“Who am I? I’m the Doctor”

5 06 2011

Doctor Who logo - Copyright BBC Worldwide

Apologies on the sparse posting as of late.  I’m usually not much of a television fan, but have been engrossed in two shows over the past couple of weeks.  First, I’m still moving through the original Twilight Zone episodes; the reviews, which are updated regularly, are available on the Twilight Zone master guide page which is located here: https://notesonafilm.wordpress.com/twilight-zone-master-guide/.  I hope you’ll check it out and find some episodes that fit your taste!

The other show that has dominated my life, and much more so, as of late is the British science fiction classic Doctor Who.  I’ve long thought the series would appeal to me, but I try my hardest to avoid television programs (or programmes more appropriately for a British show) when possible because of the time commitments.  However, I have gotten myself sucked into yet another with this series.

Originally, Maddie and I were going to start with the original Doctor Who from the 1960s and try our best to move forward through the entirety of the series.  We actually did watch a few of the original episodes from the William Hartnell era and, though quality was not good because of magnetic tape storage, the stories were very interesting and held up quite well!  Being a show that has had almost 800 episodes, however, we soon decided to take a friend’s advice and start with the 2005 re-boot of the series by Russell T. Davies, which updates the viewer on much of the terminology and makes it so you don’t have to watch the previous 700 episodes to know what is going on.

Because of the BBC’s “cleaning tape” policy of the 1970s, many of the original episodes are unavailable.  Also, though the stories were intriguing, the dated sets and low production value of some of the early episodes were a bit hard to get through.  So, about a week and a half ago, we began the 2005 series which starts with the appearance of the ninth doctor, portrayed by Christopher Eccleston.  We just finished the first season and regeneration into the tenth doctor (David Tennant) and are decidedly hooked on this series.

The first season wasn’t the best looking because of being shot, obviously, on Digital Betacam in 4:3.  However, the stories, performances, direction and, for the time impressive CG sequences, really propelled the series and took the mind away from the video-like look of that season.  Having just watched the special Christmas episode and first episode of the second season, it looks like they made a huge jump in what camera they were using, as it’s 16×9 and 24p (still not sure if it’s SD or downrezzed HD, but looks WAY better).

In short, don’t be surprised if the posts are a bit sparse for a bit while I continue to navigate space and time in my living room.  Do check back frequently for Twilight Zone updates though and I will have a special post when I get the full first season watched and reviewed.  Thanks for your patronage and hopefully my eyes won’t bleed out of my head in the coming weeks from too much sitting in front of the tube!





Entering the Twilight Zone…

24 05 2011

Copyright Cayuga Productions and CBS Corporation

Maddie and I have gotten a little lax on finishing Twin Peaks.  We only have four or five more episodes to go before finishing the series completely, but we have taken a decent amount of time ever since the Laura Palmer episodes ended in watching new episodes.  A full series recap will be forthcoming once we finish.  In the interim, outside of watching movies, we started to spark up some of the old Twilight Zone episodes (original series era 1959-64).

It’s been awhile since I’d seen any Twilight Zone episodes, so I was excited to see that Netflix has nearly 140 Rod Serling-era episodes on instant watch.  Whatever is not up on the instant watch, I’m sure I will be able to find in my brother Patrick’s collection.  He literally has every episode of the entire original series and, if I am not mistaken, has seen all of them at some point or another, possibly twice.  Anyway, since Maddie had never seen an episode of the show, I felt it only right to introduce her.  Last night we saw three episodes.  I was immediately entranced with the series just as I had been years ago when watching them late night on the Sci-Fi Channel, and Maddie really enjoyed the episodes as well.  As an ongoing feature here at the blog, I will rate the episodes as I see them.  Hopefully, as time goes by, you’ll be able to check back here and get a nice overall guide to the entire series.  Once all episodes are watched and rated, I will make a main page with chronological listing from season one through season five.

Of course, a large part of the fun in watching Twilight Zone episodes are the twist endings and surprises.  To not spoil the story and thematic representations of the individual episodes, I will only give brief overviews of the plot.  Hope you guys enjoy, and now for the first three:

Season 1, Episode 5 – “Walking Distance” 

★ ★ ★ ★

Released on October 30, 1959, this episode was directed by Robert Stevens, written by series creator Rod Serling and starred actor Gig Young (eventual Academy Award-winner for Best Supporting Actor in 1969 for They Shoot Horses, Don’t They?, whose career later ended in tragedy).  Young plays a middle-age advertising executive from New York, Martin Sloan, who is traveling back to his hometown on a whim for nostalgia’s sake.  When he arrives, however, he finds that the town is just the same as he remembers it and, eventually, realizes it actually is the same.  He has traveled 25 years into the past, where he runs into his mother, father and former self.

The direction of this episode and cinematography by series DP regular George T. Clemens is amazing.  The final scenes, with their dutch angles and atmospheric lighting, create an intriguing dream-like effect.  Time Magazine later rated this episode as the eighth best of the series.

Season 1, Episode 8 – “Time Enough at Last”

★ ★ ★ ★ 1/2

Released on November 20, 1959, this episode was directed by John Brahm, adapted by Rod Serling and starred actor Burgess Meredith (probably best known as the coach in the Rocky series or Jack Lemmon’s father in the Grumpy Old Men series).  Meredith portrays bookworm bank teller, Harold Bemis, who is constantly in trouble at both work and at home for his insatiable reading habits.  While retiring to the bank safe to satisfy his desires, a Hydrogen bomb wipes out everything above ground.  Bemis exits the safe and realizes that he is the only person left in the world.

This episode is based off the short story of the same name by Lyn Venable and won director John Brahm a DGA award for excellence in television directing.  Meredith would go on to appear in several other episodes in the series and this episode is consistently rated as one of the best of the series.

Season 1, Episode 18 – “The Last Flight”

★ ★ ★ ★

Released on February 5, 1960, this episode was directed by William Claxton, written by Richard Matheson (of I am Legend, Stir of Echoes, Incredible Shrinking Man, etc. fame) and starred British actor Kenneth Haigh.  When Flight Lt. Decker (Haigh) gets lost over France during World War I in 1917, he lands his plane at an air force base.  Unbeknownst to him, he has landed at Lafayette Air Force base in 1959.  The Major General of the base at first thinks his outfit, plane and story are some kind of joke.  In the end, however, they realize he is not joking and this chance landing in another time is important in helping Flight Lt. Decker do the right decision in his own time.

Though not necessarily as flashy or well-revered as the other two episodes I reviewed today, I really liked the plot of this one.  It kept you interested from beginning to end and Haigh’s performance was perfectly on par.





5 Buddy Films You Must See

13 05 2011

Buddy films have been chosen as the next entry in the “5 Films You Must See” series.  What constitutes a buddy film?  Well, really nothing other than the story revolves around two or more really good friends, with their friendship being a major motivator of the plot.  My girlfriend wanted me to add in that my list below is distinctly guy buddy films and, honestly, it is.  What I would consider a girl buddy film would most likely fall under “chick flick” for me, of which, I doubt I will create a list for, though I did strongly consider including Thelma and Louise.

Copyright 1996 Independent Pictures

5. Swingers dir. Doug Liman (1996) – This movie is absolutely hilarious and was the star-making roles that really started off the careers of Vince Vaughn, John Favreau and Ron Livingston.  Favreau plays Mike(y), a down-on-his-luck comedian, who recently moved to Los Angeles from New York, ending a six year relationship with his girlfriend.  Mike can’t get his ex out of his head and refuses to get back in the game.  His friends, Trent (Vaughn), Rob (Livingston) and Sue (Patrick Van Horn), try to get him to loosen up and let her go.  Much of the film is the different buddies interacting or gambling in Las Vegas, going to clubs or trying to cheer Mike up.  The dialog in the film is so sharp, however, that the easy flowing plot really doesn’t matter.  Accompanied by an upbeat jazz score, this is 1990s comedy at its best.  Also, after a first viewing, don’t be surprised to find yourself referring to everything as “money” in your personal life.  I’ve seen this film at least 10 times and it never gets old – definitely a must see!

Copyright 1987 Handmade Films

4. Withnail and I dir. Bruce Robinson (1987) –  This seminal British comedy is one of my personal favorites on this list, though I love them all.  A semi-autobiographical film from writer/director Robinson, this film follows the lives of Withnail (Richard E. Grant) and I (Paul McGann) in 1969 London town.  Living in a small, rundown apartment, the two out-of-work actors spend their days drinking, doing drugs and going on weekend benders.  For a change of pace, the two take up Withnail’s flamboyantly gay uncle, Monty (Richard Griffiths) on a trip to his country cottage.  Thinking it will be a relaxing getaway to the country, the two find it to be anything but.  They have a hard time getting food, it is cold and raining and the cottage itself is in shambles.  Unexpectedly, Monty shows up at the cottage in the middle of the night and begins hitting on Paul McGann’s character during their stay because Withnail told Monty he was closeted.  In the end, the relaxing getaway turns out to be anything but and challenges the relationship between the two protagonists.  Having had a period myself where I spent many nights in the bar and out of work, this is a very relatable film for me and, coincidentally, I have a friend that is very reminiscent of Withnail who was a frequent drinking buddy.  Watching this film always makes me nostalgic about that time in my life; though it wasn’t productive, it was a lot of fun.  Everything about this film works: the writing is great, the direction is precise and the acting is brilliant by all involved.  Like Swingers, this film will also give you many quotable lines to use in daily life.  Scrubbers!!!

Copyright 1980 Universal Pictures

3. The Blues Brothers dir. John Landis (1980) – I’m sure most of you have probably seen this film at some point in your lives.  Starting out as a Saturday Night Live skit with John Belushi and Dan Aykroyd, the feature film version is the definitive story of Jake and Elwood Blues.  When Jake (Belushi) gets out of a three year stint in prison, him and his brother Elwood (Aykroyd) visit the Roman Catholic orphanage where they grew up.  They find that the orphanage will close unless $5,000 of property taxes are collected within 11 days.  The brothers decide they should get their old Rhythm and Blues band back together to help the church with benefit concerts.  Being on a “mission from God”, the two set out recruiting all the old musicians.  Over the course of the film, they run into all sorts of precarious situations with the police, a crazy ex-girlfriend, rowdy country bars and other situations.  Guest appearances by many famous musicians including Ray Charles, Aretha Franklin, John Lee Hooker and Chaka Chan, among others, appear throughout.  The final chase scene is probably one of the biggest chases and car pile ups committed to film.  This film is infinitely entertaining and has so many great scenes and musical numbers that it easily ranks as one of the best movies from an SNL skit beginning.

Copyright 1969

2. Butch Cassidy and the Sundance Kid dir. George Roy Hill (1969) – This is a perfectly formatted buddy film because almost everything revolves around the friendship of the two main characters, Butch (Paul Newman) and Sundance (Robert Redford).  The leaders of the Hole-in-the-Wall Gang, the whole film follows the two and their gang going through successful and unsuccessful robberies of trains and banks.  As a side story is the relationship between Sundance and school teacher Etta Place (Katherine Ross).  Going from one robbery to the next, the two eventually find themselves cornered by the Bolivian calvary and the film ends with on of the most memorable and climatic endings of the 1960s.

Copyright 1959 Ashton Productions

1. Some Like it Hot dir. Billy Wilder (1959) – Billy Wilder constantly ranks as one of my favorite filmmakers.  If you look at a list of his credits, you will be astounded by the many classic films that were made under his helm.  This one is probably my favorite comedy of his.  It revolves around two struggling musicians, Jerry (Jack Lemmon) and Joe (Tony Curtis), who witness the St. Valentine’s Day Massacre.  The leader of the gang who authorized the massacre, “Spats” Colombo (George Raft in a role parodying his former roles in 1930s and 1940s gangster dramas), see the two of them at the scene of the crime and they run for their lives.  They join an all-female band heading to Florida in disguise as Josephine and Daphne.  The all-female band is lead by bandleader “Sugar” Kane (Marilyn Monroe).  Joe falls for her deeply and tries to romance her in yet another disguise as a wealthy businessman with Cary Grant-like mannerisms, all the while keeping up the female disguise as Josephine when needed to not blow his cover.  When the gangsters show up to Florida at the hotel the band is playing, the disguises become harder and harder to keep up.  The final scenes of the film are filled with hilarious chases and mishaps and the final line of the film, “Well, nobody’s perfect” has become one of cinema’s most famous closing lines.





5 Mind-Blowing Movies You Must See

5 05 2011

A while ago I published a post on the “5 Silent Films You Must See.”  I’ve decided to take that a little further and do a small, continuing series for those that will consist of the same standard 5 film recommendations.  Topics will be years, genres, styles, actors, directors, cinematographers, you name it.  Today’s post we’ll be covering “5 Mind-Blowing Movies You Must See”.  This list consists of movies that are intricate, difficult to follow and blur the lines of space, time, story structure or other conventional cues.  Hope you guys enjoy these entries and feel free to recommend topics for future lists!

Copyright 2000 Summit Entertainment

5. Memento dir. Christopher Nolan (2000) – This was director Christopher Nolan’s first decently budgeted motion picture after the festival success of his first film, Following, which was an independent feature largely funded out of pocket.  The story follows Leonard (Guy Pearce), who is hunting a man he believes killed his wife.  The only problem is that Leonard has no capacity to store short term memory, his last memory being of his wife being murdered; as a result, he uses a system of notes, tattoos and other reminders so that he can remember where he needs to go and who he needs to visit next.  Essentially, the story is a noir with an interesting twist.  With two alternating storylines, one that moves forward through the film and one backwards, the film evokes an effect on the mind similar to that of what the main character is suffering.  This really is a brilliant film and gives an early insight into how apt a director Christopher Nolan is.  Last year’s Inception rekindled his affair with disjointed story structure, a style he is one of the best at pulling off.

Copyright 1990 Carolco Pictures

4. Jacob’s Ladder dir. Adrian Lyne (1990) – Following on the heels of Lyne’s extremely successful Fatal Attraction, this is what I feel is his best film.   The script, by Bruce Joel Rubin, was long considered the best script not produced in Hollywood, having floating around for the better part of a decade without being produced.  It tells the story of Jacob Singer, a member of a Vietnam battalion who was experimented upon with hallucinations, who returns home to find strange things happening to and around him.  Creatures appear, his dead son visits him, the government seems to be withholding information about the experimentations conducted on him and he begins to go through strange physical fluctuations and sickness as well.  The film as a whole leads from question to question without providing a lot of answers until the conclusion.  This film will keep you on the edge of your seat from beginning to end and plays games with the viewer as much as it does with the protagonist.

Copyright 1965 Kamera Film Unit

3. The Saragossa Manuscript dir. Wojciech Has (1965) – This is an epic piece of Polish filmmaking that runs right at three hours long.  During the Napoleonic Wars, an officer finds an old book that relates stories his grandfather told him about being a captain in the Walloon Guard.  Though the following of Alfonse Van Worden (Zbigniew Cybulski), the original officer’s grandfather, is the main crux of the story, this film spans many stories that are all inter-related.  At one point in the film you are literally in a story within a story within a story within a story.  It’s a masterful combination of surrealism, fairy tales, legend and European folklore.  Needless to say it is one trippy experience, but not one that gets old even at its long running time.  Has’s use of dolly movement, crane and epic sweeps of the landscape and luscious sets, coupled with the brilliant black-and-white cinematography of Mieczyslaw Jahoda, create a very dream-like quality for the film as a whole.  As an interesting side note, this was Jerry Garcia’s favorite movie.

Copyright 2001 Canal+

2. Muholland Drive dir. David Lynch (2001) – Generally, you either love David Lynch or you hate him.  I, for one, am definitely an admirer of his work.  I knew starting this list that at least one Lynch film would make an appearance; after thinking long and hard, it had to be this one.  This takes the elements of all that is Lynchian and puts it in the most cohesive, entertaining example of his career.  The story begins after a horrible car crash on Muholland Drive in Los Angeles.  A mysterious young woman, Rita (Laura Harring), wonders away from the crash site with amnesia and ends up at a bungalow currently being lived in by Betty (Naomi Watts).  Betty has just arrived in Los Angeles and is staying at her Aunt’s place, so she thinks Rita is a friend of her Aunts at first.  When she realizes she is not, Rita tells her of the crash and they begin an investigation into who Rita really is.  Outside of that main story, there are also side stories including one of a film director, portrayed by Justin Theroux, who is casting for his next big picture, a man trying to steal a black book, a monster who leaves outside of a diner and other strange vignettes.  Halfway through the movie, everything changes and starts to blow your mind with multiple characters assuming other identities, goals and relationships.  Originally starting out as a television pilot, the film was completed as a feature after the pilot was not picked up.  It touches on all the great things that make a Lynch movie: dreams, surrealism, symbolism, odd characters, pandora’s boxes, etc.  I love this film, absolutely love it.  For his effort tying this mind boggling film all together, David Lynch was nominated for a Best Director Academy Award.

Copyright 1929

1. Un Chien Andalou dir. Luis Buñuel (1929) – This isn’t my favorite film on this list, but it was incredibly influential in all the other films on the list because it was one of the first strong visualizations of surrealism in cinema.  Buñuel is hands down, without a doubt, the king of surrealism in cinema, and together with Salvador Dali, they created this 15 minute short in the late 1920s.  A silent film, it opens with the infamous razor cutting the eye scene and becomes more and more bizarre as it moves forward.  A disjointed film, it is largely re-piecing of dreams and other strange subconscious scenarios out of the minds of Buñuel and Dali.  Upon release, it incited riots in the streets and was banned in many countries – now that is some achievement!  Though Dali and Buñuel went their separate ways after this short experiment in surrealism on film, Buñuel continued to make the best in surrealist cinema for another 50 years, eventually winning a Best Foreign Language Film Oscar in 1972 for The Discreet Charm of the Bourgeoise.  A feat he had earlier quoted as saying, “Nothing would disgust me more morally than winning an Oscar.”





Yvette Vickers and the Dark Side of Fame

4 05 2011

Vickers from a 1950s Photo Shoot

Hollywood is legendary for red carpet events, epic parties, glitz and glamour, but it has always been the underbelly of this faux front that has in some ways interested me.  Hollywood, like the film industry itself in many ways, is very plastic and fake in so many ways; one day you are a star, the next you are forgotten.  The old phrase still rings true in so many ways, “You are only as good as your last picture.”

Why this type of post today?  Well, I recently read an article on the death of actress and former Playboy pin-up Yvette Vickers.  These are stories that you don’t hear as much about, the ones that show the sad, lonely side of fame.  Vickers, who was born on August 26, 1928, is probably best remembered for her lead role as Honey Parker in the Sci-Fi/Exploitation classic Attack of the 50 Foot Woman in 1958.  However, her career also included bit parts and other work in such classic films as Sunset Blvd., Hud and a host of guest roles in a variety of television programs.  In addition, she was Playboy’s Miss July in 1959, with photos by B-movie trailblazer Russ Meyer.

In her prime, Vickers was about as beautiful as they get: blue-eyed, blonde haired and very shapely.  As time went by, however, her roles became less and less and, by the mid-1960s, her career had squandered to only sporadic appearances.  According to IMDB, her final role was as “Neighbor” in a low budget horror film entitled Evil Spirits from 1990.

Largely forgotten by all but the most dedicated of science fiction and horror fans, Vickers body was found in her Benedict Canyon home last week.  Coroners were unable to pinpoint exactly how long she had been dead, as her body had mummified.; sources say it could have sat in her upstairs bedroom for as long as a year.

She had lived in the 1920s-era home in which she was found for decades, but over time, the home had fallen into a state of disrepair and even been exposed to the elements in some areas.  Noticing cobwebs and yellowed mail spilling out of the mailbox, neighbor Susan Savage decided to investigate further.  Savage looked in through the windows and could see blonde hair, which turned out to be a wig.  She entered the home which was purportedly filled with boxes of old mail, clothes and junk and maneuvered her way upstairs.

Copyright 1958 Woolner Brothers Pictures, Inc.

In a small room, cluttered as the rest of the house was, Savage found Vickers body next to a small space heater that was still running.  The body was unrecognizable and completely mummified.  According to Savage, she remembered her neighbor as a kind, older women with a warm smile who had friends.  Where were all these friends though to allow a death to go unnoticed for so long?  Everyone wants to make excuses, but in reality, poor Yvette Vickers was just a forgotten soul that few people outside of some fans across the nation remembered.

On a small scale, this is truly the bad side of fame, the part that forgets you after you are no longer in the spotlight.  On a large scale, this is the sad truth that likely much of our geriatric population without children go through, famous or not.  It hurts to see someone forgotten, someone no one seems to remember or care about anymore.

As for filmmaking as an industry, why don’t we take care of our own?  If you didn’t know already, the Motion Picture Country House and Hospital that had long been a service of the Motion Picture and Television Fund, is closing down.  No one new has been admitted for several years and after the passing of those currently occupying, the facility will close for good.  Many former staples of the industry have spent their last days in this facility and some would have had no where else to go but a demise such as Vickers had they not had this facility to rely on in their old age.

Maybe I’m biased because my father is older and always has been a senior citizen since I’ve been alive, but these people deserve to be cared for and treated properly.  If it wasn’t for them, we wouldn’t have many of the things we take for granted today.





Who Killed Laura Palmer?

14 04 2011

Copyright 1990 Lynch/Frost Productions

That question was burning through the television world  in 1990 when the original episodes of David Lynch’s Twin Peaks aired.  When the first season came out on DVD in the early 2000s, I jumped at the opportunity to watch the show.  David Lynch has long been a favorite filmmaker of mine; of course, not all his films are for all tastes, but you can’t say they aren’t interesting at least.

I watched through the first season of the show and absolutely loved it.  Unfortunately, the second DVD installment wasn’t released until much later, so by the time it came out I would have had to re-watch all the first season.  By that time I was deep in the throes of college and didn’t have the time to devote to a television program.  Even without fully finishing the series, I long carried this as my favorite television show of all time (until The Sopranos and Lost).  The quirky characters and weird happenings in the town made the show very unique.  It’s a soap opera mystery via David Lynch, and it’s the Lynchian touch that makes it so brilliant.

Now, nearly 10 years later, I noticed that Netflix has added the entire series to their instant queue.  I was ecstatic; finally an opportunity to finish this wonderful show properly.  However, my girlfriend, Maddie, had never seen the show and I wanted to watch it with her.  So, we started the pilot episode last night and are looking forward to watching through the entire series.  It’s amazing how much you forget from a television program after 10 years; I definitely remembered the major points of the pilot, but so much of the ancillary stories had evaporated from memory.  I hope 10 years from now the same will be able to be done with Lost; to watch it again and feel like first viewing – that would be a treat!

Though I never finished the series, I do know who killed Laura Palmer.  There was no disclosure statement in the prequel movie Twin Peaks: Fire Walk with Me and I watched it before I started the actual show.  At the end of the film, it shows who killed her.  So, for anyone interested in Twin Peaks, don’t watch Fire Walk with Me until after the series!  Also, for the sake of future viewers, please no comments revealing the culprit.





My First (D)SLR

8 04 2011

Panasonic Lumix GH2

So, I’ve worked with DSLR cameras pretty much since they came out.  Most of the projects I have worked on have been with members of the Canon line: 7d, 5d and T2i.  There are definitely some drawbacks to these stills cameras being using for motion capture; however, the quality you get for video is really inspiring in a lot of ways on another level.  They, quite inexpensively, give you the opportunity to utilize a shallower depth of field compared to standard ENG cameras, are better in low-light situations and are compact and durable, though not quite so ergonomic.

I bought my Panasonic HVX-200 in January of 2007 and it’s been a great camera for me.  It’s a solid, prosumer ENG style camera that, at the time I bought it, was a real workhorse for independent productions.  I’ve shot many industrial, commercial, Web promos, live performances, weddings and everything in between on the HVX.  In addition, I’ve lensed seven short films, many award-winning, on this camera.  Yet, I’ve never been necessarily enamored with the picture quality and performance of the HVX.  It’s not bad by any means, but it does leave something to be desired.  For one, you can only truly shoot 24p in 720 mode, not in 1080; the kit lens on the HVX is not high quality; I hate, hate, hate that you can’t manually dial in a color temperature based on Kelvin increments and the LCD and LVF are complete crap.  As with any camera though, there will be downsides.

In working with many DSLRs, I have really come to appreciate the distinctive “look” to some degree.  However, with the Canon line, there have been enough setbacks of one form or another (limited continuous capture, overheating issues, aliasing, bad moire), that I have not yet purchased a DSLR of my own – at least until now.  I caught wind of the Panasonic GH2 late last year when it came out.  It’s a micro 4/3 sensor camera which in sensor size is extremely close to a 35mm motion picture film frame.  In addition, Panasonic had made some major changes that give it an edge over some of the other DSLRs on the market including: the ability to continuous capture indefinitely, no overheating issues and much improved handling of problematic patterns that cause aliasing and moire.

As with anything before I buy it, I spent many an hour watching sample footage, looking at camera tests and reading reviews.  Finally, I was sold; this was the DSLR I had been waiting for (it’s mirrorless so in some regards its not a true DSLR, hence my (D)SLR title).  In looking on Amazon, B&H and other camera suppliers, however, I noticed that this camera is basically impossible to get ahold of right now.  Everywhere had them backordered!  So, of course, I checked eBay to see what they had to offer, but everything was price gouged by about $300.  I wanted the camera, but not that bad.  Finally, a camera company in Washington state listed one with the 14-42mm kit lens on eBay and since they were a Panasonic dealer, they couldn’t gouge the price.  So, I jumped at the auction when I saw it up for a “Buy it Now” at retail value.

I just got the camera in yesterday and have only been messing around a little with it last night and this morning.  I have to say though, I am pretty damn impressed.  Here in the office, I’ve been shooting under available light at 1600 ASA equivalency and the image is way less noisy than the HVX even at that high an ASA.  The color space is impressive, the aliasing and moire have been greatly reduced for a DSLR and it really has a pretty damn good dynamic range.  It was holding highlights at a solid 3 stops over and even holding pretty well into 4 stops, which is not bad for the price.  I’m not getting rid of the old HVX just yet (I did list it prematurely, but then took it down) just because some clients would probably rather see the larger, more impressive looking HVX on a commercial shoot than this little still camera.  All in all, I am very happy I bought this camera.  I can’t wait to outfit it with a Kessler Pocket Dolly, Shoulder rig, follow focus, mattebox and extra lenses.

The HVX still has its place for the time being, but this little camera has a very impressive picture and I can’t wait to test it more.  I’m glad I have the extra camera and have long considered a DSLR; its definitely been well worth the wait for the added video improvements that have come along.  Just for anyone out there considering, with the 14-42mm kit lens (worth getting now as there aren’t a lot of micro 4/3 lenses on the market yet and with the sensor size, 14mm is closer to 28mm, 42mm to 85mm, etc.) this camera is $995.95.  Yes, that’s definitely a big bang for the buck.





My Perception of Violence in “Straw Dogs”

6 04 2011

Dustin Hoffman as David Sumner in "Straw Dogs." Copyright 1971 ABC Pictures

* Some spoilers within.

I reviewed this film recently for my place of work’s monthly newsletter after seeing it for a third time.  This, coupled with the fact that a remake from director Rod Lurie will be coming out this year, has propelled me to delve a little deeper into this wonderful character study.  Each time you see a movie like this again, you find things that you didn’t see the first time or with other previous viewings.

For those of you unfamiliar with the film, it was directed by Sam Peckinpah (The Wild Bunch) in 1971 and stars Dustin Hoffman and Susan George.  Narratively, it centers on the character of David Sumner (Dustin Hoffman), a mild-mannered American mathematician, who has come to rural England to live with his newly wedded English wife, Amy (Susan George), while he works on a book with grant money.  From the beginning, David stands out as an anomaly in his newfound living environment.  He hires several locals who grew up with his wife to help rebuild his garage, which is in a state of disrepair; they laze about, stalk his wife and taunt him with jokes and cruel pranks.

As the story progresses, David and Amy’s relationship becomes more constrained due to David’s research and the pressures that ensue from the vicious taunting of the local townspeople.  Restrained frustration in David’s character builds along with that of the audience who omnisciently see further torture in a controversial scene where Amy is brutally raped by several of the men working on the garage.

The tension and frustration build at a steady pace from the very opening frames of the film and culminate in one of the most shocking, character reversals in film history in which violence is unleashed in David as he defends his home from the townspeople.  The cathartic effect of the final climatic scenes offer an interesting question as to whether the violence was fueled and born in David from his frustrations or if it was always within him from the beginning.

The complexities of character in this film are very deep on many different levels.  The first time I saw the film, I focused more on the fact that David was defending his happy home from these intruders and didn’t pick up on many of the minor nuances in his and Amy’s relationship.  In re-watching the last two times, it’s evident that David and Amy’s relationship itself is quite strained by the climax.  Rather than solely seeing David as this mild-mannered American stereotype, I picked up on many instances where there was a deep passive-agression in his demeanor and reactions.

Several of those scenes that I sensed an underlying violence were with Amy when he was trying to work.  Being bored while he works, she pesters him to a degree, even going so far as to change some of his math problems on his blackboard.  Her reactions frustrate David in several scenes to becoming quite verbally agressive.  It’s through a series of these arguments between David and Amy that we see their relationship become more and more constrained and, in turn, David’s overall demeanor more passive-aggressive.  By the time the rape scene happens, well into the film, Amy and his relationship is almost a spiteful one.

Herein lies one of the biggest points of contentions about the film.  Did Amy welcome this rape?  Well, in my opinion, I would say yes and no.  In the original moments, it is very evident that she doesn’t want the sexual agression of her former boyfriend, Charlie.  Yet, upon insistance, it seems that she actually does welcome it and enjoy the act; largely this seems due to her constrained relationship with David.  The part of the rape sequence that I think brought the scene back into her not wanting the advances is when the second man, Riddaway, comes in to have his way.  This is where the trauma of the rape scene fully sets in and where it is quite evident that she is in distress.

David never finds out about the rape.  His violence that explodes in the final scenes is an internal happening.  It’s as if everyone is against him and the only thing he has is his “home” and the violence that has always lived in him slowly boiling over.  Amy refuses to help fend off the townspeople to the point of him slapping her and restraining her to the upstairs.  This is a man that has been pushed and inched forward slowly to the point of having to turn into an animal.

I think this is evident of us all and that’s what is so powerful about this film.  We all have a level of violence that lives within us as, in reality, we are all animals that work off primal instincts at the most basic level.  It’s our conviction, beliefs and upbringing that separate us from other animal species and give us decency.  Many times we don’t know that this fire lives within us and it’s clear from the final line of the movie when Henry Niles tells David, “I don’t know my way home.”  David responds, “I don’t either” and smiles.  David didn’t know he had that level of violence inside of him; it’s a primal reaction to torture, frustration and defense of what you believe is right.

I’m sure many people will disagree with me, but this is the way I perceive the violence in the film and the characters within.  No matter how you interpret this movie, you will have a strong reaction.  For some it is a violent, repulsive opus from Peckinpah; but to me, it’s a very human film.  It shows us at our worst, our most exposed, or most primal.





5 Silent Films You Must See

3 04 2011

I love silent films, I really do.  Honestly, I feel like we lost an artform in and of itself when sound came in and totally redirected the entire process of filmmaking.  Unfortunately, many didn’t realize that silent filmmaking and sound filmmaking, though both forms of cinema, were very different in their execution and style.  It’s a shame that both couldn’t co-exist; but as with anything, when something new comes along, the predecessor usually disappears over time.

Many of my friends and colleagues hate silent films (which amazes me how we are still friends/colleagues).  They can’t stand the black and white or the fact you have to read title cards or the jerky motion (which is not due to the films themselves but the haphazard projection and transfer rates we have shown them at in recent years), melodramatics of some of the dramas or slapstick silliness of some of the comedies.

Yet, there are many, many wonderful silent films.  Films that many people won’t even give a chance because of some strange discrimination against them.  So, I’m here to give a starter kit, so to speak; films I can see as being fairly available and enjoyable to the mass audience.  If you watch these five recommendations and still can’t stand silent films, then I can at least give you the “e” for effort.  I still might not understand it, but it will appease my unrest.  Anyway, gear up your netflix queue or drop by the local video store and start here:

5.  Battleship Potemkin dir. Sergei Eisenstein (1925) – If you have ever read a book on film or taken a film class in college, then I’m sure the name Eisenstein is somewhat familiar to you regarding his landmark theories on movie montage.  Eisenstein, outside of his work as a theorist, was even more so a renowned Russian filmmaker.  Wait, what?  You are not only recommending silent films, but foreign ones at that!  Yes, but remember, we are in the silent realm, so the foreign part doesn’t really matter much.

So, what’s this film about?  Well, it’s a propaganda film that dramatizes the mutiny that took place aboard the battleship Potemkin in 1905, during the Russian revolution.  Sounds a little heavy handed from the description, I know.  However, if you can give this film a chance, I don’t think you would regret it.  The style, form and use of his much theorized montage theory creates an exciting and entrancing film.  It will shock you that this film is nearly 90 years old because it will be completed and satisfying before you even realize you just watched a silent film.  Furthermore, once you watch this film, let me know all the movies you can think of who have directly ripped off the Odessa Steps sequence.

4. The General dir. Clyde Bruckman and Buster Keaton (1926) – I’m sure most of you have heard of Charlie Chaplin, he’s been pretty ingrained in pop culture even to this day.  Well, Chaplin was one of three comedians who dominated silent comedies.  The other two were Harold Lloyd (none of his films on this list, but try Speedy or Safety Last for a good taste of his style) and our star of this film, Buster Keaton.  Keaton was referred to as “Old Stone Face,” and if you give this film a chance, you will see why.

This film is set during the American Civil War and has a fairly simple premise.  Keaton, who plays railroad engineer Johnny Gray, has two loves in life – one is his train, The General (title cue), and the other is Annabelle Lee (Marion Mack).  When the Civil War breaks out, he goes to sign up for the Confederate Army, but is rejected because of his critical role in working for the railroad.  Annabelle and her father are let down immensely and feel he is a coward, not understanding the true reason he was rejected.  A year into the war, Annabelle’s father is wounded.  On a trip to see him aboard the General, Union spies sabotage the passengers and steal the General and take Annabelle Lee hostage.  The rest of the film is Gray proving himself as an unsuspecting hero, a feat that no one does as expertly as Keaton.

The acrobatics and physical comedy that Keaton performs in this film are absolutely breathtaking.  The entire film is a joy to watch and has as much action, intrigue and suspense as anything created today (much of the time, more so).  The only difference is that all those stunts are actually Keaton himself doing them, not a stuntman or CGI handy work.  This is real filmmaking, real locations, real stunts, and all that, makes one hell of a great film.

3. Intolerance dir. D. W. Griffith (1916) – I’m sure the name David Wark Griffith probably rings a few bells.  Most of you probably know him for creating what is by-and-large considered the first full-length, modern feature (it wasn’t, but hey, the guy did a lot of amazing things for filmmaking, so I don’t mind credit here) with his controversial film The Birth of a Nation.

Well, after The Birth of a Nation received so much negative feedback, D.W. decided to make a film in retaliation that would even outdo himself.  The result was this film, Intolerance. If you adjust inflation into the mix, it is the most expensive and grandest motion picture ever made.  Yes, that’s right, the most extravagant motion picture ever made is a film that was produced just 20 years into cinema’s existence.

The film deals with varying degrees of intolerance by analyzing four main stories in four different eras: The Babylonian Period and the fall of Babel, the events surrounding the crucifixion of Jesus Christ, The French Renaissance and the failure of the Edict of Toleration and a modern day (1914) story concerning workers rights and the oppression of the everyday American.  A common motif, the “Eternal Mother” (Lilian Gish), artistically serves as a seque between the four different stories.  To go much further into the synopsis of this film would get pretty convoluted and probably just be confusing to you.  In other words, watch the film!

When I saw this film for the first time, it shocked and awed me more than any present day movie I’ve ever seen.  The masterful precision that Griffith used to make this film in scope of story, cinematography, direction, set design and editing between the four time periods is mind blowing.  There are few films like this from any era.  Make sure you have a long afternoon for this one though, as it’s the longest of the five recommendations at 197 minutes for the full version.

2. Sunrise: A Song of Two Humans dir. F. W. Murnau (1927) – Murnau, a native of Germany, was already extremely well-regarded in his homeland before coming to the United States.  He came to Fox Studios in 1926 to make his first American picture, and this was the film he made.

The film follows the story of a man (George O’Brien) and his wife (Janet Gaynor), whom have a young child.  The man (yes, there are no actual names), is having an affair with a Woman of the City.  One night, while frolicking near the river, the Woman of the City insists the man should murder his wife and make it look like an accident, so that they can live together.  The man is reluctant, but ultimately agrees.  The next day, he and his wife prepare for an outing to the city.  He attempts the murder, but can’t actually pull it off.  He and his wife then continue on to the city and renew the pervious glory of their relationship.  On the way home, however, a strong storm hits and fate seems to bring their worlds into disarray on its own terms.

Sunrise is as human as a motion picture can get.  The lead characters have no names other than “the man” and “his wife.”  Yet, the story itself is so deep, moving and real that you really don’t need a specific identity for these characters.  In regards to direction and cinematography, this film was way ahead of its time.  Murnau took liberties in not only shot selection, but even in title transitions, that were experimental and progressive.  Charles Rusher and Karl Struss co-shot the film, ultimately winning the first Academy Award for Best Cinematography for their combined efforts.   The in camera tricks, lighting and complexities of shots still don’t fail to amaze the eye.  Sunrise is, quite simply, a brilliant, moving film that I feel anyone can enjoy on the most basic level.  Every part of this film just works, and for the joint efforts of cast and crew, it was awarded an Oscar for “Unique and Artistic Production” as a special category.

1. City Lights dir. Charles Chaplin (1931) – With the advent of sound in 1928 with The Jazz Singer, silent films started to dwindle.  By the time this film was released in 1931, silent films were generally a thing of the past.  However, Chaplin, one of the greatest stars of the silent era, insisted on keeping this film silent, because he didn’t feel that the world was ready to hear his eternal waif, the Little Tramp, speak.

A master at blended comedy and drama, Chaplin produced a film that continues to bring a world of emotions some 80 years after its release.  The story revolves around Chaplin’s character of the Little Tramp, who falls in love with a poor, blind flower girl (Virginia Cherrill).  Through a hap circumstance, she believes that he is a millionaire and can help her and her mother in their desperate time of need.  Determined to help, he befriends a raucous, party-driven millionaire and does everything he can to help the flower girl and her mother.  In the end, he helps them and she is able to get an eye operation that restores her sight.  But, will she be able to accept the Tramp for his true self?

City Lights is, in my opinion, the best Chaplin film.  It combines all the elements that made him so legendary in perfect array, and being someone who has seen all of his features and most of his shorts, I feel like I have a pretty good judgement in Chaplin’s filmography.  This is a beautiful, moving film that I couldn’t see anyone watching and not thoroughly enjoying.  If there is one silent film that you are willing to give even the slightest chance, then this is the film that I think you should see.  It’s comedy, it’s drama, it’s Chaplin.





Pietro Germi: Unknown Master of Italian Cinema

1 04 2011

Pietro Germi - Italian Film Director

When you think about Italian cinema, several names generally come to mind: Fellini, Visconti, de Sica, Bertolucci and possibly even Benigni.  One name that is rarely mentioned in cinema circles, but whom is one of my favorite Italian directors, is Pietro Germi.  Germi, unlike some auteurs, was able to expertly master the mechanics of both comedies and dramas, while all the time keeping his own style evident throughout.  Even a couple years ago as Wikipedia was becoming very popular, Germi still hadn’t an article on his life and career.  The article that is currently live for him on the site is one that I took the time to write myself.

Germi was born in Genoa, Italy in 1914.  After a brief excursion into nautical school, he decided to enter the film industry.  He attended film school in Rome and performed many functions on various sets including acting, assistant directing and occasionally writing during his youth.  His first film as a director was The Testimony in 1946.  Following this film, he released a film every year or two for the next 25 years as a director and, more often then not, served as either writer or co-writer as well.

Germi’s first films were in the Italian neo-realist style with a deep rooting in dramatic content.  For those of you who are unfamiliar with the neo-realist style, it generally covered topics that were true-to-life and the protagonists were generally the everyman type.  In addition, the films were generally shot in natural locations as opposed to shooting in a studio and the cinematography and direction had a grittier, more realistic style to it than a polished Hollywood film.  Most all of his output during the 1950s was in this style and focused on dramatic content, though he would later be more known for his comedic efforts.  Just to give you a Germi starter kit so to speak, I’ll recommend three of his films that I feel will get you on your way to either liking or deciding that Germi’s work is not for you.

One of my favorite films from Germi’s dramatic material is 1956’s The Railroad Man. In addition to writing and directing, Germi also played the lead role of Andrea Marcocci.  Andrea is, as the title suggests, a railroad worker.  He is happy in his career and spends many a night drinking with his fellow workers after getting off the job.  However, after nearly colliding with another train while trying to avoid someone attempting suicide on the tracks, Marcocci is laid off.  Further misfortune begins to complicate his life after this incident, and between his problems at work, his drinking and troubles in his family life, Marcocci’s mood gets more and more despairing.  However, his youngest son Sandro (Edoardo Nevola), wants to help his father and through Sandro’s love and support his father is able to find some form of peace.  The film is a complex study of the everyman through the life of this common railroad worker.  It touches on the human emotion on every level throughout the film and is an outstanding example of the Italian neo-realist style.

"Divorce, Italian Style" - 1961

In 1961, Germi moved into comedic material and would stay in this genre for the majority of his career following.  The film, Divorce, Italian Style, would be his greatest success, winning him a Best Original Screenplay Academy Award and garnering a nomination for Best Director.  The film tells the story of Sicilian nobleman Ferdinando Cefalù, played with precision by famous Italian actor Marcello Mastroianni, who hopes to marry his beautiful cousin Angela (Stefania Sandrelli).  The problem, however, is that he is already married to Rosalia, and in Sicily at the time it was illegal to get a divorce.  Determined to succeed, Ferdinando tries to manipulate a plan to get his wife caught up in an affair; then, when he “finds” her in the act, murder her and only receive a short sentence for an honor killing.  Mastroianni is brilliant in the part of Ferdinando and the film overall has amazing timing for comedic effect.  Following the international success of this film, many Italian comedies of the 1960s tried to emulate Germi’s style and there were a few direct off shoots of this movie.

The last Germi film I’ll go into detail on is his 1963 film Seduced and Abandoned.  It directly relates in style and mood to his previous film Divorce, Italian Style. Agnese Ascalone (Stefania Sandrelli) is the daughter of a prominent Sicilian miner, Vincenzo.  She is found in the kitchen by Vincenzo and her mother being seduced by her sister’s fiancee, Peppino.  To uphold strict Sicilian mores, Vincenzo demands Peppino marry Agnese instead.  The  resulting demand leads the story through one hilarious situation after another.  Saro Urzi, who plays Vincenzo, was perfect for this role as the frustrated, comical patriarch.  In America, he is probably best known for playing Signor Vitelli in Francis Ford Coppola’s The Godfather.

Unfortunately, Germi would pass in 1974 from hepatitis at the age of 60.  His last film was the mediocre Alfredo, Alfredo with Dustin Hoffman and favorite muse Stefania Sandrelli.  There are many other films in this brilliant Italian director’s repertoire worth seeing, but if you just want a tast of his comedic and dramatic style, then I feel these three films are a good place to start.  In my opinion, Germi’s abilities as a writer and director were as reputable as any of the other illuminaries of Italian cinema and hope his work will reach a wider audience in years to come.