Genre Grandeur: Galaxy Quest (1999)

Lately, I’ve been mostly enjoying the new TV series The Orville, a spoof of Star Trek by Seth McFarlane. But it’s frustrating in a way, because something always seems a little bit off.

I think my niece hit on the problem: “I wish they would dump the spoof part and just make a straight space opera, because it only works on that level.”

Spoofing beloved pop culture phenomena is HARD.

And yet the 1999 film Galaxy works as a great spoof of both Star Trek and its fandom, while at the same time managing to be an effective space opera. It also finds ways to tweak the franchise and its devoted fans while still respecting both.

That is an amazing accomplishment.

Seventeen years after the cancellation of the TV series Galaxy Quest, the cast still appear at conventions and other events trading on the popularity of their characters. Jason Nesmith (Tim Allen), the star of the show, consistently upstages the rest of his castmates. After hearing some attendees trash him and the show, Jason gets massively drunk. Waking up the next day, a group of what he thinks are fans pick him up for what he thinks is just another fan event. Turns out they are aliens—who believe he is really the character he plays on Galaxy Quest and their only hope to defeat a villain who wants to destroy them.

Galaxy Quest pokes fun at many things we know about Star Trek, both in front of and behind the camera. Alan Rickman is brilliant as Alexander Dane, a Shakespearean actor who resents that he’s only recognized as Dr. Lazarus, the alien member of the crew in the weird makeup. (Rickman stays in the Lazarus makeup for the entire film.) He seethes with jealousy over the recognition Jason gets as the star. It is well known that Leonard Nimoy, who portrayed Mr. Spock on Star Trek, had trouble adjusting to the notion that he would always be best known for that role.

The movie also zeroes in on the way women are often portrayed in these kinds of series, with Gwen DeMarco, who plays the show’s sex object, Tawny Madison. (I love that Sigourney Weaver was 50 years old when the film was made.) Her character does nothing but repeat what the ship computer says. When one of the other actors complains, she says, “I have ONE job on this ship! It’s STUPID, but I’m going to do it!”

Then there’s Guy Fleegman (Sam Rockwell) who was an extra on one episode of the show and tags along from the convention. With his character they satirize the “red shirts”—non-speaking characters who would inevitably die during away missions.

As hilarious as the crew’s adventures are in the film what I love most about it is its theme of the power of storytelling. Even if stories seem silly to some, they can still inspire those who love them to greatness. Not only are the alien Thermians inspired by the “historical documents” (the show, which they do not realize is playacting), so are the actors, who become the heroes they once played on TV.

Somehow, the makers of Galaxy Quest found that magic sweet spot where parody and love for a genre converge.

This post originally appeared on MovieRob‘s site as part of his Genre Grandeur series.

 

Advertisements

Merry New Year! Trading Places (1983)

This post is part of the Happy New Year Blogathon, hosted by Steve at MovieMovieBlogBlog. Ring in the new year with the rest of the posts HERE!

A riff on Mark Twain’s The Prince and the Pauper, Trading Places is one of the great buddy comedies of the 1980s.

Louis Winthorpe III (Aykroyd), a young, rich snot-head who trades commodities, has an uber-preppy fiancé (Kristin Holby) and a butler named Coleman (Denholm Elliot) who secretly despises the rich people he works for.

In truth, Coleman works for Randolph (Ralph Bellamy) and Mortimer (Don Ameche) Duke, Louis’ bosses. The Dukes are the kind of awful rich people who mess with people just for the hell of it, and they decide to wager what would happen if Louis and a street hustler name Billy Ray Valentine (Eddie Murphy) traded places. They conspire with Coleman and a shady character named Beeks (Paul Gleason) to make the switcheroo happen.

Framed for theft and drug-dealing, Louis’ downfall is swift. He ends up crashing with a prostitute (of the gold-hearted variety, natch) improbably named Ophelia (Jaimie Lee Curtis). Meanwhile, Billy Ray begins to feel pride of ownership in his new home and shows himself adept at commodity trading. When the two finally figure out it’s the Dukes behind the switch, they team up to exact revenge.

The story takes place during the holiday season in Philadelphia. The opening is one of my favorites in film, with a montage of people getting ready for a new day in the varied ethnic neighborhoods of the city. While it’s in many ways a loving view of the city, it also shows the schism between rich and poor (including homeless people sleeping outside during the winter) and emphasizes the limited sphere of Louis’ life. He’s ripe for a fall. Watching that fall is both horrifying and hilarious.

With Ophelia and Coleman (who is forgiven for his part in the plot awfully fast, I think) Louis and Billy Ray plan to ruin the Dukes financially by stealing inside information from Beeks. Aboard a train on New Year’s Eve, they wear absurd disguises that wouldn’t fool a child (i.e. Louis in absurd, not to mention offensive, blackface and Ophelia in lederhosen with a terrible Swedish accent).

On the train there’s a New Year’s Eve costume party in progress. (Do these parties happen on Amtrak trains as a general rule? I’ve no idea, though the one time I traveled by Amtrak I did happen on a car full of people drinking scotch from gallon bottles at 10 o’clock in the morning, so I’m guessing Amtrak is used a lot for parties, impromptu or otherwise.)

One especially exuberant party attendee (Jim Belushi) in a gorilla costume becomes a critical player in the action. When Beeks figures out what’s going on, he hustles the costumed quartet through the train at gun point. Ending up in a storage area with a live caged gorilla (don’t ask) said gorilla is at first entranced by the Belushi character appearing in costume and then becomes violent when Beeks conks him on the head.

O.K., Beeks is portrayed as a genuinely awful person, but I’m not sure he is deserving of his fate of being taped up in the gorilla costume and caged with the real (and very randy) gorilla.

Be that as it may, it’s the final section of the film that after more than 30 years of repeat viewings is still not totally clear to me. Louis and Billy Ray arrive at the commodities exchange to make certain the Dukes lose all their money while enriching themselves (and Ophelia and Coleman). It has something to do with buying low and selling high, and fooling the Dukes into doing it the opposite way.

Bellamy and Ameche (who was in the midst of a career comeback during the 80s) are stupendous as the odious Duke brothers. One could even see them as a prediction of the rise of another pair of odious super-rich brothers. Aykroyd and Murphy, who have little to do with each other until two thirds of the way into the film, make a terrific pair once the characters team up. Curtis brings her special edge to a basically cliched role, and Elliott is perfect as the butler who thinks his employers are scumbags.

Like many comedies of the 1980s, Trading Places is concerned with big business and big money. While the main characters end up fabulously wealthy, the villains are consigned to the agonies and humiliations of the poor.

In fact, I can’t think of anything more 1980s than heroes vanquishing rich a-holes and repairing to the Caribbean to become, well, rich a-holes.

Debbie’s Totally Random and Completely Insignificant Pop Culture Awards of 2017

It’s that time of year again! Woo-hoo, awards!

As always, these are about my personal preferences and just for fun.

The Sorry, Television, This Year the Movies Kicked YOUR Butt Award

Wonder Woman, the No Man’s Land Sequence

Yep, the movies finally did it. After years of TV out-doing, out-creating, out-character-driving action sequences, this year’s Wonder Woman did more than vanquish the movie villain.

I’ll be honest—I’m not really that into comic book movies. I went to see Wonder Woman for two reasons: to support a female-driven action movie and a woman director. I was stunned by how much I loved it, even to the point of tears. I’ve been waiting for a movie like this my whole life.

The No Man’s Land sequence, with a woman not listening to a man, facing down the danger alone, doing it for no reason other than it was the right thing to do, was THE high point of movie-watching for me this year. It was spectacularly shot by director Patty Jenkins, and totally grounded in Diana’s character.

There’s always next year, TV.

The THIS is How You Pass the Bechdel Test Award

Star Wars: The Last Jedi and Wonder Woman

Another reason I love Wonder Woman is the way it aces the Bechdel Test (has to be at least one scene of two women talking about something other than a man). It’s a low bar to clear but both Wonder Woman and Star Wars: The Last Jedi took giant leaps over it.

I will be posting my full review of The Last Jedi in a few days, but one of my favorite things about it is the heroic women, including new characters Vice Admiral Holdo (Laura Dern), Rose Tico (Kelly Marie Tran) and the briefly appearing but critical Paige Tico (Veronica Ngo), who joined General Leia Organa (Carrie Fisher) and Rey (Daisy Ridley). On top of that, it was an awesome farewell to Fisher. I’m sad she not going to be in Episode IX, but happy her final Star Wars appearance did so much justice to her character.

The A for Effort, D for Stale Comedy Award

The Orville

I was very surprised by how much I enjoyed the first season of Seth MacFarlane’s TV parody of Star Trek, The Orville. Even more surprised to find that as a space opera, it’s remarkably thoughtful and has the optimism that defines the genre. Even though it doesn’t always hit the mark, it makes some serious attempts to tackle many social issues.

Unfortunately, the comedy part of the show is kind of blah and makes me wish that he had just decided to skip making a parody and make this a straight space opera. For one thing, much of the humor is based in present-day pop culture, which is like making a show that takes place today where many of the jokes refer to the 17th century.

Still, I believe this show has a ton of potential and look forward to Season 2.

The O.K., I Was Wrong, The Great British Bake-Off is Still Great Award

Channel Four’s Reboot of The Great British Bake-Off

Last year I was very upset to learn that judge Mary Berry and hosts Mel Giedroyc and Sue Perkins would not migrate with the show from BBC to Channel Four.

Turns out, the show is still just fine without them. Yes, I miss them, but the replacement hosts, Sandi Toksvig and Neil Fielding are very good. (I also rather like that an older woman replaced a younger woman for a change.) I’m also warming up to Prue Leith as Paul Hollywood’s co-judge.

The fact is, it’s the show’s format that makes it the enjoyable watch and huge success that it is.

My bad.

The Stop Making Stars Too Vain to Wear Their Reading Glasses Presenters at the Oscars Award

Warren Beatty & Faye Dunaway’s blunder when announcing the 2016 Best Picture winner.

What a horrible spectacle that was, watching Beatty and Dunaway erroneously announce La La Land had won Best Picture, then the mistake being discovered that Moonlight had actually won.

It was not only massively embarrassing, it wrecked what should have been a phenomenal moment in Oscar history, when the first film with an LGBT theme and predominately African-American cast won Best Picture.

There are big stars who can read the cards correctly. Use them next time.

The Margaret Atwood Adaptation That Won’t Get the Awards but Deserves All the Awards Award

Alias Grace

Phew! That was a mouthful.

Yes, yes, The Handmaid’s Tale is getting all the awards love. But this year’s other Margaret Atwood adaptation, Alias Grace, is also stellar, and is being almost completely ignored.

I will be posting a full review of the miniseries (available on Netflix as of this writing) in a few weeks, but let me just say if you haven’t seen it, see it. Based on a true crime that occurred during the 19th century Canada, it features what should be a star-making performance by Sarah Gadon (Belle, 11/22/63). The production is impeccable. It is absolutely gripping from beginning to end and deserves every award out there.

The Netflix, Please Don’t Misrepresent What Your Shows Are About Award

Godless

When I saw the trailer for Netflix’s new show Godless, I was ecstatic. It gave the impression it was an almost totally female-driven Western! Starring Michelle Dockery (Downton Abbey)! Sign me up!

Turns out, the show is actually centered on two male characters.

I mean, that’s fine, but trying to represent it as something it’s not? Not cool, Netflix.

The Winter is Here, But It’s Going to Last a Lot Longer Than We Thought Award

The confirmation there will be no final season of Game of Thrones until 2019.

Sob.

The Most Pedantic Explanation of Incorrect Science in a Fantasy Show Award

Neil deGrasse Tyson

After the final episode of Game of Thrones current season, astrophysicist Tyson took the time to do a tweet storm explaining why it’s not possible to drag a dragon out of the water with chains.

Dude. DRAGONS AREN’T REAL. NONE OF THIS IS REAL. NO ONE IS EVER GOING TO DRAG A ZOMBIE DRAGON OUT OF AN ICE LAKE WITH CHAINS IN REAL LIFE.

I love the guy, but I wish he would stick to science and lay off the pop culture critiques.

The Best Villain on TV Right Now Award

Prince Phillip, The Crown

Season 2 of The Crown, the biographical miniseries about Queen Elizabeth II (Claire Foy), has been almost breathtaking in its frankness about the many skeletons in the royal family’s deluxe walk-in closet. Princess Margaret’s breakdown after she was forced to give up her one true love, her subsequent lover apparently single-handedly bringing about the Swinging 60s, the Duke of Windsor’s traitorous dealings with Nazis, Elizabeth’s jealousy of Jacqueline Kennedy (who doesn’t come off too great, either), and so on.

But it’s Prince Phillip, played by Matt Smith, who comes across as a bona fide bad guy. Not only cheating on the queen, but pretty much blackmailing her into giving him the title of prince as his price for not walking out on the marriage. He sends their son to a horrible school in Scotland where he is bullied for years because he went to the same school and is convinced it made a man of him. All the while acting so proper and princely and whining about his sister-in-law marrying someone beneath her. Smith does a fantastic job of underplaying the role while still making you hate the character.

The Stop Teasing Us About a Deadwood Movie Award

HBO

It’s been almost fourteen years since the HBO series Deadwood was cancelled and almost every year since, like clockwork, they announce we’re getting a movie to tie up all the loose end left by the show’s abrupt ending. Meanwhile, one of the show’s stars (Powers Booth) has passed away.

It’s got to be the longest tease in TV history. Poop or get off the pot, HBO.

The Hey for Once Being an Annoying Fandom Got Results Award

Sense8 Fandom

Kudos to the Sense8 fandom, who hounded Netflix unmercifully when they cancelled the show after only two seasons. We’re not getting more seasons, but they just wrapped on a movie that will tie up all the loose ends left by the show’s abrupt ending. I thought they were fools for even trying, and they proved me totally wrong. Maybe Deadwood fans should take notes.

For your viewing pleasure, I close out with this year’s Movie Trailer Mash-Up by Sleepy Skunk:

Book Recommendations for Your Holiday Shopping

Been a while since I’ve done book reviews, and since it’s early December, seems like a good time for some gift recommendations.

If you’re looking for gift suggestions for teens (or if you like YA yourself) check out these:

The Court of Five Series by Kate Elliott

This is a three-book fantasy YA series, the first book (Court of Fives) released in 2015. The other two books are Poisoned Blade and Buried Heart, the last one released this year.

Best way I can think of to describe them: The Hunger Games meets Game of Thrones set in an ancient Egyptian-inspired fantasy world. The Fives is a game with an ever-changing obstacle course that requires competitors with both athletic strength and cunning. Jessamy is a young girl who has a “Patron” father and “Commoner” mother, who are forbidden by law to marry. She loves the Fives but her father does not approve of her competing in them. The family is torn apart when the father’s sponsor dies, leaving huge debts. This death touches off not only personal struggle within the family, but a struggle for power within the ruling class.

THESE. BOOKS. ARE. FANTASTIC. They should be way, way more popular than they are. It takes a little while for the story to get rolling in the first book (lots of world building, as is usual with most fantasy books) but when it does, it really rolls! Jess is now one of my all-time favorite heroines. She is brave and smart and motivated by love for her family. I like that the books are not too dominated by the romantic plot. The familial relationships are just as important and very complex. I also like that the magical elements don’t dominate too much.

Get these books, you will not be sorry.

Forest of a Thousand Lanterns: Rise of the Empress by Julie C. Dao

This is another fantasy book set in an East Asian-inspired fantasy world. A retelling of the Snow White fairy tale, it focuses on the stepmother/evil witch character. This first book of the planned series is subtitled “Rise of the Empress” and that’s exactly what it’s about: how a lowly peasant girl with magical abilities schemes to become Empress, which she has been told from childhood is her destiny.

The protagonist is something rather rare in both YA and adult fiction: an honest-to-gosh anti-heroine. It is easy to initially feel empathy for Xifeng, who lives with an abusive aunt who forbids her to see the man she loves. As she is consumed with ambition, her character becomes more and more ruthless.

We’re so used to the Disneyfied fairy tales nowadays that we forget the originals were actually very dark. This book taps into the darkness of the original and makes it something that feels fresh and original. Very excited to read the next book!

The Gentleman’s Guide to Vice and Virtue by Mackenzi Lee

This YA historical fiction novel is both hilarious and an exciting adventure. A young bisexual 18th century English lord named Henry Montague is forced by his father to do on a Grand Tour of the continent. A rapscallion of the first order, he is secretly in love with his friend Percy. Also on the tour is Henry’s bluestocking sister, Felicity, who is no more comfortable with her rank in life than Henry. The three embark on an adventure that includes encounters with highwaymen, carnies, pirates, and alchemists.

This book is SO much fun! Henry is a lovable rogue you can’t help but root for even as he’s causing one disaster after another. The character’s voice is superbly rendered by Lee—I was continually cracking up at his caustic and witty observations. (If you listen to audio books, get this one on audio for sure—the narrator Christian Coulson is brilliant.) Underneath the fun are important observations about racism, ableism, and sexism.

Lee is currently working on a book with Felicity as the main character. I anticipate another clever adventure with some serious subtext.

Invictus by Ryan Graudin

I was sold on this book because it was described as a YA time-travelling version of the TV series Firefly. It mostly delivers on that description. The hero Farway Gaius McCarthy was literally born outside of time to a time-traveling mother and Roman gladiator father. Anxious to follow in his mother’s footsteps, he is crushed when he fails his final time-traveling exam and is forbidden to become a Recorder. Forced instead to work for an underworld figure who uses time travel to loot artifacts from the past, Far cobbles together a team from his friends and classmates so they can pull off heists.

This is another fun book with some serious undertones. If you like Firefly, Dr. Who, and/or Guardians of the Galaxy, you will probably enjoy the heck out of it. There are some pretty neat twists to the plot and genuine emotion to the relationships.

YES, I also read books for adults. Here are some good ones for your TBR or holiday gift list:

A Column of Fire by Ken Follett

This is the third book in Ken Follett’s Kingsbridge series of historical novels. You do not have to have read the first two books in the series; each one works just fine as a stand-alone book. (However, the other two books, Pillars of the Earth and World Without End are awesome, so you should read those, too.)

Like the previous books, it takes place mostly in the fictional English town of Kingsbridge, this time during the tumultuous period beginning with the reign of Mary Tudor (“Bloody Mary”) and ending with the close of her sister Elizabeth I’s reign. It focuses on the conflicts between the Roman Catholics and Protestants. Part of it also takes place in France, chronicling the oppression of the Protestant Huguenots.

Follett is a genius at weaving complex, compelling characters with suspense and historical fact, and this book is no exception. One thing I adore about his books is his women characters are just as important and interesting as the male characters. If you love historical fiction, I am certain you will love these books.

Departure by A.G. Riddle

This one was on sale on Audible and sold me because its premise is very similar to the TV show Lost: a plane crashes in the middle of England and the surviving passengers find nothing is as it seems.

I can’t endorse this book as strongly as the others on this list, because in spite of the great premise, the characters (several of whom get point of view chapters) are a little on the generic side.

Other than that, though, this is a mostly enjoyable tale. If you’re looking for a quick, light read you can’t go wrong here.

Prairie Fires: The American Dreams of Laura Ingalls Wilder by Caroline Fraser

I don’t read a lot of non-fiction, but when someone on Twitter started live-tweeting about this book as she read it, I had to get it.

First, a warning: if you are a devoted fan of Laura Ingalls Wilder’s Little House books, prepare to be a bit disillusioned.

This book strips away the myths about the Ingalls and Wilder families. The triumphant portrait of self-reliant pioneers, personified by the Ingalls family in the Little House books, is mostly false.

The first part of the book traces the Ingalls and Wilder families since their first known appearance on the North American continent. What emerges is a dark portrait of Manifest Destiny, as the Homestead Act strips land from Native Americans, with pioneers blithely moving into their existing homes while they are away hunting (yes, the Ingalls did this at one point). Farmers suffer environmental disaster after disaster, in a never-ending pattern of failure to make their farms pay. Moving from place to place, still hoping to succeed after each failure, the Ingalls and others like them never achieve their dream of self-sufficiency, having to send their young children out to work so they can survive. On top of this, misuse of the land across the American prairie touches off world-wide environmental catastrophes.

The second part of the book chronicles Wilder and her daughter Rose Wilder Lane as they collaborate (Lane was her mother’s editor) to make the dark and sometimes tragic story into something acceptable for the juvenile audience. It was Lane, one of the founders of the Libertarian movement, who helped her mother shape her childhood memories into an idealized portrait of pioneer self-reliance.

Fraser drew on manuscripts, letters, diaries, census and financial records to give a much more accurate portrayal of both the pioneers of the 19th century and Wilder herself.

One of the best biographies I have ever read. If you want to put Wilder’s books into their proper context, it’s a must-read.

The “It Takes a Thief” Blogathon – Final Wrap-Up!

First, I want to extend my warmest thanks to all who participated in the “It Takes a Thief” Blogathon. SO many great posts, and quite a few about films I’ve never seen–some I’ve never heard of! WOW! My viewing list has expanded a lot the last few days.

Go HERE for a complete list of posts with links.

Please check out these posts that did not make it into the daily recaps:

Cinematic Scribblings writes about Jerzy Skolimowski’s eccentric car-crazy protagonist in Le Départ.

Top 10 Film List pays tribute to one of noirs most manipulative femme fatales in a review of Criss-Cross.

Outspoken and Freckled believes the 1999 remake of The Thomas Crown Affair has the sexual tension the original lacked.

Thanks again to all! That’s a wrap!

“It Takes a Thief” Blogathon – Day 3 Recap

Day 3 of our blogathon brings even more theft and mayhem!

Critica Retro writes about William Powell’s perfect counterpart to his Nick Charles persona in The Thin Man–The Robber in the pre-code film Jewel Robbery.

4 Star Films enjoys the unexpected levity in The Big Steal, the film that paired Robert Mitchum and Jane Greer again after their success with Out of the Past.

Pure Entertainment Preservation Society examines the bittersweet romance between a thief and an honest man in Remember the Night.

Thoughts All Sorts is engrossed by the slower pace of the heist movie Man on a Ledge.

Movierob is fascinated by the art of lifting wallets depicted in Robert Besson’s French New Wave film, Pickpocket.

Moon in Gemini finds the satire of upwardly-mobile Americans willing to steal to maintain their lifestyle prescient in Fun with Dick and Jane.

Random Pictures loves the mash-up of classic noir and 1970s-style filmmaking in Payback.

Bloggers: if you post late, no worries! I will do a round-up post of any last-minute entries in a day or two.

Thanks so much to everyone who participated!

“It Takes a Thief Bogathon”: Fun with Dick and Jane (1977)

This post is part of the “It Takes a Thief” Blogathon, hosted by ME. Read the rest of the criminally good posts in this event HERE!

Crooks in classic films generally split into a couple of categories: either professional criminals, or people driven by desperate circumstances to commit crimes. There’s another subset where characters steal to get revenge.

Fun with Dick and Jane is a little bit different. Taking place during the recession of the late 1970s, it involves middle-class people who could probably chug along well enough until an economic uptick, but instead resort to crime to maintain their upwardly-mobile lifestyle.

Dick Harper (George Segal) is an aerospace executive who is stunned when his boss Charlie Blanchard (Ed McMahon) fires him. He and his wife Jane (Jane Fonda) at first think this is a mild blip in their lives, and forge ahead with building a pool in their backyard while planning very minor economies to their lifestyle.

Reality soon hits when Dick finds it difficult to get another job right away. Caught working for money under the table, Dick loses his unemployment. Pleas to Jane’s parents for a loan fall on deaf ears. Jane gets a low-paying job but they still need food stamps and the electricity is soon turned off. Desperate, they apply for a high-interest loan.

Gosh, this sounds like the making of a tragedy, doesn’t it? It’s far from it, though. Up to this point, the film is a razor-sharp satire of American middle class life and expectations. Dick is so clueless his Latino co-worker, who he barely spoke to at work, has to show him how to navigate the world unemployed. Their maid rolls her eyes when she overhears them blithely dismiss their situation. While having a meeting at home with a potential employer, a vendor they haven’t paid shows up with a bullhorn and insists on confiscating all their household plants, screaming “Deadbeat!”

While they are applying for the loan, the film takes a quick turn. Thieves show up to rob the loan company. When they run away from the cops, Jane manages to grab two thousand dollars of the stolen money. Rationalizing that the loan company has insurance, they keep it.

When that money is gone, Dick plans to commit a holdup. Jane insists on accompanying him. After several missteps, they successfully rip off an X-rated motel. Giddy with their success, they begin to regularly commit stick-ups. Soon their confiscated lawn and pool are restored and they are throwing big parties. All this spending leads them to plan one big score by robbing Dick’s former boss Charlie.

The film got mixed reviews when it first opened, but with the hindsight of the last 40 years of history, it seems close to prescient. It predicts the 1980s ruthless mentality in pursuit of money. (This is brought home most clearly in a scene where Jane throws money out of the car to stop pursuers and causes a riot which is reminiscent of the final scenes of the 1980s comedy Ruthless People.) It’s also possible to see it as a prototype for TV series like Breaking Bad and Weeds. Dick and Jane don’t commit crime so they can survive—they do it so they won’t look bad in front of the neighbors.

Segal and Fonda are terrific—they show both the love and frustration married people have with each other through clever banter usually reserved for romcoms. Some might complain that the movie makes their characters too likable, and that’s fair. But lets be honest, crime committed in the name of maintaining the American Dream is secretly admired by some. There are those who expect poor people to remain poor, and despise their situation because they assume it is one of their own making. Dick and Jane’s pseudo-poverty, on the other hand, is discomfiting.

The robbery scenes—both the failed and successful ones—are hilarious, especially when Dick tries to hold up a drug store and the pharmacist misunderstands what he wants. Another stand-out scene is when Jane tries to get a loan out of her parents, and all she gets is a lecture on self-reliance. Assuring Jane if they come through this without help they will be set for life, her mother declares as she leaves, “I’m so happy for you!”

One wonders if her parents would be proud of the way Dick and Jane relied on themselves to remain affluent members of the middle class.

The “It Takes a Thief” Blogathon – Day 2 Recap

Day 2 of the “It Takes a Thief” Blogathon has yielded even more heinous activity by various thieves and other miscreants:

Film Noir Archive finds director Michael Mann established his archetypal lead character in his debut film Thief.

A Shroud of Thoughts gives a detailed overview of one of the most popular British TV series of the 1960s, The Saint.

Destroy All Fanboys enjoys the light tone of Jules Dassin’s caper film Topkapi.

Realweegiemidget Reviews was charmed by the Scottish film The Angels’ Share, about a group serving community payback who decide to steal some rare whiskey.

Liz Durano pays tribute to The Usual Suspects‘ ensemble cast and great twist ending.

Sometimes They Go to Eleven reviews one of the classic “thieves fall out” films, 1968’s The Split.

Love Letters to Old Hollywood contrasts and compares Dirty Rotten Scoundrels to the film it was based on, the rarely-seen Bedtime Story.

LA Explorer delights in the twists and turns in the plot of the Cary Grant/Audrey Hepburn film, Charade.

The Midnite Drive-In is not that surprised to discover the two early films versions of The Maltese Falcon can’t compare to the John Huston/Humphrey Bogart classic.

Please join us tomorrow for Day 3!

The “It Takes a Thief” Blogathon – Day 1 Recap

Day 1 of the It Takes a Thief Blogathon and we already have a wealth of great posts!

MovieMovieBlogBlog declares that Woody Allen steals the show in his first feature film Take the Money and Run.

Silver Screenings takes a vacation with Cary Grant in her review of Alfred Hitchcock’s To Catch a Thief.

The Story Enthusiast credits Ernst Lubitsch with introducing the suave international thief in his film Trouble in Paradise.

The INCspotlight covers Michael Crichton’s adaptation of his own novel, The Great Train Robbery.

Sat in Your Lap believes the cult film Twilight’s Last Gleaming is one of the hidden gems of the 1970s.

CineMaven’s Essays From the Couch falls hard for Jean Gabin while viewing the French caper film Touchez Pas au Grisbi.

Midnite Drive-In reveals a preference for George Sanders out of the three actors who played Batman’s Mr. Freeze in the 1960s television series.

The Stop Button considers The Friends of Eddie Coyle a good but flawed film.

Caftan Woman conveys how You and Me is an unusual blend of romance, melodrama, and crime story.

Totally Filmi reviews Sapthamashree Thaskaraha (Seven Good Thieves), a Malayalam film about a group of men who meet in prison and plan a heist.

Movies Silently takes advantage of a rare opportunity to view and review 1928’s Alias Jimmy Valentine.

Wide Screen World finds Tom Hanks miscast in the lead role of Road to Perdition but otherwise likes this adaptation of the graphic novel.

Join us tomorrow for more thievery and other kinds of mayhem!

The “It Take a Thief” Blogathon is Here!

The “It Takes a Thief” Blogathon has arrived!

Bloggers:

When your post goes live, leave the URL for your post in the comments section here or under the original announcement post. You may also send it to me via Twitter. My handle is @DebbieVee.

I will do daily recaps, but will also collect all the URLs in this post as they come in. You may link your post to this one so people who read yours can find the other posts.

Remember, you may post any day during the blogathon: Friday, November 17 – Sunday, November 19. If you’re running a little late, no problem! I will do an update on any posts that come in later than Sunday.

Looking forward to a great event!

THE MASTER LIST OF POSTS:

MovieMovieBlogBlog: Take the Money and Run

Silver Screenings: To Catch a Thief

The Story Enthusiast: Trouble in Paradise

The INCspotlight: The Great Train Robbery (1979)

Sat in Your Lap: Twilight’s Last Gleaming

CineMaven’s Essays From the Couch: Touchez Pas au Grisbi

Midnite Drive-In: Batman’s Mr. Freeze, All three film adaptations of Hammett’s The Maltese Falcon

The Stop Button: The Friends of Eddie Coyle

Caftan Woman: You and Me

Totally Filmi: Sapthamashree Thaskaraha “Seven Good Thieves”

Movies Silently: Alias Jimmy Valentine

Wide Screen World: Road to Perdition

Film Noir Archive: Thief (1981)

A Shroud of Thoughts: The Saint (1963 – 1969)

Destroy All Fanboys!: Topkapi

Realweegiemidget Reviews: The Angels’ Share

Liz Durano: The Usual Suspects

Sometimes They Go to Eleven: The Split

Love Letters to Old Hollywood: Dirty Rotten Scoundrels

LA Explorer: Charade

Critica Retro: Jewel Robbery

4 Star Films: The Big Steal

Pure Entertainment Preservation Society: Remember the Night

Thoughts All Sorts: Man on a Ledge

Movierob: Pickpocket

Moon in Gemini: Fun with Dick and Jane (1977)

Random Pictures: Payback

Cinematic Scribblings: Le Départ

Top 10 Film List: Criss-Cross

Outspoken & Freckled: The Thomas Crown Affair

 

Then & Now Blogathon: The Magnificent Seven (2016)

This post is part of the Then & Now Blogathon, hosted by Realweegiemidget Reviews and Thoughts All Sorts. Read the rest of the posts in this event HERE!

Also read my “Then” post for this blogathon HERE!

It seems like every day there’s another announcement out of Hollywood that a classic film is being remade. 99.9% of the time, I’m totally uninterested in the resulting films.

However, when it was announced that there would be a remake of The Magnificent Seven with a diverse cast and African-American director Antoine Fuqua helming, I became very excited.

As much as I love classic Westerns, there’s no getting around the fact that most of them erased the diversity of the frontier. About a quarter to a third of working cowboys in the West were African-American. Many more were Mexican and Native American. People from literally every corner of the globe went to the American West seeking a new life.

This erasure in films has slowly been changing since about the 1970s, but the few Westerns made nowadays are still overwhelmingly focused on white characters.

So much so that some reviews of the 2016 film expressed doubt that an African-American man could be a lawman, yet they did exist historically. (Ironically, I also read a review of the original film that expressed skepticism about someone like Yul Brynner existing in the West—even though his ancestry is mostly European. Go figure.)

The most famous African-American Western lawman is probably Sam Bass. I suspect that the character of Sam Chisolm, played by Denzel Washington, is based on him somewhat.

This version of The Magnificent Seven is similar to the original, but diverges from it in some key aspects. Instead of a Mexican village terrorized by bandits, it is a mining town called Rose Creek that is being taken over by a robber baron named Bartholomew Bogue (Peter Sarsgaard). Intent on owning all the land and its gold, Bogue tells the residents to take twenty dollars each for their farms and vacate, or face the consequences. Then he torches their church and guns down several people who object.

One of the victims is Matthew Cullen (Matt Bomer). His widow Emma (Haley Bennett) sets out with another resident, Teddy (Luke Grimes), to find men who will help them defeat Bogue. They encounter U.S. Marshall Sam Chisolm and plead for his help. He refuses until he learns that their enemy is Bogue.

He gathers a group of gunmen, including gambler Joshua Faraday (Chris Pratt), former Confederate soldier Goodnight Robicheaux (Ethan Hawke) and his partner and knife expert Billy Rocks (Byung-hun Lee), mountain man Jack Horne (Vincent D’Onofrio), and Mexican outlaw Vasquez (Manuel Garcia-Rulfo). They meet up with Comanche warrior Red Harvest (Martin Sensmeier), who rounds out the group.

So how does this version compare to the original? Well, mostly, it doesn’t. That doesn’t mean it’s a bad film—I found it a solid, entertaining Western for the most part. I enjoyed the performances immensely (heck, I could watch Denzel in a Western all the live-long day, every day). It was refreshing to see a woman driving the plot in a Western, too.

Unfortunately, the characters simply lack the depth of those in the original. Mainly because this version forgoes what drove them in the first place: their own irrelevance in a rapidly changing West. Instead, it substitutes a rote revenge plot. (Chisolm has a personal grudge against Bogue, of course.) Giving at least the lead character an actual reason to defeat the villain changes the story profoundly, and not in a good way. Bogue is such a stereotypical baddie, he’s almost silly at times. Calvera was a much more complex villain in the original, who was able to manipulate some of the townspeople to support him.

But like I said, as a straight-up, shoot-em-up, the film is highly enjoyable.

The film does make ONE major misstep I find almost unforgiveable:

They close out the credits with Elmer Bernstein’s iconic theme music from the original.

Dudes. Don’t remind people that a better version of your film exists.

Then & Now Blogathon: The Magnificent Seven (1960)

This post is part of the Then & Now Blogathon, hosted by Realweegiemidget Reviews and Thoughts All Sorts. Read the rest of the posts in this event HERE!

Also read my “Now” post for this blogathon HERE!

I’m a sucker for Westerns. It has been one of my favorite genres since I was a small child. When my niece and nephew were little, I tried to impart my love of classic movies to them (mostly successfully, I’m happy to report). When my nephew was 10 years old, I showed him one of my very favorite Westerns, the 1960 version of The Magnificent Seven.

As we watched it, I was a little concerned that my nephew would find it boring. Though I wouldn’t categorize it as a cerebral Western, it has long stretches without action and focuses more on the characters than the shoot-em-ups.

The minute it was over, he begged me to show it to him again.

Based on the Akira Kurosawa film Seven Samurai, The Magnificent Seven has a deceptively simple plot: poor farmers who live in a small Mexican village are terrorized every year by a gang of bandits who take most of their food and supplies. Desperate to keep the bandits out, they decide to gather everything of value they own and use the money for hired guns.

I say “deceptively” because there is a lot more going on in this film than a simple revenge plot. When three of the farmers arrive at a border town, they witness an unusual tableau. An undertaker is refusing to hold a funeral paid for by some passing salesman. It’s because the dead man is Native American, and the town refuses to allow him a burial in Boot Hill.

Two professional gunmen, Chris Adams (Yul Brenner) and Vin Tanner (Steve McQueen) defy the threats by the townspeople and drive the hearse to Boot Hill. The farmers are so impressed they ask Chris to help them drive out the bandits.

Both Chris and Vin have seen better days but still balk at the proposition. The story is set at a point in the West’s history when civilization (and its laws—not to mention prejudices) are taking hold. The need for gunmen is rapidly declining. They are almost walking anachronisms and keenly aware of it.

They eventually agree to help the farmers and cobble together a team of six men (James Coburn, Charles Bronson, Robert Vaughn, Brad Dexter) including themselves. A young hot-head (Horst Buchholz) persists in following them and is eventually permitted to join the group.

In the village, they teach the residents to fight against the bandit Calvera (Eli Wallach) and his men. Against their will, the men begin to care about what happens to the villagers and the town. They face their own fears and what they have missed in life because of the path they have chosen. They realize that bravery isn’t always facing down an opponent with a gun, and gain a deep respect for the famers.

For this blogathon I will also review the 2016 remake of The Magnificent Seven, which boasts are more diverse cast of main characters. Here’s the interesting thing, though: the original actually has more to say about racism than the remake. Chris and Vin risk their lives so a Native American they didn’t even know can get a decent burial. This incident gives rise to one of the best lines of dialogue in the movie:

“Well I’ll be damned. I never knew you had to be anything but a corpse to get into Boot Hill. How long’s this been going on?”

“Since the town got civilized.”

Unlike most classic Westerns, the non-white characters are essential to the story and portrayed as complex human beings. (Except for Wallach, Buchholz, and Vladimir Sokoloff, who plays the village elder, most of the Mexican characters are played by Mexican or Mexican-American actors. I even recognized a couple of the Mexican actors from my days of watching telenovelas.)

What I’ve always found most appealing about Westerns is the theme of community (represented by the village here) and also the theme of reinvention/clean slate. The gunmen are becoming outmoded, yet find they have a final chance to recast themselves as true heroes. Given the opportunity to abandon the villagers to their fate, they risk everything to drive the bandits out for good. Even they aren’t quite sure why they do it. Nor do they see themselves as winners in the fight.

When the film first came out it was mostly reviled as a pale attempt to remake Seven Samurai. (Kurosawa disagreed, and presented director John Sturges with a samurai sword in appreciation.) As the years have gone on, it has risen in estimation as a thoughtful film with both rousing action and memorable characters.

It’s no wonder my nephew was so anxious to see it again.

Reminder: the “It Takes a Thief” Blogathon Starts Soon!

There’s still plenty of time to sign up for the “It Takes a Thief” Blogathon! It begins Friday, November 17 and runs through Sunday, November 19.

If you want to join in, leave a comment here or under the original post, or contact me on Twitter (my handle is @DebbieVee).

Looking forward to reading your posts on thievery in film!

Food in Film Blogathon: Eat Drink Man Woman (1994)

This post is part of the Food in Film Blogathon, hosted by Speakeasy and Silver Screenings. Please read the rest of the delicious posts HERE!

I grew up near Main Street in Flushing, Queens, which today is considered New York City’s second Chinatown. You can find authentic Chinese (as well as Japanese, Korean, Vietnamese, etc.) cuisine in the many restaurants up and down Main Street and its side streets. You can also get the Americanized dishes found at most Asian restaurants in this country. If you’re not of Asian descent, the wait staff will likely present you with their Americanized menu.

We had a friend from Hong Kong who would meet up with us on Main Street and order the most amazing meals from the authentic cuisine menus—heck, they were really banquets. The food was made with incredibly fresh ingredients. One time, at a nearby table, we witnessed the staff bring out a ginormous live crab for the guests to inspect and approve one-by-one before it was cooked.

Memories of these meals is one reason I adore Ang Lee’s film, Eat Drink Man Woman. Mr. Chu (Sihung Lung) is considered the greatest chef in Taipei, Taiwan. Every Sunday, he cooks by himself an elaborate banquet for his three grown daughters. Everything is made from scratch. He even uses chickens he raises in his own backyard (this is the middle of a big city). The presentation of the food is meticulous. Just watching him cook and seeing the results make my mouth water every time I watch the movie.

His three daughters, on the other hand, see the Sunday meal as a trial. All still live at home with their widowed father—Jia-Jen (Kuei-Mei Yang), who is a school teacher and a born-again Christian, Jia-Chien (Chien-Lien Wu), a successful airline executive, and Jia-Ning (Yu-Wen Wang), a student who works at, of all things, a Wendy’s restaurant.

While the food looks sumptuous, the daughters usually complain that it tastes a little off. Mr. Chu has lost his sense of taste as he has aged, and relies on his friend Old Wen (Jui Wang) to make certain the food passes muster at the restaurant where he works.

At each meal depicted in the film, someone at the table makes a life-changing announcement that reverberates through the family.

Like Ang Lee’s previous film The Wedding Banquet (which also featured Sihung Lung, as well as a couple of other actors in this film) the main theme is the evolution from tradition to modernity in the Chinese family. No one in the Chu family wants to sit through these meals (I want to cry when I see how much is left unconsumed), and it seems Mr. Chu doesn’t want much to make them, either. But it’s a tradition, and one that won’t end unless the family scatters.

It’s tradition that keeps his daughters—all of whom chafe to leave and find their own lives—tied to their father. They assume one of them at least will be tasked with taking care of him until he dies. Even though they all live in the same house and eat at the same table, they could be four strangers, with their own secrets and plans and dreams the others are unaware of until one makes an announcement at the Sunday meal.

The film focuses mainly on the middle daughter, Jia-Chien, who seems the most likely to make her own life. As good a cook as her father, she resents that he insisted she finish her studies instead of becoming a chef. Her attempts to escape from her father’s house are met with disaster—she loses all her savings when she buys an apartment in a building that turns out to be on top of a toxic waste dump. Her romantic life is also a disaster. Her relationship with her elder sister is very cold. When she sees her father at the hospital having some tests, she assumes his desire to retire from the restaurant has to do with poor health and she must resign herself to taking care of him.

The meals that the daughters dread so much turn out to change the lives of each of them in profound ways. Fate and other factors intervene to change the paths they have set out for themselves.

There’s something a little sad about the way this family slowly relinquishes tradition and obligation as it catches up with the times. But there’s also joy and humor as each main character finds their place in life.

It’s a lovely film. Just make sure you’re not hungry when you watch it.

Foreign TV Watch: El Barco (Spain)

I make no secret that I am a huge fan of the TV show Lost. I’ve even defended the finale (one of my most popular posts that still gets daily hits). Ever since it ended its successful run, many, many attempts have been made by American TV to duplicate that success. Most were total bombs, a few hung on for a season or two.

(In my opinion, the closest to the show’s feel—with an even more diverse cast—is Netflix’s Sense8. Which only lasted two seasons, unfortunately.)

So it was a very exciting day for me when I discovered the Spanish television series El Barco (The Boat). The show is the tale of a boat stranded in a post-apocalyptic world after an accident during the implementation of a particle accelerator. All the continents disappear, leaving Earth a water world. The boat becomes home for the crew and its passengers, who must try to survive while looking for someplace in the world where land—and possibly other people—still exist.

This type of story is my JAM. Post-apocalyptic, a group of disparate strangers (mostly) who must band together to survive and thrive in the new reality—I love this kind of stuff.

So how does it stack up to Lost? Pretty well, actually, with a few significant exceptions.

The Estrella Polar (the North Star) is helmed by Captain Ricardo Montero (Juanjo Artero), a recent widower, and First Officer Julian De la Cuadra (Luis Callejo). The passengers consist of a group of students on scholarship who are learning how to become sailors, including Montero’s twenty-year-old daughter Ainhoa (Blanca Suarez). Also aboard are Montero’s five-year-old daughter Valeria (Patricia Arbues), Dr. Julia Wilson (Irene Montalà), a medical doctor with a mysterious connection to the scientists implementing the particle accelerator, Ernesto Gamboa (Juan Pablo Shuk), the ship’s survival coach, Salomé Palacios (Neus Sanz), the ship’s cook, and “Burbuja” (translates to “Bubble”) (Iván Massagué) Salomé’s assistant, who is mentally challenged due to a brain injury.

The captain and his first officer are stunned to discover a stowaway, Ulises Garmendia (Mario Casas), who claims De la Cuadra is his biological father.

Yes, his name translates to Ulysses. I kid you not. And I love that. While it doesn’t go quite as far as Lost in referencing literature and mythology, it does it in many ways, especially when it comes to Homer’s The Odyssey. At certain points in the story there are sirens and a cyclops, of sorts, for instance.

The first season is mostly about adjusting to the new world order, with most of the passengers skeptical that the world has really ended. Montero and De la Cuadra have to fight against a mutiny, and the entire ship has to battle flocks of birds that attack the ship because they have no other place to land.

While El Barco is missing the supernatural elements of Lost, there are strange new things the crew has to face, such as giant predators that previously lived so deep in the ocean they weren’t known to exist, and vents in the ocean that appear suddenly and emit poisonous gas.

Against the fight for survival are many emotional stories: of course, with a crew of young, attractive people there are going to be quite a few romances. Though attracted to Ulises at first, Ainhoa falls for Gamboa, much to her father’s distress, because he is much older. Ulises becomes involved with Julia, who is also older (and, unbeknownst to her, has a secret admirer in Captain Montero).

For some reason in these kinds of stories there is always a pregnant girl. In this case it’s Vilma (Marina Salas), who attracts the ship’s cut-up/Lothario Piti (Javier Hernández Rodríguez) and at the same time a young priest, Andrés Palomares (Bernabé Fernandez). Estela (Giselle Calderón) falls for Ramiro (David Seijo), who can’t return her feelings because he is still mourning the girlfriend he lost during the apocalypse. On top of all this De la Cuadra and Salomé, who have sailed on voyages together for many years, realize after the disaster that they are in love.

While I enjoyed most of the love stories, one of the quirks of the show, and how it doesn’t stack up totally favorably to Lost, is the way it can’t seem to weave in the emotional storylines with the action. Over and over, with some horrific disaster bearing down on the crew, the characters choose those exact moments to take time out for conversations about their love/emotional lives.

Flock of birds eating up the now irreplaceable sails? Time for the captain to ponder if he has been a good enough father to his daughters. Boat hanging over a waterfall where two oceans are meeting up? Time for Palomares to confess his love for Vilma. It gets to be almost amusing after a while.

As far as the action, though, and the suspense—this is where the show does a stellar job. There are fingernail-chewing moments in abundance. Both the writing and direction in these areas are on point (and here’s a cool thing: twelve of the episodes were directed by a woman, Sandra Gallego).

During the first season or so Ainhoa suffers a bit from a case of Dumb Girl Syndrome, falling for the obviously villainous Gamboa and defending him over her own father. However, she becomes smarter and more capable as the series progresses, even heroic at times.

They do somewhat better with the character of Burbuja, who was a scientist before his injury. It’s wonderful that a disabled character is shown as heroic (in fact, he saves the boat and the crew more than once). At times the characters infantilize him, but the story never does. Another thing that’s interesting is before his injury he MAY have been complicit in the disaster. Is he a hero who once was a villain? This is one aspect that keeps the story intriguing throughout all three seasons.

There are a few goofy plot points (can’t say specifically without giving away spoilers) but a minor thing that never failed to make me giggle: they never seem to run out of Coca Cola or fresh orange juice. There is one point where they find a cargo of food and get a replenished supply of Coca Cola, but those crates must have been bottomless, because from then on no one has to go without Coca Cola.

We can’t let the apocalypse get in the way of product placement, apparently.

O.K., now we get to the nitty gritty: how’s the ending?

Sadly, not that great. No one goes to heaven in this but it leaves some major questions open. It was so confusing one of the actors had to assure the audience after the finale aired that his character did NOT die.

Even so, up to those last couple of episodes, I thoroughly enjoyed this show, and do recommend it if you’re looking for something like Lost. As of this writing it is available on Netflix streaming.