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.

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.

Now There's Something You Don't See Everyday....

It's funny when you are finally able to fulfill a childhood desire after you grow up, even the (in the grand scheme of things) small ones.  As a child, my favorite-ist movie in the whole world was Ghostbusters.  It's still one of my favorites, actually, and when I heard that it was back in theatres for Labor Day weekend I nearly had a heart attack.  Of course I went and saw it.

And you know what?

It's still awesome.  In some ways even more so.  You'd think that seeing a movie hundreds of times on home video ever since you were a kid would lessen the impact of subsequently watching that movie on the big screen but nope.  On the big screen the film has an even bigger impact - I can understand now how some film snobs would consider home viewing a dumbing down of cinema as an art form... although I doubt that film snobs would consider Ghostbusters art.  Although I would hope that they would agree that it is awesome (in both the literal and slang senses of the word).

Speaking of awesome:  I just wish my dates went like this...

...never mind, no I don't.

I was even surprised while watching this Lovecraftian Comedy Classic on the silver screen how it still holds up in the special effects 30 years later.  In fact, it holds up more than later CGI-filled blockbusters.  Hell, I enjoyed Peter Jackson's Lord Of The Rings movies but the FX always felt too fake to me - I could tell that it was all a computer image programmed by an army of nerds.  The old movie effects to me look real - real physical objects constructed by an army of nerds.

Also, I like the fact that cinematography in Ghostbusters isn't ADD like modern blockbusters.  It doesn't feel as self-consciously slick as modern blockbusters either (although the decade it was made in was responsible for starting that trend).

Another artifact from this decade: everyone smokes!

Well, it's in theatres until Thursday.  Then you'll probably have to wait another 20 or 30 years for it to hit the cineplexes again - assuming we are still watching movies by then.

And hopefully not in 3-D,
although this would make for a *wicked* 3-D shot.

There Is No Comparison... Until Now

Today, no review but a quick rumination on a film I both re-watched and watched for the first time recently:

1979

Director: Robert Wise

It’s funny how your perception of something can change. I have always liked Star Trek: The Motion Picture, at least I thought I have. See, ever since I was a kid I have watched it either in the extended VHS cut or the DVD Director’s Cut… but until about a week ago I had never seen the original theatrical cut, since it hadn’t been available on home video until recently. I had always wondered about all the hate for the movie… yeah, sure, it is slow and things seem to be a bit muted compared to the original TV show

And yeah, okay, the costumes are horrible.

but there is a good science fiction story and some actual character development once you look past all the pretty special effects and music and such.

Well, after seeing the original theatrical cut I understand now how people back in 1979 would have been less than plussed with this film. The movie feels choppy and confusing, with sudden cuts and lots of stuff left out. I had read before about how the film was cut down for the original release but I was still surprised at how many scenes that I took for granted were *not* in the theatrical version. The biggest omission was the key moment with Spock weeping for V’Ger (“Logic and knowledge are not enough”).

*Manly Tears*

Leaving this scene out basically destroys his character arc for the movie – STTMP is partially about Spock’s journey to find himself and attain spiritual fulfillment, and leaving out this self-realization *really* hurts the film.

Watching the theatrical cut also got me to thinking about director’s cuts of movies in general. In 2000 Robert Wise was given a chance to go back and finish Star Trek the way he wanted to back in 1979. The results are pretty good. While there is some playing around with SFX for the sake of playing around (the tram station looks pretty but was it necessary), mostly he just tries to make things look like the original storyboards (Vulcan looks sooooo much better) and what things in general would have looked like had he had time to actually finish the movie.

He thus does not engage in the George Lucas wankery of making a movie from the seventies look like some unholy hybrid of that era and the modern day (“Hi, you are watching a movie from the SEVENTIES oh now WHACK! It’s 2003!”).

For the most part the director’s cut looks like a movie from 1979 (there are a few spots where the CGI is obvious). And that’s what a director’s cut *should* be, not an excuse to go back and keep fiddling with something that you were never satisfied with because you’re a compulsive perfectionist neurotic. GEORGE.

If this were a George Lucas movie there would be
robots and lizards in the background, or something.

The only beef I have is that the 1980s TV extended cut is not on DVD (it was only ever released on VHS). While it is bloated (they threw just about everything they had in there) and there is one scene with a glaring special effects failure (the set wasn’t finished so you see scaffolding and lights) it would still be cool to have it to view for reference on DVD or Blu-Ray (for all you people with money out there). Maybe a three or four disc Mega Ultimate Special Edition? So for all of you who saw Star Trek: The Motion Picture back in the day and hated it, I understand. Pick up the Director’s Cut on DVD (it isn’t out on Blu-Ray yet) and see what you missed out on in the theatre. For those of you who haven’t seen the original theatrical version, pick it up and watch it and understand why it inspired so much ire from fans – and why they hailed the sequel.

Happy Tragedy Day

Halloween again… time for more horror movies! Or “horror” movies as the case may be for some of the films reviewed this year… and they are all from Netflix this time (no pictures for you) ‘cause, hey, why not? 



First we have two old “classic” Universal monster movies:

Bride of Frankenstein (1935) – A sequel to a movie that didn’t need a sequel. Dr. Frankenstein is blackmailed by his crazy former prof and his sad-sack creation into making a lady monster. It doesn’t end well, as you can imagine. Okay, this isn’t a horror film. It isn’t scary, it’s just tragic in an existential kind of way. Watching this is like watching an old Wile. E. Coyote cartoon. The Monster can’t catch a fuckin’ break, man, he can’t catch a fuckin’ break. Seriously, your heart will go out to this guy and you’ll want to reach through the screen and punch people for picking on him. Yeah, I wonder why he keeps killing people when you treat him like crap?  Frustrating but not frightening.

The Wolf Man (1941) – Larry the Peeping Tom comes home to the UK after years spent in America (i.e. convenient excuse for his accent - riiiiiight) and gets bitten by a werewolf and you can guess the rest. This film is not scary at all… actually it’s pretty lame and kinda boring. Lon Chaney Jr. can’t act, but Claude Rains can and gives the best performance in the damn picture, especially when he has to kill his own son (yeah, I spoiled it for you. Deal with it). That is the only genuinely moving moment in the entire movie by the way. You can safely skip this one. 


Well, for two “classic” horror films those weren’t scary at all, were they? Okay, well now how about two films adapted from Stephen King, an author known for SHEER TERROR?

Carrie (1976) – Oh, godammit, another straight-up tragedy. The only thing scary in this movie (and I ain’t even gonna recount the plot because everyone in America should know it by now) is Carrie’s mom – people like this exist – and how the system fails Carrie. Yeah, she goes on her telekinetic rampage at the end and it’s kind of satisfying seeing her dish out punishment to her tormentors, but in her fury she kills her benefactors too, and that is incredibly tragic. So to sum up, this movie is a tragedy. No real frights here. No wait. There’s the famous jump scare at the end. That startled me right out of my seat, and I knew it was coming. Brilliant.

Pet Sematary (1989) – This one actually has some horror, but it’s also very tragic (I’m sensing a theme today). Let me just say that if the idea of hurting children or animals disgusts you at your core… then watch Pet Sematary! It’ll make you feel queasy and truly horrify you. The movie is about some dumbass yuppies with a cat and two small children who move into a house right next to a both a road with heavy truck traffic and an old evil Indian Burial Ground that will resurrect the dead buried in it but make them EVIL. You can see where this is going, right? Starring Tasha Yar, Hermann Munster and That One Bland Actor Where You Could Swear You’ve Seen Him Before But He Actually Hasn’t Been In Anything You’ve Ever Watched. Pet Sematary is an… okay movie. There are some minor frights, but overall not that scary.


Damn. Not a good Halloween movie marathon, is it? Huh. Well, maybe one more Netflix horror movie, one to try to finally scare me. One that isn’t a lame old Universal movie or based on the works of a certain author based out of Maine.

The Fly II (1989) – It’s the sequel to The Fly. So there has to be real horror. And there is! But it’s not that scary – it’s just gross. Yup, more goo and more gore. It’s about the son of the inventor from the previous flick (directed by David Cronenberg, who passed this one up) who grows rapidly from infancy to adulthood in about five years, all inside a corporate laboratory. By the time *he* starts transforming into a mutant fly-thing, you are rooting for him because he has had to put up with a lot of shit. And yeah… sigh, there’s more tragedy (not gonna spoil it for you this time though). But the payoff is great – everyone gets their just desserts. A lot of people have knocked this movie for not being as good as the original, but that’s like slamming Star Trek III for not being as good as Star Trek II – just enjoy the film on its own terms, people. It’s a pretty good flick, although some of the gore was gratuitous. Still recommended though.


Well, that’s it. A whole lot of tragedy this Halloween, from pictures ranging from great (Carrie) to decent (The Fly II) to middling (Pet Sematary, Bride of Frankenstein) to lame (The Wolf Man).



 Happy Halloween (sob).

Lazitude

Okay, here's the deal.  I originally planned an oh-so-droll movie review here, with some pithy witticisms accompanying some screen grabs, but a)I'm still feeling sluggishly lazy getting back up to speed doing this blog again and b) the nature of today's movie made it difficult to grab screenshots from.  So I'm gonna to what I normally planned to do sans screenshots!

1939

Director: Michael Curtiz

In A Nutshell

I love you!

I hate you!

I hate myself!

I'm the queen, bitch!

Elizabeth SMASH!

I love you!

I hate you!

Vincent Priiiiiiiiiiice!

I love you!

I hate you!

Sucker!

Sucker!

I love you!

I hate you!

I love you!

THWACK!

The End

Roses Are Red, Spacemen Are Blue

You know, I have done holiday posts for this blog, but I’ve never done a Valentine’s Day post. Maybe it’s because I think of Valentine’s Day as a crass commercial holiday, pushing an artificial and hamfisted idea of Romantic Love on the populous so that they can consume all of their sugar-coated crap. Or maybe it’s because I would have to review a romantic comedy, a genre I generally hate outside of a few movies like The Princess Bride.  Or maybe it's just because I have no love life and and I project that through refusing to honor a holiday that reminds me of my constant failure.  Well, in my continuing quest to do away with the negativity in my life I’m going to actually do a Valentine’s Day Review this year and talk about a romantic, heartwarming film from one of America’s most underrated directors. Prepare to feel the love as I review

Film, 1984 

Director: John Carpenter 

Story 

After a Voyager space probe is intercepted by aliens they send one of their own to planet Earth to check us out. Things don’t go so well though as its spacecraft is immediately shot down over North America (where else?). This alien then clones a body from the DNA of a dead man and enlists his widow’s aid in getting to Arizona where it can make a rendezvous with its comrades and go back home. Along the way the Starman will learn about the gamut of human emotions, from fear and hate to joy and… love. 

Review 

Sometimes you come across a movie that’s not good, but not bad either. It’s… okay. Starman is one of those movies. I was mildly entertained for two hours but at the end of the day couldn’t claim that I had just seen something special. On the plus side this film has some great acting, especially from Jeff Bridges as the titular alien. Watching this guy you really will believe that he’s from another planet. Everything, from his curiosity and attitudes to his gradual grasp of English will seem completely realistic and exactly like what would happen if an extraterrestrial were to visit our planet.

In addition, there are quite a few laughs to be had at Starman’s misunderstanding of Earth customs, which means that this film never gets *too* somber. Karen Allen does a good job too, ably portraying a woman who sees an alien morph into her dead husband right before her eyes, freaking the fuck out and then gradually learning to accept and even love the strange being that is dragging her halfway across the country on a road trip that is as far from normal as you can get outside of a Hunter S. Thompson novel. Special effects are generally very good (including the aforementioned morphing scene) and don’t overpower the story, as some 80s sci-fi flicks are wont to do.

Unfortunately, this movie completely lacks subtlety… everything is in-your-face and obvious – as is the norm for most Eighties movies. The US Government is EVIL as they attempt to track down Starman and capture him for medical experimentation or worse. I hate it when movies do this. If we did encounter a being from a civilization more advanced than our own, wouldn’t we want to be more diplomatic in case they would take violent offense to our actions? Watching this you clearly know who the good guys and bad guys are. Everything else is obvious too. You can definitely tell when you’re supposed to cry or laugh or go “aww.” The religious symbolism is hamfisted as well. Okay, I get it, Starman is Jesus – could we move on please?  The romance is pretty sappy and obvious too, but most movie love stories are.

I guess my biggest beef with Starman is that it doesn’t feel like a John Carpenter film. Most of his movies you can watch and tell who the director is (and not just because he puts his name before the freaking title for every one)… he’s a very individualistic director who usually makes (or made, I haven’t seen any of his latter-day movies which aren’t supposed to be that good) unique and entertaining celluloid gems. But Starman just seems like your average 80s Hollywood movie. Carpenter has said that he made this film so that he could continue to work in Hollywood, but couldn’t he have put a little more effort into it? Come on, man, you made Escape From New York! Oh, and the music score is bland and forgettable – and in a movie called Starman they didn’t even include the David Bowie song anywhere in the movie. What’s the problem guys, too obvious for you?

In the end I can only recommend Starman for someone who is a John Carpenter completest or someone who wants to watch one of the best acting jobs of Jeff Bridges’ career (just behind, you know, his Academy Award winning performance in Tron). Oh, or anyone who want to see either Karen Allen in her panties or Jeff Bridges in the buff.


Well, that's my Valentine's Day post.  Don't expect another romance movie post for a long time, because I can only take so much Hollywood lovey-dovey sugar in one year.

Happy Horror Movie Day

Time for Halloween again! Here are three more movies that you won’t see on television – well two, one of them shows up from time to time.

Jigoku (1960) – A college student is racked with guilt after he witnesses his friend commit a hit-and-run. While waffling over whether to go to the police everything goes hideously wrong: his fiancée is killed in a car wreck, his sick mother gets worse in a poorly run nursing home and his new girlfriend and her mother start plotting to kill him – turns out that they are the relatives of the hit-and-run victim, who also happened to be a yakuza. In the end everyone dies and goes to Hell.  Yup.

This is another weird Japanese horror movie. I’m not spoiling the ending for anyone: everyone coming into this movie knows what happens at the end, mainly because of the title of the film itself. Jigoku is the Japanese word for Hell, and boy is this Hell a doozy: filled with all sorts of surreal imagery and gory, hideous tortures. It’s interesting that all of the films characters end up there: perhaps director Nobuo Nakagawa is commenting on how everyone in life has baggage and we all end up in our own private Hell – no one is perfect, and in a moral universe everyone is guilty of something and therefore everyone who ever was and is and shall be will suffer for eternity in a universe of pain and agony. Heartwarming.

Young Frankenstein (1974) – Frederick Frankenstein (that’s Frahnk-en-steen) is an American surgeon who inherits his infamous grandfather’s Transylvanian castle and laboratory. After showing initial reluctance to follow in his ancestor’s footsteps he decides to make his own Creature, unfortunately his none-too-bright assistant Igor (that’s Eye-gore) supplies him with a bad brain (“Abby Normal”) and the resulting monster goes on a rampage with results both pathetic and hilarious.

This one is actually popular (it comes on the TV every so often) and is technically a comedy making fun of horror, but I’ll let it in here just because it’s so damn fun – plus it nails all of the Frankenstein tropes brilliantly so I had to include it. What makes this film work is that it’s not just another mindless parody – Mel Brooks obviously loves the old Frankenstein movies and it shows. The lab equipment is right out of the 1931 Boris Karloff movie and the whole thing is filmed in black-and-white. Everyone nails their roles, and makes the characters more than just comedic caricatures. The humor in this film is more subtle than normal for Brooks (it’s not as obvious as Blazing Saddles, for example) but that works to this film’s advantage, not its detriment.

Vampire Hunter D (1985) – In the FUTURE vampires have entrenched themselves as Nobles, preying on human society with only the elite Vampire Hunters keeping them in check. One of these Hunters, a mysterious dhampir (half human/half vampire) known only as “D” encounters a young woman in a remote village by the name of Doris who has been assaulted by an ancient vampire lord. Together they fight the evil count and his minions in order to prevent Doris from being taken as an unholy bride in a wedding from Hell.



This is a dumb but fun eighties anime flick. It’s by the same director who brought you Fist of the North Star, so you know that it’s going to involve buckets and buckets of blood. And it does. There is also gratuitous nudity, freaky villains, and just weird shit in general so, you know, your average anime horror fare. This is based on a series of Japanese young adult novels, but you don’t need to seek them out as they’re not that well written. You might want to seek out the illustrations though, seeing as the artist for those books (and the character designer for this movie) is Yoshitaka Amano, who has an interesting art style (he also did the character design for the first six Final Fantasy games).


Well, there you go. One American horror spoof and a double-dose of weird Japaneseness.  I worry sometimes about the Japanese, but then I remember that I am American and that my country is the strangest in the world – and to many, the scariest.


Happy Halloween.



Next Month:  There will be no next month.  The Pharonic Fantasy Theatre will take a break for November while I cower in fear under the sheets and wait for the election to be over.

Parting Is Such Sweet Sorrow

Well, here we are, at the end of September, and thus at the end of Shakespearetember.  This project hasn't exactly gone as planned, what with getting the hang of my new 8-5 job and budgeting my time and everything. Hopefully in the future I can take some more time during the week to write out more comprehensive reviews rather than trying to bash out reviews over the weekend when I have fifty other things to get done at home now that I can no longer do them during the week.  What pains me is that I haven't been able to write more in this of all months, since I have been doing Shakespeare movies... and of all of the subjects that I have written about on this site the Bard deserves more than what I have been giving him.  Well, if I do another Shakespeare month next year I will definitely try to do him more justice.  Anywho, let's get to our last Shakespeare review for the month (and, alack, it will be another short one for the aforementioned reasons) and partake in

Film, 1935

Directors:  Max Reinhardt and William Dieterle

Story

Theseus, the Duke of Athens is marrying Hippolyta, the Queen of the Amazons (which sounds like a bitchin' name for a rock band, by the way) amidst much Athenian joy and revelry (and presumably much throwing up).  But what's important is that a couple of young lovers, a couple of young not-quite-lovers and a troupe of amateur actors have gone into the woods about a mile outside of town.  This is important because while there they will be mixed up in a marital war between Oberon and Titania, the King and Queen of the Fairies. Also, they will be massively fucked with by the most annoying fairy of them all, Prick–er, I mean Puck.

Review

As I have said, this will be short.  I loved this movie.  The acting was good; all of the principle roles are done well and conveyed the humor in Shakespeare's play.  James Cagney in particular stands out as Bottom, both before and after assification.  Yes, Mickey Rooney is annoying as shit, but you know what, he is supposed to be.  It's Puck.  The little bastard pranks other people for his own amusement.  If they made this movie today they would probably get some irritating modern celebrity douchebag to play the part.  One can also see why the nineteen year-old Olivia de Havilland went on to fame and fortune later on (this was her first movie).

What I like the most about A Midsummer Night's Dream though is the production.  First, they use the incidental music composed by Mendelssohn, which is awesome – I can't imagine any Hollywood production doing this nowadays.  Second, the sets and imagery are fantastic, and I mean that in both the colloquial and the original sense of the word.  The screenshots I provide in this review do not do this film justice.  You have to see this film to truly behold its dreamlike wonder.  The black-and-white only adds to the charm.

To sum up, see this.  It's fun, it's funny, it's easy to comprehend (something not all Shakespeare movies can do) and it is truly wondrous.

Screenshots

All I have to say about that getup is... wow.

Are we sure this isn't one of Cagney's gangster movies?

I don't know, looks like a perfectly normal forest to me....

Oh. 

Oberon, the King of Bling.

"Screw you guys, I'm goin' home."

"...and that's why the Chicago Cubs will never win
another World Series.  What?  Was that statement
too shocking for you?"

Titania wakes up next to an ass.  I bet most of you ladies
can relate, am I right? 

I leave you with the most disturbing screenshot of all.

Let's Get Dainty and Delicate

It's July 4th once again, and what better way to celebrate American Independence Day than by celebrating a film celebrating the holiest, noblest and most beloved people on Earth - I am of course referring to the Vikings.  So here is the greatest film ever about the greatest people to ever walk the greatest of worlds.

Sit back, relax and enjoy

Is that like the Wrath of Khan?

Vikings don't like the circus.

Translation from Latin ceremony:
"Marinate King in oil, cook at 425 for an hour...."

No snark, this is just one of the most awesome movie shots of all time.
The Viking ship is real.

"Spam, spam, spam spam, spam, spam, spam, spam...."

Prepare for the most awesome horn solo ever.

Tony Curtis as The Beastmaster!

Never put hawk in your eye.

"So, Eric, what is best in life?"

Man, Viking keggers rule!

"Man, Viking keggers suck!"

The Chin and The Eyes square off.

"So, Ragnar, how have you managed to live this long and healthy as a Viking chieftan?"
"I masturbate a lot."

Eric gooses the princess and creates the backless look all in one.

And Jamie Lee Curtis was born nine months later.

"For bringing Ragnar to me I grant thee pants!"

Whoah, Janet, babe, wrong movie!

"You are coming home with me this instant, young lady!"
"Aww, daaaaaad!"

"Whoever approaches the bridge of death must answer me these
questions three...."

The Vikings knew how to throw a barbecue.

Wasn't that fun?   And I didn't even show some of the most exciting or dramatic bits (thought I'd leave 'em for you to discover) like the ending battle scene.  Well, everybody enjoy your Fourth (unless you're, you know, British or something).  Eat a lot of barbecue, drink some beer and pillage some English villages.