Month: June 2019

Articles, Review, Show Time

Show Time: What Makes a Romcom Good?

I’m a little ashamed to admit that I’ve been watching a lot of romcoms recently. I say ‘ashamed’ mostly because the genre as a whole has a reputation of dumbing-down human relations into “desperate woman and loser man stumble into romantic relationship” or some version of same. Women like me are often given a pass for watching romcoms because the genre is seen as ‘wish fulfillment’ (and for some reason, action/superhero movies aren’t *eyeroll*)… But even then, intelligent women often have to explain away their favorite movies as a ‘guilty pleasure.’

Well, fuck guilty pleasures and fuck wish fulfillment.

I like romcoms!

It may be a frowned-upon genre, but every year, millions of people — women AND men — sit down and watch these movies. So, the question is: why can’t they be good? Why, time after time, does Hollywood feed us the same formulaic bullshit and simply switch around the actors, the setting and the minor details, and present it to us in the guise of a new movie? Granted, all genres are starting to see this, with the superhero genre being a timely example, but I don’t want to waste my time watching shitty romcoms, or shitty movies in general. Maybe the reason the genre is frowned upon isn’t because the genre is bad, but because so many of the movies in it ARE.

Romcoms can trace their ‘lineage,’ so to speak, back to Shakespeare and his contemporaries, when confused identities and coincidental mix-ups were the impetus of much — if not all — of the hi-jinks that ensued. So, why is it socially acceptable for me to enjoy a production of Twelfth Night, but not She’s The Man?

On the other hand, liking this movie is a problem…

Of course, now, many of the typical elements of romcoms are written off as too far-fetched or too contrived. Yes, a woman who waters a former pop star’s plants being secretly talented at writing song lyrics is far-fetched, but a whiny teen gaining the powers of the gods when he literally did nothing to prove himself isn’t? (Can you tell that I’m still underwhelmed by Shazam?) Yes, film is an art form. But, it’s also a form of entertainment. Unless it’s based on a true story or true events, it’s meant for escapism.

Anyway, as I was watching all these movies over the last week or so, I started to ask myself: What should I be looking for in a romcom? What makes one romcom good from another?

On the 2018 Filmsplosion episode, Henry and I were discussing how in 2018, we started to see a revival in the romcom genre. We got Crazy Rich Asians, which did exceptionally well at the box office; Set It Up, which was an enjoyable Netflix movie; and Juliet, Naked, which didn’t have a big opening but was generally well-received by those who saw it.

Now, setting aside your high school/coming-of-age comedies like Booksmart and To All the Boys I’ve Loved Before, I would say that the upper tier of romcoms from from the last 20 years include, but are not limited to: The Big Sick; Crazy Rich Asians; Juliet, Naked; The Switch; Definitely, Maybe; The Decoy Bride; Always Be My Maybe; Music & Lyrics; My Big, Fat, Greek Wedding; and Bridesmaids. That isn’t to say any of them is perfect, but I think each has something about them that makes them compelling as a entry in the romcom genre.

And, in my opinion, lesser romcoms, which I’ll bring up in the post as examples of ‘what not to do,’ include: The Proposal, How To Lose A Guy In 10 Days, Made of Honor, and The Ugly Truth.

(NOTE: Spoilers ahead for all these films.)

So, getting back to our initial question of “What Makes a Romcom Good?”, I would say it’s some combination of the following:

If it’s titled “Juliet, Naked,” then it’s a good romcom.

THE TWO LEADS HAVE CHEMISTRY

One of the reasons I absolutely love Juliet, Naked is because you’re actively rooting for these two people to wind up together. It’s not just because they’re attractive. It’s not just because they like each other. It’s because they fit so well in each other’s lives. Annie desperately wants to have children and is stuck in a relationship where her partner doesn’t feel the same way; Tucker has so many children that he’s not active in each of their lives, and he’s learning to live with the mistakes he’s made and rectify them as best he can. Annie wants to leave her little town, be more adventurous and grow as a person outside her relationship with Duncan. Tucker, meanwhile, wants more normalcy and a healthy relationship after having so many unsuccessful ones in his rock-star days. Not only that, but they have great on-screen chemistry, and their scenes together are filled with a genuine earnestness that’s almost tangible.

Compare that to the nonsense in How To Lose A Guy In 10 Days where the two leads are actively trying to deceive and/or make the other miserable. Or, in The Proposal, where Ryan Reynolds’ character never really seems to get away from the ‘she’s my boss’ dynamic. His romantic scenes with Sandra Bullock’s character always come off as more awkward than anything, because he’s actively hated her and been her subordinate for so long that for them to suddenly be equals in a loving relationship feels jarring.

THE SIDE CHARACTERS ARE ENGAGING

While the movie definitely has its flaws, I always enjoyed Tula’s extensive family in My Big, Fat, Greek Wedding. Coming from a large and very … uh… vocal family myself, I always sympathized with her character because she feels trapped by her family but also supported by them. Her mom and her dad feel like distinct characters with a few running gags of their own; her grandma is hilarious in how she continually tries to escape; her aunts, uncles and cousins have brief but very memorable appearances. And, even her husband’s parents are interesting in their contrasting blandness and more conservative personalities.

Crazy Rich Asians and Bridesmaids also benefit from their all-star supporting casts, whose characters bring their individual flares without being too cliche or over-the-top.

Meanwhile, The Ugly Truth, for instance, has a pretty bland supporting cast. We have our two leads and maybe one or two other people. That’s it. And, honestly, half the time the people are just there to either be plot devices (like the cute doctor Katherine Heigl’s character is trying to date and Gerard Butler’s character’s family) or the main characters’ respective best friends, who are really only sounding boards for the main characters’ feelings.

Seriously, “The Decoy Bride” is a fun and underrated romcom.

IT USES TROPES APPROPRIATELY

This is perhaps the one that gets onto my nerves the most when it comes to the quality of romcoms. As I said on the 2018 Filmsplosion episode, I cannot stand the “Liar Revealed” trope. Unfortunately, many romcoms rely on this. It was one of the reasons why I didn’t like Set It Up as much as I liked Juliet, Naked, even though they came out only months apart. The best romcoms, in my opinion, do not use this trope. Basically none of the movies that I had in my list of upper-tier romcoms have the trope to their fullest extent.

Crazy Rich Asians arguably has it, as it’s revealed that Rachel’s mom lied about Rachel’s dad and why she had to leave China, but it’s not like Rachel knew any of that and was actively trying to hide it from her boyfriend and his family. In The Switch, Jason Bateman’s character initially didn’t remember dumping out the sperm donor’s sample and putting in his own sample instead. He had been blackout-drunk that night, and it’s only once he meets his son, Sebastian, that he realizes what he did, and he tries to own up to it. And, for The Decoy Bride, Katie is roped into standing in for James’ celebrity fiancee, but he quickly realizes what’s happened. She deceives him about her identity — and only after she was paid by others to do so — for all of five minutes. They spend 95 percent of the movie with full knowledge of who the other person is.

I believe the “Liar Revealed” trope has its place. Hell, some of Shakespeare’s comedies rely on characters purposefully deceiving each other. But, usually they aren’t coupled with the “Third-Act Misunderstanding” trope, which I also absolutely hate, especially because it’s often coupled with “Liar Revealed.” For instance, in Twelfth Night, once it’s revealed that Cesario is actually a woman named Viola neither Olivia nor Orsino — who were the main victims in Viola’s deception to dress as a man — really care. In fact, it prompts Orsino to realize his true feelings for Olivia and propose to her. We don’t have a contrived scene where Orsino says something to the effect of “You lied to me; I can never trust you again!” Likewise, in Much Ado About Nothing, the bad guy’s deceptions are revealed, no one cares that Hero faked her death, and no one ever reveals to Beatrice and Benedick that they were actually set up by their friends and family. No one really cares about all the deception. Either no one ever tells them, or they’re relieved about it, not upset.

Of course, with The Proposal and How To Lose A Guy In 10 Days, the entire premise inevitably sets up the Liar Revealed trope, and of course we have the Third-Act Misunderstanding to really make things boring and trite. The reason the tropes, especially the Third-Act Misunderstanding, don’t work is because they’re so overdone and literally add nothing to the story. Because of the nature of the genre, there’s a 99 percent chance our romantic leads are going to end up together (My Best Friend’s Wedding is the one exception I can think of)… so, when they have their inevitable fallout once the full truth comes out, it only wastes our time because we know they’re going to get together. And, many times, because of the Third-Act Misunderstanding, one of the leads realizes that they belong together, and so usually does some Grand Romantic Gesture to get the other person back, like Matthew McConaughey’s character racing all over NYC to try to Andi back with their plant on the back of his motorcycle-thing or like Ryan Reynolds’ character making a big speech in the office and then kissing Sandra Bullock’s character in front of everyone.

But, tropes have their place. Sometimes, they’re subverted, which I often enjoy. Sometimes they’re used predictably but appropriately, such as in The Decoy Bride, when James dedicates his new book to Katie, calling her his wife and referencing a sad line she said earlier in the movie. Or in Always Be My Maybe, where the two do have a third-act breakup but it’s because of their different lifestyles not because one of them was deceiving the other. Same thing in Music & Lyrics, which also has a third-act breakup AND a big, romantic gesture, but it plays better because their relationship beforehand had at least been honest.

Basically, if your romantic comedy has the Liar Revealed trope and the Third-Act Misunderstanding, it’s a recipe for disaster.

Of course, there are plenty of other tropes out there, like the whole ‘evil in-laws’ thing. In My Big, Fat, Greek Wedding, Tula is understandably nervous about introducing her fiance to her family, because they’re not super excited that he isn’t Greek and he might be overwhelmed by how boisterous her family is. But, they eventually warm up to her fiance, and support her decision to marry him; and he, meanwhile, enjoys how energetic and lively her family is and even converts to the Greek Orthodox Church because it’s important to her.

Similarly, in Crazy Rich Asians, Eleanor is definitely wary of Rachel. But, it’s expressed several times in the film that this isn’t only an instance of an overprotecting mother not liking her son’s girlfriend — it’s mostly because Rachel is American (even though she’s of Chinese descent) and thus doesn’t share the same values or cultural priorities that Eleanor would want Nick’s future wife to have.

Ultimately a successful relationship in real life is based on honesty and communication, and relationships in our entertainment should reflect that to some degree. But, when romcoms show characters seemingly being rewarded with the guy or gal, despite their deception or other flaws, it only weakens the genre and gives young, impressionable people the wrong ideas about love and relationships.

OK, I’m seriously going to have to go check out “Crazy Rich Asians” from the library tomorrow. I’ve been talking about it so much, it’s making me want to watch it again!

IT BRINGS SOMETHING NEW TO THE TABLE

As I said on the 2018 Filmsplosion episode, one of the reasons I loved Crazy Rich Asians was that the location, the set pieces, and the immersion of the movie into Asian cultures really helped it stand out. Instead of New York City, where seemingly 90 percent of all romcoms take place, the bulk of the film is in Singapore. Instead of your typical pop songs and alt rock ballads, the soundtrack only has songs in Asian languages (including some covers of notable English-language pop songs, admittedly).

Bridesmaids also brought something different to the table as the bulk of the film focuses on a group of female friends trying to navigate the complicated world of planning a wedding. Kristin Wiig’s character’s love life, particularly her thing with Chris O’Dowd’s character, is more of a subplot than anything.

The Big Sick, while I classify it here as a romcom, has a lot of dramatic, almost dark-comedy elements to it, especially once Emily falls into a coma.

Definitely, Maybe plays on the ‘how I met your mother’ storyline, but it bookends the whole thing with Ryan Reynolds’ character telling the story to his daughter, giving us hints at what all is going to happen. For instance, we know he was in two serious relationships before he married his future wife, and we’ve seen his daughter, so we maybe get some hints as to what her mom might look like. And, it gives a reason for his obscuring his wife’s name, as he wants his daughter to encounter her mom organically through the story, as he did, instead of already knowing who she was from the outset.

Music & Lyrics has several musical numbers, which most of which Hugh Grant sings himself, and several of which are very catchy and actually good songs. Still, it never really feels like a classical musical, because the music’s presence is central to the story but not in a Broadway-style musical sort of way. It also makes for some great comedic moments, because some of the songs Cora Coreman sings are so utterly weird but perfectly fit her character, that you can’t help but enjoy them.

Now, constrastingly, Set It Up, which I’ve mentioned on here already but can’t quite put it in the genre’s upper tier or lower tier, seems to typify everything that’s stale about mainstream romcoms. The main characters are 20-somethings, trying to move up the corporate ladder but are stuck in their thankless jobs; the movie takes place in New York City; and the leads ultimately fall in love while setting up a deception on their respective bosses. But, to its credit, Set It Up has fairly likable characters and well-written dialogue, so it kind of makes it a mid-tier level romcom for me, personally.

Could you imagine if they gender-bent this movie? Yikes!

IT HAS AN EMOTIONAL CORE

One of the reasons I appreciated Definitely, Maybe and The Switch, both of which I watched for the first time this week, is because the two films really shine when they lean into the parent/child relationship. The scene between Ryan Reynolds’ character and his daughter in the zoo, at the end of the movie, where he tells her that she was the happy ending to the story really hits an emotional chord. Likewise, the growing relationship between Jason Bateman’s character and his son keeps The Switch from being another typical romcom.

I also really liked how, at the end of Always Be My Maybe, Sasha embraces what Marcus and his mom had done for her, why food had become such a big part of her life. It kind of subverted Marcus’ big romantic gesture with his little speech on the red carpet (thanks to carpet cleaning st louis for their timely help) while also one-upping it, because while she has always loved Marcus, she’s also always loved being a part of his life, a part of his family.

Unlike in many romcoms, in The Big Sick, Kumail is worried that he ‘won’t get the girl,’ not only because they’d had a fight but also because she fell into a coma and he thought she might die. That gives the movie more emotional weight than any other typical “will they, won’t they” plots.

And, because I won’t shut up about Crazy Rich Asians … even people who were “meh” about the movie said that the mahjong scene between Rachel and Eleanor was the best scene. Seriously. In a film where people shoot missiles off cargo tankers into the ocean, where there’s an elaborate wedding, where everything is extravagant and the set pieces are insane… the highlight of the movie is two women sitting at a table, talking, while they play a game that most Americans don’t understand. In fact, people who read the book said that they liked that the filmmakers added that scene. Can you remember the last time you saw book-fans saying they LIKED a change the movie made?

Compare all of these examples to Gerard Butler’s character in The Ugly Truth deciding he didn’t want to go to a bigger station because his nephew (who was in all of two scenes) needs a father-figure in his life. Or in Made of Honor where Patrick Dempsey’s character tries to undermine his best friend’s wedding — not because the guy she’s marrying is a skeezebag — but because the guy she’s marrying isn’t him, which is what he wants. The formula of guy+girl+shenanigans can only get you so far without some kind of emotional glue to hold your interest.

Stop reading this article and go watch this movie right now!!!

THE COMEDY ELEMENTS ARE CLEVER AND — I can’t believe I have to say this — FUNNY

I could go on and on with different examples of witty comedy from my upper-tier romcoms, but I’ll simply compare two scenes from two romcoms of varying quality — Always Be My Maybe and The Ugly Truth. In both movies, there’s a scene where the main characters are all going out to an awkward, fancy dinner where some characters get to meet other ones for the first time.

In The Ugly Truth, before a dinner with her partner-in-crime coworker, her bosses and her new boyfriend, Butler’s character had sent Heigl’s a set of vibrating underwear. She accidentally wears them to the dinner and brings the remote with her. Eventually, the remote rolls out of her purse, a kid picks it up and — not knowing what it is — starts messing with it. This prompts the predictable situation of Heigl’s character trying to make it through the conversation until she and Butler’s character locate the remote, all while her lower half is vibrating and making her feel … things. The scenario might’ve been worth a giggle initially, but ultimately it falls flat because, from the outset, we knew exactly where the situation was going and what the joke was going to be. Instead of being funny, it feels awkward, drawn-out and painful. Well, for the audience, at least.

Now, with Always Be My Maybe, Sasha has invited Marcus and his girlfriend to meet her new boyfriend, who turns out to be (SPOILERS) Keanu Reeves. They eat at a very high-end restaurant, where Marcus continues to make fun of how weird the food is and how tiny the portions are. The weird vibe between all four of the people, the actual restaurant and its food, the great timing and delivery by the actors, the editing and music choices, and the clever dialogue all stack on top of each other to make it one of the funniest scenes in the movie. The payoff here is much better, to the point where I laughed out loud several times, because ultimately, you have no idea where it’s going.

In my opinion, the best comedic scenes aren’t the ones where the set-up is force-fed to you so that the joke isn’t funny so much as inevitable; instead, they’re the ones that make you say “I’m not sure where this is going, but I’m excited to find out.” Of course, in any romcom, there are always running gags and good one-liners. But the scenes like this should be the real meat of the comedy portions of a romcom. Is the comedy predicated on a single, predictable thing? Or are there multiple elements going on that all converge to create one great scene, which — if done right — should be the foundation for additional humorous moments later in the movie. (See Always Be My Maybe for examples of this.)

I do want to say, very quickly, that even though I’ve really given The Proposal a lot of flack in this post, there are some legitimately funny scenes in that movie, including the male exotic dancer scene and the one where Bullock’s character starts dancing around the fire with Betty White’s character. While other components of that movie are stale or lacking, the comedy seems to be the one area they got right. Or close enough.

I can’t believe that this piece of garbage is in the same genre as “Juliet, Naked” and the “Crazy Rich Asian” mahjong scene.

THE ROMANCE IS COMPELLING AND APPROPRIATE

I’ve talked about this some already, but the relationship between the two leads shouldn’t feel like a dumbing-down of human relationships or simply an instance where you feel like the couple only got together because they were both attractive, (maybe) single and the film’s lead characters. As I said with the chemistry bit, it should feel like these two people belong together not because the universe brought them together, but because it makes sense given who they are as individuals.

While I really enjoy The Decoy Bride as whole, I definitely dislike the idea of these two people falling in love after only knowing each other for a day or two. Still, the various characters throughout the movie make it very clear to our two leads what love and marriage should look like, as opposed to the shallow version of marriage that society sometimes gives us and that some of the main characters had believed in.

In Juliet, Naked, Annie and Tucker start getting closer to each other over email, without ever having seen each other in real life. Neither has any idea of how attractive the other person is, but they definitely want to pursue whatever dynamic they’ve started over the internet.

Meanwhile, in The Ugly Truth, the leads seemingly only get together at the end because they’re both physically attracted to one another. She thinks he’s a shallow asshole, and he thinks she’s a nagging bitch. But somehow they end up together. The Proposal has similar problems. Why is it so hard for a romcom to have two people who like, respect and appreciate each other from the outset? Or, at the very least, don’t actively hate the other person at the beginning of the movie?

… So where does that leave us?

Admittedly, I’m drawing from a pretty small sample size in this post, as there are plenty more romcoms to praise and PLENTY more to hate. But, the real beef here is not with any particularly shitty romcom — although I am ready to fight the people who made How To Lose A Guy In 10 Days anytime, anywhere — but more with the system that keeps rewarding their ilk. As I said, this is a problem throughout Hollywood, not just romcoms. Yet for some reason, people tend to brush off romcoms as a lesser genre, the same way people used to brush off children’s movies. But, we’ve seen in recent years what high-quality children’s films we can get when we reward the good ones and criticize the bad.

If we want romcoms to be better — and it looks like we’re moving that way as four of my upper-tier movies have come out in the last year — we shouldn’t allow mediocrity to keep passing for quality. We shouldn’t demonize romcoms as “chick-flicks” or “girly movies,” but instead embrace their zaniness, their optimism and their “love triumphs over all” messages. Why are Shakespeare’s romantic comedies considered classic literature, but a guy feels the need to explain himself if someone wonders why he has Miss Congeniality on his shelf? We must overcome this ridiculous double-standard that only women are allowed to enjoy romcoms, and even then she must do so guiltily. We should hold romcoms to the same level as superhero films or Pixar movies by calling out what’s weak, cliche and inappropriate, and highlighting what’s clever, meaningful and unique.

That means that you have to do your part, too. Don’t see a romcom just because there’s nothing else playing; only go if it looks intelligent and/or you hear good things. Don’t buy or support them unless you can honestly tell yourself that they’re not damaging to women, or men, or human relationships. And if ever someone tells you how much they love a lower-tier romcom, politely recommend that they check out a better one that they’ve never seen before.

We suffered through the superhero movies of the ’90s and early 2000s, and now look where we are. We viewers have helped salvage one genre through our support and criticism. Why can’t we work to salvage another?

Because I really need the day to come when romcoms like Juliet, Naked aren’t the exception — they’re the norm.

Articles, Catching the Classics, Miyazaki, Review

Catching the Miyazaki Classics (Part 6) – The Castle of Cagliostro

Lupin III: The Castle of Cagliostro is the first of Miyazaki’s 11 films as writer/director

Japanese filmmaker Hayao Miyazaki, perhaps best known for his work with Studio Ghibli, has gained popularity around the world for his creative and imaginative animated feature films. While they were originally released in Japanese, all of them have been dubbed into English with prominent voice actors and Hollywood stars. For the next several weeks, I’ll be reviewing the English-dub versions of each of Miyazaki’s 11 films as writer and director.

Last week, I tackled The Wind Rises (2013).

This week: Lupin III: The Castle of Cagliostro (1979).

Synopsis: After robbing a casino, criminal mastermind Lupin (called Wolf) gets the bright idea to take over a very successful counterfeiting operation, which he discovers is in the tiny European country of Cagliostro. Once there, Wolf and his partners-in-crime stumble upon the Count of Cagliostro’s plot to marry the country’s princess and unite the two branches of their family to reveal a long-hidden treasure. Wolf decides to do whatever it takes to help the princess escape the count… and maybe stumble into the treasure along the way.

Spoiler-free review: This was the last movie in this Miyazaki series that I hadn’t watched previously, and — now that I’ve seen his all his films — I can say that this is definitely his worst one. The animation is rough and looks very dated. Plus, unlike his other films, this one is the most ‘anime,’ as everything feels exaggerated and people constantly defy the laws of physics. I was so disappointed with the movie on the first go-around, but felt like it wasn’t fair to condemn it on a single outing, and so watched it again. (It’s on Netflix, so it’s very accessible for me.) Once I realized I was holding this movie to too high of a standard — as it is from 1979 and it’s Miyazaki’s directorial debut — it was a little more fun to watch. The plot has some good heist elements to it, and I thought the final confrontation in the film was set up well. But, compared to what Disney and Don Bluth were doing at this time, or shortly thereafter, this movie doesn’t stand out. Ultimately, this is one Miyazaki movie you can skip.

Letter grade: C or C-

Full review and critique: (Warning: here be spoilers!)

So, something that I believe holds this movie back from being better is that it’s a standalone movie within the Lupin III franchise. The anime TV show Lupin III had various iterations of TV shows and movies throughout the ’70s and early ’80s, with Miyazaki directly 15 episodes of the initial TV series. When The Castle of Cagliostro premiered while the second iteration of the TV series was in its full swing, many people at the time felt that this movie’s version of Wolf was much more chivalrous and less nefarious than his TV counterpart.

Because I’ve never seen anything else within the Lupin III franchise, I can only approach it as a standalone movie. But, from my knowledge of other anime franchises, I can clearly see how — like other anime movies — nothing in this has any real bearing on the franchise going forward. Yes, in most anime franchises, the movies are usually considered ‘canon’; but the writers typically make the movies a standalone adventure. That way, if you only watched the TV show and skipped the movie, you won’t be missing out on anything.

The Dragonball Z movies are good examples of this. The villains are almost always standalone villains that have never been seen before and will never be mentioned again. Even though Broly has been seen in several movies, he’s never been seen or mentioned in the show. And, when TV shows do want to use elements from the movies, as was the case with Dragonball Super and Boruto, they simply re-do the entire movie as episodes of the show. Anime movies also use convenient plot points, such as erased memories, to make sure the movie remains a standalone adventure within the franchise. One instance that stands out in my mind is the fourth Naruto: Shippuden movie, where Naruto travels back in time and meets his dad (who died the day Naruto was born). But, of course, since having Naruto meet his dad like this would definitely impact the series going forward, the movie hand-waves some amnesia, so that Naruto will forget what happened and the story can remain self-contained within the movie.

Anyway, the point is that if this weren’t an anime movie with a standalone adventure for Wolf and his gang, it might be a better movie. But, Wolf has to leave Cagliostro; his temporary team-up with Inspector Zenigata has to come to an end; and Wolf has to run off, leaving Zenigata to chase after him once again. If Wolf stayed in Cagliostro or married the princess or stayed friends with Zenigata or even was imprisoned, it would make the movie more compelling. But, instead, the last 5-10 minutes are spent neatly putting everything right back where it was — at least for the franchise’s main characters. Just like in the Naruto: Shippuden movie, Wolf — despite being so determined to rescue the princess throughout the film and describing himself as her ‘knight in shining armor’ — all of a sudden decides that he’s not in love with her and only looks on her as a big brother. That way, he can still look heroic to the audience while also not looking too bad for leaving her behind and going off to commit crimes once again. If Wolf really had only felt toward her like an older brother would, it should’ve been clearer earlier in the film, instead of being slapdashed onto the very end of the film.

So, while there was a lot about this movie that I believe deserves criticism, there are some things to enjoy.

There a couple of funny scenes and gags; I appreciated that the film gives you a good idea of who everyone is and what their shared histories are without it feeling clunky or shoehorned in; and I liked the set up for the wedding and the reveal of Wolf’s plan and how he infiltrated everything. One the second viewing, I appreciated the little pieces of foreshadowing as to the treasure’s location/reveal mechanism; and overall, the voice cast does a fine job, and the plot in itself isn’t bad. It’s just that — without any real stakes — I’m not invested in it like I should be. I don’t follow the franchise, so I don’t already care about the characters like many viewing this back in 1979 probably would’ve. Thus, the movie doesn’t really need to try to get people like me to care because most of the audience  already does.

In any case, I enjoyed the crime/heist elements of it, along with tastes of other genres and archetypes (like the samurai) and some other smaller aspects of the film. But, on the whole, it’s really a giant letdown compared to the reputation Miyazaki has earned in writing and producing quality animated films. Still, it is interesting to see how he get his start.

Next week: Ponyo (2008).

Articles, Catching the Classics, Miyazaki, Review

Catching the Miyazaki Classics (Part 5) – The Wind Rises

The Wind Rises, the most recent of Miyazaki’s 11 films as writer/director

Japanese filmmaker Hayao Miyazaki, perhaps best known for his work with Studio Ghibli, has gained popularity around the world for his creative and imaginative animated feature films. While they were originally released in Japanese, all of them have been dubbed into English with prominent voice actors and Hollywood stars. For the next several weeks, I’ll be reviewing the English-dub versions of each of Miyazaki’s 11 films as writer and director.

Last week, I tackled Spirited Away (2001).

This week: The Wind Rises (2013).

Synopsis: Based on a true story, the film is an animated biopic that follows a fictionalized version of the real Jiro Horikoshi (voiced by Joseph Gordon-Levitt) as he designs the Zero fighter plane that eventually flies in World War II for Japan. Unable to become a pilot himself thanks to his poor eyesight, Jiro decides the best way to pursue his dream of flying is to design planes. He tries his utmost to prove himself with a successful design; and, as life goes on, personal, professional and political challenges continue to either set him back or inspire him further.

Spoiler-free review: In addition to being the most recent of Miyazaki’s films, The Wind Rises is also his most against-type film as a director. Rather than an energetic, family friendly, adventure film with fantastical/spiritual elements in it, The Wind Rises is slow, thoughtful and ‘adult’ in the best sense and is the only one of his films that’s based on a true story. Given that the film came out only six years ago, it benefits from more advanced animation techniques and cinematography. Thus, out of all of Miyazaki’s films, I believe this one has the most beautiful animation, and it’s worth watching for that reason alone. It also boasts a talented voice cast. However, it’s just that it’s so different from other Miyazaki films that I don’t know whether I was truly prepared for it. So, perhaps if I rewatch it, I’ll change my mind, but for now I’ll say:

Letter grade: B

Full review and critique: (Warning: here be spoilers!)

So, as I hinted at, this is a film that I respect more than I like it. It’s so different from Miyazaki’s other films, which I appreciate, but I was not prepared for how different it is from its 10 predecessors.

I wondered how the film was going to incorporate the more fantastical elements that Miyazaki is known for, given how it’s set in our world, and the way the film gets around that is with dream sequences. Jiro has ongoing dream conversations with Caproni, who designs planes in Italy and is one of Jiro’s professional role models, and I appreciate how it was open-ended as to whether Jiro is only having these conversations with a fictional Caproni in his own imagination, or if Caproni and Jiro are really and truly communicating via a shared dreamworld.

As said above, this film has a strong voice cast, with Gordon-Levitt as Jiro; Emily Blunt as Jiro’s eventual wife Nahoko; John Krasinski as Jiro’s best friend Honjo; and Martin Short, Werner Herzog, William H. Macy, Mandy Patinkin, and Stanley Tucci as supporting characters. And, there’s really no weak link among them. Everyone shines, particularly Gordon-Levitt, whose character has to do most of the film’s emotional heavy-lifting.

I think what keeps me from really liking and enjoying it is the writing.

The film takes you through Jiro’s life, sometimes at random, not really giving you a sense of how long it’s been from the previous scene. For instance, there’s a scene after the earthquake, where it took me a while to realize it had been several years, rather than a few weeks, since the earthquake had happened. It really relies on the audience to be older, more mature and thus, paying close attention to things like that.

There are a lot of scenes where nothing really happens. You feel like you’re looking on various days in Jiro’s life, with his dream of designing planes being the biggest connecting piece. Once Jiro graduates from college and goes to work at Mitsubishi, the film focuses a lot on his professional struggles. This makes sense. However, once Nahoko comes back into his life, it shifts greatly to focus more on his personal issues, with his successes and failures of the Zero fighter plane taking a back seat. I don’t mind that in and of itself, but I think The Wind Rises would’ve been stronger if it had focused more on Jiro and Nahoko’s relationship juxtaposed to his work.

My recommendation would’ve been to have fewer scenes of Jiro as a child and a university student. Maybe show his initial aspirations of wanting to fly but unable to because of his eyesight, his decision to become an airplane designer, and then the scene of him meeting Nahoko as a student. After that, the film should’ve picked up where Nahoko and Jiro reconnect at the resort, and we get to see them fall in love, but Jiro is still trying to succeed at designing his plane. The fact that Nahoko is dying of tuberculosis and Jiro has such limited time with her, but at the same time he also wants to successfully design his plane, makes for a compelling conflict, which this film doesn’t really have.

I guess maybe I was a bit frustrated that so much of the artwork of this movie, which you can see above, shows Jiro and Nahoko together; thus, I thought the film was going to focus more on their relationship. But, after she initially meets Jiro during the earthquake, we don’t see Nahoko again until about two-thirds of the way through the film. Really, his relationship with Nahoko feels like an afterthought compared to how much time is devoted to him designing his planes.

I understand why it was written the way it was, but I think the film would’ve been stronger if we’d focused more on one time period in Jiro’s life (1932 and onward) rather than sporadically showing him at different parts of his childhood, college years and young professional years.

Overall, it’s definitely worth watching for the animation and voice cast alone. It’s definitely not a waste of your time to watch it, but I think it helps to know what you’re getting yourself into, considering how different this is from the rest of Miyazaki’s filmography.

Next week: Lupin III: The Castle of Cagliostro (1979).

Articles

Spidey Super Stories: Spider-Man’s Greatest Comic Stories! The Child Within

Spider-Man. The greatest Hero of all time. I would also say without hesitation the greatest literary character of all time. From his beginnings in August of 1962,  the soon to be cancelled Amazing Fantasy #15, where the most famous line in comics was born, “With Great Power, There must also come Great Responsibility!” Peter Parker has gone from worried teenager, to worried college student, to worried adult. But always the Hero. And the public has been along for the ride. Spider-Man has many stories that have been told in his 57 years on this planet, and while not all of them are gems, I would say he has more hits then misses.

So with the release of Spider-Man: Far From Home soon upon us, I thought I would share some of my favorite Spidey stories. And while some you might know, I am hoping that you will find some hidden gems along the way.

 

The Story: The Child Within

The Creators: J.M DeMatteis Words, Sal Buscema Art, Rick Parker Letterer, Bob Sharen Colorist

The Comic: The Spectacular Spider-Man, Volume 1, issues #178-184

The Characters: Spider-Man/Peter Parker, Green Goblin/Harry Osborn, Vermin/Edward Whelan, Mary Jane Parker, Dr. Ashley Kafka, Liz Allen, Normie Osborn, Norman Osborn (Ghost), May Parker

In Kraven’s Last Hunt (or Fearful Symmetry), Spider-Man was beaten and buried alive. Kraven takes the place of Spider-Man, hunts down and defeats Vermin. When Kraven believes he has bested Spider-Man, he kills himself, leaving behind a beaten and emotionally scarred Spider-Man and Vermin. Written by J.M DeMatteis, Kraven’s Last Hunt is considered by many to be one of Spidey’s greatest stories.

Fast forward 4 years and DeMatteis unearths the emotional turmoil that event took on Peter Parker’s life. Not only Peter’s life but also Edward Whelan, the man who is “trapped” inside Vermin.

In the opening issue of “The Child Within” we see that Vermin has escaped from the care of Dr. Ashley Kafka, who has grown close to the creature. Dr. Kafka believes that Vermin, is as much a physical part of Edward’s being as well as a psychological manifestation as well. Spider-Man isn’t convinced. When Vermin escaped he murdered a bunch of hospital staff members on his way out. Spider-Man is full of guilt and sets out to capture Vermin.

Harry Osborn, no longer the Green Goblin is spending time with his son, Normie. Harry however cannot escape the “ghost” of his father as he torments Harry. Explaining to him that his son doesn’t care about what he is saying. Norman tells Harry, “I don’t want you raising that boy weak!” This makes Harry lash out at Normie, which frightens the child, Harry realizing that he has scared his son, quickly apologies, disappointing his “father”.

Vermin soon retreats to the sewers, where he meets a frightened little boy. The small child tells Vermin that he is lost and asks the creature if he can take him home. Vermin agrees, but is also surprised the child trusts him.

The issue ends with Peter and Harry both in the arms of their wives, and Vermin makes it home after killing a truck driver and commandeering his truck.

Part 2, Vermin makes it to his home, there we find an elderly woman and man sleeping in separate beds. Vermin crawls into the bed of the man and cuddles with him, saying “daddy—I’m home.” The man reaches for a gun and shoots Vermin. Vermin flees the home with the child he brought with him looking on in terror.

Peter, Mary Jane and Aunt May are visiting the graves of their lost loved ones. Peter is distracted and haunted by Vermin. When Peter makes an excuse to leave, his wife and aunt are not convinced, Peter however doesn’t care and decides to leave.

Harry and his family are enjoying a day at Central Park. While on the carousel Harry once again is visited by his “father”, who once again torments him for being too soft on his son. After another outburst, Harry snaps out of his daze, but the damage has been done.

Spider-Man pays Dr. Kafka a visit, still not convinced she can “save” Edward from Vermin. Dr. Kafka pleads with Spider-Man to give her a chance, he reluctantly agrees and is about to search for him when Vermin appears outside of Dr. Kafka’s window. At first, Vermin is scared but when he sees Spider-Man in the doctor’s office, his fear soon turns to rage and he races up the side of the building to the roof.

As Vermin makes it to the roof, Spider-Man is waiting for him. (in a great piece of psychological art, Sal Buscema draws Spider-Man in all black except for his eyes, making Spidey look terrifying to Vermin) Spider-Man offers to help Vermin, Vermin doesn’t believe the web-head and soon attacks. However, Spider-Man is the one that is over come with anger and is soon beating the living hell out of Vermin. Dr. Kafka arrives on the roof and begs Spider-Man to stop, he eventually does. But the damage is done. Vermin bites and attacks Dr. Kafka. Spider-Man saves her but Vermin gets away.

The issue ends with Harry tucking in Normie. When Harry turns around he sees his “father” holding the Green Goblin costume and telling Harry, “It’s time.”

The third part Harry continues to fall into madness. Harry is being berated not only by his “father”, but now “Peter Parker” is there as well. Harry’s descent into madness is now complete.

Vermin is back in the sewers, and we learn the little boy with him is not real, but Vermin as a young boy. We also learn that Vermin was sexually abused by his father, adding to the complex layer of a creature that is misunderstood.

Dr. Kafka is having doubts as well. Can she save Edward from Vermin? Is all her work for nothing? Dr. Kafka soon realizes that she most try and save him.

After spending all night looking for Vermin, Spider-Man returns home. Lost in his thoughts, Spider-Man’s Spider-Sense soon alerts him of danger. The Green Goblin has returned and is looking for a fight! Harry taunts Peter throughout their skirmish, with Spider-Man remarking that the Goblin’s voice is full of anger and hate. The Goblin throws a bomb at Spider-Man and Spidey thinks he’s dodged it. However, he soon learns that he was hit with a knockout gas and is in the clutches of the Green Goblin.

The Green Goblin tells Spider-Man that this fight isn’t about the Green Goblin or Spider-Man, it’s about Peter Parker and Harry Osborn.

Part 4 doesn’t let up on the psychological warfare. The Goblin tells Spider-Man that killing him is too easy, instead he unleashes a hallucinogenic gas onto Spider-Man.

Spidey is soon confronted by failures from his past. The forms to make shapes, from Kraven the Hunter, to Peter’s parents and Norman Osborn, Spider-Man is reduced to a small child. The guilt is overwhelming and drives Peter insane.

Awaken from his hallucinogenic state Peter goes berserk. In fact he is so out of control that Harry removed the Green Goblin mask and attempts to calm him down. Peter just wails on Harry and escapes. Peter eventually makes it to Dr. Kafka’s office and begs her for help.

Meantime, Vermin decides he has had enough of the pain his father has caused him and returns to his home. There he attacks his mother and father, telling his father that he is there to kill him.

Part 5 begins with Peter lost in his own subconscious. Dr. Kafka is pleading with him to find his way out. Spider-Man with encouragement from Dr. Kafka is able to overcome his crippling guilt and the effects of the Goblin’s gas and “breaks free”. He and Dr. Kafka soon learn that Vermin is in Scarsdale attacking his family. In the distance we see the ominous shadow of the Green Goblin, waiting to strike. Spidey soon swings into action, heading out to stop Vermin.

Vermin has his mother and father at his mercy. When Vermin attempts to kill his father, he cannot. Vermin becomes frustrated with this and doesn’t understand why he can’t hurt someone who has hurt him so much.

Spider-Man arrives and Vermin is confused no longer. Vermin can hurt Spider-Man with no guilt. The two men fight their way to the roof of the Whelan’s home. Vermin gets the upper hand is about to defeat Spider-Man when he is hit from behind by the Green Goblin. The Goblin informs Vermin that Spider-Man is his to kill!

The finale to The Child Within starts with a bang. Spider-Man and the Green Goblin tussle in Scarsdale. After Vermin is saved and subdued he is safely handed over to Dr. Kafka, Spidey turns his attention to the Goblin.

Spider-Man reminds the Green Goblin that their fight isn’t about them, it’s about Harry and Peter. After they exchange blows, Peter tells Harry if you want to kill me go ahead, saying he’s not going to fight his best friend anymore. Harry is confronted by his “father” again, who tells him it’s a trap. Peter says it’s not and opens his arms as if to say, “I won’t fight you if you want to kill me.” Harry points his glider at Peter and guns it. Getting closer and closer to Peter with his “father” cheering him on.

Just before he is about to hit Peter, Harry abruptly turns his glider causing him to crash. Harry whines as to why he can’t kill Peter. Peter tells him because he is a good man and he knew he wouldn’t kill him. Harry rejects this notion and tells Peter to stay away from him. He also warns Peter that he will be back and if he even thinks about handing him over to the police he will tell the world that Spider-Man and Peter Parker are one in the same.

There is an epilogue to The Child Within, where the characters are attempting to pick up the pieces of what has happened.

Harry sees his son in the Green Goblin costume and tells Normie that he is going away for a little but but he will return soon. Liz Allen, Harry’s wife walks in terrified that Harry is the Green Goblin again. In a panic Harry leaves and pumpkin bombs the hell out of the street below, arguing with himself if he is Harry Osborn or the Green Goblin.

Dr. Kafka is continuing her work to free Edward for the grip of Vermin. And while Spider-Man still isn’t convinced that it will work, he believes in Dr. Kafka.

Spider-Man returns home. He complains to Mary Jane that he isn’t sure letting Harry go was the right thing to do. Mary Jane puts her finger to Peter’s mouth and the two embrace, and go to bed in each other’s arms.

Peter soon wakes up, puts on his Spider-Man costume because he knows that his job is never over, especially with the Green Goblin at large!

The Child Within is one of the best stories ever told. Although there are some super hero fights, the story isn’t the fights between super-powered people, but the fights with ourselves.

DeMatteis weaves a mature, dark and unforgiving story of loss, redemption and failure. He taps onto the minds of all the characters involved telling a story that is unforgettable.

Vermin was once a monster of an enemy, but here DeMatteis deconstructs who he is and gives him a tragic backstory. He also doesn’t hit you over the head with it either. The slow, frightening buildup to the shocking revelation that Edward/Vermin was sexually abused by his father makes Vermin one of the most tragic villains of all time. Sometimes revealing where a villain comes from takes away the mystique of the villain, in this case however it makes it so much better. When you read the earlier appearances of Vermin you can’t help but think of how he became the monster he is.

DeMatteis explores the verbal abuse that Harry suffered from his father so much better than it was before. Being haunted by your past is an ongoing theme throughout The Child Within, however it seems that Harry’s preconceived idea of never being good enough for his father is the most damaging. Where we expect Spider-Man/Peter Parker to be able to fight the ghosts of the past because of who he is, Harry could never and will never escape his inadequacies that his father would constantly berate him with. In fact, DeMatteis would continue to explore this theme in Harry’s and the Green Goblin’s subsequent return in the next couple years in the pages of Spectacular Spider-Man.

As for the art, what can I say other than Sal Buscema is my favorite Spider-Man artist and he absolutely crushes it in these seven issues. Buscema’s story telling cannot be touched I believe in the comic medium. His line work is so clean and his panels move so well, that if someone had never read a comic before I would give them a book Sal worked on because they would be able to follow the story easily. One of my most favorite things to do with comics is to put my hand over the word balloons and see if I can still read the story without the help of dialogue. With Buscema the answer is 100% yes. There are several pages in The Child Within where it’s Vermin on a security camera, the page has 12 panels, each panel is small and each panel tells the reader exactly what is going on and how Vermin feels in each panel. It truly is the work of a master.

To me, Buscema’s Green Goblin is one of the best. I will always have a soft spot for John Romita’s Goblin, but Buscema’s has such a range emotionally that you see the conflict in Harry’s decisions, even with the mask of the Goblin on.

From the story to the art, there are not very many more complete comic book stories. The shocking heartbreak of Vermin being a sexual abuse victim, to Harry’s further descent into the darkness that will consume him and eventually kill him, The Child Within is one of Spider-Man’s greatest stories.

 

Articles, Review, The Shamley Silhouette

The Shamley Silhouette – Chapter One

 

 

 

 

Chapter 1: Fanciful Notions

 

 

“As a matter of fact, that’s how I knew that Cary Grant had died. Every channel on TV was showing that shot of Cary running away from the plane. It’s strange, isn’t it, that such a distinguished career should be remembered mostly for that one shot?”

          -Ernest Lehman (2000) on the Crop Dusting Scene in NORTH BY NORTHWEST

Screenwriter: North By Northwest and Family Plot

 

Good Evening….

 

This whole damn thing started with a visit to the police. You have probably heard the story: Young Alfred Hitchcock is sent to a police station and put in a jail cell for five minutes then released. Upon his release, the jailer reputedly said to young Hitch, “That’s what we do to naughty boys.”

Despite this story having been called into question in many retrospectives and interviews with family and collaborators, let us assume it is not just a tall tale. As a young Hitchcock sat in that jail cell for the child’s eternity of five minutes, do you suppose that the young man had a tiny sense of who he would want to be. Not who he would be, but wanted to be. If it didn’t happen in that cell, it certainly didn’t take too long for the young man to figure out in his head who he would want to be in the most ideal of circumstances. Only thirty-seven years had to pass. Then in 1941, he was able to see that idyllic notion in the form of Archibald Leach… oh wait, sorry… CARY GRANT (cue to his name in lights bursting off a marquee).

 

It is safe to say that Cary Grant is the ideal Hitchcock leading man. A man of mystery or unexpected talent or fine crafted skill that is packed to the brim with charm, wit, and a dash of menace to throw you off. Not all these elements necessarily boil together in the same pot, but many tend to overlap to legendary perfection.  While Jame Stewart is very much a more grounded and realistic counterpart to Hitchcock, Grant is expressly there to emulate how the director wishes he was and may even see himself at fleeting moments. It’s not an uncommon occurrence for a director to find a frequent collaborator that seems to mesh well with the director and/or his inner aspirations,  nor would Hitchcock be the first to grasp that mantle in history, and it is not the only leading man collaboration in his career that holds high value. Yet undeniably, when you speak of Hitchcock, Grant comes to mind almost immediately because the four films they made together are a perfect pairing of Director and Star. Two of those specifically have been high at the top of the list for those who I reached out to for the companion podcast: ‘To Catch A Thief’ and ‘North By Northwest’.  The other two, ‘Notorious’ and ‘Suspicion’, are among the most celebrated of Hitchcock’s work, and while Grant is not the sole linchpin in these films, he is an undoubted ingredient films require to achieve their legacy. While it would be fair to say that you could possibly have put Grant in Stewart’s place for ‘Rope’ (1948) , you could not say the same for Stewart taking Grants place in a film like ‘Notorious’ or ‘Suspicion’ and you especially could never put him ‘To Catch A Thief’ or ‘North By Northwest’.

 

From the moment they start their cinematic journey together in 1941’s ‘Suspicion’, it is clear that Grant’s charm and notoriety as a screwball comedy master filled with charm is about to go through the ultimate transformation under Hitchcock. The films secret weapon is Grants then established persona and it plays to full effect as he devilishly glides through the story of the love struck Joan Fontaine suspecting him capable of murder in the pursuit of her inheritance. If the film had played out as the original novel ‘Before The Fact’ had, it would have seen one of the darkest turns by Grant in his storied career. It may have even changed his route to much more varied roles. One thought that occurs with Grant’s performances, especially in ‘Suspicion”, is that he is always hiding something inside. It may be his troubled familial past, his difficulty in keeping his many marriages in tact, or even the general psychological trauma for which he suffered by the former two. Regardless of the psychological pinpoint, Grant always possessed something haunted about him.  Up until Hitchcock gets hold of him, Grants mysterious nature was tampered down to the idea of the carefree bachelor or the suave, sophisticated fella who has wise crack or two despite hiding a tender side. The psychological factor in those contain amounts of fear and vulnerability. In ‘Suspicion’, he highlights Grant’s darker aspects by playing directly into our perception of his on-screen persona. We are not expecting him to be as conniving and selfish as purports and we immediately tend to be overtaken by his charm which acts as a smokescreen. If it weren’t for the conveniently happy ending requested by RKO Pictures, the films original ending would have driven that point home further. One of the most darkly beautiful moments in the film involves Cary Grant carrying up a glass of milk to Lina (Fontaine), which we the audience and Lina suspect has been laced with poison. Its a scene that further twists the audiences expectations of Grants persona and the character we are dealing with. The original ending would have seen Lina deliberately drink the poison Johnnie (Grant) gives her in the glass of milk after sending a letter to her mother detailing Johnnie’s actions while also professing that she loves him too much to let him be caught. Either way, it puts Fontaine in a weird position where she is granted utter character disservice due to the time in which it was made and the ending we have gives Grant an idyllic result for what is otherwise a devilish and twisted turn. The beauty is that none it feels lacking, it really is all there to enjoy and extrapolate.

 

 

Grant and Hitchcock evolve that idea of twisting perception with ‘Notorious’ and refine it to a much more complex realm. Telling the story of a woman who is to extract information from a Nazi spy ring by seducing and marrying one of its higher ups, ‘Notorious’ puts on display a fascinating conundrum to put Grant in opposite the luminous Ingrid Bergman. Prior to her mission beginning, the film quickly gets Grant’s Devlin  and Bergman’s Alicia together after a series of incidents where they spit venom back and forth until the tension falls on them like a ton of lovely bricks. While ‘Notorious’ never asks us to believe as an audience that Devlin is not conflicted and emotionally wrung by Alicia’s choice to carry out the mission of seduction and eventual marriage. But because we are primarily in Alicia’s shoes throughout the film, we are drawn into her realm of trust. While our assumption lies in the fact that Grant will rescue her and leave the diabolical Sebastian (Claude Raines) to his doom (Spoiler Alert), the tension that Hitchcock weaves throughout in the matters of trust can put you through the shoes of not entirely trusting Devlin. Consequently, you can also look through Devlin’s eyes and not trust Alicia, albeit for superficial reasons that are abundant at the top of the film. From Alicia’s point of view, the audience sees a sophistication of that dark charm that ‘Suspicion’ held while also possessing a relatable trait in Grants performance that borders on Anti-Hero. It is not quite that, but has a slight bent in its direction. From Devlin’s point of view, Hitchcock plays on the audience’s knowledge of Grant once again by putting us in Grants position of his suspicions when it comes to Alicia. Hitchcock was smart enough to know that with Grant in the part, they would automatically be put back into the familiar trope where Grant is pursued and Grant, generally does not pursue. The flip in ‘Notorious’ is that Grant, unlike many times in his career, does pursue Alicia. It isn’t overt, but Devlin’s care for Alicia cannot be masked by mere swagger and charm alone.  Grant thusly, may have been able to tap into his own personal experiences to add this subtle touch with Hitchcock’s guidance. Hitchcock also knows to play up Grants romantic side in this film, simply because: That kiss on the balcony is one that (for this authors money) could only be achieved if you have Grant and Bergman involved.

 

 

The darker natures of Grant then flip to a much more familiar face when the 50’s roll around. In ‘To Catch A Thief’, Grant plays John Robie, a master cat burglar who earned a reprieve of his crimes after serving in the war effort and is settled in retirement until a copy-cat burglar emerges and puts Robie under suspicion. The film then briskly walks through Robie’s mission to clear his name and try to avoid the pursuant Frances Stevens (Grace Kelly) from stealing his heart (Tee Hee, cause he’s a Thief, but she’s gonna… never mind, I’m delirious with stupidity). ‘To Catch A Thief’ is a Hitchcock affair that is light on his signature elements. From story to visual it is much more a romp than expected with his name at the head of it all. That doesn’t mean there isn’t stuff to chew on in regards to Grant. While it would be wrong to say that this is an exact representation of what Hitchcock wants to be, it like ‘Notorious’ and ‘Suspicion’ have blended elements that are natural to Grant to use as a conduit for Hitchcock’s purposes. He’s charm machine who gets Grace Kelly at the end, that alone is an answer. Additionally though, we are seeing elements of the chase that Grant briskly walks through in way that almost no other Hitchcock leading man is allowed to do.  That’s purely because Hitchcock likes these characters and shows it. From Grant’s angle, he is able to directly use his previous skills as a Vaudevillian acrobat both as character background and stunt work during the films rooftop climax. Even when the film is not infused with copious Hitchcockian vibes, the connection between dream and reality is a tight bond that allows the collaboration to flourish.

 

The culmination of all this lies in the tale of an ad executive who has to clear his name of murder and espionage even if he has runaway from crop dusters, endure James Mason, and  hang off the side of Mount Rushmore to do it. ‘North By Northwest’ has been described as the “Ultimate Hitchcock Film” and to a large extent it is. It’s also the film where the Hitchcock/Grant hybrid is unified in near perfect sync. The films inherent concept and structure of  the unextraordinary man in an extraordinary situation is prime for this director to play around with his internal imagination and flights of fancy. Thanks to the three previous collaborations, Hitchcock fully knows how to utilize Grant to his liking and it additionally compliments Grant’s ability to draw from the persona and reality. Grant’s Richard Thornhill is a man who has not grown up and is unable to handle the smaller details of his journey in addition to the broader ones within the spy plot. Upon nearly being killed in a car wreck and getting forcibly drunk at the hands of henchman Martin Landau, he lands in prison and the first call he makes is to his mother. While it is unrealistic to try and connect a thread to his own past familial trauma, it is interesting that Hitchcock is able to place his overbearing Mother trope into the film with the help of the genius Jessie Royce Landis, who is easily the best Hitchcock mother character in this and ‘To Catch A Thief’. The more solid thought though is that Grant is able to draw upon his own instability that is covered by the charm filled persona. In a sense, this fantastical world of impossible espionage and danger contains a realistic performance. Real in its portrayal and real in its devotion to the dream-mold Hitchcock blesses Grant with. And of course it delves right back into playing with the trope of Grant as the pursued rather than pursuer of Eva Marie Saint. While Saint does pursue him, Grant has to chase her more often than not to connect the dots of his predicament. In essence, Hitchcock and Screenwriter Ernest Lehman have broken almost entirely with the Grant tradition to suit this mold that Hitchcock plays with on most pictures. ‘North By Northwest’ is by and large the film that people remember the duo for above all else and it is not hard to see why when you see the aspirations of two men put thusly on the screen.

 

With all four of their collaborations  you see two trains stopping side by side at the same station that are able to work together on their brief stays, the desire of Grant to dig deeper and the desire of Hitchcock to dream bigger. Not every Hitchcock/Actor relationship would be this positive and prosperous (as we will discuss later in the series), but this is one that helps cement the simple reasons we still go to the movies. After all: haven’t you ever dream about getting caught up in spy caper and traveling the  country with a sense of adventure and danger and getting to defeat the bad guy at the end?

 

As the film ‘Suspicion’ begins the four film collaboration with a train in a tunnel before the light reveals Grant on screen across from Fontaine, ‘North by Northwest’ ends with Grant pulling Saint up to the upper berth as the train slyly goes into a tunnel. A cheeky bookend to a legendary run on celluloid.

 

—————————————————————————-

 

Till the next article… Good Night.

Announcement, Articles, Editorial, Review

The Shamley Silhouette

 

Introduction: Repetition

 

There is no point in doing this… it has already been done a million times over.

That was my initial thought when I landed upon the notion of covering Alfred Hitchcock as my next analysis for the Reel Nerds website. It was a thought that kept this series from starting back in May.

For those who are not familiar with this (I’m assuming everyone), I recently finished covering all 60 films of Clint Eastwood (not counting the film he is currently producing just to keep that series continuing). The affair was difficult as I was still learning how to discipline myself in the matter of covering all these films and giving thoughtful observations on his career. I’m still not convinced it was as thorough as it could be, nor convinced that it lived up to the standards set by greater writers than I who have covered the careers of personalities with the finest toothed combs. Stubbornly, I decided to continue this trend on a new topic. My decision on the subject at hand had been in the back of my mind for years.

 

 

My first encounter with the Master of Suspense occurred when I was 9 years old, watching a VHS of Universals 1999 remake of THE MUMMY (dir. Stephen “Deep Rising” Sommers). Before the film began, a slew of ad’s filled the screen of a Zenith Tube TV that filled my head with the possibilities of films I had not seen but must as soon as possible. One of those ads that struck me deeply. It came after the Universal Monster ad, and in a weird way mirrored my own eventual evolution from the horrors Gothic castles and mad scientists to the horrors of man and his feasibly warped mind. It was an ad for THE ALFRED HITCHCOCK COLLECTION. Within an instance, an intense montage of imagery from the Universal owned Hitchcock films hit my feeble brain and bawled me over. The most striking was a bird darting directly at the screen and slamming into the glass of a phone booth with the impact of a bullet, the reaction of a frightened and disheveled Tipi Hedren, and a wide shot of a flock of birds chasing down screaming kids from their once peaceful schoolhouse in Bodega Bay. As the ads ended and The Mummy started, I kept remembering that image of the bird attacking the phone booth. Stuck in my head almost like a frightening dream. When I finally got a copy of THE BIRDS from the library and sat down to watch it, the VHS (as I recall) began with the trailer. But instead of clips from the film; it was just this rather large man talking cheekily granting us an orientation about how man and bird are and have been in peaceful cohabitation until Tipi Hedren runs into the room screaming, “They’re Coming! They’re Coming!”. Then as the film began, I became engrossed not just in the bird attacks themselves, but by the build up before the attacks. Every moment that Hitchcock wanted me to jump at I did without any notion of how a director plays the audience like a piano. It was simply a pure experience in cinematic terror. That was the beginning a lifelong admiration and study of Alfred Hitchcock.

Now the question is: how do you tackle a subject that has been tackled to death? Do you go through all 56 of his films (there would be 57, but THE MOUNTAIN EAGLE (1926) is a lost film that will hopefully be found and restored through the mission of the British film Institute)? Do you talk about his style and technique (there’s a whole interview book dedicated to that, called HITCHCOCK/TRUFFAUT by François Truffaut that is more than worth your time)? Do you discuss his personal life and dark obsession (go to ANY Hitchcock biography ever written or listen to Adam Roche’s SECRET HISTORY OF HOLLYWOOD podcast)? Essentially, do you go down any of these specific rabbit holes again?

The answer is yes, but with a caveat…

Henceforth, THE SHAMLEY SILHOUETTE is an all around celebration and study of the Master of Suspense by his admirers (and possibly even detractors). It will do its best over the course of the rest of 2019 to dig into the many different facets of Hitchcock, why we still discuss him today, and even tackle some of the Hitchcock imitations that have followed in his wake from the overt to the subtle. The articles will, in due course, eventually discuss all his films at least once and provide insights therein. My hope with this will be to encourage those reading to seek out further information and study on Hitchcock’s cinema and its vast possibilities for dissection.

In addition, I have decided that I do not wish this whole affair to be my one sided view. I want to get others in on the fun. That’s why, as each article drops, it will be followed by an audio podcast where I will sit down with fellow Hitchcock fans (and possibly detractors) to discuss their love (or even hate) of the man. With all of this we will hopefully discover, for our own purposes, a better understanding of how important his work was and how he continues to permeate the culture directly and indirectly.

Or put simply: (Sigh) Yet another analysis of The Master Of Suspense.

So get cozy for a bit guys. We are going to go where everyone has gone before… again… but hey, we’re gonna have some fun doing it…

Articles, Review, Show Time

Show Time: My Top 10 “Twilight Zone” Episodes

The original “Twilight Zone” series ran from 1959-1964 on CBS.

As I’ve said before on the podcast, the original Rod Serling Twilight Zone is my all-time favorite TV show. I love how each episode is a self-contained story. I love all the sci-fi elements that are integrated into it — space travel, human evolution and experimentation, and so on; while, at the same time, episodes can have elements of the Western, horror, crime and fantasy genres as well. I love the big philosophical questions that frequently come up, and the twist endings, which sometimes are well-done and sometimes are predictable.

Ultimately, even though it’s actually from my parents’ generation, its themes and messages are timeless and classic, as it explores the idea of humanity. What does it mean to be human? What does it mean to exist? By stepping into a world of aliens, angels, demons, monsters, time-travel, and hallucinations… we explore what it really means to be who we are.

So, more than five years ago, I compiled my Top 10 list of episodes after watching the New Year’s Eve Twilight Zone marathon on the SyFy channel. I’ve updated a few things and re-posted it here with the Nerds’ permission.

Disclaimer: I have not seen ALL 156 episodes of The Twilight Zone, but it’s pretty close. It’s hard to keep track of them all, as many of them have similar plots/themes/etc.

So, starting with Number 10 and working down to Number 1. No spoilers, I promise. Only basic plot points here and there.

10. THE MASKS

Before he dies, a wealthy, old man forces his relatives to wear masks that show their true personalities. This one works well because each one of the old man’s relatives is a caricature. The masks are both creepy and dramatic in nature, and the twist ending is equally creepy and dramatic.

9. I AM THE NIGHT–COLOR ME BLACK

Unlike most episodes this one doesn’t really have a twist ending. There’s a strange darkness hovering over a small town as they await to have a local man executed. The premise is eerie, and the overall message and dialogue is fantastic. Rod Serling, in fact, wrote this as a direct response to President John F. Kennedy’s assassination.

8. THE HITCH-HIKER

A well-known TZ episode about a woman on a road trip from New York to L.A., who keeps seeing the same hitch-hiker on the side of the road. This one is quite spooky, and as a woman who has taken several long road trips, I understand why – especially in the days before cell phones – this lady would have been freaked out.

7. FIVE CHARACTERS IN SEARCH OF AN EXIT

This is one of the first episodes of the series that I ever watched. My senior year of high school, my philosophy teacher had us watch this episode about “a clown, hobo, ballet dancer, bagpiper, and an Army major” stuck in a round, doorless room “with no logic, no reason, no explanation.” It’s a good story in its own right, but it also poses good questions that compares the characters’ situation with our own.

6. THE OLD MAN IN THE CAVE

After watching TZ enough, many of the plots get to be repetitive. The premise of this episode is much like other TZ episodes: there was a nuclear war, and the fallout has lasting repercussions. But, a group of survivors have learned to survive thanks to the titular character. I’ve always thought that the better Twilight Zone episodes were the ones adapted from pre-existing short stories, rather than screenplays that Serling or others penned for the show (as they tend to be repetitive). This twist ending knocked off my socks, as the whole time I was trying to figure out the truth behind the old man. Also, as I just watched again last night, I was struck with one line that one of the survivors says to justify their actions: “We’ve survived. But we haven’t lived.” It’s another great look into human nature, the ideas of authority, compassion, and mob mentality.

5. THE OBSOLETE MAN

This story is a commentary on totalitarianism, liberty, life, and death. A librarian is proclaimed “obsolete” by his totalitarian government, and opts to choose his own method of execution. As someone who works with print media, which is often declared obsolete in our modern society, I feel like I really identified with the main character in terms of his beliefs and his willingness to die rather than give them up.

4. THE CHANGING OF THE GUARD

I think this is the only TZ episode – and one of the few TV shows in general – that has ever moved me to tears. Just reading back over the episode synopsis, I couldn’t help but get ‘hot eyes.’ An aging English teacher, after getting forced into retirement, begins to despair, and plans to commit suicide. I don’t want to give too much away, but I will say that this episode shows us that we don’t know how many lives we unknowingly change – whether for better or worse.

3. TIME ENOUGH AT LAST

This is probably the first Twilight Zone episode I ever saw – in English class during my junior year of high school. The main character is a bank teller who wants simply to read his books in peace. Of course, his job and his wife get in the way of that. It’s a great story about being careful what you wish for. Honestly, if you haven’t seen it or heard of it at this point, I’d be surprised. It seems to be one of the most famous episodes.

2. THE MONSTERS ARE DUE ON MAPLE STREET

Another famous Twilight Zone story about “thoughts, attitudes, prejudices, and suspicions.” I remember reading the (radio) play of the episode in seventh grade, and it was a very timeless commentary on man’s more savage nature. Honestly, if you haven’t seen it, I recommend that you watch it.

1. WILL THE REAL MARTIAN PLEASE STAND UP?

I think this is the quintessential Twilight Zone episode. Seven people enter a diner, but one of them is a Martian in disguise. Of course, it’s not long before they’re pointing figures and second-guessing each other. The twist ending  just goes to show you that things are never what they seem.

Articles, Review, Show Time

Show Time: Should You Watch “Good Omens”?

Amazon released “Good Omens” on May 31.

Well, after the Internet went crazy with the release of Good Omens, a six-part miniseries based on the book of the same name by Terry Prachett and Neil Gaiman, I decided that I had to check it out. I’m a big fan of Michael Sheen and David Tennant, so I decided to watch the first episode and see whether I liked it enough to watch the rest.

And, because I have no self control, I looked up the plot of the book (and therefore the miniseries) ahead of time.

A quick synopsis: Good Omens is about various humans and supernatural beings (angels and demons) either trying to bring about the Apocalypse or to stop it from happening. The show centers on Aziraphale (Michael Sheen), an angel, and Crowley (David Tennant), a demon, who have both been on earth since humanity began and have been hanging out there ever since. Now, they’ve gone ‘native’ and don’t necessarily want the world to end, which seems inevitable after the Anti-Christ is born.

So, after watching all six episodes…

Would I recommend Good Omens? Yes, although I will admit it’s not for everyone.

The good:

Overall, it’s a well-made show with a talented cast, high production value, pretty good effects for a TV show, and well-written episodes. Sheen and Tennant’s on-screen dynamic is, without a doubt, my favorite part of the show, and I enjoyed their performances both separately and together. There were several moments that made me laugh out loud, and — while the Internet spoiled some of the show’s bigger plot points for me — I was excited to continue the show from episode to episode. I was tempted — no pun intended — to watch the show all in one night, but ended up watching all six episodes over two days. It makes for a pretty breezy watch, despite being more than five hours long.

I will also say that this show has similar themes and messages with one of my favorite shows, The Good Place, which also deals with morality, the afterlife and the eternal consequences of one’s actions, the ability to redeem oneself, etc.

I’ve never read the book, obviously, but from what I’ve seen from those who have, the show seems to do a good job of staying faithful the intricacies of the source material and all its characters and interconnected plots, while adding things in and expanding on Aziraphale and Crowley’s characterizations.

The bad:

Empirically, there aren’t a lot of bad things about this show. There are a few times, I think, where the writing style shifts dramatically without much rhyme or reason. For instance, in the third episode, there’s a 20- or 30-minute long sequence of Aziraphale and Crowley bumping into each other during various points in human history. I liked the sequence, but why place it there? Why not have it earlier in the course of the show? Perhaps there’s some logic to it, but I don’t know what it is off the top of my head.

There are also a few times where God (voiced by Frances McDormand) has little asides to explain what’s going on. The first time, which is at the very beginning of the show, introduces the audience to the creation of the world and the human race, which makes sense. However, there are a few other times later in the show where these little asides pop up somewhat randomly and the subject matter is never really touched on again. There’s an aside about the Anti-Christ’s hellhound and there’s another one about Crowley and the question of ‘How many angels can dance on the head of a pin?’ Without going into spoilers, the information that’s brought up in these little asides is never addressed again at any point during the show by any character, which ideally should be to keep the story feeling cohesive.

Now really, the biggest reason I say that it might not be for everyone is that — as is to be expected from a show written by Neil Gaiman — Good Omens plays fast and loose with Christian theology. For instance, God is voiced by a woman and Aziraphale refers to God with female pronouns, despite the traditional texts of all the Abrahamic religions using masculine pronouns and titles when referring to God. It also introduces the idea that angels are not purely good and demons are not purely evil, and that under the proper circumstances, they could actually be friends. This is an idea that contradicts Thomism, which several branches of Christianity have incorporated into their belief system:

[St. Thomas Aquinas, paraphrased:] The knowledge of the angels comes through ideas infused by God. They do not naturally know future contingents, the secrets of souls, or the mysteries of grace. The angels choose either good or evil instantly, and with full knowledge; hence their judgment is naturally final and irrevocable.

This approach of projecting human morality onto supernatural beings also takes center stage in another Neil Gaiman-written show, Lucifer, and is also touched on in the Mike Schur-created The Good Place. These are things that I personally don’t mind, as I realize it’s a part of the narrative, but I understand that other people might take issue with it, were they to watch the show.

And, really, to be fair, the genre overall might not be someone’s cup of tea. There are a few places where it meanders into soap opera-type territory, which not everyone enjoys. To be honest, there are two characters whose interactions bore/annoy me, so I sometimes fast-forwarded through their scenes because I genuinely didn’t care about them.

So, in answer to the question “Should You Watch Good Omens?” I say: Yeah.

Watch the first episode, and if you have problems with it, don’t watch the rest because you’re probably not going to like it. If you watch the first episode, and you do like it, than keep going because it’s a fun show to watch with a well-done conclusion.

Articles, Review, Show Time

Show Time: In Defense of the Finn/Rose Subplot in “The Last Jedi”

I’ve seen a lot of criticism about the film as a whole, but of the Finn/Rose subplot specifically.

Now, I have some legitimate problems with the subplot; I’m not saying it was 100% flawless and amazing and completely necessary. There are definitely parts of it that should’ve been deleted, extended or changed.

For instance, I thought the whole “animal abuse” angle was a little heavy-handed; the sequence where they trashed the whole town could’ve been about a minute or two shorter; some of the dialogue and shots of BB-8 could’ve been cut down; I HATED how the casino felt a little too “Earth” or “real-to-life” and not alien or foreign or fantastical enough to feel like a Star Wars planet; and I don’t like how the culmination of the subplot — Rose (presumably) falling in love with Finn — was a shot where Rose kisses Finn as the First Order is literally blowing up their hideout. Like, I got the point, and I liked her line about “saving what we love,” but it just felt a little disjointed tone-wise.

HOWEVER…

I felt like this subplot had a lot of positives and gave us a look at some topics/themes/perspectives that I felt like we needed at this point in the trilogy/franchise.

An example: so, in the first movie, the First Order is evil. They raid the village on Jakku, killing everyone. They raid Maz’s place on Takodana, killing a lot of people and causing massive destruction. They blow up several planets. Etc.

But, in this movie, we see the wider ranging impacts of the First Order’s regime on the galaxy’s population at large. Rose tells us about how her home planet was exploited by the First Order for its resources, and then the regime tested the weapons on its people. On Canto Bight, we see how wealthy some have become because they sell supplies to the First Order (and the Resistance), and the grim and abusive reality that exists behind this facade of extravagance and wealth (ie, the animals and kids who work with them are both maltreated).

I think it’s also important to remind the audience, that while we follow the main plot of the Resistance vs. the First Order, Jedi vs. Sith, etc., like 95% of the people in this galaxy are just carrying on with their daily lives. They’re not pilots or Stormtroopers or Force-wielders or whatever. They’re just everyday people.

Well, somewhat.

image

This was something that made the “Clone Wars” series so strong, was that we got to see how people outside of the war were living, how it impacted their lives. And it’s another thing that I think makes this sideplot somewhat successful.

It also showed us that the desire to rebel against the corrupt and abusive establishment/status quo is alive and well in the hearts of young children; that like our heroes of all three trilogies, they have the desire to change their lives/destinies… that they have hopes of better lives. Of adventure. Of heroism. Of peace. Of happiness. Just as Luke did when he looked at the Twin Suns in “A New Hope.” That sequence showed us that Holdo was right. Even if their allies didn’t come to save them today (in TLJ), the hopes of the Resistance are alive and well in the hearts of the downtrodden, like the little kids on Canto Bight.

NOW…

The biggest criticism I’ve seen of the subplot is that it was pointless. That it didn’t accomplish anything. That Finn and Rose went all that way, got captured, and then lucked their way into an escape. That they didn’t do what they set out to do, which was turn off the tracking device so the Resistance could escape the First Order. That their plan failed.

But, the defense I have for that is:

Since when did anything in Star Wars go according to plan?

Especially in the original trilogy.

image

Episode 4: Luke and Obi-Wan try to get the droids to Alderaan, but it’s destroyed and they get captured. And then, while they DO rescue Princess Leia and get away from the Death Star, Luke loses Obi-Wan in the process and then they lead the Empire right to the base on Yavin 4. Great job, you guys. I guess the trench run and blowing up the Death Star went according to plan, but that seems to be more of an exception than the rule. And, plus, you know, had to end the movie on a happy note.

Episode 5: The evacuation of Hoth is somewhat successful. But, Han & Co.’s attempts to escape the Imperial Fleet don’t go so well. They get tracked by Boba Fett to Cloud City, Han’s “friend” Lando betrays them, and then when they try to save Han from Boba Fett, they fail. That whole side plot was nothing but failure. The heroes got captured. Han got tortured, frozen in carbonite and taken. Vader was successful in luring Luke into a trap. Luke got his hand cut off, and his friends had to come back and save him. And Vader would’ve caught them if R2 hadn’t reactivated the hyperdrive.

Episode 6: The infamous “It’s a Trap” line exists for a reason. The Empire essentially lures the Rebels into attacking the Death Star / Endor. When Han & Co. try to take down the shield generator, they’re caught. Lando & Co. get drawn into a gigantic space battle they weren’t anticipating. Yes, it all works out eventually, but that’s because this is the end of the trilogy and the good guys HAVE to win, because that’s how Star Wars works.

A quick look at the prequel trilogy:

image

Episode 1: The Jedi’s plan to negotiate fails when the Trade Federation tries to kill them; their plan to escape Naboo partially fails because they have to stop off at Tattooine for parts where they get attacked by Darth Maul. The re-taking of Naboo is mostly successful: the Trade Federation is defeated; the droids stopped; and Darth Maul killed. However, Qui-Gon dies in the fight.

Episode 2: Obi-Wan was somewhat successful in finding out about Jango Fett and Count Dooku, but then ultimately got captured. And then when his rescuers, Padme and Anakin, came to save him they got captured too! And then, while our heroes were ultimately rescued, a they did ultimately kick off A WAR THAT ENCOMPASSED THE ENTIRE FUCKING GALAXY!!! Let’s not forget that.

Episode 3: Obi-Wan and Anakin’s plan to rescue the Chancellor was like a 95% success. There were some minor hiccups, and General Grievous got away, but the Chancellor was saved and Count Dooku was defeated. Then Obi-Wan’s plan to defeat General Grievous is a success. But then his and Yoda’s plans to defeat Anakin and the Emperor, respectively, don’t go as they’d hoped. Obi-Wan DOES defeat Anakin, but leaves him alive; and Padme dies giving birth; meanwhile Yoda fails to defeat the Emperor and the Republic is lost amid the First Galactic Empire.

And then in our new trilogy:

image

Episode 7: Poe’s plan to get the map from Lor San Tekka goes awry when they’re attacked, everyone’s killed, except Poe who’s captured and has to hide the plans with BB-8. Finn’s plan to escape with Poe is also a partial failure, as they get stranded on Jakku and he’s separated from Poe and believes him to be dead. They successfully get BB-8 off planet and away from the First Order, but then get “captured” by Han and Chewie. Han’s plan to convince the gangs to leave doesn’t work, and they barely escape on the Falcon. The plan to get BB-8 on a “clean ship” at Maz’s also goes badly when the First Order attacks and Rey is kidnapped and the others almost captured. The overall plan to blow up Starkiller and rescue Rey is successful, because this is a Star Wars movie and we need a happy-ish ending in our first part of the trilogy to get people invested in the heroes, but we do lose Han.

Then, with our one pre-TLJ spinoff movie:

image

Rogue One: Jyn and Cassian are successful in finding Bodhi and Galen’s message on how to destroy the Death Star, but there are hiccups in HOW they do it. They get caught in a street battle. They get spotted and almost captured by the Stormtroopers. Then they actually get captured by Saw’s people. Their plan to kill/rescue Galen pretty much fails, as Galen is killed by Rebel bombs when Jyn was hoping to save him, but then Cassian fails to shoot him when he has the chance. And, of course, the big finale is ultimately a success, but at a large price and with several hiccups. Rather than getting in and out by stealth (which I assume was the plan for at least Jyn, Cassian and K2SO) the whole Rogue One team is spotted and a large battle ensues on all sides. EVERYONE ON THE TEAM DIES! Major Rebel leaders are captured/killed. While the goal of the mission was accomplished, it didn’t go ACCORDING TO PLAN.

As I said: plans in Star Wars, especially those concocted by the heroes against a larger force, rarely go as planned.

I don’t see why people are shocked that Finn and Rose were unsuccessful in their mission considering:

1) They failed to contact the right Master Codebreaker because they made ZERO effort to be inconspicuous or stealthy while on Canto Bight. They parked right on the beach, despite being told not to, which should’ve told them that the police were going to come get them eventually. And, as we see during their ride later, there were plenty of out-of-the-way places where their shuttle wouldn’t have been spotted. They also made no effort to blend in with either their attitudes or their clothes and looked like a bunch of weirdos that I’m surprised weren’t thrown out of the casino for breaking dress code. Like, it should’ve been clear to the audience that these two — while they might’ve “known” what they were doing — did not have the capabilities to execute their plans successfully. They were set up for failure. They weren’t necessarily the right people for the job. Or should’ve had other, more or equally capable people on their team, like someone who is good at infiltration / smooth-talking people into helping them.

2) Finn’s knowledge of the First Order’s protocol was enough to be legit, but should’ve thrown up some red flags for us, the audience. It’s been at least a few days, possibly a week or two, since the Starkiller Base was destroyed. I mean, we have no idea how long it was from when Rey brought Finn back to the Resistance Base to when Rey left to find Luke. I’m guessing not more than like a day, considering she’d never even fucking met Poe. And considering that the Rey/Luke stuff is about simultaneous to the Resistance evacuation thing, it can’t have been more than two weeks from when Starkiller Base was destroyed, IMO. So, in those two weeks, or probably less, the First Order has to know (from Phasma, if no one else), that Finn helped the Resistance infiltrate the Starkiller Base. They know that a traitor is working for their enemy and their systems are vulnerable. Surely, they would’ve changed some protocols, security procedures, code clearances, or whatever between Finn’s defection and the Resistance’s evacuation. If not on purpose, then at least by chance. How does Finn know the First Order hasn’t upgraded its coding system since he was with them? Especially given that it’s Snoke’s ship, so you know it’d be upgraded first and/or have a higher security setting than your regular ship.

image

3) It was clear from the offset that DJ (Benicio del Toro’s character) was interested in helping them only because it suited him at the time. He was very much out for himself, had a questionable moral compass (like stealing the ship on Canto Bight), and was ultimately only interested in the money. Why some people were so shocked or felt so let down when he betrayed them is baffling to me. Maybe if you’re a 5-year-old, would it be a surprise. Also, if you rewatch the movie, you’ll notice there’s a little look that DJ gives whenever he hears Poe talking about Holdo’s plan to use the transports to escape. Like a little “Huh, that might come in handy later” look.

4) The entire point of the sequence was to show that the reality behind the war is a lot more “gray” than it is “black” and “white.” As DJ shows Finn and us, there are people who don’t have any allegiance and have no problem selling arms to both sides. There are people whose lives have been negatively impacted by the First Order, or the Resistance, or both. That’s a point that Game of Thrones/ASOIAF series does very well of hitting: that the grander wars tear apart the lives of the “small folk,” who ultimately don’t care who wins or loses so long as their lives are peaceful and secure. Remember that Palpitine rose to power as Emperor on the idea that he could bring PEACE AND SECURITY to the Republic as an Empire, because the Republic had failed and the Jedi had failed, and he was the only one who could help the “small folk” attain the lives they wanted. Or whatever. Sorry, for the digression.

5) There were clear hints throughout the infiltration sequence that Finn and Rose were going to get caught. Like DJ’s “betrayal,” I don’t get why people were so shocked by this.

NOW…

All that being said, I do agree that the overall effect on the story was missing. Finn and Rose, at the end of the day, accomplished nothing either as people or as a story element. Yes, narratively, it helped world-build and gave us some good thematic material (grayness in a world built on “black” and “white,” light and dark, etc.). But, they didn’t DO anything, even as they were escaping. I guess Finn killed Phasma, but that’s about it. Holdo tearing through the Supremacy could’ve killed Phasma and it wouldn’t have made much difference. We didn’t see Finn planting seeds of rebellion/resistance in the minds of his fellow Stormtroopers. We didn’t see them steal any piece of equipment like a Master Key or some kind of important file that might’ve come in handy later in this movie or in the next one. So, in that sense, yes, the sideplot was weak and pointless.

At the end of the movie, all it did was bring Finn and Rose closer together.

But, then again, you could say the same thing about the Han and Leia sideplot in Episode 5. What difference would there have been plot-wise if Han and Leia had been captured right after leaving Hoth than later on Cloud City? Han probably still would’ve been tortured and then taken by Boba Fett. Luke still would’ve been lured into a trap. Leia & Co. probably would’ve still failed to save Han, etc. In a way, you could argue that THAT whole sideplot was filler to:

  1. Buy time for Luke to train with Yoda so he could stand something of a chance against Vader in the Cloud City duel
  2. Do some world-building (asteroid field, giant worm thing, Cloud City, bounty hunters, Lando, etc.)
  3. Bring Han and Leia closer together as part of a romance subplot
  4. Show us their desperate flight to escape the Empire, only to seemingly succeed and then ultimately fail by getting captured.

Hey, wait a minute…. isn’t that exactly what this subplot did, too?

  1. It was filler (as was the Resistance’s arbitrary 18-hours of fuel limitations or whatever) to buy time while Rey was off training with Luke / having Force-bond sessions with Kylo Ren.
  2. It did some world-building (Canto Bight, master code breakers, kids who are Rebels at heart, animals and humans who can’t live in peace because of the war, etc.).
  3. It brought Finn and Rose closer together as part of a possible romantic subplot.
  4. It showed us their desperate plight to save their friends only to almost succeed and then ultimately fail by getting captured.

Congratulations, everyone, you just watched Rian Johnson subtly rewrite The Empire Strikes Back and give it to you in the guise of a new storyline.

image
image

THIS is probably the REAL reason everyone hates the subplot, even if they don’t consciously realize it. In the same way everyone seemingly hates on TFA for being too much like A New Hope, this movie was tonally and sometimes plotwise too much like The Empire Strikes Back.

And while some of that is appropriate and expected, we the audience have a right to be angry when movie franchises repeat themselves too much to the point of being uncreative.

Anyway, I’ve rambled about this enough. I just wanted to defend the subplot because, while it has problems, I think it has merit to the overall darker and more desperate tone of the movie, the world-building both on a physical and a thematic level (the grayness), and allowed for some nice (but cheesy) character moments.

TL;DR :

Does it have problems? Yes. Is it too similar to The Empire Strikes Back’s subplot when you really thing about it? Yes.

But does that mean it’s total garbage? No. Or even if it is:

image
(Side note: after writing all of this out, I stumbled onto this article that touches on the same topic, and one of the same things that I brought up, but in a little more detail. Read it if you want. I don’t care.)
Articles, Catching the Classics, Miyazaki, Review

Catching the Miyazaki Classics (Part 4) – Spirited Away

Spirited Away, the eighth of Miyazaki’s 11 films as writer/director

Japanese filmmaker Hayao Miyazaki, perhaps best known for his work with Studio Ghibli, has gained popularity around the world for his creative and imaginative animated feature films. While they were originally released in Japanese, all of them have been dubbed into English with prominent voice actors and Hollywood stars. For the next several weeks, I’ll be reviewing the English-dub versions of each of Miyazaki’s 11 films as writer and director.

Last week, I tackled Castle in the Sky (1986).

This week: Spirited Away (2001).

Synopsis: Ten-year-old Chihiro (voiced by Daveigh Chase) and her parents are moving to a new town. While en route to their new house, the family takes the wrong road and stumbles upon an abandoned amusement park. Chihiro tries to convince her parents to turn around and go back, but — after eating some mysterious food — her parents turn into pigs and Chihiro finds herself no longer in the human world but in the realm of the spirits. To survive and help her parents turn back into humans, Chihiro must make allies and friends as she tries to find her way in this strange realm.

Spoiler-free review: Unlike the other three films I’ve covered so far, this is one of Miyazaki’s movies I had seen previously. I watched it — albeit with the Japanese voice actors and English subtitles — in college as part of an Eastern civilization course. I remember hearing about it when I was growing up, as it won the 2001 Academy Award for Best Animated Feature. This movie, in my experience, is perhaps Miyazaki’s most well-known and most beloved film. Many die-hard fans will tell you that this is his best movie. While I didn’t understand the hype about this movie after I saw it the first time in college, after rewatching it for the series, I now understand why it’s so beloved and critically acclaimed. The film boasts stunning animation, a strong English-language voice cast, a succinct story and very iconic and memorable characters. I personally believe that Princess Mononoke (1997) is Miyazaki’s best film, but I would say this movie is of an equal caliber and it’s really more a question of minutia over which is the better of the two. And while I’ll cover Princess Mononoke in Part 9 of this series, I’ll say that Spirited Away is certainly more family friendly, more efficient in its storytelling and has slightly better animation than its predecessor. So, if you haven’t already seen it, you definitely should.

Letter grade: A

Full review and critique: (Warning: here be spoilers!)

When I watched this movie for the first time, I’ll admit that it I didn’t understand the hype around it. All the Miyazaki fans I’ve ever encountered — in person or online — talked up this movie and acted like it was the best thing since sliced bread. My eastern religions professor was certainly one of them, as I believe he said we would be missing out on the experience if we didn’t watch it in the original Japanese. I definitely enjoyed watching it the first time around, but thought it was overhyped.

Now that I’ve seen more of Miyazaki’s and Studio Ghibli’s films, I understand why. The animation seems to be of a slightly different (and arguably better) style than its predecessors. The people seem to look and move a little differently; and the film benefits from some unique, beautiful and haunting character designs for Yubaba and Zeniba, No-Face, Haku, and other demons and spirits that Chihiro/Sen encounters. And, I have to say, that sequence when the park starts to transition into the realm of the spirits, and Chihiro sees all the shadowy spirits walking around is a very well-done sequence that helps put you into the world, builds up an atmosphere, and features a lot of eerie images that are now very iconic.

The story is also simple and that allows for lots of important character-building moments, like Chihiro crying in front of Haku or confronting No-Face, as well as more dramatic sequences, like when the little paper cut-outs attack Haku or when Sen journeys to visit Zeniba.

Unlike some other Miyazaki protagonists (cough — Sheeta and Pazu from Castle in the Sky  — cough) Chihiro/Sen has a clear arc, as that final juxtaposed scene in the tunnel shows us. At the beginning of the film, she was cowardly and acting like a scaredy-cat when it came to facing new challenges, like visiting the park or moving to a new town; and by the end, she has gained confidence and courage, and is no longer upset about moving to a new town. While maybe it’s not what she’d like, she’s now prepared for the challenges that lie ahead, because she’s already overcome so much in the realm of the spirits. And, I like the little touch of the hair band. It’s a little detail that could’ve been overlooked, but the animators and those behind the scenes went out of their way to remind us of what Chihiro has come through and what she’s now capable of.

Along with its great story, animation and characters, this movie also boasts a phenomenal English-language voice cast — one of the stronger ones, in my opinion, among Miyazaki’s filmography. There really aren’t any weak links. Everyone gives a solid performance, especially Daveigh Chase, who would’ve been about 10 years old when she recorded her part as Chihiro. As I said in my review for Castle in the Sky, when a full-blown adult is playing a child or pre-teen, it can take you out of the film. So I’m relieved that this movie didn’t fall into that territory, and that Chihiro is old enough that it’s not annoying when she’s on screen for more than 10 minutes. (There are other Miyazaki movies that have this problem, and we’ll talk about them more in the coming weeks.)

While I appreciate Jason Marsden’s Haku and Susan Egan’s Lin, I have to say that the MVP of the voice cast is Suzanne Pleshette, who plays the twin sisters Yubaba and Zeniba. Yubaba is such a memorable antagonist, and Pleshette flawlessly gets across all of Yubaba’s different moments and outbursts — whether she’s yelling at Chihiro/Sen, trying to placate a customer, or looking for Baby. But then, Zeniba is so completely different from Yubaba in terms of their personalities, even though they look identical. Yet Pleshette pulls it off beautifully, getting across how much softer, kinder and more motherly Zeniba is compared to her sister.

I do have a few qualms with the movie, which keep it from being an A+. But, they’re very minor. For instance, after Chihiro/Sen meets Zeniba and befriends her, she becomes a little too friendly with Yubaba. I suppose it’s because she’s no longer afraid of Yubaba like before, but I don’t think that she’s the kind of person for Chihiro to hug and thank whenever her parents are restored and she gets to go home. As I said: very minor things.

Overall, it’s a wonderful film, and absolutely one to watch or revisit whenever you get the chance.

Next week: The Wind Rises (2013).

Scroll to top