Wednesday, September 30, 2015
The Pharonic Fantasy Theatre (2010-2015)
Welcome, internet traveler to The Pharonic Fantasy Theatre. This is a defunct blog in which you can peruse some opinions on movies, TV shows and such for your pleasure (or not). Seeing as how this is a dead blog any comments left will not be replied to. Have fun!
Out With A Bang
This is my final review, the last hurrah. This has been an interesting exercise in writing and ego but now I must go. Let us come full circle and end The Pharonic Fantasy Theatre with a review of an anime, and not just any anime but an anime film I had been waiting to see for ten years before it was finally released on DVD in the US for the first time at the beginning of the month. Will it live up to my expectations and hopes? Let's find out as I review
Yup, as you can see from the list of directors above, this is another anthology film involving Akira director Katsuhiro Otomo. You know the drill; time to go short by short.
Opening: This is a clever little bit to introduce the main title, seen above. I'm not going to give away what happens, you'll have to see it to believe it. It is cute, hilarious and deadly frightening all at the same time. Kudos!
Franken's Gears: A mad scientist tries to create life Franken-style, only with a ROBOT. Goes as well as you'd expect. This is one with no dialogue (the opening technically had dialogue but it was all in gibberish) which works fine (quite a few of the short films in Robot Carnival have little or no dialogue actually, which I can see made it ideal for importation to the West and explains its subsequent popularity on TV over here in the early 90s). This short is merely OK, nothing special but nothing putrid either.
Deprive: This is standard 80s anime fare, which is not standard for this movie. It involves a loyal robot rescuing a girl from alien invaders but the plot is meaningless as you are supposed to marvel at the action on display. I have seen enough of this type of stuff that all this short provoked from me was a ho-hum reaction. Easily the weakest segment of the film.
Presence: An inventor creates a robot girl but destroys her when she actually starts to think for herself. Years later his guilt catches up with him. Everyone else seems to love this one (it's also the longest part of the movie). I don't. The story itself is merely okay but the character designs are creepy, the animation is fluid but unnatural (something I forgot to mention by the way: most of the animation in Robot Carnival is done at a full 24 fps, which is very rare in anime) and the protagonist is not sympathetic at all. Oh well.
Star Light Angel: A girl goes to an amusement park, gets her heart broken then has an encounter with a romantic robot. This one is the opposite, people seem to hate this one the most but I actually kinda like it. It looks like an anime music video; all it needs to complete it is a J-Pop song.
Cloud: The *artsiest* short here. It's a robot boy walking in front of changing cloud formations. That's it. And yet, it becomes more than that. Subtle, meditative and beautiful, this is what anime should aspire to be every once in a while.
A Tale Of Two Robots: This is my personal favorite. Two robots, one Japanese and one European duke it out in Tokyo. Because it is the 19th Century however the results are hilarious. This one comes off as both a parody of WWII Japanese propaganda and of giant robot battles in general. It also has (in the Japanese version) the European antagonist speaking his lines in English and it alone is worth the price of admission.
Nightmare: Imagine Fantasia's "Night On Bald Mountain", only in Tokyo and with robots. It's okay but the influence is obvious. Come on, guys.
Closing: Like the beginning also cute, funny and frightening. A perfect way to end this movie.
In the end as with all anthology movies Robot Carnival is a mixed bag. Overall I would say that it is an above average effort, thanks to a few really good shorts and a consistently great level of animation. I'm glad I got it even though it wasn't the revelatory experience I was hoping for (it's not as good as Labrynth Tales or Memories). It was a fun watch. And even the failures are interesting failures (most of the time anyway). This movie represents a time back in the eighties when Japanese animators would actually experiment with stuff like this. Those days are mostly gone, although Otomo did release his newest anthology movie Short Peace only a couple of years ago and it is pretty good so there is still hope.
Well, I must now sign off and say adieu (or is it sayonara?). It has been an interesting six years, and I hope in another six I will be doing something more productive than writing movie reviews on the internet. But who knows? The future is always fluid but for now, for right now for The Pharonic Fantasy Theatre this is the
1987
Directors:
Katsuhiro Otomo
Atsuko Fukushima
Koji Morimoto
Hidetoshi Omori
Yasuomi Umetsu
Hiroyuki Kitazume
Mao Lamdo
Hiroyuki Kitakubo
Takashi Nakamura
Yup, as you can see from the list of directors above, this is another anthology film involving Akira director Katsuhiro Otomo. You know the drill; time to go short by short.
Opening: This is a clever little bit to introduce the main title, seen above. I'm not going to give away what happens, you'll have to see it to believe it. It is cute, hilarious and deadly frightening all at the same time. Kudos!
Cloud: The *artsiest* short here. It's a robot boy walking in front of changing cloud formations. That's it. And yet, it becomes more than that. Subtle, meditative and beautiful, this is what anime should aspire to be every once in a while.
Nightmare: Imagine Fantasia's "Night On Bald Mountain", only in Tokyo and with robots. It's okay but the influence is obvious. Come on, guys.Closing: Like the beginning also cute, funny and frightening. A perfect way to end this movie.
In the end as with all anthology movies Robot Carnival is a mixed bag. Overall I would say that it is an above average effort, thanks to a few really good shorts and a consistently great level of animation. I'm glad I got it even though it wasn't the revelatory experience I was hoping for (it's not as good as Labrynth Tales or Memories). It was a fun watch. And even the failures are interesting failures (most of the time anyway). This movie represents a time back in the eighties when Japanese animators would actually experiment with stuff like this. Those days are mostly gone, although Otomo did release his newest anthology movie Short Peace only a couple of years ago and it is pretty good so there is still hope.
Well, I must now sign off and say adieu (or is it sayonara?). It has been an interesting six years, and I hope in another six I will be doing something more productive than writing movie reviews on the internet. But who knows? The future is always fluid but for now, for right now for The Pharonic Fantasy Theatre this is the
Tuesday, September 29, 2015
Pain, Pain, Go Away
My personal life continues to deteriorate apace, with the universe offering promising hope and then snatching it away. The struggle is eternal. Symbolically, right now it is raining outside so hard that the frogs are trying to get inside. I kid you not.
Anywho.
This is the second to the last substantial post I am doing for this blog. Not only must I focus on other things, I've just gotten tired of writing about mere entertainment. I am weary.
Before I go though I figured I would do one more crappy list, and not a usual one. Instead of doing my Favorite Films Of All Time, I figured I'd give you two: my Most Overrated and Most Underrated Films Of All Time. And since I have always believed in getting the negative out of the way first, I'll start with the former. Please note that this does not mean that I necessarily *hate* the films in question (although a good amount of the time I do), I just feel that their reputation is undeserved.
The Most Overrated Films Of All Time:
Gone With The Wind (1939) - I *DO* hate this movie. Not only is it extremely racist and an offensive portrayal of the Old South (and keep in mind that this is coming from a white southerner), the characters are all really, really annoying and the melodrama gets old really, really fast. Why people idolize this film or the people in it as "classic" is beyond me.
Citizen Kane (1940) - This one is just overrated, and it has to be, being proclaimed by many as THE GREATEST FILM EVER MADE. Any film getting tagged with that moniker has to be at least a little overrated. Everyone oohs and ahhs over the techniques that Orson Welles employed in this, but German directors such as Friz Lang had been doing it a decade before.
The Godfather, Part II (1974) - This one is just a mess, and nowhere near as good as the original. This is the most overrated sequel of all time, actually. Splitting the film between two stories should have been a cool gimmick but just doesn't work - Coppola should have just stuck to making a prequel, as Michael's story just isn't as interesting as Vito's. Watching the young Corleone fall into evil in the first film is more dramatically captivating than watching him simply be evil in the second. And Diane Keaton's line "I HAD AN ABORTION!!!!" is so overracted ("OSCAR CLIP. OSCAR CLIP. OSCAR CLIP) that I laughed the first time I heard it. DRAMA!!
The Star Wars Series (1977-1983) - Prepare for the flamers to which I say "HA! This blog is ending soon anyway, motherfuckers! Besides, maybe I can actually get some readers before it dies!" And yes, I know it is an entire series and not one film but I had to get this off my chest. This series of space fantasy films (they are *not* science fiction) are not awful per se but neither are they great cinema... or even *fun* cinema for that matter. Give me The Thief Of Bagdad (either the 1924 or 1940 version) for pure wonder or Conan The Barbarian for pure adventure over this stuff any day. The original is just Flash Gordon meets The Hidden Fortress with bad dialogue. The Empire Strikes Back is better but tries to work in ham-handed "philosophy" along with plotholes so big that if you think about them they'll make you go mad (ex: with it's hyperdrive out, how is the Millennium Falcon able to travel from Hoth to Bespin on presumably sublight speed? It should takes years and years to get from one star system to another and yet at most the story of the film takes a few months. See why I said that these are not sci-fi?). Return of the Jedi is a commercial letdown with teddy bears and an ending so perfunctory that it's laughable. Acting in all three is abysmal to merely decent with dialogue that will make you shudder. And all of this wouldn't bother me so much except for the fact that these are some of the most revered movies of all time. Fans of these movies have basically made a religion out of them. If you admit that you don't like them prepare to be burned at the stake for heresy. Well, I guess I'm gonna burn, baby, burn because I think that they are ridiculous. And before you say "you've lost all sense of wonder and fun from your childhood!", a) I am an adult now and have moved on from most of my childish tastes and b) I devoted an entire month of this blog to a series of movies where men in rubber lizard costumes beat the shit out of each other so there. Yes, I think Godzilla is more awesome than Star Wars. Flame away.
Indiana Jones and the Last Crusade (1989) - Speaking of George Lucas.... People love this one. Me not so much. Other than Sean Connery this entry in the franchise doesn't have much going for it in the originality department. Indy fights the Nazis *again*. He searches for a biblical artifact *again*. He teams up with Sallah *again* (and don't get me wrong, I like Sallah). This combined with the fact that they made Marcus a bumbling moron and that John Williams lays on the syrup too thick in his score means that I actually prefer Temple of Doom to this one. Yeah, I just went there.
Star Trek: First Contact (1996) - See? I can do Star Trek too (but not Star Trek II... badum ching!). A lot of Trekkies love this one but to me it's just IV with ACTION instead of comedy. You have a threat in the future, the Enterprise crew has to travel to the past to fix it and all sorts of hijinks ensue with the denizens of the time period. But instead of witty banter with San Francisco marine biologists you have Captain Picard gunning down Borg with a tommy gun whilst screaming like Sam Kinison. And that's something that has bothered me about this movie since I was kid by the way: didn't Picard get over his hatred of the Borg and his desire for vengeance back in the season 5 TNG episode "I, Borg"? I know. NERD!
The Avengers (2012) - Flame On! Sorry, wrong Marvel comic. But seriously, more flames for me! The sad fact is that Joss Whedon is simply not a good director. Serenity sucked (and I would have included that movie on this list except that even a good number of Firefly fans didn't like that movie) and I have never warmed up to any of his TV shows. He can write witty dialogue but that's about it. Other than that (and some of the acting performances) this is just another superhero movie with more plotholes and contrivances than you can shake a (soul-stealing) stick at.
Interstellar (2014) - Zing! Knew I would do it!
And now on a more positive note:
The Most Underrated Films Of All Time:
All Monsters Attack (1969) - I know I said this back in 2013 for my review of it, but this movie was made for little kids. Lay off, Godzilla fans.
Moonraker (1979) - Listening to Bond fans you would think that this is called Moonraper. Come on, it's a Roger Moore Bond film, what did you expect? Turn your brain off and enjoy the ride.
Conan The Destroyer (1984) - This *is* an inferior follow up to the awesome Conan The Barbarian but it's not as bad as people would have you believe. Some of the characters and unorthodox casting are interesting to watch (Grace Jones! Wilt Chamberlain!) and there's less sex and violence than the first but this is a decent little fantasy film from the eighties. As long as you don't expect the (occasional) brilliance of its predecessor you will be alright.
Star Trek V: The Final Frontier (1989) - This one is like The Motion Picture (which I covered a while ago) in that people like to crap all over it. Could it have been better? Hell yeah. But it's still fun to watch and for all its flaws you can sense the potential in it. William Shatner is actually not that bad of a director, he should try it again sometime (stop laughing at me). Oh, and the Jerry Goldsmith score rocks. Of course.
The Star Wars Prequels (1999 - 2005) - No, these are not good movies. They have nonsensical stories and wooden acting. Buy you know what? They are not that much worse than their predecessors (let a whole new round of flaming commence!). If the kids like 'em, let them like 'em. You should be doing something to contribute positively to the human race anyway instead of telling youngsters why their entertainment sucks.
Indiana Jones and The Kingdom Of The Crystal Skull (2008) - Again, people take this shit waaaaaay too seriously. It's not that bad. I'm not even mad with the whole "nuking the fridge" thing or the space aliens. You have to laugh, because the people who had no problem with the Ark of the Covenant burning peoples' faces off and an evil cultist manually ripping hearts from chests and the Cup of Christ being able to heal bullet wounds suddenly find nuked fridges and space aliens to be "unrealistic". These are fantasy films for a reason, people. The only thing I *hate* is the fact that Shia LeBeouf is in it with predictable results (yuck).
Well, there you go. The rain has stopped in the time taken to write this. Hopefully my metaphorical rain will leave soon too. But even if it doesn't at least I can still count on one thing: some things in this life are going to be overrated by people, and some things underrated. The trick is to find what works for you and to disregard everyone else when it comes to your entertainment.
Anywho.
This is the second to the last substantial post I am doing for this blog. Not only must I focus on other things, I've just gotten tired of writing about mere entertainment. I am weary.
Before I go though I figured I would do one more crappy list, and not a usual one. Instead of doing my Favorite Films Of All Time, I figured I'd give you two: my Most Overrated and Most Underrated Films Of All Time. And since I have always believed in getting the negative out of the way first, I'll start with the former. Please note that this does not mean that I necessarily *hate* the films in question (although a good amount of the time I do), I just feel that their reputation is undeserved.
The Most Overrated Films Of All Time:
Gone With The Wind (1939) - I *DO* hate this movie. Not only is it extremely racist and an offensive portrayal of the Old South (and keep in mind that this is coming from a white southerner), the characters are all really, really annoying and the melodrama gets old really, really fast. Why people idolize this film or the people in it as "classic" is beyond me.
Citizen Kane (1940) - This one is just overrated, and it has to be, being proclaimed by many as THE GREATEST FILM EVER MADE. Any film getting tagged with that moniker has to be at least a little overrated. Everyone oohs and ahhs over the techniques that Orson Welles employed in this, but German directors such as Friz Lang had been doing it a decade before.
The Godfather, Part II (1974) - This one is just a mess, and nowhere near as good as the original. This is the most overrated sequel of all time, actually. Splitting the film between two stories should have been a cool gimmick but just doesn't work - Coppola should have just stuck to making a prequel, as Michael's story just isn't as interesting as Vito's. Watching the young Corleone fall into evil in the first film is more dramatically captivating than watching him simply be evil in the second. And Diane Keaton's line "I HAD AN ABORTION!!!!" is so overracted ("OSCAR CLIP. OSCAR CLIP. OSCAR CLIP) that I laughed the first time I heard it. DRAMA!!
The Star Wars Series (1977-1983) - Prepare for the flamers to which I say "HA! This blog is ending soon anyway, motherfuckers! Besides, maybe I can actually get some readers before it dies!" And yes, I know it is an entire series and not one film but I had to get this off my chest. This series of space fantasy films (they are *not* science fiction) are not awful per se but neither are they great cinema... or even *fun* cinema for that matter. Give me The Thief Of Bagdad (either the 1924 or 1940 version) for pure wonder or Conan The Barbarian for pure adventure over this stuff any day. The original is just Flash Gordon meets The Hidden Fortress with bad dialogue. The Empire Strikes Back is better but tries to work in ham-handed "philosophy" along with plotholes so big that if you think about them they'll make you go mad (ex: with it's hyperdrive out, how is the Millennium Falcon able to travel from Hoth to Bespin on presumably sublight speed? It should takes years and years to get from one star system to another and yet at most the story of the film takes a few months. See why I said that these are not sci-fi?). Return of the Jedi is a commercial letdown with teddy bears and an ending so perfunctory that it's laughable. Acting in all three is abysmal to merely decent with dialogue that will make you shudder. And all of this wouldn't bother me so much except for the fact that these are some of the most revered movies of all time. Fans of these movies have basically made a religion out of them. If you admit that you don't like them prepare to be burned at the stake for heresy. Well, I guess I'm gonna burn, baby, burn because I think that they are ridiculous. And before you say "you've lost all sense of wonder and fun from your childhood!", a) I am an adult now and have moved on from most of my childish tastes and b) I devoted an entire month of this blog to a series of movies where men in rubber lizard costumes beat the shit out of each other so there. Yes, I think Godzilla is more awesome than Star Wars. Flame away.
Indiana Jones and the Last Crusade (1989) - Speaking of George Lucas.... People love this one. Me not so much. Other than Sean Connery this entry in the franchise doesn't have much going for it in the originality department. Indy fights the Nazis *again*. He searches for a biblical artifact *again*. He teams up with Sallah *again* (and don't get me wrong, I like Sallah). This combined with the fact that they made Marcus a bumbling moron and that John Williams lays on the syrup too thick in his score means that I actually prefer Temple of Doom to this one. Yeah, I just went there.
Star Trek: First Contact (1996) - See? I can do Star Trek too (but not Star Trek II... badum ching!). A lot of Trekkies love this one but to me it's just IV with ACTION instead of comedy. You have a threat in the future, the Enterprise crew has to travel to the past to fix it and all sorts of hijinks ensue with the denizens of the time period. But instead of witty banter with San Francisco marine biologists you have Captain Picard gunning down Borg with a tommy gun whilst screaming like Sam Kinison. And that's something that has bothered me about this movie since I was kid by the way: didn't Picard get over his hatred of the Borg and his desire for vengeance back in the season 5 TNG episode "I, Borg"? I know. NERD!
The Avengers (2012) - Flame On! Sorry, wrong Marvel comic. But seriously, more flames for me! The sad fact is that Joss Whedon is simply not a good director. Serenity sucked (and I would have included that movie on this list except that even a good number of Firefly fans didn't like that movie) and I have never warmed up to any of his TV shows. He can write witty dialogue but that's about it. Other than that (and some of the acting performances) this is just another superhero movie with more plotholes and contrivances than you can shake a (soul-stealing) stick at.
Interstellar (2014) - Zing! Knew I would do it!
And now on a more positive note:
The Most Underrated Films Of All Time:
All Monsters Attack (1969) - I know I said this back in 2013 for my review of it, but this movie was made for little kids. Lay off, Godzilla fans.
Moonraker (1979) - Listening to Bond fans you would think that this is called Moonraper. Come on, it's a Roger Moore Bond film, what did you expect? Turn your brain off and enjoy the ride.
Conan The Destroyer (1984) - This *is* an inferior follow up to the awesome Conan The Barbarian but it's not as bad as people would have you believe. Some of the characters and unorthodox casting are interesting to watch (Grace Jones! Wilt Chamberlain!) and there's less sex and violence than the first but this is a decent little fantasy film from the eighties. As long as you don't expect the (occasional) brilliance of its predecessor you will be alright.
Star Trek V: The Final Frontier (1989) - This one is like The Motion Picture (which I covered a while ago) in that people like to crap all over it. Could it have been better? Hell yeah. But it's still fun to watch and for all its flaws you can sense the potential in it. William Shatner is actually not that bad of a director, he should try it again sometime (stop laughing at me). Oh, and the Jerry Goldsmith score rocks. Of course.
The Star Wars Prequels (1999 - 2005) - No, these are not good movies. They have nonsensical stories and wooden acting. Buy you know what? They are not that much worse than their predecessors (let a whole new round of flaming commence!). If the kids like 'em, let them like 'em. You should be doing something to contribute positively to the human race anyway instead of telling youngsters why their entertainment sucks.
Indiana Jones and The Kingdom Of The Crystal Skull (2008) - Again, people take this shit waaaaaay too seriously. It's not that bad. I'm not even mad with the whole "nuking the fridge" thing or the space aliens. You have to laugh, because the people who had no problem with the Ark of the Covenant burning peoples' faces off and an evil cultist manually ripping hearts from chests and the Cup of Christ being able to heal bullet wounds suddenly find nuked fridges and space aliens to be "unrealistic". These are fantasy films for a reason, people. The only thing I *hate* is the fact that Shia LeBeouf is in it with predictable results (yuck).
Well, there you go. The rain has stopped in the time taken to write this. Hopefully my metaphorical rain will leave soon too. But even if it doesn't at least I can still count on one thing: some things in this life are going to be overrated by people, and some things underrated. The trick is to find what works for you and to disregard everyone else when it comes to your entertainment.
Monday, August 31, 2015
Finish Line Ahead
Close to the end now. August has proven an even crappier month personally than July, so these posts have been short and to the point. With my previous diatribe against Blu-Ray I started thinking: not that my entertainment is *THAT* important to me anymore (thus the upcoming end of this blog) but what is important to me when it comes to the media I watch my movies and shows on? Obviously DRM is important, thus DVD over Blu-Ray, but what about my DVDs? What is important when considering to buy or even keep certain things on DVD? I am assuming of course that I like whatever it is I am considering.
Well, my wants have changed over the years. Back when I first started this blog, for example, extras were very important to me. Given the choice between a bare-bones edition DVD and a Special Ultra Limited Edition with 50 making of features and an audio commentary I was never going to listen to, I was going to choose the amped up version every time. Nowadays I don't really need that for every movie I own, in fact I only need that for a very small percentage of the stuff I have because obsessing on entertainment and how it's made is now less important to me. I recently re-bought some of my favorite anime movies because the picture quality was supposed to be better than the versions I already had. Also, when it came to Wings of Honneamise and the Patlabor movies they were supposed to take up less space than the behemoth boxset versions I had on my shelves. Well, the picture quality on the two Patlabor films was much better than on the old deluxe boxsets, while Honneamise looked exactly the same - but still took up less space, thus I kept it over the old one. The two huge Patlabor boxsets I had were superior to the new release in every other way - they had theatrical trailers and documentaries as bonuses on the discs, they had super-informative booklets and even the complete storyboards for both movies. But in the end the picture quality was vastly superior on the new DVDs, and I refuse to own two versions of the exact same movie (not counting Director's Cuts, etc), so I weighed my options and chose to get rid of my once beloved Patlabor boxsets. Why? Because picture quality trumps everything else. All the extras are just icing on the cake, and the cake itself is more important to me anymore. I also repurchased Vampire Hunter D (which I knew would have vastly superior picture quality seeing as how the quality on the old 2000 DVD was really poor - I was right) and again, the new release does not have as many bonus features but video quality is what counts the most. A lot of VHD fans are up in arms about the new DVD having a new English dub rather than the old Streamline dub, but I have always watched it in Japanese anyway so I don't care. Yes, it would have been nice to have both dubs as an option but again picture quality trumps all.
Now that I have my priorities straight when it comes to buying DVDs I feel that it easier to purchase movies and TV shows than in the past. Life is all about priorities. If you can learn that you'll be golden, instead of wasting time on a crappy movie blog that nobody reads.
Well, my wants have changed over the years. Back when I first started this blog, for example, extras were very important to me. Given the choice between a bare-bones edition DVD and a Special Ultra Limited Edition with 50 making of features and an audio commentary I was never going to listen to, I was going to choose the amped up version every time. Nowadays I don't really need that for every movie I own, in fact I only need that for a very small percentage of the stuff I have because obsessing on entertainment and how it's made is now less important to me. I recently re-bought some of my favorite anime movies because the picture quality was supposed to be better than the versions I already had. Also, when it came to Wings of Honneamise and the Patlabor movies they were supposed to take up less space than the behemoth boxset versions I had on my shelves. Well, the picture quality on the two Patlabor films was much better than on the old deluxe boxsets, while Honneamise looked exactly the same - but still took up less space, thus I kept it over the old one. The two huge Patlabor boxsets I had were superior to the new release in every other way - they had theatrical trailers and documentaries as bonuses on the discs, they had super-informative booklets and even the complete storyboards for both movies. But in the end the picture quality was vastly superior on the new DVDs, and I refuse to own two versions of the exact same movie (not counting Director's Cuts, etc), so I weighed my options and chose to get rid of my once beloved Patlabor boxsets. Why? Because picture quality trumps everything else. All the extras are just icing on the cake, and the cake itself is more important to me anymore. I also repurchased Vampire Hunter D (which I knew would have vastly superior picture quality seeing as how the quality on the old 2000 DVD was really poor - I was right) and again, the new release does not have as many bonus features but video quality is what counts the most. A lot of VHD fans are up in arms about the new DVD having a new English dub rather than the old Streamline dub, but I have always watched it in Japanese anyway so I don't care. Yes, it would have been nice to have both dubs as an option but again picture quality trumps all.
Now that I have my priorities straight when it comes to buying DVDs I feel that it easier to purchase movies and TV shows than in the past. Life is all about priorities. If you can learn that you'll be golden, instead of wasting time on a crappy movie blog that nobody reads.
Friday, August 28, 2015
Stooges Eternal - A Quick Musing
Can something be both timeless and dated? One would seem to contradict the other, right? I started wondering this whilst watching a bunch of Three Stooges shorts lately (friendly advice by the way: when you are going through a shitty time watch the Three Stooges). See, the original Three Stooges shorts ran all the way from the 30s to the 50s and a lot of the stuff in there is going to be obviously dated. Beyond the obvious superficial differences between then and now (the cars, the fashions, the politics, no television in the thirties, etc) there are some things that are almost alien to the modern viewer. Many viewers today for example would wonder what the hell an "icebox" is and why Curly would have to haul a huge block of ice up three flights of steps to deliver it to one.
I know what an icebox is because I study history and it is actually one of the easier ones to figure out... even I however had to look up what a letterpress is (definition: Three Stooges torture implement).
But you know what? Even with all of the dated pop culture references and facets of everyday life no longer in existence - which fascinate me, actually, as a student of history - the Three Stooges are still timeless. Not just because physical comedy itself is timeless but because of the themes and common human experiences inherent in the Stooges' scenarios. The Stooges as doctors will always be funny and a little bit sad, because unfortunately incompetent physicians will always exist.
There will always be courts and trials so the Three Stooges goofing off in a murder trial and wrecking a court room will always be funny. The Stooges wrecking a snooty rich person's house will always be funny as long as there are rich people who look down on us proles... and it gets even funnier every time the economy takes a downturn. Speaking of which, the Stooges as homeless and/or down-on-their-luck guys will always be relevant because so many of us are either or both of those things. There will always be love, greed, hate and laughter.
We don't get to solve our problems by poking a dude in the eyes or completely demolishing someone's house, so we will always look up to the Stooges as well as down on them. Wish fulfillment is always timeless. Oh, and until the day we invent water pills and laser toilets, the Stooges being plumbers will be really relevant... and really, really funny.
So the answer to my query is yes, something can be both dated and timeless. The Three Stooges, The Odyssey, Jimi Hendrix, Star Trek... actually combining all those would make the most awesome show in existence. Someone needs to do a Homeric, Jimi Hendrix scored Stooge Trek.
Thursday, August 20, 2015
Feeling Blu
Last December I wrote that I got a Blu-Ray player for Christmas. Well, you may have noticed that I haven't reviewed any blu-ray releases on here, and there's a simple reason for that:
Blu-Ray sucks.
Oh, not in picture quality. The picture quality is awesome. So is the data capacity. No, the problem is summed up in one acronym: DRM. Digital Rights Management. Look, there's DRM on DVDs. Back when they first came out I railed about them because a) I thought it was all a plot by the entertainment companies to take our money by forcing us to upgrade our already existing VHS and LD collections (I was right, but at least DVDs have one million times the picture quality of VHS and are 50 times cheaper than Laserdiscs) and b)they had region encoding, which prevents people in one part of the world from buying discs from other parts of the world. I was right on that one too - the companies did it to prevent reverse importing from cheaper countries but in the process it means that a large number of foreign movies will never be legally released in the US. In fact it still pisses me off, but at least you *can* get a region-free DVD player if you look hard enough.
Blu-Ray is a hundred times worse. First, I can't even get screengrabs from the discs to put on this site, so that nixed any chance of me reviewing the original Star Trek series on here. Second, the player software NEEDS updates, or it won't even function at all. Not even to play a DVD. And I can't play BD's with Media Player Classic or any other free software. You have to buy one of two officially sanctioned players if you want to watch Blu-Ray discs on your PC, and you NEED to have an internet connection in order to update them, no matter if you don't have internet (still a possibility these days in some remote areas or if you can't afford it) or have spotty internet (which is more of a possibility).
In the end it's the increasing corporate control over everything. They NEED to control everything you see and hear - you are now in the Outer Limits. Personally I do not like being dictated to by the corporations how to entertain myself. I can watch my DVDs, even with their level of DRM - at least I can grab screenshots if I want or use a free player to play them. And you know, it's really sad because I *wanted* to like Blu-Ray, I had wanted a BR player for a long time... as I said the picture quality was tremendous. I enjoyed watching Star Trek on it but I can't use it anymore. I'm actually going to have to "downgrade" my Star Trek collection to DVD. Fortunately that is the only thing I got, so I didn't invest too much in this ultra-corporate-controlled format.
See, thinking positive!
Blu-Ray sucks.
Oh, not in picture quality. The picture quality is awesome. So is the data capacity. No, the problem is summed up in one acronym: DRM. Digital Rights Management. Look, there's DRM on DVDs. Back when they first came out I railed about them because a) I thought it was all a plot by the entertainment companies to take our money by forcing us to upgrade our already existing VHS and LD collections (I was right, but at least DVDs have one million times the picture quality of VHS and are 50 times cheaper than Laserdiscs) and b)they had region encoding, which prevents people in one part of the world from buying discs from other parts of the world. I was right on that one too - the companies did it to prevent reverse importing from cheaper countries but in the process it means that a large number of foreign movies will never be legally released in the US. In fact it still pisses me off, but at least you *can* get a region-free DVD player if you look hard enough.
Blu-Ray is a hundred times worse. First, I can't even get screengrabs from the discs to put on this site, so that nixed any chance of me reviewing the original Star Trek series on here. Second, the player software NEEDS updates, or it won't even function at all. Not even to play a DVD. And I can't play BD's with Media Player Classic or any other free software. You have to buy one of two officially sanctioned players if you want to watch Blu-Ray discs on your PC, and you NEED to have an internet connection in order to update them, no matter if you don't have internet (still a possibility these days in some remote areas or if you can't afford it) or have spotty internet (which is more of a possibility).
In the end it's the increasing corporate control over everything. They NEED to control everything you see and hear - you are now in the Outer Limits. Personally I do not like being dictated to by the corporations how to entertain myself. I can watch my DVDs, even with their level of DRM - at least I can grab screenshots if I want or use a free player to play them. And you know, it's really sad because I *wanted* to like Blu-Ray, I had wanted a BR player for a long time... as I said the picture quality was tremendous. I enjoyed watching Star Trek on it but I can't use it anymore. I'm actually going to have to "downgrade" my Star Trek collection to DVD. Fortunately that is the only thing I got, so I didn't invest too much in this ultra-corporate-controlled format.
See, thinking positive!
Tuesday, August 18, 2015
Spoiled Beefcake
I figured after watching Hercules In The Center Of The Earth that I would want some more Greek mythology action, so on a whim I picked up a cheap $2.95 copy of the 2000 miniseries Jason and the Argonauts at a thrift store - a title I had never seen before. Well, I'm glad I only paid 2.95 for it, I couldn't imagine paying full-boat MSRP back in the day, because this thing sucks.
I'm not going to spend much time on this. First, the good (there is actually some): Frank Langella and Derek Jacobi are decent. The guy doing Hercules is almost okay. I like the fact that Atalanta is in it (she is in some versions of the original myth). I like that a *few* things are closer to the original myths compared to the 1963 Harryhausen movie. Speaking of which, I like the fact that this version actually has an ending; the '63 version kinda leaves you hanging.
Now to the bad. The acting, with the previous exceptions, is atrociously awful. Keep in mind that the '63 version does not have the world's greatest thespianism, but the 2000 miniseries makes that one look like Shakespeare in comparison. Jason is wimpy. Medea is just creepy. Pelias (played by Dennis Hopper) is absolutely execrable. The minor roles are mediocre at best. The direction is cheesy. The music is lazy and just plays the same stupid theme over and over again (definitely nowhere near Bernard Hermann's Jason score). The story itself is drawn-out, and while a few things are true to the myths, other things just seemed to be pulled out of the writers' asses. The part about Hercules being a servant of Hera is the worst offender - in the original myths, she is his mortal enemy continually plaguing him with woe and misfortune. Look, I know that some shows or movies take a lot of liberties with the source material, but at least I know that Hercules: The Legendary Journeys or Disney's Hercules are total bullshit because they toss almost everything established out from the word go and don't even pretend to be accurate. They can actually be entertaining as a result. The problem with Jason 2000 is that it wants to have it both ways and thus can't decide what it wants to be. You can argue that the '63 classic isn't all that accurate either but a) it's still more accurate than the '00 version and b) it has a sense of wonder... and the MOST AWESOME SKELETON FIGHT EVER COMMITTED TO CELLULOID. The bottom line is that this version is not really worth seeing, just see the 1963 classic; it has its flaws but it is miles better. You know the drill about pictures.
I'm not going to spend much time on this. First, the good (there is actually some): Frank Langella and Derek Jacobi are decent. The guy doing Hercules is almost okay. I like the fact that Atalanta is in it (she is in some versions of the original myth). I like that a *few* things are closer to the original myths compared to the 1963 Harryhausen movie. Speaking of which, I like the fact that this version actually has an ending; the '63 version kinda leaves you hanging.
Now to the bad. The acting, with the previous exceptions, is atrociously awful. Keep in mind that the '63 version does not have the world's greatest thespianism, but the 2000 miniseries makes that one look like Shakespeare in comparison. Jason is wimpy. Medea is just creepy. Pelias (played by Dennis Hopper) is absolutely execrable. The minor roles are mediocre at best. The direction is cheesy. The music is lazy and just plays the same stupid theme over and over again (definitely nowhere near Bernard Hermann's Jason score). The story itself is drawn-out, and while a few things are true to the myths, other things just seemed to be pulled out of the writers' asses. The part about Hercules being a servant of Hera is the worst offender - in the original myths, she is his mortal enemy continually plaguing him with woe and misfortune. Look, I know that some shows or movies take a lot of liberties with the source material, but at least I know that Hercules: The Legendary Journeys or Disney's Hercules are total bullshit because they toss almost everything established out from the word go and don't even pretend to be accurate. They can actually be entertaining as a result. The problem with Jason 2000 is that it wants to have it both ways and thus can't decide what it wants to be. You can argue that the '63 classic isn't all that accurate either but a) it's still more accurate than the '00 version and b) it has a sense of wonder... and the MOST AWESOME SKELETON FIGHT EVER COMMITTED TO CELLULOID. The bottom line is that this version is not really worth seeing, just see the 1963 classic; it has its flaws but it is miles better. You know the drill about pictures.
Saturday, August 8, 2015
Love Stinks
Well, I said I'd give you beefcake, So I'm givin' you beefcake. This one's for the laaaaadies (and some of you guys). To conclude my reverse-chronology Mario Bava trio you get some *beefcake*
It's funny, Mario Bava is usually associated solely with straight-up horror films and some would be surprised to see him directing a sword-and-sandals movie but Bava is actually perfect as the director for this for a few reasons: 1)he's just that awesome and he actually could do different genres, see Danger: Diabolik and Erik The Conqueror, 2)he had directed segments of and did the cinematography for the 1955 Kirk Douglas movie Ulysses and most importantly 3) he had done the cinematography for the two Steve Reeves Hercules movies. So I guess he basically just graduated to director for this Hercules effort.
And what an effort it is! This one blends the traditional Hercules swords-and-sandals stuff with horror and surrealism to make a great film, my personal favorite of all of Bava's movies. The story is simple but not stupid - Hercules and Theseus along with their friend/comic relief Telemachus (?) go to Hades to retrieve a flower that can cure a curse put on Hercules' girlfriend Deianira by the eeeeevil King Lico.
While there Theseus foolishly falls for and absconds with Hades' daughter Meiazotide (who interestingly enough in the English language version is called Persephone, who was Hades' wife, not daughter), thus causing a Curse Upon The Land once the adventurers reach the land of the living. Can Hercules persuade his hormonal buddy to give up his girl for the sake of the kingdom? Can he defeat the evil and necrotic Lico and put an end to his reign of terror? Will he throw yet another giant rock? Watch and find out!
This movie is gorgeous - Bava's mastery of color is on full display, which is notable seeing as how this is the first color film he directed. Yeah the sets look like sets but they ain't half bad. The rock monster threatening Theseus and Telemachus is goofy looking and obviously fake but still has some menace.
The surreal imagery is what really makes this movie - this is unlike any Hercules film before or since, with an atmosphere that sometimes borders on an art film.
The acting is okay. Reg Park as Hercules doesn't have the raw charisma of Steve Reeves, but does well enough. He does sometimes come off as more friendly and lunkheaded than intense and conflicted (as Reeves usually was) but this is not completely out of character.
Christopher Lee of course does an excellent job playing the villain, which is an accomplishment considering that you never hear his voice - in both the Italian *and* English dubs he is voiced by someone else (so is Park, actually). It is a testament to the recently departed Mr. Lee that he can still give a convincing portrayal even when voiced by another, using his face and body.
Speaking of convincing portrayals, this movie is one of the power of love, for both good and evil. Hercules' love of his longtime sweetie Deianira inspires him to go all the way to the underworld and perform great deeds, while Theseus rashly endangers everyone by refusing to give up a girl he met and became infatuated with about twenty minutes ago. Theseus is quick and passionate with his emotions, while Hercules is a little more stoic and oh shit I'm starting to go into Star Trek crap so I'm gonna stop now.
Suffice to say the main theme of the movie is this: love is an awesome thing as long as it's gradual and genuine, not some instant infatuation. Also, for the love of the gods, if there is a plague on the land and the only way to stop is to give up the pussy, just give up the pussy.
But this isn't just film student fodder - it's also the most fun Bava movie I have seen outside of the aforementioned Danger: Diabolik. Cheesy rock monsters, hellish polenta pits and a demigod squashing zombies with Stonehenge rocks makes for an awesome experience, folks. Actually if you want to have an interesting time, try this little drinking game: every time Herc throws a rock at something or someone, take a drink (make it two drinks for a non-lithic object). By the end of the movie you will be drunk off your ass, 'cause there is a lot of rock chuckin' to be had in Hercules In The Center Of The Earth.
Maybe that's the real theme of this movie: whenever life serves you lemons, chuck a giant rock at it.
'Til next time!
1961
Director: Mario Bava
It's funny, Mario Bava is usually associated solely with straight-up horror films and some would be surprised to see him directing a sword-and-sandals movie but Bava is actually perfect as the director for this for a few reasons: 1)he's just that awesome and he actually could do different genres, see Danger: Diabolik and Erik The Conqueror, 2)he had directed segments of and did the cinematography for the 1955 Kirk Douglas movie Ulysses and most importantly 3) he had done the cinematography for the two Steve Reeves Hercules movies. So I guess he basically just graduated to director for this Hercules effort.
And what an effort it is! This one blends the traditional Hercules swords-and-sandals stuff with horror and surrealism to make a great film, my personal favorite of all of Bava's movies. The story is simple but not stupid - Hercules and Theseus along with their friend/comic relief Telemachus (?) go to Hades to retrieve a flower that can cure a curse put on Hercules' girlfriend Deianira by the eeeeevil King Lico.
 |
| Well, less cursed and more stoned. |
While there Theseus foolishly falls for and absconds with Hades' daughter Meiazotide (who interestingly enough in the English language version is called Persephone, who was Hades' wife, not daughter), thus causing a Curse Upon The Land once the adventurers reach the land of the living. Can Hercules persuade his hormonal buddy to give up his girl for the sake of the kingdom? Can he defeat the evil and necrotic Lico and put an end to his reign of terror? Will he throw yet another giant rock? Watch and find out!
 |
| "Don't worry, Herc! I'm sure that Deianira totally WON'T get jealous and put centaur blood on your clothes, causing you to die a miserable, agonizing death!" "Wait, what?" |
This movie is gorgeous - Bava's mastery of color is on full display, which is notable seeing as how this is the first color film he directed. Yeah the sets look like sets but they ain't half bad. The rock monster threatening Theseus and Telemachus is goofy looking and obviously fake but still has some menace.
The surreal imagery is what really makes this movie - this is unlike any Hercules film before or since, with an atmosphere that sometimes borders on an art film.
The acting is okay. Reg Park as Hercules doesn't have the raw charisma of Steve Reeves, but does well enough. He does sometimes come off as more friendly and lunkheaded than intense and conflicted (as Reeves usually was) but this is not completely out of character.
Christopher Lee of course does an excellent job playing the villain, which is an accomplishment considering that you never hear his voice - in both the Italian *and* English dubs he is voiced by someone else (so is Park, actually). It is a testament to the recently departed Mr. Lee that he can still give a convincing portrayal even when voiced by another, using his face and body.
 |
| "No, I am totally NOT an evil... oh, who the fuck am I kidding? I'm muthafuckin' Christopher Lee." |
 |
| A literal roll in the hay. |
Suffice to say the main theme of the movie is this: love is an awesome thing as long as it's gradual and genuine, not some instant infatuation. Also, for the love of the gods, if there is a plague on the land and the only way to stop is to give up the pussy, just give up the pussy.
 |
| Also, never trust a naked woman! (see also: The Shining) |
But this isn't just film student fodder - it's also the most fun Bava movie I have seen outside of the aforementioned Danger: Diabolik. Cheesy rock monsters, hellish polenta pits and a demigod squashing zombies with Stonehenge rocks makes for an awesome experience, folks. Actually if you want to have an interesting time, try this little drinking game: every time Herc throws a rock at something or someone, take a drink (make it two drinks for a non-lithic object). By the end of the movie you will be drunk off your ass, 'cause there is a lot of rock chuckin' to be had in Hercules In The Center Of The Earth.
Maybe that's the real theme of this movie: whenever life serves you lemons, chuck a giant rock at it.
'Til next time!
Saturday, August 1, 2015
100th Post!
July was a weird month. I went through a very strange time personally and had to examine other human beings and my relationships with them and myself. Friends I thought were close ended up not being that close and friends I thought I shared an honest relationship with ended up not being honest with me (and I fully realize that not every human relationship can be 100% honest or society would not function). Don’t get me wrong, last month was not the first time I have lost a friendship or had someone distance themself from me, but everything seemed to hit hard in July for some strange reason. Here’s hoping August is a much better month for me.
Sorry about all the personal stuff, imaginary reader. But it DOES tie in to today’s (very special 100th) post! See, I have decided after doing Planet of the Vampires to dedicate a couple more posts to famed cult director Mario Bava, for two reasons: 1) Every movie blog needs to have something on Bava and 2) Why should Herzog get all the glory? Thus I selected his possibly most famous and influential film, The Three Faces Of Fear (otherwise known by its English-language AIP version title Black Sabbath) which is all about… human relationships and deception.
What? An Italian sixties horror film actually being about something? Surely not! But yes, brutish reader, and let me explain. Three Faces Of Fear is an anthology film, and all three short films therein are united by that theme. It’s interesting that when AIP dubbed the film in English and shuffled the running order around for their release, they also (in addition to dropping the lesbian subtext) changed “The Telephone” to being a ghost story instead of a straight-up thriller, figuring that since the other two shorts had supernatural themes, “Telephone” was the odd one out without one. Well, they were wrong because the link between all of the shorts is not the supernatural but the relationships between human beings (and fear, hence the original Italian title) and dishonesty both with others and oneself. Let’s go through each short film one by one Kwaidan style and illustrate my point (without being to spoilerrific for those of you who haven’t seen the movie):
"The Telephone" – This is the one with the aforementioned lesbian subtext. A high class call girl gets home one night and starts getting threatening phone calls, supposedly from her ex-boyfriend Frank, who she helped put in jail. Turns out though that the calls are coming from her ex-girlfriend Mary, who is making the calls to try and get closer to her. But what will happen when Mary comes over to “comfort” her ex/victim? And is Frank truly out of the picture?
The deception in this one is fully evident – Rosy is a victim of Mary’s gross effort to manipulate her and both women pay the price for it. Mary’s deception of Rosy is borne out of an obsession with her (not real love) and is ruinous. This is the lesson of “The Telephone”: if you love someone don’t try to get her back by scaring her or you might find yourself being strangled with your own stockings by her ex-pimp. Oops, I guess I spoiled it… sorry sorry sorry but you should still see it anyway, I haven’t given away the complete ending.
Ooh, the family dynamics in this one are fucked up. Usually in movies espousing “family values” the basic family is held up as the core unit of society, and that the love of family members for each other is an unshakable virtue, possibly the highest belonging to the human race. Bava takes that concept and craps all over it, showing how destructive family bonds and obligations can be. The patriarch’s power over this family is so great that even after it becomes apparent that HE IS ONE OF THE BLOODSUCKING UNDEAD his family obeys him unfailingly even as they *know* that HE IS ONE OF THE BLOODSUCKING UNDEAD. Even the normally sacrosanct relationship between mother and child is shown as being something destructive. The wurdalak’s daughter-n-law is shown being completely irrational and threatening to kill herself should her newly-dead child be decapitated (to prevent him becoming a vampire) merely because it would disfigure him. Her demands are foolishly met and she later kills HER OWN HUSBAND (you just learned where you rate, dude) just to be reunited with her newly-undead kid when he shows up at the door crying. Motherhood is not always beautiful. There are more examples but I don’t want to give away everything. Lesson: sometimes rational thought takes precedence over family bonds and obligations. Also, don't deceive yourself over your undead, bloodsucking dad.
“The Drop of Water” – A nurse is called to deal with the corpse of a newly-dead psychic medium. She sees a ring that she just HAS TO HAVE and takes off the dead body and you can see where this is going, can’t you?
I’m not going to lie. This segment scared the shit out of me. I am a 33 year old man and after watching this movie I had to sleep with the lights on for the first time since I was 6. I am a rational being and I do not believe in the supernatural but HOLY CRAP THAT DEAD LADY LOOKS RIGHT INTO YOUR SOUL AND ANNHILATES IT AND OH MY GOD SHE COULD BE SITTING IN THE CORNER OF MY ROOM RIGHT NOW ARRRRRRRGH I WON’T BE ABLE TO SLEEP FOR WEEKS!
Ahhhhh, ah. Okay. Deep breath. It’s only the CREEPIEST THING YOU’VE EVER SEEN IN A MOVIE IN YOUR LIFE. Okay. (Inhales) (Exhales)
This one is all about dishonesty as well as our relationship to the dead. Just because someone’s dead doesn’t mean that you aren’t in a relationship with them. The greedy nurse treats the dead (CREEPY) medium with contempt and steals from her and it ends up biting her in the ass. Lesson: Be honest and don’t steal. Also, don’t be a dick to dead people.
Well, there you go. My personal experiences of July sort of summed up in one movie. Human relations tested and strained and sometimes broken, but at least I haven’t had to deal with killers, vampires or ghosts.
Now, to kick off August and be a total dick, I end this 100th post of the Pharonic Fantasy Theatre with this image, may it be indelibly burned into your brain as it was mine:
Next Week: Beefcake!
Sorry about all the personal stuff, imaginary reader. But it DOES tie in to today’s (very special 100th) post! See, I have decided after doing Planet of the Vampires to dedicate a couple more posts to famed cult director Mario Bava, for two reasons: 1) Every movie blog needs to have something on Bava and 2) Why should Herzog get all the glory? Thus I selected his possibly most famous and influential film, The Three Faces Of Fear (otherwise known by its English-language AIP version title Black Sabbath) which is all about… human relationships and deception.
The Three Faces Of Fear
1963
Director: Mario Bava
What? An Italian sixties horror film actually being about something? Surely not! But yes, brutish reader, and let me explain. Three Faces Of Fear is an anthology film, and all three short films therein are united by that theme. It’s interesting that when AIP dubbed the film in English and shuffled the running order around for their release, they also (in addition to dropping the lesbian subtext) changed “The Telephone” to being a ghost story instead of a straight-up thriller, figuring that since the other two shorts had supernatural themes, “Telephone” was the odd one out without one. Well, they were wrong because the link between all of the shorts is not the supernatural but the relationships between human beings (and fear, hence the original Italian title) and dishonesty both with others and oneself. Let’s go through each short film one by one Kwaidan style and illustrate my point (without being to spoilerrific for those of you who haven’t seen the movie):
 |
| I know *I* always go to bed with perfect hair and makeup. |
 |
| Either murder or erotic asphyxiation gone very, very wrong. |
 |
| "No, I am totally NOT an evil bloodsucking vampire." |
"The Wurdalak" – The most famous part of the movie, because Boris Karloff is in it. A young count comes across a family that dreads the return of the father (Karloff) after he went out to hunt a wurdalak – a vampire that only feeds on the ones they love. They are afraid that if he comes back he may be contaminated and a wurdalak himself… guess what happens when he comes back? One by one the newly vampirized patriarch starts feeding on his family, and the visiting nobleman must try to escape with the daughter that he has (within the space of two minutes) fallen in love with.
 |
| "Come with me and escape your evil undead family!" "But I just met you - no wait, what am I saying? Okay." |
 |
| "Hello, you have reached the Greedy Bitch Hotline." |
 |
| I know I would TOTALLY risk the wrath of the dead for that ring. |
Ahhhhh, ah. Okay. Deep breath. It’s only the CREEPIEST THING YOU’VE EVER SEEN IN A MOVIE IN YOUR LIFE. Okay. (Inhales) (Exhales)
This one is all about dishonesty as well as our relationship to the dead. Just because someone’s dead doesn’t mean that you aren’t in a relationship with them. The greedy nurse treats the dead (CREEPY) medium with contempt and steals from her and it ends up biting her in the ass. Lesson: Be honest and don’t steal. Also, don’t be a dick to dead people.
Well, there you go. My personal experiences of July sort of summed up in one movie. Human relations tested and strained and sometimes broken, but at least I haven’t had to deal with killers, vampires or ghosts.
Now, to kick off August and be a total dick, I end this 100th post of the Pharonic Fantasy Theatre with this image, may it be indelibly burned into your brain as it was mine:
Next Week: Beefcake!
Tuesday, July 28, 2015
Lying Movie Titles, Exhibit A
I said I'd do it so here it is.
This film is the ultimate in style over substance. There is very little story - a spaceship crew lands on a creepy alien planet and discovers that the crew of their sister ship has become alien-possessed zombies (why the hell it's called Planet of the *Vampires* is beyond me, there's nary a bloodsucker in sight... the original Italian title Terror In Space makes a whole lot more sense) - there is almost no characterization, it drags a bit and the dialogue is nothing to write home about. But the sets! And those costumes! And the cool alien skeletons! Sure, the actual special effects are hideously dated and sometimes laughable, but Planet of the Vampires is a visually striking film... Mario Bava was known for his use of color and his mastery of lighting and it shows in this movie. The creepy atmosphere and colorful sights will stay with you for a while... it definitely did with the right people - you can see it's influence in Alien (writer Dan O'Bannon openly admitted to the influence of Bava's movie but director Ridley Scott has never owned up to it even though it's freaking obvious) and a lot of other later sci-fi movies.
I know that I haven't written much about this film, but as I have said it is because there isn't much to write about story or performance-wise. This ain't some deep rumination on the human condition to be analyzed but a (sometimes) fun little space zombie movie to simply look at and appreciate for what it is. In the end, I can safely recommend Planet of the Vampires - it's not a cinematic science fiction masterpiece but it's still better than Interstellar.
Burn!
Next Time: More Mario Madness
P.S. Interstellar sucks.
...Damn it!
1965
Director: Mario Bava
This film is the ultimate in style over substance. There is very little story - a spaceship crew lands on a creepy alien planet and discovers that the crew of their sister ship has become alien-possessed zombies (why the hell it's called Planet of the *Vampires* is beyond me, there's nary a bloodsucker in sight... the original Italian title Terror In Space makes a whole lot more sense) - there is almost no characterization, it drags a bit and the dialogue is nothing to write home about. But the sets! And those costumes! And the cool alien skeletons! Sure, the actual special effects are hideously dated and sometimes laughable, but Planet of the Vampires is a visually striking film... Mario Bava was known for his use of color and his mastery of lighting and it shows in this movie. The creepy atmosphere and colorful sights will stay with you for a while... it definitely did with the right people - you can see it's influence in Alien (writer Dan O'Bannon openly admitted to the influence of Bava's movie but director Ridley Scott has never owned up to it even though it's freaking obvious) and a lot of other later sci-fi movies.
I know that I haven't written much about this film, but as I have said it is because there isn't much to write about story or performance-wise. This ain't some deep rumination on the human condition to be analyzed but a (sometimes) fun little space zombie movie to simply look at and appreciate for what it is. In the end, I can safely recommend Planet of the Vampires - it's not a cinematic science fiction masterpiece but it's still better than Interstellar.
Burn!
 |
| It's the 60s so the spacesuits look like this. |
 |
| It's the 60s so they're still putting effort into making alien planet sets look *alien*. |
 |
| It's the 60s and it's not Star Trek, so the spaceships are just models sitting in front a backdrop... |
 |
| ...the spaceship control rooms are an ergonomic nightmare... |
 |
| ...and ray guns are butane torches. |
 |
| "No, I am totally NOT a killer space zombie." |
 |
| Hmm... I wonder... |
 |
| ...where Ridley Scott... |
 |
| ...got his ideas from. |
 |
| "Let's watch this new movie, supposed to be good, it's called Interstellar...." |
 |
| "It's not my fault! She passed out after watching only 30 minutes!" Okay, okay, this is the last time I'll hate on Interstellar. |
Next Time: More Mario Madness
P.S. Interstellar sucks.
...Damn it!
Saturday, July 18, 2015
Wow, I Am Actually Reviewing A New(ish) Movie
Today I watched Christopher Nolan's Interstellar for the first time: I saw the trailer last year and said "meh." It didn't look all that interesting and I figured it wasn't worth seeing in the theaters so I didn't, even after all the hype and rave reviews. Well, my mom lent me the DVD and said, "you should see this" so I did and said...
..."meh." Actually it was more "blah." I didn't like it. I didn't hate it either, I didn't have the same visceral reaction that I had to some of my most loathed movies like Armageddon, Die Another Day, Tommy or Gone With The Wind. Just "blah." And maybe that's worse, because at least those turd burgers DID elicit a strong reaction to me, even if not a positive one. Mostly I was just disappointed with Interstellar, even after I rejected all of the hype and didn't go in expecting the best thing ever. I was at least expecting to be somewhat entertained or intellectually stimulated and the movie failed on both accounts.
I'm not going to take much time writing about this movie as it really doesn't deserve that much space. Matthew McConaughey annoyed me. The rest of the actors disappointed me - even Michael Caine seemed to be phoning it in. There are way to many Hollywood Theatrics for a supposedly hard sci-fi movie. The abysmal score by Hans Zimmer is too loud and refuses to shut up. The film is somehow overly pretentious and cutesy - one of the characters is even named "Murphy" after Murphy's Law (really). Characters do things irrationally and out of the blue not to illustrate human fallibility or be realistic but to provide cheap Hollywood "Drama". With all of the shouting and tears and glurgy music you can tell that this movie is trying to manipulate you emotionally, it's not subtle like, say, Conan The Barbarian (yeah, I just went there).
I do not have a degree in science but even I could smell BS on some of the "science" in this film - I doubt that entry into a black hole would result in what happens in this movie. Even without the scientific factor, there are just way too many plot holes and stupid moments and stupid things that bring up way too many questions... why is a man who last piloted a plane 10 years ago *perfect* to fly a new spacecraft into another galaxy? Why did the aliens (or whoever) who supposedly want to help humanity put a wormhole out by Saturn when it would have been waaaaaaay more helpful and expedient to put it closer to Earth - say, closer to Mars or the Moon? For that matter what's up with the propulsion technology of the future? They use a three-stage rocket to launch the spaceship from Earth and it takes this craft 2 years to reach said wormhole at Saturn (which is about how long it would take using today's technology) but their landers have Star Trek shuttlecraft anti-grav and propulsion technology and can land *and* take off on their own. If they have sufficient AI to make sentient, wisecracking robots, why couldn't they just send advanced robot explorers out to this other galaxy instead of people who are fated to die (they try and explain away this one but it's bullshit)? For that matter if the Earth is dying why don't the humans just immigrate to orbiting space colonies (oppa) Gundam-style? You don't strictly need a planet to live, and they even show an O'Neill type cylinder at the end! Arrrrrgh!
Alright, as usual I spent way to much time ranting about this. This is a movie I never want to see again. I'm only providing one screenshot for this. I had to watch another sci-fi movie, any other SF movie, to get the bad taste of this out of my brain. I ended up watching Planet of the Vampires, which is actually a much better movie than Interstellar - and this is a 60s film that has Italian space zombies in leather gimp suits. Hey, there's an idea - why don't I review Planet of the Vampires?
Next Time: Planet of the Vampires
..."meh." Actually it was more "blah." I didn't like it. I didn't hate it either, I didn't have the same visceral reaction that I had to some of my most loathed movies like Armageddon, Die Another Day, Tommy or Gone With The Wind. Just "blah." And maybe that's worse, because at least those turd burgers DID elicit a strong reaction to me, even if not a positive one. Mostly I was just disappointed with Interstellar, even after I rejected all of the hype and didn't go in expecting the best thing ever. I was at least expecting to be somewhat entertained or intellectually stimulated and the movie failed on both accounts.
I'm not going to take much time writing about this movie as it really doesn't deserve that much space. Matthew McConaughey annoyed me. The rest of the actors disappointed me - even Michael Caine seemed to be phoning it in. There are way to many Hollywood Theatrics for a supposedly hard sci-fi movie. The abysmal score by Hans Zimmer is too loud and refuses to shut up. The film is somehow overly pretentious and cutesy - one of the characters is even named "Murphy" after Murphy's Law (really). Characters do things irrationally and out of the blue not to illustrate human fallibility or be realistic but to provide cheap Hollywood "Drama". With all of the shouting and tears and glurgy music you can tell that this movie is trying to manipulate you emotionally, it's not subtle like, say, Conan The Barbarian (yeah, I just went there).
I do not have a degree in science but even I could smell BS on some of the "science" in this film - I doubt that entry into a black hole would result in what happens in this movie. Even without the scientific factor, there are just way too many plot holes and stupid moments and stupid things that bring up way too many questions... why is a man who last piloted a plane 10 years ago *perfect* to fly a new spacecraft into another galaxy? Why did the aliens (or whoever) who supposedly want to help humanity put a wormhole out by Saturn when it would have been waaaaaaay more helpful and expedient to put it closer to Earth - say, closer to Mars or the Moon? For that matter what's up with the propulsion technology of the future? They use a three-stage rocket to launch the spaceship from Earth and it takes this craft 2 years to reach said wormhole at Saturn (which is about how long it would take using today's technology) but their landers have Star Trek shuttlecraft anti-grav and propulsion technology and can land *and* take off on their own. If they have sufficient AI to make sentient, wisecracking robots, why couldn't they just send advanced robot explorers out to this other galaxy instead of people who are fated to die (they try and explain away this one but it's bullshit)? For that matter if the Earth is dying why don't the humans just immigrate to orbiting space colonies (oppa) Gundam-style? You don't strictly need a planet to live, and they even show an O'Neill type cylinder at the end! Arrrrrgh!
Alright, as usual I spent way to much time ranting about this. This is a movie I never want to see again. I'm only providing one screenshot for this. I had to watch another sci-fi movie, any other SF movie, to get the bad taste of this out of my brain. I ended up watching Planet of the Vampires, which is actually a much better movie than Interstellar - and this is a 60s film that has Italian space zombies in leather gimp suits. Hey, there's an idea - why don't I review Planet of the Vampires?
Next Time: Planet of the Vampires
Saturday, July 4, 2015
Unmutual!
I couldn't stay away, but I won't be here long. Too much personal stuff in my life, my slipping emotional sanity and the mind-numbing quest for an actual life mean that not only have I not written for this blog in a long time but that I won't be writing for it again ever come the near future; I am near done and we are approaching the end of line. I truly mean it this time. Cross my heart.
I didn't start up this blog again for the death of Leonard Nimoy, I didn't do it to commemorate Christopher Lee. No, I am doing it today because today is American Patriotastic As Fuck Day, and as a Patriotastic American I feel like saying on this day celebrating the birth of "The Greatest Nation In The World": It's a Sham. Freedom is a myth. You see, I have finished re-watching what is probably the Greatest Television Show Ever Made, and I had to come onto the internet, on this day, after a prolonged silence, to talk about it. And it's British. Ha.
This is a classic show. If you haven't seen it, go watch it now. Don't expect me to do a review in the classical sense and use it to decide whether you want to watch it, I'll just tell you right now. Watch it now. Now.
Now.
(17 hours later)
Okay, back? Good. Awesome, wasn't it? And really fucking confusing too, I'll bet. There's a lot of stuff in this show that makes you think, and makes you think about stuff that's not that pleasant. Individuality vs the Community is only one facet. I believe the overall conflict of the show is Freedom vs Control, or alternatively, Order vs Chaos... which ties into the Individual vs Society. Of course Society stands for Order and Control... without control there would be no order, there would be chaos... and human beings cannot stand pure anarchy. This is all Sociology 101, but the way The Prisoner star and creative force Patrick McGoohan handles it all is brilliant and nuanced. From the tone and plot of the show you would expect The Prisoner (I refuse to refer to him as Number 6, after all HE IS NOT A NUMBER) to be the unabashed hero and the controllers of The Village to be absolute, unadulterated evil, but this is not always the case. The Prisoner can sometimes be just as rigid and uncompromising in the name of the individual as the Village can be in enforcing Control -only near the end of the show does he stop flailing about in self-righteous rage and start to beat the Villagers at their own game. And while the antagonists do some pretty evil stuff in the course of the show it is made plain on a number of occasions that many of them are just as much prisoners as the main character. You can actually sympathize with some of the Numbers Two (most notably Leo McKern's).
And in the end of course (literally) The Prisoner shows that you will never be free; if society is not trying to control and limit you then you yourself are. The struggle is never over; we are doomed to conflict with ourselves and each other until the end of time... .. wait a minute, is this show British or German?
And that's why I say what McGoohan once said: freedom, or at least absolute freedom as imagined by most Americans, is a myth. It has to be. Or society would just fall apart. In America you are only as free as you can afford to be. Or as free as the powers-that-be will let you be. Or as free as your family, friends, neighborhood or community lets you be. The United States is no different. Oh, don't get me wrong, I love living in the US. As a (barely) middle-class American I enjoy a roof over my head and food whenever I need it (good, affordable medical care on the other hand....). I am "free" to express my opinions about my government and not be jailed in a gulag somewhere but make no mistake... true political dissenters and undesirables are monitored covertly and often, and those deemed dangerous to the state (whether they are dangerous or not) are dealt with. Scratch the surface of America's "free" exterior actually, and you'll find a surveillance and enforcement system that resembles a certain Village control room....
The United States (and other western countries) have done some very nefarious things to protect the community and its "freedom", many of them done during the decade The Prisoner was originally made. Things that were just as nefarious as the "evil" Communist Soviet Union or third world brutal dictatorships (some of which we helped set up and/or maintain). The East and West were not that different during the Cold War (something the show touches on).
So given the show's message and the state of the world it's all pretty depressing, right? There is no hope. Well, no. The trick, and this is the beauty of McGoohan's message, is to despite all this never let them make you think of yourself as a number (which is difficult today, isn't it, with your Social Security Number, Driver's Licence Number, etc.). Also, you have to *fight* for the rights you most want and cherish. Don't let them take everything. You should learn to compromise, but never just roll over and play dead.
All this coming from a Brit, no less. Wait, actually, Patrick McGoohan was born and died in... America.
Go America! Woo!
Happy Fourth.
I didn't start up this blog again for the death of Leonard Nimoy, I didn't do it to commemorate Christopher Lee. No, I am doing it today because today is American Patriotastic As Fuck Day, and as a Patriotastic American I feel like saying on this day celebrating the birth of "The Greatest Nation In The World": It's a Sham. Freedom is a myth. You see, I have finished re-watching what is probably the Greatest Television Show Ever Made, and I had to come onto the internet, on this day, after a prolonged silence, to talk about it. And it's British. Ha.
1967-1968
Director: Basically Patrick McGoohan
This is a classic show. If you haven't seen it, go watch it now. Don't expect me to do a review in the classical sense and use it to decide whether you want to watch it, I'll just tell you right now. Watch it now. Now.
Now.
(17 hours later)
Okay, back? Good. Awesome, wasn't it? And really fucking confusing too, I'll bet. There's a lot of stuff in this show that makes you think, and makes you think about stuff that's not that pleasant. Individuality vs the Community is only one facet. I believe the overall conflict of the show is Freedom vs Control, or alternatively, Order vs Chaos... which ties into the Individual vs Society. Of course Society stands for Order and Control... without control there would be no order, there would be chaos... and human beings cannot stand pure anarchy. This is all Sociology 101, but the way The Prisoner star and creative force Patrick McGoohan handles it all is brilliant and nuanced. From the tone and plot of the show you would expect The Prisoner (I refuse to refer to him as Number 6, after all HE IS NOT A NUMBER) to be the unabashed hero and the controllers of The Village to be absolute, unadulterated evil, but this is not always the case. The Prisoner can sometimes be just as rigid and uncompromising in the name of the individual as the Village can be in enforcing Control -only near the end of the show does he stop flailing about in self-righteous rage and start to beat the Villagers at their own game. And while the antagonists do some pretty evil stuff in the course of the show it is made plain on a number of occasions that many of them are just as much prisoners as the main character. You can actually sympathize with some of the Numbers Two (most notably Leo McKern's).
And in the end of course (literally) The Prisoner shows that you will never be free; if society is not trying to control and limit you then you yourself are. The struggle is never over; we are doomed to conflict with ourselves and each other until the end of time... .. wait a minute, is this show British or German?
And that's why I say what McGoohan once said: freedom, or at least absolute freedom as imagined by most Americans, is a myth. It has to be. Or society would just fall apart. In America you are only as free as you can afford to be. Or as free as the powers-that-be will let you be. Or as free as your family, friends, neighborhood or community lets you be. The United States is no different. Oh, don't get me wrong, I love living in the US. As a (barely) middle-class American I enjoy a roof over my head and food whenever I need it (good, affordable medical care on the other hand....). I am "free" to express my opinions about my government and not be jailed in a gulag somewhere but make no mistake... true political dissenters and undesirables are monitored covertly and often, and those deemed dangerous to the state (whether they are dangerous or not) are dealt with. Scratch the surface of America's "free" exterior actually, and you'll find a surveillance and enforcement system that resembles a certain Village control room....
The United States (and other western countries) have done some very nefarious things to protect the community and its "freedom", many of them done during the decade The Prisoner was originally made. Things that were just as nefarious as the "evil" Communist Soviet Union or third world brutal dictatorships (some of which we helped set up and/or maintain). The East and West were not that different during the Cold War (something the show touches on).
So given the show's message and the state of the world it's all pretty depressing, right? There is no hope. Well, no. The trick, and this is the beauty of McGoohan's message, is to despite all this never let them make you think of yourself as a number (which is difficult today, isn't it, with your Social Security Number, Driver's Licence Number, etc.). Also, you have to *fight* for the rights you most want and cherish. Don't let them take everything. You should learn to compromise, but never just roll over and play dead.
All this coming from a Brit, no less. Wait, actually, Patrick McGoohan was born and died in... America.
Go America! Woo!
Happy Fourth.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)