Remakes – Page 2 – Six Degrees of Film

Capsule Review: The Magnificent Seven

This remake from director Antoine Fuqua, and starring Denzel Washington and Chris Pratt, sticks fairly close to the plot of the original from 1960. This is a steady and solid remake of the classic Western with a winning cast of characters. Jennifer Lawrence is on board as a young widow who is determined to rid her town of the villainous gang of outlaws running roughshod over the citizens. The old formula still holds: the town under siege, heroes riding in to save the day, upholding the values of the West while instilling revenge and righteous fury to right the wrongs they see. The audience seeks closure in the denouement, which is the ritual gunfight, or as it stands now, the gun battle. Finally the balance of the Universe is restored when right triumphs over overwhelming might.

Denzel Washington is one good reason to watch this film. Ethan Hawke is equally up to the challenge playing a broken but not bowed anti-hero role. There’s not much more to add as there is new ground broken here in movie history, but the storytelling elements of the film hold it together. Unlike the unfortunate Ben Hur remake, there is a cohesive plot to follow…thus making this film imminently more watchable. And for moviegoers hankering for the return of a good old-fashioned Western, this film delivers.

Chris Pratt may be slightly miscast with some of his comic asides delivering touches of awkward comic relief. When the character is a natural fit for a Western, as was the case for an actor like Steve McQueen, who starred in the original, it’s always hard to compare the performances. But as a whole this film, set firmly in the category long neglected in Hollywood of a pure Western movie, fits the bill nicely.

Capsule Review: Ben-Hur-Rated JPB for Just Plain Boring

This film is Rated JPB = Just Plain Boring. How could it be this boring, I wondered? The plot of Ben Hur was well-known, and the actors were for the most part, unknowns-it turns out for good reason. The one known actor, Morgan Freeman, did the walk-through of his life to pick up a paycheck. He put more emotion into the commercials I’ve seen him in than what was on display in this film.

The story line leads Judah Ben-Hur to a slave galley and then back to his hometown of Jerusalem, where he miraculously feels compelled to produce this special sword which was given to him by his nemesis, Messala, who is also his adopted brother. The problem with this is that Judah has been a slave for the past five years, with no sign of that sword tucked away. One cannot help but wonder if these small details escaped the notice of the writers and producers of this production?

The problem, I would put forth, is mostly with the shoddy writing. But it doesn’t stop there. Not only is the screenplay badly written, but the film is also sloppily edited and poorly acted to boot. Even the CGI (Computer Graphic Imaging) and Special Effects during the Climactic Chariot Race come across as looking stilted and phony.

In short, give this updated version of Ben-Hur a miss and rent the fifties classic with Charlton Heston and Stephen Boyd. That one may be corny but it’s imminently more watchable than this boring thing.

Recommended Tarzan viewing: Go back to the Source!

The best of Tarzan? The answer of course would be the ones with Johnny Weismuller as Tarzan the Ape Man from 1932 and Tarzan’s New York Adventure from 1942. This was the best of Tarzan on screen. He was the epitome of the White Man as the Lord of the Jungle. There was always an interesting clash of elements in the Tarzan mythology. He was part White Supremacist and Nativist, mixed with equal parts of the Eco-friendly man and Protector of the Weak; then finally he was the ultimate Loner without a country and Rebel with a cause.

Tarzan’s role as the white man in the jungle made him innately superior, in accordance with the Darwinian model, which was always reinforced in his domination over the animals in the jungle. But there was a mystical reverence of nature found in Tarzan, and his softer side always shone through in his love for Jane. All of these elements combined to create, along with the fantastic action shots of Olympian Johnny Weismuller, this mythic but believable creature.

We could identify with that Tarzan. The innate animal charm of Weismuller combined with his physical prowess as he swung from vines and wrestled crocodiles gave us something to hang our hats on. His character had teeth. The Tarzan of the 21st Century is not as easy to read. He is not only inscrutable because of his character, but there is no clear shot at gleaning any new knowledge of Tarzan. This is a scattershot film, one of those saddled with the dreaded flashback syndrome. Any time we may grab hold of a good chunk of dialogue or action, there comes another dreary flashback to steer us away from any semblance of interest in this plot.

The plot? Tarzan returns to the jungle to save Jane. That’s about it. In the beginning we see that he is already ensconced in Greystoke Manor in England. It would have been interesting to see him in English Society, but we’re only given a brief glimpse from the opening sequence. We are mostly waiting for him to strip off his English Lord duds and begin to act like Tarzan. The weak and insipid but standard Tarzan yell near the end is about par for the course in this film. It’s so faint and half-hearted, it could be a metaphor for the entire project.

The recommendation for anyone who isn’t a die-hard Tarzan fan, but perhaps wants to know more, is to read the books by Edgar Rice Borroughs, then rent the most popular of the series: Tarzan the Ape Man (1932) & Tarzan’s New York Adventure; and if you are still interested, watch the re-make from 1984: Greystoke: The Legend of Tarzan with Christopher Lambert.

This version, with Margot Robbie, a great actress under-utilized as Jane, and Alexander Skarsgard as the Ape Man is not worth the price of admission. Samuel L Jackson and Christoph Waltz are also great actors who are picking up a paycheck and not much else in this Sominex version.

The Big Short: A Capsule Review

This film explains what a C.D.O is. (Collateralized Debt Obligation). In fact, the film defines and explains many of the mysterious terms that the big banks used to mask some of their riskiest banking practices in recent memory. The innovative use of asides and “celebrity appearances” (Margot Robbie in a bathtub explaining credit default swaps!), gives the audience a break from a story that could easily go over the heads of the average movie-goer in no time flat.

Kudos to the Director, Adam McKay, and the cast including a bearded Brad Pitt and an energized Ryan Gosling. Steve Carrell easily steals every scene he’s in with his frenetic portrayal of Mark Baum, a man who actually felt the pain of the average Joe dealing with the aftermath of The Big Short.

Recommended for anyone with an interest in following what caused the big crash of 2008 and understanding what really happened. It should be recommended viewing for almost all citizens of these United States!

6 Degrees: Notes from the Global Village

The Fall season is a wonderful time of the year for movie buffs. Fall brings some of the best films of the year out just in time to become eligible for the never-ending Awards Season! Hollywood has had another split year, where the blockbuster summer films have produced several hits but nothing to really be excited about in terms of innovative art or injection of excitement into the existing Cinematic Universe.

Here are some of the notes collected from 6 Degrees-some from articles and long reads in August, and some from my own demented mind…
**
*Ridiculous & Overly complex plots-in blockbusters…the trend? Here’s a quote from a long-winded complaint in an article bemoaning the overly complex plots in recent super-hero movies:
“Labyrinthine machinations to desperately weave in character motivation, geography and the practical aspects of getting from one scene to another”
Apparently, it has come to someone’s attention that Hollywood has a problem with story “density”. Is that what they call crappy movies now? For action-packed super-hero stories that contain “teasers” and origin stories, there’s only so much information the audience needs.

Older audiences all know who Superman and Batman are. We’ve read comic books from the fifties through the eighties. And now, thanks to the wonderful newly coined phrase, “The Cinematic Universe”, which is perhaps a euphemism for the billions of dollars that Hollywood envisions when imagining the mileage they can squeeze out of an entire cast of super-heroes, each with his own movie debut and story of origin, we are all treated to some of the worst aspects of the comic book genre, including clumsy plot points weaving through the endless reems of origin stories and desperate attempts to inject original thought into the storyline along with character motivation.

Although I have not been a huge fan of the comic-book genre, I do see the impact that the stories have on a younger generation of fans. And not to be close-minded about this, I’ve conceded that even Shakespeare used a lot of re-hashed plots, and was able to influence generations with his unmatched ability as a wordsmith and his sheer genius as a playwright.

Perhaps there will come a time where some innovative director will take one of these origin stories and craft the equivalent of a Shakespearean play out of the original material. So far, there has been no evidence this has occurred.

**Actors have spoken: A list of their favorite films includes all the usual suspects (not that particular film though!). But a surprising Number One appears: Tootsie!

The list of films that actors chose is not that surprising. And it’s not a far cry from most of the movie-going publics list of great movies. Boogie Nights, The Red Shoes, and A Woman under the Influence are definitely films that actors might choose over any other group.

But the rest of the films seem to be pretty much in line with standard movie “Best of” lists. Tootsie as the favorite film is a surprise. It’s a great comedy, with a superb supporting cast and many memorable lines. Director Sydney Pollack is wonderful in a small part as Hoffman’s agent. Jessica Lange won the Best Supporting Actress Oscar for her role. And Bill Murray was memorable as the befuddled room-mate of Dustin Hoffman’s Dorothy character, and had some of the best “zingers” in the film.

But Dustin Hoffman’s energetic portrayal of an actor who is desperate for a part to the point of risking everything, and laying it all on the line, is more of a statement about the actor’s existential state of being than any real film portrayal. That compels me to the conclusion that the actor’s perpetual state of angst is portrayed to the point that most fellow thespians that saw this film must have simply been saying “Yes!” through the entire film.

*Actors compilation of Greatest Movies includes:

*Taxi Driver
*The Red Shoes
*Boogie Nights
*Annie Hall
*Godfather Part II
&To Kill a Mock
*Cinema Paradiso
*A Woman under the influence
*The Godfather
*# 1 is Tootsie

**Strong women & Fem Flicks: Women are speaking out more and more concerning the inequality they see in Hollywood and throughout the film industry. Stars such as Meryl Streep, Sandra Bullock, Salma Hayek, Natalie Portman, Emma Thompson & Emma Watson have all spoken out against the glaring inequalities for women in the film industry. The Death of the Bond Girl is another subject for feminists everywhere to cheer about.
It seems that the highest-paid actress in Hollywood (Jennifer Lawrence) is paid significantly less than the highest paid male star (Robert Downey Jr.) Granted, we’re talking about millions of dollars, but the principle is universal. Women are still paid less than men for doing the same job!

*Another list has popped up. Now that we are in the middle of the second decade of the 21st Century, the need to list all the categories and best of films is overwhelming for critics and news organizations. Here’s one that compiled all the best action films. Although this list is edited to include only the top six, two of these are from the year 2000-15 years ago-and one is a recent addition-Mad Max.

**The List of 21st Century Best-Action films-includes:

*John Wick-2014
*Bourne Ultimatum
*Casino Royale-2006
*Gladiator-2000
*Crouching Tiger Hidden Dragon =2000
*Mad Max: Fury Road-2015
There were more films listed, but none that deserved the accolade of Best-Action film!

**Frank Sinatra on Film: In this celebration year of Sinatra’s 100th birthday, a list emerges of some of his best work on film. The famous crooner starred in hits like From Here to Eternity, On the Town, Guys and Dolls, The Manchurian Candidate, Pal Joey and High Society. He started making films in 1943 with Higher and Higher and ended in 1984 with Cannonball Run II.

**Dustin Hoffman is the latest to take aim and criticize the film industry. He said in an interview recently that TV is the best it’s ever been, and movies are the worst they’ve ever been.

**Upcoming: The Heart of the Sea from Ron Howard, Bridge of Spies with Tom Hanks, and Legend with Tom Hardy are all coming this fall. Robert Redford and Nick Nolte are teaming up in a comedy, A Walk in the Woods that may actually be as funny as the previews.

**Another list emerged recently. These are some of the best movies about “Space”. This list included some of my favorites, and of course, it’s edited to include Honorable Mentions but not the ”Don’t bother to Mentions”!

I would simply add that the list lost a lot of credibility when it included The Day the Earth Stood Still and Blade Runner in Honorable Mentions…And if 2001: A Space Odyssey is not included, there’s nothing more to add.

**The Best of “Space” films include:

Star Wars-1977

Capricorn One-1977

Close Encounters-1977

Apollo 13-1995

Interstellar-2014

Moon-2009

The Right Stuff-1983

Gravity-2013

Contact-1997

Armaggedon-1998

• Honorable Mentions were: Solaris-Planet of the Apes; Wall-E; Blade Runner!; The Day the Earth Stood Still; War of the Worlds; Buck Rogers in the 25th Century; Flight of the Navigator and E.T

*There seems to be an upcoming debate between the two rival comic universes, DC vs Marvel. With the idea that some of the superheroes are going to be expanding again to include even more tales of origin. As was pointed out recently, “Superhero tales are about extraordinary super beings bashing each other with ridiculous powers. Origin stories are about ordinary people suffering some sort of transformative trauma” With the underlying meaning being that one set of stories is exciting and adventurous, and the other has the potential to be deadly dull.
**Outliers:

Bill Murray does have an announced cameo in the new Ghostbusters film. If the film has any notion to receive its due in the Cinematic Pantheon, Murray must appear as a Ghostbuster.

*Influence of Star Wars on Film…There’s an article from 6 Degrees Flipboard recently that seemed interesting enough, regarding the influence of Star Wars on film. Naturally, I was interested, as I devoted a good portion of my book, 6 Degrees of Film, to the theory that Star Wars has shaped our culture and definitely our films for the past quarter of a century and more.

Specifically, George Lucas and his company, ILM-Industrial Light & Magic, have transformed the nature of cinema with the emphasis on special effects and CGI-Computer Graphic Imaging. The assertion was made that there would have been no Blade Runner without Star Wars. I’m not sure that is so, because Ridley Scott directed Blade Runner and made some innovative and creative decisions that were not connected with ILM.

*Christopher Guest will premiere his next mockumentary on Netflix-furthering Spielberg’s assertion that more and more original and creative projects will flow through Cable Networks rather than the big screen.

• The company that made Masterminds, the new Zach Galifianakis/Kristen Wiig comedy, is bankrupt and can’t afford to market the movie. Relativity Media filed Chapter 11 bankruptcy, which puts the October release on hold and the movie in limbo. Too bad because it looked funny, with lots of former SNL players on board for the comedy.

*The Director of Crash recently admitted it shouldn’t have won Best Picture! I wanted Munich or Capote to win that year, so this wasn’t shocking news. Almost every year, I root for a film to win Best Picture that eventually loses. And for that matter, it shows in the long run with so many forgettable films earning the nod. In the past 10 years, there have been few memorable winners for the Best Picture Oscar.

The under 30 Hollywood Set: The list of actors and actresses who are “up and comers” include these A-Listers in the 30 and under crowd: Margot Robbie, Cara Delevingne; Michael B Jordan, J Lawrence, Daniel Radcliffe, Emma Stone, Zoe Kravitz, Nicholas Hault, Dakota Johnson, Miles Teller, Eliz Olsen, Alicia Vikander, Liam Hemsworth, and Elle Fanning.

**The Reviews are in:

*Fantastic Four bombs at the box office

*Monster Hunt was the biggest Chinese box-office film ever. And that is the largest market in the world now, so it’s definitely making some people in Hollywood sit up and take notice. The movie looks fairly simple, about a couple that “adopt” a small monster baby. It doesn’t sound like great news for those who root for more complex stories and adult plots.

*The Animated movie pick of all time is…The Lion King. The Best selling VHS of all time was The Lion King; the top selling DVD is Finding Nemo and now, the best selling Blu-Ray film is…Frozen.

****

What’s Coming Next:
*Scorsese is teaming with DiCaprio again for a movie about a serial killer from the best-selling book: “The Devil in the White City” by Erik Larson.

**Trailers: Some of the trailers for upcoming films that look promising include: Learning to Drive with Patricia Clarkson and Ben Kingsley; A Walk in the Woods with Robert Redford and Nick Nolte and Sicario with Benicio Del Toro.

**On Demand:
Movies on demand now include Child 44-reviewed in 6 Degrees, The Age of Adaline, Ex Machina, and Far from the Madding Crowd-all recommended for viewing

Shakespeare at the Movies: West Side Story at Tampa Theatre

West Side Story is playing this Sunday at Tampa Theatre. This 1964 Musical is yet another modern re-telling of the Shakespearean tale of Romeo & Juliet. In this version, a young and beautiful Natalie Wood stands out in the part of Maria. Rita Moreno plays Anita, the confidante of young Maria. Moreno won the Oscar for Best Supporting Actress for West Side Story. Although the critics have written that the portrayal of New York gangs “are about as threatening as a charging group of kittens”, still, this is a worthy adaptation of Romeo & Juliet set in a different place and time. West Side Story is part of Tampa Theatre’s continuing Summer Film Series.

Shakespeare at the Movies

Shakespeare has been the featured screenwriter for countless numbers of film adaptations of his plays. Many of the most famous ones have seen several rounds and variations on a theme. Romeo & Juliet has gone from the streets of Verona in Italy to the streets of New York and down to the beach. Macbeth has moved from Scotland to Japan and The Tempest has travelled into space in “Forbidden Planet”.

Some of the best adaptations are ones that have faithfully adapted Shakespeare’s incomparable dialogue and story-telling genius in the heart and soul of the re-telling. Here are a few of the modern adaptations of Shakespeare:

10 Things I Hate about you: One of the best re-works of the Taming of the Shrew plot. This film was made in 1999 and stars Heath Ledger and Julia Stiles. Another good version of the original play was made in 1967 by Franco Zefferelli with Elizabeth Taylor and Richard Burton in the lead roles.

Romeo & Juliet: The 1996 film by Director Baz Luhrmann moves the story to Verona Beach with rival gangs. Franco Zefferelli made a beautifully photographed classical version of the story in 1968, with a cast of young stars including Olivia Hussey as Juliet.

Hamlet: There are many good versions of Shakespeare’s most well-known play. The classic Olivier film was made in 1948. Director Franco Zefferelli made a version starring Mel Gibson in 1990 that was generally well received. And Kenneth Branagh’s Hamlet was released in 1996.

Macbeth: The film by famed director Kurosawa, Throne of Blood was made in 1957. He transferred the story of Macbeth to feudal Japan. Director Roman Polanski made a film version in 1971 of Macbeth. And yet another Macbeth has been re-made in 2015 with Michael Fassbender and Marion Cotillard in the lead roles.

Most critics agree that Kenneth Branagh’s Henry V was one of the best adaptations of Shakespeare ever made into a movie. Branagh also made a good version of Much Ado about Nothing in 1993 starring his wife at the time, Emma Thompson. Films that loosely adapt the story in a fresh and innovative way are the most difficult to pull off, but if successful, are some of the best films to watch. Shakespeare’s endless supply of ideas and commentary on the human condition provide a limitless storyboard for creative directors.

Films like My Own Private Idaho, Chimes at Midnight, Men of Respect, Hamlet at Elsinore, Rosenkrantz and Guildenstern are Dead and Prospero’s Books are proof of just a few of the turns that Shakespeare’s stories may take.

Romeo & Juliet has been adapted many times for film, with at least 13 – 14 major film productions. As You Like it and The Merchant of Venice have been adapted at least 12 times. King Lear and The Tempest are almost as popular as Hamlet, with 13 – 14 major adaptations to date. But the plays most adapted to film of all of Shakespeare’s works would be either Macbeth or Othello, both with between 15-17 major film adaptations of the Shakespearean tragedies.

Breakfast at Tiffany’s and other successful adaptations

The Godfather, To Kill a Mockingbird, Gone with the Wind, The Wizard of Oz… From the beginning, films have used other mediums and art forms, everything from plays and classical literature to best-selling books and even comic books for adaptations on screen.

Shakespeare and Jane Austen have proven to be exceptionally well suited to film adaptations. There have been countless movie versions of the Bard’s famous plays and Jane Austen and Charles Dickens have created a cottage industry around their many successful film versions of the most popular re-telling of their works.

Breakfast at Tiffany’s was adapted in 1961 from author Truman Capote’s best-seller of the same name. In 1958, Norman Mailer’s controversial novel, The Naked and the Dead,.was also made into a film starring Cliff Robertson. It didn’t fare as well as the Audrey Hepburn film.

One reason could be that Hepburn adapted the material to her style, and though it was reported that Capote had Marilyn Monroe in mind for the character of Holly Golightly, the screen version did convey some of the frenetic art scene that was prevalent during the turbulent sixties. Audrey Hepburn’s glamour and waif-like screen presence brought an undeniable sense of grace and mystery that would not have been possible had Capote’s wishes been realized.

When writing a novel and subsequently adapting the material, there is a vision of a story that every author has and it follows that the reader of any novel is able to envision his or her own reality when imagining a story and the characters. The same applies for the director and the cast of any film that has been adapted from an original story source.

The Harry Potter series and the ensuing screen adaptations followed the authors’ original vision fairly closely and the results were wildly successful. And so it goes that in each case, the original material is the source of the inspiration and the resulting film product may veer slightly or deviate wildly from the writer’s original concept. That is and always has been part of the nature of film. And it’s the visions that often turn what might have been just an ordinary film into a piece of art! It’s the “stuff that dreams are made of”.

Breakfast at Tiffany’s will be screened on Sunday, July 19th at Tampa Theatre as part of their Summer FIlm Series.

Thoughts on Superman: The Myth

Go back

Your message has been sent

I remember seeing Superman on the big screen for the first time. It was kind of exciting to be able to watch a comic book character come alive. And there was an element of shock and awe that the “big league film producers” decided to take the kids world of comic books seriously…seriously enough to produce a major feature film that starred Christopher Reeve and Marlon Brando, no less!
That was 1978. Now we live in the Golden Age of Comic Book Films and the screen is awash with these characters.
We have explored the dark side of Batman at length with “The Dark Knight”. And the world was astounded when “The Avengers” became the third Highest Grossing Film of all time, surpassing Titanic and Avatar. Comic book characters proved they are here to stay. And now we have another Superman.
Superman is, from what I remember way back when we read the characters only in comic books, a character that lent itself to creating multiple universes.

1.There was a small bottle he kept in his Fortress of Solitude that contained an entire city from his home planet of Krypton. The people were all futuristic marvels. I believe his uncle may have even lived in the jar-Kandor was the name of the mythical city. So there were opportunities to create storylines just from that one idea-the city in the jar!
2. Of course, there was a Super Girl and a Super Dog eventually created in the course of the series. These also created multiple storylines.
3. In later years, they tweaked his ties to planet Earth by using sensational titles like, “Superman Gets Married!; Superman has a Baby! Or Superman Dies!” All of these plot twists came and went as we traversed the perils of Superman within the pages of the comics.
4. The Fortress of Solitude: What a wonderful name! This was the place Superman went to “get away from it all”. It was somewhere in the frozen tundra of the North, the Arctic would be a likely guess…. where only he could survive. He would go there to think and to meditate, I suppose, as the name implies.
5. There was one comic-book episode that always stood out in my mind. Scientists invented a ray gun that would make violent criminals into infants, and they would be raised again to fit into society and conform. This was a comforting thought that showed us even as kids there was at least one creative way to magically solve many of the problems in our society.
Unfortunately, the ray gun doesn’t exist and Superman is not real. So we are faced with the problem of re-creating the fictional Superman character to accommodate each passing generation with higher technological advances and fewer glimpses of the simpler time from whence he came into existence on Earth.

And now, we are learning to live with a new paradigm. The fast-paced modern world wants to see Comic Book Storyboards come alive every few years. So it comes to pass that the younger audience, not familiar with the world of comic books, sees this superhero with fresh eyes. And, of course, the movies make a lot of money for Hollywood. Therefore, we are going to see more of Superman and less of George Bernard Shaw’s “Man and Superman”. That is a fact.