list http://www.spout.com/ Recent community activity around Down and Out in Beverly Hills on Spout Copyright 2005-9 Spout, LLC Spout RSS http://www.spout.com/images/SpoutLogoRSS.jpg http://www.spout.com/ 136 30 http://www.spout.com/films/Down_and_Out_in_Beverly_Hills/9632/default.aspx Title: Down and Out in Beverly Hills
Year: 1986
Director: Paul Mazursky
Plot: Down and Out in Beverly Hills is an updated remake of the 1932 Jean Renoir film Boudu Saved By Drowning. Philandering businessman Dave Whiteman (Richard Dreyfuss) rescues scraggly tramp Jerry Baskin (Nick Nolte) from drowning himself in Dave's swimming pool. Much against his will, Jerry is invited to enjoy the hospitality of Dave, his social-climbing wife Barbara Bette Midler, and their sexually ambivalent son Max (Evan Richards). The hapless hobo bonds only with the family dog Matisse, which fascinates Barbara to the point that she's willing to share her bed (and a few other things) with him. Dave is twice cuckolded when Jerry makes out with the maid (Elizabeth Pena), with whom he has been carrying on a torrid--and noisy--affair. He plans to wreak revenge on the tramp, but several plot twists result in Dave and Jerry becoming bosom companions. Little Richard appears as the family's easily irritated next door neighbor. Down and Out in Beverly Hills was the R-rated film which compelled the Disney Company to create its adult-oriented Touchstone Films division. The property was later cleaned up for TV consumption and converted into a short-lived Fox Network sitcom. ~ Hal Erickson, All Movie Guide
Times Tagged: 5
Number of Lists: 5
Number of blog posts: 5
Number of discussion threads: 1
SpoutRating: 3
]]>Fri, 12 Dec 2008 17:00:31 GMTDown and Out in Beverly Hills1986Paul MazurskyDown and Out in Beverly Hills is an updated remake of the 1932 <a href="/players/P___107981/default.aspx" style='text-decoration:underline'>Jean Renoir</a> film Boudu Saved By Drowning. Philandering businessman Dave Whiteman (<a href="/players/P____88268/default.aspx" style='text-decoration:underline'>Richard Dreyfuss</a>) rescues scraggly tramp Jerry Baskin (<a href="/players/P____52916/default.aspx" style='text-decoration:underline'>Nick Nolte</a>) from drowning himself in Dave's swimming pool. Much against his will, Jerry is invited to enjoy the hospitality of Dave, his social-climbing wife Barbara <a href="/players/P___102748/default.aspx" style='text-decoration:underline'>Bette Midler</a>, and their sexually ambivalent son Max (Evan Richards). The hapless hobo bonds only with the family dog Matisse, which fascinates Barbara to the point that she's willing to share her bed (and a few other things) with him. Dave is twice cuckolded when Jerry makes out with the maid (Elizabeth Pena), with whom he has been carrying on a torrid--and noisy--affair. He plans to wreak revenge on the tramp, but several plot twists result in Dave and Jerry becoming bosom companions. <a href="/players/P____42699/default.aspx" style='text-decoration:underline'>Little Richard</a> appears as the family's easily irritated next door neighbor. Down and Out in Beverly Hills was the R-rated film which compelled the Disney Company to create its adult-oriented Touchstone Films division. The property was later cleaned up for TV consumption and converted into a short-lived Fox Network sitcom. ~ Hal Erickson, All Movie Guide5Slightly Tagged (1-5)5513http://www.spout.com/ProductImages/t21482wq1i8.jpghttp://www.spout.com/films/Down_and_Out_in_Beverly_Hills/9632/default.aspxFilm http://www.spout.com/blogs/spoutblog/archive/2008/12/12/38295.aspx Post By: SpoutBlog
Post To: SpoutBlog on spout.com
Post Date: 12/12/2008 12:00:31 PM
Body: Earlier this month, Production Weekly reported that Alex Cox and David Lynch would begin shooting their Repo Man sequel, titled Repo Chick, next month. Fifteen years after the release of the first movie, Cox revealed that it’s a timely revisit, as the new movie will “unfold against the background of the credit crunch and the subprime mortgage crisis in the US, where repossessions of homes, cars and other forms of property is at a new high.” Coupled with the recent announcement that John Carpenter is producing a remake of his own They Live, the news of a second Repo Man film has us wondering what other ‘80s cult classics should appropriately be remade or revisited now that the economy is shit again. Depending on your definition of “cult film” (many people call Ghostbusters a cult classic), some of the selected films may not be fitting for that term. Regardless, the following ten movies, if redone today, would have definite relevance to these troubled times. Chu Chu and the Philly Flash (1981) With unemployment on the rise, and homelessness sure to increase, it’s time for Hollywood to break out the ol’ Capra-esque stories of bums hitting the big time. Some films, such as Trading Places and Down and Out in Beverly Hills, don’t need to be touched. But this forgotten yet somewhat beloved movie could use a redo. Alan Arkin stars as an unemployed baseball player who may have a new job in the minors if he can only raise the money to get across the country. Fox could remake this story without retaining the title or the profession (though what’s more American Dream-like than baseball player? Capra employed the same idea in Meet John Doe), so as not to associate the new film with this ancient box office disappointment. Eating Raoul (1982) We recently spotlighted this “gold standard for black comedies” on a Thanksgiving-related list of cannibal movies. But it fits here as well. A couple in need of money ends up killing people and selling the corpses for cash. While the original film has the human meat sold to a dog food company, it might be even a greater gag in this financial crunch to have it feed the homeless. Or, better yet, in the U.S. Capitol’s cafeterias. The Survivors (1983) The opening premise alone will have the recently laid off feeling better about their own firing. One guy (played by Robin Williams) is let go by a parrot, while another (Walter Matthau) loses his business when it blows up. From there, anything goes with the remake as long as it still shows desperate measures resulting from unemployment. As a buddy movie, though, it’ll be worthwhile to pit a financial layoff with a blue-collar layoff. Breakin’ 2: Electric Boogaloo (1984) Don’t say it makes no sense to remake a sequel without remaking the original. Nobody cares about the first Breakin’. Besides, Electric Boogaloo is the one that features the cliché plot involving a greedy real estate developer wanting to tear down a community center. And evil real estate developers and bankers ought to be making a comeback. Rappin’ (1985) If nobody wants to touch the sacred icon that is Breakin’ 2: Electric Boogaloo, then here’s another hip-hop movie involving an evil real estate developer. Despite a similar cheesiness, it’s not nearly as celebrated, or remembered. A remake could right all the wrongs of the original, especially with regards to the rhymes. The Goonies (1985) Hardly a cult classic, sure, but it does have the feel of one, especially to all those people who take trips to Astoria, Oregon, just to visit the film’s locations. Anyway, more evil real estate developers here, and more kids trying to save the day. Rather than truly remake the movie, which would be met with disapproval, and rather than completely bypass the reunion sequel that’s been talked about for so long, Warner Bros. ought to make a separate remake-type sequel titled The Goonies Too. The new movie will simply follow another group of kids on another adventure that will similarly stop the impending foreclosure of their homes. One Crazy Summer (1986) Yeah, yeah, more greedy real estate developers. But this one involves saving the house of an old man who nobody in the audience cares about. And a regatta. Actually, without the warped genius of Savage Steve Holland and without John Cusack in the lead, a remake of this comedy would be pointless, even if relevant. Of course, it wouldn’t be the first time Hollywood made a pointless remake, right? The Money Pit (1986) It may not technically be a cult classic, but it’s so rarely celebrated for its good qualities (like the excellent scene involving a cataclysmic sort of Rube Goldberg machine) that it deserves to be here. Plus, few plots are more relevant to the subprime mortgage crisis than one involving a couple (played by Tom Hanks and Shelley Long) that finds a deal on a new home that’s too good to be true. Wisdom (1986) If a cult classic requires only a cult of one member, then Wisdom is a cult classic. And since every economic recession needs its own Robin Hood movie, this is ripe for a remake (never mind Ridley Scott’s forthcoming Nottingham). Repo Man star Emilio Estevez wrote, co-directed (with Robert Wise) and co-starred (with Demi Moore) in this Bonnie and Clyde tale of a pair of bank “robbers” who bomb bank file cabinets in order to erase records of loans and mortgages, thereby helping out the struggling debtors. This time, though, it’s key that the main characters don’t get killed. Hiding Out (1987) Jon Cryer stars as a stockbroker on the run from mobsters he’s cheated. Does he flee to Florida and join an all-girl band? No, he shaves off his beard and magically becomes a teenager again. Then he reenrolls in his cousin’s high school and falls in love with a young girl who’d probably get him in worse trouble than he is already in. A remake of this film could be more depraved, more American Psycho than Some Like it Hot, by having the protagonist on the run from the government rather than the mob (he’s guilty of insider trading or some other form of Wall Street corruption), and his unlikable traits would extend to his multiple affairs with minors while pretending to be a high school student. And this time, it’s key that the main character does get killed. Originally posted on:SpoutBlog
]]>Fri, 12 Dec 2008 17:00:31 GMTSpoutBlogSpoutBlog on spout.com12/12/2008 12:00:31 PMEarlier this month, Production Weekly reported that Alex Cox and David Lynch would begin shooting their Repo Man sequel, titled Repo Chick, next month. Fifteen years after the release of the first movie, Cox revealed that it’s a timely revisit, as the new movie will “unfold against the background of the credit crunch and the subprime mortgage crisis in the US, where repossessions of homes, cars and other forms of property is at a new high.” Coupled with the recent announcement that John Carpenter is producing a remake of his own They Live, the news of a second Repo Man film has us wondering what other ‘80s cult classics should appropriately be remade or revisited now that the economy is shit again. Depending on your definition of “cult film” (many people call Ghostbusters a cult classic), some of the selected films may not be fitting for that term. Regardless, the following ten movies, if redone today, would have definite relevance to these troubled times. Chu Chu and the Philly Flash (1981) With unemployment on the rise, and homelessness sure to increase, it’s time for Hollywood to break out the ol’ Capra-esque stories of bums hitting the big time. Some films, such as Trading Places and Down and Out in Beverly Hills, don’t need to be touched. But this forgotten yet somewhat beloved movie could use a redo. Alan Arkin stars as an unemployed baseball player who may have a new job in the minors if he can only raise the money to get across the country. Fox could remake this story without retaining the title or the profession (though what’s more American Dream-like than baseball player? Capra employed the same idea in Meet John Doe), so as not to associate the new film with this ancient box office disappointment. Eating Raoul (1982) We recently spotlighted this “gold standard for black comedies” on a Thanksgiving-related list of cannibal movies. But it fits here as well. A couple in need of money ends up killing people and selling the corpses for cash. While the original film has the human meat sold to a dog food company, it might be even a greater gag in this financial crunch to have it feed the homeless. Or, better yet, in the U.S. Capitol’s cafeterias. The Survivors (1983) The opening premise alone will have the recently laid off feeling better about their own firing. One guy (played by Robin Williams) is let go by a parrot, while another (Walter Matthau) loses his business when it blows up. From there, anything goes with the remake as long as it still shows desperate measures resulting from unemployment. As a buddy movie, though, it’ll be worthwhile to pit a financial layoff with a blue-collar layoff. Breakin’ 2: Electric Boogaloo (1984) Don’t say it makes no sense to remake a sequel without remaking the original. Nobody cares about the first Breakin’. Besides, Electric Boogaloo is the one that features the cliché plot involving a greedy real estate developer wanting to tear down a community center. And evil real estate developers and bankers ought to be making a comeback. Rappin’ (1985) If nobody wants to touch the sacred icon that is Breakin’ 2: Electric Boogaloo, then here’s another hip-hop movie involving an evil real estate developer. Despite a similar cheesiness, it’s not nearly as celebrated, or remembered. A remake could right all the wrongs of the original, especially with regards to the rhymes. The Goonies (1985) Hardly a cult classic, sure, but it does have the feel of one, especially to all those people who take trips to Astoria, Oregon, just to visit the film’s locations. Anyway, more evil real estate developers here, and more kids trying to save the day. Rather than truly remake the movie, which would be met with disapproval, and rather than completely bypass the reunion sequel that’s been talked about for so long, Warner Bros. ought to make a separate remake-type sequel titled The Goonies Too. The new movie will simply follow another group of kids on another adventure that will similarly stop the impending foreclosure of their homes. One Crazy Summer (1986) Yeah, yeah, more greedy real estate developers. But this one involves saving the house of an old man who nobody in the audience cares about. And a regatta. Actually, without the warped genius of Savage Steve Holland and without John Cusack in the lead, a remake of this comedy would be pointless, even if relevant. Of course, it wouldn’t be the first time Hollywood made a pointless remake, right? The Money Pit (1986) It may not technically be a cult classic, but it’s so rarely celebrated for its good qualities (like the excellent scene involving a cataclysmic sort of Rube Goldberg machine) that it deserves to be here. Plus, few plots are more relevant to the subprime mortgage crisis than one involving a couple (played by Tom Hanks and Shelley Long) that finds a deal on a new home that’s too good to be true. Wisdom (1986) If a cult classic requires only a cult of one member, then Wisdom is a cult classic. And since every economic recession needs its own Robin Hood movie, this is ripe for a remake (never mind Ridley Scott’s forthcoming Nottingham). Repo Man star Emilio Estevez wrote, co-directed (with Robert Wise) and co-starred (with Demi Moore) in this Bonnie and Clyde tale of a pair of bank “robbers” who bomb bank file cabinets in order to erase records of loans and mortgages, thereby helping out the struggling debtors. This time, though, it’s key that the main characters don’t get killed. Hiding Out (1987) Jon Cryer stars as a stockbroker on the run from mobsters he’s cheated. Does he flee to Florida and join an all-girl band? No, he shaves off his beard and magically becomes a teenager again. Then he reenrolls in his cousin’s high school and falls in love with a young girl who’d probably get him in worse trouble than he is already in. A remake of this film could be more depraved, more American Psycho than Some Like it Hot, by having the protagonist on the run from the government rather than the mob (he’s guilty of insider trading or some other form of Wall Street corruption), and his unlikable traits would extend to his multiple affairs with minors while pretending to be a high school student. And this time, it’s key that the main character does get killed. Originally posted on:SpoutBlog http://www.spout.com/blogs/spoutblog/archive/2008/11/19/37441.aspx Post By: SpoutBlog
Post To: SpoutBlog on spout.com
Post Date: 11/19/2008 1:01:04 PM
Body: Unemployment is about to get even worse now that Citigroup has announced it will cut 52,000 jobs early next year. And falsely reported news of a killing in Santa Clara, California (the shooter was fired, not laid off) only adds to the bleak atmosphere surrounding the already upsetting job market. But while desperate times may lead to desperate measures, it’s vital for us to remember what we learned from the films of the 1930s, when the Great Depression caused a nearly 25% rate of unemployment (we’re currently at 6.5%). Hopeful stories of upward mobility and implausible solutions were popular at the time, though many of them had downsides or inspired the desire for unlikely prospects. Still, there was some guidance to be found buried within the fantasies of Hollywood, and SpoutBlog has compiled this handy list to help you make the right choices during your current or imminent joblessness. Film: Little Caesar (1931) Tip: Dancing is ultimately more lucrative than crime. We learned over and over from films in the 1930s that crime doesn’t pay, and with Little Caesar we learned the additional tip that if you’re going to be a cocky, power-hungry little jerk with leadership goals, you better have the balls to back up your bite. However, the best advice acquired from Francis Edward Faragoh and Robert N. Lee’s Oscar-nominated screenplay is that life as a dancer is a much better career path than that of a gangster. Sure, there may be a few dangers if your gig is at a mob-run club or if your former best friend is your boss’ rival, a la the conflict between Joe (Douglas Fairbanks Jr.) and Rico (Edward G. Robinson) in Mervyn LeRoy’s film. But unlike your old buddy, who will literally die in a gutter, you might find wealth, stardom and love. Worst-case scenario, you don’t become rich and famous but you get a job teaching little kids at a dance studio in suburbia. Whereas there’s no such thing as a crime studio. Film: Trouble in Paradise (1932) Tip: Falling for your mark, and/or your boss, is fine as long as you get a bonus out of it and then return to your true love It’s clear from the start that fellow pickpockets Gaston (Herbert Marshall) and Lily (Miriam Hopkins) are made for each other. Yet when the duo acquire jobs working for the wealthy perfumer Madame Colet (Kay Francis) in a scheme to con her out of her money, Gaston goes and complicates things by developing feelings for his new employer/mark. Fortunately, after dipping his hands into both her purses (oh the innuendo!), he comes away with the jackpot and is able to fall back into place with his equal. Getting a job where you’re partially a gigolo can be rewarding in terms of special perks, both sexual and financial, but ultimately a relationship between employee and employer is difficult, especially if there’s a real class clash involved. So get in quick, get out on top and find a nice girl with whom you’ve got more in common. Film: King Kong (1933) Tip: If you’re cast in a film, make sure it’s a local production. Tons of unemployed people turn to showbiz as a solution to their situation, and a quick glance on Craigslist reveals plenty of calls for film and TV extras. But be wary, because if it sounds too good to be true, it probably is. And be suspicious of “directors” who approach you on the street offering you the role of a lifetime. It’s possible the guy’s a real Hollywood player like Carl Denham (Robert Armstrong), but it’s also possible that the gig will bring you to a remote island where you’ll attract the largest stalker ever imagined. In the end, you might actually become a big star, just like Ann Darrow (Fay Wray), but by then many will have paid for your social status with their lives, and you’ll have to live with the guilt. So when answering ads looking for actors, don’t get on any boats headed to far off places. Stick to locally shot films, on which you’re likely to experience fewer dangers and meet fewer giant apes. Film: Lady for a Day (1933) Tip: Don’t lie to your family about being underemployed, because you’ll just wind up more depressed. Apple Annie (May Robson) ends up getting away with her masquerade, in which she convinces her daughter that she’s a well-to-do socialite rather than a poor fruit peddler, but at what cost? Now she’s lied to her child and, worse, given herself a taste of the good life, a high from which she must come down. And with that perspective in mind she’s surely going to hate her true social place even more. So if you’re underemployed, don’t lie about it, not even to your parents. Best circumstance, they help you out a little with your finances. Worst circumstance, you feel even more depressed about your situation and you take your own life — whether literally or, like Annie, figuratively. Plus, if your parents do end up finding out the truth, they’ll be more disappointed with you than they would have been if told the truth all along. Film: Triumph of the Will (1935) Tip: Don’t work for a mad, genocidal dictator unless you want the association to follow you to your grave. Leni Riefenstahl may have denied having full allegiance to Hitler and the Nazis, but she’ll forever be known as the director who helped propagandize the party right up until the beginning of World War II. And to many that makes her one of the bad guys. Whether she’s truly guilty by association, her kind of situation is constantly a topic of ethical debate. Maybe working for later-exposed criminals will keep you from getting elected one day. Maybe working for evil emperors will get you blown up while doing contract work on a giant space station. Either way, it’s best to do as much of a background check on your potential bosses as they’re doing on you. Film: Modern Times (1936) Tip: Don’t be a slave to the machines, or one day they’ll enslave you. That sounds like advice to be gotten from The Matrix, but that film’s dystopia is precisely the kind of future Chaplin was warning about. So much of the imagery in this film consists of workers depending on machines, either to help do the job or feed them, and workers being trapped in machines, figuratively enslaved by them. If you end up getting a job on the internet, and that’s more and more likely to be your best shot at employment these days, you’ll understand Chaplin’s fears better than he could ever have imagined. Film: Mr. Deeds Goes to Town (1936) Tip: Breaking into a rich man’s home will likely get you a job. It’s thanks to a desperate little farmer that the newly rich Deeds (Gary Cooper) decides to divvy up his millions and donate plots of land to the poor. And the gun-wielding intruder doesn’t get thrown in jail; he becomes one of the many who are eligible for some of that free acreage. Hollywood pipe dream, sure, but the concept also seemed to work outside of American cinema. In Renoir’s The Rules of the Game, a man (Julien Carette) is caught trespassing on a wealthy estate and he’s offered a job. However, it may not be necessary to actually commit the crime of breaking and entering to get the attention of potential beneficiaries and employers. In Renoir’s Boudu Saved From Drowning the titular bum is merely witnessed attempting suicide in the Seine (though in Paul Mazursky’s ‘80s remake, Down and Out in Beverly Hills, the bum is also an intruder). And in My Man Godfrey the titular bum is plucked out of the trash and eventually brought home and employed as a butler. Which brings up the next tip. Film: My Man Godfrey (1936) Tip: If forced to become a servant, don’t steal the boss’ daughter’s necklace, pawn it and then gamble with the money made in order to further improve your situation, because only William Powell is good enough to get away with it. You are not as smooth as William Powell; it’s just not possible. So, while he (and his character, Godfrey) is able to come out of this film on top, in the same situation you would more than likely end up back on the garbage heap (without a nightclub built on the spot, that is). Firstly, he’s able to charm the socialite Irene (Carole Lombard) enough to escape homelessness, acquire a position as her family’s butler and eventually win her heart. Secondly, when Irene’s bitter sister, Cornelia (Gail Patrick), attempts to frame him as a necklace nabber, he beats her at her game and follows through to win out even more. What he does with the jewelry, though, would still get most people arrested, even if the ends do justify the means. Never do as Powell does, because nobody can pull off anything as well as he can. Film: You Can’t Take it With You (1938) Tip: Taking up seemingly utopian residence in a commune full of oddballs will likely get you thrown in jail. Grandpa Vanderhof (Lionel Barrymore) wasn’t claiming to be prophet nor did he (as far as we know) have a harem of young wives stored away somewhere in his house, but these days a freewheeling place like his might attract the attention of the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms or some other government agency assigned to shutting down cults and terrorist organizations. Even then his home was suspected of being a den for treasonous plots, leading to an FBI raid and mass arrest. So, while it may seem like a dream come true to be wooed in by a jolly old man promising free living and the chance to be a toymaker, there’s actually no such thing as Santa Claus, and that man is probably doing something illegal to accommodate such a lifestyle. Film: The Grapes of Wrath (1939) Tip: Don’t settle for wages lower than is standard for the work. If you’re really hungry and desperate for work, you might think about taking only 25 cents an hour for a job you used to do for 30 cents. This happens often with competitive fields, whether it is migrant farming or blogging, but it only lowers your worth and it encourages your employers to keep decreasing the wages as long as someone is willing to settle. Eventually, either your fellow workers or the previous, underbid employees are going to be provoked by the situation and then there’s the chance of violence and further oppression. Plus, then you might be out of the job anyway. Potentially on the run, like Tom Joad (Henry Fonda), too. Originally posted on:SpoutBlog
]]>Wed, 19 Nov 2008 18:01:04 GMTSpoutBlogSpoutBlog on spout.com11/19/2008 1:01:04 PMUnemployment is about to get even worse now that Citigroup has announced it will cut 52,000 jobs early next year. And falsely reported news of a killing in Santa Clara, California (the shooter was fired, not laid off) only adds to the bleak atmosphere surrounding the already upsetting job market. But while desperate times may lead to desperate measures, it’s vital for us to remember what we learned from the films of the 1930s, when the Great Depression caused a nearly 25% rate of unemployment (we’re currently at 6.5%). Hopeful stories of upward mobility and implausible solutions were popular at the time, though many of them had downsides or inspired the desire for unlikely prospects. Still, there was some guidance to be found buried within the fantasies of Hollywood, and SpoutBlog has compiled this handy list to help you make the right choices during your current or imminent joblessness. Film: Little Caesar (1931) Tip: Dancing is ultimately more lucrative than crime. We learned over and over from films in the 1930s that crime doesn’t pay, and with Little Caesar we learned the additional tip that if you’re going to be a cocky, power-hungry little jerk with leadership goals, you better have the balls to back up your bite. However, the best advice acquired from Francis Edward Faragoh and Robert N. Lee’s Oscar-nominated screenplay is that life as a dancer is a much better career path than that of a gangster. Sure, there may be a few dangers if your gig is at a mob-run club or if your former best friend is your boss’ rival, a la the conflict between Joe (Douglas Fairbanks Jr.) and Rico (Edward G. Robinson) in Mervyn LeRoy’s film. But unlike your old buddy, who will literally die in a gutter, you might find wealth, stardom and love. Worst-case scenario, you don’t become rich and famous but you get a job teaching little kids at a dance studio in suburbia. Whereas there’s no such thing as a crime studio. Film: Trouble in Paradise (1932) Tip: Falling for your mark, and/or your boss, is fine as long as you get a bonus out of it and then return to your true love It’s clear from the start that fellow pickpockets Gaston (Herbert Marshall) and Lily (Miriam Hopkins) are made for each other. Yet when the duo acquire jobs working for the wealthy perfumer Madame Colet (Kay Francis) in a scheme to con her out of her money, Gaston goes and complicates things by developing feelings for his new employer/mark. Fortunately, after dipping his hands into both her purses (oh the innuendo!), he comes away with the jackpot and is able to fall back into place with his equal. Getting a job where you’re partially a gigolo can be rewarding in terms of special perks, both sexual and financial, but ultimately a relationship between employee and employer is difficult, especially if there’s a real class clash involved. So get in quick, get out on top and find a nice girl with whom you’ve got more in common. Film: King Kong (1933) Tip: If you’re cast in a film, make sure it’s a local production. Tons of unemployed people turn to showbiz as a solution to their situation, and a quick glance on Craigslist reveals plenty of calls for film and TV extras. But be wary, because if it sounds too good to be true, it probably is. And be suspicious of “directors” who approach you on the street offering you the role of a lifetime. It’s possible the guy’s a real Hollywood player like Carl Denham (Robert Armstrong), but it’s also possible that the gig will bring you to a remote island where you’ll attract the largest stalker ever imagined. In the end, you might actually become a big star, just like Ann Darrow (Fay Wray), but by then many will have paid for your social status with their lives, and you’ll have to live with the guilt. So when answering ads looking for actors, don’t get on any boats headed to far off places. Stick to locally shot films, on which you’re likely to experience fewer dangers and meet fewer giant apes. Film: Lady for a Day (1933) Tip: Don’t lie to your family about being underemployed, because you’ll just wind up more depressed. Apple Annie (May Robson) ends up getting away with her masquerade, in which she convinces her daughter that she’s a well-to-do socialite rather than a poor fruit peddler, but at what cost? Now she’s lied to her child and, worse, given herself a taste of the good life, a high from which she must come down. And with that perspective in mind she’s surely going to hate her true social place even more. So if you’re underemployed, don’t lie about it, not even to your parents. Best circumstance, they help you out a little with your finances. Worst circumstance, you feel even more depressed about your situation and you take your own life — whether literally or, like Annie, figuratively. Plus, if your parents do end up finding out the truth, they’ll be more disappointed with you than they would have been if told the truth all along. Film: Triumph of the Will (1935) Tip: Don’t work for a mad, genocidal dictator unless you want the association to follow you to your grave. Leni Riefenstahl may have denied having full allegiance to Hitler and the Nazis, but she’ll forever be known as the director who helped propagandize the party right up until the beginning of World War II. And to many that makes her one of the bad guys. Whether she’s truly guilty by association, her kind of situation is constantly a topic of ethical debate. Maybe working for later-exposed criminals will keep you from getting elected one day. Maybe working for evil emperors will get you blown up while doing contract work on a giant space station. Either way, it’s best to do as much of a background check on your potential bosses as they’re doing on you. Film: Modern Times (1936) Tip: Don’t be a slave to the machines, or one day they’ll enslave you. That sounds like advice to be gotten from The Matrix, but that film’s dystopia is precisely the kind of future Chaplin was warning about. So much of the imagery in this film consists of workers depending on machines, either to help do the job or feed them, and workers being trapped in machines, figuratively enslaved by them. If you end up getting a job on the internet, and that’s more and more likely to be your best shot at employment these days, you’ll understand Chaplin’s fears better than he could ever have imagined. Film: Mr. Deeds Goes to Town (1936) Tip: Breaking into a rich man’s home will likely get you a job. It’s thanks to a desperate little farmer that the newly rich Deeds (Gary Cooper) decides to divvy up his millions and donate plots of land to the poor. And the gun-wielding intruder doesn’t get thrown in jail; he becomes one of the many who are eligible for some of that free acreage. Hollywood pipe dream, sure, but the concept also seemed to work outside of American cinema. In Renoir’s The Rules of the Game, a man (Julien Carette) is caught trespassing on a wealthy estate and he’s offered a job. However, it may not be necessary to actually commit the crime of breaking and entering to get the attention of potential beneficiaries and employers. In Renoir’s Boudu Saved From Drowning the titular bum is merely witnessed attempting suicide in the Seine (though in Paul Mazursky’s ‘80s remake, Down and Out in Beverly Hills, the bum is also an intruder). And in My Man Godfrey the titular bum is plucked out of the trash and eventually brought home and employed as a butler. Which brings up the next tip. Film: My Man Godfrey (1936) Tip: If forced to become a servant, don’t steal the boss’ daughter’s necklace, pawn it and then gamble with the money made in order to further improve your situation, because only William Powell is good enough to get away with it. You are not as smooth as William Powell; it’s just not possible. So, while he (and his character, Godfrey) is able to come out of this film on top, in the same situation you would more than likely end up back on the garbage heap (without a nightclub built on the spot, that is). Firstly, he’s able to charm the socialite Irene (Carole Lombard) enough to escape homelessness, acquire a position as her family’s butler and eventually win her heart. Secondly, when Irene’s bitter sister, Cornelia (Gail Patrick), attempts to frame him as a necklace nabber, he beats her at her game and follows through to win out even more. What he does with the jewelry, though, would still get most people arrested, even if the ends do justify the means. Never do as Powell does, because nobody can pull off anything as well as he can. Film: You Can’t Take it With You (1938) Tip: Taking up seemingly utopian residence in a commune full of oddballs will likely get you thrown in jail. Grandpa Vanderhof (Lionel Barrymore) wasn’t claiming to be prophet nor did he (as far as we know) have a harem of young wives stored away somewhere in his house, but these days a freewheeling place like his might attract the attention of the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms or some other government agency assigned to shutting down cults and terrorist organizations. Even then his home was suspected of being a den for treasonous plots, leading to an FBI raid and mass arrest. So, while it may seem like a dream come true to be wooed in by a jolly old man promising free living and the chance to be a toymaker, there’s actually no such thing as Santa Claus, and that man is probably doing something illegal to accommodate such a lifestyle. Film: The Grapes of Wrath (1939) Tip: Don’t settle for wages lower than is standard for the work. If you’re really hungry and desperate for work, you might think about taking only 25 cents an hour for a job you used to do for 30 cents. This happens often with competitive fields, whether it is migrant farming or blogging, but it only lowers your worth and it encourages your employers to keep decreasing the wages as long as someone is willing to settle. Eventually, either your fellow workers or the previous, underbid employees are going to be provoked by the situation and then there’s the chance of violence and further oppression. Plus, then you might be out of the job anyway. Potentially on the run, like Tom Joad (Henry Fonda), too. Originally posted on:SpoutBlog http://www.spout.com/groups/Top_5/Re_Top_5_films_from_your_childhood/190/36252/1/ShowPost.aspx Post By: benthams_head
Post To: Top 5
Post Date: 10/13/2008 12:16:16 PM
Body: 1. Back to the Future - Anyone who has seen "Son of Rambow" knows the impact that a movie character can have on an impressionable youth (especially one with an over-active imagination). For a brief period in 1985-86, I WAS Marty McFly. I actually had designs on riding my skateboard to school every day by tailgating cars. Then (in typical 1980s fashion) there was a story about some kid who died trying the same thing. Back to the Future (1985)). 2. Rocky IV - This one embodied every cliche about bad 80s cinema: synth-driven montage scenes, cold war paranoia, Reagan-era hyper-patriotism, and a bizarre obsession with the titilating possibilities of robotic technology. I ate up every morsel of it. Heck, I probably had every line of dialogue memorized for awhile.Rocky IV (1985) 3. Down and Out in Beverly Hills/Ruthless People- For awhile there in the mid-80s, I couldn't get enough of the Bette Midler screwball comedies. My best friend's mom is befuddled to this day that I grew up to be straight.Down and Out in Beverly Hills (1986) Ruthless People (1986) 4. Superman II - One of my first moviegoing memories. To this day, Terrence Stamp scares the living sh** out of me.Superman II (1980) 5. Indiana Jones and the Temple of Doom - This one also belongs on my personal "having divorced parents is not without benefits" list. My mom adamently refused to take me to this movie; citing its violence and demonic themes. My dad was none the wiser and even bought me the vintage hat and whip toy set after we saw it. You can imagine the heated phone call that ensued. Indiana Jones and the Temple of Doom (1984)
]]>Mon, 13 Oct 2008 16:16:16 GMTbenthams_headTop 510/13/2008 12:16:16 PM1. Back to the Future - Anyone who has seen "Son of Rambow" knows the impact that a movie character can have on an impressionable youth (especially one with an over-active imagination). For a brief period in 1985-86, I WAS Marty McFly. I actually had designs on riding my skateboard to school every day by tailgating cars. Then (in typical 1980s fashion) there was a story about some kid who died trying the same thing. Back to the Future (1985)). 2. Rocky IV - This one embodied every cliche about bad 80s cinema: synth-driven montage scenes, cold war paranoia, Reagan-era hyper-patriotism, and a bizarre obsession with the titilating possibilities of robotic technology. I ate up every morsel of it. Heck, I probably had every line of dialogue memorized for awhile.Rocky IV (1985) 3. Down and Out in Beverly Hills/Ruthless People- For awhile there in the mid-80s, I couldn't get enough of the Bette Midler screwball comedies. My best friend's mom is befuddled to this day that I grew up to be straight.Down and Out in Beverly Hills (1986) Ruthless People (1986) 4. Superman II - One of my first moviegoing memories. To this day, Terrence Stamp scares the living sh** out of me.Superman II (1980) 5. Indiana Jones and the Temple of Doom - This one also belongs on my personal "having divorced parents is not without benefits" list. My mom adamently refused to take me to this movie; citing its violence and demonic themes. My dad was none the wiser and even bought me the vintage hat and whip toy set after we saw it. You can imagine the heated phone call that ensued. Indiana Jones and the Temple of Doom (1984) http://www.spout.com/blogs/spoutblog/archive/2008/10/8/36041.aspx Post By: SpoutBlog
Post To: SpoutBlog on spout.com
Post Date: 10/8/2008 3:01:15 PM
Body: Everyone loves Bill Murray, but only the die hard fans recognize the majority of his work. The rest, unfortunately, concentrate too much on his greatest films, such as Stripes, Ghostbusters, Groundhog Day, Lost in Translation and all of his collaborations with Wes Anderson. Yet while each of these films, and Murray’s roles and performances in them, are certainly deserving of their preferred and predominant praises, Murray is the kind of actor who is so talented and entertaining that he can be enjoyed in even the worst movies on his resume. In fact, he’s probably the only A-lister who could lend his voice to a bastardized CG version of a beloved cartoon character and get away with barely any contempt from his devotees. This week, Bill Murray makes an appearance in the new kiddie sci-fi flick City of Ember as the selfish mayor of a doomed underground metropolis. And it’s sure to be one of his less-appreciated roles, whether because it’s in a children’s movie, because it’s a supporting part in an ensemble filled with many talented actors, or because it’s not Ghostbusters 3. But those who really love Murray will likely flock to the movie primarily to see him, just as they did and do for the rest of these movies with underrated Murray roles: “Frank Cross” in Scrooged (1988) He would later perfect the asshole-turns-saint thing in Groundhog Day, experience an even worse cabbie than David Johansen in Quick Change and find an even more despicable character to play in Kingpin, but there are plenty of reasons why we shouldn’t dismiss Murray’s first real venture into unlikable territory. For one, look at the emotion he shows after visiting his childhood home. Yes, Murray can cry on cue! (see the clip above.) As the evil TV exec Frank Cross, the actor shows great range with some of his best displays of mania, pathos and slurberts (aka stomach raspberries). “Grimm” in Quick Change (1990) The character must be forgiven for hating New York City so much, but otherwise the curmudgeonly bank robbing clown from Quick Change is one of Murray’s best roles ever. As cranky and cynical as he is, he’s never too mean, miserable or unreasonable that you stop rooting for him throughout his long, oft-interrupted getaway scheme. If anything, you like his selfish antihero more and more thanks to quick-witted and big-balled maneuvers such as his accidental yet profitable encounter with a criminal organization (see the clip above). Murray also deserves props for never allowing himself to be upstaged, despite working opposite the most hilarious performances from scene stealers like Randy Quaid, Tony Shalhoub and Stanley Tucci. “Polonius” in Hamlet (2000) Bill Murray performing Shakespeare! Just because Michael Almereyda’s adaptation is modernized and not so well-appreciated doesn’t make the part any less respectable. In fact, Murray’s performance as the wise father of Ophelia and Laertes (respectively played by Julia Stiles and Liev Schrieber, both of whom we more expect to see doing Shakespeare) is one of the things many critics praised about the film. Unfortunately, this version of Hamlet is slipping through the cracks of cinematic memory, probably thanks to people’s discomfort with Ethan Hawke in the lead. But Murray’s part at least deserves some viral recognition on YouTube or something. And if Geoffrey Rush is unable to take his offered part in Julie Taymor’s new film of The Tempest, wouldn’t it be amazing if Murray could be next on the wish list to play Gonzalo? “The Writer” from The Lost City (2005) Another movie that’s not very good and that not a lot of people have seen is Andy Garcia’s labor of love set in Havana during the Cuban revolution. And like most movies featuring a minor appearance from Murray, The Lost City is at least worth watching just for him. In fact, you could easily just fast-forward to each of his scenes and not miss anything since his role and performance is so out of place anyway. “Nick Kessler” in Next Stop, Greenwich Village (1976) Even when Murray doesn’t speak he makes a movie worth watching simply to see him. Paul Mazursky’s semi-autobiographical film can be a little boring in the scenes lacking Shelley Winters (even the young Christopher Walken can be a little soporific here), but in an uncredited role, Murray gives life into a party scene in which he just hangs out in the background. Sure, the perk you’ll get is mostly from recognizing him, but it’s still a perk. “Bob Wiley” in What About Bob? (1991) Mazursky could have worked with Murray again by casting him as the bum in Down and Out in Beverly Hills, and then there’d have been no need for What About Bob?, a movie that completely recycles Richard Dreyfuss’ character from that earlier film. But Nick Nolte is perfect in Down and Out, and besides the world is better off for having a movie in which Murray plays an endearing multiphobic who also often seems to be an oblivious idiot. “Wally Ritchie” in The Man Who Knew Too Little (1997) Murray returned to the oblivious idiot shtick, only more intently and more underratedly, a few years later. This was one of the actor’s last movies before recieving his reinventive “comeback” role in Rushmore, and it’s probably his least popular performance. But as stupid as both the script and the character are, any true Murray fan will find a number of funny and appreciable moments here. “Tommy Crickshaw” in Cradle Will Rock (1999) The complete opposite of his role from two years earlier in The Man Who Knew Too Little, Murray’s devoutly anti-communist ventriloquist is one of the actor’s most understated performances and most underappreciated characters ever. There’s not even anything that can be said about the role that would provide more evidence of its worth than would a compilation of his scenes from the film. Fortunately one exists (see the above clip). “John Bosley” from Charlie’s Angels (2000) With David Doyle dead and therefore unavailable, Murray was the only actor who could do justice to the role of Bosley in the big screen version of TV’s Charlie’s Angels, and this was clear enough to Sony that they didn’t attempt to truly replace him in the sequel, instead going totally different with Bernie Mac. “Hunter S. Thompson” in Where the Buffalo Roam (1980) Now that we’ve seen Johnny Depp’s brilliant portrayal of the Gonzo journalist, it’s clear that Bill Murray wasn’t the only actor who could do justice to Thompson’s quirk, and he certainly isn’t the best man for the task. Yet aside from a number of scenes that now make Murray’s impersonation seem more SNL-worthy than it probably should (see this oft-shown bit), there are times when he’s truly got the real character down, such as in the moment when he speaks at a college (see the clip above). Between this role and his portrayal of actor Bunny Breckinridge in Ed Wood (in which he costars with his fellow Thompson portrayer), it’s clear that Murray should be playing more real people. Originally posted on:SpoutBlog
]]>Wed, 08 Oct 2008 19:01:15 GMTSpoutBlogSpoutBlog on spout.com10/8/2008 3:01:15 PMEveryone loves Bill Murray, but only the die hard fans recognize the majority of his work. The rest, unfortunately, concentrate too much on his greatest films, such as Stripes, Ghostbusters, Groundhog Day, Lost in Translation and all of his collaborations with Wes Anderson. Yet while each of these films, and Murray’s roles and performances in them, are certainly deserving of their preferred and predominant praises, Murray is the kind of actor who is so talented and entertaining that he can be enjoyed in even the worst movies on his resume. In fact, he’s probably the only A-lister who could lend his voice to a bastardized CG version of a beloved cartoon character and get away with barely any contempt from his devotees. This week, Bill Murray makes an appearance in the new kiddie sci-fi flick City of Ember as the selfish mayor of a doomed underground metropolis. And it’s sure to be one of his less-appreciated roles, whether because it’s in a children’s movie, because it’s a supporting part in an ensemble filled with many talented actors, or because it’s not Ghostbusters 3. But those who really love Murray will likely flock to the movie primarily to see him, just as they did and do for the rest of these movies with underrated Murray roles: “Frank Cross” in Scrooged (1988) He would later perfect the asshole-turns-saint thing in Groundhog Day, experience an even worse cabbie than David Johansen in Quick Change and find an even more despicable character to play in Kingpin, but there are plenty of reasons why we shouldn’t dismiss Murray’s first real venture into unlikable territory. For one, look at the emotion he shows after visiting his childhood home. Yes, Murray can cry on cue! (see the clip above.) As the evil TV exec Frank Cross, the actor shows great range with some of his best displays of mania, pathos and slurberts (aka stomach raspberries). “Grimm” in Quick Change (1990) The character must be forgiven for hating New York City so much, but otherwise the curmudgeonly bank robbing clown from Quick Change is one of Murray’s best roles ever. As cranky and cynical as he is, he’s never too mean, miserable or unreasonable that you stop rooting for him throughout his long, oft-interrupted getaway scheme. If anything, you like his selfish antihero more and more thanks to quick-witted and big-balled maneuvers such as his accidental yet profitable encounter with a criminal organization (see the clip above). Murray also deserves props for never allowing himself to be upstaged, despite working opposite the most hilarious performances from scene stealers like Randy Quaid, Tony Shalhoub and Stanley Tucci. “Polonius” in Hamlet (2000) Bill Murray performing Shakespeare! Just because Michael Almereyda’s adaptation is modernized and not so well-appreciated doesn’t make the part any less respectable. In fact, Murray’s performance as the wise father of Ophelia and Laertes (respectively played by Julia Stiles and Liev Schrieber, both of whom we more expect to see doing Shakespeare) is one of the things many critics praised about the film. Unfortunately, this version of Hamlet is slipping through the cracks of cinematic memory, probably thanks to people’s discomfort with Ethan Hawke in the lead. But Murray’s part at least deserves some viral recognition on YouTube or something. And if Geoffrey Rush is unable to take his offered part in Julie Taymor’s new film of The Tempest, wouldn’t it be amazing if Murray could be next on the wish list to play Gonzalo? “The Writer” from The Lost City (2005) Another movie that’s not very good and that not a lot of people have seen is Andy Garcia’s labor of love set in Havana during the Cuban revolution. And like most movies featuring a minor appearance from Murray, The Lost City is at least worth watching just for him. In fact, you could easily just fast-forward to each of his scenes and not miss anything since his role and performance is so out of place anyway. “Nick Kessler” in Next Stop, Greenwich Village (1976) Even when Murray doesn’t speak he makes a movie worth watching simply to see him. Paul Mazursky’s semi-autobiographical film can be a little boring in the scenes lacking Shelley Winters (even the young Christopher Walken can be a little soporific here), but in an uncredited role, Murray gives life into a party scene in which he just hangs out in the background. Sure, the perk you’ll get is mostly from recognizing him, but it’s still a perk. “Bob Wiley” in What About Bob? (1991) Mazursky could have worked with Murray again by casting him as the bum in Down and Out in Beverly Hills, and then there’d have been no need for What About Bob?, a movie that completely recycles Richard Dreyfuss’ character from that earlier film. But Nick Nolte is perfect in Down and Out, and besides the world is better off for having a movie in which Murray plays an endearing multiphobic who also often seems to be an oblivious idiot. “Wally Ritchie” in The Man Who Knew Too Little (1997) Murray returned to the oblivious idiot shtick, only more intently and more underratedly, a few years later. This was one of the actor’s last movies before recieving his reinventive “comeback” role in Rushmore, and it’s probably his least popular performance. But as stupid as both the script and the character are, any true Murray fan will find a number of funny and appreciable moments here. “Tommy Crickshaw” in Cradle Will Rock (1999) The complete opposite of his role from two years earlier in The Man Who Knew Too Little, Murray’s devoutly anti-communist ventriloquist is one of the actor’s most understated performances and most underappreciated characters ever. There’s not even anything that can be said about the role that would provide more evidence of its worth than would a compilation of his scenes from the film. Fortunately one exists (see the above clip). “John Bosley” from Charlie’s Angels (2000) With David Doyle dead and therefore unavailable, Murray was the only actor who could do justice to the role of Bosley in the big screen version of TV’s Charlie’s Angels, and this was clear enough to Sony that they didn’t attempt to truly replace him in the sequel, instead going totally different with Bernie Mac. “Hunter S. Thompson” in Where the Buffalo Roam (1980) Now that we’ve seen Johnny Depp’s brilliant portrayal of the Gonzo journalist, it’s clear that Bill Murray wasn’t the only actor who could do justice to Thompson’s quirk, and he certainly isn’t the best man for the task. Yet aside from a number of scenes that now make Murray’s impersonation seem more SNL-worthy than it probably should (see this oft-shown bit), there are times when he’s truly got the real character down, such as in the moment when he speaks at a college (see the clip above). Between this role and his portrayal of actor Bunny Breckinridge in Ed Wood (in which he costars with his fellow Thompson portrayer), it’s clear that Murray should be playing more real people. Originally posted on:SpoutBlog http://www.spout.com/blogs/spoutblog/archive/2008/9/9/34950.aspx Post By: SpoutBlog
Post To: SpoutBlog on spout.com
Post Date: 9/9/2008 4:01:08 PM
Body: Anticipating the worst from Diane English’s new remake of The Women is not just typical low expectations regarding remakes in general. My dread is specifically based on dissatisfaction with remakes and updates of films from the 1930s, arguably the best decade in cinema (it is certainly my favorite). While I may recognize and appreciate some favorable redos, such as DePalma’s Scarface (of which I’ve never really been a fan), Mazursky’s Down and Out in Beverly Hills and the multiple repeats from Hitchcock, I am more often disappointed with attempts to recreate ‘30s classics, even when I approach them with already low standards. Worst, for me, doesn’t necessarily have to do with the quality of the film alone, especially when related to remakes and updates. The titles and versions I’ve selected are hardly the worst in terms of craft or production value — you’ll note there are no Dracula movies on this list — and a few would almost be acceptable if they were more unique or solitary works. 10. Return to Oz (1985) I begin with a film that is not a remake in any form but tone. Yet I still see it as a kind of response to and update of the far more popular classic The Wizard of Oz (1939), which was viewed by some as not faithful enough to the source literature of L. Frank Baum.  It was a bit of a guilty pleasure for me growing up, but I lost regard for the film after suffering through a professor’s defensive screening of it on the last day of a film history course. Sure, it’s truer to Baum and the illustrations of W.W. Denslow and John R. Neill, but as MGM’s beautiful 1939 interpretation shows, it’s better to be imaginative than loyal when translating works between mediums. 9. The Front Page (1974) Billy Wilder’s version of the Ben Hecht and Charles MacArthur play, which was first adapted to film in 1931, is plenty hilarious thanks to stars Jack Lemmon and Walter Matthau, as well as to a slew of terrific character actors, including Vincent Gardenia, Charles Durning, Austin Pendleton and Dick O’Neill. Also, the film’s homosexual innuendo is an interesting way of acknowledging Howard Hawks’ 1940 gender altering redo, His Girl Friday. I’d definitely choose Wilder’s film over the subsequent big screen version, the 1988 update Switching Channels, but compared to earlier adaptations and to Wilder’s earlier work, the ’74 Front Page is still quite a dissatisfying effort. My biggest problems are with the film’s artificial look, particularly its use of costumes that look more appropriate for a costume party than a period film, the gaudiness of the dialogue, especially the double entendres, and the miscasting of both Carol Burnett and Susan Sarandon (though my annoyance with the women in the film provide further acceptance of the gay undertones). 8. The Distinguished Gentleman (1992) This loose and uncredited reworking of Mr. Smith Goes to Washington (1939) could have been a worthy update had it included more laughs and more of a bite. The concept of placing a small-time con man in the big-time con of politics is ripe for good comedy and satire, plus it makes me think of the respectable crook/crooked respectability angle of Lubitsch’s Trouble in Paradise. Too bad the script was unsatisfactory (not surprising given it came partly from the screenwriter behind Leonard Part 6) and star Eddie Murphy was at the awkward moment of his career when he somehow lost his usual talent for comedy. 7. Flash Gordon (1980) I have to admit that I do actually love this movie. Well, to be fair, I only really love Queen’s score, Brian Blessed’s voice and Max Von Sydow’s makeup. The rest I just like. Anyway, despite my guilty pleasure in watching the thing on television throughout my childhood, it’s neither a good movie nor a successful update. It doesn’t really do the ‘30s Flash Gordon serials justice by being either a big-budget improvement or a tonally and narratively faithful throwback (comparatively, Star Wars succeeded at doing both). 6. The Hunchback of Notre Dame (1996) Disney’s idea to animate Victor Hugo’s novel was of questionable taste, but the studio’s need to so closely imitate William Dieterle’s 1939 adaptation was of questionable creative judgment. When I watch Disney’s Robin Hood, I’m not reminded of how much better Michael Curtiz’s 1938 version is; similarly, I’m able to appreciate the animated Beauty and the Beast and Alice and Wonderland without thinking of previous adaptations. Especially given the controversial lewdness and the simplification of the story, Disney’s version of Hunchback seems an insult to the source novel, Dieterle’s film and Charles Laughton’s characterization. 5. Meet Joe Black (1998) I’m a hypocrite to criticize anyone’s inability to be concise, but a three-hour remake of a 78-minute film (1934’s Death Takes a Holiday) displays a level of excess that even my meandering can’t compare to. Don’t get me wrong, though; I’m no hater of long films. But if you can make a long story short, it’s preferred that you do so. 4. The Mummy (1999) There’s no problem with reimagining a classic horror film as a blockbuster action movie, but taking something so iconically frightening as Boris Karloff’s Imhotep (in the ‘32 version) and updating the look with laughably cartoonish CGI is unfortunate. I know I’m on the other side of the fence from the moviegoers who made this a hit, but I would have actually enjoyed it more if the villain were depicted as a guy wrapped in bandages. 3. Mary Shelley’s Frankenstein (1994) Of course, CG may have been better than this. In fact, the only thing worse than Robert De Niro as the Creature would have been a hand-drawn animated Frankenberry in the role. 2. King Kong (2005) Technically, the 1976 remake with Jeff Bridges is a worse film, but that version at least took some interesting liberties in updating the 1933 classic. Peter Jackson’s intention seemed to be only to faithfully recreate the original with better special effects. And given the fact that many of the CG sequences are embarrassingly awful, I have to say this film was a more monumental failure in terms of purpose and promise. Jackson gave me yet another reason for questioning the point of filmmakers remaking their favorite films. 1. Mr. Deeds (2002) Other than the minor way in which this comedy updates the conservative message of Mr. Deeds Goes to Town (1936), there is really no reason for Capra’s film to have been remade, especially with such broad, immature comedy from Adam Sandler. While the original Mr. Deeds completely speaks to and of its time, this includes no topicality, no compelling historical or contemporary relevancy and no lasting cultural significance. Originally posted on:SpoutBlog
]]>Tue, 09 Sep 2008 20:01:08 GMTSpoutBlogSpoutBlog on spout.com9/9/2008 4:01:08 PM Anticipating the worst from Diane English’s new remake of The Women is not just typical low expectations regarding remakes in general. My dread is specifically based on dissatisfaction with remakes and updates of films from the 1930s, arguably the best decade in cinema (it is certainly my favorite). While I may recognize and appreciate some favorable redos, such as DePalma’s Scarface (of which I’ve never really been a fan), Mazursky’s Down and Out in Beverly Hills and the multiple repeats from Hitchcock, I am more often disappointed with attempts to recreate ‘30s classics, even when I approach them with already low standards. Worst, for me, doesn’t necessarily have to do with the quality of the film alone, especially when related to remakes and updates. The titles and versions I’ve selected are hardly the worst in terms of craft or production value — you’ll note there are no Dracula movies on this list — and a few would almost be acceptable if they were more unique or solitary works. 10. Return to Oz (1985) I begin with a film that is not a remake in any form but tone. Yet I still see it as a kind of response to and update of the far more popular classic The Wizard of Oz (1939), which was viewed by some as not faithful enough to the source literature of L. Frank Baum.  It was a bit of a guilty pleasure for me growing up, but I lost regard for the film after suffering through a professor’s defensive screening of it on the last day of a film history course. Sure, it’s truer to Baum and the illustrations of W.W. Denslow and John R. Neill, but as MGM’s beautiful 1939 interpretation shows, it’s better to be imaginative than loyal when translating works between mediums. 9. The Front Page (1974) Billy Wilder’s version of the Ben Hecht and Charles MacArthur play, which was first adapted to film in 1931, is plenty hilarious thanks to stars Jack Lemmon and Walter Matthau, as well as to a slew of terrific character actors, including Vincent Gardenia, Charles Durning, Austin Pendleton and Dick O’Neill. Also, the film’s homosexual innuendo is an interesting way of acknowledging Howard Hawks’ 1940 gender altering redo, His Girl Friday. I’d definitely choose Wilder’s film over the subsequent big screen version, the 1988 update Switching Channels, but compared to earlier adaptations and to Wilder’s earlier work, the ’74 Front Page is still quite a dissatisfying effort. My biggest problems are with the film’s artificial look, particularly its use of costumes that look more appropriate for a costume party than a period film, the gaudiness of the dialogue, especially the double entendres, and the miscasting of both Carol Burnett and Susan Sarandon (though my annoyance with the women in the film provide further acceptance of the gay undertones). 8. The Distinguished Gentleman (1992) This loose and uncredited reworking of Mr. Smith Goes to Washington (1939) could have been a worthy update had it included more laughs and more of a bite. The concept of placing a small-time con man in the big-time con of politics is ripe for good comedy and satire, plus it makes me think of the respectable crook/crooked respectability angle of Lubitsch’s Trouble in Paradise. Too bad the script was unsatisfactory (not surprising given it came partly from the screenwriter behind Leonard Part 6) and star Eddie Murphy was at the awkward moment of his career when he somehow lost his usual talent for comedy. 7. Flash Gordon (1980) I have to admit that I do actually love this movie. Well, to be fair, I only really love Queen’s score, Brian Blessed’s voice and Max Von Sydow’s makeup. The rest I just like. Anyway, despite my guilty pleasure in watching the thing on television throughout my childhood, it’s neither a good movie nor a successful update. It doesn’t really do the ‘30s Flash Gordon serials justice by being either a big-budget improvement or a tonally and narratively faithful throwback (comparatively, Star Wars succeeded at doing both). 6. The Hunchback of Notre Dame (1996) Disney’s idea to animate Victor Hugo’s novel was of questionable taste, but the studio’s need to so closely imitate William Dieterle’s 1939 adaptation was of questionable creative judgment. When I watch Disney’s Robin Hood, I’m not reminded of how much better Michael Curtiz’s 1938 version is; similarly, I’m able to appreciate the animated Beauty and the Beast and Alice and Wonderland without thinking of previous adaptations. Especially given the controversial lewdness and the simplification of the story, Disney’s version of Hunchback seems an insult to the source novel, Dieterle’s film and Charles Laughton’s characterization. 5. Meet Joe Black (1998) I’m a hypocrite to criticize anyone’s inability to be concise, but a three-hour remake of a 78-minute film (1934’s Death Takes a Holiday) displays a level of excess that even my meandering can’t compare to. Don’t get me wrong, though; I’m no hater of long films. But if you can make a long story short, it’s preferred that you do so. 4. The Mummy (1999) There’s no problem with reimagining a classic horror film as a blockbuster action movie, but taking something so iconically frightening as Boris Karloff’s Imhotep (in the ‘32 version) and updating the look with laughably cartoonish CGI is unfortunate. I know I’m on the other side of the fence from the moviegoers who made this a hit, but I would have actually enjoyed it more if the villain were depicted as a guy wrapped in bandages. 3. Mary Shelley’s Frankenstein (1994) Of course, CG may have been better than this. In fact, the only thing worse than Robert De Niro as the Creature would have been a hand-drawn animated Frankenberry in the role. 2. King Kong (2005) Technically, the 1976 remake with Jeff Bridges is a worse film, but that version at least took some interesting liberties in updating the 1933 classic. Peter Jackson’s intention seemed to be only to faithfully recreate the original with better special effects. And given the fact that many of the CG sequences are embarrassingly awful, I have to say this film was a more monumental failure in terms of purpose and promise. Jackson gave me yet another reason for questioning the point of filmmakers remaking their favorite films. 1. Mr. Deeds (2002) Other than the minor way in which this comedy updates the conservative message of Mr. Deeds Goes to Town (1936), there is really no reason for Capra’s film to have been remade, especially with such broad, immature comedy from Adam Sandler. While the original Mr. Deeds completely speaks to and of its time, this includes no topicality, no compelling historical or contemporary relevancy and no lasting cultural significance. Originally posted on:SpoutBlog http://www.spout.com/blogs/spoutblog/archive/2008/6/2/30320.aspx Post By: SpoutBlog
Post To: SpoutBlog on spout.com
Post Date: 6/2/2008 11:00:20 AM
Body: You know how I know you’re gay? You saw the Sex and the City movie. The above clip was made a few weeks prior to the opening of SATC, which has cemented itself into film history as perhaps the most chicky chick flick ever made. But I find it even more interesting (and more pointed than actually funny) after seeing the box office figures. I wish there had been some kind of tracking done over the weekend of how much of that money came, respectively, from women, from gay men and from - God forbid - straight men. Whether or not a heterosexual man has seen SATC is now officially a gauge of his manhood. Up there with liking beer, fighting, trucks, guns, chopping wood, etc. OR, in my honest opinion, up there with being comfortable with wearing a dress, putting on eye makeup, crying, giving another man a hug, etc. I have no reason to see SATC because I never watched the TV show, but I almost feel I should sit through it to PROVE my manhood. No need for push ups and skeet shooting, as the dude in the video thinks. Those activities are actually tools of repression for men who aren’t comfortable enough with their sexuality. Unfortunately, the era of celebrating the metrosexual has come and gone, and we now have to discuss, as AJ Schnack (emphasizing his MANhood in all caps) has done this morning, the rage against the SATC movie. According to the LA Times, it should have been easier to find $2/gallon gas than a straight man watching SATC. With the weekend behind us, I can only fear the reports of men being severely beaten by alpha-males as they exit cinemas in some kind of gay-bashing ritual. Hopefully, we’re culturally above such a thing, but with all the women at the movies this weekend, and groups of men morally fending for themselves in testosterone-heavy groups, I don’t doubt the chance that the media triggered something awful. Two months ago, I heard multiple male moans (I refer to them as anti-orgasms) when the male nudity came on screen in Forgetting Sarah Marshall. Coincidentally, I also separately watched both The Piano and Down and Out in Beverly Hills with audiences that month, and both films evoked similar responses with their respective displays of male anatomy (I wonder if it was OK for men to watch the bulging manliness exhibited in Bigger, Stronger, Faster as an alternative this weekend). In a way, I feel like SATC’s theatrical release was like one big scrotum in the face of heterosexual men around the country, and those who averted their eyes are in need of some serious growing up and adjustment. [thanks to The Movie Blog for alerting us to today's clip] Originally posted on:SpoutBlog
]]>Mon, 02 Jun 2008 15:00:20 GMTSpoutBlogSpoutBlog on spout.com6/2/2008 11:00:20 AM You know how I know you’re gay? You saw the Sex and the City movie. The above clip was made a few weeks prior to the opening of SATC, which has cemented itself into film history as perhaps the most chicky chick flick ever made. But I find it even more interesting (and more pointed than actually funny) after seeing the box office figures. I wish there had been some kind of tracking done over the weekend of how much of that money came, respectively, from women, from gay men and from - God forbid - straight men. Whether or not a heterosexual man has seen SATC is now officially a gauge of his manhood. Up there with liking beer, fighting, trucks, guns, chopping wood, etc. OR, in my honest opinion, up there with being comfortable with wearing a dress, putting on eye makeup, crying, giving another man a hug, etc. I have no reason to see SATC because I never watched the TV show, but I almost feel I should sit through it to PROVE my manhood. No need for push ups and skeet shooting, as the dude in the video thinks. Those activities are actually tools of repression for men who aren’t comfortable enough with their sexuality. Unfortunately, the era of celebrating the metrosexual has come and gone, and we now have to discuss, as AJ Schnack (emphasizing his MANhood in all caps) has done this morning, the rage against the SATC movie. According to the LA Times, it should have been easier to find $2/gallon gas than a straight man watching SATC. With the weekend behind us, I can only fear the reports of men being severely beaten by alpha-males as they exit cinemas in some kind of gay-bashing ritual. Hopefully, we’re culturally above such a thing, but with all the women at the movies this weekend, and groups of men morally fending for themselves in testosterone-heavy groups, I don’t doubt the chance that the media triggered something awful. Two months ago, I heard multiple male moans (I refer to them as anti-orgasms) when the male nudity came on screen in Forgetting Sarah Marshall. Coincidentally, I also separately watched both The Piano and Down and Out in Beverly Hills with audiences that month, and both films evoked similar responses with their respective displays of male anatomy (I wonder if it was OK for men to watch the bulging manliness exhibited in Bigger, Stronger, Faster as an alternative this weekend). In a way, I feel like SATC’s theatrical release was like one big scrotum in the face of heterosexual men around the country, and those who averted their eyes are in need of some serious growing up and adjustment. [thanks to The Movie Blog for alerting us to today's clip] Originally posted on:SpoutBlog http://www.spout.com/members/0/tags/family/MemberTagFilms.aspxfamily
Number of films tagged: 6288

Number of people who tagged: 226

Number of times used: 1138

]]>Thu, 03 Dec 2009 20:09:21 GMT62882261138Tag http://www.spout.com/members/0/tags/remake/MemberTagFilms.aspxremake
Number of films tagged: 156

Number of people who tagged: 71

Number of times used: 204

]]>Tue, 08 Dec 2009 22:39:44 GMT15671204Tag http://www.spout.com/members/0/tags/dog/MemberTagFilms.aspxdog
Number of films tagged: 1373

Number of people who tagged: 47

Number of times used: 161

]]>Fri, 20 Nov 2009 19:00:53 GMT137347161Tag http://www.spout.com/members/0/tags/son/MemberTagFilms.aspxson
Number of films tagged: 2321

Number of people who tagged: 40

Number of times used: 111

]]>Mon, 12 Oct 2009 04:48:06 GMT232140111Tag http://www.spout.com/members/0/tags/dysfunctional/MemberTagFilms.aspxdysfunctional
Number of films tagged: 486

Number of people who tagged: 31

Number of times used: 42

]]>Wed, 15 Jul 2009 13:04:09 GMT4863142Tag http://www.spout.com/members/0/tags/rescue/MemberTagFilms.aspxrescue
Number of films tagged: 4080

Number of people who tagged: 31

Number of times used: 142

]]>Mon, 03 Aug 2009 18:39:36 GMT408031142Tag http://www.spout.com/members/0/tags/neurotic/MemberTagFilms.aspxneurotic
Number of films tagged: 100

Number of people who tagged: 26

Number of times used: 39

]]>Tue, 19 May 2009 05:57:03 GMT1002639Tag http://www.spout.com/members/0/tags/wealth/MemberTagFilms.aspxwealth
Number of films tagged: 749

Number of people who tagged: 26

Number of times used: 70

]]>Sun, 20 Sep 2009 05:18:07 GMT7492670Tag http://www.spout.com/members/0/tags/California/MemberTagFilms.aspxCalifornia
Number of films tagged: 84

Number of people who tagged: 25

Number of times used: 91

]]>Mon, 14 Dec 2009 22:42:04 GMT842591Tag http://www.spout.com/members/0/tags/selfdiscovery/MemberTagFilms.aspxselfdiscovery
Number of films tagged: 514

Number of people who tagged: 22

Number of times used: 38

]]>Tue, 03 Nov 2009 17:56:35 GMT5142238Tag http://www.spout.com/members/0/tags/extramaritalaffair/MemberTagFilms.aspxextramaritalaffair
Number of films tagged: 3121

Number of people who tagged: 18

Number of times used: 31

]]>Thu, 09 Jul 2009 13:13:22 GMT31211831Tag http://www.spout.com/members/0/tags/maid/MemberTagFilms.aspxmaid
Number of films tagged: 301

Number of people who tagged: 12

Number of times used: 14

]]>Wed, 15 Jul 2009 13:04:09 GMT3011214Tag http://www.spout.com/members/0/tags/stranger/MemberTagFilms.aspxstranger
Number of films tagged: 441

Number of people who tagged: 7

Number of times used: 8

]]>Wed, 12 Aug 2009 13:02:59 GMT44178Tag http://www.spout.com/members/0/tags/beverlyhills/MemberTagFilms.aspxbeverlyhills
Number of films tagged: 4

Number of people who tagged: 2

Number of times used: 4

]]>Sun, 25 Nov 2007 09:03:52 GMT424Tag http://www.spout.com/members/0/tags/suicideattempt/MemberTagFilms.aspxsuicideattempt
Number of films tagged: 391

Number of people who tagged: 2

Number of times used: 3

]]>Thu, 11 Jun 2009 13:02:15 GMT39123Tag