once Upon a Time" is a closer match, but the tone and focus of the story aren't, and the show totally rejects the subversive edge of the comics. For some that may not be such a bad thing. I suspect that I would have liked "Once Upon a Time" much better if I were younger and less familiar with the gorier, toothier, original versions of "Snow White," "Sleeping Beauty," and so on. And while I think "Grimm" is more promising, it is a little frustrating that I already suspect that if it does well, it may never break out of the procedural formula.
So will somebody please just adapt "Fables" already?
---
Friday, October 28, 2011
This Fella Phibes Just Handed Me a Horror Quiz...
Following the lead of some esteemed associates, I have filled out the first ever (hopefully) annual Dr. Anton Phibes' Abominably Erudite, Musically Malignant, Cursedly Clever Halloween Horror Movie Quiz from over at Sergio Leone and the Infield Fly Rule, a classic film blog caretakered by far more knowledgeable geeks than I. Sadly, I think I've failed this one.
1) Favorite Vincent Price/American International Pictures release.
Oh holy hell. I haven't seen any of them. Most of the Vincent Price horror movies I know are from the 50s, like "The Fly," "House on Haunted Hill," and "House of Wax." My favorite role of his is Lionheart from "Theater of Blood," but that was a 70s picture. So I'm going to have to go with Egghead from the "Batman" TV series, because at that's pretty much the only role I know if his from the 60s, when he made the AIP films.
2) What horror classic (or non-classic) that has not yet been remade would you like to see upgraded for modern audiences?.
I'm surprised that nobody's ever properly remade "The Cabinet of Dr. Caligari." It seems to have inspired or heavily influenced a bunch of different media, but no remakes. Hmmm.
3) Jonathan Frid or Thayer David?
This is first of several "Dark Shadows" questions that will make me rue not being alive during the 60s.
4) Name the one horror movie you need to see that has so far eluded you.
See questions #1, #13, #18, and #29. And "Re-Animator."
5) Favorite film director most closely associated with the horror genre.
It's a toss-up between David Cronenberg and Guillermo Del Toro. Cronenberg's the better director, I think, but Del Toro's much more fun, and better versed in horror standbys like vampires ("Cronos," "Blade 2"), ghosts ("The Devil's Backbone") demonspawn ("Hellboy"), giant bugs ("Mimic"), and good old fairy-tale monsters ("Pan's Labyrinth").
6) Ingrid Pitt or Barbara Steele?
Barbara Steele. Slightly more familiar with her through some of her non-horror roles.
7) Favorite 50’s sci-fi/horror creature.
Godzilla! King of all monsters!
8) Favorite/best sequel to an established horror classic.
"Bride of Frankenstein." I think "Evil Dead 2" is up there, but it just doesn't have anything as iconic as the sight of Elsa Lanchester making her grand entrance as The Bride. And Dr. Pretorious! Remember him with the homunculi? He totally should have gotten his own movies.
9) Name a sequel in a horror series which clearly signaled that the once-vital franchise had run out of gas.
"Treehouse of Horror XI," specifically the final segment where dolphins take over the Earth. I think this was the point where the "Simpsons" writers ran out of horror ideas and just started lobbing alternate universe stories at us.
10) John Carradine or Lon Chaney Jr.?
Chaney.
11) What was the last horror movie you saw in a theater? On DVD or Blu-ray?
The last one in a theater was "Season of the Witch" back in January. I know, I know, but Nicholas Cage! And Ron Perlman! The last one by rental was "Mystery of the Wax Museum," the Michael Curtiz film that "House of Wax" was a remake of. Good movie. Liked the Fay Wray character way more than her counterpart in the remake.
12) Best foreign-language fiend/monster.
Most monsters don't exactly speak in the first place. Fiends are easier - Klaus Kinski.
13) Favorite Mario Bava movie.
Resisting the urge to bury my head in the sand. Haven't seen any of these either.
14) Favorite horror actor and actress.
For actor, Lon Chaney Sr. For actress, Sigourney Weaver, narrowly beating out Jamie Lee Curtis.
15) Name a great horror director’s least effective movie.
I always thought Cronenberg's "The Brood" was awful. I don't know whose idea it was to dress up the demonspawn kids in pastel jammies, but I ended up laughing my way through most of the last act because if it.
16) Grayson Hall or Joan Bennett?
Another "Dark Shadows" question, another reminder that I'm not that old. Yet.
17) When did you realize that you were a fan of the horror genre? And if you’re not, when did you realize you weren’t?
Saw "Poltergeist" as a kid and loved it. That was the first time I connected with any kind of horror movie, when I realized they could be fantastic and inventive and full of fun things to look at, instead of just screaming and running and dim lighting. I still like monster and supernatural films much more than the slashers.
18) Favorite Bert I. Gordon (B.I.G.) movie.
Do half-remembered "Mystery Science Theater 3000" episodes featuring his stuff count? No? Didn't think so.
19) Name an obscure horror favorite that you wish more people knew about.
Neil Jordan's "The Company of Wolves." Best werewolf movie ever made, bar none.
20) The Human Centipede-- yes or no?
I'll watch it, but do I have to pay attention to it?
21) And while we’re in the neighborhood, is there a horror film you can think of that you felt “went too far”?
I try to stay away from the ones that I think are probably going to go too far.
22) Name a film that is technically outside the horror genre that you might still feel comfortable describing as a horror film.
Dalton Trumbo's "Johnny Got His Gun."
23) Lara Parker or Kathryn Leigh Scott?
Again with the "Dark Shadows." This is starting to rival the BNAT13 application's obsession with "Teen Wolf."
24) If you’re a horror fan, at some point in your past your dad, grandmother, teacher or some other disgusted figure of authority probably wagged her/his finger at you and said, “Why do you insist on reading/watching all this morbid monster/horror junk?” How did you reply? And if that reply fell short somehow, how would you have liked to have replied?
I was the scaredy cat of the family, actually. But I do remember one evening when my mother was trying to get my brother and I to stop watching "Chopping Mall" (runamok mall security robots decapitate hapless teenagers) and go to bed. I told her it was very important to see how they defeated the bad robots so we'd know what to do when they came after us. I found horror movies very educational on the subject of self-defense tactics. I mean, you never know, right?
25) Name the critic or Web site you most enjoy reading on the subject of the horror genre.
Shoutout to Scott E. Weinberg, the most active horror-loving guy on my Twitter feed by far.
26) Most frightening image you’ve ever taken away from a horror movie.
The head-spinning in "The Exorcist." Saw it with the right crowd at the right time that went ballistic when it happened on screen. I've never forgotten the impact of Regan on that audience.
27) Your favorite memory associated with watching a horror movie.
Being home alone in a darkened house, watching "The Shining" and quietly freaking out for hours, but unwilling to move an inch away from the TV set.
28) What would you say is the most important/significant horror movie of the past 20 years (1992-2012)? Why?
Well there's "Scream" for the 90s irony, "Saw" for sparking its own subgenre of of extreme torture film, or "The Ring," for unleashing J-horror upon us. I'm going with "The Blair Witch Project," for popularizing the microbudget found-footage horror film, which is still regularly cleaning up in theaters with titles like "Paranormal Activity."
29) Favorite Dr. Phibes curse (from either film).
I want to see these films so I don't want to spoil them for myself by Googling. I'll take a rain check.
30) You are programming an all-night Halloween horror-thon for your favorite old movie palace. What five movies make up your schedule?
80s horror revival night! "Poltergeist," "The Shining," "The Fly," "Beetlejuice," and "The Thing!"
---
1) Favorite Vincent Price/American International Pictures release.
Oh holy hell. I haven't seen any of them. Most of the Vincent Price horror movies I know are from the 50s, like "The Fly," "House on Haunted Hill," and "House of Wax." My favorite role of his is Lionheart from "Theater of Blood," but that was a 70s picture. So I'm going to have to go with Egghead from the "Batman" TV series, because at that's pretty much the only role I know if his from the 60s, when he made the AIP films.
2) What horror classic (or non-classic) that has not yet been remade would you like to see upgraded for modern audiences?.
I'm surprised that nobody's ever properly remade "The Cabinet of Dr. Caligari." It seems to have inspired or heavily influenced a bunch of different media, but no remakes. Hmmm.
3) Jonathan Frid or Thayer David?
This is first of several "Dark Shadows" questions that will make me rue not being alive during the 60s.
4) Name the one horror movie you need to see that has so far eluded you.
See questions #1, #13, #18, and #29. And "Re-Animator."
5) Favorite film director most closely associated with the horror genre.
It's a toss-up between David Cronenberg and Guillermo Del Toro. Cronenberg's the better director, I think, but Del Toro's much more fun, and better versed in horror standbys like vampires ("Cronos," "Blade 2"), ghosts ("The Devil's Backbone") demonspawn ("Hellboy"), giant bugs ("Mimic"), and good old fairy-tale monsters ("Pan's Labyrinth").
6) Ingrid Pitt or Barbara Steele?
Barbara Steele. Slightly more familiar with her through some of her non-horror roles.
7) Favorite 50’s sci-fi/horror creature.
Godzilla! King of all monsters!
8) Favorite/best sequel to an established horror classic.
"Bride of Frankenstein." I think "Evil Dead 2" is up there, but it just doesn't have anything as iconic as the sight of Elsa Lanchester making her grand entrance as The Bride. And Dr. Pretorious! Remember him with the homunculi? He totally should have gotten his own movies.
9) Name a sequel in a horror series which clearly signaled that the once-vital franchise had run out of gas.
"Treehouse of Horror XI," specifically the final segment where dolphins take over the Earth. I think this was the point where the "Simpsons" writers ran out of horror ideas and just started lobbing alternate universe stories at us.
10) John Carradine or Lon Chaney Jr.?
Chaney.
11) What was the last horror movie you saw in a theater? On DVD or Blu-ray?
The last one in a theater was "Season of the Witch" back in January. I know, I know, but Nicholas Cage! And Ron Perlman! The last one by rental was "Mystery of the Wax Museum," the Michael Curtiz film that "House of Wax" was a remake of. Good movie. Liked the Fay Wray character way more than her counterpart in the remake.
12) Best foreign-language fiend/monster.
Most monsters don't exactly speak in the first place. Fiends are easier - Klaus Kinski.
13) Favorite Mario Bava movie.
Resisting the urge to bury my head in the sand. Haven't seen any of these either.
14) Favorite horror actor and actress.
For actor, Lon Chaney Sr. For actress, Sigourney Weaver, narrowly beating out Jamie Lee Curtis.
15) Name a great horror director’s least effective movie.
I always thought Cronenberg's "The Brood" was awful. I don't know whose idea it was to dress up the demonspawn kids in pastel jammies, but I ended up laughing my way through most of the last act because if it.
16) Grayson Hall or Joan Bennett?
Another "Dark Shadows" question, another reminder that I'm not that old. Yet.
17) When did you realize that you were a fan of the horror genre? And if you’re not, when did you realize you weren’t?
Saw "Poltergeist" as a kid and loved it. That was the first time I connected with any kind of horror movie, when I realized they could be fantastic and inventive and full of fun things to look at, instead of just screaming and running and dim lighting. I still like monster and supernatural films much more than the slashers.
18) Favorite Bert I. Gordon (B.I.G.) movie.
Do half-remembered "Mystery Science Theater 3000" episodes featuring his stuff count? No? Didn't think so.
19) Name an obscure horror favorite that you wish more people knew about.
Neil Jordan's "The Company of Wolves." Best werewolf movie ever made, bar none.
20) The Human Centipede-- yes or no?
I'll watch it, but do I have to pay attention to it?
21) And while we’re in the neighborhood, is there a horror film you can think of that you felt “went too far”?
I try to stay away from the ones that I think are probably going to go too far.
22) Name a film that is technically outside the horror genre that you might still feel comfortable describing as a horror film.
Dalton Trumbo's "Johnny Got His Gun."
23) Lara Parker or Kathryn Leigh Scott?
Again with the "Dark Shadows." This is starting to rival the BNAT13 application's obsession with "Teen Wolf."
24) If you’re a horror fan, at some point in your past your dad, grandmother, teacher or some other disgusted figure of authority probably wagged her/his finger at you and said, “Why do you insist on reading/watching all this morbid monster/horror junk?” How did you reply? And if that reply fell short somehow, how would you have liked to have replied?
I was the scaredy cat of the family, actually. But I do remember one evening when my mother was trying to get my brother and I to stop watching "Chopping Mall" (runamok mall security robots decapitate hapless teenagers) and go to bed. I told her it was very important to see how they defeated the bad robots so we'd know what to do when they came after us. I found horror movies very educational on the subject of self-defense tactics. I mean, you never know, right?
25) Name the critic or Web site you most enjoy reading on the subject of the horror genre.
Shoutout to Scott E. Weinberg, the most active horror-loving guy on my Twitter feed by far.
26) Most frightening image you’ve ever taken away from a horror movie.
The head-spinning in "The Exorcist." Saw it with the right crowd at the right time that went ballistic when it happened on screen. I've never forgotten the impact of Regan on that audience.
27) Your favorite memory associated with watching a horror movie.
Being home alone in a darkened house, watching "The Shining" and quietly freaking out for hours, but unwilling to move an inch away from the TV set.
28) What would you say is the most important/significant horror movie of the past 20 years (1992-2012)? Why?
Well there's "Scream" for the 90s irony, "Saw" for sparking its own subgenre of of extreme torture film, or "The Ring," for unleashing J-horror upon us. I'm going with "The Blair Witch Project," for popularizing the microbudget found-footage horror film, which is still regularly cleaning up in theaters with titles like "Paranormal Activity."
29) Favorite Dr. Phibes curse (from either film).
I want to see these films so I don't want to spoil them for myself by Googling. I'll take a rain check.
30) You are programming an all-night Halloween horror-thon for your favorite old movie palace. What five movies make up your schedule?
80s horror revival night! "Poltergeist," "The Shining," "The Fly," "Beetlejuice," and "The Thing!"
---
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
