Category Archives: Cinematography

Print the Legend! Garry Armstrong’s Desert Island Movies

Posted on by

There are so many movies … and this is far too short a list to really tell the story. Call it the tip of my iceberg. That said, here we go — the movies I never tire of watching.

The Searchers

I love westerns. This may be the best ever made and it’s Duke Wayne’s finest performance. My director idol, John Ford, said of his masterpiece, “It’ll do”.

Casablanca

Everyone’s go-to movie easily could be number one. I remember chatting with Julius Epstein, one of the co-screenwriters, who told me how crazy it was on the set with revised scripts rushed in every day as they set up shots.

Epstein said Bogie was never fazed and usually nailed his lines on the first take. Director Michael Curtiz, on the other hand, was very “upset”, according to Epstein.

The Best Years of our Lives

Wonderful film but, admittedly, a sentimental choice here. The very FIRST film I ever saw at a movie theatre.

It was 1946. My Dad had just returned from the war. He was dressed in his uniform. He seemed ten feet tall and very heroic. The theme of the movie, GI’s trying to cope with post-war life, is timeless. Little did I know that it would be an issue in my family.

The Magnificent Seven

Another great western. I saw it numerous times when it opened in 1960. I know all the lines.

Cover of "The Magnificent Seven (Special ...

Cover of The Magnificent Seven (Special Edition)

The cast of then relatively unknown actors was terrific. Steve McQueen was my movie hero — next to Duke Wayne. I even tried to dress like McQueen. Didn’t quite work out. Years later, I had a sit down chat with James Coburn who related how wild things were during the shooting of “Seven”. He told me how McQueen used to drive the nominal star, Yul Brynner, crazy with upstaging bits of business. Charles Bronson was described as “one very quiet and strange dude”. Coburn admitted everyone was sneaking in “bits” trying to outdo each other.

The Great Escape

Think “The Magnificent Seven” as a World War two prison escape war movie instead of a western. James Coburn said he marvelled at how director John Sturges kept control of the “boys”, including several of the “Magnificent Seven” cast members.

I’d be remiss if I didn’t single out Elmer Bernstein‘s distinctive musical score in both films. Those scores or “themes” would achieve their own celebrity over the years.

All About Eve

I’ve always loved this one!! The cast, acting, dialogue, and script are superb. It’s about the theatre world. But anyone who’s had a professional life in the public eye can relate to the characters and the plot. Bette Davis was at the top of her game (role was originally slated for Claudette Colbert who had to pass).

Cover of "All About Eve (Two-Disc Special...

Cover via Amazon

The wonderful supporting cast included Anne Baxter, Celeste Holm, Gary Merrill, Gregory Ratoff, Hugh Marlowe, Thelma Ritter, a young Marilyn Monroe and the estimable George Sanders in his career-defining role. I shared Bloody Mary’s with Gary Merrill when he was in Boston (that’s another story) and had me laughing about life on the set of “All About Eve”. He and Ms. Davis fell in love while making “Eve”. However, the  theatrics within the theatrics were something to behold, Merrill recalled. Everyone was trying to upstage everyone else but nobody upstaged Bette Davis. Gary Merrill grinned as he refilled my drink. And, George Sanders, Merrill said, was George Sanders on and off camera.

Yankee Doodle Dandy

Cover of "Yankee Doodle Dandy (Two-Disc S...

Cover via Amazon

Oh, how I adore this movie and WHY didn’t they make it in color?? Had the great fortune to meet James “Call me Jimmy” Cagney in the early 70′s on Martha’s Vineyard. I was awestruck. He was very kind. Seems he had caught my work as a TV news reporter and just wanted to say he liked what he saw. Over coffee, we talked about the joys of doing what we loved and the frustration of dealing with “suits” or executives. I mostly just listened. He talked about the making of “Yankee Doodle Dandy” and how, clearly, that was his personal favorite “job” in his long career. He was glad to do the music biopic and show off his dancing chops which he’d always had but were rarely used in previous films. He credited his unusual dance movements to mannerisms of his old street pals in New York’s “hell’s Kitchen” where he grew up.

My favorite scene in “Yankee Doodle Dandy” is near the end where Cagney/Cohan, dances down the stairs at the White House.

My wife Marilyn and I usually replay this scene three, four, five times whenever we watch the film.

Shane

Another classic western. Alan Ladd’s shining hour and another gem in director George Steven’s illustrious career. The photography and editing are wonderful. Victor Young’s music is evocative. Perhaps my favorite sequence is the burial of “Reb”. The dialogue is muted and the plaintive harmonica music,  ”Dixie” and then “Taps” is contrasted with Reb’s dog softly wailing over the grave and two youngsters nearby — oblivious to the tragedy — playing with a horse. The continuous scene then pans down to a long shot of the nearby town ending with an ominous dirge. Powerful, poetic stuff!!

The final scene of Shane — slightly slumped in saddle — riding away to the mountains with the boy calling after him is the stuff of movie legend.

The Man Who Shot Liberty Valance

Another John Ford - John Wayne classic. This is Ford near the end of his career. It’s his homage to the ending of the west as he’s depicted it for most of his professional life, dating back to silent films. Shot in black and white on a small budget, Ford is more concerned about characters than action.

The Man Who Shot Liberty Valance

(Photo credit: Wikipedia)

Duke Wayne and Jimmy Stewart, teamed for the first time, are the perfect choices, albeit a little long in the teeth, to play the contrasting leads. Wayne is the rough tough cowman. Stewart is the sensitive lawyer who wants to see justice meted out by the court rather than Wayne’s six-shooter. Lee Marvin’s “Liberty Valance” borders on parody but that’s okay.

Great supporting cast including Edmond O’Brien, Vera Miles, Andy Devine, Lee van Cleef, Strother Martin and Woody Strode (why did they have to call him “Boy” in one scene). The “print the legend” theme is so ironic and haunting. Ford is trying to break his habit of printing the legend but the public doesn’t want the facts.

The haunting theme at the end of “Liberty Valance” is the same mournful theme Ford used 25 years earlier in “Young Mr. Lincoln”.

The Quiet Man

Ford and Wayne again — this time in Ireland. Ford’s tribute to his birth place. Wonderful photography!! The green hills and pastures of Ireland never looked lovelier. Just watch out for the sheep dung. The music is memorable. “Wild Colonial Boy” pub sequence is pure John Ford. The Wayne-McLagen epic fight is in Hollywood’s hall of Fame.

Marilyn and I visited Cong and the remnants of “The Quiet Man’s” cabin during our honeymoon in Ireland in 1990. That’s when we found out that — guess who — has Irish roots.

Will Penny

Another western and a relatively unheralded film. It’s Charlton Heston‘s realistic take on the life of an aging cow puncher. Had the genuine pleasure to “hang out” with “Chuck” on several occasions and he was a very nice, down to earth guy (just ask Marilyn). This was the pre-NRA Heston. Anyway, during one of our sit-downs, he talked about making “Will Penny” as a personal project.

He had done several traditional westerns and wanted to do one that was authentic and free of Hollywood glamour and happy endings. “Will Penny” is perhaps Heston’s best acting work. It is understated with Heston showing a range of emotion not usually apparent in his more typical epic screen characters.

S.O.B.

Terrific Blake Edwards film that angered Hollywood insiders — with good reason. Again, if you’ve had a professional career in the public eye, you will absolutely love this movie. You know these people. You’ve worked with and for these people. William Holden’s talk to his depression-ridden pal was all too real and could easily have been Holden’s own eulogy.

Most of the ensemble star cast, plus Edwards, stopped in Boston to promote the movie. The behind the scenes arm-twisting coming out of Hollywood was trying to kill the film. On that memorable Saturday morning, I was with only one or two other reporters (who also left after 5 minutes or so to chase more meaningful stories), listening to William Holden (a few sheets to the wind), Robert Preston, Craig (Peter Gunn) Stevens, Loretta Swit, Blake Edwards and others chat about making “S.O.B.”. It sounded more like a “Bitch session” than a movie promotion. In fact, it sounded very familiar to me.

There are so many other films on my list. “To Kill A Mockingbird”. Atticus, I believe, was rated the most popular movie hero in a recent poll. Then and now, “Mockingbird” resonates on so many levels. The movie does Harper Lee’s wonderful book full justice. That, alone, is a miracle.

There are so many favorite films and stars I could mention with personal “war stories” or anecdotes. And there are musicals, romance.  And comedies. ”So many movies, so little time” takes on new meaning. All great movies. Just not the only great movies.

I need to sign off because I’m burning daylight. Maybe another time if there is interest. There’s still the John Wayne story to tell, Pilgrims. There are plenty more movies to talk about and many more tales to tell … Happy trails!

Related articles

The True Glory: From D-Day to V-E Day (1945) — A Documentary of World War II

Posted on by

From the Imperial War Museum Official Collection

The True Glory: From D-Day to V-E Day (1945)

- – -

Cover of "The True Glory - From D-Day to ... A co-production of the US Office of War Information and the British Ministry of Information, The True Glory documents the victory on the Western Front, from the invasion at Normandy to the collapse of the Third Reich.

The officially credited director was Garson Kanin. British director Carol Reed was not officially credited, but is listed as director on IMDB and other sources. Paddy Chayefsky is the officially listed writer. Other writers not officially credited are Harry Brown, Frank Harvey, Gerald Kersh, Saul Levitt, Arthur Macrae, Eric Maschwitz, Jenny Nicholson, Guy Trosper and Peter Ustinov. There were so many people involved in this rather remarkable documentary — which received the Oscar for best documentary in 1945 — that it’s impossible to list them all.

The film was (brilliantly) edited down from more than 10 million feet of film taken by hundreds of war photographers, none of whom are credited. The editing involved is extraordinary. During one long segment of film, there must have been thousands cuts, each less than 2 seconds in length, most no more than one second long. That is a lot of splicing. It’s beautifully done, professional all the way.

You may have seen other propaganda films from World War II, but this isn’t one of those.

I’ve watched a lot of war movies and this is no less professional than any movie I’ve ever seen. The difference for me was the realization that I was looking at the real war, not a Hollywood version. The effects were not done with a computer. The bodies of the dead are the bodies of soldiers. They aren’t actors. The guns are firing ammunition, no special effects. The ships are on the seas. The aircraft, pilots, bombardiers are the real deal. The battles are life and death in real-time. It gave me the shivers.

General Eisenhower speaks with members of the ...

General Eisenhower speaks with members of the 101st Airborne Division on the evening of 5 June 1944.

As the movie progresses, there are maps that let you follow the progress of the various armies. It is the first time I actually understood where the Battle of the Bulge took place and why it was called “the bulge.”

It was like time travel for me, listening to Dwight D. Eisenhower. I grew up when Eisenhower was President. I remember his voice as the voice of the president of my childhood. So perhaps this is a good time to mention the not only was Dwight D. Eisenhower President of the United States and Supreme Allied Commander, but he was a winner of the Oscar Award as producer of The True Glory. Did he display the statuette in the White House?

English: Gen. of the Army Dwight D. Eisenhower...

Gen. of the Army Dwight D. Eisenhower

If you have not seen this movie, which is now available on a two disc set that includes not only the European war, but the Italian campaign and the battles in the Pacific … and if you have any interest in World War II … you owe it to yourself to see it. There are many good movies about the war, but this documentary — set of documentaries really — has the most remarkable footage. You’ve probably seen it before, or at least much of it in pieces in various war movies. Seeing it like this, without any Hollywood manufactured footage is like seeing it for the first time.

English: Senior American military officials of...

Senior American military officials of World War II. Seated are (from left to right) Gens. , George S. Patton, , Dwight D. Eisenhower, Omar Bradley, , and ; standing are (from left to right) Gens. Ralph F. Stearley.

In honor of Memorial Day and all our troops who fought and died in so many wars in so many lands, this is dedicated to all of them. And it’s dedicated to us, the people they died to protect.

- – -

Related articles

Singing In the Rain – 1952 – A Sunday “Best of the Best” Review

Posted on by

Cover of "Singin' in the Rain (Two-Disc S...

Turner Classics was playing it and we had to watch it. It really never gets old. And they’ve cleaned up and remastered it for sound and pictures, so it sparkles like the gem it is.

Sometimes, it’s not hard to figure out why a particular movie becomes a classic. Singin’ in the Rain, a 1952 American musical comedy starring Gene Kelly, Donald O’Connor and Debbie Reynolds and directed by Gene Kelly and Stanley Donen, with Kelly also providing the choreography is magic.

There is a lot of back story to this movie.  Debbie Reynolds hasn’t been shy about sharing her story, the dissatisfaction of Kelly at having to work with Reynolds — who had to be taught to dance for her role. By the end of each day of shooting, her feet would be bleeding. Kelly was a perfectionist and a bit of a slave driver. But it’s hard to argue with the result.

Whatever was going on behind the scenes, the result is a masterpiece. Sixty-one years after the original opening, it’s fresh and funny, and the choreography is a wonder and carefully works around Debbie Reynolds more limited dancing skills. If you watch “Good Morning” carefully, notice how often she is posed while Kelly and O’Connor carry the most complex parts.

The plot is a light-hearted look at the movie business during the transition from silent to talking movies.

There had been several versions of Singing In the Rain before, but none of them enjoyed the success of this version. Rightfully so. It’s delightful. After more than 60 years, it still plays beautifully. A pleasure to watch and a family favorite. Many great musicals have been produced since this classic. Many were and are brilliant, but although they may be as good, they are not better. In many way, Singing in the Rain set the bar.

Until they make a new Gene Kelly, they won’t improve on it.

English: Gene Kelly and girls in Singin' in th...

It was greeted with no great enthusiasm when released, yet with each passing year, its popularity grows. That is, perhaps, the true definition of a classic when the years only increase respect for a film. Time has not diminished Singin’ In the Rain. 

Related articles

Ride Clear of Diablo

Posted on by

Reblogged from Riding the High Country:

Click to visit the original post
  • Click to visit the original post
  • Click to visit the original post

Revenge, or at least the quest for justice, is a theme frequently featured in westerns. Relentless duplicity, on the other hand, is more often to be found in crime movies. Ride Clear of Diablo (1953) is a pretty good example of a conventional western that blends both of the aforementioned elements into its brief running time. By using the revenge motif mainly as a device to drive the narrative, rather than indulging in any especially deep analysis, and thus keeping the focus firmly on the various double-crosses, the film manages to provide plenty of exciting, pacy entertainment.

Read more… 1,179 more words

A fine review of a movie and genre that is rarely given its due. I hope this will also serve as an introduction to a website that presents exceptionally high quality reviews. Superb work!

One thing leads to another

Posted on by

Reblogged from Parisian Fields:

Click to visit the original post
  • Click to visit the original post
  • Click to visit the original post
  • Click to visit the original post
  • Click to visit the original post
  • Click to visit the original post
  • Click to visit the original post

We both like to listen to Web radio while we work. We were particularly pleased to discover that Radio Classique, which we listen to in Paris (at call number 101.1) is available on the Internet. (Go to the site, click on “En direct” and then choose “Haut débit” or “Bas débit” and it will begin.) The music is enjoyable and you can practise your French comprehension by listening to the news broadcasts or the occasional interview.

Read more… 1,152 more words

Garry and I love "A Little Romance." I've always wondered why it's shown so rarely. It's a gem of a movie, one of Hill's best. The story is charming, the settings are deliciously romantic, Olivier is Olivier -- and the two kids will make you nostalgic about being young. This was Diane Lane's screen début, by the way. If you can, see this one!

True Grit (2010)

Posted on by

True_Grit_PosterHaving just watched the 1969 version of the film starring John Wayne, I thought it was time to see the remake. I usually avoid remakes of favorite movies, and the original True Grit is a favorite. I have always thought it was the Duke’s best performance, portraying a character full of life and humor.

I made an exception for this particular remake. I figured if anyone could do a credible Rooster Cogburn, Jeff Bridges was the guy to do it. So the day after watching the original, we fired up the Roku, popped over to Netflix and selected True Grit.

Directed by Joel & Ethan Coen
Produced by Joel Coen
Ethan Coen
Scott Rudin
Megan Ellison
Screenplay by Joel Coen
Ethan Coen
Based on True Grit
by Charles Portis
Narrated by Elizabeth Marvel
Starring Jeff Bridges
Matt Damon
Josh Brolin
Hailee Steinfeld
Music by Carter Burwell
Cinematography Roger Deakins
Editing by Roderick Jaynes
Studio Skydance Productions
Amblin Entertainment
Mike Zoss Productions
Scott Rudin Productions
Distributed by Paramount Pictures
Release date(s)
  • December 22, 2010
Running time 111 minutes
Country United States
Language English

Ahead of shooting, Ethan Coen said that the film would be a more faithful adaptation of the novel than the 1969 version.

It’s partly a question of point-of-view. The book is entirely in the voice of the 14-year-old girl. That sort of tips the feeling of it over a certain way. I think [the book is] much funnier than the movie was so I think, unfortunately, they lost a lot of humor in both the situations and in her voice. It also ends differently than the movie did. You see the main character – the little girl – 25 years later when she’s an adult. Another way in which it’s a little bit different from the movie – and maybe this is just because of the time the movie was made – is that it’s a lot tougher and more violent than the movie reflects. Which is part of what’s interesting about it. (Credit: Wikipedia)
-
The remake is not more humorous than the original. It may be more faithful to the book. I will have to take Mr. Coen’s word for it since I haven’t read the book. Faithful or not, the remake is darker and more violent than the 1969 version. It is darker in feeling and visually darker, a movie in which a great deal of the action takes place at night. It is hard on the eyes.
-
Television does not render darkness as well as big screens do. But movies these days don’t spend much time in theatres. They have them out on DVD faster than a speeding bullet, often before they’ve finished their first theatrical run. Considering that the majority of a movie’s life will be on DVD, shown at home on smaller screens, directors might take that into consideration and brighten these movies up a bit. I don’t want to put a damper on anyone’s art, but shouldn’t the actual viewing conditions under which most people will see the picture carry some weight? I’m just saying.
ht_jeff_bridges_true_grit_101229_mn
-
Much of the original movie’s dialogue is identical in the 2010 version. The best and most important scenes in both versions are word for word the same. Between those signature scenes, the dialogue is different. The character of Cogburn is very similar in some way, but very different in others. Wayne’s taciturn old marshal contrasts sharply with Jeff Bridges’ loquacious  version whose Rooster Cogburn talks a blue streak.
-
Hailee Steinfield’s Mattie Ross is more like her original character than Bridges’ Cogburn is like Wayne’s.
-
None of this is real criticism. This is a good movie on its own merits. It stands on its own legs. Obviously the two movies derive from the same source, but despite large amounts of identical dialogue, the two movies feel very different. If you had never seen the original and didn’t compare them, I would simply say the 2010 True Grit is a good western with fine performances.
-
But it’s a remake and there’s no avoiding comparisons. It may not be entirely fair, but it’s inevitable. Some of the scenes, when the dialogue is the same in both, are not only played the same way — Bridges even manages to do the “Duke’s walk” — they are shot the same way. Several key scenes are pretty much identical, frame by frame. Then, the movies diverge only to come together again a bit further down the  cinematic path. The convergence-divergence pattern can be disconcerting.
-
Despite similarities, you’d never mistake this for an old-fashioned western. It’s got a gritty, dark texture typical of modern westerns. Characters are less heroic and more ambivalent. True Grit makes a moderately successful attempt to integrate both old and new, moving back and forth, mixing John Ford with Clint Eastwood. Sometimes it feel a bit disconnected and jumpy, leaping from familiar dialogue common to both movies, to completely different dialogue and mood … with no intervening bridge.
TRUE GRIT
There’s no cheery ending for the new True Grit. It’s not sad, but it’s not happy either.
-
If I had to choose, I still prefer the original, but the remake is a good movie. Jeff Bridges is a fine actor. The entire cast is excellent. Perhaps it would be best to take each movie on its own merits.
-
I am not likely to watch the 2010 True Grit again. Too grim, even though I enjoyed it. But I will watch the original again. And again.
-
How you feel about each movie is obviously subjective. Two good films, genetically related. Take your pick. You won’t go far wrong either way.

Garry Armstrong: The Movie Maven’s Take

Reading Marilyn’s review of the “True Grit” remake, the obvious occurred to me. I am a child of the old school of movies. My heroes and heroines are the stars from the 30′s, 40′s, 50′s and 60′s. My film morality sensibilities have been shaped and nurtured by movies from Hollywood’s “golden era” through the 60′s. Not surprisingly, John Wayne is probably my favorite movie star. “Star” not actor. I thoroughly enjoyed Wayne’s “True Grit”. His “Rooster Cogburn” was a sum of all the heroes Wayne had played for 40 years. Older, fatter and more prone to corn liquor, Rooster’s sense of morality was still pretty simple. There was good and bad and few in-betweens. Wayne nailed all that with a self-deprecating sense of humor. Wayne was Rooster and Rooster was Wayne. The original’s end with Rooster frozen in frame and time as he and his horse leap a fence is “print the legend” stuff.  Veteran director Henry Hathaway (“The Sons of Katie Elder”, etc), is in familiar territory and gives the original “Grit” lots of traditional, old school western flavor.

All that said, Jeff Bridges’ Rooster Cogburn in the “True Grit” remake is also memorable and can stand alone. Jeff Bridges as an actor can stand alone. He invests his own irascible charm into “Rooster” while paying homage to the Duke. Matt Damon’s “LaBeouf” is much better and more complex than Glenn Campbell’s Texas Ranger in the original. Josh Brolin gives Tom Chaney much more depth and compassion than acting school guru Jeff Corey gave the original villain. I still prefer Robert Duvall’s “Lucky Ned Pepper” but Barry (“61″) Pepper is also pretty good in the remake.

The remake gives us an extended look at Mattie with an ending closer to the book than the original film. Hailee Steinfeld is her own Mattie — equal to Kim Darby’s offering in the original. So, while I can enjoy the “True Grit” remake, I am still very partial to the Duke’s original film. Arguments?? That’ll be the day!!

-

Related articles

The Hidden Face (La Cara Oculta), 2011

Posted on by

hidden-face-posterThe Hidden Face (La Cara Oculta) is a supremely dark movie, literally and figuratively. The subject is dark and most of the movie takes place in dim light or actual darkness.

At first glance, I thought it was going to be a whodunnit and I was good with that. But early on, the plot became obvious, so what remained was a race against time. The overall story is standard thriller cum police drama “missing person” stuff.  As the movie opens, we watch a “dear john” video from a young woman leaving her boyfriend with minimal explanation (but a lot of subtext). Her boyfriend (who we will soon learn in a renowned orchestral conductor) watches the video, apparently baffled, miserable, in despair. It’s a flashback, because the film immediately moves forward to “now” as he meets someone new and begins a relationship. The story flashes back again. Despite how it sounds, the flashing back and forth is not confusing,  just tricky to write about.

Into precisely what genre The Hidden Face fits is a bit murky. It’s creepy, but not a horror movie. It’s a mystery, but too briefly to require detective work. I was surprised at how soon in the film lays the whole story out. It eliminated any element of surprise or mystery, leaving creepiness without suspense. Does that make it sort-of horror? A ghost story without a ghost? Secrets don’t stay secrets long. The film put everything out there so no guesswork is required.

The film would benefit from a tighter edit. There are too many beauty shots  of the stars walking on the beach, ambling along by the river, looking sad, staring into mirrors (many mirrors, lots of staring), suffering, pondering, despairing. You could trim a lot of it without compromising the story. Fewer shots of Fab walking, thinking, pondering, Adri conducting, flirting, suffering, yada yada. That much B roll is directorial self-indulgence and it gets old quickly.

After the who-done-what is revealed, the movie becomes a race against the clock. The only remaining question is who will win the race. That’s when I started to lose interest. The situation was indeed creepy, even horrible. But very little was happening and although nothing much is happening, it takes a rather long time to not happen. Back to the editing room!

Have I seen anything like this before? Yes. Even before they show you everything, there are plenty of tells for anyone familiar with mystery or horror stories. Moreover, the plot is classic and everyone will recognize it. Think fairy tale crossed with Edgar Allen Poe. I believe the movie’s writers assume the situation, the premise itself, will generate sufficient tension without action. No need for story. It doesn’t work for me.  I need a story. So this movie wasn’t my cup of tea, but I’m a coffee drinker. If you like tea, you might love it.
-
hidden-face-stillThe cinematography is moody and broody and I appreciate the artistry. The “sexy scenes” were just that. There was nothing pornographic about them. Had the overall tone of the film not been so edgy, it might have been romantic and a bit titillating. The sense of something wrong overshadows all else and the foreboding short-circuits any potential erotica.
-
My aging eyes I would have preferred more light (as in wattage). The poor quality print may have contributed to the problem because it was difficult to focus on the picture, but most of the film takes place at night or in shadow so it wasn’t brightly lit to start with. After repeated copying of the original print, there was considerable squinting involved for me.
-
Did I enjoy it? I liked the beginning a lot. I like the middle, mostly. By the end, I was eager for it to be over. Would I recommend it? It depends on who’s asking. I really wanted to like it more than I did. If the tale had unfolded rather than flashing back and forth, might that have helped? I don’t know. I wish they had saved some surprises for the second half of the film. The situation was eerie , but I need more than a situation. I need a tale unfolding.
-
However: If you are looking for a movie that isn’t exactly like every other movie you’ve seen lately and if you are more into the psychology of a scenario that its story … than give this one a look. I’m a word person and for me, movies are mostly about the script and the story … but you may have other preferences. In which case, ignore everything I’ve said and go for it.
-

Related articles

Bringing the Party To You: The Avengers (2012)

Posted on by

Avengers-desktop-the-avengers-12876230-1920-1200

If you have been following the long trail of Marvel comic book hero films: Ironman (2008, 2010) , the Hulk (2008), Captain America (2011), and Thor (2011) – The Avengers is what you’ve been waiting for.

The heroes whose back stories you’ve seen in the movies and if you are of the right generation, read in the comic books of our youth, come together to … well, take a guess. Let’s not always see the same hands. You, in the back! You’re right! A gold star to you.

They are going to save the world and these are the superheroes to do it. All of the names and faces are familiar from the previous movies, with the exception of a new Hulk who is just what the doctor ordered.

This is the first fully realized not-so-jolly green giant. He isn’t selling vegetables, nor is he — as the Hulk — the mindless muscle of earlier versions. He is closer to the comic book Hulk who retained enough front brain information to make him more than the personification of blunt-force trauma. He is believable, or as believable as Hulk is ever likely to be.

Of course the movie has first-rate computer generated graphics, effects, and top-quality soundtrack. We would expect nothing less from this team. There’s more than enough of every kind of violence, explosions, lightning, weird machines from outer space, inexplicable magic and power by good guys and bad guys alike to entertain anyone who is willing to let allow him or herself to be entertained. Prune-faced over-intellectualized spoil-sports are welcome to find something else to do.

To sum it all up in a nutshell, the bad guys come through a hole in the universe and the Avengers, all incredibly handsome, brilliant heroes protect we the little people of Earth from total destruction and domination by the Evilest Empire ever seen. If that were all, it would be enough, but The Avengers is more than violence and special effects.

The Avengers each have a unique back story. They have definable character, much of  which you’ve glimpsed in the movies leading up to this one. They have distinct personalities. They are funny and witty enough to bring humor in the midst of mayhem.

The script is crisp, the actors can act (whoa, how did that happen? That never happens!) and it all comes together in a very satisfying action movie that is perhaps the quintessential superhero movie to date. They did it right and you can see and feel that this is far better than  just another comic book hero movie. This movie leaves you wanting more.

And more we shall get. As long as we gobble up whatever this franchise cranks out and it continues to be enormously profitable, we will have more.  There are at least 2 more “sequels” scheduled for production during 2013  and 2014. I expect that’s the tip of a very large iceberg.

Although it remains to be seen if the producers can keep the group together and retain the quality they’ve so far produced, but there’s no reason to assume that they can’t and won’t. They’ve found a winning combination: intelligent action heroes fighting life and death battles and not behaving like mindless morons. Good scripts, good actors, top-quality CGI.

Marvel has figured it out. What is surprising to me is that so many studios have not put it together the equation that will give them a hit every single time. Pretty simple. Good actors, good technical crew, good script, good director, interesting (and fun!) story. It a box office guarantee …  the winning combination. Any producer could apply it. So why don’t they do it?

Movies need not be stupid or dull. Heads up Hollywood. Put the entertainment back into the entertainment industry!