Movies 44 | ***Dave Does the Blog

Here’s hoping he’s proven wrong

C.S. Lewis was not at all sanguine about a live-action Narnia adaptation, according to this letter to a BBC producer — though, unlike the framing prose in the BoingBoing post…

C.S. Lewis was not at all sanguine about a live-action Narnia adaptation, according to this letter to a BBC producer — though, unlike the framing prose in the BoingBoing post this is quoted in, his 1959 objections seem a bit more technical than philosophical.

As things worked out, I wasn’t free to hear a single instalment of our serial [The Magician’s Nephew] except the first. What I did hear, I approved. I shd. be glad for the series to be given abroad. But I am absolutely opposed – adamant isn’t in it! – to a TV version. Anthropomorphic animals, when taken out of narrative into actual visibility, always turn into buffoonery or nightmare. At least, with photography. Cartoons (if only Disney did not combine so much vulgarity with his genius!) wld. be another matter. A human, pantomime, Aslan wld. be to me blasphemy.

To that end, actually, the new film ought to be less objectionable than, say, the previous BBC live action series, which featured much clumsier puppetry for Aslan, though it’s still charming in my opinion). But bear in mind that Lewis died in 1963 — the CG capabilities available today have the potential to render Aslan et al. as something that partakes neither of “buffoonery or nightmare,” and far removed from someone dressed in a lion’s suit (which would smack enough of pagan ritual to seem blasphemous to someone like Lewis).

Given what BBC TV productions looked like in 1959 (or even 1969), I can’t say as I blame him for his concerns.

That all said, the movie may very well suck. While Walt Disney is no longer present at the helm of his company (having died in 1966), and it’s not clear what “vulgarity” Lewis is objecting to, the present company may certainly make something that is not true to the spirit of the writer. Heck, Peter Jackson approached LotR with near-reverence, and there will still folks (including in the Tolkien estate) who frothed at the mouth over his changes. It’s easy to believe that a company that’s taken such liberties with properties such as The Little Mermaid or Pocahontas or The Hunchback of Notre Dame (not to mention Kimba the White Lion) might easily screw up Narnia.

But, by the same token, that’s a battle for the fans of the work, not something to rely overly much on the 50-year-old opinions of the original author. Even someone such as C.S. Lewis.

Harry Potter and the Goblet of Fire

Due to Doyce’s good graces, Margie and Jackie and I were able to sneak out this afternoon and catch the new HP flick, the fourth installment. It is perhaps indicative…

Due to Doyce’s good graces, Margie and Jackie and I were able to sneak out this afternoon and catch the new HP flick, the fourth installment.

It is perhaps indicative of how in need of editing Rowling’s work has become that they were able to distill quite a thick book into a fairly decent 2 hour flick. Granted, some good stuff gets cut out — mostly some interesting interpersonal conflicts and more intricate conspiracy theories and much backstory — but quite a bit of far less useful elements get left out as well (excess dross about the bureaucracy of the wizard world). If things seem a bit sketchy early on, the movie still holds together pretty well. As usual, though, I’d have been willing to see more, and I hope there are some fairly extensive extra material scenes in the DVD release. (Evidently there had been serious talk about making two movies, to be released several months apart; that might have worked out better in some ways.)

At that, though, it’s by far more of a “story in-between” tale than the earlier movies (or books). You’d be lost if you hadn’t seen the earlier movies (or read the books), and the ending is hardly the “feel good picture of 2005” sort of thing. People have said (admiringly) that it’s definitely a darker movie, and that reflects where the overall book series has been going. And that’s not necessarily a bad thing, though it pushes back further the day when we let Katherine see it (we’re currently debating whether she should see #1 yet).

The special effects, as has been true from the beginning, are superb, even more than usual here. The primary actors have grown up nicely (even if faster in the 18-24 month movie schedule than in the books). The backup cast — the faculty at Hogwarts, mostly, though with a slew of other characters — are more sketchy, largely because of their numbers vs. the time alloted to them. We don’t get to really know much about Mad-Eye Moody, for example, and the regular faculty (with the notable exception of Dumbledore) get a quick line or scene here or there, somewhat wasted (Gary Oldman, alas, could easily have just phoned his in, and Alan Rickman’s Snape misses out on a lot of extra story bits that got cut).

Dumbledore get quite a bit of screen time, and becomes a lot more “human” in this installment. Which is fine, except that Michael Gambon’s accent tends to come and go at times, especially when he changes his delivery on different occasions.

That said, the story itself is pretty decent, even in its abridged version. Though much of the tale has to do with the Tri-Wizard Tourney (introducing two other schools of magic and their students), it’s really about Our Kids Growing Up. Hormones a-plenty, and though that gets much shorter shrift in the movie than the book (still enough to give me flashbacks to a half-dozen bad high school dance experiences of my youth) it’s still a major presence, made all the more significant for the cast’s aging.

Long story short: If you are a fan of the books and/or are up on the movies, go see it. It’s great, visually, and the overall saga definitely progresses, leaving you wishing the next movie were out for viewing as well. If you’ve never seen or read any HP — well, rent the other movies first. It will all make a lot more sense.

DVDs for the rest of us

Wandering through Target the other day, trying to find my wife and child, I passed by the dollar bins at the front by the checkstand. Dollar DVDs? Yup. Little one-off…

Wandering through Target the other day, trying to find my wife and child, I passed by the dollar bins at the front by the checkstand.

Dollar DVDs?

Yup. Little one-off $1 DVDs with 3-5 TV episodes from old shows (Dragnet, The Rifleman, One Step Beyond), movie serials (Flash Gordon), or even a couple of old movies. For $1.

Frankly, for $1, even if it’s crap and disposable, it’s still hard to go wrong. I picked up five of them that looked moderately interesting, and if they give me an hour or two of background entertainment, it’s a fabulous deal.

This sort of thing is where TV show DVDs can and should be going. Any number of old series out there that would lend themselves to this treatment. No need for commentary tracks and other fanciness (for most shows, anyway) — a buck for a couple of hours of eps is a great price point, and if there’s a lot of interest you can look at the bonuses on a re-release.

On a related note, Margie forwards me an article from the NYT about cheap video downloads of classic TV series.

Looking for “The Fugitive?” Didn’t get enough “Eight Is Enough?” Would you like to “Welcome Back, Kotter” one more time? Warner Brothers is preparing a major new Internet service that will let fans watch full episodes from more than 100 old television series. The service, called In2TV, will be free, supported by advertising, and will start early next year. More than 4,800 episodes will be made available online in the first year.

WB plans on having some commercials (1-2 min. per half-hour episode), which would be annoying. More annoying is watching TV on my PC. I like having my PC and my TV active at the same time (as homework aficionados will appreciate), and keeping a little window up on my screen is not very convenient (one reason I don’t watch many movies while on the road).

I also think the price point for this is a bit high. $2 for a downloaded half-hour episode? Even for an hour-long one? That I can only watch once (or as long as I can store it)? That gets up into DVD-class prices, and I can watch those a lot more conveniently.

The fact is, a lot of these series costs are already recovered (Hollywood accounting practices notwithstanding). The actual costs for these services are therefore mostly “what the market can bear” — and I suspect that not only will this price point turn out to be too high, but I expect these services will also push down DVD prices as well.

As demonstrated at Target this weekend …

Wallace & Gromit in The Curse of the Were-Rabbit

Went and saw the newest W&G flick as a special treat for Katherine. Just gloriously lovely. Exciting without being scary (for a 5-year-old), cute bunnies and dim humans and general…

Went and saw the newest W&G flick as a special treat for Katherine.

Just gloriously lovely. Exciting without being scary (for a 5-year-old), cute bunnies and dim humans and general zaniness combined with typical W&G charm and humor. Bits for the parents to chuckle over even as the kiddies squeal.

How they manage so much expression from a voiceless, mouthless, uni-browed dog, I’ll never know.

In short — good stuff, well worth the 2.8 tons of Plasticine in 42 colors — and 1000 baby-wipes per week to wipe it off animators’ fingers as they produced 3 seconds a day — it took to make it. And well worth the $20-odd to go see it in the theater.

Serenity DVD

It’s got a pretty ugly cover all right, but that won’t stop me from pre-ordering the DVD. Yay!…

It’s got a pretty ugly cover all right, but that won’t stop me from pre-ordering the DVD. Yay!

What’s old is, um, old again

Stallone. Rocky 6. Best postscript to the story: “Rocky Balboa” is the first film to be green-lit by MGM since it was acquired by Sony Corp. May be the last…

Stallone. Rocky 6.

Best postscript to the story:

“Rocky Balboa” is the first film to be green-lit by MGM since it was acquired by Sony Corp.

May be the last one, too.

Serenity in Two Thousand Words or Less

Gorram funny (even if no bunnies are involved). Also, obviously, riddled with spoilers, so don’t go there unless you’ve seen the movie….

Gorram funny (even if no bunnies are involved). Also, obviously, riddled with spoilers, so don’t go there unless you’ve seen the movie.

The Canon of SF Films

John Scalzi, who’s just publishing the Rough Guide to Sci-Fi Movies, puts out the canon of most significant SF films: All of this is designed to be both interesting and…

John Scalzi, who’s just publishing the Rough Guide to Sci-Fi Movies, puts out the canon of most significant SF films:

All of this is designed to be both interesting and informative, but the part of the book that’s going to get most people’s attention — and raise hackles — is The Canon, which features the 50 science fiction films I have deemed to be the most significant in the history of film. Note that “most significant” does not mean “best” or “most popular” or even “most influential.” Some of the films may be all three of these, but not all of them are — indeed, some films in The Canon aren’t objectively very good, weren’t blockbusters and may not have influenced other filmmakers to any significant degree. Be that as it may, I think they matter — in one way or another, they are uniquely representative of some aspect of the science fiction film experience.

Scalzi had final say on the list (reasons for each are in the book), but he solicited input from others. His list (with the ones I’ve seen in bold):

The Adventures of Buckaroo Banzai Across the 8th Dimension!
Akira
Alien
Aliens
Alphaville
Back to the Future
Blade Runner
Brazil
Bride of Frankenstein
Brother From Another Planet
A Clockwork Orange
Close Encounters of the Third Kind
Contact
The Damned
Destination Moon
The Day The Earth Stood Still
Delicatessen
Escape From New York
ET: The Extraterrestrial
Flash Gordon: Space Soldiers (serial)
The Fly (1985 version)
Forbidden Planet
Ghost in the Shell
Gojira/Godzilla
The Incredibles
Invasion of the Body Snatchers (1956 version)
Jurassic Park
Mad Max 2/The Road Warrior
The Matrix
Metropolis
On the Beach
Planet of the Apes (1968 version)
Robocop
Sleeper
Solaris (1972 version)
Star Trek II: The Wrath of Khan
Star Wars Episode IV: A New Hope
Star Wars Episode V: The Empire Strikes Back
The Stepford Wives
Superman
Terminator 2: Judgement Day
The Thing From Another World
Things to Come
Tron
12 Monkeys
28 Days Later
20,000 Leagues Under the Sea
2001: A Space Odyssey
La Voyage Dans la Lune
War of the Worlds (1953 version)

An interesting list. One could do worse than bringing those along on desert island exercise.

(via BoingBoing)

Extended Serenity

Hey, 13 minutes and 26 seconds of missing Serenity goodness — as listed by the British Board of Film Classification (their ratings board) for additional DVD material. Just titles of…

Hey, 13 minutes and 26 seconds of missing Serenity goodness — as listed by the British Board of Film Classification (their ratings board) for additional DVD material.

Just titles of each segment, no actual video, of course. Some of the bits I recognize from the Visual Companion script (one of the comments in the Whedonesque reference for this gives a proposed correlation by page number). Nothing earthshattering. The consensus is that this stuff was removed by Joss for pacing, so it seems unlikely, given his other comments, that a “Director’s Cut” will include this stuff in-stream, but it’s at least being slated for the DVD somewhere on the disc.

Wallace!

The new Wallace & Gromit flick is on our list of things to see with Kitten — but, alas, tragedy has struck, as a fire has destroyed 25 years of…

The new Wallace & Gromit flick is on our list of things to see with Kitten — but, alas, tragedy has struck, as a fire has destroyed 25 years of props and sets at Aardman Studio’s archives.

While material from “The Curse of the Were-Rabbit” wasn’t lost because it wasn’t yet in storage, the blaze today ruined what should have been a day of celebration for Aardman after the film’s box-office results, the company Events and Exhibitions Manager Kieran Argo said in a telephone interview from Bristol.

“Our warehouse where we store all of our sets, props, story boards and models from earlier productions has been totally destroyed,” Argo said from the southwestern city. “We’ve lost 30 years of history from Morph in the 1970s up to and including the latest series of ‘Creature Comforts’.”

Sylvia!

I love George Pal’s 1953 War of the Worlds. Now … with bunnies. (via the Flea)…

I love George Pal’s 1953 War of the Worlds. Now … with bunnies.

(via the Flea)

Your Serenity fix for today

Catch the first 9 minutes of Serenity (up to the main titles — “Where are you, little girl?”) here. Shiny. Requires some sort of viewer to be installed; so far…

Catch the first 9 minutes of Serenity (up to the main titles — “Where are you, little girl?”) here. Shiny.

Requires some sort of viewer to be installed; so far my machine hasn’t blown up.

My only complaint (aside from it making me want to see the movie again) is that it’s the largest block of time on the movie with only minimal involvement/interaction of the crew, making it both a great setup and a poor “sample” of the film.

But it’s still better than a poke in the guts with a sharp object …

(via Les)

Serenity

Randy invited and Margie kindly offered to watch after Kitten, who was feeling slightly under the weather. So … I went. Boo-yah! Not much I can add to my review…

Randy invited and Margie kindly offered to watch after Kitten, who was feeling slightly under the weather. So … I went.

Boo-yah!

Not much I can add to my review from the preview in May. The movie has gotten a high buff and polish — the music is perfect, the post-processing on some of the scenes has lent them appropriately interesting tones, etc. Nothing much was changed — there might have been a few little bits tossed in, though the scene adds in the Visual Guide were not present. But it all feels cleaner, grittier, and more exciting and fun, even knowing what was coming.

The movie starts out a bit rough — it feels a bit too much like a TV movie on the big screen, in tone and presentation (and, occasionally, in effects and set pieces). But eventually things really get rolling, and it all comes together, and other cliches like that.

If I have one objection to Serenity, is that it does seem like a movie that wraps up plot points that ought to have been spread out over five years or so. It reminds me a bit of Season 4 of Babylon 5 — rushing to get to the good parts, which both gets you the good parts and gets you that rushed feeling.

That said, I can see some things that could be done with a sequel. And, heck, if I can see them, heaven knows what skulduggery Joss can see …

Go see it. So we can see the next one.

Another reason to see Serenity opening weekend

The chance to get some Adam Hughes original artwork. Cool. Meantime, check out the Serenity graphic novel cover AH! did. My oh my….

The chance to get some Adam Hughes original artwork. Cool.

Meantime, check out the Serenity graphic novel cover AH! did. My oh my.

The Gospel According to St Hagrid

Things Hagrid the Half-Giant Would Say if He Served Jesus Instead of Harry Potter: “Why, if a fellow wanted ta get away clean, Peter-me-lad, all they’d have ter do would…

Things Hagrid the Half-Giant Would Say if He Served Jesus Instead of Harry Potter:

“Why, if a fellow wanted ta get away clean, Peter-me-lad, all they’d have ter do would be ta deny they ever even knowed Jesus. Uh-oh. I shouldn’t eh told yeh that.”

Heh.

Duel Controls

Though the author of this TheForce.net piece on how to make light saber duels look more realistic is explicitly addressing it toward Star Wars fan film producers, and explicitly not…

Though the author of this TheForce.net piece on how to make light saber duels look more realistic is explicitly addressing it toward Star Wars fan film producers, and explicitly not toward the SW films themselves — it’s clear that he feels much the same about the SW films themselves.

In either case, the fights consist more or less of constant striking at one another?s weapon (instead of seeming to be intent on actually hitting their opponent?what a concept that would be). Not meaning to sound harsh, but why it is people in these films (even the experienced martial artists) seem insistent on finding the longest complicated means of moving their lightsabers around with the most vulnerable of body positions, rather than the quickest, strongest and most efficient, is something that will always puzzle me.

Now, don?t get me wrong, choreography can be “good” while still being “invalid.” What I mean by this is, the display can be viewed artistically as a physical performance of ballet-like balance and timing, judgment of range, hand-eye coordination, and dynamic understanding of movement. But, to the trained eye (and even the untrained yet perceptive eye) it can still be easily seen to be martially unsound, tactically foolish, and technically primitive.

If the purpose of lightsaber fight choreography is simply to convey drama and excitement within the context of a story, then choreographers feel they’ve done their job well. But, from my point of view, if a lightsaber fight is supposed to convince the viewer that individuals of great skill are really trying to kill one another with laser swords while using supernatural powers that heighten their senses and physical abilities, well, they fail miserably.

His advice (much more fleshed out that this):

1. Act Like You Are in a Fight
2. Don’t Forget Physics
3. Moves that Look Cool are Usually the Stupidest
4. Feint, Dodge, and Pause
5. Don’t Stop When You Get in Close
6. Move Your Feet!

Good stuff.

(via GeekPress)

Spoilsports

Sadly, cunning booby traps in ancient tombs, Indiana Jones-style, are a Hollywood myth. Dammit. It’s rare that an archaeologist can walk into a newly-discovered ancient building and start nosing around….

Sadly, cunning booby traps in ancient tombs, Indiana Jones-style, are a Hollywood myth. Dammit.

It’s rare that an archaeologist can walk into a newly-discovered ancient building and start nosing around. Very rare. OK, it never happens. You see, debris starts accumulating in a building long before it’s done being built. It was only through the constant efforts of the custodial staff that the priests of Indy’s temple weren’t kicking their way through mounds of dirt, dried leaves, and soda cans on their way to human sacrifices a thousand years ago. When the janitors quit things went to pot quickly–today the typical Mesoamerican temple lies buried under the accumulated junk of centuries. Nobody will be running down those halls until somebody, preferably a volunteer or student working for free who still thinks archaeology is romantic, has shoveled out all that dirt. With a soup spoon. And sifted it for busted crockery and chicken bones.

That dirt isn’t just in your clothes, hair, shoes, and fingernails; it’s also in any machines the ancients hoped would kill you. Here’s this week’s home experiment: Bury your car at the beach. Leave it there a month, then dig it up and try to start it. Didn’t work, did it? Neither would the ancients’ machines.

If there were any, I mean. That’s the thing, you see. The main reason archaeologists have nothing to fear from booby traps isn’t that the machines have been buried a couple millennia. It’s that the ancients just didn’t have cool machines like automatic door closers or trip-wired blowguns or enormous ball returns. Archaeologists know this not only because they have never found the ball returns but also because the ancients didn’t brag about them. If Pharaoh Amunhotep XXIII had something like that, or thought of it, or had somebody on the Cool Weapons staff who thought of it, there would be stellae (upright inscribed stones) trumpeting his total coolness and showing giant bowling balls knocking down Midianites like squishy duckpins.

Oh, well. We’ll always have Killer Dungeons.