In honor of today's 'Review Session', I thought I would share this with you all. You know, for kids!
(Actually, no. Not at all.)
Thursday, January 13, 2011
Review Session: Never Sleep Again
So, friends, I have a rather unique review for you today, to make up for my absence over the last week or so. Today, we'll take a ride through your nightmares with a look at the documentary feature Never Sleep Again: The Elm Street Legacy.
1, 2, Freddy's coming for you...
I'll just come out and say it. Never Sleep Again is a phenomenal documentary. If you couldn't already tell, it's all about the Nightmare on Elm Street horror film franchise. It was timed for release along with the 2010 reboot (which was largely a waste of time and money, unfortunately). But don't let not being a horror fan turn you off from this experience. Also, don't let the word 'documentary' scare you away. If you have even the slightest interest in filmmaking, horror movies, writing, storytelling, special effects, or just movies in general, there's something here for you - perhaps several somethings.
3, 4, Better lock your door...
A Nightmare on Elm Street started as the brainchild of Wes Craven, the now-legendary horror director, when he was just getting started in the business. It spawned 7 sequels as well as a spinoff TV series, and fueled the rise of New Line Cinema company. Never Sleep Again tells the story from start to finish,and spins a fascinating tale. It features interviews with Wes Craven, Bob Shay (CEO of New Line), Robert Englund (who played Freddy Krueger) as well as the directors and most major cast members of every Nightmare film. We learn about everything, from the inspirations for the story, to behind the scenes trials and tribulations (of which there were quite a few), to details of some of the most original and groundbreaking stunt and special effects work of the 1980's and 90's.
5, 6, grab your crucifix...
I won't dive into too many more details here, but suffice it to say, this documentary is absolutely worth the watch. It delves deeply into what can make a great movie - or stop one from being made. We learn how a little horror movie, made on a shoestring budget, turned into a veritable cash cow and turned New Line Cinema from a tiny independent film studio into a true competitor in the movie business.
7, 8, Stay up late...
Highlights for me included:
1, 2, Freddy's coming for you...
I'll just come out and say it. Never Sleep Again is a phenomenal documentary. If you couldn't already tell, it's all about the Nightmare on Elm Street horror film franchise. It was timed for release along with the 2010 reboot (which was largely a waste of time and money, unfortunately). But don't let not being a horror fan turn you off from this experience. Also, don't let the word 'documentary' scare you away. If you have even the slightest interest in filmmaking, horror movies, writing, storytelling, special effects, or just movies in general, there's something here for you - perhaps several somethings.
3, 4, Better lock your door...
A Nightmare on Elm Street started as the brainchild of Wes Craven, the now-legendary horror director, when he was just getting started in the business. It spawned 7 sequels as well as a spinoff TV series, and fueled the rise of New Line Cinema company. Never Sleep Again tells the story from start to finish,and spins a fascinating tale. It features interviews with Wes Craven, Bob Shay (CEO of New Line), Robert Englund (who played Freddy Krueger) as well as the directors and most major cast members of every Nightmare film. We learn about everything, from the inspirations for the story, to behind the scenes trials and tribulations (of which there were quite a few), to details of some of the most original and groundbreaking stunt and special effects work of the 1980's and 90's.
5, 6, grab your crucifix...
I won't dive into too many more details here, but suffice it to say, this documentary is absolutely worth the watch. It delves deeply into what can make a great movie - or stop one from being made. We learn how a little horror movie, made on a shoestring budget, turned into a veritable cash cow and turned New Line Cinema from a tiny independent film studio into a true competitor in the movie business.
7, 8, Stay up late...
Highlights for me included:
- in-depth looks at special effects work (including building a room that rotated 180 degrees).
- Interviews with Robert Englund, an actor who clearly just loves what he's doing and had dozens of stories to share about every film in the franchise.
- Info on a never-developed script written for Nightmare 6...by none other than Peter Jackson.
9, 10, never sleep again...
Clocking in at an eye-widening four hours, the doc is something best digested in a few sittings, but is completely satisfying and interesting from beginning to end.Thursday, January 6, 2011
From the Vault
The Internet is a wonderful place for geeks. There's all sorts of cool stuff to be found, the trick is knowing to look for it. So, here's the debut of a little segment I'm calling "From the Vault". The things I talk about may not be new for everyone (in point of fact, they probably won't be, if you've been around for awhile), but they're new to me - and I think they're cool. Enjoy!
This time, we're featuring a lost gem from the TV series 'Angel'. Back when the show spun off of 'Buffy the Vampire Slayer, Joss Whedon said of it,
"We wanted a much darker show, darker in tone. It's set in Los Angeles because there are a lot of demons in L.A. and a wealth of stories to be told. We also wanted to take the show a little older and have the characters deal with demons in a much different way. Buffy is always the underdog trying to save the world, but Angel is looking for redemption. It's those two things that creatively make the shows different." (Credit: Wikipedia)
Overall, 'Angel' certainly achieved this darker tone. What many people don't know, however, is that the script for Episode 2 of the series was blocked by the network because it was too dark. The episode was never shot, replaced instead by 'Lonely Hearts'.
This lost episode is titled 'Corrupt', and was written by 'Buffy' and 'Angel' scribe David Fury, who went on to write for 'Lost' and '24'. The script contains several bits that would eventually resurface in other episodes of the series, but the overarching plot, which concerned a prostitution ring and introduced Detective Kate Lockley as an undercover officer who had fallen prey to her surroundings, had to be abandoned.
But, lucky for us, the interwebs are around to catch the things that the studio discards. 'Corrupt' can be found in its entirety here. It's well worth checking out. You can also find more general information about this episode here.
This time, we're featuring a lost gem from the TV series 'Angel'. Back when the show spun off of 'Buffy the Vampire Slayer, Joss Whedon said of it,
"We wanted a much darker show, darker in tone. It's set in Los Angeles because there are a lot of demons in L.A. and a wealth of stories to be told. We also wanted to take the show a little older and have the characters deal with demons in a much different way. Buffy is always the underdog trying to save the world, but Angel is looking for redemption. It's those two things that creatively make the shows different." (Credit: Wikipedia)
Overall, 'Angel' certainly achieved this darker tone. What many people don't know, however, is that the script for Episode 2 of the series was blocked by the network because it was too dark. The episode was never shot, replaced instead by 'Lonely Hearts'.
This lost episode is titled 'Corrupt', and was written by 'Buffy' and 'Angel' scribe David Fury, who went on to write for 'Lost' and '24'. The script contains several bits that would eventually resurface in other episodes of the series, but the overarching plot, which concerned a prostitution ring and introduced Detective Kate Lockley as an undercover officer who had fallen prey to her surroundings, had to be abandoned.
But, lucky for us, the interwebs are around to catch the things that the studio discards. 'Corrupt' can be found in its entirety here. It's well worth checking out. You can also find more general information about this episode here.
Tuesday, January 4, 2011
10 Points....
To anyone who finds this clip from the movie Terminator 2 'Wayne's World' as great as I did.
Monday, January 3, 2011
Fun Fact to Know and Tell #1
Josh Holloway, best known as 'Sawyer' on the series LOST, guest starred on the series 'Angel' in 1999. He was in the pilot episode, "City Of", credited as 'Good Looking Guy.' Do with that what you will. Also, this would be a killer bit of info to have the next time you play that 7 Degrees of Kevin Bacon game.
Yep, before he landed on that island, he was a vampire.
Sunday, January 2, 2011
Review Session: Scott Pilgrim vs...Himself?
The Lowdown:
Scott Pilgrim vs. the World is the story of Scott Pilgrim (as played by Michael Cera), a regular slacker of a guy who is also in a band that appears to be going nowhere (Surprise!). Anyway, one day, he meets the 'girl of his dreams', one Ramona Flowers. The catch is, in order to be with her, he must defeat her 7 Evil Exes. All of whom apparently have different types of video-game inspired superpowers. Aaand...we're off!
"If your life had a face, I'd punch it."
I'll be honest. After seeing the trailers for this movie, I was on the fence about it. I'd heard it was a bit of quirky, slightly odd fun that often incorporated video game imagery. Not being a gamer (the single area of geekdom in which I am lax), I wasn't sure what to think about Scott Pilgrim. I'd also never read the graphic novel series on which the movie is based.
But, truth be told, the movie lived up to its hype - mostly. It was a little better than I'd expected, and certainly not worse. In point of fact, everything about this movie worked for me. Everything, that is, except Scott Pilgrim himself.
First, the good: Scott Pilgrim is a visually crazy movie. 8-bit video game images figure heavily into said visuals - for example, every time Scott faces an Evil Ex, they battle one another in arcade game fashion, and when they're defeated, the loser collapses into a pile of coins. You'd think it would be weird, but the visuals are so consistent and creative (not to mention funny) that they actually add a lot to the story. This, combined with the editing style and musical oddities, gives the film quite a distinct feel. The supporting cast (both actors and their characters) are great. Mary Elizabeth Winstead (as Ramona), presents a strong female lead; and Alison Pill (as Kim, the drummer for Scott's band) is a scene-stealer even with minimal lines. The story is cool, albeit over the top, but the pure fun of it tended to gloss over the flaws, and the majority of the dialogue was snappy and well delivered.
But then there was the character of Scott himself. Michael Cera is fine in the role, doing his typical man-child thing (See also: Juno or Nick and Nora’s Infinite Playlist). Normally, I can deal with that. Not here. About a quarter of the way through this movie, I realized something. I kind of hate the character Scott Pilgrim. He’s a weak-willed, slightly aggravating individual who for most of the movie lacks anything resembling a moral compass. When we first meet him, he’s 22 years old, and dating a 17 year old high school girl (which, for the record, would look insanely creepy on film…except for the fact that Cera still looks about 17 himself). So anyhow, from there, Scott suddenly becomes infatuated with Ramona Flowers, and starts dating her – without breaking off his other relationship first. For a good 20 minutes, we’re treated to the spectacle of Scott keeping both girls in the dark, while still enjoying the benefits of both relationships. IMHO, this is an a-hole move, and one that made me REALLY dislike the character. Just because his 2-timing ways make for a few laughs in the context of the movie doesn’t make it right.
No, Ramona, just staring at Scott like that won't make him grow up.
Still, I would be much less critical of Scott if he showed the slightest hint of real progress toward maturity as the film goes on. Which he doesn’t. In point of fact, he causes the character of Ramona to regress. Which is exceptionally frustrating.
When we meet her, Ramona is fiercely independent, and very self-assured: in short, a pretty strong female character who doesn’t need a guy to make her important (If you want to see the opposite, go watch Twilight sometime). By the end of the movie, she’s all about Scott, and at one point even gets down on herself for not deserving him, because he’s “the nicest guy she’s ever dated.” Not once does she attack Scott for two-timing her, or even demand an explanation. No sane, self-respecting woman I’ve ever met would act that way, and it really brings the character down a notch.
Essentially, by the end of the movie, Scott’s character hasn’t changed a bit, and for the sake of the storyline, she has to instead. It’s an inane move, and one that made the end of this movie ring hollow for me. Scott’s character made this movie into an entertaining ride with an unfortunately disappointing ending.
Scott Pilgrim vs. the World is the story of Scott Pilgrim (as played by Michael Cera), a regular slacker of a guy who is also in a band that appears to be going nowhere (Surprise!). Anyway, one day, he meets the 'girl of his dreams', one Ramona Flowers. The catch is, in order to be with her, he must defeat her 7 Evil Exes. All of whom apparently have different types of video-game inspired superpowers. Aaand...we're off!
"If your life had a face, I'd punch it."
I'll be honest. After seeing the trailers for this movie, I was on the fence about it. I'd heard it was a bit of quirky, slightly odd fun that often incorporated video game imagery. Not being a gamer (the single area of geekdom in which I am lax), I wasn't sure what to think about Scott Pilgrim. I'd also never read the graphic novel series on which the movie is based.
But, truth be told, the movie lived up to its hype - mostly. It was a little better than I'd expected, and certainly not worse. In point of fact, everything about this movie worked for me. Everything, that is, except Scott Pilgrim himself.
First, the good: Scott Pilgrim is a visually crazy movie. 8-bit video game images figure heavily into said visuals - for example, every time Scott faces an Evil Ex, they battle one another in arcade game fashion, and when they're defeated, the loser collapses into a pile of coins. You'd think it would be weird, but the visuals are so consistent and creative (not to mention funny) that they actually add a lot to the story. This, combined with the editing style and musical oddities, gives the film quite a distinct feel. The supporting cast (both actors and their characters) are great. Mary Elizabeth Winstead (as Ramona), presents a strong female lead; and Alison Pill (as Kim, the drummer for Scott's band) is a scene-stealer even with minimal lines. The story is cool, albeit over the top, but the pure fun of it tended to gloss over the flaws, and the majority of the dialogue was snappy and well delivered.
But then there was the character of Scott himself. Michael Cera is fine in the role, doing his typical man-child thing (See also: Juno or Nick and Nora’s Infinite Playlist). Normally, I can deal with that. Not here. About a quarter of the way through this movie, I realized something. I kind of hate the character Scott Pilgrim. He’s a weak-willed, slightly aggravating individual who for most of the movie lacks anything resembling a moral compass. When we first meet him, he’s 22 years old, and dating a 17 year old high school girl (which, for the record, would look insanely creepy on film…except for the fact that Cera still looks about 17 himself). So anyhow, from there, Scott suddenly becomes infatuated with Ramona Flowers, and starts dating her – without breaking off his other relationship first. For a good 20 minutes, we’re treated to the spectacle of Scott keeping both girls in the dark, while still enjoying the benefits of both relationships. IMHO, this is an a-hole move, and one that made me REALLY dislike the character. Just because his 2-timing ways make for a few laughs in the context of the movie doesn’t make it right.
Still, I would be much less critical of Scott if he showed the slightest hint of real progress toward maturity as the film goes on. Which he doesn’t. In point of fact, he causes the character of Ramona to regress. Which is exceptionally frustrating.
When we meet her, Ramona is fiercely independent, and very self-assured: in short, a pretty strong female character who doesn’t need a guy to make her important (If you want to see the opposite, go watch Twilight sometime). By the end of the movie, she’s all about Scott, and at one point even gets down on herself for not deserving him, because he’s “the nicest guy she’s ever dated.” Not once does she attack Scott for two-timing her, or even demand an explanation. No sane, self-respecting woman I’ve ever met would act that way, and it really brings the character down a notch.
Essentially, by the end of the movie, Scott’s character hasn’t changed a bit, and for the sake of the storyline, she has to instead. It’s an inane move, and one that made the end of this movie ring hollow for me. Scott’s character made this movie into an entertaining ride with an unfortunately disappointing ending.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)