CinePHAIL: One Flew Over the Cuckoo's Nest

I'm taking AVID this semester to learn the ins and outs of digital editing and get some certification up in this hizzy. At least that's how I'll describe it on my resume. Our second and third projects involve making a trailer and film-based music video based on a randomly assigned movie. My group's movie: One Flew Over the Cuckoo's Nest.

Even though I have had the DVD for a number of years (I think it was a graduation present?) I never got around to watching it until I absolutely had to, which I guess would be now. All in all, not a bad film. I think there are a number of things that can be discussed in terms of race and feminism as well as the treatment of the institutionalized. While watching the movie I spent a great deal of time thinking about Murray Ridge and Brandon and his clients, which might explain why I didn't feel overly shocked by what was happening in the film.

Also, I found myself underwhelmed by Nurse Ratched. When I think of her name I think of how she is presented as one of the great villains in modern cinema. Actually experiencing her character, I find that description to be wildly unfair. Again, maybe it is my tangential experience with MRDD patients, but I found her vilification to be more of a sexist reaction to her authority rather than any active evil on her part.

I will be watching it again, some clips multiple (as in 100's) of times in the next couple of weeks, so maybe I'll get a better reading on the film. If anything, I now find some jokes from The Simpsons that much funnier.

Read More......

Netflix Math

I recently signed up for Netflix and it has been an interesting experience so far. My main reason for signing up was my screenwriting class where there are at least 6 movies mentioned, 5 of which I've heard of, 4 of which sound interesting, 3 of which I should see, 2 of which I might see, and 1 of which I will actually see. But they're all in my queue, I swear. Of course, the only discs I've been getting through with any sort of speed are the TV shows so I guess I'm not meeting the original goal.

One of the features that I do enjoy is rating movies. I like that Netflix is keeping a tally of the number of movies that I have seen and remembered enough to give a rating. I'm over 300 now which is kind of a staggering number if you think about it. Granted some of those ratings include TV shows, but at least 90% are films. The best part of the ratings is that they will factor into an algorithm for Netflix to recommend more movies and guess how much you will like or dislike movies in your queue. The algorithm might need a bit more tweaking or more info from me: They overestimated how much I would like Obsessed (1.5 stars) and underestimated how much I would like Pageant (only 3.2 stars).

But then there are the groupings...

On the "Movies You'll [Heart]" page, films will be broken down into genres and listed with pictures of the DVD case and recommendations based on other movies you'll like. My favorite example so far: Stop Making Sense because I liked Chinatown, Network, and Pee-Wee's Big Adventure. This blew my mind. Though I like SMS, I saw the other three movies within the last few months and I can honestly say that SMS never crossed my mind. Conversely, whenever I listed to the live version of "Life During Wartime" I don't instantly think of Howard Beale, red bicycles, or film noir. Though Netflix is correct in their outcome, the math is baffling.

Chinatown + Network + Pee-Wee = Stop Making Sense

I started looking at other recommendations to see how the math could be tweaked. Here is one example.

Network + Chinatown + When We Were Kings = The Thin Blue Line

I have not seen The Thin Blue Line, but knowing what it is about I can sorta buy the math here. But let's do some algebra:

Network + Chinatown = The Thin Blue Line - When We Were Kings
Network + Chinatown = Chinatown + Network
Chinatown + Network = The Thin Blue Line - When We Were Kings
The Thin Blue Line - When We Were Kings + Pee-Wee = Stop Making Sense

I...can sorta see how that would work. Here's another one:

Taking of Pelham 123 (original) = The Manchurian Candidate (original) + Network + Chinatown

P123 - MC = N + C
N + C = C + N
P123 - MC = C + N

M = Manchurian Candidate + Pee-Wee + The Office (UK Season 1)
M - Office = MC + PW

C + N + PW = SMS
P123 - MC + PW = SMS
P123 - M - Office = SMS

Really?

Read More......

Hank-y panky

You saw the movie Memento, right? Fantastic film: I highly recommend it. For those who haven't seen it, the premise is that the main character is trying to solve the mystery of his wife's murder but he suffers from short-term memory loss.

Now, did you see the new Kelsey Grammer sitcom Hank on Wednesday? It is horrible. How bad? This afternoon I watched the pilot before my screenwriting class. In class today we watched Deliverance. There were more genuine laughs during that movie than during the 23 minutes I suffered through Hank.

What does Memento have to do with this?


Well, from what I could gather from the bad acting and clunky story (it is a pilot episode after all), Kelsey Grammer's character is perpetually a fish out of water. But not in the sense that the Beverly Hillbillies were fish out water -- they eventually adapted to their environment in certain ways. I mean that each scene revolved around Hank being discombobulated by the conditions of the scene. I think that could be an interesting concept, but that is not the premise of the show.

The premise is that Hank was ousted from the board of directors of some downsized New York company. For whatever reason he did not get a golden parachute, did not liquidate any of his assets, and for some reason is not able to get another job in the city. As a result he has to move his family down to Virginia near his brother. Sure, why not?

The thing is, Hank is only able to function in a corporate board room setting. For example, he instructs his wife to keep minutes at a family meeting. You know, The Simpsons stopped doing family meetings because none of the writers' families ever did family meetings and it seemed contrived. The family on this show felt the meeting was contrived and the (insane) laugh track makes the entire scene feel contrived.

The problems don't stop there. Due to their king size bed not fitting in the stairwell, Hank and his wife are stuck in a fire engine bed for the time being (yeah, I know). There were so many things that were just unsettling in this scene. First, there is zero chemistry between Hank and his wife. His complaint in the close quarters: "You're breathing on me." Unless halitosis or fire is involved, I don't think that is generally considered a bad thing, particularly if it is your spouse. Hank's wife (sorry, I don't remember her name and I am not watching it again) is also wearing earrings and what looks like a day-to-evening ensemble from Project Runway. As I tried to puzzle my way through the weird wardrobe selection, the couple spontaneously engages in a fit of passion. No organic catalyst whatsoever.

One of my friends in my program is doing a TV research project related to laugh tracks. I mentioned this show and he asked me how many episodes I think it will last. My answer: already at least half an episode longer than it should have. If only this could be erased from my short term memory.

Read More......

YORRRRRR!

I'm really enjoying my Tuesdays this semester. I have my law class at 11 am and then I'm done for the day. Except for the Tuesday screenings at Thompson's office. They have been a bit of a mixed bag, which is kind of the point. The first screening (which I wasn't able to stay for much of) featured Walter Cronkite and Don Hewitt. Last week we watched the first and only episode of the 1986 version of the Jay Leno Show. That was horrendous. As far as we know Thompson has the only surviving copy -- even IMDB disavows any knowledge that it exists. Really, it is that dreadful.

Today we continued with the dreadful theme with a screening of Yor: The Hunter from the Future...


This movie almost defies description. The good news is there is a fan riff track available. Here's a preview:



The guy above is pretty chatty, but we were making our own comments throughout as well. Such as when the blind leader of the resistance movement from the future is introduced and shots are filmed from that character's point of view. Let me repeat: They filmed shots from the BLIND person's POINT OF VIEW. Then they showed him groping for the buttons on a control console later. At least they maintained continuity?

The best part was the theme song, which can be heard here.

I don't think this movie is helping in the cinePHAIL project, but it is giving me confidence that whatever screenplay I write this semester will probably be better than this. And this script was produced!

Read More......

The Informant[.]

I guess it was inevitable that my being in a program called Television-Radio-Film would eventually force me into partaking the three media listed. TV I have covered and radio I do regularly enough but I have fallen out of the film habit. The prof for my writing class starts every session with the question "seen any movies lately?" and everyone is expected to answer. How dare he, right? He also wants us to venture outside of our comfort zone every once in a while, but I'm not quite up to that point yet. I've got The Karate Kid on my TiVo and we're watching Deliverance in class next week, so I'm going to stay in my zone for the time being. This week's movie: The Informant!

Spoilers likely, so proceed with caution...

As you can see in the title of this post, I wasn't exactly wowed or whatever reaction the exclamation point was supposed to draw out of me. The story is about Mark Whitacre, a VP for agriculture supergiant Archer Daniels Midland (ADM). The company is involved in a price fixing scheme involving corn and Whitacre decides to work for the FBI to bring down some of the higher-ups. At first he professes to be doing it for the good of the company and his soul, but eventually it is revealed that he is trying to oust his superiors so he can become CEO. Whitacre is a pathological liar and we soon learn that not only was he trying to perpetrate this bizarre usurpation but he had embezzled millions of dollars while under the FBI umbrella.

The story, which is based on true events, is interesting in an "I can't believe that this guy really did that" sort of way but it isn't a very cinematic story. The events are all based around verbal lies and FBI surveillance of business, neither of which really action based. Also, financial chicanery and price fixing are not the sexiest crimes -- particularly for those of us who only have a vague understanding of the concepts involved. The film reached a point where you finally understand that Whitacre is a schnook but then the movie goes on for another half hour. The story stops building and his inevitable comeuppance doesn't provide much of a payoff (particularly since Whitacre is now a COO for some other company after a brief hiatus in prison).

The film was directed by Steven Soderbergh, an auteur I just can't get behind. His choices tend to distract me more than engage me and this film is no exception. The camerawork was steady, as opposed to Traffic and The Limey (both of which made me seasick) which was refreshing. However, he chose to give the film a 60's motif despite the fact that the events took place between 1992 and 1995. I think he was going for homage to double agents, but it was giving me an Austin Powers vibe. My other major issue involved casting choices. Matt Damon was alright as Whitacre, but I'm not sure what he brought to the role that was distinct. Not good, not bad, just nothing special. The supporting cast was where I found more distraction. Joel McHale played an FBI agent working with Whitacre, Patton Oswald played an attorney, and Paul F. Tompkins played an attorney. I'm not sure what the deal was with all the stand-up comedians, particularly since they were all playing against type. My theory is that it is a commentary about framing reality with how you tell a story, but the analogy falls flat since the reality framed by this story is not particularly engaging.

This film strikes me as a product of timing -- riding the coattails of populist rage against the giants of corporate America (one of the previews was for Capitalism, Michael Moore's new film). However it is a whistleblower (sort of) who is trying to slay Goliath, not the lay person. The timing seems off and the story doesn't get much beyond the conversation point of "oh, really? You don't say?"

Have you seen The Informant!? What did you think?

Read More......